This question is important for the visual arts because:
- Whilst conventional offsetting cannot be considered the fairest, fastest or most effective way to fight environmental issues (for the reasons listed here), there is still an urgent need to raise funds for effective frontline climate action.
-
There is a growing awareness across the sector that reducing our own organisational footprints is necessary, but won’t be enough by itself to shift the world onto a safer path. As a result, GCC has found that in addition to setting reduction targets, many arts organisations want to do something to take further action and support frontline solutions to the climate crisis. In the past, offsetting has been seen as a way to do this; but as the issues associated with offsetting become better-known, there is growing demand in the sector for alternative ways for arts organisations to show their commitment and support effective climate solutions.
-
Some arts organisations have, with the best intentions, already signed up to ‘net zero’ or ‘carbon neutral’ targets. This is understandable, as these kinds of targets have become widespread in the last few years, particularly among large companies and countries that can afford to spend large amounts of money on offsets, or who have access to large amounts of forests or other carbon-rich lands that they can count against their emissions targets. However, there is a growing understanding that while ‘net zero’ might be a meaningful milestone on a global scale (see What is 'Net Zero' and Where Did it Come From?), it is much less useful at an organisational level as in most cases it requires significant amounts of offsetting, which is problematic for all the reasons above. However, having set ‘net zero’ targets it can be hard for organisations to step away from them unless they can replace them with an alternative.
-
External spending in the wider economy is one of the key ways in which the art world has an impact on the climate. Directing more of this spending into climate solutions could make a real difference.
How do Strategic Climate Funds work?
To help meet these needs, GCC has developed an idea called “Strategic Climate Funds” (SCFs). This is how it works:
-
A GCC member would calculate their annual carbon footprint, set targets, create action plans for reducing their emissions and implement best practice. This is essential and cannot be skipped.
-
They then decide how much money to set aside each year to finance their ‘Strategic Climate Fund’ (SCF). Details on how to do this are outlined here but, essentially this can be done in a few ways (depending on the type of organisation) either by allocating 1-2% percentage of annual revenue OR by setting an ‘Internal Carbon Tax’ calculated in relation to the size of annual carbon emissions. Non-profit organisations that may not have the budget to set up an SCF in this way can still participate by raising funds for an SCF in other ways - see Xpage for specific advice on this.
-
This pot of money is your Strategic Climate Fund, which can be spent in any and all of the following ways listed here, depending on the specific needs and preferences of your organisation:
It’s important that any SCF spending on organisational reduction measures (a) is focused on creating change that would not otherwise have happened. See below for some suggestions and starting points for using your SCF this way.
For (b) and (c), GCC offers a shortlist of such initiatives that we have approved and established partnerships with. We are always interested in more suggestions for initiatives that fulfil our criteria (being effective, timely, and in support of climate justice and wider social justice goals).
Strategic Climate Funds won’t make your emissions disappear and cannot be used to avoid or delay taking the necessary actions to urgently reduce our environmental impacts. However, they can be a useful way to accelerate wider systemic change, as well as acknowledging that emissions reduction alone won’t be enough by itself to solve the climate crisis.
