The Source: The Environmental Issue (2)

72nd International Session of the European Youth Parliament — Munich 2013

#2The Environmental Issue

EditorialGentle reader,

In the last few days, I’ve had the pleasure of talking to several of you: some randomly, some I approached, and some because you came to me to fulfil a committee challenge of one shape or another. As I sit here with the editorial assistants who are carefully compiling the newspaper at an unspeakable time of night, I am par-ticularly glad to have met at least some of you. Your en-thusiasm and good cheer has me excited all over again and it’s your feedback which fuels our sleep-deprived bodies.

You may or may not know this, but the officials have been here since Wednesday preparing for your arrival. Any of them will tell you that the first few days with-out delegates are strange; there’s an empty feeling and a vague sense of anticipation. But seeing you arrive, meeting you, having you read our paper and watch our videos gives us – as twee as it sounds – a sense of pur-pose. Your spirit is infectious.

When you’re editing, you so often spend hours behind a screen and ironically then barely speak to those for whom your efforts have been spent. I can say that that

hasn’t been the case and I’ve had many chances to talk to you. I’ve happily passed on your thanks and positive feedback to the whole team who made things happen, but there is one more thing I would like to hear. Hear-ing what you like about what we’ve done is good, but what more could we do? What didn’t you like? What would you like to see in the papers or videos? The whole press team would be keen to hear what our audience and raison d’être demands.

If you have a comment on an article – perhaps you agree or disagree or have an addition – or have a question or idea in general, then The Source is always open. Write it down and give it to your journo and we will happily publish your query and our response in the next newspaper. If, better yet, you have a specific thing you’d like to see in the paper, then why not write it yourself? We are now looking for 2–3 articles by del-egates for upcoming newspapers. You could be more than just the audience.

Let’s make The Source open source.

■ Sophie

Editor: Sophie Hall (CH)

Editorial assistants:Oona Kiiskinen (FI)Harm van Leeuwen (NL)Timm Brünjes (DE)

Journalists:Lara Lindlahr (DE)Lidiia Zhgyr (UA)Erasmus Häggblom (FI)Fredrik Hultman (SE)

Daniels Grinevics (LV)Annmarie Kiiskinen (FI)Antonia Kerridge (UK)Stan van Wingerden (NL)Arriana Yiallourides (CY)Johanna Fürst (AT)Mike Whyard (UK)Amantia Muhedini (AL)David Meijers (NL)Christine-Bianca Hanganu (RO)Love Lyssarides (SE)

The Source #2

2 72nd International Session

Contents

Point of privilige: Understanding the value of an international session 4

Environmental issueForeword to the Environmental issue: Why should I care? 5

Under the weather: Extreme weather, extreme mood? 7

The environment for dummies 8

Small things count: is Munich 2013 a resource efficient session? 10

Is it really worth it? The trilateral relationship EU–China–Africa 12

Adapt or perish: The problem with modern consumerism 14

Water supply in the EU: Sailing to a new water policy 16

A historical perspective on an ever-changing Europe 18

European migration policy: A kebab worth eating? 20

Budgets and branding: What the EU can learn from Coca-Cola 22

The Opening Ceremony venue: War and peace 23

Architechts of the future: Redesigning Europe’s cities 24

EU code of extraction: sustainable, conflict-free resources 26

A Eurovillage amongst many others 28

Interview with a head organiser: “Keeping the engine running” 30

The Environmental Issue

Munich 2013 3

Point of privilegeUnderstanding the value of an International Session

In the multitude of EYP sessions that take place each year, it is the internationals that have the highest profile; bringing together roughly 300

young Europeans and creating lasting bonds across our diverse continent. In no other session will you meet such a variety of people for the same length of time. International sessions allow you to take part in every aspect of EYP in depth: from the intense res-olution writing to the all important socialising time. What makes these sessions stand apart from your pre-vious experience is that – with the absence of a selec-tion process – the element of competition is reduced. What you are left with are talented debaters working towards consensus in a relaxed, fun environment. The focus of these sessions is your enjoyment and to teach you more about Europe and EYP, so throw yourself into every minute to get the best out of the experience.

So, where does this session fit into the wider scale of EYP? Sandwiched between the IS in Amsterdam and the future 2013 sessions in Zurich and Tbilisi, Munich will take its own position in the prestigious legacy of EYP. This session – in the safe and reliable hands of the expansive German team – promises to do exactly that and make a mark on the EYP timeline. Follow-ing their tradition from the IS in Frankfurt 2010, the ambitious plans contain unique elements: back then, the introduction of the World Café and now, the use of the Resource Village. This will bring experts and delegates together to talk about the resolution topics in a progressive new aspect for an IS. A unique theme

was also chosen for the session which sets our time in Munich apart from other EYP events. The concept of the session evolves tightly around this theme, with a resourceful green focus in the organisation which, once again, leaves us open-mouthed at the effortless drive for efficiency this country demonstrates.

Taking part as a delegate in an International Ses-sion is an unforgettable experience and the memories from these sessions are often the ones that inspire your future within EYP. You have the privilege to take part in this particular session which promises to be up with the best. So, quite simply: Enjoy! ■ AKr

A huge congratulations for making it to the 72nd International Session, Munich 2013! In the wake of regional and national rounds, the next challenge looms ahead in this exciting land of lederhosen, sauerkraut and alarming efficiency. With a fresh and open mind as you arrive, you probably have many questions about what to expect at an International Session. So let this answer some of those queries.

The Source #2


Why should I care?Foreword to the Environmental issue

It is admittedly a cliché to say that environmen-tal changes affect each and every one of us, but it deserves to be said. The environment is some-

thing we take for granted. We live our lives selectively choosing to ignore the problem for the sake of con-venience and a clear conscience. We ourselves cannot make great claims as shining examples of dedicated tree huggers or recycling junkies. However, in the course of creating these articles we have come to a better understanding of why environmental issues are of paramount importance.

We are sure that you have all encountered the nor-

mal green propaganda: ranging from turn-off-your-lights campaigns and diligently recycling every single juice carton. These actions are of course significant, nonetheless they do not offer inspiring solutions to the issues at hand. Instead, we would like to offer articles to demonstrate the importance of the environment and how it can be a very engaging topic. Increased interest in the environment should lead into a more pragmatic approach on an individual level, which will have positive effects at home, as well as worldwide.

So, why should you care? ■ AY, AKr


Munich 2013 5

When we think about Europe, it is the Nor-dic countries that suffer the most from winter blues. This comes hand in hand

with the common misconception of high depression and suicide rates. There is an apparent paradox be-tween these statistics and the incredibly high stand-ards of living and welfare.

We turned the question to two delegates who ad-dressed the topic of weather affecting mood. Inter-viewing Daria Ballatsky (ITRE III) from Sweden, we were given a glimpse of the good, the bad and the freezing elements of the country and it soon became clear that despite the advantages, the weather is a defi-nite good mood breaker. In her words: “Sweden is great in its own way, it is really clean and nice. But if you are talking just about weather, then the majority

of people would probably prefer to live in a warmer country.” Daria has experienced the “polar opposites” of extreme weather; having moved to Sweden from Santa Fe, New Mexico, leaving behind the “super sun-ny” weather.

Daria was lucky to experience this contrast be-tween the two extreme climates, enabling her to give an objective viewpoint. Even though the lack of sun-light is considered to be a determining factor in boost-ing susceptibility to depression, there was no negativ-ity in her attitude towards Sweden. In fact she praised the country for its ability to cope with the weather problem and come up with innovative ways of dealing with the winter doldrums. For example, one project involved installing UV lights in bus stations in a far north city of Sweden to bring a bit of sunshine to the

Daria Ballatsky (ITRE III) has experienced “polar opposites” in Sweden and New Mexico

David Soler (BUDG) is from Valencia, where peo-ple are happier because of the sunshine

The Source #2


Underthe weather

Extreme weather, extreme mood?

Lying on the beach with a book in one hand and a cocktail in the other, the sun beating down around you and illuminating your face. Or shivering on a cold winter day as the fixed smile of a snowman mocks you as you freeze on the walk to school. It does not take a mastermind to work out what the general preference would be.

daily commutes. Light therapy is thought to be a great help with seasonal affective disorder which systemati-cally haunts many people each year.

Dressed in his layers of jackets and scarves against the penetrating cold of Munich, David Soler (BUDG) from sunny Spain gave us an insightful view on what it is like to live in a country with the privilege of con-tinuous sunlight. All the way from Valencia, David credited the weather for the people’s high happiness levels. He said “In Spain, people are more happy and loud because of the culture but also because of the weather.” This comment reinforces the view that weather is an important aspect but it does not directly determine the essence of the country and its people.

Further evidence to clear the Nordic countries from their depressive stereotype also exists. It is ac-

tually France which has the highest depression rate in Europe. With their exquisite food and wine, temper-ate climate and a certain je ne sais quoi, it is clear that France’s definition of happiness is composed of oth-er elements. So this supports the case that although weather is a mood killer, it is a combination of factors that determine happiness.

When asked if they would rather live in a cold or a hot country, the majority of people would probably prefer the sun over the rain. However, that is not to say that it is a primary factor to people’s happiness lev-els. The Brits will go on singing in the rain, the Dutch will never surrender their bicycles through the storms and the Norwegians can always rely on their trusty skis. ■ AY, AKr


Munich 2013 7

TermsA carbon footprint is the amount of carbon diox-

ide or other carbon compounds emitted into the at-mosphere by the activities of an individual, company or country.

Carbon offsetting is a programme aimed at re-ducing carbon emissions through the funding of ac-tivities and projects.

Global warming is an increase in the earth’s aver-age atmospheric temperature causing corresponding changes in climate that may result from the green-house effect.

Climate change is a long-term change in the earth’s climate, especially a change due to an increase in the average atmospheric temperature.

Pollution is the introduction of harmful substanc-es or products into the environment.

Brownfield is an industrial or commercial site that is idle or underused because of real or perceived envi-

ronmental pollution.Renewable energy is any naturally occurring, the-

oretically inexhaustible source of energy, such as bio-mass, solar, wind, tidal, wave,and hydroelectric pow-er, that is not derived from fossil or nuclear fuel.

Non-renewable energy is energy that comes from the ground and is not replaced in a relatively short amount of time. Fossil fuels are the main category of non-renewable energy.

Environmental noise is the summary of noise pollution from outside, caused by transport, industri-al and recreational activities.

Hard water is water that has high mineral content. Hard drinking water is not harmful to one’s health, but can pose serious problems in industrial settings, where water hardness is monitored to avoid cost-ly breakdowns in boilers, cooling towers, and other equipment that handles water.

The environment for dummiesThe environment can be a threatening place; full of unpredictability and unknown species lurking in the shad-ows. In an attempt to tame the wild beast, different terms have been created to establish how humans can live in and understand the natural world. Use this as your survival guide through the environmental jungle to check your knowledge on the basic terms and learn more about the institutions involved in harmonising the humans with nature.

The Source #2


InstitutionsGlobal Environment Facility (GEF): Unites 182

countries with international institutions, civil society organisations and the private sector to discuss global environmental solutions. The GEF provides grants for projects, such as climate change, international waters, the ozone layer and pollutants. It has financed over 3215 projects in over 165 countries since 1991.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): The leading international body for assess-ment of climate change since 1988. Its task is to keep the world informed and up to date and it is open to all members of the UN and the World Meteorological Association.

United Nations Environment Programme: As-sists developing countries in implementing environ-mentally sound policies and practices.

World Nature Organisation (WNO): Created to ensure the protection of the environment at an in-ternational level; focusing mainly on energy efficien-cy, climate protection and sustainable development. It also aims to create an exchange of ideas between science and businesses through conferences, conven-tions and information events.

European Environment Agency (EEA): An agency of the EU involving 32 countries and aiming to provide information on the environment. It helps countries to make informed decisions about integrat-ing environmental policies with economic policies.

Climate Action Network (CAN-Europe): A net-work of over 7000 NGOs in more than 90 countries which works to promote government and individual action to increase sustainability. CAN members ex-change information and coordinate with NGOs, as well as promote working on regional level.

European Environmental Bureau (EEB): Created in 1974, the EEB is Europe’s largest coalition of envi-ronmental organisations with expert insight on issues such as waste, nanotechnology, chemicals and climate change. The policies work closely in dialogue with the European institutions, trade unions and social organ-isations to promote sustainability.

European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists (EAERE): An international scientific association set up in 1990 which aims to develop environmental and resource economics as a “science” in Europe. It focuses on encouraging com-munication between teachers, university lecturers and research institutions in Europe. It has over 1000 members in 80 countries and involves groups from academic institutions, the public and private sectors, agricultural economics and forestry. ■ CBH, AKr


Munich 2013 9

Small things countMunich 2013: a resource efficient session?

Our society is dependent on basic resources: however the supply of those is limited and we are using resources up faster than what

they can be replaced. In this context, the notion of resource efficiency becomes more important than ever. This implies using Earth’s limited resources in a sustainable manner, in other words creating more with less: using alternatives sources of energy, recy-cle and consume in a more intelligent manner. Using resources wisely brings down costs, improves pro-ductivity and boosts competitiveness amongst firms and companies. In terms of the current financial cri-sis this is helpful as “every percentage point improve-ment in resource productivity would save up to €23 billion a year for European businesses, and create up to 150,000 jobs”. Moreover, being efficient safesguards future growth taking that one in six jobs are linked to environment to some extent. Furthermore, economic growth can be achieved by applying resource efficien-cy as this stimulates technological innovation, boosts employment and benefits consumers through more

sustainable products. The theme “Down to earth, resourcing Europe” for

this session was chosen two years ago because it was considered to be up-to-date, interesting and universal. EYP Germany adopted a green policy around three years ago: until last year they even had a ‘Green Or-ganiser’ at every session that was responsible only of ensuring that the session is as environmental friendly as possible. Kerstin Mathias (DE), who put the bid to-gether, told that: “We live in a wasteful culture. Peo-ple take more food than they need at lunch, forget to turn off the lights and throw away papers that are still

The issue of resource efficiency has become more pressing than ever. Considering the session theme is “Down to earth, resourcing Europe”, is Munich 2013 living up to being a resource efficient session?

The cups are part of the green policy

The Source #2


blank. Education in terms of environment is still su-perficial and we felt we could offer delegates a deeper insight into things by choosing this theme. We wanted to make people realise that resources are scarce.”

The organisers’ target of making the session as re-source efficient as possible is noticeable. The strategy includes using plastic reusable cups, drinking tap wa-ter, printing in black and white every time when possi-ble, encouraging the use of paper on both sides, using teambuilding materials on a rotation basis between chairs and the use of public transport while at the ses-sion. Another strategy presents the participants with the Resource Village, providing the delegates with

an opportunity to discuss with experts about the im-portance of resources for the European citizens. The purpose of the event is to provide information about different resources and to offer delegates a chance to discuss solutions for a sustainable future.

Finally, one of the most important objectives is to offset the carbon footprint of the session. To achieve that they encouraged all of the participants to use more environmentally friendly means of transports, as trains or buses instead of planes, and also tried to do so themselves. This objective was of extreme im-portance taking that since the EU-level legislation has also lowered carbon emissions in 1990, greenhouse gas emissions in the EU have fallen by more than 10%, while Europe’s economies have grown by about 40% over the same period.

As Kerstin and Head Organiser Maximilian Gigl (DE) tell us, it is small things that count in resource efficiency. Munich 2013 IS is a perfect example of that. ■ CBH

We love efficiency


Munich 2013 11

Is it really worth it?The trilateral resource relationship between the EU, China and Africa

The EU, Africa and China each have much to gain from their trilateral relationship: Africa requires investment and infrastructure, Eu-

rope requires confirmed access to resources (crucially including oil) whereas China is currently a global su-perpower almost in a class of its own. Their economic prowess must be fuelled by a huge supply of natural resources which Africa can help to provide. For China there is less risk involved in this relationship than the other two parties due to their higher position in the trade scenario.

The theme of Munich 2013 is resource efficiency, focusing on their availability, extraction and efficient use. This is a widely global issue as it is apparent that one of the very first problems facing us in the resource

chain is finding and extracting them in the first place. Currently, Africa is a hotbed of natural resources still in their raw, untapped form which provides unbe-lievable opportunities for corporations to use for so-cio-economic growth. Whilst the EU has proposed a trilateral dialogue between them, China and Africa, there has been little or no movement in a positive di-rection. China, on the other hand, has not held back with regards to gathering resources in Africa: their in-dustrial growth on African soil has been momentous and has put them a huge distance ahead of Europe in the ‘resource race’.

It would be false to state that China has not had any positive impacts on Africa. They have added sub-stantially to the infrastructure within Africa such as

With China currently being the largest importer into Europe, is it possible to manage or compete with their ex-traction of resources in Africa? Delicately balancing the need for resources in Africa with both humanitarian and diplomatic responsibilities of the EU, this is a tightrope that must be walked with more conviction than is currently being displayed.

The Source #2


their transport links and also have obviously provided a huge increase in trade for African countries; the bi-lateral trade between Africa and China has surpassed the €150 million mark annually. China has never been anything but forth-right with regards to their stance in Africa. Beijing openly admits that their primary aim is simply the acquisition of resources and that there is no political agenda to its presence in African countries. Whilst many Europeans see Chi-na’s position as one of exploitation, the simple truth is that China’s work in Africa provides some jobs and lasting provision for the responsible countries even

though they do not get their hands dirty with internal politics.

The tightrope is there to be seen. Europe cannot sway too far to one side and tread on China’s toes,

which could threaten im-perative diplomatic ties and the trade balance between East and West. However, if Europe leans too far the other way, in

favour of China’s resource dominance, they will end up struggling to retain any fair access to natural re-sources and might have humanitarian issues in Africa on their conscience. ■ MW

Africa is a hotbed of natural resources still in their raw, untapped form

The EU torn between human rights promotion and economic interests: how should the EU position itself vis-à-vis China in the increasingly intense competition for control of resources in Africa?

Committee on Foreign Affairs I


Munich 2013 13

Adapt or perishThe problem with modern consumerism

When dealing with their re-sources, European coun-tries seem to have forgotten

about the well-known Aristotelian saying, “everything in moderation”. Our economies are intelligently structured to meet the demands

of the market with the help of the planet’s available resources. But based on em-pirical evidence, the presumption that resources are in abundance is no longer

true. By 2030, there will be an estimated 50% increase in food demand. Such an

alarming statistic indicates that immi-nent action for resource efficiency is necessary.

The prevailing model of economics is being challenged because it is no longer

sustainable. The world population will soon reach 7 billion and is expected to grow by 32% till

2050. The resulting increase in demand for

natural resources will put a huge strain on the Euro-pean economy. The scarcity of resources is an issue that needs to be dealt with now, we no longer can postpone it for the sake of convenience.

Modern consumer culture is ruthless. We are ex-posed to such a plethora of products that we forget to consider where they come from. We will soon be facing a serious resource crisis, which most of us seem to selectively ignore or simply not know about. A brief reality check: resources will eventually run out, unless we take proactive measures to prevent such an irre-versible scenario.

The first step to overcoming any problem is ac-ceptance. It is only normal that every person should realise that the earth’s resources are not infinite or even abundant. The second step is adaptation. The modern consumer needs to change their mentality towards overconsumption in order to avoid the immi-nent danger of a resource crisis. We must collectively strive to ensure economic development. Otherwise,

The clock is ticking. If Europe wants its economy go grow, it needs to take steps towards resource efficiency. For that to happen, the modern consumer mentality needs to change.

The Source #2


Towards a new growth paradigm of resource efficiency: which steps should Eu-ropean countries take to ensure economic development through a more efficient use of resources despite their increasing scarcity and rising prices?

we could be putting the high quality of life that we are enjoying today in serious jeopardy.

The overconsumption that characterises European society needs to be reconsidered and eventually chal-lenged. Economies need to be restructured to follow circular and not linear models, with products having longer lives rather than being perishable. Europe has great potential to convince consumers of the impor-tance of resource efficiency, leading to a more sustain-able development.

To reach a circular economy, we need the cooper-ation of European industries. Changes in the produc-tion process could significantly decrease waste.

Resource efficiency is more local than global at its core. If we can ensure that individuals and organ-isations take responsibility for minimising waste and maximising resource efficiency, then we will be well on our way to set the new model for growth. A sub-stantial improvement in global resource efficiency could be achieved through small local steps.

It is time that Europe takes an active stance on re-source efficiency. Developing a new growth strategy can ensure sustainable economic development for the generations to come. ■ AY

Committee on Industry, Research and Energy III


Munich 2013 15

Sailing to a new water policyWater supply in the EU

While nearly 70% of the world is covered by water, only 2.5% of it is fresh and potable. The need for potable water in-

creases as the world population grows. The situation is critical considering the importance of water for sur-vival. Globally, contaminated water causes 1.5 million deaths a year and one in six people still do not have access to clean water. Unfortunately, this problem is mostly ignored and clean water taken for granted by those for who it is abundant and within reach.

Even in the EU, many people still lack access to clean water. The EU water policy needs to be revised to ensure clean water supply across the EU and meet

the target of the EU Water Framework Directive in 2015. This scheme offers EU members in the same river basin the possibility to work together on plans to improve water supply. A disadvantage of using riv-er basin management is the difficulty of overseeing and controlling the member states’ actions and their effects.

Pricing may be a way to prevent overuse of water. When people waste water, other people pay the ‘price’ of not having enough. But we rarely think of water in terms of actual costs. Many campaigns speak of water as a human right. At the same time, putting a price on water may be needed to encourage savings and fi-

More than 1.5 million people die globally every year because of contaminated water. This poignant fact shows the need for a re-analysis of the problems with water supply. How can a revised EU Water Framework Directive ensure access to clean water for everyone in the EU?

The Source #2


Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety

“Some water for all and forever”: given the revision of the EU Water Frame-work Directive in 2015, which steps should be taken over the next years so that the new EU water policy will ensure access to enough clean water at all times,

for everybody and everywhere across the EU?

nance better supply. Asking people to pay for a hu-man right seems paradoxical. Yet water is becoming a scarce resource, and anything scarce entails a price – especially when preventing overuse and ensuring equal access is important.

Water pricing is seen as acceptable because water suppliers need to cover the costs of collection, stor-age, filtering and distribution. But raising the price in order to increase savings may lead to protests if poor people and farmers could no longer afford sufficient quantities. If agricultural output decreases, the over-all economy is affected. Water prices are difficult to control at a European (or river basin) level, since they differ widely depending on costs and privatisation of water supply.

To save money, governments ofen outsource or privatise water supply for a period of time or are

convinced to do so by the World Bank or the In-ternational Monetary Fund. Privatisation may lead to worse quality, higher prices and less access. It is questionable whether a private company that aims to maxim-ise profit would have the best interest of the public in mind.

Pricing is one area which deserves attention in solving a lack of access to potable water. It is one of the most pracicable solutions, but it raises many issues. With many people still dying from contaminated wa-ter, it is essential to review the EU water policy and ensure access to enough clean water, for everybody, everywhere, all the time. ■ CBH


Munich 2013 17

An ever-changing Europe

In 1618 two Prussian Protestants pushing a Catho-lic out of a window in Prague was enough of an ideological insult for two alliances to tip the scale

and make them wage war against each other. During the glorious days of France Napoleon

raised the masses, the areas conquered by him almost reaching Russia. He had to be halted by other Euro-pean powers that wanted to reinstate the old power balance and have their fair share.

The idea of a nation state, such as Germany and It-aly, was embraced in the 19th century and culminated in what we have come to call the World Wars, because of their all-encompassing nature and presence in the lives of the European citizens.

Compared to the previous scenarios, the world in which we live in today cherishes rather different ide-

ology: the European dream, united in diversity. This gives some perspective into history. This is not by any means intended to sound terrifying or overly nega-tive – however we are all easily tempted to think in unrealistic measures. Many people agree that it is nice to be able to travel without border controls and use the common currency, no matter whether we are in Ireland or Estonia. However, it takes one step further down the historical matrix to see how far we have gone –and what an exceptional point in European re-lations we have reached. Just think about how incred-ibly peculiar this is.

European countries have had relations with each other ever since the big cities we know today formed in mediaeval times and interconnection increased. They have been friends and enemies, teamed up in

Committee on Constitutional Affairs

Imagine you could go back in time for a few centuries or even decades. Undoubtedly, you would find yourselves in a world that would not even remotely resemble what we are used to today.

The Source #2


A historical perspective

Imagine you could go back in time for a few centuries or even decades. Undoubtedly, you would find yourselves in a world that would not even remotely resemble what we are used to today.

United States of Europe vs. Europe à la carte: how could the European integra-tion process accommodate the national needs and preferences of Member States while ensuring the benefits of economic and political integration?

groups and broke those alliances up, traded goods, married, and battled each other. Most importantly, traditionally they all have primarily pursued their own interests and looked after themselves. When it was useful for Britain to fight over legal claims to ter-ritory with France, they confronted them in bloody battles for many centuries, but when a common en-emy like Germany came along in 1914, they teamed up on the same side and united their forces against the foe. (As an aside, this did not work as well as it could have, since the two powers had an incredibly hard time finding common grounds, and if it was only about who was to take military command.) Nowadays these countries being hostile towards Germans might seem like a random gag to many, but many opinions they have of each other and their con-

flicting interests and histories still bear with them.Today almost all European countries live in this

harmonised economic and political sphere, pretend-ing that we are this equal, balanced, happy class of kindergarteners. However, in reality one can notice how the powers are shifting and friendships are crum-bling apart. We cannot be sure whether none of those kindergarteners will stick a pencil into their friend’s eye or hide someone else’s cookies under their napkin. There is always a danger of getting lost on our extraor-dinary path of integration and revert to those centu-ries old traditions we like to think have been overcome. ■ JF


Munich 2013 19

After a long and tiring night out some people, myself included, tend to visit kebab shops. You enter the shop in a haze and it does not

take a lot of time before you decide to go for a sweaty, dirty and lovely kebab. The kebab itself is wonderful, and the whole atmosphere in the restaurant is chilled and relaxed. There is no tomorrow when you are in a kebab store on a Saturday night. Then you go home, you fall asleep and you wake up the following morn-ing. This is when the anxiety comes. You feel a bit dirty and the garlic sauce on the tasty kebab has now grown into a horrible breath.

The kebab represents in many ways the current situation in Europe. Not only because it is originally a Turkish dish that has spread world-wide thanks to migration and globalization, but it is also a symbol for how we look at the situation today.

Free migration within the EU is one of the funda-mental pillars of the European Union. We are moving towards a union where the European interests are as important as the national interests. Free migration, along with many other things, contributed into the European Union that we know today. There is al-though still a constant conflict between people who believe that migration is something beneficial, and those who consider it to tear societies apart.

Globalization, free immigration and emigration have given the societies and communities many ben-

There is no tomorrow when you are in a kebab store on a Saturday night

The Source #2


2013 the EU Year of Citizens: what programmes and measures should the EU undertake to foster the social and economic inclusion of asylum seekers and new immigrants as well as second generation immigrants?

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs II

A kebab worth eating?European migration policy

2013 is the European Year of Citizens. All over Europe, countries are struggling to find a way to include and inte-grate European and non-European immigrants into Europe. This demands sustainable and solid political solutions.

While thinking about the issue with migration and integration, my mind is drawn to another product in society that in many ways represents the situation, namely the kebab.

efits. Nowadays you can walk down the road of any European town and get food from all over the world. You can eat Swedish meatballs in Latvia and you can eat Latvian potatoes in Sweden. The globalized soci-ety is a society where diversity reigns and people are open-minded. A globalized society is a society in which you can eat kebab on a Saturday night out any-where in the world.

The sad truth is though that everyone loves the kebab, but not everyone loves the one selling the ke-bab. The increased migration in Europe has also led to increased racism and xenophobia; a problem that demands a solution. Throughout the last decade pol-iticians have tried to integrate people from different cultures, with different backgrounds, aiming for a so-ciety where everyone loves everyone. What we must ask ourselves today is how can we find a way for peo-

ple to live together in harmony: world where people can have their kebab but still able to live together with the kebab-seller.

2013 is the European year of Citizens. What we need to ask ourselves is what is it to be a citizen of a society? Is it something cultural or simply legal? We need to decide whether we want Europe where we force-integrate those new citizens, or whether we al-low parallel societies. Can multiculturalism and inte-gration go together? These questions lie at the heart of this debate. The only thing I know is that nothing beats a nice kebab on a Saturday night. ■ LLy


Munich 2013 21

What the EU can learn from Coca-Cola

Budgets and branding

The only place on the website of the EU where you can read about the goals and the reason for existence of the EU is the Kids Corner. And even one hour of searching the more formal parts of the EU website yielded no results. The only related thing was about how the EU was originally created to ensure peace among European countries and to

form an alliance against the communists. Which, without the communist bit, I also found on the Kids Corner.

The foundations of the EU were made 50 years ago. Now that the USSR does not exist any-more peace within the EU is almost guaran-

teed. Yet this peacekeeping is still the only real ex-planation of why European countries should work together in the EU. All the other goals can also be achieved without an overreaching entity such as the EU. If Coca Cola had branded itself in this way – if its advertising campaign was still stuck in the 1950s – who would still drink it today?

It is here that the EU budget comes into view. The aims, the goals, the justification of any organisation can be derived from where it spends its money on. Labour unions spend on political lobbying and em-ployer protection, while Human Rights Watch spends money on thoroughly researched reports on human rights development. Coca Cola spends a lot of money on making themselves seem like a cool company. The EU should spend on what it sees as the biggest prob-lem it is facing.

Surely, problems such as youth unemployment seem huge to us, as the problems we are current-ly struggling with. However, those might not be the biggest problems the European societies are facing. In order to provide proper justification, the relevance of the problem should be clear to everyone. The over-reaching problem that is most relevant is the Euro cri-sis. From a budgetary point of view, seeing this as the biggest problem makes perfect sense: for example, the productivity differences between EU countries truly go beyond the responsibilities and possibilities of na-

tional governments. Focusing on the crisis would give short-term justification to the EU budget: everyone has this problem and the EU will solve it.

However, focusing on the current crisis would still not give any long-term justification for the EU. Once this crisis is over, once this problem has been solved, the EU will just go back to its apparently use-less state. It this therefore essential that the Commit-tee on Budgets finds a purpose for the EU. They truly have to start from scratch: the foundation, the reason of existence of the EU has to last.

If Coca Cola had branded itself like the EU did, we would all be drinking Pepsi by now. This is why a new narrative for the EU is required. The Commit-tee on Budgets should, before deciding where exactly the money goes, determine why we are even giving money to the EU at all. Before playing the game, they have to agree on the rules – and on why you are even playing it. If they succeed, we will truly reach an EU that is built to last. ■ SW

The Source #2


War and peaceThe Opening Ceremony venue

On 25 April 1944, a bomb almost completely destroyed this session’s Opening Ceremony venue. The Allerheiligen Hofkirche, built between 1826 and 1837 for King Ludwig I of Bavaria, was destroyed. Only the outer walls re-

mained. This beautiful venue offers an occasion to remember the greatest accomplishment of the EU: peace.

After the war, the building was first left as it was, deteriorating further and further. Only in 1972 was it restored, but with much less

ornaments than before its destruction. The façade was originally elaborately ornamented, and the ceiling was filled with beautiful colours. If you look up now, there is a plain arched roof made of brick.

We often forget that the current prolonged period of peace in Europe is exceptional. Throughout history, Europe’s states have continually waged war with each other. The horrors of the First and Second World War are in our collective memory. But for us, young Eu-ropeans, peace is normal and we are used to it. We know of the Nazis and the death and the continent left

destroyed, but see it as a thing of the past. But to avoid peace losing its value, it is crucial not to forget war. Having the opening ceremony in this historic build-ing offers a moment to remember.

The EU plays an important role in making the cur-rent peace. Preventing war on European soil was and is an important argument for European cooperation and integration. Countries that work together polit-ically and have intertwined economies are less likely to fight each other. The idea of European solidarity, or even the plain fact of Germany helping Greece, shows how far we have come. Just contrast the Second World War and the delegates from all countries. Peace is a luxury – and shouldn’t be taken for granted. ■ DM

In the interior of the church, small pieces of original plasterwork remain.


Munich 2013 23

You read it right: your city can now come in a handy, efficient and well-designed format alongside all your other accessories. Or at

least that could well be the plan for the future. Across Europe and the rest of the world, our cities are facing a major redesign in order to accommodate for a grow-ing population, use land and resources to their full potentials and promote green ways of travelling for the public. By 2050 three quarters of the world‘s pop-ulation will be living in urban areas causing a dramat-ic outward expansion. The distinction between urban and rural areas is already blurred in many countries and this will be worsened: the old, self-sufficient vil-lages will be swallowed in expansion projects and there will be no infrastructure to support everyone in

one area. Coming from an area in the UK which could be described both as a commuter town channelling the endless supply of workers to London, or a coun-tryside idyll with the classic English rustic charm, I am suffering from my own version of a ‘city identity crisis’ and can fully understand where this confusion comes from.

The format of most cities now can be described as urban sprawl – quite fun to say, but not so fun to manage. This strange limbo, where the boundaries of the city seem to stretch endlessly onwards, is creating many problems. The EU’s 20-20-20 deadline looms closer and urban sprawl could prevent targets being met as it encourages people to drive; which leads to pollution and increased road fatalities. Higher levels

Architects of the futureRedesigning Europe’s cities

You whizz along the road in your compact car, carefully manoeuvring through the masses of compact bikes. Your friend reaches for her compact mirror and takes her lipstick from its compact case and applies, before turning with

a smile to catch you on her compact digital camera with your head thrown back, as you sing along loudly to the compact radio. You laugh, pressing your foot to the accelerator and reach the top of a hill. You see the twinkling

lights and the array of skyscrapers before you. Welcome to your compact city.

The Source #2


of obesity and a lack of community are also identified as problems. Waddling to the car with a Mars Bar is more popular than going to local amenities by public transport. It is simply an unsustainable way of cities functioning in the future.

As a result, the idea of compact cities has emerged which aims to create areas of high density settlement to re-establish an urban–rural divide where country-side is preserved from the invasion of bustling city life. A sense of community has to be encouraged in these areas to offer a high quality of life with afforda-ble and efficient public transport replacing the use of cars. European cities such as London, Milan and Riga have also introduced congestion charges which could be extended into other cities, as well as more

extreme measures like car free zones and heavily controlled parking re-strictions. The Organisation for Economic Cooper-ation and Development urges that national, regional and urban governments to work together to achieve these goals worldwide with clear aims for each city to encourage investment, alongside a necessity to retain public parks and green spaces to maintain a balance.

We are often told that good things come in small packages, so why not our cities? It is time to contain the sprawl and make the best use of the land in urban areas. The Committee on Transport has the pen in hand to redesign European cities and create a viable, sustainable future across the continent. ■ AKr

From Compact City Concepts to transit-oriented development: with 60% of EU citizens living in urban areas, how can the EU enhance the development of urban mobility while safeguarding both public health and sustainability, as well as accessibility and transport efficiency?

Committee on Transport and Tourism


Munich 2013 25

EU code of extractionResponsible treatment of nature is a topic of strong concern in the EU. After long years of implementing sustain-able policy within EU, extraction and manufacturing processes are environmentally friendly and conflict-free. Due to the scarcity of some resources, the EU is importing them, which doesn’t provide a guarantee that they are extracted in a proper way. The Committee on Foreign Affairs II is challenged to find the way the European Union can influence this situation.

Responsible production and conscious sourcing: which measures should Euro-pean countries adopt to ensure that any of the materials from foreign countries used in the production processes are extracted in a sustainable and conflict free manner?

Committee on Foreign Affairs II

The Source #2


Although the EU continuously emphasises the importance of sustainable development and the meaning of conflict-free imports of

raw materials, there is no clear strategy for achieving these goals. The urgency of the topic is increasing, and requires actions to be taken immediately. As the leading producer of manufactures the EU is one of the greatest consumers of raw materials and energy in the world. The shortage of natural resources is an increasingly pressing problem in Europe, causing the European community to look for a way to prevent the excessive use of non-renewable resources.

The economic crisis has become a strong factor favouring merchandise trade revival after a compara-tive downfall during the economic crisis. Trade in raw materials is facing a similar trend. Highly developed countries as the main consumers of resources are be-coming hungrier for cheap materials. It might seem that there is nothing to worry about, as increasing de-mand provokes higher prices in the poor countries. These countries resort to exporting natural resources and energy because their industry is not developed enough. Following this trend the shortage in raw materials multiplies itself, making the suppliers of re-sources exhausted for the sake of the rich countries’ well-being. The resources that the EU is lacking at the moment will be scarce all over the world in near fu-ture.

A sustainable extraction of imported resourc-es has been part of the EU agenda for a long time; some solutions have been found and applied as pro-grammes for sustainable development. The mecha-nisms and incentives in place are aimed at protecting

European resources from depletion. The EU cannot interfere directly in other countries’ extraction of re-sources and therefore needs to resort to indirect dip-lomatic methods.

Conflict materials are those extracted under con-ditions of human rights abuses or armed conflict. The EU can show its disapproval of these malpractices by prohibiting raw materials extracted under ques-tionable conditions from entering the EU markets. However, this is not enough as the EU could change the situation worldwide. Monitoring the extraction technologies of imported raw materials is a non-tariff measure of trade, which will ensure sustainable pro-duction for the EU imports. This step should be taken even if it might cause indignation of trade partners. Furthermore, low technological development in these countries is the reason for becoming resource-ori-ented in external trade – and the EU being the main target for it. This should be accompanied by strength-ening cooperation in the field of the research and de-velopment of sustainable technologies.

Raw material trade remains as a key reason for international conflicts. Together with developed in-ternational cooperation and peace keeping meas-ures established on global level, the number of re-source-based conflicts has significantly reduced – although not completely disappeared. The EU has great potential to influence the sustainability policies in partner countries and thus guarantee the provision of resources and a safer international environment for future generations. ■ LZ

Sustainable, conflict-free resource extraction and trade


Munich 2013 27

A Eurovillage amongst many othersHow this Eurovillage compares

“A crowded room full of hungry people from different countries drinking and eating a lot.” That is how Tommy Mallen, member

of the Irish delegation, describes Eurovillage. From the Romanian homemade cheese pie to the German pretzels, Eurovillage certainly was a multicultural ex-perience for all participants. Since this is a Eurovillage at an International Session, the standards are higher than one would normally expect. Johanne Mancdar-gent, member of the French delegation, confirms this:

“I had Eurovillage at my national session, but this is better since everyone can represent his or her own country here.”

However, it is worth noting that Eurovillage has not always been as exceptional like this at Interna-tional Sessions. Federico Fasol, President of the Ses-sion and with more than a decade’s experience of EYP, recognises this instantly. “This is the widest variety of food I have ever seen at a Eurovillage”, he declares. “There are more countries represented here than at

previous sessions.” It is not only the variety, but it is also the quality that has changed. International Ses-sions in the past included fewer countries and offered much lighter food. This is something that Federico at-tributes partly due to the fact that EYP used to have fewer members, but also to the difficult concept: “To-day everyone understands the concept better. Thanks to similar events, people have begun to grasp it.”

The increased number of members in EYP has in-fluenced the quality of Eurovillage. Dr Alan Flowers, member of the Governing Body of EYP, is very quick to emphasise the Governing Body’s role in this: “The Governing Body has been proactive in encouraging old members to become more active, like Macedonia.”

So as Eurovillage draws to a close, it is worth re-membering that in spite of the diversity of tasty dishes we see today, it has not always been as good. ■ FH, EH

More than two hundred youngsters from all over Europe, 35 tables and a wide variety of food: Eurovillage has many things to offer and is an essential part of any EYP session. It is one of the most memorable parts of any ses-sion. The Eurovillage at the 72nd International Session was not different in that aspect.

The Greek table was a highlight of the evening

The Source #2



Munich 2013 29

“Keeping the engine running”Interview with a head organiser

Hosting an international session is always an honour and a great opportunity for the national committee, as getting selected is

difficult taking that the criteria for selection are ex-tremely high. When asking Jupp about why his appli-cation got accepted, he starts laughing and explains that there were not any other applications to host the session. Still, together with the board members of EYP Germany he put a lot of effort into writing the application, taking that it still could have been reject-ed by the selection panel. Everything from finances to venues and programmes were included. This gave the overall impression that the concept was throughout thought and well planned, which lead to the applica-tion being accepted. We now know about the charac-teristics of international session but it is even more interesting to know what makes Munich 2013 unique. When asking Jupp he reasons that Munich as a city is already unique, as it is well known for its culture. Additionally, it is equally important to Jupp that the people attending the session make it a special event: a session can be as well organised as possible, but a ses-

sion without participants would not be anything at all. Let it be officials or delegates, we are all putting our effort into this session to make Munich2013 a special session.

The team of organisers consists of more than 30 people, which is a big group to handle for Jupp. Super-vising and allocating tasks among the organisers are some of his main responsibilities. The team is struc-tured in different departments for example “trans-port” or “delegate-support”, which can be compared to the internal structure of a business where tasks are distributed similarly. “Whatever work is still left is evenly distributed among all team members. This way everyone gets to do their bit”, he says. When ex-plaining in two to three words what head organising a session actually means, Jupp answers “keeping the en-gine running”. His greatest challenges throughout the session are keeping track of everything and making sure that the organisation runs as smoothly as possi-ble. At the same time it is very important to him that he is available for the organisers’ needs and provides support. After all they are the ones that are actually

Running around in their blue jackets and providing a helping hand where needed, the organisers of this session are not hard to find. Over the past two years they have put all their effort into this session in order to make sure that every participant will enjoy the session to its fullest. However, before there even was this team of organisers there was one single person building up the idea of Munich 2013: Max, aka Jupp, our head organiser. The Source met him to have a chat about challenges, expectations and what makes this International session unique.

The Source #2


Maximilian “Jupp” Gigl

doing all the work. In 2011 Jupp was head organising another ses-

sion, an international forum taking place in Regens-burg. One could imagine that he would therefore be perfectly prepared to head organise Munich. He took much know-how with him from Regensburg and oth-er sessions during past two years, but he also learned

a lot about what he could have done differently. How-ever, the amount of people attending Munich is not at all comparable with the session in Regensburg as already its size entails many new challenges that he did not have to cope with back then. Naturally, sever-al details changed overtime: for example it was orig-inally planned that the BMW Welt would host the Resource village and not the General Assembly. Nev-ertheless, he is confident concerning what he has al-ready achieved and whenever he was struggling with a problem, he knew he would learn from his mistakes.

Clearly, two years of work have a big impact on one’s personal development. Jupp reasons that organ-ising this session made him change his viewpoint of many things: that he is increasingly looking at the bright side. He explains that he came to the conclu-sion that there is a solution to every problem “as if it was born with one”. It is thus not all about having a problem but finding its solution. Whatever EYP holds for him in the future he cannot tell yet. “Ask me again at the 15th”, he says, because then he will have formed a clear opinion about Munich as his project and what his future goals are in EYP. ■ LLd


Munich 2013 31

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

The activities of the European Youth Parliament are under the patronage of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe.

Bayerische Staatskanzlei

The European Youth Parliament is a programme of the Schwarzkopf Foundation.

Documents

The Source: The Environmental Issue (2)