Developing Countries and the Politics of Sustainable Development
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Developing Countries and the Politics of Sustainable Development By ADIL NAJAM Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering (1989), University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan Specialization in Negotiation (1994), Program on Negotiation at HarvardLaw School, Cambridge, Mass., USA Submitted to the Technology and Policy Program and the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degrees of Master of Science in Technology and Policy and Master of Science in Civil and Environmental Engineering at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 1996 © Adil Najam, 1996. All rights reserved The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part. Signature of author Technology and Policy Program May 15, 1996 Certified by FRED MOAVENZADEH, Ph.D. Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering Director, Technology and Development Program Thesis Supervisor Accepted by RICH AREdT. NEUF'.ILLE, Ph.D. Professor o and Environmc:tal Engineering .Chairma MIT Technology and Policy Program Accepted by Accepted JOSEPIM.by SUSSMAN, Ph. D. J. R. East Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering Chairman, Departmental Committee on Graduate Studies Developing Countries and the Politics of Sustainable Development BY ADIL NAJAM Submitted to the Technology and Policy Program and the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering on May 15, 1996, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degrees of Master of Science inTechnology and Policy and Master of Science in Civil and Environmental Engineering ABSTRACT This thesis is about the political context in which global environmental policy decisions are made. More specifically, it is about the role and prospects of the developing countries of the South in the emerging politics of sustainable development. It is argued that there is indeed a 'South' and that neither its own intemal diversity nor the end of the cold war has weakened this coalition because its abiding interest in seeking fundamental systemic change in a hostile intemational order remains as relevant and as unfulfilled as ever. Moreover, the differences now emerging on environmental issues should be seen as lying on the very same continuum as earlier North-South conflicts; the South seeks a rearticulation of the underlying concerns that had motivated its 1970s call for a 'New International Economic Order' in the North's newfound desire for, what may be called, a 'New International Environmental Order.' This thesis focuses principally on what the South can do itself in this era of ecopolitics and suggests that the notion of sustainable development offers a window of opportunity to the South because this time the North isalso interested in pursuing dialogue and there is the potential for joint gains in juxtaposing the North's concern for environmental sustainability and the South's desire for social and economic development. To avail of this opportunity, however, the developing countries will have to reconsider their negotiation strategy. Finally, this thesis proposes a negotiation strategy for the South. This strategy builds upon the lessons of negotiation theory but is firmly rooted in the experiences of the South-the advice can be paraphrased as: "Stop feeling angry at the North and sorry for yourself." The strategy seeks to redefine North-South environmental negotiations as a non-zero-sum game. It recommends that the South should focus on interests, not positions; cultivate its own power; be hard on issues, not on people; redefine the international environmental agenda; organize itself; develop its constituency; clean up its own act; and remember that good agreements are more important than 'winning'. It is argued that such a strategy would not only better serve the interests of the South, but would lead to a more productive international environmental negotiation process and thereby would also be better for the North. Thesis supervisor: FRED MOAVENZADEH, Ph.D. Title: Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering Director, Technology and Development Program ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This thesis has been a true labor of love. In large part, that is why it has taken so much longer to write. That writing it has been such a source of tremendous leaming for me isnot special; that is what theses are supposed to do. That working on it has, in fact, never seemed like work and has been a source of so much intellectual stimulation and satisfaction, even perverse pleasure, was indeed a surprise. Maybe my friends are right and I do need to "get a life." But then, maybe, it isthey who are missing out on the great delights of forever broadening the horizons of one's own ignorance. The ideas presented here were bom in a hundred different places. A few in the many classes I took at MIT and elsewhere, the many as I debated the issues and options with friends, acquaintances and those who would probably not like to be described as either. I would like to acknowledge the impact of these even if I cannot ascribe each individual causality. What I can, and must, acknowledge and ascribe isthe deep and lasting impact on my ideas that has come from my mentor, Syed Ayub Qutub, who introduced me to so many of these issues when I worked with him, before coming to MIT, on the preparation of the Pakistan National Conservation Strategy. For this, I am in his debt. I owe a very special debt to my thesis supervisor, Prof. Fred Moavenzadeh, for his continuous support, his immense patience, and for not giving up on me. I also must express my deep appreciation and gratitude to TPP, the Technology and Policy Program-my first, and still favorite home at MIT. To Prof. de Neufville for convincing me to stay on at MIT in my moment of indecision, to Prof. Tabors for teaching me the tricks of surviving MIT, and most of all to Gail, Rene and all my classmates for simply tolerating me; having lived with myself for so long, I know how difficult that can be. While in Cambridge I have benefited from the advice, insights and criticism of some of the best minds in the field. The one's who have had the most lasting impact on this work- and for whose classes I first explored these ideas-include Professors Arpad von Lazar, Bill Moomaw, Bob Keohane, Gene Skolnikoff, and especially Larry Susskind. Finally, and above all else, I am forever grateful my parents for believing in me even when-and especially when-my own belief in myself was faltering. I dedicate this thesis to my parents without whose support I may never have started this enterprise and to my wife, Huma, without whose encouragement I may never have concluded it. I have had the opportunity to present the ideas that have become part of this thesis at various forums outside MIT, including the Third Global Structures Convocation, Washington DC; the Intemational Institute of Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria; the Aspen Global Change Institute, Aspen, Colorado; and the Sustainable Development Policy Institute, Islamabad, Pakistan. I gained much useful feedback at these and other presentations. In addition, different variants of what is chapter #8 in this thesis have appeared as parts of journal papers by me--"An Environmental Negotiation Strategy for the South", International Environmental Affairs, 1995, 7(3): 249-87 and "The South in International Environmental Negotiations", International Studies, 1994, 31(4): 427-64. An earlier version of some of these ideas also appeared as part of my chapter in Papers on InternationalEnvironmental Negotiation, Volume Ill, edited by Lawrence E. Susskind, William R. Moomaw and Adil Najam (published by the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School, 1993). Some of the discussion insection I of this thesis builds on my 1994 working paper, "The Case for a South Secretariat in International Environmental Negotiation" (Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School Working Paper 94-8, 1994). These have provided the foundation for this thesis but have been substantively and substantially rewritten in the course of producing this document. CONTENTS Page 3 * Abstract Page 5 * Acknowledgments Page 7 * Contents Page 11 * Chapter Summaries Page 13 * Glossary Page 15 * Chapter #1-Introduction and summary Page 19 The Argument Thesi of this Page 23 OrV IgUanization III I I III I I1 . SECTION 1: THE PAST Understanding the South Page 27 * Chapter #2-Defining the South Page 29 Understanding 'North-South' Page 33 Why Not the 'Third World' WIUht \AtI &Afnr h, ' Cr,,k'L Page 36 II V ia ii uKy oUutl Page 39 * Chapter #3-The institutional face of the South Page 41 The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) Page 49 The Group of 77 (G77) Page 60 Gauging Achievement hT Cha/h lln • Ahr~r ,d n ÷-,, ,-,l- '^ .^ Page 63 U aL enge ea and the South Centre Page 67 *Chapter #4-Is the South defunct? Page 69 The Challenge from Heterogeneity Page 77 Thea tha llnnr, frr~ I In;n.l i;p - , npoarty aenge rom * 7 SECTION II: THE PRESENT The South in International Environmental Politics Page 85 * Chapter #5-A-tale of two cities: From Stockholm to Rio Page 87 * UNCED and the South's Lost Innocence Page 91 * Stockholm and Rio: Two Different Worlds Page 96 * Stockholm and Rio: The Same South Page 102 * A Profile in Frustration Page 111 * Chapter #6 From NIEO to NIEO Page 112 * The New Intemational Economic Order-A Primer Page 116 * Environment as an NIEO Issue Page 119 * The South's Strategic Use of the Environment Issue Page 121 * Towards a New Intemational Environmental Order SECTION II: THE FUTURE Negotiating for the Earth Page 127 * Chapter #7-North-South dialogue: The next generation Page 128 * North-South Dialogue: The Second Generation Page 131 * New Dialogue: New Challenges, New Opportunities Page 136 * Beyond UNCED Page 141 * Chapter #8-A negotiation strategy for the South Page 143 * "Stop Feeling Angry at the North and Sorry for Yourself' Page 147 * 1 * Focus on Interests, Not Positions Page 149 * 2 * Redefine the Power Balance Page 152 * 3 * Be Hard on Issues, Not on People Page 154 * 4 * Redefine the Agenda Page 157 * 5.