Industry
Environment industry.
22 scored listings in Environment.
Category Stewards
No category steward assigned
Focused stewardship categories for this industry will appear here after reviewer assignment.
All filters
Showing entries
| Select for comparison | Description | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | African Parks | A nonprofit conservation organization that manages protected areas in partnership with African governments. African Parks scores low because of coercive violence, documented human harm, and person-dependent governance, with weak accountability reinforcing the negative evaluation. | conservation park-management nonprofit | Medium confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Developed (AI) | 4 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | -5 | -16 | -18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| GL | No vegan or vegetarian badge | American Petroleum Institute | The major U.S. oil and gas trade association representing petroleum and natural-gas industry interests through standards, lobbying, messaging, and policy advocacy. American Petroleum Institute scores low because of ecological harm, documented human harm, and material opacity, with poor loss-bearing fidelity and extractive economics reinforcing the negative evaluation. | fossil fuel trade association | High confidence (AI) | Severe policy-capture record; see Policy Capture. | Exhaustive (AI) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -5 | 0 | -22 | -15 | 0 | -10 | Material-2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | -1 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Appalachian Trail Conservancy | A nonprofit steward of the Appalachian Trail coordinating volunteers, land protection, visitor education, maintenance, and public-trail conservation. Appalachian Trail Conservancy scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and the institution is less hostile to people with weak bargaining power, and no current penalty outweighs that structure. | trail stewardship nonprofit | High confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 5 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Community Action Works | A nonprofit that trains and supports local groups confronting pollution, waste facilities, pipelines, and other environmental threats. It scores higher than the network's canvassing arms because its work transfers practical organizing capacity to affected communities, though Public Interest Network affiliation and professional-staff control keep it below the strongest community-governed models. | environmental community-organizing nonprofit | High confidence (AI) | The Public Interest Network | Policy-capture concerns; see Policy Capture. | Developed (AI) | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | -1 | 0 | -1 | ||||
| GL | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Competitive Enterprise Institute | A libertarian policy nonprofit opposing many environmental, climate, labor, consumer, and administrative-state regulations while promoting free enterprise and limited government. Competitive Enterprise Institute remains weak because of ecological harm, documented human harm, and material opacity, even where it still has some practical value. | anti-regulatory think tank | High confidence (AI) | Severe policy-capture record; see Policy Capture. | Exhaustive (AI) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | -8 | -8 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Earthjustice | A nonprofit environmental law organization that represents clients in public-interest environmental, climate, wildlife, and community-health litigation. Earthjustice scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and it bears more of the costs created by its work, and no current penalty outweighs that structure. | environmental law nonprofit | High confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 5 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Environment America | A national network of state environmental groups working on clean air, clean water, clean energy, wildlife, public lands, and climate policy. Environment America scores in the qualified middle because the mission is useful and public-facing, but its professionalized network structure and policy-pressure model keep ordinary members, workers, and affected communities at a distance from control. | environmental advocacy network | High confidence (AI) | The Public Interest Network | Policy-capture concerns; see Policy Capture. | Developed (AI) | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -3 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | -2 | 0 | -1 | ||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Environmental Defense Fund | A science, economics, policy, and advocacy nonprofit focused on climate, health, ecosystems, and market-informed environmental solutions. Environmental Defense Fund scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and it bears more of the costs created by its work, though ideological disavowal still limits the evaluation. | environmental advocacy nonprofit | Medium confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 5 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Environmental Working Group | A U.S. environmental-health advocacy nonprofit known for consumer guides on pesticides, water, cosmetics, household products, and chemicals. Environmental Working Group remains weak because of material opacity, identity capture, and ideological disavowal, even where the product or service has practical value. | environmental health advocacy nonprofit | Medium confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Partial (AI) | 4 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | -1 | 0 | -1 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Greenpeace USA | A confrontational environmental advocacy organization using campaigns, investigation, direct action, and public mobilization against ecological harm and corporate power. Greenpeace USA scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and the institution is less hostile to people with weak bargaining power, though identity capture still limits the evaluation. | environmental advocacy nonprofit | Medium confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 5 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| GL | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Heartland Institute | A free-market policy nonprofit known for climate-change denial and anti-regulatory environmental advocacy, alongside work on taxes, education, health, and energy. Heartland Institute scores low because of ecological harm, documented human harm, and youth capture, with poor loss-bearing fidelity and weak worker power reinforcing the negative evaluation. | climate-denial think tank | High confidence (AI) | Severe policy-capture record; see Policy Capture. | Exhaustive (AI) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -5 | 0 | -12 | -10 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | -3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | -1 | |||||
| GL | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Heritage Foundation | A large conservative policy think tank whose energy and environmental work emphasizes deregulation, fossil-fuel development, and opposition to climate regulation. Heritage Foundation remains weak because of ecological harm, documented human harm, and material opacity, even where it still has some practical value. | conservative policy think tank | High confidence (AI) | Severe policy-capture record; see Policy Capture. | Exhaustive (AI) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | -3 | 0 | -7 | -8 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | -1 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Just Stop Oil | A U.K. climate protest group using nonviolent civil resistance and high-disruption actions to oppose new fossil-fuel licensing. Just Stop Oil remains weak because of identity capture and documented human harm, even where it still has some practical value. | climate protest organization | Medium confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Partial (AI) | 3 | 3 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Land Trust Alliance | A national alliance supporting land trusts with standards, education, policy advocacy, accreditation infrastructure, and conservation-capacity building. Land Trust Alliance scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and it bears more of the costs created by its work, and no current penalty outweighs that structure. | land trust network nonprofit | Medium confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 5 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) | A major environmental law, science, and policy nonprofit using litigation, research, advocacy, and public campaigns to protect climate, health, wildlife, and communities. Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and the institution is less hostile to people with weak bargaining power, and no current penalty outweighs that structure. | environmental law and advocacy nonprofit | High confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 5 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Property and Environment Research Center | A nonprofit think tank promoting free-market environmentalism, property-rights conservation, conservation innovation, and incentive-based stewardship. Property and Environment Research Center scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and ownership is comparatively aligned, and no current penalty outweighs that structure. | free-market environmental think tank | Medium confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 5 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Rainforest Action Network | An environmental and human-rights advocacy nonprofit pressuring corporations and banks over forests, climate, fossil fuels, and frontline-community harms. Rainforest Action Network scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and the institution is less hostile to people with weak bargaining power, and no current penalty outweighs that structure. | environmental advocacy nonprofit | Medium confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 5 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Sierra Club | A large member-based environmental advocacy organization combining grassroots chapters, litigation, political advocacy, outings, and conservation campaigns. Sierra Club scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and the institution is less hostile to people with weak bargaining power, though identity capture still limits the evaluation. | environmental advocacy nonprofit | High confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 6 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | The Conservation Fund | A national conservation nonprofit using land acquisition, conservation finance, working-lands protection, and revolving funds to protect natural resources and community assets. The Conservation Fund scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and it bears more of the costs created by its work, and no current penalty outweighs that structure. | land conservation nonprofit | High confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 5 | 4 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | The Nature Conservancy | A large global conservation nonprofit using land protection, science, partnerships, conservation finance, and stewardship to protect lands, waters, oceans, and biodiversity. The Nature Conservancy scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and it bears more of the costs created by its work, and no current penalty outweighs that structure. | environmental stewardship nonprofit | High confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 5 | 4 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | Trust for Public Land | A national land-conservation nonprofit creating parks, trails, schoolyards, and public open space, especially where communities lack access to nature. Trust for Public Land scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and the institution is less hostile to people with weak bargaining power, and no current penalty outweighs that structure. | land conservation nonprofit | High confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Exhaustive (AI) | 5 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| No special badge | No vegan or vegetarian badge | World Wildlife Fund / WWF | A large global conservation organization working on wildlife, habitats, climate, protected areas, and conservation finance. World Wildlife Fund / WWF remains weak because of documented human harm, coercive violence, and material opacity, even where the product or service has practical value. | global conservation nonprofit network | Medium confidence (AI) | Not separately reviewed. | Developed (AI) | 4 | 4 | 7 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | -6 | -4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | None found0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | -1 |