Daily report for 6 March 1997

Members of the G-77/China met during the morning and the Working Group met duringthe afternoon to discuss Areas Requiring Urgent Action. Co-Chair Osborn noted that theannex regarding the CSD’s programme of work would not be discussed at theIntersessional, and proposed attaching the Secretariat’s text on this issue to the finalreport.

AREAS REQUIRING URGENT ACTION

ICELAND supported the identification of five or six areas for action, including oceans,energy and transport, freshwater, toxic chemicals and SIDS. NORWAY supported afocus on a smaller number of issues.

A number of speakers suggested that the text on poverty be included in the section onPolicy Approaches. GUYANA called for identification of national and internationalactors. The G-77/CHINA proposed adding references to support for micro-enterprises andrural employment. The INDIGENOUS PEOPLES CAUCUS called for fullimplementation of the WSSD Programme of Action. CANADA recommended inclusionof food security and promotion of gender equality.

On freshwater, the US questioned the need for an intergovernmental process. CANADAsupported the call for international cooperation and an intergovernmental process.AUSTRALIA said a time frame should be specified for an intergovernmental panel.SWITZERLAND proposed attention to regional approaches, upstream-downstreamlinkages and, with PERU, sustainable development of mountain areas. The G-77/CHINA,supported by the INDIGENOUS PEOPLES CAUCUS, said discussing water as aneconomic good, and thus the reference to pricing policies to recover costs, is premature.He said bilateral and regional agreements will be more effective and feasible thaninternational cooperation and an intergovernmental process. He called for financial andtechnical support for water supply and sanitation infrastructure in developing countries.BRAZIL underscored the important role of international financial institutions in helpingdeveloping countries in this regard. FAO called for promotion of investment in uplandconservation. GUYANA said waste management is linked to this matter and inefficientindustrial practices should be referenced. URUGUAY stressed the need for an integratedapproach.

On oceans, the US questioned the need for an improved system of oceans governance andsaid FAO is already addressing the issue of excess fishing fleet capacity. JAPAN and theREPUBLIC OF KOREA said the subparagraph on elimination of subsidies and excesscapacity should be deleted. BRAZIL noted considerable differences among countriesregarding subsidies and fishing fleet capacity and recommended that their elimination andreduction be conducted “where appropriate.” AUSTRALIA supported an exhaustive listof existing legal instruments and action programmes. She supported targets provided theyare based on indicators of ecological sustainablity. The REPUBLIC OF KOREA said thelisting of legal instruments should be deleted or be comprehensive. The G-77/CHINAsaid implementation of these instruments should be based on common but differentiatedresponsibilities and requires assistance to developing countries. CANADA said thatspecific proposals for an intergovernmental process on oceans are premature. MALTAsupported the reference to the Global Programme of Action for SIDS. MEXICO,NORWAY and FAO called for a reference to the 1995 International Code of Conduct forResponsible Fisheries. NORWAY noted the importance of national and regional effortsto ensure sustainable use and supported: reference to the FAO agreement to promotecompliance on the high seas; the establishment of measures and objectives, includingtargets for fisheries management; and improved control and enforcement mechanisms.Samoa, on behalf of AOSIS, supported adding “seas” to the heading and stressed the linkbetween implementation and financial and organizational capacities of countries. PAPUANEW GUINEA called for reflection on biological and physical oceans processes.

On forests, CANADA proposed including the three options for an ongoing internationalprocess recommended by the IPF in the UNGASS document.

On energy and transport, JAPAN said energy pricing should reflect a country’s economicand energy situation and the reference to nuclear energy should be deleted. TheREPUBLIC OF KOREA suggested deleting the subparagraph on subsidies. ANTIGUAAND BARBUDA said SIDS have placed priority on energy issues. SWITZERLANDsaid the possibility of behavioral changes on the demand side should be considered. TheG-77/CHINA said the time frame and targets for elimination of subsidies should accountfor differences between developed and developing countries. He called for a doubling offinancial resources for new and renewable energy sources and for access to technologiesand know-how to enable developing countries to use these energy sources. CANADAcalled for greater emphasis on energy efficiency and the benefits of recycling. BRAZILrecommended mentioning the role of international financial institutions in providingelectricity to unserved populations. He questioned the usefulness of a specific uniformtarget for elimination of subsidies. The US indicated it was not ready for a target.MALTA called for references to increased investment in solar energy and to regionalR&D in renewable energy. The NGO ENERGY CAUCUS called for: energyconservation and use reduction in developed countries; a phase-out of subsidies for fossilfuel and nuclear energy; and an increase in renewable energy subsidies. NORWAYproposed a reference to renewable energy sources available locally and supported aseparate paragraph on transport with a reference to comprehensive land-use planning. Anumber of countries also supported separating energy and transport.

On atmosphere, the US proposed adding a reference to regional agreements. JAPANproposed moving the recommendation regarding COP-3 of the FCCC to the Statement ofCommitment. The G-77/CHINA stressed the need for technology transfer and financialassistance to developing countries to enable them to meet FCCC commitments. He saidthe development and management of terrestrial and marine carbon sinks does not givedeveloped countries license to maintain unsustainable practices. CANADA proposedwelcoming the recent conclusion of meetings on replenishment of the Montreal ProtocolFund rather than calling for additional resources for phasing out ozone depletingsubstances in developing countries. BRAZIL proposed noting that the FCCCcommitments have not been met and that there is a need for renewed effort byindustrialized countries. IRAN said UNGASS should avoid making recommendations forfurther commitments. AOSIS called on Annex I countries to reduce their greenhouse gas(GHG) emissions and to strengthen their commitments. The NGO ENERGY CAUCUSemphasized equity and the primary responsibility of industrialized countries in reducingGHGs. The INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY ASSOCIATION stressed the needfor countries to make well-informed decisions on the optimal mix of energy sources, andcalled for sound technological assessments of the risks of all energy sources.

On population, the G-77/CHINA said expanding basic education must reflect the needs ofwomen and the girl-child. CANADA recommended expanding family planning.

On education, the US indicated an interest in the education for life idea. EGYPTsupported references to training and public awareness. CANADA advocated inclusion ofeducation for sustainable development. MALTA recommended emphasizing educationalsystems that include environmental programmes.

On health, the US supported a reference to WHO and the need to protect children fromenvironmental threats. CANADA suggested mentioning WSSD follow-up activities andhighlighting the link between health and the environment.

On toxic chemicals and wastes, AUSTRALIA proposed specifying the precautionaryprinciple, as contained in Rio Principle 15. SWITZERLAND called for more concretelanguage regarding PIC and POPs negotiations. The G-77/CHINA called for acomprehensive approach. He stressed the need to ensure the availability of substitutes forPOPs that are environmentally sound and accessible to developing countries. He calledfor further action to: enhance awareness of chemical safety and management; developaccident preparedness plans; complete a protocol on liability and compensation fordamages under the Basel Convention; establish regional cooperation agreements; and banlegal movement of hazardous and toxic wastes. CANADA said the recommendations ofthe Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety should be endorsed. He emphasizedwaste management, prevention and minimization. NORWAY noted the need to intensifycooperation with developing countries.

On land and sustainable agriculture, NORWAY proposed a reference to sustainableconservation and utilization of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture.CANADA noted that provision of adequate food and nutrition will requireenvironmentally sound intensification of food production. The US emphasized that theCCD Global Mechanism is not a financial mechanism. AUSTRALIA andSWITZERLAND also said the CCD COP-1 determination on that issue should not bepreempted.

On sustainable human settlements, CANADA urged implementation of the Habitat IIPlan of Action. The REPUBLIC OF KOREA called for a balance between urban andrural settlements.

SWITZERLAND proposed that the text on tourism recognize the need to involve localpopulations. The INDIGENOUS PEOPLES CAUCUS proposed adding the UN WorkingGroup on Indigenous Peoples to those organizations that should elaborate an InternationalProgramme of Work. CANADA noted the impacts of tourism on biodiversity. MALTArecommended including references to eco-tourism and to the need for environmentalpolicies in tourism development. BARBADOS stressed the importance of action on thisissue.

On biodiversity, JAPAN said examination of the equitable sharing of benefits should takeplace elsewhere, such as in FAO. AUSTRALIA proposed reference to traditional andindigenous knowledge and the equitable sharing of benefits from such knowledge. TheG-77/CHINA emphasized the role of women in sustainable use of biodiversity and calledfor implementation of environmental impact assessments. The INDIGENOUS PEOPLESCAUCUS called for the development of a bioethics protocol. CANADA said parties tothe CBD must move the Convention’s objectives forward in meaningful and measurableways. FAO called for a reference to the 1996 Leipzig Declaration and Plan of Action onPlant Genetic Resources.

On SIDS, CANADA called for references to coastal development and to integrating SIDSinto regional and global trading structures. AOSIS advocated provisions for an adequatereview of the Barbados Programme of Action in 1999.

The PHILIPPINES proposed adding a paragraph on natural disaster reduction andsustainable development.

IN THE CORRIDORS

Participants responded positively to the Wednesday briefing by Amb. Razali Ismail,President of the UNGA. He echoed a popular demand for wider ministerial participationin the CSD, with representation from key departments other than environment, such asfinance and development. He also flagged a number of ideas reflecting his view that theCSD’s dealings with the private sector must be a “two way street.” He raised thepossibility of a code of conduct, provision of information to the CSD and a monitoringrole for shareholders. NGOs concerned about access to UNGASS proceedings also tookcomfort when Amb. Razali signalled his intention to treat the Special Session like anyother major UN conference.

THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY

WORKING GROUP: The Working Group will meet in Conference Room 4 todiscuss the Assessment of Progress Reached After Rio from 10:00-12:00. Amb. RazaliIsmail, President of UNGA, will address the Group at noon. From 4:00-6:00 pm, theWorking Group will conclude its deliberations.