Outreach Magazine: May UN Meetings Day 10

pic: Carlos Ortega

inside:

a multi-stakeholdermagazine on

climate changeand sustainable

development

04 May 2012

www.stakeholderforum.org/sf/outreach/

Rio+20 must address global economic governance

25 years of Stakeholder Forum

out reach.

Felix Dodds Stakeholder Forum

André Abreu France Libertés Foundation

Kirsty Schneeberger Stakeholder Forum

Ivana Savic Children And Youth

Anabella Rosemberg Trade Unions

Joji Carino Indigenous Peoples

OUTREACH IS PUBLISHED BY:

CONTRIBUTING WRITERS

8

5

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 Forum

About 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 ([email protected] or [email protected]) You can also follow us on Twitter: @OutreachLive

OUTREACH EDITORIAL TEAM

10

Leida Rijnhout NGOs

Rachel Kyte World Bank

Sue Riddlestone BioRegional

Jan-Gustav Strandenaes Stakeholder Forum

Sébastien Duyck Alice Vincent

Catherine Skopic IBON International

1 25 years of Stakeholder Forum

2 Roads to Rio and points beyond Sustainable Development Dialogues

3 Profile - Rachel Kyte

4 Rio+20 must address global economic governance

5 Right to water affirmed, but social rights and Rio Principles still under threat

6 Major Group interviews on the Rio+20 Process - Ivana Savic

7 Major Group interviews on the Rio+20 Process - Anabella RosembergRecipe for success at Rio + 20

8 Major Group interviews on the Rio+20 Process - Leida Rijnhout

9 Major Group interviews on the Rio+20 Process - Joji CarinoTen themes for the Rio+20 sandwich days (16th-19th June 2012)

10 Moving from the ‘future we can’ achieve to the ‘future we want’

11 New York youth seek to influence UN Negotiations

12 A sense of possibility – delegates’ minds turn to post Rio delivery in New York

13 What happens on Monday? From Talk to Walk; Rio+20 Side Event Calendar; World Summit of Federated States and Regions

14 Reflections on the negotiations

contents.

pic: Carlos Ortega

1

25 years of Stakeholder Forum

25 years ago, Mostafa Tolba, the then Executive Director of UNEP, approached UK stakeholders and the UK government to set up what would become the first UNEP National Committee. Originally known as UNEP-UK and housed at IIED, Stakeholder Forum was born in June 1987.The original focus of Stakeholder Forum in those first few years was to promote UNEP in the UK and facilitate discussion on the implementation of the Brundtland Commission Report findings. Under its second Executive Director, Koy Thompson, it took a critical role in organising the UK NGO involvement in the first Rio Summit.

Reformed after the Earth Summit in 1992 to become a multi-stakeholder platform, Stakeholder Forum welcomed one of the UK’s best known greens, Jonathon Porritt, as Chair and was joined by a new Executive Director, myself. It also became the UK focal point for UNDP – reflecting the nature of the Rio Summit as a conference on environment and development.

It played an important role in the 1990s in helping to prepare the UK stakeholder input into the major UN Conferences on Social Development, Women, Human Settlements and Sustainable Development. It also played a significant role in setting up the NGO coalition on the new Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) and the coalition on the Habitat II Conference.

In 1997 the new Stakeholder Forum Chair, Derek Osborn – formerly Director General of the UK Department of Environment – was asked to co-chair the preparatory process for Rio+5. New multi-stakeholder dialogues were introduced in 1997, following a suggestion by Stakeholder Forum to the UN General Assembly in 1996.

Reformed as an idea by the amazing director of the UN Division on Sustainable Development, Joke Waller Hunter, into what became a vital part of the CSD for the next 4 years – twelve hours of interactive dialogue of stakeholders with governments on the first two days of the CSD. It was during this time that the most important stakeholder engagements within the UN system took place.

Outreach was first published by Stakeholder Forum in 1996, and has been published ever since at the UN CSD meetings, and, more recently, at the UNFCCC negotiations. It provides a vital space for stakeholders to express their views and ideas.

Stakeholder Forum became a global multi-stakeholder body in 2000, with its first International Advisory Board meeting held at Wilton Park, England, at the informal discussion on Rio+10, which was co-organised by Stakeholder Forum and Wilton Park. The meeting played a significant role in the early framing of the Rio+10 modalities.

For the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), Stakeholder Forum launched the first global network for regional government. Nrg4SD is now an important stakeholder body at global meetings - Stakeholder Forum, played the role of secretariat in its first year.

In Johannesburg, Stakeholder Forum also held the first Implementation Conference and launched 23 Type Two Partnerships, some of which have gone on to become vital parts of the sustainable development tapestry post -WSSD.

In 2008, Stakeholder Forum joined the UNFCCC processes and – jointly with the Stockholm International Water Institute – set up the Water and Climate Coalition, which succeeded in getting water on to the agenda of the UNFCCC within two years.

Also in 2008, ten days after the G77 tabled the resolution for a new summit on Sustainable Development, Stakeholder Forum hosted the first meeting on Rio+20 in San Sebastian, Spain. Stakeholder Forum has been working to support the Summit since then and launched its Rio+20 website, Earth Summit 2012, in January 2009, nearly a year before governments agreed to a Summit.

At the end of May, we will publish our thirteenth book in 15 years, ‘Only One Earth’, which examines the last 40 years, and the challenges for the future. The books have played an important role in highlighting major issues, as well as helping stakeholders to engage with the process.

As I look back on the last 20 years as Director, I see that those of us who have been involved in sustainable development have had to defend many of the agreements made in Rio in 1992. Stakeholder Forum has succeeded due to great staff and enormous support from its UK board and International Advisory Board.

I believe the new Executive Director, Farooq Ullah, who will be taking over on 1st September 2012, will build on this great work and take the organisation to the new level. I hope he has as much fun as I have had, drinking as much coffee as I have, and spending long nights working with governments, the UN, and stakeholders to help us move to a much more sustainable planet.

Felix DoddsStakeholder Forum

RIO+20

RIO+202

Roads to Rio and points beyond

Sustainable Development Dialogues

If one calls where we are now Point A – ‘living outside planetary boundaries’ – we have to get to Point B – ‘living within Planetary Boundaries’. There are many different routes to Point B. Some of us have a long way to travel, being very far away, greatly exceeding planetary boundaries; and some of us are already close to Point B, living in proximity to planetary boundaries – and all of us need to live within the context of happiness and wellbeing.

As we make this journey, we also have the responsibility of considering future generations. We have been taking from them, is it now time to put back? At the very least, efficiency and recycling of all materials and resources are no longer choices but necessities.

Catherine Skopic

16 Jun 2012 - 19 Jun 2012 Rio de Janeiro

MORE INFO www.riodialogues.org

Neither Mother Earth, nor our economies are doing very well; and there are increasing numbers of people living in poverty. Our oceans, land, water, air are crying out for relief. We need a new model - could putting Mother Earth first and letting all else flow from this point be that new paradigm?

Hopes for the success of Rio+20 are high as we plan, meet and seek to enable the continuance of life on this planet – a quality of life that meets the needs of all people, plants, animals, and ecosystems.

Most important is the realisation that the road back home is ultimately the same for all of us; for we are all living on this one earth, this one planet as one people, one family. Rio+20 is both the continuation and beginning of our work - our beginning and continuance for life, for all ‘points beyond.

The Government of Brazil is organising, with the support of the United Nations, the Sustainable Development Dialogues, a forum for civil society, to be held in Riocentro, between 16-19 June, in the context of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development - Rio+20.

In the four days prior to the High Level Segment, top representatives from civil society, including the private sector, NGOs, the scientific community, among other Major Groups, will convene at the same venue as the Rio+20 Conference. They are expected to engage in an open and action-oriented debate on key topics relating to sustainable development. There will be no participation by governments or UN agencies. The recommendations emanating from the Dialogues will be conveyed directly to the Heads of State and government delegations present at the Summit.

Ten topics will be debated, based on their relevance to the furthering of sustainable development.

1. Sustainable development for fighting poverty;

2. Sustainable development as an answer to the economic and financial crises;

3. Unemployment, decent work and migrations;

4. The economics of sustainable development, including sustainable patterns of production and consumption;

5. Forests;

6. Food and nutrition security;

7. Sustainable energy for all;

8. Water;

9. Sustainable cities and innovation; and

10. Oceans.

The debates will be broadcast live through the UN website.

With the support of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the Dialogues initiative is being launched through a digital platform, in order to provide the wider public with a democratic space for discussion. The online debates on each of the ten themes of the Dialogues will be facilitated by researchers from renowned academic institutions around the world. The platform is available in four languages (Portuguese, English, French and Spanish), with an in-built tool that allows the translation of specific posts into 40 languages. It also includes a voting system through which a set of recommendations will be chosen for transmission to the participants of the Dialogues in Rio.

This innovative bridge between civil society, Heads of State and government is expected to contribute to the incorporation and engagement of stakeholders, based on the understanding that public participation is essential to the promotion of sustainable development as the paradigm for action.

RIO+20 3

How did you get the role you are in today and what advice would you give to aspiring earth champions?20 years ago I started my career in civil society and youth politics in Europe, working on environmental issues which brought young people together. I therefore became heavily involved in the first Earth Summit and from there went on to run WEDO, working on women’s health, human rights and environment issues. I then decided I wanted to try and change things from the inside and went on to work for a big international NGO (IUCN), which had status and was part of key conversations. I was then recruited by the World Bank as an ombudsperson to mediate disputes where private sector investments had led to conflict with local communities. And it was from there that I moved to the management side of operations at the organisation.

Some sound advice I was given when I was younger, was when you are faced with a fork in the road and have to make a decision, you should always follow your heart and make the courageous choice.

How can more finance be leveraged for the implementation of sustainable development at the national level?Compared to 20 years ago, we now have domestic capital markets in the majority of countries. Even the poorest nations have banks which can invest in microfinance. It is no longer a case for countries or communities to rely on financial support from donors in order to develop and grow. In fact, today most investment flows are actually South-South in direction. When you look at all the potential sources of finance available, money isn’t actually the problem, rather it is ensuring that it is invested in the right things and in the right way. This of course includes subsidies which are limiting our ability to grow in a greener way.

What do you believe should be achieved at Rio+20?Sustainable development is as relevant today as when it was first coined. The dilemma is that we’ve made real progress in some areas but not in others, and the achievements we have made are now imperilled by the lack of sustainability in

the economic system. Rio can therefore really help with the demystification of what more inclusive and greener growth means. The pathway to sustainable development differs for every country, however, there are things that each nation can do straight after Rio to make their economy greener and more inclusive. But, for us to make different decisions, or make decisions differently, we need an alternative data-set on the table for all government departments to base policies upon. We therefore encourage as many countries as possible to use Rio as an opportunity to commit to start using natural capital accounts alongside GDP.

What’s the World Bank’s vision for sustainable development over the next 20 yearsEconomic growth can become much more efficient and supportive of the ecosystems that we depend upon. We need markets that value ecosystem services, enabling the generation of resources to allow countries to invest in the things they need to grow greener and more inclusively. We will not be able to be sustainable if inequity continues to rise within countries, even if equity is increasing between countries. We already know a lot of what we need to do. We need to attack each bad subsidy and inefficiency systematically, country by country. It’s essential to take action now. Time is not on our side. Climate change is an accelerant, making everything more difficult to do, and so the future of development is building the resilience of natural systems, countries, cities and communities. Therefore as a development institution, everything we do now is about resilience and adaptation.

Call to actionEven if global consensus is illusive, it doesn’t stop those who want to move ahead from doing so. Coalitions of the willing can and do work. It is this kind of leadership which is vital both at Rio and after Rio. We need to inspire the new generation of people that don’t remember the first Summit, and show that collective action from likeminded actors can produce results and move us forward.

Nationality: British

Country of residence: USA (Washington D.C.)

Current Position: Vice President of Sustainable Development, World Bank

profile. Rachel Kyte

RIO+20

IBON International

4

Rio+20 must address global economic governance

As many of you know, during the previous

round of informal informals, civil

society was alarmed at the proposals

of certain states to delete, weaken or

bracket references to rights, equity

and important Rio principles, which

are also grounded on human rights.

We initiated an open letter to the UN

Secretary General and member states,

signed by over a thousand organisations

from over 100 countries and territories,

expressing our alarm and calling on them

to reaffirm and strengthen rights and

Rio principles and be accountable for

their implementation.

We are therefore glad to hear that some member states have expressed support for the rights agenda in Rio+20. We would, however, like to underscore one dimension of the rights-based approach to sustainable development. That is the international dimension, or collective responsibility of the community of nations, to create enabling conditions for the fulfillment of human rights, including the right to development.

By this, we don’t just mean the provision of official development assistance (ODA) from the North to the South. Even if developed countries did provide 0.7% of their GDP as aid, it would not make a dent in poverty eradication and the shift to sustainable development pathways, without major reforms in the international financial architecture and multilateral and bilateral trade rules.

Financial speculation is a major factor behind commodity price volatility, furthermore, the hike in food prices impacts the right to food of the vast majority. Indeed, it is devastating the lives of small rural producers and low income households in urban areas today. Moreover, much needed financial resources for building ‘green’ productive capacities, generating ‘green’ decent jobs, and ensuring universal social protection, are being wasted in speculative trading of financial assets, inflating asset bubbles and causing financial convulsions in the global economy.

Unfair trade rules, including agricultural subsidies in the North, continue to wipe out small agricultural producers from developing countries. Developing countries who try to nurture their domestic industries for, say wind power and other renewable energy sources, are hauled to the World

Remarks made at the side event, “Right at Rio+20: A Rights-based Framework for Sustainable Development” (UN Headquarters, New York, April 27, 2012).

Trade Organisation’s (WTO) dispute panel. On the other hand, under the same unfair agreements, governments can also be sued by the big multinational corporations if they feel that their profits are adversely affected by new laws or regulations, including environmental standards.

Unfair intellectual property rights regimes built into the WTO and other so-called free trade agreements (FTAs) also prevent rapid adoption, dissemination, and further innovation of new technologies and production methods, including low-carbon alternatives in developing countries.

Clearly, reforms are needed in the area of international trade, finance and investments, if countries are to fulfill their human rights obligations to their citizens, and address the global challenge of sustainable development. Yet, this dimension of international cooperation is being banished from the Rio negotiations. For instance, developed countries (or at least some of them) are striking out language calling for reform of the global financial system [paras 13 sext, pre 25, 54 bis]. Or language stressing the development mandate of the Doha Round of WTO negotiations [para 65 bis]; or underscoring the need for special and differential treatment for developing countries [para 124]; or calling for transfer of technology [para 125].

We are also concerned with inconsistencies in some developed countries which, on the one hand, champion human rights – but on the other earnestly support mechanisms that uphold carbon markets, enclosures of commons, and lead to displacement especially of indigenous communities and local communities. This is a perversion of the Polluter Pays Principle – and allows developed countries a convenient excuse to evade their historical responsibility for the overexploitation of the environment.

Developed countries also appear consistently opposed to references to the right to development - despite it being endorsed by the General Assembly in the 1986 Declaration on Right to Development, the 1992 Rio Declaration as Principle 3, and in numerous other political declarations.

We call on governments to support the right to development and in so doing, support proposals for reforming international finance and trade to uphold commitment to human rights, freedom and genuine sustainable development. We need you to ensure that references to human rights are not only kept in the Rio+20 Outcome Document, but also reinforced by participatory monitoring and accountability mechanisms.

Twenty years after the Rio 1992 Earth Summit, surely we should expect more, nothing less!

André AbreuInternational Policy Advisor, France Libertés Foundation

Right to water affirmed, but social rights and

RIO+20 5

Rio Principles still under threat

European Union, Israel and Australia, which had asked for deletion and bracketing in the last session, abstained this time from the demand for deletion of the right to water, even after Canada’s intervention asking to delete the entire paragraph. Norway has maintained its position supporting rights and requested for entire paragraph to be retained. Finally, the G77 gave a strong defense of the right to water, asking for the paragraph to be divided into two parts, in order to give greater weight to the first part on rights. According to the representative of the G77, "The right to water cannot be placed in the same level with the issues of management and investment."

The networks and institutions who worked for years for the right to water to be finally recognised in the UN General Assembly in July 2010, support the position advocated by the G77, Switzerland and Norway in this process, and will not accept a setback at Rio+20 on this principle. After this week, we are confident the Canada is now isolated and will have to accept the paragraph 67 and the affirmation of the right to water.

Aside from water, it is important to note that there are positive developments and new processes being opened in the negotiations in areas such as renewable energy, food security, oceans, as well as the proposal for a Social Protection Floor. However, we see clearly that in the context of the green economy, some proposed market-based mechanisms are a clear offensive on the financial markets towards the commodification of natural resources. This more broadly represents a step backwards for some acquired social rights, and the so called Rio principles.

We know that this victory for the right to water is certainly still partial, but it stands as an example of the power of civil society influence on Rio+20 process. We now need to expand and enhance the debate on where and how member states are captured by economic interests in regards to human rights. We also need to intensify the ‘red lines’ that we believe are important to human rights and other collective principles, such as the Precautionary Principle; the Polluter Pays Principle; and the Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities. Rights and principles already established that are being ignored or bracketed in the negotiation process.

For all these reasons, we believe there is a vital need for better communication on these issues to the wider global civil society. The Facilitating Committee of Civil Society has been promoting meetings and activities to increase social participation in the process, and we hope that the People's Summit for Social and Environmental Justice, (15th -22nd June at Flamengo Park), will be an important space for this public debate. Freedom of information is only weakened if not used.

A few weeks ago, civil society groups

involved in Rio+20, shared their deep

concern about the threat against

human and social rights in the draft

text for Rio, as well as the risk

to important collective principles

established in 1992 at the first

Earth Summit. During the negotiations

in March, we watched with surprise

and disappointment, a group of a

few member states on an offensive to

bracket and delete any reference to

human rights, including the right to

water, in the draft text. Since then,

several NGOs, human rights experts,

unions and social movements, have

mobilised to denounce the attack on

rights and principles.

pic: water.org

In the last two weeks, these networks and civil society organisations have mobilised once again, proposing meetings and side events on what we called ‘rights at risk’. Finally, this week, an important victory has been won in the chapter on water, with most of the countries that originally opposed the right to water in paragraph 67 – with the exception of Canada, which again requested its deletion – stepping back. In the session on April 26th, when the water chapter was negotiated, Switzerland was the first country to speak, stressing "the importance of right to water as essential in the text". The United States,

RIO+206

Major Group interviews on the Rio+20 ProcessIn the run up to the Earth Summit in June, the Major Groups have been invited to fill out a questionnaire on the Rio+20 process, the responses from four of the groups can be seen below, with more to follow online (www.stakeholderforum.org/sf/outreach). Questions were focused on the development of a green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication, looking at the inequity within and between countries, and the overexploitation of natural resources and the destruction of the environment.

B1: Will agreements reached at Rio+20 lead to a worldwide transformation of the economy, a ‘greening’ that brings us to practices that keep us within the planetary boundaries? What must happen at Rio+20 for this to occur?

It is uncertain whether countries will reach an agreement. In the current negotiations, governments are viewed as being noncommittal and the Zero Draft negotiating text is being criticised for its diminishing prescriptive language. Some believe that there is a systematic attempt from powerful states to ‘delete our rights and bracket our future’. One way to overcome this is to present a stronger civil society movement. Social movements have the ability to effect great change; they can lobby governments to become more proactive in their approach to sustainable development, and they can build the capacity of local communities to take charge of their own futures. We need to focus our efforts on building this united civil society movement to ensure that the outcomes of Rio are positive.

B2: If Rio+20 fails, which other arenas could change be promoted in bringing the planet towards a more sustainable future?

Rio+20 is more than just a negotiating table for sustainable development policy, it is a global platform for people to share ideas, network, and build a movement towards sustainability. In this way, Rio+20 cannot fail, because it is empowering civil society to engage more proactively in sustainable development processes. Civil society can influence change both at global and local levels and this will be an important component of post-Rio+20 implementation.

A1: There is huge inequality in resources and power at the global level, as well as within countries. How do you think this influences country efforts to attain sustainable development?

The extremes of wealth and poverty are one of the greatest causes of social and economic unrest, significantly influencing the ability of countries to attain sustainable development goals. A relatively small percentage (20%) of the population is wealthy, while the majority lives in dire poverty. This imbalance exists both within nations and between nations. In addition, the gap that separates rich and poor continues to widen, which indicates that existing economic systems are incapable of restoring a just balance. These systems are predominantly based on a materialistic paradigm for development; that is, we measure development by material progress. We have seen that in reality this does not bring happiness, or an end to the social issues that keep societies from flourishing. The challenge for countries is to adopt a more holistic approach to their development, one that both reduces the gap between the wealthy and the poor, and reflects a deeper understanding of human well-being.

A2: Can the Rio outcome contribute to the establishment of a process that eventually will lead to a real change of this imbalance – which means a real implementation of what was to a great extent decided upon already in 1992, in the MDG etc.? If so: What must happen at Rio+20? If not: What must happen in other arenas? What are the alternatives if Rio+20 fails?

Rio has the potential to bring about change and contribute to the creation of social and environmental balance in the world. However, the degree to which this is achieved is two-fold. First, governments need to demonstrate their commitment to achieve a more holistic understanding of human development and wellbeing. Second, there needs to be a strong civil society movement that demonstrates their vision of a sustainable world, thus influencing the decision makers and gaining global societal support.

These interviews were led by Christian Egge, Project manager Rio2012, Norwegian Forum for Development and Environment. If you are a Major Group representative that has not yet participated in the questionnaire and is interested in doing so, please contact Christian: [email protected]

ANSWERS BY IVANA SAVIC, REPRESENTATIVE OF CHILDREN AND YOUTH:

pic: CIFOR

Nathalie Rey, GreenpeaceRecipe for success at Rio + 20 Take one small planet

• Add a Rio outcome containing new commitments; recycling old ones is not sufficient

• Using a new high seas biodiversity agreement, ensure benefits from marine genetic resources are divided fairly

• Take existing economies, remove rotten sections leaving only green parts

• Mix in ancient forests (not chopped)

• Add fresh, clean drinking water

• Whisk in a global network of protected areas & marine reserves covering 40% of the blue surface

• Sieve subsidies - removing harmful ones

• Add a large pinch of political will

• Season with sustainable agriculture (free from GE, chemical fertilizers and pesticides)

• Using 100% renewable energy, allow global fish stocks to rise

• Sprinkle large amounts of new financial resources and

• Decorate with strong Sustainable Development Goals

Let [the planet] coolServes: 6-7 billion

RIO+20 7

employment benefit, as well as access to health services), will ensure wealth redistribution mechanisms are in place to give the poorest a sustainable way out of poverty.

• A decent work objective, to be fulfilled in part through the creation of jobs in sectors that reduce the impact of production on the environment. This contributes to reducing income gaps – as decent work provides good income and working conditions as well as respect for labour standards.

• A tax on financial transactions, to generate revenues for funding sustainable development, while at the same time reducing speculation, which has harmed the capacity of countries to follow a different development pathway.

The potnetial for failure must not be the only reason for looking at alternatives. Historically, governments are only one of the means by which citizens express themselves. I’m convinced that Rio+20 must become a major moment for governments as much as for social movements. And this is important not only in order to put pressure on governments, but also to create a space where movements with different proposals about the society we want to build, can come together and start building the alternative, far beyond the limits imposed by the negotiations. In this sense, the People’s Summit, in which unions are also very much involved, has a key role to play.


I think there is an artificial barrier put here between issues related to inequality and issues related to planetary boundaries. These two are closely interconnected, and my answers to the first series (that UN can contribute by establishing principles, initiatives, etc) are still valid here – and actually our proposals aim at addressing these two big challenges together and stop working in silos.


Inequalities within countries, as well as the widening global imbalances between countries, are a major barrier for achieving sustainability. This is the case because of three reasons: the natural resources are depleted for the benefit of a few privileged people globally, who do not hesitate to exploit them, and do not see any reason for supporting sustainable development; the rules designed to maintain this situation (i.e. WTO) contribute to deepening a model that further exacerbates these inequalities; the governing concept should ensure wealth –material and natural – is distributed in a fair manner between and within generations, is sidelined for ensuring the run towards the lowest common denominator in terms of standards for the environment and labour, as the only way forward for development.

A2: Can the Rio outcome contribute to the establishment of a process that eventually will lead to a real change of this imbalance – which means a real implementation of what was to a great extent decided upon already in 1992, in the MDG etc.? If so: What must happen at Rio+20? If not: What must happen in other arenas? What are the alternatives if Rio+20 fails?

The assessment of the contribution that the United Nations system brings to solving ‘real’ problems depends on the value given to the multilateral system and democratic decision making at the international level. In my case, I tend to believe that standards, principles and initiatives agreed at the international level carry much more strength than unilateral approaches. This is why I think Rio+20 can contribute, if not to changing the system, at least to making steps in the right direction. From the labour movement, three of our key proposals are aimed at addressing the issue of inequalities and natural resource scarcity on a pragmatic and ambitious manner:

• a social protection floor for all, (which will secure maternity and children protection, pensions for the elderly and the disabled and unemployment/

ANSWERS BY ANABELLA ROSEMBERG, ITUC, REPRESENTATIVE OF TRADE UNIONS:

pic: CIFOR

RIO+208

For the moment, political will and leadership are the most important.


As far as the negotiations go for the moment, it will be very difficult to reach any strong outcomes. There is still disparity between countries on how to implement the green economy concept, but also still resistance for the green economy concept itself. Furthermore, there is a feeling that the financial crisis, for most countries, is more important than saving the Planet, both for current and future generations. Country interests are dominating discussions on our common future. It is amazing how short-sighted governments can be. It is also a pity that we first have to hit the wall very hard before we wake up and do something. Most of us do not want to wait for a total collapse, but to avoid that we need action now.


One of the arenas we, NGOs, and other stakeholders, need to stress is the legal sector. There are already some laws in place for achieving environmental justice. However, not everyone is aware of this, or is able to make use of them. There are already some campaigns focusing on environmental law, which is hopeful.


First of all, I oppose strongly to the concept of the ‘pillar’ approach, because that gives the false idea that growth is unlimited and that you only have to have the three pillars in balance to obtain sustainable development. Planetary and societal boundaries are not integrated in this approach, and therefore neither is the redistribution (equity). The need for redistribution is not present in this approach because the increasing economic growth is intended to be invested in the social and environmental pillar (trickle down effect), which we all know does simply not happen. New Economic Foundation (nef) published the report ‘Growth isn’t working’, which shows this phenomenon with fact and data. For a $1 poverty reduction, an increase in GDP growth of $166 is needed, which is so huge that you would need more than two planets to achieve it. This strategy is therefore environmentally and economically impossible.

Besides that: in our current economic system, we are facing material and financial flows from South to North, and often from poorer groups to rich people. Accumulation of wealth is still the common practice. Putting an end to this is the only way to have a positive effect on global inequality.

To obtain real results on sustainable development, we also need to tackle the power relations in the world. The people in political and financial power are not always those who have interest in changing current systems. Governments and governance in general is quite weak, compared with the power that multi-national corporations and financial institutions have. In order to achieve fair and just rules in the context of justice and equality, you need strong (national and international) governance.

A2: Can the Rio outcome contribute to the establishment of a process that eventually will lead to a real change of this imbalance – which means a real implementation of what was to a great extent decided upon already in 1992, in the MDG etc.?If so: What must happen at Rio+20? If not: What must happen in other arenas? What are the alternatives if Rio+20 fails?

For real implementation and change we need clear roadmaps for a green economy, with targets and timetables, and/or clear Sustainable Development Goals with a sustainable development strategy behind them (not a business as usual, as is the case for the MDGs), legal frameworks, and agreements that are measurable and accountable.

ANSWERS BY LEIDA RIJNHOUT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ANPED, REPRESENTATIVE OF NGO’S

Major Group interviews on the Rio+20 Process (cont.)

pic: Salim Al-Harthy

RIO+20 9

If not: What must happen in other arenas? What are the alternatives if Rio+20 fails?Indigenous peoples and local communities, transition towns, innovative economic initiatives must continue to strengthen their initiatives in local, sub-national spaces.


Rio+20 must compel all countries to take the strongest possible national action to keep within planetary boundaries. What can be agreed globally is uncertain, and in the end, actions at a national level will be crucial, including the control and regulation of the extraterritorial activity of corporations.


Ecosystem-based approaches to addressing global challenges demand action to be devolved to the lowest relevant levels to address ecosystem problems.


Some countries are acknowledging deep inequality as a systemic problem of sustainable development, while others are denying/ blocking action on this systemic problem.

A2: Can the Rio outcome contribute to the establishment of a process that eventually will lead to a real change of this imbalance – which means a real implementation of what was to a great extent decided upon already in 1992, in the MDG etc.? The 1992 outcomes did not adequately deal with the economic ‘growth’ dimensions of sustainable development, concerning itself more with the linkages between environment and development. This is also not adequately dealt with in the MDGs. The debate on a green economy needs to be opened up to deal with economic diversity, and the reality of ‘green economies’, including diverse local economies. Efforts to build counter-economic power, and support poor economies, are important to break the stranglehold of the industrial economy.

If so: What must happen at Rio+20? A strong commitment to promote and protect diverse local economies must be secured at Rio.

ANSWERS BY JOJI CARINO, REPRESENTATIVE OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES:

Ten themes for the Rio+20 sandwich days (16th-19th June 2012)

Day one (Saturday 16th June)

1. Sustainable development in the fight against poverty

2. Sustainable development as an answer to the economic crises

3. Sustainable development, employment and migration

Day two (Sunday 17th June)Overarching theme: The economics of sustainable development

4. Forest

5. Food

6. Nutrition and food security

Day three (Monday 18th June)

7. Energy for all

8. Water

9. Cities and innovation

Day Four (Tuesday 19th June, morning only)

10. Oceans

Major Group interviews on the Rio+20 Process (cont.)

pic: Salim Al-Harthy

Moving from the ‘future we can achieve’

By choosing the title "the future we

want", the UN has challenged us to

avoid making the mistakes of the past

and to rather think outside of the

box to bring real solutions to the

negotiating table. So far, it seems

that too few have registered this

challenge. With 47 days to go until

Rio+20, we call on young people to drop

the façade of pragmatism and ignore

calls to be more ‘realistic’, for it

is having the guts to keep calling for

more ambitious change that will move

us towards a brighter future. Being

pragmatic means making the best of the

status quo, even if we don’t like it.

But, as we know, the status quo is

precisely what we need to change!

We believe the future we want comes down most crucially to reforming our governance structures. Governance is the way we arrive at decisions in our societies at all levels. It boils down to a few questions: Who is empowered to make decisions? How, and to what extent, can other stakeholders make their voices heard? And how are these players held accountable?

If we have good governance and responsible and transparent decision-making processes, there is a much greater probability that we will arrive at sustainable, representative decisions and policies. This is pertinent to youth, as every policy decision has consequences, and children and future generations that will inherit these consequences. We’ve already reached – and in some cases exceeded - our planet’s carrying capacity, therefore we need to ensure that decisions made today begin to remedy the rampant social, economic and environmental injustices that we are currently responsible for.

The other main theme of Rio+20 addresses the transition to a green and fair economy. Greening our economies could include, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and redirecting public funding to where it is most needed. Even if we succeed in this objective, we would still only be remedying mistakes of the past. We need to go beyond this. The most influential voices are likely to remain the same, and money is likely to flow into the same pockets, unless the correct political institutions are in place to shape our behaviour, and governments and corporations’ notions of right and wrong.

As we prepare for Rio+20, the idea to adopt a new framework of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has gained unparalleled momentum. These SDGs would provide a follow up to the Millennium Development Goals, but broaden the scope of the framework to better integrate the environmental, social and economic dimensions of sustainable development. While this approach can perhaps help governments identify and move towards what they perceive to be realistic objectives in the mid-term, it is very difficult to see how any of these targets resonate with the vision that young people have for the future of their planet. For example, when Member States agree to halve the rate of the loss of natural habitat in the coming decade, this means to consider it acceptable for our children to never be able to admire or benefit from the existence of the species which don’t make that 50% cut. How have we come to the point where we morally justify these choices by our incapacity to create political institutions that can make decisions with a long-term vision? It might be the ‘future we can achieve’ in the current political context, but it for sure isn’t the ‘future we want’.

Unless we truly challenge the way decisions are being made, and ensure that not just the interests of a powerful minority are taken into consideration, we are failing to address the root problems underlying any environmental, social and economic crises. But here’s the good news: all we need to make the necessary reforms is political will.

Rio+20 hopes to renew political commitment for sustainable development, however this won’t happen unless we demand things that inspire! These bold proposals can be put in a palatable package and written in summitry language, but please do not shy away from bold, courageous and visionary principles! A week is a long time in politics. 49 days is an eternity in social-media. We can still make a lot of noise in these crucial last 2 months before Rio+20, putting pressure on political leaders, both in our capitals and around the negotiating tables. The future needs to be something we can look forward to, so let's do it!.

RIO+2010

to the ‘future we want’Sébastien Duyck and Alice Vincent

pic: Ars Electronica

New York youth seek to influence UN Negotiations

As part of the global “MyCity+20” movement, NY+20 brought together more than 100 young men and women to engage with policy experts and UN representatives and to discuss key youth-based issues playing out in the Rio+20 negotiation process. The all-day event included talks from H.E. Dr. Josephine Ojiambo, Kenyan Ambassador to the UN, Mr. John Matuszak from the U.S. State Department, and Mr. Brice Lalonde, Executive Coordinator for Rio+20.

As a result of the full day of discussions, participants developed a NY+20 Youth Statement which was delivered to negotiators and delegates in a side event held last Friday (27th April).

NY+20 draft statement to world leaders:

A Youth Vision for Sustainable Development in the Context of Rio+20We the participants of NY+20, representing a diverse group of youth, came together in New York City on 27 April 2012 as part of the MyCity+20 global youth initiative to assert our shared commitment to a healthy and sustainable world. We seek to draw on our ‘creativity, ideals, and courage’ to engage youth in the UN processes that impact our future. At NY+20 we established four critical areas for action ahead of Rio+20, and we now call for world leaders to implement the following commitments:

International Environmental GovernanceWe envision the creation of a United Nations Environment Organization that will serve as the primary coordinating body for environmental issues at the UN and improve efficiency, transparency and equitable participation of all stakeholders.

• Accountable Sovereignty: Establish national sustainability commitments in a public registry, but also convene a global independent body with input from civil society, to make a second set of commitment recommendations;

• Inclusive Representation: Advance youth representation in international governance through furthering awareness of opportunities for youth participation in the UN, such as youth delegates on official delegations;

• Responsible Finance: Strengthen the stringency of environmental and social impact assessment in project financing by working with financial institutions.

Green JobsWe envision a more holistic integration of sustainability into all professions and education systems to enable a transformation to the green economy.

• Equitable Growth: Adopt public policies that create enabling environments for the private sector to create accessible, decent and meaningful green jobs;

• Peaceful Livelihoods: Leverage green jobs as a strategy to demilitarise nations by providing alternative options and livelihoods for youth;

• Sustainable Development Education: Incorporate sustainable development into education and training, and improve access for marginalised youth.

Ombudsperson for Future GenerationsWe envision accountable guardians for future generations, at all levels of governance, which have a comprehensive mandate to engage and enlighten the present citizenry about the needs and rights of future generations.

• Recognize Authority: Re-incorporate the Ombudsperson or High Commissioner for Future Generations language in to the negotiating text;

• Transparent & Democratic: Establish such a position with a system of checks and balances, potentially through a Council for Future Generations;

• Paradigm Shift: Foster a culture of long-term thinking in the practices and institutional structures of non-state organizations and civil society.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)We envision a set of Sustainable Development Goals that promote and protect the economic, environmental, and social well-being of present and future generations.

• Assessment of Happiness: Measure well-being through inclusion of happiness metrics, as proposed by the Gross National Happiness Index;

• Well-being Metrics: Take steps toward establishing universal goals and indicators to measure overall well-being, as complementary to GDP, and to build upon the progress of the MDGs;

• Continue Dialogue: Implore leaders to launch a framework for the establishment of SDGs at Rio+20 that are responsive to the needs of youth.

Youth Commitment We, the inheritors of this world, see Rio+20 not as an outcome but as the beginning of a long-term process and movement for the future we want. We commit to being ombudspersons in our own lives by educating our communities on how to impact international dialogue on sustainable development. We pledge to work in partnership with youth around the world to advocate for policies and programs that ensure the future we need.

RIO+2011

MORE INFONY+20 is a coalition of students groups and nonprofit organizations including Columbia University’s Coalition for Sustainable Development, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, EOTO World, Human Impacts Institute, SustainUS, Global Kids, Road to Rio, Peace Child, Rio+20 Global Youth Music Contest, and IISD Reporting Service. www.newyorkplus20.wordpress.com; [email protected]; www.mycityplus20.blogspot.com

NY+20 Launches a Global Campaign on Sustainable Development

pic: Ars Electronica

RIO+2012

A sense of possibility – delegates’ minds turn to post Rio delivery in New York Sue Riddlestone

Chief Executive & co-founder, BioRegional

The likely tangible outcomes and post Rio+20 activities are

starting to emerge from the jumble of square brackets and

haze of wordsmithing here in New York. As we reach the final days of the negotiations, you can see

delegates’ minds starting to turn to implementation of the

anticipated agreements, with the obvious main outcome expected to

be the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Governments and civil society gathered at the Beekman Hotel in New York on Monday for a working session, organised by BioRegional, to think about the SDGs in the context of national implementation. Paula Caballero Gomez from the Government of Colombia, a leading player on the SDGs, pointed out that the SDGs would integrate the three pillars of sustainability and people’s needs. Ms Caballero emphasised that the SDGs are an open proposal and that there is no single implementation approach. But universal goals can be a common reference that we can all draw on, and a unique tool to assist governments with intra-ministerial planning. She also envisages that there will be vertical linkages from the national to local level, and a need for cross-sectoral thinking and planning.

Then we got the flip charts and post it notes out and used the ten one planet living principles as a proxy for the SDGs, to get delegates thinking about how they would be implemented at the national level. A consensus emerged amongst delegates that listing the SDG’s in a simple framework such as this could offer a strong way to communicate the SDGs – something essential for the engagement of wider society and their implementation. Echoing Ms Caballero’s points on the need for the framework to focus on implementation, we could really see the cross cutting nature of the potential Goals, such as those on energy, water and food. Increasing the coherence of policies addressing these issues remains complex but is long overdue. If got right, the SDGs could create a coordinating framework that may enable a more holistic approach to the delivery of sustainable development than we had seen before. Our limited time meant we were only able to scratch the surface, however it did get everyone thinking.

But how are we going to measure impacts? The term natural capital has its critics, with some governments pointing out that we cannot capture the real value of nature in prices. There was therefore a packed audience for our second side event on Tuesday, which explored taking natural capital into account. Guri Sandborg, from the government of Norway, highlighted that many resources are currently invisible in our economy and we need to better manage our natural resource base. The meeting’s chair, Farooq Ullah of Stakeholder Forum, emphasised that you can’t manage what you don’t measure. Glenn-Marie Lange of the World Bank, and Alessandra Alfieri of UN Statistics Division, presented the WAVES programme and the System of Environmental-Economic Accounts (SEEA). SEEA was called for in Agenda 21. Twenty years of thinking have gone in to developing this system and it shows. Ms Alfieri’s presentation clearly displayed how such data could directly inform policy in numerous ways. Everyone could suddenly see just how useful the SEEA will be. WAVES is a five year programme of the World Bank with a critical mass of countries and UN agencies who will be piloting the approach. It will bring an internationally agreed methodology and build capacity so that the approach can be widely adopted. Business and civil society are also taking natural capital into account using the ecological footprint as part of the One Planet Living initiative. We are using it to set goals, inform business decisions, and also measure progress. In addition, national ecological footprint accounts are produced annually by Global Footprint Network.

As a delegate from Latin America aptly put it “we like the SDGs because they can be defined, policy relevant, evidence based and rigorous. This panel showed us how we could somehow measure sustainable development. It gives us a sense of possibility”.

MORE INFOBioRegional and One Planet Living www.bioregional.com/oneplanetliivng [email protected] Footprint Network for national ecological footprint www.footprintnetwork.orgSystem of Environmental Economic Accounts (SEEA) [email protected] www.web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/ENVIRONMENT/0,,contentMDK:23056708~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:244381,00.html

pic: UN Photo

Date Time Room Title Organisers

04 M

ay 20

12 1:15-2:45 3 Creating a sustainable economy: top down and bottom up Institute for Plenary Synthesis and Commons Action for the UN

1:15-2:45 7 UN-Water Report on Water Resources Management for Rio+20 Summit UN WATER, UNEP

Rio+20 Side Event Calendar

On 19 June, just ahead of the Rio+20 Conference itself, the State of Rio de Janeiro and the Network of Regional Governments for Sustainable Development (nrg4SD) are convening the World Summit of Federated States and Regions in co-organisation with The Climate Group and Regions United - FOGAR.The World Summit will bring together subnational governments from all around the Globe committed to sustainable development, demonstrating how they are making sustainable development happen on the ground in close partnership with all other levels of government and the private sector.

RIO+2013

What happens on Monday? From Talk to Walk

World Summit of Federated States and Regions

Riding on the wave of momentum generated from Conferences and Summits is something that we all aim for – to go home and set in motion all the plans that will support the outcomes and achieve the commitments made, and to set to task to create the future that they want. History shows us, however, that despite all best intentions, when one thousand flowers bloom, they do not always all survive. There are myriad reasons for why this is so, and we know many of them: related to funding and financing; capacity over time; shifting conditions (political, social, geological, etc); developments of technologies – just to name a few.

To understand those factors that have limited success and which might hamper future efforts, we must learn from the past and look at new ways of collaborating and working to achieve the outcomes and commitments made this June. If Rio+20 is to be the 'implementation conference' that it is being dubbed, sincere and serious efforts must be focused on how implementation can and will be achieved.

During the preparatory processes and the final days of Rio+20 itself, the longer-term focus on the bigger picture might be compromised as deadlines focus the minds to concentrate on the minutiae of the text and the narrow picture of brackets and commas. There will be a need to create the space to look at 'life after Rio'; to focus on implementation and the actual work that will be done to ensure the legacy of Rio+20 is a true and lasting success.

To this end, Stakeholder Forum will convene the 'What happens on Monday?' conference on the final day of the

Summit, 22 June. We will bring together a diverse range of governmental and non-governmental stakeholders alike to engage in networking, information sharing and funding planning, in order to build capacity and expertise on how to develop a post-Rio+20 work plan of implementation. Learning from examples of successful implementation strategies and sharing plans for future efforts will be a focus of the conference; as will connecting those stakeholders who will be doing the implementation work with funders that are looking to support such initiatives.

Projects and initiatives that are underway and which have already achieved success will be invited to present to participants on the following key areas:

• cities

• oceans

• green jobs and skills

• freshwater

• energy

MORE INFOIf you would like to find out more about What happens on Monday? Or would like to submit your project to be considered to be featured as part of the conference, please contact [email protected]. Also follow www.earthsummit2012.org for updates and developments as we draw nearer to Rio+20.

MORE INFO www.nrg4sd.org

Kirsty SchneebergerSenior Project Officer, Stakeholder Forum

Co-organised by the State of Rio de Janeiro, nrg4SD, The Climate Group and Regions-United/FOGAR

The World Summit will launch a declaration of commitments from subnational governments for the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication, under which signatories will commit to specific targets and initiatives within the economic, environmental and social dimensions of sustainable development.

The World Summit and the declaration are open to any Federated States, Regions, Provinces and other subnational governments committed to sustainable development in their respective territories.

Tuesday 19 June | Athletes’ Park | State of Rio de Janeiro

pic: UN Photo

Outreach is made possible by the support of

Jan-Gustav Strandenaes Stakeholder Forum

Reflections on the negotiations - Thursday, 3rd May

An IFSD proposal recharges the negotiationsThe corridors leading to conference room 1 were alive with discussions and delegates intently reading a two page document. They were accentuating their arguments with body language, displaying strength, showing defensive positions, reading, studying, questioning, and looking behind the words for a subtle meaning. The veil of apparent lethargy had lifted from the negotiations and been substituted with delegate passion: the long awaited proposal on IFSD from G77 had finally revealed itself.

What did it say? Did it kill the idea of a Council? Were its proposals enough to overburden ECOSOC and render it an inefficient body? Or did the idea propel ECOSOC into its rightful position?

The first paragraphs reaffirm the importance position and function of ECOSOC. Traditional UN start - so nothing new. Then the magic words – ‘we decide.’ But what?

Many questions and few answers “A high level intergovernmental forum, building on existing structures of relevant UN bodies including CSD” read a delegate.

“Building on”, said another delegate, “that is the same as killing CSD without replacing it with anything”. “A forum in UN speak is a substitute for a talk-shop”, claimed another. “But look” said a third, “it will follow implementation on decisions by all major relevant summits, it is universal, and ensures system wide participation. Universal membership places it outside ECOSOC and in direct relationship with the GA with an action oriented agenda. That must count for something!”

Had G77 managed to unite all good proposals from all corners of the IFSD debate with this proposal? It certainly seemed to cater to all concerns. But this wasn’t a decision with a final result. This is a decision to open a process, and for a discussion to continue at the GA. “Same old, same old. It ‘s back to the GA committees” – a seasoned veteran delegate quibbled to the inexperienced underlings. “Hey – we may be inexperienced, but certainly not without commitment and engagement”, retorted an ‘inexperienced underling’.

And where is UNEP?Another group had immersed itself in the UNEP proposal. Universal membership, strengthening the financial base, no mandate change, respect for the integrity of the MEAs, giving UNEP a direct role to deliver on the environmental pillar of sustainable development, strengthen the science base – and election of the ED by all member states. “Does it have everything except calling it formally a specialized agency?” A delegate was reading loud and musing to himself. Shhh, don’t mention that word, cautioned a colleague. Use that word and all hell breaks loose. A bespectacled delegate with a surprised mien kept asking delegates – “it says legitimate scientific assessment – can anyone tell me what ‘legitimate science’ is”? No answer was offered.

Can this be developed further?Had G77 gone as far as it could in meeting different opinions? This was not a council. It was no derisive proposal concerning IFSD. But it left a number of areas subject to discussions and speculation. Where in this equation is civil society? Council-skeptic delegates had been asking the pro-council people if a council would guarantee high level and serious participation and decision-making. Now they asked the same of this. Many had hoped for a strong proposal integrating the financial dimension into sustainable development. Others had hoped to see at least fragments of the social equity and rights based discussion reflected in the proposal. But maybe these issues would be covered in the ensuing discussion, the one that would continue to Rio+20 and beyond? But if this process was to be kept alive and brought to a decision at the GA level, how could civil society and the major groups be brought into the discussion? Every politician and every delegate and every body of the UN know that no decisions of the intergovernmental system will be carried out in reality unless ‘we, the peoples’ are involved. The resolution gave no answer.

“I like this” said a charged delegate, heading for the mission, “I may not agree with all, but now we have something to work with.” Well, let’s see where this will end.

Technology

Outreach Magazine: May UN Meetings Day 10