Behind every protected area and every treaty there is an organisation paying for it and pushing it through. At HL you need to know the two main types — IGOs and NGOs — and be able to explain why they behave so differently when the same crisis lands on both their desks.
📚 What you need to know
IGOs are intergovernmental organisations: bodies set up by states, made up of member states, operating within the framework of international law.
NGOs are non-governmental organisations: non-profit bodies that are independent of any government.
IGO examples: UNEP, IPCC, WCMC. NGO examples: Greenpeace, WWF, The Nature Conservancy.
NGOs work by raising awareness, lobbying governments and businesses, and running practical projects in the field.
The six comparison factors are use of media, speed of response, diplomatic constraints, financial resources, political influence and enforceability.
Neither type is simply “better”. They are good at different things, which is why they often work together.
Environmental IGOs
IGOs are intergovernmental bodies established by states, aiming to promote environmental protection and conservation on a global scale. Because their members are governments, they can shape law and policy — but they also move at the speed governments move.
🧩 Three IGOs worth naming
UNEP — the United Nations Environment Programme. The leading global environmental authority; provides leadership and encourages partnerships in caring for the environment.
IPCC — the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. A scientific body under the UN that assesses the science of climate change, its impacts and future risks.
WCMC — the World Conservation Monitoring Centre. Provides information services on the conservation and sustainable use of species and ecosystems, and helps others build their own information systems.
Notice that the IPCC does not run projects and does not make policy. It assesses evidence. Students lose marks by describing it as an organisation that “fights climate change” — its power comes from producing reports that governments cannot easily ignore.
Environmental NGOs
NGOs are non-profit organisations independent of any government, focused on environmental protection and conservation. They raise awareness, lobby governments and businesses, and often carry out practical projects at local level.
🧩 Three NGOs worth naming
Greenpeace — an international organisation campaigning on climate change, deforestation, overfishing and nuclear power.
WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature) — an international conservation organisation aiming to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on Earth.
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) — a non-profit working to protect ecologically important lands and waters, with work spanning around 70 countries and all 50 US states.
Same crisis, different response
Both types matter. IGOs such as the UN and its agencies (UNEP, FAO) have global reach and can influence conservation at huge scale. NGOs tend to be more focused on specific issues and can respond quickly to new threats.
Use this as a thinking tool, not a fact. The point is that each organisation’s structure explains its strengths: government membership brings law and money but also delay.
The six comparison factors
This table is the heart of the HL section. If a question says “compare the effectiveness of IGOs and NGOs”, you are being asked to walk through these.
Factor
Environmental IGOs
Environmental NGOs
Use of media
Larger traditional media presence — news, TV, radio, press releases — because of their size and resources. Often communicate through formal written statements.
Often more successful at using media to promote a cause, because they are nimble and can react fast. Rely heavily on social and digital media, and use traditional media less because resources are limited.
Speed of response
Slower, because of bureaucratic processes and shared decision-making. But once a decision is made they can launch large-scale responses.
Fast, because structures are flexible and resources can be mobilised quickly. But the response may be limited in scale and scope.
Diplomatic constraints
Constrained by diplomacy, especially where several countries or political sensitivities are involved.
Generally not constrained by diplomacy, so they can take controversial or unpopular positions.
Financial resources
Usually greater, funded by contributions from member countries and other sources.
Rely on donations and fundraising, so funding can be more limited and less predictable.
Political influence
Greater, because member governments are directly involved and they can set policy at international level.
Less direct political power, but they can mobilise public opinion and pressure decision-makers into acting.
Enforceability
Can develop and enforce international laws and agreements, though enforcement depends on member countries being willing to comply.
No authority to enforce laws or agreements, but can advocate for implementation and monitor compliance.
The line that gets the top marks. Every IGO strength has a matching weakness, and so does every NGO strength. Diplomacy gives IGOs reach but slows them down. Independence lets NGOs speak freely but leaves them with no legal power. Say that, and you have shown you understand the trade-off rather than just memorised a table.
How they work together
The most effective outcomes usually involve both. An NGO spots a problem, runs a campaign and generates public pressure. An IGO turns that pressure into an agreement between governments. Then NGOs go back into the field to monitor whether governments are actually doing what they signed.
What IGOs bring
Legal frameworks and treaties.
Large, stable budgets from member states.
Global reach and scientific authority.
Ability to coordinate many countries at once.
What NGOs bring
Speed and flexibility when a threat appears.
Freedom to criticise governments and companies.
Strong media and public campaigning.
Practical, on-the-ground project delivery.
EXAM QUESTION
Compare and contrast the effectiveness of IGOs and NGOs in responding to a sudden threat to biodiversity. [6]
Similarity
Both aim to conserve ecosystems and biodiversity, and both use media to raise awareness.
Difference – speed
NGOs respond faster because of flexible structures; IGOs are slowed by bureaucracy and diplomacy.
Difference – scale and power
IGOs have larger budgets and can create binding international agreements; NGOs cannot enforce anything.
Difference – freedom
NGOs can take controversial positions; IGOs must respect diplomatic sensitivities between member states.
Conclusion: NGOs are more effective in the first weeks, IGOs in the long term, so the strongest response uses both.Similarities + differences + judgement
EXAM QUESTION
Explain why an IGO may be unable to stop a member country damaging an important habitat. [3]
Point 1
IGOs operate through international law, and enforcement depends on member countries choosing to comply.
Point 2
Diplomatic constraints mean the IGO may avoid confronting a member state directly over a sensitive issue.
Point 3Decision-making is slow, so damage may be done long before an agreement is reached.Enforceability + diplomacy + speed
💡 Exam tip
Learn three names on each side. UNEP, IPCC, WCMC / Greenpeace, WWF, TNC. Vague answers about “big organisations” score nothing.
Use the six factors as your structure in any comparison question. It guarantees you cover enough ground.
“Compare and contrast” needs both similarities and differences. Most students only give differences.
Say what each organisation actually does: IPCC assesses science, WCMC provides data, CITES-style treaties are enforced by states.
Always finish an effectiveness question with a judgement, ideally “it depends on the timescale”.
Remember NGOs are non-profit and independent of government — that phrase is worth a mark on its own.
⚠ Common mix-up
The IPCC is not an NGO. It sits under the United Nations and is intergovernmental.
NGOs are not all small. WWF and TNC operate in dozens of countries with large budgets.
“Non-governmental” does not mean anti-government. Many NGOs work in partnership with governments.
IGOs cannot simply force compliance. Enforcement depends on the willingness of member states.
Media reach is not the same as political influence. An NGO can dominate headlines and still change no law.
Do not confuse the CBD (a treaty) with UNEP (an organisation). Treaties are agreements; IGOs are bodies.
Up next: Restoring Habitats Through Rewilding (HL) — the HL version goes deeper, adding positive feedback loops and four full case studies you can use in extended answers.
Want this explained one-to-one?
Book a free session with an experienced IB ESS tutor and get your trickiest topics made simple.
