TL: EARTH SUMMIT PRESS PACK #3: EARTH SUMMIT MYTHOLOGY SO: Greenpeace International (GP) DT: May 10, 1992 Keywords: Greenpeace gp conferences unced brazil atmosphere climate north south multinationals banks world bank trade factsheets unced un / ONE: CLIMATE CHANGE MYTH: A Climate Change Convention will be the Earth Summit's major achievement. REALITY: Unless the US changes its position dramatically on cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, the Climate Change Convention, to be signed in Rio, will do very little to reverse global warming. Legally binding targets and timetables for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, especially of CO2, are essential. A major commitment to technologies for renewable energy and efficiency is also vital, yet neither UNCED nor the Climate Change negotiations show any serious commitment to such energy alternatives. TWO: TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MYTH: The North's 'environmentally sound technology' is the South's saviour. REALITY: The North's technology is responsible for most of our global environmental problems, and must undergo a fundamental transformation if global warming, ozone depletion, and the impacts from hazardous wastes are to be addressed. The North has very few "clean" technologies to transfer to the South. Instead, it most often pushes dirty industries and banned products onto economically weaker nations. Rather than addressing this huge problem UNCED defines environmentally sound technology as that which pollutes "less." This definition could easily be used to justify the export of dirty northern technologies as long as they are "cleaner" than technologies already in place in the South. Such logic is similar to that used by the World Bank's chief economist, Lawrence Summers, in an internal memo earlier this year which suggested: "Just between you and me, shouldn't the World Bank be encouraging more migration of the dirty industries to the LDCs (less developed countries)?". THREE: TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS (TNCs) MYTH: TNCs Can Successfully Regulate Themselves. REALITY: Transnational Corporations (TNCs) are responsible for many of the world's worst environmental problems. For example TNCs control the production of ozone-destroying chemicals; they generate more than half of the industrial sector's greenhouse gas emissions; and they play a dominant role in the export and import of hazardous products and technology. TNCs have hijacked the UNCED process under the guise of the Business Council for Sustainable Development (BCSD). As a result, there has been virtually no debate on the environmental and social impacts of these large corporations. The BCSD is proposing voluntary guidelines for TNCs, and unregulated "technology co- operation" between countries. UNCED has not challenged industry's contribution to global environmental destruction in any way. FOUR: UNITED STATES CENTRISM MYTH: If George Bush Goes to Rio, the Earth Summit will be a Success. REALITY: US negotiators so far have adversely impacted on a number of other governments' efforts to adopt strong, effective initiatives on financing, technology transfer, desertification, radioactive waste dumping at sea, reforming consumption patterns, waste trade and transnational corporations. If George Bush goes to Rio, it will most likely mean that the Climate and UNCED documents will have been sufficiently weakened to his liking. FIVE: NUCLEAR WEAPONS MYTH: Nuclear Power, Nuclear Weapons and the Environmental Impacts of the Military do not Belong on the Earth Summit Agenda. REALITY: During Prep Com 4, there was a nuclear accident in Russia, a US nuclear test in Nevada, and the Greenpeace flagship, Rainbow Warrior sailed into a French test zone in the South Pacific to protest nuclear testing there. (Less than three weeks later the French Government stopped its 1992 nuclear testing programme). Yet nuclear power, nuclear weapons testing and the serious environmental impacts of conventional warfare are glaringly absent from the Earth Summit agenda. At all UNCED negotiations so far, the US and a number of other nations have opposed all proposals to even mention weapons of mass destruction, let alone ban them which is what UNCED should be saying. SIX: FINANCING MYTH: Throwing Money at the Problem will Save the Planet. REALITY: Conventional wisdom at the Earth Summit negotiations holds that UNCED will be successful if the Northern industrialized nations - the US, Japan, and the European Community - give the poorer nations of the South, billions of dollars for "sustainable development." But unless the negative outflow of $45 billion a year from the South, through debt and unequal terms of trade is reversed and unless the corruption which has characterised many Southern (as well as Northern) governments is stemmed and democratic means for deciding and distributing aid are established, any new funds generated from UNCED will only provide a band-aid for a gaping wound. SEVEN: THE WORLD BANK MYTH: The World Bank is Best Qualified to Manage Environmental Funds. REALITY: The World Bank is positioning itself, with strong support from the US, the European Community, and Japan, to receive the bulk of environmental funds generated by the Earth Summit, yet it has a miserable environmental track record. Putting the World Bank in charge of a global environment fund is like leaving the fox in charge of the planetary henhouse. EIGHT: FREE TRADE MYTH: Free Trade and Economic Growth will Lead to Environmental Progress. REALITY: While countries such as the US argue that free trade is the only way to achieve "sustainable development," it is clear that the Uruguay Round of GATT, and regional free trade agreements are being used as tools to dismantle environmental regulations. By not pushing for the environment to take precedence over trade, UNCED is undermining itself. It is also buying into the argument that more of the sort of economic growth that has caused so many environmental problems in the first place, is necessary to generate the resources for environmental protection. But the resources generated by such growth will never catch up with the problems it creates. =end=