The decimation of the environment is one of the most pressing
issues facing humanity. But why is so little charitable giving
directed towards it? Alexandra Newlove spoke to some of the powerhouses in environmental philanthropy about
why donating to other causes may be a waste of time
W
hen United States president Donald Trump announced in June that his country would cease all involvement with the Paris Agreement on Climate Change Mitigation, the world responded with condemnation,
and more than a dozen US states independently joined the pact in an act of defiance. But despite the proclaimed public outrage, what is arguably
the biggest challenge facing humanity receives surprisingly little backing from the wider philanthropic sector, with just 2-4% of charitable donations made each year going towards environmental causes. Among the philanthropists who do prioritise the planet
is Jeremy Grantham, whose many hats include being the co-founder of the $74 billion Boston-based investment management firm GMO LLC. Grantham just about bursts every time someone asks him why he and his wife Hannelore have made environmentalism and climate change the focus of their giving. “I always find it shocking when someone asks me, ‘Why
would you pick this issue?’,” he says on the phone from Boston. “It was the obvious candidate. It is the most pressing of the
serious threats to our long-term wellbeing.” The Paris agreement is a consensus among nearly 200
countries to cut carbon emissions. The agreement’s aim is to keep the increase in average global temperature to less than 2°C above pre-industrial level —a level of change the vast majority of scientists agree is dangerous and irreversible. Global temperatures have already risen about 1°C since 1880, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Grantham, best known in the finance world as a noted
historian—and predictor—of market bubbles, set up the Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment with Hannelore in 1997, putting in “pretty much all” their money. About a third of the grants the Grantham Foundation gives go
towards influencing “hearts and minds as to the realities we are dealing with”, Grantham says. Investigative journalism projects supported by the Granthams
have won Pulitzer prizes, as well as an Emmy award. Other grantees include the Grantham Institute for Climate Change at Imperial College London, and the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics. Grantham keeps some wealth in his own name to fund ideas
considered too odd or “racy” for the foundation, like a lithium ion battery technology which will “probably fail, they all fail”, and a forestry and agriculture project involving Grantham’s son. “Of course, the foundation cannot do that because it is
nepotism… So I invest in my name, and if it works out, which I am sure it will, I then get to gift it to the foundation, which is completely kosher. “Meanwhile, if one of my crazy investments fails, I can get a tax deduction. So any capitalist will admire that efficiency.”
PHOTOGRAPHY: GETTY IMAGES
CAMPDENFB.COM 79
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88
