Daily report for 23 April 1997

CSD-5 delegates met in two Drafting Groups and held informal consultations oninstitutional arrangements, the CSD work programme and forests.

DRAFTING GROUP I

In 29(a) (integrated transport policies), the G-77/CHINA added references tointernational cooperation in transfer of ESTs and implementation of appropriate trainingprogrammes. In 29(c) (energy efficiency), delegates accepted G-77/CHINA texton adopting and promoting, as appropriate, measures to mitigate the negativeenvironmental impacts of transportation, adding “including measures to improveefficiency in the transport sector.” An EU proposal for an international tax on aviationfuel was bracketed following support from SWITZERLAND and NORWAY andopposition from the G-77/CHINA, the US, AUSTRALIA, CANADA, RUSSIA and JAPAN. The EU and the US supported text on phasing out leaded gasoline within tenyears. The G-77/CHINA said this must be accompanied by technical and economic assistance to developing countries. AUSTRALIA preferred not specifying a time-frame.Delegates accepted the Chair’s compromise formulation, noting CSD-3’s decision on theissue and calling for accelerated phase-out of leaded gasoline as soon as possible,preferably within ten years, and exploration of ways to provide economic or technicalassistance to developing countries.

On 30 (atmosphere), the EU, supported by SWITZERLAND, said he wouldbracket his proposal, which includes specific emissions reduction targets, if challenged.The G-77/CHINA emphasized that the Berlin Mandate focuses on strengtheningcommitments of developed countries. SAMOA, for AOSIS, underscored the AOSISprotocol as consistent with the Berlin Mandate. The US proposed language noting thatthe CSD should recommend that the FCCC accelerate negotiations and recognize theglobal nature of the problem. The US, AUSTRALIA, JAPAN, CANADA, COLOMBIA,IRAN, RUSSIA, VENEZUELA, NIGERIA and SAUDI ARABIA objected to includingspecific negotiating positions in the text and cautioned against prejudging the COP-3outcome. Delegates agreed to note the need for an international concerted effort andpolitical will (AOSIS). The US noted that greenhouse gas emissions and concentrationscontinue to rise, even as scientific evidence confirms the severe risk of global climatechange. IRAN proposed “suggests” rather than “confirms.” Delegates agreed thatscientific evidence continues to diminish uncertainties and “points evermore strongly” tothe risk. The Chair proposed bracketing proposals for the COP-3 outcome from the US(“satisfactory result”), JAPAN (agreement on quantified objectives for emissionreductions and on policies and measures), the EU (15% reduction below 1990 levels by2010) and AOSIS (20% reduction below 1990 levels by 2005). This “menu” of proposalswill be considered at UNGASS. New paragraphs were added on international cooperationand observational networks (AOSIS).

On 31 (ozone), the EU proposed that the Montreal Protocol needs strengthening,especially as regards methyl bromide and earlier phase-out in developing countries. TheG-77/CHINA said the CSD should not determine if a protocol needs to be strengthened,and prioritization of issues should be left to the COP.

On 32 (toxic chemicals), delegates noted the Intergovernmental Forum onChemical Safety, Inter-organizational Programme on the Sound Management ofChemicals, the “Responsible Care” initiative and the Code of Ethics on the InternationalTrade in Chemicals. The EU, AUSTRALIA, ICELAND, CANADA and the UShighlighted the recent UNEP Governing Council decision on chemicals andrecommended using its exact language. CANADA suggested including the dates fornegotiating PIC and POPs agreements. NORWAY noted the need to identify POPsbeyond the twelve currently specified by UNEP. CANADA, supported by AUSTRALIAand the US, noted risk assessment and management regimes for inorganic chemicals. TheG-77/CHINA called for international cooperation and support. Delegates requested theChair to produce a consolidated text.

On 32bis (hazardous wastes), delegates agreed that hazardous waste andradioactive waste will be addressed in separate paragraphs. They also asked the Chair toproduce a consolidated text on hazardous waste that highlights: the Basel Convention’stechnical working group; liability and compensation; the principle of “proximity;” andwaste recycling and disposal. On radioactive wastes, the Chair will develop aconsolidated text based on, inter alia: the Bamako Convention; the IAEA;treatment of improperly stored existing waste; prior notification; and irradiated nuclearfuel.

On 33 (land and sustainable agriculture), delegates agreed to an integratedapproach to “protecting and sustainably managing land and soil resources (EU), includingidentification of land degradation (AUSTRALIA) that involves all interested parties (G-77/CHINA), in particular women (NORWAY).” The EU objected to the US suggestion to“promote” rather than “ensure” secure land tenure for farmers. The G-77/CHINAopposed NORWAY’s call for measures to improve food security for the urban poor. TheEU, JAPAN and the REPUBLIC OF KOREA objected to an AUSTRALIAN proposal forcontinued WTO work to liberalize international trade and remove distortions tosustainable development in agriculture. The EU and the US opposed G-77/CHINA texton plans to provide complete access to basic requirements of agriculture for developingcountries.

In 34 (desertification and drought), the EU, US and JAPAN objected to the G-77/CHINA text on “new and additional financial resources” in reference to the globalmechanism. G-77/CHINA and EU amendments regarding the global mechanism werebracketed as options. Delegates continued into the night.

DRAFTING GROUP II

Financial Resources and Mechanisms: Delegates agreed to the Co-Chairs’ text in40, “Financial resources and mechanisms play a key role in the implementationof Agenda 21,” to be followed by Paragraph 33.13 of Agenda 21. A G-77/CHINAamendment was bracketed: Hence all financial commitments of Agenda 21, particularlythose contained in Chapter 33, and [especially] (G-77/CHINA) [including] (CHAIR)those [objectives] (EU) related to the provision of new and additional resources that areboth adequate and predictable, need to be urgently fulfilled. The US, supported by theEU, objected to the special reference to new and additional resource commitments.CANADA said his country was unlikely to fulfill the Agenda 21 ODA commitment of0.7% GNP “urgently.” The G-77/CHINA could not accept the EU’s reference to new andadditional resources as “objectives” rather than commitments. Chair Amorim said he was“very disheartened” and that some delegations were not in a mood to negotiate. Delegatesagreed: Renewed efforts are essential to ensure that all sources of funding(deleting international and domestic as well as private and public) contribute to“economic growth, social development and environmental protection” (CHAIR), in thecontext of sustainable development and “implementation of Agenda 21" (US). The USsaid that if delegations continued to treat the words ”sustainable development" as a“pariah” there would be nothing to discuss.

In 41 (ODA), the US and G-77/CHINA bracketed a revised G-77/CHINAproposal noting that, for developing countries, ODA remains a main source of externalfunding and is “essential” (CHAIR) for implementation of Agenda 21. They alsobracketed a sentence in which the EU proposed “now,” the US “short and medium term”and the Chair “at this stage” for the G-77/CHINA’s text that “ODA cannot be replaced byprivate capital flows.” An EU proposal calling for “recipient and donor countries toaddress the underlying factors” for the decrease in ODA was altered to state: “intensifiedefforts should be made to reverse this trend, taking into account the need for effectiveutilization of ODA” (G-77/CHINA) and “in the spirit of global partnership, underlyingcauses of the decrease should be addressed by all countries” (CHAIR). The US supportedand the G-77/CHINA altered text calling for strategies to increase support for aidprogrammes and for revitalizing the commitments donors made at UNCED.

In 42 (role of ODA), delegations agreed that ODA plays a significant role,inter alia, in capacity-building, infrastructure, combating poverty, environmentalprotection and promoting institutional development in developing countries, and “has”(Chair) a crucial role in the least developed countries. AUSTRALIA highlighted ODA’s“catalytic role in encouraging, where appropriate, country-driven policy reform efforts.”The G-77/CHINA expressed concern about conditionalities and bracketed this text.

On a G-77/CHINA-proposed paragraph 45, on multilateral financial institutions’(MFI) concessional funding, the US objected to an implication that developing countriesare totally dependent on external resources and agreed to replace “achieve” with “fullyimplement” sustainable development. Text on MFIs and stringent conditionalities wasreplaced with a call on such institutions to “continue” (US) to respond to the developmentneeds and priorities of developing countries. A call on developed countries to urgentlymeet commitments under the 11th replenishment of the IDA was accepted. In text on theGEF, CANADA, the US and AUSTRALIA supported EU text calling for satisfactoryGEF replenishment and flexibility in its mandate. The G-77/CHINA called for adequate,sustained and reliable funding, review of its decision-making process and expansion of itsscope and coverage. Both texts were bracketed. G-77/CHINA-proposed text on UN fundsand programmes was bracketed after alternative amendments were submitted byAUSTRALIA, the US and the EU.

INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS

INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS: Delegates continued to debatereferences to: the UNEP Governing Council decision of 4 April 1997; UNEP’s role;UNCTAD’s role; IDA replenishment; GEF designation as a permanent fundingmechanism; CSD’s role in regard to ECOSOC; reviews by and among countries withinregions; arrangements for interaction with major groups; and integration of thecommittees on renewable energy sources and natural resources into the work of the CSD.Informal-informal consultations took place during the evening.

PROGRAMME OF WORK: Sectoral themes discussed for CSD considerationwere: freshwater; oceans and seas; land resources/management; and atmosphere/energy.Cross-sectoral themes considered were: poverty eradication and consumption andproduction patterns as overriding themes; transfer of technology/capacity-building/education/science/awareness-raising; trade and investment/globalization;finance/trade/economic growth; and information for decision-making. Economic sectorsconsidered were: industry; tourism; fisheries; agriculture; forestry; and transport.Consultations are expected to conclude Thursday.

FORESTS: In the introductory paragraph, delegates added references to forestsas carbon sinks and reservoirs and a significant source of renewable energy, especially forLDCs. The group made limited progress on further clarification of issues arising from theIPF, agreeing to highlight “international cooperation in financial assistance andtechnology transfer and trade and environment relating to forest products” from the IPFreport. Several developing countries preferred adding traditional forest-related knowledgebut some developed countries objected to specifying issues other than those remainingunresolved from IPF. A footnote on terms of reference for an intergovernmental processand options for institutional follow-up remains pending.

IN THE CORRIDORS

Observers close to the preparation process for CSD-5 indicated that the complexity offinancial issues was probably underestimated at the Intersessional stage. There is alsoconcern that the difficulty of chairing the finance issue discussions at CSD-5 has beenheightened by the Co-Chairs’ association with the Intersessional product, whichinevitably failed to satisfy those who put forward proposals.

THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY

PLENARY: The Plenary is expected to convene in the morning. Drafting Groups may follow.

INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS: Informal consultations are expected onstreamlining national reporting and the programme of work, among others.