Hearing on RIO+20
IISD recommends Rio+20 should focus on a few, high-impact initiatives at European Parliament Public Hearing
Brussels, May 25, 2011. The European Parliament convened a high-level panel for its first public hearing to prepare for Rio+20 in 2012. The first part featured Achim Steiner, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and Karl Falkenberg, Director-General for Environment of the European Commission, presenting their views on how society could move "Towards a Green Economy." In his presentation, IISD's Senior Economist Peter Wooders detailed how Rio+20 could most usefully focus on a few high-impact initiatives that governments could implement in the short term without international agreement and for their own benefit. Peter noted that business as usual was a choice—and it is one that comes with costs and locks us into unsustainable systems and practices. IISD's recommendations were:
-
at Rio+20, countries should pledge to remove all energy subsidies unless these can be shown to lead to sustainable development, and also pledge to help other countries reform theirs;
-
similarly, sustainable public procurement (SPP) and public-private partnerships offer an ideal opportunity for governments to mould expenditure, standards and practices. Let us again make agreements at Rio+20, with quantitative targets;
-
the clean energy debate is in danger of being taken over by market share discussions as seen in the WTO disputes raised by Japan against Ontario, and the U.S. against China. More renewables must be part of a green economy, and if local content provisions—which are widely used in sectors such as oil and gas and in SPP—are needed to get political acceptance, then should we be looking at an international agreement beyond the narrow confines of the WTO?
-
let's work through the debate on energy-intensive industries. How can national, regional and international collaboration best be employed to support the essential development and implementation of breakthrough technologies and CCS? Are policies and measures optimized across the whole life cycle? Where might an international forum to discuss competitiveness issues best be located?
-
the EU can lead. If we are truly convinced that greening the economy is the only way forward—and IISD is—then let us have the courage of our convictions.
You might also be interested in
This Is What Young People Have to Say About INC-5
The treaty must address the entire life cycle of plastics, youth tell INC-5 negotiators. We couldn’t agree more.
COP 29 Outcome Moves Needle on Finance
In the last hours of negotiations, concerted pressure from the most vulnerable developing countries resulted in an improved outcome on the finance target, with a decision to set a goal of at least USD 300 billion per year by 2035 for developing countries to advance their climate action.
Stabilization Clauses: The hidden provisions that can hinder tax and investment policy reform
Stabilization clauses should no longer automatically be included in contracts between states and investors. If they are, they should, at a minimum, build on the latest international standards on stabilization to avoid being a barrier to sustainable development.
Why Trade Matters in the Plastic–Pollution Treaty Negotiations
The global push to end plastic pollution by 2040 highlights the critical intersection of trade and environmental action, with upcoming INC-5 negotiations focusing on reducing plastic production, consumption, and waste within a fair and effective international framework.