International Nongovernmental Organizations and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in the Developing World: A Quantitative, Cross‐National Analysis

Abstract

This quantitative, cross‐national study is designed to test hypotheses linking the activities of international nongovernmental organizations to reductions in carbon dioxide emissions in the developing world. While many quantitative studies of variation in carbon dioxide emissions have been published, none have included a control for the presence of international nongovernmental organizations. We review the literature that discusses the many ways that international nongovernmental organizations work to reduce environmental degradation in developing nations. We then conduct a panel regression analysis in which we include a variable to estimate the effects of international nongovernmental organizations on carbon dioxide emissions while including variables suggested by other relevant theoretical perspectives. Our findings are quite clear in that nations with high levels of international nongovernmental organization presence have lower levels of carbon dioxide emissions than nations with low levels of international nongovernmental organization presence. We also find support for the ecological modernization hypothesis pertaining to the existence of an environmental Kuznet's curve between the level of economic development and level of carbon dioxide emissions.

Sustaining without Changing: The Metabolic Rift of Certified Organic Farming

“…While these results support our theoretical assumptions, they must be understood with caution as they do not assess the specific types of practices conducted on organic farms. Population, GDP per capita, and urban population were also found to be significant predictors on BOD, which is consistent with the findings of previous STIRPAT analyses [35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43]. Specifically we find that a one percent increase in GDP per capita corresponds with a .169 percent increase in BOD.…”

“…The logic of our modeling approach is based on the STIRPAT framework [35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43]. STIRPAT was first developed by Dietz and Rosa [44] as a reformulation of the popular IPAT equation to gauge how population (P), economic growth or affluence (A), and technology (T) affect the scale of environmental impacts (I).…”

“…Environmental sociological theories of the treadmill of production and world-systems suggest economic development to be a major structural driver of environmental degradation [43]. Previous research on water pollution, ecological footprints, carbon dioxide emission, and energy consumption find GDP per capita to be a positive predictor [25,[38][39][40][41][42][43]47] (Earlier models not shown here were estimated with a quadratic term for GDP per capita and urbanization, however neither was found significant in a two-tailed test).…”

From Waste to Resources? Interrogating ‘Race to the Bottom’ in the Global Environmental Governance of the Hazardous Waste Trade

“…Scholars have documented links between the penetration of TNCs into LDCs, an essential aspect of capitalist globalization, and detrimental environmental outcomes (e.g., Jorgenson 2006Jorgenson , 2007Shandra et al 2004;Gould, Lewis, and Roberts 2004;Ross 2008). One reason for this relationship is encapsulated in the 'race to the bottom' (RTB) argument.…”

Group Inequality and Environmental Sustainability: Insights from Bangladesh and Kenyan Forest Commons

“…The environmental performance indicators that these studies explored are varied and often included, atmospheric and other pollutants pertaining to water and sanitation [5,7,8]; government commitments to different environmental treaties [9]; and a combination of indicators in the form of Environmental Sustainability Index [10][11][12]. A few studies also included impacts of democracy, and influence of "world polity" such as international NGOs or inter-governmental organisations on forestation and land degradation [5,[12][13][14][15].…”