NO 100 October — November 2003 CALENDAR
| UN UPDATE | NGO AND OTHER NEWS | FOCUS |
| S-G’s
Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change GA Extends Term of Ruud Lubbers as UNHCR Head Secretary-General and UN Share Sakharov Prize GA Adopts Convention Against Corruption UN Budget Ends the Year in the Red WFP Becomes 9th UNAIDS Cosponsor Consolidated Appeal 2004: US$3 Billion Salil Shetty Named Director of MDG Campaign 2003 Report on the World Social Situation UNCTAD Identifies New FDI Patterns World Bank’s Post-Conflict Fund Assessing Bilateral Engagement with PRSPs IMF: Implementing Transparency Measures FAO Observes World Food Day WFP: Many Go Hungry on World Food Day Poverty Eradication: S-G Calls for Bold Action CSD-12: Preparations Underway Cross-Sectoral Impact of HIV/AIDS Girls Face Discrimination in Access to School UNESCO: 32nd General Conference UNESCO: Declaration on Human Genetic Data FAO: Foodcrops and Shortages Growth of Supermarkets in Africa Special Rapporteur Reports on the OPT OIOS Survey Reports on Potential Savings Montreal Protocol MOP-15: Methyl Bromide Tehran Convention Protects the Caspian Sea |
UN/NGO
News Synergies in Partnerships with CSOs IPU Enhances Partnership with UN Child Poverty in the Developing World The State of Sustainable Coffee Forum on Chemical Safety NGO News Asia Pacific NGOs on the MDGs “Real” Progress Report on HIPC Accountability: Impossible Comparison? Other News Former Presidents Discuss Latin American Future People In Aid Revises Code of Good Practice
|
Independent
Panel on Security in Iraq Releases Report Eminent Persons Release Report on Commodity Issue GA Debates African Development Initiative UNHCR: Pre-ExCom and ExCom 54th Session The State of World Population 2003 Preparation for CSD-12: Regional Implementation Meetings UNCTAD Board Debates Interdependence, Market Access, and Africa Calendar Publications Online |
| Synergies in Partnership with CSOs | |||
| A
new report from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) illustrates
the multi-faceted nature of its partnerships with civil society organizations
(CSOs) by looking at 32 examples of partnerships in the areas of debt,
poverty reduction, conflict prevention, peace-building and disaster
management, environment and sustainable development, and HIV/AIDS.
Partners in Human Development pays special attention to the crosscutting
issues of human rights, gender and partnership with indigenous peoples.
The examples provide practical insights from country experiences,
with the goal of promoting innovation and improving learning and practice. In the area of poverty reduction, the report analyses the extent and impact of civil society participation in a range of poverty reduction processes, with examples of poverty monitoring in Ethiopia, participatory budgets in Ghana, decentralized approaches involving indigenous peoples in the Mekong sub-region, the poverty reduction strategy papers in Uganda, community-based employment in Yemen and poverty hearings in Zambia. In the area of environmental management and sustainable use of ecological resources, the partnerships cited underline the growing recognition by governments and development agencies of the urgent need to adapt community-led successes more widely. Community-based and grassroots organizations have forged partnerships to address the interrelated challenges of environment and development—whether in combating desertification in Burkina Faso, conserving biodiversity in Mexico, improving urban governance in Sri Lanka or protecting traditional knowledge in Viet Nam. In several crisis countries, the success of UN-led recovery efforts hinges on developing the capacity of CSOs and working with them at the political and community levels. CSOs—particularly those representing indigenous peoples, ethnic and racial minorities and women, who are most affected by such crises—bring unique skills in mediation and reconciliation to the negotiations table. They also ensure that crisis recovery efforts adopt a human rights dimension through their articulation of issues of inclusion and participation. The examples cover data-based research on racial inequality in Brazil, customary law among indigenous peoples in Guatemala, transition from earthquake relief to sustainable recovery in India, conflict resolution between the government and organizations representing indigenous peoples in Ecuador, women’s peace initiatives in the Mano River countries in West Africa, and peace and development programmes to address the impact of insurgency in Nepal and in the Philippines. Perhaps the most visible development impact of civil society engagement is in the response to the HIV/AIDS crisis. CSOs bring a multitude of strengths and strategies to the many frontlines of the battle against the epidemic. The report examines the indispensable role of community groups and national and regional networks in containing the epidemic, whether in leading prevention and support initiatives in Burkina Faso, South Africa and the Dominican Republic, addressing risk factors in low-prevalence Mongolia or combating trafficking through regional initiatives in South Asia. These experiences show that civil society engagement with governments and UNDP has been key to: — providing policy choices that place people at the centre when setting priorities and allocating resources; — driving policy change toward sustainable development through community-level pilot initiatives that integrate economic, social and environmental concerns; and — giving a voice to marginalized and disenfranchised groups to articulate and advocate their human rights, participate in conflict prevention and resolution and rebuild communities and habitats. The report suggests that the most effective partnerships with civil society have come as a result of UNDP promoting a national dialogue on issues; developing capacity to generate disaggregated data; engaging a wide range of actors and providing small grants for creative partnerships. Contact: Bharati Sadasivam, Officer in Charge, CSO Division, UN Development Programme, One United Nations Plaza, Room DC1-2092, New York NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/906 6232, fax +1-212/906 6814, e-mail <bharati.sadasivam@undp.org>, website (www.undp.org/cso/about.html). |
|||
| The
annual UN parliamentary hearing of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU)
was held at UN headquarters on 27 October 2003, with over 120 legislators
from 42 national parliaments and two regional parliamentary organizations
in attendance. Inaugurated by IPU President Senator Sergio Páez, UN
Secretary-General Kofi Annan and General Assembly President Julian
Robert Hunte (St. Lucia), the programme focused on reform of the UN
system as a precondition for greater world security, as well as progress
and setbacks in the global fight against terrorism, assessment of
the danger of unresolved crises, and financing for development. Mr. Annan, in his address, said “I wish to speak to you this morning about international peace and security—but before I do so, let me underline the link between peace and development. Put simply, a world in which billions are suffering from poverty, hunger, illiteracy and disease, and which is not advancing down the road of development, will not be a world at peace.” Senator Páez reaffirmed the solidarity and political support of the IPU for UN efforts to “foster peace and understanding in the world.” Mr. Annan expressed great satisfaction over the GA’s decision (A/RES/57/32) in 2002 to grant the IPU observer status, emphasizing that “The voice of the people must be heard at the United Nations. And few render that voice more authentically than elected parliamentarians…. Enhancing the parliamentary dimension of the work of the United Nations has strengthened the United Nations itself.” Noting that the majority of the world’s people look to the UN and ask whether the Organization is doing enough to protect and ensure their security, Mr. Annan stressed that the intergovernmental structures of the UN reflect an earlier age and need to be reformed. “This is most clearly the case in the Security Council,” he said, describing the need to grapple with such questions as early Council authorization of coercive measures to address certain types of threats, and its responsibility to protect civilians threatened by genocide or massive violations of human rights. Mr. Annan asked parliamentarians to build political momentum at home and encourage their governments to prioritize the reform issue. “A significant attitudinal adjustment on the part of Member States is a pre-requisite in order to permit the United Nations to carry out its responsibilities as envisaged in the Charter,” Mr. Hunte stated in his address, welcoming the deepening relationship between parliamentarians and the UN. Mr. Hunte expressed the hope that GA reform efforts would foster the building of a “global parliament” more efficient in its decision-making process and more capable of taking effective decisions. He observed that Security Council reform efforts differed from GA reform in that Member States saw the need for GA reform but had not agreed on a framework to achieve it. By contrast, he said, most Member States committed to Council reform agreed in broad terms that it should result in an expanded Council with a membership increase from the present 15 to a number in the low- to mid-twenties and that the make up of the Council should be more geographically representative. Mr. Hunte told parliamentarians that the process of reform could include modification of the UN Charter itself, and said that national parliaments would be called upon to act, as an amendment to the Charter requires ratification by two-thirds of the membership (at present 128 countries), including the five permanent members of the Security Council. Contact: Inter-Parliamentary Union, 5 chemin du Pommier, Case postale 330, CH-1218 Grand Saconnex/Geneva, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/919 4150, fax +41-22 919 4160, e-mail <postbox@mail.ipu.org>, website (www.ipu.org). |
|||
| According
to a report commissioned by the United Nations Children’s Fund
(UNICEF), more than one billion young people in the developing world
are now living in conditions of severe deprivation, and international
targets to reduce child poverty are going to be missed because globalized
trade and cuts to aid budgets are creating an ever-greater chasm between
the richest and poorest countries. The report, prepared by the Townsend Centre for International Poverty Research at the University of Bristol and the London School of Economics, measured child poverty in the developing world by analyzing the lives of more than 1.2 million children from 46 of the world’s poorest countries. The report defines children who lack one basic human need, such as food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter and education as living in severe deprivation, while those without two basic needs are said to be in absolute poverty. Child poverty in the developing world found that more than half of all children living in the developing world are living in severe deprivation, while 674 million are in absolute poverty. A third of all children in the survey lived in a dwelling with more than five people to a room, or with only a mud floor. A similar proportion had no kind of toilet facility and one in five had no access to safe drinking water. More than one in ten children aged seven to eighteen had never been to school, and one in seven was severely malnourished. The report found that children in rural areas are much more likely to be severely deprived than urban children, particularly with regards to water, sanitation and education. Countries in sub-Saharan Africa have the highest rates of deprivation. In some countries, 90% of children in rural areas were assessed as living in absolute poverty. Dave Gordon from the University of Bristol, one of the report’s authors, warned, “Many of the children surveyed who were living in absolute poverty will have died or had their health profoundly damaged by the time this report is published, as a direct consequence of their appalling living conditions. Many others will have had their development so severely impaired that they will be unable to escape from a lifetime of grinding poverty.” The report recommends that anti-poverty strategies need to respond to local conditions, and that blanket solutions to eradicating child poverty will be unsuccessful. Considerably more emphasis needs to be placed on improving basic infrastructure and social services for families with children, particularly with regards to shelter and sanitation in rural areas. Child poverty in the developing world also suggests the establishment of an international investment fund for payment towards national schemes of child benefit in cash or kind as a means to provide the impetus for rapid fulfilment of children’s fundamental rights to social security and an adequate standard of living. Shailen Nandy, also from the University of Bristol and one of report’s authors, said, “At this rate the UN Millennium Development Goals are unlikely to be met, given declining international commitment to development aid. The results of cutting public spending on basic social services have been an increase in poverty and inequality, a fact which organizations like the World Bank need to acknowledge.” Contact: Sarah Vincent, UNICEF
UK Committee, Africa House, 64-78 Kingsway, WC2B 6NB London, United
Kingdom, telephone +44-207/405 5592, e-mail <sarahv@unicef.org.uk>,
website (www.unicef.org). |
|||
| The State of Sustainable Coffee | |||
| The
International Coffee Organization (ICO)—in collaboration with
the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), the
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), and the
World Bank—has launched a report entitled The State of Sustainable
Coffee: A Study of Twelve Major Markets. The report calls for environmental and social standards, improved governance structures, better communication channels, and price premiums for the coffee market to provide help to nearly a million coffee farmers, particularly smallholders affected by the sharp drop in international coffee prices. “The coffee world has changed dramatically in the last decade and a half,” says the report’s main author, Daniele Giovannucci, World Bank market expert. “There is no doubt that at the beginning of the 21st century much of the world coffee economy is suffering. The striking emergence of dynamic market segments firmly place the coffee industry at the forefront in developing innovative responses that are relevant to the difficulties of rural development and trade in developing countries.” The share of sustainable coffees in each of the 11 most important European coffee markets—Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK—ranges from a low of 0.3% to 3.4%, while their 2002 market share in Japan was approximately 1.2%. The report notes that average sales growth for sustainable coffees in recent years has been at least five times greater than that of conventional coffees in most of the 12 major markets. By 2004, the major European sustainable coffee markets are expected to grow by about 55%-65% from their 1999 level. In Japan, the recent interest in eco-friendly coffees on the part of some of the major roasters and large retailers could rapidly increase the availability of such coffees. The report calls for stricter guidelines and policies on what can be labelled organic, fair trade, and shade grown—collectively known as sustainable coffees—and indicates that this segment of the coffee market is growing significantly but is also in need of policy guidance to ensure that producers continue to benefit. Increasingly, these coffees are being adopted by companies such as Procter & Gamble, Ahold, and Starbucks. “We are now witnessing the striking emergence of dynamic agricultural markets for differentiated products that were only tiny niche opportunities just a few years ago,” Martin Raine, Agriculture and Rural Development Sector Leader in the World Bank’s Latin America & Caribbean Region, said. “Today, markets for organic, eco-friendly, and fair trade products are measured in the hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars, and are among the fastest-growing segments of the food industry.” According to ICO, after petroleum, coffee is one of the world’s most important commodities. It represents more than 20% of export earnings for nine developing countries, and accounts for more than half of all export earnings in four countries. Approximately 25 million farmers depend on coffee incomes, while it is the smaller farmers who tend to benefit much more from sustainable coffee market segments. The report notes that living conditions of almost one million farming households in the southern hemisphere have improved because of the sustainable coffee market. Contact: Martin Wattam, International Coffee Organization, 22 Berners Street, London W1T 3DD, telephone +44 (0) 20 7580 8591, fax +44 (0) 7580 6129, e-mail <info@ico.org>, website (www.ico.org) or (www.worldbank.org/sustainabledevelopment). |
| ||
| Forum on Chemical Safety | |||
| The
Fourth Session of the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (IFCS
Forum IV) was held from 1-7 November 2003 in Bangkok (Thailand), bringing
together over 600 participants—representing over 100 governments,
intergovernmental organizations, industry and NGOs—under the
theme, “Chemical Safety in a Vulnerable World.” The Forum took stock of progress achieved on commitments and recommendations made at Forum III in 2000, and focused on topics relating to: children and chemical safety; occupational safety and health; hazard data generation and availability; acutely toxic pesticides; and capacity building. Participants developed recommendations for action on the globally harmonized system for the classification and labelling of chemicals and the prevention of illegal international traffic in toxic and dangerous products. Participants also discussed the further development of a strategic approach to international chemicals management (SAICM), and the outcome of these discussions were presented to the first meeting of the Preparatory Committee for the development of a SAICM, which took place from 9-13 November 2003, also in Bangkok. At the close of the Forum, participants voiced strong support for the role IFCS continues to play in bringing emerging and contentious issues onto the global chemicals management agenda, and in setting priorities for action on chemicals assessment and management. Delegates expressed their appreciation for IFCS, which they noted as providing an open, overarching and flexible mechanism for all stakeholders to initiate action and respond to chemical safety needs. Established in 1994, IFCS is a broad consensus-building mechanism that serves as a facilitator and advocate aiming to bring order to actions taken in the interest of global chemical safety, and functions as an accountability mechanism for its participants. Forum V of the IFCS will take place in the second half of 2006 in Hungary. More information on Forum IV is available online. Contact: IFCS Secretariat, c/o World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/791 3650, fax +41-22/791 4875, website (www.ifcs.ch) |
| ||
|
|
NGO UPDATE | ||
| Asia Pacific NGOs on the MDGs | |||
|
Addressing the Committee on Poverty
Reduction at the UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and
the Pacific (UNESCAP), a group of NGOs from the region challenged
the concept behind the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) to reduce
extreme poverty by half by 2015 on the grounds that it is too narrow
in vision, scope and direction. The Asia Pacific Civil Society Forum,
coordinated by Focus on the Global South and involving 19 other
organizations, took advantage of the inaugural session of the Committee
to urge members to consider the political, social, cultural and
human rights dimensions of poverty that are determined by factors
like class, gender, race, geography and ethnicity. According to
the Forum, such a conceptualization is necessary to design sensitive
and responsive policies on poverty. Moreover, the Forum participants
also stressed that, “Unless the MDGs address the core causes
that create and entrench poverty and hunger, they are irrelevant.” |
|||
| “Real” Progress Report on HIPC | |||
| Launching
what it has termed the “Real” Progress Report on HIPC, a
consortium of NGOs led by Jubilee Research are calling for a radical
reform of the Highly Indebted Poor Countries Initiative (HIPC) to
enable indebted countries to meet the Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs, see NGLS Roundups 98, 105 &106). The current creditor-dominated framework for debt relief lies at the heart of an ineffective process, a process that, according to the report, has resulted in only eight countries having received a debt stock reduction compared to the 21 projected to do so by this point in time. It is time, they say, for the HIPC initiative to be replaced with a fair and transparent international insolvency/debt-reduction framework, overseen by an independent arbitration panel nominated by both debtor and creditors. The report, which was launched just prior to the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) annual meetings in Dubai, is a shadow report of the official HIPC Status of Implementation report. That report acknowledges that the process of reaching the completion point—the point at which key policy reforms have been implemented, macro-economic stability has been maintained and a poverty reduction strategy paper (PRSP) has been implemented for one year—has taken longer than envisaged and attributes the delay to the challenge of maintaining macro-economic stability and preparing and implementing PRSPs. The World Bank/IMF report says that despite these challenges, the “existing standards for policy performance are being maintained to ensure that the Initiative’s objectives are reached.” The Jubilee report contends that
these conditionalities—sometimes not relevant to debt relief—such
as overly stringent fiscal criteria and privatizing many sectors
of an economy, are delaying the delivery of critical debt relief
and demands that HIPCs should no longer be forced to follow strict
IMF conditionalities to be eligible for debt relief. Other recommendations
made by the Jubilee report include tying the amount of debt relief
received by a country to resources needed to meet the MDGs; combining
debt relief with a new “contingency financing” mechanism
to help poor countries weather economic shocks; ensuring the World
Bank and IMF provide their fair share of debt relief under the HIPC
initiative through IMF gold sales and reductions in World Bank reserves;
and providing financial and technical assistance to HIPCs to help
them fight litigation by private sector creditors. |
|||
| Accountability: Impossible Comparison? | |||
|
From 23-24 October, One World Trust’s
Global Accountability Project (GAP)—which aims to assess how
open and receptive global organizations are to the internal demands
of their members and the external demands of individuals and groups
who are affected by the organizations daily operations—hosted
an international workshop in London to discuss best practices in
an organization’s relations with its external stakeholders.
The workshop brought together a variety of international NGOs and
companies, and some intergovernmental organizations. The British
NGO seeks to develop indicators to measure the degree and quality
of stakeholder engagement within the world’s international
organizations. |
| ||
|
|
OTHER NEWS | ||
| Former Presidents Discuss Latin American Future | |||
|
During a one-day conference held
at the George Washington University on 30 October, the former presidents
of Brazil, Bolivia, Costa Rica and Mexico addressed growth and poverty
in Latin America through the impacts of trade, fiscal and financial
policies, social policies and institutional change. The conference
was hosted by the University’s Elliott School of International
Affairs and co-sponsored by the World Bank and the Inter-American
Bank on Economic Development in Latin America. |
| ||
| People in AID Revises Code of Good Practice | |||
| People
In Aid, an international network of development and humanitarian assistance
agencies, has launched updated guidelines on support, safety and management
of staff. Its Code of Good Practice in the management and support
of aid personnel is a tool meant to help agencies offer better development
aid and disaster relief to communities in need, and is part of their
efforts to improve standards, accountability and transparency amid
the challenges of disaster, conflict and poverty. People In Aid says the Code of Good Practice in the management and support of aid personnel is the result of years of international collaboration by dozens of agencies. As well as building on previous guidelines, the updated Code reflects the growing attention of aid groups on issues of health and safety, diversity and equality, and is relevant for agencies engaged in development and advocacy as well as emergency response. The revised Code operates under the overarching principle that “people are central to the achievement of our mission.” It comprises seven principles: health, safety and security; learning, training and development; recruitment and selection; consultation and communication; support, management and leadership; staff policies and practices; and human resources strategy. Each of the seven principles is qualified by a number of indicators. The Code aims to improve the quality of assistance provided by international and host country staff and offers agencies the best framework for effective human resources management, helping them assess and raise their performance. Recognized “kitemarks” are awarded to agencies that are implementing the Code. The kitemarks reflect the agency’s commitment and achievement, the latter being verified through a “social audit” process involving staff and other stakeholders. Social audits allow organizations to gain a clearer picture of how their stakeholders view them and build more beneficial relationships with them. Along with the updated Code, People In Aid offers its 50+ member agencies and the wider aid community a range of training, research and support on everything from psychological support to staff benefits to HIV/AIDS. The Code of Good Practice is available online. Contact: People In Aid, Regent’s Wharf, 8 All Saints Street, London N1 9RL, UK, telephone +44-207/520 2548, e-mail <info@peopleinaid.org>, website (www.peopleinaid.org). |
| ||
|
|
|||
