Outreach Issues A daily publication of Sustainable Development Issues Network (SDIN) and Stakeholder Forum (SF)
Biofuels – and why CSD17 THURSDAY
should grasp the chance to lead
May 7, 2009
Biofuels have occupied a prominent place in the discussions in CSD the last year, and expectations are high that weeks of considerations should at least lead to a clear recommendation on the way forward. Reading the Chair’s draft negotiating document is, however, rather disappointing.
Inside this Issue: Biofuels—and why CSD17 should grasp the chance to lead
1
Maintaining the Unique Contribution of the CSD in the UN System
3
Putting Farming First in Africa
4
Maasai Pastoralists’ Voice Are Heard in New York
5
Farming First
5
Water as a Cross-Cutting ssue for CSD17
6
The Scientific Method: Where’s the Research
8
Sustainable Development and Animal Welfare: A Critical Partnership
8
Live from the CSD
9
Food for Thought…
By: Oyvind Dahl, Norwegian Forum for Environment and Development
10
The issue of biofuels is controversial, even though many participate in the discussions with different take on what it really is. Let “Outreach Issues” clear away the confusion with this article. Here we’ll sort out the different varieties to clear the confusion, and we offer advice on how delegates can make CSD adopt a clear leadership role on the issue. It is sorely lacking today! The discussions on biofuels have been prominent in the current CSD cycle for quite some time, as well as within both the climate change negotiations and the many policy initiatives on the international food crisis. This is not reflected in the draft Chair’s summary. Delegations therefore need to rectify this in the negotiations on the final text. A brief history
Outreach Issues is the civil society newsletter produced by the SDIN Group (ANPED, TWN and ELCI) and Stakeholder Forum. Outreach Issues aims to report with attitude, from the global scene of sustainability. The organizations publishing Outreach Issues are not responsible for the content of signed articles. Opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors.
Biomass has for generations represented the main energy source for millions of people, both north and south of the Equator. Cutting of trees for firewood has been necessary to cook our food, lighten up dark corners and warm our dwellings, with few alternatives available. In addition, farmers have to some extent produced biogas from animal waste and liquid fuel from small scale crops. These energy sources are likely to represent the main energy source in developing countries for generations still, and are not a controversial issue.
In developed countries the use of biomass for energy production has developed further. Plant materials have been transformed to liquid form at an industrial scale, and powered lamps, generators and even cars, supplementing or even replacing petroleum. This liquid biofuels which a large and growing part of is produced in developing countries, are by many organizations now named agrofuels. Continued on page 2 1
Outreach Issues
With the climate crisis and rising petroleum prices, many countries in the North are now looking for ways to produce more biofuels/ agrofuels than their own agricultural land can currently provide. So the pressure mounts on so-called “available” land in developing countries, and this is the core of the controversy. The current situation The climate crisis has led to developed countries looking for ways to sustain their high energy fuelled consumption economies without increasing the release of green house gases. The inability or lack of willingness to transform the economy to a low energy version is resulting in the industrialized world operating as a locust on the natural resource base of the globe, constantly moving around looking for new natural resources in order to secure the current level of consumption. But what are the consequences?
“The inability or lack of willingness to transform the economy to a low energy version is resulting in the industrialized world operating as a locust on the natural resource base of the globe, constantly moving around looking for new natural resources in order to secure the current level of consumption”
Biofuels or Agrofuels – sustainability criteria or free for all? It is obvious to most observers that the current unregulated biofuel industry in developing countries is affecting the food security of vulnerable people, leading to higher prices on staple food, and challenging the traditional and sustainable management of natural resources and land use in rural areas. Both FAO and the World Bank has concluded that part of the rapid increase of food prices last year was indeed, due to increased biofuel production. In addition, it has been documented by several NGOs that the spread of biofuel crops have led to loss of both rainforest and fragile dry land areas.
2
The potential of biofuels as a cash crop for small scare farmers and its potential as a mitigating climate tool has been thoroughly promoted, especially by energy utilities and government officials. The negative effects of biofuels however have not been properly addressed, and as CSD is mandated with a clear responsibility to consider sustainability efforts and promote the right solutions, let us take a look on the main concerns that should be addressed:
• The loss of arable land. It is not well documented that biofuel production mostly takes place in marginal and unutilized land. Quite the contrary, with increasing fuel prices, it is highly likely that biofuel production will be moved into more fertile land to boost crops. So called marginal land is also very often land used by pastoralists grazing land and for other use by people in these areas. • The threat to small scale farmers without legal protection of their land. Land tenure and land ownership issues are contentious in many countries, and the process of securing the legal rights of the farmers have still some way to go. Biofuel production represent a clear temptation for larger scale and resourceful investors to bid for land currently occupied by farmers producing for local markets and own consumption. • The climate mitigating effect of biofuels is uncertain. More research has to be performed in order to increase knowledge on what role biofuels should play in the climate change negotiations.
• The loss of biodiversity. Introducing new and modified species of crops in new areas poses a serious threat to biodiversity, nature and human health. A science based approach is necessary to avoid unintended and negative consequences. It is too risky to experiment. To some industries, the potential good from biofuel production overshadows these concerns. It is not the role of CSD, however, to promote a non-sustainable development. Quite the contrary; precautionary principles should prevail any other concerns one might have. And on biofuels this is particularly important as its positive potential remains doubtful as the negative effects come to light with increasing clarity. It is time for CSD to lead the way! So what’s next? Shall we just strike down the good results that have been shown through blanket policies and banning the whole concept of biofuel production. Quite the contrary – NGOs at this CSD-session have the following proposals: 1. Support the proposal of the UN special rapporteur on the right to food to put in place a 5 year moratorium on expansion of industrial production of agrofuels; 2. Urge FAO and UNDP to complete their efforts to develop sustainability criteria for the production of biofuels; With these first steps it should be possible to halt the negative impact of biofuels until we know more, and countries will have ample time to Include biofuel production strategies in national agricultural and energy
Outreach Issues
plans in order to secure proper land use planning, securing basic rights to land and food security, and allow for a sustainable development. The NGO Major Group has discussed biofuels / agrofuels in two of the meetings. There is no common proposals, but the following two proposals from some Norwegian NGOs have got strong support from many organizations from both the
South and the North at the NGO-meetings – and no strong opposition:
• Immediately put in place a five years moratorium on expansion of industrial production of agrofuels to avoid increased hunger, huge environmental and social problems and conflicts, avoiding competition for productive arable land and displacement of small farmers and pastoralists;
• Rules for and regulation of production of biofuels / agrofuels must be urgently developed by the un (FAO, UNEP and other relevant UN institutions) to ensure that production and use of biofuels is sustainable in accordance with the three pillars of sustainable development and takes into account the need to achieve and maintain global food security.
Maintaining the Unique Contribution Commission on Sustainable Development By: Thomas Forster, International Partners for Sustainable Agriculture
Over the history of the CSD there have been numerous times when difficult and controversial issues in sustainable development are deflected by claims that other bodies in the international system have jurisdiction, not CSD. For example, in the thematic cluster under debate in this CSD 17, such deflections have been associated with trade and climate issues.
From such a view, social and environmental impacts of trade policy can be surfaced and lead to policy mitigating these impacts. From a sustainable development perspective, the rights based approach to solving the food crises has a hearing which it may not have in a narrower construction of food security and adequate production of food. From a sustainable development
of
the
perspective, efforts to mitigate the impacts of climate change can be put into a more holistic framework. Major Groups can join the call for holding the line to consider ALL important issues from a sustainable development perspective, including the relation of agriculture to trade and climate change.
While there are other bodies that are the central decision arenas for these issues -the WTO for trade and the IPPC for climate change -- the CSD is the one body in the UN system that looks at all issues through the lens of sustainable development. The unique value of the CSD to international understanding comes through addressing issues such as trade and climate change from a sustainable development perspective. In CSD 17 the principal issues for consideration at the High Level Segment include the sustainable development approach to the food crisis and to the call for a new green revolution. It is important to have a rigorous examination of food crisis and calls for a new green revolution from a sustainable development perspective.
3
Outreach Issues
Putting Farming First in Africa Without investment in agriculture, sustainable development in Africa will remain a dream. By: Dr. Lindiwe Majele Sibanda, CEO, Food, Agriculture, and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network
A top priority of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is to halve the number of people in the world experiencing poverty and hunger. While several countries have made progress in this area (China alone has lifted more than 175 million of its people above the poverty line), too many countries in sub-Saharan Africa still face the same hunger and poverty levels that they experienced 20 years ago. Up to 300 million Africans are facing chronic hunger. So what can Africans do to put food on the table and money in their pockets? The answer is simple – invest in agriculture. After decades of stagnation in agricultural yields and little investment in rural economies, African countries are beginning to prioritize the development of agricultural production and markets. Rural development and agricultural productivity improvement now feature prominently on the agenda of national governments. Continent-wide plans and investments, through programmes under the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP), the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), Research into Use (RIU) and the Alliance for Commodity Trade in East and Southern Africa (ACTESA) and many others are encouraging. With the majority of African governments spending on average less than 5% of total national budgets on agriculture, one of CAADP's key objectives is to increase this to 10%, with the target of raising agricultural productivity by at least 6% per annum. Achieving Africa's agricultural growth also requires massive investments from the global community and the
4
“no sustainable development without sustainable agriculture� on-going global financial crisis poses a threat to Africa's efforts. Over the past generation, agriculture and farmers have been sidelined in international policy circles. During this time, agriculture's share of total aid has dropped from 17% to 3% of total spend. While total aid to sub-Saharan Africa remained stable during the 1990s, the proportion allocated to agriculture declined year on year. Aid to agriculture in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) member states declined as a proportion of total aid from 20% in the early 1980s to 8% by 2000. If poverty in Africa is to be reduced, aid to agriculture must be increased substantially and made to work more effectively. The G8 agriculture ministers, who met for the first time last weekend to discuss the world food emergency stressed the importance of sound agricultural policies
and strategies to underpin the investments, at national, regional and global level. They highlighted that these policies need to be developed in an inclusive manner, involving all main stakeholders, including farmer organizations, and to be based on reliable statistics. The G8 ministers have fully endorsed CAADP as an excellent plan of what is needed to achieve food security in Africa. It is time we realized that there can be no sustainable development without sustainable agriculture. For Africa to develop, sustainable food policies and partnerships are key. My organization, the Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN) has joined forces with international groups from the science and technology, farmers, and private sector communities to endorse Farming First among global policymakers. The time is right to bring about much needed policy reform to address the stubborn and widespread problems that have crippled African agriculture and rural economies.
Outreach Issues
Maasai Pastoralists’ Voice Are Heard in New York I am Wilfred Saiton Ole Ondungo, a Maasai pastoralist leader from Kajiado district in Kenya. I have been asked by my community to represent them at CSD 17, and to bring the local voices of pastoralists to the global platform to create awareness of the challenges that face and threaten us. The most critical of these is the recent drought that has killed hundreds of livestock early this year. Bringing more awareness and
understanding from the international community of the need for global support to help Maasai pastoralists, and the millions of other pastoralists in the world, to overcome the climate challenges that are threatening our livelihoods, is our need and our plea. I also wish to highlight local innovations and projects the community needs to overcome the challenges. Among these innovations are
building social entrepreneurship and enhancing market linkages through commodity value market chain loops, a key interest of the Kenya Livestock Working Group, whose secretariat is Heifer Kenya. As a pastoralist entrepreneur, together with other pastoralists, we have built a medium- sized abattoir called Keekonyokie Slaughterhouse that provides vital market services for feeding Nairobi. We have also identified key needs in collaboration with partners at CSD: WHAT PASTORALISTS NEED - KEY PRIORITIES FOR RESPONDING TO A FOOD CRISIS AND CLIMATE STRESSES WITH PRO-ACTIVE RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND LIVESTOCK IN AFRICA
• Food Secure Landscapes and Co-Benefits • Sustainable Value Chains • Adaptation and Risk Management Strategies • Communities of Practice Photo courtesy of Lisa Develtere, Flemish Youth Delegation
Farming First By: Morgane Danielou, International Fertilizer Industry Association
Farmers, scientists and business and industry have prepared a call to action, Farming First (www.farmingfirst.org), to respond to the global challenges posed during this round of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. For the first time in CSD’s history, three of the nine major groups formed an agricultural coalition to bring forward to governments their key policy recommendations. Together, these groups represent the world's farmers, the world's scientists, and the private sector. Farming First
illustrates the strength and value of a multistakeholder collaboration which acknowledges the specific concerns of each group while building consensus and complementing each other for a common framework for future action. It also shows the importance of including civil society’s voice within these international negotiations. “Farming First” calls for a broad-based, knowledge-centred approach to increase agricultural output in a sustainable and socially responsible manner. The platform is focused on helping subsistence farmers become small-scale entrepreneurs. Action is
needed in six key areas: 1. safeguarding natural resources, 2. sharing knowledge, 3. building local access, 4. protecting harvests, 5. enabling access to markets, and 6. prioritizing research imperatives. Governments have welcomed the Farming First initiative as they see it as an opportunity to raise awareness on the collective contributions of the some of the most important agricultural and rural stakeholders: farmers and cooperatives, researchers and extension workers, companies and entrepreneurs.
5 7
Outreach Issues
Water as a Cross-Cutting Issue for CSD17 By: Members of the CSD Freshwater Caucus and the Global Public Policy Network on Water Management, including a range of non-governmental actors, major groups and stakeholders
Recognizing that the thematic issues under discussion at CSD have significant impacts on water quantity and quality. Acknowledging that ecosystem protection requires guaranteed minimum environmental flows to meet the needs of human populations for water of sufficient quality and quantity. Recognizing that the impacts of climate change on water as it relates to agriculture, rural development, land, drought and desertification will require a fundamental re-thinking of water governance arrangements. Acknowledging that the right to water should be paired with the responsibility to protect ecosystems, preserve water quality and secure equitable quantities of water for social and environmental needs. Welcoming the decision to host a Ministerial Roundtable on Integrated Land and Water Resources Management for Agriculture and Rural Development. Recognizing that water is not the core subject of negotiation for any functioning international or intergovernmental process, convention or treaty. As such, the Commission on Sustainable Development provides a natural home for discussion of the social, environmental and economic aspects of water. We call on CSD delegates to: In the area of Agriculture: (a) Adopt an ecosystem-based approach to agricultural management, developing systems of water rights that allow for prior allocation of water to guarantee
6
minimum requirements of environmental flows, building ecosystem resilience for sustainable agriculture and livelihoods. Prioritise the requirements of environmental flows and basic social needs ahead of economic requirements, recognizing this as a critical response measure to climate change impacts. (b) Recognize and endorse the findings of the IAASTD* report and its recommendations and findings in relation to sustainable agricultural management. (c) Call on the Food and Agriculture Organisation to assess the relative environmental and social impacts of different agricultural practices, including small and large-scale practices, organic
and non-organic, industrial and nonindustrial, thereby identifying the methods conducive to the most efficient use of water. (d) Evaluate the goods and services provided to agriculture by ecosystems, including freshwater, and introduce mechanisms for reflecting their true value in agricultural management plans. (e) Utilise water footprint analyses to determine the suitability of crops in certain regions and locations. Land (a) Develop integrated land and water resources management plans and institutions for implementation at the river
Outreach Issues
basin and watershed level, involving residents and other stakeholders in decision-making processes. Encourage the strengthening of water and land management institutions where they exist to deal with competing demands for and increased pressure on water resources, which stand to be exacerbated by climate change. (b) Develop water management arrangements that guarantee minimum environmental flows for ecosystems, recognizing land as a water user in its own right. (c) Assess the value of ecosystem services provided by land and develop policies, schemes and incentives that promote and enable sustainable water management to preserve land quality, including rainwater harvesting programmes and Payment for Ecosystem Services arrangements where appropriate. Rural Development (a) Ensure access to water for human and ecosystem needs in rural areas on a fair and equitable basis. (b) Ensure that ODA for rural development is granted in a manner that encourages water-use efficiency, sustainable management of water resources and protection of ecosystems that build climate resilience. (c) Ensure that domestic subsidies do not promote inefficient or unsustainable water use and provide incentives for protection of ecosystems and integrated approaches to land and water management.
“ecosystem protection requires guaranteed minimum environmental flows to meet the needs of human populations for water of sufficient quality and quantity� Drought (a) Adopt a precautionary approach to conserving water and preparing for periods of greater water scarcity that stand to increase in range and severity under climate change, while investing in better monitoring, information, observation and forecasting systems that assist in developing appropriate response measures. (b) Integrate drought preparedness and management plans into frameworks for integrated water resources and land management (c) Recognize and address the potential impact of projected increases of drought on transboundary watersheds, building capacity to develop fair and equitable transboundary water management arrangements, recognizing the role of the UN Watercourses Convention in this regard. Desertification (a) Promote land reform that enhances incentives for investment in sustainable water and land management practices
through land tenure arrangements that provide security and ownership. (b) Integrate traditional knowledge of communities and indigenous peoples into sustainable land and water management policies and frameworks. (c) Promote economic diversification and support alternative livelihood options through education and training so that dry-land poor communities can create work that reduces the pressure on land and water resources that leads to desertification. (d) Provide additional funding and support to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification, the most underfunded of the Rio Conventions. (e) Support the development of an international Water Scarcity Policy Framework, as proposed by the UNCCD, as a tool for countries to respond to and manage water scarcity, building synergies with the UNFCCC as a key response measure to climate change. * International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development, Synthesis Report.
(d) Build capacity for effective and transparent governance arrangements in rural communities that enable the integrated management of land and water resources. (e) Address the potential for dry sanitation solutions for water-stressed and water-scarce rural areas to reduce pressure on available water resources.
7
Outreach Issues
The Scientific Method: Where’s the Research By: Aleksandra Radyuk, Global Youth Action Network
Cecile Charles-King is part of the International Partnership for Sustainable Agriculture, as well as the Brooklyn/Queens Land Trust, which maintains 34 community gardens using sustainable agriculture, and Growing Power, Inc., where she is on the steering committee for the Growing Food and Justice for All Initiative. Cecile, or “Ceci”, as she prefers to be called, is also a gardener who grows her own food using sustainable methods. I spoke with Ceci, and she presented an interesting point of view about the lack of research available to the public concerning genetically modified organisms. Elements of a Theory “When I was an undergraduate studying science,” Ceci told me, “We were taught that when you do research, you have to define your terms so that everybody starts at the same place.” The phrase “Sustainable Agriculture” has been thrown around, she argues, without a specific definition. Piling on fertilizer, which harms soil, is not a sustainable method of agriculture. Just as important, in the scientific method, is the hypothesis, a statement of the
researcher’s educated guess. Your hypothesis is the starting point from your research. To test this hypothesis, you need to conduct experiments, replicate studies and use long-term studies to show that the hypothesis is true. So where are the studies to support the hypothesis that GMOs do not have negative environmental and health-related consequences?
project have greater transparency?
Seeking Out Proof
Companion planting, as Ceci explained, is planting different crops amongst the crops or planting flowers, to confuse the pests that fly over. Most pests are crop specific—you won’t find a pest for a carrot attacking a cabbage. “Why not use time tested methods that have been proven true, instead of using a technique that involves a lot more fertilizer?”
Companies that produce GMOs make claims that their research shows higher yields, greater health benefits, and no or few adverse effects from GMOs. However, this research is not readily available. Long-term studies, which are particularly important, have not even been properly conducted. “When do we find out the results of the generation that you’re feeding?” asks Ceci. “A generation is 20-30 years. If we’re feeding this generation genetically modified food, do we have to wait 20-30 years to see the results?” Ceci goes on to argue that these companies are putting their “results” in the mainstream and marketing their products, yet not allowing the general public access to the research that shows these results. Shouldn’t such a
Alternate Solutions Ceci believes that GMOs might not be the best way to produce food. Instead, she suggests looking to alternate sustainable farming methods for solutions. One such solution, companion planting, has yielded positive results throughout Europe.
The Bottom Line “You need accountability, transparency, and long-term studies to track the development of GMOs,” Ceci stated. “We don’t know what the long-term environmental and health-related impacts could be.” There needs to be greater demand for these studies, and for more specific definitions for the terminology being used.
Sustainable Development and Animal Welfare: A Critical Partnership By: Larry winter Roeder, Jr., MS,UN Affairs Director, WSPA
Of the world’s one billion poorest people, over 850 million totally depend on animals for a living, many more for food. Livestock are an integral component of both crop and animal based agriculture. Not only do they provide nutrition, but they assist in crop planting, harvesting, and transportation of food to markets. The value of livestock is so critical that people fleeing from conflicts and natural calamities protect their ani8
mals even at risk of their own lives, because without their animals, they have no income and can not properly feed their families. Many discussions at CSD acknowledge the value of livestock in addressing the MDG, but fail to mention that their ability to do so is contingent on their welfare. Providing livestock with nutrition, veterinary care, and an environment which fosters their welfare im-
proves the lives of humans through greater food security, food safety, economic and environmental stability. In other words, if the UN is to truly protect the climate and environment, preserve food security and reduce poverty and the spread of disease, the “international community must integrate science based animal welfare into their development, environment and disaster reduction activities.
Outreach Issues
Live from the CSD
http://media.stakeholderforum.org
80’s in 99 she launched and NGO related to indigenous rights, and now is an activist for indigenous rights all over the world.
By: Catherine Karongo , Kenya Journalist, Stakeholder Forum
In Earth Talk, today coming from the UN Headquarters in New York is, a discussion programme focusing on the main issues coming out of the ongoing Commission on Sustainable Development. In today’s programme, Armando Canchanya talks to Neth Dano from the Third World Network, an alliance of NGOs in developing countries and Emillio D'allessio, President of Agenda 21 in Italy. D'allessio works with local authorities running Agenda 21 schemes.
“The only way [the United States] can continue to consume disproportionate amounts is if people in the poorest nations really just fall of a cliff and have nothing left. That's not going to happen.” - Richard Heinberg, author.
Our Greentable discussion was chaired by Felix Dodds and included contributions from Dr Lindiwesibanda, Aksel Nærstad and Raul Momtemoyor. The discussion focused on the causes and possible solutions of the global food crises Listen to the podcasts from the United Nations headquarters in New York on media.stakeholderforum.org and get the exciting insight Emillio D'allessio, Canchanya
Neth Dano and Armando
Live from CSD at the United Nations headquarters in New York, join Armando Canchanya as he brings you news, discussions and debates of events surrounding the Commission on Sustainable Development. In today’s segment, the radio team explores more on organic foods—what experts say and more importantly what you think they are and why you consume them. Don't miss out on our jargon busted segment, where we define the term 'organic' Remember, ignorance is no defence!!!!!! In Pioneers of the Planet Lucy Mulenkey, a Masai from Kenya, shared with us some of her vision on environmental protection and the indigenous communities, as well as her permanent fight to get government and mainstream media attention. Lucy started out as a radio journalist in the early
Ambassador Ronny Jumeau, Seychelles and Ambassador Angus Friday, AOSIS
9
Outreach Issues
Food for Thought…
Felix Dodds, Stakeholder Forum
“Green Recovery Packages” The past year has been fascinating look at how governments, at least in rhetoric, have been talking about a ‘Green New Deal’. I am not sure who came up with the concept but I believe it may have been the Green New Deal Group (www.greennewdealgroup.org). This group was launched in 2007 with Larry Elliot (Economics Editor of the Guardian), Charles Secrett and Tony Juniper (former Directors of Friends of the Earth UK), Andy Simms (New Economics Foundation), and Ann Pettifor (former Director of Jubilee 2000), among others. The group drew inspiration from President Roosevelt’s “comprehensive response to the Great Depression to propose a modernised version, a ‘Green New Deal’ designed to power a renewable revolution, create thousands of green-collar jobs and rein in the distorting power of the finance sector while making more low-cost capital available for pressing priorities.” The theme seems to have been picked up by political elite across the world, from President Obama to President Hu. There have been trillions of dollars spent by governments trying to secure new jobs and save their banks and financial institutions.
Recently HSBC brought out an analysis of the recovery packages. How Green were they? Who could be accused of rhetorical embellishment? I have to say I was surprised with the League Table. According to HSBC, by far the biggest investor in a “Green New Deal” was the Republic of Korea, where 81% of the money in the recovery package is earmarked for green projects, creating an estimated 950,000 new jobs. Not surprisingly, the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, has praised the example set by his homeland. What should New Green Deals include? According to Achim Steiner, UNEP Executive Director, they should include: "Investments in clean-tech and renewable energy; infrastructure such as railways and cycle tracks and naturebased services like river systems and forests”. The benefits are multiple and “not only counter recession and unemployment but can also set the stage for more sustainable economic recovery and growth in the 21st century”.
the recession to rid themselves of some of their most polluting factories. Where, according to the HSBC report, does that put the most vocal countries about the need for a Green New Deal? France at 21%, Germany at 13%, the US at 12% and the UK at 7%. Are these countries in danger of being left behind not only in recovery terms, but in the race for being part of the new wave after the knowledge wave – the environmental technology wave. As the UN Secretary General said in his Green New Deal speech in Poznan in December, what we need is:
In second place was the European Union with 59% of the Union’s recovery budget earmarked for green activities. Third was China (38%), which seems to be also using
“A revolution. A turning point. A moment when we turned away from a past that no longer works toward a more equitable and prosperous future.” The questions is, are we there yet?
E DITORIAL T EAM Senior Editor: Jan-Gustav Strandenaes, ANPED Co-Editor: Felix Dodds, Stakeholder Forum
Previous and today’s issues are easily available online, go to:
Daily Editor: Stephen Mooney, Stakeholder Forum Design and Layout: Erol Hofmans, ANPED Contributing writers:
www.sdin-ngo.net media.stakeholderforum.org
Oyvind Dahl Norwegian Forum for Environment and Development
Morgane Danielou IFA Aleksandra Radyuk Global Youth Action Network Larry winter Roeder, Jr. WSPA Catherine Karongo , Stakeholder Forum
10
.
THE ITALIAN MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT, LAND AND SEA AND
Thomas Forster IPSA Dr. Lindiwe Majele Sibanda FANRPAN
Outreach Issues is made possible through the generous support of:
Please send your contributions to: smooney@stakeholderforum.org erol.hofmans@anped.org
THE BELGIAN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT FEDERAL PUBLIC PLANNING SERVICE