[previous] [next] [Table of Contents]
YOUTH PARTICIPATION IN GLOBAL DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES
Global Politics: TNCs and the Global Governance
UNCED also holds a broader significance. The environment issue was set up as a global issue in need for global action. There were demands to strengthen international law, which could make nations toe the line. Non governmental organizations (NGOs) had been forming global networks and were working on global campaigns.
These efforts at the global level directly contributed to building a sense of global identity, or global citizenship which would be the first step towards global governance. Such global governance would further distance power from the people while giving unlimited access to governments and multinationals.
TNCs also played a role in the UNCED process. Maurice Strong, the Secretary- General of UNCED is an industrialist himself. Much of the conference was funded by Ecofund, a fund set up for the conference and receiving contributions from some of the biggest corporations in the world like Swatch, ICI (a major producer of ozone depleting chemicals), ARCO (labeled by Multinational Monitor as the corporation with the worst environment record in 1990) and Coca Cola. The corporate sponsorship of UNCED paid off with none of the documents or conventions forcing TNCs to be held accountable for their environmental destruction.
Not only did TNCs succeed in being exempted from any controlling measures, they even managed to make themselves be seen as part of the solution rather than part of the problem. Agenda 21, the principle declaration of the conference, sees the answer to environmental problems in terms of the need to increase economic growth in order to pay for environmental protection and regeneration. Additionally, new "green" technologies would have to be developed in order to decrease the environmental impact of development. Another cause of environmental degradation was said to be poverty, and that too was to be eradicated by aid and development.
Overall, "Sustainable Development", the catch phrase of the conference, was more about sustaining development as a source of power and income for corporations than saving the environment or addressing the great inequalities which exist today.
Lastly, perhaps most importantly, UNCED brought together all advocacy and grassroots organizations under the banner of "Non-Governmental Organizations". Business and Industry lobby groups were placed along side those fighting against them. All these groups were given access to the UNCED process, though only in terms of observing and the occasional speech.
There were great efforts taken to create "inter-sectoral dialogue" which would encourage NGOs to work with business interests instead of against them, following the "Our Common Future" agenda to create "partnership between industry and environmentalists."
Fundamentally, given the nature of the industry, such partnerships can only lead to a decrease in the rate of destruction of the environment, but nowhere close to the power redistribution which is needed to address the complex contradictions in society.
It is quite obvious that for some the strategy for UNCED was to dilute the impact of the NGOs, while creating a role for industry. Patrick McCully, in his conclusion on the role of NGOs in UNCED comments,
"NGOs were brought on board because they posed a challenge and co-option was the best way to defuse it. If NGO strategies in the future continue to be dominated by groups such as the Centre for Our Corporate Future the NGOs will continue to be manipulated to support the projects of those in power."
The co-option of NGOs also plays a role in global governance. In order to appear democratic, the illusion of a strong opposition allowed to voice its grievances is essential. By selecting and allowing a certain opposition to function, all other opposition is easily painted as radical and extremists.