In September 2002, world leaders will come together in Johannesburg to assess the progress made on integrating environment and development concerns over the last 10 years, since the last such meeting was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992. Governments in most parts of the world have already put in place preparatory processes, to consult with experts on concrete proposals to be submitted at the meeting. At a meeting on WSSD organised by the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) on November 22 and 23, civil society groups from India decried the Indian government’s lack of action in preparing for the meeting.

Ironically, although the government-level sub-regional preparatory meeting for South Asia has already been held in Colombo, from September 27-29, 2001, national consultations have not yet even begun in India. The Asia-Pacific High-level Regional meeting for WSSD will be held in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, from November 27-29, 2001. This meeting will decide the agenda and priorities to be put forward by the South Asia and Pacific region to WSSD. But the official paper touted to represent the South Asian sub-regional position, which will be presented at this meeting, was formulated without proper consultations among regional civil society groups.

At the CSE meeting, participants from South Asia criticised the WSSD process in the region as being non-participatory. According to a participant from Pakistan, the paper being presented as the official position of the South Asian region was prepared by a small and select group of ‘wise persons’ at a meeting in Bangkok, and was not opened for consultation at the Colombo consultation despite protests by civil society groups.

It was clear that there has been little effort on part of governments in South Asia, particularly India, to consult with civil society on the key priorities for WSSD. Consultations have begun in other South Asian countries, including Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Nepal, providing varying levels of space for civil society input. But very little has been done in India so far.

As was apparent at the Doha World Trade Organisation (WTO) Ministerial Conference, the Indian government is good at opposing ideas at the international fora, but entirely lacks a proactive agenda, whether the issue is trade-related or environment. With no concrete options to offer, they cannot keep up their opposition for long, and are left with few options but to give in to proposals by Northern governments. This trend has dominated the Indian government’s performance in almost all international negotiations on environment. At the CSE meeting, many groups were sceptical of what South Asian governments would achieve at WSSD, given their lack of interest and preparation.

The key concerns identified at the two-day meeting included the lack of seriousness on part of South Asian governments to establish a proactive agenda for global environmental negotiations. This was partly attributed to the lack of awareness in South Asian countries on the importance of such global negotiations that could have serious impacts at the national and local level. For instance, the negotiations on trade and environment, recently conducted at Doha, could have serious repercussions for Indian industry. But instead of coming up with concrete solutions on how to deal with this issue in a manner that addressed developing country concerns, the Indian government simply said ‘no’ to any negotiations on the issue. This was seen as an untenable position, and predictably, the Indian government lost out as the declaration set a timeline for negotiations on the issue. Similarly, the recent decision under the Kyoto Protocol to allow the use of forests as ‘sinks’ for carbon dioxide will have implications for the management of forests in developing nations, and particularly the communities that live in these forests.

Participants agreed that one of the key issues that should be discussed at WSSD was that of ‘ecological poverty’. The link between poverty and sustainability has been emphasised as a priority by Southern governments, but the discussions lack substance and remain rhetoric. So far, the indications are that the Indian government plans simply to demand more aid to deal with poverty, rather than to reiterate the links between poverty, land degradation and international trade. In countries such as India, the large majority of poor live in rural areas and depend on their immediate environment for food, energy and housing. They are the worst hit by ecological degradation. However, empowering them to make decisions on natural resource management would allow them to manage their resources sustainably.

WSSD would also have to deal with the issue of ‘technological leapfrogging’ – how can developing countries avoid following the polluting path taken by industrialised countries in the past, and instead adopt frontier non-polluting technologies? Incentives and policies will have to be put in place globally to ensure investment in such technologies.

BACKGROUND

WSSD will be held in September 2002 in Johannesburg, South Africa. This meeting will review progress made since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED, also known as the Earth Summit) was held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.

The main outcome from UNCED included Agenda 21, a document aimed at furthering the goals of sustainable development; and three conventions – the UN Convention to Combat Desertification, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Agenda 21 was UNCED’s action plan for sustainable development, and although not legally binding, it was designed to provide a framework for confronting the world’s numerous environmental problems. To monitor the implementation of its programmes locally, nationally and internationally, Agenda 21 called for the creation of the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD).

Nine years after Rio, however, CSD, which was created to ensure the effective follow-up to the conference at national and international levels, has become a stagnant body. Characterised by speeches, traditional positions of the South and the North, and ultimately, no money, its sessions have become the talk shops many initially feared they would.

The five-year review of Earth Summit in 1997 found that the world’s environment problems have worsened in spite of Agenda 21. The global environment agenda remained largely unfunded while carbon dioxide emissions continued to increase and 1.3 billion people were still unable to meet their basic needs.

UNCED also underlined the need for ‘multi-stakeholder participation’ in decision-making – the need to involve civil society, particularly in decisions related to the environment. But although much lip service has been paid to multi-stakeholder involvement at the global level, very little is done in practice to take on board concerns of civil society.

New issues likely to be on the agenda of WSSD

• International Environmental Governance – Should UNEP be put in charge of international environmental governance, or should a new World Environment Organisation (WEO) be created?

• Freshwater – Today 20 per cent of the world’s population lacks access to safe water, and over five million people die each year from waterborne diseases. Although discussions on this issue have not been full-fledged, it is expected to be a key priority area in regional preparatory committee meetings that will take place later in 2002.

• Funding for sustainable development – Financing for development is increasingly gaining prominence in the UN agenda, and an international conference on the issue will be held in Monterey, Mexico, in March 2002.