summary of bali sdg workshop
DESCRIPTION
uyiuoilTRANSCRIPT
Indonesia National Workshop on Sustainable Development Goals Kuta, Bali
Monday, 28th May – Tuesday, 29th May
ContentsExecutive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 2
Detailed Summary ‐ Day One – 28th May .............................................................................................. 5
Opening Session .................................................................................................................................. 5
Session 1: The Changing Context – Challenges to Planet Earth .......................................................... 7
Session 2: A Successor to the MDGs – The Case for Sustainable Development Goals ..................... 10
Session 3: Challenges to economic growth, poverty alleviation and environmental sustainability at
the National and Local Levels – the Indonesian context ................................................................... 13
Detailed Summary ‐ Day Two – 29th May ............................................................................................ 15
Opening Session ................................................................................................................................ 15
Session 4: Sustainable Development Goals – A historical Perspective ............................................. 17
Session 5: Strategies to Implement a Sustainable Development Agenda ........................................ 19
Session 6: Strategy for Indonesia’s Engagement on SDGs ................................................................ 22
Closing Remarks ................................................................................................................................ 25
2
ExecutiveSummary
Day One – 28th May
In the opening session, the status of Rio +20 as one of the most important UN conferences was
pointed out. Indonesia should use its position to ensure that decisions are taken at Rio and that
sustainability is addressed through a holistic approach. Looking back at the historic emergence of the
concept of sustainable development and past conferences from Stockholm over Johannesburg to Rio,
the need for a paradigm shift was highlighted. Increasing GDP is still the main goal of economic
policies and add‐ons such as Corporate Social Responsibility are not sufficient to address market
failures. Finding a new path to development is crucial as ecosystems are reaching their breaking
point. In the Indonesian context, this can be illustrated when looking at unsustainable practices in
the oceans, for example overfishing in the Arafura Sea.
Session 1: The Changing Context – Challenges to Planet Earth
While the MDGs have achieved important successes, especially in regard to raising awareness for
certain goals as poverty reduction, shortcomings include the lack of attention to inequality (both
within and between countries), building a real partnership for development (Goal 8) and not giving
enough attention to the kind of growth that has to be achieved and the fact that there is no blue‐
print model for economic success – Business as Usual (BAU) certainly not being the way forward. A
holistic approach, meaningful participation and the notion that development has to happen within
our planet’s boundaries – thus be sustainable socially, environmentally and economically – is needed.
Also, it has to be noted that the environmental challenges we face are not synonymous with climate
change. A Green Economy model is seen as the preferred economic vehicle to achieve sustainable
development broadly, not just the goals of climate change mitigation and adaptation. The
developing world needs a green development path, and a resource efficiency and clean energy path
is needed for the developed world.
Session 2: A Successor to the MDGs – The Case for Sustainable Development Goals
Looking back on Indonesia’s past experience with the MDGs, disparities between provinces,
nurturing synergies between national and provincial efforts and specifically achieving MDG goals 5
(maternal mortality rate) and 6 (combat HIV/AIDS) were identified as challenges. Thus, beyond 2015,
all goals that have not been achieved yet should be represented in the new framework. In forestry,
Indonesia faces the challenges of illegal logging leading to deforestation, forest degradation and also
falling timber prices and a complex governance system. At the international level, the discussion
about a post‐2015 Development Agenda revolves around Sustainable Development Goals as one way
forward with the Secretary General presenting an Action Agenda that defines sustainable
development as the overarching goal. This debate takes place within the context of a changing
political landscape: new powers, such as the BRIC countries are rising and there is a need for better
3
coordination between the United Nations, financial institutions and other entities such as ASEAN and
G20.
Session 3: Challenges to economic growth, poverty alleviation and environmental
sustainability at the National and Local Levels – the Indonesian context
Various sectoral success stories – from solar heaters in China, to organic agriculture in Uganda to
forest management in Nepal – indicate that socially pro‐poor, economically viable and
environmentally sustainable development can indeed be achieved. But to achieve this, primary,
secondary and tertiary sectors should all be invested in. But by taking a closer look at poverty, the
question was raised whether pro‐poor, pro‐green, pro‐job and pro‐growth development can indeed
happen in parallel and without trade‐offs. Economic growth still follows the prevailing growth
paradigm and while extreme poverty has been reduced, raising the poverty line to $2 a day shows
that half of Indonesia’s population still lives in poverty. Thus, poverty eradication should still be
placed at the centre of development efforts. Building upon the notion of the existing growth‐
paradigm, also evident in the six economic corridors of the MP3EI, the question was raised as to
whether and how unsustainable pathways to development could be “unlearned”. Emphasis was
placed on establishing property rights as pre‐condition for sustainable development. Drastic land‐
use change is currently taking place because of concessionary policies. It was proposed that the
President should put land rights issues on the agenda of Rio+20. Market mechanisms should be
supplemented by economic mechanisms which restore or build natural capital.
Day 2 – 29 May
Opening Session
By drawing on the example of frequent natural disasters and their adverse impacts in Indonesia, the
concept of a sectoral approach to development problems and challenges was again questioned:
when rising sea levels or changing rainfall patterns affect Indonesia, these effects are felt across
sectors and especially by the poor – subsistence farmers and fishers – whose livelihoods depend
directly on the environment. A holistic approach to development has to be chosen. Indonesia’s
leadership role in designing sustainable development goals was reconfirmed by Mr. Heru Prasetyo,
who also noted that the approach taken so far is still in a blue‐print version and that it has to be
finalized and implemented in the best way possible. Further, it was highlighted that the Agenda in
Rio must not distance itself from the MDGs poverty focus, MDG 1 and differentiate between
responsibilities of developing and developed countries.
Session 4: Sustainable Development Goals – A historical Perspective
A phone call to Ms. Paula Caballero, Colombian foreign ministry official for social, economic and
environmental affairs, was insightful. Colombia has already put forward a proposal and a concept
note on SDGs, together with countries such as Guatemala, Peru and the United Arab Emirates. Ms.
Caballero stressed that her expectation of Rio +20 is to „stop negotiating and start working“. In this
way, Rio should ideally give the political support to SDGs so that the technical process on developing
concrete key issues, goals and indicators could start. These would then again have to be accepted
4
through a political process. She also shared the experience of Colombia’s efforts in developing
national sustainable development goals.
Session 5: Strategies to implement a sustainable development agenda
Dr. Pavan Sukhdev started the session by stressing what the world needs to look at in formulating
robust and tangible sustainable development goals: a good mix of goals and key issues addressed,
measurable indicators, excellent coordination and the involvement of all stakeholders. Mr. Abdon
Nababan from the indigenous people’s organization AMAN added to Dr. Sukhdev’s list, particularly
with reference to involving indigenous people. He drew on past positive experience of indigenous
people working together with the government of Indonesia, for example by supplying community
maps. With respect to Rio, he sees 5 issues that Indonesia should bring to the table:
1. UN declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples should be key
document
2. Cultural pillar should be put as a fourth pillar to existing sustainable
development pillars
3. Protection and respect of the right of indigenous people to access
and use their lands ‐> investing in land rights is precondition to
investing in sustainable development
4. Recognize contribution from traditional knowledge
5. Green Economy should support indigenous peoples holistic
framework
Mr. Raldi Koestoer from the Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs sees a need for a greener
MP3EI. He based this on his assessment of specific corridors – such as corridor three (Kalimantan) –
where it became evident to him that the plan is not addressing real green or blue development yet.
Mr. Heru Prasetyo looked back on the historical path of the REDD+ Task Force and pointed out, how
a SDG process could benefit by going through the same stages: 1. Preparation, 2. Transition, 3.
Implementation. A paradigm shift in economic thinking and the involvement of all stakeholders was
regarded as crucial.
Session 6 – Strategy for Indonesia’s Engagement in the SDGs
Rear Admiral Willem pointed out several governance challenges if a holistic – in contrast to a sectoral
approach – should be taken. Among them are coordination challenges, insufficient implementation
of existing laws and the fact that a common understanding of the concepts of blue and green
economy is still missing when looking at different ministries and central, regional and local
government entities. Dr. William Sabandar sees several steps that still need to be taken: greening the
MP3EI, continuous work on national development problems with view to sustainable development
for the budget 2013 and choosing short term goals on which all partners (including international
partners) have to work: as an example he mentioned solving land‐related conflicts. When looking at
approaches to tackle these problems, Dr. Pavan Sukhdev advised that in fact a mix of approaches
should be taken: focussing on sectors, policies and key issues. Mr. Satya Tripathi from UNORCID used
the example of post‐tsunami disaster management experience in Aceh, stressing that functional
integration instead of institutional integration should be key: instead of asking what structure should
be designed, functions should be defined first and form built based on these functions.
5
DetailedSummary‐DayOne–28thMay
OpeningSession
Rear Admiral Willem Rampangilei, Deputy I, Coordinating Ministry of People’s Welfare, Welcoming
Remarks:
1. Rio +20 has the status as one of the most important UN conferences. Within this context,
Indonesia should use its position to make sure that decisions are taken at Rio and that sustainability
is addressed through a holistic approach where economy, environmental issues and social equality
are all considered . But taking on a holistic approach also presents a challenge.
Prof. Emil Salim, Chief of the Presidential Advisory Council, Key Note Address:
1. Looking back at the historic emergence of the concept of sustainable development and past
conferences from Stockholm over Johannesburg to Rio shows the gradual emergence of the concept
of sustainable development. Here, the 1983 World Commission on Environment and Development
was key as sustainable development was defined as the interlinkage of economic, social and
environmental questions.
2. Over the last 40 years since the UN Conference on the Human Environment took place in
Stockholm 1972, importent documents and conventions have also been produced, such as the Rio
Declaration, Agenda 21, UNFCCC and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).
3. Still, in order to truly realize the concept of sustainable development, at least ten paradigm shifts
have to take place:
1. Recognizing the Matrix of interlinkages between economic, environmental and social
questions
2. Paradigm shift from a single‐track economy to a triple‐track economy (environmental, social
and economic development)
3. Paradigm shift from resource exploitation to resource enrichment
4. Paradigm shift from a short to a long‐term development view
5. Paradigm shift from sectoral thinking to holistic thinking
6. Paradigm shift from a top‐down to a participatory approach
7. Paradigm shift from non‐renewable resource based output/energy and export of
unprocessed raw materials to renewable resource based development path
8. Market mechanism needs to internalize environmental and social costs as Corporate Social
Responsibility is not enough to tackle market failure and GDP growth is still the dominant
goal of economic planning
9. Paradigm shift from development thinking in terms of GDP only to a GDP+ approach were
sustainable development factors are integrated
10. Development of Sustainable Development Goals that integrate Social, Economic and
Environmental Goals
6
4. Consequently, what Rio+20, discussions within Indonesia and the design of a post‐2015 framework
have to focus on is finding a “new HDI” – a new measure of progress which reflects a focus on social
equity and environmental sustainability by upgrading HDI’s “per capita GDP” component with a
Gini‐adjusted, Green‐GDP adjusted measure. This workshop should provide content with regards to:
a.) what this measure is, b.) how to measure and track it and c.) which policies and processes,
frameworks and governance systems have to be in place to achieve it.
Prof. Indroyono Soesilo, Secretary‐General of the Coordinating Ministry of People’s Welfare,
Welcoming Remarks:
1. Finding a new path to development is crucial as ecosystems are reaching their breaking point. In
the Indonesian context, this can be illustrated when looking at unsustainable practices in the oceans,
for example overfishing in the Arafura Sea which could be spotted using patrol aircrafts.
2. Globally, data shows that by 2003, 32% of fish stocks had collapsed, 39% were overexploited and
the remaining 29% were at the limit of sustainability. Besides overfishing, coastal and oceanic
ecosystems are also severelt harmed by the kind of fishing practices employed: dynamite and
cyanide fishing are severely damaging and ecosystems need a long time to recover. Data by the
World Resource Institute documents the status of Indonesian coral reefs with severe destruction in
most areas but particularly at the coasts of Java, Bali and Sulawesi.
3. The second factor driving oceanic ecostystems in Indonesia and worldwide towards their breaking
point is the adverse impact of anthropogenic climate change, manifested through global warming,
gradual sea level rise and intensified climate variability (for example the shorter intervals of the El
Nino/La Nina weather phenomenon). With global mean sea level variation at a rate of 2.4 mm
annually, projections show that the North Jakarta areas of Ancol, Tanjung Priok and Pantai Indah
Kapuk could be completely flooded by 2050.
4. In this context where dangerous exploitative human practices such as pelagic overfishing and the
adverse effects of anthropogenic climate change are driving marine ecosystems towards their
breaking point, action is immediately needed.
5. One option is employing the concept of a blue economy on the national level. In 2005, the
President has already started an initiative for „Responsible and Sustainable Management of our
Marine and Fisheries Resources“. To truly realize a blue economy based on sustainable and
responsible practices, three steps are needed:
1. Improved controlling of capture fisherie activities
2. Further development of aquaculture
3. Introduction of fishery value added products (cold chain system, zero waste)
6. Internationally, global cooperation is needed to sustainably manage oceans as global commons.
Indonesia is already playing an active part in the Coral Triangle Initiative (CTI) on coral reefs, fisheries
and food security)
7
Session1:TheChangingContext–ChallengestoPlanetEarth
Dr. Pavan Sukhdev, GIST Advisory, Introduction:
1. Two of the most pertinent environmental problems Indonesia currently faces – deforestation and
coral reef destruction – illustrate, that environmental problems do not only relate to biodiversity loss
but to livelihoods as poor communities depend on ecosystem services. Poor communities living in
and near forests or as fishers close to coasts and on small islands immediately feel the adverse
consequences of ecosystem destruction and degradation. At the same time, coral reef destruction
and deforestation directly relate to the wider economic system and how economic decision making is
structured.
2. This first session of the workshop is putting a focus on finding solutions to complex problems.
Dr. Erna Witoelar, Former UN Envoy for MDGs:
1. While the Planet is changing rapidly, some factors remain: poverty, huge disparities between and
within countries, rapid urbanization and a lack of sanitation. In coping with these challenges SDGs are
one option among several and one should not confuse the two SDGs as one proposal with the
broader framework and task of designing future post‐2015 development goals.
2. When working on the challenges we are confronting today, several things should be kept in mind.
The concept of sustainable development is important as are the documents that were already agreed
upon to implement it, such as the Agenda 21. An important component of Agenda 21 was realizing
sustainable development not only globally or nationally but also at the local level – this is still missing
in Indonesia. Equally important is the Millennium Development Declaration and it is important to
remember that the associated Millennium Development Goals are not of a prescriptive nature but
that they allow for tailoring according to context. If the MDGs are sometimes dubbed the “Minimum
Development Goals” then this only indicates that the world should be more ambitious. There are also
some interesting lessons to be learnt from the way the issue of climate change appeared on the
agenda. There is now widespread public and media awareness, partly due to such seminal works like
the Stern report.
3. In the process of formulating the post‐2015 framework, at least five lessons can be drawn from the
MDGs:
1. Eliminating poverty must be at heart of every post‐2015 agenda
2. Data and statistical capability at national level is still a problem
3. Moving from climate change agenda to sustainable development
4. Holistic approach is crucial: move from MDG‐approach to interlinked and cross‐
sectoral take on development
8
5. Millennium Declaration still valid as framework: equality, good governance,
sustainability
4. In conclusion, there are at least two concrete steps that need to be taken when designing and
implementing future Sustainable Development Goals. Firstly, lessons from all the SDG milestones
should be developed incorporating solid coordination among the governance system, the local
societies and institutions. Secondly, data and awareness must be generated having the local level in
mind and good governance is crucial.
5. When looking at key issues, sanitation and water management have to addressed. The technology
and ideas are there but the priority setting seems to be lacking. Importantly, there should be more
sectoral linking between the institutions and departments responsible for sanitation and water.
Mr. Rathin Roy, Head, UNDP Asia‐Pacific Regional Centre, Bangkok:
1. Currently, around 60% of the world’s population lives in Asia. For the planet to be safe, this region
has to be safe. Further, the Asian region is not only the largest and most populated but also the
region that is probably most susceptible to the adverse effects of anthropogenic climate change.
Hence, it is crucial for the Asian region and its people to play an active role in the discussions baout a
post‐2015 development framework.
2. While the MDGs succeeded in mainstreaming simple key issues, they failed in the big picture,
which can be highlighted by the issues they ignored: inequality – both within and between countries
– was not addressed, Goal 8 (A Global Partnership for Development) was virtuelly wiped out of the
conversation and lastly it was not recognized that there are no blue‐print models leading to
economic success.
3. Looking at the first failure, ecological change is going to bring large inequalities within and
between nations. Environmental change and inequality thus both have to be addressed. Joining the
dot between economic and social problems is not difficult: It is inequality that we need to solve in
order to create balanced opportunities within and between countries.
4. Focussing on the way ahead towards Sustainable Development Goals, several problems or
challenges should be noted:
1. A better distribution of power within multilateral organizations such as the UN, WTO or the
World Bank is needed.
2. It is always emphasized that a holistic approach to development should be taken. However,
institutions themselves – both the United Nations and the Government of Indonesia – are
not organized holistically but in sectors. In the worst case, this can create a gridlock similar to
the Jakarta traffic jam.
3. Participation and consultation have to be brought on board, but in a meaningful manner.
Particpatory processes should not be implemented for the sake of participation but with a
clear purpose.
4. Climate change – while being an important issue – is not synonymous with sustainable
development. Thus, the climate change bureaucracy cannot take the lead in the SDG process
as this negates the holistic approach.
9
Mr. Heru Prasetyo, Deputy Head of UKP4
1. Drawing on historical discussion points and quotations from both the Stockholm Declaration from
1972 and the Rio Declaration from 1992 shows, that the world is confronting are still the same or
have in fact become worse and more severe. This becomes even more evident by looking at
comments that were made from participants while the milestone conference still took place, such as
when George W. Bush stated that the American way of life could not be compromised.
2. Today, 40 years have passed since Stockholm Declaration. Numerous meetings have been held
through Rio in 1992 and successive UNFCCC events, and 60,000 people will gather in Rio+20 – more
than the number of volunteers in Aceh and Nias. However, the destruction continues, due to human
mismanagement of planetary resources.
3. The reason behind the still ongoing destruction and unsuccessful initiatives of international
meetings is the failure of our economic and management models. The planet is dying and discussions
are not enough to save it. Moreover, Multinational Corporations dominate the discussion and hinder
the solution we need. The only way to cope with the decaying planet and possibly reverse adverse
effects is by changing the way we treat the planet and changing the way we perceive situations.
4. Large shifts in technology – for example the quartz movement in watches, pioneered by the
Japanese company Seiko – can serve as examples for how to bring about big changes. Firstly,
separate units that are reporting to the highest instance have to be created. Secondly, what is
needed has to be done and real reform should take place. Thirdly, parallel with these efforts, a
change in management has to take place.
5. Based on the Seiko success story, we need to establish ambidextrous organization where the
climate change unit is incorporated within the ministries and the agencies and could help the
organization deal with the real reform necessary to face the changes from within.
10
Session2:ASuccessortotheMDGs–TheCaseforSustainableDevelopmentGoals
Dr. Pavan Sukhdev, GIST Advisory , Session Introduction:
1. In trying to identify pathways to sustainable development, the concept of Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) evolved. Several recent efforts by various nations and groups can be
reviewed, concerning the why and partly also the what and the how of future sustainable
development goals (SDGs).
2. Colombia led the way in developing a proposal and a concept note for SDGs together with
Guatemala, Peru and the United Arab Emirates. The goals proposed in these documents point to
specific needs and it is noteworthy that the countries do not intend to re‐invent the wheel but rather
build upon existing strategies such as the Agenda 21 and define the necessary moves from there.
Examples of the content include the pertinent question of human settlements and the issue of
consumption and production in developed countries.
3. Recently, UNEP published its more than 200 page strong “Green Economy Report”. The green
economy is here presented as a mode to achieve sustainable development and is defined as low
carbon, resource efficient and socially inclusive.
4. With the Gaborone Declaration, several African countries stressed the value of natural capital as
asset for development. Transparency and sustainable resource management underpins the
development options a society has and poor natural capital management thus represents a
development impediment. The Declaration also includes a commitment to move forward in 2013
regarding natural capital accounting in national systems.
5. Keeping in mind the three examples stated above, this workshop session should explore how SDGs
could contribute to human development in a post‐2015 framework.
Ms. Nina Sardjunani, Deputy Minister of Human Resources and Culture, Bappenas:
1. Looking back on Indonesia’s past experience with the MDGs, disparities between provinces,
nurturing synergies between national and provincial efforts and specifically achieving MDG goals 5
(maternal mortality rate) and 6 (combat HIV/AIDS) still constitute challenges.
2. Thus, beyond 2015, all goals that have not been achieved yet should be represented in the new
development framework. Poverty remains a mature issue, especially when not only extreme poverty
is measured. Drawing on the Indonesian context, geographic and gender disparaties and inequalities
also need to be considered.
3. Likewise, the lessons learnt from the MDGs have to be incorporated. Among them were the
success MDGs had in raising public awareness and support. Further, the MGDs have provided a
framework for monitoring progress and while capacities are still not stong everywhere and regional
disparities remain, having such systems in place was a major improvement.
4. At the same time, some of the goals may have to be modified and understood in a deeper way.
11
5. Stunting, for example, is more severe than malnutrition and should be addressed through separate
indicators. Likewise, gender equality should also look at the representation of women in national
parliaments. Education needs to be measured not only in terms of quantity but also quality.
Mr. Tony Soehartono, Ministry of Forestry, on behalf of Dr. Iman Santoso, Head of Research and
Development Board, Ministry of Forestry:
1. In forestry, Indonesia faces the challenges of illegal logging leading to deforestation, forest
degradation and also falling timber prices and a complex governance system.
2. Current efforts undertaken include:
‐ Planting a billion trees: the challenge remains that people tend to plant in their
offices/homes instead of places where reforestation might be more conducive
‐ Leading the REDD+ issue in a context where there are around 61 Demonstration Activities
taking place in various areas (16 Sumatra, Kalimantan 26, Sulawesi 4, Java 4, NTT 2, Papua 6)
Registry is far from perfect within the office administration and confusion concerning
number and scope of demonstration activities in the outcome
‐ Establishment of 50 national Parks covering app. 20 million ha of forest areas
‐ Identifying Indonesian priority species for protection
‐ Ensuring better development of forest:
a. Alter the forest status from natural forest to timber plantation.
b. Deforestation decline from 5 million in 2003 to 0,5 million in 2011
c. Moratorium of natural forest for 2 years followed by the production of a new and
comprehensive map of the moratorium area and postponing the issuance of logging
permit as well as collaborating with the working group on land tenure
3. While there is a lot of progress in reforestation and forest rehabilitation, addressing (fair) forest
trade and livelihoods as well as implementing REDD+ is crucial. Further, 120 forest management
units will be established to improve governance in the sector and coordination with ongoing
activities.
Dr. Surendra Shrestha, Director and Focal Point on SDGs, Executive Coordinator’s Office, UN
Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), UN Headquarters, New York:
1. At the international level, the discussion about a post‐2015 Development Agenda revolves around
Sustainable Development Goals as one way forward with the Secretary General presenting an Action
Agenda that defines sustainable development as the overarching goal.
2. A concern voiced is that unlike the MDGs, future SDG’s should be designed through a developing
country driven process. This debate takes place within the context of a changing political landscape:
new powers, such as the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) are rising and there is a need
for better coordination between the United Nations, financial institutions and other entities such as
ASEAN and G20.
12
3. Another consideration to be discussed is the question of what would constitute ideal Rio +20
mandates. Some much discussed and currently proposed mandates for Rio +20 are :
a. Political commitment for framework on global goals (the goals would have to be truly global
this time, constituting goals for developed as well as developing contries)
b. Guiding Characterization for the Goals
c. Cross Cutting Themes for the Goals
d. Identify Potentials Goals
4. Regarding potential SDG components, we must look carefully into crosscutting issues, prioritize the
themes and then translate those into one framework of global and national goals. It is suggested to
cluster the cross‐cutting issues identified into human well‐being and planet well‐being cluster to ease
the discussion.
5. As a summary with a view towards the post‐2015 process, it is clear that the process should be
driven by member‐states, should be time‐bound and all ongoing processes and discussions need to
be brought into one framework. In the current process, leadership is missing and Indonesia with its
special position (special relation to BRIC, Islamic States, 5th fastests growing economy within the G20)
should fill this position.
13
Session3:Challengestoeconomicgrowth,povertyalleviationandenvironmentalsustainabilityattheNationalandLocalLevels–theIndonesiancontext
Dr. Pavan Sukhdev, GIST Advisory, Session Introduction:
1. Various sectoral success stories – from solar heaters in China, to organic agriculture in Uganda to
forest management in Nepal – indicate that socially pro‐poor, economically viable and
environmentally sustainable development can indeed be achieved.
2. However, in order to achieve such successes investment has to reach the primary, secondary and
tertiary sectors alike.
3. This workshop session will focus on the challenges we face when wanting to achieve growth that is
also sustainable. Also, national and local experiences relating to growth, poverty alleviation and good
resource and environment management will be shared and discussed.
Dr. H.S. Dillon, Presidential Envoy on Poverty Alleviation:
1. By taking a closer look at poverty, the question arises whether pro‐poor, pro‐green, pro‐job and
pro‐growth development can indeed happen in parallel and without trade‐offs. Economic growth –
within Indonesia and globally – still follows the prevailing growth paradigm and while extreme
poverty has been reduced, raising the poverty line to $2 a day shows that half of Indonesia’s
population still lives in poverty.
2. At the same time, the paradigm of economic growth has shifted pressure onto externalities such
as the environment. Thus, poverty eradication should still be placed at the centre of development
efforts. One way forward could be the establishment of special funds enabling the poor.
3. Analysing the national level and the current mode of economic management and policies in more
detail, at least nine challenges become evident:
1. Diffusion of corruption
2. Locked in commodity mode of extraction
3. Violence by non‐state actors (FPI as an example)
4. Pro‐poor, pro‐growth, pro‐green and pro‐employment are de facto trade‐offs but no
one has courage to address this
5. Regressive taxation
6. Creation of meaningful employment while moving up value chain needs to take place
7. How to create robust green economy? ‐> by putting poverty eradication at the
centre
8. No society willing to decrease consumption, yet this is be necessary to stay within
planetary boundaries ‐> unfettered markets do not only create a market economy
but a market society
3. Concerning the design of new development goals on the international level, four priorities have to
be set:
14
1. Poverty eradication has to be placed at the centre
2. There is no sustainability without taking care of this generation first
3. Value‐driven public‐private‐people partnerships can serve as solution
4. Addressed to UN: special funds to enable poor should be established
Dr. Noer Fauzi, Head of Studio on Indonesian Agrarian Studies, Sajogyo Institute:
1. Building upon the notion of the existing growth‐paradigm, also evident in the six economic
corridors of the MP3EI, the question can be raised as to whether and how unsustainable pathways to
development could be “unlearned”.
2. The six economic corridors focus solely on accelerating resource extraction and exporting to global
markets, for example through mining and palm oil. If this unsustainable mode of growth is to be
unlearned, an emphasis has to be put on establishing property rights as pre‐condition for sustainable
development.
3. It can also be observed that people are trapped in the idealistic principle of high economic growth
and implicitly accepting the negative ecological footprint that comes along with it. This
predominance of growth and associated carbon emissions constitutes society’s reality because of a
lack of awareness. Therefore, it is important to target the consciousness of the people in order to
alter the mainstream perspective
4. Drastic land‐use change is currently taking place because of concessionary policies and exploitative
mode of resource extraction. This is largely to the benefit of multinational corporations (MDG) and
results in disadvantages for the people traditionally occupying and using the land.
5. It is proposed that the President should put land rights issues on the agenda of Rio+20. The poor
have to be brought into negotiations with governments as corporations won’t change land rights
themselves. Local land conflicts have to be internationalized.
15
DetailedSummary‐DayTwo–29thMay
OpeningSession
Dr. Pavan Sukhdev, GIST Advisory, Introduction:
1. With regards to the first day of the workshop, several take‐home messages could be identified.
2. The first session on challenges offered an interesting historical view by Professor Salim. Looking at
specific issues and needs, it was repeatedly highlighted that managing oceans sustainably is not only
about biodiversity conservation but also poverty alleviation as many poor communities directly
depend on oceanic ecosystem services for protein intake. Further, there was consensus among
panelists that looking beyond GDP as a measure for economic performance constitutes a major
goals: it is the economic framework that needs to be changed as well as the behaviour of private
companies.
3. The second session focussed on the need for SDGs, or, more critically, if such a need exists. In this
respect it was interesting to look back at Indonesia’s experience with the MDGs, identifying were the
country succeeded and which issues still need to be addressed. During the discussion it became
evident that any way forward would have to take human as well as natural capital into account. Also,
Indonesia was viewed as a leader in this way forward – maybe we should start thinking in terms of
BRICI countries instead of BRIC?
4. In the third and final session of the first day, the focus was put on property rights and land reform
as a way to make economic practices more sustainable. Creating capacity at the hands of the poor
cannot happen without property rights. One approach would be to frame the issue as assets in terms
of ecosystem services at Rio +20. Further, the session showed that any kind of new development
framework should not distance itself from MDG 1. Also, a distinction has to be made between
developing and developed countries and their respective responsibilities.
H.E. Agung Laksono, Coordinating Minister for Social Welfare:
1. By drawing on the example of frequent natural disasters and their adverse impacts in Indonesia,
the concept of a sectoral approach to development problems and challenges can be questioned:
when rising sea levels or changing rainfall patterns affect Indonesia, these effects are felt across
sectors and especially by the poor – subsistence farmers and fishers – whose livelihoods depend
directly on the environment.
2. A holistic approach to development has to be chosen. At the same time, with 9 billion people living
on the planet in 2050, poverty remains a central issue and should not be discarded.
3. Governments should focus on the poor and vulnerable, especially farmers and fishers. At the same
time, individual consumption and production patterns have to change.
16
Mr. Heru Prasetyo, Deputy Head of UKP4:
1. From the discussions taking place on the first day of the workshop, two things can be concluded:
2. Firstly, with its natural endowments, its capacity and its relations worldwide, Indonesia as a
country is indeed in a good position to take the lead in a process for designing Sustainable
Development Goals for the post‐2015 Development Framework.
3. However and secondly, many challenges remain. An approach still has to be finalized and
implemented in the best way possible. At the same time, one has to be aware that there is no blue‐
print for success.
17
Session4:SustainableDevelopmentGoals–AhistoricalPerspective
Ms. Paula Caballero, Colombian foreign ministry official for social, economic and environmental
affairs:
1. SDGs must learn from MDGs past experience and reflect the realities and priorities within the
national context in order to guide the policy and decision making of country leaders. In its function,
the Colombian government believes that SDGs should be able to identify the gaps of development
and focus mostly on implementation and concrete action such as institutional empowerment,
capacity building, enhancing new technology which would lead countries to solve the development
issue such as water scarcity, land management, food security among many issues. In this respect, Ms.
Caballero also mentioned that Colombia decided on supporting Sustainable Development Goals as
there was a growing fear that Rio +20 would have no real impact.
2. What is crucial to Colombia’s concept of SDGs is, that they are universal in their outlook – in
contrast to MDGs which focussed on achieving goals in the developing world only.
1. Even though responsibilities are differentiated, SDGs could bring a universal shared
vision of working together – encompassing on all countries
2. Focusing on key issues, such as settlements and sanitation which represent the three
dimensions of sustainable development
3. SDGs are really about implementation with Millennium Declaration, Agenda 21 and
JPOI serving as foundation
3. SDGs are about creating a matrix but they also about going beyond the matrix. The discussion on
SDGs is indeed complex and therefore, the Rio+20 process is complex as there are many activities,
consultations and decisions that need to be made at national, regional and global levels. The
Colombian government considers that there is an urge to prioritize emerging development themes
and issues that are considered critical and paramount elements to move forward, which are inspired
by Agenda 21. Those issues are; (i) combating poverty, (ii) changing consumption patterns, (iii)
promoting sustainable human settlement, (iv) Biodiversity and Forests , (v) oceans, (vi) water
resources, (vii) advancing food security and (viii) energy including from renewable resources such as
biofuel.
4. Poverty reduction cannot be achieved through a keyhole‐vision! Consequently, SDGs are about
poverty reduction but also about so much more than poverty reduction.
5. The main expectation of Rio +20 is to „stop negotiating and start working“. In this way, Rio should
ideally give the political support to SDGs so that the technical process on developing concrete key
issues, goals and indicators could start. These would then again have to be accepted through a
political process.
6. Regarding natural capital, as a response to Gaborone Declaration by Africa leaders, the natural
capital issue should be translated into natural asset management and link it to how it would provide
real contribution to people livelihood.
18
7. While this may not be directly applicable to Indonesia, given the different context, Colombia has
made good experiences with developing sustainable development goals on the national level. The
country also set up a ministry for Environment and Sustainable Development.
Dr. Makarim Wibisono, Executive Director of ASEAN Foundation:
1. As MDGs were addressing pressing problems at that time, sustainable development is the
challenge of our time so the process should be building upon the MDGs but giving more weight on
equality and the environment in order to achieve better balance.
2. National ownership rather than sectoral ownership is needed as looking at other countries shows
that some have sustainable development councils and are faring well with it. All agencies should be
involved in developing sustainable development goals for Indonesia
3. Further, water, food security, and health issues became more pressing concerns in recent years, highlighting the dependence on natural resources and the need to manage them wisely. Therefore, these new complex areas need to be included in any future resolution. Facing complexities, cooperation between countries also becomes more important.
4. For Indonesia as a country, Rio +20 is also important with a view towards the President’s role as co‐panelist for future development goals.
5. The main focus of Rio +20 will be the green economy. Such an economy can function by (a) incorporating social concerns at all cost in the sustainability of life and market value, (b) mapping both on short term and long term targets and achievements, (c) expanding the human development index by designing a Sustainable Development Index. There is a need to create a sustainable development goal, but to be able to reach this goal, we also need to focus on the denominator and to bringing goals together by way of a new economy model, which is the Green Economy.
6. Human Rights are of high importance in this context. Problems of land degradation and land conflict are essentially part of a broader human rights take on the natural environment. As a suggestion, it is important to create a forum where all countries could provide a report of their achievements and to create a new commitment for the international framework regarding the said issue.
7. In sum, one should be optimistic but not too optimistic, as “achieving something in the UN system is like the mating of elephants […] and nothing happens for 22 months” (paraphrased, Pamela S. Chassek)
19
Session5:StrategiestoImplementaSustainableDevelopmentAgenda
Dr. Pavan Sukhdev, GIST Advisory, Introduction:
1. When taking a closer look at the process of formulating and implementing SDGs, four issues need to be addressed: a good mix of goals and key issues addressed measurable indicators, excellent coordination and the involvement of all stakeholders.
2. Sustainable development is not about three pillars but about dimensions to differefent challenges – one can hide behind pillars but not dimensions.
3. Key issues to be tackled include water management and effective cooperation between and within states.
Mr. Abdon Nababan, Head of AMAN:
1. AMAN, as one of the organizations representing indigenous people in Indonesia employs a broad
definition of what constitutes indigenous or traditional communities, that goes beyond the notion of
blood, commonly refered to by governments. Indigenous people should also be perceived through
their relation to the land they live on and use, sovereignty over land and their unique governance
system(s). These varying definitions have affected the data on the number of indigenous people in
Indonesia, which based on AMAN reaches up to 32 % of Indonesia‘s population.
2. Indigenous people living in Indonesia today face several problems. Main disadvantages relate to:
economic marganilzation, ecological degradation and increasing human rights violation.
3. Regarding the concept of sustainable development, the example of indigenous people living in
West Kalimantan can serve to illustrate how traditional communities have lived sustainably even
before the concept was introduced. Dayak in this area manage their natural resources sustainably
and territory is allocated based on the functions and services it provides .
4. These systems are relatively complicated and complex since they are intertwined with cultural
background and the tribal ancestral systems. It is important to note that there is not the indigenous
resource management practice as communities and their traditions and lastly the environments they
live in are diverse.
5. Past positive experiences of indigenous people working together with the government of
Indonesia show, that a lot for sustainable development can be done in this way. In this vein,
communities could support the government by providing maps. Community mapping documents the
sustainable ways in which indigenous communities use ancestrol land while this exercise also
supports the government in their spatial planning systems and activities.
6. With respect to Rio, there are five issues that Indonesia should bring to the table:
6. UN declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples should be the key document
7. Cultural pillar should be put as a fourth pillar to existing sustainable development pillars
8. Protection and respect of the right of indigenous people to access and use their lands;
investing in land rights is precondition to investing in sustainable development
9. Recognition of the contributions from traditional knowledge
20
10. Green Economy should support indigenous peoples holistic framework
Mr. Raldi Koestoer, Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs:
1. Green Economics is the theory of economics by which an economy is considered to be the
component of the ecosystem in which it resides: renewable energy, green buildings, and land
management are key areas to be addressed. A green economy drives sustainable growth while
valuing natural capital and provides for food, water, climate and resource security. The Green
Economy also constitutes of waste management, clean transportation and water management.
2. When establishing a green economy nationally, we need to consider building low carbon
economies in all sectors and industries; facilitating a shift to renewables and energy efficiency
economies, sustainability development, strengthening Public Services and enhancing local capacity;
as well as socio‐economic welfare as the first priority.
3. In addition, the Green Economy can also be a potential instrument in reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases. This has been regulated by the Presidential Regulation, no. 61 2011, which
mandates mitigation actions focused on: a) Agriculture, b) forestry and Peat land management, c)
Energy and Transport, d) Industry, e) Waste management, f) other supporting activities.
4. There is a need for a greener MP3EI. This is can be seen when assessing corridors – such as
corridor three (Kalimantan) which has a focus on extractive resources and energy export through
prioritizing mining and palm oil. Here it is evident that the plan is not addressing real green or blue
development yet. At the same time some areas such as Kalimantan and Papua are most sensitive to
the adverse effects of a changing climate such as flooding. Thus, not only mitigation but also
adaptation concerns have to be integrated in economic planning.
5. In conclusion, there are four factors that need to be addressed when building a national green
economy:
1. Indonesia‘s Commitments to Green Developments referring to MP3EI and PP GRK (PP 61 & PP
71/2011) to be planned globally and implemented locally
2. Requiring the spatial distribution pattern of Connectivity development and of Gas Rumah Kaca
(GRK). This requirement needs to be implemented mostly in the vulnerable regions
3. The development priorities are based on Green (techno‐science) Economy concept aiming at
Pro Growth, Pro Poor, Pro Job and Pro Environment development pathways
4. To build a real partnership and capacity building (HRD, Institutional building, and collective
efforts among development actors & stake‐holders)
Mr. Heru Prasetyo, UKP4:
1. Recalling the presentation by Mr. Abdon Nababan, there is the need to consider the idea of land‐
based islands of perma‐economies such as represented by the Dayak communities already
implementing sustainable land and resource management. We need to start thinking about creating
such land‐based islands now for the sake of future generations and their options.
21
2. In synergizing the three dimensions (economy, social and environment) we need to design a
National Agenda that addresses both spectrums; domestic public ( legislative, NGOs , private sectors)
and international agenda (multilateral, bilateral, multi‐bilateral).
3. At the same time, all implementation efforts also need to reach the sub‐national and the sub‐sub‐
national level: from the sky to the land to the peat‐lands.
4. Drawing on the historical path of the REDD+ Task Force indicates, how a national SDG process
could benefit by going through the same stages as the current REDD+ process in Indonesia:
a. Preparation, by identifying and overcoming barriers, engaging stakeholders, identifying the missing capabilities in order to provide and build it, as well as action planning.
b. Transition, by conducting pilot studies and early activities through taking a position as pilot country for sustainable development and thus gain support from global communities, performing situational fitting on a country‐country or region‐region basis within country based on their unique contextual situation, and programme integration within the national agenda.
c. Implementation, through monitoring and benefit sharing as well as budget projecting.
5. A paradigm shift in economic thinking and the involvement of all stakeholders is crucial.
22
Session6:StrategyforIndonesia’sEngagementonSDGs
Rear Admiral Willem Rampangilei, Deputy 1, Coordinating Ministry of People’s Welfare:
1. A common theme of this workshop was the importance of going beyond sectoral thinking and
conducting development planning using a holistic approach. But taking on a holistic approach is also
a challenge.
2. From the perspective of the Coordinating Ministry of People’s Welfare (Kemenko Kesra), it is
evident that environmental issues like biodiversity loss or extreme weather events impact people on
all levels and across sectors, but negative effects are felt especially by the poor.
3. However, several institutional and governance challenges exist if environmental problems are to
be addressed in a cross‐sectoral way and involving different levels of government – the national,
regional and local. Not only does each ministry have its own budgeting and systems, overlay between
central and local government competences exist and not everybody share the same understanding of
what a green (or blue) economy is.
4. As a conclusion, three steps are needed:
1. Master‐Plan grand design (even though it is questionable if having yet another master plan in
place will have a tangible impact as Master Plans are already abundant and there is no
guarantee for success)
2. Indonesia needs synchronization between ministries
3. A paradigm shift in economic development has to take place
Mr. Tazwin Hanif, first Serectary at Department of Foreign Affairs:
1. After having discussed the flesh of the future SDGs during the previous sessions,the remaining part
of the workshop should focus on discussing the bones: the process through which SDGs would need
to be designed and implemented.
2. It is vital to link the SDGs to the MDGs and focus on what still needs to be achieved. There was a
worry last year when the concept of SDGs was first put upon the agends, that MDGs might be
forgotten altogether. African countries were particularly worried that new SDGs might dilute from
the still ongoing MDG process. The Secretary General has reacted by emphasizing: „Let’s pick up
where the MDGs left of!“
3. Beyond the notion that the MDGs should be the basis for future SDGs and that especially MDG1
should still be key, there are also other concerns:
1. How can the SDGs and MDGs be linked in practice?
2. What should we (realistically) aim for in Rio?
3. What are the essentials for a post‐2015 agenda?
4. What is the scope for application of the SDG’s?
23
4. Looking at theconcept note for SDGs brought forward by Colombia and Guatemala, it appears that
the focus on environment is still too heavy.
5. Several options exist regarding to the process: a) intergovernmental process, supported by ad hoc
expert group on regional representation, b) on the advisory panel (HLP established by the UN‐SG)
and the intergovernmental (process which is possible to happen in the long process); and c) regional
process to intergovernmental process
6. A Ministry of Foreign Affairs workshop in Yogyakarta had some interesting outcomes relevant to
the SDG discussion:
1. There seems to be a choice between a sectoral approach versus key issue approach versus
policy approach ‐> or could a mix be applied
2. Attention needs to be given to indigenous poverty
3. Attention also needs to be shifted to remote areas ‐> what are the specific challenges to
Indonesia?
Dr. William Sabandar, Satgas REDD+:
1. The main fronts for Indonesian leadership at the international level are REDD+ and the Coral
Triangle Initiative – both with a view towards poverty eradication.
2. Several steps need to be taken towards national sustainable development: greening the MP3EI,
ccontinuous work on national development problems with view to sustainable development for the
budget 2013 and choosing short term goals on which all partners (including international partners)
have to work: as an example, land reform.
3. With a view towards a global agenda and action plan, Indonesia needs to bear in mind to set the
tone in Rio + 20 correctly, creating momentum and rigid focus on concrete action. At the same time
Indonesia can also establish working groups on SDG frameworks by involving people and be inclusive
by engaging friends inside and outside the country as well as embracing international diplomacy by
utilizing all the networks we have (double track; formal and informal). In the end we need to affirm
the provision of political leadership.
4. With regards to mainstreaming sustainable development goals nationally and internationally, the
focus should be on concrete actions:
1. Institutionalizing sustainable development does not mean creating new institutions but
rather new laws and regulations
2. Address coherence between sectors and regions
3. GDP is not enough (maybe Bappenas’ “green GDP” can serve as new measure)
4. REDD+ key document to make international community aware of Indonesia’s role and efforts
5. International Diplomacy should support this agenda
6. Improving coherence between local and national development
7. Think Tank for the President to work on a post‐2015 Agenda to be established
24
Mr. Satya Tripathi, Director of UN Office for REDD+ Coordination in Indonesia (UNORCID):
1. We need to highlight the importance of functional integration over structural integration in the
quest for an appropriate institutional framework for sustainable development. Instead of spending
too much time on what structure should be designed, functions should be defined first and form
built to deliver on these functions.
2. From an outsider’s perspective, Indonesia is poised to take a prominent role in designing
sustainable development goals to serve as a post‐2015 development framework as Indonesia has the
ability: both technical, political and intellectual
3. When talking about climate change and the related global and national agendas and discussion
points, one has to distinguish between science, policy and politics – and realize that the latter trumps
all.
4. In summary, Indonesia has the potential, motivation and commitment and the world is looking up
to President Yudhoyono to lead the discussion on the post‐2015 development agenda as the Co‐chair
of the High Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post‐2015 Development Agenda.
25
ClosingRemarks
Dr. Pavan Sukhdev, GIST Advisory, Synthesis:
1. A degree of unlearning is required and we need to get away from the certain conceptions we have
or we believe to have.
2. Sustainable development is not about pillars behind which one could hide but about dimensions.
In realizing these dimensions, the focus has to be on function, not on form.
3. Looking back on the MDGs, we can learn from both the positive and negative aspects
4. Climate seems to have turned into a proxy for all matters environmental . While climaste change
indeed constitutes an important issue, environment needs to be repositioned. Ecological scarcities
have to be recognized as these directly affect livelihoods.
5. To tackle issues, we need to look at sectors, policies and institutions at the same time and address
them through a mix of options – the global community has to recognize this.
6. Islands of land‐based permanence should be encouraged in order for them to appeal to others so
that they might move in the same directions.
Rear Admiral Willem Rampangilei, Deputy 1, Coordinating Ministry of People’s Welfare:
1. There are several steps that should ideally be taken to inform Indonesia’s position in Rio+20. These
include but are not limited to:
1. Identification of few inspirational goals
2. Proposal of new matrix instead of HDI
3. Existence of robust indicators ‐> you cannot achieve what you cannot measure
4. Highlighting Common goals with differentiated pathways
5. The government will continue to engage all stakeholders
Ms. Beate Trankmann, UNDP Country Director: There are three lessons to take away from this workshop:
1. The recognition that the 21st century is the Asian century, but if Asia adopts an unsustainable path, one planet will not be enough
2. A new HDI should be identified
3. There is consensus among participants: enlightened leadership on the isssue seems to be missing globally, so this provides a great chance for Indonesia to lead the way.
26
Mr. Heru Prasetyo, Deputy Head of UKP4:
1. The Rio Conference is important to civil society and people all over the world so that they can put
pressure on their governments and observe what really has been achieved.
2. There were at least two silent voices during this workshop, speaking loudly in the room
1. From civil society, considering what Rio might achieve for them
2. From the private sector, considering what they can contribute, both to Rio as well as for
sustainable development within Indonesia
3. In conclusion, from this sectoral Silo of the room, a strong commitment for a holistic approach was
felt.