Community engagement andclimate change: learning fromrecent Australian experience

John Wiseman and Lara WilliamsonSchool of Population Health, McCaughey Centre, University of Melbourne,

Melbourne, Australia, and

Jess FritzeVictorian Council of Social Service, Melbourne, Australia

Abstract

Purpose – This purpose of this paper is to summarise the outcomes of a recent project in Victoria,Australia exploring the effectiveness of community engagement strategies in improving climatemitigation and adaptation outcomes.

Design/methodology/approach – Roundtables and interviews with a diverse range of communityengagement practitioners and policy makers involved in climate change work were conducted,informed by a discussion paper outlining recent Australian and international learning aboutcommunity engagement and climate change.

Findings – The project confirms and builds on recent international learning about the importance ofcarefully planned and implemented community engagement as essential components in effectiveclimate mitigation and adaptation strategies.

Originality/value – The paper brings together learning from recent on-the-ground experience fromAustralian community engagement practitioners and policy makers working in the climate changefield. In addition to evidence supporting the international case for community engagementmethodologies the paper also summarises a number of factors important to effective climate changecommunity engagement strategies.

Keywords Environmental management, Global warming, Community relations, Citizen participation,Australia

Paper type Research paper

It is not enough for people to know about climate change in order to be engaged; they alsoneed to care about it, be motivated and able to take action (Lorenzoni et al., 2007, p. 446).

IntroductionGovernments and policy makers in many countries are increasingly investing in citizenand community engagement as a key element in strategies to improve climate changeoutcomes through informed public debate and action (Hartz-Karp and Newman, 2006;Moser and Dilling, 2007; McKinney and Harmon, 2007).

This paper summarises the outcomes of a research project recently conducted forthe Victorian Department of Planning and Community Development (Victoria,Australia) The project was undertaken by the McCaughey Centre, Melbourne School ofPopulation Health, University of Melbourne in collaboration with the Victorian Councilof Social Service and Council on the Ageing, Victoria. The project aimed to strengthen

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1756-8692.htm

IJCCSM2,2

134

Received 1 June 2009Revised 11 September 2009Accepted 1 December 2009

International Journal of ClimateChange Strategies and ManagementVol. 2 No. 2, 2010pp. 134-147q Emerald Group Publishing Limited1756-8692DOI 10.1108/17568691011040399

understanding of the ways in which community engagement strategies can be used tosupport and improve climate change mitigation, adaptation and structural adjustmentoutcomes as well as to document the range of community engagement activitiescurrently undertaken.

Informed by input from a diverse range of community organisations and policymakers the project’s conclusions confirm the importance of well designed and carefullyimplemented community engagement strategies as an important foundation forstrengthening the inclusiveness and effectiveness of climate change mitigation andadaptation strategies.

More broadly, the project adds to the increasing body of evidence which supportsthe view that:

. reducing the risks of dangerous climate change will require well informed, rapid,co-ordinated and decisive action at global, national, regional, local and householdlevels; and

. a democratic and equitable approach to this challenge involves maximising theopportunities for informed discussion and citizen participation in climate changemitigation and adaptation actions.

Project methodologyThe research project, conducted between August and October 2008, began with ascoping study of relevant Australian and international literature leading to thedevelopment of a discussion paper exploring the value and effectiveness of climatechange community engagement strategies.

The definition of community engagement employed was based on the BrisbaneDeclaration on Community Engagement agreed at the 2005 International Conferenceon Engaging Communities:

Community engagement is a two way process by which: the aspirations, concerns, needs andvalues of citizens and communities are incorporated at all levels and in all sectors in policydevelopment, planning, decision making, service delivery and assessment; and governmentsand other businesses and civil society organisations involve citizens, clients, communitiesand other stakeholders in these processes (United Nations, 2005).

The “Public Participation Spectrum” (inform, consult, involve, collaborate andempower) was used to frame the research process and report (International Associationfor Public Participation (IAP2), 2004).

The discussion paper informed three roundtable discussions involving48 participants augmented by ten telephone and face-to-face interviews in bothmetropolitan and regional areas. Interviews and discussions were conducted withparticipants from a diverse range of organisations using community engagementstrategies to support improved climate change responses. The selection of groups andindividuals invited to the roundtables was informed by advice and input from relevantpeak bodies (eg. Victorian Council of Social Service; Municipal Association of Victoria;Victorian Local Governance Association and Environment Victoria). Organisationscontributing to the report included local and state government, local climateaction groups, community services, health, educational and faith-based organisations.The report was also informed by the outcomes of a survey of local Victorian climatechange action groups conducted by the Western Alliance for Greenhouse Action.

Communityengagement and

climate change

135

Community engagement and climate change: the case for actionAt the broadest level it can be argued that well-designed and well-implementedcommunity engagement “is critical to effective, transparent and accountablegovernance in the public, community and private sectors” (Rawsthorne and Christian,2004). Genuine and effective citizen engagement is fundamental to informed, respectfuland democratic decision-making processes which maximise the opportunities for allcitizens to have a say in the issues which affect their lives (Rogers and Robinson, 2004).Community engagement is also a key component of governance and policy makinginformed by the principle of subsidiarity: that policy decisions are best made at thelowest, most decentralised or most local level at which effective action can be taken(Rawsthorne and Christian, 2004).

Engaging and involving citizens and communities in decisions and actions thatimpact upon them has been shown to have a range of practical benefits leading toimproved policy and program design and implementation (DSE, 2005; Cuthill, 2003;OECD, 2001; Langworthy and Brunt, 2008). These benefits include broadening anddeepening local input; securing and sustaining local ownership and support;improving effective communication of key policy issues and directions; heighteningthe trust, transparency and credibility of decision-making processes and improvingsocial networks and connectedness (McKinney and Harmon, 2007).

There is also a growing literature documenting community engagement strategiesspecifically focussed on improving climate change outcomes and on the related goals ofdesigning, creating and maintaining sustainable communities and cities (Lorenzoniet al., 2007; Portney, 2005; Adger, 2003; Sierra Club, 2008). The New South WalesDepartment of Environment and Conservation (2006) recent meta-analysis reviewnoted, for example, the following five key reasons for investing in communityengagement strategies to improve environmental planning and decision making:

(1) More effective projects. Participants become owners of the outcomes.

(2) Trust and credibility. Builds relationships, and allows the community tounderstand the constraints.

(3) Cost savings. High-engagement projects mobilise volunteer energy.

(4) Technical competence. Knowledge is captured through engagement; peoplebring depth, historical knowledge and new ideas to projects.

(5) Better management of environmental, social and political risks. Increase theperception of openness and fairness, and reduce risks of conflict.

In the climate change context, this work reflects the critical importance of communityparticipation in the development and implementation of mitigation and adaptationpolicies and programs (Moser and Dilling, 2007; Blake, 1999). Central to working withand in communities around climate change is knowledge of:

. the importance of maximising the resilience and adaptation of localcommunities;

. the extent of the transformations and innovation in social, economic andenvironmental and economic institutions and relationships likely to berequired;

. the extent of the changes in the behaviour of individuals, households andcommunities likely to be required; and

IJCCSM2,2

136

. the value of decentralised, “locally distributed” production, distribution andgovernance systems as key elements in innovative and effective climate changemitigation and adaptation strategies.

Feedback from the Victorian roundtables and interviews conducted for this reportconfirmed the main conclusions of relevant Australian and international literaturenoted above. Drawing on their recent policy and program development experience,participants argued that effective community engagement can assist citizens andcommunities to develop informed understandings of climate change trends, impactsand implications. Community engagement strategies were valued for creating greateropportunities for informed public debate about climate change issues and actions;broader and deeper input into government policy making processes and increasedpublic support for authorities and governments to act on climate change. Communityengagement was also seen to assist in the development and implementation ofsuccessful and sustainable climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies byindividuals, households, communities and organisations though greater communityownership and innovation; effective tailoring to local conditions and the effective use ofexisting local knowledge, resources and networks.

Climate change and community engagement: barriers and success factorsRoundtable participants strongly emphasised the importance of engagement strategiesbeing well-designed and well-implemented if the benefits of community engagementare to be fully realised. Indeed poorly designed and implemented communityengagement strategies have been criticised for their potential to be seen as cynical andtokenistic mechanisms for off loading responsibilities and costs onto local communities(Connelly, 2006; Hartz-Karp and Newman, 2006; Khassay and Oakley, 1999). Whenpoorly executed these strategies and projects may be seen as ineffective and a waste ofpublic money, time and resources, hindering support for future initiatives.

Analysis undertaken in a variety of jurisdictions has highlighted key successfactors in designing and implementing successful community engagement strategies.The UK Audit Commission (2003) has, for example, identified the following principlesunderpinning successful community engagement, based on an extensive review of UKlocal government community engagement initiatives:

. Commitment to user focus underpinned by core values such as honesty,inclusiveness, fairness and realism.

. Clarity of purpose: shared understanding about whether the primary purpose isinformation provision, consultation, encouraging involvement in decisions, etc.

. Understanding your communities: careful consideration of the best ways ofworking with diverse communities of place, population and interest.

. Communicating appropriately: employing a wide and effective range ofcommunication strategies appropriate for diverse audiences.

. Delivering change: ensuring that the outcomes of engagement strategies have agenuine impact on relevant decisions and outcomes.

In the Australian context, the NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change(2008) has identified a range of guiding principles for participatory communityengagement projects. These include the recognised capacity for participants to influence

Communityengagement and

climate change

137

the process; the presence of neutral, skilled facilitators; encouragement of open,respectful relationships; honouring commitments with visible results and a lead agencygenuinely committed to community engagement.

The issue of climate change itself provides specific barriers to effective communityengagement (Blake, 1999). Lorenzoni et al. (2007) have identified multiple individual andsocietal barriers to successful community engagement in their review of research onclimate change public engagement strategies. The most important initial barrier arisesfrom lack of access to credible and reliable information about climate change trendsand issues. The authors noted evidence of widespread suspicion about the multiple,conflicting sources of information with reactions ranging from confusion anduncertainty to cynicism and distrust. Whilst the majority of citizens agree thatsignificant social and economic changes are needed and that people should change theirlifestyles, many also believe that people are too selfish to act on climate change. This islinked to the view that others such as industry or other countries are primarilyresponsible for climate change. Climate change is often perceived and described as adistant threat both physically and temporally with shorter-term individualisticpriorities considered more important, particularly the maintenance of current standardsof living. Finally many respondents feared that it was too late to influence the climatechange trajectory and that their efforts were likely to have little impact.

The research about barriers to climate change community engagement summarisedby Lorenzoni et al. (2007) was supported by feedback from the project roundtablediscussions. In particular, the reluctance among citizens to provide a “free ride” to otherswho are not changing their behaviour was confirmed. A lack of leadership and actionnationally and internationally by government and business was also highlighted.Further barriers noted included inability to access enabling factors to support lifestylechange due to cost, convenience, viability or structural systems. The effects of socialnorms were also very influential, with “rights” to consume or to maintain existinglifestyles highlighted, as well as the low status associated with sustainable living andnegative connotations around being seen to be “a hippie” or “a greenie.”

Principles for effective climate change community engagement policy andpracticeFeedback from roundtable discussions and interviews undertaken for this projectlargely confirms and augments the conclusions reached in the international researchand evaluation literature referred to above. The following principles for effectivepractice are therefore informed by a combination of findings from internationalresearch literature and the outcomes from the Victorian project.

Government leadership about the need for urgent action to address climate changeMany roundtable participants commented that the greatest barriers to communityengagement on climate change arise from confused and variable messages fromgovernment and the media about the extent and urgency of climate change challenges,the likely effectiveness of possible actions and strategies and the precise nature ofemission reduction targets and timelines:

People aren’t clear about what the target is we’re aiming for, they are unclear how urgent it isand aggravated by government talking about building more coal plants. Media ishalf-hearted. The bulk of newspapers are still pushing energy intensive lifestyles [1].

IJCCSM2,2

138

There were many comments about the need for strong, clear government leadershipand support for an integrated, whole of government approach that values and supportscommunity engagement in setting and achieving climate change goals.

Understanding the importance of action at appropriate scope and scaleClimate change is a global issue which will have a diverse range impacts on specificlocal communities and regions (Adger, 1999). While local and household action isimportant in reducing emissions, these local actions and decisions need to be seen inthe context of broader economic policy settings, regulatory policy frameworks andprice signals which are in turn influenced by multiple levels of government (Adger,2001; Wilbanks and Kates, 1999). Focussing community engagement activities onimmediate and achievable actions can also involve the risk of ignoring broadercontextual and structural factors leaving some participants feeling unclear orunconvinced about the value of their efforts (Lorenzoni et al., 2007). It is thereforeimportant to ensure that local impacts and options are appropriately contextualised inrelation to regional, national and international mitigation, adaptation and structuraladjustment trends and policies. This is likely to improve the capacity of citizens andcommunities to understand the relationship between specific local actions and broaderstructural change.

Balancing a realistic sense of climate change challenges with a sense of possibility andempowermentThe potential impacts of climate change can be overwhelming and the complexity andurgency of mitigation and adaptation can be a significant psychological barrier toengagement and participation (Blashki et al., 2008). For this reason moving beyondnaming and framing problems in ways that reinforce polarised opinions is important.Successful examples of community engagement often used positive framing of climatechange solutions and emphasised solutions with multiple positive benefits linked tocommunity values. The seriousness of the issues and the potential for negative mentalhealth impacts and burnout also mean that approaches which create positiveopportunities for effective action and engagement are critical to prevent reactions ofnihilism, negation or despair (Eckersley, 2007).

Community engagement activities take place in diverse communities some of whomare disengaged and lacking in bonding and/or bridging social capital. It is essentialthat community engagement actions avoid the replication of existing powerimbalances and patterns of exclusion in communities, in terms of control and use ofresources and opportunities for participation and leadership (Osborne et al., 2006). It isalso important to acknowledge and address the constraints on engagement in climatechange issues presented by socio-economic and other forms of disadvantage(Brotherhood of Saint Laurence, 2007).

Helping communities feel part of a bigger picture by creating common goals canmotivate action. This may be linked to empowering communities to become morepolitically engaged through advocating for structural change in addition to altering theirown behaviour (Langworthy and Brunt, 2008). A number of Victorian communities havebeen experimenting with techniques such as “backcasting”, in which a desired futurescenario is developed and changes required from the present are identified. Celebratingactions and milestones through festivals, exhibitions and social gatherings can help

Communityengagement and

climate change

139

make achievements visible and memorable as well as replenishing the energy of thoseinvolved and strengthening social connections.

Respecting and promoting local knowledge and ownershipGenuine respect for and connection with local communities was seen by manyparticipants as fundamental to effective community engagement. This includes carefulanalysis and understanding of local social and economic circumstances, leaders,networks and culture. Employing or partnering with well-respected local people andorganisations can usefully strengthen community engagement activities and outcomes:

What was really important was employing local people. . .we employed a non-greenie and shereally made a concerted effort to go through all the networks and engage them to design herprogram and she deliberately excluded [greenie’s] like us (laughter). . .That was a process thatreally worked. It was a local person getting into the local networks bringing them together,them designing the program.

It is also important to develop and support integrated and tailored systems to supportskill development and capacity building among people working on climate changeissues (e.g. resource manuals and tool kits, education workshops, “train the trainer”programs, etc.) and provide communities with the tools to identify and monitor issuesas well as guidance on effective actions.

Building relationships based on mutual trust and respectCommunity engagement climate change strategies need to recognise and respect thediversity of local backgrounds, knowledge and priorities. Local community climatechange organisations, leadership and networks can be supported through practicalmechanisms including innovation grants; longer term infrastructure development andcapacity building; community engagement officers and brokers.

Successful community engagement relies on trusted relationships betweenpartnering organisations, funding bodies, those implementing the activities, localstakeholders and participants. Considerable time is often spent developing andmaintaining these relationships. Community engagement approaches must be designedand resourced to facilitate this process. The social capital and connectedness createdthrough community engagement is an important outcome which in turn supports futurecommunity action and innovation:

With Sustainability Street, people are attracted to it by meeting neighbours, creating andmaintaining local links with each other as well as the council, not just climate change.

Communicating accessible, reliable informationClear communication of engagement activities involving simple and focussedmessages about what is being done and who will be involved is critical in building bothparticipation and trust. Poor experiences and outcomes from previous communityengagement initiatives can create distrust as can “consultation fatigue”.

In particular, it was noted that early or introductory communications directed atcommunities can have a lasting impact on perceptions of the process or program. Beingcareful to accurately represent events and activities is important to manage participantexpectations, especially in circumstances where people need to make difficult choicesabout their use of time and resources. Other important components of an effectivecommunications strategy highlighted by participants include:

IJCCSM2,2

140

. building climate change “literacy” through appropriate strategies tailored fordiverse localities, populations and interest groups;

. collecting and communicating up to date, reliable information about local andregional climate change trends, risks and impacts of action;

. collecting, evaluating and communicating information about innovative andeffective climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies; and

. developing and implementing strategies for communicating information aboutclimate change trends, impacts and actions to diverse audiences (e.g. throughpublic forums, mini summits, handbooks, tool kits, web sites, wikis, informationin multiple languages, etc.).

Maximising community relevance, inclusion and innovationThere is considerable variation in community understanding about climate changetrends and issues. This, in part, reflects the complexity and uncertainty of the issue andthe perceived remoteness of its impacts. A key feature of successful communityengagement is overcoming difficulties in communicating complex science and futureclimate modelling, especially through the use of relevant local climate change impactprojections.

The use of existing formal and informal social networks and expertise is a criticalcomponent in ensuring that projects are relevant and inclusive. In addition, manyinterviewees commented that it is essential not to assume a particular level ofknowledge within the targeted community and to recognise that people are most likelyto change behaviours and actions if pathways to effective action are clear, simple andsupported by appropriate incentives and resources. This involves deliberately creatingwelcoming and inclusive actions and group dynamics which avoid the perception that“this isn’t for us”:

It’s important to have simple explanations, otherwise people get left behind and are ashamedto say they don’t understand. You really have to accept everyone as they are, at their level.

Valuing and drawing on existing skills, resources and networksA particularly under-utilised approach identified through the roundtables was the use ofexisting “sustainability knowledge” within communities. This often under recognisedresource includes cultural skills and stories about experiences of flexibility andsuccessful adaptation in dealing with uncertainty and unpredictability. Bringing peopletogether for a variety of projects, events and reasons provides multiple entry points andstyles of engagement:

We did a growing harvest festival and lots of people came to that that hadn’t been to anythingbefore and we had a sudden burst of membership when we were doing the bulk solar, so theycome to things that will be their personal interest and that might engage them in the biggerissues.

Quality local analysis and knowledge can minimise duplication of effort and increasethe effectiveness of community engagement by utilising existing communityresources, activities and networks (McKinney and Harmon, 2007). This involvesworking in partnership with diverse groups and organisations including schools,councils, sports clubs, faith groups, businesses and community groups.

Communityengagement and

climate change

141

In particular, successful projects engage communities through pre-existing networksas well as bringing together new groups of people based on interest and enthusiasm foraddressing climate change. Using existing local expertise, skills and contacts helpsensure that communication and activities are well targeted and reflect communityinterests and capacity. This also helps ensure that community members who do notidentify as having a strong environmental interest are more likely to participate.

Failure to successfully engage diverse participants can result in preaching to theconverted and isolated action. Being surrounded by networks of shared vision andunderstandings limits effective action by failing to engage with a breadth ofperspectives including from sectors and groups with opposing opinions. Working withmultiple local partners brings a variety of strengths and perspectives to both namingproblems and framing solutions. Where a broad range of local partners andparticipants are involved in planning and decision making they are also more likely toassist in taking action and achieving outcomes. The use of existing popular communityevents such as sporting events, community festivals, markets or expos was identifiedas particularly effective approach for reaching a wider community audience:

One of our other alliances did a terrific project with the local football league. They had thepremiership ladder for the football league and they had WIN television station as a sponsor sothey got very good media coverage. Alongside the premiership ladder was the sustainabilityladder. They got the footy teams to car pool and save water in the shower as well. So therewas a whole group of people that would never call themselves greenies in a pink fit and yetthere they were competing for the sustainability ladder [. . .] that’s the kind of stuff we needbecause it gets a new audience.

Maximising continuity and sustainabilityGiven the importance of ongoing relationships and local knowledge to successfulcommunity engagement, funding and governance models should support continuity ofresources including people involved in facilitating or coordinating activities. Manyinterviewees spoke of the frustration of losing project momentum due to uncertain orshort term funding arrangements, time constraints and unrealistic expectations inrelation to resourcing and sustainability. In particular, the loss of personal andprofessional knowledge and networks when workers needed to seek alternativeemployment due to job insecurity was detrimental to project outcomes:

You do a project and you know the money’s going to run out after a year, no one’s going tofund you and you have to scrabble again.

You need less competition, longer term funding [. . .] you need to know who to speak to,because in Victoria there’s a whole lot of departments involved.

This points to the need maximise continuity of funding and staffing; encourageintergroup co-operation rather than competition; and foster flexibility in design anddelivery of community engagement projects to maximise social innovation andadaptation to local contexts.

Encouraging reflection, learning and sharing of best practiceThere was extensive support for activities and events designed to capture and sharelearning about successful and unsuccessful strategies. This included recognition of

IJCCSM2,2

142

the need to invest in experimentation as well as strong encouragement for a process ofcontinuous learning and social innovation.

While the descriptive literature documenting international and Australian communityengagement and climate change initiatives continues to grow, formal evaluation studiesare still limited in quantity and quality. Evaluation studies are often ad hoc or post hoc,with limited planning and resourcing invested in their design and implementation. Thelack of high-quality evaluation studies is understandable given the rapid evolution andcomplexity of climate change policy responses, the dominance of short-term projectfunding and the time frames involved in understanding the long-term impacts on social,economic and environmental outcomes. However, the lack of high-quality evaluativeevidence continues to act as a barrier to knowledge sharing about successes and failures,innovation and improvements in practice, theory and outcomes.

The importance of investing in the capacity to rapidly design and conductevaluation studies was strongly emphasised, as was the need to ensure learning isswiftly and effectively disseminated. A wide range of suggestions were provided forways of promoting shared learning and information exchange including: workshopsand conferences; train the trainer programs; short courses, ideas festivals and onlineplatforms (including blogs and wikis).

Creating strategies to engage vulnerable and “hard to reach” groupsThere is increasing evidence of the potential for climate change and climate changepolicy responses to have a negative impact on low income and vulnerable populations(Fritze and Wiseman, 2009). This leads to a significant challenge in engagingvulnerable populations in actions designed to address climate change given pressuresto also meet urgent individual and household needs. There is, therefore, a particularneed to identify ways of reaching and working with vulnerable and traditionally “hardto reach” population groups such as young people, older people, women, low-incomegroups, people with disabilities, culturally and linguistically diverse communities andIndigenous communities.

At the same time, it was noted that “hard to reach groups” in relation to climatechange may also include wealthy, high-consumption communities, households andindividuals as well as citizens and communities who are unconvinced about the realityof climate change or are sceptical about the effectiveness of proposed actions andresponses.

General principles for engaging “hard to reach” population groups noted include thefollowing:

. acknowledge and understand “where different people are at” along the spectrumof denial, contemplation and action;

. acknowledge and understand the context and profiles of different communities;

. devote time, effort, resources to develop trust with diverse communities;

. use existing networks and trusted sources of information or service provision;

. train, support and if necessary “plant” multicultural leaders and biculturalworkers in relevant communities;

. identify and work with leaders who are well-respected, well-networked and ingood positions to impart information;

Communityengagement and

climate change

143

. go to places where people feel comfortable; and

. use celebrations to engage and make messages relevant.

Project outcomesIn addition to consolidating and strengthening knowledge about climate changecommunity engagement strategies the research project was also designed to directlyinform the development of the Victorian government’s policy and program agenda.The project Report “Community Engagement and Climate Change: Benefits, Challengesand Strategies” has been widely distributed and discussed across Victorian governmentagencies (Fritze et al., 2009). The research finding also helped inform the development ofthe Victorian Government’s (2009, p. 85)Green Paper on Climate Changewhich includeda significant emphasis on the importance of community partnerships and engagementstrategies:

Partnerships between the Victorian government, local government and local communitieswill be essential in strengthening the resilience of local communities in the face of climatechange and encouraging local action to maintain community liveability as the impacts ofclimate change become more apparent.

Finally, the policy and practice networks and conversations stimulated by this projecthave been sustained through a range of ongoing and evolving organisational linkages,particularly through partnership events such as the community engagement conferenceon “Changing Climate: Changing Communities” jointly organised with the (IAP2, 2009).

ConclusionsRecent experience of policy makers and practitioners in Victorian Australia consolidatesand confirms research findings from a range of Australian and international studiesabout the importance of carefully designed, well-implemented community engagementstrategies as key components of effective and inclusive climate mitigation and adaptionstrategies. Feedback from the projects roundtable and interview processesfurther strengthens the view that community engagement is a key element ina democratic, equitable, innovative and effective response to climate change both as amechanism for maximising the diversity of voices and ideas informing policies andstrategies and as a basis for achieving deep, broad and sustainable changes in the actionsand behaviours of communities, industries, households and individuals.

Effective community engagement is particularly important for addressing thechallenges of climate change which require rapid and substantial changes to local,national and global systems and behaviours in order to address a complex, “distant”emergency. Effectively engaging citizens and communities in actions to preventdangerous climate change requires informed understanding of the urgency and extentof action required at all levels as well as overcoming a sense of hopelessness andpowerlessness and strengthening understanding of the potential and capacity forcollective action.

Key principles for effective climate change community engagement policy andpractice initiatives include the following:

. government leadership about the need for urgent action to address climatechange;

. understanding the importance of action at appropriate scope and scale;

IJCCSM2,2

144

. balancing a realistic sense of climate change challenges with a sense ofpossibility and empowerment;

. respecting and promoting local knowledge and ownership;

. building relationships based on mutual trust and respect;

. communicating accessible, reliable information;

. maximising community relevance, inclusion and innovation;

. valuing and drawing on existing skills, resources and networks;

. maximising continuity and sustainability;

. encouraging reflection, learning and sharing of best practice; and

. creating strategies to engage vulnerable and “hard to reach” groups.

Future research and policy development priorities include further strengtheningunderstanding of the relevance of these principles to diverse political and culturalcontexts as well as ways of maximizing the impact of informed citizen debate anddialogue on the policy transformations needed to prevent and address the challenges ofdangerous and runaway climate change.

Note

1. All quotes are from roundtable and individual interviews conducted as part of the Victorianproject.

References

Adger, W.N. (1999), “Social vulnerability to climate change and extremes in coastal Vietnam”,World Development, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 249-69.

Adger, W.N. (2001), “Scales of governance and environmental justice for adaptation andmitigation of climate change”, Journal of International Development, Vol. 13, pp. 921-31.

Adger, W.N. (2003), “Social capital, collective action and adaptation to climate change”, EconomicGeography, Vol. 79 No. 4, pp. 387-404.

Audit Commission (2003), User Focus and Citizen Engagement: Learning from ComprehensivePerformance Assessment, Audit Commission, London, available at: www.audit-commission.gov.uk/reports (accessed 8 September 2008).

Blake, J. (1999), “Overcoming the ‘value-action gap’ in environmental policy: tensions betweennational policy and local experience”, Local Environment, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 257-78.

Blashki, G., Bourke, S., Fritze, J.G. and Wiseman, J. (2008), “Hope, despair and transformation:climate change and the promotion of mental health and wellbeing”, International Journalof Mental Health Systems, Vol. 2, p. 13.

Brotherhood of St Laurence (2007), “Equity in response to climate change”, available at:www.bsl.org.au/main.asp?PageId¼4732 (accessed 10 October 2008).

Connelly, S. (2006), “Looking inside public involvement: how is this made so ineffective and canwe change this?”, Community Development Journal, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 13-24.

Cuthill, M. (2003), “The contribution of human and social capital to building communitywellbeing: a research agenda relating to citizen participation in local governance inAustralia”, Urban Policy and Research, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 373-91.

Communityengagement and

climate change

145

DSE (2005), Effective Engagement: Building Relationships with Community and otherStakeholders: An Introduction to Engagement, Department of Sustainability andEnvironment, Melbourne.

Eckersley, R. (2007), “Don’t panic – it’s only the apocalypse”, The Sydney Morning Herald,Vol. 21-22, July, p. 10.

Fritze, J. and Wiseman, J. (2009), “Climate justice: key debates, goals and strategies”, in Moss, J.(Ed.), Climate Change and Social Justice, Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.

Fritze, J., Williamson, L. and Wiseman, J. (2009), Community Engagement and Climate Change:Benefits, Challenges and Strategies, Department of Planning and CommunityDevelopment, Melbourne.

Hartz-Karp, J. and Newman, P. (2006), “Chapter two: the participative route to sustainability”,in Paulin, S. (Ed.), Community Voices: Creating Sustainable Spaces, University of WesternAustralia Press, Perth, pp. 28-42.

IAP2 (2004), IAP2 Public Participation Spectrum, International Association for PublicParticipation, Thornton, CO, available at: http://iap2.affiniscape.com/associations/4748/files/IAP2%20Spectrum_vertical.pdf (accessed 15 May 2009).

IAP2 (2009), Changing Climate: Changing Communities, International Association for PublicParticipation, Thornton, CO, available at: www.iap2.org.au/events/id/236/title/IAP2%20VIC%20

Khassay, H.M. and Oakley, P. (1999), Community Involvement in Health Development: A Reviewof the Concept and Practice, World Health Organisation, Geneva.

Langworthy, A. and Brunt, C. (2008), “Community engagement and behaviour change”,in Newton, P. (Ed.), Transitions – Pathways Towards Sustainable Urban Development inAustralia, CSIRO, Melbourne.

Lorenzoni, I., Nicholson-Cole, S. and Whitmarsh, L. (2007), “Barriers perceived to engaging withclimate change among the UK public and their policy implications”, Global EnvironmentalChange, Vol. 17, pp. 445-59.

McKinney, M. and Harmon, W. (2007), “Governing nature, governing ourselves: engagingcitizens in natural resource decisions, Part 1”, International Journal of Public Participation,Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 1-16.

Moser, S. and Dilling, L. (2007), Creating a Climate for Change: Communicating Climate Changeand Facilitating Social Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

New South Wales Department of Environment and Conservation (2006), “A guide forengaging communities in environmental planning and decision making”, availableat: www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/warr/2006288_engagingcommunities.pdf(accessed 15 May 2009).

OECD (2001), Citizens as Partners: OECD Handbook on Information, Consultation and PublicParticipation in Policy Making, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development,Paris.

Osborne, S.P., Beattie, R. and Williamson, A. (2006), “The impact of local voluntary andcommunity sector infrastructure on community involvement in rural regenerationpartnerships”, Public Management and Money, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 235-42.

Portney, K. (2005), “Civic engagement and sustainable cities in the United States”, PublicAdministration Review, Vol. 65 No. 5, pp. 577-89.

Rawsthorne, M. and Christian, F. (2004), “Making it Meaningful . . . Government/CommunitySector Relations”, Western Sydney Community Forum, Granville, available at:

IJCCSM2,2

146

www.communitybuilders.nsw.gov.au/builder/participation/relations.html (accessed15 May 2009).

Rogers, B. and Robinson, E. (2004), The Benefits of Community Engagement: A Review of theEvidence, Civic Renewal Unit, Active Citizenship Centre, London.

Sierra Club (2008), Cool Cities-solving Global Warming One City at a Time, Sierra Club,Lexington, KY, available at: www.coolcities.us/

United Nations (2005), The Brisbane Declaration on Community Engagement, United Nations,Brisbane, available at: www.iap2.org.au/sitebuilder/resources/knowledge/asset/files/37/unbrisbanedeclarationcommunityengagement.pdf (accessed 15 May 2009).

Victorian Government (2009), Green Paper on Climate Change, Victorian Government,Melbourne.

Wilbanks, T.J. and Kates, R.W. (1999), “Global change in local places: how scale matters”,Climatic Change, Vol. 43, pp. 601-28.

Further reading

Cornwall, A. (2004), “New democratic spaces? The politics and dynamics of institutionalparticipation”, IDS Bulletin, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 1-10.

About the authorsJohn Wiseman is Director of the McCaughey Centre, Melbourne School of Population Health,University of Melbourne. Between 2003 and 2006, he was a Professor of Public Policy at VictoriaUniversity. Between 2000 and 2003, he was an Assistant Director, Policy Development andResearch, Victorian Department of Premier and Cabinet. John Wiseman is the correspondingauthor and can be contacted at: jwiseman@unimelb.edu.au

Lara Williamson is a Climate Change and Public Health Researcher at the McCaughey Centrein the Melbourne School of Population Health, University of Melbourne.

Jess Fritze is the Climate Change Policy Analyst at the Victorian Council of Social Service,the peak organisation of the non-government social and community services sector in Victoria.She has previously been employed as a Research Fellow at the McCaughey Centre, MelbourneSchool of Population Health, University of Melbourne and has a background in social work,community development and environmental education.

Communityengagement and

climate change

147

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints