Stockholm Conference Essay Example

of a quality environment for supporting a life of dignity and prosperity. This document underscores our responsibility to safeguard and improve our environment for both current and future generations. After the General Assembly's Resolution in December 1972 at the Stockholm Conference, on December 15th that same year, the United Nations adopted their own resolution promoting active collaboration among nations in issues concerning environmental conservation.

The annual World Environment Day occurring every June 5th was established by a Resolution. This event aims to encourage governments and United Nations agencies around the globe to reaffirm their commitment towards environmental preservation each year. Additionally, another resolution laid the foundation for worldwide cooperation concerning environmental issues, including financial aspects. This set the stage for forming the Governing Council for Environmental Programme in Nairobi and consequently resulted in the creation of both the Environment Secretariat and Environment Fund.

The Management Committee formulated strategies for environmental preservation, addressing both present and impending scenarios, particularly those linked to progress. The Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States from 1974 by the UN incorporates an article highlighting each nation's duty to preserve, enhance, and protect the environment for current and future generations.

Every nation needs to ensure that their actions do not harm the environment of other countries or areas outside their national boundaries. The establishment of universal guidelines and rules concerning environmental issues should be a collaborative effort among various nations. Significant progress was made in this area during the 1970s and 1980s, particularly at events like the UN-Habitat Conference on Human Settlement in 1976 and the World Water Conference in 1977.

Throughout history, numerous significant initiatives

have been launched, highlighted by a variety of prominent conferences. A prime example is the UN Habitat Conference on Human Settlements that took place in Vancouver, Canada in 1976. Similarly noteworthy was the World Water Conference held in Mardel Plata, Argentina in 1977; this marked event advocated for the establishment of a UN program dedicated to guaranteeing universal access to clean water and sanitation facilities. In the same year, Nairobi hosted the UN Desertification Conference. Furthermore, the Paris Conference conducted in 1986 underscored the crucial need to protect trees and forests and attracted participation from Heads of States and Government officials from 36 nations.

The Environmental Education Conference in Georgia, hosted jointly by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) in 1977, witnessed participation from over 400 delegates from 74 diverse nations. The UNEP's Executive Director highlighted the crucial significance of environmental education for human survival and growth. This conference also contributed significantly to the establishment of the World Commission on Environment and Development.

During the 1980s, environmental problems escalated and gained global attention. These included issues such as depletion of the ozone layer, global warming, decline in fish and forest resources, loss of biodiversity, pollution and hazardous waste; all emerging as globally significant concerns. At the same time, there was a heightened focus on sustainable development, especially for developing countries. To respond to these urgent issues, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) organized the Earth Summit Introduction in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.

The Earth Summit, which occurred in Rio de Janeiro from June 3rd to 14th, 1992, is an important

event. During this summit, a comprehensive guide named Agenda 21 was presented. This eight-hundred-page document provides exhaustive recommendations for governments on numerous subjects such as population strategy, management of hazardous waste, recycling programs, energy saving methods, renewable energy resources, business approaches and the importance of women in preserving the environment. Additionally, attendees at the summit aimed to strengthen the principles of the Stockholm Declaration on Human Environment - previously endorsed by United Nations Conference - with aspirations to further enhance its doctrines.

In a bid to establish an equitable worldwide collaboration, encouraging alliances between nations, crucial societal sectors and individuals; working towards international treaties that respect everyone's interests while preserving the wholeness of our global environmental and developmental framework; acknowledging the interconnectedness and mutual dependence of Earth, our dwelling place; Earth Summit +5 *; it was recognized by governments that the state of the global environment has worsened since the 1992 Earth Summit with a rise in greenhouse gas emissions and solid waste production.

Challenges like contamination and managing wastewater persist as primary worries, and the excessive utilization of renewable resources such as freshwater, forests, and fish is not maintainable. However, there are positive developments including a slowdown in global population increase, enhanced food safety, and prolonged life span. These matters were directly addressed at Earth Summit +5 by the involved governments who took action on multiple levels. They achieved an agreement to reaffirm their political dedication towards sustainable growth which includes all members of the international community and major civil society groups.

At the Earth Summit, industrialised countries were urged to reconfirm their financial commitments and targets for official

development assistance (ODA), while also calling for increased efforts to reverse the decline in ODA. The Earth Summit, also known as the Johannesburg Summit in 2002, reinforced sustainable development as a crucial aspect of the global agenda and provided a renewed impetus for worldwide efforts to protect the environment and combat poverty. During the summit, it was decided to establish the World Solidarity Fund dedicated to eradicating poverty. The interconnections between poverty, environment, and resource use were reassessed to strengthen this relationship. Governments agreed to reaffirm their targets and commitments for improving the implementation of sustainable development. Compared to previous international meetings, energy and sanitation issues gained more prominence in negotiations. Additionally, special attention and support were planned for the development of Africa. The summit acknowledged the vital role played by Civil society and NGO's in promoting partnerships among businesses, governments, and society. Numerous partnerships were announced during the Summit.

In Johannesburg, significant goals, commitments and schedules were set up in fields like poverty alleviation, water purity, sustainable production and consumption trends, energy regulation, handling of chemical usage, conservation of natural resources, corporate accountability and health initiatives. Besides these sectors is the emphasis on promoting sustainable growth in small developing island countries and advancing sustainability across Africa. Moreover, during the 1980s there was a global worry about ozone depletion. The stratospheric ozone layer serves as a protective barrier for Earth against damaging ultraviolet radiation (UV-B) from space.

The unseen gas, ozone, is fundamentally important in shielding the earth from damaging UV-B rays. A reduction of this ozone leads to breaches in this protective layer that lets these destructive rays reach the surface of

the earth. These rays originating from the sun can have varied effects on the global ecosystem and all forms of life. The shorter their wavelength, the more damage they can inflict on plant and animal life. Without an intact ozone layer serving as a defense shield, it could result in ecological imbalance which can eventually halt life as we comprehend it.

While the majority of flora and fauna possess some level of UV ray defense, extensive exposure can still result in these rays infiltrating deeper body layers. This could potentially cause skin cancer or eye injuries in people while also interfering with photosynthesis in plants. In 1985, a significant environmental conference called the Vienna Convention was held with its primary emphasis on ozone layer preservation. It was subsequently followed by the Montreal Protocol in 1987 that specifically targeted substances causing ozone layer depletion.

At first, the Montreal Protocol was agreed upon by 24 nations. However, this number rose to 35 in 1988. A further agreement was held in London in 1990 where delegates from 75 nations gathered to reinforce the conditions of the Montreal Protocol. In 1974, Mario Molina and Sherwood Rowland from the University of California found that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) cause significant damage to stratospheric ozone layers. These CFCs can survive for long durations and ascend through the atmosphere until they reach the stratosphere, substantially contributing to ozone layer depletion. It's important to mention that CFCs belong to a broader group of chemicals that contain chlorine and fluorine.

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), primarily CFC11, CFC12, CFC22 and CFC113, are widely known. They disintegrate under sunlight exposure, emitting chlorine atoms that contribute significantly to

the depletion of the ozone layer. Interestingly, these atoms maintain their chlorine form even after this process. In 1983, an alarming discovery was made by the British Antarctic Survey - they detected an ozone hole over Antarctica for the first time. They reported a swift drop in ozone levels with minimal replenishment during autumn seasons. The revelation about this ozone hole provoked considerable concern due to its potential global repercussions on commerce and industry sectors.

The European and Japanese sectors were fraught with apprehension, concerned that a total prohibition on CFCs could negatively impact their refrigeration industries. On the other hand, American firms seemed more open to eradicating CFCs and similar ozone-damaging substances, likely due to their recognition of possible alternatives. A compromise was eventually achieved in 1987 when the Montreal Protocol was signed by twenty-four countries. By 1990, the majority of nations had subscribed to this agreement, pledging to progressively halt production and consumption of materials that deplete the ozone layer, with special emphasis on discontinuing the use of CFCs.

The agreement specified that the production of CFCs should remain at 1986 levels until 1989, before being cut by half in 1998. Developing nations were given an additional grace period of ten years beyond the deadline for developed countries. The Montreal Protocol, as of 2001, oversees 96 chemicals including halocarbons such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons which were first discovered in 1928. These CFCs were initially celebrated as extraordinary gases due to their longevity, non-toxicity, corrosion resistance and non-combustibility.

The solvent Carbon Tetrachloride requires 42 years to degrade in the atmosphere. Another solvent, Methyl chloroform (1,1,1-trichloroethane), has a shorter degradation period

of 5.4 years. The protocol includes Hydrobromofluorocarbons (HBFCs) to deter their new applications despite their limited usage. Hydrochloroflurocarbons (HCFCs) were introduced as the primary substitutes for CFCs. Methyl bromide (CH3Br) is employed as a pesticide for premium crops and serves as quarantine treatment for agricultural goods that are set to be exported.

In the year 1998, several businesses attempted to launch a new ozone-damaging compound called Bromochloromethane (BCM) into the marketplace. To counter this issue, amendments were incorporated into the Montreal Protocol and it required significant modifications. At the outset, neither India nor China were signatories of this protocol. Initial attempts by Indian representatives to voice concerns about these alterations met with strong opposition from existing members. Nevertheless, an international environmental advocacy group known as Friends of the Earth (FOE), continues to express severe criticism towards these actions, labeling them as insufficient and feeble.

Friends of the Earth (FOE) contends that current reductions in Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) production are inadequate. They argue that even before CFCs are phased out entirely, the volume generated could significantly escalate the atmospheric chlorine levels, potentially causing a 50% surge in peak chlorine. Such an increase would substantially augment the risk of severe ozone depletion, particularly over the Arctic region. The ozone hole over Antarctica would not recover and is likely to persist at least until 2080. Furthermore, if chlorine concentrations stayed above four parts per billion (ppb), it could result in an extended period of serious ozone loss. These issues underscore difficulties with enforcement.

The revised schedule following the London agreement outlines deadlines for entirely eradicating CFCs. Developed nations are instructed to phase out CFCs by the

year 2000, whereas developing countries are given until 2010. Halons are also accounted for in this timeline and share the same cutoff as CFCs. Moreover, two more compounds, carbon tetrachloride and methyl chloroform - predominantly used as solvents in metal cleansing processes - must be phased out by 2000 as well. These fabricated chemicals have been discovered to emit chlorine that depletes ozone into our atmosphere. The search is underway for substitutes to these harmful substances.

The mitigation of the ozone hole is primarily driven by the creation and use of alternative chemicals, in place of CFCs. These substitutes are predominantly produced by the same chemical companies that were involved in CFC production. DuPont, a company accountable for one-fourth of global CFC production, has now emerged as the leading producer of these replacement chemicals. ICI, a UK-based company, is also actively participating in this shift.

However, these substitute compounds come with an increased cost compared to CFCs - they are three to five times more expensive. For instance, HFC 134a – proposed as a replacement for CFC refrigerants – will cost approximately UK ? 30 per kg while its predecessor costs significantly less. The expense associated with replacing refrigerants is particularly high. 'New Scientist' reports that using alternate chemicals in domestic cooling systems and car air conditioners could be six to 15 times pricier than other applications formerly involving CFCs. DuPont forecasts that phasing out CFCs for safer alternatives will result in expenses up to $4 billion across the entire chemical industry over the coming ten years; it also anticipates obsolescence worth over $385 billion concerning equipment mainly used in refrigeration.

In

terms of refrigerators, scientists are highlighting more affordable options such as utilizing propane or ammonia as coolants. British scientists argue that traditional refrigerators used excessive amounts of coolants, which renders the flammable propane a risky choice. The developing countries, on the other hand, face challenges concerning technology and finances. Countries like India and China are seeking guarantees for technology transfer and additional funding to support the transition.

The efforts on aid were consistently blocked by the Americans. In May 1990, the US proposed contributing US $20 million over three years to a fund for ozone friendly technology. This led Mostafa Tolba, the UNEP's Executive Director, to comment that the contribution was small compared to the over US $1 billion in revenue the US had made from taxes on ozone-depleting chemicals. The fund would have a mostly multilateral structure, with 20% of aid being bilateral and regional, which was against the preference of developing countries who preferred 10%. Developed countries would finance the fund.

The scale of assessments by the UN forms the basis for determining each nation's share of contribution. The European Community, whose consumption is less than that of the US, raised concerns regarding fair distribution of responsibilities; however, their grievances failed to bring about change. During discussions, the method of assessment was not based on a "polluter pays" principle. Focusing on India's role in ozone negotiations, it entered late into these talks and only became fully involved just before MoP-1 (the first meeting of parties) took place in Helsinki in 1989. At an international conference concerning ozone held in London during March that year, both India and China expressed strong opposition

to joining the Montreal Protocol.

Indian environmental minister, ZA Ansari, stressed the ethical responsibility of the Northern countries to aid developing nations in tackling ozone layer depletion. He recommended that these advanced countries should share CFC alternative technologies developed by their chemical industries with less-developed nations rather than expecting them to bargain commercially with corporations. He suggested setting up an international fund to finance this technology sharing initiative, something not presently covered under the Montreal Protocol.

Initially, India refrained from sending a representative to the Helsinki conference in May 1989, which caused temporary confusion. Nevertheless, it soon collaborated with other developing nations to bolster their stance. When it comes to alternatives in the Indian industry for refrigerators and air conditioners - major ODS consumers, there are three possible choices. Two of these options are shrouded in controversy. HCFCs (HCFC-22 and HCFC-141b) have been identified as transitional and need to be eliminated by 2040. Conversely, HFCs may fall under future Kyoto Protocol scrutiny because they can potentially contribute to greenhouse gases.

The consumption of HCFCs within a country must be stopped at the levels of 2015, resulting in a complete elimination by 2040. Currently, India relies on imports of HCFC-141b and has no plans to invest in production capacity since it is only a temporary substitute. However, the country has been manufacturing HCFC-22 since 1989 and currently produces 3,000 tonnes per year. Due to these limitations, some manufacturers have decided to directly use hydrocarbons as an alternate solution. Industrialized nations are already eager to accelerate the deadline for the freeze on HCFCs.

At the 20th meeting of the open-ended working group (OEWG)

of protocol signatories in Geneva, which took place from July 11-13, 2000, The European Commission (EC) suggested speeding up the end of consumption levels to 2007. Worldwide debates on product discontinuation could have a significant influence on business interests, especially those related to issues like ozone layer depletion. Though sectors such as coal and oil associated with climate change tend to overshadow those affected by the phasing out of CFCs, its relevance remains substantial for impacted businesses.

The CFC industry is predominantly dominated by key corporations like DuPont and ICI, a contrast to sectors pertaining to carbon emissions and climate change. Frequently, businesses engaged in the production of these materials strive to postpone their termination. However, with respect to CFCs, some leading manufacturers conceived an alternative approach, making them more amenable towards the product's phase-out and thus backing the Montreal Protocol for ODS control. Importantly, DuPont developed a replacement that was instrumental in its endorsement of the Montreal Protocol.

This example underscores the significance of proactive corporate engagement in global environmental treaties. The process of phasing out CFCs was relatively straightforward to negotiate due to the fewer industries involved. However, this is not applicable for climate change where numerous sectors are impacted. NGOs played a crucial role in the Montreal Protocol by participating and addressing ozone depletion through Greenfreeze technology in refrigerators - marking an unprecedented instance of NGO interaction with a worldwide technical issue.

Initially, they were hesitant to join the debates. But in the early phases, scientists became more engaged than other activists. Richard Benedick, who represented the US on ozone matters, suggested that America's dominance in stratospheric science

studies could account for the differing public reactions to warnings about the ozone layer between Europe and America. This was primarily due to significant financial backing provided to organizations such as NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration).

Benedick implies that the discussions about ozone have led to stronger relationships between various international environmental groups. Ozone Action, an organization based in the US, has done its part in raising public awareness of this issue. However, there has been somewhat limited participation from NGOs in developing countries in these dialogues.

Introduction: All nations are grappling with ecological issues such as pollution of air, water, and land along with municipal waste disposal problems. These countries have identified the roots of these difficulties and are resolved to confront them depending on their seriousness and commitment levels.

The following segments will present a comprehensive exploration on these topics. Two major worldwide environmental issues being emphasized are:

Global Warming

and

Ozone Depletion
.
Generally, developing countries often focus more on immediate challenges such as water supply, air pollution, land degradation, deforestation and others. On the other hand, developed countries tend to show greater concern for global environmental crises like global warming and ozone depletion.

The term Global Warming* is defined as the slow rise in worldwide temperatures caused by the effects of greenhouse gases (GHGs).

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the chief greenhouse

gas, accompanied by others such as nitrous oxide, methane, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and specific organochloride compounds like perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulphuric fluoride. Predominantly emitted through burning fossil fuels, these gases possess the capability to ensnare sunlight in our planet's atmosphere, leading to a temperature elevation often referred to as global warming or the greenhouse effect. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) anticipates a potential surge of 1-3 degrees C in worldwide temperatures over the forthcoming decades.

It is widely accepted that climate change, driven by global warming, leads to severe weather patterns including potential hurricanes. This poses a significant worry for Insurance Companies in developed nations as they could face losses of $50 billion from a single hurricane occurring in the USA. The Rio conference on climate change committed to maintaining greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by the close of the 20th century due to the grave impacts of global warming and related climatic shifts.

Through the application of computer models, scientists analyze variations in climate due to greenhouse gases. The dependability of such models is frequently disputed, creating skepticism regarding the theory that climate change stems from global warming. That being said, there exists a unanimous agreement among scientists on three key aspects: (i) authentic warming has occurred over the last century; (ii) an increase by twofold in CO2 levels would lead to a temperature rise between 3-5 degrees Celsius on Earth; and (iii) continued warming will result in increasing sea-levels which will notably impact coastal regions.

A temperature increase between 3-50C could potentially instigate a sea level rise of 0.5 to 5.0 feet due to the melting of mountain

glaciers and ocean expansion. This situation could cause islands like Maldives that are low-lying, to get submerged and might also lead to potential flooding in numerous coastal cities resulting in resident evacuation. These evacuated individuals may be forced into becoming environmental refugees looking for new places to live. Besides the surge in water levels, global warming is anticipated to provoke other changes such as severe summers globally, which would subsequently escalate electricity usage.

Global warming's harmful effect on agriculture and ecological equilibrium is substantial. In 1992, at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, a climate change convention was endorsed by 153 countries to confront this problem. These nations pledged to decrease CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases (GHGs), emphasizing their collective recognition of global warming's severity. Rather than embracing an inactive approach, it's essential to stimulate initiatives aimed at lessening fossil fuel usage through investigation of alternative renewable energy resources, enhancing energy administration plans, and halting deforestation.

It is widely acknowledged that coal combustion emits double the amount of CO2 per heat unit compared to natural gas. This necessitates the regulation of CO2 emissions from coal usage, which can be achieved through the exploitation of alternative energy sources such as wind and solar power. Despite comprising only 6% of the global population, the United States contributes to one-fourth of worldwide CO2 emissions. Consequently, there is a significant onus on this nation to diminish these emissions and devise innovative energy plans. A suggested method includes employing existing technology for coal purification.

The reduction of pollution could be achieved by transforming coal into gas and prioritizing natural gas over coal due to

its lower carbon content and lack of sulphur. Other credible methods for reducing CO2 emissions and pollution involve renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and photovoltaic power (which is a process that turns sunlight into electricity). These sources generate little to no pollution and do not pose safety threats. The creation of fuel-efficient vehicles is also a critical approach. An additional key initiative is reversing deforestation, which can reduce CO2 levels but necessitates cooperation among social, political, and economic sectors. After the Rio Summit, climate negotiators gathered in Geneva in December 1992 to plan subsequent meetings. A team tasked with addressing financial, procedural, institutional, and legal matters was set up to convene before a GEF conference in Beijing in March 1993.

The Intergovernmental Negotiation Committee (INC) met six times after the Rio Summit to prepare for the first conference of parties (CoP1) and completed its work by February 1995. By the end of March 1995, 127 countries and the EU had ratified the climate convention. Saudi Arabia, which had not yet signed the convention, and other members of OPEC, who feared that a stronger convention would result in carbon emission cuts and taxes on oil consumption, were able to delay substantive work of the INC until August 1993. The delay was due to their search for cheaper alternatives.

Following the EU decision in 1990 to stabilize carbon dioxide emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000, industrialized countries began searching for the most cost-effective methods to achieve their reductions. It was during the June 1991 INC-2 meeting that the Norwegian Government initially introduced the concept of joint implementation (JI). Further discussions on

JI took place during the eight, ninth, and tenth INCs, as well as at COP-1 in Berlin. The CoP 1 agenda focused on three main issues: assessing the adequacy of commitments made by industrialized countries to reduce carbon emissions, establishing the financial mechanism, and determining criteria for JI.

On the periphery, discussions between environmentalists and oil and coal lobbyists revolved around the gravity of climate change threats and if any steps should be implemented to counteract it. Regardless of the prevalent low anticipation, CoP 1 was unexpectedly considered acceptable by environmental enthusiasts, conversely being described as a catastrophe by the oil and coal advocates. Post-CoP 1, Kyoto Protocol's CoP 2 decided to organize CoP 3 in Kyoto in December 1997 targeting to finalize a protocol concerning greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

At the Kyoto conference, the United States declared their plan to keep their emissions steady at 1990 levels by 2010. Contrastingly, the European Union, G77 and China called for a cut of 15% beneath the 1990 levels. The USA foresaw this demand and had readied various market-oriented emission trading