capitalist movements, including those convened by the World Social Forum from
its founding event at Porto Alegre in 2001, and more recently the ‘Climate Justice’,
‘Occupy’ and ‘Anonymous’ movements. Such movements, even if focused on a
particular environmental or social issue, have developed a larger critique of the
way that contemporary neoliberal capitalism has affected the environment, and social
and political life, and has acted to undermine rights, producing inequality and
poverty.
Third, some green movements over time, or through splits in original groupings,
have become increasingly professionalized, forming more formal organizations, and
arguing for a place at formal policy tables and intergovernmental negotiations to
put the green case. An important spur to this was the major UN Conference on
Environment and Development held in Rio in 1992. Its predecessor in Stockholm
in 1972 had hailed the arrival of the environmental movement on the international
stage and was the moment when many organizations formed, led by visionaries
such as Barbara Ward, author of Only One Earth (Ward and Dubos, 1972) or inspired
by the likes of Rachel Carson, author of the classic environmentalist text, Silent
Spring (Carson, 1962). However, it was in 1992 that environmental issues hit the
mainstream, backed by detailed analysis and argument in the World Commission
in Environment and Development report, Our Common Future (Brundtland, 1987),
and then crystallized in the establishment of international conventions and the
bottom-up process Agenda 21 (UNEP, 1992). Such institutionalization has, of
course, presented strategic and tactical challenges, with co-optation and reformist
managerialism being balanced against access and influence. However, since the 1990s
and the rise of environmental concerns in national and international policy arenas,
such organizations have become increasingly influential, striking up important
achievements in a range of areas from biodiversity protection to climate change
to sustainable development goals, and even making inroads into business through
organizations such as the World Business Council on Sustainable Development.
Whether such groups can be classified as ‘movements’ is a moot point, however.
Some self-define not as such, but as non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Many
in the more activist groupings will dismiss organizations that engage closely with
the mainstream as co-opted ‘sell-outs’, no longer grounded in real citizens’ concerns
or challenges to the status quo. However, whatever the classification, the important
point is that today there is a huge array of groups, more or less formally organized,
committed to green transformations of different sorts. They have different
organizational forms, different framings of the problem and different proposed
solutions; they have different strategies and tactics in respect of the politics required,
and they are networked in different ways, not always working together
harmoniously.
Drawing insights from the Honey Bee Network in India, Anil Gupta (Gupta,
2013) usefully argues that movements (grassroots action) must interact with
networks (that link different grassroots forms) in order to embed and spread ideas
and change, and must be supported by institutions (embracing larger organizations)
Mobilizing for green transformations 121
its founding event at Porto Alegre in 2001, and more recently the ‘Climate Justice’,
‘Occupy’ and ‘Anonymous’ movements. Such movements, even if focused on a
particular environmental or social issue, have developed a larger critique of the
way that contemporary neoliberal capitalism has affected the environment, and social
and political life, and has acted to undermine rights, producing inequality and
poverty.
Third, some green movements over time, or through splits in original groupings,
have become increasingly professionalized, forming more formal organizations, and
arguing for a place at formal policy tables and intergovernmental negotiations to
put the green case. An important spur to this was the major UN Conference on
Environment and Development held in Rio in 1992. Its predecessor in Stockholm
in 1972 had hailed the arrival of the environmental movement on the international
stage and was the moment when many organizations formed, led by visionaries
such as Barbara Ward, author of Only One Earth (Ward and Dubos, 1972) or inspired
by the likes of Rachel Carson, author of the classic environmentalist text, Silent
Spring (Carson, 1962). However, it was in 1992 that environmental issues hit the
mainstream, backed by detailed analysis and argument in the World Commission
in Environment and Development report, Our Common Future (Brundtland, 1987),
and then crystallized in the establishment of international conventions and the
bottom-up process Agenda 21 (UNEP, 1992). Such institutionalization has, of
course, presented strategic and tactical challenges, with co-optation and reformist
managerialism being balanced against access and influence. However, since the 1990s
and the rise of environmental concerns in national and international policy arenas,
such organizations have become increasingly influential, striking up important
achievements in a range of areas from biodiversity protection to climate change
to sustainable development goals, and even making inroads into business through
organizations such as the World Business Council on Sustainable Development.
Whether such groups can be classified as ‘movements’ is a moot point, however.
Some self-define not as such, but as non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Many
in the more activist groupings will dismiss organizations that engage closely with
the mainstream as co-opted ‘sell-outs’, no longer grounded in real citizens’ concerns
or challenges to the status quo. However, whatever the classification, the important
point is that today there is a huge array of groups, more or less formally organized,
committed to green transformations of different sorts. They have different
organizational forms, different framings of the problem and different proposed
solutions; they have different strategies and tactics in respect of the politics required,
and they are networked in different ways, not always working together
harmoniously.
Drawing insights from the Honey Bee Network in India, Anil Gupta (Gupta,
2013) usefully argues that movements (grassroots action) must interact with
networks (that link different grassroots forms) in order to embed and spread ideas
and change, and must be supported by institutions (embracing larger organizations)
Mobilizing for green transformations 121