 ID: 125969
Added: 2008-06-09 6:07
Modified: 2008-06-09 6:09
Refreshed: 2009-01-07 23:42
|
|
| Appendix D. Post-Workshop Interviews |
Document(s) 18 of 21
Name | Title | Date | Catherine Day | Desk Officer for European Union External Relations, Cabinet Office, UK Government | May 19, 2006 | John Sewell | Senior Scholar, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC | May 25, 2006 | Geoffrey Oldham | Chair of Trustees, Science and Development Network (SciDev), UK | May 25, 2006 | Inge Kaul | Director, Office of Development Studies, United Nations Development Programme | May 25, 2006 | Mukesh Kapila | Senior Advisor, Crises and HIV/AIDS, Departments of Health Action in Crises & HIV/AIDS, World Health Organization | June 6, 2006 | Ralph Daley | Director, United Nations University, International Network on Water, Environment & Health, Hamilton, Canada | June 6, 2006 | Andres Rozental | President, Mexican Council on Foreign Relations | June 9, 2006 | Adil Najam | Associate Professor, Tufts University, The Fletcher School | June 12, 2006 | Richard Cooper | Maurits C Boas Professor of International Economics, Harvard University | June 13, 2006 | Anne-Marie Slaughter | Dean, Woodrow Wilson School of Public & International Affairs, Princeton University | June 14, 2006 | Paul Heinbecker | Director, Centre for Global Relations, Governance & Policy, Wilfrid Laurier University; Senior Research Fellow, Centre for International Governance Innovation, Waterloo, Canada | June 14, 2006 | Maureen O’Neil | President, International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada | June 15, 2006 | John English | Executive Director, Centre for International Governance Innovation, Waterloo, Canada | June 15, 2006 | Francisco Sagasti | President, Agenda: Peru | June 16, 2006 | David Victor | Director, Stanford University, Program on Environment and Sustainable Development | June 19, 2006 | Tim Evans | Assistant Director General, Evidence & Information for Policy, World Health Organization | July 5, 2006 |
Interview QuestionsJust by way of a quick reminder about the basis for the L-20 project, you will recall that the project rested on several premises. First, existing international institutions and processes have proven themselves incapable of making globalization more equitable or of resolving deadlocks over a series of critical issues closely related to globalization. Second, Government Leaders have a unique and indispensable role to play in addressing these pressing global issues. Third, a new Leaders-level forum based on the success of the existing G-20 Finance Ministers group could be the vehicle for making significant progress in resolving these problems. With this background in mind, we would like you to reflect on the following questions. In light of the discussions you participated in, do you believe that the L-20 approach or some variant of it (see attached chart for composition options) has value and should be attempted?
What operational steps should be taken to launch an L-20 group (e.g. beginning with a single meeting on a particular subject or committing to a regular series), and in what timeframe (e.g. as required or annual)? In particular, how should the United States be encouraged to participate in the L-20 approach?
What agenda item(s) should the first L-20 meeting(s) address?
What key international developments or trends have appeared during the period of the project (2003–2006) which might materially alter the usefulness or focus of an L-20 group?
Turning to the project itself, we would value your reaction to the following questions. Was the general format for the project productive, both in terms of the range of participants and the subjects covered?
What suggestions would you have for future projects of this kind?
Document(s) 18 of 21
|
|
