This piece appeared in UNEP´s Our Planet Magazine. It´s a joint piece with Kumi Naidoo.
The Rio+20
summit was nothing short of an
epic failure. In the face of accelerating climate change and an ever-increasing
use of resources, governments failed to deliver the transformational change needed to safeguard our planet’s future. There was
no commitment made to an energy revolution based
on renewables and energy efficiency, or to urgently end deforestation. Overall, the world got just words and greenwash,
not the urgent action required to provide prosperity for all without exceeding
our planet’s limits.
By
contrast, the strengthening of UNEP has been held up as one of the summit's top achievements.
It is indeed good news that the General Assembly finally agreed in December
2012 that UNEP will receive “secure, stable and increased financial resources from the
regular budget of the UN“. It was about time to end a state of affairs where
UNEP needed to pass around a ´begging bowl´ each year to secure vital funds for
environmental protection. And it was also excellent news that both Brazil and
China used the occasion of Rio+20 to
pledge significant additional sums to strengthen UNEP. This was a recognition
of the important role UNEP plays in emerging economies – and a long way from
the old, and false, “environment vs. development“ dichotomy that overshadowed
its founding 40 years ago.
UNEP rightly aims
to deliver “the environment for development”, and has worked very hard since
its creation to address and become relevant to the needs of developing countries.
Strengthening it therefore contributes to global development efforts, rather
than distracting from them: the environment is, after all, the essential base
for all development. No doubt, this is one reason why African Heads of States
and Governments want to see it turned into a fully fledged specialized agency.
Rio+20
should indeed have been the place where UNEP finally became a proper UN
Environment Agency, as many, including the African and European Unions,
demanded in the final plenary discussion session. Sustainable development governance needs a global authority for the
environment, with greatly enhanced implementation, compliance and enforcement
mechanisms. Yet governments failed to upgrade UNEP at the summit, another
reason for saying its outcome was a failure. UNEP did at least progress on the
pitiful status quo, but this progression was ruefully inadequate for a Heads of
States summit.
Governments must
now move urgently to complete the upgrading process started in Rio. They must
put flesh on the bones of the General Assembly resolution and secure
significant additional funds for UNEP´s urgent and important work. They must
also not shy away from more controversial subjects, such as giving UNEP the
tools needed to effectively monitor implementation of multilateral
environmental agreements – and to impose sanctions on those breaking the rules.
As long as UNEP can only plead, coach and capacity build, while the World Trade
Organization can impose punitive tariff measures on those
breaking their rules, there is an
unacceptable inequality of power. Environmental governance, people and the
environment will continue to lose out as a result.
Yet if
sustainability is to thrive, we will need much more than a strengthening and
upgrading of existing institutions. As well as UN Environment Agency with real
powers, we need global rules that change power dynamics and investment
incentives. Global rules on corporate accountability and liability, for
example, are essential to ensure that damaging people and the environment is no
longer a free for all, but has real costs. At the Johannesburg Earth Summit in
2002, governments acknowledged the need for global rules
for global corporations. At Rio+20, however, they
only called for slight – and voluntary – improvements in the way that
corporations report their social and environmental impacts. A binding global instrument that ensures full
liability for any social or environmental damage
global corporations cause must therefore remain high on any governance reform
list. Indeed, it will be fundamental test of whether governments want to set
rules for people and the planet or abandon responsibility to a free market
focussed on short-term gain.
In truth,
sustainable development cannot become reality in a world in which short-term
bets by financial markets are all-powerful. Strong controls of such markets are
therefore an integral part of the needed reform of global governance. New
fiscal instruments, such as a Financial Transaction Tax, need to be adopted to slow harmful speculation and deliver much needed finance for development and environmental
protection. A complete social and environmental review of the global trade
system is also long overdue.
There has been
talk about strengthening UNEP for decades. Remarkably, over the last 40 years,
UNEP has thrived in difficult circumstances. It's present ability to publish
global environmental assessments, for example, is remarkable: even twenty years
ago NGOs needed to invest a lot of resources to find and publicize the kind of
information that UNEP´s Global Environment Outlook , for example, now summarizes so succinctly. We are grateful to UNEP for
playing this role, thus allowing us to focus even more on frontline
campaigning. But, we also know that time is running out – and that every new Outlook report only underscores the
increasing urgency for action.
We must thus
strive for a true transformation of global governance that puts people and
planet at the centre of all decision
making. As a vital first step, governments need to give real power to UNEP and
upgrade it to specialized agency status as soon as possible. Our children can
simply not afford any more time to be lost.
P.S: Here is a link to a piece in German I wrote on UNEP and international governance in 2012:
P.S: Here is a link to a piece in German I wrote on UNEP and international governance in 2012:
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen