Green Giving #6: New map helps funders see the wood for the trees

Green Giving #6: New map helps funders see the wood for the trees

News (International, UK)

Philanthropy UK's new regular column on ‘Green Giving’ for 2010 is a response to the superordinate challenge that climate change presents to us all. Though Philanthropy UK is cause neutral, we believe the environmental issue to be one that could impact every cause. Harriet Williams and Jon Cracknell, of the Environmental Funders Network, an informal network of trusts, foundations and individuals making grants on environmental and conservation issues, will also offer analysis, news and insight of ‘enviro philanthropy’, including what other branches of philanthropy can learn from green giving.

We are keen to hear from interested parties on enviro-philanthropy and views on other issues facing society that we should feature in a dedicated column: please email editor@philanthropyuk.org.


Green Giving #6: New map helps funders see the wood for the trees

by Harriet Williams

Environmentalists are a multifarious lot. Green groups subscribe to similar long-term goals  – stabilising the global climate, protecting biodiversity, more sustainable consumption – but differ substantially in their prescriptions for how we get there.

Flick through a few websites and you’ll see several theories of change in action, even within a single issue. Groups vary in their target selection and terms of engagement. Some set about changing policy, others about changing public opinion or the market. Research, lobbying, education and direct action are among the tools at their disposal.

Diversity is a sign of a healthy environmental movement. Most people recognise that ‘silver bullet’ solutions are a rarity, and more often several fronts need to be advanced simultaneously.

Thus a division of labour and tactics is desirable. For instance, groups treading the wilder shores of green activism may open up political space for the mainstream to colonise.

This isn’t to say that a culture of mutual respect always prevails – issues such as carbon trading and how, or if, to cooperate with large corporations are proving deeply divisive (see, for example, Johann Hari’s provocative piece in The Nation.)

With so many strategies in play, how are funders to choose between them, or to navigate faultlines within the environmental movement? Conversations within the EFN suggest that grants officers may feel they only have a partial picture of the choices out there, and the opportunity costs of choosing one over another.

Further, grantmakers frequently rely on grantseekers for information – no harm in that, although it tends towards grants accruing to groups that are most effective at fundraising, without necessarily maximising the added value of philanthropic capital. Previous EFN research shows how grants cluster around a small number of high-profile green groups.

In short, there is an appetite among green funders for tools that lay out different strategies and enable comparison. Crucially, they also want to see how capacity – in terms of civil society effort and funding available – is allocated between them.

With this in mind, the EFN is developing methodology to map capacity upon specific environmental issues, starting with the example of tropical deforestation.

The ‘Saving the Rainforests’ maps and report published last week, recognise there are several ways to keep the trees standing. Some groups want to see forests priced as vast carbon stores and remunerated accordingly. Some campaign for an end to road-building, mineral extraction and other mega-projects in forested regions. Some want to reduce the market for beef, palm oil and soy reared on illegally deforested lands. For others, the whole issue starts and ends with the way forests are governed along with the rights of people living within them.

The mapping project shows how 65 leading civil society groups are aligned around various pathways to change, and the effort they expend on specific interventions within them. In doing so, it provides a visual guide of which pathways are heavily populated and which less so.

Besides looking at what civil society groups do, the project asks why they do it, unpacking the value sets that motivate different sets of forest groups. Groups are categorised according to nine ‘storylines’ relating to distinct roles within the movement, rather like niches in an ecosystem.

For instance, there are ‘Institution Watchers’, referring to groups that monitor the integrity of forest governance, ‘Brand Attackers’ that expose corporate bad practice, and ‘Parks Rangers’ that carry out practical forest management. As in the specific intervention pathways, some storylines are better represented (and better resourced) than others.

Why are these things relevant to grant-making strategy? The obvious hope is that mapping of this type will help philanthropists identify gaps in coverage. The project makes no judgements about where areas of over- and under-capacity might lie – what looks like a ‘gap’ in need of filling to one funder might be totally off limits to another. 

Rather, the project aims to help funders make informed choices between different approaches, bringing their own values and theories of change to bear.

Bernard Mercer, of the Forests Philanthropy Action Network, says, “Although there is broad consensus on the urgency of protecting tropical forests, we actually know very little about the non-profit landscape: what are the specialisations, and who is doing what? This mapping project is a terrific contribution for funders who want to support work in this area but are perplexed on where the challenges and opportunities lie.

The maps are being warmly received by the international funding community, with one commentator responding that they “help to ask the right questions”. In an area where everyone, and no one, seems to have all the answers, we see this as a good start.

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

 

  • Environment
  • Causes
  • Strategy advice
  • Trusts & foundations
  • International
  • UK