If attendance is a measure of importance, the World Summit on Sustainable Development sets the standard. Nearly 70,000 dignitaries, delegates, and citizens convene this week in Johannesburg, South Africa - a ten year follow-up to 1992's Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro - to tackle the triple bottom line: economic policies that would raise global social and environmental standards. Over 100 presidents and prime ministers will attend. But President Bush has once again punted to Powell.

The buzzword in hearings and hallways is "sustainable development," a vital but vague new concept that calls on nations to pursue policies that reduce poverty, protect the environment, and assure a shared prosperity.
Yet we're further from addressing economic and environmental crises than we were a decade ago.

• Fossil fuels consumption increased by 10% in the seven years between 1992 and 1999.
  
  
• Climate-altering emissions will rise by 33% in developed nations and 100% elsewhere by 2020.
  
  
• Rich nations' aid to poor countries has declined from 35% to less than 15% of total assistance.
  
  
• 80% of global financial flows went to the richest nations in 2000. Less than 1% went to Africa.

The summit offers a last chance to incorporate social and environmental benchmarks into a new definition of economic progress. Key to long-term success, say world leaders, is dramatic poverty reduction. Yet, note critics, the conference agenda ignores rich nations' aid and trade policies that deny poor nations access to their markets, retain protectionist subsidies, and renege on longstanding pledges of economic aid.

Why are trade and climate change absent from the agenda? Is the heightened presence of large corporations a sign of cooperation or co-optation? How can globalization become a force for shared prosperity rather than ever-widening inequality? What will be the accomplishments of the summit?