Declaration of the

United Nations
Conference on the
Human
Environment

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.[1][2] 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.[3][2] The conference sought to recognize the finite nature
of Earth's resources and human impacts on the environment.[3] It
represented the beginning of a global dialogue on the link between
economic growth, environmental pollution, and the well-being of
humanity.[3] The Stockholm Declaration urged the signatory nations to
reduce air, land, and water degradation by integrating science and
technology in their development plans.[3] It also called on nations to create
regulations on wildlife protection, environmental conservation, and
population control.[3] While the reception of the ideas in the Declaration
were generally positive, it received criticisms on its practical
implementation, especially from developing nations.

The Stockholm Declaration

Declaration of the United Nations
Conference on the Human
Environment

Type Environmental
Law

Drafted 5–16 June 1972

Location Stockholm,
Sweden

Signatories 114 countries

History

Background
During the Cold War of the 1960s, Sweden was not a NATO member,[4]
but due to its geography, it was particularly vulnerable to environmental
problems. These accumulating factors motivated Sweden to propose the
Stockholm Conference in 1967.[5] 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.[5]

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.[5][6] 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".[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] 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.[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", and to be easily comprehensible by the public
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 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."[7] 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
Delegates rode bicycles in Stockholm,
here led 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 underdevelopment. The Global South
countries argued that the Global North should bear most of the
responsibility in environmental protection.[4] Furthermore, some countries
asserted that they reserved the right to alter the text, as they were not
included in the preparatory process.[4]

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.[7] The Conference created a working
group, which resulted 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]
Result
The draft resolution was adopted by 103 votes to none, with 12
abstentions from South Africa and the Soviet bloc.[7] On 15 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]

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.[9] A year after the Stockholm
Conference, it was recognised that better implementation of the
declaration required technological, industrial and economic changes
globally.[9][10]
The logo of United Nations
Environmental Programme

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.[10] Tony Brenton
argued that nations are preoccupied with promoting their own interests
rather than preserving the commons.[11] This idea of the nation-state has
affected the outcomes of environmental agreements throughout
history.[11]

The implementation varied from country to country, for many reasons,[10]

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.[10] 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.[10]

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).[4]

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.[10] 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.[10]

Implementation in specific
regions

The European Union

The principles and goals set at the Stockholm Conference provided a
higher standard for the European Council to combat environmental issues.
At the Paris Summit 1972, the Heads of State and of Governments
acknowledged the theme of the Stockholm Conference. This 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
China, which joined the United Nations in October 1971, became an
"indispensable stakeholder in global environmental governance" after the
Stockholm Conference 1972.[13] China held its first national environmental
conference in 1973, and its second national environmental protection
conference to strengthen environmental management and pollution
treatment in 1983. China also established the Council for the International
Cooperation on Environment and Development (CCICED) to promote
international environmental cooperation.[13]

Further discussions

International environmental
law
The Stockholm Declaration had a clear impact on subsequent international
environmental treaties, as it was 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, 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 failed to do so due to a lack of funding and enforcement
mechanisms. Consequently, states are not obligated to follow up on the
agreement made at the Conference.[14]

Cold War US-Soviet rivalry:

The USSR and Eastern Bloc
boycott
The ongoing political and ideological rivalry between the US and USSR and
their respective allies continued to overshadow the tension in the
international environment during the Stockholm Conference in 1972. The
Cold War started in 1947.[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 for cooperation that 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 had to
strike a delicate balance between east and west.[4] On 7 March 1972, the
Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia boycotted the opening of the final
United Nations preparatory session for the conference.[16] The
disagreement around the participation of East Germany and West
Germany – neither country was a UN member state at the time – also
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. East Germany was not invited because it was
not a United Nations body member.[18]

Developing countries at the

Conference
Developing countries including India, Nigeria, and Brazil embraced the
environmental actions, but noted concerns for potential hindrances 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, to allow for economic growth.[4] Brazil
emphasized that the Western industrialized countries should have taken
the responsibility to address environmental issues, and no measures that
restricted trade in the name of the environment, such as environmental
requirements that would make goods more expensive, should be
imposed.[4] While discussing the need to inform other countries about
ecological disasters, Brazil criticized any principles that could 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 distracted the UN from its
central role in peacemaking and economic development, especially in the
Global South.[4]

Non-State actors at the

Conference
The Stockholm Conference was met with protests from a variety of groups
such as scientists concerned with population growth, and also 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]

Follow up

The Rio Declaration

Between 3 and 14 June 1992, the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (UNCED) met in Rio De Janeiro to reaffirm
and build on 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]

Stockholm+50
From 2 to 3 June 2022, an international environmental meeting was
planned for Stockholm, Sweden.[21] Under the theme, "Stockholm+50 (htt
ps://[Link]/) : a healthy planet for the prosperity of all –
our responsibility, our opportunity," this conference commemorated the
first United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, and
"celebrate 50 years of global environmental action."[21]

Principles of the
Stockholm Declaration
The 26 principles are:[22]

Principle 1

Man has the fundamental right to freedom, equality and adequate

conditions of life, in an environment of a quality that permits a life of
dignity and well-being, and he bears a solemn responsibility to protect and
improve the environment for present and future generations. In this
respect, policies promoting or perpetuating apartheid, racial segregation,
discrimination, colonial and other forms of oppression and foreign
domination stand condemned and must be eliminated.

Principle 2

The natural resources of the earth, including the air, water, land, flora and
fauna and especially representative samples of natural ecosystems, must
be safeguarded for the benefit of present and future generations through
careful planning or management, as appropriate.

Principle 3

The capacity of the earth to produce vital renewable resources must be

maintained and, wherever practicable, restored or improved.

Principle 4

Man has a special responsibility to safeguard and wisely manage the

heritage of wildlife and its habitat, which are now gravely imperilled by a
combination of adverse factors. Nature conservation, including wildlife,
must therefore receive importance in planning for economic development.

Principle 5

The non-renewable resources of the earth must be employed in such a

way as to guard against the danger of their future exhaustion and to
ensure that benefits from such employment are shared by all mankind.

Principle 6

The discharge of toxic substances or of other substances and the release

of heat, in such quantities or concentrations as to exceed the capacity of
the environment to render them harmless, must be halted in order to
ensure that serious or irreversible damage is not inflicted upon
ecosystems. The just struggle of the peoples of ill countries against
pollution should be supported.

Principle 7

States shall take all possible steps to prevent pollution of the seas by
substances that are liable to create hazards to human health, to harm
living resources and marine life, to damage amenities or to interfere with
other legitimate uses of the sea.

Principle 8

Economic and social development is essential for ensuring a favorable

living and working environment for man and for creating conditions on
earth that are necessary for the improvement of the quality of life.

Principle 9

Environmental deficiencies generated by the conditions of under-

development and natural disasters pose grave problems and can best be
remedied by accelerated development through the transfer of substantial
quantities of financial and technological assistance as a supplement to the
domestic effort of the developing countries and such timely assistance as
may be required.

Principle 10

For the developing countries, stability of prices and adequate earnings for
primary commodities and raw materials are essential to environmental
management, since economic factors as well as ecological processes
must be taken into account.

Principle 11

The environmental policies of all States should enhance and not adversely
affect the present or future development potential of developing
countries, nor should they hamper the attainment of better living
conditions for all, and appropriate steps should be taken by States and
international organizations with a view to reaching agreement on meeting
the possible national and international economic consequences resulting
from the application of environmental measures.

Principle 12

Resources should be made available to preserve and improve the

environment, taking into account the circumstances and particular
requirements of developing countries and any costs which may emanate-
from their incorporating environmental safeguards into their development
planning and the need for making available to them, upon their request,
additional international technical and financial assistance for this purpose.

Principle 13

In order to achieve a more rational management of resources and thus to

improve the environment, States should adopt an integrated and
coordinated approach to their development planning so as to ensure that
development is compatible with the need to protect and improve
environment for the benefit of their population.

Principle 14

Rational planning constitutes an essential tool for reconciling any conflict

between the needs of development and the need to protect and improve
the environment.

Principle 15

Planning must be applied to human settlements and urbanization with a

view to avoiding adverse effects on the environment and obtaining
maximum social, economic and environmental benefits for all. In this
respect projects which arc designed for colonialist and racist domination
must be abandoned.

Principle 16

Demographic policies which are without prejudice to basic human rights

and which are deemed appropriate by Governments concerned should be
applied in those regions where the rate of population growth or excessive
population concentrations are likely to have adverse effects on the
environment of the human environment and impede development.

Principle 17

Appropriate national institutions must be entrusted with the task of

planning, managing or controlling the 9 environmental resources of States
with a view to enhancing environmental quality.

Principle 18

Science and technology, as part of their contribution to economic and

social development, must be applied to the identification, avoidance and
control of environmental risks and the solution of environmental problems
and for the common good of mankind.

Principle 19

Education in environmental matters, for the younger generation as well as

adults, giving due consideration to the underprivileged, is essential in
order to broaden the basis for an enlightened opinion and responsible
conduct by individuals, enterprises and communities in protecting and
improving the environment in its full human dimension. It is also essential
that mass media of communications avoid contributing to the deterioration
of the environment, but, on the contrary, disseminate information of an
educational nature on the need to protect and improve the environment in
order to enable man to develop in every respect.

Principle 20

Scientific research and development in the context of environmental

problems, both national and multinational, must be promoted in all
countries, especially the developing countries. In this connection, the free
flow of up-to-date scientific information and transfer of experience must
be supported and assisted, to facilitate the solution of environmental
problems; environmental technologies should be made available to
developing countries on terms which would encourage their wide
dissemination without constituting an economic burden on the developing
countries.

Principle 21

States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the
principles of international law, the sovereign right to exploit their own
resources pursuant to their own environmental policies, and the
responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do
not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond
the limits of national jurisdiction.

Principle 22

States shall cooperate to develop further the international law regarding

liability and compensation for the victims of pollution and other
environmental damage caused by activities within the jurisdiction or
control of such States to areas beyond their jurisdiction.

Principle 23

Without prejudice to such criteria as may be agreed upon by the

international community, or to standards which will have to be determined
nationally, it will be essential in all cases to consider the systems of values
prevailing in each country, and the extent of the applicability of standards
which are valid for the most advanced countries but which may be
inappropriate and of unwarranted social cost for the developing countries.

Principle 24

International matters concerning the protection and improvement of the

environment should be handled in a cooperative spirit by all countries, big
and small, on an equal footing. Cooperation through multilateral or bilateral
arrangements or other appropriate means is essential to effectively
control, prevent, reduce and eliminate adverse environmental effects
resulting from activities conducted in all spheres, in such a way that due
account is taken of the sovereignty and interests of all States.
Principle 25

States shall ensure that international organizations play a coordinated,

efficient and dynamic role for the protection and improvement of the
environment.

Principle 26

Man and his environment must be spared the effects of nuclear weapons
and all other means of mass destruction. States must strive to reach
prompt agreement, in the relevant international organs, on the elimination
and complete destruction of such weapons.

References

1. United Nations Conference on

the Human Environment. (https
://[Link]/topic/U
nited-Nations-Conference-on-
the-Human-Environment)
Encyclopædia Britannica.
Accessed 17 March 2022.
2. United Nations Conference on
the Human Environment,
the Human Environment,
Stockholm 1972. ([Link]
[Link]/en/conferences/environ
ment/stockholm1972) United
Nations. Accessed 3 March
2022.
3. Stockholm Declaration of 1972
Broadly Recognizes Global
Environmental Issues. (https://
[Link].o
rg/tools/keywords/stockholm-d
eclaration-1972-broadly-recog
nizes-global-environmental-iss
ues) Environment & Society
Portal. Accessed March 17,
2022.
4. Linnér, Björn-Ola and Henrik
4. 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.
[Link]
blications/LinnerSelinEPC2013
.pdf
5. Chasek, Pamela. Stockholm
and the Birth of Environmental
Diplomacy. ([Link]
g/articles/stockholm-and-birth
-environmental-diplomacy)
International Institute for
Sustainable Development. Last
Sustainable Development. Last
modified 10 September 2020.
6. 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).
[Link]
dunche/dunche_e.pdf
7. Sohn, Louis B. "Stockholm
Declaration on the Human
Environment". Harvard
Environment". Harvard
International Law Journal 14,
no. 3 (Summer 1973): 423–
515.
8. Intergovernmental Conference
of Experts on the Scientific
Basis for Rational Use and
Conservation of the Resources
of the Biosphere (Paris,
France, September 4–13,
1968), Recommendations (htt
ps://[Link]/?id=ED04795
2) . 1 October 1968.
9. Panjabi, Ranee Khooshie Lal.
"From Stockholm to Rio: A
Comparison of the Declaratory
Principles of International
Principles of International
Environmental Law." Denver
Journal of International Law
and Policy 21, no. 2 (1993):
215-287.
[Link]
/cgi/[Link]?
article=1764&context=djilp
10. Strong, Maurice F. 1973. “One
Year after Stockholm: An
Ecological Approach to
Management.” Foreign Affairs
51 (4): 690.
doi:10.2307/20038013 (https:
//[Link]/10.2307%2F200380
13) .
11. 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.
12. Freestone, David. "European
Community Environmental
Policy and Law". Journal of
Law and Society 18, no. 1
(1991): 135–54.
doi:10.2307/1410105 (https://
[Link]/10.2307%2F1410105
).
13. Ma, Tianjie. "Stockholm 1972:
The Start of China’s
Environmental Journey." China
Environmental Journey." China
Dialogue. Last modified
December 7, 2021.
[Link]
ature/stockholm-1972-chinas-
environmental-journey/
14. Brunnée, J. "The Stockholm
Declaration And The Structure
And Processes Of International
Environmental Law". The
Future of Ocean Regime-
Building, July 2009, 41-62.
doi:10.1163/ej.978900417267
8.i-786.11 ([Link]
163%2Fej.9789004172678.i-
786.11)
15. Cold War History. Accessed
15. Cold War History. Accessed
March 17, 22.
[Link]
/cold-war/cold-war-history
16. "U.N. Panel on Stockholm
Conference Boycotted.” The
New York Times. Accessed 17
March 2022.
[Link]
2/03/07/archives/un-panel-
on-stockholm-conference-
[Link]
17. Death, Carl. 2015. "Disrupting
Global Governance: Protest at
Environmental Conferences
from 1972 to 2012". Global
Governance: A Review of
Governance: A Review of
Multilateralism and
International Organizations 21
(4): 579–98.
doi:10.1163/19426720-
02104006 ([Link]
1163%2F19426720-0210400
6) .
18. "U.N. Pollution Talks in Geneva
Boycotted by Soviet and
Allies". The New York Times.
Accessed 17 March 2022.
[Link]
2/02/08/archives/un-
pollution-talks-in-geneva-
boycotted-by-soviet-and-
[Link]
19. “United Nations Conference
on Environment and
Development: Rio Declaration
on Environment and
Development.” International
Legal Materials 31, no. 4
(1992): 874–80.
JSTOR 20693717 ([Link]
[Link]/stable/20693717) .
20. Boon, Foo Kim. "The Rio
Declaration and Its Influence
on International Environmental
Law". Singapore Journal of
Legal Studies, 1992, 347–64.
JSTOR 24866183 ([Link]
[Link]/stable/24866183) .
21. Stockholm+50. Accessed 15
21. Stockholm+50. Accessed 15
February 2022.
[Link]
al/
22. Declaration of the United
Nations Conference on the
Human Environment." IPCC.
Accessed 18 March 2022.
[Link]
/srex/njlite_download.php?
id=6471

Further reading

Startpage ([Link]
[Link]/government-policy/stockhol
m50/)
Stockholm+50 ([Link]
[Link]/)
Stockholm and the Birth of
Environmental Diplomacy (https://
[Link]/articles/stockholm-a
nd-birth-environmental-diplomac
y)
Declaration of the United Nations
Conference on the Human
Environment - Main Page ([Link]
[Link]/avl/ha/dunche/dunche
.html) United Nations Conference
on the Human Environment,
Stockholm 1972 ([Link]
rg/en/conferences/environment/st
ockholm1972#:~:text=The%20St
ockholm%20Declaration%2C%20
which%20contained,and%20the
%20well%2Dbeing%20of)
1972: The start of China’s
environmental journey ([Link]
[Link]/en/nature/stockhol
m-1972-chinas-environmental-jo
urney/#:~:text=The%201972%20
UN%20Conference%20on,look%
20at%20global%20environmental
%20issues)

Retrieved from
"[Link]
title=Declaration_of_the_United_Nations_C
onference_on_the_Human_Environment&ol
did=1263564755"

This page was last edited on 17 December

2024, at 10:34 (UTC). •

Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0

unless otherwise noted.