ISSUE 4
Part II
27 May to 2 June
2002
Compiled by
Richard Sherman
Edited by
Kimo Goree
Published by the
International Institute for
Sustainable Development (IISD)
Distributed
exclusively to the
2002SUMMIT-L
list by
IISD Reporting Services
For more
information on the WSSD, visit IISD's Linkages Portal at
http://wssd.info
Editor's note:
Welcome to the fourth issue of
WSSD.Info
News, compiled by
Richard Sherman.
We hope to provide this service on at least a fortnightly basis from now
through the Summit. If you should come across a news article or have a
submission for the next issue, please send it directly to
Richard.
WSSD.Info
News is an exclusive publication of IISD for the
2002SUMMIT-L list
and should not be reposted or republished to other lists/websites without
the permission of IISD (you can write
Kimo for
permission.) If you have been forwarded this issue and would like to
subscribe to
2002SUMMIT-L,
please visit
http://iisd.ca/scripts/lyris.pl?join=2002summit-l.
Funding for the
production of WSSD.Info News (part of the IISD Reporting Services annual
program) has been provided by The Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
the Government of Canada (through CIDA), the United States (through USAID),
the Swiss Agency for Environment, Forests and Landscape (SAEFL), the United
Kingdom (through the Department for International Development - DFID), the
European Commission (DG-ENV), the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and
the Government of Germany (through German Federal Ministry of Environment -
BMU, and the German Federal Ministry of Development Cooperation - BMZ).
General Support for the Bulletin
during 2002 is provided by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Environment
of Finland, the Government of Australia, the Ministry of Environment and the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Sweden, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
Trade of New Zealand, the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Environment of
Norway, Swan International, and the Japanese Ministry of Environment
(through the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies – IGES). If you
like WSSD.Info News, please thank them for their support.
Contents
Independent
2 June 2002
Internet:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/environment/story.jsp?story=301420
European governments have long suspected it. Environmentalists have long
proclaimed it. But now there is clear evidence that President George Bush's
environmental policy is indeed a load of crap. For the United States is
blocking an international plan to halve the number of people, two-fifths of
the population of the planet, who have no sanitation. Some 2.4 billion
people lack even a bucket for their wastes, and this is one of the main
causes of world disease. European and developing nations, meeting in Bali,
Indonesia, want the world's leaders to agree to meet this target by 2015.
They are proposing that the plan be put in front of the leaders when they
meet for a new "Earth Summit" in Johannesburg in August. The summit -
officially called the World Summit for Sustainable Development - is to
concentrate on the environmental problems faced by the world's poorest
people. The Bali meeting, which is the final preparatory conference for the
summit, is running into trouble, with the Bush administration, in the words
of one top Whitehall source, being "very, very negative". More than 2.2
million people - mainly children - die in the Third World every year from
diseases caused by lack of sanitation and by dirty drinking water. The
United Nations says that "the incidence of some illnesses and death could
drop by as much as 75 per cent" if adequate clean water and sanitation were
provided. Margaret Beckett, the Secretary of State for the Environment, who
is leading Britain's delegation to Bali, describes dealing with this issue
as "absolutely key to any prospect of tackling poverty". The US position is
baffling the other countries at the conference because the Bush
administration has already agreed a target of halving the number of people
without clean drinking water by the same date - and this is seen as
inseparable from solving the problem of sanitation. The British officials
held a special meeting with the American delegation on Thursday, but did not
receive any clear reason for their objection to the plan. The clash over
sanitation is only one of a range of issues holding up an agreement on a
plan of action to present to the summit. Opec countries are opposing a plan
- originating from an initiative by Tony Blair - to halve the number of
people, currently two billion, without any modern sources of energy, mainly
by tapping into renewable sources. And the US, Canada, Japan and Australia
are objecting to European proposals to make energy consumption in developed
countries more environmentally friendly. Senior British ministers fear that
if the Bali conference fails to reach agreement it will be hard for the
Johannesburg summit to succeed - and the best chance of tackling world
poverty in two decades will be lost for the indefinite future.
Associated Press
2 June 2002
Internet:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020602/ap_wo_en_po/indonesia_development_conference_2
JAKARTA, Indonesia
- Delegates at a United Nations summit were close to completing an action
plan for an upcoming environmental conference, but were still stuck on
several issues, a U.N. official said Sunday. Thousands of delegates have
gathered at a fourth preparatory summit meeting in Bali and hoped to finish
negotiations on the action plan for the World Summit on Sustainable
Development by Sunday night. But talks broke off early Sunday morning,
leading U.N. officials to suggest the plan will not be completed until at
least Tuesday. "It's gone a little slower than what we expected," said
Lowell Flanders, a senior U.N. official tracking the negotiations. "But we
are getting there. We're not at loggerheads yet." Sticking points include
issues of good governance, transfer of technology and financial resources.
About 500 delegates have been meeting since Monday to hammer out a
nonbinding agreement and timetables that will be voted on at the conference
in Johannesburg in August by the heads of state. Delegates in Johannesburg
will also vote on a political declaration that will first be approved next
week in Bali. Some 50,000 delegates are expected for what is being dubbed
the "Earth Summit 2." The meeting is timed to fall on the 10-year
anniversary of the Rio De Janeiro Summit, where the first global agreements
on how to protect the environment were reached. Critics say many of the
goals governments promised in Rio have not been achieved. Three earlier
preparatory meetings for the summit prioritized five areas for negotiation:
water and sanitation, energy, health, agriculture and preserving natural
ecosystems. Delegates at the Bali meeting are expected to adopt targets
agreed at the U.N. Millennium Summit, such as halving by 2015 the number of
people who face poverty and hunger and the number who lack access to safe
drinking water and sanitation. The United Nations estimate 1.2 billion
people around the world live in poverty. At least 1.1 billion lack access to
safe drinking water. Environmentalists at the talks have accused wealthy
nations - led by Japan and the United States _of blocking proposals that
would tie governments to a timetable for implementing the action plan and
providing money for development programs to achieve its goals. Delegates
from rich nations have used the forum to urge poorer countries to address
corruption rampant in much of the developing world by enacting laws
promoting good governance and through stronger law enforcement. The Bali
talks opened on Monday and run for two weeks. Environmental and economic
ministers from dozens of countries are due to attend talks June 5-7.
Associated Press
2 June 2002
Internet:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020602/ap_wo_en_po/britain_us_development_2
LONDON -
Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett on Sunday said U.S. decisions to
subsidize its farming industry and abstain from the Kyoto protocol on global
warming were simply short-term steps in the wrong direction. Speaking before
attending a meeting this week in Bali that is paving the way for the United
Nations eco-summit at Johannesburg in August, Beckett called on other
nations to keep pressure on the United States to fall into line with
international agreements on the environment.
"I do agree that
the recent American Farm Bill is certainly a step in the wrong direction,
but it is not what the administration wanted," Beckett told British
Broadcasting Corp. television. "We have seen a short-term step in the wrong
direction in America. What we have to do now is try to make sure that they
continue to pursue what they say are their long-term goals."
The farm bill,
signed by U.S. President George W. Bush last month, increases spending by
nearly 80 percent over the cost of existing programs and is estimated to
cost around dlrs 190 billion over the next 10 years. It raises subsidy rates
for grain and cotton growers and revives a target-price system abolished in
1996 to provide supplemental income. It also brings back subsidies for wool
and honey producers and provides new payments for milk, peanuts, lentils and
dry peas. Beckett said cuts to agricultural subsidies in the developed world
would be good both for Third World farmers, who would gain greater access to
lucrative European and American markets, and for First World consumers and
taxpayers. Beckett said Bush's refusal to endorse the Kyoto protocol did not
sound the death-knell for the agreement to tackle climate change. "Americans
are major polluters, but don't forget that this American government has said
that they accept that there is a climate change problem and accept that
action has to be taken to tackle it in America," she said. "I personally
believe that as we go on with the Kyoto protocol ... there is every
possibility that in the fullness of time the American business community and
interests in America that can see America losing out as a result of some of
these things will start to rethink and start to increase the pressure on
America itself." The Bali talks to agree on an action plan for the World
Summit on Sustainable Development in South Africa opened on Monday and run
for two weeks. Environmental and economic ministers from dozens of countries
are due to attend the gathering for three days from June 5. Some 50,000
delegates are expected in Johannesburg for what is being called the "Earth
Summit 2." The meeting is timed to fall on the 10-year anniversary of the
Rio De Janeiro Summit, where the first global agreements on how to protect
the environment were reached.
The Guardian
1 June 2002
Internet:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,11538,725841,00.html
The European Union
and Japan ratified the Kyoto protocol yesterday, binding themselves to cut
greenhouse gas emissions despite America's refusal to have anything to do
with the treaty. The decision, announced on the first day of a meeting in
Bali to make final preparations for the Earth summit in Johannesburg in
August, is designed to give the talks much-needed impetus. John Prescott,
the deputy prime minister and one of the architects of the Kyoto deal in
1997, was delighted. The Japanese foreign minister, Yoriko Kawaguchi, rang
him yesterday to wish him a happy birthday and tell him of her government's
surprise decision to ratify. Mr Prescott said: "Mrs Kawaguchi rang me at
8.30am to say she had a birthday present for me. It was a nice way to start
the day. She knows how much importance I attach to this, having been so
closely involved for so long." It is exactly 10 years since the convention
on climate change was first negotiated at the inaugural Earth summit in Rio.
The first legally binding cuts were negotiated in 1997 in Kyoto, but
agreeing the details proved difficult and the United States, the world's
largest greenhouse gas emitter, pulled out when George Bush was elected.
The rest of the industrialised world decided to go ahead with the treaty in
Bonn last year and the EU promised to ratify it before the Johannesburg
summit. Some of America's allies, particularly Canada and Australia, have
been reluctant to proceed. Japan, however, is emotionally attached to the
treaty because it was negotiated in one of its cities, and had been keen to
push ahead as long as the US was on board. For the Kyoto protocol to enter
into force, 55 parties to the convention must ratify it, including
industrialised countries accounting for 55% of their total combined carbon
dioxide emissions in 1990. As of yesterday the first condition was met but
the second was proving more difficult because the US, which alone accounts
for 36.1% of the emissions, refuses to take part. Almost all other large
industrial countries, including Russia and the eastern European states, need
to join. The ratifications have given fresh impetus to the ratification
process, increasing the percentage of industrialised country emissions now
covered under the protocol from 2.7% to around 35.2%. Mr Prescott said
Russia, with 17.4%, had already begun the process, and President Vladimir
Putin had promised to complete. More signatories were still required to
reach 55%. In ratifying the Kyoto protocol, the EU legally commits itself to
reduce greenhouse gases by 8% from 1990 levels in the period 2008 to 2012,
and Japan by 6%. Some countries in the EU, such as Spain and Ireland, with
developing economies are allowed to increase emissions and others have
offered larger reductions. The UK's share is a 12.5% reduction, made easier
by the switch from coal to gas, which produces less carbon dioxide for the
same amount of heat. Eastern European countries such as the Czech Republic
and Romania, each with 1.2% of emissions, are likely to be keen to take part
in the Kyoto process. When international carbon trading starts they will
both have exceeded emission reduction targets and be able to sell surplus
carbon dioxide to countries that cannot reach their targets. Canada, with
3.3% of emissions, and Australia, with 2.1%, are likely to face increasing
diplomatic pressure to comply with the Bonn agreement, and to show that even
without the US the world is willing to tackle climate change
United Nations
Development Programme
31 May 2002
Internet:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200206010001.html
Delegates to the
upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg,
South Africa, will be able to consult a "consumption barometer" offering a
daily update on how much food, water, energy, paper and other resources they
use. Environmental audits carried out before, during and after the summit
will chart its impact -- and what it would have been without efforts to stay
"green." The Greening WSSD Initiative, launched by the Government of South
Africa, UNDP and the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), will showcase
environmental best practices to leave a useful legacy for the host country
and create greater awareness about environmental concerns championed at the
summit. More than 60,000 participants are expected to converge on
Johannesburg for the event from 26 August to 4 September. The Greening
Initiative is expected to influence how UN and other major gatherings are
organized in future. The Department of Agriculture, Conservation,
Environment and Land Affairs (DACEL) of Gauteng Province, UNDP and GEF are
providing more than US$4 million for the initiative. The South Africa
country office of the World Conservation Union is providing technical
assistance and managing the initiative. Mary Metcalfe, the provincial member
of the executive in charge of DACEL, said: "We must make sure that in our
efforts to demonstrate and document the effects of the summit we leave a
legacy of greater public awareness, which will positively influence how
people relate to the environment in the future." The initiative is a
"tangible way of showing that we can learn by putting into action the
message of the summit," said John Ohiorhenuan, UNDP Resident Representative
and UN Resident Coordinator. Mohamed T. El-Ashry, Chief Executive Officer
and Chairman of GEF, said that the project will also demonstrate to
participants the "choices that they can make during the WSSD and in their
daily lives to minimize the negative environmental impacts of their
activities." Over the next few months, extensive awareness campaigns through
the media, schools and other channels will educate South Africans about the
challenges and opportunities of promoting sound environmental practices and
sustainable development. Summit organizers will try to ensure that
procurement transactions take into consideration and reflect best
environmental practice. Service providers, such as those dealing with waste
management and transport, are expected to apply environmentally-friendly
standards in their services. Caterers are expected to source and use
reusable and recyclable materials as much as possible, and the five "R's" --
reduce, re-use, replace, recover and recycle - will be watchwords for the
summit. Specially designed tours will enable delegates to visit field
projects that demonstrate the challenges and opportunities associated with
sustainable development at the local level. Awards for the hospitality
industry will encourage environmentally sustainable operations. For further
information please contact Sharon Chetty, UNDP South Africa, or Cassandra
Waldon, UNDP Communications Office.
United Nations
Press Release
31 May 2002
Internet
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/bali/pressreleases/envdevb10-e.htm
Tibetan Centre for
Human Rights and Democracy Denied Accreditation
The fourth and
final Preparatory Committee for the upcoming World Summit on Sustainable
Development was briefed this morning on the state of negotiations on the
Summit implementation plan, with speakers underlining the progress made in
the negotiations thus far and outlining the areas that required further
deliberation. In other business this morning, the Committee decided to
reject accreditation of a non-governmental organization (NGO), the Tibetan
Centre for Human Rights and Democracy, by a vote of 90 in favour of no
action to 37 against, with 10 abstentions. Representatives have formed two
working groups to advance their negotiations on the Chairman's paper, which
contains the text of the draft implementation programme (the latest version
of the text is contained in documents A/CONF.199/PC/WG.1/2 & WG.2/2), with a
third group deliberating on a Vice-Chairman's paper (see document
A/CONF.199/PC/L.3) entitled "Institutional Framework for Sustainable
Development".
STATUS OF
NEGOTIATIONS
KYOTAKA AKASAKA
(Japan) Co-Chair of Working Group I, which is assigned to deal with the
first half of the Chairman's paper, said the Group had worked very hard to
meet the Chairman's deadline of completion of work by this evening. About
80 per cent of the text was now agreed upon, within today's deadline. The
text of two "rather large" areas, energy and oceans, had been under
intensive consultation and were not included in the latest version of the
text. Even in those cases, good progress had been made, with many
differences having been bridged. More time was needed to complete
discussions on those items. Issues remaining in brackets included how to
deal with financial and technical issues. Some of the issues were linked to
those being discussed by the other Working Groups, which made it hard to
complete discussions without seeing the results of those Groups.
RICHARD BALLHORN
(Canada), Co-Chair of Working Group II, which is assigned to deal with the
second half of the Chairman's paper, said the latest text contained some
reproduction errors -- corrected copies were available at the back of the
room. The first chapter of the section, on sustainable development in a
globalizing world, had many bolded and bracketed texts. Trade and finance
issues would have to be dealt with in the relevant contact group. It was
not as unresolvable as it looked. He said chapter 6, on health and
sustainable development, was in reasonably good shape. Chapter 7, on Small
Island developing States, was also in reasonable shape. Discussions were
continuing, and there was a good chance that a number of the issues would be
resolved perhaps even by this afternoon. Chapter 8, on sustainable
development for Africa, had proceeded at a slightly different pace because
there had been less time at the last Preparatory Committee to deal with it.
Good progress had been made in a contact group on Africa yesterday, he
continued. It was quite a substantial text and in some cases delegations
were having to check with their authorities before they could decide. He
thought a substantial text could be achieved, but that some issues remained
to be resolved. He noted that there was now a chapter 8 bis -- proposals
for very concentrated regional initiatives to promote sustainable
development. In the final chapter, means of implementation, paragraphs 59 to
70 were the subject of a contact group and required significant further
group. He hoped experts in finance and trade -- where the biggest
challenges lay -- could sit down resolve those issues. Good progress had
been made on the remaining issues. IHAD GAMELELDIN (Egypt), Co-Chair of
Working Group II, said he was confident that the remaining issues could be
resolved. He noted good process had been made on such issues as
capacity-building and science and technology transfer. Discussions were
ongoing in the area of health. In a nutshell, progress was being made. EMIL
SALIM (Indonesia), Chairman of the Preparatory Committee, then urged
delegates to undertake a constructive approach to the remaining
negotiations. The time had come "to clean the text by focusing our
discussion on the brackets". The representative of Venezuela, for the "Group
of 77" developing countries and China, said any paragraph or section absent
from the two documents before the Committee didn't mean that they were
outside the document in real terms -- they were present in the text, even
though they didn't appear in it. The CHAIRMAN assured the Committee that
such passages would not be left out.
NON-GOVERNMENTAL
ORGANIZATION ACCREDITATION
When the Committee
took up accreditation of the Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy,
it had before it a letter from the Permanent Representative of China (see
document A/CONF.199/PC/19). The letter sets out China's firm objection to
accreditation of the NGO to the World Summit and its preparatory process,
because it was "a separatist organization that is same in nature as
'International Campaign for Tibet' and 'Tibet Justice Center' whose
applications for accreditation were resolutely rejected" by the Preparatory
Committee. At the outset of the Committee's consideration, the
representative of the United States said it was his position that legitimate
NGOs, such as the one in question, applying for accreditation could and
should be approved. All well-established and widely recognized NGOs could
make positive contributions to the Summit. The NGO in question was well
qualified to be accredited and to participate. He proposed that the plenary
grant the request for accreditation. The representative of Spain, for the
European Union and associated States, then said the Union welcomed the
participation of NGOs and other major groups at the Summit. They had an
important part to play in the discussions. A large number would be present
at Johannesburg representing a broad range of different views that would
help lead to a fruitful exchange of views. The Union believed that the NGO
in question should be able to participate in Johannesburg and he supported
its accreditation. This didn't mean it supported its views, however. The
Union supported the call for a vote just made by the United States
delegation. The representative of China next reaffirmed his delegation's
objection to the accreditation of the NGO in question. He moved to take "no
action" on the proposal of the United States and requested an immediate vote
by roll call. The Chinese government had consistently supported
participation in the Summit of NGOs operating in the spirit of the United
Nations Charter. The NGO in question was a political organization, which
had the aim of splitting China's territory. It had never carried out any
activities to help the socio-economic situation of Tibet, he noted. He
strongly appealed to vote yes to China's no action motion and reject the
NGO's application for accreditation. Following China's request, both
Pakistan and Cuba spoke in favour of the motion. The United States and
Spain, for the European Union, spoke against the motion. The motion was then
carried by a vote of 90 in favour to 37 against with 10 abstentions. Also
today, the Committee decided to accredit to the current meeting and the
World Summit two intergovernmental organizations, the Pacific Centre for
Environment and Sustainable Development and the Center for International
Forestry Research.
United Nations
31 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/whats_new/otherstories_desertification.htm
31 May, BALI,
Indonesia- The dust blowing across China that assaulted Beijing this year
went on to reach Japan and Korea, but it did not stop there: it continued on
toward the west coast of North America, disrupting air travel and causing
health problems.
Dust storms are
increasing, according to Hama Arba Diallo, Executive Secretary of Convention
to Combat Desertification, and it is affecting areas that have never though
of it as a problem before. In fact, he said, sands blown away from Africa
recently landed in Switzerland. Land degradation has often been considered a
local issues, caused by poor land management, poor farming techniques, and
poor water distribution. But the problem, which affects an estimated 2.3
billion people in over 100 countries is now blowing across national
boundaries, and is having an international impact. The issue has emerged as
a major issue for the World Summit on Sustainable Development and United
Nations Secretary-General identified land degradation, which affects as much
as two thirds of the world's agricultural land, as one of the five main
areas where the Summit should concentrate efforts to achieve results. The
United Nations Environment Programme estimates that every year, 10 million
hectares of arable land are being lost to desertification, costing the world
close to $42 billion annually. Yet that the price-tag for action to avoid
further degradation would only be $2.4 million. "No one is listening, but
this is a good investment," Diallo said, but the treaty to halt land
degradation, with virtually universal membership, still has little funding.
There are proposals presently under consideration in the Bali PrepCom to
significantly increase funding to the Desertification Convention through the
Global Environment Facility, but there are some concerns that the GEF could
be stretched too thin unless donor countries agree to a significant
replenishment.
Mostafa Tolba, who
presided over the Earth Summit+5, and who is a member of a panel of eminent
personalities for the Convention, said it was essential to address the issue
of land degradation if the Johannesburg Summit is to succeed. "About 70 per
cent of the poverty in Asia and Africa is in rural areas. If you want to
address poverty, you have to go where the poverty is. Implementation of the
Convention would be a good way." According to Tolba, interest in the
desertification issue has flagged because it is not seen as affecting people
in developed countries, although dryland areas of Spain, Portugal and Greece
are experiencing degradation. Although people see a connection between
themselves and climate change and ozone depletion, he said that link is
often missing when it comes to desertification. The Desertification
Convention, an offspring of the 1992 Earth Summit, calls for a "bottom-up"
participatory approach where people in affected communities, including women
and youth, identify their problems and their solutions. The process
eventually percolates up to the national level where, countries adopt
national action plans. To date, 58 countries have adopted these plans, and
are now looking to donors for resources to implement them. But
desertification has not been a donor priority, Diallo says. Assistance to
hot spots, such as Afghanistan, East Timor and Kosovo, Diallo said, are
usually the explanation donors give why resources to fight desertification
are not forthcoming. Desertification, Diallo said, is not about build
barriers to prevent the spread of the desert, but rather, about taking steps
to transform fragile ecosystems back into land that can produce food.
According to Diallo, restoring degraded lands can also play an important
role in mitigating the effects of greenhouse gases by serving as a carbon
sink. "What we are saying," Diallo said, "is that dealing with land
degradation can lead to win-win scenarios." Partnerships will be important
he said, but since land degradation is typically a problem of the poorest of
the poor, most of the partnerships will necessarily require the public
sector. The development of voluntary partnership initiatives has emerged as
a third major outcome of the Johannesburg Summit. The partnerships, it is
hoped, will go beyond what governments can and must do to implement
sustainable development.
United Nations
31 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=3825&Cr=sustainable&Cr1=development
31 May -
Negotiators meeting in Bali, Indonesia, today reported progress in their
efforts to hammer out draft final documents for adoption by the World Summit
for Sustainable Development, which will convene this August in Johannesburg.
Reporting to a plenary session of the Summit's Preparatory Committee,
Kyotaka Akasaka of Japan, who chaired negotiations on parts of the text,
said agreement had been reached on 80 per cent of the language. Two "rather
large" sections, on energy and oceans, had been under intensive
consultation, he added, noting that despite some progress, more time would
be needed to complete discussions on those issues. Richard Ballhorn of
Canada, another chief negotiator, said agreement was still outstanding on
sections concerning globalization, trade and finance. Other areas were
largely agreed on, including those relating to health and sustainable
development. Negotiator Ihad Gameleldin of Egypt, who is also chairing
talks on portions of the document, voiced confidence that remaining issues
could be resolved, pointing out that good process had been achieved on
issues related to science and technology. Also today, the Preparatory
Committee considered applications from several intergovernmental and
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to participate in the Johannesburg
Summit. A motion by China for the Committee to take no action on the
application of the Tibet Centre for Human Rights and Democracy, an NGO, was
approved by a vote of 90 in favour, 37 against, and 10 abstentions,
effectively rejecting the bid for participation. The Pacific Centre for
Environment and Sustainable Development and the Center for International
Forestry Research were both accredited without a vote.
The Herald (Harare)
via All Africa
31 May 2002
Internet:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200205310413.html
AT 66 years old,
Ambuya Berita Chanakira from Epworth should be retired and enjoying a
pension at some old people's home. But that life is still a fairy tale and a
luxury least afforded by most of the people in the Third World where daily
chores include warding off the poverty scourge. To expect people who daily
endure the ravages of dire poverty, hunger, disease, war and natural
disasters such as droughts, floods and earthquakes for many decades to come
to understand the advantages of sustainable development in a globalising
environment is but a tall order. For Ambuya Chanakira, constant hard work in
her small vegetable garden since her husband's death in 1986 has helped her
escape the grinding penury that is the order of day for the majority of
people in Epworth, a run down settlement that rapidly sprouted after 1980
into a major urban residential area 10km outside Harare. "This is a very
poor community, but I have never expected someone to give me food," said
Ambuya Chanakira, taking a break from adding fertiliser to the soil in her
vegetable garden along a small stream running through the settlement. "I
have to struggle everyday to fend for myself." While Ambuya Chanakira's
efforts to feed herself have had little effect on the environment, the
struggle for survival for many Zimbabweans and others elsewhere on the
globe, where poverty reins supreme, has, however, resulted in environment
degradation to a point that economic and physical survival is being
seriously threatened. "Since the 1970s the environment and key natural
resources in most African countries have been increasingly threatened by
escalating and unsustainable pressures from fast growing populations and
cities as well as expanding agricultural and industrial activities," says
the Global Environment Outlook 2000, a report by the United Nations
Environment Agency, the United Nations Environment Programme. The UNEP
reports that Africa is the only continent where poverty is expected to rise
during the next 100 years. This prediction comes at a time when the
continent's 500 million hectares of land have been affected by soil
degradation; the number of undernourished people has doubled to over 200
million since the 1960s; 50 million hectares of tropical forest have
disappeared since 1980; and water scarcity has continued to increase over
the years. The UNEP further points out that Africa is also still suffering
from economic development policies and patterns, imported by colonial
authorities that "largely neglected the adverse impacts on the poor majority
of people and on the environment". Says the UNEP: "On achieving independence
during and after the 1960s, African governments inherited and maintained
centralised economic and sectoral institutions and narrowly-focused growth
policies, usually with the encouragement and support of international aid
agencies. "These national and international 'development' policies, in
combination with rapid population growth and increased poverty, had
progressively adverse impacts on the state of the environment and natural
resource base." Epworth, a former property of the United Methodist
Church-run Mission School but invaded by desperate home-seekers from Harare
when Zimbabwe became independent in 1980, is a perfect example of the real
dilemmas and obstacles many developing countries are facing to achieve
sustainable levels. Recognised as an urban settlement after a Local
Government Board was appointed to run the area in 1986, Epworth's population
has rapidly increased over the years to more than 45 000 today. Despite the
Government's pledge since the mid-1980s to develop the area by installing
proper sewerage and water systems, constructing roads and electrifying
houses, Epworth has remained an eyesore as more home-seekers continue to
invade the settlement consequently throwing planners off course. The
majority of people are unemployed, crime and environmental degradation are
rampant as people devise means of survival. Sand and wood poachers have
wrecked havoc in the surrounding farms, stealing sand to construct their
homes and wood for domestic fuel after the cost of paraffin rose to
unaffordable levels. The area is now so densely populated that attempts to
properly settle the people would actually involve removing everyone and
flattening much of the settlement since the present set up has no provision
for roads, sewers and electricity power lines. A severe drought that has
swept across most of Southern Africa has also exacerbated the plight of the
people in Epworth after their small crop fields wilted. By merely
multiplying the plight of the people in Epworth by Zimbabwe's 15 major urban
areas where similar problems occur the country's economic and environmental
problems become a complex jig-saw puzzle. While blaming corrupt governments
for the Third World's economic and environmental crises, the International
Monitory Fund and World Bank-initiated reforms have so far managed to bring
about little relief either. The solutions to the poverty trap, that have
ironically ignored the issue of debt relief, have completely failed to
reverse the environmental catastrophe facing poor nations. The United
Nations hopes that a World Summit on Sustainable Development, due to start
in Johannesburg, South Africa, on 26 August this year, will produce
"concrete results" on providing clean water and sanitation and energy to
developing countries, and health, agriculture and biodiversity issues. The
UN conference is a follow-up to the 1992 "Earth Summit" held in Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, that put, for the first time, environmental issues on the
global political agenda. "The planet is at a crucial crossroads with the
choices made today critical for the forests, oceans, rivers, mountains,
wildlife and other life support systems upon which current and future
generations depend," the latest UNEP global report says. It is, therefore,
crucial that world leaders attending the Johannesburg meeting find the
political courage and the innovative financing needed to implement the
hundreds of declarations, agreements, guidelines and legally-binding
treaties made so far, says the UNEP Executive Director Klaus Toepfer. A
World Bank official responsible for environmental issues, Mr Ian Johnson,
says: "I think one of the themes that will emerge at a political level in
Johannesburg is how to make globalisation work for poor countries. "There's
quite a lot of evidence to suggest that public opinion is concerned about
many of the issues that will be raised at the Johannesburg summit and
politicians have yet to grasp how important it is to many people." Balancing
these issues and setting priorities right at the global level to achieve
sustainable development in a world where the number of poor people continues
to rise is definitely going to be a difficult task for the world leaders for
some time to come. For a better future to be realised in Africa, the UNEP
has, for instance, concluded that: "The key challenge is to reduce poverty.
"New approaches that put the poor at the top of the environment and
development agenda could tap and release the latent energy and talents of
Africans to bring about development that is economically, socially,
environmentally and politically sustainable."
United Nations
30 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=3811&Cr=sustainable&Cr1=development
30 May -
Negotiators are finalizing documents that are expected to be endorsed by the
upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development, according to a UN official
attending the preparatory session in Bali, Indonesia. "Overall, we are
progressing quite well," Lowell Flanders, a senior official with the Summit
Secretariat, told reporters. He predicted that working groups assigned to
negotiate the text would complete the bulk of their talks by Friday evening.
The Summit itself will convene in Johannesburg, South Africa, this August.
Critical issues still requiring further deliberation include trade and
finance, natural disasters, oceans, water, sanitation, and the establishment
of a world solidarity fund for poverty eradication, according to Mr.
Flanders. The section of the document related to Africa was also being
further negotiated, as was the issue of how best to deal with the issue of
climate change. Some of the text currently in brackets, indicating that it
is still in dispute, might "go through to Johannesburg" for final
consideration, he said. In another development, the UN today released the
unabridged version of an article by Kofi Annan on sustainable development
which was published yesterday in The Financial Times. Mr. Annan argues that
ecological and economic considerations must be integrated in order to
achieve sustainable development. He recommends that the Johannesburg Summit
pay priority attention to issues linked to water, energy, health,
agriculture and biodiversity. Acknowledging that tackling all of those areas
may sound either too ambitious or too limited, Mr. Annan says this agenda
represents "the essential, achievable start that we must make, if we are to
preserve the hope of a decent life for our children and grandchildren."
Associated Press
Writer
30 May 2002
Internet:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020530/ap_wo_en_po/indonesia_development_conference_1
JAKARTA, Indonesia
- Illegal logging will continue in poor countries unless demand from rich
nations drops and law enforcement is stepped up, activists at a U.N.
development conference in Bali said on Thursday. Forestry is one of dozens
of development and environmental issues being debated by around 6,000
international delegates at the 12-day meeting. Delegates from rich and poor
nations are debating a political declaration and action plan to be taken to
the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in August. That
meeting will mark the 10-year anniversary of the Rio de Janeiro Earth
Summit, which was the first international attempt to tackle environmental
issues. Environmentalists, also represented at the talks, have already
criticized the Bali convention, and accused wealthy nations of trying to
wreck it. "We want the political declaration to say governments have to play
a bigger role in helping reduce consumption and create good law
enforcement," said Farah Sofa from Walhi, Indonesia's leading green
organization. Speaking by phone from Bali, Sofa said delegates from wealthy
countries were insisting that log-tracking technology and labeling systems
under which timber is identified as coming from legitimate sources were the
best ways to wipe out illegal logging. Corruption in many poor countries
where exporters can easily buy fake documents meant that this approach was
ineffective, she said. "If the demand from rich countries is there, illegal
logging will continue," Sofa said.
Massive expansion
in the plywood, pulp and paper industries over the last 20 years has led to
much of the world's forests being wiped out, environmentalists say. Critics
say graft within the security forces, and forestry and port officials allows
for huge amounts of illegal timber to be sold and shipped throughout Asia.
Leading global pulp and paper industries admit as much as 60 percent of the
timber they use has been illegally felled, according to a recent study by
World Resource Institute. In Indonesia, the World Bank estimate that all of
Sumatra's forests will be destroyed by logging in five years. Those in
Kalimantan will be wiped out in 10 years.
The Bali meeting,
which started on Monday, will peak between June 5-7 when ministerial-level
negotiations from U.N-member states are due to be held.
United Nations
Press Release
30 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/bali/pressreleases/envdevb9-e.htm
As the final
Preparatory Committee for the upcoming World Summit on Sustainable
Development continued its session today, government representatives focused
their attention on the draft implementation programme to be adopted by the
Summit this September in Johannesburg, South Africa. Speaking at the daily
briefing held by the Department of Public Information, Lowell Flanders, a
senior official with the Summit Secretariat, said "Overall, we are
progressing quite well", and it looked increasingly likely that the working
groups assigned to negotiate the text would complete the bulk of their work
by tomorrow evening. He informed correspondents that the critical issues
still requiring further deliberation included trade and finance, natural
disasters, oceans, water, sanitation and the establishment of a world
solidarity fund for poverty eradication. The section of the document
related to Africa was also being further negotiated, as was the issue of how
best to reflect climate change in the text. If agreement wasn't reached on
those issues by the close of this evening, it was possible that Preparatory
Committee Chairman Emil Salim (Indonesia) would convene a "committee of the
whole" tomorrow morning to try to reach agreement. He added that it was
possible that a few phrases or bracketed text might "go through to
Johannesburg" for final consideration. Representatives have formed two
working groups to advance their negotiations on the Chairman's paper, which
contains the draft (see document A/CONF.199/PC/L.1/Rev.1), with a third
group deliberating on a Vice-Chairman's paper (see document
A/CONF.199/PC/L.3) entitled "Institutional Framework for Sustainable
Development", covering among other things, the question of governance.
Working group I is
dealing with the introduction and chapters on poverty eradication; changing
unsustainable patterns of consumption and production; and protecting and
managing the natural resource base of economic and social development.
Working group II is
covering the chapters on sustainable development in a globalizing world;
health and sustainable development; sustainable development of small island
developing States; sustainable development initiatives for Africa and means
of implementation. Also today, side events sponsored by civil society
representatives were held on such topics as: mining and sustainable
development; new strategies for sustainable energy, healthy forests, better
land and water management and food security; and habitat and sustainable
development. So far, over 3,365 people from 153 countries are participating
in the preparatory meeting, including 1,342 government delegates, 931
representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and 144
journalists.
The Jakarta Post
30 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailheadlines.asp?fileid=20020530.@04&irec=3
Debt payments
amounting to 40 percent of the state budget and a chronic budget deficit has
driven Indonesia to seek more financial aid and new debt payment options
from developed countries at the United Nations meeting in Bali on
sustainable development. A member of the Indonesian delegation, Djumala
Darmansjah, said developing countries were seeking to include loan and debt
payment proposals into the action plan, which delegates were negotiating
on. He said one suggestion was to include some US$30 billion in funds
developed countries had promised during a meeting on poverty in Monterey,
Mexico, into the action plan. "Indonesia is actively pursuing its interests
during the talks. It was, after all, our proposal to get the Monterey fund
into the negotiations," Djumala said on Wednesday. The country has much to
gain from the talks. Debts totaling $130 billion have undermined efforts to
create employment, cut poverty or, for that matter, promote sustainable
development. Domestic debt payments outweigh spending on development, of
which only a portion is allocated for social welfare programs. While
spending has been kept to a minimum, the state budget remains in a deficit,
forcing the government to rely on foreign aid to cover the shortfall.
The U.S. and the
European Union agreed at a meeting on poverty in Monterey early this year to
set aside $30 billion in aid to help reduce poverty worldwide. Djumala said
the means to channel the funds had not been drawn up yet, allowing it to be
integrated into the Chairman's Text now under negotiation. Delegates from
around the world have gathered in Bali for the fourth preparatory committee
meeting that leads up to the World Summit on Sustainable Development in
Johannesburg, South Africa in August and September. The summit is aiming to
hammer out a more concrete action plan after the first one agreed at the
1992 summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, failed to produce the desired
results. Delegates in Bali expect to finalize negotiations of the
Chairman's Text, which is the action plan for world leaders to sign in
Johannesburg, South Africa. Chapter IX of the Chairman's Text will draw the
most heated debates, as it outlines the means and implementation of the
action plan. Falling under chapter IX are the issues of loans to finance
sustainable development programs, and Djumala said it was obvious that
developed countries were defensive on this issue. "It's their money and
they just don't accept other countries telling them how to spend it," he
said. But he added that developed countries could back down on their stance
later on during the committee of the whole meeting, where different working
groups get together to iron out the final issues. He said Indonesia along
with other developing countries also proposed to utilize the International
Monetary Fund's (IMF) loans to finance sustainable development programs.
Also called the Special Drawing Rights, the IMF loans cover only a country's
balance of payment in cases of a liquidity crisis. Indonesia has been under
the IMF's auspices since the country was hit by the 1997 economic crisis.
Other suggestions under negotiation in the Chairman's Text are to loosen
financial aid to the least developed countries and promote the use of aid to
boost development. One suggestion accepted by all is the call for action to
meet developed countries' targets of allocating 0.7 percent of their gross
domestic product (GDP) to overseas development assistance. Indonesian
Delegation head Makarim Wibisono said implementation of the Monterey pledge
would bring overseas development assistance closer to its target. At
present, he said, the average overseas development assistance stands at 0.39
percent of GDP. To help cut the debt burden carried by developing
countries, they proposed several debt solutions, Djumala said. These
include debt-swapping payments with sustainable development programs or a
debt-to-nature swap that would, for instance, protect forest areas from
timber companies. Preliminary talks of a debt-to-nature swap are under way
on a bilateral basis, such as with Germany. However, the amount has been
relatively small. So far the only debt relief has come from the
rescheduling of Indonesia's foreign debts under the Paris Club group of
creditors. Some NGOs have called for more drastic measures, such as
demanding debt reduction. The government, however, is unlikely to entertain
such demands, reasoning that the mere mention of a default would condemn
Indonesia to isolation from the international finance community.
The Jakarta Post
30 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailfeatures.asp?fileid=20020530.M07&irec=6
Developed countries
have given the cold shoulder to their commitment to help developing
countries achieve sustainable development, even at the last leg of meetings
before the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg later in
August and September. Kenneth G. Ruffing, acting director and chief
economist at the environment directorate of the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD), acknowledged on Wednesday that developed
countries continued to show reluctance in spending money to support less
fortunate countries, despite their rhetorical commitments on sustainable
development. "We would like to see them be more ambitious in targeting
goals and promises that they have made. We would like to see a higher level
of ambition to protect the earth by promoting sustainable development,"
Ruffing said on the sidelines of the preparatory committee meeting for the
World Summit. OECD, established in 1960, comprises 30 developed countries,
and aims to contribute to the development of the world economy. However,
according to OECD data, in the past 10 years after the Earth Summit in Rio
de Janeiro, developed countries have failed to fulfill their own commitments
to provide the equivalent of 0.7 percent of their gross domestic product to
help developing countries. The only country that managed to fulfill that
commitment was Denmark, while the others spent about 0.2 percent of their
GDP. "They always come up with reasons for their lack of ability to fulfill
the commitments. Of course, there is no sanctions mechanism in the
organization," Ruffing remarked. One of the main reasons cited by developed
countries to avoid commitments is the lack of good governance on the part of
developing countries and ineffective use of aid. He added that it was
unhelpful if developed countries made generalizations, as each developing
country faced different problems. Considering the specific situation in
each country, Ruffing said that the OECD had adopted a new paradigm to deal
with the problem differently in each developing country. He cited that it
would be unfair to ask developing countries to look for alternative energy
sources if they could not afford to do so. In many cases, it would take a
while before developed countries brought down the cost of producing
alternative energy so that developing countries could change their
consumption patterns without paying higher prices, he remarked. To deal
with the problem, OECD is trying to take the lead in initiatives aimed at
nature conservation
The Jakarta Post
30 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailfeatures.asp?fileid=20020530.M05&irec=4
The People's
Republic of China (PRC) has again expressed its strong objection that the
Tibetan Center for Human Rights and Democracy (TCHRD) be allowed to attend
the upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South
Africa. The decision of whether the TCHRD will be allowed to attend the
meeting will be decided on Friday during the United Nations (UN)'s plenary
meeting here, confirmed Pragati J. Pascale, a senior media officer at the
UN. Norzin Dolma, one of TCHRD's activists, said on Wednesday that the
Chinese Permanent Representative to the UN had requested the world
organization exclude his group from participating at the World Summit slated
to be held from August to September this year. The organization has already
registered with the UN on its participation at the upcoming summit. In a
letter sent to the UN Headquarters two weeks ago, the Chinese representative
accused members of the TCHRD group of being separatists who support the
independence of Tibet, said Dolma. The PRC representative has also said
that the presence of the group was not relevant to the issue of sustainable
development, and they merely wanted to slander the PRC government at the
event. It was the third attempt by the Chinese government, after two
previous successful moves to kick out two other pro-Tibet organizations, the
International Campaign for Tibet (ICT) and the Tibet Justice Center (TJC),
from participating in the next World Summit. In the UN's General Assembly
meeting last April, the majority of UN member countries, including
Indonesia, rejected the presence of the two pro-Tibetan organizations in the
World Summit. "Their allegations that we would raise political issues is
groundless. We are committed to focusing on various environmental problems
in Tibet," explained Norzin at the sidelines of the PrepCom meeting
South African Press
Association via All Africa
30 May2002
Internet:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200206010061.html
Discussions on
Africa at the United Nations' final preparatory meeting for the World Summit
on Sustainable Development (WSSD), being held on the Indonesian island of
Bali, appear to be heading for a "very positive outcome", says a senior
South African official.
Four days into the
UN conference, delegates are locked in "contact group" negotiations to
resolve several sticking points that have emerged, including disputes over
corporate accountability, energy, water, sanitation, trade and finance, and
agricultural subsidies. The meetings are closed to the media. According to
the head of the South African delegation, environmental affairs
director-general Dr Chippy Olver, deal-making on many of the issues is
likely to continue past Friday, the day the UN hopes a revised version of
the so-called Chairman's Text will emerge from the process. The text --
expected to be endorsed by heads of state at the WSSD in Johannesburg later
this year -- is a plan of action for countries to curb the over-exploitation
of the earth's natural resources and to find a better way of managing
development. "The deal-making process that will start on Friday could well
go through the night, and continue through the day on Saturday and into that
night as well. "I don't know if we will complete the process by the end of
the weekend," Olver told Sapa on Thursday. He foresaw "one or two sticking
points" carrying over into the conference's second and final week, in which
the high-level ministerial portion of the event is scheduled to take place.
"When the ministers arrive, they will probably be left with two or three
strategic areas in which a deal has to be cut," Olver said. He was up-beat,
however, about discussions on Africa, saying these were "going quite well".
"It looks like on Africa, particularly because of the build up to the G8
meeting, a lot of the developed countries... are quite keen to make a very
positive outcome on the Africa chapter, which we're very happy about." One
point of concern was that other regions, particularly Latin America, were
coming up with their own initiatives. "But I'm not too worried this will
eclipse the focus on Africa, because the process we've got going at
heads-of-state level, the work that's gone into Nepad, all of this has laid
an incredibly solid basis and I don't think any other region's got...
anything to (compete) against that," he said. South Africa itself had six
main focus areas -- water and sanitation; energy; health, food security,
education; and technology -- and Olver said he wanted to see these included
in the revised Chairman's Text. "We need to get a basic set of things into
the text, and on the basis of that launch initiatives." Asked if this would
include specific targets for each of the six, he said: "Yes, that is
precisely what we want." Olver said sticking points among delegates
included the issue of good governance. "There are quite a few developing
countries who think that what is being proposed on good governance on a
national level is going to be used as 'conditionalities', which will be
imposed on them by the North. "Clearly we're going to have to work through
this issue, because sound governance is fundamental to sustainable
development." There were also sticking points around energy, water and
sanitation. "In particular developed countries are trying to back off on any
target on sanitation... the sticking point on water is to what extent we
launch a global programme of action. "This target was agreed in the
Millennium Declaration -- I think the developed countries would like to back
out of that if they could. They are now questioning whether one needs a
global programme of action." He said this was the result of a "complete
difference of approach" on the part of some developed countries.
"Particularly Japan, the United States, Canada and Australia; it's part of
their intrinsic antipathy to the multilaterals. "I don't think they believe
the UN system can co-ordinate and deliver implementation, and while they're
happy with broad normative statements of intent, they're more prepared to
say 'we will support', rather than 'we will implement'." Asked what type of
agreement South Africa would like to see emerge from the Bali conference,
Olver said this would have to include a framework for implementation. "This
has got to include, at a high level, a global target, a broad outline of the
resource strategy, private sector investment, trade benefits, technology
issues, and finance issues. "It's got to have some mechanism by which
progress is going to be monitored... so that you're able to assess how
things are working. "It's also got to have some reference to governance
arrangements, and at the very least it's got to talk about what would be an
enabling environment to allow initiatives and partnerships, within that
broad framework, to take place." Among other things, South Africa was hoping
to see a set of forward-looking deals on trade, finance, technology, debt
relief and technology transfer. Asked if there was any likelihood of
unresolved issues being carried through to the Johannesburg summit, Olver
said: "We would like to get closure on the Chairman's Text, and I think most
countries are quite committed to that."
However, there
remained a possibility some areas would be bracketed, "but we're going to
work very hard to avoid that". "We would also like to see a strong political
declaration... although would like that this be left slightly open so that
heads of state (at the Johannesburg summit) could use it as a mobilisation
excercise," he said.
The Jakarta Post
30 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailfeatures.asp?fileid=20020530.M11&irec=10
Unlike the 1992
Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, which only involved representatives of
governments and non-governmental organizations, the World Summit on
Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in August and September of this year
will be more representative of society as a whole. Among the groups at the
summit will be those representing women, children and youths, indigenous
peoples, NGOs, local authorities, workers and trade unions, business and
industry, scientific and technological communities, as well as farmers.
Representatives of these nine major groups are also involved in the Fourth
Preparatory Committee Meeting for the Johannesburg Summit currently taking
place in Nusa Dua, Bali. Starting today, The Jakarta Post will present the
views and suggestions of these nine major groups on sustainable development,
as proposed during the multistakeholders meetings in Bali with government
delegations. NGOs want speedy action, not just written principles The
Johannesburg Summit could be the last gateway for people to voice their
concerns and hopes, and non-governmental organizations will call for a
stronger political will and a real plan of action, with clear targets, time
frames, financial resources and coordination, within the concept of a
"global deal" on sustainable development. A global deal must be reached
between the rich countries of the North and the poorer countries of the
South. Any global deal should serve to bridge the enormous North-South
differences on key parameters, including equity, rights, justice, democracy
and ethics. The Johannesburg Summit should recognize the rights of local
communities and indigenous peoples to natural resources. This will require a
right-based approach that secures access for poor and vulnerable groups to
financial and natural resources, including land rights and tenures. In the
field of democracy, NGOs -- represented by the Third World Network, the
Environment Liaison Centre International and the Danish 92 Group -- are
calling for progress to be made at the local, national, regional and
international levels, regarding good governance, democracy and stronger
institutions. In the economic sector, the NGOs believe the domination of
economic liberalization at the international, national and local levels is a
matter of concern, while sustainable development remains an elusive goal.
The NGOs are calling upon governments to strengthen the existing framework
for global governance of sustainable development, to create a more balanced
global power structure with a far more active and internationally oriented
civil society. NGOs will campaign for a legally binding framework/convention
for corporate accountability and liability under the aegis of the United
Nations, with independent mechanisms for monitoring progress and
enforcement. NGOs are also asking the World Trade Organization to live up
to its own objective of contributing to sustainable development in a
meaningful way. They believe the WTO's work program must not focus narrowly
on market liberalization, instead, the focus must be on the need for making
trade a tool that serves sustainable development, incorporating social and
environmental concerns. Rich nations have been urged to grant market access
to the agricultural and industrial products of the South. Better financing
for development is needed through improved and increased development
assistance targeting poverty reduction and sustainable development. To
achieve this goal, the NGOs believe developed countries should commit to
providing 0.7 percent of their gross national products to development
assistance within specific time frames. Businesses prioritize partnerships
the world's business community is campaigning for the adoption of
partnerships among stakeholders by world leaders during the World Summit on
Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in August and September. The
business community, represented by the International Chamber of Commerce and
the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, contend that
partnerships between and among the stakeholders of sustainable development
often deliver more effective and practical solutions than those reached in
isolation. Public-private partnerships are also an effective delivery
vehicle for capacity-building, transfer of technology and the linkage of
official development assistance and foreign direct investment. Partnerships
are expected to be "type two" outcomes of the upcoming World Summit, meaning
that they are produced through engagement, and not through negotiations
among government delegations. The challenge, therefore, would be to link
this partnership initiative to the Agenda 21, a set of actions to save Earth
set out by world leaders during the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, and
to ensure that this "type two" initiative supports, strengthens and
implements the "type one" process, or the sustainable development agreements
among world leaders. According to the business community, to make the
partnerships effective, they must include the three pillars of sustainable
development: economic progress, environmental protection and social
responsibility. To have the greatest impact, the partnership projects should
be replicable, transferable and inspirational -- practical examples to be
adapted and emulated elsewhere. Organizations interested in partnerships
are invited to submit suitable projects and initiatives through
http://www.basd-action.net/initiatives/index.php.
Partnerships for workers: Unions. This time, labor unions are in the same
bandwagon as businesses. The unions have given their full support to the
partnership initiatives proposed by businesses, although they have provided
some indicators on the kind of partnerships. "Based on experience since
Rio, we propose that the World Summit on Sustainable Development promote a
variety of partnerships and capacity-building initiatives that involve
workers and trade unions," said the trade union report for the
multi-stakeholders dialog. The report was prepared by the International
Confederation of Free Trade Unions, the Trade Union Advisory Committee to
the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the
International Trade Secretariats. In the report, they list a number of
partnership demands, including partnership for employment, work-based
partnership for sustainable development, capacity-building partnerships,
public policy and action partnerships, as well as rights partnerships. In
addition, they also expressed a number of commitments, including to
undertake initiatives to research the social and employment impacts of
change, seeking new ways to adapt successful workplace structures and
processes, increasing participation by trade unions in sustainable
development and undergoing education to increase awareness on ILO
conventions and OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises. The trade
unions also said that they were committed to launching new initiatives to
link occupational health with public health, taking steps to increase trade
union participation in local Agenda 21 groups and taking steps to expand
international cooperation between unions and shareholders.
The Jakarta Post
30 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detaillatestnews.asp?fileid=20020530230107&irec=2
USA DUA, Bali (JP):
The preparatory commission meeting of the World Summit on Sustainable
Development (WSSD) currently being held in Bali looks likely to extend its
Friday deadline due given the varying views remaining on the final
chairman's text which will contain governments' commitments to sustainable
development. A senior government official on Thursday said the Chairman's
Text was originally supposed to be finalized during the third preparatory
meeting in New York. "As yet there hasn't been a compromise between the
different interests," said the official, who refused to be named. The
Chairman's Text, which is being promoted to be called the Bali Commitment,
is a set of action plans on sustainable development principles that
delegates expect to finalize before the WSSD summit in Johannesburg later
this year. Currently negotiations on the 39-page text is divided into three
working groups discussing the nine chapters of the text. Djumala Darmansjah
representing Indonesia at working group II, admitted that demands to
incorporate time targets into sustainable development programs were tough to
meet. He said a number of developed countries, notably the United States
and Japan, opposed the measures, while developing countries and the European
Union supported the time targets. Developing countries and many non
government organizations view time targets as crucial to get actions on
ground.
Jakarta Post
29 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detaillatestnews.asp?fileid=20020529232326&irec=2
NUSA DUA, Bali
(JP): The upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg
will likely fail to regulate multinational companies as a demand for a
universal code of conduct for them met with strong opposition from the
United States. A heated debate ensued on the sidelines of the preparatory
committee meeting for the summit here on Wednesday when representatives from
international non-governmental organizations (NGOs), delegates from Hungary,
Japan, the United Kingdom and Indonesia, faced a representative from the
U.S. delegation, Robert F. Cekuta, in an open dialog. The head of the
Indonesian delegation, Makarim Wibisono, said that Indonesia as well as the
Group of 77 developing countries (G-77) agreed that corporate accountability
was important for implementing sustainable development. He said the group
was pushing for the inclusion of the wording "enhance corporate
responsibility and accountability," in the Chairman's Text, but the
possibility it would be inserted into the document was slim. The Chairman's
Text, an action plan and basis for implementing sustainable development
principles, already accommodates corporate responsibility, but on a
voluntary basis. Voluntary initiatives, however, would not be forceful
enough to hold powerful multinationals, Matt Phillips, from Friends of the
Earth International, said, adding that corporations would then have the
choice of not implementing the initiatives. Multinational companies have
been accused of contributing significantly to the practices of unsustainable
development. They have been accused of transmitting an environmentally
unsound production system, hazardous materials and products to developing
countries. Cases of environmental violations by multinational companies
abound, particularly by multinational mining giants, such as the States'
Freeport McMoran in Irian Jaya and Newmont mining in Peru; the United
Kingdom's Premier, and France's Total ElfFina in Burma, according to the
California-based NGO, Project Underground. Felia Salim, the former
Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency (IBRA) deputy chairman, commented that
legal systems in most developing countries were too weak to face powerful
multinational companies. "We must take affirmative action at an
international level. Not only the management must be addressed but the
shareholders must also be addressed directly because companies are
accountable to them," she said. Felia attended the dialog as
representatives of the private sector in Indonesia. Head of the Hungarian
delegation, Tibor Farago, said also that a global framework was needed to
regulate multinationals through an international convention on corporate
accountability, otherwise governments would not be able to face them. "An
international mechanism is needed to talk to multinational corporations, to
question them and make them report (to governments and the people)," he
said. Cekuta, the director for policy analysis and public diplomacy at the
U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs, called
the proposed international convention on corporate accountability
"unimportant". He reasoned that local laws were enough to hold multinational
corporations accountable for their actions if local governments strengthened
the practice of good governance and promoted transparency with multinational
corporations. Therefore, there was no need for an international convention,
he argued. "The first recourse to hold multinational companies responsible
for the damage done in other countries is through the government where the
company is located. They (multinational corporations) should behave overseas
the same as they would behave in the United States, if not they should be
held accountable," he said. The U.S. -- together with Japan, Canada,
Australia and New Zealand -- form a powerful negotiation force under JUSCANZ
in the deliberations of the Chairman's Text, which contains a set of actions
to pursue sustainable development. JUSCANZ is accused of fighting for the
interests of multinational corporations instead of the general public.
The Jakarta Post
29 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detaillatestnews.asp?fileid=20020529231125&irec=3
NUSA DUA, Bali
(JP): The governments and its counterparts, the nine major groups, wrapped
up their multi-stakeholders dialogue meeting in Bali on Wednesday, with the
central issue of partnership and capacity building. During the three-hour
meeting, led by Emil Salim of Indonesia, representatives of the nine major
groups -- trade unions, NGOs, women, children and youth, indigenous people,
local authorities, scientists, farmers and businesses -- pushed the need for
strong action and action-oriented language in the outcome documents.
Concrete action was needed to bring to reality Agenda 21 set up in Rio de
Janeiro in 1992, as to which all outcomes of the next World Summit on
Sustainable Development should contribute to. The next World Summit on
Sustainable Development will be held in Johannesburg from August to
September this year. While touching on partnership, the major groups lashed
out at the developed countries, which rejected accepting the demands of the
developing countries to impose time-bound measures for the implementation of
the action plans set up in Rio concerning sustainable development. Dianne
Quarless, the committee vice chair from Jamaica moved ahead, suggesting the
establishment of a supervisory body to oversee the partnership. The major
groups also stressed that measures should be taken to ensure that the
government did not abdicate its responsibilities for sustainable
development. Some of the major groups, especially representatives of the
NGOs, demanded that the chairman's text -- to outline the action plan to
save the planet -- outline time-bound measures, so that countries would not
continue to drag their feet when it came to implementation. Demands for
time-bound measures have been aired several times by various groups at the
current preparatory committee meeting for the World Summit, but the demands
have fallen on deaf ears from the delegations of developed countries,
especially the U.S. The U.S. instead has promoted partnership initiatives.
This has already received a warm welcomes from the business group.
Partnerships are seen as a vehicle to improve the implementation of Agenda
21 by involving those stakeholders whose activities have a direct impact on
sustainable development, and not just the government. As of Wednesday,
there was no focus and clear thoughts on what the detail and profile of the
partnerships would be. However, the major groups would still have time to
move forward on the details of partnerships, as the opportunities were still
there for negotiations with the governments, before the high level
ministerial meetings on June 5. On capacity building, a representative from
a local government group stressed that local capacity building must be
promoted to materialize sustainable development drives.
"Local governments
must be empowered so the capacity building drive is a success. The local
government could be a pivotal party to facilitate the local and national
stakeholders to promote sustainable development drives," said the
representative. It is a common phenomenon at the meeting that the
representatives fail to identify themselves, and apparently the chairman
lets it go. Concluding the meeting, Emil Salim stressed the need to close
the gap between ideals and realities. Emil said he hoped that the
contributions of the major groups should be taken into account by government
delegations during their negotiations to prepare documents for the upcoming
World Summit. "The participants of the meeting, especially the nine major
groups would bring their views on the working group meeting, and in that
arena the real negotiations would take place," Emil told The Jakarta Post.
United Nations
Press Release
29 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/bali/pressreleases/envdevb7-e.htm
Water should be put
"at the top of the agenda in Johannesburg", Willem-Alexander, Prince of
Orange of the Netherlands, said this morning as the fourth and final
Preparatory Committee session for the upcoming World Summit on Sustainable
Development continued its work. "Water is crucial to development", the
Prince stressed. That could be seen by the fact that while the world
population had tripled in the 20th century, the use of renewable water
resources had grown six-fold, mostly for use in agriculture. No single type
of intervention had had greater overall impact upon economic development and
public health than the provision of safe drinking water and proper
sanitation. He said he knew that there would be many, many issues competing
for attention at the World Summit and it was therefore important to focus
attention clearly on priority issues. In his contribution to the report of
the Panel of the United Nations Secretary-General in preparation for the
Summit entitled "No Water No Future", which was distributed to those
present, he had proposed a small number of water targets and actions that
could go a long way towards solving the water crisis at the global level.
The targets and actions were organized in the four key areas identified by
the panel of the Secretary-General -- shared values, the public-private
sector nexus, global governance, and science and technology. Concerning
shared values, he recommended mandating the World Water Assessment Programme
of the United Nations to establish a baseline and monitor progress towards
achieving the water-related targets set out at the Millennium Summit. His
recommendation in the area of the public-private sector nexus was to build
capacity in local government to assess alternative forms of financing for
infrastructure, as alternatives to large-scale investments. Regarding global
governance, he recommended that in the international trade negotiations on
agricultural subsidies and trade in agricultural products, the World Trade
Organization (WTO) should consider the impact on water use in countries
importing and exporting food. On science and technology, his recommendation
was to have the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
assess the potential for increased drought tolerance and increased water
productivity in agriculture, including the potential use of functional
genomics and other tools of modern molecular biology.
He said the water
crisis was mainly a crisis of governance -- not of water scarcity.
Overcoming the world water crisis was one of the most formidable challenges
on the road to sustainable development. The Summit should reaffirm the
importance of achieving water security and adopt targets and actions that
would allow the international community to meet the challenge jointly
United Nations
Press Release
29 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/bali/pressreleases/envdevb6-e.htm
The fourth
Preparatory Committee, continuing to lay the groundwork for the upcoming
World Summit on Sustainable Development, this morning concluded the
"multi-stakeholder dialogue" segment of its work programme, with speakers
reporting on yesterday's discussions on capacity-building and partnerships.
The three-day dialogue allowed a wide range of civil society and government
actors to express their views on issues crucial to sustainable development,
which included the importance of good governance, the role to be played by
civil society at all levels of the process, and the importance of
capacity-building and partnerships in promoting the social, economic and
environmental pillars of development. "Major groups" representing women,
youth, indigenous peoples, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), local
authorities, trade unions, scientists and farmers participated in the
deliberations, as did representatives of national governments. At the outset
of this morning's meeting, Richard Bullhorn (Canada), Preparatory Committee
Vice-Chair, gave an overview of the morning session of the discussion on
capacity-building. He recognized the depth and the breadth of the analysis
presented by all the major groups. They had noted the central role to be
played by governments in promoting capacity-building and the priority they
attached to the enhanced role that could be played by each of their groups.
Kyotaka Akasaka
(Japan), Preparatory Committee Vice-Chair, said the afternoon dialogue had
demonstrated that the major groups had an important role to play in the
process, with speakers presenting interesting ideas on how capacity-building
could be improved. There was much shared ground between major groups, but
there had also been continuing differences among them and between
governments -- that was to be expected. However, that should not stop "us
from continuing our efforts to find further common ground". Following the
Vice-Chairs' remarks, representatives of the major groups stressed, among
others, the need for a binding United Nations convention on corporate
accountability; continued maintenance of the level of participation of
indigenous peoples in the sustainable development process; a need to more
closely integrate what was happening on the informal level with what was
happening at the formal level; the need to strengthen governance; and the
importance of networking -- "one of the keys of moving good practice from
where it is to where it's needed". Jan Kara (Czech Republic), Committee
Vice-Chair, gave a read-out of the morning discussion on partnerships. The
idea of type II outcomes [partnerships and initiatives to implement Agenda
21] enjoyed considerable interest and support even though the concept was
not accepted by all. How to bridge type IIs and
type Is
[government-negotiated outcomes] was deemed important. Type IIs could not
become a substitute for strong negotiated outcomes, speakers had stressed.
An underlying concern was how to integrate type II outcomes into the
framework of sustainable development. Dianne Quarless (Jamaica), Committee
Vice-Chair, said the discussion had been devoted to the means and modalities
of partnerships. The need to ensure adequate financial resources to ensure
sustainability had been stressed. There had been some "pretty clear
signals" emphasizing the need to ensure a truly participatory character to
partnerships. Mechanisms to ensure gender mainstreaming through the use of
gender disaggregated information had also been discussed, as had been the
need to safeguard the balance of power in monitoring partnerships. In that
regard, a suggestion had been made that an international monitoring body be
established to oversee type II partnerships. Representatives of the major
groups then took the floor to make their observations on the partnerships
discussion. A number of points were raised, including: the need for
strong, action-oriented language in the outcome document; the role local
governments could play as a "round table" around which the participants in
partnerships could gather; that partnerships must empower the disempowered;
that there must be partnerships between farmers and others, as well as among
farmers; and the importance of ensuring that governments did not abdicate
their responsibilities for sustainable development. The representative of
Norway then expressed his appreciation for all the major groups. He
stressed that efforts to improve governance structures must be based on
openness and transparency, with the active involvement of civil society. He
stressed the role to be played by women in governance. Work on sustainable
development must be revitalized. The representative of Spain, for the
European Union, said the Union felt the dialogue had been of great interest
for the purpose of exchanging views among groups that often worked at a
great distance from each other. Human capacity was essential, and education
at all levels was equally vital. The last segment of the meeting was devoted
to outlining future priorities. Among the priorities identified were: the
need to develop public services in rural areas; recognition that investment
in science and technology was an investment in poverty reduction and wealth
creation; recognition that women's equality and gender justice were
fundamental to the achievement of sustainable development; and that local
government should be seen by national governments as an equal sphere of
governance. Also stressed was the view that genuine concerns, which perhaps
could not be included in the political declaration and programme of action,
could nevertheless be placed on the table. Other items of concern included
the need to protect the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples; the
importance of cancelling the debt of developing countries; the need to
institute accountability measures for corporations; and the importance of
ensuring women's rights in the context of sustainable development. The
representative of Saudi Arabia then said his Government firmly believed that
sustainable development was dependent on the social, economic and
environmental pillars of development. Laws had been enacted to ensure
protection of environment and a special anti-pollution law was in place to
combat greenhouse gases. The Kingdom had developed a national biodiversity
strategy within the framework of the biological diversity convention. It
was fully committed to the goals of the Summit and felt that poverty
alleviation was crucial in the struggle for sustainable development. He
called for the strengthening of the United Nations Environmental Programme
(UNEP). Emil Salim (Indonesia), Chairman of the Commission on Sustainable
Development, in his closing remarks, stressed the need to close the gap
between ideals and realities. He hoped that the contributions of the major
groups would be taken into account as the preparation process for the Summit
continued.
International
Herald Tribune
29 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.iht.com/ihtsearch.php?id=59400
Stockholm: Helping
developing countries mobilize and effectively use domestic and foreign funds
to meet their key investment needs is one of the major issues to be
addressed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in
September. To date, the main sources of funding for sustainable development
- development assistance, direct investment, commercial credit, bank loans
and trade earnings, as well as a range of economic instruments such as green
taxation - have failed to close the gap between the poor and the wealthy.
Official development assistance (ODA) has dropped dramatically in recent
years; the share of ODA in total financial flows to developing countries
declined from 50 percent in 1990 to 18 percent in 1998. Meanwhile, direct
investment and commercial credit have increased, but these are often aimed
at large-scale industrial and infrastructure projects, not at the small and
medium-scale projects needed to create sustainable livelihoods. Foreign
direct investment (FDI) worldwide in 2000 totaled $1.1 billion, up from $209
billion in 1990. However, the developing-country share decreased from 35
percent in 1997 to 17 percent in 2000. Meanwhile, statistics on bank loans,
portfolio investment and earnings from international trade show that at
present too little of this money is benefiting the developing world. The
United Nations Environment Program launched a Finance Initiative in 1992,
which now includes some 270 financial institutions. A voluntary pact between
UNEP and the members builds the business case for banks, insurers and asset
managers to become sustainability leaders. This includes encouraging the
shift to serve emerging sustainability markets, as well as creating
financial tools to meet specific challenges, such as climate change. Closing
the gap Among the most powerful of these financial tools, particularly for
the developing world, is microfinance, says Hanns Michael Hölz, Deutsche
Bank's global head of public affairs and sustainable development and
co-chair of the UNEP Financial Institutions Initiative's Steering Committee.
''The financial industry is looking very closely at microcredit as a way to
close the gap between the developed and the developing world,'' says Hölz.
''Deutsche Bank, for instance, is active with microlending in Bangladesh,
Ghana, India, Mexico and Chile. Our objective is to help these countries
leverage the existing economic infrastructure to better address their
sustainable development goals.'' Directing financing at rural populations is
a strategy embraced by many of the major groups to be represented at the
WSSD, particularly women and farmers. Poverty is overwhelmingly rural, with
some 70 percent of the poorest people in developing countries living in
rural areas. According to David King, secretary-general of the International
Federation of Agriculture Producers, sustainable development will not be
possible until more funds are directed toward rural agriculture in the
developing world. ''Agriculture is the single most important contribution to
the economy in most developing countries,'' says King, ''yet only 8 percent
of World Bank loans are dedicated to rural agriculture in developing
countries. International development assistance to agriculture is the lowest
it has ever been, and the national budgets of developing countries rarely
devote more than 5 percent to agriculture. In the short term, private
investment is not going to be the answer for most developing countries. What
we need is a substantial injection of funds from the international
community.'' Other major groups participating in the WSSD have a range of
views on the best way to finance sustainable development. Indigenous people
say that globalization, privatization and the growing dominance of industry
are damaging for their communities. Local authorities see the liberalization
and deregulation of trade and capital markets shifting authority from the
public to the private sector, thus concentrating economic power into fewer
economic power centers that are not democratically accountable.
Nongovernmental organizations state that inequities and imbalances in the
trade regime, including unequal trade terms, are obstacles to sustainable
development. Workers and trade unions would like to see industrialized
countries accept a new role in promoting employment as a means of enabling
the world's poor to work their way out of poverty. Youth groups assert that
many young people have been negatively affected by the current trade
liberalization and expansion agenda. Scientific and technological
communities want more investment in science and engineering, arguing that
such investments give substantial economic and social returns. Business
supports using a free-market framework that employs market-based approaches
and dismantling flawed subsidies. ''If sustainable development were truly
prioritized as an outcome, the necessary financial conditions would
follow,'' says Jocelyn Dow, president of the Women's Environment &
Development Organization. ''Sustainability is denied by poverty and
overconsumption. So we are really talking about making choices in production
and consumption that create a new value system.'' One place to start would
be to enlarge women's decision-making role, Dow says. ''Women are principal
carriers of the current financial system, but they are not the financial
elite,'' she adds. ''They have fewer vested interests in these current
systems that are so jealously guarded. That is why women are such an
important force for change."
Inter Press Service
29 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0530-05.htm
WASHINGTON, May 29
- The United States, Canada and Australia are blocking progress on a global
plan of action to protect the environment that is being prepared for the
upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development, environmentalists charge.
As the fourth and
final preparatory meeting on the Summit completed its third day on
Indonesia's resort island of Bali, advocacy organizations were pessimistic
that the gathering would lead to concrete action if the three nations have
their way. The countries have not officially responded to the charges.
Activists say the nations have focused on voluntary measures and opposed
proposals that would require mandatory action by corporations. The three
wealthy countries were also consistently blocking proposals for specific
timelines, targets and goals, they add. "It is truly depressing to read the
texts produced for the Summit so far," said Kim Carstensen, CEO of World
Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) in Denmark, who has been at the two-week
preparatory conference. "If they are not changed substantially over the
course of the next two weeks, governments will have failed utterly to
fulfill the responsibility given to the Summit by the U.N. General
Assembly." In 1999, the General Assembly decided the Summit should focus on
taking decisions that would lead to action on a broad range of development
and environmental issues, including improving sanitation and access to
electricity, reducing poverty, preserving ecosystems, and reforming
consumption patterns.
The Summit, to be
held in Johannesburg South Africa, Aug. 26 - Sep. 4, falls a decade after
the landmark Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, where nations agreed to balance
the world's economic and social needs with environmental protection. But
most of the objectives adopted at Rio have not been met, according to UN and
environmental groups, which were counting on the upcoming Summit to
reinvigorate the process. A draft of the political declaration that nations
will sign at the Summit was expected to be completed in Bali. Most of the
hard negotiating is expected to take place June 5 - 7 when hundreds of
government ministers will arrive. More than 2,900 people from 144 countries
have been participating in the preparatory conference. Environmental groups
say Washington's decision to not send a representative of ministerial rank
to Bali proves it is not serious about the Summit's issues. Paula
Dobriansky, undersecretary of state for global affairs, will lead the U.S.
delegation in ministerial-level talks next week. The United States wants "to
avoid signing up to binding international agreements on quite a wide range
of areas on which other people might want to see progress", said Ian
Willmore, spokesperson for Friends of the Earth. The international
environmental group has been pushing for an agreement that would bind
companies to adhere to high social and environmental standards wherever they
operate. Ricardo Navarro, chair of Friends of the Earth International, said
that key paragraphs on corporate accountability were deleted from a document
titled 'Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development', which had been
negotiated during a two-day dialogue between environmental organizations,
farmers' groups, indigenous people, business and local authorities. Navarro
accused the United States and Australia of deleting the relevant text.
"These two countries have consistently worked to gut every proposal being
put forward by civil society throughout the entire preparatory process," he
said. Other nations, including the European Union, were also to blame for
lack of leadership in Bali, added Dewi Suralaga, program director at WWF
Indonesia. "So far this conference has neither leadership nor vision," said
Suralaga. "We are looking to the Indonesian chair of the preparatory
conference, Emil Salim, and the government of Indonesia to take the lead in
ensuring that this conference can really resolve some of the issues facing
the world today." Environmental groups warn that if no concrete steps are
taken in Bali, the World Summit will probably not produce measures to halt
environmental degradation. "This is their last chance to prove that
(governments) are prepared to take a lead and not simply hand control of the
planet's populations and resources over to the corporations," said Remi
Parmentier with Greenpeace International. UN officials were more optimistic
about the outcome of the preparatory negotiations. It is too early for
pessimism, said Nitin Desai, UN under-secretary general for economic and
social affairs, who is chief of the World Summit. The aim in Bali, he told
Agence France Presse, is to "see whether we can come up with a program of
action which is clear in terms of goals, in terms of activities to be
undertaken and in terms of resources".
International
Herald Tribune
28 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.iht.com/ihtsearch.php?id=59242
Paris: Health
issues are inextricably intertwined with all the concerns that will be
addressed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in
August. Ten years ago, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
made health a top priority in the first principle of Agenda 21: "Human
beings are . . . entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with
nature." The report of the UN secretary-general on health and sustainable
development in preparation for the WSSD asks for health issues to be
incorporated into all sustainable development plans, saying: "The goals of
sustainable development cannot be achieved when there is a high prevalence
of debilitating illnesses, and population health cannot be maintained
without ecologically sustainable development." This two-way street
encompasses a dauntingly wide range of issues, among them hunger, poverty
eradication, food and water safety, environmental pollution, climate change
and armed conflicts. WHO urges priority action The World Health
Organization, the task manager for health at the WSSD, is asking countries
to develop priority action plans to meet primary health-care needs, control
communicable diseases, protect vulnerable groups, meet the urban health
challenge and reduce health risks from environmental pollution and hazards.
Partnerships between the major groups attending the WSSD are seen as the
best way to tackle these problems. An organization representing each of the
major groups has prepared a dialogue paper detailing its viewpoint for the
WSSD after consulting with related groups around the world. The
International Chamber of Commerce and the World Business Council for
Sustainable Development will represent business and industry. Their dialogue
paper stresses the need for "voluntary initiatives that pursue clear targets
and report on progress" to tackle complex sustainability issues. It
advocates "setting realistic environmental health and safety improvement
goals, managing environmental impacts and protecting the public's health
through policies and measures based on well-defined, scientifically based
risk assessment principles." Farmers are on the front lines of the battle
for food security. The International Federation of Agricultural Producers'
dialogue paper calls for small farmers to increase participation in
sustainable development, while international organizations and national
governments should increase involvement and investment in agriculture and
food production. Sustainable farming will also help to reduce health hazards
associated with pesticides. The Indigenous Peoples' Caucus of the Commission
on Sustainable Development states that indigenous communities are fighting
for survival and "suffer some of the worst health and mortality rates in the
world," as a result of high rates of infant mortality, poverty and suicide,
among other factors. The paper calls for increased input from indigenous
groups in decision-making on such health-related issues as biodiversity,
climate change, desertification, sustainable forest management, persistent
organic pollutants and hazardous wastes. Local authorities, represented by
International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, point out that
they have already made many sustainability advances. The WHO's Healthy
Cities Program, for example, has been implemented in more than 1,500
municipalities. In addition, "many local governments have succeeded in
reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving air quality and increasing
sustainable transportation and efficient energy use, and, consequently,
strengthening their economies," says the dialogue paper. With nearly half
the world's population currently living in urban communities, cities can
potentially magnify social, economic and environmental problems," says the
group, which calls for a strengthening of local governments and increased
cooperation with other governments to reach goals. Nongovernmental
organizations - represented by the Third World Network, the Environment
Liaison Center International and the Danish 92 Group - favor a more active
role for NGOs and civil society in government decision-making. "Most NGOs
remain outside the decision-making machinery of national, regional and
international bodies that determine policies," says the group's dialogue
paper. It cites examples of how NGOs have played a leading role in
establishing effective programs dealing with issues such as hunger, HIV/AIDS
and access to affordable drugs for the poor. The International Council for
Science and the World Federation of Engineering Organizations states that
"the transition toward sustainable development is inconceivable without
science, engineering and technology." Obviously, this community has a major
role to play in ameliorating human health in the areas of sanitation,
genetics and biotechnology (a recent WHO report says genetic research could
save millions of lives in the developing world), agricultural development,
sustainable energy sources, and natural disaster prediction and relief. The
paper calls on the scientific community to consider "basic human and
societal needs" in its research agendas and asks for increased investment
from public authorities for research. The Women's Environment and
Development Organization notes that women face unequal access to basic
health services, disproportionate responsibilities in the family and
society, discrimination, violence and unsafe pregnancies. Says Irene
Dankelman of the University of Nijmegen in the Netherlands and a WEDO senior
adviser on sustainable development: "Limited policy and scientific attention
is paid to the gender-specific health effects of environmental pollution and
degradation. Women - and their children - are often more susceptible to
these than men because of their physical characteristics and their tasks in
households and society. Access to appropriate health care - including
reproductive and sexual - are of crucial importance for women's lives and
sustainable development.'' Healthy workplaces crucial Health is a pressing
issue for workers and trade unions. Unsustainable patterns of production
result in more than 1.3 million worker deaths per year, including 12,000
children, says the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. Says
Björn Erikson, industrial hygienist for LO, the Norwegian Confederation of
Trade Unions and member of the European Environment and Health Committee's
steering committee: "Our two major concerns about health and the sustainable
workplace are the number of workers being killed, injured or catching
diseases (from asbestos, for example, and pesticides among agricultural
workers), and the dramatic issue of HIV/AIDS." The disease mainly affects
people in their prime working years. The Ad Hoc Working Group for the
International Chapter 25 Youth Review, a global coalition of youth
organizations, advocates increased educational and employment opportunities
for youth. Addressing health-related issues such as AIDS could help combat
the continued deterioration of youth's status worldwide.
United Nations
Press Release
28 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/bali/pressreleases/envdevb5-e.htm
Government
representatives attending the fourth and final Preparatory Committee for the
upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development today in Bali continued
their consideration of the draft programme of action to be adopted by the
Summit this August in Johannesburg, South Africa. To help with their
deliberations, the two working groups had before them a revised Chairman's
paper (see document A/CONF.199/PC/L.1/Rev.1), which compiles provisions that
have been agreed upon at previous preparatory meetings, as well as passages
where consensus has not been reached. In its introduction, the text
reaffirms the validity of Agenda 21 -- a comprehensive plan of action
adopted at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
(UNCED), which embraced economic growth, social development and
environmental protection to achieve sustainable development in the
twenty-first century. Agenda 21, the draft programme states, establishes
the fundamental principles of sustainable development.
Among the key areas
identified for action in the paper are poverty eradication, changing
unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, protecting and
managing the natural resource base of economic and social development, and
health and sustainable development. Speaking at the today's briefing held by
the Department of Public Information, Lowell Flanders, a senior official
with the Summit Secretariat who is following the negotiations on the outcome
text, said good progress was being made and it was hoped that negotiations
could be completed by week's end. A key issue being discussed was whether
the document would be a real action programme containing specific decisions
or a "more typical kind of conference outcome". He said that among the
initiatives and ideas being reviewed were a world solidarity fund for
poverty eradication; an action plan for water and sanitation; an action plan
aimed at reducing by half those lacking modern energy services; the possible
application of International Labour Organization (ILO) labour standards; and
a 10-year work programme on energy resources and energy efficiency. He also
noted that representatives were discussing, in light of the United States
non-accession to the Kyoto Protocol, how best to deal with climate change in
the document. Issues related to trade and finance, oceans and good
governance were also being addressed. At a press conference given later in
the afternoon by Makarim Wibisono (Indonesia) and other members of the
Indonesian delegation, it was noted that negotiations on the draft programme
of action were moving forward. However, some speakers had stressed that a
linkage should be established between the commitments undertaken at the Doha
trade summit and the International Conference on Financing for Development
in Monterrey, Mexico with the Johannesburg Summit. Speakers had raised the
question of how best, for example, to allocate the Monterrey commitment of
$30 billion in new official development assistance (ODA) in a way that would
advance implementation of Agenda 21. Another concept that had been tabled
was the use of special drawing rights for development purposes to further
Agenda 21. Meanwhile, a third working group took up a Vice-Chairman's paper
(see document A/CONF.199/PC/L.3) entitled "Institutional Framework for
Sustainable Development". That document outlines measures to strengthen the
"sustainable development governance architecture" at the international,
regional and national levels. In other business today, the Preparatory
Committee continued its multi-stakeholder dialogue segment, with discussion
groups holding daylong meetings to take up capacity-building for sustainable
development and framework for partnership initiatives. Also today, a number
of side events sponsored by civil society representatives were held on such
topics as: "Education for Our Common Future"; "Wind Power for the World";
and "Disaster Risk and Sustainable Development". So far, over 2,900 people
from 144 countries are participating in the preparatory meeting, including
1,156 government delegates, 747 representatives of non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) and 134 journalists.
The Jakarta Post
28 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailfeatures.asp?fileid=20020528.L01&irec=0
International
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have demanded that the world delegates
currently attending the fourth preparatory committee (PrepCom) meeting on
sustainable development here produce time-bound and implementable measures
to save the planet. A number of NGO groups have expressed their concerns
about the lack of time-bound measures in the Chairman's Text, prepared by
the preparatory committee meeting chairman Emil Salim of Indonesia and
currently being deliberated by the delegates. "We don't want a broad
political statement that says "Save the world", we want measurable and
effective targets within specific time frames, action steps. That's the big
problem with the entire chairman's text," Glenn Farred from the South
African NGO Coalition (SAWGOCO-South Africa) said. The documents processed
here at the PrepCom IV are to be endorsed by the heads of state at the
upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in August.
The Chairman's Text -- prepared as a global action plan towards sustainable
development -- appeared to be more suitable as a core document for a
"northern government summit for unsustainable development," the statement
asserted. A civil society statement regarding the Chairman's Text
distributed to the media revealed that the United Nations General Assembly
itself had asked for action-oriented decisions to implement Agenda 21 and
proposed specific time-bound measures to be undertaken. "Instead, it (the
Chairman's Text) reads more as a government shopping list than an action
program for the sustainability of life on this planet," Farred said reading
from the statement. NGOs said that they saw a common corporate threat
throughout governmental deliberations, with no responsibility for corporate
abuse and no restrictions on the behavior of transnational corporations. "It
is uncritically organized around the interests of the countries of the
North," it said. Besides the lack of a time frame and steps, the NGOs had
also criticized the lack of willingness to include civil society
participation in the deliberation of the Chairman's Text, he said. This was
demonstrated by the fact that many suggestions delivered by civil society
during PrepCom II and III were ignored. The decision-making process for the
Chairman's Text remained solely in the hands of government representatives,
with civil society assuming nothing but a minor, supplementary role, the
statement said. "Is Johannesburg about creating one common agreement between
civil society and the governments, or is it two opposing movements - civil
society and the government - that's the question," Farred asked. Farred said
that the major NGO group was currently networking with the various
governments to apply pressure on this issue and get their messages across to
delegations at the PrepCom meeting, besides holding dialogues through the
Indonesian People's Forum. "It seems that we are here just to legitimize
something; we are here but they don't want to negotiate the text, they're
saying to us that actually it's non-negotiable," he said. At several
separate events, various groups also expressed concern over the Chairman's
Text. Deling Wang, co-chair of the groups for energy and climate change,
for example, said that many parts of the text were contradictory or did not
take into account other United Nations documents of recent years. "In many
respects, the text is a regression from the agreements and commitments made
in Rio, and it is certainly not worthy of presidents and prime ministers
spending their time to travel to Johannesburg to meet at the-so called World
Summit," the groups said in a statement. The United Nations conference on
environment and development, also called Earth Summit, in Rio de Janeiro in
1992 produced a set of action plans known as Agenda 21 -- a document on the
necessary steps to accelerate the sustainable development of nations.
However, Agenda 21 failed to achieve the desired results due to various
factors including a lack of a specific time frame for implementation and
sanctions for failure to comply. The group also said that the Chairman's
Text was often contradictory, citing that it still promoted continued use of
fossil fuels, while at the same time also showing concern about health,
biodiversity, air pollution, and climate change. "Agenda 21 itself doesn't
talk about fossil fuels and nuclear power. It is only in the past few years
that the two have started to be talked about," Deling said. There were also
repeated indications in the Chairman's Text that sustainable development was
being recast to suit the globalization agenda, the group said in the
statement. Separately, executive director of the national committee for the
preparatory meeting, Erna Witoelar, said that the Chairman's Text would not
please everybody. "Rather, it is a disparity of disappointment," she said in
a media conference here. Erna likened the text to a bottle that has to be
filled with water from two other bottles. "Of course, some of the water will
be spilled."
The Jakarta Post
28 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailfeatures.asp?fileid=20020528.L04&irec=3
From May 27 until
June 7 delegations headed by ministers from member states of the United
Nations will arrive in Bali to attend the final preparatory meeting ahead of
the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) to be held in
Johannesburg, South Africa, in early September 2002. The purpose is to
negotiate the Implementation Program document that further elaborates Agenda
21 based on the Rio Principles agreed in the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil in 1992. The General Assembly of the United Nations has agreed to
review and improve the implementation of Agenda 21 after ten years. Agenda
21 contains agreements on various programs of sustainable development as the
most significant outcome of the Earth Summit. The programs are intended to
give substance to the Rio Principle, which embodied the new approach to
sustainable development. While the conventional development model follow a
single track along the economic road, the sustainable development model has
a triple track of economic, social and environmental development. The
development of a nation or business takes on a holistic approach that cuts
across all these three dimensions simultaneously. Water is an indispensable
resource for human survival. Social development policy must open access to
safe drinking water for the billions of the poor who have no access. But
water is also resource that is demanded by many sectors, such as
agriculture, fisheries, industry, human settlement, tourism, etc. Economic
development policy must be geared toward the most efficient use of water to
obtain the maximum benefit per drop of water. Water is abundant in the rainy
season; it even creates floods that harm people, but is scarce in the dry
season. It requires an environmental development policy that conserves
nature's capacity to absorb water. Sustainable development requires a
comprehensive social, economic and environmental policy that simultaneously
assures water for the poor, its efficient use in production and consumption
and the conservation of water for its sustained availability. This line of
thinking does not only apply for water but all other resources and human
activities as well. After ten years of implementing Agenda 21 and the Rio
Principle, what has been achieved? The Secretary General of the United
Nations, Kofi Annan, in his report Implementing Agenda 21 last December 2001
observed that there are four areas where the gap in implementation is
visible. First, a fragmented approach has been adopted toward sustainable
development. Policies and programs, at the national and the international
levels, have generally not integrated economic, social and environmental
objectives in decision-making. Second, since the 1992 Rio Summit no major
changes have occurred in the unsustainable patterns of consumption and
production, which have put the natural life-support system in peril. The
prevailing value system reflected in those patterns is among the main
driving forces, which determine the use of natural resources. Third, there
is a lack of mutual coherent policies in the areas of finance, trade,
investment technology and sustainable development in this era of
globalization. Policy on these issues remains compartmentalized, governed
more by short-term rather than long-term considerations. Fourth, the
financial resources required for implementing Agenda 21 have not been
forthcoming and the mechanism for the transfer of technologies has not
improved. These are the four areas that have created the gap between what
had been agreed in Rio ten years ago and what has been implemented since. As
a consequence of this gap, the world in the year 2000 shows a dramatic
increase in economic welfare for 20 percent of the world's population.
However, it also shows serious environmental degradation as revealed in
global climate change, rise in sea water level, land desertification and
degradation, shrinking forest area, deterioration of biodiversity and
increase in levels of river and air pollution. Meanwhile 80 percent of the
world population is still striving to reach a humane standard of living.
More than a billion people live on less than one dollar a day and an
estimated 2.8 billion on less than two dollars a day. Close to 800 million
people are undernourished in the developing world while food production is
sufficient in the world. In education about 120 million primary school-age
children are not in school. More than half of them are girls. In higher
education, the number of girls reduces sharply. In technology the gap is
sharply widening among developed and developing countries as is clearly
demonstrated by the digital divide. The list could continue. Suffice it is
to demonstrate that the gap is growing into an increasing divergence between
the developed and the developing countries and there is an urgent need to
change it into convergence. In a special session of the UN General Assembly
attended by the heads of state in September 2000, the UN Millennium
Development Goal (MDG) had been adopted with the goal to halve the number of
people with an income of less than one dollar a day; to halve the number of
people who suffer from hunger; to achieve universal primary education, to
reduce mortality rates, to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, all
by the year 2015. In brief: to eradicate poverty once and for all. This
requires financial resources and technology with a conducive economic
environment that improves trade, finance and development relations between
the developed and the developing countries. In Doha, Qatar, ministers at the
World Trade Organization conference in Nov. 2001, agreed on a new round of
trade negotiations to be concluded not later than 1 January 2005. This was
followed by the adoption of the Monterey Consensus by the heads of state in
the International Conference on Financing for Development in March 2002 in
Monterey, Mexico. This is to be accomplished by enhancing the coherence and
consistency of the international monetary, financial and trading system in
support of development. Riding on this wave of development since the
declaration of the UN Millennium Development Goals (Sept. 2001), followed by
Doha WTO Ministerial Declaration (Nov. 2001) and the Monterey Consensus
(March 2002), this World Summit on Sustainable Development puts them all
together in Bali into the framework of sustainable development
The Jakarta Post
28 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailfeatures.asp?fileid=20020528.M06&irec=5
The arrival of the
ship Arctic Sunrise in Bali on Monday signals that its owners, Greenpeace,
are ready for action if need be to remind the meeting on sustainable
development in Bali that actions and not words are what it takes, said a
senior Greenpeace activist on Monday. Greenpeace political advisor Remi
Parmentier said Arctic Sunrise was the organization's platform to launch
various activities for which Greenpeace had earned its infamous reputation
among governments worldwide. "It (the ship) has arrived, the platform is
here. We'll announce our activities as they unfold," said Parmentier who has
been with Greenpeace for 25 years. Thousands of delegates from around the
world have begun preliminary talks at the last of a series of meetings ahead
of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg, South
Africa in late August to September. Aiming to stop the over exploitation of
the world's natural resources, the talks in Bali are expected to produce an
action plan on sustainable development that world leaders will sign at the
Johannesburg summit. But Parmentier warned that what was happening in Bali
threatened to erode governments' commitments made during the 1992 world
Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. He said the business interests of
developed countries had dominated the talks, while developing countries were
plagued with weak leadership. "For every issue under discussion, the WSSD
must agree on targets and timeframes, means of implementation and financial
resources, institutional requirements and monitoring and reporting," a
Greenpeace booklet on sustainable development says. The Arctic Sunrise is a
means to get this message across to the delegates in Bali. "The ship
symbolizes the voice of the people. This is the most effective campaign
tool," said Athena Ronquillo-Ballesteros, Greenpeace's Southeast Asia
campaign manager.
"It will be the
communication center for Greenpeace delegates and our constituencies around
the globe so that whatever happens in Bali gets broadcast to the rest of the
world." She said Greenpeace's mission here was to pressure the government to
stick with the agenda of sustainable development. "The real question for the
Bali conference is whether governments are trustworthy, can stick to their
words," Parmentier said. The global environment continues to degrade at an
alarming rate, whereas it should be the government's duty to reverse that
trend, he said. "It is our (Greenpeace) duty as a networking organization to
express this, the best we can; and we will and they're not going to get away
with this."
Inter Press Service
28 May 2002
Internet:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/20020529/wl_oneworld/1032_1022686342
WASHINGTON, May 28
(IPS) - A network of environmental organizations and community-based groups
worldwide has launched a campaign to pressure governments and international
institutions to develop enforceable environmental and human rights standards
for mining companies. While the industry says it takes every precaution to
minimize negative impacts on the environment and communities, the coalition
of activists - known as the Global Mining Campaign - argue that modern
mining practices around the world still lead to the forced relocation of
local populations, the polluting of rivers with raw mining waste, and the
destruction of landscapes and livelihoods. "We call on governments to make
a commitment to guarantee fundamental human, indigenous and environmental
rights, and to put an end to practices that allow the mining industry today
to externalize risks and costs to governments and society," says Geoff
Evans, director of the Australia-based Mineral Policy Institute. As part of
the campaign, advocacy groups have launched a new website and released two
reports here and in Bali, Indonesia, at the fourth and final preparatory
meeting for the World Summit on Sustainable Development to be held in
Johannesburg in September.
Even a mine
designed with state-of-the-art technologies intended to minimize the impact
on the environment will have dramatic and lasting impacts on communities,
the landscape, clean water and other resources, according to the report,
'Digging Deep: Is Modern Mining Sustainable?' Technical solutions are not
enough to fully address the broader environmental and social issues that the
industry faces, including fair compensation for communities, protecting
nature preserves and respect for indigenous sacred sites, says Stephen
D'Esposito, president of the Washington-based Mineral Policy Centre. "The
more important question is this: What is the most responsible and least
polluting and wasteful way for society to provide itself with the material
it needs?" says D'Esposito.
The report contains
case studies of mines that have contaminated the surrounding environment and
harmed local communities.
A gold mine in
Valle de Siria, Honduras operated by Entremares Honduras S.A, a subsidiary
of U.S.-based Glamis Gold Ltd, for example, has resulted in deforestation,
water contamination, and destruction of several tourist sites. National
mining and environmental regulations, according to the report, appear to
have been ignored. "The development of this mine, despite community
concerns and objections, has resulted in a number of serious environmental
and social problems," says Roger Esocber, vice president of the
Environmental Committee of the Valle de Siria. The case studies also
include mine proposals that, the critics say, are being pushed through by
proponents without the consent of affected communities. One such project is
an open-pit gold mine in Tambogrande in northern Peru, proposed by the
Canadian company Manhattan Minerals. In an effort to dig out massive
sulphide deposits containing gold, silver, copper and zinc, the mine could
displace more than half the town's population of about 16,000, according to
the report. More than three quarters of the agricultural district's 37,000
voters have signed a petition to block the mine, and both the town's mayor
and the local Catholic archbishop are also opposed, according to Oxfam
America. "The struggle between the people of Tambogrande and the mining
company is about more than just the choice between mining and agriculture,"
says Keith Slack, a policy adviser with Oxfam America. "It's about the right
of local communities to protect their livelihoods and have a voice in
development decisions that affect them." Communities in Kaispur, India have
been fighting a similar battle against a proposed bauxite mine promoted by
the Utkal Aluminum Project Ltd., a joint venture between the Hydro Aluminum
of Norway, Indian Aluminum Company and Alcan of Canada. The mine, says the
report, could displace three villages. In response to the project,
villagers organized against the project and resisted all activities -
including road and bridge building - initiated by the company. Their
grievances and protests have been met with violence from the local police,
says Ravi Rebbapragada, an activist with the Hyderabad, India-based group,
Mines, Minerals and People. In December 2000, police opened fire at people
for having organized a large public meeting. Three tribal members were
killed and many seriously injured. "At its core, the struggle over the
Uktal Aluminum Project is an issue of community consent," says
Rebbapragada. Other mines described in the report include: the Bulyanhulu
gold mine in Tanzania; the proposed Poboya Park mine in Palu, Indonesia; the
Kumtor Gold Project in the Kyrgyz Republic; the Ok Tedi Mine in Papua New
Guinea; and the proposed TVI Pacific Mine in the Philippines. While a
different attitude in the industry toward environmental and social issues
will be helpful in resolving some of the these problems, the new mining
campaign says that far more than voluntary commitments and partnerships
between governments, corporations, and civil society will be required to
reform the mining sector. Governments and international institutions need
to develop enforceable standards and codes of conduct for mining companies
that clearly define unacceptable practices and ensure that the rights of
affected community are respected, says the other report released by the
campaign: "Digging for Change: Towards a Responsible Minerals Future, an NGO
and Community Response." "Communities affected by mining can then have some
confidence that the mining industry's promises are not mere words," says
Anna Cody, program coordinator of the New York-based Centre for Economic and
Social Rights.
Associated Press
Writer
28 May 2002
Internet:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020528/ap_wo_en_ge/indonesia_development_conference_1
JAKARTA, Indonesia
- Environmental activists on Tuesday accused wealthy countries, including
the United States and Japan, of blocking moves to include binding agreements
at the Earth Summit being held in South Africa in August. More than 6,000
delegates from 130 countries are meeting on the Indonesian tourist island,
Bali, to debate an agenda and draft a resolution for the World Summit on
Sustainable Development to be held in Johannesburg in August. "Things are
not going well (at the Bali conference)" said Remi Parmentier, a spokesman
for the conservationist group, Greenpeace. "Every day is getting worse."
The Johannesburg
meeting - dubbed Earth Summit II - will mark the 10-year anniversary of the
Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit, the first major international attempt to tackle
global environmental concerns. Parmentier said delegates in Bali from the
United States, Canada, Australia and Japan were blocking moves to include
any internationally binding agreements in the final text to be taken to the
summit. "The text has no targets, no timetables, no new resolutions. At the
moment those who want to destroy (the meeting) are winning," he told The
Associated Press by telephone from Bali. Delegates in Bali are expected to
endorse a draft resolution that calls for improvements - but very few clear
targets - in five key areas: water and sanitation, energy, health,
agriculture and biodiversity. Environmental activists at the meeting want
world leaders to reaffirm a commitment to halve the number people suffering
a lack of safe drinking water and sanitation, as well as poverty and hunger,
by 2015. These targets were set at a summit held to mark the millennium last
year in New York. But environmentalist group Friends of the Earth said the
few goals in the draft resolution were mostly set to be achieved by
corporations through voluntary initiatives. "This is a shameful abdication
of responsibility by governments, and ignores that big business is one of
the key players undermining sustainable development today," the group said
in a statement. A senior member of the U.S. delegation in Bali denied
Washington was deliberately blocking progress at the talks. The United
States believed governments should work together with numerous partners,
including business communities, for sustainable development, he said on
condition of anonymity. The Bali talks, which began on Monday, will end on
June 7. The final two days will include ministerial-level negotiations.
BBC
27 May 2002
Internet:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/asia-pacific/newsid_2009000/2009836.stm
Indonesia is hosting a critical international meeting to prepare for the
world summit on sustainable development. The meeting, starting on Monday on
the holiday island of Bali, is expected to draw up the final agenda and
influence the outcome of the world summit due to be held in South Africa at
the end of August. Thousands of delegates from around the world are expected
to attend this final preparatory meeting, which is due to last two weeks.
The critical decisions will be taken in the second week, when ministers from
more than 100 countries will be present. Action plan Besides agreeing the
agenda for the world summit in Johannesburg later this year, the delegates
will also draft a final statement and an action plan. The Johannesburg
meeting is a follow-up to the Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro 10 years
ago. Whilst that meeting succeeded in putting environmental issues on the
international agenda, the Johannesburg summit will review what progress has
been made since then, as well as shifting to an even broader focus. This
time the spotlight will be much more on the problems facing the developing
world, in particular poverty eradication. The United Nations Secretary
General, Kofi Annan, has already said the summit should focus on five major
areas, including water and sanitation, health and agricultural productivity.
Poverty and extremism All this has been given much greater urgency since the
attacks on the United States last September. Western countries have
acknowledged the link between poverty and political extremism, and the need
for the West to provide more financial assistance to developing countries.
But there are already fears that the summit will only produce vague
conclusions and plans, none of which will ever be implemented. Very little
of what was agreed at the Rio Summit has ever been enforced internationally.
The one significant agreement, which focused on preventing global warming,
has now been undermined by the US, which pulled out shortly after President
George W Bush was elected
International
Herald Tribune
27 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.iht.com/ihtsearch.php?id=59086
The World Summit on
Sustainable Development will take place in Johannesburg Aug. 26-Sept. 4. It
will bring together tens of thousands of participants, including heads of
state and government, national delegates and leaders from nongovernmental
organizations, businesses and other major groups to focus the world's
attention and direct action toward meeting difficult challenges, including
improving people's lives and conserving natural resources in a world that is
growing in population, with ever-increasing demands for food, water,
shelter, sanitation, energy, health services and economic security. Under
the umbrella of the WSSD, the Johannesburg Climate Legacy will measure the
CO emissions of the summit, from aircraft flights to electricity used at the
summit itself. These emissions will be offset through investments in
carbon-reducing sustainable projects across South Africa. For information:
www.johannesburgsummit.org Viewers in the 180 million homes Television for
the Environment reaches via BBC World TV will be given a unique view into
what the 1992 Earth Summit meant for ordinary people. For 10 years, TVE has
been covering the fate of eight children who were born at the time of the
Rio Summit in 1992. ''Our crews are catching up with the families now on
three continents,'' says Robert Lamb, director of TVE. ''I don't think it
will come as a surprise to viewers of Earth Report that we can find no
evidence at all that the grand plans agreed upon in Rio made any difference
at all to their lives or environment.'' The Growing Up films will also be
broadcast during the Summit on South African TV. Growing Up is the
culmination of a 26 program series, ''Countdown to the Summit,'' that
started on BBC World in April. ''I think it's fair to say that by the time
the Summit convenes, we will have covered stories on the broad Johannesburg
agenda,'' says Lamb. ''No other station or production company has made this
kind of commitment.'' The Heinrich Böll Foundation in Berlin published in
April ''The Joburg Memo: Fairness in a Fragile World,'' a memorandum for the
World Summit on Sustainable Development. Drafted by a group of 16
independent activists, intellectuals, managers and politicians, it is a
contribution to the global debate from the civil society perspective. The
80-page memo calls itself ''neither a political platform nor an expert
study, but a 'memorandum' in the true sense of the word; it attempts to
state what we feel must be kept in mind.'' Its central focus is
''Development, yes, but what kind of development and for whom?''
The memo appraises
the 10 years that have passed since the Rio Summit and identifies the themes
it considers central for the World Summit on Sustainable Development in
Johannesburg in August. These include environmental fairness, livelihood
rights, fair wealth and governance issues. The Heinrich Böll Foundation,
affiliated with the Green Party, calls itself ''a legally independent
political foundation working in the spirit of intellectual openness.''
Through some 200 projects in 60 countries, it seeks to strengthen
environmental and civil activism on a global level. The memo can be
downloaded at www.joburgmemo.org
OneWorld South Asia
27 May 2002
Internet:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/20020527/wl_oneworld/1032_1022517738
Environmentalists
gathering in Bali, Indonesia, this week to lobby government ministers at
talks to prepare for the landmark United Nations "Earth Summit" later this
year have lashed out at United States moves to put trade-related issues at
the top of the agenda.
Prominent
campaigners from within the Asian and international conservation and
anti-pollution movements have pledged to oppose any attempt to put trade
concerns ahead of the issue of environmental protection at the Bali meeting,
the definitive round of talks on the text which will form the basis of the
World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa, in
August.
"The United States
may want the agenda to focus on the market, but we'll fight them," said
Poltak Simanjuntak, director of the Indonesia-based Institute for
Environment Monitoring Studies. "We are going to be very critical of any
attempts to concentrate on trade at the cost of the environment,"
Simanjuntak said Monday, at the start of the 12 days of talks. His comments
followed a speech in Washington D.C. last week by Undersecretary of State
for Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky during which she said the U.S. position
for the Johannesburg summit would lay emphasis on creating free markets and
spurring the growth of public-private partnerships, among other issues.
Relaxing regulations on inward investment and opening the way for increased
trade flows could have harmful effects on the environment of developing
countries, said Simanjuntak, who called for delegates at the convention
center on the heavily-touristed island to take full account of the impacts
of mining and timber industries in the region. The India-based Centre for
Science and Environment said trade was often used as a "lever" to push
developing nations to adopt policies that suited the interests of richer
industrialized countries, but which could be harmful to the environment.
The group, along with others around the world, has called for legally
binding international rules on environmental protection to match those which
govern cross-border movements of goods and services under the World Trade
Organisation (WTO). Efforts to achieve those protections over the 10 years
since the last Earth Summit, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, will be reviewed in
Johannesburg. Echoing the concerns of groups in Asia, Friends of the Earth
International issued a statement Monday accusing the U.S., Australia,
Canada, and oil-rich countries of using negotiations in advance of
Johannesburg to "give a free hand" to businesses engaged in international
trade. The summit's negotiating text, which is scheduled to be agreed in
Bali, has been watered down, with previous targets and timetables removed
altogether, it said. "The very few targets that remain in the text, are
mostly to be achieved by corporations through voluntary initiatives,"
according to the statement. "This...is a shameful abdication of
responsibility by governments and ignores that big business is one of the
key players undermining sustainable development today." "Bali is the last
chance to save the Earth Summit," said the group launching its global
campaign, aimed at governments who will participate in Bali under the slogan
'Don't let big business rule the world.' "Governments have broken the
promises they made at Rio in 1992. They must agree to launch negotiations
for binding global rules on corporate accountability at the [Johannesburg]
summit and must establish that Multilateral Environmental Agreements are
never to be subservient to WTO rules."
The Jakarta Post
27 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detaillatestnews.asp?fileid=20020527223145&irec=2
NUSA DUA, Bali
(JP): Two weeks of talks in Bali on sustainable development started off on
Monday with countries from the north and south divided over who should
implement what and when, while non-governmental organizations called the
meeting "mere lip service". Thousands of delegates from around the world
have gathered in Bali to draft out an action plan, known as the chairman's
statement, that seeks to curb the overexploitation of natural resources. The
meeting in Bali is the fourth and last leg of talks prior to the World
Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg, South Africa,
which will run from late August to September. Delegates must finalize
revising the chairman's statement this Friday, ahead of talks on the
ministerial level. However, some have expressed pessimism of a solid
agreement, citing persisting gaps among countries. "What I am dealing with
are efforts to throw out the time commitments (from the chairman's
statement)," said Emil Salim, the chairman of the preparatory committee, who
drafted the statement based on the results of three previous preparatory
committee meetings in New York. Adding timetables and targets into the
chairman's statement requires greater commitments from governments to
implement the action plan. This has been an unresolved issue throughout the
past three rounds of talks. Those countries seen as most rejecting the
commitments are developed nations, especially the United States.
United Nations
Press Release
27 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/bali/pressreleases/envdevb4-e.htm
A broad range of
civil society and government actors in the sustainable development process
took the floor this afternoon to express their views, as the fourth and
final Preparatory Committee for the upcoming World Summit on Sustainable
Development continued its work. During the "multi-stakeholder dialogue" that
took place, speakers broached a wide range of subjects related to
sustainable development. A representative of business and industry said the
issue of governance was fundamental because it provided the framework for
sustainable development. Good governance applied at all levels and to all
stakeholders. There must be better synergies between official development
assistance (ODA) and foreign direct investment (FDI) -- but even that would
not work without good governance. Those three aspects were interlinked and
mutually reinforcing. The contemporary world was characterized by deep
imbalances and by gross inequalities among nations, said a representative of
indigenous peoples. She called for greater democratization, transparency
and equity. It was a deep contradiction to be making policy decisions about
poverty and environmental degradation in such beautiful surroundings.
Efforts to prepare statements and engage in dialogue on the part of
indigenous peoples had not yet resulted in commitments that would improve
their lives, she stressed. A representative of trade unions said the unions
shared a vision of how their members could and must become involved in
implementing sustainable development at the local, national and
international level. She looked forward to the day when workers could help
implement change on the most pressing issues involved in sustainable
development. Trade unions hoped to announce a major initiative at the
Summit on workplace assessments, which would be used to engage employers
around the world in programmes for change.
The Summit was
about implementation -- about moving from agenda to action, a representative
of local authorities said. The concept of the partnership initiative grew
out of the understanding that the job at hand needed the participation of
all stakeholders, not just governments. One of the success stories since
Rio was what had happened at the local level. Local authorities had
delivered, she stressed. The representative of the United States said the
dialogue was a perfect forum to highlight participants' vision for the
Summit and to highlight to crucial role of all stakeholders. Efforts must
be focused on implementing the sustainable development blueprints set out at
Rio and the succeeding forums. No declaration or plan of action would give
people access to clean drinking water or education. That was why this
multi-stakeholder dialogue was essential. Effective partnerships among all
stakeholders were the means to deliver concrete results. After the opening
statements, a discussion was held on the issues raised. Representatives of
women, youth, non-governmental organizations, scientific and technological
communities, and farmers also spoke. Statements were also made by the
representatives of South Africa, Spain, speaking on behalf of the European
Union, Belgium and Finland. Emil Salim (Indonesia), Chairman of the
Commission on Sustainable Development and the Preparatory Committee, opened
the meeting and directed questions at participants during the discussion
segment. The multi-stakeholder dialogue segment will continue tomorrow at 10
a.m. in two separate discussion groups.
STATEMENTS
EMIL SALIM
(Indonesia), Chairman of the Commission on Sustainable Development and the
preparatory committee, opened the meeting. A representative of the women's
working group said 10 years ago at Rio, the international community and
thousands of women had set out a vision of sustainable development. All had
claimed to have understood the principle that human beings should live in
harmony with nature. That would necessitate a new relationship with nature,
men and women. However, at the global level the international community was
more enmeshed in freeing markets than in freeing people. Agenda 21, with
the strong input of women and civil society, had committed to the
overarching goal of sustainable development. She called on governments to
put in place effective policies for the implementation of sustainable
development at all levels. She underlined the importance of the areas of
global governance, gender and governance and transparency. Good governance
required full access for civil society into all the organs of the United
Nations. The United Nations should consider giving permanent status for
civil society in its various organs. Among other things, she urged the
adoption of a convention of corporate accountability. Commitments made at
the various forums on gender equality were integral to the achievement of
sustainable development. A representative of the indigenous peoples said the
contemporary world was characterized by deep imbalances and by gross
inequalities among nations. She called for greater democratization,
transparency and equity. It was a deep contradiction to be making policy
decisions about poverty and environmental degradation in such beautiful
surroundings. Efforts to prepare statements and engage in dialogue on the
part of indigenous peoples had not yet resulted in commitments that would
improve their lives. She stressed the need to respect indigenous peoples
rights to self-determination, among other things. They must be taken on as
equal partners in the sustainable development process. The United Nations
must promote the recognition of treaties and agreements between governments
and indigenous peoples. A representative non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) said it was crucial to turn the principles of the Rio Declaration
into broad action. Governments must not remove reference to rights, which
must be applied at all levels. International financial institutions,
including the World Trade Organization (WTO), were the dominant institutions
in international governance. Their dominance threatened the goal of
achieving balance among the three pillars of sustainable development. The
outcome of the International Conference on Financing for Development should
only be a minimal starting point, not a ceiling. He called for a better
balance between the social, economic and environmental pillars of
sustainable development. He also stressed the need for improved corporate
accountability. A representative of trade unions said the unions shared a
vision of how their members could and must become involved in implementing
sustainable development at the local, national and international levels.
She looked forward to the day when workers could help implement change on
the most pressing issues involved in sustainable development. Trade unions
hoped to announce a major initiative at the Summit on workplace assessments,
which would be used to engage employers around the world in programmes for
change. Such assessments would identify target areas and assess the
progress that could be made. She challenged all the stakeholders to give
the trade unions the tools to make change happen. A representative of local
authorities said the Summit was about implementation -- about moving from
agenda to action. The concept of the partnership initiative grew out of the
understanding that the job at hand needed the participation of all
stakeholders -- not just governments. One of the success stories since Rio
was what had happened at the local level. Local authorities had delivered,
she stressed. Sustainability involved social, economic and environment
aspects. Working in partnership on such issues was part of the daily
business of local authorities. The local level must be acknowledged by
governments. They must be part of the follow-up to the Summit. Local
action moved the world, she said. A representative of business and industry
said the issue of governance was fundamental because it provided the
framework for sustainable development. Good governance applied at all
levels and to all stakeholders. The Summit should be more than a meeting of
heads of government -- it should be a meeting of all the stakeholders
meeting to improve "our collective lot". Whatever the ownership of large
business was, all businesses were ultimately local, he noted. More could be
made of what businesses did locally. There must be better synergies between
official development assistance (ODA) and foreign direct investment (FDI),
but even that would not work without good governance. Those three aspects
were interlinked and mutually reinforcing. A representative of the
scientific and technological communities said existing governance
institutions must be transformed to ensure input from the communities.
Successful mechanisms had been developed over the past
10 years at the
international level, but they must also be developed at the local and
regional levels. A formal link should be established between the Commission
on Sustainable Development and the organizing partners of the scientific and
technological communities. To ensure policy relevance, the communities would
integrate research that supported the three pillars of sustainable
development, he said. A scientific and technological initiative approach to
sustainable development would require the participation of all stakeholders
in the process. Capacity-building for science and technology must be
supported at the Summit. The five areas set out by the Secretary-General
were areas where the scientific and technological community had much to
offer. The communities pledged their assistance to help in those crucial
areas. A representative of farmers commended the United Nations for
consulting with the stakeholders on the issues involved in the lead up to
the Summit. Agriculture was at the heart of all the dimensions of
sustainable development. Yet it was a vulnerable sector, linked to climate
and other factors. That must be taken into account at the international
level. He said specific policies must be implemented in the areas of natural
resources and rural enterprises. Food security and safety must be ensured.
All the economic players involved must work together to develop policies,
and farmers must be involved at all levels. The agricultural sector must be
strengthened. It was also necessary to increase the share of developing and
least developing countries in global trade. A representative of youth said
she had a question for all those present: "Why are we here and what are we
doing 10 years after Rio?" The Summit was meant to be about action. Youth
wanted to see strong, action-oriented words in the outcome document, not
such words as "promote" and "suggest". The policies of international
financial institutions such as the WTO should not supersede the goals of
international organizations and arrangements. She noted the immense
influence of transnational corporations on the deliberations leading up to
the Summit. In that regard, she called for corporate accountability.
Developed countries should cancel the debts of developing countries.
Ensuring an equal playing field was key. She went on to say that 50 per
cent of the world's population was youth -- they should be involved at all
levels of decision-making. Measures should be taken to ensure that youth
living in countries at war could participate in the sustainable development
process. She called for action to be taken now to ensure that another
meeting 10 years from now was not needed on the same issues. The
representative of the United States said the dialogue was a perfect forum to
highlight participants' vision for the Summit and to highlight to crucial
role of all stakeholders. His country was committed to the success of the
Summit. Efforts must be focused on implementing the sustainable development
blueprints set out at Rio and the succeeding forums. The plan of action
should carry forward the outcome of the Monterrey Conference, he said. Good
governance should be promoted as an essential foundation of sustainable
development. No declaration or plan of action would give people access to
clean drinking water or education. That was why this multi-stakeholder
dialogue was crucial. Effective partnerships among all stakeholders were
the means to deliver concrete results. Forging partnerships was not easy --
it meant all must modify the way they were accustomed to doing business, he
said. A blueprint for partnership approaches should be developed. He hoped
the partnerships could continue well beyond the Summit. The representative
of South Africa said he agreed with most of the comments made -- the Summit
was about implementation and about making Agenda 21 real for people on the
ground. He agreed that Agenda 21 could not be delivered unless the Summit
came up with a way to deal with global inequality and poverty. He agreed
that good governance was essential for sustainable development. A successful
outcome would not be possible without stakeholders, he said. Governments
could not do it on their own. The kind of participation seen here must be
built on and strengthened. Access to water and sanitation, improved health
and education were among the issues that must be addressed. Moving beyond
the text was the key. There must be mobilization for delivery and
implementation.
DISCUSSION SEGMENT
During the
discussion that followed the opening statements, speakers addressed such
approaches as thinking globally and acting locally. One speaker said it
would be important to recognize the need to build the capacity of local
authorities. The issue of workplace assessments was taken up again and
further developed. A number of criteria for dealing with such assessments
were in place, a speaker noted. The rights and protection of workers to
engage in joint actions with the employer and within the community was among
them. The importance of ensuring access to safe water and responsible water
usage was also taken up, with the opinion being expressed by one speaker
that water should not be seen as a commodity. Another speaker said that
water was owned by the public but that water services were an area where
privatization could be very effective. Another speaker noted that
privatization of water services had had negative results. Another speaker
stressed the central role to be played by women in the area of water. The
representative of Spain, for the European Union, taking the floor during the
discussion segment, stressed the need for democracy, respect for human
rights and the participation of all stakeholders to promote good
governance. Steps should be taken at the Summit to improve institutional
frameworks at all levels. Local authorities would have a key role to play
at that regard. The Union was working on partnerships with regard to water,
energy and health. Efforts that could be made at the local level to ensure
sustainable development were also discussed. Local governance could provide
for more cross-sectoral synergies to ensure viable local life, one speaker
said on that subject. The relationship of official development assistance
(ODA), foreign direct investment (FDI) and good governance was also
mentioned. A speaker from the private sector said good governance was good
for everyone -- whether women or youth. Returning to the subject of water,
the speaker said there was no gainsaying that business in many cases had
helped with improving water flow to villages. Ensuring the rights of women
was a key aspect of the sustainable development process. The representative
of Belgium took the floor during the discussion. He said that as a
federated State, Belgium needed to ensure synergy between all the levels of
power. At all levels, a contribution must be made to furthering the
implementation of Agenda 21. His Government had worked to develop planning
for sustainable development based on law with participation of all the
ministries and social groupings. He underlined the importance of
participation by citizens in the sustainable development process. The
social component was a foundation for such development, and it must be made
stronger. A proposal to have young people in decision-making structures on
sustainable development at the national and local levels was taken up by
another speaker. He was eager to see more awareness-raising programmes on
sustainable development. The possibility of establishing advertisement-free
zones was also raised, as advertisement promoted patterns of unsustainable
consumption.
The effects of
globalization were also discussed. A speaker stressed the importance of
advertising for business. Efforts to bridge the gap between governments and
science and technological communities were also addressed. The creation of
nuclear waste and its disposal was also brought up. The speaker stressed
the need to ensure sound scientific policies in that regard. He also
stressed the need to examine the world's relationship to the sacredness of
the earth. The need for policy frameworks in the area of property rights for
farmers was then tabled. Protecting the rights of small "fisher folk", who
were not represented at the current gathering, was crucial, the speaker
added. Both good and bad governance must be defined. The representative of
the United States, responding to the remark made by a representative of
indigenous peoples on disposal of nuclear waste in the United States, said
there had been a great deal of scientific research on the subject. There
were strong opinions on both sides, and the matter was being considered by
the United States Congress. To be successful on corporate accountability,
cooperation was needed at all levels, another speaker said. The
representative of Finland said he was going to discuss a form of governance
that cut across all levels -- partnerships. His Government had established
a very concrete system of partnerships. The experiences so far were
promising. Capacity-building in terms of shared learning was included in
the partnership arrangements, he noted. Such arrangements provided an
excellent platform for advancing sustainable development on a voluntary
basis and could complement other efforts undertaken. The possible
negative impact on the sustainable development process of privatization was
also addressed. Globalization became visible at the local level for the
average citizen, another speaker noted, pointing out that media brought the
world of globalization into the living room. She asked what kind of rules
there were for all the stakeholders. Local authorities must have a voice in
the system of global governance, she stressed. A speaker called for a change
of attitude -- health and the equality of all human beings must be ensured.
Another speaker noted the code of corporate governance in South Africa and
its role in ensuring a place for all. Today's world was highly transparent,
as business was being held accountable, another speaker said. All the
stakeholders present in the room were holding business accountable.
Business was not one unit -- it was very broad. Some performed well and
others did not. It was up to society to police those that did not perform
well. Lars-Goran Engfeldt (Sweden), Co-Chair of Working Group III, then
summed up the debate. A wide range of issues that covered the entire
chairman's paper had been broached. The right mix of tools was needed to
make sustainable development happen. Clear measures at all levels were
essential. The discussion had been extremely enriching. Ositadimna Anaedu
(Nigeria), Co-Chair of Working Group III, said a number of things had been
highlighted that would facilitate the discussions to be held in the coming
days. A balance between business and governance was key, he noted. He was
very happy with the kind of interaction that had been held. Emil Salim
(Indonesia) also made concluding remarks and said he had appreciated the
diversity of opinions that had been expressed
Inter Press Service
29 May 2002
Internet:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/20020530/wl_oneworld/1032_1022761375
WASHINGTON, May 29
(IPS) - The United States, Canada and Australia are blocking progress on a
global plan of action to protect the environment that is being prepared for
the upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development, environmentalists
charge.
As the fourth and
final preparatory meeting on the Summit completed its third day on
Indonesia's resort island of Bali, advocacy organizations were pessimistic
that the gathering would lead to concrete action if the three nations have
their way. The countries have not officially responded to the charges.
Activists say the nations have focused on voluntary measures and opposed
proposals that would require mandatory action by corporations. The three
wealthy countries were also consistently blocking proposals for specific
timelines, targets and goals, they add. "It is truly depressing to read the
texts produced for the Summit so far," said Kim Carstensen, CEO of World
Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) in Denmark, who has been at the two-week
preparatory conference. "If they are not changed substantially over the
course of the next two weeks, governments will have failed utterly to
fulfill the responsibility given to the Summit by the U.N. General
Assembly." In 1999, the General Assembly decided the Summit should focus on
taking decisions that would lead to action on a broad range of development
and environmental issues, including improving sanitation and access to
electricity, reducing poverty, preserving ecosystems, and reforming
consumption patterns. The Summit, to be held in Johannesburg South Africa,
Aug. 26 - Sep. 4, falls a decade after the landmark Earth Summit in Rio de
Janeiro, where nations agreed to balance the world's economic and social
needs with environmental protection. But most of the objectives adopted at
Rio have not been met, according to U.N. and environmental groups, which
were counting on the upcoming Summit to reinvigorate the process. A draft
of the political declaration that nations will sign at the Summit was
expected to be completed in Bali. Most of the hard negotiating is expected
to take place June 5 - 7 when hundreds of government ministers will arrive.
More than 2,900 people from 144 countries have been participating in the
preparatory conference. Environmental groups say Washington's decision to
not send a representative of ministerial rank to Bali proves it is not
serious about the Summit's issues. Paula Dobriansky, undersecretary of state
for global affairs, will lead the U.S. delegation in ministerial-level talks
next week.
The United States
wants "to avoid signing up to binding international agreements on quite a
wide range of areas on which other people might want to see progress", said
Ian Willmore, spokesperson for Friends of the Earth. The international
environmental group has been pushing for an agreement that would bind
companies to adhere to high social and environmental standards wherever they
operate. Ricardo Navarro, chair of Friends of the Earth International, said
that key paragraphs on corporate accountability were deleted from a document
titled 'Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development', which had been
negotiated during a two-day dialogue between environmental organizations,
farmers' groups, indigenous people, business and local authorities. Navarro
accused the United States and Australia of deleting the relevant text.
"These two countries have consistently worked to gut every proposal being
put forward by civil society throughout the entire preparatory process," he
said. Other nations, including the European Union (news - web sites), were
also to blame for lack of leadership in Bali, added Dewi Suralaga, programme
director at WWF Indonesia. "So far this conference has neither leadership
nor vision," said Suralaga. "We are looking to the Indonesian chair of the
preparatory conference, Emil Salim, and the government of Indonesia to take
the lead in ensuring that this conference can really resolve some of the
issues facing the world today." Environmental groups warn that if no
concrete steps are taken in Bali, the World Summit will probably not produce
measures to halt environmental degradation. "This is their last chance to
prove that (governments) are prepared to take a lead and not simply hand
control of the planet's populations and resources over to the corporations,"
said Remi Parmentier with Greenpeace International. U.N. officials were
more optimistic about the outcome of the preparatory negotiations. It is
too early for pessimism, said Nitin Desai, U.N. under-secretary general for
economic and social affairs, who is chief of the World Summit. The aim in
Bali, he told Agence France Presse, is to "see whether we can come up with a
program of action which is clear in terms of goals, in terms of activities
to be undertaken and in terms of resources".
Associated Press
27 May 2002
Internet:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020527/ap_wo_en_ge/indonesia_development_conference_1
JAKARTA, Indonesia
- An international development conference opened Monday with the host
nation, Indonesia, calling on wealthy countries to write off debt owed by
poorer countries. More than 6,000 delegates gathered on the tourist island
of Bali for 12 days of talks on how to reduce poverty and environmental
degradation. The U.N.-sponsored meeting is to debate and agree upon an
agenda and draft resolution to be put to the World Summit on Sustainable
Development in Johannesburg in August. That meeting will mark the 10-year
anniversary of the Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit, which was the first
international attempt to tackle environmental issues, including global
warming and over-exploitation of natural resources. Indonesia's Environment
Minister Nabiel Makarim said he was confident that delegates would include
debt relief in the final draft to be taken to Johannesburg. "I am positive
that this is one of the solutions that can go ahead," he told The Associated
Press from Bali. Makarim said Germany had agreed to wipe off dlrs 50 million
of debt owed by Indonesia by 2002 if Jakarta introduced educational programs
that would give millions of poor children a better future. "It's a small
start. But other European countries are supportive and Japan, which has so
far been reluctant to talk about debt reduction, is now coming round," he
said. Many poor countries are burdened by debt repayments. Despite ever
increasing international aid, more money now flows from poor countries to
rich ones than the other way round. The Bali talks follow three earlier sets
of negotiations that agreed to focus on five areas: water and sanitation,
energy, health, agriculture and biodiversity. Many delegates in Bali want
world leaders to reaffirm a commitment to halve the number people who face
poverty and hunger as well as a lack of safe drinking water and sanitation
by 2015. The targets were set at a summit held to mark the Millennium last
year in New York. The Bali meeting will prepare the documents to ensure that
the targets will be reinforced at the Johannesburg summit. Environmental
activists, however, complain that agreements are meaningless without the
backing of powerful nations, such as the United States. Washington is not
sending any one of Cabinet rank to the talks. The Bali meeting will peak
between June 5-7 when ministerial-level negotiations from U.N-member states
are due to be held.
Straits Times
Internet:
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/analysis/story/0,1870,123037,00.html?
The writer is Galen
L. Stone Professor of Economics, and director of the Center for
International Development, Harvard University. Copyright: Project Syndicate.
IN A shocking book
last year entitled Late Victorian Holocausts, Mike Davis described the
British Empire's attitude to famines in India and elsewhere. When monsoons
failed, millions of Indians faced imminent death. Food could have been
transported by rail within British India to save many starving people, but
the British believed in a hands-off, laissez faire policy. Starvation was
part of nature. Actually, British attitudes were even more shocking. Its
officers believed they were being brave by not being swayed by 'emotions'.
They congratulated themselves on their stiff upper lips. Unbelievable
nowadays? No, for the United States is doing something similar. America has
stood by idly as millions of Africans die of Aids. Recently, the US Treasury
Secretary and Health Secretary visited Africa and looked dying people in the
eye. Such people are dying not because early death is inevitable, but
because they cannot afford the medicines to keep themselves alive. If every
American gave US$10 (S$18) per year to this cause, over one million Africans
could be saved from Aids death each year, with money left over to fight the
disease. As recent studies show, if the one billion people in the rich world
gave US$10 per year, the resulting total of US$10 billion could finance a
serious battle against Aids, tuberculosis (TB) and malaria. The new Global
Fund to Fight Aids, TB and Malaria was started this year, but rich countries
contributed less than one tenth of the money it needs. In its first months
of operation, the fund committed all of the money that it received from rich
countries. Neither the US nor Europe has stepped forward with more money.
Every excuse is made to avoid giving what is needed. Senior US officials
continue to say that there is no infrastructure to dispense medicines, even
as these officials visit hospitals that possess the necessary doctors,
clinics, nurses and pharmacies. As doctors explain patiently, what they are
missing is medicine, because they lack the money to buy needed drugs. When
US Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill visited an Aids clinic in Soweto, South
Africa, doctors told him that they could increase by 10 times the number of
people treated with Aids drugs if sufficient money was available. Twenty-two
years into the Aids pandemic, the Bush administration insists that it won't
let emotion push it into action. We need a plan, says the US; we cannot
throw money at the problem. As in the late 19th century, we have the
spectacle of the world's superpower treating indifference as a sign of
seriousness. The truth is simpler. Africans barely count in American
politics. Africans don't vote; they don't buy US products; they don't
threaten violence. They are simply poor, hungry and disease-ridden. Few
rich countries do better than the US. I single out America not because it is
unique in its neglect, but because it is unique in its capacity to lead.
Europe and Japan have also avoided financial contributions to Aids control
that could keep millions of HIV-infected Africans alive. In the coming
months, rich countries will face three opportunities to mend their ways.
Next month, the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organisation will host
the World Food Summit. With nearly 900 million chronically-hungry people
around the globe, the summit presents an opportunity to reverse the collapse
of financial assistance for food production to poor countries. As with Aids,
a few dollars per person of assistance each year could spare millions from
hunger. Later in the same month, rich countries will hold their annual G-7
Summit. They have promised to make Africa its centre-piece. More money for
Africa rather than more soothing words will be the true test of the summit.
In August, political leaders from the entire world will gather in
Johannesburg for the World Summit on Sustainable Development. Rich countries
will once again have a chance to be true partners of the poor. The rich may
feel that clever words will absolve them of responsibility, but the hungry
and dying stand witness to the tragic realities.
The Jakarta Post
7 June 2002
Internet:
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailfeatures.asp?fileid=20020607.M11&irec=10
Agus P. Sari,
Executive Director of Pelangi, an Environmental Research Institute, Based in
Jakarta
The Bali
preparatory committee meeting was meant to prepare material for the World
Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg to address a range of
issues from helping millions out of poverty to protecting the environment.
These issues were,
among other things, poverty alleviation, changing unsustainable production
and consumption, transfers of resources and technology from rich countries
to poor countries and preserving natural resources and the environment that
development needs of future generations will be dependent upon. In
conclusion, the meeting was to agree on the implementation of sustainable
development. The past week and a half at the Bali meeting, however, has
been dominated by economic globalization, trade liberalization and
corporatization. Champions of the World Trade Organization (WTO) have been
insisting that a globalized world, free trade and the increased role of
corporations would contribute to sustainable development. Critics, however,
argued that the results would be increased poverty, gaps in income and
further destruction of the environment. Against the backdrop of these
polarized arguments, Johannesburg will have to come up with an outcome that
is acceptable to the stakeholders that the Summit represents, yet worth the
papers it produces, the words it forms and the costs it incurs. What will
this be? Remember Seattle? In 1999, the WTO held its annual meeting in
Seattle, and the U.S. anti-globalization movement, joined by a number of
anarchists, took over the streets and inadvertently incited destructive
riots. This event caught the attention of world leaders. Clinton's speech
said that the WTO must take the voice "from the outside" into account. Then
there was the meeting in Genoa where one protester was killed, putting heavy
pressure on other protesters. Afterwards, there was Doha, where the world
leaders finally agreed on the basic terms for free trade. The expansion of
the role of corporations is all too noticeable. And the impression that the
WTO is just an extension of corporate interests is all too apparent. In the
years between 1987 and 1997, foreign direct investment grew drastically from
US$88 billion to $400 billion. Overseas Development Assistance, on the other
hand, grew from $42 billion to $63 billion over the same period. Social and
environmental impacts made by these corporations have been felt mainly by
local communities while overseas executives and shareholders have enjoyed
large profits. The piecemeal programs by these multinationals, in the name
of community development, have failed to address the longer term problems of
corporate responsibility and good governance. A viable longer term solution
to this is urgently needed. There is an unspoken agreement that, given the
global and corporate world that we live in now, there is a need to balance
the power of the WTO -- to complement it, and more importantly to undertake
tasks that the WTO cannot undertake. While the WTO is good at promoting free
trade and investment, it is not well-situated to address poverty, equity and
environmental protection. These tasks should be undertaken elsewhere, not
through the WTO framework. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)
for a while tried to champion international environmental governance, with a
likely outcome of forming an organization, such as the world environment
organization. This idea, though it gained momentum in its time, failed to
materialize because it failed to address the most pressing developmental
issues, such as poverty alleviation and equity. Nevertheless it has started
a discourse on global sustainable development governance. Along these
lines, proposals to establish the likes of a world environment and
development organization and a world sustainable development organization
have been put forth. Johannesburg may be a process striving to achieve just
that: to establish an institution with a set of rules, mechanisms and
agreements. The institution may not necessarily be an organization, which at
first competes with and is the anti-thesis to the WTO, but in the end it
would work alongside the WTO, complementing its undertakings in areas where
the WTO cannot go. At the same time, in response to global world problems,
civil society has become increasingly globalized as well. Alongside the
worldwide non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such as Greenpeace, World
Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and Friends of the Earth, numerous smaller NGOs
have established international networks among themselves according to common
interests. Institutionalized rules and mechanisms to govern sustainable
development will have to comprise a range of multi-stakeholders and
governments. The old model of intergovernmental mechanisms can no longer
work. In conclusion, even though the WTO is currently the only game in the
global town, it should not be. Mechanisms to make the corporate world
accountable and responsible for its conduct everywhere in the world will
have to prevail and the constituency for it among governments as well as
civil society is growing. The shape of this new model of multi-stakeholder
mechanisms will be determined at Johannesburg. Bali started the move, and
Johannesburg must finish it.
CARE International /WWF
International.
5 June 2002
Internet:
http://panda.org/news/features/story.cfm?id=2961
*Guy Tousignant is
Secretary General of CARE International. Claude Martin is Director General
of WWF International.
The second week of
negotiations in the fourth and final preparatory meeting for the upcoming
World Summit on Sustainable Development is well underway. Ministers have now
arrived for the high-level segment which begins today, 5 June. CARE and WWF
hope that this will be a crucial turning point for the meeting, which has so
far been characterized by a lack of political will to address its objective
- creating a Plan of Action to end poverty and preserve the environment. Ten
years ago, the exuberant city of Rio de Janeiro captured the world's
attention with the historic Earth Summit. The first of its kind, the Earth
Summit firmly placed environmental, social, and economic responsibilities on
the international policy agenda and unfurled Agenda 21 - a blueprint for
ending poverty and preserving the environment that was adopted by more than
178 governments. Developed in the glow of the post-Cold War era, Agenda 21
was a ground-breaking plan to combat poverty, hunger, ill health,
illiteracy, and the deterioration of the planet's ecosystems. By integrating
environmental and development concerns at the global, national, and local
levels, it was designed as a global partnership for sustainable development
that would lead to improved living standards for all, better protected and
managed ecosystems, and a safer, more prosperous future. Tragically,
implementation of Agenda 21 has been at best feeble, and at worst completely
inadequate to deal with the social and environmental crises that we face.
Ten years on, 2 billion people - one-third of the world's population - live
in extreme poverty, lacking clean water, adequate sanitation, and access to
energy. 130 million children of school age are not enrolled, and are not
likely ever to be. Many of the world's poor also suffer from the effects of
land degradation, which has reduced the productivity of up to two-thirds of
the world's agricultural areas. The environment has not fared any better.
The crisis facing the world's rainforests had already become a worldwide
cause before the Earth Summit, but since then land clearing has continued
unabated and half of the world's tropical rainforests and mangroves are now
lost forever. And while the debate on climate change and global warming
gathered momentum in the last 10 years and many countries have ratified the
Kyoto Climate Treaty, the US -the biggest producer of greenhouse gases -
refuses to be part of an international effort to address the problem. But
perhaps even more tragic than the broken promises of Agenda 21 is that
governments preparing for the follow-up World Summit on Sustainable
Development (WSSD or Rio+10) are now unwilling to commit to the promises of
10 years ago, let alone tackle the issues facing the world today.
Representatives of the same governments that signed Agenda 21 in 1992 are
this week assembled in Bali, Indonesia, for the final preparatory meeting
ahead of the WSSD, which will be held at the end of August in Johannesburg,
South Africa. Under mandate by a 1999 UN General Assembly resolution, they
are expected to leave this meeting with an action plan - with teeth - to fix
Agenda 21. This plan should ensure the well-being of people and the health
of the planet. It should address the problems that led to inaction on Agenda
21. Its "teeth" should consist of tangible goals, specific time-frames and
financial commitments for implementing these goals, and means for monitoring
compliance with them. It should also be accompanied by a bold political
declaration to reinforce the resolve of Heads of State when they gather in
Johannesburg.
Earlier this month,
we and other leaders of nongovernmental organizations addressed a letter to
189 Heads of State, urging them to ensure that targets and time-frames are
an integral part of the draft plan of action, and to ensure financing and
monitoring mechanisms for their implementation. But instead, the government
representatives gathered in Bali have systematically removed most of the
time-frames and targets from the draft plan of action. In addition, many of
the more prosperous states have dodged the crucial commitment for financing
the plan - a contributing factor to the inaction on Agenda 21. There is
still time for governments to demonstrate real moral leadership. Before they
set off each morning in Bali for another round of negotiations, government
ministers and their staff could well have a look at the photos of their
children and grandchildren that they packed for this trip. These young
people will be the ones who judge the 2002 plan of action and its success in
ending poverty and preserving our fragile planet.
Bangkok Post
5 June 2002
Internet:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/05Jun2002_news31.html
Jane Goodall is the
founder of Jane Goodall Institutes worldwide, which advocate for the
conservation of chimpanzees and other wildlife. She is also a Messenger of
Peace for UN secretary-general Kofi Annan.
The rich variety of
animal and plant life is shrinking all the time _ rapidly. And not enough
people seem to be particularly concerned. This has to change. Today, June 5,
marks the 30th commemoration of World Environment Day. If only we could mark
the day with a celebration of humanity's efforts to protect the world's
natural environment and its diverse range of species. Instead, we must
recognise that today the world is poised on the brink of an environmental
catastrophe. A recent report by the UN's Environment Programme predicts that
in the next 30 years a quarter of the world's mammals could become extinct,
along with alarming numbers of plant and other animal species. I see this
clearly in the chimpanzee population. Some two million of them lived in
Africa at the turn of the last century. Now, reckless development and the
destruction of their natural habitats along with commercial hunting for food
have cut their numbers to less than 1/10th of that. Man may, quite
literally, destroy his closest animal relative, and countless other species,
too. It's not just the natural world that will suffer _ we will too. The
human population is set to grow by 2 billion by 2032. The lowering of water
tables and the on-going desertification of the land will lead to severe
water shortages for nearly half of humanity by this time. Serious health
problems will escalate due to malnutrition, extreme poverty, polluted air,
water and food, and viruses resistant to antibiotics. Environmental
degradation is already affecting many people's lives. Forest clearing and
burning in Asia have driven bats infected with the previously unknown Nipah
virus from their habitats into contact with human populations. A lack of
access to clean water kills more than 2 million people every year. In
Florida, Australia and Asia, pollution from the mainland is killing coral
reefs _ nurseries for hundreds of species of fish _ and endangering
multi-billion-dollar fishing and tourist industries. It's not a pretty
picture, but there are reasons for hope. The fact is all these problems can
be solved if our leaders take action. We already have an excellent
blueprint to combat these alarming trends, which will benefit all parts of
the world, not just rich nations or developing countries. But tragically,
this important document has been sitting on a shelf, largely unimplemented,
since it was approved by world leaders at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. The
plan, called Agenda 21, promotes a sustainable form of development that will
improve global living standards while preserving environmental assets for
future generations. All we need now is the political commitment to make it
happen. These plans can and do work. I've seen it with our institute's Roots
& Shoots programme, which involves young people around the world in helping
improve the quality of life in their communities and make them compassionate
and environmentally aware citizens. And I've seen it work through our TACARE
Project, which is helping to halt the depletion of natural resources in
Tanzania. More than 30 villages are improving the quality of their farmland,
managing tree nurseries, and protecting their forests from clear-cutting,
while launching income-generating activities, improving preventative health
care for members of the community, and offering women chances for furthering
their education. This summer, 10 years after Rio, world leaders will meet in
Johannesburg from Aug 26 to Sept 4 for the UN World Summit on Sustainable
Development. The decisions made at this conference will be critical for our
future and could lead to actions that change, for better or worse, the world
that we leave to our children, and theirs. But it is not just up to world
leaders to avoid a ``doomsday'' scenario for life on Planet Earth. We all
have a vital role to play. For each of us can implement simple but highly
effective changes in our lives that will protect the environment. For
example, if you skip one 30km car trip each week (or several trips totalling
30km), you can reduce your production of greenhouse gases by nearly 500kg of
carbon dioxide annually. Choose to buy products only from environmentally
responsible companies. Be assured that our individual actions, collectively,
make a huge difference. Above all, we must push our elected leaders to do
their part at the Johannesburg Summit by turning the plans of Rio into
reality. I'll be there because I know it's our best hope for finding a way
to preserve our own precious habitat _ and thus the future of mankind.
Business Day via
All Africa
5 June 2002
Internet:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200206050098.html
Aubrey Matshiqi
Johannesburg Matshiqi is an independent political analyst.
A decade after the
Rio Summit, SA is hosting the United Nations' World Summit on Sustainable
Development. Undoubtedly, Johannesburg being the venue for the summit is
significant for all South Africans because the project of ensuring "a better
life for all" is developmental in nature. Improving the lot of our citizens
is an imperative inextricably bound to the global agenda of sustainable
development. It is disturbing to see more attention being lavished on the
soccer World Cup than on an event aimed at preventing the extinction of
humankind. The fact that 1,2-billion people, mainly in the developing south,
live in abject poverty and have to eke out a living in conditions of
worsening ecological crises is no exaggeration. The goal of ensuring
sustainable development "meets the needs of the present without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" might become a
mirage if ordinary citizens continue being treated as spectators. Urgent
action on the part of ordinary citizens is needed if the negative effect of
globalisation and economic liberalisation is to be arrested and ultimately
reversed. Several theories have been put forward to try to explain our
citizens' apparent lack of interest in environmental affairs. Some have even
suggested black South Africans, unlike their white counterparts, do not care
about the environment. Of course, this is as ludicrous as the opinion of
some that whites are racist tree huggers with too much money, who care more
about animals than the plight of the poor. Both views miss the point. A
majority of South Africans has become alienated from the land, and so the
environment, as a result of colonisation and apartheid. This alienation has
been deepened by the tension between profit-making of transnational firms
and the need for forms of sustainable development to ease conditions for
poverty-hit people in the developing world. Ten years after the Rio summit,
the gap between the wealthiest and poorest countries is still not lower than
the 72 to 1 measured in 1992. The consumption patterns of the world's
richest countries reflect this inequality more starkly. The World
Conservation Union says 20% of the people of the highest-income nations are
responsible for 86% of total global private consumption, while the poorest
20% account for 1,3%. The environmental devastation seen in many a
developing nation is a direct result of such consumption patterns.
Developing countries, on the other hand, are constantly encouraged to green
parts of their environment for the benefit of tourists. It is this state of
affairs which may have spawned the apathy and cynicism of many about the
Johannesburg Summit. The road from Rio to Johannesburg has been
characterised by what some in the nongovernmental organisation (NGO) sector
have called a crisis of implementation. The balance of power between
governments and international private corporations has seldom advanced
environmental justice and the interests of the poor. Popular, as opposed to
populist, participation by masses of the environmentally disenfranchised has
been the exception rather than the norm. This means governments, the NGO
sector and social movements have inadequately mobilised global and local
resistance to the pernicious effects of economic liberalisation which, in
many cases, has led to the globalisation of poverty. Does this mean the
summit is nothing to enthuse about? The answer lies between two choices we,
as South Africans, must make. We can wallow in cynicism, or commit ourselves
to Agenda 21's overall aims.
Agenda 21, a
product of the previous Earth Summit in Rio, commits us all to finding a
path to poverty eradication and economic growth which strikes a healthy
balance between humanity's needs and those of the very environment on which
sustainable development depends. Success on this score demands that we, as
ordinary citizens, refuse to be pushed to the sidelines of environmental
security and sustainable development. We must demand access to governmental
processes to make sure we influence the decisions and actions of all
institutions of international environmental governance. If this summit
delivers nothing more than a reaffirmation of prior agreements, that should
still not be an excuse for apathy. There must come a time when no political
party can achieve electoral success unless it is able to link a better life
to sustainable development and environmental justice.
There can be no
greater love than bequeathing a healthy environment to our children.
United Nations
Press Release
30 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/bali/pressreleases/envdevb8-e.htm
Secretary-General
Kofi Annan is the author of the following text entitled "A chance to secure
our future":
Imagine a world of
relentless drought, storms and famine; of islands, deltas and coastal
regions flooded by rising sea levels; a world where millions die of air and
water pollution, while millions more flee in search of safer places to live,
and yet others fight each other for scarce natural resources. Alternatively,
imagine a world of clean water and air; of green technologies, where homes,
transport and industry are all energy-efficient; where everyone shares the
benefits of development and industrialization, and of the earth's natural
resources, yet those benefits can be sustained from one generation to the
next. The choice between those visions is ours to make. One school of
thought depicts all economic growth and development as leading inexorably to
the apocalypse. Another downplays the real ecological problems we do face,
or assures us that some spontaneous technological breakthrough will come to
our rescue. Neither approach is helpful, and neither is accurate. We human
beings can thrive in the future, as we did in the past, by living in harmony
with our natural environment. But, at present, we are failing to do so.
Over the past two centuries, remarkable gains in living standards encouraged
some of us to believe that natural limits to human well-being had been
conquered. But now the sheer number of human beings, the natural desire of
all of them to share the prosperity so far enjoyed only by a few, and the
unprecedented rates at which we are using energy and other resources, have
taken us into uncharted territory. We should no longer imagine either that
one fifth of humanity can indefinitely enjoy prosperity while much larger
numbers live lives of deprivation and squalor, or that patterns of
production and consumption, which destroy the environment, can bring us
lasting prosperity.
The issue is not
environment versus development, or ecology versus economy. It is how to
integrate the two. We thought we had found a way out of this predicament 10
years ago, with the agreements reached at the Earth Summit in Rio. But
progress since then has been slower than we hoped. Developed countries,
especially, have not lived up to the promises they made -- either to protect
the environment or to help the developing world. Discussions on finance and
the economy, from the local to the global, still treat the environment like
an unwelcome guest. Now we have another chance to get this right: the World
Summit on Sustainable Development, to be held in Johannesburg, South Africa,
in three months' time. Of course, one summit by itself will not change
history. But I believe this summit will be seen to have marked a turning
point, if we win clear commitments to change, and new initiatives to make it
happen, in five specific areas: Water -- In order to save the more than 3
million people who die each year from water-related diseases, we must
improve water and sanitation services, and access to them, by finding new
money for water development and management. And in order to save two thirds
of the world's population from facing serious water shortages in the decades
ahead, we must reduce leakage and waste, especially in agriculture ("more
crop per drop"); and provide for regional management of watersheds that are
vital to more than one country. Energy -- In order to give poor people a
chance to escape from poverty, we must provide clean energy for the 2
billion people who now lack it. And in order to make sure this advance is
not accompanied by disastrous climate change, we must improve energy
efficiency, use more renewable energy, implement the Kyoto Protocol, put an
end to perverse subsidies and tax incentives, and fund research on new types
of clean energy and carbon sequestration. Health -- In order to save the
lives of millions who die each year from an unsafe environment -- dirty
water, indoor air pollution, toxic wastes, insects that transmit deadly
diseases -- we must redouble our efforts to create a safe environment, make
immunization and treatment available to all, and increase our research on
tropical diseases which impose huge human and economic burdens in the
world's poorest countries. Agriculture -- In order to ensure that food
production keeps pace with the number of mouths to feed, we must find ways
to halt land degradation and reverse the sharp decline in agricultural
productivity, especially in Africa. That means planning and managing land
use more responsibly, implementing the United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification, and funding research on new drought-resistant crops.
Biodiversity -- And in order to halt the galloping extinction of other
species, which has devastating implications for human life, we must clamp
down on illegal and unsustainable fishing and logging practices; we must
help people who currently depend on such activities to find other, more
sustainable ways of earning their living; and we must fund new research on
ecosystems and biodiversity. In all these areas, there are things we can do
now -- with the technologies already at our disposal, provided we give the
right incentives. But science will bring us many more solutions if we make
the right investment in research. Knowledge has always been the key to
human development. It will also be the key to sustainability. This agenda
will sound impossibly ambitious to some, disappointingly narrow to others.
But I believe it represents the essential, achievable start that we must
make, if we are to preserve the hope of a decent life for our children and
grandchildren. And that is what Johannesburg is all about.
International
Herald Tribune
27 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.iht.com/ihtsearch.php?id=59077
Three months from
now, world leaders will meet in Johannesburg at the World Summit on
Sustainable Development to try to find practical ways for humanity to
improve the lives of all human beings, while protecting the environment. We
expect that they will move from the many commitments they have made in the
past to action. At the top of the agenda, two areas where concrete results
are achievable are water and sanitation and energy resources. In a recent
statement, Kofi Annan, the UN secretary-general, stressed: ''Unless we take
swift and decisive action, by 2025 as much as two-thirds of the world's
population may be living in countries that face serious water shortage. We
need to improve access. We need to improve the efficiency of water use. We
also need better watershed management, and to reduce leakage, especially in
the many cities where water losses are an astonishing 40 percent or more of
total water supply.'' Energy is essential for development, yet 2 billion
people currently go without access to energy sources. The secretary-general
recently emphasized the need to make clean energy supplies accessible and
affordable. He said: ''We need to increase the use of renewable energy
sources and improve energy efficiency. And we must not flinch from
addressing the issue of overconsumption - the fact that people in the
developed countries use far more energy per capita than those in the
developing world.'' When the world's heads of state met at the Millennium
Summit in 2000, they committed themselves, inter alia, to halve, by 2015,
the proportion of people who live in poverty and the proportion of people
who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water. They also pledged
to stop the unsustainable exploitation of water resources by developing
water management strategies to promote both equitable access and adequate
supplies. Quantity and quality Over 70 percent of the world's poor live in
the rural areas of the Third World, and a substantial proportion of those
people live in water-stressed areas. The plight of the world's poor cannot
be alleviated without addressing the quality of the resource base upon which
they depend: land and water resources. In the context of poverty, the issue
of water is both crucial and strategic. If we manage water use wisely, at
the community, regional and global level, this will inevitably have positive
consequences on land use, forest use and other biotic resources as well. The
improvement of water use is central for all of the other dimensions of
sustainable development. Huge amounts of internal and external resources
have to be generated if we are to reach universal safe water and adequate
sanitation in the foreseeable future, to improve water use efficiency and
integrated water management. There may be good potential for increasing
private-sector intervention in water and sanitation services to urban areas
of the developing world. The private sector, however, would be less
interested in extending services to the poor in urban and rural areas, where
water services often depend on subsidies and where it would be difficult to
generate a fair return on investment. The pressures on freshwater supplies
portend rising water costs and an urgent need to improve water-use
efficiency. Water-intensive industries will have difficulties locating in
water-short countries or areas. Demand management through progressive water
tariffs should increase conservation and reduce waste and pollution. This is
good for the environment and could attract private investment for essential
water infrastructure. Water scarcity may create a competitive advantage for
businesses with water-efficient processes in a water-stressed world. Energy,
as a major driver of socioeconomic development and the source of significant
levels of global, regional and local pollution, poses a great challenge to
efforts aimed at achieving sustainable development. The ability to harness
energy from fossil fuels was the force behind the Industrial Revolution and
is the factor underlying high standards of living in developed countries
today. Developed countries have grappled with associated pollution during
much of the latter half of the last century. While advances have been made
in terms of standards, regulations and technological improvements and many
local pollution problems have been addressed, emissions of greenhouse gases
remain a serious problem. For developing countries, energy use is vital for
socioeconomic growth and reducing widespread abject poverty. In absolute
terms, commercially traded energy consumption per person is almost six times
higher in developed countries than in developing countries, despite the fact
that since 1970, energy consumption per person grew by only 2.7 percent a
year in developed countries, compared with 7.5 percent a year in developing
countries. Emissions from energy use affect health and living conditions at
the local level, especially in growing urban areas. Lead, particulates,
sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides are a few of the pollutants adversely
affecting living conditions for people, especially children, in developing
countries.
Addressing energy
needs in a sustainable way in the 21st century will not be an easy task.
Everyone is affected by decisions related to both production and use of
energy services, and it is in everyone's interest to move quickly toward
more sustainable energy patterns. Everyone must be involved in the solution
Denpasar,
5 June 2002
Internet:
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/bali/pressreleases/megawati.pdf
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
At the outset, allow me to
welcome you all to Indonesia. On behalf of the people and the Government of
Indonesia, I wish to convey my appreciation and gratitude to the United
Nations for the confidence extended to us to host this very important
gathering. I sincerely hope that Bali, with all its nuances of cultural
beauty, would give more impetus to our joint effort to make this preparatory
committee meeting a success. I believe we all have put our high hope in the
success of the Conference on Sustainable Development to be held in
Johannesburg in September this year. I therefore have conviction you would
share with me that whatever agreement we could reach at this meeting will
significantly affect the final outcome of the Conference in South Africa.
In Indonesia, we have been
attentively following the deliberation on the issue from the previous
meetings. My government
is hence determined to do its
utmost for the success of this very meeting. It is all based upon our
awareness and
understanding that this fast
changing and more globalized world, with all its immense influence in the
existing value system, has
affected the approach and
perspective of many nations in developing their ideals and in pursuing their
future as well as their
vision as to how the chain of
humanity should continue. I believe that we all share the same perception
and dreams
about an advanced life that is
prosperous, just, independent and dignified. A life that communally reflects
the harmony of
nations with all the diversity
in their social structure, culture and their political system, as well as a
life that maintains
harmony with surrounding nature.
Each nation has certain condition and capacity in managing its social,
cultural, economic and political development. This, in turn, will determine
the level of its achievement and accomplishment. Whatever system the nations
may apply in their respective national lives, we witness the difference. A
nation will enjoy high quality of life if it has qualified
human resources and sufficient
ability to master, develop and apply the science and technology. With such
capacity at their
disposal, nations will be able
to develop their economic strength and accomplish their well being. They are
even in position to
develop themselves into strong
and well-developed nations in every aspect of life. These nations
effectively manage their
natural resources --however
limited such resources in their possession ,- and conserve them. In real
term, they are able to live
inharmony with nature. They soon
become the inspirer, the driver, and later act as the supervisor for other
nations about
the importance of managing and
benefiting from natural resources for development. Meanwhile, human history
also presents realities about other group of nations, which in fact
constitute the majority in the world community. While the cause and
background cannot be precisely comprehended, these nations are endowed
neither with fortunate level of the quality of life nor with better level of
advancement. Many of them see the poor capacity of their human resources as
an obstacle, particularly in relation with the level of social discipline or
with the ability in mastering, developing and implementing science and
technology. While some
others associate the obstacle
with the incapacity of the existing social system, particularly politics to
accommodate the need for
human resources development. We
are here not to seek too far the cause and background, let alone to
prejudge. However we witness how those nations still depend much their
struggle to build the future on the natural resources. Some of them are
fortunate enough to enjoy the value added of their limited natural resources
by making them into processed materials. Those who are not fortunate, will
have to directly sell them as raw materials. They often see the issue of
conservation as a luxury. To a number of nations, the ideals of living in
harmony with environment can only be enjoyed at the stage of ideas. In many
cases, such a condition is the only choice available. For them, dilemma is
part of their difficult reality that they have long experienced.
We still witness the continued
exploitation of natural resources that tends to disrupt the conservation of
sustainable environment. We are so concerned. Nevertheless, we should try to
understand. Even when we are not in the position to help find the solution,
we can always share our vision about conservation. However small, it is
better to offer tolerance rather than to punish or alienate the doers. After
all, they need to have the safety net and funding resources to secure their
plans and development programs. 'I am convinced that they are in fact
worried about the decline of the quality of the environment as well as the
depletion of their natural resources,' particularly those that are
non-renewable. I understand that we have long discussed and even argued
about the disruption of natural balance and environment. The tendency to
blame one another has become part of any discussion about environment. The
destruction as a result of uncontrolled exploitation of natural resources,
as in the case of forest exploitation, has been blamed as the main cause of
the global climate change. However, we must not forget that similar
devastation has actually taken place as a result of experiments or excessive
utilisation of a technology product. The bottom line is that the differences
in approach as well as ways and means in pursuing a better and more advanced
life are problematic in themselves and in some instances become the sources
of conflict and instability in some regions of the world. Nevertheless,
those differences have also provided us with a lesson that in this more
globalized and rapidly changing world, efforts by any nation to materialize
its dreams for better life will only be effective if they carry close
cooperative endeavours as well as mutual support and help from other
nations.
Obviously, we have further
lesson to learn, namely that interdependence is real and cooperation is
imperative in our global village.
Excellencies Ladies and
Gentlemen, Our understanding about the problem is not merely derived from
our observation or analysis over the events happening around us. We have
actually experienced it. For more than three decades we pursued our
development by primarily relying on our natural fortune. The implication of
such a model and the consequences of its application have in turn led us to
reconsider our approach to and our basic concepts on development. Based upon
our long experience, we believe in what we
have realized from the outset
that development is a process; a sustainable process. It necessitates
efforts to ensure the sustainability of resources, both natural and
biological to support the process of development. It requires sustained
steps to
build the capacity of human
resources ready to manage the development in the right way. In the early
1960's, when the world went through the uncertain period of the cold war,
Indonesia's first President, who happened to be my father, addressed the
General Assembly of the United Nations. He called on the international
community and entitled his address "To Build the World Anew." The
content was certainly related to
particular situation and challenges of the world of the time. We however
believe that the spirit and principles of the address remain relevant to our
current situation and challenges, especially in building the world anew
through sustainable development. Should we manage to make the concept work,
it would simply mean that we actually materialize the ideals of building the
world anew. Against the afore-mentioned description, I then come to a
conclusion that we cannot but work together, mutually complement, support
and help each other, for we share the same perception and ideals. We all
want to make our national life better, prosperous, just, independent and
dignified. We all concur that it must go through development. We also share
common understanding about the importance we should attach to maintain and
sustain the development process.
To that end, we should have
determination to work on feasible and workable program. I believe we have
similar and simple guidance to follow, namely to utilize natural resources
in such a way that both supports development activities and serves utmost
function of our ecosystem. In addition; the- science and technology should
be easily accessible and affordable with a view to meeting development
necessity and, at the same time, to sustaining conservation measures over
natural resources and environment as the common heritage of mankind. Ten
years have passed since we adopted Agenda 21. It is timely for us to follow
it up with concrete programs and activities. If we can work on them at this
preparatory meeting and agree on them in the forthcoming Conference in
Johannesburg next September, I am convinced that not only do we build solid
foundation for sustainable development, but also make real contribution to
humanity. In conclusion, in the name of God, Most Gracious Most Merciful, I
declare open the Ministerial Segment of the Fourth Preparatory Committee for
the World Summit on Sustainable Development. May God always bestow us with
guidance and strength in discharging this noble task. Thank you.
United Nations
Press Release
5 June 2002
Internet:
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/bali/pressreleases/envdevb14-e.htm
Following is the address by the Deputy Secretary-General Louise Fréchette to
the fourth session of the Preparatory Committee for the World Summit on
Sustainable Development in Bali today:
First, I would like to thank the Government and citizens of Indonesia and
Bali for hosting this United Nations conference with such generosity and
graciousness. You have made us feel utterly welcome. We hope to finish our
work quickly so that we can enjoy the splendid beauty of this island. Almost
two years ago, at the Millennium Summit, the world's leaders agreed on an
ambitious yet achievable agenda for peace and progress in the 21st century.
They decided in particular that the first 15 years of this century should be
used for a major onslaught against the terrible poverty that afflicts so
many members of the human family. Towards that end, they established a set
of specific, time-bound objectives, known to you all as the Millennium
Development Goals. But let us not forget that the Millennium Declaration was
not only about lifting people out of poverty, and not only about securing
them from violence and armed conflict. Equal footing was given to
protecting our common environment and the commitment to "spare no effort to
free all humanity . . . from the threat of living on a planet irredeemably
spoiled by human activities". We are here today because we face great
challenges on both sides of the development-environment equation. Three
billion of our fellow human beings suffer the dehumanizing conditions of
poverty, eking out a living on less than $2 a day. And United Nations
Environment Programme's (UNEP) latest Global Environment Outlook report --
GEO 3 -- depicts a world at risk, showing us yet again that the prevailing
model of development may not be sustainable, even for those who are most
enjoying its benefits. Johannesburg is meant to find another way, a path
that improves standards of living while protecting the environment, a path
that works for all peoples, today and tomorrow. That relationship --
between human society and the natural environment -- is the core concern of
Johannesburg, and is what sets Johannesburg apart from other United Nations
conferences and summits. The Secretary-General has proposed five key areas
for particular focus as we move ahead: water and sanitation, energy,
agriculture, biodiversity and ecosystem management and health. Why these
five from among a multitude of worthy possibilities? Because they are
widely considered to be the most central to sustainability. Because
progress is possible now, with the knowledge and technologies already at our
disposal. And because the five are so intricately connected -- call it a
multiplier effect or a virtuous circle -- that progress in one will generate
progress in another. I see with pleasure that the five priority areas
feature prominently in the plan of implementation. It is important to have
firm targets and timelines, as well as concrete commitments in these areas
so as to generate real momentum for action. Your work, so far, at this
session of the preparatory committee has made important progress. You are
coming close to agreeing on a plan of implementation. And a crucial set of
specific partnerships, meant to give practical expression to the plan of
implementation -- the so-called "type 2" initiatives -- is also taking
shape. But some critical work remains to be done over the next three days.
Full agreement has to be reached on the implementation plan before we leave
Bali. Only then, will we have established a firm foundation for the vital
work that remains to be done between Bali and Johannesburg, in particular
with regard to the partnerships, linked to the plan of implementation. The
success of Johannesburg will not only be measured by the plan of
implementation. Today, you will begin to provide elements for a political
declaration. The political declaration will be the primary tool for the
heads of State and government to convey to the world their vision for a
sustainable world. We need a credible political declaration that commits
leaders to act and inspire all actors to recognize their own
responsibilities. The political declaration is the place for commitments to
action in key areas, global and local, and for providing a sense of the
values that underpin the concept of sustainable development and instigate
actions. It has become a truism that governments cannot "do the job alone",
but there is a great deal that they, and only they, can and must
accomplish. It is governments that set national policies and priorities.
It is governments that establish frameworks of laws and incentives. It is
governments that create institutions to provide public services and meet a
nation's diverse needs. And it is governments that must deliver on the
promises they made throughout the conference cycle of the 1990s, culminating
in the Millennium Summit. In this connection, I want to make a special
appeal to your governments and to your parliaments to ratify the treaties
that underlie our efforts in the area of sustainable development. We invite
you to do so between now and Johannesburg as a concrete, immediate step
towards the implementation of Agenda 21. Of course, governments need
partners. Sustainable development will not be achieved without
non-governmental organizations (NGOs), which have formidable expertise in
programme design, deep knowledge of their communities, great skills in
organizing people, and unflagging energy in advocating the causes in which
they believe. And sustainable development will remain only a distant dream
without the involvement of the private sector. Corporate philanthropy,
welcome as it is, is not the only and certainly not the most important face
of corporate citizenship. The world is not asking corporations to do
something different from their normal business, but rather to do their
normal business differently -- to see the long term, not just the short
term; and to see not just the costs of change, but also the costs of the
status quo. I am pleased to say that many enlightened business leaders have
already accepted this, and have involved themselves in the Johannesburg
process on that basis. International organizations also have a critical role
to play. The whole United Nations system stands ready to assist in making
development sustainable. This is a goal that the Secretary-General has
embraced as a personal priority. Progress towards implementation will depend
on actions by all actors, separately and jointly by way of partnerships.
Progress will also depend on the availability of resources. Governments
must sustain the momentum generated by the Monterrey Conference,
particularly in the area of official development assistance. The additional
money pledged can also be used to mobilize other resources. Likewise,
governments must make good on their commitment in Doha to make the new
negotiations on trade a true "development round" that opens markets to
developing-country goods and allows them to compete fairly. The Summit in
Johannesburg is truly a chance to set a more hopeful course of development
for all humanity. The challenge, as ever, is to match aspiration with
action, and promise with positive change in people's lives. We know what
needs to be done. Now, let us move ahead. Today, on World
Environment Day, the preparatory process has reached a decisive moment. I
wish you every success in your important deliberations.
5 June 2002
Internet:
http://www.state.gov/g/rls/rm/2002/10836.htm
I would first like
to begin by thanking you on behalf of the United States government for all
of the hard work you, your colleagues, and the Government of Indonesia have
done as we join forces to make the World Summit on Sustainable Development a
success. We could not have progressed this far without your hospitality and
your able guidance and that of the rest of the Bureau and the Secretariat.
Thank you. It is appropriate that our first formal dialogue among Ministers
here in Bali address the question of implementation. The Johannesburg Summit
and our work beyond must be about implementing concrete actions to make a
visible difference in people's lives in such areas as energy, water, health,
education, oceans, forests and sustainable agriculture and rural
development. The United States has been working and will continue to work
tirelessly to achieve a consensus outcome for the Johannesburg Summit. We
must carry forward the outcome of last year's Doha WTO Ministerial as well
as the Monterrey Consensus concluded only three months ago. We must strive
to achieve internationally agreed development goals, including those in the
Millennium Declaration. It is time to rededicate ourselves to implement
these Millennium goals, including the goal of cutting in half by 2015 the
proportion of people without access to safe drinking water and cutting in
half by the same date the proportion of people whose income is less than one
dollar a day. To achieve these and other goals, we must reaffirm the
critical roles of international assistance and national action in
implementing sustainable development. As embraced by the international
community in Monterrey, we strongly believe sustainable development begins
at home. This means: * A strong national commitment to ruling justly by
upholding the rule of law, rooting out corruption, protecting human rights
and promoting political freedom. * A strong national commitment to invest in
people, including effective investments in education and health care.
* A strong national
commitment to promote economic freedom and entrepreneurship through open
markets and trade liberalization, and sound fiscal and monetary policies.
But articulating a vision of sustainable development is not enough. No
declaration or plan of action, no matter how well-intended or eloquent, will
by itself give people access to drinking water, halt the spread of HIV/AIDS,
or ensure access to primary education. Our second critical mission here is
to set a plan of action to make our sustainable development vision a
reality. Partnerships - involving donor and developing countries, elements
of civil society, businesses, international organizations, and others - are
the best means to deliver concrete results. Partnerships add to development
assistance commitments, multilateral funds, and other forms of cooperation.
Building upon and linked to the Millennium Goals, the United States is
committed to building effective partnerships for implementing sustainable
development. We are actively exploring initiatives in such key areas as
energy, water, health, education, oceans, forests, and sustainable
agriculture and rural development, and look forward to working closely with
all delegations here in this effort. In Bali, in Johannesburg, and beyond,
we must reaffirm our commitment to concrete solutions to address the
economic, social, and environmental conditions for sustainable development.
We owe the next generation of world citizens nothing less.
Bali, Indonesia
27 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.state.gov/g/oes/rls/rm/2002/10524.htm
Multi-Stakeholder
Dialogue
Thank you very much
Mr. Chairman.
This
multi-stakeholder dialogue is a perfect forum to highlight the United States
vision for the Summit and the critical role that governments at all levels,
non-governmental organizations, the private sector, labor unions, and all
other stakeholders must play in making Johannesburg a success. The United
States is committed to the success of the World Summit on Sustainable
Development. We believe it provides an important opportunity to build a new,
results-oriented vision -- shared by developed and developing countries --
for reducing poverty and fostering sustainable development to improve the
lives of millions around the world.
For the
Johannesburg Summit to carve a place in history, we must focus our efforts
on implementing the sustainable development blueprint that we have
established at Rio and in the 10 years since. For Johannesburg to be a
success, it should produce concrete results visible to people around the
world, not merely high-sounding rhetoric. The U.S. will work tirelessly to
achieve a consensus outcome at the Johannesburg Summit. The Johannesburg
Plan of Action should carry forward the Monterrey Consensus and should
reflect the internationally agreed development goals, including those in the
Millennium Declaration. It should emphasize the importance of good
governance -- which includes elements such as transparency, access to
information, and the rule of law -- as an essential foundation of
sustainable development. No declaration or plan of action, however, will
give people access to drinking water, halt the spread of HIV/AIDS, or ensure
access to primary education. That is why this multi-stakeholder dialogue is
particularly important. The UN has provided us with a new and potentially
extremely useful mechanism to help us achieve our goals for implementing
sustainable development. We believe that effective partnerships among
governments at all levels, businesses, NGOs, and other stakeholders are the
means to deliver concrete results. All of the stakeholders assembled here
have a special role in our collective pursuit of sustainable development.
The quality and breadth of the partnerships are a key yardstick for success
of the Summit. Johannesburg will be deemed a success if it catalyzes
partnerships to implement concrete solutions to sustainable development
problems in such key areas as energy, water, health, education, oceans,
forests, food security, sustainable agriculture, and rural development.
Partnerships, better than any declaration, will demonstrate our commitment
to sustainable development and to achieving measurable results. This type of
work is not easy. It requires all of us -- governments, major stakeholder
groups, and the UN system -- to modify the way we are accustomed to doing
our business in fora like this meeting in Bali. For example, governments
need to add new types of experts to our delegations, people who can talk
about substantive projects, in addition to those who negotiate texts. We
need to create new types of processes in our capitals to build and develop
these partnerships. It also requires that we sufficiently develop a
blueprint for the partnerships approach that allows us to demonstrate our
commitments but is not so prescriptive that it precludes others from joining
our efforts.
The U.S. would like
to see these partnerships continue well beyond the World Summit. We would
hope and expect that partnerships will provide information on their progress
and lessons learned. We believe the Commission on Sustainable Development
could play a useful role in providing the forum where reports from
partnerships could be shared and discussed.
United Nations
27 May 2002
Internet:
http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/documents/prepcom4docs/bali_documents/desai_statement.pdf
Mr. Chairman, Honourable
Minister, Excellencies, Distinguished Delegates and Friends,
Let me begin by expressing my
thanks to the many people who have been involved in organizing this meeting
in Bali in the language of Indonesia:
terimakasih Bali, terimakasih
Indonesia. You have made excellent arrangements for us, and we
truly appreciate it. Mr. Chairman, Our agenda for this two-week session is a
very challenging one; it includes many elements. I
do not propose to touch on all
of these elements, but just to focus on one: we will be busy this week with
coming to closure on the programme of strengthening implementation of Agenda
21 that is under discussion and negotiation. We can see that a great deal of
useful progress has been made over the past few days in the informals and we
can look forward to a lot of hard work over the rest of the week. As the
distinguished Minister put it, I hope we will not follow the usual U.N.
procedure of decision by exhaustion, but rather are tempted a little bit
more by a quick decision for fear of pleasures foregone and that we will
truly come to an early conclusion. Mr. Chairman, The central point of my
statement is quite simply this: the issue is not only closure of
negotiations on the programme of action, the issue is also one of whether
what we come out with, is bold and firm enough to meet the high expectations
that people have for the Johannesburg Summit in the end. That is the real
challenge - the challenge is not just of agreeing, but also of agreeing on
something that the world recognizes as being a major step forward for
sustainable development. I want to try to spell out what this challenge is.
First, many people see the Johannesburg summit as part of a set of
conferences that are defining a new multilateralism. We of course have the
Millennium Summit, which outlined the Millennium Goals stemming from all of
the U.N. conferences held in the nineties. In Doha, we saw a major step
forward in the way in which at least some of the concerns of developing
countries were give a central place in the world trade agenda. This is
perhaps the first time that we will have a trade round whose primary focus
is going to be the concerns of developing countries. Then we came to the
Finance for Development conference in Monterrey, which sought to do the same
thing for the world of finance – to put development at the center of the
world of global finance. In large measure we succeeded in doing that in the
Monterrey consensus. Even more than that, Monterrey was also marked by major
commitments of additional resources by the European Union, the United States
and others, reversing what has been nearly a decade of decline in ODA and
reversing it in a very substantial fashion with a total increase in
assistance pledged that could amount to as much as l2 to 13 billion dollars
extra by 2006. Johannesburg is the third leg of this exercise, where we are
going to define how sustainability can be put into development in order to
give the new multilateralism a programmatic basis for cooperation. This is
your first challenge: to ensure that what comes out of Johannesburg is seen
as a major step forward in outlining a new programmatic basis for
development cooperation drawing on the principles that were set out in Rio
and subsequently. What does this mean? It means that this conference, as we
all have accepted, is not about renegotiating policy frameworks. We have
done a great deal of that from Rio and beyond. Our real challenge at this
conference is to see how we can put a commitment to credible action in what
we negotiate. This focus on action, and this focus on implementation, which
is universally accepted by all participants, has to have clarity about ends
and means. Yes, it is true that in many cases, we are talking about changes
of policy, reorientation of policy and, in this, our statements will often
essentially be qualitative in nature. But, there are also many areas where
we are talking about programmatic matters and here we must be clear about
ends and
means, about goals and
resources. I urge you to note this. That is what the world outside is
expecting. Let me read to you just one passage, just one small part of a
document which the World Wide Fund for Nature has been circulating. I do not
do this for any special reason but simply because it is a compact statement
and I believe it reflects the sentiments and concerns of many of the
nongovernmental organizations
which will be participating in this meeting. Let me read this: "The Summit
will be a failure if government leadership is not shown in the form of a
strong action plan with targets and timetables, and commitment to the
resources needed to support implementation of the action plan. New
monitoring and reporting mechanisms are also essential to ensure
responsibility and accountability." The same message is coming from other
groups who are participating in this exercise
and I urge you to note that this
is what the world out there is expecting. This is going to be their measure
of success of the extent to which the programme that you will come to
closure on at the end of this week reflects a credible commitment to action.
From the side of the United
Nations, very recently the Secretary-General, in a speech at the American
Museum of Natural History, outlined five areas. Five key strategic areas
where we must have a sense that at the end of Johannesburg we have committed
ourselves to action which goes beyond incremental action - action which
truly marks a quantum change of effort. The five areas that he had
identified (which we put in the acronym WEHAB) are: water, energy, health,
agriculture and bio- diversity, standing more broadly for eco-system
management. I am not going to spell out the case for each one of these. This
has been done several times
earlier. It was highlighted in
the S-G's speech and earlier it had its place even in the report that we had
submitted to the Preparatory Committee for this conference. It is there in
your programme of action that you are looking at now and it is very
important that we would be able to say after you finish your work on this
programme, that at least in these areas, in these five strategic areas,
without which we cannot talk about moving towards sustainability, without
which we cannot talk credibly about reaching the Millennium Declaration
Goals and targets, we have a programme that truly marks a forward step in
the commitment to action by the world community. Mr. Chairman, I am
stressing this point because the World Summit on Sustainable Development has
not been called to endorse business as usual in public policy or private
activity. The Summit has been called because people want change in public
policy and in private activity and we have to reflect this desire for change
in what we negotiate here as well as in the various partnerships
initiatives, which will come out of the process. We have to signal a
commitment to change. We have to signal that there is a credible mechanism
for ensuring that these changes will take place in the years beyond
Johannesburg.
That we will not meet ten years
after Johannesburg with the same concerns that we have not been able to put
sufficient energy into the implementation of what we agreed in Johannesburg;
that we have not able to retain high level political attention on what we
agreed in Johannesburg; and that we have not been able to find resources to
implement what we agreed in Johannesburg.
This is real challenge before us
and I believe the challenge is great. But I am also convinced that the
challenge can be met. Because in this process we have seen a spirit of
accommodation to each other. Now, what we have to add to that spirit of
accommodation is a boldness and a vision which seeks not simply agreement
but seeks agreement at a higher level of commitment. What we have to aim for
therefore, during this week, is for a programme for the implementation of
Agenda 21 that we
can feel proud about, that we
can refer to with a sense of achievement as the Bali Commitment. That, I
believe is the challenge for this week before you and in the language of
Indonesia I wish you good luck "semoga
berhasil" Thank you.
