NGO PRESS CONFERENCE ON WORLD SUMMIT FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

NGO PRESS CONFERENCE ON WORLD SUMMIT FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

While the range of issues for the 2002 World Summit for Sustainable Development was being finalized by the Commission on Sustainable Development,

non-governmental organizations (NGOs) hoped to discuss the links between economic liberalization, the environment, labour and human rights, Michael Strauss told correspondents at a Headquarters press conference this morning.

Mr. Strauss, the media coordinator for the NGO Steering Committee for the Commission for Sustainable Development, said that South African NGOs would be a major focal point for the World Summit, which was scheduled to take place in Johannesburg, South Africa, in September 2002.  The tenth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development, which was acting as the Preparatory Committee for the World Summit, was discussing the agenda and structure of the meetings at the World Summit and would conclude its work tomorrow.  The NGO Steering Committee -- a coalition of NGOs -- would be very active in the Summit next year. 

Mr. Strauss was joined at the podium by representatives of three South African NGOs.  Stephen Law of the Environmental Monitoring Group said that one of the important legacies of the 1992 Rio process was the understanding that environmental problems were not just problems of the environment but were also problems of development, wealth and poverty, overconsumption and scarcity.  Despite that understanding, many global, environmental problems still existed or had become worse.  South African NGOs would work with their government to make sure that the World Summit was not just another "feel-good exercise" -- a big international photo shoot were people spent more time focusing on an international text without addressing real problems.  South African NGOs would do all they could to ensure that the Summit would result in concrete plans of action to address real problems.

Jessica Wilson of the South African NGO Forum said that the world's three richest people owned more wealth than the world's 48 poorest countries.  A quarter of the world's population consumed three quarters of the world's energy and minerals and more than half the world's food.  That was not an accident.  In terms of trade, poorer countries could not access markets in richer countries.  Resources continued to flow from the South to the North.  One of the important issues for the Summit and the preparatory process was to understand the links between poverty and overconsumption. 

Sustainable development was intrinsically linked to environmental justice and human rights, she said.  The international community needed to ensure that poor countries did not bear the brunt of environmental degradation.  Overconsumption caused the majority of global environmental problems.  The Earth could not sustain current levels of consumption.  Climate change, ozone depletion, resource scarcity and loss of biodiversity were all examples of bad methods of consumption and production.  The Summit would be a failure if global environmental issues were not seen as issues of poverty, overconsumption, social and environmental justice.

Michelle Pressend of G.E.M., South Africa, said that participation and decision-making were key elements of sustainable development.  One of the weaknesses in the process since Rio was ensuring that people most affected by development decisions were part of decision-making.  Poor people were alienated from decision-making.  It would be important that the Summit provide an opportunity for the voices of the poor to be heard.  Capacity building would also be an important part of the process.  It was important to define the different groupings within civil society.  While non-governmental organizations might represent civil groups, many community-based groups, particularly in South Africa, felt alienated from global decision-making.

One aspect of the Commission on Sustainable Development and the Summit was that NGOs were involved in both the negotiations and the process, Mr. Strauss said.  Current plans -- though still tentative -- called for NGOs to be involved in at least one dialogue session at the meeting of world leaders at the beginning of the Summit to discuss the commitments of governments, business, labour movements and donors. 

Mr. Law said that one of the issues of the Summit was non-governmental organization access to government participants at the Summit.  South African NGOs would work to facilitate the maximum amount of interaction between the NGO centre and the government centre, which were some 20 kilometres apart.  Another issue was representation and the accreditation of civil society.  Some governments would like to use the accreditation process to prevent certain NGOs from participating in the process.  The South African NGOs would lobby their own Government to ensure that participation in the Summit was open to as many organizations as possible.

Ms. Wilson said that the Summit would take place at the Convention Centre in Johannesburg.  The NGO Forum would be some 20 kilometres from the Summit.  Video link-ups and transport between the two venues would be provided.  Where possible, authorities were exploring how to ensure a two-way flow between the NGO Forum and the main event. 

On the location of the Summit, Ms. Pressend said that the NGO conference centre would be able to accommodate between 10,000 and 15,000 NGOS.  The Summit's conference centre was a huge, high-tech facility.

Who made the decision to put the NGOs 20 kilometres away? a correspondent asked.  Mr. Law said that as far as he knew the decision had been made by the South African Government in consultation with others.  The question was what facility could accommodate the expected number of participants.  The two locations chosen had the capacity to deal with the number of expected participants.

Would there be a chance for NGOs to speak at the session itself?  Mr. Law responded that NGOs could engage with their governments directly in the time leading up to the Summit.  The United Nations would handle accreditation for the Summit.  The NGOs would only be allowed into the Convention Centre if they were accredited through the United Nations. 

Mr. Strauss said that it was their expectation that the Summit would follow the pattern of the 1997 General Assembly special session in which

10 representatives of NGOs were able to address the high-level session.  Discussion was still under way on how many additional opportunities there would be for NGOs to address the Summit.

As a world conference, would it be possible for NGOs to list actions to address consumption and waste of the industrial Powers? a correspondent asked.  Climate change and the Kyoto Protocol, which were under negotiation under a separate forum, were major issues.  The NGOs would be very active.  One of the goals of the Summit was that governments would be able to sign on to a series of treaties that had been negotiated since the Rio Conference.

The NGOs would be encouraged to submit concrete actions, Mr. Law said.  What to do and how to do it must be figured out.  Solutions must be put in place.  If the Summit did not do that, it would be seen by millions of people around the world as a non-event.

How could NGOs address the challenges of globalization and the liberalization of markets? a correspondent asked.  The Summit would be just one event in the discussion, Ms. Wilson said.  The Summit could be helpful in bringing world leaders, trade and environment ministers together in the same place.  It was important that trade and development ministries were aware of what would be happening at the Summit. 

Mr. Law said that for many the Rio Summit had been seen as an environmental event.  If the Summit was not seen as a development conference, it would fail.

Ms. Pressend said that the environment still sat on the fringe and was largely seen as a green issue.  The World Summit would provide an opportunity for people to see the links between trade, industry and the environment.

The issues of official development assistance (ODA) and financing had always been a problem, Mr. Strauss said.  The South had been disappointed and angry about the failure of developed countries to live up to their commitments.  

The issue of financing and debt were interrelated, Ms. Wilson said.  While the discussions at the Summit should not lose sight of the ODA issue, it was also important to explore ways to reverse resource flows from the South to the North.

* *** *