Chapter 1
Kick-Off: Introduction

1.2 Problem statement

This efficiency argument of cooperation is also mentioned by Rucht. It is his third reason for cross-national cooperation in general. We can define East-East cooperation as a special case of what Rucht defines as cross-national cooperation. In Rucht's article nine other reasons for cross-national cooperation are given. [Rucht, 1993, p.77-78] Not all these reasons are relevant for East-East cooperation. Underneath Rucht's arguments for cross-national cooperation are mentioned briefly, followed by the relative importance of each reason for East-East cooperation.

1. The transboundary nature of a lot of environmental problems.
   This argument is especially important for East-East cooperation at border area's or in case of NGOs busy with transboundary environmental problems like air or river pollution in the region.

2. Learning from each other.
   This can be an argument for East-East cooperation, but more likely the NGOs will search for East-West cooperation, because the 'young' environmental movement in CEE expects to learn more from the longer existing and better equipped and informed Western environmental NGOs.

3. Sharing common resources.
   This can be an argument for cooperation as well, but in fact it seems that NGOs are competing for (Western) grants instead of cooperating with their East-colleagues; according the experiences of REC.

4. Advocacy and support for foreign sister groups.
   It is clear that in most of the cases this is an argument for East-West cooperation, from the point of view of the environmental NGOs in CEE.

5. Preventing the shift of problems from one place to another.
   With this argument is meant: to make difficult the 'solving' of environmental problems by shifting them to the responsibilities of other agencies. The idea is that when there are enough watchful and well-prepared groups active in as much places as possible, problem-shifting would become more difficult. This can be an argument for East-East cooperation, but more, for East-West cooperation. Because it is more likely that Western environmental problems are shifted towards CEE than the other way around, or within the region itself. It might be that the shifting of environmental problems among the CEE countries will increase, so this argument can become more and more important in the future.

6. Having an overview of the nature and scope of the problem.
   Closer cooperation between environmental NGOs might contribute to a more complete and coherent analysis of the environmental problem(s); a fact that plays a role in supporting all kinds of cooperation, national or cross-national. Not an argument especially for East-East cooperation.

7. Enlarging the environmental consciousness of the broader public.
   This argument is about the serving of a broader public's education concerning the interrelatedness of many environmental problems. Again it is more likely that this is an argument for East-West cooperation, but of course it can also be a valid argument for East-East cooperation.

8. Standardizing regulations.
   With this statement Rucht means to prevent the downplay of a problem by administrative bodies in a certain country by discovering false statements about other countries, available techniques etc. Close cooperation could be helpful towards exposing such tactics as well as putting pressure on countries which lag behind. This argument is again more likely to be used in the case of East-West cooperation, because knowledge, information and experience with lobbying and tactics of administrative bodies is better developed in the Western NGOs. But of course this argument can play a role as well in East-East cooperation, especially among countries with differences in the level of environmental policy making and/or the development of the NGO community.

9. Challenging political decision makers directly.
   Because of the shift of competencies to international and supranational agencies it is important that also environmental NGOs follow the tendency of international policy making. This argument is especially important for the countries of the EU, and not that much for CEE, although for example the Visegrad countries have to deal with the EU policies and this might also influence the environmental NGOs in these countries. This argument will become more and more important for East-East and East-West cooperation in the future, since it is the wish of most CEE countries to become a member of the EU as soon as possible.

After this enumeration, we can conclude that there are about five situations in which East-East cooperation among environmental NGOs in CEE can be expected to be relevant.

These cases are:

1. Environmental problems directly at the border of two (or more) countries; like the building of a nuclear power plant in a border area or integral water management of a transboundary river;
2. When an environmental NGO in one country has enough organizational and capacity advantages with respect to others in other countries, so that arguments 2,3 and/or 4 can become valid;
3. If the NGOs are interested in the same environmental issues. Transboundary topics or macro scale environmental issues are the most likely topics to play a role in East-East cooperation. Examples of transboundary topics are direct border issues or on a bigger scale migrating birds. Macro scale environmental issues might be air pollution in general or for example campaigning against the use of nuclear power in CE. East-East cooperation on education and public information about the environmental problem to raise the awareness of a broader public in more than one country is likely in these cases;
4. During the process of becoming part, with a group of countries, of an international environmental policy making administrative body, like the EU. In such a situation the environmental NGO community in a country experiences the same challenges and problems of that in another country which is in the process of becoming for example EU member as well;
5. When the NGO is or becomes a member of an international umbrella organization for example Friends of the Earth International or a truly supranational alliance like Greenpeace. The supranational alliance is not included in this research

The challenges of this research on East-East cooperation are at first to find out the motivation, positive and negative experiences and plans of environmental NGOs for East-East cooperation.

Secondly to find out the general characteristics of East-East cooperative NGOs, so that the Regional Environmental Center can easily find and better meet the needs of potential East-East cooperative NGOs in the future.