NPOs Are Best Equipped To Deal with Environmental Problems - Essay Example

Running Head: DEALING WITH ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS NPOs ARE BEST EQUIPPED TO DEAL WITH ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS By Professor’s name University name City, State Date NPOs Are Best Equipped To Deal with Environmental Problems Introduction In the outbreak of an environmental crisis, organizations and individuals make it their mandate to address this crisis and attempt to solve it. Each of these interested actors has its own ways of dealing with an environmental challenge considering they all have access to different types and amounts of resources and equipment. As a result, the effectiveness of these actors becomes measurable. Researchers can study and explore the efficiency of each of these parties and determine whose methods and measures are the most effective. Examples of such actors are governments or states, NGOs (Nongovernmental Organizations), NPOs (Nonprofit Organizations), global regimes like the UN, and wealthy individuals. The following paper discusses findings of studies conducted on the effectiveness of the practices of NGOs, NPOs, and states towards solving environmental problems. The paper also analyzes the findings critically to offer an in-depth insight of the ways and reasons these actors respond to environmental challenges differently. NPOs are best equipped to deal with environmental challenges than NGOs and states. How States and ENGOs Deal with Ecological Problems States offer numerous essential environmental products and services freely and publicly (Handy, 2001, p. 651). At the same time, a relatively large and unsatisfied demand for ecological quality exists that states have failed to meet. One method of fulfilling such demands is through NPOs, which are ran by individuals willing to come together and pool resources to offer public goods to the public. The purpose of environmental NPOs is to raise the degree of ecological quality. In terms of ecological quality, ENGOs (Environmental NGOs) are a medium for individuals willing to try to compensate for the shortage of public goods. In numerous cases, ENGOs are unable to offer solutions to environmental challenges explicitly because of financial or legal reasons (Keene and Pullin, 2011, p. 2131). ENGOs find it far more resourceful to cycle their more or less few resources by politicizing and influencing governments to either explicitly or implicitly offer the solutions to these ecological problems. Many literary works propose that NGOs are a natural product of democracy and capitalism. The argument is that as market forces need increasing moderations of the law for their benefit, society naturally calls for social justice to equalize negative factors of market forces (Handy, 2001, p. 652). For instance, environmental pollution affects market negatively and free economies will slowly invent ways to deal with this negative effect (Chimiak, 2014, p. 26). One way is through environmental NGOs, whose operations are based on this relationship between market forces and environmental pollution. Considering the costs to offer better environmental quality are high, it is logical for ENGOs to decide not to deal with them directly (Modi & Mishra, 2010, p. 555). As a result, lobbied states and corporations that agree to partner with ENGOs end up incurring these costs. Surveys conducted on public views about the development and measures of solving environmental issues between the 1960s and 2010 reveal a consistency in urgency. Environmental challenges ranked highest in terms of priority by the United States and Canadian public (Keene and Pullin, 2011, p. 2131). Researchers did not treat this concern as an insignificant factor considering states, ENGOs, and NPOs responded to them greatly although not immediately. These concerns match the financial charities acquired by NPOs between 1975 and 2012. More specifically, the pooled budgets of five leading ecological organizations surpassed $203 million in 1990 while the combined charities of all ENGOs in 1991 reached $2.5 billion. Additionally, membership demographics for ENGOs during the same year surpassed 20 million (Wallis and Dollery, 2006, p. 501). This significant difference in donations shows how urgent the concern for the environment was for the American and Canadian publics during the early 1990s. States often react to public sentiment and the lobbying of ENGOs in determining the amount and quality of ecological goods and services offered. These decisions are made either openly or implicitly through conventions and economic reforms that adjust behavior harmful to the preservation of the environment (Handy, 2001, p. 653). If the state’s reaction suffices, then ENGOs arguably fail to appeal to donors and the people’s concerns subside. Nevertheless, recent survey findings show this has not occurred. Public view surveys and actual resources provided to ENGOs both reveal that governments are unable to respond sufficiently to ecological crises. The support role embarked on by ecological NPOs, sponsored willingly by the public, embodies unfulfilled, surpassed demand for the alleviation of ecological problems. ENGOs can proficiently lever more or less small contributions in lobbying and support into significantly large findings. By pouring some millions on support annually, ENGOs are likely accountable for a huge portion of the tens of billions spend on degradation control yearly. ENGOs are possibly also accountable for the opportunity cost of ordained production within a given community (Wallis and Dollery, 2006, p. 492). For instance, the sum budget of ENGOs in the United States during the late 1970s entailed political support and reached nearly $10 million. Politically delegated the reduction of environmental degradation nationally and cost nearly $23 billion. This means a dollar’s value of lobbying led to an estimated $2,000 worth of degradation reduction in the environment (Chimiak, 2014, p. 27). Support by ENGOs has assisted the approval of numerous pro-environment policies in the United States. An example is Sierra Club’s coordination and contributions, along with other ENGOs, to begin the lobbying of lawmakers to verify the Wilderness Act during the early 1960s. During the same period, Sierra Club began a huge public awareness campaign to garner public advocacy for the preservation of wilderness lands. Congress got more correspondence on the suggested Wilderness Act than any other bill (Morard, Stancu, & Jeannette, 2012, p. 24). This pressure from the public caused Congress to approve a bill in 1964 by an overpowering majority after failing in Congress since the late 1950s (Handy, 2001, p. 653). Public correspondence began by environmental researchers and ENGOs compelled the state to approve less nuclear power plants. The trend continued in Sweden as more and more nuclear plants began being decommissioned slowly (McKay and Crowson, 2013, 87). More cases of the clearly beneficial relationship between states and ENGOs through lobbying and advocacy roles are the impacts of the World Bank’s credit policies and the dissolution of Shell’s aquatic waste discarding program. According to researcher Femida Handy, ENGOs can easily pressure and petition states for change in environmental policies using three unique ways (Handy, 2001, p. 661). First, ENGOs can make states amend or reform current laws and policies on environmental preservation. Secondly, observing and analyzing state agencies accountable for implementing ecological laws or offering ecological services as delegated can pressure states. Lastly, trying to alter the people’s attitude towards environmental problems through awareness programs and education can push ENGOs to better deal with these issues (Keene and Pullin, 2011, p. 2133). An efficient change in public view might additionally pressure the state because political leaders are keen on voter demands. How NPOs Deal With Ecological Problems Unlike ENGOs, environmental NPOs spend a significant portion of their resources spreading knowledge to the public and urging people both to contribute and to become more ecologically aware (Samu and Wymer, Jr, 2013, p. 1993). Today, NPOs reach out to minority groups, the aged, and spiritual groups to develop mainstream environmentalism. For instance, initiatives on recycling and the preservation of resources are finding advocacy amongst the middleclass. Additionally, whole communities are accepting these programs actively and children, senior citizens, church groups, and small enterprises are advocating them (Ujwary-Gil and Nalepka, n.d., p. 61). Academic and support programs have led to drastic adjustments in consumer and producer behavior. Legal statues regulating the behavior of NPOs limit the functions they can undertake in explicitly affecting winning over political decisions (Bryson, 2011, p. 271). As a result, lobbying done by NGOs comprises of the legally certified operations that consist of a given level of direct petitioning. These operations also comprise of all knowledge spreading for academic reasons that can affect and direct public views towards environmental sensitivity. A number of policy options for providing solutions to environmental challenges exist (Keene and Pullin, 2011, p. 2134). Environmental NPOs in favor of improved environmental quality have to decide what policies to support and promote frequently. As a result, NPOs will operate optimally by designing approaches of advocacy dependent on the net expenses incurred by the interested parties and focus on the singling out impacts of financial motivations (Wallis and Dollery, 2006, p. 472). Advocacy policies of many environmental NPOs in developed countries share inventive programs about public awareness of environmental problems and the collective potential they have towards solving them. Even though the decrease of net expenses is embraced, market-oriented policies are not largely promoted (Modi & Mishra, 2010, p. 549). Researchers make a more profound emphasis on regulatory strategies together with ethical suasion through the spreading of knowledge and academic programs. Many of the original contributions for solving environmental problems originated from concerned wealthy individuals. These individuals frequently assembled and created unpaid NPOs that jointly handled environmental matters (Samu and Wymer, Jr, 2013, p. 1993). These organizations regularly petitioning and promoting of environmental conservation altered public opinions over the years. As a result, NPOs persuaded states and enterprises to focus on fulfilling their demands. A number of these charitable relationships mobilized into huge, recognized NPOs and were retained by donations and memberships (Ujwary-Gil and Nalepka, n.d., p. 61). NPOs without this sort of support remained small and unrecognized while others split up. Nonetheless, numerous environmental NPOs keep on playing a vital role in promoting better environmental quality. Such NPOs perform at their best by endorsing policies dependent on net expenses incurred interested parties and concerning with the exempting impacts of financial incentives. Like ENGOs, NPOs are structured and do not have profit goals and political influences (Bryson, 2011, p. 277). As a result, in their support of numerous public goods and services that need trust, the public sees NPOs as more trustworthy. In the process, NPOs gain merit over states and wealthy individuals when it comes to dealing with environmental issues. As a result, the people see NPOs as credible when they evaluate state policies and petition for change (Polonsky, Lefroy, Garma, and Chia, 2011, p. 46). NPOs make fewer negotiations than NGOs because they are focused on more or less challenges than the state and do not have to concern over profits like for-profit organizations. Additionally, NPOs are bound by the legal non-allocation limit on profits. Conclusion NPOs are the most trusted and credible source for advocacy against environmental degradation and its conservation. Environmental support entails petitioning states explicitly or implicitly to cause change in conduct that could assist the extrication or prevention of environmental crises. Outside interventions like conventions, authorizations, economic incentives, and national mediations like ethical suasion might spark these desired changes. Instances of high net expenses to the actor assuming the change as a duty, outside motivators can help lower these expenses. In such instances, a policy of ethical suasion assists the change of particular value systems and preferences, which is important in assuring any behavior change. ENGOs might enjoy greater reliability by states in advocating environmental conservation and spreading of information about environmental challenges, NPOs are credible amongst the people. References Bryson, JM 2011, Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations: A Guide to Strengthening and Sustaining Organizational Achievement, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Chimiak, G. 2014, "The Rise and Stall of Non-Governmental Organizations in Development,” Polish Sociological Review, no. 185, pp. 25-44. Handy, F 2001, ‘Advocacy by environmental nonprofit organizations: An optimal strategy for addressing environmental problems?’ International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 648-66. Keene, M and Pullin, AS 2011, ‘Realizing an effectiveness revolution in environmental management’ Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 92, no. 9, pp. 2130–5. McKay, J and Crowson, N 2013, The Politics of Expertise: How NGOs Shaped Modern Britain, Oxford University Press, Cambridge, UK. Modi, P, & Mishra, D 2010, Conceptualising market orientation in non-profit organisations: definition, performance, and preliminary construction of a scale, Journal Of Marketing Management, 26, 5/6, pp. 548-569, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 20 November 2014. Morard, B., Stancu, A. & Jeannette, C. 2012, "The Relationship Between Structural Equation Modeling And Balanced Scorecard: Evidence From A Swiss Non-Profit Organization", Review of Business & Finance Studies, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 21-37. Polonsky, MJ, Lefroy, K, Garma, R, and Chia, N 2011, ‘Strategic and tactical alliances: Do environmental non-profits manage them differently?’ Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), Vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 43–51. Samu, S and Wymer, Jr, WW 2013, Nonprofit and Business Sector Collaboration: Social Enterprises, Cause-Related Marketing, Sponsorships, and Other Corporate-Nonprofit Dealings, Routledge, Los Angeles, CA. Ujwary-Gil, A and Nalepka, A n.d., Business And Non-Profit Organization Facing Increased Competition And Growing Customers Demands (Vol. 11), WSB-NLU, New York, NY. Wallis, J and Dollery, B 2006 ‘Revitalizing the contribution non‐profit organizations can make to the provision of human services,’ International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 33 Iss: 7, pp.491 – 511. Read More