|
If COP15 was any indication, international, multi-state level processes will not provide all the solutions to climate adaptation and mitigation. As Tom Kruse from the Rockefeller Foundation, (my co-conspirator on the panel) argued, “We do need a global deal.” However, most of us in philanthropy also agree that private funding in the search for solutions is essential, and can fill in some of the gaping holes that will likely result from any international agreement. The world as we know it is at risk. Whatever your grantmaking criteria, mission, or priorities, all funders can and should be increasing grants around climate change. If your foundation is new to the issue, think about beginning by educating your staff and board. You can make the link with almost every issue. If you fund economic development, consider green jobs. If you focus on education, provide information on climate change and solutions. If you’re a health or immigration funder, there are direct correlations. Every funding scale can be strategic on climate change. Local funds can make grants for alternative energy and education at all levels. State, regional, and national grantors can increase their portfolios around advocacy, networks, and public policy, especially in the short period that the Climate Bill has to make its way through the US Senate. For immediate impact, I cannot overemphasize the value of general support grants. Internationally, Global Greengrants Fund is working to bring the voices of the least empowered — indigenous and forest peoples, poor people, rural people, and women — to the global climate change table. Through the establishment of our new Climate Fund, we were involved in sponsoring delegates through the Indigenous Environment Network, Land is Life, and Oil Watch, as well as from our Central America and West Africa Boards. Greengrants funds social and environmental justice projects throughout the developing world. Our activist advisors have awarded 5,000 small grants — $500 to $5,000 — in 120 countries, mostly in the global south, in the last 17 years. These advisors are our primary strategists and decision-makers. We estimate that at least one-third of grants have gone to climate solutions at the most local level — and this focus area, for us, emerges directly from the ground and what people say they most need support for. Our advisors and partners are currently focusing on REDD and REDD+ efforts around climate mitigation. REDD stands for “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and (forest) Degradation.” It is one of the areas of discussion at COP 15 where some believe the most positive movement was made. Forests play a crucial role in global climate change. They are too rapidly being cut down: for farming, grazing, and wood, as well as for roads to facilitate extractive industries such as oil exploration and mining. According to the World Resources Institute, deforestation accounts for about 15 to 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. To succeed, REDD must include a certification process on the sale of carbon offsets, as well as regulation and market incentives strong enough to counter those that are driving deforestation at alarming rates. Countries with tropical forests are being asked to forgo revenue producing activities for other forms of compensation. The REDD issue highlights the point that even if salient solutions are part of an international climate change agreement, civil society — and hence philanthropy — has a major role to play in ensuring that the policies actually succeed and are just. Greengrants is a small player, dedicated to the effectiveness of small grants. It’s time for other foundations to step up and give at least 1 percent to climate. Every small and large effort can make a difference. |
Normal Version