pic: Reid Gilman

inside:

a multi-stakeholdermagazine on

climate changeand sustainable

development

24 April 2012

www.stakeholderforum.org/sf/outreach/

Wanted: Green Jobs in Canada

Functional Ecosystems as the Engine of the Green Economy

out reach.

Patrick Schroeder CANGO

Victor Anderson IGreen Economy, WWF

Keith Brooks Blue Green Canada

OUTREACH IS PUBLISHED BY:

1 Collaboration: The key to a fair transition

2 Without finance, Rio+20 will to fail to deliver

3 Wanted: Green Jobs in Canada

4 Functional Ecosystems as the Engine of the Green Economy

6 Revisiting our limits

7 United Nations Volunteers (UNV) Programme: Volunteer Action Counts

8 Private Sector and Governments Discuss Green and Inclusive Economy Ahead of Rio+20

9 UNITAR and UNEP Launch E-learning Course on Green Economy Rio+20 Side Event Calendar

10 News from the Negotiations

contents.

CONTRIBUTING WRITERS

3

2

Editorial Advisors Felix Dodds Stakeholder Forum

Farooq Ullah Stakeholder Forum

Editor Georgie Macdonald Stakeholder Forum

Co-editor Amy Cutter Stakeholder Forum

Editorial Assistant Jack Cornforth Stakeholder Forum

Print Designer Jessica Wolf Jessica Wolf Design

Web Designer Thomas Harrisson Stakeholder Forum

Web Designer Matthew Reading-Smith Stakeholder ForumAbout Stakeholder Forum

Stakeholder Forum is an international organisation working to advance sustainable development and promote democracy at a global level. Our work aims to enhance open, accountable and participatory international decision-making on sustainable development through enhancing the involvement of stakeholders in intergovernmental processes. For more information, visit: www.stakeholderforum.org

Outreach is a multi-stakeholder publication on climate change and sustainable development. It is the longest continually produced stakeholder magazine in the sustainable development arena, published at various international meetings on the environment; including the UNCSD meetings (since 1997), UNEP Governing Council, UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (COP) and World Water Week. Published as a daily edition, in both print and web form, Outreach provides a vehicle for critical analysis on key thematic topics in the sustainability arena, as well as a voice of regional and local governments, women, indigenous peoples, trade unions, industry, youth and NGOs. To fully ensure a multi-stakeholder perspective, we aim to engage a wide range of stakeholders for article contributions and project funding.

If you are interested in contributing to Outreach, please contact the team (gmacdonald@stakeholderforum.org or acutter@stakeholderforum.org) You can also follow us on Twitter: @OutreachLive

OUTREACH EDITORIAL TEAM

4

John D. Liu EEMP

Kirsty Schneeberger Stakeholder Forum

Emma Puka-Beals Mount Holyoke College

pic: Nicolás Lope de Barrios

1

Collaboration: The key to a fair transition

The co-chairs’ suggested text has done

a lot to consolidate the thinking and

amendments on the green economy in the

context of poverty eradication and

sustainable development. Since the

negotiating tracks have now been divided

into two – with sections I, II and IV

being discussed in one track; and sections

III and V in another, we expect there to

be a lot more in depth formulations of

the ideas and detailed discussions around

the potential outcomes.

Many of the big ideas that relate to the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication that were submitted by Member States and stakeholders alike remain in the suggested text, albeit with certain changes made based on the previous sessions’ discussions, responses, and consultations. For those of us actively following the green economy issues, we have been mapping the development of the concepts from the ‘knowledge sharing platform’ and ‘toolkits for policy makers’ to the ‘green economy indicators’ and various means of implementation. The notion of ‘transitioning’ to the green economy is prevalent in many of the paragraphs, emphasising the importance of understanding the essential and underpinning elements of a fair, equitable, and just transition; and Stakeholder Forum welcomes the continued dialogue around how such a transition will engender these core principles.

National policies

The suggested text does well to capture the feeling amongst delegates that any agreement or outcome on the green economy must not be a rigid set of top down rules imposed on national governments; but rather it emphasises the important role of governments in the development of nationally appropriate and relevant policies, to meet the overall objectives of achieving sustainable development and eradicating poverty through the vehicle of green economic policies. This is absolutely critical to ensuring that all Member States are on board with first establishing such a vehicle and subsequently driving the vehicle towards achieving the overall goals. Multiple references to this approach have been made in

a variety of ways, for example: ‘each country will choose an appropriate path towards a green economy’ (CST 25 ter); ‘all countries to pursue their own paths towards achieving goals’ (CST 31); and ‘pursue national policy and regulatory frameworks to promote a dynamic, inclusive, well-functioning and socially responsible private sector’ (CST 34, c sept) – [emphasis added].

Knowledge and experience sharing

Potentially one of the most exciting and interesting ideas that was first presented in the Zero Draft, which remains in the suggested text, is that of developing the mechanisms and systems for knowledge and experience sharing – particularly in the form of peer to peer learning and providing a variety of platforms for multi-stakeholder collaboration as a central part of the transition. With the plethora of information and knowledge that is already in existence and online, there is a very strong argument for drawing this information together and connecting the dots to expedite the successful transition – because the quicker we learn together, the quicker we can grow together. If the transition is going to be equitable and inclusive, and have capacity building as a central tenet of it, then this facilitated knowledge and experience sharing will be a vital component.

The suggested text states ‘we support the creation of a capacity development scheme and strengthening of international knowledge and technology sharing platforms and partnerships that enable countries, civil society, and the private sector to share policy options and best practices, provide country-specific advice, and assist developing countries in accessing available funds and technologies’ (CST 33) – [emphasis added]. Further down in the text there is specific mention of ‘toolboxes’; ‘model/good examples’; ‘shared databases’; and ‘methodologies for policy evaluation’ (CST 33, a – d).

Moving forward

It is hoped that these suggestions for supporting the global transition to the new economy – one that is both sustainable and eradicates poverty – will be strongly supported by all Member States in the coming weeks leading up to Rio+20. If we are to ensure that equity, fairness, and inclusivity are at the heart of the transition, then the mechanisms and frameworks for state and non-state actors alike to work together and collaborate on implementation on the ground, will need to be a central component of the outcome itself..

Kirsty SchneebergerStakeholder Forum

RIO+20

RIO+202

Victor AndersonSenior Policy Officer, Green Economy, WWF

Without finance, Rio+20 will to fail to deliver

As Rio+20 is not expected to lead to legally binding treaties

along the lines of The Earth Summit in 1992, the ability

to deliver on aspirations and policy agreement from the

conference is going to depend principally on the mobilisation

of finance.

This is a time of government budget austerity in many parts of the world. However, government expenditure is not the only potential source of money: it is increasingly necessary to look to flows of finance from the private sector and private investors. Yet if private finance could be relied upon to deliver a green economy, it would already be happening. Governments have a key role to play in encouraging finance to change direction, by setting an appropriate framework of incentives and other measures.

Information is crucial in this. Investors and the general public need higher standards of reporting on what companies are doing, in order to make better-informed decisions. Governments need better information from companies in order to feed into their decisions on policy and regulation. Insurers need better information in order to set realistic premiums that take into account environmental risk. A key outcome from Rio+20 therefore needs to be an agreement to raise standards of corporate reporting about environmental and social risks and impacts. This cannot be on a purely voluntary basis – if it is, we can expect nothing much to change. Governments should agree to establish a process for negotiating a binding convention on reporting. Stock exchanges should reinforce this by setting their own requirements for the listing of companies.

Reforms to corporate governance are also needed, requiring directors to pay much greater attention to environmental and social risks and impacts, taking their responsibilities beyond simply the short-term financial ‘bottom line’.

The prices of different products create a structure of incentives for investors and consumers - but currently, prices in general do not reflect the environmental impacts of the products on sale. Trading in carbon emissions permits represents one attempt to move in this direction, although there have been many problems with current schemes.

Rio+20 should agree that governments will move forward to restructure incentive patterns. Immediate priorities in this area are:

• An end to fossil fuel subsidies, which currently skew price incentives in exactly the wrong direction;

• A level playing field for sustainably sourced and certified commodities, such as timber, so that they are not undercut by rival products which are cheaper because they are produced unsustainably; and

• An agreement by governments to increase the proportion of total tax revenue accounted for by green taxation.

Government expenditure remains important: expenditure options should be assessed partly on the basis of climate and biodiversity impacts, so expenditure in some areas of government is not undermining what the same government is spending money on through its environmental policy.Governments should pledge to increase the funding made available to assist the transition to green economy. In particular:

• A Financial Transactions Tax should be introduced to raise money for green economy;

• International shipping and aviation fuel should be taxed;

• Money currently spent on fossil fuel subsidies and environmentally harmful agricultural subsidies should be redirected; and

• There should be a thorough review of the investment policies and infrastructure schemes of the World Bank and regional development banks.

Without finance, Rio+20 will to fail to deliver. The main measure of its success will be its achievement in influencing financial flows, towards investment in the transition to green economy..

pic: Curtis Perry

pic: Curtis Perry

pic: Pete Williamson

Wanted: Green Jobs in CanadaKeith BrooksProgram Manager, Blue Green Canada

It might come as a surprise to hear that Canadians are

keen on green jobs. Certainly the Canadian government’s

recent performance at these international fora would not have given this impression.

Indeed, if all you knew about the Canadians’ environmental

leanings was gleaned from Canada’s position and posturing at the recent UNFCCC COPs, for example, you would likely think that we don’t pay much heed to climate change and are not very

interested in environmental sustainability.

The emergence of the green economy and green jobs offers a much needed alternative to the current trajectory Canada is on. And it is tremendously attractive for those of us who are concerned about climate change and other environmental impacts, concerned about Canada’s reputation on the international stage, and concerned about the hollowing out of our economy and the risks associated with such a heavy reliance on oil as the sole driver of jobs and growth.

UNEP’s contention, as articulated in their report, Towards a Green Economy, that the greening of economies is not a drag on growth and employment, but a ‘new engine of growth [and]... a net generator of decent jobs,’ is crucial to winning support for sustainable development, and especially here in Canada. For if we are to curtail the growth of the tar sands or otherwise better align our economy with environmental realities, there will have to be jobs available to replace those that are lost. Workers and their families cannot be the casualties of the shift toward environmental sustainability. Thus, any green economic transition must be a just transition if we hope for it to find support.

It may also come as a surprise to learn that Canada has already begun to transition toward a greener economy and we have some experience in the creation of green jobs. The province of Ontario is home to North America’s best renewable energy policy and most powerful green jobs engine. The Green Energy and Economy Act employs a feed-in tariff to stoke demand for renewable energy and it contains domestic content requirements to ensure that that demand is met domestically. Thanks to this legislation, some thirty new green energy manufacturing facilities have opened in Ontario. Nova Scotia also has a renewable energy policy that has spawned jobs in that province, as do both Quebec and B.C. And we know there are many other opportunities out there, waiting to be tapped: Retrofitting the existing building stock, for example, or greater investment in public transit. We also understand that by greening our existing industries, we increase their competitiveness, improve their bottom lines, and help retain jobs that could otherwise be lost. Here in Canada, there is a tug of war between our green economy and our brown economy. Unfortunately, right now, the brown economy is winning. Those of us who understand the environmental crisis, those who follow international developments, know that the green economy will ultimately triumph. But the attention given to green job creation and the efforts made to appreciate the situation of workers will have a tremendous impact on how quickly this all comes about..

RIO+20 3

But this isn’t the case at all. Polls consistently show that Canadians care deeply about climate change and the environment. But Canada is in a tricky situation. We have the second largest oil reserves in the world, second only to Saudi Arabia, and thanks to an international appetite for oil and some technological advances, that oil is now recoverable. In short, our brown economy is booming.

For many, this boom isn’t a good news story. There are the environmental impacts to consider, of course. And there are economic impacts as well. For one, thanks to oil’s centrality to our economy, Canada now has an advanced case of ‘Dutch Disease,’ a term coined in the 1970s after the Netherlands discovered a large natural gas field which put upward pressure on its currency which, in turn, hurt its manufacturing sector. Canada’s petro-dollar, which rises in lock step with the price of oil, is responsible for the loss of some 200,000 manufacturing jobs in recent years. And it’s not just manufacturing. The pursuit of our brown economy also threatens other jobs. An oil spill off the B.C. coast, for example, would decimate both the local fisheries and tourism industry.

RIO+20

John D. Liu Senior Research Fellow, IUCN, Director, Environmental Education Media Project (EEMP)

4

Functional Ecosystems as the Engine of

“If the world is a table with four legs (US, Eurozone, China/

India, and the Arab world), right now, all four legs are

shaky”, said Thomas Freidman, New York Times columnist after

listening to discussions at the Davos World Economic Forum in January. Old capitalism, many

exclaimed, is dead. What has led us to this crisis point?

The Studying the Earth’s ecosystems is fascinating and can show us the way to sustainability if we are willing to act on the evidence before our eyes. When we consciously observe nature – the tides, atmosphere, movement of clouds, river systems, microbial communities, living soils, plants and animals – evolutionary logic is revealed. Nature is always adapting to changing conditions and seeking equilibrium. Everything has a purpose, nothing is lost, nothing is wasted, and nothing is extraneous. We know that the Earth’s naturally functioning ecosystems are the basis of life on Earth, providing air, water, soil fertility, raw materials and energy. It is also clear that the global economy does not recognise that the production and consumption of all goods and services depends entirely on the ongoing functionality of these ecosystems, and, as a result, fails to value it correctly. This is not surprising for a system that was founded on feudal privilege, military force, colonisation and slavery. While our stock market screens and bank accounts claim we have generated wealth, in reality, we have enriched a small minority of people while impoverishing a much larger majority of people on Earth, and destroyed ecological function over huge portions of the planet.

Now nature is warning us to stop and think. We currently face numerous challenges, including human-induced climate change, biodiversity loss, large-scale deforestation, desertification, hunger, economic crisis, social instability, migration, armed conflict, political revolution and war. Commenting on this “litany of sins”, Lester R. Brown, founder of the Earth Policy Institute and author of Plan B 4.0, recently said, “We must go beyond lifestyle changes and change the system, or civilisation will end”. In the face of such urgency, many of the assumptions that our civilisation has grown up with are thrown into question. Even the founder of that bastion of capitalist thought, the

Davos World Economic Forum, Professor Klaus Schwab, recently declared: “Capitalism, in its current form, no longer fits the world around us”.

From the study of natural ecosystems comes an economic answer that goes to the fundamental question of ‘what is wealth?’. Although everything that is produced and consumed comes from the bounty of the Earth, according to current economic thinking, the value of ecological function is zero. We now calculate the economy and money as the sum total of production and consumption of goods and services. By valuing products and services without recognising the ecological function from which they are derived, we have created a perverse incentive to degrade the Earth’s ecosystems. Carbon trading schemes barely scratch the surface of appropriately valuing nature. They continue to suggest that money is derived from production and consumption but offer a small proportion of that money to provide incentives for slightly less polluting behaviour. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) is more comprehensive and tries to put prices on the various services provided by nature, but it too falls short of the ideal by incorporating the assumption that money in its present form is the starting point. We have collectively become Oscar Wilde’s cynic and ‘know the price of everything and the value of nothing’. We need to go much further.

In order to survive and become sustainable we need to devise a system where instead of personal gain, the intention of all human effort is aligned with nature. Where is it set in stone that human work must be self-serving? Aren’t the great achievements that humans have made based on our ability to work together? In fact there have already been two Nobel Prizes (John Nash and Elinor Ostrom) awarded for recognising that if an individual pursues their own interest to the point where it damages the collective interest, it is no long in their own interest. This means that the interest of individuals and the interests of humanity can be seen to be the same. Shouldn’t we be basing our society, economy and civilisation on the highest possible understanding and principles?

the Green Economy

RIO+20 5

Functional ecosystems can be shown to be more valuable than production and consumption. A pathway to sustainability appears if, instead of the economy being based on production and consumption of goods and services, it were based on ecosystem function. This would mean a fundamental transformation of human society. This development trajectory can be seen to address all of our most pressing problems. In an economy based on ecological function it would be economically disastrous to pollute. A functional economy would mean that conservation is not considered an expensive luxury, but the way to preserve wealth. It would also mean that restoration of degraded lands would be recognised as a means to increase wealth. Sequestering carbon would be a matter of course rather than an afterthought. A functional ecosystem-based economy would be much more fairly distributed, because those responsible for maintaining that function – currently those who suffer worst from the degradation inflicted by consumer capitalism – would be compensated for restoring and maintaining ecosystem functions.

Seen from this perspective, it is easy to recognise that the developed economies have imposed their will on the lesser-developed economies and just assumed that they had the right to do this. A study of the thoughts of many indigenous peoples shows that their perspectives are more highly civilised in being much more respecting of the value of functional ecosystems. Since all people are equal, the views of indigenous peoples are an integral part of human culture and a crucial guide for us in mapping a new path towards sustainability.

Now many people, especially those with vested interests in maintaining the current economic structure will ask; “do we really need to have fundamental and transformational change?” If you analyse the current economy objectively you find at least three reasons why it must change. First, as already noted, it is illogical to value the derivative goods and services without ascribing an appropriate value to the source of these goods and services (functional ecosystems). It creates a perverse incentive to degrade, and we can see the results in shrinking forests, expanding deserts, drained wetlands, disrupted dry-lands and coastal regions and oceans. This basic mistake must be corrected, and soon. Secondly, it is impossible to grow the economy infinitely from finite resources, yet in the current economic model creating and maintaining jobs for new members of the labor force requires infinite growth. Simple mathematics proves that this is impossible. Thirdly, the huge crimes that have been committed to establish this system make it fundamentally immoral. This can be seen every day and everywhere in the enormous disparity between the wealthy and the poor. With seven billion people on the Earth and a billion being added approximately every 12 years, we must find a way to address the economic disparity and create a path for sustainability, based on our understanding of the need to correctly value ecosystem function.

Humanity is exhibiting the behaviour of what in a natural system would be described as a parasite – we are consuming our host. When a host dies the parasite dies as well. This characterisation, while accurate given our current behaviour, seems dark. An alternative would be to seek what is humanity’s unique evolutionary niche and contribution to maintaining ecosystem function. This seems to be consciousness. We have developed the ability to think abstractly, to envision our own death, to consider time relatively and to communicate complex thoughts from generation to generation. So, if we are to be conscious beings rather than parasites, we need to consciously design a fair, sustainable economy and society. Acknowledging that functional ecosystems are the basis of all life and therefore basis of all wealth is the first step down a long path. Leaving the path of violence and inequality that we are on is fraught with difficulty, but is there really any other choice? Making functional ecosystems the engine of a new economics, positions all people’s efforts to benefit themselves, their families, human society and the Earth. The path that values ecosystem function as the basis of life and wealth is the one that leads to sustainability, less conflict, and ultimately, survival for the human race..

pic: Satish Nikam

RIO+206

Revisiting our limits

This article was first published by China Dialogue....(http://www.chinadialogue.net/)

This year marks the 40th anniversary of the Club of Rome’s famous report The Limits to Growth, which developed a number of possible trajectories of human development from 1972 until 2100. Most of these scenarios projected ‘overshoot and collapse’: rapid industrial production, resource consumption and increasing pollution emissions overshoot biophysical planetary boundaries by around 2050, leading to a collapse in food production and population by end of the century.

The frightening truth is that in 2012 many of its findings are still valid and we remain on the same potentially catastrophic pathway.

The report also developed stabilisation scenarios, and these remain potential future pathways. To avoid overshoot and collapse, according to the report, it is necessary to stabilise our economies, currently based on increasing material through-put; to slow and stabilise population growth; and to reduce pollution levels, all before mid-21st century. The two latter goals are relatively uncontroversial in most parts of the world, but even questioning the need for on-going economic growth is still highly politically sensitive.

Still, the debate about the limits of economic growth has arisen once more, especially in Europe. In France, the movement debating these issues goes by the name “La Decroissance” -- literally, “De-growth”, referring to the controlled downscaling of production. This political and counter-cultural movement, which stands for the egalitarian use of global resources, is barely known outside the Francophone world, but has nonetheless produced valuable texts such as La Décroissance: 10 questions pour comprendre et en débattre (“De-growth: 10 questions to understand the debate”).

In the UK, Prosperity without Growth by Tim Jackson has been one of the most important books to rekindle the discussion on the ecological limits to conventional GDP growth - and its alternatives. In Germany, the debate recently shifted when Wolfgang Schaeuble, the minister of finance stated that “as much as we strive on the one hand for the elimination of hunger throughout the world, on the other hand, in our own western developed countries, we have to strive for a limitation of economic growth.” A public enquiry has also been commissioned on the topic “Growth, Prosperity and Quality of Life”.

Patrick SchroederInternational advisor to the China Association for NGO Cooperation (CANGO)

Unsustainable economic growth is generally defined as when the environmental and social costs of economic growth start to outweigh its benefits. There are several alternatives. De-growth, reducing our economic activity to reduce the overall amount of natural resources consumed, is the most radical. “Steady-state” or zero-growth approaches limit the scale of our economies to a certain, steady level.

A third approach is to “de-materialise” economic growth: continuing growth but with the absolute decoupling of GDP from resource consumption and environmental impacts. And while there is a global trend towards decoupling through increasing efficiency, overall demand and consumption continues to increase and an absolute reduction of environmental impacts has not yet occurred.

This third solution seems to be the most attractive, but it is unlikely that the global economy will reach such levels of efficiency. Take the reduction of carbon emissions: if both the global population and per capita income levels continue to increase as projected, along with modest incremental increases in GDP growth, we would need to decrease to six grams of carbon dioxide per US$1 of GDP to stay within the 450 parts-per-million target. Highlighting the magnitude of the challenge, Japan, the world’s most efficient economy, currently has an intensity of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per US$1 of GDP.

So what do these ideas mean for China, where I live and work? First, there is no doubt China still needs to grow its economy. Even after 30 years of rapid economic growth, China still faces the challenge of poverty eradication with 150 million people still living under US$1 per day. But what type of growth is needed to achieve the double goal of poverty eradication and environmental protection?

Interestingly China’s government is already trying to limit the speed of economic growth, lowering its official annual target from 7.5% to 7% in 2011, although actual GDP growth was 9.2% that year. Relative decoupling trends can be observed in China too: GDP has increased much faster than water consumption, for example, which only increases about 1% per year. However, figures on decoupling trends can be misleading if viewed in isolation. For example, per capita water resource availability has decreased from 2,802 cubic metres per capita per year in 1982 to 1,816 cubic metres in 2009.

RIO+20 7

United Nations Volunteers (UNV) Programme: Volunteer Action Counts

With this week´s next round of ‘informal informals’ starting in New York in preparation for Rio+20, the United Nations Volunteers (UNV) programme has launched the Volunteer Action Counts campaign - www.volunteeractioncounts.org

This campaign provides an opportunity for volunteers to show that they are key for building a sustainable future. The campaign will count people’s actions for sustainable development from around the world, and provide them with a space to tell their volunteering story.

“The campaign will show that many people are volunteering every day for a sustainable future. Their work might sometimes go unnoticed to the world, but their actions count in the communities that are benefitting from their hard work,” said Flavia Pansieri, Executive Coordinator of UNV. The engagement of people in discussing what is at stake in the Rio+20 agenda is important, as is the active participation of people in realising the results. After all, it is ordinary people who have the most to lose if we fail to find sustainable solutions, and the most to gain if we succeed. This is why UNV created a campaign for all volunteers around the world, not only UN Volunteers or NGO volunteers, but for all people who care about sustainable development – and to count their actions and take them to Rio.

The campaign was conceived by UNV and Stakeholder Forum during the 64th Annual UN DPI/NGO Conference that took place in Bonn, Germany from 3-5 September. “Looking ahead to Rio+20, the Conference - ‘Sustainable Societies - Responsive Citizens’, already highlighted the need to connect the dots between sustainable development and civic engagement,” explains Marco van der Ree, Chief Partnerships of UNV.

Felix Dodds, Chair of the DPI/NGO Conference and Executive Director of Stakeholder Forum during the Conference stated: “People are consumers, activists, volunteers, and (responsive) citizens. People who are actively engaged in their communities and societies will ensure action to effectively tackle pressing sustainable development issues.” Felix now adds, that “this pledge campaign is about all of us getting involved and making our contribution to a more sustainable planet. The old saying rings true ‘When the people lead, the leaders will follow’.

We are therefore asking all volunteers around the world to share their experiences on the campaign website, www.volunteeractioncounts.org, so that their stories can be showcased through a multi-media presentation to world leaders and participants at Rio+20. Their actions can also be measured on the website through the calculators from Zero Footprint, a cleantech software and services company that makes environmental impact measurable, visible and manageable, that has volunteered their expertise to the campaign. People can use the Social Media tool they prefer - ideally Twitter, but Facebook and others also count - and tag their actions under the #Actioncounts hashtag, so that UNV can ensure that their contribution to improve the world is taken to Rio+20.

Now is the perfect time to be heard, and where better to do it than at the meeting aiming to set goals for the way we will live on this planet over the next decades.

Alternative indicators for measuring environmental performance of the economy beyond GDP are also being introduced. Although a large scale green GDP index was unexpectedly shelved in 2007, the government continues to publish annual environmental calculations, with the cost of pollution for 2009 estimated to be 1.4 trillion Yuan (US$222 billion), about 3.8% of GDP and an increase of 9.2% on the previous year.

Moving beyond GDP will also require new social indicators for evaluating human development. As economist Hu Angang has written, the country could start measuring happiness and life satisfaction through the introduction of a new index. This would counteract the strong focus on GDP as a benchmark and could help to close the widening gap between rich and poor in China. Developing such indices could also provide a fruitful avenue for cooperation and dialogue with Europe.

Forty years have passed since the publication of The Limits to Growth. If the models are correct – and so far they look that way – business-as-usual is not an option: we do not have another 40 years to waste before taking action and changing course.

pic: Andrew Hux

.

.

RIO+208

Private Sector and Governments Discuss

In the run-up to Rio+20, business representatives, government officials, and other stakeholders engaged in a two-day consultation in The Hague, the Netherlands. More than 300 participants discussed the theme ‘Realizing Inclusive and Green Growth’ and how business’ strengths in innovation, adaptation and implementation can best be leveraged to facilitate the transition to a green economy. The outcomes of the discussions have been captured and will be fed into the Rio+20 negotiations.

Organised by the government of the Netherlands, UNDESA and the Business Action for Sustainable Development (BASD2012), The Hague Consultation provided an opportunity to discuss, and deliver to the Rio+20 Conference, constructive global private sector key messages around the role of business and its expectations of governments. The general consensus was that business, government, and other stakeholders will need to work together and move, as Sha Zukang, UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, and Secretary General of the UNCSD, called it “from paper to implementation”.

Leading companies around the world have placed sustainability at the top of their agendas, realising the growing significance and urgency of global environmental, social and economic challenges. Using science and technology to stimulate innovation and investment for green growth, the private sector is a catalyst for sustainable development.

“Whatever progress we have made since Rio 1992, we could not have done it without the contributions of business and industry," said Mr. Sha, who set the stage in his opening keynote address. Sha Zukang also promoted the BASD 2012 Business Day (19 June 2012, Rio): "This event will allow for a continued frank discussion between governments, business leaders and other civil society participants."

"Governments can play an important role by fighting barriers to sustainable investment, while businesses need to accept sustainability as a prerequisite for profitability", underlined Ben Knapen, Minister for European Affairs and International Cooperation of the Netherlands. "Without the private sector it is almost impossible to reach a sufficient scale and have a major impact. That is why the Netherlands attaches so much importance to this consultation in the lead-up to the Rio+20 Conference."

“Trade and investment are critical pillars for green growth,” said Jean-Guy Carrier, Secretary-General of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and member

Business Action for Sustainable Development 2012 (BASD 2012)

of the BASD Steering Group, at the meeting. “Business strongly believes that the potential of open trade and investment must be harnessed to achieve the environmental and social goals of sustainable development.”

Transparency and Alignment

A special session dedicated to Transparency and Alignment brought together representatives of business, investors, stock exchanges and NGOs, to discuss and refine policy recommendations for Rio+20 on improving the quantity and quality of sustainability information provided by companies. These discussions underscore the current momentum behind increased integration of sustainability in regular economic activity, and the broad call for measurement and disclosure of sustainability performance at all levels of economic decision-making, including at the company, product and national levels.

Clause 24 of the Rio+20 Zero Draft Document calls 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.”

Broad support was expressed for this policy recommendation, including from a global coalition of investors and other key actors from the private sector and civil society. Participants reflected that such a policy framework should support efforts to integrate sustainability, financial, governance and management reporting and demonstrate the link between an organisation’s strategy, governance and financial performance and its social, environmental and economic context. It should also build upon the work of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC), which brings together the financial accounting standard setters and existing initiatives such as the Global Compact and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI).

Participants also discussed the need for business to engage business in public-private partnerships to align sustainable development themes, methodologies and indicators at the corporate and product levels and at the national and global levels and to be actively involved in the formulation of upcoming Sustainable Development Goals.

The topics of integrated reporting and public-private partnerships will be featured in-depth at the Rio+20 Corporate Sustainability Forum hosted by the UN Global Compact in cooperation with the Rio+20 Secretariat, the UN System and the Global Compact Local Network Brazil (15-18 June, Rio)..

Green and Inclusive Economy Ahead of Rio+20

Date Time Room Title Organisers

24 Ap

ril 20

12

1:15-2:45 A Environmental Health Initiatives: Innovative Approaches for Building Sustainable Cities Parliamentarians for Global Action

1:15-2:45 7 Responding to the Global Soil Crisis Permanent Mission of Australia to the UN

1:15-2:45 4 Reclaiming the ’92 Earth Summit and Revisiting the Rio+20 AgendaGorakhpur Environmental Action Group (GEAG); Public Advocacy Initiatives for Rights and Values in India (PAIRVI); Centre for Community Economics and Development Consultants Society (CECOEDECON); and Beyond Copenhagen

6:15-7:45 A Promoting Rights and Equity through Sustainable Development Goals IBON International and Both Ends

25 Ap

ril 20

12

1:15-2:45 A SDGs: Evolution or More of the Same? WWF-UK

1:15-2:45 7 Rio+20: Towards sustainable agriculture and a world free of hunger - An interactive dialogue with the Rome-based Agencies and the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)

1:15-2:45 4 Sustainable Mobility on the Road to Rio+20: Priorities and Actions across Major Groups Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP)

6:15-7:45 7 Resource Efficient Cities as drivers of change United Nations Environment Programme- Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (UNEP-DTIE)

26 Ap

ril 20

12

1:15-2:45 4 The Future We Want for Rio+20 on Oceans and Seas UN DPI

1:15-2:45 A Global outlook and local action: water and energy for sustainable development Governments of Slovenia, Costa Rica, Cape Verde, Iceland, Singapore, UAE (the Green Group)

6:15-7:45 7 Blue Carbon as a Tool to Mitigate Climate Change and Preserve Key Marine and Coastal Ecosystems UNESCO, Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC)

27 Ap

ril 20

12 1:15-2:45 7 The State of the World Environment told by UNEP’s GEO-5 report and Global Solutions for Sustainability United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

1:15-2:45 A Rights at Risk: Decoding the Green Economy France Libertes Foundation Danielle Mitterrand

1:15-2:45 4 Planet Under pressure ICSU-UNESCO-IGBP

RIO+20 9

Rio+20 Side Event Calendar

UNITAR and UNEP

Green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication will be one of the main themes for the upcoming 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) taking place from 20-22 June 2012 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. As countries are being increasingly attentive to new patterns of development, the UN Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) have recently announced a new e-learning course entitled “Introduction to a Green Economy: Concepts, Principles and Applications”, that will take place from 14 May to 22 June 2012.

This partnership e-course has been designed for a wide audience of civil servants, diplomats, environmental managers, academics, and interested citizens. It aims at enhancing participants’ knowledge of different concepts and facets of the green economy, as well as global, national and sector-specific challenges and opportunities to advance low-carbon, resource efficient and socially inclusive development. Additionally, the future e-students will begin to develop basic skills for applying the green economy concept in a real world economic, policy and/or personal context.

Launch E-learning Course on Green EconomyThe specific learning objectives of this course include:

• Define the concept of a green economy and explain its value

• Describe social, environmental and economic benefits of advancing a green economy

• Identify enabling conditions for greening national economies

• Provide examples of successful green economy investments, initiatives and projects

• Identify principal challenges and opportunities for greening key economic sectors

• Describe national planning processes in support of a green transformation

• Recognize the range of international and regional green initiatives and support services to foster green development

• Apply the green economy concept to a real world economic, policy and/or personal context

Registration is open until 7 May 2012. Comprehensive information and registration details are available on the UNITAR Online Catalogue.

Please contact the UNITAR Environmental Governance Programme (EGP) at envgov@unitar.org for more information.

Outreach is made possible by the support of

Emma Puka-Beals Mount Holyoke College

Monday afternoon’s plenary negotiations on sections III and V of the Rio+20 Outcome Document covered paragraphs 26-37, with a focus on the new Co-Chairs’ Suggested Text (CST). Several Member State delegates intervened to incorporate text that had not been included in CST paragraphs, and the G77+China stated its refusal to negotiate using CST paragraphs altogether. Throughout the negotiations, the G77+China called on other delegates to comment on G77 text that had been proposed in March, as the G77 felt that this text, which had received very little feedback, had been removed unfairly from CST paragraphs.

The G77 moved to delete paragraph 25 and all pre and sub – which provide an overview of the Green Economy – in favor of its previously submitted text. It also moved to delete paragraph 26 on the role of the Green Economy, stating that it could not commit to something that was not yet defined. The EU stated that it had not commented on G77 text because of its length. The Co-Chair emphasised that despite the large membership of the G77, the process was not governed by majority-rule, and that other Member States and Groups could comment on old text by choice.

In paragraph 28 - the transition to the Green Economy- Switzerland, the EU, Norway, the US, Canada and Korea moved to specifically include women as a group participating in the Green Economy. The EU, New Zealand, Canada and the US moved not to single out ‘global’ firms in order to include businesses and industries of all sizes. The EU and Norway moved not to single out benefits to developing countries. New Zealand, the US and Canada had further questions on the text covering ‘incentives’, and Norway emphasised the integration of social and environmental costs in decision-making. However,

News from the Negotiations - Synthesis of Plenary SessionsMonday, 23rd April

the G77+China moved to delete the paragraph and insisted on comments to its proposed text, stating that the Co-chairs’ streamlining had fundamentally changed the section.

In CST paragraph 31 on Green Economy policies, Norway moved to delete text quoting the Rio Principles and moved to make inequalities more pronounced, and asked to delete text on complying with international trade law. The EU supported the latter proposal, while the US and Canada moved to retain this text. New Zealand stated that only “unwarranted” trade barriers should be removed. The G77 rejected this text in favor of its proposed additions to the original paragraph.

In the section on toolkits and experience sharing, Norway moved to include old introductory text. The US and Canada moved to delete text on “capacity building schemes”, and Korea and the EU moved to incorporate some old text into the paragraph (CST 33). The EU moved to separate this one paragraph into two, while the G77 moved to delete it in favor of its own less prescriptive text. In CST 34 on labor, the US and New Zealand continued to support text on businesses and industries of all sizes, and Switzerland and the EU moved to include “decent” work. In CST 35, the EU and Switzerland moved to enhance the role of Major Groups, while the Holy See moved to delete this.

In the section on a Framework for Action, the G77 insisted on moving all text to section V. New Zealand, the US and the EU asked not to move all text, and Co-chairs proceeded as planned as outlined in the CST paragraphs 37-43. The G77 stated that it could not comment on this section..

pic: Massachusettes Office of Energy & Environmental Affairs