REVOLUTION OR INCH-BY-INCH? CAMPAIGN APPROACHES ON CLIMATE CHANGE BY ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS

Nina Lansbury Hall and Ros Taplin Graduate School of the Environment, Macquarie University

Address: GSE, Macquarie University, NSW 2109; tel: 02 9850 7977/9850 7991 email: nlansburyhall@gse.mq.edu.au; rtaplin@gse.mq.edu.au

ABSTRACT Climate change is a significant environmental, social and environmental problem that has been identified by scientists in consensus internationally. The Australian Government’s response is considered by environmental non-government organisations (NGOs) to be inadequate. NGOs are ‘change agents’ of society, and in this role they are agitating to influence political decision-making on climate change response. This paper outlines the variety of campaign strategies being used by Australian NGOs to attract public and political attention to the issue of climate change. Using seven NGOs as case studies, the archival materials of these organisations were accessed and analysed. Current academic and other literature was used to reflect on their effectiveness. Four campaign themes and, within these, fifteen strategies were identified. The results indicate that the question of whether NGOs are undertaking an ‘incremental’ or ‘revolutionary’ approach, or any other dichotomy is too simple: none of the NGOs appear to intentionally favour one type of strategy. The question raised by this finding is whether the NGOs’ current approach of using a large variety of strategies is effective. This research attempts to fill the information gap of analyses on the effectiveness of NGO campaigns on environmental issues, and highlights the need for further research. KEYWORDS Australia, campaign strategies, climate change, environmental advocacy, non-government organisations

1. Introduction: Climate Change, Environmental NGOs and their campaigns “We have to undo 200 years of fossil fuel addition. It will take a while to get rid of our addiction.”1

The latest forecast of the impacts of climate change by 1,360 experts from 95 countries and involving the United Nations Environment Program warns that “by the end of the century, climate change and its impacts may be the dominant direct driver of biodiversity loss and changes in ecosystem services globally”2. Beyond biodiversity impacts, climate change will affect most realms of life, including changing and intensifying weather patterns, affecting the location and pest management of current agricultural crops and increasing the spread of tropical diseases3. Despite the scientific forecasts of negative impacts, the Australian Government continues to financially support the coal industry through grants, tax breaks and R&D support4, is planning new coal-fired power plants5, and has set the mandatory renewable energy target so low that it denies the renewable energy industry a stable market6. Such government inaction exists despite the years of active campaigning on climate change by environmental non-government organisations (NGOs) to influence government policy and community concern. This paper uses the term ‘NGOs’ to describe not-for-profit advocacy organisations focused primarily on environmental issues, being closely aware of the nexus between environmental and social justice issues. These organisations undertake research, campaigns and advocacy in an attempt to “influence the social and political decisions of an institutional elite, the outcomes of which benefit a broader range of society than just its own members”7. Some NGOs state that “governments, industry and the public have not truly engaged on this serious issue in a way that will prevent dangerous changes to the global climate system”8. This is also the perspective of the authors of this paper, as NGOs play an integral role in creating social change for the benefit of both society and their environment. According to Princen and Finger9, NGOs are ‘change agents’, acting where citizens alone, or as an unorganised movement, cannot achieve change; they question the foundations of the political process, asking questions about problems, how they are being managed, and what constitutes results. In 1993, Papadakis considered that environmental issues were the ‘dominant theme’ of social movements as they challenged the dominant belief in economic growth and materialism, and were calling for both political and social change10. This comment may still be relevant today, as Doyle considers the Australian environmental movement the “most powerful dissenting social movement in our society, continually challenging both politics and business-as-usual”11. Additionally, Worth cites research that NGOs play the major role in raising new environmental policy issues- a role dominated in other policy arenas by other ‘policy stakeholders’, such as business,12. To investigate the role of environmental NGOs in the climate change debate, a variety of campaign strategies were examined - from ‘incremental’ to ‘revolutionary’. To do this, seven environmental NGOs were selected through both an information review of publicly available campaign materials and participant-researcher working knowledge of these groups. These groups are Rising Tide, the Mineral Policy Institute (MPI), Friends of the Earth Australia (FoE), the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF), Greenpeace Australia Pacific (Greenpeace), the Worldwide Fund for Nature Australia (WWF) and the Climate Action Network Australia (CANA). These seven NGOs were chosen as they have specific climate change campaigns, are each taking a differentiated strategic approach, represent a range of budgets (from none to large), and are all members of CANA. The aims, campaign foci and the reason for the NGO’s selection are described in Table 1. For each, archival information was reviewed on their climate change campaigns from their websites, reports, journal articles, presentations and meeting minutes, as well as some strategic planning documents that are cited in a de-identified manner due to their confidential nature. These documents were obtained through participant-researcher involvement in some of the NGOs’ conferences, workshops and committees. To provide a broader perspective on these campaign strategies and relevant concepts from academic and other research on advocacy, the use of language and discourse, the power of imagery and working collaboratively were utilised in the analysis of the archival material. To address whether NGO campaigns are ‘succeeding’ or ‘failing’ is complex, and is best answered by testing against models developed to analyse campaign advocacy progress, such as the Movement Action Plan (MAP). The MAP is a theoretical model of social movements, a framework for understanding movement dynamics and outcomes, and a tool for movement analysis, and will be discussed in detail in Section 2.513.

Table 1: Environmental NGOs with climate change campaigns selected for case studies14 NGO Aim of climate change

campaign Focus Reason for Selection

Rising Tide To campaign against the causes of human-induced climate change.

Public action on climate change

Unfunded, grassroots, regional, composed of students and forest activists

Mineral Policy Institute (MPI)

To prevent environmentally and socially destructive energy projects in Australia, Asia and the Pacific.

Financing of fossil fuels Specific-focus, minimal funding, high-impact campaigns

Friends of the Earth Australia (FoE)

To generate debate and positive change to protect the climate and share the world equitably by focusing on the human dimensions of climate change.

Focus on human rights impacts

Non-environmental approach to engage with social service and human rights organisation

Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF)

To reduce Australia's greenhouse gas emissions are reduced, to phase out the use of fossil fuels, to implement 10% mandatory renewable energy target and to ratify the Kyoto Protocol.

Range of approaches eg policy submissions and Climate Change Business Leaders Roundtable

Well-funded, high profile, professional approach, proposes policy, includes business focus

Greenpeace Australia Pacific (Greenpeace)

To prevent dangerous climate change by phasing out fossil fuels, including shale oil, and replacing them with clean renewable energy such as solar, wind and water power.

Range of actions, campaigns, lobbying, large volunteer base

Well-funded, professional approach, regional branch of international network, well-funded, high-level political access

Worldwide Fund for Nature Australia (WWF)

Encouraging Australians to make a difference to climate change by choosing to use cleaner energy and by encouraging the Australian government to ratify the Kyoto protocol.

Range of approaches eg first NGO to focus on coal, built solidarity through No More Polluting Power collaborative campaign, support for geo-sequestration

Well-funded, professional approach, regional branch of international network, includes business focus

Climate Action Network Australia (CANA)

To avoid the threats from climate change by developing policy and working together with other NGOs to share information and strategies.

Umbrella climate change organisation for 34 Australian member NGOs

Coordinating body, links with international network, develops alternative policies.

2. Campaign Strategies and Analysis Each of the seven environmental NGOs selected for this research has undertaken a variety of strategies to agitate for a response to climate change from political decision-makers and the community. As suggested by Table 1, each strategy differs because they are seeking different goals and addressing different audiences.

The approaches of NGOs to an issue can range from strategies that accept the existing power relationships (such as direct service and self-help) to those that challenge the relationships (such as advocacy and direct action)15. Of interest, the strategies in use by the selected NGOs are focused only on challenging the existing power relationships. Richards and Heard16 identified three key themes of environmental campaigns in their analysis of marine environmental NGOs in Europe, all of which are within the spectrum of challenging power relationships:

1. Information, education and awareness raising (to improve public understanding); 2. Political lobbying (involved with a participative, persuasive approach) and 3. Direct and legal actions (confrontational approaches).

These three themes are adopted for the analysis of strategies in this paper, but it is necessary to create an additional theme- ‘working together’- to incorporate the strategies identified regarding corporate engagement, formal networks and building solidarity. This fourth theme also reflects the current discussion around the need for NGOs to work more closely together for greater effectiveness17. The themes and the strategies within them are described below in Sections 2.1 to 2.4.

2.1 Theme 1: Information, education and awareness raising

Communicating to the public All the selected NGOs host attractive, informative and easy-to-understand websites. Rising Tide has published an article in Greenmail, the newsletter of the NSW Greens, calling for “all groups and parties of our ilk should be concerned with climate change, for it is the environmental and social justice issue of our time”18. MPI produces well-researched, publicly-available reports such as ‘Up in Smoke’, a report intended to put the picture together of coal trade that is comprehensible to the public19. ACF’s website contains an accessible background and position on renewable energy, the Kyoto Protocol and impacts of climate change and has published articles on public health impacts of climate change in the organisation’s magazine and in Arena magazine20. Greenpeace is committed to more public interactions in an acknowledgement of the need to reach out to a wider public, through conference presentations, and has employed a campus organiser to instigate action on climate change on universities (Kennedy, D., Campaigns Manager, Greenpeace Australia Pacific, pers. comm., 18/5/05). CANA has produced reports on different aspects of the impacts of climate change, such as public health, agriculture and biodiversity, brought in authors from these specific fields to broaden the credibility and ‘legitimacy’ of the knowledge; provides an interactive map on its website detailing how climate change will affect parts of Australia; and

coordinates the No More Polluting Power coalition, listing facts about carbon dioxide emissions, benefits of energy efficiency, and government plans for extending coal fired power plants21. Gough and Shackley note that engaging the public is challenging for climate change due to the complexity of the science and lack of single obvious alternatives to existing policy, technology or practice to ‘solve’ the problem. NGO involvement in the climate change debate does not clarify these difficulties, but rather adds “yet another viewpoint on the appropriate mix of options”22. Despite these difficulties in messaging, it is crucial for the public to understand and be concerned about climate change because an ‘informed and concerned public’ is considered by some in the environment movement to be crucial in forcing the government to take action23.

Media engagement The NGOs recognise that the media play an important role in broadcasting their messages, and aim for high-profile, supportive media for their campaign issues. All of the selected NGOs produce media releases and include them on their website; on average, ACF and CANA produce three climate change-related media releases per month24. All groups publish material- including self-published reports and articles in magazines. Rising Tide and Greenpeace undertake direct actions intended to attract media and public attention. Greenpeace, and perhaps other NGOs, maintain a communicative relationship with responsive journalists, especially the environment reporter (Kennedy, D., Campaigns Manager, Greenpeace Australia Pacific, pers. comm., 18/5/05). NGOs are very aware of the power of the media, and must often comment on the conflictual discussion over climate science and policy. Riedy acknowledges that, while this conflict is “very real”, “the media tends to give the sceptical positions promoted by a small minority as much weight as the work by the IPCC, backed by hundreds of scientists … the equal weight given to climate sceptics fosters public and political uncertainty over climate change”25. ‘Translating’ scientific information Unlike many environmental campaigns, climate change was ‘alerted’ by scientists rather than NGOs. This has resulted in science-heavy information26. In response, all the selected NGOs provide comprehensible explanations about the causes and impacts of climate change on their websites. Most groups provide detailed reports and positions on specific aspects of climate change science, such as the WWF-commissioned report by a meteorologist that links the current Australian drought to climate change: “this is the first drought in Australia where the impact of human-induced global warming can be clearly observed”27. FoE links the findings of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) with the rising sea levels in Tuvalu to produce a picture of climate change in action28. Greenpeace and WWF provide a position on geosequestration (in-ground storage of carbon dioxide): for Greenpeace, it is a “bandaid, not a solution”29; for WWF “geosequestration …may be available in the future and may play a useful role but we can not wait for them before beginning the move to a clean energy future ... the risks of burying greenhouse gases underground need to be further investigated”30. WWF communicates the findings of its Clean Energy Futures report through a set of ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ on its website31.

Communicating with different audiences The NGOs have produced targeted materials for a variety of audiences, including religious groups and the financial, agricultural and medical sectors. MPI encouraged the socially responsible investment sector to exclude fossil fuel companies from their ‘ethical portfolios’, and exposed Australia’s export credit agency, the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation, as supporting fossil fuel export-related goods at one hundred times the level of renewable energy- related exports32. ACF worked with church groups to produce a brochure, ‘Changing Climate, Changing Creation’, encouraging Christians to “write to or visit their federal MP and ask what they are doing to address the threat of climate change” and to take action on climate change within churches and small groups33. WWF communicates with rural and agricultural groups, such as Landcare, catchment management associations and the National Farmer’s Federation to encourage them to plan for mitigating the impacts of climate change on their farming systems and practices, including increased extreme and variable weather conditions, predicted water shortages, and increased costs from weeds and pests34. CANA has produced a number of reports targeting the climate change impacts to different sectors, including agriculture and public health35. These diverse communication methods suggest that the NGOs are aware of the need to communicate to different target audiences. They aim to address the ‘elite’, but also the majority of the community: those that read tabloid media, as well as those who are non-English-speaking, Aboriginal or unemployed36. Ensuring that messages reach and then resonate with their target audience corresponds with Lakoff’s theory of framing. He considers that presenting the ‘facts’ alone does not ensure the audiences make sense of them- unless they resonate with existing concepts of that audience37. Similarly, the Midwest Academy warn NGOs against believing they will win merely because they believe they are “morally right, truth is on their side, they have the best information, and they speak for large numbers of people”: they must also think strategically about the positioning and framing of decision makers38. Providing images NGO websites and reports feature images that ‘portray’ climate change. ACF features a photo of penguins on an iceberg on its website, asking “Do YOU want to live in a world without penguins?”39. Greenpeace has a photo of a young girl holding

a paper windmill on its website near a quote from the group’s founder of “You’re trying to get your children into the 21st century” and for shock value, the group spread a large banner on the exposed bank of Warragamba Dam, the receding catchment dam for Sydney, which read “This is what climate change looks like”40. WWF includes images of beautiful places that risk damage through climate change, such as its report on the Great Barrier Reef41. CANA includes “visually stunning” images of Australian wildlife and physical environment to be affected by climate change in its report, ‘Warnings from the Bush’42. Linking impacts and images to climate change can be powerful, but Gough and Shackley caution NGOs need to have scientific proof of this link, otherwise “unscientific sensationalism” can damage the organisation’s reputation43. Introducing the victims Some NGO strategies personify the experience of climate change by presenting the victims. In an article MPI’s website, a Hunter Valley resident describes the impacts of noise, lights, traffic and dust caused by nearby coal mining and coal-fired power plants operating 24 hours per day, every day of the year, “Nobody knows what we are going through so this state can be rich!”44. FoE organised a speaking tour around Australia involving Samoan, Tuvaluan and Nigerian nationals to speak on energy and poverty from their country’s perspective45. Greenpeace’s ‘Climate Voices’ campaign profiles the victims of climate change: publishing the faces, names and personal stories of people from Australia and the Pacific affected by drought, coral reef damage and rising sea levels associated with climate change46. There are two issues apparent in the analyses of this strategy: justice and portrayal. More positively, a focus on the ‘justice’ dimension of climate change highlights the “disproportionate burden placed on small island states” by the impacts of climate change, particularly rising sea level, while also emphasising the unequal share of greenhouse gases that Australia (and other developed countries) are emitting as a result of their “energy-intensive lifestyles”47. FoE has intentionally taken this stance as part of the overall CANA strategy on climate change. FoE’s role, through highlighting the issues of justice, is a strategic way of reaching other stakeholders, such as refugee action groups, English as a second language groups, church groups and social services, with the intention of engaging them and then linking their constituents’ concerns with the broader climate change responses that CANA is proposing48. In terms of portrayal, groups need to be careful in portraying climate change-affected people, taking lessons from the development sector. An analysis by Lidchi on the development and aid sectors use of ‘starving babies’ images reflects on the power of photography to demean, misrepresent and insult the subjects. Respect and accuracy and crucial factors in portrayal of victims, due to the ability of photography to combine “voyeurism and control: photos are taken by the powerful of the powerless; the subjects of the photo are transformed into objects”49. Photography ‘plays’ with spatial dislocation to make an issue familiar50. While it was not positive for famine issues, it does pose an opportunity for climate change. As described by Long, images “bring the issue [of climate change] home” for many Australians51. Encouraging personal action All the NGOs encourage people to ‘take action’ on their websites by providing easy steps to make their own personal difference on climate change, such as letter-writing to politicians on climate change-related issues. They simplify the effort by providing form letters and email and postal addresses. For example, FoE encourages writing to the Prime Minister to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, Greenpeace provides form letters to Victorian Premier Steve Bracks about the expansion of Hazelwood power station, WWF encourages writing to Bob Carr to build ‘green’ power stations and to Queensland Premier Peter Beattie to support energy efficient heating in homes, and CANA encourages writing to all Premier’s to end “polluting power” and move to a “clean energy future”52. Additionally, WWF encourages buying ‘green power’, a proportion of the electricity bill paying for renewably-sourced energy, and ‘neutralising’ greenhouse gas emissions from driving and flying by purchasing carbon credits53. Providing a means to become personally involved not only ensures the uptake of climate-friendly technology, but it also provides the public with a way to feel involved and active.

2.2 Theme 2: Political lobbying and providing expertise Undertaking research, developing alternative policies, stating a position and providing an opinion A key feature of all the NGOs selected in this research is their focus on producing quality and accessible research on climate change-related issues. Greenpeace analyses the 2005 proposed budget, summarised as “Score 10 for polluting power, nil for climate protection”54. WWF’s ‘Queensland Clean Energy Future’ builds a case that there is no need to build the proposed Kogan Creek coal-fired power station in Queensland55. CANA released a national positioning statement on energy issues and a report on “Australia’s Polluting Power” and collaborated with a variety of environmental and social service NGOs to produce a position paper on the National Energy Market56. This research acts to ‘position’ the NGO on climate change, a position that can then be accessed by the media or government committees seeking a certain perspective. Providing research reports and other information was recognised by Richards and Heard as a “critical element of [NGO] work, allowing them to educate the public, monitor changes and encourage the enforcement of legislation through the effective use of the media which all provide access to both mass and discrete audiences”57. They found that “sound scientific research” legitimiced the NGO campaigns as well as the actual groups. Combined with strong political knowledge, this can raise an NGO’s lobbying potential and increase their campaign

impact58. Recognition of the NGOs’ quality information can build recognition of NGOs in policy debates with governments, multilateral organisations, and the private sector59. Lobbying political parties and politicians NGOs use reports, polls and policies to engage political decision makers and parties. Rising Tide published an article in the NSW Greens’ newsletter, Greenmail, calling for the NSW Greens party to “provide the vision for a cleaner future, and hold the government accountable” and facilitated 250 submissions to the NSW government on its Green Paper on Energy60. MPI produced a report on the assistance given by the Australian government to the fossil fuel industry over support for the renewable energy sector to help strengthen NGO arguments in increasing government support for the renewable energy industry and decreasing support for the fossil fuel industry61. ACF undertook its own poll, ‘A National Agenda for a Sustainable Australia’, produced its own climate change-related policy statements, covering ozone protection, energy pricing and carbon dioxide emissions, and made nine submissions related to climate change over the last four years on such issues as the Energy White Paper, geosequestration, energy efficiency, Mandatory Renewable Energy Target and Fuel Tax62. CANA produced its own policy document on how to respond to climate change, called ‘The Real Way Forward’, compiled climate policies for the 2004 election, and provides policy positions on issues including geosequestration, the national electricity market, wind farms and emissions trading63. In their summary of political lobbying by NGOs, Richard and Heard emphasise the need to identify the best avenues by which to target lobbying, particularly by “identifying ‘friendly’ politicians and decision-makers”64. One campaigner is sceptical of relying only on lobbying these officials, stating that a “top down strategy of lobbying does not always deliver”65. Senator Kerry Nettle reminds campaigners that lobbying is only effective if there is strong and obvious public support for the issue, stating that “social change never ever starts in parliament… it starts in the community and occasionally politicians listen”66. Posing solutions As a positive approach, NGOs provide ‘solutions’ to climate change. ACF and Greenpeace propose increasing the Mandatory Renewable Energy Target as a way to increase clean power supplies. Greenpeace proposes to replace fossil fuels with ‘clean renewable energy’, and encourages energy efficiency67. WWF convenes the Australian Climate Group which proposes ten steps that “taken today will make an important impact that will be appreciated by generations to come”68. The identification of positive ‘solutions’ is seen by Gough and Shackley as an “increasingly important component of NGOs’ approach”. They recommend identifying the benefits for those involved, such as new business opportunities and reduced business risk, which for climate change may include the potential for jobs and export earnings from the renewable energy and energy efficiency sector69.

2.3 Theme 3: Direct and Legal Actions Mass rallies, festivals and actions Rising Tide and Greenpeace are the two main NGOs staging public actions in Australia to attract attention to climate change. Rising Tide staged a Winter Solstice Festival, encouraging Newcastle residents to turn off their “power for an hour and enjoy a renewable energy-run concert”, ‘invaded’ the dinner of the Australian Chamber of Commerce who were hosting NSW Premier Carr around the same time as he announced plans for new and upgraded coal-fired power plants, holds weekly pickets at Carr’s office, and with Greenpeace, dumped a truckload of coal outside Carr’s office for April “Fossil Fool’s Day” 200570. Greenpeace blocked the coal port of Newcastle with its ship, the Rainbow Warrior, in July, staged a “ backwards march” to Premier Carr’s office in June, demonstrating the ‘backwards’ nature of Carr’s fossil fuel–based plans, projected the image of a drought-affected Warragamba dam to the media, emphasising the link between climate change and the drought, and sent the Rainbow Warrior to the Great Barrier Reef to focus attention to the risks that climate change pose to the reef’s ecosystem71. Direct action and other symbolic gestures are relatively limited for climate change compared to other environmental campaigns, in both Europe and Australia72. Richards and Heard describe a resurgence of grassroots organisations intent on direct action despite an increase in more ‘conciliatory’ engagement strategies, with groups recognising the value of confrontational tactics as it adds a “hybrid vigour” to campaigning on an issue73. In Australia, the emergence of Rising Tide since 2004 has appeared to fill a gap in public action that may be crucial in engaging the public and providing a more active media profile. Legal challenges Legal challenges in the courts are not a common approach of the NGOs, with only CANA undertaking this strategy. CANA ‘served notice’ to the directors of Australian companies identified as major emitters and facilitators of greenhouse gas emissions to highlight the possibility that they could be personally sued for damage caused by their companies' greenhouse gas emissions, appealed as a third party to win a legal action against the Redbank 2 coal-fired power station that would have emitted greenhouse gases at higher rates than any other power stations in NSW, and is currently trying to protect the Great Barrier Reef from climate change impacts through legal obligations74. This lack of popularity may be due to legal

challenges not attracting much media attention and not having immediate results. At worst, the NGOs’ lack of financial strength and expertise can mean they have to withdraw partway through proceedings75.

2.4 Theme 4: Working Together Broadening solidarity and forming new coalitions NGO strategies have sought to widen the portrayal of climate change by involving academics, the medical profession, the renewable energy industry and religious groups. ACF joined with the National Council of Churches, the Uniting Church and Catholic Earthcare to produce a brochure for Australian Christians, Changing Climate, Changing Creation (ACF 2005). Greenpeace convened an academic forum on climate change (Ros Taplin, Senior Lecturer, Macquarie University, pers. comm., 23/6/05) to perhaps provide a different source of expertise and ‘legitimacy’. This connection with academics could potentially also enable advocacy on climate change to be integrated into tertiary curriculum76. WWF brought together renewable energy industry and environmental NGO representatives to produce a joint report, ‘Clean Energy Futures’ and collaborated with the Insurance Australia Groups to convene the Australian Climate Group, involving nine senior representatives from academia, business, research and NGOs “in response to the increasing need for action on climate change in Australia”77. CANA joined with the Queensland Conservation Council to commission a paper by two medical professionals on the public health impacts of climate change, such as an increase in tropical diseases78. There is an active discussion underway amongst the NGOs about the need for greater ‘solidarity’ to encourage networking around climate change and create the groundswell of support to push for greater political attention. Some environment groups acknowledge the need to “break out of the environmental ghetto”, to reframe climate change as an “all of society problem” and to work with other stakeholders that have a concern about climate change. This would enable the climate change ‘message’ to come from a number of “trusted sources”, such as health professionals, farming community and social service NGOs79. Both Walker and Nettle recommend stronger links with trade unions, arguing that solidarity with others has a stronger voice, and large rallies add power to political lobbying80. In a training manual for campaigners in the US, the authors state that “no one organisation alone … will be able to build and exercise the power and win the social change necessary to permanently solve the problems … we face. Therefore, building strategic alliances among different constituencies … in order to collaborate on strategies is a crucial part of a successful long term plan for winning social change at the scale that is needed”.81

The benefits of greater solidarity on climate change are noted in the literature. Medforth and Maguire found NGOs that come together in a co-operative manner can produce a greater effort82. Richards and Heard see solidarity in formal coalitions or more informal networks as an obvious means to overcome a lack of financial and other resources. Working together also achieves the impression of “harmonised, focused representation in the increasingly international policy making arena”83. Hutton and Connors believe in the importance of presenting a single external ‘face’ while still nurturing a “wide spectrum of political and ethical positions”84.

Open debates that acknowledge the variety of positions will help to build this solidarity. Lakoff describes the benefits of conservative policymakers regularly debating their differences, noting that “nothing like this happens in the progressive world, because there are so many people thinking that what each does is the right thing … but ultimately is self-defeating”85. In Australia, FoE recommends “having the discussion: get to know the people (as it’s easier to disagree with a stranger); find out what to agree on and where to disagree; and put this into a written agreement”(Cam Walker, Campaigner, Friends of the Earth Australia, pers. comm., 5/7/05). When reflecting how the well a diversity of environmental and indigenous rights groups worked together to prevent the Jabiluka Uranium mine, Jacqui Katona acknowledges that there were a variety of goals but this was ‘okay’, as the ultimate goal was the same: to prevent a uranium mine86. Corporate engagement Only the ACF and WWF appear to be actively engaging in partnerships with the corporate sector. ACF convenes the Climate Change Business Leaders Roundtable, ACF and WWF are actively engaging with the insurance industry about the risks from climate change, and WWF is “recruiting pioneer companies who are taking a crucial leadership role in addressing [climate change]”87. Cowe represents the decision by WWF International (not specifically WWF Australia) to engage very positively, stating “WWF [International] has long realised that it is possible to work with business without losing independence or the capacity to criticise”, and cites a WWF company relations manager as saying “as long as your partners are willing to accept challenging targets, they are the ones you should be working with”88. The UK consultancy, SustainAbility, suggests that some key success factors for partnerships between corporates and NGOs are for the company to be serious about changing its behaviour, for NGOs to maintain clear accountability to its stakeholders, for clearly-agreed rules of engagement from the outset, and for the individuals to trust each other89. Trusting corporations to enact change is challenged by Burton. He cites Peter Sandman, a public relations consultant to major international corporations, who recommends engagement as a means of ‘outsourcing trust’: involving activist groups

in corporate decision-making is a “way of getting external groups to face hard choices, and of out-sourcing controversial decisions that would have little credibility if made within the company”90. Burton is very critical of NGOs becoming financially dependent on their corporate partners, warning that this can erode the public’s perception of the NGO as independent and fearless defenders of the public interest91. However, the strategies of ‘insider versus outsider’ are “not mutually exclusive- groups involved in lobbying can and do engage in outsider tactics such as mass demonstrations and legal actions while maintaining their insider status through [research, petitions and ministerial briefings]”92. This is most obviously demonstrated by Greenpeace, normally preferring the ‘outsider’ niche, sharing a platform with the World Business Council on Sustainable Development at the Johannesburg summit on Sustainable Development, stating that “we both share the view that the mixed, and often contradictory signals sent by governments on the environment, especially on greenhouse gas emission reductions, is creating a political environment which is not good for business nor, indeed, for the future of humanity”93. Building networks In addition to an informal network of partner NGOs, the NGOs selected for this research already benefit from a role in a more formal network. Greenpeace and WWF link into international branches of their own international organisations. As such, they host some internal campaigns, such as WWF International’s global PowerSwitch and Coal Trail campaigns. CANA hosts a network of 34 Australian member groups, including all of the NGOs selected in this research, and acts as the central information hub, coordinates a variety of issue-specific working groups, develops climate change-related policy positions and hosts collaborative campaigns such as No More Polluting Powe. CANA is also part of the Climate Action Network, an international network of over 287 NGOs working to “promote government and individual action to limit human-induced climate change to ecologically sustainable levels”94. Networking among NGOs in Europe has increased due to limited capacity and resources, according to Richards and Heard. Networks have also become necessary for increasing the ‘legitimacy’ of NGO campaigns and for influencing legislative proposals. This comment may also be relevant to the climate change campaigns in Australia. In their analysis, Richards and Heard found the traditional competition that exists between the NGOs around media attention, sponsorship and membership can be overcome as the importance of gaining members to the network surpasses the importance of maintaining each NGO’s identity95. This positive analysis may help address the issue of ‘protectiveness’ that many NGO hold over their NGO’s ‘brand’. 2.5 Models for Measuring ‘Success’ Judging whether or not a campaign has been a ‘success’ or ‘failure’ is a complex question, and depends on the criteria used for determining ‘success’. There are a number of commentators who have taken on this question and developed methods by which to measure campaign progress and determine success96. Whelan and Hepburn remind readers upfront that “environment fights must be won over and over”, suggesting that ‘success’ is a stage that must be re-captured several times97. Worth prefers to examine the ‘effectiveness’ of a campaign, and offers the definition of effectiveness as goal-attainment, but then adds a caveat that some campaigns set “impossible goals”, such as preventing global warming, and this makes it difficult to assess their effectiveness over the short or medium-term98.

Moyer’s Movement Action Plan (MAP) defines success as when “societal consensus turns the tide of power against the powerholders, launching an “endgame”process that eventually leads to the movement succeeding in reaching its goal”99. The MAP was created after analyzing previous social movements to determine eight common stages, which are (in order) ‘1: normal times’, ‘2: proving the failure of official institutions’, ‘3: ripening conditions’, ‘4: take off’, ‘5: perception of failure’, ‘6: majority public opinion’, ‘7: success’, and ‘8: continuing the struggle’100. The Australian campaigns on climate change appear to be at the beginning of the stage four of the MAP (“take off”) as they have fulfilled many of the characteristics of stage three (“conditions ripen”):

• ‘a context of historic development; • a growing, discontented population of victims and their allies; • a budding, autonomous, grassroots opposition with small, local demonstrations and non violent actions campaigns’

(such as Rising Tide starting in Newcastle); • personalisation of the problem’ (such as the strategy of ‘introducing the victims’); and • a growing public awareness of the problem, forming of new networks, and offering leadership training and

providing expertise” (such as Greenpeace’s involvement with Rising Tide).

The fourth stage will be attained if climate change becomes a high-profile social and environmental issue that is reinforced by a highly-publicised “trigger event”, which may the continuing Australian drought or further water shortages. This trigger event could even stimulate “large rallies, marches and dramatic acts of civil disobedience” which reach and activate the general public and result in capturing the attention of the political decision-makers101.

3. Conclusions The title of this paper divides NGOs working on climate change into two separate categories: those accepting a more conservative ‘incremental’ approach, through negotiation and consultation, and those taking a radical, revolutionary approach, through direct action and legal challenges. This paper describes fifteen strategies that the selected environmental NGOs are already undertaking, and acknowledges there may be additional strategies not described here. These strategies are framed within the three themes created by Richards and Heard (2005) - “information, education and awareness-raising”, “political lobbying and providing expertise” and “direct and legal actions”, and a fourth additional theme (‘working together’). These strategies range from incremental to radical approaches, and all between. All of the NGOs undertook a number of strategies from each of the four themes acting either individually or through the umbrella group of CANA. This demonstrates that none of the NGOs are intentionally choosing to favour one end of a spectrum of strategies at the expense of another, and that the choice of strategies by NGOs is more complex than ‘incremental versus revolutionary’, or any other dichotomy, such as ‘insider versus outsider’, or ‘confrontational versus reformist’102. The question that does remain, however, is whether the current approach of multi-pronged, multi-strategied NGO responses is working and achieving influence with political decision-makers and the public, or whether it is a messy, scattergun and rather desperate attempt to ‘get it right’. To answer this, further research on campaign effectiveness is required involving interviews with both NGO campaigners and their external observers- politicians, government officials and the public- to then match their perceived achievements with Schumaker’s Model of Political Effectiveness103. To conclude, the Australian environmental NGOs described here are campaigning in an energetic and dedicated manner with an obvious determination to achieve government change that will “prevent dangerous climate change”, “reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions” and “generate debate and positive change to protect the climate”104. Their campaigns have ‘ripened’ the conditions outlined in the Movement Action Plan. To the NGOs’ credit, their strategic planning documents reflect that the organisations appear open to debate and ideas on new campaign directions, are seeking to strengthen the community involvement and to move climate change to a broader issue of social concern that is championed beyond the environmental movement alone, and are becoming aware of the power of language in the key messages with which they are portraying climate change. To date, the Australian Government admits climate change is a concern that needs to be addressed, but has yet to act in way that these NGOs consider to be adequate to secure Australia’s economy, population and environment from the effects of a changing climate. 5. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge their appreciation to the seven NGOs cited in this research for access to archival documents, and to the Graduate School of the Environment, Macquarie University, for their support. 1 Kennedy, D. 2004b "Climate Change and Environmental Governance." Ecopolitics Conference XV: Environmental Governance- Transforming Regions and Localities, Macquarie University, Sydney, November 13-14. 2 MA. 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis Report (Pre-Publication Final Draft), March 23: Millenium Assessment (IEG India, SCOPE France, UNEP Kenya, UNEP-WCMC UK, WRI and Meridian Institute, USA, RIVM Netherlands, and World Fish Center Malaysia), http://www.millenniumassessment.org//en/Products.Synthesis.aspx (accessed 1/4/05), p.29. 3 see ACG 2004 "Climate Change Solutions for Australia: The Australian Climate Group." Sydney: Australian Climate Group and WWF Australia; CANA. 2005c CANA Home Climate Action Network Australia website, www.cana.net.au (accessed 23/6/05); Selvey, L., and Sheridan, J. 2002 "The Health Benefits of Mitigating Global Warming in Australia." Sydney and Brisbane: Climate Action Network Australia and Queensland Conservation Council. 4 Riedy, C. 2005 The Eye of the Storm: An Integral Perspective on Sustainable Development and Climate Change Response. PhD Thesis, University of Technology Sydney. 5 CANA. 2005b Election Stuff Climate Action Network Australia, http://www.cana.net.au/index.php (accessed 30/3/05). 6 Hogarth, M. 2001 “Finding the Energy”, Ethical Investor, Issue 6 p.24. November. 7 Worth, D. 2003 "The WA Forest Conflict: The Construction of the Political Effectiveness of Advocacy Organisations." Grit: Journal of Australian Studies 78. 8 Confidential(c) 2005 9 Princen, T., and Finger, M. 1994"Introduction." In Environmental NGOs in World Politics: Linking the Local and the Global, edited by T. Princen, and Finger, M. London, and New York: Routledge, pp.11-13 10 Papadakis, Elim. 1993 Politics and the Environment: The Australian Experience. 1 ed. Sydney: Allen and Unwin p. 11, 44. 11 Doyle, T. 2001 Green Power: The Environmental Movement in Australia. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press. p.xvii. 12 Worth 2003 op. cit. 13 Moyer, B. 2001 Doing Democracy: The Map Model for Organizing Social Movements. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers, p.111. 14 Rising Tide 2004"Climate Change Activism in Newcastle." OPUS, Newcastle University Students Association, http://www.newcastle.edu.au/association/nusa/Opus/Opus6/climate.html (accessed 30/3/05), October 15; Rising Tide 2005. Rising Tide: Climate Change Activism in Newcastle Website, Www.Risingtide.Org.Au (Accessed 24/6/05); MPI 2005 Climate Change Mineral Policy Institute website, www.mpi.org.au (accessed 30/3/05); FoE 2005 Climate Justice Friends of the Earth website, www.foe.org.au (accessed 15/7/05); Walker, C. 2005a " Doing or Debating" (Comments from Panellist) Ecopolitics conference XVI, Griffith University, Brisbane, 4-6 July; ACF 2005 Climate Change Australian Conservation Foundation website www.acfonline.org.au (accessed 30/3/05 and

23/6/05); Greenpeace 2005 Climate Change: Home Greenpeace Australia Pacific, http://www.greenpeace.org.au/climate/index.html (accessed 30/3/05); CANA 2005a Public Programs Climate Action Network Australia website, http://www.cana.net.au/index.php (accessed 30/3/05); CANA 2004 "Australia's Climate Change Strategy: The Real Way Forward." Sydney: Climate Action Network Australia website, www.cana.net.au (accessed 5/3/05); CANA 2005c op. cit.; WWF 2005 Campaigns Worldwide Fund for Nature website, http://www.wwf.org.au/About_WWF_Australia/How_we_work/Campaigns/index.php (accessed 9/4/05); CANA (2003). Minutes of Annual General Meeting. Climate Action Network Australia, Sydney. 15 Bobo, K., Kendall, J. and Max, S. 2001 Organizing for Social Change: Midwest Academy manual for activists. Seven Locks Press, Santa Ana. 16 Richards, J.P. and Heard, J. 2005 "European Environmental NGOs: Issues, Resources and Strategies in Marine Campaigns." Environmental Politics 14, no. 1, pp. 23-41. 17 see Walker, C. 2005b "Climate Justice Workshop." Ecopolitics Conference XVI, Griffith University, Brisbane, 4-6 July; Nettle, Sen. K. 2005 "Doing or Debating" (Comments from Panellist). Ecopolitics Conference XVI, Griffith University, Brisbane, 4-6 July; Hutton, D., and Connors, L. 1999 A History of the Australian Environmental Movement. Cambridge, New York and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press; Medforth, R-A and Maguire, P. 2001 "Lessons from the Campaign Strategies of Non-Government Organisations." Durban: Originally prepared for the Millenium Reviews of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. 18 Phillips, S. 2005 "No to King Coal." GreenMail (The Greens NSW) p.5. 19 Lansbury, N. 2002 "Up in Smoke - Australian Coal Exports to South East Asia." Sydney: Mineral Policy Institute. 20 ACF 2005 op. cit.; Krishnapillai, S. 2002a "Climate Bullies." Arena Magazine, pp. 24-25; Krishnapillai, S. 2002b "Forecast: Asthma, Cholera and Malaria." Habitat Australia, pp. 18-19. 21 CANA 2005c op. cit. 22 Gough, C., and Shackley, S. 2001"The Respectable Politics of Climate Change: The Epistemic Communities and NGOs." International Affairs 77, no. 2 pp. 329-45. 23 Confidential(c) 2005 24 ACF 2005 op. cit.; CANA 2005c op. cit. 25 Riedy 2005 op. cit. p.180 26 Kennedy, D. 2004a "Social Movements and Climate Change." Climate Action Network Annual Conference, Sydney, 18-19 November. 27 Karoly, D., Risbey, J., Reynolds, A. 2003 "Global Warming Contributes to Australia's Worst Drought." Sydney: WWF Australia, p.1 28 Long, S. 2003"Living on the Brink." Habitat Australia. 29 Greenpeace 2005 op. cit. 30 Greg Bourne, CEO, WWF in Sedgman, J-M. 2005"Coal-21 Group Debates Clean Power Options." In PM, April 6, 18:30. Australia: Radio National, http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2005/s1339741.htm (accessed 12/4/05). 31 WWF 2005 op. cit. 32 MPI 2005 op. cit. 33 ACF 2005 op. cit. 34 ISF 2005 "Water and Climate Change: Literature Review." Sydney: Institute for Sustainable Future, for the Climate Action Network Australia pp. 47-48. 35 CANA 2005c op. cit. 36 Confidential(c) 2005 37 Lakoff, G. 2004 Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. White River Junction, US: Chelsea Green Publishing. p.17 38 Midwest Academy. 2005 Why Thinking Strategically Matters The Midwest Academy for Community Organizing website, www.midwestacademy.com (accessed 20/7/05). 39 ACF 2005 op. cit. 40 Greenpeace 2005 op. cit. 41 Hoegh-Guldberg, H., and Hoegh-Guldberg, O. 200? "The Implications of Climate Change for Australia's Great Barrier Reef." Sydney: WWF Australia. 42 CANA 2005c op. cit. 43 Gough and Shackley 2001 op. cit. p.339 44 MPI 2005 op. cit. 45 Long, S. 2005 "Climate Justice Workshop." Ecopolitics Conference XVI, Griffith University, Brisbane, 4-6 July. 46 Greenpeace 2005 op. cit. 47 Star, C. 2005 "Notions of Ecological Citizenship in Climate Justice Campaigns." Ecopolitics Conference XVI, Griffith University, Brisbane, 4-6 July p.8. 48 Walker 2005b op. cit. 49 Lidchi, H. 1999 "Finding the Right Image: British Development NGOs and the Regulation of Imagery." In Culture and Global Change, edited by T. and Allen Skelton, T. London and New York: Routledge, p.90. 50 Ibid p.89 51 Long 2005 op. cit. 52 FoE 2005 op. cit.; Greenpeace 2005 op. cit.; WWF 2005 op.cit.; CANA 2005c op. cit. 53 WWF 2005 op. cit. 54 Greenpeace 2005 op. cit. 55 WWF 2005 op. cit. 56 CANA 2005c op. cit.; TEC 2004 "The National Energy Market: Environmental and Social Issues, NGO Position Paper." Sydney: Total Environment Centre. 57 Richards and Heard 2005 op. cit. p. 26 58 Richards and Heard 2005 op. cit. p.32, 35 59 Medforth and Maguire 2001 op. cit.

60 Phillips 2005 op. cit.; Rising Tide 2005 op. cit. 61 Lansbury 2002 op. cit. 62 Garrett, P. 2003 "National Environment Test: How Do Our Politicians Score?" Address to the National Press Club, April 19; ACF 2005 op. cit. 63 CANA 2004 op. cit.; CANA 2005c op. cit. 64 Richards and Heard op. cit. p32 65 Kennedy 2004b op. cit. 66 Nettle 2005 op. cit. 67 ACF 2005 op. cit.; Greenpeace 2005 op. cit. 68 ACG 2004 op. cit. p. 10 69 Gough and Shackley 2001 op. cit. p.336 70 Rising Tide 2005 op. cit. 71 Greenpeace 2005 op. cit. 72 Gough and Shackley 2001 op. cit. p. 339 73 Richards and Heard op. cit. 2005 p.26,34 74 Parker, J., and Anderson, G. 2003 Energy Reform and Greenhouse Gas Emissions FindLaw Australia, http://www.findlaw.com.au/article/10640.htm (accessed 28/7/05); Greenpeace 2004 Coal Proponent Pulls out of Legal Battle Greenpeace Australia Pacific; Freeman, P. 2004 "CANA's Climate Justice Program." Climate Action Network Australia Annual Conference, University of Sydney, Sydney, 18-19 November. 75 Richards and Heard 2005 p.35 76 Whelan, J. 2002"Popular Education for the Environment: Restoring Confidence in Education as a Strategy for Social and Environmental Change." Third International Education and Social Action Conference, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, December. 77 Energy Strategies. 2004"A Clean Energy Future for Australia." Sydney: Clean Energy Future Group; ACG 2004 op. cit. p.3. 78 Selvey and Sheridan, 2002 op. cit. 79 Confidential(c) 2005 80 Walker 2005a op. cit.; Nettle 2005 op. cit. 81 Castellanos, P., and Pateriya, D. (2003). Power Tools: A Manual for Organizations Fighting for Justice. Strategic Concepts in Organizing and Policy Education (SCOPE), Los Angeles. 82 Medforth and Maguire 2001 op. cit. 83 Richards and Heard 2005 op. cit. p. 36, 38 84 Hutton and Connors 1999 op. cit. p. 262 85 Lakoff 2004 op. cit. p. 16 86 Katona, J. 2005 "Doing or Debating" (Comments from Panelist). Ecopolitics Conference XVI, Griffith University, Brisbane, 4-6 July. 87 ACF 2005 op. cit.; ACG 2004 op. cit.; WWF 2005 op. cit. 88 Cowe, R. "Business/ NGO Partnerships- What's the Payback?" Ethical Corporation magazine 2004 p.17. 89 Ibid p.16 90 Burton, B. "When Corporations Want to Cuddle." In Moving Mountains: Communities Confront Mining and Globalisation, edited by G. Evans, Goodman, J., and Lansbury, N., 2002. London: Zed Books p. 134. 91 Ibid p. 147 92 Richards and Heard 2005 op. cit. p.27 93 Stigson, B., and Parmentier, R. 2002 "Call for Action: Statement to Johannesburg Summit for Sustainable Development, August 28." World Business Council for Sustainable Development and Greenpeace International, http://archive.greenpeace.org/earthsummit/wbcsd/ (accessed 14/7/05). 94 CANA 2005c op. cit. 95 Richards and Heard 2005 p. 27 96 see Schumaker, P.D. 1975 "Policy Responsiveness to Protest-Group Demands." The Journal of Politics 37 pp. 488-521; Bratzel, S. 1999 "Conditions of Success in Sustainble Urban Transport Policy: Policy Change in 'Relatively Successful' European Cities." Transport Reviews 19, no. 2 pp. 177- 90; Moyer 2001 op. cit. 97 Whelan, J., and Hepburn, J. 2005 "People Power, Politics and Poultry." Ecopolitics Conference XVI, Griffith University, Brisbane, 4-6 July. 98 Worth 2003 op. cit. 99 Moyer 2001 op. cit. p.75 100 Ibid pp. 44-45 101 Ibid 2001 pp. 51-57 102 Banaszak, L. A. 2002 "Inside and Outside the State: Movement Insider Status, Tactics and Public Policy Achievements." Workshop on Social Movements and Public Policy, 11-13 January, Laguna Beach, California; Whelan, J. 2001 "Bringing About Change: Six Ways of Thinking About Achieving Environmental Advocacy Outcomes." National Environment Movement Conference. 103 Schumaker 1975 op. cit. 104 Greenpeace 2005 op. cit.; ACF 2005 op. cit.; FoE 2005 op. cit.