|
WEDO-Women’s Caucus Asessment of the 4th FfD January PrepCom 2002 - 28 January 2002 January PrepCom Results –
Success, Failure, In-between? At the last NGO Caucus meeting of the January PrepCom, all the caucuses (thematic, issue, and regional) were asked to assess the events and outcomes and share their views with one another in preparation for the Monterrey event. A number of assessments from NGO participants have already been disseminated on various lists. This is WEDO’s Women Caucus contribution. We look forward to your responses and additions, all of which we can use as a platform for discussing strategy and coordinating and sharing events in Monterrey. Whether the consensus document that was produced by the January PrepCom is an expression of failure, success or something in-between depends on where one stands. From a gender and WID perspective, it has been and still is critical to integrate gender and WID into the spirit and concrete intentions of the FfD process and any outcome document, if the goals are poverty eradication and a gender-sensitive, people-oriented sustainable development. Unfortunately the core concerns of gender equity and women’s economic rights and the realities for women and girls are not reflected systematically in the draft outcome document. In fact it is only occasionally visible in the document. And actual commitments to what is contained in the document are few and far between. Although the consensus document contains some definitely positive elements from a Women’s Caucus viewpoint, it is in general a substantively weak document. At the start of the January PrepCom, the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan proposed in his speech at least 6 tangible results as success criteria for the FfD process in general:
Focus on Financing for Gender-sensitive, People-centered, Sustainable Development” Only the third and sixth items can be said to be partially fulfilled. Granted, these are longer term goals that can’t be resolved in a two week PrepCom or by March; but the road paving the way to their resolution needed and needs to be constructed so it is ready by the closing of the March ICFfD. And using these criteria, the outcome document only begins to make a dent in them as of yet. The January PrepCom Process
– Overview Ambassador Escanero/Mexico had been given the task of polishing up the draft which was distributed at the press conference which was made available by late Monday afternoon. All parties, including the G77, seemed to put pressure on themselves to reach a consensus, although there were great divides. It is hard to say what the most contentious issues were because all areas had a number of sticky points that were extremely difficult, with some of the countries, such as the US, threatening to leave the process if they didn’t get their proposals through (ODA). “Staying Engaged” was the last section to be finalized with the final item being the date or not for a follow-up ICFfD (para 64). G77 wanted 2006 set as the date, and the final agreement was that the “modalities of that conference shal be decided upon not later than 2005”. Runners-up for the most contentious issue area are “ODA/international cooperation” and “international resources/FDI” which were finished just prior to “Staying Engaged”. The G-77 did get a number of their proposals into the document in one form or another, such as language that ‘initiatives should be carried out in close cooperation with all relevant stakeholders’, “including civil society”, that ‘capital flows should be consistent with developing country needs, that FfD follow-up is placed in General Assembly(GA), and that an “Intergovernmental Focal Point for the general follow up of the Conference and related issues” will be reconstituted from the UN GA’s current biennial “High-level dialogue on strengthening international cooperation for development”, an annual intergovernmental “spring meeting between the ECOSOC and the Bretton Woods institutions”, and that the UN Secretary General provide sustained follow-up within the UN system, ensure effective secretariat support, and report annually on this sustained process. Some of the G77 and China members consider it a fundamental achievement in itself to get a consensus which provides a platform from which to launch a continued process in Monterrey, hoping or counting on that the process will then build a momentum of its own. Also the EU and other UN members consider it a success to achieve a consensus document and focus on what lies ahead. However, governmental stakeholders’ downplaying of the consensus document itself in favor of focusing on what is yet to come at Monterrey and the subsequent follow-up deflects attention from the weakness of the document’s substance. It seems to be regarded as the currently best-possible result from a multi-year dialogue process where the UN member governments know each other’s divergent positions well and all parties have both gained and lost. The January PrepCom Process
Itself – Pros and Cons As at early PrepComs, many delegations and country representatives found time for meetings with NGOs during the two weeks; and the NGOs organized meetings with one of the co-chairs, Ruth Jacoby, the Mexican delegation concerning the Mexican Global NGO Forum, representatives from the FfD Bureau and Secretariat, and briefings between regional representatives and regional NGO caucuses, such as the EU Presidency and Commission-NGO briefing. With the beginning of the second week when negotiations on the text began and some governments didn’t want Civil Society to be included, it was interesting that it was actually the G77 that spoke for the inclusion of NGOs based on the quality presentations that had been given in the first week. It seemed that the G77 was championing NGOs, while certain Northern governments championed the inclusion of the BWIs who could give technical presentations at these meetings. The negative were the developments in week 2 that ended with the various informal working groups being moved to small rooms where even government delegates had a hard time finding room. By the end of the second week, the NGOs couldn’t ever participate as observers, although NGOs and other stakeholders could still participate as observers in the plenary that rarely met towards the end of the PrepCom. The FfD Bureau asked NGLS and the FfD Secretariat to call a meeting with the NGO Caucus and ask us to please not to attend the informal working groups which they so did on . A disadvantage of the process, especially in the second week, was the lack of set procedure and predictability, or changing rules of the game, where NGOs were constantly scrambling to adjust strategies in response to periodic changes in the negotiation process in the course of the second week. Finally, it should be underlined once again that the reduction to almost have no access by the end of the second week is extremely regretable. Even the government delegations, like Denmark, that otherwise had regular briefings with their NGOs had a difficult time doing so because the schedules and meeting venues for the informal working groups were not announced or posted in a transparent manner. Even government delegates were wandering around trying to find the location of their informal group. For NGOs access was only possible by catching representatives in the corridors when they emerged for short breaks. The January PrepCom – the
Substance Substance – Positive: Also positive is the commitment in the “Staying Engaged” section (para.s 60-64) to engage in a follow-up process which provides a means for increased cooperation between the Bretton Woods institutions and the UN and its agencies on implementing conference results (See Process section above on the view of government delegates on the results.) which is one of the few commitments made in this document. It is positive that social and gender budgeting is included in para. 17, although it is only included as being an example of “reinforcement of national efforts in capacity building in developing countries and countries with economies in transition”. A number of governments and organizations supported the use of gender budgeting in their presentations, such as Mexico and the ILO. Under the “mobilizing domestic resources” section, “protecting labor rights and the environment” is briefly listed together with “empowering women” in para. 9 as actions to do “while” pursuing appropriate policy and regulatory frameworks … in a manner consistent with national laws to encourage public and private initiatives, …”. The latter phrase is a problematic qualification in relation to women’s empowerment and labor rights, but the formulation leaves leeway for the interpretation that this qualification is not directly linked to the actions listed. However, in spite of these positive items, the success of the “encouragement” to “mainstream gender into all development policy” being included in the document is tempered by the fact that this consensus version is watered down from an earlier and more specific call for gender mainstreaming in international financial AND development institutions. This version doesn’t include gender mainstreaming in macro-economic policies as well as development policies. Gender mainstreaming in both policy types is absolutely crucial for the FfD process and its objectives of poverty eradication and sustainable development. Without this, some of the critical “challenges of FfD” will not be addressed, and this is not consistent with aim “to address the challenges of FfD” as laid out in para. 1 of the document. Indeed, as mentioned earlier, the Consensus Document only refers to gender and women 8 times, including para.58, in spite of the many opportunities the document provides for doing so. (See annex 1) Finally, although it is important that the vague contours of a follow-up process is definitely included and agreed upon in the Consensus Document, it fails to give a precise mandate and clear role to the UN in the governance of global economic relations. The UN General Assembly is requested to take on a Focal Point role and the ECOSOC is to be strengthened which is positive; but the UN is not identified as the primary or lead agency in this dialogue and cooperation, although they are the only stakeholder that has been given actual tasks in the follow-up. Substance – Negative: - The language is weak, and most proposals are not concrete enough to actually operationalize. The language politely requests, (“consider encourage, invite, welcome consideration”), or states facts (like “the need to ensure”, “stress the need”). The strongest is “recognize, acknowledge, encourage, and urge”; and there are only 8 commitments or language that could be considered commitments, such as “affirm, will implement, will ensure, resolve, underscore … commitments”. These are found in paragraphs - 23, 26ter, 38, 40, 47, 59, 60, 62 - which are mainly found in the trade section which affirms decisions made in Doha, and a couple in ODA and the rest in the Systemic issues. The rationale for this weak language is that the UN cannot give directives to the independent entities such as the WB, IMF and the WTO in spite of the considerable overlap of memberships and the UN being the most inclusive system, as they have different sets of members and constitutions. Especially Northern UN members did not want to “risk losing” the WB, IMF and WTO as key stakeholders. - The balance between the six issue areas is skewed with priority, focus and obligations being placed on mobilizing domestic resources which emphasizes that the responsibility for development is solely a domestic one, relying on neo-liberal economic policy prescriptions and on trade liberalization and FDI as the external development dynamic. The imbalance in the new global order against small and poor developing countries is not seen as a violation of these countries’ right to development; and the burden for sustainable development is squarely placed on the shoulders of developing countries, leaving the responsibility of the international community to being voluntary actions without elements of obligation. This uneven emphasis and skewed coherence among the issue areas was one of the items of great concern in the “Statement of Concern by the FfD NGO Women’s Caucus to Delegates Regarding the FfD Process and Outcomes”, 18 October 2001. It remains a critical concern in the FfD process up to Monterrey. - Cooperation with civil society also has low visibility, especially in the Systemic Issue section; - An opportunity has been missed for establishing a human rights framework for development; - References to environmental sustainability for development as discussed in the WSSD process are lacking; - Existing power relations in global governance are reaffirmed; - The document does not establish new processes to increase international tax cooperation; - It lessens the primacy and importance of the Millennium Development Goals, although they are referred to together with “and other international development goals”; - It ignores innovative approaches such as the debate on Global Public Goods and their financing. Para. 37 has completely disappeared from the text due to the impossibility to find a compromise among the different parties; - The language on ODA and international cooperation is weak, mainly due to the US’ opposition to the approved UN goal of (a minimum of) 0,7% GNP for ODA, although references to it are included; and the call to double ODA has been dropped. The rationale for the EU to agree to dropping the “doubling of ODA” as suggested by the UN Secretary-General is because a doubling would only give 0,5% and it was preferable to maintain 0,7% as a minimum. Also a statement by business from the International Chamber of Commerce noted that even doubling ODA would fall short of the 0,7% goal and offered that the engagement of the private sector would enable success, stating that measurable objectives with clear benchmarks were needed and that private sector activities could support development initiatives by linking ODA and FDI. However, most of the dialogue from potential donor countries has focused on using existing funds more effectively, improving the quality of aid without more funds, or moving funding sources around. Although the consensus document encourages countries to meet the UN’s minimum goal of 0,7% of GNP, there are very few commitments to providing additional funds – aside from the example of Sweden that stated in its opening speech that it would soon reach 1% ODA which is unfortunately an exception. The EU has adopted an initiative for all EU countries to reach the 0,7%, but there is no time frame or substantive proposal yet. The January PrepCom – NGO
Process - “Women’s Caucus Priority Points” statement and text proposals, 18 January; - “Statement by the Women’s Caucus on the Fourth PrepCom on Financing for Development”, 25 January - “Statement of Concerns from Women’s NGO’s from the Central and Eastern European and Newly Independent States Region”, 14-25 January - DAWN Submissions to the Women’s and NGO Caucuses on the Draft Text of the Monterrey Consensus, Part I/19 January and Part II/23 January Also the “WEDO Fact Sheet: Women’s Representation in Economic Decision Making” was distributed together with the previous WC Recommendations, Briefing Papers, and the UNIFEM-WEDO Gender Audit. The WC also initiated an action on the last day – Right to Development Not For Sale – where WC and NGO Caucus participants were invited to go around with a sticker saying “not for sale $$$$” with bill of one’s own currency attached which a number of people did. It was at the least a good conversation starter and opportunity to initiate one’s lobby points.. The formulation of some assessment documentation of the new draft texts was initiated underways but modified to the resulting statements, as the shifts in the process necessitated changes in advocacy and lobby strategy. Although this PrepCom was two weeks in comparison to the one week October PrepCom, there seemed to be less time to coordinate NGO activities. The increased number of NGO caucuses in addition to national and regional NGO-delegation meetings meant that multiple overlaps were inevitable. The Trade Caucus for example had a hard time meeting as a group, and most discussions went on with one or two contact persons meeting members in the corridor and passing information back and forth. As usual, the WC, scheduled 9:45-10:30, was squashed for time in between the running over of the NGO Caucus and the start of the plenary at 10:00 and the next caucus at 10:30. Strategy/De-briefing Sessions that were introduced at the October PrepCom were also put on the program this time. The first one took place on Wednesday, 16 January, as a Lobby Training Session with the help of Litha Musyimi-Ogana/ WEDO and Barbara Adams/NGLS for the many new participants to the WC and the FfD process and was greatly appreciated. Otherwise a couple debriefings were scheduled each week, in addition to the daily WC in the morning. With the myriad of meetings taking place and time at a premium, finding sufficient time to summarize and strategize in an effort to be proactive as a preference to being reactive is difficult. With this in mind, the system of appointing WC contact persons in the various NGO caucus groupings and action groups such as the NGO Caucus Press Conference and statement groups and to cover the plenary worked pretty well. WC could certainly use more resource persons to cover the many tasks; and more emphasis should be placed on ensuring time to summarize and exchange intelligence/information that can then be translated into strategies and actions. This system and strategy will be used in Monterrey, so innovations and improvements to our methods are very welcome. From NYC to Monterrey and
Beyond - The Way Forward The task at hand could be to increase the visibility of gender and WID in relation to the consensus document, through advocacy and educational events targeted at delegates and NGOs, pointing out where gender analysis is buried in the text, if sustainable development and poverty eradication are the agenda. This would flag the areas where gender and WID isn’t tangible but should be for implementation. Therefore the consensus document must be read with gender glasses. NGO participation in the Roundtables at the Monterrey ICFfD can be a means of doing this through both gender-sensitive government and NGO/CSO presentations. It can also be done through gender-sensitive activities at the FfD Global Forum and gender-sensitive side events at the ICFfD. We need to discuss advocacy and lobby strategies for these events. As a basis for this work, the Women’s Consultation Recommendations, revised October 2001, the WEDO/UNIEM Women’s Consultation Briefing Series #1-7, the WEDO-UNIFEM Gender Audit, both October 2001, together with the many statements that from the WC and the various NGOs should be studied for proposals that can insert a gender dimension into the weak Monterrey Consensus proposals and thus assist in the preparation for a gender-sensitive operationalization of the FfD follow-up. Just to illustrate a few possibilities, I would suggest: Mobilizing Domestic Resources(2) - Develop gender disaggregated analysis of national budgets to obtain the facts about women’s labor – paid and unpaid, formal and informal, in comparison with men – from which economic development policies and strategies that are truly equitable and efficient can be devised. - Adopt and enforce transparency measures in external and internal financial decision-making bodies, and government agencies and institutions. Such measure would increase public awareness and involvement in policymaking processes, thus promoting good governance and democracy and reducing incidences of corruption - Incorporate gender-aware analyses into all macro-economic decision-making. Micro-credit alone cannot eliminate the barriers women face in accessing markets and financial resources. Macro-economic policies involving trade and loan agreements, agribusiness, land distribution, and tax administration must be developed with awareness and consideration of their gender implications. Mobilizing International Resources/FDI (2) - Prioritize gender-sensitive sustainable human development as an integral part of economic growth. A mechanism to facilitate this policy could be the establishment of a gender desk in national finance ministries. - Enact gender- and environmental sensitive regulatory frameworks to monitor global capital flows and employment practices of global corporations and multinationals. - Establish gender –sensitive Sustainability Impact Assessments of public-private sector partnerships that review fiscal and social risks of joint investments and ventures as well as social responsibility, accountability, transparency and the participation of women’s and other civil society organizations and unions. - Develop gender-sensitive program that link small business development with foreign enterprises and that encourage the transfer of information and technology to small businesses and the informal sector. This report contains some views and proposals that should be discussed on the ffd_wc-list serve. Please share your reactions and pro-actions, and let’s develop our strategy for Monterrey. Let’s use Monterrey to make gender and women visible in the document and the follow-up. JGF === Notes: (1) Partially based on an interview with Carol Barton, WICEJ coordinator, for AWID and WICEJ. For AWID (Association for Women's Rights in Development) newsletter, December 2001. Sent to WICEJ List 11 Jan 2002. (2) Women’s Consultation Recommendations, revised, October 2001, WEDO, and the WEDO/UNIFEM Women’s Consultation Briefing Series #1-7, October 2001, WEDO. ANNEX
1: (1) VISIBILITY of GENDER
& WOMEN in DOCUMENT Domestic Resources, para.8: We will pursue appropriate policy and regulatory frameworks … in a manner consistent with national laws to encourage public and private initiatives, including at the local level, and foster a dynamic and well-functioning business sector, while improving income growth and distribution, raising productivity, empowering women, and protecting labour rights and the environment. Para.9: empowering women and protecting labour rights and the environment. Para.13: …,social services and social protection, …—which take special care of children and older persons and are gender sensitive and fully inclusive of the rural sector and all disadvantaged communities—are vital to enabling people, especially people living in poverty, to better adapt to and benefit from changing economic conditions and opportunities Para.16: Microfinance and credit for micro, small and medium-size enterprises, including in the rural areas, particularly for women, … Para.17: …capacity building …in areas such as:… human resource development, … social and gender budget policies,… Mobilizing International
Resources for Development (for first
time) Systemic Issues Trade, ODA/International
Cooperation, and Debt (2) COMMITMENTS Para.26ter: We will implement the commitments made in Doha to address the marginalization of the least developed countries in international trade… Increasing international
financial and technical cooperation for development Para.40: We will ensure that the long-term resources at the disposal of the international financial system, including regional and sub-regional institutions and funds, allow them to adequately support sustained economic and social development, technical assistance for capacity-building, and social and environmental protection schemes. Addressing Systemic Issues Para.59: …We reaffirm our commitment to enable the General Assembly to play effectively its central role as the chief deliberative, policy-making, and representative organ of the United Nations, and to strengthen further the Economic and Social Council to enable it to fulfill the role ascribed to it in the UN Charter. III. Staying Engaged Para.62: To support the above at the national, regional and international levels, we resolve:… |
|
Back
to FfD-Women's Consultations
|