As we gear up for Rio+20, starting next week in Brazil, SI UN Representative Bette Levy summarises the current international position on the outcome document, and attempts to explain why the negotiations have been so difficult. She has been following events in New York since the start of the year.

As thousands of participants are preparing to
travel to Rio for the UNCSD/Rio+20 there is obvious disappointment in the lack
of results during the informal negotiations… the
negotiations broke down over and over again on key issues extremely important
to women and the work of Soroptimist International and our individual members.

Unfortunately, the summit comes at a time when
developed and developing countries seem less and less able to reach a common
understanding on key issues and principles. The North-South divide has been
visible in the negotiations at the World Trade Organisation, in the Climate
Change Convention and most recently at the UN Conference on Trade and
Development. The same divide also exists in the Rio+20 negotiations. There was
a clear division between G77 & China  and USA, EU, Canada, the Scandinavian countries.

For those of you who have been trying to follow
the difficult negotiations via email or on websites, I’ll just share that while
I have been present for the sessions since my first report in December 2011 and
have actively participated in the various Intersessional Meetings, Informal
Informal Negotiations, worked closely with the Women’s Major Group, it is hard
to understand the breakdown. At the heart of the issue are Human Rights as
member states try to pull back from already agreed upon declarations such as
the Beijing and Cairo declarations. Money, Women’s rights to land ownership and
inheritance, Sexual and Reproductive rights, equality in leadership positions
and monitoring of progress remain among the most contentious items.  There was also some signs that the developed
countries were attempting to remove/dilute the principles agreed to in Rio 20 years ago,
and to backtrack on the commitments they had made to assist developing
countries through finance and technology transfer in order to implement
sustainable development. 

Unfortunately, big differences have emerged on
the three new issues being addressed by the Conference (green economy,
sustainable development goals, and the institutional framework).

During the second round of informal negotiations (23 April – 4
May), Member States remained far from reaching
agreement on actions in priority areas. So at the request of the Bureau, Member States
agreed to meet again for another five days, from 29 May to 2 June. This was the
last chance before Rio to come to an agreement on an action agenda.  By this time views and positions of the groups,
Member States and all 9 Major Groups were well known to everyone. Therefore, as
the round of negotiations continued there was a sense of urgency, aiming for
agreement on critical issues and a balanced outcome.

At the closing of the 2^nd informal negotiations
(May 4, 2012), Secretary-General,
Mr. Sha Zukang appealed to delegations to
work toward a focused political document, as mandated by the General Assembly:

1. that renews political commitment, reaffirms Rio
   principles and builds upon earlier agreements;
2. that is action-oriented in spelling out the Future we
   Want;
3. that contains inspiring agreements for future
   generations on a green economy in the context of sustainable development
   and poverty eradication and on the institutional framework for sustainable
   development;
4. that contains ambitious universal goals – the
   Sustainable Development Goals;
5.  that contains
   concrete deliverables in priority areas; and
6. that creates or strengthens the institutions we need
   for the post-Rio+20 period.

The Secretary General Of the United Nations,
Ban Ki Moon, opened the 3^rd round of Informal Informal Negotiations
with a strong statement to the Member States to put aside personal (National)
self-interests and develop a plan for the future of the planet.

During the interim, the co-chairs (Ambassador
Ashe and Ambassador Kim) and Bureau of the
UNCSD Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) had
developed a streamlined and ‘balanced’ draft (“The Future We Want”) as the starting
point. With the goal to have at least 90% of the text ready prior to Rio and
with only the most difficult 10% needing to be negotiated in Rio.
Unfortunately, that was not the case and the negotiations closed on June 2^nd,
with only 20% agreement.

The conciliatory draft had raised hopes, but
was almost immediately crushed by amendments from the EU and the G-77/China.
Once the Co-Chairs’ text was opened, there was little holding back. The
G-77/China reinserted a number of references to the principle of common but
differentiated responsibilities and equity, against the expected objections of
developed countries. The EU insisted on specific targets, introducing language
under most thematic areas with specific targets to achieve goals by 2030,
including biodiversity—against the objections of the US and developing
countries.

The final meeting to prepare for the Conference
at UN headquarters in New York made some progress to narrow the gaps, but it
was not enough only 70 paragraphs (out of a total of 329) in the latest draft
declaration have been agreed on were agreedad referendum, with 259 containing bracketed text. There are differing
views in the rest, which have to be bridged when the delegates meet again on 13
June in Rio. There is only a few days before more than a hundred heads of state
or governments meet on 20-23 June for the Rio plus 20 summit, which marks the
twentieth anniversary of the historic Earth Summit of 1992, also held in Rio.

UNCSD Secretary-General Sha Zukang in his
closing remarks said “We are near, and yet so far”.

On
June 6, 2012 Ban Ki Moon
issued the following statement:

"We live in a world of economic uncertainty, growing
inequality and environmental decline. That is why I expect concrete outputs
from Rio – outcomes that will improve the lives of real people around the
world. First, we need to agree to define a path to an inclusive green economy
that will lift people from poverty and protect the global environment. This
requires international collaboration; it requires investment; it requires that
countries exchange experiences and technology. Second, leaders should agree to
define sustainable development goals with clear and measurable targets and
indicators. These SDGs will be a central part of the post-2015 global
development framework…" 

"We need more partnerships with civil society and the private sector –
strategic alliances that can galvanize global public support and drive change.
I look forward to new commitments and initiatives on critical challenges —
from job creation and social protection, to energy, transportation and food
security. These undertakings, and the global mobilization that has produced
them, will be a major part of Rio+20’s legacy. Ultimately, Rio+20 will be
measured in the transformation it sets in motion – the lives it changes for the
better…" 

"Our hopes for future prosperity, health and stability, rest on
finding a path that integrates the economic, social and environmental pillars
of development. Agreeing on that roadmap is what Rio+20 is about. Sustainable
development is an idea whose time has come. It is the future we want."