Digging out the foes
THE British chapter of Friends of the Earth began with a blaze of publicity: opposing the fur trade and getting pictures on the front pages of newspapers by returning thousands of "non-returnable" bottles. From these beginnings, FoE grew steadily, recruiting student radicals and campaigning on everything from dirty rivers to recycling, from saving the whale to opposing new roads and nuclear power.
FoE claims stronger "grassroots" and greater democracy than other major environment groups. Although supporters do not have a vote nationally, they become voting members of one of 300 local FoE groups. Local groups are legally separate entities and have considerable autonomy to run campaigns. They also appoint members to the national board. But they are not all-powerful. They are largely run by volunteers and are themselves licensed by the board.
Unlike groups like the World Wide Fund for Nature and Greenpeace, ultimate power within the FoE is vested at the national rather than international level. This has made FoE a less Northern-based organisation. While WWF in Britain answers to Geneva and Greenpeace to Amsterdam, FoE is likely to have to answer to Penang or Accra or Buenos Aires.
FoE UK operates in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Recognising the strong desire in Scotland for independence, there is a distinct FoE Scotland. Both are members of Friends of the Earth International, a federation of some 50 national FoE organisations.
FoE International has a small secretariat and functions largely through an annual meeting, at which new national organisations are admitted and common policy on international campaigning issues is thrashed out. The meeting also delegates coordination of international campaigns, such as rainforests, the greenhouse effect or marine environment, to national organisations.
In this federalist structure, striving to arrive at common policies has sometimes caused severe tensions. On rainforest campaigns, for instance, many Southern FoE groups have called for outright bans on tropical timber trade, whereas the North favours "green labelling" of timber extracted by sustainable means. These struggles often reflect the more "political" agendas of some Southern groups over issues such as land rights that have traditionally been avoided by some Northern groups.
FoE UK has gone farther than its domestic rivals in encouraging people to adopt more frugal and responsible lifestyles. It argued for energy saving long before the greenhouse effect became an issue and its local groups are often best known in their communities for organising and campaigning for recycling paper, bottles, cans and other waste. More FoE campaigners cycle to office than those of other groups.
At a global level, its "campaign concepts" lists prominently that "poverty is both a cause and a consequence of environmental degradation and must be addressed as such worldwide" and that "inequitable consumption and unequal access to natural resources are barriers to sustainable development".
Its mission statement says that its "primary aim is to achieve policy change amongst decision-makers" and its secondary aim is "to persuade and empower individuals and communities to adopt...sustainable lifestyles".
FoE puts great stress on gaining attention in the media, although in recent years it has often lost out to Greenpeace. Civil servants often say they fear the campaigning skills of Greenpeace more, except when FoE can mobilise local opinion on a local issue.
Although it is hard to pin particular environmental successes to particular groups, FoE claims that its prime role is usually strongest where it has used its local groups. Among the successes it names are reducing Britain's consumption of tropical hardwoods by almost half in the past four years; publicising the location of thousands of toxic waste dumps; spearheading opposition to new roads, including the successful campaign to protect Oxleas Wood, an ancient woodland near London, and pioneering recycling schemes.
FoE was the first organisation in Britain to campaign to save whales, end the fur trade and protect the rainforests. It has also participated in inquiries against the nuclear power industry, whereas Greenpeace has consistently refused to become embroiled in formal public consultation processes.
In some ways, the main environment groups in Britain operate like manufacturers of soap powder, defending their "brand leadership" in campaigning "markets". But FoE and the others do collaborate, especially in research. FoE also runs joint campaigns with organisations not seen as direct rivals. On rainforests, for instance, it has worked with Survival International, which campaigns for indigenous peoples.
Young campaigners at the WWF today embrace the rights of indigenous peoples in the planet's "wild lands" in a way never dreamed of by the original "green colonials" -- or indeed, its current president, Prince Philip. Greenpeace has turned from being overtly anti-science to funding its own research and filling its reports with references to scientific journals.
But FoE has changed its character much less than its rivals. Its earliest campaigners were student radicals of the '60s, who from the start had a strong, green ethic that extended well beyond Greenpeace's high-seas heroics or WWF's love of cuddly animals.