|
Return to UNGASS Page |
Volume 5, Number 88
|
|
A BRIEF HISTORY OF UNGASS
The Nineteenth United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) to Review the Implementation of Agenda 21 was held at United Nations Headquarters in New York from 23-27 July 1997, five years after the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro. Agenda 21 is the Programme of Action for Sustainable Development agreed at UNCED. 53 Heads of State and Government, along with ministers and other high-level officials, addressed the Assembly during the week-long meeting. Negotiations held in a Committee of the Whole, as well as several Ministerial groups, produced a Statement of Commitment and a Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21. The "Earth Summit +5" proved to be a sobering reminder that little progress has been made over the past five years in implementing key components of Agenda 21 and moving toward sustainable development. When the Special Session came to a close at 1:15 on Saturday morning, delegates, NGOs and other observers left UN Headquarters with mixed feelings. Some felt that the meeting had been a failure because governments had shown a lack of political will to force more than convoluted compromises. Others, including United Nations General Assembly President Razali Ismail (Malaysia), felt that the meeting proved to be an "honest attempt to try and make an appraisal of the results, and of how far we have gone from Rio. There was little attempt to try to sweep things under the carpet or put a gloss over something that's not there." In 1992, the General Assembly endorsed Agenda 21 and decided to convene a special session to review and appraise Agenda 21 implementation in its resolution 47/190. Negotiations on the text to be adopted at the 19th Special Session of the UN General Assembly began earlier this year during the Commission for Sustainable Development's (CSD) Ad Hoc Open-ended Intersessional Working Group and continued at the fifth session of the CSD (CSD-5). Further progress was made at informal consultations in New York during the week before UNGASS. CSD AD HOC OPEN-ENDED INTERSESSIONAL WORKING GROUP: The Intersessional Working Group met from 24 February-7 March 1997 in New York and focused on the format and substantive content of the document to be considered at UNGASS. The main output was a draft "Proposed Outcome of the Special Session" prepared by Co-Chairs Derek Osborn (UK) and Amb. Celso Armorim (Brazil) after feedback from delegates on a first draft. The re-draft provided a basis for informal consultations prior to CSD-5. Most delegates highlighted freshwater, energy and transport, forests and oceans as issues of new or priority concern. Delegates also noted the importance of the cross-sectoral issues of poverty and changing consumption and production patterns. FIFTH SESSION OF THE COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: The fifth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD-5) convened from 8-25 April 1997 at UN Headquarters in New York to complete formal preparations for UNGASS. It began with a High-Level Segment and a review of reports from the Intersessional Working Group and the CSD Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF). Delegations continued to identify and elaborate the emerging priority issues that they had considered at the Intersessional Working Group. Voluminous amendments to the draft "Proposed Outcome of the Special Session" were considered. Intersessional Co-Chairs Osborn and Amorim chaired Drafting Groups I and II, respectively. Drafting Group I considered text on "Sectors and Issues" and "Assessment of Progress Reached after Rio." Drafting Group II considered text on "Integration of Economic, Social and Environmental Objectives" and "Means of Implementation." Informal groups negotiated text on forests, institutional arrangements and the CSD Programme of Work for 1998-2002. CSD-5 Chair Mostafa Tolba (Egypt) and Vice-Chair Monika Linn-Locher (Switzerland) began consultations on a draft political statement to be adopted by the Heads of State and Government expected to attend the Special Session. Their informal modus operandi was questioned by a number of G-77 delegations at the closing Plenary. Tolba and Linn-Locher invited governments to send amendments to a draft distributed at the close of the Session and undertook to circulate a new version by early June. At the conclusion of CSD-5, numerous brackets remained in the draft documents, including unnegotiated paragraphs dealing with international legal instruments and information tools to measure progress on sustainable development. INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS: CSD-5 Chair Tolba convened informal consultations at UN Headquarters from 16-21 June 1997. Delegations used the Report of the CSD on Preparations for UNGASS, including the revised draft political statement (A/S-19/CRP.1) and the draft proposed outcome (A/S-19/14) as the basis for their deliberations. The draft political statement attracted extensive amendments, and some noted that delegations were re-negotiating issues covered in greater detail in the draft proposed outcome. The consultations were adjourned until delegations had considered related issues in the draft proposed outcome. A new draft was circulated Sunday, 22 June, immediately prior to UNGASS. A number of cross-sectoral and sectoral issues in the draft proposed outcome were resolved during the week. The exceptions covered those issues requiring high-level political input at UNGASS and/or related discussions at the 20-21 June G-8 Summit in Denver. Among the outstanding issues sent to UNGASS were: means of implementation (e.g., official development assistance, finance, mobilization of domestic resources); a financial mechanism for the Convention to Combat Desertification; a reference to commitments that should be made at the third Conference of the Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change, to be held in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997; the follow-up to the work of the CSD's Intergovernmental Panel on Forests; and a proposal to introduce an international tax on aviation fuel to fund sustainable development. On Monday, 23 June 1997, UN General Assembly President Razali Ismail (Malaysia) introduced the two speakers for the informal opening ceremony: Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso and US Vice-President Al Gore. Cardoso noted the unique opportunity to renew the partnership formed in Rio and urged participants to use it wisely. Gore welcomed participants to New York and noted that private capital flows are skyrocketing, bringing with them the promise of development. At the commencement of the opening Plenary, delegates to UNGASS were notified that 17 members are in arrears of payments and, according to the Charter, those whose arrears equal the amount of their assessed contributions for the preceding two years shall not have a vote in the General Assembly. Amb. Razali Ismail was then elected President of the 19th Special Session of the General Assembly. He welcomed the representatives of civil society, who were participating for the first time in the GA. He also drew attention to the recession of political will to catalyze change. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan identified several issues that require attention, including clean water, forests, fish stocks, atmosphere and desertification. He said his programme for reform will usher in renewal at the UN, but more remains to be done. Dr. Mostafa Tolba presented the report of the Commission on Sustainable Development (A/S-19/14) and outlined the preparatory process leading up to UNGASS. He emphasized that genuine political will was required to deal with outstanding issues. UNGASS President Razali then presented the organization of the Special Session. Tolba, Chair of CSD-5, was elected as Chair of the Ad Hoc Committee of the Whole. The Plenary also agreed to accord observer status to specialized agencies and, without setting a precedent for other special sessions, to invite major groups, including non- governmental organizations, to participate. The provisional agenda (A/S-19/1) was adopted, and the general debate began. The Plenary held two sessions each day during UNGASS, where approximately 197 statements on review and appraisal of the implementation of Agenda 21 were offered by 53 Heads of State and Government or Vice Presidents, 75 Ministers, 6 Vice Ministers, 29 Permanent Representatives to the United Nations, 5 observers, 17 heads of international organizations and 12 representatives of major groups. Twenty representatives of international organizations that were not able to speak in Plenary offered statements in the Committee of the Whole on Monday and Tuesday. Speakers generally agreed that in the five years since UNCED, the concept of sustainable development has come to inform economic planning worldwide. The principles of Agenda 21 are being codified into national legislation, and major new conventions on climate change and biodiversity are being applied. Nearly all regions of the world are now experiencing lower fertility and lower population growth. Nevertheless, there was apparent consensus that much more needs to be done. Developing countries argued that their efforts to implement Agenda 21 have continued to be hampered by lack of resources. Many countries stressed that implementation of Agenda 21 requires new and additional financial resources and technology sharing. Several speakers pointed out that without alleviating the extreme and increasing poverty that pervades the world, sustainable development is both unrealistic and impossible. Despite commitments made at Rio, consumption and production patterns remain unsustainably high, official development assistance (ODA) has actually declined, deforestation continues and developing countries lack essential "green technologies." Several speakers pointed out that one third of the world's population did not have access to clean drinking water. Speakers also emphasized the importance of action on forests, climate change, oceans, freshwater management, and unsustainable patterns of production and consumption. The need to study the impacts of globalization and trade liberalization on developing countries was emphasized by many speakers. Countries also noted the importance of educating young people, promoting sustainable tourism and encouraging local initiatives and Local Agenda 21s. It was also stressed that peace and political stability were integral components of sustainable development.
Several speakers noted that, worldwide, foreign investment
has replaced overseas development assistance in amount and
frequency. Yet, foreign investment is not an appropriate
replacement for ODA. Based on economic, rather than
developmental, objectives, such investment necessarily
yields selective benefits. For example, although several
least developed countries are following liberal policies
and have open economic systems, business capital flow has
not been forthcoming. Innovative ideas are needed to raise
funds for environmental protection and sustainable
development.
The Committee of the Whole (COW), chaired by CSD-5 Chair,
Dr. Mostafa Tolba, convened Monday afternoon to oversee
negotiations on a draft Programme for Further
Implementation of Agenda 21 and a draft political statement
by Heads of State and Government. The Committee elected
Bagher Asadi (Iran), John Ashe (Antigua and Barbuda), Idunn
Eidheim (Norway), and Czeslaw Wieckowski (Poland) as Vice-
Chairs. Two working groups, one on cross-sectoral issues
chaired by Amb. Celso Amorim (Brazil) and John Ashe, and
one on sectoral issues chaired by Derek Osborn (UK), were
established. Wieckowski chaired a contact group on the CSD
Programme of Work (1998-2002). A number of informal
consultations were also convened to resolve particularly
contentious issues, including: forests, climate change and
radioactive waste. A number of ministerial-level meetings
on these issues also took place.
At its final meeting on Friday evening, the COW adopted the
draft Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda
21. Having failed to reach agreement on a political
statement for the Heads of State and Government, the
Committee adopted, in its place, a Statement of Commitment.
The following is a summary of these documents, with
emphasis on the negotiations that took place during the
Special Session.
The Statement of Commitment contains six paragraphs. It
notes that, at UNCED, Heads of States and Governments and
other Heads of Delegations, together with international
institutions and non-governmental organizations launched a
new global partnership for sustainable development, a
partnership that respects the indivisibility of
environmental protection and the development process. It
recalls that the focus of UNGASS has been to accelerate the
implementation of Agenda 21 in a comprehensive manner and
not to re-negotiate its provisions or to be selective in
its implementation. A number of positive results are
acknowledged, but deep concern is expressed that the
overall trends for sustainable development are worse today
than they were in 1992. Participants commit to ensure that
the next comprehensive review of Agenda 21 in the year 2002
demonstrates greater measurable progress in achieving
sustainable development.
This section was, until the last day of UNGASS, envisioned
to be a longer "political statement." Delegates to the CSD
Intersessional Working Group anticipated that they would
develop a political statement, and suggested a number of
elements that could be included in it. Bilateral
consultations were undertaken by Vice-Chair Monika Linn-
Locher (Switzerland) and Chair Mostafa Tolba (Egypt) during
CSD-5. They issued a preliminary "Draft Political
Statement" during the second week. A redraft incorporated
comments from governments and was distributed during the
final Plenary. An exchange of comments in the
intersessional period resulted in a new draft, which was
first discussed during the informal consultations prior to
UNGASS. Voluminous amendments were offered, and
incorporated into the text that was negotiated during
UNGASS. Delegates completed their first reading of the
twenty-six paragraph draft on Thursday afternoon, and began
a second reading during a late night session. Many debates
during the week mirrored those taking place on similar
issues in the Programme for the Further Implementation of
Agenda 21 and progress was slow. Among the issues that
generated considerable debate were: the definition of
sustainable development; incremental costs; time-bound
commitments; commitments regarding ODA; domestic
mobilization of resources; listing the sectoral themes for
the CSD's focus in the next five years; and an invitation
to the Secretary-General to develop strategies for long-
term sustainability. The Co-Chairs of the finance
ministers' group drafted proposed text on financial
resources to be included in the political statement, but
the US, India, Brazil, Belarus, Iran, Saudi Arabia,
Germany, Venezuela and Japan expressed serious difficulty
with the text.
On Friday morning, the draft political statement was
withdrawn from consideration. UNGASS President Razali
Ismail conducted informal consultations on a "Statement of
Commitment," which was issued on Friday afternoon as
document A/S-19/AC.1/L.1/Add.1. Lebanon noted that he had
worked hard on the longer document and registered his
concern that the Statement of Commitment did not reflect
all issues that had been discussed, but he joined the
consensus in adopting the text.
PROGRAMME FOR THE FURTHER IMPLEMENTATION OF AGENDA 21
ASSESSMENT OF PROGRESS MADE SINCE UNCED
This fifteen-paragraph section contained no outstanding
text coming into UNGASS. It identifies changes and actions
that have taken place since Rio. Accelerated globalization
and interactions among countries in the areas of world
trade, foreign direct investment and capital markets has
characterized the five years since UNCED. Globalization
presents new opportunities and challenges, but only a
limited number of developing countries have been able to
take advantage of these trends. Income inequality among and
within countries has increased.
The state of the global environment has continued to
deteriorate, as noted in the UNEP's Global Environment
Outlook report. Some progress has been made in terms of
institutional development, international consensus-
building, public participation and private sector actions
and, as a result, a number of countries have succeeded in
curbing pollution and slowing the rate of resource
degradation. Population growth rates have been declining
globally, largely as a result of expanded basic education
and health care. Overall, however, trends are worsening.
Increasing levels of pollution threaten to exceed the
capacity of the global environment to absorb them,
increasing the potential obstacles to economic and social
development in developing countries.
Implementation of the commitments in the UNCED and post-
UNCED agreements, as well as others adopted before 1992,
remains to be carried out and, in many cases, further
strengthening of their provisions, as well as the
mechanisms for putting them into effect, are required. The
establishment, restructuring, funding and replenishment of
the Global Environment Facility (GEF) were major
achievements, but its funding levels have not been
sufficient to meet its objectives.
Efforts have been made by governments and international
organizations to integrate environmental, economic and
social objectives into decision-making by elaborating new
or adapting existing policies. The major groups have
demonstrated what can be achieved by taking committed
action, sharing resources, building consensus and
reflecting grassroots concern and involvement.
A number of major UN conferences have advanced
international commitment for the achievement of the long-
term goals and objectives of sustainable development, and
organizations and programmes of the UN system have played
an important role in making progress in the implementation
of Agenda 21.
Much remains to be done, however, to activate the means of
implementation set out in Agenda 21, in particular in the
areas of finance and technology transfer, technical
assistance and capacity-building. There has been a sizeable
expansion of private financial flows to a limited number of
developing countries, but the debt situation remains a
major constraint to achieving sustainable development.
Finally, the technology gap between developed countries
and, in particular, the least developed countries has
widened.
IMPLEMENTATION IN AREAS REQUIRING URGENT ACTION
In the introductory paragraph for this section, delegations
agreed that, although progress has been made in some areas,
a major new effort will be required to achieve the goals
established at UNCED, particularly in areas of cross-
sectoral matters where implementation has yet to be
achieved.
1. Integration of economic, social and environmental
objectives
Text in this section, agreed to during CSD-5, notes that
achieving sustainable development is impossible without
greater integration at all policy-making and operational
levels, including the lowest administrative levels
possible. By 2002, the formulation and elaboration of
national strategies for sustainable development should be
completed, and efforts by developing countries to
effectively implement national strategies should be
supported. A broad package of policy instruments should be
worked out, in light of country-specific conditions, to
ensure that integrated approaches are effective and cost-
efficient.
The bracketed text resolved at UNGASS included references
to economic development, social development and
environmental protection as interdependent and mutually
reinforcing components of sustainable development and the
need for: broad based growth to benefit all, democracy,
human rights and fundamental freedoms, transparent and
accountable governance and effective participation by civil
society. The G-77/China agreed to a US proposal to
introduce language from the UN Agenda for Development.
Additional outstanding text proposed by Switzerland and
supported by the EU noted that the implementation of
policies aiming at sustainable development may enhance the
opportunities for job creation — while protecting basic
workers' rights. The G-77/China proposed its deletion. The
final text includes a reference to Chapter 29
(strengthening the role of workers and their trade unions),
but drops the reference to protecting basic workers'
rights.
Enabling international economic framework: At CSD-5,
delegates agreed to text noting that, as a result of
globalization, external factors have become critical in
determining the success or failure of developing countries
in their national efforts at sustainable development.
During informal consultations prior to UNGASS, the US and
EU sought to establish that the Rio principle on common but
differentiated responsibilities refers only to
environmental issues. The G-77/China wanted to remove "in
regard to environmental issues," but later agreed to Agenda
21 language. The text therefore notes that issues can be
approached effectively only through a constructive dialogue
and genuine partnership, "taking into account that in view
of the different contributions to global environmental
degradation, States have common but differentiated
responsibilities."
Eradicating poverty: This paragraph contained a number of
bracketed subparagraphs after CSD-5. It notes that the
eradication of poverty is an overriding theme of
sustainable development for the coming years and depends on
the full integration of people living in poverty into
economic, social and political life. Priority actions
include: improving access to sustainable livelihoods;
providing universal access to basic social services;
progressively developing social protection systems to
support those who cannot support themselves; and addressing
the disproportionate impact of poverty on women. In
addition, interested donors and recipients should work
together to allocate increased shares of ODA to poverty
eradication. The 20/20 initiative is noted to be an
important principle in this regard.
A Bangladesh-proposed paragraph on access to micro-credit
for people living in poverty was submitted late at CSD-5.
The G-77/China said his Group had not had time to discuss
the proposal at UNGASS. The proposal is to be referred to
ECOSOC by the General Assembly President Amb. Razali. Text
regarding empowering people living in poverty and their
organizations was resolved during the informal
consultations prior to UNGASS, with the G-77/China's
agreement that they should be involved in "evaluation,
formulation and implementation" and that programmes should
reflect their priorities.
In the subparagraph on the disproportionate impact of
poverty on women, delegates debated whether full
implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action should be
"consistent with the report of the Fourth World Conference
on Women" (FWCW). During the week prior to UNGASS, the EU
and Canada called for full implementation of the Beijing
Platform for Action and deleting "consistent with the
report of the Fourth World Conference on Women." The G-
77/China supported the reference to the FWCW report to
accommodate those countries who recorded reservations in
the report. Syria, supported by Canada, proposed that a
footnote accompany all references to UN Conference
outcomes, stating that all references to platforms or
programmes for action in the UNGASS report should be
considered in a manner consistent with their reports. This
was agreed.
Changing consumption and production patterns: A number of
portions remained bracketed in this section after CSD-5.
The agreed text notes that, consistent with Agenda 21, the
development and further elaboration of national policies
and strategies, particularly in industrialized countries,
are needed to encourage changes in unsustainable
consumption and production patterns. Actions should focus
on:
- identifying best practices through evaluations of policy
measures with respect to environmental effectiveness,
efficiency and implications for social equity;
- taking into account the linkages between urbanization and
the environmental and developmental effects of consumption
and production patterns in cities;
- improving the quality of information regarding the
environmental impact of products and services;
- encouraging educational programmes to promote sustainable
consumption patterns;
- encouraging business and industry to develop and apply
environmentally sound technology and promoting the role of
business in shaping consumption patterns; and
- developing core indicators.
Brazil and India opposed text noting that to some extent
unsustainable patterns are also emerging in higher income
groups in some developing countries. Delegates agreed to
replace it with language based on Chapter Four of Agenda 21
(4.8 (a) (b) and (c); 4.9) and to insert a footnote
referencing the report of a workshop on sustainable
consumption and production to CSD-5. At the informal
consultations preceding UNGASS, a reference to
environmental and social audits was replaced with text on
appropriate, voluntary publication of assessments. An EU-
proposed initiative on energy and material efficiency
targets of achieving a tenfold improvement in productivity
in the long term and a possible factor-four increase in the
next two or three decades was agreed to after the EU
specified that the targets were intended for industrialized
countries. On eco-efficiency, the G-77/China agreed to US
language on the need for developed countries to pay special
attention to avoiding negative impacts on export and market
access opportunities for developing countries.
Making trade and environment mutually supportive: Various
sections in this text remained in brackets following CSD-5.
The agreed text addresses the need to establish favorable
macroeconomic conditions to enable all countries to benefit
from globalization, and greater responsiveness to
sustainable development objectives at the UN, WTO and
Bretton Woods institutions. It calls for timely and full
implementation of the results of the Uruguay Round,
promotion of the universality of the WTO, analysis of the
environmental effects of international goods transport, and
institutional cooperation between UNCTAD, WTO, and UNEP.
At UNGASS, brackets were removed from text introduced by
the EU and the US in a subparagraph on the multilateral
trading system. This US text was replaced with language
noting that decisions on further liberalization of trade
should take into account effects on sustainable
development. A paragraph proposed by Australia calling for
effective dialogue with major groups (including NGOs),
particularly in the WTO, UNCTAD and UNEP, is to be referred
to ECOSOC by GA President Amb. Razali. An EU-sponsored call
for the WTO, UNEP and UNCTAD to consider ways to make trade
and environment mutually supportive was accepted.
Population: This paragraph on the relationship between
economic growth, poverty, employment, environment and
sustainable development calls for recognition of the
critical linkages between demographic trends and other
factors. After a prolonged debate about the formula to
reference the outcome of the International Conference on
Population and Development it was agreed to insert a
standard footnote on UN Conferences (see above).
Health: This paragraph, which was agreed to during the
informal consultations prior to UNGASS, states that an
overriding goal for the future is to implement the "Health
for All" strategy to enable all people to achieve a higher
level of health and well-being, and to improve their
economic productivity and social potential. Actions such as
provision of safe drinking water, and accelerated research
and vaccine development, are suggested. Delegates removed
brackets from language regarding the effects of lead
poisoning, noting that it is important to accelerate the
process of eliminating unsafe uses of lead, including the
use of lead in gasoline worldwide, in the light of country-
specific conditions and with enhanced international support
and assistance to developing countries through the timely
provision of technical and financial assistance and the
promotion of endogenous capacity-building. The G-77/China
agreed to remove brackets from a call for strategies to
make parents, families and communities aware of the adverse
environmental health impacts of tobacco.
Sustainable human settlements: This paragraph, which was
resolved at CSD-5, notes that global urbanization is a
cross-sectoral phenomenon that has an impact on all aspects
of sustainable development. Urgent action is needed to
implement the commitments made at the UN Conference on
Human Settlements (Habitat II) consistent with its report,
and in Agenda 21. New and additional financial resources
are necessary to achieve the goals of adequate shelter for
all and sustainable human settlements development. Global
targets could be established by the CSD to promote Local
Agenda 21 campaigns and to deal with obstacles to Local
Agenda 21 initiatives.
2. Sectors and issues
The opening paragraph to this section was agreed to at CSD-
5. It notes that the need for integration is important in
all sectors, including the areas of energy and transport,
agriculture and water use, and marine resources. The
recommendations made in each sector take into account the
need for international cooperation in support of national
efforts.
Freshwater: This text was agreed during CSD-5, although
Turkey and Ethiopia reserved their positions with respect
to a reference to "customary uses of water." The text notes
that, in view of growing demands, water will become a major
limiting factor in socio-economic development unless early
action is taken. It identifies an urgent need to, inter
alia:
- formulate and implement policies and programmes for
integrated watershed management;
- strengthen regional and international cooperation for
technology transfer and the financing of integrated water
resources programmes and projects;
- provide an environment that encourages investments from
public and private sources to improve water supply and
sanitation services;
- recognize water as a social and economic good; and
- call for a dialogue under the aegis of the CSD, beginning
at its sixth session, aimed at building a consensus on the
necessary actions, means of implementation and tangible
results in order to consider initiating a strategic
approach for the implementation of all aspects of the
sustainable use of freshwater for social and economic
purposes.
Oceans and seas: This text was agreed at CSD-5. It notes
that there is a need to continue to improve decision-making
in this area at the national, regional and global levels.
It identifies an urgent need for:
- all governments to ratify or accede to the relevant
agreements and to effectively implement such agreements as
well as relevant voluntary instruments;
- strengthening of institutional links to be established
between the relevant intergovernmental mechanisms involved
in the development and implementation of integrated coastal
zone management;
- better identification of priorities for action at the
global level;
- governments to prevent or eliminate overfishing and
excess fishing capacity;
- governments to consider the positive and negative impact
of subsidies and to consider appropriate action;
- governments to take actions to improve the quality and
quantity of scientific data as a basis for effective
decisions.
Forests: Three of the four paragraphs in this section were
agreed to at CSD-5, with the critical paragraph outlining
follow-up action to the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests
(IPF) remaining entirely in brackets. Text agreed to prior
to UNGASS notes that the IPF's proposals for action
represent significant progress and consensus on a wide
range of forest issues. To maintain momentum there is an
urgent need for, inter alia: countries and international
organizations to implement the Panel's proposals; countries
to develop national forest programmes; further
clarification of all issues arising from the IPF process,
in particular international cooperation in financial
assistance and technology transfer, and trade and
environment in relation to forest products and services;
and international organizations to undertake further
collaboration in the informal, high-level Inter-Agency Task
Force on Forests.
The unresolved paragraph on follow-up contained a number of
options, including calls for the establishment of an ad
hoc, open-ended intergovernmental forum on forests, which
would consider the need for or build the necessary
consensus for a legally- binding instrument, or an inter-
governmental negotiating committee (INC) on a legally-
binding instrument on all types of forests.
Countries began negotiations on forests by outlining their
support for the various options for follow-up. The EU,
Canada, Russia, Romania, Costa Rica on behalf of Central
America, and Papua New Guinea supported the immediate
establishment of an INC, noting that while the two-year IPF
process had been very useful in clarifying key issues, a
clear political signal on forests and binding commitments
on action were now needed. The G-77/China, the US, Japan,
Australia and New Zealand opposed the establishment of an
INC at this stage, noting that the need for a convention
had not yet been established. Instead, they called for an
intergovernmental forum on forests to help implement IPF
proposals for action, and to continue discussions on issues
left pending by the IPF, such as trade and environment in
relation to forest products, technology transfer and
finance, as well as new and emerging issues. The forum
could also examine the need for an INC, without prejudging
the outcome, and could report to the CSD by 1999 (the US
preferred the year 2000).
The final consensus decision, arrived at after protracted
debate, calls for the establishment of the
Intergovernmental Forum on Forests under the aegis of the
CSD, to facilitate implementation of IPF recommendations,
review and monitor progress on sustainable forest
management, and consider matters left pending by the IPF.
The Forum will also "identify possible elements of and work
towards a consensus for international arrangements and
mechanisms, for example, a legally-binding instrument" and
will report to the CSD in 1999. Based on that report, and a
decision by the CSD in the year 2000, the Forum will
"engage in further action on establishing an
intergovernmental negotiation process on new arrangements
and mechanisms or a legally binding instrument on all types
of forests."
Debate on this text prior to its adoption centered around
the G-77/China's insistence, supported by India, Brazil,
Colombia, the US and New Zealand, on reformulating the last
sentence to read "will engage in further action on new
arrangements and mechanisms or establishing an
intergovernmental negotiation process on a legally binding
instrument . . . " instead of the compromise formulation,
supported by the EU and the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN) group. The G-77/China argued that placing
the words "an intergovernmental negotiation process" before
"new arrangements and mechanisms" seemed to suggest the
inevitability of starting negotiations on a legally binding
document. Agreement on this was achieved when the G-
77/China withdrew their proposal after an explanation from
the Chair, supported by Denmark, that many negotiation
processes are not linked to legally binding commitments.
Agreement also hinged on crucial trade-offs whereby the EU
agreed to language calling for the Forum to "work towards
consensus for international arrangements and mechanisms,
for example, a legally binding document," instead of
"including a legally binding document." The EU also agreed
to postpone the decision on follow-up until CSD-8 (the year
2000) rather than 1999.
It was agreed that the Forum should convene as soon as
possible, and would be supported by voluntary extra-
budgetary contributions from governments and international
organizations.
On the last outstanding issue, delegates decided to remove
reference to "traditional forest-related knowledge" (TFRK)
as an IPF issue requiring further clarification. Instead, a
reference to TFRK was included in the opening paragraph,
which highlighted the importance of forests for indigenous
people and other forest-dependent people.
Energy: Most of the paragraphs on energy were agreed or
agreed ad referendum as a result of informal consultations
During debate at UNGASS, Saudi Arabia proposed deletion of
subparagraphs on energy discussions to be held at CSD-9,
cost internalization and coordination on energy issues at
the UN, which had been agreed ad referendum. Nigeria,
supported by Libya, wanted to delete details of
preparations for CSD-9. Canada, the US, Australia, Japan,
Norway and the EU resisted the call to re-open negotiations
on agreed text. These issues were considered again in
subsequent sessions. Saudi Arabia said that he and 22 other
countries wished to delete all but the first two sentences
of the paragraph.
In the final COW, delegates accepted a paragraph on CSD-9
noting that preparations should use an open-ended
intergovernmental group of experts, to be held in
conjunction with the intersessionals for CSD-8 and CSD-9.
Brackets were also removed from a reference to "appropriate
national action" in a paragraph on reducing the impacts of
fossil fuels. In a paragraph on technology transfer, the EU
and US agreed to consider a compromise formulation after
prolonged discussion on the inclusion of "time bound"
commitments for the transfer of relevant technology to
developing countries. Agreed text reads: "evolving
commitments for the transfer of relevant technology,
including time bound commitments, as appropriate, to
developing countries and economies in transition." A
paragraph calling for gradual promotion of cost
internalization, minimizing impact on developing countries
and encouraging the reduction of subsidies was included.
Coordination on energy issues within the UN system,
including a coordinating role for ECOSOC, is also
mentioned.
Transport: This paragraph contained some brackets following
CSD-5, including an EU-proposed initiative to prepare, at
the international level, a tax on aviation fuel. The text
notes that current patterns of transportation with their
dominant patterns of energy use are not sustainable, and
present trends may compound the environmental problems the
world is facing. It notes a need for: the promotion of
integrated transport policies; the integration of land use
and urban, peri-urban and rural transport planning; the
adoption and promotion, as appropriate, of measures to
mitigate the negative impact of transportation on the
environment; and partnerships for strengthening transport
infrastructures and developing innovative mass transport
schemes.
Delegates agreed at UNGASS to: accelerate the phase-out of
leaded gasoline as soon as possible; promote voluntary
guidelines for environmentally friendly transport; and
reduce vehicle emissions of carbon dioxide, carbon
monoxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter and volatile
organic compounds, as soon as possible. The EU altered its
proposal for an aviation fuel tax to call for the
continuation of studies on the use of economic instruments,
"such as an aviation fuel tax," which was bracketed by
Argentina.
During a Friday afternoon meeting of the COW, Saudi Arabia,
Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, Venezuela, Iran and Morocco
called for the deletion of the entire paragraph. The US,
Norway and Switzerland opposed deleting the paragraph. The
EU expressed disappointment at these proposals but declined
to withdraw the reference. Osborn noted that similar
language was agreed at CSD-4. Delegates agreed to retain
the paragraph without the reference to aviation fuel tax.
At the end of the session, the EU delivered a statement to
be included in the minutes, noting its assumption that the
aviation fuel tax is part of the economic instruments
mentioned in the text.
Atmosphere: At CSD-5, delegates agreed to a paragraph
noting that political will and effort are required to
ensure that the global climate is not further damaged. It
also notes that while some first steps have been taken,
insufficient progress has been made by many developed
countries in meeting their aim to reduce greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. It also
notes the importance of adopting a protocol or other legal
instrument later this year at the third Conference of the
Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC
COP-3) in Kyoto.
A ministerial group on climate change was held on Thursday,
26 June, chaired by ministers from Argentina and Japan.
Delegations who had made proposals in the text explained
their positions. Brazil and Switzerland noted that the
public would measure the success of UNGASS by its statement
on climate change. Japan proposed using language from the
Denver G-8 Summit: At COP-3, the industrialized countries
should commit to meaningful, realistic and equitable
targets that will result in reductions of greenhouse gas
emissions by 2010. The agreement must ensure transparency
and accountability, and flexibility in the manner in which
Participants' meet their targets. The EU proposed text
calling for: an agreement on a legally-binding commitment
for the developed world at FCCC COP-3 for a significant
reduction of the emissions of greenhouse gases below the
1990 level by the years 2005 and 2010, as well as mandatory
and recommended policies and measures, including harmonized
ones. Delegates proposing text met in a contact group to
produce a combined text.
The combined text noted that at COP-3 the developed
countries should seek legally-binding, meaningful,
realistic and equitable targets that will result in
significant reductions of greenhouse gas emissions within
specified timeframes such as 2005, 2010 and 2020. Japan
objected to "significant" and Australia disapproved of
"legally-binding." The Co-Chairs reported the result back
to the COW and delegates agreed to reconvene the
ministerial group.
On Friday, 27 June, the Co-Chairs reported to the COW that
the ministerial group had held further discussions, but no
consensus could be reached. Tolba said that without
consensus the paragraph would have to be deleted and
delegates would have to be satisfied with the existing text
on climate change.
Norway, Brazil, AOSIS, Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago and
the EU expressed strong regret that the UNGASS could not
agree on recommendations and requested an additional
session. Saudi Arabia and Venezuela were skeptical about
resolving the issues in the time remaining. The Republic of
Korea, the Russian Federation and Australia agreed to try
again, but cautioned that the group must be open-ended,
noting that the use of a small group had led to problems
before. The US also noted that difficulties arose because
some positions were "stepped on" during discussions. An
open-ended group, chaired by Derek Osborn, was convened for
a final attempt to reach consensus, after which Osborn
reported on the results. He had polled participants in the
meeting for their positions and drafted a new paragraph.
Further consultations resulted in the following agreed
text: at UNGASS, the international community confirmed its
recognition of the problem of climate change as one of the
biggest challenges facing the world in the next century.
The leaders of many countries underlined the importance of
this in their addresses to the Assembly and outlined the
responses they have in hand, both in their own countries
and internationally.
The ultimate goal that all countries share is to achieve
stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the
atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous
anthropogenic interference with the climate system. This
requires efficient and cost-effective policies and measures
that will be sufficient to result in a significant
reduction in emissions. At this meeting, countries reviewed
the state of the preparations for COP-3 and all agreed that
it is vital that there should be a satisfactory result.
The positions of many countries for these negotiations are
still evolving and it was agreed that it would not be
appropriate to seek to predetermine the results, although
useful interactions on evolving positions took place.
There is already widespread but not universal agreement
that it will be necessary to consider legally-binding,
meaningful, realistic and equitable targets for Annex I
countries that will result in significant reductions in
greenhouse gas emissions within specified time frames, such
as 2005, 2010 and 2020. In addition to establishing
targets, there is also widespread agreement that it will be
necessary to consider ways and means for achieving them and
to take into account the economic, adverse environmental
and other effects of such response measures on all
countries, particularly developing countries.
Toxic chemicals: Agreement was reached on this paragraph at
CSD-5. It notes that environmentally sound management of
chemicals should continue to be an important issue well
beyond 2000. Particular attention should be given to
cooperation in the development and transfer of technology
for safe substitutes and in the development of capacity for
the production of such substitutes. UNEP's 19th Governing
Council's decision on sound management of chemicals should
be implemented in accordance with the agreed timetables for
negotiations on the prior informed consent (PIC) and
persistent organic pollutants (POPs) conventions. The
difference between the roles and behavior of inorganic and
organic chemicals is noted.
Hazardous wastes: This paragraph was also agreed at CSD-5.
It takes note of the important initiatives aimed at
promoting the environmentally sound management of hazardous
wastes under the Basel Convention and calls for their
further development. Land contaminated by the disposal of
hazardous wastes needs to be identified and remedial
actions put in place, and integrated management solutions
are also required to minimize urban and industrial waste
generation and to promote recycling and reuse.
Radioactive wastes: Two of three paragraphs on this issue
remained bracketed following CSD-5, with the Russian
Federation reserving its position on the entire section.
Agreed text at UNGASS notes that radioactive wastes can
have very serious environmental and human health impacts
over long periods of time. Following a G-77/China proposal,
the text notes that storage, transportation, transboundary
movement and disposal of radioactive wastes should be
guided by all principles (rather than only principle 2) of
the Rio Declaration. It also calls on States not to promote
or allow the storage or disposal of radioactive wastes near
the marine environment, and for international efforts to
prohibit the export of radioactive wastes to those
countries that do not have appropriate treatment and
storage sites. Following a G-77 proposal, it notes the need
to conduct, "as appropriate, health studies around sites
affected by nuclear activities with a view to identifying
where health treatment may be needed." Following a Russian
proposal, references to "nuclear waste" in the text are
replaced with "radioactive wastes" and text reading "it is
best for radioactive wastes to be disposed of" is replaced
by "radioactive wastes should be disposed of" in the
territory of the State in which they are produced.
Land and sustainable agriculture: The two paragraphs on
this issue were largely agreed to at CSD-5, and during
informal consultations prior to UNGASS. Final agreement was
obtained when a reference to "indigenous people[s]" as
replaced by "indigenous people(s)" in text noting the need
for involvement of all interested parties in sustainable
management of land and soil resources. The agreed text
notes that land degradation threatens the livelihoods of
millions, and calls on States to combat or reverse the
worldwide trend of soil erosion, using an ecosystem
approach. It also notes the need for poverty eradication
through, inter alia, capacity building to reinforce local
food systems, and improving food security. It calls on
States to continue or increase investment in agricultural
research, and to fully implement the WTO decision on
Measures Concerning the Possible Negative Effects of the
Reform Programme on Least-Developed and Net Food-Importing
Developing Countries. Finally, the text calls on
governments to implement the Rome Declaration and Plan of
Action on food security, adopted at the World Food Summit
in 1996.
Desertification and drought: Delegates to CSD-5 agreed to
urge governments to conclude and implement the Convention
to Combat Desertifcation (CCD) as soon as possible and to
support and participate in the first session of the
Conference of the Parties to the Convention in September
1997. Text regarding the Global Mechanism and technology
transfer remained bracketed for consideration during
UNGASS. Informal consultations and negotiations took place
throughout the week.
On Friday, 27 June, Derek Osborn, Chair of the informal
group on sectoral issues, reported a "stand-off" on the
issue of desertification. The G-77/China proposed stating
that the international community, in particular developed
countries, should provide new and additional financial
resources to the Global Mechanism. The G-77/China expressed
strong concern that despite their cooperative spirit on
other UNGASS issues, developed countries have not been
forthcoming on this issue.
Many developed countries preferred to "support the Global
Mechanism that would indeed have the capacity to promote
actions leading to the mobilization and channeling of
substantial resources." The US and the EU pointed out that
at CSD-5 there was a formulation that did not prejudice the
outcome of discussion on the global mechanism under the
CCD. Co-Chair Osborn proposed that the text reflect the
position of both groups. The G-77/China insisted that
developed countries commit themselves or register their
unwillingness and clarify what they are prepared to do at
this stage. Tolba reminded the G-77/China spokesperson that
he was requesting that the text reflect agreement where
there was none. Following considerable discussion,
delegates agreed to text reflecting both positions. A
reference to the transfer of technology on mutually agreed
terms was also removed from brackets.
Biodiversity: This paragraph, with twelve subparagraphs,
was agreed to at CSD-5. It notes the urgent need to, inter
alia:
- take decisive action to conserve and maintain genes,
species and ecosystems;
- ratify the Convention on Biological Diversity and
implement it fully and effectively together with the
decisions of the Conference of the Parties;
- undertake concrete actions for the fair and equitable
sharing of the benefits from use of genetic resources;
- respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and
practices of indigenous and local communities embodying
traditional lifestyles;
- complete rapidly the biosafety protocol, on the
understanding that the UNEP International Technical
Guidelines for Safety in Biotechnology; and
- stress the importance of the establishment of a
clearinghouse mechanism by the Parties.
Sustainable tourism: The four paragraphs in this section
were agreed to at CSD-5. They note the need to consider
further the importance of tourism in the context of Agenda
21. Of particular concern is the degradation of
biodiversity and fragile ecosystems, such as coral reefs,
mountains, coastal areas and wetlands. The text calls on
the CSD to develop an action-oriented international
programme of work on sustainable tourism. Finally, it notes
that international cooperation is needed to facilitate
tourism development in developing countries.
Small island developing States: The two paragraphs in this
section were agreed to at CSD-5. They note the
international community's reaffirmation of its commitment
to the implementation of the Programme of Action for the
Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States
(SIDS). The text also notes that the CSD adopted a decision
on the modalities for the full review of the Programme of
Action, including the holding of a two-day special session
of the General Assembly immediately preceding the fifty-
fourth session of the Assembly. Efforts to implement the
Programme of Action need to be supplemented by effective
financial support from the international community, and the
SIDS information network and technical assistance programme
should be operationalized.
Natural disasters: This two paragraph section, which was
agreed to at CSD-5, states that natural disasters have
disproportionate consequences for developing countries, in
particular SIDS, and that there is a special need to
provide developing countries with assistance in:
- strengthening mechanisms and policies designed to reduce
the effects of natural disasters, improve preparedness and
integrate natural disaster considerations in development
planning;
- improving access to relevant technology and training in
hazard and risk assessment and early warning systems; and
- providing and facilitating support in the context of the
International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction.
Major technological and other disasters with an adverse
impact on the environment: The paragraph in this section
remained bracketed following CSD-5, with disagreement
centering on the terminology to be used in the title and
introductory sentence. Agreed text in the title reads
"major technological and other disasters with an adverse
impact on the environment" rather than "human-made
disasters" or "technological and man-made disasters." The
paragraph notes that such disasters can become a
substantial obstacle to achieving sustainable development
in many countries, and calls on the international community
to intensify cooperation in the prevention and reduction of
such disasters, and in disaster relief and post-disaster
rehabilitation.
This section contained a number of brackets going into
negotiations at UNGASS. It affirms that financial resources
and mechanisms play a key role in the implementation of
Agenda 21.
Financial resources and mechanisms: These paragraphs:
- call for the urgent fulfillment of all financial
commitments of Agenda 21, particularly those contained in
Chapter 33, and the provisions on new and additional
resources;
- underline the complementary and catalytic role of ODA in
promoting economic growth;
- recognize that private capital flows are a major tool of
economic growth in a growing number of developing
countries;
- call for the enhancement of UN activities through a
substantial increase in funding;
- call on the UN Secretariat, the World Bank and IMF to
collaborate with UNCTAD to consider the interrelationship
between indebtedness and sustainable development;
- reaffirm that, in general, financing for Agenda 21 will
come from countries' own public and private sectors;
- call for full consideration of specific conditions and
different levels of development in the event of subsidy
reductions; and
- call for collection and sharing of information on the use
of economic instruments.
At the informal consultations preceding UNGASS, the EU and
US resisted a G-77/China attempt to re-open agreed
paragraphs, which note that financial resources for the
implementation of Agenda 21 will come from countries' own
resources. The US refused to negotiate on bracketed text on
terms of trade and competitiveness of developing countries
and deferred such discussion to trade fora. The G-77/China
opposed linking ODA to country-driven policy reform
efforts. Norway, New Zealand, the US and Japan supported a
proposal for an intergovernmental process on finance to
consider, inter alia, policy responses to recommendations
from the Expert Group Meeting on Financial Issues in Agenda
21. The G-77/China wanted to delete the paragraph. The
proposal is to be referred to ECOSOC by General Assembly
President Amb. Razali. In a paragraph on research on
phasing out subsidies that have market distorting and
socially and environmentally damaging impacts, the G-
77/China agreed to the removal of a reference to the
principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities"
and its replacement with language noting that subsidy
reductions should take full account of different levels of
development, specifically those of developing countries.
Transfer of Environmentally Sound Technologies: This
section reaffirms that the availability of scientific and
technological information and access to and transfer of
environmentally sound technologies (ESTs) are essential
requirements for sustainable development. All but two of
the ten paragraphs arrived at the Special Session free of
brackets.
This section:
- calls for the urgent fulfillment of all the UNCED
commitments concerning concrete measures for the transfer
of ESTs to developing countries with a regular review as
part of the CSD multi-year programme;
- states the importance of identifying barriers and
restrictions to the transfer of publicly and privately
owned ESTs;
- affirms governments' role in providing research and
development to promote and contribute to the development of
institutional and human capacities;
- calls for the creation of an enabling environment to help
stimulate private sector investment and transfers of ESTs
and public-private partnerships; and
- identifies the need to further explore and enhance the
use of information technology and communications.
At the informal consultations preceding UNGASS, delegations
debated two sets of bracketed references to "commitments"
and "objectives" on ESTs — one in relation to Chapter 34 of
Agenda 21 and one in relation to Agenda 21 as a whole. The
G-77/China agreed to replace the bracketed text with
language from the UN Agenda for Development. They also
agreed to replace the second pair of brackets with a call
for a regular review of provisions in Chapter 34 of Agenda
21.
Capacity-building: The three paragraphs on this issue were
agreed to at CSD-5. The text states that renewed commitment
and support from the international community is essential
to support national efforts for capacity-building in
developing countries and countries with economies in
transition. UNDP, through its Capacity 21 programme, should
give priority to building capacity for the elaboration of
sustainable development strategies based on participatory
approaches. In addition, attention should be given to the
needs of women and indigenous people, to the role of the
private sector and to South-South cooperation in capacity-
building.
Science: This text was agreed to during CSD-5. It states
that public and private investment in science, education
and training, and research and development should be
increased significantly. Scientific cooperation and
improved access to scientific information related to the
environment and sustainable development are proposed, as is
collaboration to promote innovations in information and
communication technologies for the purpose of reducing
adverse environmental impacts.
Education and awareness: These two paragraphs were agreed
to at CSD-5. The text notes the fundamental prerequisite of
an adequately financed and effective educational system at
all levels, and states that priority should be given to
ensuring women's and girls' full and equal access to all
levels of education and training. Education for a
sustainable future should engage a wide spectrum of
institutions and sectors. Finally, cooperation between
universities and other academic centers, especially between
developed and developing countries, is necessary.
International legal instruments and the Rio Declaration on
Environment and Development: All three paragraphs in the
section were bracketed at the beginning of UNGASS. One
paragraph, the only one considered at CSD-5, called for the
codification of international law on sustainable
development. Another on implementation and compliance with
treaties on sustainable development contained a number of
bracketed proposals. The third paragraph, proposed by
Norway, called for the development of international law
regarding liability and compensation.
On the codification of international law, delegations
agreed on a reformulation based on proposals by the EU,
Mexico and the G-77/China. The text notes that it is
necessary to continue the progressive development and, as
appropriate, codification of international law related to
sustainable development.
On implementation and compliance, the G-77/China proposed a
reformulation noting, inter alia, that implementation of
commitments under international treaties and other
instruments in the field of environment hinge on secure,
sustained and predictable financial support, sufficient
institutional capacity, human resources and adequate access
to technology. China, Saudi Arabia and Colombia noted that
implementation and financing must be linked because
financial support is essential for successful environmental
protection.
The US expressed difficulty with linking implementation
with financial support when making a general statement
about international treaties, which implies financial
support is necessary in all cases. The EU proposed that
implementation "can be promoted by" instead of "hinge on"
financial support. Norway appealed to the G-77/China to
view this paragraph as pertaining to strengthening
instruments, rather than technology transfer. Switzerland
questioned whether repeated references to financial
obligations lessened their impact. China said that pressing
for compliance obligations without making good on financial
commitments is "tragic."
The reformulated paragraph states that implementation of
commitments made under international treaties in the field
of environment remains a priority. Implementation can be
promoted by secure, sustained and predictable financial
support, sufficient institutional capacity, human resources
and adequate access to technology cooperation on
implementation between States on mutually agreed terms may
reduce potential sources of conflict.
Canada underscored the importance of science-based decision
making. Switzerland, the US, Canada, the EU and Norway
proposed language noting the importance of improving
reporting and data collection systems and developing
compliance regimes. The final text reads that it is also
important to further improve reporting and data-collection
systems and to further develop appropriate compliance
mechanisms and procedures, on a mutually agreed basis, to
help and encourage States to fulfill all their obligations,
including means of implementation under multilateral
environmental agreements. The bracketed paragraph on
liability and compensation was deleted.
Information and tools to measure progress: All six
paragraphs on this issue contained bracketed sections,
since delegates did not have time to consider them during
CSD-5. Agreed text on the first paragraph notes the urgent
need for the further development of cost-effective tools to
collect and disseminate information for decision-makers at
all levels. A Canadian proposal for collection of "gender
disaggregated data," initially opposed by the G-77/China,
is retained in the final text, preceded by the words "as
appropriate." A US reference to information that makes the
unremunerated work of women visible is also retained, as is
a Peruvian reference to support for national and
international scientific and technological data centers,
with electronic communication links between them.
The second paragraph of this text, originally a Japanese
proposal calling for the need to enhance global awareness
of environmental issues through use of high-tech info-
communications infrastructure, contains reformulations
proposed by the G-77/China, which emphasize the need for a
supportive environment to be established to enhance
national capabilities for information collection,
processing and dissemination, especially in developing
countries. It notes the importance of international
cooperation in this regard.
The third paragraph notes the importance of environmental
impact assessments (EIAs) as a tool for sustainable
development. It includes an EU and US reference to
Principle 17 of the Rio Declaration, as well as a G-
77/China proposal calling for EIAs to be undertaken for
"activities likely to have significant adverse impacts on
the environment." A Norwegian proposal noting the
importance of EIAs where environmental values may be at
stake, as well as the need to undertake EIAs for national
or international investment programmes, was deleted.
A fourth paragraph notes that the CSD's work on indicators
for sustainable development should result in a "practicable
and agreed set of indicators"(EU), "suited to country
specific conditions" (G-77/China), "to be used on a
voluntary basis by the year 2000" (EU). A fifth paragraph
referring to the importance of indicators for the greening
of national budgets was deleted. The last paragraph in this
section notes that national reports on implementation of
Agenda 21 have proved valuable to the sharing of
information, and calls for their continuation.
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS: The text on
international institutional arrangements was completely
agreed to at CSD-5, with one exception: a paragraph
regarding replenishment by the donor community of the
International Development Association (IDA) and the GEF.
The opening paragraph states that the institutional
framework outlined in Chapter 38 of Agenda 21 and
determined by General Assembly resolution 47/191 and other
relevant resolutions, including the specific functions and
roles of various organs, organizations and programmes
within and outside the UN system, will continue to be fully
relevant in the period after UNGASS.
1. Greater coherence in various intergovernmental
organizations and processes
A need for better policy coordination at the
intergovernmental level is acknowledged, and a strengthened
role for ECOSOC in coordinating the activities of the UN
system in the economic, social and related field is
recommended. This section calls for:
- cooperation between the conferences of the parties to
conventions related to sustainable development;
- effective and efficient support arrangements for the
convention secretariats;
- strengthening the ACC Inter-Agency Committee on
Sustainable Development and its system of task managers;
and
- CSD promotion of increased regional implementation of
Agenda 21 in cooperation with relevant regional and
subregional organizations.
2. Role of relevant organizations and institutions of the
UN system
This section states that all organizations and programmes
of the UN system should, within their mandates, strengthen
support for national efforts to implement Agenda 21. The
role of UNEP, as the principal UN body in the field of
environment, should be further enhanced. A revitalized UNEP
should be supported by adequate, stable and predictable
funding. UNDP and UNCTAD should also continue to play a
role in Agenda 21 implementation.
With regard to the bracketed text on IDA and GEF
replenishment, delegates at UNGASS agreed that
implementation of the commitment of the international
financial institutions to sustainable development should
continue to be strengthened. The text also notes that the
World Bank has a significant role to play, bearing in mind
its expertise and the overall volume of resources that it
commands.
3. Future role and programme of work of the Commission on
Sustainable Development
This section states that the CSD, within its mandate, will
continue to provide a central forum for reviewing progress
and for urging further implementation of Agenda 21. The CSD
has a role to play in assessing the challenges of
globalization as they relate to sustainable development,
and should focus on issues that are crucial to achieving
the goals of sustainable development. The CSD should carry
out its work in such a manner as to avoid unnecessary
duplication and repetition of work undertaken by other
relevant forums. Finally, it is recommended that the CSD
adopt the multi-year programme of work for the period 1998-
2002 contained in the annex (see below).
4. Methods of work of the Commission on Sustainable
Development
The CSD is called on to, inter alia:
- make concerted efforts to attract greater involvement in
its work of ministers and high-level national policy makers
responsible for specific economic and social sectors;
- continue to provide a forum for the exchange of national
experiences and best practices in the area of sustainable
development;
- provide a forum for the exchange of experiences on
regional and subregional initiatives and regional
collaboration for sustainable development;
- establish closer interaction with international
financial, development and trade institutions;
- strengthen its interaction with representatives of major
groups; and
- organize the implementation of its next multi-year
programme of work in the most effective and productive way.
In addition, the Secretary-General is invited to review the
functioning of the High-Level Advisory Board on Sustainable
Development. The work of the Committee on New and Renewable
Sources of Energy and on Energy for Development and the
Committee on Natural Resources should be more compatible
with and supportive of the CSD's programme of work.
Finally, the next comprehensive review of progress achieved
in the implementation of Agenda 21 by the General Assembly
will take place in the year 2002.
ANNEX: CSD WORK PROGRAMME
The CSD work programme identifies the sectoral, cross-
sectoral and economic sector/major group themes for the
next four sessions of the Commission. During UNGASS,
delegates agreed that overriding issues for each year would
be poverty, and consumption and production patterns. They
also decided that the sectoral theme for the 1998 session
would be "strategic approaches to freshwater management."
Additional themes and sectors for 1998 are transfer of
technology, capacity-building, education, science,
awareness-raising and industry. The outstanding chapters of
the SIDS Programme of Action will also be reviewed. In
1999, the CSD will consider: oceans and seas; consumption
and production patterns; and tourism. In 2000, it will
consider: integrated planning and management of land
resources; financial resources, trade and investment and
economic growth and agriculture. There will also be a "Day
of Indigenous People." Delegates at UNGASS decided that
atmosphere, energy and transport will be the sectoral
themes in 2001, and added international cooperation for an
enabling environment, information for decision-making and
participation as other cross-sectoral themes. The 2002
session will consist of a comprehensive review.
FINAL MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Friday, 27 June, began amid considerable confusion as
delegates, many bleary-eyed from previous all-night
sessions, tried to find out where and when negotiations
would resume. Rumors were afoot that delegates had
abandoned discussions on the draft political statement. By
mid-morning, informal groups were busily trying to resolve
outstanding issues related to climate change,
desertification and forests. Groups were also discussing
sectoral issues, such as a transport and the proposed
aviation fuel tax, and a number of cross-sectoral issues,
such as consumption and production patterns and trade. The
groups were to report their results to Tolba by early
afternoon and the COW would resume soon after.
The closing meeting of the COW was called to order at 5:10
pm. It continued, albeit with extensive breaks, until 12:10
am. The COW Chair noted that Idunn Eidheim (Norway) would
serve as rapporteur. She presented the proposed UNGASS
outcome, as contained in A/S-19/AC.1/L.1 and Add. 1-32. The
Addenda reflect changes made to A/S-19/14-E/1997/60 during
UNGASS. All documents were adopted, with a few reservations
and comments.
Tolba noted that the Statement of Commitment, Add.1,
replaced the political statement, for which a large body of
outstanding paragraphs remained after extensive
negotiations. He said there was no time to dwell on the
remaining paragraphs, so the President of UNGASS presented
a shorter text informally to various regional
representatives, who, as he understood it, did not object.
Following adoption of the second paragraph regarding
atmosphere, Japan said that, as host country for the
upcoming Conference of the Parties to the FCCC, he
appreciated the commitment of all to this issue. Saudi
Arabia thanked Derek Osborn for successfully meeting the
concerns of all delegations. He noted that his country
cares about the impact of climate change, but added that it
could also be the victim of the response measures that the
Annex I countries will have to take to reduce emissions. He
noted his country's willingness to cooperate but
unwillingness to be the loser from such a process. The EU
expressed appreciation to Japan and thanked Saudi Arabia
for its constructive attitude. Norway, Samoa, Russia, the
US and Australia spoke in favor of the text and thanked
Japan and Chair Osborn for their work on the issue. The COW
concluded its work at 12:20 am.
The General Assembly was convened at 12:30 am by UN General
Assembly President Razali Ismail for adoption of the final
documents. COW Chair Mostafa Tolba reported that in the
complex and detailed review of Agenda 21 just completed,
countries had tried to hold themselves accountable.
Ministers were actively involved in politically significant
issues and the meeting resulted in the Programme for Action
for Further Implementation of Agenda 21. He noted that
quite a few points could not be agreed to until the twenty-
fourth hour. He noted that developing countries were
concerned with the downward trend of ODA and said there is
now a strong signal to developed countries to commit to
targets. He noted that text on energy should provide the
basis for useful international cooperation. Participants
have accomplished much in a relatively short time.
Delegations then gave explanations for their reservations.
Turkey made a reservation on the initiative on freshwater.
He said the text refers to "customary uses of water" as if
the term had legal value in the context of water resource
use. In international law, even an "acquired right" has not
been accepted as criteria in evaluating and determining the
relevant uses of water resources. A number of African
countries, including Uganda, Burundi, Ethiopia, Rwanda,
Sudan and Kenya, also expressed reservations on the
freshwater initiative, noting that "customary use of
water," which is not in Agenda 21, could preempt the
outcome of any programme to favor certain users and uses.
They could not accept it as a basis for the future work of
the CSD. Malta took a reservation on a paragraph referring
to reproductive health.
The G-77/China said that progress has been made at the
national level in implementation of Agenda 21, but the
missing element remains the implementation of Rio
commitments on finance and technology transfer. He said the
Group did not get the significant movement it expected at
UNGASS and asked "Where do we go from here?" While
globalization is global it is not universal in benefits.
The world is crying for answers and this session did not
provide them.
The EU said its high ambitions were not fulfilled, noting
that progress was not made on desertification or finance.
Other discussions, however, revealed progress, such as
those on climate change, forests, eco-efficiency,
freshwater and poverty eradication. She thanked President
Razali for making possible NGO participation in this
process.
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, noting the late hour,
offered a brief statement. He said UNGASS had been
successful in some areas, but others, particularly finance
and technology transfer, would require more time and
political will. He expressed hope that delegates would move
beyond fixed negotiating positions to achieve cooperative
results.
General Assembly President Razali Ismail thanked delegates
for their hard work and noted that for the first time NGOs
stood alongside governments in the General Assembly. While
agreement was not reached on all items, the exchange had at
least been honest and delegates had not "glossed over" the
issues for media consumption. The results are "telling" and
the UN must learn to deal with hard-core economic issues if
it is to be successful. He adjourned the Nineteenth Special
Session of the General Assembly at approximately 1:15 am.
A BRIEF ANALYSIS OF THE SPECIAL SESSION
Five years ago, thousands gathered in Rio de Janeiro to
participate in the creation of an elaborate programming
tool that could set the planet on a new course towards
sustainable development. After two years of preparations
and two weeks of non-stop negotiations at Rio, the UN
Conference on Environment and Development adopted Agenda
21, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and
the Statement on Forest Principles. Two conventions were
also opened for signature: the Framework Convention on
Climate Change (FCCC) and the Convention on Biological
Diversity. All in all, the Earth Summit was considered to
be "a great success." While not everyone was satisfied with
the results, Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration have served
as a blueprint — "the Bible" — for sustainable development
for the last five years.
Since Rio, many of the individual players and the venues
have changed, but the problems remain the same. The major
outstanding issues upon arrival in Rio were atmosphere,
biotechnology, institutions, legal instruments, finance,
technology transfer, freshwater resources and forests.
Other areas where agreement proved elusive until the sun
rose on the last day of the Summit were the need for a
desertification convention, the question of straddling and
highly migratory fish stocks, changing consumption and
production patterns, and trade and environment, among
others.
The issues that proved most difficult to resolve in 1992
are still problematic today. Questions related to the
provision of financial resources and the transfer of
environmentally sound technologies to developing countries
have haunted conferences from Barbados to Cairo, from
desertification negotiations in Paris to climate change
negotiations in Berlin and biodiversity negotiations in
Buenos Aires. Forests have been the subject of four
meetings of the CSD's Intergovernmental Panel on Forests
(IPF), yet heading into UNGASS there was no agreement on
how to proceed. Setting targets and timetables for
greenhouse gas emissions reductions proved impossible
during the negotiations that resulted in the FCCC and are
the subject of current negotiations expected to culminate
in Kyoto in December. Regulating biotechnology safety
almost derailed the biodiversity negotiations in 1992 and
is now the subject of negotiations under the Biodiversity
Convention. So is this "déjà vu all over again," or has the
international community actually made progress over the
past five years?
In some areas, the international community has taken small
steps forward. The Convention to Combat Desertification has
entered into force. There are now agreements on land-based
sources of marine pollution and straddling and highly
migratory fish stocks. Negotiations on a prior informed
consent mechanism for hazardous chemicals are underway, and
negotiations on persistent organic pollutants convention
will begin next year. Governments are now actually
discussing indicators for sustainable development,
reproductive health care and production and consumption
patterns — topics that were practically taboo five years
ago. And the list goes on. However, there are a number of
issues where agreement continues to be elusive and the
debates of today bear a striking resemblance to the debates
at Rio.
FINANCE: The issue of how to finance sustainable
development certainly is as big today as it was five years
ago. Yet rather than trying to forge ahead, delegates
appear to be falling back on Agenda 21 language. One
observer pointed out that Agenda 21 should be the basis for
discussion rather than "the Bible," and there should be a
readiness to move on, especially since Agenda 21 was
written in a different political and economic environment.
For example, negotiators in New York did not address the
big issue of economic globalization, which is not part of
Agenda 21. The private sector has become the major agent of
change even as negotiators at UNGASS are still tied down in
discussions heavily focused on ODA. Many G-77 participants
take the attitude that ODA trends are a benchmark to
measure the success or failure of the Special Session — and
Agenda 21 implementation. For their part, the Northern
delegations did not come to UNGASS prepared to acknowledge
concerns relating to private capital flows, including how
to harness their potential for good, institutional
challenges, and the UN's capacity to monitor and assess the
rapid changes occurring in countries with large private
sector-led growth. The result is a politically frozen
debate while the real world changes daily. Realistically,
Agenda 21's approach to finance needs to be expanded to
embrace globalization and issues like the relationship
between trade and environment, corporate responsibility,
monitoring corporate activities, and identifying issues
that private sector growth will never solve.
The question of innovative financial mechanisms for
sustainable development also appears to be moving slowly. A
large number of intergovernmental and non-governmental
symposia, workshops and working groups on innovative
mechanisms have been held over the past five years and
numerous proposals have surfaced. One such proposal that
made headlines at UNGASS was the international tax on
airline fuel. At the beginning of the Special Session, some
NGOs suggested that acceptance of the EU proposal for an
international tax on airline fuel would be one of the most
important indicators of political will for innovative
action on sustainable development. One estimate is that
such an initiative could raise upwards of $2-3 billion. The
EU rationale was primarily to use the tax to help establish
a link in the public mind between transport options and
sustainable development, notably environmental protection.
In the end, governments took a conservative approach and
the EU had to settle for a text calling for the
continuation of studies in the appropriate fora, including
the International Civil Aviation Organization, on the use
of economic instruments for the mitigation of the negative
environmental impact of aviation. A reference to aviation
fuel tax was relegated to a footnote. The EU, however, is
studying the possibility of implementing such a tax within
its own borders.
CLIMATE CHANGE: The desire to open the Climate Change
Convention for signature at the Earth Summit in Rio gave
governments the political will to push the negotiations to
a bittersweet closure in 1992. Likewise, some governments
and NGOs had hoped to use the "Earth Summit +5" to raise
the political profile of the current negotiations to
strengthen the Convention and push industrialized countries
to commit to specific targets and timetables for greenhouse
gas emissions reductions. UNGASS was not mandated to
determine the outcome of COP-3, but given the level of
attention in high-level statements, the fervor of informal
discussions and the unmoving positions, delegates appeared
keenly aware that the world was watching, closely.
Observers offered a host of comments, ranging from dismay
to complacency as no remarkable changes in position
emerged. The EU and AOSIS sought specific references to
their proposed reduction targets and timetables. The US
emphasized emissions budgets, the participation of all
countries and, with frequent support from Australia, the
need for flexibility in implementation. Saudi Arabia, Iran
and Venezuela insisted on taking into account the economic
effect of response measures on developing countries.
Some FCCC denizens were surprised that Japan, not the most
outspoken of delegations, appeared to be blocking consensus
on a strong statement. Others argued that in reality there
was no consensus to block and Japan, ever conscious of its
host status, seemed determined to ensure that UNGASS did
not prejudice the outcome of COP-3 and invite disaster in
Kyoto come December.
FORESTS: The consensus reached to establish an
intergovernmental forum on forests was described by some
participants as the "only positive outcome" of UNGASS. That
a concrete decision was taken on forests is the result of
the fact that, unlike for other issues such as climate
change or desertification, the Special Session constituted
the main forum for multilateral decision making in this
area.
Forests were the subject of some of the most acrimonious
negotiations during the UNCED process. Heading into Rio,
some felt that the Statement of Forest Principles was in
such a state of disarray with 73 separate pairs of brackets
that no agreement would be adopted. After an all-night
session in Rio, consensus was achieved, yet all parties
involved left the Earth Summit deeply dissatisfied. In
spite of agreement on language, the North-South dialogue on
forests had suffered a potentially irreparable blow.
The first few years of post-Rio forest discussions were
highly fragmented, with governmental, international
organization and NGO forest-related initiatives
proliferating with little coordination. Establishment of
the IPF under the CSD in 1995 served to bring order to the
chaos, institutionally as well as conceptually, by
concentrating multilateral discussion of a range of forest
issues within one forum.
With the conclusion of the IPF, which generated reams of
background information and over 100 recommendations for
action, the question dominating debate at UNGASS was: where
to go from here? While the "convention question" remained
as intractable as ever, the forest debate was conducted in
a much less hostile environment here than was the case at
Rio.
There was, first and foremost, a shared sense of relief
when a consensus decision to set up the Forum was reached,
although views on the substantive content of this decision,
and its consequences for the sustainable management of
forests, remained deeply divided. Some in support of
initiating a negotiation process right away expressed
almost bitter disappointment that an opportunity to send a
clear signal to the world, and to commit to legally-binding
actions on sustainable management and use of forests, had
been missed. Those not ready to discuss legally-binding
commitments emphasized that there was no conceptual clarity
regarding what a convention might contain, and that even
those in support of a convention had different views on the
subject. Instead, it was noted that the IPF had only begun
to discuss extremely complex issues, and that the learning
process needed to continue. The outcome for sustainable
forest management hangs in the balance, dependent upon
whether the Forum indeed galvanizes implementation of IPF
recommendations, or proves to be another three-year talk-
shop that rehashes debates older than Rio.
POLITICAL STATEMENT: In the preparatory process for Rio,
the "Earth Charter" was supposed to be the main political
statement to emerge from the Earth Summit. Negotiations on
the Earth Charter fell apart at PrepCom IV when the Chair
of Working Group III introduced a draft text too early in
the process, before delegates had sufficiently expressed
their positions. In the end, PrepCom Chair Tommy Koh
salvaged the process with extensive consultations and,
occasionally, less than diplomatic behavior. The result was
the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development.
In the preparatory process for UNGASS, however, the
political statement was not so fortunate. The statement, in
effect, died at UNGASS when a number of Ministers requested
GA President Razali Ismail to halt the proceedings chaired
by COW Chair Mostafa Tolba. The dilemma created by the
preparation of the political statement was captured by one
participant close to the Secretariat when he observed that
if the statement was to be merely a summary of positions
agreed to in the Programme for the Further Implementation
of Agenda 21, it would be superfluous. If it was to be a
summary of the text that went beyond the language in the
main Programme it was always going to be difficult to bring
everyone on board. Some agreed that there were other
factors that contributed to the demise of the political
statement, including the way in which Tolba and Vice-Chair
Monika Linn-Locher conducted initial consultations and
responded to serious questions of procedure at the end of
CSD-5.
Tolba's role was identified as a contributing factor to the
collapse of the negotiations on the political statement —
although ultimately the lack of agreement derailed the
process. One participant said that many of Tolba's actions
were viewed with mistrust from the outset, especially by
some within the G-77. Questions of ownership and timing of
the negotiations on the political statement also influenced
the collapse. Perhaps had Tolba allowed time for delegates
to formally state their initial positions on the political
statement at CSD-5, before he and Linn-Locher submitted the
first draft, then delegates would have felt a greater sense
of ownership of the document. Even though Tolba held
consultations on the political statement at CSD-5 and
during the intersessional period, delegates did not have
the opportunity to formally comment on anything until the
negotiations during the week prior to UNGASS. By then it
was too late. In contrast, countries who share the French
language successfully concluded their own ministerial
declaration. Observers praised its focus, content and
brevity. There are notable references to the need for
conclusive role for women at all levels of decision-making
and on the innovative contribution of NGOs and local
implementation sustainable development.
ROLE OF MAJOR GROUPS: From the institutional point of view,
there is one area where there has been great progress since
Rio. During the UNCED preparatory process and in Rio, NGOs
had limited access to delegates and the negotiations. UNCED
PrepCom IV was characterized by the placement of UN
security officers at every conference room door with
instructions to keep NGOs out of informal consultations.
Through the work of the CSD and the other conferences held
since 1992, NGOs have made great strides in achieving
access to and influence on the proceedings. UNGASS marked a
major milestone. For the first time NGOs and other Major
Groups stood side by side with Heads of State and
Government to deliver speeches to a Special Session of the
General Assembly and were also allowed into ministerial-
level consultations.
The extraordinary skills and quaint humor of UNED-UK chief,
Derek Osborn, a former civil servant and current NGO
representative, spoke volumes about the contribution of
NGOs. Delegates paid tribute to Mr. Osborn's skillful
handling of the negotiations on many of the difficult
issues in the working group on sectoral issues. The profile
and energy behind some of the most practical and salient
proposals — on a finance panel and an international tax on
air fuel — were also due to NGO activity.
The key role of NGOs was acknowledged in a meeting between
NGOs and British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Responding to
the strength of his commitments on climate change as
outlined in a speech Monday, Blair responded, "that was the
easy part. Now you guys will have to get in behind us."
This need to bring NGOs on board to keep up the pressure
and help mobilize the public in readiness for far-reaching
policy on climate change was also echoed in US President
Bill Clinton's speech, with his announcement of a White
House Conference and stated belief that "we must first
convince the American people and the Congress that the
climate change problem is real and immense."
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? As the 19th Special Session came
to a close, many delegates and observers were asking each
other if the meeting had been a success. Perhaps General
Assembly President Razali Ismail captured the truth of the
second "Earth Summit" in his closing speech to the Plenary.
He turned the collapse of delegates' efforts to prepare a
media-friendly "Political Statement" for Heads of State
into the message itself: this was not a time to paper over
the cracks in the celebrated "global partnership" for
sustainable development and pretend that things are better
than they are. This was a time for sober assessment, honest
acknowledgement that "progress to operationalize
sustainable development remains insufficient," and
acknowledgement of the enormous difficulties of overcoming
short-term and vested interests that would enable concrete
commitments to specific targets and global programmes. As
Amb. Razali commented, such an honest appraisal was a
result in itself and was perhaps the key outcome of the
Special Session: the "lofty expectations" launched in Rio
collided with the street-wise realpolitik of New York
diplomacy at UN Headquarters.
Nevertheless, UNGASS did raise the political profile of
sustainable development and the work of the Commission on
Sustainable Development to levels not seen since 1993. Now
the real challenge is for governments and NGOs alike to
capitalize on this exposure and try to advance new
initiatives at the international, national and local
levels. The one area where there was immediate consensus
was that much more still needs to be done to make
sustainable development the "business as usual."
THINGS TO LOOK FOR BEFORE CSD-6
FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE: The next sessions
of the subsidiary bodies are scheduled to take place in
Bonn from 28 July to 7 August 1997 at the Hotel Maritim.
SBSTA, SBI and AG-13 will meet from 28-30 July and are
likely to meet once more during the following week. The
AGBM will begin on Thursday, 31 July. The subsidiary bodies
are scheduled to meet again from 20-31 October 1997 in Bonn
at a conference facility to be determined. At present, all
subsidiary bodies except for AG-13 are scheduled to meet in
October.
The third Conference of the Parties is scheduled for 1-12
December 1997 in Kyoto, Japan. COP-3 will immediately
allocate the completion of decisions of the Berlin Mandate
process to a sessional Committee of the Whole, open to all
delegations. The political negotiations will be finalized
in a ministerial segment, which will be convened from 8-10
December and where the final text of a protocol or other
legal instrument will be adopted. For all meetings related
to the FCCC, contact the secretariat in Bonn, Germany; tel:
+49-228-815-1000; fax: +49-228-815-1999; e-mail:
secretariat@unfccc.de. Also try the FCCC home page at
http://www.unfccc.de and UNEP's Information Unit for
Conventions at http://www.unep.ch/iuc.html.
CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY: SBSTTA-3 will be held
in Montreal from 1-5 September 1997. The third meeting of
the Ad Hoc Group on Biosafety (BSWG-3) is scheduled for 13-
17 October 1997 in Montreal. Other CBD-related meetings
include a Latin American and Caribbean regional meeting on
the Clearinghouse Mechanism, tentatively scheduled for July
in Colombia, and a workshop on the implementation of
Article 8(j) (traditional knowledge), tentatively scheduled
from 10-14 November 1997 in a venue to be determined. COP-4
is scheduled for 4-15 May 1998 in Bratislava, Slovakia. For
more information contact the CBD Secretariat, World Trade
Centre, 413 St. Jacques Street, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
H2Y 1N9; tel: +1-514-288-2220; fax: +1-514-288-6588; e-
mail: biodiv@mtl.net. Also try http://www.biodiv.org.
CONVENTION TO COMBAT DESERTIFICATION: The resumed session
of INCD-10 is scheduled from 18-22 August 1997 in Geneva.
COP-1 is currently scheduled for 29 September - 1 October
1997 in Rome. For more information, contact the CCD
Secretariat, Geneva Executive Center, 11/13 Chemin des
Anemones, CH-1219 Chatelaine, Geneva, Switzerland; tel:
+41- 22-979-9419; fax: +41-22-979-9030/31; e-mail:
secretariat@unccd.ch. Also see the INCD World Wide Web site
at http://www.unep.ch/incd.html.
MONTREAL PROTOCOL: The preparatory meeting for the Ninth
Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol is
scheduled from 9-12 September 1997 in Montreal, to be
followed by the Ninth Meeting of the Parties from 15-17
September. For information contact the Secretariat for the
Vienna Convention and the Montreal Protocol, P.O. Box
30552, Nairobi, Kenya; tel: +254-2-62-1234/62-3851; fax:
+254-2-52-1930; e-mail: ozoneinfo@unep.org. Also try
http://www.unep.org/unep/secretar/ozone/home.htm.
ELEVENTH WORLD FORESTRY CONGRESS: The Congress, with the
theme "Forestry for Sustainable Development: Towards the
21st Century," is scheduled for 13-22 October 1997 in
Antalya, Turkey. The technical programme has been
structured into seven main programme areas, which follow
the seven basic criteria of sustainable forest management
(SFM) under consideration by the various processes
(Montreal, Helsinki, Tarapoto, etc.). For information
contact: Mesut Y. Kamiloglu, Ministry of Forestry, Ataturk
Bulvari 153, Ankara, Turkey, tel: + 90-312-4177724, fax: +
90-312- 4179160, e-mail: obdi-f@servis.net.tr or Luis
Santiago Botero, FAO, Forestry Department; tel: +39 6/5225
5088, fax: +39 6/5225 5137, e-mail: luis.botero@fao.org.
Also try
http://www.fao.org/waicent/faoinfo/forestry/wforcong/.
PRIOR INFORMED CONSENT: The fourth session of the INC for
the preparation of an international legally-binding
instrument for the application of a prior informed consent
procedure for certain hazardous chemicals in international
trade (INC-4) will be held in Brussels from 20-24 October
1997. A diplomatic conference with a short preparatory INC
session is envisaged for December 1997 in Rotterdam, the
Netherlands. The UNEP Governing Council, at its last
meeting, adopted a decision calling for completion of
negotiations on a legally-binding agreement by the end of
1997. For more information contact: UNEP Chemicals (IRPTC);
tel: +41-22-979-9111; fax: +41-22-797-3460; e-mail:
IRTPC@unep.ch.
BASEL CONVENTION: The Fourth Session of the Conference of
the Parties to the Basel Convention on Hazardous Wastes is
expected to be held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia from 6 - 10
October 1997. For information contact I. Rummel-Bulska,
Basel Secretariat; tel: +41-22-979-9213; fax: +41-22-797-
3454, e-mail: sbc@unep.ch. Also try UNEP's Information Unit
for Conventions at http://www.unep.ch/iuc.html.
UN CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA: The International
Seabed Authority (ISBA) will hold its resumed third session
from 18-29 August 1997 in Kingston, Jamaica. The resumed
first session of the Commission on the Limits of the
Continental Shelf will be held from 2-12 September 1997.
The Eighth Meeting of States parties to the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) will be held from
18-22 May 1998. For information contact doalos@un.org or
try http://www.un.org/Depts/los.
INDEPENDENT WORLD COMMISSION ON THE OCEANS: The Independent
Commission on Oceans will hold its fifth session in Cape
Town, South Africa from 11-14 November 1997 and its sixth
session in Lisbon, Portugal in July 1998, in conjunction
with EXPO'98. "The Oceans: A Heritage for the Future." The
Commission seeks to draw attention to the issues of ocean
development and encourage the further development of the
ocean regime evolving from UNCLOS. For information contact
the Secretariat in Geneva; tel: + 41-22-710-0711; fax: +41-
22-710-0722; e-mail: secretariat@world-oceans.org.
|
|
This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin enb@iisd.org is written and edited by Chad Carpenter, LL.M. chadc@iisd.org, Peter Doran PF.Doran@ulst.ac.uk, Aarti Gupta aagupta@minerva.cis.yale.edu and Lynn Wagner lynn@iisd.org. The Editor is Pamela Chasek, Ph.D. pam@iisd.org and the Managing Editor is Langston James "Kimo" Goree VI kimo@iisd.org. French translation by Mongi Gadhoum mongi.gadhoum@enb.intl.tn. The sustaining donors of the Bulletin are the Netherlands Ministry for Development Cooperation and the Government of Canada. General support for the Bulletin during 1997 is provided by the Overseas Development Administration (ODA) of the United Kingdom, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, the European Community (DG-XI), the German Ministry of Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, the Ministry of Environment of Sweden, the Swiss Federal Office of the Environment, and UNDP. Specific funding for coverage of this meeting has been provided by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Norway. Funding for the French version has been provided by ACCT/IEPF. The ENB can be contacted at tel: +1-212-644-0204; fax: +1-212-644-0206. IISD can be contacted at 161 Portage Avenue East, 6th Floor, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 0Y4, Canada; tel: +1-204-958-7700; fax: +1-204-958-7710. The opinions expressed in the Earth Negotiations Bulletin are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD and other funders. Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin may be used in other publications only with appropriate citation. Electronic versions of the Bulletin are sent to e-mail distribution lists (ASCII and PDF format) and can be found on the Linkages WWW-server at http://www.iisd.ca/linkages/. For further information on ways to access, support or contact the Earth Negotiations Bulletin send e-mail to enb@iisd.org.
The Sustainable Developments may not be reproduced,
reprinted or posted to any system without specific permission from the
International Institute for Sustainable Development. This limitation includes
distribution via Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists, print media
and broadcast. For more information, send a message to the Managing Editor at <kimo@iisd.org>. |