Summary report, 31 December 1993

1993 CSD Year-end Update

COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT:: YEAR-END UPDATE

Although the second meeting of the Commission on SustainableDevelopment (CSD) will not take place until May 1994, manyactivities have taken place over the last six months. This specialyear-end issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin willreview relevant activities that have taken place since the 1993session of the CSD, summarize the results of the General Assembly'sconsideration of the CSD, and highlight upcoming events. This issueof the Earth Negotiations Bulletin is published as part ofa series of year-end issues intended to summarize the current stateof play in the various UNCED follow-up conferences and negotiationsreported on by the Bulletin in 1993.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CSD

The idea for a Commission on Sustainable Development emerged duringthe fourth session of the Preparatory Committee for the UNConference on Environment and Development (UNCED) as a means forensuring institutional follow-up to UNCED. During UNCED,governments agreed to call for the establishment of a high-levelCommission on Sustainable Development that would be a functionalcommission of ECOSOC. The Commission was called for to ensureeffective follow-up of UNCED, to enhance international cooperationand rationalize the intergovernmental decision-making capacity forthe integration of environment and development issues and toexamine the progress in the implementation of Agenda 21 at thenational, regional and international levels.

In 1992 the 47th session of the UN General Assembly set out theterms of reference for the Commission, its composition, guidelinesfor the participation of NGOs, the organization of work, the CSD'srelationship with other UN bodies, the high-level advisory boardand Secretariat-support arrangements in resolution 47/191.

The CSD held its organizational session from 24-26 February 1993 atUN Headquarters in New York where the 53 members elected the Chairand other members of the Bureau; discussed the provisional agendaand organization of work of the Commission at its first substantivesession; and approved an outline of a multi-year thematic programmeof work. Ambassador Razali Ismail (Malaysia) was elected the firstChair of the Commission.

The CSD held its first substantive session in New York from 14-25June 1993. During the course of the session, the Commissionaddressed the following items: adoption of a multi-year thematicprogramme of work; issues relating to the future work of theCommission; exchange of information regarding the implementation ofAgenda 21 at the national level; progress in the incorporation ofrecommendations of UNCED in the activities of internationalorganizations and within the UN system; progress achieved infacilitating and promoting the transfer of environmentally-soundtechnology, cooperation and capacity-building; and initialfinancial commitments, financial flows and arrangements to giveeffect to UNCED decisions.

After initial discussion of these items in Plenary during the firstweek of the session, the Chair submitted six draft decisions to thetwo informal negotiating groups for consideration. InformalNegotiating Group I, chaired by Ghazi Jomaa (Tunisia), wasresponsible for adoption of a multi-year thematic programme of workfor the Commission; issues relating to the future work of theCommission; and exchange of information regarding theimplementation of Agenda 21 at the national level. InformalNegotiating Group II, chaired by Arthur Campeau (Canada), wasresponsible for progress in the incorporation of UNCEDrecommendations in the activities of international organizations;transfer of environmentally sound technology; and finance. On 23-24June over 50 ministers gathered to participate in the high-levelsegment and address a number of issues related to the future workof the CSD and implementation of Agenda 21. (For more information,see Earth Negotiations Bulletin Vol. 5 No. 12.)

INTERSESSIONAL HIGHLIGHTS

WORKSHOP ON THE TRANSFER AND DEVELOPMENT OF ENVIRONMENTALLY-SOUND TECHNOLOGIES

The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) andthe Government of Norway co-sponsored a Workshop on the Transferand Development of Environmentally Sound Technologies, which washeld in Oslo from 13-15 October 1993. The workshop, which wasattended by more than 40 experts acting in their personal capacity,was structured around the following four themes: generaltechnology-environment issues; supply side issues; demand sideissues; and new initiatives. The report of the workshop identifiesthe following priority elements for an action programme:

Lack of information, awareness and training needs to be tackled urgently. This means keeping decision-makers from the South, in both the public and private sectors, aware of developments in environmental regulation, technical change and management practices in the North, where the parameters of future developments are currently being defined.

Benchmarking provides an effective instrument by which to assess, monitor and encourage best practice standards at the firm level.

Efforts in the area of technological cooperation need to encourage continual upgrading of environmental standards. Funds need to be mobilized and made available to provide incentives for helping the private sector to undertake technological initiatives in countries and sectors where market incentives do not induce such behavior.

A major initiative needs to be undertaken to document existing initiatives in environmentally-oriented technical assistance within both national environmental agencies and the corresponding international bodies, and to stimulate a consistent multi-donor approach to the provision of environmental services and institutional capacity building.

The absence or weakness of effective regulatory structures and enforcement mechanisms presents a major obstacle to the attraction of environmentally sound technologies. Priority should probably be given to starting the process of designing at least minimally effective, simple regulative systems and then move on to the gradual development or more effective measures over time.

There is a need for a financial instrument, comparable to the global conventions, for addressing local problems with environmental, technological and developmental dimensions.

The participants also called for further research in the followingthree areas: (a) a number of proposals for action are currentlystalled because the relevant decision-makers in government andindustry do not have sufficient empirical evidence of the realitiesof the situation to make a decision or because there was noconsistent view on the nature of the problems involved; (b) anumber of apparently successful institutional innovations need tobe documented and tracked over time. Benchmarking and other bestpractices could be disseminated to inspire innovations elsewhere;and (c) there are weaknesses in the methodological approaches to anumber of environmental issues.

PREPARATORY MEETING ON TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, COOPERATION AND LOCAL CAPACITIES

The United States and Colombia co-hosted a preparatory meeting ontechnology transfer, cooperation and local capacities in Cartagena,Colombia from 17-19 November 1993. The objective of the meeting wasto contribute to the development of an agenda for the CSD ad hocintersessional working group on technology, including formulationof a general strategy for promoting technology transfer within thecontext of the CSD multi-year programme of work. Representativesfrom 16 countries, the European Commission, and five UN agenciesfocused their discussions on two technology sub-sectors --processes that minimize, treat, recycle and eliminate liquid wasteand environmentally sound technologies for efficient generation anduse of energy for households and small industries.

The discussion on technology transfer for handling liquid wastefocused on the following "proposals for action," which could beconsidered by the CSD working group on technology transfer:improving access to information; monitoring discharges andassessing the risk they pose; improving regulatory frameworks;financing the acquisition of technology; strengthening institutionsin receiving countries; improving public awareness and support forneeded actions; lowering technological risks; and minimizing legalobstacles and trade barriers. The discussion on energy technologiesfocused on the following proposed areas for discussion for the CSDworking group: promoting and facilitating policy reforms thataccelerate the introduction of energy efficient technologies,practices and systems; fostering and financing the development andcommercialization of energy efficient technologies; promoting,facilitating and financing international dissemination ofinformation; promoting donor collaboration and coordination; andworking directly with recipient nations in developing the necessaryabsorptive capacities.

At the conclusion of the meeting, the Chair, Amb. Arthur Campeau(Canada), commented that the meeting did not solve all the problemsbefore it, as if this was an easy task it would have been dealtwith long ago. Campeau concluded that this meeting accomplished afirst step towards creative problem solving, towards innovativethinking and honest discourse, as we pursue the objective ofsustainable development. Following the meeting, some participantsagreed that despite the sponsors' best intentions, little progresswas made in resolving some of the deep-seated differences betweenNorth and South on technology transfer and, instead, the meetingcontained a large amount of well-worn rhetoric.

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY

The sixth meeting on the restructuring and replenishing the GlobalEnvironment Facility (GEF) ended in failure on Friday, 10 Decemberin Cartagena, Colombia. This was supposed to be the finalnegotiating session on GEF restructuring. The GEF was set up in1991 as a three-year pilot programme to provide additional grantand concessional funding of the agreed incremental costs forachieving agreed global environmental benefits. It financesactivities in four areas: global warming, biological diversity,ozone depletion and international waters. The Pilot Phase ends inmid-1994.

At the Cartagena meeting, negotiations stalled on two major issues:(1) what is the appropriate ratio of seats between industrializedcountries (ICs), Eastern European economies in transition (ETs) andthe developing countries (DCs) within the GEF Executive Council;and (2) whether the Council would be chaired by an individualelected from among its members or by the Chief Executive Officer(CEO) of the Secretariat, as nominated by the implementing agencies(UNEP, UNDP and the World Bank). The ICs originally proposed a30-seat Executive Council with a ratio of 14 ICs + 2 ETs + 14 DCs,with the CEO serving as Chair. The G-77 insisted on holding amajority within the Council that better reflected its constituencyof over 130 countries and on the right to elect its own Chair.

On the last day of the session, the ICs returned with two offers:(1) a ratio of 14 ICs + 2 ETs + 15 DCs, with the Chair sharedbetween the CEO and an elected co-Chair; or (2) a ratio of 14 ICs+ 2 ETs + 17 DCs, chaired by the CEO. Agreement appeared close asthe G-77 spent much of the morning reviewing the options. However,while the G-77 met, France withdrew its support for the compromiseand was followed quickly by Germany. France indicated that itinsisted on returning to the original 14+2+14 ratio or it woulddecrease its financial support for the GEF. Amidst accusations ofbad faith, and of failing to live up to the promises of new levelsof cooperation made in Rio, the negotiations collapsed.

According to some observers, this failure is not definite, aspossibilities still exist to conclude the agreement prior to thenext session of the Climate Change INC, to be held from 7-18February in Geneva. It is likely that informal consultations willtake place in New York in mid-January and the next meeting ofparticipants is expected to take place in the US before the end ofJanuary.

HIGH-LEVEL ADVISORY BOARD ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

The first meeting of the High-Level Advisory Board on SustainableDevelopment was held in New York on 13-14 September 1993. The Boardappointed Mr. Bernard Chidzero (Zimbabwe) as its Chair, Ms.Briggitta Dahl (Sweden) as Vice-Chair and Mr. Martin Holdgate(United Kingdom) as Rapporteur. Other members of the Advisory Boardappointed by UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali are: Mr.Jacques Cousteau (France), Mr. Qu Geping (China), Mr. Saburo Kawai(Japan), Mr. Tommy Koh (Singapore), Mr. Valentin Koptyug (RussianFederation), Mr. Bola Kuforiji-Olubi (Nigeria), Ms. Rita LeviMontalcini (Italy), Mr. Celso Lafer (Brazil), Ms. Maria de losAngelos Moreno (Mexico), Ms. Laura Novoa (Chile), Justice R. S.Pathak (India), Mr. Emil Salim (Indonesia), Mr. Klaus Schwab(Germany), Mr. Stefan Schmidheiny (Switzerland), Ms. Adele Simmons(United States), Mr. Maurice Strong (Canada), and Mr. Mostafa Tolba(Egypt). The members of the Advisory Board have been appointed fora two-year period.

At its first meeting, the Board decided to focus its effortsinitially within three broad themes:

Linkages between economic, social and political development in a changing world;

New approaches to finance and technology; and

The establishment of new partnerships between the United Nations and other bodies active in the field of sustainable development.

The Board agreed to establish three panels of its members toexamine and elaborate recommendations on these issues. The firstpanel will be co-chaired by Klaus Schwab and Emil Salim, the secondpanel by Tommy Koh and Stefan Schmidheiny and the third panel byJacques Cousteau and Justice Pathak. These panels will work byelectronic and other means of communication, consider the variousstudies and initiatives being undertaken by other bodies, consultexperts and organizations known to them, when appropriate, andreport back to the Advisory Board. The next meeting of theHigh-Level Advisory Board is scheduled for 17-22 March 1994.

INTER-AGENCY COMMITTEE ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

The Inter-Agency Committee on Sustainable Development (IACSD) heldits second session in New York from 8-10 September 1993. Duringthis meeting, the IACSD continued consideration of matters relatedto ensuring a coordinated system-wide response to theimplementation of Agenda 21 and other decisions of UNCED, effectivedivision of labor and sharing of responsibilities, andcollaborative arrangements for preparation of documentation for thesecond session of the CSD.

The IACSD has designated Task Managers for the follow- up to andreporting on the various chapters, issues and programme areas ofAgenda 21. The Task Managers, in cooperation with other relevantorganizations will provide coordinated technical inputs on UNsystem-wide implementation of Agenda 21 in specific areas inaccordance with the CSD's multi-year thematic programme of work.The Task Managers will prepare, in collaboration with concernedorganizations, reports that will focus on common UN systemstrategies for the implementation of Agenda 21 and identify areasfor further action for consideration by the CSD. The following isthe list of Task Managers:

Critical elements of sustainability -- UN Department for Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development (DPCSD);

Financial resources and mechanisms -- DPCSD;

Education and science -- UNESCO;

Transfer of environmentally sound technologies -- DPCSD;

Cooperation and capacity building -- UNDP;

Decision-making structures -- DPCSD;

Roles of major groups -- DPCSD;

Health -- WHO;

Human settlements -- UNEP/HABITAT;

Freshwater -- ACC Subcommittee on Water Resources;

Toxic chemicals and hazardous wastes -- UNEP;

Land, management of land resources and forests -- FAO;

World climate programme and drought monitoring -- WMO;

Environmental law, ozone and transboundary atmospheric pollution, desertification, biodiversity and Earthwatch -- UNEP; and

Biotechnology -- UNIDO.

The next meeting of the IACSD will be held in March 1994.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY HIGHLIGHTS

The Second Committee of the 48th session of the UN General Assemblyconsidered the implementation of the decisions and recommendationsof the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) andother environmental matters on Friday, 19 November, Tuesday, 23November and Wednesday, 24 November 1993. During the three days ofdebate, most delegates seemed pleased with the progress made so farin UNCED follow-up, but expressed concern that the implementationof Agenda 21 has not been as successful as they had hoped.Delegates were heartened by the positive outcome of the firstsession of the CSD, yet fear that it could become bogged down byits own bureaucracy, unless there is more innovative thinking. Mostgovernments attach great importance to the CSD's establishment oftwo ad hoc intersessional working groups on financial resources andtechnology transfer.

GENERAL DEBATE

Under-Secretary-General for Policy Coordination and SustainableDevelopment Nitin Desai opened Friday morning's debate witha summary of UNCED follow-up activities. With regard to the CSD,Desai commented on the success of its first session, theparticipation of ministers in the high level segment, and theestablishment of two working groups on finance and technologytransfer that will meet early in 1994. The CSD expects memberStates to: keep it informed on activities; adequately considernon-State actors regarding policy implementation; honor commitmentsmade in Rio; and ensure Agenda 21 follow-up in allintergovernmental bodies.

Bangladesh,

Bolivia, Burkina Faso, China, Indonesia,Iran, Israel, and Tanzania supported the establishmentof the two ad hoc intersessional working groups on technology andfinance. Colombia, on behalf of the 130 members of the Groupof 77, said that the establishment of the CSD's intersessionalworking groups need to have an agenda of themes that include thereview of financial requirements and the policy framework for theireffective mobilization as well as the requisite actions needed forremoving the barriers that interfere with the transfer oftechnology. On behalf of the European Union, Belgium urgedthat the CSD intersessional working groups should focus ontechnical aspects, not policy.

On behalf of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica,Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua,Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela, Chile said that thecreation of the two CSD working groups on technology transfer andfinance has generated new expectations for a solution to theseserious problems. Overcoming these obstacles is a prerequisite forthe implementation of all of the agreements reached in Rio andsustainable development.

Austria

stated that during this session of the GeneralAssembly, the decisions of the CSD to create ad hoc working groupson finance and technology questions will have to be given theirbudgetary grounding. Great care should be taken to avoid arestating of generalities or a partial renegotiation of Agenda 21and to ensure that these ad hoc groups really add value to thedeliberations and recommendations of the CSD. The AustrianGovernment will host a national preparatory meeting on Cluster D(Structures of Decision Making). From 14-16 April 1994, Austriawill organize a symposium on "Sustainable Development andInternational Law."

New Zealand

said that the CSD's challenge is to strike theright balance between keeping the political spotlight onenvironment and development issues, and going about the nuts andbolts work of implementation of Agenda 21. To ensure that the CSDdoes not go the way of some other UN organizations and becomebogged down in bureaucracy, New Zealand believes there is room toimprove the current guidelines for national reporting. Similarly,Australia said that the current guidelines for thepreparation of national reports may be so difficult as todiscourage governments. The CSD should consider ways to simplifythe guidelines for national reports and facilitate their voluntarypreparation.

The Russian Federation

stated that the CSD should become notonly a political forum for strengthening North-South and East-Westpartnership, but also to prepare specific recommendations forcountries and international organizations on the basis of analysisof main trends, problems and experience accumulated in the field ofsustainable development as well as a dialogue with allparticipants, including NGOs. It is also important that there beimprovement of structures for coordination among all elements ofthe UN system.

Finland

said that the Secretariat needs bold and innovativeworking methods to enable the CSD to draw necessary politicalconclusions. She suggested that the high level segment should focuson a few major political issues on the agenda of the session. Theycould even consider the possibility of informal gatherings betweenministers, in connection with the high level segment, to facilitateissues.

Kenya

welcomed the establishment of the CSD, but noted thatthe proposed liaison office in Nairobi has not yet beenestablished. Poland said that the CSD needs to ensure betterintegration of environment and development concerns. Polandsupports a Nordic proposal made at ECOSOC to devote the CSD's highlevel segment to the interrelationship between environment andeconomy.

Iceland

, on behalf of the Nordic countries, remindeddelegates that the success of the CSD will not only depend upon theCSD itself but the active work of each and every country inimplementing the results of UNCED. Innovative financing shouldbecome a central strategic theme of the upcoming CSD working groupmeeting on finance. Other issues of importance are the growingemphasis on the development and transfer of environmentally soundtechnologies, improving the link between technology transfer andcapacity building, and increased South-South cooperation forimproving the adaptation of imported technologies and enhancing theuse and development of indigenous, local and traditional knowledge.Addressing the interface of trade, environment and development isyet another issue of international significance.

Malaysia

noted that while the first session of the CSD waspositive, there is still a lot of work required to ensurecomprehensive and meaningful implementation of Agenda 21. The mostoutstanding development at the CSD session was the establishment ofthe Ad Hoc Working Groups on Finance and Technology and Malaysiahopes they will be successful and provide positive contributions tothe work of the CSD in these areas.

Germany

stated that the CSD must further the coordinationwithin the UN system in the field of environment and development.The ad hoc working groups on finance and technology, as well asother government initiatives, must provide a basis for clearpolitical decisions at the second CSD meeting.

Canada

said that the success of the CSD depends in part onimplementation of Agenda 21 at the national and local levels. Heurged that the CSD remain transparent and inclusive, establish andstrengthen constructive partnerships and use roundtable discussionsto transfer policies into actions. The CSD must continue topreserve the Spirit of Rio and resist falling into the trap ofbecoming overly institutionalized and bureaucratic.

Switzerland

said that the quality of the CSD must bemaintained and strengthened. There is a need for a better politicalplatform for the high-level segment. General statements should bebanned, the role of the Chair is fundamental, and a final statementshould be maintained, even if there is divergence of opinions. Hestressed the need to coordinate different sectoral issues, the needfor composite sustainable development indicators, and suggestedthat peer reviews in regional ad hoc groupings may assist the workof the CSD.

Mexico

said that the environment should not be givensectoral treatment but should be viewed in light of developmentplanning. The CSD should be a place for political dialogue. Theintersessional working groups should help solve the problems oftechnology transfer and financial resources and identify solutionsinvolving the GEF and the Bretton Woods institutions.

Madagascar

said that within the CSD the execution of themulti-year thematic programme of work is crucial and the complexityof environment and development problems demands an integratedapproach. The problem of financing sustainable developmentactivities is the key to the success of Agenda 21 and Madagascarregrets the "wait and see" attitude of many developed countries.Madagascar welcomed the establishment of the two CSD ad hocintersessional working groups on technology transfer and financeand counts on them to come up with action-oriented policyinitiatives. Partnership is essential in implementing Agenda 21.Madagascar hopes that the spirit of political commitment shown atthe first session of the CSD is preserved.

The only country to mention the issue of venue for the next sessionof the CSD was Belarus, who is flexible on this matter, butsupported holding the second CSD in Geneva. Belarus also said thatthe CSD needs to better address the environmental problems ofcountries in transition. The CSD should also be the main bodydealing with Agenda 21 implementation and duplication of efforts byUNEP and the CSD should be eliminated.

Brazil

noted the landmark set by UNCED in democratizinginternational relations and strengthening multilateralism and thatthe "Spirit of Rio" should be kept alive. He called the creation ofthe two CSD working groups crucial for effective implementation ofAgenda 21, noting their role in providing a political framework. Hestressed the importance of access to environmentally soundtechnology, restating Brazil's proposal that the CSD working groupon technology prepare a catalog of existing public domaintechnologies for the sectoral clusters to be considered by the CSDin 1994.

Pakistan

said that at its next session, the CSD must reviewthe issue of unsustainable patterns of consumption and lifestylesin developed countries and solicit concrete, quantitative andqualitative commitments from the developed countries. Specificpolicies must also be formulated for a conducive internationaleconomic environment, including access of developing countryexports to the markets of the developed countries. The CSD'sestablishment of the two ad hoc working groups on technologytransfer and finance is an important step forward in theimplementation of the Rio commitments. The technology group mustclearly identify the measures for the operationalization of thecommitments regarding transfer of environmentally sound technology.The finance group must identify the exact figure required for theimplementation of each programme area in Agenda 21 as well asmechanisms for financing them.

The Czech Republic recognized the difficulty in assessingperformance and progress towards sustainable development due to thelack of adequate indicators. These would provide a reliable andunambiguous measurement of progress towards sustainability. Theseindicators should be developed to meet the needs of allconstituencies. NGOs not only have the right to information, butthe provision of adequate information to them is a prerequisite toany real progress toward sustainability.

RESOLUTIONS

Since the CSD is a subsidiary body of ECOSOC, the Second Committeeof the General Assembly was not required to adopt any resolutionsrelated to the Commission. The Fifth Committee, which addressesbudgetary matters, did review the budgetary implications of the CSDad hoc intersessional working groups on finance and technologytransfer. The Second Committee, however, did adopt several otherresolutions related to the CSD and UNCED follow-up.

The first of these resolutions is titled, "Dissemination of theprinciples of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development"(A/C.2/48/L.46). This resolution urges all Governments to promotewidespread dissemination of the Rio Declaration on Environment andDevelopment at the public and private levels. The resolution alsorequests the Secretary-General to ensure that the Declaration iswidely disseminated by the competent organs and bodies of the UNsystem and its principles are incorporated in their programmes andprocesses.

The second resolution is called "Strengthening internationalcooperation in the monitoring of global environmental problems"(A/C.2/48/L.80). This resolution invites governments and relevantorganizations of the UN system and other relevant entities toreview their contribution to international cooperation inenvironmental monitoring, including environmentally related remotesensing and data assessment, and provide appropriate support forsuch activities within existing resources. The resolution alsorequests the Executive Director of UNEP to prepare and submit tothe UNEP Governing Council at its 18th session, a report on UNEP'sactivities in environmental monitoring, containing proposals andrecommendations within the context of Agenda 21 and a review ofEarthwatch. Finally, the resolution invites the Governing Councilof UNEP to consider the above-mentioned report at its 18th sessionand submit its conclusions and recommendations to the GeneralAssembly at its 50th session, through the Economic and SocialCouncil.

THINGS TO LOOK FOR IN 1994

There are two intersessional meetings being plannedfor the period 22 February - 4 March 1994. Ad hoc open-endedworking groups on financial flows and mechanisms and on technologytransfer and cooperation, established at the CSD session last June,will each meet for three-five days, depending on the workload. Theworking group on technology transfer is expected to meet first.These working groups will be composed of governments, which willnominate experts in order to assist the Commission in its work. Thefindings of these two working groups will be reported back to theCommission. NGOs and major groups that are accredited to the CSDwill be able to participate in the meetings of these workinggroups. Bearing in mind the expert nature of these working groups,their outcome will not be a negotiated text but an agreed list ofpolicy options/recommendations for the consideration of the CSD atits 1994 session.

The provisional agenda for the ad hoc working group on technologyis as follows: after election of a Chair and adoption of theAgenda, the working group will perform an overview of the currentsituation and trends relating to the transfer of environmentallysound technology (EST) in the context of Chapter 34 of Agenda 21and in accordance with decision E of the first substantive sessionof the CSD. Issues for discussion may include: appropriate economicpolicies; trade related issues of technology transfer (includingintellectual property rights); creation of a positive investmentclimate; respective roles of and interaction between the public andprivate sectors in the transfer of technology and ways and means topromote the transfer of EST that are publicly owned or in thepublic domain, as well as privately owned; and the usefulness ofsetting up information systems, clearing houses, and technologycenters. The next agenda item is called "Access to information onEST" and will include discussion on (a) information on privatelyowned/public domain/publicly owned technologies, including state ofthe art technologies; (b) priority needs of developing countries;(c) new initiatives -- data banks, information systems, referralservices; and (d) relevant experience gained in the use ofparticular technologies. This section is supposed to focus on thesectoral issues currently under review by the CSD. The last twoagenda items deal with capacity building and financial arrangementsand technological partnership -- including the removal of barriersand provision of incentives.

The provisional agenda for the ad hoc working group on financecontains the following items: Election of the Chair; Adoption ofthe Agenda; and Overview of financial resources and mechanisms inthe context of Chapter 33 of Agenda 21 and in accordance withdecision F of the first substantive session of the CSD. The nextitem will address ways and means to raise the effectiveness of theuse of existing financial resources and to mobilize new andadditional resources from all sources (domestic/external;private/public; traditional/innovative). This discussion will alsoconsider international policy instruments, such as debt relief,terms of trade, commodity prices, market access and private foreigninvestment as well as to review mechanisms for innovated financingin the context of paragraph 33.16 of Agenda 21. The working groupwill also consider national policy instruments and specificexperiences and initiatives in the sectors under review. The nextitem on the agenda is "Requirements, availability and adequacy offinancial resources and mechanisms in the sectors under review:assessment and methodological questions." The last item is"Specific policy options for the mobilization of financialresources towards a balanced implementation of all aspects ofAgenda 21 under consideration by the CSD in 1994, in the light ofthe discussion of the above items."

INTERSESSIONAL WORKING GROUPS ON TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND FINANCE:

SECOND SESSION OF THE CSD:

The 1994 session of theCommission, currently scheduled for 16-27 May (with a possibleextension until 3 June) will provide the first opportunity forsubstantive review of the Rio agreements. As there has been noformal decision regarding the venue for CSD meetings, it isexpected that the 1994 session will take place in New York.

According to the multi-year thematic programme of work adopted bythe CSD, the 1994 session will address the following chapters ofAgenda 21:

Cross-Sectoral Issues

--Chapter 2: accelerating sustainable development

--Chapter 4: consumption patterns

--Chapter 33: financial resources and mechanisms

--Chapter 34: technology cooperation and transfer

--Chapter 37: capacity building

--Chapter 38: institutions

--Chapter 39: legal instruments

--Chapters 23-32: roles of major groups

Sectoral Issues

--Chapter 6: health

--Chapter 7: human settlements

--Chapter 18: freshwater resources

-- Chapter 21: solid wastes and sewage

-- Chapter 19: toxic chemicals

-- Chapter 20: hazardous wastes

-- Chapter 22: radioactive wastes

In preparation for this session, the Secretariat has been asked toprepare a number of reports, including: an annual overview reporton progress made in the implementation of Agenda 21; thematicreports corresponding to the Agenda 21 sectoral clusters listedabove; corresponding reports on the activities of IGOs within andoutside the UN system; a report on financial flows and mechanismsto implement Agenda 21; and a progress report on the implementationof Chapter 34 on technology transfer.

Likewise, the Commission asked Governments to preparereports/communications for the Commission in accordance with themulti-year thematic programme of work. These reports must be in oneof the official UN languages, not exceed 50 pages, refer tospecific facts and data that would reflect improvements ordegradation of situations, and be submitted to the Secretariat atleast three months prior to the start of the 1994 CSD session.

Participants

National governments: US
Negotiating blocs: European Union; Group of 77 and China
Non-state coalitions: NGOs