Few events in world history have had a greater influence in reshaping man’s view of the physical world and his place in it than the UN Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm in June 1972. The almost pleading theme of the official book released on the occasion, Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet, belied its potential to impact global future on the scale it did.

As we celebrate the golden jubilee of the Conference this year, it is worth going over the genesis of the Conference and its message. India, in particular, has much reason to look back at the Conference with pride as the country’s stand on human life and the environment left a lasting impression on international green exchanges that were to follow.

The end of World War II in 1945 saw the end of colonialism too and the birth of numerous sovereign states with myriad problems and high aspirations. In the two decades that followed, the erstwhile colonial masters had not only recovered from the ravages of the War but could also restart their growth process and economic and trade diplomacy in full swing. The United Nations provided a common forum for the rich-poor exchanges of needs on one hand and assistance on the other.

Realising their inadequacy to engage themselves effectively in such exchanges, the newly arrived independent nations clubbed together and came to be called the Third World or the developing world. Stockholm gave the Third World a large forum to voice its concerns and expectations, an opportunity it never had before. In the years to come, the Third World with its banner ‘G-77 + China’, became a force to reckon with not only in environmental matters but also on many other issues as well.

Strange it may seem, the idea of a forum like Stockholm which offered much to the poor had its origins in the developed world. The heady development of the West powered by coal and oil and profligate natural resource use since the Industrial Revolution became a mixed blessing for it as its economic growth was accompanied by a fall in environmental quality.

Dumping of toxic waste

The situation became all too noticeable and unbearable following wilful dumping of toxic industrial wastes on land or into the aquatic environment as happened in the US and Japan. Incidents such as these, topped by the Great London Smog of 1952, confirmed the view that economic development with high resource and fossil fuel energy use would, if unchecked, lead to a fall in environmental quality. Publications like ‘The Limits to Growth’ commissioned by the Club of Rome forecast resource scarcity in the oncoming decades.

Behind the overt concern for an international gathering to devote attention to resource exhaustion, pollution and planetary health, there was also a covert one. If the newly independent nations were to follow a similar growth path as the rich, there would be a race for global mineral and material resources with its adverse impact on western economies.

Hence, the thesis ran that as the developed world moved ahead in its usual, expansive ways, the developing nations should concentrate their attention on basic issues like relieving their people of hunger and malnutrition and providing them with housing, sanitation, drinking water and education rather than attempt to emulate the industrialised nations. No wonder, fear spread among the poor nations that they were condemned to remain poor in the name of environmental protection. Hence, apprehensions arose that the exchanges at Stockholm, unless guided deftly, would see more confrontation than agreement.

Such a situation was averted thanks to two factors. One was the decision to hold a brainstorming of experts at Founex in Switzerland in April 1971, almost a year in advance of Stockholm, to identify the issues that confronted the poor and the rich nations having due regard to their stages of economic development. Pitambar Pant, a Member of India’s Planning Commission, represented India on the Panel.

In its report, the Founex Panel considered environmental improvement not in isolation but in a broader context of economic development, international trade and finance and technology transfer. It made a strong plea for additional aid flows to developing countries to help them address their environmental concerns and not to erect trade barriers to their exports based on uncommonly high environmental standards. The Report concluded that a level-playing field should be accorded to developing countries in global environmental exchanges.

One of the highlights of the Stockholm Conference was the stirring address by India’s then Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi. She cautioned that the poor environmental conditions in developing countries were due to lack of economic development unlike the situation in the rich nations and hence “Environment cannot be improved in conditions of poverty.”

The comprehensive ‘Declaration on the Human Environment’ that embodied the Stockholm conclusions began with the words, “Man is both the creature and moulder of his environment… Both aspects of man’s environment, the natural and manmade, are essential to his well-being and to the enjoyment of basic human rights — even the right to life itself”. A careful observer would notice that the Declaration accepted the fact of man having the need to modify the natural environment and that some interference with the natural environment was in man’s interest. This balanced view taken at Stockholm is generally missed by those who preach a hands-off approach to nature opposing all and any development activity.

The Stockholm Declaration contained 26 Principles which looked at man’s environmental concerns against the background of economics, equity, freedom, fund flows and ease of access to knowledge and technology. Of much interest to India and other developing countries was Principle 11 which stated that the “present or future development potential of developing countries should not be adversely affected by the environmental policies of [developed] states”.

Stockholm was a grand spectacle. It was also a success story for the developing countries. It showed how a free exchange of views and willingness to negotiate with the assistance of neutral facilitators can help forge international agreement on vital issues.

One cannot refrain oneself from expressing the wish that a second Stockholm, say in 2025, may be in order to take stock of the progress made by countries under Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). India may offer to host the Conference as that would provide an opportunity to India to showcase its sustainable development efforts and how it has redeemed the Stockholm pledge.

The writer is a former Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change