« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
The World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002: Reports from the Scottish Civic Delegation
Kevin Dunion, Chief Executive, Friends of the Earth Scotland
Once South Africa agreed to host the World Summit, the organisers became particularly irritated when documents and websites circulated referring to the event as 'Rio Plus Ten'. This was in recognition of the ten years since the Earth Summit in Brazil, but the Johannesburg hosts wanted their event to be just as distinctive and memorable. Sadly it is unlikely ten years from now that anybody will remember what happened in Johannesburg. Yet I want to argue that the process was not a failure and even more so the Scottish presence there was a considerable step forward for us.
There is something uncomfortable about Summits. They are buoyed up by hype and over expectation on the part of those participating and a natural cynicism from those watching from afar (although it could be argued, on this occasion, it was the other way round). The contrasts at this World Summit were always apparent. The organisers had claimed that 60,000 people would descend upon Johannesburg to grapple with the pressing issues of the day. This number was repeated in press reports and indeed attracted a lot of criticism, for the bloated nature of the event. The reality is that only 26,000 were registered for the Summit itself. 12,000 from governments, 10,000 from NGOs and 4,000 from the press. Still a substantial gathering, but not extraordinary compared to other events. In any case, the Summit itself is not a single event - those people were never gathered all together. Myriad meetings and parallel conferences were held to discuss and negotiate specific aspects of the agenda. Government and NGO delegations included a variety of specialists who have been engaged in other international negotiating processes on trade, finance, climate, agriculture, education and so on. In some ways Johannesburg was simply a synthesising of what was happening in international affairs.
Even before arriving we knew the limits of what could be achieved at the Summit. In Rio the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Climate Change Convention were successfully negotiated, both of which continue to have an impact upon national and local policy. Agenda 21 was agreed, a comprehensive 273 page action programme to deliver on the commitments made at Rio. The United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development was set up to encourage and monitor implementation.
Nothing like that was on offer in Johannesburg. No conventions or other binding agreements were being proposed. Instead great play was being made of voluntary partnerships between national governments, companies and what was loosely called civil society, which might tackle some of the pressing issues that were still starkly evident at the summit briefings.
We should remind ourselves that more than 1 billion people are without safe drinking water and over 2 billion lack adequate sanitation. As a result 3 million people die every year from diseases caused by unsafe water. The urban infrastructure of drinking water is chronically deficient with losses of 40% or more in many cities.
It is perhaps less well known that just as many people die from the effects of air pollution as from contaminated water and a billion breathe unhealthy air.
Despite the Convention on Biological Diversity severe pressure is still being placed upon the planet with 75% of fisheries exploited to capacity and 65% of agricultural land degraded.
What we were promised at Johannesburg was targets and timetables to carry into effect Agenda 21, prioritising the most pressing issues like those above.
Unfortunately, debate and negotiation made little real headway in establishing these. Some Governments, principally but not solely the US, were implacably opposed to binding outcomes, although targets were set for halving the number of people without access to water and sanitation by 2015. Other proposals such as delivering 10% of electricity from new renewables as proposed by Brazil failed to be agreed, despite negotiations continuing all through the final night.
To anybody who was not there and who reads the final Summit document the language remains committed, optimistic and progressive, but the reality is that in many cases it is simply a restatement of the Rio commitments and in some places represents a diminution. A major battle had to be fought even to maintain the recognition that the lifestyles of rich industrialised nations represent unsustainable consumption and production, and the ten-year action programme committed at Rio was watered down.
The negotiations took place in the Sandton convention Centre that emphasised the contrasts between the haves and have-nots. Ironically South Africa had just replaced Brazil as the most unequal society on the planet. Sandton is an oasis of conspicuous wealth, a convention centre attached to a luxury shopping mall. It is surrounded by the wealthy residencies of rich South Africans most of which have razor wire and elaborate security systems in place against intruders. Beyond in the sprawling city of Johannesburg are shanty towns and further south still the degraded landscape from mining and heavy industry.
The Summit process itself was the usual kaleidoscope of scurrying delegates, mountains of paper, late night lobbying. The backdrop was provided by Friends of the Earth International's demonstration on behalf of those who could not be present, with 6000 papier-mâché figures lined up outside the convention centre. There was a street demonstration - noisy, passionate but entirely peaceful - which was confronted by a redundant phalanx of riot police and kilometres of razor wire. Black stretch limousine cavalcades of heads of state rolled in and rolled out. There are still some snatches of their speeches that register. Not the hand wringing reminders of the plight of the planet but the significant snippets like the Canadian and Russian commitments to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on cutting climate change emissions. There were bizarre moments like talking live to Newsdrive on Radio Scotland on my mobile phone from the men's toilet of one of the hotels in Sandton, the only place where I could get relative quiet and a decent signal.
It confirmed that a Summit is an artificial environment in which to tackle real life problems. It doesn't set the agenda, it responds to it.
What made the summit worthwhile from my point of view were two things. At an international level I think it is essential that the process of dialogue and hard negotiation continue. Despite the disappointments of Johannesburg, where it could be said that the event failed to live up to expectations, the process is still valid. Even though that disappointment was largely shared by the thousands of groups from around the world who were present, there was no violence because United Nations gatherings provide access to the negotiators, to the conference centre and an opportunity to make comment directly to the delegates on behalf of non-governmental organisations. This contrasts with the closed and intimidating gatherings at Seattle where media attention focused on street demonstrations and violence. Meetings of the G8 in Gothenburg were similarly held behind closed doors.
At a more personal level it was hugely satisfying to be present with the Scottish First Minister. What was being discussed at Johannesburg was not foreign affairs, even though it took place in a foreign country. It was about national responsibilities, national performance on sustainable development and the common requirements on all of us to recognise that decisions taken here can impact upon people and environments far from our shores.
There was a stark admission from Jack McConnell, speaking at the Friends of the Earth International Environmental Justice side event, that Scotland is a northern nation but we still have poverty. We have chronically failed to reduce our wastes and have a legacy of past environmental degradation to make good by way of cleaning up contaminated land and pockets of urban air pollution. However, he was also able to set out his aspirations to rapidly expanding renewable energy generation in Scotland and his personal commitment to environmental justice as evidenced by his speech earlier in the year. This went down particularly well in South Africa where the concept is readily understood.
His itinerary included travelling down to Sasolburg, home of Sasol, one of South Africa's biggest companies which has recently invested in research at St Andrews University. It was particularly appreciated that he met with local environmental leaders. They were concerned about the effects of pollution from the refinery and the failings of the company elsewhere which had led to chlorine gas leaks. The environmental justice agenda means listening to people who are living next to potentially polluting activities or who are exposed to risk. That is what the Scottish delegation did in Johannesburg, and it is what needs to happen on a wider scale if we are to secure development, North and South, without degrading the living conditions of the poorest or vulnerable in society.
« Previous | Contents | Next »