Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment

Amid the Cold War in the 1960s, neutral Sweden was not a NATO member.[4] Due to its geography and increasing pollution issues, it was particularly vulnerable to environmental problems. These cumulating factors motivated Sweden to propose the Stockholm Conference in 1967. In addition, during this time period when countries were at war and decolonizing themselves, international cooperation was crucial.[5] In spite of the ongoing politics, the Soviet Union, the other members of the Eastern bloc, most Western European countries, and the United States all supported Sweden's proposal. However, the United Kingdom and France in particular were concerned that developing countries may use the conference as means to garner more financial support from formal colonial powers. Developing countries were also wary that Northern countries' interests would control the discussions and weaponize environmental issues to hinder their economic development.[5]

In December 1968, the United Nations General Assembly agreed to convene in 1972 through the adoption of Resolution 2398(XXIII), with one of the primary aims being to establish a declaration on the human environment.[5][6] Such a document is based on the proposal by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to create a "Universal Declaration on the Protection and Preservation of the Human Environment".[7] This declaration can be traced to the Intergovernmental Conference of Experts on the Scientific Basis for Rational Use and Conservation of the Resources of the Biosphere, which was convened in Paris by UNESCO in September 1968.[8] Promptly, the Application of Science and Technology to Development, the U.N. Advisory Committee, and the Secretary General seconded this notion. Finally, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council endorsed the Secretary-General's recommendation.

In 1971, General Assembly Resolution 2581 effectively created a 27-nation Preparatory Committee for the Conference, whose goal was to produce a declaration concerning the "rights and obligations of citizens and Governments with regard to the preservation and improvement of the human environment" as outlined by a recommendation by the Secretary-General.[7] The Conference Secretariat, Maurice Strong, was responsible for the preparation and organization of the Conference.

An Intergovernmental Working Group was established in the Committee's second session. The consensus was for the Declaration to be "inspirational and concise", in addition to being easily comprehensible by the public to act as a means for education, public awareness, and community participation to protect the environment.[7] The members of the Committee agreed that the Declaration should only list "broad goals and objectives", and the Conference should adopt an in-depth action program outlined by supporting documents.[7]

Initially, the Working Group drafted a preamble in addition to 17 fundamental principles. This initial draft faced heavy criticism from the Preparatory Committee due to the view that the draft was an instrument to promote "restrictive, anti-developmental and 'conservationist' policies."[7] In response to the feedback, the Group created a new document of a preamble and 23 principles. This draft was presented at the Conference without further discussion in the Committee.

Delegates rode bicycles in Stockholm, here lead by Maurice Strong.

The debate at the Stockholm Conference was headed by Maurice F. Strong, the former President of the Canadian International Development Agency.[7] In the general debate, many speakers highlighted the significance of the Declaration and several, including Strong, rallied for the adoption of the Declaration without further changes to preserve the agreements reached in pre-Conference consultation sessions.[7] However, while some speakers were willing to accept the draft, they also highlighted the text's lack of attention to developing nations' needs. Developing countries stressed that developed nations should not use environmental concerns as an excuse for imposing development restrictions.[4] They argued that developed nations exploited the greatest amount of resources and contributed most of the pollution to the global environment.[4] In contrast, developing countries suffered the burden of a degrading environment, debt, and economic backwardness. Thus, the Global South argued that the Global North should bear most of the responsibility in environmental protection.[4] Furthermore, some countries asserted that they reserve the right to alter the text, as they were not included in the preparatory progress.[4]

Following the debate, China requested a Working Group. They proposed that in order to solve environmental issues, developing countries need to develop their economy, technology, and industrialize to improve productivity. This notion was amended by Iran.[7] The Conference created this group, resulting in a series of amendment requests.[4] After an all-night session and under the leadership of Taieb Slim, T. C. Bacon, Hans Blix, along with Strong and his associates, a final draft was formed on the last day of the Conference.[7]

A debate held by Maurice Strong saw opposition and reservation from certain countries. The Committee proceeded with a draft resolution, which was adopted by 103 votes to none, with 12 abstentions from South Africa and the Soviet bloc.[7] On December 15, 1972, the General Assembly adopted the text under Resolution 2994 with 112 votes to none, and 10 abstentions.[7] The Declaration was not altered in the Assembly to preserve the agreement achieved at Stockholm.[7]

A major topic at the Conference was institutional expansion, which came to reality with the creation of the United Nations Environmental Program by General Assembly Resolution 2997.[4] Under the Action Plan, Earthwatch was established as an environmental assessment body to measure and identify global environmental issues as well as to forecast potential crises.[7]

The principles and goals set at the Stockholm Conference provided a higher standard for the European Council to combat environmental issues. In the Paris Summit 1972, the Heads of State and of Government acknowledged the theme of the Stockholm Conference that became the origin of the community environmental policy in Europe and led to the establishment of the Environmental Unit (predecessor of the Directorate-General for Environment).[12]

On 22 November 1973, the Council of Ministers approved the first four-year Environment Action Programme (1973-1976) in Europe to "reduce pollution and nuisances; improve the environment and quality of life; and promote common community action by member states, in international organizations dealing with the environment".[12]

China, as a new joint of the United Nations in October 1971, became an "indispensable stakeholder in global environmental governance" since the Stockholm Conference 1972.[13] After the Stockholm Conference, China held its first national environmental conference in 1973. After the Cultural Revolution, China held its second national environmental protection conference to strengthen its environmental management and pollution treatment in 1983. China also established the China Council for the International Cooperation on Environment and Development (CCICED) to actively promote international environmental cooperation.[13]

The Stockholm Declaration has an undeniable impact on the subsequent international environmental treaties, as it is the first major international treaty that framed environmental issues as global issues. Principle 21, which outlines states' sovereign rights to exercise in their territories and their responsibilities to prevent transboundary harm, serves as the legal core to the document.[14]

As the first attempt to achieve global consensus, experts like Brenton consider the majority of the Declaration to be "useless for legal purposes" because of its vagueness.[11] Most of the Declaration, apart from Principle 21, was written as policy statements rather than in legal language.[14] The Declaration is also not legally binding by nature, and it was considered as a soft law at the international level. In addition, while many legal treaties formed secretariats and organizations to oversee compliance and implementation, the UNEP as an institution failed to do so with its lack of funding and enforcement mechanisms. Consequently, states are not obligated nor motivated to follow up on the agreement met at the Conference.[14]

The ongoing political and ideological rivalry between the US and USSR and their respective allies continues to overshadow the tension in the international environment during the Stockholm Conference in 1972. The Cold War started in 1947 and the relationship between the US and the USSR continued to exacerbate.[15] Sweden and other supporters of the conference hoped to use preparations for it to build bridges within a deeply fractured UN and viewed the Cold War from a position of political neutrality.[4] It saw transboundary issues around environmental pollution as a potential catalyst of cooperation and could help boost the global importance of the UN.[4] Even though the Soviet Union and the United States had supported the proposal during discussions in the UN General Assembly, the Geneva-based secretariat preparing the meeting often had to strike a delicate balance between east and west.[4] However, on March 7, 1972, the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia boycotted the opening of the final United Nations preparatory session for the conference to be held in Stockholm in June.[16] The disagreement around the participation of East Germany and West Germany – neither country a UN member state at the time – resulted in a boycott by the Soviet Union and most Warsaw Pact nations in the Eastern Bloc.[17] As a member of several United Nations agencies, West Germany was invited. Still, East Germany was not invited because it has not become a United Nations body member.[18] The USSR and its alliance were dissatisfied with the ineligibility of East Germany to participate in the Stockholm Conference.

Developing countries including India, Nigeria, and Brazil expressed both embracements of the environmental actions and concerns for potential hindrance on economic development.[4] Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi asserted that "poverty is the worst form of pollution", encompassing a discursive framework that pitted Northern environmentalism against Southern development commitment that remain a prominent theme for the next forty years.[4] Brazil believed that some environmental degradation should be allowed in developing nations for economic growth.[4] The delegates of Brazil emphasized that the Western industrialized countries should have taken the responsibility to address environmental issues, and no measures that restrict trade in the name of the environment, such as environmental requirements that make goods more expensive, should be imposed.[4] While discussing the need to inform other countries about ecological disasters, Brazil criticized any principles that can potentially violate national sovereignty. Brazilian delegates also believed that the United Nations had placed too much emphasis on emerging issues such as the environment, oceans, and space, which distracts the UN from its central role in peacemaking and economic development, especially in the Global South.[4]

The Stockholm Conference was met with protests from a variety of groups such as scientists concerned with population growth, and also the more radical alternative groups that had their own environmental campaigns and agendas.[17] These protests were not disruptive or violent, but their presence suggested that some non-state participants were not aligned with the mainstream values and processes of the conference itself. These protests also set the norm for alternative environmental ideologies and countercultural beliefs that could co-exist with conventional models of development such as the Stockholm Conference.[17]

Between June 3 and 14, 1992, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) met in Rio De Janeiro to reaffirm and build onto the UN Conference on the Human Environment.[19] Given that the Stockholm Conference had previously set the standard for future international environmental conferences, the Rio Declaration adopted three of the documents drafted in the Stockholm Declaration.[20] For example, Principle 21 from the Declaration was modified and adopted into a customary international environmental law in the Rio Declaration (initially known as the Earth Charter). The aim of the Rio Declaration, which was a step forward from the Stockholm Declaration, was to create, clarify, and rearticulate principles that states can incorporate into their domestic legislation.[20] The goal was that if enough states included the Declaration domestically, it might lead to the Declaration transforming into international law norms.[20]

From June 2 to 3, 2022, an international environmental meeting will be held again in Stockholm, Sweden.[21] Under the theme, "Stockholm+50: a healthy planet for the prosperity of all – our responsibility, our opportunity," this conference will commemorate the first United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, and "celebrate 50 years of global environmental action."[21]