More than a billion people around the world live in desperate poverty. More than a billion lack access to safe drinking water. At least a billion are unemployed or under-employed. Almost a billion are illiterate. These are the billionaires’ clubs to which no-one wants to belong.

As people with an active interest and involvement in social welfare and social development, we know the gravity of these problems, even if we do not always know the precise statistics. Many of you know, much better than I do, that in your own country misery and injustice is widespread.

We also know that it is important to discuss practical options and make specific plans to address these problems, not merely to restate them, to wallow in rhetoric, or to preach only to the converted. We have dreams which can be achieved but only if visionary idealism is matched with hard-headed action.

The Copenhagen Agreements

This session of ICSW’s global conference is especially concerned to identify and pursue ways in which agreements made at the World Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen in 1995 can be put to practical use in the fight against hardship and injustice. The Summit focussed on three core issues - poverty, unemployment and social exclusion - and it agreed upon a wide range of actions to address these problems.

Although the Summit was attended by the heads of more than one hundred countries, it has not attracted the same degree of prominence in public and political debate as, for example, the Rio Conference on the Environment or the Beijing Conference on Women. Perhaps that is because by comparison with those conferences its predominant concerns - poverty, unemployment and social exclusion - are of less immediate concern to the middle classes.

The Copenhagen Summit seems likely, however, to become over time a major catalyst for action and achievement, especially by stimulating closer international cooperation to enhance social development. This will not occur, however, unless community organisations and government agencies become more aware of key elements in the Summit agreements and vigorously pursue their implementation.

The most significant aspect of the Copenhagen agreements is their focus on the importance of creating enabling environments for social development. They recognise that this applies especially to the economic, political and legal environments, and at both national and international levels. It is crucial that community organisations and governments reinforce and pursue this focus on addressing the underlying causes of poverty and hardship rather than, as so often occurs, concentrating unduly on narrower patch-up responses.

These narrower responses are also important, of course, and the Summit agreements include an extensive array of them. The array is so extensive, however, that it is essential for both advocates and actors to select and pursue some priorities. It is also essential that some measurable targets are focussed upon to ensure that the measures which are adopted actually achieve substantial improvements.

The Copenhagen agreements are of special importance to developing countries. Many of the problems with which they are concerned are especially severe in those countries, and they are especially vulnerable to weaknesses in the international environment which are identified in the agreements.

Against this background, it may be useful to suggest some aspects of the Copenhagen agreements to which priority could be given when pursuing implementation. It may also be useful to suggest some methods by which community organisations could select and advocate their priorities for action.

ENABLING ENVIRONMENTS

Economic environments

The Copenhagen agreements emphasise the need for international and national economic environments which promote productive investment and employment opportunities on a sustainable basis, rather than encouraging undue emphasis on speculation and exploitation for short-term benefit. They also emphasise the need to restrict excessive volatility in financial markets, to facilitate fair trade and to harmonize economic and social development.

A number of priorities for implementing these agreements can be suggested. At the international level, for example, a cooperative tax on financial market transactions would help to reduce the alarmingly high level of short-term speculation which harms genuinely productive businesses and intimidates governments from promoting the long-term interests of their citizens. Priority could also be given to developing an enforceable code of fair conduct for international businesses and finalising an agreement on fair trade in areas such as agriculture which would especially benefit many developing countries.

At the national level, there is a strong case for restricting short-term international transfers of funds in order to prevent excessive vulnerability to damaging speculation and dominance by foreign interests and ideologies. It is also important to establish specific targets for employment growth to which governments and central banks must give as much weight as, for example, anti-inflation targets. These issues are obviously of special relevance to recent developments in South East Asia but they are of great importance throughout the world.

The Copenhagen agreements also emphasised the need to generate sufficient funds for government expenditure on social development. This included improving aid and debt relief for developing countries, exploring options for international taxes and user charges, improving the fairness and efficiency of national tax systems, and increasing the proportion of government revenue which is devoted to meeting basic human needs.

At the international level, additional revenue for social development purposes could be obtained through a cooperative tax on international financial market transactions. Other revenue-raising options, which would also promote economic efficiency, include taxes or charges on energy usage (a carbon tax), international air transport and space satellites. A very high priority should be further relief for developing countries from overseas debt and the honouring of earlier agreements by wealthy countries to increase development assistance on a sustained basis. International taxation standards should be developed to help prevent tax competition between countries that encourages inefficient private investment and deprives governments of essential revenue.

At the national level, it is important to establish revenue targets which allow sufficient public investment in people as well as in infrastructure, and to ensure adequate contributions from wealthy people through taxation of assets (especially land and shares) and financial transactions. Substantial government expenditure on job creation is essential when unemployment levels are high. Social assistance and other basic services should be provided as enforceable rights rather than being at the mercy of short-term fiscal policy.

Political environments

The Copenhagen agreements emphasise the need to improve the structures and processes for international cooperation and governance in areas of crucial importance to social development. This includes strengthening the role of the United Nations in these areas and encouraging closer cooperation with it by other international institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. It also includes closer interaction between governments at the regional level.

A very high priority for achieving these goals is to restructure the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations so that it can provide effective leadership and governance in the interests of all countries and of both economic and social development. It is clear that this need cannot be met adequately by other international institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, WTO, G8 and OECD. In order to fulfil its responsibilities, ECOSOC will need to be smaller, meet more often, and devote more attention and expertise to macro-economic issues

Another high priority is to strengthen political structures and processes at regional and sub-regional levels. This will enable some forms of cooperative action which individual governments could not effectively implement on their own against the wishes of international financial markets, major industrial countries or large transnational corporations. It will also enable policies to be more attuned to local circumstances than is likely to be provided from the global level. Perhaps most importantly, it will strengthen the ability of developing countries which are in similar circumstances to combine more effectively in global negotiations that are currently dominated by the major developed countries.

The number and strength of regional and sub-regional groups of governments has grown considerably in recent times. They range from long-established groupings such as the European Union and the Association of South East Asian Nations to much younger ones such as the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation and Mercosur. It is important that regional groupings of this kind are persuaded to give as much attention to social development as to narrowly economic issues. It is also important that the growing trend towards inter-regional negotiations does not unduly undermine global processes through the United Nations.

At the national level, the Copenhagen agreements emphasise the need for governments to involve community organisations in developing, implementing and monitoring policy initiatives. This requires not only a sustained commitment by governments but also a practical understanding by community organisations of the opportunities which they should demand and the limitations which they should accept.

Legal environments

The Copenhagen Summit emphasised the importance of establishing enforceable human rights as a means of enhancing and monitoring social development. It especially endorsed the importance of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which, for example, establishes rights relating to food, education, shelter, employment and social security. It urged ratification of the Covenant by those countries which have not yet done so and also more effective enforcement.

Economic, social and cultural rights have tended to be the poor relations of the international human rights regime, especially by comparison with rights relating to freedom of speech, movement and association. Yet they can add valuable strength to the fight against poverty and hardship. The highest priorities here are to achieve more widespread ratification of the Covenant and to promote the use of specific internationally-agreed targets (for example, provision of universal basic education by a specified date) as guides to whether the vaguely-expressed rights in the Covenant have been honoured.

Community organisations can strengthen the effectiveness of the Covenant by insisting that governments honour their obligations to report on their compliance with it and by presenting their own reports to the UN monitoring committee. They also could campaign for the right to an investigation by the committee of their specific complaints about breaches of the Covenant and for the committee to be given sufficient resources for its task.

Economic, social and cultural rights are also recognised by some regional treaties and national laws. In general, however, these rights suffer from the same problems of vagueness, and inadequate enforcement, as apply at the global level. Much remains to be done if they are to make a major practical contribution to the fight for social justice. This applies especially to the development of specific measurable criteria for assessing whether the vaguely-expressed constitutional rights have been sufficiently protected, promoted and fulfilled.

THE CORE PROBLEMS

As mentioned earlier, the Copenhagen agreements include a wide range of measures, in addition to creation of enabling environments, for addressing the core problems of poverty, unemployment and social exclusion. Although many of these measures are expressed in very vague terms, they provide a useful compendium of options and also some support for people wishing to advocate them to governments or other actors. It is essential, however, that community organisations focus their advocacy on some specific priority actions and on some measurable targets for achieving progress.

Priority targets

One of the most debated elements of the Copenhagen agreements relates to fixing deadlines for reducing and eradicating poverty. It was finally agreed that as a matter of urgency each country should set a target date for eradication of absolute poverty and adopt a comprehensive strategy for substantially reducing poverty.

Difficulties arise, however, in relation to defining and measuring poverty for these purposes. This applies especially to definitions based on income. It may be useful to focus special attention on setting and achieving targets relating to specific problems such as illiteracy, malnutrition and mortality which are closely associated with poverty.

There are a number of specific targets and deadlines in these areas which have been agreed at international conferences. It would be useful to identify a limited number (say, five or ten) as top priorities and then closely monitor progress. Failure to achieve these targets could then be regarded as evidence of denial of economic and social rights. The selection of a list of priority targets could draw on the list of five such targets which was adopted last year by a Ministerial Meeting of the Asia Pacific Region, following a recommendation from a regional NGO Forum organised by ICSW. A United Nations Task Force on Basic Social Services has also compiled a useful, slightly larger, list of priority targets.

Some developing countries have been understandably reluctant to adopt targets without promises of greater international assistance to achieve them. The OECD, however, has now adopted the goal of halving global poverty by the year 2015. The member countries, and relevant international agencies including the World Bank and IMF, should be held accountable if they fail to provide reasonable assistance.

Priority methods

The Copenhagen agreements emphasise a number of priority methods for enhancing social development. First, they emphasise the importance of trying to prevent problems from arising rather than focussing principally on ameliorating them subsequently. This explains, for example, the emphasis in the agreements on achieving universal access to basic education and preventive health.

Second, the agreements emphasise the importance of providing people with access to opportunities and resources so that, wherever possible, they can become self-reliant rather than remaining heavily dependent on long-term support. This explains, for example, the emphasis in the agreements on improving access to land and credit, especially in developing countries.

Third, the agreements emphasise the need to provide basic social protection for those people who are experiencing the greatest hardship or vulnerability. This applies, for example, to ensuring universal access to safe water and sanitation and adequate means-tested social assistance. It also applies to ensuring that information and advice services about eligibility for assistance programmes are targeted principally at reaching those who are in the greatest need.

Fourth, the agreements emphasise the need for flexibility and innovation to meet local needs and circumstances. This includes, for example, providing prominent roles for provincial and local governments in developing, delivering and monitoring social programmes. It is also one of the reasons for ensuring that community organisations have major roles in these programmes, including through providing them with substantial government funding to deliver services.

It would not be appropriate for me to make specific comments here about the applicability of these priorities in particular countries. But I am confident that the priorities are appropriate and that the Copenhagen agreements can provide both stimulation and support for advocating specific applications of them in your own region and country.

THE WAY AHEAD

The Copenhagen meeting should really be seen as a base camp rather than a summit. It is now essential, however, to develop greater direction and momentum for the ascent.

There are many ways in which community organisations can put the Copenhagen agreements to good use. At a national level, for example, they can prepare and circulate summaries of the agreements, especially those elements which relate to a particular issue such as unemployment or health. They can convene meetings, and publish papers, to identify and promote aspects of the agreements on which they believe governments should focus. They can prepare regular reports on progress towards implementing these priority elements.

It is especially important to promote implementation at the international level, without which the likelihood of substantial improvements within individual countries, especially developing countries, will be severely constrained. It was recommended in Copenhagen that the governments of each region should meet at a high level every two years in order to assess and expedite implementation. Regular meetings of this kind commenced last year in the Latin America and Asia-Pacific regions and it is crucial that they also commence in the other regions.

ICSW’s regional councils convened successful NGO Forums to prepare written statements to the governmental meetings in Latin America and Asia-Pacific last year, and our representatives were then invited to address the meetings on behalf of Forum participants. We would be glad to initiate a similar process in other regions.

It is also important to engage governmental groupings at the sub-regional level in implementation of the Copenhagen agreements. In order to facilitate this process, ICSW is in the middle of an extensive series of sub-regional NGO forums and workshops on implementation. We are also talking directly to several sub-regional groupings, and to individual governments, urging them to consider regional and sub-regional action to implement the agreements.

The UN Review in 2000

A process of special importance is about to commence at the global level. The General Assembly of the United Nations will conduct a Special Session in the middle of the year 2000 to review implementation of the Copenhagen agreements. The first meeting of the UN’s Preparatory Committee for the Special Session was held recently in New York and ICSW was pleased to be the NGO which was invited to address it. At later meetings of the Preparatory Committee we will feed in outcomes of the series of regional and sub-regional NGO Forums that we are convening on Copenhagen implementation.

It is essential that the Special Session is provided with independent reports about progress with implementation. This should include reports from community organisations and the annual overview published by Social Watch. It will also have the benefit of the reports and recommendations which appear in ICSW’s quarterly magazine, Social Development Review, which focuses on Copenhagen implementation,

It is also essential that the Special Session concentrates on some specific decisions for action by the UN system rather than on telling everyone else what to do or renegotiating all the Copenhagen agreements. The top priority should be strengthening the systems of international cooperation and governance in order to enable implementation of policies which advance both economic and social development throughout the world on a sustainable basis.

Building Momentum

Implementation of the Copenhagen Summit is slowly developing momentum. The fact that the Summit was deliberately not promoted as a climactic occasion also means that it has not induced an anti-climax. It has not been followed by a great sense of disillusion or disappointment. Indeed, its profile and standing within the UN system and amongst governments appears to have risen slowly and steadily since 1995 rather than to have declined.

But the Copenhagen Summit has not yet developed the level of profile and commitment within countries, and amongst community organisations, which is both justified and necessary. That is why sessions like this one, and other follow-up activities, are of such importance to develop the pressure and momentum for implementation.

ICSW has committed considerable energy and resources to our fight for implementation of the Copenhagen agreements. We will continue to do so and we look forward to working closely amongst ourselves, and with other NGOs, to help people in misery and hardship throughout the world.