Pluts September 2023

 

The prospects of achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are overshadowed by multiple pitfalls and shortcomings in implementing actions in both developing and developed countries like Canada[1],[2]. While the United Nations and policymakers are already discussing post-2030 goals, there is evidence that many research findings that could contribute to achieving the SDGs are not being used[3]. Things may change soon. Indeed, the UN has recently issued few publications expressing its commitment to promoting the use of science and research results. However, several experiences suggest that we should take these announcements with caution. 

 

Regularly, even before the UN was founded, scientists have often played the role of whistle-blowers, trying to provide the required situations analysis with the intention to redirecting actions toward beneficial ends for humanity and peace[4], [5]. Thus, since its inception, the UN has walked hand in hand with the world of research and science. However, it is important to remember that the first UN declaration of January 1942 was more a declaration of war than a call for peace; more a declaration of exclusion than one of union[6]. It decided not to share resources and information, including undoubtedly science, with one part of the world, namely Hitler's forces and their affiliates.

 

UNESCO, as the organization promoting science, later decreed that research results and science are common goods. The organization also draws attention to the need to promote equal access to resources and scientific positions, and the abolition of inequalities of opportunity[7]. However, the UN, and more specifically the nations with decision-making powers, have remained within the logic of the first declaration: knowledge will never be sufficiently shared, and efforts to do so will always remain at a minimum. The 2018 publication[8] for a better perspective on the 2030 agenda on sustainable development was a breakthrough. Acknowledging the weakness of the use of research results for political decision-making, this publication gave hope that a rebalancing would eventually emerge. However, the recent announcement by the Secretary General of the creation of a Scientific Advisory Board[9] which gives this impetus a pressing character leaves us thirsty in many respects. This board with only seven external scientists will change nothing as to the systemic exclusion of less powerful countries and their concerns. 

 

A Scientific advisory board, as any human group is after all a group of lobbies with the power of orienting the decision of the authority or the individual who put it in place. Certainly, in this case, the board is entailed to be a lobby of good and beneficence. We have no doubt about the competence of the scientists. Yet, in an organisation such as the UN, there is a need to assure that all continents are equally represented. Unlike the UN Charter[10] promoting equitable geographical distribution for the identification of non-permanent members of the Security Council, there is an alarming lack of equitable continental representativeness on this new advisory board. For example, many actors who recognize the power of these instruments have called for greater inclusion of Africa in global health councils[11]. To reinforce the geographical equity, we think that two representatives by continent in the external group of the Secretary General established Scientific Advisory Board would be the best deal.

 

We hope that this board will contribute to make that research results really become common goods. The inequitable sharing of the research result as experienced through the recent Covid-19 pandemic bears witness to systemic exclusion. As Dr Tedros, Director General of the World Health Organisation, pointed out at the establishment of a framework for pandemic prevention and preparedness: “Crucially, the new global architecture cannot be designed, built or managed by those with the most power, money and influence. It must be designed, built and managed by all member states and partners in a truly inclusive process,”[12]. With the advent of Covid-19 we began to wonder if another UN declaration, like its first one, had been made stating that the benefits of vaccine research should not be shared with African countries. Eventually, it was when Western countries were no longer interested in specific types of vaccine, or when these were about to expire, that their hearts of generosity began to speak to them. Maybe they were just looking for garbage-countries or rather garbage-bodies for their soon expiring vaccines. Unsurprisingly, at the earlier stage, the effort and contribution to the Covax initiative remained symbolic, resulting in a disproportionate global Covid-19 immunization coverage[13].

 

The new board established by the UN Secretary General must include experts of the topic of war and war crimes. There is a need to remember the ravages of the use of mustard gas, Agent Orange and other chemical weapons on humans, the environment and wildlife. There are countless unexploded bombs scattered around the globe not to forget. Until the full implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention[14] bears fruit, vigilance must be maintained. The rules suggest that weapons must not be used when the magnitude of the damage they can cause is not known and when they cannot make distinction between civilians and combatants. The use of new weapons must not violate the rules of war and international laws[15]. The use of result from weapons research is currently of concern in many conflict zones. The current situation of war gives the opportunity to various armies to test new weapons on real or supposed fighter of the opponent camps. As to wars and weapons, the advisory board will be more effective if it also includes experts knowledgeable in the topic of rape used as weapon of war. 

 

There is no doubt that the various UN agencies have a more than encouraging approach to the use of research results. However, on a global scale and regarding issues of global governance, there is still much to be done in terms of sharing the benefits of research and inclusion in decision-making frameworks and processes. Change is possible, but only if the interests of each of the world's eight billion people are voiced by geographically, culturally, and thematically representative delegates. For developing countries, it is important that international commitments such as those included in the Declaration on the Use of Scientific and Technological Progress in the Interests of Peace and for the Benefit of Mankind [16] are respected. The recent G77+China summit held in Havana under the theme "the role of science, technology and innovation" in development, attended by Guterres himself, is a strong call in this direction.

 

[1] AU, UNECA, AFDB & UNDP (2022) Africa sustainable development report 2022. Building back better from the coronavirus disease (Covid-19) while advancing the full implementation of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. 

[2] Bureau du Vérificateur Général du Canada (2021). Rapports du commissaire à l’environnement et au développement durable au Parlement du Canada. Rapport 1- La mise en œuvre des objectifs de développement durable des Nations Unies. Rapport de l’auditeur indépendant.

[3] Nature, (2023). Editorial The world’s goals for saving humanity are still the best option. Nature, 621 p227-229.

[4] Einstein A. & Freud S. (1932). Albert Einstein et Sigmund Freud: correspondance sur la guerre. Science et guerre - Impact Science et Société - 26(1/2) pp 31-32. Les presses de l’Unesco. 

[5] Unesco (1976). Le manifeste Russell-Einstein. Science et guerre - Impact Science et Société 26(1/2) pp 17-19. Les presses de l’Unesco. 

[6] UN (1942). Déclaration des Nations unies. 

[7] UNESCO (2018). Recommendation on science and scientific researchers. 

[8] Dumitriu P. (2018). Strengthening poicy research uptake in the context of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. JIU/REP/2018/7. United Nations - Joint Inspection Unit Geneva.

[9] UN (2023). Scientific Advisory Board for Independent Advice on Breakthroughs in Science and Technology. https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/personnel-appointments/2023-08-03/scientific-advisory-board-for-independent-advice-breakthroughs-science-and-technology

[10] UN - United Nations Charter. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text. 

[11] Silva M. R. C e, Oduro-Bonsrah P., Wambui P., Chakroun M. (2023). Strengthening Africa's voice on boards of global health initiatives. Lancet, 402, 10403, P677-678.

[12] Cullinan K. (2023). As UN Pandemic Talks Resume, Tedros Expresses ‘Concern’ About Slow Pace of Accord Negotiations. Health Policy Watch. https://healthpolicy-watch.news/as-un-pandemic-talks-resume-tedros-concern-about-slow-pace-of-accord-negotiations/

[13] Usher A. D. (2021). ACT-A: “The international architecture did not work for us” Lancet, 400, (10361), p1393-1394.

[14] OPCW (2020). Convention sur l’interdiction des armes chimiques.  Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/download-convention

[15] ICRC (2002). Lesson 5- The law of armed conflict- Weapons. International Committee of Red Cross. Unit for relations with armed and security forces. https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/law5_final.pdf

[16]UN (1975). Declaration on the Use of Scientific and Technological Progress in the Interests of Peace and for the Benefit of Mankind. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/declaration-use-scientific-and-technological-progress-interests