In one of the many meetings on small arms since July 2001, a participant from a gun-affected country said, "There are many reasons behind the killing. If you give up your gun, you are insecure, because the military and the police are not able to provide security." This gets to the heart of an issue that has a rightful place in our work this week—the question of understanding and acting on factors related to "demand".

The Programme of Action recognizes that “a prominent reason for the large numbers of small arms and light weapons in circulation is that there is a vigorous demand for them." In the few moments that I have here I will try to highlight some of the reasons why people may want or think they need to have guns. We are here because we want to reduce the effects of small arms availability and proliferation before the Review Conference in 2006. It is, then, crucial that we understand these motivations better and become clearer on the steps that can and must be taken to reduce them.

The testimonies throughout this week—here and in other settings—show that the negative impact of guns on people is becoming better understood.

So far, however, policy responses have focused on regulating supply and transfer. These kinds of measures make up the bulk of the recommendations in the Programme of Action. The reports of States and others this week focus largely on these very necessary steps. For example, there are many references to necessary post-conflict actions, including disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration initiatives. Factors like restoring state capacity, conflict resolution and prevention, economic development, security sector reform, and building cultures of peace are in the Programme of Action. But these references are few and the suggestions for action are underdeveloped.

Although “demand” issues are largely overlooked in official international and regional documents on small arms, important initiatives are underway. Governments, NGOs, and international agencies have begun to understand some of the factors behind the spread and misuse of small arms, including the illicit trade. They have also begun to examine the relationship between availability and demand.

The following have been identified as some of the "root causes" that drive people to use or desire firearms:

· Poverty and economic imbalances.
· Lack of opportunities for youth.
· Inadequate public safety.
· Police corruption and brutality.
· Abuses of human rights.
· Inadequate access to conflict management and transformation alternatives.
· Cultures of impunity.
· Inadequate post-conflict programmes for ex-combatants, and
· Cultural attitudes.

These are complex relationships. Supply is global but demand is very local, and every setting will be different. Factors that drive gun ownership and use are different in rural and urban settings. They are different in areas that are heavily affected by conflicts across borders and those that are not. And they are different in places where states are fundamentally weak or "failed" and those that are not. But there is a clear link between demand factors and the supply issues covered in the Programme of Action.

There is a clear and growing consensus that "supply side" approaches, if they are to be effective, need to be informed by an awareness of the factors driving demand.

For example, work on youth and armed violence looks at lack of trust in the police and lack of jobs for youth. Such research has pointed to a range of responses, such as community policing, employment training and job programmes for youth, and alternative positive activities for youth such as sport, among others.

Approaches that appear to be valid across different geographic and conflict settings can be summarized under four key areas:

1. Governance and law: For example, enforcing good governance; encouraging transparency and information sharing; promoting accountability; increasing public awareness on gun violence and its impacts; strengthening gun control and enforcement; ending impunity for human rights abuses; and promoting security sector reform, including increased wages, educational incentives, human rights training, and judicial reform.

2. Civil conflict: Promoting the voices and perceptions of the key stakeholders, especially those in affected communities; using local, traditional and indigenous approaches to conflict management; and increasing the understanding and use of non-violent social change and conflict resolution approaches;

2. Socio-economic development: Using community development strategies and including key stakeholders in the design and implementation of programmes and policies; policies aimed at reducing economic disparities; creating opportunities for youth; and implementing holistic approaches DDR.

3. Cultural identity and attitudes: Building and strengthening networks of peace; making use of traditional conflict-management practices, including the role of elders; and affecting gender attitudes to gun possession.

Different communities have found a range of ways to deal with gun violence, from "gun free" zones in schools in South Africa to peace building workshops in Sri Lanka. In my country, Cambodia, demand initiatives have focused on efforts to improve the conduct of the armed forces, media campaigns to change attitudes about guns, and public gun destruction events. Many communities around the world have begun to invent solutions for reducing armed violence. They deserve to be understood as important elements in the achievement of the larger goals of the Programme of Action and be supported.

We should also take note of the ways in which both governments and NGOs have incorporated these issues into their work. There deeper understanding since 2001 of the way in which problems of small arms and light weapons must be understood. Government presentations, regional and international reporting, and input from NGOs this week have shown some of the good ideas and approaches.

So what is needed between now and the next Biennial Meeting of States in 2005 and the Review Conference in 2006?

First, research that attempts to quantify the contribution of demand factors and evaluations of programmes to reduce the misuse of small arms and light weapons are needed. We must develop key policy proposals for action at the national, regional and global levels on "demand-side" aspects and their interaction with the supply-side initiatives. A promising way forward appears to lie in emphasizing the connections between security and development. Another strategy is to emphasize community security—that is, helping to create the conditions of law and order and access to justice that reduce feelings of insecurity, and, therefore, the demand for weapons. Donors should also look to supporting development programmes that emphasize the centrality of broad human security objectives.

Section III, paragraph 18, of the Programme of Action calls on "States, regional and subregional and international organizations, research centers, health and medical institutions, the United Nations system, international financial institutions and civil society... to develop and support action-oriented research aimed at facilitating greater awareness and better understanding of the nature and scope of the problems associated with the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects." Factors related to reducing demand are critical in this equation, and should be considered in reviewing progress on the Programme of Action.

We clearly still have a long way to go to effectively diminish the demand for small arms. Let us recommit ourselves and get back to work. Thank you.