The Ecologist













 

Blackwashing: do NGO tactics risk long term public trust?

Tom Levitt

1st January, 2010

Instead of making exaggerated claims about species becoming extinct, NGOs could make progress on issues like deforestation by collaborating more closely with companies, claims a new report

The continued expansion of palm oil plantations means orangutans are just a few years from extinction, if you accept the predictions of various environmental groups, including Friends of the Earth.

One group, the Rainforest Action Network (RAN), has gone further in claiming, 'orangutans are predicted to become extinct as early as 2011.'

Neither claim is likely to be true and may in fact be evidence of 'blackwashing', a term used to describe environmental scaremongering and propaganda.

A report published recently in the journal of tropical biology and conservation analysed the publicity tactics used by both NGOs and palm oil companies on the issue of tropical deforestation.

It is openly critical of groups, including FOE and RAN, for making, 'exaggerated claims in their campaigns...misleading and unverified accusations of avoidable environmental degradation by corporations.'

It says there are 50,000 orangutans in 54 wild populations scattered across Sumatra and Borneo. And that at least 38 of those populations exceed 250 individuals, the level needed to maintain a viable breeding population.

No extinction in 2011

Other organisations like the Sumatran Orangutan Society refuse to use extinction dates because of their unreliability. ‘We prefer to say that they are likely to be the first great ape species to become extinct unless we stop deforestation,’ says spokesperson Helen Buckland.

Report co-author Rhett Butler explains further:  'We aren't saying the deforestation isn't occuring (it certainly is) but that NGOs need to be careful about getting the facts right. For example, claiming that orang-utans are going to be extinct by 2011 is not accurate.'

RAN admitted that its figure was inaccurate. Spokesperson Margaret Swink said it had been taken from a Guardian news report that in turn got it from a British orangutan association.

'Everyone wants to take the fact that is the most convincing or grabs people's attention the quickest. We try and be as accurate as possible but we don't always succeed.

'We are a campaigning organisation so research is not our main thrust,' she says.

Unfair comparison


Swink says she hopes people realise that the action they and other NGOs take are designed to force corporations to be more responsible and acknowledge the impact their decisions have on wild orangutan populations.

'This is the critical point rather than the exact extinct date of 2011, 2015 or 2020,' she says.

A point reiterated by Friends of the Earth (FOE), who said it was 'completely unfair' to compare the tactics of corporations and NGOs.

'On the one hand FOE is concerned about human rights and environmental protection. On the other hand, you have PR projects funded by industries that destroy the environment and commit human rights abuses,' says head of economics Ed Matthews.

Matthews said species like the orangutan were emblematic of the wider destruction of rainforest in Indonesia. 'To get corporations to act, to galvanise political parties, we have to focus on emblematic cases.

'But we would never have used the figures we used if we had not thought it was credible,’ he says.

Short-term tactics


The report says such an approach could actually be 'counterproductive' to safeguarding against deforestation.

In the short term, says the report, blackwashing can 'make headlines, raise the profile of environmental debates and increase donations'. But in the longer term, blackwashing exposed for what it really is could, 'diminish the trust invested in environmental groups and more generally undermine public support for conservation.'

Co-author Rhett Butler says NGOs rushing to defend their use of facts are missing a more important point, namely the unprecedented power environmental groups have to change corporate behaviour, if they stick to accurate facts.

'Given current trends, it seems likely that in the future the bulk of environmental degradation (especially deforestation) will be driven by industrial enterprises rather than subsistence users. Thus since corporate entities are the actors, engagement is important.'

NGO power


Butler points to the success of a recent Greenpeace campaign that pressurised the largest soy crushes in the Amazon to implement a moratorium on soy processing, pending the development of a tracking mechanism to ensure their crop was coming from environmentally-responsible producers.

He said while the rise of industrial-scale deforestation was ‘alarming’, it allowed NGOs to focus their attention on a ‘vastly smaller number of resource-exploiting corporations’.

‘Many of these are either multinational firms or domestic companies seeking access to international markets which compels them to exhibit some sensitivity to the growing environmental concerns of global consumers and shareholders,’ says Butler in a previous report he co-authored, ‘New Strategies for conserving tropical forests’.

RSPO


Helen Buckland, of the Sumatran Orangutan Society, says the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), working on mutually acceptable criteria for palm oil production, was a case in point. RAN and Greenpeace have been among those critical of RSPO and NGOs taking part for becoming part of corporate greenwashing apparatus.

 ‘We have to be realistic,’ says Buckland. ‘Oil plantations are not going to go away. Deforestation will continue, we cannot save every tree. But there are millions of acres of land available in Indonesia that is not of conservation value,’ she says.

Friends of the Earth said they also took a deliberate decision to harness corporate support for ethical palm oil rather than call for a boycott. Ed Matthews said while RSPO had not developed as they had hoped they had succeeded in getting all major UK supermarkets to join up.

While admitting RSPO on its own was never going to be enough, Buckland said activists calling for a ban on palm oil were getting their message across the loudest but ultimately confusing the public.

‘People might assume there will be an easy alternative to palm oil but that might be soya and then the problem is exported to the Amazon,’ she says.

How to collaborate with companies?

Buckland admits they have to continually assess their relationships with companies to make sure there is progress being made, ‘we do not want to let them use us as greenwash’.

But Butler and his co-authors say RSPO and the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) pointed the way forward for NGOs.

‘Neither greenwashing nor blackwashing campaigns are constructive...instead they should be helping palm oil industry develop stronger sustainability criteria and raising consumer awareness and demand for certified sustainable palm oil.’

Useful links

Wash and Spin Cycle Threats to Tropical Biodiversity

Rainforest Action Network
Sumatran Orangutan Society

  READ MORE...
INTERVIEW
Paul Kingsnorth: environmentalists have lost their way
Former deputy editor of the Ecologist, Paul Kingsnorth, tells Matilda Lee why an obsession with CO2 has distracted environmentalists, and why we may already be beyond the point of no return...
INVESTIGATION
Have greens got it wrong about tar sands?
For environmentalists, tar sands are a 'climate crime'; for peak oil experts, they can never do the job of ordinary crude. But neither critique tells the full story: that exploiting tar sands may worsen both the climate crisis, and the energy crisis...
COMMENT
Food riots will mark the end of oil
The end of the oil age won't be a pretty thing, but a new report by Deutsche Bank suggests it could be even uglier than we feared...
NEWS ANALYSIS
Carbon: from pollutant to potential resource
Instead of dumping carbon deep underground we could be exploring ways to use it and reduce our overall emissions at the same time
COMMENT
Where did all the green funding go?
There's still money to be had for good environmental projects, but it's a fraction of what's being spent in other areas, says Harriet Williams

 

Previous Articles...

Users Comments

Re: Blackwashing: do NGO tactics risk long term public trust?
Posted By joe-t 1 January 1, 2010 08:08:36 PM

I think this article misrepresents both the RAN and FOE positions. In conversations I've recently had with the RAN, it was clear that they support the RSPO but are calling for it to be a lot stronger. FOE seem to believe that the major push in the future will be for biodiesel so the RSPO (which is currently used primarily in the food and cosmetic supply chains) is largely academic. What is certainly true is that the RSPO covers a tiny proportion of the total palm oil production and that there is legitimate comment about its effectiveness - given it is set up and run by the palm oil producers and the manufacturers.

Re: Blackwashing: do NGO tactics risk long term public trust?
Posted By Zebra 1 January 7, 2010 12:57:16 PM

The study “Wash and Spin Cycle Threats to Tropical Biodiversity” referred to in this article is equally critical of the disinformation campaigns advocated by some proponents of the palm oil industry as it is with the exaggerated claims put forth by some elements of the fragmented environmental campaign. The main points of the study are valid, and it is an important document if for no other reason than its success in drawing our attention to the deficiencies in the ongoing debate regarding palm oil sustainability. The most immediate challenges faced by stakeholders from all sides of the current debate are a propensity toward exaggerated claims (both pro and con) and a lack of transparency. A case in point was the November 2009, General Assembly meeting of the Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Very little of what actually transpired at the meeting was made public in the mainstream media. Instead the greater spotlight was focused on the polarized standoff between the all-powerful agricultural lobby and an array of environmental interests. We heard outrageous arguments from both ends of the spectrum. For example, from the Ag-Lobby we heard claims that palm oil plantations represent an eco-friendly solution to global warming, while from the environment quarter, there were calls to revert to some type of eco-Maoist pre-industrialized economy where agri-business no longer exists. In all truth, neither of these positions are able to stand up to any form of rational scrutiny. The sad reality, is that the world needs palm oil. It's in one third of the household consumer products stocked on supermarket shelves. And if we are not eating the stuff or washing in it, then we're trying figure out ways to make electricity out of it, or to put it in our gas tanks so we can drive to work. Nevertheless this generation, has a responsibility to ensure that our production and utilization of palm oil is sustainable. The Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) is a multi-stakeholder group which brings together palm oil growers and processors, consumer goods manufacturers, retailers, banks & investors, environmental/conservation NGOs and social development NGOs. RSPO members directly engaged in the production of palm oil account for over 90% of CPO currently available on world markets. It is extremely regrettable that so little information on what transpired at the November 2009 General Assembly of the RSPO in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia was made public. The meeting occurred at a critical time for the debate on the sustainability of palm oil. Besides the fact it was held less than a month before the global talks on climate change in Copenhagen (COP15), the Nov. 2009 meeting was the first RSPO General Assembly to be held since the decision by the International Finance Corporation (IFC), an RSPO member, to place a moratorium on future financing of palm oil companies while it formulates a comprehensive strategy to guide its involvement in the industry. That decision was made in response to a highly critical internal audit report by the World Bank's Compliance Advisory Ombudsman (CAO), which castigated IFC for failing to implement its own environmental standards when considering four (4) previous loans made to the palm oil industry (see: http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_round_up/309965/world_bank_breaks_rules_in_lending_to_palm_oil_companies.html ). One of the more positive moments to occur over the course of the RSPO's fall 2009 meetings occurred when Mr. Marcus Colchester, the director of the Forest Peoples Program made a statement that the IFC's strategic review of its involvement in the palm oil sector would be lengthened from the initially planned 6 months to 18 months. He further elaborated that the IFC review, which is examining the entire palm oil supply chain world wide, would also be extended to include IFC's involvement in the the soya and cocoa industries. This information was however, only made available to the general public through a posting on the Bank Information Center website (http://www.bicusa.org/EN/Article.11648.aspx), which sighted the subscription based E&E news as the source. This is a significant development that the public deserves to know about, however it was not reported anywhere else. It wasn't reported by the mainstream media. It did not make it onto the RSPO website, nor has it been mentioned in any IFC press release. It didn't even make it on to the forestpeoples.org website, of which Mr. Colchester is the director. And this latter point is particularly significant because of the central role which the Forest Peoples Programme played in securing the initial moratorium. When World Bank President, Mr. Robert Zoellick made the decision to suspend financing to the palm oil sector, he did so through a letter dated 28 August 2009, directly addressed to Mr. Colchester (http://www.forestpeoples.org/documents/ifi_igo/ifc_wb_letter_pressrelease_sep09.pdf). The Forest People Programme then waited two weeks until 9 September 2009 before making the contents of the letter public through the issuance of a press release: (http://www.forestpeoples.org/documents/ifi_igo/pressrelease_ifc_president_%20suspends_palmoil_funding9Sep09.pdf). In the 4 months that have since passed; information on this considerable victory seems to have been buried within the forestpeoples.org website. Given the level of engagement that the Mr. Zoellick proposed to Mr. Colchester in his 28 August 2009 correspondence, you would figure that this would be the most important thing that a small UK based NGO has going for it; but to see their website, you wouldn't know it. The Forest People Program needs to improve its track record for ensuring that relevant information is made available to the public in a timely and consistent manner. The RSPO website at http://www.rspo.org suffers a different set of problems. Most concerning, is the fact that as of this writing (7 January 2009) neither the minutes nor any summary information on the November 2009 General Assembly of the RSPO have been posted to their site. The absence of a significant update regarding the November 2009 meeting can only be interpreted as a lack of transparency. Given all of the participation and resources which the RSPO has at its disposal and the continuing central role which it is expected to have for encouraging the sustainability of the palm oil industry, issues regarding a lack of transparency should not be at the forefront. Nevertheless, they continue to persist. This criticism should not be interpreted as an effort to undermine or disband the RSPO. There is too much at stake to advocate for such an outcome. The RSPO has an important role to play, but it needs improve its performance; and the first thing that it needs to do is to be more transparent, and to encourage greater transparency among its existing membership. There are too many challenges to allow transparency issues to hinder the ongoing debate. Perhaps the greatest challenge which the RSPO faces is with regards to “Green Oil”, - the current incarnation of certified 'sustainable' palm oil. The existing criteria and procedures for palm oil certification are inadequate. Consequently, there is nothing about the certified 'sustainable' palm oil, which is currently being marketed that makes it sustainable. It is therefore placing the carriage before the horse to have the Ag Lobby and Environmentalists launch public shaming campaigns against consumer products manufacturers and retailers for failing to buy into the scheme. To date a number of companies have caved into the pressure (most notably some of the UK supermarkets which have agreed to use only certified palm oil in the manufacture of their own labeled products). They have done so, however, only to protect their brands against the undue criticism that they have been receiving. From a business point of view, this is logical. The detriment of being perceived as an ecological pariah, far outweighs the marginal expense of increasing the costs of inputs. In reality, however, what these companies have done is only to provide an endorsement of a product, which for all intents and purposes, is unsustainable. In the current polarized landscape of the debate on palm oil sustainability it's difficult for anyone to come out on top. It's time that big business and environmentalists to face up to these realities. A rational consideration of what can be done to create palm oil which is genuinely sustainable can be accomplished. The RSPO will continue to be the focal point for this advancement. Acceptable standards will require improved systems for certification, which are not self-assessed. They will also require renewed efforts to address needs on a multitude of different levels. High on the list of priorities, is need to ensure that existing High Conservation Value Forests (ie. Peat lands /Virgin Rainforests) remain intact. There needs to be a shift in land bank expansion strategies to ensure that new crops are only planted on lands which have already been degraded and which are currently unproductive. Greater care needs to be taken in the definition of what constitutes degraded lands, lest there be encouragement to degrade lands for the sake of qualifying them for plantation expansion. This is one of the key failings of the existing criteria for sustainable palm oil. Efforts need to be made to utilize existing technologies to sequester the enormous volumes of methane gas (CH4) regularly produced during CPO processing. Concurrently the palm oil industry needs to become more efficient so that it can maximize its utilization of scarce resources; this will include better infrastructure (including more roads and more processing stations). Finally we need to ensure that the poorest of the poor are treated fairly and receive a greater share of the income from the palm oil industry. This will include the building of schools, health clinics, roads, houses, as well as a diversified economy with opportunities for prosperity beyond the palm oil industry. In the end, what we will find is that Palm Oil needs to be more expensive and that's okay, because consumers are willing to pay for the sustainability of the planet. Richard Aitken, Jakarta, Indonesia, zebra5thousand@bigstring.com bristol291267@bigstring.com

Re: Blackwashing: do NGO tactics risk long term public trust?
Posted By EC052111 1 January 7, 2010 07:15:03 PM

Any time you veer from what you believe is an accurate description of the truth, you risk a backlash when that deception is discovered. However, greens have some real dilemmas. First, those pushing the business-as-usual approach have no hesitancy about dismissing the seriousness of the situation to avoid costly mitigation. Thus the environmental community feels the need to counteract those views with equally exaggerated claims. Second, the urgency of the environmental problem makes near-term action essential. That means there is not much time for education or persuasion about how serious things are without exaggerated claims. Ergo the tendency towards alarming language. It is a difficult situation but I would still argue against veering from accurate description. Nature will likely be providing plenty of clarification of her own. Hopefully, it won't be too late.

IQ Test
Posted By Tester 1 February 13, 2010 10:54:03 AM

Support United Kingdom in a contest to name the smartest country in the world. Everyone can join! Follow this link to run the test: http://iq-theecologistorg-test.xf.cz/
Post a Comment
 

Members