Annual update: One year after launch of the Canadian Philanthropy Commitment on Climate Change, has there been any progress?

Image via the Canadian Philanthropy Commitment on Climate Change 

It’s been one year since a group of major philanthropic networks called on Canadian foundations to commit more funding and advocacy power to climate justice.

The call came in the form of the Canadian Philanthropy Commitment on Climate Change, a pledge foundations could sign to demonstrate their commitment to taking the climate crisis seriously. It’s the Canadian arm of a global network of such pledges, called the International Philanthropy Commitment on Climate Change. 

Jean-Marc Mangin calls it “the most important joint initiative we’ve launched since I’ve been at PFC.” Mangin is the CEO of Philanthropic Foundations Canada (PFC), one of the four networks that make up the Commitment’s steering committee (the other three are The Circle, Environment Funders Canada, and Community Foundations of Canada).

“This is the first time in Canada that there has been something like this, that really, deeply connects climate and equity, specifically for foundations,” says Dana Decent, director of partnerships at Community Foundations of Canada (CFC). 

But not everyone sees the pledge as a massive step forward. 

“My biggest concern about the pledge is that, because… a lot of funders were consulted, a lot of the language they use is purposefully vague or ambiguous,” says Kat Cadungog, executive director of the Foundation for Environmental Stewardship. “It’s built around what funders might want to commit to, not necessarily what people on the ground, in the sector, doing the climate work want from funders.” 

For instance, the Commitment recognizes that “the system in which we operate can make it prohibitive for groups closest to the work on the ground, often non-qualified donees,” and urges signatories to “work toward” funding such organizations, but doesn’t explicitly require funding for non-qualified donees — organizations without charitable status. Meanwhile, Cadungog says, the climate justice movement is made up largely of grassroots, often informal groups who have come together quickly in response to the urgency of the crisis. 

Cadungog also would have liked to see targets (the pledge doesn’t set any) for spending on the climate movement — ”in summary, a spend down,” she says. “I think it was only in tier two where the words ‘spend down’ were sort of passively hidden in their implementation guide.”

What progress has the philanthropic sector made?

One year after the pledge’s launch, there are 50 Canadian signatories, about 10 per cent of the 500-odd signatories of the global pledge. The pledge has three commitment levels — ”getting started,” “building momentum,” and “demonstrating climate leadership” — with specific actions under each, and there are roughly a third of the 50 signatories committed to each level, says Decent.

The group is expecting the first round of reports on signatories’ progress in the first quarter of 2023, to allow for reporting on the 2022 year, knowing that some signed a year ago when the pledge was launched and some signed more recently. So, it’s difficult to say exactly what difference the pledge has made in its first year, steering committee members say. 

Generally, though, signatories who are new to the world of climate justice are still in the stage of getting their boards and teams on the same page, says Devika Shah, executive director of Environment Funders Canada. ”Their starting point is often, ‘We’re still having conversations with our board to help everybody understand the connection [between climate change and the issue we work on].” 

She’s not necessarily discouraged by this: “We’re hearing lots and lots of stories of foundations making progress in that regard: slowly seeing those strategic mindset shifts happening…I can’t point to an emissions benefit as a result of that, but it is the start of a systemic shift.” And boards, specifically, hold immense power, echoes Shereen Munshi, manager of partnerships and strategic communication at The Circle: “That is the first step in most changes that happen in the sector — it has to go to the board first.”

One important area of improvement is signatories’ willingness to centre Indigenous Peoples in their work, says Munshi. “I think there are a good handful of folks who come to my mind who have signed onto the pledge and are demonstrating working differently, alongside [Indigenous communities], or just funding Indigenous movements related to climate.”

For the signatories who were already focused on climate (about half, says Shah), “their attention and action seems to be very focused on the impact investment, endowments and assets side of things, and I would say that they were probably on that track anyway, but the pledge gives them a boost.” 

The Inspirit Foundation is one such signatory. The foundation was an early signatory to the pledge, and signed on, says Jory Cohen, director of social finance and investment, while already in the midst of a low-carbon portfolio makeover. 

Cohen says the foundation hasn’t made any changes directly as a result of signing the pledge. So why sign at all? “We do feel like Inspirit, while small, does play a role specifically with impact investing that can be viewed as a leadership position. We think it’s important that we try to, in our way, influence the sector where we can. This was an easy way for us to do it. We [also] do it in other ways that take more energy and effort and resources.”  

The McConnell Foundation has made changes in the last year — they’re on track to increase their granting to climate justice from $6 million in 2021 to $8 million by the end of 2022; and they’ve done audits on both the emissions implications of their operations and their endowment’s investments, with plans to set targets on both — though Annie Bérubé, program director in charge of the foundation’s climate work, says, like Inspirit, they likely would have made these changes either way. She did add, however, that the resources the Commitment has created, like a guide on how to convince board members of such shifts, have been useful. 

Community Foundations of Canada, being both on the steering committee and a signatory themselves, has made changes as a direct result of the pledge, Decent says. They’ve created a formalized sustainability committee and a sustainable travel guide for employees, for instance.

Holding signatories accountable to their promises

Munshi says The Circle was originally hesitant to be part of the Commitment on Climate Change, given their experience organizing the Philanthropic Community’s Declaration of Action on reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples — launched just after the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s work closed. “Our observation with the Declaration, especially years ago, was that we got a lot of folks to sign onto it, but there was no accountability and there was no action that was continuing to go on, especially because of a lack of reporting.” 

Given this experience, The Circle told the other networks organizing the Commitment that for them to get involved, the pledge would need to include clear actions for signatories to take — and signatories would need to report their progress. (The Circle also made sure the Commitment aligned with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and convened an Indigenous advisory circle to “bring wisdom to the implementation guide, the reporting tools, and all of the content the Commitment puts out, knowing that equity is an essential part” of climate justice, Munshi says.)

What happens if a signatory reports taking none, or very few, of the actions the commitment requires? Someone on the steering committee would reach out and ask how they could help the signatory take action. “We’re treating ourselves not as a police force but as coaches,” Shah says.

Still, she doesn’t rule out the possibility of removing signatories who don’t fulfill the commitment in the future, though she says the steering committee hasn’t created a process for this yet. “At some point, we would have to take action to make sure that this is not some sort of performatory exercise, because we have zero interest in that.” 

Why not have a more rigid structure, with specific spending targets and requirements for public reporting — the way, say, an intergovernmental commitment might? Bérubé says this would require data about what the Canadian philanthropic sector is currently spending on climate, and what the precise need for funding is. Currently, she says, that data doesn’t exist. 

What about transparency? 

Reporting progress to the steering committee is required to remain on the list of signatories, Shah says, but signatories won’t be required to make their reports public. 

Cadungog sees this as a problem. Though one of the Commitment’s seven pillars is transparency — ”We will collect and publish information annually on the actions we have taken against the six pillars listed above to share our progress and identify areas for improvement,” it reads — Cadungog says she hoped to see more public information throughout this year on what concrete actions foundations are taking. 

Shah says that while the steering committee encourages transparency, they “knew that [requiring] it would be a deterrent to some organizations signing…The concern is they open themselves up to all sorts of public criticism [if] they’re at the beginner stage.”

The pledge’s “achilles heel” 

Munshi, Decent, and Shah all say they hope signatories do more advocacy in year two of the commitment, as outlined in pillar six of the Commitment. 

“To be honest, I personally think that is the achilles heel of this whole initiative. Where I see funders engaging in advocacy, they are the funders that are very advanced. They’ve got a depth of knowledge and expertise so that they feel equipped to engage in advocacy. For the newer people in the climate space, they’re not going to engage in advocacy very soon because they’re still having the conversations to understand how climate change is even related to their work.” 

Munshi agrees, saying organizations are doing advocacy “sparsely.”

Munshi says in year two, she hopes to sign on more foundations to the pledge, but specifically those who are willing and ready to make concrete changes to their work. “I’d like to see…people signing on with clear actions in mind already, so that the revving up period is a little quicker,” she says.

An earlier version of this story reported that the Commitment expects to receive the first round of signatories’ reports one year from now, but that’s incorrect — the Commitment expects to receive these reports in the first quarter of 2023. The story has been updated to reflect this. 

Tell us this made you smarter | Contact us | Report error