The first U.N. Social Forum: history and analysis.

• Author: Pitts, III, Joe W.

As he has had with a number of other United Nations and international conferences, the author had the opportunity to attend the proceedings of the inaugural U.N. Social Forum as an observer and non-governmental delegate. The following article thus represents the author's impressions of events as he observed them.

In the last few years a number of events have developed aiming at giving NGOs, the poor and civil society in general a voice in globalization and poverty reduction issues. The Davos World Economic Forum has opened its doors to at least a selective representation of certain Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs); the "World Social Forum" counter-event to the World Economic Forum has now met thrice in Porto Alegre, Brazil; and there was even a small "World Civil Society" meeting which met in Geneva just before the U.N. Social Forum. With all these and other proliferating events, it might be properly asked whether another 'social forum' is needed, and if so, why.

The U.N. Social Forum was conceived over several years as a platform within the U.N. system for the exchange of ideas and perhaps actions aimed at effectively incorporating human rights, especially economic, social, and cultural rights into policymaking, for the benefit of those members of the poor and vulnerable segments of society whose voices are not usually heard within that system. In a Working Paper submitted to the 2002 meeting of the U.N. Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, the Sub-Commission member from Chile and the leading advocate for the Social Forum Mr. Jose Bengoa describes the years of discussion aimed at creating a "new forum for debate within the United Nations for analysis of the relationship between globalization and human rights, in particular economic, social, and cultural rights, in a globalized world." (1) The Social Forum complements the U.N.'s overall priorities of promoting and protecting peace, stability, human rights, sustainable development, and poverty eradication, including the specific anti-poverty priority that emerged from the Millennium Summit.

In her five year service as High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Mary Robinson came to understand that poverty eradication is the most pressing human rights issue facing the world. Poverty both affects, and is affected by, other human rights violations. Ms. Robinson noted in her address to the Sub-Commission in 2001 that part of the motivation for the Social Forum was to contribute to ensuring that globalization will be positive for the world's poor as well as the world's rich. This basic objective has also been key to the thinking of Mr. Bengoa. He also continually has stressed the importance of inclusiveness, not only from the perspective of including (usually excluded) representatives of the poor in the discussion, but also in terms of engaging non-state actors such as private enterprise and international financial institutions (IFIs) in the dialogue. Bengoa is thus sympathetic to ideas for global policy networks for policy change.

1. GLOBALIZATION AND THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT FOR THE SOCIAL FORUM

   Whether by globalization we mean increasing global economic exchange, or increased global exchanges of all sorts, globalization has proceeded for millennia, and has accelerated during the past 500 years. After World War II, however, with the institution of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, economic growth exploded. This growth, however, disproportionately benefited developed industrial countries, as opposed to developing nations emerging from colonialism. By the late 1990's, discontent with persistent poverty and perceived growing inequality reached a fever pitch with demonstrations at Seattle, then Prague, Genoa, and other cities against a global economic order that simply wasn't working for many of the least well off in the world.

   Consciousness of the new questions surrounding globalization resulted in a 1995 proposal by Norwegian Sub-Commission member Asbjorn Eide to study income distribution nationally and internationally. Mr. Bengoa was selected Special Rapporteur, and completed his preliminary report on the subject the same year, noting the links between income distribution and equality of opportunity in a given society. (2) His subsequent and final reports found increases in inequality and poverty accompanying the late twentieth century globalization. (3) Mr. Bengoa's methods of comparing national income between countries and households anticipated the more recent work of World Bank economist Branko Milanovic (4), who found that in the five year period between 1988 and 1993, global inequality increased 5%, with the real incomes of the richest 20% increasing and the poorest 5% decreasing--a result comparable to the growth in inequality in the United Kingdom during the Thatcher years or the United States during the Reagan years. (5) Even adjusting for lower prices in developing countries to focus on real purchasing power, according to the Milanovic study almost 80% of the world would fall below the poverty lines established in the United States and Western Europe. Moreover, of the 83 million people added to the world each year, 82 million of them are reportedly in developing countries as opposed to developed countries. This does not augur well for reducing inequality. Neither does the fact that some regions, such as Sub-Saharan Africa, are notably worse off than they were before the last trade round. Nevertheless, the recommendations of the Copenhagen World Summit in 1995 that developed countries dedicate .07% of their GNP for developing countries have been implemented by only a handful of nations (notably Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands). (6)

   Bengoa's report noted the association of persistent poverty with increasing concentrations of wealth occurring simultaneously with globalization. Since his report, the concentration has only increased. In a widely quoted World Health Organization and U.N. Development Program comparison, the net worth of the world's richest 358 people in 1997 was greater than the combined net worth of the world's poorest 2.3 billion people, and by 1998, the gap had grown to the point that the richest 200 individuals had a cumulative net worth surpassing the world's poorest 2.5 billion people. (7) As reiterated by the President of the World Bank, "[o]f the world's 6 billion people, 2.8 billion live on less than $2 per day, and 1.2 billion live on less than $1 a day". (8) In other words, half the world's people live for a whole year on less than what many would consider the cost of a single good suit or dress, a plane ticket, or a couple of nights in a good hotel.

   Bengoa sees these trends aggravated by the infamous 'race to the bottom': the competition among developing countries to attract multinational corporations and foreign investment through lax social and environmental regulations, or deregulation, and what amounts to tolerance of human rights violations. Economic, social, and cultural rights (ESC rights) have at their core the same concerns regarding the right to life, to development of the human body, and to individual dignity that underlie civil and political rights. "ESC" rights may also be seen as a prerequisite to, and minimum condition for, the exercise of civil and political rights. Globalization has focused attention on the minimum requirements for both clusters of rights. Bengoa endorses reasonable labor and environmental controls to foster 'virtuous' globalization (healthy for people in the countries concerned) as opposed to 'perverse' globalization (exploitative and unhealthy for those concerned). Presciently, Mr. Bengoa noted the link between growing social inequity and social instability and threats to both human rights and world peace. He viewed nondiscrimination in the sense of equal opportunity, both for countries and for individuals within societies, as central to addressing these threats.

   Bengoa's conclusion was that a Social Forum was needed to exchange information and insights regarding these issues.

2. SUB-COMMISSION'S CREATION OF THE SOCIAL FORUM

   The Sub-Commission had devoted a day of its proceedings in 2001 to discussions on the purpose and effectiveness of such a Social Forum. During those discussions topics floated for consideration included shaping globalization so that it is more fair to the poor and vulnerable, the impact of international trade, and protection of labor rights and the environment. In addition to many distinguished members of the audience, including the Special Rapporteur for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Paul Hunt and the Special Rapporteur for Housing Miloon Kothari, the Sub-Commission was assisted in selecting topics for the inaugural Social Forum by an expert panel of speakers including Hina Jilani, UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders; George Abi Saab, a Member of the World Trade Organization's Dispute Settlement Body; Andrew Clapham, a Professor at the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva; and Rubens Ricupero, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.

   A major concern of the participants was to carve out a special, non-duplicative niche for the Social Forum as opposed to other U.N. bodies and mechanisms. The consensus was that the Social Forum's unique role could be to give a voice within the U.N. to the poor and those otherwise excluded on these issues. Ideally, the Social Forum could thus contribute to democratizing global economic governance by encouraging prior consultation with and participation by those affected by crucial decisions underlying globalization. Significantly, the Sub-Commission invited not only NGOs in consultative status with the U.N., but also other actors including governments, intergovernmental organizations, and newly emerging actors (including business, but also and especially actors from...