Sustainable Narratives: Case Study of a Global NGO's Environmental Discourse

Thesis Abstract

This study investigates how a leading global non-governmental organization constructs and communicates environmental discourse across its international campaigns, and how these narratives shape stakeholder perceptions, legitimacy, and action. The problem addressed is the tension between aspirational environmental messaging and measurable impact, which can affect donor trust, policy influence, and on-the-ground environmental outcomes. The aim is to critically analyze the NGO’s environmental narratives to reveal persuasive strategies, normative commitments, and rhetorical boundaries, and to assess their alignment with actual programmatic practices. The specific objectives are (1) to map narrative themes across annual reports, campaign briefs, and multimedia content from 2018–2023; (2) to examine how discourse constructs environmental legitimacy and moral authority using framing theory; (3) to identify rhetoric that facilitates or hinders stakeholder engagement among donors, beneficiaries, and policymakers; (4) to evaluate the relationship between narrative claims and reported program outcomes; and (5) to offer evidence-based recommendations for more coherent and effective environmental storytelling. The study employs a mixed-methods design anchored in discourse analysis and social-psychological theory. The population comprises publicly available materials produced by the NGO, complemented by in-depth interviews with 25 organizational communicators, 20 program officers, and 15 external stakeholders (donors and policymakers). A purposive sampling strategy selects campaign materials from five major initiatives representing different geographies and environmental issues. Data collection instruments include (a) a structured content archive capturing campaign documents, annual reports, social media posts, and press releases; (b) semi-structured interviews designed to elicit perceptions of credibility, trust, and motivation; and (c) a stakeholder survey measuring perceived legitimacy and action intent. Validity and reliability are addressed through triangulation of documentary evidence, interview transcripts, and survey results, with inter-coder reliability checks (Cohen’s kappa > 0.80) for thematic coding. Analytical approaches combine qualitative and quantitative techniques. Thematic analysis, guided by the theories of Framing (Entman) and Credibility (Toma), identifies dominant narrative frames, evaluative language, and moral appeals. Narrative seduction is assessed through systematized content analysis of recurring motifs, metaphors, and calls to action. On the quantitative side, regression analyses examine the association between exposure to specific narrative frames and self-reported willingness to donate or advocate, controlling for demographic covariates. A structural equation model tests the hypothesized pathways from narrative quality and perceived legitimacy to stakeholder engagement and reported program support. Network analysis explores co-occurrence of framing elements across campaigns to reveal narrative ecosystems and potential inconsistencies. Expected findings indicate that the NGO’s environmental discourse coherently foregrounds stewardship and planetary boundaries while occasionally overclaiming measurable outcomes, leading to elevated donor confidence but variable beneficiary trust when field achievements diverge from public narratives. It is anticipated that frames emphasizing procedural legitimacy (transparency, governance, credible metrics) positively predict donor advocacy, whereas emotionally charged moral frames more robustly predict beneficiary engagement but may risk skepticism among policymakers if not backed by verifiable impact data. The study also expects to uncover misalignments between narrative promises and programmatic reporting, highlighting areas for strategic alignment in reporting, measurement, and beneficiary participation. The contribution to knowledge lies in elaborating how global NGOs construct persuasive environmental narratives, how these narratives influence diverse stakeholder types, and how narrative alignment with empirical outcomes affects legitimacy and mobilization. The research advances discourse studies in organizational communication, development ethics, and environmental governance by offering a nuanced, evidence-based model of narrative credibility, audience reception, and impact pathways. Practical implications include a set of actionable recommendations for improving transparency, aligning storytelling with performance metrics, and fostering participatory storytelling that integrates beneficiary voices without compromising fundraising efficacy. The study concludes that strategic narrative design, anchored in transparent impact measurement and inclusive stakeholder engagement, enhances legitimacy and broadened mobilization for environmental action. It recommends adopting standardized impact dashboards, integrating beneficiary testimonials with independent verification, and training communicators in ethical framing to reduce overclaiming while preserving persuasive efficacy. Future research should explore cross-organization comparisons to determine the generalizability of the identified narrative mechanisms and their effects across different NGO sectors.