CSD 17 Day 8 - 13 May 2009

Outreach Issues A daily publication of Sustainable Development Issues Network (SDIN) and Stakeholder Forum (SF)

International Report Ignored WEDNESDAY May 13, 2009

In an exclusive interview for Outreach Issues Dr Hans Rudolf Herren, one of the Co-Chairs of the IAASTD report and President of the Millennium Institute, today expressed his shock that research findings of the four year study had failed to impact the content of the negotiations here at the Commission; ‘I am very frustrated, and above all very very sad that all of that work is now being buried and pushed aside for reasons that I can not understand’.

Inside this Issue: International Report Ignored

1

Food Sovereignty: A New Model for a Human Right

2

Sustainable Development for Dummies

4

Acroecology and Sustainable Development

5

It’s the Farmers Who Feed the World

7

La Torre de Papel

8

CSD Without Sustainability?

9

UN Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis

10

Live from the CSD

11

Food for Thought...

12

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.

In particular, Herren stressed his incredulity at the 180 degree turn of a number of governments and UN bodies since the original publication of the report back in April 2008. The IAASTD findings were reviewed and ratified during an Intergovernmental Panel in Johannesburg in April 2008, and since has been endorsed by over sixty countries including the UK, Germany and Austria. In spite of the support and commitment of member states, civil society and UN agencies, the IAASTD recommendations appear to have made very little impact here at the negotiations.

global assessments of the role of agricultural knowledge, science and technology in reducing hunger and poverty, improving rural livelihoods, and facilitating equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development. The project was launched at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002 and has taken over four years to complete.

It was the product of a multi-stakeholder process involving governments, NGOs and industries from rich and the World Bank and an array of UN bodies including the GEF, FAO, UNDP, UNESCO, and the WHO.

For those not familiar with the IAASTD report, the publication undertook global and sub-

Amongst a wide range of findings, the authors conclude that the present system of food 1

Outreach Issues

production and the food is traded around the world has led to a highly unequal distribution of benefits and serious ecological impacts that were now contributing to climate change. They also suggested that science and technology should be targeted towards raising yields but also protecting soils, water and forests.

On the question of genetically modified crops, the authors conclude that they could see little role for GM as it is currently practiced on the basis that ‘assessment of technology lags behind its development, information is anecdotal and contradictory, and uncertainty about the possible benefits and damage is unavoidable’.

However, the resounding message from the report is that a step-change is required in our approach to agricultural production. Speaking at the launch of the report at the UNEP in Nairobi over a year ago, Professor Robert Watson emphasised the need for governments to take a proactive lead in addressing food security concerns. ‘If we persist with business as usual, the world’s people will not be fed adequately over the next fifty years. Business as usual will result in further degradation of the environment and further widening of the gap between those who have and those who don’t’ he said.

The findings of the IAASTD publication offered a logical starting point for the discussions here at the CSD. However, with the exception of the Swiss delega-

tion who suggested a text amendment referencing the report, the findings have made little impact on the content of the discussions. Business as usual marches on regardless.

When asked why the conclusions of the report have failed to impact the content of the negotiations Herren shakes his head; ‘something must have happened between when we announced the report and it was endorsed a year ago’. In his mind, there is no doubt that the lobbying strategies of the agro-chemical interest groups have achieved their objectives.

Having attended the sessions today, he states; ‘people in many high places in government and the donor agencies no longer want to hear the facts’.

Food Sovereignty: A New Model for a Human Right Statement by La Vía Campesina and Friends of the Earth International On May 4th, UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Olivier De Schutter, highlighted the unique role of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) on the current discussions about the future of agricultural development.

De Schutter stated that in order for agricultural development to be sustainable, a focus on human rights is essential, and for that reason it is necessary to move towards a model in which the right to adequate food is a human right. This is what the Universal Declaration of Human Rights establishes, as well as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

De Schutter´s proposal promotes a model that prioritizes the needs of the most vulnerable people, that defines its reference points not only by the levels of production achieved but also by the impacts on the diverse food production ways, and one in which the deci-

2

sion making processes are based on participatory mechanisms.

“Increased investments in agriculture, particularly in Africa, are necessary, yet this must be thought out seriously. The experience gained from the crisis showed that the key question is not merely that of increasing budgets allocated to agriculture but rather, that of choosing from different models of agricultural development which may have different impacts and benefit various groups differently”, stated De Schutter to the CSD. This new model must protect, promote and ensure the access to, and the control over, land of the small farmers and peasants. It should promote agrarian reform, ensure the access to production resources and protect people against large-scale transnational acquisitions.

This model needs to put into practice alternatives for production that do not contribute to climate change.

All in all, it is a model that promotes and ensures, in a sustainable way, the right to food as a fundamental right of communities to produce food and to define what food they want to consume. A model which is “more about ‘how to help the world feed itself’ than about “how to feed the world,” he added.

Time for recommendations His recommendations to the CSD, included “the need, not only to increase food production, but to reorient agro-food systems and the regulations that influence them at national and international levels, towards sustainability and the progressive realization towards the right to food.”

He also recommended a reorientation of agrarian sciences, policies and institutions and a need to anticipate the effects of climate change in agriculture, promoting the diversity of agricultural systems able to cope

Outreach Issues

with climate disruptions, agroecological systems.

including

De Schutter also called for a World Food Summit with a broad agenda to encourage the international community to address the structural causes of the food crisis and fill the gaps left by the fragmentation of current global governance. The agenda should also include issues related to the insufficient or inadequate investments in agriculture, deregulation of markets which do not ensure stability or prices, financial speculation on the future markets of agricultural commodities, weak protection of workers of the sector and a search for an adequate regulation of the agrifood chain.

He also urged the CSD to promote the adoption of national strategies to the right to food, which are comprehensive and meant for the creation of sustainable agrifood systems, including production, transformation and consumption.

Finally, De Schutter highlighted the fact that the CSD must contribute to improve the recognition of the small farmers´ right to access land by the international community. He added that for that to happen it is necessary to highlight the unique role of agrarian reform and adopt international guidelines on large-scale offshore land purchases.

tree plantations to produce pulp and paper, and for wood and mining projects, are taking from the farmers, indigenous peoples, fishermen and small farmers the possibility to access this resource. In addition, these acquisitions are the cause of dangerous effects on the environment and on the ability of the communities to have sustainable life styles.

travel long distances from their production sites to the places of consumption, due to the polluting emissions this causes.

In addition, the right to access water must be ensured and it must be recognized that the peoples should control their own territories.

This implies much more than the search for mechanisms to promote their participation in the decision making processes, it entails the control of these processes.

In this respect, we stress the need to promote sustainable agrifood systems, in their production, transformation and consumption stages. We believe such sustainability lies on local and diversified agroecological production of food, and on the urgency to move from an intensive large-scale industrial agricultural system, to local and regional systems that are environmentally adequate and diverse. In the urban context, such sustainability entails the possibility to buy this kind of food in a network of diverse retail markets, which will work as bridges between people and food, links between those who produce it and those who consume it.

Moreover, we agree on promoting solutions to help the world feed itself, to enable communities to produce their own food instead of solutions of those who aim at feeding it.

That is food sovereignty: the ability for people to choose what and how to produce, and how to trade it.

“We agree on promoting solutions to help the world feed itself, to enable communities to produce their own food instead of solutions of those who aim at feeding it.”

Our Path: Food Sovereignty La Vía Campesina and Friends of the Earth International share many common opinions.

We are agreed in defending the right of the peoples to adequate food, highlighting that food must be sufficient, nutritious, healthy, and produced in an ecologically and culturally appropriate way. It also implies the right to produce food, the right of peasants and small farmers to produce food for themselves and their communities. Peasants, small farmers and artisan fishers have to play a central role in any strategy to resolve the problem of hunger and poverty.

We are also agreed on the need to ensure the right of the peoples to access land, and with that aim it is crucial to put an end to land offshore takeovers. We understand that massive land takeovers or acquisitions, meant for agrofuels production, animal feed,

We also want to bring again to your attention the important recommendations of the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD).

In addition, sustainability is completely impossible if the right of the peoples to recover, defend, reproduce, exchange, improve and grow their own seeds is not recognized. Seeds must be the heritage of the peoples to the service of human kind.

Next Steps

This includes the need for regulation to push back the influence of the corporate sector whose goal is “to feed the world” through their industrial and destructive model of production.

We support actions that prioritized the most vulnerable people. Those who produce and consume food must be at the centre of stage food policies, and should be prioritized over trade and business interests, emphasizing as well local and national economies.

We agree with the Special Rapporteur on the need to promote production models that do not contribute to climate change. This means, among other things, to promote agrifood systems which are less dependant on fossil fuels, and thus on agrochemicals, machinery, systems free from genetically modified organisms. But also, food should not

This is the time to defend a sustainable and egalitarian production and consumption model, and bring to an end the production model driven by the big corporations and promoted and financed by the WB, the IMF, the WTO, among others.

Such controls by corporations on our agrifood systems must end.

There is a need to unmask and resist the false promoters of models to block the right to food and food sovereignty, like the WB, IMF, WTO. Their policies have led us to the current crisis, and these actors should not be part of the “international community” looking for solutions.

We call for a collective defense of the right of the peoples to access land, seeds and water and push for agrarian reform.

3

Outreach Issues

Sustainable Development for Dummies By: Leida Rijnhout, Flemish Platform on Sustainable Development (VODO)

Please don’t take it personal, we know that you are not a dummy... But sometimes it is a good idea to come back to the roots and a clear definition of the concept of Sustainable Development. And maybe a short course on Sustainable Development will help you to explain your colleagues and your people at home, to inform them of what you’re aiming for at the CSD. Sustainable Development creates a framework for both governmental policy, as well as our own consumption patterns. There are three fundamental principles for Sustainable Development: 1) The earth is round and thus limited, she does not grow. This means that the carrying capacity of the earth has a limit.

2) People, from their part, are also limited.

Too much social pressure, alienation and/or environmental pollution is unhealthy.

3) The economy has to serve the needs of the peoples, not the other way around.

Sustainable Development is often described as a development that takes into account the three pillars or dimensions: the economical, social and ecological. The illusion is created as if they are all equal and deserve the same amount of attention. In reality they are seen as separate dimensions, while integration of two or more is often labeled as being Sustainable Development. In that sense Sustainable Development becomes a notion used by anyone, drifting away from the original holistic idea. The three pillars are intensively interconnected, but often these pillars in use stand next to each other. As troubadour Elton John already knew: “We can build a bridge between them, but the empty space remains”.

So instead of using the metaphor of the pillars, it is better to talk about the three capitals of Sustainable Development, which gives a better idea of the inter-linkages between each.

4

“The

three pillars are intensively interconnected, but often these pillars in use stand next to each other.”

The ECOLOGICAL CAPITAL as the basis for our life and by extension for our economy. That is why within Sustainable Development this concept needs a lot of attention, more so because it has been neglected ever since the start of the industrial revolution. Today we still tend to think that our ecological capital is unlimited. But at the moment we are eating our ecological capital in a way that is unfair towards future generations. And eating your capital is the first step towards bankruptcy.

The SOCIAL CAPITAL (peoples, social cohesion, culture, labour productivity, health etc.) of sustainable development confront

various challenges: the division and marginalization of several groups in our society, the problems of a growing aging and isolation of peoples, the complexity of the migration issue, changing labour conditions among the many diverse issues.

A society with a larger social cohesion, better education, and healthy, is more effective in realizing common goals.

The ECONOMIC CAPITAL is the set of tools that shapes and helps our 'household'.

Unfortunately, the development or growth of this toolset is often seen as a goal itself, not as a means.

The three strategies for sustainable development 1) The efficiency strategy The efficiency strategy uses closed cycles in which materials and energy are reused as much as possible. Products are designed in a way that they only need a minimal amount of resources, made from biodegradable materials and build from modules which are

Outreach Issues

easy to recycle.

So …

2) The sufficiency strategy

These three strategies ask for a change of attitude, especially the sufficiency strategy which should be supported by a change in our behaviour and needs strong political leadership. The same for the redistribution strategy. It really needs a paradigm shift in our vision on economy and economic activities. Which implies directly the need for the holistic and integrated approach which is given by the concept of Sustainable Development.

Only the efficiency strategy is not enough. All too often, the gains from the more efficient production of goods is lost due to the total production growth, the so called rebound effect. For example : cars use much less fuel then 20 years ago, but the number of cars and driven kilometers has increased so fast that the total fuel consumption by cars is still increasing.

3) The redistribution strategy Towards the developing countries the strategy of redistribution is an urgent need.

This is the best way towards poverty reduction. Concepts such as the ecological footprint and ecological or social debt are making very clear that the richness of the industrialised world is based on the exploitation of natural resources in the South. This started during the times of colonization, but persist until today. The actual small contribution in the form of development aid we will never achieve the MDGs.

Coherence in policymaking is crucial. A strong focus on interlinkages between the various challenges we are confronting currently is still lacking in (inter)national politics. The problems of the world are too complex to come with simple solutions. Too often people fall back on technical solutions, which fit in the efficiency strategy, but leave out the other two.

in absolute amounts the global use of natural resources and emission of waste products (like CO2), for social and equity reasons we have to share the right to use those natural resources in a more fair way. An economy in function for basic needs for all, not for the selective greed of a few…

The CSD is the only UN commission where governments and major groups try to discuss those complex items in a more holistic approach, and also recognise the ecological and social limits of our planet and human beings. But happily without any limits for our thinking and analysing capacity. Don’t become a dummy!

Leida Rijnhout Flemish platform on Sustainable Development (VODO) - Belgium For the whole publication, visit: www.vodo.be (in Dutch, French and English)

To repeat we have only one planet, limited space and limited natural resources. For environmental reasons we have to increase

Agroecology and Sustainable Development By: Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, Senior Scientist, Pesticide Action Network

Agroecology provides a robust set of solutions to the environmental pressures and crises facing agriculture in the 21st century.

So concludes the science and evidence-based UN-sponsored International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD).

Delegates to the UN CSD-17 this week would do well to draw on the findings of this landmark report, produced by over 400 scientists and development experts from more than 80 countries. Sponsored by five United Nations agencies (FAO, UNDEP, UNEP, UNESCO, WHO), the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility, the IAASTD findings were approved at an Intergovernmental Plenary in April, 2008. This article synthesizes IAASTD findings on the contribution of agroecology

“An agroecological approach

recognizes the multifunctional dimensions of agriculture and facilitates progress toward a broad range of goals.” towards equitable and sustainable development.

Agroecology provides a framework for strengthening four key systems properties of agriculture directly relevant to the CSD: productivity, resilience, sustainability and equity.

It combines formal scientific inquiry with Indigenous and community-based experimentation, emphasizing technology and innovations that are knowledge-intensive, low cost and readily adaptable by small and medium-scale producers. These methods are considered by

the IAASTD as likely to advance social equity, sustainability and agricultural productivity over the long term.

An agroecological approach recognizes the multifunctional dimensions of agriculture and facilitates progress toward a broad range of goals: Sustainable productivity, increased ecological resilience and reduced vulnerability to changing environmental conditions. In Central America, small-scale farmers using agroecological methods were significantly better able to withstand the adverse effects of Hurricane Mitch than those farming conventionally.

Improved health and nutrition (availability of diverse, nutritious diets and traditional medicines; reduced pesticide poisoning among workers, communities and consumers).

5 7

Outreach Issues

Conservation of natural resources (gains in biodiversity, soil organic matter, water quality and quantity, ecosystem services e.g. pollination, erosion control).

Economic stability (diverse income sources; spread of labor requirements and production benefits over time; reduced vulnerability to single commodity price swings) Climate change adaptation and mitigation increased energy-efficiency, reduced reliance on fossil fuel and fossil fuel-based inputs, carbon sequestration and improved water capture in soil).

Increased social resilience and institutional capacity (increased ecological literacy, experiential learning, social support networks.

Examples include Farmer Field Schools in Integrated Pest Management, Plant Health Clinics, farmer-to-farmer extension programs and school and urban gardens).

Growing Agroecology at Home: How to Build Local and National Capacity Achieving equitable and sustainable development in the 21st century requires strengthening of institutional and policy support toward ecologically-sound decision-making by farmers; stronger and enforceable regulatory frameworks to reverse damaging effects of resource-extractive agriculture; and significant new investments by public sector, donor and commercial actors in agroecological research, extension, product innovation and marketing.

Actions that directly support agroecological agriculture: Establish national policies and legal frameworks for the promotion and implementation of agroecological farming; revise institutional priorities, provide monetary and non-monetary professional incentives and invest in participatory models of agroecological research, extension and education.

Provide technical assistance in and financial incentives (credit lines, crop insurance, income tax exemptions, payment for ecosystem services) for agroecological practices.

Generate savings and revenues by transition-

6

ing towards systems with fewer negative externalities; levying carbon and energy taxes and fees for health and environmental harms; eliminating direct and indirect subsidies for unsustainable practices.

Encourage sustainable production labels, and increased market opportunities for farmers adopting agroecological practices.

Actions that create an enabling social, political and institutional environment: Ensure small-scale farmers, particularly women, and community-based organizations have secure access to productive resources, information and markets.

Establish fair regional and global trade arrangements and laws of ownership and access that enable farmers to meet food and livelihood security goals and diversify production.

Establish social and environmental standards for production, food quality and procurement, with liability mechanisms to address health or environmental harms arising when standards are not applied.

Guide and regulate private sector contributions: reward private investment in safe, sustainable products, technologies and markets; initiate competitive bidding for public funding based on capacity to meet equitable, sustainable development goals; establish fair competition regulations.

Use qualitative and quantitative full-cost accounting measures to evaluate and compare the social, environmental and economic costs of different agricultural production systems including impacts on agricultural and food system workers; enhance institutional integrity with codes of conduct to preserve public institutions’ capacity to perform publicgood research.

Spelling the way forward for CSD delegates, the IAASTD concludes: “An increase and strengthening of AKST towards agroecological sciences will contribute to addressing environmental issues while maintaining and increasing productivity.�

Outreach Issues

It’s the Farmers Who Feed the World The challenge which rural communities have today is to triple food production by 2050 using the same resources in an environmentally sustainable, economically feasible, and socially responsible manner.

By: Ajay Vashee, President of the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP)

With 1.7 billion more mouths to feed by 2030 and the ratio of arable land to population declining by 40-55%, a global food crisis is set to return. Yet, agriculture's share of total foreign aid has dropped from 17% to 3% over the past 30 years.

Meanwhile, governments around the world are lavishing attention onto the banks, the housing sector and car manufacturers. Every day, politicians and policy makers announce new initiatives to kick-start one or more parts of the economic and financial systems.

the global policy community continues to neglect the agricultural sector, as has been the case over the past 20 years, this farmers' ability to feed cities will be in jeopardy.

If our agriculture is unsustainable, then we, as a species, are unsustainable. Many of the solutions that could help achieve sustainability are already well-known and known to work. Plant breeding, crop protection, and integrated crop management can all help increase the productivity of our resources while preserving them over the long-term.

But is this focus a distraction from other equally pressing problems and equally deserving people? Will these bailed out bankers solve the climate change crisis? Will the subsidized car manufacturers feed the world?

We cannot afford to have any agriculture policies which do not put the farmers first.

And this means that if we don't follow a farmer-centric and knowledge-based model, it is possible that the world will face a situation where our food supply cannot be guaranteed.

It's the farmers that feed the cities, and if

Recognising that civil society groups such as

farmers can play an important role in influencing policy and facilitating change is also critical in sharing the future direction of agricultural policy. This is why the farming group has endorsed the Farming First plan (www.farmingfirst.org) at the CSD-17.

The political will to do something to improve rural development has not matched with any tangible results. We know what it will take, what policy options are available, and how much money it will take. It's not vast sums of money compared to the subsidies allocated to the banking sector and other industries.

In 24 months, we are going to see a resurgence of the food crisis. As soon as energy prices go up and the financial markets become more stable, food security and sustainability are going to be on the top of the agenda again.

7

Outreach Issues

La Torre de Papel A muchos se nos ha enseñado que en un momento la humanidad entera se reunió para edificar una torre que llegase al cielo. Al ver ello, alguien dijo: “He aquí que todos forman un solo pueblo y todos hablan una misma lengua, siendo este el principio de sus empresas. Nada les impedirá que lleven a cabo todo lo que se propongan”.

By: Gabriel Ballesteros P. Asesor Jurídico Corte Internacional de Arbitraje y Conciliación Ambiental

Hoy en Nueva York, donde nos encontramos reunidos, estamos rodeados de construcciones que evocan esa figura. Al mirar el Empire State o la Torre Chrysler en uno de estos días nublados que nos han acompañado y ver las nubes ocultando sus últimos niveles, pareciera que lo hemos conseguido. Hemos llegado al cielo!!!

Pero, si luego bajamos la cabeza y miramos al suelo, sobre el que todos nos encontramos parados, no parece ser esta una exclamación que se destaque por realista.

Después de un intenso trabajo preparatoria y una primera semana de negociaciones hemos llegado a la recta final del CSD-17. Alrededor suyo hemos permanecido muchos, defendiendo múltiples posturas, opciones y aristas, que al final confluyen en un objetivo: el desarrollo sostenible. Este es el vértice en el que concurren los trazos que hemos venido dibujando desde diferentes perspectivas.

Para alcanzar este objetivo necesitamos ponernos de acuerdo y coordinar todas estas posiciones. Esta construcción que pretendemos levantar no será elaborada con ladrillos y betún, como la de aquella vez, sino con compromisos que se traduzcan en acciones. Y para esto necesitamos hablar un mismo idioma, algo que en los años predecesores parecía muy alejado, pero hoy es cada vez más posible.

Pero, esta construcción se derrumbará, como la anterior, si no utilizamos una argamasa que permita unir nuestras intenciones a nuestro hechos. Y esta unión debe fijarse con fuerza o, de lo contrario, el desarrollo sostenible no pasará de ser más que un artilugio retórico.

Este es un nivel de sujeción que solo puede conseguirse mediante el Derecho, que en este caso será derecho internacional, dado el reto global que supone el objetivo pretendido.

Además, esta construcción debe cimentarse sobre una base sólida, que en este caso serán los principio sobre los que este sistema se edifica; tales como el principio de cooperación, el que contamina paga, el de precaución o las responsabilidades comunes pero diferenciadas,

8

entre otros. Muchos de los cuales quedaron plasmados en la Declaración de Río.

Por tanto, debe reconocerse la trascendencia jurídica de dichos principios y de las conclusiones o acuerdos que, partiendo de ellos, se consigan en el CSD. En este sentido la Corte Internacional de Justicia ya ha dado pasos significativos en casos como el relativo a la licitud del uso y la amenaza de uso de las armas nucleares, en el que basó su argumentación en el principio 2 de la Declaración de Río.

Al fin de cuentas, aquí se proyectan las conductas que la comunidad intencional deberá seguir para alcanzar un objetivo común, lo que

equivale a normas de derecho internacional consuetudinario, que se reconoce dentro de sus fuentes.

Entonces, como constructores de un futuro mejor, en el CSD debemos utilizar las herramientas correctas; un lenguaje común vinculante, que permita la eficacia de lo conseguido: el Derecho. Este debe ser el principio de esta empresa, con el cual nadie nos impedirá conseguir nuestro propósito. Y tenemos que esforzarnos para que esto se reconozca. De lo contrario, todo el trabajo aquí consumido sólo se verá reflejado en una inmensa e inútil torre de papel.

Outreach Issues

CSD without Sustainability?

As CSD 17 approaches the closing of its entire session, disagreement over the central issue of sustainability seems to run into unexpected hurdles, and G-77 seems to be at the centre of the conflict… “…We don’t want to have too much environment in agriculture. That is why we need to take sustainable out of agriculture,” the G-77 delegate tried to explain their seeming opposition to the concept of sustainability to me. Another G-77 delegate said the concept was suspicious in itself and claimed that sustainable agriculture actually opened the way for GMOs into agriculture. ”Including all the trade distorting issues as well. You know, we are all too aware of the fact that sustainable development is just another conditionality. And we are not going to fall for that any more! Such conditionality is going to be costly, and we will not accept that, and we will not accept such confusing terms as ecosystems.”

“But we all live under a huge conditionality”, I tried to be polemically polite. “The global conditionality is to make this world sustainable” I said. “Unless we have a sound and well functioning environment, there will be no agriculture, no market access, no food and no life. And that will be costly for everybody. Besides, the UN has published a several hundred pages scientific report on ecosystems showing that environment and ecosystems are indeed true scientific concepts and the ecosystems approach is indeed a sound way of looking at the environment.” The delegate stopped, looked at me politely and said emphatically: “We have to fight poverty first. Once that is solved, we can be concerned with environmental matters.

Environmental matters maybe number six or seven on our priority list. Economic development first, fighting unemployment second, economic growth third and so on.”

If there is any environment left, I thought.

The negotiated text at almost 80 pages

By Tuesday the second week, the negotiated document at CSD 17 had swelled from 17 pages from before the week-end and reached a staggering 70 to 80 pages after delegates have made serious efforts to solve their differences over the week end. The Chair observed from her desk, that this mighty document might in principle be good for agriculture and farmers, but it could have devastating effects on the CSD. Discussions over what sustainable development really meant and what to insert into the chapters on implementation seemed to be at the focus of the discussions that kept the delegates busy through the weekend. Observing these discussions from an observer’s van-

tage point, G-77 seemed to make their best to obfuscate what sustainable development really meant. The concept of ‘implementation’ had by and large become synonymous with more money for projects in the developing world.

Sustainable development is defined!

Reiterated hundreds of times in hundreds of UN documents, and serving as true evidence of agreed language, the UN accepted definition of sustainable development contains three pillars of equal importance: an economic, a social and an environmental pillar. This agreement has been accepted by the entire world for more than 20 years. Are the CSD 17 delegates trying to change, reduce and redefine this? One exasperated delegate from an unnamed country said this CSD may eventually claim that only two pillars will remain in the definition of sustainability. And if that happens, we all know that environment will disappear.

Growing disagreement As disagreement appeared to increase over the weekend, many delegates seemed to be at pains to overload the document with new text.

When G-77 proposed new text, the developed nations retaliated to maintain negotiating leverage; as EU and JUSCAN imported text, G-77 seemed to retaliate. ‘This has become a true political sew-saw, a filibuster of written words spiced up with brackets of all dimensions and categories’, one tired delegate observed. ‘It is senseless’, he added, perhaps looking for a place to hide in the downstairs catacombs of the UN. Conflicting political ambiguities More than twenty years after the definition of sustainability was introduced into the political language of the world through the Brundtland Commission, and penetrated research and academia to become a household and an easily understood concept used in all global environmental agreements and conventions, many delegates at CSD 17 now seemed to do their best to take this concept out of its context, and shroud its proper meaning in a veil of confusing and conflicting political ambiguities. A few of the experts present at CSD 17 with long standing experience in agriculture practice and policy who observed the delegate’s discussions on sustainable agriculture, balked at some of the statements expressed officially from different countries and categorised them at best as plain ignorance at worst as misleading statements.

No sustainability in CSD Text, words and context are substantive elements in negotiations, and together will convey messages that can go a long way to guarantee a substantive outcome. The women’s major group noted last week that various countries created clever insertions into the text by using the innocuous phrase ‘subject to customary’ law. By the dint of these few words, women’s rights were reduced to a level far below the intended aims that lie at the heart of the convention for the rights of women and distorted the true intention of the original text. Removing ‘sustainability’ from the CSD thematic clusters or the CSD interlinkages themes will accomplish the same and undoubtedly reduce the Commission on Sustainable, Development to a Commission on Development. Despite increasing the negotiated document to well over 70 pages, the reductionist activities of G-77 has reduced the CSD to a Commission on Development. It is true that sustainability is a conditionality, but one that serves to guarantee stable and equitable developmental standards for the future for all mankind.

CSD 17 – just markets or sustainable regulation?

As G-77 is adamant at taking away sustainability and its ensuing values, it is becoming guilty of turning the world and its development into a market where unbridled exploitative forces can roam unchallenged and without constraints.

And that is perhaps the first time G-77 unwittingly have opened the world for unbridled and unregulated exploitation of resources for market interests in a world that now tries its best to regulate what has caused a global market collapse. Strange that CSD 17 delegates fighting poverty with good intentions may cause havoc to both the environment and the market by obliterating sustainability.

“We cannot leave CSD 17 as an unfulfilled wish” the chair said at a morning meeting with the Major Groups. All major groups agreed.

Perhaps even all delegates agree. But the wish is for strong measures on sustainable development and sustainable agriculture. Not the opposite.

---jgs

9 7

Outreach Issues

UN Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis The United Nations Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and its Impact on Development will take place at the UN headquarters, New York from June 1 – 3, 2009. Civil society members would like to see this event focus on financial and economic reforms that directly benefit people and planet, instead of profits for the few.

By: Philo Morris, Medical Mission Sisters

The United Nations Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and its Impact on Development will take place at the UN headquarters, New York from June 1 – 3, 2009. Civil society members would like to see this event focus on financial and economic reforms that directly benefit people and planet, instead of profits for the few.

World leaders should set out ambitious goals to achieve an equitable, socially, and environmentally sustainable world and economy.

While at the same time, maintaining and strengthening democratic and participative structures. It is important to ensure that global financial and economic reforms have the interests of people at their heart, and are not driven by corporate and vested interests.

Therefore, the new financial system should be at the service of just and sustainable societies and economies. We want to have a financial sector that is instrumental in decreasing the gap between the rich and poor, and one that is not focused on increasing the wealth of the capital rich while diminishing the income from labor.

This crisis as an historic opportunity to achieve a "major transformation" of the entire economic and financial system. The current crisis is an opportunity to correct the world’s policy and investment priorities.

Developing countries will need adequate funding to participate effectively in the Global Stimulus for restructuring. Funding to respond to this externally generated challenge should not be debt creating, should come without conditionalities and should allow policy space which is country specific allowing .

Thus, the funding for developing countries

10

should be in the form of grants. I encourage the UN Conference to take the long-term view and give priority to decent jobs, justice and the climate, also making these priorities objectives of all crises-related measures, including the reforms of the financial sector and the global monetary system.

I would suggest that the conference sees the financial crisis and the preceding deregulation as symptoms of a systemic crisis at the core of which is the economic growth model.

Global economic governance should aim to end poverty and inequality, achieving this through building sound economies based on principles of social and ecological sustainability that includes decent jobs and public services.

Climate Change will have an adverse effect on development. The financial sector needs to be instrumental in meeting the investment demands to transform economies into carbon neutral economies world wide. We cannot be bystanders when vulnerable people and nations suffer the price for green house gas emissions to which they contributed little.

Official Development Assistance is essential to immediately confront the crisis and its consequences in developing countries.

already burdened with high debt.

Regulation: The immediate causes of the financial crisis has been the result of the failure of regulatory policies in the advanced industrial countries. The current crisis has made it apparent that there are large gaps and deficiencies in the regulatory structures in place in many countries. It is the most potent evidence against deregulation.

Restructuring International Institutions: There is a growing international consensus in support of reform of the governance, accountability, and transparency of the Bretton Woods Institutions and other nonrepresentatives institutions. These have been a long held demand of developing countries and Civil Society. Major reforms in the governance of these institutions, including those giving greater voice to developing countries and greater transparency are thus necessary. The top executive posts in IMF and the World Bank should be elected on the basis of competence.

We the people of the developing world suffering. We the people of the world watching. We place much hope in conference. We trust world leaders will liver this time.

Side Event Trade stimulation for poorest countries is needed. Elimination of all forms of developed country export subsidies is required.

The immediate abolition of agricultural subsidies would be the most effective stimulus for developing country agriculture.

.

Challenges to Sustainable Development: Responding to the current crises and the future of Agenda 21 Mission of Brazil to the UN

Debt relief should be given to those countries seriously affected by the world financial and economic crisis and which are

Conference Room 2 1.15 to 2.45

are are the de-

Outreach Issues

Live from the CSD By: Merim Tenev and Emily Benson, Stakeholder Forum

Earth Talk today was lead by Merim Tenev and focused on payment for Ecosystem Service.

With species and ecosystems disappearing at an alarming rate, could putting a monetary price on ecosystem services keep them alive?

Money flowing into the area has kept wetlands alive in the US and may preserve tracts of the Amazon forest. But how far can it go? Who will pay, and how will the accounts be kept? Above all, is it right to value nature merely for what it gives to humanity?

On Pioneers of the Planet focus was on Cary Fowler. Cary is an Executive Director of the Global Diversity Crop Trust - an independent, international organisation that backs over 1,500 gene banks located around the world.

Merim Tenev talks to Cary the issue of gene banks and the need to preserve valuable seeds that could become extinct in the near future, resulting in the loss of a valuable resource for future generations.

Cary is originally from west Tennessee, in the USA but now spends his life between Italy and Norway. In the past in the US, he was a small farmers advocate. He has dedicated much of his life to ‘saving agricultural diversity and food security for coming generations’.

The Greentable discussion are lead today by Felix Dodds from the Stakeholder Forum focussing on the topic of the global financial crisis. In recent weeks the Former Federal Reserve chairman, Alan Greenspan, called the onslaught of the economic recession a ‘once-in-a-century

http://media.stakeholderforum.org

credit tsunami’. Over the last year our newspaper headlines have become saturated with the stories associated with such a credit crisis.

Banks have gone bust, insurance companies have been sold and house prices have plummeted. Yet the credit tsunami has surged far further than Wall street or the square mile.

Felix gathers Ambassador Diaping from Sudan representing the G77, Ambassador Byron Blake the former head of the G77 and Philo Morris form the Medical Mission Sisters, to tackle the critical question; how is the financial crisis impacting the South?

On Today at the CSD, Catherine Karong’o updates you, on all the latest news and discussions from the day’s events. In this episode, we find out about fast food in Namibia, learn about the African agenda, hear about green jobs, and we bust some jargon. Catherine sat down with Rokhya Fall, Director General from the Ministry of Agriculture of Senegal, to find out why Africans are not playing a large role in shaping their continents sustainable future. This is an issue that is drawing lots of attention as delegates are working toward the final text. Tune in to find out more.

Ambassador Byron Blake the former head of the G77, Ambassador Diaping from Sudan representing the G77, Philo Morris from the Medical Mission Sisters, and Felix Dodds

11 7

Outreach Issues

Food for Thought…

Felix Dodds, Stakeholder Forum

“Banking Greed Hits the Poorest… What’s Next, the Environment?”

I don't know how we all got sucked into believing the idea that we could trust the financial institutions and that deregulation was in the interest of all. Now it seems crazy that we ever believed this but, apart from a few voices over the last few years, it has been the accepted wisdom... as has the free market.

"All those arguments the activists and the politicians had for many years about the need for aid or debt cancellation, we can lay them to rest, because we're all beginning for aid.

We just call it fiscal stimulus and we are all begging for debt cancellation, we are just call it disposing of toxic assets."

Bernard Madoff, who was the former nonexecutive chairman of the NASDAQ stock exchange, is possibly the most acute example of how mucked up the whole system was. He was convicted of operating a Ponzi scheme that has been called the largest investor fraud ever committed by a single person, with over $60 billion embezzled. This is about the amount needed to help deliver the UN Millennium Development Goals. CNN Money estimates that the US bailout for the auto industry is around $130 billion and the New York Times estimates the US banking bailout to be at $4 trillion.

NGOs such as ONE, Oxfam and Jubilee wanted the IMF to increase the amount of profits from approved IMF gold sales directed at developing countries. They called for $5 billion but were unsuccessful in this. However, they did see that the IMF reaffirmed the G20 decision to double lending for lowincome countries and instructed the fund to explore ways of making those loans more affordable.

The decision of the recent G20 to triple the IMF available funds to $750 billion to support countries through increased borrowing and boosting world liquidity, as they put it, should be welcomed. But how much of this will trickle down to the poorest? Bob Geldof put it well at the spring meeting of the Fund and the World Bank when he said:

The reform of the IMF is critical to ensure that the developing country voices, particularly those from Africa, are heard and understood.

I wondered if the IMF and World Bank understood that their support for the approach to liberalisation of markets without proper regulatory frameworks has contributed to the problems we are now facing.

Just as we were told to trust our financial institutions with our finances we have been asked to believe that we should trust companies through voluntary initiatives to protect

E DITORIAL T EAM Senior Editor: Jan-Gustav Strandenaes, ANPED Co-Editor: Felix Dodds, Stakeholder Forum Daily Editor: Stephen Mooney, Stakeholder Forum Design and Layout: Erol Hofmans, ANPED Contributing writers: La Vía Campesina Friends of the Earth International Leida Rijnhout, Flemish Platform on Sustainable Development (VODO) Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, Senior Scientist, Pesticide Action Network Ajay Vashee, President of the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP) Gabriel Ballesteros P. Asesor Jurídico Corte Internacional de Arbitraje y Conciliación Ambiental Philo Morris, Medical Mission Sisters Merim Tenev, Stakeholder Forum Emily Benson, Stakeholder Forum

12

Previous and today’s issues are easily available online, go to: www.sdin-ngo.net media.stakeholderforum.org

our environment. Is the time right to question this? Is there a need to consider a framework convention on corporate accountability? Could the OECD guidelines form a framework? What kind of penalties could we see for a company that misbehaved? I've always thought that linking the rating of companies on the stock exchange to their environmental standards might be a way of having an impact on a company. Perhaps we might also look at the role that such a convention might have upon embedding a Court of International Conciliation and Arbitration to deal with any disputes. Responsible companies should be at the forefront of calling for this... after all, if they are, as many say they are, already green, it will only impact on freeloaders.

(Edited by Aleksandra Radyuk)

Outreach Issues is made possible through the generous support of: .

THE ITALIAN MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT, LAND AND SEA

Please send your contributions to:

AND

smooney@stakeholderforum.org erol.hofmans@anped.org

THE BELGIUM FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (PODDO)