Summary report, 2 March – 4 April 1992

INTRODUCTION

The Fourth Session of the Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) was held from 2 March until 4 April 1992. Although a number of issues still remain to be negotiated -- and the relevant text remains in square brackets -- much progress was made during the five-week negotiating session.

The final chapter of the UNCED process, to be played out in Rio de Janeiro in June, will be less denouement and more conflict resolution as the climax is yet to come. After five weeks of negotiations and, according to UN sources, 24 million pages of documentation produced at PrepCom IV, there are a number of problems that still need to be resolved before the Rio Conference.

The following report is an issue-by-issue summary of the progress made at PrepCom IV and the problems that still need to be resolved. To facilitate understanding of this complex set of negotiations, the topics are arranged in the order that the chapters will appear in Agenda 21 and the other documents to be signed in Rio de Janeiro in June: the Statement of Forest Principles and the Earth Charter/Rio Declaration.

This summary is based on reports in the Earth Summit Bulletin, which was published daily by Island Press and distributed free of charge to the participants at the Fourth Session of the UNCED Preparatory Committee. The Earth Summit Bulletin and this report were prepared by Johannah Bernstein (cpcu@web. apc.org), Pamela Chasek (pchasek@igc.apc.org) and Langston James Goree VI "Kimo" (kimo@ax.apc.org). Funding has been provided by grants from the Ford Foundation, The Compton Foundation and the W. Alton Jones Foundation. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Island Press or our sponsors. The contents of this report may be freely used in other publications with appropriate citation. This report has been uploaded on the APC networks into the conference <en.unced.news>.

PART I: AGENDA 21 SECTION I: SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DIMENSIONS

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION TO ACCELERATE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES AND RELATED DOMESTIC POLICIES (PC/100/Add.3, PC/L.71)

Discussion of the chapter of Agenda 21 on international economic issues, specifically trade and debt, initially dealt with the need to incorporate the conclusions from the seventh negotiating round of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD VIII), which was recently held in Cartagena, Colombia. The contentious issues included agricultural protectionism; the use of subsidies; the setting of ODA targets and timetables; the need for mutually supportive environmental and trade policies; and the necessary policy reforms to "release resources for supporting the transition to sustainable development" (and home and abroad) and to complement policies aimed at restraining consumption.

Consultations continued until the end of PrepCom IV to resolve these outstanding issues. Since the final document (PC/L.71) still has a few brackets remaining, discussions will continue at Rio.

COMBATTING POVERTY, CHANGING CONSUMPTION PATTERNS, DEMOGRAPHIC DYNAMICS AND SUSTAINABILITY (PC/100/Add.2, PC/L.68)

The poverty and consumption chapter of Agenda 21 addresses four topics related to the social aspects of sustainable development. The programme areas include: (1) enabling the poor to achieve sustainable livelihoods (focussing on unsustainable patterns of production and consumption, developing national policies to encourage changes in unsustainable consumption patterns, developing and disseminating knowledge about links between demographic trends and factors in sustainable development); (2) formulating integrated national policies for population and environment and development; and (3) implementing integrated population, environment and development programmes at the local level.

During the course of the debate, many delegates incorporated NGO positions in their interventions. NGOs working on the issue reported that about 90 percent of their textual proposals on the issues had been incorporated into amendments made by the EC and the CANZ group (Canada, Australia and New Zealand). The US proposed the deletion of 15 paragraphs in the first programme area on changing consumption patterns. Although some compromises were ultimately made, a number of paragraphs in this section still remain in brackets. On the issue of population (an item that was not originally part of Agenda 21), women's groups, population groups and most delegates expressed satisfaction with the resulting unbracketed text.

PROTECTION AND PROMOTION OF HUMAN HEALTH (PC/100/Add.5, PC/L.62)

The Health chapter contains five programme areas: (1) meeting basic health needs; (2) control of communicable diseases; (3) protecting vulnerable groups; (4) meeting the urban and rural health challenge; and (5) reducing health risks from environmental pollution and hazards. Issues that were raised during initial discussions included the need to broaden health care systems at the community level; the relationship between development and health; and family planning.

The Holy See called for a holistic approach to meeting basic health needs. In response, Australia proposed the words "and access to safe and effective contraception." This controversial topic was the focus of much discussion in the contact group. Compromise text was finally agreed to by the Holy See, Australia and other concerned delegates.

When the document was discussed in Plenary during the last week of PrepCom IV, Argentina opposed the two compromise paragraphs that deal with family planning. Argentina specifically objected to a reference that ensured the right of men and women to decide on the number and spacing of children. The contact group reconvened to work out these differences and a tenuous compromise was finally reached. Whether it will survive in Rio or not remains to be seen.

PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE HUMAN SETTLEMENT DEVELOPMENT (PC/100/ADD.7, PC/L.67)

Programme areas in this chapter of Agenda 21 include: (1) creating national strategies for providing shelter; (2) forming an international network of trained urban managers equipped to plan for human environmental and infrastructural demands; (3) easing migration pressures on cities by creating employment opportunities in rural areas; (4) focussing on energy use and mass transportation; and (5) reducing the impact of natural disasters.

Notable comments made during discussion of human settlements included the request that attention be paid to the critically poor; capacity building for local governments to deal with urban problems; and the need to deal with human settlement problems in developed as well as developing countries. Most of the discussions on this document were non-controversial. The decision document PC/L.67 was easily adopted by the Plenary.

INTEGRATION OF ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT IN DECISION-MAKING (PC/100/ADD.8, PC/L.70)

Due to scheduling constraints, this Agenda 21 chapter was never discussed in an informal session of the Plenary. Instead, PrepCom Chair Tommy Koh decided to delegate the document directly to a contact group to negotiate the text and forward it to the Plenary. The resulting document, PC/L.70, has four programme areas: (1) integrating environment and development at the policy, planning and management levels; (2) providing an effective legal and regulatory framework; (3) making effective use of economic instruments and market and other incentives; and (4) establishing systems for environmental accounting.

During the Plenary's discussion of this document, it was announced that programme areas on full cost environmental accounting (proposed by Sweden and Norway) and global corporate environmental management (proposed by the G-77) were withdrawn and replaced by several amendments to the other programme areas. Sweden's first amendment deals with removing price distortions arising from government programmes affecting land, water, energy and other natural resources. The second amendment states that governments should encourage corporations to: provide relevant environmental information through transparent reporting; and develop and implement methods and rules for accounting for sustainable development.

SECTION II: CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF RESOURCES FOR DEVELOPMENT

PROTECTION OF THE ATMOSPHERE (PC/100/Add.14, PC/WG.I/L.47)

Protection of the atmosphere was not discussed by Working Group I until the fourth week of PrepCom IV. Debate focused on the areas dealing with lifestyle and consumption patterns, transportation systems, and all matters relating to energy. The G-77 and China's revised draft of PC/100/Add.14 was to serve as the basis for negotiation. In the discussion that followed, one of the contentious issues was the use of the word "lifestyle." The US argued that it was contrary to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for governments to determine citizens' lifestyles.

Among the many interventions on this issue, Tunisia, breaking rank with the G-77, made a controversial call for the addition of a paragraph that would set per capita levels for CO2 emissions. This amendment, which would have conflicted with the mandate of the ongoing Climate Change negotiations, was strongly resisted by Canada and the US and was not supported by the G-77. A Swedish compromise prevented a breakdown in the negotiations inviting the INC to examine the feasibility of, and where appropriate, develop scientifically credible methodologies for the identification of critical loads for greenhouse gases.

When the document was discussed by the full Plenary on the final day of the PrepCom, Yemen, on behalf of the Arab Group, stated that the final document, PC/WG.I/L.47, does not cohere with the mandate of UN Resolution 44/228 nor does it meet the Arabs' concerns. He added that since it prejudges the work of the INC, the entire document should be in brackets. Thus, with the entire text in brackets, the document was adopted. The future of this document lies, in part, with the outcome of the final meeting of the INC for a Framework Convention on Climate Change.

INTEGRATED APPROACH TO THE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF LAND RESOURCES (PC/100/ADD.15, PC/WG.I/L.41)

The one programme area in this document deals with the reorganization and, where necessary, the strengthening of the decision-making structure to ensure an integrated approach to land management. Initial discussions of this Agenda 21 chapter dealt with language concerning the cooperation and coordination of land management policy. The Philippines spoke in support for indigenous rights over land that they occupy. There was also discussion of the need to provide land users with the means of improving their land use practices, encouraging the media to play a stronger role in raising awareness and the exchange of information through networks.

Although this document was quickly adopted by the Plenary at the end of PrepCom IV, the Palestinian representative later took the floor to amend this document to ensure paragraphs that referred to participation of major groups included "people under occupation." It is likely that this issue will resurface in Rio.

COMBATTING DEFORESTATION (PC/100/ADD.16, PC/WG.I/L.43)

In comparison with the Forest Principles document, the negotiations of the Agenda 21 chapter on combatting deforestation were a "walk in the woods." The chapter tabled for negotiations was a much improved version from the document tabled at PrepCom III. Many of the changes reflected suggestions made by NGOs to delegations during intersessional period. However, discussions on the forests chapter began at PrepCom IV with Malaysia, on behalf of the G-77, introducing five new programme areas and tabling 256 text changes. After rather lengthy discussions, during which several other amendments were tabled, the Secretariat prepared a consolidated text that served as the basis for further negotiations.

The final text submitted to the Plenary for adoption was not only a clean text with only 25 percent in brackets, but it was also considered to be quite comprehensive. The four programme ares now include: (1) sustaining the multiple roles and functions of all types of forests; (2) enhancement of the protection, sustainable management and conservation of all forests, and the greening of degraded areas; (3) promoting efficient utilization to recover the full valuation of the goods and services provided by forests; and (4) establishing and/or strengthening capacities for the planning, assessment and periodic evaluations of forest- related programmes. The outstanding issues related to trade, finance and technology transfer, the resolution of which will take place under separate Agenda 21 chapter discussions.

During the Plenary's discussion of L.43, however, Malaysia expressed its strong opposition to any reference to future negotiations for a forest convention and called for the entire text to be bracketed.

COMBATTING DESERTIFICATION AND DROUGHT (PC/100/ADD.17, PC/WG.I/L.39)

According to many developing countries, desertification had been the neglected issue on the UNCED agenda. As a result, this was the first item to be discussed in Working Group I. One new programme area was proposed during initial discussions, calling for popular participation and environmental education that focuses on desertification and managing the effects of drought. Other major issues discussed included environmental information systems; the consequences of desertification; the rehabilitation of desertified lands; and wood-fuel consumption. The African Group proposed an extensive list of amendments to the Secretariat's text.

One of the contentious issues that emerged was a request for the "preparation and adoption of an International Convention to Combat Desertification particularly in Africa". Although this proposal eventually gained widespread support, a few developed countries remained opposed. Thus, paragraphs dealing with this issue remain in brackets as discussion on the proposed convention continues.

SUSTAINABLE MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT (PC/100/ADD.18, PC/WG.I/L.40)

This chapter of Agenda 21, which was developed after PrepCom III, contains two programme areas: generating and strengthening knowledge about mountain ecosystems; and promoting integrated development of mountain watersheds and alternative livelihood options. Early discussion focussed on the strengthening or establishment of local or regional institutions to encourage "bottom-up" approaches to solving the problems of fragile mountain ecosystems and the need for national governments to maintain and establish a variety of data and information mechanisms. This document was considered to be relatively non- controversial and was quickly adopted by the Plenary and sent unbracketed to Rio.

PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT (PC/100/ADD.19, PC/WG.I/L.42)

The Agenda 21 chapter on sustainable agriculture reflects growing concern regarding sustainable agriculture in light of the link between environmental degradation in agriculture and the problems of hunger, oversupply and trade and price supports. The chapter represents a comprehensive integration of criteria for environmentally sound management practices in all aspects of food and fiber production. Alternative production technologies identified in the chapter include integrated pest management; low input systems and integrated plant nutrition systems.

Discussion focused on the impact of the deterioration of the ozone layer on agriculture; the relationship of trade and environmental polices; property rights of women and indigenous peoples and harvesting storage, processing, distribution and marketing policies. The major areas of contention in this chapter dealt with harmonizing agricultural trade policies and integrating agriculture and environment policies. A new controversy emerged during the Plenary's discussion when the Palestinian representative amended the document so that paragraphs that referred to participation of major groups included "people under occupation." These amendments were bracketed and the document was adopted.

CONSERVATION OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY (PC/100/ADD.20, PC/WG.I/L.44)

In an attempt to both streamline work and to avoid conflict with the parallel negotiating process for a Biodiversity Convention, both Sweden and the EC presented new versions to replace the Secretariat's Agenda 21 chapter on Biodiversity. Both texts were taken into consideration together. Few controversies emerged since the delegates avoided discussion of any issues still under negotiation in the INC. Text dealing with the cooperation or transfer of technology and the rights of countries that are sources of biodiversity to share in the benefits from biotechnological development and commercial utilization of such resources was left bracketed. The final document, PC/WG.I/L.44, still has a number of paragraphs in brackets pending the outcome of the INC negotiations.

ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANAGEMENT OF BIOTECHNOLOGY (PC/100/ADD.27, PC/WG.I/45)

Due to scheduling constraints, very little time was allotted to this chapter of Agenda 21. By the time the document reached the Plenary, a number of brackets remained in Programme Area D, "Enhancing safety and developing international mechanisms for cooperation," linked to the issue of biotechnology safety. Brackets also remain in paragraphs on fertility-related mechanisms. The US and the EC continue to differ on how biotechnology should be regulated. The EC wants a code of conduct or legal instrument on biotechnology, whereas the US believes that the products of biotechnology can and should be regulated under existing regimes and that biotechnology itself is not dangerous and need not be regulated. Discussion on this issue will undoubtedly resume in Rio.

PROTECTION OF OCEANS, ALL KINDS OF SEAS INCLUDING ENCLOSED AND SEMI-ENCLOSED SEAS, COASTAL AREAS AND THE PROTECTION, RATIONAL USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR LIVING RESOURCES (PC/100/Add.21, PC/WG.II/L.25)

The Agenda 21 chapter on oceans is the longest and one of the most complex chapters. PC/100/Add.21, which formed the basis of negotiations, had 152 paragraphs and did not even include text for two of the seven programme areas. Each programme area had its own set of contentious issues and, as a result, contact groups were set up for each of the programme areas: (1) integrated coastal zone management; (2) marine environmental protection (including land- and sea-based sources of marine pollution); (3) sustainable use and conservation of high seas living resources; (4) sustainable use of living marine resources under national jurisdiction; (5) addressing critical uncertainties for the management of marine environment and climate change; (6) strengthening international, including regional, cooperation and coordination; and (7) sustainable development of islands.

The most contentious issues arose in the programme areas on marine living resources. These included: state obligation for flag vessels and violations of regulations; straddling and highly migratory fish species; development of international control, surveillance and enforcement systems; marine mammals; and polar regions. In the programme area on marine environmental protection, the contact group spent a great deal of time integrating the recommendations made by the intergovernmental meeting of experts on land-based sources of marine pollution into the document. Other areas of contention included reference of ozone depletion and climate change as critical uncertainties as well as Turkey's injection of political language into the programme area on islands when it proposed an amendment stating that, "The arrangement in this programme area should not be interpreted in any sense so as to prejudice the delimitation of maritime areas concerning the countries involved."

By the end of PrepCom IV, the decision document PC/L.25/Rev.1 reflected the consensus that had been achieved in all areas except the issue of straddling and highly migratory fish stocks. The very difficult whaling issue, was resolved by states agreeing to recognize the responsibility of the International Whaling Commission for the conservation and management of whales. While states could not agree on the continuation of a ban on commercial whaling, the final text contains no language advocating this activity. Discussion on the issue of straddling and highly migratory fish stocks and high seas overfishing will continue at Rio.

PROTECTION OF THE QUALITY AND SUPPLY OF FRESHWATER RESOURCES (PC/100/Add.22, PC/WG.II/l.29)

Key issues in the freshwater chapter of Agenda 21 initially included reference to the potential environmental problems caused by construction of dams and water channelization; transboundary rivers and freshwater resources; impacts of climate change of water resources; and the incorporation of the results of the International Conference on Water and the Environment into the Agenda 21 chapter.

The issue of transboundary water resources was resolved in a sub-contact group. The resulting language expresses the need for greater cooperation on the formulation of water resource strategies and action programmes. Target dates for water resources assessment and water and sustainable urban development remain in brackets, pending the outcome of the discussions on finance. The potential environmental impacts of dams and other water resource development projects are mentioned in the document. One of the contentious issues that will have to be resolved in Rio is an amendment tabled by the Palestinian observer during the Plenary's consideration of this document during the last week of PrepCom IV. This amendment adds "people under occupation" to a list of major groups involved in water resources management.

ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANAGEMENT OF TOXIC CHEMICALS (PC/100/Add.23, PC/WG.II/L.30)

Some of the contentious issues that emerged during initial discussions of the toxic chemicals Agenda 21 chapter (PC/100/Add.23) included: prevention of the uncontrolled export of substances banned domestically; the status of the GATT working group on trade in toxic chemicals; the prior informed consent procedure; and the listing of a few banned substances (asbestos and organohalogens) to the exclusion of all others. The latter issue was resolved by deletion of any reference to specific chemicals in the document. A new programme area was established to deal with illicit traffic of toxic chemicals. The only remaining bracketed text deals with finance.

ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANAGEMENT OF HAZARDOUS WASTES (PC/100/Add.24, PC/WG.II/L.26)

Since considerable progress had been made on the issue of hazardous wastes at PrepCom III, discussions in New York focussed on text that remained in brackets. The most contentious issue was the transboundary movement of hazardous waste. There was disagreement over whether to use the Basel Convention or the Bamako Convention as the basis for standard-setting and whether hazardous wastes should be exported to countries that ban their import. There was also disagreement over proposals to requiring governments to compel their respective militaries submit to environmental norms in their handling and treatment of hazardous waste. The need to include a new programme area on the illegal traffic of hazardous waste was also raised snd such a programme area was included.

The final document has brackets around references to military treatment and disposal of hazardous waste; the role of the European Community, finance and technology transfer. ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANAGEMENT OF SOLID WASTES AND SEWAGE- RELATED ISSUES (PC/100/Add.25, PC/WG.II/L.26) This was the least contentious Agenda 21 chapter on waste-related issues. One of the common themes in the initial discussion was that countries should be allowed to set their own targets and not be required to comply with internationally-set targets. Other issues raised included "reuse and recycling" of solid wastes in accordance with countries' individual capabilities, and the development of appropriate research and technology.

As Working Group II adopted the final document, PC/L.26, the only contentious issue was the setting of target dates. Malaysia pointed out that targets had been removed from the other waste-related documents at the request of developed countries and that, in this case, many developing countries would be unable to meet these targets for solid waste disposal. These paragraphs are footnoted and will be readdressed after the discussions on finance are completed.

SAFE AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTES (PC/100/Add.4, PC/WG.II/L.27)

In the initial discussions on this topic, the US and Japan made it clear that they would oppose inclusion of this chapter in Agenda 21. Other contentious issues that emerged included: the extent of national jurisdiction over radioactive waste and the acceptability of global measures to deal with radioactive waste; inclusion of military radioactive waste; and whether ocean dumping of radioactive waste should be addressed.

The final document that was adopted by the Plenary did not address the issue of military radioactive waste. Rather, it stated the need to support efforts within the International Atomic Energy Agency to develop radioactive waste safety standards. The issue of prohibiting the disposal and storage of radioactive waste near the marine environment remains in brackets, at the request of the US. Negotiations will continue in Rio on these unresolved issues.

SECTION III: STRENGTHENING THE ROLE OF MAJOR GROUPS (PC/100/Add.13, PC/L.72)

This chapter addresses the need to involve nine major groups in all aspects of Agenda 21: women; youth; indigenous peoples; non-governmental organizations; local authorities; trade unions; business and industry; the scientific and technological community; and farmers. Before this document was even addressed in an informal session of the Plenary, the coordinator, Leon Mazairac of the Netherlands, held consultations between representatives of major groups and key government delegates to exchange ideas and proposals. These consultations were aimed at facilitating the informal discussions by helping government delegates to understand the positions of these major groups and possibly to propose text on their behalf.

In the section on women, Norway took the lead and amended the text several times with amendments prepared by representatives of women's groups, led by Bella Abzug. The resulting text was viewed as acceptable by the women's groups, as many of their proposals had been incorporated. In the section on youth, Canada took the lead in proposing amendments. Sweden proposed that this section include children. There was resistance among some governments regarding the establishment of youth positions on government delegations and within government ministries.

In the section on indigenous people, France had placed a number of reservations on text dealing with adoption or strengthening policies and/or legal instruments. These reservations were finally lifted in the closing hours of the Plenary. Malaysia expressed concern that some parts of the section on NGOs blur the distinction between the work of NGOs and the work of governments. As this was the last document negotiated and, thus, the last chapter of Agenda 21 adopted by the Plenary, there was little time for extensive debate on the remaining programme areas.

SECTION IV: MEANS OF IMPLEMENTATION

FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND MECHANISMS (PC/101, PC/L.41)

The debate over financial resources was given top priority and discussions were carried out throughout PrepCom IV. The first document debated was PC/L.41, the draft text tabled by the G-77 and China at PrepCom III that sets out the elements for discussion on financial resources. At the commencement of PrepCom IV, debate focused primarily on the appropriateness of the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) as a mechanism for funding Agenda 21. The G-77 attempted to clarify key points in L.41 with a statement that called for current levels of ODA in developed countries to be increased to 0.7% of GNP. They also dropped their specific objections to the GEF while calling for changes in the structure, scope and governance of the "Fund." The Nordic Group proposed a package on financial resources that included mechanisms for the mobilization of increased resources for national and regional issues and proposals for the mobilization of new and additional resources to address global environmental problems.

Talks continued once Vice-Chair John Bell prepared an informal text that listed potential elements of convergence and areas requiring further discussion and resolution. Bell's text identified several of the key problem areas, including the appropriateness of certain mechanisms (GEF, Green Fund, etc.); the methodology for assessing contributions; and the principles for governance of the various proposed funding mechanisms.

The next step in negotiations was particularly critical. Bell privately circulated a Vice-Chair's convergence text that seemed to be acceptable to many other regional groupings except the G-77 who preferred to negotiate from their own text, L.41/Rev.1. The OECD countries were displeased with the new document since it called for all Agenda 21 financing to exceed existing levels of ODA and did not reflect the full extent of discussions that had been carried out over the previous two weeks. Bell requested comments in writing to the text and debate was held up for one week.

When negotiations finally resumed, the US, much to everyone's surprise stated that the industrialized countries must generate new and additional financial resources from various sources, both public and private, in light of the insufficient existing financial resources. Debate soon stalled over how specific levels of "new and additional" resources should be set. When Bell was unable to re-start the talks, PrepCom Chair Tommy Koh stepped in, asking Mexican Ambassador Andrs Rozental to coordinate a new round of talks. Representatives from Japan, some of the EC countries, and the Nordics met to draft a new text, which was transmitted to the G-77. The G-77 response was then debated during the final days of the PrepCom. Among its amendments, the G-77: proposed dropping a demand for a separate fund for Agenda 21; accepted the GEF as one of the channels for funding projects having global environmental significance, but not the only one; and lengthened the time it demanded for achievement of 0.7 percent of GNP going to ODA from 1995, as in previous G-77 proposals, to the end of the century. Observers both within and outside the US delegation commented that the US could have reached agreement on the basis of this text. Unfortunately, talks broke down on the eve of the last day of PrepCom when the G-77 refused to negotiate further in reaction to the EC demands regarding the GEF. The EC reportedly insisted on its formula identifying the GEF as "the appropriate multilateral mechanism." The G-77 decided to terminate the negotiations and take its own text to Rio.

TRANSFER OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND TECHNOLOGY (PC/100/ADD.9,PC/L.69)

Discussions on technology transfer (PC/100/Add.9) began on the second day of PrepCom IV and lasted until the waning hours of the very last Plenary session. Areas of contention that emerged initially included the following: (1) The use of the term "technology cooperation" rather than "technology transfer." The US prefers the term "cooperation" as it implies the notion of technology sharing from South to North and South to South, not only from North to South; as well as the sharing of information and capacity building. A number of developing countries maintain that the word "cooperation" means something different altogether, since cooperation is impossible between countries who are not on equal footing. (2) The difference, if any, between transfer of technology information and transfer of the technology itself. (3) Terms of transfer -- commercial or preferential and concessional. (4) Saudi Arabia's proposal to include "safe and" in the phrase "transfer of environmentally [safe and] sound technology.

After nearly three weeks of meetings, the contact group emerged on Thursday, 2 April with a comparatively clean document (PC/L.69). Four options for the title of the document remain in brackets, as do a number of paragraphs including amendments requested by Saudi Arabia on "environmentally [safe and] sound technology". The paragraph on the terms of transfer still remains bracketed, despite the fact that the group was close to agreement on the concept of concessional and preferential transfer and the need to protect intellectual property rights.

SCIENCE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (PC/100/Add.10, PC/L.61)

The Agenda 21 chapter on "Science for Sustainable Development" focuses on the role and the use of the sciences in supporting the prudent management of the environment and development. Comparatively few amendments were made to this document and most of them were non-controversial. This document was easily approved and sent to the Plenary for adoption. The final text, PC/L.61, only has brackets around paragraphs on finance.

EDUCATION, PUBLIC AWARENESS AND TRAINING (PC/100/ADD.6, PC/L.66)

Proposals in this chapter of Agenda 21 are aimed at promoting environmental awareness. They include: incorporation of environmental topics into school curricula; environmental training for teachers and school administrators; student studies of regional ecosystems; interactive teaching; cross-disciplinary university courses in all fields that have an environmental impact; adult educational programmes; and an emphasis on creating educational opportunities for women and indigenous people. This chapter was not considered to be controversial and, thus, discussions went smoothly. The document was easily adopted by the Plenary.

NATIONAL MECHANISMS AND INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION FOR CAPACITY BUILDING (PC/100/Add.11, PC/L.59)

This chapter of Agenda 21 deals solely with capacity building for the implementation of Agenda 21. Specific capacity-building programmes for the different sectoral and cross-sectoral issues are included in other chapters. Some of the issues raised in the initial discussions of PC/100/Add.11 included: the need to recognize the capacity-building role of other UN organizations, in addition to UNDP; the need to recognize the role of NGOs, regional and sub-regional organizations in capacity building; and the importance of UNDP and other UN agencies assisting countries in capacity building initiatives, but only when requested.

This was the first chapter of Agenda 21 to be transmitted to the Plenary for adoption. The final text, PC/L.59, only has brackets around the paragraphs on finance.

STRENGTHENING INSTITUTIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (PC/102, PC/WG.III/L.31, CRP.3/Rev.3)

The institutions chapter of Agenda 21 addresses the need for intergovernmental and inter-UN agency coordination and implementation of Agenda 21. The objectives outlined in the final decision document deal with such matters as: enhancing the functioning of the UN system in the fields of environment and development; cooperation between the UN system and other inter- governmental and non-governmental bodies; strengthening of institutional capabilities for Agenda 21 implementation; and the creation of new institutional agreements.

Surprisingly, there appeared to be a minimum of disagreement during PrepCom IV between developing and developed countries over the creation of new institutions. Both remained opposed, despite the active lobbying by NGOs. Notwithstanding, there was general support for the creation of a Sustainable Development Commission, with contention arising only around the actual reporting structure for such a body. As the text now stands, there are two proposed options for intergovernmental coordination. One option situates the Sustainable Development Commission under the direct authority of the General Assembly, while the second option proposes the establishment of such a body within a revitalized ECOSOC (Economic and Social Council). It was agreed at the final Plenary session that UNCED would choose between these two options, with discussions regarding the actual modalities to be deferred to the 47th session of the General Assembly. Other unresolved issues related to the actual role of NGOs within the UN system generally, and within UNCED implementation specifically; dispute settlement; and national reporting. Agreement was, however, reached on the manner in which UNEP and UNDP should be strengthened. For example, it was agreed that UNEP's mandate should be strengthened in such areas of environmental monitoring and assessment; the promotion of international environmental law; information exchange; and the provision of technical advice.

SURVEY OF INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS AND INSTRUMENTS (PC/103, PC/WG.III/L.32)

This chapter of Agenda 21 deals with the international law- making process, related problems (particularly in regard to developing country participation in this process), and the necessary reforms. The programme areas include: (1) review, assessment and fields of action in international law for sustainable development; (2) effective participation in international law-making; and (3) dispute resolution and prevention. Conflict arose during the course of PrepCom IV over such issues as: the need for further study of a global environmental protection convention as well as a nuclear safety convention; developing country compliance with international agreements; the confederation of means to prevent deliberate large-scale environmental destruction; and alternative dispute resolution. What was originally expected as a relatively non- controversial debate, evolved into one of the more heated and acrimonious exchanges over the above-mentioned issues, many of which remain to be resolved at Rio.

INFORMATION FOR DECISION MAKING (PC/100/Add.12, PC/L.63)

This chapter of Agenda 21 addresses the issues of collecting and using information for sustainable development and monitoring the implementation of Agenda 21. One of the major issues was access to information and the issue of national sovereignty over information. After eight hours of discussion over two days, this document was sent to the Plenary for adoption. The only bracketed text deals with finance.

PART II: AUTHORITATIVE STATEMENT OF FOREST PRINCIPLES (CRP.14/Rev.2, PC/WG.I/L.46)

Despite the high expectations at PrepCom IV that negotiations on the Forest Principles document would move quickly, the debate turned into the most acrimonious, problematic and contentious series of negotiations in New York. Brackets still remained around major portions in the text even after two and a half readings of the text by the Contact Group. Coordinator Charles Liburd was unable to move the group away from the political haggling that is more commonly found in Second Committee debates at the General Assembly.

Outstanding issues include: (1) the right to develop; (2) the likelihood of future negotiations for a forest convention; (3) the global interests of forests; (4) the role of international cooperation in forest preservation; (5) policies for forest management and utilization; (6) historical compensation for forest loss; (7) the transfer of technology for the conservation and utilization of forest resources; and (8) recognition of indigenous capacity and local knowledge of forests.

As it now stands, the document is in state of total disarray and may not even reach Rio. Former Working Group I Chair Bo Kjelln may draft a new version that could be proposed as a new text from the floor at UNCED after extensive inter-sessional private consultations and a general de-politicizing of the text.

PART III: RIO DECLARATION (EARTH CHARTER) (PC/WG.III/L.33/Rev.1)

The draft Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (as it is now called) contains 27 norms for state and interstate behavior, many of which have never been universally accepted before. Much to the surprise of the entire PrepCom, the Declaration is the only unbracketed text to go to Rio. The result of protracted procedural debate and agonizing substantive negotiations, the declaration represents a very delicate balance of principles considered important by both developed and developing countries.

At one point in the waning hours of the final Plenary, Israel threatened to prevent unanimous approval of the text, arguing that a reference to safeguarding the natural resources of "people under oppression, domination and occupation" constituted "political pollution" of the text. If it had not been for Koh's insistence that a clean text be brought to Rio, the late hour and a very fast gavel, debate would have been protracted.

The approved text represents, to a large extent, an attempt to balance the key concerns of both Northern and Southern countries. Far from being a perfect text, each side did achieve success in enshrining those specific principles that are of particular importance to their respective political agendas. No one is going home empty-handed. The developing states were able to obtain agreement around those key principles that will hopefully support their own economic development. These include such concepts as the eradication of poverty as an indispensable component for sustainable development; humans as the center of concerns for sustainable development; recognition of the special needs of developing countries; and promotion of a supportive and open international economic system. The mission of the Northern countries was, in part, to enshrine in the text principles that would not only promote and support more effective environmental management and protection but also those that would provide a soft-law basis for transboundary dispute resolution. These include such concepts as the polluter pays, environmental impact assessment and precautionary principles, as well as prior and timely notification of natural disasters and peaceful dispute resolution.

Although delegations were relieved to have been able to negotiate an unbracketed text for Rio, a majority of Northern countries expressed disappointment with the text. They wanted a radically different document, one that was short, non-legally binding, concise, memorable, and which would exhort political leaders to effective action. The Southern countries wanted and in fact achieved to a large extent, a document that represents a far more pragmatic statement of principles detailing states' responsibilities and obligations for global environmental problems.

Despite the fact that the draft Declaration does in fact contain a number of norms that take us well beyond the twenty year old Stockholm Declaration, several have commented that many of the principles are qualified in ways that preserve the status quo, particularly, the concept of a right to "exploit" natural resources and the notion of humans at the center of concerns, as opposed to the more environmentally-correct view of human concerns as wholly integrated with those related to the natural environment.

Countries are no doubt working between PrepCom IV and the Earth Summit to improve the text, which will be addressed during extensive negotiations in Rio. At this point, it is expected that the Declaration negotiations will be completed by the end of the Earth Summit. However, if this is not the case, political leaders will establish a formal process to continue formal negotiations beyond the Conference.