This paper’s starting point is a general disenchantment of many with the UN-framed activities in the field of global environmental politics. Alternatives to state-lead pro-environmental action are subject to on-going debates, and this paper aims contribute to the discussion about the role of global civil society and, in particular, of environmental NGOs in resolving climate change and environmental degradation issues.
The main question in focus is the dichotomy of the ENGO influence. On the one hand, lobbying has become major ENGO activity since 1980s, and most of the time their very “influence” is assessed through the lenses of ENGO impact on political decisions (i.e. Betsill, Corell 2003). On the other hand, as it was noted in the early 90ies by Paul Wapner, there is another side of ENGO influence which is their capacity to frame and change public opinion about environmental problems, to promote new norms and values, a sort of influence which is directed at the public, at individuals, instead of decision-makers.
In this paper it is argued that the potential of ENGOs to interact directly with the public is underestimated and underachieved, particularly in the context of stagnating global environmental negotiations. Case studies used in this paper include WWF Europe, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth: these three large, famous and well funded ENGOs are analyzed to see how they “make a difference”. It is argued that the major part of their efforts is directed at lobbying activities through participating in UN-framed global or domestic (EU or the US) environmental decision-making process which effectiveness and progress are much debated. Instead of spending most of their efforts and funds on liaising with decision-makers, this paper proposes a rationale and ways of increasing ENGO effectiveness through direct interaction with the public.
