The Stockholm Declaration of 1972, or the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, was the first United Nations declaration on the global environment. It consists of 26 principles and led to the creation of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), which laid the foundation for future global environmental governance.United Nations Conference on the Human Environment. Encyclopædia Britannica. Accessed 17 March 2022.United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm 1972. United Nations. Accessed 3 March 2022. The United Nations Conference on the Human Environment was held in Stockholm, Sweden, from 5 to 16 June 1972. The 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment signifies the first international effort to place environmental issues at the forefront of global concerns.Stockholm Declaration of 1972 Broadly Recognizes Global Environmental Issues. Environment & Society Portal. Accessed March 17, 2022. The conference sought to recognize the finite nature of Earth's resources and human impacts on the environment. It represented the beginning of a global dialogue on the link between economic growth, environmental pollution, and the well-being of humanity. The Stockholm Declaration urged the signatory nations to reduce air, land, and water degradation by integrating science and technology in their development plans. It also called on nations to create regulations on wildlife protection, environmental conservation, and population control. While the reception of the ideas in the Declaration were generally positive, it received criticisms on its practical implementation, especially from developing nations.
History Background During the Cold War of the 1960s, Sweden was not a NATO member, but due to its geography, it was particularly vulnerable to environmental problems. These accumulating factors motivated Sweden to propose the Stockholm Conference in 1967.Chasek, Pamela. Stockholm and the Birth of Environmental Diplomacy. International Institute for Sustainable Development. Last modified 10 September 2020. 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 were concerned that developing countries might use the conference to garner more financial support from formal colonial powers. Developing countries were also wary that Northern countries' interests would control the discussions, and use environmental issues to hinder their economic development.
In December 1968, the United Nations General Assembly agreed to convene in 1972 with the adoption of Resolution 2398(XXIII). One of the primary aims was to establish a declaration on the human environment.Handl, Günther. "Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm Declaration), 1972 and the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, 1992." United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law (2012). https://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ha/dunche/dunche_e.pdf The declaration was 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".Sohn, Louis B. "Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment". Harvard International Law Journal 14, no. 3 (Summer 1973): 423–515. 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. The Application of Science and Technology to Development, the U.N. Advisory Committee, and the Secretary General seconded this notion, and the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council endorsed the Secretary-General's recommendation.
Creation and drafting In 1971, General Assembly Resolution 2581 created a 27-nation preparatory committee, 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 in a recommendation by the Secretary-General. 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", and to be easily comprehensible by the public as a means for education, public awareness, and community participation to protect the environment. 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.
Initially, the Working Group drafted a preamble and 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." In response to the feedback, the Group created a new document with a preamble and 23 principles. This draft was presented at the Conference without further discussion in the committee.
Presentation at the Conference
The debate at the Stockholm Conference was headed by Maurice F. Strong, the former President of the Canadian International Development Agency. 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. 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. They argued that developed nations exploited the greatest amount of resources and contributed most of the pollution to the global environment. In contrast, developing countries suffered the burden of a degrading environment, debt, and economic underdevelopment. The Global South countries argued that the Global North should bear most of the responsibility in environmental protection. Furthermore, some countries asserted that they reserved the right to alter the text, as they were not included in the preparatory process.
Following the debate, China requested a Working Group. They proposed that in order to solve environmental issues, developing countries needed to develop their economies, and to industrialize to improve productivity. This notion was amended by Iran. The Conference created a working group, which resulted in a series of amendment requests. 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.
Result The draft resolution was adopted by 103 votes to none, with 12 abstentions from South Africa and the Soviet bloc. On 15 December 15 1972 the General Assembly adopted the text under Resolution 2994 with 112 votes to none, and 10 abstentions. The Declaration was not altered in the Assembly to preserve the agreement achieved at Stockholm.
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. 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.
Implementation While the reception of the Declaration was generally positive, there was some criticism about the practicality of its implementation. All countries agreed on the proposal during the Conference but many failed to continue implementing their formulated promises.Panjabi, Ranee Khooshie Lal. "From Stockholm to Rio: A Comparison of the Declaratory Principles of International Environmental Law." Denver Journal of International Law and Policy 21, no. 2 (1993): 215-287. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1764&context=djilp A year after the Stockholm Conference, it was recognised that better implementation of the declaration required technological, industrial and economic changes globally.Strong, Maurice F. 1973. “One Year after Stockholm: An Ecological Approach to Management.” Foreign Affairs 51 (4): 690. .
Tony Brenton and Maurice Strong highlighted the implications for nation-states within the international system, noting that states would not easily forgo their sovereignty and enter collective agreements with other nations, making international environmental action difficult. Tony Brenton argued that nations are preoccupied with promoting their own interests rather than preserving the commons.Breitmeier, Helmut. "Stockholm, Rio and Beyond: Lessons from Two Decades of International Environmental Politics: Editorial Review/Essay." Climatic Change 32, no. 1 (1996): 1-6. This idea of the nation-state has affected the outcomes of environmental agreements throughout history.
The implementation varied from country to country, for many reasons, with developing countries requiring facilitation and access to innovative technology, which was only possible through cooperation with more developed countries. To achieve the solutions outlined in the conference, a more international cooperative attitude was required. Additionally, the implementation of the Stockholm Declaration encouraged both developed and developing nations to increase their pursuit of new directions for economic growth, and especially approaches that were less energy-intensive, less dependent on non-renewable resources and more focused on reusing and recycling.
The implementation was also challenged by a lack of funding. The UNEP is a UN Programme established after the Stockholm Declaration to coordinate and promote environmental cooperation. However, UNEP was forced to rely on voluntary financial contributions from a few countries. Funding is limited and inconsistent. UNEP's 2010 annual budget was only $217 million, compared with $4 billion for the World Food Programme and nearly $4.8 billion for the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).Linnér, Björn-Ola and Henrik Selin. "The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development: Forty Years in the Making." Environment and Planning. C, Government & Policy 31, no. 6 (2013): 971-987. https://people.bu.edu/selin/publications/LinnerSelinEPC2013.pdf
On the positive side, the implementation of the Stockholm Conference led to the creation of an action plan that consisted of three pillars. Firstly, an Earthwatch Programme to identify problems of international significance to warn against impending environmental crises; second, recommendations concerning environmental management; lastly, supporting measures such as education, training and public information. The implementation also resulted in the enactment of three international conventions, in London and Washington D.C. which dealt with environmental issues such as waste dumping in oceans, preservation of heritage sites and limiting international trade in certain wildlife species.
Implementation in specific regions
The European Union