The Levels of Power that Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations Have at their Disposal to Influence Environmental Politics

Have you ever stopped to consider what a privilege it is to have a clean environment that we depend on for many of our aspects of life, such as sports, food, and the remainder of what we need to survive and thrive? Unless from off-earth, which would be things that we get from space matter (which is a miniscule amount), everything we have is thanks to our earthly resources. However, there is a huge price to the benefits. Someone has to take care of the negative effects that impact the environment, and unfortunately they aren’t fully accredited to what they have to do to maintain order in many people’s lives and ensure the environment is providing for their profession. When we think of environmentally-dependent professions more locally, many of the people of North Carolina depend on our environment to sustain their livelihood, and even to make a living for themselves, like fishermen, farmer, hunters, and all kinds of employment options. That is why Environmental non-profits in North Carolina should receive more funding annually from the government, for all the things they do to make sure our resources aren’t degraded, people can continue to use our environment for their enjoyment and any other needs.

The struggle between capitalism, national sovereignity, human rights, and environmental protectionism is a constant struggle. International Nongovernment Organzations (INGO) serve an important role in watching the process unfold. Unfortunately, the history of the world is filled with conflict and no one person or group has the answer as to the outcome.

earths wildlife and lands. Around the 1960s, the government wanted to build dams in the Grand

Greenpeace one of the current environmental interest groups is being investigated by BJP “for links to foreign funding sources and freezing their assets.” Additionally, there since India has a very industrial dominate economy comes the challenges of business lobby groups that support the government in trying to undermine the environmentalist to make sure that the economy does not wane do to the change in energy usage. One can see from these examples that interest groups have a lot of power and influence in the India government and can play a crucial role in effecting the environmental movement.

Interests groups can be many things, such as a group of individuals who focus on

The process of collaboration forced the participants to breach their normative cultural boundaries. By contrast, it also means that those who are non-rural Westerners do not share values of hard work, family, and appreciation for small town lifestyles. Karuk tribe members and Klamath Irrigators normalized an identity based on localness as “insiders” rather than maintaining the traditional cultural hegemony of Euro-American Irrigators and Indigenous American Tribes(Ferguson 2004). NGO’s in many other western case studies of environmental management have been characterized as elitist outsiders representative of urban capital (Yung, Patterson, and Freimund 2010; Wilson 1997). Many of these descriptions also apply to environmental groups who are active in the Klamath basin, with headquarters often located in Portland, staffs comprised of lawyers, and the financial capacity for lengthy legal proceedings. The Othering of non-locals has become normative, as indicated from a quote from the end of Tucker’s opinion

Environmentalism in the 20th century largely materialized from NGOs and activists that bypassed mainstream news and communicate with the public dangers and threats to the environment via alternative media (Anderson, 1997; Corbett, 2006; DeLuca & Delicath, 2003; Lester, 2010). This was in response to traditional news that overlooked or sensationalized much of what they did so environmental groups became more political savvy and sophisticated using media. Despite anti-environmental policy, public awareness grew, as did membership in environmental groups. By the 1990s, however, the news turned hostile toward these groups as a result public interest waned and many groups faced a decline in donations from large corporations. As we saw in Chapter

What conflicts does Greenpeace have (or did they have) with the government and corporations in the Netherlands and governments and corporations of other countries in the world?

The system is supposed to enhance its internal practices to reducing greenhouse gas, and they will be increasing recycling processes. More importantly, it will also create strict guidelines for JPMorgan Chase's lending decisions when it comes to The mining, forestry, oil, and gas industries it will no longer finance projects that pose a danger to the environment It has also decided to encourage clients to design plans to try and reduce the large amounts of greenhouse gasses to help the environment. The modifications come from years of the hard word by the Stakeholders as well as some other groups that included nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), investors, and activists. Stakeholders, including NGOs, investors, and activists, as well as communities, labor, and consumers all, played a significant role in improving corporate behavior. Some NGOs are willing to put themselves in danger by using strategies of conflict. Others have been working to create partnerships with companies to help them green their production, often in ways that save them money. As well, the investor community is taking a progressively active role in work with the companies in the hopes of creating a partnerships with businesses in order to help them green their production, which often save them money on the long term outlook. Some of the investor community is taking an active role as well encouraging corporations to consider the long-term financial risks of social and environmental issues rather than the next quarter's

Who has the most power? Governments, consumers or corporations? Perhaps the question that should be asked is who should have the most power. The obvious answer would be consumers and the government. Although in a perfect world this may be the case but in reality this is far from the truth. It is nor do the governments or the consumers who has the most power but rather the corporations. Over the past four decades, a shift in power has been taking place, out from the hand citizens and the nations and into the hands of the Multi-National corporations (MNCs). This essay will focus on the unparalleled growth of corporate power and the effects of corporate power on Africa in terms of social, political and environmental factors.

In their introduction to the chapter "Why International Organisations Matter," which was contributed to Business and the Politics of Globalisation: After the Global Financial Crisis, authors Xu Yi-chong and Patrick Weller begin the rhetorical defense of international organisations (IOs) by providing a review of recent global crises, and describing the various roles that global groups like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) played in addressing these most complex of dilemmas. The work performed by both the IMF and the World Bank in mitigating the disastrous effects of the global financial crisis is presented as a prime example of the efficacy of international organisations, as is the authoritative Report issued by the IPCC in response to mounting evidence in support of climate change as a demonstrable scientific phenomenon. As Yi-chong and Weller state unequivocally, "globalisation could not have taken place without the desire of states to pursue cooperation; neither could it have happened without IOs acting as effective facilitators of that cooperation" (2010), because communication on the international scale often requires an objective third-party for purposes of negotiation, mediation, and conflict resolution.

Freeman (1984, P. 46) popularized the definition of a stakeholder as ‘. . . ANY group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives’. This is a very broad definition meaning that in today’s global business environment any individuals and groups may be business’s stakeholders (Davey, 2015). This sparks the debate about whether or not the natural environment can be identifiable as a stakeholder. In the ethics in practice case ‘Are Plants and Flowers

Business people today are more aware about the social and the environment impact of their business than in the past. They start taking into account activities in helping others and preserving the environment as a main part of their business model. Business is no longer solely aim for profit as they have much larger purpose than that. However, to achieve that purpose, the business people need the Government and NGOs to create strong synergy in achieving the desirable outcome.

Part of this plan included the establishment of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) in 1990. It is described as the “international clearinghouse on sustainable development and environmental protection policies, programs, and techniques being implemented at the local level”. Their power is far-reaching as their mandate is to control every area in which humanity impacts on the environment. Some have dubbed them the “sustainability mafia”.

Environment now become a global issue. For that reason, non-state actors such as: NGOs and activists participate to solve this problem. However, their participations are almost affecting population’s idea or cooperating with firms and even lobbying policies (O’Neil, 2009). These actions can be considered as effort of non-state actors, but not directly protect environment. Therefore, non-state actors alone is not enough to deal with environmental problems that require a dependence of them on state actors. This essay will present, analyze the functions of non-state actors and will illustrate the relation between them and states.