More Ecology, Less Economy for Rio+20
un articulo por Fabíola Ortiz, for Tierramérica, reprinted by permission
Hundreds of non-governmental organizations and social movements from around the world hope to counter the failure of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), which they consider inevitable, with the success of the alternative People’s Summit.
Indigenous baby and mother in Chihuahua, Mexico.
Credit: Mauricio Ramos/IPS
click on photo to enlarge
Both events will take place in June in Rio de Janeiro, the Brazilian city that served as the venue, two decades ago, for the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development. Popularly known as the Earth Summit, the 1992 conference is considered a turning point in the architecture of international environmental law.
Rio+20 is expected to draw around 50,000 people to the city to take part in preparatory meetings and parallel activities during much of June, in addition to some 120 heads of state and government who will meet for the actual summit on Jun. 20-22.
The People’s Summit for Social and Environmental Justice in Defense of the Commons will be held Jun. 15-23 in Aterro do Flamengo park, near downtown Rio de Janeiro, as an alternative event independent of the official conference, and is expected to draw roughly 10,000 participants.
Representatives of some 20 social, trade union, youth, women’s, indigenous, peasant and Afro-descendant organizations met in Rio during the fourth week of March to coordinate actions, fine-tune their critique of the official Rio+20 agenda, and finish up preparations for the large-scale mobilization in June.
One of the challenges is the inclusion of the rights of native peoples in the concept of sustainable development, said activist Sander Otten, a member of the technical committee of the Andean Coordinator of Indigenous Organizations (CAOI), which brings together groups from Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru.
“We need to demand the fulfillment of rights so that indigenous peoples are genuinely able to have a say in the projects that are carried out in their own territories,” Otten told Tierramérica.
On Jun. 17 and 18, a global committee of indigenous peoples will discuss two key factors in this regard: the presence and impact of extractive industries in their territories, and the right to free, prior and informed consent established in International Labour Organization Convention 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples.
Otten acknowledged that some progress has been made in the area of indigenous rights in the last 20 years. However, in the majority of cases, the governments of the Andean countries are promoting the further expansion of extractive activities like mining and oil drilling, as well as large-scale industrial monoculture plantations, he stressed.
Indigenous organizations in the Andes region want to join the discussion on the green economy - one of the central themes of Rio+20 - and propose alternatives based on their own cosmovision. These include community economic management that respects “Mother Earth” and especially the paradigm of “buen vivir” or “living well”, a holistic life philosophy which pursues the goal of material, social and spiritual well-being among all members of a society, but not at the cost of the other members or the environment.
(This article is continued in the discussionboard)
Pregunta(s) relacionada(s) al artículo :
Despite the vested interests of companies and governments, Can we make progress toward sustainable development?
* * * * *
Comentario más reciente:
It's been a year since I wrote the above remarks about the failure of the nation states to address the problem of global warming, and it seems that nothing has changed. Here is the statement from leading environmental NGOs about the latest international conference on the environment being held in Warsaw, Poland.
Enough is enough.
We have said we stand in solidarity with the millions impacted by Typhoon Haiyan, and with all climate impacted people. Our solidarity compels us to tell the truth about COP 19 – the Warsaw Climate Conference.
The Warsaw Climate Conference, which should have been an important step in the just transition to a sustainable future, is on track to deliver virtually nothing. In fact, the actions of many rich countries here in Warsaw are directly undermining the UNFCCC itself, which is an important multilateral process that must succeed if we are to fix the global climate crisis.
The Warsaw Conference has put the interests of dirty energy industries over that of global citizens - with a “Coal & Climate Summit” being held in conjunction; corporate sponsorship from big polluters plastered all over the venue; and a Presidency (Poland) that is beholden to the coal and fracking industry. When Japan announced that it was following Canada and backtracking on emission cut commitments previously made, and Australia gave multiple signals that it was utterly unwilling to take the UN climate process seriously, the integrity of the talks was further jeopardized.
This week saw a “finance ministerial” with almost no actual finance, and loss and damage talks that have stalled because rich countries refuse to engage on the substance of an international mechanism. Warsaw has not seen any increase in emission reductions nor increased support for adaptation before 2020 – on these things it has actually taken us backward. And a clear pathway to a comprehensive and fair agreement in Paris 2015 is missing.
We as civil society are ready to engage with ministers and delegations who actually come to negotiate in good faith. . ... continuación.
Este artículo ha sido publicado on line el
April 12, 2012.
Si desea realizar una nueva pregunta relacionada a este artículo, primero, debe registrarse y entonces conectar. Después copie el título (More Ecology, Less Economy for Rio+20 ) y su numéro (762 ) e incorpore esta información junto con su pregunta de debate y una respuesta introductoria a la pregunta aquí..
Los artículos son enumerados por orden de prioridad según los votos de los lectores. Para esto, usted está invitado a elegir el nivel de prioridad que considera conveniente para cada artículo tildando una de las opciones que se encuentran aquí debajo: Este artículo, ¿debe considerarse prioritario?