Report
of the
UN Civil Society Outreach Symposium
Sponsored by
The Stanley Foundation
Cosponsored by the
World Federation of United Nations Associations
Under the Patronage of the
President of the General Assembly,
H.E. Mr. Harri Holkeri
May 30-June 1, 2001
Arden Conference Center
Harriman, New York
Mission Statement:
If the UN’s global agenda is to be properly addressed,
a partnership with civil society at large is not an option: it is a necessity.
—H.E. Mr. Kofi Annan, UN Secretary-General
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
1. FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE EXISTING UN MECHANISMS FOR RELATING TO CIVIL SOCIETY
1.1 Why develop UN mechanisms for relating to civil society?
1.2 Many existing consultative mechanisms could be extended or copied
Collaboration and partnerships
Role of the Office of the President of the General Assembly
Streamline accreditation procedures for civil society participation
Security as an issue of access
Establish NGO consultative status to the UN General Assembly
Make better use of NGO consultative status with ECOSOC
Communication capacity-building of NGOs in the South
Promote wider awareness of the role of civil society at the United Nations
2. INNOVATIVE WAYS TO ENABLE THE CIVIL SOCIETY TO CONTRIBUTE MORE EFFECTIVELY
AND TO BUILD A BROADER
CONSTITUENCY TO SUPPORT THE UNITED NATIONS
2.1 Successful NGO efforts that helped to shape the United Nations’ global
agenda
2.2 NGOs and the question of accountability
2.3 Searching for innovative ways to interact with the United Nations
Fund-raising
Women in Africa
Bridges between the United Nations and business
A forum for parliamentarians
Include NGOs in government delegations
Building renovations
Information-sharing on UN operational activities
2.4 Implementation of the Millennium Summit Declaration
Consult NGOs
Engage the support of NGOs locally
Role of ECOSOC
DPI/NGO Annual Conference
Upcoming events
3. 2000 MILLENNIUM FORUM AND STRENGTHENINGCOOPERATION AND COORDINATION AMONGST
THE CIVIL SOCIETY AT LARGE
Annex A List of participants and guests
Annex B Address by Dr. Michael Edwards, Director of Governance and Civil Society,
The Ford Foundation
Annex C Opening remarks by H.E. Mr. Harri Holkeri
Introduction
The Millennium Summit, the largest gathering ever of heads of state and government
at UN Headquarters, adopted a declaration on September 8, 2000, that set out
the leaders’ vision for the role of the United Nations in the 21st century
and their commitments to promote peace, development, and social justice.
The Declaration emphasized that the United Nations needs to work in partnership
with civil society to fulfill its purpose and programs. To better understand
what the scope of this partnership could be, H.E. Mr. Harri Holkeri, president
of the Millennium General Assembly, sought an opportunity to bring together
leading civil society actors, permanent representatives to the United Nations,
and senior officials of the UN system. In response to a request from President
Holkeri, the Stanley Foundation convened the Symposium at Arden House in Harriman,
New York in co-sponsorship with the World Federation of United Nations Associations,
which received valuable support from The Department of Foreign Affairs and International
Trade of Canada. The list of participants is attached (Annex A).
Participants brought a variety of perspectives, values, and expectations to
the symposium. This diversity was actively nourished by limiting the agenda
to two broad questions and by a process of facilitation that was open to all
points of view. President Holkeri made some opening remarks (which are available
elsewhere on this site). Dr. Michael Edwards, director of governance and civil
society at the Ford Foundation, gave the keynote address at the opening dinner
(Annex B). Representatives of UNDP and ILO presented case studies on partnerships
with civil society. In the context of the symposium, the Office of the President
of the Millennium Assembly prepared a reference document on the participation
of civil society in United Nations’ conferences and special sessions of
the General Assembly during the 1990s.
The symposium was not expected to formulate decisions or policy positions. However,
several proposals were developed concerning NGO consultative arrangements with
the UN General Assembly, accreditation procedures to UN meetings, briefing programs
on civil society for UN officials and delegates, strategies for NGO capacity-building
and collaborative partnerships, and the possibility of finding a way to enable
the president of the General Assembly to hear the voice
and advice of NGOs.
1. Further development of the existing UN mechanisms for relating to civil
society
The Millennium Summit Declaration of September 2000 set the global agenda for
the United Nations at the highest level. It brought together security, political,
economic, social, and cultural issues into one document and provided an enhanced
mandate for civil society participation in the work of the United Nations.
Participants agreed that H.E. Mr. Kofi Annan, secretary-general of the United
Nations, has been very welcoming and supportive of civil society participation
in the United Nations’ work. They valued, too, the leadership role of H.E.
Mr. Harri Holkeri, president of the Millennium General Assembly, in strengthening
the United Nations’ outreach to civil society.
1.1 Why develop UN mechanisms for relating to civil society?
Civil society can be both the challenger and protector of the universality of
the value-based and rule-based systems of the United Nations. The future stability
of the United Nations depends on collaboration with civil society.
Participants considered how the UN global conferences of the 1990s have shaped
the United Nations’ role as a global policymaker and served as a catalyst
for the rapid growth of new NGO networks and coalitions to advance policy agendas,
notably on eradication of poverty, environment and sustainable development,
peace and disarmament, human rights, and gender issues.
These conferences raised expectations for changes in global governance, greater
economic and social progress, and increased levels of civil society participation.
However, by the end of the 1990s, there were many concerns that these expectations
were not being met. The resulting frustrations were often seen to be linked
to the role of international financial institutions. They have been expressed
in visible protests against the World Trade Organization, World Bank, IMF, and
World Economic Forum. During this period, many NGOs working on finance, trade,
and economic issues have become alienated from the UN. However, it was recognized
by participants that the recent preparatory process for the International Conference
on Financing for Development might be creating a new way forward.
Over the decade of the 1990s, the number of NGOs enjoying consultative status
with the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) has doubled. It is now over 2000.
This rapid increase has imposed strains on UN facilities and given rise to heightened
concerns about NGOs’ credentials. The ease of NGO access to the United
Nations has been eroding.
At the same time, there have been changes in the role of NGO caucuses. They
were initially developed by like-minded NGOs to define policy positions and
strategies to influence decision makers. Now, NGO caucus meetings have become
a kind of open forum for all NGOs, involving large numbers of people and issues.
These meetings do not always provide an orientation for new NGOs. Sometimes
they are held at the same time as intergovernmental deliberations, as a parallel
forum where alternative positions are developed. It was agreed that improved
facilitation techniques could help caucus meetings become more productive.
Participants agreed that a fundamental reason for improving the United Nations’
outreach to civil society is to strengthen the links between the United Nations
and NGOs in developing countries and countries in transition. The need for NGO
capacity-building and operational effectiveness should not be divorced from
the issues of access to decision making at the global policy level. The relevance
of UN global policymaking is enhanced by the openness of the United Nations’
consultative process to “bottom-up” insights and ideas from NGOs working
at the local level. It was acknowledged that a majority of NGO representatives
at the United Nations in New York and Geneva come from countries of the North
and that issues of access to the United Nations are not a high priority for
many NGOs in the South working on development. The suggestion that Northern
NGOs had created many Southern NGOs was questioned and this prompted discussion
of the relationships among NGOs, and between NGOs and their governments in various
parts of the world. Many NGOs in the South are disadvantaged by lack of funds
and distribution of information, as well as other necessary support, and there
is a value in the funding provided by Northern governments to facilitate their
participation in the United Nations’ decision-making processes.
1.2 Many existing consultative mechanisms could be extended or copied
Convinced that it was worth extending and creating new UN mechanisms for relating
to civil society, participants shared information about the following existing
mechanisms:
· The Arria formula—by which invitations are extended to NGOs to
testify to Security Council members outside of their official meetings; e.g.,
on issues relating to women and children in conflict situations.
· The consultative process for the International Conference on Financing
for Development, which offers a possible new model for civil society involvement.
· The standard practice in UN treaty bodies of considering alternate
reports from NGOs, alongside the country reports submitted by governments.
· The Web broadcasting of meetings of the UN Commission on Human Rights.
· UNDP’s Civil Society Advisory Committee.
· The UN Optical Disk System, which will be newly available for NGOs
in August.
· The ILO tripartite system of decision making—involving government,
business, and labor representatives on an equal level.
· The potential relevance of the Global Compact for the way the United
Nations and its agencies relate to and develop partnerships with business.6
Participants put forward the following proposals for improving existing or creating
newmechanisms:
Collaboration and partnerships
One of the most effective ways of developing closer collaboration between civil
society and the UN system is through partnerships, which can take many shapes
and forms and serve many different purposes.
Many NGO participants are becoming very skilled at operating in loose coalitions
and networks. It was agreed that NGOs have a role to play in promoting effective
cooperation between all the various parts of the UN system. NGOs make a particularly
valuable impact as practitioners of development and should be promoted as partners
in the United Nations’ work at the national level. The capacity of civil
society actors to contribute to sustainable development could be extended to
many other aspects of people-centered development.
With respect to UN peacekeeping and humanitarian intervention, it is never possible
to see the “full picture” in advance. For this reason, it is valuable
for the policy process to draw on all available sources of information, including
civil society. Because each specific situation is unique, care is needed in
defining the terms of each UN peacekeeping mandate and how it is translated
into partnerships between the UN and civil society actors on the ground.
Role of the Office of the President of the General Assembly
Participants considered how the Office of the President of the General Assembly
could be a key actor in reinforcing relations with civil society.
It was suggested that the president meet periodically with representatives of
NGOs in order to create a regular contact point between the Office of the President
and NGOs. These informal meetings could develop into an “advisory channel”
to hear the voices and advice of NGOs representing different sectors and different
concerns.
Streamline accreditation procedures for civil society participation
Participants shared their sense of frustration at the protracted negotiations
over the role of NGOs in each and every UN conference. There was strong support
to further harmonize NGO accreditation practices and procedures. Because each
conference has its own particular dynamics, it is inappropriate to assume that
“one size fits all.” Nevertheless, it should be possible to define
the minimum standards and to streamline the basic procedures. There are compelling
and practical reasons to do so:
· A compilation of the accreditation procedures for UN conferences and
special sessions of the General Assembly during the 1990s has been developed
and posted on the Web site of the president of the General Assembly
· The UN Secretariat needs to exchange information on guidelines for
accreditation during drafting processes and negotiations.
· If all the basic information concerning NGO registration could be included
in the first announcement of a decision to hold a major UN conference or special
session, NGOs would have a better chance and the necessary time to prepare for
their participation. This could facilitate participation of NGOs from developing
countries, for instance, by giving them more time to seek financing and apply
for visas.
Security as an issue of access
Some participants stressed the importance of having a formal assurance from
the secretary-general that NGOs will be consulted before any new security rules
are applied to them.
Establish NGO consultative status to the UN General Assembly
Participants were briefed on strategies being used to win support for the draft
resolution to establish NGO consultative arrangements with the General Assembly,
its meetings, conferences, and special sessions. The strategies include a campaign
to educate all NGOs about the draft and to create a group of like-minded governments
from diverse countries to endorse and promote it through informal meetings with
other governments.
Make better use of NGO consultative status with ECOSOC
The NGO Section of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) has
taken various initiatives to equip NGOs with consultative status at ECOSOC to
become more knowledgeable about the United Nations and effective in their advocacy
activities. As well, there is an outreach program to facilitate NGO exchanges
within and between regions. There will be a meeting in Tunisia from January
9-11, 2002, to develop African NGO subregional networks.
It was suggested that the United Nations could be more proactive in identifying
and encouraging youth groups to qualify for affiliate NGO consultative status.
The involvement of young people in the United Nations’ decision-making
process should be more actively supported.
Communication capacity-building of NGOs in the South
Several participants indicated that they are giving priority to building the
capacity of NGOs in developing countries and economies in transition. They welcomed
the increasing priority being given by the United Nations to optimizing the
use of information and communication technologies and efforts being made to
ensure that civil society benefited from these technologies, including from
the Optical Disk System, video-conferencing, and the UN system’s Web sites.
It was suggested that it is now possible to conceive the UN house as a global
network rather than as a series of buildings.
The UN secretary-general was in Silicon Valley recently and met many industry
leaders from the high-tech sector who were keen to help the United Nations.
Participants welcomed this information and the role of civil society in bridging
the digital divide. The role of UN Information Centers and the Non-Governmental
Liaison Service (NGLS) in distributing material to NGOs should be strengthened,
as the Internet and Web sites are not yet within the range of all Southern NGOs.8
Promote wider awareness of the role of civil society at the United Nations
It was widely agreed that NGOs should take the initiative to:
· Teach people working in the UN system about the role of civil society—brief
new staff, diplomats, and security personnel.
· Organize pilot projects between governments, UN agencies, and NGOs
to build a base of experience with partnerships.
· Improve the capacity of NGOs to interact and consult with governments.
· Develop teaching material related to the United Nations for schools
and ordinary citizens.
2. Innovative ways to enable civil society to contribute more effectively and
to build a broader constituency to support the United Nations
We are living through a period of profound global change. New forms of wealth-creation
(including for the United Nations), new forces agitating for political change,
and new information and communication technologies are influencing the ways
we look at the world. Should the relationship between the United Nations and
civil society therefore be changing? Yes. Participants agreed with the comment:
To develop the relationship between civil society and the UN, we have to think
more about how NGOs can support the UN’s role in global policy making.
2.1 Successful NGO efforts that helped to shape the United Nations’ global
agenda
Participants discussed how the recent campaigns on landmines, the ICC, and child
soldiers had succeeded in making an impact. Each had set clear goals and a simple
agenda on which most could agree. People worked jointly or separately with minimal
bureaucracy. There was no attempt to exert control over their access to decision
makers, and alliances were formed with many governments. In all these cases,
there was a strong correlation between effective NGO advocacy and widening the
United Nations’ constituency.
Following effective campaigns, NGOs have developed partnerships with the United
Nations and in the process enabled their own networking activities to strengthen
and diversify over time. A good example of this was the 1999 Hague Appeal for
Peace Conference. The Hague Appeal was the result of people collaborating together
from all over the world. Its latest initiative, a global peace education program,
is being carried out jointly with the UN Department of Disarmament
Affairs.
The Department of Public Information (DPI), the NGO Section of DESA, the NGLS,
as well as the Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative
Relationship with the United Nations (CONGO), and other relevant NGO coordinating
mechanisms are providing orientation and training programs for new NGOs to prepare
them for their participation in UN activities. These have been very worthwhile.
2.2 NGOs and the question of accountability
It was suggested that of the four major global actors—governments, intergovernmental
agencies, businesses, and NGOs—only NGOs are not accountable for their
activities. Governments sometimes lose power when they fail to meet the expectations
of voters. Some businesses are now being tied into the UN Global Compact. However,
the Global Compact is not regarded as an accountability instrument and it includes
NGOs (e.g., Amnesty International, ICFTU, and WWF). NGOs with consultative status
are approved by member states and have to report regularly so, in this sense,
they are accountable to the United Nations.
It was agreed that the questions of NGO codes of conduct, self-regulation, and
peer review are complex and merited separate consideration.
Concern was expressed that some NGOs at the United Nations may be vulnerable
to outside manipulation. An example was given of a wealthy “spiritual”
movement that had been pursuing a political agenda through NGOs, sometimes with
government sponsorship, which was at odds with the purposes and principles of
the United Nations.
2.3 Searching for innovative ways to interact with the United Nations
The facilitator asked whether there is a need to create opportunities for more
spontaneous interaction between NGOs and the United Nations. New behaviors create
new patterns of relationships. The United Nations is continually being drawn
into new kinds of activities and situations, and there is great potential to
create synergies between disparate groups and interests. The following practical
examples of new ways for civil society to relate to the UN system were offered:
· Fund-raising
Given that the UN Foundation has been set up to support partnerships between
the United Nations and civil society, NGOs could work to promote support for
further funding of partnerships between the United Nations and civil society.
Participants encouraged that donor funds be given with as few strings as possible.
· Women in Africa
In Africa, a coalition of high-level women from NGOs and governments has formed
a group called African Women in Peace and Development, which now has links with
the Organization of African Unity and the Economic Commission for Africa. They
are working on strategies to integrate gender issues into the African Human
Rights Charter and the World Conference Against Racism.
· Bridges between the United Nations and business
Companies that practice corporate social responsibility could become bridges
between NGOs, the private sector, and the United Nations.
· A forum for parliamentarians
Participants had an inconclusive discussion about whether setting up a UN forum
for members of Parliaments would be an advance for civil society.
· Include NGOs in government delegations
About 20 governments routinely include NGOs in their delegations to the General
Assembly, and more do so for UN conferences and special sessions; some include
NGOs as paid consultants. Noting the potential risks of NGOs being co-opted
and controlled, it was nevertheless suggested that the secretary-general’s
letters of invitation to governments, to the General Assembly meetings, and
to special sessions could highlight this possibility.
· Building renovations
Civil society should be consulted on the proposed renovation of the Visitor
Center for the UN Headquarters and on the building plans for the development
of the site near the United Nations, between 42 nd and 36 th Streets.
· Information-sharing on UN operational activities
There are many good examples of ways in which UNDP and other UN programs and
agencies are helping to build the capacity of NGOs in developing countries.
These could be more widely shared, possibly through a Web site.
2.4 Implementation of the Millennium Summit Declaration
Participants were advised that the UN Secretariat is developing a “Road
Map” to follow up the Millennium Summit Declaration. A draft will be ready
for the 56 th session of the General Assembly. It is expected that the secretary-general
will report each year on a particular thematic set of issues in the Declaration.
This will give a focus to the discussions that year, to which civil society
could make a contribution. Some participants felt that NGOs have no sense of
ownership of the Declaration because they were not included in the drafting
process. In considering how this could be changed, the following proposals were
suggested:
· Consult NGOs
Encourage the UN Secretariat staff in preparing the “Road Map” for
the implementation of the Millennium Summit Declaration to brief and consult
NGOs.
· Engage the support of NGOs locally
WFUNA has written to the heads of state and government at the Summit offering
to cooperate in implementing the Declaration and proposed to convene a meeting
in September 2001 for United Nations Associations to share ideas about their
implementation strategies.
· Role of ECOSOC
The high-level segment of the July 2002 meeting of ECOSOC in New York would
provide an opportunity for NGOs to report on the steps that they had taken to
help implement the Millennium Summit Declaration.
· DPI/NGO Annual Conference
Future annual DPI/NGO conferences could serve as an occasion for civil society
to formulate ideas and proposals relating to the secretary-general’s annual
theme, which could then be fed into the General Assembly deliberations.
· Upcoming events
The relevance of the Declaration could be highlighted in conjunction with major
events and conferences, such as the World Summit on Sustainable Development,
which mobilize large numbers of NGO participants.
3. 2000 Millennium Forum and strengthening cooperation and coordination among
the civil society at large
Participants entered into a lively debate about whether or not the Millennium
Forum for NGOs, held at the United Nations in May 2000, had been a success or
a failure as an exercise in civil society cooperation.
Those who considered it a success highlighted the participation of a large number
of national NGOs from developing countries, the adoption of the Millennium Forum
Declaration, and the many good links that were made from the local to the global.
The outcomes were more promising than expected. They saw much convergence between
the Millennium Forum and Millennium Summit Declarations.
Those who saw the forum as a failure noted the absence of major NGO networks
and groups at the forum. Some participants were pessimistic about the capacity
of NGOs to put together anything really representative, and they argued that
each NGO values its independence and the right to decide when to use its influence
to push on a given issue. Some considered that the United Nations welcomed the
idea to hold the forum, but did not provide the necessary funds. They saw it
either as an under-resourced event or a waste of resources because it lacked
a clear purpose.
Views were also divided on the question of whether there is a need to create
some kind of new, more formal collaborative mechanism for global civil society
to interact with the United Nations. Those in support noted that if there were
to be a separate forum for parliamentarians, one would be needed for NGOs. Any
NGO forum would need to be formed from the “grassroots level,” so
an important question would be how this could be facilitated.
Those who did not give high priority to creating a separate NGO forum emphasized
the need for better understanding of the ways NGOs are already acting jointly
and achieving results. Some recently established NGO networks could have more
effective links with the UN system, such as the NGOs that conducted the World
Social Forum in Brazil in 2001. There is a need to find new ways of connecting
the people protesting globalization with the UN system and its decision-making
processes.
In conclusion, the following observations were made with respect to strengthening
the cooperation and coordination of civil society:
· NGOs should have a voice, not a vote.
· The voices of Northern NGOs dominate in UN circles; more should be
done to give voice to Southern NGOs.12
· Given that action happens at the local, national, regional, and international
levels, it is essential that civil society, particularly NGO involvement with
the United Nations, be multilevel and well integrated.
Reported prepared by Ms. Pera Wells
Assistant Secretary-General
World Federation of United Nations Associations
This report contains the rapporteur’s interpretation of the symposium proceedings
and is not a descriptive chronological account. Participants neither reviewed
nor approved the report. Therefore, it should not be assumed that every participant
subscribes to particular recommendations, observations, and conclusions.
Annex A
List of Participants and Guests
Harri Holkeri, President, General Assembly, United Nations
Sirpa Pietikäinen, Chairperson, Executive Committee, World Federation of
United Nations Associations
Susan L. Podziba, Principal and Mediator, Susan Podziba & Associates; Conference
Facilitator
Richard H. Stanley, President, The Stanley Foundation
Participant List
Barbara Adams, Deputy to the Coordinator, United Nations Non-governmental Liaison
Service
Mia Adjali, UN NGO Representative, General Board of Global Ministries, United
Methodist Church; Director, United Methodist Church for the United Nations
Donald Blinken, Secretary-General, World Federation of United Nations Associations
Renate Bloem, President, Conference of Nongovernmental Organizations in Consultative
Relationship with the United Nations, Switzerland
John W. Foster, Principal Researcher, Civil Society, North-South Institute,
Canada
Paul Heinbecker, Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations
Mats Lennart Karlsson, Vice President, External Affairs and United Nations Affairs,
The World Bank
Sinikka Koski, Research Assistant, Office of the President of the General Assembly,
United Nations
Raili Lahnalampi, Minister Counsellor, Member of the Cabinet of the President
of the General Assembly, United Nations
Hanifa D. Mezoui, Chief of NGO Section, Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
United Nations
Betty Kaari Murungi, Advocate and Member, Federation of Women Lawyers, Kenya
Kumi Shunmugam Naidoo, Secretary General and Chief Executive Officer, CIVICUS:
World Alliance for Citizen Participation
William R. Pace, Executive Director, World Federalist Movement and Institute
for Global Policy
James A. Paul, Executive Director, Global Policy Forum
Marjatta Rasi, Permanent Representative of Finland to the United Nations
Kamalesh Sharma, Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations
David Shorr, Program Officer, The Stanley Foundation
Gillian Martin Sorensen, Assistant Secretary-General for External Relations,
United Nations
Abdoul Dema Tall, Counsellor, Permanent Mission of the Republic of Senegal to
the United Nations
Yvonne Terlingen, Representative to the United Nations, Legal and Intergovernmental
Organizations Office, Amnesty International
Cora Weiss, President, Hague Appeal for Peace
Pera Wells, Assistant Secretary-General and Director, World Federation of United
Nations Associations
Joanna Weschler, United Nations Representative, Human Rights Watch
Aye Aye Win, Coordinator, Dignity International, North-South Centre of the Council
of Europe, Portugal
June Zeitlin, Executive Director, Women's Environment and Development Organization
Guest Presenters
Michael Edwards, Director, Global Governance and Civil Society Program, The
Ford Foundation
Gareth Howell, Director, International Labor Organization, New York Office
Sirkka Korpela, Director, Business Parnerships, United Nations Development Programme
Ravi Rajan, Senior Adviser and Director, Strategic Initatives, United Nations
Development Programme
The Stanley Foundation Staff
Susan R. Moore, Conference Management Associate
Annex B
Address by Dr. Michael Edwards, Director of Governance and Civil Socity, The
Ford Foundation
Thank you, Sirpa. I’m delighted to have been invited to address this important
gathering tonight.
At the start of a new century, changes of huge importance are taking place in
the shape and character of governance—the exercise of democratic authority
over matters of public concern. Two processes are occurring simultaneously,
driven by globalization, market integration, information technology, and rising
questions about the legitimacy and effectiveness of conventional politics in
addressing problems of collective action across national borders. The first
is a shift in the locus of authority, down the political system to subnational
units and up to new global institutions. The second is a shift in the focus
of authority, away from state monopolies to nonstate actors, both for-profit
and not-for-profit. These changes are likely to have both positive and negative
consequences: positive in providing greater opportunities for citizen participation
and efficiency gains in the provision of public goods, negative in threatening
the ability of the state to protect universal rights and entitlements and hold
global institutions accountable for their actions. But at the global level,
it is undeniable that these changes are opening more spaces for civil society
participation. This is “our” space—the space in which ordinary
citizens can exert more influence over the decisions that affect their lives.
However, will civil society organizations fill this space, and if so, which
civil society will it be?
What is civil society? You don’t have to agree with any definition I might
give you, but you do have to be clear with each other about which definition
you are using in order to have a sensible conversation. Definitions of civil
society have both an analytic and a normative dimension. Analytic or structural
definitions stress the importance of forms: social organizations and networks
(the third sector), or more broadly [stated], the arena in which citizens come
together to advance the interests they hold in common, containing all organizations
and associations between the family and the state except firms. Firms are excluded
(unlike other, informal areas of economic activity) because they are organized
for a fundamentally different purpose—profit. Cognitive definitions stress
the importance of norms: social values and attributes such as trust, tolerance,
and cooperation that are assumed to bring about a society defined as “civil,”
a way of being and living in the world that is different from the rationality
of either state or market. In the former case, civil society is a noun, while
in the latter, it is used as an adjective. For some there is a natural onnection
between these two definitions (since civil society organizations promote civic
values), while for others there is no connection at all, since there are “uncivil”
associations and “civic values” in the public and private sectors
too.
The key question is as follows: how do forms and norms relate to each other
at the global level? How does a strong civil society lead to a society that
is strong and civil in all that it does? That question provides a useful framework
for considering questions of roles and functions, structure and characteristics,
values, and relationships in global civil society.
Although it lacks a coherent alternative vision, the current wave of global
citizen action is, I think, comparable with earlier waves in the 1960s and earlier
periods in history. Over 30,000 international NGOs are already active on the
world stage, joined by approximately 20,000 transnational civil society networks
of various kinds—90 percent of which have been formed during the last 30
years. At the heart of these efforts lie two simple, common, but very powerful,
messages:
· That life is about more than economics.
· And that democracy governs markets, not the other way around.
Below this level of generality there is much less consensus on what needs to
be done, at any level of detail. This is entirely natural: all social movements
begin to fragment when they lack a common enemy, or when they have achieved
their initial goals—as global civil society certainly has in raising critical
questions about globalization and global governance. Tensions and differences
are beginning to emerge within NGO networks such as Jubilee 2000, the environmental
movement, and the activities of different transnational religious constituencies.
Let me provide three brief examples….
What do these vignettes tell us? They reveal a now-familiar story about representation
(NGOs who claim to speak on behalf of others, but lack any accountability mechanisms
to their constituents), structure (too many voices from the North, not enough
from the South), expertise (are NGO positions tested and substantiated with
any real rigor?), and the weakness of linkages between citizen action at the
local, national, and global levels (the tendency to leapfrog over national debates
and go direct to Washington or Geneva).
In a period when divisions look set to increase within global civil society,
we need more rules, standards, and protocols, not less—because such structures
are the only way to guard against the arbitrary selection or exclusion of some
groups at the expense of others and the domination of global networks by NGO
or other elites. If global citizen action is to be institutionalized, these
issues must be addressed. How? Let me offer three general principles:
· Leveling the playing field (promoting equal voice, capacity, and opportunity
for different civil society organizations in the global arena).
· Self-regulation or self-discipline within global civil society networks—not
imposed accountability from governments or intergovernmental bodies.
· Integration instead of displacement—marrying together different
levels of citizen action from the local to the global, and building from the
bottom up.
How might these principles be operationalized inside the United Nations? I see
at least three general models:
· Representative bodies, such as a “Global Peoples’ Assembly.”
In my view these ideas are premature and have little chance of gaining sufficient
political support, because we lack convincing answers to questions of representation
and how to establish the right to vote.
· Nonrepresentative bodies structured according to issue areas and expertise,
such as a “World Financial Forum” for the IMF (or the recent World
Social Forum in Brazil). These ideas enjoy more political support, partly because
they focus attention on the right to a voice among NGOs, not a vote.
· Different models for different purposes, regimes, institutions, issues,
and levels of governance: formal and informal, standing and spontaneous, representative
and not, and so on.
In my view, this third model is the best way forward, since it becomes much
easier to deal with questions about structure and legitimacy when the universe
under discussion is circumscribed in some way. Why don’t we challenge ourselves
to come up with five such models by the end of this meeting—actual, concrete
situations in which resources can be applied and lessons learned about success
and failure? This is much more useful than talking in general terms about what
should be done. Look for existing sources of energy out there, and build on
them.
What, in all of this, is the role of the United Nations? In my view, this is
a debate about changing the rules of global governance in order to achieve better
and more sustainable outcomes through wider stakeholder participation. Who better
to lead this debate than the UN, as the world’s custodian of the “rules
of the game,” the ultimate standard-setting body, and the institution that
can bestow some sense of legitimacy on public participation? I would like to
see the UN put more resources and political pressure behind concrete innovations
of the kind I have called for, to raise the level and profile of this debate,
and to commit to specific benchmarks. his is a debate that the United Nations
should be leading. It is not.
These questions are demanding, and their answers are as yet unclear. However,
a century ago we could not have imagined the extent to which citizens across
the world have since succeeded in their struggles for more complete and inclusive
democracies in their localities and national polities. In the 21 st century,
the globalization of power demands a new form of global citizen action that
extends the theory and practice of democracy still further. I wish you well
in your deliberations.
Thank you.
Michael Edwards