Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A Future Worth Choosing

Janos Pasztor and Tarja Halonen

Post by Patricia Grossi Reis

On Thursday June 21 Douglas and I attended a side event of the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on Global Sustainability called “Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A Future Worth Choosing.” The purpose of the panel was to share key messages and recommendations from the Global Sustainability Panel (GSP) report, a blueprint for a sustainable future produced by 22 high-level panel members from around the world. While the GSP report was not created to be a formal input to the Rio+20 conference, it sets out a comprehensive framework for driving sustainable development forward in the context of the many interrelated challenges we are facing.

I must admit it was a great honor to be sitting at the same table as so many distinguished participants such as President Jacob Zuma from South Africa, Prime Minister Freundel Stuart from Barbados, Dr. Gro Harlem Bruntland, former Prime Minister of Norway, and Tarja Halonen, former President of Finland, to name just a few (the list was extensive!). Dr. Bruntland talked about empowerment of women and the importance of reproductive rights, Prime Minister Stuart examined the need for a framework to advance ocean’s governance and Sir Richard Branson – not an official member of the GSP panel but a guest speaker at the event – called for the end of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies.

The GSP report makes 56 recommendations, which fall under three main headings: empowering people to make sustainable choices, working towards a sustainable economy, and strengthening institutional governance to support sustainable development. Recommendation 14 specifically advocates incorporating ethical dimensions into the sustainable development discourse through instruments like the Earth Charter.

Amidst so many claims that the final Rio+20 document lacks in substance and ambition, I hope governments, businesses and other stakeholders will work together going forward to adopt the recommendations presented in the GSP document and turn the vision of a sustainable future a reality.

High Level Panel on Global Sustainability

Post by Douglas F. Williamson

Gro Harlem Brundtland

In 2010, UN General Secretary Ban Ki Moon convened a High Level panel on Global Sustainability, a group comprised of a variety of experts including world leaders. The panel was tasked with reporting to the Secretary on global sustainability challenges. The group issued its report several months ago in advance of the Rio+20 conference and it included 51 recommendations, including one to use the Earth Charter for discourse on the ethical dimensions of sustainable development. The document was completed by consensus and its endorsement of the Earth Charter shows the declaration's continued relevance to the emerging sustainable future.

Jacob Zuma of South Africa

Sir Richard Branson

Many of the esteemed panels members were present for the meeting, which was packed, and although it wasn't a very interactive dialogue, it was interesting to hear about the process of the report's creation and see all the different minds that contributed. Some of the points that I found compelling were the emphasis on going beyond GDP, some called it GDP plus, and the focus on getting pricing right, meaning integrating all costs and expressing all values including what are now known as externalities, environmental and social. There was also talk of ending subsidies for fossil fuels and youth and women empowerment. All of these points and many more are elaborated in the report. All relevant information can be found at the panel's Web site.

Making Population Matter: The Demographic Dividend and Sustainable Development

Post by Olivia Gilmore

Yesterday I ventured out of RioCentro and over to Athletes Park, a separate collection of pavilions and individual country centers with a much more casual feel. What brought me there was an event entitled Making Population Matter: The Demographic Dividend and Sustainable Development, hosted by USAID, The Aspen Institute, and the Center for Population and the Environment. It took place in the U.S. Center, a drab navy box lacking the flair and style of the Italian Center or United Arab Emirates, but which was compensated for by the genuinely interesting dialogue among the panelists and audience.

Panelists included Cassio M Turra, Professor of Demography, Carmen Barroso, Regional Director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation, Susan Reichle of USAID’s bureau of Policy, Planning, and Learning, and Eliya Msiyaphazi Zulu, Executive Director of the African Institute for Development Policy. The Aspen Institute’s Peggy Clark acted as moderator; closing remarks were given by USAID’s Deputy Administrator Donald Steinberg.

The event began with an explanation of the demographic dividend, which for those of us that are unfamiliar with the term, generally refers to the economic growth a country with a large youth population can realize if it invests in the following four things: child survival, access to reproductive health, increased access to education, and job creation. If these things can all happen together then exceptional growth can be achieved.

Cassio Turra went on to explain that the economic benefits that the demographic dividend relates a change in age structure during demographic transition to economic growth. However, it is important to note that this growth is not automatic. It is more like an opportunity, an opportunity that can be missed if countries do not have the right policies.

Brazil is often cited in relation to the demographic dividend, with huge leaps in women’s education and empowerment leading to smaller family sizes. The “Asian Tigers”, such as Taiwan and South Korea were also mentioned.

However, where this opportunity is missed the social and economic realities are particularly devastating. Speaking to this point, Deputy Steinberg referenced Robert Kaplan’s famous article in the Atlantic, The Coming Anarchy, which made quite a stir in the early 90’s of the Clinton Administration. When the article showed up on his desk with a giant question mark on the top put there by the President himself as if to ask “Is this true?”, Steinberg’s response was “Maybe”. Whether this gloom and doom outlook is true or not depends on if we are dealing with the demographic transition or a youth bulge. A youth bulge is a threat to security, drag on the economy, and a situation which breeds gender and domestic violence and social unrest. The demographic dividend means a positive use of a nation’s human capital and unprecedented social and economic growth. As Steinberg pointed out, the youth bulge is seen in the people in IDP camps we don’t reach. The demographic dividend is represented by the young boy, who after receiving the Ambassador’s tie, is inspired to further his education and better his life.

At the end of the session I asked a somewhat pointed question. The phrase “integrated approach for sustainable development” was thrown around a lot, but without any explanation as to how exactly the demographic dividend is achieved without further environmental degradation. After all, rapid economic development is typically anything but sustainable. I directed my question to Susan Reichle, asking her to please speak to how the policy, planning, and learning bureau of USAID works with environmental concerns and natural resource management in countries where the demographic dividend is possible. I cited Nigeria as an example where oil has been a resource curse for the population, causing violence, corruption, and terrible pollution, often at the hand of U.S. companies. Oil… conflict… environment… U.S. interests… not surprisingly my question was conveniently sidestepped with a diplomatic response – something to the effect of “USAID considers social and environmental concerns when implementing all projects… ”.  

We Got Mad!

Post by Nora Mahmoud

I attended and participated the side event, "Get mad and do something about it! Youth as initiators for change," co-organized by Temple of Understanding, Gender Progress Consortium, Zero Waste Youth, Zero Waste Institute Brazil, Government of the City of Porto Alegre, Interfaith Consortium for Ecological Civilization (ICEC), CliMates, MobilizeUS,Worldview Impact Foundation’s Green Apprentice Programme (GAP), Peace Revolution, and Novociclo.

The event's aim was meant to recognize the anger and disappointment many young people feel when we look to our future. Rather than meeting the future with a defeated attitude, the panel explored several of the environmental hurdles facing younger generations and then presented solutions, such as, alternative lifestyles, green business ideas, green growth, social media and virtual capacity building forums and short courses, and new ideas for institutional infrastructure that are currently being implemented by youth.

It was an extremely interactive and therapeutic session in which the audience was asked to participate and express their feelings about how they felt the negotiations were going and they were also to share what actions they felt needed to take place during Rio+20 and beyond. 

I talked about my experience with the Earth Charter youth network and emphasized the importance of education for sustainable development as the way forward.

An Ethical Framework for Global Governnance

Post by Loubna Sadiki

The Earth Charter International side event that took place on June 17th, entitled "An Ethical Framework for Global Governnance" had an aim to have an open discussion about how important it is to agree on common ethical principles for a global governance system for sustainability.

The first speaker, Mr. Bosselman, started by explaining that he noticed that there is an increasing gap between civil society and governance by showing a graph that displays this gap from 1996 to 2012. He explained that since the cold war, this gap was widened due to an increase of capitalism that led to the decrease of sustainable environment practices. He also pointed out that neoliberalism had a peak after the Johannesburg conference in 2002 where it was the emphasis of partnership between the government and the corporations that have resulted nowadays to a decrease of green practices.

Later, he explained the concept of Global Commons. He defined it as a public good (when we look at it from a global perspective); It's everything we share and have in common. He stressed that about 200 years ago, in the European Union, the government agreed that no land has to be sold to anyone because it is inherited and passed to the future generations.

The second part of the speech was presented by the Mr. Rubens and Mr. Liknotal. Mr. Rubens said that ''We should act on both local and international environmental levels.'' He added that as representatives of civil society, we should be able to act on all levels, and not have to choose between the government and civil society. He emphasized that we need instruments for global governance.
Mr. Liknotal then talked more about what kind of change we really need nowadays in regards to major environmental issues. He stressed on having values and spiritual values, ''without them we are doomed.'' This made me think about how relevant the Earth Charter is to helping to providing a values based framework that can guide us to more sustainable ways of living. The speech ended with Mr. Liknotal expressing his discouragement about the new agenda for Rio+ 20; he explained that the discussions on the environment and sustainability don't touch the real problems that we are facing such as water and deforestation but focus only on the green economy.

Global Youth Music Contest at Rio+20

Post by Douglas F. Williamson

Last year, ECI Youth Coordinator Nora Mahmoud and I went to Klagenfurt, Austria to meet with many youth leaders and innovative thinkers to set up the Global Youth Music Contest. We workshopped for several days and created the contest. The contest was a succes with more than 3,000 submissions.

On Monday, I attended a preliminary launching of the next phase and was lucky to get a performance of the winners from the Youth category.

You can see all the submissions at the official site.

How can we measure well being?

Post by Douglas F. Williamson

On Wednesday, June 20th, I attended an event called "Beyond GDP" organized by UNDP, attended by several high level IGO representatives and heads of state, and chaired by UNDP Director Helen Clark. The event explored the emerging trends in measuring national metrics to determine well being that go beyond the narrowly limited but overly used Gross Domestic Product or Gross National Product. The most interesting presentation was by a representative from the Human Development Index, which measures many other metrics to determine the progress and well being of citizens of nations. There was a mention of the Happy Planet Index, which is an even more progressive measurement of well being, but for the most part the dialogue focused on increasing governmental buy-in to alternative measurements for the well being of their societies.

The Earth Charter has a definite role to play in helping determine what well being is defined as. The values and principles of the Earth Charter can indicate what humanity values and can guide those trying to measure that well being to better define their metrics. In the end, quantifying what we most value is impossible. There is no number or quantity to express the amount of love we feel for our families, our cultures, or our friends. Justice, security, satisfaction, happiness, faith, care, and respect are all values that we treasure beyond measurement, and that is why the discussion on shifting how we judge our societies' well being must move beyond GDP and strictly economic indicators.

What do you think?