Global governance for sustainable development

The first plenary session which took place during the EADI General Annual Conference (24-28 June, Geneva) was dedicated to

"Global Governance for Sustainable Development: the Challenge of Policy Coherence among International Organizations"

Chaired by Desmond McNeill (EADI) the panel was composed by Kermal Dervis (UNDP), Juan Somavia (ILO), Bertrand Ramcharan (Graduate Institute for International and Development Studies, Geneva) and Ngaire Woods (Global Economic Governance Programme, Oxford).

Kemal Dervis described the world economy being in a state of crisis with rapid growth rates and a power shift towards emerging economies. He predicted that the raise of global commodity prices including food and energy will set back the global fight against poverty. However, this could have been avoided with an attempt towards global policy coordination, which would be more useful for developing countries than increased aid funds.

Juan Somavia focused on the social dimension of a sustainable economic development. He underlined that it is necessary to replace the neo-liberal discours by a vision focusing on sustainable development. Somavia was convinced that political leadership towards such an economic model will not appear without a strong civil society movement pushing governments into the right direction.

Listen to Mr. Somavias plea in his own words:




Complementing Mr. Somavias remarks, Bertrand Ramcharan, former Acting UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, stressed the importance of a global human rights protection system to achieve global justice and equality. Nevertheless most nations are very reluctant since such an institution directly concerns internal aspects of governance. Furthermore he called on the UN to enforce crimes against humanity also in peace situations, which would apply for countries like Zimbabwe or Myanmar.

Ngaire Wood presented some lessons learned from the earlier global economic crisis in the 1980s in order to draw conclusions for the current situation. She promoted the concept of subsidiarity to face future challenges. However there is a tendency to either see all solutions on a national level or to overcharge global institutions by trying to solve everything internationally.

Ms Woods concluded that the global economy has become more unequal, more insecure and less governed than some years before. Former world powers do no longer have the right to sit at the top table but need to share the control of the leadership and decision-making.

Desmond McNeill reflected on the discussions after the presentations of the keynote speakers. Listen to his words:



by Martin Behrens

See the Euforic dossier and newsfeed on governance, as well as the newsfeed on trade.

Read more stories from the conference and visit the conference blog.

What is business doing in development?

In April, Friends of Europe discussed the role of business in development at the second Development Policy Roundtable held in Brussels.

In the first session, three speakers - from the business sector, the European Parliament and the UN - showed the realities of business involvement in development, particularly the need to follow a structured process and to take an holistic view of the value chain when intervening in a country.

Sean De Cleene from Yara International opened by observing that we face a crisis of leadership and imagination in development. To alleviate poverty he stressed that we need to work across sectors and work together. According to De Cleene, there have been four revolutions affecting development:

• Technology - the opportunities of mobile phones and payment technologies;
• Markets - globalization effects;
• Demographics - common problems facing the planet such as food security, climate change and hiv/aids;
• Convergence - the roles of states and corporations are changing, we need to rethink the landscape and look at whole value chains, not just raw materials.

De Cleene believes we should think big. He talked about an international effort to ensure an African green revolution. He pointed out the role his own company plays in the Tanzania partnership where they look at the whole value chain essentially from field to port. While there is much partnership in small initiatives at community levels, this is often not scaled up, as brokerage organisations in countries often don't exist.

Richard Howitt of the European Parliament focused on Corporate Social Responsibility. In his experience, companies adopt CSR for two reasons: to develop future opportunity for business; and to manage their social and environment impact.In his view, each business needs to follow a 5 step plan:

• Screen activities against Millennium Development Goals and become part of this partnership;
• Engage more fully with different actors in development;
• Develop products and process to meet MDGs;
• Become a corporate citizen - add value in the country it is working in, by for example supporting the fair trade sector;
• Take core standards such as the Kyoto protocol, the universal declaration of human rights, and the MDGs, and participate in global reporting initiative.

Christian Thomas of the UNDP pointed out that foreign direct investment is now 5 - 10 times the amount of aid to developing countries. Growth is due to business, but despite this economic growth, one third of the planet (2.7 billion people) still lives on less than 2 dollars per day.

Historically, he recounted how business has gone through three stages of involvement with development:

1. Philanthropy: Initially businesses contributed through philanthropy. This was primarily risk-free but the business benefit was not clear. The other problem is that development initiatives take 15-20 years, whereas donations are often not sustainable over the same timescale.
2. CSR: Here the risks are higher - some core business assets are committed with a CSR unit managing the reporting.
3. Core business in development: This is a high risk. Here the business looks at how business contributes to MDGs. Some companies have seen the opportunity to reach untapped markets of 2.7 billion people.

In the light of this, he felt the whole development community needs a new approach. According to Thomas, business can:

• Improve livelihoods through selling basic goods and service to poor but this does not empower them;
• Sell economic tools, e.g. telecoms and microcredit productivity agents;
• Buy from the poor.

The first and third options need engagement from entrepreneurs. UNDP supports these interventions by supporting entrepreneurs. He finished with the story of the business entrepreneur behind Camelbert, a dairy business working with nomadic traders in Mauritania, that has now expanded worldwide.

The following discussions highlighted the need for the Development Committee of the European Parliament to look at new instruments to support farmers, with an emphasis on production in poor countries, in particular new instruments to support small to medium enterprises (SMEs).

There was a call for businesses to adhere to international law before engaging in developing countries and concern at the level of tax avoidance in developing countries which runs at 255 billion dollars.

At the same time, a number of examples such as the Malawi Business Coalition for aids, showed that the private sector is an active partner in the sustainable delivery of a number of projects.

According to a representative of DG Development of the European Commission, business should follow three steps:

1. Coherence - must adhere to MDGs and not undermine;
2. Capacity building - trade at regional level;
3. Finance - think innovative sources, remittances, climate change payments.

Ericsson, the telecoms business, was perhaps alone in saying that a partnership approach takes too long. 80% of their business expansion has been in emerging markets. Initial risk taking needs to be shared with the public sector but the private sector can then commercialize.

There was also some concrete discussion on how this group could take the issue forward, focusing around:

• The need to consider a specific global alliance on the green revolution for Africa;
• The need to have case studies of public private partnerships to examine best practice.

Story by Chris Addison

Slow food, movement connects food production with consumption

Carlo Petrini, founder of the Slow Food Movement was in Brussels this week to launch the European Parliament's first Slow Food 'convivium.'

He argued that local producers have become an endangered species. With 85% of Europe's agricultural production in the hands of five companies, we are losing the connection between food consumption and its production.

This also has implications for the developing world: Mangroves are cleared to farm shrimps for western pizzas; a sustainable life for fishers on Lake Victoria is devastated as the fish are harvested to feed Europe.

The Slow Food Movement is centered around an understanding of gastronomy - knowledge of food production and preparation. Its manifesto is about:

• education about nutrition
• defending biodiversity
• constructing a direct relationship with producers
• preserving quality and farming
• supporting a local economy

In Africa, Petrini argued that local gastronomy needs to be re-discovered. The first priority should be to grow food - instead of just producing exports. Slow food has been taken up in Senegal and Ethiopia.

When pressed whether there is a danger that promoting local sourcing of goods - in Europe - will damage existing livelihoods in developing countries, he stressed that Slow Food is not a religion but an approach. There is no need to banish pineapple from the diet just because it isn't grown locally. The key to slow food is an appreciation of the way the food is produced and a link with the producer.

He stressed the global impact of our disrepect for food and agriculture. Current riots in Haiti and elsewhere brought about by food price rises are directly caused by the use of good food crops to make oil for energy. In the past, intensive maize production in the USA had led to maize dumping in Mexico and destruction of the local maize economy. Now there's an 'oil' market for excess US maize production, the maize isn't available for Mexico. It's own maize production was decimated, now it can't afford to buy maize to eat.

Our shifting habits of eating also give rise to concern. On average, each Belgian eats 100 kg of meat a year. Producing this meat requires feed for animals, hence 65% of farming is to grow cereals for animals. If China's population were to eat the same amount of meat, 5 planets could not grow the cereals needed to feed the animals.

He pointed out that we now conserve biodiversity in a concrete bunker in a glacier in Norway, when we should conserve the biodiversity that's in the hands of peasants who grow crops.

All of this is consumer driven. If the attitudes of consumers are changed, production will change. "Eating is the first act of agriculture."

Summing up, he explained that Slow Food combines the pleasure of food with the knowledge that it did not cost the environment.

Slow Food is a non-profit, eco-gastronomic member-supported organization that was founded in 1989 to counteract fast food and fast life, the disappearance of local food traditions and people's dwindling interest in the food they eat, where it comes from, how it tastes and how our food choices affect the rest of the world.It has over 80,000 members.

Related story: At the February 2008 Brussels Development Briefing, Benito Müller strongly criticized ‘food miles’ as an example where environmental concerns can harm development efforts.

story by Chris Addison

CONCORD meets the European Parliament's new Trade Committee Chairman

For a long time CONCORD wished to meet with the European Parliament's Committee on International Trade (INTA). This wish has only come true this month with the invitation from its new chairman, Mr Helmuth Markov. Mr Markov is a member of the Confederal Group of the European United Left – Nordic Green Left and is well known in the Parliament and beyond for his thorough work in the Trade Committee. On Monday 16 April, a delegation from the CONCORD Secretariat and member organisation CIDSE introduced to him the work of CONCORD in the area of European trade policy. During the one-hour meeting, they discussed CONCORD's background, the nature and scope of its membership, its work and what relation the latter has to the European Parliament's Trade Committee.

The discussion was very broad and informal. CONCORD emphasised the reforms it had undertaken to ensure greater transparency and legitimacy, as well as the breadth of its membership and the importance of national platforms within it. It argued that developing a fairer trade policy required mobilisation and debate at the national level as well as at EU level. In that respect, it underlined the role that INTA committee members could play in engaging with their national counterparts and linking the EU trade policy debate to the local concerns of their constituents.

CONCORD also highlighted the necessity for European lawmakers to engage more systematically with civil society representatives from the South, particularly those from countries that are in the process of forging freetrade deals with the European Union, such as the ACP countries. It was argued that this kind of direct engagement can be extremely beneficial and can help inform European thinking with the experience of those who tackle the consequences of flawed trade policies on a daily basis. It was emphasised that CONCORD members work with many organisations in the South and can therefore help facilitate such a relationship.

Finally, the delegation argued for initiating a regular, structured dialogue between CONCORD and the INTA Committee, emulating similar dialogues that have been very successful with the European Parliament's Development Committee. Indeed while, as a community, the European development NGOs in Brussels remain candid interlocutors of the European institutions, such dialogues help demystify preconceptions on both sides, thereby promoting a healthier and more constructive European trade policy debate.

Mr Markov took an active part in this discussion and was responsive to many of the issues raised by the CONCORD delegation. He acknowledged both the importance of making a more direct engagement with the South possible on key trade issues, and the potential merits of a structured dialogue with development NGOs, though he cautioned that this would have to be a gradual process, as trade traditionally was, and remained, a rather rigid policy area. Mr Markov said he was looking forward to seeing the INTA Committee developing a more open and confident working relationship with civil society on key development matters, something which CONCORD will do its very best to ensure.

Hadelin Feront – Policy and advocacy officer with CIDSE: feront@cidse.org

Source: CONCORD Flash - April 2007.

See also Euforic dossier on EU trade.

EU strategy on Aid for Trade: EC communication and working paper

In the beginning of April, the Commission adopted a communication entitled 'Towards an EU aid for trade strategy - the Commission's contribution'. Together with a staff working document, the Communication was transmitted to the Council of ministers who will discuss it at the GAERC meeting of 14 and 15 May. This Communication is the Commission's contribution to further expanding EU support for Aid for Trade, with a view to the adoption of a joint EU strategy by the Council in the second half of 2007, as agreed by the Council in October 2006.

The communication states that "Aid for Trade is a key complement to trade negotiations. It is not a substitute for a pro-development outcome of these negotiations but should be delivered independently of progress in the negotiations. The Communication also refers to the fact that as the Council drew specific attention to the Aid for Trade needs related to the ongoing negotiations of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with ACP countries, the EU strategy should pay similar specific attention to these developments, in order to help realise the full development potential of EPAs". It seems to be the intention of the Council of ministers to include a commitment to the fact that the EU will strive to increase its trade related assistance to 2 billion per year (1 billion from the EC and 1 billion from the MS) by 2010 in the Conclusions on EPA negotiations that will be adopted at the same GAERC meeting.

On that specific commitment to significantly increase trade related assistance in the coming years, the Commission's makes the following recommendations:

• A linear trend from the present situation to their 1 billion target would imply that the collective commitments to TRA by EU Member States should rise to at least € 600 million by 2008;
  
• The EU strategy should underline the importance of integrating trade-related concerns into national development strategies and identify criteria for when it is acceptable to finance trade-related priorities in anticipation of national development strategies being updated.

Chapter 5 of the Communication is devoted to the specific ACP angle of the strategy with, among others, the following recommendations:

• The EU strategy should provide guidance on the amounts involved in the Council's commitment to allocate a "substantial share" of the additional TRA to ACP countries with a view to increasing the share of overall TRA allocated to the ACP.
  
• The strategy should include a political commitment on the part of the EU to strengthen its support for traderelated infrastructure, productive capacity and trade-related adjustment, starting by supporting good coverage of such wider issues in trade needs assessments.
  
• The strategy should outline how to strengthen support to regional trade needs assessments, in support of regional integration. In the EPA context, this includes a particular emphasis on the EPA Regional Preparatory Task Forces.
  
• The strategy should indicate a priority to EPA regions as regards coordinating delivery modes and supporting regionally owned initiatives, such as regional EPA funds.

Other chapters of the strategy refer to enhancing quality of aid for trade, monitoring and reporting and EU capacity for aid for trade.

Source: EU News - Issue 3, May 2007 (APRODEV, CIDSE, Caritas Europa).

See also Euforic dossier on EU cooperation.