We can take ownership of climate change

November 25, 2009 3:45 pm

World HandsThe Labour movement column

By Anthony Painter and A. Williams

“Gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages; the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage; neither our wisdom nor our learning; neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country; it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.”

Robert F. Kennedy knew that value wasn’t just about profit and loss. In his time, the significant environmental concern was pollution. Now it is climate change. And 40 years on we have moved at a frighteningly slow pace in terms of our fundamental ethos. To paraphrase Oscar Wilde: we know the price of everything and the value of little.

But at least, as we approach the Copenhagen Climate Conference next week, there is an acknowledgement by policy makers that this cannot continue. Whether this acknowledgement results in a meaningful Treaty remains to be seen. At best, it seems that we can hope for a political agreement with a legally binding Treaty to follow in 2010.

All this is mainly a conversation between elites. The rest of us are onlookers. Like financial collapse the problem seems too big and too remote to even contemplate. Only 41% of UK citizens accept that climate change is happening and is anthropogenic, according to a recent Populus poll. The risk of backslide on the climate change agenda is significant. And yet, little is being done to bring people into the process of changing our society and economy so that we can avert climate catastrophe.

Quite simply, we have to find ways of enabling people to take ownership in a collective effort to reduce our negative impact on the environment.

Imagine if local communities could set the priorities, visions and goals for how they might reduce climate change along with the government. Sound idealistic? Well, such an arrangement has been established not in the field of climate change but in development. We are not talking about the UK. We are talking about the African state of Angola, emerging from over three decades of civil war.

A US government and corporate funded pilot project was established in 2006 to increase capacities of both local government and civil society to participate in municipal development.

Essentially the Municipal Development Program (MDP) is building a connection between communities and government to achieve lasting development.

Local forums were established where local issues are discussed and projects to solve them are created. In these forums, community members, community leaders, local government officials and the private sector discuss the priorities of the local area and establish development projects.

These have included the renovation of local schools, rehabilitation of the local water supply, agricultural projects and training for youths and women benefiting well over 200,000 people. Through a continued process of consultation and debate, these and other projects and policies are included into a municipal development plan, which informs local planning policies and development.

In a country where a generation grew up accustomed to civil war in their communities, a genuine spirit of cooperation, accountability and renewed hope is emerging. A process of political debate, social interaction and investment has transformed the five municipalities participating in the programme.

Angola has recently overtaken Nigeria as Africa’s largest oil producing nation and the government has remained committed to decentralisation despite the recent fall in the price of oil. This indicates that the price of people’s participation is more important than oil, something Robert F. Kennedy would agree with.

So could this apply to the UK? In the UK we consider ourselves to be a developed country and that perhaps the lessons from Africa do not apply to us. Yet, adapting to climate change is, in a sense, a development issue. So, like the Angolan example, why not involve our communities in the effort to reduce our detrimental impact on the environment? How would this work?

Last week’s Labour movement column argued that the left should properly acknowledge the importance of ownership in distributing power more equitably. Here is an opportunity to develop new forms of ownership that can be engineered towards reducing our impact on the environment.

Each community (based on local authority area) could establish an environmental cooperative. It could be piloted in 20 communities initially. The objective of the cooperative would be to reduce that community’s carbon emissions by say 10% within five years. A baseline assessment of per capita carbon emissions would be made and then the reduction would be calculated in relation to that.

Every individual, public body, voluntary organisation and business would be given a share of the cooperative. Collectively they would decide how to reduce the area’s per capita emissions: determining to grant wind power planning applications, installing roadside charge points for electric cars, insulating homes, public buildings and businesses, increasing recycling above legal requirements, investing in better public transport and so on.

A central fund would be established to incentivise communities. The local environmental cooperatives could access these funds based on whether they can successfully meet the targets. Those cooperatives who reduce their emissions and improve their environmental impact the most will receive a higher proportion of the funds.

Like in Angola, under these proposals, local communities in the UK could use their green windfall to spend on local priorities. This could be improving public spaces, local schools, investing in further environmental improvements, or distributing it as a Council Tax rebate.

So just as the development model trialed in Angola increased participation, extended citizenship, met local needs and priorities, and fulfilled broader objectives, this new inclusive approach to managing our environmental impact in the UK would have similar benefits. Once successfully implemented in the pilots, there is no reason why this model could not be applied across the UK as a whole and replicated in the EU and beyond.

No-one is pretending this ambitious idea will be easy. But if our society is to reach beyond materialism, recover public value, embrace participation and citizenship, and make a greater dent on how we negatively impact the environment, then we can’t be ambitious enough. Robert F. Kennedy wouldn’t flinch from this fight for a single second. And nor should we.




Comments are closed

Latest

  • Comment Fairness dictates that we show concern for both sides

    Fairness dictates that we show concern for both sides

    We have all been shocked to see the surge in violence between Israel and Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip. This conflict is causing enormous hardship on both sides. Particularly distressing is the sight of civilian casualties. The scale of human suffering in the current escalation is immense and every civilian casualty is a tragedy. The people of Gaza have the right to live in peace and freedom, just as Israelis have the right not to fear for […]

    Read more →
  • News Are Osborne’s spinners block journalists from asking questions they don’t like?

    Are Osborne’s spinners block journalists from asking questions they don’t like?

    An intriguing story emerged from a copy of the Express and Star last week, the regional newspaper that covers the West Midlands and Staffordshire. Daniel Wainwright reports that during a recent visit from the Chancellor, a radio journalist said she wanted to ask George Osborne about food banks, and was told that he simply wouldn’t answer it. Here’s the story: “Talking of George Osborne, here’s a little insight into what goes on in the run up to getting an interview. These […]

    Read more →
  • News Alexander intervenes on Gaza escalation that “shames our shared humanity”

    Alexander intervenes on Gaza escalation that “shames our shared humanity”

    Douglas Alexander, Labour Shadow Foreign Secretary, has made another intervention on the Gaza conflict as the crisis in the Middle East continues to escalate. Alexander condemns the attack on a UN school in Gaza, describing the deaths of children there as “[shaming] our shared humanity”. His latest comments seem to be aimed largely at lobbying Israel to stand down the level of the force, and to recognise that as a democracy with “vastly superior technological and military capabilities, comes particular responsibilities”. […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Labour changes track – and now it can win

    Labour changes track – and now it can win

    Labour has not generated many headlines this week. There haven’t been game-changers. David Cameron wasn’t trounced in Prime Minister’s Questions. The polls haven’t shifted. The meeting with a post-stardust Obama passed by without significant benefit or incident. Yet, this has been Labour’s best week for some considerable time – certainly in this Parliament. Heading into the final furlong of the election race, Labour has three strategic weaknesses: its perceived weaknesses on leadership, an absence of a strong governing story and a […]

    Read more →
  • News This is just one of the reasons why the Tories will never do well in the North East

    This is just one of the reasons why the Tories will never do well in the North East

    David Cameron has been on BBC Radio Tees – that’s the radio station for the Middlesbrough area, and the Tees is the name of the river there. Except this happened (via Buzzfeed): Presenter: “You keep mentioning the River Tyne. That’s not our region prime minister. I’m sorry, we are the River Tees.” Cameron: “I’m sorry, I thought I was doing….” Tyneside is of course around 50 miles North of Middlesbrough – it’s home to Newcastle, and Gateshead, and those of us who are […]

    Read more →