Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-rvbq7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T17:16:50.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Accomplishments and New Directions?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2008

Extract

The World Summit on Sustainable Development took place in Johannesburg from 26 August to 4 September 2002. Its intended purpose was to hold a ten-year review of the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development (Rio Summit) in order to rein-vigorate the global commitment to sustainable development.1 Perhaps attempting to duplicate the products of other international meetings, national governments agreed to negotiate and adopt two documents: the Johannesburg Declaration2 and the Plan of Implementation3 However, differences emerged over the binding nature of the instruments and if so, the strength of the obligations therein. It appeared that this tension spilled over to all the negotiations. Some countries pushed for concrete timetables, reiterating other goals stipulated in previous international declarations or decisions, while other countries, weary of taking on new commitments that are unlikely to be met, preferred a more soft-law declaratory approach.

Type
Current Developments Public International Law
Copyright
Copyright © British Institute of International and Comparative Law 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 55/199.

2 Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development, (2002) A/CONF. 199/L.6, <http://www.johannesburgsummit.Org/html/documents/summit-docs/l009wssd_pol_declaration.doc>.

3 World Summit on Sustainable Development, Plan of Implementation, (2002), <http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/documents/summit_docs/2309_planfinal.pdf>.

4 Paras 5, 7, 11, and 21.

5 Art 2.

6 Art 4. This specifically includes the right to development and respect for cultural diversity.

7 Art 125, Plan of Implementation.

8 United Nations Millennium Declaration, A/RES/55/2, Art 19, <http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.htm>.

9 Arts 7, 24. The parties also agreed to develop integrated water resources management and water efficiency plans by 2005, with support to be given to developing countries for this purpose. See Art 25.

10 Art 8.

11 ‘Kyoto Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change’ (1998) 37 ILM 22.Google Scholar

12 The Protocol comes into force after 90 days upon the deposit of instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession of a minimum of fifty-five parties, including Annex I (industrialised countries and countries with economies in transition) parties that account for at least 55 per cent of the total carbon dioxide emissions for 1990.

13 Art 36.

14 Art 23.

15 Art 36.

16 Art 42(t). Some concern has been raised that the limited references to the Biosafety Protocol and the right of countries to assess the environment and health risks coupled with the explicit provision to promote measures for access to the results and benefits arising from biotechnology based upon genetic resources, to represent a balance towards the acceptance of GMOs in Art 42(p). See CIEL (2002), Preliminary Comments on Trade Related Issues in the 12th June Draft Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development at 6 (Washington, DC; CIEL). It should be further noted that during the Summit, some South African countries were refusing to accept food aid contaminated with GMOs.

17 Art 36. Similarly, the Convention on Biological Diversity is considered to be the ‘key instrument’ for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources. Art 42.

18 Art 36(a)(b).

19 Art 19(e).

20 Emphasis added. Art 19(e).

21 In the absence of any specific language, India stated that nuclear power is included for the purpose of interpreting Art 19(e) while Norway and Tuvalu noted that it does not.

22 Art 19(q).

23 Art 8.

24 Art8(a).

25 Art 56(J)(j), (k). The parties also agreed to mobilise resources to address African adaptation to the adverse impacts of climate change.

26 Art 47(f).

27 Art47(f).

28 Art 48.

29 Art 22.

30 Respecting human rights was also proposed in Art 121 listing the objectives of measures to strengthen sustainable development institutional arrangements but this was ultimately deleted from the final text. In Art 121(e), countries are generally called upon to promote the rule of law strengthen governmental institutions.

31 Art 47.

32 The Hole See, Ecuador, and Peru stated that the Plan of Implementation activities should be mindful of the inviolability of human life and dignity.

33 It was pointed out that industrialised nations currently spend about $350 billion a year assisting farmers, more than the economic output for all of Africa. World Bank, ‘Agricultural Subsidies Must be Cut, Nations Say’ (28 Aug 2002) <http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/O,date:08-28-2002~menuPK:34461~pagePK:34392~piPK:34427~theSitePK:4607,00.html#Storyl>.

35 Art 13.

36 The words ‘without prejudging the outcome’ are also present in Art 13 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration.

37 This also could be done within the framework of preferential agreements. See Art 61(c).

38 Art 38.

39 Art 38.

40 Art38(a).

41 (1967), 6 ILM 360.

42 Art 61.

43 (1994) 33/LM 116.

44 Art 39.

45 ‘United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’ (1992) 31 ILM 851.Google Scholar

46 ‘United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity’ (1992) 31 ILM 818.Google Scholar

47 Art39(c)(f).

48 Conference of the Parties Decision VI/26. Art 42, Plan of Implementation.

49 Art 42.

50 Art 23.

51 Art 23.

52 Art 1.

53 Art 15(3), (4)). See also Art 16(3).

54 The Bonn Guidelines on Access to Genetic Resources, adopted at 6th Conference of the Parties (Decision VI/24), is one of the few models that have been proposed, and includes disclosure requirements.

55 Art42(o).

56 The United States claimed in the closing plenary that this is not a legally binding requirement while Brazil has claimed at the WTO Committee on TRIPS that there is now an obligation on CBD parties to negotiate such an agreement.

57 Art 19.

58 Art47(h).

59 (1992) 21ILM 1261.

60 Art 29(a).

61 The Untied States is not a party to UNCLOS.

62 Art29(b).

63 This was agreed to in Art 29(d) with specific note of the Reykjavik Declaration on Responsible Fisheries in the Marine Ecosystem and Decision 5/6 of Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity.

64 The wording in Art 30(e) did at one point include ‘equitable fisheries’ as part of the chapeau but this was ultimately dropped.

65 Art 30(a). Maximum sustainable yield is taken from Art 5(b) of the UN Agreement Relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Migratory Fish Stocks, (1995) 34 ILM 1542.Google Scholar Interestingly, the parties to the Plan of Implementation agreed to ratify or accede to and effectively implement this Agreement in distinction from the general obligation inviting states to ratify or accede to and implement UNCLOS.

66 Art30(a).

67 <http://www.oceanlaw.net/texts/faocode.htm>. This is to be done taking note of the special requirements of developing countries noted in Art 5 of the Code.

68 Art 30(f). See Art 28 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration.

69 Art 30 (e).

70 Art31(b).

71 ‘Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar)’ (1972) 11 ILM 963.Google Scholar This specifically included the joint work programme with the Convention on Biological Diversity and the programme of action called for by the International Coral Reef Initiative.

72 Art 32. The last two instruments have particular importance for the management of municipal wastewater and preventing physical alteration and destruction of habitats and nutrients.

73 Art33(a).

74 The United Nations has imposed a target for developed countries to commit 0.7 per cent of their GDP to ODA. Few countries meet this target.

75 Art 6(b). In addition, the need to avoid duplication of existing United Nations funds was stressed.

76 Art 6(a).

77 Doha Ministerial Declaration, Art 31.

78 Art 92.

79 Art 95.

80 United StatesImport Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp ProductsRecourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Malaysia, AB-2001–4, Report of the Appellate Body.

81 Art 91(b), 93(b). Some NGOs were calling for additional language that would recognise the use of subsidies to correct market failure and ‘promote progress towards sustainable development’. See, Centre for International Environmental Law (2002).

82 The Declaration also that the TRIPS Agreement ‘be part of the wider national and international action to address health problems’ calling for an expeditious solution to problems facing countries that lack manufacturing capacity to develop Pharmaceuticals.

83 Art 94. See F Abbott (2002), ‘The Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health: Lighting a Dark Corner at the WTO’., 5:2 Journal oflnt Eco Law 469–505.

84 Art 42(r). WTO members agreed to examine in the TRIPS Council, pursuant to Art 19 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, the relationship between the two agreements.

85 Art 89 called for the parties to address the instability of commodity prices and declining terms of trade but evened this by committing themselves to facilitate the capacity building of commodity dependent countries to diversify their exports through financial and technical assistance including international assistance for economic diversification.

86 Art 17. Several NGOs including Friends of the Earth and Oxfam were urging the delegates to establish some form of multilateral instrument on the topic.

87 Art 17(a).

88 Art 45ter. See also Art 122 (f). For instance, Principle 13 calls on states to develop national law regarding liability and compensation for the victims of pollution and other environmental damage

89 Principle 7, Declaration of the UN Conference on Environment and Development, (Rio Declaration) UN Doc A/CONF.151/26/Rev 1.

90 Ibid, Principle 15. Note that Principle 15 refers to the precautionary approach and not the precautionary principle, which appears in several multilateral environmental agreements (Protocol on Biosafety (Cartagena), (2000) 39 ILM 1027, Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (Stockholm), (2001) 40 ILM 532 as well as the WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards. For additional thoughts on the meaning of the precautionary principle as reflected in the SPS Agreement, see the report of the WTO Appellate Body in EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones) WT/DS26/AB/R, Part IV, para 123.

91 Art 75.

92 Art 2

93 Art 19.

94 Art 13.

95 Art 37. The proposed addition of the principle in the paragraph dealing with institutional framework for sustainable development was deleted. For ozone depletion, the parties agreed to facilitate implementation of the Montreal Protocol by ensuring adequate replenishment of its fund by 2003/2005 as well improve access by developing countries to alternatives to ODS by 2010. (Art 37(b)(d)).

96 See above n 90.

97 (1945) 59 Stat 1055, TS No 993.

98 Art 103(f).

100 Art 22.

101 UNCED (A/RES/55/199).

102 The parties were only required to give consideration to the possible relationship between environment and human rights, including the right to development. See Art 152.

103 Earth Negotiations Bulletin, Summary of the World Summit on Sustainable Development: 26 Aug-4 Sept 2002.

104 The parties were called upon to undertake measures to promote the rule of law and strengthen governmental institutions. See Art 121(d).

105 Art 123 states that good governance at the international level is fundamental for achieving sustainable development. There are calls in Art 124 for a new UN Convention on corruption that would include provisions mandating the repatriation of funds illicitly acquired to countries of origin.

106 Section 2. These groups are: women; children and youth; indigenous people; NGOs; local authorities; workers and trade unions; business and industry; scientists and technologists; and farmers.