The Role of the Nonprofit Sector within the Climate Change Discourse: The View Through Russian News Media

2.1 Nonprofit Sector and Climate Change

The role of non-state actors within the climate change field is well documented in academic literature. The nonprofit sector has been recognized as being at the forefront of the battle against climate change since the late 1980s (Doyle 2009). It is useful to provide a working definition of the “nonprofit sector” first before moving through our review. In this study, we use the structural/functional definition of the nonprofit sector set forward by Salamon and Anheier (1992). In their structural/functional definition, the nonprofit sector includes five basic characteristics: formal (institutionalized to some extent), private (separate from the government), non-profit-distributing (not generating profits for shareholders), self-governing (controlling their own activities) and voluntary (including voluntary participants) (Salamon and Anheier 1992). This definition is particularly recommended for comparative, cross-national research (Salamon and Anheier 1992).^[1] It is important to note that this definition is broad in nature and includes NGOs and philanthropic organizations. In this paper, we will use these terms interchangeably.

The nonprofit sector is primarily serving two functions: engaging in public-serving activities and/or in political activities (Bies et al. 2013). An example of public-serving activities is nonprofits (and particularly, NGOs) serving as climate services providers, such as knowledge brokers and intermediaries (Guido et al. 2016; Harvey et al. 2019). One study, for example, focused on the contributions of NGOs in countries at risk from climate change (such as Afghanistan, Bhutan, Kiribati, Nepal, and Tuvalu). Researchers concluded that local NGOs are heavily involved in the dissemination the knowledge both at the scientific and community level, and engaged in actions to support adaptation to climate change (McGregor, Yerbury, and Shahid 2018).

Political activities include advocacy, representation, and mobilization among others, which have the potential to shift public opinion on contested issues and influence the policy process in a variety of ways (Bies et al. 2013). Globally, NGOs have been particularly successful in shaping climate change discourse (Hironaka 2014). Although international institutions rarely have the resources and power to enact social change, NGOs were exceptionally successful in setting environmental agendas, empowering pro-environmental agents, and promoting new cultural norms in recent decades (Hironaka 2014). With the increased volume of environmental NGOs around the globe, more organizations were able to attend UN summits and form coalitions (Hanegraaff 2015; Ylä-Anttila and Swarnakar 2017). Additionally, they have been successful in utilizing public relations strategies to influence news media and policy discussions (Greenberg, Knight, and Westersund 2011). Researchers even documented how NGOs successfully ‘co-produced’ news with journalists, which led to the adoption of similar environmental frames by the media (Lück, Wozniak, and Wessler 2016) and served as critical drivers of media attention to climate change (Schäfer, Ivanova, and Schmidt 2014). There are certainly exceptions to this rule. Australian NGOs, for example, do not enjoy the same level of political legitimacy (compared to the UK, for instance), and their advocacy efforts regarding climate change are marginalized (Hall and Taplin 2007).

An important point to consider is that the two discussed functions that the nonprofit sector has are not mutually exclusive, and public-serving activities are often entangled with political activities. As one study put it, the “power and politics largely shape the development and deployment of climate services, actors involved in its provision and implications for the future” (Harvey et al. 2019, 81).

2.2 News Media and Climate Change

The news media is an influential player in shaping public opinion regarding issues/events/objects (Lippmann 2017). These effects are especially powerful when people cannot experience these issues/events/objects (like climate change) directly. In his seminal book, Lippman (2017, pp. 9, 18) explains:

The only feeling that anyone can have about an event he does not experience is the feeling aroused by his mental image of that event. The world that we have to deal with politically is out of reach, out of sight, out of mind. … We, therefore, rely on the media to explore the world around us and to construct our “reality.”

News media is known to play a significant role in shaping the climate change discourse. Some posit that it is central to public understanding as it provides “a key resource through which people make sense of climate change and assess the actions of government to address it” (Watts et al. 2019, 34). News media is especially good at translating the abstract threat of climate change as reported by the scientific community into the language of the general public (Antilla 2005; Boykoff and Boykoff 2007; Carvalho 2007). While it has a potential to shape perceptions and reactions to the danger posed by climate change (Boykoff 2012), news media framing of the issue can sometimes confuse rather than clarify scientific (Burgess 2005) and even undermine discussion of the climate change problem (Poberezhskaya 2015a). The US news media, for example, bound by a tradition of balancing reporting, for decades constructed and magnified the resulting discourse as a ‘battle’ over unproven science between climate change deniers and climate change policy advocates (Boykoff and Boykoff 2004; Moser 2010). As a result, news media contributed to a significant divergence of popular discourse from scientific discourse (Boykoff and Boykoff 2004). In another study, researchers empirically demonstrated a connection between exposure to news about the scientific controversy of global warming and skepticism of global warming (Krosnick, Laura Lowe, and Visser 2006).

3.1 Coding Guide

Researchers first developed a quantitative coding guide through multiple stages of piloting with the final overall intercoder reliability rate of 88% (Cohen’s Kappa), an acceptable intercoder reliability score (the lowest category was 68%, and the highest was 100%). The coding guide included several blocks of captured data. The first block included technical news article characteristics, such as article date, publication (source), length (in characters), article relevance (yes for relevant, and no for irrelevant) and article setting (1 = local; 2 = national; 3 = international; 4 = multiple settings; and 99 = other or unable to determine).

The second block contained the climate change discourse typology adopted from the Media and Climate Change Observatory (MeCCO). The coders recorded yes (1), no (0), or unsure/unable to determine (99) if the climate change was presented as a political issue, economic issue, scientific issue, cultural issue and/or ecological/meteorological issue. These categories are not mutually exclusive. Examples of political issues included debates on climate change policies, executive orders, foreign agent law, climate policy actions/nonactions, regulatory rollbacks, etc. Examples of economic issues were corporate pledges for emission reductions, divestment plans, etc. Examples of scientific issues were science programs, science conventions, science reports, record-breaking discoveries, new understanding of intersectional climate challenges, etc. Examples of cultural issues included social movements, such as pipeline protests, Covering Climate Now initiatives, Greta Thunberg movement, etc. Finally, examples of ecological/meteorological issues were extreme weather events, natural disasters such as tropical storms, typhoons, hurricanes, etc.

The third block recorded the nonprofit cognitive attributes typology adopted from Cooley (2020). The coders recorded presence (1) or absence (0) of these non-mutually exclusive attributes: (a) nonprofits raising money, (b) involved in activities, (c) acting in courts, (d) attacking an issue/group, (e) serving as an information source, and/or (f) releasing a report.

The fourth block registered government/nonprofit cognitive attributes. These non-mutually exclusive categories included (a) Russian government attacking NPOs, (b) assisting NPOs, and/or (3) exerting power towards (NPOs). Coders recorded presence (1) or absence (0) of these attributes in each article.

The next block recorded information sources typology adopted from Poberezhskaya (2015a). Each article was evaluated based on the information sources (included as quotes or references in article body) and recorded as presence (1) or absence (0) of these sources: Russian official sources, foreign official sources, business sources, science sources, nonprofit and nongovernment sources, and other sources.

The last block included several additional individual categories that did not fit into other blocks, such as mentions (1 = mentions, 0 = not mentions) of climate change agreements, mentions of “foreign agent” law, mentions of “undesirable organizations,” and mentions of the Year of Ecology. The last question recorded the valence of the nonprofit sector (1 = presented favorably; 0 = presented neutrally; −1 = presented unfavorably; 99 = unable to determine).

Researchers also qualitatively reviewed all news media articles and recorded examples that were representatives of quantitative codes. These examples are embedded within the discussion section.

5.1 Nonprofit Sector’s Role in the Climate Change Discourse: The Media Portrait

The most important finding is that the nonprofit sector addressing climate change is framed through a national issue lens first and foremost by the Russian news media. This finding is profoundly different from the results of previous studies. Previous research tell us that the nonprofit sector is typically discussed within local contexts (Gould et al. 2003; Hale 2007; Kensicki 2004). The climate change, however, seems to be an issue of national importance, rather than local focus, and the Russian media is keen on discussing the nonprofit sector within the national context.

The Russian news media on climate change and nonprofit sector uses primarily a political frame, and this is evidenced through a high number of political-themed stories. In other words, the Russian news media does not see environmental concerns as important compared to political concerns. On the contrary, environmental concerns were discussed as a last-minute addition to political concerns. One example is Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev who is quoted to state that there needs to be a balance between ecology and industrial needs and that “environmental concern should not be a barrier to industry.”^[2]

When a news article presented climate change through economic lenses, most often these stories included discussions on and examples of corporate social responsibility (CSR) efforts. As one news article reports, “Large global and local companies are increasingly involved in projects related to the environment. Many have heard the term “corporate social responsibility” (CSR). This is a concept for the development of companies in which business is aimed not only at making a profit but also at helping society. At the same time, CSR is not charity. This is a systematic and, most importantly, nonprofit contribution of companies to a developing country, city or region in which it operates.”^[3]

What is most surprising is that climate change (the issue primarily driven by scientific discovery) rarely includes science in the conversation. Topically, there are sporadic inclusions of scientific discussions of the issue, and scientific information sources are not widely cited. This can be attributed to the failure of the nonprofit sector in serving as a mediator between scientific expertise and the public (Ladle, Jepson, and Whittaker 2005) and filling educational and information voids (Bies et al. 2013). Future comparative studies might be useful in determining if this phenomenon is unique to the Russian context.

The nonprofit sector is generally presented very positively. Most often, the nonprofit sector organizations are presented as performing work or serving as information sources. Here is one example that describes environmental nonprofit activities: “they delve into problems, carry out expert examinations and write reports, propose and discuss with the authorities and business ways to solve them. Otherwise, they seek changes through the courts. Street protest is a last resort for them.”^[4] Attacking an issue or a group or acting in courts is seldomly mentioned, even in non-government outlets.

5.2 Where do Government and Nongovernment Media Outlets Diverge?

The government-backed news media presents the climate change as a national issue, under state control, not an issue that needs to be resolved with involvement from other parties (such as the nonprofit sector). Below are several examples where government and nongovernment media outlets diverge in their coverage of the nonprofit sector’s role in the climate change discourse.

First, government outlets clearly frame climate change as a national issue. This is different from nongovernment outlets that include a balance of local, national, and international stories, a more typical breakdown of stories. Interestingly, the international context is highlighted primarily by nongovernment media outlets. This is unsurprising since nongovernment outlets are more likely to include foreign actors (like NGOs) that will drive attention to the topic from international perspectives. This finding is congruent with previous research where scholars find oppositional media to report on a climate change in their elaborate analyses of global politics (Boussalis, Coan, and Poberezhskaya 2016).

Second, there is a clear difference in the thematic framing of the climate change topic. Government outlets are rather reluctant in presenting climate change as a political issue. Other researchers found that state-owned media is more likely to discuss climate change within energy discussions, such as paying more attention to energy solutions (e.g. energy efficiency and renewable energy) (Boussalis, Coan, and Poberezhskaya 2016). Interestingly, our project found support that the government media presents climate change as a cultural issue. Even the solutions to address climate change are sometimes discussed through historical and cultural lenses. For example, a state-owned Rossiyskaya Gazeta offers an alternative to plastic bags, “In the USSR, string bags were woven at the enterprises of the All-Union Society of the Blind (VOS). Knapsack a classic string bag is woven in 14 rows of 24 cells. The maximum load is 70 kg. Service life 20 years old.”^[5] This solution, for example, imply that the nonprofit sector’s efforts existed for a long time.

Nongovernment media outlets, on the other hand, think of it as a political issue first and foremost. Here is an example from one newspaper: “Volgograd environmental activists will monitor the implementation of orders in the region Vladimir Putin associated with the Year of the Environment. According to the results of the first quarter of 2017, the administration [produced] an independent report on this topic [that] will be sent to the head of state. [Volgograd] Greens consider it necessary to tackle the problem of the reliability of environmental information provided by the authorities.”^[6] In this example, the oppositional newspaper Nezavisimaya Gazeta clearly challenges the Russian government in their environmental reporting efforts. Other researchers report similar governmental critique findings in their studies (Boussalis, Coan, and Poberezhskaya 2016).

Third, there is a clear difference in media coverage of cognitive attributes of the nonprofit sector. Government media very rarely report on the nonprofit fundraising activities, in comparison to nongovernment outlets. This is explained through the hesitancy of the government in drawing attention to private and foreign funding of the nonprofit work in the area of climate change. Indeed, previous research found evidence for the Russian government’s desire to eliminate “troublesome outside funding” of nonprofits and “tie organizations to funding streams more firmly under government control” (Salamon, Benevolenski, and Jakobson 2015, 2204).

Fourth, and not surprising, finding is that government outlets never mention attacks on the nonprofit sector or exertion of violence. Instead, they are rather praiseworthy of the Russian government assisting the nonprofit sector. Nongovernment outlets, on the other hand, do mention attacks and power exertion as well as government assistance, although very rarely.

The last distinction lies in the penetration of sources. Government-owned media clearly relies heavily on Russian official sources. For example, one story quotes the first deputy governor of the Rostov region Viktor Goncharov who shares his expertise on the federal program for the rehabilitation of the Tsimlyansk reservoir.^[7] Government outlets rarely rely on foreign sources. Again, the explanation here is that climate change is believed to be a state-controlled issue, not an area in the nonprofits sphere of influence. Nongovernment media outlets, on the other hand, include foreign sources as the second-highest category. They also draw significantly on business sources. This can be partly attributed to the fact that this study classified business media sources as nongovernment sources.

Interestingly, reports on government-nonprofit cooperations are not rare (but mostly appearing within state-owned newspapers). Our analysis indicated that stories that included both environmental nonprofits and the Russian government seemed to report more successes in the area of climate change. Even in light of worrisome ecological situations, dialogue that included some kind of strategy or action plan included representatives from environmental nonpropfits and government representatives. One example comes from a story about the environmental information bill being proposed. The bill would give citizens the right to access information about the state of the environment. The bill is proposed by a political party and seems like a good idea. However, environmentalists believe the amendments in the bill will actually allow officials to hide environmental information. The story concludes with the opinion that the collaboration on a bill between the Russian government and the nonprofit sector organization will result in helping people better understand the environmental situations.^[8]

5.3 Implications for the Nonprofit Sector

One of the goals of this study was to assist the nonprofit sector (more broadly) and nonprofit/nongovernment organizations (in particular) in gaining more prominence within Russian media since they play a critical role in filling educational and information voids (Bies et al. 2013) and strategically moving an issue to more prominence and immediacy in public’s mind (Eden 1996). Our recommendations are as follows. First, NPOs/NGOs should be focusing more on government-nonprofit cooperations. These events are already prominent in Russian news media, and both government and non-government media outlets are equally eager to cover them.

Second, they should provide more scientifically-based information that will contribute to promoting value-based narratives to become new norms. We know that scientific facts alone do not drive culture change in regards to climate issues (Luers 2013), but we also know that NPOs/NGOs excel at translating the abstract threat of climate change from the scientific community into the language of the general public. In Russia, the nonprofit sector clearly has room for improvement in terms of driving scientific information sources and representations to news media.