Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Comments to the Draft Zero RIO+20 on behalf of Quercus – ANCN

Comments to the Draft Zero RIO+20 on behalf of Quercus – ANCN

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2 |Likes:
Published by Quercus ANCN
Comments to the Draft Zero RIO + 20 on behalf of
Quercus – Associação Nacional de Conservação da Natureza
Comments to the Draft Zero RIO + 20 on behalf of
Quercus – Associação Nacional de Conservação da Natureza

More info:

Published by: Quercus ANCN on Apr 08, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Comments to the Draft Zero
RIO + 20
on behalf of
Quercus – Associação Nacional de Conservação da Natureza
Comments to the Draft Zero Rio + 20 on behalf of Quercus – Associação Nacional de Conservação da Natureza
General revision:
Twenty years after the first Earth Summit – Rio 92, governments, interna-tional institutions and civil society representatives from all over the world willparticipate in the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development(CNUSD or “Rio+20”). The main focus of the conference will be the transitiontowards a global green economy encompassing the challenges to eradicatepoverty and building a governance oriented towards sustainable development.As stated by the Secretary General of the Rio +20, Mr. Sha Zukang, the out-comes should reflect in political commitments, partnerships and concreteaction on the ground.From the Rio+20 summit it is expected that it initiates a fast and pro-found process of global transition towards a green economy – an economy thatgenerates growth, jobs and eradicates poverty through investment and preser-vation of natural capital upon which our long term survival depends. “It isexpected that the concept of green economy will be better defined with prac-tical implications. It is expected that it can be effective in addressing the par-ticular needs of different regions and people. It is expected that it meets thenecessities of the poorest and reduces the invulnerabilities of those least pro-tected from the effects of climate change.” According to Zapata, the conceptof the Green Economy, “(...) apart from being vague is substantially optimistic.It advances the believe that the adoption of eco-efficient technologies in keysectors, with market mechanisms, will be sufficient to guide us towards sus-tainability. There exists however a large debate about what should actually beconsidered a green technology and what indicators should be applied. (…)Additionally, the debate does not make reference to a profound change inproduction and consumption based on radical innovations. Equally vague andlimited, the term sustainable development and its explicit meaning (to meetthe needs of the present without compromising the ability of future genera-tions to meet their own needs) were consecrated by all countries in 1992. Itshould be taken into account that every type of consensual diplomatic lan-guage, especially when globally agreed, is necessarily vague.”
February 2012
Since the debacle of Copenhagen, and 20 years of tortuous negotiations,Rio +20 has become the focal point for a turn to “reinvent the world” andrenew hope. Rio +20 faces a double challenge to deconstruct the fatality ofthe “tragedy of the Commons”and build a collective project to recover theplanet's biocapacity.A change of this importance wont happen easily. The biggest obstacle weface is not that of technological solutions but in fact the “politicalimpossibility”to realize the necessary changes in the organization of the inter-national governance structures in order to initiate the recuperation of theplanets biocapacity.The “Zero Draft” finds itself in between the vague term “sustainabledevelopment”, which enters into conflict with the global governance of ameffective sustainable society and the urgent necessity to operationalize this“green” economy. By not referring to the the need to intervene in the neces-sary structural conditions to change the paradigm, and perpetuating the widelyadopted “proclamatory” pathway, this document risks to become irrelevant,missing the possibility to become an important milestone in the desired transi-tion towards a green economy.Despite the formal concept of green economy already existing, theoperational instruments of this “new economy” have still to be formulated andwe still need to find the foundations for this new human construction. How-ever, in a document that should be programmatic we find no clear objectivesthat indicate the path to take. It is on these structural questions that we focusour analysis: Building a green economy is not just about reducing pollution,developing green technologies and improving eco-efficiency andattempting to organize “collective fruition” through a “function of exchangeand alienation” of the rights to pollute, with all the perverse effects thatarise. Constructing a green economy is also maintaining and recovering thenatural capital, introducing in the accounts of international relations and inGDP the positive contribution of each intervener in the global ecologicalsystem and in this way allowing a positive stimulus for the recovery of theplanet´s biocapacity to sustain human life.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->