Network 2002 November Issue

Contents:

Earth Summit 2002 Vision – Ahmed Gamaleldin
Editorial
News
Earth Summit 2002 Vision – Emil Salim
African Regional Prep. Comm.
International Freshwater Conference
World Food Summit – Five Years On
Life online debate summary
Meet the international Advisory Board
Collaborative Approaches to Food Security
Diary Dates, Events & Conferences
What’s in Next Months Network.

Earth Summit 2002 Visions

  In the last of our visions series we invite the views of Egypt’s Prof. Ahmed Gamaleldin. Interview by Felix Dodds.
(Q) We are now just three months before the Second Preparatory meeting for the World Summit. How do you think we have been doing in the preparatory phase?
(A) The momentum for the Summit has definitely started to pick up and the substance and the possible outcomes are starting to take shape. I believe that the preparatory process at the sub-regional and regional levels has provided us with lessons which would certainly help us to be more efficient and effective in handling similar undertakings in future.
  In my personal opinion, the sub regional meetings have not produced the contribution expected and maybe in the future it would be better to concentrate our efforts in preparing for good regional meetings which should be structured to benefit from the inputs of major groups which should inform the governmental deliberations. In addition, I believe that the experience has taught us that intergovernmental documents should be prepared by a core group of government representatives not by secretariats or consultants so as to guarantee ownership by the countries concerned. In this regard, I am pleased  that  the African Ministerial Meeting held in Nairobi produced a solid and concrete declaration representing the views of African countries. 
  We have also learned that countries can face a major constraint to undertake their national assessments due to the lack of institutional capacities and resources made available to them. The lesson here is that we need to start the national processes earlier and that there needs to be adequate funding and capacity building, especially since these represent the prerequisite for determining their future priorities. 
  On the positive side, I believe that that the Earth Summit 2002 is now definitely on the radar screen of Governments at the highest levels. However in order to guarantee the interest and participation of Heads of State and Governments it is important that they see that the Summit will represent a serious turning point that will result in a concrete work programme with time bound targets and a proper follow up mechanisms. 
  I am sure that developing countries do not want to see a repeat of the experience of the Millennium Declaration which lacked a reference to the commitment by the north to provide the necessary means of implementation to help them achieve the international development not to mention those targets in the outcome documents of other UN conferences and Summits. We need a clear road map on how to achieve all those targets because this should be a joint responsibility between the north and the south. 
(Q) What issues should the Summit be addressing?
  UNCED has produced the Rio Principles and Agenda 21.  It is imperative that Earth Summit 2002 not result in the renegotiation of the outcome of UNCED but in reaffirming the commitment of the international community to their full implementation bearing in mind the fundamental principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. Of course many developments have occurred since Rio. These should be addressed in the context of A21. One such developments is the process of globalization. We should see how we can make it contribute to sustainable development, and ensure that an equitable share of its benefits accrue to developing countries who for the time being bear a disproportionate share of its costs and suffer from marginalization. Another important issue that needs to be urgently addressed is that of financial resources to overcome the major disappointment that developing countries feel nine years after Rio because of the lack of provision by the developed countries of the requisite financing.
  Let me remind you that achieving the target of halving by the year 2015 the number of those living in abject poverty in Africa requires the continents economy to grow by at least 7% between now and 2015 and thus an investment ratio equivalent to 33% of regional GDP. How can you achieve this target without ODA,  FDI, debt cancellation and market access in the sectors where African countries have comparative advantage. The European Commission estimated that removing all obstacles to trade can generate an additional $700bn to developing countries.   
  We need to see concrete actions in Doha, Monterrey and later in Johannesburg to show that the international community is serious about achieving the poverty reduction target of the Millennium Declaration. We do not need another academic discussion describing poverty but multi-pronged actions to address it. In the case of Africa, it is estimated that 70% of its poor live in rural areas, and that tremendous amount of lands have been degraded. Thus the international community should as a matter of priority reverse the decline of resources provided by the World Bank to the agricultural sector, ensuring access to energy at affordable prices and to water. Enough resources have to be channeled for the full implementation of the United Nations Convention for Combating Desertification as it is the closest avenue to address poverty.  Of course we recognize that domestic resources will need to be activated but they cannot alone deliver what is needed. At present only 4 countries have reached the 0.7%  GDP target for ODA and two other countries have now set dates to achieve 0.7%. For Johannesburg we expect to see the other developed countries to set dates to deliver the ODA target and I hope that Doha results in a significant move in the trade negotiations to address the concerns of developing countries. This would represent the kind of political commitment developing countries are hoping for.
 (Q) There has been talk about Johannesburg delivering a ‘Global or New Deal’. What are your views about this?
(A) There needs to be an international discussion on what should be the elements of any deal that would come out of the Summit. It is important that an open-ended process of consultations be undertaken between the north and the south on the parameters of such deal. I welcome the recent initiative by the Danish Minister of Environment, who is a highly respected international figure in both the north and the south. I consider the paper presented by Denmark as the beginning of a long process which should be open-ended and transparent and which in my view could lead to a convergence of minds and thus to making the Summit the success we want it to be.  But to reach such target, everyone must feel ownership of the end product and sufficient time needs to be dedicated to international consultations.
(Q) What impact do you think the events around September 11th and beyond are having on the agenda for sustainable development.
(A) The events of September 11 are a sad moment for all of us. It is only normal that we all feel the mourning of the families of the victims of terrorism. However, the international community has to guard against all attempts to let these tragic events lead us away from our common humanity, or to create a clash of civilizations in a year which was destined to celebrate the dialogue among them. All civilizations and religions are unanimous in condemning terrorism in all its forms and treasure the ideals of tolerance, justice, and peace for all. We must therefore make sure that the Summit will be one of hope for the entire humanity,  and a new beginning that restores the credibility of multilateralism and realizes the legitimate aspirations of all peoples of the world. Indeed, we should all work towards this objective since only multilateralism will help us to achieve sustainable development for all. Therefore, WSSD does offer a real chance for the international community to agree on a common vision for a better world and to commit the resources to deliver it.                                                
agamaleldin@cs.com

Editorial

  My mistake. Last month I was somewhat critical of the European Regional Prep. Comm. for not adequately integrating Major Group participation into the process, citing General Assembly resolutions to back my argument. However, in all fairness, this situation is not unique to the European process. Other regions have similarly elected to conduct their processes in lack-lustre fashion. One wonders why? 
  Whilst it is true that these are Government forums, Stakeholders can bring unique expertise to the table. But this needs to be properly organised. UNED has explored this space and has developed a Methodological Framework for Multi-Stakeholder Processes. Hopefully the upcoming Global Prep Comms. (I know, there’s no respite is there?), will draw from experiences at regional level to look at issues prioritised by the for which Stakeholders can have substantive impact. Indeed there is broad support for a more integrated role for stakeholders, not least from governments themselves. What needs more thought is how we go about achieving this.
  Meanwhile, around the world we are taking stock of the outcomes from the regional level, reports enclosed. Minds are crystallising around what will be on the Summit agenda and on what it might seek to achieve. Looking back through recent issues, it is interesting to see the degree of consensus among members of the Summit Bureau from our visions articles.  Perhaps most articulately put in this months article by Egypt’s Gamaleldin who observed     
  ‘We do not need another academic discussion describing poverty but multi-pronged actions to address it...However in order to guarantee the interest and participation of Heads of State and Governments it is important that they see that the Summit will represent a serious turning point that will result in a concrete work programme with time bound targets and a proper follow up mechanisms.’ 
  Also from his article are references to the WTO and  Financing for Development processes. This kind of joined up thinking is to be encouraged, and will prove vital in terms of getting the international community to all pull in the same direction. Other notable processes include the International Freshwater Conference in Bonn and the now postponed World Food Summit Review. We have invited some of the key players in these processes to give an overview of the issues and to show how they feature on the Road to Johannesburg.
  There are often calls for the Summit to be a stage for success stories on the Sustainable Development agenda. The shaky climate change process still heads the list for prominent back-slapping opportunities by ministers. Next weeks meeting in Marrakech will seek to firm up agreements met earlier in the year to make the Kyoto Protocol a viable reality. Similarly the International fisheries community met recently in Reykjavik to consider its input to the Summit. Perhaps the meeting was not a roaring success, but it did table a bold and mature approach to management of the Marine environment. Both these issues are covered in this months news.
  Finally we have a report on the final 2 weeks of the lifeonline debate dealing with HIV/AIDS and Corporate Responsibility. Completing the 4 week series of issues likely to be addressed at the Summit heated debate again issued. 
T.Middleton

News, News, News

Fisheries Management in Reykjavik 
  The Responsible Fisheries in the Marine Ecosystem Conference took place in Reykjavik, Iceland, from 1-4 October 2001.  Organized by the Government of Iceland and the UN Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO), the conference was attended by over 400 participants, including many of the worlds leading marine scientist.
  The purpose of the event was to explore more complex Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management (EBFM) systems of managing the marine environment, as apposed to considering just one species as has historically been the case for many of the worlds commercial fisheries. To assist in addressing the scientific complexities of considering the complex inter-linkages between marine flora & fauna, a Scientific Symposium, running parallel to the negotiations explored many of the issues at hand.. 
  Jacques Dious, Director General of FAO, opened the conference with his speech implying the need to strengthen global efforts to ensure the sustainable use of marine resources, and the sound management of the ecosystem.  
  Otto Gregusson, Minister of Fisheries of Norway, talked of his and other countries dependency on the sustainable harvesting of marine resources, stating that action is needed at both national and global levels to address the pressures on these resources.
  The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iceland, Halldor Asgrimsson, explained his country’s reliance on fisheries for its livelihood and for export earnings.  He noted that some countries having fisheries-related problems should not export their difficulties to the countries that have managed their fisheries sustainably.
  The negotiations on the Declaration progressed slowly sticking on numerous points relating to: market distortions; the integration of a multitude of other international agreements; the scientific information required to pursue EBFM; and the exclusion of reference to the impact of the consumption of fish by marine mammals. Progress was made in further recognising the importance of implementing and strengthening existing agreements, notably the FAO’s Code of Conduct (for fisheries management). There was also encouragement for increased technology transfer, technical assistance and scientific information for developing countries. 
  Compromise text on these, and other, issues allowed the majority of states to adopt the declaration - which will now be carried forward to Earth Summit 2002. This can be seen as a significant step for the sustainable management of the marine environment. Whilst the scientific complexities are at this stage daunting, the long term benefits of moving towards this system of management sooner rather than later are invaluable. The impact for food security, economic development and environmental protection are clear.
  However, broader outstanding issues for the fisheries industry including a global fleet estimated to be 40% too large, knowledge of landings in many developing countries and the significant effect of discards remain. Until these issues are addressed by governments, the impacts of more sophisticated fisheries management systems will have limited impact.

Climate Change in Marrakech 
  The worlds governments will meet in Morocco from Oct. 29th to November 9th to finalise procedures and institutions to make the Kyoto Protocol fully operational.
  Essentially working to establish the rules by which the Protocol will operate, this 7th meeting of the Conference of the Parties will seek decisions on how to increase the flow of financial and technological support to developing countries. An indirect aim of the meeting is to further motivate other non-government players into action - notably business - to create low carbon economies for the future. More directly, the meeting will also clear the way for governments ratify the Protocol, bringing it into force internationally.
  There is also a desire to mobilise the next phase of political debate with a longer term aim of drawing the US back to the negotiating table. Chances of that though seem slim. Whilst recent international events have focussed attention on the importance of multi-lateral responses to global problems, this is unlikely to result in an American U-turn on Kyoto. However, it is equally unlikely that the US would propose any international alternative, leaving Kyoto as what one termed ‘the only game in town’.
  The Marrakech conference is also expected to start setting up the Kyoto institutions. A first step being to elect the Executive Board of the Clean Development Mechanism to ensure its prompt start. However, this has not stopped others stealing a march on the process. Showing how this might be done, in Japan, Tokyo Mitsubishi Securities C. have offered to calculate greenhouse gas emissions for power plant operators in developed countries enabling them to sell emissions rights to companies and governments in the developed world.
  More broadly though, all eyes will be on Russia and the European Union on 2 main counts. Firstly, for the Protocol to enter into force it must be ratified by a majority of industrialised nations. Secondly, with the US withdrawal from the process, the Lions share of global greenhouse gas emissions are sourced from these regions. After the US, Russia is the worlds largest contributor, with some 17.4% of global emissions, leading one high-level official to comment that ‘if Russia stays out with the US, there’s no Protocol.  
  However, chances of Russia ratifying are high as its emissions are now 30% below their 1990 levels. This would leave Russia with a significant excess of allowable emissions which can be traded to other governments. Similarly, EU nations are expected to sign by mid-2002, presenting the Protocol as a timely success story for the following Earth Summit.
  Following on from the Bonn agreement of earlier this year, the meeting will look at access to funds and technology for developing countries. This will include establishing a special climate change fund for adaptation, technology transfer and emissions limitations under the convention. Developed country pledges for this fund stand at $410m/year by 2005.
  Finally the Marrakech meeting work on the Protocols Compliance mechanism, which will deal with both current emissions reduction commitments as well as further action: for every ton of gas that a country emits over its target, it will be required to reduce an additional 1.3 tons during the Protocol’s second commitment period.

Earth Summit 2002 Preparations Indonesia’s Perspective

  With the final Regional Prep. Comm. in Asia and the Pacific upcoming we hear from Indonesia’s Prof. Salim, Chair of the Summit Bureau. Drawing together the outcomes from the web of meetings that have taken place, Prof. Salim considers how this all relates to his home-country, Indonesia and to the region as a whole.
  Most the of bottom-up approach preparatory works for the World Summit on Sustainable Development are almost completed. The regional roundtable of eminent persons, the sub-regional and regional preparatory committee meetings are scheduled to be completed by the end of November 2001 after the last regional preparatory meeting of the Asia and the Pacific region to take place in Cambodia on November 27 to 29, 2001. In aiming to provide contributions from the business perspective, Indonesia, in close cooperation with the Secretariat of the World Summit and the governments of Japan and Australia, has organized a regional forum on business opportunities and sustainable development: partnerships strategies in Jakarta from 3 to 5 September 2001. 
  Sub-regional and regional preparatory committee meetings have been attended by officials at the ministerial level and participated in by all major groups as recognized by the Agenda 21 as well as representatives of the international and regional organizations. This reflects the high awareness being given by the international community to sustainable development issues and in particular their attachment to the comprehensive review of the implementation of Agenda 21 after its adoption 10 years ago in Rio de Janeiro. 
  Having considered the on-going preparatory work of sub-regional and regional levels, the bureau noted that the preparatory process at the national level, particularly those of the developing countries in preparing their national assessment of the implementation of Agenda is still lacking and needs to be supported. Another challenge confronting the preparatory processes of the World Summit is the limited involvement of the relevant departments or institutions at the national level taking into account that sustainable development has economic and social development dimensions in addition to environment protection as interdependent and mutually reinforcing components. 
  The sub-regional and regional preparatory works have identified a number of issues of utmost concern based on their specific constraints, challenges and experiences. Commonality of issues arise from those meetings including among others, the urgent need to eradicate poverty, to eradicate unsustainable pattern of production and consumption particularly in the developed countries and the critical need for the developing countries to be supported by appropriate means of implementation as stipulated in the Agenda 21. The need to develop “a new model” of development by integrating the three components of sustainable development also emerged during the regional roundtable meetings of eminent persons while the other regional meeting forwarded a proposal to develop “a new deal” relating to the decreasing implementation of Official Development Assistance.  All in all, the preparatory processes were unable yet to come up with concrete proposals as in addressing the challenges and constraints that have been identified so far both from the past 9 sessions of the Commission on Sustainable Development as well as from the sub-regional and regional preparatory works. 
  Being a country that attaches great important to the sustainable development issues, Indonesia is prepared to do its utmost to ensure that genuine partnership should work for humanity and all our commitments in Rio and the targets adopted at the Millennium Summit should be translated into concrete actions. Indonesia as the developing country that also faces similar challenges and constraints is trying to do its utmost in complementing its commitment in Rio. Indonesia also completed its Agenda 21 on 5 sectoral issues in addition to the national Agenda 21 published in 1997. In ensuring better coordination and coherence on the implementation of Agenda 21 at the national level, the government is also in the process of establishing its national council on sustainable development by engaging more actively the other departments and institutions involved. Indonesia is also engaging more actively relevant major groups by encouraging their involvement in the preparatory processes both at national, sub-regional, regional and global levels. Raising awareness is also of crucial importance in ensuring the full implementation of Agenda 21 at all levels. In the context of the implementation of regional autonomy in Indonesia, the national committee is undertaking various initiatives aimed at promoting awareness at the local level on the need to integrate sustainable development in their policy making processes and implementation. 
  Taking into account all of the outcomes of the sub-regional and regional preparatory work, it is considered very critical for the forthcoming meeting in Cambodia to develop concrete initiatives both at sub-regional and regional levels. Those initiatives should also include ways and means to addressing the constraints and challenges as well as to ensure the further implementation of Agenda 21 by, among others, strengthening the existing mechanisms both in term of its mandate as well as their capacities to help countries in fulfilling their commitments. In this context, the active involvement of the authorities at the highest level in the preparatory process as well as involvement of head of states and governments in the Summit is of significant importance to reinvigorate political commitments at the highest level from developed and developing countries. 
Prof. Emil Salim

African Preparatory Conference for Earth Summit 2002

  UNED Forum’s Co-chair, Hesphina Rukato reports on African Regional Preparations.
NGO meeting: 
  The NGO meeting was held on 15-16 October.  Much of the first day was spent on discussions of the UNEP/Civil Society Engagement debate, and not on Summit preparatory meetings.  While this debate was deemed to be very important by many stakeholders, it was felt that UNEP should have organised a separate process to deal with this very important issue.  Further, many participants had not prepared themselves for this debate, since the draft UNEP/Civil Society Engagement report was only circulated on the day of the discussion.  This limited the effective participation of those present.  It was also clear that the deadline for comment that was announced by UNEP staff was not conducive to effective stakeholder input.  Participants to the UNEP meeting raised fears that this process is too rushed, and might therefore not deliver the desired outcome.
Summit Preparations 
  SANGOCO made a presentation on where they were in terms of the Summit preparations.  They appealed for cooperation and support from other African NGOs and civil society groups.  A proposal was put forward for the formation of an African regional Steering Committee that would work together with the SANGOCO secretariat to facilitate and ensure the participation of African NGOs and civil society organisations.   SANGOCO will take a lead in this process.
Sub-regional reports
  Other sub-regional focal points made presentations on their Summit preparations.
UNED Forum stakeholder meeting
  UNED Forum facilitated a stakeholder dialogue meeting on Tuesday, 16 October.  The meeting was aimed at giving stakeholder representatives an opportunity to exchange views and sectoral priorities for the Summit.  The presentations were made by:  Lorraine Lotter, South Africa, Trade Unions, Women, Youth, ICLEI and two NGO/Civil society representatives.  A summary of issues report was prepared and circulated during the ministerial segment on Thursday.
Presentations to the ministerial segment
  Several stakeholder groups presented sectoral reports to the ministerial segment on Wednesday, 17 October.   The following groups presented reports: industry report, Civil Society/Non-governmental Organisations, Trade Unions, the Youth, and the United Nations Secretariat for the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction.  UNED Forum was not given the opportunity to present the summary report of the October 17 Stakeholder dialogue meeting.  However, the report was widely circulated.  The World Bank also circulated a statement.
  The various non-government stakeholder groups made it clear that they were willing to take responsibility for the future implementation of Agenda 21 principles, and were willing to go into partnerships with other stakeholder groups and governments for the achievement of sustainable development objectives of Agenda 21.  The Youth expressed their desire to use the Summit to dispel the notion that Africa is a “dark continent”.  They also made it clear that this could only be achieved if they, and other stakeholders, were given enough space and resources to ensure their effective participation both in the Summit and the process leading up to the Summit. 
Key outcomes
  A quick glance at the various stakeholder reports, as well as the draft ministerial declaration suggest that there is a convergence of views of many stakeholders as to what the outcome of the Johannesburg Summit should be.  The most common challenges that were raised include:
•	Setting targets and timeframes for the implementation of agreements
•	Eradicating poverty for Sustainable Development
•	Bridging the digital divide between the North and the South in the context of globalisation
•	Ensuring security, particularly in the wake of the tragic events of 11 September in the United States.
•	Addressing HIV/AIDs
•	Reforming existing international institutions for environmental governance both for ensuring effective participation of African stakeholders, and for implementation of Multi-lateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs)
•	Cancelling Africa’s debt, coupled with good governance and accountability with the African states
•	Developing an African vision for the Johannesburg Summit that will be guided by the New African Initiative (NAI) principles
Where this leaves us
  The Johannesburg Plan of Action/Global Deal:  The need for a Johannesburg Plan of Action or Global Deal/Partnership is evident.  What is not clear is how this Plan of Action or Deal will be arrived at. Proposals have been made for the African Ministers to initiate a process through which the various components of the Partnership/Deal/Plan of Action can be unpacked.  This would allow enough time for consultations to ensure that when it comes to the Summit, there will not be any “killer issues” as has characterised the Kyoto negotiations.  Whether or not South Africa, as host to the Summit, or the African ministers are receptive to this proposal remains to be seen.  However, if this process is to take place, it should not be left until it is too late.
  On the part of NGOs and Civil society, there is a need for more organising and planning if they are to use the summit as an opportunity to strengthen Civil Society in Africa and the South as a whole.  While South African NGOs are set to play an important role in the preparations of the Summit, there is a need to present a coherent African NGO/Civil Society voice prior, during and after the summit.  The Summit process presents a good opportunity for African NGOs/civil society to strengthen themselves the same way the Latin American NGOs/Civil society did as a result of their region hosting the Rio Earth Summit in 1992.

International Conference on Freshwater - Bonn 2001

  Water is a strategic resource for the integration of economic, social and environmental concerns and is a key to sustainable development.  It sustains human productivity and livelihoods and is elementary for the integrity of the world’s ecosystems. Safe drinking water and adequate sanitation are essential for human health and dignity, yet 1.2 billion people lack access to safe drinking water and close to 2.5 billion are not provided with adequate sanitation. Water is under increasing and competing demands from agricultural, industrial and domestic users. Pollution is on the increase, threatening tomorrow’s livelihoods. Extreme and unprecedented floods and droughts cause tremendous suffering. As usual it is poor communities who are the hardest hit. 
  Against this background the German Government offered to host the International Conference on Freshwater in Bonn in order to build on the freshwater-related objectives identified in Chapter 18 of Agenda 21, and to focus on the urgent need for action in the area of freshwater has been emphasised in the UN Millennium Declaration adopted in September 2000: 
  “to halve, by the year 2015, the proportion of people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water".
  "to stop the unsustainable exploitation of water resources by developing water management strategies at the regional, national and local levels, which promote both equitable access and adequate supplies".
  The Conference Outcome is also intended to prepare the water-related decisions of the upcoming Earth Summit 2002.
  Keeping the focus on implementation, lessons learned and forward-looking policies, delegates will focus on cross-cutting issues within the context of a range of sectoral thematic areas that require major attention.
  The Cross-cutting Issues include: Governance; Integrated Management and New Partnerships; Mobilising Financial Resources; Capacity Development; and Technology Transfer; Gender Issues. 
  The Sectoral Thematic Areas include: Innovative Strategies for Water and Sanitation for the Poor; Access and Affordability; Protecting Ecosystems and Water Resources; Pollution Prevention; Balancing Water Uses; Water for Food and Water for Nature Transboundary Waters; Sharing Benefits, Lessons Learned; Floods and Droughts; Coping with Climate Change and Variability.
  Conference participants will include Governments, UN Agencies, International Organisations and Major Groups. The German Government has invited all UN Member States as well as non-member States with permanent observer status to participate at the highest possible level. 
Conference Documents
  Discussion during the Conference will focus on the Cross-cutting Issues mentioned above, for this purpose several Conference Documents have been prepared: 
  A Conference Issue Paper concentrates on the most important fields for political action to solve the water crisis. It will examine freshwater management in the context of sustainable development and poverty alleviation from the angle of the Cross-cutting Issues mentioned above. 
  A Gender Background Paper takes into account the gender aspects in freshwater management.
  Thematic Background Papers describe feasible solutions on regional, national and local levels for the improvement of water management. They are based on a description of today's situation - state of the art analysis and proposals on what needs to be done to combat present problems. 
A Draft Conference Outcome Paper which pulls together all the above is published on the  conference website for comments.
Participation of Major Groups 
  UNED Forum are working with an Advisory Board to prepare two Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue at the Conference. The aim of the process is to promote better decisions by means of wider input on particular issues and to integrate diverse viewpoints by bringing together representatives of principal actors needed for successful implementation of the Millennium Declaration water targets. The Dialogue offer a space for an interactive exchange between the Major Groups and Government. The output will be to be presented in the plenary, attended by high-level government representatives.
  There will be two consecutive sessions held at the beginning of the meeting: Dialogue A - Equitable Access and Sustainable Supply of Water for the Poor; Dialogue B - Developing Strategies for Sustainable and Equitable Management of Water Resources
  The process identified 5 Major Groups most concerned with implementation. These groups, including, Business, NGOs, Local Authorities, Trade Unions and Farmers will each have a delegation participating in the Dialogues at Bonn.  Papers prepared by these Major Groups addressing Ethics, Institutions, Finance, Technology Choices and Possible Partnerships have been published on the website www.water-2001.de. The Dialogue sessions will touch on some of the ‘big issues’ for implementation such as public-private partnerships, liberalisation of water services, cost-recovery, subsidies, land ownership, access to information, allocation of water, technology choices.
  The background papers, your comments and the draft Conference Outcome document (also available for comments on the website), will be used to focus the content and outcome of the Dialogues in Bonn. 
  For further information and contact details of the Stakeholder Advisory Board please refer to www.water-2001.de/msd or email dmorley@earthsummit2002.org

The Hunger & Agriculture Debate - A human bridge between Rome, Qatar and South Africa

  Civil Society networks are preparing for the linked negotiating processes in the World Food Summit Five Years Later (WFS-FYL), the proposed launch of a new round of WTO negotiations and the preparatory process for the Earth Summit 2002. Linda Elswick & Thomas Forster report.
  All of these processes are to take place in the 11 months remaining before the Johannesburg Summit. Major Groups will continue to host multi-stakeholder processes during the Earth Summit preparations, as they have since CSD8 in 2000 and at the FAO Committee on Agriculture meeting in March 2001.
  In October the WFS-FYL was postponed, perhaps until June 2002. Notwithstanding, the regional conferences for WFS-FYL and the global planning of Civil Society Organisations through a Core Planning Committee are working to assemble the most important regional and global consensus on the critical issues. This consensus of both Northern and Southern perspectives will inform campaigns for advocacy and concrete action in coming multiple international processes. 
  Case Studies of Alternative Approaches: Under the guidance of the Core Planning Committee for the WFS-FYL, case studies are being assembled to demonstrate alternative approaches to the industrial model of agriculture. These will be built upon by Major Groups at the Earth Summit Prep. Comms. The case studies will show concrete projects in different agro-ecosystems, with comparison between industrial and agro-ecological methods, and results such as similar or increased yields, increased biodiversity, better economy of inputs, enhanced quality of life for producers and community structure. 
Core Issues
1. The Right to Food: Work has proceeded on an International Code of Conduct on the Right to Adequate Food. Civil society organizations in both the South and the North have advocated that implementation and promotion of the right to adequate food must become a central objective of all States and other relevant actors in order to end hunger and malnutrition. While the right to adequate food is firmly established as a fundamental right, it needs to be further elaborated to facilitate its implementation. 
2. Food Sovereignty: Food sovereignty is the right of each nation and its peoples to maintain and develop its own capacity to produce the people's basic food, while respecting productive and cultural diversity. Food sovereignty is a pre-condition for a genuine food security. Key issues include: a. Local food producing capacity for local and regional markets b. Participation by producers in decision-making processes c. The concept of fair trade.
3. Agricultural Production Models: The case studies mentioned above will define what agro-ecology and other sustainable agricultural practices are, what kind of food security many local and rural actors are talking about and who benefits, the impacts of industrialized agriculture on food security, and the impacts of best practices on food security, the environment, community, human resources and the economy.
4. Access to productive resources (land, water and genetic resources; land reform and security of tenure): The factors related to various resources are being assessed, including policy issues and identifying practical examples related to land, water, and genetic resources as well as land reform and security of tenure. Concerns to be addressed will include the need for decentralized access to water; how recommendations can become policy; how traditional agriculture preserves agricultural biodiversity and how to re-introduce the access to productive resources as a key to conserving agro-biodiversity. Both animal genetic diversity and crop diversity will be included. The facilitating groups will note such issues as the erosion of agro-biodiversity through privatisation; the GMO threat and negative impacts on food security; and the experiences with conservation of biodiversity and how have these affect food security.
  Attention will be paid to links between food security and conflict over land and resources, as well as urban-rural migration particularly since the Green Revolution and experiences with agrarian reform. Both the cost and impacts of reduced access to land on food security will be documented, comparing and contrasting the impact of the World Bank model on the privatisation of land with other models. 
5. Democracy and civil society involvement: Community empowerment and the national institutional arrangements to foster its capacity and legitimacy are essential. At the same time, it is crucial that governments acknowledge their full responsibility and take effective action towards obtaining food security for all. The existence of international mechanisms should aim to support economic, cultural, social and political processes of democratisation at the country level, rather than encouraging their marginalization.
  Papers developed for each of 5 issue areas analysing the situation of sustainable agriculture and food security as well as addressing the political context will be available by late 2001. The papers will be prepared to serve several purposes: the NGO Forum for the WFS-FYL, the WTO meeting and Earth Summit 2002. Relevant new issues not on the agenda at WFS in 1996 or in the products of Rio should also be raised, including GMOs, intensive livestock feeding operations and new food safety concerns such as mad cow and foot and mouth disease. The critical importance of gender issues will be addressed throughout.
  In support of the intended preparatory processes for Earth Summit 2002, there will be concrete proposals and initiatives among Major Groups and between Major Groups and Governments dealing with these issues. These initiatives will be the basis for negotiated targets and agreements between parties, with concrete actions and timetables. The  goal is to prepare for a very broad spectrum of concerted civil society action under the theme of food, land and agriculture in the context of the crosscutting themes to be identified for Johannesburg.

Earth Summit 2002 online debates on HIV/AIDS and Corporate Accountability

  During September UNED Forum, as part of the Lifeonline initiative, have been hosting an online debate on key issues that the Summit could address. More than 800 participants from 103 countries participated in the debate. A summary of the discussions of the last 2 follows.
  Week 3 of the debate asked "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?"
  While many aspects of HIV are shared with other diseases, AIDS presents a unique challenge to sustainable development in the 21st century. The HIV/AIDS epidemic has to be thought of not merely in terms of a disease but in terms of a behavioural issue. And, we have to consider the interdependence between the HIV pandemic and a range of other development dynamics.
  The areas of prevention and treatment are of particular concern. Successful prevention of HIV infection relates to social, cultural, economic, psychological and behavioural factors, with poverty and gender as the main issues. To tackle this complex relation, a multi-sectoral approach is required, involving an integrated public and private sector response and including religious institutions and NGOs. An inclusive debate needs to be established, involving policymakers, the media, those working in HIV/AIDS care and prevention and, above all, affected individuals and communities. The question on global guidelines on intellectual property rights, as outlined in the TRIPS agreement was also discussed.
  Key barriers to achieving a multi-sectoral approach to the AIDS epidemic were identified, such as the provision of particular goods to general issues such as empowerment of women and the protection of infected and vulnerable people. Organised religions, whose opposition to the promotion of condoms and to the rights of those whose behavior they disapprove of was also identified as a major barrier to effective HIV prevention. Equitable access to health care depends on a large-scale reallocation of global resources – the basis for which is a value system that is based on just and equitable principles.
  Several examples of good models and ideas on how to overcome barriers were suggested, ranging from setting up of a “Season of AIDS awareness” to reflecting on the positive role religion could play in giving people motives for behavioural change.
  Recommendations for Earth Summit 2002 include strengthening the link with the existing international process on HIV/AIDS; encourage governments to take decisions that favour young people who are particularly troubled due to abuse of drugs and alcohol, unemployment, sex work, etc.; further establish a multi-sectoral approach, including multi-stakeholder partnerships in the fight against the HIV/AIDS epidemic, for developing policies but in particular for the implementation of agreements.
   Week 4 posed the question "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?"
  Many promises were made by business at the Earth Summit in 1992. Since then, the processes of privatisation, liberalisation and globalisation have continued. Progress in terms of corporate accountability and reporting for sustainable development has been made but against the benchmarks explicit or implicit in the Rio agreements, overall progress has been slow. To soften negative impacts of these processes, governments will have to put more regulation in place. 
  Key issues that were discussed included voluntary initiatives that have a crucial role to play in achieving corporate social responsibility. However, they alone won’t suffice to change corporate behaviour. At the global level, serious efforts are emerging to encourage positive corporate policies. Contributors examined existing regulations for corporate accountability, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN Global Compact. These processes can help produce agreements that are more binding than unilateral declarations but the question of implementation remains crucial.
  In addition to voluntary codes of conduct and regulatory frameworks, a shared commitment to building effective partnerships needs to be strengthened. A fundamental conscience change needs to happen at senior managerial level - values need to be related to economic mechanisms and shareholder value be understood in a more systemic way.
  Several examples of good models for furthering corporate responsibility were suggested, ranging from a symbiosis between profit, not-for-profit corporations and governments to the concept of a sustainability ranking list for investors of multi-national corporations. Other contributors emphasized that corporations should rather be influenced by offering better options for ethical trading.
  Recommendations for Earth Summit 2002 included strengthening existing legal frameworks for TNCs as well as developing a new global framework; determine a modality within the UN system for negotiating obligations on corporate investors; governments should focus on corporate disclosure to achieve accountability; and aim at globally accepted and enforced standards that will break the stranglehold of the private sector over individual governments.
  To view the archives and summaries of the debates of all 4 weeks, please go to www.lifeonline.org/debate
  To receive a printed copy of the report (soon to be published), please contact info@earthsummit2002.org 

Jasmin Enayati

Meet the International Advisory Board

Organisation: International Chamber of Commerce
Contact: Jack Whelan
Web: www.iccwbo.org
Aim: The ICC is the world business organisation  -  the only representative body that speaks with authority on behalf of enterprises from all business sectors in every part of the world. ICC promotes an open international trade and investment system and the market economy.   
Key Activities: ICC  members establish the business stance on broad issues of trade and investment as well as on vital technical and sectoral subjects. These include financial services, information technologies, telecommunications, marketing ethics, the environment, transportation, competition law and intellectual property. Highlights of ICC activities on behalf of world business include:
•	WTO - ICC is promoting business ideas and objectives for achieving a successful new round of trade negotiations;
•	United Nations - ICC is engaged in dialogue with the UN on progressing the economic, social and environmental objectives on the sustainable development agenda;
•	Incoterms 2000 - ICC's standard commercial terms define the respective responsibilities of buyer and seller in international sales contracts;
•	Guides to Investment - In a joint project with UNCTAD, ICC enlisted support from 30 major companies in providing guidance to least developed countries on policies and practical steps to attract more foreign direct investment. 
Current  Projects: Together the ICC and  World Business Council for Sustainable Development have initiated a campaign to mobilise business organisations under the title 'Business Action for Sustainable Development' (BASD), in preparation for  Earth Summit 2002. A key feature of the BASD initiative is the mobilisation and presentation of business organisations' own initiatives which demonstrate progress in addressing the challenges issued in Agenda 21.              www.basd-action.net 
Key Partners: Member companies, national committees and affiliated organisations, and  sectoral associations in over  140  countries. 
Geographical Coverage: Global

Collaborative Approaches to Food Security
  
  Sustainable agricultural and food security objectives form critical components of any sustainable development programme. Although political considerations, such as good governance and efficient markets, affect food security, 75% of the chronically undernourished live in rural areas. Efforts to deliver agricultural solutions to farmers contribute to improved livelihoods and food security in these areas. In this context, an International Food Policy Research Institute report highlights the growing importance that the 1.8 billion small holders will play in food security during the coming decades.  
  Collaborative, multi-stakeholder approaches that take these small holders’ needs into account will be critical to ensure that their efforts are sustainable – economically, environmentally and socially. CropLife International has identified case studies where industry has assisted or created opportunities toward achieving economic growth and more sustainable agriculture in developing countries at the small holder level. These case studies were gathered in response to the UN Commission on Sustainable Development’s request at its 2000 meeting (CSD-8) and to contribute to Earth Summit 2002.
  The case studies illustrate the importance of multi-stakeholder participation in efforts to promote food security. No one group has all the necessary information or the ability to reach all small holders globally. Examples include a programme in Mexico where a consortium of partners developed a technology package that increased corn yields by 50% and incomes by 400%. Another case study shows the success a Kenyan NGO has had in cooperating with industry to ensure that technology packages for basic food crops are adapted to local farmers’ budgets.  Given this project’s impact on food security and poverty alleviation, donors are assisting the NGO to extend its approach. These projects can have a greater proportionate impact than projects for large holders due to the multiplier effect of their contribution to the food security, poverty alleviation and economic development needs of the local communities in which they operate.
  The publication outlines benefits and constraints encountered in the past decade and looks at areas that need to be developed in the future, such as maintaining open lines of communication and seeking multi-stakeholder partnerships. It will soon be available on the web at www.croplife.org and hard copies can be ordered by email at: info@croplife.org 

Diary Dates, Events & Conferences

29 Oct.–9 Nov.	7th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Marrakech, Morocco. Contact: www.unfccc.int	
6-9 November	African Regional Preparatory Committee Meeting to Earth Summit 2002. Nairobi, Kenya. 
Contact: www.unep.org/ROA/wssd.htm	
7-9 November	The International Forum on National Sustainable Development Strategies. Accra, Ghana. 
Contact: www.johannesburgsummit.org/web_pages/ghana_experts_meeting.htm	
9-13 November	WTO Fourth Ministerial Meeting. Doha, Qatar. 
Contact: www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/min01_e/min01_e.htm	
26-27 November	UNECLAC & UNEP Finance Initiative Roundtables. Santiago, Chile. 
Contact: http://unepfi.net/mtgs/chile/index.htm	
26-30 November	Intergovernmental Meeting on Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activiies. Montreal, Canada. Contact: www.gpa.unep.org	
27-29 November	Asia & the Pacific Regional Preparatory Committee Meeting to Earth Summit 2002. Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Contact: www.rrcap.unep.org/wssd/	
1 December	Intergovernmental Group of Ministers on International Governance. Berlin, Germany. 
Contact: www.unep.org/IEG	
3-4 December	GEF Replenishment Meetings. Edinburgh, Scotland. 
Contact: www.gefweb.org/Replenishment/Schedule_of_Meetings/schedule_of_meetings.html	
3-7 December	International Conference on Freshwater. Bonn, Germany. Contact: www.water-2001.de	
6-7 December	Global Environment Facility Council Meeting. Washington DC, USA. 
Contact: www.gefweb.org	
6-11 January	Rio 02 - World Climate & Energy Event. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 
Contact: www.rio02.de	
14-25 January	Financing for Development Final Prep. Comm.. New York, USA.
Contact: ffd@un.org	
29 Jan. - 8 Feb.	World Summit on Sustainable Development Prep. Comm. II. New York, USA. 
Contact: www.johannesburgsummit.org/web_pages/second_prepcom.htm	

What’s in next months Network ~2002…

•	Climate Change COP 7 - Outcomes
•	Latin America & the Caribbean Regional Prep. Comm. - Outcomes
•	West & Central Asia Regional Prep. Comm. - Outcomes
•	WTO Ministerial - Outcomes
•	Global Environment Facility Meetings - Preview