The Friday afternoon session of the Grassroots Academy welcomed the associate of the CSD Major Groups Programme, Tonya Vaturi from the UN Secretariat to offer suggestions for making the most of your time at the CSD. Ms.Vaturi’s advice was particularly relevant for first time attendees. She summarized the CSD as a forum to 1) inform, lobby, and influence the UN, 2) stimulate debate by providing new information, innovative solutions, and new ideas 3) network and build partnerships 4) raise awareness on the challenges and obstacles that you face and 5) identify policy options that best address the issues of sustainable development. After giving a brief background of last year’s session and the IPM, Ms Vaturi moved into a discussion of steps forward and how the accomplishments and decisions of the previous sessions will shape the CSD-15. Ms. Vaturi stressed that we are moving into the “era of implementation” and that there will be “no more focus on what to do. The focus now is on doing it.” Questions among the Grassroots Academy members quickly arose as to the realistic scope of action and change that one can anticipate to come out of CSD considering that the outcome is not legally binding. In response to this critique, Ms.Vaturi offered optimism: “[CSD] is the only forum of its kind that exists in the world… CSD is a valuable process to many people. There has been quite a bit of progress made with these issues, at least understanding what challenges exist, even if it is chaotic sometimes.” 

Most opportunities for influence happen behind the scenes at CSD. During the policy session, the focus is on measures to speed up implementation and mobilize action to overcome the obstacles and constraints which were identified during the review session. At this point, attendees should expect heavy lobbying. This happens in the corridors, over lunch, 

at the café, and during major groups meetings. Ms.Vaturi pointed out that it isn’t always possible to have your voice heard from behind the microphone, but individuals can make significant contributions to the process by submitting written statements ahead of time and post best practices and case studies online. Submitting a document creates a permanent record which is easily accessible as a reference for participants. Ms Vaturi stressed that this permanent record could potentially play a more significant role than actually speaking on the record during CSD, which not everybody has access to doing.  During the Q & A session, Ms Vaturi re­affirmed that the most important work continues after the CSD is over. It is up to the NGOs and the people on the ground to take the lessons home from CSD and to take action on the decision that were made. The major groups are the drivers of implementation and their efforts can be strengthened through the partnerships and networking that took place at the CSD. No one can achieve sustainability on their own; the CSD is just another opportunity to form alliances with like-minded people all hoping to achieve the same laudable objective of sustainable development. To make the most of your time at CSD, meet people, network, interact, and don’t be shy about approaching anyone; this is your opportunity to make connections and have your voice heard. If you have any problems, turn to Tonya Vaturi or Federica Pietracci, they are there to facilitate the major groups and to help you have a positive experience at CSD-15. 

Angie Hacker, a member of the Young Women’s Leadership in Sustainability Training Program of the Lower East Side Ecology Center, held a session Thursday afternoon on what participants can realistically expect to achieve at the CSD-15. This session provided the opportunity for newcomers to re-adjust expectations to avoid feeling overwhelmed or disappointed during CSD. Ms. Hacker walked the attendees through the main goals of CSD-15 and other basics such as defining certain ubiquitous but ill-defined acronyms; PRSP, SIDS, G77, and summarizing the main documents and agreements which underline CSD (Agenda 21 and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI)). 

The session then turned into sharing useful tips of about the CSD and beyond. Marta Benavides, an El Salvadorian representing the WILPF, the International Institute for Cooperation Amongst Peoples and the XXIII Century, shared her experience and impressed upon everyone the importance of the CSD and the UN despite the non-legally binding status of the outcomes. Ms. Benavides illustrated that in El Salvador, simply because the UN required their members to set up a ministry of environment, a lot of change happened over time as the people kept pushing the new ministry to implement environmental policy or processes eventually resulting in the inclusion of mandatory Environmental Impact Statements. Tara DePorte, the organizer of the UN Grassroots Academy, shared that while not all of our objectives will be achieved, becoming an observer 

studying the decision-making process can be a meaningful exercise in itself. Ms. DePorte also mentioned that much can be accomplished outside of the main events such as attending the side-events organized by the major groups, talking to delegates in the hallways, and networking with other like-minded groups. Ms. DePorte shared tips on how to approach a delegate and stressed that real impact can be achieved through these interactions- especially when approaching a delegate from one’s own country. It is also useful to speak as a group rather than make a personal statement and ask the delegate to be in support of your issue. Ms. DePorte also recommended finding a “mentor”: shadowing a veteran CSD attendee to get an idea of how to navigate the conferences and events. Dahlia Goldenberg of the Huairou Commission and GROOTS International suggested to use a buddy system at the CSD since one person alone cannot attend all the events while a small group can keep members posted as to what is going on when and where, and can brief each other on the main outcomes of sessions. Grove Harris, a peace commissioner from Boston, reminded the participants to take care of their bodies during the CSD and to be open to the unexpected.  The session concluded with the consensus that attending the Major Groups Caucuses as well as the side-events will be most useful for first-time participants and that it is important to take advantage of the easy access to so many influential and connected people who can offer your organization support. 

Lily Parshall, PhD Sustainable Development, Columbia University.

Lily gave a presentation on how climate change impacts development, and examples of grassroots efforts to push back global climate change. She discussed examples of NYC mitigation and adaptation efforts, including the Mayor Bloomberg’s “PlanNYC 2030,” which is attempting to mitigate the source of climate change and reduce temperatures in the city by various methods, such as planting trees that shade buildings, and thus reduce our reliance on air-conditioners.

While it is generally agreed that climate change is happening, Lily pointed out that the following is definitely not agreed on by the general public: What are the impacts of climate change? Fortunately, local initiatives have not waited for a “consensus” to act. There are an increasing number of grassroots programs that are currently addressing energy efficiency and public health, having a positive socio-economic impact on our communities. These groups are improving our quality of life and setting international examples.

Silvia Fraccia, consultant to the Sustainable Energy Programme of the UNDP

Silvia’s presentations opened with the fact that energy is not represented in the UN’s eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)–which range from halving extreme poverty to halting the spread of HIV/AIDS, all by the target date of 2015. The balance of the presentation, titled “Energy Issues at CSD-15,” focused on how energy affects all dimensions of sustainable development: economic, environmental and social.

In years past, the energy policy debate has been fragmented between the north and south, and has stagnated on how best to move forward and prioritize. Over recent years, however, there has been somewhat of a convergence. An example of this is the so-called “energy-gender nexus” (which is also sometimes expanded to the “energy-gender-poverty nexus”). Silvia explained how this concept acknowledges the mainstreaming of gender into energy policy, and that women and girls, who are disproportionately effected by a lack of energy services, are an important drive for the creation of energy policy.

Silvia presented both alarming statistics and alarmingly simple energy solutions.

For example, 1.6 billion people have no access to electricity and an additional 2 billion people have access to unreliable electricity and 2.4 billion people rely on traditional fuels (wood, charcoal, dung, etc.) for heating and cooking. These figures, when considered in tandem with how women bear most of the food preparation responsibilities, highlight how women are excessively exposed to indoor air pollution, and the need for basic solutions, such as stoves that pollute less.

Anhthu Hoang, General Counsel for West Harlem Environmental Action

Anhthu brought the focus back to the US on both the national and local level.

Titled “Environmental Justice and Environmental Health–Northern Manhattan & Beyond,” her presentation defined air pollution as chemical, physical, or biological agents that alter the natural characteristics of the atmosphere. Anhthu then noted various sources and impacts of air pollution, focusing on northern Manhattan, which consists of communities of color (44% African American, 44% Hispanic) and low-income (medium household incomes range from US$15,000 to $30,000 per year).

Other topics discussed by the group included how NYC bus depots are not regulated by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), compared to, say, factories that are, and that the congestion pricing proposed for Manhattan south of 86th Street could effectively “push” traffic up to northern Manhattan.

Across the US, Anhthu stated, not only are black and Hispanic Americans more likely to live in communities with toxic waste facilities and unregulated waste sites, but they are also more likely to suffer higher asthma, morbidity, and mortality rates.