Editor: The Halifax Declaration shows how the Universities and student body were used to usher in Agenda 21. Link to Halifax Declaration which is posted below. Link to International Association of Universities Please spend time studying the IAU as it is important to understanding the role and goals of the UN and its agencies as it moves us closer to World gov. Sustainable Development, Global Warming/Climate Change, Renewable Energy, Water Shortage etc. are all Mechanisms used to convince people of the need for World gov. Ask yourself why neither “gov” or media ever mentioned the real goals of the UN. If they did they would expose the Fraud they are so heavily involved in.

Creating a Common Future: University Action for Sustainable Development

(A preparatory conference to UNCED of universities from across the world

Over the period 8-11 December 1991, the presidents and senior representatives of 33 universities from 10 countries on 5 continents met in Halifax, Canada to take stock of the role of universities regarding the environment and development.  They were joined by a number of senior representatives from business, the banking community, governments, and non-governmental organizations.  The meetings were sponsored by the International Association of Universities, the United Nations University, the Association of Universities and Colleges Canada and Dalhousie University, Canada, which also provided the detailed planning and secretariat support.

At the end of the meetings, the following declaration was released by the conference:


Human demands upon the planet are now of a volume and kind that, unless changed substantially, threaten the future well-being of all living species. Universities are entrusted with a major responsibility to help societies shape their present and future development policies and actions into the sustainable and equitable forms necessary for an environmentally secure and civilised world.

As an international community marshals its endeavours for a sustainable future focused upon the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Brazil in 1992, universities in all countries are increasingly examining their own roles and responsibilities. At Talloires France in October 1990, a conference of university presidents from every continent, held under the auspices of Tufts University of the United States, issued a declaration of environmental commitment that has attracted the support of more than 100 universities from dozens of countries. At Halifax, Canada, in December 1991, the specific challenge of environmentally sustainable development was addressed by the presidents of universities from Brazil, Canada, Indonesia, Zimbabwe and elsewhere, as well as by the senior representatives of the International Association of Universities, the United Nations University and the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada.

The Halifax meeting added its voice to those many others world-wide that are deeply concerned about the continuing widespread degradation of the Earth’s environment, about the pervasive influence of poverty on the process, and about the unsustainable environmental practices now so widespread. The meeting expressed the belief that solutions to these problems can only be effective to the extent that the mutual vulnerability of all societies, in the south and in the North, is recognised, and the energies and skills of people everywhere be employed in a positive, co-operative fashion. Because the educational, research and public service roles of universities enable them to be competent, effective contributors to the major attitudinal and policy changes necessary for a sustainable future, the Halifax meeting invited the dedication of all universities to the following actions:

(1) To ensure the voice of the university be clear and uncompromising in its ongoing commitment to the principle and practice of sustainable development within the university, and at the local, national and global levels.

(2) To utilise the intellectual resources of the university to encourage a better understanding on the part of society of the inter-related physical, biological and social dangers facing the planet Earth.

(3) To emphasise the ethical obligation of the present generation to overcome those current malpractice’s of resource utilisation and those widespread circumstances of intolerable human disparity, which lie, at the root of environment unsustainability.

(4) To enhance the capacity of the university to teach and practice sustainable development principles, to increase environmental literacy, and to enhance the understanding of environmental ethics among faculty, students and the public at large.

(5) To cooperate with one another and with all segments of society in the pursuit of practical capacity-building and policy measures to achieve the effective revision and reversal of those current practices which contribute to environmental degradation, to South-North disparities an the inter-generational inequity.

(6) To employ all channels open to the university to communicate these undertakings to UNCED, to governments and to the public at large.

Done at Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada, the 11th day of December, 1991.


Creating a Common Future: An Action Plan for Universities.


Follow up to the Halifax Conference on University Action for Sustainable Development, December 9-11, 1991.  Halifax: Lester Pearson Institute for International Development, Dalhousie University, 1992.         This pamphlet is issued as part of the follow-up activities to the University Action for Sustainable Development Conference held in Halifax, December 9-11, 1991.


“The justification for our existence as universities is that we must make a difference to the human condition, to the social and economic conditions of humankind.  Even if one accepts that we are in the business of the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, we are still responsible in terms of the development of our peoples.” Walter Kamba, Vice-Chancellor, University of Zimbabwe and President, International Association of Universities

University presidents and senior officials from universities, governments, the business community and NGOs from five continents met in Halifax, Canada in December, 1991 to discuss the role of universities in improving the capacity of countries to address environment and development issues.

An important and somewhat similar process had been initiated at the Tufts European Centre in Talloires, France in October, 1990.  It had become clear to the Halifax conference organizers that the UNCED meetings, planned for Rio de Janeiro in June 1992, must be widely seen to be a catalyst for serious efforts to steer the world towards sustainable development patterns.  It was also clear that the university community must be challenged to re-think and to re-construct many of its traditional activities and frameworks in order to play a leadership role in a world at serious risk of environmental destruction.

The conference was organized by the Association of Universities and Colleges Canada, the International Association of Universities, the United Nations University, and Dalhousie University.  Support was received from the Department of External Affaires and International Trade Canada, the Canadian International Development Agency, and the Province of Nova Scotia.  Mr. Ivan Head, past President of the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) served as conference chairman.  Among those delivering key-note addressed were the Hon. Jean Charest, Minister of the Environment, Canada; Professor Walter Kamba, President of the I.A.U. and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Zimbabwe; and Mr. John Bell, chair of the Canadian Delegation to UNCED.

In readiness for the conference at Rio, key papers from the conference are being published in a special issue of Higher Education Policy, the journal of the International Association of Universities.  The detailed proceedings of the conference are being published by Dalhousie University and will be available, upon request after May 1, 1992.

This brochure contains two essential outcomes of the Halifax conference:

·        A follow-up plan of action, as a basis for practical strategic plans for sustainable development—details of which are now being refined and pursued by many of the universities represented in Halifax and by their ‘converts’.  Emphasis is to be placed on concrete actions at home as well as the vigorous and strategic use of worldwide networks.

·        A Declaration, done at Halifax, which provides a general direction being pursued by the universities involved.  Emphasis is to be placed on education and training, on research and policy information, on inter-disciplinary work and on a pro-active role by universities for sustainable development.

Those in attendance at the Halifax conference believe the UNCED process is a critical step towards an environmentally sustainable future and pledge their support.  They invite their colleagues in other universities and institutions to help ensure the long-term success of the UNCED challenge to create a sustainable and more equitable world.

We try to enlarge the activities of the universities not only on the academic side but also in the action programs because of pressing physical needs and because of the ethical aspect of the problem of the poor.  With respect to the environment, the tensions between those who have been successful in the process of development and those who have been left behind is very, very serious.” Sukadji Ranuwihardjo, Director of Higher Education, Indonesia


This plan ‘model’ is strategic in approach –not detailed. It is intended to provide a clear sense of direction for a number of core activities to which many others may be added and, of course, from which some may be subtracted. Examples of other possible activities which originated at the conference appear in the recommendations which follow this plan.

This plan outline identifies short- and long-term goals at the local and regional, national, and international levels. The short-term goals are those to be effected between December 12, 1991 and June, 1992; the longer-term goals are those which continue past the June 1992 UNCED Conference. While this preliminary plan focuses on the period leading up to the UNCED Conference, it also examines some mechanisms for designing longer term strategies.


The local-regional framework comprises actions which may be instituted within the university itself, and those which require that the university interact within the geographic region where it is situated.
Within the university itself, the following actions might be considered in the short-term:

Unit/focal Point Identification: the first step recommended is to identify a unit or focal point responsible for developing a sustainable development strategy for the university. Minimally the unit/focal point would be an individual: ideally the unit should be a small task group linked clearly to an administrative unit in the university for support purposes. The unit must work comfortably across the university system –so the working style will be important. It should not be a new centre or bureaucratic body: it is simply to be seen as a small task force to help refine and launch these initiatives. The president of the university should work closely with this unit to demonstrate personal commitment to the process.

University Sustainable Development Strategy: It is suggested that within two months of establishment, the sustainable development unit should have completed an initial sustainable development strategy for its particular university (i.e. by March 31, 1992 a the latest). The emphasis should be on actions and results — not on lengthy papers.  Such a strategy could have two time frameworks: (1) up to June 1992; (2) longer-term. Some longer-term, outputs can/should be started before June, 1992. A more refined strategy can be designed in the later period (e.g. April – August 92).

Practical Tasks: It is suggested that, in the initial strategy, a number of clear and operationally practical tasks be identified. For the shorter-term, each university strategy might include the following eight activities:

  1. A meeting between the president and senior management of the university to explain the conference and its outcome and to distribute copies of the key conference papers (including the Halifax Declaration and this follow-up strategy). The group would determine the best approach for follow-up in their particular university. It is suggested this be undertaken in January, 1992. The Board of Governors and also Senate should, it is suggested, be informed of the process underway and the proposed university specific strategy should be tabled at senate, once it is drafted.


  1. A meeting between the president and other university presidents within the province/state/region should be arranged to explain the conference outcome to those not represented and to encourage them to endorse the Halifax Declaration and to participate in this process. Some regional mechanisms for follow-up might well occur and should be encouraged. It is suggested this should be undertaken in January 1992. Obviously it can be added to the agenda of routine meetings.


  1. Each university represented (and endorsing the Halifax Declaration) might organize at least one substantial public presentation on sustainable development and the challenge represented by UNCED, at which time reference should also be made by the organizers to this process. The focus should be on the challenge and content of sustainable development, not narrowly on the process of UNCED itself. The sessions might include panelists from several disciplines (sciences, law, social sciences, arts). Obviously the more ambitious the event(s) the better — but since this should not be viewed as a single event, but the start of a process, it is important to make a beginning. The suggested initial session is before the end of March, 1992, so a maximum number of students can participate.


Each university might encourage faculty to review their course curricula and also their research agendas to see how sustainable development might best be integrated in and between disciplines. This should not be introduced in a “threatening” way. Special workshops for faculty on sustainable development ideas might be considered as one way of approaching the situation. (To be started before June, 1992.)


  1. Each university might sponsor a series of university prizes in sustainable development, linked to UNCED. They could be for papers contributed by students and also by faculty from any discipline.


  1. Each university might review all university linkage projects to explore how sustainable development elements are being or might be addressed.


  1. Each university might undertake a review of its own “sustainable development” impact on the region, e.g. from recycling paper to “green architecture”. This goes beyond a narrow tradition of “environmental audit”, to include a proactive dimension.


  1. Each university might participate in a “Sustainable Development Day”, linked to UNCED in June, 1992.

These eight activities only represent a starting approach. Obviously the sustainable development units in each university might add new activities, drawing from the Recommendations for Follow-Up to this strategy and adding to it also.

Within each university in the long term: Proposals for the longer-term are not identified in this strategic plan, but a number of ideas are listed in the Recommendations for Follow-Up. A longer-term strategic plan for sustainable development should be identified as an outcome of the work of the particular university units for sustainable development and their work. A representative task force from these universities could be set up to design the draft for a longer-term strategy to be completed by May 31, 1992 (in advance of UNCED). It could be along the lines of this initial plan, i.e. some eight or so strategic steps, with additional recommendations in an annex that can be routinely enlarged upon as ideas are exchanged within the network of universities. The strategic steps are likely to include curricula and teaching steps, new or reinforced research programmes across disciplines, inter-university linkage arrangements, new approaches with NGOs and governments, etc.

With respect to the interaction of the university and the local region in the short-term each university might undertake the following:

  1.  University presidents and representatives from the sustainable development units might meet with the Minister of the Environment of their province to brief the Minister on the process underway. Similar meetings could be held with appropriate representatives of chambers of commerce, NGOs, federal departments, municipal governments. The precise mechanism would vary from province to province; for example, while the initial meeting with the responsible minister would be a special meeting, the other meetings could be through the mechanism of adding the subject to appropriate conferences that are already being organized, at lunch-time speeches that the presidents may already be scheduled to give to Chambers of Commerce, and so on.


  1. Each university might arrange to give a series of talks in schools on sustainable development and UNCED.


  1. Each university might work with the Citizens Support Programme, linked to the Ministry of the Environment and UNCED, in order to contribute ideas and help make it effective.


  1. Each university might meet with local NGOs to see how they can work effectively together for sustainable development (e.g. see the ideas in the Recommendations for Follow-Up re: possibilities in cooperation with the Red Cross).


  1. Each University might meet with representatives of key sectors in the province (e.g. banks, forest industry representatives) to work out ways to cooperate for sustainable development


  1. Each university might meet with local town/city councils to see how they might cooperate in support of sustainable development.


The national framework comprises both actions within the national university community, and the role of the universities within the national fabric.
Within the national university community, in the short-term where there are overall bodies representative of the national community of universities, they might be encouraged to establish a sustainable development advisory group which would comprise a mix of university presidents and members of the sustainable development units. The groups should meet by March 1992 at the least, to review progress at the national level — following up on the Halifax Conference and preparing both for UNCED and for a longer-term sustainable development national university-wide strategy. This could be an integrative process linked clearly with the various university strategies for sustainable development.
A list of possible shorter and longer-term outputs appears in the Recommendations for Follow-Up, from which to make a start. In the Canadian context, the body responsible for this work will presumably be the AUCC. In the case of Canada, the secretariat of the AUCC will be drafting a preliminary set of goals and strategic plan for the AUCC regarding sustainable development.
With respect to the role of the universities within the nation, in the short-term, both individually and through the appropriate national body (e.g. AUCC), the universities might draw up a number of activities in support of sustainable development at the national level.


Four particular activities are suggested:

  1. Work with the national (Canadian) delegation for UNCED, preparatory to UNCED.


  1. Review the key public policy documents on sustainable development and write critiques of them both to assist the sponsor (e.g. CIDA) and by way of encouraging public awareness and interest.


  1. Support national citizen participation programmes through the provision of skills and advocacy.


  1. Approach the national media services (e.g. CBC) to identify practical ways the universities can contribute to national programmes on sustainable development.


A longer-term strategy will need to be prepared by the national bodies (e.g. AUCC).




At the international level, universities in the short-term, could take the following actions:


  1. Support the President of the IAU, in cooperation with UNU, to represent the international university community at UNCED.


  1. Establish an appropriate international council for sustainable development linked coherently to the IAU. IAU to draft a proposed mandate, in cooperation with UNU and Halifax Conference organizers.


  1. Endorse the idea and assist the Rector of the University of Rio de Janeiro in his proposal to organize a parallel university conference to UNCED


  1. Push to have environmental education placed higher on the UNESCO agenda.


  1. Promote the concept that a major international prize in sustainable development be initiated.


  1. Build sustainable development concepts into all the international linkage programmes of those universities present and signatories to the Halifax Declaration drawing upon the key principles found in the EMDI model, insofar as these are appropriate. Develop new programmes in sustainable development between the universities at the conference.

A longer-term strategy will need to be prepared — presumably the proposed international council might be responsible for this and it would build on the UNCED lessons.


If the university is to provide leadership in sustainable development, must it not first set its own house in order?  Can universities provide leadership in debate on the social and ethical dimensions of sustainable development at a time when many question the university’s role in the development of ethics and ethical positions?   And yet if the university does not provide such leadership and does not produce graduates who genuinely live the principles of sustainable development, who will, and what hope is there for us?” Howard Clark, President, Dalhousie University


These ideas were put forward by persons attending the conference and are not ranked, nor were they formally ratified by the conference.

  1. Within each university, activities could include:
  1. identifying a unit focal point on campus to be responsible for developing a sustainable development strategy for the university;
  2. completing an initial sustainable development strategy for the university by the sustainable development unit within two months of establishment;
  3. a meeting between the president and senior management of the university to explain the Halifax UASD Conference;
  4. organizing at least one public panel presentation on the challenge and content of sustainable development and how this relates to UNCED;
  5. a commitment to encourage faculty to review curricula to see how sustainable development concepts might be integrated into their courses. Some form of support seminar may be necessary for this idea to work;
  6. sponsoring prizes in sustainable development linked to UNCED. These might be for students, faculty, and administration;
  7. examining all university linkage projects to explore how sustainable development elements might be infused;
  8. conducting an environmental audit of the university;
  9. participation in a Sustainable Development Day linked to UNCED in June, 1992. Universities around the world could ideally agree on the same date;
  10. examining the university in the context of the Green Plan (or comparable documents in other countries);
  11. examining existing research programs to see how they might contribute more to sustainable development imperatives;
  12. endorsing the Talloires declaration;
  13. the distribution of the Nova Scotia Round Table on Environment and Economy and the Tufts University papers dealing with education and curriculum development (or comparable documents) to students and faculty for comment and response;
  14. designing new and collaborative environment and sustainable development research projects involving faculty and students;
  15. meetings with faculty, students, and the Board of Governors to respond to the challenge of how the university will deal with the sustainable development;
  16. increasing the number of fellowships for students from developing countries to study in Canada;
  17. encouraging innovative educational technologies for communicating environmental issues;
  18. developing more partnerships with business and industry for sustainable development;
  19. developing more partnerships with NGOs in order to learn about their work with sustainable development and also as a means of contributing to it. Some examples, using the Red Cross and Red Crescent as a model, might include:
  • exploring cooperation with national and international Red Cross or Red Crescent societies and then linking university research to support the societies’ field operations for sustainable development,
  • exploring methods of twinning university projects with Red Cross or Red Crescent societies’ projects to see how they can reinforce each other,
  • helping reinforce South/South cooperative projects with the Red Cross/Crescent. This is a Red Cross priority approach and is frequently put into practice,
  • linking some centers of excellence with Red Cross/Crescent centres of strength, e.g. the Bangladesh cyclone centers and early warning systems; Finnish Red Cross blood bank and research; several disaster preparedness centres which are linked to sustainable development, such as in Ethiopia,
  • supporting research, advocacy, and training into- the ever-growing plight of refugees, working with the Red Cross/Crescent or UNHCR,
  • encouraging faculty to be available for front-line environment project work with the Red Cross for which advice is frequently needed,
  • cooperating with the Red Cross in such fields as women and sustainable development and bringing the handicapped more fully into society,
  • cooperating with the Red Cross/Crescent to provide training for sustainable development to persons willing to work as Red Cross/Crescent volunteers.
  1. publicizing the student winners of the Globe ’92 Environmental Audit Competition and supporting annual event among Canadian universities;
  2. encouraging university libraries to purchase more documents written or published in the South;
  3. examining the realignment of existing academic units to address sustainable development while at the same time not compartmentalizing the theme;
  4. building more South/North research projects as a means of learning about sustainable development from both perspectives;
  5. enabling and encouraging more South/South cooperation in linkage projects;
  6. developing teaching teams to serve as models for interdisciplinary research;
  7. fostering two-way exchanges of personnel to promote capacity building for sustainable development;
  8. establishing chairs in sustainable development and sponsoring links between universities for sharing speakers in this field;
  9. designing continuing education programs with respect to environmental issues for NGOs, public service units, and businesses;
  10. designing an environmental literacy program that would be widely available and encouraged;
  11. meeting with local town and city councils to see how they might cooperate in support of sustainable development;
  12. developing forums for awareness and information exchange, education, and public debate;
  13. designing interdisciplinary seminars which examine a sample of university linkages from the point of view of sustainable development;
  14. encouraging leading issue research programs and teaching orientations that foster inter-disciplinary work;
  15. supporting a network on universities and sustainable development within the region;
  16. encouraging outward bound sustainable development projects that reach across the university and into the regions where the university is situated;
  17. establishing a prestigious prize to encourage far-reaching analysis and thought on sustainable development;
  18. funding scholarships in sustainable development;
  19. forming think-tanks, with people drawn from government, industry, and academe to examine the interaction of sustainable development with particular disciplines;
  20. examining appropriate technology and recognize that to be “appropriate” technology must be environmentally sound, economically viable, and relevant in the social context;
  21. assessing community needs for environmental information, assessment, and technology transfer and seeing how university programs might respond;
  22. examining the Environmental Management Development in Indonesia Project model for its application to linkages;
  23. developing fund raising methods for sustainable development to determine the applicability of innovative approaches, such as debt-for-nature swaps, developed by organizations like Conservation International;
  24. reviewing all linkage programs to see how sustainable development elements can be injected;
  25. adjusting the university reward system to account for community service and outreach as a balance for other criteria for tenure and promotion;
  26. examining how indigenous knowledge might be given greater weight in curricula;
  27. giving a series of talks in school on sustainable development and UNCED;
  28. specifying multi-disciplinary research as an area which requires extensive support;
  29. building more multi-disciplinary teams to tackle environmental concepts and issues;
  30. accessing state-of-the art curriculum on sustainable development and circulating it;
  31. building twinning relationships with institutions in twinned cities;
  32. encouraging urban issues as areas for teaching and research while at the same time not neglecting the rural;
  33. including alumni in efforts to address sustainable development;
  34. involving chambers of commerce in the university’s efforts to address sustainable development;
  35. working with faculty and students to develop sustainable development strategies, policies, and action plans;
  36. tasking key faculty members to feed sustainable development through the university system;
  37. involving government, business, and NGOs in the university’s efforts to address sustainable development;
  38. involving students in the university’s linkage projects both at home and in the host country;
  39. listing sustainable development expertise on campus such as was done at the University of Manitoba;
  40. developing a strategic plan for sustainable development within the university;
  41. preparing a manual on “Sustainable Development in Universities”; other publications could include “How Universities can work with NGOs in Contributing to Sustainable Development;
  42. preparing a mission statement which articulates a commitment to the environment and general environmental principles;
  43. preparing an advisory paper to encourage and guide graduate students on how they might link their thesis subjects to the goals of UNCED;
  1. Within the Region, university activities could include:
  1.  encouraging universities which were not at the conference to participate in the process and to endorse the Halifax Declaration;
  2. having the presidents and the sustainable development unit representatives of universities in the region meet with the provincial Minister of the Environment to discuss mutual goals;
  3. establishing a network among universities in order to share information about the “Greening” of the universities: this could be linked to the national university network.
  1. On a National Level, university activities could include:
  1. the establishment of a sustainable development advisory group within bodies representative of a national community of universities to review progress at the national level;
  2. working with the national delegation for UNCED preparatory to the conference;
  3. reviewing key public policy documents on sustainable development;
  4. supporting national citizen participation programs;
  5. approaching national media services to identify practical ways the universities can contribute to national programs on sustainable development;
  6. seeking to have universities play a more central role in strategic planning and decision making with respect to capacity building;
  7. encouraging governments to identify strategic plans for capacity building;
  8. circulating to students through the national university association the Youth Declaration on Environment and Development;
  9. establishing a national university network to be linked to the national university association;
  1. At the International Level, university activities could include:
  1. providing support for the president of the IAU, in cooperation with UNU, to represent the international university community at UNCED;
  2. establishing an international council for sustainable development linked to the IAU; IAU to draft a proposed mandate in cooperation with UNU and Halifax Conference organizers;
  3. pushing to have environmental education placed higher on the UNESCO agenda;
  4. promoting a “Brundtland” prize or some distinguished international prize in sustainable development;
  5. building into all the international linkage programs of those universities present and signatories to the “Halifax Declaration”, a sustainable development component and drawing upon the key principles found in the EMDI model insofar as they are appropriate;
  6. circulating the “Halifax Declaration” and “Plan of Action” as widely as possible, in different languages, to university organizations at the national, regional and international levels, appropriate NGOs including youth organizations, relevant UN. bodies, and the mass media;
  7. increasing interaction between the university community and those UN organizations concerned with sustainable development such as UNU, UNESCO, and UNEP;
  8. encouraging international agencies to use their requirements for information and policy development to build up local capacity in the universities;
  9. encouraging government to assign a percentage of external aid funding for basic education and training in sustainable development;
  10. for the countries represented at the UASD Conference, Zimbabwe, Brazil, Indonesia and Canada, forming a partnership for cooperation for sustainable development;
  11. accepting the offer of the Brazilian rectors to attend the pre-UNCED Academic Scientific Parallel Conference and have the Brazilian rectors also put forward the view of the universities, in addition to the IAU presentation.

There is virtually no university that I know of where a person can enroll in a Master’s degree in environmental engineering, policy or science and acquire a comprehensive, holistic view of environmental management.  Generally these programmes are not only limited in perspective, but they are entirely oriented with controlling and remediating environmental problems as opposed to anticipating and preventing them.  Furthermore, many members of faculty consider the programmes to be non-rigorous or soft science because they are interdisciplinary—in some cases, they’re considered simply faddish.  An additional feature of most programmes is that they’re almost always supported by soft money.  Why?  Because they’re interdisciplinary or multi-disciplinary and therefore are not considered to be part of the central mission of the universities.” Anthony Cortese, Dean of Environmental Programs, Tufts University

“Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the capacity of countries to address environment and development issues.  While basic education provides the underpinning for any environmental and development education, the latter needs to be recognized as an essential part of learning, including basic learning.  It is indispensable for achieving ethical awareness and promoting behavior consistent with the sustainable use of natural resources and sustainable development.  To be effective, it should deal with the dynamics of the physical /biological environment and human development, be integrated in all disciplines and employ all formal and non-formal methods and adequate communication.” Report of the Secretary General of UNCED; A/Conf.151/PC/100/Add.6, p.2, 4/16 Jan. 1992

Universities have to become leaders in putting their own houses in order.  How many university presidents in Canada today have already committed themselves to an environmental audit of their university operations?  How many university administrators apply the principles of green architecture to building construction?  How many universities have effective senior managers with the term ‘environment’ in their title?  How many universities have a five-year green plan, a strategic plan for five years or longer, in which a whole series of measures of sustainable development can be looked at in an integrated and careful fashion, and where students and NGOs are involved in the development of that plan?”  Robert Page, Dean, Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary

Agenda 21 in Action

Regardless of where you live UN Agenda 21 is being implemented by your local council without your knowledge. Time to Stand, say NO!! and mean it.

The Chicken Man, Andrew Wordes, in his own words 2012


What’s not Sustainable? Private Property

“Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.” From the report from the 1976 UN’s Habitat I Conference in Vancouver Canada

This is one of those stories that often never makes it to the Front Page of any newspaper or website. It’s a story about Property Rights and Eminent domain. It’s the story of one man who tried to fight back; and sadly it’s the story of a man who lost it all in the process. It’s also a story that can happen to anyone who is reading this article.

The story begins back in 2009 when Andrew Wordes, otherwise known as the Roswell Chicken Man, began his fight to raise chickens on his property. In February 2009, the city of Roswell, GA started to cite Andrew Wordes for raising livestock in his backyard. Wordes, who had started raising chickens on his .97-acre homestead in 2005, decided to fight back. And guess what he won.

But sadly, that’s when the real trouble started:

You see, the story actually has very little to do with chickens. While the city of Roswell, and cities just like it across America, would like people to believe it’s a story about chickens, the real story is about the rights of property owners.

When taking a look at a map that was published back in 2003, as part of Roswell’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan for city improvements, one thing becomes painfully obvious; The city had already planned to take Wordes’ property.

The Map showed that the city had major plans for his property. In fact, his property sat right in the middle of a planned city park. His property was being targeted for “city improvements”, and this fight had nothing to do with chickens. The chickens were really just the catalyst for the city to unlawfully seize his land.

After initially winning his fight in municipal court, the City of Roswell made Wordes life a living hell.

The Harassment Campaign Against Andrew Wordes

On Dec. 14, 2009, the city council approved a new ordinance banning roosters and using lot size to limit how many chickens a resident could keep. Wordes claimed that the harassment started immediately after the meeting, when Roswell police ticketed him for no insurance and a number of other moving violations.

  • In September of 2010, Roswell prosecuted Wordes under the new ordinance claiming he had too many birds for his lot size. The judge found him not guilty since he had the chickens before the ordinance became law.
  • In September of 2010, he was convicted of grading sediment on his land without a permit and having inoperable vehicles in his yard.  He was sentenced to community service.
  • In November of 2010, code enforcement served Wordes with a  nuisance citation.
  • After winning twice in court against the city, the county then got involved and actually cited him for “not properly stacking his firewood.”
  • In 2011, the 84 year-old women who held Mr. Wordes mortgage was harassed by the city into selling Wordes mortgage for forty cents on the dollar. The city then began the foreclosure process.
  • While in the process of trying to save his home, Andrew Wordes was arrested by Roswell Police on the day that he was to bring paperwork that would’ve delayed his bankruptcy and the foreclosure on his home.
  • Wordes was jailed for violating his probation after the city claimed he only served 122 of the 150 hours of community service that he had been ordered to serve.  He then served 99 days in jail.

After his release, he placed a sign on his property that read “Trespassers will be construed as a bodily threat” and then waited for authorities to arrive and remove him.

On Monday at 10:45 a.m. Marshalls arrived at the home. After a two-hour standoff, Wordes advised the Marshall that they needed to immediately leave the property.  That’s when the explosion happened. After years of battling for his right to keep his land, Wordes finally had enough.

On a website dedicated to Andrew Wordes, one of his friends wrote:

We all lost a little something today. Andrew was a man of faith, with a strong love for God. He was a staunch Constitutionalist with a passion for our freedoms and liberties.

You pushed Mr. Wordes to this point. You marched around Roswell bashing Andrew, annihilating his character, marking him as crazy and filing lawsuits whenever you could, bankrupting him and denying him rights given to property owners in the United States.

Andrew fought the good fight, not just for himself but for others because he knew it could happen to anyone. And it is. Eminent domain is being abused all over our country, just look it up. Communities are plagued with repeated abuses of the use of eminent domain. It’s tragic and your neighborhood could be next. Andrew fought to his last breath, for himself, for me, for you. In his mind, he went on his terms. Right out of Atlas Shrugged. Andrew is at peace now but it’s not over.

The sad truth about this story is its not an isolated incident.   When any government (talking city or county now) finds financial motivations, and they are able to initiate those directives at gunpoint of it’s local law enforcement, it’s important to keep powers in check so that they cannot be abused.

From the Federal Government seizing property because of “environmental regulations”, to local municipalities who use code enforcement agents codes to intimidate people into giving up their land, we have a huge problem in this country. Our property rights are being shredded before our eyes, and it’s only a matter of time before this story becomes an everyday occurrence, and the causes need to be addressed.  Remember, in the U.S, every town, every county, and every State makes many of it’s own laws, so circumstances vary from place to place.  It’s important to get plugged in to where you live and be sure that your local governments are above reproach with their handling of the citizens they intend to serve.

Regardless of where you live UN Agenda 21 is being implemented by your local council without your knowledge. Time to Stand, say NO!! and mean it.



Global Warming Climate Change Cult Proves They Have Small Brains

The Sequestration of Exhalation

First Global Revolution Book Front Cover.jpg

“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”

The Debate is Over! Global Waming Fraud Exposed

al gore climate change

The first known video promoting the scam of “Man made global warming”  showing how they demonized the life gas CO2 and make man earth’s enemy in the process…. is from 1958!

Environment was the chosen mechanism to bring about global gov. “They” needed a global problem that required a global solution… Enjoy some early Al Gore type hype from 1958 in this video.

According to the Club of Rome: “The common enemy of humanity is man. “In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill.

“we came up with the idea “

Not based on any facts! They just came up with the idea.  What is the Club of Rome? A think tank created by men and women who want a global communist system that they control.  Who are these people? Here is a list of present and notable members from the Green Agenda (highly recommended you spend so time on this site) Members include David Rockefeller, George Soros, Henry Kissinger, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Mikhail Gorbachev, Kofi Annan, Maurice Strong, Bill Gates, Ted Turner, Tony Blair, Robert Muller, The Dalai Lama, Hassan bin Talal, Javier Solana, Javier Perez de Cuellar, Gro Harlem Bruntland, Garret Hardin, King Juan Carlos of Spain and his wife Queen Sophia, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, Prince Philippe of Belgium, and about 80 other wealthy elites, new age cultists, former and current U.N. figures, and political figures.

First earth day 1970

Stockholm 1972 – United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

The (false) oil crisis of 1973-1974

United Nations Conference on Human Settlements was held at Vancouver from 31 May to 11 June 1976

Our Common Future 1987

Rio Earth Summit 1992 which brought the world Agenda 21

The fraud and deception started long ago and is being implemented by ever level and faction of gov. including UN NGO’s

The fraud is well documented and the peoples of the world need to take action. Not to save us from “climate change” but the people who “came up with the idea.  They cause the environmental crisis, the wars, famines, depressions etc.  They are the enemy, not you and I

Now for some truth about climate Change.

The Sea Around Us by Rachel Carson shows the effects of the ocean cycles.  Those who constructed the MMGW fraud knew when the natural ocean and sun cycles would produce the most natural warming. They used this information for the basis of the fraud. Those natural cycles are now moving into the cooling cycle.

The global warming lie is used to bring about UN corporate world gov. by the same people who created the UN, Israel, Wars, Depressions, Famines etc. Their disturbing visions are laid out in Agenda 21.

As the global warming fraudsters like to say “the debate is over.”

I agree, the debate is over and the fraud exposed!

Check and Mate!

– We have now entered the cooling cycle.

Elected officials (who represent the corporation, not the voters), teachers, preachers, media, health etc.  (bow to their corporate masters) and law enforcement (Policy enforcers of the corporation)  are  the useful idiots used to spread the propaganda and implement “their” evil plan.

Some know what they are doing …  most don’t. It is our job to inform all of them and insist they STOP immediately! They’re involved in fraud, conspiracy to commit,  genocide and breach of trust.

Rural Ontario being “SOLD OFF” to China by OUR Mayors

Rural Ontario being “SOLD OFF” to China by OUR own Government????

Ontario Mayors are now “salesmen” for OUR lands and resources???????

The “end-game” appears to be on track for Ontario’s Rural communities that have been virtually ruined by successive Provincial Governments with their Agenda 21, Sustainable Development attack on municipalities across Ontario. De-value properties, make them virtually unliveable with Green Wind projects, raise cost of living beyond ability to pay and when that is completed put up a huge “FOR SALE” sign on it for a foreign country to bid on it!

Here’s the formal plan for Immigrant Placement” within South Western Ontario where the lands have been laid “fallow” by these Government policies!

Here is a “snippet” from the above document that shows clearly how the Government views a true Canadian: “

“Clearly, a Chinese immigrant possesses an advantage here over the typical Canadian.”

Is there any reason that 7 Mayors of Ontario’s Rural Towns have been “invited” to go on an “Investment” tour in China for ten days when thousands of Private Sector Companies have gone this way for years at their own expense for their own markets?

It seems to have started back in October at the Canada China Business Council in Markham where 13 Ontario Mayors attended a sales pitch by Chinese reps to lure them to China for negotiations over LAND available in Canada………………………. for WHAT?

Remember that these people are OUR elected representatives supposedly elected to represent our needs as citizens of each particular Municipality,NOT the interests of a foreign Government!

Agenda 21 (Sustainable Development  is not a very well liked word within Municipal Offices these days. As the public becomes more informed of what has been going on behind their backs inside Municipal politics and that is the de-population of Rural Ontario which is Agenda 21′s main purpose, Councillors become more agitated and nervous when confronted by informed citizens.

Just try it. Call your Municipal office and ask them if they are following Agenda 21′s local Government initiatives. You will be met with denial and when pushed, a rather aggressive “hang up”! If you get to this point then ask the Council about this little nugget of “Sustainable Development” that every Council in Ontario should have on it’s book shelves:  FCM’s Green Municipal Fund.*

Here’s a “snippet” of this document which clearly shows that Municipal Councils promote and adhere to Agenda 21 proposals in case your Councillor claims “he doesn’t know what your talking about!”

*Examples of SCPs: (Sustainable Community Plans)

• integrated community sustainability plans
• long-range sustainability plans
• Local Agenda 21 plans
• local action plans (for example, greenhouse
gas reduction plans)

That publication will lay out the United Nations engineered plans for virtually all loss of control over YOUR lands and resources for the “better good”!

How “entrenched” in Canada at all levels of Government and Business is Agenda 21 and it’s tenticles that are literally aimed at redefining our quality of life, our future and our present day Rights and Freedoms that have been  guaranteed by our forefathers who actually laid down their lives to ensure a Free and Democratic Canada?

Well, here is just one “think tank” all dressed up to represent large business and Education centres in order provide Global Governance guidelines for less than “enlightened” politicians.

Centre for International Governance Innovation


Spend some time on this little gathering and notice some “players” like RIM Canada and University of Waterloo who have millions of $$$ invested in setting up a policy panel which in turn advises Political leaders on how to manipulate the lands and resources that WE live on for investing in foreign countries. 

For a foreign Government to literally pay the way for an elected official to attend any type of negotiations regarding OUR sovereign lands could actually be perceived as bordering on treason.

The same type of trip in Vancouver triggered some outrage and obviously these Ontario Mayors are about to commit the same indiscretion.

Seven Lower Mainland mayors who went on a privately funded trip to China last month believed — as did most of their councillors — that they could accept the trip because it was being paid for by someone who was never going to do business in their municipalities or in Canada.

Seven Lower Mainland mayors who went on a privately funded trip to China last month believed — as did most of their councillors — that they could accept the trip because it was being paid for by someone who was never going to do business in their municipalities or in Canada.

But municipal experts and some critics say the new Community Charter legislation makes it clear that council members should not accept any gift from anyone, doing business or not, that is coming to them because of their positions.


Here is a report on an Ontario October meeting of Toronto Mayors that “mirrors” the Rural Mayor’s meeting with the Canada China Investment Association.

Mayors discuss doing business with China

Oct 04, 2012

China forum


Aurora Mayor Geoff Dawe (from left), Barrie Mayor Jeff Lehman, Chatham-Kent Mayor Randy Hope, Georgina Mayor Robert Grossi, London Mayor Joe Fontana, Markham Councillor Carolina Moretti, Niagara Falls Mayor James Diodati, Canada China Business Council executive director Sarah Kutulakos, Parry Sound Mayor Jamie McCarvey, Pickering Mayor Dave Ryan, Richmond Hill Mayor Dave Barrow, Vaughan Councillor Sandra Yeung Racco, Waterloo Mayor Brenda Halloran and Whitchurch-Stouffville Mayor Wayne Emmerson gathered at the Hilton Suites in Markham to discuss doing business with China.
Aurora BannerWe want a piece of you, China.
That’s the key message from the sales pitches of 13 Ontario mayors who met in Markham Tuesday to discuss that country’s economic impact during what was billed the Mayors’ Forum on China.
Even if you don’t like what you see, working up an appetite for China is better than saying you are not interested, Canada China Business Council executive director Sarah Kutulakos said.
“Even if you don’t want to do business with China, you need to have a China strategy,” she said. “It’s in your value chain, even if you pro-actively try not to do business with China.”
Six York municipalities had representatives at the forum, including Georgina Mayor Robert Grossi, Aurora Mayor Geoffrey Dawe, Markham Mayor Frank Scarpitti, Richmond Hill Mayor Dave Barrow, Vaughan Councillor Sandra Yeung Racco and Whitchurch-Stouffville Mayor Wayne Emmerson.
Vaughan Mayor Maurizio Bevilacqua was in Italy on a trade mission.
Mayor Scarpitti couldn’t stay for the panel discussion and was represented by Councillor Carolina Moretti.
Other mayors in attendance included those from Barrie, Chatham-Kent, London, Niagara Falls, Parry Sound, Pickering and Waterloo.
Developable greenfield, the largest vacant employment lands in the GTA, a future downtown at Jane Street and Hwy. 7, York University and its location as an economic gateway are some of the attributes Vaughan has to attract Chinese investments, Ms Yeung Racco said.

Now here is the announcement


 10/04/2013, 11:20

 By Barb McKay

Kincardine mayor Larry Kraemer will travel to China in May to discuss trade opportunities.

He is one of a handful of Ontario mayors invited on the 10-day trade mission by the Canada China Investment Association. Others invited include mayors from Erin, Belleville, Petrolia and Niagara-on-the-Lake. The group leaves May 15 and will spend time in Shanghai and Beijing before returning home on May 25.

“They were very clear that they are looking for trade opportunities – bilateral trade – and they are looking at Ontario,” Kraemer said when he told Kincardine council about the trip during its meeting last Wednesday.

Costs associated with the trip, minus airfare, are being covered by the China Canada Investment Association. Bruce County council has agreed to allow Kraemer to use money from his conference fund to cover the cost of airfare.

Councillor Ron Coristine said the trade mission should involve individuals who are entrenched in Kincardine’s economic development planning. Kraemer said he had made his involvement with the trade mission known to the Penetangore Regional Economic Development Corporation (PREDC), but said he was lucky just to be invited on the trip.

Report continues here … thebiggreenlie