2. OverviewOverview
Main goalsMain goals
The United NationsThe United Nations
MethodologyMethodology
ResultsResults
ConclusionsConclusions
3. AimsAims
1.1. Assess the proposition that sustainable development isAssess the proposition that sustainable development is
representative of a reflexive modernityrepresentative of a reflexive modernity
Both expose the relationship between humanity and theBoth expose the relationship between humanity and the
environmentenvironment
Both, draw into question notions of progress, rationality andBoth, draw into question notions of progress, rationality and
scientific knowledgescientific knowledge
Consequently, both draw into question the relevance ofConsequently, both draw into question the relevance of
current political formations.current political formations.
2.2. How is sustainable development integrated intoHow is sustainable development integrated into
the governance structure of the world?the governance structure of the world?
5. 57th United Nations General
Assembly
Examine sustainable development discourse
from nearly every nation in the world as well
as other governance actors
Sustainable development could be examined
in an interactive and negotiated environment
The 57th
GA directly followed the WSSD
SD particularly relevant to UNEP
6. METHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGY
ETHNOGRAPHY: GETTING CLOSE TO THE DATAETHNOGRAPHY: GETTING CLOSE TO THE DATA
Data sourcesData sources
In depth Interviews with UNEPIn depth Interviews with UNEP
officersofficers
Informal discussion andInformal discussion and
general observationsgeneral observations
Document Collection fromDocument Collection from
general sources.general sources. Focus on theFocus on the
statements made at the Unitedstatements made at the United
Nations General DebateNations General Debate
7. General DebateGeneral Debate
Statement made by all members of theStatement made by all members of the
UNUN
Provides and overview of the main politicalProvides and overview of the main political
concerns of the timeconcerns of the time
Coherence of data sourceCoherence of data source
Provided a foundationProvided a foundation
8. Sustainable Development and GovernanceSustainable Development and Governance
StructuresStructures
TWO STAGESTWO STAGES
I.I. Examine general perceptions of sustainableExamine general perceptions of sustainable
development (development (DIVERGANCEDIVERGANCE))
II.II. Explore the way sustainable development isExplore the way sustainable development is
utilised in the governance structure of the UNutilised in the governance structure of the UN
((CONVERGANCECONVERGANCE))
10. United Nations General DebateUnited Nations General Debate
Provides overview of main issues andProvides overview of main issues and
builds a foundation of sustainablebuilds a foundation of sustainable
development discoursedevelopment discourse
HIV/AIDS PandemicHIV/AIDS Pandemic
Global TerrorismGlobal Terrorism
GlobalisationGlobalisation
Environment riskEnvironment risk
Sustainable DevelopmentSustainable Development
11. DIVERGANCEDIVERGANCE
72%72% of all statements delivered, referred toof all statements delivered, referred to
sustainable developmentsustainable development
Pillars of DivergencePillars of Divergence
• SOCIALSOCIAL
• ECONOMICECONOMIC
• ENVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTAL
12. Substantive IssuesSubstantive Issues
SocialSocial EnvironmentalEnvironmental EconomicEconomic
Power RelationsPower Relations
EqualityEquality
GenderGender
DemocracyDemocracy
HealthHealth
Global Climate ChangeGlobal Climate Change
(related Phenomena)(related Phenomena)
Nuclear related Issues.Nuclear related Issues.
PollutionPollution
Foreign DirectForeign Direct
InvestmentInvestment
National DevelopmentNational Development
PlansPlans
Gross Nation ProductGross Nation Product
Distribution of wealthDistribution of wealth
17. Risk AssociationRisk Association
89%89% of all statements that mentioned SD associated itof all statements that mentioned SD associated it
with some form of risk drawn from the three pillarswith some form of risk drawn from the three pillars
Perceptions of SD focused onPerceptions of SD focused on InternalInternal andand externalexternal riskrisk
on a global basison a global basis
No direct link between cause and effectNo direct link between cause and effect
Complexity of global risk phenomenaComplexity of global risk phenomena
Degrees ofDegrees of UncertaintyUncertainty
18. Discursive IntegrationDiscursive Integration
““Disastrous floods in my country, in part ofDisastrous floods in my country, in part of
Central Europe, Asia and the Americas asCentral Europe, Asia and the Americas as
well as droughts in other parts of the world,well as droughts in other parts of the world,
just before the start of the WSSD, were ajust before the start of the WSSD, were a
painful indication of changes rendering SDpainful indication of changes rendering SD
even more important”even more important”
19. PartnershipPartnership
Between nations statesBetween nations states
Between wider sectors of societyBetween wider sectors of society
““If the Gates foundation go into India with half a billion dollars andIf the Gates foundation go into India with half a billion dollars and
say here we are we want to eradicate polio in India, do you as thesay here we are we want to eradicate polio in India, do you as the
World Health Organisation (WHO) tell Bill Gates, well go ahead andWorld Health Organisation (WHO) tell Bill Gates, well go ahead and
do it with your half a billion dollars, we’ll just go on running our owndo it with your half a billion dollars, we’ll just go on running our own
project in India like we’ve been doing for the past fifteen yearsproject in India like we’ve been doing for the past fifteen years
although our budget is only fifty thousand dollars. No, you have toalthough our budget is only fifty thousand dollars. No, you have to
partner them, because otherwise you are going to have duplicationpartner them, because otherwise you are going to have duplication
and you’re going to be found to be lacking from the UN systemand you’re going to be found to be lacking from the UN system
side”.side”.
20. Summary of ConvergenceSummary of Convergence
Sustainable development Creates aSustainable development Creates a
common languagecommon language
Sustainable development and riskSustainable development and risk
create an inclusive political discoursecreate an inclusive political discourse
Partnerships are formed from disparatePartnerships are formed from disparate
ideological positions under a singleideological positions under a single
bannerbanner
21. Conclusion 1: Sustainable Development, aConclusion 1: Sustainable Development, a
Constructive AmbivalenceConstructive Ambivalence
SD is a diverse and fragmented concept which reflects the diverse
and fragmented nature of the UN. There is a direct link between
governance, the UN and SD. These are layers of ambivalence that
need to be negotiated.
A paradigm that represents all facets of human existence and its
relationship with its environment.
Within this United Nations SD as a discursive entity is not a goal in
itself, but exists in a space of pre-goal negotiation, facilitating
cooperation and a constructive conflict between disparate
ideologies.
SD within the UN is embraced for it’s constructive ambivalence.
22. Conclusion 2: SustainableConclusion 2: Sustainable
Development and Reflexive ModernityDevelopment and Reflexive Modernity
SD does represent a reflexive modernity at the United
Nations
Opens up a space for political discourse beyond nationalOpens up a space for political discourse beyond national
boundariesboundaries
Represents a political system increasingly formedRepresents a political system increasingly formed
around the notion of riskaround the notion of risk
The adoption of SD within the UN is evidence of a global
political structure that fundamentally questions the
central tenets of modern processes.
What follows is going to be a brief overview of the research conducted and is by no means complete but it gives an initial indication of the ambivalence of sustainable development as a goal
The overall proposition that drives this research is that the rise of SD is a discursive representation of the emergence of a reflexive modernity. There is little space now to explore definitions of these concepts, but what is important is to recognise the connection that exists between the two (read out the slide) In order to address this proposition the question is asked.
In turn, In order to answer this question a forum was needed that was representative of A.) global governance and B) A global governance structure that uses SD in its governance framework, Arguably, the only forum that fits these parameters is the United Nations. For me this image epitomises the nature of the governance structure of the United Nation but also governance more generally. It was taken on the grounds of the UN. Dominant in the picture the fractured globe. This represents the nature of governance structures today world today many nations many religions and many ideolological positions all competing and jostling for position on the world stage. The flag symbolises unification of these different positions that is accomodated within the UN. But perhaps most powerfully symbolic, yet daringly inconspicuois nestled between these two overt symbols of the UN the pepsi cola sign. These three structures brought together in a single frame seem to indicate the reality of the tasks that the UN has to face. It is an organisation that has accommodate now, more than ever before the many actors that influence the governance process. Corporate, etc. But even so what this picture symbolises is the official accepted governance systems that operate with in the walls the UN. An to all these issues SD is applied
More specifically, The research was conducted during the three month period from September to December during the 2002 General Assembly whilst serving as an intern with UNEP. There were three main advantage of examining SD from within this environment (read them off the slide).
SO within this environment SD was examined from an in depth qualitative perspective. Ethnography inside the UN (elaborate on ethnography READ THE SLIDE). The main focus of today’s results are the statements of the UNGD
What is the GD. Firstly I think basically because of the coherence of the data source, it offered a structure to perceptions of SD that other forms don’t offer. It also provided a foundation for understanding how SD was being perceived over the three month period
Well within this governance structure two main stages of accessing the relationship Between SD and RM are identified. The first, examines the general perceptions of SD, attempting to access the many dimensions of SD rhetoric that exist, here this is headed by the theme divergence. Secondly the way that this divergence is being utilised in the governance structure of the UN. This I’ve convergence
Observing the general debate gives an initial indication of the priority issues that influence the UNGA. As this slide shows five main issues can be highlighted. These factors were prominent throughout the three month period (list the issues)
Firstly, it is worth establishing that the majority of the member states of the UN used SD in some context. These were many and varied. Some were similar others were in conflict. What was initially apparent was that statements were predominantly using a three pillars approach to organising their discussion on SD. This is used here as an organising framework for presenting the data.
This framework is adopted here in order to organise the data. What the following indicates that, as expected there was a wide range of issues that SD was associated with these dimensions of SD.
The designation of a statement into a particular pillar depended on the overall emphasise of the rhetoric. So for example, and this is not definitive, the environmental, emphasised global climate change , radioactive waste, pollution etc. The social pillar power relations, equality, gender issues, democracy. Economic FDI, NDP GNP distribution of wealth Its important to recognise that the boundaries between these pillars are not static but interchangeable
An analysis of the statements made revealed that there was a broad understanding of SD meant to the different nations. The main point to make here is that the rhetoric was very diverse there was little unity of interpretation of what actually constitutes SD. In fact it was acknowledged that viewing SD as a purely environmental issues is seen as hindering the development of goals based around the concept and can form a discourse of exclusion. Alienating various elements of the governance framework.
Discourse of exclusion
The way SD was presented not only showed how each nation understood the concept, it also served a tactical purpose. The association of SD with a particular issue within a particular pillar put forward an interpretations that projected one nations ideological base to all others other nations. This was done in numerous ways, but can be distilled into three Distinct categories. Firstly Association for SD with legal norms. Secondly appeals were made to the moral consciousness of the world this is the language of common risk and common threat. And thirdly some states would use sensationalist facts and figures to highlight their interpretation of SD. These were used interchangeably and this form of conflict was visible not only in the GD but throughout the GA
Altogether perceptions of SD during the UNGD and indeed though out the GA can be characterised as ambivalent, diverse and contested. This is hardly a surprise considering the various positions that are represented within the GA. Whilst it is important to initially establish how SD is perceived within the UN, it says little about how the diversity of SD can be utilised in the process of forming particular goals. And so the second level of analysis is to understand how these processes are utilised within the UN to produce effective goals. And this is done through the notion of convergence
The second theme is that emerged from the discursive representation of SD is convergance
What was evident in the debate statements and throughout the General Assembly was references to SD that were being associated to different levels of risk. This risk produced of co-operation between nations as governance structures have to be set in place on an international level. This cooperation is built on the lack of cause and effect that exists in this global risk and is built on notions of uncertainty which meant that precautionary principles had to be set in place. And what is argued here is that the association of SD with risk forms a unifying framework on which cooperation is based.
This statement is typical of the way SD was presented in this context. This country uses its own risk and associates it with risk on a global scale. And the practical outcome of this was the need for increased partnership in governance structures
Whilst this partnership existed in a national context it was frequently extended to include the broader sectors of society. Corporate dimensions and civil society. This was persistently evident throughout the UNGA at both the national level and from the UN secretariat. So SDwas seen as only achievable through a partnership process
On the basis of these observation the following points of convergance can be summarised
The results presented above have focused on the conventional political governance framework of the UN. However the notion of governance extends beyond the official structures. This demonstration was one of many that was highly visible during the UNGA. Issues varied but the point to make is that the pressures on the governance structure of the UN operate not only from within but outside of the official political system issues that are outside the governance framework, If the relationship between SD and a reflexive modernity is to be fully understood then these sub political formations need to also be seriously considered