1
Intervention by India on the
‘Discussion on the compilation document: comments and guidance for the
zero draft outcome document’
15 December 2011
Thank you, Chair for giving me the floor. Time is short and I will be
direct. India associates itself with the statement made by Argentina on behalf
of G-77.
2. RIO+ 20 provides us with a valuable opportunity to bring sustainable
development agenda back to the centre stage of global development matrix,
guided by the Rio principles, in particular the principles of equity and common
but differentiated responsibilities. There can be no rewiring of the Rioprinciples
or their dilution.
3. Unmet commitments, inadequate means of implementation and clear
lack of political will on the part of developed countries to put in place an
enabling global environment that gives a level playing field to developing
countries have been the key obstacles to Sustainable Development. These
must be comprehensively addressed in Rio+20.
4. Poverty eradication is and will continue to be the foremost global
development challenge. Sustainable development and green economy must
ensure that the overriding priority of developing countries to eradicate poverty
is provided all the policy space and international support that it requires.
5. It is critical that issues of core development concern such as food
security and sustainable agriculture; universal access to modern energy
services; access to clean drinking water; natural resource and land
degradation; challenges of urbanization; public health; human resource
development and employment generation are addressed in all their
manifestations.
2
6. Rio+20 outcome should include strong defining actions on each of these
development challenges. Moreover, unsustainable patterns of consumption n
developed countries need to be rationalized so as to reduce their ecological
footprints. This cannot be a forgotten and relegated to the back burner.
7. The outcome document should recognize that national circumstances
and priorities would define the nature of policies and strategies adopted by
each country to green its economy. No one size fits all.
8. The evolution of GE should be facilitated through a menu of policy
options and a toolbox of instruments with ample flexibility and policy space for
countries to allow them to make their own choices.
9. It needs to be ensured that green economy paradigms do not adversely
impact the livelihoods of vulnerable sections of society, like the small and
marginal farmers and those employed in SMEs. GE should not be used as a
pretext for green protectionism, including tariff and non-tariff barriers on
exports of developing countries or aid conditionalities. It should also not
exacerbate technological dependence of developing countries on developed
countries.
10. Win-win strategies need to be identified and formulated where greening
activities are synergistic with economic growth for poverty eradication.
11. Means of implementation are critical. New, additional and predictable
financial support; transfer and sharing of technology, capacity building and a
development oriented international environment on trade, Intellectual Property
Rights, debt relief, financial mechanisms and global governance in general
are critical for developing countries to pursue sustainable development.
12. A target based prescriptive approach on sustainable development
should be carefully though-out. Such an approach could undermine the
relentless and ongoing efforts being made by developing countries on poverty
eradication, MDGs and other internationally agreed development goals. In any
case these issues need to be the subject of detailed negotiations among
3
member-states with a balanced approach in which developed countries need
to walk the talk on action and support.
13. Let me now delve on some key issues related to IFSD.
14. On institution building, India supports strengthening of UNEP through
scaled up financial resources, enhanced mandate and universal membership.
15. CSD either needs to be reformed comprehensively or we need to be
willing to look at creating a new body such as a Sustainable Development
Council based on equitable geographical representation reporting directly to
the General Assembly.
16. There is clearly a need for greater representation of developing
countries, accountability and transparency in the Bretton Woods Institutions in
order to increase their effectiveness and responsiveness to UN-led processes
and outcomes. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) has to be strengthened.
The quantum of financial contributions to GEF Trust Fund should substantially
increase from the present level.
17. Before I close, let me reiterate that equity, poverty eradication and
balance between the three pillars remain the benchmark of our approach to
GESDPE and IFSD.
Thank you Mr. Chairperson.
*****
