Columnists
Johannesburg Summit: What's missing from the WSSD?
> BY SOON-YOUNG YOON
Copyright © 2002 by The Earth Times. All rights reserved

Nitin Desai, Secretary General of the WSSD, is keenly aware that refereeing a global consensus on sustainable development requires a strong hand. Governments will finalize negotiations on a Johannesburg Political Declaration and a policy document based on Agenda 21, the vision for the 21st Century agreed upon in 1992. Taking new trends such as globalization and HIV/AIDS into account, delegates will assess past achievements and plan a new course of action. They must avoid renegotiating international agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol while responding to NGO calls for a new treaty on corporate accountability. A wide range of concerns such as poverty, education, health, tourism, energy and transport, oceans, freshwater resources and natural disasters will get due attention while controversial ones like finance and trade are likely to be the main attractions of late-night negotiations.

Thus far, a pragmatic tone has dominated the preparatory committee meetings and is in tune with the UN's call for the summit to focus on deliverables to accelerate progress. Secretary General Kofi Annan has identified key areas where concrete results can be obtained. All of his recommendations make good sense and are strategic actions affecting a variety of development processes. For example, progress has been achieved in the last decade in improved access to clean water and sanitation, but accelerating implementation would bring additional benefits far beyond health, such as extending working life and raising the living standards of the poor. Equally important is Annan's call to reduce over-consumption of energy resources, reverse climate change and provide modern energy to more than two billion people. Another strategic action would be to increase investments in health, including management over toxic and hazardous materials, air pollution and tackling tropical disease like malaria. Annan further advocates a renewed commitment to preserve biodiversity.

NGOs will have an opportunity to add to this list during the Civil Society Global Forum to be held from August 19 to September 4 less than ten minutes away from the official meeting. Trade unions will very likely push harder for corporate accountability on indoor environmental problems likes occupational health and safety-an issue that has generally been skirted in official documents. NGOs from the South will present their Algiers Declaration that claims racism is an obstacle to sustainable development. They site the trans-boundary shipment of toxic waste to poor developing countries as evidence of post-colonial practices. Children will have a collective voice as representatives present a consensus statement based on a Children's Environment Conference held in Canada. Among their demands is a ban on CFCs and other toxic chemicals. High on the list of priorities for the indigenous peoples will be control over customary land. The oil exploration pending in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is an example of a priority issue. REDEH, a Brazilian-based communications NGO, and the Women's Environment and Development Organization will facilitate a Women's Action Tent devoted to a wide range of concerns including sexual and reproductive rights and women's political representation. Responding to calls for businesses to become more environmentally responsible, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development will plunge into the controversies with evidence that businesses too are eco-friendly. The Council plans to commit businesses to redress child labor and uphold high environmental standards.

Attempting to provide some coherence to these debates, the UN has outlined three themes, or "pillars," of sustainable development. These are: 1) combating poverty and promoting sustainable livelihoods, 2) sustainable consumption and production and 3) protecting the integrity of life-support eco-systems. These topics help focus attention on how environment and development interrelate and suggest useful pathways for the future. For example, the comprehensive UN progress report on Agenda 21 states that environmental degradation, natural disasters and disease have disproportionately affected people in poverty. Without additional resources to protect their sea walls and coral reefs and as climate change contributes to rising sea levels, small islands like Tuvalu can expect the majority of its rural population to become environmental refugees. The report also notes that sustainable development cannot be achieved without major changes in the world's consumption and production patterns. Industrial societies, particularly the US, currently consume a disproportionate share of the earth's natural resources and contribute the major portion of green house gases. Closely related to this problem is the accelerated damage to forests, fisheries and watersheds due in part to changing land-use and poor ocean management.

Given the near universal scope of the WSSD agenda, it may appear ludicrous to suggest that there is something missing. Yet that is clearly the case. Put bluntly, the WSSD is precariously balanced on three pillars with a weak foundation. The call to make this conference "practical" is driving some governments to play by traditional rules and backtrack on past international agreements like the Rio principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities." The grand mission of setting the world on a new course toward sustainable development has been trivialized in many instances as technocratic solutions while attention to mobilizing political will and finances fall by the wayside.

The Johannesburg summit can still succeed, but delegates must turn their attention back to basics and keep an eye on the big picture. The first challenge is to make sure that the public grasps the main message of the WSSD: Earth and all its living creatures are heading for ground zero, and everyone must start behaving "as if human beings intended to stay on this planet." Then, they need to be convinced that a UN summit will help set things right in the world. The urgency of the matter was well expressed by Secretary General Kofi Annan in his lecture at the London School of Economics earlier this year when he said, "Sustainable development may be new conventional wisdom, but many people have still not grasped its meaning. One important task is to show that it is far from being as abstract as it sounds. It is a life-or-death issue for millions upon millions of people and potentially the whole human race." Thus far, in many countries, the WSSD has failed to build a foundation for the most important element of sustainable development-a broad-based political leadership with popular support. But there is a more serious rift in the structure of the conference; even among the faithful attending the event, a mistrust of the UN's call for partnerships persists. Partly in response to criticisms that UN meetings are little more than one-time events that are quickly forgotten, the UN designed events to promote networking. Citing successes such as the Global Health Initiative it has encouraged partnerships involving stakeholders including businesses, youth and women's groups. However, the organization is facing a standoff with some NGOs for brokering forced relationships. For example, Friends of the Earth has accused the UN meeting of being hijacked by corporations pursuing the WTO trade agenda. Other NGOs have shown their disdain for partnerships based on what they perceive to be "unequal power relations" by turning their backs on the private sector altogether. They argue that in the absence of a serious redistribution of power, community groups that join hands with dominant allies will carry the burden of development projects while having little say in decision-making. Before all partners give up hope, there is still a chance to build teamwork. Taking the stakeholders' reluctance to heart and addressing the issue head-on may be the only way to bridge this growing chasm.

The WSSD process must also be better grounded in scientific knowledge about how to make sustainable development work. International conferences can, and often do, contribute to an essential body of "how-to" knowledge. Out of the international exchange of views and review of the global condition, a clearer picture of why policies succeed or fail should emerge. But to date, few country reports provide the in-depth policy analyses required to make that happen. Part of the problem is poor funding for research to help governments analyze the impact of their policies on social change. Another concern is the paucity of scientific tools for understanding the interaction between global processes and human behavior. We are years behind in preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS and the looming epidemic of tobacco-related diseases in developing countries is hardly recognized. Economics, the preferred policy tool, is still a poorly tuned craft. Even the World Bank with its elite corps of economists would not claim to have the power to predict the final scenerio of globalization. Invoking the Precautionary Principle is a major step forward, but governments and the UN also have to put more financial resources into filling in the knowledge gaps. Researches on sustainable development and the environment require comprehensive, longitudinal methodologies and should include political and social as well as scientific analyses. For example, more research is needed to discover cheap energy resources that can be used to replace the current carbon-based ones, but little is known about which policies would make them acceptable to manufacturers or consumers, particularly in developing countries. Science and technology policies also need serious rethinking about how knowledge is generated, protected, and shared globally. If nations are heading for global interlinking eco-systems, then governments need to keep the flow of knowledge circulating freely. That means overcoming barriers that prevent major groups like women, indigenous peoples and farmers from contributing to and accessing information and enlisting their help to solve the sustainable development puzzle. Although the WSSD draft plan acknowledges the importance of increased investments in science and technology, few governments are forthcoming with the political will to achieve these goals.

Finally, delegates need to place greater faith in the power of a human rights approach to sustainable development. The human rights concept has evolved from a narrowly defined legalistic, "western" approach to an international standard of conduct with far reaching legislative implications. Although often appearing in different guises, the ethical basis of sustainable development has been on the UN agenda for decades. We need to draw upon this rich tradition and rethink human rights so that it lays the intellectual foundation to tackle such problems as the environment, self-determination, peace and corporate accountability. Human Rights Covenants clearly state that all people have the right to economic development and that this right is universal as well as indivisible from other civil and political rights. Other sources closer at hand are the 27 core principles of the Rio Declaration adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit. The Rio Declaration stands out for its clarity of vision and anticipation of the 21st century challenges to sustainable development. Yet this important historic document has struggled to stay alive in this WSSD process. Principle 1 states that "Human beingsâ?|are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature." Principle 3 expresses that "The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations." And it notes that States should cooperate in a spirit of "global partnership to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth's ecosystem." It is time to invite the spirit of the Rio Declaration to Johannesburg so as to breathe life back into the proceedings. A world summit that is devoted to changing the course of human history must rally the moral consciousness of every citizen, and this particular world summit is still a potential winner.