METHODS - ENVIRONMENTAL
ORGANIZATION
The construction of
the environmental organization data base consisted of four distinct steps. First, ten series of directories, eighty nine
print directories, and forty seven web directories containing environmental and conservation organizations with
national or regional coverage from 1899-2003 were gathered (if print) and
examined to gather names and specific data elements for each organization over
this time period. This file was then
cleaned of non-environmental organizations. This resulted in an organizational
file listing national environmental organizations from 1899-2003. The third task was to develop a data file of
the characteristics of the environmental organizations in the file. To accomplish this task, additional materials
were gathered on each organization, either by writing the organization,
examining the organization’s web site, or collecting historical written
material on the organization. Using
these materials, the fourth step involved coding the organizational characteristics. This created an environmental organizational
file with detailed coding information on each organization’s characteristics.
A. Compilation Of Organizational Listings
The following items
were examined to compile a organizational data base of
environmental organizations from 1899-2003.
1. Key word search, Encyclopedia of Associations: Organizations listed based on search of on-line
version – “Associations Unlimited”, using the subject headings listed in Table I for national or
international organizations in the
2. International, National, and Regional U.S. organizations listed in online version of Conservation
Directory
3. List from Jenkins
1995 Sample
4. List from
Baumgartner 1990 Sample
5. List from Brulle 1995
Sample
6. Review of all
organizations over $25,000 annual income in
appropriate
7. Review of the following print directories:
SERIES
1. Acid
rain resources directory. Acid Rain Foundation.
1982-1988
2. Bulletin Of The Associated Mountaineering
Clubs Of North America 1916-1927
3. Conservation Directory and predecessors 1900-2003
4. Conservation Yearbook 1952-1954
5. Directory
of National Environmental Organizations 1984 - 1992
6. Directory of National Organizations Concerned with Land Pollution
Control 1970-1974
7. Encyclopedia of Associations 1956-2003
8. Forestry Almanac 1929-1949
9. People
of Color Environmental Directory (series)
10. World
Directory of Environmental Organizations 1973 - 1996
1. A coastal directory for marine nature conservation: Marine
Conservation Society, - 1988
2. A directory : youth conservation
programs: Youth Policy Institute, - 1979
3. A directory of environmental organizations in the
4. A Directory of National Women’s Groups, - 1992
5. A Golden guide to environmental organizations, - 1972
6. A survey of environmental science organizations in the
7.
8. Bioregional Directory, Plant Drum Foundation - 1987
9. Bird conservation directory 2001
10. Buzzworm Environmental Journal Directory of
Environmental Organizations 1990
11. Carroll’s environmental directory, - 1995
12. Conservation and renewable energy resource directory, - 1980?
13. Consumer energy atlas, - 1980
14. Directory – Group Research Inc. , - 1962
15. Directory of American Agricultural Organizations - 1920
16. Directory of conservation tillage clubs & associations:
17. Directory of environmental and conservation organizations in the Metro
D.C. area -
1989
18. Directory of Environmental Information Sources, - 1972
19. Directory of Environmental Resources & Activities in the N.A. Religious
Community - 1992
20. Directory of Intentional Communities, 1992 & 1994
21. Directory of nature centers and related environmental education
facilities - 1979
22. Directory of official housing improvement and neighborhood
conservation agencies, - 1955
23. Directory of resources in neighborhood conservation - 1980
24. Directory Of Walking, Camping And Nature
Clubs Of
25. Directory of women in international natural resources, - 1983
26. Directory to Environmental Groups, - 1992
27. Directory: Ready reference on groups attempting to influence
governmental and economic affairs - 1962
28. Earth Tool Kit, - 1970
29. Ecotactics –The Sierra Club Handbook for
Environmental Activists, - 1970
30. Eenvironmental guidebook: Environmental Frontlines, -
2002
31. Energy activists directory : who's who in
energy conservation, conversion, and alternatives - 1975
32. Environment
33. Environmental Address Book , - 1991
34. Environmental Directory , - 1990
35. Environmental Hazards - Air Pollution, - 1989
36. Environmental Hazards - Marine Pollution, - 1993
37. Environmental Hazards - Radioactive Materials and Waste, - 1990
38. Environmental Hazards - Toxic Waste and Hazardous Material, - 1991
39. Environmental information sources handbook, - 1974
40. Environmental Profiles, - 1993
41. Environmental resource handbook., - 2002
42. EPA Information Resources Directory, - 1989
43. Federal environmental monitoring directory, - 1973
44. Gale Environmental Almanac, - 1993
45. Global oceans directory :a compendium of
organizations dedicated to marine conservation: EPA - 1992
46. GreenWorld's directory - 1994
47. Guide to Ecology Information and Organizations, - 1976
48. Guide to private citizen action environmental groups, - 1973
49. Guide to Public Affairs Organizations - 1946
50. Guide to the American Left: Laird Wilcox Editorial Research
Service, - 1993
51. International Health Organizations and Movements 1918-1939 1995
52. Inventory of environmental improvement programs Keep America Beautiful, Inc. - 1974
53. Liaison conservation directory for endangered and threatened
species - 1983, -
54. Macrocosm
55. Mining conservation directory 1998 :the hardrock mining activist's sourcebook
56. National directory of conservation land trusts Land Trust Exchange - 1989
57. National Directory of Farmland Protection Organizations, - 1983
58. National directory of local and regional land conservation
organizations Land Trust Exchange, 1985
59. National Directory of Safe Energy Organizations, - 1994
60. National Health Agencies - 1945
61. Naturalists Guide To The
62. Nature Directory: A guide to Environmental Organization, - 1991
63. New Age Journal – Annual Environmental Directory – 1990
64. North American conservation tillage clubs and associations - 1991
65. Officials and Organizations concerned with the conservation of
natural resources - 1945
66. Plant conservation directory, Center for Plant Conservation,
67. Regional conservation directory: Rocky Mountain Center on
Environment - 1972
68. Renewable energy resources :a directory
of conservation & renewable energy organizations & pubs - 1981
69. River conservation directory.
70. Sate and regional conservation councils, - 1969
71. Solar directory, Environmental Action of Colorado, 1975
72. Sportsman's Directory - 1891
73. State and regional conservation councils - 1969
74. Stevens environmental sourcebook::
Stevens Pub. Corp., - 1995
75. The Environmentalists, - 1993
76. This land is your land: a
guide to
77. Turning things around: a women’s occupational and environmental
health resource guide, - 1990
78.
79.
80.
81. Water conservation directory - 1991
82. Who is Who at the Earth Summit - 1992
83. Who is Who in Service to the Earth, -
1993
84. Who’s Who in Ozone, - 1994
85. Who's who in energy and conservation: New York State Alliance to Save Energy, -
1977
86. Women’s Council on Energy and the Environment – Membership
Directory, - 1994
87. World Environmental Report, - 1994
88. Yearbook Of The Department Of Agriculture
- 1899
89. Your Resource Guide to Environmental Organizations
, - 1991
10.
Books/Publications
a. NASH - WILDERNESS
b. SUTTER - DRIVEN
WILD
c. Report Of The
President's Committee On Wild-Life Restoration US. Dept Of
Agriculture 1934
11. Proceedings
a. Proceedings Of The National Conference On Outdoor Education 1963
b. Proceedings Of The
National Conference On Outdoor Recreation 1924
c. Proceedings Of The
National Conference On Outdoor Recreation 1926
d. Proceedings Of The
North American Wildlife Conference - 1936
e. Proceedings of the
f. Proceedings of the First National Conservation Congress - 1909
g. Proceedings of the National Park Conference, September 11 & 12, 1911
12. List of Organizations on Executive Committee of Environmental Justice Summit II
13. Environmental Organizations registered with the United Nations
14. Web listings as follows:
1. Acton Institute for the Study of Religion & liberty
-http://www.acton.org/ppolicy/environment/theology/orgs.html
2.
3. Amazing
Environmental Organization WebDirectory http://www.webdirectory.com
4. American
Rivers Listing http://www.amrivers.org/index.php
5.
6. Bird
Conservation Directory - http://www.abcbirds.org/directory/directory.htm
7. Center
for the Defense of Free Enterprise - Undue Influence Book Data - http://www.undueinfluence.com/
8. Children's
Environmental Health Network - http://www.cehn.org
9. Citizens
for Responsible Wildlife Management -
http://www.responsiblewildlifemanagement.org
10. Coalition
for Environmentally Responsible Economies - http://www.ceres.org
11. Conservation
Groups http://www.americanlands.org/forestweb/groups.htm
12. Dictator
Watch list of environmental groups - http://www.dictatorywatch.org
13. Directory
of Intentional Communities - http://iclist.ic.org/iclist/index.php?page=list&sort=alpha&display_all=true
14. DMOZ Open Directory
project - Env Justice ttp://dmoz.org/Society/Issues/Environment/Environmental_Justice/
15. Dogwood
Alliance Member Groups www.dogwoodalliance.org
16. Earthday
Network http://www.earthday.net/g&e/searchNetwork.asp
17. Ecoportal
http://www.eco-portal.com/
18. EF!
Journal - http://www.earthfirstjournal.org/efj/
19. Envirolink
- The Online Environmental Community - http://www.envirolink.org
20. Environmental
Health Professional Online - http://www.niehs.hih.gov
21. Environmental
Justice and Health Union - http://www.ejhu.org
22. Evangelical
Environmental Network - http://www.creationcare.org/partners.php
23. Freedom
Activist Network Index - http://www.freeact.net
24. Great
Lakes Directory http://www.greatlakesdirectory.org/
25. Green
Tithe - http://www.GreenTithe.com
26. GreenTreks
Network http://www.greentreks.org/education/links.asp
27. Harvard
University Forum on Religion & Ecology - http://environment.harvard.edu/religion/religion
28. Health
Care Without Harm - http://www.noharm.org
29. Heartwood
- http://www.heartwood.org
30. MacroNet -
http://www.macronet.org/htsearch.html
31. Minority
Environmental Leadership Development Institute - www.umich.edu/`meldi
32. Moving
Ideas - http://www.movingideas.org
33. National
Trappers Links - http://www.nationaltrappers.com/Funlinks.html#Organizations
34. North
American Association for Environmental Education - http://www.eelink.net
35. North
American Coalition For Christianity And Ecology -
http://www.nacce.org/links.html
36.
37. Partnership
for Children's Health and the Environment - http://www.partnersforchildren.org
38. Rachel’s
Hazardous Waste Newsletter Directory - www.rachel.org/orglist
39. Rails to
Trails Clearinghouse -
http://www.trailsandgreenways.org/connections/links/default.asp
40. Religion
and Environment Orgs http://www.icci.co.il/linkpageecologyreligion.html
41. Religious
Witness for the Earth http://www.religiouswitness.org/links.html
42. River
Network Organization - http://rivernetwork.org
43. Sprawl
Watch Clearinghouse - http://sprawlwatch.org
44. Toxic
Links Coalition Web Site - http://www.toxiclinks.net
45. U.S.
Climate Action Network
http://www.climatenetwork.org/uscanweb/uscan-contacts.htm
46. World
Directory of Environmental Directories Online - http://www.interenvironment.org
47. Yahoo Envr Web Dir
-http://dir.yahoo.com/Society_and_Culture/Environment_and_Nature/Organizations/
B. Selection of
National Environmental Organizations/Cleaning File
National Environmental Organizations are defined for this data collection effort as any national or regional nonprofit organization that seeks to bring about improvement in the natural environment. This role can be fulfilled for a number of reasons:
1. Size - either in budget, membership, or staff resources,
2. Perceived political influence - highly influential in establishing environmental agenda, either through lobbying, publication of widely read material, etc.
3. Uses a unique set of activities or tactics - the organization initiates actions that represent a unique position within the environmental movement i.e., it does different things.
4. Issue focus - the types of 'problems' and 'solutions' developed by the organization form a distinct position within the overall environmental movement, i.e., it looks at things differently.
In compiling our inventory, we excluded the following types
of organizations from the file:
1. Organizations with a local or foreign focus –
Local is defined as an organization with activity in only one state or
community (two states or more will be coded as regional orgs). If, however, a local organization has some
national activity (either currently or historically) it will be included in the
file. International environmental
organizations without a
2. Government organizations – Government
organizations are those whose participants are exclusively government officials
or government organizations. This
includes interstate commissions, government advisory boards, or elements of any
government agency. If an organization
includes government organizations as well as individuals or organizations from
the private sector (eg. an umbrella org. or joint govt/non-profit org membership), then the organization will
be included.
3. Industry trade associations – Organizations that are confederations of industrial or trade associations that take collective action to forward their joint economic interests were excluded. Joint industry, public, and government organizations that seek to influence industrial practices are included in the file.
4. Foundations without an operational function –
Foundations (or grant-givers) that are solely involved in issuing grants to
environmental organizations will not be included unless they have some type of
operational function aimed at environmental improvement.
5. Anti-environmental advocacy organizations –
Advocacy groups whose sole purpose is to counter the goals of pro-environmental
organizations will not be included.
Those organizations that are pro-environment on some issues and
anti-environmental on others will be included.
The list of organizations was checked against several directories of
anti-environmental organizations.
6. Strictly Humane Society/Animal Rights Organization (no secondary environmental concerns) – Those organizations that are strictly humane societies (concerned with protecting the interests of household pets), will not be selected. In addition, organizations specifically focusing on animal rights, without any connection to environmental issues, will also be excluded. If either of these types of organizations have a secondary environmental concern they will be included.
7. Strictly Outdoor Recreation
(no
secondary environmental improvement concern) – Those organizations that are strictly
recreational in focus (hiking, fishing, or hunting clubs etc.) will not be
coded unless they have some evidence of environmental concern.
8. For profit organizations – If an
organization provides products or services for profit they will not be included.
9. No environmental improvement goals – An organization will not be coded unless it has some goals or activities aimed at environmental improvement.
C. Data Gathering
on Organizational Characteristics
Utilizing the list
of organizations developed by the above process, additional material was sought
by letter to each listed current environmental organization. Key items requested included the
organization’s bylaws, current and past
C-1.
Founding and Defunct Date Determination
To determine dates of organizational founding and death dates where it was not listed in one of the consulted directories, the following procedures were used in priority order:
1. Web search for articles or other information regarding defunct organization
2. Search of Worldcat Data Base - for dates of publications by organization. The starting date and ending date of a periodical publication were assumed to be the birth and death dates of an organization.
3. Search of the data base - Historic NY Times, Washington Post, and Christian Science Monitor for mention of the organization’s name in any story. Birth date was based on the year of first mention of the organization, and death date was assumed to be the year after the last mention of the organization in any of these papers.
4. Failure to appear in the directory - the year of the birth and death for the organization were based on the initial year and last year an organization appeared in a directory series (Conservation Directory or Encyclopedia of Associations).
C-2 Environmental Organization
Characteristics File
This data collection yielded a data set of national environmental organizations with the following fields:
1. NAME
2. ADDRESS
3.
4. YR FOUNDED
5. YR DIED
6. DEATH
TYPE
1
Organization defunct
2 Address
unknown (listed in Directory)
3 Presently
inactive
4 No longer
listed in Directory
5
Merged/absorbed (name in “Absorbed By” or “Merged to Form”)
7 . OTHER NAMES OF ORGANIZATION INCLUDING:
Former Names
Merged To Form Names
Absorbed Names
Otherwise Known As Names
8. ENCYASSOC SIC CODES
9. ENCYASSOC SUBJECT DESCRIPTORS
10. ENCYASSOC SUBJECT CATEGORY
11. SOURCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL
IDENTIFICATION
12. SOURCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL
13, MEMBERS
2003
14. STAFF 2003
15. BUDGET 2003
16. MEMBERS 2000
17. STAFF 2000
18. BUDGET 2000
19. MEMBERS 1995
20. STAFF 1995
21. BUDGET 1995
22. MEMBERS 1990
23. STAFF 1990
24. BUDGET 1990
25. MEMBERS 1985
26. STAFF 1985
27. BUDGET 1985
28. MEMBERS 1980
29. STAFF 1980
30. BUDGET 1980
31. MEMBERS 1975
32. STAFF 1975
33. BUDGET 1975
34. MEMBERS 1970
35. STAFF 1970
36. BUDGET 1970
37. MEMBERS 1965
38. STAFF 1965
39. BUDGET 1965
40. MEMBERS 1960
41. STAFF 1960
42. BUDGET 1960
D. Environmental Organization Coded
Characteristics File
The material
gathered for each organization, including the textual materials provided by the
organization was then coded in accordance with the coding instructions shown in
the attached file. This resulted in a
coded characteristics file for each environmental organization in the following
dimensions:
1 & 2.
NATURE OF SMO Primary & secondary
nature of organization, based on the following definitions:
1 Advocacy Org: attempts to change institutional practices or decision making, or disseminates
material to impact public opinion on the environment.
2. Think Tank/Research Institute: Conducts research and disseminates results
3. University
Affiliated Research Institute: Conducts
research and disseminates results
4. Government Affiliated Association: Created by government action or affiliated with government
agency
5. Scientific Association: Association
of scientists or researchers
6. Professional Association Association of professionals in a given
field
7. Zoo/aquarium/museum/botanical garden: Collecting/exhibiting animals, plants, etc.
8. Land Trust: Purchases or trades land to ensure its
preservation
9. Environmental Education Organization: Develops/facilitates/conducts structured environmental
education programs
10. Recreation: Facilitates outdoor recreational activities
11. Foundation: Provides funds to environmental organizations
12. Plant/Animal/Ecosystem Propagation or Rehabilitation: Aids in the restoration, development,
preservation, or growth of natural world through physical
activities, such as
rehabilitation or release of injured wild animals, breeding
wild animals to restore
endangered species, tree planting, stream restoration,
community/beach cleanup, etc.
13. Humane Society: Cares for abandoned/orphaned/injured pets or
wild animals.
14. Other:
Other activities
3.
GROUP SCOPE
0. Unknown
1. International
2. National (code if no information and
appears to have national focus)
3. Regional
4.
MEMBERSHIP: Typically indicated by significant membership
plus presence of chapters
0. Unknown/Not
Indicated
1. Non-membership
2. Membership
Org
5.
MEMBERSHIP BASE
0. Unknown/None
1. Individuals
2. Organizations
only
3. Mixed:
individuals & orgs
4. Umbrella/Network/Coalition
5. Other/unspecified
6.
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
0. Unknown
1. Independent Organization
2. Federation – organization with multiple
chapters at state, local, or regional levels
7.
ANNUAL CONVENTION OR MEETING
0 Unknown/Not indicated
1. None
2. Annual
3. More than one time/year
8-23 TACTICS OF ORGANIZATION –
Activities engaged in by the organization to realize its goal based on the
following descriptions. Coded 0 – Not present, 1 - Present
8 Political
Advocacy/Lobbying: Lobbying, and
petition campaigns, electoral politics
9. Litigation/Legal Advocacy: Engage in civil/criminal suits or other legal
activities
10 Economic Boycott: Advocate product purchasing boycott to change
behavior of corporation
11. Scientific Advocacy: Development and dissemination of scientific information to influence
treatment of the natural environment
12. Public Opinion/Information Advocacy: Provide materials/publications to influence public opinion
13. Educational Advocacy: Foster development/conduct formal
environmental educational activities
14. Moral/Spiritual Advocacy: Develop and make moral pronouncements to promote changes in the
treatment of the natural environment
15. Aesthetic Advocacy: Develop/distribute aesthetic materials (pictures, music, etc.) to change
treatment of the natural environment
16. Community Organizing: Provide staff and technical assistance to
organize local community
organizations
17. Protest
Activities/Demonstrations: Use of public marches, rallies, nonviolent
protest, civil
disobedience or other forms of extra-institutional
collective action
18. Direct Action: Confrontational activities, such as Tree
Sitting, Road Blocking, Monkey wrenching
19. Offer Grants/Funds: offer funding or other material resources to
support change activities
20. Support Services:
Provide support activities on behalf of social movement groups,
such as publicity, research,
21 Produce/Develop/Sell Products: Develop, market, or promote new
technologies/products
22. Physical Activities/Buy Land: Physical Activities to
Conserve/Preserve/Restore – buy land for
preservation, plant trees, physically clean up areas,
plant/animal Reproduction or rehabilitation
23. Mass Communications/Media Techniques: Develop/promote use of mass media to
promote environmental improvement
DISCURSIVE
CHARACTERISTICS OF ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS - ITEMS 24-41
(See attached coding instructions for these items)
24-34 DISCURSIVE FRAME OF ORGANIZATION
– Discourses used by organization based on the following definitions. Coded
0 - Not Present, 1 - Present 2 - Strongly Present
24. Wildlife
Management
25. Conservation
26. Preservation
27. Reform Environmentalism
28. Environmental
Justice
29. Environmental Health
30. Deep Ecology
31. Ecofeminism
32. Ecospiritualism
33. Animal Rights
34. Other Discourse
35. PRIMARY DISCURSIVE FRAME OF ORGANIZATION Forced
choice of one primary discursive frame of organization (See attached coding instructions)
1. Wildlife
Management 5. Environmental Justice 9. Ecospiritualism
2. Conservation 6. Environmental
Health 10.
Animal Rights
3. Preservation 7. Deep Ecology 11. Other
Discourse
4. Reform
Environmentalism 8. Ecofeminism
36.
GENERALIST/FRAME SPANNER Does the organization
contains multiple discursive frames? (See attached coding instructions)
0. No
1. Yes
37.
ISSUE FOCUS Institutional focus,
based on the following definitions: (See attached coding instructions)
1. Narrow
focus
2. Broad,
multi-issue focus
3. Multi-movement
focus
38.
GOAL DEFINITION
Extent of clarity of institution’s
goals or objectives (See attached coding instructions)
1. Vague
2. Implicit in
Text
3. Well Defined
39.
1. Conservative
2. Managerial
3. Confrontational
40 & 41 STRATEGY FOR SOCIAL CHANGE Identification of the implicit theories of
how to bring about social change underlying social movement activities based on
the following definitions. Coded by
Primary and Secondary Strategy (See attached coding
instructions)
1. Transcendence
2. Education
3. Intellectual
4. Parliamentarian
5. Protest
6. Prophecy
7. Sabotage/Terrorism
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
(See attached coding instructions for these items)
42.
AMOUNT OF BUREAUCRACY
Does
the organization have a professional staff?
0. No
1. Yes
43, STRUCTURE OF ORGANIZATION Does the organization have chapters or subgroups?
0. No
1. Yes
44-49 STATUS OF LEADERS
44.
Are there limits to the
number of terms that can be served by members of the Board of
Directors of the
organization?
0. No
1. Yes
45.
Are there limits to the
number of terms that can be served by the Executive Officers
(President, Vice
President, etc.) of the organization?
0. No
1. Yes
46.
Are there limits to the
number of years that can be served by the Executive Director of the
organization?
0. No
1. Yes
47.
Are the members of the Board of Directors elected?
0. No
1. Yes, by current board of directors
2. Yes, by representatives of members
3. Yes, directly by members
48.
Are the Executive Officers of the organization elected?
0. No
1. Yes, by current board of directors
2. Yes, by representatives of members
3. Yes, directly by members
49.
Is the Executive Director elected?
0. No
1. Yes, by current board of directors
2. Yes, by representatives of members
3. Yes, directly by members
50-52. DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL GOALS
50.
Is there a provision for
a referendum to be held in the bylaws?
0. No
1. Yes
51.
Are there provisions for members to communicate with the Board of
Directors or officers of the
organization?
0. No
1. Yes
52.
Does the organization's literature contain information on the income and
expenses of the organization?
0. No
1. Yes
53. INTERNAL
CONFLICT/ CIRCULATION OF
DISSENTING OPINIONS Does the organization's literature contain
dissenting opinions regarding organizational matters of policy/program
initiatives?
0. No
1. Yes
54-56 CHARACTERISTICS OF MEMBERS LEVEL OF
KNOWLEDGE OF ORGANIZATION
54.
Are board meetings required to be public?
0. No
1. Yes
55.
Does the organization's literature contain the results of a Board of
Director's meeting?
0. No
1. Yes
56.
Does the organization's literature contain results of an election?
0. No
1. Yes
57-58 POWER DISTRIBUTION-
57.
Are there requirements for some form of proportional representation on
the Board of
Directors?
0. No
1. Yes
58.
Can members nominate individuals to run for election to the Board of
Directors or as officers
of the
organization?
0. No
1. Yes
59-61 PARTICIPATION SKILLS
59.
Are the rules for elections specified in the bylaws?
0. No
1. Yes
60.
Does the organization's literature contain notice of a meeting of the
Board of Directors?
0. No
1. Yes
61.
Does the organization's literature contain notice of an election?
0. No
1. Yes
62.
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE:
1. Oligarchy
2. Representative
3. Limited
Democracy
4. Democracy
CODING INSTRUCTIONS
DISCURSIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
The task of coding the discourse of environmental organizations involves characterizing their discourse in seven areas. These areas are:
1. Discursive Frame of Organization
2. Primary Discursive Frame of Organization
3. Generalist/Frame Spanner
4. Nature of Issue Focus
5. Clarity of Goal Definition
6. Rhetorical Style of Discourse
7. Strategy For Bringing About Social Change
The material on which to base your coding is contained in
the enclosed organization files. Each of
the files contain material on a particular
environmental organization. Included in
each file are descriptions of the organization from several environmental
directories, and copies of the organization’s founding statement, bylaws,
annual income tax return, and publication.
A separate coding sheet is enclosed for each organization. Based on the following descriptions of each
area, please complete a form for each organization.
1. DISCURSIVE FRAME OF ORGANIZATION: The first task is to code which environmental
discourse forms the viewpoint of the organization. The discourse on which an environmental
organization is based can be identified by reviewing the documents produced by
the organization. Every organization
produces a vast number of texts, including position papers, fund raising
letters, news releases, etc. Among these
documents, there are key documents that provide insights into the discourses on
which an environmental organization is based. One set of key documents are the
bylaws, annual reports, or self descriptions of the organization. Here the purpose of the organization is
stated in short, clear terms. This
statement of purpose is generally the clearest expression of the organization’s
world view. Another key area to examine
is the magazine produced by each organization.
The literature of environmental organizations can be seen as an effort
in mobilizing the members of the organization.
This creates a distinct genre of magazine. This genre has two general themes. First, the value of the organization is
demonstrated by success stories.
Secondly, the members are mobilized for further efforts by discussions
of threats to the desired state of affairs in the world, and the need for
action. An examination of the successes
and threats described in the magazine can provide valuable insights into the
type of discourse that forms the basis of the organization. There are ten environmental discourses that
can be selected.
A. Wildlife Management: This discursive frame defines an
orientation toward the recreational use of a given wildlife resource - be it fish species,
types of birds, or different animals.
Key components of this discourse are as follows:
n The scientific management of ecosystems
can ensure stable populations of wildlife.
n This wildlife population can be seen as a crop from which excess populations can be
sustainable harvested in accordance with the ecological
limitations of a given area.
n This
excess wildlife population thus can be utilized for human recreation in sport
hunting.
Organizations with this discursive frame focus on ensuring
that there are plenty of the desired species available for hunting or
fishing. They also define what
constitutes correct “sporting behavior.”
Organizations based on this discourse define their objective as
conserving or rationally developing our wildlife resources to provide for human
recreation needs. They use words such as
"maximizing the supply of game", or "conserve our wildlife
resources.” Their magazines are usually
highly polished and illustrated with the game species that the organization
seeks to conserve. Organizations with
this discursive frame are generally hunting or fishing organizations.
B. Conservation In this discourse, nature is a resource to be
used by human society to meet human needs.
This forms the basis for collective action to ensure that natural
resources are used by applying the criteria of rationality and efficiency to
achieve the maximum utility to society.
Key components of this perspective are:
n Physical
and biological nature is nothing more than a collection of parts that function
like a machine.
n Humans
need to use the natural resources provided by nature to maintain society.
n Nature can be managed by humans through the application of technical knowledge used by competent professionals.
n The
proper management philosophy for natural resources is to realize the greatest
good for the
greatest
number of people over the longest period of time.
Organizations based on this discourse define their objective as conserving or rationally developing our natural resources to meet long term human needs. They use words such as "ensure wise use of natural resources", or "bring about efficient conservation and development". In their publications, the focus is on successful instances of rational management of natural resources. The activities of the following types of organizations are generally included in this discourse:
Gardening Or
Beautification Club
Association Of Natural Resource Users (Joint Industry/Government Associations
, Recreational Use Groups
Land Trusts preserving Green Space
Soil And Water Conservation Organizations
Watershed Management Groups
Land
Management Groups
C. Preservation This discursive frame defines a spiritual and psychological
relationship between humans and the natural environment. In this discourse,
nature in the form of wilderness, untouched by human activity, has intrinsic
value. Nature also serves as a site for
self renewal through the experience of its aesthetic beauty. This translates into a concern over the
preservation of scenic areas, wilderness, and wildlife. Key components of this perspective are:
n Natural systems are self-creating evolutionary wholes that cannot be reduced to the sum of their
parts. Hence nature is not a machine, but an intact
organism.
n Human actions can impair the ability of natural systems to maintain themselves or to evolve
further
n Wilderness & wildlife are important component in supporting both the physical and spiritual life
of humans.
n Human values
go beyond those measured by the national income accounts to include the
preservation
of wild lands and life.
n Continued existence of wilderness and
wildlife is critical to the spiritual well being of humanity.
n Protection of wilderness areas and wildlife for the current and future generations is an essential
environmental
task.
Several key features identify organizations based on this discourse. First, they define their objective as preserving wilderness in a pristine state, untouched by humans. This includes leaving all of the plants and wildlife that inhabit that area to develop in a "natural" manner, i.e. unaffected by human influences. They use words such as "preserve and protect", or "ensure the continued existence of wilderness areas." Some Preservation organizations focus only on a specific species, or geographic region. This is reflected in the name of the organization. Some examples of these types of organizations are "Save the Whales", "Save the Sea Otter", and the "Mono Lake Committee". Secondly, the magazines produced by these type of organizations celebrates wilderness and wildlife through the use of extraordinary pictures and descriptive articles. The magazines also describe threats to wilderness areas or wildlife, and the need to take action to preserve them, and report to their membership on the triumphs that the organization has had in preserving a particular species, or wilderness area. The activities of the following types of organizations are generally included in this discourse:
Outdoor Camping
or Hiking Clubs
Land Trusts
Seeking To Preserve Biodiversity
Wildlife
Protection/Preservation Groups
Park/Wilderness Preservation Groups
Aquarium/Museum/Zoo/Botanical
Garden
D. Reform Environmentalism This discursive frame maintains that human prospects for the future
are linked to ecosystem conditions. Based in the natural sciences,
and the notion of humanity as part of the earth’s ecosystems, it links human
survival to environmental conditions. In
this discourse, nature has a delicate balance, and humans are part of it. This perspective emphasizes that nature is an
ecological system, that is, a web of interdependent relationships. Humanity is part of this ecological
system. Hence, to maintain a
healthy and growing social order, ecologically responsible actions are
necessary. These actions can be
developed and implemented through the use of law and the natural sciences. This perspective
animates action to identify and eliminate the physical causes of environmental
degradation. Key components of this
perspective are:
n Natural systems are the basis of all
organic existence, including humans
n Humankind is an element within natural
ecosystems, and hence human survival is linked to ecosystem survival.
n Ethical human actions (actions which
promote the good life for humankind) necessarily promote action toward all life
on earth in an ecologically responsible manner.
n Proper use of natural sciences can
guide the relationship between humanity and its natural environment.
Organizations based in this discourse identify their organization's purpose as protecting the earth's ecosystem, and the human condition overall. The purpose of these organizations tends to use phrases along the following lines: "to protect and enhance human welfare and combat environmental deterioration", or "this organization is dedicated to improving environmental quality." The magazines produced by these type of organizations contain descriptions of ecological problems, and propose ways to remedy them. In general, the descriptions of the problems are very analytic, and based in the natural sciences. The proposed remedy is usually some form of law or regulation to be enforced by government, or tax incentives to use market forces, to either clean up or reduce the ecological problem. In addition, successes of organizational initiatives are listed that generally appears as a regular feature of the magazine. Organizations in this discursive frame generally focus on the following areas:
Population
Control
Specific
Environmental Pollution Problem
Environmental Litigation
E. Environmental Justice This
perspective sees ecological problems occurring because of the structure of
society and the imperatives this structure creates for the continued
exploitation of both humans and nature.
Hence, the resolution of environmental problems requires fundamental
social change. The link between human
survival and ecosystem survival defined by Environmentalism is accepted. However, instead of focusing on the physical
causes of environmental degradation, this frame sees environmental problems as
creations of human social order. Hence
the solution of environmental problems lies in social change. Key components of this viewpoint are:
n Domination of humans by other humans
leads to domination of nature.
n The
economic system & nation-state are the core structures of society that
create ecological problems.
n Commoditization
& market
imperatives force consumption to continually increase in the developed economy.
n Environmental
destruction in low income/racially distinct communities,
or third world countries originates in the exploitation of the people who live
in these areas by the dominant social institutions.
n Resolution
of environmental problems requires fundamental social change based on
empowerment of local communities.
Regardless
of their specific focus, groups based in the discourse of environmental justice
define their objective as changing the social order in some manner to solve
environmental problems. The means to
carry out this goal include holding government and corporations accountable
through democratic processes, or by bringing legal
suits to end toxic waste dumping. Some organizations with this orientation
describe the purpose of their organization in terms such as "Create
economic democracy through localized decision-making", "Develop grass roots capabilities
to involve local citizens in resolution of their communities environmental
problems.", or "Abolish environmental racism". The magazines of
these organizations are focused on strategies and opportunities for
change. They report on successes of how
these changes were achieved, and provide guidance designed to enable citizens
to take effective action. Groups in this
discursive frame are generally local or regional in nature, and include a
number of hybrid civil rights/environmental justice organizations.
F. Environmental Health In this discourse, Human
health is the outcome of a number of interactions with physical, chemical,
biological and social factors in the natural environment. Additionally, human
health is directly impacted by toxic substances and pollution. To ensure community health requires a livable
and healthy community, with adequate social services, and elimination of
exposures to toxic or polluting substances.
Key components of this
discourse are:
n Human health is a collective property based
on community characteristics
n Exposure to toxic chemicals or other
pollutants results in a deterioration of community health
n To preserve human health, a clean and
unpolluted community environment is needed
Organizations with
this discursive frame focus on the identification and elimination of sources of
pollution that impact community health.
G. Deep
Ecology In this discourse, nature is seen as a value
in its own right, independent of human existence. Humanity is only one species among many, and
has no right to dominate the earth and all of the other living organisms. This creates an ethic of radical wilderness
advocacy. Unlike Preservation, which
seeks to keep what remains, Deep Ecology seeks the restoration of fully
functioning ecosystems, in which the evolution of life, unaffected by human
actions, can continue. It also advocates
the inherent rights of all nonhuman beings to exist in their natural
state. In this sense, Deep Ecology makes
a moral argument for the preservation of the natural environment. Key components of this discourse are:
n The
richness and diversity of all life on earth has intrinsic value.
n Humankind's
relations to the natural world presently endanger the richness and diversity of
life.
n Human
life is privileged only to the extent of satisfying vital needs.
n Maintenance
of the diversity of life on earth mandates a decrease in the human impacts on
the natural environment, and substantial increases in the wilderness areas of
the globe.
n Changes
(consistent with cultural diversity) affecting basic economic, technological,
and cultural aspects of society are therefore necessary.
Organizations based in Deep Ecology generally define their objectives as acting to preserve the rights of all nonhuman beings to a natural existence, unaffected by human intervention. These organizations use words such as "intrinsic rights of species to life" or "placing ecological considerations first in any decision making process" to define their purpose. The publications of these types of organizations are almost always printed on newsprint. The articles in these publications focus on assaults on living species, and interventions by the organization in their behalf. Using headlines such as "Dolphins Kidnapped" to describe an aquariums capture of dolphins for exhibit, these magazines describe the destruction of wilderness and wildlife as assaults on the inherent rights of these beings. In addition, since many Deep Ecology magazines engage in direct action to realize their goals, the magazines detail the exploits of the members of the organization as heroes protecting all living beings. Organizations in this discursive frame generally take the following forms:
Alternative Communities/Bioregionalists
Direct Action Wilderness Protection Groups
Radial Wilderness Advocacy Groups
H. Ecofeminism This discourse ties the development of a patriarchal society, and the domination of women by men, to the domination of nature by humanity. In this discourse, nature is a living web in which humanity is enmeshed. Ecosystem abuse is rooted in androcentric concepts & institutions. Specifically, the origin of the problem of ecological degradation is the treatment of nature as an object to be possessed and dominated, instead of a partner to be cooperated with. This cultural treatment of nature is tied to the development of an patriarchal society, and the domination of women by men. Just as man dominates women, humanity dominates nature. The resolution of our ecological problems thus entails a shift from a manipulative and controlling culture toward both women and nature to a culture of co-operation. Relations of complementarity rather than superiority between culture/nature, human/nonhuman, and male/female are needed to resolve the conflict between the human and natural worlds. Key components of this discourse are:
n
Earth is home for all life
and should be revered &
nurtured.
n
Ecosystem abuse is rooted in
androcentric concepts, values, and institutions.
n
Relations of complementarily
rather than superiority between culture/nature, human/nonhuman, and male/female
are needed to resolve both patriarch and environmental degradation.
n The
many problems of human relations, and relations between the human and nonhuman
worlds,
will not be resolved until androcentric institutions,
values, and ideology are eradicated.
Ecofeminist organizations generally define their
objectives to expand the use- of feminist views into the decision making process
regarding the natural environment, such as 'promote the inclusion of women and
their environmental perceptions in the design and implementation of development
and environmental policies.'” magazine: The magazines of ecofeminist
organizations highlight role of women and the home economy in environmental
affairs. They also highlight how
effective programs that originate from the perceptions of women can effectively
deal with environmental issues.
I. Ecospiritualism For this discursive frame, nature is God's creation, and humanity
has a moral obligation to keep and tend the Creation. Hence, natural and unpolluted ecosystems and
biodiversity need to be preserved. Key
components of this discourse are:
n Nature is
endowed with spiritual value.
n Humanity,
as part of nature, has a moral obligation to preserve it intact.
n Religious beliefs need to be developed
that embody this ethic.
n These beliefs can then inform actions to
create an ecologically sustainable society.
Organizations with this perspective generally take the form of either faith-based or congregation based efforts to preserve the natural environment. The rationale for action is based on a moral argument regarding the spiritual or religious character of Nature and humanity’s obligation toward it.
J. Animal Rights In this discursive frame, all species are seen to have intrinsic rights to realize their own evolved characteristics, and to live an independent life free from human direction or intervention. Key components of this discourse are:
n All of creation is endowed with an ability to define itself and evolve
n Life thus has a right to be left to develop according to its own character
n Humanity has no right to infringe on these rights of animals
2. PRIMARY DISCURSIVE FRAME OF ORGANIZATION: The second task is to code the single
best descriptor of the discursive frame of the organization. This is a forced choice of one of the
discursive frames previously described.
3. GENERALIST/FRAME SPANNER: The third task is to code whether the organization has a significant presence of two or more discursive frames evident in the file materials. If two or more discursive frames are identified as strongly present, then the organization is a frame spanner. This is a forced choice coding.
4. NATURE OF ISSUE FOCUS: Task four is to characterize the issue focus of the organization according to the following definitions.
A. Narrow focus: Single or very limited issue focus, related only to one issue or topic.
B. Broad, multi-issue focus: Focus on a number of environmentally related issues
3. Multi-movement focus: Embraces a very wide range of issues, including those outside of environmental concerns, such as human rights, civil rights, economic equity, etc.
5. CLARITY OF GOAL DEFINITION Task five involves a characterization of the clarity of the goal of the organization into one of the following categories:
A. Vague: Difficult to discern what the overall goal of the organization is, or what it seeks to accomplish.
B. Implicit: Although not directly stated, the overall goal of the organization can be discerned from the textual materials in the file.
C. Well Defined: Specific, well defined goal identifiable in the textual materials of the organization.
6. RHETORICAL
A. Conservative A style of language use
that accepts and legitimates the basic order of society. It accepts and reaffirms the dominant
cultural beliefs of society and the current power structure as legitimate. Questions about the status quo and existing
relationships of power are not raised.
Conservative environmental texts generally focus on a
narrow incremental goals that can marginally improve particular
environmental problems.
B. Managerial A style of language use
that accepts that the basic order of society is legitimate, but proposes
marginal changes within the existing social order. Some of the aspects of the dominant cultural
beliefs and power structure are seen as either illegitimate or outdated. But the amount of this problem in the
dominant cultural beliefs is not great enough to reject the social order. Rather, society is seen as basically sound,
but in need of some fixes- This results in a discourse that identifies problems
and then suggests remedies that can be brought about within the existing social
structure. Managerial environmental
texts generally use scientific information to illustrate a specific problem,
and then identify specific policy measures that can be implemented within
existing social institutions to mitigate or rectify a particular problem.
C. Confrontational A style of language use
that challenges the legitimacy of the existing social order and forwards
alternatives. This style of language
rejects the legitimacy of the basic order of society. This includes a rejection of the dominant cultural
beliefs and existing power structure. Instead. an alternative set of
cultural beliefs is forwarded and advocated.
Confrontational environmental texts identify environmental problems as
being so fundamentally tied to our current social order that solutions to them
lie in another way of organizing human relations to the physical and natural
environment. These texts then attempt to
develop an alternative ways to organize social order.
7. STRATEGY TO
BRING ABOUT SOCIAL CHANGE: The seventh task is to characterize
the way in which the environmental organization attempts to realize its objectives. Social movement organizations engage in a
vast array of particular activities.
Underlying these activities, there are implicit theories of how to bring
about social change (Lofland 1996). The coding task is to identify which one of
the seven categories best describes the implicit strategy on which the
organization bases its action. One of
the following strategies should be chosen.
A. Transcendence: This approach to social change focuses on rapidly changing what people believe. Organizations following this strategy attempt to create a new society by bringing about a shift in consciousness. By changing what people believe, a new society would emerge. Application of this strategy in the environmental movement entails the use of consciousness raising procedures, and artistic or aesthetic presentations that convey an environmental viewpoint.
B. Education: The education strategy entails the collection
and systematic dissemination of information.
This strategy envisions that by collecting and communicating information
to the public, the power of reason would convince the public to act to bring
about the desired social change- In environmental organizations,
this strategy involves activities such as; developing and disseminating environmental
education materials, producing documentary films, and operating environmental education
centers.
C. Intellectual: Although similar to education, this strategy
of social change is premised on the belief that new insights, developed by
intellectuals, will lead to social change.
By developing these ideas, and then educating the activists and
politicians about them, this strategy envisions that a new politics would be enabled. In the environmental movement, this strategy serves
as the basis for the actions of university and environmental research
institutes, and individual writers.
D. Parliamentarian: This strategy for social change involves
working through the existing power structures to bring about change. This strategy is premised on the idea that
the existing social institutions provide a workable means to address the
specific problem. The key focus of this
strategy is to develop 'workable' and 'realistic' proposals that can be
implemented. In the environmental movement,
this strategy involves these organization in legislative and regulatory
development, judicial actions, such as suits, and developing actions 'in
partnership' with corporations, and governmental agencies.
E. Protest: The protest strategy involves a shift away from attempting to change society through presentation of reasoned arguments. Instead, change is based on forcing consideration of movement issues through direct action. This strategy seeks to require concessions by developing actions that lead to the disruption of regular routines. To restore regular social routines, the changes demanded by the protestors must be fulfilled. In the environmental movement, this is enacted in various forms of civil disobedience, ranging from sit ins, tree sitting, blocking roads, and street demonstrations.
F. Prophecy: The prophecy strategy entails a radical rejection of the dominant social order. Rather than seeking changes within society, this approach to social change involves the creation of separate communities based on an alternative world view. This strategy is based upon the notion that the dominant social order can be replaced by creation and expansion of alternative communities and ways of life. In the environmental movement, this is strategy takes the form of attempts of moral regeneration through the creation of communes, and other alternative institutions.
G. Sabotage/Terrorism: This strategy, although similar to protest, views social change as coming about through the continuous disruption of regular social routines. By undertaking illegal actions against proper or people, this strategy hopes to force collapse of the established practices, and to open room for the substitution of alternative practices and institutions. In the environmental movement, this takes the form of monkeywrenching, violent street protests, burning of SUVs or undesired building developments.
CODING INSTRUCTIONS
ORGANIZATIONAL
STRUCTURE
Coding of the organization’s internal structure involves a
review of the bylaws to determine the degree of democracy in the
organization. This was based on Devall's strategy (Devall,1970). In this study, he developed a series of
criteria to typify the organizational type that characterized the Sierra
Club. Based on Michels
(1915) and Lipset (1956), this index contains nine
variables. These criteria are operationalized by answering the question(s) listed below
each area in italics through a review of the bylaws and literature of the
organization.
Amount of Bureaucracy - Organizations with large,
professional staffs are less democratic than those organizations with smaller
staffs.
1. Does the organization
have a professional staff?
Structure of Organization - Organizations with a
pluralist, decentralized structure, with the opportunity for multiple centers
of power to exist are more democratic than centralized organizations.
2. Does the organization have chapters or
subgroups?
Status of Leaders and Members - Organizations with a
small amount of status incongruity between the leaders and members of the
organization will be more democratic than organizations where this incongruity
is high.
3. Are there limits to the number of terms that
can be served by members of the Board of Directors, or officers of the
organization?
4. Are the members of the Board of Directors or
officers of the organization elected?
Development of Organizational Goals - Organizations
where the overall goals and programs of the organization are fluid and
changeable are more democratic than organizations with a fixed set of goals,
and the decisions implementing them are seen as technical or administrative
matters.
5. Is there a provision for a referendum to be
held in the bylaws?
6. Are there provisions for members to
communicate with the Board of Directors or officers of the organization?
7. Does the organization's literature contain
information on the income and expenses of the organization?
Internal Conflict - Organizations with a moderate
level of conflict are more democratic than organizations that do not have any
defined cleavage and Circulation of Dissenting Opinions - Organizations
where members are able to receive dissenting opinions are more democratic than
organizations where members cannot receive this information (Combined for
coding procedures.)
8. Does the organization's literature contain
dissenting opinions regarding organizational matters of policy/program
initiatives?
Characteristics of Members Level of Knowledge of Organization
- Organizations with interested and informed members are more democratic than
organizations with apathetic members.
9. Are board meetings required to be public?
10. Does the organization's literature contain
the results of a Board of Director's meeting?
11. Does the organization's literature contain
results of an election?
Power Distribution - Organizations with no
overwhelming faction are more democratic than an organization with one faction
holding a strong majority position in power.
12. Are there requirements for some form of
proportional representation on the Board of Directors?
13. Can members nominate individuals to run for
election to the Board of Directors or as officers of the organization?
14. Can members vote for members of the Board of
Directors or officers?
Participation Skills - Organizations with
opportunities for members to learn how to participate in organizational
politics outside of the control of the official hierarchy are more democratic
than organizations where these skills can only be learned by participating
within the hierarchy.
15. Are the rules for elections specified in the
bylaws?
16. Does the organization's literature contain
notice of a meeting of the Board of Directors?
17. Does the organization's literature contain
notice of an election?
18
Organizational Structure: Based on the results of this series of
questions, each organization is assigned to a type of organization using the
following criteria.
1. Oligarchy - Governed
by Board of Directors. The Board of
Directors is a self replicating mechanism and elects the officers of the
organization. No provisions for
individual member input exist.
2.
Representative - Members can elect representatives for their local
chapter of the organization. These representatives
then participate in the selection of the board of directors, officers, and
policies of the organization.
3. Limited Democracy -
Governed by mix between Board of Directors and members. Individual members can nominate/elect some of
the members of the board of directors or officers of the organization. However, certain aspects of organizational
control are specifically delegated to the Board of Directors.
4. Democracy - Governed by members. Board of Directors and Officers of the Organization are nominated and elected by membership. Policies of the organization can be debated and voted upon by individual members.
APPENDIX
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF
ASSOCIATIONS
|
Acid Rain Agroforestry Alleghenies Alpine Alternative Lifestyles Alternative Technology Animal Rights Animal Welfare Animals Appalachian Appropriate Technology Bicycle Biology Bioregionalism Bird Birds Of Prey Burro Butterfly Camping Canoeing Cetaceans Chimpanzee Climbing Conservation Conservationist Cougar |
Deer Duck Eagles Ecology Elks Energy Environment Environmental Education Environmental Health Environmental Law Environmental Quality Evolution Family Planning Feminism Ferret Fish Fishing Food And Drugs Forestry Gardening Government Accountability Hazardous Materials Hazardous Wastes Hiking |
Historic Preservation Home Economics Hunting Insects Irrigation Land Control Mollusks Moose Natural Disasters Natural Resources Nature Religions New Age Noise Control Oceanography Organic Farming Outdoor Education Outdoor Recreation Owls Paper Parks And Recreation Pollution Control Population Primates Property Rights Public Lands Public Transit Radioactive Waste Rain Forests |
Rangeland Reptiles Rural Development Safaris Sanitarians Sanitation Self-Sufficiency Sewage Shooting Social Action Social Change Social Problems Soil Soil Conservation Solar Solar Energy Sustainable Agriculture Toxic Exposure Waste Water Water Conservation Water Pollution Whales Wildlife Wildlife Conservation Wind Energy Women’s Rights |
Table I
350 Preservation of Natural Resources
(Conservation)
351 Combating or Preventing Pollution
(Air, Water, Etc.)
352 Land Acquisition for Preservation
353 Soil or Water Conservation
354 Preservation of Scenic Beauty
355 Wildlife Sanctuary or Refuge
379 Other Conservation, Environmental or
Beautification Activity
529 Ecology or Conservation Advocacy
541 Population Control Advocacy
TABLE II
NTEE ACTIVITY CODES
NTEE Code Category
of Organization
C00 Environmental Quality Protection, Beautification
C01 Environmental Alliance/Advocacy
Organizations
C02 Management & Technical
Assistance
C03 Professional Societies, Associations
C05 Research Institutes and/or Public
Policy Analysis
C11 Single Organization Support
C12 Fund Raising and/or Fund
Distribution
C19 Monetary Support N.E.C.
C20 Pollution Abatement and Control
Services
C27 Recycling Programs
C30 Natural Resources Conservation and
Protection
C32 Water Resource, Wetlands
Conservation and Management
C34 Land Resources Conservation
C35 Energy Resources Conservation and
Development
C36
C40 Botanical, Horticultural, and
Landscape Services
C41 Botanical Gardens, Arboreta and
Botanical Organizations
C42 Garden Club, Horticultural Program
C50 Environmental Beautification and
Aesthetics
C60 Environmental Education and Outdoor
Survival Programs
C99 Environmental Quality, Protection,
and Beautification N.E.C.
D01 Animal Related Alliance/Advocacy
Organizations
D20 Animal Protection and Welfare
D30 Wildlife Preservation, Protection
D31 Protection of Endangered Species
D32 Bird Sanctuary, Preserve
D33 Fisheries Resources
D34 Wildlife Sanctuary, Refuge
E01 Health Alliance/Advocacy
Organizations
K25 Farmland Preservation
N32 Parks and Playgrounds
W01 Public, Society Benefit
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
W05 Public, Society Benefit Research
Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis
TABLE
CODING SHEET
IN/OUT DECISION
|
NAME OF
ORGANIZATION: URL: |
|
A.
|
IN/OUT |
|
|
|
B. OUT REASON CODE
1. Local 6.
Humane Society 2. Govt. Org 7.
Recreation 3. Trade Assoc 8.
For Profit 4. Foundation 9. No
Environmental Improvement Goal 5. Anti-Environmental Org |
REASON CODE
|
|
|
|
|
CODING SHEET - ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS |
|||||||
1 & 2. NATURE OF SMO 1. Advocacy Org 5.
Scientific Assoc 9. Environmental Ed 13. Humane Society 2. Think Tank/Research Inst 6. Prof Assoc
10. Recreation 14. Other 3. Univ Affil Research
Inst. 7. Zoo/aquarium/etc 11. Foundation 4. Govt Affil Assoc 8. Land Trust 12. Plant/Animal Prop |
#1. Primary |
#2. Secondary |
|||||
|
3. GROUP SCOPE
0. Unknown
2. National 1. International
3. Regional |
|
||||||
|
4. MEMBERSHIP 0. Unknown/Not Indicated 1. Non-membership 2. Membership Org |
|
||||||
|
5. MEMBERSHIP
BASE 0. Unknown/None 2. Organizations
only 4. Umbrella/Network/Coalition 1. Individuals 3. Mixed:
individuals & orgs 5. Other/unspecified |
|
||||||
|
6.
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE 0. Unknown 1. Independent
Organization 2. Federation |
|
||||||
|
7. ANNUAL
CONVENTION OR MEETING 0 Unknown/Not
indicated 2. Annual 1. None 3. More than one time/year |
|
||||||
|
TACTICS 8-23 |
ABSENT- 0 |
PRESENT-1 |
|||||
|
8. Political
Advocacy/Lobbying |
|
|
|||||
|
9. Litigation/Legal Advocacy |
|
|
|||||
|
10. Economic Boycott |
|
|
|||||
|
11. Scientific Advocacy |
|
|
|||||
|
12. Public Opinion/Information
Advocacy |
|
|
|||||
|
13. Educational Advocacy |
|
|
|||||
|
14. Moral/Spiritual Advocacy |
|
|
|||||
|
15. Aesthetic Advocacy |
|
|
|||||
|
16. Community Organizing |
|
|
|||||
|
17. Protest
Activities/Demonstrations |
|
|
|||||
|
18. Direct Action |
|
|
|||||
|
19. Offer Grants/Funds |
|
|
|||||
|
20. Support Services |
|
|
|||||
|
21. Produce/Sell Products |
|
|
|||||
|
22. Physical Activities/Buy
Land |
|
|
|||||
|
23. Mass Communications/Media
Techniques |
|
|
|||||
|
DISCURSIVE FRAME 24-34 |
NOT PRESENT - 0 |
PRESENT - 1 |
STRONG PRESENCE - 2 |
||||
|
24. Wildlife Management |
|
|
|
||||
|
25. Conservation |
|
|
|
||||
|
26. Preservation |
|
|
|
||||
|
27. Reform Environmentalism |
|
|
|
||||
|
28. Environmental Justice |
|
|
|
||||
|
29. Environmental Health |
|
|
|
||||
|
30. Deep Ecology |
|
|
|
||||
|
31. Ecofeminism |
|
|
|
||||
|
32. Ecospiritualism |
|
|
|
||||
|
33. Animal Rights |
|
|
|
||||
|
34. Other Discourse |
|
|
|
||||
|
35. PRIMARY
DISCURSIVE FRAME OF ORGANIZATION (Forced
Choice - Only One Code Allowed) 1.
Wildlife Management 5.
Environmental Justice 9. Ecospiritualism 2.
Conservation 6.
Environmental Health 10. Animal
Rights 3.
Preservation 7.
Deep Ecology 11.
Other Discourse 4.
Reform Environmentalism 8.
Ecofeminism |
|
||||||
|
36. GENERALIST/FRAME SPANNER 0. No 1. Yes |
|
||||||
|
37. ISSUE
FOCUS 0. Unknown 1. Narrow
focus 2. Broad,
multi-issue focus 3.
Multi-movement focus |
|
||||||
|
38. GOAL
DEFINITION 0. Unknown 1. Vague 2. Implicit 3. Well
Defined |
|
||||||
|
39. 1.
Conservative 2. Managerial 3.
Confrontational |
|
||||||
|
40 & 41.
STRATEGY 0. Unknown 4. Parliamentarian 1.
Transcendence 5. Protest 2. Education 6. Prophecy 3.
Intellectual 7. Sabotage/Terrorism |
#38 Primary |
#39 Secondary |
|||||
|
|
|
||||||
CODING SHEET - ORGANIZATIONAL GOVERNANCE
Based on the information contained in the attached organizational bylaws and other material, indicate if information related to the following items appears.
|
CATEGORY |
NO (0) |
YES (1) |
||||
|
42. Does the
organization have a professional staff? |
|
|
||||
|
43. Does the
organization have chapters (sub groups)? |
|
|
||||
|
44. Are there term
limits for members of the Board of Directors? |
|
|
||||
|
45. Are there term limits for the executive officers (President, Vice President, etc.) of the organization? |
|
|
||||
|
46. Are there term
limits for the Executive Director of the organization? |
|
|
||||
|
|
NO (0) |
YES, BY CURRENT BOARD OF DIRECTORS (1) |
YES, BY |
YES, DIRECTLY BY MEMBERS (3) |
||
|
47. Are members of the Board of Directors elected? |
|
|
|
|
||
|
48. Are the executive officers of the organization elected? |
|
|
|
|
||
|
49. Is the Executive Director elected? |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
NO (0) |
YES (1) |
||||
|
50. Is there a provision for a referendum to be held in the bylaws? |
|
|
||||
|
51. Does the organization's literature contain information on the income and expenses of the organization? |
|
|
||||
|
52. Are there provisions for members to communicate with the Board of Directors or officers of the organization? |
|
|
||||
|
53. Does the organization's literature contain dissenting opinions regarding organizational matters of policy/program initiatives? |
|
|
||||
|
54. Are board meetings required to be public? |
|
|
||||
|
55. Does the organization's literature contain the results of a Board of Director's meeting? |
|
|
||||
|
56. Does the organization's literature contain
results of an election? |
|
|
||||
|
57. Are there requirements for some form of proportional representation on the Board of Directors? |
|
|
||||
|
58. Can members nominate individuals to run for election to the Board of Directors or as officers of the organization? |
|
|
||||
|
59. Are the rules for elections specified in
the bylaws? |
|
|
||||
|
60. Does the organization's literature contain notice of a meeting of the Board of Directors? |
|
|
||||
|
61. Does the organization's literature contain
notice of an election? |
|
|
||||
|
62. 2.
Representative 3. Limited Democracy 4. Democracy |
|
|||||