Internal
Links

Top
Review Notes on  Env Soc:  Participants in the Envl Debate
External
Links
Link
 Social Change  
Link
       Collective Behavior  
Link
       Social Movements  
Link
       The New Social Movements    ( NSMs )  
Link
       Professional Social Mvmts Orgs      ( SMOs )  
Link
       Why the Middle & Working Classes have Not Organized  
Link
 Participants in the Envl Debate   
Link
       Domhoff on Key Interest Groups  
Link
         Indlists in the Envl Debate  
Link
          Indlist Orgs & Envl Opposition Grps  
Link
         The General Public & the Envl Debate  
Link
         Envl Racism   
Link
         Recreationists & the Envl Debate  
Link
          Tourism & Econ Dev  
Link
          Rec Orgs  
Link
         Envlists & the Envl Debate  
Link
          Envl Orgs  
Link
          Intl Envl Orgs  
Link
          Critique of the Envl Mvmt  
Link
          Envlism as a Soc Mvmt  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Social Change
External
Links
  SOCIAL CHANGE IS THE ALTERATION OF BEHAVIOR PATTERNS, SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS, INSTITUTIONS, & SOCIAL STRUCTURE OVER TIME   
 
 Soc change is the transformation of culture & social institutions over time that is reflected in the life patterns of individuals   
  Soc change, aka social development, is a general term which refers to a change in the nature, the social institutions, the social behavior or the social relations of a society, community of people, or other social structures   
  Soc change is any event or action that affects a group of individuals that have shared values or characteristics & the acts of advocacy for the cause of changing society in a normative way  
  Soc change is the alteration in the underlying structure of a social object or situation over a period of time  
  THERE IS PERVASIVE SOCIAL CHANGE; IN THE PAST, SOME SOCIETIES WERE STABLE / UNCHANGING FOR CENTURIES; TODAY CHANGE IS THE NORM & IT IS INCREASING IN PACE 
 
  In the contemporary world, everyone has experienced change, & people expect more, rapid change in the future 
 
  It must be remembered that rapid soc change is not the norm throughout history in that in many eras, esp the Mid Ages in Euro, or the Chinese Dynasties from about 1 AD to the 1700s, life changed little for the common family   
  Understanding soc change means understanding the degree of any modification in the basic instits during a specific period as well as an understanding of what remains stable
 
  Soc scientists note that soc change occurs in different soc structures at different rates 
 
  In our rapidly changing world, there are continuities from the long distant past such as major religious systems, gender / pairing customs such as monogamy, broad soc instit such as the military, etc. 
 
  The concept of cultural lag, as developed by conflict theorists, notes that cultures inevitably change at different rates, w/ some lagging behind others
 
 
 Soc change encompasses everything from revolution & paradigm shifts, to narrow changes such as a particular cause w/in small town govt 
 
 
 EARLY THEORIES OF SOCIAL CHANGE WERE OFTEN CRITICAL OF IT & THOSE WHO FOMENTED IT 
 
 
 Theories of soc change examine the success or failure of different political systems, globalization, democratization, development & econ growth
 
 
 Some soc changes that are beneficial to society, while others may result in negative side effects or consequences that undermine or eliminate existing ways of life that are considered positive
 
 
 One of the earliest, albeit non scientific, beliefs about social change the idea of decline or degeneration, or, in religious terms, the fall from an original state of grace, connected w/ theology
 
 
 Ancient philosophers developed the idea that there was little soc change & instead 'history' was comprised largely of cyclical change, a pattern of subsequent & recurring phases of growth & decline, & the social cycles  
 
 The idea of cyclical change persists into the modern era
 
  CONTEMPORARY THEORIES OF SOCIAL CHANGE RECOGNIZE IT AS A NEW, COMPLEX, SOCIAL PHENOMENON THAT IS CENTRAL TO MODERN SOCIETY   
  Beginning in the late mid age, the idea of continuous social progress was recognized   
 
 While there are many important theory of social change, the two approached of social evolution & historical materialism are the predominant theories 
 
 
 Social evolution is a gradual process of social change whereby a society develops, increases in complexity, & offers it members a better quality of life 
 
 
 Soc evol also tries to relate biological & soc change 
 
  See Also:  Social Evolution  
  Evolutionary theories including social Darwinism
 
  See Also:  Social Darwinism 
 
 
 Historical materialism holds that soc changes comes about by changes in the material env & that the most imp aspect of that change in relation to changes in society are the changes in the mode of production & class structure
 
 
 Marxists Historical Analysis   
 
 Embedded in almost all theories of soc change is the role of tech
 
  The wide adoption of a new tech leads to imbalance in the econ relationship btwn econ agents.   
  Tech changes in econ systems in turn leads to changes in the social balance of power, therefore leading to social change  
  Historical precedent shows that major social changes have taken place during "cusp" periods, defined by changing relations among human formations, nature, & technology  
 
 Among many forms of creating social change are theater for social change, direct action, protesting, advocacy, community organizing, community practice, revolution, & political activism
 
  Other important theorists of soc change include Weber, Parsons & many others  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Collective Behavior
External
Links
  -  Video:  History Channel on the Civil Rights Mvmt:  Crossing the Bridge          44 minutes
Link
  -  Video:  Woodstock
Link
  -  Video:  Jena 6.   Sept. 20, 2007
Link
  -  Video:  GM UAW Strike.   Sept. 24, 2007
Link
  -  Video:  Protests in Myanmar.   Sept. 24, 2007
Link
  -  Video:  Waco:  The Rules of Engagement.  April 19, 1993
Link
 
 -  Project:  Collective Behavior
Link
  INTRODUCTION
Our task will be
1.  Explain how people come to transcend, bypass, or subvert established institutional patterns & structures
2.  Explain CB w/ respect to attitudes: does CB form attitudes or vice versa?
3.  Explain the "collective" in CB		  
 
 Collective Behavior is one type of Social Change
 
 
 For Locher, collective behavior is any event during which a group of people engage in unusual behavior, i.e., a "group" form of deviance
 
 
 Review:  Human Formations:  group vs. an aggregate  
 
 For Farley, collective behavior is large numbers of people acting together in an extraordinary situation, in which the usual norms governing behavior do not apply
 
 
 For Macionis, collective behavior is action, thoughts, & emotions that involve large numbers of people & that do not conform to established social norms
 
 
 For Smelser, collective behavior is the relatively spontaneous & unstructured behavior of a group of people who are reacting to a common influence in an ambiguous situation
 
  For Turner & Killian, collective behavior is those forms of social behavior in which usual conventions cease to guide social action  & people collectively transcend, bypass, or subvert established institutional patterns & structures  
  Collective behavior is large numbers of people acting together, i.e. a collectivity, but not necessarily in same locale, w/ similar thoughts & emotions & not conforming to established social norms to achieve relatively common objectives, which may be action oriented, or thought or emotion oriented  
  Collective behavior is a term in sociology that refers to how people act in crowds & other large, relatively unorganized groups  
  The various types of collective behavior include fads, panics, & riots.  Collective behavior often arises in situations that stimulate people's emotions  
  Situations which may lead to collective behavior include sporting events, protest demonstrations, & disasters such as floods & fires  
  For a social action to be labeled as collective behavior it must be a social processes or event which do not reflect existing social structure (laws, conventions, & institutions), but which emerge in a "spontaneous" way which is to say, standard sociological, psychological, political, etc. explanations are inadequate  
 
 COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR EXAMPLES: 
 
 
 THE CRUSADES
1096  Pope Urban II
Everybody wanted to go... to where they didn't really know.
Land values dropped.
Only cowards remained.
 
 
 During the Selma March, 
- many followed ML King into the streets & jails
- the goals were not as simple & noble as the leaders represented them to be
- the leaders were both devout men of God seeking to overcome evil as well as social mvmt pragmatists
- only a few were cynical power mongers who were successfully marginalized by the primary leaders
- the civil rights mvmt accomplished a social revolution & altered history
 
 
 A bizarre form of collective behavior, St. Vitus’ Waltz, aka the Dancing Disease,  was caused by viral encephalitis which caused brain fever, affecting balance & emotion, giving people the feeling of being in love
 
  Some examples of collective behavior are a religious revival, a panic in a burning theater, an outbreak of peace symbol painting, a change in popular preferences in fashion, any revolution, a sudden widespread interest in body piercing, etc.  
  ROBERT E. PARK  
 
 Robert E. Park is credited as the founder of the field of collective behavior & is credited w/ the first use of the term
 
  Park believed movements such as the Crusades, the Civil Right Mvmt, etc. played a central role in social change, i.e., history  
  Much collective behavior is impulsive, unplanned, & brief & thus, it differs from the more predictable, longer lasting actions of such organized groups as school classes, teams, & social clubs  
  Some types of collective behavior fit into organized social frameworks such as an organized political party or soc mvmt which use mass demonstrations as a device in seeking social change  
  Before the 1900's, scientists knew little about the forces at work in collective behavior, but during the 1890's, Gustave Le Bon, a French physician & social scientist, made one of the first psychological studies of crowds  
  The American sociologists Robert E. Park & Ernest W. Burgess introduced the term collective behavior in their book, Introduction to the Science of Sociology (1921)  
  EARLY VIEWS ON COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR  
 
 Collective behavior was originally called "mob behavior" or "mass hysteria" because it was once believed that people lost their ability to reason
 
 
 Most collective behavior is non-violent, though originally it was often mislabeled, assumed to be, violent
 
  LeBon, a frightened aristocrat, interpreted the crowds of the Fr Rev as irrational reversions to animal emotion, & infers from this that such reversion is characteristic of crowds in general   
  Freud expressed a similar view of the maddening crowd in his Group Psychology & the Analysis of the Ego (1922), but modern CB addresses other types of crowd behavior  
  COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR IS NON ROUTINE  
 
 Collective behavior today is still defined as being deviant, unusual, etc. but it often evolves into acceptable behavior
 
  Collective behavior often becomes "routinized" & it may even become "institutionalized"  
 
 Once collective behavior becomes routine, it ceases to be collective behavior  
 
 Collective behavior must always be considered in the context of social norms, including folkways, mores, rules, laws  
  As the character of the more amorphous ( changing, unformed ) norms change, so does the character of collective behavior  
  The "deviance" of collective behavior must not be a value judgment of "bad, evil, etc."  since deviance only denotes behavior that is outside of accepted social norms  
  Even a majority of people can be deviant, in that deviance is not defined by majority rule, but by power  
  See Also:  Deviance  
  THE CATEGORIZATION OF COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR  
  Early on in CB theory, i.e. in the 1800s, theorists noted the existence of crowd behavior that exhibited significantly different qualities from other forms of behavior known to social scientists.  
  Gustave LeBon, a frightened aristocrat, interpreted the crowds of the French Revolution as irrational reversions to animal emotion  
  In the 1900s, at the U of Chicago, Robert Park & Herbert Blumer saw crowds as emotional, but as capable of any emotion, not only the negative ones of anger & fear  
  Social scientists now recognize that there are both compact & diffuse crowds  
  Compact crowds are those whose participants are assembled in one place while diffuse crowds are those in in which the participants are not assembled in one place  
  Turner & Killian's examples of diffuse crowds include stock market booms, panics about sexual perils, "Red scares" & more  
  Some psychologists have suggested that there are three fundamental human emotions, fear, joy, & anger  
  Smelser & others have proposed three corresponding forms of the crowd, including the panic, the craze & the hostile outburst, which today is usually called a riot  
  In the panic, fear is the dominant emotion; in the craze, joy is the dominant emotion; in the riot, anger is the dominant emotion  
  Park develop the categories of the public & the mass to distinguish btwn diffuse crowds concerned w/ issues or events from diffuse crowds concerned w/ mass media issues or events  
  For Park, the public expresses a common emotion or response to various issues as a result of exposure to conversation, & thus every issue has a public  
  For Park, the masses, or a mass, expresses a common emotion or response not as a result of conversation, but as a result of exposure to a mass media event whether it might be a TV report or just the diffuse knowledge that a widespread action is occurring  
  Blumer recognized the final major form of CB in the soc mvmts which are typically distinguished from a crowd, a public or a mass by the fact that they typically have a structure & persistence  
 
 Because the field of CB is relatively, new the broad categories of crowds, publics, masses, & social mvmts are frequently re-categorized into other theoretical frameworks in order to highlight various qualities or theories of action
 
 
 There are EIGHT basic types of collective behavior examined by social scientists today, including:
1.  Crowd Behavior
     a.  Mass Suicides
     b.  Mob Violence
     c.  Riots
2.  Non Consumer Fashions & Fads
3.  Consumer Collective Behavior
     a. Fashions 
     b. Fads
     c.  Crazes
     d.  Panics
4.  Rumors
5.  Public Opinion
6.  Mass Hysteria
     a.  Physical
     b.  Sightings & Miracles
7.  Terrorism
8.  Soc Mvmts
 
 
 Collective behavior occurs in so many forms that social scientists have reached few conclusions about its origins, development, & consequences
 
 
 Some investigators believe the pace of modern life & the growth of mass communications have increased the amount of collective behavior
 
  COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR, ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & INSTITUTIONAL BEHAVIOR  
  While collective, orgl, & institutional behaviors have some common characteristics, & often overlap in practice, they are often distinct fields of inquiry  
 
 Routine or institutionalized social behavior, including that carried out by any of the 10 social institutions (family, religion, politics, etc.), such as war, econ activity, family activity, media activity, political activity etc. is not collective behavior
 
  Many types of behavior are so common as to be regularized or institutionalized by society  
  Park was one of the first social scientists to expand the realm of collective behavior beyond that of the crowd, recognizing the public itself as an important agent of social change  
  For Park, many social changes begin w/ slow, cumulative shifts in public opinion, which end the old social patterns, & begin the new social patterns  
  Herbert Blumer was Park's student, & he expanded the actors of collective behavior beyond the crowd to include the collectivities of soc mvmts & the public  
  For Blumer the FOUR actors or collectivities of collective behavior include
1.  the crowd
2.  the mass
3.  soc mvmts
4.  the public		  
  Orgl beh is not considered to be collective behavior & generally includes groups that are governed by established rules or procedures which have the force of tradition behind them  
  In contrast to collectivities, org behavior often is governed by rules or laws such as Robert's Rule of Order or the rules of a bureaucracy  
  Collectivities are not guided in a straightforward fashion by the culture, norms, ideology, etc. of the society  
  Collectivities are informal in that they lack defined meanings, goals, procedures  
  Institutional behavior is not considered to be collective behavior but generally is less organized than org behavior  
  Institutional Behavior
Family
Play
Religion
School
Work		  
  Institutional behavior is guided by the culture of the larger society  
  CONTINUITY IN BEHAVIOR FOR CHANGE & SOCIAL CHANGE  
  There is a continuum of behavior that ranges from individual behavior, to small group behavior, collective behavior, orgl beh, institutional behavior, etc.  
  Weller & Quarantelli propose a typology that ranges from "normal" or routine behavior to new behavior or social change  
  1.  Normal behavior generally occurs in orgs or institutions by well established social actors who follow well established norms  
  2.  Non routine normal behavior occurs when normal social relations endure but norms emerge as occurs w/ hospital staff in a disaster  where old actors establish relatively new norms  
  3. Emergent, routine social behavior occurs when a new collectivity emerges & follows conventional norms  
  An example of emergent, routine social behavior w/ a new collectivity can be seen in the historically recent rise of sports fans who are following the old norms of watching sports, but are emergent in the sense that they are a mass mvmt which is generating new attention & a new relationship w/ other institutions & actors  
  4.  Social change or new behavior occurs when there are emergent norms, actors & social relationships as when a new collectivity acts in new, unique ways establishing new norms in the process  
  An example of emergent norms, actors, & social relationships can be seen in the Crusades or the civil rights mvmt  
  For Blumer, social change is normal, as normal as the established social order in the sense that it is always occurring, but it is not normal in the sense that it occurs outside of the norms of society  
  Social change is abnormal, in that it challenges, confronts or in some manner causes disruption in the established social order   
  For Blumer a soc mvmt:  "... takes on the character of a society," developing a culture, a soc org, a new scheme of life  
  For Blumer a soc mvmts were not necessarily under the influence of custom, tradition, conventions, rules or institutional regulations   
  For Blumer the examination of collective behavior is concerned w/ the way in which the social order comes into existence  
  Collective behavior is "extra institutional" in that it is outside of everyday social behavior which always takes place in one of the ten social institutions  
  At first CB was considered the opposite of institutional behavior (IB).   
  IB may be defined as people governed by norms, folkways, mores, & laws  
  RATIONAL & NON RATIONAL MOTIVATIONS IN CB
 
  As the study of CB developed, social scientists came to understand that people cast aside norms & acted on emotion or suggestibility or unsocialized impulses as opposed to the standard norms of IB  
  Early in the study of CB, some social scientists stressed rational calculation  
  Early in the study of CB, some social scientists proposed that CB took place under the governance of emergent norms  
  Today, some social scientists propose that CB occurs because individuals find solidarity of voice for an amorphous norm, & develop a shared definition of right & wrong  
  People riot, etc. because they find a new definition of right & wrong  
  Emergent norms may include the redefinition of right & wrong as seen when the public became convinced that segregation was wrong  
  Perhaps the simplest case of CB is permissiveness, where actors see wrong behavior as permissible under the circumstances  
  Only in the case of looting do people come to accept the logic that they are taking what is rightfully theirs, & yet opportunities to steal always exist  
  Under normal, non looting conditions the opportunity to steal exists, but norms are not redefined to make it acceptable  
  Passengers on the Titanic defined panic as unacceptable & defined a sense of necessity of heroic behavior  
 
 More complex CB requires emergent norms that are permissible & obligatory as in the case of war, the environment, etc.
 
 
 People come to act collectively when the conditions or event are sufficiently outside the range of ordinary happenings so that people turn to others for help & support in interpreting & responding
 
 
 People come to act collectively when there is a ready availability of pre-existing social groups that act collectively outside of the norm
 
 
 People come to act collectively because people tend to form ad hoc groups on basis of some recognizable informal, or minimal grouping
 
 
 CB is distinctive from other types of soc beh because it requires more complex decision making & communications than individual behavior because of the necessity of a complex division of labor & coordination of labor
 
 
 CB is distinctive from other types of social behavior because the use of pre-existing communication networks such as in the community, or the mass media is essential
 
 
 CB is distinctive from other types of social behavior because problems of communication & coordination, etc. are much greater for sustained than for transitory action
 
  EXPLANATIONS OF COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR  
  1.  Contagion theory focuses on special psychological mechanisms including moods, attitudes, communications  
  2.  The emergent norm perspective focuses on emergent definition of the situation, how actors create meaning & rules  
  3.  Value added theory integrates functional theory into an analysis of collective behavior & assumes that col beh is functional / useful for society  
  4. The assembly sociocybernetic symbolic interactionist / behaviorist (AS-SIB) holds that behavior converges because of the common meaningful interpretations or instructions created by participants & other  
  5.  Individualist theories assume that collective behavior comes from w/in the individual & sees individual motivations as the key to understanding why collective behavior occurs  
  6.  Convergence theory focuses on characteristics & predispositions which individuals bring to the situation  
Link
 Figure  on a Model of Collective Behavior by Turner & Killian
 
  A Model of Collective Behavior demonstrates that precipitating incidents justify the emergence of a norm which justifies extra institutional action, i.e., outside of the normal channels & that a precipitating incidents justify or stimulate the interaction of pre-existing groups or ad hoc formations give pre-existing conditions of feasibility & timeliness  

 
Top
  
Figure on a Model of Collective Behavior by Turner & Killian

A Model of Collective Behavior demonstrates that Precipitating incidents justify the emergence of a norm which justifies extra institutional action, i.e., outside of the normal channels & that a precipitating incidents justify or stimulate the interaction of pre-existing groups or ad hoc formations give pre-existing conditions of feasibility & timeliness

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Social Movements
External
Links
  -  Supplement:  Video:  Social Mvmts
Link
  -  Video:  Living Wage:  The Insider Story:  UVa, 2006        3:07 minutes
Link
  -  Video:  Living Wage:  The Arrests:  UVa, 2006      27 sec
Link
  -  Video:  The US vs. John Lennon          1 hr 36 min
Link
  DEFINITIONS   
  A social movement is a large number of people acting together on behalf of some objective or idea
 
  A soc mvmt usually involves use of non institutionalized means such as marches, protests, rallies, boycotts, etc., to support or oppose some social change
 
  A defining characteristic of a soc mvmt is that it involves substantial numbers of people for an extended period of time
 
  A soc mvmt is a group of people who organize in an attempt to encourage or resist some kind of social change  
  CHARACTERISTICS OF A SOC MVMT  
  A soc mvmt is a group of people who have no political power who join together in order to acquire some  
  People in a soc mvmt hope to influence their community or their society by joining together  
 
 A soc mvmt has an agenda that it seeks to promote
 
 
 Generally, the agenda of a soc mvmt is contained w/in a larger ideology, which is a  world view (a set of beliefs & values) that it seeks to promote
 
  The success of a soc mvmt depends on its ability to convince participants & general public of the merits of its objectives
 
  A soc mvmt has large scale membership, a promotional character, & a sophisticated administrative process whose structure varies as the soc mvmt develops
 
  For many social theorists, social change & soc mvmt are part of a historic, dialectical & mutually reinforcing relationship
 
  Redcliff & Benton demonstrate that there are FOUR broad perspectives to the examination of soc mvmts, including:  1.  the descriptive approach, 2.  the historical approach,  3.  systematic classification,  4.  the comparison of soc mvmts & interest or pressure groups  
  1.  The DESCRIPTIVE APPROACH, though not founded on post modernism, is post modernist in its view that there is no consistent logic that captures all the qualities of soc mvmts  
  Because there is no consistent logic, analysts should rely on general description therefore we must rely on a general description  
  For Yearly there is no categorization that adequately describes Soc Mvmts & we must rely on description & consensus as to what is a SM & what is not  
  Most collective behavior theorist consider soc mvmts to be a type of collective behavior, but others see soc mvmts as a separate, unique form of social behavior
 
  2.  The HISTORICAL APPROACH to examining soc mvmts attempts to articulate the interest of some developing historical actor  
  Giddens notes that articulating interests may seem easy in retrospect, but is very difficult in practice, & even the most skilled analysts can rarely predict the future beyond a few days or weeks w/ any accuracy  
  See Also:  The History of Soc Mvmts  
  3.  The SYSTEMATIC CLASSIFICATION of soc mvmts examines the different functions of soc mvmts in society & as well a comparison of the roles or niches that different types of soc mvmts fulfill  
  One important type of systematic classification of soc mvmts is done by Giddens in his examination of the institutional dimensions of modernity  
  For Giddens the major institutions of modernity are capitalism, surveillance, militarism, & industrialism  
  For Giddens the power of the major institutions of modernity is being met, reflexively, by soc mvmts  
Link
 The Table of the Institutions of Modernity & the Reflexivity of Social Mvmts shows that soc mvmts balance, challenge, temper, etc. the actions of the most powerful structures of modernity  
  See Also:  Giddens  
  4.  The separation of soc mvmts from "PRESSURE GRPS" is an important distinction that many analysts fail to make  
  For Redcliff & Benton, soc mvmts do cognitive praxis in that they produce innovative knowledge claims while pressure mvmts are a subset of a soc mvmt in that the latter may disseminate the knowledge that  soc mvmts create  
  Praxis is the combination of theory & social action  
  Soc mvmts define a new way of thinking, a world view, an ideology  
  However, some soc mvmts seem to have no new ideology, i.e. Moral Majority, & these types of mvmts are considered to be a unique type, often called counter mvmts, which are attempting to re-assert an old ideology  
  Major soc mvmt subjects
Political mvmt (revolution) 
Labor mvmt 
Women's mvmt 
Civil rights mvmt 
Envl mvmt 
Peace mvmt		  

 
Top
  
The Table of the Institutions of Modernity & the Reflexivity of Social Mvmts
External
Links
Link
Institution of Modernity
Reflexive Social Movement
  
PW
Capital accumulation Labor mvmt    
Surveillance Democracy/free speech mvmt    
Military power Peace mvmt    
Industrialism Ecology mvmt    
The Table of the Institutions of Modernity & the Reflexivity of Social Mvmt shows that soc mvmts balance, challenge, temper, etc. the actions of the most powerful structures of modernity    

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  New Social Movements
External
Links
  -  Project:  The Intersection of Culture & Social Structure via Social Issues by Social Group 
Link
 
 NSM'S ARE SOC MVMTS THAT ARE 'NEW' IN COMPARISON TO THE ORIGINAL OR 'CLASSIC' SOC MVMTS OF RELIGIOUS UPHEAVALS, POL REVS, THE LABOR MVMT, THE CIVIL RIGHTS MVMT, & THE WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE MVMT   
 
 New social movements ( NSMs ) are the social mvmts that have arisen in the later half of the 1900s in conjunction w/ the rise of democracy & modernization
 
 
 NSMs are distinguished from older social mvmts in that the latter were much more rare, often had to develop into a political mvmt or revolution to succeed, did not have the advantages of voice that democracy offers, nor of communications, the media, etc. as modernization offers
 
 
 Old social mvmts include the Crusades, the Reformation, revolutions, etc. while the NSMs include the Labor Mvmt, the Civil Rights Mvmt, the Women's Mvmt, the Env Mvmt, etc. 
 
 
 The NSMs arose w/ the demise of of traditional working class, the decline of industrial jobs
 
 
 Since the 1950s, the Working Class is down from 50% to 20% of the population w/ less than 15% unionized in US
 
 
 STRUCTURAL CHANGE IN THE 1ST WORLD 
 
 
 Since the 1950s there is a decline of social democrats as seen in the Reaganist dismantling of Keynesianism, the welfare state & other achievements of the FDRites
 
 
 The failure of social democrats to achieve their goals through traditional politics has fostered the fragmentation of the social groups supporting FDRism & social democratic policies into the NSMs
 
 
 A strength & weakness of the NSMs is that they must now accommodate diverse groups including the working class, ethnic & gender minorities (minorities in terms of power) and new middle class of NSMs such as the feminists, env grps, peace grps, anti nuke grps, etc. 
 
  NSM'S CRITIQUE OF SOCIETY ADDRESSES MATERIALISM, INDIVIDUALISM, RATIONALISM, ETC.   
  NSMs often offer a broad critique of society as seen in their position that  
  - modern society is based on materialism  
  - modern society is based on individualism in that we often either ignore the problems of others or assume they are individual & not social in nature  
  - science, rationalism, modern society, etc. have the ideology of omnipotence & infallibility, but are flawed, possibly fatally flawed  
 
 NSMs often embrace the modernist view of social change & knowledge, while some such as the anarchists eschew the modernist view in favor of chaos theory, post modernism, nihilism & so on
 
  LIMITS OF NSMs  
 
 The limits of  the modernist NSMs includes the viewpoint that knowledge is 
1.  limited
2.  politicized
3.  a product of existence
4.  the result of the interplay of knowledge & beliefs
5.  the result of globalized issues
 
  1.  LIMITED KNOWLEDGE  
 
 Knowledge is based primarily on limited scientific knowledge
 
  "Knowledge" is an unexamined combination of knowledge which is tested, 'valid' science (which has limitations) & beliefs which are untested 'valid' ideas, values, & norms  
  Environmentalism must be based on more than just environmental enlightenment based on physical science knowledge about the env  
  People view social problems in different ways, using different criteria including different scientific knowledge, values, politics, jobs, etc.  
  Scientific knowledge & beliefs are not fixed, rather they are experiencing rapid change  
  2.  POLITICIZED KNOWLEDGE  
 
 Science is politicized in environmentalism, abortion, & other social issues that enter the realm of public discourse
 
  The politicization of science is the result of the natural dev of paradigms in the creation of knowledge, the use of knowledge by various grps in society, the creation & control of knowledge by grps in society, & the fact that particular socio hist contexts negate the ability of society to accept particular bits or types of society  
  3.  KNOWLEDGE, BELIEFS, ETC. ARE PRODUCTS OF EXPERIENCE   
 
 Beliefs are a product of all levels of social existence
 
  Beliefs are formed through experiences in social structure & culture  
 
 Just as knowledge is learned through everyday experiences of teaching & ed, trial & error, etc., so beliefs, values, & norms are learned through everyday experiences of faith, tradition, etc.   
Link
 The Table on the Intersection of Culture & Social Structure via Social Issues by Social Group shows that knowledge, beliefs, values & norms surrounding an issue vary depending on what structure of society one is functioning in & by the group to which one belongs  
  The concept of master status embodies the idea that people may have a dominant social structure or social group to which they belong which in our society is usually one's occupation  
  However, even one's master status may be significantly influenced by one's relationship to another sphere of life such as ones' family, peers, religion, education, etc.  
  The relationship btwn social issues, social mvmts, social grps, culture, & social structure demonstrates that to a large extent all culture is local, i.e. situationally specific  
  4.  KNOWLEDGE & THE INTERPLAY OF KNOWLEDGE & BELIEFS   
 
 The identity of social problems come & go, i.e. enter & leave the realm of public discourse, on the basis of "knowledge AND beliefs"
 
  Knowledge is changed by science, politics, the media, social mvmts, etc.  
  The concept of the "social construction of reality" holds that the creation of the env debate, or any public debate,  is a product of science, media, politics, culture, etc.   
  5.  KNOWLEDGE & GLOBALIZED ISSUES   
 
 Many social issues are now globalized & have an impact on interest groups, & constituencies around the world, & these diverse groups & levels of analysis are extremely difficult to synthesize
 
 
 The env problem, or any public problem, engenders policies, grps, debates, lobbyists, think tanks, etc. & all of these actors must comprehend all levels of action & discussion from the global level to the national level to the regional level to the local level to the personal, & how these actors & levels interact in the complex processes of the public discussion
 
 
 The globalization of social issues can be seen in the dictum, "the personal is political," in that whether I drive a gas hog or an economy car, or whether I heat w/ coal, oil, nuclear/electric, wood, or super insulation, or whether I eat fast food or food from my own garden are all both personal choices & global issues
 
 
 The difficulty of synthesizing the interests of diverse groups & multiple levels of social existence can be seen in the failure of the env & other mvmts to understand the peripheral nations, the interests of the working class, businesses, & racism, etc.
 

 
Top
  
Table on the Intersection of Culture & Social Structure via Social Issues by Social Group
Social Movement or Group that is concerned w/ this issue: 
Social Movement or Group that conflicts or allies w/ the soc mvmt or grp on this issue:
Social Issue:
Social Issues that compete w/ this social issue for this social group: 
Culture -->


 Social Structure  \/
 Knowledge

 
Beliefs

 
Values

 
Norms

 
Peers
 
 
 
 
Family  
 
 
 
Religion  
 
 
 
Govt  
 
 
 
Military  
 
 
 
Economy  
 
 
 
Charity  
 
 
 
Education  
 
 
 
Media  
 
 
 
Recreation & Leisure  
 
 
 
The Table on the Intersection of Culture & Social Structure via Social Issues by Social Group shows that knowledge, beliefs, values & norms surrounding an issue vary depending on what structure of society one is functioning in & by the group to which one belongs

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Professionalized SMOs
External
Links
  PROFESSIONALIZATION   
  Professionalization is the process whereby an occupation attempts to be recognized as a profession by increasing education, licensing, regulation, etc. requirements
 
  Professionalized social movement organizations ( SMOs ) are a new form of soc mvmt that was made possible by the advances in technology, mass media, & political systems
 
  Professionalized SMOs have in effect modeled themselves after professional lobbying firms, marketing firms, & other mainstream orgs
 
  In a professional SMO leaders & primary activists are professional reformers pursing a career in reform causes
 
  Professional SMO members are not from the group that stands to benefit from mvmt success, though many members of soc mvmts will not benefit from their mvmts success
 
  SMO FUNDING & RESOURCES   
  Professional SMO members may move from cause to cause applying the same techniques of fundraising, publicity, organization, & leadership in each situation
 
  Most funding for professional SMOs comes from third party sources such as individuals, churches, corps, or even the govt
 
  The resources & services of professional SMOs are often in such demand that they can make money as does a typical business by selling its services to other soc mvmts  
  In professionalized SMOs, a small, vocal group of potential beneficiaries are used for public relations purposes & as media representatives of the mvmt
 
  In professionalized SMOs, a large conscience constituency is accessed through direct mail appeals & newsletters
 
  Oberschall notes that many soc mvmts have some characteristics of the professionalized SMO & that professionalized SMOs are not that different from the typical SMO except they are more organized, more structures & more formal, which often leads to greater success
 
  Professionalization is an objective that many SMOs strive for but have difficulty in achieving because they cannot muster the resources to pay professionals
 
  On the other hand, professionals are likely to increase the amount of resources available to an SMO  
  INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF SMOs  
  Professional SMO leaders, advisors, & other specialists have only begun to emerge in the last 30 years & thus degrees, certificates, & advanced training from educational orgs has just begun to become common   
 
 For professional SMO leaders, advisors, & other specialists, as of the present, there are no professional organizations that serve as a central clearing house for degree certification, research centralization, & advocacy as the AMA does for doctors
 
  The existence of the soc mvmt industry implies that soc mvmts have been institutionalized, when a practice of soc arrangement becomes widely accepted  
  Examples of soc arrangements becoming institutionalized because they were widely accepted include vacations, preschools, after school programs, soc mvmts, etc.  
  Little attention is paid to inter-soc mvmt relationships such as how soc mvmts cooperate, conflict, & shape society  
  From one perspective the env mvmt may not even qualify as a soc mvmt because it is radical & highly bureaucratized or professionalized  
  Compared to many other mvmts, the env mvmt may not qualify as a soc mvmt because of its small membership, but its effect is large because of professionalization, i.e. the manipulation of media & access to the political system  
  The institutionalization of the env mvmt is seen in that through the 80s, Greenpeace became less radical & more focused on lobbying  
  THE KNOWLEDGE CLASS   
  In the professionalization of soc mvmts orgs, the problem of the knowledge class ( KC ) becomes particularly apparent  
  The KC is also know as the intellignesia, academics, the scientific community, wonks, etc.   
  The KC consists of people whose jobs deal w/ production & dist of knowledge such as: academics, educators, the media, communications, govt & pol systems  
  The KC is large & growing  
  The KC has no unifying ideology & therefore consists of many conflicting subgrps  
  The KC has a high level of influence  
  The KC appears as a strong base to many soc mvmts but is not a committed membership:  may support some aspects of a soc mvmts & not others  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on   Why the Middle & Working Classes Have Not Organized
External
Links
  -  Project:  Why People Don't Get Involved 
Link
  THE MID & WKING CLASSES HAVE NOT ORGANIZED BECAUSE:   
  [Note that all of these reasons are intertwined & influence each other]  
  1.  COMPETITION MAKES SACRIFICE FOR THE GROUP DIFFICULT  
  The mid & wking classes have not organized because the present socio economic political system (SEP Sys) makes it hard to sacrifice for the group, the greater good, when you are fighting for survival  
  2.  THERE IS A LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE REASONS TO ORGANIZE, & HOW TO ORGANIZE  
  The mid & wking classes have not organized because the non upper classes lack basic knowledge of the workings of the SEP Sys  
  See Also:  The Theories of the Social Sciences  
  See Also:  Conflict Theory  
  3.  THERE IS A LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT HOW TO CHANGE THE SYSTEM   
  The mid & wking classes have not organized because the non upper classes lack basic knowledge of how to change the SEP Sys  
  See Also:  Social Change  
  4.  THE UC IS ORGANIZED & PURSUES ITS OWN INTERESTS & OPPOSES ACTION BY THE MC & WC  
 
 The mid & wking classes have not organized because the upper class has it's own interest, & pursues them; the UC has class consciousness; the UC has opposing interests to the non- upper classes; the UC is better organized & funded than any of the lower classes;  the UC works to preserve their own ideology & disseminate it to the non upper classes
 
  See Also:  Class & False Consciousness  
  See Also:  Ideology  
  5.  THEY HAVE FALSE CONSCIOUSNESS  
  The mid & wking classes have not organized because the non upper classes have false consciousness in that they support the interests of the UC  
  6.  THEY PURSUE THE "AMERICAN DREAM" AS INSTITUTIONALIZED BY THE UC  
 
 The mid & wking classes have not organized because non upper class culture reflects the culture of the UC as embodied in the "American Dream" & this is a culture that socializes people to pursue institutionalized goals via institutionalized methods, & it is not a culture of revolution, must less even radical change
 
  See Also:  Culture  
  See Also:  Working Class Culture  
  7.  THERE IS A WIDE RANGE OF DIVERSITY IN THE MC & WC WHICH MAKES UNITARY CONSCIOUSNESS / ACTION DIFFICULT   
 
 The mid & wking classes have not organized because working class diversity embodies diverse values which represent diverse interests over riding the goal of improvement for all
 
  8.  DIVERSE INTERESTS OF RACE, ETC., ARE EXPLOITED BY THE UC  
 
 The mid & wking classes have not organized because racial, ethnic, & gender differences are exploited by the upper class
 
 
 See Also:  Split Labor Mkt Theory  
  9.  THE HORATIO ALGER MYTH, THAT WE CAN ALL GET AHEAD, IS STILL OPERATIVE   
 
 The mid & wking classes have not organized because the Horatio Alger Myth, where we see the upper class as something to attain, not something to change, & other main stream values are actually the knowledge, beliefs, values, & norms, i.e. culture of the upper class  
  10.  THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY SATISFIED WHERE THEY ARE FOR MUCH OF THE TIME   
 
 The mid & wking classes have not organized because the non upper classes of the 1st world have the power to institute change but are essentially satisfied, or not exploited to the stage of wanting to fight for change 
 
  The inaction of the non upper classes in relation to social change because of their relative satisfaction is often called pacification   
  11.  THE LOWER CLASSES AROUND THE WORLD DO NOT HAVE THE POWER TO FOSTER CHANGE   
  The mid & wking classes have not organized because the non upper classes of the semi periphery & periphery are essentially dissatisfied to the stage of wanting to fight for change, but they do NOT have the power to do so  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Participants in the Environmental Debate
External
Links
  -  Project:  Participants in the Env Debate
Link
  -  Project:  Video:  Yellow Creek & Participants in the Public Policy Issues
Link
  GROUP THEORY   
 
 Group theory, aka pluralism, holds that pol decisions are result of struggles among competing interests who have access to pol process
 
  In any social / political conflict, the amt of pwr of each grp varies slightly over short run & much more over the long run  
  Some of the hist changes of power levels amongst participants in social debates include: 
- the public in gen has gained pwr
- industrialists who have lost absolute political power, but have gained pwr in magnitude
- the media which has expanded reach but not issue clarity
- rec & env who have gained pwr
- the govt has gained & then lost some pwr / status since the 1980s		  
  Group theory holds that in a democracy, & to a lesser extent in an autocracy, each participatory grp has a role in pol & social debate  
  Each policy debate, public issue, etc. has its own unique set of participants  
  A conflict resolution analysis looks at who has how much power & their role as a participant in the political & social debates  
  PARTICIPANTS IN THE ENVL DEBATE   
 
 Participants in env debate include 6 broad strata of the population including: (PIMREG)
- the general public 
- industrialists
- media
- recreationists
- environmentalists
- govt
The participants may also be referred to as stakeholders or social groups, interest grps, etc 
 
  In forestry, there are three major grps involved, including:
- industrialists
- the recreationists
- the environmentalists		  
  Domhoff views conflict in democratic nations as involving three participants, including the corporate coalition, i.e. big business, the small business coalition, & the labor liberal coalition  
  THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE ENVL DEBATE, (PIMREG) IE STAKEHOLDERS, SOC GRPS, INT GRPS, ETC INCLUDE THEIR INTERESTS, IE THEIR BELIEFS, VALUES, ETC  
  The general public has an unformed interest in any particular env issue; ie, they have not committed or made up their mind yet, though in the long run they do have an interest; it just has not been recognized yet   
  Industrialist have a resource use or resource mgt in the env   
  Historically industrialist consumed nat resources w/o regard to sustainability, but today many claim, some accurately, some inaccurately that they have a sustainability pt of view towards resources   
  Industrialist will generally publicly adhere to the conservationist perspective, but not generally the preservationist perspective   
  Some industrialists public voice support for conservation & sustainability but their policies & actions indicate they are primarily concerned w/ profits, mkt expansion, etc   
  An interest indirectly related to resource use has been the ability to pollute, to dispose of haz mat, to degrade the env, to completely consume a resource, & to put the costs of these processes on other stakeholders  
  The media in the West has, in the last 100 yrs, primarily subscribed to the philosophy of journalism whereby they attempt objectivity & so their interest is merely to report the facts as they see them   
  Given the politicization of both public policy & science the media often appears & is biased   
  In an attempt to appear objective many media outlets will report on stakeholders from many perspectives of an issue when the objective science indicates there may not be such perspectives   
  Recreationists have interests of both conservation & preservation of the env in that they have the interest of a range of activities from simply exploring the env to passive tourism to active recreation to extreme sports   
  Many recreationist have an interest in some level of resource use provided sustainability is a real outcome & not simply a false pronouncement   
  Many recreationists have an interest in a high level of preservation   
  Environmentalists have interests of both conservation & preservation of the env  & the values supporting these interests overlap w/ those of the recreationists, but generally include a stronger aesthetic ethic which sees the env as a good or entity as an end in itself   
  Govt entities, like the media, have generally adhered to a strategy wherein they are objective representatives of the people, & not directly the env   
  The govt has generally followed the lead of Western history, of the public, in that all levels of govt, natl, state, & local, have become more concerned w/ estbing both conservation of the env, w/ sustainability, & some preservation   
  The govt is often 'captured' by the industrialists, representing their interests over that of the public & other stakeholders  

 
Top
  
Table on the Social Groups in Env Debate (aka Participants or Stakeholders [ PIMREG ] )
Gen Public
Industrialists
Media
Recreationists
Environmentalists
Govt
Native Am Loggers Natl media: CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, NYT, Wash Post & Internet Outfitted recreationists Preservationists World Orgs: WTO, World Bank, IMF, UN
Professionals, scientists, etc. Ranchers/ farmers Regional media
Large urban areas		 Motorized recists Conservationists US Fed Govt Link
Retirees Millworkers/ laborers Local media
Small cities, towns, etc.		 Hunters Restorationists Exec Branch: Fed land mgt. agencies: BLM, Nat Park Service, Nat Mar Fish. Service, FS, US Fish & Game, EPA, etc.
Foot-loose Miners Websites Non motor recists Radicals State Govts
State Forestry Services
State EPA's
Locals Oil & Energy Email lists, blogs, etc. Water recists Grass Roots env grps Local Govts
Counties & cities
Note, some cities are as pwrful as some nations: NYC, Beijing, etc.
Large & small private land holders  Large retailers   Tourists Other social justice orgs
 
Regional peoples: East, West, Urban, Rural, etc.     Large rec biz  
 
International peoples Biz orgs, e.g. NAM, Chamber of Commerce Media advocacy orgs Rec Orgs: rec adv grps Env Orgs: The big 10 env grps, intl env grps NGOs
Biz serving gen public Biz serving indl gps Biz serving the media Biz serving recists Biz serving envlists Biz serving govt
Other gen pub Other indists Other media grps Other recists Other envlists Other govt grps
t is necessary to include an “other” category under each of the major soc grps since some grps may not match grps as listed 
  Examples of "others" might be tree planters, mushroom pickers, media, water recists, photographers, etc. 
  While each of these grps is important, it is not possible to include every grp

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the   Key Interest Groups by Domhoff
External
Links
  -  Project:  Key Interest Groups 
Link
  -  Project:  Key Interest Groups in the Envl Debate 
Link
  THE KEY INTEREST GROUPS   
  According to Domhoff, 1983, there are three main interest groups trying to influence policy at the national level:   the corporate coalition, the small business coalition, & the labor / liberal coalition
 
  In 1990, there were more than 6,800 congressional lobbying groups in the US, however most of them tend to represent certain groups of interests, such as Domhoff three key interest groups
 
  In 2005, there were more than 14,000 registered lobbying groups in Washington, DC, averaging just over two employees each for a total over 30,000 lobbyists (many lobbying firms are small)  
  In 2005, there were approximately 30,000 members of Congress & staff members, making the ratio of lobbyists to officials on the Hill nearly 1 to 1  
  In the early 90s the total value of earmarks added to bills was under $100 mm, while in 2005 the value was over $32 bb  
  A.  THE CORPORATE COALITION   
  The corporate coalition include multinational corporations from around the world
 
  Also included in the corporate coalition group are policy foundations & research institutes that do not call themselves lobbyists, but claim to operate on the behalf of "good govt" or the "national interest"
 
  Examples of conservative policy foundations include the Ford, Rockefeller, & Carnegie Foundations, the Committee for Economic Development (CED), the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Trilateral Commission, & the Business Roundtable
 
  Conservative policy foundations lobby for policies that promote free trade & polices that allow multinationals to operate in the world economy w/ minimum restrictions
 
  The North American Free Trade Act (NAFTA), the General Agreement on Trade & Tariffs (GATT), the US govt's support for the Maquiladores program are examples of the efforts of the policy institutes allied w/ the multinational corporations
 
  B.  THE SMALL BUSINESS COALITION   
  The small business coalition includes the Chamber of Commerce & national orgs of professions that operate as small businesses such as the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Dental Association (ADA), & the Farm Bureau
 
  The small business coalition is more conservative that the corporate coalition
 
  The small business coalition concentrates on opposition to govt regs of business
 
  The small business coalition is less involved in foundations & research institutes than corporate coalition
 
  The small business coalition does support the American Enterprise Institute & the Hoover Institute
 
  C.  THE LABOR / LIBERAL COALITION   
  The labor / liberal coalition is a loose coalition & is the most diverse, & thus the most divided of the coalitions
 
  The labor / liberal coalition includes organized labor, feminists, the civil rights movement, the envl mvmt, et al
 
  Specific orgs w/in the labor / liberal coalition include the AFL CIO, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Urban League, the National Association for Women (NOW), the National Education Association (NEA), the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, the Ralph Nader based orgs, et al
 
  Domhoff developed an analysis of the key interest groups that shows that, indeed, contrary to what pluralists believe, one group controls the govt, benefits from govt policy, & wins controversial issues
Link
  See Also:  A Comparison of Pluralist Theory & Power Elite Theory by Farley
Link

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Industry Participants & the Env
External
Links
  INDLISTS  
  Industrial participants in the env debate include loggers, ranchers & farmers, miners, oil & energy firms, large retailers, biz orgs, biz serving indl gps, & others  
  DOMHOFF'S ANALYSIS OF INDLISTS  IN THE ENVL DEBATE   
  Domhoff holds that businesses have two sets of interests & ideologies which often overlap, but sometimes conflict  
  For Domhoff business interests & ideologies are represented by the corporate coalition, e.g. big biz, & the small business coalition  
  See Also:  Domhoff on Key Interest Groups  
  Using Domhoff's stratification of large & small biz, in general small biz are more opposed to envlists positions than are big biz because they have less resources to adapt to the changes proposed by the envlists  
  Using Domhoff's stratification of large & small biz, in general large biz are less opposed to envlists positions than are small biz because they have more resources to adapt to the changes proposed by the envlists  
  Using Domhoff's stratification of large & small biz, in general large biz have more resources to oppose envlists positions, impact the env to a greater degree, & influence the govt, the media & the gen public to a greater extent than small biz  
  QUALITIES OF INDLISTS IN THE ENVL DEBATE   
  Each type or category of industry has a unique interest w/ relationship to envl issues
 
  The types of industries include extractive, mfr, service, information, & financial industries 
 
  In general extractive ind & mfr ind are the most opposed to the position of the envlists
 
  In general extractive ind & mfr ind have the greatest impact on the env, but service, info, & fin inds also indirectly impact the env because they service & direct extractive & mfr ind   
  In general, service industries & info & fin ind are the most friendly, of the indlists, to the positions of the envlists
 
 
 ENVIRONMENTAL OPPOSITION IN THE US 
 
 
 The progressive ideals of the conservation mvmt had support in the 1900s 
 
  Early conservation groups were dominated by business orgs that were influential in the political arena   
  The goals expanded from conservation to environmentalism in the 60s & 70s & so did the potential impact on biz   
 
 Early opposition to envl positions consisted primary of
-  farmers & ranchers
-  organized (and unorganized) labor
-  industry
but in recent decades more ind orgs have joined them
 
 
 Recently ind grps opposing envlists coalesced into the Wise Use Mvmt 
 
  Farmers & ranchers at first were concerned with the influx of the city people  
  Recreationists brought $ & urban problems  
  They also brought environmental concern about animals, habitat loss & chemical use  
 
 Use of water was also important. 
 
  LABOR ISSUES   
 
 Labor supports a safer workplace related to envl issues such as pesticide regulation, clean air, haz mat, clean water, etc.
 
  Labor has generally opposed pollution control, the Endangered Species Act, higher mileage requirements in vehicles, limits on extractive industries such as coal, etc.   
  While Labor & ind decries the loss of jobs from envl reg, more often the cause of job loss is technology not the ESA or other envl reg  
  The natural resource extraction industry has been hard hit by envl regs & has opposed most regulation   
  INDL OPPOSITION APPROACH   
 
 Industries use a threefold approach to opposing envl grps, including: 
 
  a.  a public relations campaigns to paint industry w/ an environmental brush, which is often called 'green washing'   
  b.  the use of large numbers of lobbyists at the fed, state, & local levels   
  c.  pressing their case through the admin maze of permitting & rule making   
  Implementation decisions are done by low level administrators & occurs less in the public arena than in Congress   
  PROACTIVE INDUSTRY   
 
 The biggest strategic change in ind activity is that opposition to legislation is now proactively done by industry instead of just reacting to the push of envlists 
 
  Industry is proactive because many envl issues are finding their way onto the ballot   
  Referendums on envl issues often take the form of: 
-  green initiatives 
-  job initiatives 
-  wise use initiatives 
-  trojan horse Initiatives 		  
  INDLISTS WHO WORK W/ ENVLISTS   
 
 Some industry leaders have worked w/ environmental groups
 
 
 Some env groups have been charged w/ being captured by big business
 
 
 In 1983, the National Wildlife Federation  proposed the creation a Corporate Conservation Council of invited companies 
 
 
 It is unlikely the two sides will ever totally agree, but there is / was a sense that they had more to gain from cooperation than from confrontation 
 
 
 For firms under heavy regulation, this cooperation may become the rule rather than the exception 
 

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Indl Orgs & Envl Opposition Grps
External
Links
  OPPOSITION ORGS EMERGE   
  Conservation & multiple use grps once dominated the envl debate
 
  The progressive ideals of the conservation mvmt had wide public support in the 1900s
Early cons grps were dominated by biz orgs that were influential in the pol arena 
The goals of the cons grps expanded from cons to envlism in 60s & 70s & so did their potential impact on biz
 
  Opposition to envlism emerged from
-  farmers, ranchers
-  organized (& unorganized) labor
-  industry
-  indl grps:  NAM, US Chamber of Commerce, etc.
 
  WISE USE MVMT
 
  Recently, indl grps coalesced into the Wise Use Mvmt
 
  In relation to envlism, farmers & ranchers were at first concerned mainly  w/ the influx of city people

Reclists brought $ & urban problems to rural areas as well as their envl concern about animals, habitat loss, pollution, chemical use, etc.
 
  The use of water grew in importance to Western indl grps
The use of water had been a battle over who had irrigation rights
The struggle over irrigation rights dev into a struggle btwn urban & rural water use, e.g. the Colorado River, the Hoover Dam, etc.
 
  WISE USE GOALS 
 
  Ron Arnold coined term Wise Use, referring to 25 goals to reform envl policies
The goals of the Wise Use mvmt were to 
1.  open parks & wilderness areas to mineral exploration
2.  expand visitor facilities
3.  restrict the ESA
 
  Today the Wise Use Mvmt is a loose coalition w/ deep anti govt feelings & opposed to efforts by envlists to closing off the use of fed lands
 
  Examples of Wise Use related grps include the Mountain States Legal Foundation, ag groups, oil, timber, mining grps
 
  The Wise Use mvmt is attempting to go beyond the Sagebrush Rebellion in that they want to broaden their constituency & issues beyond the West
 
  LABOR ISSUES 
 
  Labor supports a safer workplace & so is often supportive of envl regs of pesticide use, toxic chemicals, etc.
 
  Labor has generally opposed pollution control, the Endangered Species Act, regulated econ dev, higher mileage standards, etc.   
  Envlists argue that often the cause of job loss is labor saving tech not the ESA or other envl restrictions  
  The nat resource extraction ind has been hard hit by envl regulation & has opposed most regs, but has been hit harder by job reducing tech  
  THE AMERICAN FOREST INSTITUTE   
  Pulp & paper ind realized in the 50s that rec was demanding more forest use  
 
 The Am Forest Institute was created to justify the need for more, not less, timber production.
 
  The oil ind also has been hard hit because envl safeguards are expensive:  in 1989 the top 5 oil producers spent 36% of total profits on env issues for a total of $3 billion  
  LOBBYING   
  The biggest change in opp grps strategy has been an increased opposition to env legislation  
  The lobby for the Wise Use mvmt is now proactively done by ind instead of just reacting to envlists positions  
  Ind is proactive because many env issues find their way onto the ballot including
- green initiatives
- job initiatives
- Wise Use initiatives
- Trojan Horse Initiatives		  
  THREE INDLIST APPROACHES   
  Ind use 3 approaches to opposing env grps
1.  Ind engages in green washing which is a public relations campaign, i.e. a mkting campaign, to paint ind w/ an envl brush
2.  Ind employs lobbyists in fed, state, & local govts to promote their positions
3.  Ind presses their case through the admin maze
The implementation of govt regs is done by low level bur & in a less public arena than Congress, & is therefore cheaper & easier to influence		  
  SELL - OUTS  
  Some industry leaders have wked w/ env grps
These env grps are charged w/ being captured by big biz, though that is not necessarily the case		  
  It is possible for envlists & indlists to work together w/o being co-opted or captured & many observers maintain this is indeed the best process for resolving conflict 

Opposition grps wking together to reach a solution is often more productive that a conflicted solution that may be found in the courts or the political arena of legislation & govt admin lobbying

  
  GRASS ROOTS OPPOSITION  
  In the 1970s, the Sagebrush Rebellion grew & became a grass roots mvmt in that it had widespread support from local people  
  In 1988, there were over 250 grps at the Multiple Use Strategy Conference sponsored by Center for Defense of Free Enterprise  
  CLINTON'S SUPPORT OF WISE USE   
  Under Clinton, the govts support for envlists & Wise Use policies consisted of a controversial compromise where there were no grazing fee increases, limitations on ESA, & some selling off of fed lands in return for less opposition to other policies  
  Supplements:  INDLIST SUPPORT ORGS   
  US Chamber of Commerce
 Link
        US Chamber:  EPA Envl Justice Proposal Flawed
 Link
        US Chamber Air Quality Requirements 
 Link
        US Chamber on Extreme Envlists
 Link
  National Assoc of Mfr
 Link
  American Forest & Paper Association
 Link
  Am Forest Instit   
  Mtn States Legal Foundation
 Link
        Mtn States Legal Foundation Mission 
 Link
  Center for Defense of Free Enterprise
 Link
        Center for Defense of Free Enterprise Mission
 Link

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  General Public & Envl Issues
External
Links
  INTRO   
  W/ relation to envl issues, the gen public may be stratified several grps, including Native Am, scientists, professionals, retirees, the footloose, locals, large & small private land holders, regional peoples: (East, West, Urban, Rural, etc.), international peoples, biz serving the gen pub, & others  
  While Democrats will tend to be more envlist than Republicans, the issue is not one that typically dictates voting behavior  
  Thus, envlism is a topic that crosses political lines & there are Dem & Rep envlists  
  In understanding the dev of envl policy, it is not generally useful to stratify the affected population into Dems & Reps because there is so much party cross over in envl affiliation  
  THE GENERAL PUBLIC   
  The gen public is not generally involved in pol issues as is seen in significant pres elections such as in 2004, where less than 60% of eligible voters voted  
  The gen public is, never-the-less, seen as a resource for all participants in any public pol debate in that if a grp can significantly turn gen public opinion to its position, it will have much greater power  
  The gen pub has a narrow attn span that focuses on the hot issue of the moment & can generally only deal w/ 4 or 5 issues  
  The gen pub has a short attn span on almost any public pol issues & will add & drop issues only a monthly or yearly basis  
  PUBLIC ATTENTION   
  Both indlists & envlists struggle to gain attn & support of the gen public   
  Usually pub attn is only focused during a crisis   
  There is a small amt of attn focused the rest of the time, i.e. btwn crises, by: 
  - the rich 
  - profls 
  - the activists 
  - the committed 		  
 
 The mid & lo classes do not have time nor resources to be involved w/ most public forum issues except when crisis arises 
 
  COMMUNITIES & INDUSTRY   
  Small communities are dependent on local ind & often exhibit the characteristics of a "company town" in that they are very supportive of their major employer(s) even in the face of negative factors such as pollution   
  Often company towns have majority of wkrs employed in one ind  
  Small communities tend to be very supportive of their ind  
  An example of a company town can be seen in small towns in the west where timber sales come from public lands, & many of the locals work in the forestry ind  
  Locals feel sympathy for for wkrs & mill workers when the FS limits timber to be cut  
  Also, local taxes, i.e. revenue for the county is generated from amt of timber cut  
  Often the closing of plants is played off as an envl issue  
  THE ENV & THE ECONOMY   
  The public's concern for the env is linked to economics  
  To date, most envl issues have been voted on as short term econ issues
 
  The fact that the economics of envl issues is complicated by the fact that indirect or long term effects are not included in the costs of production is called spill over costs & benefits, or externalities  
  The public often ignores spill over costs & benefits & externalities   

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Environmental Racism
External
Links
  INTRO  
  Envl racism occurs when environmental burdens are disproportionally borne by the disadvantaged  
  Poor areas are more likely to have locally unwanted land uses (LULUs) in their neighborhood  
  POWERLESS GRPS 
 
  Many minority grps do not have personal or pol pwr to fight envl degradation in their areas, e.g. placing toxic waste incinerator in poor neighborhood
 
  Recycling centers, incineration facilities, dumps, & other envly dangerous facilities are more likely to be located in poor areas where minorities may live  
  It takes time, $$$, effort, knowledge to be able to fight a govt &/ private firms who seeks to put LULUs in poor areas where land is cheap & opposition is weak/ nonexistent
 
  LANCER:  THE LA EXPERIENCE 
 
  In LA, the Lancer Plant was expected to dispose of waste & generate elec
 
  Local politicians attempted to put the waste incineration facility in a deteriorating residential area that was once a thriving indl & commercial area
 
  In the case of the Lancer Waste Incinerator,
- 96% of the people at the proposed site were minorities
- a public urban envl grp emerged
- emergent citizens groups questioned the health & safety
- the city launched a $250,000 PR campaign in support of the incinerator
- supporters eventually spent $12 mm & lost
- anti Lancer city council members were elected
 
  In general, envl racism occurs because unpopular or envly degrading dev such as landfills, incineration facilities, recycling facilities, etc. are place in minority enclaves or poor areas because these people have less power to oppose them  
  See Also:  Recycling, incineration, dumps  
  INTL ENVL RACISM / IMPERIALISM
 
  Today, dumping often occurs intly & has similar dynamics to envl racism in that intly dumping occurs in those nations who have less pwr & influence to reg it
 
  Poor, pol weak nations cannot resist govt &/ global corps who seek to use them as dumping, testing, etc. areas
 
  EXAMPLES OF INTL ENVL RACISM / IMPERIALISM 
 
  The "ghost ship" of Am garbage was dumped in a small nation in the Caribbean
 
  Nuclear testing has gone on for decade on small Pacific island nations
 
  Macquiladories are Mex indl border towns which have extremely poor envl qual because Am corps pollute in manner that is illegal in US  
  TRADING THE ENV FOR JOBS   
  Note that all of the relationships such as dumping in the Caribbean, nuke tests, Am  corps polluting in Mex, are perfectly legal  
 
 Local leaders often portray the decisions to portray environmentally harmful projects as job creating projects  
 
 Trading the env for jobs has five effects, including
a.  envl racism
b.  world pollution 
c.  lower health standards for minorities & the poor
d.  pol support from the people who fill the jobs
e.  pol support from the politicians & corps who own the jobs
 
  CAUSES OF ENVL RACISM   
  Envl racism is caused by many of the same factors as racism in general, but it also has some unique causative factors related to the pwr dynamics of the placement of envly undesirable projects, i.e. LULUs  
  The causes of en racism may be considered to be institutional racism in that often they have no personal, individual, or racial animosity attached to them  
  Institutional racism occurs when social practices that are deemed to be just, never-the-less have a discriminatory impact on a particular grp or grps  
  Examples of institutional racism other than en racism include the last hired, first fired policy, some admissions policies, some hiring policies, etc. 
 
 
 See Also:  Causes of Racism  
  NIMBY  
  One unique causative factor of en racism is NIMBYism  
  NIMBY denotes the "Not in My Back Yard" syndrome where people w/ resources opposed any envly degrading dev in their area  
  NIMBYism has taken on racial overtones  
  LULU   
  Another unique causative factor of envl racism is a LULUs  
  LULU denotes the "locally unwanted land uses" syndrome where people w/ resources opposed any undesirable land use such as a Walmart  
  LULUs are dangerous, lower property values, but they often bring some jobs  
  NIMBYs & LULUs are disproportionately located near concentrations of minority groups  
  NOMITIO  
  Another unique causative factor of envl racism is a NOMTIO  
  NOMTIO denotes the "Not On My Term In Office" syndrome where politicians will not make unpopular decisions in their term in office w/ relation to any envly degrading dev, or any unpopular decision in general  
  NOMTIO denotes that politicians will usually place envly degrading dev in areas w/ less political power, such as minority enclaves or the poor sections of an area  
  See Also: NIMBYs, LULUs, & NOMTIOs  
 
 RACISM IN ENVL GRPS 
 
 
 Many have charged that the envl mvmt represents diverse interests, but never-the-less does a poor job of fighting envl racism & representing the envl interests of minorities & the poor
 
  Minority leaders believe that environmentalists do not share the same interests of the disadvantaged community  
  Environmental groups have been charged with racism  
  The environmental justice movement focuses on how environmental burdens are frequently borne by disadvantaged neighborhoods, Indian Tribes, etc.  
  In 1991, the First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit was held to address the problems of envl racism  
  The same criticisms of racism could be leveled against business/industry that opposes the envl movement  
  Industry has not included ethnic grps or interests of the peripheral nation in the corp boardroom  
  They too are dominated by elites and wealthier interests than the population as a whole  
  Critics expect the envl mvmt to operate by higher standards than other orgs  
 
 "Great Schism"  gulf between environmental group leaders and the grass roots members 
 
  For example, dissidents in the Sierra Club accused the leaders of compromising goals to get legislation through Congress.  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Recreationists & the Envl Debate
External
Links
  SUMMARY   
 
 Recreationists are networked into many groups, including outfitted recreators, motorized recreators, hunters, non motorized recreators, water recreationists, tourists, businesses serving recreationists, recreational orgs, recreational corporations, the hotel industry & more
 
  RECREATIONISTS   
  Reclists have become a major participant in the envl debate as their influence has grown in society in general  
  Reclists use the env & they have resources to influence the envl debate  
  Rec has grown rapidly in the last century to be come one of the major sectors of the econ in the core nations  
  Rec is expected to grow even more rapidly in the next century in the core nations as well as in peripheral & semi peripheral nations  
  Today, people w/ disposable income, i.e. the middle class, want to recreate & they pursue that recreation at least in part, in the outdoors  
  TOURISM   
  In many areas that formerly relied almost exclusively on the extractive ind of logging, mining, etc., the econs are becoming more tourist oriented than extractive ind related  
  Tourism & recreation are becoming more econly powerful interests than the traditional extractive ind interests  
  As the mid class, as a class w/ disposable income, the reclists are willing & able to enter in to the envl debate  
  RECLISTS BTWN INDLISTS & ENVLISTS   
  Reclists often are in a mid position btwn indlists & envlists
 
  Reclists historically supported indlists; e.g. Teddy Roosevelt was avid hunter, explorer  
  In relation to forestry, reclists were the early conservationists & favored a multi use land policy   
  RECLISTS SUPPORT OF THE ENV
 
  Since multi use policy has mostly been policy which supported indl use, reclists have occasionally supported envlists  
  Reclists may be seen as the gen public w/ a stronger personal interest in the env  
  TOURISM 
 
  Most tourism is less environmentally concerned than recreation in general  
  Tourism can be envlly costly & damaging  
  Some tourism, eco tourism, is known to be envlly friendly  
  REC ORGS 
 
  There are many rec related orgs  
  Almost all of the bigger rec orgs examine envl issues as part of their services to their constituency  
  But by & large rec orgs may be seen as indl in nature because they are motivated by profit 1st, env & indigenous concerns 2nd  
  Reclist orgs favor land use policies that are mid way btwn indlists & envlists in that they generally support multi use land policies, motorized recreation, road building, econ dev, etc. as well as limited resource extraction   

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Tourism & Economic Development
External
Links
  -  Project:  A SWOT Analysis of Tourism
Link
  THE SCOPE OF TOURISM   
  By 2000, tourism was the largest single item in world trade  
  1 in 15 wkrs, or 150 mm, worldwide, wk in tourism   
  The primary occupation in tourism are in the areas of: 
a.  transporting
b.  feeding
c.  housing		 d.  guiding
e.  amusing
 
  Only 10% of Am have passports
 
  Most tourism is done in people's home country  
  In 1970 there were 147 mm tour trips abroad
 
  In 1995 there were 650 mm tour trips abroad  
  In 2010 there are est to be 1 bb tour trips abroad  
  Intl tourism is increasing in breath & so now 1/8 of all tourists go to peripheral nations in Africa, Asia, & Lat Am
 
  INVESTMENT IN TOURISM 
 
  Tourism requires only a lo cost infrastructure because there are no heavy plants & little hi tech equip
 
  The cost of creating 1 job in tourism is < 20% that of mfr job & < 2% of the cost of a hi tech job
 
  EFFECTS OF TOURISM 
 
  The effects of tourism are not always strong at the local level
 
  The concentration of tourists in 20 affluent countries yields 70% of tourists
 
  Transnat corps own many tourism assets such as hotels, tour ships, resorts, golf courses, amusement parks, tour agencies, ski areas, etc.  
  Because transnat corps own so many tourism assets, profits often return to core countries & do not go to the countries where the tourism occurs  
  Typically, only 40% of the cost of a tourist's trip is reaped by the local region in which the tourism takes place
 
  If a tourist trip involves a foreign owned hotel, the port of the trip reaped by the local region falls to only 25%
Who gets the $$ & why?		  
  TOURISM INCREASES ECONOMIC INSTABILITY   
  Tourism often fosters econ vulnerability in the region or nation in which it occurs
 
  All industries have some level of risk / volatility tourism, like all hi end aspects of consumption depends on style & fashion & thus is especially vulnerable
 
  Thus a tourist region may lose it's popularity & experience an econ downturn  
  Some tourist destinations are sought because of their remoteness & "natural" undev quals & thus are econlly successful  
  Thus thru their own success, tourist areas become congested & thus less popular & experience an econ downturn  
  Example Mediterranean beaches were abandoned by the NW Euro mid class tourists, who go to more distant, exotic locales
creating a 70% \/ in tourism on the Med beaches		  
  Various exogenous factors can affect tourism such as warm weather at a ski resort, a change in currency exchange rates, & political unrest in Ireland, the Mid-East, Africa, Lat Am etc.  
  LOCAL BENEFITS OF TOURISM   
  Local tourism provides income to: 
a.  local hotel owners
b.  tour guide firms		 d.  tourism wkrs
e.  local businesses
 
  Local benefits of tourism include that it: 
a.  help sustain indigenous lifestyles 
b.  help sustain a regions cultures, arts & crafts 
c.  provide wildlife preservation		 d.  increase envl protection 
e.  support conservation of historic buildings & sites 
 
  LOCAL DISADVANTAGES OF TOURISM   
  Local disadvantages of tourism include that it can: 
a.  adulterate & debase indigenous cultures
b.  foster unsightly dev
c.  increase pollution		 d.  result in envl degradation
e.  bother or threaten local flora & fauna
 
  An example of the threat of tourism can be seen in the Caribbean where sewage poisoned mangrove trees & polluted the coast, boats & divers damaged coral reefs  
  An example of the threat of tourism can be seen in the Alps where 40,000 ski runs attracts tourists in numbers 10 time greater than the local population  
  Local disadvantages of tourism include that it can: 
a.  support exploitative relationships
b.  package lifestyles & regional cul for sale
c.  strip the meaning from cul & cul artifacts		 d.  turn trad ceremonies into acts
e.  turn artifacts are mfr not for original use, but as cul items
 
  ALTERNATIVE TOURISM   
  On an alternative vacation, there is an emphasis on self determination, authenticity, social harmony, preservation of env, small scale dev, use of local techniques, materials, architecture styles, etc.   
  To be successful, alternative tourism must be aimed @ tourists who are both 
- wealthy & 
- envlly conscious 		  
  Alternative tourism is not a large mkt, but it is growing   
  See Also:  
  -  Costa Rica:  Alternative Tourism  
  -  Ecuador:  Alternative Tourism  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Recreational Orgs
External
Links
  Recreational orgs include all orgs in support of recreationalists from a the small, local hunting club to the national level org w/ intl ties & influence 
 
  There are more rec orgs than envl orgs 
 
  A COMPARISON OF REC, ENVL & INDL ORGS   
  Rec orgs & envl orgs have some goals in common & some divergent goals 
 
  Rec orgs & indl orgs have some goals in common & some divergent goals 
 
  Rec orgs as a whole have more money & resources than envl orgs but because they are smaller & more widely dispersed than most envl orgs, only a few have as great natl recognition as do the big envl orgs 
 
  IMPORTANT REC ORGS   
  Important rec orgs include: 
the NRA
Trout Unlimited 
the Am Camping Assoc 
United Four Wheel Drive Assoc
Four Wheel Drive & Off Road Assoc		 the Am Hiking Assoc 
National Hunters Assoc
Rocky Mtn Elk Foundation
Ducks Unlimited
American Sport Fishing Assoc
 
  REC ORG GOALS   
  Rec org goals are primarily to promote the rec oriented opportunities of their membership   
  Some rec orgs, such as Trout Unlimited,  have strong envl goals, while others, such as the NRA, have almost none 
 
  Some rec orgs, such as the United Four Wheel Drive Assoc, have strong ties to indl goals & development goals because their needs parallel those of development 
 
  REC ORG HISTORY   
 
 The first rec orgs were the only envl orgs in the sense that Teddy Roosevelt, & the like, were sportsmen & early envlists 
 
 
 Today, rec orgs environmentally oriented goals are often increasing because they are out in nature & see the human impact on it 
 
  The contemporary growth of rec orgs has paralleled that of rec itself, growing dramatically since WW 2   
  Rec has become the leading econ component of many regions econs & continues to outpace many other sectors of the econ   
  Like rec itself, the growth of rec orgs is phenomenal   

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Envl Participants Involved in Envl Debate
External
Links
  EARLY ENVL PARTICIPANTS   
  Environmentalists are networked into many groups, including preservationists, conservationists, restorationists, radical envlists, grass roots envl grps, the big envl grps, the biz who serve envlists, & others
 
  In the late 1800s & early 1900s, the conservation & preservation mvmts struggled w/ each other & the indlists for control of the env
 
  CONTEMPORARY ENVL PARTICIPANTS   
  Envlists have become a major participant in the envl debate as their influence has grown in society in general just in the last 40 yrs since the 1960s
 
  Beginning in the 1960s, envlism has developed into a soc mvmt w/ a wide constituency in the gen public, professionalized envl orgs, the envl org industry, & has had a powerful influence on the govt, the media, has estb several major envl policies & has been a powerful opponent to indlists & others in relation to the econ
 
  The envlists have gained power relative to the indlists because of the actual social & physical problems associated w/ the env
 
  The gen public has increased its support for the env because of the soc & phy probs related to the env, but also because of a change of ideology which is the result of the probs but is also a result of education, organizing, & demonstration by the envlists
 
  STRATEGY & TACTICS   
  Enlists use many strategies & tactics to influence public opinion & to thwart the efforts of the indlists including education, demonstrations, lobbying, passive resistance, eco terrorism, & more
 
  Envl orgs to a great degree cannot agree on a common strategy or a set of tactics
 
  Envl orgs & envlists to a great degree cannot agree on common goals
 
  Because of the lack of agreement on goals, strategy & tactics, the env mvmt is highly fragmented, esp when compared to the indlists in the env debate
 
  CORE QUESTIONS   
  For the env mvmt, several core questions continue to fuel debate w/in the mvmt
 
  Envlists are concerned whether their is enough time for a continual struggle w/ the indlists since they fear that env collapse may be imminent
 
  Envlists are concerned as to whether they should base their strategies on env ethics or env economics or some other fundamental principle
 
  Envlists are concerned as to whether fundamental changes in the way people relate to the env are necessary or whether (expensive) technological fixes are sufficient  
  Fundamental changes in the way people relate to the env include population control, reigning in consumerism, total mass transit, etc.
 
  Techno fixes include envlly friendly energy sources such as solar or even fusion power, super insulation, genetically engineered foods, etc.
 

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Environmental Orgs
External
Links
  THREE TYPES OF INTEREST GRPS   
  There are three types of envl interest grps including
 
  a.  the trad pressure grps w/ limited envl interest  
  b.  conservation grps concerned w/ wildlife & habitat conservation or preservation  
  c.  militant grps focused on compensation for injury to the env or anti dev issues  
  THE GROUP OF TEN 
 
  There are ten major envl grps that because of their age, experience & reputation have served as the founders & models for the thousands of envl grps that have come after them  
  7 of the Group of Ten envl grps were founded before 1970  
  Most of the Group of Ten envl grps have broadened their interests beyond their original goals, evolving w/ changing issues  
  Most of the Group of Ten envl grps have broadened their interests from land & wildlife issues to broader 2nd gen issues  
  THE MAJOR US ENVL GRPS include: 
1.  the Sierra Club
2.  the National Audubon society
3.  the National Parks and Conservation Association
4.  the Wilderness Society
5.  the Nat Wildlife Federation		 6.  the Nature Conservancy
7.  the World Wildlife Fund
8.  Greenpeace USA
9.  the Natural Resources Defense Council
10. the Isaac Walton League
 
  1.  Sierra Club
 
  http://www.sierraclub.org/
Link
  SC Homepage
Link
  Clean water
Link
  2. Audubon Society
 
  http://www.audubon.org/
 Link
  Homepage
 Link
  Mission
 Link
  Plan
 Link
  Base
 Link
  3. Nat Parks & Conservation Assoc
 
  4. Wilderness Society
 
  http://www.wilderness.org/index.shtml
 Link
  Homepage
 Link
  5.  National Wildlife Federation    estb 1983  
  The NWF proposed the creation a Corporate Conservation Council of invited companies  
  In relation to the NWF proposal, it is unlikely that the two sides, envlists & indlists, will ever totally agree, but there was a sense that they had more to gain from cooperation than from confrontation  
 
 For firms under heavy regulation, envlists hope that cooperation will become the rule rather than the exception  
  6. Nature Conservancy & Ducks Unlimited  
  The two long lived orgs of the Nature Conservancy & Ducks Unlimited focused on mgt & preservation of the land assuming that this would help protect species too  
  http://www.tnc.org/
Link
  Homepage
Link
  What the Nat Conservancy Does
Link
  7. World Wildlife Fund  
  The WWF operates on On 5 continents & sponsors over 1400 conservation projects  
  The WWF usually focuses on endangered species  
  8. Greenpeace  
  Greenpeace is the largest intl envl grp w/ over 4 mm members  
  9.  Environmental Defense Fund        estb 1946
now the Natural Resources Defense Council       estb 1967		  
  The NRDC dev litigation as an art form for envlists  
  The Citizen Suit Provision allows any person to sue private parties for noncompliance w/ the law for relief & civil penalties  
  The NRDC tried to act as an envl umbrella org but to date the envl grps are still very fragmented having divergent strategies, tactics, & constituencies  
  Today the NRDC is primarily an info sharing body, providing policy briefings, surveys of opinions, etc.  
  10.  Isaac Walton League  
  Radical Environmental Orgs  
  Earth First!  ELF, the Fox are all considered to be more radical envl grps  
  The tactics of the radical envlists include:
a.  direct action
b.  biological diversity
c.  action by independent members (cell like)		 d.  destitute by choice
e.  members have only minimal hope of success
 
  The tactics used by rad envlists might include:
1.  monkey wrenching
2.  ecotage
3.  shock tactics
4.  species emancipation		 5.  billboard banditry
6.  guerilla theater
7.  ecodefense
 
  The Fox targeted polluting industries in Chicago area
 
  Earth First! put a simulated giant crack down the Hoover dam  
  Radicals often embrace an ideology based on the concept of deep ecology:
 
  The paradigm of deep ecology holds that:   
  a.  people are no more imp than any other species  
  b.  self realization & ecocentrism are important aspects of humanity that must be dev for us as a species to actualize  
  Radical envlists legitimize mainstream grps
 
  SIZE & INFLUENCE   
  Resources for the Future found that:   
  a.  only 8% of people belong to an envl grp  
  b.  27% of those w/ $30,000 income were envl grp members  
  c.  the college ed, higher income strata of the population are disproportionately represented in envl grps  
  RAPID GROWTH OF ENVL GRPS   
  In the 60s & early 70s: 
 
a.  membership in the envl grps grew rapidly  
b.  energy issues replaced envl issues as the most imp in public debate  
c.  James Watt, Interior, & EPA's Anne Burford were very adversarial & motivated envlists  
  OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BRING GRPS TOGETHER   
  There are many opps & threats related to envl issues that bring grps together   
  he Roadless Area Review & Evaluation (RARE I & II) brought a lot of groups together in 1978-9 land designation debates  
  In 1977 & 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments also brought grps together to advance this legislation & prevent rollbacks   
  While the envl mvmt remains highly fragmented, consensus reports are becoming more commonplace as in the 1985 publication of An Environmental Agenda for the Future, Island Press & The Blueprint for the Environment in 1989  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  International Environmental Orgs
External
Links
  INTL ENVL PARTIES & MVMTS 
 
  There are two types of intl envl groups including those:
 
  -  US & European groups that have broadened their interests   
  -  indigenous NGOs from semi peripheral & peripheral nations who have broadened their interests  
  Non governmental orgs, NGOs, are those orgs & networks that conduct govt or state functions which include the new govt functions of charity, family administration, religious admin, militarism, & so on  
  The intl envl grps are more dependent upon NGOs than are the US envl grps
 
  Envl NGOs are more
-  grass roots oriented
-  policy specific 
-  parochial
-  pragmatic
-  results oriented
than trad envl grps
 
  Many NGO intl envl grps are much more personalized & do not relate well to abstract orgs as is the case in Mexico & France
 
  GREEN PARTIES 
 
  Green Parties are political parties some of which actually have the name the 'Green Party'
 
  There are nearly 20 Green Parties worldwide  
  The US has a very weak Green Party, which allied w/ Nader in 2000  
  There is no single worldwide Green Party & most Green Parties are in Europe  
  The European pol sys's allows minority parties to have a role in govt  
  GREEN PARTIES CHARACTERISTICS 
 
  Green Parties operate mostly at the local & regional levels
 
  Systems w/ majority voting eliminate electoral success & therefore make it very difficult for Green Parties to gain any power  
  Proportional representation doesn't guarantee success, but it allows more voices, such as the Green Party, at the political table  
 
 EUROPEAN ENVL MVMT 
 
  In England, the Commons, Open Spaces and Footpaths Reservation Society (COSFRS) was founded in 1865
 
  The COSFRS is the oldest envl org outside the US
 
  Like many envl mvmts, the British envl grps are tied to the biz cycle & do the best during booms & the worst during busts  
  Italian envl groups are mostly nature lovers' associations 
 
  EAST EUROPEAN ENVL MVMTS 
 
  E Euro has the worst pollution in the world
 
  E Euro has not envl mvmt, but Ecoglastnost is growing  
  Rudolph Barro is an E Euro famous academic & pol leader who has a strong integration of envlism & conflict theory  
  ASIAN ENVL MVMT   
  Deforestation is an imp issue for the Asian envl mvmt  
  India has, perhaps, the most complex system of resource extraction which any European empire ever estb in the dev world  
  Logging in India causes floods in the lower plains  
  The Tokyo airport was heavily protested  
 
 Taiwan & Hong Kong are infamous for
-  polluted air
-  black rivers
 
  China now has some of the world's worst air pollution  
  SO & CEN AM ENVL MVMT   
  Prior to mid 1960s, the Catholic Church & other NGOs in L Am coalesced around issues of charitable work & relief:   
  In the late 1960s, they shifted to a concern w/ soc justice  
  L Am envl grps are weak, & lack institutionalized channels for citizen participation  
  In So Am, the tropical forests are being clear cut & converted to grazing land
The Floram Project, organized by Brazilian scientists & industry, planted 10 b trees		  
  AFRICAN ENVL MVMT   
  Kenya has a Green Belt Movement:   that focuses on planting trees  
  Wangari Maathai  is Kenyan envl leader: “African government has not yet accepted the fact that people can direct their own destiny.  They want to guide them and they want to be followed blindly."  
  Maathai won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2004 for her envl work  
  Africa primarily has wildlife preservation grps that seek to protect endangered species such as the tiger, elephant, gorilla, etc.   
  Corporations are dumping nuclear and Indl wastes in Africa  
  MID EASTERN ENVL MVMT   
  The first Persian Gulf War demonstrated that the mid east is almost devoid of envl grps  
  the Mid East primarily has wildlife preservation grps  
  Israel has some envl grps  
  NGOs ARE EVOLVING IN 3 DIRECTIONS   
  a.   Some NGOs are seeking autonomy from the No grps  
  b.   Some NGOs are forming intl networks to keep up on the issues  
  c.   Some NGOs are performing new roles in legal defense & policy research  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Critiques of the Envl Mvmt
External
Links
  -  Project:  Your Critique of the Envl Mvmt
Link
  EXAGGERATED POWER 
 
  The size & influence of the envl mvmt has been grossly exaggerated
Envl orgs & spec intl grps in general have pol pwr at lobbying, but not much popular backing
 
  But any one person can vastly /\ their pol pwr by: 
a.  writing letters
b.  calling elected & appointed officials
c.  emailing		 d.  writing to/ appearing in the media
e.  going to DC & lobbying
 
  ENVL RACISM:  DO ENVL ORGS REPRESENT DIVERSE INTERESTS? 
 
  Minority leaders believe that envlists do not share the interests of disadvantaged communities
 
  Envl grps have been charged w/ racism because of their neglect of envl issues affecting minority communities  
  The envl justice mvmt focuses on how envl burdens are frequently borne by disadvantaged neighborhoods, Indian Tribes, etc.
 
  The envl mvmt has not put envl racism high on its agenda
 
  See Also:  Envl Racism  
  THE NORTH HAS IGNORED THE SOUTH 
 
  The envl mvmt has not included ethnic groups or interests of the 3rd world in its analysis or initiatives
 
  The No - So split has grown from being a small prob to a large prob in environmental issues as we understand that econ dev in the So = /\ pollution  
  The So wants the right to pollute to advance their econ dev, as the No did during its indl rev  
  ENVL ORGS ARE ELITIST & BUREAUCRATICALLY INEFFICIENT 
 
  Critics of the envl mvmt state that envl grps compromise what should be absolute goals
 
  Envl orgs are dominated by elites & wealthy interests 
 
  Envl orgs do not have membership that represents the population as a whole  
  The "great schism" is the gulf btwn envl grp leaders & grass roots members
 
  An example of the great schism is seen where the dissidents in Sierra Club accused the leaders of compromising goals to get legislation through Congress  
  PROBLEMS IN ENVLISM IN GENERAL   
 
 A problem w/ envlism in general is that there is: 
 
  a.  a tendency to focus on the science & ignore the politics & social implications  
  b.  opposition in the 3rd World to much of the North's agenda on the env  
  c.  a tendency to use existing categories of state as unit of analysis  
  d.  a tendency to view env & econ as in opposition  
 
 INDLISTS CRITIQUES OF THE ENVL MVMT 
 
 
 Indlists believe that the envl mvmt:
 
  a.  mvmt is unrealistic in that they too often ignore the realities of the world, esp econ & physical issues  
  b.  does not offer real positions, just negotiating positions  
  c.  spreads false info to the gen public  
  d.  inflames public opinion w/ sensationalistic depictions of indl practices  
  e.  does not rely on science  
 
 ENVL ORGS RESPONSE TO CRITICISM 
 
  Envlists note that opp grps always claim that another grp has too much pwr because they: 
a.  are not elected
b.  try to speak for everyone, but only rep spec individuals		 c.  are funded by rich spec individuals
d.  during cold war, were funded by communists
 

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Environmentalism:  The Social Movement
External
Links
  ENVLISM IS HISTORICALLY NEW
 
  Envl mvmts are a relatively new phenomenon going back maybe 200 yrs
 
  Green mvmts are considered new in relation to old labor  
  Green, civil rights, women's, peace mvmts all differ from labor in that they draw support from across the classes  
  THE ENVL MVMT IS RELATIVELY SMALL 
 
  The envl mvmt is relatively small when compared to other soc mvmts  
  From one perspective the envl mvmt may not even qualify as a soc mvmt because it is small, radical, bureaucratized, & professionalized
 
  The envl mvmt's small membership implies that its effect is result of professionalization; i.e. the manipulation of the media & access to the pol sys  
  In the 80s, Greenpeace became less radical & more focused on lobbying
 
  THE ENVL MVMT IS INTL 
 
  The intl character of the envl mvmt is seen in the fact that it is in 
a.  all indl nations 
b.  some 2nd world nations 
c.  many 3rd world nations		 d.  authoritarian & democratic nations 
e.  pre industrial, industrial, & post industrial nations
 
  The intl character of the envl mvmt reflects the intl or transboundary character of envl issues  
  THE ENVL MVMT'S INTERESTS PARALLEL THE INTEREST OF GOVTS 
 
  Govts have an interest in getting other nations to deal w/ envl issues
 
  If the 3rd world conserves on gas & reduces emissions, then the 1st world is more free to do less; or if I do more, you may do less  
  Envl mvmts can use the divergent interests of nation to their own advantage by berating govt X for not doing as much as nation Y  
  In most cases, the industrialized nations were responsive to the pressure of their peers, & thus would follow at least a similar envl pol  
  However, the Bush Jr. Admin of 2000 - 2004, 2004 - 2008, has chosen not only to not respond to the community of nations, it has chosen to pursue policies at odds w/ the community of indlized nations on the env, as well as in other areas  
  The Bush Jr. Admin has not signed the largest & most important intl treaty, the Kyoto protocols on global warming & thus the traditional envl mvmt of using intl peer pressure to advance changes is less effective today  
  The envl mvmts that are the most internationalized are experiencing the most growth  
  Envl mvmts can cooperate on issues, but have their own populace in which to seek political & monetary support  
  THE ENVL MVMTS COMPETITORS   
  The envl mvmt has few intl competitors other than a few soc mvmts such as the: 
a.  women's mvmt
b.  peace mvmt 
c.  human rights mvmt 		 d.  civil rights mvmt 
e. others
 
  THE ENVL MVMT CREATED THE MODERN EQUIVALENT OF THE "COMMONS"   
  The envl mvmt has a greater vision for an alt society than other soc mvmts because of its broad critique of capitalism, consumption, & the Western lifestyle  
  Some envl mvmts support a completely alt value sys, alt soc, alt way of life  
 
 The envl mvmt created the concept of the modern commons   
  THE ENVL PROBLEM IS THE MOST IMPORTANT   
  The envl mvmt holds that the env is perhaps the major soc prob faced by the world today  
  Many soc mvmts believe their issue is the most imp  
  The envl mvmt challenges the thesis that we are at "the end of history," i.e., that all major prob have been solved, or are being solved  
  For the envl mvmt, the major social cleavages have not been solved  
  Thus only the envl mvmt is a totally new political cleavage  
  But the transformational character of the envl mvmt is tempered by practical organizing concerns  
  THE IRONY OF THE ENVL MVMT   
  The very surplus that allows the 1st world & the knowledge class to exist is also the surplus which envl mvmt is attempting to end, limit, modify, etc.   
  SAVING THE ENVL IS A PUBLIC GOOD   
  For the envl mvmt, saving the env is in everyone's interest  
  The fact that the env is everyone's concern makes envlism too involved in too many forums  
  Being involved in the interests of all people allows envl mvmt to make moral & ethical claims that it is imperative for all grps to cooperate in overriding the politics as usual system, & address multiple level discords  
  Science can be used to support envlist claims, but has also been used to destroy envlist claims  

The End
 
Top