A World that Works

Global V is iona r y Ac t iv is tsR ichard BransonDavid de Rothschi ldR obert Swan

S ust a inabi l i t y in Act ionM a s d a r / L o n d o n 2 0 1 2 / W B C S D

Uni t ed N at ionsDr . Kandeh Yumkel laDr . Joan C losMrs . I r ina Bokova

Rio+20 Special Edition

J u n e 2 0 1 2

+ S p e c i a l E n e r g y F o c u s

SUSTAINIATo create sustainable societies we need something desirable to strive for.

Sustainia is the world’s first holistic model of what’s possible.We’re built on your ideas and solutions.

JOIN US TODAY.

The world of tomorrow

Georg KellExecutive Director

UN Global CompactArnold Schwarzenegger

Honorary ChairSustainia Committee

Connie HedegaardEU Commissioner for

Climate Action

joinS

US

TAIN

IA.M

E 

 F

AC

EB

OO

K.C

OM

/SU

STA

INIA

  

TW

ITT

ER

: @S

US

TAIN

IA_

ME

  

LIN

KE

DIN

.CO

M/C

OM

PA

NY

/-SU

STA

INIA

-

WELCOME TO SUSTAINIA

“ SUSTAINIA IS A CLEAR ARTICULATION OF THE FUTURE WE WANT.

“ SUSTAINIA CAN HELP MAKE COMMUNITIES HEALTHIER, WEALTHIER, AND MORE SUSTAINABLE FOR GENERATIONS TO COME.

“ SUSTAINIA IS A NEW AND NEEDED APPROACH TO COMMUNICATING ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY.

The next Planet B will be published in the last quarter of 2012: ‘The Road from Rio’ reviews Rio+20 and its shining stars and puts under the spotlight those best placed to implement the Conference outcomes. It also features a special section on COP 18. For all advertising enquiries contact Sian Goddard: sian@thebuzzbusiness.comFor all editorial enquiries contact Dominic Hale: dominic@sextantmedia.co.uk

Planet B speaks of a world that works for the voiceless and the marginalised, as well as those with a seat at the top table.

A sustainable revolution is taking place and we are leading from the front; riding on the crest of a wave of innovative thinking that will transport you to Planet B; a better place where lies a better future for us all. However, whether you’re in the public, private, government or NGO sector, if you don’t know how to get there, you’re likely to get lost along the way, or worse still, left behind completely. Fortunately, we have the directions to Planet B and to a bold new dawn of governance, equity and doing business. With our contributions from the world’s leading sustainable visionaries, academics and captains of industry, let us show you the way.

Produced to coincide with the Rio+20 Conference and its theme of ‘The Future We Want’, this special 100 page edition of Planet B uncovers the barriers and entry points to this new world, and discovers who’s doing what, where and why. It’s an approach that cuts through the background noise and makes abundantly clear the compelling environmental, social and economic case for applied sustainable development.

The United Nations sets us on our way to Planet B. In our probing interviews with Heads of UN Agencies such as

Dr. Kandeh Yumkella at UNIDO, Dr. Supachai Panitchpakdi at UNCTAD and Dr. José Graziano da Silva at FAO we have the definitive UN view on all the stated Rio+20 priorities including ‘Energy’, ‘Cities’, ‘Food’ and ‘Water’. To reach Planet B the world needs the right pilots. These global visionary activists such as Richard Branson, David de Rothschild and the Green Sheikh believe in a better future for everyone and have contributed their vision of the path we need to take. With the additional input of business movements like the UN Global Compact, World Business Council for Sustainable Development and the International Chamber of Commerce, this title is firing on all cylinders.

By way of turning the rhetoric into reality, we also look at the private sector. It represents the key to creating a meaningful and inclusive green economy and to realising Planet B and the future we want. 2012 is the UN year of Sustainable Energy for All and in light of this we have profiled the energy sector in depth, as well as those other core sectors that must be brought on side in order to ensure Rio+20 outcomes are implemented to maximum effect.

The great and the good are gathering in Rio. Can they come up with the right trajectory? In short, they must, and this time we believe they will.

Editorial DirectorDominic Hale

Business Development Director Sian Goddard

Design Wallace Wainhouse, Claire Turner

Editorial James Wilson, Florence Holland

Additional ContributionsJoanna Gray, Judith Luscombe, Morgan Palmer Hubbard  Websitewww.PlanetBMagazine.com

Further Informationwww.thebuzzbusiness.com

Planet B is published by The Buzz Business and Sextant Media Limited (in equal partnership).

A World that Works

The Rio+20 Special Edition

NEXTEDITION

Disclaimer: The information contained in this publication has been obtained from sources the proprietors believe to be correct. However, the publishers cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. In no way does any of the content constitute legal advice and the publishers and staff accept no responsibility nor legal liability for any loss or damage caused by or arising from reliance on it.  Copyright: No part of this publication may be reproduced without the prior consent of the publishers. © Planet B Magazine. Unless otherwise stated photographic content is licensed under the Creative Commons (cc) attribution license. To view a copy of this license visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Cover photo © LaiQuocAnh/Shutterstock.com. Also, NASA imagery.

About Planet B

6 Rio+20: Implementation, Integration and Coherence for a Sustainable Future

ByNikhilSeth,Director,DivisionforSustainableDevelopment,UnitedNationsDivisionofEconomicandSocialaffairs(UNDESA)

8 Kris Gopalakrishnan, Chairman, Business Action for Sustainable Development (BASD) 2012

10 Corporate Sustainability Leadership: A Framework for Action at Rio+20 and Beyond

ByGeorgKell,ExecutiveDirector,UNGlobalCompact

12 Rio+20, Stakeholders and Democracy

ByFelixDodds,ExecutiveDirector,StakeholderForumandMichaelStrauss,ExecutiveDirector,EarthMedia

14 Interview with Gerard Worms, Chairman, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)

16 From the Best ‘in’ the World to the Best ‘for’ the World

ByMarkDrewell,CEO,GloballyResponsibleLeadershipInitiative(GRLI)

17 Peter Paul Van De Wijs, Managing Director, Communications and Business Role Focus Area, World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)

18 How Can Investors Drive the Sustainability Agenda at Rio+20?

ByMarkRobertson,HeadofCommunications,EIRIS

20 Interview with Dr. Kandeh Yumkella, Director-General, UNIDO and Chair of UN Energy

Energy

24 Interview with Fulvio Conti, CEO, Enel

25 Rainer Hinrichs-Rahlwes, President, European Renewable Energies Federation (EREF)

28 Interview with David Martin, Head of Sustainable Development, Royal Dutch Shell

29 Rio+ 20: The UAE’s Path to a Green Economy

Dr.SultanAhmedAlJaber,ChiefExecutiveOfficerofMasdarandUAESpecialEnvoyforEnergyandClimateChange

30 Sustainable Development and CSR – Essential Components of Sakhalin Energy’s Strategic Development

32 Interview with Andrei Galaev, CEO Sakhalin Energy

33 Phasing out Fossil Fuel Subsidies - Unlocking Public Finances for Poverty Eradication and a Greener Economy

ByMarkHalle,ExecutiveDirector,InternationalInstituteforSustainableDevelopment,Europe

34 Interview with Professor James Sweeney, Director of the Precourt Energy Efficiency Center at Stanford University

36 Out of Africa VictorSmart,DirectorofProfile

andCommunicationsatCharteredInstituteofManagementAccountants

(CIMA)meetsProfessorMervynKingtodiscusshowaccountancycanhelptosavetheplanet

37 After ‘Decade of Stupidity’ it is now Time for Change

Sanchia Temkin on Prof. Mervyn King’s belief that a new kind of board of directors is needed

38 Interview with Eskom CEO, Brian Dames

BrianDamesexplainshowEskomisdiversifyingitsenergymixtolowercarbonemissionsandrespondtothechallengesoutlinedinSouthAfrica’sNationalDevelopmentPlan

40 OPEC & Rio+20 ByAbdallaSalemEl-Badri,Secretary

GeneralofOPEC

42 BP’s Target Neutral Programme BP’snot-for-profitcarbon

managementprogramme,TargetNeutral,ishelpingLondon2012achievetheambitiontodeliverthemostsustainableGamespossible

44 Interview with Taleb Rifai, Secretary-General of UNWTO (World Tourism Organisation)

Tourism

46 Sustainable Tourism in the Turks & Caicos Islands

InterviewwithRalphHiggs,DirectorofTourismattheTurks&CaicosTouristBoard

48 Orascom Development InterviewwithChairman,Eng.Samih

Sawiris

C o n t e n t s

Introduction

Energy

Tourism

GerardWorms

FulvioConti

DavidMartin

BrianDames

RalphHiggs

AndreiGalaev

SamihSawiris

51 Vitoria-Gasteiz, European Green Capital, 2012

52 Interview with Dr. Joan Clos, Executive Director of UN-Habitat (United Nations Human Settlements Programme)

Cities

54 At Airbus Best Practices Shape Sustainability

56 Cornwall’s Green Economy UKregion’scommitmenttoreducing

itscarbonfootprintandfosteringasustainableeconomicenvironment

58 Interview with Dr. Supachai Panitchpakdi, Secretary-General, UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development)

GreenJobsandSocialInclusion

62 Vision 2050 Arabia HussainAlMahmoudi,President,

UAEBCSDdiscusseshowtheVision2050ArabiainitiativechallengestheMiddleEasttolivesustainably

64 Mining’s Contribution to Sustainable Development

ByDr.AnthonyHodge,President,InternationalCouncilonMiningandMetals(ICMM)

66 Richard Branson, Chairman, Virgin Group

Thelegendaryinternationalentrepreneuroutlineshowactionsspeaklouderthanwordswhenitcomestocreatingthefuturewewant

68 Ray Anderson’s Legacy to Business and Industry

ByDanielT.Hendrix,ChairmanandCEO,Interface,Inc.

69 Climate Change and the ICT Solution

ByDrHamadounTouré,ITUSecretary-General

70 Telefónica’s Commitment to Green ICT in a Resource Constrained World

ByDanielaTorres,GlobalHead,ClimateChangeandEnergyEfficiencyOfficeofTelefónica

72 Henkel Remembers Rio Henkelexplainshowitseeksto

createmorevaluewhilereducingitsecologicalfootprint

74 Macho Economics – Time for a Change?

CeriGoddard,CEOoftheFawcettSociety,onwomenandsustainabledevelopment

76 Interview with Jacqueline Alder, Head of UNEP Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Branch

Oceans

78 Interview with David de RothschildTheEnvironmentalistandadventurerexplainshowtellingpeoplewhattheycan,ratherthancan’tdo,willhaveamassivepositiveimpactontheoverallsustainablenarrative

79 Mr. Philippe Michaud, Chairman, Seychelles Fishing Authority (SFA)

SFAChairmanoutlinesplanstofurtherenhanceSeychelles’statusasapioneerofresponsiblefishing

80 The Choice is Ours ByAmbassadorMarleneMoses,

Chair,theAllianceofSmallIslandStates(AOSIS)

82 Interview with Dr. José Graziano da Silva, Director-General, FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation)

Agriculture

84 Robert Swan and 2041 Thepolarexplorer’sinspiringworkto

raiseglobalawarenessofthethreattotheenvironment

86 Interview with Mrs. Irina Bokova, Director-General, UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation)

Education

88 Time for a New Approach from the Board

ByMikeRosenberg,AssistantProfessorofStrategicManagement,IESEPlatformforStrategyandSustainability

89 Interview with ‘The Green Sheikh’ (Sheikh Abdulaziz bin Ali bin Rashed Al Nuaimi)

90 Aid: ‘We’re Not Arguing for a Culture of Dependency. We’re Arguing to End it’

ObservereditorJohnMulhollandspeakstoONEco-founderBonoandleadingeconomistProfessorJeffreySachsaboutthepoliticsandeconomicsofaid

92 Interview with Rachel Kyte, Vice President, Sustainable Development, The World Bank

DisastersandResilience

94 Rio de Janeiro: ‘Cidade Maravilhosa’ (Marvellous City)

TheRio+20hostcityisonaroll

96 Myoozes ZainabSalbi,AlannahWeston,and

JuneSarpong-threewomenhelpingtomaketheworldabetterplace

98 London 2012 – Sustainable

Olympics ByDavidStubbs,Headof

Sustainability,LondonOrganisingCommitteefortheOlympicGamesandParalympicGames(LOCOG)

Cities and Regions

Trade, Industry and Technology

Climate and Ecosystems

Education

RichardBranson

Davidde

Rothschild

TomEnders

Bono

Rio+20isaonce-in-a-generationopportunityfortheworld’sleadersandpeoplestorenewandstrengthentheircommitmentforactiontoachieveasustainablefuture.Theconferencewilladoptanaction-orientedoutcomedocument,asortofroadmaptothefuturewewant–afuturewithdynamiceconomicdevelopment,universalsocialwell-beingandahealthyenvironmentforpresentandfuturegenerations.

Based on 6000 pages of initial submissions by governments and major groups, this document will include provisions to strengthen the political commitment, to operationalise the concept of a green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication, and to implement institutional reforms to better integrate sustainable development’s inseparable economic, social and environmental pillars.

Rio+20 also aspires to be an action conference through inviting governments and stakeholders to announce and launch in Rio hundreds of new voluntary initiatives for sustainable development that would make a measurable difference to peoples’ lives and the welfare of ecosystems.

Rio+20’s Secretary-General Sha Zukang has clearly indicated that the conference has to achieve three things: integration, implementation and coherence. By its own definition, sustainable development is all about integrating its social, economic and environmental pillars. Coherence is another indispensable principle while implementing measures related to these three pillars, and to ensure that these three pillars will mutually reinforce each other.

In practice, integration and coherence are rather difficult challenges to meet, which explains in part why progress towards sustainable development was much slower than expected. After all, our governments, our international and national organisations, and even our civil society organisations, are mostly geared to specialisation. When government departments operate in a sort of silo, this has implications at the global level. In many instances, fragmentation at the national level leads to fragmentation at the international level. In a similar vein, progress in strengthening coordination at the national level will be conducive to achieving more coherence at the global level.

International agencies themselves have their own special focus areas such as health, education, agriculture, etc. We all tend to specialise and to do what we do best. But this planet’s problems and challenges do not specialise. Therefore, we must talk to each other, think holistically, and plan and act accordingly. So it is our hope that the Rio+20 outcome document’s section on the institutional framework will deliver the right solutions to reduce the fragmentation and duplication of functions among institutions, and to build a stronger international leadership in tackling major global sustainable development challenges.

Toward Sustainable Development Goals

The zero draft of the Rio+20 outcome document also includes a ‘Framework for action and follow-up’ calling for action. To accelerate and measure progress, this section proposes, after the success of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in advancing poverty eradication, to establish a set of global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) consistent with the Agenda 21. These Goals would mobilise the international community and provide a means for promoting action and monitoring progress. If they are

endorsed by world leaders, SDGs would become a key contribution of Rio+20.A key feature of SDGs should be that, while respecting national sovereignty and policy space as well as common but differentiated responsibilities, they would apply to all countries and unite them in common efforts to tackle sustainable development challenges. It is important to recall that many developing countries will continue to need financial and technological support in their efforts to align development and environment.

Our hope is that Rio+20 will deliver a firm commitment in this regard and ideally identify the critical areas for the elaboration of goals. SDGs could also provide a means for monitoring progress. Another potential area for agreement at Rio+20 should be the launching of a process for establishing internationally agreed accounting frameworks and metrics to complement gross domestic product.

Seven critical issues

At a more specific level, a number of priority issues have emerged from member states and stakeholders which might serve as the basis for identifying sustainable development goals at Rio+20. Among these, seven critical issues stand out in particular: green jobs, energy, water, oceans, sustainable cities, sustainable agriculture and food security and disaster risk reduction.

GreenJobsandSocialInclusion

We have made progress on the social pillar of sustainable development, but it still remains weak. Job creation - creating decent work - is a big challenge facing all countries today. Unemployment is a

Rio+20: Integration, Implementation and Coherence for a Sustainable Future

Rio+20 is a once-in-a-generation opportunity

ByNikhilSeth,Director,DivisionforSustainableDevelopment,UNDivisionofEconomicandSocialAffairs

© n

adiy

a_se

rgey

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

©LaiQuo

cAnh

/Shu

tterstock.com

6

scourge not only for those without work, but for their families too and society. The economic recession has taken a toll on both the quantity and quality of jobs. For the 190 million unemployed, and for over 500 million job seekers over the next 10 years, labour markets are vital not only for the production and generation of wealth, but equally for its distribution. It is also crucial that work is geared to the needs of the natural environment. ‘Green jobs’ are positions in agriculture, industry, services and administration that, while providing decent livelihoods, will contribute to preserving or restoring the quality of the environment. Decent work needs to be accompanied by adequate social protection.

SustainableEnergyforAll

Energy access and energy security are critical priorities. Energy poverty is still widespread in Africa and South Asia. Some 1.4 billion people still lack access to electricity. Almost twice that number relies on the traditional use of biomass for cooking. United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is leading a Sustainable Energy for All initiative to ensure universal access to modern energy services, to improve efficiency and increase use of renewable sources.

Water

Clean, accessible water for all is an essential part of the world we want to live in. There is sufficient fresh water on the planet to achieve this dream. Every year, due to bad economics or poor infrastructure, millions of people, most of them children, die from diseases associated with inadequate water supply, sanitation and hygiene. Water scarcity, poor water quality and inadequate sanitation negatively impact food security, livelihood choices and educational opportunities for poor families across the world. Drought afflicts some of the world’s poorest countries, worsening hunger and malnutrition. By 2050, at least one in four people is likely to live in a country affected by chronic or recurring shortages of fresh water.

Cities

Cities are concentrations of human energy and creativity. They embody both the source of sustainable development problems and the laboratories for

solving them. Most of the developing world’s population will live in cities and towns by 2020. Three-quarters of the developed world’s population already do. This means that urban planners and managers, transport planners, real estate developers, architects and engineers all have a crucial role in shaping a sustainable planet. The world’s mayors and local authorities are among the most critical stakeholders to come to Rio. We look forward to seeing their concrete initiatives to scale up and build on the valuable work that they have already done, notably through establishing their own local Agenda 21s.

DisastersandResilience

Disasters caused by earthquakes, floods, droughts, hurricanes, tsunamis, etc., have devastating impacts on people, environments and economies. But resilience - the ability of people and places to withstand such impacts and to quickly recover - remains possible. Smart choices help us recover from disasters, while poor choices make us more vulnerable. These choices relate to how we grow our food, where and how we build our homes, how our financial system works, what we teach in schools and more. With a quickening pace of natural disasters taking a greater toll on lives and property, and a higher degree of concentration of human settlements, a smart future means planning ahead and staying alert.

Oceans

The world’s oceans are too heavily exploited and too little managed. The dire state of many fisheries is hard evidence. Problems plaguing the oceans include overfishing and destructive fishing, loss of biodiversity, including the serious decline and depletion of certain fish stocks (e.g. tuna, cod, haddock, etc.), ocean acidification, ocean warming, coral reef destruction, watershed-based and marine-based pollution, including accidental oil spills and radioactive water from nuclear accidents as well as invasive species from ballast water.

FoodandSustainableAgriculture

It is time to rethink how we grow, share and consume our food. If done right, agriculture, forestry and fisheries can provide nutritious food for all and generate decent incomes, while supporting people-centred rural development and protecting the environment. But right now, our soils, freshwater, oceans, forests and biodiversity are being rapidly degraded. Climate change is putting even more pressure on the resources we depend on. A profound change of the global food and agriculture system is needed if we are to nourish today’s 925 million hungry and the additional 2 billion people expected by 2050.

Conclusion

This Conference must revive the ‘spirit of Rio.’ It should give new impetus to achieve ratification of and universal participation in all the treaties and conventions promoting the integration of the three pillars of sustainable development, including those relating to human rights, such as workers rights and rights of women and youth, as well as to natural resources, oceans and seas and land use.

Above all, Rio+20 must provide the roadmap to the future we want – a future with dynamic economic development, universal social well-being and a healthy environment for present and future generations. Rio+20 must be first and foremost an ‘implementation’ conference. A compelling political document must be accompanied by actions. Our hope is that all states and stakeholders also come to Rio+20 ready to announce and launch new voluntary initiatives for sustainable development that will make a measurable difference to peoples’ lives and the welfare of ecosystems.

Rio+20 must be first and foremost an implementation conference

Mr. Nikhil Seth, Director of the Division for Sustainable Development at UN DESA

©Luiz Rocha/Shutterstock.com

7

InJune2012,Rio+20willprovideauniqueopportunitytoscaleupactions,andastheofficialcoordinatorforbusinessandindustryinRio,theBusinessActionforSustainableDevelopment(BASD)isengagingwithgovernmentsandotherstakeholderstoencouragecompaniesofallsizestoadoptsustainabilityapproaches.

Companies around the world have placed sustainability at the top of their agendas, realising the growing significance and urgency of global environmental, social and economic challenges. Using science and technology to stimulate innovation and investment for green growth, the private

sector is contributing substantially to sustainable development.

Private sector engagement in policy development and implementation is indeed critical to advance global partnerships for sustainable development.

Business is a central player in green growth and sustainability, and we welcome the opportunity to engage substantively in moving ahead to Rio+20. Yet, it is imperative that governments provide clear policies and regulatory frameworks in order to support and advance the role of business in sustainability. Such a framework will maximise the business potential in providing solutions for sustainable development.

Business creates shared economic and societal value

Business is an essential component of all societies in all countries. Most people around the world count on the business sector for their employment and livelihood, whether self-employed, entrepreneurs, farmers, or employees. The contributions of businesses of all shapes and sizes – small, medium-sized and large multi-national and state owned enterprises – are indispensable

for the achievement of sustainable development, both globally and locally, across the social, economic and environmental dimensions.

Yet, beyond business, it is essential that we green all sectors in all countries. Business already has the products and solutions which are waiting to be diffused. However, what is needed is for governments to recognise this and support both flexible regulatory and voluntary policy frameworks as well as collaboration on a much broader scale.

The core function of business is to provide the products and services required by society, by bringing together

Kris Gopalakrishnan Chairman, Business Action for Sustainable Development (BASD) 2012

The core function of business is to provide the products and services required by society

©C

laire

Tur

ner

8

natural, human, and financial resources in efficient and productive ways. In doing this, businesses contribute to the realisation of a green and inclusive economy - alleviating poverty, raising living standards, and ultimately improving human well-being.

Government will only be able to achieve the objectives of poverty alleviation, greener economies and sustainable development by enabling business to fulfill these functions in society.

Business in general has made tremendous progress over the past 20 years, in terms of awareness, engagement, and action. Progressive businesses of all sizes are leading by example. They are committing themselves to sustainable operations and products. They are reducing environmental impacts across more inclusive value chains. They are increasing energy, water and resource use efficiency. They are investing in low-carbon and renewable energy. They are combating corruption and promoting social equality.

As businesses innovate and develop new, more sustainable produce and services, they often find themselves acting faster than governments’ own actions and regulations. This generates some progress, but not on the scale required to address our global challenges, and in no way reduces their need for good governance and clear and appropriate policy.

Shared responsibility and partnerships between business, governments and civil society will realise green growth

Sustainable development and the greening of our economies, is a shared responsibility that will require collaborative action between all actors in society – business, governments, civil society, and consumers.

Business cannot succeed in a society that fails. It is equally true that society cannot achieve sustainability without business as a committed solutions provider.

Strong partnerships with governments, who have the responsibility to provide the supporting policy frameworks, will make it possible for business to deliver solutions for a green economy. At the same time, partnerships with civil society are essential to create trust, and to support the substantial transformations on the pathway to sustainability. In short, we are all in this together.

We support the practical and integrated approach taken by the Rio+20 process

to date, building on past progress and complementary activities. The recognition that business has a key role to play in helping to achieve the goals of sustainable development is an important step.

Business is the primary tool for the investment and action needed to reach a sustainable future, and is ready to play its part. We already have the majority of the technologies, financial resources, and management skills necessary to make this happen. Businesses around the world are investing in innovative products, processes, technologies, and services that deliver sustainable solutions and green our economies. So how can we move forward, at the pace and scale necessary to achieve a sustainable future?

In particular, business needs to be an active and constructive participant in the design of the institutional architecture moving forward. As the primary solution provider for green, inclusive economies, business must have a formal role in the governance functions that emerge from the Rio+20 process.

Rio+20 provides a unique opportunity for business and others to scale up actions

On June 19 in Rio, BASD will host a ‘Business Day.’ The event will bring together a variety of business, government and NGO participants, and will address both sector and cross-cutting issues.

As the final input from the business community before the Rio+20 Conference starting the next day, the Business Day will be essential in engaging business and government leaders from around the world in a series of discussions to address the challenge of achieving scale in sustainable development.

Since 1992, business has been leading the way, but again, the transition to a sustainable future, overcoming poverty and greening of our economies, is a shared responsibility. We need to address the interconnected social, environmental, and economic challenges of sustainable development.

There is a real urgency to make faster progress than has been achieved over the past 20 years. The BASD 2012 coalition, with its many thousands of member companies and associations, stands ready to support, build, scale, and accelerate cooperative initiatives in Rio+20 and beyond to achieve sustainable development.

We are approaching Rio+20 at a key juncture for business and industry to be recognised as leaders in implementing sustainable practices. Smart policy that engages the private sector can bring about widespread, global action supporting sustainability, green growth and poverty eradication.

There is a real urgency to make faster progress than has been achieved over the past 20 years

©Toria/Shutterstock.com

©Toria/Shu

tterstock.com

9

The UN Conference on Sustainable Development, also known as Rio+20, aims to put the world on a more sustainable course. With over a billion people lacking access to safe drinking water, food and electricity, a majority of the world’s ecosystems in decline, and in the face of a changing climate and growing populations, there has never been greater urgency to act. If left unaddressed, these momentous challenges threaten the foundation of the global economy and any hope of advances in development and poverty reduction.

Yet, agreement and solutions have not been easy to come by – even as business, civil society and governments are collaborating more closely than ever before. Progress is stymied by a range of factors, including the complex, global nature and interconnection of sustainability challenges; a short-term focus in the political and financial realms which yields policies and incentives contrary to long-term viability; and a lack of accounting for externalities. At the most fundamental level, governance failures and corruption pose an enormous obstacle, often in those countries that need to strengthen their economies, societies and natural environments the most.

Rio+20 is an opportunity to collectively address this impasse and unlock the will of all actors. Collaboration, ingenuity and experimentation will be essential, as will the courage to move from the status quo toward a more sustainable future.

Business Must be a Part of the Solution

Companies around the world are recognising the material challenges created by global environmental, social

and economic issues. For instance, market disturbances, civil unrest or ecological strains in any corner of the world can have far-reaching impacts on value chains and capital flows, as well as on productivity and public opinion.

As a result, there is greater awareness than ever before of the ways in which the private sector – business and investors – can help advance sustainable development on a broad scale, in line with the Rio+20 agenda. Collaborative, serious and solution-oriented business engagement is critical and can help ensure that the Rio Conference will inspire comprehensive action.

However, companies are not only viewing sustainability issues from a risk management perspective. The business case for sustainability is increasingly driven by the notion that a commitment to greater responsibility can breed new and viable business opportunities – particularly associated with green growth and ‘base-of-the-pyramid’ approaches.

Two decades ago, when the United Nations hosted the Earth Summit in Rio, few companies were exploring their social and environmental impacts. Today, there are thousands of businesses advancing corporate sustainability through a number of global initiatives. The United Nations Global Compact is the world’s largest, with nearly 7,000 business signatories in 134 countries – representing approximately 50 million employees, and nearly every industry sector and business size.

Companies participating in the UN Global Compact commit to take steps to respect and support human rights, ensure decent working conditions, safeguard and restore the environment, fight corruption, and enact good corporate governance. They also pledge to report publicly on their progress. Through Global Compact Local Networks in 100 countries, companies are also convening and acting on sustainability issues at the local level.

Promising and progressive work is underway. The UN Global Compact’s engagement platforms – on climate and energy, water, human rights, women’s empowerment, children, labour, anti-

Corporate Sustainability Leadership:A Framework for Action at Rio+20 and BeyondGeorg Kell, Executive Director, UN Global Compact

Companies around the world are recognising the material challenges created by global environmental, social and economic issues

©K

onst

antin

L/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

10

corruption, supply chain, peace and partnerships for development – are developing guidance and best practices to fill gaps and assist implementation by companies. Increasingly, companies are pursuing collective action, aiming for transformative impact on systemic issues, such as corruption, children’s rights or gender inequality. At the same time, the UN Global Compact is closely linked to the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) initiative – with 900 investors from 47 countries managing assets up to US$ 30 trillion – and the Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME) initiative – with over 400 academic institutions in 76 countries. These sister initiatives bring hundreds of mainstream investors and business schools into the fold of corporate sustainability – in Rio and beyond.

A Call for Corporate Sustainability Leadership

Despite positive developments and shifting trends, sustainability is still not a strategic priority for most of the world’s companies. Even among Global Compact participants, just one quarter consider their efforts to be at an advanced level, suggesting that a very small percentage of the broader business community is at the leading edge of sustainability practice.

Companies point to a number of systemic barriers to implementation, namely lack of incentives from markets and non-conducive regulatory or political environments. Likewise, moving from isolated actions to an integrated sustainability management approach remains a serious challenge, especially when it involves subsidiaries and suppliers. Another problem is that still too many companies treat sustainability

as a public relations exercise, with little intent to make meaningful strategic or operational changes. And finally, many lobbying efforts by, or on behalf of business, continue to conflict with a company’s stated values, lack transparency and take a lowest-common-denominator approach, rather than pursuing long-term interests.

In light of these obstacles, a new level of corporate performance will be needed in order to build more robust and inclusive global markets, and help deliver on the sustainability promise. Companies everywhere are called on to do more of what is sustainable and put an end to what is not.

Increasing the scale and impact of sustainability efforts globally will involve reaching companies that have yet to embrace corporate responsibility, motivating less-advanced companies to deepen their commitment and efforts, and inspiring front runners to

lead the way to the next generation of sustainability performance.

Framework for Action at Rio+20 and Beyond

Rio+20 provides a unique and powerful platform to unleash implementation, innovation and collaboration by business that advances sustainability on a massive scale. To do so, economic incentive structures must be realigned so that corporate sustainability is valued and profitable.

To support greater scale and quality of corporate sustainability, governments in Rio are called upon to take action in three distinct areas:

1) Build effective policy frameworks to support corporate sustainability

2) Strengthen the modalities for corporate sustainability implementation

3) Advance sustainability issues through private sector practices, innovation and collaboration

In many cases, transformative solutions exist – with the proven ability to have profound impacts on areas as diverse as energy access and efficiency, emissions reductions, water security, corruption and gender equality. But most are not supported in ways that allow their potential to be realised. With the right incentives, enabling environment and means of implementation, the private sector will make significant contributions to sustainable development for generations to come.

economic incentive structures must be realigned so that corporate sustainability is valued and profitable

©To

m W

ang/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

©l i

g h

t p

o e

t/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

11

ByFelixDodds,ExecutiveDirector,StakeholderForumandMichaelStrauss,ExecutiveDirector,EarthMedia

“TheUNoncedealtonlywithgovernments.Butnowweknowthatpeaceandprosperitycannotbeachievedwithoutpartnershipsinvolvinggovernments,internationalorganisations,thebusinesscommunityandcivilsociety.Intoday’sworld,wedependoneachother.”

(Annan, 1999)

Where it Began – the 1992 Earth Summit

In recent years, it has become something of a given - indeed, verging on cliché - that every significant new national or international issue that is urgently addressed by government must include a component of ‘robust’ multi-stakeholder involvement. But that model didn’t exist before it was invented two decades ago at the United Nations’ original ‘Earth Summit’.

The extent of the role that stakeholders would eventually play might not even have been fully anticipated in 1992, when the idea of active participation by the independent sector first was reflected in a UN document. At UNCED (UN Conference on Environment and Development), Agenda 21 – the summit’s extraordinary blueprint for how to move towards a sustainable planet – framed those stakeholder sectors as the Major Groups. The nine identified then were Youth and Children, Business and Industry, NGOs, Local Authorities, Trade Unions and Workers, Indigenous Peoples, Science and Technology, Women, and Farmers.

It was a linguistically-awkward and epistemologically-inconsistent series of categories, but it contained the vast

majority of those not-governmental players who were increasingly active in defining governance policy – and whose cooperation was understood to be essential if the world was to achieve a transition to sustainable technologies and practices.

Since 1992 there has been a plethora of experiments in stakeholder participation at the local, subnational and global government levels, not to mention the growth of stakeholder consultations with business and industry, collectively and individually.

Indeed, the last twenty years have shown that much of the world may be in the middle of a transition from a purely Madisonian (or, representative) form of democracy towards Jeffersonian (or, participatory) democracy. If so, we may now be in a period of hybrid or parallel models that include what might be called stakeholder democracy. Stakeholder democracy is the idea that involving a full range of societal actors, in all their social and economic roles, will result in better-informed decisions being taken. It should result in those stakeholders thereby feeling more ownership of the outcome, and then being more active in the delivery of policy on the ground, often in partnership with governments and each other.

The last twenty years has seen a trend towards increasing disillusionment with

all levels of government, often resulting in political immobilisation. Stakeholder democracy offers a platform that could help give governments the political support to address the difficult decisions that need to be made now and in the near future to ensure the viability, equitability and sustainability of life on this planet.

One of the key differences between governments and stakeholders is that stakeholders are not limited by national boundaries. Organisations such as Friends of the Earth, Oxfam, Third World Network, La Via Campesina, the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, ITUC and the WBCSD are active in many countries either through international membership, parallel autonomous national chapters, or working in multinational coalitions with other organisations. By doing so, they can to some extent bring together global and local perspective in a way government cannot. And where better to express that than within the processes of the United Nations?

Stakeholders and the UN

Experiments in how to integrate stakeholder views in the UN have now been tested. These include multi-stakeholder dialogues with governments at the UN Commission on Sustainable Development, high-level hearings at the GA process for the MDGs, stakeholder panels providing input at UNEP, and seats at the table to enter text at Habitat II. These are all what are considered soft engagements, without stakeholders having votes, and, except for Habitat II, not fully engaged in developing the output document by providing text.

Rio+20, Stakeholders and Democracy

stakeholders are not limited by national boundaries

Felix Dodds, Executive Director, Stakeholder Forum Michael Strauss, Executive Director, Earth Media

©re

d-f

enik

s/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

©Le

s S

chol

z/N

AS

A/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

12

Of course, the involvement of stakeholders isn’t entirely new. The International Labour Organisation (ILO), established in 1919, has a tripartite governing body composed of 28 government representatives, 14 workers’ representatives, and 14 employers’ representatives. It has functioned effectively and has even been looked at as a model for changing global governance. However, the ILO model was never replicated on the international level.

Another example was the establishment of the UNAIDS Board in 1996 which has five representatives, and five alternates represent the perspectives of civil society; these are non-voting members. UNAIDS was the first United Nations programme to have formal civil society representation on its governing body.It is probably not surprising therefore that the Aarhus Convention – a convention dealing with public participation agreed by the UN Economic Commission for Europe, which flowed directly from the Rio Declaration Principle 10 – allows NGOs the status of ‘non-voting participants’ during negotiations. It has evolved to let NGOs basically participate in negotiating processes. An environmental representative can also sit on the Aarhus Convention’s coordinating bureau.

A final example is in the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM), a process set up after the WSSD, which also involves stakeholders sitting in its governing body and in negotiations as equal partners.

By the mid 2000s, in much of the sustainable development arena the concept of ‘Major Groups’ had replaced ‘civil society’ as the organising principle of participation in the United Nations.

The nine stakeholder sectors selected in 1992 are not the only stakeholders that could or should be involved in the process. Among the obvious ‘missing sectors’ that have been suggested are the faith community, the education community, subnational governments, parliamentarians, regional government and the soon to be numerically exploding demographic of older people. But amending the UN process to add such categories now would face typical political inertia, plus the real obstacle of the sheer number of sectors becoming logistically too unwieldy to provide adequate time for each.

Interestingly, at the time, the decision on selecting those nine wasn’t taken with an extensive discussion of the possible implications in the future. Rather, it was a more mundane exercise in pragmatic

geopolitical give and take. The first group included was women, because at the summit the international caucus of women’s environmental organisations had played an early and highly effective role in advocating issues and mobilising public support.

Adopting multi-stakeholder processes does not mean that everything will become easy. But it is clear that the present representative democracy model is encountering serious obstacles. Stakeholder democracy enables a way for more voices to be heard, and for more individuals motivated by cooperation to act. Kadar Asmal, the former Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry, of South Africa, put it well in 2000:

“Apartingwarning:(conductinganMSP)isneveraneat,organised,tidyconcerto.Moreoften,theprocessbecomesamessy,loosely-knit,exasperating,sprawlingcacophony.Likepluralistdemocracy,itistheabsoluteworstformofconsensusbuilding,exceptforalltheothers.”

Earth Summit 2012

A number of possible new institutions are currently being discussed as possible results from the Earth Summit in June 2012. It is possible that UNEP – which was an output from the 1972 Stockholm UN Conference on Human Environment – will be upgraded. In the area of sustainable development it’s clear that the UN Commission on Sustainable Development – which was the main institutional driver to take Agenda 21 forward from the 1992 Earth Summit – has run its course. For the process to have effectiveness there will be a new body for sustainable development, either at the level of ECOSOC or the UN General Assembly.

A major question for stakeholders will be what role they will have in these new or reformed institutions. Will they be brought into the decision making process? Will they be involved in designing even further the implementation of the global agreements?

The Rio Conference in 2012 will not only be about new institutions. It will be about governments, and for the first time stakeholders, making commitments to take forward the outcomes from the Summit. It will be an ideas festival which will echo through the next decade as its promotion of effective ideas and good practice will be replicated throughout the planet.

Unless there are significant changes, future generations will surely decide that ours has been the irresponsible generation. They will look upon 1992 to 2012 as a lost twenty years, during which we could have laid the foundations for a more sustainable world. Instead, we have increased unsustainable consumption patterns in developed countries and exported them to developing ones, with increasingly negative and destructive impacts on the world’s environment and on poor people. We knew the problems, we knew most of the answers – but we failed to scale them up to accomplish what was needed.

That cannot be allowed to happen. Rio+20 must be the start of a new democracy and about implementing what is agreed, together.

FelixDoddsandMichaelStrauss,withMauriceStronghaveanewbookout:‘OnlyOneEarth–TheLongRoadviaRiotoSustainableDevelopment’.

The nine stakeholder sectors selected in 1992 are not theonly stakeholders that could or should be involved

13

How does the ICC Business Charter for Sustainable

Development help businesses to integrate the environmental, social and economic pillars of sustainable development into their practices? 

Business has already demonstrated considerable success in integrating

sustainability into its practices, for example via voluntary codes such as the ICC Business Charter for Sustainable Development, which has provided thousands of companies, large and small around the world with the basis for sound environmental management to integrate the three pillars of sustainable development.

In addition, since the UN global framework on sustainable development, called Agenda 21 (1992), ICC has been contributing and participating in all sessions of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD). ICC continues to be a committed key partner and the voice of global business in main intergovernmental processes on topics such as the green economy, climate change, sustainable consumption and production or biodiversity. ICC strongly encourages corporate responsibility initiatives, and supports the notion that responsible, long-term oriented entrepreneurship is the driving force for sustainable economic development and for providing the managerial, technical, and financial resources needed to meet social and environmental challenges.

The Framework for Responsible Environmental Marketing Communica-tions, Guide to responsible sourcing, Model Contract for Technology Transfer and Incoterms® Rules, an internationally recognised standard used worldwide in international and domestic contracts for the sale of goods, are just some of the tools that ICC has produced.

Where do you perceive the greatest gaps to be in respect

of implementing agreements prior to Rio+20 and in which areas do you think the most significant progress has been made?

In 1992 the role and contribution of the private sector towards

sustainable development was not well understood or accepted. Today, its role as a constructive partner and engine of growth and sustainable development is

widely recognised, as are the benefits that business is bringing: creating jobs, building skills and developing new technologies.

Over the last 20 years, we have seen considerable successes and we can confirm our belief in the vital role that business plays in achieving the objectives of sustainable development in collaboration with governments and civil society.

Agenda 21 and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI) have defined a broad terrain of necessary areas for action. Recognising that there are growing financial constraints and limited resources, the challenge at Rio 2012 will be for governments and stakeholders to set priorities and deploy resources efficiently and cost-effectively. As critical as good policies are, without

enabling markets and frameworks, their effectiveness will be limited. Business encourages governments to consider the importance of the contexts of open trade and markets, rule of law and other necessary elements for successful business endeavours.

Today, there is ample evidence that business, with its resources and capabilities, has a vital role to play in helping achieve the goals related to sustained economic growth in an environmentally and socially responsible manner. Business provides conceptual solutions to sustainable development that focus on concrete actions and deliverable results.

Which corporate solutions to date do you think have been

most successful in creating a more sustainable world?

From a business perspective, the starting point of strengthening its

contribution is in national sustainable development efforts, that build on compliance with national laws, in associated business planning and management systems and in implementation wherever a company operates. These can include and be reinforced by a number of additional voluntary approaches, including:

•Partnerships with governments, inter-governmental organisations, and NGOs

•Voluntary codes like ICC Business Charter for Sustainable Development or the Global Compact

•Voluntary sectoral approaches such as the chemical sector’s ‘Responsible Care’

• ‘Soft law’ approaches, like the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises

•Reporting initiatives, such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)

•Standards and guidance, such as ISO 14000 and ISO 26000

In order to become a functional economic system, the Green Economy needs however to become ingrained in international and global markets and operationalised in the market and business balance sheets. Economy-wide approaches should be adopted that include receptive markets for delivering business value and commercially viable products and services along the value chain.

How can the potential for a green economy to lead to green

protectionism be addressed?

Gerard Worms, Chairman, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)

“Business is suffering from a crisis of confidence”

©Marafon

a/Shutterstock.com

14

We are in a time of multiple and interlocking crises: climate change,

food, water, energy and of course the economic crisis. It is in this context that we will meet in Rio. Business is suffering from a crisis of confidence created by volatile economic conditions. One negative consequence of this has been to delay business investment at a time when jobs are badly needed. The environmental crises also present similar challenges – they stem from complex issues that lead to a lack of confidence and leadership, which hinders private investment. The economic crisis has certainly led governments to pursue austerity measures and made it difficult for hard pressed national treasuries to invest in a green economy. Moreover, it has also provided fertile ground for the rise of economic nationalism and protectionism – which hinders solutions in an interdependent world.

There is an urgent need to rebuild business’s faith that the crisis and enabling conditions for green growth will be addressed effectively. The first step is to restore confidence and stabilise the world economy in order to reduce volatility and to encourage business investment.

In terms of effectively addressing the challenges of sustainable

development it will be necessary to garner international support for developing countries in relation to technology cooperation, capacity development and finance. To what extent do you believe this is already taking place?

With an expected rise in global population from 6.5 to 8 billion, a

50% increase in energy demand and a doubling of economic output in the next 25 years, it is critically important to marshal the necessary technological resources to address sustainability challenges and increase the pace of technological innovation, cooperation and dissemination.

In order to move forward, it is crucial to green all sectors in all countries and advance resource efficiency and life cycle approaches. We consider improvements in existing processes (manufacturing technologies, jobs, logistics, research, etc) to be as important as launching new products and technologies. Both approaches should be pursued simultaneously for a step change. It should be noted that business operates across global supply and value chains and greening all stages along the life cycle of its products and services is becoming a guiding principle for many leading companies and sectors.

The actions needed to transition towards a green economy vary from sector to sector, value chain, and from country-to-country, depending on national circumstances. For example, near-term priorities may differ significantly, especially for least developed countries.

However, enhanced technology development and deployment will be particularly important for developing countries, acknowledging that the world population will keep growing in the coming years and decades, particularly in urbanised areas and in developing and emerging countries. In order to accelerate the development and deployment of key technologies, new financing approaches will be required. Carbon financing will bridge some of the gap, but multilateral development financing and other policy incentives will help accelerate deployment.

Do you consider that a recurring culture of corruption and unrest

in some global quarters prevents meaningful social, economic and environmental sustainability from being delivered in those areas until

such time that these issues are addressed?

Corruption and unrest are prime obstacles to economic and social

development and environmental sustainability around the world. Achieving improved conditions for transparency and integrity in doing business in all countries is of paramount importance for private and public sector actions in support of implementation of a sustainable development.

The right combination of rights, responsibilities, laws, incentives and agreements can encourage environmental protection and rational use of natural resources. This will help to ensure the sustainability of economic activities that rely on these resources. National and international organisations can be instrumental in the management of these laws and norms. The private and public sector can work together in fighting corruption and thus help save for example scare resources in this way.

Increasingly companies are demonstrating leadership by implementing effective anti-corruption programmes within their companies. ICC’s 2011 Rules on Combating Corruption provide all the elements for an effective anti-corruption compliance programme. Common features include policies on bribes, kickbacks, extortion, third parties, facilitation payments and money laundering.

Collective action and public-private partnerships are growing in importance as a joint approach to fighting corruption, including through government recognition or endorsement of private sector anti-corruption programmes.

www.iccwbo.org“We consider improvements in existing processes to be as important as launching new products and technologies”

Mr. Gerard Worms, Chairman, ICC

15

Eighty years from now we will celebrate the centenary of the first Rio Summit held in 1992. It will be a momentous occasion. Momentous because in all probability, we will have either achieved a global state of social justice in a system which operates within the boundaries of nature, or we will be in the final throws of our own extinction.

I am an optimist, so I think it will be the former scenario and not the latter. My optimism is guided by a sense that we are at the start of a profound revolution in our approach to sustainability.

That revolution heralds the end of the era of incrementalism. For fifty years we have built our approach on the idea that the game is to be better each year than we were last year and to broadly check how we stack up against our peers. This peer analysis has been all consuming at the level of countries, at the level of companies and at the level of individuals.

In the incremental era we asked questions like, “How do companies operate more sustainably as we pursue an agenda of global GDP growth?” Now we are asking, “How do we redesign our economic system to deliver the possibility of nine billion of us living well within the capacity of the natural systems on which we depend for our very existence?”

We are starting to recognise and engage with the fact that we only have one planet to live on.

So in this new era it’s not about incremental change, it’s about absolutes.

And for companies, long term survival is

no longer guaranteed by seeking to be the best in the world. Thriving in the 21st century is about asking how can we be the best for the world?

Going up the scale to countries, the era of absolutes has the potential to transform political discourse. Here, however, a health warning is necessary, in that entrenched dominant institutions of power are perhaps the least equipped to change in any systemic transformation, and the nation state represents the most entrenched institutional framework of our time. It is the pinnacle of the system we created in the 20th century. This is why at UN gatherings we still have a mindset of negotiation and comparison dominating even the absolutes which confront us such as our relationship with nature.

It is at a personal level that the move from striving to be the best in the world to being the best for the world is perhaps the most challenging and the most important.

The solution lies in the education arena. The good news is that across the world young people are growing up with a deep understanding that our global system operates in contradiction to the goals of social justice and environmental sustainability.

This is creating the conditions for a shift from a society of incremental change to one of boundaries and absolutes. Here are some of the goals we might focus on:

1. All economic processes are closed loops where every waste product in one cycle is an input into another – something nature has been doing for 4 billion years on this planet alone.

2. Every one of us (yes, all seven billion) have a right to live in dignity – a minimum universal global income?

3. Success beyond this baseline is measured by things that really matter

to human beings – the quality of relationships, service to others, living in a community, meaningful work, learning for the sake of learning and connectedness to nature.

4. All energy comes from renewable sources – not one drop of oil or coal (precious resources for making things for generations to come) is wasted to provide energy to provide light, heat or power.

There are many more such goals. They are all achievable within an economic system the size of our current one. It does not need to get any bigger – it needs to get cleverer.

The new role of the business school is to act on behalf of society to develop a generation of globally responsible leaders and managers equipped with the knowledge, skills and tools to harness the economic system to deliver the kind of world we would really like to live in (again all seven billion of us).

This is a really exciting time for academics because the research challenge to find answers to how we change individual behavior, organisational performance and the overall economic system to align with what the world really needs from a social and environmental perspective is immense. Just contemplate the fact that we simply don’t know how to run a global financial system which is not predicated on perpetual growth. An extraordinary indictment on one hand, but seen positively, an amazing opportunity.

The release of GRLI’s 50+20 Vision: Management Education for the World at Rio+20 is, we hope, a contribution from a global partnership of companies and business schools to addressing this challenge in management education. It sets out how this change can happen. We think it’s time to drop the incremental approach and move from a mentality of being the best in the world, to being the best for the world.

www.grli.org

From the Best ‘in’ the World to the Best ‘for’ the World Mark Drewell, CEO, Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative (GRLI)

in this new era it’s not about incremental change, it’s about absolutes

© L

isa

A/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

16

Which corporate solutions do you think have been most

successful, to date, in a creating a more sustainable world?

There are many examples of solutions companies have

contributed that have helped the move towards sustainable development. I would say that business in general has made tremendous progress over the past 20 years, in terms of sustainability awareness, engagement, and action – and this is not only coming from big companies; smaller enterprises have engaged as well.

An area where great strides have been made is in reducing environmental impacts, and I believe eco-efficiency has very much helped companies become more environmentally-friendly. The WBCSD had coined the term “eco-efficiency” in the early 90s to describe the positive connections between economic and ecological efficiency; in simple terms ‘creating more value with less resources’. Clearly, eco-efficiency has enabled companies to increase energy, water and resource use efficiency and reduce waste and recover used materials. Also, it has pushed them to replace end-of-pipe approaches to pollution by cleaner, more efficient technology throughout production chains, thereby moving from linear throughput thinking to systems and recycling approaches.

Another striking example of business solutions is in the area of poverty alleviation. Clearly, this was not an area one could have thought about two decades ago. It started with discussions around Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and what this means for business. In fact, the question was raised as to whether this was even something business should be involved in? Today,

the situation is very different and companies understand that as major economic players, they have a CSR responsibility and that it is not in conflict with being profitable. In fact, a number of companies are now engaged in inclusive business, using market forces to find solutions to foster development and alleviate poverty in developing countries.

How is the WBCSD working to persuade captains of industry

across the board that sustainable development is inextricably linked with economic success?

Two years ago, the WBCSD launched ‘Vision 2050’, a report

that outlines a roadmap to nine billion people living well and within the planet’s resources by mid-century. Every one of these individuals will want access to education, healthcare, energy, communication and consumer goods. And each will require food, clean water, shelter, and transportation. Not only do we believe this vision is doable, but it also offers great business opportunities, in particular in buildings and transforming cities, infrastructure, and lifestyles, as well as in improving bio-capacity and the management of ecosystems. Enabling these changes will create opportunities for finance, information and communication technology and partnerships.

In short, companies that take on the challenge, developing the technologies and the markets necessary to provide for one planet’s worth of people with one planet’s worth of resources, will prosper. Altogether, the new business opportunities for companies that lead with a sustainable development agenda are estimated to be worth approximately USD 6 trillion. I would say captains of industry are receptive to this message!

In parallel, we also see that a green race has emerged around the world in recent years. Governments and companies have started to realise that to be successful in the future, they need to meet the demand for services and products in a resource-constrained world. And this recognition is happening in some unexpected

places. The United States has lost the top position for attracting clean energy investments and China and other Asian countries are now moving aggressively to capture the lead.

What measurable enhancements to the existing institutional

framework stemming from discussions at Rio+20 does the WBCSD hope to see that will allow for the effective integration of the three pillars of sustainable development; namely ‘environmental ‘social’ and ‘economic’?

Let me give a bit of background here. The core function of business

is to provide the products and services society requires, by bringing together natural, human, and financial resources in efficient and productive ways. In doing this, companies contribute to the realisation of a green and inclusive economy – alleviating poverty, raising living standards, and improving human well-being. Governments will only be able to achieve the objectives of poverty alleviation, greener economies and sustainable development by making it possible for business to fulfil these functions. Therefore, one of the WBCSD’s key messages to governments in Rio will be that business needs to be an active and constructive participant in the design of the institutional architecture that emerges from this process.

Companies have already developed many great solutions but in order to make a greater impact, we need to scale up and share these solutions. This involves both encouraging more companies to participate in sustainability programmes and ensuring sustainable solutions receive the support they need from governments and policy makers. With this in mind the WBCSD has developed a discussion paper to complement Vision 2050 called ‘Changing Pace’. This paper, which will be published in the run up to Rio+20, lays out a policy framework and an accelerator model, as well as concrete policy options to enable scaling up of the development and implementation of business solutions.

Only when governments and business and others truly start working in partnership can the pace and scale of action necessary to achieve a sustainable future be reached. As the primary solution provider for green, inclusive economies, business must have a formal role in the governance functions that emerge from the Rio+20 process.

Peter Paul Van De Wijs, Managing Director, Communications and Business Role Focus Area, World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)

we need to scale up and share these solutions

©C

hris

tian

Lage

rek/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

17

2012 ought to be a big year for sustainable investment. Calls for a more responsible approach to capitalism are growing, along with the sense that a more sophisticated understanding of investment risk – one which takes longer-term sustainability issues into account – is urgently required. In particular, the global financial crisis and other recent catastrophic events have highlighted the increasing importance of companies having business strategies that are sustainable over both the short and the long-term.

There is a growing need to ‘do more with less’ in the context of population growth, climate change and resource availability, particularly with regards to pollution and the consumption of energy and water resources. Integrating environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations into financial decisions is critical in supporting efforts to tackle the pressing issues of climate change, population growth, food security and human rights. Such an ambitious task requires a concerted response and a number of investor-led initiatives exist to encourage the switch to a greener economy for the Rio+20 Conference. Twenty years ago, the first Earth Summit highlighted the importance of the natural environment and its crucial role in sustaining life on earth. Twenty years later, investors are being urged to sign the ‘Natural Capital Declaration’ - a statement by the financial sector on its commitment to work towards integrating natural capital criteria into financial products and services. The ‘Natural Capital Declaration’ calls on governments to develop the regulatory frameworks needed to stimulate businesses to integrate, value and account for natural capital in their business operations by means of disclosure, reporting and fiscal measures. The declaration is open to signature by CEOs of willing financial institutions and

is intended to get top-level buy-in by banks, institutional investors and asset managers. It will be launched at Rio+20. Aviva has convened a Corporate Sustainability Reporting Coalition (CSRC) of more than forty global institutions, including institutional investors managing in excess of $1.6 trillion, to call for improved reporting on Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) risks at Rio+20. Markets are driven by information and if the information they receive is short term and thin, then these characteristics will define global financial markets. The coalition is therefore asking Earth Summit delegates to commit to develop a policy framework on Corporate Sustainability reporting.

Ideally, the Rio summit will result in an international commitment to develop national regulations which mandate the integration of material ESG issues into annual reports and accounts and which provide effective mechanisms for investors to hold companies to account on the quality of their ESG disclosures, including, for instance, through an advisory vote at a company’s annual general meeting. Stock exchanges also have a unique role to play in facilitating improvements in corporate sustainability reporting and performance. The Sustainable Stock Exchanges initiative has been urging all stock market listing authorities to make it a listing requirement that companies consider how responsible and sustainable their business model is. It subsequently requests companies put a forward-looking sustainability strategy to the vote at their AGM. So far, only a few a stock exchanges, such as those in South Africa, Singapore and Malaysia, have made progress. Elsewhere, there has yet to be a serious commitment to sustainability by, for example, integrating it into the guidance that they issue to companies or their listing rules.

EIRIS has a long track record of promoting sustainable investment and working with asset managers, asset owners, and stock exchanges around

the world to increase the uptake of responsible investment. Sustainability encompasses a very broad range of ESG issues and it is vital that investors consider each of these – and not just focus on environmental issues – when assessing corporate performance. At EIRIS we have recently developed a sophisticated system of sustainability ratings which enable investors to understand and asses the sustainability performance of companies. In the run up to Rio+20 we have applied our sustainability ratings to 2,063 companies worldwide to see where they have got to in tackling the various sustainability challenges they face. The good news is that there are signs that companies are making sustainability a significant part of their plans and strategies and acknowledging its importance, not only in terms of acting as good ‘corporate citizens’, but also in terms of ensuring their own long-term success. However, a significant proportion of companies are demonstrating only a limited progress on sustainability and significant progress is required across the board if companies are to address the full range of challenges they face. Big differences in sustainability performance exist at the national, regional and sectoral level, with UK and continental European companies outstripping their US and Asian counterparts, underlining the need for commitments to tackle sustainability which are agreed at the global level. If the UN conference on sustainable development is to be successful in promoting the shift to a greener and fairer economy, both companies and their investors must be fully engaged in the sustainability debate. Rio+20 offers an important opportunity to advance the concerted action needed by financial institutions, business and governments alike to support the transition to a more long-term, sustainable and resilient economy.

EIRIS (www.eiris.org) provides independent, global research on responsible investment.

How can Investors Drive the Sustainability Agenda at Rio+20? Mark Robertson, Head of Communications EIRIS

2012 ought to be a big year for sustainable investment

©Noreb

bo/Shutterstock.com

18

Energy

©egd/Shutterstock.com

©am

asterpho

tograp

her/Shu

tterstock.com

Do you feel global emissions targets are realistic in light of the

surge in population? Can one issue be addressed without the other?

There are 7 billion people now, and the UN forecasts that there will be

8 billion by 2020, and 9 billion by 2030. All of this means there will be more demands for all types of energy services, and if we continue with business as usual there will certainly be more emissions. So, the position of my agency and others, such as the European Union, is that without an energy revolution you cannot solve climate change, because 50-70% of the emissions come from energy.

Some of the recent projections suggest we’ll have another 3 billion people moving into the middle class by 2020-25. These 3 billion people, mostly from developing countries, need more televisions, more cars, more of everything. Therefore, consumption and production systems must change.

Our agency believes that in addition to an energy revolution there must also be increased attention on resource efficiency or resource productivity, because we, who have enjoyed all of the benefits of the industrial revolution for the past 150 years, cannot say to the new middle class in 20 years that they should not consume in the way we did. We must push for resource efficiency and change consumption patterns for all – this must be prominent in Rio+20 negotiations this June.

For example, UNIDO spearheads a global Industrial Energy Efficiency Programme that supports industry in reducing its energy consumption. We have seen that successful industrial energy systems optimisation can attain average efficiency gains between 15 and 30 per cent, very often with payback periods of less than 1 or 2 years. (see case study)

There is a sense in the west that the electorate is becoming more

sceptical with regards to climate science. What role do you hope Rio+20 will have in putting the issue at the forefront of people’s minds again?

Let us be careful that we don’t make Rio a conference about the

environment and climate change only. Rio is a conference about development and that’s the position of developing countries. Therefore, let us emphasise all

the aspects of sustainable development and the fact that economies need to create jobs and need to grow. We want to talk about development in its totality; women empowerment, how can we improve water resources, and the interests of many economies to lift people out of poverty. So, let us broaden it out. I don’t want Rio+20 to be captured by climate issues alone.

With the global recession, western electorates are beginning

to question the value of overseas aid. Where do you stand on the aid versus trade argument?

There is a critical role for aid, so long as the aid considers wealth

creation and structural changes for countries. Africa should do what Asia did and fight for structural change, competitiveness and trade. A typical aid-only scenario makes Africans manage poverty without reducing poverty. You cannot reduce poverty without creating wealth - that is my mantra. To create

wealth you need infrastructure, energy access, trade and competitiveness – this doesn’t come from aid money alone. Aid money can help build capacity and change policies so countries become attractive destinations for investment. Africans in particular need to look at how aid is used to leverage private finance, and in our energy related work we recognise that.

Today, the total overseas development money, bilateral and multilateral money going into energy access related activities is about $9 billion, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). To have universal access to energy as we are fighting for by 2030 you need about $48 billion per year for the next 20 years, and we believe it’s doable. As an example of that, the IEA estimates that a 2% increase in the electricity tariffs of OECD countries would generate all that money, so we’re talking about details.

Are you able to briefly explain why sustainable energy access

is so critical to safeguarding the environment?

As an example, 2.7 billion rely on biomass to create firewood and

charcoal, so they are still cutting down the trees. This in turn means that 1.5-2 million people a year are dying from indoor air pollution, which is more than are killed by malaria and HIV AIDS.

In India you have 400 million people with no access to energy and 587 million people in Africa; they rely on eco-systems for their survival. So unfortunately, because of lack of energy, in addition they are depleting the forest resources which they dearly need for food security, managing the water tables and catchment areas and so on. These are the multiple linkages we’re trying to highlight.

How many people are affected and does trade help or hinder?

Whilst I am an advocate for trade, this also puts pressure on precious

eco-systems. What’s happening now is that there’s a trading system where everyone comes in and adds to the destruction of eco-systems, because they need more raw materials from these poor countries to create the products that you and I use as higher income people. That is why we need to highlight at Rio the issues of resource efficiency and resource productivity. Otherwise, the

Dr. Kandeh Yumkella, Director-General of UNIDO and Chair of UN Energy

ENERGY

“We must push for resource efficiency and change consumption patterns for all”

©ssuapho

tos/Shutterstock.com

20

demands of companies and people will destroy eco-systems, because those of us who are well off want to maintain the same consumption patterns to which we are accustomed.

Are you able to offer examples of energy revolutions taking place

that can be used as blueprints for other countries?

Energy revolutions are taking place in some Nordic countries. In

Norway and Denmark energy is not only central to their growth strategy, it is also central to their development assistance strategies. These countries recognise that energy is the central linchpin to many development challenges. I was in Denmark last October with their new Prime Minister and green growth is central to their politics. Although they are often cited for their success in the wind industry, Denmark is one of three nations that has successfully decoupled. The economy has grown continuously for ten years, but demand for energy has been declining continuously, so one of the issues here is energy intensity where their life style hasn’t gone down, but they’ve managed to decouple economic growth from energy demand. From the example that Denmark has set, the whole EU is trying to do the same.

UNIDO’s renewable energy strategy promotes bio-energy,

small hydropower, small energy, wind

energy, marine and tidal energy. Are they taking off?

The fact that in the EU 71 per cent of new investment last year was

in renewable energy power generation demonstrates the vitality of the industry. Brazil is another good example where you see a rapid combination of renewable energy in the energy mix and the initiative of ‘Electricity for All’. The new President is picking up this initiative because she sees the connection between energy access, poverty reduction and sustainability. China also is making great moves; it is the largest solar photovoltaic producer, and already China has the largest wind market. There are also some impressive mini-revolutions in certain municipalities in the United States. What we have to do as an agency is help ramp-up or disseminate these successful models and make the case for job creation, while helping to allow new technologies to become available to developing countries to create new transformative changes.

In relation to your work the figure 1 billion people living on less than

$1 a day crops up a lot. With this in mind, are you approaching Rio+20 from an optimistic position?

Whenever there is an opportunity for global dialogue, I always feel there’s

an opportunity for optimism. It’s better that we have a global dialogue to define what ‘sustainable development’ means going forward, rather than have conflict and disagreement as we have seen at a number of previous negotiations. Poor countries are already disappointed that the Doha round of trade talks were never completed and are worried that the good building blocks achieved in previous global talks about climate change will not end up in a grand deal. However, in spite of these concerns, good building

blocks are in place and we do have some clarity about the issues. Rio gives all countries small and big an opportunity to come together, express themselves and discuss what they mean by ‘growth’ and how it includes fairness and equity. ‘Fairness’, ‘equity’ and ‘sustainability’ - these are the key issues. If we don’t have all three, there will be even bigger conflicts in the world.

What about your job causes you pride?

For me personally and for my team it is the fact that we have put energy

on the global development agenda. Five years ago people did not even want to talk about energy as it related to the Millennium goals. Thanks to my team and good cooperation from a number of major economies we got a resolution passed in the UN General Assembly declaring 2012 the ‘Year of Sustainable Energy for All.’ We also got the Secretary-General to launch his own

initiative - the only one he has launched for his second term. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s ‘Sustainable Energy for All’ initiative has set three interlinked targets to be achieved by 2030; ensuring universal access to modern energy services; doubling the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency; and doubling the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix. I am privileged to be co-chairing together with the chairman of Bank of America a high-level group that is spear-heading this effort.

So, if there’s anything I’m proud of it’s the small agency and my team making the world realise that energy is the central issue for the 21st century. We’ve put the engine for change together and we hope we get some boosters for the rocket to make it take off!

UNIDO has introduced the ‘Industrial Energy Efficiency Improvement Project’ (IEE Project) in South Africa by way of contributing to national efforts to reduce pressure on the country’s electrical distribution and generating capacity, and to reduce industry related energy consumption and industrial GHG emission intensity. It also aims to increase the cost competitiveness of South African industry, in international terms, by reducing energy related production costs. It is hoped this will lead to enhanced job security and promote job creation through increased investment capital being made available through production cost savings. The

four year project is scheduled to finish April 2014.

Highlights of the project to date include the provision of training courses to cover compressed air, pumping, steam, fans, motors and process heating and some 44 different training workshops with almost a thousand experts involved.

During the 2012-2013 period the project will be expanding its demonstration and showcase aspects, as well as building the required level of certified accreditation and auditing capacity in order to operationalise the ISO50001 Energy Management Standard.

Case study: The Industrial Energy Efficiency Improvement in South Africa Project

Dr. Kandeh Yumkella, Director-General of UNIDO

©ep

sylon_lyrae/Shu

tterstock.com

©Marafona/S

hutterstock.com

©Von Schonertagen/Shutterstock.com

21

A STRONG FUTURE REVOLVES AROUND TODAY’S STRENGTHS.

FOR 50 YEARS, OUR STRENGTH HAS COME FROM OUR VISION.The future of energy is being built on solid foundations. We’ve been working on the future since 1962. Continuously investing in research into new technologies that are able to make an increasingly sustainable form of energy available to everyone at

low cost. It’s why we’re Italy’s biggest electricity company*, and growing in 40 countries in North and South America, Europe, Africa and Asia. It’s why, for 50 years, our strength has been our solidity. enel.com*Platts Top 250 Energy Company Rankings

A STRONG FUTURE REVOLVES AROUND TODAY’S STRENGTHS.

FOR 50 YEARS, OUR STRENGTH HAS COME FROM OUR VISION.The future of energy is being built on solid foundations. We’ve been working on the future since 1962. Continuously investing in research into new technologies that are able to make an increasingly sustainable form of energy available to everyone at

low cost. It’s why we’re Italy’s biggest electricity company*, and growing in 40 countries in North and South America, Europe, Africa and Asia. It’s why, for 50 years, our strength has been our solidity. enel.com*Platts Top 250 Energy Company Rankings

Enel is recognised for its commitment to ESG (Environmental,

Social, Governance). Has this approach been compatible with economic growth?

Enel’s business plans are based on creating synergies that impact the

environment and society positively, as well as obtaining adequate financial returns. Our success as a global energy leader is linked to responsibility and ethics, as well as constant focus on social value. Our path of economic growth thrives in a framework of governance, climate change mitigation, environmental protection, social development and transparent relations with a vast base of stakeholders, including local communities and future generations, to ensure long-term sustainable growth.

Enel is widely recognised in the field of Corporate Social Responsibility

(CSR). What inspired this approach?

Today’s world requires a business community based on ethical

values, transparent behavior and respect for individuals and the environment. Multinationals need to behave and conduct their business as ‘world citizens’, working with national and supranational institutions, using their own initiative to effect positive change. Enel has embraced the concept of conducting business with these principles since the company’s inception in 1962, recognising its fundamental role as a utility in developing Italian society. Since then, Enel has become a global company and continued to build on these principles.

How is Enel’s commitment to the economic, environmental and

social pillars of sustainable development addressed?

CSR is an integral part of Enel’s commitment to sustainable

development with a comprehensive approach that envisages value creation on the economic, environmental and social level. Enel is included in the Dow Jones Sustainability and FTSE4Good indexes. 14% of Enel shares held by institutional

investors come from Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) funds. In 2011 we were the first utility ever to be admitted to the Carbon Performance Leadership Index of the Carbon Disclosure Project. We are involved in a number of social initiatives such as our partnership with the UN World Food Programme to develop a business model to generate credits for the reduction of CO2 emissions through the distribution of high-efficiency stoves in underdeveloped areas. These are some examples.

Access to sustainable energy is an essential component of a country’s

prosperity. Can Enel lead the transition to a low-carbon economy, establish inclusive social contracts and strengthen participatory politics?

Enel’s ability to lead the transition to a low-carbon economy is highlighted

in many activities. Roughly 42% of our energy production worldwide in 2011 came from clean sources with no carbon emissions, and we are active in researching and implementing technologies that will revolutionise energy over the next 20-30 years. But leading the transition to a low-carbon economy is not determined by individual company actions alone, it is a question of recognising one’s role inside a greater whole. Once this path is chosen, it becomes the work of sharing knowledge, experience and know-how where it serves most. If energy access is considered from this perspective, supplying abundant, clean and sustainable electricity is more than a service. It is the satisfaction of a basic human need at the heart of individual and community development.

How is Enel’s commitment to greater access to energy best

evidenced?

It is imperative for Enel to do its part in guaranteeing access to energy

where it is still unavailable. Energy is an irreplaceable keystone in increasing industrial and agricultural production, creating jobs, improving education and healthcare, as well as opening new opportunities for development. Yet, despite the immutable facts on energy’s crucial role in improving the human condition,

1.3 billion people in the world live without it. These people must not be left out of the energy equation. In response, Enel is developing solutions which bring the necessary infrastructure to these people directly, making them protagonists in satisfying their energy needs through programmes like Enabling Electricity, part of the UN’s 2012 Year of Sustainable Energy for All.

Where does Enel stand on the adaptation vs. mitigation debate?

We are bombarded with information on the viability or social, economic

and environmental consequences of mitigation vs. adaptation in a context that is often highly politicised. Enel’s commitment is to drastically reduce carbon intensity in power generation, prioritising the use of low-carbon technologies, as well as introducing significant quantities of renewable power generation into the global energy mix. If we continue down this path, a one-third reduction in CO2 emissions per unit of electricity generated will be possible by 2035 compared to 2008 levels, with CO2 free energy generation by 2050.

How have you met the challenge of converting abstract sustainable

goals into tangible company strategies?

I don’t believe sustainable goals are abstract. They are the fundamental

basis for creating long-term value. Whether it be a populous urban area, a rural village, a multinational corporation or a single individual, we are all decision-makers when it comes to sustainability. It is not a question of ‘converting’ the abstract, it is one of commitment, and this is perhaps nowhere better evidenced than through concrete instruments which objectively identify and report on how company strategy can blend harmoniously with sustainable goals.

What was the motivation in accepting the invitation to

participate in Global Compact LEAD?

It is a great honour to be included in Global Compact LEAD, and the

result of hard work at the forefront of sustainability and CSR models in business. Inclusion in Global Compact LEAD carries the responsibility not only of implementing the various elements necessary to adhere to the group, but also through the ‘Blueprint for Corporate Sustainability Leadership’ which acts as a guide in recording successful mechanisms so that other companies can find the structure and inspiration to make their own progress towards sustainable goals.

Fulvio Conti, CEO, Enel Enel CEO discusses the company’s pivotal role in leading the transition to a low-carbon economy

It is a great honour to be included in Global Compact LEAD

©N

AS

A/C

laire

Tur

ner

24

AGlobalParadigmShiftTowardsRenewablesisanIndispensableMilestoneforaCleanEnergyFuture

Global energy demand is rising dramatically. The industrialised world is increasingly relying on energy services available at any time and any place. China, India, Brazil and Mexico – to name just a few – are catching up and more countries are on their way, whilst some two billion people do not have regular access to modern energy sources.

Depletion of fossil and nuclear resources is accelerating. Whereas demand is rising, supply is becoming critical. Increasing scarcity and related price volatility has become a major obstacle for smooth development and has resulted in numerous conflicts and wars, whilst awareness is rising about the intolerable risks of climate change and the dangers of nuclear energy. Development of renewables has rapidly increased globally, driven by some frontrunner countries, and more are following. Renewables are carbon free or carbon neutral – truly clean energy, and they are available in abundance. Renewable energy is domestic energy – reducing import dependency and risks of price volatility for imported resources.

Renewable energy is the solution for a sustainable energy future for all. Most technologies for tapping the huge potentials of renewables are mature and costs are rapidly decreasing. Wind power is already cost competitive to new conventional power plants, even though markets are distorted and costs of environmental, social and health impacts are not included in energy prices. Solar energy has experienced dramatic learning curves and cost decreases in the last few years. Grid parity is being reached in sunny countries of the south, but also in other parts of the world, and for most remote areas, a mix of solar and wind combined with hydro and biomass is the only reasonable choice for a secure and affordable energy supply.

Renewable energy is available everywhere. It can be tapped by various technologies at different sites and of different size. Portable solar stoves provide cooking facilities for a family or huge offshore wind turbines produce electricity for thousands of households. Pumped hydro, meanwhile is a reliable source of baseload and balancing power for electricity grids, and solar energy provides heating, cooling and electricity in decentralised solar homes or in utility scale PV or CSP power plants, often combined with storage capacities for around-the-clock supply security. Renewables can provide all energy services from decentralised installations and micro-grids to centralised utility scale power plants for industrial processes or private consumers in rural and in urban areas. It is also predominantly distributed energy, creating opportunities for more energy democracy for thousands of small and medium producers/consumers, instead of dependence from the centralised oligopolies.

Renewable energy has rapidly grown in the last decade. This was triggered by bold and forward looking policies developed in a few pioneering countries, and now being adopted in an increasing number of countries worldwide, such that global capacity of renewables has significantly increased. Hydro power, geothermal energy and increasingly modern biomass continue to be important elements of energy supply security, but growth rates were particularly high in wind power and in the last few years also in solar energy. This trend should be perpetuated for the next decades, until global energy supply will eventually be based on renewables.

Renewable energy is mature and increasingly cost competitive. However, despite today being a mainstream source of energy, barriers still prevent a global breakthrough. Administrative procedures discriminate against renewables, oligopolies continue to exploit the benefits of their written-off centralised and dirty power plants, and infrastructure designed for inflexible baseload is incompatible with modern and flexible energy supply. Moreover, the instability

of economic and political framework conditions and, most importantly, the lack of political will to powerfully and unambiguously push for the paradigm shift towards a renewables based energy system are still key factors preventing a global breakthrough.

With Europe’s targets for 2020, particularly the Renewable Energies Directive and the mandatory target of at least 20% renewables in the EU’s gross final energy consumption, a landmark has been set for good and effective policies. Full and ambitious implementation of this legislation will be a major asset for a sustainable energy future for Europe. Thereafter, for a reliable investment framework beyond 2020 to further develop renewables, the next step should be a clear and ambitious perspective for 2030 and beyond. The European Commission’s Energy Roadmap 2050 is a useful tool in respect of this as it clearly shows that energy efficiency and renewables are a no-regret-option for a clean energy future.

Regrettably, the Roadmap falls short of dismissing unsustainable and uncertain options such as CCS and nuclear, and it refrains from highlighting a future energy system fully relying on increased efficiency and renewables. The Roadmap does not yet propose a next milestone after 2020, yet without one clear signals for decision makers are missing. Developing and adapting policies and framework conditions – market design, regulatory background, support policies, networks – for an increasing renewables share is imperative. Renewable energy associations have therefore started to advocate a new binding renewable energy target for Europe of at least 45% renewables by 2030. The earlier the EU agrees on such a target and related policies, the better for a sustainable energy future.

Depletion of fossil and nuclear resources is accelerating

Rainer Hinrichs-Rahlwes President, European Renewable Energies Federation (EREF)

©dalish/Shutterstock.com

©W

DG

Pho

to/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

25

Shell helped found the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves

in 2010. What is the Alliance and why have you got involved?

The reality is that nearly half of the world’s population - three billion

people - cook their food using open fires or traditional cookstoves. This causes an estimated 2 million premature deaths every year with women and children the most affected. The use of clean cookstoves and fuels can dramatically reduce exposure to hazardous smoke, helping save lives.

The independent Shell Foundation have been working on effective ways to tackle the issue of indoor air pollution for the last ten years, and Shell as a company were keen to take the opportunity forward. We became a founding partner of the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves in 2010 to improve access to cleaner energy solutions for the world’s poorest. Their bold but achievable ambition is to enable 100 million homes worldwide to adopt these stoves by 2020.

I’m proud of Shell’s support and I am personally involved in the Alliance through my role on its advisory board. Our $6 million contribution will go towards developing international standards for clean and efficient stoves, rigorous testing protocols and local testing centres. So far, our support has focused on countries including Nigeria, China, South Africa and East Timor, and we will work with the Alliance to expand its reach over the next few years.

Shell has been something of a pioneer in the sustainable

development field, having adopted its General Business principles as far back as 1976. What motivates this approach?

There are now 7 billion people in the world, and we are on our way to

9 billion by 2050. As the world becomes

more crowded, the stresses on the essentials of life – water, food and energy – will grow. For business, a sustainable approach is no longer just a ‘nice to have’ but an imperative. This belief has been at the heart of Shell for many years and shapes how we operate around the world.

Non-technical risks to our energy projects, such as a lack of support from local communities and landowners, or the presence of a fragile ecosystem, now account for the majority of project challenges in our industry. Building long term resilience into our plans and operations and working with partners, communities and governments can help. For example, we can help bring longer term value by creating supply chains and jobs for local businesses.

How is Shell’s commitment to a wider energy mix best evidenced?

According to the International Energy Agency, the world would

need to invest some $38 trillion in infrastructure to meet projected energy demand to 2035 alone. So for companies like ours, we need to keep investing in new energy supplies to prevent the world from standing still – literally.

Shell continues to invest heavily to develop new sources of oil and gas around the world. We have twenty-six new projects under construction and are studying over thirty more which could be developed or under construction by 2020. This includes delivering more, cleaner energy. Through the Raízen joint venture in Brazil, we are producing the lowest-carbon biofuels commercially available today in the form of ethanol from Brazilian sugar cane.

We also have a wind business, mainly in the US, and are developing natural gas, the cleanest burning fossil fuel. In fact, natural gas will play a far more significant

role in meeting future energy needs than was previously assumed. It will also be the fastest and cheapest route to reduce power-sector emissions of CO2. And it complements wind and solar power, which need a highly flexible backup supply when the wind stops or the sun goes down.

In the coming years, many decades-old coal plants will be reaching the end of their natural life, which provides an opportunity for gas to grow, while improving local air emissions and reducing CO2. Fitting newer, larger coal plants with carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology will also help. By adding CCS to natural gas plants, their CO2 emissions can be brought down to nearly zero.

To what extent do you believe that organisations such as Shell have

the capacity to lead the transition to a green economy?

I believe a green economy is a sustainable economy and the energy

industry is one of the key engines of economic growth. Our products serve as inputs into nearly every good and service imaginable, and energy demand has been resilient throughout the recession driven mainly by growing consumption in emerging markets. Going forward, the challenge will be to marry the need for future growth and prosperity with the need to make a positive environmental and social contribution to society.

Shell and the energy industry can make a strong contribution by continuing to provide jobs and invest in new energy sources to meet growing demand. But for truly sustainable economic growth, we must also look at our shared responsibility of resource management. Shell and the energy industry cannot do this alone. To drive investment in low carbon technologies, governments will need to put in place appropriate regulations including introducing carbon pricing, preferably through a market based approach. Shell is working with governments to support the introduction of carbon pricing in the EU, Australia, South Africa and elsewhere, and sees positive developments in Brazil with development of an emissions trading scheme in the State of Rio.

LearnmoreabouttheGlobalAllianceforCleanCookstovesatwww.cleancookstoves.organdviewShell’slatestsustainabilityreportatwww.shell.com/sustainabilityreport.

David Martin, Head of Sustainable Development, Royal Dutch Shell

For business, a sustainable approach is no longer just a ‘nice to have’ but an imperative

28

Twenty years ago, when world leaders convened the first UN Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro to raise sustainable development issues to the highest level, our world was decidedly different. Global population was about 5.5-billion, carbon emissions from energy usage were roughly 21-billion metric tonnes, and a ‘green economy’ was nothing more than a dream.

Since then, world population has grown to over 9 billion and our CO2 emissions have jumped by upwards of 40 percent, but the vision of a green economy is far closer to becoming a reality. It is a reality the United Arab Emirates is actively pursuing by investing in measurable goals to achieve sustainable environmental objectives with real-world impact.

This year, our world leaders again converge on Rio to discuss sustainable development at the highest level. And our countries are better-armed than ever to overcome the obstacles we face.

In 1992, many issues of global importance, such as climate change, biodiversity and desertification, lacked a true multilateral process to address them. Today, we have a wide array of multilateral treaties and negotiating processes allowing us to look across the major issues and build new ways to cooperate and to achieve all our goals. The upcoming COP-18 climate negotiations in Doha, Qatar, the first-ever UN climate talks in the Gulf region, are one such example.

Yet, greater progress is possible by linking critical areas of sustainability. There are important links, for example, between human capital development, women’s empowerment and poverty reduction. In turn, all are important factors when addressing climate change. Considering how these priorities must be addressed together, with win-win solutions, they can be done only at the highest level, with leaders who can give perspectives across all the issues.

Let me give one example. In Rio, we will be sharing the experiences of young Emirati women from the Masdar University - an Abu Dhabi graduate level research university established in partnership with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. These students are directly involved in generating new clean energy technologies, including new intellectual property. We believe that only by harnessing the talents of all our

citizens can we truly confront today’s sustainability challenges. The majority of Emirati students at Masdar Institute are women.

These linked issues are central to realising a green economy, one of the UN Secretary General’s priorities for this year’s Earth Summit. In January, the UAE’s Vice President and Prime Minister, His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, announced that the creation of a green economy is central to our national development. Although the UAE is blessed with abundant natural energy resources as the 5th largest oil exporter, we are using our energy expertise to innovate and

advance renewable technologies, build international clean energy cooperation, and create new jobs and economic opportunities. We view clean energy as a natural extension and a means to maintaining our leadership in the global energy market. As a major energy player, we have an obligation to contribute to the energy sector’s future development. Not only do we hold the experience and expertise to understand the dynamics that make energy markets move, but our position enables us to make the necessary investments.

Our foray in the renewable energy sector has so far been led by Masdar - Abu Dhabi’s renewable energy company. Since its 2006 announcement by His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi and Deputy Supreme Commander of the UAE Armed Forces, Masdar’s activities have spanned across Europe, Middle East and Asia. The projects include the UK’s London Array, the world’s largest offshore wind farm; Abu Dhabi’s Shams 1, the world’s largest CSP project; and smaller scale aid projects in Afghanistan,

Tonga and Seychelles. Although these projects and investments have yielded positive returns for the UAE and contribute to our green economy ambitions, they have also played a significant role in enabling nations to access clean energy. As such, we take great pride in contributing to the global adoption of clean energy technologies and the green economy drive, both within developed and developing nations.

The UAE is firmly committed to this progress. Through intellectual and financial investments, we are paving the way toward a green economy that supports technology transfer, economic stability, and social empowerment. The proof lies in our commitment to renewable energy both at home and abroad, through our clean energy portfolio being driven by Masdar.

The responsibility of preserving our natural resources started with our Founding Father, Sheikh Zayed Bin Sultan Al Nahyan. And today, the UAE is building on this legacy by innovating and implementing urban efficiency measures, driving higher efficiency standards, and empowering the developed and developing worlds to respect the environment.

The 2012 UN Earth Summit in Rio is a major opportunity for all countries to move toward a green economy, to build on initiatives such as the United Nation’s Year of Sustainability for All and to make clean energy more widely available. We must also launch a process to set Sustainable Development Goals that will help steer the world in a direction that will reduce poverty, further empower women, and limit our impact on the environment.

Twenty years ago, world leaders identified the importance of global sustainability, taking the first steps toward that goal. And today, the UAE stands ready to move forward down that road, sharing our successes and challenges, engaging with like-minded countries, and strengthening our avenues of cooperation.

Our foray in the renewable energy sector has so far been led by Masdar - Abu Dhabi’s renewable energy company

Rio+ 20: The UAE’s Path to a Green EconomyDr. Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, Chief Executive Officer of Masdar and UAE Special Envoy for Energy and Climate Change

Dr. Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, CEO, Masdar

29

Sakhalin-2 is one of the world’s biggest integrated oil and gas projects. Sakhalin Energy was established in 1994 specifically for the development of this project, and since 1999, during ice-free seasons has been producing oil from Molikpaq, Russia’s first offshore ice-class platform, as part of Phase 1 of the project. Two more offshore platforms were built and commissioned during Phase 2, which also included the following: 300 km of offshore pipelines to connect all the platforms to the shore; some 1,600 km of onshore oil and gas pipelines; an onshore processing facility; an oil export terminal; and Russia’s first liquefied natural gas plant, launched in 2009. As Russia’s most innovative and technologically advanced project, Sakhalin-2 plays a pivotal role in the overall development of the Russian oil and gas industry.

In recent decades, more attention has been paid to the social responsibility of business and the effective cooperation between business, governments, and society. Global experience has confirmed that only businesses that follow responsible business practices can achieve long term success. These practices are based on respect for human rights, transparency, non-financial reporting, environmental responsibility, care of personnel and contributions to the sustainable development of the region.

Sakhalin Energy developed a sustainable development policy from the very outset of its operations. At the corporate level a sustainable development strategy ensures a gradual fusion of the economic, environmental and social pillars of the company’s operations into a single self–organising system to ensure economic effectiveness, environmental safety, social justice and ethical behaviour, combined with an overall reduction of human impact on the biosphere. Strong, transparent, constructive and systematic co-operation and communication between all groups of stakeholders allows for implementation of the strategy and has proven to be the backbone of our success.

While pursuing its activities, Sakhalin Energy adheres to the following key CSR principles:

• Observance of and respect for human rights

• Accountability

• Transparency

• Ethical behavior

• Respect for stakeholders’ interests

• Supremacy of the law and compliance with internationally accepted codes of conduct

To fulfil these principles the company relies on the best international standards and policies, including ISO, EC and UN standards and directives, World Bank and IFC directives/policies/standards, GRI and AA1000SES, etc. Furthermore, in 2011, the company completed a self-evaluation of its implementation of the principles and provisions of recently approved international standard ISO 26000:2010.

Many of the company’s CSR achievements have been widely recognised, both nationally and internationally. Sakhalin Energy was named one of the philanthropy leaders in Russia and came second in the national ‘Corporate Charity Research 2011’ ranking, whilst it received a Special Merit Award in the 2010 Shell Chief Executive Officer HSSE and SP Awards in the category ‘Excellence in Social Performance’.

Sakhalin Energy has also attracted the interest of the UN and a number of other international organisations, such as the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and the World Bank, through being the first industrial company to use the principle of “free, prior and informed consent” (FPIC) when engaging with the indigenous people of the Sakhalin Oblast region.

Cooperation with UN System and International Engagement

The company maintains an active involvement in the United Nations Global Compact, a global initiative aimed at upholding the social responsibility of corporations, with Sakhalin Energy CEO, Andrei Galaev now heading the UN GC Network in Russia and representing its interests in the Russian Federation, as well as in other countries and international organisations.

In 2011, Sakhalin Energy became the first (and so far the only) Russian company chosen by the UN to participate in a new corporate sustainability leadership platform, ‘Global Compact LEAD’, with a view to implementing the Blueprint for Corporate Sustainability Leadership. In joining LEAD the company has committed to leading new efforts to raise sustainability performance and share related outcomes and lessons with the broader universe of companies in the Global Compact by participating in global initiatives, as well as in Global Compact Local Networks, as evidenced by having brought together a taskforce focused on business engagement with indigenous people.

Sakhalin Energy’s pioneering role is also apparent in its work with the UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative John Ruggie on developing guiding principles for business and human rights. For two years it was one of the five companies to test these principles related to grievance mechanisms. In the summer of 2011 the principles were approved by the UN Human Rights Council as a new international business standard to ensure that human rights are observed and respected.

Oil Spill - Prevention and Response Preparedness

Oil spill prevention and oil spill response (OSR) preparedness are top priorities for Sakhalin Energy. In accordance with Russian statutory requirements and best international practice, Sakhalin

Many of the company’s CSR achievements have been widely recognised, both nationally and internationally

Sustainable Development and CSREssential Components of Sakhalin Energy’s Strategic Development

The Sakhalin-2 LNG plant and carrier

30

Energy has developed OSR plans for all its facilities having risks of oil spills, and submitted them to Russian state agencies for approval. Moreover, the company has the necessary equipment and highly-skilled staff in a constant state of readiness to tackle any possible oil spills.

The fruits of this labour can be seen in the company having spilled only about one millionth of one percent of a total output of 245 million barrels of oil since 1999, and having avoided any situations that could be classified as an emergency.

Monitoring of Western Gray Whales – Biodiversity Responsibility

Sakhalin Energy also stands out in the global oil and gas industry in terms of its efforts to minimise the impacts of its operations on biodiversity and environment, as per the developed and approved Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP).

BAP implementation is supported by all stakeholders at both national and international levels, and since early 2000 has included monitoring of western gray whales as a priority. Here, a research programme allows for ongoing assessment and mitigation of any possible impacts on the species from Sakhalin Energy’s activities.

These efforts have been further consolidated through collaboration with the International Union for Conservation (IUCN). This has led to the formation of the Western Gray Whale Advisory Panel (WGWAP), presently comprising a panel of scientists from Russia, Germany, UK, Canada and the USA that processes and analyses the collected data to provide advice and recommendations on operational plans and mitigation measures. Effective Stakeholder Engagement – the Key to Successful Operations

Effective stakeholder engagement is an integral part of successful operations of the company. The statement on transparent and open stakeholder engagement is included in the company’s General Business Principles, with Sakhalin Energy using a systematic and proactive approach, based on best international as well as best Russian national standards. Special engagement programmes are carried out for communities and vulnerable groups that may be affected by the company’s activities.

Five basic complementary and interdependent mechanisms are used:

• Impact assessment – free, prior, informed, participatory consultations with project-affected communities.

• Ongoing three-level system of direct communication with community – open

public meetings; community liaison organisation, etc.

• Grievance addressing procedures – to ensure that grievances are processed in a timely and effective manner and in accordance with international best practice.

• Partnerships – strategic cooperation with public and authorities to deliver social and environmental projects based on co-ownership and equitableness.

• Public reporting – primary annual Sustainable Development report prepared as per Global Reporting Initiative and AA1000 standards.

Sakhalin Indigenous Minorities Development Plan - a Path to Consent

Indigenous Peoples (IP) is a special group of stakeholders. Sakhalin Energy has had an ongoing dialogue with Sakhalin’s IP directly affected by the project since the company was founded in 1994.

In 2005 IP staged a protest against all the oil and gas companies operating on Sakhalin Island. They demanded a more regular and transparent dialogue, as well as greater recognition of the needs of the indigenous peoples. Doing “a lot” turned out to be not enough, and so, responding to the requirements of

modern reality the company elaborated a new mechanism of engagement which involved all groups of the Sakhalin IP; the Sakhalin Indigenous Minorities Development Plan (SIMDP).

Sakhalin Energy has committed to implement five-year SIMDPs during the entire life of the Sakhalin-2 project. These are designed to achieve the following key objectives:

• Avoidance or mitigation in sustainable manner of the project’s potential negative impacts

• Provision of project benefits to IP communities in a culturally appropriate and sustainable manner

• Enhancing capacity of IP for sustainable development

SIMDP is an IndigenousPeoples–Business–Governmentpartnership programme worked out and implemented by a Regional Council of authorised IP representatives, Sakhalin Energy and the Sakhalin Government.

Active engagement with the broad IP community (IP enterprises and organisations, NGOs, population, etc.) is critical to the approach of the three partners to successful SIMDP preparation and implementation.

The below principles are devised with that goal in mind:

• Arrange culturally appropriate consultations

• Recognise the need for community consensus-building and that it takes time

• Plan an inclusive approach

• Emphasise transparency

• Keep communications open, including on any concerns, issues and/or grievances

• Rely on indigenous co-ownership

The development and implementation of SIMDP caused a breakthrough in the relationship between the oil and gas company and IP. SIMDP partners had succeeded in their pioneering effort to demonstrate that a private-sector project can productively cooperate with indigenous communities and comply with the FPIC principle.

SIMDP partnership and engagement has emerged as a good practice model at both international and national levels, but most importantly the plan is highly appreciated and trusted by the indigenous community.

The company maintains an active involvement in the United Nations Global Compact

Indigenous Peoples Conference

Western gray whales are constantly monitored

31

Sakhalin Energy is widely recognised for its commitment to sustainability,

protection of the environment, philanthropic endeavours and its active role in cooperating with local communities and indigenous people. Has such an approach been entirely compatible with economic growth?

Global experience has indeed proved that only businesses that follow

responsible practices based on respect of human rights, transparency, environmental responsibility and care of personnel, and that are thereby contributing to sustainable development, can achieve long-term success. In an age of economic globalisation and crisis, corporate social responsibility (CSR) assumes special significance.

Sakhalin Energy, along with the world’s leading companies shares the opinion that a considerable proportion of economic profit is derived from the area of so-called intellectual or information capital. This capital is built by internal (company employees) and external stakeholders (local communities, suppliers and customers, authorities, non-profit organisations, media, etc). Moreover, the share of such intangible assets as a proportion of the total assets of the companies is constantly rising. However, companies can ensure stakeholders’ confidence only if they maintain an ongoing dialogue and can prove that business takes into account stakeholders’ interests.

Here is the most recent example of the key role that stakeholders play in adding value to the economic growth of the company. In March, production sharing under the Sakhalin-2 project began (the Sakhalin-2 project is being implemented under a Production Sharing Agreement/PSA). According to the PSA, production sharing starts when all project expenses have been recovered. This milestone was reached ahead of plan and made possible not only because of favourable market conditions, but, primarily, thanks to the efforts of the employees, who constitute a key asset of the company. To maintain this asset and to add value, we implement significant HR progammes and care about corporate culture.

In respect of the necessary project financing for the Sakhalin-2 project, Sakhalin Energy is required to meet a range of HSE and social conditions and undergoes regular lenders’ monitoring and audits.

Sakhalin Energy is something of a trailblazer in the sustainable

development field having integrated it into its decision making for many years. What originally inspired this approach?

Sakhalin Energy has assumed this approach since the very first day of

the Project development and continues to base its activity on a strategy of sustainable development. In Sakhalin Energy’s Business Principles we have committed “tocontribute

tosustainabledevelopment.Thisrequiresbalancingshortandlongterminterests,integratingeconomic,environmentalandsocialconsiderationsintobusinessdecision-making.”

What are the most enlightening examples of sustainable strategies

being implemented within the supply chain at Sakhalin Energy?

Sakhalin Energy has made the Company’s Business Principles, HSE

and social performance standards an integral part of all its contracts, many of which include findings of the social, environmental and health impact assessment. To this end, it has been compulsory for contractors to consider such data when developing impact mitigation measures.

During the construction phase, major EPC /engineering, procurement and construction/ contractors were required to allocate a special set aside fund for implementation of sustainable development projects in the host communities. Projects were selected in accordance with the SD strategy of Sakhalin Energy. Also, our key contractors were required to establish a community liaison network.

Sakhalin Energy is committed to develop local manpower resources, whilst maximising Russian content is obligatory for all contractors and sub-contractors, who must regularly report on the Russian content of employment, goods and services. Furthermore, the contractors are required to timely provide information about job opportunities to local communities.

Sakhalin Energy has also established the Vendor Development Programme, aimed at training potential Russian vendors. Courses cover HSE and social performance commitments and policy, quality management and tendering skills and enable the participants to gain knowledge of best international practices, international companies’ requirements in general and, in particular, information about Sakhalin Energy’s tendering process.

How has Sakhalin Energy met the challenge of converting abstract

sustainable goals into tangible company strategies?

I believe our company has managed to meet this challenge. For example, in

addition to multi-factor reporting according to the IFC/World Bank standards, we have incorporated into our practice the principle of “free, prior and informed consent” that is contained in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.Another example is the development and implementation in Sakhalin Energy of the Health, Safety, Environment and Social Action Plan (HSESAP). This summarises the company’s principles and describes its HSE and social responsibility management system, as well as specific goals, standards and commitments, reporting requirements and KPIs in these interrelated areas.

What was the motivation in accepting the invitation to participate in

Global Compact LEAD with a view to implementing the ‘Blueprint for Corporate Sustainability Leadership’?

The Blueprint for Corporate Sustainability Leadership suggests a model to achieve

higher levels of performance in CSR and sustainable development. Although we perform our activities according to the highest international standards, we endeavour to progress along with society and continually upgrade business standards as well. This is our fundamental principle; the heart of our philosophy. This principle is declared in Sakhalin Energy’s mission statement which says: SakhalinEnergyiscommittedtobeingapremierenergysupplier,recognisedforitssafety,operationalexcellenceandreliability.Weconductourbusinessinanethically,sociallyandenvironmentallyresponsiblemanner.

Also, as the Blueprint for Corporate Sustainability Leadership and LEAD provide a platform for achieving more significant results of sustainability leadership through effective cooperation with other companies, as well as with the UN agencies, it was only natural for Sakhalin Energy to support and join the initiative.

“In an age of economic globalisation...CSR assumes special significance”

Andrei Galaev, CEO, Sakhalin EnergySakhalinEnergyCEO,AndreiGalaevexplainshowthecompanyisfulfillingitscommitmenttocontributetosustainabledevelopment.

32

ByMarkHalle,ExecutiveDirector,InternationalInstituteforSustainableDevelopment,Europe

Globally, governments subsidise fossil fuels to the tune of over $600 billion per year – that’s six times the amount of funding promised by wealthy countries for climate finance in Durban. All countries subsidise fossil fuels to some degree. The bulk of fossil fuel subsidies benefit companies producing oil, gas and coal (over $100 billion) and companies or higher-income households that can afford to consume more energy. In fact, only 8% of the $406 billion spent in developing countries goes to the poorest 20% of the population (IEA,2010). These subsidies also directly contribute to over-consumption of fossil fuels and higher emissions of local and global pollutants. Removing these subsidies would save over 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

A pledge to phase out fossil fuel subsidies at Rio would take a big step towards greener economies. It would also unlock billions of dollars of public finances within developing countries for poverty eradication and other national development priorities. Savings from the reduction of ineffective fossil fuel subsidies can be redirected toward improving energy technologies, infrastructure or services to meet the UN’s goal of Sustainable Energy for All.

So, if the gains are so obvious, why do we still have prolific fossil fuel subsidies? The short answer is that subsidy reform is challenging – for a host of reasons. Governments around the world have tried to reduce spending on fossil fuels, only to retreat in the face of public backlashes. Indeed, as the demonstrations in Nigeria earlier this year attest, subsidy reform can be a political bombshell.

There are often good reasons for citizens to be concerned. Rising energy prices as a result of subsidy reform, and the

inflationary impacts that flow through the economy, can have disproportionately negative impacts on the poorest. Experience shows that reforms need to be structured carefully to minimise these impacts and should be accompanied with effective support measures for low-income households, for example cash compensation, targeted social welfare programmes or alternative energy and transport solutions. In countries where natural resources are – or are perceived to be – poorly managed, moves also need to be taken to improve governance.

Subsidies also create vested interests by those that receive the greatest benefits. These interests and political motivations can be very difficult to overcome, but not impossible. Recent efforts by Iran, India and Ethiopia, prove that it is possible to reduce or eliminate subsidies. Mounting pressure on government budgets and fiscal deficits as a result of the rising price of oil can provide effective incentives for overcoming these obstacles.

Some countries have made a start. In 2009, 53 countries represented in the G-20 and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forums committed to phasing out fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption, while protecting poor and vulnerable groups. However, many of these governments have yet to effectively implement the commitment.

At Rio, governments have the opportunity to turn the political rhetoric into action. To do so, governments need to do more than simply extend the existing commitment to phase out fossil fuel subsidies

to the 194 members of UNCSD. The commitments should include measures to help countries overcome barriers to national implementation, by providing technical and financial assistance, sharing research, best practice, and lessons learned from other countries. Governments should establish a mechanism, such as a centre of excellence, to share research and policy advice, facilitate dialogue amongst policy makers, and provide expertise and general support. The mechanism could also establish regular reporting of countries’ subsidies to help monitor progress against the reform commitments.

In Rio, governments face the difficult task of negotiating solutions for complex and overwhelming global problems – a changing climate, a fragile global economy, increasing food and fuel prices, to name a few. Reducing, and ultimately eliminating, inefficient and harmful subsidies for fossil fuels is one practical but high-impact action that every government can take to improve the nation’s fiscal health, local livelihoods and the global environment, while restructuring public expenditure for a greener economy.

Phasing out Fossil Fuel Subsidies Unlocking Public Finances for Poverty Eradication and a Greener Economy

A pledge to phase out fossil fuel subsidies at Rio would take a big step towards greener economies

Mark Halle, Executive Director, IISD Europe

©iri

n-k/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

©Paul Cowan/Shutterstock.com

33

ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Much of the attention on the solutions to climate change

concerns the latest whiz-bang technologies in solar, wind, biofuel and other renewables. How can you inspire people’s imagination about saving energy?

Energy efficiency is the bridge to the low-carbon future of that

whiz-bang technology. Thousands of people are working to invent new energy technologies, and the advances in renewables, especially wind and solar, are being deployed at a very encouraging rate. Still, modern renewables, other than traditional biomass and large hydropower, supply just a sliver of the world’s energy today. Let’s say modern renewables were to grow by five times over the next ten years. The associated reduction in greenhouse gas emissions would be relatively minor compared to what we need to do to protect our world and to what we could accomplish by reducing the overall use of energy

This is particularly the case because to continue to boost renewables at a rapid trajectory we must reform the electrical grid, including increased grid-level electricity storage. To get modern renewables from 1% to 3% of the world’s energy supply didn’t lean hard on our current system. To get from 3% to 15% would.

Sounds like you’re against all the energy technology research

dollars for new energy sources?

Not at all. I don’t want in any way to disparage research into renewables

or into supply-side technologies to cut emissions, like carbon capture and storage. These opportunities are very exciting and very important. We should be developing all of these supply-side options, trying the ones that work and commercialising the cream of the crop. That takes time. And then, given the massive scale of our current energy system, implementing the resulting

technologies enough to sharply impact carbon emissions will take at least several decades, to say nothing about the massive financial investments that will be required.

So, if you’re thinking about energy policy you need to think not just about the supply of energy but as importantly, about the demand for energy. How we manage the use of fossil fuels in the next 20 years is fundamental to the question of whether we get a handle on

the issue of global climate change. If you ask climate-change experts what is the most important thing to do right now, most will tell you, “energy efficiency.” Cutting waste could, in principle, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 15% to 25% in modern economies, where most greenhouse gases are emitted. Over the next 10 or 20 years, changes of that magnitude could dwarf the expected impacts of new energy supply technologies on climate change. Developed countries can reduce the intensity of energy use

while their economies continue to grow. Furthermore, economically efficient reductions in energy use enhance economic growth.

So you want more research for technologies that can reduce the

use of energy?

Yes. Great progress has been occurring and can continue for

energy efficient lighting such as light emitting diodes, for batteries that would make electric vehicles or plug-in hybrid vehicles economically attractive, for improved insulating materials for buildings or refrigerators, for smart meters and associated information systems, for more efficient internal combustion engines in cars and trucks, for more sophisticated building management systems, for waste heat recovery devices, for more efficient AC-DC converters and for electric-using devices that turn themselves fully off when not in use.

But, we should not stop there. We need more research to include behaviour, economics, and systems analysis, in addition to physical technology. We can design an energy efficient building, but fail to achieve the planned energy efficiency because the fragmented construction industry does not function as well as it might. Humans can override energy-efficient designs or fail to take advantage of the energy efficient features embedded in buildings. Landlords may avoid economically attractive energy efficiency upgrades because the tenants pay for energy while the landlord would bear the capital cost of the upgrades. People using electricity have very little way of getting feedback on the energy costs of their decisions to use or not use specific pieces of equipment. We need to more deeply understand these behavioural, economic, and systems issues in order to develop the appropriate ways of addressing these problems.

Prof. James Sweeney, Director of the Precourt Energy Efficiency Center at Stanford UniversityJamesSweeney,StanfordUniversityprofessorofmanagementscienceandengineering,isthedirectorofthePrecourtEnergyEfficiencyCenter(PEEC).PEECresearcheseconomicallyefficientpolicies,economics,behavioursandtechnologiesthatleadbusinessesandhomeownerstoreduceenergywaste.Theenvironmental,economicandsecuritybenefitsofenergyefficiencyinspiredStanfordalumnusJayPrecourttoworkwithSweeneytocreatethecentrealmostsixyearsago.HeisinterviewedforPlanetBbyMarkGolden,ofthePrecourtInstituteforEnergy,StanfordUniversity.

“How we manage the use of fossil fuels in the next 20 years is fundamental to the question of whether we get a handle on the issue of global climate change”

34

Despite all this, many of those who control energy research dollars focus their attention on energy supply options and some seem fundamentally hostile to any area but technology.

What are the main obstacles to changes in energy use becoming

the norm?

One of them, certainly, is a lack of knowledge. Most people don’t

know that one compact fluorescent light bulb can save $70 in electricity, or that aggressive driving can reduce highway gas mileage by 33 percent. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could see how much of our utility bill is going at least to the big items like heating and air conditioning, the refrigerator, the washer and dryer, the dishwasher, and idle electronics?

That sort of cost transparency also gets into some technological barriers. Two more quick examples of needed technological improvements on the demand side are better control systems and software for optimised building construction.

We also need better government policies. The biggest one here - and there are many – is a carbon price, whether a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system. I personally believe a revenue-neutral carbon tax would be superior to a cap-and-trade system but either would be far better than having nothing. The carbon price should be large enough for now to squeeze out economic inefficiencies, like water pumps that are cheap to buy, but which are so inefficient that the higher lifetime operating costs are many, many times greater than the savings at the cash register.

At the state level, high-efficiency building codes need to be adopted by all states for new buildings. Existing codes, which are set typically at minimal levels, should have efficiency requirements raised. And state and city governments need to improve compliance.

But even when the right policies and technology are in place,

we have seen examples where economically attractive efficiency measures have not been widely implemented. Why do we often struggle to harvest this low-hanging fruit?

I like to think about the barriers in three groups: institutional, market

failures, and behavioural. In business, one institutional barrier is that energy use is often treated as overhead and managers aren’t evaluated based on

their department’s energy consumption. Even in universities, a faculty member installing a high-power computing cluster normally needs funds for the capital cost of the computers, but understands that the electricity cost would be borne by the university as a whole. Thus there is an incentive to pay close attention to the capital costs but

to ignore the electricity cost. There is a real opportunity here for companies and other organisations such as universities to improve their bottom lines if they put the right incentives in place.

I have already mentioned the market failure of landlords failing to make energy efficiency upgrades because it is the tenant that would capture the benefit of the energy cost savings. The failure to appropriately price environmental externalities, such as greenhouse gas emissions reduces incentives for energy efficiency and leads markets to fail.

An important market failure right now is the working of credit markets. If certain retrofits to an existing home would reduce the utility bill by more than the amortised cost of the retrofits, we should find a way to finance that if needed. There are several financing mechanisms for residents, small businesses and local governments; wider adoption could remove the credit-market-failure. One of those mechanisms, where a utility finances retrofits for a home through monthly charges on the utility bill, is underway in New York and is being

considered in California. The return on investment of such financial innovations is very good.

And then we get to behavioural issues. One survey showed that the majority of programmable thermostats in the United States are not programmed. The technology is in place and the behaviour needed is almost a one-time thing. Although subsequent adjustments are needed, it does not require changing habitual actions like turning off the lights when you leave a room. Old refrigerators are often not replaced, even though replacement would save more money in electricity than the cost of the new refrigerator. Yet how many people understand that such an action would be financially beneficial. Behavioural improvements have also been shown to be more pronounced when they are interactive and social. Fortunately, recent advances in communications and sensors make this possible.

Some people say that if you just set the policy goals and instituted

a carbon tax most of these problems would be resolved. I take it you don’t believe in a silver bullet for energy efficiency?

There is no silver bullet. We should have a carbon tax. Yet the

other market failures, the institutional problems, and the behavioural issues would persist even with a carbon tax. Many people are working on these crucial problems and we have learned a lot about how to motivate people to conserve energy, but there is much still to be learned. We will get there. Sometimes you strike out, and sometimes you hit a single. Sometimes you hit a homerun. The important thing is that you’ve got to swing the bat.

“There is no silver bullet”

Prof. James Sweeney

©am

asterpho

tograp

her/Shu

tterstock.com

© S

erge

j Kha

kim

ullin

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

35

ByVictorSmart,DirectorofProfileandCommunicationsatCharteredInstituteofManagementAccountants(CIMA).

GlobalcorporatereportingreformerProfessorMervynKing,afoundingfatherofSouthAfrica’ssustainabilitymovement,explainshowaccountancycanhelptosavetheplanet.

When I meet Mervyn King in Johannesburg, he is just back from China – his second visit in as many weeks. There is a sense of urgency in his manner. The ‘professor extraordinaire’ at the University of South Africa’s College of Economic and Management Sciences is on a quest to convince people that it is possible to avert environmental disaster by adopting the right brand of corporate reporting, but only if we act swiftly.

In the past two decades he has been instrumental in establishing this new style of ‘integrated reporting’ in South Africa, and is now part of a co-ordinated global effort to export it around the world. “We have a two- to ten-year window at most,” declares the former judge and chairman of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI).

We meet for breakfast at a hotel in the affluent Melrose Arch district of the city. Frequented by the chic and well-heeled, it is an achingly cool boutique hotel that looks anything but sustainable – icily air-conditioned and decked out with wacky ‘look at me’ furniture. Evidently, aspirant consumers in emerging markets relish the trappings of material prosperity every bit as much as those in the developed world.

But King’s corporate reporting crusade has its roots in the hardships of the closing days of apartheid. In 1992, two years before the white regime formally ceded power, King received a call from Nelson Mandela, still incarcerated on Robben Island, who began by asking, “How is my favourite judge?”

“When I get a call like that I know I am going to have a lot of work to do, without remuneration,” King explains wryly. The call was not a complete surprise, though. King had been working with one of Mandela’s daughters on a campaign to feed the rural poor at that time. As the transition to a multiracial society was being planned, King was set to work on ways to bring the marginalised black majority into mainstream society.

That represented the origins of the King committee, which helped to reshape the country’s corporate governance regime. It began by teasing out how firms could not only speak to dividend-hungry shareholders, but also engage with all the other disparate groups in South Africa with a stake in their enterprises.

“I was actually dithering when I got Mandela’s call, but we launched a committee and realised that we had

to look at the special circumstances in South Africa. One of the circumstances was that most of our fellow citizens were precluded from economic and political life. We felt we should identify companies’ stakeholder groups and their legitimate interests and expectations. In a company, you are not accountable to those groups, but you should be aware of the impact your decision-making has on them. So, out of Africa always something new,” King declares, citing the old adage.

It was the beginning of a trajectory that has put narrative reporting, with a strong emphasis on sustainability, centre stage. This holds the promise, at least, of becoming a powerful agent for broader change around the world. And it’s likely that no one has invested more faith than King in the idea that corporate reporting can change corporate behaviour.

It is fast becoming the orthodoxy, outside the US, that conventional annual reports that largely look backwards and focus on a company’s financial information do little to reflect the broader contribution that a business makes. A different sort of integrated reporting is therefore required, showing not only the financials, but also the firm’s impact on the environment and the wider community.

Since 1992 there have been three King reports in South Africa, akin to the series of UK corporate governance reports begun by Sir Adrian Cadbury. Since March 2010 reporting on environmental

Out of Africa

King’s corporate reporting crusade has its roots in the hardships of the closing days of apartheid

Mervyn King, Chairman of the International Integrated Reporting Committee

©D

onov

an v

an S

tad

en/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

©olly/Shutterstock.com

36

and social issues has been mandated for firms quoted on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange on a ‘comply or explain’ basis. The results can be seen all around Johannesburg. Advertising hoardings extol the efforts made by mining giant Anglo American to provide anti-retroviral drugs for its workers. Newspaper jobs pages seek accountants with an in-depth knowledge of the GRI, Aids/HIV policy, as well as an “eagerness to work long hours”.

Some observers are sceptical about the whole exercise, of course. They argue that South Africa is at the leading edge of a welter of box-ticking schemes designed to cure the country’s social ills, while the country still trails the field in practical terms.

But the campaign has now leapt beyond South Africa’s boundaries. King tells me, before a trip to Hong Kong, that the integrated reporting message is spreading like “wildfire”. Just over two

years ago the GRI joined forces with Accounting for Sustainability, the UK project driven by the Prince of Wales, to launch the International Integrated Reporting Committee.

The trick, as King sets out in his book ‘Transient Caretakers’, has been to change the perception of sustainability as an anti-business stance. Instead, the aim is to convert it into a business strategy, backed up with hard facts, that stacks up in the boardroom. King believes that responsible large businesses will embrace integrated reporting willingly and then the smaller firms in the value chain will have to follow suit. Pension fund trustees will be key here. They have an obligation to behave ethically and, he hopes, can breach the defences of recalcitrant quoted companies in which they have stakes. Then will come the private companies, such as family-run businesses. They will be brought into line by virtue of their position in the supply chains of

the big, reputation-minded companies. “Traceability” will be key, says King, as he explains approvingly that big quoted firms, such as global retailer Walmart, are starting to insist that everything they sell, whether it be coffee or furniture, must be from proven ethical sources.

And what of accountants themselves? “The accountant is, in my view, critical,” says King. “All professionals, and especially accountants and management accountants, have the ability and the professionalism to help. They advise and help boards and managers. If they have been doing sustainability reports in a silo – let’s say they have been doing GRI – it is almost a seamless movement to integrate that with the financials.”

King’s mantra is: “No planet, no people, no profit.” If he is to be believed, accountants, and an idea germinated in Africa, may yet save the planet.

©CIMA2011

After ‘Decade of Stupidity’ it is now Time for ChangeBySanchiaTemkin

A new kind of board of directors is needed in light of pressing economic, financial, political and social demands on companies, says South Africa’s doyen of corporate governance, Mervyn King.

The continuing financial crisis, climate change, and the consumption of natural resources were having an effect on companies’ performances, he said earlier this week.

Mr. King was participating in a panel debate in Johannesburg on what boards should be discussing. The event was hosted by the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa’s corporate governance network.

“History will call the decade between 2000 and 2010 the decade of stupidity because we knew about climate change and ecological overshoot, but we continued with business as usual. The chairman of the board has to be plugged into these issues, and make sure they appear on the board’s agenda.”

The chairman of the board was often compared to the conductor of an orchestra, but Mr King said “nothing could be further from the truth”. He said each board member came with his own

preconceptions and understandings of the issues placed before the board, and one of the chairman’s central roles was to ensure a common understanding of the main issues being discussed.

Richard Foster, chairman of the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa and group secretary for Old Mutual, said the quality of the board agenda and supporting documentation, was vital to maximising the board’s effectiveness, particularly as boards only met a few times a year for a limited time.

The company secretary, he said, could also play a key role in helping to ensure an agenda that balanced the needs of both the CE and the board chairman.

Michael Judin, senior partner at commercial law firm Goldman Judin, said that the agenda, as well as the minutes, were of vital importance for directors.

© Business Day 2011

MervynKingconsultsandadvisesoncorporatelegalissues.Heisrecognisedinternationallyasanexpertoncorporategovernanceandsustainability.Hesitsasanarbitratorandasamediator.HeisafoundingmemberoftheArbitrationFoundationofSouthernAfricaandforsomeeightyearswastheSouthAfricanjudgeattheICCInternationalCourtofArbitrationinParis.HehasactedasanInspectorofCompaniesandaCommissionerofInquiriesintotheaffairsofcompanies.Hehaschairedmanymeetingsforthecompromiseofcreditorsofcompaniesandtherearrangementofshareholders’interests.Hehasspokenatconferencesandlecturedoncorporateissuesin38countries.Heisaregularspeakeronradioandtelevisiontalkshowsandranhisowntelevisionseries,“KingonGovernance”.

A new kind of board of directors is needed...says South Africa’s doyen of corporate governance, Mervyn King

37

BrianDamesexplainshowEskomisdiversifyingitsenergymixtolowercarbonemissionsandrespondtothechallengesoutlinedinSouthAfrica’sNationalDevelopmentPlan.

Eskom is something of a trailblazer in the sustainable

development field having integrated it into its decision making for many years. What originally inspired this approach?

Eskom recognised the importance of integrating sustainable development

into our strategic approach many years ago. This view has been driven by the fact that we are in a long term business and it is therefore critical that we ensure we take a robust and holistic approach to strategy development which includes the integration of all the elements of sustainable development.As a state owned company we also have an important role to play in the country in terms of catalysing change and transformation and driving government policy in relevant sustainability areas. By integrating sustainable development concepts into our process we also ensure that we manage risk and are able to identify and capitalise on opportunity.

In 20 years South Africa will look different – coal will contribute much less to primary needs, while renewable energy resources, especially wind, solar, nuclear and imported hydroelectricity will play a much larger role. It is within this context that Eskom is diversifying its energy mix to lower carbon emissions and respond to the challenges outlined in the country’s National Development Plan.

Eskom’s strategy details a significant increase in generation capacity to unlock economic potential in a wide range of sectors such as mining, manufacturing and agri-business. By diversifying the sources of energy, Eskom will make a meaningful contribution to the sustainability of energy supply and to better environmental management. Eskom is a ‘leading indicator’ of investment and job creation for sectors such as mining and energy-intensive manufacturing that depend on a reliable supply of energy.

Eskom also plays a central developmental role: as an enabler of Government’s vision and as a supporter of economic growth in South Africa. Eskom buys from and sells electricity to the countries of the Southern African Development Community (SADC). The future involvement in African markets beyond South Africa is currently limited mainly to projects that have a direct impact on ensuring a secure supply of electricity for South Africa itself. However, Eskom is investigating additional opportunities in the Southern African Development Community region.

Furthermore, South Africa’s growing international stature and its rising participation in various global forums must be supported by a sound domestic economy.

A hallmark of the way we do business is to benchmark ourselves against best practice and to learn by doing. To this end, we have been an active member of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) since its inception, providing input to their projects, initiatives and positions, and also learning from the best practice of other members. In addition, Eskom is a member of the UN Global Compact, the Global Sustainable Electricity Partnership and the International Chamber of Commerce, organisations that provide a platform for leading thinking in the area of sustainability, which Eskom has benefitted from. Furthermore, Eskom prides itself in voluntary benchmarking through the Dow Jones sustainability index and the Johannesburg Stock Exchange Socially Responsible Investment (JSE SRI), where we have performed exceptionally well.

How has Eskom’s sustainable Demand Side Management

programme (DSM) acted to positively influence customer and consumer behaviour, thereby promoting a culture of sustainable consumption?

The Energy Efficiency demand-side management initiative focuses

on identifying and promoting more efficient ways to use electricity through the implementation of technology enhancement and behavioural change.

The majority of savings in the residential sector have been achieved through the implementation of large-scale mass roll-outs of replacing incandescent light bulbs with fluorescent lamps (CFLs). Over 47 million CFLs were installed in the residential sector across the country. A total of 235,885 solar water systems have been installed to date to reduce pressure on the grid. Eskom embarked on a major drive to reduce electricity consumption amongst all electricity users. Two major initiatives were launched aimed at immediate and long-term behavioural change – the ‘Power Alert’ and ‘5pm – 9pm’ evening campaigns. The targeted demand savings for this initiative is 250 to 500 MW during evening peak hours.

The ‘long-term behavioural change’ initiative seeks to embed energy efficiency attitudes, habits and practices in all consumers, particularly residential users, to reduce their consumption by 10%. Eskom’s 49M campaign, an initiative that encourages the more than 49 million South Africans to use electricity efficiently, also provides advice and financial assistance to residential customers and corporations ‘to make the switch’ and install energy efficient technologies for a sustainable lifestyle.

Access to reliable energy for all is an essential component of any

country’s well-being and prosperity. To what extent do you believe that Eskom has the capacity to lead the transition to a green economy, establish an inclusive social contract and strengthen participatory politics within South Africa?

Electricity underpins the economy of the country. It is essential to the

functioning and wellbeing of business and society alike. For this reason, there is huge potential within the industry to make a significant impact on the green economy.

The shift to a lower carbon economy is essential for this. Government’s Integrated Resource Plan 2010 (IRP2) makes an important shift in this regard. In the development of the IRP a number of ‘scenarios’ or policy cases were developed to identify the impact of various policy options including emission constraints and a carbon tax. These results provided input to multi-criteria decision-making by government to produce a final policy-adjusted IRP. The final Policy-Adjusted IRP has additional renewable capacity (particularly solar photovoltaic energy) and the bringing forward of the renewable programme to stimulate local development of the industry.

Eskom CEO, Brian Dames

Electricity underpins the economy of the country

38

To this end, Eskom’s aspiration is to pursue a more diverse energy mix with the objective of reducing the utility’s relative emissions until 2025 and subsequently reducing absolute emissions. While the electricity planning process includes technologies that are currently commercially available, we have modelled a number of scenarios in order to assess our future emissions profiles and the potential contribution that near commercial lower carbon emitting technologies can make to an emissions reduction target. In doing this work we also recognise that there is no single technology option that is the panacea for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We are therefore committed to the assessment of all options for reducing our emissions. Our comprehensive climate change strategy deals with all aspects of climate change that will potentially contribute to the Green Economy. The six pillars of this are:

• diversification of the generation mix to lower carbon emitting technologies by increasing the share of nuclear, gas, renewables, imports and cleaner coal technologies

• Energy efficiency measures

• Adaptation to the impacts of climate change

• Innovation through R&D

• Carbon Financing opportunities including carbon trading

• Advocacy, partnership, and collaboration with national and international stakeholders

In line with government commitments Eskom has recently

embarked on an energy diversification programme that prioritises the use of renewables as alternative energy sources. Within this framework, which renewable initiatives are set to take centre stage?

We currently have three main renewable energy projects under

way which will leverage the abundant renewable energy resources available to the country.

Eskom is evaluating the construction of a Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) demo plant rated at approximately 100 MW in the Northern Cape Province. The Northern Cape has high solar irradiation when compared to other areas of the world considered suitable for concentrating solar power generation. Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) technologies have been identified as being potentially viable and capable of being employed on a large scale. This plant could electrify up to 400,000 standard homes p.a. if 200kW per month is assumed.

Secondly the Sere Wind Farm – a 100MW wind farm will be constructed in the Western Cape. This plant can electrify 150,000 standard homes.

We have implemented Solar PV systems at Megawatt Park Head Office in Gauteng, Kendal Power Station in Mpumalanga and Lethabo Power Station in the Free State. This provided an opportunity for PV to provide a significant amount of renewable energy to the various Eskom facilities and also served as a means of providing shaded parking to visitors and employees as applied in the Megawatt Park PV system

Photovoltaic systems interconnected into existing Eskom buildings provide zero emissions clean energy during daylight hours. The electricity generated by the PV systems reduces the amount of grid electricity consumed by the building while offering the opportunity to reduce the carbon footprint of these Eskom facilities.

An extensive research programme is in place to investigate harnessing renewable energy resources for power generation and cleaner ways to generate with coal. These include solar, wind, ocean wave power, biomass technology, small scale hydro, energy storage options and cleaner coal technologies such as underground coal gasification and carbon capture and storage.

How important a part are innovations such as solar thermal

plant, smart grids and underground coal gasification set to play within the Eskom portfolio of sustainable initiatives?

Eskom has an extensive technology innovation programme which seeks

to continually integrate new technologies into our portfolio and ensure that we are able to meet the changing requirements of the country. We have identified a few areas where we have developed pilot projects that move us forward and where we need to test and develop technologies specifically for South African needs and conditions. We also participate in a number of national and international programmes and partnerships to leverage our innovation spend. This includes membership of the Electric Power Research Institute.

It is important to note that the new coal-fired power stations that Eskom is building - Medupi and Kusile – are significantly more efficient and therefore have much lower greenhouse gas and local air emissions per unit of electricity produced, and significantly lower water usage, which is crucial in a water-scarce country such as South Africa. Cleaner coal, in this sense, is an important part of Eskom’s sustainability effort.

These are part of an important suite of options to move towards a more sustainable energy mix. Underground coal gasification (UCG) enables us to use coal more efficiently and provides the important balance of continuing to use coal for the time being, meeting environmental imperatives and affordability. Gas is still a fossil fuel but has lower emissions intensity and can be used more efficiently. Coal currently provides much of South Africa’s primary energy needs and the underground coal gasification (UCG) as a potential clean coal technology enables mitigation of the environmental consequence of this dependence, while alternatives to coal are developed.

The use of UCG gas as a fuel for advanced clean coal technology power generation has the potential to address a number of strategic drivers for Eskom and the country. The UCG technology also enables modular expansion which has cost and lead-time benefits.

Solar Thermal power has the potential for storage and therefore base load capability. The building of a pilot plant and customising the technology for South Africa will provide enormous benefit as a renewable baseload plant. With plant of this kind being built the world over, the expectation is that the cost of building will drop. To enable these technologies as well as innovations for feeding back into the grid from households, utility load managers etc, a smart grid is essential. All of these innovations are required and it is important to continue to seek finance and technology support for them.

These options are also extremely important in terms of meeting the aspiration of stimulating the local economies in which they will be built and operated.

Underground coal gasification (UCG) enables us to use coal more efficiently

Construction of Kusile Power station

39

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) has long been an advocate of sustainable development and its three intertwined and mutually-supportive pillars: economic development, social progress and environmental protection. Its Member Countries recognise that oil producing countries have an essential role to play in the pursuit of sustainable development, especially since fossil fuels will continue to satisfy the bulk of the world’s energy needs.

Energy is crucial for the development of nations and for the daily life of people. For developing countries, the challenge is two-fold: they need to ensure a rapid socio-economic development to eradicate poverty and improve the living conditions of their population, and at the same time face the adverse impacts of the deteriorating status of the global environment, as well as the adverse impacts of response measures.

OPEC Member Countries are well aware of the importance of oil in sustainable development. They have played a proactive role in supporting development while actively contributing to the protection of the environment in the international arena.

Supporting Development Projects in Other Countries

OPEC Member Countries have continually sought opportunities to learn about ‘best practices’ in sustainable development, through exchanging ideas and sharing important lessons with other countries. In addition, they have actively helped other developing countries in

their own development efforts — through bilateral and multilateral aid programmes.

As early as 1975, the Solemn Declaration of the First OPEC Summit emphasised the inter-related goals of sustainable development, poverty eradication, and human and social development. These goals were later re-emphasised in the Solemn Declarations of 2000 and 2007, and OPEC Member Countries have, since then, ensured that these goals have been included in the Organization’s activities.

Even though all of OPEC’s Member Countries are developing countries, providing assistance to other developing countries has been seen as similarly important. Thus, Member Countries established a multilateral institution, the OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID) in 1976, to help developing countries around the world. Now in its 36th year, OFID’s assistance has spread to 132 poorer developing countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean and Europe. By the end of March 2012, OFID had made aid commitments totalling US$ 13.8 billion.

Alleviating Energy Poverty

Energy poverty remains a critical impediment to sustainable development. Today, 1.4 billion people have no access to electricity, and 2.7 billion people — almost 40% of the world’s total population — continue to rely on traditional biomass for cooking and heating.

In fact, addressing and alleviating energy poverty is a high priority for OPEC’s Member Countries, many of which have communities that lack access to affordable and reliable energy.

They also contribute to addressing energy poverty abroad through assistance programmes provided by both OFID and OPEC Member Countries to other developing countries, in particular least developed countries.

Investing in Cleaner Energy

OPEC’s Member Countries are also actively pursuing projects that use cleaner fossil fuel technologies.

Many Member Countries have taken important actions to voluntarily reduce the carbon footprint of energy production. One example is the In Salah natural gas project in Algeria, which relies on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology to store large quantities of CO2 in deep geological formations. Other Member Countries are also pursuing projects using technology like CCS, with the hope that they may be considered under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) of the Kyoto Protocol, such as the use of carbon dioxide for enhanced oil recovery.

Other Member Countries have adopted entirely different approaches. Ecuador, for example, has committed itself to refrain from extracting the estimated 8.5 million barrels of oil reserves lying in the Ishpingo-Tambococha-Tiputini (ITT) oilfield located within the Yasuni National Park. The initiative effectively conserves and prevents deforestation in an ecosystem covering 4.8 million hectares.

Efforts have also been made in all Member Countries to reduce gas flaring. Algeria, for example, is a success story in drastically reducing the volumes of flared gas in its oil fields. Nigeria has also successfully reduced flaring, by almost 50% in the decade from 1997-2007. Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia have also invested billions of dollars over the last few decades on related flared-gas recovery projects. Globally, the volume of flared gas has continuously declined in the last five years.

OPEC Member Countries generally, have increased the development of renewable energy. Iran, for example, has several large-scale wind projects underway, as well as plans to build the world’s highest dam - a 1.5 GW project in the Zagros Mountains. Saudi Arabia inaugurated its first 500 KW solar power plant - expandable to 6-8 MW - on Farasan Island in 2011, while

OPEC & Rio+20Abdalla Salem El-Badri, Secretary General of OPEC

OPEC Member Countries are well aware of the importance of oil in sustainable development

40

Qatar has announced investments in a 3,600 tonnes/year polysilicon solar panel production facility, which is expected to start operating in 2012. Last year, Algeria inaugurated the largest solar-natural gas combined power plant near Hassi R’mel. Additionally, several solar thermal power projects are being constructed in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The UAE also has plans to build the world’s first carbon-neutral, zero emission city - Masdar City - in Abu Dhabi, where current and future renewable and cleaner technologies are researched, developed and tested.

These are just a few examples of OPEC Member Countries putting social and environmental values first. The continued promotion, development, and deployment of cleaner fuel technologies in both OPEC and non-OPEC Member Countries remains an important area for collaborative action, and the Organization has consistently supported such efforts.

Common but Differentiated Responsibilities

To best address the challenge of climate change, collaboration among all countries is needed. But it is important to recognise that it is developed countries that have the technological and financial capabilities to address the problem. Furthermore, they also have, in contrast to developing countries, a historical responsibility for contributing to the current state of the earth’s atmosphere. Developed countries should thus take the lead in mitigating climate change, as well as in helping developing countries in adapting to the adverse impacts of climate change and response measures, through adequate financial resources, technology transfer and capacity building.

It is important to remember that under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which provides a balanced institutional and legal framework for

addressing climate change, socio-economic development and poverty alleviation are the overriding priorities of developing countries. The principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities” is the cornerstone of all multilateral agreements since the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. It should be respected, preserved and reinforced during the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20). Its importance cannot be overstated.

Rio+20 and Beyond

Rio+20 is being held 20 years after the Earth Summit. During the period between these two events, sustainable development has gone from being merely a concept to an actionable approach in the socio-economic development of nations. Environmental multilateralism has taken shape, implementing institutions have been established, and legally binding - as well as non-legally binding - instruments have come into existence.

Furthermore, we have seen immense progress over the years in the acceptance of ‘sustainability’ as a priority in development policies. This would not have been possible without the guiding

principles of the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21, which continue to be the foundation of sustainable development. These principles need to be maintained and re-emphasised.

However, there are still numerous gaps in the implementation of the various commitments made at the Rio Conference. Thus, a key outcome of the upcoming Rio+20 Conference would be for those attending to examine how to fully implement what was agreed upon 20 years ago - while remaining guided at all times by the principles of “equity” and “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities.” Any international norms, practices, and arrangements arising out of the Rio+20 Conference will need to observe these principles. Outcomes from Rio+20 should be realistic, fair, and equitable - while remaining fully consistent with the principles of the Rio Declaration, and in compliance with the provisions of the UNFCCC. OPEC recognises that important changes have been made in the environmental and energy policy objectives of many industrialised and oil consuming countries. But it continues to stress the need for balance and for avoiding discrimination.

Since the Earth Summit, OPEC has been an active participant in ongoing UN-sponsored negotiations. It has also supported efforts to achieve sustainable development and has invested in comprehensive efforts to reduce the environmental footprint of the global production and use of energy, in general, and of oil, in particular. The Rio+20 Conference provides an excellent opportunity for global actors to cooperate to ensure that the oil industry will continue to improve its environmental credentials, while responding to world energy needs in an economic, efficient and timely manner, with due regard given to efforts to meet the needs of all developing countries, including OPEC’s own Member Countries.

Since the Earth Summit, OPEC has been an active participant in ongoing UN-sponsored negotiations

©1xpert/Shutterstock.com

41

AsthefirsteverOfficialCarbonOffsetPartnerofasummerGames,BP’snot-for-profitcarbonmanagementprogramme,TargetNeutral,isplayinganimportantpartinhelpingLondon2012achievetheambitiontodeliverthemostsustainableGamespossible.

Such an honour comes with much responsibility. With this in mind Target Neutral is determined to do all it can to raise awareness of the carbon impact of travel by using the Games as an opportunity to engage with a huge audience and help encourage lower carbon travel choices.

Target Neutral is doing this by offering to offset for free the travel of every ticketholder and games participant at London 2012 who signs up online. The hope is that by engaging the broader public this will lead to increased awareness of the impact of carbon emissions from travel.

Through this programme, Target Neutral will attempt to set the world record for the largest number of people offsetting their travel carbon footprint to a single event from anywhere in the world. It’s a fun way to engage with Olympic audiences and hopefully leave a legacy for future Games to follow. Further, as the official Offset Partner of the London 2012 Games BP is providing its most advanced fuel and lubricants to the 5000 vehicles in the official Games fleet and is also offsetting all carbon emitted from the Fleet during Games time.

LOCOG Chairman, Lord Coe describes it thus; “As a sustainability partner and our offsetting partner, the London 2012 Games supports and endorses BP in its efforts to both raise the awareness of what each of us can do to reduce our carbon emissions in transport and

through its programme of activities to make this a low carbon Games.”

The London 2012 carbon offsets will be sourced from six low carbon development projects across the globe, one from each of the continental regions participating in the Games. Strict criteria have been used to ascertain which projects will be supported as part of the Target Neutral London 2012 Portfolio, which itself aims to build upon best in class projects worldwide.

As well as a clear benefit to the environment, the low carbon development projects also need to show tangible long-term social and economic benefits to the surrounding communities in which they operate. These come in the form of green jobs and skills training, education, irrigation and enhancements to energy security and infrastructure. In this way each project’s legacy becomes a self-perpetuating low carbon one.

In addition, independent verification comes by way of compliance with the

Independent Carbon Reduction and Offset Alliance (ICROA) Code of Best Practice which Target Neutral is audited against. Moreover, thorough due diligence is designed to ensure that projects are not only technically viable, but also to assess the local impact of projects socially, environmentally and economically. This ensures that all Target Neutral projects make a lasting contribution to sustainable development goals.

Target Neutral’s progress is overseen by an Independent Advisory and Assurance Panel made up of environmental luminaries such as Jonathon Porritt and Charles Secrett. The Panel sees that funds are appropriately distributed and reviews and approves all projects. Thereafter, a Verified Emission Reduction Purchase Agreement (VERPA) is negotiated for each project to ensure transparency, with those credits sold to offset emissions being officially ‘retired’.

The six low carbon development projects in the London 2012 portfolio are as follows;

Africa–Kenyanfarmersreforestationproject

Oceania–cycloneresistantwindfarmsinNewCaledonia

Europe–greenpowerfromlandfillgasandanaerobicdigestioninTurkey

North America–greenpowerfrommethanecaptureinWisconsindairyfarms

South America–biomassfuelledceramicsproductioninRiodeJaneiroState

Asia–biomasspowerplantinTongcheng,China

Each of the six projects aims to encompass the three pillars of sustainable development, being environmental, economic and social. For example, the Tongcheng power plant in China produces clean electricity from local biomass such as rice husks which were formerly characterised as waste. The rice husks provide an additional revenue stream to some 50,000 local farmers, whilst 172 new jobs have been created to harvest the biomass and run the power plant.

www.bptargetneutral.com

Target Neutral is offering to offset for free the travel of every ticketholder and games participant at London 2012 who signs up online

BP’s Target Neutral Programme

Biomass project, Tongcheng, China

42

Tourism

©A

chim

Baq

ue/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

©G

raem

e S

hann

on/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

In a nutshell how does tourism have the capacity to address

the three economic, environmental and social pillars of sustainable development?

On the economic front, tourism is one of the largest and fastest

growing sectors of the world economy. It is directly responsible for 5% of global GDP, 30% of the world’s exports of services and one in every twelve jobs worldwide. And with international tourist arrivals reaching one billion by the end of this year, tourism is set to continue creating decent jobs and providing economic security for hundreds of millions worldwide, particularly in developing countries.

In terms of the environment, the growth in tourist numbers has no doubt brought about mounting challenges. Yet, increasingly destinations and companies have incorporated sustainable goals and practices to ensure that the socio-economic benefits generated by tourism do not deplete the natural resources. Tourism is in fact becoming one of the most effective ways to generate support and income for environmental conservation. For many national parks, tourism provides the financial means and incentives for conservation and allows for the creation of further protected areas. Sustainable tourism can also preserve land for nature, offering alternative livelihood options to those who may otherwise resort to less sustainable land use.

Concerning social equity, tourism has an almost unparalleled ability to distribute wealth across territory and society. Crucially, tourism creates jobs and business opportunities for people where they live, especially for some of the most vulnerable segments of the population such as women and youth; it helps reversing population decline and decay in many of the world’s poorest and most isolated regions.

Tourism’s proven capacity to contribute to the three pillars of sustainability is reflected in the fact that it has been identified by the Green Economy Initiative of the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) as one of the ten sectors that can lead the transformation into this new model.

The UNWTO expects that 2012 will see a total of 1 billion

international travellers. Do you see such a figure as compatible with sustainability?

There can be no question that reaching one billion international

tourists is a major milestone but it is also a great responsibility. The responsibility is in ensuring that while we meet the needs of today’s tourists and host communities we do not menace our environment, our social values and our cultural heritage.

With the correct policies, the adequate business strategies and the right attitudes, the potential of one billion tourists for sustainability is actually enormous. Studies show that travellers are increasingly environmentally-aware and are demanding sustainable practices, and it is encouraging to see that these demands are being answered by the sector. If one billion people were to demand sustainable practises from hotels and tour operators, business

models would be radically changed. If one billion people would buy locally, billions would benefit. These may be small actions, but given the size of our sector, their impact can be huge.

How can policy makers best be made aware of the perils

of unplanned and poorly managed tourism development?

Today, sustainability is no longer an option. It is good for the planet

and good for business. Time and time again we see that those countries that integrate the principles of sustainability into their tourism development are those that are benefiting most from sustained growth. This is not simply because these countries are preserving the natural and cultural resources that attract tourists in the first place, although this is also crucial, but because they are distinguishing themselves from others by appealing to the higher environmental and social consciousness of today’s tourist. This is the best manner in which to highlight the positive impact of sustainable tourism planning and show the perils of other options.

Would you like to see a binding international agreement with

regard to sustainable tourism development that sees those who neglect to abide by its rules penalised?

Given the challenges that reaching a binding international agreement

entails, and considering that we need to act right now, our work is geared towards setting goals, principles and voluntary indicators that can guide tourism development.

The UNWTO Global Code of Ethics for Tourism, for example, is a set of guidelines which entails a “moral” obligation for all UNWTO Member States, who adopted it by consensus. UNWTO monitors the Code’s implementation and reports on the subject both to its General Assembly and the General Assembly of the United Nations, thereby giving States who uphold the principles of the Code greater visibility, and all the more incentive to fulfil their obligations.

“tourism has an almost unparalleled ability to distribute wealth across territory and society”

Taleb Rifai, Secretary-General of UNWTO (World Tourism Organisation)

TOURISM

©igor1308/Shutterstock.com

44

In your organisation’s research have you discovered whether

those who have embraced the UNWTO Global Code of Ethics for Tourism have found that it translates to increased revenue, preservation of ecosystems and job creation on the ground?

The UNWTO Global Code of Ethics is a set of guidelines to be followed

by all those in the tourism sector, with the objective of minimising the negative impact of tourism on the environment and cultural heritage, while maximising its benefits. For it to gain ‘live’ it needs to be translated into specific policies and practices which can in turn be evaluated. As more and more countries incorporate the principles of the Code into law, which is a trend we are increasingly seeing, the potential of tourism to contribute to sustainable development and poverty reduction grows ever greater.

Do you see any paradox between the promotion of sustainable

tourism development and the associated increase in air travel that this is associated with?

Sustainable development means preserving the environment for

future generations, but also generating economic growth and social equity. For many developing countries, namely small island developing states, tourism is one of their main sustainable income sources, creating much-needed employment and opportunities, especially in rural areas.

Measures aimed at reducing the expansion of air transport may in fact be hindering tourism’s contribution to social and economic development and poverty eradication; considered the first and overriding priorities of developing countries by the Copenhagen Accord struck at the 2009 Climate Change Conference (COP15).

This is not to say tourism, and aviation in particular, should shrug off its responsibility to bring down emissions; on the contrary, the aviation industry is working tirelessly to cut carbon emissions, and has committed to cap net emissions from 2020 and cut them in half by 2050 compared to 2005 levels. Aviation is, in fact, one of the world’s

most proactive industries in this regard, with route optimisation, investments in new and more fuel-efficient aircraft and sustainable biofuels top of the agenda.

How can national tourism boards overcome resistance from

influential tourism operators on the ground that constitute key providers of jobs and that they may be unwilling to risk upsetting with exacting sustainable criteria?

Since the adoption of the UNWTO Global Code of Ethics for Tourism

in 1999, around 50 countries have incorporated the principles of the Code into their legislative texts and used the same principles as a basis for establishing national laws or for designing policies for assuring the sustainable and responsible development of tourism. Putting these

principles into law is a strong message to any party unwilling to adhere to the principles of sustainability. On the other hand, an increasingly important number of tour operators have embarked on the implementation of sustainable business strategies, recognising that these are not only part of their corporate social responsibility, but that they are also good business options, as often they imply reducing costs, or increasing a competitive advantage that can differentiate them from their competitors.

Can you provide any outstanding examples of existing

developments and those currently under construction worldwide that best encapsulate commitment to sustainable tourism, and why?

There are countless examples of tourism developments around the

world that are exceptional models of how

to move forward sustainability in tourism. At the heart of these developments are the three pillars of sustainable development as applicable to tourism: they make optimal use of environmental resources, respect the socio-authenticity of host communities, and provide viable, long-term socio-economic benefits to all.

A number of these are being actively supported by UNWTO through its technical cooperation, including a recently launched Congo-Nile River Trail in Rwanda, tourism routes along the Caribbean Coast of Nicaragua and a canopy walkway in the forests of Laos to name just three.

Do you advocate a state of affairs whereby a definitive proportion

of any revenue from, or jobs created as a result of sustainable tourism development should stay within the local community?

Absolutely. That jobs and revenue created by tourism stay within

local communities is at the heart of sustainable tourism. UNWTO has long advocated for policies which create opportunities for local people. These include incentives or the obligation for developers to hire local people and use local products for building and consumption. Without these, such business models are simply unsustainable, especially as consumers continue to demand and expect economic, social and environmental responsibility from their tourism providers.

“That jobs and revenue created by tourism stay within local communities is at the heart of sustainable tourism”

Mr. Taleb Rifai, Secretary-General of UNWTO

© Iz

mae

l/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

©kw

est/Shu

tterstock.com

45

RalphHiggs,DirectorofTourismattheTurks&CaicosTouristBoardexplainshowsustainabilityhasbeenplacedattheveryheartofthecountry’smostimportanteconomicsector.

How has the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) managed to reconcile

growth in the tourism sector with the preservation of its status as one of the last remaining unspoiled paradises in the world?

The Turks and Caicos Islands are truly unique in that one third of the

country is set aside in the Protected Areas System (P.A.S), comprising of National Parks, Nature Reserves, Sanctuaries, and Areas of Historic Interest.

The Turks and Caicos Islands Government (TCIG) has taken an integrated approach over the past two decades through involvement with various NGOs, Private Groups and agencies such as the Turks and Caicos National Trust, Chambers of Commerce and departments such as the Department of Environment and Coastal Resources (DECR).

Another example is where the DECR and the National Trust are promoting the zero-net-loss policy. The DECR requires all developers to plant 10 trees for every tree that is disturbed or destroyed. Additionally, the TCIG has just passed the Marine Pollution Ordinance, one of the strictest laws in the Caribbean in terms of imposing penalties for any violation in the territorial waters of TCI, whilst the National Trust acts as custodian for our heritage products.

How have you overcome any initial resistance from key

brands operating on the islands to increased sustainable thresholds set at government level?

Communication between lead agencies for a multi-agency

approach has been most beneficial to TCI. This allows for key brands to operate in a holistic fashion. The environment is not sacrificed for the business or development project, and vice versa. If no compromise agreement is reached, no development project takes place.

When targeting investment, what distinguishes TCI from the

competition in terms of your green credentials and proven brand and market?

TCI has taken a quality driven approach to investment backed

by National Papers such as the Environmental Charter that seeks to put forth best practice scenarios. TCI looks at investment from a holistic, rather than solely environmental perspective, with developers taking on various socio-economic projects to compliment their efforts in respect of the natural environment.

This includes the mandatory submission of Environmental Impact Assessments at the start of the development proposal. All projects are required to conduct EIA by an accredited group(s) to the satisfaction of the DECR and Dept of Planning, with input from various key agencies.

To further strengthen the position, TCIG has a 50% off import duty policy on Green based products and Energy Star, this having gone a long way towards ensuring our residents and visitors utilise the best green products.

Which of the existing developments and those currently

under construction best encapsulate TCI’s commitment to sustainable tourism and why?

TCI has seen many developments that exemplify its commitment to

sustainable tourism as both an emerging stay over and cruise destination. Let’s look at both; The Amanyara Resort is a good example of an existing development project that showcases environmental sustainability by only creating a disturbance via the footprint of its buildings and reasonable access roads. It has also hired a naturalist with responsibility for nature conservation and development. Blue Horizon Resort is another that disturbs vegetation minimally and encourages conservation.

Meanwhile, the Grand Turk Cruise Center surprises many as it is the world’s only Blue Flag Cruise Port on the Beach, with visitors finding it hard to believe that a facility of this sort could exercise such a high degree of environmental stewardship. To complement this, there has been much restoration and preservation of cultural and heritage sites in the area, along with the creation of the Caribbean’s first Self-Drive and Walk Bird Tour, offered by the Turks and Caicos National Museum.

The Shore Club is another example of a development project currently under construction that is taking its potential environmental impact seriously.

Are there any as yet untested markets that you feel would

be particularly receptive to TCI’s sustainable offer and that you are looking to target?

With TCI promoted as a quality driven, high-end destination

new markets could include Japan, Chile, Australia, Brazil and China. In addition, two emerging niches that have been largely unexplored are wellness/medical tourism and recreational/sports tourism. These new areas have the potential to increase financial injection and create sustainable livelihood options, and are consistent with how our islands have been positioned, being likely to particularly appeal to the nearby US market. 

Sustainable Tourism in the Turks & Caicos Islands

“TCI has seen many developments that exemplify its commitment to sustainable tourism”

46

The last of the Caribbean’s unspoiled islandsIn time, everyone will discover the beauty of Turks & Caicos: Incomparable beaches, boutique hotels, and the most incredible scuba diving and snorkeling in the world. It’s no wonder Trip Advisor named Turks & Caicos #1 on the list of “The World’s Best Beaches” for 2012.

www.turksandcaicostourism.com

Take your loved ones on a trip they will never forget…

Visit Turks & Caicos

Trip Advisor named Turks & Caicos #1 on the list of The World’s Best Beaches for 2012

PlanetBrecentlymetwithChairman,Eng.SamihSawiriswhereheoutlinedthejourneyOrascomDevelopmenthastakentoachieveinternationalrecognitionastheauthorityincreatingsustainablelivingcommunitiesandtransformingordinarysettingsintoincomparabledestinations.

Planet B (PB): Can you explain the philosophy behind Orascom Development?

Samih Sawiris (SS): The model we’ve developed matured around 7 years ago. We’ve been in development for 22 years, and 15 years down the road we started clearly identifying ourselves and targeted our business plans in different countries to copy what we had developed during that time in Egypt; basically a town-development concept. We did it in El Gouna and Taba Heights in Egypt and also in Oman, Jordan, and Morocco, always with the ultimate target of having enough people living there permanently. So, you have to provide for schooling, hospitals and entertainment as well. We’ve done this in El Gouna where we have 20,000 residents, and we’ve also done it in a budget housing town project outside Cairo where we

have 30-35,000 living there already, with this figure set to grow to around 400-500,000 people when the whole land bank we’ve acquired is used over the next 20 years.

Another thing we cherish is having sustainable livelihood sources. In El Gouna half the people are working in the construction of new houses and new hotels, and the other half in those hotels or in the service industry that provides services to the people living there. So, it’s a mini-economy that feeds itself to growth. And as the community grows and the housing and living needs of the inhabitants are met, over time the land becomes more valuable, and every time you add a house the land is marked with more value which you then benefit from.

PB: Was that always your vision?

SS: When we started 22 years ago I was just thinking of developing some houses, a hotel and a marina. It took me ten years to figure out it’s a stupid idea because it’s not sustainable and you can’t provide the livelihood for the employees. The nearest baker was 30 km away, the nearest gas station 30 km away and the nearest makeshift hospital even further. So, in a way the idea of developing a small town happened almost by default. It was running away from failure! But it drove us towards growing to a critical mass, which is very important. As a developer, if you don’t have that critical mass, you’re doomed.

You then start thinking about the sustainability from an environmental point of view. For example, when you see the destruction of reefs in the area around Hurghada because no one is taking care of moorings, you realise that if they ruin the reefs nobody will want to come back! But, once you start, you can’t stop. You start to think about all the garbage being produced which you can’t

just take and dump in the desert, so you have to recycle it. Then you think about recycling, it still leaves 20-30% residual waste. Why? So, over the last 15 years we have tried to find better and better ways to reuse and recycle, and now we are up to around 97%. That last 3% we are putting in concrete blocks to form paving stones, so we can say we are a 100% recycling destination.

I say do it now and you might earn a couple of brownie points, or wait and you will be forced to do it anyway, and it will probably be more expensive. I don’t believe we can afford to keep polluting the way we do while developing. That’s the reason we made the decision to turn El Gouna into a carbon neutral town. We’ve done the most important part which is relying on wind power for the electricity supply, and we’re still working on the other items which are not compensated for by the electricity we produce. We have a big farm now that gives us 3-4% credit for our emissions, and we are moving to eliminate boilers and cut transportation emissions by introducing electric vehicles.

PB: Is the biggest challenge for project development getting buy-in from the local authorities and residents?

SS: That changes from country to country – in Switzerland it was easy. The Swiss are very environmentally conscious and enforce it by law. When

“As a developer, if you don’t have critical mass, you’re doomed”

Orascom DevelopmentOver20yearsagoOrascomDevelopmentbeganwithasimpleidea–tocreatealittlepieceofparadiseontheexquisitelydesolateRedSeacoast.Today,itisaleadingdeveloperofintegratedsustainablelivingtownswithastrongfootholdinEgyptandtheMiddleEastofferinghotels,privatevillasandapartments,leisurefacilitiessuchasgolfcoursesandmarinasalongwithallrelatedservices,facilitiesandinfrastructuresupportingalivingcommunity.WiththeAlpineAndermattprojectcurrentlyunderdevelopmentinSwitzerlandandEco-BosintheUK,ithasexpandeditsactivityoutsidethisregionandintoEurope.

Eng. Samih Sawiris, Chairman, Orascom Development

© R

echi

tan

Sor

in/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

48

we were starting our project there I felt safe that if we went CO2 neutral, it would be well supported, although we are still far away from having buyers willing to foot the bill. You need to feel a bit of pride about being a developer covering another piece of Planet Earth that is not replenishable, and at least do it in such a way that you don’t cause more harm. It helps drive you towards your target.

PB: Have you learnt anything from other projects?

SS: Usually you learn what you need to avoid. For example, all government-produced towns totally neglect entertainment. They seem to think it’s silly. But if you don’t entertain residents, they won’t live there. In El Gouna we have a stadium, and our football team is now in the premier league. We have a library, a go-karting track, tennis courts...

PB: Tell us about the Eco-Bos project in Cornwall, England.

SS: Eco-Bos were looking for somebody to turn these old deserted china clay mines and a deserted harbour into a new sustainable entity. Probably no one has built as many marinas in the past 15 years as Orascom has, and we are also among the big developers of real estate and communities. So, we know a lot about the challenges, the infrastructure needed, and how to develop. Therefore, we were a perfect fit for Cornwall.

PB: Doesn’t Switzerland have strict regulations regarding development and real estate ownership by foreigners (the Lex Koller)?

SS: Yes, but that was lifted for Andermatt. I explained why the project had a necessity to reach critical mass fast, and that it would take ten times longer if we could only sell to Swiss nationals, which would jeopardise its overall success. They saw it as a legitimate need.

PB: Has the Andermatt project been affected by the financial crisis?

SS: The crisis has slowed down the base

of our developments across the board – in Switzerland, in Oman, in Montenegro, everywhere. But the name of the game is to acknowledge the changes and plan for a crisis. Since we are building towns, it doesn’t happen overnight, so you have to figure that at some point in the twenty years it takes to develop there will be a period of crisis. The solution is quite simple; you slow down, you let things idle and prepare for the future. We don’t sell as much real estate, we don’t build as quickly.

PB: Do you think Orascom has shown that the private rather than public sector can lead the transition to a green economy?

SS: I think the only way is to let the private sector do it. However, you can’t always rely on its goodwill, and sometimes you need the government to impose certain criteria that ensure the environmental sustainability of any new project.

PB: Do you think that green social development necessarily has to mean a loss of profit?

SS: It has to. But, who cares? You can consider it a tax, as long as it applies to everybody. Then nobody has any benefit from not being sustainable. But if some people can get away with not doing it, and others cannot because of ethical reasons, then they are handicapped. Governments are worried that if they impose hefty regulations they might kill the economic feasibility of the project, which means less employment, less income, less tax, and so they shy away from doing anything. In my opinion they should do it and then create a credit to pay developers back for the extra investment it requires.

PB: What are you most proud of in your career?

SS: I will be proudest when El Gouna becomes the first truly carbon-neutral town in the world. That for me will be the completion of the project. It is now sustainable, feasible, generating enough in taxes to keep the town going and

there are enough jobs for people to bring their families and live there. From here on, it’s just a matter of how it develops into an even larger town, the target being to make it impossible for it to become a slum, a polluter, overcrowded or badly managed.

PB: What has been the driving force behind your success?

SS: For me it’s 66% luck, and the rest is a combination of hard work, intelligence, and guts. We were lucky that Egypt changed to the open, free-market concept for the national economy so we could benefit from being able to do our own thing. We were lucky that we were at the right place at the right time, with the right education, and with the right name.

PB: Where do you see Orascom Development in twenty years?

SS: I think Orascom will be the mayor of eight or nine towns around the world, with a couple of million people living in these towns, and I think we’ll be a good sustainable example for others to follow.

PB: Are you optimistic about the world? Do you think your children will be able to enjoy the planet?

SS: My grandchildren will. I think they’ll be living in an era when everybody is relatively rich and everybody fed. People will start spending much more money on the environment, whether by force or by choice and the world will start becoming a better place. I remember when I was in university in Germany you couldn’t put your finger in the Rhine because it was so chemically polluted. Today you can drink out of it. So, you can restore nature. It’s not impossible.

OrascomDevelopment’sprovenbusinessmodelisexpectedtoyieldfurtherstrategicdevelopmentopportunitiesinthemediumandlong-term.Itcurrentlyoperatessixfullyfledgedtowns;ElGouna,RedSea,TabaHeights,Sinai,andHaramCity,6thofOctober,allbasedinEgypt;inadditiontoJebelSifahandSalalahBeachinOmanandTheCove,RasAlKhaimahintheUnitedArabEmirates,offering26hotelswithmorethan6,500rooms,whilstitcontrolsalandbankofapproximately118millionSqmandcanpointto aworkforceof17,119employees.

Furtherinformation:www.orascomdh.com

“we can say we are a 100% recycling destination”

©DAmgu

n/Shu

tterstock.com

49

Cities and Regions

© Il

ja M

ašík

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m©

Vla

dim

ir M

elni

k/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

Vitoria-Gasteiz, European Green Capital, 2012

Vitoria-Gasteiz will continue the challenge of city planning from an environmental standpoint

51

Can rapid global urbanisation realistically be reconciled with

holistic sustainable development that encompasses not only environmental, but economic and social concerns too? e.g. green job creation and social inclusion, energy access and security for all, food security for all, water management, disaster preparedness etc?

Cities are crucial to leveraging the mutually-supportive opportunity

of the green economy for three complementary reasons.

Firstly, a Green Economy thrives on innovation, and virtually all innovation originates in cities. New jobs and technologies will almost certainly arise out of the crucible of the urban context in whose density of institutions, people and infrastructure, ideas are shared and tested and experiments carried out.

Secondly, urban density – when sensitively planned and appropriately supported by sustainable infrastructure – constitutes the world’s most efficient settlement pattern. In this way, cities reduce the spatial footprint of development and allow for shared infrastructure which itself reduces emissions and the resource use. As existing sprawling cities densify themselves, retrofitted transport and service systems will require new investments and labour.

Thirdly, the agglomeration economies of cities means new technologies can be tested and implemented more competitively. As green products and services become competitive and affordable, they unlock enormous potential for economic growth by expanding the market and by expanding access of these products and services to the urban poor.

Fourthly, in the long term, the green economy offers opportunities for strengthening resilience by reducing dependence on carbon intensive growth, by stimulating efficiency in resource use, and by expanding skills for leapfrogging towards a new trajectory of economic growth.

There is a contradiction where developed countries are the

biggest contributors to climate

change, yet developing countries the greatest sufferers of its effects due to their lack of access to resources to deal with the problem. In terms of effectively addressing the myriad challenges associated with increased urbanisation it will be necessary to garner international support for developing countries in relation to technology cooperation, capacity development and finance. To what extent do you believe these developing countries themselves can mobilise this financing to realise greener cities?

Whereas much of the developed world had the chance to develop

over the last century and a half, many of its cities now having the infrastructure and robustness to deal with the effects of climate change and other environmental disruptions that this development has directly and indirectly caused, cities in the developing world will have to develop in a very different context of relatively higher energy prices.

Newer and expanding cities have, however a degree of flexibility due to relatively few technological, market and institutional rigidities. Without these burdens, new and expanding cities can make the transition at an even lower cost than already-developed cities. In an era of rising energy prices, an early transition to systems that consume increasingly-cheaper renewable energy sources will pay off quickly. Far from limiting their right to development, the green economy

may allow many cities in the developing world to leapfrog some of the costly mistakes of the developed world.

What measures can be taken to ensure sustainable cities do

not become synonymous with gated enclaves where developers target the most privileged since they offer the best returns, while the disadvantaged and disenfranchised are left out in the cold? Are dense, mixed-use community developments with an enforced proportion of affordable housing the answer?

We must re-embrace the compact, mixed-use city. Cities and their

component neighbourhoods need to be compact, integrated and connected. This requires a shift away from the mono-functional city of low density and long distances, which is poorly connected, socially divided and economically unproductive. Instead, the new paradigm optimises demographic and economic densities and privileges proximity among firms and people within a dominantly mixed land-use pattern. The resulting human scale minimises transport and service delivery cost, optimises the use of land and promotes social diversity. It also supports the protection and organisation of urban open spaces.

Reasserting urban space is a highly effective entry point for improving a city’s functioning. The ways in which space is deployed and shaped, proximity and connectivity enhanced and land and place value developed and captured are central to the process of city development. Urban public space is the backbone of the city. It allows people to live amidst complexity, negotiate differences, assert their identities and access resources in ways both formal and informal. Effective policies on the establishment, management and maintenance of urban space are the key to inclusivity, walkability and access.

City-dwellers themselves – particularly the poorest and most vulnerable – must remain the primary beneficiaries. These are the primary stakeholders who directly and personally experience a city on a daily basis. The ‘right to the city’ remains a powerful principle for ensuring that the collective interest of a city prevails. A human rights-based approach is the only way to uphold the dignity of all urban

Dr. Joan Clos, Executive Director of UN-HABITAT (United Nations Human Settlements Programme)

“We must re-embrace the compact, mixed-use city”

©A

lison

Han

cock

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

CITIES

52

residents in the face of multiple rights violations, including the right to decent living conditions. This paradigm shift cannot take place without addressing the fundamental issues of equity, poverty and social justice.

How should ad hoc and unplanned city growth be

addressed? Is the first step the legitimisation of informal settlements, or does this only serve to exacerbate the problem?

Informal settlements are often symptomatic of wider urban

dysfunction. Cities can address the underlying causes in a number of ways.

Identifying critical acupuncture points can transform existing cities. Cities must then undertake interventions appropriate to these points. Very often this simply involves going ‘back to basics’. Firstly, this means concentrating on minimal conditions of an intervention that will produce a meaningful effect. Cities must prioritise core issues over ‘collateral’ ones. Secondly, interventions need to be grounded in the key processes and essential underlying systems that make cities function.

Urban practitioners must move from sectoral interventions to those that address the city as a whole. The prevailing fragmented, sectoral approach to urban development has only created enclaves of successes with little transformational impact. Partial solutions tend to worsen the conditions of the city, often producing dysfunction in the whole. Many cities are even locked in ‘diseconomies of agglomeration’ whereby they experience the problems above without ever having enjoyed the quintessential advantages of density. Addressing the many problems characterising cities today – such as sprawl, segregation and congestion – requires a more holistic, integrated, and city-wide approach.

Urban planning and design set the critical spatial framework. Good urban form is essential for sustainability, and it must be addressed at both the programmatic and operational levels. Good urban planning and design should establish minimum densities, optimised street connectivity and social mixity with a variety of housing prices within an area. The resulting urban fabric will be fine grained, with a variety of housing types, an inviting public realm, pedestrian-friendly streetscapes, defined centres and edges and varying transport options.

Smartening land-use planning and building codes is essential. Effective codes and regulations are key instruments for pursuing resilient and low-carbon urban development. Such codes should limit specialised land use zoning, encourage optimal mixed use through floor space designated for economic uses and mandate minimum street area as a proportion of a neighbourhood’s overall land area.

Cities must promote endogenous development. The new urban paradigm requires strategies, plans and model projects that optimise endogenous factors. Such factors include nurturing and utilising local assets – particularly human capital – maximising tangible and intangible local opportunities, exploiting local potentials, and positioning the city within the outward macro context of regional, national and global development.

How can the respective demands of the brown and

green economies on already scarce and stressed natural resources be reconciled as cities grow and generate new activity and wealth?

The central tenet of the green economy is that environmental

sustainability and economic growth can develop harmoniously; they are not inherently mutually-exclusive. This can be accomplished by decoupling the rate of economic growth from the rate of energy and material use and environmental degradation. Because the world can no longer depend on cheap fuel for growth, and economic growth

will almost certainly be driven by cities, sustainable urban development must incorporate these new principles.

Can you give examples of cities that provide a blueprint for

sustainable development elsewhere? What are the common denominators running through these examples?

Cities in Asia and Europe offer, generally speaking, some of the

best models with Singapore, Tokyo and Osaka and Copenhagen, Stockholm and Oslo leading their counterparts. Siemens Green City Index, for example, provides a comprehensive, rigorous set of measurement principles for sustainable cities along the parameters of low CO2 emissions and energy use, optimal land use, efficient buildings and transport, recycling of water and waste, and air quality and environmental governance. According to the index, the best examples in North America are San Francisco, Vancouver and New York; in Latin America, Curitiba and Bogota. In Africa, Cape Town and Durban offered the best models.

“Informal settlements are often symptomatic of wider urban dysfunction”

Dr. Joan Clos, Executive Director of UN-HABITAT.

©Binkski/Shu

tterstock.com

© Il

ja M

ašík

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

©D

avid

Dav

is/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

53

The volcanic ash cloud impact in 2010 has demonstrated how vital aviation is to the global economy. More than 56 million jobs and US$2.2 trillion of GDP are supported by the air travel industry.

Aviation provides the only rapid worldwide transportation network, which makes it essential for global business and tourism and plays a vital role in facilitating economic growth, particularly in developing countries. Moreover, air transport carries around 35% of world trade by value, but only 0.5% by volume.

We also know that the aviation industry contributes to two percent of all man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, 80 percent of which are related to passenger flights exceeding 1,500km, and for which there is no practical alternative.

Airbus believes that it is important to continue to invest in innovation, making sure air transport needs are met in a sustainable way. Thomas Enders, CEO of Airbus describes it thus; “At Airbus, we believe air transport is crucial to a thriving and healthy global economy, which in turn needs social and natural environments. These beliefs drive everything we do. We engage our customers, employees, suppliers and communities to build a business which makes a positive contribution to the environment and to society overall.”

To this end, Airbus has taken on board the aviation industry targets of improving fuel efficiency by an average of 1.5 percent annually to 2020, capping

net carbon from 2020 and aiming for a 50 percent net reduction in carbon emissions by 2050 compared to 2005 levels.

More than 90 percent of Airbus Research & Technology investments are, in fact, for the benefit of the environment. This investment goes mainly to the development of new aircraft technologies, to the improvement and implementation of a modern Air Traffic Management and to the implementation of alternative-fuel value chains.

As a result, in October 2011 Airbus and Air-France completed the world’s greenest commercial flight by putting into practice elements in the Airbus roadmap: alternative-fuels, optimised ATM and green navigation, with the flight from Toulouse to Paris using an Airbus A321 emitting just half the CO2 of a regular flight.

Airbus strongly believes that aviation can perform today a “perfect flight”. However, this cannot be developed and implemented without the support and involvement of the whole aviation industry, as well as stakeholders and politicians.

Airbus Aircraft: Eco-efficient by Design

The environment is Airbus’ top level requirement for the design of any aircraft. This reaffirms Airbus’ commitment to European Commission Flightpath 2050 targets of 75 percent CO2 emissions reduction per passenger, per kilometre,

90 percent nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions reduction and 65 percent noise reduction by 2050.

With 25 percent less fuel consumption than the current generation aircraft, the A350XWB aircraft can lay claim to the leading environmental performance in the long-range market, designed as it is to be eco-efficient from gate-to-gate.

The New Engine Option (neo) developed for the A320 Family, combined with enhanced vertical wing tip extensions

to improve aircraft efficiency called ‘sharklets’ will allow for 15 percent fuel burn saving compared to the older generation, which equates to 3,600 tonnes of CO2 saved annually per aircraft. Meanwhile, Airbus’ eco-efficiency approach goes throughout the life cycle of its products, creating added value while minimising environmental impact.

This is evidenced through Airbus’ use of a robust environmental management system to continually monitor and minimise the environmental impact of its processes and products at each stage.

Of additional note is the fact that in January 2007, Airbus became the first company in the aerospace manufacturing sector to receive ISO 14001 environmental certification covering all its manufacturing sites and product related activities throughout a full life-cycle approach. The ISO 14001 was successfully renewed in 2010.

Alternative Fuels

The most obvious way to cut CO2 emissions is to reduce fuel consumption. This can notably be done through the use of alternative fuels. Airbus believes these should be primarily reserved for aviation as there are no other viable alternative energy sources foreseen in the coming years. Airbus’ alternative fuels strategy is based around being the catalyst in the search for sustainable solutions (those that don’t compete with land needed for water or food) for the production of alternative fuels in commercial quantities for aviation.

In June 2011, Airbus, together with the European Commission, the leading European airlines and European biofuel producers launched an exciting new industry-wide initiative to speed up the commercialisation of aviation biofuels in Europe.

These “Biofuel Flightpath” members have commited to support and promote the production, storage and distribution of sustainably produced drop-in biofuels for use in aviation, with the objective of reaching two million tonnes production and consumption by 2020.

Airbus is leading this process through a global programme connecting farmers, refiners and the end users (airlines) to form regional alternative fuel “value chains”, five of which have already been established; in Brazil (TAM); in the Middle East (Qatar); in Romania (Tarom);, in Spain (Iberia); and in Australia (Virgin).

Airbus’ role in the value chain is to lead and manage the sustainability assessment and life cycle analysis as

At Airbus Best Practices Shape Sustainability

Airbus strongly believes that aviation can perform today a “perfect flight”

54

Thomas Enders, CEO, Airbus

Source: Air Transport Action Group

55

TheregionofCornwalllocatedontheUK’sSouthWesttipboastspowerfulAtlantictides,aprevailingandreliablewesterlyoceanicswell,thelongeststretchofcoastlineintheUKat700km,andgranitegeology.ItisthereforenosurprisethatCornwall’soffercontinuestoattractinwardinvestment,supportedbyalocalGovernmentcommittedtoreducingthecounty’scarbonfootprintandtofosteringasustainableeconomicenvironment.

Cornwall has a well established green economy, playing host to global leaders in wind, marine, solar and geothermal power, waste processing and environmental consultancy, resulting in an enviable infrastructure, knowledge base and supply chain to address investors’ requirements. 

The region also boasts globally respected environmental and climate research hubs in the form of the Combined Universities in Cornwall and the Eden Project, which alongside visionary projects such as the Orascom Development led proposed eco-town, serve only to cement Cornwall’s reputation.

In 2009 the wider South West region became the UK’s first Low Carbon Economic Area, and in January 2012 its status as the UK’s first Marine Energy Park was announced by UK Energy Minister Greg Barker. The South West Marine Energy Park brings together the public and private sectors to create a focus for attracting further investment and accelerating the commercial development of the marine renewables’ sector.  It is in fact activity in the fields of marine renewable energy as well as geothermal power that most clearly attests to Cornwall’s world-leading status in respect of sustainable development.  Marine Renewables There are a number of jewels in Cornwall’s marine renewables crown. Key to its leadership is the geographical

closeness of an excellent wave resource to the supportive grid and port infrastructure, as well as internationally recognised research facilities. Stand out projects include ‘Wave Hub’, Fab Test, the Dynamic Marine Component Test Facility (DMAC) and the South West Mooring Test Facility (SWMTF).

Wave Hub, off the north coast at Hayle, constitutes the world’s largest dedicated facility for long-term testing of wave energy arrays. It is owned by the UK Department of Business Innovations and Skills (BIS) and is run and managed by a local operating company Wave Hub Limited.

Falmouth Bay’s Fab-Test provides technology developers with a consented sea area for short term pre-commissioning trials. DMAC, meanwhile, will benefit wave energy device developers, investors and insurance companies by providing opportunities for companies to identify potential engineering problems and refine designs quickly and efficiently, whilst the SWMTF will help develop a thorough understanding of the mooring system behaviour of Offshore Renewable Energy systems in real wave, wind, current and tidal conditions, which in turn will lead to more reliable and economic mooring systems.

Support for the growth of the marine renewable energy in Cornwall, is provided by the Peninsular Research Institute for Marine Renewable Energy (PRIMaRE). This body of international researchers and world-class facilities for R&D in respect of wave and tidal

resource assessment, hydrodynamics and reliability testing and modelling, acts to promote knowledge transfer to industry through a network of specialist business contacts.

For potential investors the established nature of the sector in Cornwall is clear, with an abundance of specialists in the fields of geotechnical investigation, off-shore wave, wind & tidal farm construction, diving, marine construction, marine drilling and socketing and marine pipeline installation, as well as an established marine energy industry cluster centred around Falmouth’s deep water harbour.

Hayle Harbour, is internationally recognised as being the landfall for Wave Hub and a purpose-built Marine Energy Business Park will be completed by 2014, providing sector-driven facilities to support the development of the global marine energy industry.

Geothermal Cornwall’s geology that sees granite present close to the surface ensures it is ideally suited for deep geothermal power.

Building on the knowledge accrued and experience of heat pump specialists and geothermal experts involved in the original 1980s hot dry rocks research project, plans for the first two commercial geothermal plants in the county are imminent. The first of these is a £40m development near Redruth set to supply 10MW of base load electricity to the National Grid and up to 55MW of renewable heat for local use, whilst the second comes in the form of a plant to power the aforementioned Eden Project and nearby eco-town.

The UK government is lending its support via its innovative Renewable Heat Incentive, offering cash incentives for the generation of heat from renewable sources, which should prove particularly enticing to the commercial sector. Meanwhile, some residential and educational premises in Cornwall have already introduced ground-source heat pumps to generate renewable energy from their own premises.

Cornwall’s Green Economy

Cornwall's Wave Hub facility

Interested in business opportunities in the UK? Explore Cornwall as the next location for your business.

Get in touch: +44 (0)1872 322872info@investincornwall.comwww.investincornwall.com

Get in touch: +44 (0)1872 322872info@investincornwall.comwww.investincornwall.com

Scan the code with your smartphone to view further info online now

©W

illya

m B

rad

ber

ry/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

Trade,Industry and Technology

jet

engi

ne p

hoto

©ID

1974

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

mnu

mb

ers

illus

trat

ion©

UR

RR

A/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

©don

victorio@o2

.pl/S

hutterstock.com

Is there the need for a single universally accepted and strict

definition of what constitutes a ‘green job’ encompassing a high threshold in respect of efficiency in the use of energy, water and materials to ensure progress can be accurately quantified and to eradicate the illusion of progress given by some more general definitions that are open to interpretation? If so, what would this definition be and is it subject to change to reflect future technological developments?

To date, there is no internationally agreed definition of what constitutes

a ‘green job’ or the ‘green economy’. At UNCTAD we deal mostly with the concept of green economy. Our work focuses on analysing the opportunities as well as the challenges that would be presented to developing countries by a concerted multilateral effort to promote sustainability in both production and consumption.

The concept of green economy, even without a clear and consistent definition, has emerged as a central point of discussion in the intergovernmental negotiations for the UN Rio+20 Conference, and UNCTAD is the UN focal-point institution dealing with trade and trade-related matters. For practical reasons, we, like other UN organisations, have adopted a working definition, which states that a green economy is “one that is low carbon, resource efficient and socially inclusive.”

The goal of building a green economy on these terms is consistent with long-established expectations and understandings, and we believe that, in this broad sense, achieving a green

economy is likely to become a widely shared goal. The basic challenge is to foster sustainability in all its dimensions, while also achieving accelerated economic development and social inclusion.

The substantial growth in investment necessary to achieve

climate mitigation and adaptation objectives is one of the most important drivers of green jobs. However, how can mass job losses in those anachronistic industries being replaced, which in many cases will define a whole region, be avoided during the transition?

To the extent that switching to low-emitting and sustainable methods

reduces natural resource depletion and reduces or avoids externalities that impose uncompensated social costs on others not directly involved in production, then the transition to green methods may be a necessary response to market failure and should leave society as a whole better off. Yet the transition to a green economy will certainly have costs, and will likely result in significant dislocation in production methods and locations and in the structure of employment, both within and among

countries. ‘Brown’ sectors will be phased out and replaced by greener industries and that could result in job losses, at least during the transition phase. As a society, therefore, we face an urgent challenge of finding ways to continue to advance social development while ensuring that the global commons are sustained. To minimise the social costs, governments must have an active role in managing the transition. And coordinated policies and actions are also needed at the international level to steer a transition that is fair in both its sharing of the costs and in assuring full global access to emerging technologies and practices.

Do you feel that the sustainable development debate to date

has not adequately addressed the challenge of social exclusion? How important is job creation and particularly green job creation in respect of formulating policy at Rio+20?

Substantial progress has been made since the Rio Conference

of 1992, including the creation of multilateral agreements that protect the Earth’s environment. However, there are also many significant gaps on the social and environmental fronts. As a society we are faced with a major challenge; namely finding a way to continue to advance social development while ensuring that the global commons can be sustained to the benefit of current and future generations. How can we meet this challenge? Some have argued that we should moderate economic growth. But this is not an acceptable option, because economic growth is required both to meet the consumption needs of a growing global population and to create jobs and reduce poverty for the world’s poor. Others have suggested that we manage population. However, at current population levels production and consumption patterns are already environmentally unsustainable. Technological progress to increase resource efficiency thus emerges as a critical pathway to achieve the objective of sustaining continued economic and population growth while at the same time decreasing the adverse effects of future production and consumption activities.

You have spoken of how the next era of globalisation should be

‘development’, rather than ‘finance’ led. What do you mean by this and how will it assist in bringing about social inclusion on a global scale?

We are in need of effective frameworks to support sustainable

development. For this to happen, reforms have to take place at the national and global levels. On the one hand, national governments need to recover some of the policy space they have lost under a variety of international trade and investment agreements, so that they can adopt time-proven policies for accelerating industrial development, fostering structural transformation and technological upgrading, and increasing productive capacities.

Dr. Supachai Panitchpakdi, Secretary General, UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development)

GREEN JOBS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION

Dr. Supachai Panitchpakdi, Secretary-General of UNCTAD

“the transition to a green economy will certainly have costs”

58

GREEN JOBS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION

We also need to focus on more creative and flexible approaches to knowledge sharing, and avoid financialising access to technology by making it wholly dependent on international financing and foreign licensing. Developing national capacities for technology absorption, adaptation, and innovation must be seen as a vital aspect of national development. Developing countries themselves must prioritise investments to strengthen their own scientific and technical base, whether in agriculture, mining and refining, and/or a wide range of other relevant productive activities. But they should also be able to count on international support.

In the past, we have found ways to combine resources and skills internationally to create and share new knowledge. The first green revolution worked this way, with regional centres established around the globe for research and development; these centres produced new hybrid seed strains and helped to cultivate cadres of national experts through an active programme of knowledge sharing. This is one illustration of what I mean by an era of globalisation that is not finance-centred, but rather development-centred.

Is it asking too much of governments with re-election

in the backs of their minds, to create the policy space necessary for the re-regulation of finance and business necessary to facilitate the massive investments required to lead the transition to a green economy and deliver fundamental change - especially when they are currently so preoccupied with dealing with the financial crisis? Can voters realistically be convinced that employment losses resulting from a policy of inertia in respect of the environmental crisis are likely to be far more serious than environmental policies which in the short term have the potential to threaten jobs?

These are good, but difficult questions: Is a radical

transformation of the economy required? If so, are massive investments necessary for a transition to a green economy, and where, then, will the financial resources come from? First, on the question of funding and in spite of the current world economic situation, the answer may well be: yes, funds can be mobilised. Despite the worldwide deleveraging underway, corporate balance sheets are relatively healthy – thanks in large part to massive public sector support, including unprecedented monetary easing and a shifting of private deficits to the public sector. So the availability or scarcity of money isn’t the core problem.

Second, the transition to a green economy is already underway in many places of the world, driven essentially by market forces, and sometimes enabled by targeted government interventions and subsidies. There are many examples of this. Many countries are involved in

organic production, ecotourism, and biofuels, to name just a few examples of sectors that conform to a green economy. Therefore, the transformation we are anticipating will be profound, but is also likely to be gradual and diffuse. The question is whether developing countries will be included in this transition, or will be punished for being left out. Will deliberate efforts be made to foster an inclusive pattern of disseminating ‘green knowledge’, or will countries that are in a position to pursue green solutions use border adjustment taxes and other measures to impose costs on countries that face severe competitive disadvantages in making the transition to green methods and technologies?

Finally, in the case of developing countries, massive investments are required, not specifically to foster transition to a green economy, but generally to accelerate development and to foster rapid increases in productivity and employment creation. The question is: how much more will it cost to adopt ‘green’ systems and solutions than standard approaches, and what can be done to make the green alternatives cost competitive? I am a technological realist: I do not believe that technology is the answer to all of our problems, but I do believe that when the world community has made a decision to solve a technological problem, the solutions are found, most often sooner, rather than later.

One of the key themes of Rio+20 is the facilitation of an

institutional framework to deliver effective sustainable development. Would it make sense for such future

institutions to be governed by the UN to ensure the broadest support possible and a far-reaching mandate?

I do believe that the UN is best positioned to be the forum for

deciding what the institutional architecture of a globally coordinated approach should be, and every facet of the UN system must become more focused and more committed to fostering sustainability.

Some ideas mooted to date include a strengthened UNEP,

a UN Global Economic Council to replace the G20, a council of experts to address systemic issues, a global regulatory regime to redirect finance to productive investments and a low carbon economy and an increased role for the UN in advancing international tax cooperation, which ultimately represents a valuable tool for financing sustainable development. What are your thoughts on these – do they go far enough in your opinion?

All of these are important, powerful ideas that deserve appropriate,

careful consideration. I have been among those who have publicly supported many of these ideas, and some others as well. For example, I have repeatedly called for strengthened institutional architecture to manage and resolve international debt issues, and I fully support the Global Sustainability Panel recommendation of having an advisory scientific board.

The failures of globalisation to date have largely been failures of governance. This is certainly true in the case of the most recent global financial crisis, whose causes we have yet to fully address and whose consequences are expected to remain with us for many years. But it is also true in the case of global resource management. In both cases, we have allowed unregulated financial markets to play a much larger role than is prudent, and yet we find we cannot re-regulate financial markets unless we can achieve broad consensus on many basic issues of financial and fiscal governance –including, as President Obama recently proposed in his State of the Union Address, a global tax floor.

We must confront with renewed urgency the paradox of sovereignty, recognising that while we live in a world of nation-states, no nation-state has the capacity to secure and manage all of the conditions of its existence independently of all the others. We need considerable institutional development for more effective world governance, and we need to evolve new principles of subsidiarity to enable broad-based, inclusive participation in the design or reform of appropriate rules and organisations.

It has been argued that a financial transactions tax could

promote long-term investments, provide resources for climate change adaptation/mitigation and help fund a social protection floor. Do you agree?

“transformation...will be profound, but is also likely to be gradual and diffuse”

©VLA

DGRIN/Shu

tterstock.com

©E.G.Pors/Shutterstock.com

59

We think that the financial transactions tax could help to

regulate some of the particularly volatile short-term funds that can help to distort the currency values, though this is not the only way to regulate financial activities. So, we support the implementation of an FTT.

Until now it has been obvious that the existing sources of climate change finance for both mitigation and adaptation fall short of the needs identified by developing countries. Existing climate-related funds and UNFCCC mechanisms intended to generate new and additional finance to support a low-carbon future have had significant teething problems – especially for the countries that need the most help, the least developed countries and the small island developing states.

As a member of the UN Secretary-General’s high-level Advisory Group on climate change Finance (AGF), I argued strenuously that proposals for climate finance should proceed from a clear understanding of developing countries’ needs. Today’s patchwork of instruments tends to duplicate and overlap functions, and encourages competition and confusion among institutions and their intended clients. Therefore, rather than thinking only about new instruments, I believe the focus should also be on asking how climate finance can be used to address fundamental development needs. Aligning existing funds and funding mechanisms with these needs, and giving developing countries a far greater say in the governance of these funds can go a long way toward improving the effectiveness and coherence of existing institutions, mechanisms and instruments. The effectiveness of the future architecture for global climate change finance will very much depend on rebalancing governance in climate finance.

Is it right that creditors should carry some share of the burden

in any truly fair and equitable debt workout mechanism, so as to allow all parties affected, and particularly LDCs, to focus on meaningful implementation of sustainable development?

Without making a broad a priori judgment about what constitutes

a truly fair and equitable debt workout mechanism, I believe that some procedural matters should be addressed to assure that debtors, as well as creditors, are treated fairly. Accordingly, I have called for debt payment moratoria or standstills in the face of debt payment difficulties as an important measure to protect the interests of both creditors and debtors.

Some see the green economy as a chance to promote new

jobs, markets and technology, while others are wary of powerful incumbent interests exacerbating existing inequalities through forms of protectionism in respect of these new markets and policies. Is this fear misplaced? Is it important that the public rather than private sector leads the transition to a green economy, since only it can establish an inclusive social contract and strengthen participatory politics?

The concern raised by some developing countries that

promoting the green economy may lead to new forms of trade protectionism is legitimate. There is already some evidence that some countries may wish to impose new standards and border adjustment measures that would have the effect of closing developed-country markets to developing country producers. It is also a matter of concern that certain policy instruments designed to foster development and adoption of

low-carbon technologies and sustainable or green production may be subject to litigation under existing trade rules. This implies that a transition will have to be effectively managed at the international level to prevent and resolve any conflicts that may emerge.

How can developed world policymakers be prevented

from blocking imports on ecological grounds to achieve traditional protectionist goals?

A mechanism for international cooperation on trade-related

green economy challenges could be established through a solution-oriented ‘Forum on Green Economy and Trade’. This Forum could serve as a round-table for technical discussions on issues identified by a broad range of stakeholders, including governmental and non-governmental representatives. The Forum would not be a formal negotiating venue, but rather a platform for science-based discussions aimed at consensus building. Sessions would be convened regularly and would be demand-based, addressing topics reflecting the expressed interests of member States. Forum topics will be announced well in advance to allow the fullest participation of interested stakeholders.

Do you accept that the current received wisdom of what

constitutes progress, prosperity and economic value, which has historically delivered myriad benefits to the developed world, is now outmoded, and that to address the joint global challenges of a growing population, depleted resources, rocketing growth and the marginalised poor, a wholly new vision is required? Has the time now come for financial markets and institutions to serve, not dictate the real economy, in light of the fact that speculative market behaviour fundamentally heightens inequality and threatens social and economic stability and inclusiveness.

My answer to the second question is strongly affirmative. So much so

that I made the transition from finance-led globalisation to development-centred globalisation the central theme of my Report to the Thirteenth Session of the UNCTAD in Doha, Qatar, April 2012.

In my report I argued that many of the worst features of globalisation as we have experienced it during the past 30 years – the ever rising propensity to financial instability and crisis, the pronounced shift toward market concentration and inequality, and the marked unevenness of prosperity and development – are directly connected to the most distinctive aspect of contemporary globalisation: the dominant role that global finance has been allowed to play.

“every facet of the UN system must become more focused and more committed to fostering sustainability”

Ecotourism is another service growing in a greening economy

©P

ichu

gin

Dm

itry/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

60

The most urgent challenge we face today is not simply to sustain recovery from the last financial crisis, but to address the deeper causes of that crisis and the many that preceded it. In order to make globalisation, which remains a powerful force for good, more development oriented and inclusive, we need to rebalance state and market by strengthening governance institutions at all levels. We also need to rebalance finance and the real economy by doing far more to assure that financial resources are more effectively channelled to increasing productive capacities and fostering sustainability. Finally, we need to rebalance the social contract, more effectively linking productivity increases and economic growth to increases in wages and incomes, and assuring equality of opportunity, voice and participation.

There are many obstacles to widespread green employment in

the increasingly globalised agricultural sector. How can this be addressed without ‘turning back the clock’ for many LDCs looking to move away from a subsistence era? Is Payment for Environmental Services (PES) the answer?

Agriculture continues to be the primary motor of many developing

countries, in particular in LDC economies where it accounts for between 30 to 60 per cent of the GDP and employs up to 80 per cent of the national workforce. The sector supplies the bulk of basic food and provides subsistence and other income to more than half of the LDCs’ populations. Sustainable agricultural production protects natural ecosystems and yields natural products, including organic products that are benefiting from growing demand and represent a tangible opportunity for many developing countries. However, obstacles to greening the agricultural sector remain. For instance, as energy becomes scarce in the coming decades, agriculture must transition to practices that run more on renewable energy, regenerate soil fertility and enhance yields. These three objectives should guide in agricultural policies, and we resist the belief that all the answers lie with additional funding.

Do you agree that if large-scale green employment is to become

a reality, then a much bolder blend of regulations, business incentives, and PPPs needs to be realised than has to date been the case? Do you consider there are additional tools other than public investment, subsidy shifts, new R&D priorities, ecological tax reform, producer responsibility obligations, eco-labelling, binding targets and the proactive promotion of green alternatives that can assist in this process?

At UNCTAD we have examined a variety of potential trade instruments

that have been proposed to promote a green economy. These measures include

subsidy reform; environmentally-related taxation; other tax instruments, fees and charges; use of regulations, standards or prohibitions; removal of trade barriers to green goods and services; increased funding for the innovation chain; investment incentives; conditioned support; and, public procurement policies to foster sustainability. Our analysis finds the majority of proposed instruments are domestically focused, with little expected impact on imports or exports; some with potentially positive impacts for foreign exporters; and others, while not inherently negative, with possible troubling aspects depending on their design. There are a number of measures that do have troubling impacts but would be prevented by WTO disciplines, and only a few measures that are likely to be problematic and are not adequately inhibited by existing rules.

Should captains of industry be encouraged to take a more

integrated approach to how they assess ‘productivity’ so that it incorporates labour, energy, materials and environmental factors, thereby in the process supporting greener jobs and workplaces? How can they be persuaded that going green is not just compatible with profits, but can also increase them?

There are major commercial opportunities in a global greening

market. Businesses are clearly

persuaded, as the trends indicate. Within the energy sector for instance, global growth in renewable energy sources contributing to world primary energy supply now greatly exceeds growth in fossil fuel based energy sources. Since 1990, annual growth in solar PV, wind and biofuel supply capacity has averaged 42, 25 and 15 per cent respectively, compared to the rate of only 1.3 per cent for oil.

The increase in renewable energy capacity is reflected in recent investment trends. In 2010, US $211 billion was invested in renewable energy supply, more than 5 times the amount invested in 2004. And for the first time, developing countries surpassed developed countries in new spending on utility-scale renewable energy projects and provision of equity capital for renewable energy companies; US $72 billion was invested in developing countries versus US $70 billion in developed economies.

Developing countries are also increasing their presence in sustainably harvested timber products markets. Globally, forest land area certified by the Forestry Stewardship Council has increased seven-fold over the past decade to reach nearly 140 million hectares in 2010, with developing countries’ share of this total rising to about 20 percent.

Momentum towards a green economy is also present in the services sector. Over the past decade, carbon emissions reduction services have grown from infancy to become a major world market today. The value of the global carbon market rose from only US $11 billion in 2005 to US $142 billion in 2010. Much of this market (US $120 billion) involves emissions trading among developed countries, but CDM projects in 81 developing countries supported investments worth US $20 billion in 2010.

Ecotourism is another service growing in a greening economy. It is projected to capture 25 per cent of global tourism revenues in 2012, with international tourists spending US $240 billion in ecotourism destinations. The majority of these destinations are in developing countries.

Recognising the dynamic growth of nascent green economy markets, firms in both developed and developing countries are pursuing expanded export opportunities for green goods such as more efficient and renewable energy technologies, cleaner production technologies, sustainably produced agricultural, timber and fisheries products, as well as for green services such as ecotourism and carbon sequestration.

“There are major commercial opportunities in a global greening market”

©M

atth

ew C

ole/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

©VLA

DGRIN/Shu

tterstock.com

61

Vision2050ArabiachallengestheMiddleEasttolivesustainablyandforthepublic,privatesectorsandgeneralpublicatlargetoconsiderthe‘greenagenda’.JoannaGraytalkstoHussainAlMahmoudi,PresidentoftheUnitedArabEmiratesBusinessCouncilforSustainableDevelopment(UAEBCSD)whichislaunchingtheVision.

As far back as 2009 the Saudi Minister of Petroleum, Ali Al-Naimi stated in an interview with Reuters that, “Saudi Arabia aspires to export as much solar energy in the future as it exports oil now.” With a Deloitte report entitled ‘Energy on Demand: the future of GCC energy efficiency,’ predicting that per capita electricity consumption up to 2035 in the GCC is likely to increase at an annual rate of 2.5 per cent, clearly even in the most oil rich region on earth there is support for alternative energies and solutions to meet rising demands.

So hats off to the man responsible for bringing Vision 2050 to Arabia: Hussain Al Mahmoudi, President of the UAE BCSD, the regional arm of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). He approached PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), compilers of the original WBCSD report, in late 2011, and by early 2012 Vision 2050 had been translated into Arabic and the region specific document ‘Vision 2050 Arabia’ launched at the World Future Energy Summit in Abu Dhabi. The very fact Hussain Al Mahmoudi, a man of immense corporate standing in the Middle East, is confident that its mere launch can help to change the

debate in the region demonstrates its potential. Corporations from across the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) are already involved, which illustrates that talk of sustainability is gaining real traction in the Middle East.

So why is it that Mr Al Mahmoudi thinks that Vision 2050 Arabia can engage corporations to develop a plan to conserve human, economic and natural resources, while also enabling production? “The first point is that this is the first time an initiative has been launched that engages the private sector and public sector and establishes how both sectors can develop sustainably. Normally in this part of the world plans come from the Government side, but Vision 2050 is a partnership and a

roadmap for the future. This is unique. The second point is to set up a protocol for stakeholders to think long term rather than short term. Most of the issues we have in this part of the world are short term, but we want to lay the foundations for future thinking and planning. The commitment of this region to sustainability in general and social sustainability is being led by NGOs rather than the government.”

What Mr Al Mahmoudi is most keen to impress is the value of Vision Arabia in educating both corporations and the general public about the merits of clean technology and energy efficiency. “It’s

the responsibility of Governments and our organisation to raise awareness and not to assume that people will understand and see the point of this from day one. Businesses are there to make profits and to do what makes good business sense and we have to find a balance between NGOs promoting sustainability and business interests. I think they are receptive and demonstrate responsibility. There are a lot of areas of education for everybody; governments, public and private sector.” What takes Vision 2050 Arabia beyond another corporate utopian document into one of real present benefits is its awareness of the potential of sustainable industry to contribute to the solution of youth unemployment. The Middle East has a famously high youth population, but also high youth unemployment hovering at around 25 percent. Al Mahmoudi agrees, “Of course, youth development and youth employment is a key issue throughout the Arab world. I think almost all governments around the region believe these are very key issues and we can see this in what is happening in the Arab Spring. In the arena of sustainability it’s key to developing local talents, with our children and looking for solutions for the problem within sustainable industries.

“The big shift that we could achieve in the Middle East is by educating the population about the basics of sustainability; how they manage the simple things like their consumption and use of water. Before we go talking about reducing CO2 and carbon capture, let’s get the public to consider how they use their own resources. But we should all walk the talk, as the sustainability argument applies everywhere, not just here.”

Vision 2050 Arabia

It’s the responsibility of Governments and our organisation to raise awareness and not to assume that people will understand and see the point of this from day one

Sheikh Zayed Mosque, Abu Dhabi, UAE

pho

to C

C b

y Jo

achi

m H

uber

Hussain Al Mahmoudi, President, UAEBCSD

©D

hanaji Wad

akar/Shutterstock.com

62

The extraction and processing of minerals to provide services important to human society has gone on for millennia. The resulting metals and minerals play a vast, essential and evolving role in today’s society, a role that will continue far into the future, inevitably expanding to include usages that are not currently understood.

However, in some communities and regions, the environmental and social legacy of mining and metals manufacturing is far from positive. In the early 1990s, concerns linked to this observation led some to question whether in certain circumstances the presence of a mineral endowment was a kind of ‘resource curse’. We now know that this does not need to be the case. If managed responsibly and effectively, mining and metals manufacturing can and will provide a foundation for achieving the kind of life that different cultures seek.

But what does this ‘managed responsibly and effectively’ really mean? Minerals and metals are a critical part of developing a modern society – providing essential products, wealth, jobs and opportunity. But in some countries these resources have been misused and squandered, fuelling conflict and political unrest. There have been disputes over land use, property rights, environmental damage, transparency of revenues, and a growing debate about the distribution of the spoils.

At the same time, demands for a ‘green’ and/or ‘low-carbon economy’ are growing. Critically, the millennium development goal of reducing poverty

must be met. In reality, for human kind to walk more lightly on the earth and to achieve the poverty reduction that is needed across the world, we need evolution that is marked by innovation, creativity and sensitivity. These needed approaches are not possible without mined metals and minerals.

The International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) was formed in 2001 to catalyse change and enhance the contribution of mining, minerals and metals to sustainable development. Our 21 member companies employ close to one million of the 2.5 million people working in the mining and metals sector

worldwide. These companies have some 800 operations in 62 countries and produce many of the world’s commodities – 38% of the gold, 30% iron ore, 37% platinum and 34% nickel (WorldMineralProduction2004-2008,BritishGeologicalSurvey2010). These operations place our members on the front line in dealing with the many complex environmental and social issues apparent today.

Mine projects follow a life cycle that starts with exploration and proceeds through construction, operation, closure and post-closure. Something that is little understood is that across this full life cycle, a 20 to 30 year operating mine can involve five to seven generations of ‘relationship’ between industry and host community at a given location. The seven generation perspective of many indigenous peoples has thus a practical and direct application to mining and metals operations.

In following a path that is ‘responsible and effective,’ an approach is called for that is built on a full understanding and explicit recognition of all benefits, costs, risks and responsibilities that accrue to all parties that are affected. This is a tough challenge and inevitably entails collaboration to ensure that an equitable distribution of these is achieved.

Each one of these – benefits, costs, risks and responsibilities – is complex when

Mining’s Contribution to Sustainable DevelopmentBy Dr. Anthony Hodge, President, International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM)

The long term nature of mining provides an opportunity to be a partner with communities over multiple generations

Dr. Anthony Hodge, President, ICMM

©Va

he K

atrjy

an/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

64

viewed from the perspectives of different interests. But all must be considered.

For example, from a country-level macroeconomic perspective, the generation of foreign direct investment, foreign exchange, and government revenues are all important. At the local level, however, it is the direct benefits of jobs, infrastructure, and community services that become critical to consider. It is here that a community’s confidence can be enhanced in achieving the future that it wants for itself.

When developing a mine, companies risk the capital of their investors to create the project and ultimately generate a return. However, communities too face risks in terms of the effect mining has on their way of life over the long term.

Importantly, if we are to ensure that the needed balance of benefits, costs and risks is achieved, all parties – government, company, community – carry certain responsibilities that must be clearly assigned and resourced if we are to ensure that accountabilities are maintained and learnings drawn out that will lead to performance refinement and improvement over the long term.

The industry has made significant progress in the last 20 years, but there is much yet to do. The long term nature of mining provides an opportunity to be a partner with communities over multiple generations. If the activities are designed and implemented in a way that reflects the overlap in values of all the parties – government, company and community – there is a tremendous opportunity for a positive contribution over the long run.

Importantly, within the mining and metals industry there is a key role for collaboration as well. Mines often occur in clusters and when they do, collaboration between companies to address service and infrastructure needs of projects and communities alike is critical if the possible efficiencies are to be achieved – not only for the mine projects, but also for the region, and

not only for the time of operating mine, but also long after. Small players in the industry are nimble, agile and fast movers. Large companies have the resources and the technical skills. There is an opportunity to value and benefit from each other’s skills and strengths. Seen in this way, the mining and metals industry is a complex, interdependent web of players.

Aristotle said, “it is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen.” We need to become better at communicating what the real contribution of the mining and metals industry is, how we can redefine this contribution, make it stronger and ensure it is better understood across the world. Open and transparent decision-making will enhance trust and respect. A full and open treatment of strengths and limitations is essential. Listening and hearing others’ concerns as well as our own is essential.

If you ask engineers to design something so that the ecosystem after you have finished is just as nimble and just as capable of reproducing, they will accept that challenge and find a solution. If you do not ask them, they will not do it. It is our own creativity that makes this possible.

You may ask: what is the value of mining to your country – can it be a bridge to

a better future? Our answer is yes, if the process is done responsibly and effectively. Learning our way forward to being more responsible and effective, strengthening our contribution to sustainable development is the task before ICMM, its members and the industry as a whole.

TheInternationalCouncilonMiningandMetals(ICMM)wasestablishedin2001toimprovesustainabledevelopmentperformanceintheminingandmetalsindustry.Today,itbringstogether21miningandmetalscompanies,aswellas31nationalandregionalminingassociationsandglobalcommodityassociations.

www.icmm.com

within the mining and metals industry there is a key role for collaboration

The industry has made significant progress in the last 20 years, but there is much yet to do

A weir for preserving and enhancing water resources under construction in 2009 at Rio Tinto’s QIT Madagascar Minerals (QMM) in Madagascar

Pho

to ©

Rio

Tin

to

65

I was once asked what I thought was the most pressing problem facing the world today. To select the worst of the worst is hard, but the Rio+20 Conference’s priority areas of energy supply, decent jobs, sustainable cities, sustainable food supplies, access to water, quality of the oceans and disaster readiness make a comprehensive list to start with. For me, climate change and poverty are also high on the shortlist; and all of these issues are interlinked, so we can’t solve one whilst ignoring the others.

Ensuring society has a sustainable supply of essential resources like food, clean water and energy is becoming more of an issue every year. With rising populations and increased impact from the effects of anthropogenic climate change, it is easy to become downbeat and overwhelmed by the scale of the challenges we face. However, I am an optimist at heart and believe with innovation, strong policy changes and an entrepreneurial spirit, we have the ability to change our ‘business as usual’ behaviour, protect and preserve the natural systems on which we depend, and adapt to the changes that will be thrown at us. The varied challenges faced by the world today, especially that of mitigating and adapting to the effects of climate change, require new and revolutionary thoughts, ideas, collaborations and actions – this is exactly what entrepreneurs do best!

Despite my optimism, I would never consider a positive outlook as an excuse to sit back and wait for change: I am calling for action. We must support those making pragmatic and positive changes, encourage those that aren’t and understand the impacts and responsibilities we all have.

Valuing our natural and human resources in much the same way we value commodities, businesses and currency is one way to do this. If the costs of using and the benefits of protecting less tangible assets, such as the quality of our air, the stability of the climate and the biodiversity of our terrestrial and marine ecosystems, were properly evaluated and considered, would the global citizens in our global society and economy be doing a better job of managing them?

As a businessman I have been lucky enough to meet many amazing people and visit beautiful places around the world. This constantly reinforces my belief in the huge contribution business must make to urgently tackle the world’s problems. I am not only referring to the internal agenda which focuses on the operations, but also a greater understanding of how a business’ core product can help deliver the positive changes we need today.

Many see there to be a clash between success in business and leading a sustainable life, but I see the real conflict being between business and unsustainability. Business cannot prosper in a world of poverty, dangerous climate change and declining resources. Long term success can only happen when there is a world of fairer incomes, efficient resource use, stability and well being. Sustainable businesses, by their very definition, will always out-compete their unsustainable rivals. Their success will in part be thanks to the efforts of policymakers and regulators, but also because sustainable businesses see the upsides to be found in working in harmony with nature and the systems of our planet, rather than against them; they do business like there is a tomorrow.

Sometimes my passion for sustainability and climate change has been challenged

because of my investments in airlines. I would argue this does nothing but heighten my interest in both topics. There is nothing quite like running an airline to make you aware of the technical, commercial and political complexities of continuing to provide a service the world wants, while remaining competitive and embedding a low carbon strategy across the business.

Whilst entrepreneurs often succeed in going it alone, many aspects of sustainable development require us to collaborate within and across sectors. Converting an entire fleet of aeroplanes from high carbon fuel to low carbon fuel requires commitment from not only the airlines themselves, but also the fuel and aircraft makers, policymakers, airport operators plus all our competitors.

New technology and fuel is one area that Virgin is taking very seriously. We founded the Virgin Green Fund to invest growth capital in cleantech, and we have been looking at how our own companies can drive new innovation forward.

Last October I announced Virgin Atlantic had partnered with LanzaTech to develop a next generation low-carbon fuel. LanzaTech has a unique patented fermentation technology that uses a microbe to convert waste carbon monoxide (CO) gas from industrial steel mills into ethanol. Then, using technology from Swedish Biofuels, the ethanol is converted into jet fuel. The best bit about the LanzaTech biofuel is that not only does it have less than half the total life cycle carbon content compared to kerosene, its prices are on a par with current commercial aviation fuel and it uses what is essentially a waste product that is currently just flared off directly to the atmosphere.

We are still at the testing phase, but I think this is a really amazing breakthrough. If successful, it could produce up to 15 billion gallons of jet fuel a year, which is almost 20% of current global fuel consumption – this really would be a great step forward!

Not only do I want to look at the individual impacts of my business, I have tried to look at the bigger picture and start finding solutions on a bigger scale. This is what led me to co-found the Carbon War Room in 2008.

The Carbon War Room is a not-for-profit organisation which aims to remove 25 Gigatons of carbon out of the earth’s atmosphere, or a Gigaton from each

Despite my optimism, I would never consider a positive outlook as an excuse to sit back and wait for change: I am calling for action

Richard Branson, Chairman, Virgin Group

66

of the main carbon emitting industries without damaging those industries. Most of the climate change challenge can be solved today in a profitable way, using existing policy and technology. The biggest hurdle is bringing the right people together and getting enough finance behind the initiative - this is what the CWR helps to overcome.

So far the CWR has launched shippingefficiency.org to work with owners, ports, banks & brands to attract capital to upgrade inefficient fleets and is developing the world’s first renewable aviation fuel decision-making tool to help drive the industry forward.

It has also looked at speeding up the implementation of energy efficiency and generation technology in buildings through the Green Capital Operation. So far, the CWR has been successful in forming the PACE Commercial Consortium (PCC) which has unlocked $650 million for improvements in Florida and California by bringing together a range of organisations to make government policy work more effectively. The Carbon War Room is doing some fantastic work by focusing on eliminating barriers, creating opportunities, rather than condemning and punishing – perhaps something we all need to think about within this complex debate.

Carbon emission reduction should be a top priority, but I also want to investigate if it is possible to remove carbon dioxide that is already in our atmosphere, as an additional way of avoiding the effects of anthropogenically-accelerated climate change and ocean acidification. This is why in 2007 I announced a science and innovation competition called Virgin Earth Challenge offering a $25 million prize for whoever can demonstrate a commercially viable, scalable and sustainable activity that can achieve the new removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.

After a lengthy review process, we created a short list of leading groups who were doing great work and whose efforts showed the greatest potential to possibly get to a prize winning state as they move forward. The Virgin Earth Challenge team are now working with the leading groups and collaborating organisations in pursuit of our challenge.

But of course, it doesn’t just stop with carbon and climate change. My own foundation, Virgin Unite has helped me to address other global issues and aims to help revolutionise the way that governments, businesses and the social sector work together – driving business as a force for good.

One of the most inspirational projects that Virgin Unite has helped me to launch was The Elders, an independent group of eminent, respected leaders, who are experienced in problem solving at a global level.

The group’s work is inspired by the role that elders play in traditional societies, where they are a source of advice, wisdom and experience. Working for peace and human rights in areas such as Sudan, Cyprus, the Middle East and Zimbabwe, the Elders support courage where there is fear, foster agreement where there is conflict and offer hope where there is despair. The group, which includes The Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Mary Robinson and President Jimmy Carter, also look at wider global issues including gender equality and environmental issues. I hope that the world leaders and other participants at the Rio Summit will take some inspiration from their efforts.

Although I believe businesses and entrepreneurship must play a critical role in driving change, we all need clear leadership and solid commitments from national governments and the international community to create lasting impact.

There is a wonderfully diverse range of businesses around the globe that are positively responding to our changing world, but many businesses are still failing to act. Policymakers must help to push them in the right direction. Climate change mitigation and adaptation solutions are among the most exciting opportunities of the 21st century. If we fail to make the changes to our use of energy, natural resources and people, then rather than “screwing business as usual” – business as usual may in fact, screw us all.

There is nothing quite like running an airline to make you aware of the technical, commercial and political complexities of continuing to provide a service the world wants, while remaining competitive and embedding a low carbon strategy across the business

© N

AS

A

©ID

1974

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

67

It has been nearly one year since we lost Ray Anderson, founder and chairman of Interface, Inc., my mentor and friend, and nearly 18 years since Interface started its climb up what Ray called, “Mount Sustainability.” As UN Rio+20 convenes, I can’t help but contrast our progress at Interface with the lack of progress we’ve made as a society when it comes to dealing with sustainable development and global growth.

If you know Ray’s story, you probably know that in 1973, he risked everything, investing his life savings and that of several others to found Interface, a company that would bring modular carpet, or carpet tile, to the U.S. Carpet tile was a new idea then, and one that seemed, to some, as heresy. Why would you cut up perfectly good carpet? But the modern office was emerging, one that needed a floor that would accommodate wires and cables, and carpet tile was the perfect solution – a floorcovering that would ‘interface’ with technology; so right, so smart.

More than 20 years of business success later, it was in1994 that Ray had what he called a “spear in the chest” epiphany. Maybe it was just who he was – an entrepreneur now endowed with the wisdom of experience – or maybe it was an act of conscience that inspired Ray, then 60 years old, to rethink our company and its impact on the environment. Either way, the industrial world was not quite ready for his new vision that “we take nothing from the earth that is not rapidly renewable, and do no harm to the biosphere.” As Ray’s CFO at the time, I certainly was not ready for his vision.

It would take almost 10 years and a number of proof points, but what started out as a small band of believers at Interface turned into a cultural

revolution, a company (including me) transformed by the innovation trajectory that sustainability inspired. Speaking as someone who was once an old-school financial guy, I can assure you today that new thinking, through the lens of sustainability, now impacts every decision we make as a company, and makes every decision we make better; so right, so smart.

Granted, the journey of our $1 billion global manufacturing company to sustainability isn’t a precise metaphor for the path of development globally. However, our experience can, I believe, serve as a blueprint for the role that business and industry can play in contributing to sustainable growth.

Here’s the business case as we at Interface know it: Sustainability doesn’t cost, it pays. Our waste elimination and avoidance efforts alone have freed up over $450 million, contributing to the bottom line and offsetting investments in sustainability. Sustainability contributes to a powerful shared culture. Interface has been transformed by our commitment to this higher purpose, and we’ve attracted better associates because of it. The goodwill in the marketplace creates competitive advantage. Our customers are increasingly interested in products with a smaller carbon

footprint, and they trust Interface not to sacrifice performance in the name of sustainability. Informed by biomimicry and other ‘new thinking,’ our products are better than ever.

This business case is backed by sound numbers, in the form of ecometrics which we monitor and report annually. To whit, our 2011 results include: energy use down 47%, greenhouse gas emissions down 34%, water use down 88% and waste to landfill down 88%. Renewable energy makes up 31% of our energy mix, and 44% of our raw materials are recycled or biobased. All of these figures are based on a 1996 baseline.

We are, as I said, a $1 billion company. While this represents a small fraction of the global economy, what if you were to multiply our impact? What if you were to apply Ray’s visionary approach to all of business and industry, or just to manufacturing alone? As Ray often asked, “what is the business case for not pursuing sustainability?”

We’ve heard from many of you over the last few months who were persuaded, maybe by Ray’s Southern gentleman charm but most assuredly by his testimony around the progress that Interface has made. It has become abundantly clear that Ray’s legacy as a visionary pioneer and a champion for the environment is a permanent chapter, not just in our company’s history, but also that of business and industry.

Ray has entrusted to us - me, you, all of us - the fulfilment of his legacy - to climb to the top of what he called “Mount Sustainability.” Ray showed us the way, but it is up to us to make the rest of the climb. Can I count you in?

Ray Anderson’s Legacy to Business and Industry Daniel T. Hendrix, Chairman and CEO, Interface, Inc.

the industrial world was not quite ready for his new vision that “we take nothing from the earth that is not rapidly renewable, and do no harm to the biosphere.”

The late Ray Anderson, founder of Interface

© M

opic

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

Daniel T. Hendrix, CEO, Interface, Inc

68

Climate Change and the ICT SolutionDr Hamadoun Touré, ITU Secretary-General

If necessity were really the mother of invention, we would already hold in our hands an innovative and inclusive agreement that helps our world to reduce the consequences of climate change.

The past decade has shown us the incredible potential information and communication technologies (ICT) have to transform our society. Think of the impact of mobile phones, the Internet, or satellites, not just in increasing connectivity, but also in such areas as healthcare, education, government services and much more. Today, with over six billion cellular subscriptions, and over 2.3 billion people online, the world is better connected to high-speed communication networks than ever before, facilitating the flow of information and knowledge and empowering people to meet their development goals and aspirations. ICTs are the powerhouses of the global economy, the enablers of trade and commerce and the creators of jobs and livelihoods, even when other sectors are faltering.

At the same time, vexing problems like climate change remain an issue that must be a constant on the world’s political agenda. It is among the greatest challenges humankind has ever faced and cannot be simply scheduled for periodic discussions around major international conferences.

Tackling climate change requires coordinated global action and it is only through a unified approach based on far-reaching collaboration by governments, the private sector, international organisations and civil society that we can achieve the necessary conversion to a low-carbon economy. Incremental measures are insufficient, serving only to distract from the global solutions that are so desperately and urgently needed.

We believe that the pace of transformation to a low-carbon economy can be accelerated significantly on a

global scale. This can be achieved by integrating the use of ICTs with climate change policy. Broadband networks can enable widespread use of ICT services and applications and set governments on a forward-looking course, while working to meet national development and poverty reduction goals.

Creating a low-carbon economy requires moving from the energy-intensive, physical infrastructure of the last century to the connected, information-based infrastructure of the 21st century. More than 100 governments have a national strategy to promote broadband because they recognise the opportunities broadband offers for addressing a range of socio-economic goals. The expansion of affordable, reliable broadband access should be a key priority, as it affords the potential to transform our lives and create new business models and opportunities at a time when many countries are struggling to revive their economies from financial crisis.

The International Telecommunication Union has undertaken several concrete measures to tackle climate change and the global challenge we all face.

The first step is to green the ICT sector itself, to ensure that emissions from its manufacturing processes, its use, and its end-of-life waste disposal are kept to a minimum. ICTs are responsible for roughly 2-3 per cent of global GHG emissions, but these technologies also have the potential to enable a low carbon economy.

ITU’s standardisation sector is coordinating a project to establish environmental sustainability guidelines for the ICT sector, whereby sustainability best practices will be determined in partnership with a number of ICT, environmental and research organisations. The resultant sustainability guidelines will provide ICT organisations with a checklist of sustainability requirements, guiding them in efforts to improve their eco-efficiency, and ensuring fair and transparent sustainability reporting.

ITU’s standardisation work has addressed issues such as recycling e-Waste and introducing smart solutions for power consumption, as well as intelligent transport systems.

ITU’s Radiocommunication Sector has focused on earth observation applications for maintaining and improving the accuracy of weather forecasts, for monitoring and predicting climate change, for disaster prediction, monitoring and mitigation, for increasing the understanding, modelling and verification of all aspects of climate change, and for related policy-making. Earth observations are also used to obtain pertinent data regarding natural resources, this being particularly crucial for developing countries.

There is also growing interest in operating oceanographic radars to measure coastal sea surface conditions to support environmental, oceanographic, meteorological, climatological, maritime and disaster mitigation operations. These measurements help to give a better understanding of such important matters as coastal pollution, fisheries management, search and rescue, beach erosion, and maritime navigation. ITU’s work in the area of early warning, disaster mitigation and relief operations is also essential to offset the impact of severe weather conditions as a result of climate change that is wreaking havoc around the world.

ITU’s work impacts every sphere of human activity. By addressing the challenges we face on land, in the air, under sea and in outer space, we aim to make our planet more sustainable in every way possible.

With vision, effective policy choices, far-reaching partnerships and targeted investment, we can turn this unprecedented global challenge into a remarkable opportunity to reshape to a low carbon economy.

ITU’s work impacts every sphere of human activity

© V

LAD

GR

IN/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

69

ByDanielaTorres,GlobalHead,ClimateChangeandEnergyEfficiencyOfficeofTelefónica.

Information and communications technology (ICT) has transformed our society’s way of living. ICTs have continuously delivered innovative products and services that are part of our common activities in cities, countries and regions. However, the huge growth of ICTs and the increased relationship with user-devices, while bringing with it process optimisation, has also marked an increase in energy use and materials consumption.

ICTs, which include telecommunications, computing and internet devices, TVs and data centres, contribute around 2 to 2.5% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.1 These emissions mainly come from the electricity required to operate hundreds of millions of computers, mobile phones and more than two billion televisions that are never fully turned off in homes and offices.

At the same time, different towns and cities of the world suffer various challenges that compromise their social, economic and environmental development. Resource scarcity such as energy, water, or sanitation access, are examples of these challenges. Despite this, people in these regions rely on public policies and innovative technologies to overcome them.

Many argue that the economic downturn has caused companies to push the ‘green agenda’ down the priority list. This is not the case for ICT companies such as Telefónica, however, where we are paying more attention to the business opportunities presented by new ICT solutions, which in turn creates more efficient resource management and contributes to sustainable development.

According to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), “ICTs have the potential to assist in finding a solution to reducing the remaining 97.5 per cent of global emissions from other sectors of the economy, including cities”. Meanwhile, the Smart 2020 report states that new ICT solutions present an opportunity to reduce five times the sector’s own emissions. This is equivalent to 7.8 GTn CO2, or 15% of the total world emissions predicted by 2020, most of which will be generated in cities.2

At present, more than 50% of the global population lives in cities and they account for more than 75% of global CO2 emissions. This massive urban concentration presents a challenge to local governments charged with supplying the resources citizens need to develop their social and economic activities.

As centres of transportation, mobility, industry, basic services supply and local environmental management, the cities of the world are the perfect locations for the adoption of intelligent solutions. As such, they are called upon to be the driving force behind scarce resource management and leaders in the establishment of efficient patterns of consumption for their citizens. In this sense, we believe that despite their carbon footprint and related energy consumption, ICTs are key players in tackling climate change in cities and strategic sectors of the economy. Positive outcomes can be achieved by the introduction of energy-efficient devices, applications and networks, and by the development of new Green ICT technologies.

Internally, ICT companies such as Telefónica must continue to reduce energy consumption & GHG emissions related to their own operations. This is being facilitated by the development of energy efficiency programmes and the implementation of CO2 reduction practices. Furthermore, ICTs must support other sectors of industry and society to reduce their resource consumption through the provision of pertinent products and services. Radical decisions must be taken in order to incorporate different ways of thinking, living, working, doing business, and above all, developing solutions.

There are many examples of opportunities for efficient resource management that the ICT sector provides. These include travel replacement through the use of sophisticated telecommunication services such as videoconferencing and telepresence, as well as smart metering solutions for water and energy management. Online media, e-ticketing, e-paper, teleworking and other remote-participation services constitute other examples.©koya979/Shutterstock.com

Telefónica’s Commitment to Green ICT in a Resource Constrained World

ICT road pricing schemes encourage greater use of public transport, thereby reducing congestion

70

On a city level, ICTs can also be used to promote energy efficiency and reduce GHG emissions in the transport sector, for example, in the form of smart traffic control systems where traffic lights send out status signals to warn drivers to slow down. In addition, smart parking methods act to direct vehicles to an empty space so that there is no need to drive around to find a slot, whilst ICT road pricing schemes encourage greater use of public transport, thereby reducing congestion.

Telefónica has several “Green TIC” services that are designed to help foster an eco-efficient and low-carbon economy. They also promote sustainability in cities by connecting people in a smarter way. Our Green ICT services are designed to optimise resource consumption such as energy, or to manage environmental aspects such as wastewater, urban waste or transport emissions.

Cities are seeking to be as sustainable and as efficient in the use of scarce resources as possible, whether in the household, or in the transport or industrial sector. ICTs can be enablers in achieving these goals. The role of the

sector will be critical, since technology is set to play a pivotal role in meeting ambitious targets for the reduction of energy and water consumption at a local level. For this, we require common standards to measure the environmental

benefits of implementing a Green ICT technology. That is why we encourage and support global activities in pursuit of standardisation led by the International Telecommunication Union.

At Telefónica we believe that Green ICT services have a major role to play in the solutions that local governments demand in order to reduce costs, environmental risks, energy consumption, GHG emissions and internal process timings. In addition, these technologies enhance the quality of life of citizens and guarantee cities’ sustainability. In this sense, our role is to communicate effectively this potential and to ensure it becomes and remains part of the political discussion, so as to foster ICT development within a resource constrained world.

A global commitment is required from the ICT sector, as well as from other industries and local stakeholders, in order to encourage behavioural change, green ICT standards and new management practices. However, the role of citizens is perhaps the most important factor in creating a sustainable model of Green ICTs in cities.

1 Internacional Telecomunicación Unión. ICTs and

Climate Change. 20102 The Climate Group. Smart 2020 Report. Enabling a

Low Carbon Economy. 2008

©P

asko

Mak

sim

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

Telefónica has several “Green TIC” services that are designed to help foster an eco-efficient and low-carbon economy

• In 2011, for the second consecutive year, we obtained the highest score in the telecom sector on the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) Leadership Index.

• We bolstered our commitment to the “International Telecommunications Union’ group No.5 on “Environment and Climate Change”, in charge of devising methodologies to measure the environmental impact of ICT.

• We are recognised as a leading ICT company in terms of energy efficiency for promoting sustainable businesses, according to Verdantix’s Green Quadrant.

• Last year, we attained nearly 20% of the goal we set in 2007 of reducing our network electricity consumption by 30% by 2015 (KWh/access eq).

• In 2011, we carried out more than 30 global energy efficiency projects, which translated into a reduction of

68 GWh, or 24000 tons of CO2e, and financial savings of €7.6 million. For example, our subsidiary Telefónica-Vivo in Brazil invested in 2011 almost one million euros in energy efficiency projects.

• Our greenhouse gas emissions in 2011 reached 1.8 million tons of CO2, almost the same as in 2010.

• In 2011, Telefónica’s R&D team invested €15 million in innovation processes for energy efficiency services (transport, utilities, smart buildings), especially M2M-based services.

Telefónica’s commitment to Green ICTs & Sustainabil i ty

In 2011, Telefonica’s R&D team invested €15m in green innovation

Source: Telefónica Sustainability Report 2011

(1) ICT: Information and Communication Technologies (2) Green ICT Services in the market.

Virtualservices

Green ICT(1)

ServicesSmart City

Telepresence(2)

Green Technology

Smart energyStreet lighting (2)

Smart transportManagement of electric vehicle recharge (2)

Environmental servicesWaste management (2)Smart

buildingsBuilding automation(2)

Health and safety

Local management

Sustainable mobility

Energy and environment

Economy and business

71

The challenges of achieving sustainable development hand a special role to members of the business community. Above all, globally operating companies are in a strong position to make a real difference, but only if the concept of balancing economic, environmental and social objectives actually shapes their day-to-day actions. Many global players have accepted this responsibility and implemented meaningful sustainability measures.

Long before the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, officially titled the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), Henkel had made a practice of continuously taking steps to achieve greater sustainability. Way back in the 1920s, for example, it became the first company to hire a safety engineer to improve work conditions and occupational safety. In the late 1950s, Henkel was first to introduce regular ecological quality checks of detergents and household cleaners. And in 1986, it became the first company to introduce phosphate-free laundry detergents – only one example of how Henkel has integrated the principles of sustainability into product development.

Ahead of the 1992 Earth Summit, Henkel became one of the first companies to sign the International Chamber of Commerce’s Business Charter for Sustainable Development in 1991. Also in 1991, former Henkel CEO Helmut Sihler became a co-founder of a global business association dedicated solely to sustainable development – the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) – which has become today’s leading business voice on sustainability. A year later, the company backed up the commitment expressed in these moves, by becoming one of the first in the world to publish a report on its ecological impact, the Henkel Environment Report.

Rio 1992: A milestone on the path to greater sustainability

For the first time, the Earth Summit brought together representatives of 172 governments from all over the world to address key environmental and sustainability issues. Documents emerging from the conference included the ‘Rio Declaration on Environment and

Development’ comprising 27 principles of sustainable development, the action plan ‘Agenda 21’ and the ‘Forest Principles’, a set of recommendations for managing the world’s forests. Although it could be argued that these documents lacked legal clout, they represented a declaration of intent and a step toward establishing a global sustainability agenda.

Two legally relevant agreements were opened for signature, the ‘Convention on Biological Diversity’ and the ‘United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’ (UNFCCC). The ‘Biodiversity Convention’ recognised biodiversity as a “common concern for humankind” and entered into force in 1993. The UNFCCC, which is aimed at stabilising greenhouse gas concentrations that could interfere with the climate system, entered into force in 1994. Though technically not legally binding in itself, it gave rise to the Kyoto Protocol, which was concluded in 1997 and established obligations for developed countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.

Steps on the path to greater sustainability

Although binding guidelines have been slow to take shape in the years since the Earth Summit, Henkel has not stood still during this period. On the contrary, the company has continued to systematically enhance its performance in all areas of sustainability – environmental, social and economical.

In 1994, Henkel established a corporate mission to seek competitive advantages through eco-leadership. The company’s efforts received external recognition, and CEO Hans-Dietrich Winkhaus was named Eco-Manager of the Year 1994 – awarded jointly by the German finance publication ‘Capital’ and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). The following year saw the introduction of the Guidelines for Teamwork and Leadership, which are binding for all Henkel employees worldwide.

Henkel continued to anchor sustainability in its corporate policies. In 1997, for example, it introduced integrated management systems and binding company-wide safety, health and environment (SHE) standards, backed by worldwide SHE audits.

The Make an Impact on Tomorrow (MIT) Initiative, launched in 1998, supports Henkel employees and retirees in their social volunteering activities. The highly successful programme supplies donations in kind, Henkel products, financial aid, special paid leave for employees who volunteer and technical advice. Projects supported include sports teams and playground restorations in various countries, the building of a kindergarten in South Africa, refurbishment of village homes in Guatemala, reforestation projects, support of volunteer fire departments and educational assistance for deprived teenagers in Cambodia.

From its inception in 1999, the Dow Jones Sustainability Index has recognised Henkel for its leading sustainability performance and it continues to list the company to this day.

Henkel recognises the importance of an open and inclusive approach

The2012UnitedNationsConferenceonSustainableDevelopmentinRiodeJaneiroisanopportunitytofurtherintensifyinternational

dialogueonthefutureofourplanet.Andtherecanbenomistake:achievingsustainabledevelopmentisaglobalchallengethatwecanmasteronlybyworkingtogetheracrossbordersandstakeholdergroups.Atthesametime,thisconcertedeffortmustbeginwithindividualinitiatives.AlookbackattheobjectivessetatthefirstRioSummitin1992andatHenkel’strackrecordrevealsthatthecompanyhastakenitsresponsibilitiestoheart,showninitiativeandconsistentlyfollowedapathtobettersustainability.

Henkel Remembers Rio

In 1907, Henkel launched the world’s first self-acting detergent that facilitated washing. In 1986, Henkel was the first company worldwide to develop a phospate-free detergent.

72

New millennium, new focus on sustainability

Henkel’s listing on the Dow Jones Sustainability Index reflects an increased focus on the connection between sustainability and business viability, an aspect that CEO Ulrich Lehner emphasised in statements made at the dawning of the new millennium. In a paper titled ‘From Environmental Protection to Sustainability’ published in 2000 by ‘Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC’, Lehner advocated “a strategy that increases market shares through environmentally innovative product optimisations.” He directly linked this approach to shareholder value orientation and Henkel’s profitable growth strategy.

The first year of the 21st century also saw the introduction of the Henkel Code of Conduct and Business Ethics and the establishment of the Henkel Sustainability Council, a global steering committee chaired by the CEO. The Environment Report was renamed the Sustainability Report and supplemented by social topics.

The first Sustainability Report in the new format appeared in 2001, and included a look back on the decade since Henkel signed the International Chamber of Commerce’s Business Charter for Sustainable Development. Taking the 16 management principles of the ICC Charter as a basis, the company conducted a self-evaluation of its progress toward greater sustainability. The audit showed significant advances in all 16 areas, with 15 of the principles implemented in ‘most markets’ or ‘almost all markets’. Room for improvement was identified on the point

of ‘Contractors and suppliers’, where the management principles were found to be implemented in ‘many markets’.

In 2003, Henkel declared its participation in the United Nations Global Compact, an initiative to encourage businesses worldwide to adopt sustainable and socially responsible policies, and to report on their implementation. A further milestone was reached in 2005, when Henkel introduced the Code of Corporate Sustainability and became the first company to sign the Charter for Sustainable Cleaning of the International Association for Soaps, Detergents and Maintenance Products (AISE). Established in 1952, the AISE is dedicated to consumer and environmental protection.

A set of global Diversity & Inclusion Guidelines introduced in 2009 reflects Henkel’s heightened awareness of equal opportunity aspects. As an internationally operating company manufacturing products for people of virtually all age groups, ethnic backgrounds, cultures and mindsets, Henkel recognises the importance of an open and inclusive approach.

By the end of the first decade in the 21st century, Henkel had introduced an array of sophisticated metrics for measuring and enhancing sustainability. These include lifecycle analyses of its products and tools like Henkel Benefit Calculator, which enables car manufacturers to calculate the economic and environmental benefits of using Henkel materials in vehicles. In consumer products as well, Henkel has launched a number of intelligent tools to improve products and support awareness and sustainable use. For example, the Sustainability Master facilitates comparisons of laundry and detergent products according to defined criteria. And the interactive online Resource Calculator raises awareness by helping consumers measure their own energy and water consumption.

More with less

As daunting as tomorrow’s sustainability challenges are, Henkel does not see sacrificing quality of life and consumption as a realistic solution. In 2011, the company adopted the Vision 2050 of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) as the basis for its new strategy: “In 2050, 9 billion people live well and within the resource limits of the planet.” For Henkel, this means helping people live well by generating value while using less resources and causing less emissions.

This idea is at the heart of the new sustainability strategy: ‘Achieving more with less’. Henkel seeks to create more value – for its customers and consumers, for the communities it operates in and for the company – while reducing its ecological footprint. Building on decades of experience in sustainable development, Henkel is intensifying its cooperation with all stakeholders to develop viable solutions for the future. The goal: a significant contribution to the green economy as well as to the company’s own economic success.

Henkel seeks to create more value – while reducing its ecological footprint

Kasper Rorsted, CEO of Henkel

© M

aksy

m P

rots

enko

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

73

CeriGoddard,CEOoftheFawcettSociety,theUK’snumberoneorganisationcampaigningforequalitybetweenwomenandmen,onwomenandsustainabledevelopment.

Around the world, governments and increasingly business are acknowledging the central role of gender equality in genuinely sustainable development. Whether you are developing government policy or business strategy, taking a gender blind approach doesn’t just miss the point, but half the population. Unequal societies stymie both social development and economic growth and the gap between women and men is still a major hurdle to meaningful change. Put simply, governments and business who think more about how their decisions impact on women, and involve more of us in this, do better; better at supporting growth - increasing women’s participation in the UK labour market could be worth £23 Billion or 2% of the UK’s GDP - and better at making profit - international companies with more women on their boards show a 66% higher return on invested capital.

However, whilst in the West, women today have far greater equality in the home, at work and in government than our grandmothers could ever have imagined, we’ve still a long way to go. We also know we are operating in a global context where to be born a woman is still to be born to a second class life. Girls and women have lower social status than boys and men, they are more severely affected by poverty, they have less power to make decisions for themselves and for their family, and

they are less likely to be sent to school. When they are sick, they are less likely to receive good medical care.

While the recent rapid expansion of transnational corporations and the private service sector means that there are now more women in paid, formal employment than ever before, the global financial crisis is seeing many of these opportunities disappear. Women are acting as shock absorbers for faltering economies and find themselves forced out of the labour market during the economic downturn. In the formal sector seven out of ten workers being laid off due to the impact of the financial crisis are women, according to GABRIELA, the National Alliance of Women, Philippines. Here in the UK, the age of austerity has seen the number of women out of work hit a 25 year high, and on top of dramatic spending cuts to public services, is starting to turn back time on women’s equality.

In this context, the culture and practices within the private sector become even more vital to empowering and investing in women around the world. Moreover, progress on issues such as unequal pay and women’s representation at board level benefit businesses’ bottom line.

Women are still too rare a sight in boardrooms, but with more women at the top table comes better decision making and improved profit margins. The ‘diversity dividend’ is increasingly undeniable, whilst improved corporate cultures when it comes to women can also enhance local attitudes.

At the same time, progress on the pay gap - where women, whatever their job, wherever they work, can expect to earn less than their male counterparts – would

go a long way to forgings women’s economic security. If all businesses were to ensure fair pay across their workforce, from top to bottom, the impact on women around the world would be immense.

It’s not just about looking inwards at business practice, but looking outward at how product and services choices can impact on women at the intra national, national and local level. How do your products and activities hinder or help a gender equal world? Increasingly, this question speaks both to tackling social justice and the bottom line.

Empowering and investing in women is one of the most powerful weapons in our armoury in the push to create a more resilient and sustainable world. Business has the power and the creativity to really unleash this potential, if and when it opens its masculine mind set.

TheFawcettSocietyistheUK’sleadingcampaignforequalitybetweenwomenandmen.Ourvisionisofasocietywherewomenandourrightsandfreedomsareequallyvaluedandrespectedandwherewehaveequalpowerandinfluenceinshapingourownlivesandourwiderworld.Wemakerealdifferencesinwomen’slivesbycreatingawareness,leadingdebateanddrivingchange.OurlobbyingpowermeanswehaverealinfluencerightatthetopofUKpoliticsandamongthosewhomakedecisions.

Macho Economics – Time for a Change?

with more women at the top table comes better decision making and improved profit margins

© P

erru

sh/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

© P

iotr

Mar

cins

ki/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

74

Climate and Ecosystems

©A

leks

and

ar M

ijato

vic/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

©S

ylvi

e B

ouch

ard

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m©PaulPalad

in/Shu

tterstock.com

It is estimated that half a billion people depend on fisheries for

their livelihoods and one billion on fish as a primary source of protein. However, over-exploitation and lack of management, particularly in respect of those waters located outside national exclusion zones, has seen the viability of many fish stocks put under severe pressure. What specific measures could sufficiently strengthen the institutional framework to ensure existing and future commitments to preserve such stocks are fulfilled and that all international parties are bound to comply?

It is important to understand that more than 80% of the global catch

of marine fish is within 200km of the shore, and much of this is national waters. As such, the viability of stocks is just as pressing, if not more so within national jurisdictions, especially if you are considering the food security of those one billion people who never benefit (nutritionally or financially) from fish caught outside of the EEZs.

There are a number of measures, but the key one is to reduce fishing effort – and this can be done in many ways. With subsidies totaling some US$27 billion a year, re-directing around US$8 billion of that into improved management measures such as marine protected areas, tradable quotas, the retiring of vessels and the retraining of fisher-folk, could boost catches and conserve stocks.

Investing in institutions to monitor and assess fish stocks along with enforcement so that quotas and other catch and effort limits can be confidently set will help to ensure stocks are well managed, and financially viable.

There also needs to be more integrated management of oceans, fisheries management agencies and other agencies such as environment, transport etc. These bodies need to collaborate and discuss the trade-offs needed to ensure that marine ecosystems can provide the resources and other services to ensure all sectors can contribute to sustainable development in the long-term. Currently, overarching bodies to coordinate all the different sectors are conspicuous by their absence, and while at the regional level we have RFMOs and Regional Seas, along with other regional economic bodies, they need to better collaborate and coordinate. UNEP

is planning to pilot such efforts in the coming years in the Southeast Pacific and possibly the Western Indian Ocean.

Oceans, including coastal areas, are critical for life, food security

and the prosperity of humankind and thus encompass the three social, economic and environmental pillars of sustainable development. Given the undoubted importance of the oceans debate, why has it taken so long for it to reach the top of the global agenda? Is the scope of the debate too vast to effectively galvanise all stakeholders to action and the pursuit of a common goal?

A number of factors come into play here - oceans are not where

people live or spend most of their time and therefore oceans do not resonate as much with the public. Oceans were also seen as a vast limitless resource, but as

populations grow and demand for goods from the oceans increases we are seeing how resources such as fish and oil are reaching their limits, and beginning to understand the consequences of having less fish on food security and ultimately development. However, given the increased awareness of ocean in terms of human survival and especially

in the face of climate change, I think that we finally have a critical mass of interested stakeholders asking the right questions on how the oceans should be managed for the future. Oceans are vast, management complicated and what is at stake cannot be measured in either financial terms or social terms, However, we do know that mismanagement will impact significantly on human kind based on what little we do know (e.g. we know that every second breath originates in the oceans, and so if oceans do not function properly we will all suffer).

Subsidised, industrial-scale overfishing imposes an increasing

burden on the poor and vulnerable, especially in developing coastal countries and small island states. Can subsidies ever be justified?

Yes, where they improve fisheries management or provide

opportunities for poor and vulnerable communities. For example, aquaculture is now filling the gap in the demand for fish. If subsidies that were damaging fisheries were shifted to developing aquaculture ventures for coastal communities it would create a win-win scenario. It is, however, important to stress that aquaculture will not save wild capture fisheries, only fill the gap in meeting demand for fish.

Do you accept that any decommissioning and reduction

of fleet capacity and implementation of MPAs deemed necessary to facilitate agreed sustainable development goals must go hand in hand with retraining for those workers adversely affected by such actions? If so, who should pay for this?

These measures do not necessarily have to lead to unemployment in all

situations – in some fisheries the people potentially affected could shift to other fishing fleets, or undertake specialised small scale fishing operations, or be employed in post-harvest processing. It is well known that while taking less fish, small scale fisheries generally employ many more people. However, this is not always the case as in some countries there are too many small scale fisheries to begin with and even a scaling back of industrial and semi-industrial fisheries will not be sufficient to reduce effort/capacity

Jacqueline Alder, Head of UNEP Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Branch

“Oceans were seen as a vast limitless resource”

OCEANS

© ssuaphotos/Shutterstock.com

76

– in these situations other economic opportunities need to be created in other sectors. In such cases it is not so much pointing the finger at who pays, but the industries, government and communities coming up with the solutions that are acceptable to those most affected.

Do you consider the increasing involvement of developing

countries in ocean affairs a wholly positive development, or does the inevitable increase in frequency of conflict that this brings make meaningful consensus nigh-on impossible with so many parties involved?

The involvement of developing countries can only be seen as an

overall positive development since they are often in a position to be able to take up new approaches to management and therefore leap ahead in terms of sustainable ocean use, so providing proof of concepts for some of the proposed changes. Yes, the more countries there are, the harder it is to reach consensus, although various groupings are now taking common positions and if this continues it will not significantly increase the challenges.

Current policies would suggest many national governments are

simply not heeding their own experts’ warnings as to the dire consequences of inertia in the oceans debate, particularly in respect of fisheries. Are the reasons for this solely economic, or do many parties remain to be convinced as to the seriousness of the situation? If science can’t persuade policymakers, what can?

The question is more complex - often fisheries ministers have a

limited or no background in the subject (and often the Ministry is considered low level/junior) and it is a stepping stone to bigger and better things - so senior staff are faced with the challenge of trying to ensure the Minister is happy (i.e. to be seen to be saving jobs and contributing to the economy) while at the same time trying to reign in overfishing/excess effort which means in the short-term less jobs and less income, yet in the long-term more economic stability. Where ministers have listened to science (as has happened in the likes of Alaska and New Zealand) fisheries are important to the economies and are fairly stable.

However, such examples are few and far between with notable common factors including the small size of the fisheries, the well functioning state of the governments and the relatively well-educated nature of the constituencies and industry.

Persuading policy makers requires not more science, but using the science (ecological, economic and social) and developing the trade-off tools to show the consequences in respect of social and economic prosperity in the long-term, whilst finding the means to cushion the short-term impacts to ensure these are socially acceptable. The EU, which has all of the resources at hand, struggles - fishers in France who riot at the thought of losing their job could be compensated, but how? What would be acceptable alternative livelihoods? There needs to be greater dialogue between the interested parties (industry and not just fisheries, government, conservation and civil society).

There has been a reduction in the volume of oil spills from

super-tankers in recent years as binding commitments governing the international maritime industry have taken hold. What other achievements to date give cause for optimism in the drive for more sustainable oceans?

The shipping industry and double hulled tankers is a great example,

as is the ballast water convention which has spawned an industry currently worth multi-millions of USD/year from no industry at all in 2000.

Gas and oil exploration in the oceans has been going on for

many decades, and now the energy sector is turning its attentions to the potential for the industrial production of methane from methane hydrates on the sea floor. Yet, this brings with

it new environmental concerns. What other new and emerging challenges must the oceans debate encompass?

The oceans debate needs to also encompass the use of oceans

for other energy sources such as tidal and thermal, which could see massive infrastructure development inshore and offshore. There are also the emerging industrial scale offshore mariculture proposals which likewise will see huge infrastructural development on the oceans.

Although not a new issue, a persistent problem set only to become more pressing with increasing development and infrastructure is marine litter. This does not just float on the surface of the ocean, but can also get into the intakes of vessels and their propellers causing mechanical damage, and with it economic losses. Other infrastructure such as energy plants and aquaculture could also be impacted.

Are you confident for the future? Do you believe future generations

will inherit a better, more sustainable world?

Of course as someone with a child I cannot be anything but confident.

I hope the work of those of us interested in better management of the oceans will leave a better more sustainable ocean and therefore sustainable world for future generations. Otherwise, the future of humanity will be severely challenged and if we do not take care of our oceans it will come sooner and more devastatingly than some ever thought.

Jacqueline Alder, Head of UN Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Branch

"we finally have a critical mass of interested stakeholders asking the right questions on how the oceans should be managed for the future"

© li

veos

tock

imag

es/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

© Rufous/Shutterstock.com

© a

ntos

777/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

77

Planet B (PB): What do you put the apparent global inertia down to in respect of sustainable development?

David de Rothschild (DdR): There are those who truly believe we’re on Spaceship Earth and that there are finite resources to keep it going, but unfortunately there are those on the other side who believe we’re arrogant to even think we have an impact on our planet, and it seems that the people with the negative narrative have a much louder voice.

PB: Do you think outcomes should be measurable in any fashion? How otherwise can you ensure that what you’re doing is the right thing?

DdR: Yes, and that’s why I feel we’ve got wrapped up in a debate that is never going to have a definitive or quantifiable result, because every climate scientist will tell you there are multiple variables. We have to start focusing on the quantifiable outputs such as pollution, deforestation, species loss, water loss, top soil erosion and the accumulation of waste in our oceans etc. You can’t deny that the forests or species are disappearing, but you can, sadly, keep a conversation going about how much is man-made vs not man-made. Well that conversation is going to get us nowhere, and is how we’ve been distracted for quite a long time now.

PB: How do you think those with the negative narrative can best be brought into the debate?

DdR: We have to create an environment where people who are active and want to become a part of the solution need to be isolated. Change is the greatest inspirer of change and if you can tick a few things off the list and actually prove the model to the naysayers then that becomes very hard to ignore. However,

if you can’t say you’re going to commit to one thing then I don’t think you should be allowed into the arena.

The green movement has unfortunately been telling us what we can’t do for a very long time. That becomes very tiring, so that when it comes to the environment people often shut down. Telling people what they can do will have a massive positive impact on the overall narrative.

PB: Are the wrong people making the decisions? Would unelected representatives not in thrall to voters or shareholders be better placed to set policy?

DdR: I do think having some independent structure that is neither politically nor business motivated would shake things up. We create these massive bail outs for industry, but why aren’t we creating a bail out for our survival on this planet? A survival species fund regulated by NGOs and a council that was independently selected and on a revolving timescale could be made available to vested interests, so long as they put themselves onto a cleaner path

of thinking and doing. For example, if your inherent knowledge is in building cars, that’s fine, but you’ll be asked to do it in a way that is clean, smart and for the future. If you can do that you’ll be able to access the capital to get out of your existing debt structure that ties you to old manufacturing systems, suppliers, contracts and which is stifling progress.

Things can change very quickly too. If we can find a progressive leader who’s got the right momentum and popularity, in a short period of time policies can be implemented and legislation passed.

PB: In Myoo’s dealings with big business do you find you have to compromise to the beat of the client’s drum? Are there certain criteria clients must fulfil, or will Myoo Agency work with anyone?

DdR: There’s always a quandary you’re faced with. These businesses, no matter who they are, are beholden to shareholders and markets that push them in the direction of cutting corners. However, if we can start to nibble away at some of the processes and influence them to do something positive with their money, albeit representing probably a very small fraction of their overall budget and impact, then I’m a believer that that is better than doing nothing. With Levi’s it’s a really quantifiable outcome; 200million litres of fresh clean drinking water provided to communities all over the world, and that’s why we’ve decided to go with them.

A lot of people out there still don’t know or care about the issues, but what they do care about is brands. If we can piggyback off a brand and create some quantifiable outcomes that reduce waste, pollution and energy consumption in the supply chain, then I think it’s worth it.

FormoreinformationonDaviddeRothschildandMyoovisitMyoo.com.

“if you can’t say you’re going to commit to one thing then I don’t think you should be allowed into the arena”

David de Rothschild

DaviddeRothschildisprobablybestknownforhisglobaladventureswhichunderlinetheparlousstateofourplanetandshowcasearangeofremediesforthesickpatient.Theseinclude‘Plastiki’,ajourneyacrossthePacifichighlightingtheGreatPacificGarbagePatchonaboatmadeentirelyfromfullyrecyclablematerialsand12,500reclaimedplasticbottles.MorerecentlytheBeloMonteexpeditionhasbroughtthespotlightontothelossesbeingvisitedbytheconstructionofahydroelectricdaminBrazil.

Hispublicprofileandpopulartouchbringsomemuchneededstellarstatustowhatcansometimesbeaverydrydebate,butthat’snottosaythere’sanythingremotelylightweightor‘pieinthesky’aboutthisenvironmentalist.Hisproposedsolutionsareverymuchinformedbyrealworldthinking.

UndertheMyooumbrellahehasdonemuchtochampioninnovationandinterconnectivityasthemeansofdrivingthroughpositivesocial,environmentalandeconomicchange.

HerehetalkstoPlanetB.

78

To what extent does the SFA work with other sectors to further

national and international sustainable development goals?

The fishing industry involves many sectors of the economy and works

closely with other organisations. For example we have to liaise regularly with the Coastguard for the surveillance of our EEZ for illegal fishing and for the safety of our fisherman against possible piracy threats. With the Seychelles Ports Authority we discuss issues relating to use of ports and harbours, bearing in mind that Port Victoria is the biggest tuna port in the world. The fact that I am Technical Adviser in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs also means that this Ministry is fully informed and involved in all fisheries related issues, such as negotiations of foreign fishing agreements, trade issues, bilateral and international cooperation.

How much of a threat is piracy to the continued growth of

the fisheries sector? What efforts have been made by government, coastguard and the fleets to mitigate this threat?

At present we have two Seychellois fishermen as hostages in Somalia.

The local fishing activity was seriously disrupted when this happened as fishermen were afraid of going far from shore. The Coastguard has reinforced its patrols of certain areas where fishermen operate and some bigger vessels have armed guards on board. The tuna purse seining vessels all have armed personnel on board. This considerably improves safety as no vessels with guards on board have been captured, but on the other hand this has increased the cost of fishing operations.

What developments have there been in Seychelles to ensure all

fleets operating in its waters adhere to sustainable parameters?

Seychelles is an active member of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission

(IOTC) and abides by the management measures of that organisation. For example, all foreign vessels under licence in Seychelles must have a functioning Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) so as to better monitor their catch and fishing activity. There are seasonal restrictions and catch or effort limits on certain fisheries such as the lobster and sea cucumber fisheries. Though fisheries are generally well managed, we cannot be complacent and government needs to devote more resources to improve on the management, especially concerning the

coastal areas which are heavily fished. Seychelles has one of the highest per capita fish consumptions in the world and its population is very dependent on the catch of the artisanal fishing fleet for its protein.

The SFA is working closely with the Seychelles Fishing Boat Owners Association in the promotion of a labelling programme for the hook and line fishery to promote responsible fishing practice and resource sustainability. There is a need to continue to sensitise all stakeholders to work together for a sustainable fisheries industry.

In a nutshell, why do the Seychelles semi-industrial tuna

and swordfish long-line fisheries, mariculture and processing and export sectors offer such sound prospects to investors? How strict are the environmental criteria you impose?

Seychelles Fisheries laws are very strict and are intended to promote

responsible fishing. The long-term policy of the Government of Seychelles for the fishing industry is “the promotion of sustainable and responsible fisheries development and optimisation of the benefits from this sector for the present and future generations.”

The whole of the plateau and around all Seychelles islands are zones where foreign vessels are not allowed to operate and these regulations are strictly

enforced. Among the many regulations which protect the environment is the banning of bottom trawling and the use of spear guns, etc, whilst investment in the artisanal fishery is reserved only for Seychellois nationals. In the future, much emphasis will be put on investments in semi-industrial and industrial tuna fishing, mariculture, fish processing and services.

As described in the ‘Seychelles Strategy 2017’ the fisheries strategy of the Government of Seychelles is “to increase the yield, value of the yield and the financial benefit of fisheries to Seychelles by maximising domestic processing, promoting exports and increasing Seychellois stakeholding in the industry. The ultimate objective is to turn Seychelles from a mainly fisheries transhipment hub to the primary seafood processing centre in the Indian Ocean.’’

It is expected that an Aquaculture Master Plan will be completed by the end of 2012, so as to provide clear guidelines to investors.

Tuna bycatch represents revenue in waiting and affords scope for

fisheries growth, as well as effective resources managements. What plans are there to tap into this potential?

Seychelles at the IOTC meeting in 2010 proposed a resolution which

eventually became a recommendation which encouraged tuna purse seiners to retain on board the bycatch and reduce wastage.

Bycatch from tuna purse seiners is already being used for fish meal, bait, processed products etc and this is expected to increase in the near future. In order to make better use of this raw material, it is necessary to provide adequate infrastructure, such as more quays and cold storage facilities. Plans are well underway to develop an area from the reclaimed land next to the Fishing Port for more fisheries related activities.

Mr. Philippe Michaud, Chairman, Seychelles Fishing Authority (SFA) Mr.PhilippeMichaud,ChairmanoftheBoardoftheSeychelles

FishingAuthority(SFA)outlinesplanstofurtherenhanceSeychelles’statusasapioneerofresponsiblefishing.

“Seychelles Fisheries laws are very strict and are intended to promote responsible fishing”

Mr. Philippe Michaud, Chairman, SFA

© Vladislav Gajic/Shutterstock.com

79

‘The Future We Want’ is the title of the negotiating text we have come here to complete. Since it was first made public in January, the draft has swollen to over 200 pages. Challenges to be considered have been identified: over a billion people live in poverty, food and water are becoming increasingly scarce, and two-thirds of the earth’s ecosystems are in decline, to name but a few. Governments, civil society and other stakeholders have weighed in. Text has been proposed, debated, amended, accepted and struck.

Yet the product of those months of deliberations and analysis (‘The Future We Want’) barely mentions the biggest humanitarian and environmental crisis of our time by name.

That climate change is not spoken more explicitly - instead we refer to it implicitly, as a kind of silent motivation for ‘low-carbon development’ and building a ‘green economy’ - I do not regard as an achievement of political communications, but rather a failure of political will.

As leaders we have a responsibility to fully articulate the risks our people face. If the politics are not favourable to speaking truthfully, then clearly we must

devote more energy to changing the politics.

The fact is we cannot achieve fair and sustainable development unless we dramatically reduce the greenhouse gas emissions responsible for climate change. Until we do, famines will grow increasingly frequent and intense, droughts will become more severe and widespread, and the world’s rainforests and coral reefs, which support the livelihoods of billions of people, will continue to disappear. That is a reality we won’t be able to disguise for long - no matter how clever our rhetoric.

We must begin this summit, therefore, by acknowledging our failure to deliver on the promises made here in 1992 and work to apply the lessons we have learned. First and foremost that means ensuring legally binding commitments to tackle climate change. This is particularly important because the UN climate talks last year in Durban, South Africa failed to deliver the level of action necessary to prevent runaway global warming.

Keep in mind, in the 20 years since over 100 world leaders met here and resolved to lower greenhouse gases, emissions have soared to their highest

level on record – and so have global temperatures. The past 12 years alone included the 10 hottest ones in recorded history.

The consequence, of course, has been a relentless onslaught of severe weather and associated human catastrophes. In 2010, tens of millions of people were impacted by a devastating heatwave in Russia and a tragic flood in Pakistan. Last year, we witnessed a heartbreaking famine on the Horn of Africa. If you live in New York, you will have noticed that we scarcely had a winter this year. No continent or country is immune to the impacts of climate change.

For many of the world’s island and coastal communities, climate change has grown into an existential threat. Kiribati and the Maldives have already lost some of their islands to rising seas and more territory loss has been reported in the Pacific and Caribbean. Shoreline erosion and flooding has caused major damage to roads, public utilities and homes. Saltwater intrusion has degraded agricultural lands and freshwater supplies. Tackling climate change, in other words, cannot be separated from sustainable development.

What’s more, the relentless rise in emissions are turning the oceans more acidic, threatening microscopic organisms that form the basis of the marine food chain and eroding coral reefs that are essential habitats for the world’s commercial fisheries. It would be a tragic irony if our failure to address

The Choice is Ours By Ambassador Marlene Moses, Chair, Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS)

If the politics are not favourable to speaking truthfully, then clearly we must devote more energy to changing the politics

©Mop

ic/Shutterstock.com

80

emissions ultimately undermines other gains we make here in ocean conservation.

Given the stakes, we cannot afford to ignore the overarching problem of the emissions gap, here or in any discussions that involve international environmental or development policy.

In the vocabulary of climate science, carbon dioxide emissions are measured in gigatonnes, ‘Gt’ for short. One gigatonne - a billion metric tons - is roughly equivalent to the annual emissions from 200 coal-fired power plants or about 200 million passenger vehicles, which gives you a sense of the scale of the challenge.

In 2010, total emissions worldwide exceeded 48 Gt and they are on track to hit 56 Gt in 2020. But the latest research shows that annual emissions must drop below 44 Gt in 2020, and decline steeply thereafter to avoid warming of more than 2.0 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

This says nothing of keeping the global temperature well below the 1.5 degree Celsius mark needed to give us a realistic chance of avoiding an even more devastating rise in sea level and other unthinkable calamities.

The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), a coalition of 43 vulnerable island nations from around the world, has submitted a work plan to achieve urgent emissions cuts pursuant to the agreement reached in Durban. The proposals, some of which are outlined below, are based on the latest economic and scientific research and can be accomplished quickly and affordably.

For example, studies have shown that the global economic downturn has made cutting carbon pollution considerably less expensive than previously

estimated. In light of these savings, governments should increase their pledges accordingly.

Research has shown that simply increasing the world’s energy mix from the current 10 percent renewable to 15 percent would get us about half the emissions cuts we need. Jumping to 20 percent would get us all the way there.

Another way to slash emissions is simply to waste less energy. Study after study has shown that making automobiles, buildings, appliances, and energy grids operate more efficiently produces remarkable savings not only in emissions, but also money.

The developed world must take the lead in this effort by implementing the solutions that are so readily available and provide the resources and technology needed to build low-carbon development pathways in the developing world. There is simply no other way to achieve the necessary cuts.

Our plan also calls for an end to the lavish production subsidies enjoyed by the fossil fuel industry. This is no time to be subsidising an energy source that is responsible for causing so much damage.

If you look at our proposal at www.aosis.info you will find a schedule of workshops where countries can discuss how they can take advantage of these and other opportunities to cut emissions, including a request for a ministerial meeting in New York later this year. It seems reasonable to me for the world’s environment ministers to get together and take stock of where we are and where we need to be on a matter of such grave importance.

Of course, much harm has already been done by climate change, and I’m afraid much more is still to come. To that end, we have developed a “loss and damage” proposal that would compensate vulnerable countries for the impacts they have already suffered and insure their property against future harm related to climate change. It would work much like insurance plans commonly found in the developed world that help communities rebuild after floods and storms.

‘The Future We Want’ is an appropriate slogan for our work. It implies that we have a choice to make here. We can choose to build a global economy that is fair and sustainable or we can continue on a path we know can only end in tragedy. The time has come to decide.

AmbassadorMarleneMosesisthePermanentRepresentativetotheUnitedNationsfortheRepublicofNauruandChairstheAllianceofSmallIslandStates(AOSIS).

For many of the world’s island and coastal communities, climate change has grown into an existential threat

Ambassador Marlene Moses, Chair, Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS)

pho

to c

c b

y E

ston

ian

Fore

ign

Min

istr

y

©VladisChern/Shu

tterstock.com

©G

rego

r B

uir/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

81

Can agricultural subsidies ever be compatible with sustainable

development e.g. to encourage better use of agricultural biodiversity, which has the capacity to lead to more nutritious diets, enhanced livelihoods for farming communities and more resilient and sustainable farming systems?

The impacts of agricultural subsidies differ significantly according to the

design of the subsidy programme and the context in which they are applied. The significant use of agricultural support in many OECD countries, including export subsidies, has resulted in market distortions and had various negative consequences on agricultural development in developing countries, particularly in those competing with imports from countries providing the subsidies.

Poorly designed programmes can also have negative consequences, including the waste of scarce budgetary resources. However, there are subsidies which can be effective at promoting economic development and investments. The important issue is the subsidies design. Well-designed and well-targeted agricultural subsidy programmes

promoting investment and improved technologies can have positive effects.

On the GM front, should more be done to encourage the

development of more in-demand, but less profitable crops? How could this be done?

The long-running controversy about GM crops frequently overshadows

the fact that genetic modification is just one of a wide range of available agricultural biotechnologies, and that these biotechnologies can play an important role in increasing productivity for smallholder farmers and conserving natural resources. For example, the recent eradication of rinderpest, arguably the most devastating disease of cattle, and for centuries a major cause of famine and poverty, would not have been possible without the use of DNA-based methodologies.

More research and development in agricultural biotechnologies should be focused on the needs of smallholder farmers, the crops they grow and the animals they raise. To make this happen, stronger partnerships among and within countries will be fundamental, including South-South cooperation, regional alliances and public-private partnerships for sharing experiences, information and technologies. It is, however, important that countries develop their own national vision and policy for the role of agricultural biotechnologies, with options and opportunities examined within the context of their national economic, social, rural development and environmental strategies, objectives and programmes.

Finally, let me first say that GM crops are not indispensable for food security. At the global level we already produce

enough food; hunger is primarily a problem of access. Today, irrigation, fertilizer and good farm management are much more important in poor countries than expensive, high-tech products.

How can the many statements, such as those embodied in the

Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development (SARD) Initiative and other relevant Agenda 21 Chapters underlining the need to focus on supporting small-scale sustainable agriculture, which provides income, employment, upward mobility opportunities and up to 80% of food in developing countries, be more effectively realised on the ground?

Realising these various objectives requires investment in the whole

value chain, particularly production, processing and marketing. Often there is a trap – small-scale farmers don’t produce more intensively for lack of a market, but without the guaranteed availability of raw material, few businesses will invest in processing and value addition. Public investment and incentives can help resolve this, and create a virtuous circle of productivity improvement and livelihoods enhancement.

One example are public policies that link safety net programmes such as cash transfers or school meal programmes, with support to small-scale farmers. This way, families have increased incomes, children receive better nutrition and markets are created for small-scale farmers. In Brazil, a law determines that 30% of the food used in school meal programmes (that benefit over 45 million children in Brazil) be purchased locally from small farmers.

Is the industrialised agricultural sector being unfairly demonised

in the sustainable development debate? Can it be brought on side?

If by ‘industrialised agriculture’ what is meant is large-scale, mono-

cropping systems, with high use of chemical inputs, little adjustment to local conditions and a high-energy footprint ... then they are clearly not sustainable. But

Dr. José Graziano da Silva, Director-General of FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation)

AGRICULTURE

“GM crops are not indispensable for food security”

© L

ivin

gCan

vas/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

82

other, more environmentally responsible forms of large-scale agriculture exist. I am thinking in particular of the large farms which are increasingly adopting conservation agriculture, which is based on minimal soil-disturbance and crops rotation, coupled with more natural forms of pest control, for example.

Less sustainable practices have generally been driven by economics – and the fact that input prices do not correctly reflect the impact which overuse may have on ecosystem services. One way for industrialised agriculture to contribute to more sustainable development, to bring large-scale farming ‘on side’, would be for policy makers to value ecosystem services more correctly, and to provide economic incentives for more judicious use of external inputs.

What particular measures have and should be taken to

increase global food security for women and children, encompassing food availability, access, stability and utilisation, while using less natural resources through improved efficiencies throughout the food value chain?

Special measures are needed to strengthen the rights of women,

indigenous people and landless rural people. The 2010-2011 FAO State of Food and Agriculture (SOFA) report found that if the gender gap in agriculture was closed, farmers could increase yields on their farms by 20–30 percent.

Support to smallholders can be provided through diversified food systems and the generation of off-farm employment in areas such as processing and value addition, rural-urban food networks, agri- and eco-tourism, and small-scale forest-based enterprises, which offer livelihood opportunities while improving land stewardship. Sustainability can also be promoted through more nutritious diets, which would help diversify production and the processing chain.

Another important area is the promotion of access to information

and environmentally sustainable technologies. Access to green technology should be encouraged to support local technology design and to enhance the pool of knowledge. Access to information, ICT, knowledge and innovation should be promoted with full participation of farmers, including women.

It has been estimated that agricultural growth has greater

poverty-reducing effects than any non-agriculture sector. Yet, such activity has a significant impact on natural resources. How can the

environmental, economic and social aspects of sustainable development be addressed as a coherent whole in respect of the global agricultural sector?

The poverty-reducing effects of agriculture come from increased

income for farmers—not necessarily through more depletion of natural resources. We need to increase incomes through smarter farming, i.e. not by using more inputs, but by improving technologies and management practices to use inputs more efficiently. There is considerable scope to do this in many parts of the world; the challenge is to support innovation (and information and education and extension), and simultaneously to improve the incentives and ability of smallholders and family farmers to access and apply those innovations.

Is it fair to say there will be no green economy without

agriculture at its heart?

Agricultural systems, which include non-food as well as food products

from cropping, livestock, fisheries and forestry, are the main source of food and income for most of the world’s poor and food-insecure people, and they are likely to remain so for some time, due to projected patterns of population growth. The millions of people that manage agricultural systems - from the very poorest to the most commercialised producers – constitute the largest group of natural resource managers on the face of the earth. Their management decisions affect not only their own and others’ food security, but also the health of global ecosystems. Improving agricultural and food systems thus lies not only at the heart of improving the livelihoods and health of people, but of producing healthier ecosystems as well.

“The millions of people that manage agricultural systems... constitute the largest group of natural resource managers on the face of the earth”

Dr. José Graziano da Silva, Director-General, FAO

© M

urie

l Las

ure/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

© Andre van der Veen/Shutterstock.com

© R

ober

t G

ubb

ins/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

83

RobertSwan,OBEisapolarexplorer,environmentalleaderandthefirstpersonevertohavewalkedtotheNorthandSouthpoles.Heisanexceptionallygiftedcommunicatorandisregardedasoneoftheworld’stopmotivationalspeakers.

In 1992, on completion of the walks to both poles, Robert Swan was charged by world leaders at the first ‘World Summit for Sustainable Development’, held in Rio de Janeiro, to undertake a ten year global and local environmental mission involving industry, business and young people.

Upon the successful completion of the missions, Swan reported back to world leaders at the second World Summit in 2002, held in Johannesburg. Here he committed to a further ten-year mission to inspire youth to become sustainable leaders and promote the use of renewable energy for a sustainable future.

Swan’s unique insights and lessons learned have enabled him to educate and stimulate young people and business leaders all around the world. He compares his icy experiences to boardroom manoeuvres and his inspirational addresses on leadership and teamwork have received acclaim from discerning audiences worldwide.

His contribution to both education and the environment have been recognised through his appointment as UN Goodwill Ambassador for Youth, a visiting Professor of the School of the Environment at Leeds University and in 1994 he became Special Envoy to the Director General of UNESCO. He was awarded an OBE (Order of the British Empire) in 1995.

During 2003 Robert and his company, 2041, delivered the first corporate Antarctic Expeditions on teamwork and leadership through positive participation and real missions. Throughout these five years, the ‘Inspire Antarctic Expeditions’ (IAE) teams have helped design and build the world’s first education station (The E-Base) in Antarctica.

Robert Swan has an extraordinary ability to inspire those around him into action. His presentations continue to thrill, uplift and stimulate audiences worldwide.

Why 2041?

In the year 2041, the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty could potentially be modified or amended. The aim is to work towards the continuing protection of the Antarctic Treaty so that the last great wilderness on earth is never exploited.

2041 led the first corporate expedition to Antarctica in 2003, during which 42 people from 18 nations joined Robert on his ‘Leadership on the Edge’ program. Since then, over 500 corporate leaders, educators, students and entrepreneurs from around the world have experienced Antarctica with the 2041 team.

The world’s first educational base in Antarctica – The E-Base

From 2002 to 2007, Robert’s dream of building the world’s first educational base (E-Base) in Antarctica became a reality. E-Base serves as a resource for

teachers and an inspiration to young people around the world. 2008 saw ‘The E-Base Goes Live’. Powered entirely off renewable energy, Swan and a small team lived and broadcast to schools and universities demonstrating clean technology and energy saving techniques.

In spring 2010, in partnership with China Light and Power, a leading power company in the Asia region, a small team lived at the E-Base and repaired damage to the ‘Live 365’ equipment so that the E-Base can continue to broadcast the message of preserving Antarctica and the importance of renewable energy 365 days a year.

The coolest curriculum in the world

Over the past seven years 2041 have taken 20 teachers from various countries to Antarctica, many of whom in turn have helped produce ‘A Journey to Antarctica – The Coolest Curriculum in the World’. The curriculum’s aims are:

• To inform learners about Antarctica, its geology, its geography, its history, its climate, its stunning scenery and captivating wildlife.

• To educate learners through practical, creative activities and hands-on investigations that enable them to deepen their understanding of this beautiful continent.

• To inspire learners to action, to open their minds to ways in which they, both individually and collectively, can make a positive difference to their world, and Antarctica in particular.

Robert Swan has an extraordinary ability to inspire those around him into action

Robert Swan and 2041

© L

eene

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

84

Education©

Bug

no.a

rt.p

l/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

mP

hoto

- C

C b

y E

dm

und

Gar

man

Is the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development’s

mission to create a more sustainable future, in terms of environmental integrity, economic viability and a just society for present and future generations, being successfully realised?

The ‘United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable

Development’ has taken off across the world. Impressive numbers of governments, civil society organisations, businesses, education institutions, along with individual educators are working to fulfil its objectives. It is vital that we continue to reorient education so that everyone can acquire the values, competencies, skills and knowledge necessary to shape a future of human dignity for everyone on the planet. This calls for integrating sustainable development into the heart of education. It means designing teaching and learning so that learners acquire the skills they need to build a better future.

There are many success stories to highlight. China has designated 1,000 experimental schools for Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) and has included ESD in the ‘National Outline for Medium and Long-term Education Reform and Development (2010-2020)’. The Centre for Environment Education in India has run the campaign ‘CO2 Pick Right’ on climate change and individual lifestyle choices in over 70,000 schools across the country. The Canadian province of Manitoba is reorienting its schools to address sustainable development. Increasing numbers of countries have created national coordinating bodies to take forward ESD.

As lead agency for the UN Decade, UNESCO supports countries and societies in all of their efforts.

We provide advice to policy-makers on how to integrate ESD into education plans and curricula. We publish material on ESD for decision-makers, teachers and students. We collect and share good ESD practice in all areas of education. We support ESD practitioners from all regions of the world and bring them together. We monitor progress in the implementation of the Decade, and we make the case for ESD whenever we can - within the United Nations and beyond.

We have three years left in the Decade and much still to accomplish. Many positive steps have been taken, especially after the ‘UNESCO World Conference on ESD’ in Bonn, Germany,

in 2009, which recognised its importance for quality education. But we must remain clear-eyed. The fact is ESD is far from being mainstreamed across the whole education sector. Member States are working hard and gaining momentum - but ESD will have to remain a top priority well beyond the end of the Decade in 2014.

If it is accepted that a ‘one size fits all’ approach is impractical

and unworkable, how can one ensure that the countries, regional and international organisations developing their own priorities and schedules for implementation in accordance with their needs, policies and programmes, are ‘singing from the same hymn sheet’?

Experience shows clearly there is no such thing as ‘one size fits all’ in

sustainable development. The context and specificities of every country and region must be the starting point of all thinking and action.

The case of the Small Island and Developing States is instructive. These countries face unique challenges, deriving from their size, geographical location, which is usually remote and insular, their environmental fragility, as well as their vulnerability to external

economic shocks, hazards and natural disasters. This is why these countries have called for all measures agreed at Rio to be consistent with their current sustainable development priorities, which are contained in ‘Agenda 21’, the ‘Johannesburg Programme of Action’ and the ‘Mauritius Strategy of Implementation.’ The same is true for culture. Culture in all its diversity has a vital – andtoooftenunderestimated – role to play in addressing current ecological challenges, including biodiversity loss and resources scarcity. Why? Because cultural factors influence lifestyles, individual behaviour and consumption patterns. They colour our values relating to environment stewardship. There is much to learn from the wisdom, knowledge and experience held by rural and indigenous peoples in managing development at the local levels in ways that are sustainable. This knowledge and know-how are core resources for sustainable development. Biological and cultural diversity are embedded in a wide range of human-nature interactions - they evolve together and are mutually reinforcing. There is a vast wealth of experience and practices to be shared. Diversity must be the name of the game. For this, we must also do more to encourage South-South and triangular cooperation.

As the United Nations Secretary General has said, I believe the time has come for the international community to set a new sustainable development agenda. We need a new set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to complement and pick up where the Millennium Development Goals leave off. Building on the success of the MDG framework, these new goals can focus on some of the gaps we have identified since the adoption of ‘Agenda 21’ and identify how to address these in a holistic and integrated manner, across the three pillars – economic, social and environmental. With these goals, we must develop internationally-agreed sustainable development indicators to monitor, measure and assess progress. The challenge I see now is to develop the SDGs and these indicators in a transparent, open and consultative manner - to ensure they receive widespread support and engagement among governments, the United Nations family, the private sector, and civil society.

It has been suggested that a global fund run by the Global

Environment Facility would greatly assist in accelerating the training of

EDUCATION

Mrs. Irina Bokova, Director-General of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation)

“We provide advice to policy-makers on how to integrate ESD into education plans and curricula”

© G

arsy

a/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

86

future citizens in sustainability. Do you concur?

This is a very interesting proposal. As the ‘2009 World Conference on

ESD’ and many other such conferences have recognized, we need funding to scale up education and training to promote sustainable development. The area of climate change education – a focus of UNESCO in its current work - is a case in point. Article 6 of the ‘UN Framework Convention on Climate Change’ addresses the issue of education, training and public awareness and is the main vehicle by which this Convention fosters action to develop educational and training programmes on climate change. The first consensus decision on Article 6 was taken at COP16 in 2010. This decision includes calls to promote the participation of young people and all the major actors in the processes of climate change, to develop national and regional projects of Article 6, including national strategies and to promote formal, non-formal and informal education.

Now that Article 6 has been agreed, we must clarify who will support governments to implement and fund it and what accountability mechanisms should be put in place. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) is one potential funding source. I see the agreement on Article 6 as a window of opportunity for ESD implementation. For instance, GEF funding could be used to upscale ESD programmes following UNESCO’s work piloting national Climate Change Education programmes in Small Island Developing States and countries in Africa. From experience, we know that people often learn best from personal experience. Training is likely to succeed when relevant knowledge and experience are brought to peoples’ attention in local contexts. This is why we should push forward with all activities that raise awareness and that share experience, including within existing projects and programmes.

I wish to highlight here UNESCO’s work to promote dialogue and learning through its biosphere reserves, where we seek to join key actors together to discuss and agree on actions for sustainability in ways that are meaningful to them. I believe we can do more to harness the potential of biosphere reserves for learning, civic participation and action to enhance sustainable development.

How can indigenous peoples across the world who have

perhaps the greatest wisdom to impart in respect of sustainable development

be effectively brought into the education and training process?

In the unique cosmologies of indigenous peoples, as in their

worldviews of how people and nature co-exist, there is great wisdom on sustainable living. This is my firm belief and it is the conviction guiding UNESCO.

The territories of indigenous peoples continue to harbour much of the world’s biodiversity. It is unacceptable that many formal education systems around the world contribute to the erosion of indigenous languages, knowledge and ways of life. Many indigenous youth have no choice but to attend schools where mainstream languages are the only medium of communication, and where the knowledge of their forefathers is excluded. The consequences in alienation and loss of identity are well-documented.

Through its programme on ‘Local and Indigenous Knowledge Systems’ (LINKS), UNESCO is working with indigenous communities and Ministries of Education to ensure that education safeguards and supports indigenous livelihoods and worldviews. In the BOSAWAS Biosphere Reserve of Nicaragua, the indigenous knowledge of the Mayangna people has been gathered into two richly-illustrated volumes in the Mayangna language – these are now being integrated into school curricula. In the Solomon Islands, a wiki has been created in the local language based on the indigenous knowledge of the peoples of Marovo Lagoon. Teacher and students in remote rural Marovo are accessing, revising and upgrading the wiki - thus, reinforcing the transmission of traditional knowledge and language from village Elders to youth. These initiatives are vital for the sustainable development of our planet - we cannot afford the further loss of the knowledge and wisdom held by local and indigenous peoples.

How can implementation of those Rio+20 commitments with

educational implications best be monitored and evaluated?

We have gained strong experience in this area. I believe that

implementation must be monitored by identifying a set of time-bound and measurable indicators for these goals. This would require defining suitable, relevant and measurable indicators at

every level – local, national, regional and international – and for each initiative and programme.

To give an example, if a specific goal were the integration of sustainable development principles into education policies, plans and programmes, indicators might include the total number of countries that have developed national ESD action plans and strategies in a cross-sectoral and interdisciplinary manner - for instance, by integrating ESD and disaster risk reduction and preparedness, by mainstreaming climate change, by integrating scientific and indigenous knowledge, by greening technical and vocational education and training. Other indicators could be the number of countries that have integrated ESD into their curriculum, the proportion of mandatory sustainable-development-related courses in national curriculum at secondary school level and the proportion of programmes for technical and vocational education and training designed to promote green skills.

Are you confident for the future? Can education facilitate a

behavioural landscape where current and future generations are sufficiently sensitised to environment and development issues to feel personally motivated and bound to realise meaningful sustainable development?

Education is a force for transformation. Facts speak for

themselves. A child born to a mother who can read is 50% more likely to survive past the age of 5. Each year of additional schooling increases individual earnings by 10%, empowering women and men to lift themselves out of poverty. So much of our lives is shaped by the education we get in and, equally importantly, outside of school. I see every reason to be confident about education’s power for positive change.

“A child born to a mother who can read is 50% more likely to survive past the age of 5”

Mrs. Irina Bokova, Director-General of UNESCO

© B

ugno

.art

.pl/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

©BortN66/Shutterstock.com

87

TheBoardofDirectorsofmanyfirmsistheappropriateplacetomakepolicydecisionsregardingthesustainabilityofafirmanditsactivities.Boardmembers,however,maybeconfusedbythetopicandappeartobetakingoneofthreeapproaches.Thearticlearguesforafourthapproachthat,whiledifficult,mayofferthebestreturnsoverthemediumterm.

The Problem

Sustainability, as a topic, can be confusing to business leaders. 

The idea that mankind affects its environment and that many of those effects are negative has, I believe, been accepted by many business leaders and members of the Board of Directors of firms, especially in Western Europe and the United States. To get from that general acceptance to a clear idea of what a particular firm ought to do, however, is much more complicated and far from clear.

For business, sustainability is usually taken to mean adding the impact a firm has on the physical environment and social reality to the economic impact that is normally the core of its existence. This idea of reporting a ‘triple bottom line’ has become common place.

Firms also pursue a variety of initiatives to reduce consumption of raw materials, water, and energy and to produce less waste from their processes and products, as well as reduce carbon emissions, but in my experience, many of these initiatives come from an idea that the firm “ought to do something” to protect it’s reputation or brand, rather than a clearly defined strategy over the medium term.

At the same time that corporate activity is increasing, the global effort to stop, or at least slow down, Global Warming or Climate Change, seems to be slowing down due to the economic crisis and political stalemate, both at the international level and within many countries.

Examples of this inability are the very slow progress on creating carbon trading schemes at the regional or global level and the reduction of subsidies for alternative energy across much of the European Union.

To make the potential for confusion complete, there are a number of contrarian analysts such as Denmark’s Bjørn Lomborgwho questions whether we, as a society, are actually focused on the right things. Lomborg’s thesis is that the claims of most special interest groups about the increasingly negative situation simply do not bear up under rigorous statistical scrutiny.

The problem, as I see it, is that with politics in many countries being deeply divided, the Board of Directors of a firm is left without a stable and clear reference point from which to base policy with respect to sustainability.

The Solution

Boards appear to take one of three paths to deal with the ambiguity described above. In some boards, there is a major shareholder or group of shareholders who are convinced of the perceived problems facing the planet and ready to put their money where their mouth is. Such a Board then instructs management to go beyond compliance with the idea that the business case will possibly emerge over the goodness of time, but that in any event, the direction is the ‘right thing to do’. Since at the end of the day, the majority shareholder is playing with their own money and convictions, I find this idea to be ‘sustainable’ from a governance point of view.

A second approach is to obey the law in each of the countries or jurisdictions a firm operates in and perhaps set up a complex, but normally understaffed, compliance function to be able to prove it. Complete assurance that a large multinational and all of its suppliers and partners are perfectly complying with all environmental and social laws, is of course, impossible, but it does create a blizzard of paperwork and allows the CEO to say that the firm is doing all it can.

The third approach, which I believe is the most common, falls somewhere in between. In this scenario, the board instructs management to do things like sign the UN Global Compact and to improve performance across a number of metrics, as long as shareholder value does not suffer as a result.

The challenge with this approach is that there is often little or no empirical evidence to connect specific initiatives with medium term performance or competitive advantage, and studies which show that consumers’ willingness to pay increases with environmental or social performance are tenuous at best.

In my view, Governments will continue to give mixed signals to companies and even shareholders do not know what they want the firms they invest in to do. Boards, and the people who sit on them, will have no choice but to make their own best guess as to the course to set for Management.

Some firms, however have articulated a vision for the future based on fact based analysis that is able to group their disparate activities in the sustainability area under a clear strategy which adds value to shareholders and the planet over the medium term.

This, for me, is the role of the Board of Directors, regardless of the political and regulatory environment of the moment.

Time for a New Approach from the BoardMike Rosenberg, Assistant Professor of Strategic Management, IESE Platform for Strategy and Sustainability

Sustainability, as a topic, can be confusing to business leaders

© T

om W

ang/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

88

Should rich countries carry a greater share of the financial

burden of placing the world on a path of meaningful sustainable development?

It’s not about money, it’s about ethics and values; ‘people’, ‘planet’,

then ‘profit’.

Currently, the formula for trade between the rich and the poor is not fair. If we continue with the same leadership, nothing will change. We need change from the grassroots. For example, in Brazil, witness the change during Lula’s term as president. He came from the grassroots.

There’s no balance, we need a paradigm shift. I think what’s happening now in Arab countries is that the public are demanding change because there’s no fairness or justice.

You are an Ambassador for the Ford Motor Company

Conservation and Environmental Grants Programme. What does this entail?

The grants are for existing projects rather than proposals and are

designed to encourage environmental preservation, renewable energy, and so on. So, if you need to expand your project, or modify it, you can apply for the grant. It was found that in the GCC countries there was very low

participation by young people, so I have tried to encourage young people at schools and universities to make projects happen, and then if they’re struggling with something, we can come and help with funding, depending on the size of the project.

Which one issue would you say the world needs to know more

about?

One big issue is waste, and energy loss. We lose 55-60% of our energy!

The technology is there, the renewables are there, but we need to improve the quality of our auditing systems, our housekeeping and our maintenance. Before reinventing the wheel we first need to fix what we already have by focusing on effectiveness, efficiency and restoration.

What do you do to reduce your own environmental impact?

First of all I reduce my water shower – two to four minutes and have cold

rather than hot showers, even in winter. I only eat meat about once a week and I try to have smaller meals, like just having fruit or salad for dinner. I also try not to buy too much and walk when I can. In addition, I try to be a model to my kids in little ways, like switching the lights off when I leave the room and turning the air-conditioning off. These small habits create change.

What do you feel is the biggest challenge the world is facing?

Everyone is talking, and there’s not enough listening and acting. It’s all

about building understanding – culturally, economically and environmentally. A lot

of countries like buzzwords, but they’re not implementing things. There’s a gap.

What’s your biggest fear for the future?

I don’t have fear. We need to adapt to the future, we need to be

prepared, but I’m not afraid. The future will come, but I’m preparing myself with knowledge and doing what I can now. I think there are a lot of other people like me doing good things, but they’re invisible – no one knows about them. So, we need to find these people and show they’re important too.

What is the thinking behind the ‘Green Sheikh’ brand?

It’s not just for my country, there’s no boundary for the environment;

the planet was here before us, and we will leave before the planet disappears. The Green Sheikh is not just a brand, it’s a vision. When I say GREEN, it means Global, Rethink, Enlightenment, Ethics, and Networking with people. That’s my green.

Have you always been that way or have you had to work at it?

As a member of a royal family, as an Arab, as an Emirati, and as a

Muslim there is a lot of pressure, both internal and external. Your behaviour, actions, talk and dealings with people - everything is observed.

For me this pressure is an opportunity. I’m serious about my work and I have only one face. I try to be myself and if I see the truth, I say it.

“Everyone is talking, and there’s not enough listening and acting”

The Green SheikhSheikh Abdulaziz bin Ali bin Rashed Al NuaimiAmemberoftherulingfamilyofAjman,oneofthesevenUnitedArabEmirates,SheikhAlNuaimiisbetterknownbyhismoniker‘GreenSheikh’,havingleftbehindacareerintheoilindustrytopursuehisvocationasaglobalenvironmentalcampaigner.Amongstmanyotherroles,theGreenSheikhischairmanoftheInternationalSteeringCommitteefortheGlobalInitiativeTowardsaSustainableIraqandhonourablepresidentoftheZayedEnvironmentalImpactNetwork,attheUAE’sZayedUniversity

“The Green Sheikh is not just a brand, it’s a vision”

89

Bono, compared with 10 years ago, what has changed in Ghana? If

you were taking a group of aid sceptics around this country now, what would you point to and say: “That’s the benefit of aid”? 

Bono: The thing that I’ve always found really difficult to cope with

was medical professionals diagnosing a problem and not being able to treat it. We used to see this all across Africa with HIV/Aids. Even after we had anti-retroviral drugs in the west, only a tiny percentage of people in Africa who were sick could get the drugs. And if you didn’t get them, you died… So having the drugs now for over 6 million people is a big deal for me. Having malarial drugs is a big deal for me. Visiting the hospital in Accra, which is aided by the Global Fund… the mood in that hospital was one of real optimism.

I’m particularly proud because a third of the Global Fund’s resources in Ghana are paid for by RED (founded in 2006 to raise money for the Global Fund by selling branded products via Nike, Apple, Starbucks and others)… and ONE and other campaign groups helped raise much of the rest from other donors. So I was very overpowered yesterday as I saw the hospital, and I am buoyed by that. And you’ve near universal education. For instance, the Millennium Challenge is building 240 new schools. That’s pretty great. The hard data tells us that Ghana’s had over 14% growth in the last year. We think that malaria is down by over 50%, maybe over 60%, which is astonishing. 

But to answer your question a little more specifically: I am an aid sceptic, OK? I don’t know anyone who wishes

to see aid as a natural solution to these problems. Aid is what we do in emergency situations to get you through to a place of self-reliance. Ireland needed aid from Europe, Germany needed aid from the United States after the Second World War. All of us need aid. It’s investment – and if it’s investment, what is your return on investment?

In Ghana, it is clear that this country will in five years need a lot less aid than it needs now, and in 10 years may not need aid at all. To answer your question, the reason I’m excited about aid is that it looks like we can see the end of it here. As a result of the smart aid, the aid industry is putting itself out of business here, hopefully in 10 years. One way this transformation can accelerate is if countries like Ghana use their natural resources for their people, and key to that is greater transparency in the extractives sector – something ONE is pushing hard for at the EU level right now. I’ve personally met with eight G20 leaders and five G20 finance ministers on this issue.

Jeff, the climate in which discus-sions are taking place about aid

across the west is difficult, with more and more voices rising in opposition to aid spending. What do you say to them? 

J. Sachs: There are good ways to do things and bad ways to do

things with aid. Aid works when it’s practical, when it’s focused, when it’s targeted, when it’s an investment, when it is part of a strategy; and aid does not work when it’s money handed over in an envelope to a friendly ally, especially in a war zone, or when it’s a payoff for some other diplomatic support. It needs to be seriously managed, professionalised, results-based – and I’m very happy that the Department For International Development (DfID) is really exemplifying that approach right now. What’s the bottom line? What are the results? What are we getting out of it? And it’s being made into a very practical contract, in essence, between donor and recipient.

This is how it should be done. And when it is done that way, diseases can be brought under control, food productivity can rise, basic infrastructure can be built, kids can be educated, population growth can slow down as girls complete secondary education. Many very important things are necessary to help regions that for reasons of history, geography, geopolitics, bad luck are in a situation where they need a lift to self-sustaining growth.

Bono: There’s one thing that might help with aid cynics. Because clearly no one likes the culture of dependency.  No one’s arguing for it. We’re arguing to end it. I think there’s something a bit funky about aid as it stands right now. The two most important parties involved

Aid: ‘We’re not arguing for a culture of dependency. We’re arguing to end it’

“Aid is what we do in emergency situations to get you through to a place of self-reliance”- Bono

OnatriptoGhana,oneofAfrica’sgreatdevelopmentsuccessstories,ObservereditorJohnMulhollandspoketoONEco-founderBonoandleadingeconomistProfessorJeffreySachs(J.Sachs)aboutthepoliticsandeconomicsofaid.

90

in the transaction – the taxpayer who’s providing the resources and the person who needs those resources to stay alive or keep their family alive – are the two people who know the least about what’s going on. So that has to change.

The British people, at a time of real austerity, have decided to stand by their principles and promises to the most vulnerable in far-off places, but they need to know exactly what they are achieving and how much it’s costing.  

Where there’s a clearer communication about this transaction, this contract, I think the fog around aid and development assistance will lift, and people will go, “This is just incredible value for money and what a privilege it is to give less than one percent of the national income to transform lives.” 

Jeff, you are outspoken about results-based aid – but people often

take the opportunity to have a pop. Does that ever get to you? 

J. Sachs: I think there are two things that are completely different.

One is the words, and there’s a lot of words flying around. And then there is the fact of malaria down 40% over a decade. Believe me, the only thing that matters is the second one.

There’s a lot of verbiage around this issue – a lot of it by critics who don’t seem to ever leave their offices, don’t know what’s happening in the field, don’t really see it. 

Bono, what will you be saying to world leaders to try to secure the

funding commitments they have made to the Global Fund – and which now look under threat? 

Bono: The obfuscation of the facts that’s going on is really a

fog to excuse inaction. And we had to put out a fire in the United States that suggested there was massive corruption in Global Fund grants. There wasn’t. There are some instances of corruption involved. The Global Fund is audited objectively, audited independently and prints on its own website when things are not what they should be – i.e. they out themselves.

These are then taken by critics of aid to be a reason to not do it, but it’s rather the opposite. Transparency should give us confidence to go ahead. Think about it: there’s 3.3 million people on anti-retroviral drugs from the Global Fund. And 1.3 million pregnant women not passing the virus on to their children. You have 5.6 million orphans involved in some sort of care made possible by the Global Fund. And 8.6 million cases of tuberculosis diagnosed and treated. That is just incredible. 

Yet we’ve got to go to Congress every year and fight for those budgets. In Germany, we have to fight for the Global Fund. In the UK we’re campaigning with partners for a doubling of smart lifesaving aid for the Global Fund.

ThisarticlefirstappearedinTheObserver,15thJanuary,2012.

BonoistheleadsingeroftheIrishrockbandU2andawell-knownactivistinthefightagainstAIDSandextremepoverty.Heistheco-founderofONE,anadvocacyorganisationdedicatedtofightingextremepovertyandpreventabledisease,particularlyinAfrica.BonohasreceivednumerousawardsforhismusicandhiscampaigningincludingTIMEMagazine’sPersonoftheYear(in2005withBillandMelindaGates),theLegionD’HonneurfromtheFrenchGovernment,andanhonoraryBritishknighthood.

For more information, please visit www.ONE.org

JeffreyD.SachsisDirectoroftheEarthInstitute,ColumbiaUniversityandaworld-renownedprofessorofeconomics,leaderinsustainabledevelopment,seniorUNadvisor,bestsellingauthor,andsyndicatedcolumnistwhosemonthlynewspapercolumnsappearinmorethan80countries.HehastwicebeennamedamongTimeMagazine’s100mostinfluentialworldleaders.HewascalledbytheNewYorkTimes,“probablythemostimportanteconomistintheworld,”andbyTimeMagazine“theworld’sbestknowneconomist.”ArecentsurveybyTheEconomistMagazinerankedProfessorSachsasamongtheworld’sthreemostinfluentiallivingeconomistsofthepastdecade.

For more information, please visit www.earth.columbia.edu

“(Aid) needs to be seriously managed, professionalised, results-based” - Jeffrey Sachs

© a

fric

a924

/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

91

Disaster resilience is linked to the protection and management

of the environment, which serves as the basis for social and economic development. Disasters are a critical and emerging challenge, and sustainable development is critical to building resilient societies, yet resilience capacity is not on a par with the increased frequency and severity in disasters. How can greater awareness of the environmental and trans-boundary impacts of disasters, and in particular the lack of action in addressing their impact on ecosystems, be brought about?

Healthy eco-systems are critical for increasing the resilience of

vulnerable people to disasters. Not only do they act as natural protective barriers and buffers, they also increase resilience by strengthening livelihoods and the availability of resources. While there are limitations to the protection natural buffers can offer against extreme events, they provide an increasingly attractive option for addressing a wide range of hazards as part of a holistic approach to disaster resilience. For example, after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami there was a major initiative to plant mangrove forests in country coastal areas to act as natural barriers against sea surges.

The monetary undervaluation of eco-system services remains an important obstacle to the adoption of eco-system based disaster risk reduction. We now have an important opportunity to address that issue and to take the work on valuing eco-systems and natural capital accounts to the next level: by encouraging more countries to join the WAVES initiative (Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services) Partnership that we have developed, as well as by making a commitment to ramp up such efforts in Rio+20.

Are you confident that Rio+20 will bring about the reinforcement

of the practical application, as well as political, financial, and technological commitment to disaster risk reduction, necessary for meaningful cross-cutting sustainable development, by providing an opportunity to strengthen governance and institutional frameworks for appropriate multilateral action?

We know that climate change, current patterns of urbanisation,

and increased population pressures will shape and exacerbate disaster risks. Increasing disaster resilience is a pre-condition for sustainable and inclusive growth. Resilience needs to be built at the community, ecosystem, city, sub-national and national level.  Rio+20, especially hosted in Rio de Janeiro, where the city and state wrestle with resilience, is an important opportunity to highlight the importance of disaster risk reduction for achieving broader development goals. Proactive disaster risk management needs to be an integral part of development planning. Disaster risk management is too often seen as a humanitarian relief issue, gone from the headlines as soon as the next disaster comes along. But in fact it is a core element of development and growth.

At the World Bank, through the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR), we have long been working towards this shift in focus from response to prevention. Rio is another chance to spread this message.

The vulnerability of communities and societies to disasters caused

by natural hazards is closely and inversely related to the level of social and economic development. How can developed countries be persuaded to become more proactive in effective disaster risk management?

The best answer is an example. In 2000, Mozambique requested $3-4

million from donor countries to help it to prepare for impending floods. It received only about half that amount. After the floods struck, however, donors gave

Mozambique more than $100 million in relief alone, and pledged more than $450 million for recovery and reconstruction. How donors channel aid also matters. Investments in prevention often imply long-term development expenditures. Donors could specifically earmark development assistance - as opposed to humanitarian aid, whose primary focus is immediate response and relief - for prevention-related activities. Prevention pays: it is more cost-effective to invest in disaster risk reduction today then pay the price (in terms of lives and livelihoods) tomorrow. This message should resonate with developed and developing countries alike.

How important is it to increase private sector engagement in

the disaster resilience agenda, given that it owns and operates a large proportion of an economy’s critical infrastructure? How can this best be achieved? Is the principal role of public funding to leverage private sector support?

Private sector engagement is paramount. The East Japan

earthquake and tsunami, and the recent Thailand floods, have shown the dramatic impact that disasters can have on the global supply chains. J.P. Morgan estimates that the Thai floods set back global industrial production by 2.5%.

Governments can encourage innovative ways to engage the private sector in building disaster resilience. A good example is multi-purpose, critical infrastructure. For instance, Kuala Lumpur’s Stormwater Management and Road Tunnel (SMART) is a good example of hazard-specific, multi-purpose, and cost-effective infrastructure. Both a road tunnel and a drain, the 9.7-kilometer tunnel prevents Kuala Lumpur’s city centre from flooding in the event of heavy rains.

The private sector’s engagement in disaster risk management is growing. The World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Council on Disaster Management has launched consultations on a private sector model for approaches to community resilience, focused on the development of partnerships that maximise the potential of private sector engagement in DRM.

In the context of climate change we are beginning to see leading firms in different

Rachel Kyte, Vice President, Sustainable Development, The World Bank

DISASTERS AND RESILIENCE

Floods, Thailand

© achiaos/Shutterstock.com

92

sectors analyse their climate adaptation risk. Risk from climate events is both a potential additional capital cost, as well as an issue for business continuity and disruption. These tools are important to disseminate to build awareness. The insurance industry is a thought leader here.

Of the 33 cities that will have at least eight million residents

by 2015, 21 are in coastal areas; the proportion of the world’s population living in flood-prone river basins has increased by 114 percent over the past 30 years, while the numbers living on cyclone-exposed coastlines has grown by 192 percent over the same period. Should more be done to discourage further settlement in such disaster-prone regions?

While rapid urbanisation can raise exposure and destroy a city’s

natural buffers against disasters, it can also give people job opportunities and better access to health, education, and infrastructure services. Cities, when well run, enable governments to reach more people with their preventive investments thanks to economies of scale. So, disaster risk reduction should not just be about discouraging people to move to vulnerable areas, it should be about creating the right incentives for citizens and cities to invest in prevention and become more resilient. Together with the right incentives, a key element is data. Access to information - hazard data in particular - helps countries, communities, and individuals understand the risks they face and prepare accordingly. The Netherlands has long coped with the risks of living on a low-lying coastline. A recent article published in ‘The Economist’ highlighted the new approach to the flood-proofing of exposed Dutch coastlines, with a focus on making cities and countryside more resilient - moving dykes inland and giving water space - rather than only relying on the protection of dykes to keep water out. This shows that a major rethinking has started on how to address the vulnerabilities of cities.

More than 680,000 people died in earthquakes between 2000

and 2010 due mainly to poorly built buildings. Yet, how can disaster risk reduction become fully integrated into city planning decisions when so many settlements are informal in nature? Is the first step the legalisation of slums?

This is a critical issue that many of our client countries are facing. The

integration of disaster risk reduction into the development process is at the core of our business and we work to ensure that disaster risk management is a central aspect in all urban upgrade projects in the World Bank.

 While, in general, slum legalisation can be part of a comprehensive urban

risk management programme, much depends on the specific conditions and vulnerabilities within a particular urban setting. Our experience shows, however, that tenure security provides an enabling environment for families to invest in safer and better buildings.

Women and children are 14 times more likely to die than men

during a disaster. Consequently, it’s vital that women play a more central leadership role in building their communities’ climate resilience. Can you give any examples of where this has successfully happened? What plans does the World Bank have to further address gender inequality in respect of disasters and resilience and ensure equal access to resources and opportunities?

It’s true that women are disproportionately vulnerable to the

effects of disasters and climate change especially where their socio-economic status suffers and where they have less voice and influence in shaping policies and prioritising development choices. Empowering and investing in women is an important ingredient in building disaster resilience. There are many examples where this works. In the Horn of Africa, capacity building support to women’s savings and loans groups helped achieve livelihood diversification and enhanced food security during the 2005-08 drought cycle. Similarly, in 1991, Cyclone Gorky killed 140,000 people in Bangladesh. Deaths of women outnumbered those of men by a ratio of 14 to 1. Through the government’s intensive efforts to increase women’s involvement in preparedness – including providing women-only spaces in storm shelters and getting women more involved as community mobilisers – the number of deaths in a similar cyclone event in 2007 saw the absolute numbers of fatalities decline significantly, as well as seeing the gender gap in mortality rates shrink to 5:1.

We are seeing time and time again that when women are empowered to play leadership roles within their communities, the whole community benefits from

better preparedness for extreme weather events. It is smart economics, smart business, smart planning, and smart design to look at challenges with women’s realities in mind. 

Should governments be called upon to promote financial

instruments that help to respond and recover from disasters, as well as to transfer risk such as insurance, capital markets and contingency funds?

At the World Bank, we promote ‘ex-ante’ risk financing instruments

that help respond to natural disasters’ impacts. Innovative financial solutions definitely help enhance the capacity of developing countries to respond to natural disasters and provide immediate liquidity while other post-disaster funding sources are being mobilised following a natural disaster. These financial solutions must complement, not substitute, investments in disaster risk reduction and should be part of a holistic approach to building resilience.   The World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA) now provides a Crisis Response Window which offers the poorest countries a line of contingent financing to respond to a range of crises (economic, food security, natural disasters). This is a significant step forward. In addition, an increasing number of middle-income countries are using financial instruments such as the World Bank’s Catastrophe Risk Deferred Drawdown Option (CAT-DDO). This is a contingent credit line that gives a government immediate access to funds after a natural disaster strikes. For example, following Tropical Storm Agatha, the government of Guatemala was able to provide immediate help to almost 400,000 people, thanks to an $85 million CAT-DDO operation. 

“women are disproportionately vulnerable to the effects of disasters and climate change”

Rachel Kyte, Vice President, Sustainable Development, The World Bank.

93

RiodeJaneiroisoneofthemostinstantlyrecognisablecitiesintheworld.Knowntheworldoverforitscarnivalcelebrations,gloriousbeacheslikeIpanemaandCopacabana,yearroundsunshine,ChristtheRedeemerstatueandtheSugarloaf,this‘MarvellousCity’isthemostvisitedinthesouthernhemisphere.

As well as being the location for the initial Rio Earth Summit in 1992, and again now for Rio+20, the city also recently hosted the Pan American Games in 2007, while as hosts of the World Youth Day in 2013, FIFA World Cup finals in 2014 and the first ever South American Olympic Games in 2016, the eyes of the world are increasingly being trained upon this stunning metropolis with its unparalleled setting. Consequently, Rio is buoyed by confidence right now and as well as the residents

themselves, this extends to business leaders and investors who are looking to build upon Rio’s status as the second largest metropolitan region in Brazil in terms of GDP and its host of real estate and business opportunities. Its commercial credentials are not lost on the likes of Petrobas and Vale who call it home, as does the Globo mass media and comms group, the largest of its kind in Latin America.

The honour of hosting events such as the Olympics comes with a great responsibility, and while it’s fair to say that concerns have been voiced over the levels of poverty, which continue to remain juxtaposed and often omitted from the elegant and picture perfect images of the city, new programmes such as the ‘Morar Carioca Favela Regeneration Project’, ‘Renda Melhor’, which promotes better wages, and the ‘UPP’ security enhancement drive, are helping to prove the

‘Cidade Maravilhosa’ (Marvellous City)

© M

ark

Farr

er/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

the government of Rio has chosen to fight poverty instead of the poor

© lu

min

ousl

ens/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

94

More than a destinationRio de Janeiro is a state of mind

Come and enjoy a new dimension of luxury!jwmarriottriodejaneiro.com

■ 245 rooms and suites, combining style, comfort and state of art technology

■ 24 hours Room Service■ Executive Lounge■ Outdoor Pool■ 24 hours Fitness Center■ Sauna■ Beach Service

Get a new perspective of this incomparable city by staying at the JW Marriott Rio de Janeiro, an oasis of approachable luxury in the heart of Copacabana beach.

doubters wrong. These initiatives and others are helping to facilitate the integration of the slums into the formal Brazilian economy by way of infrastructure and services, and so it would appear that the government of Rio has chosen to fight poverty instead of the poor themselves.

The original driving force behind these programmes is widely considered to have been former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, better known as ‘Lula’ whose observation that “modern leaders find themselves saddled with the burden of correcting the mismanagement of the past manifested in the favelas”, was one that UN-HABITAT would use in their campaign to promote sustainable urbanisation around the world.

Future international events have helped the current government kick-start an ambitious urbanisation master plan for the city centre, which had been on the backburner for decades. ‘Vision 2025 - Rio de Janeiro’ constitutes the largest ever urban regeneration project in Brazil and revolves around ‘Porto Maravilha’, a large-scale urban waterfront revitalisation project covering a 5 million m2 area, in the heart of the city centre. Its objective is to improve urban infrastructure, foster economic growth and opportunities, increase the number of inhabitants within the region and create better social balance and a sustainable urban environment. In a nutshell, it will create a legacy for generations to come.

Rio is buoyed by confidence right now

The Relais & Châteaux Hotel Santa Teresa, 5star design boutique hotel with 40 rooms

located in the historical and cultural district of Rio de Janeiro. Close to all attractions such as

Christ the Redeemer, Sugar Loaf, Museums, Lapa nightlife, beaches,

as well as the financial and business district. Tropical gardens, 25 meter panoramic pool,Natura SPA, and gastronomic Térèze restaurant featuring

the best in contemporary Brazilian cuisine.

The true and authentic RIO experience.

www.santateresahotel.com

© L

aiQ

uocA

nh/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

95

Zainab Salbi

Zainab founded ‘Women for Women International’ in 1993, an NGO dedicated to providing women survivors of war with both financial and emotional support. She is also the author of two books, a national bestseller ‘Between Two Worlds: Growing up in Tyranny: Escaping the Shadow of Saddam’ and ‘The Other Side of War: Women’s Stories of Survival and Hope’.

MYOOisacommunityofsmartpeoplewhoaredoingincrediblethingstomaketheworldabetterplace.Wecan’tthinkofthreebetterrepresentativesthanZainabSalbi,AlannahWeston,andJune

Sarpong–threeamazingwomenwhoseactionsspeaklouderthananyofourwords.LearnmoreaboutthembelowandvisitMyoo.comtoexplorethegoodworkofallourMuses.

June SarpongJune is not your average mega-TV personality. She’s nabbed interviews with a small army of celebrities and politicians doing good work for the planet, including Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Nelson Mandela, and Bono. She started out at MTV UK, where her big break came in the form of an exclusive interview with none other than Tony Blair in the special ‘When Tony Met June’.

Alannah Weston

As creative director for one of England’s biggest retail stores, Alannah has implemented a new concept in the shopping world: retail activism. Her first venture is ‘Project Ocean’, a month-long campaign in the Selfridges chain that highlights the perils of over-fishing.

Myoozes

Who is your favourite Eco-Warrior?

A small farmer in Rwanda who uses bio dynamics and organic farming and who has managed to be fully self-sustainable through his simple plot of land. 

What is your biggest concern for our planet?

Water. Shortage of water.

What is your favourite eco-project?

Gecko Farm in Rwanda. 

What recent change have you made in your life to protect the planet?

I try to be as holistic and consistent as I can in ensuring that all my purchases reflect my values and are anchored in respect for all aspects of this earth. From ‘Dr Hauschka’ for my moisturiser to buying local farmers’ products for my meals.

Who is your favourite Eco-Warrior?Professor Jonathan Baillie, Director of Conservation at the Zoological Society of London. He inspired me to spearhead Project Ocean at Selfridges.

What is your biggest concern for our planet?I have so many concerns, but the depletion of our oceans is the one I feel the most passionate about.

What is your favourite eco-project?Project Ocean at Selfridges. Project Ocean has set up a Marine Protected Area in the Philippines and is funding the Marine Reserves Coalition in the hope that more MPAs can be created in the UK and around the world.

What recent change have you made in your life to protect the planet?I have stopped eating endangered fish and in my house there are no plastic bottles.

Who is your favourite Eco-Warrior?

David de Rothschild of course! Is there another one? 

What is your biggest concern for our planet?

My biggest concern for our planet is the amount of ignorance there still is around environmental issues. The majority are still very ill informed. That is what worries me most and how one addresses that.

What is your favourite eco-project?

I love anything Van Jones does and I think his new book is awesome.

What recent change have you made in your life to protect the planet?

I’ve started becoming very mindful of what I buy in general. Not only has it been good for the environment, but it’s been good for my pocketbook.

96

“I have so many concerns, but the depletion of our oceans is the one I feel the most passionate about”

“I’ve started becoming very mindful of what I buy in general”

“I try to be as holistic and consistent as I can in ensuring that all my purchases reflect my values and are anchored in respect for all aspects of this earth”

© s

zefe

i/Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m©

Ep

icS

tock

Med

ia/S

hutt

erst

ock.

com

© R

yan

Car

ter/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

©A

nett

e Li

nnea

Ras

mus

sen/

Shu

tter

stoc

k.co

m

97

I first dipped my toes into the world of ‘greening’ events when the subject was in its infancy in the mid-1990s. Precisely, this was on the occasion of the first World Conference on Sport and Environment in July 1995, co-hosted by the IOC and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Back then, everyone was looking forward to how the Sydney Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2000 would address these issues. Those Games set a high standard in many areas, particularly in terms of environmental infrastructure, but today the broader and more holistic sustainability agenda is taking things to a new level. This is especially evident in terms of the business case for sustainability, where London 2012 is dramatically demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of taking informed, balanced decisions to ensure we achieve sustainable outcomes in planning, design, procurement and operations.

Fast forward to April 2012 (3 months before the London Olympic Games), and we find ourselves welcoming environmental VIP, Achim Steiner, the Executive Director of UNEP to the Olympic Park, to mark the launch of our pre-games sustainability report. Following the vast amount of work that has gone into this programme, we were thrilled that upon seeing the park, Mr Steiner backed our sustainability measures, saying: “It puts London 2012 within the tide of positive case studies from major sporting events that are shining pathways towards a sustainable century and a transition to a Green Economy in advance of Rio+20.”

The tour of the site, which was accompanied by a posse of international journalists, focused on the environmental centrepiece of the Park, where the former canalised River Lea has been re-profiled into a broad open valley providing new wetland habitats for wildlife and vital flood alleviation for the neighbouring communities.

Our guest was impressed with London 2012’s thoughtful approach and the fact that so much attention has been placed on long-term legacy benefits. For example, many of the 30 new bridges across the network of rivers and canals have been scaled for Games-time use and will be reconfigured into smaller structures for legacy use. The attention to resource efficiency was also appreciated, demonstrated by the many temporary structures that have been put in place, to ensure we only build permanent facilities that have viable, long-term futures.

In the UK we don’t hear much about UNEP but in the wider world of the Olympic Movement, this is a special relationship. UNEP has been working with the IOC since the mid-90s on a mission to promote higher environmental and sustainability standards in the world’s premier sporting event. This gives them a unique perspective on the achievements of successive host cities, which is why it was gratifying to hear Achim Steiner’s appreciation of the way we have progressed the sustainability agenda forward through areas such as design, material selection and supply chain management. We are also proud that we have taken sustainability thinking for the first time deep into the operational aspects of major events, including areas such as transport, logistics, catering and waste management.

We were especially proud to announce that our report was the first one to be written in accordance with the new Global Reporting Initiative’s (GRI’s) Event Organisers’ Sector Supplement, and to be GRI-checked to application level A. This is top grade, world class sustainability reporting standard, all the more challenging because we are a temporary organisation that disbands as soon as possible after the Games have been delivered – so we really only had one chance to get this right.

In fact, this temporary status means we have an extra focus on legacy. We are therefore thrilled to have been able to

contribute to the establishment of the new GRI guidelines for the event sector and we see this as a long-term benefit for events across the world.

Alongside the full GRI-checked report, a summary report has been published focusing on six priority areas chosen by our stakeholders following a detailed survey last year:

Delivering low carbon Games

Zero waste Games

Sustainable and accessible transport

Economic benefits of sustainability

Promoting sustainable living

Olympic Park legacy

Across each of these we have set out our approach, achievements and challenges. The London 2012 Sustainability Summary Report highlights numerous case studies from sponsors, suppliers and our own organisation that demonstrate how sustainable solutions are good business solutions. We have achieved this because we had a clear vision and mandate from the original bid, a determined leadership and an expert team installed from the outset.

Along the way we have learnt a great deal and we are keen to pass this knowledge on to future Host Cities and the wider event world. This is a mission we are keen to share with UNEP and look forward to a strong collaboration over the coming months.

www.london2012.com

we had a clear vision and mandate

London 2012 – Sustainable Olympics By David Stubbs, Head of Sustainability, London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG)

98

Photo Credit (above right): Sebastian Rich/Save the Children

G8 Leaders: What’s on your menu this weekend?While you enjoy your first-class meals, more than 170 million kids are suffering from chronic malnutrition, in part because they don’t eat the right variety of food. Producing more food in the world is good. But making sure kids eat the right food is even better.

Change starts now. Take action at SaveTheChildren.org/Child-Survival.