A good example of collaboration between industry and Non-Government Organization
ID: 77617 • Letter: A
Question
A good example of collaboration between industry and Non-Government Organizations (NGO's) that resulted in a "win/win" situation is the case of Greenpeace (the NGO) and the Calor Group, manufacturers of refrigerants (CFC's and HCFC's) that have potential ozone depleting qualities. Greenpeace persuaded the Calor Group to develop a completely ozone "friendly" hydrocarbon refrigerant, "Greenfreeze". Greenpeace used its world-wide contacts to promote Calor's product resulting in the product being sold and used in China, the fastest-growing refrigerant market in the world. Search those websites and find another case study where collaboration between industry and environmentalists resulted in the satisfaction of both parties (e.g., an environmentally safe/safer product or production method and industry profits). Your case study can involve the development of pollution control methods that resulted in the recovery of some valuable resource for industry while mitigating a serious pollution problem, or any situation where collaboration resulted in both sides being satisfied. Cite your resources correctly according to APA format.
Explanation / Answer
Conflicts between Aboriginal peoples and Canada%u2019s forestry industry over the use of forestlands have arisen all
too frequently in recent decades. While at times escalating into confrontation and violence, these conflicts have
also led to the formation of innovative collaborative arrangements between the two parties. These arrangements
can provide opportunities for economic benefits for both industry and Aboriginal communities, for more
equitable forest tenure systems, and for cooperative management institutions that are empowering Aboriginal
peoples in the forest management process.
In this report we review the diversity of Canadian experience and seek to develop an integrated view of
collaboration between Aboriginal peoples and the forestry industry in Canada. This report is based on a
review of more than 250 studies and documented experiences of collaboration, along with an inventory of
collaborative arrangements in 482 Aboriginal communities across Canada.
We adopt a broad view of collaboration, covering a variety of ways that these two groups work together on
forestry activities in the expectation of obtaining certain benefits. We summarize our findings and reflections
concerning the collaboration between Aboriginal peoples and forestry companies as follows:
1) Collaboration is driven by Aboriginal rights, policy and other factors. Drivers of collaboration vary across
Canada and may also change over time. Arrangements that are currently appropriate in one situation may
not respond adequately in another case or in the future.
2) Collaboration can, and should, take different forms. We have identified five main approaches to collaboration,
with many sub-types. Aboriginal communities and forestry companies need to choose one, or several,
forms that respond to their needs. We suggest that leaders use Figure 1 (page 23) to consider their current
arrangements.
3) Collaboration must meet different needs and interests. Forest industries, Aboriginal peoples and governments
all have particular interests. Often parties can agree on shared goals or on goals that are different but not in
conflict. However, they may also need to negotiate concerning goals that cannot be met.
4) Collaboration outcomes help build capital, but outcomes need to be balanced. Successful collaborative
arrangements can contribute to building different types of capital: economic, natural, social, human and
cultural or institutional. Different types of capital are not equally important for all parties, and so outcomes
must be balanced if collaboration is to be beneficial for each group.
5) Collaboration doesn%u2019t just happen, it needs to be built. Collaboration is best understood as a process, as
presented in Figure 3 (page 29). An important implication is that collaboration is not simply a model that
can be applied, but is instead about learning and building