Champions were expected to implement behaviour change in the workplace.
An important part of this was convincing management that climate-protecting behaviour was a worthwhile pursuit. Champions often required time away from their official role, the authorisation to implement changes in the workplace and funding for environmental projects. In this section I will analyse the motivations that champions used in order to try to change the attitudes of their line managers and those
responsible for making decisions within the business. In the majority of cases, champions appealed to notions of self-interest and profit when they suggested the implementation of climate-protecting behaviour.
Specifically, champions appealed to the economic benefits for their company of a green image. One CSR manager talked about the increasing prevalence of environmental questions in tendering contracts:
Certainly stuff like this is massively helpful in winning contracts... we’re always updating our kind of…status reports… as regards to where we are in the whole climate change arena. So, we’ve got kind of a whole band of people that just love this stuff because more and more it’s becoming part of tender writing (A-manager, 781-792).
People are increasingly aware of the environmental impact of their actions.
Companies who portray a green image are more likely to win contracts and therefore
131
increase their profit. One champion pointed out that ‘a lot of the clients have got their own green targets so if [Business C] seem to be like in sync with them then we’ll be more attractive as a supplier’ (C-10, 92-95). The ‘greening’ of society in general has necessitated the ‘greening’ of any successful business. Clapp (2005) argues that
‘adhering to CSR principles makes “good business sense”’ (p.26).
For some champions, the importance of a ‘green’ image encouraged a sceptical attitude towards their company’s environmental commitments. One
champion said, ‘a lot of the environment push from the top is from, erm, a, like a PR perspective’ (C-10, 85-86). Another agreed that, ‘obviously it’s, it’s sort of PR for climate change isn’t it’ (A-3, 519). In this sense, the establishment of the climate champion programme itself is, arguably, a means to increase profit (through a green image) rather than being directed towards protection of the climate. Despite these reservations, the champions maintained that appealing to the economic benefits of climate protection was the most effective way to foster behaviour change28.
For this reason they also highlighted the more general economic benefits of climate protecting behaviour. The champions attempted to gain ‘buy-in’ from middle management by proposing actions that were ‘financially viable’ (C-5, 646) and presenting a ‘business case’ for doing them (D-3, 173). One champion explained the necessity of this approach:
At first the business wasn’t really aware of the business benefits that it could bring to it. If you were doing it then fine, but if anything happened where it needed money or anything else or budget in terms of how many people are spending time on it then they had to understand, well, what’s in it for us as well as the environment (D-1, 276-281)?
Given this stipulation, it was the job of the champions to work out how a project could be profitable for the business. The reduction of CO2 emissions alone was not a good enough reason to invest money or time into a project. Young (2000) argues that,
‘companies do not develop a broader long-term interpretation of their environmental responsibilities for altruistic reasons. Their concern is economic self-interest’ (p.20).
This position is supported by evidence of the kinds of projects that were successfully implemented.
28Hargreaves (2008) made similar observations of the champions in his study. They felt that ‘the appeal to financial values was seen as likely to work well with “the Board”’ (p.145).
132
An example of one successful project was the campaign by a champion to reduce the number of journeys done by a delivery van. In the past, the van had done several daily trips to and from closely situated depots. The champion suggested that the driver could reduce this to one round trip to all of the depots. He acknowledged that it was ‘quite a big impact from a cost saving as well as an environmental saving’
(B-8, 207-209). The champion had faced no resistance in implementing this ‘cost saving’ change. In contrast, a champion who had tried to set up recycling facilities had faced insurmountable difficulties. The business reaction to her proposal was,
‘we’re not going to be paying for recycling and we’re not going to be paying for anything’ (A-6, 51-52). The champion could not create a business case for a recycling programme that cost money to establish. Motivations for action had to be directed towards the economic gains of the business. This was the most effective way to gain buy-in from middle management.
The approach taken by the champions to motivate their business reflects a discourse of ecological modernisation (EM). The champions drew upon many of the key components of EM to frame their messages about climate change. The most fundamental component of this discourse is the reconceptualised relationship between the environment and the economy. This relationship is no longer one of conflict. In fact, ‘the core message of the theory of EM is that economic development and environmental policy can be reconciled; so-called “win–win” opportunities can be seized upon’ (Pataki 2009, p.83). This is the message that the champions tried to make clear to middle management.
Indeed, ‘in engaging with the EM agenda, firms achieve financial benefits from reduced waste production and greater business efficiency, as well as through the creation of new markets’ (Gibbs 2003, p.4). Business had the opportunity to save money through the implementation of more efficient processes and to make money through their investment in environmental technology or climate-protecting products and services. Champions drew on the reconceptualised relationship of the
environment and the economy to present this win-win idea. Often the focus was on saving money rather than making money, but the general message was the same.
Managers did not need to prioritise economic concerns over the climate because protection of the climate would inevitably lead to greater profit. Ultimately, it was in their self-interest to pursue environmental objectives. Curran (2009) argues that
133
‘“greening business” becomes good for the economy, good for the environment and good for consumers and governments alike’ (p.203).
More fundamentally, EM contends that a ‘high level of environmental protection is a precondition for economic development’ (Reitan 1998, p.5). A business stands to make extra money from climate-protecting behaviour, but more importantly, it cannot afford to ignore the issue because ‘business ultimately depends on the health of the planet and surrounding atmosphere’ (Young 2000, p.2).
Participants acknowledged that this was an important concern. One manager said,
‘[Business B] is acutely aware that you know climate change will affect our business completely’ (B-manager, 141-142). The issue was not only about increasing profit but also about securing the future of the business.