1
Statement by Dr. Atsushi Suginaka
Director, Global Environment Division
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan
Second Intersessional Meeting of the UNCSD Preparatory Process
United Nations, New York
16 December 2011
Thank you, Mr. Co-Chair,
In March this year at the closing session of the 2nd preparatory committee, Japan
stated that “the outcome document should be a concise political declaration focusing on
the two themes.” I welcome this opportunity to further elaborate this statement. As
requested by the bureau, I would like to do this by presenting Japan’s position on the
format, structure and length of the Rio+20 outcome document.
Mr. Co-Chair,
First, Japan welcomes the Guidance Note prepared by the Bureau, which presented
two models for the format of the outcome document. In its national submission, Japan
made it clear that such a “‘Focused political document’ should be concise and clear to
convey a robust global message toward Sustainable Development.” Therefore, Japan
supports the second model, which is a political declaration without a separate action
plan. We have only six months before Rio+20, and it would be difficult to reach a
consensus on concrete action plans if we were to start formulating them now. If actions
have to be mentioned in the political declaration, it would be most realistic for the
outcome document to indicate an agreement on formulating and reviewing action plans
following Rio+20.
Mr. Co-Chair,
Second, Japan was disappointed that the bureau was not able to present ideas or
options for structure of the outcome document. At the beginning of the national
submission, Japan proposed that the outcome document should consist of three parts: an
“‘Overview,’ ‘A green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty
eradication’ and ‘the institutional framework for sustainable development.’” Rio+20 is
different from the Earth Summit in 1992 and the Johannesburg Summit in 2002 because
it focuses the two themes: a green economy and the institutional framework. Other
issues related to sustainable development should not be given equal weight to the two
themes. Those other issues should be mentioned, if necessary, under the “Overview” or
the section on sustainable development.
2
Mr. Co-Chair,
Finally, Japan supports the Bureau’s recognition that when we discuss the length
the outcome document, we should take into account the limited negotiation time. If we
are to achieve consensus on the outcome document within the limited time available
between now and June 2012, the zero draft has to be concise and sufficiently brief.
There are a number of issues relating to the two themes which require intensive
discussion. Therefore, the section on sustainable development has to be shorter than the
sections on the two themes.
Mr. Co-Chair,
Two years have passed since we decided to convene Rio+20. We have only six
months until it happens. If we really want to succeed at Rio+20, we have to be realistic.
The decisions before us on the format, structure and length of the outcome document
are all very important. Let me reiterate, once again, for the sake of the success of
Rio+20, Japan firmly believes that the outcome document should be a concise political
declaration focusing on the two themes.
Thank you, Mr. Co-Chair.
