Introduction

One of the core practices of International Relations theory is the detailed analysis of political theories to use them as a tool to make sense of the political world today. In Western societies, the theory that dominates the political system is arguably Liberalism, as indicated by the existence of intergovernmental organizations as a means of settling disputes between states, use of trade to achieve economic prosperity, and organizations within the state like NGOs influencing government policy. In the case of NGOs, tools are used such as lobbying (in the case of the United States), to promote their desired interests through funding of politicians. In other cases, NGOs conduct in-depth research and produce policy briefs that influence policy-makers when drafting proposals. To accurately assess how NGOs can be impactful on both foreign and domestic policies, this paper will use real world case studies of NGOs’ impact on state policies and conclude on their effectiveness and methodology.

Analysis

Within the European Union, one of the most important cases of NGOs influencing government policy is that of ClientEarth. ClientEarth is a European NGO with offices in over 5 European capitals focusing on fighting climate change through legal actions [1]. It was founded in 2008 by the former lawyer James Thornton and won NGO of the year in 2012. Using its legal expertise, it tackled air pollution within the UK and concluded that the British government wasn’t doing enough to protect its citizens from the ever-worsening air quality within the country. As a result, in 2011 ClientEarth sued the British government, specifically DEFRA, for its lack of action against air pollution. Aftr four years of legal battles in the high court of justice, ClientEarth won three high court rulings against the British government [2]. What resulted was the adaptation of stricter measures being adopted by the British government to actively combat air pollution, a problem that affected the entire UK population[3]. The ClientEarth case reveals how impactful an NGO was in affecting domestic policies. By taking legal action against the government itself, it was able to alter policy on an issue regarding the well-being of citizens across the country. Within Western societies with strong legal systems, ClientEarth’s approach also reveals the blueprint for action:  NGOs should have a strong legal team that can be used to improve domestic policies that can better the lives of people. Although it was a battle fought over several years, ClientEarth serves as a prime example of the power NGO’s have in influencing government policies.

However, when looking at legal actions to alter policies, limitations of using this method should also be explored. While the ClientEarth case is a success story, legal cases against governments often do not yield the desired results. In the UK, only 22% of cases presented at the High Court of Justice against the government were definitive wins. [4]  Moreover, the total time for a case to reach its conclusion can be lengthy, as evidenced by the ClientEarth case that took four years for an outcome. Despite the difficulties legal actions have as a means of affecting domestic policies, ClientEarth has proved that NGOs can use it to yield important results.

Besides looking at this case of how an NGO has influenced government policies, it is important to look at organized efforts of multiple NGOs that, through lobbying, have successfully dictated policies of governments all over the world. Such is the case of the international campaign to ban landmines, which is a coalition of over 100 NGOs, founded in 1992, across the globe that aimed to ban landmines as a weapon of war. Through lobbying  governments across the world, their efforts successfully created the Mine Ban Treaty (Ottawa Treaty) in 1997, signed by over 160 states, that prohibited the creation, distribution, and use of landmines in the combat field [5]. The case of the international campaign to ban landmines reveals how impactful lobbying can be to influence government policies. The coalition used its worldwide NGO members to bring about global change in modern warfare. Because each NGO had the luxury of influencing its own country’s goverment, more credibility was added to the cause as more and more states started advocating for the ban on landmines, and their voice became more difficult to ignore. This also reveals the power that global NGO partnerships can hold. While a single NGO can successfully shift its own country’s policies, a global coalition of NGOs can bring radical change on a global level. It also speaks of the power that lobbying can have as a means of influencing government policies. The campaign also used written proposals, media campaigns, and other means of swaying public opinion to their cause and pressure their national governments. While those methods help to persuade public opinion, lobbying efforts by the NGOs were arguably the greatest weapon of the coalition’s arsenal.  Lobbying in Europe sees a success rate of 61% for lobbying firms, while in the US, a staggering 89% [6]. Despite these high success rates, it should be noted that it’s viewed as a core reason of democratic deficit .[7] NGOs that leverage lobbying as the main measure to advance their means may face harsh criticism, pushing people away from their cause, no matter the nobility of the cause.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this essay aimed to find how NGOs influence government policies both domestically and internationally. First, the case of ClientEarth was explored and indicated that through legal action NGOs can have profound impact on domestic policy, as seen by the UK adaptation of stricter measures to combat air pollution after legal battles with ClientEarth. Afterwards, the international campaign to ban landmines was analyzed and it was concluded that through lobbying and worldwide collaboration of different NGOs, the face of modern warfare changed forever. Taken together, these two cases indicate how impactful NGOs are in shaping government policies and the variety of means they have at their disposal in achieving just that. Understanding how non-state actors can shape governmental policies can not only result in better understanding of the modern political landscape, but also policies better suited for each nation’s need can be crafted through cooperation with them.

Spyros Tsaparas is an undergraduate student majoring in International Relations and European Affairs at the American College of Greece - Deree and a Junior analyst for international affairs at KEDISA.

Sources

BBC. Government Loses Clean Air Court Case. 21 February 2018. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43141467.

Christine Mahoney. ‘Why Lobbying in America Is Different’. POLITICO, 4 June 2009. https://www.politico.eu/article/why-lobbying-in-america-is-different/.

Farah Nayeri. ‘A Legal Approach to Fighting Climate Change’. The New York Times, 3 January 2025. https://archive.is/3WGRF.

‘Information Section - ICBLCMC’. Accessed 23 August 2025. https://www.icblcmc.org/about-us.

Jessica Shankleman. Client Earth Sues Caroline Spelman over Weak Pollution Plans. 29 July 2011. https://www.businessgreen.com/news/2097938/client-earth-sues-caroline-spelman-weak-pollution-plans.

Karr, Karolina. Democracy and Lobbying in the European Union. Campus Verlag, 2007.

UK Human Rights Blog, Guest. The True Statistics behind Judicial Review’s Success Rates. 23 March 2015. https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2015/03/23/the-true-statistics-behind-judicial-reviews-success-rates/.

[1] Farah Nayeri, ‘A Legal Approach to Fighting Climate Change’.

[2] Jessica Shankleman, Client Earth Sues Caroline Spelman over Weak Pollution Plans.

[3] BBC, Government Loses Clean Air Court Case.

[4] UK Human Rights Blog, The True Statistics behind Judicial Review’s Success Rates.

[5] ‘Information Section - ICBLCMC’.

[6] Christine Mahoney, ‘Why Lobbying in America Is Different’.

[7] Karr, Democracy and Lobbying in the European Union.