World Economic Strategy by Kh Atiar Rahman

There is no denying the fact that before the emergence of the concept of ‘sustainable development’, the development issue of the Southern countries was raised several times in international environmental conferences. In the world’s first major environmental conference, in Stockholm in 1972, the Northern environmental alarm was not shared universally. The main emphasis of the developing countries was their economic growth, not pollution. Indian Prime Minister Indira Ghandi emphasised that poverty was the principal problem confronting India, not pollution. The South was much concerned about possible pressure by the West to slow down their economic growth and impose environmentally motivated restrictions on aid, investment or trade policies. They gave emphasis on their sovereignty and the right to choose their own path of economic development. The North wanted to emphasise the issues of marine pollution, over consumption and global population, but on the insistence of the South, global poverty and aid issue were also included in the agenda. Both the North and South were almost divided on the question of development. However they were successful to reach an agreement about the creation of the United Nations Environmental Programme UNEP, to work as a unit on the environment within the existing UN structure. In order to meet the concern of the developing countries it was given a large governing council and after some argument it was sited in Nairobi. As has been mentioned, the Brundtland report of 1987 provided the concept of ‘sustainable development’, which gave emphasis on economic development and environment together to sustain the growth. I will therefore now focus on some other important environmental conferences to see the North-South position in those conferences.Before the Montreal Protocol it was the believe among the scientists that the chlorofluorocarbons were the main cause of ozone depletion. Developing countries concerns had been of marginal significance in the Montreal negotiation. It was thought that the developing countriesconsumption of CFCs was small (less than one twentieth per capita of developed country consumption). A small number of developing countrieswere present at the early sessions of the conference. The provision written into the protocol therefore to gain their adherence was the right to a ten year delay in phasing out CFCs by developing countries. Some highly unspecified references to their demand of financial and technical assistance was also made. As the consumption of CFCs was growing rapidly in some developing countries (particularly in China and India,) it was thought that if the threat to ozone layer really to be tackled, the developingcountries must form part of the effort. By the end of 1989, only 21 developing countries had signed the protocol. The important developingcountries were making it clear that they would only get involved in this process if the North would provide the extra finance and technology for their industries with CFC substitute. This demand raised conflict between the North and the South.

This North-South tension was dominant up to the 1990 London meeting scheduled to review the Montreal Protocol. In London, it was extremely tense contest between North and the South on these financial issues. The South was trying to get the best possible financial and technological terms, while on the other hand, the North was trying to get the South on board without vast financial and technological commitments. The final result was the agreement to establish a new fund, initially of 160-240 million US$ to be contributed by the North for use by the South. The Northern companies also assured the south about the substitute technology which would be transferred later on. All the major developing countries consequently later joine