After growing phenomenally throughout the 1970s and 1980s, environmental organizations have experienced a precipitous downturn in popularity over the past two years. In many cases, they have been damaged by their growth.

A study of five high-profile, politically powerful environmental groups - the Sierra Club, the National Audubon Society, the Wilderness Society, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Nature Conservancy - concludes that, with the exception of the Nature Conservancy, the groups created such large bureaucracies to operate their expanded activities that their ability to influence public policy declined.

To differentiate themselves and to attract members and philanthropic support, organizations have resorted to hyperbole. For example:

• The Natural Resources Defense Council claimed in 1989 that more than 6,000 children would develop cancer from eating apples containing traces of the pesticide Alar, prompting an unprecedented joint statement by the Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration and the Environ-mental Protection Agency that the claim was erroneous and there was no reason to suspend the use of Alar.

• The Wilderness Society, the Sierra Club and the National Audubon Society, seeking a backdoor way to limit timber cutting in the Pacific Northwest, orchestrated a campaign to "save" the Northern Spotted Owl, even though the species actually thrives.

Not all large environmental groups have encountered the problems associated with diversification. A notable exception is the largest and wealthiest mainstream environmental organization, the Nature Conservancy. Its positive achievement can be attributed primarily to two factors:

• It has remained focused ex-clusively on one issue: protecting ecosystems.

• It has emphasized market approaches to achieve its goals.

Sticking to its niche has allowed the Nature Conservancy to avoid the fierce competition for funds and membership that has plagued other large environmental organizations. Potential donors view it as offering a product distinct from those offered by other groups. The Nature Conservancy, which obtains ecologically sensitive habitat or development rights to land through gifts, trades and purchases, also has used a nonconfrontational approach, respecting private property rights.

Source: Christopher Boerner and Jennifer Chilton Kallery, "Restructuring Environmental Big Business," Policy Study No. 124, January 1995, Center for the Study of American Business, Washington University, Campus Box 1208, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130, (314) 935-5630.