Insiders reveal how to influence environmental policy pre-election: new study

Led by RMIT University, researchers interviewed 12 experts with a wealth of experience who currently or previously held influential roles in government or advocacy-focused environmental NGOs.

RMIT’s Dr Lily van Eeden and Professor Sarah Bekessy are available for interview following the publication of their peer-reviewed article and piece published in The Conversation (Creative Commons).

Dr Lily van Eeden, study lead author

“We know most Australians want more government action to stop species extinctions, so it might appear democracy is failing us on nature conservation.

“However, while opinion polls may indicate a voter is pro-nature policies, politicians are unlikely to act unless they think the view will sway a vote. Unfortunately, nature issues no longer shape federal elections like the Franklin Dam campaign in the 1980s.

“Our study found social media and petitions are a good way to increase public awareness and enthusiasm for a cause but are often ineffective in influencing policy. Broad public support is not enough.

“Individual letter-writing can be effective, depending on location and scale, as it can be seen to reflect votes.

“It is possible to make a difference as an individual. Well-informed, well-connected and motivated individuals can make an impact through access to decision-makers and acting strategically in policy windows – like the window right now, in the lead up to the federal election.”

Dr Lily van Eeden is an interdisciplinary scientist with expertise in conservation biology and human behaviour. She's interested in how people interact with nature, and what factors cause them to act in ways that protect or harm the natural environment.

Professor Sarah Bekessy, study co-author

“Change can take a long time, so effective nature advocates need resources and support to stay the course.

“Our interviewees talked about the important role that ‘insider advocates’ can play, such as public servants who rally for a cause internally, sometimes partnering with community groups.

“For those not working in government, local groups that focus on a specific place or species are more likely to have the longevity and knowledge to build influence and effect change. They are also more likely to identify opportune moments for intense advocacy.

“On a larger scale, environmental non-governmental organisations (ENGOs) can also be effective, particularly if they operate in a politically nonpartisan manner, so they can continue to influence regardless of which government is elected. However, barriers include ENGOs being disunited, competing for limited funding, staff and resources, and consistency of messaging across groups and Australia’s biodiversity/climate change policy debate.

“A 2019 study showed approximately half of Victorians have little or no understanding of the term ‘biodiversity’. Biodiversity is also losing public attention amid growing discussion, research and project funding around climate change. This makes it harder to protect specific places at-risk or endangered species of plants and animals.

“An election and the lead up to it can be a good time to advocate for nature.

“Speak with your local politician and their competitors about the change you want to see, connect with anyone you know in government, or join a local group focused on a biodiversity issue for the greatest impact.”

Professor Sarah Bekessy leads RMIT’s ICON Science research group, which uses interdisciplinary approaches to solve complex biodiversity conservation problems. She is particularly interested in understanding the role of human behaviour in conservation.

‘Public pathways to influencing pro-nature decision-making in government: A case study in southeastern Australia’ is published in Conservation Science and Practice (DOI: 10.s1111/csp2.13295).

General media enquiries: RMIT External Affairs and Media, +61 439 704 077 or news@rmit.edu.au