Ποιειν Και Πραττειν - create and do

International relations - base line WSSD 2002

  1. International relations mediated through governments, NGOs: leading World opinions

The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) provided insights into world state affairs. 190 countries came together under the auspices of the United Nations in an effort to seek not merely global clarification about reference points with regards to both environment and development, but also consensus to translate governance into 'collective responsibility'. By all indications while the first part did work to some extent, the second aspect received but a lukewarm response from major actors, if at all. Significant was not merely the absence of President Bush (he delegated instead Secretary of State Powell), but an agreement of international institutions with the business entities of the world about the agenda. As such the absence of such an agenda that could generate further consensus was missing and consequently the outcomes of Johannesburg as predictable as the pre-negotiations left little room for anything but these outcomes.

Significant as outcome but with no measurable commitment was the pledge to eradicate world poverty. With it is connected the intention to do something especially about access to clean water and in turn about sanitation, including sewage and treatment of wastage reflected in 'dirty', 'polluted' and 'contaminated' water.

The naming of such a reality as a real threat to the world population is not self understood since different factors and causes contribute to this overall lack of drinking water which mankind needs next to air and other healthy conditions to survive on this earth.

Thus one aspect of poverty was touched upon and as such indicates the world of politics believes in simplification in order to get at least something done. The schematic administrative mind does not allow for much more complicated and complex thoughts when it comes to treating a combination of factors. There is, so the argumentation, the need for a focus on specific issues in order to increase the chances of successful implementation.

Yet there are more complicated factors that prevent people from reaching needed water sources. For example, there can prevail for some people denial or at least severe hindrance of access to land due to military occupation as the case of Israel with Palestinian territories. There needs also to be looked at the rate of water consumption or rather liters of water available on a daily, weekly, monthly and yearly basis to different population groups. It is said that while Palestinians have but 38 liters a day available, an average Israeli consumes 360 liters a day. This issue has been addressed at the summit with Jordan and Israel agreeing to do something about the danger of the DEAD SEA drying up due to too much water being tapped off before it can reach the sea. Altogether excessive water consumption e.g. for swimming pools compared to real needs for 'clean' water gives a very different angle to the story of the global situation concerning natural resources and what human beings need in 2002 to survive in not just any but fore mostly in an intelligent way.

Of interest is here that the Action Plan to be implemented after Johannesburg does speak about a production and consumption pattern that is not sustainable right now in this world, given economic growth prerequisites leading to a none sustainable development.  But this is the only one side of the issue. The other is that Johannesburg did not challenge really the reasons for such unsustainable development, but failed to retain a commitment to the model of sustainable development as developed already ten years ago at Rio. This model contained at least 260 indicators to be used when measuring progress in that direction. By not retaining and upholding the need for such a methodology of measurable outcomes, the summit in Johannesburg is more than a failure. As a matter of fact, it is an outright sabotage of any serious effort towards global governance based on collective responsibility expressed through the willingness to apply and to use the agreed upon indicators. As such it means the world is unwilling and unable to translate international relations into clear commitments for sustainable development in order to safeguard the future of this planet and its people.

When comparing the news bulletin before and after the world summit, then this outcome was more than just predictable:

Incoming news (as of August 15, 2002)

In view of what international investors define as their concern about specific economies, including that of the United States of America, the question of the world summit has been how to summon and to rally major and minor actors together so as to help create framework conditions for fruitful ‘coalitions of responsibilities’, in order to decrease world poverty and threats to human and natural resources as most outstanding contradictions to demands for policies, policy measures and commitments leading towards sustainable development.

Depending on how sustainable development is interpreted, clearly much depends when something has to go into effect e.g. when the nuclear industry will have to shut down their reactors (10, 15 or 30 years, for example, with prospects of further postponement always in the industry’s interest so as to avoid costs of change while having sufficient time to adapt to restructuring needs). This already reflects the degree to which measures agreed upon are in view of expectations by environmental and development NGO’s sufficient to conclude practical consequences would relieve the earth from pressures of increasing and indeed irreversible damages. Again damages and loss of resources enters also into the debate as a difficult term, that is when do governments, businesses, consumers, and different kinds of societies and their individuals have really to draw consequences and not continue as in the past wasting natural and human resources to the detriment of the future.

Outgoing news (middle September 2002)

It has become too silent. That cannot be attributed alone to the exhaustive trip, long nights and money spend on lobbying endlessly and yet getting stranded in site events. It was said that nearly 100 000 people went to Johannesburg. Some try to measure the non-committal success by presenting at least a few positive items such as Russia and Canada joining the ratification of the Kyoto agreement, while everyone pledges to reduce the sanitation risks for the poorest of all people on this planet. There is also the Action Plan with the United Nations standing there as the organization having brought about a surge of NGOs’ involvement around the globe in this process of trying to clarify the common issues of sustainable development. Most likely the indirect outcomes are the most important ones: the visibility of so many actors involved in a common cause and yet still searching for governance, peace and reduction in world poverty. Someone said in the International Herald Tribune (16.9.) that these values are the basis on which the American society stands on and subsequently there is an opportunity to reinforce that trend when there is no other threat on a global scale but this war against terrorism. Still, if Western Civilization realizes its values without imposing them upon others, a different sets of arguments have to be found to convince those politicians who appear to give everyone what they want in order to press home their very own issues and dictums. This makes the international partnership based on a ‘coalition of responsibilities’ less likely to be felt in practice as it became clear international relationships with 190 nations being involved do not follow a Western consensus model while being under threat of a United States ready to declare war against not only Afghanistan but also Iraq.


What remains as analysis of the outcome, and its possible impact upon international relationships, is the action plan to be implemented. Such declaration of intention without full commitment to a methodology allowing all partners to work with measurable indicators is almost meaningless. It shows that business interests enforced a maximum flexibility and left the rest of the world without a chance to even criticize inadequate measures taken, never mind obtain proof of developments having an adverse impact. This raises the question whether or not the key term, namely 'sustainable development' is really adequate, politically speaking, to bring about such world consensus that coalitions of responsibilities would ensure the implementation of a sensible plan.

Involvement of different actors (to be completed)



United Nations

European Union

World Bank

International Organisations

World Business Community


Agenda and negotiation / lobbying strategy combined with official delegations

"In Johannesburg it could be observed that business had not done only excellent lobby and PR work, but hat developed concepts and prepared themselves well for many interventions not only on main but many side issues. For this the political groups e.g. GREENS of the European Parliament, were not really prepared. Business no longer lobbies only from outside, but have become a part of the official delegations send by the various governments." - Juan Behrend, General Secretary of the GREENS of the European Parliament


There is also some explanation necessary as to why the outcomes of Johannesburg were not satisfactory.

Outcomes of Johannesburg have no real relevance to a global world marked by a new tendency to give war a higher priority than eradication of poverty. The Action Plan is also very weak in what it seeks to promote. The linkage with Agenda 21 is more nominal and symbolic rather than substantial. Real lessons out of the failure of Agenda 21 were not drawn.

United Nations - involvement, degree of responsibility and evaluation

Action Plan

WSSD working groups

Contacts made and impact upon international relations

International Actors

European Union

Access to the markets of the industrial states – here there is no unified position by the EU member states with France, Ireland and Spain (in part) having objections to alterations in EU subsidies for agriculture.

It is said that OECD countries spend yearly 335 Billion Dollars on subsidies for agriculture.

Web: www.globesa.org

GREENS of the European Parliament criticized the EU delegation as

a)      favouring too much trade issues at the neglect of environmental ones

b)      lacking co-ordination and therefore not being as effective in final negotiations


In their letter to the editor of the European Voice, Margot Wallstroem, Commissioner for Environment and Poul Nielson, Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid wrote:

“We were surprised to read your article in last week’s issue (‘Greens hit out at Wallstroem-Nielson split’) suggesting a division between us and between the Commission’s services, during the Johannesburg Summit. As will have been obvious to anyone associated with, or genuinely following the negotiations, nothing could be further from the truth.” (European Voice, 12 – 19 September 2002)

They go on saying that the Commission put a lot of effort in preparing for the summit and spoke there with ‘a strong voice’ when it came to articulate the EU position at the Johannesburg meeting. Given the fact that both development and environment were on the agenda, they had to be addressed equally.

They continue to argue that “this was crucial in pushing the EU agenda in the context of reluctance from other developed countries, and to finally secure agreement on a target for providing sanitation to the world’s poor – just one important example of the EU objectives achieved at the summit.

Although we would have liked to see an even more ambitious global agreement to further sustainable development in Johannesburg, including on concrete targets for increasing the share of renewable energy, the WSSD outcome was a good result for the Commission and EU. This outcome would not have been possible without the lead taken by a well co-ordinated Commission working closely with the Danish presidency. This is what we both personally experienced in Johannesburg: an excellent partnership and a smoothly functioning negotiating team.”

(European Voice, 12 – 19 September 2002)

Juan Behrend reported that the conference the GREENS held together with the Heinrich Boell Foundation in Johannesburg was very successful. Unfortunately not much of that came across due to bad internet connections. Like everyone else, they had Mr. Toepfer as one of the key speakers.


Political groups in the European Parliament


More reports are needed to assess the work of the political groups in Johannesburg, that is whether or not it they went beyond mere stating of opinions articulated already on many other occasions in various contexts. For the European position at global level it was also a test for going beyond mere security interests to define another world agenda.





The role of the Greens in the German coalition government with the Social Democrats has been subject to many forms of evaluations and criticisms after four years of being in governmental responsibility. The key issue for the GREENS in 1998 was the ending of the nuclear power stations since the waste they produce contradicts any notion of sustainability. Contaminated uranium are burdens that should no longer be handed on to future generations. Robert Jungk’s dictum, “The future has already began”, after the first testing of nuclear bombs in the desert of Nevada, impregnated the peace movement leading to the formation of the GREENS and convinced everyone here a ‘no’ must be articulated first of all.

In preparing for the World Summit other issues became important in the general news: renewable energies, biodiversity and genetically engineered food. The protection of the consumer became an expression of a desire for ecological food and a new agricultural reform while food scandals in England but also in Belgium, Germany and elsewhere reflected the problem of honesty in the business when it comes to recycle old food stuffs e.g. olive oil used for cooking remade into food stuffs for animals and thereby spreading other forms of contamination. All that has been accompanied by greater awareness for the forest but also what recycling means for products no longer used i.e. paper, glass, batteries, no longer used cars. Over and again political protest erupted once the atomic rubbish had to be transported from nuclear power stations to temporary or final storage places: converted former mine fields underground. There have been at issue also the oceans and not merely over fishing, but also oil spillage due to use of old ships no longer satisfying reasonable safety standards. Usually accidents of these kind would stand big in the newspapers with local inhabitants working frantically to save fishes and birds from the spreading oil slicks, but also tourist operators would fear about loss of revenues when the beaches were considered to be no longer safe for swimming. A Greek who went with two other fellows by dingy from Athens via Marseilles to Stockholm described how much unbelievable amount of rubbish is swimming in the sea everywhere: the ocean as waste bin.


Behind the GREEN movement with its concern for environmental issue there looms a larger issue. It is a part of an inherent philosophy not yet clearly articulated in political terms. Since it has to include concern for nature as a cultural landscape, a new approach is needed. It has to be an interdisciplinary and cultural approach in order to include the poet’s voices speaking about living conditions in cities. Any future political program must thereby include cross-references to architecture, planning, transportation while dealing with the international, that is global impacts of recent economic development.

As this can be discussed in terms of how space is used and what kind of investments are made, it should be clear that Germany faces here within the scope of the Structural Fund / Spatial Policy specific problems. For instance, there are the many investments made literally on the Green meadows in Eastern Germany after 1989. These became a popular measure due to tax incentives, but also in order to do away with all kinds of restrictions for building activities, if investments were to be located within existing urban centers.

Action at International level: e.g. World Summit on Sustainable Development

Germany contributed through the Heinrich Boell Foundation to facilitating reports, synthesis of NG Os’ opinions working together with the United Nations, while attempting to bring other governments on a similar course called by Chancellor Schroeder an ecological sensitivity with economic solidarity.


Before the summit:


Juergen Trittin, in an interview with the Sueddeutsche, 17.Juli 2002, speaks before the world conference in Johannesburg about ‘not having reached yet the peak of the mountain, but neither is the conference down the drain’. He implies certain positions of the Europeans, Americans and developing countries may jeopardize the outcome. The key issue for the developing countries, in his view, is the access to the markets of the richer countries who subsidize their specific economic sectors, in particular agriculture. There is the matter of increasing the percentage of ‘renewable energies’ in use, while the overall drive appears to be towards ‘measurable commitments’ as binding agreements at global scale.

Specifically the German government proposes to increase the amount of renewable energies up to 15 percent.

It is recognized that a critical situation exists for that part of the world population that has no access to sanitary infrastructures nor basic drinking water.

As for access to market, two criteria are used in the argumentation: distortion of competition and damage to the environment.


Measurable commitments – the key issue:


Juergen Trittin:

Johannesburg can become the departure point for a measurable development towards a sustainable world policy. It can also begin the end of the development since Rio.



Statement of Jürgen Trittin as to the results of Johannesburg


4. September 2002

4. September 2002

”Meine Damen und Herren,

die Bundesrepublik Deutschland hat sich sehr frühzeitig dafür eingesetzt, zehn
Jahre nach der großen Konferenz für Umwelt und Entwicklung in Rio de Janeiro in
Johannesburg neue Ziele und auch neue Aktionsprogramme zu vereinbaren, um aus
dem, was damals erklärt worden ist, ein Stück mehr Umsetzung zu erreichen. Es hat andere Kräfte gegeben, die im Vorfeld dieser Konferenz erklärt haben, auf keinen Fall würden sie neue Ziele in Johannesburg akzeptieren, weil sie diesen Prozess einer international vereinbarten Umwelt- und Entwicklungspolitik so nicht mittragen wollten.

“ Ladies and Gentlemen,


The Federal Republic of Germany has made initiated steps already at an early stage, to come ten years after the big conference on environment and development in Rio de Janeiro in Johannesburg to an agreement about new goals and also new action programs, in order to make that, what had been declared at that time, into something being applied a bit more. There existed other forces, which had declared in advance of this conference, that they would under no circumstances  accept new goals, because they did not wish to support in such a way the process towards a international commitment on environmental and development policy.

Wenn wir an dieser Ausgangslage die Ergebnisse messen, stellen wir fest:
Es ist gelungen, in bestimmten Bereichen neue Ziele zu vereinbaren. Im Bereich der biologischen Vielfalt soll bis 2010 der Rückgang des Artenreichtums deutlich reduziert werden. Hier ist gleichzeitig darauf zu achten, dass die Entwicklungsländer, die Leistungen erbringen, tatsächlich dann auch einen entsprechenden Ausgleich erhalten. Bis zum Jahr 2015 soll die anhaltende Vernichtung der Weltfischbestände reduziert werden.

If we measure the results against the initial basis, they we can maintain:

There have been achieved in certain areas to come to an agreement about new goals. In the area of biodiversity there should be halted by 2010 in a significant way the reduction of biodiversity. Here it is noteworthy to see that the developing countries who must achieve here the most, shall also receive for doing so compensation. By 2015 the continuous destruction of fish numbers shall also be reduced.

Aber es sind nicht nur neue Ziele definiert worden, sondern es sind mit neuen Zielen auch Aktionsprogramme und Geldmittel definiert worden. Das beste Beispiel ist hier der Bereich der sanitären Grundversorgung. Bis zum Jahre 2015 soll der Anteil der Menschen, die keinen Zugang zu sauberem Wasser haben, die keinen Zugang zu einer angemessenen Abwasserbehandlung haben, halbiert werden.
Das sind immerhin eine Milliarde Menschen, die so zu sauberem Wasser und einer vernünftigen Abwasserbehandlung gebracht werden sollen.
Dieses soll durch gemeinsame Aktionsprogramme geschehen. Allein für diese Aktionsprogramme wird die Europäische Union 1,4 Milliarden Euro in den nächsten Jahren zur Verfügung stellen. Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland beteiligt sich dabei in einer Größenordnung von 350 Millionen Euro.


But not only new goals have been defined, but along with these new goals there have been defined also action programmes and financial means. The best example is here the sanitary basic measure. By 2015 the number of people who have no access to clean water, who have no adequate access to appropriate sewage water treatment, shall be halved. That is after all one billion human beings who should by then have clean water and a reasonable water sewage treatment. It should be brought about by these action programmes. Alone for these action programmes the European Union wants to make available 1,4 Billion Euros in the coming years. The Republic of Germany shall participate in this programme with an amount of 350 Million Euro.

Es ist auch gelungen, ein Thema, das lange Zeit gar nicht auf die Tagesordnung sollte auf die Tagesordnung zu setzen: nämlich die Frage, die für eine Entwicklung Schlüsselfrage ist, des Zugangs zu Energie und hier die Förderung der erneuerbaren Energien. Es ist zwar nicht gelungen, ein quantifizierbares Ziel für den Anteil erneuerbarer Energien zu vereinbaren, aber es ist sichergestellt, dass der Anteil erneuerbarer Energien deutlich erhöht werden soll, und diese Vorgabe in den kommenden Jahren regelmäßig auf ihre tatsächliche Realisierung überprüft werden soll.

There was also achieved something, namely to put something on the agenda that had not been planned to be put on the table: that is the question which is a key question for any development with here access to energy and there the promotion of renewable energy. It was impossible to achieve a quantifiable goal for the proportionate part of renewable energies, but it has been made certain, that the part of renewable energies should be noticeably increased and this directive shall be monitored in the coming years on a regular basis as to factual implementation.

So bitter es ist, dass es an dieser Stelle nicht zu einer Vereinbarung über feste Quoten gekommen ist. Eines hat der Bundeskanzler mit seiner Rede in Johannesburg deutlich gemacht: Wir werden dieses nicht nur proklamieren, sondern mit der Einberufung einer internationalen Konferenz zu Erneuerbaren Energien, die in Bonn stattfinden wird, einen Impuls für die Entwicklung erneuerbarer Energien geben, was für die Sicherung der Energieversorgung der 2 Milliarden Menschen, die keinen Zugang zu Strom haben, eine Schlüsselfrage ist. Wir werden allein dafür in den nächsten fünf Jahren als Bundesrepublik Deutschland 500 Millionen Euro für die Förderung erneuerbarer Energien in den Entwicklungsländern und 500 Millionen Euro für die Verbesserung der Energieeffizienz - gerade in den Entwicklungsländern - zur Verfügung stellen.


As bitter it is that no agreement in this matter was reached on fixed quotas. One thing was made clear by the Chancellor in his speech in Johannesburg: we shall not merely proclaim this, but call for an international conference with the theme ‘renewable energies’ to take place in Bonn. It will give an impulse for the development of renewable energies, a key question for 2 billion people on how to secure access to energy supply, that is people who have no electricity. Alone Germany will provide over the next five years 500 Million Euro for the promotion of renewable energies in the developing countries and 500 Millionen Euro for improving the energy deficit – in particular in developing countries.

Bei all dem ist es uns auch gelungen, Rückschritte, die andere angestrebt haben, etwa, dass man internationale Umweltabkommen kompatibel machen wollte zu den Regeln der Welthandelsorganisation, zu vermeiden und statt dessen an dem festzuhalten, was auf der letzten Welthandelskonferenz in Doha vereinbart worden ist, nämlich eine Gleichrangigkeit und ein Abstimmen zwischen multilateralen Umweltabkommen und den Regeln der Welthandelsorganisation.

In view of all of this we succeeded as well to prevent a step back as others tried to evoke, since as for instance, some wanted to make the international agreement on the Environment compatible with the rules of the World Trade Organisation and instead retain what was last agreed upon at the world trade conference in Doha, namely an equal ranking and an equalization between multilateral environmental treaties and the rules of the WTO.

Schließlich ist für den Klimaschutz hier weltweit von dieser Konferenz ein wichtiges Signal ausgegangen: Russland und Kanada haben beide erklärt, dass sie das Kyoto-Protokoll ratifizieren wollen. Mit der Ankündigung Russlands ist klar: Auch gegen die Zurückhaltung und die Widerstände, die Einzelne nach wie vor diesem Protokoll entgegengebracht haben, wird es in Kraft treten. Es wird nicht aufgehalten werden. Und zweitens. Mit der Ankündigung Kanadas wird erstmalig auch auf dem nordamerikanischen Kontinent ein Land das Kyoto-Protokoll ratifizieren. Gleichzeitig werden dort die Unternehmen von den Vorteilen,die dieses Protokoll bietet, etwa im Bereich des Klimaschutzes in anderen Ländern über den "clean development-mechanism" profitieren. Das wird den Druck auf Andere auf diesem Kontinent, die hier sehr zurückhaltend sind, erhöhen.

Finally this conference did send out an important signal with regards to climate protection: Russia and Canada have declared that they would ratify the Kyoto-Agreement. With the declaration of Russia one thing is clear: despite the reservations and resistance of some still against this agreement, it shall be implemented. It will not be delayed any longer. And secondly, with the declaration by Canada we have for the first time also a country from the North America continent ratifying the Kyoto-protocol. At the same time, the enterprises shall profit from the advantages that the “clean development-mechanisms” offer in the other countries. That will increase the pressure upon others on this continent who have been until now very much reserved towards this protocol.


Insofern würde ich in der Bilanz sagen: Wir sind einen Schritt vorangegangen. Wenn es nach uns gegangen wäre, dann wäre es noch einen Schritt weitergegangen. Aber wir haben einen Konsens von 190 Staaten zu organisieren. Wir haben gerade durch die Rede des Bundeskanzlers deutlich gemacht hat, dass wir dazu stehen:
Wir wollen tatsächlich umsetzen und nicht in erster Linie Erklärungen abgeben.”

Insofar I would say in the balance: we did take a step in the right direction. If it had been going according to us, then we would have taken still another step. But we have to organise a consensus of 190 states. Precisely through the speech of the cancellor we made plain, that we stand to this: we do want to actually implement and not just give in the first place merely statements.

Preparatory Failures or Strategic ways of securing specific interest articulations:


Example of ‘coalition of responsibility'

The United States opposed this term while efforts were made in Germany to bring together government, NGOs and business sector’, in order to go to Johannesburg with a joint declaration. This failed after business and NGOs would not agree on what would be a common position in Johannesburg.


“Umwelt Erklaerkung gescheitert”  /

‘Declaration for Environment failed’


These were the News headline in Sueddeutsche, Thursday, July 18, 2002 – that is ahead of the world summit in a year when German federal elections are due.


The report indicates a failure of a central project by the German government. It means that there shall be no joint declaration by the Union of Industry together with the Environmental Groups. At stake is how to enrich and substantiate further the concept of enterprises and industry wishing to contribute towards sustainable development on a basis of self-responsibility rather than through regulation and governmental interferences in economic activities and business practices. This was also an overall concern of business interest when pressing home voluntary rather than regulatory measures.


Consequently business launched an image making campaign e.g. BMW with the new one liter car, something Joschka Fischer praised during his election rally in Leipzig, 31.August 2002. Yet such symbolic gestures do not alter as of yet the gasoline consuming car manufacturing business. Instead there was clear evidence of the World Summit being co-opted by business creating for itself the image of being ‘clean’ and ‘pro environmental’, lessening rather than intensifying the pressure upon governments to do something about the CO 2 emission.


Organizations involved in Germany:


Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie (BDI), President Michael Rogowski

Trade Union, e.g. Verband der Chemischen Industrie (VCI)


Origin of this initiative

Initiative of Business together with Trade Unions and Environmental- and Development Associations wanted to take further considerations for environmental concerns especially when it comes to foreign investments abroad.

Originally the participants wanted to present a concept for sustainable economic development based on following agreements:

-         acceptance of responsibilities

-         application of the best technology

-         observance to environmental protection laws

-         improved protection of workers especially in case of investments abroad


The consensus seemed to be there but then the environmental associations wished that observance of this agreement be not monitored by the enterprises themselves, but by an independent body (unabhaengige Gutachter – independent evaluators). The Associations were also wishing that self-declared responsibilities be transformed over time into legal obligations.

Both points were not accepted by BDI since it had nothing to do with self-responsible concepts.

BDI demanded also that the Ministry for Economy would also sign the agreement but since January 2002 Minister Werner Mueller had departed from these talks.

Juergen Trittin managed to persuade the Environmental Associations to take back their demands.

The Chancellor’s office also put pressure upon the Ministry for the Economy to support this momentum towards self-responsible commitments (also Schroeder exerted some pressure behind the scenes).


Position of the BDI:

“ The environmental organizations have withdrawn their demands, but they aim to articulate them again at the world summit in Johannesburg. Therefore, the trust in working together has been substantially disturbed.”


Trittin’s criticism of the Economic Association of German Industry:

“When today the BDI does not accept today what the Union of Chemical Industry has accepted in May, then that has something to do with the politically orientated leadership at the top of the BDI. It will damage the reputation of German industry abroad.”


Predictability as to the outcome

German government – Ministry for Environment / BMU

Declaration in advance indicate:

-         German government wishes together with the European Union that Johannesburg is not a failure, but rather bring about concrete action programs especially in the fields of renewable energies / energy coefficients / water / sanitary measures, efficient economies and eco-efficiency and life cycle economy

-         Wishes to use the summit to demonstrate a balance of its four years of co-ordinated policy: Environment, Energy and Agriculture which altogether make up a policy for sustainability

-         The Federal Government of Germany recognises that international and national climate policy is not one of the core issues when negotiations shall begin in Johannesburg; rather it is an independent process within the framework of the climate convention. Nevertheless on the background of the natural catastrophes (flood waters), there exists in Germany a high level of expectations that the summit will give a clear indication. Here ratification of the Kyoto Protocol is top priority. Expectations thereof are directed primarily towards Russia to ratify the protocol still this year.

-         The declaration contains furthermore a pledge to work together with the European Partners to achieve in Johannesburg the commitment towards climate relevant energy policy goals e.g. higher energy efficiency in the case of energy conversions, distribution and usage, including application of such technologies that have low emissions when using flammable resources as well as to attain a more effective use of traditional biomass.

-         The Federal Government pursues especially the goal, to have by 2010 the portion of renewable energy up to 15% and within the OECD states to increase their proportion by 2% compared with 1990. In order to secure the implementation of these goals, the Federal Government demands from its European partners to work out



The text declares further that:

"Aside from the important topics of a sustainable Energy policy, the Federal Government of Germany engages itself for such agreements - new goals - that guarantee access to basic sanitary services (e.g. treatment of sewage water); that turn around the tendency towards loss of resources and of bio-diversity and for such action programs that need still to be worked out, in order to provide access to clean water and to sustainable production and consumption patterns.


Besides these political results of the world summit, that should be approved in Johannesburg (Political Declaration and Action Plan, socalled "Type I outcomes"), there will be prepared "Type II outcomes" for the summit. These are the voluntary partnerships and initiatives for sustainable development, that serve the purpose to secure concrete implementation of individual aspects of political decisions and determined their conceptualization and realisation, and that should correspond to the basic declarations that have been approved already.


The Federal Government participates in a number of "Type Two" Initiatives, for one together with the EU, for another with NGOs. For example, Germany participates in the EU Initiative "Energy for Fighting Poverty and for Sustainable Development", and started such initiatives as - e.g. BMU: Initiative for the introduction on the market of  solar thermal power stations; CO2-free after Johannesburg (also as example for a Type II/CDM), BMZ: within the frame of bilateral co-operation - and support among others the construction of a world wide network for existing Energy agents under the  co-ordination of UNEP. "




United States of America


Official delegates from the United States appear to have difficulties with binding commitments.



July 26, 2002

Groups encouraged to sign NGO Statement for World Summit on Sustainable Development

Washington, DC - US NGOs, citizen and public interest groups are asking for your signature to a statement addressing critical priorities and concerns about the positions and actions of the U.S. government at the upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa next month.  Originally produced and delivered at a press conference last month in Bali, Indonesia at the final preparatory meeting for the Summit, the statement responds to the question asked throughout the two weeks of the meeting:  "What are we going to do about the United States?"

This question, repeating an informal comment by Chairman Emil Salim during the meeting, reflects the frustration of people seriously concerned with a decade of increasing environmental degradation, deepening poverty, and corporate irresponsibility not effectively being addressed by world leaders, especially the United States.  At the same time, the US administration is presenting itself as a global leader in sustainability and good governance. In reality, it means bending the definition of sustainable development to fit its own agenda of deregulation, privatisation, voluntary approaches by corporations, and a refusal to ratify and support key international environmental agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol and Biodiversity Convention.

Therefore, US groups working for the public interest want to make it clear to the news media and the American people that they are seriously concerned about the lack of leadership by the US government on sustainable development, as seen in both its policies and its performance at the Summit.

The signed statement will be sent to President Bush and Secretary of State Powell just before the Summit begins.

To add your organization or name to the NGO statement:  "What Are We Going to Do About the United States? A Call for Leadership on Sustainability" go to


For more information about the statement and campaign, contact:
Citizens Network for Sustainable Development at info@citnet.org

For more information about the World Summit on Sustainable Development, go to www.citnet.org/worldsummit
and also the official UN website for the WSSD at www.johannesburgsummit.org




David McNicoll reports 17.7.2002 that Canada has still not issued an official negotiation position although but one month away from the Summit, and this after 10 Reports on this subject. The question is whether or not this has to do with the wish to keep the key cards close the chest before showing one’s hand at the negotiation round table.


WSSD Information, 25.7.2002


“The Government of Canada has donated more than R1,5 million to the WSSD
Civil Society Secretariat to enable NGOs to build a consensus before the
Johannesburg summit. The donation will be used to hold four provincial
and one national workshop in South Africa. Two sector specific workshops
for the youth and indigenous groups will also be sponsored. Canada
considers the participation of civil society central to making the
summit inclusive and representative. The workshops will enable South
African NGOs to play a leading role during the summit on issues such as
Agenda 21, Women and Development, Nepad and Globalization. The donation
will strengthen the Secretariat's ability to coordinate the involvement
of African and international NGOs in the WSSD preparatory processes and
to ensure an effective communication strategy to make the voice of civil
society heard.”


In Johannesburg:


The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development of Canada
invited to a panel discussion on governance mechanisms and
their importance in ensuring accountability for sustainable development:

”Making Sure Things Get Done: Governance, Accountability and Strategies”

For Sustainable Development

29 August 2002, 16:00 * 17:30

Ubuntu Village, Conference Centre, Room D

Information: "Charest, Helene" chareshe@oag-bvg.gc.ca>


Canadian presentation at the summit focused on following priorities:

-         in search of tools used for integrating

-         National sustainable development strategies sustainable development concepts into government policies and programs


While the key issue in relation to experiences made with regards to the mechanisms in place to measure progress towards sustainability is signified by the ‘critical importance’ given to ‘building accountability into the design and implementation of strategies and institutions’.


Canada has a Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. Crucial would be to find out what system Canada has implemented for monitoring and reporting on the state and progress of Canada's federal sustainable development strategies.


Ms. Johanne Gélinas

Canada's Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development


Other contact:

The Honourable David Anderson,

P.C., M.P. Canada's Minister of the Environment and President of the UNEP Governing Council


(for further information contact address for summit was Darlene Pearson at:

Fax: (+1 613) 941.8286

Email: darlene.pearson@oag-bvg.gc.ca





Praise for Russia and Canada

from Juergen Trittin, Environmental Minister of Germany



“Schließlich ist für den Klimaschutz hier weltweit von dieser Konferenz ein wichtiges Signal ausgegangen: Russland und Kanada haben beide erklärt, dass sie das Kyoto-Protokoll ratifizieren wollen. Mit der Ankündigung Russlands ist klar: Auch gegen die Zurückhaltung und die Widerstände, die Einzelne nach wie vor diesem Protokoll entgegengebracht haben, wird es in Kraft treten. Es wird nicht aufgehalten werden. Und zweitens. Mit der Ankündigung Kanadas wird erstmalig auch auf dem nordamerikanischen Kontinent ein Land das Kyoto-Protokoll ratifizieren. Gleichzeitig werden dort die Unternehmen von den Vorteilen,die dieses Protokoll bietet, etwa im Bereich des Klimaschutzes in anderen Ländern über den "clean development-mechanism" profitieren. Das wird den Druck auf Andere auf diesem Kontinent, die hier sehr zurückhaltend sind, erhöhen.”


"For climate protection an important signal was given in Johannesburg: both Russia and Canada have declared that they will ratify the Kyoto protocol. With the announcement of Russia it is evident that the protocol shall be implemented despite the reservations and resistance of some states. It cannot be stopped now. And secondly, with the announcement of Canada there will have ratified for the first time a state of the North American continent the Kyoto protocol. At the same time, enterprises in those countries will profit from the advantages this protocol offers, for example in the area of climate protection in other countries via the "clean development mechanism". That shall increase the pressure for those who have been reluctant to join until now."



Latin America


The innovative content on sustainable development of the mayority of the national constitutions of Latin America is available. A comparison of them with the Earth Charter is offered in Spanish at: www.earthcharter.org (resources ; essays...)





Arabic World


United Arab Emirates Delegation to the World Summit on Sustainable Development Media Advisory

Abu Dhabi Global Environmental Data Initiative

Main Speakers:


During the Johannesburg Summit, there was held a meeting on 2.9 to show both data and what framework conditions exist in Arabic countries with regards to impacts of recent development upon the environment. Contact person then was Nick Nuttall, Head of Media (Tel. 27 11 (0) 72 5338239


Of significance is the

Israeli NGO Shadow Report to the Government of Israel’s Assessment of Progress in Implementing Agenda 21.

Bali Prepcom Brief, June 2002:

because it provides insights into a whole range of issues that become identifiable the moment a portion of collective responsibility makes itself felt in a strive towards new forms of governance.


“Introduction on the Country

Israel is a relatively small country of 20,330 square kilometers and a population of 6.3 million people. It is part of the Asian continent, bordered by the Mediterranean to the west, the West Bank / Palestinian Territories and Rift Valley / Jordan to the east, Lebanon and Syria and higher mountain ranges are to the north and the desert of the Negev, the Gaza Strip and the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula are to the south. The Mediterranean coastal plain, the central hills and the Rift Valley dominate the landscape. From sea level at the Mediterranean, the hinterland climbs quickly to 1,000 meters and then dramatically drops to the lowest point on earth at the Dead Sea at minus 417 meters below sea level.

Israel is located at a biogeographical crossroads, a meeting point for fauna and flora that originate from three different continents: Europe, Asia and Africa. The north of Israel can receive 1,000 mm of precipitation annually while the south dominated by the Negev desert and constituting 60% of the land mass can receive as little as 100 mm rainfall annually. Due to the Rift Valley, Israel is situated in the most important bird migration route in the eastern hemisphere, which increases the country's biodiversity even more.


Israel’s people are diverse: some 80% are of Jewish descent and some 20% are Arab -Moslems, Christians and Druze. Israel has the highest percentage of its population of any country in the world born elsewhere, mostly Jewish immigrants arriving from all continents on the globe. Israel was created by a controversial 1947 United Nations resolution that decided to divide Mandatory Palestine into two states. This was followed by wars and conflict in the region that have tragically continued to this day at great loss of life to Israel and her neighbors.

Process used for the Shadow Report


At a meeting of Life and Environment an Umbrella organization of most Israeli environmental organizations in early 2001, the suggestion was first raised that it could be effective to pressure the Israeli government to advance environmental issues in Israel by producing a Shadow Report to that prepared by the government and to be presented at the Johannesburg Summit.


These first and subsequent meetings were attended by some 20 different Israeli environmental and social NGOs who decided that different NGOs would prepare a critique of the Government Report according to the different Agenda 21 issues and the field of their expertise. An NGO steering committee and working groups were created.



The objectives sought to advance by producing the Shadow Report include:


The Israeli NGO Shadow Report is pluralistic, representing different approaches, different methodologies, with no attempt to reach consensus. However, there was a decision that the chapters would focus on issues of environmental justice and sustainability.


The report is divided into three sections. An introduction produced in three languages (Hebrew, Arabic and English), seven chapters dealing with the social and economic dimensions of Agenda 21 and eight chapters dealing with natural resource issues.

Highlights of Shadow Report Chapters

Education for a Sustainable Society in Israel:

Public Participation in the Formulation of Policy and Decision-Making:

Minorities in Israel:

Combating Poverty:


Protecting and Promoting Public Health:


Cultivating Environmental Awareness through Art:


Air Pollution, Global Warming & Ozone Depletion:

Conservation of Biological Diversity:

Regional and International Cooperation:

Water in Israel in light of Agenda 21:

Environmental Planning and Sustainable Development of Land Resources:

The Mediterranean Coast:

Environmentally Sound Management of Solid Waste:

Population and Consumption:



At different levels all chapters of the Shadow Report ask if Israeli society is on the road to sustainability? A comparison between Agenda 21, the Government Report, and the NGO Shadow Report concludes that Israel is not. Though a great deal of knowledge and expertise exists, this has yet to be translated in Israel into environmental awareness. Though there exists a sense of what needs to be done and how to go about doing it, there are institutional impediments often due to a lack of political will to implement change.


The lack of political will prevents the adoption of a comprehensive vision of a sustainable society and guiding policies advocating for sustainability.  Development is overwhelmingly the predominant ethos in Israel, with environmental and social aspects of development little taken into consideration. In Israel, in general, the environment is noticed only when it presents problems and hazards and then responsible agencies engage in ‘stomping out fires’. Ultimately the environment and its advocates are turned into impediments of development with the consequences that; the status of environmental professionals is weakened; the demise of planning institutions occurs; the erosion of capacities and enthusiasm takes place; the public is discouraged from participation; enforcement is lax, even when progressive legislation exists and there is a fragmentation of environmental efforts and mechanisms.


The Government Report in fact identifies many of these failings and to its credit it is very self-critical.  But the Government Report, prepared by the Ministry of the Environment, reflects the deep lack of political will in Israel for sustainability, as the Report itself is unable to even recommend an agenda for change to place Israel on track. Because the Ministry of Environment in Israel is so powerless it can’t even suggest changes to correct the situation, as it knows that these would be most certainly defeated.


The challenge before all those advocating for sustainability in Israel is to help create the necessary political will that would advance adoption of a comprehensive sustainability agenda in Israel. The contribution of the NGO Shadow Report to this process is to identify the issue of environmental justice in Israel as a catalyst for political awakening and coalition building in favor of sustainability. “



Jordan and Israel - joint annoucement with regards to the DEAD SEA

Already under Rabin a joint planning and peace project was formulated to bring together Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority. The project was meant to safeguard the natural resources around the DEAD SEA and at the same time to ensure that this lake more than 400 meters below the earth surface does not evaporate, that is dry up. As significant this kind of agreement is, the exclusion of the Palestinian Authority suggests also that under present political circumstances there is no or little chance for co-operation at communal level nor between NGOs from all three meant to be partners when set up originally.







In Iran, V.S. Naipaul writes, land until the oil boom completely worthless, has been transformed into speculative matters bringing up some people very quickly to the level of high richness, but who were punished during the Revolution starting with Chomeiny’s return to Iran in 1978. Since then the neglect of the environment has been detrimental to both the health of the poorer classes while the privileges of those who could afford it elongates the inequality in use of space and natural resources. The typical urban patterns found all over the world, and exemplified by Johannesburg, are repeated here as well. As of yet there is little to go on what reform of governmental institutions would mean in terms of a state having plundered all richness of the land and not found an equivalent of enlightened development starting with proper education in terms of balance between man and nature. The question is what key concepts can prevail in a society marked in the past by the ‘Asiatic mode of production’ (this is written in memory of what Rudi Dutschke said in one of his last appearances during a conference in Berlin with the theme ‘no future’, and which was attended as well by Michel Foucault), that is a highly centralised version of the economy giving power to those who can lend money to the state in order to undertake the costly irrigation systems. The technology of these irrigation systems was too sophisticated and too expensive for individual farmers to share either individually or collectively the burden of investment and upkeep. The state created the land aristocracy (land for money exchange) in order to raise the necessary capital.

The economy under the reign of the Shah had permitted the bazaar to operate like a market and stock market in one and the same function. This was illegalised immediately after Chomeiny came to power. Since then the functioning of the state under religious control of the Mullah leaves no clear economic perspective.

Again Naipaul writes in ‘Beyond Belief’ how much the economy and the environment was ruined by the 8 year war against Iraq.


The Canadian delegation to the World Summit had invited to one of their side events to speak about the environmental situation in Iran. It was not confirmed in time if he made his appearance.

Dr. Massoumeh Ebtekar

Vice-president of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Head, Department of the






United Nations University report calls for a system-wide assessment of
international governance institutions


Tokyo, Japan
released a new report today entitled "International Sustainable Development
international cooperation and institutional responses to sustainable
development continue to grow rapidly, progress remains slow. This report
examines how changes in international institutions
between them
It is the first to assess carefully previous proposals and attempts to
reform the existing governance system.

As thousands prepare to gather in Johannesburg, South Africa for the World
Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), this report offers thoughtful and
specific policy proposals about governance to be incorporated into the
debate. Governance is a key component of effective policies for sustainable
development. To protect and preserve the natural environment, institutions
at all levels must better reflect the link between environmental problems
and the underlying economic and social issues that likely led to them. The
success of the WSSD will depend on careful consideration of institutional

"International Sustainable Development Governance" represents a final
summary of the collaborative efforts and research of a core group of
scholars around the globe. Their collective work focuses on identifying the
gaps and weaknesses within the current system of international environmental
and evaluating concrete proposals aimed at strengthening the existing

³Institutional reform has long been discussed as a way to improve the
environment and promote development,² said Bradnee Chambers, Senior
Programme Coordinator of the Institute of Advanced Studies and a contributor
to the report, ³but a system-level analysis is needed in the same way that
assessment on climate change (e.g. IPCC) or other ecosystems are carried
before inter-governmental negotiations take place. This research offers some
important insights on the steps needed to undertake those reforms.²

The report closely examines a number of issues central to future reforms of
international environmental governance. These include:

*     A pragmatic approach to linking environmental treaties which share
common objectives and functions, sometimes known as clustering. (e.g.
linking CBD and FCCC)

*     The strengths and weaknesses of both a centralised and a decentralised
approach to international environmental governance, including the possible
creation of a World Environment Organisation.

*     An evaluation of the roles of certain institutions that are often
considered to be key in facilitating a balance between the economic, social
and environmental pillars of sustainable development.

*      An integrated policy approach that builds on linkages between
different environmental and economic governance for more effective financing
for sustainable development.

*      Methods for creating more enfranchisement for civil society in
intergovernmental processes and a call on advocates of more NGO involvement
in these processes to define their ultimate target.

The large scope of the report is an attempt to map the landscape of
international governance structures for sustainable development. ³It is this
kind of broad vision that is needed for effective reform,² said Chambers.

The report can be downloaded from


For more information and copies of the report, please contact:
United Nations University/Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU/IAS)
Toshie Honda honda@ias.unu.edu or
W. Bradnee Chambers chambers@ias.unu.edu
Tel: +81­3­5467­2323, Fax: +81­3­5467­2324
or pick one up from the UNU stand in Ubuntu Village.


Kristen Elsby
Dissemination Coordinator
United Nations University
Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU/IAS)
Email kristen@ias.unu.edu
URL http://www.ias.unu.edu

The Development Day:INVITATION

Date: Sunday, 01 September 2002
Time: 11:00-17:30
Venue: Japan Pavilion, Ubuntu Village

We have the pleasure of inviting you to attend the Development Day at the
World Summit on Sustainable Development, Ubuntu Village.
Entrance to The Development Day symposium is free of charge.

PROGRAM the DEVELOPMENT DAY – 1 September 2002

Global Transmission of “East Asian Development Approach”

1)   Outcome of the Initiative for Development in East Asia
Ms. Yoriko Kawaguchi, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Japan.
Dr. Dante B. Canlas - Director-General of National Economic Development
Authority, Philippines
Dr. Zephirin Diabre – Associate Administrator of UNDP

2)   Asian Dynamism and Vietnam’s Model for Growth Oriented Poverty
Prof. Izumi Ohno - National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies Japan.

Growth Driven by Trade, Investment and Economic Cooperation - The East Asian
Experience in Economic Development and Cooperation

1)   Presentation - Prof. Kenich Ohno - National Graduate Institute for
Policy Studies Japan.

2)   Panel Discussion led by:
Mr. Yoshihiko Sumi - Director-General International Finance and Economic
Cooperation; METI (Moderator)
Prof. Jeffrey Sachs - Columbia University.
Dr. Narongchai Akrasanee - former Minister of Commerce in Thailand (To be
Mr. Xian Zhu – Principal Director for Office of Cofinancing Operations, ADB

15:30- 17:30   Multiple approach towards the Promotion of Trade and
Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO)

1)   Keynote Speech
Mr. Francis Moloi, Director, Trade Negotiations / WTO, South Africa DTI
Mr. Ichiro Araki - Director of Research, Research Institute of Economy,
Trade and Industry, IAI, Japan.

2)   Multilateral Approach to Trade and Investment Promotion and
Mr. Chiedu Osakuwe Director Technical Cooperation Division, WTO Secretariat.
Mr. Karl P. Sauvant, Director, Division on Investment, Technology and
Enterprise Development, UNCTAD.

3)   Japan’s Approach towards Trade and Investment Promotion and
Mr. Keiji Ide, Director, Developing Economies Division, Economic Affairs
Bureau, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan
Mr. Hiroyuki Wakabayashi, Executive Vice President, JETRO
Mr. Kazuo Korenaga, CEO, Mitsubishi Corporation, Johannesburg Branch.

* Entrance to The Development Day symposium is free of charge.

* Under commission by the Japan External Trade Organization, this campaign
is coordinated by International Trade Projects.

Kumiko Makino
Jetro Institute of Developing Economies


Position of NGO’s – civil society – towards such a World Summit




Important is, therefore, to be clear about the role of the NGO’s in this world debate about how to reach sustainable development. It relates to the official agenda of the Earth Summit to be held in Johannesburg, August 24 – 31, 2002.


As the Jasmin Enayati, co-ordinator of the UNED Forum (an international multi-stakeholder forum for sustainable development with seat in London, UK) stated, “an online debate can claim to be representative of a particular group or reach a critical mass, even if let’s say 10 people have the same argument…but there are many questions re legitimacy and accountability of NGO’s. I think as NGO’s we can only offer our expertise and concerns to the official government representative, however, as non-elected bodies we cannot claim to be representative of the ‘public’. The Earth Summit is the most participatory of all UN processes. However, I still think that we are there as ‘guests’ to offer expertise and advise. It’s a platform to exchange views and the outcome will be summarised and used to inform decision-makers …If ideas and concerns will be taken up in the official agenda, I won’t be able to say. The official preparatory process is well underway, with national consultations and regional roundtables leading toward the global preparations. The issues for the Earth Summit haven’t been decided yet so the whole process is still wider open in some ways. The topics we chose were those that are likely to be on the agenda but they might not even be in the end. I definitely think (and you might be surprised to heard that from the moderator) that one needs to be critical of efforts like these. In general, I have experienced that it is most of the time very difficult to have direct evidence of the ‘success’ we NGO’s have in the work we are doing” (Sept. 4, 2001)


Starting from this premise that the NGOs have little or no direct influence upon the outcome of the Summit. The opinion making by the art of persuading is finding the right arguments along with empirical data and evidence in order to benchmark for the public and its institutions the progress made in the world towards sustainable development. To organise that viewpoint would be crucial so as to avoid some basic confusions as to what is the value of the information received and what results can be expected by sharing it with others.


After Johannesburg

The role of NGOs and their linkages to Civil Society is a crucial element for sustaining the kind of politics that goes with transparency and civic values. Especially the changes needed in politics at all level, all that has to do with initiating an overall learning process based first of all upon a constant feed-beck needed what can and should be implemented. In that has to be included learning to recognize things going wrong (a matter of indicators) to draw the right practical consequences in time (correction and not repeating the same mistakes). It means finding a way out of the dilemma especially a world economy in recession with high rate of unemployment and wastage of resources due to its unsustainable production and consumption patterns.


Sources of information / Documents:


--- Sustainable Development Issues Network (SDIN)
announces new SDIN listserver for the World Summit

As you may know, the Sustainable Development Issues Network (SDIN) is a coalition of nongovernmental issue-based caucuses and networks during the year before the World Summit on Sustainable Development.  The purpose of the coalition is to provide mutual support and exchange of information among NGO caucuses and networks promoting sustainable development.

We would like to announce and invite you to join a new listserver http://sdissues.net/sdin/discuss.aspx hosted by SDIN to encourage substantive DISCUSSION AND DIALOGUE on the important issues and strategies of concern in the World Summit on Sustainable Development.  In the remaining weeks of the Summit there are many topics and questions of concern to participants and observers that will need to be addressed by NGOs.

For more information about some of the issue caucuses and networks involved in the WSSD, see www.sdissues.net

Note:  The purpose of this listserver is NOT to compete or be an alternative with the other listservers on the World Summit already operating which are providing useful information about the WSSD process and events.  In fact, we strongly discourage the use of this listserver to post duplicate announcements of events, activities and other news already carried on these current listservers.  Other WSSD listservers carrying information about the Summit include:

http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/csdlistserver.htm - UN Summit Secretariat listserver
http://iisd.ca/enb/2002summit-l.asp - International Institute for Sustainable Development's 2002Summit list
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rio10/ - Danish 92's WSSD newsletter (see also http://www.rio10.dk/index.php?home=1
http://www.worldsummit2002.org/ - Heinrich Boell's WSSD newsletter
http://lists.healthdev.net/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?join=earthsummit2002 - Stakeholder Forum's EarthSummit2002 list

There are also several other listservers as well as websites focusing on the Summit and we encourage you to find out about them.



VISITE  www.rio10.dk





Ingrese directamente clikeando los url.
Cualquier comentario o solicitud de información lo puede hacer escribiendo a

Ivana Brunet
Consultora de Información



^ Top

« 1. International Trends | 2. Urban Sustainable Development and Quality of Life: Planning for the Future »