David Harrison
THIRTY-FIVE thousand Ugandans from the Kibale forest region had not heard of the 1992 Earth Summit when they were evicted by police and soldiers clearing the area for a European Union-funded project to protect the forest and encourage tourism.
Local people who resisted were shot or burnt alive in their homes, women were raped, their crops torched. They had nowhere to go.
The EU, hamfistedly ignoring the commitment made at the summit in Rio de Janeiro to help sustainable development while protecting local people, left Western charities such as Oxfam to sort out the mess.
The Ugandan story is not an isolated case. All over the developing world, Rio-inspired schemes have been launched by the West with appalling consequences.
It wasn’t meant to be like this. When representatives of 172 governments, including 108 heads of state, gathered in Rio five years ago there were grand- sounding statements of principle and plans of action. Everything from pollution to the spread of deserts was to be tackled. A better world beckoned.
Five years on, as 70 heads of state arrived in New York for the second world environment summit, dubbed Rio Plus Five, the mood is different.
The Western leaders look shifty. Heads of developing countries feel let down. Industrial nations, they believe, have broken their promises.
The failure to match the Rio goals has been colossal, and rich countries must take most of the blame. Not only has every target been missed, but things have got much worse on almost every count.
The crunch issue of global warming has been almost ignored, while politicians bicker over reducing carbon-dioxide emissions. Yet the West has shown little serious commitment to renewable sources of energy.
The destruction of forests is adding to the problem. The Rio summit agreed to “principles” on the sustainable use of forests. An inter-governmental panel on forests was set up in 1995. But deforestation continues. Edward Wilson, a American biologist, estimates that deforestation wipes out three species every hour.
And what of water? A 1997 study by the Stockholm Environment Institute says the water crisis is worsening. Two-thirds of the world’s population will face serious trouble if current water use and management are maintained. In 1995, one-fifth of the world did not have access to safe drinking water.
The protection of oceans promised in Rio’s Agenda 21 is also all at sea. Fish stocks are over-fished in 70 of the world’s 200 big fisheries, 50 of them are over- exploited and catches are growing in the rest. The United Nations says 60% of fisheries need “urgent management”.
Oil and gas companies continue to seek profits from the sea, moving into deeper oceans, bringing new threats of pollution and destruction.
At the root of the post-Rio failure is poverty. The rich nations promised to increase aid for sustainable development to 0,7% of gross domestic product (GDP), about $125-billion. In fact, they have cut it by 20%. Private investment has tripled, to $230-billion, in the same period, but three-quarters of this has gone to only 12 countries.
Unfair trade terms and rising debt have deepened the crisis. A deal being thrashed out by the Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development looks set to make things worse by allowing investors to move into developing countries on their own terms.
The result is that world poverty has grown since Rio’s fine words stated that fighting it was “a basic condition for sustainable development”. The UN’s 1997 Human Development Report says the world’s poorest 20% enjoy only 1,1% of global income, down from 2,3% of 1960.
There are successes, notably at local level in schemes implemented by charities such as Oxfam and ActionAid. A new language of environmental responsibility has even penetrated boardrooms. But the suspicion remains that this is “greenwash”, a public- relations front that covers ruthless profit-seeking.
The world’s record since 1992 is unimpressive. Greenpeace says the past five years have amounted to “an environmental U- turn”. So will New York be, as the UN hopes, “a wake-up call for humanity”? Or will it bring only more fine words and promises?