|
Published
by the International
Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)
Vol. 05 No. 179
Tuesday, 24 April 2001
CSD-9 HIGHLIGHTS:
MONDAY, 23 APRIL 2001
On the second week of work,
delegates began drafting CSD-9 decisions. They completed a
first reading of the draft decision on atmosphere during a
morning session and discussed the draft decision on energy in
a morning and early afternoon session. They considered draft
decisions on transport and on international cooperation for an
enabling environment in late afternoon sessions, and a draft
decision on information for decision-making and participation
in an evening session.
DRAFTING GROUP I
ENERGY:
Chaired by Alison Drayton (Guyana), the Group completed a
first reading of the draft decision on energy and sustainable
development. On additional financial resources, delegates
agreed to include wording from the Programme for Further
Implementation of Agenda 21 (UNGASS-19). The EU underlined its
preference to refer to general principles over
non-prescriptive policy options. On combining various
sustainable energy practices, SAUDI ARABIA, the RUSSIAN
FEDERATION and POLAND urged retaining specific reference to
the exclusion of nuclear technologies.
SAUDI ARABIA, the G-77/CHINA
and the US opposed the Chair’s compromise text on ensuring a
reliable market for energy suppliers, arguing it did not
reflect an appropriate balance between energy supply and
demand. On establishing energy efficiency programmes, SAUDI
ARABIA, opposed by the EU, proposed removing the requirement
for national plans and policies. On strengthening the role of
major groups in decision making, the EU, opposed by the
G-77/CHINA, supported the Chair’s proposal to include
language from Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration. The EU
disagreed with text on poverty eradication, which remains
bracketed. On the polluter pays principle, SAUDI ARABIA
underlined that this refers to developed countries, and
proposed alternative text calling on energy taxes to be
restructured to reflect the level of environmental pollution
of each energy source. This remains bracketed.
On encouraging the
generation and distribution of electricity at affordable
rates, the EU, opposed by the G-77/CHINA and the RUSSIAN
FEDERATION, proposed reference to commercially viable and
socially acceptable rates. AUSTRALIA proposed reference to
competitive rates. Affordable rates remains bracketed. SAUDI
ARABIA opposed text referring to the development of energy
efficiency codes and standards for appliances, equipment and
buildings. This is bracketed. On phasing out energy subsidies,
AUSTRALIA, JAPAN and the EU, opposed by the G-77/CHINA,
proposed deleting specific reference to developed countries.
This remains bracketed.
On the challenges and
recommendations for nuclear energy technologies, AUSTRALIA,
the G-77/CHINA, JAPAN, NEW ZEALAND, the RUSSIAN FEDERATION,
the US and others, opposed by SAUDI ARABIA, supported
unbracketing the draft text, with certain revisions. The EU
distributed revised text on the challenges of nuclear energy,
and said they had not decided their position on whether to
retain the text on government recommendations. A number of
delegations proposed amendments to the text on government
recommendations, particularly on the transboundary movement of
nuclear waste. These proposals will be included in the revised
text. Delegates failed to reach agreement on text regarding:
transport systems for sustainable development; the progressive
elimination of leaded gasoline; indicators; and
eco-efficiency.
Closing the meeting, Chair
Drayton distributed her proposed text on making markets work
and on international cooperation.
DRAFTING GROUP II
INFORMATION FOR DECISION
MAKING AND PARTICIPATION: Drayton
chaired the work of the Group. All proposed text was included
in brackets. The EU called for numerous references to Rio
Principle 10 throughout the draft elements, and proposed two
new paragraphs on the same issue. Stating that they were not
expecting new text, many delegations objected to the
proposals. The G-77/ CHINA preferred separate references to
developing countries and countries with economies in
transition (EITs), stating their circumstances are different.
JAPAN called for reference to global observing systems. The
section on indicators for sustainable development was not
addressed, pending discussion in informal consultations.
On general considerations,
the EU, opposed by the G-77/CHINA, suggested text on
"adequate" financial resources. On accessibility
guidelines, the US suggested reference to people with
disabilities. On training and capacity building, CANADA
suggested reference to relevant international organizations,
as appropriate. On access to information, the EU highlighted
the importance of the media, and on providing technological
infrastructure, she suggested deleting "to developing
countries."
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
FOR AN ENABLING ENVIRONMENT: Group
Chair Madina Jarbussynova (Kazakhstan) invited delegates to
conduct a first reading of the document. All text suggestions
were bracketed. The EU made many proposals on sound
macro-economic frameworks, good governance and poverty. The
G-77/CHINA opposed reference to good governance. Other
proposals included: the need for equitable sharing of benefits
from globalization; the principle of common but differentiated
responsibilities; the need for CSD to contribute to the Third
UN Conference on Least Developed Countries and to the 2002
Financing For Development conference; reintroduction of text
from CSD-9 Intersessionals on technology transfer and finance;
and reference to national strategies for sustainable
development, as opposed to national and regional development
programmes.
Divergent views were
expressed on: ODA flows and their coordination; how to resolve
the debt problems of highly indebted poor developing
countries; language on the third replenishment of the GEF;
references to poverty eradication, as opposed to poverty
alleviation; and environmentally-sound investments in
developing countries. Regarding trade practices that hinder
the export of developing country products to developed
countries, JAPAN proposed using agreed language from CSD-8
decision 8/6, which the EU and the G-77/ CHINA said could be
compromise text. On improving market access, the US, with
AUSTRALIA, and opposed by the G-77/CHINA, preferred deleting
reference to products from developing countries.
Other proposals related to:
the need for benefit-sharing mechanisms; defining natural
resource property rights; the establishment of
"public-public" partnerships; the reintroduction of
a G-77/CHINA proposal on the reform of existing taxes to
reflect environmental and safety considerations; and support
to developing countries to implement national sustainable
development strategies.
In response to proposals
from the EU, SWITZERLAND and the US, the G-77/CHINA cautioned
against imposing new conditionalities, but indicated
willingness to compromise on current text if references to the
rule of law could be replaced with "an enabling legal
environment."
DRAFTING GROUP III
Drafting Group III was
chaired by David Stuart (Australia). Based on the morning
session, a revised text on atmosphere with bracketed proposals
was distributed in the late afternoon.
ATMOSPHERE:
The EU proposed text on the effects of air pollution on
cultural heritage. The EU, the US, CANADA and JAPAN, opposed
by the G-77/CHINA and others, proposed deleting text on equity
and historical share regarding atmospheric issues. On support
to EITs and developing countries, proposals included:
developed country provision of new resources to the Montreal
Protocol’s Multilateral Fund; the introduction, development
and transfer of cleaner fuel and abatement technology; and
assessment of global air pollution impacts.
Divergent views were
expressed on the EU’s proposals to send a strong political
message to the negotiating parties to the Montreal and Kyoto
Protocols. The G-77/CHINA called on the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change to increase participation of
developing country experts in report preparation. On regional
cooperation, the EU and the REPUBLIC OF KOREA, opposed by
SAUDI ARABIA, recommended text to "further develop"
regional agreements and strategies for improved air quality.
The EU, supported by SAUDI ARABIA, proposed text on, inter
alia, capacity building and institutional strengthening.
The G-77/CHINA, with the EU
and the US, proposed deleting or reformulating text referring
to improvements in shelter conditions to benefit women and
children’s health. The EU proposed text calling for:
promoting urban health plans and strategic environmental
evaluations; avoiding introduction of ozone-depleting
substances (ODS) not yet covered by international regulations;
and supporting the conversion to non-ODS or alternative
technologies. The US and SAUDI ARABIA questioned the
appropriateness of discussing ODS within the CSD. MEXICO
called for the dissemination of information to raise public
awareness of health risks of atmospheric pollution and ozone
depletion.
TRANSPORT:
Discussion in the session focused on the transport of nuclear
waste. JAPAN and the RUSSIAN FEDERATION opposed reference to
nuclear waste transport. NEW ZEALAND suggested broadening the
reference to the transport of hazardous substances in
accordance with International Atomic Energy Agency terms that
provide for measures regarding the movements of nuclear
materials in general. Backing this proposal, NORWAY, supported
by numerous others, proposed additional text on notification
and consultation with countries that might be affected by
nuclear materials transport. Delegates failed to agree on
reference to sustainable transport or to sustainable
development in general. The EU: said public-private
partnerships to promote investments should address sustainable
transport and facilitate the introduction of
environmentally-sound technologies; suggested referring to
funding for the elimination of lead in gasoline and reduction
of sulfur and benzene in fuels, as well as particulates in
vehicle exhaust; and, with the G-77/CHINA, proposed reference
to, inter alia, multi-stakeholder cooperation, an
international framework for fair pricing in transport and
infrastructure, and International Civil Aviation Organization
actions to address climate change. SAUDI ARABIA suggested
deleting text on international cooperation for transport, and,
with the G-77/CHINA, requested additional time to consider the
EU proposals.
IN THE CORRIDORS
Mixed feelings were
expressed regarding progress on the first day of negotiating
draft decisions. In contrast to the tense atmosphere that
characterized the February and March meetings of the Energy
Experts Group and the CSD-9 Intersessionals, work in most of
the drafting groups was conducted with a good-humored and
constructive spirit. Still in its early days (and nights), and
with most of the contentious issues not yet tackled,
participants in the energy group were optimistic that the
discussions would be fruitful during the rest of the week,
attributing this to changes since the Intersessionals, and
recognizing that delegates are now under pressure to reach
consensus. Some delegates were more cautious, however, noting
the potential for possible stalling on the nuclear issue.
In order to avert a crisis
in the drafting group on information for decision making on
the issue of indicators, an informal consultation was held to
"strike a deal," but agreement could not be reached
before the group�s evening session. Participants expressed
exasperation toward the end of the day following the
introduction of a high volume of new and unexpected text
proposals.
THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY
DRAFTING GROUP I: The
Drafting Group on energy will reconvene from 11:00 am � 1:00
pm in Conference Room 2 to consider revised text on the draft
decision.
DRAFTING GROUP II: The
Drafting Group will reconvene from 3:00-6:00 pm in Conference
Room 3 to discuss the revised draft decision on information
for decision making and participation, and from 7:00-9:00 pm
in Conference Room 3 to consider the revised draft decision on
international cooperation for an enabling environment.
DRAFTING GROUP III: The
Drafting Group will meet from 11:00 am � 1:00 pm in
Conference Room 3 to consider the revised draft decision on
atmosphere, and from 3:00-6:00 pm in Conference Room 2 to
continue the first reading of the draft decision on transport.
SIDE EVENT: The
International Institute for Sustainable Development will make
a presentation in Conference Room A from 1:15-2:00 pm on a new
tool to help policy makers and the public visualize and track
progress toward sustainable development. |