!

"#$%$&'$ $
The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, known as Rio+20, was held in Rio de Janeiro from 20-22 June 2012. It was the biggest meeting on the international calendar in 2012 and attracted high level participation. Rio+20 comes 20 years after the landmark 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, known as the Rio Earth Summit. More than 100 heads of state attended the Rio Earth Summit, which adopted a wide-ranging blueprint for action to achieve sustainable development. This included the Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Rio Declaration and the Agenda 21 sustainable development plan. Rio+20 focused on: The green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication The institutional framework for sustainable development. New Zealand priorities at Rio+20 New Zealand sought an action-orientated outcome at Rio+20, taking a leadership role on two key areas within the green economy: Blue Economy New Zealands emphasis on the blue economy includes sustainable fisheries, protection of the marine environment and the elimination of harmful fisheries subsidies. It reflects the importance of oceans to New Zealand and our neighbouring countries in the Pacific. A key concern is that harmful fisheries subsidies contribute to overfishing and overcapacity, including illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. At the September 2011 Pacific Islands Forum meeting in Auckland, leaders called for blue economy issues to figure prominently at Rio+20. They urged the international community to tackle threats to marine ecosystems and work towards integrated oceans management and a global network of marine protected areas. Read more about the blue economy. Reducing Fossil Fuel Subsidies In 2010 worldwide fossil fuel subsidies exceeded US$400 billion (International Energy Agency (IEA) World Energy Outlook 2011 report). Subsidies for fossil fuels encourage wasteful consumption, distort markets, impede investment in clean energy sources and undermine efforts to deal with climate change. The same IEA report also estimated only 8 percent of these subsidies reached the poorest 20 percent of the population. Some countries spend more on fossil fuel subsidies than they do on health or education. Reducing fossil fuel subsidies would offer significant climate and environmental benefits as well as freeing up money that could be directed at social and environmental protection and investments. New Zealand urged Rio+20 to join other international efforts for a commitment to the early phase out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, while mitigating adverse impacts on vulnerable groups. New Zealand is a member of the Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform group, which works to highlight the potential climate, economic, trade and energy security benefits of fossil fuel subsidy reform.

Preparatory Committee for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development Statement by Juliet Hay, Counsellor, New Zealand Permanent Mission to the United Nations, 25-26 January 2012 We join others in thanking the Co-Chairs for the zero draft of the Rio+20 outcome document. In our view, it provides a good basis for negotiations. We also associate ourselves with the statement made on behalf of Pacific Islands Forum states which focused mainly on oceans and fisheries issues. These are a priority for New Zealand. We were pleased to see the references in the zero draft although, as the Pacific statement mentioned, we seek some further strengthening. Comments on the structure Today we comment on other aspects of the zero draft, starting with the structure. We commend the Co-chairs for a comparatively short document. Our aim now should be to make it even more concise and focused. The final text should be inspiring and action-oriented one that is not only appropriate for Leaders but also captures the public imagination as that is critical for implementation. We should make every word count. One strong reference to an issue is better than a multitude which dilutes the impact. We consider that there is scope for streamlining as highlighted in our written comments on paragraphs 1-24. Some of those comments are also applicable to other parts of the document. For example, we accept that there needs to be reaffirmation of relevant documents such as the various Rio documents. This should be done at the beginning of the document but then taken as read without needing to mention commitments individually in later parts of the text. More generally, we should be disciplined when drawing on other texts, avoiding selective quotation. Also, in what is to be an action-oriented document, we should carefully scrutinise noting paragraphs, ensuring whether they really are necessary and add value. The draft currently contains three sections entitled Framework for action. This is potentially confusing. For example, much of Section V(A) seem to be green economy related actions. In our view there should be one such section - a clear list of agreed actions which can be easily located. This will also contribute to our streamlining efforts. There are also a number of paragraphs scattered throughout the text that propose goals, targets, indicators, strategies or toolkits. Some rationalisation is needed. Before working through the proposals individually we suggest a general discussion at the March meeting to gain a clearer understanding of the objectives underpinning each proposal, including what each would be used for and how they relate to one another. We should be cautious not to invest too much time and energy in developing such tools unless we are sure that there is a demand for them, and that they would make a difference. In a number of areas the zero draft mandates further work while this is probably an appropriate approach in most areas, we need to ensure that the timeframes specified are realistic but also ambitious. We should not lose momentum. Comments on specific proposals We are pleased to see the draft contains a number of issues that New Zealand regards as priorities, including on the phasing out of fossil fuel, fisheries and agricultural subsidies. We would, however, like a much greater degree of specificity as well as more ambitious timeframes so intend to propose some amendments. As we said in December, we are also open to discussing further the inclusion of text relating to the development of sustainable development goals. The draft lists priority areas including oceans, which New Zealand would support given that the importance of oceans as a global resource. However, there needs to be further discussion on how to determine which areas should be the subject of SDGs. There are some general issues mentioned in the text which may benefit from more prominence, including: The importance of national ownership and leadership in sustainable development, recognising that no one size fits all; and The importance of enabling environments, including good governance at all levels this is not only relevant to private sector investment.

We are all aware of the need for financial resources for implementation and also of the constraints arising from the current economic situation. We would like to see more emphasis on better use of resources which should therefore come from a range of sources. (The text refers to the private sector but does not, for instance mention, civil society and foundations, nor domestic resources such as taxation. Public-private partnerships should also be encouraged.) One aspect in that regard is building on the progress made on aid effectiveness, most recently at Busan, and we support the reference to the Busan Partnership. Institutional framework for sustainable development (IFSD) Section IV, which deals with IFSD, contains some alternative paragraphs. New Zealand does not yet have final positions on these issues. We suggest that time be set aside at the March meeting for a general exchange of views on Section IV before starting on paragraph-by-paragraph consideration. In order to determine the precise shape of the institutional architecture there needs to be an emerging consensus around what we are trying to achieve. As we mentioned in December, form should follow function. The driver for change should be improved effectiveness, not just change for changes sake. One aspect that would benefit from a stronger paragraph is the one UN approach to operational activities at the country level, reflecting the progress made in reform initiatives, including delivering as one and the harmonisation of business practices. We look forward to getting into discussion on the detail in the coming meetings.

Preparatory Committee for the UN Conference on Sustainable Development Statement delivered by Juliet Hay, Counsellor, New Zealand Permanent Mission to the United Nations, 16 December 2011 New Zealand is looking forward to Rio+20 as an opportunity to re-energise and realise our common objective of sustainable development. For us, an ideal outcome would be a renewed political commitment to sustainable development, underpinned by agreement on focused forward-looking actions. We must not only bank the achievements made since the first Rio Conference under each pillar of sustainable development, but also update and strengthen them to reflect todays reality and look towards to a more sustainable future for us all. We have been asked to consider today the structure and format of the zero draft document. There are a number of possible precedents, some of which are long and detailed. Time is not in abundance to complete our work. New Zealand values quality over quantity. We need a document that will inspire us all, one that is tightly focused on future action and concrete outcomes. In that regard, we should be ambitious yet pragmatic. We should be clear in our vision, yet take into account the multitude of different circumstances. Our blueprint for the future needs to be challenging yet attainable. This week we have heard much about creating Sustainable Development Goals, a proposal that has potential to capture the imagination at Rio. New Zealand is open to constructive dialogue on coverage, content and measurability of possible SDGs. Like others, we would see this as a separate process from achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, which should remain a key priority. New Zealands submission focused on areas where we see potential to make real and substantial differences. We mentioned yesterday, in the statement given on behalf of Pacific Islands Forum members, some specific concrete outcomes that we are seeking relating to oceans. Priorities for New Zealand are commitments relating to: Integrated sustainable oceans management: the Pacific Oceanscape provides a possible model for an integrated approach to sustainable development of oceans and fisheries as it covers legal and governance issues, science and capability building aspects, local, national and regional resource management, engagement with stakeholders and processes for dealing with emerging issues; Effective fisheries management, including within Exclusive Economic Zones is crucial. Ensuring small island developing states are able to generate greater returns from the sustainable management of their fisheries resources is a key to achieving development goals in the Pacific region; Continuation of the Regular Process for the Global Assessment of the Marine Environment, including socioeconomic aspects: sustainable oceans protection and management should be based on sound information and science. We seek collective commitment to further regular assessments of the marine environment, once the first assessment is completed in 2014; Combatting illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing: States should reaffirm their commitment to effective implementation of current mechanisms, mechanisms including port and flag state measures and catch certification processes. Further assessment of whether additional measures are required could be considered; Taking concrete steps towards elimination of harmful fisheries subsidies: Subsidies contribute to overfishing and overcapacity: in some cases subsidies are being provided to vessels which have a history of illegal fishing, as well as for activities affecting fish stocks which are already overfished. Given the worsening state of global fish stocks, fisheries subsidy reform needs urgent attention;. Creating a global network of marine protected areas, providing for regeneration and protection of biodiversity, as agreed in Johannesburg. Phasing out, over the medium term, inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption and undermine sustainable development, while mitigating adverse impacts on vulnerable groups; Improving access to clean, reliable, and affordable energy, particularly renewable energy; and Creating a framework supportive of sustainable agriculture and wise management of water resources. To underpin these outcomes, the institutional framework for sustainable development must become more effective and efficient. We first need a common understanding about what we want reforms to achieve. Institutional structures should not be an end in themselves but should facilitate the achievement of objectives

that the international community sets. Form must therefore follow function. Perhaps the zero draft could begin by identifying the elements where there is common ground in the submissions rather than suggesting a particular structure at the outset. For instance, before supporting the creation of new structures New Zealand would want to be sure that they would result in improved policy coherence and implementation of sustainable development objectives. We would also want to avoid the shortcomings of the current international environmental governance framework, which are well known. Change whatever form it takes- should not provide an opportunity to shelter continuing poor coordination, communication and out-dated processes. And whatever structures we have must represent good value for money. All stakeholders, and particularly the institutions involved, should prepare themselves to work in new and innovative ways to support sustainable development. We look forward to working together on these issues over coming months, and to a successful conference in Rio

SUBMISSION FOR THE RIO+20 PROCESS BY NEW ZEALAND New Zealand welcomes this opportunity to make a submission on the forthcoming United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development. We look forward to engaging with other stakeholders through the process of consideration of a focused, action- oriented outcome document. New Zealand has not sought to comment on every element of the sustainable development agenda in this submission. Rather, we have focused on our top priority issues for the purposes of this document. New Zealand is currently Chair of the Pacific Islands Forum. The annual Pacific Islands Forum Leaders meeting in Auckland in September 2011 contained a number of themes that are of direct relevance to Rio+20. We have highlighted several in this submission. The relevant outcomes of the Forum meeting will also be relayed separately to inform the Rio+20 process of the priorities of the Pacific region. Expectations for the outcome of Rio+20 and preference for the format of the outcome document: New Zealand notes that the objective of Rio+20 is to secure renewed political commitment for sustainable development, assessing the progress to date and remaining gaps in the implementation of the outcomes of the major summits on sustainable development and addressing new and emerging challenges. Accordingly, New Zealand envisages Rio+20 producing a short, focussed outcome document containing implementable political outcomes. We wish to see an emphasis on political commitments and actions to achieve them. Working within that context New Zealand wishes to highlight a number of priority areas which it regards as strong candidates for international agreement and action. Green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication New Zealand considers pursuit of a green economy to be a pragmatic approach, not a new paradigm it is as much about how we grow as it is about how much we grow. New Zealand supports mutually reinforcing environmental, social and economic policy that makes the most of opportunities to develop new industries, jobs and technologies to clean up polluting sectors, seek efficiencies in resource use and transform consumption patterns. New Zealand does not consider that it is desirable or possible to take a one-size-fits-all approach to achieving a green economy. A flexible approach to the green economy will allow countries to implement polices and activities suitable to their own national context. It is vital that the pursuit of a green economy avoid trade distorting measures and imposing new, green, barriers to trade. 2 Oceans and Marine Living Resources: TheBlue Economy: For us, and for other Pacific Island Forum countries, a crucial element of the greeneconomy is the blue economy. Capitalising on the potential of our oceans is crucial for the future of the Pacific and the livelihoods of its peoples. In the Waiheke Declaration on Sustainable Economic Development of September 2011, Pacific Islands Forum leaders recommitted to pursuing a goal of ensuring a sustainable economic environment for all. In September 2011, PIF Leaders noted the regions unique dependency on the Pacific Ocean as the basis for their livelihoods, food security and economic development. New Zealand as Chair of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) reiterates the PIF Leaders call for the Rio+20 conference to recognize the significant global value and contribution of the Pacific Ocean to sustainable development, and to acknowledge the stewardship of Pacific Island Countries. New Zealand also reiterates the PIF call for the international community to work towards integrated oceans management, for which the Pacific Oceanscape1 could be a model, with the aim of realising relevant international goals to contribute to the health and vitality of the ocean environment, and the maximisation of returns to Small Island Developing States from the sustainable use of ocean resources. Health of the Oceans: New Zealand strongly supports the completion of the first global integrated assessment of the state of the marine environment (Regular Process for the Global Marine Assessment) by 2014, which was mandated by the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation and calls for adequate resourcing for the first assessment. New Zealand emphasises the importance of the Regular Process for the Global Marine Assessment as a credible, robust process and calls for a commitment to an ongoing

process of assessments after 2014. New Zealand calls on states to take account of the Regular Process for the Global Marine Assessment outcomes and act upon them in formulating national, regional and global oceans policy. We note ongoing concern about ocean acidification and other climate change effects on the oceans especially in the Pacific region. Sustainable fisheries management including greater return to small island developing states from their fisheries resources: New Zealand emphasizes that generating greater returns from sustainable fisheries is a high priority for the Pacific. Support for sustainable development of Pacific fisheries and securing a greater proportion of returns for Pacific Island countries and territories are key themes of New Zealands Pacific fisheries engagement, in terms of our participation in Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) and our development assistance. New Zealand urges renewed commitment to improved oceans governance, including adherence to the key principles of the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement, including a reinforcement of the precautionary approach. We recognize the important link between fisheries and food security. We call on RFMOs dealing with highly migratory species to continue to coordinate among themselves to develop and adopt best practice in the conservation and management of these species and their ecosystems. We also call on RFMOs dealing with straddling stocks and on coastal states to cooperate in the sustainable management of stocks. We underline the need for quality, targeted and better-resourced science and for RFMO decisions to be made on the basis of that science. New Zealand also urges a focus on improved fisheries management within Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs). This would involve analysis of and emphasis on fisheries sustainability within EEZs (which is where more than 90% of global fishing takes place). States must also take action to ensure their management of fisheries within their EEZs faithfully implements the UNCLOS requirement to conserve and manage fisheries resources, in accordance with international commitments. Fisheries subsidies: New Zealand believes that Rio+20 must address harmful fisheries subsidies that contribute to overfishing and overcapacity, and impact negatively on sustainable development. Fisheries subsidies can undermine fisheries management decisions, contribute to illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing, create perverse economic incentives which impact on the long term sustainability of global fisheries, and add pressure on the last remaining, not fully exploited fisheries. Ultimately the impacts of subsidies will fall most heavily on countries and communities that depend on fisheries resources for livelihoods, development and employment. In this context, as a complement to ongoing WTO negotiations, countries should re-commit at Rio+20 to eliminate subsidies which contribute to overcapacity, as well as subsidies for activities that affect already overfished stocks, and subsidies for vessels and enterprises found to be engaged in IUU fishing. Countries should also undertake to pursue further unilateral or plurilateral reform of subsidies that contribute to overfishing, commit to significant improvement in the transparency of current subsidy programmes, and consider greater accountability for nonnotification. Marine Conservation and Marine Protected Areas: New Zealand reaffirms the importance of creating, based on sound science, an environmentally sound, representative network of Marine Protected Areas that advance biodiversity. We recall the international commitment, by 2020, for at least 17% of terrestrial and inland water, and 10% of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, to be conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscape and seascapes. We endorse ongoing work to identify and protect Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems. Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing (IUU): New Zealand urges the international community to take effective measures against IUU fishing including: increased monitoring, control and surveillances measures; commitment by the flag state to enforce RFMO and coastal state measures against their vessels, including full compliance with reporting obligations; implementation of port state measures, including ratification of the FAO Port State Measures Agreement and development of RFMO IUU vessel blacklists; implementation of clear and equitable market measures, including the development of appropriate catch certification schemes and international standards for fisheries product certification; and encouraging states to take action against those responsible for IUU fishing, including their own companies and nationals. We urge governments, industry and NGOs to work together to combat IUU fishing. We call for the IMO and FAO to continue their joint work on flags of convenience. We reiterate the importance for the Pacific region of actions to combat IUU fishing and improve monitoring, control and surveillance, and recognize progress to this end, including under the Niue Treaty.

Reform of Inefficient Fossil Fuel Subsidies: A key impediment to the successful transition towards a green economy is the existence of perverse incentives that continue to encourage practices harmful to the environment and which inhibit new sources of economic growth. One of the key commitments in the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development Johannesburg Plan of Implementation was to remove [energy] market distortions including the restructuring of taxes and the phasing out of harmful subsidies. In 2009, under the leadership of G20 and APEC Leaders, this issue received attention again. Since then G20 and APEC, together representing 54 economies2, have repeatedly recognised that subsidies for fossil fuels encourage wasteful consumption, distort markets, impede investment in clean energy sources and undermine efforts to deal with climate change. The Report of the Secretary-Generals High-level Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing found that freeing up fossil fuel subsidies in developed countries alone could raise up to $8 billion/year that could potentially be redirected to climate change finance. G20 and APEC Leaders have committed to rationalise and phase-out over the medium term inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption, while recognising the importance of providing those in need with essential energy services (through targeted case transfers and other appropriate mechanisms, for example). In addition, the 2011-2020 Convention on Biological Diversity Strategic Plan, agreed in Nagoya in 2010, calls for the removal, phase out, or reform by 2020 of incentives, including subsidies, that are harmful to biodiversity. New Zealand acknowledges the leadership shown by G20 and APEC economies. New Zealand believes that Rio+20 should join these other international efforts to reform inefficient fossil fuel subsidies over the medium term, while mitigating adverse impacts on vulnerable groups. New Zealand urges Rio+20 to extend to all UN members the G20 and APEC commitments to phase out over the medium term, inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption and undermine sustainable development, while mitigating adverse impacts on vulnerable groups, to all Rio+20 Parties. Mechanisms to support such a commitment should include regular reporting of expenditures and actions taken to reduce subsidies; technical assistance underpinned by research and development; and the sharing of tools needed to achieve reform. 2 19 members of the G20 plus the EU Presidency, which represents an additional 23 European countries, plus 12 member economies of APEC (in addition to those G20 members of APEC already counted). An outcome from Rio+20 in this area would complement and build on the commitments made by G20 and APEC leaders. A Rio+20 outcome on inefficient fossil fuel subsidy reform would help address a current impediment to green growth. New Zealand is working with the other members of the Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform group to highlight the potential climate, economic, trade and energy security benefits of fossil fuel subsidy reform and support the G20 implement their commitments. Energy New Zealand sees access to clean, reliable, and affordable energy as essential for sustainable economic development, including in our own region the Pacific. In the Pacific, there is an extraordinarily high dependence on imported fossil fuel for transport and electricity needs. Projects to reduce this dependency have the potential to improve energy security, provide greater access to energy services, and decrease vulnerability to price volatility - all of which are positive for sustainable economic growth. New Zealand is supporting the Pacific region in actively exploring enhanced use of renewable energy sources for electricity generation, including solar, wind, hydro power, bio-energy, and geothermal energy, including through fast start finance contributions. Enhanced energy efficiency measures are a fundamental part of this ongoing work. New Zealand strongly supports the Secretary Generals initiative to achieve the goal of Sustainable Energy for All by 2030 through three interlinked targets3. We see access to clean and affordable energy as a key element of sustainable economic development. A comprehensive, planned approach is required to develop the energy sector. In this respect the use of "energy roadmaps" pulling together country-specific information, including the availability of energy resources, current and future energy use, distribution and transmission constraints, proposed improvements, policies, targets and regulatory issues, can provide a robust framework for donors and partners to coordinate their development efforts, including financing. New Zealand would encourage more widespread use of energy roadmaps as part of the broader consideration of sustainable development at Rio+20.

Sustainable Agriculture For New Zealand and for many other Pacific Islands Forum members, immense potential rests in our productive sectors, including sustainable agriculture. Capitalising on this potential is crucial for the future of the Pacific and the livelihoods of its peoples. New Zealand believes that efforts to reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions must not compromise global food security. New Zealand has been a lead voice in calling for greater international attention to, and investment in, agriculture greenhouse gas mitigation research and better coordination of efforts. To this end, New Zealand launched the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases in December 2009 in the margins of the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen, Denmark. Over 30 countries, spanning all continents, are now members of the Alliance. The Alliance is focused on research, development and extension of technologies and practices that will help deliver ways to grow more food (and more climate-resilient food systems) without growing greenhouse gas emissions. The Alliance seeks to deepen and broaden existing networks of agriculture mitigation research and build new ones; enhance scientific capacities; increase international investment; improve understanding and measurement of agricultural emissions; and improve access to and application of agricultural mitigation technologies and best practices. The Alliance invites new members and partner organisations to support this vitally important work for the benefit of all countries. Fresh Water Resources New Zealand considers the issue of wise management of water resources to be critical for sustainable development. In the Pacific and particularly for those living on small islands the availability of a safe and reliable supply of fresh water for both potable use and for agriculture is a critical issue. In many cases it is the limiting factor in agriculture development and the supply is precarious at best and unseasonal periods without rain can cause severe shortages (as is occurring at present in Tuvalu, Tokelau, and the outer islands of the Cook Islands). Population growth, development pressures and climate change are making the situation more unstable and less reliable. Options for increasing supply are very limited as many islands have no surface water sources and very limited ground water sources and are required to depend on rain water collection. Institutional framework for sustainable development There are various proposals for structural changes to the United Nations institutional framework, some of which are potentially far-reaching. Before embarking on change it is necessary to have agreement on the objective - what are we trying to achieve? NewZealand considers that form should follow function, that is, the institutional structures should not be an end in themselves but should enable achievement of the objectives set by the international community. The UNs institutional framework for sustainable development has two main functions: to set international norms relating to sustainable development and to assist countries with implementation. It is timely to review the effectiveness of the current framework. We recall that the 2005 Millennium Summit outcome document flagged the need to explore system wide coherence in relation to environmental activities. This is relevant for all the pillars of sustainable development. In reviewing the institutional framework for sustainable development, it is necessary to consider the following elements: - effective policy integration of the three pillars of sustainable development at all - levels (ie aspects of each should be considered in the development of policies for the other.) - closer cooperation and coordination between and among institutions; - avoidance of overlap and duplication; - continuation of the principles of partnership at multiple levels arising from the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21; - good value for money for member states and effective delivery of assistance; - adequate resourcing; - monitoring results (in particular, the effectiveness of development assistance). New Zealand does not want to prejudge the final format of the institutional framework, particularly on the question of intergovernmental bodies. New Zealands preference has to date been to focus on pragmatic reform of existing institutions, rather than larger-scale institutional change, ensuring that reforms are practical, achievable and effective at the national level. We would look, however, to apply the elements listed above to any proposals. Further, it will be important that States have a full understanding of the financial, legal and comparative advantages of all proposals for structural reform. New Zealand is a strong supporter of the Delivering as One initiative, considering a unified and coherent UN structure at the country level is beneficial both for the UN system and the country concerned. In our view, the pilots have worked well as they have reduced waste and improved delivery on the ground and demonstrably supported national strategies, institutions

and systems to achieve the particular governments development goals. The initiative should be expanded and applied to sustainable development generally. Sustainable development goals New Zealand is interested in the proposal that Rio+20 consider a process to develop a set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). New Zealand considers the proposal to have some merits and would support further development of the concept. It would be important that the focus of the SDGs be tightly defined. We consider it important that any process established should not detract from the continuing collective international effort to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

Environment: Asia and Pacific Regional Preparatory Meeting for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development Seoul, 19 20 October 2011, Statement by New Zealand: Green Economy Mr Chair, Honorable Ministers and distinguished delegates, New Zealand wishes to join others in thanking the Government of Korea for hosting this conference. And we extend our thanks to ESCAP, UNEP and the ADB for the preparation and organization. This meeting is very timely as we all head to the deadline for national submissions. It is an opportunity to have an exchange of ideas and to identify commonalities as we move forward. First, New Zealand would like to endorse the comments by the Honorable Minister of Natural Resources and Environment of Samoa, on behalf of Pacific small island states, on the special case of SIDS for both environment and development - as identified and set out at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. Flying to Seoul yesterday, hours on end over the vast Pacific Ocean scattered with small islands, made graphically clear why the blue world is so important to those of us located in the Pacific region. The Minister and Pacific delegates have explained very clearly the importance of oceans and fisheries to the island states of the Pacific, so I will not repeat these points here. Second, delegations may be aware that at the annual meeting of Pacific Islands Forum leaders in Auckland in September New Zealand took up the rotational Pacific Islands Forum chair. That meeting produced the Waiheke Declaration on sustainable economic development which affirms that immense potential rests in our productive sectors, particularly fisheries, tourism and agriculture, and that capitalising on this potential is crucial for the future of the Pacific and the livelihoods of its peoples. At the Pacific Islands Forum the United Nations Secretary General and Pacific Forum Leaders stressed the critical importance of the sustainable development, management and conservation of the regions oceans, coastal and fisheries resources as a source of livelihoods and income for communities, industries and governments, and of enabling Pacific SIDS to enjoy a greater share of the benefits derived from those resources. The Pacific Islands Forum communique also called for Rio+20 to recognise the significant global value and contribution of the Pacific Ocean to sustainable development, acknowledging the stewardship of Pacific Island Countries. These messages will be conveyed to the Rio+20 secretariat. It will be important that Pacific interests in the blue economy feature strongly at Rio+20 and we believe that these issues should be fully reflected in the outcomes of this meeting. Third, New Zealand will be putting oceans and fisheries to the fore in its national submission for Rio+20. We will be looking for outcomes that support the health and sustainability of the oceans through: global integrated assessment of the state of the marine environment (Global Marine Assessment); creation of marine conservation and protected areas based on sound environmental and scientific evaluation; improved oceans governance and management of fisheries taking a precautionary approach; addressing illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and fisheries subsidies. Fourth, New Zealand has made its general views on the green economy clear in various meetings leading to Rio+20. We see pursuit of a green economy to be a pragmatic approach, not a new paradigm - it is as much about how we grow as it is about how much we grow. It is not desirable or possible to take a one size fits all approach. Pursuit of a green economy should avoid trade distorting measures and imposing new, green, barriers to trade. New Zealand wishes to use this opportunity to discuss two specific elements under the green economy heading fisheries subsidies and fossil fuel subsidies. We welcomed the reference in the draft proposal for the Asia Pacific regional statement to refer to damaging subsidies.

New Zealand sees Rio+20 as an opportunity to address harmful fisheries subsidies, given the stalled WTO negotiations, and would be pleased to discuss this with other delegations here. New Zealand believes that Rio+20 must address harmful fisheries subsidies that contribute to overfishing and overcapacity, and impact negatively on sustainable development. Harmful fisheries subsidies can undermine fisheries management decisions, contribute to illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing, and create perverse economic incentives which impact on the long term sustainability of global fisheries, and add pressure on the last remaining, not fully exploited fisheries. Ultimately the impacts of subsidies will fall most heavily on countries and communities that depend on fisheries resources for livelihoods, development and employment. In this context, as a complement to ongoing WTO negotiations, countries should re-commit at Rio+20 to eliminate subsidies which contribute to overcapacity, as well as subsidies for activities that affect already overfished stocks, and subsidies for vessels and enterprises found to be engaged in illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing. Countries should also undertake to pursue further unilateral or plurilateral reform of subsidies that contribute to overfishing, Finally, in the 2002 Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, we committed to remove [energy] market distortions including the restructuring of taxes and the phasing out of harmful subsidies. G20 and APEC leaders reaffirmed these political commitments to rationalise and phase-out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption. Global fossil fuel subsidies cost an estimated US$300 - $500 billion a year. New Zealand is working with others, including with the Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform (FFSR) group of non G-20 countries to support reform. Fossil Fuel Subsidy reform offers positive climate change and environmental outcomes by reducing the potential for wasteful usage of fossil fuels and associated emissions, as well as being good for public finances, energy security and trade. This fits well with the 'green economy' focus of Rio+20. New Zealand believes that Rio+20 should join these other international efforts to reform inefficient fossil fuel subsidies over the medium term, while mitigating adverse impacts on vulnerable groups. We would welcome the support of others on this topic. Thank you Mr Chair.

Preparatory Committee for the UN Conference on Sustainable Development Statement by H.E. Jane J. Chigiyal, Permanent Representative of the Federated States of Micronesia to the UN on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum Members New York, 25 January 2012 I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum members represented at the United Nations. We wish to thank the Co-Chairs for the work done since December to prepare the zero draft of the Rio outcome document. In our view, it provides a good basis for negotiations. For Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) members, it has been particularly important that oceans issues be addressed in the outcome document. For those who call the Pacific "home", the green economy is in fact a blue economy because, for Pacific countries, sustainable development cannot be separated from the health of our ocean, including its management and conservation. The region is uniquely dependent on the Pacific Ocean for livelihoods, food security, and economic development. The health of the oceans is also a global issue. Oceans cover 70 percent of our earth. World fisheries support 170 million jobs and more than 1.5 billion people rely on marine resources for their protein intake. Even those who live far from the sea are affected by the state of the oceans, because they play a critical role in the global climate system and in connecting world trade. Building a blue economy ultimately benefits all countries and makes a crucial contribution to global sustainable development. We are therefore pleased to see that oceans feature in a number of paragraphs in the zero draft including: - actions that target threats to the ocean environment, including from acidification, - pollution, and illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; - the commitment to restore global fish stocks to sustainable levels by 2015; - the conservation and sustainable management of marine eco-systems and resources; and as a possible Sustainable Development Goal. We would, in addition, like to see specific language on the importance of delivering on existing oceans-related commitments and international goals, such as establishment of the global network of marine protected areas, as agreed at Rio+10; and the need for arrangements to ensure that small island developing states (SIDS) receive greater benefits from their ocean resources as this is critical to their sustainable development. We are also pleased to see other issues of importance to our region included in the zero draft including the paragraphs on food security, water resources, and energy. Many PIF countries have a high level of reliance on imported energy and would therefore like to see greater emphasis on improved access to clean, reliable and affordable renewable energy. It would be useful to broaden the paragraph on infrastructure. As well as improving national infrastructure, it is also important for PIF countries to enhance regional infrastructure to ensure access to markets. We would also like to see strengthened text on the importance of an enabling environment that supports increased investment, productive activity and a strengthened private sector, all of which can generate income and employment. We also strongly support the proposal for a global SIDS conference to be held in the Pacific in 2014. With Rio now on the horizon, we are reaching the business end of the work of the Preparatory Committee. We look forward to working together constructively over coming months so we can present our Leaders with an inspiring and action-orientated outcome document.

Ministry Statements and Speeches 2011: Preparatory Committee for the UN Conference on Sustainable Development Statement delivered by Jim McLay, New Zealand Ambassador and Permanent Representative, on behalf of Pacific Islands Forum Members, 15 December 2011 I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Pacific Island Forum members represented at the United Nations. Our region is uniquely dependent on its ocean; for Pacific Island countries, their ocean is their lifeblood. Our ocean underpins livelihoods, food security, and economic development. And it was ever thus: Pacific peoples were navigating their ocean the world's largest at a time when others were still confined to their coastal waters. For all those reasons, we say that oceans issues must be a priority at Rio. For those who call the Pacific "home", the green economy is in fact a blue economy. For Pacific countries, sustainable development cannot be separated from the health of our oceans sustainable development does not stand apart from oceans management and ocean conservation. Of course, oceans and their benefits stretch far beyond the Pacific. Oceans cover 70 percent of our earth. World fisheries support 170 million jobs and more than 1.5 billion people rely on marine resources for their protein intake. Even those who live far from the sea are affected by the state of the oceans, because they play a critical role in the global climate system and in connecting world trade. And oceans also provide valuable amenity and recreation for people of every country. For many people, no matter where they live, a beach or a coral reef is the classic symbol of paradise. All of us benefit from maintaining our oceans - and building a blue economy ultimately benefits all countries. And yet the state of this important life sustaining resource is threatened by pollution, overfishing, and climate change. No conference on sustainable development will be successful if it does not address those challenges. And so it was that, at the 42nd Pacific Islands Forum held in Auckland, New Zealand, in September 2011, Leaders reiterated the critical importance of ensuring the sustainable development, management, and conservation of our ocean, noting the regions unique dependency on the Pacific as the basis for their livelihoods, food security, and economic development. We have repeated those calls in our submission. They are really important to those of us who live in and are sustained by the Pacific; but they are also relevant to those who live well beyond the Pacific, particularly for small island developing states which face the same issues the same unique and particular vulnerabilities. We highlight a number of particular areas in the context of this meeting. It will be vital for members of the Pacific Islands Forum that the significance of protecting the health of our oceans for sustainable development is recognised and operationalised through Rio+20. The health of the oceans is a global development issue. We urge the international community to work towards integrated oceans management, using the Pacific Oceanscape as a model; and we look for specific outcomes addressing: realisation of relevant international goals such as establishment of the global network of marine protected areas, as agreed at Rio+10; actions that target threats to the ocean environment, including from acidification, pollution, and illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; the conservation and sustainable management of marine eco-systems and resources; and arrangements that ensure that small island developing states enjoy a greater share of the benefits derived from the conservation and sustainable management of ocean resources.

These points were also recognised in the joint statement by Forum Leaders and the United Nations Secretary General on 7 September 2011, which called for Blue Economy issues to figure prominently at Rio+20. The range of issues that will confront us as we work our way towards Rio are daunting, but we are encouraged by the growing recognition of the crucial importance of the sustainable development and protection of our oceans. If the advancement of the original Rio goals has been uneven, it has been particularly so in relation to those oceans. We urge the international community to deliver on past commitments and to seize the opportunity to provide a path forward on oceans, recognising their crucial contribution, not just to island states, but also to global sustainable development.

Forum members also wish see the Rio+20 outcome document address other areas that were highlighted in this years Forum Communiqu as key to unleashing the productive potential needed for sustainable development. These include: fostering an environment that supports increased investment, productive activity and a strengthened private sector, all of which can generate income and employment, particularly in fisheries, agriculture and tourism; conserving and managing the fragile island ecosystems that underpin sustainable development and food and water security; improving energy security, through greater efficiency measures and the promotion of clean and affordable energy, including renewable energy; and investing in improved infrastructure.

Forum members place great importance on a successful outcome at Rio, so we will engage constructively in the discussions over the coming months. Our objective will be to deliver on the priorities identified by Forum Leaders just over two months ago; and we undertake to work with other Member States to achieve those outcomes

14/10/2011 PAC/PIF/2011 UN CSD Office Division for Sustainable Development UN-DESA UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 2012: SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS FORUM The forthcoming United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development 2012 (Rio+20) provides an opportunity to secure renewed political commitment to sustainable economic development. As Chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, it is my honour to convey to you the themes that the Leaders of the Pacific Islands Forum have highlighted as being of crucial importance, including in the context of the Rio+20 process. Leaders of the Pacific Islands Forum met in September 2011 under the theme of converting potential into prosperity. The Leaders agreed the Waiheke Declaration on Sustainable Economic Development. The Waiheke Declaration is attached to this letter. The Pacific Islands Forum would ask Rio+20 to note the Waiheke Declaration, and in particular, the pledges and commitments within it. The declaration is based on the premise that strengthened sustainable economic development is key to a better quality of life for all our peoples, and contains pledges and commitments related to the Rio+20 themes of the green economy and the institutional framework for sustainable development. The Pacific Islands Forum Leaders meeting Communiqu makes specific reference to the importance of oceans and fisheries as a key issue for the Rio+20 Conference. Leaders reiterated the critical importance of ensuring the sustainable development, management and conservation of our ocean, noting the regions unique dependency on the Pacific Ocean as the basis for their livelihoods, food security and economic development. Leaders called for the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) to recognise the significant global value and contribution of the Pacific Ocean to sustainable development, acknowledging the stewardship of Pacific Island Countries. Leaders further urged the international community to work towards integrated oceans management, using the Pacific Oceanscape as a model, with the aim of ealising relevant international goals to contribute to the health and vitality of the ocean environment, including through the global network of marine protected areas agreed at Rio+10. Leaders also highlighted the threats to the ocean environment, including from ocean acidification, pollution, and illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. To ensure that Rio+20 includes strong outcomes on the conservation and sustainable management of marine ecosystems and resources that reflect the needs of the Pacific region, Leaders also called for the maximisation of returns to Members from the conservation and sustainable management of ocean resources. Finally, Pacific Forum Leaders and the United Nations Secretary General made a joint statement on 7 September 2011 which, inter alia, Stressed the critical importance of the sustainable development, management and conservation of the regions oceans, coastal and fisheries resources as a source of livelihoods and income for communities, industries and governments, and of enabling Pacific SIDS to enjoy a greater share of the benefits derived from those resources. They called for such issues, often referred to as the Blue Economy, to figure prominently at next years UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20). They urged the international community to tackle threats to marine ecosystems and work towards integrated oceans management and a global network of marine protected areas. It is the strong wish of Pacific Islands Forum Leaders that the Rio+20 process recognises and highlights the importance for our region of sustainable economic development as set out in the Waiheke Declaration, with particular focus on our productive sectors of fisheries, tourism and agriculture, and the importance of sectors such as transport, infrastructure, education and energy in providing the environment to achieve that potential. It is also the desire of Pacific Islands Forum Leaders that Rio+20 includes strong outcomes on oceans and fisheries, as set out in the Pacific Islands Forum Communiqu 2011 and in the Joint Statement of Pacific Island Forum leaders and the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Yours sincerely, Rt Hon John Key, PRIME MINISTER THE WAIHEKE DECLARATION ON SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT We, the Leaders of the Pacific Islands Forum, meeting in Auckland, New Zealand: Acknowledging with gratitude the foresight of Pacific Leaders who forty years ago first met in Wellington, New Zealand, to establish what is today the Pacific Islands Forum involving sixteen independent member states of the Pacific region; Recognising the vision of Leaders at that first meeting who strongly encouraged the development of regional cooperation as a valuable mechanism to assist in resolving issues of common concern affecting the daily lives of the peoples of the Pacific; Celebrating the achievements accomplished through close and effective regional cooperation; Realising the economic and social challenges we all face, including those arising from climate change, the increasing costs and insecurities of supply of daily necessities such as energy and food, and the impacts of urbanisation and natural disasters; Expressing with appreciation the significant assistance received over the past four decades from the regions development partners; Taking into account the strategic direction provided by the Pacific Plan for progressing the pillars of sustainable development and economic growth in the Pacific; Acknowledging the importance of good governance and security, the other two pillars of the Pacific Plan, in helping to deliver sustainable economic development outcomes; Reaffirming the importance of accelerating progress towards the Millennium Development Goals, Highlighting the benefits of advancing development coordination involving Pacific Countries and development partners, as articulated in the Cairns Compact on Strengthening Development Cooperation in the Pacific (Forum Compact); Sharing our aspiration to create a prosperous, stable and secure Pacific for future generations; Hereby declare that strengthened sustainable economic development is key to a better quality of life for all our peoples; Recommit ourselves to pursuing a goal of ensuring a sustainable economic environment for all, so that all our peoples, in particular the young who are the future of our societies, have opportunities for gainful employment and can live healthy, productive and safe lives; Recognise that sustainable economic development increases the resilience of communities, including their most vulnerable members. Set out to transform the regions future by drawing on the Pacifics unique assets by collectively focusing our efforts on areas where we have an impact on our peoples long-term wellbeing; Recognise that despite challenges related to our small size and our relative isolation, we live in an ocean of opportunity, that immense potential rests in our productive sectors, particularly fisheries, tourism and agriculture, and that capitalising on this potential is crucial for the future of the Pacific and the livelihoods of its peoples; Acknowledge the importance of sectors such as transport, infrastructure, education and energy in providing an environment in which the Pacifics potential can be realised; Affirm the high importance of the private sector in helping realise the regions potential;

Acknowledge our responsibility to create an environment where business can thrive and contribute to the regions development; Recognise the way in which regional and economic integration can improve the prospect of stable, long-term economic growth in Pacific communities by creating jobs, enhancing private sector growth, and raising standards of living, through the freer flow of goods, services and investment within the Pacific; Pledge to: - Pursue improved sustainable returns to Pacific island economies from the abundant natural resources, particularly fisheries, available from the wealth of our shared Pacific Sea of Islands; - Foster an environment that supports increased investment, productive activity and a strengthened private sector, particularly in relation to fisheries, agriculture and tourism, to generate income and employment; - Empower the next generation by significantly improving childrens access to quality basic education, so as to raise literacy and numeracy rates; - Improve the health status of our peoples so that they can enjoy more productive and less troubled lives and to relieve the burden on Pacific economies; Conserve and manage fragile island ecosystems which underpin sustainable development and food and water security within our region; Commit ourselves specifically to: - Improve energy security through greater efficiency measures and the promotion of clean and affordable energy, including renewable energy; - Address the persistent problem of illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing in the Pacific through enhancing the effectiveness of regional monitoring, control and surveillance activities; - Promote the Pacific as an exciting and diverse tourism destination, and support the sectors ability to generate income and employment for its peoples; - Raise educational standards and expand opportunities for acquiring technical and vocational skills relevant to job markets, especially for women, including through non-formal education and training provision; - Increase opportunities for women to participate in the formal labour market and as entrepreneurs; - Ensure the meaningful engagement of civil society and Pacific island communities in the development process; - Develop institutions that contribute to creating an enabling environment for private sector-led growth including by introducing appropriate regulatory and legal reforms; - Reduce barriers to regional trade and investment in order to expand access to markets for Pacific businesses and focus on building the capacity of economies to benefit from the trade and investment opportunities that arise; - Continue strengthening public financial management and development coordination as a means to improve development effectiveness and to adequately prepare and ensure efficient management of the influx of resources to address climate change; - Invest in improved infrastructure; - Support the development of niche, high value agricultural production and its links into global value chains, such as Fair Trade and organics; Agree to strengthen the monitoring of progress against regional priorities; Undertake to examine further ways in which we might enhance regional cooperation and integration, including through enhancing the effectiveness of shared institutions, in order to promote efficient delivery of regional public goods, and improved services, to our businesses and peoples; Urge Pacific Regional Organisations to actively consider how their work programmes can contribute to economic growth and enhancement of the capacity of the productive sectors where applicable; Call on our international partners to support, in a coordinated way, our endeavours by focusing their assistance on areas that directly and indirectly improve our ability to develop sustainable productive economies.

Nick Smith 8 MARCH, 2012 Rio+20: The Future We Want Good morning. Thank you to the organisers of todays seminar for providing this opportunity for everyone involved in contributing to the Zero Draft Document for Rio+20 to get together and share ideas and information on these matters which are so critical to our future. I would like to acknowledge the distinguished speakers and guests, and especially acknowledge and thank all of you who have put many hours and much thought into your submissions. Of course, we are all here because in June this year, leaders of states, civil society and business will meet in Rio de Janeiro to map out the next steps for sustainable development. The Rio+20 conference will be one of the largest international events this year. In the twenty years since the Rio Earth Summit, ground-breaking concepts contained in the Rio principles and Agenda 21 have been mainstreamed into our daily lives. Significant environmental agreements in climate change, biodiversity, and desertification grew out of that Summit, and work under these conventions continues to develop. This years Rio+20 conference on sustainable development will focus on two themes: the green economy in the context of poverty eradication, and the institutional framework for sustainable development. It will consolidate progress made so far, but it also seeks to address current shortcomings and new challenges. In times of global economic uncertainty, it is tempting to downgrade or consider sustainable development as an option. This would be a mistake. There is vast potential in sustainable development, something this government recognises, not only for New Zealand but also in the Pacific and globally. The green economy and green growth are areas that New Zealand is focussing on to drive important economic, environmental and social growth. It is as much about how we grow as it is about how much we grow. There are complex issues and balancing of interests. It is clear that there is no one definition and no one-size fits all policy, for us or our neighbours. New Zealand already has many innovative businesses that leverage off our strong clean green reputation. There is the potential for more innovation leading to more jobs and wealth creation in New Zealand. Recognising the importance the need for New Zealand to further take up Green Growth opportunities; the Government established the Green Growth Advisory Group to provide advice on ways to green New Zealands growth. The Report was released last weekend and the Government is currently considering the recommendations of the group. In 2011 the Green Economy index was published analysing the performance and perception of 27 countries. New Zealand was ranked first for overall performance. The report states that New Zealands best green performance in 2011 suggests that prioritising green in the political and economic spheres can transform smaller nations into global sector leaders. We favour a broad approach to green growth that has all industries moving to more environmentally sustainable technologies. NZs focus us to bring together policies that support a strong, growing economy with sound stewardship of our national environment.

The Ministry for the Environment is recognising work in Green Economy with 2012 the first year that the Green Ribbon Awards include a Green Economy Category. Nominations for these awards are now open. So if you know any individual or organisation in New Zealand thats making a difference to our environment, please nominate them before 23 March. Within the Rio+20 process, as the submissions from governments and stakeholders show (all available online), there are a wide range of views on what sustainable development entails. We are aware that New Zealand stakeholders, either directly or through their international linkages, have made submissions as well as engaged with officials. We welcome this and encourage you to continue to provide feedback When faced with the multitude of issues presented - from sustainable agriculture, to education, food security, disaster preparation, to mountains and oceans, reasonable people will come to different views on what needs to be done and how. For New Zealand, our focus is on the areas that are most urgent, where we can add value, and where there are good prospects to make progress. The oceans, or the green economy in a blue world is one area where we believe significant advances can be made at Rio+20. Although the health of the oceans and sustainable use of fisheries and other marine resources was addressed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002, implementation has been largely lacking. New Zealand is a nation surrounded by water and I am pleased to say that we are taking steps to improve the management of the environmental effects of activities far out at sea in our exclusive economic zone, through legislation now before Parliament. Oceans cover 70 percent of our earth, feed and provide employment for millions, many from least developed countries, and yet the state of this important life sustaining resource is threatened by pollution, overfishing and the effects of climate change. And yet there is a lack of coordinated, science-based collective management of our oceans. Illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing continues unchecked in many parts of the world, sometimes even supported by Government subsidies. The FAO reports that 85 percent of the worlds fisheries are fully exploited, overexploited, depleted, or recovering from depletion - the highest percentage since FAO began keeping records, and a 10 percent increase from four years ago. Things are heading in the wrong direction. Halting or slowing overfishing will be one goal, but restoring the oceans will be another. We support the call for a global network of representative Marine Protected Areas that can provide a natural refuge and be a regenerative resource for the oceans. For the Pacific, oceans issues are the top priority for Rio+20. Sustainable development in the Pacific cannot be separated from oceans and fisheries issues. Small Island Developing States in our region must receive a greater share of the benefits derived from those resources. Over 55 percent of our development assistance is focussed on the Pacific, and our efforts support long term sustainable development, including in oceans and fisheries. As Chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, we have also highlighted the importance of progress in these areas in our statements and submissions on behalf of Pacific Island countries. Tackling fossil fuel subsidies reform is another priority area for New Zealand. Fossil fuel subsidies harm the environment and encourage wasteful consumption. The needs of the vulnerable can be better met by targeted assistance rather than broad subsidies that often have perverse effects on the environment. New Zealand, along with like-minded countries such as Ethiopia and Switzerland have been supporting international efforts for reforms as part of the Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidies Reform, and we hope to build on the work underway in APEC and the G20. New Zealand will push for specific outcomes in these areas, and we invite interested stakeholders to work with us on these issues, to provide your ideas on the best way forward.

Although oceans and fossil fuel subsidies reform are key priorities, sustainable energy, agriculture and fresh water are also important areas we support. They are important not only to New Zealand, but are also key to development, whether in the Pacific or elsewhere. Sustainable Development Goals have been proposed as one possible form for specific commitments. These are likely to apply to both developing and developed countries, and we think they could be useful targets, as complements to the Millennium Development Goals. Sustainable energy and oceans are two front runners for possible goals. The reform of the institutional framework for sustainable development is also on the table for Rio+20. It is recognised that the current system has fragmented, uncoordinated and duplicative frameworks in place. Greater impact and effectiveness, not simply more money and more projects and programmes is needed. New Zealand is a strong supporter of the UNs delivering as one initiative, which provides countries with one coordinated UN contact point, rather than the multitude of offices as in the past. Proposals that will be tested include strengthening existing mechanisms, such as the Economic and Social Council, the Commission on Sustainable Development and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Other proposals centre on creation of new institutions, such as a Sustainable Development Council, a World Environment Organisation or a new specialised agency from the core of UNEP. What kind of framework does New Zealand seek? Though it is often stated, it makes it no less true - form should follow function. The form should ensure effective integration of the three pillars at all levels, eliminate duplication and overlap, produce measurable and monitorable outcomes, while being cost efficient. The pros and cons of each option need to be fully explored to see whether they will meet our needs for a coherent, coordinated, responsive and efficient institutional framework. The creation of yet another mechanism or entity without regard to the actual issues to be solved and the realities of the current environmental, economic and financial pressure is unlikely to progress sustainable development. Consider for example, the proposal to transform UNEP into a specialised agency to raise the status of the environment pillar. What problem are we addressing? Is there a risk that environment work could become further siloed? What is it that UNEP cannot do now that a new framework might allow? Is there a risk that a new institution could be weaker rather than stronger than what exists now? What might it cost? What are the implications for UNDP, which is the UN lead agency responsible for the development system? Will this answer the concerns of duplication in physical and intellectual resources with existing institutions, such as the United Nations Development Programme? What are the advantages of this proposal, as compared to strengthening any other institution or even the creation of a new World Environment Organisation? These are the questions that we must ask ourselves and others. We are listening carefully to stakeholders, and again invite your considered views and insights. New Zealand intends to play a constructive role at Rio+20, as it did at the original Rio Earth Summit and the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development. We will not be the biggest and may not be the loudest voice at the conference, but we intend to be one of the most practical and relevant. The Rio+20 conference will consolidate and build upon the progress made since the original Summit. Perhaps it will not make the same headlines as the original ground-breaking Rio Earth Summit. If concrete measures and outcomes in key areas of oceans and subsidies reform are achieved, then we have played our part.

Nick Smith 8 MARCH, 2012 Oceans and Greening Growth NZ Rio+20 Priority New Zealands priority at the United Nations Rio+20 Summit in June will be on improving environmental management of oceans and opportunities from greening growth, Environment Minister Nick Smith said when opening the United Nations Association New Zealand Conference in Wellington today. We are putting strong emphasis on oceans in New Zealands contribution to Rio+20 because it is so important for our part of the world and more needs to be done globally to protect the marine environment. Our concern is that illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing continues unchecked and often supported by Government subsidy. New Zealand will also be promoting its ideas around greening growth at the Rio+20 Summit. We have a real contribution to make noting our ranking as best performer in the 2011 Global Green Growth Index. The global community, in these difficult times, needs to focus on policies that enable improved living standards and incomes while ensuring better stewardship of natural resources. We will be particularly active in advocating for reform of fossil fuel subsidies. The debate on carbon pricing to reduce emissions is undermined by global subsidies of $500 billion per year of fossil fuels. There is real opportunity for significant emissions reductions and saving for governments from removing these distorting subsidies. Real gains were made at the original Rio Earth Summit with conventions on climate change, biodiversity and desertification. Our ambition for Rio+20 is for progress to be made on improving management of our oceans and on greening global economic growth, Dr Smith says.

Tim Groser 17 DECEMBER, 2011 New Zealand leads call for action on fisheries subsidies Trade Minister Tim Groser has led a call at the WTOs 8th Ministerial Conference in Geneva for urgent action to protect global fish stocks. New Zealand is coordinating a group of countries that includes Argentina, Australia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Norway, Peru and the United States. The purpose of the meeting, which included a wider range of Government representatives, international media and international environmental NGOs, was to issue a joint statement drawing political attention to the destruction of wild fisheries and to reiterate the group's commitment to ambitious and effective disciplines on fisheries subsidies. In presenting the statement today on behalf of the group, Mr Groser emphasized that an estimated 85% of the worlds fish stocks were fully exploited, over exploited, depleted or in recovery. The depletion of the worlds fish stocks is the clearest example today of what is called the tragedy of the global commons. Obviously, no country individually seeks the destruction of the wild fisheries of the world, but this is exactly the danger facing certain critical fish stocks in parts of the world unless there is more effective international cooperation to deal with the problem. We need action on a variety of fronts, but reduction of harmful subsidies which contribute to over-fishing is a central part of any solution, Mr Groser said. It is first and foremost an environmental tragedy but it is also a development issue of particular importance to developing countries in the Pacific the source of about half the global wild catch. Fish is part of these countries food security. Beyond that, it is also one of their great economic assets, offering Pacific countries significant economic development opportunities. The scale of subsidization was huge - around US $20 billion per annum, or US $200 billion since the Doha round began. The countries which have signed this statement represent a diverse group of developing and developed countries. We have come together to call for urgent corrective action at all levels - national, regional and international to address harmful subsidization of the fisheries sector. Subsidies that contribute to environmental depletion demand priority attention if we are to have a sustainable future.

Amy Adams 21 JUNE, 2012 NZs key goals included in Rio+20 outcome document Environment Minister Amy Adams says the key goals on oceans pushed by New Zealand at the Rio+20 conference in Brazil have been included for discussion in the summits outcome document. This is a great step and shows that the international community recognises the need for urgent collective action to address the state of our oceans, Ms Adams says. This is an area that we believe can deliver real and substantial economic, social and environmental global benefits. The text in the outcome document commits to further improvement of regional fisheries management, and actions to crack down on illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing. The text clearly registers the importance of small island developing states and getting a greater share of the return from their fisheries resources. This has been a long-standing New Zealand and Pacific goal. The outcome document also endorses the United Nations process to assess the health of the oceans, and locks in the global goal of having 10 per cent of the worlds oceans in marine-protected areas. New Zealand is particularly concerned about harmful fisheries subsidies, Ms Adams says. These only add to the worsening state of global fish stocks, distort trade and undermine sustainable development. Some governments subsidise new fishing boats when the world already has too many, some subsidise fishing industries that are targeting already over-fished stocks, and others even give subsidies to fishing entities linked to illegal fishing. Tackling government subsidies for fossil fuels is another area of New Zealands focus that has seen some progress at Rio. Ms Adams says that while New Zealand supported stronger commitments in this area, the Rio+20 text nevertheless represents further international recognition of the importance of fossil fuel subsidy reform by all UN members. Fossil fuel subsidy reform is becoming an important internationally, as weve seen from a number of civil society campaigns in the lead up to the conference. Phasing out fossil fuel subsidies over the medium term would deliver significant benefits for a greener economy and the climate. We are mindful that reform will have consequences for poorer populations, and needs to be done progressively, but money spent on fossil fuels is huge. This is money that could be spent on other sustainable development priorities. Some countries spend more on fossil fuel subsidies than they do on health or education.

Amy Adams 21 JUNE, 2012 NZ supports indigenous network launched at Rio+20 New Zealand is supporting an Australian initiative that will see indigenous people better connecting with each other to improve the management of natural resources, Environment Minister Amy Adams announced today. The International Indigenous Land and Sea Managers Network was launched by Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard at the Rio+20 sustainable development conference in Brazil today. New Zealand believes it can contribute to the success of this new network by drawing on our wealth of experience in land and sea management by Mori, and the joint activities undertaken by Mori and the Government, Ms Adams says. The network will provide a way for indigenous peoples to come together to share experiences and learn from each other on managing natural resources. There is no similar mechanism globally. Mori are significant owners of land and marine resources. As well as their experience in the economic development of these, Mori have an important guardianship role. As Mori and the Government reach settlements under the Treaty of Waitngi, iwi are becoming formally engaged in the management of public protected lands, coastlines and oceans. We have a growing pool of capable and experienced iwi/ Mori resource and environmental practitioners working alongside regulators, developers and operators in sustainable resource development and management. For example, New Zealands national environmental regulatory authority has a statutory Mori advisory group to advise its Board and statutory decision-makers on matters of policy, process and decision-making from a Mori perspective. New Zealand is keen to participate in the work of this new international network. We hope we can contribute to maintaining healthy biological diversity and resilient ecosystems. These underpin robust economies, human health, poverty alleviation, and sustainable livelihoods. Traditional knowledge, local practices and cultural connections are important in sustainable use of the worlds biodiversity. New Zealand has been active in conducting exchanges with Australia over the management of protected landscapes, particularly National Parks. This programme being launched by Australia continues this useful work and will provide new opportunities for sharing knowledge and ideas more widely.

Rio + 20 Statements, Speeches and Media releases Statement by Aliki Faipule Kerisiano Kalolo Ulu o Tokelau (titular head of tokelau) on the occasion of the Rio+20 side event organised by the government of Australia on indigenous peoples and local communities land and sea management Wednesday 20 June 2012 Hon Julia Gillard MP, Prime Minister of Australia Hon Tony Burke MP, Australian Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities Excellencies, distinguished presenters for this side event, ladies and gentlemen, thank you Master of Ceremony It is indeed a great honor to be amongst you this afternoon. As the Ulu o Tokelau and also the Minister responsible for the environment and natural resources the opportunity to attend this seminar for the first time was too good to miss. I am excited with the initiative for indigenous leaders to present, talk and discuss how knowledge sharing and exchange in our communities improve land and sea conservation management and create broader social and economic benefits. As some of you may be aware, Tokelau consists of 3 low lying atolls very isolated from the rest of the world. The only way you can travel to Tokelau is by ship, from Samoa and the trip to the most southern of our atolls takes between 24 30 hours depending on the weather. Tokelaus ecosystem is a delicate and fragile. The land area is only 12 square kilometres with a total of approximately 319,000 square kilometres of its exclusive economic zone. At no point does the land rise more than 5metres above sea level. Being overwhelmingly surrounded by the vast Pacific Ocean, the atolls are very susceptible to the impacts of climate change and sea level raising. This is a major concern for Tokelau and we stand to lose not just our land and environs but our culture and traditions which affirm the identity of our people. At this juncture, it is appropriate that Tokelau acknowledges the generous assistance from the Governments of New Zealand and Australia for the adaptation funds that have come though as our current political status limits our eligibility to access global funds. Tokelaus traditional and cultural practises focus on taking care of her people, her land, and her oceans. As in the case of most indigenous communities around the globe, the conservation of the land and oceans is very much an intricate component of a communitys survival. While the land provides a limited supply of nutrition for our people the sea continues to be a substantial part of our life. Hence, our way of life, our songs and dances strongly conveys our relationship with the sea. I will now describe some of the traditional conservation measures that we to sustain our way of life. The most important conservation measure is the lafu system whereby all types of fishing are banned in specific areas of the main reef. An example would be prohibiting activity on the entire windward reef shortly after the bi-annual change in the direction of the prevailing wind. The decision to establish a lafuis made by the Council of Elders of the particular village. An attempt is made to define the geographic area in such a way that no family will suffer disproportionate amount of hardship by the ban. Although the lafuis established for reasons other than a reduced abundance of a particular species, it is generally agreed that it results in a substantial increase in the availability of marine resources in that area. To assure marine foods will be plentiful at an important festival, fishing may be banned from a section of the reef until just prior to the event. Other marine conservation measures include: Rejection of under-sized fish when captured alive; Destructive fishing methods are discouraged in the traditional system; Restriction the amount of fishing efforts; Offshore fishing effort is encouraged to relieve pressure on the more vulnerable inshore species; Lagoon species are reserved for harvesting only when weather conditions do not allow for efforts in the open sea; Giant clams harvested is required to be towed around the reefs where they were collected in order to release eggs from the harvested meat; An elaborate process of perfecting fishing skills which has the effect of reducing destructive side effects. The title tautai is conferred on those individuals who have acquired skills used in the capture of different types of fish. For example, in octopus fishing, a knowledge of octopus behaviour, the manufacture of an octopus stick and its use eliminates the need for crushing coral.

Our people feel that traditional conservation system has served them well over the centuries. They are also aware, however, due to market demands and population pressure of the need for modification of the system to reflect recent changes. This requires a more modern and robust approach to conservation. Tokelau acknowledges the international call for action in ensuring environmental protection and recognises the role of indigenous peoples and their communities in strengthening their biodiversity conservation. In our commitment to Agenda 21 the Government in working closely with the communities have adopted the following initiatives: Adoption of the Bio-Diversity Rules to provide the legal framework for the protection and development of our ecosystem; Launching of our national waste management plan aim to reduce waste in Tokelau; Declaration of Tokelau as a whale and shark sanctuary; Environmental issues integrated into our curriculum and community education programmes; Community beautification programmes. Finally, work is currently in progress in our communities to complete our renewable energy project. The result of this project is to have all or 100% of our electricity needs supplied by solar energy. With the continuing support from the Government of New Zealand we hope to complete this project late this year.

We are apprehensive as to what the future holds for our children and therefore Tokelau is committed, through her National Strategic Plan 2010-2015 to a development path that does not further threaten her land, sea, and people. Its geography and relative isolation makes delivery of basic economic and social services very costly and a significant challenge. Therefore development that is truly sustainable is essential if we are to ensure our survival. Our development plan maps out the initial steps we must take for the long-term preservation of our land, our surrounding waters, our culture and heritage and our people. We acknowledge the Government of Australia for this considered and visionary initiative in recognizing indigenous people and measures on how communities can improve land and sea conservation management and create broader social and economic benefits. I wish you all a successful meeting and a safe journey home Malo and fakafetailahilele.

Amy Adams 20 JUNE, 2012 NZ commits to global ocean partnership at Rio+20 New Zealand has signed up to a global partnership on oceans at the Rio+20 conference in Brazil, Environment Minister Amy Adams announced today. New Zealand joins nine other countries in the partnership, including Australia, South Korea and Norway. The partnership also includes 63 other organisations, including fishing and seafood companies and non-governmental organisations such as WWF. The concept behind this partnership is exciting - looking for new ways for states, business, researchers, and conservationists to combine their expertise to support healthy and productive oceans, Ms Adams says. The partnership has three themes; better management of fisheries, protecting marine environments and addressing pollution. Fishing and tourism are major sectors of our economy which rely on healthy oceans. Sustainability is central to our ability to harness the economic potential of the oceans now and in the future. We led the world in creating tradable quotas for fishing, which give secure access rights while managing the overall size of the catch, based on sound science. Marine protection is an important part of the partnership's focus with an international target of having 10 per cent of oceans in a network of marine protected areas. New Zealand is continuing to create marine parks, and we have introduced new legislation to manage the environmental effects of activities in our Exclusive Economic Zone. It is pleasing to see that globally, sustainable oceans are getting a high level of focus, and we are pleased to see concerted global action on marine pollution.

Rio +20 SIDS and Oceans: Panel Address by Amanda Ellis Distinguished participants and fellow panel members, Kia ora tatou katoa - Greetings from New Zealand It gives me great pleasure to be here and to participate in these discussions on Small Island Development States and Oceans. As present Chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, New Zealand would like to highlight the oceans priorities from our region and how one of these priorities oceanic fisheries can be supported to help build resilience and enhance social and economic benefits for the small island developing states of the Pacific. I also thought it would be useful to share New Zealands thoughts on how developed country partners can work with SIDS to help realise their aspirations for the conservation and sustainable management of the oceans and their fisheries resources Covering a third of the globe's surface, the Pacific Ocean supports and sustains the environmental, social, cultural and economic livelihoods of Pacific peoples. Indeed Pacific Leaders have many times highlighted the critical importance of the ocean and its resources as the basis for their livelihoods, food security and economic development. Reefs and other elements of the Pacific marine ecosystem are under threat however from the impacts of a changing climate, pollution, and increasing and potentially unsustainable levels of resource use. With their strong connection to the ocean, this places the people of the Pacific under threat too. Pacific Leaders recognise these challenges and have shown true leadership on oceans, including here in Rio. Their collective efforts led last year to the appointment of my colleague and our panel chair Tuiloma Neroni Slade as the Pacific Oceanscape Commissioner. Fisheries are a Pacific Plan priority. Almost 5 years ago, Pacific Leaders gave an unequivocal message about the importance of their fisheries resources by issuing a declaration called Our Fish, Our Future. In Cairns, Australia in 2009 Pacific leaders indicated support for developing and implementing fisheries management and development regimes, implementing monitoring, control and surveillance strategies, addressing barriers to market access and strengthening sector governance. For many Pacific SIDS, fisheries resources represent one of their main prospects for sustainable economic development. The Pacific tuna fishery for example accounts for close to two thirds of the value of the global tuna catch - some $4.3 billion. Yet the returns from their resource to Pacific islands is only around 2pc of the catch value. The message is clear: these are Pacific island states' resources, and we must recognise and accept the rights, interests and aspirations of Pacific SIDS to conserve and sustainably manage these resources for the benefit of the Pacific and its peoples. As a partner, New Zealand recognises these rights, interests and aspirations and is investing US$23 million over the next three years to support Pacific fisheries management, development and compliance activities, both through the regional body the Forum Fisheries Agency, in partnering and coordinating with other donors and in our bilateral Joint commitments for development. As Chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, New Zealand encourages all present at Rio to lend support in the following ways. First, we must pool our collective efforts to conserve and sustainably manage the key Pacific tuna stocks. We must learn the lessons from other international tuna fisheries and reach agreement on measures to restrain catch and effort. Helping the islands conserve these stocks is in everybodys interest. Pacific island countries themselves are leading the way, for example by implementing measures to conserve and manage tropical purse seine fishing, and looking at similar measures for tropical and southern longline fisheries.

These measures are legitimate expressions of SIDS' sovereign rights over the Pacifics tuna resources. And we expect cooperation of all nations exploiting Pacific fisheries by complying with, and supporting, these measures. Second, we need to work together to stop illegal, unreported and unregulated or IUU fishing, the thieves and poachers of fish. This is a scourge that undermines sustainable resource management, weakens economic returns, and risks damage to the health of the marine environment. Current estimates are as much as 10pc of the region's resource is at risk. As we all know, the Pacific Ocean is huge and SIDS have meagre resources to monitor and police them. New Zealand and Australia as well as the United States and France - provide monitoring and surveillance support. But to be effective we need all nations exploiting Pacific fisheries to do their part, by introducing controls on fish landed at their ports, controls on fishing vessels that fly under their flag, and catch certification processes that control the supply of product to market. If we can implement these controls, we can tighten pressure on illegal operators. Our aim should be make their activities economically unviable. Fishing nations should take prompt action to prevent and remedy IUU activity by their flag vessels and by their nationals. They need to make absolutely sure that government subsidies do not go to fishing entities that engage in illegal activities. Third and finally we need countries to be real development partners with SIDS. By this we mean getting increased coherence between development policy on one hand, and fisheries management policy and fisheries trade policy on the other hand. New Zealand welcomes the growth in revenues and jobs that Pacific SIDS are receiving from their fisheries resources. These outcomes are critical for their ongoing economic and social resilience. We understand that others who assist SIDS sustainable development efforts also welcome these outcomes. We strongly urge all nations exploiting Pacific fisheries to join us in supporting measures that allow Pacific SIDS to seek the legitimate realisation of their longer-term development interests. The interests of the Pacific are the interests of all of us who wish to protect and conserve the Pacific, maintain a healthy ocean environment, and encourage prosperity for its people. In conclusion, Pacific SIDS are leading the way in developing their fisheries within a sustainable management framework, supported by the relevant regional bodies such as the Forum Fisheries Agency and the Secretariat of the Pacific Community. I encourage all partners to join us in this endeavour. New Zealand, in our role as Pacific Islands Forum Chair, thanks you for the opportunity to present these perspectives. Amanda Ellis Deputy Secretary International Development Head of New Zealand Aid Programme

Amy Adams 6 AUGUST, 2012 SPEECH: Hon Amy Adams to EDS (National Defense Society) Good afternoon. I would like to start by congratulating EDS for organising this event. I am particularly pleased to see an environmental conference acknowledging up front that New Zealands economy depends on primary production. This is to me a major advance on previous thinking which has seemed to pit the economy against the environment. I am pleased to note that your conference is considering new approaches and new tools for farming, resource management and the environment that will serve to enable economic growth while maintaining our environmental integrity. I see this as a sign that by focussing on growing green, New Zealanders are also growing up. I am delighted to see this approach gaining traction in the wider conversations being had on the economic and environmental challenges that matter to all of us whether we come from the town or the country. Let me start today by giving you my take on Rio+20. The first thing that struck me is the sheer scale of the event which had to be seen to be believed. The second matter that struck me was the vast disparity of views country by country on issues many New Zealanders might regard as universally agreed. In that sense we do have to guard against the approach that suggests that everyone else should just hurry up and agree with us and if they don't they are simply wrong. The fact that we have a consensus outcome document at all, and the 283 statements within it, is truly testament to the abilities and goodwill of everyone who attended thats 45,000 people in total, of whom 12,000 were official delegates. It is also a tribute to the governments, organisations and people who worked behind the scenes in our home countries. I would particularly like to thank the other Kiwis who represented New Zealand so well. The young New Zealanders there did us all proud. Our speech competition winner, Brittany Trilford, spoke compellingly about the importance of action not just words. The other youth delegates were a constant and positive reminder of why we were all there to deliver the future we all want. The NGO representative on the New Zealand delegation, Dr Sudhvir Singh, did a stellar job connecting with a range of NGOs to provide further information on fossil fuel subsidies reform. Although we had only a small team on the ground, New Zealand was able to showcase its credentials as an active and influential small state. I know that these events are often characterised as talk fests where little of substance is achieved, and the outcome document from Rio+20 has been criticised by some NGOs as lacking ambition. But to dismiss it so readily is to vastly underestimate some pretty significant developments. For example Rio+20 was one of the most interactive international meetings in history, thanks very much to new technologies such as Twitter, which greatly helped to engage young people. And, the Conference was a landmark in terms of private sector involvement. They gave a strong message they want to be part of the solution on sustainable development.

From this Governments point of view, we made solid progress. The key goals on oceans pushed by New Zealand at Rio+20 were included in the outcome document. This is an important signal that the international community recognises the need for urgent collective action to address the state of our oceans. Our position is that harmful fisheries subsidies only add to the worsening state of global fish stocks, distort trade and undermine sustainable development. New Zealand was publicly acknowledged for its leadership in sustainable fisheries management and I am pleased that the text in the outcome document commits to further improvement of regional fisheries management, and actions to crack down on illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing. The text also clearly registers the importance of small island developing states getting a greater share of the return from their fisheries resources. This has been a long-standing New Zealand and Pacific goal. I am confident that our message was heard. Tackling government subsidies for fossil fuels is another area of New Zealands focus that I felt made some progress at Rio. New Zealand had looked to Rio+20 for all countries to commit to phase out, over the medium term, inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, while mitigating adverse impacts on vulnerable groups. While the final outcome falls short of that goal, we are nevertheless pleased that the Rio+20 text represents recognition of the importance of fossil fuel subsidy reform. We are mindful that reform will have consequences for poorer populations, and needs to be done progressively, but phasing out fossil fuel subsidies would deliver significant benefits for a greener economy and the climate. The UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon made the point that now the speeches are over, the work really begins. There is a short time now to reflect, but with the outcome document setting a work programme for several years to come, the road from Rio is likely to be as challenging as the road to Rio. Back in New Zealand, I am confident that we are travelling on the right road and in the right direction. The Government is taking a good, hard look at the way we manage our natural resources. We are focussed on growing our economy, while looking after the environment that we all know is the source of our wealth and our competitive advantage. Our focus is on oceans and freshwater, better planning and consenting, and better performance by the decision-makers in our resource management system. At Rio, we were among the first to sign up to the Global Partnership for Oceans. Through this partnership we are committing to work with other countries, NGOs and private sector organisations to tackle overfishing, pollution and habitat loss. We are continuing to build our reputation as a global leader in sustainable fisheries. Our aquaculture reforms have increased the level of data available to decision-makers for better planning for aquaculture development. And, New Zealands draft proposal for a Marine Protected Area in the Ross Sea region, if successful, will be the largest Marine Protected Area anywhere in the world. It was at your conference last year that my colleague, Dr Nick Smith, announced the Governments intention to introduce a Bill to fill the gaps between the somewhat patchy series of laws we have in place to protect our marine environment. The marine consenting regime the EEZ Bill proposes is pragmatic and responsible.

It is a sensible response to the environmental, reputational and investment risks we face as a result of the lack of a comprehensive environmental management regime for our oceans. Thanks to the thoughtful submissions provided by the EDS and others, the Bill as reported back from select committee has been further improved and strengthened. A number of positive changes have been recommended. We have clarified what decision-makers must consider, given stronger recognition to the Treaty of Waitangi, made wider reference to our international obligations, increased enforcement powers for the EPA, and made more workable transition provisions. The Bill is due to have its third reading in Parliament, and today I want to announce that the Government intends to make more amendments to the Bill. These changes will be presented to Parliament in a supplementary order paper during the committee of the whole House next week. The key changes the Government intends to make are: Amending the purpose of the Bill to incorporate the concept of sustainable management similar to the RMA; Increasing the maximum penalty levels for companies from $600,000 to $10 million; Clarifying that the transitional period will enable planned activities to proceed during the 2013/14 season and; Providing a statutory timeframe of about six months for a marine consent process. The proposed purpose clause will use the concept of sustainable management and include the same environmental foundation as the purpose of the RMA. For example, sustaining the potential of natural resources to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations, and safe-guarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil and ecosystems.

Certainty of how the purpose will be interpreted was a key issue for stakeholders, who raised concern that the balancing purpose would result in extensive litigation to clarify its interpretation. There was also concern that the word balance is associated with trade-offs and a pure cost-benefit analysis, pitting the environment against the economy, rather than the broad judgement that was intended. Because the proposed wording is similar to the purpose of the RMA, it should benefit from more than 20 years of the RMA case law that clarifies the meaning and implementation of sustainable management. In more closely aligning the EEZ Bill and the RMA, the proposed changes will create greater consistency in environmental regulation for different areas of ocean jurisdiction. This will be particularly useful for any activities that span both the territorial sea and the EEZ beyond 12 nautical miles. The Government is proposing that the maximum penalty under the Bill for anyone other than a natural person should be increased from the current level of $600,000 to $10 million. It is my view that the EEZ context justifies a higher criminal penalty for non-natural persons and the increased level will likely provide an additional incentive for large multi-national corporations to comply with the regime when operating in the EEZ. Proposed changes to the Bill will also clarify that the transitional arrangements will allow planned petroleum activities to continue through the 2013/14 season recognising the long lead time for investment decisions for such activities. This will ensure that economic opportunities are not unduly interrupted in the short term given the investments that have been made in New Zealand. To ensure environmental effects are considered during the transition, any petroleum operators will have to prepare an impact assessment for the Environmental Protection Authority. The Government intends to make changes to the timeframes for the marine consent process. Currently, there are statutory timeframes around all aspects of the marine consent application process for the duration of the hearing. The addition of a 40

working day timeframe for the hearing means that all aspects of the process will have statutory timeframes, with the total process taking 120 working days or about six months. This will increase process certainty for both applicants and submitters, and based on experience with the Nationally Significant process under the RMA, will still allow sufficient time for the hearing.I would like now to turn to the Governments wider resource management reform agenda. I will start by acknowledging that the Resource Management Act is an internationally-recognised piece of legislation which has at its heart the 1992 Rio Earth Summit principles of sustainable management.But it is now more than 20 years since the RMA was introduced. It is time to check its pulse to make sure that it adequately manages contemporary issues, and also to build on some of the efficiency gains we have made over the past four years. The incentives to look at the resource management system have been wide-ranging. You will be well-versed in these, but three main issues spring to mind: Firstly, a lack of firm limits or rules is creating uncertainty for investors and communities, for example, in the use of our freshwater resources. Secondly, we are facing significant planning and infrastructure challenges as a result of increasing urban development. I see the system struggling to positively plan for growing resource pressures. As a result we are seeing squeezes on the housing supply, for example, and difficulties where resource management issues span local authority boundaries or land use affects our waterways. Thirdly, although we have made great strides in terms of streamlining and simplifying planning and consent processes for nationally significant projects and improved council performance for consent processing timeframes, there are still areas for improvement. Consent processes for medium-sized projects especially, are still unnecessarily litigious and often long and unpredictable. The Government is looking at a suite of initiatives to tackle these issues For example: We are looking at a single resource management plan for each district, and ways of simplifying plan-making; We have asked the stakeholder-led Land and Water Forum to provide further consensus-based advice for Ministers to consider, on how to tackle the issues surrounding freshwater reform in a way that balances the needs of all New Zealanders; Ministers are talking to Iwi representatives about freshwater reform and specifically Maori rights and interests in freshwater. It is the Governments intention to introduce a six-month processing time frame for medium-sized consents; and We asked an independent group of resource management experts to review the principles in the RMA to make sure that they reflect contemporary matters like urban growth and infrastructure, and emerging issues like managing the risks of natural hazards. I recently released their report and it has generated a lot of interest and debate. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the EDS for the report you delivered on this issue. Your contribution and that of the independent technical advisory group is with officials now for consideration as part of the policy work on this. I should stress, however, that no policy decisions have yet been made by the Government in respect of proposed changes to sections 6 and 7 or any other part of the RMA. We will consider the TAGs recommendations in due course, alongside a range of other guidance, including the recommendations of the Land and Water Forum, feedback from stakeholders such as you, and advice from officials, as part of our wider reforms of the resource management system. So, you can see there is a lot going on. But to achieve further improvements we will need to confront some difficult issues and consider potential trade-offs. I intend to canvass some ideas with you and the wider resource management community and the public in due course, as we continue to develop and refine policy options for Government to consider over the coming year or so. I would like to thank the Environmental Defence Society for your valuable input into the thinking that goes into this work affecting some of the most important issues facing New Zealand.

Amy Adams 21 JUNE, 2012 Opening address to the Rio+20 Summit I am honoured to represent New Zealand, and to amplify the voices of the Pacific, as New Zealand is current Pacific Islands Forum chair. New Zealand has come to Rio with a hope that in reaffirming and renewing the worlds commitment to sustainable development we will address the future of the planet and aspirations of future generations. A healthy environment is essential for maintaining human life and livelihoods and for healthy economies that are sustainable into the future. New Zealand is very conscious that resource use must be based on sustainability. Good science is essential to quality policy decision-making. Best outcomes emerge when governments engage civil society. In New Zealand the Treaty of Waitangi has created a special partnership between the government and Maori. Looking beyond our shores, New Zealands development assistance is directed to support sustainable development, in order to reduce poverty and contribute to a more secure, equitable and prosperous world. New Zealand sees a green economy as a driver of economic, environmental and social development. We are as focussed on how we grow, as how much we grow. We recognise that there is no one size fits all solution. Green economy policies need to take into account different national circumstances. More than 30 per cent of New Zealands land area and some 8 per cent of our territorial seas are in reserves. Most of our energy is from renewable sources. New Zealand has a world-leading fisheries management system. New Zealands emissions trading scheme is one of the first in the world. Internationally, New Zealand launched the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases, to help ensure agriculture could play a vital role in food security, poverty eradication and growth, without increasing greenhouse gas emissions. New Zealand continues to promote the removal of trade distorting and environmentally harmful subsidies, whether these are for agriculture, fisheries or fossil fuels. In looking at the green economy, New Zealand has focussed on areas that we believe can deliver real and substantial economic, social and environmental global benefits. New Zealand has looked to Rio+20 to commit to phase out, over the medium term, inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, while mitigating adverse impacts on vulnerable groups. The scale of subsidies for fossil fuels is massive. Estimates suggest that the total cost is between US$400-600 billion a year. Money spent on fossil fuels is money that could be spent on other sustainable development priorities. Some countries spend more on fossil fuel subsidies than they do on health or education. Phasing out fossil fuel subsidies would deliver benefits for a greener economy and the climate. New Zealand identified the sustainable management, conservation and protection of our oceans as an area for more ambitious collective action. Fisheries support 170 million jobs and more than 1.5 billion people rely on marine resources for their protein intake. Landlocked countries, too, are reliant on the oceans because of the impact of oceans on the global climate and because of the role they play in global trade.

New Zealand is particularly concerned about harmful fisheries subsidies which make a significant contribution to the worsening state of global fish stocks. Subsidies create overcapacity, undermine fisheries management decisions and can contribute to illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing. New Zealand is delighted at the commitment at Rio+20 to eliminate harmful subsidies in the fisheries sector. We have worked hard to address these harmful subsidies in the World Trade Organisation, but states need not wait for an outcome in Geneva. We are pleased to see Rio encourage states to eliminate these subsidies right now. We draw attention to the 2011 call of Pacific Forum Leaders, including New Zealand, for Rio+20 to recognise the significant global value and contribution of the Pacific Ocean to sustainable development, acknowledging the stewardship of Pacific Island countries. Pacific Leaders urged the international community to work towards integrated oceans management, using the Pacific Oceanscape as a model. Leaders urged the realisation of international goals that contribute to the health and vitality of the ocean environment, including through the global network of marine protected areas agreed at Rio+10. Leaders also highlighted threats to the ocean environment, including from ocean acidification, pollution and illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. Finally, to ensure that Rio+20 included strong outcomes on the conservation and sustainable management of marine ecosystems and resources, Leaders called for the maximisation of returns from the conservation and sustainable management of ocean resources. New Zealand sees ensuring small island developing states enjoy a greater share of their marine resources as a priority. They are amongst the most fragile economies in the world. Collectively we must do all we can to support their efforts to strengthen their resilience. We are pleased to see commitments on these issues at Rio+20. New Zealand is supporting sustainable development in the Pacific, Asia, Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean through programmes focused on investing in economic development, promoting human development, improving resilience and responding to disaster, and building safe and secure communities. New Zealands assistance has a particular focus on sustainable economic development. Programmes include funding for a wide range of activities in support of agriculture, fisheries, tourism, transport services and renewable energy objectives. Activities are developed in close partnership with our developing country partners. Examples include the substantial support provided for strengthened fisheries management across the Pacific region, for a major solar power project in Tonga and geothermal power in Indonesia and dairy and horticulture initiatives in Africa and Latin America. Turning to the second theme of the conference, the institutional framework for sustainable development, we believe that form should follow function. New Zealand believes reforms should be practical, achievable and effective, improve delivery on the ground and support national strategies, institutions and systems to achieve the development goals of the country concerned. New Zealand has welcomed the initiative to develop sustainable development goals. However, development of these goals should not undermine continuing international effort to achieve the millennium development goals. New Zealand stands ready to participate in any process to develop these goals. I am proud that so many committed New Zealanders have made the long trip to Rio to participate in this meeting in their own right. There are issues on which the international community has found it hard to agree. But what we have in common, what we all agree on, is the importance of a renewed commitment to sustainable development and the future of the planet. That is the over-arching goal to which I, the New Zealand government, and New Zealanders, are committed.

International Environmental Governance New Zealand participates in a number of international bodies working in different ways to protect and improve the global environment. Central to these efforts are international agreements and organisations focusing on sustainable development. Agreements on sustainable development have their origins in the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil where countries, including New Zealand, adopted Agenda 21. The Agenda 21 programme sets out actions for governments, United Nations organisations, development agencies, non-governmental organisations, and the private sector in every area in which human activity impacts on the environment. Ten years later in 2002 countries reviewed their progress on implementing the Agenda 21 programme of action at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg. The key document from the Summit, the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, provided new targets and recommendations for practical action on sustainable development. The plan included a ten year framework of programmes to change the ways societies produce and consume, actions to achieve sustainable fisheries and the conservation and management of oceans, integrating water resources management, and action to reduce the risks and vulnerability to natural hazards in many parts of the world. The United Nations Commission for Sustainable Development was created to ensure that Agenda 21 and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation were implemented. The Commission is composed of United Nations member states and its annual sessions focus on specific sustainable development themes. New Zealand chaired the 1998 session and continues to maintain an active interest in the work of the Commission. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs - Division for Sustainable Development New Zealand is a member of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and held a seat on its Governing Council from 2000 to 2003. UNEPs role - confirmed by the Nairobi Declaration agreed by UNEP members in 1997 - is to provide leadership and promote partnerships for environmental protection, through assessments of the state of the global environment, furthering development of international environmental law, carrying out policies to advance environmental protection, and coordinating activities in the UN system and further afield. The annual UNEP meeting provides an opportunity for Environment Ministers from around the world to engage on international environmental issues and to set the direction of the international environmental agenda. UNEP also provides information on the state of the global environment. Its Global Environment Outlook is its major publication. UNEP plays an important role in international negotiations on Multilateral Environment Agreements (MEAs) and acts as the Secretariat to a number of them, including the Ozone Secretariat and the Montreal Protocol's Multilateral Fund and CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora). The distinct secretariats for others, including the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on Migratory Species, also form part of the UNEP operation. UNEP also provides secretariat services to a growing family of chemicals-related agreements, including the Basel Convention on the Trans-boundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). In June 2008, New Zealand hosted World Environment Day in cooperation with UNEP. United Nations Environment programme website (UNEP) As a developed country, New Zealand contributes to the financing and governing of the Global Environment Facility (GEF). The GEF is an international body providing finance to developing countries for activities addressing global environmental issues around climate change, biological diversity, chemicals management, sustainable land management and international waters. New Zealand takes its turn on the GEF Governing Council, which is responsible for setting policies and programmes most recently from January 2008 to June 2009. Global Environment Facility website (GEF) New Zealand is a member of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The OECD conducts its work on environmental issues principally through the Environment Policy Committee. It provides expertise through environmental performance reviews (New Zealands environmental performance was reviewed in 2006), collecting and analysing data, and policy analysis to support governments in addressing environmental challenges. NewZealand participates in the Environment Policy Committee as well as other OECD working groups.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development New Zealand also participates in the governance and operation of regional bodies working on environment issues in the Pacific, including the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme and the Pacific Islands Applied Geoscience Commission. By: Vernon Rive, June 28, 2012 @ 12:32 pm The result from Rio is high on affirmations and statements of encouragement, and low on concrete step changes. The much-hyped international environmental talks in Rio last week finished on Friday with a whimper rather than a bang, with the leaders and representatives of 193 nations signing off on a 283-paragraph declaration, 'The Future We Want'. The final document was the same in substance as a draft thrashed out by officials after a three day 'prepcom that wrapped up on the earlier Tuesday. Most of the three-day plenary session that began on Wednesday consisted of a series of formulaic, occasionally propagandist, national statements which rarely delved deeper than scripted skite sheets highlighting individual countries environmental achievements or the taking of (appropriately diplomatically worded) potshots at other countries warning them off any ideas of environmental or economic imperialism. The essential message from G77 countries: we know how to manage our natural resources, are intent on developing them, would appreciate financial assistance from the west and north but have no plans to be curtailing expansion of our economies for the sake of the environment any time soon. The language was replete with references to sustainable development and green economy. But despite the rhetoric, there were scant concrete signs of any step changes towards environmentally sustainable economies. Rio+20 in 2012 As it became clear that the document was unlikely to develop further from the Tuesday draft long on lengthy, highly conditioned statements of intention, short on clear commitments civil society organisations moved to distance themselves from the declaration. Addressing the plenary on behalf of one of the NGO Major Groups" last Wednesday, Wael Hmaidan, director of Climate Action Network International, said: The text as it stands is completely out of touch with reality. Just to be clear, NGOs here in Rio in no way endorse this document. Already more than 1,000 organisations and individuals have signed in only one day a petition called The Future We Dont Want that completely refuses the current text. It does not in any way reflect our aspiration, and therefore we demand that the words in full participation with civil society are removed from the first paragraph.The words remained in the final version. Meanwhile, UN officials defiantly maintained positive stances on both the document and the process. Its not clear whether anyone was comforted by the statement by Sha Zukang, Secretary-General of the conference: "This is an outcome that makes nobody happy. My job was to make everyone equally unhappy". Or UNEP head Achim Steiners brave reference in his final press conference to the hidden richness in this document. As widely reported, the word encourage appears in the text 50 times, the phrase we will, five; support is used 99 times; must, three times. Amongst the small number of statements that come close to decisions or clear statements of intention are: - agreement on a process to develop Sustainable Development Goals (action oriented, concise and easy to communicate, limited in number, aspirational, global in nature and universally applicable to all countries) which will sit alongside the existing Millennium Development Goals; - a decision to create a universal intergovernmental high-level political forum to follow up on the implementation of sustainable development; - a decision to strengthen and upgrade the United Nations Environment Programme. The bulk of the rest of the document consists of high-level exhortations, affirmations, invitations and statements of encouragement. The New Zealand political reaction

I spoke to New Zealand's recently appointed Minister for the Environment Amy Adams on the second to last day of the conference and asked for her views on the success or otherwise of the venture. We set ourselves two goals coming to Rio. One was around fossil fuel subsidy reform, and the other was around better global fisheries management. On the global fisheries side of the equation, I think we can be pretty pleased with where we got to[On fossil fuel subsidies reform] we would have liked to see more, of course we would, and that's what we fought for. But realistically to even have text in there about the need to have a look at fossil fuel subsidies is huge It is not particularly definitive. But let's not forget that it is progress. I sought out Green MP Kennedy Graham (the only other New Zealand MP to attend the conference) for his reaction to statements by some commentators that people shouldn't be too concerned or distracted by the outcome document itself, but rather that the real value of these sorts of conferences comes from connections made and initiatives launched. Graham bluntly rejected the proposition. Don't worry, be happy? Come on. The critical point of the conferenceis to get the international community of states to emerge with specific and substantive resolutions on solutions to the global problem. To say never mind if weve got a weak, wishy-washy document, well be okay and it's been fun is about as ostrich-like as can be. What about Rio+20s implications for New Zealand? I asked the Minister whether, from a New Zealand government perspective, we can expect business-as-usual post-Rio +20, or if she sees anything coming out of the conference which might translate to changes in domestic policy. Take what you will from her response. In the wider framework in the environment space, reading through it so far, I think a lot of it is reflective of the direction that we are heading in our policy-making anyway. I'm sure that there will be parts that we look at and think, You know we do need to take that, and perhaps emphasise that. But that's going to be something that we will take back for further consideration. On the specific issue of the governments present proposals to strip references to sustainable development out of the purpose clause of the Local Government Act (a move which seems curiously out of sync with paragraph three of the declaration that the Minister went on to sign), Adams response was effectively: don't ask me, ask Minister Carter. Certainly within the resource management part of the local government activities, absolutely, [sustainable development is] central. It has to be, because that is the part at which that level of government has to be very careful in managing its resources. I agree that it has to be integrated at all levels of government. But I would argue that it is anyway. It's not the same as saying 'it must be in every piece of legislation ". So I'm not saying that there isn't a role there, I'm simply saying that I'm not the right person to ask, so that's something that Minister Carter will need to consider. Grahams reaction to the Minister's response on this? Doctrinally incorrect, and very politically incorrect in terms of UN documentation that she's just signing today. Because she is saying: not my job, go and talk to David Carter. And she's signing a document which calls for an integrated holistic approach to sustainable development across all sectors. It's fatuous. All the more reason why the Prime Minister should have been here Further analysis A number of useful analyses of the document are emerging. Interesting perspectives from New Zealand include those from Rod Oram, Nicola Tokai, Graham. Offshore, the posts by Sara Bice (Sustainable Business Forum), the Guardians George Monbiot, The Telegraphs (slightly more upbeat) Louise Gray, and the New York Times' Simon Romero and John Broder are worth a read. One of the more piercing analyses that I have seen so far is a piece headed Life After Rio: A commentary by Mark Halle of the International Institute for Sustainable Development. We must put a stop to the massive waste of money represented by events like the Rio conference. If our governments are not prepared to move towards sustainability, it is better that our voting populations know this. Calling a failure a success even a guarded success is to paper over the everwidening cracks in the system. So the first conclusion we must reach is that we should call a moratorium on all global multilateral negotiations and begin to address the thousands of unfulfilled promises and commitments we have made. Last Thursday, the Minister indicated to me that she would be going through the document with Cabinet. I doubt too many people will be holding their breath for news from that discussion.

Helen Clark, UNDP Administrator State of the Nations Environment What does Rio+20 mean for sustainable development? Lincoln University, New Zealand, 20 August 2012, 7:30pm I thank Lincoln University for the invitation to deliver this years State of the Nations Environment address. I commend both the University and the Isaac Centre for Nature Conservation for establishing and supporting this annual lecture as a way of drawing attention to the environmental and sustainability issues New Zealand faces. This years address takes place in the 25th anniversary year of the release of the Brundtland Report - the UN Report which, in defining sustainable development, helped facilitate a global consensus on its importance. We also meet just two months after world leaders gathered in Rio de Janeiro to agree on steps to advance sustainable development at the UN Conference on Sustainable Development, Rio+20. Advancing sustainable development worldwide is central to the mandate of the UN Development Programme which I lead, and it is also of critical importance for both the health of New Zealands environment and the well-being of its people. No country is truly an island: the state of New Zealands environment and the well-being of its people are also related to the willingness and capabilities of those outside our borders to make the right decisions and take collective action to implement them. I am especially pleased, therefore to join you today to examine what the Rio+20 Conference means for sustainable development for all of us. My lecture tonight will address three issues: First:The background to Rio+20, and what happened at the conference Second:What Rio+20 means for engagement in and leadership of sustainable development. Third:How the outcome of Rio+20 could be translated into policy solutions to pressing global challenges. First, the background to Rio+20, and what happened at the conference. Many of you will have seen the somewhat mixed media accounts of the conference outcome some are hopeful, while others are rather dour and pessimistic. Before drawing conclusions about its success or failure, however, lets look at what the Conference was intended to achieve, and what it actually did accomplish. We also need to consider the context in which it took place. The negotiations of UN member states on the outcome document for Rio+20 occurred against the backdrop of significant political and economic tension in Europe, the United States, and elsewhere. Economic uncertainty and the prospect of slow growth polarized the political discourse on growth and austerity, and left leaders reluctant to be proactive in addressing global challenges, including through development assistance and environmental protection. Development co-operation does have a vital and catalytic role to play in advancing sustainable development. If traditional donors are reducing the quantity of aid, that does not help the atmospherics around a conference like Rio+20. Indeed, the volume of official development assistance, as measured in real terms by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), dropped last year for the first time since 1997. That is not the ideal backdrop for a major UN conference related to development. For these and other reasons, failure to agree on any outcome whatsoever at Rio+20 remained a distinct possibility up until the arrival of high-level delegations at the conference itself. Months of negotiations in New York had produced few results. No outcome would have been disastrous, making it more difficult to generate the momentum needed to address the linked challenges of environmental degradation, social inequity, and economic volatility. Unfortunately it is not unknown for major multilateral meetings to fail to produce significant outcomes: the UN Committee on the Status of Women could not agree this year; the Commission for Sustainable Development struggled last year; and the Copenhagen Climate Conference struggled the year before. As New Zealanders are acutely aware, the WTOs Doha Development Round has been in trouble for years.

After much debate and late night negotiations, however, the 193 UN member states at Rio+20 adopted the compromise outcome document submitted by the host, Brazil. Its title, The Future We Want, restates the global commitment to achieve sustainable development, and calls on all actors to reinvigorate their efforts. Considering the global political context, this outcome must be seen as a glass at least half full. To assess the value of the agreement, we should also view it in a longer term historical context, and consider what the Conference was established to achieve. The Rio+20 outcome document concludes that sustainable development is the only viable path for development, and, therefore, that for development to be effective it must be sustainable. It highlights how environmental protection and economic development are linked, and gives, for the first time at a global conference of this kind, equal emphasis to the social or people-centered - dimension of sustainable development. This is of great importance to UNDP, which both promotes human development and works across the three strands of sustainable development, seeking synergies between them. Thus the Rio+20 outcome reflects an advance in thinking which brings the consensus of member states closer to the conclusions of the Brundtland Report 25 years ago. In 1983, the UN Secretary General had asked Gro Harlem Brundtland to chair a World Commission on Environment and Development, citing her experience as Norways Prime Minister and Environment Minister. The Commissions Report gave us the concept of sustainable development, which is widely used today. It defined sustainable development as development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This definition linked the concept to a fundamental tenet of justice and to human development: that no one should be denied the ability or opportunity to live lives they value because of their gender, ethnicity, or any other factor, including, in this case, the generation in which they happen to be born. The Brundtland Report argued that sustainable development was about both advancing social justice and human progress and about maintaining the integrity of ecosystems. The Report went further to suggest that the economic, social, and environmental strands of sustainable development represent interconnected objectives which countries can and should pursue together. The Reports powerful and compelling ideas popularized sustainable development, bringing the term and concept into mainstream development discourse in developed and developing countries. It also laid the ground for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. That Conference, commonly referred to as the Earth Summit, focused mainly on moving the environmental agenda forward which it did in powerful ways. It agreed on Agenda 21, the Global Environment Facility, and UN conventions on climate change, biodiversity, and desertification, thereby establishing a strong foundation for sustainable development. Its implementation, however, has been uneven. Rio+20 this year was intended to be a review conference which would assess the progress made since 1992. As such, its aims, on paper at least, were more limited than those of its predecessor. The opportunity offered by a major global conference to advance sustainable development, however was one not to be missed. Many argued that to tackle growing global challenges of inequity and unsustainability, quick, bold, & concerted action was needed from Rio+20. It was hoped that leaders might re-create the spirit of the Earth Summit, and determine to move past short-term, sectoral thinking; learn from best practice on sustainability; and make commitments to tackle the pressing challenges from ocean acidification and diminishing biodiversity to food insecurity, entrenched poverty and much more. In so doing, the misconception that sustainable development is only or mainly about the environment could be dispelled. In the third week of June, some 100 Heads of State and Government, many ministers, and more than 40,000 other representatives of governments, non-governmental organizations, the private sector, and civil society gathered at Rio+20, making it the largest ever UN gathering.

It is true that the agreed outcome document included no new binding targets, few concrete initiatives, and little new financial and institutional support. That left many activists, NGOs, scientists, and development actors disappointed. That is understandable, as, measured against the scale of the global challenges including environmental degradation, growing inequality, and economic volatility, the outcome document does fall short. But it is also true that the outcome document has wise things to say about every aspect of sustainable development, and provides a platform to which to link action by all who want to act, from citizens to governments. The challenge arising from Rio+20 is how to advance economic, social, and environmental objectives simultaneously, lifting integrated policy-making to new levels. The outcome signals a broad understanding that the systems and behaviours which have brought us to this point in history reaching planetary boundaries and societal breaking points - must change. The document: (1) calls on governments and the UN system to work across sectors to identify the policies and programmes which will grow economies and reduce inequities, while also protecting the environment. In some quarters, economic growth is looked at as antithetical to environmental protection. Rio turns such thinking on its head encouraging us all to identify how entrepreneurship, job creation, and social protection can be generated through and linked to environmental protection. In my work, I encounter countless examples of such action for example, just last month in Senegal, meeting local women committed to replanting and protecting the mangrove forests, which, once re-established, nurture fish and shell fish stocks, thus generating new sources of incomes for families. In this spirit, UNDP is committed to help countries learn from and scale up triple-win policies and programmes, which many countries are already employing and which are designed to advance economic, social, and environment objectives together. (2) emphasises that economies must be made both green and inclusive. It singles out poverty eradication as the worlds most pressing challenge, and calls for targeted efforts to reach the poor and vulnerable, including by creating jobs and opportunities. Negotiations on the green economy were particularly heated, due to the fears of developing countries that the term could be code for new conditions on trade and aid. It was agreed that the green economy should be seen as an important tool for sustainable development, rather than as a rigid set of rules. In other words, no firm pathway was agreed on. There is much which can be done, however, to identify locally appropriate ways to generate green jobs and incentivize shifts to sustainable production and consumption. UNDP and sister agencies expect to be heavily engaged in supporting developing countries to do that. (3) calls for continued efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by their 2015 target date. Looking beyond 2015, Rio+20 also agreed to craft sustainable development goals which should: (a) build on the significant success of the MDGs in focusing development efforts and mobilising diverse actors around a common cause; (b) fully reflect all three strands of sustainable development; and (c) raise the level of global ambition to eradicate extreme poverty. Overall, while the agreements reached at Rio are voluntary, not binding, and overarching, not specific, they do strengthen the international communitys commitment to implement sustainable development and provide a platform for action by those willing to act.

It should not surprise us that the concerns raised by the Brundtland report 25 years ago found more resonance with world leaders gathered in Rio this June. The more polluted and unequal our world becomes, the more governments will tend to view environmental and social protection systems not as luxuries to be acquired when countries become wealthy, but as necessities, vital to sustain development and meet the needs of citizens. This conclusion is increasingly compelling for developing countries with restless young populations, overstretched services, and rapidly expanding cities. The challenges are especially daunting for small island countries faced with obliteration from rising sea levels, and for other poor countries also bearing the brunt of extreme climate events including through the deadly droughts affecting parts of Africa and the catastrophic flooding in Pakistan and elsewhere. Second, what Rio+20 means for engagement in and leadership of sustainable development. Some observations: 1. The role played by developing countries. It was evident in Rio that new groupings of countries have realized the importance and relevance of pursuing sustainable development at home and through global collaboration and international action. Alongside the Conferences official proceedings, developing and emerging market countries met in side events and shared success stories. Many revealed new and innovative policy approaches, and displayed their willingness to collaborate across borders for sustainable development. Through south-south co-operation, developing countries are sharing best practice and lessons learned. It was notable that while the majority of the G8s leaders stayed away, emerging economies were generally represented at a very high level, strengthening their voice in proceedings. 2. The role of Brazil. Brazil played a major role as host in steering the conference, and is determined that there will be a legacy from it. As part of that, an announcement was made during the conference by Brazils Minister for the Environment and me that Brazil and UNDP will establish the Rio+20 World Centre for Sustainable Development. Located in Rio, the Centre will promote implementation of the outcome of Rio+20, share best practice, and support countries' efforts to adopt integrated policy-making and pursue objectives across the three strands of sustainable development. 3. A new member state forum at the United Nations. At the global level, member states at Rio+20 agreed to establish a universal membership, intergovernmental, high-level political forum for sustainable development at the UN, which builds on the strengths, experiences, resources, and inclusive ways of working of the current Commission on Sustainable Development, and subsequently replaces the Commission. An intergovernmental process will define the features of the new forum which is expected to convene at the beginning of the 68th session of the General Assembly in September 2013. The overall mandate of the High Level Political Forum will be to help countries implement the outcome of Rio+20. It could do this by reviewing and monitoring progress on sustainable development, and by providing a platform for countries to share their experiences on implementation, rather as the Development Co-operation Forum associated with the UNs Economic and Social Council does. It could also promote co-ordination across the UN system on sustainable development programming and policies, and seek to strengthen the science-policy interface. 4. The level of engagement beyond the UNs member states. UN global conferences like Rio+20 traditionally work through the good faith, legitimacy, common understandings, and shared principles generated in inter-governmental negotiations and dialogue. But Rio + 20 broke the usual mould with the very large presence of civil society, business people, and local governments. The voluntary commitments made by businesses, development banks, cities and regions, UN agencies, and NGOs and civil society activists were among Rios most significant outcomes. More than 700 formal commitments were registered, and more than $500 billion dollars were pledged. For example: Unilever, Tesco, and Johnson and Johnson committed to end deforestation in their supply chains for beef, soy, paper, and palm oil by 2020, The 1800 largest companies listed on the London Stock Exchange committed to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions, The cities of Beijing, Cairo, Delhi, London, Moscow, New York, and Sydney, among others, committed to reducing a gigaton of carbon emission reductions, and agreed to report on their progress through an annual report card, and

Eight development banks committed to spending $175 billion in grant and loan funding by 2020 to support sustainable low carbon transportation.

This outcome suggests that motivated leaders from across the economic and social sectors and subnational governments can help accelerate sustainable development. Many of these are well ahead of many governments at the national level, and certainly well ahead of what UN member states can agree on. They are not waiting for governments to act nor should they. The need to act is urgent. Progress on implementing the more than 700 voluntary commitments made at Rio+20 needs to be monitored. UNDP will be working with civil society partners and in-country networks to support such monitoring, which can also help grow constituencies for sustainable development by raising awareness of what can and should be done. 5. Social media engagement on a global scale. Global constituencies for change can also be built, following on from the successful Rio dialogues. Held in the lead up to the Conference, these were a series of structured on-line discussions, which originated from the Government of Brazil and UNDPs drive to consult citizens on what should happen at Rio+20. The initiative engaged 60,000 people around the world in voting for the specific sustainable development actions which were most important to them. The results were presented to the leaders attending Rio, setting precedents for new levels of citizen engagement and offering a glimpse of what future of UN summitry could be. The UN Charter begins with the words we the peoples. Through the strategic use of new media, the UN can convey the message that the capacity to expand peace, freedom, and sustainability does not rest in the hands of diplomats in meetings in New York alone, but with all of us - the citizens. We are all the shareholders of Planet Earth. Third, how Rio+20 could be translated into policy solutions to pressing global challenges? 1. Rio+20 drew attention to the pressing need for universal access to modern and reliable energy services, at the same time as there is also a need to move away from the high level of dependence on fossil fuels which the world currently has. The International Energy Agency (IEA) reports that in 2011, 1.3 billion people lacked access to electricity. Without access to clean fuels, 2.3 billion people use traditional biomass for heating and cooking. An estimated two million people, mainly women and children, die each year as a result of exposure to indoor smoke from such fuels. Reliable access to energy is essential for providing basic health, education, and sanitation services. It also lightens the domestic burden of women. At Rio+20, member states noted the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moons Sustainable Energy for All initiative, and expressed their determination to act to make sustainable energy for all a reality. The Secretary-Generals initiative has set three targets for 2030: achieving universal access to modern energy services; doubling the share of renewables in the global energy mix; and doubling the rate of improvement in energy efficiency worldwide.

Of the US$500 billion pledged through voluntary commitments at Rio+20, more than sixty per cent were dedicated to this initiative. UNDP is helping take the Sustainable Energy for All initiative forward in the 55 countries which have signed on thus far, using the convening power of UN Resident Co-ordinators, who are also the UNDP Representatives, to bring stakeholders together to identify how to overcome barriers to achieving sustainable energy for all, and to act to do so. 2. At Rio+20 the UN Secretary-General also issued an ambitious challenge to achieve zero hunger in his lifetime. Specifically he called for a world in which: everyone has access to sufficient levels of nutritious food all year round; there is no malnutrition in pregnancy and early childhood; all food systems are sustainable;

smallholder farmers have the inputs and opportunities they need to double their productivity and income; and food losses stemming from waste, poor storage capacity, and infrastructure are brought to an end.

Food is produced today in quantities which could feed everyone; yet the FAO estimates that in 2010 925 million people were undernourished. Nearly a quarter of the population of Sub-Saharan Africa is affected by hunger. This means children are denied the opportunity to reach their full potential, and adults suffer from lifelong poor health and low productivity. About a third of global food production intended for human consumption is lost or wasted each year. In developing countries, more than forty per cent of food losses occur post-harvest. Grains are eaten by vermin, and fruits and vegetables rot before they can be sold or eaten. Reliable electricity for cold storage and local processing facilities, and better rural infrastructure, are essential for expanding food security in the developing world. New Zealands expertise in the science and technology of agriculture, including here at Lincoln University, can be employed not only to make the shift to more sustainable production methods here at home, but also to support developing countries to increase the productivity of small farmers. Investments in sustainable agriculture have the potential to alleviate food insecurity and malnutrition, mitigate climate change, and protect the environment. As well, UNEP estimates that these investments have the potential to create up to fifty million more jobs by 2050. The growing numbers of young people in Sub-Saharan Africa in will need these opportunities in agriculture. 3. Rio+20 has given impetus to finding new ways of measuring development progress, and ending the tyranny of measurement by GDP. UNDP has for 22 years produced the Human Development Index, which encompasses health and education components alongside income. Yet, still today, countries are more likely to be judged by the speed at which their economies grow rather than by the education or health status of their populations, or by their ability to reduce chronic hunger and provide work. This year, the UN Statistical Commission adopted a System of Environmental-Economic Accounting to monitor progress on increasing green investment, creating green jobs, improving energy and resource efficiency, and recycling. UNDP is exploring the possibilities of adapting the Human Development Index to reflect environmental and other sustainability indicators better. 4. Rio+20 showcased innovative social protection systems which are designed to have environmental benefits. Brazils Bolsa Verde, South Africas Working for Water, and Indias National Employment Guarantee scheme, are all good examples. Brazil, for example, established an environmental conservation support initiative which employs impoverished families living by forests in support of their protection. These are just some of many examples of triple win policies of the kind which UNDP supports around the world, showing that economic, social, and environmental objectives can be advanced together. 5. Rio+20 called on member states to eliminate, or at least seriously reduce harmful and inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption and undermine sustainable development. A grassroots campaign against fossil fuel subsidies went viral in social media before and during Rio+20, and had an impact on negotiators. The IEA estimates that in 2010 the world spent roughly $409 billion in subsidies on the sale of fossil fuels. In some countries, fossil fuel subsidies now exceed the total budget allocated to education, health, and social programmes - one reason why finance ministers are increasingly supportive of their removal. Ending or reducing such subsidies would promote energy conservation, investments in renewables, and free up significant funding for policies which meet the needs of the poor and advance sustainable development, such as social protection, mass transit systems, or renewable energy.

While fossil fuel subsidies disproportionately benefit wealthy households which consume more energy, strategies to remove or reduce subsidies need to mitigate the impact on the poor. Without a commitment to such measures, governments can expect savage reactions, as seen in Nigeria a few months ago. Effective mitigation might involve directing energy subsidies away from energy companies towards vulnerable households. To do this, however, countries must have the institutional capacity to identify vulnerable households and compensate for the estimated impact of higher energy prices. Public awareness campaigns and revisions to the underlying social compact may also be needed to convince sceptical publics. A large share of the worlds fossil fuel subsidies are provided by G20 countries which have pledged to phase them out. In Rio, a petition with one million signatures was presented to the G20, asking them to make good on their pledge. 6. Rio can make good on its promise if increasing numbers of governments meet their Rio+20 obligations through integrated and low-carbon development planning. The Resilient People, Resilient Planet report of the Secretary Generals High Level Global Sustainability panel suggested that most economic decision makers still regard sustainable development as extraneous to their core responsibilities. Yet we know the contrary can be true: that integrating environmental and social issues can be vital to the success of economic decisions. Strong leadership is required to build broad constituencies for sustainable development. International development assistance, climate funds, and other sources of investment are needed to help overcome the capacity deficit most developing countries face. Cross-sectoral co-operation and integrated approaches to policy-making require effective public administrations and governance systems. UNDP is committed to supporting countries to develop these capacities and implement low carbon development plans, which can achieve national development priorities, while limiting future emissions and responding to the needs of vulnerable, poor, and excluded groups and communities. Last year at the Durban climate conference, Ethiopia launched its low carbon, climate resilient, green economy strategy. Ethiopia aims to lifts its people out of poverty, but to do so in a way which does not wreck the environment. If one of the worlds poorest countries is determined to act in this way, surely all countries can? Conclusion The significance and relevance of global summits like Rio+20 ultimately lie in their ability to connect with and influence what people are doing on the ground around the world to think globally while acting locally. This brings us back home to New Zealand. Our country is more heavily reliant on the earths bounty than are most developed countries. Our land- and sea-based industries thrive when the climate is benign, and when ecosystems are healthy. Lincoln University, the Crown Research Institutes, and the Isaac Centre for Nature Conservation can all play an advocacy role for the importance of New Zealand seeking sustainability at home and doing what it takes to create a more sustainable world. Rio+20, with its huge engagement of sub-national governments, NGOs, communities, and businesses, can be seen as promoting bottom-up leadership for sustainable development, based on pragmatic, multi-sectoral, issue-based coalitions. In the end, what will motivate governments to act is the knowledge that there is a groundswell for change. The outcome document from Rio+20 is a solid foundation on which to build. To paraphrase Winston Churchill: Rio+20 was not the end for sustainable development, nor was it the beginning of the end. It may, however, have been the end of the beginning. It does not mince words on the seriousness of the challenges our world faces. It challenges us all in our various capacities to act to put our world on a more sustainable course.