A BOLD NEW GLOBAL PERSPECTIVETO END POVERTY

QUARTERLY NEWSLETTER

ISSUE 3 > 2013

membership info > commentary > AM14 in Istanbul, Turkey ENJOY as part of

your ACUNS membership

Communicating Scientific ResearchThrough Web and Social Media

PLUS:

RENEWABLE ENERGY: Myths, Misconceptions and Evidence-Based Science

A NEW GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP What Happens After 2015?

AM 14details and updates

up2datenews & opinions

MPubmember publications

FEATURE ONE: A BOLD NEW GLOBAL PERSPECTIVEto End Poverty Through Sustainable Development | 3Hany Besada Research Specialist, United Nations Secretary-General’s High Level Panel Secretariat, Post-2015 Development Agenda

SPECIAL FEATURE:COMMUNICATING SCIENTIFIC RESEARCHThrough the Web and Social Media | 5Brendan Barrett Academic Program Officer, Office of Communications, UN University, Tokyo

FEATURE TWO:RENEWABLE ENERGY:Myths, Misconceptions and Evidence-Based Science | 7Maithili Deshpande Mitchell Niagara Sustainability Initiative Guest Blogger

PLUS:

A NEW GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP What Happens After 2015? | 9

Q > CONTENTSQUARTERLY

AM14 details and updates

THURSDAY – SATURDAY > June 19-21, 2014Kadir Has University Istanbul, Turkey

AM14GLOBAL GOVERNANCE: ENGAGING NEW NORMS AND EMERGING CHALLENGES

CONNECT WITH US

FEATURE ONE: A BOLD NEW GLOBAL PERSPECTIVEto End Poverty Through Sustainable Development | 3Hany Besada Research Specialist, United Nations Secretary-General’s High Level Panel Secretariat, Post-2015 Development Agenda

SPECIAL FEATURE:COMMUNICATING SCIENTIFIC RESEARCHThrough the Web and Social Media | 5Brendan Barrett Academic Program Officer, Office of Communications, UN University, Tokyo

FEATURE TWO:RENEWABLE ENERGY:Myths, Misconceptions and Evidence-Based Science | 7Maithili Deshpande Mitchell Niagara Sustainability Initiative Guest Blogger

PLUS:

A NEW GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP What Happens After 2015? | 9

A C U N S Q U A R T E R LY N E W S L E T T E R > I S S U E 3 > 2 0 1 3 A C U N S . O R G 2

WELCOME TO ACUNS

up2date news & opinions

SECRETARIAT STAFFAlistair Edgar Executive Director, ACUNS Associate Professor, Wilfrid Laurier UniversityT > 226.772.3167 E > aedgar@wlu.ca

Brenda Burns Co-ordinatorT > 226.772.3142 F > 226.772.3004 E > bburns@wlu.ca

Andrew Koltun Administrative AssistantT > 226.772.3121 E > akoltun@acuns.org

ACUNS SECRETARIATWilfrid Laurier University75 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, Canada N2L 3C5

BOARD MEMBERS2013-2014Chair: Abiodun Williams The Hague Institute for Global Justice

Past Chair: Christer Jönsson Lund University

Vice Chairs: Hugh Dugan US Mission to the UN

Melissa Labonte Fordham University

M E M B E R S

Roger Coate Georgia College and State UniversityMary Farrell University of Greenwich Kirsten Haack Northumbria UniversitySukehiro Hasegawa Hosei UniversityLise Morjé Howard Georgetown UniversityRama Mani University of OxfordNanette Svenson Tulane University

Impromptu conversations speak to our expertise Institutional connections and our network of knowledge contribute meaningfully to events and initiatives

Dr. Alistair Edgar, ACUNS

Our typically very busy summer is drawing to a close. The AM13 at Lund University in mid-June ran smoothly and successfully, thanks to the efforts of host Christer Jönsson and his team of faculty advisors and student volunteers. The one hiccup, the unfortunate withdrawal by the Opening Keynote speaker, saw Hans Corell – former USG for Legal Affairs and Legal Counsel at the UN in 1994-2004 – agree at late notice to step into the role, in an interview format hosted by ACUNS Chair Abiodun Williams. Abi also had worked closely with Hans during the former’s tenure as Director of Strategic Planning in the EOSG under Kofi Annan – an interesting connection being that the last time we used this format was with Secretary-General Annan in 2003, interviewed then by Barbara Crossette in New York. Personally at least, I very much enjoyed the intimate and conversational format, which ranged across subjects and experiences to draw upon the vast experiences of both interviewee and interviewer.

In early July, ACUNS co-hosted at the Balsillie School of International Affairs, a fascinating two-day workshop on Sudan and South Sudan, sponsored by the Canadian Department of National Defence through its Targeted Engagement Program. The TEP, despite its name, has nothing to do with drone strikes: it is a very valuable program to engage the scholarly community in practical and policy-oriented discussions of key global security issues. In this case, the workshop brought together highly experienced participants including John G. Cockell, currently Regional Portfolio Manager Arab States with UNDP New York, and in 2009-11 Deputy Head of Strategic Planning with UNMIS and co-head of the Joint Planning Unit on Darfur with the UN-AU Hybrid Mission in Darfur; George Somerwill, former BBC African Service and CBC correspondent who served in 1998 as Baghdad spokesman for the Oil-For-Food Programme and then between 2003 to 2011 served with UN missions in Ethiopia and Eritrea (UNMEE), Sudan (UNMIS) and Liberia (UNMIL); and Susan Stigant, researcher at the United States Institute of Peace in Washington DC, with six years’ prior experience working in Khartoum with the DC-based National Democratic Institute. Other speakers included Canadian Forces officers, national intelligence analysts and NGO representatives each with field experience in or directly related to Sudan and/or South Sudan or its neighboring states.

Most recently, I have just returned from coordinating the annual ACUNS-ASIL Summer Workshop on International Organization Studies, looking at the theme of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation and hosted this year in Vienna by the Vienna Center for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation (VCDNP) and by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The seventeen participants this year were drawn from a variety of UN offices and agencies – supported again by the UN Office of Human Resources Management in New York – as well as from a range of different universities and research institutes. The participants presented their own individual research projects, shared insights from work experiences, and had the opportunity to engage with several senior guest speakers from the VCDNP and CTBTO.

With our core programming now complete for 2013, I have to focus my own attention over the next two or three months as much as possible on identifying and pursuing funding support opportunities, for our 2014-15 programs and for new projects. However, our normal ACUNS Secretariat office functions will be handled as well as always by Brenda, Andrew and Gwenith (our PhD intern returning to the role of Book Review Editor after a summer conducting doctoral research). Michelle, the doctoral student who very ably took over the Review role during the summer, will be returning to other RA and TA roles at the university – thanks Michelle!

Last but not least, of course, we have just now begun our third five-year term as the hosts of the ACUNS Secretariat here at Wilfrid Laurier University. For anyone looking further ahead and checking the calendar, that means we will be hosts until 30 June, 2018. The Call for Proposals for a potential host institution for 2018-2023 will be issued in early- or mid-2016, so that a successor will be selected and in place by June 2017, giving a year to ‘ramp up’ while working with the current team. If you and your institution are considering putting together a proposal, we really do want to make sure that you have every opportunity to do so and we will be happy to address any questions. A strong and active competition is the best way also to ensure a strong and active future for ACUNS. It takes time and effort to put all of the pieces together, and I always am happy to answer any questions that I can or to refer inquiries on to the Chair and Board of Directors.

STARTING POINT

FEATURE STORY

> H A N Y B E S A DARESEARCH SPECIALIST,

UNITED NATIONS SECRETARY-GENERAL’S HIGH LEVEL PANEL SECRETARIAT,

POST-2015 DEVELOPMENT AGENDA

A BOLD NEW GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

3

On May 30, 2013, the High Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda released “A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies through Sustainable Development,” a report which sets out a universal agenda to eradicate extreme poverty in all its forms by 2030 and deliver

on the promise of sustainable development. This follows months of work by the Panel, which was tasked by the UN Secretary General in July 2013 to advise on the global agenda

beyond 2015, the target date for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

T he post-2015 development agenda, for which developed and developing countries must accept their proper share of responsibility in accordance with resources and capabilities, needs to be driven by five fundamental, transformative shifts. These changes can remove the barriers that hold people back, end the inequality of opportunity, and effectively bring together social, economic, and environmental issues. The first four shifts involve focused action at the country level, while the fifth – forging a new global partnership – is the key change in international cooperation that will facilitate national transformations.

First, leave no one behind. We should design goals that focus not on reducing extreme poverty but ending it in all of its forms, including income poverty and hunger. No person should be denied universal human rights and basic economic opportunities, regardless of income, gender, disability, ethnicity, race, geography, or other status. The new agenda should tackle the causes of poverty, such as weak infrastructure, inadequate healthcare and education, unclear and unenforced rules related to property, business, and resources, and lack of social justice. By tracking progress at all levels of income and providing social protection to build resilience, we can reach the poorest and most excluded people.

Second, put sustainable development at the core. With climate change being the overarching concern, governments, businesses, and individuals must transform the way they generate and consume energy, travel, transport goods, use water, and grow food. The introduction of new technologies, reduction of unsustainable consumption, and mobilization of the private sector are crucial. Examples of feasible, cost-effective options include constructing energy-efficient buildings, improving vehicle aerodynamics, recycling waste, and restoring soil. Incentives, such as taxes, subsidies, regulations, and sustainability certification and compliance programs, must be in place to encourage change.

Third, transform economies for jobs and inclusive growth. The ingenuity and dynamism of the private sector can create more value and drive sustainable, inclusive growth. We should harness the innovation, technologies, and potential of multinational corporations as well as small and medium-sized firms to catalyze the diversification of economies and increase productivity, which can lead to more good and decent jobs and improved livelihoods, namely for young people and women. We must ensure equal opportunities for all and access to education, training, healthcare, clean water, electricity, telecommunications, and transport. Simplified, stable regulatory frameworks would make it easier for people to invest, start a business, and trade openly. Governments should develop and implement detailed approaches to encourage sustainable activities and properly cost environmentally and socially hazardous behaviour.

Fourth, build peace and effective, open, and accountable institutions for all. Peace and good governance must be recognized as core elements of well being. Ensuring the fundamental human rights of personal security, access to justice, freedom from discrimination and persecution, and expression and peaceful protest is essential for fostering peace and prosperity. Governments need to be honest, accountable, and responsive to their constituents’ needs. They should support the rule of law, property rights, freedom of speech and the media, open political choice, access to justice, and accountability. People particularly need to be able to see where and how taxes, aid, and revenues from extractive industries are spent.

Fifth, forge a new global partnership. A new spirit of solidarity, cooperation, and mutual accountability must underpin the post-2015 agenda. The new partnership should move beyond state-to-state partnerships to involve national governments, local authorities, people living in poverty, those with disabilities, women, civil society organizations, indigenous and local communities, traditionally marginalized groups, multilateral institutions, businesses, academics, and philanthropic foundations, all which have their respective roles to play. Stakeholders can partner by theme to innovate, advocate for good policies, and obtain funding. Importantly, the international community must promptly reduce corruption, illicit financial flows, money laundering, tax evasion, and hidden ownership of assets. It should also provide more and better long-term finance, champion free and fair trade, facilitate technology innovation and transfer, and promote financial stability. Starting with a shared vision that accounts for different contexts but is uniformly ambitious, governments can then develop plans of action at national, regional, and local levels that contribute to securing a better future for all.

Building on the MDGs and the process to develop a set of Sustainable Development Goals launched at the 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro, the international community must now come to a consensus on a single clear and widely applicable development agenda. Critically, the impact of these five shifts depends on how they are translated into specific priorities, goals, actions, and measurable and time-bound targets. In its annexes, the HLP report provides an illustrative framework to stimulate debate. The 12 suggested goals and associated targets and indicators are part of a bold yet practical vision for development moving forward. Any new goals should be accompanied by an independent and rigorous monitoring system, with regular reporting on progress and shortcomings at a high political level.

The Panel’s report represents a major breakthrough that profoundly puts sustainability at the heart of the development agenda moving forward. The report clearly makes the case that poverty is intricately

A C U N S Q U A R T E R LY N E W S L E T T E R > I S S U E 3 > 2 0 1 3 A C U N S . O R G 4

FEATURE ONE

Continued on page 9 >

These changes can remove the barriers that hold people back, end the inequality of opportunity, and effectively bring together social, economic, and environmental issues.

In 2008, looking for a way to increase the impact of our outreach activities, a group of colleagues in the Media Studio (now the Office of Communications) at the United Nations University in Tokyo came together to discuss new strategies. We realized that, as a team, we had many projects with the potential to reach a much larger audience than we had so far. Our first idea was to identify one project upon which we could all collaborate. This plan grew into a proposal to build an online magazine (a web magazine) called Our World 2.0.

In line with the United Nations University’s mandate to share knowledge on “pressing global problems of human survival, development and welfare” we decided to focus on some pretty big questions. How is the world going to mitigate or adapt to climate change? How can we create the energy system that our modern societies need without frying the planet? How can we feed an ever-growing population? And how can we do this without destroying the amazing biodiversity of this beautiful home we call Earth?

We decided that this world of ours needed a new operating system— version 2.0. thus the name we chose for the magazine. This new version, we envisioned, would spring from open global collaboration, just as the advent of that version number implied for the Internet (Web 2.0). An online magazine seemed like a great opportunity to try to reach an increasingly online and interconnected public (currently 2.4 billion internet users). The beauty of using the web is that there is no gatekeeper between you and your audience, no external journalist or editor deciding whether or not your story is interesting.

Another key challenge that we wanted to address was how it may be possible to create a conversation around the work of the United Nations University. Our charter says that we should seek to “increase dynamic interaction in the worldwide community of learning and research”. How do you do that? With the emergence of the web and social media, it is now possible to get almost instant feedback from our target audience by direct comments on research articles and videos. And through

people sharing our work with their colleagues and friends around the globe we can keep growing online audience numbers and attention, all of which add up to increased visibility for the University’s work.

we are not aloneWhat we did not realize when we began this journey was that a number of other institutions were almost simultaneously hatching similar plans. That should not be surprising because good ideas tend to have many subscribers. However, we were fascinated to discover a couple of years after the birth of Our World 2.0 that Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies launched a web magazine, Environment 360 (http://e360.yale.edu/), at about the same time we had. It is described as an “online magazine offering opinion, analysis, reporting and debate on global environmental issues”.

Meanwhile, at the University of Minnesota, the Institute on the Environment launched a print and online magazine in 2008 with the name Momentum (http://environment.umn.edu/momentum/). This has very recently been renamed Ensia (http://ensia.com/) and now describes itself as “a media platform that’s out to change the world”.

Other examples along similar lines include the Solutions Journal, launched in 2010 and currently hosted by the Australian National University (http://thesolutionsjournal.anu.edu.au/), and Planet Forward (http://planetforward.org/) at the Center for Innovative Media at the George Washington University.

This is clearly just the beginning of a new trend as scientists and academics explore the potential of these innovative communication tools to reach a broader segment of society.

how are we doing?You may be wondering whether or not we have succeeded in our objective of reaching a much larger audience. Well, the answer is both yes and no. Yes, we have had some pretty impressive

results from our work so far. However, the answer is also no because we would really like to reach even more people.

Since the launch of Our World 2.0 in 2008, we have had 1.5 million visits, 885,000 unique visits and 2.6 million page views. This makes the web magazine the second most visited of 15 UNU websites after the main UN University website, unu.edu. To date, we have published 650 articles from 470 authors, with 55 percent of the articles written by UNU researchers. Our efforts have been acknowledged with four awards: Best Blog Design (2008 Weblog Awards), New Media Creation (2009 Society for New Communications Research Excellence Award), Earth Journalism Award (2009 Earth Journalism Network) and Green/Eco-friendly Award (2011 Communicator Awards).

Worth highlighting is that Our World 2.0 is published in both English and Japanese. As a result, 40 percent of our readers are Japanese (which compares with 10 percent Japanese readership for unu.edu).

We are also reaching a relatively young (80 percent of readers are under 40 years old) and well-educated demographic (78 percent with bachelors degrees and above, 10 percent with Ph.D.s).

From the start, one of our goals was to partner with traditional media outlets and we currently have syndication agreements with the Guardian, Deutsche Welle and NHK. Furthermore, because we use Creative Commons licenses for our articles and videos we often find that other websites republish our work, including Al Jazeera, National Geographic, Treehugger, Resilience, Solutions and many more.

The end result is that many more people get to read what we are writing and to watch the videos we produce. On the latter point, we also manage the UNU YouTube Channel and we have produced 65 video briefs (short five to ten minute character-driven stories). To date, the UNU YouTube Channel has had over 4.5 million views and currently has 3,260 subscribers. In addition, Our World 2.0 has 5,537 followers on Facebook and 6,341 followers on Twitter as of June 2013.

5 A C U N S . O R G S i g n u p f o r o u r E > U P D AT E b y b e c o m i n g a m e m b e r !

> B R E N DA N B A R R E T TACADEMIC PROGRAM OFFICER OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS,

UN UNIVERSITY, TOKYO

COMMUNICATING SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

This is clearly just the beginning of a new trend as scientists and

academics explore the potential of these innovative communication

tools to reach a broader segment of society #scientificresearch #UNU

through the web and social media

Continued on page 6 >

SPECIAL FEATURE

The EU’s Role in Global Governance: The Legal DimensionBart Van Vooren, Steven Blockmans, and Jan Wouters (Eds.)

For years the European Union has been looked on as a potential model for cosmopolitan governance, and enjoyed considerable influence on the global stage. The EU has a uniquely strong and legally binding mission statement to pursue international relations on a multilateral basis, founded on the progressive development of international law. The political vision was for the EU to export its values of the rule of law and sophisticated governance mechanisms to the international sphere.

Globalization and the financial crisis have starkly illustrated the limits of this vision, and the EU’s dependence on global forces partially beyond the control of traditional provinces of law. This book takes stock of the EU’s role in global governance. It asks: to what extent can and does the EU shape and influence the on-going re-ordering of legal processes, principles, and institutions of global governance, in line with its optimistic mission statement? With this ambitious remit it covers the legal-institutional and substantive aspects of global security, trade, environmental, financial, and social governance. Across these topics 23 contributors have taken the central question of the extent of the EU’s influence on global governance, providing a broad view across the key areas as well as a detailed analysis of each. Through comparison and direct engagement with each other, the different chapters provide a distinctive contribution to legal scholarship on global governance, from a European perspective.

Country-level Aid Coordination at the United Nations: Taking the Resident Coordinator System ForwardTimo Casjen MahnGerman Development Institute/Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik

How does aid coordination work within the United Nations, and how can it be improved? This study examines the role of resident coordinators – normally the UN’s highest ranking official on the ground – in forging coherence among the three dozen organizations that together form the UN development system. A functioning system of resident coordinators has been deemed key for the functioning of the UN development system overall.

The proliferation of actors and the fragmentation of aid are important determinants for the organization of development cooperation, including for the UN development system. Against this background, the study considers the case for aid coordination within the United Nations, examines its institutional setup, historical evolution and differentiation over time. A particular focus concerns the United Nations Development Programme as manager of the resident coordinator system. The study offers relevant lessons on how to mandate, organize and manage aid coordination at the country-level.

A C U N S Q U A R T E R LY N E W S L E T T E R > I S S U E 3 > 2 0 1 3 A C U N S . O R G 6

MEMBER PUBLICATIONS MPub

The Oxford Handbook of Modern DiplomacyAndrew F. Cooper, Jorge Heine, and Ramesh Thakur (Eds.)

Including chapters from some of the leading experts in the field this Handbook provides a full overview of the nature and challenges of modern diplomacy and includes a tour d’horizon of the key ways in which the theory and practice of modern diplomacy are evolving in the 21st Century.

At a time when diplomatic practices and the demands imposed on diplomats are changing quite radically, and many foreign ministries feel they are being left behind, there is a need to understand the various forces that are affecting the profession. Diplomacy remains a salient activity in today’s world in which the basic authoritative actor is still the state. At the same time, in some respects the practice of diplomacy is undergoing significant, even radical, changes to the context, tools, actors and domain of the trade. These changes spring from the changing nature of the state, the changing nature of the world order, and the interplay between them. One way of describing this is to say that we are seeing increased interaction between two forms of diplomacy, “club diplomacy” and “network diplomacy”. The former is based on a small number of players, a highly hierarchical structure, based largely on written communication and on low transparency; the latter is based on a much larger number of players (particularly of civil society), a flatter structure, a more significant oral component, and greater transparency.

The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy is an authoritative reference tool for those studying and practicing modern diplomacy. It provides an up-to-date compendium of the latest developments in the field. Written by practitioners and scholars, the Handbook describes the elements of constancy and continuity and the changes that are affecting diplomacy. The Handbook goes further and gives insight to where the profession is headed in the future. Co-edited by three distinguished academics and former practitioners, the Handbook provides comprehensive analysis and description of the state of diplomacy in the 21st Century and is an essential resource for diplomats, practitioners and academics.

ACUNS Exclusive DiscountOxford University Press is pleased to offer ACUNS members an exclusive 20% discount on the Handbook, reducing the handbook from £95.00 to £76.00. Customers can claim the discount by visiting the OUP website, adding the book to the shopping basket, and entering the promotional code in the promotional code box. If you are an ACUNS member and would like to request a promotional code, contact admin@acuns.org.

We have identified four hurdles related to publishing research-related materials via the web magazine. First, some UNU researchers (not all) worry that publishing via an online magazine will not be acknowledged as a work of academic merit according to scales normally used by universities when evaluating faculty performance or suitability of candidates for new positions. In effect, the only real measure of academic output is through peer-reviewed journals. While this is certainly true, the point to make here is that publishing a related article on Our World 2.0 has the potential to greatly increase the visibility, readership and citations of the original peer-reviewed paper. What’s more is that the researcher may find new connections

and peer discussions grow out of this exposure. We have found that the best researchers already understand this.

A second concern relates to the question of quality. Essentially, submitting to a peer-reviewed journal ensures that the article receives some kind of formal vetting. The approach for Our World 2.0 is that two or three editors review every article. Admittedly, this can be a less robust mechanism and inevitably there are challenges, particularly in rather technical fields where specialist knowledge is required. Never-theless, it is one effective way to ensure quality and is supported by the fact that any errors can be identified by the readership and subject to immediate correction. In this respect, Our World 2.0 functions along the lines of the news media, whereby research articles are subjected to wider public scrutiny and rapid critique/feedback.

Some researchers find this format to be rather daunting, whereas others embrace the opportunity to get direct feedback.

A third concern relates to the use of video to communicate research. If your academic career has focused on journal outputs, it may seem grossly inappropriate to use video as a way to communicate your work, especially via YouTube where you have to compete with “cute kitten in a box” videos for attention. The experience from Our World 2.0 shows, for instance, that videos of a “talking head” or lecture format are not necessarily engaging, unless they cover exceptional educators or orators. By far the most successful videos on Our World 2.0 focus on character-driven stories that engage the viewers (attracting anywhere from 3,000 to 30,000 views per video, which eclipses the normal readership of an academic book of around 1,000).

Continued on page 10 >

what have we learned?

SPECIAL OFFER

Continued from page 5 >

FEATURE STORY

RENEWABLE ENERGY

> M A I T H I L I D E S H PA N D E M I TC H E L LNIAGARA SUSTAINABILITY INITIATIVE

GUEST BLOGGER

7

In each issue of our newsletter, the ACUNS Secretariat hopes to feature an article by at least one young scholar and/or practitioner (and ACUNS member). We have decided as well, because these young contributors will not be as well known to our readers as are our senior contributors, that we will include a short ‘About Me’ note to help introduce them and their work. In this Issue, we introduce Meithili Deshpande Mitchell. We look forward to engaging with many more young members and contributors from around the world in forthcoming newsletters: if you are interested to do so, please contact us with a suggested topic and a short bio note.

The ignorance that flows from widespread myths and misconceptions about climate change and renewable energy acts as social, cultural and behavioural barriers to the wider implementation of renewable energy. Greater environmental literacy in this respect would play a part in breaking down these barriers. Two key myths are:

Renewable engergy can never meet the growing electricity demand.

Climate change and today’s energy crisis is hype.

T

7

he first myth centres around the diffuse and intermittent nature of wind and solar energy. For solar power, critics often point to the fact that the sun shines only during the day, which they claim, limits its usefulness. However, peak demand occurs typically during the day; in other words, the sun shines exactly while demand is high-est. For wind energy, if the turbines were distributed geographically, the aggregate electricity generated would be less variable than from a single isolated large wind-farm because it is unlikely that the wind would stop blowing at all the sites simultaneously – we would be able to generate electricity from at least some, if not most of them (Sobin, 2008). If we examine available resources it becomes clear that even a fraction of their full potential would suffice for all our electricity needs.

The US for example, is abundant in renewable resources, but, current development is only a fraction of the potential. Winds in the US contain energy equivalent to 40 times of what the nation uses. Using existing solar PV technology, an area of just over 40 thousand square km could provide all the daily electricity used in the US (NREL, 2004). This is only about 0.4% of the total land area of the US or, about 7% of US cities and residences. In principle, if solar PV panels were mounted on rooftops, over parking lots, on sides of buildings, and along highways, this could provide the US with electricity without having to develop any additional land. The practical use of solar power is not limited to merely the sunniest locations in the world: Germany, with an average solar resource per square meter about half that of the US (Sobin, 2008) produced 6,579 GWh of solar PV electricity in 2009, compared with the US’ 1,698 GWh during the same period (OECD/IEA, 2010). In a single year, Germany produced four times as much electricity from solar PV as the US, with only half as much in available solar resources. North American populations are geographically even better placed relative to the Sun to benefit. Germany’s southernmost point is about 47°16’N; most of the USA, not counting Alaska, lies south of 45°N, and 70% of Canada’s population lives south of 49°N. The claim that parts of the US and Canada are too far north falls flat when solar resources and actual generation capacity are compared.

Hydro power, the single largest source of renewable electricity, also has considerable untapped potential. For instance, a survey by the World Energy Council reports that Sweden could more than replace its entire nuclear generation, and that Germany has the potential for producing nearly one third of its electricity using hydro (Ahlenius, 2007; EEA, 2011).

Existing renewable technologies used in combination with each other already have the potential to provide our electricity needs. Further advances will continue to improve development, but the production of electricity from renewable sources is not limited by technology or by renewable sources themselves. The myth that renewable energy is inadequate can be easily refuted by simply examining available resources and potential to develop them. The justification for using renewable sources is, of course, human induced climate change resulting from fossil fuel. But, misconceptions abound regarding

the issues, which leads us into the second myth, that climate change and the energy crisis is hype.

A key part of this myth is the belief that (the crisis of) human-induced climate change is itself a myth. People who reject climate change are mistrustful of science in general, an attitude which dictates how they interpret the evidence. In particular, they reject that climate change is a result of human activity. Where do they get their information and come to these conclusions?

A study of 928 peer reviewed articles on climate change in scientific journals published over a 10-year period showed that every single author agreed with the consensus position that climate change is indeed occurring, and that it is human induced. By contrast, a study of popular media’s1 reporting over a 14-year period showed that more than half the articles on climate change gave equal weight to the views of deniers compared with scientific consensus (David Suzuki Foundation, 2012). Impartiality and balance is an ideal within North American media culture, while the European public expects an explicitly partisan view, and the Japanese press is expected to avoid interpretation and stick to factual reporting (Antilla, 2010; DSF, 2012). In the case of climate change reporting, the impartiality misrepresents the degree to which it is a result of human activities, and in particular, a result of fossil fuel usage. It is not merely the volume of media productions that matters, but also the quality and nature of the information presented. Because of the wide reaching implications of climate change, the issue attracts attention from and is influenced by political, social and economic stakeholders.

In a capitalist society, the media depends on advertising revenue, largely from advertisers for automobiles, airlines, fast food, real estate and home furnishings. Publishing articles that demand real change in attitudes and policy would go against the interests of their very sponsors. As such, there is pressure on the media to frame their representations of climate change to mollify particular commercial interests. An example is the influence of the carbon-based (fossil fuel) industry, which, in combination with the penchant towards journalistic impartiality has led to a disproportionate representation of uncertainty in the science (Holmes, 2009). Active PR strategies by the carbon-industry used the media to cast doubt on the science of climate change, garner public opinion and prevent any action on the issue – a campaign not unlike the earlier efforts of the tobacco industry to undermine public awareness of the dangers of smoking (Holmes, 2009).

People confuse weather and climate. They confuse ozone depletion with the greenhouse effect, and ozone depletion with climate change. The “greenhouse effect” is often thought of as the cause of “hot and steamy” climate (Bostrom et al., 1994). The terms “climate change” and “global warming” themselves have been politicized and have different connotations. Although these terms are not strictly synonymous, both refer to changes in

A C U N S Q U A R T E R LY N E W S L E T T E R > I S S U E 3 > 2 0 1 3 A C U N S . O R G 8

FEATURE TWO

Continued on page 10 >

Maithili Deshpande MitchellMA(Hons) Geography, Brock University, St. Catherines, Ontario, Canada

MAITHILI DESHPANDE MITCHELL is a recent distinguished graduate of Brock University’s Geography MA program. Her Major Research Paper, Eclipsing Renewable Energy: Ignorance, Indifference, and Inaction examined the barriers to renewable energy technologies. Tilli (as she is more commonly referred to) currently writes periodic blogs for the Niagara Sustainability Initiative, and has recently assisted in research for a study examining the impact of industrial interests on U.S. Congressional voting records concerning the 1990 banning of chlorofluorocarbons. She welcomes opportunities for research on energy and environmental issues.

T

1 The study included four influential American newspapers: New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times and Wall Street Journal.

linked to the natural environment and sustainability issues with respect to natural resources. Equally important, the report reflects the need to include all countries in the development debate. Clearly industrialized countries have a fundamental role to play when it comes to tackling poverty and sustainability challenges, both at home and in developing states. It is important to recognize that all major stakeholders have a shared responsibility and joint

accountability in advancing the post-2015 development agenda. These include civil society, international institutions, national and local governments, business, and philanthropists, among others. The challenge now is to how best shape these bold recommendations and strong aspirations into concrete and tangible actions backed by realistic but yet bold targets.

9 A C U N S . O R G S i g n u p f o r o u r E > U P D AT E b y b e c o m i n g a m e m b e r !

To answer this important question, the Secretary-General of the United Nations (UNSG) appointed 27 leaders from all over the world – from governments, academia, civil society, and business – as the High-level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda. He tasked the Panel with providing recommendations on what the successor framework to the MDGs could look like.

In May 2013, the Panel released its report, A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies through Sustainable Development. The report sets out a bold – but also practical – vision for how the world can eradicate extreme poverty and tackle the challenges of the twenty-first century.

The report builds upon the historic advances of the Millennium Development Goals, and harnesses the incredible passion and diversity of voices heard in the Panel’s consultations with people around the globe. The Panel interacted with more than 5,000 civil society groups from 121 countries in developing its recommendations.

DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

www.un.org/sg/management/pdf/ HLP_P2015_Report.pdf

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the central reference point for global development

since their inception in 2000, expire in 2015. This raises the important question:

A NEW GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP: ERADICATE POVERTY AND TRANSFORM ECONOMIES THROUGH SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

1. LEAVE NO ONE BEHIND. We must ensure that no person – regardless of ethnicity, gender, geography, disability, race or other status – is denied basic economic opportunities and human rights.

2. PUT SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AT THE CORE. We must make a rapid shift to sustainable patterns of production and consumption, with developed countries in the lead. We must act now to slow the alarming pace of climate change and environmental degradation, which pose unprecedented threats to humanity.

3. TRANSFORM ECONOMIES FOR JOBS AND INCLUSIVE GROWTH. A profound economic transformation can end extreme poverty and promote sustainable development, improving livelihoods, by harnessing innovation, technology, and the potential of business. More diversified economies, with equal opportunities for all, can drive social inclusion, especially for young people, and foster respect for the environment.

4. BUILD PEACE AND EFFECTIVE, OPEN AND ACCOUNTABLE INSTITUTIONS FOR ALL. Freedom from violence, conflict, and oppression is essential to human existence, and the foundation for building peaceful and prosperous societies. We are calling for a fundamental shift – to recognize peace and good governance as a core element of wellbeing, not an optional extra.

5. FORGE A NEW GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP. A new spirit of solidarity, cooperation, and mutual accountability must underpin the post-2015 agenda. This new partnership should be built on our shared humanity, and based on mutual respect and mutual benefit.

WHAT HAPPENS AFTER 2015?In the report, the Panel calls for the new post-2015 goals to drive five big transformative shifts:

FIVE BIG TRANSFORMATIVE SHIFTS:

Continued from page 4 >

A BOLD NEW GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

A C U N S Q U A R T E R LY N E W S L E T T E R > I S S U E 3 > 2 0 1 3 A C U N S . O R G 1 0

QUARTERLY NEWSLETTERIssue 3 > 2013

Academic Council on the United Nations System (ACUNS) Quarterly Newsletter is published four times a year with the support of the Department of Communications, Public Affairs & Marketing (CPAM) at Wilfrid Laurier University.

ACUNS SECRETARIATWilfrid Laurier University75 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, Canada N2L 3C5

T > 226.772.3142 F > 226.772.3004

Publisher: Alistair Edgar Executive Director, ACUNS

Editor: Brenda Burns Co-ordinator, ACUNS

Contributing Writers: Hany Besada, Brendan Barrett, Maithili Deshpande Mitchell, Alistair Edgar, Brenda Burns

Design: Dawn Wharnsby, CPAM

Imagery: iStockphoto.com

Send address changes and feedback to:

E > akoltun@acuns.org T > 226.772.3121

We welcome and encourage your feedback. Opinions expressed in ACUNS Quarterly Newsletter do not necessarily reflect those of the editor, ACUNS or the host institution.

© ACUNS 2013. All rights reserved.

the climatic systems as a consequence of changes in atmospheric GHG concentrations (Lorenzoni & Pidgeon, 2006). However, the term “global warming” has stronger connotations of human causation, while “climate change” has a greater connotation of natural causes (Whitmarsh, 2009). In addition, analysis of word usage shows that (at least in the US) conservative think tanks prefer to use the term “global warming” while liberal ones prefer “climate change” (Schuldt, Konrath, & Schwarz, 2011).

Not unlike the imperatives of media coverage on climate change and global warming, the official policy responses on the two sides of the Atlantic have also been very different. The EU has supported and promoted the Kyoto Protocol; both Sweden and Germany have met their obligations to Kyoto so far. By contrast, the US withdrew from it in 2001 and Canada withdrew recently, in 2011; both countries essentially refusing to meet obligations until developing countries also do “their share,” while still being two of the largest per-capita emitters of GHGs and users of electricity.

There needs to be both public awareness and the willingness to change so that renewable energy can become the more prevalent source for electricity than fossil fuels. Information on renewable energy and the effects of fossil fuel use must align public opinion with facts rather than myths. Issues of global warming/climate change and renewable energy must not be treated as politics, but as what they are: evidence-based science. The evidence tells us that the Earth is heating up, and that our use of fossil fuels is the cause. Our research tells us that reducing our dependence on fossil fuels and switching to renewable sources of energy is the solution to mitigation and adaptation to global warming and climate change.

WORKS CITED:

Ahlenius, H. (2007). Hydropower potential (theoretical possitibility for electricity generation). (W. E. Council, Producer) Retrieved July 30, 2012, from GRID-Arendal, United Nations Environmental Programme: http://www.grida.no/graphicslib/detail/hydropower-potential- theoretical-possitibility-for-electricity-generation_1094

Antilla, L. (2010). Self Censorship and Science: a geographical review of media coverage of climate tipping points. Public Understanding of Science, 19(2), 240-256.

Bostrom, A., Granger, M., Baruch, F., & Read, D. (1994). What Do People Know About Global Climate Change? Mental Models. Risk Analysis, 14(6), 959-969.

Boykoff, M., & Boykoff, J. M. (2004). Balance as bias: global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 14, 125-136.

Boykoff, M., & Rajan, S. (2007). Signals and noise: Mass-media coverage of climate change. European Molecular Boilogy Organization Reports, 8(3), 207-211.

David Suzuki Foundation. (2012). Climate Change Deniers. Retrieved July 15, 2012, from David Suzuki Foundation: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/issues/climate-change/science/climate-change-basics/climate-change-deniers/

EEA. (2011, September 05). Distribution of natural resources in the pan european region for selected issues. Retrieved July 30, 2012, from Euro-pean Environment Agency: http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/distribution-of-natural-resources-in-the-pan-european-region-for-selected-issues-3

Holmes, T. (2009). Balancing Acts: PR, Impartiality and Power in Mass Media Coverage of Climate Change. In T. Boyce, & J. Lewis (Eds.), Climate Change and the Media (pp. 92-102). New York, NY, USA: Peter Lang Publishing Inc.

Lorenzoni, I., & Pidgeon, N. (2006). Public Views on Climate Change: European and US Perspectives. Climatic Change, 77, 73-95.

NREL. (2004). PV FACS: How much land will PV need to supply our electricity. Retrieved July 20, 2012, from National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Leading Clean Energy Innovation: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/35097.pdf

OECD/IEA. (2010). Key World Energy Statistics 2010. Paris: OECD.

Schuldt, J. P., Konrath, S. H., & Schwarz, N. (2011). “Global Warming” or “Climate Change”? Whether the Planet is Warming Depends on Question Wording. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(1), 115-124.

Sobin, R. (2008). Energy Myth Seven: Renewable Energy Systems Could Never Meet Growing Electricity Demand in America. In B. K. Sovacool, & M. A. Brown (Eds.), Energy and American Society: Thirteen Myths (pp. 171-200). Dordrecht: Springer.

Sovacool, B. (2007). Introduction. In B. K. Sovacool, & M. A. Brown (Eds.), Energy and American Society: Thirteen Myths. Dordrecht: Springer.

UNESCO-UNEP. (1976). UNESCO-UNEP Environmental Education Newsletter: The Belgrade Charter, A Global Framework for Environmental Education. Paris, France: UNESCO-UNEP.

Whitmarsh, L. (2009). What’s in a name? Commonalities and differences in public understanding of ‘climate change’ and ‘global warming.’. Public Understanding of Science, 18, 401-420.

Continued from page 8 >

Continued from page 6 >

But perhaps the crux of the matter is how you measure the impact of such outreach activities. Who are the 4.5 million people who watch UNU videos on YouTube? Who are the readers of Our World 2.0 articles? Is it more important if someone cites your journal article because at least then you can say that the knowledge you generated was added to a greater body of research? The answer to the last question is yes, that is certainly an important indicator of research impact. But if we are talking about research influencing society, then normally we look to the broadest dissemination and that is usually via the traditional media — on television, radio and in newspapers. If your research is picked up by the New York Times, for instance, then the automatic assumption would be that this is a positive result. But if your research were watched by 2 million YouTube viewers, you might be less sure, because you are less clear on the identity of those who watch YouTube.

However, we would argue that this perception is changing and further, the other hurdles too are ones that we can learn to surmount. For the big difference the web offers is the possibility for your audience to respond directly and instantly to you. We can have a conversation about the kind of world we want to live in.

This article paraphrases a book chapter with the same title that will be published in Geoscience Research and Outreach: Schools and Public Engagement, edited by Vincent Tong, published by Springer, August 2013.

CELEBRATING OUR SHARED SUCCESSTHE ACUNS QUARTERLY NEWSLETTER has earned a top award in the prestigious 2013 Hermes Creative Awards competition.

Wilfrid Laurier University won six platinum and six gold awards in the international competition, which recognizes outstanding achievements in the concept, writing and design of marketing, communication and advertising materials, including a gold award for its ACUNS quarterly newsletter.

The 2013 awards were selected from thousands of entries from throughout the United States and around the world, and are judged by the Association of Marketing and Communication Professionals.

Thanks to all who have contributed excellent and compelling articles as well as to the Publisher and Editor for organizing content and advising on layout. Collaboration at its best!

CONNECT WITH US

RENEWABLE ENERGY

COMMUNICATING SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

1 M E M B E R I N F O R M AT I O N

Prefix: o Dr. o Mr. o Ms. o Mrs. o Miss

First Name: ___________________________________________ Last Name: ___________________________________________

Mailing Address: o (Home) o (Work)

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

City: _________________________________________________ State/Province: _______________________________________

Postal Code/Zip Code: ___________________________________ Country: _____________________________________________

E-mail (required for e-access): __________________________________________________________________________________

Telephone: ____________________________________________ o (Home) o (Work) o (Mobile)

o I would like to receive the ACUNS newsletter electronically

o I would like to receive the ACUNS e-update and receive free monthly updates on the latest news, events and activities

o I would like to receive information on ACUNS events & activities in Vienna

o I would like to receive information on ACUNS events in New York

2 M E M B E R S H I P T Y P E Institutional Memberships also are available at acuns.org

ACUNS memberships are based on the January to December calendar year. If you join mid-year, you will receive back issues of Global Governance and the ACUNS quarterly newsletter. If you have any questions regarding joining mid-year, please contact the Secretariat at admin@acuns.org.

Please note that membership fees are in U.S. Funds.

o $425 (Extended 5-year Term) o $155 (Sponsoring)* o $95 (Over $40,000 income)

o $70 (Up to $40,000 income) o $50 (Retired) o $50 (Student)

*In addition to your own, sponsor a new one-year membership for a person from a developing country.

3 PAY M E N T O P T I O N S

o VISA o MASTERCARD o Enclosed Check (drawn on a US or Canadian Bank)

Card No: ____ ____ ____ ____ / ____ ____ ____ ____ / ____ ____ ____ ____ / ____ ____ ____ ____

Expiration Date: ____ ____ / ____ ____ Signature:___________________________________________

> For more information, please email admin@acuns.org or call (1) 226.772.3121

o New o Renewal

RETURN PAYMENT TO:

ACUNS SECRETARIAT

Wilfrid Laurier University

75 University Avenue West

Waterloo, ON N2L 3C5

Canada

OR

Fax: (1) 226.772.3004

MEMBERSHIP FORM INDIVIDUAL

ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP

A C U N S . O R GRENEW YOUR MEMBERSHIP OR BECOME A MEMBER ONLINE AT

Email us to find out how to become an institutional member at admin@acuns.org