Over the past two decades, local governments have shown that they are capable of implementing sustainable development and initiating relevant local processes – sometimes more effectively than national governments or international agencies. Sustainable development has been successfully localized and is no longer a remote, theoretical concept but emerges from meaningful and day-to-day operations.
1 – There was not much local awareness about the global and future impact of today’s activities
20 years after the United Nations Environment and Development (UNCED) conference in Rio de Janeiro, local sustainability processes are not following a common approach, but a common argument: local contributions to global sustainability are actually a conscious and purposeful side effect of the pursuit of improved local living conditions. Local sustainability refers first and foremost to a healthy, diverse and resilient local economy; Job An attractive natural and built environment; Good quality housing; Access to healthy food, air and water; Social and political systems and public service management; And (financial) independence from increasingly costly fossil resources. The uniqueness of this global movement in the process of local sustainability, unprecedented in history, is that it all takes place under the paradigm of both the global ecosystem and the global and future impact of local activities.
Information on global trends and the impact of local activity on future generations and elsewhere must be made available as an ideal basis for political and economic decision making.
2 – A good local stabilization process combines different driving forces
Local sustainability processes are characterized by their initial dynamics. The types described in this study show that these forces originate in different systems: local government, civil society, networks, national governments, and international partners each give local processes their unique strengths and qualities. It is important to understand that every quality taken alone is invaluable, but not enough for a strong sustainable process. Together they form a simple but helpful set of mutually supportive forces: an ideal spatial stabilization mechanism would and would combine as much as possible the characteristics of each of the five types thus identified:
Vested in a civil society initiative,
Connecting with others as part of an integrated action,
Included in a national policy, and
At the same time enriched by international partnership.
The five processes identified in this study should combine as much energy as possible to maximize the effectiveness of programs designed to support local sustainability processes as well.
The 3-Multi-local movement has prepared the ground for advancing national and international sustainability policies
Thousands of local governments around the world dedicate local activities to the common cause of ‘sustainability’ and thus represent a significant political innovation affecting national and international policies and standards. Yet, the results of these political innovations cannot be measured primarily by any drastic change in physical condition or energy and wealth flow, as many originally expected. Instead they can be found in many social innovations, which are crucial for the physical changes that are undoubtedly necessary for future civil society to be subject to and not owned.
The potential for a local sustainability process needs to be recognized and further improved in order to radically change policy at all levels through political and social innovation.
4 – Local sustainability process is the center of social innovation
The development of the local sustainable movement coincides with the widespread spread of the Internet, personal computers and mobile phones worldwide. It has opened up entirely new possibilities for civil society to organize itself, to receive and share information, and to participate in the political process. Local sustainability processes utilize the benefits of new media in disseminating information at extremely low cost to previously unimaginable mailing lists, in a more evolving way to engage the public and stakeholders, and to integrate local activities with them elsewhere. But it is even more important to see the potential for social innovation with new communication technologies and make the most of them: working on new forms of self-organization such as carrot mob, crowd sourcing, crowdfunding, participatory GIS, guerrilla gardening, commitment, etc. . In contrast, the classic counseling method is usually employed in a local sustainability process rather than aimed at developing general concepts and positions.
By combining the classic methods of consultation and participatory policy development with spontaneous and collaborative action, local sustainability processes can strengthen their role as test beds for sustainable innovation.
5 – Local Sustainability was one of the first open source development processes – and one of its biggest strengths
The local sustainability movement has not been led by a specific organization that can structure, standardize, document, or evaluate local processes implemented worldwide. Yet, at the same time, a number of international organizations and networks have sprung up, uniting local governments and representing them in international policy. Numerous international instruments have been created with different teams and different objectives to find ways to evaluate the progress, recognition and progress of local governments. In addition, more and more independent local governments are beginning to integrate and present themselves internationally – mayors have become truly global actors, something that has never been known before. While the implementation of sustainable development has largely turned to localization, local governments have simultaneously globalized themselves.
The global program for sustainable development needs to combine the diversity, creativity and adaptability of local strategies with the universal national and international support framework.
6 – Local governments need to deal with the effects of an uncontrolled global economy
The development of the multi-local sustainability movement has coincided with the globalization of the economy, giving large international corporations virtually unlimited access to natural and human resources worldwide. The political response to this phenomenon, however, is the environmental and social values defined by the national government and the competition with each other that effectively controls these values downward. The negative effects of this vicious circle are seen locally worldwide: where people do not have access to clean water, where products from rich areas of the world are produced in degrading conditions, where intact medium-sized companies are occupied and liquefied, where forests are cut down and arable land polluted. Where the prices of maize, electricity, fuel or steel go up, and so on.
Primary contact with local governments for vulnerable people, as well as for international organizations that seek to help them: local sustainability processes thus act in a gap between globalized economic activity and inadequate protection of natural and human resources through national and international policymaking.
To provide a reliable framework for the global economy and local sustainability process, the world community needs to agree internationally on effective environmental and social standards through national law.
7 – Greening the economy is an opportunity to deal with the crisis
Focusing on the emerging economies during the preparatory process towards Rio + 20 carries an invaluable potential to correct the hitherto unstable development in the world: changing the conditions of human economic activity. For many internationally run companies and some national governments, the ‘green economy’ can only be understood as a technological innovation supported by ‘green growth’ and public money: operating systems for urban infrastructure, large-scale power plants based on renewable energy sources, genetically modified super -. Seed or electric car are just a few examples. This focus on technological solutions, however, is very narrow and leads to new risks: social innovations such as new forms of organization, new business models, basic income models, como.
8 – ‘The future we want’ needs a new definition of growth
Many local governments around the world are experimenting with different indicators to measure their success or failure in moving towards sustainable development. As a result, a wide range of sustainability indicators are available but difficult to communicate with the public. Others are examining single collective indexes such as the Human Development Index [[en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index]] environmental footprint [[www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/]] or the overall national happiness [[ www.grossnationalhappiness.com/]] index. At the same time, the most popular indicator for measuring global development still remains Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which is not suitable for measuring human welfare. While stable and unpredictable events such as disasters, disease and pollution are potentially contributing to GDP growth, it has become clear that this indicator is misleading our perceptions of the world because it does not measure the actual progress of human development.
GDP needs to be replaced by a development indicator based on social welfare and environmental standards, and at the same time easy enough to calculate and communicate at the local, national and international levels.
- – Sustainable development requires multidimensional governance with multi-sectoral approach
This study shows that local governments are willing and able to do much to move towards sustainable development. However, where national taxes and subsidies encourage, and the law fails to allow erratic behavior, the optimal local sustainability process reaches its limits of effectiveness. Therefore, at the Rio + 20 Conference, it is not enough for local governments to demand good recognition and support for their sustainability process at the local level. Clearly, now is the time for all countries to promote the terms of the legal and financial framework (direct) direct investment and to think of sustainable solutions.
At the international level, world leaders are working to improve the institutional framework for sustainable development so that formally all levels of government as well as private actors, each with their own strengths: a multi-sectoral system to create a multidimensional regime where each player Must play its role accordingly.
The future institutional framework for sustainable development of the United Nations should include local governments as government partners and at the same time introduce national and international laws that support their efforts.
10 – The time has come to move from national interests to global environmental justice
In addition to the above, it may be helpful for the international community to move away from the habit of discussing individual national reduction targets as a percentage of current emission levels. Instead, acceptance should be sought for a globally applicable average per capita limit for the extraction of natural resources and their emissions as a result of their use. These limits can be calculated from the carrying capacity of the global ecosystem and can be universal for all countries. Provided, however, that compensation for the very unbalanced use of resources in the past may be included, which may provide a basis for the reduction of targets and development corridors for any country, both north and south, and may be further subdivided into national and local governments. Ultimately, this approach will facilitate the establishment of access and emission trading schemes between regions.
International discussions on emissions reduction and access to natural resources should be based on the principles of global environmental justice, thus allowing every citizen of the world to use the same share of global resources on average.