–in the context of Guyana’s ‘green’ economy (Part II)

THE United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is the anchor global environmental

organisation. Its programme generally focuses on “helping states meet the challenges of environmental governance” through goals such as sound science and decision-making, international cooperation, national development planning and international policy setting and technical assistance.
UNEP also offers support in strengthening laws and institutions in order to promote sustainable national and regional development (UNEP 2016).
Contextualising UNEP’s goals within Guyana’s ‘green’ economy space, I see a role for the Institute of Applied Science and Technology (IAST) in partnering with UNEP towards the goal of sound science and decision-making to bridge the science gap between Guyana and the rest of the world.
Further, professionals such as farmers, miners, fishermen and agro-foresters who use land, water and the forests to produce most of Guyana’s jobs must be able to access sound science and technical assistance from IAST relevant to the greening of Guyana’s economy.

SCI-TECH HUB
IAST must, therfore, become a science and technology hub between UNEP and Guyana.
Hence, the coordinating of UNEP’s goals of international cooperation and national development planning will have to fall under the purview of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of the Presidency for effectiveness, especially since it is now clear that the President of Guyana is the Minister of the Environment.
It should be clear also, that both vertical and horizontal integration of all actions relating to these goals and agencies responsible therefor, would be essential to ensuring the integration of environmental sustainability into national development policies, and the adoption of new international environmental laws and standards into Guyana’s environmental regime.

As Mazi puts it, UNEP, as the main body administering multilateral environmental agreements, was challenged by the increasing number of new agreements and institutions formation. In Mazi’s view, this led to institutional fragmentation and loss of policy coherence in the work of the United Nations; a situation not unlike Guyana’s current environmental regime, but one which has begun to improve under the newly formed Department of the Environment.
Further, Mazi posits that instead of organisational reforms, which are effective in resolving specific environmental problems, resort should be towards institutional changes such as changes in structures of rights, rules and decision making processes to guide actors in relation to issues like climate change and bio-diversity.

CALL FOR REFORM
According to Young, however, UNEP has largely been ineffective, with some even calling for reform. However, Young believes that there is a call for environmental reform of the structure of international organisations that deal with environmental issues.
In this regard, proposals include the strengthening of UNEP with universal membership, a secure budget, and the establishment of a United Nations Environment Organisation. Some have even called for the establishment of a World Environmental Organisation similar to the World Trade Organisation.
Of note also is the Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development Issue Brief # 4
(UNEP 2011) which informs that the Nairobi-Helsinki Outcome speaks to the upgrading of UNEP, and the possible establishment of a specialised agency such as a World Environment Organisation.
Upgrading UNEP to a specialised agency allows for autonomy and independent financing, along with treaty and convention-making powers. Current and future multilateral environmental agreements would then be negotiated under one agency, and all the present and future secretariats could possibly unite under one specialised agency.

I believe that such a transition would redound to the benefit of Guyana’s ‘green’ economy pathway, assuming, of course, that fiscal and technology transfer barriers are eliminated, or, at best, significantly reduced.

UNLIKELY CHANGE
There is a view that reform in UNEP is unlikely to result in changes in the systems of rights, rules and decision-making procedures. Though institutional reform is indeed important, the functions of institutions are more critical and should be resolved before reform is contemplated (Young). Ford, who posits that current global environmental governance mechanisms leave out social grassroots movements, supports this view. In addition, where grassroots movements might be influential, co-option obtains to assimilate them into mainstream thinking.

Even though nongovernmental organisations criticise the orthodox approach to environment and sustainable development, it is difficult to measure to what extent such criticism affect the orthodoxy of approach, when they are, in fact, designed by powerful states.
Greening Guyana’s economy must therefore anticipate and mitigate orthodoxies driven by poweful states through mechanisms such as wide stakeholder and targeted consultations, deliberative democracy, grievance mechanisms, and environmental justice. Mainstream thinking, in Guyana’s context, must be a reflection of the wishes of the populace, evidenced through transparent methods such as open meaniful consultations.

Compliance and dispute settlement are particular challenges to global environmental governance. In fact, UNEP-introduced guidelines on compliance with, and enforcement of, multilateral agreements, which were adopted, are advisory and non-binding, and do not alter obligations (UNEP). However, Crossen poignantly adds that even though compliance rates are high, the environment is deteriorating rapidly. He advocates the imposition of more onerous obligations in multilateral environmental agreements, and stressed that the creation of strong, legitimate enforcement systems will move the process beyond compliance to issues of effectiveness.

BE VIGILANT
However, Guyana must be vigilant in not not accepting increased onerous environmental standards that are beyond its capabiities, but also disproportionate to its historical contribution to climate change.

Brunnée importantly notes that the majority of environmental law is made within a treaty-based system, where consent is the trigger for the creation of legal obligations and, at the same time, the factor consent makes consensus difficult. Notwithstanding difficulties relating to compliance, grassroots citizens and non-governmental orginasational involvement in international environmental agreements was boosted by the 2001 Aarhus Convention, which allows for the auditing of the state’s obligations to international environmental agreements (Kravchenko).
Aarhus allows citizen-state interaction, which enhances environmental democracy.

The citizens of Guyana, beyond the articles locted in the Guyana Constitution, can therefore rely on the Aarhus Convention to drive monitoring compliance of national environmental governance systems. In this context, I refer to the agencies such as the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission, The Guyana Forestry Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Office of Climate Change and the Department of Environment.
Citizens’ advocacy and vigilance represents a potent tool in enabling environmental democracy.

Guyana should also ensure that its trade polices and laws do not conflict with environment law. This goes to the issue of harmonisation and integration of trade and environment laws in Guyana, in order to ensure that our trade policies do not conflict with our environmental policies.
However, at the international level, there seems to be some conflict between trade and environmental law, which will impact Guyana if we are not vigilant. Whereas World Trade Organisation officials sit in on multilateral environmental agreement negotiations, the opposite is not permissible. In this regard, environmental nongovernmental organisations have accused the global trading regimes of not assessing the impact of trade policies on the environment (Eckersley).
A good area of environmental research concentration would be conflicts between trade and environmental law.

As we travel along the path of a ‘green’ economy as the main driver towards a ‘green’ state, it must be forever clear in our minds that environmental governance, both at the international and national levels, is critical to the sustainable development of our natural capital, and the promised good life for this and future generations.

SHORT BIO
Mr Gary A R Best is a retired Rear Admiral and former Chief of Staff of the Guyana Defence Force. He is an Attorney at Law and the Presidential Advisor on the Environment. He is a PhD candidate at the University of the West Indies. He holds a BSc in Nautical Science (Brazil), and Masters Degrees from the University of the West Indies and the University of London. He is also an alumnus of the National Defence University and Harvard Kennedy School. His research areas include climate change governance, climate change finance, international relations and environmental law.

Comments can be sent to: towardsagoodlife@gmail.com