Rio summit takes muddied steps towards its goal

THE UN Conference on Sustainable Development, Rio+20, held in Rio de Janeiro last week (News, Comment, 15 June), ended in the way that vast international negotiations often do, with disappointment, recrimination, and a few decisions upon which future progress can be built.

Expectations for the conference were always low, because it had such a vast agenda - global poverty and environmental destruction - but many observers were still downcast by the lack of urgency in the outcome document, The Future We Want.

The general secretary of the ACT Alliance of faith-based development organisations from across the world, John Nduna, said that Rio had exposed "a gigantic gap in the leadership on global issues that we so desperately need. More of the same is not acceptable but our leaders seem to speak a different language from the people they claim to represent."

As usual, when world leaders negotiate on how to tackle international problems, the talks were deadlocked for days. There were long-standing disagreements about, for instance, whether and how rich countries should fund poor countries, to help them tackle poverty and develop in ways that are environmentally sustainable. Another sticking point was the question of subsidies for fossil fuels, which are politically popular, but bad for the environment.

The Brazilian hosts of the conference forced a delicate compromise - a balance of unhappiness, as they put it - between the demands of the big powers, such as the United States, China, the G77 (representing developing countries), and the European Union. As a result of the hosts' tough tactics, the final Rio text - a 49-page document - emerged days before the conference ended last Friday (www.uncsd2012.org/thefuturewewant.html).

Christian Aid's senior adviser on climate change and sustainable development, Dr Alison Doig, said that the event had been "stunning only in its lack of urgency". But the outcome, she said, included a few encouraging points: "There is some hope that Rio will yet have a positive legacy, because leaders have committed to create a new set of sustain-able development goals which will set the direction of global development work from 2015.

"The goals could help make global food-production more sustainable, and ensure that many millions more people can enjoy clean water and sustainable, modern energy. But this will only happen if citizens keep up the pressure as work to shape the goals continues."

Another widely welcomed development in Rio was the announcement by the Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, that, from next year, large companies listed on the London Stock Exchange will be required to reveal their emissions of greenhouse gases.

Those who have campaigned for the reform believe that it will help to reduce the UK's contribution to climate change.

On Tuesday, Mr Clegg said that Rio has not been an "unqualified success", but that "few would have expected it to be". He praised the creation of a declaration of support for the "green economy" which "helped to alleviate some of the fears of developing countries that green growth is a veil for a kind of eco-protectionism designed to stymie their development".

Caroline Lucas, the Green Party MP for Brighton, criticised the concept of "sustained economic growth", and questioned whether the problem at Rio had been "too many madmen or too many economists".

The Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance, an alliance of 80 churches and organisations, said that the conference's final document "leaves the door open for greater intensification of industrial agriculture", a system that has not eradicated hunger but has led to "near-collapse of ecosystems and communities".

Rachel Baird is a policy and campaigns journalist at Christian Aid.