Activist Groups: The Key to Saving the Environment

Alec Stewart

According to a report done by the WWF and reported on by The Guardian “Earth has lost half of its wildlife in the past 40 years” and at this rate of global consumption, the human population would need 1.5 Earths to stay sustained. These facts are detrimental and inescapable. The human race needs to end this unsustainable way of life. I argue that the most effective way of combatting the environmental issues of the world is by working through activist groups to improve the environment on a global scale.

Activist groups are often seen just as “global pressure groups” (Wapner) that bring issues to light and force states to talk about certain issues. However, activist groups can play a much more important role in influencing the world’s environmental situation; they can create change without the need for government organizations.  According to Wapner, activist groups can “shape public affairs by working within and across societies themselves.” I believe the key to bringing any tangible improvement to the state of the world’s environment is not by creating worldwide policy through a world environmental organization that influences, from the top down, the behavior of states, corporations, and individuals. Rather, I believe change must come from activist groups who influence the behavior of individuals who then make decisions that change behavior and policy from the bottom up. This can be done through many different ways including spreading a sentiment for ecological responsibility, leading campaigns to pressure international corporations, and aiding local groups. All of these strategies have been used in the past by activist groups to improve the world’s environment, and should be used more aggressively to prevent the destruction of the world’s wildlife.

Some people may argue that activist groups work on too small of a scope to create any broad scoping change in regards to the world’s environment. Many people propose that some type of world environmental organization is necessary to create any real change. In response to this, I would point to the many failed attempts to improve the environment through international summits and proposals that have accumulated over the years including the Kyoto Proposal and the Copenhagen Summit. While these are not international environmental organizations, they are international attempts at creating worldwide environmental policy that are largely considered failures, and can serve as a good predictor of how an international environmental organization would turn out. The fact is that leaders of the countries mainly responsible for the world’s environmental problems, namely China and the United States, are not taking the responsibility necessary that is needed to make some type of worldwide environmental policy that would positively impact the environment. Any policy created would require the leaders of these states to be willing to suffer economic losses. This would be political suicide for any leader because influential corporations who employ countless people within these countries have vested interests in the status quo of environmental policy.  

On the contrary, activist groups have a track record for being able to influence environmental problems both domestically and internationally. One such example comes from various TEAGs, including Earth Action Network, ability to get McDonald’s to stop using clamshell hamburger boxes and use paper packaging instead, which they thought would reduce the use of foam and plastic. These environmental organizations were able to do this through a “send-back” program that encouraged people to mail back McDonald’s packaging to the national headquarters. The fact that McDonalds, a multibillion dollar international corporation, was swayed by activist pressure is astounding and shows the power that activist groups can have. Another example of activist groups impacting environmental policy is seen in the diminishment of harp seal hunting. Activist groups including Greenpeace and the Sea Shepherds brought harp seal hunting to the world stage, stating that it could potentially cause harp seals to go extinct. This in turn caused people to stop buying products made out of harp seal which led to the market drying up and harp seal hunting to reduce dramatically. In this way Greenpeace and the other activist groups involved made an impact on an environmental issue without the need for help from any government. While both of these examples are anecdotal evidence, they display the very real change that activist groups can spark, and there are countless other examples of activist groups doing this in various environmental arenas. The power of public opinion is a strong weapon that TEAG’s effectively wield to advance their cause and improve the environment.

While the change that activist groups create is often incremental, sporadic, and sometimes hard to measure, they are our best shot at saving the environment because they create change on a personal level which in turn sparks change on a global scale; they do not rely on the politics of the world. I encourage anyone who wishes to improve the environment and end the unsustainable way of life that the majority of the world has come to adopt to get involved in groups like Greenpeace, the WWF, or any other activist group that peaks your interest. Change starts with individuals.

News Article

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/29/earth-lost-50-wildlife-in-40-years-wwf