This week, the IPCC’s international climate report emphasized even more strongly than before that citizen behavior change should be at the heart of climate policy. Over the past few days, the government has communicated frequently about concrete policy to achieve behavioral change. Citizens were encouraged to lower the heating, the air passenger tax will also be raised and a meat tax is being considered.
A golden rule of effective government communication is that the message is geared to the value system of citizens. We have seen a very good and a very bad example of this in recent days.
button to
A good example was the ‘Turn the switch’ campaign. On Saturday morning, all national media reported on the cabinet’s decision to lower the thermostat by 2 degrees in government offices. This main message was immediately followed by the request to citizens and companies to also participate and a perspective for action was offered. If you clicked on the link in the articles, you came to a website where you can see how much you can save by turning down the heating, just like the government.
This government campaign fits in seamlessly with the value system of citizens. Almost a year ago I was involved in the Climate Consultation, a study among more than 10,000 citizens into their value system around climate policy. This consultation showed that the large middle group will only accept measures aimed at daily life behind the front door if the government and large polluting sectors themselves first set a good example.
The ‘Turn the switch too’ campaign applied this lesson perfectly. Apart from some angry twitterers, the reporting was positive. Even GeenStijl put the advice for citizens on its website.
timing
The timing to kick off the campaign over the weekend was also good. Saturday morning the newspapers were full, the evening news paid attention to the campaign and on Sunday Minister Jetten (Climate) was shown on TV at Buitenhof plenty of room to once again explain the example the government is setting, what measures it wants to impose on polluting sectors and he expressed his confidence that the rest of the country will follow. Many a family has discussed over the weekend whether it is a good idea to turn down the heater or take a shorter shower.
But you can also do it completely wrong as a government. In the same week, Minister Staghouwer (Agriculture) sent a letter to the House of Representatives about food policy. If you read the letter to parliament carefully, you will see that Staghouwer, like Jetten, wants the government itself to set a good example. Government company restaurants must offer organic products that are sustainably and locally sourced. He also cautiously proposes investigating whether a tax on meat could encourage more sustainable and healthier choices for consumers.
media spin
Staghouwer only forgot to actively communicate in the media that the government would set a good example, even though he had the chance to do so on TV on March 24 in the talk show On 1† If you do not actively communicate your message yourself, you are dependent on the spin given in the media to a letter to parliament.
The Telegraph headlined with ‘Staghouwer opens the hunt for the meat supply in the supermarket’. This was taken up in other media and subsequently MPs from VVD, CDA and a large number of opposition parties spoke out against a meat tax, while Staghouwer had only cautiously announced an investigation.
In the evening shows, Arjen Lubach still stood up for a meat tax, but elsewhere the idea was dismissed as government meddling and patronizing. Some of the twittering in the Netherlands eagerly drew the (culinary) ‘dictatorship’ card.
You wonder how it is possible that the government communicates so differently about two climate topics. Is it Jetten’s media experience in The Hague that Staghouwer still lacks? It might be a good idea if the two ministers give a presentation on imaging and climate policy at the next Council of Ministers: first set a good example (meat is becoming more expensive in central government canteens) and communicate about this in good time.
Niek Mouter is associate professor of government policy assessment at TU Delft and scientific director of Populytics.