Saturday, 30 June 2012

Sink or Swim? The Oceans in our Veins at Rio+20

  • by Julie Melrose - following Oceans debate at Rio+20 

Day after day, day after day,
We stuck, nor breath nor motion;
As idle as a painted ship, 
Upon a painted ocean.

Water, water, every where,
And all the boards did shrink;
Water, water, every where,
Nor any drop to drink.

Samuel Taylor Coleridge - The Rime of the Ancient Mariner 

Australians have a deep connection with the ocean. It is of great importance to our identity, prosperity, lifestyle, culture and security. I have a personal passion and connection with oceans, and I found myself taking an interest in the oceans debate at Rio+20 after Australia started taking a leadership role in the negotiations.

I had the special privilege of growing up living right on the beach in a surfing town called Cronulla to the south of Sydney, in the same house that my great-grandmother, grandmother and father grew up in, and spending all my spare time doing something that involved the ocean. I played water polo in the ocean pools, competed in ocean swimming and surf life saving, went surfing, helped my next door neighbour who was a marine biologist collect and tag soldier crabs on the sand flat outside our house and attended protests about jet skis tearing up the seagrass in the bay. Sand was a welcome visitor to our house, and we always had healing oyster cuts, itchy sea lice or jellyfish stings. But this is the way of life that creates the special beach/ocean culture of Australia's coastal communities. The ocean is a kind of bio-sensitivity that is my frame of reference to the world. It is where I feel at home.

The Great Blue Hole, Belize Barrier Reef, Central America
In 2009 I spent a year working as a PADI Divemaster in Belize, in the Caribbean sea, leading divers to the magnificent 'Blue Hole'. When you are under water, diving, breathing air from a tank, completely dependent on your equipment for survival, you realise how much we do not know about the ocean that supports us, how misunderstood it remains in society, and how frightening that is in the face of its destruction. While some parts of the ocean are managed or protected at a national level in Australia, they are far from adequately protected on an international level or to the same extent at a national level in other countries around the world.

Divers in the Blue Hole

I attended an Official Rio+20 Side Event run by the Marine Reserves Coalition (Pew Environment Institute and Zoological Society of London). Oceans are one of the 7 critical issues being discussed and debated at Rio+20. Currently under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), countries are committed to a 10% target of all oceans being protected at some level by 2020. In reality, we are very very far from even having a chance of meeting that target, which is too weak to make a difference anyway.

State of the world's oceans

The problems that our oceans face are so incredibly immense and at times immeasurable that it is hard to comprehend or accept. But it is important to understand the sheer scale of some of these challenges so as to gain an appreciation of the solutions needed.

As Susan Leiberman, Director of International Policy at the Pew Environment Group explained, oceans cover 71% of the Earth's surface, contain half of all species, 80% of fisheries, and are the primary source of protein for 1 billion people. Yet, less than 1% of oceans are fully protected. Oceans are faced with a myriad of threats from oil and gas spills, over-fishing, waste, climate change, acidification, debris..the list goes on and on. We have reached a critical tipping point. This is dramatically illustrated by an amazing resource which details the protected areas of the world - you can see just how little of the ocean is coloured in on the map.

According to the most recent Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) State of the World's Fisheries and Aquaculture Report 2010, 85% of our oceans are either over-exploited, exploited, or depleting. And the FAO's new report to be released soon is predicted to increase that figure. 90% of the populations of large fish globally, such as sharks, tuna and swordfish have disappeared in the last few decades. For example, we are literally eating the Bluefin Tuna to death with over 80% of populations disappeared since 1970. A shocking video by Time Magazine provides an insight into how things have changed in the Philippine port of General Santos City from overfishing: The Trouble with Tuna. 

The 'trash vortex' of the North Pacific Ocean, commonly called the "pacific gyre", is a vast expanse of rubbish the size of the American state of Texas. It is estimated that there are 6 kilos of plastic for every kilo of plankton there. The very thing that makes plastic useful to us as human consumers - their durability and stability - is the very thing that makes them a nightmare for oceans. Greenpeace International has a great explanation of how the world's rubbish ends up in these horrid ocean tips by ocean currents. And this is just one of the threats that oceans face.

There are now more problems that have arisen since the Joburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI). These include increased nutrient over-enrichment contributing to habitat degradation, lack of ocean-based renewable energy use, continuing threats to coral reefs, the existence of vast areas of marine debris in the form of plastics, and a lack of systemic data exchange across nations. 

History of ocean management 

2012 is the 30th anniversary of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). In 1982, almost ten years after the debate on a global oceans treaty bean, a conference ended and agreed to a new UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) - an unprecedented attempt by the world to regulate the oceans and bring a stable order to mankind's very source of life. A treaty was drafted and covered issues like navigation rights, maritime zones, continental shelf, deep sea mining, protection of marine environment, scientific research, binding procedure for settling disputes - the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Watch this UN video on the history of oceans management before and after UNCLOS. UNCLOS was a very significant move to recognise the oceans as a common heritage of mankind, rather than as a free resource to be pillaged and fished as nations saw fit. But it is still not enough.

Ocean management and protection is still inadequate 

There exist 21 international treaties dealing with the protection of the oceans under the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), but so far we have had little luck in successfully implementing them so as to see real and effective results in the protection and sustainable management of the oceans. The commitment to maintain or restore depleted fish stocks to levels that can produce their maximum yields has not been met, deterrence of illegal, unreported or unregulated fishing is almost non-existent, and marine pollution remains a very serious issue. We are also yet to meet commitments made regarding biodiversity conservation and establishment of Marine Protected Areas - the 10% by 2020 target under the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation. Thus, one thing we need to do as a starting point is to have renewed political commitment to implementing existing treaty obligations. 

Australia's Leadership on Oceans at Rio+20

In Australia, oceans have a special place not only in our culture but for our economy. They directly support jobs in commercial and recreational/charter fishing and indirectly through supporting businesses and communities along the coastline. Marine tourism contributes over $11 billion per year to the Australian economy and economic activity in the marine environment has been found to contribute more than $44 billion per year (over 4% of GDP). 
Australia's Network of Marine Protected Area
Here in Rio, Australia is considered a leader in the oceans debate after they announced a large addition to our National Marine Protected Areas, the Coral Sea Marine Reserve. Australia now has the largest network of ocean reserves in the world. Prior to the announcement, Australia only had 9% of waters protected in some way (through zoning and licensing) and only 4% fully protected (no-take areas). Now, Australia leads the world in having 38% of our waters protected, and 14% fully protected. The Coral Sea reserve enjoys a sprawling no-take zone a little under the size of Spain. Yet there is still a huge amount of opposition to marine reserves in Australia and around the world.

What Rio+20 achieved for oceans - Will we sink or swim?

The final text that came out of Rio+20 basically recognises and notes a lot of important and pressing issues, without going far enough to actually agree on solutions and put in place practical measures to implement them. In international conferences, the first word in each of the paragraphs of the text agreed usually tells you enough about the depth and impact of the agreement or commitment reached. "Recognise" and "note" usually mean that they agree something is a problem but don't have consensus so couldn't put in place any solutions. "Supported" or "reaffirm" usually means status quo - what they are doing just needs to continue. "Call upon" "call for" and "urge" is getting a bit stronger, but is just a political tool to try and garner support from countries to initiatives, and falls short of a commitment. "Commit"is the only word that means consensus has been reached and a process will be put in place to honour that commitment. 

In the final oceans text decided at Rio+20, only 2 out of 20 paragraphs started with the word "commit". Ocean law expert Kristina Gjerde of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has criticised the text for failing to create a binding international legal framework for Marine Protected Areas, and much of the text relies on voluntary and small scale contributions from "coalitions of the willing". However, some positive points that provide some hope are: 
  • Strengthened wording on overfishing that specified actions - including fishing bans - that governments must take to protect fish stocks and biodiversity; 
  • Specific actions for eliminating illegal fishing such as better monitoring of ports and assistance for authorities in developing countries; 
  • A commitment to transparent and accountable marine management within regional fisheries through the use of publicly available independent assessments that authorities commit to implementing; 
  • Specific actions to eliminate harmful substances - such as fuel subsidies - for the fishing industry. 

The question is - is this enough? Is this going to happen fast enough? Will it simply become more hot air and empty promises? We must start to take the probems with our oceans very seriously, before we reach a tipping point of no return. We must continue to raise awareness about the crucial importance of effective oceans management both at a national, regional and international level. We must not become as 'idle as a painted ship, upon a painted ocean'. 

Thursday, 28 June 2012

Eb blog: Parting thoughts on Rio+20

Eb blog: Parting thoughts on Rio+20: I'm leaving Rio, leaving behind a great city and a conference that tends to evoke an uncertain range of grimaces from people when spoken of. . The uninspiring outcome of Rio+20 provokes different reactions depending on expectations and personality. I myself never expected much from the actual document. I came to find out how the bottom-up approach makes use of international meetings and how the local relates to the global. I learned a few things...

Saturday, 23 June 2012

Where's the Love in Rio?

by Teifi Caron

For me Rio +20 has been a juxtaposed conference set in a city of contrasts that perfectly outline the major contributing factors behind the sustained attack we are currently engaged in against a vulnerable global ecosystem - poverty, inequality, greed and fear.  Let me explain....

I have often heard (and I thoroughly believe) that love primarily requires 3 factors:  Trust, Respect and Affection.


I noticed before this conference even began that there was obviously no trust amidst these global negotiations.  The military and police operations underway in preparation for the arrival of so many heads of state, and others deemed to be important, was frighteningly thorough.  I spotted 8 warships navigating the crystal clear ocean waters from Botafogo to Sao Conrado on my way to my hotel, 4 military helicopters hovered overhead, army trucks every few blocks with soldiers sporting their automatic weapons, federal police, state police, municipality police, security guards, horse-mounted police, sniffer dogs (we have invaded other species on our quest for self-preservation) were all present to 'protect' the city.  Since when did protection require such a display of force? When did we become so frightened of each other???

Add to this the elaborate processes involved with debugging the hotels where each delegation stays to prevent international espionage and I think we can all agree, trust is definitely not there.  I wonder how much work our leaders would actually be able to get done if they didn't have to spend so much time in security convoys traveling out to conferences on the outskirts of town due to the fear of civil societies' protests if locations were more accessible?  


After staying in a glitzy hotel for the first few nights where the delegations of Australia, Iran and South Korea happened to be staying, I packed my bags and headed to a grimy backpackers in Botafogo to get a feel for the other side of the conference attendees.  My 8-person dorm room is filled with Central and West Africans and Brazilians who have traveled interstate for their chance to be part of what was lauded as such a historic conference.

Speaking with Babamondo from Nigeria this morning over a breakfast of fresh tropical fruits and strong coffee, Babmondo gave me a personal insight into the corruption and abuse of human rights endured in his home country after oil was discovered in the Niger Delta.  He asked me a powerful question which I couldn't give him an appropriate response to considering his war-torn past  "what is point of having these big conferences to talk about ethical issues in front of the cameras, when under the table none of these laws are respected".  I did a quick bit of further research and found a great article from research coming out of Berkeley University for those of you who want to know more about the issue.

On the bus journey out to the conference centre, I thought of many other examples of violations of international law in the relentless pursuit of resources to satisfy ever increasing standards of living, influence doctrine or for personal vendetta.  East Timor, the Palestinian Territories, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Cambodia, South and Central America come to mind.  In fact, notable examples from every region in the world.

Yes, I think we can tick respect off our list.  It is not present behind the scenes of this conference.

If international law is not respected, we have no chance of saving our planet. Simple.


One of the coolest things I've seen during this conference is the bread tank initiative by the World Future Council which publicises the realistic possibility of eradicating hunger and extreme poverty by redirecting military spending.

Visiting the bread tank present here yesterday with Julie Melrose (and eating some of the slightly stale pita bread to subdue our hunger), I learnt that defence spending world-wide last year was $1.74 trillion. Hang on, let me get that that straight - $1,740,000,000,000 is spent internationally on methods to kill one another.

And according to Edward Davey, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, UK; "Competition for resources could intensify, as territorial change puts pressure on trade and makes conflict more likely.  Natural disasters could increase the demands on our military capability". Therefore, presumably military spending will increase to combat the exacerbated instability caused by climate change and environmental destruction. See how it is all linked in a cycle of positive feedback loops?    

Nope, I think we can agree, affection can't be present while we're blatantly spending so much plotting to murder each other so let's tick that off our list and conclude that there is no love here in Rio.  If international relationships were marriages, I think we would see a very high divorce rate indeed.

I'll leave you with a nice image and song which reflect the sentiment of this post to end it.  I look forward to receiving your comments....

Friday, 22 June 2012

How do you feel when... you meet Julia Gillard

by Sophia. 

This is just a shortie. I’m finding that processing so much of what occurs here in Rio takes me some time, so I’m probably going to go back to front in the order of my posts. But for now:
Silly as it might sound, I think I've got a feeling for how many world leaders might feel when they meet other world leaders. After spending this week in rooms with, amongst others, the King of Sweden, the President of Ecuador, the UN Secretary General, ex-Presidents of Finland and Ecuador, Nobel laureates, and the heads of countless highly respected NGO’s and Civil Society groups, something has changed. I’ve begun to lose the excitement I initially held about attending this or that session, because Head of State X was presenting, or NGO Y was chairing the panel. 
Instead, many have lost their sheen. Despite the titles they’re given, and the reputations that precede them, they’re still human. Just like the other 7 billion or so people they share this planet with, they also fundamentally depend on the same things as I: most generally food, water, shelter, and community.
So today, when the Delegation met with the Prime Minister of Australia, this is what I felt. She was human, just like us: she was a woman sitting at the other side of the table, who also gets jetlag and frizzy hair when travelling.  As someone most definitely in the spotlight, almost constantly surrounded by media, where everything she says is scrutinised from all angles, she perhaps becomes at ease in any situation. Especially if meeting with a bunch of students from Canberra who only have 15 minutes in her company; by the time introductions and logistics are ticked off, it doesn’t leave much time to ask the tough questions and potentially ruffle any feathers!
I’m far from positive that the outcomes of Rio+20 themselves will actually do much in getting us where we need to be. We all need to live here, utilising essentially the same resources to do so.  Therefore, we shouldn’t wait around for our ‘leaders’ to lead before doing anything to try and secure ourselves a sustainable existence. Because this is our planet, it doesn’t belong just to those who I used to be nervous about meeting in the flesh.
We have an equal right to take action, in whatever capacity that might be. No doubt I hope that they also realise that their wellbeing is at stake by acting too slowly. Without reflecting on our common humanity, it would be even more difficult for me to think that anything successful could come out of this Conference.
However, my hope lies not with most of the political leaders I’ve been exposed to, but with the members of civil society who I have been so inspired and excited by this week.  Civil society deserve a post in their own right, so more on that to come. Once I've processed this batch of info...


Strong legally binding text, passionate civil society movement or maybe a bit of both

A worthy initial note, Rio must be the most beautiful city in the entire world - the sheer jungle cliff faces make a perfect backdrop for a world environmental conference. It is a pity of course that the conference is less environmentally inspiring and is funded by less environmentally inspiring mining companies and multinational corporations like coca cola. 

So to the theme of this blog; I would like to share with you my reflections of Rio +20 so far. In such a fast paced environment it is hard to slow down enough to be able to sit still and write a blog, however as my discontent over the process grows – I feel the need to get across my observations to you all.

My focus for the conference is two-fold: I am looking at mining for sustainable development and an analytical interpretation of the implementability of the legal document that will be produced at the end of the Rio +20 conference.

The conference will create a non-legally binding document supported by States to reaffirm previous texts and commit to sustainable development and green economy initiatives. The current text was described by Jeffrey Sachs in a panel discussion this morning as a ‘call for action’ in a flexible way, outside the constraints of bubble-wrapped legally binding agreement. But where is the incentive if not in a legally binding text? 

The text was closed by Brazil on June 19 bringing a halt to negotiations. Brazil, to save face, closed the text in a successful attempt to ensure an outcome is secured at the conclusion of Rio +20 on 22 June. The closure of the text understandably left many countries in the lurch as the hope for reaching a strong agreement quickly dissipated.

The general consensus on June 20 was that the text did not provide strong language and would not create commitments to take action. There were whispers of powerful players, the EU and Switzerland walking out of the plenary in disgust and hope that this action would push for a consensus to re-open the text among States.

This now seems unlikely, and it is with reserved sobriety that I and many States have come around to the idea that the final text will remain a weak non-committal document. It has been noted that the current text somewhat reflects the result of the Rio earth summit of 1992, and that what will follow in the aftermath of the conference will create strong conventions and global initiatives. Time will tell.

I however have hope and take consolation in the fact that a move toward a sustainable and environmentally secure world cannot be achieved through a document alone. The move will need to be an institutional overhaul of the status-quo as such multi-faceted issues deserve multi-faceted responses. I have come to a compromised understanding within myself after all I have seen over the past few days that through civil-society movements, communication, education, technology, legal and regulatory frameworks, green economics and most importantly a dedicated passion to make change we can achieve a world that will be progressively more sustainable and will provide a safe environmental future for us all.

This is my hope; some would say it is naïve. However, as I stand in solidarity with the people of this world, these people who care enough in their hearts to come together and fight for the future they want, I cannot help but think that a better and more sustainable world is still within our grasp.

May I also add what a privilege it has been to work with such inspirational and motivated people, further proof that a global sustainable future can be achieved.

Rio+20, The End of the Road

Six years ago I started university - the meeting places for great young minds, where those around you are not yet cynical and jaded, where ideas flourish and where youthful enthusiasm means anything is possible.

I was fortunate to stumble upon some of the most switched on and passionate of these minds and realised that young people could make the world a better place, idealistic though this may sound.

I became an ’activist’. Every meeting, protest, or angry letter – count me in, the more the better.

I was arrested for protesting against the wasteful and dangerous renewal of my country’s renewable weapons system. I was stopped and searched by overzealous police operating under laws created by a paranoid government, simply for protesting at the expansion of our already expansive airport. I was hauled into the Dean’s office of my university for questioning an annual careers fair dominated and sponsored by giant multinational oil and arms companies.

I was absolutely convinced that if you shouted loud enough, those in power would listen. I was wrong.

We replaced our nuclear weapons, committing future generations to decades more anachronistic cold war politics and power relations based on military might. Heathrow got its extra terminal and is responsible for 18 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year; at a time when scientists agree on the need to drastically reduce such emissions. The corporatisation of universities, schools, and public spaces continues unabated. Even Rio+20 is sponsored by Coca-Cola.

Cynical and jaded, burnt out, and exhausted, I looked for another way. A way that I, we, could still effect change. As a lawyer, I thought that maybe this was the answer. I thought that binding international laws could be agreed that would steer us in the right direction. If all nations see the problem, and we fairly distribute the responsibility for solving the problem, everyone will be happy, right?

Wrong again.

A few more years later, and we have only regressed. There is no successor to the Kyoto Protocol, countries are shirking existing commitments so that they may utilise evermore hideous ways to exploit my planet, rapid economic growth continues to be the purported Holy Grail for human societies, and continues to be predicated on the cheap and abundant supply of fossil fuels and ever-growing global inequality.

In short, our failure to act with the required urgency is plunging our planet into potential catastrophe. And we shouldn’t be so arrogant as to think that we could ever fully understand the complexity of the impacts our actions have on our environment.

Rio+20 was an exciting prospect. An opportunity to enunciate the future we want and agree on a way to get there. Instead, the vast majority of world leaders, with notable exception, have settled for the lowest common denominator, bedded down for an endless talkfest, and condemned my future children to inherit a planet in crisis.

We must do better.

I now realise that I was once again misguided, but fortunately we learn from our experience. Let us all learn from our experience and not make the same mistakes twice.

The self-serving, vapid and non-committal show and tell that Rio+20 has become is a signal to me, and a signal to youth and civil society across the world, that if we want a more just, prosperous and sustainable world, we are going to have to do it ourselves.

Rio+20 is the end of the road. I refuse to speak up when I am not listened to. I refuse to engage with bureaucratic processes that promise everything and deliver nothing. I refuse to be drawn into negative battles against so-called ‘leaders’ that are incapable of leading, and would happily see my planet trashed and its people in poverty, so long as they have their creature comforts.

Engaging with flawed processes does not work. Endless protesting does not work. Radical and verbose mutterings will put even the most liberal and dedicated of us off.

No. Instead let us dictate the future we want, not have a substandard future forced upon us. It is time to start shaping a future that we can be proud of, positively develop a vision, and bring our skills, knowledge, and hopefully youthful enthusiasm to bear.

My faith in law as a tool for change remains, though at a different level. International agreements are not the answer, but we can develop and implement strong national frameworks that can make our positive vision for the future a reality.

We can argue for rights for nature, to enshrine respect for the systems that sustain our very lives. We can stop obsessing over GDP and demand governments deliver based on metrics that assess our happiness, not our economic output and consumption. We can learn from indigenous peoples all over the world that thankfully never lost their deep connection with their natural environment.

These ideas are not radical. They are not new. They are just the beginning.

Let’s reject passive engagement in processes destined to fail. Let’ use only positive means for effecting change, and abandon negativity and fear mongering. Let’s not strain our voices shouting in the face of those that will never listen. It is time for us to not listen to them.

It is time to talk to each other, develop a positive vision behind which we can all rally, and create the future we want for ourselves and future generations.

It is our obligation, our immense challenge, and our privilege, to be a generation of young people that could change the course of the history of our species. Let’s start now.

Thursday, 21 June 2012

ANU Joins 50,000 strong protest at Rio+20

by Julie Melrose

Yesterday at the People's Summit, a separate gathering being run in contrast to the main Rio+20 conference, we heard Indian conservationist Vandana Shiva speak. One of the main things that came across was that she believes the power is in the social networks that we create with each other, and mobilisation of civil society.

Today was the People's March during Rio+20 - and the ANU Student Delegation joined over 50,000 others walking through the streets of Rio de Janeiro demanding social and environmental justice.

Emotions have been running high amongst members of the delegation as the Rio+20 conference proper began today and the magnitude of the conference and what is at stake has hit home. We are all running on very little sleep - coming home late at night from the conference exhausted after very busy and diverse activities during the day. While some of the delegation were at the Rio+20 conference today (Maris was able to get a pass to sit in the Plenary session with the world leaders), some of us chose to do civil society engagement.

We had our banner sprayed at the Peoples Summit on the beach before letting off some steam by marching, singing, dancing and chanting our way around the city in the People's March.

ANU delegates marching with their banner
Julie and Karina whistle blowing at the march

Many people were suprised to read our banner seeing that we were from so far away.  The majority of people in the march seemed to be from Brazilian civil society - chanting and singing things I didn't understand in Portuguese. It didn't matter though, we were so happy to be walking alongside people and feeling a part of something really powerful - the voice of the people who want world leaders to take sustainable development seriously and set us on a better path. 
Brazilian unionists protesting 
Tatiana, Julie, Karina, Tom and Sophia with the ANU delegation banner 

Early thoughts (posted late!)

My thoughts? Rio+20 will give us the opportunity to shape the way understand progress and development, learn from our mistakes and share amazing ideas that really work. Most importantly, regardless of what actions the governments take, Rio+20 will provide society with inspiration to work for a better world. While it can be easy to focus on the bad (especially if you get the politics) we need to use every opportunity can to make a difference. A friend also in the Australian National University delegation talked about how one day the world will wake up and realise that we've been doing it all wrong. Then they're going to look for how to do things right. That's where we come in with all of where we're doing it right and show them that sustainable cities, transport etc is really possible. Wise words :) So basically - I'd rather take action than sit around and complain about how no one is taking action   ¡Bienvenido a Argentina! But before all that begins I'm spending a couple of days in Buenos Aires, Argentina! In fact, I'm sitting in bus from the aeroporto to the city right now. After walking out of my front door 26 hours ago I've nearly reached my first destination. The next couple of days will be filled with filete (steak), baila (dancing), tinto vino (red wine) and my nearly non-existent Spanish. BA seems pretty cool so far - I've seen a lot of apartment buildings, heaps of street football courts (I wanna play but I think their u14s are about the standard of our men's league...) and a lot of trucks (I'm pretty sure police cars and ambulances just leave their lights flashing even when their driving normally). Thanks for reading :)


A typical Rio+20 day

Eb blog: A typical Rio+20 day: I now consider myself settled into a pattern in Rio; I have gotten used to sleeping in the hostel by simply burning the candle at both en...

Tuesday, 19 June 2012

10 Points from Forest Dialogue at Rio+20

10 Points from Forest Dialogue in UN Rio+20

By ANU Delegate Yin Yang 

1.     Promote science, technology, innovation and traditional knowledge in order to face forests major challenges: how to turn them productive without destroying them (Support Level 54.5%).
         强科学、技术、革新和传统知识为面对来自森林的主要挑战:如何让森林更具生产力而不摧毁他们 (支持率 54.5%)

2.     Invest in local controlled forestry; promoting source right, organization, business capability and fair deals for local people (Support Level 40.9%).

3.     Restore 150 million hectares of deforested and degraded lands by2012 (Support Level 21.8 %).
         2020年前恢复1.5亿公顷被破坏的森林和退化的土地(支持率 21.8%)

4.     Protect language diversity to preserve traditional knowledge and support biodiversity conservation (Support Level 21.2%).
        护语言的多样性,保护传统知识和支持生物多样性保护(支持率 21.2%)

5.     Entrench the principles, inclusion, transparency and accountability of local peoples in forest governance (Support Level 17.8 %).
        确立当地人民在治理森林时的原则,包容性,透明度和​​问责制度(支持率 17.8 %)

6.     Restore forestland and mangrove zone (Support Level17.0 %).
        恢复森林与红树林区域(支持率 17.0 %)

7.     Value forest carbon from forest plantations in the context of the green economy (Support Level 15.2 %).
        在绿色经济的背景下价值化来源于人工林的森林碳(支持率 15.2%)

8.     Government should support agroforestry as a promising alternative to balance the need for food and fuelwood whilst reducing pressure on natural forests (Support Level 14.2 %).
        政府应该支持农林业作为一个有前途的替代方案以平衡来自食物和薪柴的需求,同时减少对天然林的压力(支持率 14.2 %)

9.     Organize a UN Commission to mobilize the necessary public and private finance to implement REDD+ actions globally (Support Level 13.3%).

10.  Common framework conditions for forest certification and include it in the rio+20 framework for action (Support Level 12.9%). .