Network 2002 – September 2001 Issue

Contents:
Kyoto Protocol
Editorial
News
European Regional Prep. Comm.: Sweden’s Ambassador’s views
Export Credit Agencies
Regional Round Table and Sub-regional Meetings
European Regional Prep. Comm. NGO Meeting
WRI’s Access Initiative
UNED-WHAT Merge
Meet the International Advisory Board
Conferences, Meetings, Diary Dates
What’s in Next Months Network 2002

Let the Sun Rise on the Kyoto Protocol
  The ongoing climate change debate achieved a major step forward at the resumed Kyoto Protocol negotiations last Month. Richard Sherman reports.  
  For the recent years, the international community has been engaged in a serious and concerted effort to develop new climate change strategies beyond the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). These strategies are now embodied in the Kyoto Protocol. Progress on resolving the Protocol’s outstanding elements, has been slow and at times it often seems that the process had a limited focus on addressing the concerns of the US. However, in July 2001 Parties to the Convention entered the final round of negotiations on the Kyoto Protocol and on July 23rd, the Bonn Political Agreement on the Kyoto Protocol was approved, and by the 25th was adopted.  
  Under the Kyoto Protocol the world's developed countries pledged to collectively reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to an average  of at least 5% below 1990 levels in the commitment period 2008 to 2012. Although many recognised the need to cut global emissions of carbon dioxide and the other greenhouse gases to prevent dangerous global warming, many developed countries, aided by intensive public pressure from the fossil fuel industry, refused during the negotiations to agree to the kinds of cuts in their domestic greenhouse gas emissions, which the science demanded – reductions in the area of 60-80%. However, the most significant characteristic of the Protocol is that the emission reduction targets are legally binding, as opposed to the soft law approach taken by the UNFCCC. There was a clear understanding by almost all Parties, industrialised and developing alike, that a voluntary approach had proven to be inadequate and that hard, verifiable and enforceable obligations were absolutely necessary for the next stage. Although such deep emissions cuts are beyond the limited scope of the Kyoto Protocol, many spectators believe the Political agreement will provide a basis for continued progress beyond 2012 by stimulating energy policy reform and encouraging new R&D investments to bring about low-emission technologies.
  As far back as Kyoto, many acknowledged that the Protocol would represent only a first step toward achieving the goal set by the original climate treaty: to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere “at a level that would prevent dangerous interference with the climate system.”  Despite its apparent flaws the Kyoto Protocol should be regarded as a milestone in the history of climate protection. 
  Finally, and perhaps most important, it does send a clear signal to policy-makers, industry and other relevant domestic actors that climate change has been firmly placed on the world’s agenda. Because of its far-reaching implications for the way we produce and consume, the Kyoto Protocol is likely to affect the life of every person living on this planet in the next century more than any other international agreement.  
  To have any hope of achieving the Kyoto targets, global, national and local climate change polices will have to reflect a fundamental shift in the way energy is produced and the way it is used. It will require, in particular, a fundamental review on the way fossil fuels are used. This factor in itself is enough to catapult the Protocol into the domain of global economics. Yet the economic relevance of the Protocol is not limited to its overall efforts to curb the use of fossil fuels. Its economic relevance also stems from the unique manner in which countries may seek to achieve greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
  Apart from greenhouse gas emissions commitments, the Kyoto Protocol contains a number of provisions whose details were not resolved at the final negotiating session in Kyoto in 1997. The political package is divided into four sections: Mechanism, Sinks, Compliance and Finance. Countries were successful in putting underlying legal text to the majority of issues. The rest will be finalized at the 7th Conference of the Parties in Morocco in October 2001. Key elements of these decisions include:
•	Nuclear power has been explicitly excluded from both Joint Implementation (JI) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).
•	Simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale CDM projects (including renewable energy and energy efficiency projects). 
•	The agreement clearly underscores the importance of reducing inequalities between industrialized and developing countries. This will be essential in achieving long-term emissions cuts, providing it is taken to mean sharp reductions in industrialized country emissions. 
•	Sinks use is limited to approximately 169 megatonnes of carbon: this is equivalent to 3.4% of Annex I parties assigned amounts, effectively reducing their emission reductions target from 5.2% to 1.8%.  However, cropland, rangeland and grazing lands are not included, which could open up a significant loophole.
•	Establishment of three new funds, two under the Convention and one under the Protocol. Contributions to the Convention funds are voluntary. The new funds are as follows: 
•	A special climate change fund, to provide assistance for the full gamut of climate change purposes. 
•	A least developed country fund to support National Adaptation Programmes of Action. 
•	A Kyoto Protocol adaptation fund to be funded by the CDM levy as well as voluntary contributions. 
•	An acknowledgment of the "need" for "new and additional" funding under the Convention, but no specific funding level identified and no new legal requirement on countries to provide funds. 
•	A political pledge by the European Union and several other developed countries to contribute $410 million per year. (This figure includes contributions toward replenishment of the Global Environment Facility). Canada joined this political pledge; Japan offered to intensify its ODA budget in these areas. 
•	Establishment of a new expert group on technology transfer. 
•	For every tonne of global warming gases that a nation emitted in excess of its Kyoto target during the first commitment period (2008-2012), a non-complier would have to reduce an additional 1.3 tonnes beyond their agreed commitments in the second period (2013-2017).
•	A compliance action plan (CAP).
  Given a number of remaining uncertainties over how the effects of the different political provisions will play out, it is difficult to judge the impact that the agreement will have. However, what is clear is that the Kyoto targets will lead to a significant departure from the business-as-usual trend of emissions growth. It will require industry to invest in the development and use of low-carbon technologies and sets the stage for deeper emissions cuts in the future. 
  In his closing remarks, Ambassador Bagher Asadi, Chairman of the Group of 77, described the outcomes of the Bonn Negotiations as “an accomplishment under very trying circumstances, an honourable deal indeed.” According to Asadi,  “ the significance of what we have achieved here in Bonn does not merely relate to the climate change process and progress on the Kyoto Protocol - important as they are. Rather, it signifies the centrality of the concept of international cooperation for higher common objectives of the global community. The success in Bonn cannot be anything but the very direct outcome of dialogue, mutual understanding and a sense of conciliation and compromise.  We reached out, and they reached out. And here is the outcome; representing the triumph of multilateralism and cooperation over unilateralism. This should, no doubt, augur well for the future of this process and other multilateral processes.”
  For many of the Bonn participants, the meeting's success will be measured by the early entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol – by 2002, ten years after the adoption of the Convention at the Rio Earth Summit and in time for the Earth Summit 2002. For the majority of government and climate stakeholders, the Kyoto Protocol is not replaceable; it must be ratified and brought into force. Those that dismiss the Kyoto Protocol ignore the major impact it has already had. By clearly laying the groundwork for a carbon-constrained world, it has given an invaluable lead to business and to policy makers. Climate targets are starting to influence, however imperfectly, the design of policy in other areas. The economic, employment and other benefits of driving technology development and improving efficiency is already being seen in Europe. To abandon the Protocol now, would be the height of folly.

Editorial
 I decided to gallantly sacrifice half of my editorial this month in the interests of Climate Change. However, this seems a small price to pay in light of the progress made in making the Kyoto Protocol a workable agreement. 
  Whilst it is fair to say that the Protocol isn’t perfect, it remains a telling step. As we look towards next years Earth Summit we are able to benchmark our progress against the first Earth Summit in 1992, here employing Agenda 21. The Kyoto Protocol provides that same invaluable milestone as we march towards the 2008-2012 Climate Change implementation deadline. 
   In the News is our own online Earth Summit 2002 debate. Your chance to shape the agenda and discuss some of the critical issues likely to come up in Johannesburg. 
  We start what we hope will be a series of reports from members of the Summit’s high level Bureau, focussing on each of their respective regional processes. This month, preceding the European Regional Prep. Comm. we have Sweden’s Ambassador Lars-Göran Engfeltd. Turn to page 4 to read his views.
  One of the questions most likely to come up at next years summit is ‘who is going to pay for all of this?’ On page 5 we investigate the impact of Export Credit Agencies on the world’s economy and explore its potential to support the principals of sustainable development.
  There is coverage of the regional and sub-regional meetings that have taken place, and details of how to get involved in upcoming events. On with the show!
T. Middleton
News, News, News…
The Earth Summit 2002 Online Debate:
"What should Earth Summit 2002 be trying to achieve?"
  On September 03 2001 UNED Forum will be launching a four-week online debate with key spokespeople of the City Life series and other key actors in the sustainable development arena. 
  Ten years after the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, the world’s nations will gather again in Johannesburg next September to review progress made in implementing the commitments of Agenda 21 and plan for the future. Preparations for the World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002 are well under way, emphasising a transparent and participatory approach. This electronic forum hopes to initiate a focused and constructive public discussion on some of the priority issues. We invite people to share their ideas, knowledge and diverse perspectives. 
  Everyone is encouraged to join in. Key actors will start the debate each week.
Questions:
Week 1 (3rd -9th September)
  How can cities be made part of a sustainable future? What are the key barriers, good models, roles and responsibilities involved in improving 21st century urban life? How should Earth Summit 2002 address this issue? 
Week 2 (10th – 16th September)
  How can marginalized people participate effectively in today’s globalised world? What are the roles and responsibilities of key actors? What obstacles and processes should be addressed at Earth Summit 2002 to tackle this issue? 
Week 3 (17th – 23rd September)
  HIV/AIDS is a great threat to sustainable development; how can multi-sectoral responses be developed to influence government policies and pharmaceutical companies on this issue? How can Earth Summit 2002 tackle the wider question of equitable health care?
Week 4 (24th – 30th September)
  How can multi-national companies be influenced to adopt corporate citizenship and accountability for sustainable development? Who are the key actors and what are the main barriers? What strategies could Earth Summit 2002 develop to address this issue? 
  To join the Earth Summit 2002 online debate, please go to www.lifeonline.org/debate and fill out the registration form.
 will produce weekly summaries and a final report of the discussions, analysing the results and different viewpoints and recommendations. The report will be widely disseminated to policy-makers and all other interested stakeholders engaged in the 2nd PrepCom of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (New York, January 2002) and be made available online at www.lifeonline.org
  The debate will be moderated by UNED Forum with support from Lifeonline partners TVE, One World and Panos. The debate is part of Lifeonline - a multi-media initiative exploring the impact of globalisation on the poverty and social development agenda of the Habitat+5 meeting in June 2001, as well as the upcoming 10-year review of the 1992 Earth Summit.
Join us September 03-30 2001 for a lively discussion. Visit: www.lifeonline.org
Contact Jasmin Enayati, jenayati@earthsummit2002.org

UNEP Plants it’s Stake and Cleans Up 
  UNEP’s Executive Director, Klaus Töpfer, led his organisation around the world to draw attention to two pressing issues on the international environment agenda.  
  Starting in London, August 20th, for the launch of a new report titled ‘An Assessment of the Status of the World’s Remaining Closed Forests’, Töpfer drew attention to the vital need for greater conservation efforts in the field.
  ‘The importance of healthy forests cannot be underestimated. Forests are vital for the well being of the planet. They provide a variety of socio-economic and ecological goods and services’ Töpfer commented.
  Using unique satellite based surveying techniques, one of the reports key findings is that over 80% of the world’s stock of Closed Forests are located in just 15 countries. The survey also reveals that the vast majority of these vital forests are sparsely populated, providing great hope for well-focussed, well funded conservation efforts.
  Töpfer continued, ‘Short of miraculous transformation in the attitude of people and governments, the Earth’s remaining closed-canopy forests and their bio-diversity are destined to disappear in the coming decades...I believe this new study provides a new focus. I urge governments, communities and international organisations to act on our findings and recommendations’.
  The report calls on governments in the key 15 countries concerned to draft action plans detailing how they propose to conserve their remaining closed forests.
  The next leg of the journey took UNEP’s Executive Director to Seoul, Korea, to address the tri-annual Clean Air Congress. This years meeting focussed on Trans-boudary air pollution, health effects of air pollution and global warming.
  ‘It is a resource we are entirely dependant on. We each take about 20,000 breaths a day, processing about 13,500 litres of air’, Töpfer stated. Specifically considering the continent he was in, Töpfer drew attention to the stresses of air pollution in urban areas. ‘Soon half of Asia’s people will live in cities. Yet 10 of Asia’s 11 largest cities currently exceed WHO guidelines for particulate matter by a factor of 3’. 
  Referring to the Kyoto climate agreement, Töpfer highlighted moves being made towards addressing climate change and the decarbonising of economies. He went on to focus on the importance of establishing a forward looking agenda: The process of preparing for next years Earth Summit 2002 is allowing many citizens groups, governments and industry sectors  to reflect on the current environmental, economic and social situation and the implications of business as usual, said Töpfer.
  ‘We established goals in Rio de Janeiro 10 years ago and the ways to get there in agenda 21, but we need to define the steps and the institutional support required in more practical and committed ways’, concluded Töpfer.

Globalisation,Governance and the Summit
  As we prepare for the first Regional Prep. Comm. Sweden’s Ambassador Engfeldt offers a vision of integration.
  Preparations for the Johannesburg Summit are now in an important stage. The positive outcome of the first, organisational, meeting of the Preparatory Committe has been followed by regional roundtables of experts and subregional consultations. Some conclusions from these can already be drawn.
  The need to operationalise sustainable development through concrete policy measures  emerges as the central challenge. It is only through action and not more words that we can implement Agenda 21. In the struggle to eradicate poverty, a clear link should be established between the international development targets already agreed and the Summit agenda. Partnerships must be strengthened between governments, the private sector and civil society to resolve common problems effectively. A new challenge after Rio is to make globalisation work for sustainable development. We also need to improve considerably our systems of governance at the global, regional and national levels.
  From the discussions held so far around the world, the importance of ensuring substantial progress on issues related to financing is strongly emphasised. There is a strong linkage between the Financing for Development process culminating in Mexico in March 2002 and the Johannesburg Summit. Close co-operation is required between these two efforts with a view to advancing this agenda well before Johannesburg. 
  There are both opportunities and threats emanating from globalisation. We should aim in Johannesburg to contribute to sharing more equitably its benefits and avoiding marginalisation, exclusion, increased environmental degradation and loss of cultural diversity. It is essential to make markets work effectively for sustainable deveopment. The international system, including the WTO, has to play an effective role in contributing to sustainable development. Further efforts are needed to eliminate environmentally damaging subsidies and promote market access for developing countries.
  Since the first PrepCom in May, the concept of  a ”global deal/pact” has been suggested as one possible outcome of the Summit. This interesting notion will have to be further explored in the coming months. Such a deal could bring co-operation between the North and the South to a higher level of trust and commitment and involve all relevant stakeholders. Commitments by the business community to corporate responsibility, environmental accountability and exchange of best practices and technology could be parts of such a deal or pact. The private sector plays a key role and should be an important part of the efforts to achieve sustainable development.
  The Summit could take specific initiatives on key issues that reflect the economic, social and environmental aspects of sustainable development such as fresh water, energy, land degradation, biodiversity, health as well as rural and urban development. The security aspects of sustainable development and natural resources could be addressed, with a view to enhancing and strengthening preventive strategies.
  The Summit provides a unique opportunity to discuss and agree on governance issues. An enhanced governance structure for sustainable development should secure public participation in decision making and improve access to information. Sustainable development strategies will be one of the key mechanisms to improve complementarity and consistency at the national level. Structures for regional level implementation of Summit commitments should also be strengthened. In this context, it seems natural to define the future role of the United Nations regional economic commissions. At the global level, the institutional framework for sustainable development should be considerably reinforced. This requires a fresh look at the post Rio institutional arrangements, which need to be adapted to the enormous challenges emanating from the ever expanding sustainable development agenda. A beginning has been made in the environmental area through the UNEP International Environmental Governance (IEG) process which will present its results to the Global Ministerial Environmental Forum (GMEF) in Cartagena in February 2002. Subsequently, the broader issue of securing integrated and effective global management of sustainable development will have to involve consideration of the roles and future functioning of the principal organs of the United Nations and the relevant subsidiary bodies, including the CSD. 
  The road that leads to Johannesburg begins at home. The preparations are organised through a bottom up approach. The ECE region will hold the first in a series of regional preparatory meetings. This meeting will be held at the ministerial level on 24 – 25 September. In developing the ECE regional platform for Johannesburg, it will be important to strike a balance between the interests, needs and responsibilities of the different subregions of the ECE, i.e. North America, Western, Central and Eastern Europe. Against the background of this region’s considerable ecological footprint as well as economic and social impact on the rest of the world, specific targets and commitments for action are highly desirable.
  It should be kept in mind that the location of the Summit is not arbitrarily chosen. The particular challenges of Africa need to be given prominence. Improving health, securing sustainable livelihoods and reducing the vulnerability of the poorest communities and countries should be a central objective. A key concern is access to land and the natural resource base by the poor. 
  A central challenge this autumn will be to mobilise increased political engagement in all UN member states. Serious cross-sectoral preparations need to begin and the involvement of major groups be secured. The Johannesburg Summit is expected to reinvigorate the Rio spirit through a new commitment to sustainable development manifested by a series of concrete measures and undertakings at all level. The international community should emerge from the Summit with a new message of hope for the world. This is perhaps the single most important task for the Summit.
Ambassador,Lars-Göran Engfeldt
Hidden Subsidies, Export Credits and Sustainability
  Unsurprisingly finance is often at the Centre of the Sustainable Development debate. Be it the World Bank/IMF, WTO, G8 or European Union attention often focuses on the sustainability of global economics. The little known world of Export Credit Agencies meanwhile avoids the limelight, until now. Sander van Bennekom reports on emerging efforts to bring ECA’s to sustainable accountability.
  Both public and private financial resources play a central role in the debate on sustainability and international cooperation. The implementation of Agenda 21 in developing countries was budgeted at US$600 billion per year.
  This means that both existing public and private resources should be made in conformity with the principals of sustainability and that additional resources should be raised.  It is safe to say that most industrialised nations have failed in both aspects. First of all, the industrialised nations have failed to raise their ODA budgets despite the commitment in Agenda 21. Infact, after the first Earth Summit levels of ODA actually fell and have only been seen to recover over the last 2 years. Secondly, many domestic subsidies don’t even have the most basic criteria relating to sustainability. Export Credit Agencies are the most striking example of the limited impact of the Earth Summit. The size and importance of these agencies are in sharp contrast with their public control and familiarity with the public at large.
What are Export Credit Agencies (ECAs)?
  ECAs support and subsidize a country’s outward investment through insuring and/or financing direct credits or guarantees. Most industrialised nations own one – or more – ECAs and their combined output is about US$100 billion per year. The aggregate budget of all ECAs is more than the combined budgets of the World Bank, the IMF and ALL regional development banks!
  This makes export credit support by far the most important form of `trade subsidy,’ and a significant instrument of economic policy. More than 10% of world trade is directly supported by ECAs. Ministers of  economic affairs give credit support for political purposes and in today’s era of harmonized fiscal, monetary and trade policies, credit support remains one of the few national instruments to support domestic corporations. ECA-support goes largely to infrastructure-related projects, such as dams, roads and railways, (nuclear) power plants etc. 
  The position of ECAs in the global economy is quite unique. They have been able to withstand decades of continuous liberalization and harmonization, and they also have been by and large ignored by the debate on sustainability. The Founding Treaty of the European Union has mentioned the importance of harmonized rules for ECAs in 1957(!), but little progress has been made. Only at CSD 8, did delegations adopt a resolution asking for environmental guidelines for ECAs. The most significant change in the modus operandi of ECAs has been initiated by a number of national campaigns. The United States and Australia are worth mentioning and the UK ECA (ECGD) has also been under pressure from domestic NGOs. For instance, the involvement of the ECGD in the construction of the Ilisu dam in Turkey was widely criticized and has led to reconsideration of the ECA support for this project. 
  International pressure on ECAs is only beginning to emerge. In July 2000, a number of NGOs gathered in Jakarta in order to develop a common agenda for ECA-reform, main demands are:
•	Transparency, ECA should provide relevant information about their projects and about possible criteria that were taken into account;
•	Binding and common standards about the environmental or social impact of ECA-supported projects;
•	Human rights criteria;
•	Criteria to end ECA’s abetting of corruption;
•	Phase-out of ECA-support for non-productive investments. There is still massive support from ECAs to the military sector;
•	And finally, the cancellation of ECA-debt for the poorest countries. ECAs are responbsible for 25% of all developing country debt;
  The demands of the Jakarta declaration indicate the central role of ECAs in the global economy and it requires a concerted effort from the NGO community to ensure the acceptance of the demands of the Jakarta declaration. A more active involvement from human rights groups, trade unions and peace movements would be of great value for the international ECA-reform campaign. 
  First and foremost, ECAs should respect basic rules about transparency. In the end, these agencies spend public funds and the tax payers are entitled to receive any information regarding the spending of  any public funds. Increased transparency of ECAs is long overdue and the secrecy that has so far been typical for the operation of ECAs is the main cause for the fact that ECAs have been able to operate outside the public political arena. In this respect, the entry into force of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, to be expected in October 2001. 
 
Regional Preparations Kick Off!
  Ensuring that no stone is left unturned on the path the Earth Summit 2002, the preparatory process has included a number of sub-regional preparatory meetings. UNED Forum’s Rosalie Gardiner takes us on a global tour. 
  With just over a year to go before the Jo’burg Summit, we find the official preparations well underway. A number of sub-regional meetings have already taken place from May- July and “Eminent Persons” Round tables have run in parallel with these meetings. These were a prequel to the regional events organised between September and November, co-ordinated by the UN Regional Economic Commissions (Africa, Europe, Latin America & Caribbean, Western Asia and Asia Pacific) with support from the regional offices of UNEP. 
What’s up for debate?
  Whilst the process has to run its course before we can know what the specific Summit issues will be, certain thematic and cross-cutting topics have already begun to emerge at the sub-regional and stakeholder meetings, some of which are outlined below. 
Africa
  A far-reaching debate was held by African experts during their round table meeting (Cairo, Egypt 25th –27th June).  On the cross-cutting agenda participants focused on the need for furthering regional integration and empowerment of countries to take action on critical areas. This included: enhanced financial support for sustainable development, poverty eradication, increasing domestic economic growth and credit worthiness, debt cancellation, and new financial mechanisms e.g. social development banks and community funds; enhanced information management and dissemination; consolidation of National Strategies for Sustainable Development (NSSDs) within the region; the enhancement of human capacities through greater access to technology, training and education programmes, empowerment of women and marginalised groups; the broad application of principles for good governance, including the adoption of MSP within the development of NSSDs and to tackle corruption. 
  They also called for the enhancement of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development to a position either above ECOSOC status or toward becoming a UN Trusteeship Council. Of the more thematic areas participants highlighted the primary need for poverty eradication and economic growth; the development of strategies and programmes in the face of wars/internal conflict; to target key health problems, such as HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis; integrated natural resource management plans to deal with land/water/atmospheric degradation; tackling food insecurity related to the inequality of access to resources, unsustainable production methods and poor rural/urban infrastructure; there was also a call for greater investment in the renewable energy sector.
Asia and Pacific 
  The sub-regional round table for East Asia and Pacific took place in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 9-11 July 2001. Participants were clear that there could be no “one size fits all solutions” when it comes to sustainability. This was especially true in a region facing a growth of militarisation and proliferation of small arms which has greatly impacted economic stability, environmental systems and social welfare, in the region.
  Rapid urbanisation, linked to rural-urban migration, has also resulted in massive ecological degradation, species loss, water pollution, forest destruction, soil erosion, climate change, natural disasters. To tackle these problems a number of cross cutting areas were outlined, including: greater corporate responsibility e.g. green businesses, zero waste plants, eco-funds; wider civil society involvement in policy making, based on sound philosophies, local, spiritual, traditional and indigenous principles. The development of fiscal policies was also recommended toward financing human development and empowering marginalized groups (i.e. poor, women, youth, indigenous), especially to enhance access to health care, land, credit and micro-credit, education, information, training. Policies would need to address the possible implications of legislation for SD; promoting improved social equity and economic self-sufficiency; as well as building gender equity for e.g. education, job security, employment opportunities.
Latin America & Caribbean
  The Latin America & Caribbean Sub-regional Prep. Comm (Havana, Cuba, 28th– 29th June) saw the first Latin American meeting. Participants posed many similar cross-cutting issues to elsewhere, including: the need for greater interdependence between economic, social, environmental, and political processes; consolidation of NSSDs within the region; enhancement of legal instruments for regulating sustainability e.g. Multi-lateral environmental agreements; enhanced equity in negotiations; improved access to financial resources e.g. industrialised countries to meet the ODA target of 0.7% GDP, and more finance for the Global Environment Facility. Thematic topics touched on: furthering the benefits of trade liberalisation to developing countries; tackling climate change; integrated watershed management; strategies for dealing with natural disasters (especially Small Island Developing States).
North America/Europe 
  At the “expert” roundtable meeting (Vail, Colorado, USA 6th -8th June), participants produced broad recommendations for submission to the pan-european meeting (Geneva, Switzerland, 24th –25th September). Some of the cross-cutting issues proposed included: a call for a “new development model”; greater corporate sustainability and wider institutional reform, such as the international financial institutions; the further establishment of local and national sustainable development councils; as well as wider application of multi-stakeholder participation in decision-making processes at all levels. Thematic topics included: calls for tax and subsidy reform; more sustainable consumption; reducing natural resource depletion; as well as tackling climate change issues head on.
  Around the same time representatives from the Central and Eastern European Countries gathered in Bucharest. Participants recognised that there had been a lack of civil society participation and transparency in many CEE countries in the past, as well as considerable pressure from internal and cross-border conflicts which has hugely impacted human security, biodiversity, social and cultural welfare. They called for greater participation, transparency and stakeholder participation, development of equitable partnerships for sustainable development and greater support from international donors. Groups called for the development of a regional framework for SD, to support LA21, reduce poverty, enhance quality of life, transport systems, participation, better use of information and technology (e.g. through the Aarhus Declaration), education on SD to be taught throughout Curriculum. 
  During the preparatory government meeting for the European regional process (Geneva, 12-13th July) topics that arose included: further development and implementation of NSSDs and LA21 programmes; setting human rights as central aim of SD; meeting the ODA target of 0.7% GDP. Thematic topics included: climate change; sustainable transport – shifting from road to rail; natural resource management, development of biodiversity management plans, application of environmental impact assessments in all new development projects; improving patterns of sustainable consumption; establishing a European food authority; enhancing governance through greater transparency, participation and integration.
The Summit and beyond
  A number of groups have suggested that these meetings are also a testing ground for scaling-up the role of the regional bodies, such as the Regional Economic Commissions, in the future. Some are proposing that these bodies could offer a more suitable platform for implementation of SD beyond Jo’ burg. The Regional Commissions would be in a good position to adopt a common mandate, to track issues in the years after the Summit, with a 5 year prospect of a set of regional summits in 2007 to assess progress. It is likely that many of the global issues for the Summit will take on a regional flavour, however, first and foremost, it is imperative that the regional meetings in autumn take strong, participative and forward-looking agendas, setting up clear and time-bound strategies to tackle the most critical global issues head on. 

European NGO Input to Regional Prep. Comm.
  ANPED - The Northern Alliance for Sustainability have taken the lead in co-ordinating NGO efforts for the European Regional Prep. Comm. process. Here they give you details of how and why to get involved. ANPED Executive Director, Pieter van der Gaag reports.
  We are inviting you to participate in a UNECE region-wide NGO preparatory meeting for the 2002 Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development. The meeting will be held on 22-23 September and will be back to back with the UNECE’s Ministerial conference in preparation of the World Summit (24-25 September) NGOs participating in this NGO meeting are invited to participate as observers in the Ministerial conference as well, on the condition that they have the correct accreditation arranged with the United Nations. 
  The goals of the NGO meeting on the 22nd and 23rd are threefold:
•	To inform UN ECE based NGOs on the progress;
•	Process so far at the official level towards the 2002 WSSD; 
•	Sharing experience, insight and strategy for the WSSD;
•	Drafting a NGO declaration to be delivered to the ensuing Ministerial Conference. 
  On the afternoon of the 23rd of September, UNED Forum in co-operation with ANPED, will organise a Multi-stakeholder dialogue on these issues related to the Sustainable Development agenda specific for the region. The dialogue involves representatives from all relevant major groups (ie. Business, Trade Unions, NGOs, Women, Youth and others) with governments in observance. It is intended that the outcomes of this dialogue will be presented to the Ministerial session. 
  ANPED is in the process of securing limited funding for participation in these meetings for representatives of NGOs from the Central and Eastern Europe and the Newly Independent States. NGOs from these areaa needing financial support should contact ANPED at the details listed below for furhter information. NGOs not from these regions should also contact ANPED for the relevant registration information. These NGOs are requested to book their own hotel and pay for all their expenses. All representatives have to have secured official accreditation to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, to participate in these meetings (Accreditation procedures and forms are attached)
  All completed NGO meeting registration forms need to be received by the ANPED secretariat by September 5th. All NGOs need to have fulfilled those requirements for UN accrediation, before being able to participate in both the NGO pre-meeting and the Ministerial conference. In case you need help with getting accreditation, please contact the ANPED secretariat in time  for instructions. The accreditation form is available in PDF format, Email us for a copy, and will need to be filled out and faxed to the UN ECE Secretariat before August 29.
  The staff of ANPED is ready to help with any questions, so do not hesitate to contact us. 
We look forward to your participation,
Contact: www.anped.org
anped@anped.org

Editors Note
  Many of the dates and venues of the upcoming sub-regional and regional preparatory meeting for Earth Summit 2002 have been updated, confirmed or amended. 
  For full listings, including contact details for the responsible and organising agencies please refer to the back page of this issue. 
  More extensive diary dates can be found on the UN Johannesburg Summit page, at:
www.johannesburgsummit.org/web_pages/calendar_of_preparatory_meetings.htm

Good Governance? 
The Access Initiative Takes Stock
  Public participation in international decision making has developed markedly within the field of Sustainable Development. The World Resources Institute’s Access Initiative looks to define structures for decision making at the National level.
  If a cyanide spill occurs on the Tisa River, should citizens and communities be immediately alerted about the spill and its effects on the river, the fish and the people along its banks? Should the same people be included in decision-making about future development of the river?
  The world’s governments and people have answered these questions with a resounding “yes”. They have endorsed the Rio Declaration, with its commitments in Principle 10 to access to information, participation, and justice in decisions affecting the environment and natural resources. They have legitimized public access to decision-making in Agenda 21 and reaffirmed it at the Istanbul+5 meeting on progress on Habitat and Human Settlements. Many governments have also developed national legislation or regional treaties guaranteeing public access, as seen in national environmental impact assessment laws or the regional Aarhus Convention on access to information, participation, and justice, which takes effect this October.  
  Despite these steps forward, implementation of the three access principles of information, participation, and redress, both nationally and internationally, remains uneven. In response, the Access Initiative, a global coalition of NGOs and public interest groups, has come together to build a framework to measure the progress that countries have made in ensuring their citizens’ access to information and decisions. Led by the World Resources Institute of the United States, the Environmental Management and Law Association of Hungary, Corporación Participa of Chile, and the Thailand Environment Institute, in partnership with NGOs from nine countries, the Initiative aims to improve decisions and policies that affect the environment and human lives by establishing common global practices for national public access. Such practices require national legislation and institutions for public access to:
•	Information in emergencies and monitoring information about the quality of the environment and natural resources;
•	Information about the environmental performance of facilities and/or Pollution Release and Transfer Registries
•	Review and comments on decisions on sectoral policies, programs and plans with environmental impacts;
•	Review and comments on environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and decisions on site-specific activities with environmental impacts; and,
•	Redress and remedy for infringement of rights to access to information and participation.
  Implementation of such instruments and procedures and the building of relevant infrastructure will ensure that countries implement their Agenda 21 and Rio Declaration commitments. The framework is now being pilot-tested in Hungary, Uganda, South Africa, Thailand, India, Indonesia, Chile, Mexico and the United States. The findings from the pilot tests will be published in a report for the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development.

UNED - WHAT Merge
  As of the 1st of September, UNED Forum and the World Humanity Action Trust (WHAT) will be merged.  
  This is the result of negotiations following completion of the work of three WHAT Commissions and the publication of the WHAT Report “Governance for a Sustainable Future.” 
  The World Humanity Action Trust (WHAT) has been an independent think tank seeking practical resolutions to global problems
  Jack Jeffries the Chairman of the Trustees of WHAT said: “WHAT was set up in 1993 in response to a speech on Governance by Sir Austin Bide in which he perceived a widening gap between global problems and the human means for managing them. In 1998, WHAT set up three Commissions in the broad area of governance to look at matters affecting humanity's common inheritance of oceans, atmosphere, and biosphere. We defined governance as the framework of social and economic systems and legal and political structures through which humanity manages its affairs.
  With the completion of the WHAT Report on “Governance for a Sustainable Future” we believe we have made a substantial contribution to the debate on global governance. Our merger into UNED Forum is in recognition of the role that UNED Forum plays globally in briefing policy-makers in both governments and international institutions. WHAT believes that the ideas expressed in its report will be developed and propagated best as a department within UNED, focussing in the immediate future on utilising the Earth Summit in 2002 as an opportunity to move the governance debate forward.”Derek Osborn UNED Forum Co-Chair said:
  “It is clear that global governance is one of the issues that will be addressed by the Earth Summit in Johannesburg and as such UNED has already been inputting to the debate. The merger with WHAT will help us do this more effectively. It will give us access and support from the excellent Commissions who were part of the WHAT work and build on UNED’s unique understanding of the international governance process.”
  UNED Forum will have a WHAT Governance department from the 1st of September directed by Richard Sherman, based in Cape Town, South Africa. Richard Sherman is also head of the Research and Policy Unit at GLOBE Southern Africa, a parliamentarian group. GLOBE Southern Africa is a collaborating with UNED Forum on the Governance project and actively involved in the preparations for the Johannesburg Summit. 
  Information on the work of the Governance programme can be found on the web site www.what.org.uk. Information on the Earth Summit 2002 process can be found at www.earthsummit2002.org 

Meet the International Advisory Board

World Resources Institute
Contact: Jonathan Lash
Web-site: www.wri.org
Aim: WRI’s aim is to move human society to live in ways that protect Earth’s environment and its capacity to provide for the needs and aspirations or current and future generations. Our specific goals are to:
•	Safeguard Earth’s climate from further harm;
•	Protect ecosystems upon which human well-being depends;
•	Reduce the use of materials and generation of wastes;
•	Guarantee all people’s access to environmental information and decisions regarding natural resources and the environment.
Key Projects: Biological Resources; Climate, Energy and Pollution; Economics; Information; Institutions & Governance; Management Institute for Environment and Business.
Future Projects: The Access Initiative; www.digitaldivedend.org
Key Partners: Environmental Management & Law Association; Corporacion Participa; Thailand Environment Institute; African Centre for Technology Studies
Geographical Coverage: Global

ECO-Accord, 
Contact: Victoria Elias
Web-site: accord.cis.lead.org
Aim: ECO was established in 1992 with the main goal to contribute to the transition to sustainable development by:
•	Searching new approaches and solutions for environmental, economic and social problems at all levels;
•	Raising broad public awareness on issues of development and survival of humankind;
•	Promoting and contributing to multi-stakeholder co-operation at all levels.
Key Projects: Participation in the elaboration of the Environmental Action Programme for Central and Eastern Europe at UNECE level. Currently ECO-Accord works on the EAP implementation. Since 1997 ECO-Accord has been a member of the Interagency Working Commission for the Russian NEHAP.  ECO-Accord hosts the co-ordination Unit and Information Service of the European ECO-Forum, in the framework of the Pan-European ‘Environment for Europe’ (UNECE) and ‘Environment & Health’ (WHO) processes. www.eco-forum.org
Key Partners: Network of over 1500 NGOs & other Stakeholders
Geographical Coverage: NIS Region

Sustainable Development Publisher Launches New Website
  Established in London in 1988, Earthscan Publications Limited have published a wide range of books on the environment and sustainable development which are distributed worldwide. Numerous books and reports have been published on behalf of national and international institutions, and in association with a wide range of governmental and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). In the lead up to the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002 Earthscan aims to publish material that attempts to shape the agenda and achieve a favourable outcome.
  Earthscan are very pleased to announce the launch of their new website and invite you to visit www.earthscan.co.uk to take advantage of up to a 25% discount on special offers, obtain information on new publications, browse our on-line catalogue, read sample chapters and full contents obtain NGO discounts and secure on-line ordering. To celebrate the launch they are giving away one hundred £10.00 vouchers towards online orders. Visit www.earthscan.co.uk for full details 

Diary Dates, Events & Conferences

2-5 September South Africa Sub-regional Preparatory Committee Meeting. Port Louis, Mauritius. 
Contact: abhuglah@mail.govt.mail 
5-7 September North Africa Sub-regional Preparatory Committee Meeting. Tunis, Tunisia. 
Contact: olaye@uneca.org 
5-7 September Pacific Sub-regional Preparatory Committee Meeting. Apia, Samoa. 
Contact: www.sprep.org.ws/Events/2001/RIO10_Sep/DocList.htm 
10-12 September East Africa Sub-regional Preparatory Committee Meeting. Dijbouti, Dijbouti.
Contact: olaye@uneca.org 
17-19 September Central Africa Sub-regional Preparatory Committee Meeting. Libreville, Gabon. 
Contact: olaye@uneca.org 
19-21 September Central Asia Sub-regional Preparatory Committee Meeting. Almaty, Kazakshstan. 
Contact: surendra@ait.ac.th 
24-25 September European & North American Regional Preparatory Committee Meeting to Earth Summit 2002. Geneva, Switzerland. Contact: www.unece.org/env/rio+10/welcome.html 
24-26 September West Africa Sub-Regional Preparatory Committee Meeting. Abuja, Nigeria. 
Contact: olaye@uneca.org 
29-30 September World Bank - IMF Annual Meeting. Washington DC, USA. Contact: www.imf.org/external/am/2001/index.htm 
23-24 October Latin America and the Caribbean Regional Preparatory Committee Meeting to Earth Summit 2002. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Contact: abarcena@eclac.cl 
24-25 October West Asia Regional Preparatory Committee Meeting to Earth Summit 2002. Cairo, Egypt. 
Contact: www.uneprowa.com.bh/wssd.htm 
29 Oct.–9 Nov. 7th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Marrakech, Morocco. Contact: www.unfccc.int 
5-9 November World Food Summit - 5 Years Later. Rome, Italy. Contact: www.fao.org/worldfoodsummit/ 6-9 November African Regional Preparatory Committee Meeting to Earth Summit 2002. Nairobi, Kenya. Contact: www.unep.org/ROA/wssd.htm 
27-29 November Asia & the Pacific Regional Preparatory Committee Meeting to Earth Summit 2002. Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Contact: www.rrcap.unep.org/wssd/

What’s in next months Network ~2002…

•	European Regional Prep. Comm. - Outcome
•	Climate Change COP 7 - Preview
•	World Bank - IMF Annual Meeting - Outcome
•	Latin America & the Caribbean Regional Prep. Comm.