1 / 41

First National Forum on International Environmental Governance 14 th September, 2010

First National Forum on International Environmental Governance 14 th September, 2010 Addis Ababa University. IEG Reform Process. First National Forum on International Environmental Governance 14 th September, 2010 Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Satishkumar Belliethathan

tyrone-clayton
Download Presentation

First National Forum on International Environmental Governance 14 th September, 2010

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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)

  6. UNEP-Governance • Governing council - Established in accordance with General Assembly resolution 2997 (XXVII) (Institutional and financial arrangements for international environmental co-operation) 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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

  9. 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 Processpresented their so-called 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)

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. 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)

  14. 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)

  15. Challenges The economy working for sustainable development, Environment as the foundation of sustainable development. (Scanlon, undated accessed September 11, 2010)

  16. 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)

  17. Environmental Governance in the UN (UN-JIU, 2008)

  18. 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 GroupUN Water UN OceansUN Energy

  19. 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

  20. 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)

  21. Multilateral Environmental Agreements (Ivanova, 2010)

  22. Timeline – major MEAs catalysed by UNEP (Ivanova, 2005)

  23. 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.

  24. 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.

  25. 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.

  26. 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

  27. 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;

  28. 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

  29. 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

  30. 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.

  31. Next Meeting Second meeting of the Consultative Group of Ministers or High-level Representatives on International Environmental Governance Helsinki - November, 2010

  32. 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

  33. IEG and Sustainable Development Rio + 20 Rio 20 Stockholm + 40 • Objectives: • Securing renewed political commitment to sustainable development, • assessing the progress and implementation gaps in meeting already agreed commitments, and • addressing new and emerging challenges. • Themes: • Green Economy within the context of sustainable development  and poverty eradication. • Institutional Framework for sustainable development

  34. 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)

  35. 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 ?

  36. 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)

  37. This is how the world started

  38. Thank You

  39. Environmental Governance - UN CBD ESCWA ISDR SBC UNFCCC UNU CITES FAO ITC UNCCD UNESCO WFP 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 CMS IAEA ITU UNCTAD UNFPA WHO EMG DFS GEF UN-HABITAT 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

  40. Environmental Governance - UN CEB

  41. Environmental Governance - UN

More Related