The Switch � April 2008

The Marrakech Process is a global effort to promote progress on the implementation of Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) and the elaboration of a 10-Year Framework of Programmes on SCP (10YFP). The process responds to the call of the WSSD Johannesburg Plan of Implementation to develop a 10YFP to support regional and national initiatives to promote the shift towards sustainable consumption and production patterns.

At the Third International Expert Meeting on SCP under the Marrakech process, which took place in Stockholm, Sweden in June 2007, it was decided to set up an Advisory Committee to the Marrakech Process. In April 2008, Consumers International was appointed to represent the NGO Major Group in the Advisory Committee. Bjarne Pedersen, Deputy Director of Consumers International, outlines the responsibilities of the committee and how Consumers International plans to ensure a proper consultation in connection with the work of the Advisory Committee with the NGO Major Group as well as the global NGO community [click here for article].

The first meeting of the Advisory Committee is scheduled to take place on 8 May 2008 at CSD 16 in New York. Preceding the Third International Expert Meeting, an NGO Forum took place in Stockholm.

Panel Discussion on Biofuels at CSD 16

The Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of the Netherlands cordially invites you to an interactive panel discussion, organized by the Netherlands� Ministries of Foreign Affairs and of Housing, Spatial Planning & Environment, the Netherlands Women�s Council and ANPED (Northern Alliance for Sustainability), entitled "Biomass production for Biofuels? Only if sustainable: how to achieve social, economic and ecological sustainability".

Wednesday, 7 May 2008, 1.15 PM to 2.45 PM, Conference Room 6, UN Headquarters.
The panel hopes to contribute to this year�s deliberations of the Commission on Sustainable development (CSD) with an interactive discussion on how to achieve social, economic and ecological sustainability in biomass production for biofuels.

The panellists/speakers in the event will be Ms. Nienke Smeets, policy advisor of the Netherlands� Ministry of Environment, a representative of the Drylands Coordination Group, Neth Dano of Third World Network, Nnimmo Bassey of Friends of the Earth Africa and a representative from the Netherlands Women�s Council (NVR).

The panel will be moderated by Ms. Lesha Witmer, chair of the Commission on Sustainable Development of the Netherlands Women�s Council.

A New SDIN Website

The Sustainable Development Issues Network (SDIN) has launched a new website, SDIN-NGO.NET.

SDIN is a collaborative effort of three large international networks - TWN, ELCI and ANPED - to form a global NGO network whose purpose is to promote good governance, and enhanced awareness and knowledge about environmental and sustainable development processes and to ensure global quality NGO participation in these global processes within the intergovernmental systems, primarily within the United Nations.

Third World Network (TWN), headquartered in Kuala Lumpur and Penang, Malaysia; Environment Liaison Centre International (ELCI), headquartered in Nairobi, Kenya; and ANPED, the Northern Alliance for Sustainability, headquartered in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, sharing an understood common value basis and approach to political issues concerning sustainable development and the environment, in 2001 together founded the international NGO network called SDIN, the Sustainable Development Issues Network.

The primary area of cooperation is in facilitation of the NGO input into processes that are under the mandate of UN ECOSOC and more specifically in regard to the so-called CSD processes. SDIN works on:

Capacity development and awareness-raising;
Intergovernmental processes and translating global decisions to national and local plans, making the global architecture of International Environmental Governance (IEG) relevant to local actions;
Understanding the environment, sustainable development and its interconnectedness;
Democracy, organisational capacity, accountability and participation;
Process understanding;
Policy analysis;
Lobby and strategy development and proficiency;
Information dissemination.

Forcing Products to Go Green?

During 2007 the European Commission has been developing an EU strategy on Sustainable Consumption and Production Action Plan. This plan is a response to calls for a more proactive response and EU leadership on the 2002 Johannesburg Sustainable Development Conference commitment on a 10 year framework of programmes and plans on Sustainable Consumption and Production (being implemented through the so called Marrakech process). This plan coincides with the necessity for the EU Commission to deliver its next steps on the Strategy on Integrated Product Policy (in particular an overdue assessment of what steps could be taken on �(eco) design requirements� as proposed in the IPP strategy itself.

A new study by the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation, Forcing Products to Go Green? - Opportunities for Strengthening EU Ecodesign Legislation, looks at current trends in the development of eco-design law in EU. It takes a broad view, including to what extent comprehensive producer responsibility is being considered as a viable proposal. The aim has not been to go into great detail on the pros and cons of the different actions or policy tools on the table, but instead to generically map the legislative landscape and identify potential opportunities for avenues to be followed up at this point in time in the political discussions, taking particular account of the ongoing developments of the Sustainable Consumption and Production Action Plan.

Email the Commission Before 7 May GMO Vote

Greenpeace is calling on the public to write their European Commissioner an email saying "No!" to GMOs.

An important vote on GMOs is due to take place on 7 May in Brussels. The agro-chemical industry wants EU permission to grow pesticide-producing maize plants and a GM potato that contains an antibiotic resistant gene. Greenpeace wants EU Commissioners to say "No!" when they discuss the applications and vote them.

According to Greenpeace:

The two maize varieties that will be debated on 7 May produce their own pesticide. According to current practices these crops were only tested for 90 days for health effects whereas pesticides are tested for 2 years!
The GM potato contains a gene that makes cells resistant to antibiotics! If this were to get released into the environment there could be serious problems in treating diseases, such as tuberculosis.
Recently 37 scientists wrote a letter to the Commission pointing out from a scientific point of view the many gaps and uncertainties in relation to GMOs.
The majority of European citizens oppose the use of GMOs and this opposition has been consistent for the past 10 years.
Industry promotes GM crops as potentially feeding the world, however this has not materialised whilst ecologically sound farming models and methods show real potential. Recently, even the UN admitted that genetically engineered crops are not a solution for poverty, hunger or climate change.
The body responsible for advising the Commission on GMOs, the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) is not doing its job properly. First of all it has recognized that it lacks the methods for carrying out long term assessment of the health and environmental impacts of GMOs. Secondly, it is relying on incomplete data that is submitted by the agro-chemical industry � and it hardly ever checks it properly.

What's Wrong With GMOs?

The Pinky Show is the original super lo-tech hand-drawn educational TV show. The Pinky Show focuses on information and ideas that have, for various reasons, been misrepresented, distorted, suppressed, ignored, or otherwise excluded from mainstream discussion. The creator and main character of the show, a cat named Pinky, presents and analyzes the material in an informal, easy-to-understand way, with helpful illustrations that she draws herself.

The most recent Pinky Show episodes address GMOs [transcript / video]. By now most people know that GMO stands for Genetically Modified Organisms. But how do GMOs affect us, the food we eat, and the environment? Jeffrey Smith, founder of the Institute for Responsible Technology provides a solid general overview in this interview.

Biofuel Production Can Marginalise Women

Rapid increases in the large-scale production of liquid biofuels in developing countries could exacerbate the marginalization of women in rural areas threatening their livelihoods, according to a new FAO study.

The study, Gender and Equity Issues in Liquid Biofuels Production � Minimizing the Risks to Maximize the Opportunities, notes that large-scale plantations for the production of liquid biofuels such as bioethanol and biodiesel require an intensive use of resources and inputs to which small farmers, particularly women, traditionally have limited access. These resources include land and water, chemical fertilizers and pesticides.

"Unless policies are adopted in developing countries to strengthen the participation of small farmers, especially women in biofuel production by increasing their access to land, capital and technology - gender inequalities are likely to become more marked and women�s vulnerability to hunger and poverty further exacerbated," said Yianna Lambrou, co-author of the study. "Biofuel production certainly offers opportunities for farmers � but they will only trickle down to the farm level, especially to women, if pro-poor policies are put in place that also empower women."

Biofuels Production and Overconsumption Creating High Food Prices

A new paper by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Rising Food Prices: What Should be Done? addresses the sources, impacts and policy implications of the world food situation and the prices of food commodities.

The combination of new and ongoing forces is driving the world food situation and, in turn, the prices of food commodities. One emerging factor behind rising food prices is the high price of energy. Energy and agricultural prices have become increasingly intertwined. With oil prices at an all-time high of more than US$100 a barrel and the U.S. government subsidizing farmers to grow crops for energy, U.S. farmers have massively shifted their cultivation toward biofuel feedstocks, especially maize, often at the expense of soybean and wheat cultivation. About 30 percent of U.S. maize production will go into ethanol in 2008 rather than into world food and feed markets. High energy prices have also made agricultural production more expensive by raising the cost of mechanical cultivation, inputs like fertilizers and pesticides, and transportation of inputs and outputs.

According to Joachim von Braun, who heads the IFPRI, a moratorium on global grain- and oilseed-based biofuels would help ease raging wheat and corn prices by up to 20 percent in the next few years. "Our models analysis suggest that if a moratorium on biofuels would be issued in 2008, we could expect a price decline of maize by about 20 percent and for wheat by about 10 percent in 2009-10. So it's this significant."

At the same time, the growing world population is demanding more and different kinds of food. Rapid economic growth in many developing countries has pushed up consumers' purchasing power, generated rising demand for food, and shifted food demand away from traditional staples and toward higher-value foods like meat and milk. This dietary shift is leading to increased demand for grains used to feed livestock.

EEA Recommends Suspension of EU Biofuels Target

The EEA Scientific Committee has made public its opinion on the environmental impacts of biofuel use in Europe, recommending a new, comprehensive scientific study on the environmental risks and benefits of biofuels, and that the EU target to increase the share of biofuels used in transport to 10 % by 2020 should therefore be suspended.

The increasing urgency of the steady rise of greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector, caused by the continuing growth of transport volume, have sparked the introduction of mandatory biofuel quotas in the expectation that in the medium term the growth in transport emissions could be reduced and subsequently stabilised. In 2007 the EU target for biofuels was increased to an ambitious 10 % level by 2020, under the conditions of production being sustainable and second generation technologies being commercially available. Despite the fact that previous targets were missed, the pace of biofuel production in the EU and of biofuel imports from third countries is picking up. The EEA is concerned that:

Biofuel production based on first generation technologies does not optimally use biomass resources with regard to fossil energy saving and to greenhouse gas reduction.
Biomass utilisation implies combustion of very valuable and finite resources from our living environment. These resources ought to be preserved wherever possible.
The land required to meet the 10 % target exceeds the available arable land for bioenergy production without harming the environment in the EU. This is even the case if a considerable contribution of second generation fuels is assumed. The consequences of the intensification of biofuel production are thus increasing pressures on soil, water and biodiversity.
The 10 % target will require large amounts of additional imports of biofuels. The accelerated destruction of rain forests due to increasing biofuel production can already be witnessed in some developing countries. Sustainable production outside Europe is difficult to achieve and to monitor.
The overambitious 10 % biofuel target is an experiment, whose unintended effects are difficult to predict and difficult to control. The EEA recommends suspending the 10 % goal; carrying out a new, comprehensive scientific study on the environmental risks and benefits of biofuels; and setting a new and more moderate long-term target, if sustainability cannot be guaranteed.

Ruggie Report on Business and Human Rights

The legal rights of transnational corporations (TNCs) have been expanded significantly over the past generation. This has encouraged investment and trade flows, but it has also created instances of imbalances between firms and States that may be detrimental to human rights. While providing legitimate protection to foreign investors, the more than 2,500 bilateral investment treaties currently in effect also permit those investors to take host States to binding international arbitration, including for alleged damages resulting from implementation of legislation to improve domestic social and environmental standards - even when the legislation applies uniformly to all businesses, foreign and domestic.

This imbalance creates potential difficulties for all types of countries. Agreements between host governments and companies sometimes include promises to �freeze� the existing regulatory regime for the project�s duration, which can be a half-century for major infrastructure and extractive industries projects. During the investment�s lifetime, even social and environmental regulatory changes that are applied equally to domestic companies can be challenged by foreign investors claiming exemption or compensation.

A new report by John Ruggie, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, presents a conceptual and policy framework to anchor the business and human rights debate, and to help guide all relevant actors.

The framework comprises three core principles: the State duty to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including business; the corporate responsibility to respect human rights; and the need for more effective access to remedies. The three principles are aimed at forming a complementary whole in that each supports the others in achieving sustainable progress.

Greenwashing, Greensumption and Eco-Promises

Greenwashing is the unjustified appropriation of environmental virtue by a company, an industry, a government, a politician or even a non-government organization to create a pro-environmental image, sell a product or a policy, or to try and rehabilitate their standing with the public and decision makers after being embroiled in controversy.

Organizations are attracted to engage in greenwashing for a wide range of reasons, which include: deflating the pressure for regulatory change; seeking to persuade critics that they are both well-intentioned and have changed their ways; seeking to expand market share at the expense of those rivals not involved in greenwashing; narrowing the perceived 'green' advantage of a rival; and making the company seem attractive for potential investors, especially those interested in ethical investment or socially responsive investment.

Terrachoice, an environmental marketing firm, recently conducted a study which found that almost all of the environmental claims made for consumer products are false or misleading. It identified six patterns, or 'sins of greenwashing': hidden trade-offs; no proof; vagueness; irrelevance; fibbing (false use of third-party certification); and the sin of the lesser of two evils (does the product really offer a benefit?).

A new report, Eco-promising: communicating the environmental credentials of your products and services, sponsored by softdrink company PepsiCo and household chemicals company SC Johnson, in cooperation with UK charity Forum for the Future, offers a manual for companies on how to effectively make environmental claims about their products and services. According to the report, in order to build trust, companies need to be transparent in what and how they communicate with your customers. The report underlines the risk of negative consumer backlash if claims mislead or cannot be substantiated.

The International Forum on Globalization (IFG) produced a video called Greensumption which criticizes the trend of purchasing supposedly green products like the Toyota Prius without making the actual lifestyle changes needed for sustainable consumption. IFG Board member Jerry Mander: "If you internalize all the costs involved in the production of the [Toyota] Prius, and all the energy costs and material costs involved, and all of the mines, and all of the lands that have been ripped up to make that happen, it's profoundly harmful. If you need a new car, the best decision to make is to buy a good used car."

Deep Economy

Challenging the prevailing wisdom that the goal of economies should be unlimited growth, McKibben argues in Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future that the world doesn't have enough natural resources to sustain endless economic expansion. For example, if the Chinese owned cars in the same numbers as Americans, there would be 1.1 billion more vehicles on the road�untenable in a world that is rapidly running out of oil and clean air.

Drawing the phrase "deep economy" from the expression "deep ecology," a term used to signify new ways of thinking about the environment, he suggests we need to explore new economic ideas. Rather than promoting accelerated cycles of economic expansion - a mindset that has brought the world to the brink of environmental disaster - we should concentrate on creating localized economies: community-scale power systems instead of huge centralized power plants; cohousing communities instead of sprawling suburbs.

He gives examples of promising ventures of this type, such as a community-supported farm in Vermont and a community biosphere reserve, or large national park�like area, in Himalayan India. McKibben's proposals for new, less growth-centered ways of thinking about economics are intriguing, and offer hope that change is possible.

The Bridge at the Edge of the World

How serious are the threats to our environment? Here is one measure of the problem: if we continue to do exactly what we are doing, with no growth in the human population or the world economy, the world in the latter part of this century will be unfit to live in. Of course human activities are no holding at current levels�they are accelerating, dramatically, and so, too, is the pace of climate disruption, biotic impoverishment, and toxification. In The Bridge at the Edge of the World: Capitalism, the Environment, and Crossing from Crisis to Sustainability, author Gus Speth begins with the observation that the environmental community has grown in strength and sophistication, but the environment has continued to decline. Something is badly wrong, and a deeper critique is needed.

Speth contends that this critique leads to a severe indictment of today�s economic and political system � capitalism as it now actually operates. Our vital task is to change the operating instructions for the modern economy before it is too late. The book is about how to do that.

Commission Expert Groups Dominated by Industry

Industry and corporate lobbyists are dominating the European law-making process, campaigners warned this month with the publication of a report analysing the membership of a number of the European Commission�s Expert Groups. What is more, the Commission is not being transparent about membership of these groups researchers say, preventing public accountability.

ALTER-EU, a coalition of 160 organisations concerned with transparency within Europe � is calling on the European Commission to dissolve some of its Expert Groups because of the dominance of industry lobbyists.

Its report Secrecy and corporate dominance - a study on the composition and transparency of European Commission Expert Groups reveals that industry controls a number of the Commission�s most controversial Expert Groups, including advisory groups on issues such as �biotechnology�, �clean coal� and �car emissions�. Expert Groups are established by the Commission to provide advice on the development of new laws and policies, giving group members considerable power over EU policies and legislation, the report says.

ALTER-EU warns that public interest may be at risk given the predominance of industry representatives on some Expert Groups. In a study of Expert Groups advising on some of the most controversial issues, it found that industry representatives made up more than 50% of the membership of one in four of the groups surveyed. Almost two thirds of the groups were unbalanced and just 32% of the groups were composed of members representing a wide range of interests.

The EU Commission President Jos� Manuel Barroso promised last year to make information available on Expert Group membership, following pressure from the European Parliament. In February this year the European Parliament stepped up pressure and called for an investigation into the composition of Expert Groups following further concerns about the lack of transparency.

Building on Forest Destruction

Illegal logging and related trade is a major cause of the worldwide disappearance of 13 millions hectares of forests per year. Deforestation and forest degradation leads to the loss of biodiversity and worsens poverty for at least a billion people who are dependent on the forests for their livelihoods. Europe is a major market for illegally logged timber. Half of the wood which the European Union imports from high-risk areas Russia, Indonesia, Central Africa and the Amazon has been harvested illegally.

Milieudefensie investigated the use of wood in building projects financed by the European Union through several funds, grants and subsidies and in buildings which house the European Commission. In these buildings and building projects Milieudefensie found spruce, meranti, ipe and azobe wood species, lacking certification of legal or sustainable forest management, sourced from regions which fall under the OECD definition on �high risk areas� for illegal logging (China, Russia and all tropical countries).

The results of the investigation, published in the report Building on Forest Destruction, show that the use of illegally logged wood has penetrated into all corners of the timber industry. Illegally logged wood lies in European timber yards, is incorporated into our wooden garden furniture, can be found in doors and flooring made of merbau and meranti and is extensively used in both government and private sector building projects.

Since 2003, the European Commission has been working on FLEGT (Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade), an action plan aimed at combating illegal logging and related trade. However, in that time, no effective measures have been put into operation to accomplish this and the European Commission has been unable to keep illegal and destructively logged wood from being used, even in its own construction projects