So a couple of months has passed since the car-crash that was Copenhagen, and the ripples from the failure continue to stir the waters of the debate. Climate Change is certainly in for an interesting year. On the one hand the deniers and skeptics seem to be winning the battle in the media, at least in certain parts of it and the doom laden messaging is backfiring through a Northern Hemisphere confusion over the difference between climate and weather, as record breaking snow and cold grip the US and Europe and influence people's opinion.
Polls, for whatever they are worth, show public opinion going in the wrong direction, and some companies are using the failure as a reason to back out of their commitments, others seizing the chance to strive forwards with gusto and leadership. Even Yvo de Boer has tossed in the
towel.
But this is not the grim situation it appears. It's an opportunity and maybe now is the time to gather forces, build a new position and march forwards. With the IPCC glacier mistake, the various 'climategates' and the targets set in the wake of Copenhagen so weak they might as well not be worth it, perhaps we need to take stock of where we're at and examine what's needed to move forwards. The lack of clarity in the public, government and corporate spaces leaves far too much room for fiddling while we burn. The science really hasn't been 'rocked', check this
app, yes there is one for that, to see the main points - it is still as terrifying as it was last November. But the mood and human perception is shifting and we would be remiss if we let it slip to the point where we have to wait and see the disastrous effects rather than acting before they happen, nor take advantage of the multitudinous benefits from implementing low carbon solutions. So what are the elements that we need to focus on with this new drive forwards?
Science
Firstly and most obviously the science. But this is easier said than done. Is there a reputable single voice on Climate Change that everyone can trust, no, not really. The IPCC should be that but they aren't and with a paltry budget no bigger than a tiny percentage of an oil company's marketing spend, have little resources to face the onslaught of confusion. Plus they have some serious issues to work through on the communication management front. Some Western government leadership might help, yes America that's you, but this is as likely as Sarah Palin winning a geography pub quiz, and Obama's hands are tied by the corporate controlled senate. So what is needed is a clear position from the climate science community in a clarified and transparent form, assisted by some communications expert help and supported by heavy political hitters. Here's what we know, here's what's in question, this is what is and will happen, this is what might happen and this why we need to act.
All told with simple language and global agreement based on hard science, with the real questions forming a new level of debate. The story of this clarity work should be communicated daily through social media and released simultaneously across the world once complete, with a strong identity and decent financial backing through various media, it needs to be a line in the sand. And then be repeated every year.
It needs to explain the background to today and where we are going in the future. Shouldn't be too hard right? Science is science, that's the whole point, it isn't an idea but facts based in peer-reviewed and agreed truth. And that's what's needed, the facts and truth separating from the maybes and the wrong questions taken out of the debate, yet identifying what still needs to be known, with an ongoing plan for working that out, together. All this should be conducted in the spirt of positive human collaborative understanding.
So who could do this? The UN maybe, but do they really have the balls and skills to take on the skeptics and media, i doubt it. I reckon it should come from independent leaders, the ones from the private sector with big reputations and the independent power and money to set something up. And they do exist, Bill Gates for one, with his recent
TED talk,
Richard Branson is another, I expect Elon Musk would fancy it too and I'm sure Mr Clinton could be persuaded to help build a gang.
These guys get together, and agree to fund a new organisation, 'The Climate Change Clarity Coalition'. I expect some nice brand could be cooked up with all the 'C's'. It is set up with relationships across the scientific community and it's job is to translate science into simple clarity and provide funding for a big brand style communication campaign. The job of the coalition isn't to set targets, government agreements, corporate solutions or citizen involvement, but simply present the facts properly and provide a solid foundation.
Communication
Ok, so say by some miracle that happens, what else is needed? Well, international target setting, government agreements decided and planned for with policy and incentive introductions, corporate solutions researched and developed and citizen involvement increased to mainstream engagement. The biggest missing piece of the puzzle to achieving this - a new kind of story and one we can all believe in and be part of. Human beings live through story telling, starting when they can first talk and using it throughout their lives. It is the oldest form of communication and the thing that we rely on to make sense of our reality. It may take many forms, films, advertising, conversations, newspapers, facebook or government reports, whatever it looks like it does the same thing, it transfers information and creates a sense of belonging.
To date the 'story' of climate change hasn't exactly been one to inspire. The doom-laden fear messages got the necessary attention to frighten the debate into the mainstream but then froze, got stuck and failed to progress further. Producing repetitive stories on the the same theme, 'do something or the polar bear gets it' have not engaged a global audience to embrace low carbon transformation. There is little mass demand for governments and corporations to change. But there needs to be. So the story has to change; how do we do that?
Well some have already started, here's Futerra and their
'sell the sizzle' stance. The message needs to become one of hope, change, innovation and benefit. Plus, let's not pin everything on the future, people don't live there. Let's focus on what low carbon transformation means today. By all means let's have beautiful and inspiring images of those solutions taken to scale but also real communication around micro actions that change people's homes, lives and lifestyles for the better; as well as protecting the polar bears' ice floes. And who best to do this? Why not the guys that sell us all the crap we don't need, the advertising community. A plan is currently underway for this and i'll report on news in due course, but they are a very talented bunch of folks with work that is hardly testing their planning and creative capacity. Selling nappies and brown sugar water is one thing, but climate change, well surely that has to be, 'the world's toughest brief'.
Real Solutions
So great, people 'get it' understand the whys and whats but then they need to get involved. And here is required some serious work. Changing lifestyles, companies, infrastructure and government policy means a massively complex and interconnected system working together, with each bit working individually. The changes required are far too many to list but what is possible is a mapping project. It will take some seriously clever brains, but why not, what else is more important to work on. Imagine a huge map showing all the elements both big and small that could be started today, and in many cases are being already in action.
Bet that process would throw out some incredible opportunities, kind of like a Climate Change Solutions Census. With a clear map, the task of which i am not underestimating, we could see what was being done today and get involved at a touchpoint relevant to our lives. Additionally we could see where innovation needs to happen and set task-forces at the job, with as much collaboration as possible. Think about what huge corporates with revenues larger than countries have to work out on a daily basis, is it really beyond us if we wanted to do it. Might need a few people to get their cheque-books out but why not.
Then we come back to the communication issue, oh and the government incentives and policies. By explaining how and enabling to, people might really get involved. Not forgetting that we've done the why, perhaps they might actually make the changes necessary, at least it would be on an improvement on today's status quo. Now onto the reason none of this is happening yet at the scale we need it to.
The Biggest Challenge - Vested Interests
The biggest solution - collaboration. It's that simple yet that hard. Herein lies the biggest of battles and the most dangerous of foes. But this, and I'm not going to use the war analogy, is survival. Climate change isn't just about climate and that's their problem, it's about change and they don't like it. But we need it, the low carbon innovation path has so many more benefits than just regulating the temperature of our world, it brings us a new one, and once there we'll be really glad we made it, even the baddies.