Insights Rio + 20: Another World Summit?

Miquel Muñoz and Adil Najam A bout the authors The year 2012 will mark the 20th especially important not only because Dr. Miquel Muñoz, a Post-Doctoral anniversary of the landmark 1992 the Rio was, in fact, Fellow at the Frederick S. Pardee Rio Earth Summit — officially called a particularly important event Center for the Study of the the United Nations Conference on but also because Rio itself Longer-Range Future, Environment and Development marked the 20th anniversary specializes in climate change, (UNCED). It is more than likely that the of an equally significant and sustainable development. He has participated as an observer in nearly 50 international environmental negotiations meetings.

Prof. Adil Najam is the Frederick S. Pardee Professor of Global Public Policy at Boston University and Director of the Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future. He works on issues international community will choose to milestone: the 1972 United of international diplomacy, commemorate the anniversary in some Nations Conference on sustainable development, and human well-being, with a fashion, possibly by holding a follow-up the Human Environment focus on developing countries. world summit. Is this a good idea? And (UNCHE) held at Stockholm if so, what might such a summit focus and credited with launching the on to make it a worthwhile exercise? global (GEG) system, including the establishment Sustainable Development Insights is a Of course, there is nothing magical of the United Nations Environment series of short policy essays supporting the Sustainable Development about 20th anniversaries except that Programme (UNEP). — like any anniversary — they provide Knowledge Partnership (SDKP) and a convenient opportunity to revisit, However, other ‘anniversary’ edited by Boston University’s Frederick re-energize and reflect upon issues in a conferences have been far less S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future. The series seeks way that brings new attention and focus memorable or meaningful. Few to promote a broad interdisciplinary to them. The opportunity provided remember, for example, that there dialogue on how to accelerate by this particular anniversary may be was a ‘Stockholm+5’ as well as a sustainable development at all levels. www.un.org/esa/dsd http://tinyurl.com/susdevkp www.bu.edu/pardee 002 November 2009 Bretton Woods This is a non-comprehensive timeline of key events of global impact. Conference International World Bank Whaling Commission IUCN

1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954

United Nations GATT

International Monetary Fund

Sustainable Development timeline

Rio + 20: Another World + 20: Rio Summit? ‘Stockholm+10’ conference just influential report Our Common enthusiasm — and real resources — as there was a ‘Rio+5’ as well as a Future, which was greatly influential into 2012, it may be worthwhile to ‘Rio+10’ meeting. None of these in putting the term ‘sustainable look to the past for some cues about ever took on the hallowed status of development’ into the policy lexicon. how to move ahead. the Stockholm and Rio meetings, More than that, the world has The landmark summits, Rio and Stockholm, were precisely that — “Simply having a global meet-up, even if it is at a summit level,  landmarks. What is it that made is not enough, especially with today’s glut of global summitry.” these meetings memorable, even when others organized with similar aplomb became forgotten as well as forgettable? even though Rio+10 — officially changed significantly in the last called the World Summit on 20 years. We have new knowledge Both were special because the timing Sustainable Development (WSSD) about the intensity of the challenges was right. But they were also special and held in Johannesburg — did gain we face. We have new insight about because they came to embody a grand comparatively more public attention the policy measures that do, and purpose that coincided with a glaring and was planned and executed at do not, work. We have an array of need of the time and they resonated the same scale of global summitry new global agreements, institutions with a shared global sense of what as the Rio Earth Summit. Simply and policy instruments. We have far needed to be done. Importantly, having a global meet-up, even if it greater public interest in sustainable both were able to articulate the is at a summit level, is not enough, development issues. We even have promise, or at least the potential, especially with today’s glut of global more resources committed to action of grand global change. When there summitry. for a more sustainable world. But is a grand purpose, people might above all, we also have a realization disagree on the answer, but not on There are very good reasons for that the challenges that face us as the question. Stockholm marked the world to use 2012 to take 2012 approaches are even bigger than the conversion of emerging sporadic stock of where we stand on global the challenges we thought we were national environmental movements environment and development and confronting in either 1972 or 1992. into a global enterprise. There was to chart a course for future action, a purpose, there was a need, and just as we did at Stockholm and For all these reasons and more, 2012 Stockholm delivered the institutions. Rio before this. To add one more could be a good opportunity for the Similarly, Rio saw the emergence anniversary to the mix, 2012 will also world to take stock of where we have of sustainable development, born mark the 25th anniversary of the come from, what we have achieved, from the alliance between the World Commission for Environment and where we should be headed. environmental and the development and Development’s (WCED’s) But before we invest too much

2 sustainable development insights | 002 | november 2009 The year refers to entry into force for treaties/conventions, year of publication for publications, and year of creation for institutions.

Silent Spring

1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965

Antarctic Treaty UN Development WWF Programme

• Conference • Treaty • Publication • Institution • Event

communities. There was a purpose, forum to talk is not enough either, options, each a degree of aspiration there was a need, and Rio began particularly given the proliferation of higher than the previous, that could crafting the principles and rules. alternative meetings and venues for become, either singularly or in dialogue. Too many past meetings, combination, the raison d’être of such Without Stockholm and Rio, the lacking a grand purpose, were either a grand event. These options include environmental movement and considered not as successful or faded an upgraded global environmental the structure of the GEG system into oblivion. governance system, a new deal would not be what they are now. By contrast, in Johannesburg there was no clear need or grand purpose for the summit, no necessary new thing to be debated or created. As a result, nothing transcendental was delivered in 2002.

When considering the possibility of a Sustainable World Summit in 2012, we must begin by asking ourselves: what is the grand purpose that this summit could fulfill? What is the Looking ahead to 2012 one thing is grand promise that will excite the for sustainable development, and clear: if there is no grand purpose, world enough to invest their energies a reconsideration of the values we should not waste time, effort and and aspirations in this enterprise? we associate with sustainable money on a world summit. The 2012 summit cannot be simply development. There could be other purposes, but to us, any of these “Looking ahead to 2012 one thing is clear: if there is no grand three could become the basis of crafting a worthwhile grand purpose. purpose, we should not waste time, effort and money on a

world summit.” #1. GEG 2.0 The global environmental governance another ‘review’ exercise. While If, indeed, the world decides to hold (GEG) system, born at Stockholm midcourse correction is a fine and another summit in 2012, we should in 1972 with the creation of UNEP, desirable idea, it is insufficient, put some serious thought into what and given greater impetus by the by itself, as the main purpose of the grand purpose of that event institutions created at or around a summit. Likewise, providing a would be. We offer three possible the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, has

sustainable development insights | 002 | november 2009 3 Stockholm Conference on Human Environment

Limits to Growth UN Environment Program First Earth Day, US ENDA, Senegal

1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976

Greenpeace, Canada First Oil Crisis CITES

IIED, United Kingdom RAMSAR Convention

Sustainable Development Global Governance timeline

Rio + 20: Another World + 20: Rio Summit? come a long way. The key operative piecemeal over three decades has also may not be possible unless it question that propelled the GEG turned out to be incoherent and comes out of a high-profile, focused, system during much of its early days fragmented. There is an acute process of global consultation — was: ‘is an agreement possible?’ recognition, including among the exactly the type of consultation that Since then, a formidable negotiation custodians of the system, that a 2012 summit might provide. machine has been built. We now something is wrong. But various The specific details of what such a have ongoing negotiations, treaties, attempts — ranging from within the reformed GEG system would entail conventions, protocols and other UN headquarters, from national are beyond the scope of this paper; instruments on most environmental governments, and from international after all, that would be the purpose issues. Without doubt, the world is organizations — have failed to of the summit discussions. However, better off than it would have been ‘mend’ a system that clearly needs that discussion could be anchored in without such a system. reform. Reform attempts have either a vision of an upgraded GEG system tried to apply band-aids to hold — what we call GEG 2.0 — based on But the GEG system, in its current the fragmented system from total the following principles: version, is facing serious challenges. disintegration, or have bordered on The most important of these are: (a) the need to integrate development priorities into the system (addressed “The ultimate test of the system is not whether countries are in the next section); and (b) the complying with the provisions they agreed to, but whether the realization that the enormity and interconnectedness of the system is leading to an actual improvement in the state of the  problems we face have outgrown world we live in.” the institutions we set up to deal with them. While things may well be radical surgery that would require First, GEG 2.0 must be a performance- better than they would have been throwing out much that does work, based system, as opposed to the without the institutions we created, inviting the political and bureaucratic existing GEG 1.0 system which in absolute terms most indicators wrath of deeply vested institutional remains compliance-based. This implies of sustainable development, and and national interests. a shift from ‘reaching agreement’ to certainly of environment, are actually ‘implementation.’ The ultimate test worsening. So now, a few decades It is clear that reform is needed. of the system is not whether countries later, the operative question is: ‘are But it is also clear that reform are complying with the provisions the agreements working?’ must be holistic (i.e., system-wide), they agreed to, but whether the realistic, and politically acceptable to system is leading to an actual It is not a surprise that a GEG system multiple stakeholders. Such reform improvement in the state of the that had been pulled together is necessary, but will not be easy. It

4 sustainable development insights | 002 | november 2009 IPCC World Conservation Strategy Chernobyl Nuclear Ozone Vienna ENMOD Convention CSE, India Accident Convention

1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988

Second Oil Crisis Convention on Our Common Migratory Species Future

MARPOL

• Conference • Treaty • Publication • Institution • Event

world we live in. A first step towards actors, which is especially important us. The global financial system nearly answering that question — even if the if GEG 2.0 is to be implementation collapsed. The environmental order answer is already well-known — could based. In particular, it must allow is a messy patchwork of multilateral be a review of the state of the world, for a greater and more meaningful environmental agreements (MEAs). not in terms of what countries have participation of civil society The economic cooperation system done for the global environment, but organizations (CSOs), sub-national is not yielding the expected results. what has been the impact of those actions. To use a physics analogy, we do not want to measure the force “A 2012 summit may provide us with an opportunity to shoot for applied, we want to measure the an ambitious, but truly exciting, goal: a New Deal for Sustainable work done. Development — a new institutional architecture based on the Second, GEG 2.0 need not require new institutions, but it does need principles of sustainable development. ” much more coherence amongst existing institutions. There is a wealth and local governments, and the New and more globally mobile of ideas for better coherence and private sector. This would require diseases are becoming an increasing coordination amongst international opening up the policy space to create challenge. The trade system is environmental institutions already new opportunities for participation failing to incorporate social and being discussed on topics such in implementation activities, to environmental concerns and has as treaty clustering, back-to-back reach out to those local and national stalled in never-ending negotiations. negotiation meetings, environmental actors currently distant from GEG The global food system is under financial tracking, pooled funding discussions, and to seek closer severe stress. Climate change is only mechanisms, and so on. However, collaborations amongst the various solvable through — as yet non- these discussions themselves are institutional stakeholders in society. existent — concerted global action. happening in varied institutions that do not communicate well with each Even though sustainable other. A global summit that focuses, #2. A New Deal for development is now amongst amongst other things, on targeted Sustainable Development the aspirations of most global coherence for institutions could have The need for a New Deal for institutions — from UNEP to the deep and far-reaching impacts on Sustainable Development, including World Bank — the systems of global environmental governance. economic, social and environmental governance and implementation issues, is evident — and even being remain largely parochial in terms Third, GEG 2.0 must become less articulated — in the face of the of either being ‘environmentally- state-centric and more open to new multiple institutional crises that face focused’ or ‘developmentally-

sustainable development insights | 002 | november 2009 5 WBCSD

UN CSD Antarctic Rio Earth Summit UNFCCC Treaty Environmental IISD, Canada Basel Convention UNCLOS UNCCD Protocol

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

Ozone Global Convention TRIPS Agreement Rio+5 Review Montreal Environment on Biological Protocol Facility Diversity World Trade Organization

Sustainable Development Global Governance timeline

Rio + 20: Another World + 20: Rio Summit? focused.’ The aspiration for The common underlying problem is Each aspect of the multifaceted sustainable development is shared that the international cooperation crisis can be addressed individually, as well as genuine, but the means of mechanisms designed for much patching the system as if with band achieving it have not gone beyond simpler times are becoming aids. Indeed, that is what we seem to simply sprinkling more and more insufficient to accommodate the be trying to do. Or, a grand event — of ‘environment’ over development pressures of a shrinking planet like the 2012 summit — could provide institutions or of ‘development’ over with increasing and increasingly the world with the opportunity to environmental institutions.

If the goal is to move towards real “...the current system... is based on two unspoken but very sustainable development at a global powerful assumptions underlying nearly all policies: (a) human level, such an incremental approach has severe limits, which may already well-being is correlated to development; and (b) development have been reached. A 2012 summit equates to economic growth” may provide us with an opportunity to shoot for an ambitious, but truly exciting, goal: a New Deal for global appetites. Similar to children sit back and take on the challenge Sustainable Development — a new outgrowing their clothing, the world of formulating a new global deal institutional architecture based has outgrown the mechanisms — based around the principles of on the principles of sustainable of global cooperation (on trade, sustainable development — that development. The ambition level of finance, environment, food, etc.), leads to a new global architecture this goal would make the summit which might once have fit the of institutions that not only work in not only a follow up to Rio and situation but now are increasingly better coordination with each other Stockholm, but also to the 1944 stretched and ineffective. but also in sync with the new realities Bretton Woods conference. that face us today and will define our tomorrows.

Call it the sustainable new deal, the , Deal-21, or whatever other name that catches your fancy. The real purpose is to lay down the foundations of a new system for international cooperation — encompassing trade, finance, climate change, environmental governance,

6 sustainable development insights | 002 | november 2009 Malmö Declaration Rotterdam Convention (PIC) Worldwide food UN Millennium Summit Stockholm Convention (POPs) and oil price spikes — MDGs World Summit on Sustainable Wangari Maathai wins Nobel Financial UN Forum on Forests Development Peace Prize crisis begins

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Global Ministerial WTO Doha Cartagena Al Gore and Environmental Forum Round begins Protocol on the IPCC win Biosafety Millennium Nobel Peace Seattle protests Ecosystems Prize against WTO Assessment

• Conference • Treaty • Publication • Institution • Event

food, etc. — a foundation that builds regulations, market forces, public The aspiration of unlimited economic on past successes and is structured perceptions. In the aftermath of growth has remained unchallenged. around the principles of sustainable the current financial crisis, we see At the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, then development. a similar unfolding in the realm of U.S. President George H.W. Bush economic and trade decisions, as reportedly declared: ‘the American Let’s be clear: we are not proposing well as the gearing up for a possibly way of life is not negotiable.’ Today, the sustainable development agenda carbon-constrained world. A many developing countries have also (or community for the matter) to 2012 summit provides us with the assumed Bush’s 1992 position, in take over the trade, financial, food opportunity to merge sustainable the variant of ‘our right to growth is vice versa. and trade agendas, or We social, environmental and equity not up for negotiation.’ Any quest for are talking, instead, of a truly new principles with the economic sustainable development will remain architecture in which these issues — governance system. unfulfilled until we clearly articulate that are so intrinsically connected — the difference between growth and are dealt with together in recognition development, and begin focusing on of the connections, rather than #3. Values: Redefining human well-being as the cornerstone in the haphazard, piecemeal, and Development goal. conflicting ways in which current Our earlier points are incremental institutions deal with them. improvements — improving Such issues, together with others effectiveness and broadening scope — of more ethical character, tend to be lumped together under the issue of values, often mentioned as the “Any quest for sustainable development will remain unfulfilled until missing “fourth pillar” of sustainable we clearly articulate the difference between growth and development, development (the other three being environmental protection, and begin focusing on human well-being as the cornerstone goal.” social development and economic development). Talking about values is potentially divisive and ultimately This may already be beginning to to the current system which is based could lead to the redefinition of the happen, but in an ad hoc fashion. on two unspoken but very powerful social meaning of development and For example, the response to global assumptions underlying nearly all environment. But let’s remember climate change is not simply an policies: (a) human well-being is that past successful summits also environmental response. It is a correlated to development; and (b) discussed at-the-time radical ideas. response that comes from multiple development equates to economic growth. In 1972, linking development quarters: business, governments, and environment was considered civil society; and in multiple forms: radical, yet Stockholm sparked

sustainable development insights | 002 | november 2009 7 that discussion. In 1992, involving Any world summit in 2012 will not Sustainable Development non-governmental actors in the global be successful if it is held merely to Knowledge Partnership (SDKP) environmental process was highly grab the global limelight for a brief brings together governments, individuals, institutions, and controversial, yet that is one of the main moment or simply because ‘it is time’ networks engaged in the production legacies of Rio. to meet again. To be meaningful, such and dissemination of knowledge on a summit will need a grand purpose. sustainable development, including Is sustainable development — and, In this essay we have suggested three research institutions and sustainable indeed, development — merely an possible purposes that, to our mind, development expert networks. Its economic condition, and a condition meet that test — purposes that have the aim is to organize knowledge on that can be equated simply with potential to define the next 20 years of sustainable development and make economic growth? Or does development sustainable development action, policy it available to policy makers and practitioners. The Partnership and human well-being also encompass and discourse. We understand that each is supported by the Division for a set of social values that go beyond is more ambitious than the prior. But let Sustainable Development of economic values? These questions have not a lack of ambition scuttle away this been ignored and neglected for too the United Nations. Sustainable moment of opportunity. Development Insights is a contribution long. They need to be confronted. What of The Frederick S. Pardee Center for better place or time to confront them The world may not choose any of our the Study of the Longer-Range Future than at the 20th anniversary of Rio, the three options as the grand purpose for at Boston University to the SDKP. 25th anniversary of WCED and the 40th a 2012 World Summit. anniversary of Stockholm? But whatever goal is chosen for a The Frederick S. Pardee Center for summit needs to be not only grand, the Study of the Longer-Range but truly meaningful. If it is, then future Future at Boston University Conclusion generations will remember that event convenes and conducts interdisciplinary, policy-relevant, and Summits seldom solve problems. But, like we remember Stockholm and Rio. future-oriented research that can when successful, they can frame the If it is not, then another summit is not debate for years and decades to come. contribute to long-term improvements what the world needs right now. in the human condition. Through its Both Stockholm and Rio did so. • programs of research, publications and events, the Center seeks to identify, anticipate, and enhance the long-term potential for human Further Reading progress, in all its various dimensions. Dodds, Felix (ed.). 2000. Earth Summit 2002: A New Deal. London: Earthscan.

Najam, Adil. 2005. ‘A Tale of Three Cities: Developing Countries in Global Environmental Negotiations’ In Global Challenges: Furthering the Multilateral Process for Sustainable Development Insights Sustainable Development. Edited by Angela Churie Kallhauge, Gunnar Sjöstedt and Series Editor: Prof. Adil Najam Elisabeth Correll. Pages 124–143. London: Greenleaf. Boston University Najam, Adil, Michaela Papa and Nadaa Taiyab. 2006. Global Environmental Governance, Pardee House A Reform Agenda. Winnipeg, Canada: International Institute for Sustainable 67 Bay State Road Development (IISD). Boston, MA 02215 USA Rowland, Wade. 1973. Plot To Save The World: The Life and Times of the Stockholm [email protected] Conference on the Human Environment. Toronto, Canada: Clarke Irwin & Co. 617-358-4000 (tel.) Thomson, Koy. 1992. United Nations Conference on Environment & Development: A user’s 617-358-4001 (fax) guide. London: International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), and www.bu.edu/pardee United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).

World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). 1987. Our Common The views expressed in Sustainable Future (Brundtland Report). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Development Insights are strictly those of the author(s) and should not be assumed to represent the position of their own institutions, of Boston University, of the Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study www.un.org/esa/dsd http://tinyurl.com/susdevkp www.bu.edu/pardee of the Longer-Range Future, or the United Nations.