World Environment Organization: Difference between revisions

Since then there were be different debates, the most important one to link the two main ideas of the reform process in reality was presented in the world-summit 2005: In the final-document §169 it means to create a: »more tightly managed entity in the field of environment«<ref> You can find the document [http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N05/487/60/PDF/N0548760.pdf?OpenElement ‘here’]</ref>. Beside this in the end of June of 2009 in Belgrade a further step of the very slow reform-process was taken: A next step of the discussion called the Belgrade-Process. Probably right now nobody can say when this process comes to an end. Maybe the decision will be taken under scientific and urgency aspects or economical and power interest will win-for both directions there are different examples in the history of the UN.

From my point of view, facing the advantages, an own entity is needed- therefore the UNEO model is the most attractive- integrating other reform attempts, being a counterweight to other organizations but still more an umbrella organization than a hierarchical one.

But beside the aspect how the current environmental policy is reformed the main point is that there must be a reform- fast. Moreover I hope this decision is made under urgency aspects. Rio+20<ref> More information about [http://www.earthsummit2012.org/ 'Rio+20']</ref> can be a chance for the reform process: The world-risk-society gets after Copenhagen a second chance to give the global environmental policy the attention and the action which are  needed right now.