Title, subtitle, authors
Full text search with Google
Written by: FPH
Writing date: April 2012
This document of about forty pages has been elaborated by the Foundation Charles Léopold Mayer (FPH). From an analysis of ongoing global governance challenges that the Foundation leads for years, the principles of which we share, the authors took the articles of the zero draft of the conference one by one, and made proposals in order to allow meaningful progress in years to come.
The alternative proposition is very different from the official draft: it makes us measure that we have still a long way to go so that the Rio + 20 conference permits real progress.
After the failure of the Conference, we considerer that this particularly rich document retains its full interest for those who consider that the improvement of the governance of natural resources is necessary and urgent for the humanity.
In January 2012, The United Nations elaborated, on the basis of the submissions transmitted in autumn by governments, the “zero draft”, which was the starting point for the coming negotiations in the perspective of a Final Declaration at Rio+20. Thanks to the experience of 20 years of reflection and action with its partners on sustainable development, The Foundation Charles Léopold Mayer for the Progress of Humankind (FPH), has taken the initiative to write an “alternative zero draft” (AZD). The aim of this AZD is to propose a coherent and global vision on the major issues of the Rio Conference, an ambitious vision which allows questioning the current model of development.
Thus, the AZD keeps the same structure as the official draft zero written by the United Nations but its amendments are geared by the principles of an agenda for the Great Transition.
Like the initial Draft Zero, this document is an open proposal requiring to be enriched by the contributions of all those
who want a new start for the next 20 years.
I RENEWING THE POLITICAL COMMITMENT
The AZD drafted by FPH takes for granted the fact that we should not only renew the political commitment, as proposed by the UN agenda, but also acknowledges the limits and contradictions of the concept of sustainable development, the way it has been agreed upon twenty years from now, and the need for a new development paradigm, far beyond the concepts of sustainable development or green economy. In particular, the AZD highlights:
The gap between intentions and actions in the articles 1, 5, 6, 7, 12, 14
The need to adopt a new paradigm for sustainable development in the articles 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 14
The importance of considering the interdependences that are transforming the humanity into a community of destiny, in the articles 2, 4, 6, 9, 98
The need to found the Great Transition on an ethics of responsibility and to reform the international law according with this principle in the articles 2, 4, 5, 9, 12, 16, 17, 19, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 31, 40, 41, 44, 46, 49, 53, 54, 59, 60, 61, 63, 69, 71, 74, 80, 85, 88, 90, 92, 93, 97, 98, 101, 102, 105
The importance of joining all the international actors in collaborative politics and the definition of precise rules of partnerships in the articles 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23
II REFORMING THE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION PATTERNS
The Great Transition also entails a major reform of our current production and consumption patterns which are linked to the aggravation of inequalities, to the growing use of fossil energy and nonrenewable natural resources, and finally, to the degradation of ecosystems. Rethinking the production and consumption patterns is the alternative proposed by the FPH to the UN limited concept of “green economy”. The FPH insists on:
The key role playing by the territories and local governance in the transition towards sustainable production and consumption patterns in the articles 20, 25, 28, 31, 42, 44, 59, 60, 61, 72, 92
The establishment of quotas and the implementation of an obligation of a rule of traceability to regulate the consumption of non –renewable fossil energy appears in the articles 24, 25, 30, 31, 69, 70, 97, 107
The principle of ecological justice and equal access to energy resources in the articles 24, 30, 78
The need to reorganize the international trade around sustainable global supply chains in the articles 14, 19, 27, 31, 43, 54, 64, 74, 97
The distinction of different categories of goods in order to define relevant governance regimes in the articles 13, 26, 27, 43, 61, 63, 69, 70, 72, 90, 107
the right of every country to find its own development path and the need to support this effort in the articles 8, 14, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 97
III REFORMING SYSTEMS OF GOVERNANCE
Our current governance model, based on the segmentation and fragmentation of problems and skills is inappropriate to solve systemic problems, as highlighted by current crises which are at the same time economic, social, sanitary and environmental. In consequences, the FPH underlines:
The need to conceive governance regimes able to deal with issues in a more holistic way in the articles 12, 17, 22, 51
The importance of establishing a multi-level governance, based on the cooperation of all international actors involved in the Great Transition an on the principle of active subsidiary, in order to
manage our social and environmental challenges in the articles 5, 20, 22, 25, 44, 59, 61, 62, 64, 67, 69, 70, 92
The creation by different stakeholders of international networks sharing experiences in the articles17, 18, 20, 28, 32, 44, 46, 60, 62, 64, 69, 72, 92, 98
The need to define guidelines as an outcome of experience sharing, to orient the action of governments and to foster the cooperation among all stakeholders in the articles 28, 31, 37, 60, 69, 92
The need to organize a permanent feedback, follow-up and evaluation of progress especially through international meetings and through the definition of qualitative and quantitative indicators in the articles 17, 28, 37, 43, 44, 46, 49, 63, 69
the global governance reform is in the articles 14, 17, 24, 41, 46, 49, 51, 54
fph_draft_zero_alter_rio20_en.pdf (220 KiB)