Facts and stats don’t win hearts and minds, no matter how many times you repeat them.
If you want to garner public and political support for your cause, you need “buy in”.
If you’re trying to create change politically, you need to convince those in power that what you’re advocating for has tangible benefits for their constituents, their party, and the country.
And to generate political will, you need to demonstrate significant public or industry support – which is achieved by showing people what’s in it for them.
To secure this buy-in, you need to show people how the problem you’re seeking to solve is having an immediate impact on their daily lives, their customers and/or their business operations, and how they will benefit from the change you’re pushing for.
This often means framing your argument to address numerous concerns (not just environmental) and demonstrate tangible impact on a number of outcomes for different stakeholders (again, not just environmental).
The recently announced ban on disposable vapes in the UK is a huge policy win that campaigners can learn a lot from.
Environmental campaigners pushed for action on disposable vapes, which are hard to recycle, waste valuable resources and are creating a significant littering problem.
The batteries are also a fire hazard in recycling centres, which is driving up their insurance premiums, creating a push-back from industry stakeholders.
Health campaigners and concerned parents were worried about the impact of vapes on young people. According to a study by Cancer Research UK, a ban would affect 1 in 7 young adults in this country. Regulation is also set to now target youth-friendly flavours of vape liquids, such as cotton candy and gummy bear.
If you were campaigning for a ban on vapes, and ‘facts and stats’ was your primary method of communications, “1 in 7 young adults (your kids) are addicted” would be the headline. This doesn’t win the argument because it’s a fact, it wins the argument because it plays into the fear of every parent hearing it.
The UK government doesn’t generally like banning things, with health hazards being one of the only exceptions due to the high level of public interest in health concerns.
The environmental impact of disposable vapes alone was unlikely to ever result in a ban. Securing the parliamentary time to make this happen on environmental grounds alone would be exceptionally difficult. But showing how addictive they are and how dangerous this is to young people pushes the issue up the priority list and secures the ban that all campaigners were in favour of.
To make this happen, multi-stakeholder engagement and a multi-level argument were key.
In environmental campaigning, there is lots to be learnt about this approach from the action on plastics in recent years.
The charge on plastic bags, for example, has been an exceptionally effective driver of behaviour change. The 5p charge was introduced in supermarkets in 2015 (with a 2 year lead time after first announcing the plans in 2013). Since then usage at the main retailers has dropped by a staggering 97%.
A poll commissioned by the ‘Break the Bag Habit’ coalition found that well over half of English adults (56%) think it is not unreasonable to charge for carrier bags, it was also widely supported by retailers, and since the government introduced the charge it has generated nearly £190 million for good causes – demonstrating both public support and public interest.
The ‘Break the Bag Habit’ Coalition was formed by a number of environmental campaigning organisations, and is one of the best examples of the environment sector coming together to push for change with one clear, actionable message.
Through the Environment Act 2021, the government has chosen to ban plastic cutlery and commonly littered disposable plastic items – described by the government as ‘avoidable plastic waste’.
Plastic cutlery was in the top 15 most littered items in Britain in 2020.
The ban was announced in January 2023 with a nine month lead time for industry to phase out disposable plastic products before the ban came into effect in October 2023, after consulting with industry and finding a 93% approval rating for the ban.
The key argument here, and with the plastic bag charge, is that there are viable alternatives at similar price points so the burden isn’t placed on businesses to shoulder the cost or pass it onto the public, and that the burden is spread equally across the sector – i.e. nobody is gaining competitive advantage.
The key drivers for securing this ban were a ‘public interest’ argument (preventing litter), an equivalence argument (that everything can be replaced with something more sustainable, therefore you’re not asking anyone to give anything up and impact on the consumer is minimal) and industry buy-in with enough time for meaningful and cost effective change.
Outside of the sustainability echo-chamber, environmental impact isn’t a top-of-mind concern or priority for everyone. But the health and wellbeing of our children usually is.
It’s an election year, so the government and opposition will be prioritising decisions that make them look stable and capable, and that will win them votes in the key battleground constituencies.
We’re already seeing parties on all sides of the divide row back on and water down environmental and green economy pledges and investments under the guise of fiscal responsibility, with the aim of winning what will undoubtedly be an economic election focused on cost of living.
Campaigners looking to have political influence now and with the next government need to consider what people in key election battlegrounds are going to prioritise as front-of-mind concerns when choosing who to vote for later this year.
That might mean adapting your message.
Whether you campaigned against vapes because of recycling concerns, littering or health outcomes, a win is a win.
But these are prime examples of an issue where reframing your message can make your campaign more popular and your desired policy outcomes more likely.
