Vol. 05 No. 155
Thursday, 4 May 2000
Delegates to the Commission on Sustainable Development met
in three drafting groups to consider revised text. Drafting
Group I met in the morning to continue consideration of the
draft on Integrated Planning and Management of Land Resources,
and in afternoon and evening sessions to consider the draft on
Agriculture. Drafting Group II met in the afternoon to discuss
a revised draft on Financial Resources and Mechanisms and in
the evening to deliberate on a revised draft on Economic
Growth, Trade and Investment. Drafting Group III met in the
morning and evening to continue discussions on preparations
for the ten-year review of UNCED.
DRAFTING GROUP I
INTEGRATED PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF LAND RESOURCES: Delegates
convened in the morning to consider the revised draft on
Integrated Planning and Management of Land Resources. On
rural-urban interactions, the G-77/CHINA proposed, and the EU
opposed, deleting references to governments "at all
levels." References remain bracketed. The US proposed,
while the EU supported, and TURKEY and the G-77/CHINA
rejected, references to transboundary effects. Text remains
bracketed. The EU, opposed by the G-77/CHINA, supported a new
paragraph on land use indicators. TURKEY, supporting the EU,
added reference to best practices. No consensus was reached
on: including farmers and agro-food industries in reference to
land users; using general over specific references to relevant
conventions; and reference to ratifying the Kyoto Protocol by
2002.
AGRICULTURE: Drafting Group I met in the afternoon and
continued in the evening to consider the revised draft on
Agriculture. On the role of agriculture, the G-77/CHINA
proposed deleting references to: food "safety"; the
maintenance of the countryside or open space; and conservation
of nature/land and natural resources. The EU, supported by
JAPAN, proposed that agriculture has a "unique"
place in society; is "essential" for food security;
and contributes to the maintenance of the
"countryside," and ensures "spatially balanced
development." On food security and poverty, delegations
agreed to use the phrase "poverty eradication"
rather than "poverty reduction." On SARD, the
G-77/CHINA, opposed by the EU, proposed deletion of reference
to food "safety and quality of food."
The EU supported a G-77/CHINA proposal to delete reference
to crop production systems, but opposed deletion of reference
to carbon sequestration.
The US proposed, and the G-77/CHINA opposed, language on
development and use of quantitative assessments in pursuing an
ecosystem approach to SARD. The G-77/CHINA suggested deleting
a proposed paragraph on the social dimensions of SARD. The
G-77/ CHINA proposed, and the US opposed, deleting references
to the effects of agricultural practices on human safety and
on the health of farmers, their families and employees. The EU
noted that these elements reflected recommendations from the
Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue and the High-Level Segment, and
supported their inclusion. On access to other resources, the
EU preferred a formulation including Habitat language, while
the G-77/CHINA, with BRAZIL, opposed.
On financing SARD, the EU, with the US, opposed text
because it appeared to suggest that domestic resources might
never become the main source of finance, while the G-77/CHINA
proposed that domestic resources will continue to be the main
source in some countries. On strategies to promote private
capital and investment in sustainable agriculture in
developing countries, the US reserved its position on a
proposal to "support the direction" rather than
guide a larger share of this capital. On technology transfer
and capacity building, the US supported fostering SARD and
questioned why the G-77/CHINA sought to remove the word
"sustainable." The US reserved its position on a
G-77/CHINA proposal urging developed countries to meet the
needs of developing countries regarding ESTs. On integrated
pest management and integrated plant management, the EU
supported an alternative paragraph focusing on the elimination
of unsustainable use of plant products and fertilizers and
referring to stakeholders, including agricultural workers,
farm workers and consumer groups. CANADA preferred a
reformulation urging governments to develop and use
transparent, science-based risk assessment and management
procedures.
DRAFTING GROUP II
FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND MECHANISMS: In the afternoon,
Drafting Group II reviewed a revised draft on Financial
Resources and Mechanisms. On governance, proposals relating to
"good" and "participatory" governance were
bracketed. An EU proposal to replace the "effectiveness,
efficiency" of ODA with "quality" was
bracketed. On mobilizing ODA, an EU-proposed sentence on
improving allocation of ODA and on targeting resources to
developing countries with, inter alia, good governance,
was bracketed.
Reference to "multilateral debt relief" was
bracketed, following an EU suggestion to delete the text.
JAPAN’s proposed inclusion of a provision for cancellation
"and equivalent relief" of bilateral official debt
was bracketed. Reference to the international community’s
consideration of the means for identifying unpayable debt for
possible action by creditors, was deleted. NEW ZEALAND’s
proposal on "taking into account" special and
differential treatment was bracketed. The entire text on the
role of trade liberalization in the context of debt relief was
bracketed, pending discussion on trade. Changes to text were
accepted to reflect the need to address the recurrence of
financial crises arising from volatile movements of private
capital. Following the G-77/CHINA rejection of an EU-proposed
deletion of reference to the UN Convention to Combat
Desertification funding mechanism, the paragraph was
bracketed. The G-77/CHINA stated that it could not accept any
formulation of the paragraph on the Clean Development
Mechanism. Delegates deleted EU-proposed text identifying the
GEF as the principal mechanism for funding sustainable
development in developing countries. The G-77/CHINA’s
proposed text to "strengthen and broaden" the GEF
was bracketed. Delegates accepted G-77/ CHINA proposals: to
delete a paragraph on reforming international financial
institutions; and stating the private sector "can play a
major role," as opposed to "be a main force,"
in sustainable development. A contact group was established to
review text on the establishment of an ad hoc
intergovernmental panel to study the fulfillment of financing
commitments.
ECONOMIC GROWTH, TRADE AND INVESTMENT: In the evening,
Drafting Group II reviewed a revised draft on Economic Growth,
Trade and Investment. A G-77/CHINA proposal to use Agenda 21
language, identifying unsustainable consumption and production
patterns, particularly in industrialized countries, as the
main cause of environmental deterioration, was bracketed.
Following discussion, Chair Seok-young proposed deleting text
referencing poverty eradication. The US proposed text on the
right of host countries to determine the type and pace of
investment liberalization, "in accordance with
international obligations." CANADA suggested inserting
"as appropriate." Text remains bracketed. Delegates
accepted a G-77/CHINA proposal on investment to
"promote" sustainable development. On promoting
sustainable development through trade and economic growth,
delegates agreed to language on "sustainable resource
management." The EU suggested text calling for the
equitable distribution of gains from trade between nations, to
achieve sustainable development. NEW ZEALAND proposed
"equitable distribution between nations of gains from
trade." The EU questioned the relevance of
G-77/CHINA-proposed text on the decline of commodity prices.
Chair Seok-young suggested delegates resolve the matter
informally.
On the objective of trade liberalization, the G-77/CHINA,
opposed by the EU and CANADA, suggested text referring
specifically to developed countries. The phrase remains
bracketed. The G-77/CHINA opposed reference to
"unjustifiable" non-tariff trade barriers. The term
was bracketed. On trade-distorting policies, the EU proposed
replacing reference to "continued elimination" with
"progressive reduction" and both phrases were
bracketed. JAPAN agreed to meet informally with the EU, the
US, and the G-77/CHINA in a contact group to discuss this
language.
On market access, NEW ZEALAND, with the EU, suggested text
on modernization and operationalization of special and
differential treatment, and proposed using UNCTAD-X language.
The US opposed this.
DRAFTING GROUP III
PREPARATIONS FOR THE TEN-YEAR REVIEW OF UNCED: In the
afternoon, Drafting Group III discussed preparations for Rio
+10 based on the draft of Chair Basmajiev (Bulgaria). SUDAN,
with the EU, proposed a chapeau identifying the document as a
recommendation to ECOSOC and the UN General Assembly (GA). The
G-77/CHINA, with others, expressed concern with text
indicating that the agenda be set from the outset, and
emphasized that focus areas be taken from regional and
national processes. SUDAN, with EGYPT, suggested that the GA
set the focus. The EU proposed inviting the preparatory
support of secretariats of conventions related to
"sustainable development." BRAZIL and SUDAN
suggested conventions on "environment and sustainable
development." On contributions from major groups,
AUSTRALIA, with the EU, supported language on their
participation in the preparatory process and at Rio+10. CHINA,
supported by CUBA, the G-77/CHINA, EGYPT and SUDAN, stated
that arrangements for participation adhere to UN regulations.
On the relationship between CSD-10 and Rio+10, and on
financial details, the Secretariat referred to a note
describing CSD-10 structure and funding. She said that a
back-to-back meeting with CSD-9 could begin preparations and
CSD-10 will be devoted to Rio+10 preparations. Delegates
reconvened at 10:00 p.m. to consider the first revision of the
Chair�s draft. The G-77/CHINA, with BRAZIL and SUDAN,
reemphasized concern with the CSD setting the Rio+10 agenda.
It was agreed that the review focus on areas where further
efforts are needed to implement Agenda 21 and other outcomes
of UNCED, and result in action-oriented decisions. CANADA
requested consistency in distinguishing between the
"review" and "event." It was agreed that
the CSD will encourage "contributions for, and
involvement of all major groups," and that the
secretariats of "relevant conventions" will be
invited to participate, with the GA in clarifying the relevant
conventions. On the Secretary-General�s report to the GA, it
was agreed that this should take account of the views
expressed during the Hig-Level Segment. On the location of the
event, it was agreed that this be "preferably" in a
developing country. The US noted that in terms of current
policy he would not be able to pay his share of UN funding for
a UN conference outside New York.
IN THE CORRIDORS
NGOs participating in the review of the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) at UN Headquarters are planning
to seek the support of CSD-8 on Friday for their efforts to
promote sustainable energy, ruling out the nuclear option,
"peaceful" or otherwise. Campaigners are
disappointed that nuclear power appears in the report of the
Co-Chairs of the CSD open-ended ad hoc Working Group on
Sustainable Energy.