Global Marshall Plan Balance the world with an eco-social market economy A project of hope
„It is not only for what we do that we are heldresponsible, but also for what we do not do“(Molière)
DID YoU KNoW thAt … 30,000 children die every day from starvation, water pollution and preventable disease – 11 million per year a child dies from malaria every 30 seconds – 1 million per year 1.2 billion people live on less than $1 a day 2.8 billion people live on less than $2 a day 200 species of plants and animals become extinct every day in 2004 $79 billion was spent on development projects worldwide, but $116 billion was paid in interest payments to the “donor countries” annual expenditure on armaments is approximately $1,000 billion the fortune of the 792 billionaires in the world increases by $300 to $400 billion annually the four richest people in the world have more wealth than a billion of the poorest.
BUt, YoU MAY ASK: cAN We AS INDIVIDUALS Do ANYthING ABoUt ALL thIS? Yes! If we join together with everyone who has the power and will to change the present situation we will have a chance. Let’s concentrate on what concerns us all: the preservation of the globe and the struggle for the human dignity of all its population. The ethical basis for this focus will be empathy, humanity and spirituality. The Global Marshall Plan Initiative is built on precisely this ethical founda- tion. It is an integrated platform, in which the worlds of politics and econo- mics together with non-governmental organisations (NGOs), the scientific and religious communities and the media – people from North and South – can co-operate in a new way. Transcending state borders and cultural and religious boundaries, the initiative works towards providing a win-win soluti- on for a fairer and sustainable form of globalisation. The primary goal of economic development must not be to serve the inte- rests of profit maximisation for the few. The economic goal rather is to serve the well-being of the greatest number of people and to facilitate the development, preservation and security of life and the ecological system. A rationally developed Global Marshall Plan for a worldwide eco-social market economy is in the long-term interests of all countries, of regional, national and international politics, of the world economy and also of civil society – for us, the people of the world and the globe. It can turn out to be the most effective programme possible in today’s world for peace and eco- nomic development in the decades to come. Let us bring the world into balance together!
the hIStorY ofthe GLoBAL MArShALL pLAN INItIAtIVeIn the course of UN Conferences many documents have been prepared andmany agreements reached about ways to meet global challenges – but all toofrequently these were never implemented.In 2003 representatives of science, politics, the media, culture, the economyand NGOs cooperated to meet the challenge of an ever-deepening crisis inhuman development. Their contribution was to be in the framework of theGlobal Marshall Plan for a worldwide eco-social market economy, based onthe idea of the Marshall Plan after World War 2 as well as the concept deve-loped by Al Gore in the 1990s, which would link (co-)financing with thesetting of environmental and social standards to create a win-win situation forboth North and South. Since 2003 the initiative has grown into a networkof more than a hundred organisations together with many federal states andcommunities. The initiative is independent, without party, religious or culturalaffiliations.Many thousands of people from all parts of the globe have pledged their goodwilland their support for the Global Marshall Plan initiative. They include:Franz Alt, Dieter Althaus, Kurt Beck, Prince El Hassan bin Talal of Jordan,Carl-Eduard von Bismarck, Karlheinz Böhm, Eugen Drewermann, HansPeter Dürr, Peter Eigen, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Franz Fischler, JohanGaltung, Heiner Geissler, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, Jane Goodall, VittorioHösle, Sandra Maischberger, Wahu Kaara, Reinhold Messner, Josef Riegler,Hermann Scheer, Vandana Shiva, Klaus Töpfer, Jakob von Uexküll, ErnstUlrich von Weizsäcker and Jean Ziegler.By arranging lectures and discussions, disseminating information and publi-shing books as well as through networking and carefully targeted lobbying,the Global Marshall Plan Initiative has been trying to consolidate forces andto raise consciousness about the changes that are going to need to take place.If everyone who was convinced of the need for change managed to persuadejust one other person a year, the snowball effect would mean that in 33 yearsthe entire population of the world would share a common ideal (for 233 = 8.5billion).
the orIGINAL MArShALL pLAN: A SYMBoL of hope, SoLIDArItY AND peAce The historic Marshall Plan (officially: the European Recovery Program, or ERP for short) was the USA’s economic reconstruction programme for Western Europe after the Second World War. It was named after its foun- der, the US Secretary of State and winner of the Nobel peace prize George C. Marshall. The programme began in 1947 and lasted for four years, in the course of which the USA paid to the participating states 12.4 billion dollars or 1.3% of its GDP. Over the following two decades there was – through what was called the economic miracle –, extraordinary economic growth and a huge increase in wealth. Moreover, today, the Marshall Plan is seen as the first step towards European integration. In the light of both of these facts we have decided to name our initiative the “Global Marshall Plan”. Obviously one cannot directly compare the situation then with that in the disadvantaged regions of the world today. Likewise, we are also aware that the political and economic aims of the original Marshall Plan are not undisputed. Nevertheless the Marshall Plan stands for hope, solidarity and peace. Who ShoULD Be INVoLVeD IN the GLoBAL MArShALL pLAN? The Global Marshall Plan Initiative is quite consciously addressed to diffe- rent groups simultaneously: to all those in the world, who are prepared to bring their knowledge, experience and ideas to the initiative
to churches and other religious organisations, to the media undartists, who can help spread the idea of the Global Marshall Plan andraise awareness in societyto the representatives of interest groups, as well as to civil society asrepresented by NGOs. Our goal is to join forces in order to worktowards a more just and sustainable form of globalisationto the scientific community. We invite specialists in all areas todevelop further the Global Marshall Plan into a more detailed inter-disciplinary projectto business leaders who could embrace the Global Marshall Plan inorder to work for socially just and environmentally responsible deve-lopmentto governments and national parliaments, to give the GlobalMarshall Plan official support and to develop it in dialogue with theother players. This new quality of global action and cooperative pro-blem-solving is in the long term interests of all countriesto the G8, who in fighting poverty should not focus on short-termmeasures such as aid and debt relief, but on eradicating structuralpoverty through a reform of global regulations and institutionsto the European Union, as the most important hope for our projectand for millions of people in the world. The member states of the EUhave a historic opportunity to progress from being former colonialpowers to partners in an effective and comprehensive developmentpolicy. The EU can and should be courageous enough to develop analternative to the current form of globalisation and then go on to pro-mote it in international negotiationsto the UN with all its programmes and special organisations, whichhave a central role to play in bringing this project to fruition.Moreover we support the initiatives aimed at reforming the UN interms of its efficiency, powers and funding.
oUr GoALS: for A More jUSt forM of GLoBALISAtIoN Globalisation doesn’t just happen; the way it develops can be shaped. To do this, however, it requires determined private and political interests who want to shape it in a new and sustainable direction – for the general good. The aim of the Global Marshall Plan Initiative is a peace strategy for the development of humanity, based on justice, solidarity and sustainable deve- lopment as well as a dialogue between the different cultures and religions of the world in a partnership based on mutual respect, empathy and tolerance. Although the Initiative was started in Europe, it sees itself as a joint forum of the “North” and the “South”, working for a sustainable world. We want to cooperate with many existing projects, initiatives and personalities – in the conviction that, although there are many legitimate differences in social poli- cy, party politics and the concerns of interest groups, as well as philosophical and religious disparities, there is significant common ground in the overall aims: a more just form of globalisation economic, ecological and social sustainability realisation of human rights and human dignity for all In our opinion the achievement of these goals will only be possible if they benefit both sides, “North” and “South”. For this reason we are proposing the following requirements: equal development opportunities to be achieved through coo- peration and efficient funding – funds should be raised partly by taxes on global currency transactions fair global competition to be achieved by the cautious establish- ment of open markets, allowing at the same time individual nations the right to some protection of their markets, and by the establish- ment of a global economic framework of social and ecological stan- dards which will be binding for all countries.
The Global Marshall Plan Initiative is interested in picking up on good ideasand initiating independent projects so that, through awareness-raising from thebottom up, it will be possible to change the behaviour of political and businessleaders.oUr StrAteGY:the LINKING of fUNDING toeNVIroNMeNtAL AND SocIAL StANDArDSWe need a just and practicable international regulatory framework. Withthat in mind the Global Marshall Plan is based on a successful and above all“humanitarian” model – namely that of the social market economy, com-plemented by the principle of environmental responsibility in the sense ofcomprehensive sustainability. Therefore we are calling our model the eco-social market economy.The eco-social market economy is a constructive alternative to the neo-libe-ral market economy dominated by economic interests.In the eco-social market economy the aim is to achieve a balance between anefficient economy, social cohesion and the protection of the environment.The main concern of the “Global Marshall Plan for a worldwide eco-socialmarket economy” is that equal weight should be given to the setting andobservance of trade, environmental and social standards on the one handand securing of the provision of the funds necessary for development on theother.In this, the proposed (co-)financing is designed to facilitate consensus andthe implementation of the standards, following a similar logic to the stagesof EU enlargement: (co-)financing in return for the implementation of lawsand standards shared by all. In this context it is worth emphasising that theprinciple of the eco-social market economy is firmly anchored in EU policy.The principle is also part of the Lisbon strategy in conjunction with the EUStrategy for Sustainable Development and the draft treaty on the EU consti-tution.
Implementation is inadequate however, even in Europe. Our consumption of natural resources, as in all OECD countries, is far too high and dispropor- tionate to our share of the world’s population. Therefore it is necessary for us, here at home, to make major changes to increase the sustainability of the way we live and run our economy. The real goal of a worldwide eco-social market economy, however, goes far beyond the first step of introducing compulsory social and environmental standards. Its demands are: better regulation of world financial markets in order to limit the risk of speculation against individual national economies and currencies a system of worldwide tax co-ordination, including most important- ly the abolition of tax havens and the control of offshore banking, through which between $50 and $60 billion in tax revenue is lost instead of being used for the common good the creation of a worldwide policy of cohesion, i.e. firm cooperation between countries and regions a concept of “prosperity for all”, of prosperity in its widest sense, based on environmental sustainability – which is why the implemen- tation of the polluter pays principle and the environmental real cost of production is a core element of the eco-social market economy the establishment of a world competition commission to prevent over-powerful companies dominating markets, enjoying monopolies or creating cartels. Obviously this worldwide eco-social market economy should not preclude the existence of other approaches, such as for example the economies based on solidarity in South America, but these always need to be implemented within the context of a particular culture.10
„All the good in this world has happened onlyas a result of someone doing more than hehad to“ (unknown)
oUr LISt of reQUIreMeNtS: fIVe eLeMeNtS of AN eco-SocIAL MArKet ecoNoMY Aspects of the Global Marshall Plan, which contains five inter-related ele- ments, are already contained in the results of past UN summits, are already part of European policy or among the stated demands of various NGOs and other institutions. These will form both the starting point for our initiative and its foundation – and increase the chances of attaining the stated aims. 1st eLeMeNt: the reALISAtIoN of the INterNAtIoNALLY AGreeD UN MILLeNNIUM DeVeLopMeNt GoALS In 2000 at the UN Millennium Summit 189 states agreed a set of deve- lopment goals to be reached by 2015. We see the implementation of these goals as a first step to sustainable development and a more just world. a halving of the number of people in the world suffering from starva- tion, likewise of those who have an income of less than $1 a day the provision of basic education for all children the promotion of gender equality and empowerment of women in society a reduction in the rate of infant mortality to a third of the current figure a substantial improvement in maternal health a reversal of the trend in the growth rates of HIV/Aids, malaria and other epidemic diseases a reduction in the rate of loss of natural resources and a halving of the number of people who have no access to clean drinking water (currently over one billion)12
the creation of a new type of partnership for development the development of an open system of world trade and finance within an appropriate framework a concerted effort to fight poverty, e.g. in relation to the debt problems of the poorest countries the creation of decent and productive employment opportunities affordable access to major drugs universal access to the benefits of modern technology2nd eLeMeNt:the rAISING of AN ADDItIoNAL $100 BILLIoN per YeAr forDeVeLopMeNt projectSThe financial provision needed to reach the Millennium DevelopmentGoals is, according to an UN analysis, the Zedillo Report, $50 billion peryear, with an additional $20 billion to be allocated for public projects andfor humanitarian purposes. The full amount has still to be raised. Since thisanalysis assumed the availability of funds from 2001, whereas the implemen-tation of the Global Marshall Plan will not be possible before 2008, we mustassume a requirement of additional funds of $100 billion a year comparedwith expenditure in 2004.The total expenditure for international development cooperation in 2004was $79 billion, which is about 0.26% of Gross National Income (GNI) ofthe OECD countries, who as far back as 1970, pledged themselves in a UNresolution to spend 0.7% of GNI on development aid. Through the propo-sed Global Marshall Plan this proportion would rise by about 0.6% of GNI. 13
Some figures for comparison: Over a period of four years after the Second World War the United States spent 1.3% of its Gross Domestic Product on the Marshall Plan. The amount the world spent on arms in 2004, excluding the cost of the Iraq war, was approximately $950 billion. By the end of the year 2006 the Iraq war has cost close to $300 billion. These figures make it clear that the Global Marshall Plan is both necessary and that it can be funded in its suggested scope. 3rd eLeMeNt: chArGeS oN GLoBAL trANSActIoNS AND oN the coNSUMptIoN of reSoUrceS AS A SoUrce of fUNDING The Global Marshall Plan Initiative supports the goal of raising 0.7% of Gross National Income for development work and it calls upon govern- ments to fulfil their obligations in this regard. In addition we support further debt relief measures and a system for the responsible allocation of credits. Even the most optimistic assumptions about reaching the 0.7% target sug- gest, however, that from 2008 there will be a substantial shortfall in the additional $100 billion that is required. For this reason and also for reasons of regulatory policy a substantial part of this money should be raised by taxes on global transactions and on the consumption of natural resources. Currently, new financial instruments are being introduced as pilot projects in some countries, for example the tax on airline tickets – a small fuel surchar- ge – or the International Finance Facility, a financial instrument financed through bonds which can make additional short-term funding available for the Millennium Development Goals. That, however, is far from enough. Therefore we would argue for more far- reaching measures and would be ready to pick up on ideas that come up at international conferences or are developed by financial experts and by socie- ty at large. We want global taxes which will bring an end to regional distor- tions in competitiveness, because at the moment, in proportional terms, too1
little tax is levied on global economic activity. Moreover economic activityplaces a disproportional burden on the environment without bearing therelevant costs. The proposed taxes will however only burden the economyand consumers to a small degree. A further criterion is easier administrationthrough already existing institutions.Tax on Foreign Exchange TransactionsThis is a sales tax on foreign exchange transactions (for example on theexchange of euros into yen), which, not entirely correctly, is termed the“Tobin tax”. Because the daily exchange transactions in the EU alone arecurrently almost 700 billion euros, around $30 billion per year could be rai-sed for the Global Marshall Plan through a minimal charge on all currencytransactions of, for example, 0.01%.There have long been many calls for a tax on foreign exchange transactions.Such a measure has already been approved by the French and Belgian par-liaments on the condition that it would be implemented on an internatio-nal basis – in Austria there has also been a similar parliamentary decision. AEurope-wide introduction (EU and Switzerland) would be feasible and wouldin addition bring more transparency to the exchange markets.Tax on KeroseneAs the Landau Report, commissioned by the French President JacquesChirac, shows, there are many advantages to be gained from a tax on kero-sene. It is related to the real cost of air pollution caused by air travel andcan be raised easily because the sale of kerosene is regulated. It is estimatedthat a worldwide introduction of such a scheme would provide an additi-onal income of around $10 billion. This would increase air ticket prices byaround 2.5%. Moreover, from the perspective of the Global Marshall PlanInitiative it is incomprehensible that air travel, with its attendant pollution,should be subsidised through a no-tax policy on kerosene.More financial instruments being discussed within the Initiative are specialdrawing rights for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) – that is an artifi-cial unit of currency, which can be used for the good of marginalised coun-tries – and the Terra charge, a small tax on world trade. 1
4th eLeMeNt: GLoBAL GoVerNANce – the DeVeLopMeNt of A frAMeWorK for the WorLD ecoNoMY The overcoming of global fundamentalist market strategies and the realisa- tion of a worldwide eco-social market economy should be made possible through the establishment of a better framework in line with a fairer world contract. For that purpose the existing body of regulations and institutions governing the economy, environment, society and culture (e.g. in the WTO, IMF, World Bank, UN and their programmes and special organi- sations like the ILO, UNDP, UNEP and UNESCO, likewise the IUCN) should be linked and submitted to reforms. Step by step, broad internationally agreed standards are to be established in conjunction with the Global Marshall Plan. Only in this way will the desired effect materialise and permanent broad support from global civil society and from the world of economics and politics be obtained. The most appropriate way to achieve this is the linking of environmental and social standards and the aforementioned body of regulations with the (co-)financing programme. Moreover, the allocation of resources for the latter should not be determi- ned by short-term economic interests or through the short-term exercise of power by elite countries in poorer ones. For this phase of the Global Marshall Plan the use of the following stan- dards, which have already found consensus amongst UN members, will be the goal: fundamental economic, social and cultural human rights, which are to a large extent congruent with the core principles of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) such as union rights, equal gender treatment, the prohibition of child labour, etc. the standards of international environmental and nature conservation agreements such as for example the Convention on Biodiversity, the Ramsar Convention, the Washington Conservation of Species Agreement, the Kyoto Protocol and the Montreal Protocol.1
When applying these criteria to the allocation of funds one needs to remem-ber that failing to observe some of these environmental and social standardsrepresents the most important competitive advantage that economicallymarginalised countries possess. The example of EU enlargement shows that,nevertheless, arrangements concerning the application of common standardsand levels of protection can be reached, if at the same time the necessaryfunding for sustainable development can be secured for the poorer partnersfrom the richer countries. It is clear that this linkage is profitable for all con-cerned.the GLoBAL MArShALL pLAN AND the WtoIn den Überlegungen der Global Marshall Plan Initiative spielt die WTO einebesondere Rolle. Sie ist zwar wie keine andere internationale Organisation indie Kritik geraten, vor allem, weil sie, ihrem Mandat entsprechend, primärden Abbau von Handelshemmnissen fördert und dabei ökologische, sozialesowie kulturelle Aspekte weitgehend unberücksichtigt lässt. Aber längerfristigkönnte die WTO dennoch zur geeigneten Institution reformiert werden, umdie Verknüpfung von Handelsregeln mit sozialen und ökologischen Standardszu einem gerechten, ausbalancierten und in sich schlüssigen, auf Nachhaltigkeitausgerichteten Wirtschaftsystem zu erreichen. Dabei sind der Grad anVerbindlichkeit und die Durchsetzungsmöglichkeit von wesentlicher Bedeu-tung, die mittels neuer Sanktionsmöglichkeiten weiter gesichert werdenkönnten. Ohne eine aktivere Teilnahme der marginalisierten Länder an transpa-renten Verhandlungsprozessen wird sich die WTO allerdings schwer von demVorwurf befreien können, der verlängerte Arm der großen Handelsmächte zusein. Alternative Überlegungen hinsichtlich der Durchsetzbarkeit ökologischerund sozialer Standards setzen auf eine Stärkung einer reformierten UNO, z. B.durch eine Weiterentwicklung der UNEP zu einer Weltumweltorganisation(UNEO) und effizientere Instrumente zur Durchsetzung von Sozialstandardsim Rahmen der ILO bzw. der Menschenrechte. 1
5th eLeMeNt: SUStAINABLe DeVeLopMeNt INSteAD of MereLY cAtchING Up – for A DeVeLopMeNt poLIcY BASeD oN jUStIce The following are crucial factors in establishing a rational global framework and autonomous development: fairness and cooperation at all levels a strengthening of the powers of the partner countries in decision and policy making the promotion of good governance and the fight against corruption a co-ordinated and grassroots approach to the allocation of funds, e.g. micro-credit and micro-financing adequate financing Many people in rich countries still stubbornly hold on to the idea that if only people in the “developing” countries would think and trade, produce and consume like us, they would also have our level of “earned wealth”. Behind that thought lies the old idea that fortune always favours the virtuo- us and that poverty is essentially self-inflicted. Quite apart from the fact that this ignores the multi-faceted dimensions of poverty, it does not take into account the extent to which its causes lie in the inequality of power and ownership structures which have perpetuated poverty and dependence for centuries. The worldwide expansion of “western” development, even if we ignore all its undesirable and unsustainable aspects, will certainly not lead to universal prosperity for all peoples and nations, but rather to cultural impoverishment and the destruction of our natural resources. A development policy based on poorer countries “catching up” is thus clear- ly not desirable nor even in own interests. The devaluation of traditional or socially and culturally different ways of life and belief systems has contributed to weakening people’s initiative and their feeling of self-worth, as well as mar- ginalising entire national economies.1
Not least, it is the arrogance of “western civilisation”, which is seen by peo-ple in other parts of the world as degrading and threatening and provokesanti-western feeling that creates a breeding ground for hate and violence.Other factors are inequality of opportunity and a lack of balance in the waythe interests of poorer nations are represented.Fighting world poverty is not charity but a humanitarian imperative. Wesee development policy as a policy for peace – it is a matter of enlightenedself-interest, as the Brandt Report made clear as long ago as 1980. In ourworld, with its mutual dependencies and vulnerabilities, security can only beachieved if people work with each other and not against each other. Securitypolicy in the narrow military sense is totally inadequate because it ignores thestructural causes of violence, such as socio-economic and political grievances.Moreover it is necessary at the same time to build mutual trust and to acceptpeople in disadvantaged countries as equal partners and to allow them to par-ticipate in processes of international negotiation and decision making.Such a development policy goes far beyond cooperation on developmentprojects and programmes and includes: the removal of obstacles to development in world economics and politics building cooperative partnerships to solve global challenges and problems.How much development policy is actually capable of achieving obviouslydepends both upon the resources that are made available and the extent ofsupportive political will behind it. Without a radical change in the currentdivision of wealth and power our vision of peace, freedom, justice andsustainable development will never become reality. 1
froM DeVeLopMeNt AID to DeVeLopMeNt cooperAtIoN It has long been recognised that there is a complicated network of causes underlying obstacles to development and furthermore that there is no simple solution to the problem. Improvements to development cooperation both in terms of quantity and quality are still necessary. In their planning experts have long ignored the actual living conditions of people and not taken into account contextual inter-connections. A rethink is happening only gradually. The ini- tial paternal type of development aid has become development cooperation, recipients have become partners. Development, understood in terms of individual abilities and capabilities reaching their full potential, has to mean “self-development”. People them- selves are the real experts. However, the initial impetus and a framework of favourable conditions for development may come from outside. An essential element is the empowerment of women and disadvantaged groups so that they are made aware of their rights. Therefore, the Global Marshall Plan Initiative attaches great importance to grassroots initiatives and financial instruments such as micro credit. At state level, institutional organisation and “good gover- nance” is required as well as the concentration of regional resources. For more effective development work there needs to be a commitment to increasing the funding in stages as well as the following qualitative improvements: greater harmonisation, cooperation, coordination and coherence among OECD countries more effective institutions on both the national and international level a greater degree of importance to be attached to the priorities of the partners and also on sustainability mutual responsibility, accountability and transparency a strengthening of the problem-solving abilities of individual states and their scope for action as well as an active role for people in sha- ping their own future an integrated but flexible approach to eradicating poverty, reducing environmental damage and securing peace20
„Nothing in the world is as strong as an idea whosetime has come“ (Victor Hugo) 21
SUpporterS of the GLoBAL MArShALL pLAN INItIAtIVe (extrAct) Aachen Foundation Kathy Beys AIESEC Germany and Austria Akademie für Natur und Umwelt des Landes Schleswig-Holstein (Academy for Nature and Environment Schleswig-Holstein) AKWD (Committee for World Church Services of the Church of Nordelbien) Alpen-Adria-University Klagenfurt American Council for the United Nations University Andheri Hilfe Austrian Biomass Association Austrian Environmental Umbrella Association Austrian federal states of Burgenland, Lower Austria Salzburg, Styria, Tyrol, Upper Austria, Vorarlberg B.A.U.M e.V. (German Environmental Management Association) BAKI Bank für Sozialwirtschaft Bau-Verein zu Hamburg Beratungsring Biopolitics International Organisation Breinlinger+Partner Bund Naturschutz Schwabach (Schwabach Alliance of Nature Conservation) BWA (Federal Association for Economic Development and Foreign Trade) Cap Anamur Caritas Austria Center for Global Negotiations Club of Budapest Club of Rome COMMARO mobile trading systems Committee for a Democratic U.N. Coolit DABEI (German Association for Education, Invention and Innovation) DBU (German Environmental Foundation) DEV (German Inventors Association) Doehler GmbH DRD (German Delphic Council) DSI (Umbrella Association of Student Initiatives Lüneburg) DSW (German Foundation for World Population) DWA (German Association for Water, Wastewater and Waste)22
EaiD Task Force JusticeEcosocial Forum Austria, Europe, Croatia and HungaryEPEA (International Environmental Research)Evangelische Akademie Tutzing (Protestant Academy Tutzing)Fairness FoundationFair Trade AustriaFarbfieberFAW/n (Research Institute for Applied Knowledge Processing/n)Femme Total e.V.Fleuchaus GalloFondsNetzwerkForum Umweltbildung (Forum for Environmental Education, Austria)Friends of NatureFundación Agreste, ArgentinaGBG Green Budget GermanyGemeinde Mallnitz (Community of Mallnitz)Gemeinsam für Afrika (Together for Africa)German federal state of ThüringenGIP (Society of Intercultural Philosophy)GiraffentoastGlobal Contract Foundation, HamburgGrüne Wirtschaft Österreich (Green Economy Austria)Grünhelme e.V. (Green Helmets)Handelskontor WillmannHauptkirche St. Katharinen, HamburgHLA Yspertal (Economic Polytechnic Yspertal)IndienhilfeInternational Students ClubISG (Inter-Disciplinary Society)IUFE (Institute for Environment – Peace – Development)JBZ (Robert-Jungk-Library for Future Questions, Austria)Junior Chamber International (JCI)KAB (Austrian Catholic Workers Association)Katholische Kirchenstiftung Verklärung ChristiKatholischer Laienrat ÖsterreichKEMEL (Center of Greek Volunteer Top-Managers)KLB Bad Tölz-Wolfrathausen (Catholic People’s Movement of Bad Tölz- Wolfrathausen)KOO (Co-ordination Office of the Austrian Episcopal Conference for International Development and Mission) 23
Krämer Marktforschung (Krämer Market Research) Landentwicklung Steiermark Lebenschancen International Legas Delaney Hamburg Lexware Ltd. Lichtbrücke e.V. Limasol Sports SA Cape Town Marie-Schlei-Association MCC Public Relations Memo AG Meusel Begeer GbR, Positive Concept Mouvement Ecologique a.s.b.l. – Friends of the Earth Luxembourg Münchner Initiative CSR (Munich Initiative CSR) NetzwerkZeitgeist NRW NiBB (Network of Innovative Citizens) Nova EUropa NUE (North German Foundation for the Environment and Development) ÖBU (Swiss Association for Environmentally Conscious Management) ödp (Ecological-Democratic Party) Oikocredit Förderkreis Baden-Württemberg OpenSpace-Online Partnerschaft Mirantao/Mantiqueira (Miranto/Mantiqueira Partnership) Peter-Hesse-Foundation Philosophical and Theological University Heiligenkreuz Reformierter Bund (Protestant Union) Rotary Club Nürnberger Land, Oberstdorf, Oberstaufen-Immenstadt a.s.o. SBP Schlaich Bergermann and Partner SpardaBank Munich SPES Verein (SPES Association) SSES (Swiss Association for Solar Energy) stadt land impulse (town country impulses) Stadt Sonthofen (city of Sonthofen) Stiftung Apfelbaum (Foundation Apple Tree) Stiftung Kinder in Afrika (Foundation for African Children) Stiftung KIT Initiative (KIT Initiative Foundation) Tegut Terra One World Network United World Philharmonic Youth Orchestra UN Millennium Campaign (Germany) University Club Klagenfurt2
University of Applied Sciences Wiener Neustadt | Campus WieselburgUniversity of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences ViennaUniversity of Salzburg, Institute of Inter-Cultural Theology and the Study of ReligionVENRO (Association of German development non-governmental organisa- tions)Verband Druck und Medien Nord e.V.Volksbank Goch-Kevelär eG and Volksbank Neu-Ulm eGWelthaus InnsbruckWeltparlament der Kulturen (World Parliament of Cultures)WHKT (West German Chambers of Crafts and Skilled Trades‘ Council)Wirtschaftsjunioren Deutschland (Junior Chamber Germany)WKO (Austrian Federal Economic Chamber – Department of Economic Politics)World in UnionWorld Trade Point Federation GermanyYOIS Youth for Intergenerational Justice and SustainabilityZukunftsstiftung Entwicklungshilfe (Future Foundation for Development Aid)GLoSSArGNI: Gross National IncomeILO: International Labor OrganizationIUCN: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural ResourcesIMF: International Monetary FundNGO: Non-Governmental OrganizationOECD: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and DevelopmentUNDP: United Nations Development ProgrammeUNEO: United Nations Environment OrganisationUNEP: United Nations Environment ProgramUNESCO: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural OrganizationUNO/UN: United Nations OrganizationWTO: World Trade Organization 2
the GLoBAL MArShALL pLAN INItIAtIVe International co-ordination Global Marshall Plan Initiative, Steckelhörn 9, 20457 Hamburg, Germany Tel.: +49 (0)40 822 90 42-0, Fax: +49 (0)40 822 90 42-1, Email: email@example.com Account details: Global Marshall Plan Foundation, account 212, routing number: 251 205 10, Sozialbank, Swift/BIC: BFSWDE33HAN, IBAN: DE73 2512 0510 0008 4098 00 USA co-ordination Center for Global Negotiations, PO Box 63776, Philadelphia, PA 19147, USA Tel.: +1 215 592 10 16 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Account details: Center for Global Negotiations, account 0496287319, routing number: 121000248, Wells Fargo, BIC: WFBIUS6S German co-ordination The German Association for the Club of Rome, Steckelhörn 9, 20457 Hamburg Tel.: +49 (0)40 89 80 75 86, Fax: +49 (0)40 89 80 75 87, E-Mail: email@example.com Austrian co-ordination Ecosocial Forum Europe, Franz Josefs-Kai 13, 1010 Vienna, Austria Tel.: +43 (0)1-533 07 97, Fax: +43 (0)1-533 07 97-90, Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Swiss co-ordination ÖBU (Swiss Association for Environmentally Conscious Management), Obstgar- tenstrasse 28, 8035 Zurich, Switzerland Tel.: +41 (0)44 364 37 38, Fax: +41 (0)44 364 37 11, Email: email@example.com Imprint: Authors: Franz Fischler, EU Commissioner ret., President of the Ecosocial Forum; Petra Gruber, CEO Institute for Environment – Peace – Development (IUFE); Franz Josef Radermacher, Director of FAW/n (Research Institute for Applied Knowledge Processing/n), Ulm; Josef Riegler, Vice-Chancellor ret., Hon. President of the Ecosocial Forum; Klemens Riegler, Co-ordination Global Marshall Plan Austria, Ecosocial Forum; Editors: Ernst Scheiber, Klemens Riegler, Layout: Demner, Merlicek Bergmann2
„the best way to predict the future is to create it“(unknown)
DecLArAtIoN of SUpport of the GLoBALMArShALL pLAN INItIAtIVeplease fax to: +49 (0)40 822 90 42-1I/We support the Global Marshall Plan Initiative as an organisation in personOrganisation: ...……………………………………………………….........Name: ………………………………………………………............Position: ………………………………………………………............Adresse: ………………………………………………………............Email: ………………………………………………………............ I/We would like to receive information and the monthly newsletter by email. I/We would like to participate in the Initiative. I/We would like to financially support the Initiative. monthly quarterly biannually one-off paymentPlease contact me/us.Date/Signature: ............…………………………………………………
Info-Link: www.globalmarshallplan.org This booklet was made by: www.ecosocialforum.org www.umweltdachverband.at www.iufe.at30 Ein Projekt der Hoffnung weiß groß