Scottish climate action hubs: models research

6. Conclusions

6.1. Overview and Aims

The research has explored a range of community climate action hub case studies from the UK and beyond. The analysis provides findings to assess how the learnings from these models could be applied to the Scottish context. This is to support the success of Scottish Government’s Climate Action Hub Programme. This programme aims to support the development of a network of regional hubs to support community climate action locally, in support of Scotland’s net zero targets.

The research project had two primary objectives:

• Investigate whether there are similar models to the climate hubs in the UK and abroad.
• Assess whether learnings from these models can be applied to the development of the Climate Action Hub Programme in Scotland.

6.2. Key Findings

Approach and Structure

The research found that hubs are generally established as a result of networking between individuals from local climate action projects. They are often delivered by existing or new third sector organisations, whilst working with Local Authorities on specific projects. Hubs tend not to have a specific strategic plan of activity, due to being led by the interests of the community throughout.

Outcomes and Aims

Hubs tend to collect data aligned to their overall aims. The exception to this is carbon counting to reflect net zero targets. Methods for measuring impact should be proportionate to the scale of the project and not impede delivery.

Successes

The research identified a number of factors that support the success of climate action hubs. Having a paid member of staff was found to be key for long term success, providing oversight and consistency that purely volunteer-led hubs did not have the resource to deliver. In the case of networked hubs, a core team of staff, who are in regular contact with each hub, supported development of the hubs by facilitating networking, knowledge sharing and effective use of resources. In addition to this, early engagement with the local community was found to help ensure the hubs initiatives aligned with local priorities. The case studies also suggest hubs with a physical presence were more effective than purely digital ones. These spaces provide a local place to offer information and host events, whilst anecdotal evidence suggests that it increases engagement within local communities.

Challenges

One key challenge identified in the research was the conflict between a focus on the climate emergency and engaging the local community outside of the ‘climate bubble’. As a fundamental aspect of community hubs is to reflect local interests, hubs make sure not to enforce specific activities. This can increase engagement by creating a sense of local ownership. However, it also results in projects not fully aligned with the hubs aims. Many hubs reported that when they had delivered events focused on the climate emergency directly, local residents found this topic too daunting and did not engage. In response, hubs report a focus on sustainability projects that would appeal to the community otherwise not engaged with climate change. Some hubs also reported conflict between partners as a challenge, and the need for staff with strong mediation skills to handle these situations.

Another key challenge is the short-term nature of the current funding landscape. Funding available is largely project based and is preventing hub’s ability to create a lasting programme with ongoing impact. Hubs report that the legacy of their networks and initiatives they establish are often expected to have an ongoing impact by funders after they stop financing the project. In practice, hubs report this is unsustainable without the financial resource, and the impact projects have tended to end abruptly.