Transcript First National Forum on International Environmental Governance 14th September, 2010 Addis Ababa University.

First National Forum on International Environmental Governance
14th September, 2010
Addis Ababa University
IEG Reform Process
First National Forum on International Environmental Governance
14th September, 2010
Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Satishkumar Belliethathan
Environmental Science Program/HoA-RECN
College of Natural Science
Addis Ababa University
Objectives and expected outcomes
Aim
 The overall objective of the workshop is to raise awareness and mobilize effective
commitment and actions on the part of all stakeholders and partners at all levels to
effectively contribute to reforming the International Environmental Governance
system.
Objectives
 Assessing the implementation of Multilateral Environmental Agreements in Ethiopia.
 Soliciting for CSOs ideas on broader reforms to IEG and participation in the Process
to Rio+20.
Outcomes
 Effective participation of Ethiopian CSOs in intergovernmental processes and global
negotiations
 Enhanced support for coordination and implementation of Multilateral
Environmental Agreements (MEAs) in Ethiopia
 Awareness raised on Environmental Governance
Table of Contents










International Environmental Governance
UNEP – Governance/issues
IEG process until NOW
Frustrations
Challenges
Environmental Governance at UN
IEG process NOW
IEG and Sustainable Development
Role of Civil Society in IEG process
Future course of Action
IEG – Terminologies
Governance
"Governance is the framework of social and economic systems and legal and political
structures through which humanity manages itself"
(World Humanity Action Trust (WHAT), 2000)
Governance has also been described as fundamentally about ‘power, relationships and
accountability: who has influence, who decides, and how decision makers are held
accountable’.
( Institute on governance and Parks Canada, 2003)
International Environmental Governance
Although international can have broader meanings, when referring to IEG, the term usually
means intergovernmental. In terms of IEAs the definition is operationalized to include all
agreements to which governments of two or more states have (or are allowed to) become
parties but exclude instruments between single governments and either international
organizations or NGOs and instruments between or among international organizations,
corporations, or NGOs.
(based on Mitchel, 2010 accessed September 11, 2010)
UNEP-Governance
 Governing council - Established in accordance with General Assembly resolution 2997
(XXVII) (Institutional and financial arrangements for international environmental cooperation) of 15 December 1972. Governing Council reports to the General Assembly
through the Economic and Social Council.
 58 members of the Council are elected by the General Assembly, for four-year terms,
taking into account the principle of equitable regional representation. Had been
meeting since 1973 – 25 sessions/11 special sessions.
 Pursuant to General Assembly resolution 53/242 (Report of the Secretary-General on
environment and human settlements) of 28 July 1999, the Global Ministerial
Environment Forum is convened annually to review important and emerging policy
issues in the field of the environment, with the Governing Council constituting the
forum either in its regular sessions or special sessions.
 Currently, UNEP’s Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environmental Forum
(GC/GMEF) performs both of the governance functions UNEP needs: providing
leadership to international environmental governance and overseeing UNEP’s program
and budget.
IEG Process – Until now
 19th Session GC – 1997 - Adopted Nairobi Declaration - expanded UNEP mandates
including ‘catalyzing and promoting international cooperation and action’.
 20th session of GC/GMEF – 1999 – adopted 30 decisions including support to
environmental and environmental-related conventions and policy issues, including
the state of the environment, coordination and cooperation within and outside the
UN.
 6th Special session of GC/GMEF – 2000 – Adopted Malmo Ministerial Declaration,
which agreed that the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD)
should review the requirements for a greatly strengthened institutional structure for
international environmental governance (IEG)
 21st session of GC/GMEF – 2001 – established Open-ended Intergovernmental
Group of Ministers or Their Representatives (IGM) to undertake a comprehensive
policy oriented assessment of existing institutional weaknesses, as well as future
needs and options for strengthening IEG.
IEG Process – Until now
 7th special session – GC/GMEF – 2002 – Cartegena decision on International
Environmental Governance (decision GCSS.VII/1 – universal membership before 64th
General Assembly
 WSSD – 2002 – The Johannesburg Plan of Implementation – emphasis the
international community should fully implement the outcomes of decisions SS.VII/1
on IEG
 22rd session – GC/GMEF – 2003 – 40 decisions related to IEG
 8th special session – GC/GEMF – 2004 - Jeju Initiative – implementation of SS.VII/1
 23rd session GC/GEMF – 2005 – adopted the Bali Strategic Plan for Technology
Support and Capacity Building and IEG among other issues
IEG Process – Until now
 2005 World Summit Outcome – Paragraph 169 - Governments agreed to explore the
possibility of a more coherent institutional framework, including a more integrated
structure, for environmental activities in the United Nations system.
 Pursuant to that paragraph, the General Assembly at its sixtieth session, upon the
proposal of the President of the Assembly, established an Informal Consultative Process
on the Institutional Framework for the United Nations' Environmental Activities. The
first round of consultations took place in June 2006.
 9th special session – GC/GMEF – 2006 outcome of the 2005 World Summit and GC
Universal membership did not produce an agreed outcome and divergent views
expressed were reflected in the report.
 In June 2007 the Co-Chairs of the Informal Consultative Process presented their socalled Options Paper. The Options Paper contained a list of over 50 recommendations for
an improved IEG system. Based on these ideas and experiences, the co-chairs saw the
IEG reform process develop via two parallel ways. Firstly, there is the reform and
strengthening of the existing structures, for which there is a “wide volume of consensus”.
Secondly, there’s the debate on a “broader transformation” of the IEG system (i.e.
structural change), an evolutionary process concerned with the “future needs”.
(Maes and Goeteyn, 2009)
IEG Process – Until now
 9 November 2006 Report of the Secretary-General’s High-level Panel “Delivering as
one”, recommends that:
IEG be strengthened and made more coherent in order to improve the
effectiveness and targeted action of environmental activities in the UN system.
UNEP be upgraded and given real authority as the environmental policy pillar of
the UN system, backed by normative and analytical capacity.
 24th session – GC/GEMF – 2007 – IEG issues – need to strengthen UNEP is imperative
– Entrenched positions are and will continue to drag out the IEG issues.
 2008 Commonwealth Consultations on IEG.
 2008 Joint Inspection Unit Report on the Management Review of Environmental
Governance in the UN System.
IEG Process – Until now
 After a new series of informative talks, the co-chairs of the Informal Consultative
Process came out with the “Draft Resolution on Strengthening the Environmental
Activities in the United Nations System” in May 2008.
 In December 2008 several delegations moved to have a break in the negotiations. The
failure of the debate in New York created a window of opportunity for UNEP to step into
the debate, in which it had had only a marginal voice before. Nevertheless it is expected
that finally UNGA will decide.
 Co-chairs of the informal consultations of the General assembly on the institutional
framework for the United Nations environment work submitted a report dated 10
February 2009 and had recommended to produce proposals that ‘allow improving the
current system’. Through this they have now reached out to other processes, in
particular UNEP, to initiate their own processes to feed in fresh ideas for UNGA.
 The co-chairs of the process in New York have not ended their mandate. The main
venue for discussion on IEG is still the UNGA. The ministerial consultations in GMEF
will thus not create a parallel process, but aim only to help the debate in New York.
IEG Process – Until now
The need to kick-start the reform debate prompted UNEP at the 25th Regular Session of
its Governing Council in February 2009 to make IEG one of the two central themes to
be discussed in the ministerial conference, under the provocative title “IEG: help or
hindrance? IEG from a country perspective”.
UNEP Governing Council decision 25/4 (International Environmental Governance):
Requests the group of ministers or high-level representatives to conclude its work
and present a set of options for improving international environmental governance
to the Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum at its eleventh
special session (February 2010), with a view to providing inputs to the United
Nations General Assembly.
Frustrations
Frustration with lack of progress with Cartagena
Package
–
–
–
–
–
–
Role of GC/GMEF
Bali Strategic Plan
Strengthening financial base
Science base
Coherence & cooperation
Universal membership
Environmental discussion happening in UNEP, while social and
economic discussions are happening in UNGA
– Sustainable development has 3 pillars – economic, social &
environmental
(AMCEN, 2007)
Challenges
• Challenges:
– Environment & SD discussions happening in “silos”
– “Firewall” between environment and sustainable development in
the UN
– Lack of a strong political base for IEG & SD
– Lack of coherence and coordination between different UN bodies
and agencies
– Fragmentation of implementation, scientific work and policy
development
– Capacity building and technical support not meeting expectations
– Huge resource gap leading to discrepancies between
commitments and actions
(AMCEN, 2007)
Challenges
The economy working for sustainable development, Environment
as the foundation of sustainable development.
(Scanlon, undated accessed September 11, 2010)
Challenges
 The current framework of international environmental governance is
weakened by institutional fragmentation and specialization and the lack of a
holistic approach to environmental issues and sustainable development. The
duplication and fragmentation of the work of United Nations system
organizations stem principally from a blurred distinction in their work
programmes between environmental protection and sustainable development
and the absence of a single strategic planning framework.
 United Nations system organizations have not defined clearly their
responsibilities under the governance framework, which aims at integrating
environmental protection into economic and social development and
mainstreaming environmental considerations in sustainable development
policies.
(Inomata, 2009)
Environmental Governance in the UN
(UN-JIU, 2008)
Environmental Governance in the UN
Environmental Management Group
- UN specialised agencies
- UN programs
- UN conventions
Other interagency bodies
UN System Chief Executives Board for Coordination
- High - level Committee on Programmes
- High - level Committee on Management
- United Nations Development Group
UN Water
UN Oceans
UN Energy
Environmental Governance in the UN
 High level Advisory Group on Climate Financing
 High level panel on System Wide Coherence in the areas of Development,
Humanitarian Affairs and the Environment
 High level panel on Global Sustainability
Multilateral Environmental Agreements
(Mitchell, 2010 accessed 12 September 2010)




Total Number – 729 (protocols and amendments)
357 – Original agreements (20 % protocols and 30 % amendments)
Several not entered into force - 50 have been replaced or terminated
3 – 1 ratio – Bilateral Environmental Agreements
(Mitchell, 2003)
Multilateral Environmental Agreements
(Ivanova, 2010)
Timeline – major MEAs catalysed by UNEP
(Ivanova, 2005)
IEG – Belgrade Process
First meeting of the Consultative Group in Belgrade, 27-28 June 2009:
Nomination of co-Chairs:
H.E. Mr. John NjorogeMichuki, Kenya, and
H.E. Ms. Stefania Prestigiacomo, Italy.
Outcome: Co-Chairs Summary: ‘The Belgrade Process-Moving Forward with Developing a
Set of Options on International Environmental Governance’
“The co-Chairs’ summary is a reflection of the interactive dialogue that occurred among
the ministers and high-level representatives attending the Consultative Group meeting. It
reflects the ideas presented and discussed.” (Belgrade Process, paragraph 5).
The Belgrade Process –guiding implementation of GC decision 25/4.
IEG Process – Belgrade process
As per paragraph 7, Ministers and high-level representatives
generally supported the following:
Developing a set of options for improving IEG should follow from a fresh examination
of multiple challenges and emerging opportunities.
Any reform to IEG should be based on the principle that form should follow function.
Consultations on functions will lead to a discussion on forms that could range from
incremental changes to other broader institutional reforms that can be considered
alongside each other.
The IEG debate should be addressed in the broader context of environmental
sustainability and sustainable development.
The work of the Consultative Group should be political in nature.
IEG – Belgrade Process
Second meeting of the Consultative Group of Ministers or High-level Representatives on
International Environmental Governance - Rome, 26 – 29 October 2009
Two papers prepared by ED – UNEP
1. ‘The Belgrade Process’ Developing a set of options for improving International
Environmental Governance
This paper is prepared by the Executive Director in response to paragraph 17 of
the co-Chairs’ summary of the first meeting of the Consultative Group of Ministers or
High-Level Representatives on International Environmental Governance (‘the
Consultative Group’), which was held in Belgrade, Serbia from 27 to 28 June 2009. The
summary is also referred to as the ‘Belgrade Process’. A draft paper was distributed on
14 August 2009 with electronic comments requested to be sent on or before 13
September 2009 to the Executive Director.
This paper has been prepared to assist the Consultative Group in implementing
Governing Council Decision 25/4 in line with the Belgrade Process. It draws upon the
discussion of the Consultative Group during its first meeting, subsequent written
comments provided by participating governments, comments on the draft paper, and
other sources in identifying potential functions and possible forms to address such
functions.
IEG – Belgrade Process – incremental changes
2. Table on incremental changes for IEG: Actions to be taken by the UNEP Governing
Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum versus the United Nations General
Assembly (short term options)
Creating a strong, credible and coherent science base (Int. panel for natural resource
management?)
Developing a global authoritative and responsive voice for sustainability
Achieving coherence within the UN system (between and with MEAs; between and
with agencies)
Securing sufficient, predictable and coherent funding (VISC: voluntary indicative scale
of contributions)
Ensuring a responsive and cohesive approach to meeting country needs
IEG process Now and role of Civil society
 11th Special session GC/GMEF– February 2010, Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia – adopted
decision SS XI/1 on International Environmental Governance. The decisions are (among
others)
 5. Decides to establish a regionally representative, consultative group of ministers or
high-level representatives, inviting each United Nations region to propose between
four and six Governments to participate, while remaining open to participation by
other interested Governments,
 8. Decides that the group will consider the broader reform of the international
environmental governance system, building on the set of options but remaining open
to new ideas
 9. Invites the consultative group, through the United Nations Environment Programme
secretariat, to seek relevant inputs from civil society groups from each region in the
process of further strengthening international environmental governance;
 10. Decides that the group will conclude its work in a timely fashion and present a final
report to the Governing Council at its twenty-sixth session in anticipation of the
Council’s contribution in time for the second meeting of the open-ended preparatory
committee of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development and the
sixty-fifth session of the General Assembly;
IEG Processes
The Malmö Declaration stressed the need to intensify efforts to remedy the
alarming deterioration of the natural resource base that supports life on
Earth. The window of opportunity to preserve our natural capital is diminishing
rapidly. ……. The gulf between the aspiration for environmental sustainability and
our achievements remains too wide. Improved international governance of
environment and development can help close that gap.
…………environmental ills cannot be solved where influence and institutions are
weak.
A coherent and effective international environmental governance
architecture can provide a foundation for human well-being for generations to
come……….. I urge you to be bold and creative in putting forward new ideas. In that
spirit, I wish you a successful and productive meeting.
Ban Ki Moon
IEG Process – NOW – examples
The simultaneous extraordinary meetings of the Conferences of the Parties to the Basel,
Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions was held in Bali, Indonesia, at the Bali International
Convention Centre in, Nusa Dua, from 22 to 24 February 2010.
The convening of three independent treaty conferences simultaneously marked a historic
departure for international environmental governance.
Stockholm convention – on Persistent Organic Pollutants
Rotterdam Convention – International Trade in Hazardous chemicals/Environmentally Sound
use of those chemicals
The Basel Convention on the Control of Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes
and their Disposal
High level representatives on IEG
First meeting of the Consultative Group of Ministers or High-level
Representatives on International Environmental Governance
Nairobi, 7 – 9 July 2010
Back ground paper submitted by ED - Options for broader reform of International
Environmental Governance
CO-CHAIRS’ SUMMARY : Building on the Set of options for improving international
environmental governance of the Belgrade Process
Parameters to guide the process (among others)
 IEG addressed in the broader context of environmental sustainability and sustainable
development.
 Work of CG should be political in nature
 Incremental reforms – UNEP, broader reforms – Consultative Group
 International environmental governance constitutes an essential part of the
governance of sustainable development and within this context its strengthening will
directly contribute to a more effective sustainable development governance system.
Next Meeting
Second meeting of the Consultative Group of Ministers or High-level
Representatives on International Environmental Governance
Helsinki - November, 2010
IEG and Sustainable Development
IEG reform in the context of environmental sustainability and sustainable development:
ED’s paper and intervention in Belgrade
 Recognition of the negative impacts of a degraded environment on the development
process –environment moving from often being considered as a marginal issue to the
centre of political and economic decision making
 The environmental pillar as the foundation for the economic and social pillars of
sustainable development as life on earth is conditioned upon a healthy environment
 Mainstreaming of the concept of a green economy throughout the UN system,
including agencies dealing with other pillars of sustainable development
 Linking the Bali Strategic Plan with the transition to a green economy
Belgrade process is about IEG –in context of sustainable development
IEG and Sustainable Development
Rio + 20
Rio 20
Stockholm + 40
Objectives:
1. Securing renewed political commitment to sustainable development,
2. assessing the progress and implementation gaps in meeting already agreed
commitments, and
3. addressing new and emerging challenges.
Themes:
1. Green Economy within the context of sustainable development and poverty
eradication.
2. Institutional Framework for sustainable development
Proposed scenarios – some examples
 Clustering of International Environmental Agreements (Moltke, 2001)
 GEF as a pioneering institutions – (Chazournes, 2003)
 Non institutional proposals (Perrez and Ziegerer, 2008)
 World Environment Organisations (Biermann, 2007)
 United Nations Environment Organisation (Ohlendorf and Knigge, 2007)
 Greening the treaties (GEF, 2009)
Reform process - contributions
For afternoons discussions
 What do you think are the gaps in the current IEG system based on your experience ?
 What do you think should be done at the global, national and local level with respect
to deteriorating environment ?
 How could we in Ethiopia join hands to address these important issues ?
Possible future course of actions
 Synergy between different MEAs at the local level (PANE)
 Individual organisations taking lead – thematic areas (EWNHS – Biodiversity,
Enda- Ethiopia – Waste Management)
 Involvement in the IEG process
 Networking on IEG issues (online/physical)
 Research on IEG issues (agenda is already being prepared)
 Training course on IEG (in discussions with GEG project)
 Rio + 20 process (start well ahead – lessons from CC preparations)
This is how the world started
Thank You
Environmental Governance - UN
1. UN Secretariat
2. Regional Commissions
3. UN Funds and Programmes
4. Other UN Entities
5. Research and Training
Institutes
6. Specialized Agencies
7. Convention Secretariats
8. Related Organizations
CBD
ESCWA
ISDR
SBC
UNFCCC
UNU
CITES
FAO
ITC
UNCCD
UNESCO
WFP
CMS
IAEA
ITU
UNCTAD
UNFPA
WHO
DFS
GEF
UNHABITAT
WIPO
UNECA
ICAO
UNHCR
World
Bank
UNECE
IFAD
OCHA
UNDESA/
DSA
UNICEF
WMO
ECLAC
ILO
OHCHR
UNDP
UNIDO
WTO
ESCAP
IMO
Ramsar
UNEP
UNITAR
WTO
EMG
Environmental Governance - UN
CEB
Environmental Governance - UN