What factors determine NGO influence in international environmental negotiations?
“We live in an era in which international affairs are no longer dominated by States as the sole actors. The participants include non-governmental organizations, national parliaments, private companies, the mass media, universities, intellectuals, artists, and every woman and every man who considers him or herself to be part of the great human family.”
As the quotation from former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan suggests, international affairs and global diplomacy are no longer only characterised by the dominance of states, but also the active participation of non-state actors. In recent years, the number of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) has grown significantly and they have become more involved in all spaces of international affairs. Many scholars have also acknowledged the importance of NGO influence during international environmental negotiations. The analysis of the factors determining the influence of NGOs is crucial in order to understand the dynamics of such international environmental negotiations.
In discussing the role of NGOs, the available literature refers to many different factors which appear to determine their influence in international environmental negotiations. Listing and examining all of them, however, would go beyond the scope of this article. It will thus focus on some selected factors which help explaining the influence of NGOs in the negotiations of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) and the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The climate change negotiations are argued to be one of the prime examples of NGO involvement as more than 1,500 accredited non-state organisations were reported to be involved. NGOs were perceived to be especially active during the Kyoto Protocol negotiations. NGOs’ active participation was also noted during the UNCCD negotiations, with Correll mentioning that 187 NGOs participated in the process from 1993 until 1997.
In defining NGO influence, scholars often underline the importance of their ability to communicate effectively and thereby intentionally change other actors’ behaviour; i.e. “when they intentionally transmit information to negotiators that alters both the negotiating process and outcome from what would have occurred otherwise”. As a result, their success in shaping the result of the negotiations has to be examined in addition to their ability to influence the negotiation process, for example, by providing specialist information, putting issues on the agenda and influencing the viewpoints of other actors.
Cooperation between different NGOs
The ability of NGOs to cooperate and to ‘speak as one voice’ has repeatedly been mentioned as a factor which improves NGOs’ capability of influencing. During the UNCCD negotiations, NGOs were seen as a united force with similar concerns and as effectively coordinating their activities. The absence of powerful northern NGOs and other non-state actors during the UNCCD negotiations is argued to have facilitated NGOs’ attempts to influence. Notwithstanding profound North-South divides during the Kyoto Protocol process, the NGO representatives succeeded in exerting influence by presenting themselves as a united and well-coordinated entity, especially by collaborating through the Climate Action Network. The effective coordination of the NGOs helped them to receive the required attention in order to advance their agenda in spite of the fact that different other non-state actors participated in the negotiations. Nevertheless, the more heterogeneous composition of the participants of the Kyoto Protocol negotiations, especially also compared to the UNCCD negotiations, may have led to a more challenging negotiating environment for the NGOs.
The timing of involvement & the nature of the issue at stake
Although early participation during negotiations is believed to contribute to NGOs’ success to exert influence, NGOs are still found to be able to impact negotiations at later states. NGOs were not involved in the pre-negotiation period of the UNCCD negotiations, for example, but actively engaged during proceeding phases of the process. At the onset of the Kyoto Protocol talks, however, NGO representatives formed the discussion on emissions trading and inclusion of sinks. The political stakes are also often believed to be comparably low during the initial stages of negotiations when generalities are discussed. Even though some scholars assert that NGOs have greater influence on negotiations when governments’ stakes are comparatively low, as aforementioned, NGOs sometimes continue to exert influence beyond such initial agreements.
In situations of high levels of political contention, governments may still cooperate with NGOs if they have worked with them before and know of their specialist knowledge, referring to the argument of Axelrod (1984) that the likelihood of cooperation increases with repeated interaction among the same actors. During the UNCCD negotiations, NGOs’ technical expertise was considered to be invaluable in order reach an effective agreement. NGO representatives were also able to enhance their influence during the Kyoto Protocol negotiations due to their scientific knowledge of this complex issue. However, as the Protocol was designed to be a legally binding treaty, the political stakes for delegates were higher than in previous non-binding agreements which complicated the exertion of NGO influence.
The compatibility of the environmental issue area with economic interests is another factor that may militate against the success of NGOs’ efforts. During the UNCCD negotiations, NGOs’ involvement was facilitated by the absence of interest and competition from business NGOs and industry representatives, implying that economic interests did not seem to be at stake. The economic interests involved in the Kyoto negotiations, however, complicated the efforts of NGO representatives. The climate change discussion is intertwined with governments’ economic aspirations and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is considered as impacting energy prices and production. Opposing the resourceful fossil fuel industry was a difficult endeavour, thus NGO impact was limited due to the “linkage between climate change and the global economy”.
The relationships of NGOs with government representatives
The relationships of NGOs with government representatives and the access granted to the negotiations are further considered important in determining NGO influence. Effective collaboration with important governments is said to be of utmost importance for the success of NGO influence. Some governments, for example, choose to turn to NGOs for policy implementations due to cost-efficiency reasons. In the UNCCD case, NGOs took advantage from sound relationships with donor countries which considered them to be helpful actors in the fight against desertification. NGOs increasingly improved their relations with government representatives as the UNCCD negotiations progressed, allowing them to have meetings with delegations and thus influence the process.
In the Kyoto Protocol negotiations, NGOs formed an alliance with the European Union which was indispensable in order to push the United States towards changing its view on its greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets. Both the EU and the NGOs had been dissatisfied with the US stance on the issue in previous negotiations so that their alliance became important for NGO influence. The interaction between governments and NGOs is thus complex in many ways as it also depends, for example, on the relationships between the different governments involved.
NGOs’ access to negotiations
The opportunities for active participation for NGOs in negotiations is often considered as enhancing their ability to influence and also the legitimacy of such negotiations as they usually take place excluding the general public. Governments can be argued to control NGOs’ efforts to some extent as they usually regulate the access of NGOs to negotiations. As already indicated, the negotiating environment is assumed to have been more supportive in the UNCCD negotiations than in the Kyoto Protocol sessions. In the UNCCD case, NGO representatives were granted relatively open access to the negotiations. The involvement of NGOs was actively supported by the UNCCD Secretariat. NGOs from developing countries, in particular, were encouraged to participate in meetings, for example through financial support. During the Kyoto Protocol negotiations, NGOs were only able to secure limited access as the participation of non-state actors was prohibited during several sessions. However, NGOs were able to bypass these constraints, for example, by building on their previously established relationships with government representatives in order to receive updates about the sessions. Although less restricted negotiations may thus increase NGOs’ ability to influence, NGOs may also be capable of finding ways to circumvent the limited access of certain negotiations.
All of the factors mentioned may help in explaining why NGO influence in the UNCCD negotiations is believed to have been more successful than in the Kyoto Protocol negotiations. NGOs are seen to have significantly influenced the UNCCD negotiation, leading to as strong statements as that without “the NGOS, the Desertification Convention would not be the instrument it is today”. In addition to their ideas being incorporated in the final text, NGOs also shaped the process of the UNCCD negotiations, e.g., by enhancing governments’ trust towards NGOs overall. Due to the restrictions that NGOs faced during the Kyoto Protocol negotiations, especially perhaps the constraints arising from the contention over the economic dimensions of the issue and the negotiating environment, NGOs are concluded to have influenced the Kyoto Protocol negotiations to a moderate extent.
changing nature of negotiations
Recent years have revealed the changing nature of international environmental negotiations, with NGOs appearing as evermore important actors. Due to this alteration in the dynamics of international environmental negotiations, it becomes ever more important to discuss which factors are crucial in shaping NGO influence. By focusing on the analysis of the UNCCD and Kyoto Protocol negotiations, this article scrutinised some determinants in light of their effectiveness of determining NGO influence.
The above discussion has illustrated that the examination of the interplay of factors is essential in order to assess their impact on NGOs’ ability to exert influence. Moreover, not just the NGO’s strategies have to be considered, but also the fact that NGOs’ actions are bound by the context and structure of the negotiations. Furthermore, it should be kept in mind that this piece concentrates on two environmental issue areas and some specific factors which were relevant for these two areas. The key findings should thus be treated with caution when other environmental issue areas are considered. Nevertheless, they can be helpful in stimulating additional research on the factors determining NGO influence in other environmental issue areas.
Written by Theresa Stroll