Applying Blue Finance in Canada

A consistent theme in blue finance guidance is that solutions need to reflect local conditions. The systems involved are complex, and the factors that influence them vary from one place to another. This is particularly relevant in the context of ocean systems, where environmental conditions, economic activity, and community interests differ by region and those differences influence how outcomes are achieved. Financial decisions sit within that same context. They influence which activities move forward and how they are structured.

In the United States, the role of the board is often described in terms of accountability to shareholders. Directors are expected to oversee management, set direction, and ensure that shareholder interests are protected. In Canada, the framing is different. Directors are responsible for the long-term interests of the corporation itself, which in practice brings a broader set of considerations into discussion. Employees, communities, regulators, and environmental conditions are more directly part of how decisions are evaluated. This difference is not always visible in the final decision. It is more evident in how decisions are approached, in the questions that are asked, the risks that are considered, and the time horizon over which outcomes are evaluated.

From a common set of guiding principles, blue finance will develop differently across jurisdictions. In Canada, a number of factors influence how this is likely to take shape.

The banking system is highly concentrated. The six largest banks account for the majority of corporate and institutional lending, and their approach to incorporating environmental and ocean-related factors will have an outsized influence on how blue finance develops in practice. Credit unions play a different role. They are more closely connected to small and medium-sized businesses and operate within cooperative governance models. While this segment has not traditionally been the focus of structured blue finance transactions, it provides a setting where local conditions and stakeholder considerations are already part of decision-making.

Geography also matters. Ocean-related economic activity is concentrated in Atlantic Canada and British Columbia. These regions have established networks of ocean-based businesses, supported by organisations such as the Ocean Supercluster and COAST, which bring together industry, research, and capital around ocean-related activity. This creates a natural base for activity where financing and ocean systems are already closely linked. In some regions, Indigenous governance and stewardship play a central role in how ocean-related activities are managed. National institutions such as the Canada Infrastructure Bank and evolving insurance markets also influence how capital is structured and deployed.

Regulation is evolving in the same direction. Federal guidance, including OSFI's climate-related expectations under Guideline B-15, is beginning to influence how risk is assessed and managed within financial institutions. Provincial regulators are moving along a similar path, adapting those expectations within their own frameworks. Taken together, these factors form the environment in which financial decisions are made and in which blue finance will take hold.

These factors describe the setting in which financial decisions are made in Canada. On their own they do not determine outcomes. They influence how decisions are approached and what is considered in the process. Ocean systems involve multiple participants operating within the same space. Fisheries, shipping, coastal communities, regulators, and scientific institutions are interconnected, and decisions made by one group affect others, sometimes immediately and sometimes across longer periods. A governance approach that considers a wider set of interests allows those connections to be reflected in financial decision-making. Environmental conditions, long-term system stability, and the interests of different stakeholders can be incorporated into how decisions are evaluated without requiring new tools. Existing frameworks for credit assessment, pricing, and portfolio construction can accommodate these factors when they are considered directly.

In Canada, the structures that support this way of thinking are already in place. Board oversight, regulatory expectations, and institutional practices allow for a broader set of considerations to be part of financial decision-making. This does not determine outcomes, but it does influence how decisions are framed and what is considered relevant, which affects how capital is directed and how activities are structured. As blue finance develops, it will reflect these conditions. The underlying principles are shared, but their application will depend on how decisions are made in practice. This creates space for approaches that are grounded in Canadian conditions. Financial institutions, policymakers, and businesses are already operating within a framework that can accommodate these considerations. There is no single model to follow. What emerges will reflect the choices made within this context.