Sustainability and policy - Climate Change: Biological and Human Aspects - page 456

(the mid year between 2008-12), the 2004 global carbon dioxide emissions figures
were 26% higher than in 1990, and subsequent annual emissions were even higher
still (not withstanding a temporary dip in emissions due to the 2008/9 global finan-
cial recession). Consequently, only an undaunted optimist could consider Kyoto to
be working. Yet it should not be dismissed. Kyoto was undoubtedly a spur for the
limited switching of energy away from fossil carbon that is occurring. Had this not
taken place then emissions would have been, and would be, even higher still and so
make subsequent reductions that much harder. Furthermore, those Kyoto countries
that have developed more non-fossil energy sources may well find future economic
benefits in being more independent from fossil fuels and this could act as a spur to
further, more ecologically meaningful, cuts in the longer term.

8.1.9 JohannesburgSummit:UNCED + 10(2002)

The UN World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg was also known
as UNCED 10 and this last more accurately reflects its purpose. This was to chart the

progress made since the UNCED in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and to take things forward.
Alas, despite the presence of many premier politicians and G8 leaders, UNCED

+

10
was hardly considered a success. It transpired that on the ground little progress had
been made since 1992. Further, the future commitments were not binding and the
wording was loose. This was also reflected in those issues that have a major focus on
biology, human ecology and climate change.
Food security had deteriorated so it was agreed at Johannesburg that this must be
improved and that the numbers suffering from hunger in Africa should be halved
by 2015. It also had a goal that 'on an urgent basis and where possible by 2015,
[to] maintain or restore depleted fish stocks to levels that can produce maximum
sustainable yield'. With regards to the UNCED Biodiversity Convention, it was
recognised that little progress, if any, had been made. Those at Johannesburg resolved
to 'achieve by 2010 a significant reduction in the current rate of loss of biological
diversity'. This signalled that they accepted that biodiversity was going to continue
to deteriorate and so only planned to slow the rate at which this happened. By 2005,
with just half a decade to the deadline, progress on even this modest goal had yet to
show signs of success. With regards to human mortality it reaffirmed a goal the UN
made at the turn of the millennium (the Millennium Development Goal) to 'reduce by
2015 mortality rates for infants and children less than 5 by two-thirds, and maternal
mortality rates by three quarters, of the prevailing rate in 2000'. It also affirmed to
reduce HIV prevalence in the most affected countries in people of 15-24 years of age
by 25% and globally by 2010. This too, as of 2006, appeared to be difficult to realise
as deaths from AIDS (for all ages) had increased from under a third of a million a
year in 1990 to nearly 3 million in 2000. Today, 2012, HIV/AIDS in many nations
(especially some of those with weak economies) continues to be a growing problem.
The commitments of UNCED

+

10 to climate change were limited, primarily
because politicians were leaving this to the development of the Kyoto Protocol taking
place at the same time (and which itself was having its own difficulties, especially
with the recent loss of the USA from negotiations). However, energy did feature, and
here the energy goals, though lacking in specificity, were in line with Kyoto goals.
These included diversification of global supply and increasing the contribution from

+