The future of “sustainable development”
Martin Khor
The world is in even graver crisis
almost two decades after the promises made at the 1992 Earth Summit. A
new Rio Summit in 2012 will aim to close the gaps and discuss new
problems. Intro Ends
It’s been almost two decades since the Earth Summit of 1992 in Rio de
Janeiro (Brazil) that woke up the world to the crises in the environment
as well as development.
The loss of biodiversity is causing even more economic loss than
global warming |
Despite the great declarations of that meeting, which most government
heads attended, the environment today is in even greater crisis.
An important reason is that globalisation, spurred by the creation of
the World Trade Organisation in 1995, ushered in new forces of economic
competition among countries. They had to keep costs low so that their
companies could survive in the globalised market, and less and less
priority was given to environmental protection or to assisting
developing countries.
It has been business as usual, with more forests chopped, minerals
exploited and factories and cars pumping pollutants and warming the
world’s temperature.
Though climate change has hogged the news recently, there are also
many other ecological problems. The loss of biodiversity is causing even
more economic loss than global warming, according to a new United
Nations report leaked to and reported by The Guardian last week.
There is also the increasing scarcity of water, which will affect
large numbers of countries in the next decade and has a great potential
to cause conflicts.
The latest sign of this is the fight over the rights to the use of
the waters of the Nile among seven countries in Africa on the upper and
lower reaches of the river. This has the potential to develop into a
major regional problem.
The UN is organising the World Summit on Sustainable Development in
2012, also in Rio, to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the 1992
conference.
Only sustainable development can provide durable solutions to
the crisis |
The aim is to get renewed commitment from
political leaders for sustainable development, to assess progress and
gaps in the follow-up of previous summits, and address new and emerging
challenges. Two specific themes have also been chosen: a green economy
and the institutional framework for sustainable development.
The first meeting in this “Rio plus 20” process took place at the UN
in New York in May.
“We are meeting against the backdrop of multiple crises,” said UN
Under-Secretary General Sha Zukang. “The sad truth is that despite two
centuries of spectacular growth on our planet we have failed to
eradicate the scourge of poverty.
“If we continue on our current path we will bequeath material and
environmental poverty, not prosperity, to our children and
grand-children. Our stop-gap solutions can no longer suffice. Only
sustainable development can provide durable solutions to the crisis.”
“Sustainable development” is indeed the key concept underlying the
whole discussion. It is a term that emerged with its multi-faceted
meanings from the 1992 Earth Summit.
The original proposal was to hold a UN conference on the environment,
but developing countries insisted that environmental issues had to be
considered in relation to development issues as well.
Thus “sustainable development” was born, containing three pillars
environmental, social and economic issues - that are inherently
inter-linked in a balanced and integrated manner.
It was agreed that environmental problems are so much related to
social and economic problems (especially poverty and under-development)
that all three aspects have to be tackled together.
The principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” was
also born – that all countries share the task of bringing about
sustainable development but that the rich have a greater duty because of
their greater previous use of the world’s resources and their greater
capacity. Thus, they have to assist developing countries, including
through transfers of finance and technology.
This principle is at the centre not only of Rio 1992’s main outcome
(Agenda 21) but also the Conventions on Climate Change and on
Biodiversity, which were also signed at the same time in Rio.
The developing countries want the “Rio plus 20” process to examine
what has gone wrong in the past 20 years that led to such poor results.
There has been a persistent “implementation gap”, said the Chair of the
Group of 77 and China, Ambassador Abdullah Alsaidi of Yemen, at last
week’s meeting.
Many commitments by the developed countries have not been met, and
there must now be more effective implementation of what was agreed at
previous summits, with greater funding, he added.
Many developed countries are however not very keen to have the 2012
Summit focusing on the failures of the past. Perhaps they don’t want to
be embarrassed at how little of the pledged financial and technology
transfers have taken place.
They would like instead to focus discussions on the “Green Economy”
and on a new international structure to deal more effectively with
environmental issues.
While agreeing with these two topics, the developing countries are
also on guard against any attempts to over-emphasise environmental
issues at the expense of the social and economic development pillars of
sustainable development.
The G77 and China said there is no need to redefine sustainable
development or replace it with an “imprecisely defined, abstract
concept”, referring to the Green Economy.
The group was especially concerned that the transition to a Green
Economy should not lead to conditions and standards that justify
unilateral restrictions in trade, finance and aid.
It should allow countries the policy space to define their own paths
to sustainability.
The underlying fear of the developing countries is that too much
stress on the environmental aspect of a new economic model would neglect
the development needs of developing countries, and thus be a step
backwards from the concept and practice of “sustainable development”
which took so long to reach agreement on.
Last week’s meeting launched the debate on what is to be achieved at
“Rio plus 20”. Another major controversial issue is what kind of
institutions should govern sustainable development in the future.
Should the existing institutions, such as the UN Environment
Programme (UNEP), the Commission on Sustainable Development, the UN
Development Programme (UNDP) and the UN Conference on Trade and
Development (UNCTAD), be strengthened and work better together? Or
should there be a more radical restructuring or even the creation of a
new institution altogether and what would its mandate be?With such
interesting and important topics, the road to the 2012 Summit will be
paved with much intense negotiations.
-Third World Network Features
(The writer is
Executive Director of the South Centre, an intergovernmental policy
think-tank of developing countries, and former Director of the Third
World Network). |