mondochallenge
close this window

Select a challenge:

You have chosen to accept our mondochallenge; that's great news!

As you can see, you have a choice. It should only take you a couple of minutes to get through it. Additionally, if you score a perfect 10, we'll donate one euro to a local charity. So go ahead and see how much you know about topics related to our own business.

Home ›› Expression ›› Blogs ›› Giray's blog ›› 18,000 people

18,000 people

My assistant and I are about to take a flight to Rio de Janeiro to meet up with over 18,000 people who have come from all over the world for the World Urban Forum. I have mixed feelings. On the one hand I fully support the United Nations, UN-Habitat, all involved civil society organizations, the governments of Brazil and Rio de Janeiro for helping to organize the event. I support the urban agenda. I support the World Urban Campaign. I support all the discussions that will likely take place at the conference. In fact, I support all the discussions that take place at all the public interest conferences held around the world. And yet…
A conference

I have two concerns. The first is trend-connected: climate change. I'm very aware of the carbon footprint left by 18,000 people taking planes, consuming taxi rides, moving around in air conditioned conference spaces and overly generous buffets. The second is operational. Isn't there an alternative? Do we need to bring 18,000 people together to get the planet moving? Do we need to all meet to get our development agendas coordinated?

My answer to the first dilemma is obvious: moving 18,000 people does not make sense in an era when we tout video conferencing, smart phones and laptops. In fact soon, according to Cisco, the internet will be able to handle multi-million video person video conferences. So maybe, just maybe, we'll be able to finally do things the 'high-tech' way sometime soon. So yes, some day soon we will have huge virtual meetings (today it's still at the hype stage, multi-person 'virtual events' still do not work well enough to be effective.

But there is still the issue of the added value of actually putting the 18,000 people together in one space. Instinctively I am against it. But admittedly, I have been giving this issue some thought for many years now. This is not a new dilemma for me. I started thinking about this the very first time I went to a major conference in 1979. Back then it was not an issue of climate change so much as an issue of efficiency. Time was, I believed, a precious commodity, and traveling 20 hours to just listen and talk about things we can often just view or read… Today, however, it's time and carbon and money and disease and many more issues. So, are these huge meetings good? Do they accomplish something? Did Copenhagen accomplish something? Did Rio (climate)? Do UN general assemblies or World Health Assemblies move the world one or several steps forward?

My answer?

I'm going to, for now, take the risk of saying yes. I think that these meetings do more rather than less. I think that they motivate organizations to do more. I think that they do forge partnerships. I think that they do give us some ideas. But I also think that they are not as efficient and effective as they could be. Let's be honest, most of us come away wishing more had been accomplished. So what's the solution? It lies with us. It is up to us to get things done both at the conference and beyond. Let us not squander the privilege and opportunities given to us by these meetings. Let us act responsibly and aim to learn, teach, partner, pass on and otherwise be great conference participants.

Gotta run, suitcase to pack!

Comments

Log in or create a user account to comment.

Giray

Giray's blog

Welcome to my blog. In it you will find some of my thoughts on campaigning, institutional change, the issues and current events that shape them.

Calendar

Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

Tag cloud