Content area
Full Text
ABSTRACT
Greenpeace uses the developmental republican model of democratic governance for setting organizational policy. This model does an excellent job of forming members into effective leaders who are committed to the organization and its mission. However, Greenpeace could more effectively encourage the global community to become involved in environmental activism and set more responsive policy by employing an Internet-based deliberative democracy policy-setting process.
INTRODUCTION
In an age in which democracy forms the basis for the legitimacy of global governance, one would think that nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) would embrace democracy as a means of self-governance. This assumption is especially relevant in the context of NGOs that claim to act in the interest of the world's population as a whole, such as environmental organizations addressing issues that have an impact on the lives of everyone.
Greenpeace claims to value democracy as a means for global decision making1 and asserts democratic legitimacy.2 In addition, Greenpeace has made accusations that the World Trade Organization (WTO) has an undemocratic voting structure as a basis for denouncing the organization.3 However, Greenpeace itself may be subject to accusations that it lacks democratic legitimacy. Greenpeace must deal with the unresolved problems of defining the demos4 the organization represents and the ability of the demos to have an input into the activities of the organization.
Greenpeace has adopted a developmental republican structure of democratic governance, but the fundamental problem with this governance structure is that it resembles a bureaucracy rather than a democratic community of citizens. The relationship between management and participants is analogous to the hierarchical structure of a branch of the civil service. Low-level members must tolerate management's policy goals until rising to a position to change that policy, or they can leave the organization. This mechanism is effective for producing bureaucrats who carry out management's policy. Yet, in the context of environmental advocacy, the bureaucratic structure weakens the organization's ability to foster activism and to respond to grassroots environmental concerns.
The current developmental republican structure is not suited to instilling the notion of citizenship in the global populace at large, meaning that participants do not have the sense of entitlement to participate in governance or duty of loyalty that members of democratic systems should possess. Greenpeace could inspire greater amounts...