The origins of environmental issues are considered to be rooted in the Woodstock generation when young people turned their backs on modernity and sought ways to return to nature. Over the years these values have changed repeatedly and become institutionalized. Green politics have undergone several stages from consolidation on the conceptual level to the participation of green parties in government; each stage has influenced the manner in which environmental ideas, themes, and objectives have been represented.
Environmental ideas were first expounded by social movements reflecting new interests that were ignored by the establishment. These movements ranged from informal and non-hierarchical groupings of individuals who shared common aspirations to organizations that operate institutions that advance their concerns from a top-down perspective. The emergence of organizations that sought to influence the government led to the development of green parties competing for government. Two stages should be distinguished in this development – the first is the foundation of a political party, and the second is the entry of the party into the legislature and its emergence as a political faction. The final stage is the inclusion of green parties in government: the innermost circle in terms of influence and involvement.
Who Needs a New Party? The Transition from Movement to Party
Social movements and interest groups focusing on the issue of the environment began to be active in Europe during the 1960s. The gradual entrance of green movements into institutionalized politics, which they had formerly opposed, represents part of a broader process of development in party politics. Modern life presented political parties with challenges they found difficult to address. The electorate also changed, becoming more educated, with access to alternative sources of information and media. In addition, the public was better equipped to organize itself in alternative frameworks such as third sector organizations and social movements, thus eroding the exclusive status that had been enjoyed by political party structures.
The declining strength of conventional parties was coupled with the emergence of parties that reflected a new agenda, with a more modern and democratic structure. One of the models that explaine the weakening of the bonds between citizens and political parties is the realignment model, which argues that over the years new interests have emerged in society, such as environmental issues; they emerged in Western society against a backdrop of peace and economic prosperity. New interests that lacked institutionalized representation developed into movements and were transformed from organizations that sought to influence reality into parties that sought to govern. As a result, conventional political parties which represented traditional issues were obliged to make room for new parties that represented issues that secured an increasing level of interest.
The process whereby green organizations transitioned into the political arena was accompanied by a number of challenges, particularly the need to justify the shift from extra-parliamentary movements to the core of institutional political activity. Green movements formed part of a “new politics,” which emerged as a counter-reaction to institutional politics. They opposed such aspects as party political hierarchy, internal bureaucracy, the desire for power, personal motives, and lack of accessibility. Accordingly, participation in the institutionalized political system was in many ways perceived as an abandonment of the key values of social organizations in general, and as a step that legitimized political institutions. In order to take such a step, the organizations were required to justify this move, above all to themselves and to their adherents.
Dr. Gayil Talshir, who has researched the subject of green parties, contends that these parties presented several arguments justifying their entrance into institutionalized politics:
- The transition into a political party is the only alternative. The activities of green movements outside the framework of government did not influence policy. The only way to advance an environmental agenda is from the inside.
- A political party is just one of the wide range of tools that may be used by green organizations. Accordingly, the central core is still alternative, yet it may draw on institutional tools such as political parties and lawsuits.
- The green party itself will constitute a challenge. Apart from raising new issues on the public agenda, the structure of the party will challenge the structure of the existing parties. It will function as an anti-political party - party, and its agenda will be determined by its activists. The challenge is also manifested in the rejection of the traditional left-right dichotomy, the argument being that the green parties are “not heading right or left, but straight ahead.”
Entry into Government
Government is the innermost circle of involvement and influence – the political core in which decisions are made. Entering parliament is just one step toward securing influence; sometimes it represents the furthermost step secured by the party. Not every political party manages to become part of government, and green parties find this achievement particularly difficult.
A green party does not have a good chance of joining a coalition if environmental issues are not of central importance in the nation, or if party is of negligible size. If the party commits itself to a radical agenda on environmental issues, compromise will be impossible, and it will not be accepted as a partner.
On the other hand, the advantage of green parties is that they do not always have principle positions on non-environmental issues; this can facilitate negotiations.
The first green government minister was appointed in Finland in 1995, where the green party was part of the ruling coalition from 1995 through 2002, and again in 2007. In Germany the Greens were a senior partner in Schroeder’s governments between 1998 and 2005. Their leader, Yoshke Fischer, served as Minister of Foreign Affairs – the most senior position reached to date by any green politician. In Italy the Greens had a representative in the center-left government from 1996 through 2001, and again from 2006. In Austria there has not yet been a green government minister, but the party is the third largest in parliament (with 21 seats out of the total of 183). In New Zealand (since 1999) the Greens have not been a formal partner in government, but have supported the government in return for influence over policies (toleration). The Greens have no representatives in Canada (despite support at a level of almost 4.5 percent), Australia (despite support of over 7 percent), and Britain (where support is at 1 percent).
Green parties have participated in coalitions and governments in fourteen European countries in different ways, in addition to cases when green parties have supported the government from the outside, such as in Sweden (as well as in New Zealand, as mentioned, outside Europe). Most of the instances in which green parties have participated in government occurred in Eastern European countries during the period following the disintegration of the Communist bloc.
Of these fourteen cases, Germany is the only one in which the green party was a significant partner in the government. The German Greens are the only green party to have secured the position of a key anchor coalition partner, and four years later they became the sole coalition partner of the ruling party. The only party to come close to this status is the Greens in Belgium following the merger of two green parties.
A distinction may be seen between the approach taken by green parties in Eastern and Western Europe. In Eastern Europe, leading green politicians have been co-opted to government and have sometimes continued to serve even in the absence of significant parliamentary representation. This has been the case in the Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia, Bulgaria, and Romania. In some cases (Georgia and Bulgaria) green representatives in government have resigned from the green party in order to join a new party. By contrast, green parties in the West developed through the transition from movements to parties and thus have stronger roots in political action.
Does Power Corrupt? The Impact of Participation in Government on the Green Parties
The entrance of green parties into government is accompanied by ideological changes and requires the parties to moderate their demands on national environmental issues as well as on foreign affairs (e.g. the nuclear issue). A party that wishes to be invited to serve in a coalition cannot campaign and express itself in the same way as an independent organization. In Germany, for example, the Greens tried to weaken their longstanding connections with anti-nuclear and peace movements, and denied any connection with the new anti-globalization movements.
Green in the Political Arena – Drawing Lessons from Experience
Various attempts have been made in the literature to define conditions for the success of green parties. Success may be the product of cumulative conditions:
- The electoral system – a proportional representation system requiring the formation of coalitions creates possibilities for the inclusion of green parties.
- National experience – coping with developments such as a nuclear crisis may encourage green awareness and influence the prominence of environmental issues among voting considerations.
- The party’s positions – the willingness of the green party to compromise, particularly on foreign affairs and economic issues, and acceptance of government policy influence the willingness on the part of the ruling party to include the green party in a coalition, as well as the willingness of other parties to join with the Greens in pre-election coalitions. A radical party cannot expect to do more than support a coalition from the outside.
The weakness of green parties is explained by their reliance on a limited electorate, and their dependence on being invited into coalitions by other parties.
The Environment Belongs to Everyone, but Who Cares?
Protecting the environment benefits all human beings. However, despite the broad scope of potential electors, green parties do not enjoy broad-based support.
One of the basic explanations for this reality is the fact that green parties form part of what is known as “post-materialist” politics. This politics can exist only when traditional threats to physical or social security are weakened. Accordingly, in countries where security issues still play a central role (such as Israel) citizens who have not yet felt free to consider issues of welfare see environmental issues as non-urgent; accordingly, when faced with burning issues, they see no reason to “waste” their vote on green issues.
However, even in countries that enjoy peace and economic prosperity, green parties depend on a restricted electorate comprised mainly of young people who have completed higher education. This may be explained by the status of green parties as niche and single-issue parties, as well as by the perception that a vote for a green party is a protest vote. Protest votes can secure results in a single election but cannot predict ongoing voting patterns or reflect party political loyalty.
In addition, environmental issues suffer from a “diffusion of responsibility.” Since they affect everyone, no one sees themselves as responsible for worrying about these issues; the assumption is that someone else is already doing so or that any action will be no more than a “drop in the ocean” and will not actually contribute to the environment.
Naomi Himeyn Raisch is a Research Assistant at the IDI and an M.A. student at the Department of Political Science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.