Biofuels—and why CSD17

should grasp the chance to

lead

1

Maintaining the Unique

Contribution of the CSD in the

UN System

3

Putting Farming First in Africa 4

Maasai Pastoralists’ Voice Are

Heard in New York

5

Farming First 5

Water as a Cross-Cutting ssue

for CSD17

6

The Scientific Method:

Where’s the Research

8

Sustainable Development and

Animal Welfare: A Critical

Partnership

8

Live from the CSD 9

Food for Thought… 10

Biofuels – and why CSD17

should grasp the chance to lead

Outreach Issues

The issue of biofuels is controversial,

even though many participate in the

discussions with different take on

what it really is. Let “Outreach Issues”

clear away the confusion with this

article. Here we’ll sort out the

different varieties to clear the

confusion, and we offer advice on

how delegates can make CSD adopt a

clear leadership role on the issue. It is

sorely lacking today!

The discussions on biofuels have been

prominent in the current CSD cycle

for quite some time, as well as within

both the climate change negotiations

and the many policy initiatives on the

international food crisis. This is not

reflected in the draft Chair’s

summary. Delegations therefore need

to rectify this in the negotiations on

the final text.

A brief history

Biomass has for generations represented the

main energy source for millions of people, both

north and south of the Equator. Cutting of trees

for firewood has been necessary to cook our

food, lighten up dark corners and warm our

dwellings, with few alternatives available. In

addition, farmers have to some extent produced

biogas from animal waste and liquid fuel from

small scale crops. These energy sources are

likely to represent the main energy source in

developing countries for generations still, and

are not a controversial issue.

In developed countries the use of biomass for

energy production has developed further. Plant

materials have been transformed to liquid form

at an industrial scale, and powered lamps,

generators and even cars, supplementing or

even replacing petroleum. This liquid biofuels

which a large and growing part of is produced in

developing countries, are by many organizations

now named agrofuels.

Continued on page 2

Inside this Issue:

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

THURSDAY May 7, 2009

1

Outreach Issues is the civil society

newsletter produced by the SDIN

Group (ANPED, TWN and ELCI) and

Stakeholder Forum. Outreach

Issues aims to report with attitude,

from the global scene of

sustainability.

The organizations publishing

Outreach Issues are not responsible

for the content of signed articles.

Opinions expressed in articles are

those of the authors.

By: Oyvind Dahl, Norwegian Forum for

Environment and Development

Biofuels have occupied a prominent place in the discussions in CSD the last year,

and expectations are high that weeks of considerations should at least lead to a

clear recommendation on the way forward. Reading the Chair’s draft negotiating

document is, however, rather disappointing.

2

With the climate crisis and rising petroleum

prices, many countries in the North are now

looking for ways to produce more biofuels/

agrofuels than their own agricultural land

can currently provide. So the pressure

mounts on so-called “available” land in

developing countries, and this is the core of

the controversy.

The current situation

The climate crisis has led to developed

countries looking for ways to sustain their

high energy fuelled consumption economies

without increasing the release of green

house gases. The inability or lack of

willingness to transform the economy to a

low energy version is resulting in the

industrialized world operating as a locust on

the natural resource base of the globe, con-

stantly moving around looking for new natu-

ral resources in order to secure the current

level of consumption. But what are the con-

sequences?

Biofuels or Agrofuels – sustainability criteria

or free for all?

It is obvious to most observers that the

current unregulated biofuel industry in

developing countries is affecting the food

security of vulnerable people, leading to

higher prices on staple food, and challenging

the traditional and sustainable management

of natural resources and land use in rural

areas. Both FAO and the World Bank has

concluded that part of the rapid increase of

food prices last year was indeed, due to

increased biofuel production. In addition, it

has been documented by several NGOs that

the spread of biofuel crops have led to loss of

both rainforest and fragile dry land areas.

The potential of biofuels as a cash crop for

small scare farmers and its potential as a

mitigating climate tool has been thoroughly

promoted, especially by energy utilities and

government officials. The negative effects of

biofuels however have not been properly

addressed, and as CSD is mandated with a

clear responsibility to consider sustainability

efforts and promote the right solutions, let

us take a look on the main concerns that

should be addressed:

• The loss of arable land. It is not well

documented that biofuel production

mostly takes place in marginal and

unutilized land. Quite the contrary, with

increasing fuel prices, it is highly likely that

biofuel production will be moved into

more fertile land to boost crops. So called

marginal land is also very often land used

by pastoralists grazing land and for other

use by people in these areas.

• The threat to small scale farmers without

legal protection of their land. Land tenure

and land ownership issues are contentious

in many countries, and the process of

securing the legal rights of the farmers

have still some way to go. Biofuel

production represent a clear temptation

for larger scale and resourceful investors

to bid for land currently occupied by farm-

ers producing for local markets and own

consumption.

• The climate mitigating effect of biofuels is

uncertain. More research has to be

performed in order to increase knowledge

on what role biofuels should play in the

climate change negotiations.

• The loss of biodiversity. Introducing new

and modified species of crops in new

areas poses a serious threat to

biodiversity, nature and human health. A

science based approach is necessary to

avoid unintended and negative conse-

quences. It is too risky to experiment.

To some industries, the potential good from

biofuel production overshadows these con-

cerns. It is not the role of CSD, however, to

promote a non-sustainable development.

Quite the contrary; precautionary principles

should prevail any other concerns one might

have. And on biofuels this is particularly

important as its positive potential remains

doubtful as the negative effects come to

light with increasing clarity. It is time for CSD

to lead the way!

So what’s next? Shall we just strike down

the good results that have been shown

through blanket policies and banning the

whole concept of biofuel production. Quite

the contrary – NGOs at this CSD-session

have the following proposals:

1. Support the proposal of the UN special

rapporteur on the right to food to put in

place a 5 year moratorium on expansion of

industrial production of agrofuels;

2. Urge FAO and UNDP to complete their

efforts to develop sustainability criteria for

the production of biofuels;

With these first steps it should be possible

to halt the negative impact of biofuels until

we know more, and countries will have am-

ple time to Include biofuel production

strategies in national agricultural and energy

Outreach Issues

“The inability or lack of

willingness to transform the

economy to a low energy version

is resulting in the industrialized

world operating as a locust on the

natural resource base of the

globe, constantly moving around

looking for new natural resources

in order to secure the current

level of consumption”

• Rules for and regulation of production of

biofuels / agrofuels must be urgently

developed by the un (FAO, UNEP and

other relevant UN institutions) to ensure

that production and use of biofuels is

sustainable in accordance with the three

pillars of sustainable development and

takes into account the need to achieve

and maintain global food security.

South and the North at the NGO-meetings –

and no strong opposition:

• Immediately put in place a five years

moratorium on expansion of industrial

production of agrofuels to avoid increased

hunger, huge environmental and social

problems and conflicts, avoiding

competition for productive arable land

and displacement of small farmers and

pastoralists;

3

areas poses a serious threat to

Outreach Issues

Over the history of the CSD there have

been numerous times when difficult and

controversial issues in sustainable develop-

ment are deflected by claims that other

bodies in the international system have

jurisdiction, not CSD. For example, in the

thematic cluster under debate in this CSD

17, such deflections have been associated

with trade and climate issues.

While there are other bodies that are the

central decision arenas for these issues --

the WTO for trade and the IPPC for climate

change -- the CSD is the one body in the

UN system that looks at all issues through

the lens of sustainable development. The

unique value of the CSD to international

understanding comes through addressing

issues such as trade and climate change

from a sustainable development perspec-

tive.

In CSD 17 the principal issues for consid-

eration at the High Level Segment include

the sustainable development approach to

the food crisis and to the call for a new

green revolution. It is important to have a

rigorous examination of food crisis and

calls for a new green revolution from a

sustainable development perspective.

From such a view, social and environ-

mental impacts of trade policy can be sur-

faced and lead to policy mitigating these

impacts. From a sustainable development

perspective, the rights based approach to

solving the food crises has a hearing which

it may not have in a narrower construction

of food security and adequate production

of food. From a sustainable development

perspective, efforts to mitigate the im-

pacts of climate change can be put into a

more holistic framework.

Major Groups can join the call for holding

the line to consider ALL important issues

from a sustainable development perspec-

tive, including the relation of agriculture

to trade and climate change.

Maintaining the Unique Contribution of the

Commission on Sustainable Development

plans in order to secure proper land use

planning, securing basic rights to land and

food security, and allow for a sustainable

development.

The NGO Major Group has discussed

biofuels / agrofuels in two of the meetings.

There is no common proposals, but the

following two proposals from some

Norwegian NGOs have got strong support

from many organizations from both the

By: Thomas Forster, International Partners for

Sustainable Agriculture

4 4

Outreach Issues

A top priority of the Millennium Develop-

ment Goals (MDGs) is to halve the number

of people in the world experiencing

poverty and hunger. While several

countries have made progress in this area

(China alone has lifted more than 175

million of its people above the poverty

line), too many countries in sub-Saharan

Africa still face the same hunger and

poverty levels that they experienced 20

years ago. Up to 300 million Africans are

facing chronic hunger.

So what can Africans do to put food on the

table and money in their pockets? The

answer is simple – invest in agriculture.

After decades of stagnation in agricultural

yields and little investment in rural

economies, African countries are begin-

ning to prioritize the development of

agricultural production and markets. Rural

development and agricultural productivity

improvement now feature prominently on

the agenda of national governments.

Continent-wide plans and investments,

through programmes under the Compre-

hensive Africa Agriculture Development

Programme (CAADP), the Alliance for a

Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA),

Research into Use (RIU) and the Alliance

for Commodity Trade in East and Southern

Africa (ACTESA) and many others are

encouraging.

With the majority of African governments

spending on average less than 5% of total

national budgets on agriculture, one

of CAADP's key objectives is to increase

this to 10%, with the target of raising

agricultural productivity by at least 6% per

annum. Achieving Africa's agricultural

growth also requires massive investments

from the global community and the

on-going global financial crisis poses a

threat to Africa's efforts.

Over the past generation, agriculture and

farmers have been sidelined in interna-

tional policy circles. During this time,

agriculture's share of total aid has dropped

from 17% to 3% of total spend. While total

aid to sub-Saharan Africa remained stable

during the 1990s, the proportion allocated

to agriculture declined year on year. Aid

to agriculture in the Southern Africa

Development Community (SADC) member

states declined as a proportion of total aid

from 20% in the early 1980s to 8% by

2000. If poverty in Africa is to be reduced,

aid to agriculture must be increased

substantially and made to work more

effectively.

The G8 agriculture ministers, who met for

the first time last weekend to discuss the

world food emergency stressed the

importance of sound agricultural policies

and strategies to underpin the invest-

ments, at national, regional and global

level. They highlighted that these policies

need to be developed in an inclusive

manner, involving all main stakeholders,

including farmer organizations, and to

be based on reliable statistics. The G8

ministers have fully endorsed CAADP as

an excellent plan of what is needed to

achieve food security in Africa.

It is time we realized that there can be no

sustainable development without

sustainable agriculture. For Africa to de-

velop, sustainable food policies and part-

nerships are key. My organization, the

Food, Agriculture and Natural Re-

sources Policy Analysis Network

(FANRPAN) has joined forces with interna-

tional groups from the science and tech-

nology, farmers, and private sector com-

munities to endorse Farming First among

global policymakers.

The time is right to bring about much

needed policy reform to address the stub-

born and widespread problems that have

crippled African agriculture and rural

economies.

Putting Farming First in Africa

By: Dr. Lindiwe Majele Sibanda, CEO, Food, Agriculture,

and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network

Without investment in agriculture, sustainable development in Africa will remain a dream.

“no sustainable develop-

ment without sustainable

agriculture”

needed in six key areas: 1. safeguarding

natural resources, 2. sharing knowledge, 3.

building local access, 4. protecting harvests,

5. enabling access to markets, and 6. priori-

tizing research imperatives.

Governments have welcomed the Farming

First initiative as they see it as an opportunity

to raise awareness on the collective contribu-

tions of the some of the most important agri-

cultural and rural stakeholders: farmers and

cooperatives, researchers and extension

workers, companies and entrepreneurs.

7 5

Outreach Issues

sustainable development without

Farmers, scientists and business and industry

have prepared a call to action, Farming First

(www.farmingfirst.org), to respond to the

global challenges posed during this round of

the United Nations Commission on Sustain-

able Development. For the first time in CSD’s

history, three of the nine major groups

formed an agricultural coalition to bring for-

ward to governments their key policy recom-

mendations. Together, these groups repre-

sent the world's farmers, the world's scien-

tists, and the private sector. Farming First

illustrates the strength and value of a

multistakeholder collaboration which ac-

knowledges the specific concerns of each

group while building consensus and comple-

menting each other for a common frame-

work for future action. It also shows the im-

portance of including civil society’s voice

within these international negotiations.

“Farming First” calls for a broad-based,

knowledge-centred approach to increase

agricultural output in a sustainable and so-

cially responsible manner. The platform is

focused on helping subsistence farmers be-

come small-scale entrepreneurs. Action is

Farming First

I am Wilfred Saiton Ole Ondungo, a Maasai

pastoralist leader from Kajiado district in

Kenya. I have been asked by my community

to represent them at CSD 17, and to bring

the local voices of pastoralists to the global

platform to create awareness of the

challenges that face and threaten us. The

most critical of these is the recent drought

that has killed hundreds of livestock early

this year. Bringing more awareness and

understanding from the international

community of the need for global support to

help Maasai pastoralists, and the millions of

other pastoralists in the world, to overcome

the climate challenges that are threatening

our livelihoods, is our need and our plea.

I also wish to highlight local innovations and

projects the community needs to overcome

the challenges. Among these innovations are

building social entrepreneurship and enhanc-

ing market linkages through commodity

value market chain loops, a key interest of

the Kenya Livestock Working Group, whose

secretariat is Heifer Kenya. As a pastoralist

entrepreneur, together with other pastoral-

ists, we have built a medium- sized abattoir

called Keekonyokie Slaughterhouse that

provides vital market services for feeding

Nairobi. We have also identified key needs in

collaboration with partners at CSD:

WHAT PASTORALISTS NEED - KEY PRIORITIES

FOR RESPONDING TO A FOOD CRISIS AND

CLIMATE STRESSES WITH PRO-ACTIVE RISK

MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND LIVESTOCK

IN AFRICA

• Food Secure Landscapes and Co-Benefits

• Sustainable Value Chains

• Adaptation and Risk Management

Strategies

• Communities of Practice

Photo courtesy of Lisa Develtere, Flemish

Youth Delegation

Maasai Pastoralists’ Voice Are Heard in New York

By: Morgane Danielou, International Fertilizer

Industry Association

Recognizing that the thematic issues

under discussion at CSD have significant

impacts on water quantity and quality.

Acknowledging that ecosystem

protection requires guaranteed

minimum environmental flows to

meet the needs of human populations

for water of sufficient quality and

quantity.

Recognizing that the impacts of climate

change on water as it relates to

agriculture, rural development, land,

drought and desertification will require a

fundamental re-thinking of water

governance arrangements.

Acknowledging that the right to water

should be paired with the responsibility

to protect ecosystems, preserve water

quality and secure equitable quantities

of water for social and environmental

needs.

Welcoming the decision to host a

Ministerial Roundtable on Integrated

Land and Water Resources Management

for Agriculture and Rural Development.

Recognizing that water is not the core

subject of negotiation for any

functioning international or

intergovernmental process, convention

or treaty. As such, the Commission on

Sustainable Development provides a

natural home for discussion of the social,

environmental and economic aspects of

water.

We call on CSD delegates to:

In the area of Agriculture:

(a) Adopt an ecosystem-based approach

to agricultural management, developing

systems of water rights that allow for

prior allocation of water to guarantee

minimum requirements of

environmental flows, building ecosystem

resilience for sustainable agriculture and

livelihoods. Prioritise the requirements

of environmental flows and basic social

needs ahead of economic requirements,

recognizing this as a critical response

measure to climate change impacts.

(b) Recognize and endorse the findings

of the IAASTD* report and its

recommendations and findings in rela-

tion to sustainable agricultural manage-

ment.

(c) Call on the Food and Agriculture

Organisation to assess the relative

environmental and social impacts of

different agricultural practices, including

small and large-scale practices, organic

Water as a Cross-Cutting Issue for CSD17

and non-organic, industrial and non-

industrial, thereby identifying the meth-

ods conducive to the most efficient use

of water.

(d) Evaluate the goods and services

provided to agriculture by ecosystems,

including freshwater, and introduce

mechanisms for reflecting their true

value in agricultural management plans.

(e) Utilise water footprint analyses to

determine the suitability of crops in cer-

tain regions and locations.

Land

(a) Develop integrated land and water

resources management plans and insti-

tutions for implementation at the river

By: Members of the CSD Freshwater Caucus and the

Global Public Policy Network on Water Management,

including a range of non-governmental actors, major

groups and stakeholders

6 6

Outreach Issues

through land tenure arrangements that

provide security and ownership.

(b) Integrate traditional knowledge of

communities and indigenous peoples

into sustainable land and water man-

agement policies and frameworks.

(c) Promote economic diversification

and support alternative livelihood op-

tions through education and training so

that dry-land poor communities can

create work that reduces the pressure

on land and water resources that leads

to desertification.

(d) Provide additional funding and sup-

port to the UN Convention to Combat

Desertification, the most underfunded

of the Rio Conventions.

(e) Support the development of an in-

ternational Water Scarcity Policy Frame-

work, as proposed by the UNCCD, as a

tool for countries to respond to and

manage water scarcity, building syner-

gies with the UNFCCC as a key response

measure to climate change.

* International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge,

Science and Technology for Development, Synthesis Report.

7 7

Outreach Issues

basin and watershed level, involving

residents and other stakeholders in

decision-making processes. Encourage

the strengthening of water and land

management institutions where they

exist to deal with competing demands

for and increased pressure on water re-

sources, which stand to be exacerbated

by climate change.

(b) Develop water management

arrangements that guarantee minimum

environmental flows for ecosystems,

recognizing land as a water user in its

own right.

(c) Assess the value of ecosystem

services provided by land and develop

policies, schemes and incentives that

promote and enable sustainable water

management to preserve land quality,

including rainwater harvesting pro-

grammes and Payment for Ecosystem

Services arrangements where appropri-

ate.

Rural Development

(a) Ensure access to water for human

and ecosystem needs in rural areas on a

fair and equitable basis.

(b) Ensure that ODA for rural develop-

ment is granted in a manner that en-

courages water-use efficiency,

sustainable management of water

resources and protection of ecosystems

that build climate resilience.

(c) Ensure that domestic subsidies do not

promote inefficient or unsustainable

water use and provide incentives for

protection of ecosystems and integrated

approaches to land and water

management.

(d) Build capacity for effective and

transparent governance arrangements in

rural communities that enable the

integrated management of land and wa-

ter resources.

(e) Address the potential for dry

sanitation solutions for water-stressed

and water-scarce rural areas to reduce

pressure on available water resources.

Drought

(a) Adopt a precautionary approach to

conserving water and preparing for peri-

ods of greater water scarcity that stand

to increase in range and severity under

climate change, while investing in better

monitoring, information, observation

and forecasting systems that assist in

developing appropriate response meas-

ures.

(b) Integrate drought preparedness and

management plans into frameworks for

integrated water resources and land

management

(c) Recognize and address the potential

impact of projected increases of drought

on transboundary watersheds, building

capacity to develop fair and equitable

transboundary water management ar-

rangements, recognizing the role of the

UN Watercourses Convention in this re-

gard.

Desertification

(a) Promote land reform that enhances

incentives for investment in sustainable

water and land management practices

“ecosystem protection requires guaranteed minimum

environmental flows to meet the needs of human populations

for water of sufficient quality and quantity”

project have greater transparency?

Alternate Solutions

Ceci believes that GMOs might not be the

best way to produce food. Instead, she

suggests looking to alternate sustainable

farming methods for solutions. One such

solution, companion planting, has yielded

positive results throughout Europe.

Companion planting, as Ceci explained, is

planting different crops amongst the crops or

planting flowers, to confuse the pests that fly

over. Most pests are crop specific—you

won’t find a pest for a carrot attacking a

cabbage. “Why not use time tested methods

that have been proven true, instead of using

a technique that involves a lot more

fertilizer?”

The Bottom Line

“You need accountability, transparency, and

long-term studies to track the development

of GMOs,” Ceci stated. “We don’t know

what the long-term environmental and

health-related impacts could be.” There

needs to be greater demand for these

studies, and for more specific definitions for

the terminology being used.

8

Outreach Issues

Cecile Charles-King is part of the Interna-

tional Partnership for Sustainable Agricul-

ture, as well as the Brooklyn/Queens Land

Trust, which maintains 34 community gar-

dens using sustainable agriculture, and

Growing Power, Inc., where she is on the

steering committee for the Growing Food

and Justice for All Initiative. Cecile, or “Ceci”,

as she prefers to be called, is also a gardener

who grows her own food using sustainable

methods. I spoke with Ceci, and she

presented an interesting point of view about

the lack of research available to the public

concerning genetically modified organisms.

Elements of a Theory

“When I was an undergraduate studying

science,” Ceci told me, “We were taught that

when you do research, you have to define

your terms so that everybody starts at the

same place.” The phrase “Sustainable

Agriculture” has been thrown around, she

argues, without a specific definition. Piling

on fertilizer, which harms soil, is not a

sustainable method of agriculture.

Just as important, in the scientific method, is

the hypothesis, a statement of the

researcher’s educated guess. Your

hypothesis is the starting point from your

research. To test this hypothesis, you need

to conduct experiments, replicate studies

and use long-term studies to show that

the hypothesis is true. So where are the

studies to support the hypothesis that GMOs

do not have negative environmental and

health-related consequences?

Seeking Out Proof

Companies that produce GMOs make claims

that their research shows higher yields,

greater health benefits, and no or few

adverse effects from GMOs. However, this

research is not readily available. Long-term

studies, which are particularly important,

have not even been properly conducted.

“When do we find out the results of the

generation that you’re feeding?” asks Ceci.

“A generation is 20-30 years. If we’re

feeding this generation genetically modified

food, do we have to wait 20-30 years to see

the results?”

Ceci goes on to argue that these companies

are putting their “results” in the mainstream

and marketing their products, yet not allow-

ing the general public access to the research

that shows these results. Shouldn’t such a

The Scientific Method: Where’s the Research By: Aleksandra Radyuk, Global Youth Action Network

Of the world’s one billion poorest

people, over 850 million totally depend

on animals for a living, many more for

food. Livestock are an integral compo-

nent of both crop and animal based agri-

culture. Not only do they provide nutri-

tion, but they assist in crop planting, har-

vesting, and transportation of food to

markets. The value of livestock is so

critical that people fleeing from conflicts

and natural calamities protect their ani-

mals even at risk of their own lives,

because without their animals, they

have no income and can not properly

feed their families.

Many discussions at CSD acknowledge

the value of livestock in addressing the

MDG, but fail to mention that their

ability to do so is contingent on their

welfare. Providing livestock with nutri-

tion, veterinary care, and an environ-

ment which fosters their welfare im-

Sustainable Development and Animal Welfare:

A Critical Partnership

proves the lives of humans through

greater food security, food safety,

economic and environmental stability.

In other words, if the UN is to truly

protect the climate and environment,

preserve food security and reduce

poverty and the spread of disease, the

“international community must

integrate science based animal welfare

into their development,

environment and disaster reduction

activities.

By: Larry winter Roeder, Jr., MS,UN Affairs Director, WSPA

9

Outreach Issues

In Earth Talk, today coming from the UN

Headquarters in New York is, a discussion

programme focusing on the main issues

coming out of the ongoing Commission

on Sustainable Development. In today’s

programme, Armando Canchanya talks to

Neth Dano from the Third World Network,

an alliance of NGOs in developing coun-

tries and Emillio D'allessio, President of

Agenda 21 in Italy. D'allessio works with

local authorities running Agenda 21

schemes.

Live from CSD at the United Nations

headquarters in New York, join Armando

Canchanya as he brings you news,

discussions and debates of events sur-

rounding the Commission on Sustainable

Development. In today’s segment, the

radio team explores more on organic

foods—what experts say and more

importantly what you think they are and

why you consume them. Don't miss out on

our jargon busted segment, where we

define the term 'organic' Remember,

ignorance is no defence!!!!!!

In Pioneers of the Planet Lucy Mulenkey, a

Masai from Kenya, shared with us some of

her vision on environmental protection

and the indigenous communities, as well

as her permanent fight to get government

and mainstream media attention. Lucy

started out as a radio journalist in the early

80’s in 99 she launched and NGO related

to indigenous rights, and now is an activist

for indigenous rights all over the world.

Our Greentable discussion was chaired by

Felix Dodds and included contributions

from Dr Lindiwesibanda, Aksel Nærstad

and Raul Momtemoyor. The discussion

focused on the causes and possible

solutions of the global food crises

Listen to the podcasts from the United

Nations headquarters in New York on

media.stakeholderforum.org and get the

exciting insight

Emillio D'allessio, Neth Dano and Armando

Canchanya

Live from the CSD http://media.stakeholderforum.org

By: Catherine Karongo , Kenya Journalist, Stakeholder

Forum

Ambassador Ronny Jumeau, Seychelles and Ambassador Angus Friday, AOSIS

into their development,

“The only way [the United

States] can continue to consume

disproportionate amounts is if

people in the poorest nations

really just fall of a cliff and

have nothing left.

That's not going to happen.”

- Richard Heinberg, author.

Food for Thought… Felix Dodds, Stakeholder Forum

Recently HSBC brought out an analysis of

the recovery packages. How Green were

they? Who could be accused of rhetorical

embellishment?

I have to say I was surprised with the League

Table. According to HSBC, by far the biggest

investor in a “Green New Deal” was the Re-

public of Korea, where 81% of the money in

the recovery package is earmarked for green

projects, creating an estimated 950,000 new

jobs. Not surprisingly, the UN secretary

general, Ban Ki-moon, has praised the exam-

ple set by his homeland. What should New

Green Deals include? According to Achim

Steiner, UNEP Executive Director, they

should include: "Investments in clean-tech

and renewable energy; infrastructure such

as railways and cycle tracks and nature-

based services like river systems and for-

ests”. The benefits are multiple and “not

only counter recession and unemployment

but can also set the stage for more sustain-

able economic recovery and growth in the

21st century”.

In second place was the European Union

with 59% of the Union’s recovery budget

earmarked for green activities. Third was

China (38%), which seems to be also using

the recession to rid themselves of some of

their most polluting factories. Where, ac-

cording to the HSBC report, does that put

the most vocal countries about the need for

a Green New Deal? France at 21%, Ger-

many at 13%, the US at 12% and the UK at

7%. Are these countries in danger of being

left behind not only in recovery terms, but

in the race for being part of the new wave

after the knowledge wave – the environ-

mental technology wave. As the UN Secre-

tary General said in his Green New Deal

speech in Poznan in December, what we

need is:

“A revolution. A turning point. A moment

when we turned away from a past that no

longer works toward a more equitable and

prosperous future.” The questions is, are

we there yet?

“Green Recovery Packages”

Senior Editor: Jan-Gustav Strandenaes, ANPED

Co-Editor: Felix Dodds, Stakeholder Forum

Daily Editor: Stephen Mooney, Stakeholder Forum

Design and Layout: Erol Hofmans, ANPED

Contributing writers:

Oyvind Dahl Norwegian Forum for Environment and Development

Thomas Forster IPSA

Dr. Lindiwe Majele Sibanda FANRPAN

Morgane Danielou IFA

Aleksandra Radyuk Global Youth Action Network

Larry winter Roeder, Jr. WSPA

Catherine Karongo , Stakeholder Forum

EDITORIAL TEAM

Previous and today’s issues are easily available online, go to:

www.sdin-ngo.net

media.stakeholderforum.org

Please send your contributions to:

smooney@stakeholderforum.org

erol.hofmans@anped.org

Outreach Issues

10

The past year has been fascinating look at

how governments, at least in rhetoric, have

been talking about a ‘Green New Deal’. I am

not sure who came up with the concept but

I believe it may have been the Green New

Deal Group (www.greennewdealgroup.org).

This group was launched in 2007 with Larry

Elliot (Economics Editor of the Guardian),

Charles Secrett and Tony Juniper (former

Directors of Friends of the Earth UK), Andy

Simms (New Economics Foundation), and

Ann Pettifor (former Director of Jubilee

2000), among others.

The group drew inspiration from President

Roosevelt’s “comprehensive response to the

Great Depression to propose a modernised

version, a ‘Green New Deal’ designed to

power a renewable revolution, create thou-

sands of green-collar jobs and rein in the

distorting power of the finance sector while

making more low-cost capital available for

pressing priorities.”

The theme seems to have been picked up by

political elite across the world, from Presi-

dent Obama to President Hu. There have

been trillions of dollars spent by govern-

ments trying to secure new jobs and save

their banks and financial institutions.

Outreach Issues is made

possible through the

generous support of: .

THE ITALIAN MINISTRY OF THE

ENVIRONMENT, LAND AND SEA

AND

THE BELGIAN SUSTAINABLE

DEVELOPMENT FEDERAL PUBLIC

PLANNING SERVICE