Transcript Slajd 1 - United Nations Office for Sustainable Development

Sustainable
Development
Governance
Programme & Outcomes
Grazyna Pulawska
Asia-Europe Foundation
UNOSD workshop
Incheon, Korea
15 November 2012
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction
Process
Research scope
Conclusions
Follow up
Multilateral Forums in Asia
and Europe
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
UN Bodies, G20
EU-ASEAN
EU-ASEAN +3
EU-China, EU-Japan, EU-India
ASEAN +3
East Asia Summit
ASEM
ASEM process
• The Asia–Europe Meeting (ASEM) was officially
established in 1996 at the first summit
in Bangkok, Thailand.
• ASEM is an interregional forum which consists of
the European Commission, the twenty-seven
members of the European Union (EU), the
thirteen members of the ASEAN Plus
three regional groupings
• 2008: India, Mongolia, and Pakistan
• 2010: Australia, Russia and New Zealand
• 2012: Bangladesh, Norway, and Switzerland
Main components of ASEM process
•
•
•
•
Political and security dialogue
Economy
Education and culture
They are so-called three pillars
Members
• ASEM currently has 51 partners: 49 countries and 2
international organizations.
• The partners: Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium,
Brunei, Bulgaria, Cambodia, China, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,
Hungary, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Republic of
Korea, Laos, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Malta,
Mongolia, Myanmar, the Netherlands, New Zealand,
Norway, Pakistan, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, Russia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, the United Kingdom,
Vietnam,
• Organisations: European Commission and ASEAN
Secretariat.
Asia-Europe Foundation
Established in 1997
Goals (mirroring ASEM process):
• strengthen Asia-Europe ties
• create shared experiences for learning and
dialogue
• enhance mutual understanding
• explore opportunities for cooperation
Asia-Europe Environment Forum
• partnership of the Asia-Europe
• Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF), the Institute for
Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Hanns
Seidel Foundation (HSF), the Swedish
International Development Cooperation Agency
(SIDA)
• advisory committee consisting of representatives
from EU&EEA, ASEAN and recognised think tanks
from Asia and Europe
Role of the ENVforum
• has actively brought together stakeholders
from Asia and Europe, since 2003
• uses facilitated dialogue and knowledge
exchange, to explore different points of view
and new perspectives with regard to
environmental changes that seriously affect
today’s societies
• 2010: shift towards sustainable development
What is the problem?
• poverty eradication
• green economy
• sustainable development
• choosing the focus on sustainable
development governance
What is the problem?
ENVforum Programme
Asia-Europe Strategies for the Earth Summit
• acting as a bridge between civil society and
ASEM governments
• 2 year consultation process
• 3 workshops substantiated by research
• group of 80 experts involved in the process
• Foresight approach
1 workshop in Yogyakarta
IFSD&IEG: state of play
Megatrends analysis
exploring alternative futures
predefined by existing IFSD and IEG
options
2 workshop in Uppsala
presenting outcomes of the first
workshop
deepening futures on the base of
recent developments in IFSD and IEG
creating alternative
option
3 workshop in Bangkok
integrating research outcomes
assessing all IFSD and IEG options: pros
and cons
positioning outcomes for Rio+20
Scenarios
Status Quo
Incremental Progress
Enhanced priority for
the environment.
Fundamental Change
Sustainable
development as an
overarching goal
Beyond Institutional
Change
Institutional reform
achieved
Approach
Business as usual
Global
No significant reforms, Additional funding and The creation of a
non-binding
universal membership World Environment
Organisation/ UN
declarations
Environment
Organisation with a
focus on green
economy
A reformed global
environmental agency
Regional
More regional cooperation
Improved coordination
between institutions
engaged in the
environment.
Sustainable
development
coordination body
established.
Transfer of sovereignty
to regional bodies
National
Sustainable
development a weak
priority
Mainstreaming of the
environment in
national development
plans
Sustainable
development
coordination body
established
A focus on green
economy
State-of-Play of
IEG
Scenario 1
Status Quo
Scenario 2
Incremental Progress
International
Decisions and resolutions at the
UN and other relevant bodies
regarding sustainable
development but no significant
reform of the IEG
Regional
More regional co-operation with Greater role for regional
regional associations filling the organisations and
gap in IEG.
mechanisms.
Scenario 3
Fundamental Change
Scenario 4
Beyond Institutional Change
Changes to the UN
Charter results in an
enhanced ECOSOC to
integrate sustainable
development pillars.
The UN Convention for Sustainable
-Fundamental reforms to IEG
Development lead to the SDC creation have failed.
to integrate 3 pillars of SD at the
international, regional, and sub-national There is now a push to
levels.
rethink the global
governance structure to
A significantly weakened UNEP Additional funding and
alleviate poverty and
SDC is spearheaded by a high level UN
as lead organisation for
universal membership for
accelerate the development
representative such as the UN High
sustainable development
UNEP.
of a ‘green economy’.
Commissioner for Sustainable
Dominance of the few countries
Development or the UN Ombudsman
/marginalisation of others
Civil society and private
for Sustainable Development;
sector playing a significant
Greater participation of civil
role.
The creation of a WEO or UNEO to
society and the private sector,
strengthen the environmental pillar.
however, with limitations
There is a focus on a green economy.
regarding participation and
impact
Civil society participation and
accountability mechanisms assured.
- Sustainable development coordination Transfer of sovereignty to
bodies established.
regional bodies, with
principle of subsidiarity
nationally and locally.
Civil society and the private
sector having an enhanced role.
National
Sustainable development a weak Mainstreaming of
Sustainable development coordination A focus on a green economy.
priority for national
sustainable development bodies established.
governments.
in national development
plans.
Civil society organisations and
the private sector activated at
the national level.
Research scope
A. Creation Sustainable Development Council
• A.1. Mapping the existing UN SD structure
• A.2. Analysis of the SDC’s place
• A.3. Proposing possible structure and functions
• A.4. Assessing the civil society participation models including
the need for an accountability framework
• A.5. Assessing of the options filtered via scenarios
Research scope
Implications of the regional and national SD mechanisms for
Vertical Integration
• B.1. Mapping existing regional SDC bodies in ASEM
• B.2. Assessing the efficiency of existing structures and
choosing the best practices examples
• B.3. Analysis of a potential level SDC’s place in the existing
structure
• B.4. Analysis of national models for SD structures in ASEM
countries and choosing the best practices
• B.5. Assessing the possible civil society participation models
Research scope
Analysis of Asian and European positions on strengthening
International Environmental Governance
• C.1. Upgrading UNEP – practical implications related with
competences and global membership
• C.2. Upgrading UNEP – legal aspects of mandate change:
UNEO or WEO.
• C.3. Options of governance structure and possible organs of
IEG body
• C.4. Funding mechanisms proposals
• C.5. Identification of common positions and opportunities for
further dialogue in ASEM based on submissions and further
negotiation positions.
Research team
• Ms. Ella Antonio, President, Earth Council Asia Pacific;
• Dr. Ingeborg Niestroy, PublicStrategy for Sustainable
Development
• Mr. Simon Høiberg Olsen, Policy Researcher, Governance and
Capacity Group, the Institute for Global Environmental
Strategies;
• Mr. Ruben Zondervan, Executive Director, the Earth System
Governance Project;
• Mr. Christer Holtsberg and Ms. Georgia Noaro from the
Regional Resource Centre for Asia and the Pacific (RRC.AP) at
the Asian Institute of Technology.
Focus points
•
•
•
•
•
•
Focus on the sustainable development
Asia-Europe lenses
Civil Society involvement
Access to information
SD and IEG – coordination system
Looking at the Rio+20 outcomes
General recommendations
• There is an urgent need to update the existing system of the IFSD to
enable it to deal with current and emerging challenges.
• There are a host of large systemic problems that need to be dealt
with to effectuate behavioural change and change the course of
global development.
• Strengthening the environmental dimension and reforming the IFSD
are not mutually exclusive undertakings.
• Integrating the dimensions of sustainable development requires
prolonged attention and effort from highest-level line ministries of
all sectors on national, regional and global levels.
• National planning can create positive incentives for a wider
involvement from the bottom-up by including SDGs throughout line
ministries’ portfolios, that will also ensure their participation at the
intergovernmental level.
Summary of findings: SDGs
• Sustainable Development Bodies should be guided by measurable
SDGs
• The expression of SDGs should be broad and aspirational
• Considering existing philosophies guiding development plans and
structures at national and regional levels, for example, Thailand’s
Sufficiency Economy, Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness, South
Korea’s Green Growth, Japan’s Low Carbon Economy, the European
Social Model, Germany’s Energy Transition, etc
• At a global level, there is a need to determine themes and clusters
for SDGs that are broad enough for countries to decide on their
specific direction and pace
Summary of findings: SDGs
• the implementation of SDGs needs to be discussed and
agreed upon at regional levels (by regional, subregional bodies, etc.),
• once integrated at the national levels, ensuring
common but differentiated responsibilities is crucial
• non-state entities such as civil societies and business
councils, etc. must be consulted in the formulation of
SDGs
• ideal participation should be proportional (formula
should integrate local realities)
• nonn state actors should be accountable to public
Summary of findings: SDGs
• National SDGs targets are to be set by countries
• targets should be measurable (including deliverables
and milestones)
• policy review mechanisms should be in place to
enable peer review (ensuring independent
monitoring)
Source: Global Architectures for Sustainable Development Delivery, ASEF 2012.
Summary of findings: civil society
• a guiding framework should be established
• it must include, among others, mandatory
participation of non-state actors in planning and
policymaking at all levels
• guidelines for representation
• accountability systems and procedures
• maintenance of independence
Summary of findings: regional and
national measures
• set up a platform for co-ordination and knowledge
sharing among sub-regions or across regions since
current mechanisms are confined within regions and
within sub-regions (ASEM as possible mechanism to
explore)
• establish systems and procedures that would
improve enforcement and compliance of global
agreements
• monitoring and evaluation of performance of nations
and sub-global bodies in complying with said
agreements
Summary of findings: regional and
national measures
• strengthen nsd mechanisms by addressing issues
and challenges that beset them foremost of
which are inadequate participation of non-state
actors
• clarify functions and focus areas of co-ordinating
mechanisms at each level (the subsidiarity
principle)
• strengthen the existing political and
administrative mechanisms for vertical and
horizontal coordination
Summary of findings: regional and
national measures
• provide access to adequate and sustained financing
for NCSDs including for its nonstate members
• build capacity especially of national sustainable
development bodies, by strengthening technical and
substantive inputs, providing venue for exchange of
knowledge and experiences, meetings and joint
project
• establish an Asia-Pacific Principle 10 Convention to
ensure stakeholders’ access to information and allow
them to contribute substantively to policy and
decision making
Enabling conditions
•
•
•
•
increasing public awareness and education
developing skilled human resources
disseminating information on good practices
creating the appropriate financial mechanisms
(policy level eg. incentives, green tax etc.)
Follow up
2012
‘Sustainable Development Assessment: Towards Measurable Goals’ will take place at
ASEF in Singapore (21-22 November 2012)
2013- 2015
• continuation of research on SDGs in ASEM countries
• knowledge management
• information tailored to target group
• multi-stakeholder consultation
Specifically:
• what SD means for ASEM countries
• how it translates into a strategy
• implementation mechanism
• how the bodies responsible cooperate
• connection & consistency with other policies
• practical implications
Contact
Ms. Grazyna Pulawska
[email protected]
Asia-Europe Foundation