Civil society in Rio

22 June 2012, article by Lucie Rosset, UN Youth Delegate for Switzerland:

We have been talking about Rio+20 for months now, yet the conference only got under way officially the 20th of June 2012. In reality, the text that will be presented and signed by all of the member states at the end of these two days of the conference has already been approved. It is supposed to reflect the unbelievable number of hours of work that were involved in the numerous sessions of negotiations in New York. How is it possible to use such vast human and financial resources to arrive at a result comprising around 50 pages, which many people find disappointing? Is it legitimate to accept such a weak text given the scale of the degradation already proven?

The expression «it’s better than nothing», which has been uttered by numerous delegations, is questioned by civil society today. During the opening ceremony of the conference, the nine major groups were invited to address the heads of state. They all asked the world’s big decision-makers not to content themselves with this text and to take advantage of the two remaining days to improve it. Moreover, some spoke of rejecting the text in the form, in which it is presented today. This applies to the NGOs that would like the words «in full participation with civil society» deleted from the first paragraph. This statement triggered even more debate among the young people than the initial ones on the question of our position vis-à-vis this result. A large proportion of young people reject the text while others adopt a more qualified position, why is this so?

Rather than being a question of different visions arising from different cultural backgrounds, I think that the problem here is the broad scope of sustainable development. In effect, in aiming to cover all of the possible elements of society, sustainable development is becoming a concept, in which everyone can find something of interest. Hence, numerous conflicts of interest arise as the nature conservationists do not sing from the same hymn sheet as the economists or the activists striving to eradicate poverty. The abundance of the topics approached leads, de facto, to a lack of capacity on the part of the actors to consider sustainable development as a whole. Hence, some young people may be satisfied because the topic they support, be it equality between men and women, rights of access to education or the protection of flora and fauna, is dealt with relatively well in the text. Nevertheless, I believe that a more general vision should be adopted here and the text should be considered as a whole.

Moreover, international phenomena are not simple. Despite its defects, the UN remains the only institutional platform that facilitates exchange, hence it has an essential role to play in enabling us to think about the future together. I do not have the time to go into it in detail here, however, in my view, one of the positive aspects of Rio+20 is the reversal of the North-South powers. We have seen how traditionally dominated countries were able to assert their positions and defend their interest with a considerable degree of success.

Finally, instead of heralding a phase of global pessimism and scepticism, the results of Rio+20 should be approached with an attitude of constructive criticism. Concrete alternative suggestions should be produced at all levels so that we can remain confident in the capacity of people to live together with dignity while respecting others and their environment.

21 June 2012, article by Hans Hurni, University of Bern:

At midday today on 19 June 2012, around 800 people from all corners of the world passed their own, very latest negotiation document by acclamation here in Rio. This happened just five minutes after the beginning of the meeting when all of the participants had not yet quietened down and a few hundred people were still trying make themselves comfortable on the floor because there simply were not enough seats for everyone. The acceptance of the draft document, on which the community of states had been working intensively for over a year, happened so quickly that a member of a delegation from an African country had to ask why people were clapping for so long. It was then announced that the preliminary negotiations were concluded and the work of the delegations from all of the participating countries was done.

This is just as well as the past few days were filled with extremely intensive negotiations which took place both on, behind, below and in front of the main stage. In between, there were only a few hours’ sleep to be had. So we now have the draft of a document which the heads of state will discuss at their three-day summit from tomorrow, and which should be adopted as the main outcome of the Rio+20 conference by Friday 22 June 2012. So far so good.

As a representative of Swiss science and research, I must now ask myself: What will Rio+20 achieve for science? Greater recognition? More work? New tasks? I trawl through the almost 50-page-long negotiation document briefly, a task undertaken nowadays using the Word program’s search function. The term «university» is only mentioned once in the document. «Research» arises 17 times and there are 23 occurrences of «science». The term «capacity building», which arises 71 times, is far more important. So, overall, the haul for science is not too bad. The developing countries, in particular, cannot stress highly enough how important the development of their human resources in the areas of science and technology is for them. They face enormous challenges in developing their countries into knowledge societies, i.e. they want to become equal to the rich countries.

But I must also ask, conversely: What will science contribute to the implementation of Rio+20? Of course, it will be a question of focusing research even more on the three dimensions of sustainable development. The contributions to this aspect can be disciplinary. In addition to this, the promotion of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches will increase in importance. In other words, the cooperation between the natural, engineering and social sciences must be promoted. The inclusion of society in the definition of the objectives, with which sustainable development is to be targeted, must be ensured. And the roads that a society and economy must embark on to attain a more sustainable future, must be researched. In other words: in addition to the traditional systematic knowledge, target knowledge and transformational knowledge are also needed. The latter two areas are relatively new for research.

This applies not only to research in Switzerland but at least equally to research cooperation with developing and transition countries. According to external evaluations, the Swiss National Centre of Competence in Research NCCR North-South has already been doing this with considerable success every year for over ten years. The future will show whether or not research promotion and development cooperation are prepared to take such experiences on board and continue to support them. Unfortunately, the signs are not very good at the moment.

The past week here in Rio was gruelling. I have managed to see very little of this fascinating city up to now. I was mostly a participating observer at the preparatory conference and occasionally an actor on the secondary platforms. Despite this, the journey was worthwhile for the Swiss Academy of Sciences, who nominated me, for the University of Bern, to which I will return with many new insights, and for me personally as I met many old friends and made new ones.

20 June 2012, article by Urs Näf, economiesuisse:

Following numerous and lengthy rounds of preliminary negotiations, the host country Brazil pulled off a huge and unexpected coup on 19 June 2012. The text to be negotiated at the conference has been finalised: no country succeeded in fully enforcing its position and none managed to block the final negotiations. The compromise of Rio 2012 is born.

For the Swiss economy and business, the signs are good. First, the concept of the green economy is enshrined for the first time in the UN framework. The economy will now be involved to a far greater extent with other important groups in the policy organisation and design process. In addition, companies are encouraged to become more active in the area of social responsibility – as has already been successfully achieved in Switzerland on a voluntary basis. The activities of the Global Compact, whose Swiss section is actively supported and coordinated by the ICC Switzerland, the Swiss wing of the International Chamber of Commerce, were singled out for particular praise.

So what should we understand by the «green economy»? The new approach should not be understood as a rigid formula and should be implemented on an individual basis according to the needs of the individual countries. In addition, the green economy should enable economic growth and ensure sustainable employment. It is also important that protectionist trade restrictions are not created under the pretext of the green economy. Finally, a matter of importance for the Swiss economy was also taken into account: the protection of intellectual property remains unaffected.

Overall, from the perspective of Switzerland, the result is to be welcomed. It means that open markets and a clear commitment to the market economy remain the central pillars of global sustainable development. Previous achievements in the areas of green technology and sustainable products will further strengthen the Switzerland’s leading position in the area of the green economy and sustain its competitive advantage.

19 June 2012, article by Isolda Agazzi, Alliance Sud:

No badge is needed and there are no security checks when you enter the Aterro de Flamenco park, the legendary location of the 1992 Rio Earth Summit and the place where the Peoples Summit is currently under way. There are no noisy cars either: located in the middle of the city, the idyllic park which seems to hug one of Rio’s innumerable bays is just a stone’s throw from the nearest Metro station. The journey to the Rio Centro, the venue of the official summit, involves a far more tedious one-and-a-half bus ride.

So here, under the vigilant eye of Christ the Redeemer, who is currently bathed in appropriate green light , and with a panoramic view of the Sugar Loaf, huge numbers of activists from NGOs and social movements from all over the world mix with curious locals. They carry on animated discussions about sustainable development, the future of the planet and organic farming. Under white tarpaulins between shady trees, men and women of all ages listen attentively to a woman farmer from Africa who tells them about the serious consequences of climate change and the many problems caused by land grabbing. Indigenous people from the Amazon region have pitched their tent nearby to protest against deforestation which is threatening their relationship with nature or «Mother Earth» as they say. Dressed in their most beautiful clothes and adorned with magnificent tattoos, they improvise a sacred ceremony, accompanied by dances and rhythmical drumming. They threaten to drown out the speech being given by a trade unionist from Burkina Faso who is holding forth nearby on the disadvantages of a genetically modified agricultural landscape. Here the rhythmical drumming, in Rio Centro the monotonous humming of the air conditioners ….

The two worlds could not be more different. And they appear to have precious little to do with each other. Few of the official conference delegates are likely to know about the existence of the Peoples Summit, despite the fact that the Brazilian organisers expect up to 40,000 participants each day. For their part, the people in the Aterro de Flamenco follow the progress of the official negotiations with impatience. They reject the idea of the last corner of the earth being declared a commodity and have already passed the death sentence on the green economy, the solution being pushed by the countries of the North. Is this colourful Peoples Summit not far closer to the original spirit of Rio than the official conference? Did it really take place here? The NGOs claim that this is the case, the governments deny it … it really has become the stuff of legend.

18 June 2012, article by Felix Gnehm, WWF:

«Order and progress» is the motto inscribed on the Brazilian flag. The latter, in particular, is urgently required for the concluding phase of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development. The negotiations between the heads of state begin on Wednesday. The wrangling over individual words progressed at a snail’s pace in recent days. My colleague Hans Hurni provided a very vivid description of this process in his contribution to the blog.

In order to trigger a change of pace, for once, Brazil is not expected to put on a dazzling display of ball handling skills. Instead, it must provide leadership and persuasiveness to enable the heads of state from all over the world to create a legacy of workable sustainable development goals for future generations. From the WWF’s point of view, a vision of «The Future We Want» has not emerged from the preliminary negotiations but, instead, a lowest common denominator full of empty words that avoid obligations and concrete objectives.

Is Brazil actually a good role model with regard to sustainability? The impression made by the newly industrialised country is ambiguous. President Dilma Rousseff sends signals to both environmental activists and the supporters of unbridled growth. Environmental organisations praise the new conservation areas and the guaranteed rights of use for the indigenous population, and the fact that Ms Rousseff will present the Nagoya Protocol outlawing biopiracy to parliament for ratification. This means that access to genetic resources and the associated traditional knowledge will be regulated – a move that strengthens the position of the indigenous population.

However, the other side of the Brazilian political coin aims to sacrifice nature conservation areas for hydropower projects and has accepted the new forest law. This was supported by powerful Brazilian agri concerns, in particular, which benefit enormously from it. It amounts to an amnesty for environmental criminals and could result in the large-scale logging of the Amazon rainforest. The WWF opposes this dilution of the law.

Irrespective of whether Brazil succeeds in providing a positive role model for sustainability, there can be no doubt that the Latin American giant likes to present itself as a strong champion of sustainable development. And it now has the opportunity prove this by shaping the assembled world panel into a winning team by Friday.

17 June 2012, article by Nick Beglinger, Swisscleantech:

I am looking forward to Rio – I have never been there before and have never attended a UN conference of this size. I fly out early tomorrow morning at 6.30. I am highly motivated, particularly as an economic representative. The global resources and climate problem needs new solutions today – and the economy has a crucial role to play here. So it’s good that the green economy is one of the main themes of Rio+20!

A significant increase in the quality of economic activity in relation to resource efficiency and emissions, in all sectors of industry and on every levle of the value chain, represents the main challenge facing the international community. An increase in quality is essential if we want to develop sustainably. This applies to both the production processes and the products and services that feed our consumption behaviour. They must no longer be «damaging to the environment» («dirty», «unsustainable») and must become «environmentally friendly» («clean», «sustainable»). The green economy is synonymous with «cleantech». The traditional understanding of cleantech is too narrow and fails to convey the potential of a comprehensive new trend. What is involved here is the quality of the entire economy and not just «industrial policy»: it is not about the promotion and support of individual sectors, it is about our future.

The trade association swisscleantech sees itselfa s the voice of the green economy in Switzerland. The new path in this direction already existed for us before Rio. We are liberal and sustainable in our orientation. We support full-cost accounting, that is the «internalisation» of cost factors that were previously considered externally (i.e. not correctly incorporated), for exmaple ozone-forming nitrogen oxides and nuclear risks. And we support the market. This plays sustainably (or «cleanly», «greenly») if the framework conditions (i.e. the applicable laws and regulations) take the full-cost account into consideration. Through this, the clean and not less-clean products and services are systematically rewarded. The rules of the game are changing fore everyone – everyone can and must participate. Innovation is arising and based on the new rules, everywhere and without planned-economy requirements, on which specific technologies or processes should be based. If correctly introduced, this «sustainable market economy» does not need any subsidies either. The rules of the market game require sustainability. Unsustainable management costs.

This is the only way that sustainable development can emerge from its niche into the mainstream – and we can only succeeded in mastering the challenges that face us in the time that remains if the mainstream is sustainable. We must set ourselves these challenges, in our own interest and in the interest of future generations.

For the economy this means that it must be involved in defining the framework conditions. The empty phrase «we support voluntary measures, more research and innovation» is no longer enough. The green economy is not at odds with a regulatory framework per se, as neoliberal thinkg suggests. Instead, the economy must actively ensure that the framework is lean and efficient. Not more but fewer rules are required. But the right rules are urgently needed. Voluntariness is good, however the adequate framework is better – not least due to the planning security it creates.

Rio+20 offers an important platform at international level for discussing the shift in the direction of a green economy. The future we want to aim for should be defined there jointly. The overall meaning of the results is recorded in the concluding document «The Future We Want». Unfortunately, concrete results can hardly be expected from Rio. The specific challenges will continue to exist.

Irrespective of the outcome of the negotiations, the attention that Rio attracts to our global challenges should be availed of as an opportunity to adopt the green economy in a specific way after the conference at international, national and local level. A concrete example of this is the Swiss Energy Strategy 2050. This transformation will be no walk in the park – either at global level or in Switzerland. The «clean» «green» path to the future is essential, however. From September, this must be implemented specifically in Switzerland. The journey will be worth it. ‘The Future We Want’ is the destination.

Nick Beglinger, 42, is an economist and President of the swisscleantech trade associaiton. He has worked internationally as an entrepreneur and established swisscleantech together with Christian Häuselmann and Bertrand Piccard in December 2009. Today, the association represents over 300 member companies and has 20 sectoral associations. Beglinger is accompanying the official Swiss delegation in Rio as an expert.

16 June 2012, article by Lucie Rosset, UN Youth Delegate for Switzerland:

One of the many achievements of the Earth Summit 20 years ago was the recognition of the important role that civil society has to play in decision-making processes relating to sustainable development. To create a participative system, nine «major groups» representing the different aspects of society were defined. These include the Major Group for Children and Youth, which is very big and involves thousands of young people throughout the world who have been working online for Rio+20 for months.

Just before the beginning of the final round of negotiations, from 9 to 12 June, around 2,000 young people from over 100 countries met for Youth Blast, a conference organised by young people for young people to discuss the challenges facing Rio+20. These days were teeming with ideas! Despite the fact that we come from very different economic, social and cultural contexts, we identified very similar concerns regarding our future.

«The Future We Want», the title of the final document which has been under negotiation for several months does little to respond to the expectations of young people. In addition to the already widespread problem of unemployment, we do not want to have to suffer the problems associated with the degradation of the environment and, even less, to live in a society that is already in serious decline in terms of human relationships. This is why we are appealing to the negotiators to find common solutions for the establishment of an effective institutional framework. We also ask that all of the States consider the decisions taken and put concrete action plans in place.

To conclude, I will recount an anecdote about the closing session of Youth Blast, which was attended by Mr Sha Zukang, Secretary-General of Rio+20. During a question-and-answer session, a young person asked him the following question: «If Rio+20 ends in failure, what will you say to all of these young people who will leave Riocentro (conference venue) disappointed? Mr Sha replied without hesitation and with undue conviction: «Failure, no! We should not allow this conference to fail!»

The people who still believe in this miracle are in the minority and I myself am in the sceptics’ camp. However, there are still some days to go so let’s hold on to a glimmer of until the final bell rings !

15 June 2012, article by Hans Hurni, University of Bern:

A visionary promise. Twenty years after the famous Earth Summit of 1992, the global community will finally come up with an audacious plan. Unfortunately, however, the slogan for Rio+20, «The Future We Want», risks failing for the want of the right words.

It is 10 pm. According to my body clock from the day before yesterday in Switzerland, it should be three o’clock in the morning and high time for a 60+ year-old to go to bed. However, a promise is a promise, so I will write this blog quickly and turn in. At 6 pm this evening, I took my leave of the Swiss delegation and was driven for two hours through Rio de Janeiro’s rush hour traffic to my hotel. Most of my colleagues are still at the negotiations and will probably not return to their hotels until midnight.

The first day of negotiations of the three-day PrepCom lies behind us. This is the last preparatory meeting before the actual summit from 20-22 June 2012. The day began at 6.30 am when the last arrivals from Switzerland met at the group’s hotel for breakfast. The journey from the hotel in Copacabana to the Riocentro, the enormous convention centre around 50 kilometres away on the edge of the city, took over one hour. The sun rose almost vertically but was soon concealed by foggy clouds. A cool day for the tropics.

The delegation passed the morning in separate groups: those who were allowed directly into the centre and the rest, that is us. We lacked badges, the personal IDs, without which it is not possible to enter the convention centre. We had all been registered as required three weeks ago but it emerged yesterday that each person’s position and institution must be specified. We had done that as required. However, the accompanying letter sent to New York referred to me as a «Representative of Swiss Science». What kind of institution is that and who can vouch for my position? Explanations like: «The Swiss Academies nominated me» were of no use. So it was back to square one: «I am employed as a professor at the University of Bern.» That was more effective and did not even have to be vouched for; as an institution the university is too venerable to require verification and the position of professor too credible. A useful tip for conmen.

After two hours, thanks to the Swiss embassy, all of the delegation members who had remained outside received their badges and were able to enter the Riocentro. We had missed the opening address, of course. I received an email from someone lucky enough to be inside somewhat later. «General chaos in a much too small plenary room.» The chairperson’s orders were clear: «Outstanding issues: work on the language (… of the draft text), and agree to a concept or a target in areas where there is still no agreement and more discussion necessary. We have only three days. We owe it to ourselves to finish our work; we owe it to HOS; we owe it to future generations and our planet.» Everyone has email access and is constantly emailing and text-messaging back and forth. Apart from «HOS», I understood everything but that was not the only acronym you had to find an explanation for yourself.

So we set off to the first working group on the topic of «Desertification, land degradation and drought»; I had already missed lunch. This was a sobering experience. I accompanied the federal official and spokesman for the Swiss delegation in this group and provided some support – I had over 30 years experience in dealing with these topics, which also form part of the focus of my research. The meeting lasted three hours and was concerned with ironing out around 10 highlighted points of disagreement on a single page of the conference text. There was bargaining about the words and word order but much more so about the hidden agendas and politics. The spokesmen were the USA, the EU and the representative of the G77 group of developing countries. The stupid thing was that I understood all the positions, I knew what they secretly wanted and understood the underlying political intentions. It is difficult to have your own position in such circumstances, and the Federal Council had not given us any specific instructions on this topic.

So the Swiss negotiator made just one brief contribution and was acknowledged with a friendly nod. At least we did not hinder the negotiations, or did we? Hand on heart: could we not be more generous? And is it this future, how we want it?

14 June 2012, article by Felix Gnehm, WWF:

I set off on the journey to Rio with mixed feelings. On the one hand, I felt sceptical: the preliminary negotiations were tough. Progress was blocked at every turn by conflicts between the industrialised and developing countries. On the other hand, I couldn’t help feeling optimistic and excitement: Rio will bring progress because a huge number of creative, solution-oriented and future-oriented doers and thinkers are gathering here in Brazil!

So where do the gaps between the negotiating delegations lie? I would like to focus on just one example, the enormous development gap between the very poor and very rich nations. This fact can be demonstrated very simply by comparing Switzerland with Ethiopia, a country I know particularly well from my early work with HEKS (aid organisation of the Protestant churches of Switzerland).

The annual per capita income of an Ethiopian is just about USD 345 while the income of the average Swiss person is 188 times greater than this, i.e. USD 65,000. An Ethiopian generates 0.1 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year and a Swiss person 50 times more, i.e. five tonnes. My Ethiopian friends ask two things of me as a Swiss person: first, that I allow them to develop just as we have developed in Switzerland so that Ethiopia does not stand still as the poorhouse of East Africa simply because we should all use fewer resources now. Second, they ask that we support Ethiopia in embarking on a development path that will enable it to leave poverty behind in a way that does not involve any cost for the environment. It is easy for us to speak of environmentally friendly development. When industrialisation transformed Switzerland from a European poorhouse to one of the richest countries in the world, ecology was not yet an issue.

Against the background of these completely different interests between rich and poor countries, the negotiations are anything but a walk in the park. But the real opponents are not the Ethiopians. Instead, there are the forces that do not wish to change today’s economic model at any price. If these fossil raw-material junkies from industrialised and newly industrialised countries retain the upper hand, very little of tangible value will be agreed on in Rio. And this will be to all our detriment – whether we’re Swiss or Ethiopian. The critical limits of our planet do not care a jot about the competition between nations.

I am delighted to take part in the global conference on sustainability as part of the Swiss delegation, and to play my part for our planet and our future. I have brought the concrete demands of the WWF with me in my suitcase. A strong, tangible commitment to two central aims: sufficient food, energy and drinking water for all and a green economy that reduces environmental pollution and poverty.

13 June 2012, article by Urs Näf, economiesuisse:

The international community of states is seeking ways of defining the concept of the green economy in Rio, and of deriving from this definition meaningful political conditions for the promotion of economic growth and the simultaneous improvement of environmental protection and the promotion of social progress. A uniform definition, set of indicators or financial parameters do not exist that indicate what exactly the «green economy» involves. In economic circles, people tend to speak of «green economies» and are referring here to the many challenges and opportunities that exist across the sectors and value chains. The green economy should act as a compass which points to the direction that global economic development should take despite all of the current tensions and economic turbulence.

The preconditions for the transition to a green and sustainable economy can be subdivided into three different sectors of innovation: social innovation, ecological innovation and economic innovation.

Social innovation

1. Raising awareness of the tasks and opportunities
The change in direction towards a green economy requires an awareness of the magnitude of the global economic, ecological and social tasks we face, and also of the new opportunities that arise from them.

2. Promoting education and skills
Education is a priority in the development of a green economy. Education must be promoted by the political arena, academic world and private sector so that the necessary skills and entrepreneurial capacities can be developed.

3. Employment: keeping an eye on the big picture
Employment is a crucial factor for the economy, the environment and social development. A green economy offers reasonable and meaningful jobs and promotes global employment, in particular with a view to eradicating poverty. Political measures for the creation of so-called «green jobs» should not, however, result in the net loss of jobs.

Ecological innovations

4. Resource efficiency and decoupling: «more from less»
The green economy increases the resource efficiency of material flows through the application of the «more from less» principle, and tries to incorporate the economic value of natural capital and ecosystem services. In the long term, the green economy strives to increase economic, social and economic utility and to decouple it from negative environmental influences.

5. Lifecycle approach: minimising the ecological footprint
A green economy follows the lifecycle approach, by means of which the ecological footprint of all economic activities is further minimised. The lifecycle approach also helps to track down hidden opportunities and takes unintended consequences, external effects and the competition for resources into account.

Economic innovation

6. Open and competitive markets: the foundation stone
A green economy highlights the significance of sustainable growth and access to open, functional and efficient markets. Approaches should be established throughout the economy that are based on markets for competitive products and services.

7. Accounting and reporting: developing new indicators
To implement a green economy, indicators and figures for accounting and greater transparency and reporting should be developed that make sense in economic terms. A more flexible approach to the assessment of costs and benefits is crucial to its success.

8. Finances and investments: promoting well-founded decision-making
A green economy actively steers innovations in private and public finances and investments in the direction of sustainable development. To ensure that this succeeds, political and regulatory conditions are needed which promote well-founded investment decisions by public and private investors. The demand for innovative and responsible business sectors should be increased through transparency. Long-term shared values form the basis for sustainable investment decisions.