Published on

Prepared by Dr Ingeborg Niestroy, EEAC

Published in: Technology, Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this


  1. 1. Rio+20 StocktakingSD COUNCILS and other MULTI-STAKEHOLDERBODIES fostering civil society involvement, and:Horizontal and vertical coordination mechanismsEEAC –European Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentAdvisory CouncilsDr. Ingeborg Niestroy
  2. 2. Outline 1 SD strategies and Councils in Agenda 21: Regional level - EU SD strategy 2 Diffusion of national SDSs and SDCs worldwide and in Europe: interdependencies 3 SD Councils: Functions and capacities, - Europe and wider discussion 4 SDCs and SDSs in Rio+20 negotations 5 Other bodies; horizontal + vertical coordination (gov.) 6 Some governance insightsNiestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 2
  3. 3. 1 SD strategies and councils after Rio 1992 Agenda 21: commitment for SD Strategies and improved stakeholder involvement: Initiative to establish SD Councils as a means for this 1997 "Rio+5": call to prepare SDSs for WSSD 2002 2002 J-burg P.o.I. Chapter XI: promotion of SDCs 2002+/- wave of SDSs and SDCs (in Europe) 2009 Decision UN GA to hold a UN Conf. on SD in 2012 2010-12 Preparation process 2012 “zero draft” as basis for negotiations: - 1st draft on 5 Jan.  Para 59-61 on SD Strategies and SD Councils  SDCs in Europe (EEAC) gave input - March: "informal consultations" and “Intersessional” - April: "informal consultations" - 13-15 June: last PrepCom, 20-22 June: UNCSD "Rio+20"Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 3
  4. 4. 1 Regional: EU SD strategy 2001 EU SDS (Gothenburg) 2006 Revision (AT Presidency): deepened governance - better linking EU and national level/SDSs - SDS says that by 2011 it should be decided when a "comprehensive review" will take place - SD Councils are mentioned as means 2007 MSs progress reports 2009 Review, not revision (SE Presidency) 2010 EU 2020: for "smart, inclusive and sustainable growth" 7 "Flagships" and Roadmaps, incl. "Resource Efficiency" with governance (European Semester/Nat.Reform Programs)  new +/- leading paradigm (as is green economy) Since then: debate about the future+added value of the EU SDS; possibly: review after Rio+20 conferenceNiestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 4
  5. 5. 2 Global proliferation of SD Councils (Busch/Joergens, 2010) Earth Council Report 2000: SDCs in more than 70 countries globallyNiestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 5
  6. 6. 2 National SDSs worldwide ...unverified picture (UN DESA, 2010)Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 6
  7. 7. 2 EU Member States: SDSs and SDCs [1] SD strategy from SDS reviews, revisions and other activities Participation / SDC establishedUK 1994 SDS 2004/05 Review 2000 (succeeding a Roundtable 2005/06 SDSs in regions for SD, 1994) 1999 2nd SDS 2007 SD Indicators, Action plan Terminated in 2011Finland (1990 report, 1995 2003 Progress report 1993 [mixed] report) 2006 revised SDS, SD indicators work 1998 SDS 2009 External review 2010 Network for SD Indicators 2012 Planned start of new SDS processSweden 1994-99 "green 2004 revised SDS, SD Indicators - Environment Council (1968)  Sweden“; env. object. 2006 revised SDS, SD Indicators Council for Env. Research (2011) 2002 SDS - SD Commission [mixed] (2007)Ireland 1997 2002 Review 1999 > 2003 Reporting on indicators for all sectors Terminated 2011 ( tasks moved > 2008 Review process; 2012 draft “FSDI” to NESC)Luxem- 1999 2004 Law 2005burg > 2008 Review process (2010 SDC strengthened ) 2010 Revised SD law (with SDS)Belgium 2000 2003/04 Review 1993 2004-08 Revised (2nd) SDS (‘SD plan’) (reinforced legal basis in 1997) 2010-14 Draft revised (3rd) SDS to be adoptedGermany 2002 2004 Progress Report (government) 2001 2006 SD Indicator Report (statistics office) 2008 2nd Progress Report (government) 2009 Int. Peer Review (stakeholders) 2012 3rd Progress Report in preparation Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 7
  8. 8. 2 EU Member States: SDSs and SDCs [2] SD strategy from SDS reviews, revisions and Participation / SDC established other activitiesAustria 2002 2009 National SDS agreed (2002) * (joint federal and regional)Denmark 2002 SDS 2009 Revised SDS [Danish Nature Council terminated in 2002]Netherlands (NEPs: 1989, 1993, 1997,2001) 2007 Peer Review no SDC, other councils engaged: 2003 SD Action Programs 2008 Monitoring Report RMNO (terminated 2010), SER [=NESC], RLG, VROM-raad (merged to ‘RLI’ 2011)France 2003 SDS 2005 Peer Review 1993-2003 CFDD 2006 Revised SDS 2003-2008 CNDD 2008 Progress report from 2010: CNDDGE 2010 New SDSCzech Rep. 2004 SDS 2006 Progress report 2003 [mixed] 2007 2nd Progress reportPortugal (NEP 1995) [Annual Progress Reports, 1998 (SDS drafts 2002, 2004) 2010 Review planned, 2007 SDS institutional changes]Hungary (NEPs 1997, 2003) [Biennial SD Action Plans] - Environment Council OKT Nat.Env.Program 2003-08 (stakeholders) since 1995 2007 SDS - SDC established by Parliament in 2008Spain 2007 SDS - - Environment Council CAMA (stakeholder type) since 2004 Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 8
  9. 9. 2 Other countries in Europe: SDSs since... (really?) [3] SD strategy from SDS reviews, revisions and other activities Participation / SDC establishedBulgaria 2007/08 Drafting, - (broad consultation in 2007/08) no adoptionCyprus 2007 SDS - Env. Council, was turned into an SD Council, which did not come in beingEstonia 2005 SDS - Government Council for SD, low/no civil society, faded away New creation, independent, in 2010Greece 2002 SDS 2007 Revision: new SD agenda, not adopted -Italy 2002 SDS 2007 Revision started/ stopped -Latvia 2002 SDS 2010 Revision: adopted by Gov. and Parl. Gov. Council for SD, low/no civil soc.Lithuania 2003 SDS 2010 Revision started Gov. Council for SD, low/no civil soc.Malta 2007 SDS - (but recently creating a coord. unit in PM SD council operating for some years Office)Norway 2007 SDS (new) 2009 Report on SD (in the national budget in nat. budget for 2009)Poland 2000 SDS > 2008 Revisions, new long-term (Env. council: mainly academic, (*many) development strategy (no impl. mech.?) technical)Romania 2008 SDS - Independent Centre for SD (UNDP support) with civil society part.Slovakia 2001 SDS 2005 Action Plan (Government Council for SD, no civil 2010 New Action Plan and indicators planned society) Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 9
  10. 10. 3 SD Councils: Bridging the gap(s) EU European stakeholder * EU – national: organisations SDCs cooperate - in EEAC, Sta k e holde rs - with EESC / Civ il Soc ie ty Na tiona l Gov ernme nt - with ESDN Business Prime Ministers Office - with .. NGOs /Foreign A. M I N I S T R Y of Trade Unions others * EU – global: Dev .Aid Fin Soc.A. Econ.A. Others* Env National Env./Dev. ... NGOs Council EU Strategy for SD Science Only for Rio+20, Energy SD SD SD Internat . Consumer NGO OECD . . others . . * Nat. – global: Individual SDCs have projects * Nat. – sub- Regional Re gional Gov e rnme nts interest groups national: varies Local interest groups M unic ipal itie s / Local Agenda 21 Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 10 typical lead cooperation typical membership
  11. 11. 3 SD councils: capacitiesBridging the gaps:• between science and policy making• between government and civil society• bringing different types of knowledge together (transdisciplinary)• with the connecting capacity - spider in the web - also comes that they give impulses and foster horizontal and vertical coordination/integration“Keeper of the long-term view”:reflecting in advice and activities (communication and projects)Seeing the wood for the trees:• keep the overview• make links between initiatives (or: identifying needs that this happens and make it happen)• organise regular reflecting, stock-taking, bringing actors together again (government/other actors could do this, but ...) Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 11
  12. 12. 3 SD Councils: Stimulate informed debate as• Advisor: all SDCs do- by considering / integrating different dimensions, emphasising process-oriented thinking- by involving (more) stakeholders in drafts, fact finding and discussing advice- by following-up advice by further evaluation and feed-back loops- freedom of agenda setting has awareness raising effects• Agent: the core identity, most do- being in contact with the relevant government departments at working level- using a variety of formats for dialogue with civil society, scientists, politicians, business, relevant institutions, across different levels, sectors, going regional ...- triggering actors not yet involved- initiating redesigning research for SD- some aim to change market patterns• Communicator: meanwhile more SDCs also do- new/fresh/other means of communication/media use- political communication (schools, youth, elderly / contests in design etc.)- addressing recommendations to others than government- involving the interested/wider public, e.g. SD “panel” Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 12
  13. 13. 3 SD Councils in Member States (April 2012)Fully functioning SD Councils …and/or 7 (8) (AT), BE, DE, EE, *FR, HU, IE, LU, PT, UK [+ some regional ones]Stakeholder Environment Councils 4 (6) ES, HU, NL, SI (PL, SE)SD Centres/Agencies 2 HE, ROEconomic-Social Committees with SD tasks 3 FR, IE, NLMixed bodies 1 (4) (CZ), FI, (MT), (SE)Government bodies with low/no civil society 3 LT, LV, SKinvolvement / not workingNo SD/Environment Council 5 BU, CY, DK, (IT), UKTotal: Councils in around 15 Member states, plus HR Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 13
  14. 14. 3 SD Councils: some discussion items• different models of councils composition: mainly discussed “how much government” in the council / independence [*in Europe: in some countries; elsewhere: see next slide]• alternative means/institutions for the 3 functions: * advice / bridging science and policy-making: consultant, “chief scientist”, ad hoc committees * agent: government (or ...?) organises stakeholder meetings / consultation * communicator: other role for media? * for all (?): transformation of the Economic-Social committees?• advantages of councils: - some group identity + permanence/continuity (vs. ad hoc formations) contribute to better dialogue and bridging (of disciplines, sectors, ... interests) - efficient (low costs) Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 14
  15. 15. 3 SD Councils (2): wider views• Governmental / mixed models Due to different views on the aimed function, in many countries outside Europe also/predominantly such models• Horizontal/vertical integration * While it is in the spirit of Agenda 21/WSSD that SDCs should be a means for improving civil society involvement, this objective has remained ambiguous in the JPoI (Chapter XI):• "Further promote the establishment ... of SDCs and/or coordination structures at the national level, ... , in order to provide a high-level focus on SD policies. In that context, multi-stakeholder participation should be promoted."• More clarity? * coin bodies without stakeholder participation as "multi-sectoral" or "inter-departmental" (steering) bodies / groups / committees * coordination as core task of government departments, while non- state actors may give impulses, support implementation by being involved and contribute early in the process(es) Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 15
  16. 16. 4 SD Councils in the Rio+20 "zero draft"• Para 61: "We underline the need for more coherent and integrated planning and decision-making at the national level. We therefore call on countries to establish and strengthen, as appropriate, national sustainable development councils to enable them to coordinate, consolidate and ensure the mainstreaming of cross- cutting issues in the highest decision-making bodies, with the integration and full participation of all stakeholders."•  Focus on the policy coordination function, and stakeholder involvement rather annexed• EEAC proposed para 61: "We underline the need for more coherent and integrated planning and decision- making at all levels, as well as strengthened civil society participation. We therefore call on countries to establish Sustainable Development Councils or similar multi-stakeholder bodies that bring in new ideas, set the agenda, change market patterns, make participation schemes work and stimulate informed debate. The challenge lies in linking possible long-term futures and threats with solutions and decisions. We expect the (new) UN Council for Sustainable Development to establish working links to national and sub-national Sustainable Development Councils or similar multi-stakeholder bodies." Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 16
  17. 17. 5 Informal SD Networks, EU – national level• EEAC – European Env. and SD Advisory Councils * Informal bottom-up network of national and sub-national advisory councils for environmental policy and SD * Since 1993, with some steps of institutionalisation 1996 / 2001 / 2005 (subscription fee, central secretariat, own legal person) * Objectives: sharing knowledge and experience, developing joint advice for EU env. and SD policies (only for Rio+20: global) * Global – regional link: rather exceptional for Rio+20• ESDN – European Sustainable Development Network * Informal bottom-up network of SD administrators in national Ministries, plus other participants (... similar to SDplanNet AP...) * Since 2002, with some institutionalisation in 2005 (financial contribution, central secretariat) * Objectives: providing updated information on national SD strategies/policies; sharing knowledge and experience; feeding into the EU SD strategy process: profiled itself as alternative to the SD coordinators meeting (which has not been convened by the Commission) * Global – regional link: not done / weak (even within one Ministry) Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 17
  18. 18. 5 EESC – European Economic and Social Committee – a bridge between Europe and organised civil society• Formal EU advisory institution (since 1958) composed of representatives of civil society organisations /business; governance background corporatist, with some widening: three groups: employers, employees, various interests• Members are nominated by EU MSs; proportionate representation• Established an "SD Observatory" (2006) in response to the EU SD strategy: a sub-committee preparing opinions on SD Policies• Informal: EESC coordinates a low key network of national ESCs in the EU (exist in 20 MSs), but not in particular on SD (so far)• Global – regional link: - Sub-committee for external relations adopts opinions on internat. issues (development, trade, foreign affairs...) - Relations with ESCs in non-EU countries: strengthen civil society - Divers committees, incl. Round-tables with ESCs in Brazil, China, India and Russia Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 18
  19. 19. 5 Horizontal and vertical coordination (gov.)Horizontal: Inter-departmental bodies ("multi-sectoral"), e.g.•EU Commission: Inter-service steering groups, (Sustainability) ImpactAssessment ("IA": economic, social, environmental) of all policy proposals since2003, improving coordination and science-policy link (e.g. LIAISE)•Member statesGermany (similar: Belgium, other mech. in place: NL, FR, FI, AT...)- State Secretary Committee for horizontal coord. at federal level, chaired by theDG of the Chancellery (PM Office), with Interdepartmental Working Group- Parliamentary Advisory Council (for SD Impact Assessments)Vertical:•National – EU- Council of Ministers: the existing cross-cutting formation (General AffairsCouncil) has never taken up SD  the Environment Council deals with it, andsometimes the European Council- bottom-up: ESDN network, SD administrators (often from MinEnv)•National – EU – Global- "Working Party for International Environmental Issues" (WPIEI) in theEnvironment Council; at nat. level: weak links - even within the MinEnv Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 19
  20. 20. Germany - Institutional framework Chancellor Angela Merkel State SecretaryGerman Council Commission Interdepartmentalfor Sustainable working group Development Director-General of Fed. Chancellery (PM Office) National SD - Strategy German "Laender" Parliamentary (sub-national),Advisory Council Municipalities, Civil for SD Society, Business
  21. 21. 6 Governance insights from own study:"and – and" .. "mix/balance/moving towards ‘ends’"Leadership D FIN Ownership(is performed) (is fostered) PTop-down P B D UK S FIN Bottom-upFirmnessFirmness, D UK ALL FlexibilityMonitoringFramework D FIN NL Actiondocument focus Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 21
  22. 22. 6 ... found in other theory development• "Metagovernance" (Meuleman, 2008) - smart mix of the three basic governance styles: hierarchy, market, network - adapted to specific phases + situations• "TransGov" (IASS / In t Veld, 2011) - social reflexivity - knowledge democracy / transdisciplinarity - second modernity (Beck, 1992): - and ... and (not or) - diversity rather than simplicity  combined: transgovernance• "Balance of the opposites" (Heraklit / Cornélis, 2012)Niestroy, 18.4.12 ASEF - Bangkok 22