REPORT FROM BELLAGIO, ITALY
MAY 16-18, 2000

For three days in the small village of Bellagio on Lake Como, a group of 23 activists from 19 countries (see participants list, attached) considered a series of complex questions raised by contemporary globalization. In Seattle, Montreal, Bangkok, Davos, Washington DC, Geneva and many more cities, the call for a change in the way the global economy works has echoed resoundingly. And yet, what is to be done?

The core of the agenda in Bellagio was to explore alternative visions for global governance and in particular how the international economic system could become more democratic and accountable. In plenary, we talked about ourselves and our work, debating the implications of recent history. Portions of the time were devoted to detailed analysis of the state-of-the-art in our global campaigning on trade, debt and human rights. Another portion was spent in assessing regional trends, strategies and needs. While it is not possible in a short report to fully describe three days of intense conversation, an illustrative list of subjects would include the following:

• Neo-liberal deregulation, re-regulation and restructuring, public and private interests, the public and private sectors;
• Foreign direct investment, capital flows, Tobin Tax, the end of the "Washington consensus";
• The roles of the state, civil society, international institutions, donor/aid agencies and the private sector;
• UN processes including Beijing+5, WSSD+5, Millenium Summit, Financing for Development, and Rio+10;
• UN agencies including ECOSOC, UNDP, UNEP, ILO, UNCTAD, former UNCTC, the UN Commission on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;
• New instruments to arbitrate labor, environmental, debt and human rights abuses;
• Security issues: military, land mines treaty, biosafety, poverty, hunger, health;
• Soft law and hard law;
• Blocking damage vs. enabling transformation;
• Regional economic agreements, the UN's regional system, regional NGO networking;
• Circumstances in specific countries, e.g. Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Germany, USA;
• Culture, lifestyles, marketing and advertising, consumer education, valuation, cash economy;
• Food security, biological diversity, cultural diversity, local knowledge;
• Origins of knowledge, packaging of knowledge, transmission of knowledge;
• Utility theory, analytical reductionism, complexity theory and paradigmatic shifts;
• Neo-Keynsianism, new-Kantianism, neo-Groetiusism and the Groetiun Society;
• Political power, the rise of fundamentalism, fascism, populism, democracy and justice.

Our discussions were highly nuanced; optimism and pessimism balanced warily on the tightrope strung from case to case as participants described effective political tactics, brutally repressive incidents, and signs of change for better and worse. It was abundantly clear that there is tremendous ferment all over the world, and there are innumerable efforts underway to improve the lot of peoples and the planet. But the heartiest brainstorming occurred in five small groups, which met repeatedly over the course of the three days, to consider the following six questions:

1. What kinds of institutions can subject the economy to the 'power of the polity' and to democratic accountability?
2. How can we reallocate power and authority among existing and new global regimes?
3. What is the proper separation between the executive, legislative and judicial functions of governance internationally?
4. What is the proper separation of responsibility between the global, regional, national and sub-national levels?
5. In all of these systems, how can the voice of citizens be amplified?
6. Most fundamentally, what are the concrete and practicable steps that can move us along the continuum from our current world-state towards a more positive vision for the future?

In the end, of course, there was no single answer to be had. To the contrary, many more questions were raised. But perhaps it is fair to say that there was a strong sense among all of the participants that the PROCESS of building discussion among all those affected by the ever-evolving geopolitical system, especially local communities, is key. Listen to the voices of participants:

"The Seattle protests were very carefully prepared. It's a positive side of globalization. Young people are totally convinced their practical actions will have results!"

"The political opening is overwhelming. But we need much more discussion on bridging the gap between international and local work."

"In some places, political space is opened up but in some places it is closing down. We need to identify the different degrees of political space that is open in different places. And in every case, the fair participation of all stakeholders is urgent."

"International systems of decisionmaking need to be based on diversity - how communities organize themselves. We must avoid monocultural globalism and instead work on 'localization.'"

"Global governance is not 'up there.' It is a system of linkages from the local to national and transnational; it is the relationship between these levels."

"The globalization critique misses the fact that it's a political process, not natural evolution. We need a political workplan."

"We must support local mobilizations and work on issues with local resonance. We need to trust each other's campaigns and intensify regional networking."

"Who is 'we?' Over time, we've organized many local institutions. But how do we create the link to include them in global strategies?"

"Let's make a humble initiative. If we work on the process, the analysis will follow and next is action."

At the end of the third day, before celebrating the conclusion of our work over a gift of tequila from our colleague from Mexico, we reviewed our individual and collective plans for the coming year. Individually, many expressed commitments towards promoting local campaigns and local and regional discussions in the search for alternative solutions to the many challenges of globalization and global governance. Collectively, the following agreements were reached:

1. IATP will set up a list-serv enabling all participants to share information, ideas, perspectives and workplans in the coming months and years.
2. IATP, ISD and CIEL will draft a report of the gathering, to be circulated to all participants. Eventually, an agreed second draft will be posted for circulation to the general public.
3. The Rockefeller Foundation noted its intention to generate a matrix / mapping of key actors, events, and funders working on issues related to democratizing global economic governance for distribution to participants as a contribution toward further strategic thinking and cooperation.
4. Everyone agreed to give further thought to the expanded list of questions (see "clusters," attached) to be shared among our networks and with each other as feasible.
5. IATP will serve as a "focal point" to facilitate possible future collaborations that may emerge as a result of this process.
6. The Forum International de Montreal (FIM) will invite participants to help frame and organize its Spring 2002 Conference on Global Governance, as a direct follow-on to our work in Bellagio.

On behalf of all participants, thanks are offered to the volunteer steering committee, which consisted of:

• Yash Tandon of SEATINI, the Southern and Eastern African Trade, Information and Negotiations Initiative based in Zimbabwe,
• Sue Edwards of the Institute for Sustainable Development in Ethiopia,
• Kristin Dawkins of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy in the USA,
• Isagani (Gani) Serrano of the Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement, and
• Matthew Stilwell of the Center for International Environmental Law in Switzerland.

Special thanks to Carolyn Deere and the Rockefeller Foundation, as well as to the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, for their support of this gathering. Carolyn was also roundly applauded for compiling and making available a thick notebook of "Globalization, Civil Society and Governance: Recent Academic Writings."

And very special thanks to our hosts at the Bellagio Center, whose gracious service and facilities enabled the meeting to proceed smoothly, comfortably, and with beauty all around.

1. the UN vs. Bretton Woods structures - voting rights, financing, legitimacy, etc.
2. economic protectionism vs. social and ecological protectionism - what is right? what is wrong?
3. WTO vs. Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) - a hierarchy among international treaties? Trade Uber Alles? what are the proper roles for UNEP, the CSD, etc.? a new global environmental institution?
4. trade-and-labor standards: within the WTO? how should it relate to the ILO? how can countries avoid corporate flight to lower-wage locations? Should small and medium size enterprises be treated differently than transnational corporations?
5. the "right to development" - promoting economic, social and cultural human rights as well as civil and political rights; gender and development; overcoming racial discrimination and genocide

CLUSTER #2: FROM INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS TO SOCIETAL JUSTICE

6. community rights - striking a balance between individual human rights and those of collective communities; the a priori rights of peoples regardless of civil law
7. Indigenous Peoples' Rights - how to enfranchise indigenous nations as equal partners in multilateral relations
8. property rights - land, water, seeds, and knowledge: who owns it? Who controls it? how should it be shared?
9. the "public interest" vs. private interests - science, technology, banking, utilities, and privatization generally: what is the role of the state? how do we avoid technological apartheid?
10. citizenship/state sovereignty/subsidiarity - define, describe, relate
11. culture - the right to cultural autonomy, the value of cultural tradition: how can we respect and promote cultural diversity and avoid monocultural consumerism?

CLUSTER #3: EXERCISING JUSTICE AND DEMOCRACY

12. civil society and the polity - who has a voice, who has a vote? The relative civil and economic rights of citizens, immigrants, and corporations
13. the "national interest" - how is a "national mandate" to be established? how can trade, environment, agriculture, health and foreign affairs ministers negotiate international agreements consistent with a coherent national mandate?
14. the North/South feud - how are the political, economic, social and cultural dimensions distinct? what is the role of economic and military coercion? what does differentiated responsibility mean? how to overcome the bitter legacy?
15. regional economic agreements - decentralizing economic power or divide-and-conquer?
16. South-South trade, bioregionalism, fair trade - what is a positive strategy?
17. transparency and accountability/corruption/campaign finance reform - access to information, access to justice, access to democracy: what is to be done?

CLUSTER #4: GLOBAL FINANCIAL ARCHITECTURE

18. the "financial architecture" - currencies and capital flows, IMF/WB, debt relief, etc.
19. Tobin tax, air travel tax, grain-trade tax, other global taxing authority - how? how much? how distribute?
20. MAI follow-up/global anti-trust -what are the rules for corporate responsibility? how are they enforced?
21. the polity and the market - checks and balances and the separation of powers: balancing regulatory and deregulatory agendas according to the citizens' mandate

CLUSTER #5: MECHANISMS OF GLOBAL GOVERNANCE

22. the executive - high-level summits, diplomatic missions, the Trans-Atlantic Economic Partnership, Multilateral Recognition Agreements, and other executive dealmaking
23. the legislative - multilateral negotiations: the slowest approach to a least common denominator? least international parliamentarianism: can it work? what would it look like?
24. the judiciary - the International Court of Justice, European Court of Justice, WTO Dispute Settlement Body, etc. Is there a model that works? How do they inter-relate?
25. compliance and dispute settlement - trade sanctions vs. other forms of enforcement: "carrots" vs. "sticks"; the South Africa case vs. the Iraq case: when are trade sanctions justifiable? How can a just system of enforcement back up a just system of rules?

Ms. Liana Cisneros
Latin America and Caribbean Desk
Jubilee 2000 Coalition UK

Ms. Kristin Dawkins
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy
Minneapolis, USA

Ms. Carolyn Deere
The Rockefeller Foundation
New York City, USA

Ms. Sue Edwards
Institute for Sustainable Development
Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA

Ms. Eva Haxton
International Coalition for Development Action (ICDA)
BELGIUM

Mr. Steve Hellinger
Development Gap for Alternative Policies (DGAP)
Washington D.C., USA

Ms. Mika Iba
Network for Safe and Secure Food and Environment
JAPAN

Ms. Dot Keet
University of Western Cape, Center for South African Studies
Capetown, SOUTH AFRICA

Mr. Richard Kimera Henry
Uganda Consumer Protection Association (UCPA)
Kampala, UGANDA

Mr. Miloon Kothari
Habitat International Coalition, Housing and Land Rights Coalition
New Delhi, INDIA

Mr. Nigel Martin
Montreal International Forum
Montreal, CANADA

Ms. Mariam Mayet
Environmental Lawyer
Emmarentia, SOUTH AFRICA

Mr. Farhad Mazhar
UBINIG
Dhaka, BANGLADESH

Mr. Marco Mezzera
Focus on the Global South
Bangkok, THAILAND

Mr. Kumi Naidoo
CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
Washington, D.C. USA

Mr. Kwesi Owusu
Africa Initiative
Jubilee 2000 Coalition UK

Stefan Rostock
Debate 21
Bonn, GERMANY

Ms. Azra Sayeed
Roots for Equity
Karachi, PAKISTAN

Mr. Isagani Serrano
Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement
Quezon City, PHILIPPINES

Mr. Matthew Stilwell
Center for International Environmental Lawyer
Geneva, SWITZERLAND

Mr. Yash Tandon
International South Group Network (ISGN)
Harare, ZIMBABWE

Alejandro Villamar C.
The Mexican Action Network on Free Trade (RMALC)
Mexico D.F. MEXICO

Alexandra Wandel
Friends of the Earth Trade Co-ordinator, Europe & Middle East
BELGIUM