U.S. Labour and climate justice activists advocate for recovery proposals which include the Care Economy

The THRIVE Agenda  is an economic renewal plan for the U.S., created by the Green New Deal Network and endorsed by more than 100 climate justice, civil rights and labour organizations –  including the American Federation of Teachers, American Postal Workers Union, Amalgamated Transit Union, Communication Workers of America, Railroad Workers United, Service Employees International, United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America (UE) as well as the  Labor Network for Sustainability.

The website states: The THRIVE Agenda presents a bold new vision to revive our economy while addressing these interlocking crises of climate change, racial injustice, public health, and economic inequity with a plan to create dignified jobs for millions of unemployed workers and support a better life for the millions more who remain vulnerable in this pivotal moment.”   A 6-page Resolution document fleshes out these goals, and a framework of “8 Pillars” itemizes them. Regarding climate change, Pillar 5 is:  “Combating environmental injustice and ensuring healthy lives for all; Pillar 6 is “Averting climate and environmental catastrophe”; Pillar 7 is “Ensuring fairness for workers and communities affected by economic transitions” and Pillar 8 is “Reinvesting in public institutions that enable workers and communities to thrive” .

Modelling job creation in infrastructure, clean energy, agriculture and the care economy

The THRIVE Agenda claims that their proposals “would create nearly 16 million new jobs and sustain them over the next critical decade”, based on modelling by Robert Pollin and Shouvik Chakraborty.  Their report, Job Creation Estimates Through Proposed Economic Stimulus Measures , published by the University of Massachusetts Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) in  September 2020, models the costs and job creation benefits of economic recovery proposals made by various groups in the U.S., including Making the Grade by the BlueGreen Alliance (2017, re infrastructure), and Sierra Club proposals to Congress (April 2020 ). The report offers projections in four categories: Infrastructure; Clean Energy;  Agriculture and land restoration programs; and notably, the “Care economy, public health, and postal service”.  The Care Economy modelling is based on proposals in the Joe Biden’s Plan for Mobilizing American Talent and Heart to Create a 21st Century Caregiving and Education Workforce released in July 2020.     

How human rights approaches can aid climate activism and litigation

Climate change, justice and human rights is a collection of ten essays, released by Amnesty International Netherlands in August 2020 (published in English). It is a thoughtful and critical discussion of the opportunities and problems of taking a human rights lens to climate change. “The language, policies and (campaigning) strategies around climate change and human rights are still in development, leading to new insights, (re) definitions, and new challenges for human rights and environmental activists.” The opening essay, “Amnesty’s approach to climate change and human rights” discusses whether Amnesty should become involved in climate change, and if so, how.  It concludes “Simply framing the crisis as a human rights crisis will by itself make only a modest difference. However, with determination, sound strategy and humility we can use our strengths to support and be guided by those who are at the front line of the climate crisis, and who have been leading the struggle for climate justice for a long time.” Specifically, when options for tactics were presented at a People’s Summit in 2019, participants voted for: Changing public opinion (25%); Civil disobedience (19%); Litigation (17%); Divestment (14%); Mass demonstrations (9%); Consumer boycotts (9%); or  something else (7%). Not all of these are tactics commonly used by Amnesty International, but the report discusses how they determine to go forward.

Besides the considerations of Amnesty’s future direction and tactics, the essays look at the concept of climate justice, and finally, at specific policies areas, in chapters such as “Climate change and the human rights responsibilities of business enterprises” by  Sara Seck, Associate Professor, Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University; “The use of human rights arguments in climate change litigation and its limitations” by Annalisa Savaresi, one of two Executive Directors of Greenpeace Netherlands; “The climate crisis and new justice movements: supporting a new generation of climate activists” by Anna Schoemakers, Senior Lecturer in Environmental Law at Stirling University, UK; and “ Human rights and intergenerational climate justice “ by  Bridget Lewis, Senior Lecturer at the Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane, Australia.   

  

Only 24% of Canadians willing to give up flying to fight climate change – compared to 41% globally

On Earth Day, public opinion polling company Ipsos Global Advisor released a survey  titled, How does the world view climate change and Covid-19? . The survey was conducted during March and April and so includes Covid-19 questions, along with measuring the top environmental concerns of respondents, and their willingness to act to combat climate change.   Top-line results show that:  71% globally agree that climate change is as serious a crisis as Covid-19 and 65% globally support a ‘green’ economic recovery from the Covid-19 crisis. Sadly, however, there has been no increase since the 2014 survey in the number of people willing to make sacrifices to combat climate change, and the changes they are willing to make are mostly low effort and low impact.

How do Canadian opinions compare to other countries?

Only 64% of Canadians agree with the statement that “In the long term, climate change is as serious a crisis as Covid-19 is” – compared to a 71% global agreement, and 87% in the highest country, China. Only Australia and the United States have a lower  rate than Canada.  Similarly, only 61% of Canadians supported the statement: “In the economic recovery after Covid-19, it’s important that government actions prioritize climate change”, compared to  81% in India and 65% globally.

Globally, the top-ranked environmental concerns reported are global warming/climate change; air pollution; waste; deforestation; water pollution; depletion of natural resources. For Canadians, when asked “what are the top environmental issues you feel should receive the greatest attention from your local leaders?”, 44% responded “global warming/climate change” – the third highest response in the world after Japan and South Korea.  A similarly high concern (44%) was recorded for the amount of waste we generate.  Other concerns ranked surprisingly low – for example, air pollution (23%);  water pollution (22%); future energy sources and supplies (20%); emissions (16%); depletion of natural resources (15%); deforestation (15%) ;  flooding (7%).

air canadaThe final section of the report reports on understanding of climate change and what changes respondents are willing to make to combat climate change. Globally, people are most willing to 1.avoid products which have a lot of packaging; 2. Avoid buying new goods in favour of mending or buying used; and 3. Conserve energy at home.   The three behaviour changes least favoured:  1. Not flying; 2. Eating less meat; 3. Eating fewer dairy products.  Canadians are the least likely in the world to give up flying, with only 24% willing to make that change – well below the global average of 41%. Similarly, only 28% are willing to eat less meat (28% – only 1% more than Australians and Americans) and 22% to  eat less dairy.

The Ipsos summary and press release are here.

Bargaining for the Common Good- including climate justice and just recovery

“Bargaining for Climate Justice”  appears in the March 2020 special issue of The Forge, a publication launched in September 2019 by and for community and labour organizers.  The article is written by Todd Vachon, Saket Sonni, Judith LeBlanc and Gerry Hudson, and  updates their earlier article,   “How Workers Can Demand Climate Justice”, which appeared in American Prospect in September 2019. Both articles describe the new movement  of Bargaining for the Common Good, defined as:  “an innovative approach for bringing unions and allies together to shape bargaining demands that advance the mutual interests of workers and communities alike. BCG campaigns seek to increase investment in underserved communities and confront structural inequalities—not simply to agree on a union contract.”

The origins of the BCG movement are described in “Going on Offense During Challenging Times” (in New Labor Forum, 2018) which explains: “Bargaining for Common Good aims to avoid transactional relationships between community and labor by building lasting alignments between unions and community groups, not merely temporary alliances of convenience.” “Bargaining for Climate Justice” describes how the element of climate justice fits in to the broader concerns of BCG , and updates it with the example of the February strike by janitors in Minneapolis, members of SEIU Local 26,  as well as the concept of  “bargaining for a just recovery”, expanding it from climate-related disasters such as hurricanes and pipeline spills, to the most recent disaster: the current pandemic.  The authors state:

“To date, BCG campaigns have been launched around issues of education, racial justice, public services, immigration, finance, housing, and privatization. But they are in many ways perhaps best suited to taking on the overarching existential issues such as global pandemics and human-caused climate change that intersect with and often exacerbate all of these other issues.”

bargaining for the common good toolkitThe Center for Innovative Workplace Organization at Rutgers University  in the U.S. has established a program to promote concrete initiatives around all aspects of Bargaining for the Common Good – building alliances, convening conferences and regional meetings (now delivered through webinars), and compiling resources such as a “Common Good” Toolkit. That Toolkit includes examples of bargaining demands related to Climate Justice.

European Investment Bank stops fossil funding; Bank of Canada acknowledges the dangers of stranded assets

european investment bank energy_lending_policy_enThe long-awaited decision came on November 13, when the European Investment Bank (EIB) issued a press release announcing that “ We will stop financing fossil fuels and we will launch the most ambitious climate investment strategy of any public financial institution anywhere.”  Also, “…..The EIB will work closely with the European Commission to support investment by a Just Transition Fund. The EIB will be able to finance up to 75% of the eligible project cost for new energy investment in these countries. These projects will also benefit from both advisory and financial support from the EIB.”  The Guardian summarizes the policy here ; details are in the full document, EIB Energy Lending Policy: Supporting the energy transformation.

The decision ends a long and contentious review process which received more than 149 written submissions and petitions signed by more than 30,000 people.  National members of the EU negotiated and compromised – the German government had been expected to abstain from the vote but ended by supporting the measure.  A press release from WWF-Europe  is generally supportive, stating “All public and private banks must urgently follow suit” – while pointing out that the decision postpones the end of financing for gas projects until 2021, and allows for further financing for any gas infrastructure that could potentially transport so-called “green gas”. A summary in Clean Energy Wire quotes Claudia Kemfert, climate economist at the German Institute for Economic Research, who calls the EIB decision “a game changer”, and says, “Even if there’s still a backdoor for fossil gas included, this is an important and necessary step in the right direction.”

Bank of Canada acknowledges climate change risks to the economy

On November 19, the Bank of Canada published its most complete statement to date about the transitions and risks which climate change will bring, in Researching the Economic Effects of Climate Change , a report prepared by Miguel Molico, senior research director at the bank’s Financial Stability Department.  On November 21, the Governor of the Bank of Canada followed up on this by raising the issue of climate change and the risk of stranded assets during an address to the Ontario Securities Commission .  The National Observer summarizes the development in “Bank of Canada warns of stranded assets and an abrupt transition to clean economy” (Nov. 23).

Also in Canada, on November 19, the Institute for Sustainable Finance was launched Housed at the Smith School of Business at Queen’s University, Kingston Ontario : “ The Institute for Sustainable Finance (ISF) is the first-ever cross-cutting and collaborative hub in Canada that fuses academia, the private sector, and government with the singular focus of increasing Canada’s sustainable finance capacity.” A more formal statement comes in the Institute’s launch report:  Green Finance: New Directions in Sustainable Finance Research & Policy  which states: “the Institute will span a continuum of expertise from across varying disciplines, including finance, economics, environmental studies, political science and others, in order to foster innovative research, education, external collaborations and partnerships. The Institute’s mandate is threefold:

  •  Generate innovative and relevant research on sustainable finance and effectively communicate this research to all pertinent stakeholders.
  • Serve as a platform for collaboration between government, academia and industry.
  • Provide educational opportunities and develop capacity in the field of sustainable finance.”

The Green Finance report summarizes the discussions by financial experts at a conference by the same name, held on June 14-15, 2019, following the release of the Report of the government’s Expert Panel on Sustainable Finance – Mobilizing Finance for Sustainable Growth.  To help readers who are not financial experts,  the Institute website offers useful “primers” to explain some fundamental concepts in sustainable finance, including  Climate-Related Financial Disclosures, Divestment, and Transition Bonds. Not to be confused with Just Transition funding, the primer explains that “Transition Bonds” are corporate financing tools, and the companies who issue them must use the proceeds to fund a business transition towards a reduced environmental impact or reduction in carbon emissions. ( The example given is that a coal-mining company could issue a  transition bond to finance efforts to capture and store carbon.)

Institute for sustainable financeAs one of its first actions, the ISF established the Canadian Sustainable Finance Network (CSFN)  an independent formal research and educational network for academia, industry and government to bring together a talented network of university faculty members and relevant members from industry, government and civil society.  A list of members, here , includes multiple faculty from twelve Canadian universities, one from Yale in the U.S., and other individual academics from universities which are not institutional members (including UBC, HEC Montreal, and Memorial University).