Agenda 21, Johannesburg and Rio+20
Chapter Fifty-Six
Syllabus topic 3, "International Concern for Environment Protection"
Pages 166 to 168 of 663
In one line
Rio produced a programme, and the thirty years since have been four attempts to keep it alive, ending in the seventeen Goals the world now works to.
In exam wording: the follow-up to Rio consists of Agenda 21 of 1992, reviewed at the special session of the General Assembly in 1997; the World Summit on Sustainable Development at Johannesburg in 2002, which adopted the Johannesburg Declaration and a Plan of Implementation; the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development at Rio in 2012, which adopted The Future We Want and launched the process for the Sustainable Development Goals; and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted by General Assembly resolution 70/1 of 25 September 2015.
The sequence
| Year | Event | Output | What it added |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1992 | Rio Earth Summit | Agenda 21 | The programme, 40 chapters |
| 1997 | Rio+5, a special session of the General Assembly | Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21 | An honest finding that implementation had been poor |
| 2002 | World Summit on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg | Johannesburg Declaration; Plan of Implementation | The three pillars; targets with dates; partnerships |
| 2012 | United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, Rio+20 | The Future We Want | The Goals process; upgrade of UNEP's Governing Council |
| 2015 | Adoption of the 2030 Agenda | Resolution 70/1, 17 Goals, 169 targets | A single universal framework replacing the separate development and environment agendas |
Agenda 21, and why it did not work
Its structure is in the Rio chapter. Its failure has three causes and each is examinable.
One: no money. The estimated cost of implementation was very large and the finance chapter, chapter 33, secured only a general commitment. The target that developed countries should devote 0.7 per cent of gross national product to official development assistance was reaffirmed and has been met by very few States.
Two: no obligation. Agenda 21 binds nobody. Its implementation depended entirely on national will.
Three: no institution with teeth. The Commission on Sustainable Development reviewed and reported. It could not require anything of anybody, and its sessions became a cycle of reporting on activity rather than on outcome. It was wound up in 2013.
Johannesburg 2002
The World Summit on Sustainable Development produced two documents.
The Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development contains the formula now used everywhere: the three pillars of sustainable development, economic development, social development and environmental protection, described as interdependent and mutually reinforcing. If a candidate learns one thing from Johannesburg it is that formula.
The Plan of Implementation set dated targets, of which the most cited were to halve by 2015 the proportion of people without access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation, to maintain or restore fish stocks to levels producing maximum sustainable yield by 2015, to achieve a significant reduction in the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010, and to establish representative networks of marine protected areas by 2012. Most were missed.
Agenda 21, Johannesburg and Rio+20
Johannesburg also introduced Type II partnerships, voluntary arrangements between governments, business and civil society registered with the Commission. They were criticised as a substitute for commitment, and they are the origin of the multi-stakeholder partnership model that Goal 17 now carries.
Rio+20, 2012
The outcome document is called The Future We Want. Three things in it matter.
- It launched the Goals process. It decided to establish an open working group to develop a set of sustainable development goals, building on the Millennium Development Goals and converging with the post-2015 development agenda.
- It upgraded UNEP's governing body, from a Governing Council of fifty-eight States to universal membership, which became the United Nations Environment Assembly. It did not make UNEP a specialized agency.
- It replaced the Commission on Sustainable Development with a High-level Political Forum, which reports through the Economic and Social Council and meets at head of State level every four years.
It also endorsed the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication as one of the important tools available, a formulation whose caution reflects the developing States' fear that green economy conditions would become trade barriers.
The 2030 Agenda
Adopted by General Assembly resolution 70/1 of 25 September 2015: seventeen Goals, one hundred and sixty-nine targets, and a review mechanism through the High-level Political Forum. It is dealt with in its own chapter in Module II.
Two features distinguish it from everything before.
- It is universal. The Millennium Development Goals applied in effect to developing countries. The Goals apply to every State, including the richest.
- It integrates rather than separates. There is no environmental section. Environmental targets sit inside goals on water, energy, cities, consumption, climate, oceans and land.
Worked example
An examiner asks what happened to Agenda 21.
A weak answer says it was not implemented. A strong answer traces the institutional history: reviewed and found wanting in 1997; supplemented with dated targets and partnerships at Johannesburg in 2002, most of which were missed; converted at Rio+20 in 2012 into a process for goals; and absorbed in 2015 into the 2030 Agenda, which replaced a separate environmental programme with an integrated one and made it universal.
Then the assessment: each step traded specificity for political acceptability, and each traded obligation for review. What survives is a reporting cycle, and whether that is worth having is the honest question. The answer offered by the ozone regime is that reporting plus finance plus a trade restriction works, and that reporting alone does not.
What it does NOT mean
The Goals are not law. Resolution 70/1 is a General Assembly resolution.
Agenda 21, Johannesburg and Rio+20
Johannesburg's three pillars are not a legal test. They are a formula for describing the concept.
Rio+20 did not create a World Environment Organization. The proposal was on the table and was not agreed.
Quick revision
- 1992 Agenda 21; 1997 Rio+5 review; 2002 Johannesburg, three pillars and dated targets; 2012 Rio+20, The Future We Want; 2015 the 2030 Agenda, resolution 70/1.
- Agenda 21 failed for want of money, of obligation and of an institution with power.
- The Commission on Sustainable Development was replaced by the High-level Political Forum in 2013.
- Rio+20 gave UNEP universal membership and did not make it an agency.
- The 2030 Agenda is universal and integrated; the Millennium Development Goals were neither.
Test yourself
1. What formula did Johannesburg contribute? The three pillars of sustainable development: economic development, social development and environmental protection, interdependent and mutually reinforcing.
2. Name the three institutional changes made at Rio+20. The Goals process was launched, UNEP's Governing Council became the universal-membership United Nations Environment Assembly, and the Commission on Sustainable Development was to be replaced by a High-level Political Forum.
3. Give the three reasons Agenda 21 was not implemented. No finance, no binding obligation, and no institution with power to require anything of anybody.
The rest of this subject
These notes are cut from the University's printed syllabus. Open the syllabus itself, or the past papers, for the same subject.