Center for Scientific Studies (CECS) in Chile

The Center for Scientific Studies (CECS) was founded in 1984 as the first independent scientific research organization in the history of Chile, and has become an important centre for science in Chile and Latin America. CECS was founded by Chilean theoretical physicists and biologists who had established careers abroad but chose to return to Chile to contribute their skills to the development of their country.

Investigations in the field of Glaciology and Climate Change at the CECS are notably innovative as well as their scientific expeditions to the Antarctic territory. To some extent the Center has arguably reshaped thinking about the role of science in development in Chile and Latin America. The CECS has incorporated the military force as a support to science research, while also holding a democratic view of society. The Center has contributed to the decentralization of the country due to the decision to move and settle down in Valdivia, a small city 800 km (to the south) from the capital city Santiago.

The Center is led by the physicist Claudio Bunster, who, together with his team have helped develop private-public partnerships in order to obtain financing for the institution. Scientists from Latin America and all around the world visit the Centre for their research. The Center has an internal organization based in horizontal relations and mutual support between researchers.

It has been an excellent example of an institution demonstrating that from the South of the world it is possible to produce science of a very first level. In recent years the Center has been involved in a new challenge of greater support and development of applied sciences, beyond their traditional strength in basic sciences. CECS research is funded by competitive funding from the National Fund for Scientific and Technological Development (FONDECYT - Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico) and other national and international agencies.

Timeline entry contributed by Juan Manuel Fernández Urcelay

Source: CECS website

The Belgrade Process on International Environmental Governance

The Belgrade Process towards International Environmental Governance involved a first meeting of the Consultative Group of Ministers or High-level Representatives in Belgrade, 27 – 28 June 2009.

The premise of the process is the complex, fragmented and inadequately coordinated institutional context for international environmental governance of growing environmental challenges affecting societies and ecosystems at all scales from local to global.

To date, there are more than 500 multilateral environmental agreements in existence, dozens of agencies mandated to comply with and implement these agreements and address a multitude of other environmental aims and needs, with still fairly limited and dispersed funding sources.

In the last couple years, the persistent debate on how to reform international environmental governance (IEG) has grown and ‘gained significant momentum through processes put into place by the UNEP Governing Council, statements made by Heads of State, as well as through initiatives taken by intergovernmental bodies such as the Commonwealth, and by civil society such as the Global Environmental Governance Project’.

The Consultative Group of the Belgrade Process began by identifying the ‘possible core objectives and underlying functions of the system’ with the aim to find a form for IEG that effectively fits its function. This identification represents a critical step towards defining a pathway for improving IEG, and was a first. It also shows a growing recognition that only when there is a clear analysis of what is needed of the IEG system, followed by an assessment of what exists, can the international community embark upon an effective reform of the system. (UNEP, 2009)

Summary of the Consultative Group activities:
1. The Belgrade Meeting, June 2009 – Output: Roadmap
2. The Rome Meeting, October 2009 – Output: Set of Options for Improving IEG
3. The Bali Meeting, March 2010 – Output: Nusa Dua Declaration (Climate change, sustainable development, Green economy Biodiversity and ecosystems)

UNEP aims to coordinate the development of a ‘functioning IEG system that provides the international framework to support governments in successfully addressing environmental challenges and meeting their commitments at the national level’ and is, ‘in many cases, a precondition for UNEP to carry out other activities effectively’. (UNEP, 2009)

Timeline entry contributed by Biljana Ledenican

Ethos founded in Brazil

Ethos is a not-for-profit organization, founded in Brazil in 1998 by a group of businessmen and executives from the private sector. Ethos clusters knowledge management, exchange of experiences and tools development to support firms to analyze their management practices and set commitments toward social responsibility and sustainability.

Ethos became a reference in Brazil for CSR and sustainability, building awareness and being a key player in making sustainability a mainstream topic in the news media and closer to individuals.

The mission of Ethos is to ‘mobilise, sensitise, and support firms to manage their businesses in a socially-responsible way, towards the construction of a more just and sustainable society’. The Ethos Institute ‘develops, organises, and adapts materials on Tools for Business Management to keep them up to date and relevant to issues of global and national Corporate Social Responsibility.’ Tools include instruments for self-evaluation and learning, developed to meet the needs of firms at different stages of management, but primarily for internal use in diagnosis, planning and implementation, as well as benchmarking for the evaluation process.

The basic tools include Best Practices Bank, Social Accountability Guide, Compatibility Guide, Ethos Indicators, Contextualising tools, Matrix of Essential Criteria, Evidence Matrix, Sustainability Reporting.

Timeline entry contributed by Carolina de Andrade

Happy Planet Index

The Happy Planet Index (HPI) is an index of human well-being and environmental impact that was introduced by the New Economics Foundation (NEF) in July 2006.

The index is designed to challenge well-established indices of countries’ development, such as Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the Human Development Index (HDI), which are seen as not taking sustainability into account. In particular, GDP is seen as inappropriate, as the usual ultimate aim of most people is not to be rich, but to be happy and healthy. Furthermore, it is believed that the notion of sustainable development requires a measure of the environmental costs of pursuing those goals.

The HPI is based on general utilitarian principles — that most people want to live long and fulfilling lives, and the country which is doing the best is the one that allows its citizens to do so, whilst avoiding infringing on the opportunity of future people and people in other countries to do the same. In effect it operationalises the IUCN’s (World Conservation Union) call for a metric capable of measuring ‘the production of human well-being (not necessarily material goods) per unit of extraction of or imposition upon nature’. Human well-being is operationalised as Happy Life Years. Extraction of or imposition upon nature is proxied for using the ecological footprint per capita, which attempts to estimate the amount of natural resources required to sustain a given country’s lifestyle. A country with a large per capita ecological footprint uses more than its fair share of resources, both by drawing resources from other countries, and also by causing permanent damage to the planet which will impact future generations.

Those who sign on to the Happy Planet Charter believe that:

“- A new narrative of progress is required for the twenty-first century.

- It is possible to have a good life without costing the Earth.

- Over-consumption in rich countries represents one of the key barriers to sustainable well-being worldwide and that governments should strive to identify economic models that do not rely on constantly growing consumption to achieve stability and prosperity.

They call for:

- Governments to measure people’s well-being and environmental impact in a consistent and regular way, and to develop a framework of national accounts that considers the interaction between the two so as to guide us towards sustainable well-being.

- Developed nations to set an HPI target of 89 by 2050 – this means reducing per capita footprint to 1.7 gha, increasing mean life satisfaction to eight (on a scale of 0 to 10) and continuing to increase mean life expectancy to reach 87 years.

- Developed nations and the international community to support developing nations in achieving the same target by 2070.”

Timeline entry contributed by Andrew Mailing

Special Climate Change Program 2009-2012 Mexico (PECC)

Elaborated by the Mexican Federal Government this document establishes quantitative mitigation and adaptation goals for the period 2009-2012 and long term goals for 2020 and 2050. It is important because it incorporates actions to be taken by different ministries and goes beyond short term presidential periods. The objectives are specific and provide detail of the type of projects required in each sector. As a result it triggers clean technology innovation and deployment in Mexico. Currently the World Bank has provided US$500 million loan to increase scientific knowledge and technologies in relation to carbon sinks and strategies outlined in PECC.

Timeline entry contributed by Gabriela Moya Toledo

The World Conservation Strategy

The World Conservation Strategy was published by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) in 1980. Its main objectives are:
(a) to maintain essential ecological processes and life support systems,
(b) to preserve genetic diversity, and
(c) to ensure the sustainable utilization of species and ecosystems.

It is said that the concept of ‘sustainable development’ first appeared in the WCS. This document stresses the importance of development within “the reality of resource limitation and the carrying capacities of ecosystems.” While the Brundtland report (1987), which proffers the famous definition of sustainable development, has a strong concentration on the satisfaction of human needs, the WCS is primarily concerned with ecological sustainability. Since the publication of the WCS, many countries have prepared national conservation strategies. Also the concept of conservation of genetic diversity influenced formulation of the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992).

Among the priorities for national action that the WCS identifies are ‘improving the capacity to manage’ both in terms of ‘legislation and organisation’ and also ‘training and research’.

Timeline entry contributed by Ai Kaibu