WSSD: A Sigh of Relief as World Summit Ends

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Analysis - Farah Khan

JOHANNESBURG, Sep 4 2002 (IPS) - Johannesburg breathed a palpable sigh of relief Wednesday as the United Nations largest ever, most expensive ever, Summit wound down.

Many African delegates shopped in surrounding Sandton; others began tallying the losses and gains for the continent at the World Summit.

A son of the soil, Ghanaian UN secretary-general Kofi Annan praised the conference for being “action-oriented”. He said, “This summit puts on a path that reduces poverty while protecting the environment, a path that works for all peoples, rich and poor, today and tomorrow.”

His view was in sharp contrast to that of non-governmental organisations like Oxfam which work in Africa and who believe the Summit did not deal effectively enough with poverty. “There is no new commitment to lift aid levels to the 0.7 percent of gross domestic product agreed in Rio,” said the British charity and in this, the Summit had failed Africa.

K.Y. Amoako, the executive secretary of the Ethiopia-based Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) said aid levels to Africa should be doubled to help the continent achieve the Millennium Development Goals. The goals are a plan to cut poverty in half by 2015 by targeting incomes, education and food security.

“At current growth rates, which at best are 3.5 percent, very few countries will meet the goals,” he said.

But, host President Thabo Mbeki and his cabinet were upbeat about the outcome. They believe that it goes some way to deal with “global apartheid” – the term Mbeki used to describe a world that had grown more unequal in sustainable development indicators, since the last UN environmental conference in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992.

Mbeki is particularly pleased that the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) is highlighted in the Summit’s blueprint, though anti-colonial, pro-land grab rhetoric by Zimbabwe’s president Robert Mugabe and Namibia’s president Sam Nujoma raised eyebrows.

A specific commitment has been made to ensure that access to energy reaches 35 percent of all Africans by 2022.

African trade ministers were chaffed that the Summit secured a commitment from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries to begin to dismantle subsidies paid to their farmers, which now run well in excess of 1 billion U.S. dollars a day.

Over 70 percent of African economies are agriculture-based and the reduction of state support will give market access in an area where the continent is competitive. “Reducing agricultural subsidies is the single most important area where rich countries can do something for Africa,” said World Bank director for development policy Ian Goldin at the start of the Summit.

By the end of the meeting, NGOs complained that not enough had been done. Oxfam said no new timetables had been set to phase out export subsidies.

Earlier in the meeting, it released a report showing how European export subsidies on sugar were debilitating small sugar farmers in Southern Africa to the tune of well over 200 million U.S. dollars a year.

But World Trade Organisation director-general Supachai Panitchpakdi said the reaffirmation of the pro-development goals (which include subsidy reduction) of the Doha trade round was important for developing regions like Africa. “The reiteration means the Doha agenda is being backed up. It’s a very important message which can speed things up,” said Supachai in Johannesburg.

“Market access is important for all countries,” added Amoako, who said it was vital, especially in an era of static aid flows.

He added that Africa should also become a more vocal supporter of the Kyoto protocol, post-Johannesburg. While the continent’s responsible for the least amount of greenhouse gas emissions (because it has such a low industrial base), it was suffering a disproportionate impact of climate change.

Mahendra Shah, co-author of a book called “Climate Change and Agricultural Vulnerability” said cereal production on the continent was severely threatened by climate change. The droughts currently afflicting six countries in southern Africa was an example of the impact of climate change. By 2080, climate change would see Africa’s agricultural output decline by eight percent.

All in all, the Summit presented a mixed bag for Africa, as it did for most regions. But holding it on the continent in a relatively glitch-free fashion has provided an image boost to a region too often portrayed as a basket case.