2008/09 Annual Report Sustaining Excellence · 2010-05-05 · 2008•2009 Annual Report of the...

20

08

•20

09

An

nu

al R

ep

ort o

f the

Inte

rna

tion

al In

stitute

for S

usta

ina

ble

De

velo

pm

en

t

Le

Ra

pp

ort

an

nu

el 2

00

8•2

00

9 d

e l’

Inst

itu

t in

tern

ati

on

al d

u d

éve

lop

pe

me

nt

du

rab

le

SustainingExcellence

200

8/0

9 A

nnual Rep

ort

Développerl’excellence

Rap

po

rt a

nnue

l 20

08

/09

161 Portage Avenue East6th FloorWinnipeg, ManitobaCanada R3B 0Y4Tel: +1 (204) 958-7700Fax: +1 (204) 958-7710

MIE 29, chemin de Balexert1219 ChâtelaineGenève, SuisseTel: + (41-22) 917-8683Fax: + (41-22) 917-8054

340 Albert StreetSuite 710Ottawa, OntarioCanada K1R 7Y6Tel: +1 (613) 238-2296Fax: +1 (613) 238-8515

300 East 56th Street#11ANew York, New York10022 USATel: +1 (646) 536-7556Fax: +1 (646) 219-0955

Printed in Canada© International Institute for Sustainable DevelopmentEditor: Stuart Slayen, Manager, Publishing and Communications, IISDDesign: 23 Below Graphic DesignTranslation (English to French): Sylvie SabourinProofreading (English): Lael DyckCover photo: iStockphotoPrinting: Premier Printing, Winnipeg, Manitoba

E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.iisd.orgReporting Services Web site: http://www.iisd.ca

1 Our Vision and Mission

2 From the Chair and President

4 IISD Board of Directors

5 The IISD Team

6 Guest Essay: Exploring the Green Economy Initiative

8 Opinion: What Happens Between Promise and Delivery?

9 Promoting Conflict-sensitive Conservation in Africa

12 Taking the Pulse before Copenhagen

16 Ecological Goods and Services

18 Social Networking

19 IISD Adopts a People-first Approach to Sustainability Reporting

20 Program Reports

32 Capital Campaign Surges Ahead

33 Critical Next Steps

35 IISD Consolidated Financial Statements

161 Portage Avenue Est6

eétage

Winnipeg (Manitoba)Canada R3B 0Y4Tél. : +1 (204) 958-7700Téléc. : +1 (204) 958-7710

MIE 29, chemin de Balexert1219 ChâtelaineGenève, SuisseTél. : + (41-22) 917-8683Téléc. : + (41-22) 917-8054

340, rue AlbertPièce 710Ottawa (Ontario)Canada K1R 7Y6Tél. : +1 (613) 238-2296Téléc. : +1 (613) 238-8515

300 East 56th Street#11ANew York, New York10022 USATél. : +1 (646) 536-7556Téléc. : +1 (646) 219-0955

Imprimé au Canada© Institut international du développement durableDirection éditoriale : Stuart Slayen, gestionnaire,

Publications et communications, IIDDConception : 23 Below Graphic DesignTraduction (anglais au français) : Sylvie SabourinCorrection d’épreuve (anglais) : Lael DyckPhoto de couverture : iStockphotoImpression : Premier Printing, Winnipeg (Manitoba)

Courriel : [email protected] Site Web : http://www.iisd.org

1 Notre vision et notre mission

2 Message du président et message du président-directeur général

4 Conseil d’administration de l’IIDD

5 L’équipe de l’IIDD

6 Réflexion invitée : Explorer l’Initiative pour une économie verte

8 Opinion : Que s’est-il passé entre la promesse et la réalisation?

9 Promouvoir la conservation tenant compte des conflits en Afrique

12 Prendre le pouls avant Copenhague

16 Biens et services écologiques

18 Réseautage social

19 L’IIDD rend compte de la durabilité en fonction des personnes

20 Rapports de programme

32 La campagne de capitalisation avance à grands pas

33 Prochaines étapes essentielles

35 Bilan consolidé de l’IIDD

1Our Mission

and VisionISD contributes to sustainabledevelopment by advancing policyrecommendations on international trade andinvestment, economic policy, climate changeand energy, measurement and assessment, andnatural resources management, and theenabling role of communication technologies inthese areas. We report on internationalnegotiations and disseminate knowledge gainedthrough collaborative projects, resulting in morerigorous research, capacity building indeveloping countries, better networks spanningthe North and the South, and better globalconnections between researchers, practitioners,citizens and policy-makers.

IIISD’s vision is better living for all—sustainably; its mission is to

champion innovation, enabling societies to live sustainably. IISD isregistered as a charitable organization in Canada and has 501(c)(3)status in the United States. IISD receives core operating supportfrom the Government of Canada, provided through the CanadianInternational Development Agency (CIDA), the InternationalDevelopment Research Centre (IDRC) and Environment Canada;and from the Province of Manitoba. The Institute receives projectfunding from numerous governments inside and outside Canada,United Nations agencies, foundations and the private sector.

Our Web SitesFrom April 1, 2008, to March 31, 2009, IISD experienced high traffic on our two primary Web sites: the research Web site at http://www.iisd.org;and the Reporting Services Linkages Web site at http://www.iisd.ca. Approximately 483,000 pdf documents were requested from www.iisd.organd 357,000 were requested from www.iisd.ca.

Above are a few selected measures of IISD’s reach, but these numbers tell onlypart of the story. Our reach can also be assessed by looking at the workshopsand conferences we lead and attend every year; the numerous face-to-facemeetings we hold with decision-makers and partners; our consistent presenceas reporters at international meetings; the interns we place around the world;and the re-posting of our materials on other Web sites and blogs.

Our Mailing ListsIISD runs a number of e-mail lists with subscribers from all over theworld. Our current accumulated number of subscriptions is about100,000. To learn about—and subscribe to—our lists, visithttp://www.iisd.org/mailinglists.asp.

Publishing and MediaIn the calendar year 2008, and excluding Reporting Servicesdocuments, IISD posted 106 books, papers, commentaries, flyers,excerpts and contributions to other publications. These can besearched at http://www.iisd.org/publications. In that same period, IISDtracked more than 100 Canadian and International media references tothe Institute and/or its personnel. Seehttp://www.iisd.org/media/iisd_media_hits.asp.

Our Reach

2 IISD Annual Report

From the Chairt would be a gross misstatement to describe the year

between this and our last Annual Report as a normal one.We’ve seen watershed changes with the election of thefirst African-American President of the United States; thebursting of a worldwide economic bubble; the loss oftrillions of dollars in value and the disappearance ofmarkets; the fall of financial and commercial icons; and theloss of millions of jobs, bringing hardship and afundamental shift in people’s view of the carrying power ofgovernments as well as business and financial leaders. Addto this the recent flu pandemic, continued environmentaldegradation and other factors, and the fragility of our worldbecomes self-evident.

In the midst of this unprecedented pace of events,IISD continues to focus on the fundamentals of our vision:“Better living for all—sustainably.” Our mission is tochampion innovation, enabling societies to live sustainably.Buffeted by economic, social and environmentalchallenges, that mission—while simply articulated—iscomplex, diversified and critical. While there is consensusabout the urgency of our mission, the ways in which we goabout setting our priorities, establishing goals and lining upresources to meet those goals are subjects of passionate,occasionally heated exchanges. Securing a broad base offinancial support, renewing program and core funding toensure excellence and continuity in research, and retoolingto align talent and know-how with our goals areresponsibilities shared by the Institute’s seniormanagement and Board of Directors.

IISD’s success rests on our six programs: Trade andInvestment; Sustainable Natural Resources Management;Measurement and Assessment; Climate Change andEnergy; Global Connectivity; and Reporting Services. Theefforts of these programs are outlined in this report andmore information is available on the Web. Our programsare diverse, but what they share in common is a sharpfocus on the end game—to promote sustainable practices,markets and communities.

I

I want to acknowledge the contribution of our corefunders and other donors. In this past year, they have beenthere in support of our mission in spite of difficult economiccircumstances. The Governments of Manitoba and Canadahave been stalwart supporters, and in recent years a numberof governments from various countries have joined in fundingprojects or research important to their efforts to meet theirSD challenges. Their commitment inspires and motivates all ofus. And the fact is that many of the projects undertaken by ourworld-class researchers would not see the light of day withoutdollars and in kind-contributions to fuel them. Certainly thatwould be the case without Manitoba Hydro’s generoussupport of our new Water Innovation Centre.

Another key ingredient to our continued success is ourpersonnel. Our experts, academics, managers and supportstaff are the backbone of IISD. And this exceptional team isbolstered by an enthusiastic and experienced internationalBoard of Directors.

In closing, I acknowledge the exemplary leadership ofDavid Runnalls, our President and CEO. His enthusiasm,energy, global relationships and intellectual curiosity continueto challenge and direct our efforts.

Daniel Gagnier, Chair, Board of Directors

3

From the President

T

David Runnalls, President and CEO

he Copenhagen climate conference inDecember 2009 could be the mostsignificant international meeting in the last50 years. It has an almost wartime sense ofurgency. Every week brings another alarmingstory about the melting polar ice cap, theWest Antarctic ice sheet or the permafrostof northern Canada and Siberia. And everyweek brings a story about how our politicalleaders are unwilling to swallow the ratherlarge pill of significant greenhouse gasreductions by 2020.

Over 20 years ago, the BrundtlandCommission demonstrated that climatechange is caused by dysfunctional energypolicies, and is therefore primarily aneconomic problem. In 2007, Nicholas Sterndemonstrated that the cost of inaction couldbe as much as 10 per cent of global GDP. Thisgot the attention of finance ministers and

heads of governments, not just environment ministers. Climatechange is now a major global political and economic issue. So thepressure is intense and the conference may well not be able to liveup to expectations.

IISD will be a major presence at the conference. Our EarthNegotiations Bulletin team will be counted upon to provide up-to-the-minute, unbiased reporting of the proceedings. The ENB hasbeen present at every climate change negotiation since the EarthSummit of 1992. We also provide coverage of some of the numerousside events that will dot the Danish capital.

The use of protectionism looms ever larger as a tool for climatepolicy-makers, particularly against imports from developingcountries. Our Climate Change team has joined with our Trade andInvestment program to build a leading-edge project on therelationship between climate change and trade. They have alsoworked with developing countries to help them to cope with theeffects of changes in the climate. A joint project with The Energy andResources Institute in India helped to develop flexible, local policiesfor adapting to the challenges of climate change. With ourSustainable Natural Resources Management program, they havedeveloped a series of publications on the effects of climate changeon the security of sensitive regions such as the Middle East.

We have long been a participant in the national discussions onclimate change in Canada and enjoy close working relationships withour home province of Manitoba, as well as other Canadian provinces,in the development of their climate strategies. And we are the onlyCanadian research group invited to participate in Meetings of theParties of the Western Climate Initiative (covering seven U.S. statesand four Canadian provinces: B.C., Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec)and we provide expert advice on competitiveness, recognition forearly actions and the design of the regulatory instrument. And it isindeed in North America where we hope to see progress. There arepromising signs from the Obama Administration and we are closelymonitoring progress on the Waxman-Markey clean energy bill in theU.S. as we continue to provide advice to the Canadian government.

Climate change will be with us for a long time and long-termsolutions are the key to success. But the new science is telling us thatwe must make major cuts in emissions over the next 10–15 years or itmay be too late. Success at Copenhagen is vital.


IISD Board of Directors 2008/2009

Daniel GagnierChief of Staff, Office of the

Premier of Quebec (Canada)

David RunnallsPresident and CEO, IISD

(Canada)

Stephanie CairnsPrincipal, Wrangellia

Consulting (Canada)

James CarrPresident and CEO, Business

Council of Manitoba (Canada)

Retired June 2008

Angela CropperAssistant Secretary-General andDeputy Executive Director, UNEP

(Trinidad and Tobago)Retired June 2008

John ForgáchChairman, Equator LLC

(Brazil)

Roger GibbinsPresident and CEO, Canada

West Foundation (Canada)

Chuck HanthoChairman of the Board of

Directors, Hamilton UtilitiesCorporation (Canada)

Retired June 2008

LaxanachantornLaohaphan

Vice President for InternationalAffairs, Chulabhorn Research

Institute (Thailand)

Charles LoewenCEO, Loewen Windows

(Canada)

Måns LönnrothFormer Managing Director of

Mistra, the Swedish Foundationfor Strategic Environmental

Research (Sweden)

Claude MartinHonourary Advisor and past

Director General,WWF–International

(Switzerland)

Gordon McBeanChair, Policy, Institute for

Catastrophic Loss Reduction(Canada)

Patricia Moles-RiveroBrazil Country Manager, Petra

Foods Pte. (Brazil)Elected June 2008

Mark Moody-StuartChairman, Anglo American plc

(United Kingdom)

Khawar Mumtaz Shirkat Gah Women’s

Resource Centre (Pakistan)

Maureen O’NeilPresident and CEO, Canadian

Health Services ResearchFoundation (Canada)

Elected June 2008

Mohamed SahnounAmbassador, Special Advisor

to the Secretary-General for Africa (Algeria)

Bruce SampsonFormer Vice-President ofSustainability, BC Hydro

(Canada)

Bruce SchleinVice President of

Environmental Affairs, Citi(United States)

Elected June 2008

Vicky SharpePresident and CEO of

Sustainable DevelopmentTechnology Canada (Canada)

Elected June 2008

Emöke SzathmáryPresident Emeritus andProfessor, University of

Manitoba (Canada)Elected June 2008

Tensie WhelanExecutive Director, Rainforest Alliance

(United States)

Milton WongChairman, Perceptronix

(Canada)

Advisory ParticipantsPaul Vogt, Clerk of the Executive

Council, Province of ManitobaJane Gray, Executive Director,

Climate Change and Green Strategy Initiatives Branch, Manitoba Science, Technology, Energy and Mines Until May 2008

Maureen O’Neil, President, International Development Research Centre Elected to Board June 2008

Robert Greenhill, President, Canadian International Development Agency Until June 2008

Margaret Biggs, President, Canadian International Development Agency Commenced June 2008

Michael Horgan, Deputy Minister, Environment Canada, Until June 2008

Ian Shugart, Deputy Minister, Environment Canada Commenced July 2008

Distinguished Fellows Jacques GérinArt HansonJim MacNeill, Chair EmeritusMaurice Strong

Founding ChairLloyd McGinnis

Friends of the Institute Gro Harlem BrundtlandGary FilmonJosé GoldembergJim MacNeillBrian MulroneySir Shridath RamphalMaurice Strong

5The IISD Team

he IISD Team is a diverse group of talented, motivated men and women from around the world. While anchoredin Winnipeg, Geneva, Ottawa and New York offices, IISD is a colourful, international tapestry of staff, associates,consultants and young interns who bring their unique experiences, perspectives and energy to our work. Theindividuals listed here served with IISD in 2008–2009.

TStaffJaved AhmadHeather AndersonJocelyn AndrewRod AranedaSue BarkmanLori BeattieLivia BizikovaOli BrownCarolee BucklerJohnvee CalaguianChristopher CharlesDiane ConollyAlec CrawfordHeather CreechDennis CunninghamRamon DatorBrian DavyFariba Di Benedetto-AchtariJohn DrexhageLael DyckCindy FilliettazJanice GairPhilip GassBill GlanvilleJenny GleesonVicky GoodallLangston James (“Kimo”)

Goree VI Karen GouldingRick GroomRichard GrosshansMark HalleAnne HammillJennifer HirschfeldTammy KaratchukTara LaanColleen LaneSylvia Lehmann-WeilenmannGrace LorussoJason MackiJason ManaigreClarita Martinet-FayStacy MatwickMatthew McCandlessChristina MoffatElias MukoziLisa MuirheadRachael MullerDiego NogueraLaura NormandJo-Ellen ParryNona PelletierOshani PereraEvan PetersJacqueline PilonLászló PintérMichael RatcliffeBéatrice RichéDimple Roy

Marlene RoyDavid RunnallsChrista RustMaja Schmidt-ThoméKathleen SexsmithIan SeymourRichard ShermanStuart SlayenChris SpenceAdam StetskiDarren SwansonFlavia ThoméCharles ThriftHenry VenemaTim VerryTony VetterDamon Vis-DunbarVivek VooraDebbie WatkinsShannon WentzPeter WoodersHuihui Zhang

AssociatesMark AnielskiGraham AshfordStephan BargJane BarrPamela ChasekAaron Cosbey Peter Dickey Frédéric Gagnon-Lebrun Maryline GuiramandPeter HardiRochelle HardingTony HodgeStefan JungcurtTara LaanDonald J. MacLean Nancy MacPhersonSheldon McLeodRobert McLemanMahnaz MalikHoward MannFiona MarshallAlanna MitchellDeborah Murphy Norman MyersAdil NajamJean NoletBryan OborneLeslie PaasJiahua PanJean PerrasJames A. PerryJason Potts Dale RothmanDaniel RubensteinDavid Sawyer Cory Searcy

Sabrina ShawRon SteenblikNatalie SwayzeNeal ThomasDagmar TimmerDennis TirpakStephen Tyler Terri WillardChris Wunderlich

Senior FellowsKeith BezansonBrian DavyRichard MatthewAdil NajamOla Ullsten

IISD Reporting ServicesConsultantsSoledad AguilarOluwatomilola AkanleKaren AlvarengaAsheline AppletonMelanie AshtonGraeme AuldIngrid BarnsleyPaula BarriosNienke BeintemaDan BirchallAlice BisiauxRobynne BoydDouglas BusheySuzanne CarterClaudio ChiarollaAlexandra ConliffeDeborah DavenportFranz DejonRado DimitrovDaniela Diz PintoPeter Doran Norma Erendira GarciaAngeles EstradaSocorro EstradaGlen EwersRenata FoltranBo-Alex FredvikAnders Goncalves da Silva Leonie GordonMaria GutierrezReem HajjarSikina JinnahSarah Stewart Johnson Twig JohnsonHarry JonasHal KaneResson KantaiTallash KantaiPui KhemarosPia KohlerKati Kulovesi

Aaron LeopoldKate LouwPak LowJonathan ManleyWilliam McPhersonLeila MeadMarie-Annick MoreauAmber MoreenMiquel MuñozWagaki Mwangi Wangu MwangiLaurel NemeKate NevilleDiego NogueraOlivia PasiniGmelina RamirezKeith RipleyAnne Roemer-MahlerTatjana RosenRenata RubianLaura RussoLisa SchipperMaja Schmidt-ThoméNicole SchabusMark SchulmanAnna SchulzAri ShapiroSabrina ShawMatt SommervilleMarkus StaasJessica TempletonClaudia ten HaveElsa TsioumaniJames Van AlstineCecilia VaverkaAndrey VavilovIngrid VisserenLynn WagnerNancy WilliamsPeter WoodKunbao XiaYulia Yamineva

InternsJoel BenoitLisa CyrJaclyn DaitchmanSamantha DarlingMeghan DoironJennifer DunnFaiza FarahTim HollandJessica KotierkMathew McBurneyMichael McNultySimon MichaudAllison PaulFelisa Ponce-TamayoSuryapratim RoyAlexandra Winton

6 IISD Annual Report Feature - Guest Essay - Achim Steiner

Exploring theLinking crisis and opportunity

he food, fuel and financial crises have served assobering reminders that the world is on afundamentally unsustainable path.

Climate change and a looming natural resourcescarcity are also rapidly emerging. We are indeedpushing if not pushing past the limits of what theplanet can take.

Concurrently we have however witnessed quitean extraordinary phenomenon. Almost overnight,US$3 trillion-worth of stimulus packages has beenmobilized to deal with the economic crisis.

The central question is whether this will bespent to set the stage for a low-carbon, resource-efficient Green Economy—one that deals with themultiple challenges of the here and now and thosebleeping on the sustainability radar screen.

This includes securing employment for the 1.3billion people underemployed or unemployed, andthe half a billion joining the work force over the next10 years.

UNEP, in collaboration with economists, civilsociety, the World Bank, the International MonetaryFund, the Organisation for Economic Co-operationand Development and over 20 UN bodies havereviewed the potential of earmarking over $750billion-worth of the stimulus packages—or aroundone per cent of global GDP—towards environmentalinvestments.

The experts conclude that targeted at fivesectors—renewable energy, sustainable transport,conservation agriculture, ecological infrastructureand energy efficiency—such sums allied to creativemarket mechanisms could assist in reviving theglobal economy and boosting employment whileaccelerating the fight against climate change,environmental degradation and poverty.

Energy use in buildings is a good example of aGreen Economy-“green new deal” approach. It canalready be cut by 80 per cent in a cost-effectivemanner using existing technologies.

Additional investments in this sector would notonly stimulate the recovery of the construction andallied industries. It could also generate tens ofmillions of jobs—indeed an estimated two million to

T

3.5 million green jobs in Europe and the United States alone,with an even higher potential in developing countries such asChina or Mexico.

Organic agriculture as part of an overall sustainableagricultural strategy is another, perhaps counter-intuitive, casein point. In the past, it was perhaps considered a luxury for thewell-off. But a recent survey by UNEP and the UN Conferenceon Trade and Development has looked at 114 small-scalefarmers in some 20 countries in Africa who have switched toorganic systems.

Yields have risen by, on average, 100 per cent and in EastAfrica by over 120 per cent, in part because more organicmatter in the soils has prolonged the growing season.

Green Economy Initiative

1

7

Achim Steiner, United Nations Under-SecretaryGeneral and United Nations Environment

Programme (UNEP) Executive Director

“The experts conclude that targeted at five sectors… such sums alliedto creative market mechanisms could assist in reviving the global

economy and boosting employment while accelerating the fightagainst climate change, environmental degradation and poverty.”

Returns on investments in water are also high. Just $15 billion ayear on meeting the Millennium Development Goal of halving by2015 the number of people without sustainable access to safe waterand basic sanitation could generate global economic benefits worth$38 billion annually—$15 billion of which would be in sub-SaharanAfrica alone.

And what about investments in ecological infrastructure? A globalmarine protected area network, involving the closure of 20 per cent ofthe total fishing grounds, could sustain fisheries worth $80 to $100billion a year while ensuring a future for 27 million fishing-related jobsand generating one million more in areas such as conservation.

The Green Economy Initiative is gaining traction in somecountries including China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, severalEuropean countries and the United States to name a few.

The Republic of Rwanda is an example of a nation in Africa thathas made the link between crisis and opportunity along with suchlong-standing advocates as Costa Rica in Central America.

In terms of Rwanda, the country is now investing in what couldwell be the biggest solar project on the continent, while committingthe economy to a low-carbon path including energy efficiencyimprovements in agriculture, which employs over 50 per cent of thepopulation.

Costa Rica has not only spearheaded ecotourism and paymentsfor ecosystem services, including hydro-electric companies financingfarmers upstream to conserve forests, but has set a target to be oneof the first zero-emission economies by the early 2020s.

Climate change represents perhaps the starkest example of howthe unsustainable economic models of the past are unlikely to serveus well in the future.

Combating it also represents the biggest and most comprehensivestimulus package of all from reduced dependence on finite resourcesto delivering clean energy to the two billion people without access to it.

Combating climate change also represents new kinds of greenjobs in renewable energy and conservation, up to new and morecreative ways of managing and paying for the planet’s ecosysteminfrastructure including forests, grasslands, soils and perhaps, one day,even our seas.

IISD has for several decades been one of the pioneers of creativethinking and inspiring policy options on sustainable development anda supporter and partner to UNEP.

The Green Economy Initiative is part of the logical evolution ofthat rich inheritance and perhaps a real and tangible opportunity toachieve the transformative and comprehensive change that will allowsix to nine billion people to live together prosperously, productivelyand peacefully in years to come.2

1 Vineyard soil treated with organic fertilizer. Organicagriculture shows promise as yields continue to rise,writes Achim Steiner. iStockphoto.

2 Two engineers at a geothermal power station.Combating climate change will open up jobs in cleanenergy, writes Achim Steiner. iStockphoto.

8 IISD Annual Report Feature - Opinion - Mark Halle

What HappensBetween Promise

and Delivery?

By Mark Halle, European Representative and Director, Trade and Investment Program

“We all despair at the unsustainable path on which our worldis set, and our hearts are lifted when our leaders recognizethe challenge and solemnly swear to change course.”

In 2000, the world’s heads of state gathered in NewYork at the Millennium Summit. Faced with growingevidence of global poverty, disease, inequity and violencethey made a series of solemn pledges—eight to be exact.These are the Millennium Development Goals, a set ofspecific and, in most cases, measurable goals to be metby 2015 at the latest. We are now past the half-way mark,so it is time to ask: how are we doing?

The answer, unfortunately, is “not well.” In few if anycases are we anything like on track to meet or evenapproach the goals set with such pomp andcircumstance, even if the pledge was made by the highestauthorities of the land. In respect of many of the goals,the predicament they aim to address is considerablyworse than it was at the turn of the millennium.

We all despair at the unsustainable path on which ourworld is set, and our hearts are lifted when our leadersrecognize the challenge and solemnly swear to changecourse. All that is understandable and, indeed, human;what is less understandable is that we then trust ourleaders to fulfill their promises, to follow the logic of theiranalysis, and to take the decisions that will lead us tochange course. They rarely do.

With many of our sustainability challenges—such asclimate change—reaching a crisis point, it has becomevital now to take seriously what can be done to reduceand, if possible, bridge the gaping chasm betweenpromise and delivery. It has become a priority for those ofus fighting for sustainable development to turn ourattention to designing accountability mechanisms thatwork. But how should we go about it?

A start would be to figure out what has worked in thepast—what approaches might be replicated and scaledup? After all, successful examples abound, ranging fromincentives to comply or deliver, to punishments for failingto do so. In the Convention on International Trade inEndangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, non-enforcement of the rules governing trade in threatenedspecies can lead to a blanket ban on all trade with theguilty country. Non-respect for World Trade Organization(WTO) rules can, for a country winning a formal dispute inthe WTO’s Appellate Body, lead to the authorizedapplication of economic sanctions against its opponent.Mining companies are used to putting down a“performance bond,” aimed at ensuring that they will fulfilltheir obligations—cleaning up after the mine is exhausted,for example.

We need to inventory and promote theseaccountability mechanisms and exact a political oreconomic price for not fulfilling one’s solemn promises.One thing is for sure—trusting our leaders withoutexercising accountability is a recipe for disaster.

9

Promoting Conflict-sensitiveConservation in Africa

Since 2007, Alec Crawford has been travelling to Africa to advance IISD’s work onconflict-sensitive conservation. He travels with a caring ear for feedback from theregion and great passion for his work. He also travels with his camera and takeshundreds of pictures each time he’s in the region.

or more than four years, IISD's Environmentand Security team has been working with partnersin Africa’s Albertine Rift to understand howconservationists can work better in conflict zones.Our research has examined conservation activitiesin Uganda, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic ofCongo (DRC). We use this experience to helpconservationists make their work more “conflict-sensitive.” For conservationists, this means: a. more effectively addressing the root causes ofnatural resource-based conflict; b. minimizing the risk of their activitiesexacerbating conflict; and c. maximizing opportunities for peacebuilding.

We’re preparing a field manual forconservationists so they can better integrateconflict-sensitivity into their work and theirorganizational culture. We recently presented adraft of the manual to practitioners in Goma, DRC,on the outskirts of Virunga National Park (one ofour focal sites). We received extensive feedbackthat we are incorporating into the final version, setfor release later in 2009.

It was my third visit to this beautiful buttroubled corner of the world. I’m happy to reportthat a sense of cautious optimism pervades for thefirst time since I started coming to the Virungaregion in 2007; the recent capture of rebel leaderLaurent Nkunda has eased tensions, and on May 1,2009, Virunga National Park opened its gates totourists for the first time since September 2007.

F

Story and photos by Alec Crawford, IISD Project Officer

10 IISD Annual Report Feature

More than three million people live within a day’s walk ofthe park, and this number will continue to grow.

Twenty years of near-constant conflict has threatened thespecies, habitats and communities that depend on Virunga fortheir survival. The park is in crisis: its governance systems areweak; its boundaries are encroached upon by the surroundinglocal and refugee populations; its habitats are being destroyedby overfishing and charcoal production; and its animals arekilled for meat and ivory. More than 120 park rangers—a sixth ofthe total patrolling the park—have been killed while on duty.

Stretching along the Congolese border with Uganda andRwanda, Virunga National Park is Africa’s most biodiversepark, with more bird, mammal and reptile species thanany other on the continent. Founded as Albert NationalPark in 1925, it is home to the critically endangeredmountain gorilla; once hosted the world’s largest hippopopulation; and recently witnessed the first sighting ofan okapi, a rare African mammal, in the wild in 50 years.

For the past two decades, Virunga National Park andthe surrounding area in North Kivu province haveexperienced near-constant violent conflict. Theconflicts have been driven by a host of factors,including identity, political and colonial legacies, andcompetition to control valuable natural resources.Between 1998 and 2007, more people died from thisconflict than from any war since World War II. Most ofthe casualties were civilians, and almost half children.Kibumba Refugee Camp (above) is just one of manycamps bordering the park.

11

Most of the local population relies on charcoal, withalternate sources of energy severely limited or non-existent for the majority of villages bordering the park.This energy deficit means that, for millions, the parkcontinues to serve as the primary source of energy inthe region; the park’s old-growth trees are prized forproducing charcoal that burns longer and hotter.

In July 2007, 10 of Virunga's critically endangered mountaingorillas were killed, none by poachers. Only 720 of the animalsremain in the world, so the loss was significant. Eventually, themurders would be tied to those running the region's lucrative,but illegal, charcoal trade, a warning to conservationists trying tobreak up the trade and protect the park resources and habitatsit was destroying. Senkwekwe, the murdered group's silverback,was buried at Rumangabo along with the other killed gorillas.Fighting between the Congolese army and rebel groups blockedaccess to the gorillas in September 2007; conservationists wereonly admitted back into their habitat in early 2009. Theconservationists had feared the worst, but thankfully thepopulation had escaped the fighting relatively unscathed, andhad even increased slightly. A sign of hope if there ever was one.

Today, one kilogram of fish caught on the Ugandan side of LakeEdward is made up of two fish; on the Congolese side, the samekilogram is made up of six fish. This reduced productivity directlyimpacts the economic livelihoods of the communitiessurrounding the lake, and has even driven Congolese fishers toillegally cross into Ugandan waters.

The fishing village of Vitshumbi lies in Virunga NationalPark on the southern shore of Lake Edward. Economiclife in the village revolves around the local fishery, whichhas nearly collapsed in recent years; a function of poormanagement and the decimation of the lake’s hippopopulation. In the 1970s, 29,000 hippos contributed tothe lake’s high productivity. Because of poaching formeat and ivory, only about 500 hippos remain.


Taking the Pulseam writing this article for IISD’s Annual Report

fully cognizant of the fact that I venture where evenfools would fear to tread: forecasting the prospectsof an international agreement on climate change bythis December, at a high-level conference to be heldin Copenhagen, Denmark. Let me say this at theoutset: if an agreement is reached at Copenhagen, it will almost certainly not be in the form of acomprehensive agreement (covering mitigationtargets on the part of developed countries,commensurate actions on the part of developingcountries, revised market mechanisms, an enhancedsinks regime, complemented by frameworks foraddressing adaptation, technology transfer andfinancing) that might have been envisioned whenthis process was initially launched under the BaliAction Plan in December 2007. That much becameclear in the aftermath of the negotiations held inBonn early June. The negotiating text under the AdHoc Working Group on Long-term CooperativeAction under the Convention (LCA) has ballooned toover 200 pages from the 80 pages initially submittedby the Chair, Michael Zammit Cutajar, at thebeginning of the Bonn discussions. That itself shouldnot cause too much concern since much the samekind of development took place prior to Kyoto andwe were still able to reach an agreement six monthslater in 1997. But negotiators face a number ofadditional challenges today that will make anagreement that much more difficult to achieve.

First of all, the LCA Chair still has no mandatefrom Parties to develop a “consolidated text” for thenegotiations as there are at least four other textsbeing circulated by other Parties as alternatives.

I

Second, the LCA is not the only forum in which negotiations ona post-2012 regime are taking place. There is a parallel set ofnegotiations under the United Nations Framework Conventionon Climate Change called the Ad Hoc Working Group onFurther Commitments for Annex 1 Parties under the KyotoProtocol. And that is the track major developing economies(MDEs) prefer, since the onus is exclusively on developedcountries (except for the U.S., which never ratified the KyotoProtocol [KP]) to take on emission reduction targets after 2012.

By John Drexhage, Director, Climate Change and Energy

“While this hardly seems to be a recipe for an optimistic outcome byCopenhagen, I would also note that the international regime has beennotable for its resilience over the years. ”

1 An intense moment in theMarch/April 2009 climatemeetings in Bonn, Germany.Photograph courtesy ofIISD/Earth NegotiationsBulletin.

1

13

before Copenhagen

In a word, MDEs would prefer a simple amendment to theKP for the post-2012 agreement, with stronger targets onthe part of developed countries and the addition of theU.S. to the list of Annex 1 members. However, that is thelast thing American negotiators would accept, as theirpriority lies in reaching an agreement at Copenhagen thatcould be ratified by the U.S. Senate. That would call for anagreement divorced from the Kyoto Protocol—one thatwould focus on nationally designed delivery andcompliance mechanisms versus the top-down frameworkunder the KP which is characterized by internationallybound targets and timetables.

And we haven’t even begun to discuss the chasm thatcurrently exists on what level of reductions would actuallybe required by developed countries in the mid-term.Developing countries have stated their preference for at

least a 45 per cent reduction from 1990 levels by 2020;the European Union, a 25 per cent reduction; while otherdeveloped countries, led by the U.S., say they can only goso far as stabilizing emissions at 1990 levels (actually, someof these countries are insisting on different base yearsfrom Kyoto). While there is no doubt that the science ismaking an increasingly urgent case for significantreductions—the earlier the better—the political andeconomic realities, particularly in North America and majordeveloping economies, are such that achieving thestabilization of emissions by 1990 would actuallyrepresent the beginnings for a radical de-linking betweengreenhouse gas emissions and economic growth, but itmay very well not be enough to stave off dangerousinterference with the global climate. And I am sad to saythat an equally large gap exists between countries on thefinancing available to help developing countries addressclimate change, as well as on the matter of how to governsuch financing and technology transfer arrangements.

While this hardly seems to be a recipe for an optimisticoutcome by Copenhagen, I would also note that theinternational regime has been notable for its resilience overthe years. And let’s not overlook that this negotiationprocess is no longer some environmental “outlier” as it wascast by many during the days of Kyoto: it is the pre-eminentmultilateral negotiating “happening” this year and so failuremay not be an acceptable outcome. It also highlights theurgency with which Canada needs to come to terms withthis issue once and for all. As the only Kyoto Party that willnot meet its target through domestic actions or internationalcredits, it needs to make a strong case that it will beimplementing a serious regulatory framework and relatedpolicies that command some sort of attention. Withoutsuch a package in his negotiating “arsenal,” EnvironmentMinister Jim Prentice will go to Copenhagen completelyempty-handed and with very little room to maneuver inthose final days in December.

In December 2009, Ministers and Ambassadors will gather in Copenhagen to see if they can reach an agreement onaddressing climate change after 2012 (when the commitmentperiod under the Kyoto Protocol runs out). At this stage, saysJohn Drexhage, reaching a comprehensive agreement asoriginally hoped will be a very tall order.


The Trade, Investmentand Climate ChangeConnectionBy Aaron Cosbey, IISD Associate and Senior Advisor

“How are trade and climate change related? Inthe happiest of possibilities, there are ways to achievethe objectives of both communities at once.”

he urgency of climate change as a global issue haspolicy-makers of all stripes searching for ways that theirspecialized work might be relevant to the challenge. Inthe area of trade and investment policy, this search waskicked into high gear when the Indonesian governmentconvened an exploratory Trade Ministerial on thesidelines of the United Nations Framework Conventionon Climate Change’s agenda-setting Conference of theParties in Bali at the end of 2007. IISD had been workingin the area for many years (and helped organize the Balimeeting) and since then has been pursuing a suite ofresearch designed to deepen our understanding of theissues, and find policy solutions(www.iisd.org/trade/crosscutting).

How are trade and climate change related? In thehappiest of possibilities, there are ways to achieve theobjectives of both communities at once. For example,trade policies that lower tariffs on low-carbon goods, orthat seek to lower fossil fuel subsidies, offer bothsignificant investment benefits that will also work toaddress the real threat of climate change. On the otherhand, there are also potentially dangerous rifts thatrequire forethought and coordination. U.S. and EUpolicy-makers are considering trade measures imposedon imports from countries whose climate changeregimes are less stringent, to “level the carbon playingfield.” These measures, and other climate-motivatedpolicies, may run afoul of trade rules. In other areas wesimply need more knowledge: for example, does tradelaw on intellectual property impede the flow of new low-carbon technologies? IISD’s research will help ensurethat trade and investment policies make their fullcontribution to the climate change effort.

T

Climate Change as a Peacebuilder?By Oli Brown, IISD Program Manager

“Climate change… could encourage cooperationbetween previously hostile neighbours.”

f economics is the original dismal science, thenclimate change could be its understudy.

Reports on climate change typically make for grimbedtime reading: full of worrying statistics anddoomsday scenarios. Sometimes it feels like the onlygamble left is whether it’s the rising sea levels, tornadoesor forest fires that are going to get you first.

Worse still, analysts have begun to warn that thescope and speed of climate change could present realthreats to international peace: shrinking transboundarywater resources could lead to disputes between countriesand large movements of climate “refugees” could raisetensions between previously separate ethnic groups. Infact, newly accessible resources under the receding Arcticice are already leading to a modern day land grab ascountries, Canada included, scramble to establishownership of “their” underwater continental shelf.

But there may be a silver lining to this dark cloud.And that is that climate change, a shared problem like noother, could encourage cooperation between previouslyhostile neighbours.

There is more to this than mere wishful thinking.Many environmental issues ignore political boundaries ina way that can drive parties to the table even when theyare fighting over other issues. These issues often requirelong-term cooperation, providing an opportunity to buildup trust over time. And environmental issues lendthemselves to cross-border interactions among civilsociety groups more so than other bilateral issues suchas currency trading or nuclear proliferation.

Whether or not this happens is likely to be one ofthe challenges of the century. To investigate thepossibilities IISD is working on how environmentaldiplomacy and adaptation to climate change cansupport wider peacebuilding.

I

Taking the Pulse before Copenhagen

15

Reducing the CarbonFootprint of ICTsBy Don MacLean, IISD Associate

“To help ICT and climate change policy-makersconnect, IISD is conducting scenarios-based research onthe long-term relationship between ICTs, climate changeand sustainable development.”

ersonal computers, mobile phones, portable mediaplayers, digital cameras and other information andcommunications technology (ICT) devices are part of daily lifeat work and play for people around the world. Apart fromissues related to end-of-life disposal, ICT generally has beenconsidered a clean technology. However, recent studiescommissioned by the ICT industry have begun to tell adifferent story about the relationship between ICTs andclimate change.

These studies estimate that the ICT sector is directlyresponsible for two–three per cent of global carbonemissions—equivalent to those of the aviation industry or thecountry of Canada—and that these emissions will triple by2020 under a business-as-usual scenario. These estimates donot include the “indirect effects” of ICT—emissions resultingfrom their use by businesses, consumers, governments,universities, and public institutions throughout the economyand society.

A “green” movement is underway in the ICT sector.Driven by a mixture of business opportunity, regulatorythreat and corporate social responsibility, its main goals are:• to reduce the carbon footprint of the ICT sector – by

improving the energy efficiency of its processes, productsand services, and switching to renewable energy sources;and

• to help reduce the carbon footprint of other sectors – bydeveloping “smart” energy grids, transportation networks,building management systems, supply chains andproduction processes.

The ICT industry estimates these latter measures couldreduce global GHG emissions by 15 per cent by 2020. ICT policy-makers are beginning to factor this potential into their policydevelopment processes. The time has come for climate changepolicy-makers to do likewise. To help ICT and climate changepolicy-makers connect, IISD is conducting scenarios-basedresearch on the long-term relationship between ICTs, climatechange and sustainable development. The results of this researchare being fed into the OECD and the UN Internet GovernanceForum, both of which have work programs in this area.

P

1

1 IISD’s Alec Crawford (foreground) participates in Syrian consultation on climate change and conflict.


Ecological Goods and

ecognizing the economic value of theservices nature provides is an increasinglycommon and powerful approach forcommunicating why we need to protect,restore and properly manage ecosystems.By producing oxygen, filtering air, regulatingclimate, cleaning and redistributing water,and by forming productive soils, natureprovides us with all of life’s essentials—engineering substitutes is usuallyprohibitively expensive or impossible.Today, the functions we usually take forgranted are referred to as ecological goodsand services or EGS—a term popularized bythe Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.

Ever aware of the important role EGSplays, IISD’s Sustainable Natural ResourcesManagement (SNRM) team continues toeffectively apply EGS concepts toshowcase their utility. A prime example wasan ecosystem services valuationassessment, which was released inDecember 2008. The study examined thevast, intact section of boreal forest thatstretches along the east side of LakeWinnipeg and straddles both northernOntario and Manitoba.

IISD conducted the study for thePimachiowin Aki Corporation, whose namemeans “the Land that Gives Life” in Ojibwe.The non-profit group is leading the bid tohave the forest proclaimed a UNESCOWorld Heritage Site in time for thenomination in 2011. If proclaimed, this40,000 square km section of forest wouldbe recognized as a natural treasurealongside Australia’s Great Barrier Reef,Egypt’s pyramids at Giza and Canada’sRocky Mountains.

R

By Rick Groom, Development and Communications Officer

“By examining new and innovative ways in which ecological goods andservices can be better managed and valued, our program continues toshow just how and why environmental protection should beincorporated into policy and decision-making.”

—Dr. Henry (Hank) David Venema, Director, IISD Sustainable Natural Resources Management program

Definitions

Ecosystem/ecological goods and services (EGS): Benefits societyderives from ecosystems such as water filtration from riparianareas—where land and water form a transition from aquatic toterrestrial ecosystems; along streams, lakes and open waterwetlands; as well as soil erosion control from shelterbelts, flood andwater retention from wetlands. Some ecological features like uplandforests provide multiple services like carbon sequestration, waterpurification and watershed protection.

Integrated water resources management (IWRM): A process thatpromotes the coordinated development and management of water,land and related resources.

1

1 Rushes and fall trees on the east side of Lake Winnipeg.Photo by Don Sullivan.

2 An airboat on the move in Netley-Libau Marsh in Manitoba.Photo by Richard Grosshans.

17N

The Value of Nature

IISD’s Sustainable Natural Resources Managementteam determined that the Pimachiowin Aki area ofthe boreal forest provides $120 to $130 million peryear in ecosystem goods and services. Its carbonstorage capacity is estimated to be worth up toCDN $17.5 million while its fishing and hunting arevalued at $30 million annually. Other examples ofEGS are traditional medicine and water regulation.The SNRM team’s efforts also delineated thedistinction between services benefiting residentsand non-residents, both locally and globally.

ew ground was broken this past year thanks to theInstitute’s research in the Netley-Libau Marsh in the southernbasin of Lake Winnipeg, approximately 65 kms north ofWinnipeg. Officially deemed a Canadian Important Bird Areain October 2000, Netley-Libau is now a candidate fordesignation as a Heritage Marsh under the Manitoba HeritageMarsh Program. Consisting of 24,381 ha of upland andwetland habitat plus 848 kms of shoreline, the area includesseveral lakes and streams whose water levels are influencedby Lake Winnipeg.

In 2009, the SNRM team showed how wetlands can bemanaged and restored to provide a suite of eco-benefitsincluding flood protection, water treatment and bioenergy.The natural water retention function of Manitoba wetlandswas demonstrated during the flooding of the Red River Valleyin 2009 when they helped lower flood peaks by slowing andretaining water flows.

When harvested, wetland vegetation can be processedinto heating fuel pellets. Vegetation re-growth continues toabsorb and filter nutrients from water. According to RichardGrosshans, IISD Project Officer for the Netley-Libau Marshproject, “Since it sits at the mouth of Lake Winnipeg,revitalizing this marsh through EGS could lead to majorimprovements in the damaged lake’s water quality, whileintroducing a new source of renewable energy.”

Throughout 2008 and 2009, the team continued itsexploration of the links between EGS and integrated waterresources management (IWRM). Effective IWRM requires aconsultative process that engages watershed communitiesand stakeholders. Thus far, IISD research indicates the futureof EGS in the context of IWRM could pay substantial eco-dividends. Based on what the SNRM team has learned todate, these could include increased stakeholder participationand institutional capacity building, improved conflictresolution and financing IWRM in watersheds as it enhancessustainability worldwide.

Services

EGS, IWRM and the Institute’s Sustainable Natural Resources Management team played major roles in establishing theWater Innovation Centre during 2008–2009. For details, please see “Capital Campaign Surges Ahead” on page 32.

Working with nature towards sustainability

2


By Terri Willard, IISD Associate

Social Networking

19

By Dave Wilkins, IISD Associate

“We’re redefining what sustainability reporting means for IISD.”

e need to keep our people motivated to help ensure success in theirwork. One way to do that is to stay on top of their social well-being,” saysMarlene Roy, head of Research and Learning Resources at IISD.

She adds that the organization has taken the well-being of its people toheart with the redesign of its Operational Sustainability Report (OSR). “We’reredefining what sustainability reporting means for IISD,” she says. The OSR isproduced each year by the Internal Sustainable Development Assessmentand Reporting (ISDAR) team, headed by Roy. ISDAR is responsible forintroducing, implementing and maintaining internal sustainabledevelopment measures for all of IISD’s offices.

Previous OSRs followed the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines,focusing on economic, environmental and social aspects of IISD’s operations.This year’s OSR, however, has dropped the economic indicators (because theyare reported in the annual report), kept the environmental indicators andadded a lot more indicators to the social aspect—creating a people-first focus.

Roy says that the business community continues to follow the GRIguidelines. “However, IISD’s mandate includes improvement of human well-being as well as the environment. Therefore, our new people-firstsustainability focus strengthens our social dimension reporting

“The people-first focus will provide us with a much better snapshot of:how IISD invests in its people to better equip them with the knowledge andtools they need; the levels of fairness in hiring practices; effective policies todeal with harassment; and making IISD a healthier place to work,” stresses Roy.

IISD Adopts People-first Approach to Sustainability Reporting

“W

And this has led to some interestingfacts being highlighted. One case in pointis the number of people experiencingnegative workplace stress hasdecreased, according to our employeesatisfaction survey, she points out.

“The success of our work dependson the well-being of our employees.Through the OSR we can track the well-being of staff and use those findings toassist us in making improvements.” Forexample, even though fewer people areexperiencing high levels of negativeworkplace stress, over 50 per centreported this stress is still a factor forthem. “This suggests that more workneeds to be done to identify causes ofnegative workplace stress and findingways to minimize this stress,” says Roy.

IISD’s Operational SustainabilityReport, formerly published as an AdobePDF file, is now available in a new Webformat, graphing trends from2002–2003 for several indicators. The2008–2009 assessment found fewnegative trends, but three areas needcloser monitoring, namely the vitality ofour innovation culture, negative workstress and gender equality.

Visit www.iisd.org/about/sdreporting to see the new report,“Enriching, Acting, Achieving IISD’sOperational Sustainability.” New to thepage is a list of seven links to greaterdetails on the social and environmentalindicators of IISD’s operationalsustainable development.

20 IISD Annual Report - Program Report

Mark Halle, Director, Trade and Investment

“Each of our program’s three pillars—trade, investment and subsidies—isnot only central to the current predicament, but central to getting out of it.”

emember when a speed skater won theOlympic gold medal because, although trailing formost of the race, all the others fell or wereeliminated? Well, it looks like that perpetual also-ran—sustainable development—is still in the raceas one after another, the traditional medal-winners fall flat on their faces!

We have long insisted that anyone whosegoal is sustainable development should befocusing on the economic, not theenvironmental, infrastructure. The events of thepast year have driven that message home with avengeance as the global economy has gone overthe cliff and the impact of the collapse hasaffected virtually every corner of our globe. Wasit simply greed? Was it economicmismanagement by leaders blinded by theshort-term? In part, yes, but those are thesymptoms. The cause is the lack of “joined-up”public policy. Had the lessons of sustainabledevelopment been taken seriously and applied,we would not be where we are today, with tradenegotiations stalled, investment evaporating andpublic budgets hopelessly misused.

But a crisis is also an opportunity and as thecrisis unfolds, we are well-placed to offer somenew ideas. Each of our program’s three pillars —trade, investment and subsidies—is not onlycentral to the current predicament, but centralto getting out of it. With our predilection to seekpragmatic solutions for public policy reform thatadvances sustainable development, we may findthat we attract more attention to our ideas andthat, in relaunching the economy on a newfooting, we can help ensure that it now, genuinely,does favour sustainable development.

Trade and InvestmentR

1

1 IISD published Sustainable Development and China:Recommendations for the Forestry, Cotton and E-productsSectors. See http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2008/china_sd_sum.pdfiStockphotos.

2 IISD continued to study the impact of biofuels subsidies onfood prices and availability. Our work demonstrates thatbiofuels are a "shaky prospect" on economic, environmentaland climate change grounds. iStockphoto.

21We gratefully acknowledge the generous supporters of our Trade and Investment work:

Charles Stewart Mott FoundationCitigroup Foundation Department for International

Development (United Kingdom)ETH DomainThe German Marshall Fund of the

United States Hivos Industry CanadaInternational Centre for Trade and

Sustainable DevelopmentInternational Development

Research Centre (Canada)Lodestar FoundationMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food

Quality (LNV) (The Netherlands)Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Norway)Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Sweden)Natural Resources CanadaNorwegian Agency for Development

CooperationOrganisation for Economic

Co-operation and DevelopmentPermanent Mission of Norway in GenevaRockefeller Brothers Fund Royal Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs Switzerland State Secretariat for

Economic AffairsSwedish Foundation for Strategic

Environmental Research Swiss Agency for Development and

CooperationUnited Nations Environment

Programme

Highlights of 2008–2009:■ Our Trade Knowledge Network

(TKN)—now coordinated directly fromparticipating developing regions—hasgreatly increased the pace andproduction of policy-relevant researchon trade, investment and sustainabledevelopment rooted in the problemsas faced by the countries themselves.Operating now in South America,Southern Africa and Southeast Asia, itsinfluence on national thinking andpolicy is palpable.(www.tradeknowledgenetwork.net)

■ We are advising the Governmentof China on what they would need to doso that the growth of their internationaltrade also contributes to strengtheningsustainable development—a first for anycountry and significant in one whosetrade is among the most closelywatched and studied.(www.iisd.org/trade/china)

■ We conducted a range ofcountry case studies on theintroduction of sustainable publicprocurement, aimed at working out

how governments can best provide amassive incentive to green productionby purchasing goods and services thatmeet sustainable criteria.(www.iisd.org/markets/procurement/country_projects.asp)

■ We have built a large program onSustainable Markets and ResponsibleTrade (SMART), aimed atunderstanding and progressivelyremoving the obstacles to sustainableproduction through the wide use ofstandards. (www.iisd.org/markets)

■ We are pioneering a program onTrade and Climate Change, exploringhow trade can be harnessed toadvance climate goals and how, whentrade measures are used to inducemore climate-responsible behaviour,they can be so designed as not toclash with the rules of the multilateraltrading system.(www.iisd.org/trade/crosscutting)

■ We have created a global forumfor developing country investmentnegotiators in which they can shareexperiences and best practices and

work together to begin to level what hasbeen a hopelessly tilted playing field.(www.iisd.org/investment/capacity/dci_forum_2008.asp)

■ We are helping Sierra Leone—recently emerged from a devastatingcivil war—review its mining andresource-exploitation contracts toensure that the revenue from its wealthdoes not simply flow to shareholders inthe rich countries, but contributes alsoto the social and economicdevelopment of the country.

■ We have completed a series ofstudies on biofuel subsidies thatdemonstrate that biofuels are a shakyprospect on economic, environmentaland climate change grounds and aredubious even if energy security is themotivation. Further, subsidies tobiofuel production have led to a steeprise in food prices, triggering a massivefood shortage in many poor countries,and have provided incentives fordeforestation in the developing world.(www.globalsubsidies.org)

2


Henry David Venema, Director, Sustainable NaturalResources Management

“Policy attention turned 180 degrees and the billions never available todevelopment suddenly appeared to right sinking stock markets—but thefood crisis has not gone away.”

ast year, the sustainable development community held itsbreath—we appeared to be on the verge of a majorbreakthrough. The political will for a coherent response to theworld food crisis appeared genuine and change imminent. Thefinal declaration of the High-Level Conference on World FoodSecurity held in Rome last June said all the right things: apatheticdevelopment policy, climate change impacts and misguidedenergy policy were exacerbating environmental degradation andundermining food security. A coherent policy response wasneeded urgently and required that food, agricultural trade andoverall trade policies prioritize food security with a pro-poor,people-centred policy framework at the core.

Perhaps unsurprisingly—but sadly—the political momentumand commitment to real sustainable development vanishedwith the economic tsunami that capsized northern economies.Policy attention turned 180 degrees and the billions neveravailable to development suddenly appeared to right sinkingstock markets—but the food crisis has not gone away. Ifecological goods and services principles were fully embedded inpolicy, agricultural trade and investment would look verydifferent. Key factors exacerbating the food security crisis—unsustainable cultivation leading to desertification;deforestation; wetlands destruction; and biodiversity loss formonoculture energy crops—would be greatly reduced. Inevitablyand inescapably, trade, investment and development policywould focus instead on people-centred sustainable agriculture.

We’re steering EGS principles into policy in two major issuedomains: first, on water and agriculture issues in the LakeWinnipeg Basin of Western Canada—a stark example of agro-ecological vulnerability and food security issues in our ownbackyard; second, we’re tackling environment and securityissues—the role of environmental management as a cornerstoneof recovery and peacebuilding in regions overwhelmed by failedgovernance or conflict.

Sustainable NaturalResources Management

L

1

1 IISD Associate and NSERC ScholarRichard Grosshans studies Manitoba'sNetley-Libau Marsh.

2 Woodland Caribou near Poplar River onthe east side of Lake Winnipeg.

23We gratefully acknowledge the generous supporters of our SustainableNatural Resources Management work:

Agriculture and Agri-Food CanadaEnvironment CanadaInternational Development

Research CentreLake Winnipeg Foundation MacArthur FoundationMax Bell FoundationProvince of Alberta, Department of

the EnvironmentProvince of Manitoba, Department of

Agriculture, Agri-foods and Rural Initiatives

Province of Manitoba, Department of Water Stewardship

Province of Manitoba, Department of Conservation

Agriculture and Food Council of AlbertaUnited Nations Environment

Programme Wildlife Conservation Society

Highlights of 2008–2009:■ In collaboration with Canadian

federal departments of Agricultureand Environment, IISD continued itsregional work on ecosystem goods andservices by developing the architecturefor inter- and intra- watershed-basedwater quality trading in the LakeWinnipeg Basin.

■ IISD continues to work with theManitoba Department of WaterStewardship to develop policy tools toenable cost-effective land- and water-based stewardship through localwatershed agencies in Manitoba.

■ IISD continued to supportPimachiowin Aki, the proposedUNESCO World Heritage Site on theeast side of Lake Winnipeg. Wedeveloped an economic valuation ofecosystem services provided by thearea. (www.iisd.org/pdf/2008/ecosystem_valuation.pdf)

■ With the Network for EcosystemSustainability and Health, we publisheda research paper on ecosystemsapproaches to re-integrate waterresources management with healthand well-being. (www.iisd.org/pdf/2008/ecohealth_watersheds.pdf)

■ IISD’s work on nutrientmanagement for Netley Marshinfluenced Manitoba’s provincialthrone speech priorities on wetlands

management and restoration ofNetley, and the development ofincentives for wetlands managementand restoration in general.(www.iisd.org/natres/water/netley.asp)

■ We coordinated the work of theExpert Advisory Group for UNEP’sPost-Conflict and DisasterManagement Branch and co-authoredFrom Conflict to Peacebuilding: TheRole of Natural Resources and theEnvironment. The report, launched inseven countries, discusses the linksamong environment, conflict andpeacebuilding, and providesrecommendations on how these canbe addressed more effectively.(www.iisd.org/pdf/2009/conflict_peacebuilding.pdf)

■ We were part of UN missions toAfghanistan, Central African Republic,Rwanda and Sierra Leone. InAfghanistan, we evaluated theeffectiveness of UNEP operations asthe country tries to rebuild. In CentralAfrican Republic, we assessed theviability of launching a UNEP post-conflict program. In Rwanda, wecarried out a post-conflictenvironmental impact assessment forUNEP. And in Sierra Leone, launched astudy of mining concessions in thecontext of the country’s post-conflictreconstruction.

■ We worked with conservationactors in Uganda, Rwanda andDemocratic Republic of Congo toanalyze the conflict context andunderstand how their work cancontribute to peacebuilding. (See ourphoto feature on page 9.)

■ Published a paper examining thelinks between the risk of conflict andthe production and trade ofagricultural and marine resources.

■ IISD released a report exploringthe role of multilateral environmentalagreements in biodiversity hotspotsaffected by conflict. (www.iisd.org/pdf/2008/meas_cons_conf_virunga.pdf)

■ We prepared a study on Arcticsovereignty and security in the face ofclimate change for the 20thanniversary of the National Roundtableon the Economy and the Environment.(www.iisd.org/pdf/2008/arctic_sovereignty.pdf)

■ We published a paper on thelinks between microfinance servicesand climate change adaptation,highlighting both the opportunities andrisks of using micro-savings, credit andinsurance for reducing the vulnerabilityof the world's poorest populations.(www.iisd.org/pdf/2008/microfinance_climate.pdf)

2


László Pintér, Director, Measurement and Assessment

“…I find it misleading and potentially dangerous to suggest that the trackwe need to get back on is one of continuing GDP growth.”

f there was a most popular slogans contest,“getting the economy back on track” would haveprobably won first prize in 2008–09. I am usuallysuspicious of slogans, and I find it misleading andpotentially dangerous to suggest that the trackwe need to get back on is one of continuing GDPgrowth. In fact, the fixation on the performanceof narrow economic metrics such as GDP growthat a cost to environmental sustainability andhuman well-being was one of the things that gotus off the sustainable development track in thefirst place, well before the food, energy, sub-prime and economic crises of 2008.

Getting a handle on what the true measuresof progress are and how they can transformdecision-making and governance, down to theorganizational and even individual level, has beena core mission of our program. An increasingnumber of people realize changing the way wemeasure progress is transformative in terms ofthe way we set goals; develop strategies andworkplans; put together budgets; verify impactsrelated to sustainability standards; and evaluateperformance. The stakes are higher than everbefore. Many organizations are willing to gofarther than just having alternative metrics andworking through their implications for specificdecisions, whether resource use efficiency,poverty or climate change. I see it as our role toadvance measurement methods and promotetheir use in, not only helping the economy,society and the environment get back on track,but in redefining what the right track is.

Measurement andAssessment

I

1

25We gratefully acknowledge the generoussupporters of our Measurement andAssessment work:

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Deutsche Gesellschaft für

Technische Zusammenarbeit Eco. Ltd.Environment CanadaEnvironmental Assessment Agency

(Netherlands)Federation of Canadian MunicipalitiesGRID-ArendalInternational Development

Research Centre (Canada)Lake Balaton Development

Coordination AgencyNational Round Table on the

Environment and the Economy (Canada)

Prince Albert Model Forest Aboriginal Caucus

Province of AlbertaProvince of ManitobaSerecon Management Consulting Inc. TelPay IncorporatedUnited Nations Environment ProgrammeWorld Bank

Highlights of 2008–2009:■ We worked with First Nations

communities in Saskatchewan toenhance knowledge andunderstanding around environmentalassessment from a communityperspective. The development of theresource handbook was based onguidance from the Prince Albert ModelForest Aboriginal Caucus and ishelping to build the capacity andimprove the overall understandings ofenvironmental assessment.(www.iisd.org/measure/learning/prince_albert)

■ We moved our capacitydevelopment work on integratedenvironmental assessment (IEA) andreporting with UNEP to a new phasethrough an e-learning course based onour IEA Training Manual. The Manual isnow used by all of UNEP’s regions todevelop IEA training curricula withcustomized content.(www.iisd.org/measure/learning/assessment/iea.asp)

■ With support from IISD’sInnovation Fund, we completed thebeta version of an information portalthat combines the presentation ofindicator trends with time series maps,brief analyses and multimediainterviews with stakeholders. Wepresented the system at anOECD/Statistics Sweden Seminar on“Turning Statistics into Knowledge.”(test.balatontrend.org)

■ The Canadian SustainabilityIndicators Network, coordinated byIISD, has grown in membership to over850 individuals and organizations.Several CSIN learning events were heldin 2008–2009, and planning began fora major national conference in 2010with the theme “Accountability throughMeasurement.” (www.csin-rcid.ca)

■ We completed the first phase of aproject with the Dutch EnvironmentalAssessment Agency developing amethodology to assess how internationalpolicy mechanisms can contribute to thedelivery of ecological goods and servicesin developing countries.

■ We published a paper onchallenges and lessons learned fromintegrated landscape management(ILM) projects in Canada, the U.S. andEurope. We also developed a series ofcapacity building events to helpresearchers and policy-makers engagedin the current ILM projects in Canada toaddress the complexity of human andnatural interactions in an effort topromote better decision-making.(www.iisd.org/pdf/2009/challenges_lessons_ilm.pdf)

■ We developed a methodologyto track and evaluate the impact ofcommunity sustainability projectsfunded under the Federation ofCanadian Municipalities $550 millionGreen Municipal Fund.

■ IISD managed the developmentof SDplanNet-Asia & Pacific /SDplanNet-Latin America & Caribbean,two regional networks designed to helpgovernment officials share bestpractices for integrating sustainabledevelopment into national plans,budgets and strategies.(www.SDplanNet-AP.org;www.SDplanNet-LAC.org)

2

1 IISD was guided by the Prince Albert Model Forest Aboriginal Caucus in the development ofa resource handbook designed to increase understanding of environmental assessment.Photograph courtesy of Hamilton Greenwood, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan.

2 László Pintér in Brussels, helping to launch the IntegratedEnvironmental Assessment Community Platform.


Global Connectivity

Heather Creech, Director, Global Connectivity

“Global Connectivity incorporates a new focus on how communicationstechnology is supporting and changing how we organize governingsystems, economies and cultures in unprecedented ways.”

n 2008–09, my team and I launched IISD’s newGlobal Connectivity program. Central to the program isour commitment to the development and deploymentof the Internet and its related technologies in support ofsustainable development. In addition to our work oncommunications, networking and leadership skills underthe previous Knowledge Communications program,Global Connectivity incorporates a new focus on howcommunications technology is supporting and changinghow we organize governing systems, economies andcultures in unprecedented ways.

Telecommunications in general, and the Internet inparticular, have become the fourth major globalinfrastructure, together with energy, water andtransportation. It is our view that its managementrequires strong domestic and international policyframeworks, multistakeholder partnerships and a sharedresponsibility, right down to the individual citizen, for itsgrowth and use. Internet policy practitioners need tolook beyond the Internet’s positive contribution toeconomic growth and engage with environmental andsocial actors who are now dependent on, but alsoconcerned by, how the Internet is developing andwhether it will support or detract from long-termsustainability goals.

Over this past year, we consulted with severalhundred stakeholders across Canada andinternationally to discover what may be at stake. Wehave identified a number of critical uncertainties on thefuture of the Internet, related to the governance of thesystem, the evolution of the technology, concerns overits security and stability, and issues with the growingenvironmental footprint of the Internet. Our challengeover the coming years will be to secure broadinternational agreement among the key institutions andstakeholders on how the Internet will be governed andmanaged in support of sustainable development.

I

1

27We gratefully acknowledge thegenerous supporters of our GlobalConnectivity work:

Canadian International Development Agency

Canada School of Public ServiceCommission for Environmental

Cooperation Department of Foreign Affairs and

International Trade (Canada)Federal Ministry for the

Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (Germany)

Indian and Northern Affairs (Canada)

Industry CanadaInternational Development

Research Centre (Canada)Oxfam – QuebecProvince of ManitobaThe Aylmer GroupWalter and Duncan Gordon

FoundationWorld Business Council for

Sustainable Development

Highlights of 2008–2009:■ We advanced our work on the

future of the Internet(groups.iisd.org/internetscenarios):

Prepared the foundations for ourwork with a new public forum and aline of publications on the informationand communications technology (ICT)sector and the global connectivitysystem, critical uncertainties and thefuture of the Internet.

Secured agreement at theinternational level that sustainabledevelopment should be a keyemerging issue for consideration bythe Internet Governance Forum.

■ We investigated models ofICT-enabled multiple stakeholdergovernance, collaboration and actionfor sustainable development(www.iisd.org/networks):

Launched a review of how largeonline social networks may impactsustainable development governance(see page 18 for a related story).

Continued our internationallyrecognized research into themanagement and governance ofcollaboration: including the publicpolicy influence of internationaldevelopment networks; capacitybuilding of international networksthrough positive relationship work; andthe governance of non-legal entities.

Established a new onlineknowledge exchange among small andmedium-sized social andenvironmental entrepreneurs, inpartnership with the Commission forEnvironmental Cooperation NorthAmerica and the SEED Initiative, andwith input from our workshop onnorthern entrepreneurship trainingwith the Centre for Governance andDevelopment.(www.entrepreneurstoolkit.org)

■ We advanced new approachesto leadership that capitalize on amore connected world(www.iisd.org/leaders):

Established a new consortiumwith IUCN, WWF and LEADInternational for training the nextgeneration of sustainability leaders.

Made the case for the need forsuch training, with two major reportson how to support the next generationof international leaders and the needto secure the future of the Arcticthrough leadership training.

Built our capacity in e-learningdelivery, with the creation and deliveryof online courses to interns andenvironmental assessmentpractitioners.

With the support of the Provinceof Manitoba, piloted a new tool tomeasure changes in knowledge,attitudes and behaviours that are thedesired outcomes of education forsustainable development initiatives.(www.iisd.org/leaders/un.asp)

Trained 16 interns, including the firstsouthern participant in our program.

2

1 Heather Creech, right, shares her thoughts on the role the Internet Governance Forum could play inachieving global sustainability at the IGF in Hyderabad, India, December 2008. Photo by Tony Vetter.

2 Participants discuss the future of the Internet and its role in supporting a more sustainable society atan IISD-hosted consultation in Vancouver in March 2009. Photo by Tim Bray.


ISD Reporting Services supportssustainable solutions to climatechange, biodiversity loss and otherglobal threats by championingtransparency and accountability inkey intergovernmental negotiations.Beginning in 1992 with coverage ofthe Rio Earth Summit, IISD ReportingServices has provided accurate,neutral and balanced informationand analysis to policy-makers andother key stakeholders ever since. Inrecent years, Reporting Services hasbuilt on the success of our flagshippublication, the Earth NegotiationsBulletin, expanding and addingseveral new products andpublications that are tailored tomeet the needs of decision-makers.For instance, in mid-2008, ourClimate-L Daily News Feed waslaunched to great acclaim. It isalready established as one of themost popular and widely-usedresources in the internationalclimate change community.

Readership of IISD ReportingServices’ publications demonstratesthe value of our work. Subscriptionshave grown at a rapid clip, withdirect e-mail sign-ups to our mailinglists rising 55 per cent per annum. In a 2009 survey of more than 800 readers of Earth Negotiations

I

Langston James Goree VI (“Kimo”), Director, Reporting Services

“Perhaps even more telling, 91 per cent said we make a significant contribution to greater transparency.”

Reporting Services

1

1 (L to R) Lynn Wagner, ENB TeamLeader/Writer (U.S.); GerdaVerburg (the Netherlands),Chair of the SeventeenthSession of the UN Commissionon Sustainable Development;Tanya Rosen, ENB Writer(Italy/Yugoslavia/U.S.); andWagaki Mwangi, ENB Writer(Kenya). Photograph courtesy ofIISD/Earth Negotiations Bulletin.

Bulletin, 87 per cent rated the publication as either “excellent” or “very good.”Perhaps even more telling, 91 per cent said we make a significant contributionto greater transparency. These statistics suggest that the sustainabledevelopment community relies on IISD as a trusted provider of informationand analysis on international policy-making.

29Highlights of 2008–2009:

■ The Earth Negotiations Bulletin(ENB) maintained its reputation forquality coverage of key internationalnegotiations on climate change,biodiversity, forests, desertification,sustainable development, trade inendangered species, oceans, freshwater and chemical management. In2008–2009, we provided print andonline coverage from 32 meetings.(http://www.iisd.ca/enbvol/enb-background.htm)

■ The Climate-L.org Web site’sDaily News Feed service waslaunched in mid-2008. The site is aunique knowledge managementproject providing comprehensivedaily updates on activities by theUnited Nations and otherinternational actors. The service hasbeen supported financially by theSwiss Agency for Development andCooperation and the U.K.’s Foreignand Commonwealth Office. It ismanaged in cooperation with the UNsystem agencies, funds andprograms through the UN ChiefExecutives Board for CoordinationSecretariat and the UNCommunications Group Task Forceon Climate Change. The Daily NewsFeed has already become a primarysource of information for anestimated 60,000 climate changepolicy-makers and otherstakeholders. As well as daily newsupdates, it has also featured newarticles and opinion pieces from UNSecretary-General Ban Ki-moon, UNClimate Secretariat head Yvo de Boerand a range of other prominent figures.(www.climate-l.org)

■ The Reporting Services “L” listsare a collection of issue-specificcommunity announcement lists.These lists allow subscribers tocommunicate to colleagues aroundthe world in the areas of climatechange, biodiversity, chemicalmanagement, forests, oceans, water,energy, MEAs and African sustainabledevelopment. In February 2009, atenth list was added—our SustainableDevelopment “SD-L” list. Collectively,

these lists now have 75,000 directsubscribers. (www.iisd.ca/email/subscribe.htm)

■ Reporting Services offers “forhire” conference reporting for clientsthrough the Your Meeting Bulletinpublication. In 2008–2009, ourteams covered 20 events in 13countries. (www.iisd.ca/sd/index.html)

■ At large UN meetings,Reporting Services publishes a dailyreport on side events—ENB on theSide (ENBOTS). In 2008–2009, weprovided side events coverage at theNinth Conference of the Parties tothe Convention on BiologicalDiversity (May 2008), the Bonnclimate change negotiations (June2008) and the UN Climate ChangeConference in Poznan, Poland(December 2008).(www.iisd.ca/meetings/2008.html)

■ Linkages Update provides afortnightly overview of negotiations,conferences, workshops, symposiaand other notable events across theentire field of internationalsustainable development policy-making. (www.iisd.ca/email/linkagesupdate.htm)

■ Launched in 2006, the MEABulletin, published in cooperationwith the UN Environment ProgrammeDivision of Environmental Law andConventions, provides twice-monthlyreports on the activities of thesecretariats and parties ofmultilateral environmentalagreements. (www.iisd.ca/email/mea-l.htm)

■ In 2008–2009, IISD ReportingServices’ African Regional Coverageprovided conference reportingservices from nine events in Africa, aswell as publishing a range of briefingpapers. During the same period,subscriptions to our African coveragedoubled. Launched in 2006, thisinitiative is helping to build a body ofknowledge about the range of Africaninstitutions in this field.(www.iisd.ca/africa)

The Earth Negotiations Bulletin is supportedby two categories of donors. IISD gratefullyacknowledges the generosity of the followingfinancial supporters of our ReportingServices work in 2008–2009:

The Sustaining Donors of the Bulletin( > €100,000 per year ) are: The UnitedKingdom (through the Department forInternational Development) ■ TheGovernment of the United States of America(through the Department of State Bureau ofOceans and International Environmental andScientific Affairs) ■ The Government ofCanada (through the Canadian InternationalDevelopment Agency) ■ The Danish Ministryof Foreign Affairs ■ The German FederalMinistry for Economic Cooperation andDevelopment and the German FederalMinistry for the Environment, NatureConservation and Nuclear Safety ■ TheNetherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs ■ TheEuropean Commission ■ The Italian Ministryfor the Environment, Land and Sea.

General Support for the Bulletin ( > €35,000per year ) is provided by: The NorwegianMinistry of Foreign Affairs ■ The Governmentof Australia ■ The Austrian Federal Ministryof Agriculture, Forestry, Environment andWater Management ■ The Ministry ofEnvironment of Sweden ■ The New ZealandMinistry of Foreign Affairs and Trade ■ SWANInternational ■ The Swiss Federal Office forthe Environment ■ The Finnish Ministry forForeign Affairs ■ The Japanese Ministry ofEnvironment (through the Institute forGlobal Environmental Strategies – IGES) ■The Japanese Ministry of Economy, Tradeand Industry (through the Global Industrialand Social Progress Research Institute ■ TheGovernment of Iceland ■ The United NationsEnvironment Programme

Funding for the translation of the Bulletininto Spanish is provided by the SpanishMinistry of the Environment and Rural andMarine Affairs.

Funding for translation of the Bulletin intoFrench is provided by the InternationalOrganization of the Francophonie.

Publication of the MEA Bulletin is supportedby a grant from the United NationsEnvironment Programme Division forEnvironmental Law and Conventions.

The Climate-L.org Web site and Daily NewsFeed is supported by the Swiss Agency forDevelopment and Cooperation. It has alsoreceived support from the British Foreignand Commonwealth Office.

IISD Reporting Services coverage of AfricanRegional meetings is supported by grantsfrom the German Federal Ministry forEconomic Cooperation and Development,South Africa’s Department of EnvironmentalAffairs and Tourism, and the CanadianInternational Development Research Centre.


John Drexhage, Director, Climate Change and Energy

“We are likely to see the emergence of quite modest emissions reduction targets that do not reflect the deep cuts urgently called for…”

n the ever-changing climatepolicy arena, we continue to live inthe most interesting of times. On theone hand, the arrival of the Obamaadministration in Washington hasbrought a breath of fresh air andpositive energy that is particularlywelcome—and essential—as theinternational community engages inthe critical negotiations leading up tothe 15th Conference of the Parties tothe UNFCCC in Copenhagen inDecember. It is here that theframework for the global climateregime after 2012 will (hopefully) bedetermined. Yet expectations arealready being tempered by thedominant realities within the UnitedStates. We are likely to see theemergence of quite modestemissions reduction targets that donot reflect the deep cuts urgentlycalled for by an increasingly worriedscientific community.

This leaves us with the need toengage in a critical balancing act—ensuring that we don’t set the bar forgreenhouse gas emission reductionsso high that it becomes impossibleto engage key countries, while at thesame time not setting it so low thatwe risk enabling a process of climatechange that threatens our capacityto adapt and puts at risk the livesand livelihoods of millions in thedeveloping world.

I

1

1 Economist Dr. Jeffrey Sachs (right), andYvo de Boer, Executive Secretary of theUNFCCC, shared the stage at an eventcalled: “The Kyoto Mechanisms – Key toCombating Climate Change?” Theprogram was webcast live andpresented by IISD and The EarthInstitute at Columbia University in New York in October 2008. Photo byMark Inglis, The Earth Institute.

2 IISD's Anne Hammill (right)participated in the high-level openingsession for the IISD-CARE internationaltraining workshop on integratingclimate change adaptation intodevelopment in Niger (November2008). Photo by Angie Dazé.

There are no easy answers, and the way after Copenhagen is uncertain. Yet wecan clearly see the need to ensure that climate change is not addressed as adiscrete policy, but as one that is intimately linked to a global move to clean energyand a sustainable future. The implications of this change for industry and ourlifestyles are significant—but the stark consequences of not making the shift makethe need for action imperative.

Climate Change

31We gratefully acknowledge the generous supporters of our ClimateChange and Energy work:

Highlights of 2008–2009:■ We were invited to become one

of the expert advisory bodies to theWestern Climate Initiative (WCI) as itdevelops and implements itsregulatory package addressinggreenhouse gas emissions. The WCI iscomposed of seven U.S. states andfour Canadian provinces.

■ Our work on the future design ofthe international climate regimecontinues to inform Canadian andinternational decision-makers aboutemerging trends, options for theengagement of developed anddeveloping countries, and potentialgovernance structures.(www.iisd.org/climate/kyoto)

■ We are examining howagriculture can be effectivelyincluded in a post-2012 climateregime, giving attention to theconcerns of developing anddeveloped countries and asuggested framework for Canada’sapproach to agriculture in theUNFCCC negotiations.(www.iisd.org/climate/kyoto)

■ Our work with the Manitobagovernment continues to help enablethe province to be a leader inaddressing climate change as weprovide support for its participation inthe WCI and implementation of itsClimate Change Action Plan.

■ We have entered into a newpartnership with the Pembina Institutefor Appropriate Development and theMcCall-MacBain Foundation toexplore ways in which Canada canbecome a more effective partner indeveloping a strong, credible NorthAmerican response to the climatechange challenge.

■ We remain actively involved withindividual Canadian provinces (BritishColumbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario,Quebec, Nova Scotia andNewfoundland) and influential privatesector actors, providing strategicupdates on relevant developmentsdomestically and internationally.

■ We are exploring ways in whichtrade and investment policies might beharnessed to help achieve climatechange objectives, drawing attention inparticular to their implications fordeveloping countries.(www.iisd.org/trade/crosscutting)

■ We are working with expertsfrom developing countries and theDanish government to develop guidingprinciples for land and watermanagement that promote sustainabledevelopment and adaptation toclimate change. We will promote theinclusion of these principles in theCOP-15 agreement and their use by thedevelopment community.

■ Our work with the projectscreening tool CRiSTAL (Climate RiskScreening Tool – Adaptation andLivelihoods) has continued to increasethe capacity of developmentassistance organizations to incorporateclimate change adaptation into thedesign and implementation of theirprojects and programs.(www.cristaltool.org)

■ We undertook a study groundedin field research that examines whatclimate change could mean for peaceand security in the Middle East andidentifies strategies that could bepursued to address these threats. Aswell, we completed a desk-basedstudy of climate change and securityin Africa, which served as a basis fordiscussions at the Nordic-AfricanForeign Ministers meeting inCopenhagen in March 2009.(www.iisd.org/security/es/climate)

2

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Canadian International CouncilClimate Change CentralConocoPhillips CanadaÉcoRessourcesEnbridge Inc.Environment CanadaThe German Marshall Fund

of the United StatesGraymont Ltd.INFRAS Consulting Group

for Policy Analysis and Implementation

Institut de l'énergie et de l'environnement de la Francophonie (France)

Institute of Development StudiesInternational DevelopmentResearch Centre (Canada)Korean Institute for InternationalEconomic PolicyManitoba HydroNorwegian Agency forDevelopment Cooperation

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

Province of AlbertaProvince of British ColumbiaProvince of ManitobaProvince of OntarioRoyal Danish Ministry of

Foreign AffairsShell CanadaSuncor Energy Inc.Swedish Ministry of

Foreign Affairs Swiss Agency for Development

and Cooperation TransCanada CorporationUnited Nations Development

ProgrammeUnited Nations Environment

ProgrammeUnited Nations Institute for

Training and ResearchUnited Nations Office

for Project ServicesWestern Governors' Association

and Energy


y focusing on innovation, IISD’s Bridging the Gapbetween Knowing and Doing Capital Campaigncontinued its successful surge forward, with $1.6 milliondonated and pledged by March 31, 2009.

Bolstered by a major contribution from ManitobaHydro, the Institute’s 2008–2009 fundraising effortsbenefited from a solid show of support from staff,associates, Board members and youth alumni.

“We’re enormously grateful for the generoussupport of all our donors—individual and corporate, largeand small,” said Charles Loewen, Campaign Chair,“particularly during these trying economic times.”

With a total goal of CDN$5 million over the nextthree years, IISD Fund Development is focused on thefollowing four areas of strategic importance: ClimateChange and Energy; the Sustainability LeadershipInnovation Centre; the Innovation Fund; and theCommunity Initiatives Fund.

Sustainable Natural Resources ManagementProgram: Water Innovation Centre (WIC)

Water is essential for virtually all life on earth. Yet itremains a critically-stressed global resource. Primecauses: overconsumption; excess nutrients frommunicipal and agricultural sources; and the impacts ofclimate change. To bridge this gap and to meet the needto link markets and environmental technologies withcommunity-based watershed management, IISD willestablish the Water Innovation Centre (WIC) as part ofthe Capital Campaign.

To be located in Winnipeg, the Centre is staffed by aworld-class team of water experts including IISD’sSustainable Natural Resources Management programteam. WIC is dedicated to the protection andpreservation of the world’s most precious resource: water.It will accomplish this by promoting sustainabledevelopment approaches for water worldwide.

For more about IISD’s water protection andpreservation efforts, please see page 18.

Climate Change and Energy ProgramClimate change remains a major priority of the Capital

Campaign. Funds will be dedicated to IISD’s climate changeefforts which promote policy responses designed to moveeconomies towards a low-carbon energy future and prepare forthe effects of climate change.

Current examples of Climate Change and Energy projectsinclude a new partnership with the Pembina Institute forAppropriate Development and the McCall MacBain Foundationto investigate ways in which Canada can become a moreeffective partner in developing a North American climatechange response; an examination of how agriculture can beincluded in a post-2012 climate regime; as well as work on thefuture design of the international climate regime.

By Rick Groom, Development and Communications Officer

“Manitoba Hydro is proud to partner withIISD in establishing the Water Innovation Centre. We share its vision toprotect and preserve water in Manitoba, across Canada and worldwide.”

—Bob Brennan, President & Chief Executive Officer, Manitoba Hydro

Capital Campaign Surges Ahead$1.6 million raised by fiscal year end

B

1

1 Visit the campaign Web site at www.iisdisbridgingthegap.org

33“We’re enormously grateful for the

generous support of all our donors—individual and corporate, large and small.”

–Charles Loewen, Capital Campaign Chair

Sustainability Leadership Innovation Centre (SLIC)The theme of innovation also runs through this

portion of the Capital Campaign. Known as IISD’sYouth Internship Program when it launched over 10years ago, Global Connectivity’s new SustainabilityLeadership Innovation Centre (SLIC) initiative will sowthe seeds of a new generation of innovative,sustainability leaders.

SLIC’s vision is to inspire and prepare a newgeneration of sustainability leaders aged 20 to 30years to create real, systemic change towards asustainable future. Designed to identify keycharacteristics, gaps and challenges, SLIC is a flexible,forward-thinking sustainability leadership program fortomorrow’s leaders.

The Innovation FundBecause innovation is at the heart of all the work

IISD does, the Institute established the IISDInnovation Fund in 2004. Since then, the Fund hassupported a wide range of projects, including a studyof the links between the environment and humansecurity in Sudan and China; an analysis of Kenya’spoverty reduction strategy that demonstrates theinterdependence between human development andecosystem services; and an examination andassessment of the laws, guidelines and policies thatpromote sustainable public procurement inpartnership with The Energy and Resources Institutein India.

The Community Initiatives FundIISD’s partnership with the United Way of Winnipeg

continued its work to create a unique CommunityIndicators System to measure and report on progressin the quality of life of the city’s population. It willeffectively collect, analyze and interpret data and willregularly report its findings—including progresstowards sustainable development—back to theWinnipeg community.

Our sincere thanks to supporters of the IISDCapital Campaign.

For more information, please contact:Sue Barkman, Director of Development andCommunity Relations | [email protected]

Rick Groom, Development and CommunicationsOfficer | [email protected]

CriticalNext StepsHow to move forward on sustainable development

IISD personnel reflect on what needs tohappen for sustainable development totake a leap forward.

The most critical commitment governmentsaround the world could make to sustainability is tocommit to the establishment of a real wealthbalance sheet that would account for the physical,qualitative and monetary well-being conditions ofthe five capital assets of a nation: human, social,natural, built and financial capital. This is the realwealth of nations which contributes to genuinehappiness—the word wealth means “theconditions of well-being” in Old English. Currently,nations operate without a proper balance sheet,focusing instead on GDP instead as the singularinstrument to guide the economic journey.Sustainability should be defined and measured inbroader terms of whetherthe five capital assets are ina flourishing conditionproviding benefits to currentand future generations, whilealso accounting for unfundedliabilities to current andfuture well-being.Mark Anielski, IISD Associate

Continued on next page


Ecological goods and services (EGS) are thebenefits all life forms derive from healthyecosystems like clean air and plenty of freshwater(goods) and crop pollination and groundwaterrecharge (services). EGS is a powerful tool and anincreasingly important way to understandconservation and to develop policy. I think that thecritical next steps for the use of EGS forsustainable development are: Economic: We must understand that EGS havemonetary value. This fact will positively informinvestment and policy decisions. Social: We must understand the importance ofEGS as a tool to empower the voiceless, the ruralpoor who are the unacknowledged stewards of theecosystem. Environmental: EGS-thinking allows us to simplystrengthen the rationale forconservation and adaptivemanagement of our naturalcapital, and support it withsound economic data. Dimple Roy, Program Manager

We need to be realistic about “green jobs”and the extent to which they might providethe lubricant for an age of sustainable living.Just creating these jobs will requireadditional government stimulus spendingwhich carries the risk that it will plungefuture generations into unsustainable levelsof debt. More important, these green jobsare not likely to increase net employmentopportunities, but rather counter balancethe jobs that are currently being lost. Itwould be more sustainableto also focus on strategiesfor cross-career re-training and up-skilling tobuild workforce flexibilityand dynamism all around. Oshani Perera,Program Officer

International negotiations on climate change are at a critical stage. In December 2009, diplomats will gather inCopenhagen in an effort to secure a new global deal. With the scientific evidence for urgent actionnow irrefutable, the need for a strong international agreement to emerge from Copenhagen could notbe greater. Set against the science is the challenge of crafting a political consensus among almost 200nations on one of the most multi-faceted and difficult challenges humanity has faced. At IISDReporting Services, our goal has been to support these diplomatic efforts by creating transparencyand greater accountability. Since our early coverage in the 1990s, we have expanded our reportingand strengthened our team of climate specialists on our ENB teams. In 2008, we also launched ourClimate-L.org Daily News Feed to complement the work of our ENB teams at conferences.Chris Spence, Deputy Director, IISD Reporting Services; Manager, ENB Climate Team

The Internet has emerged to become the single mostimportant communications medium for pooling globalknowledge and coordinating action. The ease withwhich users are able to freely communicate and shareinformation is a cornerstone of the Internet thanks toopen and inclusive standards that have guided itsdevelopment, largely free of government intervention.However some governments already, or are threateningto, restrict Internet access, even in democraticsocieties, under the guise of combating terrorism andcontent piracy. In my opinion, it is essential to ensurethat global connectivity continues to spread, especiallyto the disenfranchised, without being limited bymisguided government or corporate controls. Withouteffective connectivity, people will be less able to worktogether on achievingsustainable developmentthrough collaborative projects;networks that bridge geographic,linguistic and cultural divides;and interactive dialogue amongresearchers, practitioners,citizens and policy-makers. Tony Vetter, Project Officer

Having joined IISD in October 2008, preceding theelection of Barack Obama by mere days, the UnitedStates’ shift in climate change policy has influenced mywork and has made clear the importance the U.S. will playin the development of the global post-2012 climateregime. Establishing strong emissions reductions policyin the U.S. is critical to achieving significant globalreductions as the plans of other major emitters such asChina, Japan, and Canada will be influenced by U.S.policy. The Obama administration has shown a great dealof vigour on the issue, working hard with its allies to passlegislation on cap-and-trade and other climate initiativesin Congress, but their success is not a foregoneconclusion given the strength ofthe administration’s opponents,and the extremely high stakes atplay. The success or failure of theU.S. government to implementclimate change policy will definethe post-2012 climate regime. Philip Gass, Project Officer

Critical Next Steps (Continued)

35

Auditors’ ReportTo the Members of The International Institute for Sustainable Development

We have audited the consolidated statement of financial position of the International Institute forSustainable Development as at March 31, 2009 and the consolidated statements of operations, changesin net assets and cash flows for the year then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility ofthe Institute’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statementsbased on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards. Thosestandards require that we plan and perform an audit to obtain reasonable assurance whether thefinancial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis,evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includesassessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well asevaluating the overall financial statement presentation.

In our opinion, these consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, thefinancial position of the Institute as at March 31, 2009 and the results of its operations and its cash flowsfor the year then ended in accordance with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles.

Chartered AccountantsWinnipeg, ManitobaMay 12, 2009

IISD Consolidated Financial Statements

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

$ M

ILL

ION

S

14

11.32

2.16

11.99

2.11

11.50

2.15

11.77

2.64 2.86

12.29

16

18

Total Expenditures

Designated Grants and Other Revenue

Operating Grants

14.86

3.01

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

15.34

3.30

2009

2003–2009 IISD Financing Trend


Consolidated Statement of Financial PositionMarch 31, 2009

2009 2008

ASSETS

CURRENT

Cash $ 2,447,317 $ 1,592,542

Marketable securities 8,035,878 7,923,045

Accounts receivable 7,734,176 7,747,287

Prepaid expenses and deposits 421,867 148,889

18,639,238 17,411,763

CAPITAL ASSETS 363,747 432,536

$ 19,002,985 $ 17,844,299

LIABILITIES

CURRENT

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $ 1,789,305 $ 1,653,513

Deferred revenue 8,911,755 7,967,108

10,701,060 9,620,621

NET ASSETS

Net assets invested in capital assets 363,747 432,536

Reserve for program development 4,595,558 4,754,179

Reserve for long-term development 460,759 833,481

Innovation Fund 29,743 45,764

Campaign Fund 30,351 31,453

Unrestricted net operating assets 2,821,767 2,126,265

8,301,925 8,223,678

$ 19,002,985 $ 17,844,299

37

Consolidated Statement of OperationsFor the Year Ended March 31, 2009

2009 2008

REVENUE

Designated grants $ 11,231,702 $ 11,836,739

Operating grants 3,301,532 3,013,569


Interest 352,496 363,352

Other revenue 488,681 278,519

TOTAL REVENUE 15,452,380 15,599,507

EXPENSES

Projects

Trade and Investment 4,799,502 4,845,587

Reporting Services 3,200,419 3,086,864

Climate Change and Energy 1,989,601 1,612,038

Sustainable Natural Resources Management 1,356,237 1,459,297

Global Connectivity 1,009,373 941,323

Measurement and Assessment 834,819 945,921

New Project Development 177,848 82,485


Economic Policy 2,747 48,787

13,450,714 13,132,017

Administration 957,869 872,747

Fund Development and Publishing and Communications 744,451 694,687

Board 183,976 157,138

TOTAL EXPENSES 15,337,010 14,856,589

EXCESS OF REVENUE OVER EXPENSES 115,370 742,918

APPROPRIATION TO UNRESTRICTED NET OPERATING ASSETS

Net assets invested in capital assets 68,789 32,060

Reserve for program development 138,621 82,485

Reserve for long-term development 372,722 169,655

INCREASE IN UNRESTRICTED NET OPERATING ASSETS 695,502 1,027,118

UNRESTRICTED NET OPERATING ASSETS, BEGINNING OF YEAR 2,126,265 1,099,147

UNRESTRICTED NET OPERATING ASSETS, END OF YEAR $ 2,821,767 $ 2,126,265


Note on Funding ArrangementsDesignated grants IISD receives funding from a variety of public and private sources to finance specific projects

relating to its strategic objectives. Projects may carry on over more than one year. The related designated grants are

recorded when the funding commitment is made and recognized in revenue as the projects progress. A comparative

summary of designated grant funding committed during the year is as follows:

Funding Commitments

2009 2008

($000’s) ($000’s)

Governments and agencies

Canada $ 2,750 $ 2,795

International 7,315 5,840

10,065 8,635

United Nations agencies 801 715

International organizations 306 509

Philanthropic foundations 604 237

Private sector and other 681 1,073

$ 12,457 $ 11,169

Designated grants and other revenue which includes publication sales, cost recoveries and, in the case of

Administration, Fund Development and Publishing and Communications, the net foreign exchange gain recognized at

March 31 in the amount of $402 thousand (2008 – $50 thousand gain), are summarized by activity area as follows:Other Innovation Designated

Activity Area Revenue Funds Grants Total

($000’s) ($000’s) ($000’s) ($000’s)

Trade and Investment $ 19 $ – $ 3,961 $ 3,980

Reporting Services – – 2,905 2,905

Climate Change and Energy 19 – 1,712 1,731

Sustainable Natural Resources Management 2 – 1,172 1,174

Global Connectivity 5 – 748 753

Measurement and Assessment 3 – 684 687

Administration, New Project

Development, Fund Development and

Publishing and Communications 440 – 50 490

488 – 11,232 11,720

Innovation Fund – 78 – 78

$ 488 $ 78 $11,232 $11,798

Operating grants IISD has entered into a one year agreement with Environment Canada from April 1, 2008 to

March 31, 2009. The previous three year funding agreement with the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA)

which expired March 31, 2008 was increased by $719,000 and extended by six months to September 30, 2008. Thereafter

a new 18 month agreement was reached with CIDA for a total of $2.28 million. The arrangement with CIDA provides

operating grants. The arrangement with Environment Canada provides a blend of operating grants and contributions in

support of research that is consistent with the interests and priorities of Canada. IISD has funding agreements with the

Government of Manitoba and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) for five and six year periods ending

March 31, 2011 and June 30, 2012 respectively. Both of these arrangements also provide for a blend of operating grants

and contributions in support of research that is consistent with the interests and priorities of the funders.

A summary of the operating grant funding is as follows:Funding

Funding Funding Recorded Commitment

Commitment 2009 Prior years Remaining

($000’s) ($000’s) ($000’s)

Government of Canada

Environment Canada $ 500 $ 500 $ – $ –

Canadian International Development Agency 7,279 1,479 4,280 1,520

Government of Manitoba 4,186 837 1,674 1,675

International Development Research Centre 1,907 485 282 1,140

Operating grant revenue $13,872 $ 3,301 $ 6,236 $ 4,335

39

Schedule of Operations By Activity Area ($000’s)

For the Year Ended March 31, 2009Sustainable Fund

Climate Natural Measurement Development andTrade and Reporting Change and Resources Global and New Project Innovation Economic Publishing and 2009 2008

Investment Services Energy Management Connectivity Assessment Development Fund Policy Administration Communications Board Total Total

Revenue $ 3,980 $ 2,905 $ 1,731 $ 1,174 $ 753 $ 687 $ 39 $ 78 $ – $ 432 $ 19 $ – $11,798 $12,223

Personnel 2,327 958 1,277 898 509 533 64 42 1 705 453 – 7,767 7,170 Collaborators 1,261 911 154 190 235 113 57 20 – 48 76 – 3,065 3,023 Travel 526 979 240 76 135 79 30 14 – 48 31 – 2,158 2,409 Rent 150 106 67 47 28 27 – – – 34 25 – 484 454 Supplies and other 142 86 70 40 24 24 4 4 – 51 46 – 491 456 Publishing 74 42 32 8 11 14 – – – 13 51 – 245 299 Amortization of

capital assets 58 54 28 27 13 14 – – 2 20 22 – 238 230 Meetings 200 – 65 50 30 6 21 – – 15 25 – 412 388 Telecommunications 39 57 46 15 21 21 1 – – 18 11 – 229 213 Board – – – – – – – – – – – 184 184 157 Research materials 22 7 11 5 4 4 1 – – 6 4 – 64 58

Total expenses 4,799 3,200 1,990 1,356 1,010 835 178 80 3 958 744 184 15,337 14,857

Excess of expenses over designated grants and other revenue $ (819) $ (295) $ (259) $ (182) $ (257) $ (148) $ (139) $ (2) $ (3) $ (526) $ (725) $ (184) (3,539) (2,634)

Excess of expenses over designated grants funded by:Operating grants 3,302 3,014 Interest 352 363

Excess of revenue over expenses $ 115 $ 743

Governmentsand Agencies,International 52.1%

PhilanthropicFoundations 8.1%

Private Sectorand Other 7.5%

InternationalOrganizations 3.4%

United NationsAgencies 8.1%

Governmentsand Agencies,Canada 20.8%

2008–2009 Designated Grant Revenue by DonorTotal designed grant revenue of $11,231,702

Sustainable NaturalResources Management 9%

Global Connectivity 7%

Measurement andAssessment 5%

Climate Changeand Energy 13%

New Project Development,Innovation Fund, Fund Development and Publishing and Communications, Administration, and Board 14%

Trade andInvestment 31%

ReportingServices 21%

Financed by:

Operating Grants

Designated Grants and Other Revenue

2008–2009 Revenue and Expenses by Activity Area

Total expenses of $15,337,010


Government of Canada (and Agencies)

International Development Research Centre (IDRC) $ 1,000

Environment Canada 264

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) 215

Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) 148

Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) 122

Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade 87

Industry Canada 46

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) 81

National Resources Canada 24

National Round Table on the Environment

and the Economy (NTREE) 17

2,004

Governments of provinces

Manitoba 691

Alberta 36

British Columbia 16

Ontario 3

746

Governments of other nations

Denmark

Royal Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs 1,936

Norway

Norwegian Agency for Development

Cooperation (NORAD) 793

Permanent Mission of Norway Geneva 476

Ministry of Foreign Affairs 147 1,416

Switzerland

Swiss Agency for Development and

Cooperation (SDC) 434

State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) 397

Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) 46 877

United Kingdom

Department for International Development 805

British Government for Climate Change 31 836

Sweden

Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs 621

Netherlands

Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and

Food Quality (LNV) 254

Environmental Assessment Agency 140 394

Germany

Federal Ministry for the Environment 122

Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische

Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) 50 172

Italy

Italian Ministry for Environment, Land and Sea 148

European Commission 147

Spain

Spanish Ministry of the Environment 146

Japan

Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) 90

Global Industrial and Social Progress

Research Institute (GISPRI) 38 128

Finland

Ministry of Foreign Affairs 84

Ministry of the Environment 23 107

Turkey

5th World Water Forum Secretariat 106

France

Institut de l’Energie et de l’Environnement

de la Francophonie 92

Taiwan

Forestry Bureau, Council of Agriculture 57

New Zealand

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade 41

Suriname

Government of Suriname 31

Korea

Korean Institute for International Economic Policy 27

Philippines

Clean Air Initiative - Asia Centre 16

Austria

Austrian Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry,

Environment and Water Management 14

Iceland

Icelandic Ministry of Foreign Affairs 3

7,315

United Nations agencies

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) 599

United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) 65

United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) 41

United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) 37

United Nations Framework Convention on

Climate Change (UNFCCC) 34

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 21

Others (under $10,000) 4

801

International organizations

International Centre for Trade and Sustainable

Development (ICTSD) 141

International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) 61

Lake Balaton Development Coordination Agency 37

Canadian International Council (CIC) 33

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development (OECD) 20


306

Philanthropic foundations

Citigroup Foundation 154

The German Marshall Fund of the United States 129

Rockefeller Brothers Fund 123

Lodestar Foundation 77

Charles Stewart Mott Foundation 51

The Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental

Research (MISTRA) 39

The PEW Charitable Trusts 20


604

Private sector and other

Hivos 125

Western Governors’ Association 110

Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) 77

ETH Domain 74

Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) 66

The Aylmer Group 33

Oxfam - Quebec 22

Prince Albert Model Forest Aboriginal Caucus 20

Collage of Marine & Earth Studies, University of Delaware 17

Transcanada Corporation 16

Serecon Management Consulting Inc. 12

INFRAS Consulting Group for Policy Analysis

and Implementation 11

Shell Canada 10

ConocoPhillips Canada 10


681

$12,457

Consolidated Schedule of Designated Grants Committed ($000’s)

For the Year Ended March 31, 2009

2008/09 Annual Report Sustaining Excellence · 2010-05-05 · 2008•2009 Annual Report of the...

Documents

Transcript of 2008/09 Annual Report Sustaining Excellence · 2010-05-05 · 2008•2009 Annual Report of the...