A/HRC/19/70 international cooperation, introducing structural and systemic reform, participation, accountability and human rights principles. The aim should be to apply a development approach to human rights. National efforts in providing aid and financing for development were described. The principles of transparency, participation and accountability in elaborating development policies and the role of civil society were stressed. Concern was expressed over the different meanings of “non-discrimination” in the trade and human rights regimes. The need for more coherence, understanding and acceptance of human rights in WTO was underlined. Questions were raised how the right to development could help in revamping what remained of the Doha round, linked with the role of trade and financial institutions within the broader picture of incorporating the right to development into the collective responsibility of States. 52. In concluding remarks and addressing specific questions, the panellists, inter alia, pointed out that human rights obligations should be used as leverage when addressing imbalances in trade, finance and economic regimes. They could empower States to claim the policy space needed. More work had to be done in the area of arbitration in disputes arising from investment agreements. Arbitrators need to technically know how to use the human rights framework in the context of investment agreements. A number of practical strategies in the area of TRIPS flexibilities were mentioned as potential avenues for replication in order to ensure the right to health. It was pointed out that the nondiscrimination provisions in WTO allowed for flexibilities and included specific provisions for LDCs. It was further noted that the WTO regime limited and regulated the use of counter-measures employed under general public international law. 53. Felix Kirchmeier, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, presented his concluding views on the Social Forum. He pointed out that the Social Forum was conceived of as a space for civil society. This was unfortunately not matched with the power for civil society organizations to table resolutions on the outcome of the Social Forum sessions. He encouraged the Human Rights Council to discuss the recommendations in substance and take action on them. As concerned the 2011 Social Forum, he concluded that, while the Declaration on the Right to Development was recognized as a forceful tool with the potential to readjust existing power imbalances in international relations, to date it had had little impact. While the right to development meant many things for many people, and indeed had a wide reach, for rightsholders it was about effectively changing, or preserving, their situation at a very local level. 54. The Chairperson-Rapporteur in his closing remarks summarized key findings and conclusions of the Social Forum which are reflected below. IV. Conclusions and recommendations A. Conclusions 55. The right to development provided an integrated, holistic and cohesive framework, applying human rights to the national and international dimensions of development. The multi-dimensional aspect of the right to development was emphasized, moving beyond economic growth to achieving well-being of populations, social inclusion and justice. Normative frameworks were already in place in relation to many of the elements of right to development: existing human rights mechanisms and provisions needed to be utilized and the right to development had to be invoked more routinely by employing strategic litigation and legal advocacy. This would provide the means by which rights-holders could shape jurisprudence from the perspective of marginalized or vulnerable groups and thus help define human rights standards and hold actors accountable. 17