28 Agenda 21 and Rio +20

Dr.Shilpa Jain

LEARNING OUTCOME:

1. Understanding of Rio declaration on environment and development.
2. In depth study of principles adopted at Agenda 21.
3. Study of the United Nation Conference on sustainable development or Rio+20.

The 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development or, as it is better known, the “Rio Earth Summit,” is symbolic of the international solidarity that the world showed in the face of deteriorating environmental conditions, when the nature was crying out for sustainable development. The Earth Summit was the first such congregation of a monumental stature with representatives of 172 countries, including 108 heads of states and governments, coming together for over 12 days of negotiations. The event garnered the attention of the World media at an unprecedented scale. The event can also be hailed as a game changer in the context of international relations when after the bitterness that had snow balled into Cold War was kept aside for a while and the nations came together with a common target of sustainable development.

The Summit resulted in a plethora of crucial decisions that emerged in the form of unbinding principles that form the foundation stone of the international environmental solidarity that the world witnessed: Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the Statement of Forest Principles, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.

Agenda 21 proclaimed a particularly noble purpose, one which intended to inspire generations. As “humanity stands at a defining moment of history,” Agenda 21 sought to address “the pressing problems of today and to prepare the world for the challenges of the next century.”

Since the crucial environmental problems addressed at the Earth Summit in 1992, many changes had taken place across the globe and it was time for some serious stock-taking of the situation to see how far had the world come in addressing the challenges that it had taken stock of at the Earth Summit. This resulted in Rio+20 i.e. after a gap of 20 years since the Earth Summit took place in Rio De Janeiro in 1992. By this conference United Nations wanted to bring together governments, international institutions and major (NGO) groups to agree on a range of smart measures for-

1. Poverty reduction
2. Clean energy
3. Sustainable development (and this Sustainable Development has three pillars)
   1. economic development;
   2. social development;
   3. Environmental protection.

Now the question arises what is sustainable development. This can be understood through that advertisement that was in vogue when we were kids where a father leaves the engine of the car on, while waiting for the traffic signal to turn green, to which the son retorts, if the petrol is used so extravagantly, there will be nothing left when he grows up. This clearly resonates with the philosophy of sustainable development i.e. the utilization of resources in such a way that along with the fulfillment of the needs of the present generation, the needs of the future generation are also met.

The two major core themes decided at the Rio+20 were “a green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication” and secondly “institutional framework for sustainable development”.

INDIA’S STAND AT RIO+20

India has always been advocating for a non-binding legal commitment and no pre-determined targets for sustainable development as being a developing country. For effective sustainable development, effective mobilization of appropriate resources is also required to effectively carry out the aim of sustainable development and the related concerns voiced by India were:-

• Most environment-friendly/green technologies are with the developed countries.
• RIO 20 should facilitate the transfer of these technologies from developed countries (US) to developing countries (India) on concessional terms.
• India also wanted Early operationalization of the Nagoya Protocol (for Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization (ABS))
• Creation of a ‘Sustainable Development Fund’ for providing finances to the developing countries.
• In short, India wanted adequate flow of resources and technologies to developing countries.

This was about Rio+20 which took place after the Earth Summit, but prior to this a consensus had been reached among the world leaders on the deleterious impact of human activity on mother nature, which resulted in the formulation of the below mentioned principles which form a part of Agenda 21.

On 22 December 1989, the United Nations General Assembly called for a global meeting that would devise strategies to halt and reverse the effects of environmental degradation “in the context of increased national and international efforts to promote sustainable and environmentally sound development in all countries.”

Agenda 21, adopted by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development on 14 June 1992, is the international community’s response to that request. It is a comprehensive programme of action to be implemented “from now and into the twenty-first century” by Governments, development agencies, United Nations organizations and independent sector groups in every area where human (economic) activity affects the environment. It was aimed that the programme should be studied in conjunction with the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and the principles for the sustainable management of forests which were also adopted at the Conference, known as the Earth Summit, held from 3 to 14 June 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

The major principles adopted at Agenda 21 are as under:-

• Principle 1  Human beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development. They are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature.
• Principle 2  States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental and developmental policies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.
• Principle 3 The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations.
• Principle 4 In order to achieve sustainable development, environmental protection shall constitute an integral part of the development process and cannot be considered in isolation from it.
• Principle 5 All States and all people shall cooperate in the essential task of eradicating poverty as an indispensable requirement for sustainable development, in order to decrease the disparities in standards of living and better meet the needs of the majority of the people of the world.
• Principle 6 The special situation and needs of developing countries, particularly the least developed and those most environmentally vulnerable, shall be given special priority. International actions inthe field of environment and development should also address the interests and needs of all countries.
• Principle 7 States shall cooperate in a spirit of global partnership to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth’s ecosystem. In view of the different contributions to global environmental degradation, States have common but differentiated responsibilities. The developed countries acknowledge the responsibility that they bear in the international pursuit of sustainable development in view of the pressures their societies place on the global environment and of the technologies and financial resources they command.
• Principle 8 To achieve sustainable development and a higher quality of life for all people, States should reduce and eliminate unsustainable patterns of production and consumption and promote appropriate demographic policies.
• Principle 9 States should cooperate to strengthen endogenous capacity-building for sustainable development by improving scientific understanding through exchanges of scientific and technological knowledge, and by enhancing the development, adaptation, diffusion and transfer of technologies, including new and innovative technologies.
• Principle 10 Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness  and participation by making information widely available. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy, shall be provided.
• Principle 11 States shall enact effective environmental legislation. Environmental standards, management objectives and priorities should reflect the environmental and developmental context to which they apply. Standards applied by some countries may be inappropriate and of unwarranted economic and social cost to other countries, in particular developing countries.
• Principle 12 States should cooperate to promote a supportive and open international economic system that would lead to economic growth and sustainable development in all countries, to better address the problems of environmental degradation. Trade policy measures for environmental purposes should not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade. Unilateral actions to deal with environmental challenges outside the jurisdiction of the importing country should be avoided. Environmental measures addressing transboundary or global environmental problems should, as far as possible, be based on an international consensus.
• Principle 13 States shall develop national law regarding liability and compensation for the victims of pollution and other environmental damage. States shall also cooperate in an expeditious and more determined manner to develop further international law regarding liability and compensation for adverse effects of environmental damage caused by activities within their jurisdiction or control to areas beyond their jurisdiction.
• Principle 14 States should effectively cooperate to discourage or prevent the relocation and transfer to other States of any activities and substances that cause severe environmental degradation or are found to be harmful to human health.
• Principle 15 In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.
• Principle 16 National authorities should endeavor to promote the internalization of environmental costs and the use of economic instruments, taking into account the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution, with due regard to the public interest and without distorting international trade and investment.
• Principle 17 Environmental impact assessment, as a national instrument, shall be undertaken for proposed activities that are likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment and are subject to a decision of a competent national authority.
• Principle 18 States shall immediately notify other States of any natural disasters or other emergencies that are likely to produce sudden harmful effects on the environment of those States. Every effort shall be made by the international community to help States so afflicted.
• Principle 19 States shall provide prior and timely notification and relevant information to potentially affected States on activities that may have a significant adverse transboundary environmental effect and shall consult with those States at an early stage and in good faith.
• Principle 20 Women have a vital role in environmental management and development. Their full participation is therefore essential to achieve sustainable development.
• Principle 21 The creativity, ideals and courage of the youth of the world should be mobilized to forge a global partnership in order to achieve sustainable development and ensure a better future for all.
• Principle 22 Indigenous people and their communities and other local communities have a vital role in environmental management and development because of their knowledge and traditional practices. States should recognize and duly support their identity, culture and interests and enable their effective participation in the achievement of sustainable development.
• Principle 23 The environment and natural resources of people under oppression, domination and occupation shall be protected.
• Principle 24 Warfare is inherently destructive of sustainable development. States shall therefore respect international law providing protection for the environment in times of armed conflict and cooperate in its further development, as necessary.
• Principle 25 Peace, development and environmental protection are interdependent and indivisible.
• Principle 26 States shall resolve all their environmental disputes peacefully and by appropriate means in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
• Principle 27 States and people shall cooperate in good faith and in a spirit of partnership in the fulfillment of the principles embodied in this Declaration and in the further development of international law in the field of sustainable development.

But beyond the mere awareness that Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration brought for sustainable development worldwide, they also stimulated direct funding for projects in support of sustainable development. International organizations in particular have used such instruments to guide and prioritize their funding portfolios. To showcase a single example, in 1997 the World Bank published a paper tracking its grants and loans in furtherance of Rio’s objectives during the five-year period following the Earth Summit. The study documented the steady increase in projects targeting the improvement of environmental management, the rise in the funding available for such projects by $8 billion, or 8% of its lending over that time period, and the ways in which the Bank was working to mainstream sustainable development into other development programs. Further substantiating the sustained international attention to the goals articulated at the Earth Summit, the number of multilateral environmental agreements has exploded over the years, now totaling some 500 (or more) different legally binding documents. Yet, despite this encouraging trend that has enabled environmental agreements where the traditional treaty process would have stood still, the spike of international commitments, however, has not been matched by either national implementing laws or capacity for enforcement. A well-recognized “implementation gap” exists between goals recognized at the international level and the practical ability to attain those goals on the ground. Even with dedicated funds and attention to overcoming the implementation gap, there are long delays between the enactment of national legislation, its implementation, and the ultimate impact on environmental and developmental outcomes in the country.

This fundamental shortcoming has been well-documented in the context of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) legislation. The Rio Declaration incorporated as Principle 17 a requirement to undertake an EIA for national activities that are likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment. Throughout the 1990s, there was a proliferation of national legislations for implementing EIA Principle. By 1998, more than 100 countries had incorporated some form of EIA legislation. A number of international organizations, including the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the World Bank, and UNEP, implemented measures to promote the establishment of EIA laws and provide guidance or training on EIA implementation. A 2003 study diving deeper into implementation, however, found that most EIA systems in developing countries failed to meet a series of performance criteria. More recent country-specific studies have found that, the effectiveness of EIAs remains uneven and lacking in key areas, including, for example, public participation, technical expertise, and regular enforcement. The gradual nature of countries’ progress in the implementation of EIA laws is the same story that could be told across a wide range of international environmental commitments.

The upshot is not that the Earth Summit failed to have impact, but that the force of that impact, and subsequent efforts, has not been sufficient to reach a change in behavior at a sufficiently global scale. The pertinent question for Rio+20 thus becomes how to recognize and account for the achievement gap to streamline implementation in the future, in addition to what role this particular conference can play in reinforcing commitment or amplifying the effectiveness of ongoing efforts to advance sustainable development.