Access To Development

The "Access to Development" conference striving towards a Central African charter allowed nations, large and small, to present their various issues in a cooperative and peaceful manner. Delegates from every country were given the opportunity to prepare a presentation that outlined the gravest of their nation's problems, and then interact with representatives of other countries in an effort to develop an outline for the region's future. The gathering of such a large number of nations ensured that there was not one overbearing power present at the conference, and this helped to promote democratic ideals in the formation of the clauses. In general, the collaboration of many Central African counties proved that a large conference format can be a successful means of addressing critical issues in a region. The one major problem with the conference, which took place in a University of Toronto Schools classroom, was that each country arrived with a pre-written list of Issues of Priority (IOP), and in a drastic attempt by delegates to address every one of these, some of the clauses quickly overlapped and covered a number of unrelated problems. This resulted in the conference becoming more of a competition between participating countries to cover the most IOPs, rather than a healthy discussion of issues that pertain to the entire region. Much of this problem can be attributed to the constraints of the conference regarding the IOPs, and also the inability of the participating students to put these aside and work towards a uniform solution to the region's many problems. In a sense, this immaturity on behalf of the students represents the greed of real countries to focus on their individual problems, but the conference as a whole was ultimately successful in stimulating discussion and promoting the vital interests of Central Africa.

The conference was an effective method of gathering countries in the Central African region and targeting solutions that the majority of the representatives agreed upon. This was not a flawless method of devising resolutions as a number of close votes took place, but there were no disputes over which clauses would pass once each referendum was final. By being in such close quarters with each of the countries in the region, every representative was forced to overcome obstacles and differences with the other nations, and ultimately understand that any clauses passed would have to benefit the majority of countries in the region. This resulted in a completely democratic conference where equal opportunity was given to each country, regardless of their size or economic influence, to express their individual beliefs, and also present the relevance of their potential solutions to the future prosperity of the region.

One setback of the conference was the selfish desire for each representative to establish their country's IOPs, for the sole purpose of gathering points that were to be tabulated at the conclusion. This was particularly prevalent when countries scrambled at the end to make their resolutions heard, while also negotiating with other countries for support by adding in vague sub-clauses that would be, for the most part, completely unrelated to the original issue addressed. Despite the ambiguity, yet complex nature of some of the clauses presented, some representatives still voted in approval with the hope that this would be recognized as a valid solution to one of their IOPs. However, the moderator made it clear in the end that this type of solution to an IOP would not be considered, and the disappointment from many representatives was evident. It is natural for a country to diligently pursue an option that is most beneficial for them, and the greediness on the part of many representatives in this conference was undeniably similar to how countries would approach such a summit in real life. A more advantageous alternative would be to dismiss any notion of an IOP, and simply allow the participating countries to discuss the overpowering issues, unrestricted by a quantitative tally of individual success. Delegates would still be allowed to present issues that are relevant to their country's prosperity, but there would be a far greater emphasis put on issues that pertain to the entire region, which was the initial goal of such a large conference.

There was such a large number of contrasting opinions present at the conference that it was simply impossible to create any specific clauses. When a country raised an issue that they deemed to be relevant, it quickly turned into a more general solution. This was likely not the best way to address and solve a problem, but it did allow for a greater number of countries to feel involved in the formation of the clause. The voting did however become time consuming after a number of presented clauses did not satisfy enough of the participating countries. This was especially problematic because a conference of this size is not typically considered to be extremely large. To compare, the United Nations General Assembly consists of several hundred countries trying to address a wide variety of general issues (United Nations, 1995). Another large summit that has seen only limited success is the Kyoto Accord, where over 150 countries have agreed to reduce the world's greenhouse gas emissions by diminishing the emission points between participating nations. The Kyoto Accord has been criticized heavily by politicians and scientists around the globe, particularly for the concessions made to China and Japan to gain their support as well as the United State's refusal to join (Green, 2007). A conference