Nick Clegg MP writes… Rio+20: We made progress

The dust has now settled on last week’s Rio+20 summit and I’m keen to look back at my initial goals and to let you know what we achieved in terms of meeting them. Of course the final text was not all we would have wanted had we been able to write it ourselves; however I am pleased to be able to report that all three of my priorities have been included in the final text of the document that was agreed last week.

  1. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We agreed to launch a process to develop these, to ensure that countries around the world grow but do so sustainably, in a way that protects the environment as well. In my view, this is a really positive step and gives us an excellent base on which to build. SDGs will be a real driving force for change towards putting the world on a more sustainable footing if we get them right. I would have liked to see themes for the SDGs agreed, but these will be decided during the next phase of negotiations and I hope to see rapid progress towards this agreement. In my view, the SDGs need to focus on food, energy, and water – important for growth, poverty eradication and sustainability – and be coherent and integrated with the UN Development agenda beyond 2015. They should be aspirational and apply to both developed and developing countries. This is what we will be pushing for in the forthcoming negotiations.
  2. Achieving agreement on the need to develop a better understanding of growth – something called GDP+. I’m really pleased that Rio recognised the need to develop broader measures of progress to complement GDP to allow countries to measure their natural wealth and social wellbeing and make informed decisions. And this is the crucial part. We don’t just need to measure what matters, we need to adopt Natural Capital Accounting to ensure that our natural resources, on which 40% of our global economy depends, are properly reflected in decision making. We are moving as a country to measuring our own prosperity in those terms from 2020, showing real leadership on this key issue.
  3. I said that I wanted to see recognition of the need to involve businesses more. Government cannot do this alone. That’s why it’s so important that Rio has recognised the role of business sustainability reporting, something which would have been inconceivable even a year ago and which owes a lot to the leadership of the Government and to UK businesses. I also announced in Rio that we will be the first country anywhere to mandate large companies to report on their greenhouse gas emissions. There is a market demand for this. There is increasing recognition among major companies that using resources sustainably is in their own interests. Companies have been asking for it, investors need to know, consumers want to make informed decisions, and this should eventually lead to a global framework.

So, concrete progress on my three priorities. Alongside this, there were other steps forward. For example, the final text specifically recognises that environment and development are intrinsically linked. This is major progress for us as Liberal Democrats, who not only believe that the two are linked, but see sustainable growth as essential to raising living standards. The text goes even further, stressing the importance of the green economy to sustainable development – the first time a multilateral document expressing support for the green economy has ever been agreed. And here’s the thing: for us in the UK this is a real commercial opportunity. Close to a million people already work in the green economy in our country alone. We can become real world beaters on this. This is a great opportunity to create jobs at home, but sustainable development across the globe as well.

Some individuals and organisations have said that the text agreed at Rio+20 doesn’t go far enough or reflects too much the spirit of compromise. It’s true that the agreement reached at the summit is not as ambitious as I would like and had hoped for, but it is a firm step towards achieving a sustainable future. We can only move the world forward through consensus. Any other agreement would have meant rejecting the views of large parts of the developing world. I’m clear this would have been completely unacceptable. Indeed, one of the most interesting things about Rio+20 has been the rise of the G77 – developing countries for the first time really making their voices heard.

I believe that what we agreed at Rio+20 gives us all the right components; now we need enough political will and determination to build those components into a machine capable of delivering the inclusive, sustainable growth we all seek. If we can build on the agreements reached at the summit in the months and years ahead then it will have been a clear success.

* Nick Clegg is the MP for Sheffield Hallam

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.


  • jenny barnes 26th Jun '12 - 10:41am
  • I don’t know why anyone bothers to attend; an equally effective result would have been achieved by issueing a ‘photocopy’ of the promises from the last one.

  • The phrase ‘ Sustainable Growth ‘, is used often without much thought into what it means.
    Sustainable, means that a proposed activity can continue indefinitely.
    Growth, (economic), means a process of increasing in physical size.
    Given that growth cannot continue indefinitely on a finite planet, then it follows that Sustainable Growth is an oxymoron.
    Do we have choices? Yes.
    1. We begin now to re-think and re-design our economy into something more steady state.
    2. We ignore all the warning signs, right up until we hit the brick wall.

  • In order to truly have Sustainable Development, all subsidies must cease. Unless you’re at least breaking even without pricing yourself out of the market, you can forget it.

  • Reading Nick Clegg’s description, it is very much deja vu. Of course we need goals, but as I remember Rio 1992 and its follow-up, Agenda 21 and Local Agenda 21, put a lot of energy into developing goals, at all levels, from the local to the international. How far did Rio 2012 create an audit of this process and outcomes? All the comment from the environmental side this time round has been of the sort that Jason has provided above, and that we are not any further forward with, eg reducing carbon emissions, or stemming the tide of ocean pollution, or reducing inequality in the world (yes that was a key goal in 1992, as it was recognised that unless the world became a more equitable place, we would have little or no chance of advancing on an environmental front).

    So my questions to Nick are:
    1 What has been done to take sustainability ON from the work done following 1992, and recognising that work?

    2 Given that current GDP skews the economic process in all the wrong directions, what is being done URGENTLY, to get the world back on track. Linked to that, why are we not hearing from various economic summits about the linkages to environmental goals, because that is where the action and the tough decisions need to be?

    3 What does Nick think he personally added to the process?

    The outcomes of this summit process look distinctly like going round in circles – you could say “rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic”, in the overused but highly appropriate cliche, and reading Monbiot’s analysis doesn’t give me any more hope that we are any further forward than 1992.

  • John Twidell 27th Jun '12 - 11:14am

    Nick Clegg’s summary of the outcome Rio+20 is somewhat pathetic. He may be pleased that he had weak expectations and so felt he met his aims, but few others are. Politicians usually see the world from top to down, so the view is discouraging. They need to see what can be done successfully at ground level in case studies (hopefully including their own lifestyle and work) and then amplify these upwards. Utilising renewable energy oneself and taking steps to support biodiversity etc through local actions and careful purchases is totally possible, as countless personal and some business examples show.

    I say this as a Lib Dem member.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • Simon R
    I do actually agree that at one level, it is very bad that the law creates two classes of adults. Ordinarily, a law that discriminates on the basis of age in th...
  • Simon R
    @Katharine: Yes, it's true I pointed out how things look from a landlord's perspective, but equally, you were taking things only from the tenant's perspective. ...
  • Peter Davies
    I think the imbalance is between good and bad landlords. We have quite a lot of rules but they are almost unenforcable. With the current shortage of property to...
  • Steve Trevethan
    Thank you for your article! Might a significant factor in this problem be our recent and current, neo-liberal/austerity managed, anti relational-well-being, ...
  • Katharine Pindar
    @ Peter M. and Simon R. There are certainly arguments for and against dependency on renting: there are, for instance, good housing associations such as my local...