Europa > La Unión europea en el mundo > European Union @ United Nations > Commissioner Wallström's Speech on results of WSSD

Mapa del sitio | Índice A-Z | Empleo | Enlaces | Contacto

English Español Français

 

 

Commissioner Wallström's Speech on results of WSSD

Introductory Remarks Rio Plus Ten Years and One Week

It is a pleasure to have this early opportunity offered by CEPS to give my assessment of the outcome of the World Summit on Sustainable Development which concluded in Johannesburg a week ago today.

This is an early opportunity not just in terms of the starting hour for this breakfast meeting!

It is also rather early to make a definitive assessment of the outcome of Johannesburg. Time and our own committed political efforts - will tell if this Summit will deliver where Rio did not. We have the words. It is now the duty of all of us to turn these words into effective deeds.

But even at this early stage I will not shy away from giving my assessment of whether Johannesburg was a success or a failure. I believe that we can be satisfied with the result.

I am naturally ambitious and impatient as far as delivering sustainable development is concerned. To that extent, I would of course have welcomed further achievements.

But I am convinced that we added new momentum to the cause of sustainable development and that the outcomes of the Summit take us in the right direction.

Of course people will draw comparisons with the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. The immediate assessment of some NGOs and others in the period after Rio was that it had been a failure. Now it has come to be seen as a defining moment in the fight for sustainable development.

But the Rio Summit was very different from Johannesburgin some important respects:

Firstly, there were no legally binding Conventions on the table at Johannesburg, while Rio launched the Convention on Bio-diversity and the Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Secondly, and despite the absence of such Conventions, Johannesburg was much more directed at how to achieve practical action than was the case in Rio.

But most importantly, we should never forget that the world in which we live in 2002 is a very different world from ten years ago.

The Changed Political Climate

Rio came to life in an era of optimism. The Berlin wall had fallen and the Cold War was on its way into the history books. The U.S.S.R. had broken up, Eastern European countries were embracing freedom and democracy, the US economy was recovering from recession and the Asian Tigers leaped ahead.

In Europe, green-left governments put people and the environment in the center of their policies and won elections. All this created a good atmosphere for high ambitions in Rio. There was genuine hope for real change.

Ten years later, at the beginning of the 21st century the picture is very different.

Many feel insecure, threatened by forces beyond their control; excluded from the prosperity which globalization is supposed to bring; alienated from their politicians and the political process.

It will not have escaped anyone's attention that today marks the first grim anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the United States. The 11th of September 2001 shook the global community - we all realized that we live under a threat of terrorism and we are still trying to come to terms with the consequences.

We all also realize that poverty lies at the root of terrorism, but we are struggling to come to grips with solutions.

Many blame globalization for the problems currently facing the world. While it offers enormous opportunities for development, there are concerns that not all countries benefit from it. There are fears for negative environmental and social implications, as well as for loss of cultural diversity. Globalization can be a powerful force for positive change but its potential to promote sustainable development for all remains to be realized.

In short, many feel that the world is more starkly divided into winners and losers than was the case ten years ago.

So while the expectations were very low for Johannesburg, the stakes were very high.

The main danger was that the Summit could have collapsed in acrimony on the trade and finance issues. I believe we would then had risked losing the very concept of sustainable development.

The EU Objectives at Johannesburg

Against this political backdrop, it fell largely to the European Union to champion the cause of sustainable development in Johannesburg.

World leaders converged in South Africa with the responsibility to deliver on the promises made in Rio and in the Millennium Development Goals in order to achieve three main objectives:

• to eradicate poverty;
  
  
• to improve living standards based on sustainable patterns of consumption and production; and,
  
  
• to ensure that the benefits of globalization are shared by all.

At a time when the temptation to resort to unilateral action seems stronger than ever, the Johannesburg Political Declaration had to reaffirm the need to work together to address these common challenges.

It was therefore heartening that in Johannesburg, there was a broadly shared feeling that addressing these challenges required renewed global commitment and increased solidarity; that all countries rich and poor must work together, recognizing their common but differentiated responsibilities, to provide for the needs of the present and future generations.

In concrete terms, we worked to undertake further steps towards the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals, in particular the goal of halving the number of people living in extreme poverty by 2015. The Union argued that we had to show real commitment by setting quantifiable targets, with timetables and monitoring mechanisms, in the Implementation Plan.

My assessment is that the Implementation Plan and the Political Declaration that were adopted in Johannesburg last week, together with Doha and Monterrey, have shaped a global partnership for sustainable development. This partnership includes commitments to increased development assistance and market access for developing countries, good governance and a better environment.

Specific Outcomes from Johannesburg

Let me now focus in particular on some key achievements reached in Johannesburg.

The first element I would like to highlight is that a set of new targets has been agreed as part of the Implementation Plan. Let me mention five:

• Halving by 2015 the proportion of people lacking access to basic sanitationthis currently stands at three billion people, half of the total population. This new target complements the Millennium Development Goal on access to clean water.
  
  
• Commitment to minimize harmful effects on human health and the environment from the production and use of all chemicals by 2020.
  
  
• Commitment to halt the decline of fish stocks and restore them to sustainable levels no later than 2015.
  
  
• Commitment to begin implementation of national strategies on sustainable development by 2005.
  
  
• Commitment to halt the loss biodiversity by 2010, as earlier agreed by the Parties to the Biodiversity Convention. The endorsement by all Heads of State and Government is a major achievement. But unfortunately the target to reverse the current trend in loss of natural resources loss by 2015 was not acceptable to other partners.

The agreement to establish a ten-year framework for programmes on sustainable consumption and production, with industrialised countries taking the lead in this global effort, is another important result. In fifty years time, nine billion people will live on the planet and world output will quadruple. Unless we cut the link between economic growth and the degradation of the environment, we will simply not be able to sustain ourselves.

On globalization, the Summit has agreed concrete actions to enhance the role of trade for sustainable development, for example by encouraging trade in environmentally friendly and organic products from developing countries and by strengthening international action for corporate responsibility.

Energy and Sustainable Development

Let me add some comments on the subject of energy and sustainable development. I am firmly convinced that there can be no sustainable development without sustainable energy development.

Experience taught us that energy would be high on the agenda throughout the negotiations since one of the so-called "failures" ten years ago was on energy. The oil-producing nations, led by OPEC, were unrelenting at Rio in their resistance to the inclusion in Agenda 21 of provisions that might constrain the use of fossil fuels.

As The Economist put it in 1998, "For most people, renewable energy used to conjure up thoughts of bearded vegetarians in sandals. No longer. Big energy companies are more interested in renewables than ever before". The magazine quoted the then Chairman of Shell as saying that "in 50 years, Shell could be 50% oil and 50% renewables".

But this change like many others inevitably meets resistance from vested interests. The obstacles range from vast public subsidies for fossil and nuclear energy to outmoded and entrenched ideas. As Maurice Strong, the main organizer behind the Rio Earth Summit memorably put it, "not all the fossils are in the fuel"!

But Johannesburg has again confirmed that sustainable energy development is at the heart of the fight for sustainable development.

Although we were ultimately not able to get a specific target for renewable energy sources in the Action Plan, we did reach an agreement to increase urgently and substantially the global share of renewable energy sources. We also agreed to take joint actions to improve access of the poor to energy. Those agreements will be regularly evaluated and progress reviewed.

In addition, last week we launched a "coalition of the willing". This includes countries and regions willing to set themselves targets and timeframes for the increase of renewables in the energy mix.

This coalition, called "the OPEC of Renewables" by one NGO, will keep up pressure on the unwilling and should give a boost to the development of renewable energy throughout the world. Significantly, this coalition will set a renewable energy target representing a floor as opposed to a ceiling.

The energy issue won't go away!

Linked to this, on climate change there have been positive developments. Those who have already ratified Kyoto have confirmed their commitment to entry into force at the earliest possible date and others are urged to join as soon as possible. Although this does not guarantee that the US will ratify Kyoto, the announcements made by the Russian and Canadian Prime Ministers mean that the Protocol should enter into force very soon.

Follow- Up by the EU

This leads me to what undoubtedly is the most important aspect of all: implementation.

In this regard, I am pleased that the links between the Millennium Summit, Doha, Monterrey and Johannesburg have been confirmed. We now have a more coherent framework within which to work to implement the outcome of all major UN Conferences. The new roles given to ECOSOC and to the Commission on Sustainable Development will help to ensure proper follow-up within the UN system.

Partnerships between governments, business and civil society should be a key instrument to deliver the commitments made in Johannesburg. I welcome the wide range of partnerships more than 200 launched at the Summit. These partnerships will bring with them additional resources and expertise, and will help to mobilize action at all levels.

The EU has consistently advocated that there should be a close link between the Implementation Plan and the new partnerships for sustainable development. This has been recognised. Although the EU would have liked even clearer follow-up mechanisms and guiding principles for partnerships, the UN Commission on Sustainable Development is to serve as a focal point for future discussion of partnerships, including sharing lessons learned, progress made and best practices.

Of course we must move swiftly to implement the two partnerships on water and energylaunched by the EU in Johannesburg.

More generally, it is clear that the effective implementation of the outcome of Johannesburg will depend crucially upon what is done regionally, nationally and locally. The EU must continue to take the lead and translate political commitment into concrete action.

The European Council has already agreed to review, at their Spring meeting in 2003, the EU Strategy for Sustainable Development, with a focus on putting into practice the commitments undertaken in Johannesburg. To prepare this review, the Commission intends to submit proposals building on the Communication "Towards a Global Partnership for Sustainable Development" issued earlier this year. Internally, one of the main issues to be addressed in the synthesis report for the next Spring European Council should be how to move towards more sustainable consumption and production patterns in the EU.

In Johannesburg, we also had very difficult negotiations on agriculture and fisheries, including on the issue of subsidies. This underlines again the importance of pursuing the reform of our agriculture and fisheries policies on the basis of the proposals that the Commission recently presented.

Finally, a last word about development cooperation and trade. The EU is already the largest provider of ODA and we need to honor the commitment made in Monterrey to reach 0.39% of GDP in development assistance. But it is a sobering thought that, despite our status as the world's largest donor, we were unable to convince the G77 group of developing countries to join us on several of the key sustainability challenges. On several issues, they preferred to side with the USA.

The conclusion I draw from this is the need to step up the integration of sustainable development into our development and trade agenda. We need even closer working together with our partners in developing countries to convince them of our joint interest in sustainable development.

Concluding Remarks

Let me now share with you a few concluding remarks before I leave the floor open for your comments and questions.

Firstly, the European Union can be proud of its performance in Johannesburg. Unfortunately, on many of the issues of substance the EU was the only engine pushing for an ambitious and sustainable outcome. Everybody, including those who criticise the outcome of Johannesburg, recognise that the EU made a decisive contribution towards keeping the flame of Rio alive.

Secondly, let me stress once again the importance of implementation. I agree with the Danish Prime Minister Rasmussen that the 1990s was the decade of mega-summits and that we should make the next ten years the decade of action.

Some have questioned the value of having such world-scale summits and have called instead for a reduced format, focusing on specific sectoral issues. I am of course open to new formats, but we should not throw the baby out with the bath water. Compartmentalizing issues into specific sectoral concerns would run counter to the core of sustainable development.

What is absolutely clear, however, is that we have high expectations of the UN system in helping us to deliver. We need much more from the UN in terms of sustainability indicators, effective monitoring and reporting.

Last but not least, the Summit has been an important boost for multilaterally. Countries have reaffirmed the importance of multilateral solutions to global problems. The Political Declaration expresses a commitment by world leaders to act together to save the planet, promote human development and achieve universal prosperity and peace. These grand words which should not only re-launch multilaterally but also reaffirm the place of sustainable development on the global agenda.

I am confident that this time we can make it happen. Beyond the commitments reflected in the official documents of the Summit, Johannesburg has helped to increase awareness and to mobilize a wide range of stakeholders NGOs, business, consumers, local authorities, etc. The challenge now is to translate all the positive energy generated by Johannesburg into political will and concrete action in order to make a real move towards sustainable development.

Thank you for your attention.

| Arriba |

Búsqueda avanzada

• Commissioner Wallström promotes New Environmental Partnership at Kiev Conference (19/5/2003)
• Developing countries and trade (18/9/2002)
• The World Summit on Sustainable Development (16/9/2002)
• The EU and Financing for Development (16/9/2002)
• President Prodi's Statement on sustainable development (12/9/2002)
• Now we must turn WSSD agreement into concrete results (4/9/2002)
• EU launches global initiative to achieve World Summit goals (3/9/2002)
• EU launches coalition at WSSD to deliver renewable energy goals  (3/9/2002)
• EU reaffirms commitment to reach global deal at WSSD (2/9/2002)
• EU Presidency Statement - WSSD (2/9/2002)
• EU launches major energy partnership initiative at WSSD  (1/9/2002)
• EU stresses commitment to combat illegal logging at WSSD (31/8/2002)
• Commissioner Fischler welcomes WSSD agreement to prevent overfishing  (29/8/2002)
• Commissioner Nielson's Speech on "A Better Quality of Life for All : Delivery and Governance" (21/6/2002)
• Commissioner Wallström's Speech on WSSD (21/6/2002)
• Commissioner Nielson's speech on external aspects of sustainable development (16/5/2002)
• Commissioner Nielson's speech on WSSD (18/4/2002)
• Commissioner Lamy's speech on WSSD (18/4/2002)
• Commissioner Wallström's speech on WSSD (18/4/2002)
• Commissioner Wallström's speech on Global Sustainability (26/2/2002)
• Commissioner Nielson's speech on global sustainability (8/2/2002)