PCCA: Rio+20 reaffirms ICPD but shies away from population and reproductive rights

20 June 2012

Yesterday UN member states reached consensus in the Rio+20 negotiations. From the perspective of the Population and Climate Change Alliance (PCCA) which called for the summit to address the critical linkages between population, sexual and reproductive health and rights and sustainability, Rio+20 has delivered some wins for women and sustainability, but there have also been failures.

Considering the point of departure; not a single reference to sexual and reproductive health and rights in the zero draft outcome document, we can celebrate the good language on sexual and reproductive health, and the reaffirmation of the International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action of (ICPD PoA). But on the other hand, the consensus document fails to recognize both reproductive rights and the critical relationship between population dynamics, sexual and reproductive health and rights, gender equality and sustainable development.

Below we provide an overview of these issues in relation to The future we want.

The highs and the lows

References to sexual and reproductive health and rights are mostly found in the ‘Health and population’ and the ‘Gender equality and women’s empowerment’ sections in Chapter five covering cross-cutting issues.

The highs:

• The ICPD PoA is reaffirmed in three places (paras 16, 145 and 241), perhaps most importantly in section II (para 16) which reaffirms various international agreements, although its implementation is only reaffirmed the once (para 241).
  
• The need for integration of reproductive health in national strategies and programmes is emphasized.
  
• The language on gender equality and women’s empowerment is generally good in the text, and much improved from the zero draft.
  
• With reference to the full and effective implementation of the Beijing Platform of Action and the ICPD PoA the text includes in para 145 “promotion and protection of all human rights in this context.”
• This text (para 146); “We will work actively to ensure that health systems provide the necessary information and health services addressing the sexual and reproductive health of women, including towards universal access to safe, effective, affordable and acceptable modern methods of family planning, as this is essential for women’s health and advancing gender equality."

 The lows: 

• There is no reference to reproductive rights in the text. While this is disappointing, ‘reproductive rights’ have not been recognized within the context of any conference or commission on sustainable development. This is of particular concern in relation to the post-2015 international development framework, and as governments gear up for ICPD+20.
• There is no recognition of the importance of the connection between population dynamics, reproductive health and sustainable development. The only remaining reference to population dynamics / trends in the ‘Health and Population’ section is para 144: "We commit to systematically consider population trends and projections in our national, rural and urban development strategies and policies. Through forward looking planning, we can seize the opportunities and address the challenges associated with demographic change, including migration."
  
• ‘Gender equality and women’s empowerment’ is one of the very last sections.
  
  

How the negotiations unfolded

In the end, the negotiations came to a close very quickly, with the Brazilians keen to secure an outcome document from what had been extremely slow and difficult negotiations.

It seems that the Brazilians who put the last negotiation draft together took the decision at the last minute not to include reference to reproductive rights, despite according to various sources having promised to.

In contrast to recent negotiations on the Commission on Population and Development, the EU did not split in the Rio negotiations. And as Malta and Poland do not support reproductive rights, nor did the EU. The G77, with over 130 countries, has never had a shared position. The G77 did split in the negotiations and in what seemed to be a coordinated effort, all the well-known anti-SRHR countries spoke out against reproductive rights. Throughout the negotiations the Holy See had been vocal in opposing text relating to to both SRHR and population dynamics. Only a few Latin American countries spoke in support of reproductive rights while the African and Asian countries were almost completely silent.

It was clear that delegations lacked SRHR experts in the negotiations and that this had a very negative impact on the SRHR outcome.

The SDGs and looking forward to post-2015

The final outcome document sets out a process for the establishment of a set of Sustainable Development Goals, but unlike previous drafts does not suggest specific themes or cross-cutting issues.

On the SDGs:

• "The goals should address and incorporate in a balanced way all three dimensions of sustainable development and their interlinkages. They should be coherent with and integrated into the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015, thus contributing to the achievement of sustainable development and serving as a driver for implementation and mainstreaming of sustainable development in the Nations system as a whole. The development of these goals should not divert focus or effort from the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals" (para 246).
  
• An open working group will be constituted no later than the opening of the 67th session of the UN General Assembly that shall comprise thirty representatives, nominated by Member States through the five UN regional groups. 
• This group is to; "ensure the full involvement of relevant stakeholders and expertise from civil society, the scientific community and the UN system in its work. It will submit a report to the 68th session of the UNGA containing a proposal for sustainable development goals for consideration and appropriate action" (para 248).
  
• No specific goals, targets and time frameworks were decided upon, but para 247 states that the goals;  "should be action oriented, concise and easy to communicate, limited in number, aspirational, global in nature and universally applicable to all countries while taking into account different national realities, capacities and levels of development and respecting national policies and priorities. We also recognize that the goals should address and be focused on priority areas for the achievement of of sustainable development, being guided by the present outcome document."

It is still the intention that the SDGs and the MDGs should be  integrated post 2015. How this will happen is more uncertain but one thing is sure; SRHR advocates must address the shortcomings of Rio+20 and integrate gender equality and women’s empowerment, sexual and reproductive health and rights, and human rights-based consideration of population dynamics as cross-cutting issues that are central to a sustainable future.

The PCCA at Rio+20

The PCCA had a strong presence at the Rio+20 summit, with the member organisations Blue Ventures Madagascar, IPPF, PAI, PATH Foundation Philippines Inc., PHE Ethiopia Consortium, RFSU, Sex & Samfund, as well as PSN, all represented at the summit.

The alliance had a visible impact on the final document, particularly the inclusionof a ‘Population and Health section’ originally proposed by the alliance, and containing some of our recommendations.

We held a successful side-event Population, rights and sustainability: voices from the Global South and PCCA was busy throughout the informal negotiations in the run-up to the summit, seeking to influence the outcome of the summit.

Further information

To stay up to date and share infomation about the latest Rio+20 developments relating to population and SRHR  issues you could join the PCCA Rio+20 egroup. Contact Sarah Fisher if you are interested in joining.

Read more about the PCCA,  our call for Rio+20 and our publication Why talk about population and reproductive rights at Rio+20?