Rio 1992
Chapter Fifty-Four
Syllabus topic 3, "International Concern for Environment Protection"
Pages 160 to 162 of 663
In one line
The Earth Summit met at Rio de Janeiro in June 1992, produced two conventions, a declaration, a programme of action and a statement on forests in eleven days, and is the largest single event in the history of this subject.
In exam wording: the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, convened by General Assembly resolution 44/228 of 1989 and held at Rio de Janeiro from 3 to 14 June 1992 with 172 States participating and 108 heads of State or government present, adopted the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development with 27 principles, Agenda 21, and the Non-Legally Binding Authoritative Statement of Principles on Forests, and opened for signature the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity; it also led to the establishment of the Commission on Sustainable Development and to the restructuring of the Global Environment Facility.
The five outcomes, and their legal status
| Outcome | Status | What it did |
|---|---|---|
| Rio Declaration | Soft law | 27 principles, including precaution, polluter pays, differentiated responsibilities, impact assessment |
| Agenda 21 | Soft law | An action programme in 40 chapters and four sections |
| Forest Principles | Expressly non-binding | The failure of the conference: no forest convention |
| Framework Convention on Climate Change | Treaty, opened for signature at Rio, in force 21 March 1994 | The climate regime |
| Convention on Biological Diversity | Treaty, opened for signature at Rio, in force 29 December 1993 | The biodiversity regime |
Learn that table. It is the answer to any question that asks what Rio produced, and the distinction between the soft and the hard outcomes is what an examiner is testing.
What made Rio different from Stockholm
One: development is in the title. Stockholm was the Conference on the Human Environment. Rio was the Conference on Environment and Development. The Brundtland Report's whole purpose was to make that conjunction possible.
Two: two treaties were opened, not merely a declaration adopted. Stockholm produced no treaty at all.
Three: heads of government attended. One hundred and eight of them, which made the outcomes politically owned at the highest level.
Four: non-governmental participation was on a new scale. A parallel Global Forum with thousands of organisations, and Agenda 21's Section III addresses the roles of nine "major groups": women, children and youth, indigenous people, non-governmental organisations, local authorities, workers and trade unions, business and industry, the scientific and technological community, and farmers.
Five: the bargain was explicit. Rio Principle 7 states common but differentiated responsibilities, and the developed countries acknowledge the responsibility they bear. That acknowledgement is what the developing States came for.
The forest failure, which belongs in every answer
The conference was intended to produce a forest convention. The developing States, led on this point by Malaysia and supported by others with large forests, refused: a binding convention on forests would have made a resource wholly within national territory the subject of international obligation, while no equivalent obligation was proposed for the temperate and boreal forests of the industrialised States, and none for their consumption.
Rio 1992
What emerged instead is titled the Non-Legally Binding Authoritative Statement of Principles for a Global Consensus on the Management, Conservation and Sustainable Development of All Types of Forests. The title says the whole story. There is still no global forest convention.
That failure is the best available illustration of what "international concern" cannot do: it can produce reporting and review, and it could not produce an obligation over a resource a State regards as simply its own.
Agenda 21, in outline
Four sections and forty chapters.
- Section I, social and economic dimensions: international cooperation, poverty, consumption patterns, demographics, health, human settlements, integrating environment and development in decision-making.
- Section II, conservation and management of resources: the atmosphere, land, deforestation, desertification, mountains, agriculture, biodiversity, biotechnology, oceans, freshwater, toxic chemicals, hazardous wastes, solid wastes and radioactive wastes.
- Section III, strengthening the role of major groups: the nine groups named above.
- Section IV, means of implementation: finance, technology transfer, science, education, capacity building, international institutions, international legal instruments and information.
Chapter 17 on the oceans is the marine programme; chapters 19 to 22 on chemicals and wastes are the ancestors of Rotterdam, the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and much of the Basel work; chapter 18 on freshwater is the programme that produced least.
What Rio built afterwards
- The Commission on Sustainable Development, established by the Economic and Social Council in 1992 under Article 68 of the Charter, to review implementation of Agenda 21. Replaced in 2013 by the High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development.
- The restructured Global Environment Facility, 1994, as the financial mechanism for the climate and biodiversity conventions.
- The Convention to Combat Desertification, negotiated after Rio at the insistence of the African States and adopted in 1994, which completes the set of three Rio conventions.
Worked example
A candidate is asked to compare Stockholm and Rio.
| Stockholm 1972 | Rio 1992 | |
|---|---|---|
| Title | The Human Environment | Environment and Development |
| States | 113 | 172 |
| Declaration | 26 principles | 27 principles |
| Treaties opened | None | Two |
| Programme | Action Plan, 109 recommendations | Agenda 21, 40 chapters |
| Institution created | UNEP | Commission on Sustainable Development |
| The principle that mattered | 21, sovereignty and responsibility | 2 (restating 21), 7, 15, 16, 17 |
| The failure | No liability regime, Principle 22 | No forest convention |
What it does NOT mean
Rio did not create sustainable development. Brundtland defined it in 1987 and Rio adopted it.
The Rio Declaration is not binding. Only the two conventions are, and only for their Parties.
Rio 1992
Agenda 21 was not implemented. Its review, ten years later at Johannesburg and twenty years later at Rio+20, found progress uneven and finance far short of what had been estimated.
Quick revision
- 3 to 14 June 1992, Rio de Janeiro; 172 States, 108 heads of State or government; convened by resolution 44/228 of 1989.
- Five outcomes: the Declaration, Agenda 21, the Forest Principles, and two conventions opened for signature.
- Framework Convention on Climate Change in force 21 March 1994; Convention on Biological Diversity in force 29 December 1993.
- The forest convention failed; the Forest Principles are expressly non-binding.
- Afterwards: the Commission on Sustainable Development, the restructured Global Environment Facility, and the desertification convention of 1994.
Test yourself
1. Which of Rio's outcomes are binding, and on whom? Only the two conventions, the Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity, and only on their Parties. The Declaration, Agenda 21 and the Forest Principles bind nobody.
2. Why was there no forest convention? Because the forest States refused an obligation over a resource wholly within their own territory when no equivalent obligation was proposed for the industrialised States' own forests or for their consumption. The result was an expressly non-binding statement of principles.
3. Name the three Rio conventions. The Framework Convention on Climate Change 1992, the Convention on Biological Diversity 1992, and the Convention to Combat Desertification 1994, which was negotiated after the conference at the insistence of the African States.
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.