Research Topics: Kyoto Agreement

THE ECONOMICS OF GLOBAL WARMING

Introduction               Global warming is an environmental damage of international proportions caused by greenhouse effect. Greenhouse effect refers to the heat-trapping effect of the rising concentrations of carbon dioxide and other gases emitted by burning fossil fuels, deforestation and other human activity into the atmosphere creating a barrier that traps the sun’s heat inside the earth. (Cline 3) The result is immeasurable overall damage to society that pervades every individual’s social, economic and political life. The most important implication of global warming is its non-discrimination against culture, gender or economic status and of no state no matter how advanced is spared from its effects.               The benefit-cost analysis (Cline 5) conducted based on conditions in the early 1990s showed that the cost of global warming already amounted to trillion. Imagine the increase in cost after more than a decade of continues intensified emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The agricultural losses due to drought and heat stress amounted to a yearly cost of billion. Global warming caused glacial ice to melt increasing the sea water level affecting the frequency of floods contributed an annual cost of billion. Warmer weather also increases the consumption of electricity for fans and air conditioning amounting to an annual cost of billion. Deforestation not only results to the non-absorption of greenhouse gasses by trees and plants but also greater run-off curtailing water from dropping into water basins resulting to billion in annual cost. Increase in urban pollution due to warmer weather amounts to billion. Deaths due to heat waves amount to a conservative billion annually when the cost of a life is calculated through lost earnings. The loss of the long-term value of forests amounted to billion annually. Warmer weather melts snowcaps of mountains amounting to a loss of $ 1½ billion annually.                  Due to the international effect of the phenomenon, there is the realization that minimizing its effect needs international cooperation. In 1997, the Kyoto Protocol developed during the United Nations Convention on Climate Change. The Kyoto Protocol is the result of the agreement of 160 developed and developing countries during the third session of the convention. The purpose of the protocol is the promotion of policy change on phasing out incentives, tax exemptions and subsidies to industries attributed with majority of greenhouse gas emissions and giving these incentives to environment friendly industries. (Chambers 70) However, the nature of global warming and climate change covered by the Kyoto Protocol exacts voluntary compliance (Wiener 680). The Kyoto Protocol takes effect only after it is ratified by 55 countries including the countries attributed with 55% of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide and states determine the amount of cutback in emissions to be achieved in 2012. It was only in February 2005 that the required ratifications was achieved. The Kyoto Protocol had weaknesses since it does not impose a ceiling or a minimum level of compliance to be able to achieve significant results (Gardiner 25) and it does not expect compliance from developing countries that ratified the protocol (Page 127). Nevertheless, it is a necessary solution to global warming.   Despite the reality of climate change and the corresponding need to decrease greenhouse gas emissions, the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol was met by protests from industries that will be affected by policy changes and the use of environment friendly gasses. Policy changes on the oil industry was also challenged by the United States when it did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol on the ground that the commitment of cutting back greenhouse gas consumption will result to economic loss of 0 billion affecting 149 million jobs (Lisowski 102 ).   Rationale of US Actions on Global Warming               Despite the effectivity of the Kyoto Protocol in 2005, the United States maintains its decision; not to ratify the agreement. Some of the reasons given are political and legal such as the failure of the negotiations spearheaded by the United States to include developing countries in the agreement (Lisowsky 101) but most of the reasons given were economic centering on the effects of compliance with policy changes in the oil industry. The basis of the economic justification is the Byrd-Hagel resolution passed on July 25, 1997 by the senate with a unanimous vote. The significant parts of the resolution are as follows: (1) the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol to, or other agreement regarding, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change of 1992, at negotiations in Kyoto in December 1997, or thereafter, which would— (A) mandate new commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for the Annex I Parties, unless the protocol or other agreement also mandates new specific scheduled commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for Developing Country Parties within the same compliance period, or (B) would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States; and (2) any such protocol or other agreement which would require the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification should be accompanied by a detailed explanation of any legislation or regulatory actions that may be required to implement the protocol or other agreement and should also be accompanied by an analysis of the detailed financial costs and other impacts on the economy of the United States which would be incurred by the implementation of the protocol or other agreement.                 The reason why President Bush did not present the Kyoto Protocol to the senate is the lack of justification for doing so, especially since studies show the economic cost of changing policy in the oil industry in order to encourage the cutback of fuel consumption by households and businesses is greater than the cost of continuing the present status of the oil industry. There would also be an inconsistency in the policy of the President especially since his administration encourages the economic growth in the oil industry.                 Since countries ratifying the Kyoto Protocol have to limit their greenhouse gas consumption, the mechanism of ensuring the decrease is through the imposition of emission permits. Emission permits are like taxes on carbon, where importers of greenhouse gas producing products are given a limit that they can purchase in the world market. The limit may change periodically. In the event of exceeding the limit, there would be financial consequences against the importer. The trading permit is like obtaining the permission to produce a certain amount of greenhouse gas. The purpose is to lessen the consumption of greenhouse gas emitting substances and encourage alternative sources of energy. (Hahn and Hester 362) Higher limits on emission result to greater economic effects. Permits may be traded, making it an important business product but subject to limitations under the Kyoto Protocol.                 Implementing the policy of emission permits different costs to entail. First is the increase in the price of gasoline in the United States because the added cost of importing oil is passed on to the end consumers, the households and domestic businesses and the limited supply also necessarily affects price. The 2000 forecast showed that the increase in gasoline prices in America could reach 12 to 38 cents for every gallon due to the implementation of the emission permit policy with the increase relatively smaller if there was no limit in the trading of oil. The amount is based on the value of the dollar in 1997. (Lasky 31) This will be experienced by most households since according to the Energy Information Administration (1), “Motor vehicles are an integral part of the American way of life”. The additional price for a gallon of gasoline means a decrease in the amount to be used by households for other economic needs. Computing the total of the cost to households as the price increase due to emission permits would amount to billions.               Apart from the increase in the price of gasoline, the implementation of the emission permit policy had the United States ratified the agreement will result to the increase in the price of natural gases by as much as 13 to 42 percent by 2010. This is a significant increase especially since the United States doubled its importation of natural gas from 8 to 16 percent as compared to the previous decade. (Lasky 32) One reason for the importance of natural gas is its production is not concentrated in the Middle East, which means that the United States can negotiate a better deal with independent fragmented suppliers than with the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Another reason is that the use of natural gas is less a burden to the environment than fossil fuels. The United States is after all concerned with global warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions, which are greater with the use of fossil fuels. Still another reason is that natural gas has its potential in the development of new products such as automobiles and appliances run by natural gas. (Energy Information Administration 1-2) The maximum projected increase in natural gas prices by 42 percent in 2010, with the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, is devastating to the United States economy and to households. President Bush is not committed to incurring these costs in the next 6 years.               Another product that is affected by the increase in price through the implementation of the emission permit policy under the Kyoto Protocol is electricity. According to projections, the price of electricity to households may increase by 13 to 36 percent in 2010. Taking the maximum expected increase of 36 percent, the increase is like 36 cents to a dollar, to a hundred dollars and 0 to a thousand dollars multiplied with the number of households in the United States by 2010. (Lasky 33) Of course, there are other considerations such as the increase in household income. Unless the expected increase in household income is greater than the increase in the price of electricity, the imposition of the policy that would increase price is not economically sound. Moreover, if the increase in income is equal to or less than the aggregate increase in the price of the different energy producing substances, then the average American household would be in the same economic state as it was 6 years ago or even in a worst condition.               The aggregate result of the increase in the prices of gasoline, natural gas and electricity would result to a decrease by 0.5 percent to 1.2 percent of real GDP in 2010 if the United States ratified the Kyoto Protocol. In terms of consumption, the aggregate value would decrease by 0.4 to 1.0 percent in 2010. (Lasky 36) Without going into the actual measurement of Gross Domestic Product, it is a fact that the computation shows the standard measure for aggregate economic activity. Economic growth is commonly measured through the percentage increase in GDP from the previous years. A percentage increase implies economic growth. Economic growth means that there is an increase in aggregate income of the United States. Economic growth in turn results to vibrancy of business operations, employment, increase in income and purchasing power and increased consumption. (Scully 652-653) However, with the protocol, the United States expects to experience a decrease in GDP in 2010 that could make the economy unstable.               The limited trading of emission permits under the Kyoto Protocol also affects the US economy. Another justification for non-ratification is the country’s defeat in its request to include developing countries in the protocol thus increasing the price for limited permit trading. According to studies, the losses in terms of Gross Domestic Product and consumption will be lesser if the reduction in carbon emission will be implemented without the international trade of emission permits. The projected loss in the trading of permits varies from 0.4 to 4.2 percent of the baseline GDP. Correspondingly, aggregate private and government consumption is projected to decrease by 0.2 to 3.1 percent. (Lasky 2)               Limiting the international trading of emission permits discourages industries to cutback on their use of greenhouse gas emitting substances. The purpose of the trading of emission permit is to provide incentives for businesses to profit from decreasing their consumption of fossil fuels and other carbon based products by limiting their emission to a certain amount and selling their permit for the remaining allowable emission to other businesses. (Hanh and Stavins 3) The cost of reducing greenhouse gas emissions should be offset, though not entirely, by the amount that the business firm or the state receives in selling their emission permits. If there is no trading of emission permits, then the cost incurred by private businesses and the US government is high. Since under the Kyoto Protocol, the trading of permit emission internationally is limited, there is no sufficient incentive for the United States to ratify the agreement.               However, if there is a trading of emission permits, the United States expects to decrease its projected decrease in GDP and consumption in 2010. The trading of permits allows the US to gain additional emission permits in other countries that offers a lower price. There are two benefits of economic trading to the United States. First is that unrestricted trading allows economic forces to work decreasing the price permits if there are alternative sellers in the global market. The United States can choose to purchase from a state that offers a competitive price. Moreover, competition tends to decrease price under normal circumstances. Second is that unlimited trading of emission permits with the inclusion of developing countries would provide the United States with a cheaper source of additional emission permits. (Lasky 2) The savings that would be derived by the United States in these conditions constitute sufficient economic incentive for the country to ratify the agreement. In terms of GDP in the United States, projects to cut in half the expected decrease without or with limited permit trading. Thus, with the conclusion of negotiations on the subject is not in favor of the demands of the United States, the country did not ratify the agreement.   Conclusion               Global warming is an environmental damage of international scale that developed due to the aggregate contributions of states. However, no single state takes responsibility for their individual contributions and in addressing the problem collectively with the cooperation of all states. This may be because air and the atmosphere have always been considered as an unlimited resource. It is not owned by any state and every state has the right to utilize it. Because of the nature of our atmosphere, no state spends for its utilization and therefore there is no state that can exact payment for its use. In the same way, there is no state that can prevent another from exploiting or destroying the atmosphere. This is the reason why the Kyoto Protocol is voluntary. It cannot exact compliance because there is no basis for strictly enforcing the agreement to all states. States should voluntary assume the burden of addressing the global warming.               Although the Kyoto Protocol became effective in 2005, the United States did not ratify the agreement by primarily citing economic reasons for not assuming the burden of global warming. The United States have two objections towards the Kyoto Protocol. First is the imposition of emission permits that limits the trading and consumption of greenhouse for has emitting products. Limiting consumption increases the price of gasoline, natural gas and electricity that affects the productivity of the economy decreasing real gross domestic product and consumption. Second is limiting the trading of emission permits that prevents the United States from decreasing its expected cost when it is able to purchase emission permits from other states at a lower price. In this way, the expected decrease in GDP and consumption is lowered by half. These economic considerations were the reasons why the United States did not ratify the agreement and President Bush did not even present the protocol to the senate. In weighing the economic cost of allowing global warming and the cost of reducing greenhouse emission, the latter is more economically sound in the case of the United States.    Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

THE ECONOMICS OF GLOBAL WARMING

Introduction Global warming is an environmental damage of international proportions caused by greenhouse effect. Greenhous...

Kyoto Protocol – Global Warming Essay

Global warming is an environmental damage of international proportions caused by greenhouse effect. Greenhouse effect refers to the heat-trapping effect of the rising concentrations of carbon dioxide and other gases emitted by burning fossil fuels, deforestation and other human activity into the atmosphere creating a barrier that traps the sun’s heat inside the earth. Due to the international effect of the phenomenon, there is the realization that minimizing its effect needs international cooperation. In 1997, the Kyoto Protocol developed during the United Nations Convention on Climate Change. The purpose of the protocol is the promotion of policy change on phasing out incentives, tax exemptions and subsidies to industries attributed with majority of greenhouse gas emissions and giving these incentives to environment friendly industries.  However, the nature of global warming and climate change covered by the Kyoto Protocol exacts only voluntary compliance. The Kyoto Protocol takes effect only after it is ratified by 55 countries including the countries attributed with 55% of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide and states determine the amount of cutback in emissions to be achieved in 2012. It was only in February 2005 that the protocol came into effect. The Kyoto Protocol had weaknesses since it does not impose a ceiling or a minimum level of compliance to be able to achieve significant results and it does not expect compliance from developing countries that ratified the protocol. Nevertheless, it is a necessary solution to global warming. The primary environmental concern in the issue of global warming is stopping the century-old practice of indiscriminate emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to prevent its effects. The heat trapped inside the earth affects the agricultural sector and our food supply because of drought and heat stress. The melting of glaciers increase the seawater level causing flooding in areas below sea level. Rapid deforestation limits the ability of nature to absorb the mass of greenhouse gases and rainfall increasing water runoff causing landslides and flooding.  No state can contest these effects so that involvement by states in the Kyoto Protocol, which is the first international effort to address global warming, is justified by these effects. The primary political issue raised by non-participating states is the conflict between the protocol’s regulation of fossil fuel trading and the WTO principle of free trade. However, the Kyoto Protocol can exist together with free trade because states are free to define the targeted decrease in their greenhouse gas emissions.  Thus, this issue is capable of settlement with clarification of the provisions of the agreement. Thus, this political issue is not a sufficient justification for non-participation in the Kyoto Protocol.              The primary economic issue in global warming is weighing the economic cost of global warming and the economic cost of limiting the use of fossil fuels and the emission of greenhouse gases. On one hand, the benefit-cost analysis conducted based on US conditions in the early 1990s showed that the cost of global warming already amounted to trillion annually. The agricultural losses due to drought and heat stress amounted to billion. Melting of glacial ice increasing the seawater level causing floods contributed billion. Warmer weather increases electricity consumption for air-conditioning amounting to billion. Water run-off that curtails water from dropping into water basins contributes billion. Increase in urban pollution due to warmer weather amounts to billion. Deaths due to heat waves amounts to a conservative billion annually calculated through lost earnings. The loss of the long-term value of forests amounted to billion. The melting of mountain snowcaps amounts to a loss of $ 1½ billion to the ski industry. On the other hand, US refused to ratify the protocol because it contends that it will incur economic loss of 0 billion, affecting 149 million jobs. The US projects that it will experience a decrease in real GDP and consumption by as much as 1.2 percent and 1.0 percent respectively by 2010 with the Kyoto Protocol. The limitation on the trading of fossil fuels will also increase the price of gasoline by as much as 36 cents for a gallon, natural gas by as much as 42 percent, and electricity by as much as 36 percent by 2010. There is also loss due to the limitation in the trading of permits to as much as 4.2 percent of the baseline GDP.  It is in terms of economic issue that participation in the Kyoto Protocol becomes an issue.              Global warming is an environmental damage of international scale that developed due to the aggregate contributions of states. However, no single state takes responsibility for their individual contributions because the atmosphere is deemed an unlimited resource. No state owns it and every state has the right to utilize it. No state can prevent another from exploiting or destroying the atmosphere. This is why the Kyoto Protocol is voluntary. States should voluntary assume the burden of addressing global warming. Environmental and political reasons coupled with the economic cost of global warming justify the voluntary participation of all states in arresting global warming for sustainable development and the future of humankind. Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Kyoto Protocol – Global Warming Essay

Global warming is an environmental damage of international proportions caused by greenhouse effect. Greenhouse effect refers ...

Effective non-compliance procedures have been more the exception rather than the rule in multilateral environment agreements

The international environmental laws that were produced in the 1992 Kyoto Protocol is one that continued to establish over the years in their non-compliance. The agreement for international law has shown that while there may be an international protocol to follow, individual laws with regards to the decisions of the country for their own safety are also in effect. The agreements are done through legal claims which is held and recognized internationally. Moreover, international laws are also based on the hold of the United Nations Organization when it comes to the membership of the people. In the United Nations Environment Programme discussed the ideas of non-compliance especially with regards to the decisions of the Parties and how this can be practiced depending on the country’s policies. In the effect of non-compliance, it is not the rule of the higher organizations to focus on, yet it is based on the ideas of the government on how the corporations are able to meet the requirements of the country’s environmental law. Multilateral environmental agreements depend on the relationships and the arrangements made by several countries especially as based on their findings. Such of the discussed subjects were the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants[1] and Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks.[2]             Companies that do not comply to the procedures that were given to them shows that they are more likely to focus on the environmental problems that the people are having. Sand[3] pointed out that the environment is everyone’s concern especially in providing for climatic security, biological security, and chemical security. Such may be achieved by enforcing such laws within the country. Environmental consciousness is becoming one of the most discussed subjects in countries, one of which is Australia which has also taken part of. The method that is being used here is more on the federal ruling rather than the absolute enforcement, thus showing that there is more focus on the exception.[4]             While taking part in the effort to ensure the environmental security of the country, Australia also takes part in establishing the ways in which they can ensure the safety of their own area, especially by focusing on the international laws that have been established within the country and also the ones that were placed on them as mandated with their multilateral environment agreements. There are some methods in dealing with the non-compliance of the environmental treaties especially with the multilateral environmental issues.[5]             One of the advantages of the multilateral environmental agreements is that the shared vantage of the point gives more advantage regarding the ideas that the countries and the organizations may use, and thus they may effectively ensure the security of the methods that they may use for the protection of the country, especially as based on their co-existence in a pre-defined space. By being vigilant in their investigations, the members of the organizations will be able to determine the methods that may be used in the establishment of their powers. Saunders[6] elaborated the constitutional treaties within the Australian continent and the legislations as based on the various ways that the state can exercise their power. One of the discussed subjects is the inconsistency of the legislation concerning the discussion of their laws, especially when it comes to the determination of the validity of some claims. Moreover, it was also pointed out that there have been questions on the validity of some claims when it comes to the responsibilities of states and the ways that they believe they should take care of their environment.             It is the need for the responsible take that the government have on their assigned turfs. Enforcement of legislations should be followed by the different states and also the agreements must be based on the established acts that are already being enforce within their own states. This lessens the confusion that the other states may have when it comes to dealing with the policies of other states and also gives a relative basis on the similarities of their environmental capabilities.             Information flow is also one of the most major concerns, and the exchange of knowledge has to be established as based on the agreement. In doing so, there is also the need for the agreement regarding the scientific developments and researches that the countries are having. It was pointed out, however, that such agreements are more likely to be established based on the economic advantages rather than the environmental advantages that these may bring to the states.[7] The flow of information between the stipulated states may give the legislators the idea on how to handle the precarious differences that states hold on their laws.             The exception rule that the Australian government has focused is one that shows an almost passive reaction to problems that are currently showing. Scientific researches have continued to reiterate the great changes that have been occurring over the years and how they will affect the different parts of the world, yet this has been treated as more of a warning rather than a real occurrence. The specific enforcement of the legislation may send message to the people regarding their lack of actions regarding the matter, especially when it comes to the dissemination of information that may be helpful for the outcome.             At the same time, exception may also bring some problems regarding the possibility of sustainable development that the country may have, especially in taking advantage of the knowledge that are given. While it has been given that Australia has several resources that can be protected, these knowledge that are continuously being discovered can be used to establish better protection and security for the environment while also establishing a way that they can continue to support the demands of the people. At the same time, the availability of information and new regulations that will control not only the environmental use but also the abuse of the resources may be helpful. This is not simply the question on whether these should be the decisions of other states within the agreements but they are all part of the decisions that the legislators have to decide on for the future of the country and—more importantly—the people. [1] Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. 2001, May 22. [on-line]; available from http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jsct/September2003/report.htm. [2] Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks. 2001, December 11, [on-line]; available from http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_fish_stocks.htm [3] Palmer, Geoffrey. 1992. New Ways to Make International Environmental Law. American Journal of International Law 86: 259-283. [4] Holland, K. M. (1996). “Introduction.” In Federalism and the Environment: Environmental Policymaking in Australia, Canada, and the United States, ed. Brian Galligan, Kenneth M. Holland, F. L. Morton, 3-16. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. [5] Redgewell, Catherine. n.d. Non-Compliance Procedures and the Climate Change Convention [on-line]; available from http://www.geic.or.jp/climgov/03.pdf [6] Saunders, Cheryl. 1996. The Constitutional Division of Powers with Respect to the Environment in Australia. In Federalism and the Environment: Environmental Policymaking in Australia, Canada, and the United States, ed. Brian Galligan, Kenneth M. Holland, F. L. Morton, 55-76. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. [7] “Australia” in Yearbook of International Environmental Law, 1998 ed. Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Effective non-compliance procedures have been more the exception rather than the rule in multilateral environment agreements

The international environmental laws that were produced in the 1992 Kyoto Protocol is one that continued to establish over th...

The Extreme Cold Winter

Dear Vic Fabe, Can you please send me the 6th entry story by 19 March. Thanks a lot!! The 6th entry story: social consequence of climate change, for example climate change made many American immigrate to Europe, also the extreme cold winter causing snow storm in China had destroyed most of their crops and deteriorating the problem of food shortage and hence, rising price in food,. And after 20 years, Hong Kong will never have winter again, or even i think there is energy substitution such as corn….so mainly focus on the social consequence that climate change bring to us. Also for the 6th bog style entry story, can you please tell the writer this time also focus on climate change, global warming. The writer already wrote about ‘the cause of climate change’,’ Kyoto protocol’, the most recent one i recieve is about the ‘IMP and Nick’s conference.’ Maybe this time can write social consequence of climate change, for example i read news that climate change made many American immigrates to Europe, also the extreme cold winter causing snow storm in China had destroyed most of their crops and deteriorating the problem of food shortage and hence, rising price in food,. And after 20 years, Hong Kong will never have winter again, or even i think there is energy substitution such as corn….so mainly focus on the social consequence that climate change bring to us. And you please tell the writer to write about 250-300 words as i mentioned in the first place, Jessica Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

The Extreme Cold Winter

Dear Vic Fabe, Can you please send me the 6th entry story by 19 March. Thanks a lot!! The 6th entry story: social consequence of climate ...

Sustainable Development and International Law

Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Sustainable Development, 2006a) However, different concepts have emerged on the manner of actualizing this definition. The particular concern that policy makers had over the application of sustainable development is the determination of the measure of what is sustainable. Since the late 1940s, consistent with the stabilization of the United Nations and fundamental rights, environmentalists and economists developed the idea that sustainable development involves the aggregate consideration of the ecological, economic, and social as well as the ethical aspects of reality in policy making and in practice. This led to the integration of eco-development in the programs of Third World countries. During the 1970s, the family of nations heightened its dedication to sustainable development so that in the Stockholm Conference, initial attempts were made to incorporate both environment and development issues in the international agenda. (Moffatt, 1995) In the succeeding conferences, developments in efforts for the actualization of sustainable development occurred, particularly the Earth Summit in Rio de Janiero in 1992 where agreements on forest protection, climate change and biodiversity were reached together with the establishment of twenty-seven guidelines to aid in the practice of sustainable development. (Bodansky, 1995)             The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development dubbed as Agenda 21 constituted a complete plan of action to be implemented on an international scale but permeates into national and local programs. In 1992, more than 178 states adopted Agenda 21 starting the pace for the achievement of sustainable development in an international scale. In 2002, the complete implementation of Agenda 21 and commitment to the Rio principles were affirmed in the World Summit on Sustainable Development in South Africa. (UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Sustainable Development, 2006b)             Agenda 21 comprise the most decisive and workable agreement on sustainable development because not only does it provide guidelines for practice but it also invokes action through the incorporation of sustainable development into international law binding upon the states that adopted the Rio agreement. (Sitarz, 1993; Keating, 1993) Chapter 39 of Agenda 21 covers international statutory instruments and mechanisms to assists states in the promotion of sustainable development in the national and local levels. Provisions of this chapter provides for the accommodation of differences in the condition of the different states such as the case of Third World countries so that it encourages state leaders to evaluate international laws on sustainable development and the manner that the application of these laws would be consistent with their particular situation. (UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Sustainable Development, 2006c)             Apart from the adoption of Agenda 21 by most states, there are other agreements that formed part of international law on sustainable development adopted by states during the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janiero. The Convention on Biological Diversity came into force in December 1993. This involves the commitment of states to balance sustainable development and economic development. Three main goals constitute the thrust of the convention, which are biological diversity conservation, sustainable use if biodiversity components, and fair and equitable sharing of benefits derived from genetic resources. (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2006) In 2000, members of the convention adopted the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety covering the issue on genetic modification in relation to the maintenance of biodiversity. (Anderson, 2002) The Framework Convention on Climate Change came into force in March 1994 with its Kyoto Protocol adoption in 1997. The Kyoto Protocol in an important portion on international law covering climate change because it provides for a system of compliance by states to cut-back on greenhouse gas emissions to prevent or at least delay the effects of global warming. (Chamber, 2001) It was only in 2005, that the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol was completed with the signature of states accounting for 55 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the world. However, one of the biggest greenhouse gas users, the United States failed   to ratify the protocol. (Klepper and Peterson, 2005) The Statement of Forest Principles was adopted in 1995 to cover the iussue of rapid deforestation, illegal logging and the depletion of other forest resources. (Humphreys, 1996) In 2001, the UN Economic and Social Council created the UN Forum on Forests with the goal of promoting “…the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests and to strengthen long-term political commitment to this end…” (UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Sustainable Development, 2006b)   Sustainable Development and the European Union (EU)             Sustainable development is deeply rooted in the development of the European Union due to the previous commitments of the different member states to international conventions addressing sustainable development as well as the common global issues of global warming and its various effects such as flooding and change in weather patterns that all EU members face. Sustainable development as a principle surrounding the creation of the EU is fitting because the achievement of this encompassing goal requires interstate cooperation and this is achieved through the EU venue. Sustainable development issues such as the limiting greenhouse gas emissions, maintaining biodiversity and preserving forest resources are best achieved through cooperation. (Baker et al., 1997; Baker, 1997)              The Treaty on European Union or the Maastricht Treaty 1992 led to the creation of the European Union. Part of the objectives of the European Union contained in the treaty is the implementation of sustainable development in its member states. Sustainable development is an underlying principle in the creation of the European Union so that its policies, strategies and actions consider the balance between economic, social and environmental factors [Figure 1].   As the venue for the European action to achieve sustainable development the EU showed its determination to implement sustainable development in compliance with international law when it set out to develop sustainable plans embodying the objectives of the EU and determine the various areas where sustainable development is to be implemented as well determine the various strategies of achieving sustainable development in the context of the particular economic, social and environmental situation of every EU member. (Baker et al., 1997) The European Union initially established its commitment to the achievement of sustainable development in mid-2001. It was during this time that the Gothenburg European Council approved the EU Sustainable Development Strategy. In 2002, the European Commission issued a communication covering the external element of sustainable development that was endorsed by Barcelona European Council. These comprised the complete EU Sustainable Development Plan. It was determined that the sustainable development strategy would be reviewed at the commencement in office of the Commissioner or every four years. In the 2005 review, it was determined that there is a need to adopt a ore comprehensive approach focusing on economic structural changes to achieve a production and consumption level that meets the objectives set for sustainable development. (Commission of the European Communities, 2005) The EU’s approach to sustainable development is expressed in four components. First is the broad vision determining what is sustainable, which is the mutually reinforcing status of economic, social and environmental factors. The strategy on sustainable development envisions the region as having a more prosperous and just society living the promise of clean, safe and healthy environment. Second is the improvement in the manner of creating policies to arrive at an informed policy decision-making through the development of clear and understandable policies explaining to the people about the goals, issues and the trade-offs involved in the policy. Third is the identification of trends proven as not sustainable such as climate change, energy use, public health threats, poverty, ageing societies, existing natural resource management strategies, and land use. Fourth is the integration of international goals to the EU sustainable development strategy in compliance with international law. (Commission of the European Communities, 2005) It is clear that the creation of the European Union is tied to sustainable development and the EU is pulling its efforts to live up to this principle as observed in the development and regular review of the sustainable development plan for Europe. As basis for the development of the sustainable development plan, environmental laws were enacted through various agreements. The Treaty of Amsterdam that became effective in 1999, provided for an encompassing perspective on sustainable development. In recognition of the fact that the achievement of the goals of sustainable development transcends borders led to the recognition of the European Union of its responsibility to look into the policies of the members of the European community to determine and address any incompatibilities with sustainable development. The Treaty of Amsterdam direct EU members to comply with the standards set for sustainable development. In 2001, the Treaty of Nice was enacted to provide a process for policy and decision-making of the EU members, covering a wide range of issues including environmental legislations, due to the recognition of the expansion of its membership and the rise of new issues. (Commission of the European Communities, 2005)   Sustainable Development and Future Environmental Laws               Sustainable development still has a future in building succeeding environmental laws because the concept is the most important guide for the development of legislations, policies and programs that integrates economic, social and environmental factors in decision-making and implementation. This is a timely concept especially during this period when the world is experiencing a vast array of the undeniable effects of the previous decades of environmental neglect. If the lack of consideration of environmental sustainability continues, the world is expected to deplete its irreplaceable natural resources in the next decades. No other concept expressed the concern for the environment in the context of actual conditions except sustainable development (Mirovitskaya and Ascher, 2001).             The concept of sustainable development comprises a significant foundation of environmental legislations. In international law, sustainable development has been enshrined in agreements such as Agenda 21 and other conventions so that removing the concept as the context for these legislations and future legislations would render the agreements indecisive and meaningless. In the case of the European Union, one of its founding principles is sustainable development so that this concept is expressed in its environmental legislations. If the concept were to be detached from future environmental legislations then the EU defeats its purpose of its existence as a cooperative union of states.   Bibliography       Anderson, T. (2002). ‘Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity: Trade liberalisation, the WTO and the environment’. Asia and Pacific Journal on Environmental Law, 7(1): 1-38.   Baker, S. (1997). The politics of sustainable development: theory, policy and practice within the European Union. London: Routledge   Baker, S., Kousis, M., Richardson, D. & Young, S. (1997). ‘The theory and practice of sustainable development in EU perspective. In S. Baker, M. Kousis, D. Richardson & S. Young.  The Politics of Sustainable Development:  Theory, Policy and Practice within the European Union. London: Routledge.   Bodansky, D.M. (1995). ‘International law and the protection of biological diversity’. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 28(4): 623-634.   Chambers, B. (ed.) (2001). Inter-Linkages: The Kyoto Protocol and the International Trade           and Investment Regimes. New York: United Nations University Press.   Convention on Biological Diversity (2006). Sustaining Life on Earth: How the Convention on Biological Diversity promotes nature and human well-being. Retrieved May 3, 2006, from http://www.biodiv.org/doc/publications/guide.asp.   Humphreys, D. (1996). Forest Politics: The Evolution of International Cooperation. London: Earthscan Publications.   Keating, M. (1993). Earth Summit’s Agenda for Change: A Plain Language Version of Agenda 21 and other Rio Agreements. Geneva: Centre for Our Common Future.   Klepper, G. & Peterson, S. (2005). ‘Trading Hot-Air. The Influence of Permit Allocation Rules, Market Power and the US Withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol’. Environmental and Resource Economics, 32(2): 205-228.   Mirovitskaya, N & Ascher, W.L. (eds.) (2001). Guide to Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.       Moffatt, I. (1995). Sustainable Development: Principles, Analysis and Policies. London: Parthenon Publishing Group.   Sitarz, D. (ed) (1993). Agenda 21: the earth summit strategy to save our planet. Boulder: Earth Press.   UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Sustainable Development (2006a). Sustainable Development: The UN System at Work. Retrieved May 3, 2006, from http://www.un.org/issues/m-susdev.html.   UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Sustainable Development (2006b). Agenda 21. Retrieved May 3, 2006, from http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/index.htm.   UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Sustainable Development (2006c). International Law. Retrieved May 3, 2006, http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/sdissues/intl_law/law.htm.   Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Sustainable Development and International Law

Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (UN Depa...

Non-Governmental Organizations

INTRODUCTION               This paper discusses the issue about non-governmental organisations (NGOs), specifically about the understanding towards them. It presents and discusses basic definitions and facts about NGOs and cites relevant examples that display their influences on public opinion and government policies. Different types of NGOs that stand for different issues have been around for years, trying to serve the people by being the medium that delivers the plea and messages to those who are in authority. Is this an advantage or disadvantage to the society? How much influence does NGOs have on public opinion and government decision-making? This paper, after defining an understanding on NGO, will also try to assess the level of their influences on both the public and the State.   What is an NGO?   According to Ball and Dunn (1995), an organization may be correctly labelled an NGO if it has four characteristics identified by The Commonwealth Foundation, a London-based NGO study group. An NGO should be: voluntary, independent; not-for-profit; and not self-serving in aims and related values (Ball and Dunn, 1995). An NGO can also be referred to as a Nonprofit or Not-for-profit Organisation, Independent Sector or the Third Sector, Philanthropic Sector or Charitable Organisation, Civil Society Organisation etc.    NGOs perform important roles in today’s society. The fact that they have been recognized by the UN as important contributes to their credibility and prestige. . Edwards (2000) stated that there is already a consensus among the donor community that a strong civil society is crucial to successful development performance. The UN recognizes this, and as Secretary General Kofi Annan have stated, “…In today’s world, we depend on each other” (UN Department of Public Information, 2003). The UN basically recognizes, however, that NGOs are the most helpful type of civil societies. He stated that “The extent to which NGOs are able to organize themselves around broad networks focusing on specific issues will have a bearing on the form and impact of their involvement in the work of the Organization” (Annan, 2004, p.3). Furthermore, Annan (2004) stated that civil societies are also key participants in peace-building, reconciliation and transitions to civilian administration. With all this appreciation of the UN on civil society, particularly NGOs, it is important to note that civil societies are not just NGOs but are much broader than that. With their emergence as being helpful in achieving a decent strong society, there is no doubt that their promotion is highly advisable.   According to Annan (2004), civil societies specifically NGOs still lack the capability to operate in their full strength in underdeveloped countries. The UN stated that the increasing participation of NGOs in intergovernmental bodies needs to be addressed. According to the UN, NGOs from developing countries are underrepresented. This is partly a result of the lack of resources of NGOs from developing countries to cover travel and accommodation costs. The UN noticed that level of attendance of NGO representatives from developing countries in standing United Nations meetings is low. This will be remedied by creating a single trust fund that supports the travel and accommodation of accredited NGOs. Accreditation of NGOs is also part of the partnership program of the UN with civil society, and being accredited means winning the support of the Organization.    The extent to which NGOs are able to organize themselves around broad networks focusing on specific issues will have a bearing on the form and impact of their involvement in the work of the UN. Carothers (1999) explained that NGOs play important, growing roles in developed and developing countries. They shape policy by exerting pressure on governments and by furnishing technical expertise to policy makers. They foster citizen participation and civic education. They provide leadership training for young people who want to engage in civic life but are uninterested in working through political parties. Furthermore, they promote many individual ideas that lead to peace promotion.   NGOs were deeply involved before and during the creation of the UN (Alger, 2002). Before the founding of the United Nations, NGOs led the charge in the Geneva conventions of 1864; multilateral labour conventions adopted in 1906, and the International Slavery Convention of 1926; all stemmed from the work of NGOs who infused the international community with a spirit of reform (Annan, 1998).   NGOs have long been held in high esteem particularly those that have been around for some time as well as those whose activities have borne fruit for the betterment of mankind. Examples are the GreenPeace movement which espouses protection and preservation of the natural planet earth through the conservation of natural resource programs, World Wildlife Fund which is similar to GreenPeace but focuses more on the wildlife as unwilling victim of humanity’s increasing civilization and industrialization, the Red Cross and Red Crescent which deal more with casualties of war at the varying stages of armed conflict: intermediation, caring for casualties during the war and post-war rehabilitation both for the warring factions as well as those who are disinterested but directly affected by the war.   Types of NGOs                 There are different types of NGOs by orientation. They are: charitable orientation; service orientation; participatory orientation; and empowering orientation (William, 1991). Charitable organizations are NGOs that focus on meeting the needs of the poor i.e. distribution of food and clothing, provision of housing, or relief activities on the victims of natural disasters. Service organizations, on the other hand, are those who provide people with health services, family planning lessons, or education services. Participatory groups are those NGOs who participate with local projects by providing cash, materials and other forms of contributions. Finally, empowering organizations focus more on educating the poor about the different social, political and economic factors that affect their lives (William, 1991).               NGOs also vary when it comes to level of operations. There are community-based organizations, city wide organizations, national NGOs and international NGOs (William, 1991).   NGO: a Type of Civil Society     An NGO is basically a type of civil society.  Janoski (1998) stated that civil society acts as the mediator between the citizen and the state. The model constructed by Uphoff and Krishna (2004) clearly illustrates this definition (see figure 1).                 Figure 1: Civil Society as a buffer between the state and the individuals     Uphoff and Krishna (2004) explained that this model is relevant but more of a rhetorical rather than an analytical model of civil society, and it have led to premature closure and simplification of the civil society concept. But then again, this simplified interpretation offers relevant explanation on how civil society connects the state and the individuals. Individuals of a particular society have but a small voice when they try to communicate and reason with the government alone. This lack of organizational support can lead to the point that most individual’s pleas and ideas are ignored. But through civil society, individuals can have a representative of their pleas or a medium to make their voices heard by the state.   Basically, there are NGOs that focuses on peace and cooperation missions which can communicate and negotiate the ideals of the public similar to theirs to the state. For instance, the Mine Ban Treaty implemented in 1999 was caused by NGOs. According to Rutherford (2000), the NGOs utilized the Internet as a medium to communicate with both the citizens and the government. International governments were convinced of signing such treaty because of the creation of a wide-ranging coalition against land mines with wide ethnic, geographical, organizational and religious diversity. Land mines can be a disruption of peace as it claims lives intentionally or unintentionally. But with the help of civil society, land mines have been banned, making peace won over disruption.   In addition, civil society also contributes to the empowerment of democracy. According to Carothers (1999), an active, diverse civil society discipline the state, ensure that citizens’ interests are taken seriously, and foster greater civic and political participation. He cited from Putnam that a weak civil society leads to a lack of “civic engagement” and “social trust.”   The NGO Influence               It can be said that NGOs today are already established groups that are recognized by the State. NGOs have developed their reputation as groups that have no other concern but the welfare of the citizens, through addressing the different issues that bothers or disrupts the order within the society. As Clark (1995) stated: “The economic, informational and intellectual resources of NGOs have garnered them enough expertise and influence to assume authority in matters that, traditionally, have been solely within the purview of state administration and responsibility”. Clark (1995) argued that the influence of NGOs grew mainly because of their great difference from the State. The first rationale is that compared to the State that performs many functions, with national security as a top priority, NGOs focus on single issues or sets of issues to the exclusion of others. Further, NGOs commit themselves to causes that states’ priorities frequently subordinate to other foreign policy interests or ignore entirely. Finally, NGOs’ scope is narrower and their membership is less ideologically diverse than the issues and citizenry to which states are accounted to (Clark, 1995).               In the study conducted by Corell and Betsill (2001), it was found that environmental NGOs played a huge role in the Kyoto Protocol. It was concluded that those ENGOs that participated in the protocol convinced United States Vice-President Al Gore to attend the convention, and convinced the EU to hold out reduction targets. Also, NGOs played an influential role in the Desertification Convention. It pushed the financial mechanism in the convention, such as the national diversification funds (Corell and Betsill, 2001). NGOs also helped emphasized theirs and local community participation (Corell and Betsill, 2001). However, not all people warmly welcome the strong influence of NGOs. Singleton et al (2000) cited from a magazine editorial that NGOs are strong enough to influence the United Nations, and are in need to be regulated. It stated that NGOs have elevated themselves into a kind of additional consistency of national and international governance that demands all kinds of regulations (Singleton et al, 2000). The editorial strongly suggested the need to regulate the NGOs that are notorious of characteristics such as being unrepresentative, undemocratic and are only concerned with their own personal agenda (Singleton et al, 2000).   Think Tanks behind NGOs                 Another way to explain the strong influence of NGOs on public opinion and government policies is the participation of Think Tanks behind them. Think Tanks are basically non-profit research organizations, which engage in public policy analysis and research, and often advocate solutions. Majority of them are oriented to the political ‘right’. Their approach is by checking the staff list and the board of governors. Further, they express their ideas through newspapers and articles (Singleton et al, 2000).               One example of Think Tanks in Australia is the Samuel Griffith Society, an organization with the aim to: defend the existing Australian constitution; oppose further government centralization of power; redress the balance of power in favor of the States; defend the Parliament against the Executive; and defend the Judiciary (Singleton et al, 2000).             On another hand, in terms of influencing public opinion, an example of a Think Tank is the Evatt Foundations. It focuses on promoting ideals of labor movement, such as: equality, participation, human right, and social justice (Singleton et al, 2000).   The Different NGO Approaches                 NGOs can be considered as interest groups, which means groups that are protecting a specific interest, e.g. labor wage, the environment, etc. Interest groups have three types – they are: promotional groups; sectional groups; and hybrid groups (Singleton et al, 2000). Promotional groups promote a cause that they think everyone should favor. On the other hand, sectional groups defend the interests of particular groups or sections within the community. Finally, hybrid groups display aspects of both promotional and sectional groups (Singleton et al, 2000).               Groups such as the NGOs have different strategies. They include: publicity activities such as meetings, advertisements, letter to the editors, interviews on television and radio; campaigning in elections in support of the group’s policies; negotiating with other groups or building alliance; attracting members and funds; lobbying and bureaucracy; research and analysis; lobbying ministers; lobbying ministerial staff; hiring professional lobbyists; and resorting into court actions; and the use of mass media (Singleton et al, 2000).     Which Strategy is better?                 All interest organization strategies mentioned above have different purposes and level of effectiveness. For instance, publicity activities may be effective if the organization plays the right cards. That is, the effectiveness of this approach may depend only on the popularity of the type of media that the organization will use for publicity. The question is how many people can the medium reach, or how much volume does the medium distribute? Another concern in this type of approach is how effective the contents of the publicity campaign will be. If for instance, the representative who will participate in this publicity is not effective in clearly describing the demands or goals of their organization, then there will be a question of effectiveness – on how well their demands gained sympathy from targeted audience.               Another approach mentioned earlier is the strategy of campaigning in elections. This approach may work if the politician that the organization supports wins the election because their demands will be recognized. However, if the politician they support loses, then there will be less chances of getting their demands noticed. This move can be very risky since it’s a win-lose situation for the NGO.               The means of negotiating or building alliances with other groups is another strategy that interest groups like NGOs use. This approach may be effective as it may create a solid foundation for the organization. Networking may also help the organization learn new things from their partners or access areas that were inaccessible before. However, this may also be a disadvantage because it can brew competition from within the network. It can also limit the operation of the group to the network’s interests or policies.               Attracting members and generating funds is another strategy, basically to keep up the operation of the organization. Members can be used as mediums to preach the aims of the organization, while the funds can be used to produce new campaigns. However, the problem here is making sure that the members are real serious of joining the organization, or are really motivated to join because they fight for a similar cause. Some people join organizations for conformity and may not essentially contribute to the organization’s cause.               Lobbying is another form of strategy that NGOs or interest groups use. Lobbying is basically a means to persuade someone or a group that has more position power to participate or support the cause of the interest group. Lobbying ministers or ministerial staff may help the organization in getting its concerns noticed. However, there is a need here to know which lobbying approach should be used. That is why; there are some NGOs who hire professional lobbyist, whom mostly are former politicians. According to the Sydney Morning Herald (2002), an interest group hiring o former top public servant acquires significant advantages because such senior figures know how the system works and how they work it. However, the disadvantage of this is that hiring a former public servant may lead to government scrutiny. This may also introduce concepts of corruption within the NGO, given if the public servant they hired used to be a corrupt one.               Research and analysis is another NGO strategy that can either be effective or not. As mentioned, there are NGOs being led by Think Tanks that purely focus on research and analysis, and present their findings on the government. However, while this strategy may be a good way to convince the public or the government about a particular type of problem, it may also be a problem since most research findings are subjected into scrutiny. Questions about the validity of the research may arise, and as a result, this may prevent the government or the public from taking any action about the particular issue. Furthermore, counter-research on the research undertaken by the organization may also serve as a problem as there will be ambiguity regarding which results are correct or more valid.               Court action is another strategy that may work in favor for the organization. However, due to the fact the court actions are complex and time consuming, such strategy may be a disadvantage to the organization.               Finally, a strategy that NGOs can use is the utilization of mass media. The media may have the greatest advantage above all of the strategies mentioned because of it provide the widest reach ever. Through the use of television, using commercials or shows, billions of audience around the world will be able to watch the campaigns. Radios and newspapers, on the other hand, may also reach people on the national level. On the other hand, the use of Internet may reach a wider scope of audience, but mostly people who are internet savvy. However, the shortfall of this approach is it is too expensive and may have a short lifespan.   The Issue of NGO Credibility                 In today’s modern world of information bliss and post-cold war setting, NGOs are playing a critical role in ensuring that the voices of the civil societies are being heard by those who are in the governmental position. For years, NGOs have fought to alleviate poverty, protect human rights, preserve the environment, and provide relief worldwide. However, there are some questions that still need answers that shade heavily the credibility of NGOs. The issue of NGO credibility basically scopes questions such as: how many NGOs actually exist, and what are their agendas? Who runs these groups? Who funds them? And, perhaps most significantly, to whom are NGOs accountable, and how and what influence do they actually have on world politics? (McGann and Johnstone, 2005).               The growth of international funding is one of the issues that greatly relates with the questionable status of NGOs. McGann and Johnstone (2005) pointed out that foreign funding can raise question to NGOs credibility because it can lead to doubt on whether the supported NGOs are being dictated by the donors, specifically directing their goals for personal agendas. The danger here is that NGOs can be exploited through the dictates of these financial providers.               The issue of funding sources contributes to the development of NGOs’ poor public image. The lack of clear financial management rules shadows the credibility of the NGOs, as they lead to money-laundering acts, as well as being used by politicians for their own campaigns or political gains.               Another issue of credibility for NGOs is the question of accountability. NGOs are often not transparent enough for the private sectors and governments to trust. Although it was proven that they can expose accountability issues of government departments or corporations, they themselves have problems of accountability (McGann and Johnstone, 2005).               NGOs have grown into a large scale sub-industry that rivals the very government institutions or departments they attack and this fact subjects them to competition and the laws of competition (Jordan, 2005). Governments are starting to question the accountability of NGOs because they feel threatened and they feel that there is a need to assess the status of their critics as well – if they are following the standards of transparency and accountability, the quality of services and products they donate, and many others. Because NGOs are subjected to scrutiny, many complex issues within their organizations are being discovered. For example, NGO Monitor.org (2006) has pointed out a particular funding issue in Finland between financial supporters and NGOs. The key background of the issue is that the Ministry for Foreign Affairs Development Cooperation (here after FDC) of the Finnish Government distributes governmental funds for the “promotion of global securityreduction of widespread poverty [and the] promotion of human rights and democracy” in developing countries (NGO Monitor, 2006). However:”… there are a number of organizations who receive money from Finland whose work contradicts the official goals of Finnish development cooperation. Such NGOs also contribute to misinformation and hostile and rejectionist attitudes towards the state of Israel, among the international media, diplomatic and development-organization communities”.               Those who question the credibility of NGOs in terms of accountability also fear the continuous growth of their influence over international bodies. Steinberg (2006) of NGO Monitor stated: “The hijacking of the Durban anti-racism conference in 2001 by anti-Israel NGOs illustrated the dangers of politically motivated humanitarian groups that derive credibility simply on the basis of mission statements promoting “universal human rights.”               Such examples demonstrate that there is a mixed opinion on NGOs, on whether or not they contribute to the welfare of the society. But in order to understand, NGOs must be subjected to scrutiny the same way that they scrutinize the operations of other organizations. However, NGOs can improve their credibility by being transparent either through releasing annual reports of costs, or adopting modern financial management approaches. NGOs should answer the questions ‘for whom’ they are accountable to, and ‘for what’ purpose or purposes (Jordan, 2005). Jordan (2005) suggested that NGOs should learn to assess the motives behind their donors to allow the opportunity for organizational learning. If the donor is too stringent to undergo assessment, then that donor may not be too sincere or may have other agendas aside from helping or donating. The academic community should also take responsibility in reviewing and assessing such an issue. NGOs should not be tolerated with everything because they are also organizations that should follow the right standards, specifically in terms of transparency and limitations.   Conclusion               This paper concludes that hybrid groups, regardless of NGO type, that use multi-strategies in campaigns may have the edge over the other groups. The reason for this is because they have more flexibility than the others, more agile, and has more option when pushing support for their campaign. Both promotions and sectional approaches are important for campaigns because it gathers more sympathy from public and governments that are concerned with the issue. It will show the image that the organization is knowledgeable about the interest that it pushes.               Additionally, an organization can be more successful in influencing public opinion or government policies if it utilizes a wide range of campaigns on different types of media, such as television, radio, newspaper and internet. However, because only large international NGOs can afford such budgets, it is concluded in this paper that International NGOs that have promotional and sectional approaches, and utilizes mass media campaigns are the most influential NGOs. Some examples of these NGOs are the Red Cross and the World Wildlife Fund for Nature. These NGOs have the widest reach of audience, has the most influential lobbyists, and uses other means of strategies that may further expose their campaigns. It is concluded in this paper that budget is important for an NGO since this will allow the utilization of mass media campaigns – an imperative to influence more people and has more positioning power when suggesting policy changes to the government.               However, the irony behind the importance of budget for NGOs is that it blends with the issue of transparency and accountability. On the one hand, generating budget or soliciting donations from various sources may contribute greatly to the campaigns of the NGOs, making them reach as many people as possible around the world. On the other hand, funding sources, depending on how large the amount they contribute, may dictate the very operation of the NGOs, or may have power over control. A budget that is also poorly financially managed may have an adverse effect on the very core of the organization since problems such as corruption or money-laundering schemes may arise. That is why NGOs should resort to programs that will build up their transparency to regain the trusts of the State and their critics. NGOs should build up financial management programs and release reports of their operations for transparency.     Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Non-Governmental Organizations

INTRODUCTION This paper discusses the issue about non-governmental organisations (NGOs), specifically about the understan...