GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES AND TRENDS: NEED FOR LEADERSHIP

1. GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES AND TRENDS: NEED FOR LEADERSHIP Dr. Peter King Senior Policy Advisor Institute for Global Environmental Strategies

2. DPSIR FRAMEWORK • Drivers lead to • Pressures, which change the • State, which causes • Impacts, requiring • Responses • Ideally the responses should tackle the underlying drivers, so there is a positive feedback loop

4. SOME KEY DRIVERS • Growth is good, greed is good – an economy that is not growing is no good • Adam Smith’s hidden hand is absent where it counts – in ecosystem services • Living off fossil reserves – energy, phosphate, groundwater, lithium, soil – already at peak levels • Creating new chemicals not found in nature or man-made chemicals greater than found in Nature (such as nitrogen) • Nature treated as commodity, not mother or sustainer of life • Urbanization and emotional disconnect from Nature

5. WHAT ARE SOME IMPACTS? • Planetary thresholds are breached or on the brink – climate change, biodiversity, nitrogen cycle, ozone layer etc. • Ecological footprint – already need 1.3 Earths • Consumption trends continue – need 4 Earths • Climate change – sea level rise, ocean acidification, air and sea temperatures, increased storm severity and frequency, disappearance of some countries, mass migration.

7. TYPICAL LEADERSHIP RESPONSES • Convene international summits (Rio+20 next) • Negotiate multilateral environment agreement (MEA) or regional agreement • Encapsulate MEA into national legislation and regulations – assign responsibility • International and domestic funds provided for half-hearted implementation • Report progress to conferences of the parties, and then negotiate some more

8. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS APPROACH? • Environmental quality continues to degrade almost everywhere • Too many people continue to live in squalor and poverty • Unequal actors, disenfranchised actors, and uncommitted actors – winners and losers • For small developing countries, scarce staff constantly away “negotiating” new agreements, not implementing existing MEAs • Far too many MEAs (over 500) – rationalization is needed – far too many plans and reports

9. INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSES • Proliferation of MEA secretariats and new funds, new agencies at national level • Constant changes in names of agencies as priorities shift • UNEP remains understaffed and underfunded – we deserve a fully equipped WEO • Regional environment programs drain away best and brightest environmental staff from national action • National environment agencies weakest in Cabinet, too small, underfunded, over-mandated • Delegation of powers to local government not matched by funding needed • NGOs and civil society too often ignored – not part of decision making processes

10. Government effectiveness (quality of public services, quality of civil service and degree of independence from political pressures, quality of policy formulation and implementation, and credibility of government’s commitment to such policies) World Bank (2006)

11. ANY GOOD NEWS? WE KNOW THAT GOOD POLICIES REALLY DO WORK AND ARE OFTEN TRANSFERABLE – BUT THEY ARE NOT BEING IMPLEMENTED OR WORKING FAST ENOUGH!

12. ANY MORE GOOD NEWS? • Hole in the ozone layer may be repaired in about 50 years – although may contribute to climate change • Simple things like polluted or burning rivers, plagues and other environmental disasters are largely managed in developed countries, showing that it can be done • Increasing level of awareness, especially among the younger generation • Large body of environmental legislation and institutions since the 1970s • But environmental quality and resource depletion continue to decline almost everywhere.

13. ALTERNATIVE APPROACH • Immediate moratorium on global negotiations – deal with climate change through G20 (80% of emissions) • Dust off all existing environmental plans (NEAPs, TFAPs, NAPAs, NAPs, NCSAs, NSDSs, NAMAs, NBSAPs) • Identify what is still a priority and stay at home and implement them • Re-assign global experts to work in developing countries as mentors/trainers or in regional environment programs • Retain UNEP as a small secretariat working as secretariat for all MEAS • Relocate Global Environment Facility secretariat to UNEP and upgrade it to WEO

14. WHAT TO GIVE UP? • Global assessments only done every 20 years • No more national plans – there is enough already – dust off the old ones • All reports to COPs done virtually – with UNEP secretariat to consolidate progress reports • Very limited international meetings – only for urgent new issues • Environment mainstreamed into all sectors and not treated as a stand alone issue • Stop feeding the media with bad news stories and require them to disseminate the good news, as it happens

15. WHAT DO WE GET IN RETURN? • Environment mainstreamed into development plans, sector strategies, and annual budgets • Staff freed up to implement and enforce environmental laws and regulations • Communities and businesses more aware of their obligations and involved in decision making • Increased attention to local lifestyles, replacing goods with services, and focusing on quality of life, rather than quantity of consumption.

16. WHY IS LEADERSHIP SO IMPORTANT? • Information is now consumed in small bits (like text messages or TV news clips) • Leaders dominate the news, allocate resources, and provide moral guidance • By definition, leaders have many followers • Communication of environmental information is disputed space – potential losers defend the status quo, winners may over-hype their case • Leaders can be found everywhere – not just in politics

17. CONCLUSION • We are on a slippery slope towards the planet becoming uninhabitable, and we don’t know how long we have to turn this around • Business as usual will not get us off this trajectory – a shift in paradigms, policies, and approaches is needed • We need action and massive injections of finance and human energy in rehabilitating the planet • Let’s not forget, Earth is our only home!