Cement, Energy and Environment July-Sep 2002

... j provides them th e financia l and technological wherewithal to opt for susta inable development, in which case they should have no objections to maki ng the change). The second problem is with th e defin it ion of ' sust a in ab le development'. Given. that the term is a chame leon with no fixed meaning, it is apparent that the Sou th 's 'right to susta inabl e development' will be defined by the whi ms and fancies of the financ ial muscle ofthe North. And as we have learn t over the last so many years, Northern definitions of sustainabl e development can be very anti-poor and pro-rich. Take the instance of sustai nable fo restry. Most of the cri teria defined for susta in abl y prod uced timber fa vour Northern practices of susta inab le forestry. They give no importance to whether the process of producing the timber benefits the poor or further lines the pockets of the rich. Or whether the poor ti mber producers of the South will be able to compete with the rich producers of the North in meeting the criterion. A right to s us ta inab le development cou ld become a problem for the poor for two other reasons mentioned before, because the extra funds needed to practice sustainable deve lopment are not yet ava ilable to the South, and a lso because there is every likelihood that whi le the South will be bribed and bull ied into kee ping the ir commitment to sus ta inab le development, the North will carry on with business as usual, whil e there is not a thing the South will be able to do to make them change their ways. Nort hern NGOs wi ll be as powerless as they now are in their own countries, and will therefore find it more convenient to continue to turn a relative blind eye to the non-performance of the ir own governments. This is exactly what they have been doing in the case of g lobal warm i ng. lnstend oftly ing to change policies to reduce fossi l fuel dependence in their own countries, these groups find it ~as ier to force changes on the South by u~ ing their influence on g lob a l financi a l instit utions. Courtesy: Down to Earth, Aug 15, 02,?-52. Fax: 91-11-6085879 Email: cse@cseindia.org Web: JIIJIIW.cseindia.mg INDIA SEEKS LONG– TERM ACTION PLAN AT RIO 10 + 8 Sudha Nagaraj, The Economics Times, 14Au~02 India and oth er deve loping countries in the Group 77 will push fo r the acceptance of the draft impl ementation age nda for sus ta inabl e de ve lopment in its enti rety at WSSD (World Summi t on Sustai nabl e Deve lopment) to be held at Johannes burg between 28 August and 3 September 2002. The draft pl an catering to Agenda 2 1 agreed to at Rio, has been prepared over a period of one year. But at the last meeting in Ba li in May-June, serious differences arose between the North and the South with the developed world refusing to commi t to severa l key issues in continuing susta inabl e development efforts. The bracketed portions included the all important clause on common but differentiated responsibilities. This implies a multil ateral approach to susta inable development with all countries are opposing it. Secondly, there is no consensus on setting dead lines to ach ieve goals. The targets too have become contenti ous with the US and Japan sticking to those deri ved from the Millenni um Development goals (li ke a!leviating poverty, providi ng drinking water) while the EU wants to embrace othe r issues like san itati on and energy too. Thi rd ly, deve lop ing countries feel the need for new and addit ional fi nancia l reso urces to continue sustainable development e ffo rts and expect the developed countri es to pi tc h in , \.Vhc reas developed countries are shift ing the onus on the plea that there is a lack of good governance. Courtesy: TERI Ne wsJVire. /- 15 Aug, 02. P23. Fax: 46821 ./.J or -16821-15 Email: outreach@teri.res . in Web: wu• w.teriin.org HALF A CHEER FOR DEMOCRACY UN DP 's Human Development Report 2002 If you like to judge a book by its cover, here's a mixed metaphor: the title is 'Deepening democracy in a fragmenting wo rld '. but the. image shows pigeons fl ying out of drawn out hands. Depth and fl ight don't make an easy marriage. But th is, perh aps , wou ld be red ucti on ism. T he Huma n Development Report 2002 of UN DP offers some vi tal ind icators about the politics-development link. The report is as much a rep01t card of 173 countries' performance in hum an deve lopm ent as of democracy, wh ich gained currency in the last two decades as never before. In this period, ''8 1 countries too k s ign ifica nt s teps towards democracy, and today 140 of the world 's nearly 200 countries hold mu lti-party e lections." And then the re are the sobering statistics: of the 8·1 that dallied with democracy, onl y 47 are 'full y democ rati c. ' Overall, only 82 countries, wi th 57 per cent of the world's people, are fully democratic. The answer: "..democracy in itse lf does not guarantee greater soc ia l j ustice, faste r economic g rowth or in creased socia l and political stabi lity. The lin ks between democracy and human development can be strong - but they are not automatic." If the link is so strong, how does the report explain India – the largest democracy in the world and one of the oldest in tlJe