Chemicals by chenmeixiu

VIEWS: 24 PAGES: 17

									          European Commission




                      UNITAR

Thematic Workshop on the Implementation of the
 Strategic Approach to International Chemicals
             Management (SAICM)

                     Session 2:
Panel on Governance for National SAICM
           Implementation


                     19 June 2006

             DG Environment, European Commission
                 European Commission



            Governance for National SAICM Implementation

Why am I here?
Not a chemist, health professional or ecologist.
No longer an aid official involved in project implementation,
   but an environmental negotiator and policy-maker, with a
   particular interest in financial and institutional questions.
Been asked to address final question before the Panel.
 What are donor perspectives (and possible expectations)
   concerning national governance frameworks for SAICM
   implementation?
To do so also need to look at another of the questions -
 How can SAICM implementation be integrated into
   national development planning processes?
                                                                   2
                European Commission



            Governance for National SAICM Implementation

Donor perspectives – Gloom in the 1990s
 In the 1990s growing public feeling in Europe that aid was
  not working. Taxpayers had provided enormous amounts.
  Yet still famine in Africa, deep poverty in Asia, excluded
  millions in Latin America, conflict and AIDs. Some wanted
  to turn off the aid tap and spend in Europe.
 The needs of recipient countries are HUGE and diverse and
  many donors had great difficulty in deciding on priorities for
  their support.
 Without priorities and targets, it became increasingly
  difficult to make the case that development aid was working
  and should continue and grow.
                                                                   3
              European Commission



         Governance for National SAICM Implementation

Donor perspectives – 2000 and 2002 the response
 UN Millennium Development Summit was a turning point.
 It made poverty eradication the overarching theme of
  development.
 Adopted Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) - 7
  overall priorities and specific time-bound targets to
  measure progress.
 Key factor was that these were agreed by donors AND
  developing countries. A common agenda and an agreed
  date - 2015.

 BUT missing ingredient ……..
                                                          4
               European Commission




          Governance for National SAICM Implementation



Donor perspectives – 2000 and 2002 the response

Goal 8 agreed in 2002.


          €€€        ¥ ¥ ¥
EU collective commitment to reaching 0.7% by 2015 and to
  doubling total EU aid to € 66 billion by 2010.

                                                           5
                 European Commission



           Governance for National SAICM Implementation


Donor perspectives –the MDGs
 No time to go through all the MDGs (see handout).
 Essential point is that they provide:
    Agreed priorities
    Agreed timetable
    A global partnership for getting there with donor promises of
     resources
 This is a very powerful combination with a lot of
  political momentum and pressure to deliver.
 The problem is that we are not on course to deliver the
  MDGs, especially in Africa.
                                                                     6
                European Commission



           Governance for National SAICM Implementation


Donor perspectives –the MDGs
So the pressure to concentrate becomes ever stronger.
Donors and the Finance and Planning Ministries of
developing countries alike are scrutinising all aid proposals to
see how they contribute to poverty eradication and how they
will meet the MDGs.
If your issue is not seen as MDG-friendly it is not likely to
be proposed for the pre-determined aid allocation by the
Finance Ministry and is not likely to be accepted by a donor.


                                                                   7
                 European Commission



            Governance for National SAICM Implementation

Donor perspectives – Country owned approaches
Donors have long ceased to pretend to know best.
Since last year’s Paris Declaration between nearly all
donors and many developing countries, there is general
agreement on ‘country owned, country-led’ development
policies where the developing country sets the priorities,
objectives and strategy and the donor provides support.
Donors are moving away from projects to sectoral
programmes, or even general budget support.
This means that even if the donor thinks that an issue is
important, they will not force its inclusion in a bilateral
development relationship.
                                                              8
                European Commission



            Governance for National SAICM Implementation

What does this imply about donors’ attitudes to SAICM?
At the bilateral level
Donors are unlikely to raise SAICM spontaneously with
partner governments.
Like me, most aid officials are not chemists, health
professionals or ecologists. They do not know about the
benefits and potential risks of chemicals and would rather stick
to health clinics and schools. (MDG friendly and vote-winners)
Nor do donors, when putting together large programmes, tour
the country asking everyone for good ideas. They expect their
usual contacts in partner governments to have engaged in
dialogue and that priorities have been discussed across all
Ministries and with civil society. (Country owned and country
led)
                                                                   9
              European Commission



          Governance for National SAICM Implementation


So for a donor what would be the ideal national governance
  framework for SAICM implementation?
No single recipe, but some characteristics:
 Something that makes evident the links with the MDGs
  and makes SAICM a credible and integrated part of an
  MDG-based national development programme/PSRP.
 Something with strong civil society support and the
  backing of many different Ministries including Planning
  and Finance.
 Something with the prospect of being self-financing in the
  long-term.
                                                               10
              European Commission



          Governance for National SAICM Implementation


Is that possible?



                YES
              
       But it is not easy!
                                                    11
                European Commission



           Governance for National SAICM Implementation

Relatively easy to show SAICM is relevant to MDGs
  (integration):

    MDG 1 poverty (role of chemicals in prosperous
     livelihoods) and hunger (role of chemicals in agriculture)
    MDG 4 child mortality (reducing risk)
    MDG 5 maternal mortality (reducing risk)
    MDG 6 disease (role of chemicals – not just
     pharmaceuticals - in healthcare and disease prevention)
    MDG 7 environmental sustainability (sound management
     of chemicals as a fundamental aspect)

                                                                  12
               European Commission



        Governance for National SAICM Implementation




But how relevant – why SAICM rather than clean
water etc etc?
Need to provide credible evidence if to achieve real
integration
        Need to bring in the economists to use evidence from the
         Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and recent study on
         environment and health by WHO.
        Studying the costs of non-action was very important in EU
         enlargement in building understanding and political will.

                                                                     13
              European Commission




          Governance for National SAICM Implementation



 On the basis of credible MDG linkages should be able to
  mobilise both the green NGOs and the development
  NGOs. Very powerful combination in Europe and I would
  expect them to be more effective together than apart in
  partner countries.
 If politicians see that people care, easier to bring in
  Ministries of Finance and Planning – who are also swayed
  by credible MDG link and prospect of long-term financial
  sustainability.

                                                             14
           European Commission



        Governance for National SAICM Implementation



                         But
Need money to get started – for making link with
 MDGs, integration into development plans, and
       looking at financial sustainability

                   
                                                   15
          European Commission




       Governance for National SAICM Implementation

     This is where the SAICM QSP
    Quick Start Programme
and other funding comes in, such as the
   EU Thematic Programme for the
 Environment (€ 806.5 over 7 years of
    which about 5% for chemicals)
                   
                                                 16
European Commission




                      Information




                                    17

								
To top