1. Briefing Note for Brian Hayes MEP
Overview Subject: World Society
Subject 1: Why We Should Give the Future a Seat at the Negotiating Table:
Future Generations in the Post-2015 Agenda
Summary
A global focus on the future and on younger generations is important for sustainability
innovations: bringing future generations to the negotiating table would become a catalyst for
action, strengthening synergies among existing institutions and initiatives and leading to
"system innovation".
In the meantime, only a minority of countries around the world (incl. Canada, Brazil,
Namibia, and a few others) have a functioning institution recognizing future generations. The
rest of the world's (incl. the US and other world powers) mechanisms still need drastic
improvement.
Issue
The austerity policies adopted to shore up the conventional economic model are impacting
most severely on the younger generations and less affluent social groups.
Environmentalism, workers' rights and business taxation are seen as constraints on growth
and competitiveness and are being called into question or given lower priority.
If this trend escalates, generations born today and in coming decades will suffer and be
impacted even worse.
Background
In recent years the UN has shined light on the importance of future generations; a report was
released in 2013 supporting specific representation of the interests of future generations and a
focus on normative and ethical issues, rather than purely economic cost-benefit analyses. It
suggests installing a Special Envoy focusing on future generations.
Considerations
• Youth unemployment has climbed to record highs globally, reaching as much as 60% in
comparatively affluent countries such as Greece and Spain.
• Bringing the voice of future generations to the negotiating table is fundamental for tackling
today’s issues and challenges like climate change, biodiversity losses and poverty.
Conclusion
Current generations with power need to provide a stable path for future generations to pursue
in helping obtain sustainable development.
Recommendation(s)
• Functioning institutions need to be set up globally to recognize the rights of future
generations.

2. Subject 2: World Society under Surveillance:
Intelligence Networks and the Threat to Privacy
Summary
As a largely closed self-referential system, intelligence can be as harmful to democracy as the
threats from which it purports to protect citizens. However, although mass collection
potentially threatens civil liberties, public reaction is highly ambiguous. It is debatable
whether global internet governance can contribute to securing citizens' privacy and freedom
rights, as long as the commitment of (parts of) civil society to protect civil liberties is not
echoed by nation-states.
Issue
• disagreements between civil society their role in state-corporatist network in Internet
Governance
• (for reformers): no one challenges the right of states to infringe on the privacy of those
targeted because of proportionate suspicion that they may be involved in illegal, threataning
activites, but many challenge the propriety of mass surveillance and trawling.
Background
A 2013 UN General Assembly draft resolution titled “The right to privacy in the digital age”
was co-sponsored by 57 Member States; the Assembly called upon all States to respect and
protect the right to privacy in digital communication, affirming that the rights held by people
offline must also be protected online.
Considerations
• in 2013 57% of Americans were “very or somewhat concerned” that privacy rights had been
violated. 42% weren't “too or at all concerned”, but 53% “disapproved” of the collection of
telephone and internet data.
• EU institutions and EU member state embassies and representations have been subjected to
• The US authorities are or have been accessing and processing personal data of EU citizens
on a large scale.
Conclusion
Mass surveillance is used to try and deter crime rates and patrol illegal activity – but to what
avail? It's an ethical battle, with a lot of morality questions to take in consideration.
Recommendation(s)
What can be done to counter mass surveillance?
• seeking the same protection for EU citizens under US law as they would enjoy in Europe
• establishing effective transnational oversight

3. Subject 3: Cultures of Humanitarianism
Summary
• Ever-growing demand in the world for humanitarian action in response to the suffering
caused by complex emergencies and natural disasters.
• Humans have the innate ability to empathize with strangers – but for this positive attribute
to have a broader political effect, it must be organized in accordance with cultural traditions
and codes of conduct .
Issue
Humanitarian disasters and crises are occurring more frequently with lasting impact, but to an
insufficient amount of global humanitarian aid.
Background
These traditions of empathetic philosophies partly influenced the standards of international
law that were imposed during the Geneva Conventions to afford protection to wounded
combatants, prisoners of war, civilian persons in times of war, and victims of civil wars.
Considerations
• global humanitarian response to natural/technological disaster is largely inadequate –
currently an annual funding deficit of ≈ USD 4.6 billion in unmet needs.
• (specific target example) 12 million Southern Africans in desperate need of emergency
food aid, according to estimates of the World Food Programme (WFP)
Conclusion
The long-term goal of humanitarian aid is sustainable development, which is a focal point for
the EU, UN and hundreds of NGOs. Meeting the demands of developing countries,
especially after natural/technological disasters is necessary to help them progress and remain
or become useful assets to global economy, and also for them to play a role in attaining the
SDGs..
Recommendation(s)
• promote direct transcultural cooperation between humanitarian actors on the basis of
equality
• a study by the OECD suggests donating cash instead of other commodities (food, cooking
oil, etc.) would be more beneficial to areas of need, because other commodities slow arrival
times and run the risk of destroying rural economies by flooding recipient countries with free
food .