International Report Ignored 1

Food Sovereignty: A New

Model for a Human Right

2

Sustainable Development

for Dummies

4

Acroecology and

Sustainable Development

5

It’s the Farmers Who

Feed the World

7

La Torre de Papel 8

CSD Without Sustainability? 9

UN Conference on the World

Financial and Economic Crisis

10

Live from the CSD 11

Food for Thought... 12

International Report Ignored

Outreach Issues

In particular, Herren stressed his incredulity

at the 180 degree turn of a number of

governments and UN bodies since the original

publication of the report back in April 2008. The

IAASTD findings were reviewed and ratified

during an Intergovernmental Panel in

Johannesburg in April 2008, and since has been

endorsed by over sixty countries including the

UK, Germany and Austria. In spite of the

support and commitment of member states,

civil society and UN agencies, the IAASTD

recommendations appear to have made very

little impact here at the negotiations.

For those not familiar with the IAASTD report,

the publication undertook global and sub-

global assessments of the role of agricultural

knowledge, science and technology in reducing

hunger and poverty, improving rural livelihoods,

and facilitating equitable, environmentally,

socially and economically sustainable develop-

ment. The project was launched at the World

Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002

and has taken over four years to complete.

It was the product of a multi-stakeholder

process involving governments, NGOs and

industries from rich and the World Bank and an

array of UN bodies including the GEF, FAO,

UNDP, UNESCO, and the WHO.

Amongst a wide range of findings, the authors

conclude that the present system of food

Inside this Issue:

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

WEDNESDAY May 13, 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 responsi-

ble for the content of signed

articles. Opinions expressed in

articles are those of the authors.

In an exclusive interview for Outreach Issues Dr Hans Rudolf Herren, one of the

Co-Chairs of the IAASTD report and President of the Millennium Institute, today

expressed his shock that research findings of the four year study had failed to

impact the content of the negotiations here at the Commission; ‘I am very

frustrated, and above all very very sad that all of that work is now being buried and

pushed aside for reasons that I can not understand’.

sion making processes are based on partici-

patory mechanisms.

“Increased investments in agriculture, par-

ticularly in Africa, are necessary, yet this

must be thought out seriously. The experi-

ence gained from the crisis showed that the

key question is not merely that of increasing

budgets allocated to agriculture but rather,

that of choosing from different models of

agricultural development which may have

different impacts and benefit various groups

differently”, stated De Schutter to the CSD.

This new model must protect, promote and

ensure the access to, and the control over,

land of the small farmers and peasants. It

should promote agrarian reform, ensure the

access to production resources and protect

people against large-scale transnational

acquisitions.

This model needs to put into practice alter-

natives for production that do not contrib-

ute to climate change.

However, the resounding message from

the report is that a step-change is

required in our approach to agricultural

production. Speaking at the launch of

the report at the UNEP in Nairobi over a

year ago, Professor Robert Watson

emphasised the need for governments to

take a proactive lead in addressing food

security concerns. ‘If we persist with

business as usual, the world’s people will

not be fed adequately over the next fifty

years. Business as usual will result in

further degradation of the environment

and further widening of the gap between

those who have and those who don’t’ he

said.

The findings of the IAASTD publication

offered a logical starting point for the

discussions here at the CSD. However,

with the exception of the Swiss delega-

2

production and the food is traded around

the world has led to a highly unequal

distribution of benefits and serious

ecological impacts that were now

contributing to climate change. They also

suggested that science and technology

should be targeted towards raising yields

but also protecting soils, water and

forests.

On the question of genetically modified

crops, the authors conclude that they

could see little role for GM as it is

currently practiced on the basis that

‘assessment of technology lags behind its

development, information is anecdotal

and contradictory, and uncertainty about

the possible benefits and damage is

unavoidable’.

tion who suggested a text amendment

referencing the report, the findings have

made little impact on the content of the

discussions. Business as usual marches

on regardless.

When asked why the conclusions of the

report have failed to impact the content

of the negotiations Herren shakes his

head; ‘something must have happened

between when we announced the report

and it was endorsed a year ago’. In his

mind, there is no doubt that the lobbying

strategies of the agro-chemical interest

groups have achieved their objectives.

Having attended the sessions today, he

states; ‘people in many high places in

government and the donor agencies no

longer want to hear the facts’.

Outreach Issues

Food Sovereignty: A New Model for a Human Right Statement by La Vía Campesina and Friends of the Earth International

On May 4th, UN Special Rapporteur on the

Right to Food, Olivier De Schutter, high-

lighted the unique role of the UN Commis-

sion on Sustainable Development (CSD) on

the current discussions about the future of

agricultural development.

De Schutter stated that in order for agricul-

tural development to be sustainable, a focus

on human rights is essential, and for that

reason it is necessary to move towards a

model in which the right to adequate food is

a human right. This is what the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights establishes, as

well as the International Covenant on Eco-

nomic, Social and Cultural Rights.

De Schutter´s proposal promotes a model

that prioritizes the needs of the most vulner-

able people, that defines its reference points

not only by the levels of production achieved

but also by the impacts on the diverse food

production ways, and one in which the deci-

All in all, it is a model that promotes and

ensures, in a sustainable way, the right to

food as a fundamental right of communities

to produce food and to define what food

they want to consume. A model which is

“more about ‘how to help the world feed

itself’ than about “how to feed the world,”

he added.

Time for recommendations

His recommendations to the CSD, included

“the need, not only to increase food produc-

tion, but to reorient agro-food systems and

the regulations that influence them at na-

tional and international levels, towards sus-

tainability and the progressive realization

towards the right to food.”

He also recommended a reorientation of

agrarian sciences, policies and institutions

and a need to anticipate the effects of cli-

mate change in agriculture, promoting the

diversity of agricultural systems able to cope

travel long distances from their production

sites to the places of consumption, due to

the polluting emissions this causes.

We also want to bring again to your atten-

tion the important recommendations of the

International Assessment of Agricultural

Knowledge, Science and Technology for

Development (IAASTD).

In this respect, we stress the need to pro-

mote sustainable agrifood systems, in their

production, transformation and consump-

tion stages. We believe such sustainability

lies on local and diversified agroecological

production of food, and on the urgency to

move from an intensive large-scale indus-

trial agricultural system, to local and re-

gional systems that are environmentally

adequate and diverse. In the urban context,

such sustainability entails the possibility to

buy this kind of food in a network of diverse

retail markets, which will work as bridges

between people and food, links between

those who produce it and those who con-

sume it.

In addition, sustainability is completely im-

possible if the right of the peoples to re-

cover, defend, reproduce, exchange, im-

prove and grow their own seeds is not rec-

ognized. Seeds must be the heritage of the

peoples to the service of human kind.

Next Steps

This is the time to defend a sustainable and

egalitarian production and consumption

model, and bring to an end the production

model driven by the big corporations and

promoted and financed by the WB, the IMF,

the WTO, among others.

Such controls by corporations on our agri-

food systems must end.

There is a need to unmask and resist the

false promoters of models to block the right

to food and food sovereignty, like the WB,

IMF, WTO. Their policies have led us to the

current crisis, and these actors should not

be part of the “international community”

looking for solutions.

We call for a collective defense of the right

of the peoples to access land, seeds and

water and push for agrarian reform.

tree plantations to produce pulp and paper,

and for wood and mining projects, are taking

from the farmers, indigenous peoples, fisher-

men and small farmers the possibility to ac-

cess this resource. In addition, these acquisi-

tions are the cause of dangerous effects on

the environment and on the ability of the

communities to have sustainable life styles.

In addition, the right to access water must be

ensured and it must be recognized that the

peoples should control their own territories.

This implies much more than the search for

mechanisms to promote their participation in

the decision making processes, it entails the

control of these processes.

Moreover, we agree on promoting solutions

to help the world feed itself, to enable com-

munities to produce their own food instead

of solutions of those who aim at feeding it.

That is food sovereignty: the ability for peo-

ple to choose what and how to produce, and

how to trade it.

This includes the need for regulation to push

back the influence of the corporate sector

whose goal is “to feed the world” through

their industrial and destructive model of

production.

We support actions that prioritized the most

vulnerable people. Those who produce and

consume food must be at the centre of stage

food policies, and should be prioritized over

trade and business interests, emphasizing as

well local and national economies.

We agree with the Special Rapporteur on the

need to promote production models that do

not contribute to climate change. This

means, among other things, to promote agri-

food systems which are less dependant on

fossil fuels, and thus on agrochemicals, ma-

chinery, systems free from genetically modi-

fied organisms. But also, food should not

3

Outreach Issues

“We agree on promoting

solutions to help the world feed

itself, to enable communities to

produce their own food instead

of solutions of those who aim at

feeding it.”

with climate disruptions, including

agroecological systems.

De Schutter also called for a World Food

Summit with a broad agenda to encourage

the international community to address the

structural causes of the food crisis and fill the

gaps left by the fragmentation of current

global governance. The agenda should also

include issues related to the insufficient or

inadequate investments in agriculture, de-

regulation of markets which do not ensure

stability or prices, financial speculation on

the future markets of agricultural commodi-

ties, weak protection of workers of the sec-

tor and a search for an adequate regulation

of the agrifood chain.

He also urged the CSD to promote the adop-

tion of national strategies to the right to

food, which are comprehensive and meant

for the creation of sustainable agrifood sys-

tems, including production, transformation

and consumption.

Finally, De Schutter highlighted the fact that

the CSD must contribute to improve the rec-

ognition of the small farmers´ right to access

land by the international community. He

added that for that to happen it is necessary

to highlight the unique role of agrarian re-

form and adopt international guidelines on

large-scale offshore land purchases.

Our Path: Food Sovereignty

La Vía Campesina and Friends of the Earth

International share many common opinions.

We are agreed in defending the right of the

peoples to adequate food, highlighting that

food must be sufficient, nutritious, healthy,

and produced in an ecologically and cultur-

ally appropriate way. It also implies the right

to produce food, the right of peasants and

small farmers to produce food for them-

selves and their communities. Peasants,

small farmers and artisan fishers have to play

a central role in any strategy to resolve the

problem of hunger and poverty.

We are also agreed on the need to ensure

the right of the peoples to access land, and

with that aim it is crucial to put an end to

land offshore takeovers. We understand that

massive land takeovers or acquisitions,

meant for agrofuels production, animal feed,

Please don’t take it personal, we know that

you are not a dummy... But sometimes it is

a good idea to come back to the roots and a

clear definition of the concept of Sustainable

Development. And maybe a short course

on Sustainable Development will help you to

explain your colleagues and your people at

home, to inform them of what you’re aiming

for at the CSD.

Sustainable Development creates a

framework for both governmental policy, as

well as our own consumption patterns. There

are three fundamental principles for Sustain-

able Development:

1) The earth is round and thus limited, she

does not grow. This means that the car-

rying capacity of the earth has a limit.

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

Too much social pressure, alienation

and/or environmental pollution is

unhealthy.

3) The economy has to serve the needs of

the peoples, not the other way around.

Sustainable Development is often described

as a development that takes into account the

three pillars or dimensions: the economical,

social and ecological. The illusion is created

as if they are all equal and deserve the same

amount of attention. In reality they are seen

as separate dimensions, while integration of

two or more is often labeled as being

Sustainable Development. In that sense

Sustainable Development becomes a notion

used by anyone, drifting away from the

original holistic idea. The three pillars are

intensively interconnected, but often these

pillars in use stand next to each other. As

troubadour Elton John already knew: “We

can build a bridge between them, but the

empty space remains”.

So instead of using the metaphor of the

pillars, it is better to talk about the three

capitals of Sustainable Development, which

gives a better idea of the inter-linkages

between each.

4 4

Outreach Issues

The ECOLOGICAL CAPITAL as the basis for our

life and by extension for our economy. That

is why within Sustainable Development this

concept needs a lot of attention, more so

because it has been neglected ever since the

start of the industrial revolution. Today we

still tend to think that our ecological capital is

unlimited. But at the moment we are eating

our ecological capital in a way that is unfair

towards future generations. And eating your

capital is the first step towards bankruptcy.

The SOCIAL CAPITAL (peoples, social

cohesion, culture, labour productivity, health

etc.) of sustainable development confront

various challenges: the division and

marginalization of several groups in our

society, the problems of a growing aging

and isolation of peoples, the complexity

of the migration issue, changing labour

conditions among the many diverse issues.

A society with a larger social cohesion,

better education, and healthy, is more

effective in realizing common goals.

The ECONOMIC CAPITAL is the set of tools

that shapes and helps our 'household'.

Unfortunately, the development or growth

of this toolset is often seen as a goal itself,

not as a means.

The three strategies for sustainable

development

1) The efficiency strategy

The efficiency strategy uses closed cycles in

which materials and energy are reused as

much as possible. Products are designed in a

way that they only need a minimal amount

of resources, made from biodegradable

materials and build from modules which are

“The three pillars are

intensively interconnected,

but often these pillars

in use stand next to

each other.”

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

Development (VODO)

in absolute amounts the global use of natu-

ral resources and emission of waste prod-

ucts (like CO2), for social and equity reasons

we have to share the right to use those

natural resources in a more fair way. An

economy in function for basic needs for all,

not for the selective greed of a few…

The CSD is the only UN commission where

governments and major groups try to dis-

cuss those complex items in a more holistic

approach, and also recognise the ecological

and social limits of our planet and human

beings. But happily without any limits for

our thinking and analysing capacity. Don’t

become a dummy!

Leida Rijnhout

Flemish platform on Sustainable

Development (VODO) - Belgium

For the whole publication, visit:

www.vodo.be (in Dutch, French and English)

7 5

Outreach Issues

various challenges: the division and

easy to recycle.

2) The sufficiency strategy

Only the efficiency strategy is not enough. All

too often, the gains from the more efficient

production of goods is lost due to the total

production growth, the so called rebound

effect. For example : cars use much less fuel

then 20 years ago, but the number of cars

and driven kilometers has increased so fast

that the total fuel consumption by cars is still

increasing.

3) The redistribution strategy

Towards the developing countries the

strategy of redistribution is an urgent need.

This is the best way towards poverty

reduction. Concepts such as the ecological

footprint and ecological or social debt are

making very clear that the richness of

the industrialised world is based on the

exploitation of natural resources in the

South. This started during the times of

colonization, but persist until today. The

actual small contribution in the form of

development aid we will never achieve the

MDGs.

So …

These three strategies ask for a change of

attitude, especially the sufficiency strategy

which should be supported by a change in

our behaviour and needs strong political

leadership. The same for the redistribution

strategy. It really needs a paradigm shift

in our vision on economy and economic

activities. Which implies directly the need for

the holistic and integrated approach which

is given by the concept of Sustainable

Development.

Coherence in policymaking is crucial. A

strong focus on interlinkages between the

various challenges we are confronting

currently is still lacking in (inter)national

politics. The problems of the world are too

complex to come with simple solutions. Too

often people fall back on technical solutions,

which fit in the efficiency strategy, but leave

out the other two.

To repeat we have only one planet, limited

space and limited natural resources. For

environmental reasons we have to increase

Agroecology provides a robust set of solutions

to the environmental pressures and crises

facing agriculture in the 21st century.

So concludes the science and evidence-based

UN-sponsored International Assessment of

Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technol-

ogy for Development (IAASTD).

Delegates to the UN CSD-17 this week would

do well to draw on the findings of this

landmark report, produced by over 400

scientists and development experts from more

than 80 countries. Sponsored by five United

Nations agencies (FAO, UNDEP, UNEP, UNESCO,

WHO), the World Bank and the Global Environ-

ment Facility, the IAASTD findings were ap-

proved at an Intergovernmental Plenary in

April, 2008. This article synthesizes IAASTD

findings on the contribution of agroecology

towards equitable and sustainable develop-

ment.

Agroecology provides a framework for

strengthening four key systems properties of

agriculture directly relevant to the CSD: produc-

tivity, resilience, sustainability and equity.

It combines formal scientific inquiry with

Indigenous and community-based experimen-

tation, emphasizing technology and innovations

that are knowledge-intensive, low cost and

readily adaptable by small and medium-scale

producers. These methods are considered by

Agroecology and Sustainable Development the IAASTD as likely to advance social equity,

sustainability and agricultural productivity

over the long term.

An agroecological approach recognizes the

multifunctional dimensions of agriculture and

facilitates progress toward a broad range of

goals:

Sustainable productivity, increased ecological

resilience and reduced vulnerability to

changing environmental conditions. In Central

America, small-scale farmers using

agroecological methods were significantly

better able to withstand the adverse effects of

Hurricane Mitch than those farming conven-

tionally.

Improved health and nutrition (availability of

diverse, nutritious diets and traditional

medicines; reduced pesticide poisoning among

workers, communities and consumers).

By: Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, Senior Scientist, Pesticide

Action Network

“An agroecological approach

recognizes the multifunctional

dimensions of agriculture and

facilitates progress toward a

broad range of goals.”

Guide and regulate private sector contribu-

tions: reward private investment in safe, sus-

tainable products, technologies and markets;

initiate competitive bidding for public funding

based on capacity to meet equitable, sustain-

able development goals; establish fair compe-

tition regulations.

Use qualitative and quantitative full-cost

accounting measures to evaluate and com-

pare the social, environmental and economic

costs of different agricultural production sys-

tems including impacts on agricultural and

food system workers; enhance institutional

integrity with codes of conduct to preserve

public institutions’ capacity to perform public-

good research.

Spelling the way forward for CSD delegates,

the IAASTD concludes: “An increase and

strengthening of AKST towards agroecological

sciences will contribute to addressing environ-

mental issues while maintaining and increas-

ing productivity.”

ing towards systems with fewer negative

externalities; levying carbon and energy taxes

and fees for health and environmental harms;

eliminating direct and indirect subsidies for

unsustainable practices.

Encourage sustainable production labels, and

increased market opportunities for farmers

adopting agroecological practices.

Actions that create an enabling social, political

and institutional environment:

Ensure small-scale farmers, particularly

women, and community-based organizations

have secure access to productive resources,

information and markets.

Establish fair regional and global trade ar-

rangements and laws of ownership and access

that enable farmers to meet food and liveli-

hood security goals and diversify production.

Establish social and environmental standards

for production, food quality and procurement,

with liability mechanisms to address health or

environmental harms arising when standards

are not applied.

6 6

Outreach Issues

Conservation of natural resources (gains

in biodiversity, soil organic matter, water

quality and quantity, ecosystem services e.g.

pollination, erosion control).

Economic stability (diverse income sources;

spread of labor requirements and production

benefits over time; reduced vulnerability to

single commodity price swings)

Climate change adaptation and mitigation

increased energy-efficiency, reduced reliance

on fossil fuel and fossil fuel-based inputs,

carbon sequestration and improved water

capture in soil).

Increased social resilience and institutional

capacity (increased ecological literacy,

experiential learning, social support networks.

Examples include Farmer Field Schools in

Integrated Pest Management, Plant Health

Clinics, farmer-to-farmer extension programs

and school and urban gardens).

Growing Agroecology at Home: How to Build

Local and National Capacity

Achieving equitable and sustainable develop-

ment in the 21st century requires strengthen-

ing of institutional and policy support toward

ecologically-sound decision-making by farmers;

stronger and enforceable regulatory

frameworks to reverse damaging effects of

resource-extractive agriculture; and significant

new investments by public sector, donor and

commercial actors in agroecological research,

extension, product innovation and marketing.

Actions that directly support agroecological

agriculture:

Establish national policies and legal frame-

works for the promotion and implementation

of agroecological farming; revise institutional

priorities, provide monetary and non-monetary

professional incentives and invest in

participatory models of agroecological

research, extension and education.

Provide technical assistance in and financial

incentives (credit lines, crop insurance, income

tax exemptions, payment for ecosystem

services) for agroecological practices.

Generate savings and revenues by transition-

farmers can play an important role in

influencing policy and facilitating change is

also critical in sharing the future direction of

agricultural policy. This is why the farming

group has endorsed the Farming First plan

(www.farmingfirst.org) at the CSD-17.

The political will to do something to improve

rural development has not matched with

any tangible results. We know what it will

take, what policy options are available, and

how much money it will take. It's not vast

sums of money compared to the subsidies

allocated to the banking sector and other

industries.

In 24 months, we are going to see a

resurgence of the food crisis. As soon as

energy prices go up and the financial

markets become more stable, food security

and sustainability are going to be on the top

of the agenda again.

7 7

Outreach Issues

It’s the Farmers Who Feed the World

By: Ajay Vashee, President of the International

Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP)

With 1.7 billion more mouths to feed

by 2030 and the ratio of arable land to

population declining by 40-55%, a global

food crisis is set to return. Yet, agriculture's

share of total foreign aid has dropped from

17% to 3% over the past 30 years.

Meanwhile, governments around the world

are lavishing attention onto the banks, the

housing sector and car manufacturers. Every

day, politicians and policy makers announce

new initiatives to kick-start one or more

parts of the economic and financial systems.

But is this focus a distraction from other

equally pressing problems and equally de-

serving people? Will these bailed out bankers

solve the climate change crisis? Will the sub-

sidized car manufacturers feed the world?

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

the global policy community continues to

neglect the agricultural sector, as has been

the case over the past 20 years, this farmers'

ability to feed cities will be in jeopardy.

If our agriculture is unsustainable, then we,

as a species, are unsustainable. Many of the

solutions that could help achieve sustainabil-

ity are already well-known and known to

work. Plant breeding, crop protection, and

integrated crop management can all help

increase the productivity of our resources

while preserving them over the long-term.

We cannot afford to have any agriculture

policies which do not put the farmers first.

And this means that if we don't follow

a farmer-centric and knowledge-based

model, it is possible that the world will face a

situation where our food supply cannot be

guaranteed.

Recognising that civil society groups such as

The challenge which rural communities have today is to triple food production by 2050 using the same resources

in an environmentally sustainable, economically feasible, and socially responsible manner.

Hoy en Nueva York, donde nos encontramos

reunidos, estamos rodeados de construcciones

que evocan esa figura. Al mirar el Empire State

o la Torre Chrysler en uno de estos días

nublados que nos han acompañado y ver las

nubes ocultando sus últimos niveles, pareciera

que lo hemos conseguido. Hemos llegado al

cielo!!!

Pero, si luego bajamos la cabeza y miramos al

suelo, sobre el que todos nos encontramos

parados, no parece ser esta una exclamación

que se destaque por realista.

Después de un intenso trabajo preparatoria y

una primera semana de negociaciones hemos

llegado a la recta final del CSD-17. Alrededor

suyo hemos permanecido muchos, defendi-

endo múltiples posturas, opciones y aristas,

que al final confluyen en un objetivo: el

desarrollo sostenible. Este es el vértice en el

que concurren los trazos que hemos venido

dibujando desde diferentes perspectivas.

Para alcanzar este objetivo necesitamos

ponernos de acuerdo y coordinar todas estas

posiciones. Esta construcción que pretendemos

levantar no será elaborada con ladrillos y

betún, como la de aquella vez, sino con com-

promisos que se traduzcan en acciones. Y para

esto necesitamos hablar un mismo idioma, algo

que en los años predecesores parecía muy

alejado, pero hoy es cada vez más posible.

Pero, esta construcción se derrumbará, como

la anterior, si no utilizamos una argamasa que

permita unir nuestras intenciones a nuestro

hechos. Y esta unión debe fijarse con fuerza o,

de lo contrario, el desarrollo sostenible no

pasará de ser más que un artilugio retórico.

Este es un nivel de sujeción que solo puede

conseguirse mediante el Derecho, que en este

caso será derecho internacional, dado el reto

global que supone el objetivo pretendido.

Además, esta construcción debe cimentarse

sobre una base sólida, que en este caso serán

los principio sobre los que este sistema se

edifica; tales como el principio de cooperación,

el que contamina paga, el de precaución o las

responsabilidades comunes pero diferenciadas,

8 8

Outreach Issues

entre otros. Muchos de los cuales quedaron

plasmados en la Declaración de Río.

Por tanto, debe reconocerse la trascendencia

jurídica de dichos principios y de las conclu-

siones o acuerdos que, partiendo de ellos, se

consigan en el CSD. En este sentido la Corte

Internacional de Justicia ya ha dado pasos sig-

nificativos en casos como el relativo a la licitud

del uso y la amenaza de uso de las armas

nucleares, en el que basó su argumentación en

el principio 2 de la Declaración de Río.

Al fin de cuentas, aquí se proyectan las

conductas que la comunidad intencional deberá

seguir para alcanzar un objetivo común, lo que

equivale a normas de derecho internacional

consuetudinario, que se reconoce dentro de

sus fuentes.

Entonces, como constructores de un futuro

mejor, en el CSD debemos utilizar las

herramientas correctas; un lenguaje común

vinculante, que permita la eficacia de lo

conseguido: el Derecho. Este debe ser el

principio de esta empresa, con el cual nadie

nos impedirá conseguir nuestro propósito. Y

tenemos que esforzarnos para que esto se

reconozca. De lo contrario, todo el trabajo aquí

consumido sólo se verá reflejado en una

inmensa e inútil torre de papel.

La Torre de Papel

By: Gabriel Ballesteros P. Asesor Jurídico Corte

Internacional de Arbitraje y Conciliación Ambiental

A muchos se nos ha enseñado que en un momento la humanidad entera se reunió para edificar una torre que

llegase al cielo. Al ver ello, alguien dijo: “He aquí que todos forman un solo pueblo y todos hablan una misma

lengua, siendo este el principio de sus empresas. Nada les impedirá que lleven a cabo todo lo que se propongan”.

7 9

Outreach Issues

No sustainability in CSD

Text, words and context are substantive ele-

ments in negotiations, and together will convey

messages that can go a long way to guarantee a

substantive outcome. The women’s major

group noted last week that various countries

created clever insertions into the text by using

the innocuous phrase ‘subject to customary’

law. By the dint of these few words, women’s

rights were reduced to a level far below the

intended aims that lie at the heart of the con-

vention for the rights of women and distorted

the true intention of the original text. Remov-

ing ‘sustainability’ from the CSD thematic clus-

ters or the CSD interlinkages themes will ac-

complish the same and undoubtedly reduce the

Commission on Sustainable, Development to a

Commission on Development. Despite increas-

ing the negotiated document to well over 70

pages, the reductionist activities of G-77 has

reduced the CSD to a Commission on Develop-

ment. It is true that sustainability is a condition-

ality, but one that serves to guarantee stable

and equitable developmental standards for the

future for all mankind.

CSD 17 – just markets or sustainable regula-

tion?

As G-77 is adamant at taking away sustainabil-

ity and its ensuing values, it is becoming guilty

of turning the world and its development into a

market where unbridled exploitative forces can

roam unchallenged and without constraints.

And that is perhaps the first time G-77 unwit-

tingly have opened the world for unbridled and

unregulated exploitation of resources for mar-

ket interests in a world that now tries its best

to regulate what has caused a global market

collapse. Strange that CSD 17 delegates fighting

poverty with good intentions may cause havoc

to both the environment and the market by

obliterating sustainability.

“We cannot leave CSD 17 as an unfulfilled

wish” the chair said at a morning meeting with

the Major Groups. All major groups agreed.

Perhaps even all delegates agree. But the wish

is for strong measures on sustainable develop-

ment and sustainable agriculture. Not the op-

posite.

---jgs

“…We don’t want to have too much environ-

ment in agriculture. That is why we need to

take sustainable out of agriculture,” the G-77

delegate tried to explain their seeming opposi-

tion to the concept of sustainability to me. An-

other G-77 delegate said the concept was suspi-

cious in itself and claimed that sustainable agri-

culture actually opened the way for GMOs into

agriculture. ”Including all the trade distorting

issues as well. You know, we are all too aware

of the fact that sustainable development is just

another conditionality. And we are not going to

fall for that any more! Such conditionality is

going to be costly, and we will not accept that,

and we will not accept such confusing terms as

ecosystems.”

“But we all live under a huge conditionality”, I

tried to be polemically polite. “The global con-

ditionality is to make this world sustainable” I

said. “Unless we have a sound and well func-

tioning environment, there will be no agricul-

ture, no market access, no food and no life. And

that will be costly for everybody. Besides, the

UN has published a several hundred pages sci-

entific report on ecosystems showing that envi-

ronment and ecosystems are indeed true scien-

tific concepts and the ecosystems approach is

indeed a sound way of looking at the environ-

ment.” The delegate stopped, looked at me

politely and said emphatically: “We have to

fight poverty first. Once that is solved, we can

be concerned with environmental matters.

Environmental matters maybe number six or

seven on our priority list. Economic develop-

ment first, fighting unemployment second,

economic growth third and so on.”

If there is any environment left, I thought.

The negotiated text at almost 80 pages

By Tuesday the second week, the negotiated

document at CSD 17 had swelled from 17 pages

from before the week-end and reached a stag-

gering 70 to 80 pages after delegates have

made serious efforts to solve their differences

over the week end. The Chair observed from

her desk, that this mighty document might in

principle be good for agriculture and farmers,

but it could have devastating effects on the

CSD. Discussions over what sustainable devel-

opment really meant and what to insert into

the chapters on implementation seemed to be

at the focus of the discussions that kept the

delegates busy through the weekend. Observ-

ing these discussions from an observer’s van-

CSD without Sustainability? As CSD 17 approaches the closing of its entire session, disagreement over the central issue of sustainability seems to

run into unexpected hurdles, and G-77 seems to be at the centre of the conflict…

tage point, G-77 seemed to make their best to

obfuscate what sustainable development really

meant. The concept of ‘implementation’ had by

and large become synonymous with more

money for projects in the developing world.

Sustainable development is defined!

Reiterated hundreds of times in hundreds of

UN documents, and serving as true evidence of

agreed language, the UN accepted definition of

sustainable development contains three pillars

of equal importance: an economic, a social and

an environmental pillar. This agreement has

been accepted by the entire world for more

than 20 years. Are the CSD 17 delegates trying

to change, reduce and redefine this? One exas-

perated delegate from an unnamed country

said this CSD may eventually claim that only

two pillars will remain in the definition of sus-

tainability. And if that happens, we all know

that environment will disappear.

Growing disagreement

As disagreement appeared to increase over the

weekend, many delegates seemed to be at

pains to overload the document with new text.

When G-77 proposed new text, the developed

nations retaliated to maintain negotiating lev-

erage; as EU and JUSCAN imported text, G-77

seemed to retaliate. ‘This has become a true

political sew-saw, a filibuster of written words

spiced up with brackets of all dimensions and

categories’, one tired delegate observed. ‘It is

senseless’, he added, perhaps looking for a

place to hide in the downstairs catacombs of

the UN.

Conflicting political ambiguities

More than twenty years after the definition of

sustainability was introduced into the political

language of the world through the Brundtland

Commission, and penetrated research and aca-

demia to become a household and an easily

understood concept used in all global environ-

mental agreements and conventions, many

delegates at CSD 17 now seemed to do their

best to take this concept out of its context, and

shroud its proper meaning in a veil of confusing

and conflicting political ambiguities. A few of

the experts present at CSD 17 with long stand-

ing experience in agriculture practice and policy

who observed the delegate’s discussions on

sustainable agriculture, balked at some of the

statements expressed officially from different

countries and categorised them at best as plain

ignorance at worst as misleading statements.

10 10

Outreach Issues

already burdened with high debt.

Regulation: The immediate causes of the

financial crisis has been the result of the

failure of regulatory policies in the advanced

industrial countries. The current crisis has

made it apparent that there are large gaps

and deficiencies in the regulatory structures

in place in many countries. It is the most

potent evidence against deregulation.

Restructuring International Institutions:

There is a growing international consensus in

support of reform of the governance,

accountability, and transparency of the

Bretton Woods Institutions and other non-

representatives institutions. These have

been a long held demand of developing

countries and Civil Society. Major reforms

in the governance of these institutions,

including those giving greater voice to

developing countries and greater trans-

parency are thus necessary. The top execu-

tive posts in IMF and the World Bank should

be elected on the basis of competence.

We the people of the developing world are

suffering. We the people of the world are

watching. We place much hope in the

conference. We trust world leaders will de-

liver this time.

The United Nations Conference on the World

Financial and Economic Crisis and its Impact

on Development will take place at the UN

headquarters, New York from June 1 – 3,

2009. Civil society members would like to

see this event focus on financial and eco-

nomic reforms that directly benefit people

and planet, instead of profits for the few.

World leaders should set out ambitious goals

to achieve an equitable, socially, and envi-

ronmentally sustainable world and economy.

While at the same time, maintaining and

strengthening democratic and participative

structures. It is important to ensure that

global financial and economic reforms have

the interests of people at their heart, and are

not driven by corporate and vested interests.

Therefore, the new financial system should

be at the service of just and sustainable so-

cieties and economies. We want to have a

financial sector that is instrumental in de-

creasing the gap between the rich and poor,

and one that is not focused on increasing the

wealth of the capital rich while diminishing

the income from labor.

This crisis as an historic opportunity to

achieve a "major transformation" of the

entire economic and financial system. The

current crisis is an opportunity to correct the

world’s policy and investment priorities.

Developing countries will need adequate

funding to participate effectively in the

Global Stimulus for restructuring. Funding to

respond to this externally generated chal-

lenge should not be debt creating, should

come without conditionalities and should

allow policy space which is country specific

allowing .

Thus, the funding for developing countries

should be in the form of grants. I encourage

the UN Conference to take the long-term

view and give priority to decent jobs, justice

and the climate, also making these priorities

objectives of all crises-related measures,

including the reforms of the financial sector

and the global monetary system.

I would suggest that the conference sees the

financial crisis and the preceding deregula-

tion as symptoms of a systemic crisis at the

core of which is the economic growth model.

Global economic governance should aim

to end poverty and inequality, achieving

this through building sound economies

based on principles of social and ecological

sustainability that includes decent jobs and

public services.

Climate Change will have an adverse effect

on development. The financial sector needs

to be instrumental in meeting the invest-

ment demands to transform economies into

carbon neutral economies world wide. We

cannot be bystanders when vulnerable

people and nations suffer the price for green

house gas emissions to which they contrib-

uted little.

Official Development Assistance is essential

to immediately confront the crisis and its

consequences in developing countries.

Trade stimulation for poorest countries is

needed. Elimination of all forms of devel-

oped country export subsidies is required.

The immediate abolition of agricultural

subsidies would be the most effective

stimulus for developing country agriculture.

Debt relief should be given to those

countries seriously affected by the world

financial and economic crisis and which are

UN Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis

By: Philo Morris, Medical Mission Sisters

The United Nations Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and its Impact on Development will

take place at the UN headquarters, New York from June 1 – 3, 2009. Civil society members would like to see this

event focus on financial and economic reforms that directly benefit people and planet, instead of profits for the

few.

Side Event .

Challenges to Sustainable

Development: Responding to the

current crises and the future of

Agenda 21

Mission of Brazil to the UN

Conference Room 2

1.15 to 2.45

7 11

Outreach Issues

Earth Talk today was lead by Merim Tenev and

focused on payment for Ecosystem Service.

With species and ecosystems disappearing at

an alarming rate, could putting a monetary

price on ecosystem services keep them alive?

Money flowing into the area has kept wetlands

alive in the US and may preserve tracts of the

Amazon forest. But how far can it go? Who will

pay, and how will the accounts be kept? Above

all, is it right to value nature merely for what it

gives to humanity?

On Pioneers of the Planet focus was on Cary

Fowler. Cary is an Executive Director of the

Global Diversity Crop Trust - an independent,

international organisation that backs over

1,500 gene banks located around the world.

credit tsunami’. Over the last year our newspa-

per headlines have become saturated with the

stories associated with such a credit crisis.

Banks have gone bust, insurance companies

have been sold and house prices have plum-

meted. Yet the credit tsunami has surged far

further than Wall street or the square mile.

Felix gathers Ambassador Diaping from Sudan

representing the G77, Ambassador Byron Blake

the former head of the G77 and Philo Morris

form the Medical Mission Sisters, to tackle the

critical question; how is the financial crisis im-

pacting the South?

On Today at the CSD, Catherine Karong’o up-

dates you, on all the latest news and discus-

sions from the day’s events. In this episode, we

find out about fast food in Namibia, learn about

the African agenda, hear about green jobs, and

we bust some jargon. Catherine sat down with

Rokhya Fall, Director General from the Ministry

of Agriculture of Senegal, to find out why Afri-

cans are not playing a large role in shaping their

continents sustainable future. This is an issue

that is drawing lots of attention as delegates

are working toward the final text. Tune in to

find out more.

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

By: Merim Tenev and Emily Benson,

Stakeholder Forum

Merim Tenev talks to Cary the issue of gene

banks and the need to preserve valuable seeds

that could become extinct in the near future,

resulting in the loss of a valuable resource for

future generations.

Cary is originally from west Tennessee, in the

USA but now spends his life between Italy and

Norway. In the past in the US, he was a small

farmers advocate. He has dedicated much of

his life to ‘saving agricultural diversity and food

security for coming generations’.

The Greentable discussion are lead today by

Felix Dodds from the Stakeholder Forum focus-

sing on the topic of the global financial crisis. In

recent weeks the Former Federal Reserve chair-

man, Alan Greenspan, called the onslaught of

the economic recession a ‘once-in-a-century

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

support of reform of the governance,

watching. We place much hope in the

Conference Room 2

I don't know how we all got sucked into be-

lieving the idea that we could trust the finan-

cial institutions and that deregulation was in

the interest of all. Now it seems crazy that we

ever believed this but, apart from a few

voices over the last few years, it has been the

accepted wisdom... as has the free market.

Bernard Madoff, who was the former non-

executive chairman of the NASDAQ stock

exchange, is possibly the most acute example

of how mucked up the whole system was. He

was convicted of operating a Ponzi scheme

that has been called the largest investor fraud

ever committed by a single person, with over

$60 billion embezzled. This is about the

amount needed to help deliver the UN Millen-

nium Development Goals. CNN Money esti-

mates that the US bailout for the auto indus-

try is around $130 billion and the New York

Times estimates the US banking bailout to be

at $4 trillion.

The decision of the recent G20 to triple the

IMF available funds to $750 billion to support

countries through increased borrowing and

boosting world liquidity, as they put it, should

be welcomed. But how much of this will

trickle down to the poorest? Bob Geldof put

it well at the spring meeting of the Fund and

the World Bank when he said:

Food for Thought… Felix Dodds, Stakeholder Forum

"All those arguments the activists and the

politicians had for many years about the need

for aid or debt cancellation, we can lay them

to rest, because we're all beginning for aid.

We just call it fiscal stimulus and we are all

begging for debt cancellation, we are just call

it disposing of toxic assets."

NGOs such as ONE, Oxfam and Jubilee

wanted the IMF to increase the amount of

profits from approved IMF gold sales directed

at developing countries. They called for $5

billion but were unsuccessful in this. How-

ever, they did see that the IMF reaffirmed the

G20 decision to double lending for low-

income countries and instructed the fund to

explore ways of making those loans more

affordable.

The reform of the IMF is critical to ensure that

the developing country voices, particularly

those from Africa, are heard and understood.

I wondered if the IMF and World Bank under-

stood that their support for the approach to

liberalisation of markets without proper regu-

latory frameworks has contributed to the

problems we are now facing.

Just as we were told to trust our financial

institutions with our finances we have been

asked to believe that we should trust compa-

nies through voluntary initiatives to protect

our environment. Is the time right to ques-

tion this? Is there a need to consider a

framework convention on corporate ac-

countability? Could the OECD guidelines

form a framework? What kind of penalties

could we see for a company that misbe-

haved? I've always thought that linking the

rating of companies on the stock exchange to

their environmental standards might be a

way of having an impact on a company. Per-

haps we might also look at the role that such

a convention might have upon embedding a

Court of International Conciliation and Arbi-

tration to deal with any disputes. Responsi-

ble companies should be at the forefront of

calling for this... after all, if they are, as many

say they are, already green, it will only

impact on freeloaders.

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

Senior Editor: Jan-Gustav Strandenaes, ANPED

Co-Editor: Felix Dodds, Stakeholder Forum

Daily Editor: Stephen Mooney, Stakeholder Forum

Design and Layout: Erol Hofmans, ANPED

Contributing writers:

La Vía Campesina

Friends of the Earth International

Leida Rijnhout, Flemish Platform on Sustainable Development (VODO)

Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, Senior Scientist, Pesticide Action Network

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

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

Philo Morris, Medical Mission Sisters

Merim Tenev, Stakeholder Forum

Emily Benson, Stakeholder Forum

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

12

Outreach Issues is made

possible through the

generous support of: .

THE ITALIAN MINISTRY OF THE

ENVIRONMENT, LAND AND SEA

AND

THE BELGIUM FEDERAL

ADMINISTRATION ON SUSTAINABLE

DEVELOPMENT (PODDO)

(Edited by Aleksandra Radyuk)