NGO PRESS CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

In the months leading up to the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) would be calling on governments to focus on issues such as corporate accountability, economic terrorism and globalization, correspondents were told at a Headquarters press conference sponsored by the Department of Economic and Social Affairs this afternoon. 

Before introducing the five panellists, Michael Strauss of Earth Media said that one of the key themes of the 2002 World Summit, to be held this August in Johannesburg, was partnerships between civil society and government.  The press conference coincided with the second Preparatory Committee for the Johannesburg Summit and the World Economic Forum, which was also taking place in New York City.

An early commitment on the part of world leaders to attend the Summit would help to shape the agenda for the Johannesburg Summit, the President of the Earth Day Network, Kathleen Rogers, said.  She hoped that the Summit would provide world leaders an opportunity to denounce not only the obvious form of terrorism but also the "quiet kind" of terrorism -- economic terrorism.  Economic terrorism took many forms and was experienced by the majority of the developing world.  It included mothers who were unable to feed their children, and men dying of HIV/AIDS who were unable to access drugs for economic reasons.  She also hoped that the Summit would be able to address the connection between health and environmental issues.

The Summit must also address the issue of corporate accountability, Daniel Mittler, Coordinator of Friends of the Earth International, said.  The Summit was a review process to assess what had happened since the Rio Earth Summit 10 years ago.  It was generally agreed that the past decade had not been one of sustainable development, but of globalization and deteriorating social and environmental indicators.  Governments could not explain why that had been the case, because they refused to acknowledge that, through a process of liberalization and deregulation, they had given up their ability to ensure that social and environmental rules were globally applied. 

Globalization was one of the principal causes of global insecurity, poverty and environmental degradation, John Klotz of the Sierra Club said.  It was hard to talk about security when a cup of safe drinking water was an impossible dream for hundreds of millions of people.  It was also hard to talk about freedom when so many of the nations of the South were being made a repository for the waste of the North.  The issue was not whether to globalize, but what to globalize.  Globalization could not be stopped.  Through the World Summit, he hoped that freedom would be globalized.  World leaders must understand that the Summit might be the last chance to create a secure world.

Economic power relations were the central theme of globalization, Shao Loong Yin of the Third World Network said.  A political commitment to change those relations was needed to achieve sustainable development.  Two issues must be put on top of the Summit's agenda, including the "reigning in" of globalization, in particular the World Trade Organization (WTO).  The principle of common but differentiated responsibilities must be applied.  While the challenge to reign back globalization must be borne by both the North and the South, the North must

take most action.  It was not enough, however, to reign in globalization.  Equitable governance for sustainable development must replace globalization.

International financial institutions such as the World Bank, the WTO and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) must be controlled, Emmy Hafild of the Indonesian NGO Forum for the World Summit on Sustainable Development said.  Indonesia, for example, had been under the World Bank structural adjustment programme since the early 1980s, while at the same time going through a programme of economic liberalization under an authoritarian government.  Unprecedented prosperity resulted in incredible poverty, however, when the country's currency melted in the 1997 economic crisis.  Indonesia, with its economy in disarray, now had the highest deforestation rate in the world.  She hoped the Summit would address those issues.

It was easy to pinpoint problems, but did the panel have a "plan of action" to solve the problems they were raising? a correspondent asked.  Mr. Mittler said that NGOs were in the process of providing a positive alternative agenda.  It was a key role of civil society, however, to provide a critical voice and raise awareness that the current system of development was leading to poverty and environmental degradation.  He did not apologize for "pointing the finger" when it was necessary.

Globalization was both a general and specific problem, Mr. Yin said.  The North-South Compact that failed in Rio must be revived.  The South's key development needs must be addressed.  The North must take the lead in encouraging nascent moves in sustainable alternatives.  The South must be more serious in devising a sustainable development approach and give priority to the social and environmental agenda.  A deep reform of the WTO was needed.  Reversing the disastrous trends of the WTO could be the Summit's most important achievement.  Global governance institutions must be changed to reflect the priorities of sustainable development.

Where would the will come from to promote such a sea change in international economic policy? a correspondent asked.  With the recent case of the Enron collapse, people now realized that companies could ruin people's lives in a matter of seconds, Ms. Hafild replied.  While no one expected that change would take place right away, a legally binding corporate accountability framework could be in place within a couple years.

Mr. Klotz said that he would not underestimate the power of civil society to effect change even in the absence of governmental action.  Civil society organizations had proven that they could do much using their own resources through the globalization of information.

The worldwide recession had opened the door to discussion, Ms. Rogers said.  People were talking about investor and corporate responsibility.  But world leaders must commit not only to a basic outline for an agenda, but also to attend the Summit.  There were business and government leaders who were willing to work.

Responding to a question on the World Bank, Ms. Hafild said that international financial institutions were more powerful than Indonesia's Government.  The current situation in Indonesia was a result of the World Bank's prescription to its development model and the IMF's prescription to curb the

financial crisis of 1997.  Mr. Mittler said that only real changes in power structures would prove that the World Bank was listening. 

What was the panel's message to the World Economic Forum?  Did they foresee a shift in the development paradigm soon? a correspondent asked.   Mr. Strauss said a surprising number of people inside corporations sympathized with what NGOs were saying.  Different corporate leaders realized the importance of adjusting some of the issues of environmental and social conditionalities.  It was much less polarized than it was perceived to be.  As the preparations for the Summit progressed, it would be possible to see the emergence of a group of corporate leaders looking for ways to work with NGOs and governments to find common answers to global problems.

* *** *