Public policy involves the search for meaning through discourses that are complex semantic systems, expressing different perspectives, concepts and assumptions. This paper aims to contribute to the current dialogue concerning recent environmental policies, inquiring as to what extent the debates that took place at Rio + 20 break away from the dominant environmental discourses of the last 40 years. These predominant discourses are: survivalism, problem solving, sustainability and green radicalism. They differ on their ontology (realist or nominalist), their assumptions regarding natural relationships (competition or cooperation), agents and their mot ives (individuals or collectivities, strong or weak) and the key metaphors and other rhetorical devices used to defend their positions (DRYZEK, 1997). Some questions are also asked in order to evaluate the impact and feasibility of the discourse: policies associated with discourse, effect on the policy of governments, the effect on institutions, arguments of critics and flaws revealed by evidence and argument. These analytical devices were applied to the final document of the conference "The Future We Want" to appraise the Rio +20 discourse. We conclude that two prior discourses can be included in the conference debates: problem solving and sustainability. Some anticipated effects of Rio +20 are: improvement of environmental statistics; increased number of green economy jobs; and public policies that change the relative prices of using natural resources and internalizing the costs of environmental externalities.
Environmental discourse; Rio +20; Environmental policy; Sustainable development; Green economy
