Nature Conservancy Took Millions from BP

Why do we care that politicians take money from big corporations or their executives? Why are we concerned when scientists take money for research from the companies whose products they are testing for safety or efficacy? Well, to state the obvious, we fear that the politicians or the scientists might act to please their benefactors to the detriment of good public policy or scientific truth. The idea is that big donors hold a lot of sway, and that even when the politicians or scientists think they are acting independently, they may not be. And, besides, appearances are important. We want the public to trust politicians and believe in scientific research.

This article in yesterday's Washington Post explains that the Nature Conservancy, the large environmental non-profit, is a "business partner" with BP and has taken about $10 million in cash and land from the oil giant and its corporate affiliates. The article explains that, in the wake of the environmental disaster in the Gulf, some of the Nature Conservancy's (former) supporters are livid that the Conservancy's partnership with BP partnership "has lent BP an Earth-friendly image." The article notes the Conservancy's position as well: that taking money from BP and forging a relationship helps reform bad environmental practices from within. Others disagree:

Nate Swick, a blogger and dedicated bird watcher from Chapel Hill, N.C., chastised [Conservancy Chief Executive Mark] Tercek on the [Conservancy's website] for not adequately disclosing the Conservancy's connections to BP and for not working to hold the company accountable. Swick said in an interview that he considered BP's payments to the organization to be an obvious attempt at "greenwashing" its image. "You have to wonder whether the higher-ups in the Nature Conservancy are pulling their punches," said Swick, who added that he admires the work the Conservancy does in the field.

The article notes that other environmental non-profits take money from the companies whose practices they seek to control or reform. I'd be curious to hear from others about non-profits of all political persuasions that take money from for-profit companies or from government.

Comments

[CLPreader]

Your link to the article in the WaPo doesn't seem to be pointing to the correct URL.

[Brian]

Thank you so much for pointing out this error on my part. I have made the correction.

[CS]

The book Green Inc has a lot in it about this kind of greenwashing and how many industries partner with, or donate to, these charities to make themselves appear Green. It's hogwash...charity followed by a press release is advertising, not charity. Shame on these org's for selling out. I know they need money but they're fools to sell their souls to the devil. At the very least they could make it clear that a corporate donation won't buy silence or complicity.