Archives

The second world summit on sustainable development will be held in Johannesburg next year. The following article argues that this event will present South Africans and others with a unique opportunity to come to grips with the causes of global inequality and degradation, and reinforce a growing social movement towards creating a fairer and more sustainable world.

We are women and men, farmers, workers, unemployed, professionals, students, black and indigenous peoples, coming from the South and from the North, committed to struggle for peoples' rights, freedom, security, employment and education. We are fighting against the hegemony of finance, the destruction of our cultures, the monopolisation of knowledge. mass media, and communication, the degradation of nature, and the destruction of the quality of life by multinational corporation and anti-democratic policies.' - Porto Alegre, January 2001.

The term 'sustainable development' was catapulted into the consciousness of world leaders at the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. At its core was an understanding that development - poverty eradication, recognising the human spirit, equity and justice - is integrally tied to keeping the world's natural resources and ecosystems free from pollution and degradation.

Environment and human development are part and parcel of each other. This was recognised through commitments signed by governments at Rio: Agenda 21, the Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on Biological Diversity and Forestry Principles, and the Rio Declaration. The spirit was also alive in the parallel NGO forum where scores of 'alternative treaties' were signed on issues such as poverty, trade, and agriculture.

Ten years later, South Africa will host the world summit on sustainable development in Johannesburg. The problems faced by the world in 2002 bear a striking resemblance to those faced in 1992, but in many cases they are even more serious.

The gap between rich and poor has grown, the arms industry continues to flourish and support conflict around the world, the severity of climate change is far greater than was estimated at Rio, fisheries on which many coastal communities depend are in serious decline and/or have been monopolised by big industry, and biodiversity continues to be lost at an alarming rate. This trend is likely to continue as long as the underlying causes - the abuse of power, inequity, and the quest for excessive profits - are further institutionalised and entrenched.

At the same time, there is a growing global social movement for change - a movement that puts people before profits, promotes democracy, values all life forms, and works to protect cultural and biological diversity.

If the world summit is to be a success, it needs to embrace these latter principles and reject the neo-liberal policies advocated by international economic institutions such as the WTO (World Trade Organisation) that are accompanied by pain, poverty, and the destruction of the natural environment.

The world summit could be a significant milestone in the growth of a global social movement towards a world that is fairer and more sustainable; a world in which justice and equity are intrinsic components of any action or decision.

Key challenge

The key challenge in this rapidly globalising world, which will be echoed at the world summit, is to break the power imbalance that allows exploitation and the abuse of women, children, men, nature, rural communities, and developing countries. This imbalance of power is observable in:

* Terms of trade that favour rich countries over poor, and which, through controlled access to markets, the control of technology, etc, serve to maintain or deepen that inequality.

* Debt flows in which billions of dollars flow out of the developing world every year in the form of debt repayments, paying interest upon interest upon interest. Yet the ecological debt incurred by the North and its consumptive lifestyles has never been paid.

* Flows of development aid from North to South which have declined massively in real terms over the past 10 years. More and more, development aid is being linked to trade agreements invariably loaded in favour of the North; to investment in which substantial profits are paid offshore; to strict conditions that cut state spending on education, health, etc; or allocated to specific 'development' projects such as dams, large agricultural projects, etc, designed and constructed by Northern consultants.

More subtly, the intrusion of multinational business into developing countries has disrupted social and cultural traditions based on an understanding of the sustainable use of resources, and supplanted them with inappropriate new habits.

* Carbon emissions and pollution originating in the developed world yet posing a global threat and leaving developing countries even more vulnerable.

If the United States, for example, were to emit its 'fair share' of carbon dioxide while keeping within the 'safe limits' of greenhouse gas emission, it would need to reduce its C02 emissions by about 90%. At the same time, models predict that the poorer countries are the most vulnerable and the least able to adapt to the negative effects of climate change. It is predicted that southern Africa will be particularly hard hit by climate change.

* Resource consumption, where a quarter of the world's people consume more than three-quarters of the world's energy, metals and minerals; produce more than 90% of all industrial and hazardous waste: and eat more than half the world's food.

* Women and children as the primary targets of violence and abuse in developed and developing countries, and are among those who suffer most from poverty, injustice, and underdevelopment. Since 1945, 'superpower' conflict has invariably played itself out in developing countries, from Korea through Vietnam to Afghanistan and Somalia.

Notwithstanding the direct impact of war on natural systems, these conflicts serve to deepen poverty and disrupt formerly stable social and cultural traditions.

* International law and institutions whose development has historically been driven and controlled by 'Northern' interests. Even today's generally accepted definition of 'sustainable development' is a Northern product.

It is clear that people in the developing world - both government and non-government - need to be up-front about this: neither development nor environmental protection can take place in a world where a privileged few control access to and the ownership of resources.

It is not just about ironing out small problems in international texts, or graciously accepting another sum of 'development' aid with different strings attached. It is about taking the lead and demonstrating that if human beings are to survive as a species, we need to go about managing the world in a very different way.

No new agreements

What would such a world look like, and what would our guiding principles be? How can we use the world summit to set us on the right path?

Although the agenda for Johannesburg 2002 has not yet been determined, there is a general acceptance that no new agreements will be negotiated; instead, the event will be used to assess and evaluate progress made over the past 10 years. This will include a formal review of Agenda 21, the blueprint for sustainable development concluded in Rio in 1992.

While the official government process is taking place, the NGOs will be running their own forum where a strong Southern vision will be as important as at the official summit. There will also be a host of side-events - seminars, discussions, street theatre, training workshop - where ordinary people will explore different aspects of sustainable development and their personal relationship to the environment in which they live.

Justice, equity and empowerment are key, non-negotiable principles in a sustainable world. At all levels, from household to global, the link between inequality and environmental degradation is clear. Shared resources, whether local grazing commons or our global air quality, can never be managed sustainably if stakeholders are not equally empowered.

Public participation and democratic decision-making are key requirements for a sustainable world. Development is not development if it does not meet people's needs. These are best articulated by empowered and informed participation.

The summit needs to highlight the extreme poverty and insecurity in which billions of people live, and recognise that it is they who are particularly vulnerable to environmental degradation and global change. Most of the world's population live directly off the bounty of nature. Pollution, habitat destruction, and so on can rob these people of their livelihoods., ensuring that they remain trapped in a cycle of poverty which in turn can lead to further environmental degradation.

Energy-impoverished households depend on wood fuel, unwittingly contributing to deforestation. Increasing demand and high prices paid by Northern consumers for ivory, abalone, etc are a powerful incentive for poor people to strip these resources with little thought about their sustainability. Developing countries depend on industries that are often based on outdated technology and are therefore more likely to pollute the environment.

Struggle for survival

At all levels, from household to nation-state, the poor seldom have that luxury of making the best 'environmental' choice. The greatest store of biodiversity is located in the developing world. Yet it is hard to imagine how the survival of the African elephant or the Bengal tiger in fenced-off nature reserves, for example, can ever be assured as long as communities bordering those reserves struggle daily for survival.

The eradication of poverty - a necessary condition in a sustainable world - is not possible without reducing the opulence and excessive consumption of rich people.

George Bush Jr cannot stand up as his father did in Rio and say that American lifestyles are not negotiable. Indeed, if we are to avoid a calamity - American lifestyles have to change, and soon.

Time is not on our side. Human impacts on the environment often take many years to manifest themselves and to be felt by humankind. The results of excessive carbon dioxide emissions that started with the industrial revolution are only now showing up as small changes in average global temperatures. The future effects on humankind of species extinction, habitat loss, non-renewable resource use, and land degradation - unprecedented in recent history - can only be guessed at, but are unlikely to be desirable.

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries |

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager