Informal Rio+20 negotiations continue without consensus on key areas

According to the Earth Negotiations Bulletin June 2 publication, the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development’s third round of informal consultations has made progress within two groups of negotiators, looking forward to the outcome document of this summit. However, differences between the G-77 and China group against the United States and other developed countries stands as a source of disagreement between the parties, making consensus more difficult.

On financial discussions, the US proposed a more transparent budgetary management, changes in aid architecture and a redefinition of roles for development finance and middle income countries. While China and the G-77 group agree with some of these concerns, they advocate for a more aggressive plan. This includes the transference of US$30 billion per year from developed countries to developing countries, for promoting sustainable development, and the possible implementation of a sustainable development fund. The European Union, Canada and Japan expressed reservations about this proposal.

On trading measures, however, most countries agree about the importance of international trade, market access, fight against protectionism and the reduction of harmful subsides. On the other hand, disagreements from countries like Korea and Canada remain, especially in reduction of subsides. Meanwhile, China and the G-77 group attempted to delete the Registry of Commitments from the declaration, while the US wishes to keep it and invite the UN Secretary General to oversee these commitments.

Concerning the regions, China and the G-77 group propose focusing on addressing development needs of the least developed countries, land-locked developing countries, Africa, the Arab Region, Latin America and the Caribbean. They call for differential conditions for these regions. The US, Canada and Japan disagree with this propositions, noticing that they do not stress enough importance on domestic responsibilities. The EU is considering this text for the least developed countries only.

The second workgroup had informal meetings concerning green development and economy, political commitment and an institutional framework for sustainable development. However, little progress could be achieved, especially because the best negotiators were already working and the first workgroup. Negotiators expressed their discomfort about this situation, and some believe that consensus will not be achieved if the current situation remains.