论文部分内容阅读
TWENTY years ago, history was made in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, at the June 1992 Earth Summit, a landmark global meeting that adopted Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the Statement of the Forest Principles –documents laying down the guidelines for sustainable global development.
On June 20, 2012, the city is once again in the global spotlight as the UN Conference on Sustainable Development, also known as Rio+20, convenes for three days to continue the work of the 1992 summit, as well as the 2002 Johannesburg summit.
Prior to Rio+20, which was attended by more than 130 heads of state or government including Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, an estimated 50,000 participants from different nations showed up at the UN conference venue, the Rio Center, for a wide range of side events.
Participants in the preparatory events included lawmakers, senior government officials, business executives, and representatives of NGOs and the media. The forums, seminars and workshops they took part in were invariably dedicated to sustainable development issues – environmental protection, poverty relief, corporate responsibility, food security, recycling economy, and equal opportunity of employment.
Thanks to the Earth Summit in 1992, the concept of sustainable development has taken root in the minds of the people around the world. Tangible results have been attained during the past 20 years, as many countries made sustainability a national development priority. China, for instance, published its own agenda as early as 1994, and the country has made significant inroads in reducing poverty –one of the Millennium Development Goals agreed upon by all UN member countries at the UN Millennium Summit in 2000.
However, many of those goals remain largely unfulfilled, according to an assessment released by the UN Environment Program on June 6. The persistent problems of environmental degradation, depletion of natural resources and climate change have worsened, and new problems caused by unbalanced regional development and widening income gaps across the globe continue to emerge. Many people have been led to believe that unless drastic remedies are adopted to reverse the situation, sustainable development will be an unattainable dream.
Opposing Positions
The failure to fully carry out those commitments was largely attributed to the confrontation between the developed North and the developing South over the issue of how to approach sustainability. Zhao Yumin, a research fellow with the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation (CAITEC), believed that for developing countries, priority should be given to eradicating or reducing poverty and closing the gaps with the developed world. This means they will have to adopt a development model compatible with the actual level of their national development. To them,“sustainable development should be carried out step by step, in the same way as a baby shouldn’t be expected to run before he can walk,” she said.
According to Zhao, this explains why the Group of 77 developing nations and China insist on “common but differentiated responsibilities.” Adopted at the Earth Summit in 1992, the concept is a cornerstone of sustainable global development. Although all countries – developed and undeveloped alike – share a common responsibility for the environment, sustainable policies must take into account each country’s different national conditions. According to the framework laid out two decades ago, the North should therefore proactively support sustainability efforts in the South.
Phil Kline, from Greenpeace U.S.A. in Washington, D.C., believed that the concept embodied common human values. He said developed countries should help developing nations because they are in a much more privileged position.
“It will be the right thing to do if they can let poor countries share what they already have,” Kline said.
Conflict has dominated the preparatory meetings for Rio+20, as countries from the North and the South disagreed over both fundamental principles and trivial details, frequently in areas such as green economy policies and sustainable development goals. A source close to the Chinese delegation revealed that talks in the two initial rounds of the negotiations between March and May dragged on for weeks, largely because of North-South disputes.
The wording of the document was repeatedly revised, with individual articles added and paragraphs deleted – one step forward, two steps back. The final draft was cut to just 49 pages, down from the original 200 or more. This hard bargaining essentially shows that he North and the South were “on the alert against each other,” the source said. On June 14, a negotiator identified as representing the Group of 77 member countries reportedly walked out of the meeting room to protest the North’s refusal to compromise.
Luiz Alberto Figueiredo, executive secretary of the Brazilian government’s negotiation committee, also acknowledged that“countries with converging interests did form some kinds of alliances during the negotiation process.” Developing countries invariably expressed their disapproval of the North’s apparent shunning of its responsibility. Raoul Ferdinand Diandy, a Senegalese Foreign Ministry official, pointed out that rich countries can and should help poor countries in reducing poverty and developing green economy despite their current difficulties.
Hussein Al-Gunied, the Republic of Yemen’s Deputy Minister for Environmental Affairs, said, “The North has retreated from what they had promised at the 1992 Earth Summit,” which he also attended. He pointed out that developed nations should take on a “much greater share of responsibility” in sustainable development.
“They polluted the water and air, and made heavy use of our energy and other resources, and then, as they became rich and economically powerful, began to restrict our development. This is not fair,”Deputy Minister Hussein said.
Green economy Dilemma
As one of the major themes of Rio+20, building a green economy was another point of contention between the North and the South. While all agreed that recognizing the economic value of natural capital and ecological services is important to ensuring sustainable development, serious disputes remained between the two sides at the negotiation table. Again, the reality is that developing countries are short of the capital and technology for the industrial restructuring required to implement measures such as carbon emissions trading, while developed nations boast a large pool of such resources.
Germany, for instance, now offers as many as 250,000 job opportunities in local green economy sectors, and the number is predicted to rise to 300,000 by 2030. “If the North could help the South, in terms of financial aid, technology transfer, as well as market access, not only the two sides, but the whole world would also benefit,” said Enoch Deng, secretary general of the International Green Economy Association, at an NGO event in Rio de Janeiro.
Zhao of CAITEC simply said that by selling the notion of green economy to the developing world, developed countries actually intended to draw up the rules of the game so that they would make use of the initial opportunities economically or even politically.
Criticism aside, there were also con-structive views voiced over the NorthSouth confrontation. Sha Zukang, secretary general of Rio+20 and UN under secretary general for economic and social affairs, pointed out that although the argument between the North and the South was becoming intense, the ultimate goals of sustainable development should bridge the gap between the North and the South, rather than erecting a barrier that divides them. He Jikun, chairman of the Chinese Society for Sustainable Development, an NGO that hosted a workshop on the sidelines of the Rio+20 conference, also called for closer international cooperation in dealing with the challenges, saying it would be in everyone’s best interest for people from different countries to join hands to create a better world.
Mixed Reactions
For a moment, pessimism reigned over Rio de Janeiro. Seeing the hard bargains and unfulfilled commitments, and considering the non-binding nature of the outcome document, The Future We Want, a large number of participants believed the future for sustainable development would be quite uncertain.
Chandra Tamirisa, CEO of Transformations LLC., an independent consulting firm in Washington, D.C., expressed his doubts. “It would be interesting to see how the UN will coordinate the nations and push them.”
Others simply gave up completely.“The Rio summit will not bring about ‘the future we want.’ It will provide a stark and distressing reminder of the present we have,” said Kumi Naidoo, executive director of Greenpeace International.
There was also positive assessment. Some people said the conference would become another historical landmark. In addition to the adoption of the final document, the conference offered a good opportunity for countries around the world to look back at what they had achieved, realize why they had failed, and discuss what should be done in the future. “The meeting has brought to our attention something we are all concerned about, and also has come up with something encouraging and constructive,” said Kline. “Something is always better than nothing.”
The final draft of the outcome document was generally inclusive, balanced and set in a positive tone, said Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu after the document was agreed upon following rounds of hard talks on June 19. It addressed the major concerns of all parties, and will play an important role in promoting global sustainable development, he added.
The document reiterated the principled stances at the 1992 Earth Summit, in particular, the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities.” With regard to green economy, Ma said the document called for respecting each country’s sovereignty, national conditions, as well as development stage, and attaching greater importance to eradicating poverty around the world.
The document urged developed countries to fulfill their commitments to helping developing countries. These include providing to the developing world aid of up to 0.7 percent of their gross national product, extending environmentally friendly technology transfers under favorable terms to developing nations, and helping them build capacity, Ma said.
But as to the development in future, many believed it depends on how determined countries around the globe are to act for change.
On June 20, 2012, the city is once again in the global spotlight as the UN Conference on Sustainable Development, also known as Rio+20, convenes for three days to continue the work of the 1992 summit, as well as the 2002 Johannesburg summit.
Prior to Rio+20, which was attended by more than 130 heads of state or government including Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, an estimated 50,000 participants from different nations showed up at the UN conference venue, the Rio Center, for a wide range of side events.
Participants in the preparatory events included lawmakers, senior government officials, business executives, and representatives of NGOs and the media. The forums, seminars and workshops they took part in were invariably dedicated to sustainable development issues – environmental protection, poverty relief, corporate responsibility, food security, recycling economy, and equal opportunity of employment.
Thanks to the Earth Summit in 1992, the concept of sustainable development has taken root in the minds of the people around the world. Tangible results have been attained during the past 20 years, as many countries made sustainability a national development priority. China, for instance, published its own agenda as early as 1994, and the country has made significant inroads in reducing poverty –one of the Millennium Development Goals agreed upon by all UN member countries at the UN Millennium Summit in 2000.
However, many of those goals remain largely unfulfilled, according to an assessment released by the UN Environment Program on June 6. The persistent problems of environmental degradation, depletion of natural resources and climate change have worsened, and new problems caused by unbalanced regional development and widening income gaps across the globe continue to emerge. Many people have been led to believe that unless drastic remedies are adopted to reverse the situation, sustainable development will be an unattainable dream.
Opposing Positions
The failure to fully carry out those commitments was largely attributed to the confrontation between the developed North and the developing South over the issue of how to approach sustainability. Zhao Yumin, a research fellow with the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation (CAITEC), believed that for developing countries, priority should be given to eradicating or reducing poverty and closing the gaps with the developed world. This means they will have to adopt a development model compatible with the actual level of their national development. To them,“sustainable development should be carried out step by step, in the same way as a baby shouldn’t be expected to run before he can walk,” she said.
According to Zhao, this explains why the Group of 77 developing nations and China insist on “common but differentiated responsibilities.” Adopted at the Earth Summit in 1992, the concept is a cornerstone of sustainable global development. Although all countries – developed and undeveloped alike – share a common responsibility for the environment, sustainable policies must take into account each country’s different national conditions. According to the framework laid out two decades ago, the North should therefore proactively support sustainability efforts in the South.
Phil Kline, from Greenpeace U.S.A. in Washington, D.C., believed that the concept embodied common human values. He said developed countries should help developing nations because they are in a much more privileged position.
“It will be the right thing to do if they can let poor countries share what they already have,” Kline said.
Conflict has dominated the preparatory meetings for Rio+20, as countries from the North and the South disagreed over both fundamental principles and trivial details, frequently in areas such as green economy policies and sustainable development goals. A source close to the Chinese delegation revealed that talks in the two initial rounds of the negotiations between March and May dragged on for weeks, largely because of North-South disputes.
The wording of the document was repeatedly revised, with individual articles added and paragraphs deleted – one step forward, two steps back. The final draft was cut to just 49 pages, down from the original 200 or more. This hard bargaining essentially shows that he North and the South were “on the alert against each other,” the source said. On June 14, a negotiator identified as representing the Group of 77 member countries reportedly walked out of the meeting room to protest the North’s refusal to compromise.
Luiz Alberto Figueiredo, executive secretary of the Brazilian government’s negotiation committee, also acknowledged that“countries with converging interests did form some kinds of alliances during the negotiation process.” Developing countries invariably expressed their disapproval of the North’s apparent shunning of its responsibility. Raoul Ferdinand Diandy, a Senegalese Foreign Ministry official, pointed out that rich countries can and should help poor countries in reducing poverty and developing green economy despite their current difficulties.
Hussein Al-Gunied, the Republic of Yemen’s Deputy Minister for Environmental Affairs, said, “The North has retreated from what they had promised at the 1992 Earth Summit,” which he also attended. He pointed out that developed nations should take on a “much greater share of responsibility” in sustainable development.
“They polluted the water and air, and made heavy use of our energy and other resources, and then, as they became rich and economically powerful, began to restrict our development. This is not fair,”Deputy Minister Hussein said.
Green economy Dilemma
As one of the major themes of Rio+20, building a green economy was another point of contention between the North and the South. While all agreed that recognizing the economic value of natural capital and ecological services is important to ensuring sustainable development, serious disputes remained between the two sides at the negotiation table. Again, the reality is that developing countries are short of the capital and technology for the industrial restructuring required to implement measures such as carbon emissions trading, while developed nations boast a large pool of such resources.
Germany, for instance, now offers as many as 250,000 job opportunities in local green economy sectors, and the number is predicted to rise to 300,000 by 2030. “If the North could help the South, in terms of financial aid, technology transfer, as well as market access, not only the two sides, but the whole world would also benefit,” said Enoch Deng, secretary general of the International Green Economy Association, at an NGO event in Rio de Janeiro.
Zhao of CAITEC simply said that by selling the notion of green economy to the developing world, developed countries actually intended to draw up the rules of the game so that they would make use of the initial opportunities economically or even politically.
Criticism aside, there were also con-structive views voiced over the NorthSouth confrontation. Sha Zukang, secretary general of Rio+20 and UN under secretary general for economic and social affairs, pointed out that although the argument between the North and the South was becoming intense, the ultimate goals of sustainable development should bridge the gap between the North and the South, rather than erecting a barrier that divides them. He Jikun, chairman of the Chinese Society for Sustainable Development, an NGO that hosted a workshop on the sidelines of the Rio+20 conference, also called for closer international cooperation in dealing with the challenges, saying it would be in everyone’s best interest for people from different countries to join hands to create a better world.
Mixed Reactions
For a moment, pessimism reigned over Rio de Janeiro. Seeing the hard bargains and unfulfilled commitments, and considering the non-binding nature of the outcome document, The Future We Want, a large number of participants believed the future for sustainable development would be quite uncertain.
Chandra Tamirisa, CEO of Transformations LLC., an independent consulting firm in Washington, D.C., expressed his doubts. “It would be interesting to see how the UN will coordinate the nations and push them.”
Others simply gave up completely.“The Rio summit will not bring about ‘the future we want.’ It will provide a stark and distressing reminder of the present we have,” said Kumi Naidoo, executive director of Greenpeace International.
There was also positive assessment. Some people said the conference would become another historical landmark. In addition to the adoption of the final document, the conference offered a good opportunity for countries around the world to look back at what they had achieved, realize why they had failed, and discuss what should be done in the future. “The meeting has brought to our attention something we are all concerned about, and also has come up with something encouraging and constructive,” said Kline. “Something is always better than nothing.”
The final draft of the outcome document was generally inclusive, balanced and set in a positive tone, said Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu after the document was agreed upon following rounds of hard talks on June 19. It addressed the major concerns of all parties, and will play an important role in promoting global sustainable development, he added.
The document reiterated the principled stances at the 1992 Earth Summit, in particular, the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities.” With regard to green economy, Ma said the document called for respecting each country’s sovereignty, national conditions, as well as development stage, and attaching greater importance to eradicating poverty around the world.
The document urged developed countries to fulfill their commitments to helping developing countries. These include providing to the developing world aid of up to 0.7 percent of their gross national product, extending environmentally friendly technology transfers under favorable terms to developing nations, and helping them build capacity, Ma said.
But as to the development in future, many believed it depends on how determined countries around the globe are to act for change.