Poverty or pollution?
We are moved by different passions. iPhone or VW campervan; round ball or oval ball; Attenborough or Schama; poverty or pollution.
As co-ordinator of the Environmental Funders Network, I warmly welcome the Joseph Rowntree Foundation's engagement in climate change and social justice. This research programme will make a valuable contribution to policy in fields as diverse and important as housing, energy, planning and community development.
However, for me, one of the potentially most important contributions of this programme will depend on how it frames the relationship between social justice and environmental sustainability. Are these conflicting or complementary goals?
It would be wrong to deny that there can be short term tensions between environmental and social goals. High energy prices impact disproportionately on poor households, who pay more for their energy per unit, and live in less well insulated homes; conversely cheap energy has been the driver of much environmental degradation, in everything from traffic congestion to plastic waste to global warming.
However, the choices before us are not a socially-just, high-carbon society or a socially-unjust, low-carbon society. In the medium term, neither possibility is tenable. Globally, if we do not move to a low carbon society, the alternative is no society at all – civilisation will collapse under the effects of runaway climate change. On the other hand, we will only be able to make the dramatic social and economic changes necessary to decarbonise if we have a democratic mandate and a sense of the collective good, both of which require in turn require that the costs are fairly spread.
This autumn, energy bills are a hotly debated topic, amongst the general public and the political classes. Alternative explanations circulate for recent price rises – is it the fault of the big six energy companies? green taxes? supply shortages? Is the age of cheap energy over? The facts are that the main driver is rises in international gas prices, but in terms of future energy policy public perception will matter as much as factual information.
For those whose first concern is people in poverty, the top priority is making bills affordable. Lower prices are one short-term way of meeting this. For those who are passionately concerned about climate change, the priority is to get energy use down. Higher-prices do contribute to this goal, however unfairly. However, if we want to see long-term progress on both goals, we need to get onto common ground:
The long-term solution to fuel poverty, and one that also supports the objective of reducing carbon emissions, is to increase dramatically the energy efficiency of fuel-poor households' homes. (JRF Viewpoint)
A great practical example of this is the successful campaign, supported by a number of EFN members, for a minimum energy efficiency standard for the private rented sector from 2018. However, that is still seven winters away, and just one element of a comprehensive solution to properly insulate all UK homes. Whether it is poverty or polar bears that get you worked up, that is a goal we should all have in common.
