General Assembly President Vuk Jeremic. Pic: UN Photo/JC McIlwaine

By Sophie Yeo

The United Nations is uniquely suited to push forward a new age of sustainability, according to a new report by a leading panel of UN officials.

It says national governments must come together to design and implement the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) agreed in 2012.

These will take over from the Millennium Development Goals when they expire in 2015.

Member States agreed to adopt SDGs at Rio+20 in a document entitled The Future We Want. The goals, they said, would “be useful for pursuing focused and coherent action on sustainable development.”

The goals will last until at least 2050, with a stage of urgent implementation from 2015 to 2030. Together, they will direct action towards a sustainable approach in economic, social and environmental development.

UN at the centre

The report was presented by a panel led by the economist Jeffrey Sachs on Monday. At the launch, Vuk Jeremic, the President of the General Assembly, said that sustainable development was the overriding challenge of the 21^st century.

He said that the UN “must be the vital centre of the sustainable effort, one that draws on every stakeholder: private businesses, non-governmental organizations, universities and research centres, international financial institutions, and the UN organs themselves.”

The report says that “The challenge of setting and implementing SDGs will constitute the largest and most ambitious global development agenda ever undertaken.”

But, it adds, “Nothing less is needed in view of the seriousness and urgency of the challenges facing humanity.”

But while the powerful member states and international financial institutions are crucial to the success of the project, “only the UN has the capacity to lead it,” it says.

This is because the goals will deal with global issues that only the UN has the political legitimacy to address, and will require worldwide expertise across multiple disciplines.

A million voices

The paper coincides with another report from the UN, released yesterday and entitled A Million Voices: The World We Want. This aimed to capture a sense of global priorities in addressing global development, in order to help Member States to craft the SDGs.

“Our work to define a post-2015 development agenda will help us to recalibrate our efforts to eradicate extreme poverty and chart a course to a world of prosperity, peace, sustainability, equity and dignity for all,” Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said at a press conference in New York.

Both reports aim to address why the current global situation requires a whole new set of goals, rather than merely extending the Millennium Development Goals by another 15 years.

But the first report states that, while the world should not lose sight of its Rio+20 commitments, a new framework was required to ensure that these were achieved sustainably, rather than merely bringing about achievements that would quickly be lost in an era of social instability.

The latest report adds that the new goals need to respond to the new challenges posed by population dynamics and environmental degradation that have worsened since the initial goals were crafted in 2000.

The post UN bids for leadership role in ‘age of sustainable development’ appeared first on Climate Home News.

This week in New York City, the 27 members of the high-level panel of eminent persons appointed by the UN Secretary General will deliver a report providing recommendations on the post-2015 development agenda.

This is a critical opportunity to address the inadequacies of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and to chart a new course for sustainable development.

The post-2015 “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) must break from failed convention by integrating environmental and social dimensions into the pursuit of economic development aims, acknowledging that our future economic health will critically depend on our planet’s ecological health.

Thirteen years ago in New York, the United Nations established the MDGs — eight global commitments to eradicate extreme poverty, promote gender equality, improve human health and achieve other ambitious objectives by 2015. Important progress has been made toward achieving the MDGs (learn more in the 2012 report).

The world met its poverty reduction target, with poverty rates declining in every developing region. Over 2 billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources between 1990 and 2010. The lives of some 200 million slum dwellers improved, exceeding the targeted level.

Yet as a whole, our accomplishments have fallen short of our ambitions — particularly on environmental concerns.

Boltz says environmental protection should not be viewed as a parallel process to development but as a pre-condition

The status of the world’s birds, mammals and amphibians is declining, and a substantial proportion of species in all taxonomic groups are threatened with extinction.

Since 1990, greenhouse emissions increased almost every year, with particularly high growth since 2002.

The resulting temperature rise has led to more frequent extreme weather events across the globe, making communities — many of them already poverty-stricken — increasingly vulnerable to devastating droughts, fires and storms.

Why have the MDGs fallen short of critical development aims? Several reasons may be given, of course, from issues of equity to governance challenges to the global economic downturn. But one certainty is that there is a critical flaw in our approach to sustainable development.

The health of our planet, which is fundamental to sustainability, is treated as a distinct and parallel goal rather than an underlying principle. Indeed, it may be argued that we have sacrificed sustainability for the sake of development.

The dangerous assumption that environmental concerns can be subordinated to economic goals disregards the fact that our society and economy are bound by a natural biophysical system. Natural resources and ecosystems are the bases not only of all material wealth, but a precondition for our very existence.

We draw on nature to fuel our economic growth — to power our homes, pollinate our crops and filter our wastewater. We depend on its proper functioning to provide vital resources and to maintain conditions suitable for our success — and indeed our survival.

RTCC Video: Fred Boltz on water, forests and climate change

Since the MDGs were established, more daunting and urgent environmental risks have arisen that threaten social and economic welfare.

According to The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) 2010 report, the loss of natural ecosystems that provide food, raw materials and livelihoods for billions of people is already costing billions to our global economy. The global fisheries industry alone is shrinking by $50bn every year thanks to current unsustainable catch rates.

Ecosystem degradation is a direct threat to our food, water, health and energy security. This realization should prompt a profound realignment of our sustainable development model, and environmental integrity must be at its core.

For example, the global fight to eradicate hunger cannot succeed without ensuring that productive natural ecosystems continue to provide water, pollination, pest regulation and other ecosystem services vital to agriculture.

Forty years in the making

The suggestion that sustainable development should fully integrate environmental concerns is not new.

The 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment focused global attention on this interdependency; twenty years later, the first Earth Summit in Rio brought the environment into the mainstream. Despite its prominence in popular rhetoric, however, in practice the environment has been pursued as a secondary concern to human economic growth.

Last year at the 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), the community of nations committed to charting a course of post-2015 development commensurate with the challenges we face in the 21st century.

The high-level panel report and our collective efforts to achieve future SDGs must set expectations for a new and truly sustainable model, beyond current paradigms and business-as-usual that are putting humanity at ever-greater risk.

Key to succeeding in that new course of development will be fully integrating environmental sustainability in the entirety of our development agenda, not merely treating it as one of many goals.

Depending on how we pursue our development aspirations, we can either threaten or enhance natural resources and ecosystem services and similarly determine long-term potential for improving and sustaining human livelihoods.

Environmental integrity is not merely a dimension of development on par with economic and social concerns; it is a requisite condition.

Fred Boltz is senior vice president for international policy in Conservation International’s Center for Environment and Peace. This article first appeared on the CI Human Nature blog.

The post Comment: A healthy planet is a precondition for development appeared first on Climate Home News.

A report sketching out the framework of the new UN development agenda has included targets for renewable energy, the eradication of fossil fuel subsidies and energy efficiency.

Earlier this year, Saudi Arabia was understood to be opposed to any energy goals other than those dealing with access and wanted no stated preference for specified sources.

The High-Level panel includes Unilever boss Paul Polman and Queen Rania of Jordon and was chaired by heads of state from Indonesia, the UK and Liberia.

There were objections to setting a target for clean energy within the new development framework (Source: BrightSource)

The “illustrative targets” in the report suggest doubling the share of renewables in the global energy mix by 2030, doubling energy efficiency and ensuring universal access to modern energy.

These mirror Ban Ki-moon’s existing Sustainable Energy for All programme and will add extra weight to their objectives. A report released this week found that those targets will be missed unless the pace of action is increased dramatically.

Subsidies

The High Level Panel has also recommended an explicit target to eradicate fossil fuel subsidies.

The G8, the World Bank and a number of other institutions have stated this goal in the past. Enshrining it in the UN’s Post-2015 development agenda would be the most explicit statement of intent on the issue so far.

The IMF recently withheld a loan from Egypt until it agreed to reform its substantial fossil fuel subsidy regime.

The eventual outcome of the panel’s work will be a set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The SDGs were established at the Rio+20 summit and are set to replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) which end in 2015.

The main objective is poverty alleviation but the focus on sustainability could add momentum to climate-friendly development at a time when countries are starting negotiations over a legally binding emissions treaty also set to be agreed in 2015.

Negotiations on that deal, handled through the UNFCCC, will resume in Bonn next week.

The post UN goals could tackle clean energy, fossil fuel subsidies appeared first on Climate Home News.

Proposed sustainable development goals (SDGs) must focus on cutting rich nations’ environmental footprint rather than boosting flows of overseas aid, a new group representing some of the world’s poorest nations warns.

Targetting rising consumption levels of developed countries and the resulting pollution this creates is likely to be more effective than ‘bad aid’, they say.

The Independent Expert Group of the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), supported by the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), met in London for the first time this week, and plans to submit recommendations to the UN’s SDG working group in June.

“In the past with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) the framing was getting poor people out of poverty. It was about the developed countries funding that,” the IIED’s Saleemul Huq said.

“The next era is much less in our view about that paradigm continuing – it’s not about the rich giving money to the poor. That remains an unfinished but minor part of the agenda.

“A bigger part of the agenda is the whole world reaching sustainability, in which the rich are over-consuming and over-polluting. It’s not about them sending money to the poor. It’s about them doing something at home.”

If the UK included imported goods into its carbon emission calculations between 1990-2008, they would rise 20% (Pic: Flickr)

The former prime minister of Haiti – Michèle Duvivier Pierre-Louis – will co-chair the group, whose other members come from Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Eritrea, Gambia, Mali, Nepal, Uganda and Senegal.

Consumption levels are soaring around the world, a consequence of a rising global population and greater levels of choice for consumers in terms of food, travel and other material goods.

This in turn is causing a surge in environmental degradation and greenhouse gas emissions in developing countries, where many of these products are manufactured.

Scientists warn that the collapse of natural ecosystems is undermining attempts to combat poverty.

In an article in the journal Nature, David Griggs from the Monash Sustainability Institute argued: “the stable functioning of Earth systems – including the atmosphere, oceans, forests, waterways, biodiversity and biogeochemical cycles – is a prerequisite for a thriving global society.”

A 2012 report by a UK Parliament Committee calculated that 40% of China’s total emissions were due to export orders, in effect outsourced by rich nations.

“One part of sustainability is not addressed – and that is consumption. They address poverty but not consumption,” said Youba Sokona, Mali’s representative on the group.

New era

Countries began the process of constructing post-2015 targets in February this year. The SDGs are likely to replace the MDGs, which expire in 2015.

Most developing nations want their richer counterparts to take the lead in combatting the environmental stresses the world faces on the grounds of historical responsibility.

But in what has already proved a contentious move for some developing country representatives at the UN, the LDC group wants to move discussions on the proposed SDGs away from finance and back onto what domestic actions donor countries can take.

It says ‘bad aid’ is actually holding back their own development: “It corrupts politicians, those who should be guardians of our societies. It corrupts legal systems. It pushes funding to fossil fuels,” said Dipak Gyawali, a group member and former Nepal Minister of Water Resources.

“Wherever we see things in our countries where there are moments of hope, where we see amazing innovations in villages such as technology or new practices and energy, micro, hydro, solar, these are happening by some mysterious means that really has little connection to the global discourse on foreign aid, development and MDGs.

“The time is gone to think of this whole thing in terms of aid. I am one of those who argues the age of aid is over.”

Huq points to Bangladesh’s new US$350 million national climate change fund as proof developing nations can survive without aid from abroad, while Gyawali says community projects in Nepal have a better track record than larger internationally funded efforts.

Target battle

While there appears to be reluctance at UN level to directly tackle global consumption, pressure from development NGOs is growing.

Stakeholder Forum’s recently launched SDG e-inventory already contains a variety of proposals on how sustainable consumption and production could be integrated into the post-2015 agenda.

“It is clear that eradicating poverty whilst remaining within our planet’s environmental limits, as the core objectives of the SDGs, are simply not possible unless developed nations address their issues of over-consumption and unsustainable production,” said Stakeholder Forum’s Jack Cornforth.

“Nonetheless these are not the only drivers of poverty and environmental degradation, therefore SDG targets on consumption and production should be set for all countries, accompanied by other targets pertaining to interrelated factors also key for sustainable development such as such as governance, health and education. ”

Despite their small economic status and relatively weak diplomatic power, the 49-nation LDC group has risen to prominence in recent months, notably at the UN climate change talks.

One of the group’s major strengths appears to be its ability to encourage the major emerging economies of China, India and Brazil to recognise their responsibilities in implementing change.

Huq added: “We want to show the LDCs as a positive force with a lot to contribute to the global agenda, and not just be recipients of aid which is the frame in which they are stuck – we want to break out of that framing of them as victims.”

The post Post-2015 sustainability goals ‘should target consumption’ appeared first on Climate Home News.

Whether a success or failure, Rio+20 has firmly put sustainable development back on the agenda of governments across the world.

As the UK delegation headed out to Rio last week – led by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman – they aimed at focusing on several key areas; making the case for the green economy, pushing the concept of GDP+ to measure growth alongside the well-being of society and pushing for the Sustainable Development Goals.

The final document which came out of the conference – while criticised by many for being light on action – did recognise all three of these principles and puts the world at the beginning of a pathway towards these aims.

DfID say access to modern energy will be vital in eradicating poverty (© UN Photo/Staton Winter)

Now the real work begins, as governments, civil society and the private sector put these words into actions. The UK’s Department for International Development (DFID) and the UK government will play a key role in this transition, with Prime Minister David Cameron co-chairing the high-level panel for a post-Millennium Development Goal framework.

RTCC spoke to Melinda Bohannon, Head of the Climate and Environment Strategy Unit at DFID about how they define sustainable development, what the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) should look like and how climate change is impacting the development agenda.

RTCC: This year is the year of Sustainable Energy for All. How vital is ensuring energy access to alleviating poverty?

MB: Dependence on fossil fuels is not sustainable in the long term – either economically or environmentally – so it is vital we address energy access in a way that reduces dependencies on fossil fuels and contributes to energy security objectives and builds local resilience.

Access to modern energy technology, such as electricity and efficient cooking facilities, plays a crucial role in fighting poverty.

Today, using smoky stoves to cook is estimated to cause as many as 1.5 million premature deaths a year. Helping the poorest access modern and efficient energy services can help some of the most vulnerable people in the world, especially girls and women, and improve their health, education, and economic options.

That’s why the Coalition Government works hard to support and build local markets and innovation in the private sector to help millions of the poorest people as part of our commitment to fight poverty through our investment into sustainable energy.

World leaders at Rio have set the world on a pathway towards sustainable development (Source: Flickr/UN_Photo_Conference)

RTCC: Sustainable Development is a word which is being discussed and debated around the world now, with many disagreements over what it actually means, what does this term represent for DFID?

MB: DFID’s goal is the eradication of poverty and from this goal springs our understanding of sustainable development.

We aim to balance different, and often competing, development needs against an awareness of the wider environmental, social and economic situation to ensure that we help the poorest without disadvantaging other groups or damaging the natural environment on which the growth is based.

We want to make sure all our work is socially, environmentally and economically sustainable so we make a real and lasting difference. We want to take wide-angled view of development and not be driven by one particular need without fully considering the wider or future impacts.

The Government is promoting the need to value natural resources correctly to help when making decisions that could have a big impact on the environment, such as setting the right business incentives, involving the private sector, and recognising the importance of open access to information.

RTCC: One of the major talking points at the Rio+20 conference was the idea of a new set of SDGs, and the outcome sets out the pathway to agreeing these goals in the future. How do we ensure these goals address the three pillars of sustainable development?

MB: The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have played a critical role in shaping the international development agenda and galvanising action over the last decade. The UK Government is committed to reaching the MDG target by 2015 and has already announced efforts to step-up contributions to core development areas such as health and education.

It is clear that thinking behind the idea of SDGs draws on the experience of the MDGs. The UK thinks that SDGs could be a way to draw more attention to those development issues requiring us to bring together all three dimensions of sustainable development: social, economic and environmental.

That’s why we’re pushing for a short, focused set of SDGs on food, energy and water, and for those SDGs to be developed as part of the broader process to elaborate a post-2015 international development agenda.

RTCC: Could we (and should we) have a set of all-encompassing goals? What lessons can we learn from the MDG process in setting out these new goals?

MB: The UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has announced a High Level Panel to consider exactly how to build on the successes of the MDGs and to secure a framework for development going forward.

The UK will play a critical role with the UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, one of the co-chairs alongside the Presidents of Indonesia and Liberia. Certainly we can see that part of the success of the MDGs is their relative simplicity.

This is something that we will want to hold on to in thinking about how best to bring in not only the critical issues of sustainable development being discussed at Rio but also other important issues such as promoting growth and tackling corruption.

Climate change threatens many vulnerable areas around the world (© DfID)

RTCC: With many of those living in the poorest place increasingly impacted by climate change, how have development priorities changed over the last 20 years because of this?

MB: Climate change is one of the most urgent environmental challenges facing the world today. The UK’s Humanitarian Emergency Response Review predicted that 375 million people will be affected by climate related disasters by 2015 every year and the number is expected to increase over time. As droughts, floods and famines set to increase in frequency and intensity and plunge the poorest deeper into poverty, we have to act now to minimise the impact of climate change on DFID’s work.

We have therefore prioritised those sectors most vulnerable to climate impacts and where adaptation support has yet to reach. We have also prioritised those countries and regions that are most vulnerable, but have the capacity to demonstrate the greatest results.  We will work with the private sector to design and deliver programmes to demonstrate what works.

RTCC: In a period of increasing difficulties worldwide, how important has it become to find innovative way of raising funds for climate adaptation and development and ensure the funds go to the right places and the right people?

MB: We need to provide a truly comprehensive and integrated response to the challenges of development and climate change, and finding innovative ways to do this is both essential and urgent. There is huge potential for innovative financing mechanisms to grow and help deliver the money needed to help poor countries to adapt to change.

The UK’s International Climate Fund brings in additional funding from the private sector and looks at less traditional means of channelling funds to those most in need.

We also support initiatives, such as the Clean Development Mechanism and the International Finance Facility for Immunisation, which have raised up to US $5.5 billion for the health sector and $31 billion for the environmental sector since 2002.

Most importantly, the UK is committed to making sure the aid we direct to the poorest people to grow and adapt to climate change actually reaches them.

The UK Government has a zero tolerance approach to corruption and we do not tolerate corruption or misuse of taxpayers’ funds in any form. All allegations of fraud are taken very seriously, and we have robust systems to safeguard aid money and make our systems even stronger.

The post Rio+20: How UK’s DFID will continue on sustainable development pathway appeared first on Climate Home News.

Following just two days of what can hardly be called negotiations – an endless stream of nations pre-prepared and uninterrupted statements – the negotiators and heads of state at the Rio+20 conference prepare to ratify the conference outcome.

Finalised on Tuesday and despite late pleas from the major groups, Date of History winner 17-year-old Brittany Trilford and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, the draft outcome was hardly debated at all during the high-level segment of the conference.

The conference was opened by a plea from 17-year-old Brittany Trilford (UN Photo/Mark Garten )

With groups accusing the delegates, who arrived at the conference on Wednesday, of agreeing to a weak text, their frustration spilled-over yesterday into a sit-in protest followed by a walkout by many civil society and youth groups.

Speaking at the conference Sharon Burrows from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) called for Civil Society to be given a voice at the table in these types of negotiations.

“Frankly the leaders didn’t even show the courage of even negotiating with each other,” she told reporters. “They accepted a low ambition text from the bureaucrats, from the diplomats and they did nothing to lift the aspiration.”

While the text shows a strong understanding of what must be done, recognises the importance of sustainable development, and re-affirms the pledges made 20 years ago at the first Earth Summit, Kumi Naidoo Executive Director of Greenpeace says it offers little in terms of concrete pledges.

“Our main issue is that there are no bench marks, no deadlines, no money on the table to make these things happen and we would be really stupid as a civil society, or as anybody really, if we just accept that they are now going to act in a way that the world requires.”

With financial crises hitting the world and many politicians looking inwards to their own countries rather than out towards the globe, and with discussions covering topics from poverty eradication to planetary limits and new economic systems to replace GDP, the discussions were never going to be simple.

For Meenakshi Raman, from Third World Network, the conference represented the state of the situation globally.

“The lack of ambition in the text that you see, really represents the state of global politics today and I think as the President of Brazil was saying giving the economic and the financial crisis internationally, countries particularly in the North are having domestic issues and are focusing domestic and are less willing to talk about international cooperation and international solidarity,” she told RTCC.

AUDIO: Meenakshi Raman gives RTCC’s Ed King her reaction to the Rio+20 outcome:

Rays of Hope

And while negotiations may have fallen far short of what many civil society groups, and many countries may have hoped for, it is not the end of the process and could be seen as a positive beginning.

“What you see in the outcome document is the reaffirmation of Rio principles including CBDR, you see in finance and technology what we actually got were mechanisms that we could get in the future,” added Raman. “There are positives but from where the developing countries began, to what they got, you can look at it as a glass half full.”

And while the final three days of negotiations have run fairly smoothly, the fraught process which has been going on behind the scenes for over a year now brought moments where it looked as if there would be no agreement at all.

NGOs say the road towards the 'future we want' is still open (UN/Maria Elisa Franco)

Erica Carroll, Policy Analyst from Christian Aid told RTCC: “Thanks to the leadership of the Brazilian government, the text went from being highly contentious with the possibility of no agreement, to a finely balanced compromise that all countries could sign on to, even if they were not happy with every aspect of it.

“We have a commitment to pursue a process to formulate sustainable development goals. If government and civil society, along with allies in the private sector take action on these commitments then we will be making some positive, measurable and accountable steps to a sustainable future.”

However, she too warned that civil society – especially those poorest and marginalised – must be incorporated into this process for it to be successful.

She praised the youth presence at the conference – both for their contribution to the negotiation process and their acts of protest – for an outcome that alone does little to secure their future.

“What needs to happen now,” she says, “is action and implementation of the commitments we see on paper, otherwise the fair, equitable and sustainable future that we really want many be just a distant dream.”

Other NGOs too recognised the rays of hope that could be taken from the civil society presence at the conference, and the positives that can be taken away from the process.

Barbara Stocking, Oxfam’s Chief Executive said: “Rio will go down as the hoax summit. They came, they talked, but they failed to act.

“The People’s Summit was a vision for a future we want with people at its centre, and a rejection of business as usual. It’s been a painful birth but the vision of an ambitious set of goals on environment and development, applicable to all countries, is a solitary light in the fog of Rio.

“But we need one set of goals for the people and planet – ending poverty and protecting the environment are inextricably linked and cannot be addressed in isolation.”

The post Rio+20: Long way to go on road to sustainable development, say NGOs appeared first on Climate Home News.

Ban Ki-moon issues his warning to delegates at the UN Rio+20 draft agenda negotiations. (Source:UN/Mark Garten)

There were angry scenes at the UN in New York this week as negotiations on the Rio+20 draft agenda became frayed.

The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) reports that one of the Co-chairs of the talks called for a break to allow things to “cool down”.

Diplomats are drawing up a draft document that will form the basis of the ministerial talks at the Rio+20 sustainable development summit next month.

The talks have proven to be more complex than imagined with the agenda ballooning in size once discussions began, creating more work for delegates who must cut the text down in to a manageable but effective document.

Another chair, Sook Kim, expressed his own disappointment with the progress telling the delegates: “You are expected to turn the text from a tiger to a lion, but you changed it to a bird.”

The current session is an additional emergency round of talks organised after the previous meeting failed to make sufficient progress.

Ban Ki-moon opened the latest set of talks and warned negotiators that “time was running out”.

Related Stories:

Is the Rio roadmap doughnut shaped?

What makes a good sustainability leader?

Five reasons why we need Rio+20

The post Tempers flare at Rio+20 negotiations as Ban Ki-moon urges progress appeared first on Climate Home News.

For many, describing what the Rio+20 Summit is trying to achieve is hard enough. Finding actual solutions to achieve them is even harder, as we found out at our Rio+20 Student Workshop.

Policymakers heading to Rio, in the meantime are always keen to develop actions, after all, talk is cheap.

We all know that business can talk a good game when it comes to environmental protection, green growth and sustainability.

So what ideas does big business have to offer the negotiators in Rio that are faced with the unenviable task of forming policies that unite economic growth, social development and environmental sustainability?

While some items on the agenda in Rio+20 are complex, simpler issues such as access to clean water remain prominent. (Source: UN/Kibae Park)

Well as it turns out they have quite a few.

The Aldersgate Group invited nine major businesses across a range of sectors to pitch one such idea (in 100 seconds) to an audience of NGO, business and governmental representatives (each armed with a voting terminal) and a panel of judges including UK Environment Minister Caroline Spellman and WWF-UK CEO David Nussbaum.

Here’s a summary of the ideas:

B&Q

The hardware retail chain (and stockist of sustainable timber) proposed that governments adopt a commitment based on no net loss of natural capital, the economic value of the earth’s natural resources and processes such as fisheries, freshwater supplies and less obvious services such as pollination.

Unilever

Unilever has attained a huge portfolio of consumer brands from Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream to Vaseline and Cif by enforcing rigorous business plans and that is precisely what it says the world needs. The conglomerate proposed the adoption of a set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) underpinned by a carefully thought out business plan, drawn-up in conjunction with the private sector.

Siemens

Siemens called for industrial call waste reduction and design with re-use in mind. (Source: Flickr/Peter Kaminski)

The German industrial giant touches the sustainable agenda through a number of its subsidiaries from public transport to energy. They suggested an overhaul of product lifecycles and design to create a “circular economy” or put more simply a low-resource economy. This means reusing and recycling on an industrial and governmental scale by discouraging the use of materials that cannot be reused.

Aviva

The message from Aviva on behalf of a coalition of other big investors, was simple, “we’d love to invest in sustainability, but we need more companies to open the books on their environmental credentials”. They want governments to help with this, opening the door for investment. Given that this coalition has $2 trillion of assets, filling that data hole could be very worthwhile.

Microsoft

Despite being responsible for its share of carbon emissions, as highlighted so emphatically by Greenpeace in recent weeks, the IT world can also help to make drastic improvements. With the development of smart grids, smart buildings and so on, Microsoft proposed that it would be smart to ensure that the tools on offer were fully understood by policymakers by encouraging closer cooperation between the two.

The company recently announced it would enforce an internal carbon price on itself to cut emissions, a move welcomed by UN climate change chief Christiana Figueres when she spoke to RTCC in Bonn.

Virgin Atlantic

While aviation is certainly not the cleanest way to get around, it remains a necessity for trade and personal travel. As long as that holds true, Virgin Atlantic argued that there is a case to be made for addressing sustainability issues, not just for airlines, but across all forms of transport. The company called for an acceleration of work on the development of both the technologies and the policies underpinning alternative fuels.

ASDA

Some startling and rather daunting statistics from the Walmart-owned ASDA supermarket chain, this was perhaps the strongest – by 2050 the world will need to boost its food production by 70%. A strong argument for putting food security at the top of the agenda in Rio. To start, supermarkets can look to increase the amount of produce they source locally and improve the rate of return for farmers, something Walmart has already begun work on.

Philips

Energy efficiency measures such as new lighting should be viewed as an investment rather than a cost. (Source: Flickr/Jeici1)

Lighting is one area where the available technology already allows for returns on investments via improved efficiency. As with all energy efficiency measures however, less is rarely seen as more. Philips called for governments in Rio to stress that energy efficiency is not a sacrifice, it’s a positive, and to lead by example.

PepsiCo

Unsurprisingly, PepsiCo’s major environmental concern is water scarcity. With many businesses already impacted by pressures on water availability, PepsiCo called for an increase in partnership programmes between businesses and the public sector, such as the Water Resource Group 2030 program with the World Bank, to improve access to clean, sustainable sources of water.

The verdict?

The audience was asked to rank the pitches in order of preference. The ultimate winner, by a whisker, was ASDA’s food security pitch, earning the supermarket’s external affairs and corporate responsibility director Paul Kelly, a bottle of English sparkling wine.

The Aldersgate Group intends to issue the event’s findings to the Rio+20 secretariat for consideration. The real winner could be the idea that influences delegates at the summit and the reward for that could be significant.

The full results will be available from the Aldersgate Group website shortly.

Have your say: What do you think of these proposals for Rio+20? What’s missing? What role can business play in accelerating the sustainability agenda?

Get in touch via twitter @rtccnewswire or email the author.

The post Rio+20: What would business do? appeared first on Climate Home News.

Here’s one idea, in a recent Oxfam Discussion Paper, that could provide a compass for the journey toward sustainable development in Rio.

A safe and just space for humanity

(Source: Oxfam)

What’s going on here? Let me explain.

In 2009 the Stockholm Resilience Centre brought together a group of leading Earth-system scientists to come up with the concept of planetary boundaries. They identified a set of nine Earth-system processes – like the freshwater cycle, climate regulation, and the nitrogen cycle – which are critical for keeping the planet in the stable state that has been so beneficial to humanity over the past 10,000 years.

Under too much pressure from human activity, any one of these processes could be pushed into abrupt and even irreversible change. So the scientists drew up a set of boundaries below their danger zones – and they called the area in the middle of the circle ‘a safe operating space for humanity’.

Environmentally safe, yes, but that space could also be deeply socially unjust, leaving millions of people living in poverty.

So how about adding the idea of social boundaries to the picture? Just as there is an environmental ceiling of resource use, above which lies unacceptable environmental degradation, so too there is a social foundation of resource use, below which lie unacceptable human deprivations.

In their submissions to Rio+20 the world’s governments highlighted 11 social deprivations, so these constitute the social foundation in the image above.

Between the social foundation and the environmental ceiling lies a space – shaped like a doughnut – which is the safe and just space for humanity. Inclusive and sustainable economic development would bring us into this space.

The Earth-system scientists estimate that we have already crossed three planetary boundaries, for climate change, nitrogen use, and biodiversity loss. Meanwhile, much of humanity still lives far below the social foundation: 13% of people are undernourished, for example, shown here by the blue gap beneath the social foundation for food (see image below).

Falling far below the social foundation

(Source: Oxfam)

So humanity is still falling below social boundaries, while already exceeding planetary boundaries: it’s a sign of just how deeply unequal and unsustainable our current path of development is.

Indeed, around 50% of global carbon emissions are produced by just 11% of people, and the richest 10% of people hold 57% of global income. Extreme inequality is what’s putting this planet under pressure.

So what would it take to get inside the doughnut and live between planetary and social boundaries? Far greater global equity of resource consumption, and far greater efficiency in using resources to meet human needs.

How that’s achieved is of course the source of intense international debate. But if this doughnut could help bring the ship’s crew together at least to agree on a shared destination, that would be a strong start for the voyage ahead.

Kate Raworth is a Senior Researcher with Oxfam GB.

Check out a short video introducing the idea, and the full discussion paper.

RTCC Countdown to Rio articles:

VIDEO Big-hitters bemoan lack of action

How has the world changed in 20 years?

Did you sign the pledge wall at Rio 1992?

The post Rio+20 needs a compass. Will it turn out to be a doughnut? appeared first on Climate Home News.

It was one of the iconic images of the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. Hundreds, if not thousands, of delegates’ signatures, vowed to uphold a simple pledge. So how are they doing?

Did you sign the pledge wall? Get in touch. (Source: UN/Michos Tzovaras)

The Pledge

“Recognizing that people’s actions toward nature and each other are the source of growing damage to the environmental resources needed to meet human needs and ensure survival and development, I PLEDGE to act to the best of my ability to help make the Earth a secure and hospitable home for present and future generations.”

Twenty years on from the original conference, many of those delegates will return.

How much progress has truly been made is up for debate. Now many of those signatories will return to the same conference centre to try again.

If you signed the pledge wall we want to hear from you. Even if you missed out on the wall but attended the summit get in touch using any of the methods below.

We’ll be compiling some reflections from delegates of Rio ’92 in the coming weeks to assess just what lessons those attending Rio+20 can learn.

Were you at the Earth Summit in 1992? Did you sign the pledge wall? Get in touch via a tweet to @RTCCnewswire or email jp@rtcc.org

The post Rio 1992: Did you sign the “Pledge Wall”? appeared first on Climate Home News.

Lindsay Clinton from the SustainAbility think tank explains how the latest Rio Earth Summit can help link business, environment and development for everyone’s benefit.

The empty plenary hall at Rio '92 the night before the conference started. (Source: UN/Michos Tsovaras)

Early talk about the UN Summit Rio+20 to be held June 20-22 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, gives the impression that it may flop.

Recent articles from respected groups like the Council on Foreign Relations and the World Resources Institute and outlets like Guardian Sustainable Business and Environmental Finance cite low expectations.

For those that pay attention to international governance meetings, the lack of progress at the annual COP meetings (Conference of the Parties) to assess and negotiate climate change commitments and lack of action after past sustainable development meetings have created a cloud of fatigue.

While many are sceptical about Rio+20, we stand to gain from holding this fourth –the fourth in forty years – in a series of Summits focused on environment and development.

Here are five reasons why Rio+20 matters:

1. Because we don’t want to end up with the future we deserve

The Rio+20 Summit tagline “The Future We Want” gives us an opportunity to pause and imagine a better future world. But, it also tacitly acknowledges that our current trajectory does not lead us there.

Some might argue we are on a path towards a future we deserve. After decades of squandering our resources and polluting the environment, we’ve developed habits and lifestyles that do not allow for prosperity for all, nor for future generations.

Rio+20 aims to steer us toward a green economy and an institutional framework for sustainable development, and for that, we must be hopeful.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has played an active and very public role in the build-up to Rio+20. (Source: UN/Eskinder Debebe)

2. Because not everything’s been accounted for

Why is it so expensive to “go green”? Why is it cheaper to buy products that are not Fairtrade or recyclable or chemical free? Our economic system treats natural resources like freebies and turns a blind eye to those that don’t clean up after themselves.

The Rio+20 outcome document, the “Zero Draft”, is currently being discussed and doctored by national representatives participating in the Summit process. Section 24 of the original Zero Draft called for “a global policy framework requiring all listed and large private companies to consider sustainability issues and to integrate sustainability information within the reporting cycle.”

Unfortunately, the Summit co-chairs have significantly altered the language so that the text merely “recognizes the need” for a global commitment on corporate sustainability reporting.

Business Action for Sustainable Development (BASD), a coalition of leading international business groups who are committed to sustainable development, supports the alteration for reasons specified here.

Corporate sustainability pioneers have been talking about “integrated reporting” for over a decade. Doing so would require work. We would need to create new, achievable, transparent standards for companies. It would necessitate coordination between regulators, policy makers and the private sector.

Modifying the text slows what would have been a necessary, but tough – and critical – slog towards green accounting. But, even in the absence of such progress, finance and environment ministers, CEOs, and sustainability teams have been forced to take a closer look at their own balance sheets. They know what’s coming down the pipeline – eventually.

3. Because we need climate change

A long time ago plant-eating dinosaurs, like the stegosaurus and triceratops, died off because the atmosphere around them changed, and they, in essence, lost their lunch.

They subsisted on pines and cypress trees and when those plants decreased, herbivorous dinosaurs didn’t have enough food. And the rest is history. When you change the environment, those within it have to adapt – or they disappear. (Hat tip to Pavan Sukhdev, Founder-CEO of GIST Advisory, who used this analogy at the FT Road to Rio+20 conference last week.)

We need the kind of climate change that will make businesses adapt, i.e., incentives, taxes, recognition for good behaviour and the end of perverse subsidies.

Rio+20 is catalyzing a wider conversation about how we can create an environment that will prod companies to become more responsible.

If companies won’t change themselves, we need to make it easier for them. Some of the influencers at Rio+20 are aiming to do so.

4. Because it’s time we acknowledged the sum of our parts

Nation states are important for many reasons: cultural identity, organizing political participation, provision of social services, etc.

But, over time, they also divide us from one another and pit us against each other (e.g., developed vs. developing countries) when it comes to the use of planetary resources.

Rio+20 reminds us that we are all living on the same planet, that we are more than nations and national identity. What would our world look like if we had a global social contract?

The powers that be at Rio+20 are evaluating international environmental governance. Proposals are on the table for creating a World Environmental Organization (WEO), or strengthening the influence of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), a forty-year old program that is suffering from lack of funding, decision-making power and operational capacity.

Might we see the genesis of the creation of a group that takes charge of planetary rights?

5. Because we are ready for take-off

Those that expect the same calibre of results from Rio+20 that we saw in 1992 may be disappointed. But, they shouldn’t be – it’s like comparing apples to potatoes. The two have many similarities but the context has completely changed.

The original Earth Summit was a point of arrival for sustainable development.

It focused on gaining consensus on the need for sustainable development, the creation of processes where there were none, the launch of organizations and conventions that had never been tried before. It was an important evolutionary landmark in the education of civil society, business and local government.

Twenty years later, Rio+20 serves as a point of reflection and departure. Today, we have greater acknowledgement of climate change than ever, agreement on the need to move beyond GDP as a singular measurement of progress and an understanding of the benefits of green energy.

Importantly, we also have the commitment of some – perhaps not enough, but some – key business leaders. Paul Polman, chief executive of Unilever, who is expected to attend the Summit, said in an FT article last week, “World leaders must attend the summit. The world expects nothing less. Our leaders’ presence and commitment is crucial if Rio is to deliver real change.”

Many speculate that the real outcomes of Rio+20 will emerge slowly over the next several years as leaders aim to create a new set of sustainable development goals that will merge or complement the MDGs and apply to all of humanity.

Change takes time. Often it is frustratingly slow. But, we are not starting from zero. We are ready to take off.

Lindsay Clinton is a manager with the SustainAbility think tank and consultancy.

If you’d like to learn more about Rio+20 and past Earth Summits as well as SustainAbility and GlobeScan’s initiative to advance private sector involvement in sustainable development, visit The Regeneration Project website.

Related RTCC articles:

VIDEO Big-hitters bemoan lack of action

How has the world changed in 20 years?

Ban Ki-moon: 40 days and 40 nights to save Rio

The post Five reasons why we need Rio+20 appeared first on Climate Home News.

Ban Ki-moon has called for negotiators to pull out all the stops before the Rio+20 begins, to ensure the summit is not wasted.

The UN Secretary-General’s comments came after it was revealed negotiators had requested an extra five days to decide on the summit’s draft agenda document, which forms the basis of the high-level talks between ministers and leaders at Rio+20.

“We are at a crucial stage. We have about 40 days – and 40 nights – to Rio. We must use every moment,” he said.

“We must be determined to confront the hard issues now instead of kicking the can to Rio. Quite simply, we need a negotiated outcome document before Rio to ensure the high-level participation that we have worked so hard to generate,” he added referring to the lack of participation at a ministerial level if there is no document for them to discuss.

“I am encouraged that there is consensus on a process forward. I trust this new process will unleash ambition, creativity, and the flexibility necessary to get the job done. After all, we cannot continue the same approach and expect different results,” he added.

Ban also set out some objectives for the conference, including the start of a process to develop Sustainable Development Goals and the creation of a new development index to replace the purely economic Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

Ban Ki-moon called for negotiators to pick up the pace to ensure a draft document is in place to negotiate on by the time Rio+20 starts. (Source: UN/Mark Garten)

Related articles:

VIDEO Big-hitters bemoan lack of action

How has the world changed in 20 years?

George Bush’s Rio 1992 Speech

The post Ban Ki-moon: 40 days and 40 nights to ensure Rio+20 is success appeared first on Climate Home News.

In the run-up to the UN’s Rio+20 conference on Sustainable Development RTCC will be examining some of the highlights from the original Earth Summit in 1992.

If you remove carbon dioxide from the equation, then President George HW Bush’s bold claim at a press conference in Rio in 1992 might hold some sway.

He said the country was “the world’s pre-eminent leader in protecting the global environment, had been for many years, we will remain so”.

Bush Senior pushed through some rather meaty air pollution legislation in 1990.

His time in office also included some significant forestry projects overseas, including 40% of all the world’s “debt for nature” schemes, where the US and other countries cancelled portions of national debts in return for investment in local environmental protection – particularly forestry.

Environmentalists at the time were uneasy about the President’s highly economic outlook on the environment. He summarised his philosophy in Rio.

George HW Bush talks to reporters about his country’s role in Rio 1992

“Economic growth provides the resources for environmental protection, and environmental protection ensures that growth is sustainable,” he said in the same press briefing.

It is thought that as the creation of the UN’s climate change body, the UNFCCC, was being negotiated, Bush was the loudest voice in the room calling for mandatory emissions cuts to be replaced with voluntary measures and only signed once this revision was made.

Similar calls have emanated from the Whitehouse throughout the 18 years of the UNFCCC’s negotiations, regardless of the tenant.

Bush Senior cited scientific uncertainty and economic risk to the US. This was the same call his son would make when renouncing the Kyoto Protocol in 2001, two months after being sworn in.

With much of the science settled, climate change should now fall into the environmental-economic-development union that Bush talked about two decades ago.

Many would not bet against history repeating itself.

George HW Bush’s full speech, Earth Summit, Rio, 1992

President Bush signs the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in Rio, June 1992. (Source: UN)

President Collor, Mr. Secretary-General, heads of delegation, may I first express my admiration to Secretary-General Boutros-Ghali and my gratitude to Secretary General Maurice Strong for his tireless work in bringing this Earth summit together. This is truly an historic gathering.

The Chinese have a proverb: If a man cheats the Earth, the Earth will cheat man. The idea of sustaining the planet so that it may sustain us is as old as life itself. We must leave this Earth in better condition than we found it.

Today this old truth must be applied to new threats facing the resources which sustain us all, the atmosphere and the ocean, the stratosphere and the biosphere. Our village is truly global. Some find the challenges ahead overwhelming. I believe that their pessimism is unfounded.

Related:

RTCC Rio+20 Student Workshop: Setting a sustainable agenda

How has the world changed in 20 years?

Fidel Castro’s 1992 speech

Twenty years ago, at the Stockholm conference, a chief concern of our predecessors was the horrible threat of nuclear war, the ultimate pollutant. No more. Upon my return from Rio, I will meet with Russian President Yeltsin in Washington, and the subject we will discuss is cooperation, not confrontation. Twenty years ago, some spoke of the limits to growth. Today we realize that growth is the engine of change and the friend of the environment.

Today, an unprecedented era of peace, freedom, and stability makes concerted action on the environment possible as never before. This summit is but one key step in the process of international cooperation on environment and development. The United States will work to carry forward the promise of Rio because as important as the road to Rio has been, what matters more is the road from Rio.

There are those who say that cooperation between developed and developing countries is impossible. Well, let them come to Latin America, where debt-for-nature swaps are protecting forests in Costa Rica and funding pollution control in Chile.

There are those who say that it takes state control to protect the environment. Well, let them go to Eastern Europe, where the poisoned bodies of children now pay for the sins of fallen dictators, and only the new breeze of freedom is allowing for cleanup.

There are those who say that change can never come because the interests of the status quo are too powerful. Well, let them come right here to Brazil, where President Collor is forging a new approach that recognizes the economic value of sustaining the rainforest.

There are those who say that economic growth and environmental protection cannot be compatible. Well, let them come to the United States, where, in the 20 years since Stockholm, our economy has grown by 57%, and yet we have cut the lead going into the air by 97%, the carbon monoxide by 41%, the particulates by 59%. We’ve cleaned up our water and preserved our parks, wilderness, and wildlife.

There are those who say that the leaders of the world do not care about the Earth and the environment. Well, let them all come here to Rio.

Mr. President, we have come to Rio. We’ve not only seen the concern, we share it. We not only care, we’re taking action. We come to Rio with an action plan on climate change. It stresses energy efficiency, cleaner air, reforestation, new technology. I am happy to report that I have just signed the Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Today, I invite my colleagues from the industrialized world to join in a prompt start on the convention’s implementation. I propose that our countries meet by January 1st to lay out our national plans for meeting the specific commitments in the Framework Convention. Let us join in translating the words spoken here into concrete action to protect the planet.

We come to Rio with a proposal to double global forest assistance. We stand ready to work together, respecting national sovereignty, on new strategies for forests for the future. As a downpayment, we will double U.S. forest bilateral assistance next year. And we will reform at home, phasing out clear-cutting as a standard practice on U.S. national forests and working to plant one billion trees a year.

We come to Rio with an extensive program of technology cooperation. We stand ready, Government and private sector, to help spread green technology and launch a new generation of clean growth.

We come to Rio recognizing that the developing countries must play a role in protecting the global environment but will need assistance in pursuing these cleaner growths. So we stand ready to increase U.S. international environmental aid by 66% above the 1990 levels, on top of the more than $2.5 billion that we provide through the world’s development banks for Agenda 21 projects.

We come to Rio with more scientific knowledge about the environment than ever before and with the wisdom that there is much, much we do that’s not yet known. And we stand ready to share our science and to lead the world in a program of continued research.

We come to Rio prepared to continue America’s unparalleled efforts to preserve species and habitat. And let me be clear. Our efforts to protect biodiversity itself will exceed, will exceed, the requirements of the treaty. But that proposed agreement threatens to retard biotechnology and undermine the protection of ideas. Unlike the climate agreement, its financing scheme will not work. And it is never easy, it is never easy to stand alone on principle, but sometimes leadership requires that you do. And now is such a time.

Let’s face it, there has been some criticism of the United States. But I must tell you, we come to Rio proud of what we have accomplished and committed to extending the record on American leadership on the environment. In the United States, we have the world’s tightest air quality standards on cars and factories, the most advanced laws for protecting lands and waters, and the most open processes for public participation.

Now for a simple truth: America’s record on environmental protection is second to none. So I did not come here to apologize. We come to press on with deliberate purpose and forceful action. Such action will demonstrate our continuing commitment to leadership and to international cooperation on the environment.

We believe that the road to Rio must point toward both environmental protection and economic growth, environment and development. By now it’s clear: To sustain development, we must protect the environment. And to protect the environment, we must sustain development.

It’s been said that we don’t inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. When our children look back on this time and this place, they will be grateful that we met at Rio, and they will certainly be pleased with the intentions stated and the commitments made. But they will judge us by the actions we take from this day forward. Let us not disappoint them.

Mr. President, once again, my congratulations to you, sir. Mr. Secretary-General, our sincere thanks. And thank you all very, very much.

The post Countdown to Rio+20: George Bush Senior starts 20 years of stalemate appeared first on Climate Home News.

Talks on the draft agenda began in May but the summit has been subject to discussion since 2010. (Source: UN/Mark Garten)

The negotiations to set the agenda for the Rio+20 summit will run to an additional round of talks after failing to come to an agreement last week.

A second round of talks in New York, which lasted two weeks, struggled to reach consensus resulting in an additional meeting being scheduled for May 29-June 2.

The Rio+20 summit marks the anniversary of the Earth Summit held in the city in 1992.

The event will look at a number of issues from agriculture and environmental protection to energy supply and poverty alleviation.

Combining these issues is proving to be more complex than anticipated.

The original “zero-draft” agenda, was first proposed in January and ran to 19 pages.

However, subsequent meetings saw it balloon to the 206 pages that formed the starting point for the latest round of talks.

“Delegates have expressed disappointment and frustration at the lack of progress,” said Kim Sook, Rio+20 Preparatory Committee co-chair, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea.

A further comment suggested that relations among the negotiators had become frayed.

“The spirit of the negotiations must match our ambition,” added Kim.

According to the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), the main sticking points are the green economy and the possible formation of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Some countries are keener than others to embed private sector responsibility into the agenda. China has raised concerns that it could lead to economic protectionism.

RTCC’s own workshop to set SDGs showed how difficult that process is.

The Colombian Government has developed a popular proposal on the formation of SDGs, available at the bottom of the page.

Together with access to sustainable energy, these form the key components of the event’s agenda.

The extra round of talks will commence work using a streamlined version of the current draft prepared by the co-chairs to speed up proceedings.

Countdown to Rio+20:

RTCC Rio+20 Student Workshop: Setting a sustainable agenda

How has the world changed in 20 years?

Fidel Castro’s 1992 speech

New Concept Note on SDGs – Colombian Govt May 2012

The post Emergency round of Rio+20 talks called after negotiators run out of time appeared first on Climate Home News.

In the twenty years that have passed since the original earth summit, the main challenges facing policy makers have not changed a great deal. The scale and the complexity of many of these problems have.

Policy makers at Rio+20 face similar challenges to their 1992 colleagues but the goalposts have shifted markedly. (Source: Flickr/Ollily)

Finding long term solutions to protect biodiversity, food, water and energy security while also alleviating poverty and boosting the economy is no simple task.

We’ve picked out some key environmental and development indicators from the World Bank and UNEP, to demonstrate just how much the world has changed since leaders sat down to tackle these issues 20 years ago.

Population

The population clock at Rio '92 was installed to remind delegates of the scale of the problem they faced. (Source: UN/Michos Tzovaras)

Perhaps the key statistic underlying many others, the world’s population just keeps growing and growing.

This photo (right) of the World Population clock at the Rio Summit was taken on June 9, 1992. It shows the world population to be 5,466,817,368.

According to the UN, we reached 7 billion on October 31, 2011. That figure is likely to be 7.05bn by the time Rio+20 begins.

While population undoubtedly increases pressure on the world’s resources, particularly food and water supplies, many argue that consumption patterns are the root cause of shortages, rather than growing demand.

Importantly, the UN data also shows that the rate of this growth is declining from just over 1.5% in 1992 to 1.2% today.

Urban population

Another important population indicator is the percentage of the world living in cities rather than rurally.

This has huge knock-on effects for resource security, environmental impact, health and the economy.

When the world’s leaders came together in 1992 this figure was 44% globally and 38% in the developing world.

Today these figures are 50% and 46% respectively, changing the parameters for negotiators significantly.

Air transport

The growth of the middle classes and the emergence of low cost airlines has boosted passenger numbers. (Source: Julian Herzog)

As the world’s middle classes have grown so too have the number of plane journeys.

In 1992 there were 1.15bn air passengers annually.

The latest data for 2010 is 2.6bn. More than double the level at the time of the 1992 conference.

Emissions from aviation are deposited higher in the atmosphere and have a greater effect on climate change as a result. While the issue won’t be specifically dealt with in Rio+20, it’s a useful demonstration of how consumption patterns have been transformed, be it travel, clothing or housing.

CO2

CO2 emissions per person provides a good indicator of the carbon intensity of the average citizens lifestyle.

As the most abundant of the greenhouse gases responsible for climate change, CO2 per capita shows how “dirty” our lifestyles are.

In 1992 we were 4.1 tons per capita. By 2008 we reached 4.8 tons per capita.

Life expectancy

Its not all bad news however. The globally averaged life expectancy at birth, has risen from 65.7 years to 69.6 years.

A host of other mortality indicators also show real improvement as a result of large-scale immunisation and better access to clean drinking water and sanitation.

Meat

Massive cattle ranches like this one in Brazil have helped sate the world's appetite for meat but at what cost?. (Source: Flickr/Eduardo Amorim)

The average person eats 43kg of meat and fish annually today, up 26% from the original Rio Earth Summit.

In 1992, China’s meat consumption was one third of that of the US, today, China’s 71 million tons is double the States’.

Matching this demand means intensive growth in cattle and grazing lands, often to the detriment of existing ecosystems and even resulting in the removal of indigenous people from the land.

Based on the above, Rio’s negotiators clearly have enough on their plates too.

Quick stats, since 1992…

The world has warmed 0.4°C

The share of electricity generation from fossil fuels has grown by 4.6%

The world has increased plastics production by 130%

The number of signatories of environmental agreements grow by 330%

The percentage of the earth’s surface that is irrigated grew by 21%

The post Countdown to Rio+20: How has the world changed in 20 years? appeared first on Climate Home News.

Yesterday RTCC held a Rio+20 Student Workshop to pin down exactly what the summit should set out to achieve. While the results were not definitive, they were certainly telling.

Drawing on a group of ten students and five mentors from leading civil society organisations in development, climate change policy and green economics, we initially sought to produce a definitive list of ten goals for the conference.

What became apparent was that combining policies to address poverty eradication, economic and environmental sustainability and energy access, in a fair manner, all within the bounds of human rights laws, is no simple task.

Even this statement throws up more questions than it answers. Is poverty purely financial? What does sustainability mean? Is all energy “good energy”? Who’s definition of fair are we using?

Immediately the complexity of the task facing the real negotiators becomes clear and it is easy to understand how the initial draft document for the summit swelled from 60 to 240 pages once talks began.

Initially, we planned to develop our own Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a concept that the UN is pursuing, very much in the mould of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). It soon became apparent that this a little ambitious for one afternoon!

Below is a set of proposed ambitions for the summit on sector by sector basis.

Have a look through our breakdown of Rio ambitions and let us know what you think. Leave us a comment below, leave a post on our Facebook page, tweet us @rtccnewswire or email info@rtcc.org.

Cities

Copenhagen, home to this vertical garden, and a frequent case study for a sustainable cities. (Source: Flickr/La Citta Vita)

Drawing parallels with action on climate change, the group proposed placing cities, municipalities and regions at the heart of any action agreed at the conference.

Action at this level has multiple benefits. Changes in the places people live are more tangible than national policies and targets. They can also be localised and implemented in a much shorter period of time.

There are 1.1bn more people living in cities now than there were during the first Rio Summit, and this growth shows no signs of abating.

Despite this, work on cities must not be done without a parallel track ensuring that rural communities are also catered for.

The role for the UN could be one as a hub for knowledge transfer and best practices between regions facing similar challenges. This could unleash the experience gained by its agencies, specifically those working on the ground in agriculture (FAO), desertification (UNCCD), biodiversity (UNCBD) and more broadly the UN Environment Programme. The UN would also be able to pool the vast experience of its network of NGO partners.

Green Economy

The Green economy can be a powerful tool to incentivise, fund and prolong change.

Rio+20 should examine the scale of the green economy beyond the east to see direct jobs in sectors such as renewable energy but other industry’s such as waste management, forest management and ecosystem restoration.

Even within these direct sectors, the jobs spread up and down the supply chain. A solar panel retailer may employ 20 installers, but there are also, administrative, accounting and marketing jobs created. The same company is also supporting the jobs of its supplier’s right through the supply chain to the extraction of the raw materials.

It is important that the scale of this potential and the related benefits in biodiversity, health and carbon cutting be well communicated to the public and policymakers alike.

Jobs also represent an opportunity to tackle issues on gender and youth involvement, one that should not be missed.

Energy

Micro-hydropower schemes like this one in Kenya, are a promising source of sustainable energy. (Source: Flickr/Practical Action)

A pet subject for the UN with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon declaring 2012 the year of Sustainable Energy for All.

It is also an area where the complexity of the issues being faced at Rio+20 were clearest.

One goal for the conference was “Access to Energy for All”, and no one would disagree that this is a worthy ambition.

The goal was soon followed, however, by the sub-conditions of energy within the boundaries of the planet, acknowledging the potential negative impacts on the rights and wellbeing of people and the need to address the determental effects of unlimited growth.

Add to this the questions around what sustainable energy, equitable energy and equal energy would mean for the world and we have turned one clear goal into several, much less clearer pathways.

The workshop did come up with some concrete ideas on energy. For example, Rio+20 should establish a means to enable appropriate technologies are able to deliver energy for electricity, cooking and transport sustainably in different markets.

There is again an opportunity for the UN to act as a filter and distributor of information on successful projects and to match make civil society organisations with groups looking for help, be them local or national governments, community groups or utilities.

Developing new energy systems also opens the door to embrace new technologies. Smart grids in particular could play a huge role in securing energy supply in developing countries.

Biodiversity

Just today, a new study has been published highlighting the damage that loss of biodiversity can do, arguing that it is potentially more influential than climate change.

The links between all of the topics on the table at Rio+20 are interlinked but biodiversity is arguably the most complex.

Protecting biodiversity feeds directly into food and water security, agriculture, energy access and ecosystem services. It can support local communities economically.

We are in the second year of the UN Decade of Biodiversity. Five goals have been set to mainstream the issue, reduce pressure on ecosystems and improve protection, enhance the benefits of ecosystems and to improve planning and participation.

These goals can act as further constraints to ensure that all actions generated in Rio and subsequently.

Biodiversity generates opportunities as well as challenges. Both require further attention.

Given that biodiversity is invariably linked to all discussions on sustainable development, there is an argument for it to be incorporated into all areas and of discussion, rather than treat it as its own issue with its own specific targets.

Food and water security

Projects like this market garden improve food security and provide extra income for communities. (Source: Flickr/Oxfam International)

The so-called perfect storm of rising population and climate change are putting intense pressure on global food security.

Protecting ecosystems can maximise agricultural output.

While much of the focus on food security will be on supply, consumption (particularly that of the developed and developing world) has received attention of late.

Key to the argument is the acceptance that food security is not about the lack of food but it is about the lack of access to food.

The solutions to this problem lie partly with technology and new approaches to agriculture. But a review of behavioural and consumption patterns and campaigns to raise public awareness on these issues are just as important, though frequently ignored.

Water security needs the same attention as it cannot be separated as an issue from food.

The wider argument about whether the SDGs should be universal or more regionally targeted is put into focus by issues around food. A target for the EU has no relevance in the Horn of Africa and vice versa.

While the workshop didn’t define a set of goals for Rio+20 it was able to open up the discussion and helped the students and us to fully understand the complexity of the issue facing negotiators.

Have a look through our breakdown of Rio ambitions and let us know what you think. Leave us a comment, leave a post on our Facebook page, tweet us @rtccnewswire or email info@rtcc.org.

The post RTCC Rio+20 Student Workshop: Setting a sustainable agenda appeared first on Climate Home News.

Fidel Castro delivers his speech to the Earth Summit in 1992. (Source: UN/Michos Tzovaras)

In the run up to the UN’s Rio+20 conference on Sustainable Development, RTCC will be examining some of the highlights from the original Earth Summit in 1992.

Today we look at the contribution of Cuba’s then leader, Fidel Castro.

Castro was one among more than 100 world leaders that attended the meeting that set the path for the next two decades of environmental debate and contributed heavily to thinking on global development thereafter.

Castro’s speech was typically radical warning of the “progressive elimination” of humanity’s habitat.

Spotting an opportunity to lay the blame with his capitalist foes, Castro had a field day.

“It must be said that consumer societies are chiefly responsible for this appalling environmental destruction,” he told delegates.

“They were spawned by the former colonial metropolis. They are the offspring of imperial policies which, in turn, brought forth the backwardness and poverty that have become the scourge for the great majority of humankind.”

Away from the politics, he picked up on a few key themes: “Population pressures and poverty lead to desperate efforts to survive, even at the expense of nature.”

A depressing statement that holds true today.

Castro on tar sands

He may have ceded power to his brother Raul, but Comrade Fidel clearly continues to monitor environmental issues.

In a not entirely coherent letter published by Cuban state media last month, he points the finger of blame at Canada, via Washington DC of course.

“I knew about the damage caused by the Yankees to the people of Canada,” he wrote. “They forced the country to look for oil by extracting it from huge extensions of sand that are impregnated with that fluid, thus causing an irreparable damage to the environment of that beautiful and extensive country.

“The incredible damage was the one caused to millions of persons by the Canadian companies specialized in the mining of gold, precious metals and radioactive material.”

Once again, the environmental message may be sincere, but the politics are never far from the surface.

A more positive call to action can be found in the conclusion to Castro’s 1992 speech:

“Enough of selfishness. Enough of schemes of domination. Enough of insensitivity, irresponsibility and deceit. Tomorrow will be too late to do what we should have done a long time ago.”

Make your own  mind up and read Fidel Castro’s speech in full from the Earth Summit, Rio, 1992:

“An important biological species — humankind — is at risk of disappearing due to the rapid and progressive elimination of its natural habitat. We are becoming aware of this problem when it is almost too late to prevent it. It must be said that consumer societies are chiefly responsible for this appalling environmental destruction.

They were spawned by the former colonial metropolis. They are the offspring of imperial policies which, in turn, brought forth the backwardness and poverty that have become the scourge for the great majority of humankind.

With only 20% of the world’s population, they consume two-thirds of all metals and three-fourths of the energy produced worldwide. They have poisoned the seas and the rivers. They have polluted the air. They have weakened and perforated the ozone layer. They have saturated the atmosphere with gases, altering climatic conditions with the catastrophic effects we are already beginning to suffer.

Inside the negotiating hall at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. (Source: UN/Michos Tzovaras)

The forests are disappearing. The deserts are expanding. Billions of tons of fertile soil are washed every year into the sea. Numerous species are becoming extinct. Population pressures and poverty lead to desperate efforts to survive, even at the expense of nature. Third World countries, yesterday’s colonies and today nations exploited and plundered by an unjust international economic order, cannot be blamed for all this.

The solution cannot be to prevent the development of those who need it the most. Because today, everything that contributes to underdevelopment and poverty is a flagrant rape of the environment.

As a result, tens of millions of men, women and children die every year in the Third World, more than in each of the two world wars.

Unequal trade, protectionism and the foreign debt assault the ecological balance and promote the destruction of the environment. If we want to save humanity from this self-destruction, wealth and available technologies must be distributed better throughout the planet. Less luxury and less waste in a few countries would mean less poverty and hunger in much of the world.

Stop transferring to the Third World lifestyles and consumer habits that ruin the environment. Make human life more rational. Adopt a just international economic order. Use science to achieve sustainable development without pollution. Pay the ecological debt. Eradicate hunger and not humanity.

Now that the supposed threat of communism has disappeared and there is no more pretext to wage cold wars or continue the arms race and military spending, what then is preventing these resources from going immediately to promote Third World development and fight the ecological destruction threatening the planet?

Enough of selfishness. Enough of schemes of domination. Enough of insensitivity, irresponsibility and deceit. Tomorrow will be too late to do what we should have done a long time ago.”

The post Countdown to Rio+20: Fidel Castro’s 1992 speech appeared first on Climate Home News.

A women prepares dung patties for a small scale biogas project in India. (Source: UN/Ray Witlin)

With 2012 designated the year of Sustainable Energy for All by the United Nations and the issue high on the agenda at the Rio+20 summit in June, what exactly is sustainable energy and how can it help developing countries?

The immediate image it may conjure in the developed world is much the same as renewable energy. The two are not interchangeable however.

Technologies that work elsewhere, cannot be transplanted into the developing world and expected to function the same.

“I think it is really important to define what we mean by sustainable energy,” says Pascoe Sabido, sustainable energy advisor, Friends of the Earth Europe.

“It should not negatively impact the broader environment or people’s local environments that they depend on for their livelihoods. It shouldn’t impact people socially, in terms of human rights and health impacts either.

“[Without a clear definition] we’re going to see destructive technologies like large-scale industrial biofuels and big dams moving people off their land and destroying local ecosystems,” warns Sabido.

There have been instances in Central America of land clearances to make space for huge energy crop plantations. These have led, in some cases, to violent clashes including one incident in Guatemala that saw three people killed.

Sabido says that the definition of sustainable energy also rules out technologies that could contribute toward dangerous levels of climate change, such as coal.

It’s not all about large-scale electricity generation however.

Projects that replace kerosene lighting with solar technologies and replace indoor wood and coal fires with efficient cookstoves can provide added benefits.

These can both save money for the user while reducing wood burning can help save the time taken to gather it and helps provide marginal vegetation with a better chance of developing. The health benefits are perhaps the most tangible however.

“Deaths from smoke-related diseases, from people burning wood and dung, indoors kill more people than malaria, more than HIV/AIDS and more than TB,” says Sabido.

Corruption

Identifying the right kind of projects is only half the battle however.

“If energy access is to be achieved in these countries the whole process must be transparent,” says Geoffrey Kamese, Programme Officer, National Association of Professional Environmentalists, Uganda (NAPE).

“When you invest a lot of money in a project, at the end of the day, corrupt leaders, corrupt companies end up taking out most of this money. It does not end up benefitting the communities for whom it was intended. If we are to overcome that kind of shortcoming the processes must be transparent.”

AUDIO: NAPE Uganda’s Geoffrey Kamese on the threat of corruption to sustainable energy projects…

Kamese says that large, centralised projects such as new power stations to feed a national grid are more susceptible to corruption than others.

“Development in Africa has been decided by the politicians. They want to leave a legacy behind, some big investment that they will be remembered for. Yet, these big, big investments do not benefit small, rural communities.”

Progress at Rio

Using alternative fuel sources such as biomass pellets and using efficient burners has environmental, health and economic benefits. (Source: UN/Sophia Paris)

So what does Kamese hope to see from Rio+20.

“When we are going to develop projects that benefit our people, they must be able to participate. When we talk about participation nowadays it is only participation in quotation marks,” says Kamese.

“We need communities to discuss their own problems and come up with solutions that informs the decision making,” says Kamese. “We want meaningful participation at Rio. Let the people generate the ideas.”

While the expectations of Rio+20 are routinely talked up, Kamese warns of the dangers of pushing for tangible, concrete results at the summit.

“If we go to Rio to make targets they will not have come from the people, they will have come from “the cream”. Firm decisions at Rio would come from a specific [elite] group of people, not the people they represent.”

The role of business

Funding the sustainable energy agenda is another issue that will have to be tackled at Rio+20.

While Kamese is correct that limiting corruption will help offer good value for investment, attracting that funding must come first.

Nick Main, Global Leader of Sustainability and Climate Change with the consultancy firm Deloitte, says sustainability has become an integrated part of the business landscape.

“The term tends to have a green tinge to it but now it is much broader than that,” he says.

“This is about business resilience, the ability to continue in the future and it’s not purely about business. It’s not just about environmental sustainability, it’s about resource efficiency.

“It’s also about the social impacts too. People realise that you can’t have a sustainable business in a community that isn’t flourishing.”

AUDIO: What do the terms sustainability and resilience mean to the business community? Deloitte’s Nick Main tells RTCC’s Ed King…

The post What is sustainable energy? appeared first on Climate Home News.

As the world prepares for Rio+20, RTCC wants you to add your voice to the growing numbers of people calling for real, solid action towards a sustainable future.

This Wednesday students from across London will be joining RTCC to discuss and develop our own ideas of sustainable development and the much debated Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Put forward by the Colombian government, the idea of a set of SDGs gained momentum very quickly as the world readies itself for the Rio+20 Earth Summit in June.

Endorsed by the UN Secretary General and featured heavily in the zero draft outcome document for the conference, it is becoming more likely that the concept of the SDGs will play a central role in Brazil.

In the Colombian proposal for the SDGs they proposed a series of issue ‘clusters’ that the goal could address including atmosphere, climate resilience, land degradation, sustainable agriculture, biotechnology and waste.

However, with the world also preparing for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) coming to an end and with work already underway to develop a post 2015 framework to continue their achievements, there has been much debate over how a new set of goals could be related to the MDGs.

In the build up to Rio+20, RTCC wants to know what students think about the Earth Summit, what it should achieve and how far it could go in setting out these new goals to address both sustainable development and continue to work toward poverty alleviation.

Things to think about:

As part of this event we will be asking the questions:

– How should and could the Sustainable Development Goals relate to the Millennium Development Goals? Should the new goals take over from the MDGs, run in parallel or be a completely separate set of goals?

– How far should Rio+20 go in developing the idea of the Sustainable Development Goals? Should they produce a set of specific targets or develop the pathway to establishing these at a later date?

– What areas should be covered by the goals?

– Should the goals be universal or country specific? The MDGs focused on countries suffering from poverty but many believe the SDGs should focus on global environmental concerns.

What the workshop will do

Helped along by mentors from both the campaign world and the research world, the 20 students at the Road to Rio workshop will address these questions, and come up with their own ideas of what sustainable development could encompass and what the Rio+20 conference should achieve.

The overall objective of the workshop will be to produce a set of Action Points (the beginnings of the Sustainable Development Goals) which they believe Rio+20 should focus on and achieve.

Add your voice

RTCC wants to hear from you too.

What do you think Rio+20 should achieve? Do you love or hate the idea of the Sustainable Development Goals? What do you think sustainable development even means?

Get in touch with RTCC and make your contribution to our Road to Rio workshop.

There are still a very limited number of places available for the workshop. If you want to come along get in touch at ts@rtcc.org.

Or why not make your own contribution online, leave a comment below, email at ts@rtcc.org or get in touch on @RTCCNewswire or on our Facebook page.

The post Have your say: Road to Rio Workshop appeared first on Climate Home News.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has called for Rio+20 to find an alternative indicator to GDP. (Source:UN/Mark Garten)

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has called for this summer’s Rio+20 summit to create a sustainable development index to replace GDP as the main measure of a country’s advancement.

Addressing a group of mayors and local government officials at the UN in New York, Ban called for “an outcome from Rio+20 that is thus both practical and transformational”.

“We need to move beyond gross domestic product as our main measure of progress, and fashion a sustainable development index that puts people first,” said Ban.

The Rio+20 event marks the 20th anniversary of the Rio Earth Summit that saw three new UN conventions established to tackle global environmental issues, namely biodiversity loss, desertification and climate change.

The agenda of the conference is still being thrashed out, however a broad scope of issues will be covered including sustainable energy and the green economy.

“We expect the conference to agree on the need to launch a process to elaborate Sustainable Development Goals that build on the Millennium Development Goals,” added Ban.

“Energy, water, food, biodiversity, climate change adaptation, exposure to natural hazards, consumption and production patterns, social protection floors and jobs, especially for young people – these are all closely linked. Our challenge is to connect the dots, so that advances on one can generate progress on others.”

The original draft outcome document has ballooned from 19 pages to 278 pages following two rounds of discussions.

The draft, once complete, will form the basis of the talks in Rio.

The post Ban Ki-moon calls for Rio+20 to replace GDP with sustainable development index appeared first on Climate Home News.