Hot air and weak messaging

This week presented a chance to catch up on some much needed reading. The Green Alliance's excellent From Hot Air to Happy Endings collection of articles analysed why the climate change message is not resonating with the public, with most contributions pummelling the government for sending out mixed and inconsistent messages.

In his article, one of our trustees, Ian Christie, points out that our leaders use a baffling array of stories to describe the problem. These vary from a global crisis through to a great opportunity for the UK; or from potential financial disaster through to a fantastic new low carbon economic future.

The Act on CO2 campaign is heavily criticised. Ian asks "even if people know that CO2 is the chemical notation for carbon dioxide how does one "act on" a molecule? And why? "

One of the campaign adverts shows a girl being read a doom-laden bedtime story by her dad depicting the threat of the CO2 monster. The campaign's answers to the huge ecological threat seem puny in the face of this looming calamity. Is drawing your curtains at night really going to solve the problem? Having said that, I do think that the campaign's current drive to show people what others have and are doing through social media is a good idea. Anything that makes the solutions seem main stream is a step in the right direction.

Let's hope the Government learn to follow this example, but in a much bigger way. A large number of the contributors urge them to start taking high profile visual action that demonstrates that they are responding at an appropriate scale to the problem they are describing. A major and high profile programme of renewable energy installations on public buildings or a shift of public procurement to electric vehicles could both play a major role.

Instead of these significant initiatives we are faced with technical tinkering which is not understood or seen by the majority of the public and communication campaigns that are fundamentally flawed.

Unruly verges

On Thursday, I spoke at a Sustainable Development Conference. The majority of the delegates were from local authorities. Local authority interest in sustainable development seems to be increasing largely because of a new set of environmental National Indicators that many authorities have signed up to. These indicators are a classic example of central government delegating responsibilities which they are too afraid to take down to a local level.

I was struck by how enthusiastically and successfully many of the authorities have addressed this added responsibility – usually with very minimal resources. Despite their efforts however, the result is often that a myriad of local schemes and initiatives which can cause public confusion. The best example of this is in London where recycling schemes vary from borough-to-borough making it hard for people to understand what they can recycle and meaning there are a huge number of different communication campaigns.

The other thing that struck me from the conference is what a difficult role local authorities have. During question time a Councillor from North Devon stated that she wanted to increase the bio-diversity in her area. One way of doing this is by leaving roadside verges and other public spaces to grow rather than being constantly cut. This would also have the advantage of saving money. She had put this policy in place only to face a public backlash from people who were outraged that the area looked less tidy. What she asked, could she do to change public opinion. I had absolutely no idea, it would require a major education and awareness programme on just this one issue to get public support for what is a very sensible and simple policy.

Fallen woman of Southwark

One source of income for charities is from Charitable Trusts and Foundations. There are literally thousands of these. Many were set up by philanthropists during the Industrial Revolution and give out small amounts of money to reflect the concerns of the wealthy donors. As a result, there are trusts that give small amounts of money to very specific causes including money to help "fallen women in Southwark" or to support retired greyhounds.

For the past five years the Ecology Trust has analysed how much charitable trust money is given to green causes. This research shows that less than three per cent of total trust funding is spent on environmental grants. Less than 0.3 per cent of grants made by the largest grant-making foundations were directed to climate change activities.

There are a whole host of reasons why this is the case. Climate change wasn't an issue when a large number of trusts were established. They tend to be very conservative in their giving and infrequently alter priorities even though societal needs change. There are a limited number of new foundations being established, unlike the US where the spirit of philanthropy is alive and kicking and where environmental giving represents nearly seven per cent of the total amount donated (more than twice in the UK).

Finally charitable trusts want to ensure that their money is spent well and like to see clear and tangible outcomes. This is difficult with an issue as large and as abstract as climate change and – it has to be said – environmental charities in the UK tend not to be very good at explaining what they do and why they offer value for money. We try to tackle this by measuring action rather than pledges, but it can be an uphill struggle.

Social lepers

My wife and I decided that we would cycle from Newbury to Reading this Saturday along national cycle route 4. The trip involved getting a couple of trains one way and another on the way back.

This sort of break should tick many of the Government's policy boxes, as it is relatively low carbon and healthy. But undertaking the trip required a herculean effort. The two South West trains had no facilities for bikes making us extremely unpopular with our fellow passengers. The First Great Western train did have space for five bikes but required an Olympic sprint from the bike storage area back to the passenger seats to ensure that we managed to get on the train.

It was not surprising that we were the only people on any of the trains with bikes and that the sporadically signposted but beautiful cycle route was sparsely used. Moving the UK to a low carbon economy where people can spend their leisure time in a way that has a lower impact on the environment seems a long, long way away.

Trewin Restorick is chief executive of environmental charity and advisory body Global Action Plan

This article first appeared on his weekly blog Trewin Says