CURRENT DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS RAISE MATERIAL WEALTH AT ENVIRONMENT’S EXPENSE, PREPARATORY COMMITTEE FOR 2002 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT SUMMIT TOLD
| Press Release ENV/DEV/578 |
Commission on Sustainable Development
Acting as Preparatory Committee for
World Summit on Sustainable Development
1st Meeting (AM)
CURRENT DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS RAISE MATERIAL WEALTH AT ENVIRONMENT’S EXPENSE,
PREPARATORY COMMITTEE FOR 2002 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT SUMMIT TOLD
Emil Salim (Indonesia) Elected Chairman
The Commission on Sustainable Development acting as the Preparatory Committee for the World Summit on Sustainable Development began its organizational session this morning, with the newly-elected Chairman, Emil Salim (Indonesia), saying the kind of development pursued thus far was not sustainable in the economic, social or environmental sense.
Mr. Salim said the major features of Agenda 21 -- the programme of action adopted at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro -– had not been embraced as priorities in development. Rather, development had raised the level of material wealth in nations, but at the expense of environmental degradation. Policy-makers failed to make the necessary link between development and the environment.
Nitin Desai, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, said that there was concern that the international community had not yet gotten a grip on sustainable development. It was necessary to lay out clear goals for sustainable development and draw clearer links between Agenda 21 and specific guidelines for its implementation. It was also important to take into account changes since Rio, such as globalization, and its impact on sustainable development.
Also this morning, representatives of major groups provided the Committee with information on their preparatory activities and other issues they wished to raise in connection with preparations for the World Summit, which is scheduled to be held in Johannesburg, South Africa, in 2002.
In other action this morning, the Committee approved the request for accreditation of the following intergovernmental organizations as observers: International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology; Convention on Wetlands; and the South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme.
Also, the Committee elected the following nine Vice-Chairmen: Ihab Gamaleldin (Egypt); Ositadanma Anaedu (Nigeria); Kiyotaka Akasaka (Japan); Jan Kara (Czech Republic); Alexandru Niculescu (Romania); Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti
1st Meeting (AM)
(Brazil); Diane Marie Quarless (Jamaica); Richard Ballhorn (Canada) and Lars G. Engfeldt (Sweden). In addition, it adopted its agenda and programme of work.
Statements were made by the representatives of: the Women’s Environment and Development Organization; the United Nations Association of Canada and Commission on Sustainable Development’s Youth Caucus; the International Indian Treaty Council and the Sustainable Development Commission’s Indigenous Peoples Caucus; the South Africa NGO Forum Host Committee; the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions and the Trade Union Advisory Council to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives; the International Chamber of Commerce; the International Union for Science; and the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP).
The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. today to continue its discussion of preparatory activities for the World Summit.
Background
The Commission on Sustainable Development, acting as the Preparatory Committee for the World Summit on Sustainable Development, met this morning to begin its organizational session. The Summit will be held in early fall of 2002 in Johannesburg, South Africa.
The Commission had before it a number of reports. Among them is the report of the Secretary-General on agriculture, land and desertification (document E/CN.17/2001/PC/13), which states that the loss of land resources and increasing severity and extent of land resource degradation continues, despite enhanced techniques and knowledge. The direct and indirect impact of technology and the scale of the global economy have had profound implications for, and some pernicious effects on, sustainable agriculture, land use and fragile ecosystems.
Issues for further consideration at the national level include additional financial resources for the full implementation of existing international and national regulatory instruments dealing with land management and sustainable agriculture and rural development. At the international level, further consideration should be given to, among other things, a shift from a response-oriented approach towards longer-term proactive operations of vulnerability reduction and protection, aimed at promoting sustainable development.
For background on the reports before the Commission, see press release ENV/DEV/575 issued 27 April.
Statements
Following his election as Chairman of the Commission, EMIL SALIM (Indonesia) said that development had been successful in raising the material wealth of nations at the expense of the environment. Population had grown more in the past 50 years than at any other period in history, and current production and consumption levels had had a negative impact on the environment. The bottom line was that the type of development pursued thus far was not sustainable in the economic, social or environmental sense. Major features of Agenda 21 -– the action plan of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) -- were not embraced as priorities in development.
Environment was considered a “free good”, he said. Policy-makers failed to make the necessary link between development and environment -- for example, with the recent rejection of the Kyoto Protocol. International financial institutions considered the environment outside their priority areas. On the positive side, there were such practices as the use of eco-labelling, impact analysis and “green-budget” policies. While such practices were necessary, they were not enough. The implementation of sustainable development must be reinvigorated and developed and developing countries must join forces. Both developing and developed countries were on the same spaceship -- Earth -- and faced the challenge of either moving towards sustainable development or crashing into an environmental disaster. They must chart the journey together without confrontation.
Election of Vice-Chairmen
The results of the voting for two Vice-Chairmen from the Western European and Other States were as follows:
Number of ballot papers: 125
Number of invalid ballots: 0
Number of valid ballots: 125
Number of abstentions: 0
Number of members voting: 125
Required majority: 63
Number of votes received:
Richard Ballhorn (Canada) 69
Lars G. Engfeldt (Sweden) 69
Reinhard Krapp (Germany) 60
Jean-François Giovannini(Switzerland) 45
Having received the required majority, Richard Ballhorn (Canada) and Lars G. Engfeldt (Sweden) were elected as the two Vice-Chairmen from the Western European and Other States Group.
Progress in Preparatory Activities
NITIN DESAI, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, reported on progress in the preparations for the Summit and presented the official Web site of the Summit. He said that there was concern that the international community had not yet gotten a grip on sustainable development. It was necessary to lay out clear goals for sustainable development and draw clearer links between Agenda 21 and specific guidelines for its implementation. It was also important to take into account the changes since Rio, the most important of which was globalization, and their impact on sustainable development. Further, it was important to connect sustainable development with poverty eradication.
A global ethic of good stewardship to guide sustainable development was also crucial, he said. There were a variety of expectations for the preparatory process and the Summit itself and it was important to ensure that they were all heard. In that regard, there would be regional preparatory meetings, round tables and substantial work done by the major groups leading up to the Summit. A vital element in the preparatory process was the exchange of information. To ensure that overall preparation was maintained, the Secretariat had invested in the establishment of a Web site to keep people engaged and informed.
Presentations
JUNE ZEITLIN, Executive Director of the Women’s Environment and Development Organization, gave a brief overview of preliminary activities that had been undertaken by her organization in preparation for the upcoming World Summit. Women had entered the UNCED process with their own comprehensive vision that had emerged from the First Women’s World Congress for a Healthy Planet. The Congress subsequently adopted its own platform –- Women’s Action Agenda 21 -– which generally covered issues of governance and decision-making. More specifically it covered, among others, environmental ethics and accountability, women’s rights, women’s consumer power and biodiversity.
While the framework of and approach to some of those issues might be a bit different today, she continued, they nevertheless remained critical challenges to achieving sustainable development from a gender perspective. For that reason, her organization, partnered with other international women’s organizations, planed to undertake a major review and revision of the Women’s Action Agenda during the preparatory process. The intent would be to launch “Women’s Action Agenda 2002” at the Johannesburg World Summit. That forward-looking Agenda would serve as a principle guide for global advocacy at all levels for both men and women.
She went on to stress the importance of broad dialogue and discussion throughout the preparatory process. She cautioned the Commission against plans to hold meetings between governments and non-governmental organizations in separate locations. Such actions would invariably limit access and curb dialogue between groups, and possibly undermine the stakeholder process. During the last few weeks, she said, her organization had begun to organize its preparatory activities. Principally, it planned to convene women’s caucuses at all upcoming United Nations global meetings. It would also work actively with regional women’s groups and promote gender balance among non-governmental organizations' participants at those meetings.
JULIE LARSEN, of the United Nations Association of Canada and representative of the Commission on Sustainable Development Youth Caucus, as well as the non-governmental organization Ministry of Holism, said she would be remiss if she did not point out that there were few youth present in the room today. The first call for the groups she represented was to ensure the support for youth participation in the preparatory process for the upcoming World Summit. She further noted that a youth caucus consisting of members only from Europe or North America could not be truly representative of youth worldwide. To that end, she urged each industrialized nation -– or “overdeveloped” country –- to pay for the participation of one southern youth at the World Summit preparatory conference.
She said that preparations for the Summit by youth groups were well under way. The Youth Caucus at the ninth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development had been enriched by presentations on many of those activities. In Canada, a Youth Agenda 2002 was under way and a team had begun drafting actions on a youth review of Agenda 21. At the international level, there were also several meetings planed. In May, 250 youth from nearly 100 countries would gather in Sweden for an event specifically aimed at outlining activities for the World Summit. It was important to note that all activities would support the notion that youth did not want to reopen or renegotiate Agenda 21, but rather focus on removing obstacles to its implementation.
First and foremost, she said all activities at the World Summit should focus on poverty eradication. To arrive at real social justice, there was a need to recognize the links among poverty, over-consumption and the environment. Also, the cancellation of the debt burden must be high on the agenda at Johannesburg, so that developing countries could use their precious resources for sustainable development. Further, it must also be made clear that the international trade structure was exploitative. The international community should emphasize the importance of “people and planet before profit”. To that end, she urged the Preparatory Committee to recognize a business community that went beyond multinational corporations and promoted participation of local partnerships and communities.
CAROL KALAFATIC, International Indian Treaty Council and the Commission on Sustainable Development Indigenous Peoples Caucus, said that while indigenous peoples were the most historically marginalized stakeholders, they actively contributed to sustainable development for all people of the world through their continued practice of traditional knowledge and culture. A recent United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) report reaffirmed the obvious link between cultural diversity and biological diversity. Indigenous peoples were estimated to make up only about 5 per cent of the world population, yet represented about 90 per cent of the world’s cultural diversity. It was no accident that more than 80 per cent of the world’s remaining biodiversity was found within their territories. Their traditional practices had allowed them to safeguard the well-being of those life forms.
She urged an official thematic focus on indigenous peoples and biodiversity at the World Summit. The Summit was expected by many to result in specific time-bound commitments for achieving the goals of sustainable development. Hence, she also urged a specific commitment to harmonize development policy with international instruments, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on Biological Diversity. The only way indigenous groups could contribute was if their human and collective rights were observed and respected.
She said that indigenous peoples had proven that their resistance to non-sustainable forms of development, such as oil drilling, mining and large hydro power, had contributed to the goals of Agenda 21, often despite the actions of industry, governments and multilateral lending institutions. Therefore, the preparatory process should address the forces that had caused the Commission to move backward, rather than take forward steps towards sustainable development. Among those forces were globalization, privatization and the growing influence of industry within the United Nations.
MICHELLE PRESSEND, representative of the South African NGO Forum Host Committee, said that centuries of colonization and oppression in South Africa had forged a civil society that was deeply conscious of the relationship between power and the quality of life. It was not surprising, then, that the Forum saw the environment as a site for political struggle for basic human rights -– a struggle for resources, livelihoods, justice and equality. Indeed, it was that particular understanding of the environmental challenges facing the world today that had spurred the Forum to invite governments, non-governmental organizations and business leaders to Johannesburg next year.
The Rio Conference, she continued, had marked the emergence of the notion that, at its core, the concept of sustainable development included an environmental component that went beyond the problems of pollution and loss of natural resources to encompass such issues as poverty, development, equity and security. Today, it had become more clear than ever before that environmental challenges touched every person on the planet. The negative impact of human activities on the environment had become increasingly apparent, particularly climate change, loss of natural habitat and the rapid extinction of animal species. “There is no more time to waste”, she said. “We know we need to work together.”
She said that sustainable development was simply not possible while millions lived in poverty and Earth could not sustain the current levels of consumption in many developed nations. Sadly, there appeared to be no move on the part of some governments to address poverty or the redistribution of wealth. The upcoming Summit would be considered a failure if it did not reframe global environmental issues as issues of global inequality, of poverty, of social and environmental justice. The Summit would be considered a further failure if its decisions were taken behind closed doors and the opportunity for real interaction between governments and non-governmental organizations was missed.
LUCIEN ROYER, International Confederation of Free Trade Unions and the Trade Union Advisory Council to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), said that trade unions would be involved in the World Summit. They would be holding an international preparatory meeting next year in Brussels. They wanted Johannesburg to serve as a catalyst for workers everywhere to further commit themselves to sustainable development.
The Summit should send a clear message to workers and trade unions everywhere to help implement solutions, he said. The pay-off must not only translate into better production methods, but also on showing workers how to become better consumers. Workplace actions after Johannesburg must deliver a “win-win” outcome. The multi-stakeholder process must be incorporated into the official agenda for the Summit and the physical facilities at the Summit must contribute to their participation. In addition, government delegations should include a mix of major stakeholders. Among the major themes for the Summit could be poverty, employment, food security and the major obstacles to the implementation of Agenda 21.
SEAN SOUTHEY, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, on behalf of local authorities, said that local governments had made progress with their partners and could be a key element of the national process. The local Agenda 21 phenomenon had been one of the most significant achievements of the Earth Summit. While progress on the Kyoto Protocol had stalled, efforts of local governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions had been successful. Local governments and local partners had a distinct role to play and could be very effective.
He added that the future success and credibility of the international movement for sustainable development depended on the endorsement of bottom-up local strategies at the Summit. Preliminary consultations pointed to the message that local action worked, but that a national enabling environment was essential. In that connection, he urged national governments to work with local governments to remove the national barriers to sustainable development.
JACK WHELAN, International Chamber of Commerce, speaking on behalf of business and industry groups, said the business community was aware that Johannesburg was not simply a review exercise. Indeed, it should point the way forward and build on the broad understanding that achieving the overall goal of sustainability meant addressing global environmental challenges while ensuring that demands for social and economic benefits were met, particularly in developing countries. The business sector was clearly the “engine room” for innovation and investment, as well as implementation of policies required to balance the social, economic and environmental imperatives at the heart of sustainable development efforts.
He went on to say that, while the business sector would continue to be the main provider and producer of managerial, financial and technological expertise to ensure sustainable development, there was a need to emphasize the vital role of integration, particularly the multi-stakeholder process. That meant not simply holding dialogues, but promoting the process of identifying and forging relationships and partnerships with governments and other stakeholders. The multidimensional nature of the challenges facing the global community required just such an approach. The business community was improving its performance in that regard by focusing on its responsibilities to the environment, the economy and the communities in which it operated.
He said that his organization's active participation in the multi-stakeholder dialogue on sustainable energy and transportation during the ninth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development had been encouraging and had highlighted the need for continuing such practices. His organization, along with the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, had organized a -– “Business Action for Sustainable Development” -- for all relevant business community actors participating in the World Summit. The aim was to create a network among business groups at all levels to ensure active and constructive participation in the Summit. In South Africa, business organizations had already been mobilized and were soliciting input for participation in the Summit’s multi-stakeholder advisory committee.
LARRY KOHLER, International Union for Science, said that the international scientific and technological community had participated in the multi-stakeholder dialogues for the first time at the ninth session of the Sustainable Development Commission. It had not yet finalized how it could best contribute to the Summit and the review process. It would soon be developing initiatives to ensure that science was covered in the preparatory process. Among the initiatives it was working on was the creation of a task force to assess the implementation of chapters 35 and 36 of Agenda 21 on the impact of science and technology on sustainable development. Also, it would promote and facilitate the participation of scientists in national preparatory meetings.
Among the priorities for the scientific and technological communities was the need for research and development funds to be strengthened, he continued. Within the science community, the notion of “sustainability science” was slowly developing. It was also necessary to significantly strengthen scientific and technological capacities in developing countries and improve how the international community used the existing capacities in those countries in the international arena. In addition, higher priority must be given to the exchange of scientific data and information. Furthermore, public understanding of sustainable development issues remained weak and there was a need for improved education on the issue.
TOM FORRESTER, representative of the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP) and Via Campesina, two major organizations acting globally on behalf of farmers, said food security, rural development and ensuring sustainable livelihoods were among the crucial themes produce-workers wished to see highlighted at the upcoming World Summit. As one of the major contributors to the drafting of Agenda 21, IFAP believed that Johannesburg would give farmers the opportunity to “tell their stories” about the progress that had been made in environment and development in the farm sector, as well as to draw attention to constraints that might impede further progress. The IFAP Executive Committee would meet in Australia in May to outline activities for the World Summit.
He said that the number one concern for farmers and allied major groups was to ensure that issues of rural environment and rural development were given priority on the international agenda, and given particular consideration at Johannesburg. Indeed, the very location of the Summit in Africa, where food security and rural development were critical issues, begged for a comprehensive consideration of those issues. Without the political will and resource mobilization for community-based food security and rural development, the current crisis levels in many rural areas would soon become irreversible. Without farmers, he added, there would be no sustainable development, no rural communities and no food production. Farmers could not ensure sustainable agriculture without cooperation from other international stakeholders.
He went on to say that development efforts should be targeted to strengthen human and social capital. Also, small farmers needed to control the structure and direction of their businesses, to ensure that they were not squeezed out as the agricultural industry progressed. To that end, he said that farm groups were committed to continuing the informal dialogues that had begun last month in Rome at the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) meeting of the Committee on Agriculture. However, such dialogues were most effective when the discussions were used to enhance initiatives being taken at higher levels. Multi-stakeholder dialogues should be geared towards assisting governments in advancing negotiated solutions to food security and rural development, which were at the heart of the sustainable development process.
* *** *