What then?

While I agree that leadership is necessary to effectively confront global environmental change, I’m not so sure it starts with government. If coordinated action from government and individuals is what we’re after, or, if action by the government is the end goal, the potential for INGOs as a means to be effective is huge.

International organizations force states to do things they wouldn’t necessarily do, and in this respect, I think that citizens can actually make a difference. INGOs allow so called “non-state actors” to rally around and alter policy preferences. If we’re going to talk about history like Maniates brought up in his article, why not consider the success and influence of citizen activism more recently: case in point, the activism of Jody Williams in the 1990s against land mines not only challenged US interests, a review conference at the UN ended with a partial ban. Also, since the primary goal of INGOs is information, “frank talk” about how to best confront situations in ways that are “rewarding, confusing, and creative” is possible.

Someone brought this up in class today and I think it's a valid point: maybe American citizens are apathetic towards environmental change and policy because it’s perceived as an abstract thing that it is out of our control. Not in the sense that we have no control over our impact, but in the sense that no matter what small eco-friendly actions individuals take, recycling, driving a hybrid car, etc, it’s unimportant. Like Rachel mentioned, examples of successful IO initiatives may entice more people to get on board for environmental activism.