Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on

Sustainable Development, June 2012

(name redacted)

Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy

(name redacted)

Specialist in Natural Resources Policy

June 18, 2012

Congressional Research Service

7-....

www.crs.gov

R42573

CRS Report for Congress

Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Summary

The United Nations (U.N.) Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD or “Rio+20”)

convenes June 20-22, 2012, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. This conference marks the 20th anniversary

of the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio in 1992.

Governments participating in the 1992 meeting politically endorsed the objective of “sustainable

development” as achieving economic, environmental, and social development that “meets the

needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own

needs.”

Rio+20 begins from the premise and findings that the objectives of the 1992 Rio conference have

not been achieved. The U.N.’s fifth Global Environmental Outlook, published in June 2012,

found significant progress toward only 4 of 90 internationally agreed goals associated with

sustainable development. It found back-tracking on 8 goals. Stakeholders widely agree that

changes in policies and institutions are desirable to improve implementation, but do not agree on

means. It seems unlikely that Rio+20 will produce any agreements that would require

congressional action or be legally binding. Some proceedings, however, may engender

congressional interest in concepts proposed for simultaneously achieving economic, social, and

environmental objectives. Rio+20 could influence views and actions internationally on

development paths and practices, thereby affecting regional and global economies, demand for

development aid, transnational environmental issues, and conflict incidence and resolution.

Therefore, Congress may take interest in the conference. In addition, proceedings may reference

the non-binding Agenda 21 produced at UNCED in 1992; media coverage could raise questions

from constituents that Members may wish to address.

The Rio+20 organizers indicate that “[g]overnments are expected to adopt clear and focused

practical measures for implementing sustainable development, based on the many examples of

success we have seen over the last 20 years.” However, with strongly divergent views among the

expected 115 Heads of State and up to 50,000 participants, Rio+20 may be more like a trade show

than political negotiations. Indeed, some observers suggest that the conference may yield many

deals among private participants. It is not expected to produce a treaty or any other binding

commitments of national governments. Some observers wonder whether a meaningful

communique can be successfully negotiated. High-level participants will be prompted to address

issues that include

•

the definition of “green economy,” and whether a definition gives adequate

emphasis to social aspects (e.g., “fairness”) of sustainable development;

•

whether “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) should replace or supplement

the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), agreed by the U.N. General

Assembly in 2000 and expected to end in 2015, as well as how SDGs might be

negotiated, and what priorities might be set among them;

•

how to reform international environmental institutions, particularly whether the

United Nations Environmental Program should be strengthened;

•

what actions, if any, might lead to improved implementation of existing

sustainable development goals, given slow progress so far;

•

whether governments may commit to greater financial and technological

assistance to low-income countries to support their sustainable development.

Congressional Research Service

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Contents

Overview.......................................................................................................................................... 1

Considerations for Congress............................................................................................................ 2

Expectations and Concerns.............................................................................................................. 2

Rio+20 Conference Focus and Objectives....................................................................................... 3

Themes............................................................................................................................................. 5

The Green Economy.................................................................................................................. 5

Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development (IFSD)................................................. 6

Sustainable Development Goals ...................................................................................................... 6

Measuring Progress: The U.N.’s Fifth Global Environmental Outlook (GEO-5) ........................... 7

Example: Freshwater—U.S. Interest & Rio+20 .............................................................................. 9

U.S. Views and Submissions to Rio+20 ........................................................................................ 10

Appendixes

Appendix A. Timeline of Environment and Development Discussions ........................................ 12

Appendix B. The Millennium Development Goals (2000)............................................................ 13

Contacts

Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 14

Congressional Research Service

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Overview

The United Nations (U.N.) Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD or “Rio+20”) will

convene June 20-22, 2012, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. This conference marks the 20th anniversary

of the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio in 1992 and the 10th

anniversary of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg, South

Africa. As many as 115 heads of state may attend, with up to 50,000 other participants. Rio+20

organizers seek three objectives:

•

securing renewed political commitment to sustainable development,

•

assessing the progress and implementation gaps in meeting already agreed

commitments, and

•

addressing new and emerging challenges.

No legally binding agreements are expected to be made at the meeting. Government delegations

may agree to a process to identify new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).1 In addition,

reform of international environmental institutions is on the conference agenda, with a focus on

the U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development and the U.N. Environment Program (UNEP).

In 1992, governments attending the “Rio” conference (formally called the United Nations

Conference on Environment and Development or UNCED) politically endorsed the objective of

“sustainable development”—achieving economic, environmental, and social development that

“meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet

their own needs.”2 High-level government representatives produced a political declaration,

Agenda 21,3 and a Statement of Forest Principles—none of which contain legally binding

commitments. Agenda 21 led to establishment of the U.N. Commission on Sustainable

Development, under the U.N. Economic and Social Council, as well as creation of national

commissions on sustainable development in many countries, including the United States. The Rio

meeting also opened for signature two treaties: the United Nations Framework Convention on

Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Biological

Diversity (CBD).

This report summarizes the objectives and major issues of Rio+20 and gives a sampling of the

wide diversity of views to be discussed by government officials; non-governmental organizations

(NGOs); business leaders and trade associations; and representatives of youth, women, landlocked countries, cities, researchers, artisans, farmers, and many, many others who will be present

at Rio+20. It also outlines United States policy toward the conference and possible issues for

congressional consideration, including possible action on conference outcomes, the role of

1

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) would replace the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for

sustainable development agreed in 2000, as the deadlines set in the MDGs were 2015 or earlier. The MDGs are

identified in Appendix B.

2

This is the most common definition of sustainable development, from United Nations World Commission on

Environment and Development (the Brundtland Commission). Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, 1987.

http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-ov.htm#1.2.

3

Agenda 21 is a 40-volume, non-binding “program of action” on a wide range of environment- and developmentrelated topics. It is available at http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/. Also request CRS Congressional Distribution

Memorandum “Agenda 21” by (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

1

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Agenda 21, and, more broadly, the possible role of sustainable development in the United States

and U.S. foreign policy.

Considerations for Congress

Few Members of Congress or their staffs are expected to attend Rio+20. Many experts anticipate

no legally binding or immediately consequential outcomes from the conference and some might

question the relevance of the conference to Congress. Nonetheless, it is possible that some

elements of any communique may serve U.S. national interests and foreign policy. These may

merit examination through briefings or hearings. Members of Congress may find it useful to be

apprised of the active discussion occurring mostly outside the United States on sustainable

development. Background documents prepared for Rio+20, including the Global Environmental

Outlook, may provide data and descriptions of circumstances and policies in other countries that

may be useful to congressional decision-making.

There may be additional issues for Congress

related to Rio+20 that merit attention or

communication with constituents. For

example, there may be differences of view

between the federal executive and legislative

branches of the United States on sustainable

development and implementation of its

principles.

Also, some segments of the U.S. population

have expressed suspicion and opposition to

what they perceive sustainable development to

be, and particularly about its potential impact

on national sovereignty; some may query their

Members’ offices. Some have offered their

concerns about Agenda 21 (see adjoining

box), which is likely to be referenced in the

2012 conference.

Agenda 21 Concerns

Agenda 21, a 40-volume “plan of action,” was produced

in preparation for the 1992 U.N. Conference on

Environment and Development in Rio, and has been the

subject of a high level of concern and misunderstanding

by segments of the U.S. population. For example, some

people express concern that Agenda 21 contains binding

commitments or actions and infringes on U.S.

sovereignty. In fact, Agenda 21 does not.

Agenda 21 will undoubtedly be referenced at Rio+20 and

could be raised by constituents concerned, on the one

hand, about lack of progress on international goals

toward sustainable development or, on the other hand,

about proposals to strengthen agencies of the United

Nations, or gain commitments to increase financing to

low-income countries.

For more information on Agenda 21, request from CRS

the congressional distribution memorandum “Agenda

21” by (name redacted).

More broadly, there is some debate regarding the role of sustainable development in the United

States. For much of the world, the striving for sustainable development is of central economic,

social, and environmental importance. In the United States, there is lack of accord on the

intersection among economic, social, and environmental policies. Almost any topic containing

“sustainable” or “green” may elicit controversy in the United States. Dialogue in Congress on the

concepts behind them may provide constructive opportunities for identifying common ground.

Expectations and Concerns

Over the past decade, many stakeholders have grown increasingly impatient with, and resistant to,

“top-down” decision-making by national governments and international entities. International

processes have witnessed a shift toward greater inclusion of and decision-making by civil society,

local communities, and the private sector. This movement seems welcomed by a large majority of

Rio+20 participants. The broad inclusiveness of the conference may produce outputs that more

Congressional Research Service

2

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

resemble a cacophony of messages than an orchestrated plan with broad consensus. Like many

international documents on issues that are complex, the output may offer length and ambiguity

rather than clarity and consensus.

Rio+20 is premised on analysis showing that the objectives of sustainable development of the

1992 Rio conference have not been achieved. The fifth Global Environmental Outlook (GEO-5,

see section below) concluded in early June 2012 that significant progress has been made on only

4 of 90 assessed, internationally agreed goals associated with sustainable development.

Nonetheless, the Rio+20 website indicates that “[g]overnments are expected to adopt clear and

focused practical measures for implementing sustainable development, based on the many

examples of success we have seen over the last 20 years.”4

For optimistic observers, “the second Earth summit is a chance to take honest stock of the

situation and present ways to break political deadlock and hasten progress on the ground, in the

air and in the oceans.”5 Others see the process in a stalemate that leaders in Rio are unlikely to

resolve, and call for wholesale, perhaps radical, change. Among the jaded, one observer

commented that “the United Nations seems to be more concerned about the number of paragraphs

agreed upon than about concepts.”6

Rio+20 Conference Focus and Objectives

Rio+20 includes three days of public meetings (Sustainable Development Dialogues),7 followed

by three days of meetings among diplomatic delegations from 193 nations, including many heads

of state.

Governments outlined three overall objectives for the conference:

1. securing a renewed political commitment for sustainable development;

2. assessing progress and remaining gaps in implementation of sustainable

development efforts; and

3. addressing new and emerging challenges.

As part of these objectives, governments are expected to assess the implementation of

international environmental agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol under the U.N. Framework

Agreement on Climate Change (UNFCCC),8 and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), a

set of eight internationally agreed-to development goals created in 2000.9

4

Ibid.

“Back to Earth.” Nature 486, no. 7401 (June 7, 2012): 5–5, at http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v486/n7401/full/

486005a.html.

6

Reported in Thalif Dean, “Rio+20: A Stalemated U.N. in Do-or-Die Session on Action Plan” Inter Press Service. June

3, 2012. http://www.globalissues.org/news/2012/06/04/13902.

7

http://www.uncsd2012.org/index.php?page=view&nr=596&type=13&menu=23.

8

CRS Report R40001, A U.S.-Centric Chronology of the International Climate Change Negotiations, by (name re

dacted).

9

See CRS Report R41410, The Millennium Development Goals: The September 2010 U.N. High-level Meeting, by

(name redacted) and Marian Leonardo Lawson.

5

Congressional Research Service

3

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Many participants and observers hope that Rio+20 outcomes will address the Rio+20 objectives

in a Communique from high level officials, which may contain agreement to a process to produce

new Sustainable Development Goals, and affirmation of—and a Framework for Action to

implement—internationally agreed goals.

The draft Communique, entitled The Future We Want, is eclectic and sweeping, like the

background reports and side meetings. As of the beginning of the third and last Preparatory

Committee, only one-quarter of the draft text had been agreed and was “unbracketed” (i.e., does

not contain proposed alternative language). Tens of pages, however, had been eliminated from

earlier drafts. Delegations will likely continue previous differences over proposals to create a new

global environment agency, “strengthen” financing,10 enhance technology transfer, and increase

capacity in nations.

In addition, the Rio+20 conference process includes collection of voluntarily submitted

commitments to action from all stakeholders. The U.N. established a registry for such

commitments.11

Rio+20 Conference Priority Areas and Proposals

Organizers indentified seven priority areas: jobs, energy, cities, food, water, oceans, and disaster readiness (described,

with fact sheets, at http://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/index.php?menu=123). A sampling of related proposals includes:

Decent Jobs: some advocates seek stronger standards to both reduce adverse environmental impacts and provide

decent working and living conditions for all workers and respect for workers’ rights; others call for addressing the needs

of rural communities; some propose attention to job opportunities associated with investment in natural capital (natural

resources), a low-carbon economy, and sustainable resource management;

Energy: many agree on a general goal of affordable access to energy for all people; some press for goals to increase

energy efficiency and the share of renewable energy sources; some seek greater financial and technological sources, and

others seek commitments to phase out subsidies to fossil fuels;

Sustainable Cities: increasing urbanization is understood to be an ongoing trend, and the form of cities, especially of

megacities, is viewed as a critical element of sustainable development. Cities seek greater recognition of their roles and

actions, greater authority, and augmented resources; proposals also call for a 3rd Conference on Housing and Sustainable

Development in 2016;

Food Security: proposals call for a right to food and proper nutrition, and needing to eliminate trade barriers and

politics that distort production and trade of agricultural products;

Water: some advocates press for a goal of universal access to clean water and adequate sanitation, as well as reform of

water and wastewater management; some call for the Secretary General’s Advisory Board on Water and Sanitation to

begin consideration of new goals for managing water resources after 2013;

Oceans: the rise in attention to the “blue economy” includes calls for an agreement for conservation and sustainable use

of marine biological diversity, and addressing governance of marine areas beyond national jurisdictions; others propose to

end fishing subsidies; some call for another conference in 2014 or 2016 on Small Island Developing States (SIDs); and

Disaster Readiness: proposals call for actions to carry out the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015.

Many other topics will be discussed as well, including health, migration, forests, protection and assistance to the family,

gender equality, sustainability accounting and reporting, and others. Despite having initially identified seven priority areas,

the expanded list under discussion is reflected in likely disagreement of what priorities should be beyond the Rio+20

conference.

10

“Strengthening” financing could include proposals to increase the magnitude, reduce the conditions on financing,

alter how finances flow, etc.

11

Registry at http://www.uncsd2012.org/voluntarycommitments.html.

Congressional Research Service

4

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Themes

The preparatory committees identified two main themes: the green economy in the context of

sustainable development and poverty eradication; and the institutional framework for sustainable

development (IFSD).

The Green Economy

The first theme of Rio+20 is “The Green Economy.” Government delegations agreed that “[e]ach

country will choose its own green economy approach and policy mix, assessing national priorities

and adapting measures to national institutions and economic systems.”12

A major point of discussion, however, has been lack of agreement on what the green economy is,

and what its relationship to sustainable development may be. Some see it as an element of

achieving sustainable development, which was described in 1992 as consisting of three

“pillars”—economic, social, and environment—all of which were critical to supporting the

edifice of development. Rio+20 organizers described the green economy as “the intersection

between environment and economy”;13 others expressed concern that this formulation gave too

much emphasis to the economic pillar and not enough to social aspects (e.g., equality of women,

engagement of civil society in decision-making, etc.), and risked supplanting the three-pillar

concept of sustainable development.

Organizers may wish to see high-level officials agree at Rio+20 on policy options to facilitate the

green economy and foster greater international cooperation. Background documents and side

meetings identify a host of practices to foster a green economy by community, national,

international, and corporate actors. The conference preparations emphasize a diversity across

regions and countries of meanings and approaches to sustainable development.

One element of the green economy that seems to enjoy widespread agreement is the importance

of the private sector in sustainable development. Some observers have suggested that one

outcome from the proceedings may be a large number of private deals on renewable energy,

pollution control, water infrastructure, and other commercial and development investments.

Issues of trade also have been examined, including risks of protectionism, subsidization,

compatibility of national measures with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, and the

importance of countries’ domestic conditions and institutions (e.g., protection of intellectual

property) to enable trade. For example, participants may debate how technologies essential to

environmentally compatible development should be developed and disseminated across countries,

with disagreements on such topics as “transfer” versus commercial sales.

12

UN, “Background note for round tables of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development ‘Looking at

the way forward in implementing the expected outcomes of the Conference.’” A/CONF.216/4. (May 29, 2012) at

http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N12/354/46/PDF/N1235446.pdf?OpenElement.

13

From the Rio+20 webpage on the green economy at http://www.iisd.ca/uncsd/rio20/enb/.

Congressional Research Service

5

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development (IFSD)

The second theme of Rio+20 is the institutional framework for sustainable development (IFSD).

Many stakeholders agree that reform of existing international processes and institutions on

environmental matters could benefit the effectiveness and efficiency of environmental

protections. There also seems to be general agreement on some type of high-level,

intergovernmental body on sustainable development.

Many stakeholders would like to strengthen the U.N. Environment Programme (UNEP); among

these, some propose to make UNEP a “specialized agency” of the United Nations, with greater

authority and standing than the current program. Some European delegations proposed creating a

world environmental agency under the United Nations that would have stronger regulatory and

compliance authority; such concepts are strongly opposed by the United States and many other

countries, for both pragmatic and sovereignty reasons. Other proposals would expand

membership in UNEP to all countries, and increase its financial base.

Some delegations have proposed to create a new Council for Sustainable Development in the

United Nations, parallel to the Economic and Social Council and the Security Council. Other

proposals would strengthen the U.N. regional councils and support national sustainable

development councils. Others seek greater engagement of the public (“civil society”) in the

United Nations and national decision-making regarding sustainable development.

Sustainable Development Goals

Rio+20 may launch a new process to develop Sustainable Development Goals to succeed and

extend the MDGs (Appendix B).14 Some participants propose that SDGs could provide a

framework for work toward sustainable development beyond 2015. Many ideas put forward for

individual SDGs would expand the scope of the MDGs, and there remains little agreement on

specific language. Moreover, views differ on whether the SDGs would be applicable to all

countries and applicable uniformly, or whether there would be differentiation among categories of

countries. The wealthier countries emphasize the growing importance of rapidly developing

economies, and that the choices made in developing countries will have greatest effect on people

and the global environment. Lower-income countries point to the greater capacities of the

wealthier economies and argue that they must take on greater responsibilities and augment

assistance to lower-income countries. If there is agreement to create SDGs, there are at least three

remaining areas of contention:

•

Integration: There remain differences of views on how the three “pillars” of

sustainable development—social, economic, and environmental—might be

integrated in the SDGs. Some participants have expressed concerns that social

and economic priorities may not receive sufficient emphasis in SDGs, and some

observers have expressed concern that SDGs risk evolving into a distinct track

parallel to a post-MDG path. Others suggest that SDGs and post-2015 MDGs

would be complementary.

14

See CRS Report R41410, The Millennium Development Goals: The September 2010 U.N. High-level Meeting, by

(name redacted) and Marian Leonardo Lawson.

Congressional Research Service

6

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

•

Process: The process by which SDGs may be developed remains unresolved as

well. G-77 countries15 prefer that it be “inter-governmental” without oversight by

the General Assembly or the Secretary-General, as was done for the MDGs.

Others contend that a process would need guidance from some office or agency,

with the Secretary General’s office as the most likely contender, under the

General Assembly.

•

Priorities: While delegations appear to generally agree that priorities should be

set among emergent SDGs, they diverge on what the priority areas should be.

The United States, for example, has opposed inclusion of “equity” and

“sustainable production and consumption” in a priority list.

Of all the proposals, only two SDGs were agreed to ad referendum by government delegations in

the early June preparatory meeting:

SDG 1. We underscore that the MDGs are a useful tool in focusing achievement of specific

development gains as part of a broad development vision and framework for the

development activities of the United Nations, for national priority setting and for

mobilisation of stakeholders and resources towards common goals. We therefore remain

firmly committed to their full and timely achievement.

SDG 2. We recognize that the development of goals could also be useful for pursuing

focused and coherent action on sustainable development. We further recognize the

importance and utility of a set of sustainable development goals, which are based on Agenda

21 and JPOI [Johannesburg Plan of Implementation], fully respect the Rio Principles, in

particular common but differentiated responsibilities, build upon commitments already

made, respect international law and contribute to the full implementation of the outcomes of

all major Summits in economic, social and environmental fields, taking into account that

these goals should ensure a holistic coherence with the goals set out in Agenda 21. These

goals should address and incorporate in a balanced way all three dimensions of sustainable

development and their inter-linkages. These goals should be incorporated and integrated in

the United Nations Development Agenda beyond 2015, thus contributing to the achievement

of sustainable development and serving as a driver for implementation and mainstreaming of

sustainable development in the United Nations system as a whole. The development of these

goals should not divert focus or effort from the achievement of the Millennium Development

Goals.

Measuring Progress: The U.N.’s Fifth Global

Environmental Outlook (GEO-5)

One of the key background documents for Rio+20 is the fifth Global Environmental Outlook

(GEO-5), prepared under UNEP. Its “Summary for Policymakers” was negotiated and endorsed

by many governments, including the United States, in January 2012. It concludes that, despite

moderate successes in some areas on some environmental problems, neither the scope nor speed

of adverse environmental changes worldwide has decreased over the past five years. GEO-5

identified 4 of 90 internationally agreed goals related to sustainable development on which

15

The G-77 is a negotiating group, in the United Nations framework, of developing countries. See http://www.g77.org/

doc/.

Congressional Research Service

7

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

significant progress has been made. Some progress has been made on 40 goals, such as reducing

rates of deforestation and expanding protected areas. Little progress has occurred for others, such

as abating human-induced climate change, preventing desertification, and maintaining fish stocks.

The report observed deterioration for 8 goals, such as protecting coral reefs.

Environmental Successes Identified by GEO-5

The four successes noted by GEO-5 are:

•

Ozone Protection: A drastic reduction in both the production and use of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) has

been achieved, resulting in a 31% improvement in ODS indicators at mid latitudes since 1994, and the predicted

avoidance of 22 million cases of cataracts for people born between 1985 and 2100 in the United States of

America alone.

•

Drinking Water: The world is on track to reach the Millennium Development Goal on access to safe drinking

water, but not that of sanitation—2.6 billion people still lack access to basic sanitation—and some progress has

been made in meeting water efficiency goals.

•

Lead: Lead in gasoline has been phased out globally except in six countries; lead blood levels in children have

gone down.

•

Marine Pollution: Efforts in research on marine pollution are being made globally, including in the developing

world, in order to protect marine resources—often an important food supply—from pollution.

Source: United Nations Environment Program. Global Environmental Outlook 5: Summary for Policymakers, June

2012 (pp. 7, 10, 11). A matrix of issues, trends, and gaps is available from UNEP at http://www.unep.org/geo/pdfs/

geo5/Progress_towards_goals.pdf.

GEO-5 raises many unresolved challenges of degrading “natural capital,”16 on which the

productivity of economies and human well-being depend. GEO-5 reports that statistics show

deteriorating air quality and rising concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere;

depleting groundwater reservoirs; eutrophying coastal waters and acidifying ocean waters; losses

of vertebrate biodiversity of up to 30% in some areas with thousands more species at risk;

declining reporting on hazardous wastes; and other problems. Many of these problems are most

acute in rapidly developing but low-income countries that may lack adequate financial,

institutional, and technical capacity to address them. Many of these problems also flow across

national boundaries.

In addition, GEO-5 urges more reliable and systematic monitoring by nations of their

environments and of related economic, social, and environmental processes, in order to inform

decision-making. It stresses the importance of improved standardization of methods and access

by the public to data.

The report identifies a host of best practices by issue area. Regarding the potentially controversial

topic of environmental governance, GEO-5 identifies best practices as

Multi-level/multi-stakeholder participation; increased introduction of the principle of

subsidiarity;17 governance at local levels; policy synergy and removal of conflict; strategic

16

“Natural capital” is a term used to describe natural resources that are critical as input to economies, such as water,

air, stability of the climate, etc. Often, these resources are available for free or minimal cost (often for extraction but not

for their value); if they are consumed or degraded, man-made capital may be required to replace them.

17

Subsidiarity is a political and sometimes management principle that responsibilities should be handled at the least

(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

8

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

environmental assessment; accounting systems that value natural capital and ecosystem

services; improved access to information, public participation and environmental justice;

capacity strengthening of all actors; improved goal setting and monitoring systems.18

Example: Freshwater—U.S. Interest & Rio+2019

To illustrate how U.S. interests, and therefore

congressional interests, relate to the Rio+20

event and negotiations, this section discusses

the U.S. interest in sustainable development

and security issues related to freshwater in the

international context. Water has played a

prominent role in the dialogue leading up to

Rio+20. While freshwater is not the focus of

Rio+20 or other recent international

negotiations (e.g., the climate change

negotiations in Durban, South Africa, in

2011), the natural resource management

challenge of water and attention to water’s

role in achieving poverty, health, and climate

objectives is generating water-related

discussions at U.N. conferences. Water was

selected as a priority issue in all the GEO-5

scoping consultations (see “Water in GEO-5”

box for assessment of progress on water

indicators).

International freshwater issues are receiving

rising attention in the United States and

elsewhere as a security20 issue. Although the

argument that water and other environmental

conditions can contribute to either improving

or deteriorating community safety and

political stability is not a new concept,

attention to and analysis of the global water

situation, its stressors, and linkages to other

sectors is growing rapidly. A February 2012

Intelligence Community Assessment of

Water in Geo-5

GEO-5 assessed progress as follows for water indicators:

•

Access to improved water: significant progress;

modest progress on rural-urban equity

•

Water-related diseases: some progress

•

Water scarcity: deteriorating conditions

•

Water demand: deteriorating conditions

•

Water use efficiency: some progress

•

Water security: deteriorating

•

Competition and conflict: some progress

•

Climate change impacts on human security: some

progress on adaptation and mitigation strategies;

little or no progress on funding and implementation

•

Extreme events: modest progress in some years or

regions, deteriorating in others

•

Dams and river fragmentation: dam density is

increasing; progress on freshwater supply,

deteriorating ecosystems

•

Groundwater contamination: very little or

deteriorating progress

•

Pathogenic contamination: some progress

•

Nutrient pollution: little or deteriorating progress

•

Toxic chemicals: some progress

•

Integrated water management: some progress;

insufficient data

Source: UNEP, Global Environment Outlook 5, June 2012.

(...continued)

centralized level of authority at which they can be successful; that more central authorities should perform tasks only

when they cannot be performed effectively by less centralized authorities (including private decision-making). In the

United States, this is consistent with many concepts of federalism (a term which has other meanings in other countries).

18

Ibid., p. 15.

19

This section was authored by (name redacted), CRS Specialist in Natural Resources Policy.

20

“Security” is now associated with many social concerns, including food security, health security, and national

security. It has different meanings in different uses, which this report does not attempt to explore.

Congressional Research Service

9

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Global Water Security21 illustrates the rising view of water as critical not only to public or

environmental health but also to political stability, food and energy supplies, and climate change

mitigation and adaptation. Specifically, the report warns that water is anticipated to increasingly

contribute to instability in nations important to U.S. national security interests.

Consequently, some U.S. decision makers and stakeholders are evaluating what actions and

opportunities are available for influencing the future role of water in fostering improved

international security. Rio+20 is seen by some stakeholders as one such opportunity.

In preparation for Rio+20, conference organizers distributed for discussion a “zero draft” of the

Communique.22 No legally binding commitments are expected in the version high-level officials

may adopt. The portion of the draft specific to water reiterated the right to safe and clean drinking

water and sanitation as a human right. This aim would be consistent with the 2010 United Nations

Human Rights Declaration by the U.N. General Assembly on access to safe and clean drinking

water and sanitation as a human right essential to the full enjoyment of life and all other human

rights. The zero draft also supported “the necessity of setting goals for wastewater management”

and proposed renewed commitment to integrated water resources management and water

efficiency plans. These would be encouraged through capacity development; exchange of

experiences, best practices, and lessons learned; and sharing appropriate environmentally sound

technologies and know-how. In addition to the language in the zero draft, there were proposals for

specific water targets and water-related discussion in other background and advocacy documents

(e.g., how to meet and manage water use and promote water use efficiency in both agriculture and

in energy development, water’s role in natural disasters and resiliency to disasters and climate

change, emerging water quality concerns).

As previously noted, Rio+20 could launch a process to develop Sustainable Development Goals

by 2015. These may supplement or replace the current MDGs; like the MDGs they would almost

certainly be non-binding.23 Among the eight current MDGs (Appendix B), the one to “Ensure

Environmental Sustainability” includes the target to “[h]alve, by 2015, the proportion of people

without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.” One proposal in the SDG

discussion would elevate water to its own goal─“safe drinking water and sanitation for all,”

rather than water as a quantifiable target within a broader goal. Some proposals would give more

attention to sanitation given the slow progress on it under the MDGs.

U.S. Views and Submissions to Rio+20

The United States provided a submission of its views on November 1, 2011, entitled Sustainable

Development for the Next Twenty Years.24 It identifies three “key messages” that guide the U.S.

approach to Rio+20:

21

Intelligence Community, Global Water Security, Office of the Director of National Intelligence , February 2012,

http://www.dni.gov/nic/ICA_Global%20Water%20Security.pdf.

22

United Nations, The Future We Want, United Nations, January 10, 2012, http://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/content/

documents/370The%20Future%20We%20Want%2010Jan%20clean%20_no%20brackets.pdf.

23

Among other challenges, the goals are global in nature, without responsibilities allocated quantitatively to various

entities. As such, global goals would not be enforceable if some wanted to try to make them legally binding.

24

U.S. Department of State, “Sustainable Development for the Next Twenty Years: United States Views on Rio+20,”

available at http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/37011-11(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

10

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

1. The Built Environment: Clean Energy and Urbanization, addressing Clean Energy, New

Infrastructure, and Access for All; Urbanization and Sustainable Cities; Water Systems;

Sustainable Manufacturing and Environmental Goods and Services; and Human Capacity and

Green Jobs.

2. The Natural Environment: Ecosystem Management and Rural Development, comprised of

Food Security and Sustainable Agriculture; Oceans, Coasts, and Fisheries; and Ecosystem

Services and Natural Resource Management.

3. The Institutional Environment: Modernizing Global Competition, including Making New

Connections: Linking Governments, Communities, and Businesses for Action; Transforming

Traditional Institutions; Strengthening International Environmental Governance; and Informing

Decisions, Catalyzing Action, and Measuring Progress.

No comprehensive statement is available of how this U.S. vision translates into positions on

specific elements of the Rio+20 proposals. Still, some views may be distilled from statements.25

As examples, the United States

•

agrees with strengthening international environmental institutions, but opposes

adding a Council on Sustainable Development to the U.N. architecture or making

UNEP a specialized agency of the United Nations;

•

views the transfer of technology as outside the scope of sustainable development

commitments;

•

opposes discussion of intellectual property rights;

•

opposes a call for a new agreement to protect biodiversity in the marine

environment in the high seas (i.e., outside of national jurisdictions);

•

opposes proposals for significant new funding for sustainable development;

•

encourages actions toward sustainable development by stakeholders, especially

women and youth;

•

seeks greater emphasis globally on transparency and public awareness of

corporate and governmental performance on environmental responsibilities,

facilitated by new communication technologies; and

•

resists commitments related to climate change or other issues addressed in other

fora.

(...continued)

01%20US%20Submission%20Rio%2020%20Nov%201%281%29.pdf.

25

Various statements and reports on positions can be found, among many sources, at http://www.uncsd2012.org/

content/documents/579us.pdf; http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/676usa.pdf; http://www.iisd.ca/uncsd/

rio20/enb/; http://www.iisd.ca/uncsd/iinzod3/; http://www.twnside.org.sg/title2/sdc2012/sdc2012.120201.htm;

http://www.twnside.org.sg/title2/sdc2012/sdc2012.120605.htm. More sources are available on request.

Congressional Research Service

11

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Appendix A. Timeline of Environment and

Development Discussions

Date

Milestone

Outcomes or Issues

1972

United Nations Conference on the

Human Environment (the “Stockholm

Conference”)

Stockholm Declaration; Stockholm

Action Plan; and 5 resolutions calling for

ban of nuclear weapons, a databank of

environmental data, an environmental

fund, actions on development and

environment, and establishment of the

U.N. Environment Programme (UNEP)

1987

Report of the World Commission on

Environment and Development (the

Brundtland Commission)

Our Common Future: Defines “sustainable

development”: “meets the needs of the

present without compromising the ability

of future generations to meet their own

needs”

1992

United Nations Conference on

Environment and Development

(UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Rio Declaration; Agenda 21; United

Nations Framework Convention on

Climate Change; United Nations

Framework Convention on Biological

Diversity; Statement of Forest Principles

1997

19th Special Session of the U.N. General

Assembly

Programme for Further Implementation

of Agenda 21

2002

World Summit on Sustainable

Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg,

South Africa

Johannesburg Plan of Implementation;

Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable

Development; Marrakesh Process—

recognized contribution of

“partnerships”

2012

Informal-Informal Negotiations on the

Zero-Order Draft Communique

Draft Communique of more than 200

pages; two subsequent sessions have

reduced it to about 80 paragraphs

June 13-15

Third PrepComm in Rio de Janeiro,

Brazil

Agenda, Rules of Procedure, draft

Communique, etc.

June 16-19

Sustainable Development Dialogues in

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and on the

worldwide web

Recommendations expected from each

of Dialogues on 10 topics, to be

conveyed to the high level Rio+20

Partnership Forum

June 20-22

High-Level Rio+20 Partnership Forum in

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Communique expected

Congressional Research Service

12

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Appendix B. The Millennium Development Goals

(2000)

On September 8, 2000, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the United Nations

Millennium Declaration (A/RES/55/2). Among other aspects of the Declaration, the General

Assembly adopted what are commonly called the eight Millennium Development Goals

(MDGs),26 most to be achieved by 2015.

The MDGs are aspirational and not legally binding. The Goals and their respective targets are

described below.

Eradicate extreme hunger and poverty

1. Reduce by half the proportion of people living on less than a dollar a day;

2. Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young

people;

3. Reduce by half the proportion of people who suffer from hunger.

Achieve universal primary education

1. Ensure that, by the same date, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to

complete a full course of primary schooling and that girls and boys will have equal access to all

levels of education.

Promote gender equality and empower women

1. Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005, and at all

levels by 2015.

Reduce child mortality

1. Reduce by two-thirds the mortality rate among children under age five.

Improve maternal health

1. Reduce by three-quarters the maternal mortality ratio.

26

The United Nations Millennium Declaration may be found at http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/

ares552e.pdf. See also CRS Report R41410, The Millennium Development Goals: The September 2010 U.N. High-level

Meeting, by (name redacted) and Marian Leonardo Lawson.

Congressional Research Service

13

Rio+20: The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012

Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases

1. Halt and begin to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS;

2. Achieve, by 2010, universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS for all those who need it;

3. Halt and begin to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases.

Ensure environmental sustainability

1. Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programs; reverse

loss of environmental resources;

2. Reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and

basic sanitation;

3. Achieve significant improvement in lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers, by 2020.

Develop a global partnership for development

1. Develop further an open, rule-based, predictable, non-discriminatory trading and financial

system;

2. Address the special needs of landlocked developing countries and small island developing

states;

3. Deal comprehensively with the debt problems of developing countries;

4. In cooperation with pharmaceutical companies, provide access to affordable essential drugs in

developing countries;

5. In cooperation with the private sector, make available the benefits of new technologies,

especially information and communications.

Author Contact Information

(name redacted)

Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

Congressional Research Service

(name redacted)

Specialist in Natural Resources Policy

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

14

EveryCRSReport.com

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the

Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on

issues that may come before Congress.

EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The

reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to

the public.

Prior to our republication, we redacted names, phone numbers and email addresses of analysts

who produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made

any other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.

CRS reports, as a work of the United States government, are not subject to copyright protection in

the United States. Any CRS report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without

permission from CRS. However, as a CRS report may include copyrighted images or material from a

third party, you may need to obtain permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or

otherwise use copyrighted material.

Information in a CRS report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public

understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to members of Congress in

connection with CRS' institutional role.

EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim

copyright on any CRS report we have republished.