[Position Paper] Position Paper on the final draft of Voluntary National Review of Korea for HLPF
Korean Civil Society Network for SDGs
Position Paper on the final draft of Voluntary National Review of Korea for HLPF
July 1 2016
Introduction
This position paper is to officially deliver comments on the final draft of 'Voluntary National Review(herein VNR)' prepared by Korean government for High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development(herein HLPF) to be held on 11-22 July 2016, and to offer suggestions on 'national implementation of the SDGs and reporting system' to the government.
This paper was created through a review meeting, after receiving English draft of report from the government on the evening of 24th June 2016, and around of opinion gathering through email and SNS.
Korean Civil Society Network for SDGs(herein KCSN) is composed of local and national CSOs encompassing women, people with disabilities, economy, society, environment and governance, and officially launched on June 14 to work together on addressing Korean VNR's content and procedural problem as well as following-up a participation system for SDGs implementation by Korean government after HLPF. A meeting of CSO activists held on March 10 2016 for domestic and foreign tendency of SDGs information interchange was the starting point of the KCSN.
This document consists of two parts: 1) A general comments on VNR, 2) Suggestions and calls for the establishment of participatory implementation system of SDGs. Attached separately is opinion on details of VNR.
General Comments on VNR
SDGs adopted by UN on 25 September 2015 is an objective that each government would agree and implement while recognizing the importance of responding to economic, social and environmental challenges each government and global society are facing.
Ahead of HLPF to be held this July to discuss construction of international implementation system of the SDGs, our government has diligently prepared VNR as a chairman country of HLPF. Unfortunately, however, it seems that the government's preparation of VNR is very insufficient. Above all, based on the draft report up to now, we doubt whether the government is aiming to implement the SDGs and whether they have the will to implement as a matter of content and form.
The report has nothing to do with SDGs overall, or is invalid, or is cobbled together from the government policy retreated. That is 'The 3rd Master Plan for National Sustainable Development', 'The Three Year Plan for Economic Innovation', 'national political agenda', 'The Second Five Year Plan for Green Growth', and 'The Second Master Plan for International Development Cooperation'.
These plans do have partial relationship with SDGs, but they are not for national implementation of SDGs. The true content is far from implementation of SDGs. For example, according to the VNR, the 3rd Master Plan for National Sustainable Development (2016-2020) was developed after considering the success and limitation of the 2nd Master Plan for National Sustainable Development and seeks to resolve issues such as climate change, biodiversity, social polarization, and low economic growth. The review links its actions to SDGs implementation plan and policies; however, the stated issues are still not resolved or even exacerbated. Furthermore, the national task or economic innovation in practice was reduced from the initial promise of the current government, and many of these are not properly implemented or ineffective.
On the other hand, the UN guideline requires the VNR to contain present implementation status, problems, pending issues, and follow-up measures. But the review draft does not state the economic, social, environmental, and governance problems that South Korea faces, and consequently lacks relating policies and follow-up implementation plan. In addition, despite the importance of domestic implementation, it concentrates on global co-operation and development rather than domestic implementation plan.
Currently Korean society is faced with structural crisis and pending issues that betray our expectation for sustainable society. Korea has revealed many problems such as civil safety issue (Sewol ferry tragedy, humidifier sterilizer, defoliant contaminated army base, anthrax testing, MERS illness, safety in work environment), failing industrial structure innovation and economic recession, peaking youth unemployment rate/elderly poverty ratio/household debt, skyrocketing monthly housing rent, deficiency in provision of rental housing, taxation policy that simply focuses on increasing taxation but far from fair taxation, mass production of temporary employee and discriminatory treatment, economic industrial policies favouring large companies, government’s block and control of access to information, governmental institution’s collection and surveillance of personal information, restriction of people’s basic human rights such as freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association, doubts about justice of jurisdiction, threat to peace and ideological conflict due to confrontation between South and North Korea, energy (extension of coal-fired electrical power plant plan), fine dust, cancellation of Greenbelt, etc. This indicates that past and present government has serious limitations and problems. Therefore, VNR should disclose the causes of these problems and present effective solutions and implementation plans.
More specifically, the 3rd Master Plan for National Sustainable Development’s contents is less inclusive than past two master plans. The past National Master Plans were established by the Presidential Commission on Sustainable Development(PCSD) as a control tower based on the active participation of multi-stakeholders including civil society groups. However, after the enactment of the Framework Act on Low Carbon and Green Growth Law in 2010, PCSD fell under the Ministry of Environment as an advisory committee, the Committee on Sustainable Development, diminishing its authority and function. Additionally, the participation of major groups and stakeholders in decision-making process of national sustainable development has become very limited. Therefore, there are fundamental problems in the 3rd master plan in terms of integrative issues, inclusive implementation system, and practical means of implementation. In other words, it is described as more concentrated in range and content that the Ministry of Environment can accept rather than as a plan that prepares overall nation’s sustainable development. This also means that the 3rd Master Plan for National Sustainable Development’s relationship to SDGs’ goal is very unnatural and unreasonable.
In the contents of ‘3-year plan for economic innovation’, although this year is the last year of the plan, we have lack of implementation in three strategies: fair and efficient economy, growth through innovation, and balance between exports and domestic consumption. Expected outcome has been off the social and economic status. Even though the plan selected stabilizations of household debt, housing market, and lease market, we can find debt and average price of housing market went up. In spite of this, VNR ambiguously mentioned as if ‘3-year plan for economic innovation’ gives a positive effects on welfare and income for youth, women, and elderly. In reality, however, Korean society broke the record on youth unemployment rate in 2015, has not reduced income gap between women and men, and has deepened inequality to non-regular workers. It should not indicate hopeful expected outcomes but our challenges, and should have suggested a direction for a solution. Since ‘3-year plan for economic innovation’ ends in this year, we need to start a discourse for the next sustainable economic policy. For that, we need to re-interpret SDGs in the context of Korean society as a priority. To set an initiative for sustainable economic growth, government should include two contents in the VNR: 1) what process the government has had to share opinions on policies with labor groups, enterprises, CSOs, and scholars until now and 2) how governments effectively have developed sharing system for the implementation of SDGs during 2015.
In the contents of international development and cooperation, governments proposed ‘Better life for girls initiative’ and ‘Safe life for all initiative’ as a major plan for implementation of SDGs. However, Korean government does not clearly indicate the linkage between initiatives and SDGs (including targets), and prepare detailed and proper policies as well. And government should delete the description about Saemaul Undong in which only positive side is narrated saying that it is the ROK’s unique rural development case in the 1970s. In the paragraph describing influences on farming villages, this report does not embody the controversy and a counterargument on Saemaul undong such as outflow of rural population and balancing income gap between urban and rural areas. It is not appropriate to apply a country’s past development experience to today’s developing countries without considering political and social context. Especially, it cannot be suitable to initiate developing country into a developing policy designed by a dictatorship without evaluation from a variety of aspects. When we take these issues into account, it is difficult to have support and agreement from international society on the contents of Samaul Undong as a main initiative for SDGs implementation
‘Gender equality’ is specified in SDGs as 5th goal out of 17 goals by raising serious and urgent issues such as economic power and capacity empowerment of women, violence against women and reproductive rights. Targets of other SDGs (1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, and 17) reflect gender issue by specifying that it belongs to not only gender issue but also cross-cutting issues and emphasizing the importance of statistics on gender segregation. However, VNR does not explain how the goals, outcomes and challenges are connected with gender equality even if the report describes a master plans which have a variety of policies current governments are carrying now. Furthermore, in some part it has factual errors in a description of detailed policies. And it does not have any policies for improvement of female human right and current situation such as violence against women and femicide. The report also remains silent on the issue of Gender Gap shown by the ratio of women in the population living in poverty, gap in the working hours of domestic work, major proportion of women in elderly poverty, wage gap which is ranking top among OECD countries for many consecutive years. Special recognition on these issues and plans for improvement at the policy level as well as proper gender statistics are lacking. The vision of SDGs to adopt gender perspectives as a cross-cutting issue is not being properly reflected. It is required to evaluate existing policies for the implementation of the 10 gender-related goals and targets and to complete remaining tasks in the Korean context.
According to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDGs) and the reporting guideline for Voluntary National Review, the government shall keep the entire process of implementing open, inclusive, participatory and transparent and support reporting by all relevant stakeholders. However, the Korean government’s approach to a limited range of CSOs casts this principle into the shade. There were no opportunities of participation for workers who are struggling with the flexibility of labour, farmers groaning with the failure of agricultural policies, the youth as future generations, women’s group working to mainstream gender issues. The report mentions CSOs’ inputs in the process of review and its efforts to promote ownership of multi-stakeholders such as parliament, local governments, private sector, and civil society. Nevertheless, these efforts were either made in a very narrow sense or exaggerated from activities independently conducted by various actors. Even with the limited range of participation, the information was not sufficiently shared in a timely manner. This all led to producing a report that is far from the reality.
Recommendations
The civil society is deeply concerned of the initial state of the government’s plan for the implementation of the SDGs after reviewing the VNR report. The government’s policy itself cannot be directly deemed as the plan for SDGs implementation without a will to go through internal transformation. The implementation of SDGs should be major national tasks, not just empty rhetoric. The Korean government should show its will to substantially implement the SDGs through consultations with the civil society before it is late any longer.
With this point of view, we demand the government to comply with core principles of SDGs as follows:
1. ‘Leave no one behind’: ensure broad, inclusive, predictable and official participation
The theme of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDGs) adopted at the UN General Assembly in September 2015 is ‘Leave no one behind’ which represents the core principle of SDGs that is based on universal participation and equity. Various mechanisms should be established to ensure participation of all, from the local level to national level with major groups and other stake-holders, especially vulnerable groups and the minority groups. In order to make this possible, an independent accountability mechanism should be introduced at the local and central governmental level. That is, we need a system that can impose the government responsibilities for regular mandatory evaluation and collect reports of the local authorities. Most of all, all stake-holders should be able to participate in the entire process of planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating when the central and local governments set up the strategies for SDGs implementation. Especially, regular consultations with marginalized groups are essential. The evaluation must take place at the highest political level.
2. Transparent innovative and accountable monitoring and review
Monitoring and reporting are critical elements for enhancing accountability of the government. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDGs) clearly states that the actors should review the progress based on data which is high-quality, accessible, timely, reliable and disaggregated by income, sex, age, race, ethnicity, migration status, disability and geographic location and other characteristics relevant in national contexts(para. 74). To this end, a transparent and participatory reporting system should be put in place and be recognized as a duty of the government and a right of citizens. We need to develop an adequate ambitious set of indicators that can address agenda from local level to national level without leaving a single issue behind.
The monitoring and reporting process should not only focus on the implementation of SDGs itself. Key principles of SDGs, such as redistribution of wealth, intergenerational fairness, and respect of the global environment should also be the part of evaluation as well as contribution for international implementation of SDGs.
Civic data produced by the civil society or other stakeholders should be reflected in the national report. This can lead to taking further steps by narrowing the gap between data and the reality and broadening the scope of data collection. Above all, shadow reports of the multi-stakeholders should be recognized as a legitimate part of the process of reviewing SDGs. Without this, the participation of multi-stakeholders is likely to be seen as a mere formality.
Call for Participatory Process for SDGs Implementation in a Formal, Predictable and beforehand manner
Based on the principle 'leave no one behind', KCSN calls for the followings to the government in order for major groups and other stakeholders to actively participate in building implementing infrastructure; level of government's implementation will be a barometer reflecting their will to implement the SDGs.
1. Hold a public meeting within one month after the HLPF meeting in July to share results of HLPF and further implementation plans for major groups and stakeholders including civil society, particularly, individual meetings for vulnerable groups of the society including women, people with disabilities, and youth.
2. Hold a formal dialogue with major groups and stakeholders, in particular, individual dialogue with women, people with disabilities, and youth, to discuss national indicators of SDGs in developing process of national indicators that will be completed until the late of October this year.
Korean Civil Society Network for SDGs:
Citizen's Coalition for Economic Justice, Korea Civil Society Forum on International Development, Green Future, Korean women's Environmental Network, People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, The Human Rights Forum of Persons With Disabilities In Korea, Korea Institute Center for Sustainable Development, Korean Federation for Environmental Movements















제주리더스 포럼에서 참여자들이 자연기반해법에 대해 논의하고 있다.[/caption]
생물다양성 협약에 대한 논의 간 진행되는 자리라고 생각하고 제주 리더스 포럼에 참여했다. 해양 활동가인 나에게 가장 중요한 목표 중 하나인 30x30 세션(2030년까지 해양 면적 30% 이상을 해양보호구역으로 지정하자는 운동)도 있어 마감이 촉박한 글을 뒤로하고 일단 제주로 날아갔다.
[caption id="attachment_228598" align="aligncenter" width="800"]
제주리더스 포럼에 참석한 활동가들과 환경운동연합 중앙사무처 지찬혁 선배[/caption]
아침 8시 출발 비행기로 날아가 제주에 도착해 등록을 마치니 낯익은 얼굴들이 보였다. 서울에서 함께 중서부태평양수산위원회와 국내 원양산업발전법 개정에 같이 연대했던 한정희 대표를 만났다. 현재는 일회용 컵 사용을 없애는 푸른컵의 대표로 제주를 기점으로 컵 대여사업을 하고 있다. 푸른컵에서 제주 리더스 포럼에서 컵 대여를 맡아 오랜만에 반가운 얼굴을 봤다.
소통 없는 관의 포럼
차갑게 말하자면 리더스포럼에 기대는 없었다. 보통 국제회의는 NGO가 주관하는 사이드 미팅이 있어서 관에서 얘기할 수 없는 진짜 현실을 공유하는 자리가 있다. 하지만 제주리더스포럼은 NGO의 주관 사이드 세션도 볼 수도 없고 참여자 질의도 받지 않는 행사다.
외교적인 발언만 나올 수 있고 폐쇄적인 성격의 행사라는 인상이 깊었다. 이런 외교적 행사는 날카롭지 못하고 정부의 역할을 촉구하기도 힘들다. 이 행사의 대부분이 그러했다.
그럼에도 불구하고, 자연기반해법(NBS)와 30x30에 관한 내용은 우리가 고민해야 할 일이 많다는 숙제를 남겼다.
자연기반해법(Nature Based Solution, NBS)
자연기반해법의 뿌리는 생태기반접근법(Ecosystem-based approaches)다. 해양에서 생태기반접근법으로 관리되는 시스템 중 하나는 광역해양생태계(Large Marine Ecosystem, LME)다. 공해를 제외한 세계 주요 바다를 66개로 나눠서 관리하는 광역해양생태계는 미국해양대기청이 소개했다. 우리는 48번 황해 광역해양생태계(Yellow Sea Large Marine Ecosystem, YSLME)를 접하고 있다. 영양분이 풍부한 황해 광역해양생태계는 다양한 생물종이 살고 있지만, 남획⋅지속가능하지 못한 양식⋅오염⋅생태계 구조 변경⋅서식지 변화와 같은 큰 문제를 마주하고 있다.
참고로 이 얘기가 나온 지는 십 년도 더 지났지만, 현실에선 아직도 이 얘기를 하고 있다.
반면에 자연기반해법은 지속가능한 발전, 합리적인 이용 등과 같은 모호성으로 경제주체들에 그린워싱의 도구를 쥐여준다는 비판을 받고있기도하다. 지구의 벗(Friends of the Earth)과 같은 단체가 연대해 자연기반 해법을 강력히 반대하고 있다. 환경운동연합 역시 지구의 벗으로 지구의 벗 한국이라는 두 개의 이름과 역할을 갖고 있어 생태 활동가로 자연기반해법에 대한 필요와 갈망 그리고 상충점에 대한 이해와 사용이 고민스럽다.
지금 생태계는 보전하고 산업 발생 탄소를 줄여야한다
생태계를 보전해야 인류가 살 수 있다. 지구 육상과 해양생태계는 인간이 만드는 탄소의 약 50%를 저장하는 역할을 한다. 인간이 만드는 탄소를 큰 폭으로 줄이고 육⋅해양생태계를 온전히 보전해야만 탄소 감축이라는 목표로 약진할 수 있다.
지금 논의되는 탄소 감축이 생태계 탄소 저장량 50%를 교묘하게 이용하지 않는지 볼 필요가 있다. 이미 잘 보전된 지역을 보호구역으로 지정하거나 보전하는 비용을 지급하면서 탄소량의 몇 퍼센트를 감소하고 있다는 얘기는 말장난에 불과하다.
기존 생태계는 보전이라는 전제하에 기준으로 설정하고 생태계가 복원되는 만큼 다시 탄소에 대해 논의해야 한다.
안타깝게도 인류는 생태계 보전을 통해 당연히 탄소를 감축해야 하면서도 여전히 생태계를 개발해야 하는 대상으로 바라본다. 우리는 ‘적절한 개발을 하면서 탄소를 절감하는 척’을 지양하는 법과 제도를 만들고 시민단체의 시선을 더 예리하고 날카롭게 만들 필요가 있다. 반면 합리적이고 상식적 판단으로 진정성 있게 생태계를 보전하겠다는 의지를 보이면, 누구든 협력하지 않을 이유가 어디 있겠는가?
[caption id="attachment_228609" align="aligncenter" width="800"]
산불로 망가진 산림(강원 삼척)[/caption]
생태는 지뢰밭, 집중이 약해지는 생태 활동
우리나라 생태계도 위협을 받고 있지만, 한국 환경단체 생태도 위험함이 감지된다. 환경단체의 내적 요인이든 외적 요인이든 그리고 조직의 규모를 떠나 생태를 맡는 활동가가 안타깝게도 계속 줄어들고 있다.
현업 생태활동가의 일부로 이런 식으로 가다간 선배 세대가 진행하던 활동의 맥이 하나둘 끊겨 나갈 수 있는 위험이 도사리고 있다.
여기저기서 지뢰처럼 터지는 개발 사안 하나하나를 쫓고 있는 도중 놓쳐서는 안 될 국제 협약, 국가 수준 기본계획과 종합계획을 놓치는 게 부지기수다.
50% 이상의 인류 기인 탄소를 처리하는 게 산과 들, 강과 바다 생태계다. 모든 이슈가 기후와 에너지에 집중될 때 반드시 놓치지 말고 지켜봐야 하는 게 생태지만 현실은 그렇지 못하다.
다양한 고민을 마주하고 있는 상황에서 참여한 제주 리더스포럼. 그 속에서 논의된 자연기반해법(NBS)이 자연스럽게 눈에 들어오는 이유다.
시민들의 의견
댓글 달기