Network 2002 – November Issue

Contents
Earth Summit 2002 at the GA
Editorial
News, News, News
Road to COP 6
The Kyoto Effect
Quality or Quantity – Istanbul + 5 preparations
Engaging the ‘Social’ in the Environmental, Social and Economic Equation
EURO ENVIRONMENT EUROPEAN CONFERENCE
ICFTU challenges World Bank & IMF
UNEP’S 6TH International High-level Seminar on Cleaner Production
Forum International de Montreal
Diary Dates, Events & Conferences
What’s in next months Network 2002

Earth Summit 2002, the UN GA decides

  Last week the 55th UN General Assembly turned its attention to Environment & Sustainable Development, including Earth Summit 2002.  Following on from preliminary debate on the issue held by a number of other UN Agencies, the GA’s decision will cover the location of the Summit, its purpose and objectives and, broadly, what issues might be addressed.
  To assist its discussions, the GA received a number of reports from the Secretary General’s office as well as from some of its specialised agencies.  This included UNEP’s Malmö Ministerial Declaration adopted earlier this year, contributions from the Global Environment Facility to Agenda 21 in addition to recommendations on effective preparations to the Summit given in a report from the Sec. Gen..  These papers will soon be available at: www.earthsummit2002.org/es/2002/default.htm
  At time of going to press discussion at the GA had moved on country presentations outlining sustainable development priorities and preparations for Earth Summit 2002.  As this interesting process has developed a lot of common ground is being found between nations.  Positions developed previously have been substantiated, sending clear signals to the GA as to what is expected in 2002.
  To begin with there was a clear message universally held that Agenda 21, the main policy document to come out of Rio in 1992, should not be renegotiated.  There were calls across the board for efforts to focus on the further implementation of Agenda 21 with specific details given as to how this should be achieved.  In many cases this centrered on the Rio Conventions - Climate Change, Biological Diversity and Desertfication.  However, in saying this many Southern Governments linked this position to ‘common but differentiated responsibilities between governments of the North and South.
  The Brazilian statement, also acting on behalf of 6 nations from Latin America, used perhaps the strongest language on this issue, noting that ‘we will not allow that Rio+10 results in new commitments for developing countries that are not matched with compatible commitments on the part of developed countries.’
  Nigeria, representing G77, continued on this theme stating that ‘problems in implementing Agenda 21 relate to a lack of financial resources’ and also noted a ‘failure of most developed countries in honouring their commitments.’
  Another common theme from developing countries was the trend of declining levels of Overseas Development Assistance, crushing external debt and economic marginalisation brought on by increased globalisation.  The G77 statement summarised this as ‘creating a vicious cycle that unleashes endless damage to the environment.’
  Meanwhile many northern governments called for what the US termed  ‘innovative financing designs’, particularly looking at the private sector.  This issue was closely linked to experience from the climate change negotiation relating to the Clean Development Mechanism, as well as next years highly anticipated Financing for Development Conference. On a related note were calls for  greater multi-stakeholder participation within the sustainable development agenda in preparation for 2002 as well as at the Summit itself.
    In terms of the location of the Summit the two main candidates both made further cases for why the Summit should be held in their country.  Indonesia, drawing the support of 10 other countries from the region, highlighted increasing urbanisation in Asia with 27 of the 33 world largest cities expected to be from the region by 2015.  The Indonesian Government went on to suggest that if Earth Summit 2002 took place in the region it would help to prioritise those problems associated to this phenomenon, including poor air quality and water resource management and loss of biological diversity and coastal resources.  
  Concluding, the Indonesian bid for the Summit stated that ‘organising the conference in the region will greatly enhance the sense of urgency, awareness and ownership among the people...to translate commitments undertaken into concrete action’.
  South Africa, the other main possible host, drew attention to the devastating effects of poverty, whereby the attainment of economic and social progress and the associated achievement of sustainable development remained a distant goal for many developing countries.  Keen to make tangible progress towards sustainable development, South Africa’s statement welcomed increased partnerships between North and South to facilitate the transfer of environmentally sound technologies, specifically regarding energy.  Ranked as the third most biologically diverse country in the world, the South Africans made particular reference to the massive dependence of many of the worlds poor on biological resources, thus calling for continued support for the Convention on Biological Diversity.  
  Including Climate change, Desertification, Small Island Developing States and the management of water resources, South Africa’s bid to host the Summit concluded by stating that if hosted in Africa, the Summit would ‘enhance the African Renaissance and provide the people of Africa with the opportunity to recommit themselves to the principals of Agenda 21.’
  On organisational matters there was significant coherence between governments. There was widespread support of the 10th Session of the CSD, to be held next May, to act of the 1st open ended prep. com. for the Summit.  Also that preparations at the regional and international level should include all stakeholders and that preparations should start sooner rather than later.  The role and work of UNEP was also commended, especially in supporting the process of enhancing inter-linkages among international organisations.
  The GA, which will draft its resolution on these issues next week, has a good deal of energy from which to draw.  As a result of prior discussion held under the UN umbrella over recent months, governments have been able to think through and develop their positions in a way that was perhaps not seen prior to Rio+5.  One might say that this new air of positivity is brought on by an increasing awareness of the urgency associated to these issues, 8 years after Rio.  Whatever the root causes, by building on this momentum the GA has a opportunity to establish a framework for the Summit which could deal with these critical issues in an open and forward looking manner.
  Despite the current political climate though, perhaps the most pertinent question still to be answered was that posed by the Mongolian statement; ‘Do we have sufficient political will and sense of solidarity to forge the genuine partnerships needed to erase the staggering discrepancy between commitments and action?’

Editorial

  There seems to be an awful lot of honesty in the air, and not just honesty but also a good deal of like-minded thinking.  Cynics might say that this is an idealistic, or even naïve reflection of what’s taking place.  But looking around it’s interesting that its all going on at the same time in a number of different places.  
  Debate about 2002 abounds.  Everyone seems to be fitting it into their agenda somewhere.  Of course the GA discussion on the matter has helped to focus attention and raise the Rio+10 profile.  But more than that, one cant help but feel that the sum of the 2002 whole is greater than the value of the individual parts.
  Of these ‘parts’, the GA currently being the most prominent, governments are presenting statements which flatly state that the international community has in the past ‘talked lots and delivered little.’ The interesting aspect is that this is coming from a range of sources, and the South are not the only ones who are conceding this...others are agreeing.  
  Across the board, in a range of different forum, it is also good to see momentum gaining for more meaningful engagement of partners from all sectors.  This in turn is increasingly being met by a willingness to jump on board.  The Climate Change and Desertification processes, to name but two, both feature significant levels of discussion on partnerships, particularly with the private sector.  This is also seen elsewhere and offers the potential for new ways of thinking about how these global issues are addressed.  
  2002 is a real opportunity to engage stakeholders in high-level decision making, linked to meaningful roles and responsibilities in towards effective and on-going implementation.  Cynics might dismiss this as an idealistic aim, but then why are we trying to re-establish the ‘spirit of Rio’ if not to be a little idealistic?
The Editor

News, News, News…

US ratify Desertification Convention as World prepares for next global meeting

   Earlier this month the US Senate agreed to ratify its first Rio Convention, dealing with Combating Desertification (CCD).  This brings the US inline with 169 other nations to ratify, accede or accept the Convention.  This move comes in advance of the 4th Conference of the Parties (COP 4) to the CCD, taking place in mid-December.  
  The importance of Desertification, as an issue, is the knock-on effect it has into other fields.  Largely affecting the developing world, increasing Desertification has a number of key causes, including over cultivation and grazing, deforestation and other forms of poor land use management. This in tern leads to increased rural poverty, migration of immigrants often to urban slums causing social and economic tension and global food security problems.  Much of the migration is to developed countries, particularly the US, Mexico and Western Europe.
  COP 4’s agenda will look at initiatives being developed in affected regions to address these challenges, with a particular focus on partnerships at the local, national, sub-regional and regional level.  The US’s move to ratify is therefore an important step in recognising the integrated nature of Desertification between North and South.
  Recent regional preparatory meetings in Latin America and Africa have looked at the key issues which COP 4 will address.  Drawing from National Reports the Latin American prep com looked at difficulties encountered in implementing the convention.  Including enhanced regional co-operation, harmonisation of public policy, greater engagement of gender perspectives and the involvement of the private sector, these reports form an important resource for focussing the debate in the region.  A review of these reports at COP 4 will be one of the core items on the agenda.
  Similarly, the 17 African National Action Programmes are at the core of the strategic and legal framework for the implementation of the CCD at the Local, National and Sub-regional level.  Facing many similar problems as those found in Latin America the African prep com will again be looking to strengthen international partnerships as COP 4, as well as raising the profile of other stakeholder groups role in the process.
  For more information contact:  www.unccd.int

UNEP Financial Services Initiative address Globalisation & Sustainable Development

  At their International Roundtable Meeting later this month UNEP’s Financial Services Initiative (FSI) in partnership with the Insurance Industry Initiative will have as their over-arching theme ‘Globalisation  & Sustainable Development - Opportunities for the Financial Services Sector’.  Running for 2 days from November 16th in Frankfurt Germany, the purpose of the meeting is to provide an international forum in which financial service sector officials, member of the business community can, alongside governments, academics and other stakeholders,  explore how environmental factors affect corporate performance.
  With a list of speakers including Mike Moore (WTO Director General), Rubens Ricupero (UNCTAD Sec. Gen.) and Jurgen Tritten (German Environment Minister), the meeting’s packed agenda will look specifically at responses by the financial and insurance sector to globalisation, asset management, assessing the sustainability impacts of changing global markets, environmental management and reporting and corporate responsibility.
  By looking at best practice for sound environmental management, the meeting will be seeking to share experiences and develop strategies towards integrating environmental considerations in the insurance and banking service sectors.  
  Preceding the Roundtable meeting will be the FSI’s AGM and an NGO preparatory roundtable.  Taking place the day prior to the main event, the AGM will establish the FSI 2 year workplan, and so  will be considering the Earth Summit 2002 within that period.  As multi-stakeholder participation gathers pace and with finance increasingly underpinning discussion on most all issues, this sector will play a central role in discussions.  The NGO meeting of the same day will further broaden the appeal of the FSI by helping to develop greater understanding and partnership between sectors.
For more information contact: 
www.unep.ch/etu/finserv/roundtable/Frankfurt.htm

FAO Report finds food still not reaching the table

  Launched on World Food Day, FAO’s new report ‘The State of Food Insecurity in the World’ (SOFI 2000) reveals shocking statistics about the global state of world’s hungry.  Despite pledges by world leaders at the 1996 World Food Summit to cut the number of undernourished to 400 million by 2015, reductions have not been forthcoming.  
  The report find 826 million currently without enough to eat meaning the international community will have to find reductions of 20 million a year to achieve its 2015 target.  Considering that during the 1990’s the average annual figure was 8 million, radical changes will be inherently necessary.
  SOFI 2000, however, goes beyond overall statistics, pinpointing specific groups most vulnerable to hunger. Moreover, the report stresses a need to take into account different nutritional needs of individual family members  This refining of information is aimed squarely at policy makers to facilitate more effective legislative responses.  
  When looking for solutions to world hunger FAO Director General, Dr. Jacques Diouf, in his foreword, appealed to the international community to focus on four essential measures:
1.	To address conflict, the cause of the deepest hunger in most of the poorest countries in the world.
2.	To make investments needed to build foundations for long-term sustainable growth & poverty reduction.
3.	To target the people who are suffering the deepest hunger.
4.	To orient agricultural research towards improvement of agricultural commodity production.
  SOFI 2000 also looks at success stories to provide models of what can be achieved. Examples from Ghana, Nigeria, and Thailand show how government policy has led to rapid improvements in domestic nutritional standards.
  Nevertheless, at a time of unparalleled global prosperity the fact that one sixth of the world population  are not able to reach basic nutritional levels is as un-necessary as it is unacceptable.  The report is a timely reminder of the results of a further 4 years of inadequate action.
 For more information contact: 
www.fao.org/NEWS?2000/001002-e.htm

  Road to COP-6

  The climate change debate is set to intensify. The sixth Conference of the Parties (COP-6) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change will take place in The Hague, Netherlands, from 13-24th November. 
  COP-6 will draw together negotiations from the past year, and is seen to be the most important climate change session since the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. The Buenos Aires Plan of Action agreed at COP-4 in 1998 set a two-year objective for strengthening implementation of the UNFCCC and entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol: COP-6 marks this deadline.
  The Conference of the Parties is the highest decision-making authority of the UNFCCC, established to review implementation of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). In broad terms, the commitments of Parties will be examined in relation to policies and measures, mechanisms and compliance. The Conference of the Parties marks the crucial culmination of meetings, workshops and ongoing negotiation processes. 
  Over the past year, the negotiation schedule has been tight. The 11th meeting of the parties to the Montreal Protocol and 5th Conference of the Parties to the Vienna Convention in Beijing convened to discuss additional steps to help reduce the consumption and production of ozone-depleting substances (ODS). Industry seminars and meetings have addressed issues such as Energy Efficiency and Technology Transfer. Meanwhile, workshops have been held to examine specific articles of the FCCC such as Best Practices in Policies and Measures, and regional or sectoral issues such as the use of Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) activities in meeting greenhouse gas reduction. The recent 13th session of the Subsidiary Bodies for Implementation and Scientific and Technological Advice in Lyon last month highlights the diversity of concerns that remain to be reconciled.
  There is considerable pressure from parties and observers for a positive outcome at COP-6. However, the road to success looks bumpy. Ratification of the Kyoto Protocol requires significant moves from developed countries (Annex 1 Parties) in sufficient numbers to bring the Protocol into force. COP-6 also requires support for action by non-Annex 1 parties to enhance the contribution of developing countries in achieving the UNFCCC’s ultimate objective: stabilization of atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases at safe levels.
  The Kyoto Protocol is key to this aim, with specific targets to reduce emissions within a defined time frame (by 2008-2012). Under the Protocol, each Annex 1 party has differentiated targets ranging from –8% to +10%. These combined targets will lead to an overall reduction of at least 5% from 1990 levels, of the major greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).
  The Kyoto Protocol provides a framework for Parties to meet their commitment to greenhouse gas reduction. The issues under negotiation form the specific details of that framework. Despite lengthy negotiations over the past year, COP-6 sessions need to resolve a range of issues on mechanisms, compliance and communication, and the use of sinks.
  The preparatory process has achieved multistakeholder input into the decision-making process. The Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry workshop in Joensuu, Finland (25-28 September) was attended by participants representing academic and research institutions, government departments and ministries, and international organizations. Key issues addressed include carbon accounting methodologies, LULUCF activities under Article 3.3 (afforestation, reforestation and deforestation) and 3.4 (additional activities) of the Kyoto Protocol; and the current state of negotiations in the run up to COP-6. 
  Three possible outcomes of the Kyoto Protocol were discussed at Joensuu: 1) abandonment at COP-6 and COP-7 because of failure to agree on certain key issues; 2) ratification but failure to meet targets due to the manner in which carbon sinks are included; 3) ratification and sinks conform to the objective of the UNFCCC. Overall, however, there was an overriding desire for the Protocol to succeed in leading to the agreed reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. It remains to be seen whether this mood is reflected in renewed political cooperation in The Hague.
  The odds appear to be against a positive outcome at COP-6. Offshore mechanisms such as Emission Trading, Joint Implementation and the Clean Development Mechanism present critical stumbling blocks. However, measures of technology and capacity building present the opportunity for developed and Less Developed Countries (LDCs) to work together in a combined global effort. Initiatives such as the launch of an international web-based petition, appealing to world political leaders to take action at COP-6, demonstrates the public pressure for an end to global warming. Ratification of the Kyoto Protocol at COP-6 is an important step along this complex path.
 For more information contact:  www.unfccc.int

The Kyoto Effect

  On November 13th and 14th in Antwerp, Belguim, scheduled to coincide with COP 6, The Kyoto Effect Conference will provide a forum for business and industry to discuss the wide reaching impacts of global climate change agenda.
   Industry will be given a chance to speak out about the economic impact of the Kyoto Protocol.  The debate about the most far reaching energy legislation in the world in moving from the US to Europe, and industry is now being provided a voice to help shape this legislation.
  During this decade, every major business in the developed world will need to adapt the way in which it does business to take account of the New Carbon Economy.  What will adapting entail? How much will it cost? How can businesses plan to take account of these dramatic changes? And what are governments doing to implement them?  Who will advise them?  The Kyoto Effect conference will seek practical solutions to these pressing issues.
  Many innovative companies have had environmental concerns in general and CO2 emission limitations on their radar for some dime.  Many more are increasingly realising that the political will to impose substantial change has now appeared.  Industry realises the inevitability of green house gas emissions controls, and so wants to be part of an economically viable solution.
  There is a need to listed to and engage industry in the dialogue.  This will be a vital part of ensuring that the full value of cross fertilisation can be realised between the stakeholders in developing more meaningful policy options in response to the climate change agenda.
  For more information contact: 
www.globalcarbonreduction.com

QUALITY OR QUANTITY?
PREPARATIONS FOR INSTANBUL+5

  The preparatory process for the five year review of the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) is well under way…. 
  In June 2001, the Special Session of the UN General Assembly will convene in New York for a five-year assessment, review and appraisal of the implementation of the Habitat Agenda: Istanbul+5. Regional Preparatory meetings have taken place over the past month, in association with the Regional Economic Commissions of Europe, West Asia, Asia and the Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean. The regional meeting of Africa is set to take place in Addis Ababa in early November. 
  These high-level meetings have enabled regions to assess progress of the Habitat Agenda at both the national and regional level. Countries submitted national level reports for a UNCHS synthesis of the implementation of the Habitat Agenda at each of the regional conferences. UNCHS presented the main trends and issues of concern relating to each of the commitments of the Habitat II agreement. The UNCHS synthesis also highlighted policy and legislative changes since Habitat II, institutional weaknesses, obstacles encountered and experience gained. 
  Country reports and the UNCHS presentation focused on six themes: Shelter, Social Development and Eradication of Poverty, Environmental Management, Economic Development, Governance and International Cooperation. To reflect the range of issues, from security of tenure and support of disadvantaged groups to mechanisms for implementation of local Agenda 21 initiatives, the meetings were attended by multistakeholder representatives. Participants from regional government, specialised national and international institutions, international banks, and non-governmental organisations worked together to facilitate the dialogue on human settlement. 
  The purpose of the regional meetings was not only to review progress made thus far, but also to identify initiatives for future action and commitment beyond Istanbul+5. Additional presentations examined regional trends and conditions affecting compliance with the Habitat agreements, in order to encourage regional and sub-regional co-operation, and identify realistic targets for Istanbul+5. 
  New challenges of urbanisation and human settlement were recognised across the regional meetings. The Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) presented a document examining the shift from rapid urbanisation to a period of ‘Consolidation of Human Settlement in Latin America and the Caribbean’.
  Other regions were more concerned with quality of settlement than rates of urbanisation. The European meeting focused on the inequalities generated by past patterns of human settlement, demographic changes and processes of globalisation. In order to address the widely varying housing standards across the ECE, Ministers adopted a declaration and strategy to improve the quality of life in the 21st century.
  Quality is the pivotal point of the new Strategy. As Kaj Bärlund, Director of the UN/ECE Environment and Human Settlements Division summarised, “Back in the 50s and 60s people needed a roof over their heads. Quantity was important: everyone had to be housed…but in the new millennium, the focus has shifted to quality and taking social and environmental factors into account”.
  Urban environmental performance was recognised a key contributing factor to quality of human settlements, through the generation of waste, energy consumption, traffic generation and pollution. Participants called for an integrated approach to the interconnected problems relating to transport, employment and housing distribution in European cities. 
  Differences between ECE countries inevitably mean national priorities differ. Overcrowding, housing-renewal requirements and an ageing population puts pressure on existing settlements and the need for public investment. The average home in the United States measures 190sq.m., compared to half that in Austria or Switzerland, and less than a third in Belarus, Latvia and Lithuania. On the other hand, in the U.S., nearly 50 million homes, half the total stock, has six rooms or more, whilst in France only one sixth of homes does. Such disparities give an indication of the numerous challenges ahead that need to be reconciled to reach regional and global agreement at Istanbul+5.
For more information contact:  www.unchs.org

Engaging the ‘Social’ in the Environmental, Social and Economic Equation

  This month saw 700 delegates from 80 nations converge on the 29th Conference of our International Advisory Board member the International Council on Social Welfare (ICSW). Held between 23rd and 27th October in Cape Town the theme of the event was “Poverty, Social Welfare & Social Development: Challenges for the 21st Century”.
  Influenced by its South African location, the two predominating issues were poverty alleviation and HIV/AIDS. In fact, one of the successes of the conference was undoubtedly the linking of these issues between the South African and international contexts. This linkage was supported by the high proportion of African delegates attending, who were able to offer insight in to the social development processes of the world’s poorest continent.
  The Towards Earth Summit 2002 project exhibited a stand at the conference, to try and encourage development practitioners to become involved in the Earth Summit process. In light of the perception of the Earth Summit process as an environmental one, many social development practitioners have little knowledge of the process, concentrating instead on the Copenhagen process of the World Summit on Social Development. This apparent lack of ownership of the Earth Summit process was reflected in the minimal turnout for the side event held by the project.
  Despite this those in attendance showed a genuine enthusiasm for involvement once the history of the process and plans for the 2002 summit were outlined. This translated in to a worthwhile set of discussions whereby small groups identified the priority issues they, as social development practitioners, think should be the two or three to be focused upon in 2002. 
  A major concern, in light of the fact participants were asked to rank their choice of issues, was that they felt unable to using a ranking system, due to the inter-linkages and the equal value of solving different issues that would benefit sustainable development as a whole. However, education and health were the two most mentioned issues, closely followed by poverty, HIV/AIDS and the enabling issue of access to information. Issues related to land and ecosystems, i.e. land use, agriculture, biotechnology, forestry and biodiversity, were also widely advocated. Interestingly the concept of equity was also a recurrent theme, despite it not being originally included in the list of issues for consideration.
  The project’s experience at this conference indicates a low level of buy in, or even real knowledge of, the Rio process by the social development community. Therefore we know to increase our efforts in outreaching to the sectors of major groups which are focused on the social point in the sustainable development triangle.
  At least now we have identified the ‘gap’ in the market we can begin the challenge of redressing the imbalance.
  ICSW is an international non-governmental organisation working for social welfare, social justice and social development. Representing tens of thousands of organisations worldwide, the ICSW fulfils its mandate through policy development and advocacy, dissemination of information, supporting the work of its membership and international programming.
  For more information contact: www.icsw.org

EURO ENVIRONMENT EUROPEAN CONFERENCE

  Multinationals met again in Aalborg, Denmark to present and discuss their visions and strategies for a sustainable future with politicians and key environmental organisations from all over the world. 
  Euro Environment 2000 Conference addressed “Visions, Strategies and Actions Towards Sustainable Industries”  . The final session of the Conference addressed Earth Summit 2002. Some of the key speakers from industry included Claude Fussler from the WBCSD and Lord Holme the Chair of the International Chamber of Commerce Sustainable Development Commission. Both highlighted the commitment of industry to positively engage in the Summit. The WBCSD has among other initiatives one to have a sustainable development strategy for the mining industry read for the Summit.  
  Lord Holme said for the ICC:
  “One of the critical questions world leaders will examine at the 2002 meeting will be the environmental impacts, for good and bad, of the powerful socio-economic, financial, and technical forces creating global markets. An associated challenge for governments will be to forge more effective public-policy mechanisms which de-link economic growth and environmental degradation while safeguarding the developing global, free market system.  It is this free market system which has the potential to roll back the most pernicious driver of environmental degradation, namely the scourge of poverty which prevents many billions of our fellow human beings from achieving truly sustainable livelihoods. The balancing act of sustainable development – to ensure economic, environmental and social integrity, underpinned by a vibrant free market system – is the great challenge of this century.”
•	He ended up saying: “Those businesses which have recognised that a free market system that excludes several billion people is not a working global market, also recognise that future commercial success depends on ending exclusion and marginalisation for the world’s poor. “
  Claude Fussler from the WBCSD raised 5 key issues for industry for 2002:
•	poverty elimination
•	climate risk
•	water security
•	food and health
•	institutions and finance
  Also addressing the meeting was Felix Dodds UNED Forum Director who identified the need for partnership in the preparations between now and the Summit and also identified six issues that need addressing:
•	finance;
•	water
•	AIDS/HIV
•	Fisheries
•	Energy
•	Institutional architecture 
  In the Conclusion to the Conference Chairman, President of World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Mr. Björn Stigson. Said:
  The debates have shown a high degree of convergence in the messages from governments, business and NGOs.  And there has been a generally positive attitude that we can move towards sustainable industries if we pull together . 
  We have tried to disseminate the many messages coming out of the debates. 
Agreements on many fundamentals 
  There has in overview been agreement on many fundamentals for a more sustainable development.
1.	There is a necessity for well-functioning markets, for resource-allocation including the crucial role of the financial markets.
2.	but there is also a need for legislation to create momentum for the broad mass of companies to move forward and to stimulate innovation. The legislation should increasingly be based on market instruments and be targeted on incentive basis.  Voluntary agreements with business are important complementary tools for governments.
3.	There is a need for expansion of partnerships and stakeholder interaction by all parties. To maintain credibility companies must be transparent and report on performances.
4.	We need a strong focus on resource efficiency to delink economic growth and resource use.
5.	We recognise poverty as a major cause of environmental destruction meaning that a no-economic growth strategy cannot work but we also recognise that a growing world population cannot consume resources on the north American level.
  A number of tools to address resource use were mentioned, like eco-efficiency, innovation and technology and targets and incentive-based legislation. Pricing including elimination of subsidies.
 The importance of clear indicators to influence behaviour and steer actions was underlined. 
  There are major global sustainable development issues without a clear path how to resolve them. The present global governance is not working. The only alternative seems to making markets work more efficiently to support a triple bottom line approach.
  Successful actions by companies require top-management commitment and management processes that take a holistic approach integrating financial, environmental and social issues.
Special challenges
  A number of special challenges has surfaced in the debate for which we do not have clear answers.
1.	How do we reach the SMEs (small and medium sized enterprises)?
2.	Tools like ISO 14000 and LCAs are not yet adapted to the special situation of SMEs.
3.	How can we influence behaviour and values of consumers to consume differently and support a delinking of economic development from resource use?
4.	Can eco-labelling play a part in consumer behaviour?
5.	What is the role of taxation?
6.	How do we make trade-offs between what is technically feasible with what is socially acceptable?
7.	In a fast changing world where are the borderlines between companies and societies for social responsibility?
Visions, Strategies and Actions
  Visions are needed, strategies are needed but most importantly actions. Actions are the key. Turning to a quote by Henry Ford: “You cannot built a reputation based on what you are going to do!”
  Based on the positive experience from this years conference, the conference organisers have decided that they intend to organise a EURO ENVIRONMENT 2002.
For more information contact:  
http://www.akkc.dk/uk/euro/envire/index.htm

ICFTU challenges World Bank & IMF

October 25th saw a series of meetings between the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU)  and the highest levels of the World Bank and the IMF. ICFTU’s Bill Jordan led the schedule of meetings designed to raise and resolve questions about the input of the unions into Bank and IMF discussion and decision-making processes. Proposing increased levels of cooperation as a solution to the institutionalised evasion and procrastination protested against in Seattle and Prague, ICFTU put poverty reduction, core labour standards and international financial reforms at the top of their agenda. Addressing the unions’ relationship with the institutions and changes that they feel are imperative within the institutions, dialogue was open, frank and productive. 
ICFTU’s engagement in the new post-globalisation political climate put less traditionally union-related issues on the agenda. Jordan et al expressed considerable concern about the rigidity of the criteria by which WB/IMF determine which countries qualify for HIPC status/debt relief. ICFTU is of the opinion that more countries need the assistance of the programme. However, they are also pushing for the removal of those countries that do not meet the core labour practices of the Bank/IMF from the programme. This raises the contentious issue of conditionality. Already prompting widespread criticism, the conditions attached to aid packages would – if meeting ICFTU’s criteria – be even more explicit and far-reaching. Critics of the validity of conditionality will presumably be less than enthusiastic about ICFTU’s proposals.
The consensus reached between ICFTU and the top dogs of global finance is reassuring. The support at WB/IMF for increased union input into policy making was, perhaps, surprising. Likewise, in going to WB/IMF, the unions could be said to be taking a somewhat elliptical route to rectifying these issues.  Bill Jordan asked the Bank to show itself willing “to step in and insist that governments do consult trade union groups”. This is an interesting reflection of the balance of power at the international level.
  ICFTU also expressed concern about what measures, the WB/IMF are taking in their capacity as policy-shapers in the fight against HIV/AIDS. The epidemic in Africa is a particular worry. The worst effected group in South Africa is the mining population, of whom some 40% are estimated to be HIV-positive. The ICFTU expressed its concerns that, due to the lack of stakeholder input into WB/IMF policies, the problems of sufferers are not being adequately addressed. The need to improve education about the disease, workers rights (not to be fired, for example, as a result of their illness) and preventative strategies should, Jordan indicated, be given greater priority. 
The Union delegation is pushing the WB/IMF to place greater emphasis on social safety nets at all levels. Their concern is, obviously, their members. However, this is of concern to all stakeholder groups as the siphoning-off of resources to service debts inevitably effects all sectors of society. Concern was also expressed about the IMF’s handling of crisis payments, most notably the antipathy it has shown in getting the private sector to take responsibility for debts accrued by a country in the wake of a financial crises. Likewise, the ICFTU argued that the promotion of labour standards would contribute to poverty reduction in response to a new Bank study that apparently shows no correlation between compliance with these standards and macroeconomic performance of a country.

UNEP’S 6TH International High-level Seminar on Cleaner Production

  The achievement of cleaner production is increasingly imperative in a consumption-driven global economy, whose production methods are decimating the earth’s environment. Governments and industry are working closely with each other, with the common aim of pollution elimination. A rising commitment is evident in the numbers of high-level decision-makers present at last months Montreal seminar. In 1998 more than 200 of these, representing over 40 countries, signed the UNEP International Cleaner Production Declaration. This was a voluntary undertaking to implement sustainable production and consumption behaviours. 
  UNEP’s seminars aim to ensure that production practices eliminate negative side-effects. By increasing overall efficiency of production, and reducing the risks to human health and the environment so prevalent in current production methods, improved amounts of sustainable development and rising quality of life and the environment would follow.
  To this end, the engagement of industry and government bodes well. It indicates willingness and commitment to bring about changes in attitudes, practices and policy of consumers, producers and legislators. Montreal’s agenda was focussed heavily around the impact of existing consumption patterns, as exemplified by youth cultures’ notions of desirable lifestyles. The rights of consumers to make informed decisions, based on transparency of production methods and information about sustainable consumption was also a pivotal issue. The broader ramifications of changing production and consumption patterns were likewise explored, notably the relationship between meeting the basic needs of the global poor and improved production methods and consumption priorities. 
  Claude Fussler of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development stated that “Public policy should be a catalyst”. Industry made it quite clear to governmental representatives that they recognised the need for policy changes to reflect priorities: “Governments must switch over from perverse subsidies to stressing incentives for cleaner production”. Supporting these statements was a diverse range of increasingly integrated groups – research centres, youth groups, financial institutions – working alongside industry and government at the seminar.
  The progress made and the efficiency of methods employed to date by business, public authorities and all stakeholder groups in the contribution to Cleaner Production was also under review. 

Forum International de Montreal

Human Security: new definitions, new roles for global civil society and multi-lateral institutions 

  At the beginning of October around 50 NGO representatives from all corners of the globe gathered together to focus on the issue of Human Security for the second International Forum of Montreal (FIM). FIM was formally set up two years ago with the idea of encouraging civil society practitioners to compare and reflect upon a range of campaigns and activities. Using a small-group workshop format the forum draws upon shared lessons and experiences, as well as examines their relationship to multilateral institutions. 
   During this year’s forum participants looked at five case studies, each of which touched upon the overarching theme of human security.
1.	Peace and security:  Steve Grose (Human Rights Watch, USA) looked at the their campaign for a treaty to ban land mines 
2.	Environmental security:  Tewolde Efziabher (Biosafety Protocol ad-hoc Working Group, Ethiopia) discussed the role of civil society in the development of the Cartagena Biosafety Protocol
3.	Food security:  Antonio Quizon (Popular Coalition, Philippines) looked at the role of a NGO/World Bank partnership and its impact upon agrarian reform
4.	Economic security:  Ann Petifor (Jubilee 2000, UK) reviewed their campaign to cancel the debt of the world’s poorest countries 
5.	Health and human security:  Dr. Sherad Gokhale (Chairman, International Leprosy Union India) outlined civil society interaction with the World Health Organisation in the fight against Leprosy.
Throughout the forum participants used the case studies as the basis for drawing out common threads within each of the campaigns. The discussion led to three emerging strands of thought. The working groups went on to examine each of these three areas in more depth, they referred to:
  1. Underlying values and visions: through a broad ranging discussion it became clear that many of the campaigns had arisen in response to a perceived failure in some dominant societal attitude and or behaviour. A member of the group referred to NGO activity as “value evangelism”, where NGOs develop visions of how to change certain values and make others a reality and then develop strategies and programmes to put their ideas into action. 
  2. Power: The interplay of NGOs with a range of local to global, private and public institutions was the focus of this group. The group examined the importance of following changing power-bases. This was discussed in relation to how to best bring about a change in decision-making processes. Also there was some consideration of the changing interaction between the nation state and civil society in the context globalising processes and institutions.
  3. NGO effectiveness: On a more practical tone a third group looked at critical elements that might exist to enhance all campaigns whether for long term programmes or emergency response. The importance of clear goals, the right kind of leadership, planning, strategy, communication, networking and media outreach, periodic assessment as well as flexibility were amongst some of the core principles that the group identified. The group also raised a number of questions such as whether and how NGOs should set limits to their campaigns and programmes e.g. on size of campaigns, inclusiveness, range of action.
  Whilst the forum did not produce any final statements or concrete proposals, the benefit of allowing free- flowing and unrecorded discussion was quite apparent. Those who attended agreed that it also challenge them to look at their work at a deeper level and it served to highlight the benefit of sharing skills learnt from a diverse range of experiences.
  Next year’s FIM will review NGO involvement in the “+ 5” World Summit Reviews. And in May 2002 (12th -15th May) FIM will also be hosting a conference on Global Governance “Civil Society and the Democratisation of Global Governance” to be held at the Palais des Congress, Montreal Convention Centre. The conference aims to examine the international influence of civil society by inviting leaders from all sectors to share their common vision of a global future. Representatives from civil society, UN, the World Bank and development banks, governments, academia and media are invited to attend.
For further info contact: e-mail:  fim98@cam.org

Diary Dates, Events & Conferences

6-7th November: UN Financing for Development Civil Society Consultation. New York, USA. 
Email: pietracci@un.org

6-10th November:  Third Global Meeting of Regional Seas Conventions & Action Plans.  Monaco. Email:  jorge.illueca@unep.org

13th-24th November: UN Framework Convention on Climate Change COP 6. The Hague, The Netherlands. Contact: http://cop6.unfccc.int

16-17th November: UNEP Financial Serivices Initiatives International Roundtable meeting on Finance and the Environment. Frankfurt, Germany.  Contact: www.unep.ch/etu/finserve/fsiconf/conf.hm

4-9 December: Persistent Organic Pollutants 5th Session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee.  
Johannesburg, South Africa.  Contact:  http://irptc.unep.ch/pops 

11-12 December:  UN Financing for Development Private Sector Consultation. New York, USA. 
Email: pietracci@un.org 

11-15th December:  Montreal Protocol MOP 12.  Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.  Contact:  http://www.unep.org/ozone/meet2000.htm

11-15th December: First Meeting of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Cartagena Protocol. Montpellier, France. Contact:  www.biodiv.org/conv/meetings.html#new 

11-22 December:  UN Convention to Combat Desertification COP 4. Bonn, Germany.  Contact: www.unccd.de

22-25th January:  International Workshop of Experts on Financing Sustainable Forest Management.  Oslo, Norway.  Email:  vahanen@un.org 

5-9th February: 21st Session of the UNEP Governing Council.  Nairobi, Kenya.  Email:  millerb@unep.org

13-23rd February:  39th Session of the UN Commission for Social Development. New York, USA.  Contact:  www.un.org/esa/socdev/csd/2001.htm

What’s in next months Network ~2002…

•	UNFCCC COP 6 
•	Global Environment Facility Council Meeting 
•	Financing for Development Consultations
•	UNEP Financial Services Initiative Annual Meeting
•	UN Convention to Combat Dersertification - COP 4
•	Persistent Organic Pollutants 5th Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee