Second WCD Forum Meeting
Sharing the Knowledge - Charting the Future
April 6-8, 2000 - Cape Town, South Africa

Closing Speech
Professor Kader Asmal, WCD Chair

Friends,
I have often, as chairman of committees and meetings, been left with the challenging task of making concluding remarks after hours of fractious debate. Today I have a more pleasant task before me-it is clear that the Forum has shown its full engagement and commitment to the WCD process, and I would like to thank all of you for your exemplary prison discipline over the last two days. This shows that it is possible to consult constructively with a wide range of interest groups on complex issues through meetings such as this, and that the process can only make our recommendations more relevant to the concerns of the different constituencies.

The Commission has been in 'listening mode' during this meeting, and in keeping with the entire WCD process of participation and review, I assure you that we have listened - sometimes painfully- but always with an open mind. We shall take full account of your comments as we move toward drafting the final report.

We are obviously very gratified by the review of the knowledge base that you have undertaken. We know that gaps and shortcomings remain. We shall do what we can to address them, yet the general message we take away is that the Forum feels that good quality work has been done and your comments suggest we have indeed compiled a sufficient body of knowledge which we can use in developing our final report.

I can assure you that our report will draw heavily on the evidence and the facts, reflecting the knowledge base; we will not simply pander to vested interests on either side of the debate. Some of you have expressed concerns about the roles of different partners in implementing the WCD guidelines. As a Minister myself, I am only too aware of the key role played by governments, and the need to ensure intergovernmental processes to adopt and adapt our recommendations to country contexts. Mr Kakakhel of UNEP has kindly suggested that we may launch just such a process through the UN family, in collaboration with UNEP, and we shall explore that further with him and Dr Toepfer.

I was also very impressed by the industry group which met for three days, presented clear proposals, and took the initiative to share these with the wider group. After a rather shy start, the industry has shown it can take a collective initiative - this is an excellent model for the future and can only strengthen our process of dialogue. The NGOs have also engaged constructively as they have done throughout the whole WCD process.

Your discussions here have emphasised the need for a report that is practical and useable. As I said in my opening remarks, we share your view and we do not wish to leave a worthy tome to gather dust on the shelf, but rather to develop practical responses to the issues that generated the Commission in the first place. We are all aware that this inevitably includes the challenge of building local capacity to implement such complex projects on the ground.

One of the key issues discussed here has been the future of the WCD process once the report is published. Many of you have said, quite reasonably, that you cannot commit to buying the report "site unseen". Others, like the industry group, the African Development Bank, and the UNEP have committed to its dissemination well in advance. But let's be quite clear - the report will not satisfy everyone on all points and the Commission will not dilute its content to the extent of being completely anodyne. Nor will it answer all the questions you may have. In that sense I am confident that there will be a need for continuing dialogue in the future and the Forum clearly needs to discuss the way forward when the report becomes available. We shall explore the possibilities for a third Forum meeting to discuss implementation of the report and the next steps in the process, as many of you feel that this is essential.

Let me leave you with a few thoughts, an extended metaphor, on that regard:
Four decades ago, President John F. Kennedy spoke after the failed U.S. invasion of much smaller Cuba: "Victory has a thousand fathers. Defeat is an orphan."

That "defeat" came because, I would suggest, the decision was made without transparency, without participation, without democracy. It came from a handful of like-minded, self-selected men, who acted in secrecy, from the top down, without regard to the past or concern for the future.

I cite it because it represents the epitome of the old process of decision-making. The old school of forming policy. As such, it stands in sharp contrast to our own.

But in the larger context, I use it because I have been thinking for some time about what I call "the feminisation of policy, decisions, and politics." People understandably ask me what exactly I mean by that phrase?

On one level it simply means bringing more women into the process, listening to their different point of view, adopting their perspective that does not often get heard, even though they represent 53 percent of the work force, especially regarding the use of water, power, and food.

On another level, the 'feminisation of policy' seeks a less confrontational, egotistical, exclusive and zero-sum approach in which I win at your expense. It replaces this with an inclusive approach that constructs creative solutions, makes mutually agreed upon decisions, and promotes collective bargaining founded on broad education.

But only now, in my capacity of Chair of the WCD, and over the past few days, do I recognise the full extent of this new approach. What does it mean? What does it take? At this level, the 'feminisation of policy' is metaphorical: the WCD is quite simply the process of incubating and giving birth to a living, breathing organism.

Several years ago, in Gland, the germ of an idea took root, conceived in consensus, transparency and shared self-interest. It was an intercourse of ideas, and the seed was at the time deceptively simple: a pure report analysing and advocating conditions and guidelines for the construction, operation, upkeep and decommissioning of dams around the world.

The Commission quickly became the womb of this seed, providing nourishment as it grew. The organism was fed by a broad knowledge base, deep analyses, cross-cutting critiques, and your personal experience. For several years there has been no real distinction between mother and child. The primary concerns were growth and development.

During that time the doomsayers predicted it would fail, miscarry, or otherwise lose the child prematurely. None of this has happened, nor is it likely to happen, because we recognise that the report is not some mechanical thing that was engineered, but an organic creature which grows out of us all.

Over the past few days, our challenge has changed. Now all of you, all of the anxious mothers and fathers, no longer doubt the certainty of our child's birth, but want to know what it will look like, and if it will bear your personal imprint. Will it have your eyes? Nose? Pigment? Hair? Will it be athletic, musical, intelligent? And of course from the polar extremes, each side wants to know its gender, will it be pro-homme or pro-damme?

This is the most critical stage in any woman's pregnancy, and the most critical stage in ours. We must not only carry our baby to term, in quiet confidence -- but ensure that all of you, all of its parents, are prepared in advance for your responsibility, and that it is, indeed, your child to raise.

For under the mandate of Gland, we, the Commission, will perish in the process of childbirth. Upon delivery of the child - the Final Report due in November -- midwives and nurses will release it into your care and your capacity to raise.

The transition and release will not simply come overnight, suddenly, one day in the huge November launch, but over the weeks and months and years ahead, through seminars, summits and briefings for all the multi-stakeholders. Workshops will involve each of you, from export banks and credit agencies, to NGOs and to Industry groups like ICOLD and ICID. The Forum is critical to that transition. For that reason we welcome the proposal to reconvene the Forum early next year to chart the future course of action.

This involves no small amount of trust on our part, and a great deal of responsibility on yours. For as a newborn, the Report, with all its exhaustive knowledge base, will be strong, bright and healthy, but it will still be only an infant. It will be neither an "enfant terrible" nor, I'm afraid, "the Second Coming." If it is to survive into adulthood, and flourish, you must, like all good parents, set an example for it, knowing it will watch your every move, pepper you with questions, drain your of energy and look to you as a role model.

With that in mind, let us conclude with not only the hope but the expectation that this child we will soon give birth to will, with its hundreds of mothers and fathers, prove victorious. Let us work together to ensure that he - or she - will outlive us all and play a role in the lives of our grandchildren and in the lives of their grandchildren to come.

So in closing this second Forum meeting I would like to thank Commissioners, participants, translators and the secretariat for their interest and time, and your commitment to following through the work that we began so long ago.