
|

| |
FEATURE STORY
New Style of Dialogue Among Major Stakeholders Holds Promise For Future Change
in Global Negotiations
 |
|
03 June, BALI, Indonesia In the ten years since the Rio Earth
Summit opened up the decision-making process to include nine major groups from
civil society, the process of interactive dialogue has evolved in a manner that
could serve as a new model for future negotiations within the multilateral
context. |
The multi-stakeholder dialogues that concluded last week featured focused
discussions on the central objective of the World Summit on Sustainable
Development, which is to promote sustainable development activities that will
achieve measurable results on the ground.
In separate sessions covering sustainable development governance, capacity
building for sustainable development and the issue of partnerships, the
representatives of major groups voiced a wide-range of proposals to government
delegates. These ranged from the need for a legally binding convention on
corporate accountability to equal representation of women at all levels of
economic decision-making, and the need for prerequisites and principles for
partnerships. (See
Chairman's Summary of the Multi-Stakeholder
Dialogue).
The dialogues were noteworthy for the number of government delegates who
attended and participated, and PrepCom Chairman Emil Salim said the ideas from
the major groups are "important contributions and deserve our careful
consideration."
The idea of allowing representatives of major groupsthe groups closest to
people in societyto participate in the intergovernmental discussion on
sustainable development was radical when it was proposed, but in its present
incarnation of facilitated dialogues, it is even more radical-representatives
of major stakeholders can address their concerns directly to each other, or to
government delegates.
As an answer to the problem of dialogues becoming forums for lengthy statements
and monotonous monologues, the Bali multi-stakeholder dialogues used
facilitators to keep the discussions moving and on topic.
"Negotiation in the multilateral setting is broken and needs to be
fixed," according to Paul Hohnen, one of the facilitators. "Too much
time, and too much money, is spent on achieving too little."
A good part of the dialogue in the sessions was interactive, and delegations
were put on the spot on occasion. But according to Ida Koppen, the other
facilitator, as long as the setting is so formal, it will be hard to get away
from people just making statements.
"I was impressed by the level of commitment by the representatives of the
major groups," Koppen said, but she added that there were widely varying
degrees of preparations. She noted that for many major groups, meeting
beforehand was prohibitively expensive.
Many major groups, she said, enter the discussions from a feeling of
powerlessness, and consequently become defensive. But through preparation, she
said, there are ways to gain power, such as coming with well prepared
proposals.
Hohnen said the UN was showing leadership through the multi-stakeholder
dialogue, not only in raising issues, but also in process. 'We covered a lot of
ground in a short time. This is a road to go down further in the
decision-finding process."
Both facilitators said that dialogues could be enhanced if they could break
down into smaller groups and if the dialogues were not so closely tied to the
formal negotiating sessions. That, they said, caused many groups to assume
postures from which they could not budge in order to find common ground.
In fact, non-governmental organizations asked at one point during the
discussion on partnership, "where is this conversation going." The
NGOs said that discussing the partnership initiatives might make it seem as if
they accept the idea, when they reserved the right to reject it altogether if
governments fail to make serious commitments in the negotiated outcome
document.
The proposals put forward by the major groups for consideration by delegations
contain suggested elements for partnerships and the means and mechanisms for
monitoring the follow-up after the Johannesburg Summit. The proposals call for
partnerships that are credible and have measurable objectives and targets, can
be monitored and have proper financing mechanism. They also called for the
partnerships to be guided by principles such as equality, transparency, the
precautionary and polluter-pays principles, and for full participation at an
early stage. The idea of respect for rights, and the idea of equity between
generations, were also stressed by the major groups.

__________________________________________________________________
Copyright © United
Nations
Department of Economic and
Social Affairs
Division for
Sustainable Development
Comments and suggestions
24 August 2006
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|