Summit report
Johannesburg summit: What will change?
~Effects of Johannesburg Summit in the coming
decade~
A SEED JAPAN / Yuki Tanabe
At Johannesburg, trade problems were the
point in dispute
Agenda 21 drawn up at the Earth Summit in
Rio a decade ago was supposedly a benchmark
to curb poverty and environmental destruction,
and promote sustainable development. However,
A21 flopped, achieving little of what it
set out to do. 10 years down the track, the
Johannesburg Summit was held in South Africa,
and the Implementation Document was drawn
up as a follow-up to A21 to determine specific
goals and methods to reach them. Though dubbed
as the ‘Environmental and Development Summit’,
the real focus of Johannesburg Summit was
in fact on trade problems. So much so that
it could be described as a prelude to the
next WTO Ministerial meeting (the highest
decision making authority of the WTO held
every two years) to be held in Cancun, Mexico
in September 2003.
The UN; UN-Decisive
In the trade part, what was most feared by
the public was that environmental treaties
such as the Biodiversity treaty and Kyoto
Protocol would be subordinated to WTO rules.
During the middle phase of the Summit, and
agreement to ‘give precedence to the WTO
agreements over international environmental
and development agreements’ caused quite
a stir. Due to strong lobbying by NGOs and
a last minute comment by the EU and G-77,
the proposal was taken back, though wording
implying continued consistency with WTO rules
remained. What this means is, in future UN
conferences dealing with international economy
and politics such as trade, it will become
increasingly difficult to make decisions
that contradict WTO rules. Take for example
‘Give and Take’ policies that influence
the value of goods produced by Africa and
other poor nations with the severest debt.
These goods are vital for securing stable
foreign currencies, but their value will
not be decided by UNCTAD, in which developing
nations have a say, but rather by the WTO
which is heavily influenced by developed
nations. Tragic as it is for the public,
in the following decade the range of WTO
decisions will only increase, and the day
when the UN looses it’s decision making
power in social policies may not be too far
away.
Water; The last Great Market ~Preparation
for Privatization~
Who then will decide these policies? In place
of the UN’s role of deciding
fair international
rules, privatization of public
services such
as energy and water pushed by
multinational
companies are attempting to promote
‘global
anarchy/ an economy oriented
world’.
One of the main objectives of the Johannesburg
Summit was ‘promotion of multi-party partnerships’.
However considering only partnerships between
governments and businesses, this could encourage
privatization of public facilities. Privatization
has been occurring in Japan for several years:
from National Railways to Japan Railways,
and Japan Telephone and Telegram Authorities
to NTT, and as there have been no major negative
effects compared to other counties, few people
are aware of the potential threats of privatization.
In developing countries with unstable market
and financial infrastructure, privatization
of public services and the involvement of
multi-national corporations in public services
can bring major problems. Take for example
extremely poor people who are unable to pay
for water services. Privatization of waterworks
would mean cutting them off from this service
necessary for human life. Blindly pushing
for these partnerships without proper rules
can only be seen as a strategy for privatization
of public services leading up to the next
WTO Cabinet Assembly in Cancun.
Though concrete goals for improving access
to water have been added to the Global Implementation
Document, how we go about preparing and managing
the water facilities to reach these goals
will be a major challenge. Multinational
corporations will hold the real power at
the 3rd World Water Forum to be held in Kyoto, Osaka,
and Shiga in March 2003, and leaving these
problems up to them is equivalent to selling
off the last great market: Water.
Continue monitoring, Lobby, Empower!
At Johannesburg Summit, not only did we fail
to curb the negative effects of globalization
brought about by free trade that WTO and
other international organizations are pushing
for, but in fact there was an agreement that
would lead to an increase in the negative
effects. Whether we can maintain a democratic
decision-making system and make a start to
put an end to poverty and environmental destruction
depends on whether we the public can continue
to monitor international meetings, actively
lobby the government, and empower ourselves.
Translated by Ken Rhodes
