On Friday and Saturday, Subgroup C completed work on paragraphs 66-75 in Section B (Adequate shelter) and began Section C (sustainable human settlements). In paragraph 77 (urban role in sustainable development), references to natural (EU) and religious (Holy See) heritage were added. References to demographic, poverty, consumption and production factors (US) remain bracketed. Proposals for a 77bis suggested by the EU (recognition of local authority role) and the US (knowledge and skills of stakeholders) were deferred.
In 79 (unsafe disposal of waste), the US added language on cross-boundary impacts. Brackets were placed around EU proposals on carrying capacity, the precautionary principle, environmental impacts, and language on trade in hazardous waste. The latter was qualified by the US to apply only to parties to international agreements.
In 80 (rural settlements), additions included: social and physical infrastructure for all (UNICEF); forests (US); and the integrating role of strong subnational institutions (EU). In 81 (international cooperation), new language includes: city-to-city cooperation and additional activities to promote sustainability (Canada); and patterns of human settlement in the context of UN conference objectives.
In 82 (land resources), Israel and G-77/China replaced "conflicting" with "potentially" (Canada) competing demands of different land uses. The US added reference to safe access to land for members of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. An NGO suggested stronger language on land issues. Proposals on the precautionary [principle] (EU) [approach] (US) and environmental and social impact assessments (EU and Australia) were bracketed. The G-77/China proposed deferral of an EU-proposed 82bis (water development and management). In 83 (peripheral land use), the EU deleted a reference to the promotion of land-use patterns as a "precondition." Australia added water quality and recharge. The EU introduced 83bis (green spaces) with an amendment on pollution by Norway.
In 84 (establishing sustainable urban land-use patterns), EU amendments included: appropriate levels, human settlements and sustainable land-use, and planning. Canada proposed 84(a)bis to encourage sub-national and urban land-use plans. In 84(b) (efficient and accessible land markets), the G-77/China replaced "ensure" with "promote." The US introduced 84(e)bis (polluting facilities in areas inhabited by the poor). The EU preferred general reference to residential areas and language on pollution minimization. In 84(f) (improved land-management), the EU and Canada added "forested areas." In 84(g) (integrate land-use and transport policy), the US added "communications planning." Barbados added 84(g)bis (integrated coastal management). In 84(h) (urban monitoring and indicators), Canada added "promotion of capacities." In 84(i) (participatory approach to sustainable urban development), the G-77/China replaced "urban development" with "human settlements." Canada, with Norway/UNICEF, specified a list of vulnerable groups. In 84(j) (community-based land-resource protection), the EU preferred "land-management." The G-77/China introduced reference to best practices in human settlements. The EU added 84(k) (integrated environmental management).
The qualification [establish] "as appropriate" was introduced to 85(b) (quasi-judicial local structures) by the US and G-77/China. Norway expressed discomfort with the weakening of language. In 85(c) (land market), delegates accepted a Swaziland reformulation of an EU proposal to establish an environmentally sound and effective legal framework. The Subgroup continued work during an evening session.
[Return to start of article]