0514

MEDIA BRIEFING
WHAT PROSPECTS FOR THE EARTH SUMMIT?

There are now fewer than four months to the Earth Summit - the first major summit dealing with sustainable development since Rio in 1992.

Despite some important achievements, Rio failed to deliver the real changes necessary to protect the environment for future generations. Since then, political will has waned, corporate influence has grown and the poorest have suffered. Will the 2002 Earth Summit succeed where the 1992 Earth Summit failed?

Not if the USA gets its way.

The Bush administration has made it clear that it does not want any new global agreements at the Summit. It is even trying to unravel some of the progress gained over the last decade. For example it wants to restrict the use of the precautionary principle in decision making. The principle has been at the centre of confrontation between the USA and the EU over restrictions on hormone treated beef and GM food.

This briefing outlines the major issues for the Earth Summit, and the politics that may make the talks collapse.

Earth Summit: Major Issues

Corporate accountability

The treaty would

• Guarantee communities a legal right of redress for activities that adversely affect them, as well as rights to prior consultation, against displacement and for compensation or reparation.
• Guarantee ndividuals and communities rights over the resources they need to enjoy a healthy and sustainable life, including common property resources such as forests.
• Place a duty on directors of corporations to take account of social and environmental factors when taking business decisions
• Require corporations to meet best environmental, social, labour and human rights standards wherever they operate.

The USA is set against any legally binding framework on corporate accountability. The European Commission would prefer to promote voluntary measures. However, the Commission is under pressure from the European Parliament and others to push for legally binding agreements. The UK Government is not warm to a new Treaty either but will be under increasing pressure as the negotiations on the Earth Summit progress. The abject failure of OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, which are voluntary have undermined the credibility of agreements in this area which do not have a legal foundation.

The G77 countries potentially have most to gain from a Treaty on corporate accountability, but are not united in their approach to the idea. Some may fear that a Treaty might be used as an excuse to deny them access to developed country markets, others may fear that a Treaty might expose bad practice by their domestic business sector or by their politicians and state institutions.

Energy

Trade

Many environment and development groups believe that neo-liberal economic theory – the world's dominant economic model – is unsustainable. Instead, Governments should seek to increase economic diversity and ensure that states retain necessary powers over their domestic economies. They should reject the strait-jacket of export-led development. The impact of trade liberalisation on inequality, inequitable consumption levels, food security and safety, environmental protection and the status of multilateral environmental agreements should be priority concerns.

This issue is one which divides Governments and civil society. The trade issue which causes the greatest disagreement is agriculture. Trade liberalisation for agriculture threatens the livelihoods of subsidence farmers in developing countries but also the livelihoods of small farmers in the UK and other developed countries. Sustainable Consumption and Production Developed countries are responsible for most of the environmental and developmental problems faced by the world as a result of the unsustainable production and consumption patterns of the last two hundred years. Progress in tackling these issues since the Rio Earth Summit 10 years ago has been slow. Developing countries naturally expect developed countries to take action before they commit themselves pursue economic growth in a way which does not break environmental limits. EU Environment Commissioner Margot Wallström said in February: “we cannot keep coming back from world gatherings with impressive commitments and fine words that we then leave in the corner of our offices to gather dust. Our implementation deficit will quickly turn into a credibility gap...@

Developed countries must make solid commitments at a domestic and at an international level before the Earth Summit, including timetables, targets and finance. Without the Earth Summit may be little more than an expensive photo opportunity for world leaders.

But the omens are not good. At the last preparatory meeting held in New York in April, Governments failed to deliver on the priority task for the meeting to produce a ‘Programme of Action’. This was meant to include commitments to action, identify barriers to progress and ways of removing them, and also agree necessary financial support. Work on this will now continue at the next Preparatory Meeting (27th May – 7th June, Bali).

Other Issues

• water,
• fisheries,
• poverty reduction,
• HIV/AIDS,
• forests,
• environmental governance, and
• chemicals.

Friends of the Earth’s Objectives for the Earth Summit

Corporate accountability

Key Documents

Friends of the Earth International’s press releases on the Earth Summit

United Nations website www.johannesburgsummit.org
Including the outcome of the most recent preparatory meeting held in New York between 25th March and 7th April. The most important documents are three papers based on the draft chairman's paper from a previous preparatory meeting. See ‘comments on chairman’s paper - Part I, Part II, and Part III.

Key Events

Key Contacts

For a copy of FoE EWNI's media pack on the earth summit, contact the press office: 020 7566 1649