Rio 20+: Sustainable Development?

1. Rio 20+: Sustainable Development? Dr Amanda Smith Senior Lecturer in International Studies Nottingham Trent University amanda.smith02@ntu.ac.uk

2. Overview of talk • The Road to Rio 2012 • Sustainability & Modern Environmentalism • Key Global Conferences, Reports and Agreements • 1972 Stockholm • 1987 Brundtland Report • 1992 Rio • COP3 Kyoto 1997 • COP15 Copenhagen 2009 • COP16 Cancun 2010 • Johannesburg 2002 • Rio 2012 • Green Economy? • Sustainable Development? • The Future We Want?

3. The Enigma of Sustainability • Popular • Multi-faceted • Multi-dimensional • Highly Contested • Chastised • Prey to differing interpretations

4. Brundtland Commission’s Definition from ‘Our Common Future’ “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (WCED, 1987:8)

5. This definition encompasses two key concepts • the concept of ‘needs’, in particular the essential needs of the world’s poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and • the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organisation on the environment’s ability to meet present and future needs. (op cit:43)

6. Popularity of Brundtland Definition despite it being chastised • Difficult not to be in favour of sustainable development, as it seems to hold out the hope of ‘development’ with at least no further environmental degradation and an improved quality of life. • It offers to bridge the gap between economic growth and environmental preservation, without significant changes to the capitalist market system (Escobar,1996).

7. Sustainability and Sustainable Development- clarifying the semantics? • The terms ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’ are frequently used interchangeably and rarely clarified. • Many take the term ‘sustainability’ to be synonymous with ‘sustainable development’ (Reid, 1995).

8. Sustainable’, as an adjective in the English language, means enduring or lasting at a certain rate or indefinitely. • Thus the term ‘sustainable’ can be used as a prefix or suffix to a variety of actions, which should caution us to question; “What is to be sustained? For whom? How long?” (Lélé, 1991:615)

9. Does the word ‘development’ matter more? • Some authors (Pearce et al 1989) feel that sustainable development simply means: • Development that lasts • Therefore it is the word ‘development’ that needs clarification: • development is essentially economic development, which they claim can be narrowly defined as real GNP, or more broadly to include other indicators such as education, health and ‘quality of life’ (Pearce et al, 1993) This relates to my talk in Nov about well-being

10. Sustainability does not = sustainable + development • As a concept sustainability is far more complex than sustainable development • It addresses additional ethical features, such as the appropriate management of nature, reflecting the more traditional concerns of environmentalism • Sustainability’ in its strongest sense can be a highly biocentric and ethical endeavour

11. Environmentalism and Sustainability “four stopping points in what is really a continuum of environmental concern.” (O’Riordan, 1981:375) 25

12. The ecocentric mode • Characterised by attitudes of reverence, humility, respect and care for nature. • Codes of behaviour are based upon ecological principles. • This is a mode of thought best understood through its roots in 19th century romanticism and its enrichment with the ideas of individuals such as Malthus and Darwin • Its geographical roots are not as distinctly ‘Northern’ as those of technocentricism

13. Ecocentrics believe: • 1 Lack of faith in modern large-scale technology and its associated demands on elitist expertise, central state authority, and inherently antidemocratic institutions • 2 Implication that materialism for its own sake is wrong, and that economic growth can be geared to providing for the basic needs for those below subsistence levels

14. Deep Environmentalists • Intrinsic importance of nature for the humanity of man • Ecological (and other natural) laws dictate human morality • Biorights- the right of endangered species or unique landscapes to remain unmolested

15. Soft Technologists • Emphasis on smallness of scale and hence community identity in settlement work, and leisure • Integration of concepts of work and leisure through a process of personal and communal improvement • Importance of participation in community affairs, and of guarantees of minority interests. Participation seen both as a continuing education and political function.

16. Ecocentrism and Romanticism “Nature they [transcendentalists of mid 19th century America] claimed, enjoyed its own morality which, when understood, could lead the sympathetic and responsive human being to a new spiritual awareness of his own potential, his obligations to others, and his responsibilities to the life-supporting processes of his natural surroundings.” (O’Riordan 1981:3)

17. Ecocentrism and Malthus • Notion of (natural) limits • Essay on the Principle of Population 1798 • population growth would eventually reach the limits of food production, and unless checked, lead to famine, poverty, disease, and war • He was sceptical of the abilities of agricultural production to be increased indefinitely, which reflected a contrast to the optimism in the agricultural revolution of the time

18. The technocentric mode • the dominant mode of thought towards nature and environmental problems in modern Western society • Characterised by the need to approach and manage environmental problems in a scientific, objective and rational manner; where, • nature is seen as separate from humans; • knowable via scientific investigation; and • ultimately manageable.

19. Anthropocentrism “though all societies live from nature, the industrial technologies of modern societies allow them to exploit natural resources much more efficiently and systematically, thus speeding up the degradation of nature. In the quest for economic and material development, the problem of nature has been all but lost sight of. Nature is seen simply as the backdrop fro human activity, presenting no limits to what can be achieved, given human ingenuity and technological advances” (Sutton, 2004:77)

20. Roots of Anthropocentrism: The Bible? • Can the historical roots of our ecological ‘crisis’ be located in the despotic Judaeo-Christian world-view, which interpreted Genesis as regarding nature as existing solely to serve mankind and therefore ripe for exploitation? (White 1962) • Or can we see in the Bible traditions associated with stewardship, conservation and concern for ‘non-humans’? (Carter, 2007) • Indeed, this Judaeo-Christian thesis cannot explain why non-Christian societies have ‘exploited’ nature

21. Roots of Anthropocentrism: The Enlightenment? • The dominance of anthropocentrism in Western culture is often blamed on the Enlightenment ideas and the scientific revolution of the sixteenth/seventeenth centuries. • Francis Bacon • Renee Descarte • Reductionism and Cartisian Dualism

22. Anthropocentrism and Classical Science • Descartes suggested that nature could be known through reductionist analysis: • By breaking nature down into component parts, ultimately, everything can be reduced to the same, measurable, basic qualities and quantities • Descartes also suggested that a Cartesian Dualism exists whereby: • humans and nature are dualistic, in that nature is made up of primary qualities, an object, reducible to atoms with unthinking, mechanistic behaviour. As opposed to humans, who having a soul, are self-reflective and capable of rational thought; thus they are able to observe the subject of nature. • Later Francis Bacon affirmed that scientific knowledge equated to power over nature

23. Accommodators 1 Belief that economic growth and resource exploitation can continue assuming, a) suitable economic adjustments to taxes, fees etc.;  b) improvements in the legal rights to a minimum level of environmental quality;   c) compensation arrangements satisfactory to those who experience adverse environmental and/ or social effects 2 Acceptance of new project-appraisal techniques and decision review arrangements to allow for wider discussion or genuine search for consensus among representative groups of interested parties 3 Provision of effective environmental management agencies at national and local levels

24. Cornucopians 1 Belief that man can always find a way out of any difficulties, either politically, scientifically, or technologically  2 Acceptance that pro-growth goals define the rationality of project appraisal and of policy formulation  3 Optimistic about the ability of man to improve the lot of the world’s people  4 Faith that scientific and technological expertise provides the basic foundation for advice on matters pertaining to economic growth, public health, and safety  5 Suspicious of attempts to widen the basis for participation and lengthy discussion in project appraisal and policy review  6 Belief that any impediments can be overcome given a will, ingenuity, and sufficient resources arising out of wealth

25. Summarising • Both modes of thought have influenced and shaped modern environmentalism and policy making/politics • Ecocentrism - natural morality, the concept of limits, questions of equity, the need for democracy, and participation, alongside self-reliance and self-sufficiency • Technocentrism - optimistic outlook, technology has the power to overcome all problems, and political decisions can be value free if they draw upon scientific knowledge for justification

27. Evolution of Environmental ‘Issues’ • 1st generation: preservation and conservation (pre-1960s) • Protection of wildlife and habitats, soil erosion, local pollution • 2nd generation: ‘modern environmentalism’ (from 1960s) • Population growth, technology, desertification, pesticides. Resource depletion, pollution abatement • 3rd generation: global issues (late 1970s onwards) • Acid rain, ozone depletion, rainforest destruction, climate change, loss of biodiversity, GMOs Source: Carter (2007:5)

28. The Global Problématique Club of Rome in early 1970s coined the term to bring attention to: • impact of human activities upon the earth • the increasing polarisation and inequity between rich and poor • concern over the rate of population growth, especially in light of the previous issues

29. Responses to the Global Problèmatique • Environment • Development

30. 1960s Economic Growth 1970s Development & Poverty 1980s Environment & Development 1990s Sustainable Development Dominant sustainability ideologies from the 1960s to 1990s (based on Elliott, 1994)

31. Global Problèmatique: The Key Responses   1972 United Conference on the Human Environment - Stockholm   1974 UNEP-UNCTAD : Pattern of Resource Use, Environment and Development Conference at Cocoyoc   1980 World Conservation Strategy - IUCN 1984 UN appoint WCED - Brundtland Commission 1987 Brundtland Commission Report published 1992 Rio ‘Earth Summit’ United Nations Conference on Environment & Development Further: Kyoto 1997, Johannesburg 2002, Copenhagen 2009 etc.

32. Stockholm 1972 • Stockholm conference seen as a ‘milestone’, as the first ‘global’ response to the environmental problems. • The Stockholm conference was attended by 113 nations and 500 NGOs and published two documents: • ‘The Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment’ with its ‘Declaration of Human Rights’ and the ‘Action Plan for the Human Environment’. • Also the book ‘Only One Earth’ (Ward & Dubos, 1972) was written for the conference, the ethos of which reflected the emerging ideology of a finite global ecosystem. • The Conference established the UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) and subsequently it was the UNEP- UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) symposium that issued the Cocoyoc Declaration in 1974.

33. Cocoyoc Declaration 1974 • The UNEP-UNCTAD symposium on the “Pattern of Resource Use, Environment and Development” was held in Cocoyoc, Mexico in 1974 • The Cocoyoc Declaration provided a strong critique of development, advocating development of human beings rather than ‘things’; the pursuit of self-reliance; and the avoidance of development which had adverse impacts upon local and traditional economies and cultures • Followed by the 1975 report “What Now? Another Development”, by the Dag Hammarskjöld Institute in Uppsala, Sweden • Both based on the concept of Eco-development (equitable distribution rather than ‘no growth’)

34. Brundtland • Shortly after publishing its second report (Common Crisis) the UN disbanded the Brandt Commission and appointed the Brundtland Commission in 1983 with the following mandate; “to re-examine the critical environment and development issues and to formulate realistic proposals for dealing with them.” (WCED, 1987:3) • Published “Our Common Future” in 1987, and this contained that ubiquitous and ambiguous ‘definition of sustainable development: “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (WCED, 1987:8)

35. The WCED (Brundtland) suggested a number of critical objectives for environment and development policies that followed from its conception of sustainable development ·reviving growth; ·changing the quality of growth; ·meeting essential needs for jobs, food, energy, water, and sanitation; ·ensuring a sustainable level of population; ·conserving and enhancing the resource base; ·reorienting technology and managing risk; and ·merging environment and economics in decision making. (WCED, 1987:49)

36. The WCED, itself, was quick to establish that the report is; “not a prediction of ever increasing environmental decay, poverty, and hardship in an ever more polluted world among ever decreasing resources. We see instead the possibility for a new era of economic growth….based on policies that sustain and expand the environmental resource base.” (WCED, 1987:1, emphasis added)

37. Brundtland’s Faith in Multilateral co-operation “The Commission feels confident that the mutual interests involved in environment and development issues can generate the needed momentum and can secure the necessary international economic changes that will make it possible” (WCED, 1987:64)

38. Sustainable development, for the WCED, was based upon the need to maintain and revitalise the world economy • The WCED recognised that growth might apply environmental pressures but nonetheless felt that world growth should speed up. • It was agreed that such environmental constraints could be respected, and indeed mitigated against • Adams (1990)suggests that this is rooted in a Cornucopian (technocentric) ideology, and reflects the 1960s optimism in economic development as a cure for all ills. • It is tempered by some ecocentric ideals, such as basic needs and the equity debate, but essentially rooted in a ‘business as usual’ global politics or a “comfortable Keynesian reformism”

39. Key Global Conferences and Agreements

40. The Rio ‘Earth Summit’ 1992 • The Summit brought environmental issues to centre stage in world diplomacy. • It was the result of a two year process, supported by an UNCED secretariat. • The specific aims of the process were to produce: • an Earth Charter- 20 years on from the Stockholm Declaration; an Agenda 21- a programme of action to implement the principles of such an Earth Charter by the year 2000; • an agreement upon financial resources for actioning Agenda 21; and • to conclude negotiations already underway on climate change, biodiversity and forests (Finger, 1993).

41. Who was at Rio? • Key • 117 heads of state and representatives of 178 nations • http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2164240.stm • Marginalised? • The Global Forum- 30 miles away • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vfR_0iYf28

42. The outcomes of Rio • Rio Declaration on Environment and Development • Agenda 21 • Convention on Biological Diversity • Statement of Principles on Forests • Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

43. Conferences of the Parties (COP) Since the UNFCCC entered into force in 1994, the parties have been meeting annually in Conferences of the Parties (COP) to assess progress in dealing with climate change, and beginning in the mid-1990s, to negotiate the Kyoto Protocol (at COP-3 in 1997) to establish legally binding obligations for developed countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.

44. Securing the Climate – UNFCCC Approach • The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change came into force in 1994 (after Rio 92) and led to COP process e.g. COP 15 Copenhagen: Article 2: • The ultimate objective of this Convention and any related legal instruments that the Conference of the Parties may adopt is to achieve, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. • Such a level should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.

45. Kyoto-COP3 • This agreement committed developed countries to reducing their collective emissions of 6 key greenhouse gases by at least 5% below 1990 levels throughout 2008-12. • Individual Targets: • 8% The EU • 7% USA • 6% Canada, Hungary, Japan, Poland • 0% Russia, New Zealand, Ukraine

46. Kyoto Protocol • Agreed in Dec 1997 • Entered into force in Feb 2005 • 176 countries have ratified

47. Kyoto Protocol • The Protocol also agreed three new flexibility mechanisms to reduce the costs of reducing emissions: • An international emissions trading regime allowing industrialised countries to buy and sell emissions credits amongst themselves • A Joint Implementation procedure enabling industrialised countries to implement projects that reduce emissions or remove carbon in another Annex 1 country in exchange for emission reduction credits • A ‘clean development mechanism’ permitted developed countries to finance emissions-reduction projects in developing countries to receive credit for doing so

48. COP15 Copenhagen • December 2009 • An attempt to agree ambitious targets to move Kyoto onwards and come into force in 2013 • What came out? Copenhagen Accord • This Accord, brokered by the US in a backroom agreement between Brazil, China, India and South Africa came about in the final hours of the 2-week conference. But not without controversy because, • Some delegates out of the 187 countries excluded from this backroom meeting were visibly upset at not being involved • Some therefore decided not to support it, and • In the end, the accord had no legal standing under the UN convention on climate change — participating countries merely noted its existence and expressed support or not.

49. A fundamental obstacle throughout negotiations lay in the question of how much the western world, which has polluted its way to prosperity, should consider itself in "carbon debt" to countries that have yet to realise their industrial potential. • Rich nations acknowledged that debt in theory, but wanted assurance that big polluters in the developing world would ultimately share the carbon-cutting burden. • That stance was denounced by poorer countries as an attempt by the west to wriggle out of obligations, with the added inference that the habits of imperialism were to blame. • That is an emotive argument, but not always a helpful or an accurate one. The status of a "developing nation" does not accommodate the enormous and growing power of China and India. They represent a new kind of strategic entity – bearing the economic and military might of superpowers, but with huge populations living in pre-modern conditions of poverty. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/dec/20/leader-copenhagen-accord

50. Copenhagen Accord • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fv2RgEOGGJU • the deal includes the first formal financial commitment by richer nations to help poorer ones adapt to the threat of climate change. It establishes a fund with an initial annual outlay of $30bn, rising to $100bn by 2020.