The future we want
By
Mohamed El-Ashry
Issue 181 - April 2013
The 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, was a bright moment for the environment and sustainable development. It yielded some genuine results. The Climate Change and Biodiversity Conventions were adopted, and Agenda 21 confirmed the direct link between the environment and human development.
Since then, despite some progress, humanity greater in number and more economically active with each passing day, is increasingly playing havoc with Earth’s natural systems. Our actions are giving rise to a multitude of critical threats: the degradation of soils, water, and the marine resources essential to food production; health-endangering air and water pollution; global climate change that is likely to disrupt weather patterns and raise sea levels everywhere; the loss of habitats, species, and genetic resources, damaging both ecosystems and the services they provide; and the depletion of the ozone layer. In the Arab region we have our fair share of these critical challenges as has been documented in AFED’s reports.
As my colleague Gus Speth put it: “The 1992 Earth Summit was the high-water mark. The water fell pretty quickly after that.” It is ironic that as the evidence for environmental degradation becomes more convincing, the political will for action has become weaker or lacking. This was confirmed once again in June, at Rio+20, where world leaders failed to grasp the dimensions of the challenge.
The outcome document from Rio, entitled “The Future We want,” listed every environmental problem and green initiative; yet its 283 paragraphs started with the words “affirm,” recognize,” “underscore,” “urge,” and “acknowledge.” The word “reaffirm” is used 60 times and little or no “decide” and “commit.” This prompted a number of environment and sustainable development leaders to write to heads of states and government that the outcome of the conference represents “The Future We Do Not Want.”
On a slightly positive note, governments did agree to start talks on setting sustainable development goals to augment the existing Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) which are set to expire in 2015. They also addressed, though briefly, “green economics” which was one of the two main themes of the conference. The other was environmental governance.
In deciding to organize Rio+20, the UN General Assembly declared that one of the principal themes of the conference would be a green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication. This, in view of the many linked crises the world has been facing—from energy to food, to water to climate—and in recognition of the serious discussions around the world about green economy which entails changing development paradigms and reshaping economies to deliver improved human well-being and social equity. As you know, last year’s AFED annual report and conference were on green economy in the Arab world, and the subject relate as well to this year’s report and conference as we have witnessed in the 2-day discussions. Both reports address the belief that measuring growth in terms of GDP alone does not tell us what we need to know about human progress and the state of the natural resource base upon which life depends in the first place.
An interesting observation from Rio and other recent international forums is the big power shifts around the world. These include the rise of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) and the new assertiveness by developing countries. How the emerging economies respond to sustainability challenges will increasingly drive how the world responds. These power shifts also include the growing capacity of non-governmental organizations and corporations to mold effective action without the blessing of governments.
In fact, many observers saw the glass of Rio+20 as half-full. They support the UN SG Ban Ki-Moon’s statement: “In Rio we saw the further evolution of an undeniable global movement for change,” and cite the hundreds of “non-globally-negotiated” specific commitments made by countries, communities, and corporation outside the outcome document. They estimate that these commitments are worth more than $500 billion, while other pledges are difficult to put a dollar value on such as the pledge by 400 of the world’s largest companies to make their supply chains deforestation free by 2020.
In my view, the one major progress from the sidelines of Rio was the institutionalization of “Sustainable Energy For All.” Recognizing the importance and urgency of global energy challenges, the United Nations General Assembly designated 2012 as the International Year of Sustainable Energy for All. Building on this step, the Secretary-General announced last fall his own initiative on Sustainable Energy for All, which seeks to mobilize global action in support of energy access, energy efficiency, and increasing the share of renewable energy. Three linked objectives underpin the goal of Sustainable Energy for All by 2030:
• To ensure universal access to modern energy services;
• To double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency; and
• To double the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix.
On September 24th in New York, the initiative became operational with the naming of a Chief Executive. More than 60 developing countries have signed up to participate, and businesses and development banks have committed more than $50 billion toward the three objectives. It is estimated that more than a billion people will benefit as a result, through scaled-up renewable energy and improved energy policies.
In closing, let me say that we face a new world where global change is unprecedented in its scope, speed and scale. By 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity (that includes many Arab Countries). As to climate change, the concentration of CO2 is almost 400 ppm whereas scientists argue that the threshold should be 350 ppm. We are already facing rising sea levels, acidifying oceans, extreme weather events, large-scale societal dislocations, and collapsing ecosystems.
If we are already exceeding the limits of what the planet can sustain given the size of today’s economy and population (as we heard the last 2 days), how will the planet be able to cope with the global economy in 2050 when it will be four times as large as today, and the population 2-3 billion more than today?
Clearly, for the last 20 years, governments have not made the environment and sustainable development a priority despite the accumulating evidence on environmental degradation and increased poverty and hunger. As the international community comes together again to discuss setting sustainable development goals, the interconnected crises of the last few years--energy, food, water, and climate change--should provide an impetus for a new vision and thinking on global sustainability. These also should be a high priority on the agendas of non-government organizations as they press their governments for action.
Now that the problems have been well defined, the real emphasis should be on the "how." How to overcome the political hurdles for advancing sustainability? How do we get difficult reforms to happen? How do we navigate entrenched interests and established modes of behavior?
Mohamed El-Ashry is chairman of Renewable Energy Policy Network (REN21) and vice-chairman of AFED’s board of trustees.