121
edits
World Environment Organization: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
World Environment Organization (view source)
Revision as of 19:44, 15 January 2010
, 19:44, 15 January 2010no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
The following article will give an overview to main points of the current reform-debate and show the characteristic. Therefore it points out in a first step the situation of institutional global environmental policy right no and the need for a reform more specific. In a second step different attempts for a reform will be shown and the necessary characteristics of such an organization will be pointed out. Finally there will be a conclusion and an outlook to the process in the future. | The following article will give an overview to main points of the current reform-debate and show the characteristic. Therefore it points out in a first step the situation of institutional global environmental policy right no and the need for a reform more specific. In a second step different attempts for a reform will be shown and the necessary characteristics of such an organization will be pointed out. Finally there will be a conclusion and an outlook to the process in the future. | ||
=Current Global Environmental Policy= | |||
The current environmental policy is characterized by a high fragmentation: More than 30 years after the first global environmental conference in Stockholm there are different UN-secretaries, the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), special organisations e. g. FAO, IFAD, UNESCO, UNDO and the World bank, sectional environmental conventions and a huge number of interstate committees and work teams involved. There were more than 900 multinational agreements. The illustration on the left makes this situation clear. In total there are less organizations pursuing cross-sectional purposes (Rechkemmer, p.5). Only the UNEP calls itself in the Nairobi-Declaration: “The leading global environmental organization […] within the United Nations system and that serves as an authoritative advocate for the global environment.” | |||
==Problems in general== | |||
It seems like an uncoordinated, ineffective system of autonomic processes with a number of overlapping, contra-productive single decisions, with unused synergies. For the developing countries this system is unwieldy and because a lack of resources they can concurrate in the conference-marathon. | |||
Furthermore as Copenhagen has shown there is the need for consensus-decisions. And even if there are agreements there is still a lack of implementation of the decisions (Informationen zur politischen Bildung, p. 72). | |||
==Problems in the UNEP== | |||
Facing the UNEP as the main organization for environmental problems of the UN it has no fixed financial basis, there is no universal membership, there are only 800 employees (for example the German Federal Environmental agency has about 1300 employees) in Nairobi and it has no own entity (REchkemmer, 15). | |||
Facing this lack of environmental policy the need for a reform becomes clear. The following text will focus of this reform of global environmental policy- but is has to be seen against the backdrop of the reform of the UN in general and the problems there<ref> More information about the reform of the UN can be found for example on the [http://www.un.org/reform/ '' UN-Website''] and on an [http://www.globalpolicy.org/un-reform.html ''External political Website'']</ref>. | |||