A Southern Dialogue: Articulating Visions of Sustainable Development

ISSUE NO. 5 SPECIAL EDITION                                                                          November 1999     

“International agreements that address environment and development issues must incorporate established principles of equity.”

Introduction

Environment and development issues are global in nature.  Therefore, achieving sustainable development will require political vision articulated by civil society.  Public hearings, national and international conferences and the development of local and national policy initiatives are examples of initial steps taken to meet this goal.  Recent discussions in conjunction with meetings of the parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and other international conferences have identified an urgent need for more dialogue that addresses the links between environment and development.  This dialogue needs to occur at a global level with participation from all sectors of society.

As a prerequisite to such global dialogue, we feel that a “Southern Dialogue” should take place.  This dialogue should focus on articulating visions of sustainable development from distinctly Southern perspectives and should aim to meet three key objectives:

•  strengthening Southern institutions working in the fields of environment and development;

•  providing a sustained forum for discussing and articulating Southern visions of sustainable
development; and

•  supporting the implementation of local, regional and national strategies for sustainable
development.

This issue of Aviso is a collaborative effort by authors in Argentina, Canada, India, Senegal, and Sweden, who are taking a pro-active role in supporting the establishment of a Southern Dialogue.  We envisage a Southern Dialogue initiative, by and for Southern organizations.  The Dialogue would focus on common themes comprising a range of activities (see Text Box 1) implemented by core institutions in each of three regions (Africa, Asia and Latin America). The core institutions would coordinate activities through broad regional networks of organizations working in the fields of ­environment and development to facilitate Southernwide discussions.

The discussion below focuses on four topics that we have identified as critical to Southern interests and, are therefore, useful starting points for a Southern Dialogue.  The first three are fundamental issues that must be addressed in any serious discussion of sustainable development: equity, good global governance, and strengthening institutional capacity.  The fourth topic we discuss — indicators of sustainable development — is necessary for providing a set of tools with which to measure progress toward achieving sustainability.

Equity and Sustainable Development

Alleviation of poverty and providing sustainable livelihoods are primary concerns to developing countries.  In the near term, development with a specific emphasis on economic growth is a major priority in addressing these concerns.  Major international studies, institutions and agreements (from the World Commission on Environment and Development to recent discussions on global warming) have emphasized this priority.  For development to be sustainable requires more than a focus on economic growth.  It requires that economic, social, institutional, and environmental concerns be integrated into the development process.

The inequitable distribution of income, natural resources, and power is a major cause of both the continued impoverishment of populations and environmental degradation.  Sustainable development implies that principles of equity and justice must underlie any development framework.  The equitable allocation of common resources today and for future generations as well as equitable burden sharing to protect the environment, are essential for all international agreements that touch on issues of environment and development.

The concept of atmospheric equity i.e., equitable distribution of the benefits of the global atmosphere provides one clear example of the importance of a framework for incorporating principles of equity when negotiating international environmental agreements.  The atmosphere is a common resource.  For this reason, the issue of global atmospheric equity has arisen in the context of the UNFCCC and the need to share responsibility for achieving its objective of stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions to an acceptable level (See Figure 1: Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions for Selected Countries). 

Figure 1.     

Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions,
Selected Countries, 1989 - 1995

Initial discussions in the Convention focused on reaching agreements to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with minimal social and economic cost while encouraging the participation of all countries.  One important issue being discussed in this context is the strong relationship between carbon emissions and economic growth.  There is a perceived conflict between the need for economic growth in developing countries and the global need to reduce carbon emissions.  This conflict has become a central issue in attempts to negotiate a legally binding instrument to strengthen the commitments for developed country Parties to the UNFCCC (the Kyoto Protocol).

In the negotiations, a number of countries have advocated the adoption of two principles in an attempt to resolve the conflict between economic growth and the need to reduce carbon emissions. These are the principle of equal entitlements and the principle of convergence.  These principles help to define the rights and responsibilities of all nations in collectively meeting the ultimate objective of the Convention:  to achieve stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.

•  The principle of equal entitlements embodies the notion that every person is entitled to an equal share of total global emissions.  Such entitlements could be defined based on current and future emissions or on historical emissions.

•  The principle of convergence sets a global emission target toward which all countries would agree to converge over a defined time period.  Each country would be assigned an emission quota based on their population in a given year and on the convergence target. Countries producing more than their quota would reduce their emissions over time, while those producing less would be allowed to increase their emissions until the global target is reached.

These ideas reflect one method of applying principles of equity to international agreements. States affect the environment in different ways and are affected in different ways.  They have different levels of capacity and different histories.  Agreeing to what is fair and equitable is a complex task and must take into consideration an historical context, including who pollutes the most, what sort of needs different countries have and the diversity of the world’s population.  These types of ideas need to be addressed in a dialogue on the issue of equity and sustainable development.

The concept of human security could provide a starting point for such a dialogue.  For a community to be secure it must exhibit: the options necessary to end, mitigate, or adapt to threats to their human, environmental, and social rights; the capacity and freedom to exercise these options; and participation in attaining these options.  This working definition of human security provides one framework within which emerging principles of equity can be tested.  Because it is a participatory framework, it encourages the involvement of all stakeholders.  It also encompasses the dual notions of rights and responsibilities.  These need to be recognized within the existing generation and in the context of future generations’ abilities to achieve the same level of development as the present generation.

Ultimately, international agreements that address environment and development issues must incorporate established principles of equity.  Further developing and constructively debating a variety of emerging principles would contribute to the process of adopting equity as the foundation for all international environmental agreements.

Good Global Governance

Recent discussions of environment and development have identified a pressing need for laws and institutions that operate beyond traditional boundaries of sovereignty.  Global governance refers to the collective responsibility of people, public and private institutions, regimes, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) for managing world affairs.  Institutional reform that re-defines the roles of and relationships between these actors is necessary for enabling the fulfilment of this responsibility.  Coupled with this is a need to bring Southern perspectives into the development of new models of social organization.

A process of “ecological globalization” has paralleled the process of economic globalization that has taken place during the last two decades.  In the process of developing and negotiating international environmental treaties (such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), rich and poor nations have begun to lay the groundwork for governing the world’s global commons. 

However, this is being done with no clear mechanism for linking and balancing economic, social, and environmental concerns.  When leaders of nation states meet to develop rules and regulations for economic globalization, they take positions to protect their individual economies.  Likewise, emerging environmental policies tend to be based on principles of business transactions rather than good governance.  The cardinal principles of good governance—equity, justice, and democracy—are not evident in emerging environmental conventions of global governance.  As a result, the current process of establishing precedents for global governance does not ensure that good global governance will be achieved.

Good global governance is essential to achieve an equitable sharing of the Earth’s natural resources, which is a prerequisite to achieving sustainable development.  In the case of the global environment, this means democratic governance among nations, with equal representation of all nations and clear specifications of the environmental rights of all citizens.  This, however, is not the emerging trend.  Instead, economic considerations commonly take precedence over environmental concerns and the interests of powerful countries (both politically and economically) are often given priority.

The UNFCCC provides a timely example.  In the process of negotiating a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, principles for governing the global commons are being established without addressing the issue of good governance.  This has not been clearly acknowledged in the formal negotiations of the Convention and its Kyoto Protocol.  Instead, the negotiations have focused on least-cost options for the wealthiest countries.

One of the challenges of good governance is to protect the right of all citizens to manage their own natural resources.  This can only be achieved by decentralizing decision making and moving toward local or community participation and public empowerment.  Environmental governance must not be left to politicians and diplomats who forget they are negotiating principles of governance, not business.

Achieving the ideals of good global governance requires the same tools as good governance in a nation state.  At a minimum, good governance must allow for a diversity of opinions and provide safe spaces to promote them.  The emerging global democracy must be driven by an empowered global society — including but not limited to NGOs, citizens’ coalitions, and professional associations — that gives equal political rights to all citizens of the Earth and creates awareness, debate and dialogue.

Strengthening Institutional Capacity

There is a pressing need for visionary thinking and strategic planning to address the long-term issues of, and the close links between, environment and development.  The institutional capacity to address these issues is severely limited in the South.  Many developing countries lack adequate institutions to address and implement their visions of sustainable development.  In addition, in many developing countries, the number of trained policy analysts, scientists, technicians, and other professionals available to address environment and development issues is inadequate.  For these reasons, key actors in the public, private and civil sectors of developing countries are concerned about capacity building.  Developing countries must have the capacity to discuss, articulate, promote and implement their visions of sustainable development in order to shape their future to their own contexts and the needs and values of their people.

As well as needing to expand institutional capacity, the structures of many existing Southern institutions need to be revisited.  Although they face different issues and challenges, Southern institutions have traditionally followed Northern development models.  Most Southern institutions are passive (providing services to Northern partners) rather than pro-active in addressing the critical issue of sustainability.  Some have been compelled to respond to the many crises that arise in an ad hoc, reactionary mode.  Many are only able to work at the project level.

A few emerging Southern institutions are trying to develop local or regional agendas, perspectives, and foci.  These types of initiatives need to be fostered, so that many Southern institutions are able to play a pro-active role; one that anticipates future problems and issues. Institutions must be able to confront short-term problems, while at the same time addressing medium and long-term issues.  Many developing countries lack the institutional infrastructure to cope with these challenges.  Therefore, frameworks and strategies through which to strengthen institutional capacity are needed.

The UNFCCC process provides an opportunity to explore the potential for new institutional arrangements.  The Convention and related mechanisms provides a framework within which capacity can be built for identifying, formulating, and implementing projects.  Individual projects should maximize the use of local skills and resources, and contribute to achieving long-term objectives for institutional reform.  In this context, capacity building implies more than the transfer of funds, technology, and know-how.  Implementing the Convention — in a manner that meets ­Southern needs — will require a strong Southern institutional framework.  This framework must be grounded in extensive networking among competent organizations from all sectors and regions.  Furthermore, the resource limitations and gaps in institutional capacity in developing countries necessitate coordination among existing institutions.

It is clear that institutional development cannot be achieved solely through short-term measures and/or individual training exercises and workshops.  Long-term strategies and the targeted commitment of resources are required.  In the context of a global environment where financial resources are scarce and uncertain, there is also a need to address strategies for ensuring that institutions in general, and civil institutions in particular, are financially viable in the long-term.

Indicators of Sustainable Development

The purpose of development indicators is to provide a method for measuring contributions to development in units that are broadly understood.  Indicators of sustainable development must go one step further; they must provide standards for measuring contributions to development that incorporate environmental and social criteria.  Whether or not an activity contributes to sustainable development can only be evaluated in subjective terms.  Therefore, it is important that developing countries identify appropriate indicators of sustainable development that are relevant to their contexts, and that these indicators be incorporated into international agreements that address environment and development issues, such as the UNFCCC and its Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the Kyoto Protocol.

The CDM may provide the first international agreement that requires that the goal of ­sustainable development be operationalized in such a manner that compliance can be assured.  For developing countries to benefit from CDM projects, this means that contributions to development as well as greenhouse gas emission reductions must be “measurable and additional” (for more explanation see Box 2).  Appropriate indicators of sustainable development are necessary to fulfil this requirement.

The Commission on Sustainable Development, the World Bank, the United Nations Development Program, and other institutions are working to develop and model indicators of sustainable development.  However, progress has been slow, largely because both the interpretation and implementation of sustainable development varies widely across countries and regions.

The development of sustainability indicators is a complex task.  There are always problems of data reliability, combining indicators, incorporating qualitative information, and understanding what the indicators mean.  Defining and using sustainability indicators in the Southern context raises additional ­challenges.  These include: lack of data; political control of data; a Northern bias in the selection of indicators (and even what data are collected); and lack of indicators that are meaningful in the Southern context (either because the indicators do not reflect the structures of Southern societies or because they do not reflect Southern values).

As developing countries articulate their visions of a sustainable future, there will be an increasing need to develop indicators of sustainable development that incorporate Southern visions and perspectives to monitor progress toward sustainability.  Meeting this need will be key to ensuring adequate Southern participation in the global dialogue on environment and development and for ­implementing international agreements and sustainable development plans.

Conclusion and Recommendations

This issue of Aviso focused on the need for increased dialogue to promote understanding, strengthened institutional capacity, and the implementation of sustainable development strategies.  We believe that there is an urgent need to promote dialogue that focuses on the perspectives of countries and institutions in the South.  A Southern Dialogue that articulates visions of sustainable development from distinctly Southern perspectives is a prerequisite to successful global dialogue on these issues.

We have highlighted four topics that are critical to Southern institutions: approaches to adopting equity as the foundation for all international environmental agreements; achieving the ideals of good global governance; strengthening ­institutional capacity through expansion and reform; and identifying indicators of sustainable development that incorporate Southern visions and perspectives.  A significant contribution to promoting the type of Southern Dialogue argued for above could be achieved by addressing these issues through a sustained forum, as part of a formal Southern-driven program for strengthening Southern institutions working in the fields of environment and development.

Youba Sokona
ENDA Tiers Monde, Dakar

Anju Sharma
Centre for Science and Environment, Delhi

Sunita Narain
Centre for Science and Environment, Delhi

Sergio Mazzuchelli
Instituto Internacional de Medio Ambiente y Dessarollo–América Latina, Buenos Aries

Deborah Cornland
Cornland International, Stockholm

Steve Lonergan
GECHS, Victoria

Individuals and/or institutions interested in participating in the Southern Dialogue and/or providing feedback on this report are encouraged to contact any of the co-authors or the GECHS project office.