What can France’s Citizens’ Assembly on the Climate tell us?
Matthew Hull, Unlock Democracy
From 19th to 21st June France’s Convention Citoyenne pour le Climat met for its final session, referring several proposals on climate change to the French government for action.
150 people selected to represent a cross-section of French society handed down 149 recommendations, developed in consultation with experts and stakeholders over 8 months. The convention, tasked with identifying measures to achieve a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels “in a spirit of social justice”, was created in the aftermath of months of direct action by the gilets jaunes (‘yellow vests’) street movement. Responding to calls for more direct democracy, President Emanuel Macron pledged that the convention could refer measures to the French Chamber of Deputies or a public referendum without obstruction.
The result is unusual and perhaps even unprecedented in the modern history of citizens’ assemblies. The convention has called for a referendum on whether to enshrine environmental protection in the constitution, and on introducing a new crime of ‘ecocide’ to the French penal code. Here are four things we learned from this recent example of participatory democracy in action.
Citizens’ assemblies can have ‘teeth’
Citizens’ assemblies are often described by critics as ‘talking shops’ without any real power. But this certainly can’t be said of this recent French example. After all, the assembly’s 149 concrete recommendations have been referred either to the legislature or to a public referendum.
In one case, a recommendation for mandatory renovation of housing for energy efficiency was endorsed by President Macron as a candidate for a referendum; but the convention preferred to refer this to legislators, keeping it off the public ballot. This is certainly not the action of a convention that feels totally restricted by central authorities.
The Convention Citoyenne is a citizens’ assembly with real power to explore its own possibilities.
This assembly’s origins in direct action set it apart from other examples
As citizens’ assemblies and participatory initiatives have become better known and more popular among policymakers, they have been commissioned with increasing regularity. Examples from the United Kingdom range from Camden Borough Council’s Citizens’ Assembly on the Climate Crisis to Oxford City Council’s Citizens Assembly on Climate Change, both over the last year. More recently, the West Midlands Combined Authority has established a citizens’ panel to consult on Covid-19 recovery plans.
“The assembly wouldn’t exist if it hadn’t been for the gilets jaunes crisis.”
What sets apart the French Convention Citoyenne is its origins in the aftermath of direct action. The assembly was proposed by President Macron in 2019, in large part as a response to the militant actions of the gilets jaunes. In the words of Mathilde Immer, who founded the Gilets Citoyens group for more citizen involvement in policy decisions, “this deliberation exercise wouldn’t exist if it hadn’t been for the gilets jaunes crisis.” The movement had already turned the dial on what would be considered decent or acceptable action on climate change; the inclusion of the “spirit of social justice” in the assembly’s founding objectives is perhaps intended to burnish the credentials of an administration damaged by its proposals for regressive fuel taxes.
In a sense, the real power of this assembly derives from direct action taken over the preceding months and years to change the narrative on climate and social justice.
The idea of ecocide is spreading
This assembly is not the first to propose a law penalising ‘ecocide’. In 2011, Bolivia’s pre-coup administration passed its ‘Law of Mother Earth’ granting 11 new rights for nature, including the right not to be polluted. Other countries, including South Africa, enshrine constitutional protections of various sorts for nature.
These protections are not perfect or all-encompassing by any stretch, but they demonstrate a wide public awareness of the need to protect both people and environment in law. The idea of ecocide has the potential to set the tone for public debate on environmental protection, and shows how constitutional changes can be important in shaping our aspirations for broad social change.
This is a powerful instance of an ecocide law being proposed in a Western European country and a member of the G8. We’ll be looking at how the public debate around this issue proceeds in the run-up to the promised referendum.
Authorities still have enormous power to dictate terms
Despite the relative independence of the assembly and the binding nature of its outputs, the power of the French government to set its terms must not be underestimated.
The most obvious example of this is the stated aim of the assembly. It describes its mandate as “to define a series of measures that will allow [France] to achieve a reduction of at least 40% in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 (compared to 1990) in a spirit of social justice.” A 40% reduction in emissions from 1990 would scarcely begin to address the scale of the climate crisis: the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) advises a net-zero emissions target of 2050; even this target is pilloried by campaigners as being unacceptable, given the historic responsibilities of countries in the global north and the need for negative-emissions technologies. Most social movements have led with a 2030 target date for a carbon zero economy. Even if it achieved its target, France would still be failing to tackle the climate emergency.
In this context, the mandate of the Convention Citoyenne seems more suited to the political priorities of the current French administration than tackling the climate crisis itself. Clearly, movements need to do much more to shape these priorities before citizens’ assemblies can fully address the problems of our time.