Methodology

Climate Action Barometer

How we calculated the Climate Action Barometer

The Climate Action Barometer is our diagnostic tool designed to track economy-wide climate action across six key drivers of change. These drivers, or themes are Policy, Capital, Consumer Action and Sentiment, Industry Action and Sentiment, Emissions and Technology. Each theme consists of progress indicators that measure key decarbonization policies and activities. Our choice of progress indicators was dictated by the availability of good quality time series proprietary or third-party data.

The Barometer measures annual changes in climate action, starting from 2019. That year was chosen as the baseline as it marked the start of federal climate policies—aligned to the Paris Agreement of limiting global temperature increases to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels—and data collection efforts by governments and third-party data providers to track climate action. We also chose 2019 as the baseline year to limit skewing of results from pandemic-induced historic lows in emissions.

The progress indicators, as described further, for each of the six themes track a combination of annual changes. Stock is a snapshot of quantity at a specific point in time, while flow shows the rate of change in a stock. We measure annual flows for the Consumer Action and Sentiment, Industry Action and Sentiment, Emissions and Capital themes. The Policy and Technology themes are measured using a stock approach.

As we continue to advance our measurements and data used in constructing the Climate Action Barometer, we apply changes retrospectively across all years where applicable and comparative figures have been restated where applicable. The more significant changes made this year are described in each section below. While the restatement of prior periods have impacted the thematic and overall values, they have not changed the directional trending.

Sectoral Climate Action Indices

The Sectoral Climate Indices is our diagnostic tool designed to track sector specific climate action across four key drivers (themes) of change—Policy, Action, Capital and Emissions—across six sectors: agriculture, buildings, electricity, heavy industry (comprising mining, smelting and refining (non-ferrous metals), pulp and paper, iron and steel, cement, and chemicals and fertilizers), oil and gas, and transportation.

Each theme’s contribution to each sector’s index score is equally weighted at 25%. Similar to the Climate Action Barometer, each theme consists of progress indicators that measure key decarbonization policies and activities for that theme. The choice of progress indicators was dictated by the availability of good quality time series proprietary or third-party data.

The measurement timeframe is from 2019 to 2025. Progress indicators track annual changes in stock or flow. Data values for 2025, and in some cases 2024, are estimates, based on projections or annualized year-to-date data, if applicable. Where data for a given year is unavailable, estimates are derived based on projections or annualized year-to-date data.

The index values are calculated and derived using the same approach as for the Climate Action Barometer. Each theme’s index weight, a description of its progress indicators, and additional thematic specific calculations are outlined below.

Government Survey Methodology

The Climate Action Institute’s team used federal budget documents between 2013 to 2025 to measure Canadian government climate sentiment. First, we extracted sections from the table of contents from PDFs and matched respective texts from the documents.

Then we applied ClimateBERT—a large language model trained on climate-related research paper abstracts, corporate and general news and reports from companies—as a first-layer filter to classify and screen large volumes of text before applying more computationally intensive models.

Once filtered, we used OpenAI’s GPT-5 reasoning model with high ‘effort’ specification to further evaluate filtered outputs. We fed detailed prompts with examples to identify whether a section is climate- or environment-related or not. In cases where it is, we further attempted to evaluate if the section outlines new climate- or environment-related funding, mentions new climate- or environment-related regulations and policies, commitments or plans, or refers to past actions and/or sets climate or environment as a contextual narrative. Additionally, based on the context of a section, we asked the reasoning model to classify it into one of six categories: Growth and Competitiveness; Mitigation, Net-Zero and Decarbonization; Energy Systems and Infrastructure; Adaptation and Resilience; Nature and Biodiversity; People, Jobs and Just Transition.

The count of the climate- or environment-related sections and breakdown by category or thematic focus was used to compile the sentiment value for the budget in a given year.

Contributors

  • John Stackhouse, Senior Vice President, Office of the CEO
  • Sarah Pendrith, Vice President, Strategy & Operations
  • Jordan Brennan, Managing Director
  • Yadullah Hussain, Managing Editor
  • Lisa Ashton, Director, Agriculture Policy
  • Shaz Merwat, Director, Energy Policy
  • Farhad Panahov, Economist
  • Stephanie Shewchuk, Housing Policy Lead
  • Vivan Sorab, Senior Manager, Clean Technology
  • John Intini, Senior Director, Editorial
  • Lavanya Kaleeswaran, Director, Digital & Production
  • Caprice Biasoni, Design Lead
  • Sarah Kennedy, Senior Director Communications
  • Jen Gorman, Senior Manager, Communications, Media Relations
  • Joelle Schonberg, Program Manager
  • Alanna Whitten, Manager, Content Delivery