International Environmental Governance

Robert WabunohaLegal Officer, Regional Office for Africa

What is IEG?

“We understand global environmental governance (GEG) as the sum of organizations, policy instruments, financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms that regulate the processes of global environmental protection.”

International Institute for Sustainable Development

Why IEG?

Objective:

Comprehensive protection of the environment at the international and national level.

Assist policy-makers in developing laws, regulations, policies, programmes, etc.

Complement governance framework for sustainable development.

An effective IEG system:

Building blocks of an effective IEG system: 1) scientific evidence;2) coherent decision-making and objective-setting;3) institutional architecture to implement and

coordinate;4) management and operationalization; and5) coordination of the effective implementation at the

country level.

Why does nobody care for the environment?

Environment’s dilemma Public good Issue overlaps

History of the current IEG system

Main instruments:

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), established in 1972 by General Assembly resolution 2997

A plethora of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs)

Development of IEG system

From 1972 to now: Negotiation of numerous multilateral environmental

agreements

Creation of multiple funding mechanisms

System’s loss of coordinating mechanism

Result: FRAGMENTATION

Organisations with environmental mandate

Agriculture

Air Pollution

Biodiversity

Chemicals

Climate change

Desertification

Energy

Fisheries

Forests

Invasive species

Trade in endangered species

Water

UNCCDCSDECAFAOIFADILOITCITUIUCNOCHASSOUNCTADUNDPUNEPWorld BankWTO

CSDECEECLACESCAPESCWAGEFICAOILOLRTAPOECDOHCHRUNECEUNEPUN-HabitatWHOWorld BankWMO

Cartagena ProtocolCBDCITES CMSRamsarECAECLACESCAPESCWAFAOGEFIUCNUNDPUNEPUNESCOUNUWIPOWorld BankWTO

CSDFAOGEFIAEAIFADILOIMOOECDOHCHRSBCUNCTADUNDPUNECEUNEPUNEPUN-HabitatUNHCRUNICEFUNIDOUNITARUPUWFPWHOWMOWTO

CBDCSDESCAPESCWAGEFICAOIEAIPCCISDROECDUNCTADUNDPUNEPUNESCOUNFCCCUNITARWHOWMOWorld BankWTO

CBDCSDUNCCDECAESCAPFAOIFADISDRITUOECDOCHAUNDPUNEPWTO

CSDECLACGEFIAEAIEAUNDPUNEPUPUWorld Bank

CBDCITESCSDFAOILOIMOITLOSIWCWTOUNEPWTOWWC

CBDCSDGEFFAOIFADITTOIUCNUNEPUNFFUNHCRWorld BankWTO

CBDFAOGEFGISPIMOIUCNUNEP

BonnCBDCITESInterpolIUCNUNEP

CBDCSDRamsarECAESCAPESCWAGEFIMOITUUNDPUNECEUNEPUNESCOUNFPAUNICEFUNUWHOWMOWorld BankWWC

Summary of meetings and decisions of major MEAs 1992-2007

Non-alignment of policy and finance

UNEP Environment Fund Global Environmental Facility

Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF)

Multilateral Fund of the Montreal Protocol World Bank: Climate Investment Funds (CIFs)

Coordination mechanisms

Environment Coordination Board

Environment Management Group - 1999

Why IEG reform?

The fragmentation of the IEG system has led to a number of deficiencies, including: Use of financial resources Inconsistency in interpretation of rules Neglect of interlinkages Structural inefficiencies No coherent, system-wide environmental strategy

Implementation gap Monitoring, review and accountability

Ongoing IEG Processes

Currently open IEG processes: 2002 Cartagena Package, UNEP GC/GMEF decision SS.VII/1 – universal

membership; 2005 World Summit Outcome, Paragraph 169, resulting in the UN General

Assembly Informal Consultative Process on the Institutional Framework for United Nations Environment Work;

2008 Commonwealth Consultations on IEG; 2008 Joint Inspection Unit Report on the Management Review of

Environmental Governance in the UN System (Executive Director’s response to be discussed by the CPR on 5 November 2009);

2009 and 2010 Consultative Group set up under UNEP GC decisions 25/4 and SSXI/1 respectively.

UNEP Governing Council decision 25/4

Established a regionally representative, consultative group of ministers or high level representatives, with two co-Chairs, one ‑from a developing and one from a developed country (Kenya and Italy)

The group met twice (Belgrade 39 countries; Rome 43 countries)

The group presented a set of options for improving international environmental governance to the UNEP Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum in February 2010

President of the Governing Council transmitted the set of options to the General Assembly in May 2010

The Set of options

Objectives and functions identified:

1. Creating a strong, credible and coherent science base.

2. Developing a global authoritative and responsive voice for environmental sustainability.

3. Achieving coherence within the UN system.

4. Securing sufficient, predictable and coherent funding.

5. Ensuring a responsive and cohesive approach to meeting country needs.

UNEP Governing Council decision SSXI/1

Established a consultative group on the same basis as the previous group with Kenya and Finland as co-Chairs

The group met in July 2010 in Nairobi (58 countries) and in November 2010 in Helsinki, Finland (42 countries)

The group received input from the UN system through the Environment Management Group and civil society

The group built upon the Belgrade Set of options and agreed on the Nairobi - Helsinki Outcome, submitted to the 26th session of the Governing Council

The Nairobi – Helsinki Outcome

System-wide responses:

To strengthen the science-policy interface with the full and meaningful participation of developing countries;

To develop a system-wide strategy for environment in the United Nations system;

To encourage synergies between compatible multilateral environmental agreements and to identify guiding elements for realizing such synergies;

To create a stronger link between global environmental policy making and financing;

To develop a system-wide capacity-building framework for the environment;

To continue to strengthen strategic engagement at the regional level.

The Nairobi – Helsinki Outcome

Form-related aspects of broader institutional reform

a) Enhancing UNEP;b) Establishing a new umbrella organization for sustainable

development;c) Establishing a specialized agency such as a world environment

organization;d) Reforming the United Nations Economic and Social Council and the

United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development;e) Enhancing institutional reforms and streamlining existing structures.

Essential building blocks

The essential building blocks for transformative IEG reform are:

Universal membership of the UNEP Governing Council; Alignment of global environmental policy with global

environmental financing; Closing the implementation gap through increased capacity

building and technology transfer; Voluntary review of MEA implementation.

Contributing to Rio+20

One of the two main themes of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development, to be held in 2012 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, is the institutional framework for sustainable development. IEG is an integral part of it.

The Nusa Dua declaration of the UNEP GC/GMEF of 2010 calls for UNEP and the Consultative Group to directly contribute to the process.

The outcome of the First Preparatory Committee for the Rio+20 Conference equally calls for the Consultative Group to feed into the preparatory process.

Rio+20 provides the political momentum for comprehensive reform.

Thank you