August
31, 2002
WSSD Turned Into
Partnership Market
Instead of discussing fair multilateral rules for global
environmental governance, the US is undermining multilateralism by shifting the focus to
voluntary partnerships
"The US is trying to undermine the multilateral
nature of the WSSD by shifting focus to voluntary partnerships," Sunita Narain,
Director of the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), New Delhi, said today.
"Instead of agreeing to a rule-based system to govern the management of the global
environment, where nations take responsibility for their actions and can be held
accountable for them, the US is trying to shift focus onto voluntary agreements that have
nothing to do with rules or responsibility, and over which there will be very little
control."
Narain was reacting to a US press conference, where Paula
Dobriansky, head of the US delegation, made it clear that voluntary bilateral
partnerships, and not the ongoing multilateral negotiations, were of utmost importance to
the US. "The WSSD is focusing more on text, more than 35,000 words. These words
cant save the Earth," she said. "We need actions. That is the reason why
we have come to Johannesburg with practical partnerships."
Dobriansky had declared that "with the current
partnerships, USA (is) the world leader in sustainable development". The focus on
voluntary action through partnerships instead of the WSSD process is, however, consistent
with the views of many in the Bush administration, which see multilateral agreements such
as the Kyoto Protocol as an unnecessary restraint on the US.
Unwilling to make any firm commitments or deadlines to
fund global sustainable development efforts at the WSSD, the US first proposed the idea of
voluntary partnerships in the preparatory process of the WSSD. Despite widespread protests
that the WSSD was meant to be a venue for multilateral commitments to strengthen global
cooperation and not bilateral partnerships, the idea of Type II agreements -- partnerships
between governments, regional groups, local authorities, non-governmental actors,
international institutions or private sector actors -- were accepted by governments with
minimal discussion.
From outright rejection of Type II agreements, many
non-government participants at WSSD have been forced to accept that they will form part of
the Summit agreement. They have started lobbying for some sort of control over the
free-for-all process, with over 500 partnerships already registered, and more added
everyday. Several NGOs and UN agencies have also jumped onto the Type II gravy train,
choosing to overlook the dangers of endorsing a voluntary bilateral process at a
multilateral forum such as the WSSD.
Such partnerships take the world a step further away from
global implementation of the 'polluter pays' principle, where rich countries provide funds
to developing countries not out of charity, but instead as payment for using more than
their share of the common ecological resources.
Instead, Type II agreements will be riddled by the same
problems as existing aid projects, where donors decide priorities. Very few of the
registered partnerships so far have come from developing countries. There are already
fears that particularly with the involvement of corporate partners, these priorities could
range from promoting genetically modified products to privatisation of natural resources
in developing countries.
Besides their role in undermining the global process,
many other problems plauge the partnerships. Other than three pages of general guidelines,
there are no rules to ensure that the partnerships will actually work towards Agenda 21 or
the Millennium Development Goals, instead of undermining them. There is currently no
monitoring system in place. Although the US has suggested that the Commission for
Sustainable Development (CSD) be appointed the monitoring agency, CSD is unlikely to have
the capacity to oversee hundreds of projects among hundreds of partners.
There is also no guarantee that the partnerships bring
additional financial gain to developing countries. Instead, old projects are likely to be
repackaged. The Economic Cooperation Bureau of Japan has already announced during a Summit
press conference that they will be pulling out money pledged to the Global Fund for HIV,
TB and malaria to fund water and sanitation projects in the South Pacific.
"Governments do not need a multilateral forum like
the WSSD to announce bilateral partnerships," Narain said. "Instead of reducing
everything to a business proposition, they should focus this Summit on establishing fair
rules for sharing the limited resources of the Earth."
For more information, please contact: cse@cseindia.org |