Can participatory emissions budgeting help local authorities to tackle climate change?

A lack of concerted action on the part of local authorities and their citizens to respond to climate change is argued to arise partly from a poor relationship between the two. Meanwhile, local authorities could have a significant impact on community-wide levels of greenhouse gas emissions because of their influence over many other actors, but have had limited success with orthodox voluntary behaviour change methods and hold back from stricter behaviour change interventions. Citizen participation may offer an effective means of improving understanding between citizens and government concerning climate change and, because it is inherently a dialogue, avoids many of the pitfalls of more orthodox attempts to effect behaviour change. Participatory budgeting is a form of citizen participation which seems well suited to the task in being quantitative, drawing a diverse audience and, when successfully run, engendering confidence amongst authority stakeholders. A variant of it, participatory emissions budgeting, would introduce the issue of climate change in a way that required citizens to trade off greenhouse gas emissions with wider policy goals. It may help citizens to appreciate the nature of the challenge and the role of local government in responding; this may in turn provide authority stakeholders with increased confidence in the scope to implement pro-environmental agendas without meeting significant resistance

Food Vulnerability during COVID-19, 2020-2023

This research project mapped and monitored responses to household food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, governments, local authorities, charities and local communities worked to ensure access to food for those facing new risks of food insecurity due to being unable to go out for food or due to income losses arising from the crisis. New schemes were developed, such as governments replacing incomes of people at risk of unemployment on account of lockdowns, providing food parcels for people asked to shield, referrals for people to receive voluntary help with grocery shopping, and free school meals replacement vouchers or cash transfers. These worked alongside existing provision for those unable to afford food – such as food banks – which have been adapting their services to continue to meet increasing demand from a range of population groups. This resulted in a complex set of support structures which developed and changed as the COVID-19 pandemic, and its impacts, evolved. About the project The project was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) through the UKRI Ideas to Address COVID-19 grant call and ran for two years from July 2020. The research aimed to provide collaborative monitoring and analysis of food support systems to inform food access policy and practice. The research team was led by the University of Sheffield and King’s College London alongside colleagues from Sustain: the alliance for better food and farming and Church Action on Poverty. Full details of the team are below. Collaboration with partners and stakeholders was at the heart of the project. The research team worked with stakeholders from national and local government, the civil service, third sector, NGOs as well as people who were accessing food and financial assistance during the pandemic. The End of project summary of key findings were published in August 2022. Details of the workpackages and research reports can be found below. Project work packages Work package 1: National level food access systems mapping and monitoring Looking at food access support across the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic, national level mapping and monitoring was undertaken in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales as well as at a UK level. National level stakeholders (for example from devolved governments and national voluntary organisations) from across the four nations worked with us to understand and monitor how support for food access has operated and evolved across the UK. Work package 1 publications: Mapping responses to the risk of rising food insecurity during the COVID-19 crisis across the UK (published August 2020) Monitoring responses to the risk of rising food insecurity during the COVID-19 crisis across the UK (published December 2020) Mapping and monitoring responses to the risk of rising food insecurity during the COVID-19 crisis across the UK - Autumn 2020 to Summer 2021 (published August 2022) Work package 2: Participatory Policy Panel To fully understand food access responses, it was crucial to hear directly from those with lived experience of food insecurity during the pandemic. In partnership with Church Action on Poverty, we convened a participatory policy panel made up of people who have direct experience of a broad range of support to access food. Meeting regularly throughout the project (Oct 2020-Dec 2021), the panel used a range of participatory and creative methods to share and reflect on their experiences and contribute these to policy recommendations. Work package 2 publications: Navigating Storms (published October 2021) Food Experiences During COVID-19 Participatory Panel Deliberative Policy Engagement (published August 2022) Food Experiences During COVID-19 - Participatory Methods in Practice: Key Learning (published August 2022) Work package 3: Local area case studies Fourteen local areas across the UK were the focus for more in depth case study research. Working with local stakeholders in each area, the research mapped what local responses looked like and how they operated. The research followed the developments in these areas throughout the duration of the project. Work package 3 publications: Comparing local responses to household food insecurity during COVID-19 across the UK (March – August 2020) – Executive Summary (published July 2021) Comparing local responses to household food insecurity during COVID-19 across the UK (March – August 2020) (published July 2021). Eight local case study reports covering responses in those areas between March and August 2020: Argyll and Bute, Belfast, Cardiff, Derry and Strabane, Herefordshire, Moray, Swansea, West Berkshire (published July 2021). Local Area Case Studies – Methodological Appendix (published July 2021) Local responses to household food insecurity during COVID-19 across the UK (March – August 2020): Full report (published July 2021) Local responses to household food insecurity across the UK during COVID-19 (September 2020 – September 2021) (published February 2022) Local responses to household food insecurity across the UK during COVID-19 (September 2020 – September 2021) - Executive Summary (published February 2022) The project was undertaken with ethical approval from the University of Sheffield.Working with national governments across the UK - including Defra's Food Vulnerability Directorate, the Scottish and Welsh governments and the Food Standards Agency, this project will apply a systems approach to enable understanding and monitoring of the array of activities to enhance or provide food access to vulnerable people during the COVID-19 outbreak, including both financial and direct access. Reflecting Defra's Food Vulnerability focus, target groups include people with low incomes, shielded individuals, and the 'non-shielded vulnerable'. The aims of this project are to: - Undertake comprehensive mapping of the food access systems, highlighting key areas of vulnerability within them and identifying links to other support systems. - Using a case study approach, develop and apply methods for monitoring and evaluating the food access for vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 outbreak and through the easement of lockdown restrictions. - Develop 'exit strategies' for managing the transition out of systems that will not be provided after the crisis. - Establish 'best practice' protocols for resiliency planning for the future. The project methods include collaborative systems mapping, local area case studies (collating qualitative and quantitative data) and in-depth interviews with system users and other key actors. The project will provide policymakers with a comprehensive overview of food access activities for vulnerable groups and identification of key gaps and weaknesses within this system, informed by stakeholders who use these systems and those contributing to them. Civil society and business communities benefit by directly informing this work, but also from its evaluative and monitoring components, enabling them to identify and refine their efforts in the wider context.</p

Banking for the Poor: Addressing the Needs of Financially Excluded Communities in Newcastle upon Tyne

In the UK, many low-income communities have seen the withdrawal of `mainstream', high-street-based financial service infrastructure from their local areas since the mid to late 1980s, whilst more costly sub-prime lenders have flourished, often in their place. There has been a developing search for `alternative', welfare-oriented rather than profitdriven solutions to the problem of social and spatial segregation in financial service provision. This paper explores an initiative to create such an alternative, affordable and locally embedded form of personal financial service in a socially disadvantaged urban neighbourhood in the North East of England, Financial Inclusion Newcastle (FIN). This paper reflects on FIN's successes and failures, the potential limitations of such alternative area-based solutions and the lessons that can be learnt from these, through a focus on three key issues surrounding FIN's demise—the FIN model, its internal functioning and, perhaps most important of all, its relationship with the local community

Living wages and the 'making work pay' strategy.

Poverty among workers is a perennial problem. Recently there has been much interest in the idea of living wages. As mechanisms to increase wages above the ‘poverty line’, living wages present an alternative to New Labour’s ‘making work pay’ strategy; a combination of minimum wage regulation and means-tested, in-work relief. Through a comparison of living wages and the ‘making work pay’ strategy this paper critically examines both by focusing upon the aims of the two strategies, their ability to deliver higher incomes to workers and their families, and the assumptions upon which the two strategies are based. The paper demonstrates that while the ‘making work pay’ strategy is more sensitive to need than living wages, outside of wider changes in the social relations of capital and gender, the two strategies are similar in buttressing capitalism and institutionalizing stereotypes of women as dependants and carers