 |
 |
United Nations Development Programme |
Lecture of the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan
at the London School of Economics and Political Science 25 February 2002 (extract)
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It’s
a great honour for me to speak at the London School of Economics, which counts
among its alumni so many heroes of the struggle for independence and for development
in the former colonial world – including Kwame Nkrumah, the founder-president
of my own country.
What I want to talk to you about this afternoon is essentially the continuation of that struggle.
Like the struggle for independence, the struggle for development has to be carried on mainly in developing countries and by their people. But it is a struggle that concerns the whole world.
Eighteen months ago, at the Millennium Summit in New York, world leaders reached agreement on some immediate targets, the Millennium Development Goals, for halving extreme poverty in the world by 2015 by tackling both its worst symptoms and its most obstinate causes.
I believe success depends on the answers to three global questions, each of them associated particularly with one of the three international conferences referred to in the title of my lecture.
The first question is: Will men and women in the developing world be allowed to compete on fair terms in the global market?
That question received the beginning – but only the beginning – of a positive answer at last November’s meeting of the World Trade Organisation in Doha.
The second question is: How can we mobilise the resources so desperately needed for development?
That question will be discussed next month at the International Conference on Financing for Development in Monterrey, Mexico.
And the third question – a more complex one – is: Can the people now living on this planet improve their lives, not at the expense of future generations, but in a way from which their children and grandchildren will benefit?
That, of course, will be the issue at the World Summit on Sustainable Development that begins in Johannesburg six months from tomorrow.
Poor people in poor countries are not asking for a handout. What they want is a hand up. They would be the first to say that trade, not aid, is the path out of poverty.
That’s why it’s so important that we fulfil the promise of Doha – the promise of a “development round” of trade negotiations, which will remove the unfair subsidies now given to producers in rich countsries, and fully open the markets of those countries to labour-intensive exports from poor ones.
However, even if developed countries were to declare their markets fully open, developing countries would still need help in walking through the door.
Many small and poor countries do not attract investment – not because they are badly governed or have unfriendly policies, but simply because they are too small and poor to be interesting markets or to become major producers. The unpleasant truth is that markets put a premium on success, and tend to punish the poor for the very fact of being poor.
At Monterrey, leaders from north and south – presidents, finance ministers, the United Nations, the Bretton Woods institutions, heads of private companies and foundations, and NGOs – will come together to discuss creative, practical ways of overcoming this market failure. They will address issues crucial to the fight against poverty and the transition to sustainability – such as debt relief, commodity prices, and the management of the global economy.
They will seek ways to tap private investment, which is a far bigger source of money for development than official development assistance will ever be. The question is how to tap it with the right mix of incentives, policies and partnerships.
But I hope the leaders of industrialised countries will also give new commitments of official aid.
Our greatest challenge is to show that these problems are part of an even bigger problem – the problem of global poverty and underdevelopment. Islands of treatment are a vital start; but we must also address the larger sea of misery.
There is a global deal on the table: developing countries doing more to reform their economies and increase spending on the needs of the poor, while the rich countries support this with trade, aid, investment and debt relief. At Monterrey, let us clinch that deal!
And now I come to Johannesburg.
The World Summit on Sustainable Development is not, as some people think, simply another conference on the global environment. The whole idea of sustainable development, reflected in the Rio Earth Summit ten years ago, is that environment and development are inextricably linked.
Much was achieved at Rio. Agenda 21, adopted there, remains as visionary today as it was then – and local authorities and civil society in almost every part of the world have been working to implement it. Moreover, legally binding conventions on climate change, biodiversity and desertification have been added since then, as well the action plans adopted at United Nations conferences throughout the 1990s, now brought together in the Millennium Development Goals.
One important task at Johannesburg is to show that sustainable development is far from being as abstract as it sounds. It is a life-or-death issue for millions upon millions of people, and potentially the whole human race.
Our way of life has to change, but how, and how fast?
Agenda 21 and all that flowed from it can be said to have given us the “what” – “what” the problem is, what principles must guide our response.
Johannesburg must give us the “how” – how to bring about the necessary changes in state policy; how to use policy and tax incentives to send the right signals to business and industry; how to offer better choices to individual consumers and producers; how, in the end, to get things done.
Far from being a burden, sustainable development is an exceptional opportunity – economically, to build markets and create jobs; socially, to bring people in from the margins; and politically, to reduce tensions over resources that could lead to violence and to give every man and woman a voice, and a choice, in deciding their own future. What is needed is a positive vision, a clear road map for getting from here to there, and a clear responsibility assigned to each of the many actors in the system.
Johannesburg must give us that vision – a vision of a global system in which every country has a place, and a share in the benefits. And it must give us all a clear sense of our share in the task.
Will these three conferences – Doha, Monterrey, Johannesburg – find a place in the history books? It depends on us. Let’s resolve to make it come true!
|
On 14 February the UN Report “Human consequences of Chernobyl Nuclear Accident. A Strategy for Recovery” was introduced to the Russian public at the State Museum of Contemporary History of Russia.
The study was conducted by a multidisciplinary team of experts on behalf of United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF), with the support of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) and World Health Organization (WHO). International consultants worked together with national experts from Belarus, Russia and Ukraine.
The worst affected countries, Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, have made an enormous commitment in addressing the consequences of the accident, the scale of which has never been fully appreciated by the outside world. Fifteen years after the accident, governments in all three countries are reviewing their policies in response not only to economic constraints, but also to new priorities and a new perception of the kinds of measures that are needed to address the long-term consequences of the accident. The international community also needs to adopt a new approach to the needs of those affected. A concerted campaign is needed to remind the World of the on-going suffering of the affected communities and of the continuing need for international support for recovery efforts.
The analysis of health, socio-economic and environmental effects
of the accident and the events that followed concludes that the Emergency Phase
covering the fifteen years following the accident from 1986 to 2001 is now over.
This phase was characterised by urgent measures to make the reactor safe, to
resettle the population in immediate danger, to deliver humanitarian assistance
to those in urgent need and to explore the best means to address longer-term
issues through pilot projects and research is now over.
The new approach, to be embodied in a second, ten-year, Recovery Phase, will focus on enabling the individuals and communities affected by the disaster to enter fully into society by taking control of their own lives and acquiring the means for self-sufficiency through economic and human development.
For the next ten years, among other measures, resources should be concentrated on mainstream services which have the greatest effect on life expectancy and general well-being, including primary health care, health education, clean water, and economic development.
Expanded health reform in the three countries is needed, ensuring that services are delivered on the basis of medical need and that poor rural communities get improved care. Reformed medical services should also address the effects of social and environmental factors on health, including poor diet, alcoholism, tobacco abuse and living conditions.
A long-term, independent, properly funded and internationally recognized program of research on the lasting environmental and health effects of Chernobyl is essential.
Special attention should be paid to the lifetime needs of people who were infants or children at the time of the accident, lived in the areas affected by the fallout of radioactive iodine and may have contracted or be at risk of thyroid cancer, which has emerged as a primary threat.
Intensive economic measures should be undertaken, aimed at expanding self-sufficiency among those most affected, along with ongoing but more focused direct support until such sufficiency is achieved. National policies that bring about an investment-friendly business environment, including village-level enterprise zones, and business development incentives in towns and cities adjacent to the most affected areas. Special emphasis must be put on the local agricultural economy.
Adequate measures to improve environmental policy planning, implementation and management at the local, national and transnational levels should be implemented.
The UN Report emphasizes the need to focus attention on two groups of affected population. First, from 100 to 200 thousand people who live in severely contaminated areas: unemployed re-settlers, and those, whose health is most directly threatened, including victims of thyroid cancer. This group is at the core of the cluster of problems created by Chernobyl, and focusing on their needs and helping them take control of their destinies must be a priority. The second group is an additional hundreds of thousands of people whose lives have been directly and significantly affected but who are already in a position to support themselves. This group needs as a priority to be reintegrated into the society as a whole, so that their needs are addressed through mainstream provision and criteria.
The three affected countries and the international community need to combine their efforts in moving toward a new phase of recovery and sustainable development. The aim should be to “work toward normalizing the situation of the individuals and communities concerned in the medium and long-term”. This depends on a holistic approach to addressing the medical, environmental and economic problems faced by the affected people and enabling them to take more control over their future. The report suggests ways, in which the international community could practically support such an approach.
Mr Frederick Lyons, the UN Resident Coordinator in the Russian Federation, Ms Rosemary McCreery, UNICEF Representative in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, and Dr Mikko Vienonen, Special Representative of the WHO Director General in Russia answered questions from the media.
Representatives of Russian governmental and legislative bodies, donor agencies, NGOs, administrations of Bryansk, Orel and Tula regions also took part in the event. They were invited to view an excellent exhibition of children’s drawings, provided by the Bryansk regional NGO “Radimichi-For Children of Chernobyl”.
“A coordinated campaign is needed to remind the world on the need for international help for the recovery of affected territories. A new approach must help people return to a normal life in the medium term. An integrated approach should combine medical, ecological and economic measures,” ITAR-TASS stated a few minutes after the launch. RosBusinessConsulting stresses the need to review existing budgets allocated for the recovery measures. The development of socio-economic infrastructure is essential for the revival of the territories affected, says RIA Novosti. The emergency stage is over, a new “recovery stage” is to start, states Strana.ru. A substantive article in “Vremya MN” a daily newspaper, states, that “one should stop worrying and start to live. This is the best way to overcome the consequences of the catastrophe”.
In the coming months, the UN Country Teams in the Russian Federation, Belarus and Ukraine will continue consultations at all levels aimed at promoting consensus around the strategy presented in the report. These consultations will also begin the process of leveraging national resources and identifying other local and international resources to support the implementation of the strategy.