Outreach at UNCSD 3rd Round of Informals - 1 June 2012

inside: Green buildings for great cities Cities are our key to a successful future

a multi-stakeholder magazine on climate change and sustainable development

out reach.

01 June 2012

Be PaperSmart: Read Outreach online www.stakeholderforum.org/sf/outreach

pic: NYC DOT

contents.

1

Green buildings for great cities

2

Sustainable buildings: leaving a lasting legacy

3

Cities are our key to a successful future

4

A green infrastructure strategy would help let nature carry the load in our cities

5

Is the raison d’etre of the conference waning?

6

Cities, villages and adaptation to climate change

7

Sustainable cities: friends share experiences from the bottom up

8

Profile: Todd Stern

9

Book Launch- Thursday 31st May - 1pm ICLEI publishes a global study on local sustainability processes

10

2

5

6

Reflections on the Negotiations – Thursday 31st May

pic: Kyle Gradinger

OUTREACH IS PUBLISHED BY:

About Stakeholder Forum Stakeholder Forum is an international organisation working to advance sustainable development and promote democracy at a global level. Our work aims to enhance open, accountable and participatory international decision-making on sustainable development through enhancing the involvement of stakeholders in intergovernmental processes. For more information, visit: www.stakeholderforum.org

Outreach is a multi-stakeholder publication on climate change and sustainable development.

It is the longest continually produced stakeholder magazine in the sustainable development arena, published at various international meetings on the environment; including the UNCSD meetings (since 1997), UNEP Governing Council, UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (COP) and World Water Week.

Published as a daily edition, in both print and web form, Outreach provides a vehicle for critical analysis on key thematic topics in the sustainability arena, as well as a voice of regional and local governments, women, indigenous peoples, trade unions, industry, youth and NGOs. To fully ensure a multistakeholder perspective, we aim to engage a wide range of stakeholders for article contributions and project funding.

If you are interested in contributing to Outreach, please contact the team (gmacdonald@stakeholderforum.org or acutter@stakeholderforum.org) You can also follow us on Twitter: @Earthsummit2012

OUTREACH EDITORIAL TEAM Felix Dodds

Stakeholder Forum

Farooq Ullah

Stakeholder Forum

Editor

Georgie Macdonald

Stakeholder Forum

Co-editor

Amy Cutter

Stakeholder Forum

Editorial Assistant

Jack Cornforth

Stakeholder Forum

Print Designer

Jessica Wolf

Jessica Wolf Design

Web Designer

Thomas Harrisson

Stakeholder Forum

Web Designer

Matthew Reading-Smith

Stakeholder Forum

Editorial Advisors

CONTRIBUTING WRITERS Bridget Brady

Mount Holyoke College

Sue Riddlestone

BioRegional

Natalie Cosans

Planet Positive

Freya Seath

Bioregional

Ron Dembo

Zerofootprint

Stakeholder Forum

Jane Henley

World Green Building Council

Jan-Gustav Strandenaes

Gary Lawrence

AECOM

Ashwani Vasishth

Ramapo College of New Jersey

Green buildings for great cities Jane Henley World Green Building Council The Rio+20 conference presents an unparalleled opportunity to highlight the central role that buildings and cities play in a green economy. More than half the world’s people live in cities. These cities, and the buildings within them, have a profound impact on the environment, the global economy, and the quality of life of the world’s citizens.

Challenges and solutions

Our buildings are responsible for around 40% of global energy consumption and over one third of global greenhouse gas emissions. However, buildings also represent the single largest opportunity to mitigate climate change. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has found that ‘no other sector has such a high potential for drastic emission reductions’.

Built with water and energy efficiency in mind, green buildings cost less to operate and deliver a range of benefits for building owners and occupants; from lower operating costs and higher returns, through to increased health and productivity, and savings on utility costs.

However, green buildings are not only great for the people who live and work in them - they are great for the entire community. In fact, green buildings can help communities and cities save money, support job growth and improve the health, wellbeing and living conditions of millions of people.

Delivering prosperity

In developed nations, energy efficiency retrofits for buildings save energy and create jobs. UNEP has found that investments in energy efficiency measures in buildings could generate 3.5 million green jobs in Europe and the United States alone.

Boosting productivity

Green buildings can improve the health and wellbeing of occupants – increasing worker productivity and student learning, and reducing health problems associated with ‘sick building syndrome’. All of these factors have the potential to significantly affect a nation’s competitiveness and economic security.

A survey in the US has found that green schools can deliver a 15% improvement in student productivity and a 25% improvement on test scores. In Australia, one landmark green building study found that office workers’ productivity had increased by 10.9% simply by moving into a green certified building.

Empowering communities

Green building projects can reduce poverty and empower local communities to improve their lives.

In South Africa, for instance, an entire street was retrofitted with green building technologies to coincide with COP-17 in Durban last year. The Cato Manor project will deliver a range of socio-economic, health and environmental benefits, such as lower energy costs, reduced illness and safety risks, skills training and job creation for disadvantaged members of the community, as well as reduced greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impact.

On the other side of the world, the the Los Silos in Tlajomulco, Mexico, is building 6,000 sustainable, affordable homes for low-income families. The world’s first national sustainable housing program under the Clean Development Mechanism, at Los Silos greenhouse gas emissions are tracked and recorded, and credits are then traded on the international market.

On the Road to Rio+20

The global green building industry has worked together over the past decade to prove the business case for green building, develop new products and processes, and build capacity and knowledge all over the world. Now it is time to apply this expertise with buildings to our cities. To do this, we need business and government to work together on effective policies and strategies to ensure we get much better outcomes – for our buildings, for our cities and for the people who live in them

.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Jane Henley leads the world’s largest non-profit organisation influencing the green building marketplace.

As Chief Executive Officer of the World Green Building Council, Jane’s role is to drive collaboration between 90 national green building councils, provide leadership, support and advocate for green building as a mechanism to deliver environmental, economic and social benefits.

MORE INFO This article has been produced with the support of Skanska. Read more about how Skanska contribute to a more sustainable built environment by visiting:

www.skanska.com/sustainability

RIO+20

1

Sustainable buildings: leaving a lasting legacy Natalie Cosans Planet Positive The construction and building trade in the UK consumes the most energy, and produces more CO2, than any other sector.

The industry also creates more waste and pollution than any other sector and remains a major contributing factor to global climate change. Thus, it is now more important than ever to fight against this evolving threat by regulating and reducing emissions from buildings.

Changes spurred by new regulations over the past twenty years illustrate the effectiveness of sustainable design and development. Beginning with the supply chain, environmentally friendly businesses and buildings are now utilising low carbon materials and services.

With these new advancements, carbon output can be reduced by almost a quarter, improving the environment, community, and saving money. Large construction firms recognise the benefits associated with these advancements and are taking the lead in helping to promote a more sustainable future.

“Our stores play an important role in promoting our business and our sustainable values”, says Munish Datta, Head of Property Plan A of Marks & Spencer (M&S), a UK based food and clothing retailer. “They shape our consumer experience. For this reason we want stores which embody sustainable design and encourage sustainable consumption by us, our property supply chain and our customer base”.

Sustainable design originates with the construction of a building. Up to half of the whole-life carbon emissions of a building come from its raw materials and construction process. Energy used within the building, such as heating and lighting, also releases significant quantities of carbon.

Furthermore, buildings produce waste and contribute to environmental pollution during the deconstruction phase.

For these reasons, the construction of a highly sustainable building requires a full life cycle assessment.

The challenge of building design is to be fully sustainable with zero carbon output. Organisations such as Deloitte conduct sustainability full life cycle assessments for developments using materials that sequester carbon and can be fully reused on decommissioning.

M&S similarly adopted efforts aimed to reduce the amount of carbon released in their buildings through the creation of their Plan A program. Through sustainable practice, M&S has successfully reduced carbon output, while saving money.

2

RIO+20

“Whether it is reducing energy or water consumption, the amount of waste we produce, and how we treat it, the embodied impacts of the materials we use to build our stores, the creation of new biodiversity habitats or the role our buildings play within the local communities they reside in, the M&S built environment is playing a central role in meeting our Plan A aspirations and bringing financial benefits”, Datta affirms.

Addressing the sole issue of building emissions does not solve the problem entirely. Investment beyond the building also plays a critical role in creating a sustainable future. Investing in carbon reduction projects promotes sustainability on a deeper level. For example, the education of citizens, future generations and the protection of endangered forests can often mollify the effects associated with environmental pollution.

“In the UK we invest in local schools projects to educate and engage pupils in sustainability through workshops, assemblies and site visits”, says Simon Cox at ProLogis.

“Each UK development also mitigates unavoidable embodied carbon emissions by protecting hundreds of acres of endangered Amazon rainforest”.

Organisations, such as Planet Positive, help make the conversion to sustainability for businesses like ProLogis more achievable. For example, Planet Positive offers certification to meet planning requirements in an affordable way, while also allowing businesses to invest in sustainable projects such as education on sustainability in schools and approved rainforest protection schemes.

Through certification programs such as Planet Positive, businesses are provided with the resources to positively impact the planet, its people and ecosystems.

By implementing just a few steps, reducing carbon emissions in buildings can effect change. With access to certification processes and opportunities to inform and protect the community and environment, companies can easily achieve sustainability. As Simon Cox says: “This combination helps to leave a lasting sustainable legacy both locally and globally”

.

Cities are our key to a successful future Gary Lawrence AECOM Imagine an urban conurbation that fosters complex interactions between diverse people, ideas, goods and services towards the end of optimising conditions for human development over time.

In practice, most of our cities fall short of this promise.

The very worst have exacerbated inequality, poverty, incivility and poor health.

Yet the ideas and points of view found within the concepts of sustainable development are attractive to most of us. The problem is that for too many of us the term ‘sustainability’ is an abstraction.

In many instances, science is providing us clearer insights into the effects of human behaviour. In some instances, what we ought to do about the undesirable effects is becoming clearer. Far less often do we see society changing its behaviours and instructing government and the marketplace to make different choices in order to avoid the undesirable consequences of our current expectations.

If this is going to change, if our society is going to translate its embedded values into a more constructive approach to the future, we need a new dialectic. Rather than focusing on the abstraction of ‘sustainability’, we should shift our attention to securing a happier, healthier, brighter future for people. If the goal is to optimise conditions for human development over time – we must broaden our understanding of the issues, ask better questions, and take responsibility for the cumulative effects of our decisions.

As we attempt to solve problems or seize opportunities, we seldom pay attention to the unintended consequences that pop up somewhere else or some time later. We cannot keep shifting consequences.

Average global life expectancy will rise from 68 today to 81 in 2095. How would urban design and systems be different if the objective were to make life as easy as possible for the elderly? For women? For parents with small children?

The reality is that there are always circumstances in which the car is the best mode of transportation. Once we have accepted this it is possible to begin looking at an integrated urban transportation system that offers real alternatives and allows every member of society to remain active, productive and engaged.

Four preventable chronic diseases account for 50% of the world’s deaths. The overweight now outnumber the malnourished. What is the role of design in reducing the social and financial burden of preventable chronic disease?

Disabled people of working age are three times more likely to be unemployed and live in poverty than are the rest of the population. One third of the world’s population lives in slum conditions with worse health outcomes, high child mortality, and increased incidences of acute respiratory disease. Is it the responsibility of design and planning professionals to incorporate considerations of fairness, justice and poverty alleviation when making recommendations to policy makers and communities?

Current environmental, social and economic policies have left our cities vulnerable to unpredictable climate impacts: • Growing urban populations stress existing resources.

• Poorly articulated growth strategies consume natural buffers.

• Dispersed, uncoordinated governance slows reaction and adaptation.

• Weak infrastructure threatens global competitiveness.

• Increased burden on poor and infirm erodes productivity.

How can planning and design strategies mitigate the impact of disasters related to climate change on the economic security, health and safety of urban populations?

After agriculture, cities are the second largest consumers of water. Cities consume 75% of the world’s energy and are responsible for 80% of the world’s carbon emissions – much of this consumption lies in the transport of goods and necessities to the city. By 2030, 60% of the world’s population will live in cities. All this suggests that finding a more efficient way to nourish our urban populations can not only address the concerns of food security but also reduce the consequences of carbon emissions, decrease water consumption, mitigate the impact of harmful chemical use, reduce energy consumption, improve health and promote equity among our citizens.

If we have the courage to reshape ideas in ways that have more natural and emotional appeal to the public, we can, I think, see sustainable development become the context through which civil renewal, greater justice, more equity, and more constructive ownership in our nations’ future can emerge

.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Gary Lawrence is Vice President and Chief Sustainability Officer for AECOM. His 20 years of global sustainability experience include serving as advisor to U.S. President Clinton’s Administration Council on Sustainable Development, the Brazilian President's Office and the British Prime Minister's Office.

RIO+20

3

A green infrastructure strategy would help let nature Ashwani Vasishth carry the load in our cities Ramapo College of New Jersey

The negotiating text, in its current form, makes reference to a commitment to promote ‘the need for a holistic approach to urban development and human settlements that provides for affordable housing and infrastructure and prioritises slum upgrading and urban regeneration’ (Section V, Cities 1).

However, it makes no explicit reference to the idea of green infrastructure as an urban ecology strategy toward sustainability. This is an error that should be rectified by the integration of a phrase that references the increasing deployment of green infrastructure strategies.

There is no question that some parts of the world desperately need investment in infrastructure. But, too often, we think of infrastructure rather narrowly, as concrete and steel. We import electricity and water and export waste and pollution. We increasingly rely upon the automobile to carry us further and further afield, across a landscape that we have segmented into disparate and disconnected sectors. We build roads, roofs, and parking lots in a manner that has a cumulative detrimental effect on the ecological processes that shape our world.

Green infrastructure could just as easily, and far more cheaply, be deployed to help carry the burden we place so unthinkingly upon the land. These are goods and services that are ours for the taking, if we can promote intelligent recognition of our ecological context, and a respect that is due to the land.

Conventional building practices result in increased ambient temperatures due to the proliferation of heatabsorbing surfaces, reduced groundwater recharge and increased urban stormwater runoff. The construction of tree-less parking lots, placing non-native vegetation in ornamental gardens and synthetic maintenance of lawns, results in a patchwork appropriation of land uses, increased air and water pollution, more biological and material heat stress, and, ultimately, the deepening separation of humans from nature.

Rather than using locally appropriate building materials and climatically adapted dwelling types, we choose instead to capitalise on what seem like the clear economic benefits of mass-production. Of course, we must then compensate for the ecological consequences of such choices through the increased use of air

4

RIO+20

conditioning and heating, single-occupancy automotive transportation, and the ever-greater importation of water and electricity. By denying ecology, we come to live more heavily upon the land.

Fortunately, it need not be so. We can let nature back into our cities, using intelligence and trees and native vegetation, to lighten our tread. Three strategies from urban ecology can together provide many of the infrastructure benefits our contemporary society needs.

Heat island mitigations, urban forestry, and impervious surface management can drastically reduce air and water pollution, significantly increase our natural water supply, substantially strengthen the connectivity of the rich and diverse habitats within which we dwell, and at the same time considerably mitigate against the massive transfer of below-ground carbon into the atmosphere through our use of fossil fuels.

Heat island mitigation measures use lighter coloured and heat reflecting building and paving materials for sunward oriented surfaces, to reduce peak afternoon loads on our electricity supply infrastructure, and to substantially extend the life of the building materials themselves, by reducing heat stress. Urban forestry uses strategically planted, ecologically appropriate species of trees and shrubs to shade our buildings, to cool the air through the entirely natural processes of evaporative transpiration, to capture dust particles upon their copious leaf surfaces, to capture and store rainwater, and penetrate the soils to increase groundwater recharge. Impervious surface management would use innovative, and by now, well-tested materials technologies to make our downtown parking lots more porous, while deploying drought-resistant xeriscape plants which naturally need less water to grow across our lawns and gardens. Together, and cumulatively, these green infrastructure measures would reduce our ecological footprint, and, at the same time, increase the effective carrying capacity of our land.

If we intelligently deployed greener infrastructure as an integral element of regional infrastructure investments, we would need far less concrete and steel. Ensuring that such plans include a central green infrastructure component which takes account of ecological processes, they will result in substantially better returns on investments today, while ensuring a benefit stream that will continue much further into the future. Grey or green, the choice is ours. But we must choose

.

MORE INFO Contact: Ashwani Vasishth, vasishth@ramapo.edu.

Is the raison d’etre of the conference waning?

Jan-Gustav Strandenaes Stakeholder Forum I saw a friendly face waving me over to a table in the Vienna Café. My delegate friend had just joined the negotiations.

Few, if any, carry this much knowledge and experience in process and content. His government had obviously decided that these virtues, combined with savvy negotiating ability, subtle diplomacy and a large dose of integrity, was what the doctor had ordered for this conference.

After a handshake and quick repartee, the discussion quickly moved to the matter at hand. “Can you please tell me what is going on here?” He looked at me seriously. I was not sure what he was aiming at. “Look, he said, I have talked with friends from the Major Groups, colleagues from delegations and the UN, and they all complain about everything”.

I kept my silence. I knew my delegate friend would go on talking: “Well, some of the statements remind me of that famous Rumsfeld statement – and they make almost as much sense”. He pulled a piece of paper from his wallet while he talked. I made no protestations as I knew he would quote correctly.

“This is what Rumsfeld said – that defence guy in the Bush administration - "Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know". This is basically what is happening in the rooms beneath us. But what gets me more”, he said “is the portrayed despondency that seems to have gripped everybody – everybody keeps repeating: ‘this is nothing new, this will be a failure, how can you take this process seriously’ and so on, like a litany befitting someone entering Dante’s Inferno”.

“Well, the negotiations have entered a complicated stage”, I ventured, “and you cannot expect us to recreate the euphoria of 1992. That was only just after the wall fell and the world looked like new; we talked about the peace dividend, the big powers collaborated”.

pic: UN Photo

“Well, we have been at this process for while a while”, I ventured. “We are actually coming up to 40 days of formal preparatory work”. My delegate friend looked at me with knowing disbelief.

“40 days? You expect sympathy because you are feeling tired? Do you remember twenty years ago, working on Rio 92? One of our Prep Coms lasted four weeks. We had two years of hard intensive and inspirational work back then”.

“Listen”, he said, “I was in the room this morning and one of the delegates said – We need aspirational elements, but not a package, voluntary, indicative in nature and not binding”. Had I chaired I would have told the person to consult with his capital before I would have him continue. Do you know what the conversation in the rooms reminds me of – because they are conversations and not negotiations – do you?”

“Look”, he said, “I do not take you for an uncomprehending fool. Rio+20 is already paradigmatic. First the General Assembly decides on a resolution to grant the Major Groups a formal position in the negotiating process, which has never happened before. Then the Bureau decides to invite every stakeholder in the world to contribute to the content of the outcome document – also unprecedented. The governments among themselves have come up with the Sustainable Development Goals, a forward looking concept that will bring universality back to the UN. Then there is serious talk of creating a Sustainable Development Council or a high level forum for sustainable development issues – institutions that could report directly to the General Assembly, deal with emerging issues and be the home of a High Commissioner for Future Generations. All of this is new and speaks of the ‘Future We Want’. I apologise for paraphrasing. I did not mean to make that into a cliché.

A cell-phone buzzed. My delegate friend answered, apologised, saying he was needed in the negotiating room. “More later – we need to secure these novelties”, he said as he sped down the stairs. Well, I thought, if he can be optimistic and solution oriented, then so can I. But will the rest of the delegates? The coming days will tell

.

RIO+20

5

Cities, villages and adaptation to climate change Ron Dembo Zerofootprint

In 2008, the world finally reached the point where more people live in cities than in rural areas. The mass migration to urban areas is a global phenomenon, but is particularly strong in Africa and Asia where the rural poor leave their villages and head for the cities in huge numbers, in search of a better life.

By 2030, it is expected that cities will hold five billion citizens in all, nearly two thirds of the world's projected population. For many of the rural migrants, city life turns out to be a struggle against poverty in vast chaotic slums. Nevertheless, urban migration is increasingly seen as positive, with cities best placed to absorb the global population explosion. Successful cities, such as Tokyo and New York, support high population densities, provide enormous opportunities and foster thriving communities.

From a climate change point of view, many argue that mass urbanisation is to be welcomed because cities generally have lower per capita carbon footprints than the countryside that the migrants leave behind.

We should be careful, however, about writing off villages too soon. Not only do we need a thriving country population to grow food for the urban masses, but villages could play an important role as we adapt and respond to global warming.

Villages are inherently more resilient and adaptable than cities – a fact that may become increasingly important as the climate shifts. Villages need not be carbon intensive, nor do they need to be social and cultural wastelands that drive young people away. In fact, cities could benefit by becoming more like collections of villages.

A report by IIED (March 2009), found that per capita greenhouse gas emissions for many of the world's leading cities were significantly lower than their national averages.

A New Yorker's footprint averaged 7.1 tonnes of carbon, compared with the US average of 23.92 tonnes. Smaller living spaces and greater use of public transport are some of the key reasons for the differences. This is why people, such as economist Paul Romer, argue for the building of a new generation of cities to cope with population growth and reduce poverty. Romer proposes the creation of

6

RIO+20

'charter cities' on the model of Hong Kong, built on nonarable land and with voluntary migration. He states that good governance and design are essential, but the pay-off will be immense if we if we get such cities right.

While such ideas have much merit, they are in danger of overlooking some important issues. First, the per capita carbon footprints used for cities are usually measured only on the direct consumption of emission-producing goods and services, such as fuel for heating, and do not take into account indirect emissions from the production of goods consumed, such as clothing. If these were factored in, it would change the equation significantly, and reveal that the gap is not so much between the city and the village dweller, but between the rich and the poor. Cities like Mumbai only achieve their low per capita carbon averages because their vast slums balance out the high consumption of their wealthy elite.

City evangelists claim villages as too small and lacking in opportunity to be viable in the modern world. But just as there are many successful cities, there are also many successful village communities. Europe abounds with them.

Where there is mass migration away from villages, part of the answer may be to strengthen the villages and provide the facilities they lack, rather than just building new cities that will entice even more villagers to abandon the land.

Cities versus villages is essentially a debate between centralised versus distributed models. Cities offer many of the advantages of the centralised model, chiefly economies of scale and concentration. The centralised model's weaknesses are vulnerability and lack of flexibility.

However, the distributed village model, while lacking economies of scale, is far more adaptable and resilient.

pic: Urban Sea Star

Villages have the potential to generate their own energy, by solar, wind or other means. They can become self-sufficient and potentially feed any surplus back into the grid. City dwellers might be low carbon, but they are still dependent on external energy sources and vulnerable to interruptions in their supply. The same applies to food and water, giving villages the ability to survive crises and adapt to change.

Cities on the other hand, are brittle, and are only a few steps away from chaos. Cut off the electricity supply to a major city and it would immediately grind to a halt. Within days, there would be panic and social unrest as food and water supplies run out, sanitation and energy systems fail, leading to potentially serious health effects. Cities have coped with all kinds of crises in the past, but we are entering uncharted water with climate change. The first principle of risk management is diversification. Villages offer a resilient alternative to the vulnerable concentrations of cities.

Before we pour all our resources into creating a new generation of cities or expanding our existing ones, we need to re-evaluate our villages and recognise their benefits. We should direct at least some of our efforts at supporting and strengthening our village networks using for the resilience and connection with nature they bring. Finally, let’s create virtual cities or ‘Villages Without Borders’ by linking villages using the Internet and social networking to offer the amenities of cities (museums, movies, concerts) while still maintaining their advantages in an increasingly challenged world

.

MORE INFO This article has been adapted for Outreach, to read the full paper visit: www.zerofootprint.net/wordpress/wp-

content/uploads/2012/04/Cities_Villages_Adaptation.pdf ABOUT ZEROFOOTPRINT

Zerofootprint is a socially responsible enterprise whose mission is to apply technology, design and risk management to the massive reduction of our environmental footprint.

www. zerofootprint.net

Sustainable cities:

friends share experiences from the bottom up Sue Riddlestone CEO, BioRegional & London Sustainable Development Commissioner This week, London announced a four week public consultation on PAS2070, a new standard for cities to measure their embodied greenhouse gas (GHG). The standard was developed in response to a report, Capital Consumption, which we published in 2009. The report not only analysed impacts, but used the data to model how Londoners could achieve a high quality of life with a 90% reduction in consumption – based on GHG emissions – by 2050. The opportunities and policy options highlighted in the paper led London’s Mayor, Boris Johnson, to formalise an approach for a standard which all cities could freely use.

As I relayed this to Staffan Tillander, the Swedish Ambassador to the UN, he enthused that “this is a fantastic example of a city government who is showing the way. It’s an example of how cities can take steps ahead of others and demonstrate what is possible.” The Swedish government, together with Singapore and almost thirty missions in New York, are developing a new platform called the Friends of Sustainable Cities. This new grouping strongly supports the text on sustainable cities and human settlements in the Rio+20 Outcome Document.

Ambassador Tillander also noted that the sustainable cities text shows the recognition of other actors outside national governments, and the important role that they play. The Ambassador continued by suggesting that there is an opportunity for a platform where cities can play a role in the international arena, creating that link from the bottom up to the UN.

The vision of the UN Friends of Sustainable Cities Group has three elements, which are:

1. A global partnership of those who work on sustainable cities; 2. An e-platform with easy access to good examples; and 3. Stronger UN coordination working with UN Habitat, UNDP, and the World Bank.

Ambassador Tillander believes that “this global partnership could bring the practical experience of the many civil society actors to assist governments with the development agenda of MDG’s and SDG’s.”

.

MORE INFO Capital Consumption- the transition to SCP in London.

London Sustainable Development Commission and BioRegional. www.bioregional.com/news-views/publications/capital-

consumption/

City Standard Consultation PAS 2070, Specification for the assessment of greenhouse gas emissions of a city by direct plus supply chain, and consumption-based approaches. To download, review and comment on the draft, please go to www.bsigroup.com/ pas2070draft and register for free online (new users) and log in. The closing date for consultation is Tuesday 26 June Friends of Sustainable Cities Contact: Staffan Tillander Ambassador of the Swedish Mission - staffan.tillander@foreign.ministry.se

RIO+20

7

profile.

Todd Stern

US brings in its Minister - the heavy hitter!

Nationality: American Current Position:

United States Special Envoy for Climate Change

Those of us who have been operating in the UNFCCC know Todd Stern well as he is the United States Special Envoy for Climate Change, leading talks at the United Nations climate conferences, since his appointment by Hillary Clinton in 2009.

While Assistant to the President and Staff Secretary in Clinton’s White House from 1993, Stern also acted as the senior White House negotiator on the Kyoto Protocol. Following this, he joined the US Treasury, from 1999 to 2001, advising the Secretary on the policy and politics of a broad range of economic and financial issues.

Perhaps other governments should have sent their Ministers to this round of negotiations….a missed opportunity perhaps?

What does Todd Stern believe?

May, 2004: "After all, the evidence of climate change is overwhelming. Average temperatures are clearly rising - the 12 warmest years on record have occurred since 1990; the last 50 year period appears to be the warmest half-century in 6,000 years. Evaporation and rainfall are increasing; glaciers are retreating; sea ice is shrinking; sea level is rising; permafrost is melting; wildfires are increasing; storm and flood damage is soaring. The canary in the coal mine is singing for all she's worth."

June, 2007: Stern and William Antholis argued that negotiations on international environmental treaties, via United Nations meetings involving representatives of over 150 countries, "is no way to run a planet".

Instead they argued for a new process to "break through the political fog and bureaucratic clutter to give global environmental issues the focused top-level treatment they deserve. We propose the creation of an E-8: a compact forum of leaders from developed and developing countries devoting their full attention once a year to global ecological and resource challenges". They proposed four developed and four developing countries - United States, the EU, Japan, Russia, China, India, Brazil and South Africa. They noted that other possible contenders could be Australia, Canada, Indonesia and Mexico, but that "the objective of preserving a sense of intimacy and informality argues against a larger grouping".

8

RIO+20

January, 2009: "As the President and Secretary Clinton have made clear, climate change poses a profound threat to our future. If our deepest obligation in life is to care for our children and leave a better world for them and those who follow, then we must confront climate change now with an entirely new level of commitment, energy, and focus. Our scientists are telling us, emphatically, that the rate at which we are warming the planet is unsustainable and will cause vast and potentially catastrophic damage to our environment, our economy, and our national security".

September, 2009: "My basic view here is that there are a handful of really important issues that are core to getting to get a deal done, that there is a deal there to be done if countries evaluate what they can do on the basis of their own real interests, their own economic, material, and political interests.

There is a lot of ideological baggage that has been carried – that has been sort of part of the DNA of these negotiations for the last 17 years.

And that kind of baggage can hang you up and make agreement hard to get. I think if people can focus on their real interests, what they can do, what they can’t do, respecting everybody’s own legitimate constraints, there’s a deal there to be done. I think that we will get a deal done, but that’s critical. That pragmatic viewpoint is going to be critical to having that happen."

October, 2009: Kathy Newman, from Channel 4 News, asked Stern whether he agreed with "Gordon Brown that the planet does face a catastrophe if there is no deal at Copenhagen, or would you use slightly less apocalyptic language?" Stern evaded the question, preferring to praise Brown for having taken a leadership role in the debate on climate change. Immediately afterwards, he was asked "Are we facing [inaudible]?" (though it appears from media reports the missing word was "catastrophe). "You should ask a scientist", Stern said dismissively

.

MORE INFO Quotes taken from:

www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Todd_Stern

Book Launch- Thursday 31st May - 1pm Thursday 31st May, marked the official launch of the book ‘Only One Earth: The Long Road via Rio to Sustainable Development’, written by Felix Dodds and Michael Strauss with Maurice Strong. The book explains in what has been achieved in the last forty years of sustainable development negotiations; what obstacles have been encountered; ways to navigate around them; and what can be expected, and aspired to, at the upcoming Rio+20 Summit.

Three Ambassador-level representatives joined co-authors Dodds and Strauss to receive copies of the book, and explain its importance in the lead-up to the Rio+20 meetings. Mr. Ahmed Ehab Gamaleldin, Deputy Assistant Foreign Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development of Egypt described the book as “very timely” and said that Rio+20 is an opportunity to implement the “elements of the global deal” agreed upon at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 – a key message in the book.

Mr. André Aranha Correa do Lago, Brazilian Minister in the Division of Environmental Policy and Sustainable Development said that the book is a great initiative. He said that it is particularly effective because it sheds light on the sustainable development process, and people who aren’t versed in the negotiations need to understand the mechanics of the meetings to appreciate how much has been achieved, and what remains to be done.

Mr. Frank Liu, President of World Harmony Foundation and the sponsor of the book launch, said the book motivates people to become environmentally conscious, something that is imperative at this juncture.

“[This book] is a testimony that without the civil society nothing can be achieved.”

Mr. Jean-Pierre Thébault, France- Ambassador for the Environment

ICLEI publishes a global study on local sustainability processes With 19 days left until Rio+20, ICLEI is pleased to share with you our Local Sustainability 2012 study, consisting of two complementary reports: • Taking Stock and Moving Forward - Global Review; and • Showcasing Progress - Case Studies.

The study documents the variety of local processes for sustainability that have emerged globally since the 1992 Earth Summit. Local initiatives, many of them inspired

by Local Agenda 21, have made a lasting mark not only on local, but also national and international governance systems, changing profoundly the way we think about sustainable development and pushing the boundaries of what is achievable.

Taking into account current discussions on the international governance framework for sustainable development, one of the key themes of Rio+20, the main focus is on placing local sustainability initiatives within a broader national and international context, in order to identify opportunities and barriers to scaling up local action.

Looking into the future, the study proposes a list of recommendations to leaders at the national, international and local level. The recommendations underpin ICLEI’s advocacy activities as Local Authority Major Group coorganising partner in the run up to Rio+20, and will further inform ICLEI’s work globally.

The study has been produced by ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability, in association with the Charles Leopold Mayer Foundation and UN-Habitat.

MORE INFO To read more and download the reports (including summary and press release) visit www.local2012.iclei.org/local-

sustainability-study/

We are looking forward to discussing the contents and recommendations during ICLEI World Congress, the Rio+20 Global Town Hall and other Rio-related events.

Be PaperSmart: Read Outreach online Rio+20 will be a ‘PaperSmart’ conference so we are encouraging our readers to move online and access Outreach on our newly optimised website: www. stakeholderforum.org/sf/outreach or download each daily edition using a Quick Response (QR) code displayed here.

4 easy steps to using the Quick Response (QR) Code

1. Download a QR code reader on your phone or tablet 2. Open the QR code reader 3. Scan the QR Code with your camera 4. Today's Outreach pdf will automatically download to your phone or tablet

RIO+20

9

Reflections on the Negotiations – Thursday 31st May

Bridget Brady Mount Holyoke College

Freya Seath Bioregional

In Working Group 1, delegates generally expressed their support for the Co-Chairs’ text, though continued to add amendments throughout. While states reinserted old text and re-expressed arguments with little compromise in the plenary, the real negotiations seemed to take place in the spin-off groups, tasked with resolving any outstanding issues. In the morning session, unresolved sections included climate change, mining, food, chemicals, water, disasters, desertification, oceans, forests, biodiversity, mining, gender, education, jobs, and sustainable production and consumption. With such an extensive list and time running short, the plan to hold no more than three breakout groups per day was abandoned. Major Group's access to these meetings was generally encouraged, but ultimately left to the discretion of their chair.

After 45 minutes of finalising today’s various focus group meeting room logistics, the session on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Measuring Progress Beyond GDP finally began in Working Group I.

The morning began with a discussion of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Many states expressed their approval of the Co-Chairs’ text and highlighted the significance of this section as a major outcome of Rio+20. However, many amendments were made throughout.

In the afternoon session, discussions turned to section VI on Means of Implementation. In the section on Finance, Canada, the US, and New Zealand preferred the deletion of "increases in the provisions of financing," for, as Canada, explained, "We do not believe Rio+20 is a pledging moment." The G77 expressed their extreme disappointment with the current state of the text on finance, which they see as a crucial issue. They concluded by noting that if the text were to remain as is, "that would be a sad departure." The evening plenary was cancelled to accommodate the break-out groups on gender, education, jobs, and sustainable production and consumption. The true success of the day will be seen in results of these groups, where, with any luck, the real negotiations and compromises are being made.

.

Canada opened by stating they were happy with the Co-Chairs’ text on SDGs, offering just a couple of amendments – I rather optimistically wondered whether this would set a positive trend for the morning. Sadly, it did not.

The EU also stated they were ‘positively inclined’ towards the CoChairs’ text. They went on to emphasise the need for high levels of ambition, the importance of building on the experience of the MDGs, and ‘engaging in a process’ at Rio+20. The EU also proposed that SDG 9 should be moved to section Va - Thematic Areas and Cross-Sectoral Issues – to emphasise the limitations of GDP as an important issue in itself. Several countries echoed this sentiment.

The EU and Switzerland both recognised that implementation of SDGs is not just the role of governments but that of other stakeholders – it was good to have this emphasised in plenary!

Despite claiming SDGs should be ‘aspirational’ and could ‘inspire the world’, the US worryingly called for the removal of references to sustainable consumption and production, and equity in SDG 5. Fundamentally important cross-cutting issues that the SDGs absolutely must recognise.

Subsequently, the G77 quickly began stripping away text, including the involvement of ‘all relevant stakeholders’ in implementation under SDG 4. They also stated that defining thematic areas for the SDGs should only occur as part of a post-Rio process. The final blow came, however, when the Group called for the deletion of SDG 9, on indicators beyond GDP. This is a cause for concern for ensuring that alternative ways of measuring progress – which capture wellbeing and recognise the value of nature – are included in the Outcome Document.

It seems all countries recognise the SDGs are likely to be the most important outcome from Rio+20, but it is still unclear what form any agreement on this issue will take. Will any themes be identified, what will the process look like, and how will they complement the post-MDGs work? As the session broke for lunch I felt a deep concern that there is still a very high mountain to climb before any consensus can be reached on SDGs

.

Outreach is made possible by the support of

www.earthsummit2012.org