121
edits
World Environment Organization: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
World Environment Organization (view source)
Revision as of 19:47, 15 January 2010
, 19:47, 15 January 2010no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
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>. | 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>. | ||
=Theoretical Reform-Attempts= | |||
There is a global agreement for a reform of the political environmental system- but what this reform should look like there Rechkemmer distinguishes about four attempts (2005, p. 21). What the concert reform-attempts look like will be shown later in this essay. | |||
==Upgrade-Approach== | |||
The aim of this approach is to strengthen and to consolidate the UNEP. Therefore the financial system should be changed from a trust-fund-principle to a core budget sum. Moreover the staff should be increased and a universal membership of all UN-members should be installed. The cooperation with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) should be intensified and through a conversion of the inner organisational structures and management the assertiveness should increase. This model could be colloquial called as “pimp UNEP” represents the position of the UNEP itself and nations for example China and India. | |||
==Mainstream-Approach== | |||
Since Rio 1992 there is the idea of the integration of social, economical and ecological attempts in sustainability. Furthermore the worldwide power is situated in the economical entities like WTO, worlbank and IWF. Because of these two aspects the interest of this approach is to integrate the environmental policy into these other organisations. It is important to separate environmental issues no longer because it is already a cross-section-task. With a single environmental organization there would be a further separation of environmental issues, moreover it would be not as powerful as other economical organizations are. Therefore it needs a systematic integration of environmental issues into these organizations. | |||
==Specialized-Agency-Approach== | |||
The aim should be an entity for the environmental issues under the UN- compared to the World Health Organization (WHO). Therefore the financial system and the personal situation would be reformed anyway. The decision-making would be democratic, but for example with a norther-souther- balanced decision-process. The fragmentation of all the environmental secretaries would be disbanded and integrated into this one powerful organization. Of course this organization could develop form the UNEP. This idea is the position of more and more counties for example Germany and France. One scientific model of a hierarchical world environmental organisation was developed by the WBGU and was discussed very often.<ref> The model can be found under [http://www.wbgu.de/wbgu_jg2000_engl.html ''WBGU-model'']<ref> | |||
==Global-Governance-Approach== | |||
The main idea of the global-governance-Approach is that environmental policy is no longer a question what could be answered by (national) policy itself or what is concentrated on one policy field. Rather there must be an integration of other actors for example NGOs and companies. Therefore a WEO must be planned in the way of an integration and participation of these other actors and cooperation with other organizations. | |||
==Critics== | |||
Of course these four different approaches cannot be separated in the reality perfectly. Rather every idea, reform-process and compromise is a conglomerate of aspects of these approaches. | |||
And of course there are lots of critical aspects the realization is influenced by. Some critiqs are the following: | |||
*The missing point are not the structural deficits, it is the political willingness. These problems could not be solved with a new organization. | |||
*The complexity of the current environmental policy is an appropriated answer to the complexity of the problems- a centralization could endanger their solution even more. | |||
*A huge institution needs a huge organizational apparatus; therefore important human resources and financial resources would be needed for this and cannot be used for facing concrete environmental challenges. | |||
Because of these aspects the reform-process of global environmental governance in reality is very hard, last lots of years. | |||