To campaign or not to campaign by Harriet Williams

Do charities spend too much time campaigning? Many would argue that the freedom to speak up for social and political change is precisely what sets the voluntary sector apart.

However, last year, third sector minister Angela Smith came under fire after grants earmarked for campaigning charities were suddenly reassigned to front-line service provision.

And last month, Oliver Letwin, the Conservatives’ head of policy, suggested that charities should focus their energies on service delivery rather than campaigning, the better to “change things and solve problems.” For those who believe environmental and social problems arise from shortcomings in policy design, as much as delivery, Mr. Letwin seemed to have his priorities the wrong way around.

Research by Australian academic John Dryzek and his colleagues suggests that the UK’s political culture has proven consistently hostile to environmental campaigning.  In a comparison of environmentalism in the US, UK, Norway and Germany, the authors describe the UK as an ‘outlier’, where successive governments have operated a policy of “active exclusion” towards oppositional social movements.

This includes the use of criminal laws to suppress more radical forms of environmental campaigning and protest (remember the civil liberty concerns raised by heavy-handed police treatment of climate protestors last year?) careful management of access to the policy-making process for more moderate groups.

Though Ed Miliband, in his short tenure as third sector minister, did verbally support the campaigning nature of charities, that politicians are reluctant to invest government funding to support campaigning organizations comes as no surprise. After all, this would amount to an invitation for grantees to ‘bite the hand that feeds’. Spending the money on service delivery, in line with government policy, must seem an attractive alternative.

And yet it is clear that a lack of political will is a common factor in many of the most pressing environmental challenges that society faces.  In his pamphlet, The New Politics of Climate Change, Stephen Hale, former special adviser to environment secretary Margaret Beckett, and now director of the Green Alliance, persuasively sets out the reasons why politicians find it difficult to take action on issues like climate change.

With negligible government funding available to address these political challenges and to drive changes in policy, what of philanthropists? Are green grantmakers reaching for those parts of civil society that other funders won’t touch?  The evidence that emerges from research carried out by the Environmental Funders Network is mixed.

While a growing number of funders explicitly focus on both politics and policy it is clear that trusts and foundations overall are most comfortable funding practical conservation work, research, and generalized environmental awareness-raising.

Matthew Smerdon of the Baring Foundation is amongst those who would like to see more emphasis on campaigning. “Service delivery is important but the issues facing society cannot be solved by this alone. Whether the aim is to address climate change, improve housing or reduce inequalities we need to influence the public, civil society, business and government. Campaigning, as well as being essential for a healthy democracy, is totally fundamental to our power to achieve our aims.”

For other funders, practical service delivery projects have more appeal. The Community Foundation serving Tyne & Wear and Northumberland, for instance, focuses its environmental programme on projects that benefit disadvantaged groups such as the homeless or urban poor.

“We’re inspiring local communities to take responsibility for changes they can make at the grass roots,” says Katie Wellstead, assistant director, environment. Although campaigning is less relevant to this model, Wellstead thinks it can help create policy change. “Yes, it’s about raising environmental awareness, but over time people might get to a point where they think, we have the evidence of how to do things better , and push policy makers for change.”

The fact remains that foundations are one of the few places that campaigners can turn to for support, particularly when new initiatives are trying to get off the ground. Beth Breeze’s research for the Institute of Philanthropy shows that grantmakers themselves identify “campaigning that led to major social change” among the top three achievements of modern philanthropy.

As environmental problems stack up and the timeframe available to address them shortens, perhaps now is the time for green grantmakers to re-think their strategic approach and to up the campaigning ante.

Harriet Williams helps coordinate the Environmental Funders Network, the views expressed here do not necessarily represent those of the of the Network

Baring Foundation looks to fund effectiveness of organisations in Africa

The Baring Foundation’s Joint International Development programme 2010, in collaboration with the John Ellerman Foundation, is now open.

The purpose of programme is to improve the effectiveness of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and community-based organisations (CBOs) in Sub-Saharan Africa to address problems arising from the long-term forced displacement of people. This does not include economic migration.

The foundations will accept applications from registered charities, voluntary and constituted not-for-profit organisations in the UK, which have had an income of over £150,000, and less than £15m, for each of the last two years.

For more information visit the Baring Foundation website.

Pilot project shows climate change impact must be factored into charity strategy

A pilot project which helped four major UK charities to work through how the world’s changing climate could directly affect their beneficiaries and what they need to do now to protect services and people in future has been completed by The National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO), together with Green Alliance and Global Action Plan.

The resulting guidance from the Big Response project for voluntary and community groups encourages them to think beyond reducing their own carbon footprint to consider how the people and communities they help may need extra support to deal with flooding, heat waves and rising costs brought on by climate change.

Kate Damiral, from NCVO’s strategy and impact team, said: “Too many people still think of climate change as a purely environmental issue to do with recycling, light bulbs and air travel. But organisations need to realise it will pose an immense humanitarian challenge in which vulnerable and disadvantaged people are likely to be the most badly affected.

“By starting to prepare for a changing climate now, charities could help save lives in future by ensuring they are not overwhelmed by events and can deliver the right services to those they support. This is something every charity needs to think about, no matter what the cause.”

The charities involved in the Big Response project were the British Red Cross, Equinox Care, Friends of the Elderly and the Royal National Institute for Blind People (RNIB).

The British Red Cross recognised it could become overwhelmed by the number and scale of climate-related emergencies in the UK. Climate change is now built into the organisation’s next five-year strategy, acknowledging it is one of the most likely factors for increasing demand on its services.

Voluntary and community groups can find advice on how to explore the possible effects of climate change on their beneficiaries and the work they do, along with tips on ways to respond to this challenge on NCVO’s website.

The Big Response project was funded by the Baring Foundation to work specifically with charities that help vulnerable groups.