Vol. 05 No. 147
Monday, 13 March 2000
On Monday morning, 6 March, Choi Seok-Young (Republic of
Korea), a member of the CSD Bureau, opened the first meeting
of Expert Group on behalf of CSD Chair Juan Mayr (Colombia).
Mohammed Reza Salamat (Iran) was elected by acclamation to
Co-Chair the group. Following a requested vote by secret
ballot, Irene Freudenschuss Reichl (Austria) was also elected
Co-Chair. Marcio Nunes (Brazil) and Jaroslav Maroušek (Czech
Republic) were elected as Vice-Chairs. The election of one
other Vice-Chair was postponed pending a nomination from the
African Group. Following the ballot, the G-77/China said that
political issues should not be allowed to intrude in an expert
process.
In their opening remarks, the Co-Chairs stressed the need
for constructive dialogue to enhance the mutual understanding
of views and concerns on energy within the context of
sustainable development. Delegates then adopted the Agenda and
Programme of Work (E/ CN.17/ESD/2000/1).
The Group first considered the World Energy Assessment (WEA),
which addresses, inter alia: why the present energy
system is not sustainable; the need for a paradigm shift to
sustainability; available solutions; future scenarios; issues
and options; and current work on energy and sustainable
development. Delegates then participated in a panel discussion
on global energy trends, financing, investments, sustainable
energy and sustainable development. The panelists were drawn
from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC),
the International Energy Agency (IEA), the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP) and the Global Environment Facility (GEF).
On Tuesday, 7 March, the Expert Group heard general
statements from country delegations, UN agencies and regional
commissions and NGOs. Delegates also began exchanging views on
the key issues raised in the Reports of the UN
Secretary-General on Energy and Sustainable Development: Key
Issues (E/CN.17/ESD/2000/3) and National Submissions (E/CN.17/ESD/2000/2).
The first draft Co-Chairs’ Summary of the discussions on the
key issues was considered on Wednesday, at which time the
Group raised a number of issues for inclusion in a revised
summary. A second draft version was discussed on Thursday,
following consideration of the programme of work for the
intersessional period and the provisional agenda for the
Expert Group’s second session. Delegates dwelled at length
on the nature of the document and procedural issues, and
agreed that the draft summary was not a negotiated document
and did not represent a consensus, but rather reflected both
shared and contested views of countries and groups of
countries on the identification of and approaches to key
issues. A third and final revision of the Co-Chairs’ Summary
was distributed on Friday during the closing Plenary.
CO-CHAIRS’ FINAL SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSION ON KEY ISSUES
ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT
The following is a synopsis of the third and final version
of the Co-Chairs’ Summary of the discussions on key issues
and organization of work for the second session. A brief
outline of some of the debates on the two draft summaries that
preceded the final version is also included to illuminate the
history of debate leading up to the preparation of the final
Summary.
INTRODUCTION: This section outlines the history of the
mandate for the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Group of Experts on
Energy and Sustainable Development, summarizes the work of the
first session, and outlines its modus operandi leading up to
CSD-9.
In discussions held on Thursday, 9 March, the EU, opposed
by the G-77/China, pressed for special reference to essential
points from the EU background paper (E/CN.17/ESD/2000/4), most
notably market reform and the internalization of
externalities. Referring to the background paper that had been
submitted to the Secretariat, he challenged the view that only
those points elaborated on the floor of the meeting could be
reflected in the Co-Chairs’ Summary. The G-77/China said he
would "tear a document to pieces" if its contents
had not been presented for consideration by the
intergovernmental process. He stressed the Group’s key
interests in technology transfer, capacity building and
finance for sustainable development. Brazil called on the EU
to refrain from introducing politicized debates on issues such
as pricing and market reform. The EU responded that the issues
of internalizing externalities and market reform were as
relevant to the work of the Expert Group as they were
intimately tied to the issue of energy in the context of
sustainable development. The US, the UK and the EU expressed
concerns with the implication that the content of the
Co-Chairs’ Summary enjoyed the support of the Group as a
whole.
The final text traces the mandate of the Expert Group back
to the decision by the 19th Special Session of the General
Assembly. The work of the first session is outlined, together
with an indication that preparations for CSD-9 should build on
Agenda 21, UNGASS, and other international documents and
processes with a bearing on energy and sustainable
development. The section states that the Expert Group will
benefit from exchange of information with other
intergovernmental processes, consider the special
circumstances of developing countries, and emphasize the
expert nature of its work and its overall objective. The
Expert Group process will endeavor to provide information for
decision-makers for their consideration in policy development.
SECTION TWO: KEY ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION BY CSD-9: This
section contains eleven subsections dedicated to each of the
key issues prioritized during discussions at the first session
of the Expert Group.
An attempt by Saudi Arabia to delete or edit text in the
second draft Co-Chairs’ Summary that implied that fossil
fuel use is unsustainable was opposed by the EU. The
G-77/China and Saudi Arabia disputed a statement that
"current energy systems do not support the goals of
sustainable development." Iceland and the UK preferred
language in the first draft Co-Chairs’ Summary, which
describes the current unsustainable pattern of production and
use of energy.
The final text notes that technical work will be required
during the preparatory process leading up to CSD-9, to promote
a common understanding of the challenges and constraints
inherent in the concept of energy for sustainable development.
It states that progress will be determined by factors such as
socio-economic conditions, stages of development and political
will.
Accessibility of Energy: This section notes that access to
energy is crucial to the achievement of economic and social
development, poverty alleviation and addressing environmental
concerns.
The G-77/China said that accessibility of energy does not
simply depend on market stability, and called for low-cost
financing schemes for developing countries. Switzerland
opposed Saudi Arabia’s proposal to delete references to the
diversification of energy sources and on information and
enhanced transparency. Finland underlined the acute problems
of fuel access in some countries. Denmark called for the
promotion of environmentally sound and economically
advantageous solar, wind, biomass and ocean-based
technologies.
The final text notes the need to deliver energy services
reliably, affordably, economically and in an environmentally
sound and socially acceptable manner, particularly in
developing countries. Diversification of energy sources is
underlined. The section also notes:
measures to enhance security of supply and demand, and
market stability;
the need to address the growing problem of access to
sustainable fuel wood;
the increasing importance of electricity in the energy
mix;
the array of new challenges for the power sector in
developing countries;
the possible contribution of liberalization of electric
power markets;
rural electrification;
solar, wind, biomass and ocean-based technologies;
investments in cross border infrastructure; and
transport of energy products.
Energy Efficiency: This section notes the need to increase
the efficiency of current conventional energy production,
conversion, transportation, distribution and use.
The G-77/China remarked that he saw portends for the
intergovernmental process after Denmark called for new
sections on energy pricing and market reforms, with
recognition of regional variations. He explained that the
introduction of proposals on certification, labeling, pricing
and market reform would lead to these elements becoming
conditionalities for developing countries unless they were
introduced as part of a package that also included technology
transfer, capacity building and treatment of financial flows.
Egypt called for references to "energy for sustainable
development" rather than "sustainable energy."
The final text notes the large gains achievable in all
types of energy technology and economic sectors, urges
consideration of energy policies for accelerated development
alongside technological adaptation to reduce the growth of
energy use, and discusses investment, technology transfer, and
national institutional and legal frameworks. It also notes the
need for attention to long-term planning, energy conservation,
and addresses energy efficiency, international cooperation for
technology adaptation, and public awareness.
Renewable Energy: This section notes the importance of
renewable energy, with due consideration to cost
effectiveness.
In early exchanges before the Co-Chairs prepared their
first draft, the International Union for the Conservation of
Nature (IUCN) expressed concern at the G-77/China’s emphasis
on conventional energy sources and their rejection of
"leap frogging" to cleaner and more efficient energy
sources. The IUCN recalled that the WEA report had clearly
demonstrated that a conventional high technology resource path
would be so capital intensive that it would leave little room
for spending on other critical needs in developing countries.
The G-77/ China, with Venezuela, sought to use language on
subsidies from Agenda 21 and UNGASS, while Saudi Arabia called
for the deletion of a paragraph on this issue. Egypt described
an EU call for an increased role for renewables in the least
developed countries, as too ambitious. Saudi Arabia proposed
deleting a paragraph on investment initiatives for renewable
technologies, describing them as subsidies.
The final text notes that an increased role for renewable
energy will be linked, in developing countries, to technology
transfer and availability, and capacity building. It also
addresses: the role of research; market expansion to reduce
the costs of technologies; information gathering on the
availability of renewables; and investment initiatives,
including the requirement for bilateral and multilateral
assistance. The section also deals with market analysis and
public awareness, and addresses costs and other constraints in
developing countries.
Advanced Fossil Fuel Technologies: This section notes the
need to promote, research, develop and use advanced and
cleaner fossil fuel technologies. It calls on the
international community to cooperate in the dissemination and
transfer of such advanced technologies, in their operation and
in financing their use.
Nuclear Energy Technologies: This section acknowledges that
nuclear energy will continue to contribute to the overall
energy mix, and notes the need to find acceptable responses to
concerns such as reactor safety, radioactive waste management,
proliferation of fissile material and life cycle costs.
In discussing this issue, there was disagreement over
whether nuclear energy should be considered as a means to
achieve sustainable development. The Russian Federation, Iran
and Canada supported nuclear energy as an option for
sustainable development, while Italy, Austria, Denmark,
Ireland, Belgium, the Republic of Korea and the Netherlands
objected. Colombia noted that one nuclear accident is more
lethal for the environment and health than an accident
involving other energy sources.
Rural Energy: The Co-Chairs’ summary underlines the
challenge of providing affordable energy services that are
designed to meet local needs, such as water supplies, to rural
areas. Discussions on this issue underscored the need to
include energy for production and income generation when
considering access to energy for the rural and urban poor. The
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) underscored the role
of energy in enhancing agricultural productivity. The EU
emphasized the use of domestic resources and the role of the
private sector in providing rural energy.
The Co-Chairs’ Summary states that financing mechanisms
for rural energy services should be designed to maximize local
ownership by extending credit at low cost to the local
community, and by introducing other innovative financial
mechanisms. It recognizes that this will require domestic
resources and both national and international cooperative
efforts to mobilize additional resources. It also notes the
social and economic benefits of enabling women in rural areas
to become beneficiaries of environmentally sound energy
technologies.
Energy and Transportation: This section acknowledges that
transportation is the fastest growing energy-consuming sector,
and notes the potential that exists in using alternative fuels
and additives. It notes that there are a number of possible
policies to encourage faster uptake of alternative fuels and
reduce the negative environmental impacts of transportation.
It states that initiatives should build on existing industrial
and manufacturing agreements, which establish guidelines for
improved product efficiency. During discussions on Wednesday,
8 March, Saudi Arabia suggested deleting reference to
"negative environmental and social impacts of
transportation" and reference to encouraging uptake of
alternative fuels. Switzerland and the Russian Federation
underscored the development and promotion of public
transportation, while Austria and Denmark called for the
adoption of efficient transportation policies.
Technology Transfer: This section addresses the need to
identify the transfer of energy technologies in order to
achieve energy for sustainable development. During initial
discussions on this issue, the G-77/China highlighted
technology transfer and adaptation, as well as the removal of
barriers to these. He proposed including the concept of
capacity building with technology transfer to ensure
maintenance of a sustainable energy supply. The Russian
Federation emphasized the importance of scientific cooperation
and technical research, the commercialization and marketing of
cleaner technologies, and the role of technology leadership.
The final text notes the need to remove constraints and
barriers to the effective transfer of energy technologies, and
to consider international cooperation that encourages local
development, adaptation, operation and maintenance of
environmentally sound technologies. It recognizes the
important but differentiated contributions of the public and
private sectors in efforts to enhance scientific and technical
cooperation, and emphasizes the role of government in
developing and fostering enabling policy, legal and
institutional frameworks.
Capacity Building: This section outlines the role of
capacity building in international cooperation activities. It
recognizes that education and awareness levels of end-users
should be raised to promote the acceptability of many
environmentally sound energy technologies, and underscores the
need to support increased civil society participation in
national and international project development.
Mobilization of Financial Resources: This section
highlights the need for additional financial resources for
sustainable energy, and identifies specific measures aimed at
promoting such resources. During the discussion on the
section, the UN Economic Commission for Europe (ECE), with
Switzerland, suggested that the opportunities offered by the
Kyoto Protocol’s mechanisms should be fully exploited.
Venezuela, supported by the G-77/China, Indonesia and Tunisia,
objected to the proposal, noting that the Protocol is not yet
in force. Indonesia, with the G-77/China, said the ECE’s
proposal was an attempt to dilute the use of overseas
development assistance (ODA). Canada suggested using ODA
funding for "capacity building" for sustainable
energy development, while the US suggested that such funding
should be "to support" developing countries. The EU
emphasized the importance of enhancing the effectiveness of
existing financial resources, and called for specific sections
on price incentives and market reform. Nepal emphasized the
need for structural reforms in the energy sector. On the
question of subsidies, the Russian Federation added the
qualifier "environmentally harmful subsidies,"
suggesting that these apply to production not consumption.
Denmark emphasized the environmental and economic inefficiency
concerns surrounding subsidies. The US noted that not all
developing countries are hampered by debt problems.
The final text notes the need for substantial new and
additional financial resources to support developing countries’
efforts to move towards sustainable energy practices. It calls
on multilateral financial institutions to strengthen their
financial assistance, and notes the importance of an enabling
environment for attracting private investment, including
increased privatization, market liberalization and the gradual
removal of harmful subsidies. It notes that the importance of
the internalization of externalities to achieve accurate price
signals was highlighted, and that concerns were also raised on
this matter. It further notes that the external debt problem
could continue to hamper developing countries in achieving
sustainable development, and highlights the need to provide
for the protection of biodiversity when investing in the
development of new energy sources.
International and Regional Cooperation: This section deals
with the important role of international and regional
cooperation in addressing the challenges of sustainable
development. During the discussion, the G-77/China pressed for
the cancellation of unsustainable foreign debt and for
increased ODA and foreign direct investment flows. A proposal
from Switzerland on the use of the Kyoto Protocol mechanisms,
Joint Implementation and the Clean Development Mechanism, was
opposed by Venezuela, who pointed out that the Protocol has
not come into effect. Canada supported public-private
partnerships to enhance capacity building in developing
countries. Nepal and the Russian Federation called for
regional cooperation on energy transmission as well as retail
energy distribution.
The final text identifies roles for: UN regional
commissions and other regional organizations; regional energy
cooperation agreements; and energy policy and planning. Donors
and international financial institutions and the UN are asked
to pay particular attention to least developed countries (LDCs).
A final paragraph calls for an intensification of
international cooperation, both North-South and South-South,
in order to create environmentally sound, cost effective and
affordable energy systems and promote energy efficiency.
ANNEX I: PROGRAMME OF WORK BETWEEN THE FIRST AND SECOND
SESSIONS OF THE EXPERT GROUP: The Expert Group considered its
intersessional work programme on Thursday, 9 March, and
adopted the draft programme of work during the closing
plenary. The Group welcomed the proposals to hold expert
meetings and consultations, particularly those at the regional
level. (Editors’ Note: Some of these activities are listed
below in the "Things to Look For" section of this
report.)
The Programme of Work takes note of information provided by
delegates and representatives of UN regional bodies and
agencies, on ongoing or planned expert activities on energy
and sustainable development. The G-77/China welcomed the
announcements on intersessional events, but stressed that the
outputs of these activities should serve only to inform the
intergovernmental meetings.
The Programme of Work states that any decisions on policy
recommendations to be presented at CSD-9 will rest with the
Expert Group. All countries and organizations planning or
proposing activities are called on to ensure the open-ended,
transparent, participatory and representative nature of their
initiatives, as well as the balanced and active involvement of
developed and developing countries and relevant stakeholders.
During the period leading to the second session of the
Expert group, views on key issues will be solicited from
governments and case studies will be compiled on specific
issues under discussion.
ANNEX II: PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR THE SECOND SESSION THE
EXPERT GROUP: The Provisional Agenda produced by the Expert
Group includes consideration of the key issues for sustainable
development in tandem with further discussion on the means of
implementation, capacity building, technology transfer and
financial resources. The key issues include energy
accessibility, energy efficiency, renewable energy, advanced
fossil fuel technologies, nuclear energy technologies, rural
energy and energy-related issues in transportation. It also
includes provision for consideration of regional initiatives
and endeavors, and success stories in the promotion of energy
for sustainable development.
A proposed agenda item in the earlier draft of the
provisional agenda, to review progress made since UNCED, was
deleted following doubts expressed by the G-77/China about the
relevance of this issue to the mandate of the Expert Group.
Other discussions included whether to include an agenda item
on market reforms and the priority to be accorded to the item
on success stories.
CLOSING PLENARY
On Friday, 10 March, Co-Chair Freudenschuss Reichl opened
the final Plenary meeting of the Expert Group. Delegates heard
a statement by the World Bank, and considered the Expert Group’s
proposed intersessional programme of work and provisional
agenda for its second session.
The World Bank underlined the importance of sustainable
energy within the Bank and noted its recently approved
environmental strategy for energy, "Fuel for
Thought." Noting the need for a proactive approach, he
emphasized the importance of, inter alia: rural energy;
increased action on urban air pollution; development of new
technologies; promotion of renewable energy sources; and the
effective transfer of knowledge. He stressed the importance of
motivating investors to view clean energy as a good and
profitable business, and underlined the benefits of
deregulation, decentralized private commercial schemes, and
the development of new business models. He identified current
activities of the International Finance Corporation (IFC), and
noted the potential catalytic role of the recently approved
carbon fund.
INTERSESSIONAL PROGRAMME OF WORK: Co-Chair Freudenschuss
Reichl introduced Annex I, containing the intersessional
programme of work, which includes a listing of ongoing and
planned initiatives that will support the work of the Expert
Group and further work to be undertaken in preparation of the
Group’s second session.
The EU welcomed the emphasis on regional activities and the
importance of drawing on experiences. He drew attention to the
ongoing Energy Week of the World Bank and the work of the
Inter-Agency Task Force on Energy. JoAnne DiSano, Director of
the UN Division for Sustainable Development, said the
Inter-Agency Task Force on Energy is comprised of all UN
agencies involved in energy issues. She said the Task Force
was compiling a comprehensive overview of the agencies’
relevant activities. She pledged to work with the Co-Chairs to
ensure that a timely and comprehensive input is made by the
Task Force into the work of the Expert Group. CANADA informed
delegates of two upcoming meetings to be hosted by the
Canadian Government. The NETHERLANDS drew attention to the
Sixth Conference of the Parties to the FCCC to be held in The
Hague, noting the relevance of the results of that meeting to
the work of the Group. DENMARK expressed its interest in
advancing the understanding of structural reforms in the
energy sector and said it was considering arranging a series
of regional workshops on the subject. SAMOA welcomed the
attention paid to regional initiatives, stating that this
would help to address the problems of the smaller countries.
The G-77/ CHINA welcomed the information on the forthcoming
activities and said that whereas his Group was supportive of
formal and informal workshops and studies, the outcomes of
these should be designed to inform and not upstage the
intergovernmental process.
ICELAND, supported by AUSTRALIA, the EU and the US,
proposed soliciting more input on success stories from
governments. The US requested the Secretariat to compile
information on regional initiatives and best practices to
facilitate an exchange of ideas on efforts to promote
sustainable development. SWITZERLAND noted that the FCCC
Secretariat was involved in similar activities to compile
experiences.
PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR THE SECOND SESSION OF THE EXPERT
GROUP: The Co-Chair invited comments on the Provisional Agenda
for the Second Session. The final draft takes on board two new
developments. The first new element reflects the desire of
delegations to have separate chapters on advanced fossil fuel
technologies and nuclear technologies. The second change is
the exclusion of an element on input to the Rio+10 process,
following doubts expressed by the G-77/China about the
relevance of this issue to the mandate of the Expert Group.
The US suggested that an item on "Learning from each
other: Success Stories in the Promotion of Energy for
Sustainable Development" be the focus of future
discussion by the Expert Group, and proposed that it become
the second item on the Provisional Agenda. The G-77/CHINA
expressed concern that consideration of success stories might
overshadow the issues of capacity building, technology
transfer and financial resources, as set out in the extant
second item of the Provisional Agenda. AUSTRALIA rejected a
G-77/China description of success stories as a "side
event," and recalled ICELAND’s description of the
Expert Group’s work as a search for solutions. ICELAND
supported the proposal to restructure the Provisional Agenda
to focus on success stories. SWITZERLAND proposed integrating
the existing second item on key issues with consideration of
success stories. DENMARK, supported by the US, expressed
disappointment and surprise at the absence from the
Provisional Agenda of consideration of market reforms as an
issue. He described his difficulties with not being allowed to
place the issue on the agenda for discussion at an
intergovernmental process, and noted that the issue of market
reforms is a live issue in many countries. The G-77/CHINA
invited discussion on market reform in so far as it is linked
to all the key issues. The Expert Group adopted a proposal
from the EU to switch the order of the Provisional Agenda
Items on Enhancing International Cooperation and Success
Stories. On market reform, the Co-Chair cautioned that the
Expert Group was unlikely to find agreement on this issue of
substance during its deliberations on the organization of
work.
CO-CHAIRS’ SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSION ON ENERGY AND
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: At 12:00 noon the third draft of the
Co-Chairs’ Summary was distributed to delegates. Co-Chair
Freudenschuss Reichl noted that there was no procedural
mechanism to integrate further comments on the Co-Chairs’
Summary, and suggested that rather than rewriting the Summary,
delegates should offer their thoughts on the expected outcome
of CSD-9. The EU supported this proposal, noting that the
draft was for information rather than formal discussion. The
G-77/ CHINA briefly identified concerns with some of the
revisions to the draft, but noted the Group’s intent not to
revisit the document.
CONCLUSION: Co-Chair Freudenschuss Reichl presented the
Draft Report of the First Session of the Group of Experts
(E/CD.17/ ESD/2000/L.1), to which the Co-Chairs’ Summary
would be annexed. Responding to the EU’s query about the
vacant position of Vice-Chair, the G-77/CHINA assured
delegates that this would be addressed as soon as possible.
The EU requested that the Secretariat’s report of the
meeting reflect that the absence of an EU comment on the
revised draft did not imply agreement or disagreement with its
content.
In their closing statements the G-77/CHINA and the EU
thanked the Co-Chairs for their useful and professional work
during the week. Co-Chair Freudenschuss Reichl then closed the
first session of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Intergovernmental Group
of Experts on Energy and Sustainable Development at 12:45pm.
There was a muted air of expectation Monday morning, as
delegates to the Expert Group on Energy gathered to address an
issue critical to the attainment of sustainable development:
how to alleviate poverty by ensuring an increased supply of
energy, while at the same time addressing local and global
environmental threats. It is a high stakes question, with
inevitable scope for conflict between, on the one hand, the
deeply embedded interests of the fossil fuel and nuclear
energy lobbies, and on the other, an increasing appreciation
of the radical transformation of traditional energy supply and
demand equations demanded by new and more sustainable
development trajectories.
This brief analysis evaluates the outcome of the week’s
meeting by examining some of the factors that influenced the
nature and levels of participation by delegations, and by
identifying the potential stumbling blocks that lie ahead.
STUPOR TUESDAY: Motivating Expert Interest in the CSD
Process: While the streets of New York were abuzz with
anticipation of the outcome of the "Super Tuesday"
presidential primaries, the mood at the Expert Group on
Tuesday morning was a little less animated. Following the
frisson of the Expert Group’s unprecedented secret ballot on
Monday, in which the Austrian Co-Chair Freudenschuss Reichl
was elected (by a majority of 11 to 1, with 24 abstentions and
1 invalid ballot), discussions on Tuesday got off to a quiet
start. The call for a secret ballot from one delegation,
provided some European capitals with a means to register their
opposition to the new Austrian Government coalition.
Some delegates attributed the slow and disengaged mood of
early deliberations to the low number of expert
representatives from the capitals. This was particularly true
of the G-77/China, where the prevalence of permanent
representatives from New York missions was seen as one of the
underlying causes of the Group’s rigid resort to the
assertion of core Group positions on Agenda 21, that many saw
as being "thin in terms of the technical aspects of
energy." This was despite the fact that 11 out of 37
submissions to the Secretary-General’s report were from
G-77/China members. A number of observers suggested that the
nature of the G-77/China’s participation constrained the
level of discussion during the week, causing one concerned
European delegate to comment: "We must work on this, by
ensuring a more informed representation." He indicated
that intersessional efforts would be made to directly engage
country experts with an established interest in the issues.
A number of reasons were offered to explain the low number
of experts participating from the G-77/China. Some observers
highlighted that the problem was a shortage of resources,
noting that funding to enable participation by developing
countries who are not members of the CSD was limited to
contributions from one Scandinavian donor. Others pointed to
the timing of notification to capitals, and to the late
distribution of documentation.
Several observers noted the large number of OPEC expert
representatives, suggesting that this reflected the higher
political stakes of OPEC countries. The timbre of some
arguments presented by the Nigerian Chair provoked some
speculation regarding the extent to which the G-77/China’s
varied interests were being adequately represented. It was
observed that the possibility for unrepresentative statements
was compounded by the poor institutional arrangements
immediately prior to, and during, the meeting for soliciting
input from G-77/China members. The G-77/China convened a
mid-week meeting of the Group to discuss some of these
problems with the Nigerian Chair. The Chair was requested to
more accurately reflect the diversity of country circumstances
within the Group in his statements to the Expert Group.
If there was the slightest cause for speculation on
potential disagreement within the G-77/China camp, there was
reason too to ponder the dynamics within the European Union.
During the roller-coaster ride that comprised the week’s
meeting, arguably the two lowest points in the week’s
discussions bore the imprints of discord within the EU: Monday’s
secret ballot to elect the Co-Chair and Thursday’s halt in
proceedings in response to the EU’s point-of-order. On the
latter issue, a standoff emerged between the EU Chair,
Portugal, and the Co-Chairs, following Co-Chair Salamat’s
initial refusal of a European request for an adjournment to
complete their coordination of a common position. Underlying
the tensions were two related issues: one procedural and one
substantive. There was a sense among European Union delegates
that compliance with the Co-Chairs’ request to offer general
comments, rather than engage in a drafting exercise, had not
been followed by some other delegations. In lieu of detailed
verbal proposals, the EU submitted a detailed background paper
only to find that some core issues on market reform and
pricing had not been adequately reflected in the Co-Chairs’
second Summary. The adjournment was granted after G-77/China
and others supported the EU request for more time to
coordinate its response.
CSD AND THE POLITICS OF THE GOP (GRAND OLD POSITIONS): While
there may have been fertile ground for speculation on
potential cracks within the EU, mainly on procedural issues,
on matters of substance the EU portrayed a consistent message.
It is evident that at future meetings, the EU will be
emphasizing the issues of market reform, liberalization in the
energy sector, internalization of externalities (read energy
taxes), and the phasing out of environmentally harmful
subsidies. This emphasis on the creation of investor-friendly
"enabling environments" for the mobilization of the
private sector within developing countries was sufficient to
provoke an animated response from the G-77/China. Brazil
interpreted the EU efforts as an attempt to impose the Union’s
own political agenda. There appears to be potential for some
meeting of minds on these issues. However, there is concern
with the G-77/China’s unyielding opposition within the CSD
forum, at the expense of a more nuanced debate.
The question for delegates is how to draw back from a
dead-end debate based on a simplistic dichotomy of interests
and on rhetorical defenses of core Agenda 21 language on
technology transfer, capacity building and financing
sustainable development. By interpreting calls for the
internalization of externalities as a developed country
agenda, the G-77/China Chair helps to obscure the fact that
pricing remains a contentious issue within the industrialized
countries, notably for the United States, where the failure to
walk the market talk has been well observed.
One issue that spurred a number of delegations to speak for
the first (and only) time, and which also solicited active
corridor comment from NGO observers, was the contested role of
nuclear power in sustainable development. Strong statements
were made by a number of individual EU member States, Poland
and the Republic of Korea. The most vocal proponent of the
nuclear option, Canada, despite support from Iran and the
Russian Federation, has been described as increasingly
isolated. On the margins of this debate, of course, is the
emerging debate on the FCCC Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)
and passionate opposition among NGOs, and green-tinted
European coalition governments, to calls for the inclusion of
nuclear power as a climate-friendly technology.
Other issues for further debate will include: the promotion
of renewables; the concerns of developing countries on issues
relating to labelling, certification, and financing; and the
timing and nature of a role for the Kyoto Protocol’s
flexible mechanisms. Co-Chair Salamat flagged his interest in
a debate on the question of credits and the CDM but, perhaps
wisely, dropped his suggestion without further comment.
MOVING BEYOND THE GOP? A feature of the Expert meeting
has been the spirited interjections of the G-77/China
spokesperson, who introduced a humorous air to the
proceedings. It will take more than good spirit, however, if
these meetings are, in his words, "to touch the life of
the common people in a practical way." For this to be
realized, delegates may need to move beyond the forced
opposition of "Grand Old Positions" relating on the
one hand to technology transfer, capacity building, and
financial assistance, and on the other to the removal of
subsidies and greater market liberalization. One key to such a
breakthrough may be effective use of the proposed
intersessional work at the regional level. As one observer
noted, the regional activities stimulated by the preparations
of the CSD-9 agenda may produce some of the most fruitful
deliberations and results. The intersessional process will be
as important as the final output from the 2001 session. There
is little doubt that such activities will provide useful
opportunities for experts to become more actively engaged in
the process and allow the CSD to reflect on and contribute
meaningfully to conditions within regions. In this way the
Commission will help to bring Agenda 21 down to earth.
