Issue: 86
Indeed, the destiny of millions and millions of poor and marginalized people on the globe, to a great extent, depends upon how effectively and robustly we integrate the children’s needs and rights in the new development paradigm at all layers and level of government and society.
Therefore, ECD with its multi-faceted and inextricable construct and linkages contributes to achieving the full human development potential and productivity.
There is a significant body of research and evidence which shows that ECD eliminates the gender inequality and disempowerment, alleviates the age and disability related disadvantages, promotes healthy and active societies and realizes the troika of environmental, social and economic development.
Post 2015 development agenda and early childhood development
The Millennium Declaration of 2000 followed by adoption of MDGs. The time-bound development targets represented the first ever global consensus on the future course of development up to 2015.
The global debate on post 2015 framework started in the UN General Assembly and continued at Rio+20 Conference and is now being elaborated at national and regional levels.
Turkey is part of these ongoing deliberations at the national level driving national consultations.
The Mayor of İstanbul, Mr. Kadir Topbaş has been selected as one of the 26 prominent personalities sitting in the High Level Panel to contribute to the process.
The UN system in Turkey facilitated the discussions for the development agenda by outreaching the unheard voices through civil society, academia and private sector.
Therefore, the post 2015 development agenda is an important opportunity where we can ensure a holistic and concerted action to usher in transformative progress in early childhood development that will ensure and secure the future of this generation and posterity.
We need to invest in future by promoting programmes and policies for advancing the positive development of young children in their formative years of life.
After all, its importance in taking its much deserved place in the post 2015 development agenda is evident.
* Shahid Najam, UNDP Resident Representative in Turkey and UN Resident Coordinator in Turkey
It is crucial to protect the biodiversity in Mediterranean which is unique because 30 percent of species living in Mediterranean belongs only to Mediterranean and which is one of 25 biodiversity hotspots in the world.
The report comes within the framework of the Mediterranean Action Plan (UNEP/MAP) – Barcelona Convention for the protection of the Marine Environment and the Coastal Region of the Mediterranean.
State of the Mediterranean Marine and Coastal Environment Report 2012 provides information on the overall nature of Mediterranean ecosystems and defines pressures affecting the state of Mediterranean’s environment, to which 21 countries have coast.
The report indicates pressures like urbanization, tourism, loss and degeneration of habitats as affecting the Mediterranean on different levels in different regions.
Current situation in Mediterranean Sea according to the report
The number of Mediterranean monk seals, migratory birds and sea mammals decrease day by day and breeding grounds for eelgrass peculiar to the Mediterranean perishes.
The number of invasive species in Mediterranean increases every day. These species enters to the Mediterranean through aquacultural work facilities, sea transportation, Suez Canal.
Furthermore, temperature rise due to climate change leads to an increase in the number of invasive species in Mediterranean. Some of these species are utilized as an important fishing source but others put the ecosystem in jeopardy.
Over-fishing, random or by-catch fishing, bottom trawls damaging the seabed and other methods put the Mediterranean under great pressure affecting the ecological processes and ecosystem services.
Sewage in 37 percent of seafronts are being emptied into the sea without being refined, 18 percent of waste water treatment facilities are insufficient. Moreover, 15 percent of world sea traffic is in the Mediterranean and due to the sea accidents, oil pollution increases.
Report identifies that due to the threats are cumulative, solutions should be integrated.
You may find the full report below:
PTT has decided to give a value to the UNDP logo for UNDP’s contribution to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).
In Turkey, UNDP over the last seven years has embarked to work with private businesses to help Turkey achieve its development goals, specifically through Corporate Social Responsibility promotion within the framework of the UN Global Compact.
The Compact calls on companies to embrace ten universal principles in the areas of human rights, labor standards, environment and anti-corruption to be integrated into companies' core business strategy and in everyday business practices.
CSR network under the UN Global Compact is developed with the aim of facilitating the implementation of CSR principles and to establish ties with other networks in Europe in order to exchange innovative practices and lessons learned.
The study was prepared under the context of the "Strengthening the System of Marine and Coastal Protected Areas of Turkey" project.
The results of the study concluded by the Underwater Research Society-Mediterranean Seal Research Group (SAD-AFAG) demonstrated the great threat for the monk seals, which are the symbols of Foça.
45 monk seals have been observed in 2012 in the Mediterranean. The numbers were 31 for 2008, 51 in 2009, 118 in 2010 and 82 in 2011.
Threats of illegal fishing and increasing marine activities
The threats for the monk seals and their habitat were defined by the study.
According to this definition, any kind of illegal fishing creates both direct and indirect threat in terms of depletion of the food sources for monk seals.
Marine tourism, which has increased since 1990s, and the sea traffic, which has increased because of amateur fishing, are the other important threats creating stress on the habitat of the monk seals.
For further information: www.dka.gov.tr
The participants of the workshop consisted of staff members from Turkish Standards Institution.
During the training, Energy Management Systems (EnMS) training materials of United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) were benefited from.
The workshop aimed to present currently available training programme on Energy Management Systems (ISO 50001) and discussions were also allowed to identify the modifications needed to harmonize with national needs on Energy Management Systems in Turkey.
The three days workshop was concluded with great success thanks to the support of two UNIDO EnMS experts namely, Mr. Erik Gudbjerg (Director of Lokalenergi A/S, Denmark and International EnMS Expert) and Mr. Gerard Doherty (Principal Consultant at Zero Carbon, Ireland and International EnMS Expert).
Improving Energy Efficiency in Industry in Turkey Project aims that energy efficiency in Turkish industry is improved via encouraging industrial enterprises for creating an effective energy management with energy efficiency precautions and energy efficient technologies.
The GEF (Global Environment Facility)-supported project is executed by General Directorate for Renewable Energy, and implemented by UNDP and UNIDO Technology with the cooperation of KOSGEB, TSE and Technology Development Foundation of Turkey (TTGV).
The meeting was important in terms of dedication to the establishment of a multi-stakeholder alliance for geothermal energy-based food drying for poverty reduction, food security and inclusive growth in fragile markets.
The meeting was also attended by the Food and Agriculture Organization and Orka Energy, an Icelandic company specialized in global geothermal resource development and operation.
Ólafur Ragnar Grimsson, President of Iceland, stated that the food crisis is the profound challenge of the 21st century.
“A great deal of food is wasted or gets destroyed within a few days because effective storage methods and preservation technologies are not available. In India it has been estimated that up to 20% of food is wasted due to the lack of long-time storage” further explained by President Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson.
As the global population could reach 9-10 billion in the coming decades and resources are getting scarcer, we should put an end to wasteful consumption and focus on less resource-intensive production to limit the deterioration of the environment and adverse change in climate.
IICPSD, FAO and IRENA with the assistance of the Presidency of Iceland agreed to engage in a global partnership for addressing challenges faced for food security.
To expand the knowledge base in energy solutions for food security, the IICPSD together with the Presidency of Iceland and the Government of Turkey will host a dedicated conference and business matchmaking events in Istanbul in September 2013.
The project which takes its name from Argande, which is the only Goddess of Kommagene Kingdom that ruled on Mesopotamia Territories, completed its first phase by providing social and economic empowerment of women in the GAP Region.
In its second phase, Argande again aims to increase women participation in the labour market, re-brand Southeastern Anatolia Region and create new sales and marketing opportunities.
In addition, by making the cultural heritage visible, the Project continues to help the perception of the region to grow in a more positive way based on local cultural treasures, diversity and women’s income generating activities.
Argande is a sub project under the project of Innovations for Women’s Empowerment in the GAP Region which was implemented jointly by UNDP and the GAP Regional Development Administration and with financing by the Swedish International Coopeation and Development Agency (SIDA) since May 2008.
The project enables a cooperation between prominent Turkish designers anb the women in the GAP Region to work together and prepare the products which will be sold in the big shops.
International community has continued discussions to determine the post 2015 Development Agenda.
The agenda which will be determined by national consultations and public contributions implementing in more than 60 countries, including Turkey, will create a roap map for our future.
At this point, how and by whom the priorities of post 2015 period will be determined have become very important.
Therefore, all around the world, an intense consultation process has been started with governments, non-governmental organizations, universities and research institutions.
Turkey is one of these countries and the thematic consultations in Turkey will be completed till the first quarter of 2013.
Instagram users who want to be a part of this process for a more equal, peaceful and fairer world share their photos on Instagram with #2015sonrasi hashtag.
For more information about the contest, please visit www.2015sonrasi.org
UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) announced that, compared to November, the Food Price Index dropped 1.1 percent.
According to the report, the main reasons of this decline were the decrease in prices of cereals and oils.
The Index is measured according to a basket including 55 food commodities. The basket is comprised of food commodities like meat, dairy, sugar, and cereals.
FAO states that the results show a reversal from the situation of sharp increases in the food prices from early 2012 to July 2012 that prompted fears of a prospective food crisis.
FAO emphasizes that this reversal is largely due to a common action of international community which could calm the price increases.
At the end of 2012, the Food Price Index was measured 212, which is 7 percent less than in 2011.
Representatives from UNDP, Ankara University Vice-Chancellor, members of academia, government representatives, representatives from NGOs and students participated to the inauguration of the project.
The project, which is executed by Ankara University at Gölbaşı Campus under Every Drop Matters Programme, is designed to contribute to the efforts to solve the issues related to water scarcity and effective use of water.
By implementing the pilot project in Gölbaşı on rainwater harvesting, drip irrigation and training of farmers, technical staff and residents, a great contribution is aimed to be made to raise public awareness on effective use of water.
In addition, the project will be a good example for the adaptation to climate change in a dry area.
The project is one of the two projects in Turkey under the 'Every Drop Matters' Global Programme. The other one is the construction of a 'Rainwater Harvesting Pool for Irrigation Purposes' in Manisa.
For more information: www.everydropmatters.com
Activity was held with the logistical support of “Improving Energy Efficiency in Industry in Turkey” project executed by Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources General Directorate of Renewable Energy together with UNDP and UNIDO.
The participants of the training consisted of representatives from Energy Service Companies (ESCO), authorities of Organized Industrial Zones and several industrial facilities.
The two days training program was successful with considerable attendance, interactive training sessions and smooth organization.
The aim of the training was to technically strengthen ESCO company representatives, Organized Industrial Zone authorities and representatives of industrial facilities in terms of energy efficiency.
Fair is conducted every year on the second week of January, which is known as the “Energy Efficiency Week”.
The fair gathered all representatives and experts from energy sector and formed an important platform where the developments about energy sector in Turkey and in the world were monitored and challenges and suggestions for solutions were evaluated.
The energy efficiency projects that are implemented by Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, General Directorate of Renewable Energy with the support of UNDP and GEF (Global Environment Fund) were presented in this fair.
The stall drew great attention where the Market Transformation of Energy Efficient Appliances in Turkey, Promoting Energy Efficiency in Buildings in Turkey, Improving Energy Efficiency in Industry in Turkey projects were promoted.
Thanks to this stand, projects were promoted to various governmental institutions, companies from private sector, non-governmental organizations and citizens.
Fair is considered to be one of the most important components for mobilizing people on energy efficiency in Turkey.
In this programme, we will talk about the report, titled “Way Out from the Middle Income Trap : Which Turkey?”, which is prepared by Turkish Enterprise and Business Confederation (TURKONFED).
New Horizons (N.H.): This is the New Horizons Podcast of United Nations Development Programme Turkey. In this programme, we will talk about the report, titled “Way Out from the Middle Income Trap : Which Turkey?”, which is prepared by Turkish Enterprise and Business Confederation (TURKONFED). Our contributor is Assoc. Prof. Ebru Voyvoda from Middle East Technical University (METU). Welcome.
Ebru Voyvoda (E.V.): Thank you.
N.H.: You are a member of this research team and can you please tell us about other members?
E.V.: Other members of the team who prepared this report, are Prof. Dr. Erinç Yeldan from Yaşar University and Kamil Taşçı from Ministry of Development and Mehmet Emin Özsan.
N.H.: Therefore, four people who are experts and academicians built a team and prepared a report titled “Way Out from the Middle Income Trap : Which Turkey?” on behalf of TURKONFED. Now first of all, what is middle income trap? Why is it important?
E.V.: Although there is no clear definition of middle income trap and “trap” as a concept, considering the development or growth adventures of countries and the common points of these adventures, the middle income trap can be assumed as a transition from agriculture to industry as a starting point and then the rapid growth and capital accumulation with the transformation of mass of labour force in agriculture to industry and also to cities and at last, with capital accumulation, the increase in the productivity of this labour force become the main source of the growth. This growth or development can transform lower income countries into middle income countries in a relatively easy way. However, from this point, the growth or development adventure becomes a period in which the transition from villages to cities or from agriculture to industry and the labour flow have slowly become limited, the reduction of return of capital has began with the effect of concentration of capital and labour force in cities and the usage of import technologies has come to the limits, and as a result, the country cannot maintain any growth by capital-based, traditional and cutting age technology.
N.H.: Here you mention countries, on the other hand, the cities are also included in this issue, therefore, I guess middle income trap, in quotation, should be identified with cities and regions addition to the countries.
E.V.: Definitely. In other words, the term “middle income trap” can be related to different countries and regions and also the regions in a specific country. Thus, at some point, the source of growth has to be changed and depended on the high productivity technics instead of traditional and capital-based technics. And this change in the source of growth brings the transition to a high income country. Hence, with research and development technologies, human capital and education, the growth is regenerated by the increase in productivity of labour force and in capital and the development of technology. The countries which are not able to transit to the high level income category and to the industry with cutting edge technology, can be named as the countries caught in the middle income trap in general.
N.H.: Parallel with the beginning of the report, a theoretical introduction is given with these definitions. For more information, you can visit the TURKONFED web site and download this report. If you’d like to, we could continue with the findings of the report in Turkish context. You mention middle income trap, but here the definition of trap is an important issue that should be explained. I think, the trap means that the countries cannot upgrade themselves to a higher level. What kind of classification you make, is it like high income, middle income and low income groups?
E.V.: You are right that the notion of “trap” carries a meaning of caught in the middle and also the inability to upgrade. There are also several other definitions in the literature and we have been trying to determine the situation of Turkey related to these definitions, however, mainly we have benefited from two specific definitions; one is the definition of Barry Eichengreen and his friends which indicates more concrete numbers that income per capita should be equal to the 58 per cent of the gross national income of America or in terms of fixed prices in 2005, the real income per capita should be equal to 16.000 $ and the industry ratio in value-added should be approximately 23 per cent to determine a country in middle income trap. The other definition we benefited from also gives a numerical definition and the values of trap that if the income per capita is between 2000 $ and 7250 $, it reflects a middle low income area and if it is between 7250 $ and 11.150 $, this means a middle high income area.
N.H.: So you determined the theoretical part in this way and then specified the criterias and made at regional analysis to find out the situation in Turkey. In the report, you mention three different Turkey. The most interesting thing that drew our attention is that the sum total of the fourteen cities in Turkey which have higher ranks of development than Switzerland and Singapore. On the other side, twenty seven cities are at poverty line, when fourty cities are caught in the middle income level and all those cities from Artvin to Çanakkale, from east to west, have different characteristics. And as you expressed, why these cities cannot step up onto the middle income trap?
E.V.: You are so right. In fact, when we try to associate the question of “which Turkey” and the general picture of Turkey in the middle income trap, we see three different Turkey. One of them is the industrialized and nearly fully-integrated to the world production network with its high technological capacity and qualified labour force. And Kocaeli, İstanbul and Ankara are the cities included in this category. And the west side of the line drew from Hatay to Zonguldak does not face a total middle income trap and have the potential to be intergrated to cutting edge technology. Besides this, acccording to the definitions I mentioned before, especially the regions such as Denizli, Gaziantep and Kahramanmaraş with an economic structure concentrated on traditional industry in textile, clothing and metal sectors are identified as the middle income cities and regions. Additionally, it is plausible to say that especially the Eastern and Southeastern cities which are almost non-industrialized, even have so little capacity for traditional industrialization and carry out agricultural activities with low-qualified labour force, are caught in the poverty trap. Hence, when we look at the general situation in Turkey, it is impossible to see a homogeneous picture. Related to the qualifications of capital, labour force and natural resources at different levels, for each region, there are several traps existed.
N.H.: Another finding that drew our attention is the fact that Turkey stayed at low middle income level for fifty years, while Turkey reached that level in the year 1955 and then in 2005, it succeeded to step up to the higher level. And there are so many other findings in the report. Compare to the other countries, can you tell us briefly that how come an exist for the cities in middle income trap can be possible?
E.V.: Actually, this report and study consist of two parts and the part we discussed about...
N.H.: I suppose, the second part will come later.
E.V.: Exactly. At first, in this part or report, we aimed to make a situation analysis. We hope that the other report which will be ready in 2013, involves some kind of package of suggestions. Therefore, with asking some questions such as how the tools we have or policy-makers have can be used and what kind of suggestions can be given, we aim to study in a more detailed way in the context of a regional macro-economic model reflecting regional differences we presented in the report. However, regarding to your question, I try to give a general answer in macro-economical terms. As you mentioned, when we look at the experiences in country level, we see that Turkey is the one of these countries which have been stayed in the middle income trap for a long time. For instance, similar to Turkey, Bulgaria and Costa Rica are the other countries that spent fifty years or more in the middle income trap. However, as you stated, Chinese economy existed from this trap in seventeen years. Also Korea completed this transition process in less than twenty years. And the main two factors behind these successful transition processes are qualified labour force and techological developments. Together with Turkey, during the 1950s and 1960s, according to the general assumptions, the countries like Korea and Malaysia existed from this trap particularly by increasing their average education level and changed and qualified their labour forces.
N.H.: Hence, the human development is again the key point. You said techonology, human capital and education as the three crucial elements that make countries exist from the trap. We await the second report impatiently and it should be emphasized that this report brings so many important suggestions. Those who would like to get more information, can visit turkonfed.org to read the report “Way Out from the Middle Income Trap : Which Turkey?”. Thank you Assoc. Prof. Ebru Voyvoda to join our programme.
E.V.: You’re welcome.
N.H.: We have come to the end of this episode of New Horizons which is prepared by United Nations Development Programme UNDP Turkey. This program has been recorded at the studio of Radyo ILEF of Ankara University Communications Department. You can follow our program on iTunes under podcasts, on FM frequency in İstanbul, on Açık Radyo (Open Radio) on internet, on nearly fifty Police radios and also on university radios in our broadcasting network and on undp.org.tr. Our user name for social media is undpturkiye. Hope to see you soon, good bye!
In this part, we talk about a research called "Governance in Rural Development" which was conducted in Şanlıurfa, by Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey (TEPAV).
New Horizons (N.H.): This is the New Horizons Podcast of United Nations Development Programme Turkey. In this week's programme, we will talk about a research titled “Governance of Rural Development” which is made by Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey, TEPAV. Our contributors are Ülker Şener and Ragıp Evren Aydoğan, the researchers from TEPAV, Governance Research Programme. Welcome.
Ülker Şener (Ü.Ş.): I’m glad to be here. Thank you.
Ragıp Evren Aydoğan (R.E.A.): Hello.
N.H.: You chose Şanlıurfa to conduct this research in 2012. In the research, you attempted to present how governance mechanisms operate in the rural development and which tools are used in the governance of rural development. Your goal here is to reveal how the rural development tools have been used in Şanlıurfa. You interviewed with nine institutions during the research. I want to ask that why did you choose Şanlıurfa? Let’s start talking with you Ms. Şener.
Ü.Ş.: Why we chose Şanlıurfa is indeed the question also asked by these nine institutions we interviewed with during our research. They all asked that “Why do you choose Şanlıurfa, why are you here, is not there any other city in Turkey to do this research?” We have two answers to these questions: One of them is about a problem in Şanlıurfa’s demographic structure. The other one is Urfa’s economic structure which is related to its demographic structure. Concerning its demographic structure, there is an overall decrease in the rural population in Turkey. According to the data in 2011, the rural population rate in Turkey is 23 percent. However, when we look at the situation in Şanlıurfa, while 40 percent of the population lived in the rural area in 2007, it increased to 45 percent in 2011. Contrary to Urfa, in Turkey the overall rural population was 30 percent in 2007 and then it decreased down to 23 percent.
N.H.: Then we can say that in Urfa, a totally different demographic trend exists and it may be the one or one of few cities in which the rural population is increasing.
Ü.Ş.: I think so. It is probably the only city, but we did not check the numbers in other cities. Secondly, the general problem in Turkey is the aging rural population and the fact that only old people live in rural areas and therefore, economic activities are shaped by these people. However, in Urfa, we do not only see old people in rural areas. On the contrary, a rural population which includes young people is what we see in Urfa. And birth rates in rural areas are much higher than in Urfa. In villages, the birth rate is 4.4 percent and it is also higher than the average birth rate in Turkey. Thus, because of these two distinctive reasons, we have chosen Urfa for our research.
N.H.: We have mentioned about the reasons why you chose Urfa, but if you would like, let’s talk about the background of your research because you made a rural development research and of course, apart from these demographic reasons, there should be other reasons that made you choose this area. Can you please tell us, why did you choose Urfa considering this perspective?
Ü.Ş.: In addition to the demographic structure, economic structure is also important. In Turkey, there is a shift in economy towards industry and service sector. In Urfa, still there is an economy based on agriculture and industry in the region develops in relation to the agriculture sector. By combining the economic and demographic structures, thus, we may answer to the question of why Urfa. The rural development as the background of the research aims to ameliorate the living standards of the disadvantaged groups in rural areas. And the indicators show that within the scope of ameliorating the living standarts in rural areas, Urfa has not been in such a good condition. For instance, while Urfa’s developmental ranking was 42 in 1973, it receded to 72 in 2011. The gap between city and rural areas is huge in Urfa. As we mentioned before, the access to the education facilities is very problematic in rural areas. The poverty rate in rural areas is higher than cities and it is two times more than the average rate in Turkey. Thus, Turkey needs specific policies devoted to the rural development or the problems in rural areas.
N.H.: At this point, I would like to ask some details about your research to Mr. Evren. You went to the field to analyse the governance mechanisms in rural development and as I mentioned before, you interviewed with nine institutions. Can you please tell us which method did you use to draw the picture of situation in Urfa?
R.E.A.: The coordination was the basic concept in our minds before we started to do this research. Coordination can be understood as horizontal coordination or vertical coordination. We interviewed with public institutions to understand the organizational process of their works in rural development. And we also tried to understand that within these different processes, as if coordination mechanisms are created spontaneously or through a specific strategy, or if they aim to reach a goal to determine the problems or if they manage some policies to find urgent solutions to the problems. Hence, we interviewed one by one with the Provincial Directorate of Agriculture, Rural Development Support Institution, GAP Directorate of Administration whose centre is moved to Urfa, as a part of Social Support System SODES under the Governorship, Chamber of Agriculture and Producers Association.
N.H.: And I guess, you also interviewed with the Development Agency, am I right?
R.E.A.: Yes, you are right. We interviewed with the Investment Office of Karacağ Development Agency whose centre is in Diyarbakır. An important shortcoming must be pointed out. We also wanted to interview with a peasant production cooperative. Within these nine institutions, we tried to find a person or a cooperative which is organized in this way to defend their own rights and to reflect their problems, however, we could not find an institution like that. When we returned to Ankara, we told about this situation with our stakeholders and we learned that there are actually a few cooperatives in Urfa even if they are not very influencial.
N.H.: Then, organization is another problem addition to the other problems you mentioned at first. Therefore, addition to a demographical problem which causes some social problems as serious problems of rural development, there is also the problem of organization in rural areas.
R.E.A.: I will come to that point as a second important problem. At first, the coordination problems of institutions and secondly the issue regarding if peasants as the main target of development policies and the level of development, can be organized and defend their rights or not are the questions in our minds before we began our research.
N.H.: It is possible to reach to your research on tepav.org.tr and as I know, you aim to publish a book about this research. For whom would like to express their personal opinions may use #yeniufuklar hashtag on Twitter. Now, I would like to come to the findings of the research. Can you please explain us the result of the research very briefly?
Ü.Ş.: Actually, this research has more than one result. One of them is directed to rural areas in Turkey that they need to be organized and reflecting their ideas through more efficient ways, because we see that the rural policies are determined in centre, Ankara and then imposed on the rural areas. And Ankara determinies these policies in the context of some basic commitments to the European Union and also to other institutions such as IMF and so forth. Firstly, the problem we detect is that the necessity to determine these policies in rural areas and hence, we want more localization. Secondly, we do not mention just local institutions when we say localization, but also small peasantry and seasonal agricultural workers to provide their inclusion to policy-making process and to make them organize and give them voice. Because development is a human-oriented approach and for us, development is mainly about human development.
R.E.A.: As we mention at the beginning, there are some attempts related to these issues by Chambers and public institutions. However, there is no systematic and formal coordination mechanism. In other words, there are no regular meetings or another organizations that are performed every month regarding the rural policy. These kind of organizations can only be performed for a support policy or after a disaster happened in that year. Thus, there is an informal coordination mechanism and maybe because of a general deficiency, NGOs cannot involved effectively in this process. We see that local administrators and institutions come together under the initiative of Governor. In this respect, these bring a problem of participation similar to the problem of organization. The policies are not determined through specifying a participative mechanism in the scope of rural development in particular and an administrative mentality in general. As Mrs. Şener stated, the policy-making process is operated in the centre that can be Ankara or a policy for Ceylanpınar which is determined by the Provincial Directorate of Agriculture in Urfa.
N.H.: After all, the issue of participation makes us think again the problem of organization. You mentioned coordination and an idea of decentralization as solutions. You criticised the system and is it possible for us to deduce a solution offer by considering your criticisms in a reversed way?
R.E.A.: Yes, of course.
N.H.: We hope that your research contributes to the discussions about these problems and at the end, through strengtenening mechanisms in rural areas, we can reach the ideal system you suggest. Thank you very much. Our contributors are the researchers Ülker Şener and Ragıp Evren Aydoğan from Governance Research Programme, TEPAV. And we have come to the end of this episode of New Horizons which is prepared by United Nations Development Programme UNDP Turkey. This program has been recorded at the studio of Radyo İlef of Ankara University Communications Department. You can follow our program on iTunes under podcasts, on FM frequency in İstanbul, on Açık Radyo (Open Radio) on internet, on nearly fifty Police radios and also on university radios in our broadcasting network and on undp.org.tr. Our user name for social media is undpturkiye. Hope to see you soon, good bye!
In this part, we talk about environmental sustainability which is one of the nine thematic areas of Post 2015 Development Agenda.
New Horizons (N.H.): This is the New Horizons Podcast of United Nations Development Programme Turkey. In this week's programme we talk about environmental sustainability which is one of the nine thematic areas of Post 2015 Development Agenda. Our contributor is Alper Acar, Environmental Sustainability Expert from UNDP. Welcome.
Alper Acar (A.A.): Hello.
N.H.: You also used to work as the Coordinator of the project of Enabling Activities for the Preparations for Turkey 2012 United Nations Sustainable Development Conference. Currently, you are an expert supporting UNDP on sustainable development. If you want, we may start talking about the current situation on environmental sustainability. What have been done in the world and especially in Turkey within the scope of environmental sustainability since 2000s? Where are we now?
A.A.: When we look at in terms of environmental sustainability, compared to the period so-called ecological crisis in the late 1960s, today we see that many issues which we see unrelated before, are actually affecting, feeding, weakening and interlocking each other. Of course, this process is spanning thirty years. Since 1992 Rio Summit where the concept of sustainable development was institutionalized, crucial developments have been recorded at the global stage. As you may know, developments of communication technologies and science have created opportunities for us to improve the quality of human life. But these developments caused some costs such as environmental pollution, loss of ecosystems and biodiversity loss. In fact, when we look at past 20 years, we are in such a period that we face these kinds of contradictions. As you know, there are summits on sustainable development which are organized every ten years. These summits were organized in 1992 in Rio, in 2002 in Johannesburg and recently in 2012 in Rio, which presents a process called the Rio +20. In fact, when we look at the historical sense, they showed us learning processes. Post 2015 Development Agenda is one outcome of these learning processes. In the first Rio Summit in 1992, where the Agenda 21 was accepted, some new concepts such as participation and governance came into our lives. Of course it took some time for international community – nations, countries and institutions - to adopt this participation both in them and in international process. However, we learned. Today we have reached the level where people can say their own thoughts and lead some policies while they were only spectators before.
N.H.: Of course, when we talked about development, the environment was supposed not to be ignored. As you mentioned, addition to the environment, the factors of sustainability and participation were also included in the development discussions. And these topics must be discussed interlocked. It is useful to remind for our audiences that: Post 2015 Development Agenda has been discussing on eleven thematic areas in the global perspective and nine thematic areas in Turkey. Turkey is one of the fifty countries which discuss Post 2015 Development Agenda. The environmental sustainability which is also your field is one of these nine thematic areas. The Millennium Development Goals were set in 2000. And these targets should be maintained until 2015. What are we going to talk about global development after 2015? It is better to approach environmental sustainability in this sense.
A.A.: Some of the issues we are going to discuss after 2015 are clear, but some of them are not. As you know, the deadline for Millennium Development Goals is 2015. There was a road map came out in the last Rio+20 Summit: to determine more sustainable goals which will be valid for all countries in next two-three years. Of course, addition to the goals there must be monitoring mechanisms and indicators. So, we can say that there was a road map came out in order to canalize international funds to well determined fields; set development goals after 2015; act together and collaborate, while evaluating the lessons we learned and the challenges we faced throughout Millennium Development Goals. Of course, these are the definite issues that we are going to talk after 2015. The indefinite part is how to complete this chain of goals. We mentioned a learning process; however, formerly, these kinds of goals were determined by an expert group. Since United Nations realized some hitches in this system, a new period was started which is more open to community through a bottom-up structure. The fundamental aim of these national consultations is to listen to the institutions and people who directly face development problems in their daily lives, so that they could produce solutions. Thus, what we discuss for Post 2015 in terms of content and thematic areas and what must be set as a target will be determined in the end of consultation meetings with stakeholders. Parallel to this, the meetings at international and inter governmental level will continue. However, the fundamental things in this process will be the issues which actually come to agenda, and may lead politicians and scientists.
N.H.: It is aimed to have different views of everyone who has something to say and to suggest for the future, before Post 2015 development agenda is determined. Ensuring environmental sustainability is the seventh of eight Millennium Development Goals. When we look at Turkey, we can say that it is sensitive in terms of preventing extreme poverty -the first goal-, women’s empowerment and women’s representation- third goal- and environmental sustainability -seventh goal- which is also your field. We have talked about current situation a bit and let us continue with Rio+20. We can say that the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, held in Rio de Janeiro in June, is a milestone for the development discussions. In this conference, it is decided that sustainable development goals are going to be replaced by Millennium Development Goals. Let us talk about a little bit of this process related to the Post 2015 Development Agenda. How does the consultation process run in Turkey?
A.A.: The consultation process in Turkey run through nine thematic areas as we have mentioned before. Of course, these areas will be discussed by private sector, academia and non-governmental organizations which are the stakeholders of this process in the sense of its subject. After that, people’s opinion at the local level will be taken. Of course, the main philosophy here is to help individuals and groups to raise their voice. This process will be completed in early 2013, after all the opinions are taken. Then, these will be gathered as a report and included in the intergovernmental negotiation process. And the next process is going to be the initiative of politicians or government officials.
N.H.: 1,5-2 years after Rio+20, the new development agenda will be shaped globally. Recently, you also organized a thematic meeting on environmental sustainability in Ankara. What are your observations during this meeting? Who participated and what kind of outcomes were achieved?
A.A.: We can say that both global community and national organizations reached a common mind. If you ask how we managed to built this link: there are some issues that Rio+20 brought into our lives and these issues will be the main topics to discuss in the next 2-3 years. One of them is the sustainable development goals. One of the most important outcomes of Rio+20 is to have some indicators to complete the gross national product to be able to measure prosperity. Because as you may know, gross national product is just a financial term. Nevertheless, anyone who has money, may not be happy, live in a healthy environment or have no chance to make his own choices. Thus, a new process which is going to complete this kind of gross national product approach has begun.
N.H.: So, that will define how we measure the development and progress.
A.A.: That is right. Another main problem is about the financing of sustainable development. So, we will set some goals but what are we going to do in terms of funding? As you know, the financial crises that the world has been facing recent years disrupt many things. National community will discuss what might be the innovative funding sources. A progress which aims that information and technology will be shared at the international level is going to begin. When we look at the workshop that we had in November, we see that, in fact the solution suggestions and opinions of stakeholders are parallel to these outcomes. For example, we discussed both the affects of socio economic policies on sustainability and the challenges for the implementation of environmental sustainability policies. It is not enough to talk about problems: we said that if we want to change things, we need to discuss the opportunities that we have. So, we tried to look at the events within the framework of our opportunities that we have. Then we tried to formulate what may be the main messages that we need to take into our agenda. To conduct particular common goals is also the opinion of our stakeholders. Again, throughout the recommendations of our stakeholders, there is a need determined to have some indicators to be able to measure prosperity. Of course, the financial problem was also the topic since it is always an issue. We also take the suggestions of participants about local politics. There were some very interesting things came out there, too. I would like to mention these a little bit. There are some national institutions such as sustainable development committee or council in some countries. They provide coordination and orientation in this kind of policies. Some of the participants said that, this kind of local organizations must be a part of municipal councils. That was a very nice suggestion. Then we discussed what may be the tasks of stakeholders in this dynamic agenda. For example, there is need for a mechanism which must be established for non-governmental organizations to be able to follow some national activities. That is also another good point.
N.H.: As we mentioned earlier, there are environment, sustainability, participation and governance in the agenda. The sustainable development, which is also your field, includes all of these. The consultations on nine thematic areas continue in Turkey. For who would like to participate these consultations may contribute to discussions by using #2015sonrasi tag on twitter. There is also a website called 2015sonrasiturkiye.org. You may participate to questionnaire and contribute to global development agenda discussions. There is also a photo contest on Instagram to raise the awareness. It is possible to participate in this contest via 2015Sonrasi.org. The contribution of Turkey will be presented to United Nations in early 2013. The high level panel from fifty countries will evaluate these results. This discussion is going to continue during 2013 and 2014. The Post 2015 Development Agenda is going to be determined after these. Our contributor today is Alper Acar, Sustainable Development expert from UNDP. We have come to the end of this episode. This program has been recorded at the studio of Radyo İlef of Ankara University Communications Department. You can follow our program on Açık Radyo (Open Radio) on FM frequency, on Police radio, on university radios in our broadcasting network, on iTunes under podcasts and on undp.org.tr. Our username for social media is undpturkiye. Hope to see you soon, good bye!
Editor: Faik Uyanık
Assistant: Nazife Ece
Intern: Gülşah Balak
Contributors to this issue: Ceyda Alpay, Deniz Tapan, Gönül Sulargil
© 2013 UNDP Turkey
All rights of New Horizons are reserved to UNDP Turkey. Any use of information should be accompanied by an acknowledgment of New Horizons as the source citing the URL of the article.