Flack Attack

There is something very seductive about the idea of "win-win" solutions, as Peter Sandman well knows. But sometimes seduction is just a nice word for getting screwed.

One of Sandman's protegés, Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), has carved out a niche for his organization as a "pragmatic" dealmaker willing to sit down with corporations and negotiate environmental "solutions." Our article in this issue tells the disturbing story of how one of these deals came close to introducing an insidious new source of greenhouse gases into the environment.

Krupp and Sandman appear to believe sincerely that reform is best achieved through cooperation with corporations. But careful examination of this approach reveals deep flaws. It is an approach based on studying conflicts over chemical plants in densely populated areas of the U.S. It assumes, moreover, that activism is undertaken without fear of reprisal in a democratic country where activists can access support networks, information and the media. These assumptions are tenuous enough in the U.S. but can only be considered fanciful in parts of the world dominated by military and economic dictatorships.

Once committed to "engagement," many environmental and activist groups are inclined to believe the best of a company, no matter how often the company plays the dual game of speaking nicely while lobbying behind the scenes to weaken existing regulations.

Eternal forgiveness of corporate misbehavior is likely to result in "battered activist" syndrome. Fear, lack of perceived alternatives, unwillingness to admit a mistake and financial dependency keep "engaged" citizen groups imprisoned in a dependent and unhealthy relationship where powerful corporations are the real winners.