Independence and Impartiality in Legal Defences of the Environment

  • Steven Yearley

Abstract

Voluntary organisations concerned with environmental protection and nature conservation clearly need a source of funding to pay staff, to undertake their projects and for various administrative tasks. Some depend almost exclusively on donations and membership subscriptions and devote a great deal of organisational resource to funding drives. They may also trade in books and tee-shirts, even seek commercial sponsorship. Others receive governmental support in various ways. For example, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) receives official grant aid towards specific projects, funding which complements its highly successful private and commercial fund-raising operations.1 Exploiting a different opportunity, the various Wildlife Trusts that made up the Royal Society for Nature Conservation (RSNC) used to get a good deal of Manpower Services Commission money to support workers under the ‘Community Programme’ job-creation scheme which ran in Great Britain during much of the period of highest unemployment in the 1980s. And since the government’s main aim in distributing this money was to get recorded unemployment figures down, the Trusts felt reasonably free to allocate the money according to their own criteria. Moreover, the groups in the RSNC have traditionally been close to the government’s statutory nature conservation body (at the time of the case study, the Nature Conservancy Council, NCC2) and many of them do the kind of work which the NCC or - in Northern Ireland - the DoE Countryside and Wildlife Branch (CWB) ‘should’ be doing.3

Keywords

Income Jetty Defend Rounded Milton 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Copyright information

© Steven Yearley 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven Yearley
    • 1
  1. 1.University of YorkUK

Personalised recommendations