Rio +20

Rio +20 provides an opportunity to consider what can and needs to be done to improve the chances for meeting the still unfulfilled goals established at the Earth Summit. These objectives were as follows:

The “stabilization of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” (Article 2, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change).

“the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources” (Article 1, United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity).

“to combat desertification and mitigate the effects of drought in countries experiencing serious drought and/or desertification, particularly in Africa . . .” (Note: Desertification refers to land degradation in semiarid and subhumid regions from climate change and human activities; Article 2, United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification).

To establish a global partnership to meet the challenges of environment and development (Agenda 21).

Although there has been some progress in terms of improved scientific information, greater global awareness, and strengthened international, national, and local governance capacities, overall trends remain alarming as the following statistics suggest:

The year 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year on record since measurements began in 1880. ¹ Concentrations of CO₂ in the atmosphere have reached 390 ppm, ² well above the relatively “safe” level of 350 ppm and approaching the 2 degree equivalent of 450 ppm.

An objective that was set in 2002 to significantly halt the loss of biodiversity by 2010 was not achieved. By 2000 only 73% of original global natural biodiversity was left. ³ Anthropogenically induced species extinction is estimated to be far beyond the natural rate. The IUCN projects large percentages of species that have been assessed globally for the threat of extinction: 13% of all birds, 25% of mammals, and 41% of amphibians. ⁴

Whereas between 1981 and 2003 16% of degraded land was improved, during the same time frame 24% of global land was degraded. Causes include overgrazing, overcultivation, deforestation, and poor irrigation systems as well as climate change itself. ⁵

The Millenium Development Goals that address poverty, access to safe drinking water, infant mortality, and disease control, among other issues, have been partially fulfilled, but many basic needs remain to be met. Given that in the past 20 years the world’s population increased by an estimated 1.6 billion people and a similar amount will be added over the next two decades, further progress is critical.

So what has been done and what can be done in response to these problems?

A global consensus has emerged around the need to stabilize greenhouse gases at a level that will keep global average temperatures under 2 degrees centigrade above preindustrial levels. The political will to take action, however, remains weak. At the 17th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, agreement was reached to extend the Kyoto Protocol into a second phase that is to start in 2013. Yet the second phase of Kyoto will be greatly narrowed in scope. Canada has formally pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol, and Japan and Russia indicated they will not take on any new commitments under the agreement. The United States was never on board. Thus, this leaves only the Europeans, Australia, and New Zealand subject to still-undecided new commitments. In parallel, a second agreement was reached to form a global agreement on climate change that is to include both developed and developing countries and that has as its objective to keep global average temperature increases to no more than 2 degrees centigrade. Yet the agreement’s contents will not be negotiated until 2015, and assuming all goes well, this still nonextant agreement will not enter into effect until 2020. In other words, the Durban meeting was able to avert a complete collapse of the international climate negotiations but pushed a solution long into the future.

Some suggest that the international climate negotiations are essentially beyond hope or repair and that it should be in other forum, such as the G-20 or the Major Economies Forum, that agreements be forged among the largest emitters. I am of the conviction that despite their many problems, keeping the international climate negotiations going is important. They do provide a vehicle for global scientific, technological, and policy-related discussions not only about mitigation but also about adaptation and play an important role in elevating the attention of climate change in governments that might otherwise ignore it completely. Nevertheless, the frustratingly slow pace of the negotiations and the tendency of states to embrace low common denominator positions argue for the importance of simultaneously pursuing and strengthening other initiatives. Very briefly, these include, but certainly are not limited to (a) parallel discussions on mitigation in forum like the G-20; (b) the establishment of climate change (and biodiversity) targets across subnational levels of government (e.g., among the world’s large urban areas); (c) removing direct and hidden subsidies for fossil fuels; (d) supporting energy efficiency initiatives both in developed and developing countries in the housing, transport, and industrial sectors; (e) expanding incentives for the use of renewable energies; (f) promoting green purchasing requirements for governments; (g) reducing the rates of deforestation and encouraging tree planting; (h) reducing unnecessary packaging and material use in products in order to save resources and reduce waste and energy use; (i) expanding taxes on luxury expenditures (such as air transport); and (j) strengthening public education on climate change mitigation and adaptation.

It is illustrative to look at a few examples of how such policies are being implemented. In the United Kingdom, there has been a strong effort to promote more sustainable development through the introduction of green purchasing requirements for all government institutions. Across Europe, North America, and Asia there are a growing number of local communities that have established climate action plans. Some European governments, such as Germany, Switzerland, and Sweden, and also many local communities, have announced and started to implement ambitious plans for very sharp reductions in CO₂ emissions and large-scale expansion of renewables. Indeed, interest in renewables is expanding globally with more than 50 countries now making use of feed-in tariffs and a growing number of local communities striving to be 100% renewable. ⁶ As another positive sign, Brazil and Indonesia have managed to slow deforestation, an important step in addressing climate change and biodiversity loss. Largely as a result, forest loss has slowed from about 8.3 million hectares per year from 1990 to 2000 to about 5.2 million hectares per year from 2000 to 2010. ⁷ It is also encouraging that both the World Bank and the OECD are discussing steps to remove fossil-fuel subsidies. In the coming years, these and other such efforts need to be scaled up and diffused.

In many ways, climate change has received more attention than biodiversity loss. This is despite the recent findings of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) studies, hosted by the United Nations Environment Programme, related to the high costs to the economy associated with biodiversity loss. ⁸ The costs of biodiversity loss to businesses may even surpass those of climate change in the short term. ⁹ Much more should be done to link climate change and biodiversity protection strategies. Somewhat hopefully, the Conference of the Parties to the Biodiversity Convention that met in Nagoya in 2010 did succeed in winning global agreement on halting biodiversity loss by 2020. It is also encouraging that a global target for the establishment of protected areas was surpassed. Still, much more can and needs to be done in parallel to the international negotiations in order to assure that biodiversity loss is indeed stemmed. This includes such activities as the establishment of biodiversity protection plans by local communities and municipalities, the mobilization of businesses to introduce biodiversity protection strategies, removal of harmful agricultural subsidies, promotion of protected areas in marine environments, and greater integration of biodiversity and climate change protection strategies.

Perhaps the most fundamental lesson to be learned is that we cannot wait for others to act first. We must all begin to act now.