This initiative flows directly from ICTSD’s primary objective - to empower stakeholders in the trade policy and sustainable development domain through providing a forum to generate innovative thinking, analysis and dialogues on the pressing issues of the day.

The Trade and Sustainable Development Symposium will be taking place on the 19th of June 2012, at the Rio Othon Palace hotel in Copacabana, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Fore registration and more information on programme, partners and speakers please click here.

The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) is being organized in pursuance of General Assembly Resolution 64/236 (A/RES/64/236), and will take place in Brazil on 20-22 June 2012 to mark the 20th anniversary of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), in Rio de Janeiro, and the 10th anniversary of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg.

The Rio+20 Conference is envisaged as a Conference at the highest possible level, including Heads of State and Government or other representatives. The Conference will result in a focused political document.

The Conference will focus on two themes: (a) a green economy in the context of sustainable development poverty eradication; and (b) the institutional framework for sustainable development.

The 17 controversial rare earth elements have unique magnetic, heat resistant, and phosphorescent properties and are crucial ingredients in the manufacturing process of many high-tech and green energy products, including wind turbines, engines for electric and hybrid vehicles, and medical equipment.

The complainants in the case argue that China’s export quotas on the elements, combined with its near-monopoly over global production - some 97 percent of the world’s supply, according to EU estimates - are highly disruptive to domestic industries and result in higher production costs. Market prices experienced a 20-fold price increase between mid-2010 and mid-2011, but have since fallen back in line.

They further complain that the policy offers Chinese competitors an advantage by providing them with cheaper and easier access to the elements compared to foreign manufacturers.

Environmental grounds

In line with its rationale on restricting raw materials, China argues that the extraction process for producing rare earth elements is highly damaging to the environment and that the quota restrictions have nothing to do with trade disruptions.

“In previous communications, China has emphasised that the purpose of these measures is to protect exhaustible natural resources and environment as well as maintain sustainable development,” China’s Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) said in a statement. “China does not intend to protect domestic industry by distorting trade.”

While environmental grounds can be used in some instances to justify trade barriers at the WTO, the Appellate Body earlier this year ruled that Beijing’s export restriction policies for nine raw materials failed to meet the requirements set out by WTO law (DS394, 395, 398).

The Appellate Body ruled that these environmental exceptions could not be applied, as they were not explicitly referred to in the section of China’s accession protocol that prohibits export duties (see Bridges Weekly, 1 February 2012). They also confirmed that quantitative export restrictions for finite natural resources taken with conservation aims could only be justified if they were coupled with similar limitations on domestic consumption and production.

For its part, Brussels argues that, despite the intended environmental protection goal of China’s rare earth export policies, Beijing’s approach is unlikely to achieve such an outcome.

“The EU supports and encourages all countries to promote an environmentally friendly and sustainable production of raw materials,” the EU said in a 13 March press release. “However, the EU believes that export restrictions do not contribute to this aim; there are more effective environmental protection measures that do not discriminate against foreign industries.”

But this case might be different from the 2009 raw materials spat. As recently as this past January, China reformed its rare earths quota system, introducing additional environmental protection requirements as a prerequisite for receiving export permits.

The export restrictions are also part of a broader campaign by Beijing to address the pollution challenges that come with rare earths extraction. The government has wrestled with rampant illegal mining around the country for many years - a practice that will likely be exacerbated by any clampdown on production.

Meanwhile, some experts say that Beijing’s perceived stranglehold on rare earths extraction as a means to boost local downstream industries may not be as straightforward as previously thought.

A recent article by Indiana University professor Scott Kennedy for GK Dragonomics suggests that the policymaking process on rare earths in China is so fragmented among different levels of government that Beijing’s intentions may have little to do with reality on the ground.

“The general pattern has been for local governments to pretend to agree with central aims, and then go about doing whatever is needed to help their local firms,” Kennedy writes.

This fragmentation of rare earths policy prevents China from achieving many of its major objectives, including consolidating the industry and obtaining downstream technologies from foreign competitors, Kennedy argues, despite the country’s dominance in rare earths mining.

US election year

The joint challenge is the latest in a series of road bumps in China-US trade relations and the issue is likely to intensify as President Barack Obama shores up his defence from Republican accusations that he is not doing enough to improve the domestic job market.

Republican presidential candidates, particularly Mitt Romney - considered by many to be the frontrunner for his party’s nomination - have been hammering Obama on his China policies on the campaign trail, a strategy that will likely intensify as the November election draws nearer.

Obama, however, says he is on firm ground vis-à-vis China, recently boasting that his administration has brought trade cases against China at almost double the rate of that of previous president George W. Bush. In addition to recent skirmishes over China’s solar panel and wind power subsidies, Obama in February announced the creation of a new agency tasked with identifying unfair practices by US trading partners.

The president noted the new Trade Enforcement Unit in a statement Tuesday, suggesting that the US has taken on a new, less tolerant position on alleged trade violations.

“Our competitors should be on notice:  You will not get away with skirting the rules,” Obama said in a statement. “When we can, we will rally support from our allies.  And when it makes sense to act on our own, we will.”

China is also facing a once-in-a-decade leadership change this year, with Wen widely expected to be replaced by Vice President Xi Jinping. Trade featured prominently in discussions between Xi and Obama when the two met in Washington last month (see Bridges Weekly, 22 February 2012).

The request for consultations on the rare earths issue is the first step in the WTO dispute settlement process. Should the parties to the dispute be unable to reach a resolution after 60 days of talks, the EU, US, and Japan will have the right to ask that a WTO panel be established to hear the complaint.

ICTSD reporting; “AP source: US brings new trade case against China,” ASSOCIATED PRESS, 13 March 2012; “Obama Takes Aim at China With Plan for WTO Case on Rare-Earth Export Caps,” BLOOMBERG, 13 March 2012; “US to challenge China over rare earths,” FINANCIAL TIMES, 13 March 2012; “Trade Issues With China Flare Anew,” THE NEW YORK TIMES, 12 March 2012; “Deals Shows China’s Sway in Rare-Earth Minerals,” WALL STREET JOURNAL, 11 March 2012; “U.S. and Europe Move on China Minerals,” WALL STREET JOURNAL, 13 March 2012.

To honour UNEP’s 40th anniversary, the meeting produced a ministerial statement committing the ministers to, “making Rio+20 a success.” The statement emphasised that Rio+20 is, “a unique opportunity to address the economic, social, and environmental challenges in the context of sustainable development,” There was, however, little mention of what a success constituted.

Achim Steiner, UNEP’s Executive Director called the ministerial statement, “a clear signal to the Rio+20 summit,” stressing this was a recognition of the need for a, “scaling up of the implementation of sustainable development and that bold, transformative decisions need to be taken in four months’ time in Brazil.”

The Global Ministerial Environment Forum (GMEF), held on the sidelines of the 21-24 February Governing Council negotiations, was dominated by plenary sessions and ministerial roundtables. These meetings provided a platform for Environment ministers and delegates to freely exchange views on the main topics of Rio+20, and to build consensus on the UNCSD Zero Draft and the summit outcomes, away from the main negotiations in New York.

The discussions cut to the heart of the contention surrounding the green economy as delegates discussed the effects of such a transition, that the transformation of economic structure will undoubtedly create winners and losers.

Other outcomes of the GCSS was a number of successfully negotiated decisions on international environmental governance, chemicals and waste, sustainable consumption and production, coordination across the UN system including the Environment Management Group, and the Multilateral Environmental Agreements for which UNEP serves as the secretariat.

With initial discussions on the UNCSD Zero Draft focussed on reaffirming governmental support for the 1992 Rio Declaration and Agenda 21 as well as starting to discuss various issues surrounding the implementation gaps in international commitments, this week’s meeting marks a shift toward pinning down more concrete outcomes.

The next round of informal Rio+20 negotiations is scheduled to take place on 19-23 of March and will focus on the Green Economy and the Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development.

ICTSD Reporting

The two co-chairs of the High-level Panel on Global Sustainability (GSP), Finnish President Tarja Halonen and South Africa’s Jacob Zuma, presented the report - entitled “Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A Future Worth Choosing” - to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at a meeting of the African Union in Addis Ababa.

The report arrived 25 years after the release of the Bruntland Report, which coined the concept of sustainable development. The new report highlights the interconnected web tying together the core elements of sustainable development.

“Today we see with increasing clarity that economic growth, environmental protection, and social equity are one and the same agenda: the sustainable development agenda,” the report reads. “We cannot make lasting progress in one without progress on all.”

The report focuses on a range of issues, such as modalities for including social and environmental issues into economies; ways of measuring progress beyond gross domestic product; developing sustainable development indicators, as well as sustainable development goals; and strengthening the role of science in the political process. The report contains 56 specific recommendations, including the need for a periodic sustainable development outlook report.

A new set of SDGs

The sustainable development goals, or SDGs, that were included in the report echo similar discussions taking place in the lead-up to Rio+20. The deadline for implementing the current Millennium Development Goals is approaching in 2015, and the report notes that the world now faces a wider set of sustainable development challenges.

Therefore, the authors support “a set of key universal sustainable development goals [that] could help to galvanize action, drawing on the experience of the Millennium Development Goals and building on their successful aspects.” These should be defined in a way that complements the Millennium Development Goals while allowing for a post-2015 successor framework, they added.

In receiving the report, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon noted several recommendations for further action on his part, including task forces to develop indicators to measure progress towards sustainable development and to define new Sustainable Development Goals for the post-2015 period. He stressed that sustainable development lies at the core of his second term in office.

Reactions

A number of non-governmental organisations active in the field of sustainable development, such as WWF and Oxfam, welcomed the report, while saying that it did not call for enough immediate and concrete action.

Greenpeace agreed with the report that “it’s time to end the perversity of taxpayers paying for fossil fuels which destroy our future and to admit that ‘tinkering at the edges will not do the job’ of achieving a sustainable future for all.” However, Greenpeace said that it would have preferred immediate targets, rather than SDGs with targets stretching out to 2030 in terms of their implementation.

On the other side, the Times of India reports that government officials there had taken a more cautious approach to some of the GSP recommendations, specifically with regards to Sustainable Development Goals. In their view, agreeing on a set of universal SDGs would go against the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, eliminating the ‘firewall’ between obligations on developing and developed countries - a statement that some observers say is contrary to common interpretation of last December’s outcomes at Durban’s UN climate conference.

Initial discussions on Rio+20 Outcome Document

Meanwhile, diplomats and interested stakeholders met in New York late last week for initial discussions on the Outcome Document for Rio+20. The zero draft of the Outcome Document was released on 10 January (see Bridges Trade BioRes, 23 January 2012).

Among the topics receiving strong support among delegates at the meeting were the SDGs. However, with different actors viewing the Goals in a myriad of ways, some observers say the road ahead towards concrete and workable definitions remains long.

For example, in their intervention, the African group said the SDG’s negotiation must not lead to the MDGs being left aside. The group also called for higher ambition overall in the zero draft, and stressed the importance of sustainable land management and responding to desertification as an African issue. The group also noted the continent’s particular vulnerability to climate change.

The EU said they strongly believe that countries at Rio+20 should agree to accelerate and broaden the worldwide transition towards a green economy.

The G-77 group of developing countries emphasised the need to fulfil obligations and goals undertaken at Rio twenty years ago, as well as other major conferences on sustainable development. The group also underscored the need to secure new and additional financing, as well as technology transfer.
India, in its statement, noted regarding SDGs that these should be understood as voluntary and aspirational, should not distract from the MDGs, and should respect the principles of common but differentiated responsibilities.

In an informal meeting convened by Colombia’s delegation, as a co-proponent with Guatemala, broad support was voiced for the initiative of establishing SDGs, whether at Rio or in a process initiated then. Civil society and various government representatives took the floor to endorse SDGs as a visionary idea that could speed up efforts towards sustainable development.

Road to Rio

A new round of “informal-informal” negotiations on the zero draft is expected on 19-23 March, and the next inter-sessional meeting of the Preparatory Committee for Rio+20 will be held on 25-27 March.

The last Preparatory Committee meeting is scheduled for 13-15 June, only days before Rio+20 itself, which takes place from 20-22 June.

Rio+20 marks the twentieth anniversary of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). The conference aims to secure renewed commitment to sustainable development and meet new and emerging challenges.

More information

The UN report Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A future worth choosing can be accessed here.

ICTSD Reporting; “India opposes UN panel’s ‘back door’ for green caps,” THE TIMES OF INDIA, 31 January 2012.

For that reason, this paper analyses market access opportunities for environmental goods (EGs) from developing countries in the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) regions and focuses on a few issues particularly relevant to these countries. The paper uses a partial equilibrium model to estimate the possible trade effects of different tariff liberalisation scenarios for ACP countries. It finds that any tariff elimination by ACP countries will result in an increased level of imports and a deepening of the trade imbalance in this sector. The paper subsequently discusses how to leverage the benefits that may come from tariff liberalization of environmental goods.

The Rio+20 Conference marks the twentieth anniversary of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). The conference’s objective is to secure renewed commitment to sustainable development and to meet new and emerging challenges by focusing on the following themes: the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; and the institutional framework for sustainable development.

Report provides blueprint for sustainable development, low-carbon prosperity

The two co-chairs of the High-level Panel on Global Sustainability (GSP) - Finnish President Tarja Halonen and South Africa’s Jacob Zuma - presented the report to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at a meeting of the African Union in Addis Ababa.

The report arrived 25 years after the release of the Bruntland report, which coined the concept of sustainable development. According to the new report, “Today we see with increasing clarity that economic growth, environmental protection, and social equity are one and the same agenda: the sustainable development agenda. We cannot make lasting progress in one without progress on all.”

“With the possibility of the world slipping further into recession, policymakers are hungry for ideas that can help them to navigate these difficult times,” said Zuma. “Our report makes clear that sustainable development is more important than ever given the multiple crises now enveloping the world.”

The report focuses on a range of issues, such as modalities for including social and environmental issues into economies; ways of measuring progress beyond gross domestic product; developing sustainable development indicators, as well as sustainable development goals; and strengthening the role of science in the political process. The report contains 56 specific recommendations, including calling for a periodic sustainable development outlook report.

A new set of SDGs

The sustainable development goals, or SDGs, that were included in the report echo similar discussions taking place in the lead-up to Rio+20. The deadline for implementing the current Millennium Development Goals is approaching in 2015, and the report notes that the world now faces a wider set of sustainable development challenges.

Therefore, the authors support “a set of key universal sustainable development goals [that] could help to galvanize action, drawing on the experience of the Millennium Development Goals and building on their successful aspects.” These should be defined in a way that complements the Millennium Development Goals while allowing for a post-2015 successor framework, they added.

In receiving the report, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon noted several recommendations for further action on his part, including task forces to develop indicators to measure progress towards sustainable development and to define new Sustainable Development Goals for the post-2015 period. He stressed that sustainable development lies at the core of his second term in office.

Reactions

A number of non-governmental organisations active in the field of sustainable development, such as WWF and Oxfam, welcomed the report, while saying that it did not call for enough immediate and concrete action.

Greenpeace agreed with the report that “it’s time to end the perversity of taxpayers paying for fossil fuels which destroy our future and to admit that ‘tinkering at the edges will not do the job’ of achieving a sustainable future for all.” However, Greenpeace said that it would have preferred immediate targets, rather than SDGs with targets stretching out to 2030 in terms of their implementation.

On the other side, the Times of India reports that government officials there had taken a more cautious approach to some of the GSP recommendations, specifically with regards to Sustainable Development Goals. In their view, agreeing on a set of universal SDGs would go against the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, eliminating the ‘firewall’ between obligations on developing and developed countries - a statement that seems contrary to common interpretation of last December’s outcomes at Durban’s UN climate conference.

Initial discussions on Rio+20 Outcome Document

Meanwhile, diplomats and interested stakeholders met in New York late last week for initial discussions on the Outcome Document for Rio+20. The zero draft of the Outcome Document was released on 10 January (see Bridges Weekly, 11 January 2012).

During the talks, participants first provided general comments, then moving on specifically to the two first sections of the zero draft, which focus on commitments to sustainable development and progress so far, as well as implementation gaps.

Among the topics receiving strong support among delegates were the SDGs. However, at this point in time, different actors view them in a myriad of ways. The road ahead towards concrete and workable definitions remains long.

For example, in their intervention, the African group said the SDG’s negotiation must not lead to the MDGs being left aside. The group also called for higher ambition overall in the zero draft, and stressed the importance of sustainable land management and responding to desertification as an African issue. The group also noted the continent’s particular vulnerability to climate change.

The EU said they strongly believe that, in Rio, countries should agree to accelerate and broaden the worldwide transition towards a green economy.

The G-77 group of developing countries emphasised the need to fulfil obligations and goals undertaken at Rio twenty years ago, as well as other major conferences on sustainable development. The group also underscored the need to secure new and additional financing, as well as technology transfer.
India, in its statement, noted regarding SDGs that these should be understood as voluntary and aspirational, should not distract from the MDGs, and should respect the principles of common but differentiated responsibilities.

In an informal meeting convened by Colombia’s delegation, as a co-proponent with Guatemala, broad support was voiced for the initiative of establishing SDGs, whether at Rio or in a process initiated then. Civil society and various government representatives took the floor to endorse SDGs as a visionary idea that could speed up efforts towards sustainable development.

Next steps

A new round of “informal-informal” negotiations on the zero draft will follow on 19-23 March, and the next inter-sessional meeting of the Preparatory Committee for Rio+20 will be held on 25-27 March.

The last Preparatory Committee meeting is scheduled for 13-15 June, only days before Rio+20 itself, which takes place from 20-22 June.

ICTSD reporting; “India opposes UN panel’s ‘back door’ for green caps,” THE TIMES OF INDIA, 31 January 2012.

The Rio+20 Conference marks the twentieth anniversary of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). The conference’s objective is to secure renewed commitment to sustainable development and to meet new and emerging challenges by focusing on the following themes: the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; and the institutional framework for sustainable development.

During the second half of 2011, the various UN regions weighed in on the preparations for Rio+20 through preparatory meetings held in these same regions (see Bridges Trade BioRes, 19 December 2011). Governments and stakeholders from civil society, academia, and the private sector submitted their inputs to the outcome document ahead of a November 2011 deadline. The submissions were collected for a 6000-page compilation document spanning a wide-ranging area of initiatives and proposals.

From 15-16 December, the latest round of formal negotiations - an Intersessional Meeting of the Preparatory Committee for the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD or Rio+20) - took place at UN headquarters in New York. Participants took the opportunity to discuss the submissions and process so far, and plan for the final six months leading up to the conference in June.

Process starting to solidify

Many close to the process have lamented the fact that the timing of Rio+20 - amid growing anxiety due to the state of the global economy, growth and jobs topping the current agenda, and multilateralism on the wane - has meant that expectations are low and preparations have started off slowly.

However, some participants at the December meeting were more upbeat, saying that the process is beginning to come together. One participant noted with satisfaction the progress made towards the outcome document. In addition, a number of countries were beginning to find common ground around the idea of setting up a process to agree to ‘Sustainable Development Goals’, an initiative originally proposed by Colombia. The most important topics, including water and food security, were beginning to solidify. There was also strong support for a truly multi-stakeholder process.

Challenges also remained, however, with regards to financing, given the overall problems in the world economy. In addition, tensions around trade continued to echo, with developing countries highlighting their concerns regarding the potential for protectionism and green conditionalities.

The Outcome Document for Rio

The ‘zero draft’ Outcome Document, building on an abundant and wide-ranging amount of input, was released on 10 January, and comprises a 19-page document containing five sections: Preamble/Stage setting; Renewing Political Commitment; Green Economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development; and a Framework for action and follow-up.

The first brief section stresses the commitment by heads of state and government - although their presence has not yet been confirmed - to sustainable development and the themes of the conference.

The second section reaffirms the Rio principles and past action plans supporting sustainable development. In assessing progress and implementation, the signatories acknowledge the uneven progress and current challenges. The need to engage all major groups and stakeholders is emphasised, as well as co-operation in a broad framework for action.

The third section focuses on a green economy, emphasising flexibility and the need to tailor solutions towards the needs and capacities of specific countries. It stresses that the green economy must not create new trade barriers or conditionalities on aid and finance. It proposes the creation of tool-kits and experience-sharing, and emphasises the role of different actors within a framework for implementation. The section also proposes a roadmap with the establishment of mechanisms and indicators of progress between 2012-2015; implementation between 2015-2030; and an assessment of progress in 2030.

The section on the institutional framework for sustainable development provides several options. The current Commission on Sustainable Development could either be retained as is, or replaced by a high-level Sustainable Development Council. The section also provides either for the strengthening of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), or the establishment of a UN specialised agency for the environment operating on an equal footing with other specialised agencies.

The fifth section on a framework for action and follow-up identifies a number of key issues: food security, water, energy, cities, green jobs-social inclusion, oceans, seas and small island developing states (SIDS), natural disasters, climate change, forests and biodiversity, land degradation and desertification, mountains, chemicals and waste, consumption and production, education, and gender equality.

In terms of accelerating and measuring progress, the document sets out the idea of Sustainable Development Goals, to be devised by 2015. The document also sets up a process to create such goals, including ways to measure progress in their achievement by 2030.

The document also highlights the need for financing to make progress, calling for the fulfilment of existing goals, prioritising sustainable development, and enhancing aid effectiveness.  It stresses the need for strengthened scientific and technology co-operation, and for capacity building.

There is a sub-section focusing specifically on trade, calling for the completion of the WTO’s Doha Round of trade talks and stressing the need for co-operation to ensure that developing, and least developed countries in particular, are able to benefit from international trade. It supports the phase-out of market-distorting and environmentally-harmful subsides, such as those in the areas of fossil fuels, fisheries, and agriculture. For developing countries, it supports trade capacity building to allow such countries to seize new export opportunities, including those linked to the transition to a green economy.

Finally, the outcome document will contain a compendium of voluntary commitments.

In presenting the document, Brice Lalonde, the UN’s executive co-ordinator of Rio+20, said: “[The draft] is a good start. Most topics are on the table: from efficient international co-operation to sustainable development goals, from a regular review of the state of the planet to an agency for the environment, from universal access to energy to social safety floors. What is missing now is one verb: to decide. Because to stress, urge, call, recognise, underscore, encourage, support, or reaffirm is not enough. When heads of state meet, it should be to decide.”

Next steps

The UN Secretary General’s High-level Global Sustainability Panel is expected to release its report by the end of January. A first informal discussion on the zero draft of the Outcome Document will be held from 25-27 January. Further discussion will follow on 19-23 March, and the next inter-sessional meeting of the Preparatory Committee for Rio+20 will be held on 25-27 March.

The last Preparatory Committee meeting is scheduled for 13-15 June, only days before Rio+20 itself, which takes place from 20-22 June.

ICTSD Reporting; “Decisions must be made at Rio Earth summit, urges UN official,” THE GUARDIAN, 11 January 2012.

The Rio+20 Conference marks the twentieth anniversary of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). The conference’s objective is to secure renewed commitment to sustainable development and to meet new and emerging challenges by focusing on the following themes: the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; and the institutional framework for sustainable development.

During the second half of 2011, the various UN regions weighed in on the preparations for Rio+20 through preparatory meetings held in these same regions (see Bridges Weekly, 7 December 2011). Governments and stakeholders from civil society, academia, and the private sector submitted their inputs to the outcome document ahead of a November 2011 deadline. The submissions were collected for a 6000-page compilation document spanning a wide-ranging area of initiatives and proposals.

From 15-16 December, the latest round of formal negotiations - an Intersessional Meeting of the Preparatory Committee for the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD or Rio+20) - took place at UN headquarters in New York. Participants took the opportunity to discuss the submissions and process so far, and plan for the final six months leading up to the conference in June.

Process starting to solidify

Many close to the process have lamented the fact that the timing of Rio+20 - amid growing anxiety due to the state of the global economy, growth and jobs topping the current agenda, and multilateralism on the wane - has meant that expectations are low and preparations have started off slowly.

However, some participants at the December meeting were more upbeat, saying that the process is beginning to come together. One participant noted with satisfaction the progress made towards the outcome document. In addition, a number of countries were beginning to find common ground around the idea of setting up a process to agree to ‘Sustainable Development Goals’, an initiative originally proposed by Colombia. The most important topics, including water and food security, were beginning to solidify. There was also strong support for a truly multi-stakeholder process.

Challenges also remained, however, with regards to financing, given the overall problems in the world economy. In addition, tensions around trade continued to echo, with developing countries highlighting their concerns regarding the potential for protectionism and green conditionalities.

The Outcome Document for Rio

The ‘zero draft’ Outcome Document, building on an abundant and wide-ranging amount of input, was released on 10 January, and comprises a 19-page document containing five sections: Preamble/Stage setting; Renewing Political Commitment; Green Economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development; and a Framework for action and follow-up.

The first brief section stresses the commitment by heads of state and government - although their presence has not yet been confirmed - to sustainable development and the themes of the conference.

The second section reaffirms the Rio principles and past action plans supporting sustainable development. In assessing progress and implementation, the signatories acknowledge the uneven progress and current challenges. The need to engage all major groups and stakeholders is emphasised, as well as co-operation in a broad framework for action.

The third section focuses on a green economy, emphasising flexibility and the need to tailor solutions towards the needs and capacities of specific countries. It stresses that the green economy must not create new trade barriers or conditionalities on aid and finance. It proposes the creation of tool-kits and experience-sharing, and emphasises the role of different actors within a framework for implementation. The section also proposes a roadmap with the establishment of mechanisms and indicators of progress between 2012-2015; implementation between 2015-2030; and an assessment of progress in 2030.

The section on the institutional framework for sustainable development provides several options. The current Commission on Sustainable Development could either be retained as is, or replaced by a high-level Sustainable Development Council. The section also provides either for the strengthening of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), or the establishment of a UN specialised agency for the environment operating on an equal footing with other specialised agencies.

The fifth section on a framework for action and follow-up identifies a number of key issues: food security, water, energy, cities, green jobs-social inclusion, oceans, seas and small island developing states (SIDS), natural disasters, climate change, forests and biodiversity, land degradation and desertification, mountains, chemicals and waste, consumption and production, education, and gender equality.

In terms of accelerating and measuring progress, the document sets out the idea of Sustainable Development Goals, to be devised by 2015. The document also sets up a process to create such goals, including ways to measure progress in their achievement by 2030.

The document also highlights the need for financing to make progress, calling for the fulfilment of existing goals, prioritising sustainable development, and enhancing aid effectiveness.  It stresses the need for strengthened scientific and technology co-operation, and for capacity building.

There is a sub-section focusing specifically on trade, calling for the completion of the WTO’s Doha Round of trade talks and stressing the need for co-operation to ensure that developing, and least developed countries in particular, are able to benefit from international trade. It supports the phase-out of market-distorting and environmentally-harmful subsides, such as those in the areas of fossil fuels, fisheries, and agriculture. For developing countries, it supports trade capacity building to allow such countries to seize new export opportunities, including those linked to the transition to a green economy.

Finally, the outcome document will contain a compendium of voluntary commitments.

In presenting the document, Brice Lalonde, the UN’s executive co-ordinator of Rio+20, said: “[The draft] is a good start. Most topics are on the table: from efficient international co-operation to sustainable development goals, from a regular review of the state of the planet to an agency for the environment, from universal access to energy to social safety floors. What is missing now is one verb: to decide. Because to stress, urge, call, recognise, underscore, encourage, support, or reaffirm is not enough. When heads of state meet, it should be to decide.”

Next steps

The UN Secretary General’s High-level Global Sustainability Panel is expected to release its report by the end of January. A first informal discussion on the zero draft of the Outcome Document will be held from 25-27 January. Further discussion will follow on 19-23 March, and the next inter-sessional meeting of the Preparatory Committee for Rio+20 will be held on 25-27 March.

The last Preparatory Committee meeting is scheduled for 13-15 June, only days before Rio+20 itself, which takes place from 20-22 June.

ICTSD reporting; “Decisions must be made at Rio Earth summit, urges UN official,” THE GUARDIAN, 11 January 2012.