im Rahmen der Reihe Talking for Peace. A Karl Kahane Lecture Series laden wir Sie sehr herzlich zu der

folgenden Veranstaltung ein:

Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 7.00 p.m.

WOMEN CARRY THE BURDEN CONFLICT PREVENTION AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Opening event in the framework of the 2010 International Meeting of National Committees for UNIFEM (Part of UN Women) presented by DER STANDARD

Welcome: Gabriele Heinisch-Hosek, Federal Minister for Women and Civil Service

Introduction to UN Resolution 1325: Maj. Gen. Johann Pucher, National Security Policy Director, Federal Ministry of Defence and Sports

Keynote: Inés Alberdi, Executive Director of UNIFEM (Part of UN Women)

Contributions:

Sonja Biserko, Helsinki Federation for Human Rights, Serbia

Taghreed El-Khodary, New York Times, Gaza

Liberata Mulamula, Executive Secretary, International Conference on the Great Lakes Region, Burundi

Anat Saragusti, Executive Director of Agenda, Israel

Moderator: Gudrun Harrer, Senior Editor, DER STANDARD

In cooperation with

the Austrian National Committee for UNIFEM (Part of UN Women)

and the support of the Federal Chancellery, the Federal Ministry for Women and Civil Service,
the Federal Ministry of Defence and Sports (Directorate for Security Policy,
and the Vienna Institute for International Dialogue and Cooperation.

Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue | Armbrustergasse 15 | 1190 Wien

Please register: Tel.: 3188260/20 | Fax: 318 82 60/10 | e-mail: einladung.kreiskyforum@kreisky.org

Melitta Campostrini
Bruno Kreisky Forum
for International Dialogue
Armbrustergasse 15
A-1190 Vienna

Reihe: GENIAL DAGEGEN/ kuratiert von Robert Misik

Montag, 6. September, 19.00 Uhr

Bruno Kreisky Forum für internationalen Dialog | Armbrustergasse 15 | 1190 Wien

Anmeldungen unter: Tel.: 3188260/20 | Fax: 318 82 60/10 | e-mail: einladung.kreiskyforum@kreisky.org

FRANZ WALTER

Institut für Demokratieforschung Göttingen

VORWÄRTS ODER ABWÄRTS?

Hat die Sozialdemokratie noch eine Zukunft?

Moderation:   Robert Misik, Journalist und Autor

Vorwärts oder Abwärts?: Zur Transformation der Sozialdemokratie (edition suhrkamp)

Jospin, Blair, Schröder: 1998 sah es so aus, als stünde die europäische Sozialdemokratie vor einem goldenen Zeitalter. Elf Jahre später hat die SPD 10.192.426 Millionen Stimmen verloren und sechs Parteivorsitzende verschlissen, die niederländische Partij van de Arbeid fuhr 2002 das schlechteste Ergebnis ihrer Geschichte ein, die schwedischen Sozialdemokraten 2006, die österreichischen 2008. Der »Dritte Weg« erwies sich als Weg ins Abseits, längst ist vom Ende einer Volkspartei die Rede.

Es sieht so aus, als hätten die Sozialdemokraten keine überzeugende Antwort auf den radikalen Wandel der Arbeitswelt, auf Individualisierung und Globalisierung.

Franz Walter, einer der profiliertesten deutschen Parteienforscher, untersucht die Ursachen für den Niedergang der SPD. Er wirft einen Blick über die Grenzen Deutschlands und fragt, was Freiheit, Gleichheit und Solidarität in unserer Zeit bedeuten.

Melitta Campostrini
Bruno Kreisky Forum
for International Dialogue
Armbrustergasse 15
A-1190 Vienna
tel.: ++43 1 3188260/11
fax: ++43 1 3188260/10
e-mail: kreiskyforum@kreisky.org

www.kreisky-forum.org

We are engaged in a project which seeks to address the problem of climate change displacement.
The focus of our project is a proposal for a convention for persons displaced by climate change.

Please find attached a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) about our climate change displacement convention.
The FAQs can also be found at the ‘Documents’ page of our project website – www.ccdpconvention.com.

Our proposed convention would largely operate prospectively; assistance to climate change displaced persons would be based on an assessment of whether their environment was likely to become uninhabitable due to events consistent with anthropogenic climate change such that resettlement measures and assistance were necessary.  In other words, displacement is viewed as a form of adaptation that creates particular vulnerabilities requiring protection as well as assistance through international cooperation.

If you have any questions about the paper please contact me at d.hodgkinson@hodgkinsongroup.com or on +61 402 824 832.

Best wishes
David

___________________________

David Hodgkinson

The Hodgkinson Group

+61 402 824 832 (international)

0402 824 832 (within Australia)

www.hodgkinsongroup.com

www.ecocarbon.org.au

www.ccdpconvention.com

“COMMON WEALTH:  Economics for a Crowded Planet.”

by Prof. Jeffrey D. Sachs

A New York Times Bestseller

Penguin Books, 2008

ISBN 978-1-59420-127-1  (hc.)

ISBN 978-0-14-311487-1 (pbk.)

386 p.

==============================================

The obligatory textbook for any would-be policy maker in the Twenty-first Century.

Don’t elect any one to Congress unless he testifies that he has read this book.

==============================================

We have a crowded planet and there are common challenges – it does not matter where you live.
We all get nourished from a source of common wealth that we must learn to honor as Environmental Sustainability.

We tried to draw a system in our own “Promptbook on Sustainable Development For The World Summit in Johannesburg August 2002,” but Professor Sachs did a much better job then I was able to do and I tip my hat before him.

Professor Sachs, with his knowledge, and with the tremendous resources of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, clearly achieved a much larger scope then we could have attempted – his book is full of data and still readable – even by policy makers that are not economists.

“Lucid, quietly urgent, and relentlessly logical . . . this is Big think with capital B.” says the New York Times Book Reviewer quote on front cover – and he is right.

——————————————————————————-

Let us start from the realization that the 20th Century saw the end of European dominance of global politics and economics and the 21st Century will witness the decline and end of American dominance.

The world is passing to new powers – China, India and Brazil.

Our own estimate is that Europe could have held on for a little longer had the European Union succeeded in creating a real Union – but in the form of the present cloud of competing States it is finished. The US, had it presented a united leadership, it could also have competed for a while longer, but as we heard today, from Senator Kerry on the Fareed Zakaria show, with the ongoing obstructionism in US Senate, we just watch how China has moved from 5% of the global production of solar panels – just two years ago, to the global production in 2010 of 60% of those panels, and this week’s announcement that the US Senate is incapable of gathering 60 votes for a Climate & Energy Bill this year – and hearing just one day after that the Chinese say that they are going to cap carbon emissions – this means that “WE WILL BE RIPPED OUT OF THE MARKET PLACE – WE ARE CUTTING OUR OWN THROAT HERE,” concluded Senator Kerry.

And why does this happen? The established economies grow fat and complacent – the world turns to new ideas from large and hungry Nations that are ready to learn fast and innovate and grow. They push the old mush to the sideways. Can the obfuscating politicians understand this?


——————————————————————————

The mush starts from the refusal to recognize that resources are scarce, there are environmental stresses, and there will be large areas that become eventually uninhabitable leading again to great mass migration, clashes of civilization, warfare and mayhem. The above will be reinforced by the human created climate change, that gets super imposed on the power change to new Mega-Nations of more then a billion people each, and we must note that the world population has risen by 4 billion people in the span of just 60 years since 1950 – the Korea War – that came after what was thought to be the start of a post WWII peace.

For the world to save itself we must recognize the Anthropocene, when human activity became the dominant driver of the natural environment, and look for Global Solutions to Climate Change and Water Needs – to start a new strategy of Economic Development, end poverty traps, and create economic security in this changing Globalized World.

Our leaders must rethink Foreign Policy in the light of Global Goals which Prof. Sachs ends up as defining as “The Power of One.”

He points out that we are not only the subjects of history, carried along by blind forces, but agents of history.

Further, we have to gird ourselves against the unholy trinity of reactionary rhetoric identified by the great development economist Albert Hirschman. He noted that every new idea for constructive change is met with three attacks.

The first is futility: the course of reform cannot work because the problem is unsolvable.

The second is perversity: any attempt at solution will actually make matters worse.

The third is jeopardy: attempting to solve the problem will take attention and resources away from something even more important.

This negativism is a state of mind, not a view based on facts.

Relentless acceptance of the status quo is not acceptable in the face of the challenges we confront.

U.N. Lists Kyoto Plan B Options If No Climate Deal.
Date: 22-Jul-10

Author: Gerard Wynn, Reuters, UK

The U.N.’s climate agency has for the first time detailed contingency options if the world cannot agree a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, whose present round expires in 2012 with no new deal in sight.

The document reflects the stuttering pace of U.N. talks to extend or replace the Kyoto pact and disappointment at the outcome of a summit in Copenhagen last December.

Countries which are party to the Kyoto Protocol in June asked the U.N. climate secretariat to report on legal options to avoid a political vacuum or gap.

———————

Kyoto placed carbon emissions caps on nearly 40 developed countries from 2008-2012. Under existing rules, a new round of targets needs the agreement of at least 143 countries — or three quarters of all parties to the Protocol.

But a new deal appears months or years off, and even after an agreement its implementation would require ratification by the national parliaments or relevant bodies of more than 100 countries. The process of national ratification of the original Protocol took eight years.

“Domestic ratification processes are likely to involve … national legislative bodies, a process that may involve a considerable amount of time,” said the U.N. paper, published online and dated July 20.

Ratifying a successor agreement should be quicker, focused mostly on amending the targets in the existing text.

“A delay in the entry into force beyond 1 January 2013 would result in a gap between the end of the first commitment period and the beginning of the subsequent commitment period (of emissions targets),” the paper added.

CARBON MARKET

Without a deal by the end of 2012, the future of a $20.6 billion trade in carbon emissions rights under Kyoto was unsure, said the paper, titled “Legal considerations relating to a possible gap between the first and subsequent commitment periods.”

Much of the UN rebuttal is mush and we will report on how this unfolds.

——————————

Departing U.N. official calls Ban’s leadership ‘deplorable’ in 50-page memo.

Inga-Britt Ahlenius wrote a 50-page memo upon the end of her term as head of the U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services. (2008 Photo By Mark Garten/Associated Press)

By Colum Lynch

Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 20, 2010

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/19/AR2010071904734.html?referrer=emailarticle

UNITED NATIONS — The outgoing chief of a U.N. office charged with combating corruption at the United Nations has issued a stinging rebuke of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, accusing him of undermining her efforts and leading the global institution into an era of decline, according to a confidential end-of-assignment report.

The memo by Inga-Britt Ahlenius, a Swedish auditor who stepped down Friday as undersecretary general of the Office of Internal Oversight Services, represents an extraordinary personal attack on Ban from a senior U.N. official. The memo also marks a challenge to Ban’s studiously cultivated image as a champion of accountability.

Shortly after taking office in 2007, Ban committed himself to restoring the United Nations’ reputation, which had been sullied by revelations of corruption in the agency’s oil-for-food program in Iraq.

But Ahlenius says that, rather than being an advocate for accountability, Ban, along with his top advisers, has systematically sought to undercut the independence of her office, initially by trying to set up a competing investigations unit under his control and then by thwarting her efforts to hire her own staff.

“Your actions are not only deplorable, but seriously reprehensible. . . . Your action is without precedent and in my opinion seriously embarrassing for yourself,” Ahlenius wrote in the 50-page memo to Ban, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Post. “I regret to say that the secretariat now is in a process of decay.”

Ban’s top advisers said that Ahlenius’s memo constituted a deeply unbalanced account of their differences and that her criticism of Ban’s stewardship of the United Nations was patently unfair.

“A look at his record shows that Secretary General Ban has provided genuine visionary leadership on important issues from climate change to development to women’s empowerment. He has promoted the cause of gender balance in general as well as within the organization. He has led from the front on important political issues from Gaza to Haiti to Sudan,” Ban’s chief of staff, Vijay Nambiar, wrote in a response.

“It is regrettable to note,” Nambiar added, “that many pertinent facts were overlooked or misrepresented” in Ahlenius’s memo.

The departure of Ahlenius, 72, coincides with a period of crisis in the United Nations’ internal investigations division. During the past two years, the world body has shed some of its top investigators. It has also failed to fill dozens of vacancies, including that of the chief of the investigations division in the Office of Internal Oversight Services. That post has been vacant since 2006, leaving a void in the United Nations’ ability to police itself, diplomats say.

“We are disappointed with the recent performance of [the U.N.'s] investigations division,” said Mark Kornblau, spokesman for the U.S. mission to the United Nations. “The coming change in . . . leadership is an opportunity to bring about a significant improvement in its performance to increase oversight and transparency throughout the organization.”

The U.N. General Assembly established the Office of Internal Oversight Services in 1994 to conduct management audits of the United Nations’ principal departments and to conduct investigations into corruption and misconduct. The founding resolution granted the office “operational independence” but placed it under the authority of the secretary general and made it dependent on the U.N. departments it policed for much of its funding and administrative support.

The dispute between Ahlenius and Ban has underscored some of the resulting tensions and exposed a protracted and acrimonious struggle for power over the course of U.N. investigations.

While Ahlenius cited Ban’s move to set up a new investigations unit as a sign that he was seeking to undermine her independence, Nambiar said that it was intended to strengthen the United Nations’ ability to fight corruption.

Ahlenius also clashed with Ban over her efforts to hire a former federal prosecutor, Robert Appleton, who headed the U.N. Procurement Task Force, a temporary white-collar crime unit that carried out aggressive investigations into corruption in U.N. peacekeeping missions from 2006 to last year. The unit’s investigations led to an unprecedented number of misconduct findings by U.N. officials and prompted federal probes into corruption.

Ban’s advisers said they blocked Appleton’s appointment on the grounds that female candidates had not been properly considered and said that the final selection should have been made by Ban, not Ahlenius.

“The secretary general fully recognizes the operational independence of OIOS,” Nambiar said. But that, he said, “does not excuse her from applying the standard rules of recruitment.”

—————————————-

The above story, as per – http://www.orf.at/#/stories/2004590/ - also echoed in Vienna.

Scheidende UNO-Diplomatin rechnet mit Ban ab.

Die scheidende Chefkontrolleurin der Vereinten Nationen geht laut Medienberichten mit Generalsekretär Ban Ki Moon hart ins Gericht. Ban habe ihre Arbeit als oberste Korruptionsbekämpferin unterlaufen und die UNO in eine Ära des Niedergangs geführt, schrieb Inga-Britt Ahlenius laut einem Bericht der „Washington Post“ gestern in einem vertraulichen Memorandum.

Entgegen seinen Ankündigungen zum Amtsantritt 2007 habe Ban die durch mehrere Affären angeschlagene Reputation der Vereinten Nationen nicht mit allen Mitteln geschützt.

——————————
„Verwerflich“

Vielmehr habe er ihr Amt der Chefrevisorin mehr und mehr geschwächt, schreibe Ahlenius in dem 50-Seiten-Papier an Ban: „Ihr Handeln ist nicht nur bedauerlich, sondern sogar verwerflich.“ Es sei beispiellos und „meiner Meinung nach für Sie selbst beschämend“. Das Blatt zitierte: „Ich bedaure es, sagen zu müssen, dass das Sekretariat in einem Zerfallsprozess ist.“

Kritiker werfen Ban seit langem vor, die UNO nur zu verwalten und vor wirksamen politischen Initiativen zurückzuschrecken. UNO-Mitarbeiter wiesen die Vorwürfe in der „Washington Post“ als „unfair“ zurück. Ban habe mehrere politische Schwerpunkte gesetzt, etwa beim Klimaschutz und bei der Gleichstellung der Frau. Die Abrechnung der scheidenden Schwedin sei ein „höchst unausgewogener Ausdruck ihrer Differenzen“ mit Ban.,

19 July 2010

by Jan Lundberg

19 July 2010 Our Posting is in effect an amalgam of Jan Lundberg’s article at Culture Change http://www.culturechange.org/cms/content/view/666/68/ and an older version that reached us earlier. We all want to really make it right in the Gulf. Will BP and the government handle it well enough? That’s in doubt. It’s actually up to us all. We need urgent environmental action especially involving energy consumption: let us cut oil use. – The grassroots coalition World Oil Reduction for the Gulf (WORG) has as its initial objective the promulgation and propagation of a powerful Resolution for immediate global remediation of the gusher in the Gulf of Mexico. –

We all want to really make it right in the Gulf. Will BP and the government handle it well enough? That’s in doubt. It’s actually up to us all. We need urgent environmental action especially involving energy consumption: let us cut oil use.The grassroots coalition World Oil Reduction for the Gulf (WORG) has as its initial objective the promulgation and propagation of a powerful Resolution for immediate global remediation of the gusher in the Gulf of Mexico. A sensible approach is to go after the low-hanging fruit, which WORG and many other advocates have identified. World Oil Reduction for the Gulf’s first purpose is to ecologically and numerically counteract the unprcedented millions of barrels of toxic oil and methane spewing into the Gulf waters and the atmosphere. The crisis may seem to abate, but it may not be possible to fully describe the long-term ecological and economic consequences with words, numbers and images. To act you need not go further than to read and distribute the WORG Resolution. See the document on our new webpage at www.WorldOilReduction.org. As specified, relatively simple measures can begin to bring U.S. oil consumption under control, if we move toward achieving a reduction commensurate with the near hundreds of millions of gallons of oil and unknown number of cubic feet of methane released by the Deepwater Horizon (Macondo) gusher. We cannot stop there. The Gulf disaster has opened the eyes of millions of people to the threat that oil poses to all aspects of life on our small planet. The crisis in the Gulf cannot “go away” any time soon, but some citizens may want to believe it — will they miss the opportunity to do something about the overall problem? Will ecological degradation reach the killing point world-wide, to finally wake people up when it is too late? If enough people begin to push their city councils to act — ordinances to follow the Resolution — we can achieve action also on the State level, finally causing the federal government to act in confirmation of a national movement. It seems obvious that for first states, Louisiana and Florida should be logical candidates, despite any anti-oil green tinge from cutting oil consumption: the “pain” of reducing oil use across the board would be distributed mainly beyond the Gulf. For a progressive proposal such as WORG to fly, it may have to be that a state like Vermont takes the plunge first. We invite you to join us in our attempt to have the U.S. finally address its oil and energy gluttony. This can affect positively other nations and the global economy. The standing of the U.S. today as most wasteful consumer can improve by offsetting the Gulf disaster on a barrel-to-barrel basis, by cutting petroleum use. The U.S. uses twice the energy of affluent West European countries per capita, largely due to massive pro-oil subsidies in the U.S. It is high time that the profligate U.S. cuts back now, when the planet is taking a big hit from greedy BP and from those tied to its fortunes (you and me?). WORG offers a choice of various kinds of cutbacks in oil use for communities to undertake. These cutbacks, requiring “sacrifice,” would in the aggregate potentially make up for the entire Gulf oil gusher — past, present and future — in a short time if they were even modestly implemented. They will be clearly set out: a Washington, D.C. think tank is preparing for WORG a special graph of U.S. oil consumption that shows some of the many ways to reduce oil consumption. They won’t all be on the pie chart, but these ways include: lessening car dependence through enhancing mass transit, bicycling, and car-pooling; purchasing less food shipped from thousands of miles away; banning some disposable plastics; adjusting thermostats; banning leaf blowers and discouraging power mowers; shutting BP’s unsafe refineries, and — last but not least — ending the wars for oil. Plugging the damaged well and cleanup are only the first step. President Obama has offered no leadership towards slashing oil use – except for calling for a clean energy future. We need action now, rather than waiting for results from long-term investment and faith in the free market and government. As an independent oil industry analyst I have been trying to do everything possible to bring culture change to the forefront. We stand a good chance now to do that through WORG. I hope you share our goals and will get involved. We have the WORG coalition counts as its members: Center for Biological Diversity RealitySandwich.com Population Press Hope Dance Culture Change and Dr. Brent Blackwelder, president emeritus of Friends of the Earth – U.S. ——————————————– To join WORG (no membership fee), consider the Resolution that we hope your city council and state will adopt. It is at www.WorldOilReduction.org. Let us know if you and your organization can be listed as a member or endorser of WORG. Your involvement in this cause as a WORG coalition member is most welcome. Very soon the website will be further developed for maximum participation and speedy actions for WORG participants. Besides signing up more groups and individuals, the task at hand requires networking, research, travel, and publicity. The present WORG coalition members will do their part. Meanwhile, prior to rapid deployment for our first city-council Resolution for world oil reduction for the Gulf, Culture Change is now the organization making the big initial push. So your generous donation to Culture Change today will support the early, rapid development of WORG. Please go to our donation page at culturechange.org/donate.html Thank you, Jan Lundberg independent oil industry analyst Publisher, Editor and Founder, Culture Change P.O. Box 4347, Arcata, CA 95518  http://www.culturechange.org Committee Against Oil Exploration (CAOE, pronounced K-O). www.WorldOilReduction.org jan “at” culturechange.org Further reading: On oil subsidies and more: “New thinking on BP spill: Declare a holiday!” by Brent Blackwelder,The Daly News: Energy Bulletin

UN ADVISORY GROUP SEEKS TO ENHANCE PUBLIC-PRIVATE LINKS TO BOOST ACCESS TO ENERGY.

The potential of new public-private partnerships to enhance energy access and efficiency topped today’s discussions by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s high-level advisory group on the nexus between energy and climate change.

“Governments alone will not be able to deal with the challenges,” said Kandeh K. Yumkella, Director-General of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), at the latest meeting of the Energy and Climate Change Advisory Group.

“We need a commitment from all sectors of society, including the private sector, academia and civil society, as well as from international organizations and NGOs [non-governmental organizations],” he added.

The meeting in Mexico City was hosted by Carlos Slim Helú, Mexican businessman and one the world’s wealthiest people, who is also a member of the Group, set up by Mr. Ban last year and comprising 20 business leaders, academics and representatives of the UN and civil society.

In April, the Group launched a report calling on nations to commit themselves to two complementary goals.

First, it urged universal access to modern energy services that are reliable, affordable, sustainable, and, if possible, from low-emissions sources by 2030.

It also underlined the need to slash global energy intensity, measured by the quantity of energy per unit of gross domestic product (GDP).

Currently, some 3 billion people worldwide rely on traditional biomass for cooking and heating, resulting in adverse health effects if used in inadequately ventilated buildings, with 1.6 billion having no access to electricity.

“This is why we are looking at launching a worldwide campaign to ensure that access to modern energy services no longer represents a barrier to development,” Mr. Yumkella said. “A reliable, affordable energy supply is the key to economic growth and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs],” the eight anti-poverty targets with a 2015 deadline.

Private companies, he pointed out, already have the technology needed to make global energy systems less dependent on fossil fuels, while many governments are offering financial incentives and support for this transition.

“What we need today is to forge strong public-private partnerships to tackle these goals,” the UNIDO chief, who chairs the Advisory Group, said.

Today’s meeting, co-hosted by Mexican Energy Minister Georgina Kessel Martínez, drew top UN officials and business executives, while representatives of Sharp and other corporations presented some of the latest renewable technologies.

In a related development, a new report launched today by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) found that the United States and Europe have added more capacity to their electricity supplies from renewable sources, such as wind and solar, for the second consecutive year.

In 2009, renewables accounted for 60 per cent of newly-installed capacity in Europe and more than 50 per cent in the USA.

“The sustainable energy investment story of 2009 was one of resilience, frustration and determination,” said UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner.

The sector was able to weather the global financial downturn, but faced setbacks given that last December’s UN climate change conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, did not achieve the targets that had been hoped for, he noted.

“Yet there was determination on the part of many industry actors and governments, especially in rapidly developing economies, to transform the financial and economic crisis into an opportunity for greener growth,” the official said.

* * *

TODAY’S GLOBAL CRISES HIGHLIGHT NEED TO PROMOTE HUMAN SECURITY – BAN.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has emphasized the need to promote the concept of human security, noting that the challenges facing the world today threaten the lives of millions and undermine development efforts.

“Everyone has a right to enjoy freedom from fear…freedom from want…and freedom to live in dignity,” Mr. Ban said in a video message for a symposium on human security taking place in Tokyo.

“These mutually reinforcing aspirations are at the heart of human security and our mission to build a better world for all,” he stated.

More than ever, “we live in an interconnected world,” where crises transcend borders and threaten the lives and livelihoods of millions of men, women and children, he noted.

“They increase human insecurity and undermine progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),” he added, referring to the targets world leaders have pledged to achieve by 2015, ranging from ensuring quality education and a clean environment to reducing hunger and disease.

He said the symposium can help inform and advance discussions at the high-level summit he will be convening in New York in September at which world leaders will gather to push for further progress on the MDGs.

The landmark 2005 World Summit referred to the concept of human security, recognizing that “that all individuals, in particular vulnerable people, are entitled to freedom from fear and freedom from want, with an equal opportunity to enjoy all their rights and fully develop their human potential.”

In May, the General Assembly held its first formal debate on human security, during which Mr. Ban presented his report on the issue.

Addressing that meeting, he had stressed that “we must ensure that the gains of today are not lost to the crises of tomorrow,” calling for actions focusing on “people-centred, comprehensive, context-specific and preventive strategies at every level.”

Such an approach, the report pointed out, helps address both current and emerging threats, as well as their causes. The report also emphasized the need for strong and stable institutions to advance human security.

To UN Women, $100 M Offer by Qatar for HQ, But UNFPA Inks 15 Yr NYC Lease.

UNITED NATIONS, July 14 — Less than two weeks after the formation of “UN Women,” to consolidate the UN’s agencies working on the issue, one of the agencies has gone forward with a major lease of real estate in Manhattan.

The UN Population Fund, UNFPA, has just reportedly signed a 15 year lease for three floors (131,000 square feet) at 605 Third Avenue in midtown Manhattan.

Meanwhile, multiple sources tell Inner City Press that during the negotiations to form UN Women, Qatar offered $100 million if it the headquarters would be put in Qatar.

But as Inner City Press reported earlier this month, Qatar is one of only three countries which has never sent a female athlete to the Olympic Games, along with Brunei and Saudi Arabia.

So now matter how much money is offered, some ask how could the headquarters of UN Women be in Qatar?

UN’s Ban and Sheikha Mozah bint Nasser Al Missned, $100 M not shown

————————————————————————————————————————————–

A Group of 77 source complained, as to UN agency headquarters, that an effect of the European Union’s push to form a UN Environment agency would be to undermine the status of Nairobi, where the current UN Environment Program is headquartered.

But maybe if UNEP stepped out and signed a big long term lease for more Kenyan real estate…

———–

At UN, As Rudd Meets Ban for 50 Minutes, Pasztor Is Present, Job for Climate Change in Air?

UNITED NATIONS, July 14 — When Kevin Rudd, just ousted as Australia’s prime minister, met late July 14 with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, there was one attendee rarely as such meetings: Janos Pasztor, the head of the UN’s climate change unit.

This came a day after Inner City Press reported that the UN is being urged by the Obama Administration to give Rudd a climate change job.

Inconveniently, the IPCCC top post was recently awarded to Christina Figueres of Costa Rica. (Pasztor competed for the job, temporarily and partially recusing himself from his past and current job, but lost out.)

Now, while the U.S. wishes the IPCCC post were open, it appears that a new special envoy on global warming post would have to be created. One wonders what Pasztor thinks. Also present in the meeting were Ban’s chief of staff Vijay Nambiar and his deputy, but most senior advisor, Kim Won-soo.

UN’s Ban and Rudd

Prior to meeting Rudd, Ban had an audience with representatives of the Korean Red Cross. They bought a gift, which was waiting by the elevator. Moments before Rudd came in, Ban emerged from his office and began walking to his spot at the table.

Moments later, Pasztor joins

Then he stopped, remembering – he had forgotten to put on his glasses. He went back and got them. Then Rudd entered, then Pasztor. The photos were taken, and the photographers hustled out.

But Rudd did not leave until 6:20 p.m. — 50 minutes later….

UNEP NEWS RELEASE: Green Goes Mainstream: Biodiversity Is Climbing the Corporate Agenda.
July 13, 2010

from James Sniffen :

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) for Business Report.

Green Goes Mainstream: Biodiversity Is Climbing the Corporate Agenda.
Companies with ‘Net Positive Impact’ on Biological Diversity are Winners in
Resource-Constrained World.

One in four global CEOs sees biodiversity loss as a strategic issue for
business growth: Latin American and African CEOs are most concerned about
impacts of biodiversity loss on business growth prospects—European CEOs are
least concerned.

————

13 July, 2010 – Business leaders in biodiversity-rich developing economies
are concerned about losses of “natural capital”, a new report launched
today highlights.

Over 50 per cent of Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) surveyed in Latin
America and 45 per cent in Africa see declines in biodiversity as a
challenge to business growth. In contrast, less than 20 per cent of their
counterparts in Western Europe share such concerns.

The findings, compiled by a study of “The Economics of Ecosystems and
Biodiversity” (TEEB), indicate that those corporate chiefs who fail to make
sustainable management of biodiversity part of their business plans may
find themselves increasingly out of step with the market place.

Another recent survey, also spotlighted in the TEEB report for business,
shows rising interest among consumers with 60 per cent of those surveyed in
America and Europe and over 90 per cent in Brazil aware of biodiversity
loss.

Over 80 per cent of those consumers surveyed said they would stop buying
products from companies that disregard ethical considerations in their
sourcing practices.

The “TEEB for Business” report indicates that scrutiny of big business and
its impacts on the world’s natural capital is likely to intensify as better
evaluations and assessments come to the fore.

The UK-based consultancy TruCost, on behalf of the UN’s Principles for
Responsible Investment, is set to publish a study on the activities of the
world’s top 3,000 listed companies, estimating that their negative impacts
or “environmental externalities” total around $2.2 trillion annually.

Pavan Sukhdev, the TEEB Study Leader and also head of UNEP’s Green Economy
Initiative, said: “Through the work of TEEB and others, the economic
importance of biodiversity and ecosystems is emerging from the invisible
into the visible spectrum. It is clear that some companies in some sectors
and on some continents are hearing and acting on that message in order to
build more sustainable, 21st century businesses.”

Today’s report, entitled “TEEB for Business” and part of a suite of reports
being launched in the UN’s International Year of Biodiversity, calls for
companies to embrace concepts such as “No Net Loss”; “Ecological
Neutrality” and ultimately “Net Positive Impact” on the environment.

Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary-General and Executive Director of UNEP
which hosts TEEB, said: “We are entering an era where the multi-trillion
dollar losses of natural and nature-based resources are starting to shape
markets and consumer concerns. How companies respond to these risks,
realities and opportunities will increasingly define their profitability;
corporate profile in the market-place and the overall development paradigm
of the coming decades on a planet of six billion, going to over nine
billion people by 2050.”

Julia Marton-Lefevre, TEEB advisory board member and Director-General of
the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), which
coordinated the “TEEB for Business” report, urged companies attending the
1st Global Business for Biodiversity Symposium at the Excel Centre in
London on 13 July to back new and transformational policies such as those
outlined in the report.

“Together Governments and business, in both developed and developing
economies, can show leadership by establishing networks of committed
corporations across all sectors dedicated to achieving a ‘Net Positive
Impact’ on biodiversity and ecosystem services.”

The TEEB report cites the case of the multinational mining giant Rio Tinto
as one company that has committed itself to achieving “Net Positive Impact”
on biodiversity. In association with leading conservation experts the
company has developed new ways of assessing the biodiversity values of its
land holdings, and has begun to apply biodiversity compensation or “offset”
methodologies in Madagascar, Australia and North America.

Other companies with similar commitments on biodiversity include Wal-Mart
(Acres for America initiative), Coca Cola (water neutral by 2020) and BC
Hydro (no net incremental ecological impact).

In addition to minimizing and mitigating adverse impacts, business can also
generate revenue from conserving biodiversity and delivering ecosystem
services. Agriculture, forestry and fisheries all depend on healthy
ecosystems to ensure healthy profits.

The tourism sector has a major stake and role to play in conserving
biodiversity. Realizing its reliance on the biodiversity rich but fragile
coral reefs, Chumbe Island Coral Park Ltd in Tanzania has invested over
$1.2million to establish a marine park to protect the corals surrounding
Chumbe Island. The company actively supports park management as well as its
own resort facilities.

The “TEEB for Business” report, which will form part of a final TEEB
synthesis report to be launched at a meeting of the Convention on
Biological Diversity in Nagoya, Japan in October 2010, calls on
professional associations to develop new accounting and reporting tools for
business.

The measurement and valuation of biodiversity and ecosystem services in
business is improving. The report recommends that accounting professions,
financial reporting bodies and others should accelerate efforts to develop
common standards and metrics to enable business to assess and disclose
their biodiversity impacts and responses in annual reports.

Joshua Bishop, the “TEEB for Business” report coordinator and Chief
Economist of IUCN, said: “Better accounting of business impacts on
biodiversity – both positive and negative – is essential to spur change in
business investment and operations. Smart business leaders realise that
integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services in their value chains can
generate substantial cost savings and new revenues, as well as improved
business reputation and license to operate.”

In another recent report by the World Business Council for Sustainable
Development, business leaders expressed their vision of a sustainable
future, which include “prices that reflect all externalities: costs and
benefits” (WBCSD Vision 2050).

Steps in this direction are already being taken, as evidenced by the growth
of markets for biodiversity and ecosystem services.  Market data compiled
by Forest Trends and the Ecosystem Marketplace showed:

* The certified agricultural products market was valued at over $40bn in
2008 and may reach up to $210bn by 2020.

* Biodiversity offsets, such as wetland mitigation banking in the United
States or “bio-banking” in Australia, are predicted to rise from $3 billion
in 2008 to $10 billion in 2020.

* Bio carbon/forest offsets including REDD are expected to rise from just
$21m in 2006 to over $10bn in 2020.

Starting today, businesses can show leadership on biodiversity and
ecosystem services (BES) by:

1. Identifying their impacts and dependencies on biodiversity and ecosystem
services
2. Assessing the business risks and opportunities associated with these
impacts and dependencies
3. Developing BES information systems, set targets and report results
4. Taking action to avoid, minimize and mitigate BES risks
5. Integrating BES actions with wider Corporate Social Responsibility
initiatives
6. Engaging with business peers and stakeholders to improve guidance and
policy
7. Grasping emerging BES business opportunities

The “TEEB for Business” report will be launched at the first Global
Business of Biodiversity Symposium on 13 July at the Excel Centre, London.
 http://www.businessofbiodiversity.co.uk/

———-

The “TEEB for Business” report is available at www.teebweb.org

The lead authors and editors of the “TEEB for Business” report include
staff from Business for Social Responsibility (BSR), Earthmind, the Global
Reporting Initiative (GRI), PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), IUCN, UNEP and
WBCSD.

The survey of CEOs and their attitudes to biodiversity loss was carried out
by Price WaterhouseCoopers.

The survey of consumer attitudes to biodiversity and business was carried
out by global market survey company IPSOS.

The TEEB project is hosted by UNEP and supported by the European
Commission; the German Federal Environment Ministry; the UK Government’s
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; the UK Department for
International Development; Norway’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs; The
Netherlands’ Interministerial Program Biodiversity; and the Swedish
International Development Cooperation Agency.

For more information, please contact:

Georgina Langdale, Communications, TEEB, Tel: +49-1707-617-138, Email
Georgina.langdale@unep-teeb.org

Brian Thomson, Media Relations and Campaigns, IUCN, Tel: + 41-22-999-0251,
Email Brian.Thomson@iucn.org

Or Nick Nuttall, UNEP Spokesperson/Head of Media, Tel: +254-733-632755
Email nick.nuttall@unep.org

***********************************
Jim Sniffen
Programme Officer
UN Environment Programme
New York
tel: +1-212-963-8094/8210
sniffenj@un.org
www.unep.org
*********************************

Brian Stelter knows something about TWITTER – he is running his own, but he also had a Thursday article in the New York Times in which he analyzed the transgressions of another Journalist – a CNN senior editor – that went beyond what is allowed in journalism and ended up being fired by CNN. Her obvious transgression was on Twitter.

Brian Stelter (brianstelter) on Twitter

– 2:04pm Get short, timely messages from Brian Stelter. Twitter is a rich source of instantly updated information. It’s easy to stay updated on an incredibly wide …
twitter.com/brianstelter

His article on-line was

CNN Fires Middle East Affairs Editor.

By BRIAN STELTER, Published: July 7, 2010

The title as in NYT print July 8, 2010 was: “A TWITTER POST THAT ENDED A 2-YEAR CAREER AT CNN.”

Octavia Nasr

Parisa Khosravi, the senior vice president of international newsgathering for CNN Worldwide, said in an internal memorandum that she “had a conversation” with Ms. Nasr on Wednesday morning and that “we have decided that she will be leaving the company.”

For her coverage of events like last year’s protests in Iran, CNN had previously called Ms. Nasr a “leader” in integrating social media Web sites like Twitter within its newsgathering process.

Ms. Nasr, a 20-year veteran of the network, wrote on Twitter after the cleric died on Sunday, “Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah … One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot.”
The ayatollah routinely denounced the United States and supported suicide bombings against Israel.

Some supporters of Israel seized on the Twitter message as an indication of bias. A CNN spokesman said Tuesday that Ms. Nasr had made an “error of judgment” that “did not meet CNN’s editorial standards.”

In an explanatory blog post on CNN.com Tuesday evening, Ms. Nasr said she was sorry about the message “because it conveyed that I supported Fadlallah’s life’s work. That’s not the case at all.”

She said she used the words “respect” and “sad” because “to me as a Middle Eastern woman, Fadlallah took a contrarian and pioneering stand among Shia clerics on woman’s rights. She continued, “This does not mean I respected him for what else he did or said. Far from it.”

Despite her senior editor title, Ms. Nasr did not run CNN’s Middle East coverage, a spokesman said. She reported and provided analysis about the region for CNN’s networks.

Her explanation of the Twitter message was apparently not enough for her CNN bosses. Ms. Khosravi wrote in the memo, “at this point, we believe that her credibility in her position as senior editor for Middle Eastern affairs has been compromised going forward.”

——————-

The problem with this is not Ms. Nasr – she would be clearly entitled to say what she wants to her tweeter – that is guaranteed by the First Amendment, but CNN has more at stake here. It is the credibility of CNN that she undermined and provided clear proof to the Israelis that when CNN covered the Lebanon war it might not have been impartial. With people like Octavia Nasr, partisans to a cause, the credibility of the media is being destroyed.

We post this because we think CNN is the best there is on US TV. We watch religiously the Fareed Zakaria weekly program – the only consistently intelligent program we know on US TV – so we do not want to see CNN downgraded to the level of a FOX. Granted, Ms. Nasr was not a columnist anchor of the network, but she was in charge of media gathering – and if the news are faked by partisanship – the whole system is “kaput.”

——————-

FRIDAY, JULY 09, 2010
CNN’s Objectivity Questioned in Sacking of Mideast Reporter.
Eli Clifton

WASHINGTON, Jul 8 (IPS) – CNN’s firing of Octavia Nasr, the editor responsible for the network’s Middle East coverage, over a Twitter post in which she expressed her sadness over the death of a Lebanese cleric has set off a firestorm of debate about what the decision says about CNN’s fairness in reporting on the region. On Sunday, Nasr wrote, “Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah… One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot,” on her Twitter account, which is followed by over 7,000 readers.

Fadlallah was an inspirational figure for Lebanese Shiites and an early supporter of Hezbollah. Fadlallah, who initially supported the use of suicide bombings as a means of resistance against the occupation of Lebanon and Palestine, later criticised Hezbollah for its close ties to Iran, as well as Ayatollah Khomeini’s velayet- e faqih “rule of the clerics”, which Khomeini imposed in Iran in 1979.

Critics of Fadlallah have charged that he was staunchly anti-U.S., and had been linked to bombings that killed more than 260 U.S. citizens, but others have pointed to the cleric’s support for women’s rights and fatwas against female circumcision and honour killings as evidence of his comparatively progressive position. After the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and a number of right-wing news outlets and blogs took issue with her expression of regret over Fadlallah’s death, on Tuesday, Nasr wrote another Twitter post in which she attempted to clarify her earlier comment and emphasised her admiration of Fadlallah’s defence of women’s rights.

“Fadlallah, designated by the U.S. Department of Treasury as a specially designated terrorist, disseminated numerous fatawa’ supporting terrorist operations and was a vocal supporter of terrorism against Israeli targets,” read a statement from the ADL on Tuesday.

“It is clearly an impropriety for a CNN journalist/editor to express such a partisan viewpoint as Ms. Nasr did in her tweet,” the statement continued.

“How did CNN senior editor of Middle East affairs Octavia Nasr celebrate July 4? By mourning the passing of Hezbollah’s Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah,” blogged Daniel Halper at the neoconservative Weekly Standard.

But other journalists and watchdog groups expressed concern over the speed with which CNN fired Nasr and the emergence of a double-standard when reporting on Middle Eastern affairs.

“The network – which has employed a former AIPAC official, Wolf Blitzer, as its primary news anchor for the last 15 years – justified its actions by claiming that Nasr’s ‘credibility’ had been ‘compromised,’” wrote Salon’s Glenn Greenwald in an article in which he went on to argue that Nasr was fired for offending the “neocon Right” by expressing regret over the death of a “profoundly complex figure, with some legitimate grievances, some entrenched hatreds and ugly viewpoints, and a substantial capacity for good.”

Peter Hart, activism director at Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), a media watchdog group, told IPS that, “If there was some suggestion that she had been producing questionable journalism over all these years you’d think this would have been an issue before this, but it doesn’t seem to be the case. So it’s a decision which is disconnected from any sensible policy. The real problem is that she said something which offended very powerful people and that was her mistake.”

Nasr had worked for the Atlanta-based CNN for 20 years and rarely appeared on-air except for occasional appearances as an analyst in discussions on Middle East news. She had no history of an anti-Israel or pro-Palestinian bias and, according to Greenwald, “blended perfectly into the American corporate media woodwork”.

“Octavia Nasr got fired for the one smart thing she ever said,” quipped journalist Nir Rosen, a fellow at the New York University Center on Law and Security, in a Twitter post.

“[P]lenty of American journalists and politicians have shown ‘respect’ (and in some cases, fawning admiration) for various world figures with hands far bloodier than Ayatollah Fadlallah – including Mao Zedong, Ariel Sharon, the Shah of Iran, or even Kim il Sung – but it didn’t cost them their jobs,” wrote Stephen Walt, a professor of international relations at Harvard University.

Questions have been raised over why Nasr, known as an uncontroversial reporter of Middle East affairs, was fired so quickly for an off-the-cuff Twitter post.

According to some observers, her unwillingness to conform to the narrative depicted by a number of right-wing news outlets and U.S. Jewish groups that Fadlallah was a terrorist, anti-US and anti-Semitic resulted in CNN receiving pressure to fire her.

“Nasr’s comment was enough to spark fierce outrage from the various precincts of the neocon blog/twittersphere, who went after Nasr for her egregious failure to reduce Fadlallah to an anti-Israel, anti-American terrorist bogeyman,” blogged Matt Duss, a National Security Researcher at the liberal Center For American Progress.

While right-wing news outlets, such as the Weekly Standard and the conservative WorldNetDaily gleefully reported on Nasr’s departure from CNN, others expressed concern for the double standard which has emerged when discussing Middle East affairs in the US mainstream media.

“The standard here is based on nothing that Nasr reported for CNN. [Her Twitter post] was barely a one sentence expression of sympathy. Firing her was a decision that was completely disconnected from her work so it’s a decision that’s very troubling. Lou Dobbs’s thoughts about immigrants were on CNN every night and CNN stood by him as the criticism mounted and the factual inaccuracies piled up,” said Hart.

“In this case, a stray comment is enough to terminate someone’s role at CNN almost overnight,” he said. “The discrepancy is rather revealing and CNN would have a very hard time revealing precisely what their policy is on this. It’s hard to find precedent for this. She has a history of covering the region and that is not easily replaced.”

———————-

We do not approve of the Lou Dobbs diatribe on CNN on US immigration, and we think he should have been chastised by the network, but this is the only point the above article makes that we can agree with.

Otherwise, the article is in itself proof of how split and detrimental to the surfacing of the truth on matters of the Middle East the whole public policy arena is for years. There are plenty of Jewish groups that think Wolf Blitzer is biased against the Israeli government. We have met the man at the time he worked at the UN and are convinced he is a true journalist. Most others mentioned belong either to the left or to the right and as we know well both sides have other goals then a two State solution for the Middle East morass. Our website neither accepts the demise of Israel, nor the lack of a Palestinian State, so we clearly can say that someone who believes that Allah calls for suicide bombers to achieve his goal of eradicating Israel, is no better then Ahmedi-Nejad – the true follower of Hitler.

Yes, Ms. Nasr had to go not because ADL wanted her to go. It is because CNN needed her to go- and yes, CNN might look also at who else has to go in order to build back its own credibility.

————————

The continuing problem Ayatollah with Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah’s followers is in today’s news – so a credible press coverage is imperative – niceties and partisanship aside – just see in -

UN DAILY NEWS DIGEST – 9 July, 2010:

LEBANON: SECURITY COUNCIL CALLS FOR FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT OF UN PEACEKEEPERS .

Strongly deploring recent incidents directed at United Nations blue helmets in Lebanon, the Security Council today called for ensuring the safety and freedom of movement of the peacekeepers serving there.

Members of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) have recently been the target of protests and attacks by villagers in the south of the country in response to routine military exercises carried out by the mission.

“The members of the Security Council strongly deplore the recent incidents involving UNIFIL peacekeepers which took place in southern Lebanon on June 29th, July 3rd and July 4th in the UNIFIL area of operation,” Ambassador U. Joy Ogwu of Nigeria, which holds the Council’s rotating presidency for July, said in a statement read out to the press following closed-door talks.

They also emphasized the importance of not impairing UNIFIL’s ability to fulfil its mandate under Security Council resolution 1701, which ended the 2006 war between Israel and Hizbollah.

The resolution also calls for respect of the so-called Blue Line separating the Israeli and Lebanese sides, the disarming of all militias operating in Lebanon and an end to arms smuggling in the area.

“They call on all parties to ensure that the freedom of movement of UNIFIL remains respected in conformity with its mandate and its rules of engagement,” the statement added.

In addition to monitoring the 2006 ceasefire between Israel and Hizbollah, UNIFIL is also tasked with accompanying and supporting the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) as they deploy throughout the south, and extending its assistance to help ensure humanitarian access to civilian populations and the voluntary and safe return of displaced persons.

Also today, Michael Williams, the UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon, discussed the recent incidents involving UNIFIL with Lebanese Foreign Minister Ali Shami.

“We all hope that the situation has now calmed down and that there will be no recurrence of such incidents,” he in a statement following the meeting in Beirut.

Mr. Williams asserted that UNIFIL’s freedom of movement is a critical element for it to discharge its mandate and it must be fully respected.

“I think that we all agree that the excellent cooperation between UNIFIL and LAF has been the backbone of the stability that has prevailed in the south, and we must do all we can to maintain and to enhance it,” he added.

A blog about all things green, from conservation to Capitol Hill.

Read more: http://ecocentric.blogs.time.com/2010/07/06/report-card-on-renewables-europes-getting-as/#ixzz0t4OJ8DiL

from: Teshome Hunduma Mulesa <Teshome@utviklingsfondet.no> to African SD Policy Makers <africasd-l@lists.iisd.ca> date Wed, Jul 7, 2010

Invitation to global consultations on Farmers’ Rights.

We herewith invite you to participate in global consultations on Farmers’ Rights as these are addressed in Article 9 of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (also called the Plant Treaty; see www.planttreaty.org). The background for these consultations is a decision made by the Governing Body of the Plant Treaty at its third session (Resolution 6/2009). Here the Governing Body recalls the importance of fully implementing Farmers’ Rights, and, among other things, requests the Secretariat to convene regional workshops on Farmers’ Rights to discuss relevant national experiences. The Fridtjof Nansen Institute (www.fni.no) in Norway is assisting the Secretariat in carrying out this task. Funding is limited, so we begin by carrying out consultations via e-mail, in order to involve as many stakeholders as possible, in all parts of the world. The e-mail consultations have been made possible thanks to support from SwedBio of Sweden and the Development Fund, Norway. We are still trying to raise the funds necessary to hold a consultation conference towards the end of the year, which will then be global, with regional components. The results of the global consultation process will be presented to the Governing Body of the Plant Treaty at its Fourth Session in 2011, as a basis for its deliberations on promoting the realization of Farmers’ Rights at the national level.

The following questionnaire is designed to obtain information in the context of Resolution 6/2009 of the Governing Body and to facilitate discussions at the consultation conference. The Secretariat will follow this process and provide information to Contracting Parties accordingly.

We hope that you can distribute this questionnaire to organizations and individuals engaged in plant genetic resources for food and agriculture and farmers’ rights – in your own country and abroad. We would also be grateful if all those who are working with farmers take this opportunity to distribute the questionnaire among them, or to convene group consultations among farmers to complete the questionnaire collectively, if appropriate, and send it to us.

We sincerely hope that you will take the time to complete this questionnaire to the best of your capacity, and return it to us.

The final deadline for submission of this questionnaire is 31 August 2010.
Please e-mail the questionnaire to tow@fni.no or as fax to (+47) 67 11 19 10.

We will publish the results of this e-mail based part of the consultation by the beginning of November 2010 in the form of a report, with the responses presented region-wise. For more information please visit the website of the Farmers’ Rights Project of the Fridtjof Nansen Institute at (www.farmersrights.org) or contact Tone Winge (tow@fni.no).

Engelsk: http://www.farmersrights.org/about/fr_in_itpgrfa_7.html
Fransk: http://www.farmersrights.org/FR/concernant_traite4.html
Spansk: http://www.farmersrights.org/ES/acerca_tratado4.html
Thank you for all your help in making these important global consultations a success!

Oslo, Norway 6 July 2010
Sincerely yours,
(sign.)
Regine Andersen,
Senior Research Fellow and
Director of the Farmers’ Rights Project
Fridtjof Nansen Institute

UN-SUPPORTED RENEWABLE ENERGY CENTRE FOR WEST AFRICA OPENS IN CAPE VERDE.

A new regional centre to help develop the renewable energy potential for West Africa opened today in Cape Verde, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), which is supporting the facility, said.

The Centre for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (ECREEE), a specialized agency of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), is based in Praia, the capital of Cape Verde. It is supported by UNIDO and the Governments of Austria, Cape Verde and Spain.

It will help develop renewable energy and energy efficiency markets in West Africa, formulate policy, build capacity and quality assurance mechanisms, as well design financing plans. The centre will also implement demonstration projects with potential for regional scaling up.

“The current energy systems in the ECOWAS region are failing to support the growth prospects of the over 262 million inhabitants, especially the needs of the poor. The creation of ECREEE is a central milestone in efforts to accelerate the deployment of renewable energy and energy efficient technologies and services in the region,” said Yoshiteru Uramoto, Deputy to UNIDO’s Director-General.

“Investing in renewable energy systems and introducing energy efficient technologies will contribute to the region’s economic and social development without harming the environment,” he added.

It is estimated that a total of 23,000 megawatts of large and small hydroelectric potential is concentrated in five ECOWAS member States, of which only 16 per cent has been exploited.

Traditional biomass is already the main source of energy for the poor majority and accounts for 80 per cent of total energy consumed for domestic purposes. There are also considerable wind, tidal, ocean thermal and wave energy resources available. The region has vast solar energy potential.

UNIDO has a number of projects in Africa where renewable energy sources like small hydro, biomass gasification, wind energy, solar thermal and photovoltaic energy are used to promote the development of small industries, particularly in rural areas, that contribute to growth and poverty reduction.

The agency has also developed an energy programme for 18 countries in West Africa, including all ECOWAS member States, funded by the Global Environment Facility. ECREEE will become the main implementing agency of the $150 million programme that will focus on the energy access agenda and energy efficiency in key sectors of the economy.

 http://www.modul.ac.at/pgm/msc?gclid=CLP…

Master of Science in Sustainable Development, Management and Policy

Study in a Unique Multidisciplinary Environment

The Master of Science (MSc) degree programs* at MODUL University Vienna offer a unique multidisciplinary approach, working with research teams from three different departments: public governance and management, tourism and hospitality management and new media technology. Our research and teaching staff actively participate in international scholarly and professional networks and are at the forefront of their field, which enables us to bring you right to the heart of scientific practice.

Are you interested in studying the principles of sustainable development and understanding the impact of environmental policies on local communities and international businesses or the impact of economic development policies on environmental quality? Do you want to investigate what policies can be implemented to reduce environmental impacts in the tourism production chain? Do you want to understand to what extent the success of local environmental policy depends on civic participation in policy making? The future world needs people with comprehensive knowledge of both environmental and development issues to provide leadership for our local and global communities.
As a MU Vienna Master of Science graduate, you will be able to address the globalization and sustainability challenges of this millennium.

As a graduate of the MSc in Sustainable Development, Management and Policy you will be qualified for positions as consultants, scientists, policy advisors, program coordinators and environmental marketing specialists at research institutes, in government, in globally presented companies or at NGOs all over the world. In addition, the MSc degree prepares students for a subsequent PhD program. For further information, see the folder for the MSc programs.

Strenghts of the Study Program

• Studying in a multi-disciplinary research environment with an emphasis on critical thinking and the application of specialist knowledge to the challenges of the 21st century
• Understanding the emergent trends and key management issues by empowering the analytical skills of students
• The open atmosphere at MU guarantees the best support for writing the master thesis

Facts & Figures

Admission Criteria

• Admission to this master program is granted to persons who have completed at least the equivalent of a bachelor’s or diploma degree, and ideally can demonstrate their research skills and their basic knowledge of the natural and/or social sciences.
• A suitable preparation for the MSc in Sustainable Development, Management and Policy might include courses from among physics, geology, technical sciences, biology, geography, earth sciences, planning, sociology, policy sciences, law, management, or economics. Selection will be based upon transcripts of courses and grades taken at previous universities and other educational organizations.
• All candidates whose native language is not English and who have not graduated from an undergraduate program conducted in English are required to provide proof of proficiency in the English language by showing that they have passed one of the tests below or by satisfying the Admissions Committee in a form deemed appropriate by the Committee:
  - TOEFL (570 PBT or 230 CBT or 88 IBT) or
  - IELTS 5.5 (no sub-score under 5.0)
• MODUL University Vienna reserves the right to request that individual applicants submit TOEFL or IELTS scores, even if they have attended a secondary school conducted in English, to ensure their English skills meet the expected academic level.
• CV and motivation letter

Credit transfer applications must be submitted together with the admissions documents.

The Admission Committee will make decision on a case-by-case basis to determine whether there are sufficient grounds for admission. The admission committee decides on:

• Type of acceptance (full acceptance / conditional acceptance)
• If credits are transferred to the program
• Merit scholarships
• Additional courses that need to be taken by candidates who do not fulfill all requirements for entering the program

For further information on the admissions process, please contact admissions@modul.ac.at.

* Degree programs are subject to accreditation by the Austrian Accreditation Council.

Attachment
Application Form MSc Programs.pdf
Facts_MSc_Programs.pdf ——————————————————— ———————————————————- Study Abroad Cooperations MODUL University Vienna’s Department of Tourism and Hospitality Management maintains exchange agreements with many institutions. For general information on the exchange programs please contact the International Officer at the Student Service Center.  http://www.modul.ac.at/study_abroad among the list of such institutions is also included the - City University of New York, USA The City University of New York (CUNY) is the largest urban public university in the USA and also offers a program in Hospitality Management. An exchange program is under development. ——————————————————- Contact Admission Services For information for prospective students, please contact: Admission Services Address: Am Kahlenberg 1 1190 Wien, Austria Tel.: +43 1 320 3555-202 Fax: +43 1 320 3555-902 E-Mail: admissions@modul.ac.at University Communication Office For information on press and media material as well as for journalistic inquiries, please contact: University Communication Office Address: Am Kahlenberg 1 1190 Wien, Austria Tel.: +43 1 320 3555-104 Fax: +43 1 320 3555-902 E-Mail: andreas.eder@modul.ac.at ——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Thailand Fights Addiction to Plastic Bags.
Lynette Lee Corporal
 http://ipsterraviva.net/UN/currentNew.as…

BANGKOK, June 28 (IPS) – Buy a hairpin and the sales clerk has a microscopic plastic bag for it. A soda purchase from a corner store may end up having the liquid poured into a plastic bag, and then topped off with a plastic straw. There is no plastic bag yet that could fit a car, but if there was one country that could come up with one, Thailand would probably be it.

But here in the capital, local authorities have restarted a campaign to wean the residents of the Thai capital from their plastic bag ‘addiction’. For the second year in a row, the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) is holding its 45-day ‘No Bag, No Baht’ project, which offers consumers a one-baht (three U.S. cents) discount for every 100 baht (nearly three dollars) purchase if they use their own cloth bags when shopping in several local markets. Meanwhile, each plastic bag will cost them one baht.

This year’s BMA campaign was launched on Jun. 5, World Environment Day. Last year, the campaign targeted a cutback of 4.4 million plastic bags among Bangkok consumers. This year, BMA authorities want a cutback that is three times that figure. BMA figures show that every day, more than 600,000 plastic bags are used in this city of nine million people.

Their annual disposal cost reaches more than 600 million baht (18.4 million dollars), city officials have said. Local media have quoted BMA deputy governor Porntep Techapaibul as saying that of the city’s daily 10,000 tonnes of trash, about 1,800 tonnes are plastic bags, a number projected to increase by about 20 percent each year.

By now, many Bangkok residents have heard of the health and environmental hazards posed by plastic bags. Made from a non-renewable natural resource, petroleum, the bags have for their main ingredient polyethylene – or polythene – which is said to take 1,000 years to decompose on land and 450 years in water.

But even green-minded residents have problems avoiding the use of plastic bags. Thai Fund Foundation coordinator Chomphu Rammuang says that although she brings a big cloth bag to the supermarket and a lunch pack to work, she can still wind up with a plastic bag in hand by day’s end.

Thailand, after all, is a major manufacturer of plastic. That could help explain why even micro-entrepreneurs here think nothing of shoving their merchandise in plastic bags.

For instance, Yakult health drink vendor Suprathit says that a 100-piece pack of small plastic bags costs her only five baht (15 cents). Pusadee, who sells office lunches in clear plastic bags, also says she buys a kilo of these for 70 baht (two dollars). She says a kilo’s supply lasts her two days.

Thailand produces other plastic products. According to Greenpeace South- east Asia-Thailand country representative Tara Buakamsri, the country is among South-east Asia’s biggest manufacturers of polyvinyl chloride (PVC), which is the third most widely produced plastic after polythylene and polypropylene.

Cheap, durable and easy to assemble, it is often used to make pipes, water bottles, credit cards. It is also non-biodegradable.

In April, the English-language daily ‘Bangkok Post’ reported that domestic demand for PVC is about 450,000 tonnes per year.

A study presented in 2009 by Wuthichai Wongthatsanekorn at the World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology in Dubai, says that the recovery rate of plastic waste in Thailand in 2000 was only 23 percent.

It also says that only about 35 percent of the solid wastes collected from parts of Thailand outside of Bangkok are properly managed, while the rest of the waste products are “piled up in open dumping areas waiting to be dissolved.”

For a campaign to be effective, Tara says, consumers have to be aware of the importance and the long-term effect of the scheme.

“We need to study what economic mechanism will work if plastic bags are banned in Thailand,” he says. “What would be the reaction of the huge plastic industry in the country? What will be the economic incentive for people to follow this campaign?”

The good news, though, is that many establishments like supermarket chain Tesco Lotus and furniture store Home Pro are open to taking part in the BMA project. In fact, even before the ‘No Bag, No Baht’ project was relaunched, Tesco Lotus already had its very own ‘Green Bag Green Point’ campaign. For each bag saved, a customer can earn one Green Clubcard point.

Tesco Lotus senior corporate affairs manager Saofang Ekaluckrujee told IPS in an email interview, “We are very pleased to see policymakers such as the BMA making this issue a national priority. Our Green Bag Green Point scheme’s initial target is to reduce plastic bag usage by 9.8 million bags in 2010.” Other huge shopping malls like Siam Paragon and Central also give incentives like bonus shopper points for not using their bags – plastic or paper ones for that matter – or a 5 percent discount at certain times of the month.

Even small businesses are joining in. During the BMA campaign’s soft relaunch in May, than 5,000 stores in Bangkok’s famous Chatuchak weekend market participated.

Chomphu also reports that her monthly visits to the Chatuchak weekend market have become a pleasant experience, plastic bag-wise. “The vegetarian store near Chatuchak that I go to is actively participating in the project,” she says. “Buyers are encouraged to bring their own bags.”

Sergio had vision, good will, and the stamina of drive to high value achievements. He knew how to fit in the UN system but also was ready to pull the system in directions he considered right. Coming from Brazil, but having had also a thorough European upbringing in an intellectual global oriented home, he saw the potential in Kofi Annan’s Global Compact, its potential importance to Human Rights, and as such was ready to help. Without him around anymore, not even this UN organization has performed as the initiator’s envisioned.

============

Article by Sergio Vieira de Mello, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

‘Leader to leader’ commentary to Special Edition on Business and Human Rights.
New Academy Review, 5th Edition, 2003

www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/news_events/9…/bshop_unhchr.pdf

We found the following article and could not resist posting it – these days when the Global Compact, in New York City, at the Marriott hotel across town from the UN, had its 10th year celebratory meeting – under UN regulations that took it practically off its purpose and of the attention of the public.

————-

When the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted more than 50 years ago, the nation-state was the principal actor in the international arena. Today, in what has became known as the globalized world, transnational corporations have assumed significantly expanded roles, in some ways even superseding the roles of nation states. As the corporate role has grown, so have expectations for corporate responsibility. A company’s investment choices can make the difference between growth and decline for an entire country; how a company manufactures its products can make the difference between healthy economic growth and environmental devastation. Such power brings responsibility.

—
In the field of human rights — my particular concern as High Commissioner — there are growing expectations that corporations should do everything to promote and respect universally agreed standards. The parameters, however, are still being defined, and uncertainties remain about what is expected from corporations with regards to human rights.

Governments continue to possess primary responsibility for their citizens and for the protection of human rights.

Corporations, even as they accept greater responsibility in the human rights field, do not have the same legal duties as States under international law. Corporations cannot be expected to substitute for governments.

Nonetheless, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights calls upon all individuals and all organs of society to protect, uphold and promote human rights. This applies to governments and companies, individuals and groups.

Parts of the UN human-rights system are now addressing the role of the business sector. Several standard-setting initiatives, recently concluded or underway, will reinforce this trend. Indirect obligations for corporations will be strengthened through new or proposed treaties that deal with anti-corruption and tobacco control, for example — both of which touch on human rights issues.

Governments are negotiating and endorsing other standards that place indirect obligations on companies, for example with respect to the sale of diamonds from areas of armed conflict and the illicit trade in small arms. The Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights — an expert body of the inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights — is in the process of developing human-rights principles for companies under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other universally accepted norms. These principles are expected to place direct obligation on companies.

The European Parliament has called on the European Union to adopt binding human-rights regulations to govern the conduct of transnational corporations based in Europe.

It is often assumed that companies would oppose the development of legal standards to respect human rights. Recourse to law suggests (expensive) compliance procedures and possible litigation. However, companies committed to respecting rights will want to have some guidance in fulfilling that commitment; and all companies will benefit from clarity in international law. When the scope of duties is doubtful, companies cannot easily defend themselves or prevent criticism. Beyond that, corporate commitments to human rights should not carry market penalties. Where commitments are purely voluntary, pioneering companies might lose out to competitors who aren’t as committed to human rights. International standards provide a level playing field.

I believe that binding standards are crucial to enable the enforcement of minimum norms. But that is different, of course, from making a business case for change. We must provide incentives so that doing the right thing also makes good business sense. By focusing exclusively on setting standards, business is driven toward the logic of managing the costs of compliance. Society will then fail to benefit from the tremendous power of business to innovate and establish new forms of behaviour.

Business leaders don’t have to wait – indeed, increasingly they can’t afford to wait – for governments to pass and enforce legislation before they pursue “good practices” in support of international human rights standards within their own operations and in the societies of which they are part.

The Global Compact offers one possible vehicle for corporations to engage in achieving public goals. Formally launched by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in July 2000, the Global Compact calls on business leaders, trade unions and NGOs to join forces behind a set of core values in the areas of human rights, labor standards and the environment and to enact these principles within their spheres of influence. The Secretary-General picked these three areas because he was worried by a severe imbalance in global rule-making: while there are extensive and enforceable rules for economic priorities, there are few strong measures for these other concerns that have such a direct impact on human welfare.

Several hundred companies, from a very wide range of countries, have responded to the Global Compact. They are working with labour federations, civil society and the UN to make the Global Compact principles part of the strategic vision and everyday practices of companies in all regions.
With respect to human rights, corporations signing up to the Global Compact should, first, ensure that they support and respect human rights within their sphere of influence as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and, second, ensure they are not themselves complicit in human rights abuses.
More specifically, once a company has signed up to the Global Compact, it should set in motion changes to business operations so that the Global Compact and its principles become part of strategy, culture and day-to-day operations. The company is expected to publicly advocate the Global Compact and its principles via corporate communications such as press releases and speeches. It is further expected to publish in its annual report or similar document (e.g., sustainability report) describing the ways in which it is supporting the Global Compact and all its nine principles.

The Global Compact is developing a learning forum which will serve as an information bank of the disparate experiences — some successful, some not — companies have had in trying to implement the Compact’s principles. The idea is to move toward a system of performance-based good practices, reflecting the judgment of the broader international community, rather than
asking companies simply to adhere to varied and often weak local standards and legislation. It is too early to say whether this initiative will bring about large-scale improvements in business practices around the world. But I believe it is an experiment worth trying.

The corporate pioneers in this field have already shown there is much a company can do within its spheres of influence. For instance:

• HIV/AIDS: Volkswagen in Brazil and DaimlerChrysler in South Africa have introduced expanded “Aids Care” programs;

• Corporate culture: Companies such as Novartis, Pearson and Spedpol have incorporated the Compact’s principles into employees’ job responsibilities and criteria for success through their worldwide operations;

• Tolerance: Volvo and five other companies are combating discrimination and promoting diversity with a joint report and awareness campaign.

What does the Global Compact mean for involving the private sector in our human-rights work at the UN? Allow me to give you a few brief examples. At the 2001 World Conference against Racism, the Global Compact provided the framework for analysis and reflection on some very interesting initiatives by six companies from five continents on diversity, equality and non-discrimination in the workplace and surrounding communities. A multi-stakeholder workshop looked at partnership approaches to fighting discrimination and fostering diversity; a panel co-hosted by the OHCHR and the ILO brought together trade union, company and UN representatives to share experiences of implementing equal-opportunity and diversity policies within organisations. The resulting report of company experience, called ‘Discrimination is Everybody’s Business’, is available on the Global Compact website. The initiative has inspired a number of national initiatives between business and civil society that are getting underway this year.

My Office is also developing its role as a facilitator of dialogue with the private sector. In December 2001, for example, we hosted a workshop between representatives of indigenous peoples and natural-resource, energy and mining companies. There was a lively discussion at the workshop which led to recommendations for joint action.

The Global Compact is a voluntary initiative to promote good corporate citizenship. I want to stress that it is not, and must not be, a mere public relations exercise. A commitment to the Global Compact has to lead to concrete actions in support of the core principles.

A two-part approach – standard setting and voluntary action – to me is the right one if we are, in the words of Secretary-General Kofi Annan, “to reconcile the creative forces of private entrepreneurship with the needs of the disadvantaged and the requirements of future generations.”

——————————————-

This article appeared in the Spring 2003 edition of the ‘New Academy Review’, with over twenty articles focusing on ‘business and human rights’. For subscription details please e-mail:  info at new-academy-review.com.

Europe Moves Closer To Electric Car Infrastructure.