TECHNOLOGY: UN Must Incorporate Science or Risk Losing Authority

By Gustavo Capdevila Reprint | | Print |

Gustavo Capdevila

GENEVA, Jun 10 2002 (IPS) - The United Nations runs the risk of losing control over the major decisions of the future if it does not incorporate a scientific and technological focus into its diplomatic operations, warn academics and experts.

Calestous Juma, professor at Harvard University in the United States, says “there is sufficient evidence showing that some important decisions are taking place at the margin of the UN but under the UN flag.”

Juma, director of the Science, Technology and Innovation Programme at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, cited the case of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.

The programme, launched a year ago by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, entrusts 1,500 scientists to carry out a four-year study of the state of the world’s ecosystems.

The Harvard academic pointed out that the initiative utilises the United Nations logo, “but the mechanism for running it is outside the UN system.”

In order to prevent UN power from being undermined, Juma proposes linking knowledge to diplomacy. “This is central to enforcing the role of the UN as locus for global governance,” he said.

The very creation of the United Nations system entailed the use of knowledge and it has become increasingly important over the years, said Juma. As such, if the UN does not take measures to bring knowledge to the decision-making process, it runs the risk that important decisions are going to be made beyond its reach.

These warnings were expressed at a forum convened by the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) to discuss diplomatic initiatives related to science and technology.

Rubens Ricupero, UNCTAD secretary-general, reported that the debate concentrated on the application of science and technology in matters that are subject to diplomatic negotiations.

The global economy is increasingly becoming a “knowledge intensive economy” and, as a result, the possibility for developing countries to compete in markets worldwide lies in their ability to master new technologies, said Ricupero.

For this reason, UNCTAD, whose mission is to work with these countries to help them overcome the obstacles to their development, organised the seminar to discuss mechanisms for raising the awareness of trade negotiators and public officials about the important role of science and technology.

Competitive capabilities must be improved because “it is a false panacea to believe that trade negotiations per se will resolve development problems, particularly when countries not have the productive capacity to take advantage of the results of trade negotiations,” said the UNCTAD chief.

Ricupero based his argument on the example of the Lomé Agreements, which created a special trade area between Europe and some of its former colonies in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP).

“For 30 years those countries have enjoyed trade preferences, in some cases very significant ones,” granted by the European nations, he said

But figures from the European Commission state that the share of the African ACP countries in the European markets plummeted more than 50 percent between the mid-1970s and the mid-1990s.

The ACP case shows that something more than trade preferences is needed. Developing countries need productive capacity, and to achieve this, “technology is becoming more and more decisive,” Ricupero said.

However, the matter presents numerous challenges because developing countries are limited in their ability to confront issues like intellectual property rights or sanitary and phytosanitary regulations in trade.

The UNCTAD leader cited the case of Brazil, his country of origin, which faces the dilemma presented by genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Brazil is one of the leading agricultural producers in the world, and continues to resist the introduction of transgenic crops.

Brazil is forced to compete with the United States and with neighbouring Argentina, which have both adopted transgenic soya. The latter’s GMO crops threaten to contaminate Brazilian fields.

“Political borders do not stop cross-pollinating, favoured by winds,” he pointed out.

As evidence of the complexity of the GMO question, within the Brazilian government there is a deep division of opinions, said the UN official.

Brazil’s Minister of Agriculture “favours the introduction of transgenic varieties because of their promises in terms of gains in productivity,” while the Minister of Environment is opposed “because of their still unknown impact in terms of environment and health.”

The differences between the two Brazilian ministries take on greater proportions when once considers that “the two largest agricultural powers in the world, the United States and the European Union, are of opposite views and opposite practices in this respect.”

“The United States has chosen to underscore the gains in productivity and to minimise the environmental and the health risks involved,” said Ricupero, adding that the Europeans “are still considering the risks involved.”

The problem presents “enormous complexity, and no one would claim that science itself would be able to solve this in a simple way,” stated Ricupero.

Swiss academic Werner Aber, of the University of Basil and 1978 Nobel laureate in Medicine, said during the UNCTAD debate that it would be many decades before humanity can speak with any certainty about the impacts of genetically modified organisms.

Ricupero commented that these scientific and technological questions have enormous consequences for the negotiations that are taking place under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

The UNCTAD secretary-general stated that in these debates the international community must take advantage of the knowledge that non-governmental organisations (NGOs) can contribute, and invite them to participate in the process.