Earth Summit 1997

8/6/2019 Earth Summit 1997

1/27

Greenpeace's Priority Issues

- for the UN General Assembly Special

Session - Earth Summit 2

Five years after nearly 120 heads-of-stateand 172 governments gathered in Brazil forthe Earth Summit, the largest environmentalgathering ever, the UNGA's 23-27 June

1997 Special Session (UNGASS) serves asthe first formal review of that event.

The Earth Summit was very important,focusing attention on issues linked withevolving concepts of "sustainable

development." It also provided excitingopportunities for 18,000 NGOs from aroundthe world to come together to shareexperiences, network and plan for the future.

Nonetheless, Greenpeace hung a banner in

Rio at the end of that Summit, with "SOLD"stamped over the planet. In our view,governments had failed to come to gripswith critical matters facing decision makers


2/27

in 1992, e.g., transnational corporations,financial institutions, states' abuse of

"sovereignty" rights, non-binding promisesand other issues affecting humankind'srelationship with the planet.

Now, five years later, the "big picture"assessment of Earth Summit implementation

strongly indicates that those and otherproblems still have not been remedied. Onissues such as climate, forests, toxics,fisheries, nuclear power and nuclear wastes,the key environmental indicators show thatwe are still going in the wrong direction -

away from, not toward, sustainability.

Globally, there have been some positivesteps forward - e.g., the Basel Conventionban on transboundary shipments ofhazardous waste, commitments to curb the

use of ozone depleting substances under theMontreal Protocol, the London Conventionban on ocean dumping of radioactive andhazardous wastes, the new global fisheries


3/27

agreement on straddling and highlymigratory fish stocks, and UNEP's recent

decision to convene the negotiation of a newglobal treaty on persistent organicpollutants.

However, most of the "successes" have beenlittle more than "paper victories,"

overshadowed by growing real worldevidence of troubling developments that arenot being dealt with adequately.

The recent United Nations EnvironmentProgram's (UNEP) Global EnvironmentOutlook (GEO) and UN Secretary-General'sEarth Summit-related overview and trendsreports, inter alia, provide revealing,comprehensive accounts of the challengesfacing all of us. They also make fordisturbing reading, as is the case with the

following excerpt from UNEP's GEO (page3):


4/27

from a global perspective the environment

has continued to degrade during the past

decade, and significant environmentalproblems remain deeply embedded in the

socio-economic fabric of nations in all

regions. Progress towards a global

sustainable future is just too slow. A sense of

urgency is lacking. Internationally and

nationally, the funds and political will areinsufficient to halt further global

environmental degradation and to address

the most pressing environmental problems -

even though technology and knowledge are

available to do so. As a result, the gap

between what has been done thus far and

what is realistically needed is widening.

Given the critical decision making roles thatgovernments and the private sector have,much though by no means all of the blamefor grim findings, such as the above, lies attheir door. With few exceptions, too manygovernments and too many businesses have


5/27

been far too willing to sacrifice theenvironment for the sake of short-term

financial gain and special interests. Thereare some success stories and heroes, but theyare way too few, given what is needed.Moreover, the record shows that NGOs havebeen largely on target in their warnings overthe decades. The denials of big industry and

some governments of the existence orseverity of various environmental problemsshould now be seen in perspective. Overall,NGOs have a solid record of accuracy.Rather than allow debates again to becomepolarized, industry and governments shouldwelcome NGO inputs, howeveruncomfortable those may be.

UNGASS/ES2 must be seen as a realWAKE UP CALL! The results of theSpecial Session must include a strongmessage that "business as usual," which hascontributed signficantly to the current,unacceptable state of affairs, will end. To be


6/27

realistic, we realize that the likelihood ofthat happening is not good. The drafts of the

two official documents - the politicalstatement, and detailed program of Agenda21 implementation - are little more thanrestatements of Earth Summit words,promises layered on top of promises,rhetoric without real action. Moreover, the

endless stream of 7-minute speeches byheads-of-state and other dignitaries in theUN General Assembly Hall, while occasionsfor individual leaders to commit to boldinitiatives, offer limited opportunities forreal dialogue and collective steps forward.

In Greenpeace's view, governments, as wellas UN/international agencies and the privatesector, need to agree four changes ifUNGASS/ES2 is to have any chance ofsucceeding. First, they need to accept theurgency of the situation. Denial, findingfault with the details of various grim reports,or wishing the problems would just go away


7/27

won't get the job done. Second, they need tovery clearly recognize that nowhere near

enough is being done to chart developmentalong a sustainable course. Third, they needto ensure that UNGASS/ES2 comes togetheraround a set of concrete, inspirationalactions and targets that directly andadequately respond to the nature of the

threats. This includes bold directional policyshifts, such as the beginning of the phase-outof fossil fuels. Fourth, they need to agree apackage of substantial first steps that aremeasurable, allowing for accountability.

Greenpeace remains committed to helpingimplement strong commitments, whereverwe can. Not only will we continue to letgovernment and corporate leaders know ourviews on what they are and are not doingright, but we also will help show thatparadigm shifts are possible in habits andways of thinking. We will point tobehaviours, policies and technologies (some


8/27

even commissioned by Greenpeace!) whichprove that faster, positive change is possible,

now. With regard to the need for concrete,inspirational actions and targets that aremeasurable, we call upon heads-of-state andother government leaders, at UNGASS/ES2,to take bold decisions in relation to thefollowing twelve (12) issues, among others:

1. SAVE THE CLIMATE:The planet's weather system, and theentire web of life based on it, facepotentially massive long term disruptionfrom climate change. Fossil fuels, such

as coal and oil, are the main sources of"greenhouse gases." A clear politicalcommitment is urgently required to shiftglobal energy dependence from pollutingfossil fuels to abundant clean, renewableenergy sources such as solar power. As afirst step, industrialized countries shouldcommit themselves at the "ClimateSummit" in Kyoto, Japan in December


9/27

1997, to legally binding CO2 emissioncuts of 20% below 1990 levels by the

year 2005. In parallel, there should be ahalt to development in these countries ofnew oil fields, and a removal of taxpayersubsidies for fossil fuels, as soon aspossible;

2. SAVE THE FORESTS:

Land clearing and "clearcut" typeforestry are devastating the remainingancient forests, among the richestreservoirs of biological and socialdiversity on the planet. As forests aredegraded and disappear, soil erosion,flooding, desertification and speciesextinction follow. Climate change isexpected to add to forest loss in the nextcentury. Beginning in the industrializedcountries, governments must pledge to

stop destruction by 2000 of all remainingprimary, old growth forests, and torestore degraded forest lands. As part ofthese efforts, governments should


10/27

closely monitor the ecological impact offorest companies, promote ecologically

responsible forest use, ensure maximumreuse and recycling of wood and woodproducts, and provide for the fullparticipation of indigenous peoples andlocal communities in decisions on forestuse. In parallel, governments need to

commit to tripling, by 2002, the totalglobal area of protected forest areas. Oncritical issues, the intergovernmentalpolicy dialogue on forests, under CSDauspices, should continue. However,rather than enter into the lengthynegotiation of a likely "chainsaw"convention that risks deferring ordelaying needed action, leaders should,in addition to carrying out the above-listed actions, implement the 130-plus

"actions" agreed in the recent globalforest policy dialogue (IPF/CSD);

3. BAN TOXIC CHEMICALS:


11/27

The long-term health and environmentaleffects of the estimated 70,000 different

synthetic chemicals currently in use arelargely unknown and untested. About1,000 new chemicals enter the marketevery year. Many of these are toxic, arespread globally and concentrate in thefood chain, ending up on our dinner

plates. In particular, the group ofchlorine-based chemicals are known todamage the immune and reproductivesystem in animals and humans, and posemajor risks to developing foetuses. Anurgent commitment is necessary to movetowards a global system of `cleanproduction', within a generation. As afirst step, governments should concludeby 2000 at the latest, a legally bindinginternational treaty banning persistent

organic pollutants (POPs). In addition,the export of all hazardous chemicalwastes from industrialised to developingcountries should be halted through


12/27

universal ratification of the BaselConvention ban by the end of 1997;

4. RESPONSIBLE FISHING:The capacity of the world's fishing fleetgreatly exceeds the amount of fish thatcan be caught on a sustainable basis. Inthe last 40 years alone, the world fishcatch has increased four-fold. As a

result, most of the world's majorfisheries are now either depleted, over-exploited or fully-exploited. Too manyboats, especially big ones, are chasingtoo few fish, often using subsidies paidfrom tax dollars.

Governments must commit themselvesto protect remaining fish stocks throughurgent national, regional and globalmeasures. As a first step, OECDgovernments must reduce total fishingcapacity, particularly by large-scaleindustrialized fishing vessels, by at leasta quarter by 2000. In parallel, there


13/27

should be a global moratorium by 1998on any further intensive shrimp

aquaculture unless it is both ecologicallysound and socially equitable;

5. END NUCLEAR POWER/NUCLEARWASTE:

The nuclear industry is arguing for a

major expansion, supposedly to combatclimate change and meet the increasingworldwide demands for electricity.However, such an expansion wouldentail massive economic costs, whiledramatically increasing the risks of

Chernobyl-type nuclear accidentsresulting in potential radioactivecontamination of tens of thousands ofpeople over many years. As a first step,governments must halt furtherinvestments in and subsidies to nuclearpower and initiate phase-outs of theexisting nuclear power plants. Inparallel, they must greatly increase


14/27

investment in improving energyefficiency and renewable sources of

energy such as solar power.With regard to radioactive waste, aftermore than 50 years of nuclear power, thewaste produced at every stage of nuclearoperations has contaminated the planet's

oceans, rivers, land and air - threateningthe environment and human health. Over400 nuclear power reactors in about 30countries continue to produce ever largeramounts of radioactive waste.Reprocessing plants discharge

radioactive waste directly into theoceans adding to the radioactive wasteproblem.

Much of this waste will be radioactivefor many thousands of years, with no

safe solution for its long-termmanagement. In addition to the above-stated urgent need for halting reactorconstruction and phasing-out of nuclear


15/27

power, the highest possible standard ofcare must be applied in the management

of existing wastes, including a ban on alldischarges, and application of the"proximity principle" that wastes shouldbe stored as close as possible to theirsource;

6. DISARM/MILITARY WEAPONS:Conventional and nuclear weaponscontinue to offer no security against thethreat of global pollution andenvironmental destruction - the realenemies of the planet in the next century.

In spite of some positive trends in areasto reduce military budgets and weaponnumbers, they still command far toohigh a share of national budgets. Leadersmust commit to concluding anagreement by 2000 that would ban theproduction and use of weapons-usablefissile material immediately, and nuclearweapons between 2000-2010. In the


16/27

nearer term, governments should adopt aglobal, legally binding ban on anti-

personnel land mines by 1998 -applicable both within and betweencountries;

7. BIOLOGICAL POLLUTION/GMOS:Molecular biology has started to revealthe basic code of life. Applied as genetic

engineering technology, this enablesgenes to be transferred betweencompletely unrelated species and thecreation of artificial organisms. Howeverscience is still far from understandingand predicting the consequences of theirrelease into the natural environment.Any genetic mistakes or adverse effectsencoded into the engineered organisms,can result in "biological pollution",which could spread quickly - and

irreversibly - through the naturalenvironment.


17/27

While natural species are being madeextinct at an unprecedented rate as a

result of human activities, multinationalchemical companies are investing in thecreation and patenting of new crops,animals and micro-organisms to makethem pesticide resistant or toxic, orsimply grow faster or bigger. Apart from

the ecological risks of this development,there are commercial and culturaldisadvantages for farmers andconsumers, who will have reduced cropdiversity. Also, the ethical and socialimplications of increasingly placing theworld's food supply in the hands of afew multinationals owning the patentsneeds to be addressed. Internationalstandards are urgently required to applythe precautionary principle to regulate

strictly the use of all geneticallymanipulated organisms (GMOs). Therelease of all GMOs into theenvironment should be prohibited in a


18/27

new Biosafety Protocol to theConvention on Biological Diversity.

Property rights on natural organisms andtheir genes must be banned underinternational patent law;

8. PROTECT FRESHWATER:Currently, 1/5th of the world's

population lacks access to safe water,1/2 of the population lacks access to safesanitation, and over 5 million people dieannually from waterborne-relateddiseases. Studies show that if thesetrends continue, as many as 70% of the

world's population will suffer watershortages in the next 25 years.Freshwater reserves are a significantsink for the dumping of wastes fromurban and industrial sources, agriculturalchemicals and other human activities. Atthe global and regional levels, effectiveinternational agreements need to benegotiated by no later than 2002. In


19/27

addition, governments sharing commonwatersheds/airsheds should take the

necessary steps, nationally andregionally, to make freshwater quality,conservation and supply a priority -including shifts to clean production inrelation to industrial, municipal andagricultural sector uses of toxic

substances and wastes - as part ofsustainable freshwater management;

9. FINANCING CHANGE:Sustainability requires fundamentalstructural changes in society. Whilemany changes can be made at a neteconomic saving (e.g., energy andprocessing efficiency), many will requirethe injection of large amounts of privateand public finance. Leaders shouldpledge at UNGASS/ES2 to establish an

Intergovernmental Finance Panel withthe achievement of ecologically soundand socially just development as itscentral, guiding tenet. Given the


20/27

dominant role of private capitol as asource of development and international

project financing, among other tasks, thePanel should propose mechanisms toenable a global environmental audit ofprivate sector finance in relation to thegoal of sustainable development.Simultaneously, OECD countries should

meet the 0.7% of GNP target for aid by2002, and achieve half (0.35%) of thattarget by 1999, including a 50% increasein the current Global EnvironmentalFacility (GEF) replenishment, andtargeted debt reductions in the mostindebted, least developed countries (inreturn for initiatives to furthersustainable development);

10. SUSTAINABLE TRADE:The role of international trade in

contributing to sustainable developmentremains unclear. Currently, the WorldTrade Organisation is not accountable tothe UN General Assembly, nor are its


21/27

activities audited in relation to potentialenvironmental impact. Moreover, there

is a disturbing trend in the WTO tooverrule national and international lawsthat limit trade, with little or no regardfor sustainable development. Leadersmust commit to ensuring thatenvironmental laws will not be set aside,

and follow that up, e.g., with a formalunderstanding by 1998 that multilateralenvironmental agreements (MEAs) shallnot be bound by WTO-imposedrequirements or restrictions. On relatedfronts, a trade and environmentMinisterial Summit should be convenedbefore the next WTO Ministerial inGeneva (May 1998), and transparencyand effective opportunities for NGOparticipation within the WTO and its

Committee on Trade and Environmentneeds to be ensured;

11. CORPORATE ACCOUNTABILITY:


22/27

The globalization of the economy hasmeant that corporations have benefited

most from the ability to shift finance andproduction around the planet. While it isa governmental prerogative to set andimplement local production andinvestment standards, multinationalcorporations and host governments must

acknowledge a responsibility to ensurethat regulations and corporate behaviouradd to, rather than set back, efforts toachieve global sustainability. As a matterof principle, "double standards," e.g.,observing one level of conduct in oneplace and a lower level in another, mustbe rejected. In this respect, governmentsshould commit to full and transparentenvironmental audits of corporateoperations. With that objective in mind,

leaders should agree at UNGASS/ES2 tocreate a permanent CorporateAccountability Subcommission of theCSD, with a mandate to develop


23/27

internationally agreed mechanismsensuring far greater accountability of

multinational corporations; and12. NGO ACCESS/PARTICIPATION:Consistent with transparency andparticipation measures that have evolvedas part of Earth Summit follow-up,especially activities under the auspices

of Commission on SustainableDevelopment , as well as the importantcontribution, more generally, of NGOsin UN decision making processes,Governments need to take appropriatesteps to ensure effective strengthening ofNGO access to and participation in theUN General Assembly, its MainCommittees and subsidiary bodies, aswell subsequent Special Sessions -based, at minimum, on the revised

Arrangements for Consultation withNon-Governmental Organizations - PartVII of Resolution 1996/31.


24/27

Words may sink Eco-Summit

Many poor countries have to use resources regardless of consequences, writes EVELYNLEOPOLD in Now York. Now they fear the big powers may just offer words Instead ofprotecting the environment.

UNITED NATIONS - Forests, farmlands and coral reefs are dwindling, pollution isincreasing, oceans are overfished and one billion people are so poor they threaten to useany resource available just to stay alive. Environmentalists are jittery. And so are theorganisers of the second Earth Summit, apprehensive that speeches from world leaderswill be bereft of concrete action. As the fifth anniversary of the landmark Summit in Riode Janeiro approaches, more than 65 heads of state or government will meet at UnitedNations headquarters. Their aim is to set hew targets on "sustainable development" -economic growth moving in tandem with ecological goals. But days before this week'sconference, . experts were huddling to complete a draft paper that lacks agreement onseveral basic issues financing for poor nations, climate change, energy, fishing and

forests preservation. 'This should be a wake-up call," said Clifton Curtis of GreenpeaceInternational. "We should be beyond promises of Rio and into implementation."Chancellor Kohl of Germany is expected to propose that all the United Nationsenvironmental bodies be in one place Bonn - when his govemrnent moves to Berlin.President Clinton has promised some initiatives, although Europeans find Washingtonshying away from specific goals.

An many developing nations are refusing any commitments until rich states keep theirpromises in Rio for assistance they need for basic technological, health and educationalprogrammes. But such aid is decreasing rather than rising. "If it becomes universallyaccepted that even aid is no longer an option, then one can predict that discussions on

international cooperation will collapse," Tanzania's minister plenipotentiary Msuya WaldiMangachi told a recent meeting. What remains is a call for each country to find its ownresources, "if it can, and do whatever it can or wants."

In Rio, about 10,000 diplomats produced "Agenda 21" - some 2500 goals followed bytreaties on biological diversity, climate change or conservation and "desertifaction" orland degradation. And at least 1800 communities set up their own environmentalprogrammes. But the scarcity of fresh water, the loss of agricultural land and forests andthe downward spiral of poverty are undermining a rise in food production, healthstandards and a slower population growth. "Overall, we haven't made the fundamentalchanges of course promised in Rio," said Canadian businessman Maurice Strong, whowas secretary-general of that conference. According to John Gummer, Britain's formerenvironment minister, "We do have to recognise that the rich notions have to pay theprice. "We benefit from pollution, from over-exploitation of fishing and so on.

'And richer nations are more able to deal with geographical catastrophes. But MrGummer said developing countries could not opt out of negotiations. "The North cannotoperate unless it is seen that the South is part of the process," he said. Another highlycontentious issue is climate change and energy efficiency. The European Union has set


25/27

targets to reduce so-called 'greenhouse gases" such as carbonon dioxide or nitrousoxide, to roll back global warming, affecting climate changes. The EU formula calls for a15 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions below the 1990 level by the year 2010,Small island states are righting for a 20 per cent reduction by 2005. To achieve thesegoals, energy usage has to be more efficient, subsidies for fossil fuels have to be phased

out and wind or solar energy altematives have to be explored. But the United States wantsno specific targets now, preferring to leave itself negotiating room at a Decemberconference on the issue in Kyoto, Japan. And not much can be done without fullparticipation from Washington. Despite many American innovations toward energyefficiency, experts say it still takes 120 workers to produce the energy needs for theaverage American, 60 for each European but only eight for each Chinese and one foreach person in Bangladesh.

Dire Warning at Earth Summit - Poor condemn broken promises

NEW YORK - The United Nations Earth Summit opened with Europe attacking the

United States for not doing enough to combat global warming and poor nationscondemning broken promises by the rich. The week-long, 173-nation conference istaking stock of what has been done to save the planet from ecological disaster since thefirst Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. President of the United Nations General

Assembly Razali Ismail of Malaysia said achievements since Rio had been "paltry"

and predicted castrophe if action was not taken soon. "We as a species, as a planet,

are teetering on the edge, living unsustainabty and perpetuating inequity, and maysoon pass the point of no return," he said.

Challenging the United States, the world's largest polluter, to do more against climatechange, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said: "We in Europe have put our cards on the

table. It is time for the special pleading to stop and for others to follow suit." Europefailed at the Group of Seven summit in Denver last week to push President Bill Clintoninto setting speciflc targets for cutting greenhouse gases. Britain, Germany and theNetherlands renewed the pressure on New York At a separate news conference, GermanChancellor Helmut Kohl, Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, South AfricanDeputy President Thabo Mbeki and Singapore Prime Minister Goh Chok Tongunderlined their support for targets proposed by the European Community. The four saidthey expected the summit to send the world a "clear message", calling for 15 per centreductions in carbon dioxide emissions below 1990 levels by 2010, with a 10 percentreduction by 2005. Dr Kohl also asked that the United Nations put its myriadenvironmental agencies under one roof in a 'global environmental umbrella organisation"with the Nairobi-based United Niations Environmental Programme as a "major pillar."This week's second' Earth Summit comes five years after a heady conference in Riowhere 10,000 diplomats and environmentalists outlined an ambitious blue-print tosafeguard the planet, covering nearly every aspect of human, animal and plant life.Concrete results include framework treaties on conserving wildlife, preventing the spreadof arid lands and committing industrial states to lower their emissions


26/27

But since Rio, forests, farmlands and coral reefs have dwindled, pollution is increasing,oceans are overfished and 1.3 billion people are so poor they threaten to use any resourceavailable just to stay alive. Worldwide carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels,like oil or coal, climbed. to 6.25 billion tonnes in 1996, altering the atmosphere and theclimate. Japan and Canada, whose carbon emissions are rising, have also made no

commitments on cutting the gases. REUTER

July 1997 Summit Big on Words - Not so Hot on Action

NEW YORK - A week-long UN Earth Summit ended with its chairman delivering theverdict: "Our words have not been matched by deeds." Razali Ismail, the bluntMalaysian UN General Assembly president, called the results of the session attended by,dozens of presidents and prime ministers sobering' but "honest" in not attempting togloss over failures. He accused the more than 170 participating nations of lacking the"political will to tackle critical issues" set out at a landmark 1992 enviroranent summitin Rio de Janeiro. But he said there was wide-spread recognition that abject poverty

affecting 1.3 billion people had to be eradicated if the world was to make economic andecological progress. And, he said, 'we have advanced our understanding on the need foraction on fresh water, forests, climate change and energy policies. - Delegates made nofirm commitments on greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate changes or onproviding more aid to developing countries so they would not follow the polluting pathsof wealthier industrialised nations. Prospects, however, were good for new agreements onprotecting fresh water in separate negotiations after the conference ended.

On protecting forests, the session put off until 2000 a decision on whether to negotiate atreaty, pushed by Europe, Canada, Malaysia and Russia but opposed by the United Statesand Brazil. Echoing Mr Razali's words, Tanzania's UN ambassador, Daudi Ngelautwa

Mwakawago, representing Third World states, told the meeting: "The world is. crying forpositive answers. This session has not provided them." Most industrial countries pledgedat Rio to increase foreign aid to 0.7 per cent of their gross national product, a goal on theUN agenda since 1972. Only Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands have everachieved this goal. Elswhere aid has fallen to below 0.3 per cent, with the United Statesregistering the sharpest drop in the past few years. After five days of speech-making, theconference's main committee completed its work in a lighthearted atmosphere as ablizzard of amendments was gavelled into acceptance. The paper patchwork was thenstitched together and passed on to and adopted by the General Assembly's plenary. Thefinal summit document, however, failed to include a political statement of intent becausegovernments could not agree on one. Instead a more general, shorter preamble wasattached to the voluminous final document reaffirming the lofty principles set forth in Riothat enshrined the concept of 'sustainable development" - economic growth compatiblewith social justice and ecological safety. While acknowledging a number of positiveachievements since Rio, the text said: 'We are deeply concerned that the overall trends forsustainable development are .worse today than they were' in 1992." As expected, a Majorbattle will take place before agreements ort global warming are reached among industrialstates meeting in Kyoto, Japan, in December.


27/27

Greens attack Clinton Speech

NEW YORK - Environmental groups attacked President Bill Clinton yesterday forrefusing to announce specific targets for cutting the greenhouse gases that cause globalwarming when he addressed the United Nations Earth Summit. But a key business group

welcomed his cautious approach, saying he had softened his position from severalmonths ago.

"He resisted the temptation to use this highly public event -to unveil draconian measuresthat would be harmful to our economy and harmful to the American people," said GailMcDonald -, president of the oil and coal industry-backed Global Climate Coalition. "Weurge the President to continue to evaluate the economic impacts of his climate policy andhow it will affect American workers and their families."

Fred Krupp, executive director of the Environmental Defence Fund, said: "If countrieswhose economies are weaker than the United States are willing to commit to significant

reductions in green-house gases, what does that say about the United States?" In hisspeech, Mr Clinton pledged to cut "significantly" United States green-house gases andpromised to spend $US 1 billion ($1.47 billion) to help developing nations reduce theirproduction of the gases. But he rejected European Union targets for sharp cuts as"impossible.' "To help developing nations reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the UnitedStates will provide them with $1 billion in assistance over the next five years," MrClinton said. Most of the $1 billion aid plan will come from money already ear-markedfor foreign assistance. United States officials said $750 iWIlion would be shifted fromexisting foreign aid programmes. Mr Clinton said the United States, the world's biggestpolluter, had clear responsibilities to control its own emmisions of carbon dioxide and tohelp the efforts of developing nations. Sensitive to the complaints of European leaders

that the United States has failed to commit itself to specific reductions in carbon dioxideemissions, Mr Clinton said he would seek specific targets when a United Nationsconference on global warming meets in Kyoto, Japan, at the end of the year. "We willwork with our people - and we will bring to the Kyoto conference a strong Americancommitment to realistic and binding limits that will significantly reduce our emissions ofgreenhouse gasses.

"Here in the United States, we must do better with 4 per cent of the world's population,we produce 20 per cent of its greenhouse gases." But Richard Mott of the WorldwideFund for Nature said: "He devoted his entire speech to global warming and the best hecan do is offer up one million solar roofs." Barbara Dudley of Greenpeace said MrClinton had not "used this pulpit to do anything dramatic but he hasn't said 'no'." "He isfeeling the pressure from both sides, and right now the pressure from industry is greater."REUTER

Earth Summit 1997

Documents

Transcript of Earth Summit 1997