KEY MESSAGES FROM      “IMPROVING THE INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT-              A deep dive into g...
support for P10 in terms of specific language to ensure support for national, regional and global        language on imple...
•    The establishment of this office should be agreed in Rio and followed by a transparent, inclusive     process to agre...
•    MGS participation in a reformed IFSD/IEG should provide more space for MGS rather    than just being mere observers, ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Key Messages from "Improving the Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development

1,075 views

Published on

This workshop focused on discussions on promoting transparency, inclusiveness and accountability as
outcomes of Rio 2012. The discussion focused around means to enhance Principle 10 of the 1992 Rio
declaration on access to information, public participation and access to justice, as well as new means to
ensure accountability through public monitoring of commitments.

Published in: Technology
1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Sustainable development for LDCs
    :: by Subash Duwadi
    Schematic Representation of 'Sustainable Development'
    Climate Change is a global fact. There is a need to agree on a framework of action during Rio+20 and have, among others, a timeline for implementing sustainable development commitments with a set of actionable goals. The poor and mountainous countries contribute least to global warming but are the most vulnerable to climate change and erratic weather patterns. But, their capacity to address the problems is limited. Therefore, the global community needs to develop mechanisms to support the most vulnerable countries in effectively addressing the adverse impacts of climate change and for using the opportunities resulting from it to improve livelihood and achieve climate-resilient development. The ability of vulnerable countries to address different global crises is limited and therefore the need for a mechanism to help such countries to overcomes crises, and improve resilience.
    Nepal believes this can be achieved through proper and effective integration of Istanbul Program of action for the LDCs in the global sustainable development agenda. While using natural resources (hydropower generation and biodiversity conservation) for economic gains, care must be taken to ensure fair and equitable benefit sharing with local communities and indigenous people, whose life and livelihood directly or indirectly depend on the resources or the ecosystem services. Both income inequality and poverty reduction need to be addressed sustainably taking into account the need to democratize ownership, control and decision making over productive natural resources and assets.
    There has to be an appropriate mix of the democratic and inclusive models such as cooperatives, collective and community- based and driven ventures, and public-private enterprises for ensuring that the economic activities contribute to the developmental goals of the community and society. LDCs such as Nepal need support for the strengthening innovation capacity to generate appropriate technologies, enhance extension services and improve market infrastructures for increasing the productivity of agriculture and natural resources. It is also necessary to develop easily adoptable and resilient technologies that meet the needs of the poor, women and excluded groups and communities. Both farm and non- farm linkages need to be strengthened by improving connectivity, creating post- harvest infrastructures and facilities, promoting value adding small and micro enterprises (SMEs) and increasing marketing and distribution efficiency.
    Despite constraints, Nepal has made considerable progress in implementing programs related to the natural resources management, renewable energy, health and education and poverty reduction. It can be better given its comparative advantages and natural resources endowment for the developing sustainable agriculture, ecotourism, water resources, renewable energy, non- timber forest products, community forestry and biodiversity conservation. However, it needs additional support (finance, technology transfer and capacity development) for the sustaining the achievements and scaling up the successful pilot interventions
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,075
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
54
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
13
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Key Messages from "Improving the Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development

  1. 1. KEY MESSAGES FROM “IMPROVING THE INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT- A deep dive into governance issues and the Rio +20 zero draft”WORKSHOP FOR GOVERNMENT DELEGATES, INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS AND MAJOR GROUPS AND STAKEHOLDERS. Sunday 25th March, 2012 9:30am -4:00pm Church Center for the United Nations 777 First Avenue at 44th Street New YorkObjective: - To provide a venue for dialogue on ambitious and visionary outcomes on the second themeof the conference strengthening the institutional framework for sustainable development to make Rio+20 a success.The following are the main key messages from each of the working groups:- Hooks in the Zero Draft - Principle 10 and Compendium of CommitmentsThis workshop focused on discussions on promoting transparency, inclusiveness and accountability asoutcomes of Rio 2012. The discussion focused around means to enhance Principle 10 of the 1992 Riodeclaration on access to information, public participation and access to justice, as well as new means toensure accountability through public monitoring of commitments. • There is strong support from many governments for Principle 10 (P10) to be reaffirmed and formalized through new legal instruments (especially for a new regional convention in Latin America but also possibly a global convention), as well as improving national implementation. • CSOs are very concerned that the proposed amendments to the Zero Draft are going backwards on P10. They are especially concerned with the G-77s calls for deletion of paragraph 58 and removal of all sections that speak about implementation of this Principle and many amendments proposed by governments which weaken it. They call on governments to reaffirm
  2. 2. support for P10 in terms of specific language to ensure support for national, regional and global language on implementation. • New information technologies can provide opportunities to identify and monitor commitments to hold governments accountable. A new compendium of commitments/global registry has been proposed to be run jointly by the UN/CSOs under the UNCSD but with some independence. This should include an accountability mechanism. This cannot replace institutional procedures of reporting and compliance. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Zero Draft • Sustainable development goals (SDGs) need to be developed within a participatory approach, they need to be simple, achievable, realistic and measurable. A long list of SDGs is not desirable and means of implementation should be incorporated within the formulation of these goals. A human, economic and social rights framework should underlie the goals. • The SDGs to be developed must be based on an assessment of the gaps in the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) process. • Rio+20 should agree on a process and a set of principles for the formulation of the SDGs. Key principles need to be based on the Rio Declaration/Agenda 21 and should include transparency, intergenerational and gender equity, sector integration, public participation, accountability, common-but-differentiated-responsibility and non regression. • SDGs should be universal and applicable to both developed and developing countries. • A SDG on global partnerships (following the MDG 8) is needed to underpin improvements to institutions to ensure a governance framework for success of the goals. • A robust governance and accountability framework for sustainable development can be part of the SDGs, but foremost needs a strong reference in other parts of the Rio outcome document. Ombudsperson for Future GenerationsThis workshop focused on the establishing an institution to help bring the long-term view andintergenerational equity to policy making. A proposal has been raised to establish this institution at theinternational, regional, national and local levels. • This proposal to establish an ombudsperson for future generations has the full continued support of civil society. • The value of both proposed titles Ombudsperson for Future Generations and High Commissioner was recognized with emphasis upon the reference to future generations in the title.
  3. 3. • The establishment of this office should be agreed in Rio and followed by a transparent, inclusive process to agree its mandate. This should be a very high level office with several suggested options about where it should sit, one being within the Secretary- General’s unit. This office would provide an important link between UN organs, member states and would be accessible by local communities. The ombudsperson office needs to be multidisciplinary understanding law, policy and science. The office must be independent, with independent funding.• Part of the mandate for the Ombudsperson should be to act as an interface and a high-level advocate for future generations and sustainable development. There are a number of offices that we could review to help determine the mandate of the ombudsperson including UN Rapporteurs, the Controller of the US, Canadian Commissioner for Environment and Sustainable Development, Hungarian Ombudsman for Future Generations and the World Bank Inspection Panel.• A number of governments have referred to the financial implications of this new office. However, it was discussed that the costs of this institution is relatively low and is designed to bring long-term cost savings. This institution is critical for implementation of outstanding gaps which have prevented us for meeting the challenges of sustainable development. Investment in this body could have a long standing impact on achieving the aims of sustainable development. The financial cost of other similar institutions does not make this prohibitive e.g. World Bank Inspection Panel (with a budget of circa US $3 million p.a.). An International Environmental Governance Framework and Sustainable Development Governance for the Future• Current governance systems are not strong enough to ensure effective implementation, monitoring and review. We need a new institutional framework that is effective to address current gaps. Rio+20 has to deliver on governance institutions and mechanisms that are strong enough to carry effective universal periodic review of implementation, provide accountability framework, and build coherence and coordination across the UN system.• On IFSD, the transformation of ECOSOC may not be possible as it would mean opening the UN charter, which is unlikely. However, Rio+20 must agree on the transformation of the CSD into a Council that will have a renewed political authority, and embed adequate review mechanisms, accountability framework, and provide a space for integration of sustainable development dimensions. A reformed IFSD has to facilitate dialogue between ministries of environment and ministries of finance, planning and budget, to further strengthen national governance and integration of the three pillars.• IEG is an integral part of the IFSD framework and both need strengthening: they are mutually reinforcing dimensions. Therefore the functions as well as the basic elements of the IEG reform that need to be considered include: universal membership, predictable and secure financial resources, and location. Rio+20 is expected to deliver on the upgrade of UNEP into a specialized agency.
  4. 4. • MGS participation in a reformed IFSD/IEG should provide more space for MGS rather than just being mere observers, given the role MGS play in implementation, and their contrition to the full integration of sustainable development dimensions. Different models of MGS participation can be learned from (Human rights council, ILO, FAO Committee on Food Security, etc.) to move away from multi-stakeholder consultation into multi-stakeholder governance and equal participation. The establishment of the Ombudsperson for Future Generations function may also provide additional entry points for MGS participation.• In addition, Rio+20 has to also deliver, in the context of governance for sustainable development, on the following: (i) a convention on corporate reporting; (ii) a global convention on Rio+20; and (iii) a convention on precautionary principle for new technologies.

×