Back to Index * SLT Home Page * Lycos * Alta Vista
Some of the instruments needed to bring about change are already in place. What is missing? And what changes are needed in the way existing institutions operate?
| Action Planning |
|---|
| This is a hands-on tool for making good use of the wealth of knowledge and experience of local people to sort out what needs to be done to improve their surroundings. It integrates their values and concerns with the skill and knowledge of officials, architects and technical experts. The technique can be adapted to suit any situation where consultation and participation are required, such as planning a new community building, crime and traffic problems and environmental projects and full-scale neighbourhood plans. Instead of relying solely on private initiative and bureaucratic planning procedures, strategies for action are generated by getting all interested parties to work together at carefully structured events, involving intensive work sessions, normally lasting four or five days, guided by a multi-disciplinary team of independent specialists. |
Local initiatives can help solve environmental, economic and social problems in an integrated manner by responding directly to people's real needs: the smaller the community involved, the easier the participation of all concerned. Local initiatives are sustainable essentially because people have a sense of ownership. The importance of the public benefits they can deliver should be recognised by empowering local community action through greater resourcing from public funds.
Local initiatives are basic building blocks for creating a sustainable city and they should be publicised and celebrated London-wide. This should be reflected in strengthening the role of grass-roots democracy. Local organisations are self-motivated and self-sufficient. But they need to be able to link up London wide, to learn from each other for mutual benefit. To facilitate this would be a major function of the London Citizens Forum.
| True community |
|---|
| "A true community can begin to evolve only if the citizens themselves are involved in building it up.
A 'Master Plan' unconnected with the people, with its unpleasant undercurrent of mastery, can tear
a city apart more easily than it can build a better one. For that, citizen involvement is the only
creative route". Barbara Ward |
| Benefits of community involvement |
|---|
| Research done for the Department of the Environment in 1994 suggested that "at its best, community involvement can enable processes to be speeded up; resources to be used more effectively product quality and feelings of local ownership to improve ; added value to emerge ; confidence and skills to be increased for all; and conflicts to be more easily resolved." |
Numerous local initiatives around London are promoting young people's understanding of the
environment and their ability to act constructively. They are linked by the London Environmental
Education Forum.
Environmental Education
There are many such initiatives in London and they undertake a wide range of activities.
Requirements for success include the services of a skilled professional social entrepreneur and an
effective governing board. The most successful are those that have engaged with the wider
economy and achieved a degree of financial independence through trading activities.
Community-based regeneration organisations
Here are examples of London community based organisations that are making a great deal of difference locally:
The Bioregional Development Group, based at the Sutton Ecology Centre is promoting local production for local needs. It established the Bioregional Charcoal Company, which supplies charcoal to B&Q. The project shows that coppice woodland management can meet Londoners' need for charcoal, firewood, fencing and furniture. The Group also has projects for local paper production based on flax and hemp ('Feasible Fibres'), reviving the cultivation of traditional fibre crops to help meet the need for textiles and paper; and for reviving the plant oil industry in South London.
Sutton is also one of the few boroughs to establish new allotment sites at a time when others are allowing theirs to be turned into building sites. The allotments at Cheam nursery now accommodate 38 new plots, some conventional, some constructed as raised beds using old railway sleepers, with perforated hoses running through the beds making them self-watering. These are particularly popular with disabled people, including people with spinal damage.
Sutton is also the home of the Centre for Environmental Initiatives which promotes Local Agenda 21 activities in Sutton and elsewhere.
Local Artists played a key role, enabling people to explore new activities. The four pillars of Art, Education, Health and Environment were established and soon the Centre became a vital resource for the locals. Their own contribution has ensured the growth of new projects and services, enabling people to discover new potential in themselves. The Centre's atmosphere of excellence and beauty, and the new opportunities offered, stimulate a growing local interest in urban regeneration.
| The Community Safety Forum |
|---|
| London's Metropolitan Police have played a pro-active role in developing a Partnership Approach. This
involves formalised activities in which police and others work together to improve community
safety. A London-wide Community Safety Forum has been established. The value of this
approach is illustrated by the Police and Community Consultative Groups, established in response
to the Brixton riots in 1981. Set up to enable local communities to voice their feelings about
policing, these have led into the real issues that underlie crime and a positive approach to creating
community safety. To quote the Eileen Conn, Chair of the Southwark Police and Community
Consultative Group: "It is not easy for people from quite different organisational cultures and backgrounds to work together, nor to find a way for community representatives to have a real voice in the policy process. But the SPCCG, through its independence and its informal style of working with an emphasis on respecting and listening to views from all sides, already has a good track record of showing how this can be done." |
Agenda 21 is a not-legally-binding plan of action by and for the whole world community, designed to integrate environment and development for "the fulfilment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future ... Human beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development. They are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with Nature." In other words, the goal is sustainable development. And it involves active participation: the Rio Declaration states explicitly that all concerned citizens should have the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process.
Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 makes the following statement: "Because so many of the problems and
solutions being addressed by Agenda 21 have their roots in local activities, the participation and
co-operation of local authorities will be a determining factor in fulfilling its objectives. ... As the level
of governance closest to the people, they play a vital role in educating, mobilising and responding
to the public to promote sustainable development." Chapter 28 also calls for each local authority
to "enter into a dialogue with its citizens, local organisations and private enterprises and adopt a
Local Agenda 21". Through consultation and consensus building, local authorities "would learn
from citizens and from local, civic, community, business and industrial organisations and acquire
the information needed for formulating the best strategies".
Local Agenda 21
Local Agenda 21 ensures that sustainable development is not just seen as an environmental initiative, but that economic, social, quality of life initiatives are integrated into local government policies and activities. Awareness raising and education, consultations with the public, partnership approaches and monitoring progress towards sustainability are all part of the work.
Local authorities are regularly informed about eachother's 'best practice' initiatives. Right across the UK, they have now drawn up environment reports and sustainability indicators, and initiated consultation processes. Many have integrated sustainable development principles into land-use planning and environmental management systems. Some have linked up with developing countries to develop joint sustainable development initiatives.
| Excerpts from the Habitat Agenda |
|---|
| 'We commit ourselves to ... promoting changes in unsustainable production, and consumption patterns, particularly in industrialised countries, population policies and settlement structures that are more sustainable, reduce environmental stress, promote the efficient and rational use of
natural resources - including water, air, biodiversity, forests, energy sources and land, - and meet
basic needs, thereby providing a healthy living and working environment for all, thereby reducing
the ecological footprint of settlements.' 'The use and transfer of environmentally sound technologies that have a profound impact on consumption and production patterns are prerequisites for sustainable human settlements development. Advanced and appropriate technologies and knowledge-based systems that support their application offer new opportunities for more efficient use of human, financial and material resources, more sustainable industrial practices and new sources of employment.' 'Sustainable human settlements are those that, inter alia, generate a sense of citizenship and identity, co-operation and dialogue for the common good, and a spirit of voluntarism and civic engagement, where all people are encouraged and have an equal opportunity to participate in decision-making and development.' |
| Choices for Bristol |
|---|
| Choices for Bristol is a process to enable everyone in Bristol to participate in creating the future of their city. Following the Chattanooga model, people are being invited to put forward their own "solutions for making Bristol the best city it can be". Meetings will be held to organise everybody's solutions into a shared vision of the community's future. Copies of this will be sent to all participants and to all councillors business leaders and community groups with an invitation to work together "to make sure the goals and solutions you care about are accomplished within the next ten years." |
Progress in taking up the challenges of Local Agenda 21 in the London Boroughs is being monitored by the London Ecology Centre (LEC) , an independent organisation established by the GLC just before its demise. Their report What is holding London back makes interesting, but sobering reading. Out of London's population of 7 million, according to Roger Levett of CAG Consultants, so far only 0.01% has been involved in the Agenda 21 process.
What has been done to create a 'Local Agenda 21' for London as whole in the absence of a
London-wide local authority? The initial lead, following the Rio Summit, was given by the London
Ecology Unit (LEU). In a series of meetings it explored whether a London-wide Forum could
facilitate the process of Agenda 21 in the capital. This initiative was then taken over by the newly
formed Association of London Government which organised a series of working groups whose
reports - covering many points touched on in this manifesto - will be discussed at a special ALG
conference. This is a useful start.
A London-wide Local Agenda 21
Building on the work of organisations such as LEU, the LEC and the ALG - the London Citizens Forum could assemble a steering group to develop a comprehensive London-wide Local Agenda 21, ensuring shared direction of the process, with far wider participation, in order to create a process fully owned by Londoners and also fully accepted by the organs of democratic government.
Habitat II, the United Nations "City Summit" was held in Istanbul in June 1996. It adopted the
Habitat Agenda for the world's cities, towns and villages which was signed by 185 governments.
The plan contains strong advocacy for principles which are as vital to the future of London as they
are for any town anywhere. For example, the importance of women becoming full and equal
partners in political, social and economic life; the improvement of health, and the alleviation of
poverty; facilitating independent initiative and creativity; encouraging a wide range of partnerships,
including with the private sector, and within and between countries. Highly relevant to the main
thrust of this manifesto are the passages referring to the linkages between cities and the global
environment and local responsibility for maintaining its health.
The Habitat Agenda
| The Commission for Sustainable Development |
|---|
| This body was set up by the 1992 Earth Summit to ensure effective follow up, to examine progress
of the implementation of Agenda 21 in order to achieve sustainable development. It works by
consensus. In addition to the UN member states, it allows a wide variety of non-governmental
organisations to participate. "The central role of the CSD, in the true spirit of Rio and in promoting
the implementation of Agenda 21, is to be an instrument of change. Not only, as it is commonly
interpreted, exclusively for better and more responsible environmental stewardship, but for
dramatically improving the quality of decision-making at all levels, from the individual, local and
national to global". Ambassador Henrique Cavalcanti, Chair of the CSD at the 1995 UNED-UK Annual Conference. |
How many Londoners are likely to know that there is a 'Cabinet Committee for London' or that this is advised by the 'Joint London Advisory Panel' consisting of 12 Ministers, 3 representatives from London Boroughs, 3 from business, 2 from planning bodies, and just 1 from the voluntary sector?
Londoners have only the haziest idea of how decisions about London are taken and by whom. The only people they choose as representative are Councillors, who are elected to Borough Councils which have very limited powers and no London-wide function, and MPs who represent particular constituencies and do little for London as a whole. Londoners know vaguely that the big decisions affecting London are taken by someone, somewhere; all they know for certain is that they are seldom even consulted. Londoners are effectively disenfranchised and as a result there is a widespread feeling of powerlessness and disillusionment.
An important aspect of the undemocratic way London is governed is that those who decide how to spend public money are largely unaccountable to Londoners for the way in which they have spent it.
Local authorities have limited roles in the lives of most Londoners, their main function being to provide certain services. The public depends for other important services on commercial organisations which are unelected and unaccountable. Local authorities often have insufficient powers and resources to take effective action in the public interest. As a result, many partnerships have been set up in London for dealing with specific issues or areas. They tend to be partnerships between borough councils, commercial interests and key agencies concerned with major developments. Such partnerships have an extremely important part to play in regenerating London. But at the moment their influence is not balanced by forces representing the views of the people concerned, or representing the natural environment on which the future of London and Londoners ultimately depends.
Another feature of the 'deficits' from which London suffers is that many local councils have been run for decades by the same party, with few opportunities for voters to influence policies that affect them. This breeds arrogance. Councillors who have typically received the votes of only 20% of the electorate (ie. half the 40% who troubled to vote) behave as if they have a divine right to impose their views on the community. Another problem is that councillors are often seriously overstretched: the system demands too much of them. The fact that bureaucracies get established and are run by the same officials for long stretches of time can also be a cause for concern at a time when new approaches are badly needed.
There is currently a debate about regional government in the UK generally: Londoners need to shout for what's best for London, whatever views may prevail for other parts of the country. London is special because it's the capital city and home of the central government. Londoners could and should also influence the development of the European Community: to do so they need their own democratic voice.
| The balkanisation of London government |
|---|
| "Besides the extension of direct rule from Whitehall, another consequence of the loss of city-wide
London government has been its balkanisation. London government is not even the sum of its 33
parts, for London is at war with itself. Governance is now structured in a way that puts each
London Borough in competition with its neighbour." Michael Young in Governing London, published by the Institute of Community Studies. |
Other issues, such as education and training, health, culture, open spaces, utilities, racial harmony and minority needs, also are important factors in London becoming a more sustainable city and they need consideration and co-ordination at a London-wide level for this purpose. Other city-wide functions include London's relations with Europe and other cities - dealing with London as a 'city state' within a global economy.
It makes most sense for a strategic authority's area of responsibility to be co-terminus with that of the London Boroughs, though it will be involved in policy making affecting both smaller and larger areas. It is very widely accepted that both democracy and efficiency would be strengthened by the new authority being directly elected by Londoners. Clearly, an electoral system should be used which ensures effective representation of London's diverse communities.
To ensure that councillors' workload is not too onerous - to widen the range of people who could take it on and make them more effective - there should be a very large number of them. There can then be numerous committees, so that each councillor, in addition to playing their full part in the council, can really get to grips with the subjects of the committees on which he or she serves. And they must be properly paid.
There is also a growing movement, though by no means as yet a consensus, in favour of London having an executive Mayor reporting to a non-executive assembly of elected councillors. This idea is seen by some as inconsistent with the call for wider participation in decision-making. But if the Mayor is committed to such wider participation, this may well be the best way to get the big London-wide issues out into the open. We agree with those who insist that the Mayor should be directly elected and not simply appointed by the political party in power. We also like the suggestion that the City of London should offer to the whole city the office of Lord Mayor, who would be elected in future by all the citizens of Greater London.
| Seeking the informed view |
|---|
| Partnership is becoming a feature of public life in several different contexts. Several methods of obtaining the informed view of citizens (contrast opinion polls which seek to ascertain existing views) have been developed. Citizens juries, used in America and Germany, apply the jury principle to policy issues. Consensus conferencing, a closely related approach, is being used today in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham. |
London's new strategic authority would no doubt continue the practice of working in partnership
with other agencies. But as we have already noted these partnerships tend to leave the citizen out
of the decision-making processes. London needs deep reforms to breathe new life into the
democratic system. In particular there is a need to strengthen the direct political role of individuals,
communities, cultural minorities and the voluntary sector.
Secondly, we need a revolution in the way government is conducted
To address the need for greater participation, we identify two developments.
First, there should be greater opportunities for participation at the local level. One of the problems
with the London Boroughs is that they have little sense of identity. They were formed by
amalgamating smaller boroughs: their size is more appropriate for efficient service delivery than for
effective democratic control and accountability. The sense of identity often relates to much smaller
neighbourhood areas. This is the level at which a more active democracy could be developed. A
flexible approach is needed. In some places it might be appropriate to create town councils,
whose areas might be the same as that of the old boroughs; in others neighbourhood forums
covering smaller areas might be appropriate. London Boroughs should be under an obligation to
formulate schemes to suit the needs and wishes of their electors. Local communities would be
encouraged to put forward proposals for their areas.
The revival of local democracy
If in the long term a consistent pattern emerged, these smaller units could be the wards for electing the members of the strategic authority.
Numerous recommendations for strengthening local democracy were made by the Commission for Local Democracy's 1995 Report Taking Charge: the Rebirth of Local Democracy. As stated in the Report : "The involvement of citizens in the decision-making processes of the authority should be a fundamental principle of our new system of local government". In this manifesto we have sought to show how this view is reinforced by considering how to promote sustainable development in London: this requires a far more participatory democracy. The recommendations of the Commission should be considered carefully, especially the suggestion that local authorities should be under a duty to produce an annual democracy plan for decentralisation and citizens involvement.
Secondly, much wider involvement is needed in local authority decision-making generally,
including policies for the future of the city at the London-wide level. For this, process is more
important than structure: Londoners and non-governmental organisations need to play
constructive roles both locally and in an active London-wide democracy. Thus a new directly
elected strategic authority is not the only change required at this level.
Developing new methods of participation
| The ungovernment of London |
|---|
| "Londoners have ceased to have any collective voice in how their city should be run. Theirs is the
most attenuated democracy in the UK; theirs the most disenfranchised capital city in the Western
world. Ungoverned by its citizens, London has not been run, but run down, by government.
Londoners, the capital, and the nation will remain ever poorer for it until democracy is restored." Michael Young in Governing London published by the Institute of Community Studies, 1996 |
| Canadian Round Tables |
|---|
| The Round Tables vary considerably but they all act as catalysts to promote policies and processes, take decisions by consensus and have representation from all key interest groups. The processes by which they operate include creating visions, developing and reviewing policies and proposals, monitoring the state of the local environment, raising awareness and strengthening local communities. |
Effective participation in decision-making involves dialogue between all the groups concerned, with a view to building consensus. Dialogue on this scale requires a process in which the public has confidence and a sense of ownership. All concerned must have equal access to relevant information. There would be a strong emphasis on learning from example. Wider participation in decision-making is being developed in cities and organisations throughout the world.
| Environmental Resolve - consensus-building |
|---|
| This in an Environment Council programme to help prevent and resolve environmental disputes
using consensus-building processes. It provides an independent facilitation and mediation
service and training in consensus-building. "The successful provision of an integrated transport
system, clean and efficient energy resources, and effective waste management strategies are not
just technical problems; thet involve (and affect) all possible groups within society. Too often
hiowever, partial, technical and imposed solutions (however valuable, generate negative reaction
from one group or another. Mutually agreed solutions (however valuable) are often possible, but
we have - in the past - lacked the processes to enable such solutions to develop, gain agreement
and move into implementation. Consensus-building has a growing track record of success in exactly these types of situation. It provides a clear and common framework through which all parties can come together in a properly managed way. Consensus approaches have been used in a wide range of transport, waste and energy issues; at the strategic level, on highly contentious large scale problems, on small issues at community level and, in relation to them, development of coherent and agreed planning policies". The latest highly contentious large-scale problem to be tackled in this way is the decommissioning of the Brent Star oil platform. It is emphasised that consensus-buuilding is not a blanket approach. It is not normally suitable where there is an issue of public accountability. Further experience will show in what situations it is most appropriate. The process typically takes 3 - 6 months. |
We now summarise some of the suggested functions of such a body and then consider what kind of a body it would need to be and how it would work. All this is put forward as a basis for further discussion. The London Citizens Forum is a 'bottom up' concept which needs to be developed to meet their needs.
The London Citizens Forum would promote the use of techniques for achieving wider participation
in decision-making and consensus building, leading to better decisions and wider 'ownership'
of outcomes, such as action planning, planning for real, city visioning, 'open space' events, and
other tried and tested techniques. These processes often require independent and experienced
facilitators: the London Citizens Forum would coordinate a network of independent consultants.
The circumstances in which these processes are most appropriate are still being explored: the
London Citizens Forum would keep abreast of developments in London and elsewhere.
Participation and consensus building
Building on the work of organisations such as the London Ecology Unit, the London Ecology
Centre and the Association of London Government, the London Citizens Forum could assemble a
steering group to develop a London-wide Local Agenda 21, ensuring shared direction of the
process, with far wider participation, in order to create a process fully owned by Londoners.
Local Agenda 21
The London Citizens Forum could then publish annual reviews of indicators of sustainability and of the growth of participatory democracy in London. Measuring progress towards sustainability and the growth of participatory democracy in London needs to be conducted in a very public way.
The new strategic authority for London should be devised with the full participation of the public.
Many important issues have to be debated. Existing organisations, such as the Association of
London Government, London First and the London Voluntary Service Council as well as MPs,
political parties and campaigning bodies such as Charter 88, will have their say in the debate
about a new authority. But can they be relied on to ensure that sustainability and related issues
are central to the debate about London governance? And will the general public have any real
say, except through the ballot box? The London Citizens Forum would facilitate input into the
debate especially from grassroots organisations and the general public, for example, through
sessions of a 'London People's Parliament'.
Devising the new London government
There will be an important role for cultural activities because they often cross barriers, make
connections and involve a wider public in activating creativity. Cultural efforts can greatly help us
reinvent our city. Activities such as forum drama can trigger the involvement of disadvantaged,
apathetic and alienated people in constructive action. The London Citizens Forum would promote
the use of these mediums for their inspirational, social and economic value, mainly by endorsing
independent cultural initiatives.
Drama and the Arts
Telecommunications offer scope for easier access to information and to elected representatives.
This is constructive provided that access is equally available to all. Other techniques of decision-
making making use of telecommunications are open to abuse unless accompanied by safeguards.
The London Citizens Forum would explore these ideas and assist in arrangements to ensure that
access is available to the general public.
Telematics
There is scope for a wide range of voluntary sector organisations to make a greater contribution to
the development of local and London-wide policy and practice. The London Citizens Forum would
support non-governmental organisations having greater influence in policy and strategy
development.
Voluntary sector participation
| Open Space |
|---|
This is a form of community participation organised by the community itself. Participants create
their own workshops and discussion groups based on what THEY want to talk about. The day
takes the following course:
|
Participants could work on the issues that most concern them. Subjects could include, for example, Local Agenda 21, energy, water, air, food, transport, education or economy. The Forum could equally well be used for more narrowly targeted subjects such as small and medium-sized businesses, co-operatives, fair trade, ethical investment, corporate government and business principles, sustainability indicators, dispute resolution, food production within London, or any aspects of recycling. Many of these are already the subject of studies by various bodies: these could be brought into the Forum.
Reports would be presented to public meetings of the Forum for comment and discussion. They could be collated into an annual review of sustainability issues in London.
The Forum would thus act to facilitate the work of existing organisations who would themselves provide most of the input and resources. The Forum staff would provide whatever back-up and networking services the participants required. Similar principles could be applied to the way in which the Forum carries out the other functions described above.
To carry out these functions we envisage a body which would be
THE CHARACTER OF THE LONDON CITIZENS FORUM
WHAT A LONDON CITIZEN'S FORUM MIGHT ACHIEVE
| The Dragon Awards | Real World | |
|---|---|---|
| These awards, funded by the Corporation of London and Carlton Television and organised by Business in the Community, aim to highlight and give recognition to initiatives undertaken by businesses based in London to regenerate communities throughout the UK. | Real World is a coalition of 32 campaigning charities and pressure groups covering a range of issues - environment, aid, constitutional reform and poverty - with over 2 million supporters between them. It was formed recently in response to the perceived failure of British politics to face up to the challenge of the real world. |
There are many others, including many local groups. All these organisations should be invited to be founder members of the London Citizens Forum: it would in any event need to establish mutually supportive relations with them, collaborating to avoid duplication of effort and seeking to strengthen them by linking them up on sustainable development issues.
The idea of a London Citizens Forum is far from being the first new institution to be proposed to
help implement sustainable development. Sustainable development and Agenda 21 have created
the need for new institutions at all levels from the international to the local.
COMPARABLE TOOLS FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
At the international level the United Nations Commission for Sustainable Development (CSD) has been established as a permanent body. Local communities the world over are experimenting with Local Agenda 21 forums and other arrangements: a wide variety is likely to emerge to serve widely differing needs. They will all be seeking to strengthen the power of existing institutions to play their parts in delivering the goals of sustainable development, as well as encouraging new initiatives. That will be the role of the London Citizens Forum in London.
At the national level, comparison, or perhaps contrast, can be made with the Government's own 'Panel on Sustainable Development', set up as part of the Government's machinery for implementing Agenda 21. The contrast is that such bodies are not 'owned' by the general public. Canadians have since 1988 been using 'Round Tables' to arrange community participation in sustainable development. This is perhaps the closest model for the London Citizens Forum.
There are also many successful examples of the sort of city-wide participatory planning advocated in this manifesto. Chattanooga, USA, is most frequently quoted in this context. The need for joint campaigns and a new kind of politics is reflected in two recent developments on the national stage, Real World and Forum for the Future.
The road to a sustainable London is a long and arduous one. But the journey will also be exciting
and full of explorations of the old and the new. London was at the beginning of the urban age;
many cities all over the world have copied its example. Now we can make an important
contribution to world-wide sustainable development by proving that London can work sustainably
and that social improvement is inseparable from environmental stability.
Getting there
A comprehensive Agenda 21 for London, arrived at through the process we have described, needs to be completed before the start of the new millennium. Whilst many other initiatives go ahead, we suggest the following timetable for establishing the framework called for in this manifesto.
Readers who would like to support the London Citizens Forum, or take part in the discussions, should work through their own organisations or contact SLT direct.
| Examples of consensus building initiatives |
|---|
|
| Forum for the Future |
|---|
| More and more people now believe that the best way forward is to lay much greater emphasis on positive solutions. Most of these solutions already exist, be they technical, political or economic. There are many examples of best practice and pioneering innovation, but few mechanisms or organisations exist to multiply their beneficial impact. This is the mission of the Forum for the Future. This new-formed organisation has formed strong links with the business community. Its activities will include a Sustainable Economic Unit to demonstrate how an environmentally sustainable economy can be both achievable and politically attractive. |