War, What Is It Good For?

Absolutely Everything (As Far as Washington Is Concerned)

by Tom Engelhardt | Sep 18, 2026 

Reprinted with permission from Tom Engelhardt’s Substack: 

I was almost six years old when the Korean War began and Korea was a mere 7,000 or so miles from Washington, D.C. I’m now 82 years old and my country is at war with Iran, whose capital, Tehran, is — phew! — only about 6,300 miles from Washington, D.C. What a relief!

By the time I’m 110, there’s a dim possibility that, should that be a pattern (and don’t forget Vietnam, a mere 9,000 miles from Washington; Afghanistan, a mere 7,000 miles away; or Iraq, a mere 6,000-odd miles offshore of the United States, all of which suggest that distance has indeed been a significant — and significantly unnerving — part of American imperial warmaking since 1945), the U.S. might be warring with a country merely 5,000-odd miles from our capital. And by the time I’m 126, the war of that moment might, for all I know, be right next door. (Of course, if Donald Trump, who would then be 124 years old, is still president, it might even be in Canada, “our cherished Fifty First State.”)

I should, in truth, be more used to my country’s distant wars by now. After all, I can still remember my opposition to the Vietnam War, a moment when I actually took to the streets and turned in my draft card in public protest — yes, back then, the military wasn’t an all-volunteer outfit — and also learned how to be a draft counselor to help potential draftees like me, who were against that all too literal war from hell.

Almost 60 years later, I find it strange that my country is once again fighting a distant war for reasons that, at best, make no sense whatsoever to me, and at worst are simply horrific and repetitive beyond belief. It’s a war that, as the New York Times reported, was essentially sold to the president by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as a “near-certain victory” against a weak Iranian regime that would prove incapable (no question about it!) of blockading the Strait of Hormuz, could do little harm to America’s allies in the Middle East, and “could foster the conditions for the Iranian opposition to overthrow the regime.”

Yes, it’s true that my country may indeed have been the most imperial — in the sense of influencing so much of the world — country in history with a truly global reach. Of course, there were also the other two great powers of the last half century. There was the Soviet Union — now, Vladimir Putin’s Russia, which, to give him credit of an unnerving sort, is at least fighting his nightmarish war against Ukraine right at or near its own border rather than in Asia, Africa, or Latin America. And then there is China, which has so far proven itself a remarkable imperial force by having but a single military base anywhere else on the planet — unlike the 750 American ones scattered around the globe — and not fighting a war anywhere other than not particularly successfully against Vietnam in 1979 and border skirmishes with India in 2020 and 2021 (which, historically speaking on this planet of ours, is almost the imperial equivalent of pacifism).

No such luck for the United States of Donald J. Trump, of course. “Our” latest president has continued a tradition now more than 75 years old of launching distant wars that simply never succeed. Never.

You would think, of course, that there might be some extremely modest learning curve when it came to such conflicts, but if so, you would think wrong. Logical as that might appear, it’s proven to be anything but the reality of our world. And after so many failed wars globally, that’s once again our reality in relation to Iran, despite the fact that “our” president in his first term in office offered this description of himself: “They said: ‘He will start a war.’ I’m not going to start a war. I’m going to stop wars.”

And curiously enough, with the exception of an ongoing conflict in Syria, he stuck to his… oh, sorry, but it is the phrase… guns then. No such luck recently, of course. And Iran is turning into a disaster first class, while the harm to that country is, as with all such wars (remember the millions killed in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia), or at least should be considered, unbearable. And mind you, while “our” president was turning our world into an ever greater mess at home and abroad, he was still planning to extend his renaming frenzy from the Gulf of Mexico (oh, sorry, the Gulf of America) and Lake Ontario (oh, sorry, again, Lake America) to the Strait of Hormuz, which he was hoping, believe it or not, could be renamed the “Trump Strait.” As he wrote at his Truth Social account, “Now that we have it under U.S.A. control, should we change the name Hormuz Strait to TRUMP STRAIT??? Like America itself, it would be ‘hotter’ than ever before! Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DONALD J. TRUMP.”

Imagine that, will you — not that the Strait of Whatever You Want to Call It was, in fact, faintly under American control.

And for what acts might it be renamed? Well, just as I was writing this piece, for instance, accounts appeared indicating that a missile launched by my country reportedly killed at least four people, including a four-year-old child, and wounded another 68 at a wedding — yes, a wedding! — in Iran.

Oh, and let me at least add that, right here at home, one American was finally brought to justice for his acts — in this case, U.S. Air Force Major Jason Watson, who had stood on the steps of the U.S. Capitol and called for the impeachment of President Trump. As he told CNN, “Not only is [Trump] a failure as president, he is flagrantly violating the Constitution, breaking the law, engaged in rampant corruption, and is killing Americans. And that is unacceptable to me.”

And as it turns out, it’s also unacceptable to the Iranians. Since, despite what Benjamin Netanyahu assured “my” president about, they have indeed been capable both of attacking American allies and a whole string of American military bases in the Middle East with missiles and drones, while indeed largely shutting down traffic through the Strait of Hormuz and so driving up oil prices strikingly on a global level.

There are so many things that are truly needed on this overheating planet of ours, how deeply sad (not to say genuinely pathetic) that the best thing the president of the United States and his advisors could find to do this year was launch a war halfway around the world that would kill all too many people, ruin worlds (and weddings), pour greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and waste enormous amounts of taxpayer dollars thousands of miles from home at a moment when all too many people in this very country still need so much.

Why is it, I wonder, that American presidents of seemingly any stripe simply can’t stop launching distant, disastrous wars with our tax dollars? In some sense, I simply don’t understand. How can there be no learning curve whatsoever when it comes to American wars abroad since 1945? How thick-headed do you truly have to be not to notice an overwhelming pattern of lack of success (not to say outright failure)? It’s so obvious that there should be no way it wouldn’t be a front-and-center phenomenon no one could miss or ignore?

No such luck, of course.

[I’ve recently been recommending other authors’ books at this spot above my Substack pieces. Today, let me recommend a book I only recently reread by an author I’ve known remarkably well all these years. His name is Tom Engelhardt and, back in the early 1990s, he wrote a book he called The End of Victory Culture: Cold War America and the Disillusioning of a Generation, which he updated in 2007 (a mere 19 years ago). And I have to tell you that I think it still reads remarkably well and remains sadly apt for our grim Trumpian moment and the war in… no, not Vietnam anymore, of course, but Iran. In fact, I’m not alone when it comes to such an opinion. In July, historian David W. Blight had an op-ed in the New York Times in which he wrote, “The journalist and editor Tom Engelhardt, in his book ‘The End of Victory Culture,’ showed how in the 1950s and ‘60s, across popular culture, ‘triumphalism was in the American grain.’ With children’s toys, cartoons and popular magazines, and especially at the movies, ‘the pleasures of victory culture’ were ‘an act of faith.’ All of us who grew up in this overweening Cold War culture of the 1950s, including and especially Mr. Trump, remember this well, with wildly different lessons.”

And let me add a note about something else entirely: I want all the readers who have “liked” one of my recent Substack pieces to know that I do indeed get a notice of your “liking” it and am always deeply pleased. Unfortunately, this old man just can’t take the time to respond to those reactions, but I wanted you to be aware that I take in every single one of them and they make me feel great! Tom]

Tom Engelhardt created and ran the website TomDispatch.com for nearly 25 years. He was also a co-founder of the American Empire Project and the author of a highly praised history of American triumphalism in the Cold War, “The End of Victory Culture.”

"Whole Earth Farming: Smallholders and the Great Regenerative Transformation," by Hugh Locke

September 20, 2026

By Eurasia Review

Key Takeaways:

Smallholders already feed a third. Hugh Locke’s Whole Earth Farming (Climate Week NYC) says about 475 million Global South farms under two hectares produce ~30% of world food and house ~2 billion people, yet get the least finance, markets, and extension.

His 2050 bet. Supporting about 240 million of those families on ~12% of arable land with regenerative farming and agroforestry, he argues, could cover extra food demand from ~1.5 billion more people without further degrading nature. Haiti’s SFA (~10,000 members, co-founded with Timote Georges): ~40% higher yields, 50–100% higher household income, ~1 million trees a year via “tree currency.”

Climate and measurement, with caveats. Locke cites peer-reviewed work putting mature soil-carbon removal at ~0.48–0.72 Gt CO2/year on ~480 million hectares, plus ~0.1 Gt from less fertilizer (~0.6–0.85 Gt CO2e/year, aviation-scale)—only while soils still take up carbon (often 1–3 decades). He backs Regen10 outcomes over a practice checklist and treats Bahá’í farm principles as optional “open-source” ethics, not a creed. Foreword: Rockefeller’s Roy Steiner.

Just Half World’s 475 Million Smallholder Farmers Could Meet All Of Humanity’s Additional Food Needs In 2050 While Restoring Soils And Biodiversity

Hundreds of millions of smallholder farmers could play an outsized role in feeding humanity’s growing population while restoring nature, but a new book underlines that they are the least supported producers in global agriculture.

Whole Earth Farming: Smallholders and the Great Regenerative Transformation says there are roughly 475 million smallholder farms in the Global South, typically operating on less than two hectares (five acres). Together, these farmers already produce about 30% of the world’s food, despite severely limited access to finance, markets, technical and practical education support.

In his book, development expert Hugh Locke says helping just half of the smallholders farmers worldwide – about 240 million farming families – to adopt regenerative agriculture and agroforestry could yield all the additional food required by population growth through 2050 while improving rather than degrading nature.


And those farms would occupy only about 12% of the world’s arable land.

“The world’s smallholder farmers are too often treated as beneficiaries of development assistance when they should be recognized as architects of the next agricultural transformation,” says Locke, co-founder of the Smallholder Farmers Alliance in Haiti.

The world population is expected to increase by roughly 1.5 billion by 2050, he notes, with that growth concentrated in developing countries. Locke’s central proposition is that meeting that additional food does not have to come at the cost of further soil degradation, biodiversity loss and climate change.

Instead, he argues, the same investment needed to increase smallholder productivity could help turn agriculture into a regenerative force.
Haiti: a working laboratory

Many of the insights in Whole Earth Farming are based on Locke’s experience with the Smallholder Farmers Alliance (SFA), which he co-founded with Haitian agronomist Timote Georges in 2010.


The organization now works with roughly 10,000 member farmers in Haiti.

When participating smallholders receive basic agricultural support based on sustainable practices, their yields increase by an average of about 40%, he notes, while household incomes rise between 50 – 100%, depending on local conditions.

SFA members also plant an average of approximately 1 million trees a year.

With SFA’s leadership and help, Haiti’s farmers began transitioning production to a regenerative approach that combines agroforestry with what the SFA calls “tree currency”: farmers plant and care for trees in exchange for agricultural services, training, seeds and other inputs. The model connects increased farm productivity directly with environmental restoration.

The Haiti experience helped shape one of the book’s central conclusions: hundreds of millions of smallholder farmers are producing below their potential because agricultural policies, research, financing and extension systems have disproportionately supported large-scale agriculture for decades.

“This is not about nostalgia or returning agriculture to the past,” Locke says. “It is about recognizing where one of the greatest opportunities for the future now exists.”
Farming that restores instead of extracting from nature

Rather than simply reduce the damage farming causes, regenerative agriculture is a holistic approach to farming that aims to improve the natural systems on which agriculture depends.


It draws on three streams of knowledge: Indigenous and ancestral farming traditions; decades of experience with organic farming, agroecology, permaculture and other sustainable approaches; and contemporary science, including advances in soil biology, ecosystem science and impact measurement.

Depending on local conditions, regenerative farmers can employ techniques including crop rotation, cover crops, intercropping and diverse cropping systems, composting and other methods of building soil organic matter, reduced tillage, agroforestry and integration of livestock.

The objective is not adherence to a universal checklist. It is measurable improvement in outcomes such as soil health, biodiversity, water quality and availability, carbon storage, food production, farmer livelihoods and community resilience.

Locke describes this as regenerative agriculture’s “dual revolution”: a farming methodology and a framework for determining whether farming is actually producing regenerative results.

This distinction is important because practices appropriate to a smallholder in Haiti, India or Kenya may be very different from those suitable for a farm in Canada or the United States.


“The question is not simply, ‘Are you using regenerative practices?'” says Locke. “The more important question is, ‘Is the land, the ecosystem and the farming community measurably better as a result?'”

The approach represents a shift, he says, from shifting agricultural practices to “do less harm” to practices designed to produce net positive outcomes.
Climate dividend

The book also examines how such a transformation could affct climate change.

Healthy soils and growing plants remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store carbon in soil and biomass. Regenerative systems can also reduce emissions associated with the manufacture and transportation of synthetic fertilizers.

Drawing on peer-reviewed research, Locke says approximately 240 million smallholder farms making the transition to regenerative agriculture across an estimated 480 million hectares could eventually remove every year up to 0.72 gigatons of CO2 from the atmosphere annually during the period in which soil carbon is actively accumulating.

Furthermore, reduced reliance on synthetic fertilizer could provide an additional climate benefit of roughly 0.1 gigaton of CO2 equivalent annually, bringing the estimated combined benefit to approximately 0.6 to 0.85 gigatons per year at mature adoption.

That is roughly comparable in scale to the annual CO2 emissions of global aviation.

Locke stresses that soils cannot absorb carbon indefinitely. Soil carbon generally accumulates over one to three decades before approaching a new equilibrium, and outcomes vary substantially with soils, climate, farming practices and farmers’ starting conditions.


“Regenerative agriculture is not a license to keep emitting carbon elsewhere,” says Locke. “Its climate potential is important precisely because it comes alongside other benefits we urgently need anyway: healthier soil, greater biodiversity, more resilient farms, increased food production and stronger rural communities.”
Measuring what “regenerative” actually means

The book arrives as regenerative agriculture is moving rapidly into the mainstream but still lacks a universally agreed definition.

Locke argues that this makes credible measurement especially important.

Rather than allowing a farm or company to be considered regenerative because it has adopted one favoured technique, Whole Earth Farming advocates assessing a broad range of environmental and social outcomes.

The book highlights the emerging “Regen10 Outcomes Framework,” developed through more than two years of global consultation, as an important step toward establishing a common reference for assessing regenerative agriculture while allowing farmers to choose methods appropriate to local circumstances.

The framework encompasses ecological health, farmer livelihoods, food quality, community resilience and other outcomes.

The distinction also guards against reducing regenerative agriculture to carbon alone.

A farming system that sequesters carbon while degrading biodiversity, water resources or farmer livelihoods, Locke argues, cannot meaningfully be called regenerative.
A great regenerative transformation

Locke calls the opportunity a “Great Regenerative Transformation,” comparable in ambition to the Green Revolution that dramatically increased agricultural production during the second half of the 20th century.

But there is a fundamental difference. Where the Green Revolution relied heavily on improved crop varieties, irrigation, synthetic fertilizers, pesticides and increasing standardization, Locke envisions a transformation that combines traditional agricultural knowledge with ecological science, locally adapted practices and modern systems for measuring outcomes.

The goal is not simply more food per hectare. Success would instead be measured by what agriculture produces and what it leaves behind: healthier soils, restored ecosystems, greater biodiversity, improved water systems, climate resilience and viable farming communities.


Locke argues that smallholders are particularly well positioned to lead such a transformation because many retain traditional agricultural knowledge, operate diversified farms and have not adopted industrial farming systems as extensively as producers in wealthier countries.

The challenge is giving them access to the training, finance, research, markets, data and extension services needed to make that potential real.

Alongside its practical exploration of smallholder farming and regenerative agriculture, Whole Earth Farming makes a less expected case: that the Bahá’í Faith offers principles relevant to agriculture’s future; its teachings connect farming with humanity’s spiritual, social and economic development.

Locke focuses particularly on ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, who from 1901 to 1921 directed the farming community of ‘Adasíyyih in the Jordan Valley. He argues that practices used there anticipated many now associated with regenerative agriculture, including crop rotation, agroforestry, integrated livestock and soil-building, while applying broader principles of equality, consultation and justice.

Locke extends these ideas globally, arguing that the faith’s principle that “the earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens” provides a framework for treating farmers, governments, companies and international institutions as parts of an interdependent agricultural system. He stresses that the principles require no religious belief, describing them as “open-source foundational truths” that could help regenerative agriculture scale across cultures, continents and generations without fragmenting into competing definitions.
“Not a measure of the problem, but a measure of the possibility”

The book carries a foreword by Roy Steiner, Senior Vice President, Food Initiative, The Rockefeller Foundation, who describes the world’s 475 million smallholder farming households as “not a measure of the problem, but as a measure of the possibility.”

Steiner writes that regenerative transformation cannot be reduced to carbon or measured by crop yield alone, and that it cannot succeed without farmers themselves being active agents of change.

The book has also drawn endorsements from leaders spanning agriculture, humanitarian action, conservation, development and public policy.

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton says Locke shares lessons from his work with smallholders “with both rigorous evidence and genuine humanity.”

Chef and humanitarian José Andrés writes that farmers have the power not only to produce food but to strengthen local economies and nourish the future, concluding: “Read this book. Then do something.”

Other contributions and endorsements have been provided by Elizabeth Dowdeswell, former UN Environment Programme Executive Director and Lieutenant Governor of Ontario;
Danielle Nierenberg, Food Tank President;
Rainn Wilson, actor and environmental advocate, who wrote the introduction;
Paula Caldwell St-Onge, former Canadian Ambassador to Haiti;
Tara Shyam, Executive Director of Regen10; and
Leaders from organizations working in agriculture, food security, reforestation and international development.

The book includes 21 stories from 18 countries illustrating regenerative agriculture through the experiences of farmers and farming communities rather than presenting it solely as an abstract global model.

Its examples range from Colombia and Thailand to Canada, the Netherlands and farming communities across Africa, Asia and Latin America.

Launched during Climate Week NYC, Whole Earth Farming offers a deceptively simple proposition: The world need not choose between feeding more people and restoring the planet. It’s possible to do both if hundreds of millions of farmers who have long operated at the margins of agricultural policy are finally given the means.
By the numbers

570 million – Approximate number of farms worldwide.

475 million – Smallholder farms in the Global South with less than two hectares (five acres).

~2 billion – People living and working on those smallholder farms, approximately one-quarter of humanity.

30% – Approximate share of the world’s food already produced by smallholders.

1.5 billion – Approximate increase in world population expected by 2050, concentrated in developing countries.

240 million – Smallholder farming families the book proposes supporting in a global regenerative transition.

12% – Approximate share of global arable land those farms would cultivate.

0.48–0.72 gigatons CO2/year – Estimated potential annual soil carbon removal at mature adoption during the active accumulation period.

0.6–0.85 gigatons CO2e/year – Estimated combined mature annual climate benefit when avoided emissions associated with reduced synthetic fertilizer use are included.


10,000 – Approximate number of Smallholder Farmers Alliance members in Haiti.

1 million – Approximate number of trees planted annually by SFA members.

21 stories / 18 countries – Farmer and regenerative agriculture stories featured in Whole Earth Farming.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for BAHAI

 

Dogs Leading the Way Out of Animal Experimentation

For years, the suffering of animals in Canadian laboratories has been hidden behind closed doors. But thanks to courageous whistleblowers and undercover investigations, the truth is finally coming to light. In 2025, Animal Justice helped two brave whistleblowers expose a secret dog-testing lab at St. Joseph’s Hospital in London, Ontario. The public outrage that followed helped force the hospital to shut down the lab, and the surviving dogs were rehomed. The exposé also helped pass groundbreaking legislation prohibiting invasive medical research on dogs and cats—a world first.  More recently, an investigation by Last Chance for Animals exposed the cruel treatment of beagles at Nucro-Technics, Canada’s largest contract animal research facility, which sourced many of its dogs from the controversial and now-shuttered Ridglan Farms. These breakthroughs have opened a rare and urgent window of opportunity. If you care deeply about protecting animals and want to help turn this momentum into nationwide change for all animals, this panel is for you. Dogs Leading the Way Out of Animal Experimentation Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2026  Time: 7:00–8:30 PM ET Join Us! Our panelists: Dr. Stacy Lopresti-Goodman: Animal Legal Defense Fund Alex Mooney: St Joseph’s Whistleblower Nives Ilic & Mack: Animal Justice & former lab dog  Dr. Charu Chandrasekera: Canadian Institute for Animal-Free Science Kaitlyn Mitchell: Animal Justice Hosted by: Animal Justice’s Kimberly Carroll We’ll discuss: How to help ensure dogs and cats are rehomed before Ontario’s Bill 75 comes into force in January How to push for similar protections for companion animals across the rest of Canada Using this momentum to move toward replacing all animals in research The case for animal-free science and how supporters can help advance it Animal Justice panels are always warm, spirited events where folks get to learn, exchange ideas, and be in community. I hope you’ll join us! Also, feel free to pass this event on to anyone you think would be interested.  Register Now We hope to see you there. In appreciation, Kimberly Carroll Animal Justice Camapaign Strategist & Board Member

 

Emergency room visits for gambling disorders nearly doubled after expanded online gambling market

Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences

Facebook

X
Email

Toronto, ON, September 16, 2026 — Emergency department (ED) visits for gambling disorders doubled following the legalization of single-event sports betting and expansion of Ontario's online gambling market, according to a new study from ICES. The increase was observed predominantly among young men.  

Canada legalized single-event sports betting in August 2021. In April 2022, Ontario became the first province to allow private companies to operate in a regulated online gambling market alongside the existing government-run platform. Ontario’s online legal gambling market currently includes 83 gaming and betting sites operated by 43 private companies, including some of the world’s largest multinational gambling corporations. In 2024, Ontarians wagered $82.7 billion CAD on these sites through 2.6 million player accounts.  

To assess the effects of these changes, researchers analyzed ED visits for gambling disorders all among Ontarians aged 10 to 105 years before and after the online gambling expansion to private companies, which included legalizing single-event sports betting. 

Over the 14-year study period, 757 people had a total of 952 ED visits in which a gambling disorder was recorded as either the main or a contributing reason for the visit. Almost three-quarters of these individuals were male. 

By the end of the study period, the observed number of visits was 154 per cent higher than expected among males aged 10 to 29; and 116 per cent higher than expected among males aged 30 to 44. There were no changes in females. More than 70 per cent of gambling disorder ED visits involved another mental health condition or heavy substance use and almost one-third of the visits led to hospital admission. 

“The concentration of the increase among younger males is particularly concerning given the rapid growth and promotion of online sports betting, which target this demographic,” says first author Ryan Forrest, a public health doctoral student at the University of Toronto. “The consequences of rising gambling involve not just harm to people who are gambling but wider effects on families and communities.” 

Past research has shown that individuals with gambling problems seldom pursue formal treatment due to stigma, and those who seek help often do so only after worsening health and social harms. 

The author team previously reported a substantial increase in gambling-related contacts to ConnexOntario, Ontario’s mental health and addiction helpline, following the expansion of online gambling. However, the increases in helpline trends could have been explained by greater promotion of gambling support services, including requirements for gambling advertisements and websites to display contact information for ConnexOntario.  

The new findings provide important complementary evidence as EDs are not promoted through gambling advertisements or betting websites as a source for gambling support. Collectively, increases in both helpline contacts and severe gambling-related presentations to the ED add to evidence that the expansion of online gambling has been accompanied by an increase in gambling-related harm, particularly among younger men. 

“Most people experiencing gambling problems will never seek care, so the concern is that the increases in ED visits for gambling disorders we observed may be revealing much larger increases in gambling-related harm,” says senior author Daniel Myran, Gordon F. Cheesbrough Research Chair at North York General, a scientist at ICES, and an associate professor with the Department of Family and Community Medicine at the University of Toronto.  

In July 2026, Alberta became the second province to allow private operators to offer online gambling, “and other regions of Canada are considering or facing pressure to follow suit,” says Myran.  

“Data from Ontario provide an important caution about the potential harms that can accompany rapid expansion of online gambling,” continues Myran. “Jurisdictions considering expanding or offering online gambling through private operators should carefully weigh these potential risks and, if proceeding, consider additional safeguards, including restrictions on marketing and higher-risk forms of gambling, alongside better recognition and treatment of gambling-related harms.” 

The study “Emergency department visits for gambling disorders after the legalization of single-event sports betting and rapid expansion of online gambling” is in the September issue of The American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 

 

ICES is an independent, not-for-profit research and analytics institute that uses population-based health information to produce knowledge on a broad range of healthcare issues. ICES leads cutting-edge studies and analyses evaluating healthcare policy, delivery, and population outcomes. Our knowledge is highly regarded in Canada and abroad and is widely used by government, hospitals, planners, and practitioners to make decisions about healthcare delivery and to develop policy. For the latest ICES news, follow us on Facebook and LinkedIn: @ICESOntario      

North York General is Canada's #1 community academic hospital as recognized by Newsweek, with a vision to deliver World-Class Care, 24/7, where care is always on, always coordinated, and always centred around the person. We are among the world's highest performing hospitals, combining innovation with compassionate, people-centred care. From advances in digital health and AI to new models of care, research and education, we are always looking for better ways to improve health and the patient experience. Home to one of Ontario's largest birthing centres, a top-performing Emergency Department, Canada's only breast cancer program accredited by the American College of Surgeons, and comprehensive palliative care, we are also building a new model for seniors' care. Through every stage of life, North York General is here for life. 

About Bruyère Health Research Institute
Bruyère Health Research Institute conducts world-class research to maximize quality of life and shape the future of health care. As part of an academic sciences centre, our research supports evidence-based care focused on memory, aging in place, long-term care, palliative care, rehabilitation and 

---

Journal

American Journal of Preventive Medicine

DOI

10.1016/j.amepre.2026.108551

Method of Research

Observational study

Subject of Research

People

Article Title

Emergency department visits for gambling disorders after the legalization of single-event sports betting and rapid expansion of online gambling

Article Publication Date

16-Sep-2026

 

Canada courts C$1 trillion with mining at centre of pitch

Cecilia Jamasmie | September 14, 2026 | 

PM Mark Carney emphasizes mining in Canada’s C$1 trillion global investment bid. (Photo by Lars Hagberg | PM Office.)

Prime Minister Mark Carney is putting mining at the centre of Canada’s bid for C$1 trillion ($721 billion) in global investment as Ottawa seeks capital to build mines, processing plants and the infrastructure needed to get more of the country’s resources to market.

More than a third of the 167 projects being pitched at the first Canada Investment Summit in Toronto this week involve minerals and mining. The broader portfolio spans energy, infrastructure, manufacturing and technology as the government brings Canadian businesses face-to-face with some of the world’s largest investors.

The mining-heavy pitch comes as escalating trade tensions with the US increase pressure on Canada to diversify its economic relationships and find new markets for its resources. But attracting investors is only part of the challenge: Canada must also show it can permit, finance and build major projects quickly enough to compete for global capital.

Mining capital

Carney invited 100 of the world’s biggest investors, collectively overseeing more than $70 trillion in assets, to the summit.

Expected attendees include BlackRock chairman Larry Fink and Temasek CEO Dilhan Pillay, along with managers of Norway’s government pension fund and representatives of state-owned companies such as Abu Dhabi National Oil Co.

Among the mining companies seeking capital is Troilus Mining (TSX: TLG), which needs $1.43 billion to develop its gold-copper project in Quebec. The prospectus also includes a nuclear-fuel services project described as Canada’s first uranium refining and conversion facility in more than 40 years.

The investment gap leaves substantial room for growth. BMO Equity Research forecasts annual Canadian development capital expenditures will increase more than 11% over the next two years. 

Mining companies covered by BMO are expected to spend about C$350 billion on operating costs, sustaining capital and growth projects to produce Canadian metals and minerals over the next five years.

Beyond commodities

Canada’s opportunity extends beyond extracting commodities, BMO Global Metals & Mining analyst Matthew Murphy said in an investment report. Additional capital is needed for copper smelting and refining, by-product recovery, battery precursor materials, rare earth separation, magnets, graphite processing and recycling.

Building those capabilities could allow Canada to capture more value from its mineral wealth instead of relying primarily on upstream production.

The country has already produced major mining companies and attracted some of the world’s largest operators, giving investors exposure across commodities and market capitalizations. They range from Canada’s Agnico Eagle Mines (TSX: AEM; NYSE: AEM) to global miners Glencore (LSE: GLEN) and BHP (NYSE: BHP; LSE: BHP).

For investors gathering in Toronto, BMO’s analysis suggests the opportunity is therefore broader than financing individual mines. Reaching Canada’s investment ambitions will require capital for infrastructure, mineral production, processing and downstream industries that can turn its resource base into more complete domestic supply chains.

Carney’s push for investment also extends beyond Canada’s borders. After the summit, he is scheduled to travel to Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon, France, on Sept. 20 to meet French President Emmanuel Macron.

The two leaders are expected to discuss deeper cooperation in strategic sectors including energy and critical minerals, along with aerospace and advanced technologies such as quantum computing, satellites and supercomputing. The talks come as Canada pursues closer economic and security relationships with France and the European Union.

Carney has also put figures with deep business and investment experience in key government positions. He appointed Dominic Barton, chair of Rio Tinto (ASX, LON: RIO) and a former Canadian ambassador to China, as chair of Invest in Canada, the federal agency responsible for attracting foreign direct investment.

Building challenge

For miners, access to capital solves only one part of the development equation.

Carney has moved to streamline project approvals and accelerate major developments, but Canada’s lengthy permitting processes and history of delays remain potential obstacles to converting investment commitments into producing mines and processing facilities.

The issue is particularly acute in mining because deposits cannot be moved to jurisdictions offering faster approvals. Developing a mine can require billions of dollars in upfront investment alongside roads, power, processing plants and transportation infrastructure before its commodities reach customers.

Energy investors have faced similar problems. Carney has reversed some climate policies introduced under former prime minister Justin Trudeau and supported the prospect of another oil pipeline, yet some executives remain wary after previous projects failed to advance.

Enbridge Inc.’s (TSX: ENB) proposed Northern Gateway pipeline had its federal approval overturned by a court, while TC Energy (TSX: TRP) abandoned its C$15.7-billion Energy East project to carry crude to Eastern Canada.

Canada could encourage reluctant investors to move off the sidelines by putting government capital behind projects, according to TD deputy chief economist Derek Burleton.

The summit’s success could ultimately hinge on whether Canada can move beyond supplying raw materials and attract the investment needed to build domestic refining, processing and manufacturing capacity that captures more of their value.

(With files from Bloomberg)

Investment in Canada’s mining sector to grow with global demand: BMO

Marina Meireles | September 13, 2026 |

Saskatchewan, the heart of Canada’s potash industry, is a top destination for mining investments. (Image courtesy of Potash Corp.)

Canada’s mining sector could capture a larger share of global capital as rising critical-mineral demand, expanding development spending and government support create opportunities from mines to processing, according to BMO Global Metals & Mining. 

The outlook comes ahead of the Canada Investment Summit on Sept. 14-15, which aims to bring together major global investors and business leaders to help catalyze C$1 trillion ($721 billion) in total investment in Canada over the next five years, according to Matthew Murphy, BMO’s managing director, Equity Research. The federal government has identified critical minerals as one of the key areas for attracting that capital. 

Canada already ranks as the world’s largest potash producer, second-largest uranium producer, and fourth-largest gold producer and aluminum refiner. Global mining expertise and leadership as well as government regulators that aim to develop the industry domestically, give the country an established base from which to expand. 

Development spending is also returning to corporate capital allocation plans. As of 2025, companies planned about C$120 billion of spending on projects included in Natural Resources Canada’s 10-year Major Projects Inventory outlook, Murphy said. That is C$50 billion more than in the 2018 outlook, though still well below the previous cycle’s peak of about C$220 billion in real 2026 dollars. 

The investment gap leaves substantial room for growth. BMO Equity Research forecasts annual Canadian development capital expenditures will rise more than 11% over the next two years. Mining companies covered by BMO are expected to spend C$350B on operating costs, sustaining capital, and growth projects to produce metals and minerals in Canada over the next five years.  

Investment in key areas 

BMO’s study asks investors to shift from upstream towards downstream investment to make end-to-end production in Canada a reality. That spending could reinforce Canada’s position as governments seek more secure supplies of commodities essential to energy, defence and advanced manufacturing, while miners increasingly consider the country for new development capital, the bank says. 

For that shift to happen, the next mining investments need to focus on domestic copper smelting and refining, by-product capture, battery precursor materials, rare earth separation and other specific materials smelting and production, BMO recommends. 

Infrastructure has always been a key area for investing in mining, but it now can unlock new mining districts and generate new opportunities across the country, from British Columbia to Ontario’s Ring of Fire to Nunavut in projects ranging from gold, nickel and lithium.  

Considering the importance of critical minerals in the global market, BMO recommends developing niche critical-mineral supply chains, which may require government intervention where market economics alone are insufficient. 

Targeted price supports could be needed for some commodities, while capital and regulatory backing for vertical integration could help companies develop more profitable downstream portions of the critical-mineral supply chain, Murphy said. 

Those measures could address some of the challenges facing critical-mineral projects, including volatile prices, limited domestic processing capacity and competition for investment capital.  

Infrastructure financing may provide another route to expanding the industry. Separating infrastructure investment from mine development could attract specialized infrastructure funds, reduce the cost of capital and free miners to direct more money toward production capacity and downstream facilities, according to Murphy. 

Funding gap 

Improving mining profitability and advancing new projects will require not only greater investment in the sector, but also careful decisions about where that capital is allocated.  

Separating infrastructure and mine operations investments could attract more infrastructure funds, lower the cost of capital and bring more capital for mining capacity and downstream industry.  

While Canadians are investing in mining, BMO finds it could be invested more domestically. It suggests that there’s an opportunity for mining infrastructure investment, especially through the Canadian pension fund that manages C$4.5 trillion ($3.2 trillion) in assets that are under-allocated domestically.  

Murphy said that alignment could allow Canadian pension funds to generate more competitive risk-adjusted returns domestically, while helping finance infrastructure and mining capacity needed to unlock new districts. 

For investors gathering at the Canada Investment Summit, BMO’s analysis suggests the opportunity is therefore broader than financing individual mines. Reaching Canada’s investment ambitions will require capital across infrastructure, mineral production, processing and other downstream industries that can turn the country’s resource base into more complete domestic supply chains. 

With the increasing alignment of government, regulators, and citizens, the Canadian mining sector can offer highly competitive risk-adjusted returns and enable funds to invest in the country, BMO concluded.