CIVIL SOCIETY AT THE WSSD

Along with the idea of broad participatory possibilities for relevant stakeholders, the highly controversial nature of the issues discussed at the World Summit lead to a heightened mobilisation of civil society organisations within the preparation process and the Summit itself. It appears that governments have accepted not only themselves but also NGO activists as partners within the field of environment and development -- formalised in the major group concept and the multi stakeholder dialogues in the preparatory process.

Civil Society has unfolded a parallel process that is interwoven with the "official" process at various occasions, most notably the global PrepComms and the regional Ministerial meetings that have taken place in all regions by now. Apart from flanking the official process, there have been a number of events to prepare Civil Society for the WSSD. Among those are

The Pan African Conference, January 2002, Nairobi
The Southern Civil Society Summit, March 2002, Algiers
The World Social Forum, February 2002, Porto Alegre
The Delhi Sustainable Development Summit, New Delhi
The Global Youth Summit, March 2002, Copenhagen
The World Civil Society Forum, July 2002, Geneva
The Jakarta People's Forum, parallel to the PrepComm IV

All these events will conferge into the Global People's Forum and many other activities that will take place parallel to the World Summit in Johannesburg.

To ensure participation of Civil Society in the official progress, so-called Multi Stakeholder Dialogues have been held, one at PrepComm II assessing Agenda 21 process and another one at PrepComm IV in order to discuss future issues.

NGO Demands: Fill in the Blank of the Jo’burg Agenda

When the negotiations were stuck at PrepComm III, some NGOs, particularly Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, even considered the option of calling for cancelation the WSSD if no progress is in sight. In general, however, NGOs are active working with delegations and within the various issue caucuses in order to succeed with their positions as much as possible. NGOs from the whole range of civil society submitted comments to the Chairman's Paper. NGOs express criticism of all major blocks: The US government had continued its withdrawal from multilateral agreements and singled itself out of the international arena. The European Union had only shown poor leadership under its Spanish Presidency and abandoned its environmental advantage in favor of trade liberalisation. G77/China still neglected the genuine relationship between environmental protection and development.

NGOs considered it inevitable that the fourth and last PrepComm needed to conclude with a negotiated draft document for the World Summit in Johannesburg, including answers and strategies to eradicate poverty, to protect the environment, and to tackle the downsides of globalisation. The weak and unfinished outcome of the last PrepComm IV disappointed most NGOs, and many have given up hope that there would be a meaningful outcome of the summit. [ What on Earth is Missing? Joint Statement by 16 NGO issue caucuses; issued June 7 after the Bali faliure -- rtf; 5 pages ]. As a result, many NGOs decided to mainly concentrate on the goal of preventing the World Summit from backrolling the Rio Principles and from “Green Washing” the Doha and Monterrey Declarations. Moreover, NGOs came to the conclusion they should use the Summit to point out the failure of the governments and to build coalitions with those forces which are willing to re-invent the global system for sustainable development. One early goal of the World Summit won’t be achieved: the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. While the Climate Change Treaty often stands for the entire Rio Conference, it won’t go into force in Johannesburg, since not enough signatures could be collected in time.

Most NGOs insist that any agreement must include binding commitments and specific components that can later be used to measure and evaluate the achievements of governments. NGOs address the five key areas laid out by Kofi Annan -- Water, Energy, Health, Agricultural Productivity and Biodiversity -- and make suggestions how to solve the problems while fighting poverty and enable economic development without injustice and further environmental degradation. Above all, they criticise the current shape of globalisation, and call for a shift away from further trade liberalization and privatization neglecting local economies and endangering existing sustainable production and market structures. The conflict about current policies is most obvious in the debate about Type-II-Partnerships, and about the responsibilities of industrialized countries to financially assist and enable sustainable development in developing countries.

Partnerships and Corporate Accountability

NGOs unanimously called for linking Type-II-Agreements to intergovernmental Type-I-Agreements, and pointed out that strict rules must be set for all involved actors. Moderate NGOs consider partnerships as one way among others toward sustainable development that needs to be clarified, monitored and controlled. Partnerships must not mean that governments are allowed to steal away from responsibility. Sustainable development must not be privatised. NGOs try to ensure that Type-II-Partnerships are framed by environmentally and socially sound guidelines and have to follow transparent as well as binding regulations.

Major campaigns were continued in environmental matters and involvement as well as control of the private sector. Friends of the Earth International and a coalition of various NGOs called for "corporate accountability", particularly if governments, NGOs and businesses enter partnerships. "Corporate Accountability" remained in the various sections of the Chairman's Paper, and has been generally accepted as important by the major governments; NGOs now work on the power of the language. Their goal is a binding convention on corporate responsibility and liability, whereas supporting government delegates favor voluntary initiatives by the business sector.

Environment

The main goal for NGOs is a binding arrangement that sets Multilateral Environmental Agreements superior to the World Trade Organisations. Since the establishment of the WTO in 1995, environmental agreements may be challenged by the internationally binding WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism. MEAs however lack enforcement authority, and lack the power of the legal arrangements in the trade arena. Moreover, it has become apparent that trade liberalisation is given priority and is even considered to be the key to sustainable development.

NGOs also emphasise that Johannesburg must be the venue for the ratification and entry into force of the various agreements made in the wake of UNCED 92, such as the Kyoto Protocol of the Convention on Climate Change and the Biosafety Protocol of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Further steps are also needed toward the implementation of the Conventions on Hazardous Wastes and Chemicals, Desertification and Straddling Fish Stocks.

Energy

NGOs criticised the stagnation of policies toward sustainable energies. They stated that there was no implementation of the CSD-9 outcome nor any proposals for concrete targets and timeframes for earlier agreed steps since UNGASS/Rio+5. NGOs decried the lack of action toward energy conservation, efficiency, and sustainable forms of renewable energy.

The NGO Energy and Climate Caucus (read its comments on the Chairman's Paper here) calls for targets and timeframes to phase out environmentally and socially harmful energy subsidies in OECD countries, exempting targeted subsidies directly provided to the poor and low-income. They propose an International Sustainable Energy Fund with the goal of providing energy conservation and efficiency, as well as sustainable energy to developing countries and countries in transition.

Water

NGOs criticised the lack of language concerning sanitation. They pointed out that the risk through inadequate sanitation is higher than the problem of access to freshwater. In their eyes, the international community fails to give political backing and funding to the real problems in the freshwater sector.

Governance

In terms of Governance, NGOs called for a stronger role of UNEP within the Sustainable Development Framework, and a reform of CSD as a dialogue and monitoring body. They also highlighted the need for capacity building and technology transfer from the North to the South.