Questionnaire Youth Children

8/8/2019 Questionnaire Youth Children

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/questionnaire-youth-children 1/23

Questionnaire for the Major Groups on

Experiences, Success Factors, Risks and Challenges

with Regard to Objective and Themes of UNCSD

Submission on behalf of the

Major Group on Youth and Children

- 1 -



Attachment A

Questionnaire onRenewing political commitment for sustainable development

I. Introduction

The overarching objective of UNCSD is to renew political support for sustainable

development, assessing the progress to date and the remaining gaps in the

implementation of the outcomes of the major summits on sustainable development,

and addressing new and emerging challenges.

The issue of renewed political commitment will need to be addressed in the longer term context of how agreement among governments and other stakeholders at

UNCSD could help accelerate progress towards, inter alia: (i) the demographic goal

of stabilizing the global population; (ii) the developmental goal of extending the

benefits of development equitably to all segments of global society; and (iii) the

decoupling goal of ensuring that the use of materials and generation of wastes is

within the regenerative and absorptive capacities of the planet.

II. Questionnaire

Major groups and other stakeholders are invited to provide contributions onexperiences, success factors, challenges and risks pertaining to the UNCSD objective

“ Renewing Political Commitment to Sustainable Development ” in response to the

following questions which have been developed based on the discussions which took

place at the first Prepcom.

Experiences

1. Are there objective ways of measuring political commitment? What are the

relevant indicators? Which indicators are most useful from your perspective?

(e.g., New legislation enacted, Policy announcements, Budgetary allocation andsupport, Prominence of relevant institutions, Level of media interest, etc.)

We see merit in the assumption of enacting Sustainable Development (SD) policies

being a good indicator for measuring political commitment. This legislation, however,

must be evaluated in terms of it’s ability to meet sustainable development goals and

the extent of its influence (either potential or observed). Nations or regions with more

comprehensive legislation should be recognised as having a higher level of political

commitment.

Therefore, we think it is important for parties, regions, as well as the international

system to perform a complete impact assessment to identify both the intended and

- 2 -





6) Assess the breadth and efficacy of any implemented policies against the SD

indicators. An increased knowledge of the effectiveness of existing SD policies will

ideally guide future efforts to implement and modify such policies.

2. Based if possible on these indicators, how would you evaluate the political

commitment today to sustainable development in the country(ies)/region(s) of

interest to your group, compared to 1992? How would you evaluate the political

commitment of the international community compared to 1992?

In general, one could argue that there has been mixed progress in terms of political

commitment to sustainable development. While acknowledging that it requires

significant research and global agreement on the process, we believe that generating

an accurate estimation of political commitment for each nation, region and within theUN-system is paramount.

A meaningful comparison across nations, and among international governance levels

is crucial in assessing where political commitment is located, and most important,

there where it’s lacking. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of States

participating in the High Level

Conference on Sustainable Development (HLCSD), with the guidance of the

secretariat, to undertake this analysis at the national, regional and international level

prior to the 2012 conference. However, as the indicators discussed above illustrate, an

accurate estimation of political commitment for each nation that would be meaningfulacross nations requires significant research and global agreement on the assessment

process.

This is not a process that can be carried out completely here. However, this is an

extremely valuable process that Member States should agree to undertake before the

2012 conference. Obviously, such an assessment must be highly transparent and

incorporate stakeholder positions, including several sessions of stakeholder dialogue.

This is not only an informative process, but would also allow Parties with little or

underdeveloped experience in utilising SD indicators and impact assessments to begin

refining this process. They can be encouraged to maintain this process even after the2012

meeting.

Success Factors

3. What actions have been introduced in your country to strengthen political support

for sustainable development?

One of the most crucial factors for achieving political support for Sustainable

Development is the presence and activity of a highly engaged and concerned civil

society. For example,the environmental movement in the US is constantly seeking

- 4 -



more ambitious policy at the federal level: Power Shift 2009, Power Vote, the Great

Power Race and 10/10/10. for example, were meant to create more political

momentum towards passing climate and energy policy in the US and around the

world. The youth environmental movement is organizing and highly involved in theseinitiatives.

While civil society has not always been successful in generating political support for

SD (e.g. the above-mentioned examples did not result in any climate policy in the

US), the absence of a broad and strong civil society would further erode political

support for SD, assuming that politicians in democracies are responsive to massive

demonstrations of public support for a certain policy pathway. These initiatives do not

always succeed in changing the minds of politicians who are already either

antagonistic or ambivalent towards SD goals such as climate and energy legislation,

but broad popular pressure from civil society has been instrumental in making progress on various issues across the globe. (e.g. in state-level or local level

environmental policy making in the US).

Another strategy for countering the “anti-environmentalism” seen many countries

would be education on the need for SD from very young ages. For example, recycling

became a more accepted (though, admittedly, not completely well-implemented or

effective) tool for environmentalism in the US after mainstream advocacy and school

efforts to encourage it since the beginnings of its widespread implementation in the

late 1960s. Again, often these educational efforts began and still continue today

outside the formal school system, and often in, for example, youth clubs and youthorganisations like Scouts and 4H.

A quick review of the history of waste generation and recycling reveals that during

war time, with the accompanying shortages of metal, fabrics, etc., governments have

embarked on campaigns to encourage citizens to reduce waste, increase efficiency and

to save their garbage. An important question to ask is how to generate this sense of

urgency over the finite availability of resources in everyday life, outside times of

crisis? How is this urgency generated? During war time, it is likely a sense of fear that

drives a heightened awareness of consumption patterns, compounded by more

concerted government efforts to encourage such activity.

For example, increasing political commitment for SD for a US audience, will likely

require very specific lobbying for issues falling under SD, rather than pushing for SD

as a whole. Advocating “sustainable development” is likely to sound to US voters as

an radical leftist agenda from which the benefits are highly unclear. Advocating

“conservative use” of specific, targeted resources might be more palatable language.

Fear appears as a powerful emotion to evoke, but it is not likely to be the best strategy

for encouraging long term commitment to SD. This is because fear cannot be

sustained over long periods of time and because it would be preferable for consumersto actively incorporate actions that support SD into their lifestyles to strengthen their

- 5 -



investment in the idea and its processes. Education can play an important role in

encouraging consumers to appropriate SD (or its disaggregated parts) into their

national and local narratives.

An important strategy identified by the environmental community is to frame

lobbying or political support for addressing global environmental issues in terms of

how they impact individuals and communities in very concrete ways. For example, in

the US, much of the lobbying for renewable energy is argued on the grounds of

national energy security and job creation, two tangible issues at the federal and local

level, and not on the grounds of climate change, which is still a controversial issue for

the political right. Because most (though not all) of the threats of climate change will

occur on a global scale, and it is based on science that many do not understand, it is

difficult for US voters to rally behind it. There appears to be more support for

renewable energy legislation than climate legislation in the US, likely because the benefits of renewable energy are more obvious to voters. As pointed out above,

increasing political support for SD would therefore likely require very specific

lobbying for issues falling under SD, rather than pushing for SD as a whole.

Again using the US as an example, some of the most prominent arguments against

environmental regulation and initiatives is that there is little or no economic benefit,

or that the economic costs are too high. These arguments rarely account for the costs

of externalities and/or future costs, which reveals the assumption that environmental

costs and/or costs to future generations are not valued equally to immediate economic

costs. In this instance there is very strong discounting for future concerns. Therefore,it is important to note that not only do decision-makers believe there are trade-offs

among the three pillars of SD, but they strongly devalue the environmental pillar.

This focus on short-term economic concerns is likely exacerbated by the immediacy

of election cycles. Governments tend to plan and decide with the next election in

mind and the prospect of being re-elected, making it difficult for governments to

make decisions which would be perceived as politically damaging. Therefore difficult

decisions are often postponed or modified in order not to offend an electorate. For

example, a decision not to log, or not to fish, that may be desirable for reasons of

sustainable development would not be contemplated in the run-up to an election because of the unemployment it would cause.

Historically, commitment to sustainable use of a product or resource is not brought

about purely by political will, but rather directly tied to its decline in popularity as a

commodity (see, for example, the whaling industry). This highlights the need for

sustainable, economically competitive substitutes to the unsustainable goods and

resources currently used, such as fossil fuels, rare earth metals, and fish stocks. It

appears the political will materializes when such substitutions are more economically

attractive or when resource stocks reach critically low levels (in the example of fish

stocks, near or total collapse). Even in the example of fish stocks, where this

conservation issue has reached crisis proportions in some areas of the world, political

- 6 -



action has still been insufficient for achieving sustainability. In the example of the EU

Common Fisheries Policy, which establishes fishing-day quotas for each Member

State, only 72% of allowed EU fishing effort was deployed in 2006.4 This indicates a

lack of political will to require sustainable practices, even though the policyframework is in place to do so. This is not promising for those nations that lack the

policy framework as well.

Because sustainable development requires long-term thinking and most likely, a

certain level of sacrifice in the present, it does not fit in the current global paradigm

seeking constant and immediate economic growth. Decision makers will have to

come to terms with this disconnect, and cease speaking simultaneously about the need

for sustainable development and yet not implementing policies that would support it.

Developing quantitative global SD goals may help politicians and civil society

understand more clearly the necessary actions.

4. Are there specific sectors or areas (e.g., water, energy, biodiversity, other) where

national political commitment to achieve sustainable development goals has been

especially strong? If so, what factors explain that commitment?

5. What examples or experiences from other areas demonstrate how political support

for critical issues was enhanced (e.g., MDGs, climate change)? How could they be

applied to SD?

Challenges

6. Looking forward to the next 10 years, what are your’s highest priorities for

accelerating progress towards sustainable development?

We consider the need to elevate new and emerging challenges on the international

political agenda on Sustainable Development. These challenges, some of which have

reached the point of crisis and will continue to do so in the future, include food,

energy, water and financing for sustainable development (e.g. 0,7% ODA,

climatefinancing, ...).

We believe that a world population rising to approximately 9 billion in the coming

decades will bring about significant pressures on all sectors of the world economy, but

specifically to agricultural systems as it becomes next to being the main provider of

food and feed, also an important provider of other services such as fuel, fibre and

flowers and even leisure. On the other hand, agriculture is also a net contributor, both

directly as indirectly to the existing challenges of climate change, biodiversity and

drought and desertification as well as driving other resource related problems.5 Food,

energy and water security are and will continue to grow as critical geopolitical

issues. Radical, systemic transitions are needed.

- 7 -



Access to clean drinking water and sanitation continues to be an unmet Millennium

Development Goal. In the past year, the UNGA has recognized water as a human

right, and yet no central structure or MEA directly deals with comprehensive water

issues such as access to water, water conservation, water management and sanitationissues, etc. Although review processes under the CSD have raised continuing

challenges and best practices related to water issues, the international community will

need to continue addressing water as a cross cutting issue in a number of MEA

contexts (UNFCCC, UNCCD, etc). Furthermore, greater efforts will need to be made

to support local initiatives and more comprehensive policies to combat water scarcity

as it accelerates with climate change and contamination issues remain prevalent

worldwide.

However, we also want to stress that in recent times there has been some growing

political attention to these issues with, for example, the Copenhagen Accord promising some shorttrack financing for climate change, the recognition of water as a

Human Right, the recent report on food-security by the UN, as well as even

references in older documents such as the Brundtland report and the report of the

Club of Rome. However, it is paramount to devise a more integrated approach for

securing decent food, water and energy provisions for the global population in the

coming decades. Failure to do so may produce disastrous results.

7. How can international cooperation ensure support for sustainable development?

What are your expectations for UNCSD in this regard?

While, for example, the number of world leaders present at COP15 indicated an

unprecedented level of political momentum and support, we have seen only vague,

nonbinding accord emanate from it. This clearly indicates that aspects such as the

process leading up to a summit or conference and even some of the more technical

organisational details are crucial for harnessing the power of the political support

gathered in the forms of the Heads of State attending. The HLCSD should broker

renewed commitment to a holistic, global agreement on Sustainable Development. We

therefore expect heads of state and their respective ministers of finance to attend the

conference, ready to gift agreements with strong compliance mechanisms as a result

of their political commitment.

However, as argued above, we also believe that such an agreement should be

formulated with the integrated efforts of both state and non-state actors throughout the

planning process leading up to the 2012 conference, as well as at the conference itself.

The UNCSD could therefore act as a new platform for engagement of SD

stakeholders and facilitate a new paradigm of international environmental

governance, in which both state and non-state actors work to come to consensus on

key issues which affect the global population. This request for input is a good start to

such a process, but the inclusiveness of participation in planning and information

sharing must continue.

- 8 -



The increased participation of non-state actors should become a new strong and

enforceable principle in national and global decision-making processes. Only then can

civil society fully assist in strengthening the political commitment as well as

contributing their knowledge, ideas and ability to assist with implementation. This canincrease both the efficacy of global-level agreements and initiatives as well as allow

non-state stakeholders to become more invested in SD efforts. In particular, as young

people we believe that we can contribute in efforts relevant to both formal and non-

formal education on sustainable living and development, as we believe that education

is crucial for achieving the abovementioned goals.

Risks

8.Among senior national policy makers in the country(ies) or region(s) of interest to

your group, would you say the predominant view of the three pillars of sustainabledevelopment is that: ____there are difficult trade-offs among them? ____ they are

strongly complementary? Please briefly elaborate on your answer.

- 9 -



Attachment C

Questionnaire onAddressing New and Emerging Challenges

I. Introduction

Although there is no such thing as a definitive list of “new and emerging challenges”,

the following are the most significant ones:

Climate Change, as new evidence has emerged to suggest that the danger is a

more imminent one than previously thought.Rising water scarcity and increased desertification

The unfolding of the financial crisis in developed countries, and its

transmission to other countries through financial markets as well as through

the ensuing global recession.

Halting progress, and even reversal in progress, towards MDGs despite

consistent political support.

Food crisis, caused by the rapid escalation of food prices.

Energy crisis, precipitated by the unprecedented volatility in energy prices.

Other environmental trends that had worsened more rapidly than anticipated,

including concerns that some “planetary boundaries” had been exceeded,especially biodiversity;

Degradation of marine ecosystems

Inefficient and wasteful patterns of consumption and production; and

A succession of disasters.

All countries face these challenges, but they differ widely in their ability to cope with

the risks and shocks inherent in them. Challenges have been exacerbated in

developing countries by poverty, competition for scarce resources, the rapid pace of

rural/urban migration, and the concomitant challenges to provide food, infrastructure

and access to basic health, water and energy services.

The sustainable development challenge posed by climate change illustrates well the

importance of a holistic response from the international community.

II. Questionnaire

- 10 -



Major groups and other stakeholders are invited to provide contributions and inputs

on experiences, success factors, challenges and risks pertaining to GA Resolution

64/236’s call for “ Addressing new and emerging challenges” in response to the

following questions, which have been developed based on the discussions that took place at the first Prepcom.

Experiences

1. What five new and emerging challenges are likely to affect most significantly the

prospects for sustainable development in the coming decade? Please rank in order

of importance.

We consider the need to elevate new and emerging challenges on the international

political agenda on Sustainable Development. These challenges, some of which havereached the point of crisis and will continue to do so in the future, include food,

energy, water and financing for sustainable development (e.g. 0,7% ODA,

climatefinancing, ...).

We believe that a world population rising to approximately 9 billion in the coming

decades will bring about significant pressures on all sectors of the world economy, but

specifically to agricultural systems as it becomes next to being the main provider of

food and feed, also an important provider of other services such as fuel, fibre and

flowers and even leisure. On the other hand, agriculture is also a net contributor, both

directly as indirectly to the existing challenges of climate change, biodiversity anddrought and desertification as well as driving other resource related problems. Food,

energy and water security are and will continue to grow as critical geopolitical

issues.

Access to clean drinking water and sanitation continues to be an unmet Millennium

Development Goal. In the past year, the UNGA has recognized water as a human

right, and yet no central structure or MEA directly deals with comprehensive water

issues such as access to water, water conservation, water management and sanitation

issues, etc. Although review processes under the CSD have raised continuing

challenges and best practices related to water issues, the international community willneed to continue addressing water as a cross cutting issue in a number of MEA

contexts (UNFCCC, UNCCD, etc).

2. What mechanisms have been put in place in the country(ies) or region(s) of

interest to your group to address these challenges: At the local level? At the

national level?

3. In which of these areas has support from the international community been

forthcoming? In what areas is new or enhanced international support needed?

- 11 -



On recent times there has been some growing political attention to these issues with,

for example, the Copenhagen Accord promising some shorttrack financing for climate

change, the recognition of water as a Human Right, the recent report on food-security

by the UN, as well as even references in older documents such as the Brundtlandreport and the report of the Club of Rome. However, it is paramount to devise a more

integrated approach for securing decent food, water and energy provisions for the

global population in the coming decades. Failure to do so may produce disastrous

results.

As mentioned above, the new and emerging challenges are closely related to the

already identified challenges. As specified in the 3 Rio conventions, tackling climate

change, biodiversity loss, drought and desertification are priorities. These challenges

to sustainable development are not new, but one could hardly argue that we have fully

tackled these challenges. Especially when combined with recent global crises, and thenew and emerging challenges, it is clear that a more holistic approach is needed in

order to avoid compromising a decent life for young and future generations. We think

that there are a set of common issues, as well as a common solutions (e.g. a joint

REDD+ facility) that would integrate existing and new concerns. Also, we believe it

is crucial to underpin new dimensions to the already identified challenges, for

example the link between Climate Change and Security.

4. What new and emerging challenges should be acted upon at UNCSD?

Next to the above-mentioned issues (e.g. food, energy and water) we believe thattackling the new and emerging challenges, as well as those already identified, can be

done in several ways, and even provide a basis for further deepening and legitimising

current strategies for reducing injustices and inequities. We want to underline that the

current instruments within the field of Sustainable Development contain balanced

language aiming to reconcile environmental integrity and the right to development.

However, it is insufficient to consider the principle of “common but differentiated

responsibilities” only from a spatial perspective, thereby failing to account for

intergenerational justice and equity. We believe that we should strengthen both the

norms of spatial and temporal justice and equity on the international level. Withregards to the temporal justice, we clearly see that

young and future generations have few legal norms to enforce accountability to them.

We specifically want to see the HLCSD establish a higher political profile for young

and future generations in three dimensions:

1) Conserving options for young and future generations;

2) Conserving quality for young and future generations; and

3) Conserving access for young and future generations.

Only by establishing these norms at the international level, as well as engaging young

stakeholders and utilising their knowledge and ideas in the process of establishing

such norms, can both intertemporal and global equity be appropriately incorporated

into SD goals.

- 12 -



Also the identified challenges identified at Rio in 1992 need some attention. Climate

change is likely to impact many facets of the global environment and will affect

efforts to implement sustainable practices, namely by changing the limits to certaineconomic activities. For example, a changing climate will mean that various species

already at risk from habitat loss due to anthropogenic sprawl will become more

vulnerable, increasing the need for even more stringent efforts to protect biodiversity.

It will also impact fresh water resources, and therefore agricultural systems, as well as

creating potential for large-scale immigration and new stresses on resources in areas

of changing population dynamics.

Therefore, addressing climate change would be a priority for integrating progress

towards multiple sustainable development goals, though it would only address more

longterm challenges. Sub-priorities for addressing climate change include:1) A global price on greenhouse gas emissions;

2) Establishing steady, sufficient flow of technical and financial aid to developing

countries, facilitating a transition to low-carbon economies which meet more than

basic human needs; and

3) Countries establishing and/or meeting their energy efficiency, renewable energy

and GHG emissions reduction quotas.

Efforts will also be needed to address the most pressing environmental concerns,

which are further exacerbated by climate change.

Halting the loss of global biodiversity will require concentrated efforts above and beyond simply reducing the rate of climate change. More near term priorities include:

1) Establishing integrated ecosystem management to creates structures for addressing

competing needs of various stakeholders;

2) Radically rethinking conservation strategies, which must be based more on

building resilience and capacity for adaptation in ecosystems (e.g. mobile protected

areas, protection of migratory corridors);

3) Reducing the spread of invasive species by developing multilateral policies and

monitoring programs.

The HLCSD can generate renewed commitment to a global agreement on GHGreductions within the UNFCCC as a cornerstone of the actions needed for SD. We

expect heads of state to attend the conference, having already agreed on a global

climate deal at the UNFCCC COP17, and ready to sign an agreement that they will

fulfill their duties to address climate change as well as additional pressing

environmental challenges (highlighted specifically in the agreement document).

Such a document could be formulated with the integrated efforts of both state and

nonstate actors throughout the planning process leading up to the 2012 conference.

The HLCSD could therefore act as a new platform for engagement of SD stakeholders

and facilitate a new paradigm of international environmental governance, in which

both state and non-state actors work to come to consensus on key issues which affect

- 13 -



the global population. This request for input is a good start to such a process, but the

inclusiveness

of participation in planning and information sharing must continue.

Success Factors

5. What factors explain the successful ability to address new and emerging

challenges?

adequate financial resources

strong government leadership

investment in essential infrastructure

dedicated government programmes

literacy and awareness among the population

effective communication systemsavailability of data and technical capacity

speed and adequacy of international support

leadership by international organizations

south-south cooperation

regional cooperation

6. What steps have been taken or are under consideration in the country(ies) or

region(s) of interest to your group to enhance these success factors?

Challenges

7. How can the link between science, education, and policy be strengthened to

address the new and emerging challenges, especially those identified above?

Education and especially education for sustainable development is crucial in

achieving lifestyle- and behavioural changes. Therefore, sustainable development

should be integrated in all study curricula, at all levels, whether primary, secondary,

vocational or tertiary. People with different interests and skill sets have their

differentiated role to play in ensuring true sustainable development takes place.

Without empowering all individuals, especially young people, we cannot mobilize the boundless human capital that can potentially bring about significant, positive change

to the unsustainable status quo.

Furthermore, non-formal learning, especially by youth-led organisations, should be

stimulated and recognised as a valuable tool for SD education.

In addition, forums, discussions, debates and public consultations on sustainability

issues must be utilised to allow different stakeholders to voice their opinions and

introduce perspectives that may translate to concrete policy actions. There must be an

active citizen and civil society participation in policy creation as it is the job of

governments to represent these viewpoints.

- 14 -



With regards to science and policy, a stronger science-policy interface definitely has

to be forged. Decision-making by political leaders must be increasingly influenced by

what scientific research indicates is necessary. Governments must also encourage the

development of technological innovations and research without the tainting of specialinterest groups.

Young people should be included at all levels of the decision-making processes

related to climate policy and other aspects of SD, such as the National Sustainable

Development Councils. The meaningful involvement of young people in decision-

making can increase support for and implementation of any education, training and

public awareness strategy.

8. How can international support be harnessed effectively to address these

challenges?

Participation is a key issue for Youth and Children, as children

and young people comprise easily half of the world population. Reminiscent of the

charter of the United Nations, which references “we, the peoples of the United

Nations” rather than discussing nation-states, the final report on the World

Commission on Environment and Development, foresees a “political system that

secures effective citizen participation in decision making”.

From the perspective of civil society, one could say that the glass is half full or half

empty. Great steps forward have been made, with civil society participation, andyouth participation in particular, being politically recognised in Agenda 21.

Furthermore, the institutions concerned with Sustainable Development, especially in

the UN Commission on Sustainable Development and the three Rio Conventions,

have expressed concern over their ability to more effectively engage civil society,

though there appears to be inconsistent and insufficient progress in this direction.

We believe stakeholder engagement could be enhanced through participation of

civil society representatives within the decision making structures dealing with

climate change, biodiversity, desertification, and other international

environmental agreements. Recalling that participation is a prerequisite for sustainable development, we can only note that other experiences across the UN

system such as the policy bureau of UNAIDS, the Office of Humanitarian Affairs

(OCHA) and the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) have all included

civil society representatives in their respective bureaux.

Regarding youth participation, we want to draw attention to two specific practices.

Firstly, in the youth sector of the Council of Europe, representatives of youth civil

society and representatives of government enter into co-management.# They both

participate in decision making via consensus, an example of this regional organisation

making decisions that concern us, together with us. Another example of participation

are the official youth delegates across the UN system. Because official youth

- 15 -



delegates are integrated in their official delegations, they are a powerful means for

enhancing youth-participation.

Stakeholders, including young people, must be included at all levels of decisionmaking processes related to Sustainable Development policy. The meaningful

involvement of young people in decision making is crucial for the quality, legitimacy

and credibility of the system. Unfortunately, this development has not been seen

within the field of Sustainable Development. While we acknowledge the efforts being

made to codify such norms at the regional level with the Aarhus convention, the

recent example of civil society participation at the UNFCCC COP15 as well as the

lack of diversity of youth currently engaged in the SD decision making process

indicates the need for stronger and more tangible action in this area, such as

committing additional resources to the UN CSD trust fund in order to strengthen

participation from the Global South.

Risks

9. Do the new and emerging challenges pose a fundamental risk to the prospects of

economic growth and development in the country(ies) or region(s) of interest to

your group?

10. How can the risks to the poor and other vulnerable populations be addressed?

- 16 -



Attachment E

Questionnaire on

Institutional framework for sustainable development

I. Introduction

Institutional support for sustainable development works horizontally across different

domains, agencies, ministries, functional groups, and countries, while the traditional

organization of authority and action is vertical , precisely along the lines of the same

agencies and ministries and other specialities. So, the challenge is to identify

institutional elements that can facilitate integration, on a continued basis, across

existing lines of authority and programme structures, without undermining or

displacing them.At the international level, UNCED led to the establishment of three main institutional

structures to pursue sustainable development, namely the Commission on Sustainable

Development (CSD) for political leadership, the Inter-Agency Coordination on

Sustainable Development (IACSD) for coordination within the UN system, and the

High Level Advisory Board on Sustainable Development (HLB) for intellectual

guidance. CSD remains the principal policy making institution on sustainable

development within the UN system, but the other two structures were discontinued.

Since Rio, many UN bodies and international organizations have aligned their work

with the principles of sustainable development, which is referred to in the 2005 World

Summit Outcome (GA Resolution A/RES/06/1) as “a key element of the overarching

framework of United Nations activities”.

At national levels, early innovations include national sustainable development

councils (NSDC), and integrated strategies. The experience with NSDCs needs to be

assessed to identify lessons of success as well as failure. The process of developing

integrated strategies has taken root, including in the form of national sustainable

development strategies (NSDS), but there is a need to review this experience to assess

how best the goal of integration can be advanced, and in particular whether the

existence of several competing strategy processes (e.g., PRSP, development plan,

national conservation strategy) can undermine the very goal of integration.

At local levels, Local Agendas 21 were developed by local institutions and urban

municipalities, and again there is a need to draw lessons from this experience.

II. Questionnaire

Major groups and other stakeholders are invited to provide contributions and inputs

on experiences, success factors, challenges and risks pertaining to the UNCSD theme

“ Institutional framework for sustainable development ” in response to the following

- 17 -



questions, which have been developed based on the discussions that took place at the

first Prepcom.

Experiences

1. Various changes in the global institutional framework for sustainable development

have been discussed. What is the importance of the following avenues for reform?

Strengthen existing institutions

Merge institutions

Improve coordination among existing institutions

Establish new institutions

Change mandate(s) of institution(s)

Streamline institutions

Kindly explain your choices, indicating what concrete measures could be

considered in this regard.

Sustainable Development as a holistic concept has been defined to encompass the

three dimensions of social, environmental, and economic issues, and yet UN

institutions remain isolated across these lines and lack in comprehensive dialogue and

collaboration. Whether new institutions are created or existing ones are revamped, it

is clear that in order to achieve SD they will need to bring together a diverse range of

non-state actors andgovernments and address economic, social, and environmental issues in a holistic and

interconnected way. Concretely this suggests that given the nature of the complexity

and interrelated issues that are part of sustainable development, SD should be better

integrated into the heart of the UN work.

Existing institutions such as UNEP, be strengthened in their mandate to work more

closely in implementation and bring together a wide range of stakeholders and NGOs

to partner in achieving SD policy goals. UNEP should function as a facilitator

between international policies and local implementation by partnering with NGOs,

local organizations, and municipalities to provide capacity building, information, andwork with these local entities to help best achieve SD policies at the local level.

We support better integration of civil society and stakeholders into the institutional

framework and decision making process as one way to better support implementation

of SD policies. A reoccurring challenge of SD is the gap between international policy

making and local level implementation. In order to address this, there must be

increased capacity building and investment from a broader range of civil society

actors that can help governments implement these policies. UNEP and other central

SD institutions should also work closely with all Major Groups to help implement

policies. Stakeholders often have a strong local connection and knowledge that can beessential in bringing international policies and translating them to on the ground

- 18 -



action in various communities, but stakeholders need to be supported by institutions

with funding and programs, as well as incorporated into decision-making processes so

there is knowledge and investment to bring policies back.

Ideally the HLCSD will take many of recommendations from member states,

international institutions and civil society to strengthen governance around SD. It is

clear that UNEP’s role needs to be reconsidered as well as the way civil society can

positively contribute to the decision making process and be partners in implementing

policies. The greatest risk at the HLCSD in relation to governance would be if the

process failed to be a model of good governance itself and didn’t include diverse

voices and those of civil society. So far, we have been encouraged by the Secretariats

efforts in preparation to ensure meaningful input that includes civil society. We are

hopeful for a meaningful and substantial revision of international environmental

governance at the HLCSD in Rio.

2. How can the institutional framework ensure effective synergies between the CSD

and other existing inter-governmental instruments and processes, including

different multilateral agreements, UN programmes and funds, and regional

processes?

We would like to see the UNGA take a more prominent role in dealing with SD and

perhaps UNCSD be moved as a UNGA commission rather than commission under theECOSOC. As the UNCSD has a broad and far-reaching mandate to oversee the

implementation of the Agenda 21, it’s current place of as a functional ECOSOC

commission seems to contrast

with the high-profile leadership role it’s mandate requests. Upgrading it’s lower status

in the international institutional hierarchy, is paramount.

3. How can the institutional framework ensure effective coordination among

different agencies and organizations responsible for aspects of sustainable

development?

We believe that the Conventions should continue to promote dialogue through the

Environmental Management Group and the Joint-Liaison Group on the interconnected

issues that are currently separated and discussed in separate forums, such as

UNFCCC, UNCCD, CBD, etc. The Environmental Management Group and the Joint-

Liaison Group could also be strengthened in its work by involving non-state actors

that are implementing relevant policies. Non-state actors could share in best practices

and provide insight for how policies in these different forums can better work together

to achieve SD on the ground.

The most significant challenges for Environmental Management Group is findingways to work together and collaborate on an issue that falls across so many different

- 19 -



areas and UN entities. In some ways creating a strong central structure would at least

allow for clear leadership on who should facilitate this collaboration process, but it

will nonetheless be essential to work with other UN agencies, civil society, and

convention structures across all three dimensions of SD. Another challenge for international institutions is that they must remain in the international sphere and yet

they must strive to work closely with national and local organization to ensure

meaningful implementation that is not necessarily the same model for all

communities, but brings together local knowledge to implement SD in the community

and country. Therefore international institutions cannot always provide top-down

support and funding, but should work with local organizations to understand the

context and how to best achieve SD goals within the community.

Another pathway is to harmonise the international agenda on Sustainable

Development with the international framework on Development Cooperation. AsSustainable Development contains a lot of language on the “right for development” it

would make sense to make more concrete institutional arrangements with e.g. the

MDGs, the Accra Agenda for Action and the Paris Declaration. The HLCSD could

become a key moment in elaborating a post 2015 framework for development,

eventually formulating the successor of the MDGs, the Sustainable Development

Goals.

4. Do(es) the country(ies) of interest to your group have an active national

sustainable development council (NSDC) in place? Yes/No. Do you think an

active NSDC could facilitate national preparations for UNCSD? If so, how?

5. In your assessment, how effective have national sustainable development

strategies (NSDS) been in promoting integrated decision making?

6. Has your group been actively involved in developing and/or implementing local

agendas 21? If so, where?

7. In the country(ies) of interest to your group, what role have sub-national and local

sustainable development councils played in implementing sustainable

development since Rio? What role has your group played in such councils?

Although Agenda 21 has paved the way for stakeholder representation, youth

especially still face underrepresentation in NSDCs. For example, the Belgian NSDC

only has the National Youth Councils as an observer, while other Agenda 21 groups

such as Business and Trade Unions are full members. There is clearly a need to renew

commitment in these processes to integrating Agenda 21 groups, especially youth.

Also because of the transient nature of youth and the lack of funding in many cases,

more of a proactive effort may need to be made from governments to ensure diverse

and meaningful youth representation within NSDCs and other processes.

- 20 -



National organizations need to be given the knowledge and support to understand and

implement SD policies from the international level. Some of their biggest challenges

can be financial support and capacity-building to help implement policies and access

to information on international policies and how they may fit in with domestic basedwork. It would make sense to facilitate the sharing of learning-mistakes and best-

practices among states.

8. Since the UNCED (Rio) in 1992, has the participation of major groups and other

relevant stakeholders in national decision-making processes on sustainable

development significantly increased? Yes/No. Please indicate which of the

following forms of engagement of major groups in decision making are

commonly used in the country(ies) or region(s) of interest to your group (ranking

in order of importance with 1 equal most important):

participation in policy development public hearings

partnerships

scientific panels

inclusion in international delegations

multi-stakeholder consultations for international meetings

9. Name the governments with which your group has had the closest collaboration.

For each, briefly describe the main features of the collaboration.

Success Factors

10. Are there examples, whether in the sustainable development domain or in related

policy domains (e.g., MDGs, other), where an effective institutional framework

has contributed to significant positive outcomes at national level? international

level?

More specifically, one successful framework model to consider is the Carpathian

Convention reuniting all countries around the Carpathes. The Carpathian Convention

aims to act as a transnational framework for cooperation and multi-sectoral policy and

coordination, a platform for joint strategies for sustainable development and a forumfor dialogue between all stakeholders.

1) The model transcends drawn borders of states or counties and instead bring

together actors around an ecological issue. An international framework will ultimately

need to support implementation and collaboration with actors across national/local

levels and state boundaries.

2) It provides a model for how larger policies can be coupled with action on a more

local scale to ensure meaningful implementation.

- 21 -



11. How can the lessons from such successes be used to enhance the effectiveness of

the institutional framework for sustainable development? Are the lessons relevant

to the Commission on Sustainable Development?

12. How can the lessons from such successes be used to enhance the effectiveness of

international environmental governance/policy guidance?

13. What in your experience have been the most effective means of strengthening

major groups’ and other stakeholder’s participation in national sustainable

development efforts?

Of particular importance to assist in the implementation of all these strategies is to

increase participation of non-state actors in national and global decision-making

processes, thereby maximising the use of their knowledge, ideas and ability to assistwith implementation. This can increase both the efficacy of global-level agreements

and initiatives as well as allow non-state stakeholders to become more invested in SD

efforts.

With the adoption of Agenda 21, UN–sponsored conferences have increasingly tended

to promote broader public participation. The CSD has adopted the principle of multi–

stakeholder dialogues. These provide a forum in which different groups with diverse

interests can interact with one another to establish common ground, thus contributing

to building trust between all parties as well as between governments. Within

international environmental institutions, the range of NGO involvement has beenextended—from the agenda setting stage to the decision making stage. A positive

move forward would be to ensure that any reforms within the international

environmental governance system adhere to good governance principles such as those

in the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision

Making, and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters. However, as this convention

is only regional in scope, and bearing in mind CSO-participation at the recent

UNFCCC COP15, we would call for the HLCSD to critically improve and strengthen

the participation of Civil Society in International Sustainable Development

governance.

Challenges

14. What are the most significant challenges facing international institutions charged

with promoting sustainable development?

There is a clear lack of enforcement and dispute settlement to corner an effective

International Governance for Sustainable Development. MRV between the different

MEAs varies and does not seem to be as effective as e.g. WTO dispute settlement.

We would propose considering giving the International Court of Justice compulsory

jurisdiction on matters concerning sustainable development such as climate changeand the needs and interests of future generations. Learning from the GATT panel

- 22 -



dispute resolution system, we would urge to, pursuant article 22 of the UN Charter, to

establish an judicial body that would have the power to refer cases to the International

Court of Justice. Another option would be to expand the mandate of the UN Security

Council, broadening the exercise of it’s mandate by including environmental issuesand their security related issues within it’s activities.

15. What are the most significant challenges facing national institutions charged with

promoting sustainable development in the country(ies) of interest to your group?

Risks

16. What decisions should UNCSD aim to reach on the institutional framework for

sustainable development? What are the main risks threatening a successful

UNCSD outcome on the institutional framework?

- 23 -

Documents

Questionnaire Youth Children