Download to read offline
Uploaded byGregory Borne
United Nations Research
The document discusses sustainable development within the United Nations. It analyzes statements made at the 57th UN General Assembly to understand perceptions of sustainable development. It finds that views of sustainable development diverge across social, economic, and environmental issues but converge in associating it with global risks and forming partnerships. Sustainable development creates common language and political discourse. The conclusion is that within the UN, sustainable development represents a constructive ambiguity that facilitates cooperation across differing ideologies and reflects reflexive modernity in questioning modern political structures.
More Related Content
Similar to United Nations Research
United Nations Research
- 1. SustainableSustainable DevelopmentDevelopment The Reflexive Governanceof RiskThe Reflexive Governance of Risk Inside the United NationsInside the United Nations
- 2. OverviewOverview Main goalsMaingoals The United NationsThe United Nations MethodologyMethodology ResultsResults ConclusionsConclusions
- 3. AimsAims 1.1. Assess theproposition 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?
- 4. Governing the WorldGoverningthe World
- 5. 57th United NationsGeneral 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 CLOSETO 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 andGovernanceSustainable 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))
- 9.
- 10. United Nations GeneralDebateUnited 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% ofall statements delivered, referred toof all statements delivered, referred to sustainable developmentsustainable development Pillars of DivergencePillars of Divergence • SOCIALSOCIAL • ECONOMICECONOMIC • ENVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTAL
- 12. Substantive IssuesSubstantive Issues SocialSocialEnvironmentalEnvironmental 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
- 13.
- 14. Projecting SustainableProjecting Sustainable DevelopmentDevelopment Legal (regime formation).Legal (regime formation). Moral (common responsibility)Moral (common responsibility) Sensationalist (cold, hard facts)Sensationalist (cold, hard facts)
- 15. Overall Perceptions ofSustainableOverall Perceptions of Sustainable DevelopmentDevelopment DIVERGANTDIVERGANT AmbivalentAmbivalent DiverseDiverse ContestedContested
- 16.
- 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 ““Disastrousfloods 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 nationsstatesBetween 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 ConvergenceSummaryof 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: SustainableDevelopment, 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: SustainableConclusion2: 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.
- 23.
Editor's Notes
- #3 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
- #4 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.
- #5 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
- #6 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).
- #7 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
- #8 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
- #9 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
- #11 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)
- #12 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.
- #13 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
- #14 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
- #15 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
- #16 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
- #17 The second theme is that emerged from the discursive representation of SD is convergance
- #18 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.
- #19 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
- #20 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
- #21 On the basis of these observation the following points of convergance can be summarised
- #24 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