ENB:05:86 [Next] . [Previous] . [Contents]

PROPOSED PROGRAMME FOR THE FURTHER IMPLEMENTATION OF AGENDA 21

Vice-Chair John Ashe (Antigua and Barbuda) chaired morning and evening negotiations on outstanding cross-sectoral issues. Intersessional Co-Chair Derek Osborn (UK) chaired afternoon and evening discussions on outstanding sectoral issues.

Integration of economic, social and environmental objectives: In paragraph 23 (making trade and environment mutually supportive), delegates agreed to text noting that the elimination of discriminatory and protectionist trade practices will improve access for developing countries’ exports and facilitate the full integration of economies in transition. In 23(b) (multilateral trading system), the EC and US supported the reference to trade and environment policies being mutually supportive. The G-77/CHINA preferred to delete “policies.” A reformulation based on GA resolution 51/167 was considered. The US supported the call for considering effects on sustainable development in connection with decisions on further liberalization. INDIA believed the WTO’s Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) is the appropriate forum for such deliberations.

In 23(f) (cooperation between relevant institutions), INDIA repeated her reservation to strengthening cooperation between UNCTAD, UNIDO, WTO, UNEP and other relevant institutions on environment and sustainable development issues in the context of domestic and FDI, including a possible multilateral framework on investment. The EC supported the text. On subparagraph 23(f)bis (effective dialogue with major groups within the WTO CTE), AUSTRALIA opposed an INDIAN proposal to delete the subparagraph and suggested a reference to NGOs working on trade and environment issues in specific organizations. MEXICO asked for a reference to CTE rules for participation of major groups. The US added language on important NGO work. The paragraph remained bracketed.

On 23(h) (making trade and environment mutually supportive), the US introduced language from Agenda 21 on avoiding arbitrary and unjustifiable trade discrimination. The EC said the WTO, UNEP and UNCTAD should consider ways to make trade and environment mutually supportive. There was no agreement during the morning.

Sectors and issues: On 29 (initiating a strategic approach on freshwater), TURKEY and ETHIOPIA noted concerns with the reference to “customary uses” of water. The EU suggested that they specify this concern in their reservations. Chair Osborn invited comments on the energy section in paragraphs 35-39. SAUDI ARABIA proposed deletion of subparagraphs 39(a) (energy at CSD-9), 39(g) (cost internalization) and 39(h) (coordination on energy issues at the UN), which had been agreed ad referendum. NIGERIA, supported by LIBYA, wanted to delete details of CSD-9 preparations in 39(a). CANADA, the US, AUSTRALIA, JAPAN, NORWAY and the EU resisted the call to re-open negotiations. Chair Osborn said he would report the situation regarding the views of SAUDI ARABIA, NIGERIA and LIBYA to the COW. On subparagraph 40(e) (aviation fuel tax), the G-77/CHINA asked for immediate deletion. The EU said it should go to the COW.

On five proposals for a paragraph 42 (FCCC COP-3 negotiations in Kyoto), the Chair said he would report that the group could not reach agreement, and that two new proposals had been tabled: one for deletion and one, from JAPAN, supported by the US and possibly CANADA, for a new draft paragraph based on the Group of 8 communique from Denver. The EU, supported by AOSIS, favored ministerial consultations on the options. AOSIS said the G-8 figures would be unacceptable. SAUDI ARABIA, NIGERIA, VENEZUELA and IRAN called for deletion. KOREA and RUSSIA supported the proposal urging agreement on a satisfactory COP-3 result.

On paragraph 49 (radioactive wastes), delegations responding to G-77CHINA proposals, agreed to: drop a reference to Principle 2 of the Rio Declaration and underline “all” Principles; and conduct, as appropriate, health studies around sites affected by nuclear activities with a view to identifying where health treatment may be needed and should be provided. They agreed with RUSSIAN proposals to: replace references to nuclear wastes with “radioactive wastes;” state (in paragraphs 49 and 50) that radioactive wastes “should be” disposed of in the territory of the State in which they are produced, to be consistent with the forthcoming IAEA Convention.

In 55 (desertification and drought), the G-77/CHINA supported text noting that the international community should “ensure new and additional financial resources.” The US objected to the reference to new and additional resources. The EU offered to replace the new and additional reference, ad referendum, with “promote actions leading to the mobilization and channelling of substantial resources for” implementation. Informal consultations will continue.

In 65 (human-made or technological disasters), delegations agreed, ad referendum, to the proposal to use “Other disasters with an adverse impact on the environment” in the title and introductory sentence.

Means of implementation: On 67 (ODA), the G-77/CHINA supported the reference to ODA remaining a main source of external funding and called for deletion of a reference to a role for ODA in encouraging country-driven policy reform efforts. The US, EU and AUSTRALIA objected to the latter, which was reformulated to encourage, “where appropriate, all aspects of country-driven capacity building and strengthening.” The G-77/CHINA reordered the institutions in 73 (understanding the impact of indebtedness) to invite the UN, the World Bank and the IMF to collaborate with UNCTAD in considering the interrelationship between indebtedness and sustainable development. In 74 (domestic resource mobilization), the G-77/CHINA added text noting that, while financing for the implementation of Agenda 21 will come from countries’ own public and private sectors, international cooperation is also essential. The EU placed the international cooperation reference at the beginning of the sentence and the US, supported by AUSTRALIA, replaced “essential” with “important,” to which the G- 77/CHINA added “very.” Delegates deliberated into the night.

[Return to start of article]