Welcome to an important exchange of views between the World bank, the UNEP, Norwegian development actors and academics.

This seminar has its focus at the local level. It takes place at the very same day of formally establishing the norwegian branch of attac. Attac has as its main thrust to give voice to the frustration over a globalisation process that cause dis-empowerment rather than empowerment, of people, groups and countries that are systemically and structurally marginalised. Global structures, and governments behaviour within global structures are the focus of attention – "under attack".

The frustration is real. There is a lot of inefficiencies in the way we deal with the major political challenges of today, poverty and environment. The Aids pandemic demonstrates, may be clearer than anything, both the system failure, the political failure and the civil society failure to act timely, seriously and effectively.

We, the governments and the global institutions have failed to deliver and we have failed to communicate. Therefore the new focus on global governance to guide the forces of the market is essential. But equally critical is the need to focus our energy on what it takes to overcome barriers and release the potential of poor people on the ground.

This is why the theme for this seminar and the development actors represented here today is so appropriate at the very day when Attac "starts to attack" here in Norway. We need to respond as governments and institutions on the global arena. There truly is a need for change. And we need to respond at the local level, in ways that really make a difference. That is where the test is for credibility, both for attac and for us "under attack".

A lot has been done by the World Bank to respond to the poverty agenda, the environment agenda and the aids agenda. More and more the cutting edge of discussions has moved to civil society and understanding difficult concepts such as social integration, social cohesion and social capital.

I am just back from attending the annual meeting of the African Development Bank. Preceding the meeting was a Symposium on Partnership for African Development. Most meetings of this nature are rather predictable and repetitious. To me, this was different. It was a meeting that demonstrated African leadership. African Presidents and Ministers called the agenda and re-visited the meaning of genuine partnership, both in terms of quality and equality.

They did not avoid speaking about devastating conflicts, vulnerable democracies and the stumbling blocks of good governance. But they were concerned that development partners also must be helped to discover Africa as a variety of countries, in different circumstances; facing different challenges. We heard about new momentum in regional integration efforts, and were advised to discuss performance based on realities, not perceptions. That was refreshing.

Focussing on how we can make better sense at the local level and doing it together, bridging the competencies of the World Bank and the UNEP, and building on local ownership and participation is opening a path for making a difference. It has the potential of being one of the ways of breaking through barriers.

Let me come back with two observations arising from the meeting of the ADB that i will like to leave with you as you enter into your discussions, because i believe they may have some relevance to your discussions:

• In all our talk about the need for building ownership, we must be able to discern that it is there – if we allow it to unfold. In all our technocratic, well-meaning, check list behaviour based on shared problem analysis and development consensus, we may have, and I use president Chissano’s words, "undermined the capacity of African countries to think differently". We may have lost our curiosity and do not see the forest for all the trees. If that is so, it is serious for sustainable development at the local level.

• Secondly, we need accountability in the partnership. Based on reality, not perceptions. The reality for countries and the reality for people. More and more i learn that politics is about claiming the clue to what is reality.

Let us remind each other that the need is not for a new conceptual exercise. The need is to identify and overcome concrete barriers to action – in a partnership that is "not undermining local capacities to think differently".

The reality about poverty and marginalisation can only be owned by people living in it. We need to be humble, because we are both part of the problem and part of the solution. We are not neutral agents of good will. Accountability for progress towards the international development goals we have subscribed to, has both an input side and an output side:

• The resources we put in,
• The machinery and processes, the institutions and the relationships that turn inputs into outputs
• And the end results.

Let us be real. The institutional framework for development is a tool, a part of the machinery, not the output or end result. Streamlining efforts is important, but development is more about messy, unpredictable, creative and fragile processes where stakeholders find ways to align interests and overcome barriers. Sustainable development has more than anything to do with policy choice of a political nature. Within an enabling policy environment.

We cannot deal with accountability for performance in poverty reduction and sustainable development unless we bring in the accountability for inputs, the accountability for relationships, processes and machinery of development and the outputs including access to and use of development benefits. This is why we are deeply in it together,- if we take partnership in the real sense of the word seriously.

In the recent months i have started to ask myself if we have substituted all we have learned about political processes with the mantra; prsp. By all means, finding a national framework to set the direction for national development efforts and aligning development partners for this purpose is a powerful and critically important tool. But it is only a tool. A tool for generating and rooting participation and ownership, for aligning stakeholders and for establishing mutual accountability.

A major challenge is to link the various arenas and concerns that call for a comprehensive policy framework. One cannot have de-linked sets of poverty reduction strategies, national aids strategies and national environment strategies – since choices to respond to poverty, aids protection, prevention and care, natural resource management, environmental degradation, livelihoods and social cohesion are so mutually dependent and interconnected.

I have noticed how easy it is to get caught up in conceptual discussions. Not just on PRSP methodology but also on what should be listed first, economic growth and poverty reduction. What really matters is that we do hold on to the interplay between growth, poverty, social cohesion and the environment as crucial to sustainable development. We need to develop more knowledge and a better practical understanding on how these issues are interrelated. In a way that demonstrates both the moral and the political imperative for action.

A key focus for attention is on building the infrastructure of ground rules and knowledge that is needed to make energy systems, industry and transport more sustainable and pro-poor. We need stronger agreement on how to make the international agreements we already have more efficient and we need to identify where countries will achieve better results by cooperating. Here both World Bank and UNEP have important roles to play.

The normative work on codes and regulations within the un has to be followed up in implementation. Nine years after the Agenda 21 in rio we have learnt that it is not the single act of agreeing to a text which brings the world forward, it is the process of implementation. It is my hope that this workshop can stimulate the World Bank and UNEP to work closer together to assist poor countries in building capacity in order to better implement sustainable policies.

I am pleased that this workshop takes place at the University of Oslo. The Ministry much appreciates the active and constructive role the centre for development and environment (sum) has taken in organising this event. Sustainable development is very much a question of learning from the past to plan for the future. A university auditorium therefore seems the appropriate setting for the discussion that will follow. It is also nice to see so many students present engaged in a constructive dialogue with the World Bank instead of in an atmosphere of protest.

This seminar is a manifestation of a growing partnership between the world bank and the norwegian government in the area of sustainable development. And an example of seeking to nurture strategic alliances between the un and the brfetton woods institutions, focussing such alliances on country implementation.

An aim of this workshop is also to initiate a stronger dialogue between world bank staff and norwegian institutions and individuals working in the field of sustainable development. We regard this as a meeting place where both the World Bank and UNEP can gain knowledge and make contact with relevant norwegian expertise.

The preparation of the 2002 World Development Report on Sustainable Development can be an important instrument for this dialogue. We are pleased that there is a space also for norwegian contribution to this process.

Let me close by referring to what is now expected of us in the process leading up to Johannesburg in 2002. The focus is on deliverables and commitments. G77 countries and OECD countries have a range of challenges to deal with to meet the expectation. We are in a series of events with crucial importance for the outcome; the ldc conference, just finished. The un special sessions on aids, habitat and children. The un conference on racism. The preparations for a new round in wto. The conference on financing for development in Mexico early next year and Johannesburg.

Each of these processes will test our political will, the ability to have such a will carried by public opinion and our creativity to find new solutions in different kinds of partnerships and alliances - between public, private and civil society actors.

For our government it means that global poverty, linked with the issue of environment is high on our political agenda now as we approach the election. There are real divides in the norwegian political landscape on these issues. We have seen consequences of a more inward looking and self-centered political environment in several oecd countries. A Norway on a retreating front in international solidarity will be a major defeat. Norway must continue to be a strong and strategic partner in fighting global poverty, as a matter of moral obligation as well as of self interest.

We have done a lot. But we need to do better in linking our development partnership with countries and our policies and positions in the global system. We need to be better at bringing together the various areas of policy nationally. It is a question of coherence. And it is a question of credibility.

There are similar challenges for you as you pursue the agenda for this meeting. We have done a lot. But we need to do better. All actors need to do better.

Thank you for your attention.