Plenary Presentation of Outcomes of Panel Discussions

The Committee presented a summary of the papers and key recommendations that came out of the two panels. In the first panel, the ECA Secretariat presented papers on:

(i) Raising awareness and building analytical capacity to address nexus issues in Africa;

(ii) Follow-up to major global, regional and international conferences related to food security and sustainable development;

(iii) World Summit on Sustainable Development: Regional Implementation and

(iv) The state of food security in Africa.

In the second panel, the following papers were presented:

(i)Small-scale mining and technology challenges;

(ii) Renewable energy technologies (RETS) for poverty alleviation, and

(iii) Science and technology for sustainable development.

Panel 1: Food Security and Sustainable Development

The first panel considered raising awareness and building capacity. The Committee also accepted the PEDA model, but it was suggested that there was a need to further develop and popularize it in member countries. The Committee suggested the Secretariat should contact universities and other development institutions in member states to popularize the PEDA model. The Committee also noted that member countries faced numerous constraints when it came to adopting and utilizing the PEDA model. Some of the major constraints included the lack of computers and the relevant data that is required to fully take advantage of the PEDA model.

The Committee also raised concerns about some of the conclusions in some of the reports presented by the Secretariat. In particular, the Committee questioned why the primary source of data used in some of the analytical work done by the Secretariat to raise awareness and building capacity to address nexus issues in Africa was largely based on qualitative sources of data. The Committee suggested that the Secretariat should also include quantitative sources of data in its future work. It was also suggested that the civil society in member States be involved in future surveys undertaken by the Secretariat.

The Committee further recommended that there was a need to integrate at the regional level future follow-up activities of global meetings. This strategy would allow member States to better integrate the goals of these global meetings since sustainable development goals were cross cutting in nature. Such a strategy would increase grassroot support for the recommendations and goals of the global meetings. The Committee noted that for this strategy to work effectively, there was also a need for the rationalization of sub-regional and regional organizations when it comes to implementing the goals of global meetings.

The Committee also noted that in the discussions that followed the presentations made in Panel 1, there was a need for member countries to prioritize training activities primarily because basic training was central to the successful adoption and implementation of technology for the poor.

With regard to the WSSD, the Committee insisted on the importance of more involvement of civil society. The Committee also suggested the need to include conflict resolution as part of sustainable development goals. The Secretariat was encouraged to take a more proactive role in the operationalization of WSSD goals. Any future increased role of the Secretariat should be at the national, sub-regional and regional levels

The Committee also reported that delegates had thoroughly discussed the state of food security in Africa. The Committee reported that it was important for member states to retain WFS priorities. However, the Committee also noted that it was imperative for member states to invest heavily in the agricultural sector. It was suggested that member States should seriously explore the possibilities of engaging in joint agricultural investment projects at national, sub-regional and regional level. The pulling of resources at these various levels would help member States address the problem of under-capitalization of the agricultural sector in Africa as well as to share success stories and lessons learned. In addition to this recommendation, the Committee further noted that it was equally important for member states to make appropriate technology easily accessible to small-scale farmers.

On the issues of livestock production, access to pasture and water, the Committee noted that these important issues had not been included in the papers presented by the Secretariat. Therefore, the Secretariat needed to address them in its future work.

During the discussions that followed this summary presentation of the papers presented in Panel 1, delegates raised a number of issues. First, it was noted that the summary presentation had not addressed what the Committee had recommended when it came to the issue of training of a core group of PEDA trainers that the Secretariat is organizing in December 2003 in Addis Ababa. Delegates recommended the need to decentralize PEDA training activities. Preferably, the training of trainers could be organized at the sub-regional level. Delegates also suggested that the Secretariat should seriously consider utilizing existing training institutions in Africa such as IFORD and RIPS.

Delegates also suggested that the Secretariat should consider ways and mechanisms it can follow-up on national implementation activities. For example, it was suggested that the Secretariat could ask member states to submit national reports covering national deliberations of sustainable development issues to the ECA. It was suggested that such a strategy could have the benefit of fostering the growth of grass roots participation in the adoption and implementation of global goals and recommendations.

In response to these issues raised by the Committee, the Secretariat noted that some PEDA training had already been undertaken at the sub-regional level. However, the Secretariat, as part of its overall strategy to improve the adoption and use of the PEDA model wanted to train a core group of trainers. These trainers would then be tasked with the responsibility to train other trainers. The later group would then be responsible for the training of researchers, policy makers and other important groups in member states.

In the discussions that followed the delegate from Zambia explained the position of his country regarding GM food and GM crops. He said that his country sent a mission to a number of countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom and Norway, in order to make an informed decision concerning their introduction. He said that his country was not opposed to GMO but that it had only decided to be cautious for the moment since regulatory mechanisms are still in their infancy, the safety of GM food is still not guaranteed and the impact of GM crops on the environment is still largely unknown. The delegate also pointed out inaccuracies in an interview given to an Ethiopian newspaper by the Secretariat and asked the Secretariat to provide a corrected statement. The Secretariat responded that the position of ECA on GMO is very clear: the Secretariat is to provide assistance to member States for building their own capacity to decide what is best for their countries regarding GMO. It was stated that the newspaper report did not represent the position of ECA and that appropriate actions would be taken to seek correction.