for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development

1. Asian and Pacific Regional Preparatory Meeting for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development 19-20 October 2011, Republic of Korea Rae Kwon Chung Director Environment and Development Division UNESCAP

2. Participation and outcome • 300 delegates from 40 countries • over 60 civil society delegates • Hosted by the Republic of Korea, organized by ESCAP in collaboration with UNEP and the Asian Development Bank • Opened by H.E. Ms. Yoo Young-Sook, Minister of Environment of the Republic of Korea, and Mr. Sha Zukhang, as Secretary General of the UNCSD Secretariat • Report2 from the meeting includes: • Overview of proceedings • Chair’s Summary (annex I) • Seoul Outcome (annex II) • 1http://www.unescap.org/esd/environment/Rio20/pages/documents/List-of-Participants-Final-0111.pd • 2http://www.unescap.org/esd/environment/Rio20/pages/documents/APRPM_Report_final_0911.pdf

3. Inter-Governmental Preparatory meetings in Asia-Pacific Pacific Preparatory Meeting/ Joint Ministerial Meeting, July 2011, Samoa. Senior Officials’ Meeting of the North-East Asian Subregional Programme for Environmental Cooperation (NEASPEC), Sept 2011, Republic of Korea. High-Level Symposium on the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, Sept 2011, China. (Beijing Symposium) High-Level Dialogue on an Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development, July 2011, Indonesia. (Solo Dialogue) Delhi Dialogue on Green Economy and Inclusive Growth, Oct 2011, India.

4. Non-Governmental preparatory meetings in Asia-Pacific • Major group meeting “The Road to Rio 2012: Charting our Path” held 17-18 Oct 2011, Republic of Korea • International Council for Science Regional Committee for Asia and the Pacific, April 2011, Malaysia. • International Forum for Sustainable Asia and the Pacific, July 2011, Japan • Promoting a transformative agenda for Sustainable Development: A strategy workshop on Rio+20, Aug 2011, Thailand • Asian Women’s Forum on Gender Justice and the Green Economy: Special focus on water, energy and food security, Sept 2011, Thailand

5. Seoul Outcome: Regional Position on Rio+20 • AP Unique Regional Dimension • Diversity / High Growth and largest number of Poor • Countries with special needs : SIDS, high-mountain & land-locked States • Reaffirming Principles from Rio 1992 & Objectives of UNCSD : Secure Renewed political commitment for SD • Assess progress and implementation gaps • Addressing new and emerging challenges

6. Qualifications of GE • Based on the Rio Principles • Action-oriented • Forward-looking • Consensus-based • Inclusive • Supportive of global partnerships for SD. • Green economy has to be seen in the context of SD and poverty eradication. • Common but differentiated responsibilities. • Sustained economic growth for poverty reduction • A means to achieve SD

7. Qualifications of GE • Facilitate trade • Address 3 pillars of SD in a synergistic manner • Policy space and Flexibility based on national circumstances • Inclusive of vulnerable groups, women, youth, • Involve all stakeholders • Facilitate technology innovation and transfer • Countries with special needs; SIDS, Land-locked • Not a pretext for green protectionism

8. Principle for IFSD • IFSD should: • Strengthen coherence and coordination • Enhance implementation at all levels • Strengthen governance in all three pillars • Promote the spirit of multilateralism • Improve balance and integration among the • 3 pillars • Promote institutional capacity-building • Be aimed at enhancing the role of the United • Nations at all levels, including regional and • sub-regional levels.

9. Seoul Outcome Constructive framework for Rio+20 Identified essential qualifications and concerns in pursuing GE laid a comprehensive & balanced guidance on IFSD could serve as a basis for Outcome of Rio+20 Result of forward looking engagement & interactions of AP member states

10. Major Concerns on GE Conditionality & Protectionism Dilution of existing commitments Might replace SD Policy Space and flexibility Could weaken social dimension: Might distort balance of 3 pillars of SD Provision of Technology/Finance/Capacity building

11. AP Perspective • Countries in AP region are already taking national initiatives in line with the idea of GE: Green Development of China, Green Vision of India, Green Growth of Korea, Green Bridge of Kazakhstan, etc. • GE Rio+20 Outcome can build on AP Regional Experience

12. AP Perspective • While many countries are taking national initiatives, • Concerns on potential negative impacts of shifting towards GE • Uncertain whether double dividend/win-win synergy between “Green” and “Economy” is feasible • Comprehensive policy options/roadmap are not yet fully established and available: Gap of policy options

13. GE: Double Dividend • Rio+20 objectives are - assessing and filling gaps in the implementation - addressing new and emerging challenges • GE can be defined as generating double dividend/win-win synergy between “Green “ and “Economy,” thus  filling implementation gap  address new emerging challenges: energy, food/fuel, resource, climate crises by improving energy/resource/carbon efficiency

14. GE to be supported by Inclusive Social Policy for Poverty • GE could have positive impacts on poverty reduction, but not the ultimate solution • GE has to be supported by inclusive social policy initiative on poverty: No automatic guarantee that cost and benefit of GE will be evenly distributed among population • Developing countries are the most vulnerable: - 42 million will fall back into poverty due to food/fuel price rise in 2011, 19 million already 2010

15. IFSD: IEG & IFSD • Distinction between IEG & IFSD Critical • IEG & IFSD has to go hand in hand • IEG: International Env Governance is not IFSD strengthening of Env Pillar • IFSD: integration of 3 pillars, mainstreaming SD into UN System as a whole ex: ECOSOC  SD Council, has to cover 3 pillars DESA  DSDA (Dept for SD Affairs) ESCAP  RSDC (Reg SD Commission)

16. GE & AP • AP: Green Economy is not new adopted Green Growth at MCED5 in 2005 adopted Green Bridge at MCED6 in 2010 • ESCAP : now developing a roadmap for Green Growth; a compilation of policy options that can generate win-win synergy

17. 5 Tracks of ESCAP Roadmap 1. Quality of Growth: not to deny quantity, improving quality could even end up higher quantity of Growth 2. Changing Invisible Structure: tax, fiscal, regulation, life-style, social value 3. Changing design of Visible Structure: physical Infra; transport, urban planning, energy, water, waste system 4. Promotion of Green Business 5. Institutionalizing Low Carbon Economics

18. Vision for Rio+20 Vision for Rio+20 1. Global Consensus on definition for GE/IFSD 2. Launch a process to elaborate Policy Options (Roadmap) 3. Launch a global partnership for GE to support DCs 4. Mobilize Political Commitment of Government because the Market cannot and will not deliver GE not as ecological Conditionality but as an economic strategy to cope with multiple crises, for which DCs are most vulnerable

19. Rae Kwon Chung Director Environment and Development Division UNESCAP chung1@un.org THANK YOU