ENB @ WSSD PrepCom II: 7 February (day 8)

The World Summit on Sustainable Development
Second Preparatory Committee (PrepCom-II)
New York, 28 Jan - 8 Feb 2002

Thursday, 7 February

In a morning Plenary session, delegates heard presentations from South Africa and Indonesia on preparations and logistics for the WSSD and for PrepCom IV. In the afternoon, the PrepCom heard from representatives of UNEP, UNDP, ECOSOC and the Administrative Committee for Coordination (now Office of Interagency Affairs) on governance, followed by a discussion on governance. Photo: Qazi Shaukat Fareed, Adnan Amin, Director, UNEP New York Office, Alvaro Umana, UNDP, Sarbuland Khan, Director, ECOSOC Division, DESA, Co-Chair Ositadanma Anaedu (Nigeria), and Lars-Goran Engfeldt (Sweden).

Discussion on Sustainable Development Governance:
Presentations from heads of UN agencies

Sarbuland Khan, ECOSOC, described reforms in ECOSOC structure and work in order to increase coherence in the work of the regional and functional commissions that report to it. He said that a new approach is emerging in how to deal with conference follow-up, one that places a premium on wide participation. He stated that ECOSOC was the center of coordination for sustainable development, "the fulcrum for coherence between the UN, development finance institutions and the WTO."

Co-Chairs Ositadanma Anaedu (Nigeria), and Lars-Goran Engfeldt (Sweden)

Kenya asked about the relationship between the EMG and IEG, and their futures after the WSSD.

Bolivia asked about coordination with trade organizations, such as the WTO.

Amin's answers to Kenya's and Bolivia's questions (see above).

Adnan Amin, Director, UNEP New York Office, outlined the history of the current international environmental governance (IEG) process, reiterated that UNEP has brought an environmental dimension to the CSD's work and said that IEG results would be reported to PrepCom III. He also reiterated that the nature of the environmental challenge is planetary in scope, and that there is global solidarity in facing these issues. He said over 100 Environment Ministers were expected to be present at the final meeting of the IEG in Cartagena.

Alvaro Umana, UNDP, said clear, practical and effective systems of sustainable development governance at the global, regional, national and local levels were necessary to overcome the implementation gap. He noted fragmented sectors that compete rather than cooperate, and he called for a new global initiative to build capacity for sustainable development governance using innovative partnerships.

Qazi Shaukat Fareed, Director, Office of Interagency Affairs, said its role was to monitor coordination between the different agencies within the UN. Currently, he said its work was being driven by substance more than scheduling needs at this point. He also emphasized using new technologies in a continuous dialogue between agencies.

Canada said that in his experience, ECOSOC had achieved little in terms of coordinating sustainable development, and perceived the Council as more of an obstacle. He worried that issues of fragmentation will continue and that proposed ad hoc processes won't increase coordination nor command commitment.

Discussion on Sustainable Development Governance:
Statements from Delegations

Argentina, speaking for the G-77/China, said the cluster on governance cannot be used as a basis for discussion, and should not be included in the next version of the Chair's text. He stressed governance at the regional level and said the regional economic commissions, as well as UNDP national offices, could be mandated to promote sustainable development.

China noted the efforts that it and other developing countries have gone through to make sustainable development a reality, despite the lack of promised resources for implementation from developed countries. He stressed the need to consider the specific situation of different countries, and said that governance cannot be applied in a one-size-fits-all manner. He said he could not support the establishment of an international environmental court, and he qualified the IEG as an immature process that should not be included in the WSSD process.

South Africa emphasized full participation by developing countries, and said the economic pillar is missing in sustainable development governance. She stressed strong coordination between the UN system, the Bretton Woods institutions and the WTO. She said the IEG process must speak directly to the sustainable development governance architechture. She also stressed the importance of regional structures of goverance, stating that the success of NEPAD depends on regional governance.

Bolivia outlined possible scenarios for governance: strengthening environmental governance; strengthening existing institutions, as all are working in a fragmented way; concentrating and strengthening the CSD machinery, which might encompass the whole concept of sustainable development and the whole UN system including the Bretton Woods institutions, and suggested an umbrella organization, where sustainable policies would be implemented. He expressed pleasure that there will be further consultations on this topic.

Norway supported strengthening existing organizations and institutions. He proposed that the next CSD should invite the recently formed UN Permanent Forum for Indigenous Issues to provide advice on the Forum's priorities. He urged, inter alia, bridging the gap between policy decisions and implementation.

Egypt lamented that only environment ministers attend the CSD, as the CSD is supposed to the be the apex institution for policy dialogue on sustainable development. He questioned whether the proposed global sustainable development court would apply to countries who have not met their obligations, to those who overfish or to those whose emissions are leading to global warming.

Poland emphasized governance at the local level, stating that "nothing is real unless it becomes local." He said a global sustainable development court could promote and oversee better implementation and compliance of international law and of settlement of disputes.

Switzerland emphasized establishing compliance and enforcement mechanisms, building on UNEP's work on compliance and enforcement. He suggested transforming the CSD from negotiating decisions towards more dialogue and more exchange of information and of concrete experiences. He said there was no conflict between strengthening international environmental governance and sustainable development governance and that they are complementary and mutually supportive.

Canada said the environmental pillar of sustainable development is the weakest, as UNEP and environmental ministries are chronically short of funding. He said governance creates enabling conditions for allowing countries to develop, and also stressed the importance of environmental and social indicators.

Hungary agreed with the G-77/China statement that the section on governance should not be included as such in the next draft. He stressed the need for everyone to understand each other and a conceptual understanding of what governance is. He also emphasized stakeholder involvement and said they should feel that it is their Summit.

EU statement on governance

US statement on governance

The United Nations University presented findings of its Interlinkages Initiative: the key to effectiveness and institutional reform is to enhance interlinkages between MEAs at the subregional and national levels; financial mechanisms play a key role in creating the priorities for achieving synergies and coordination; and clustering of MEAs could be an effective and cost-efficient approach to their implementation.

Presentations from South Africa and Indonesia on preparations for the WSSD and PrepCom IV

Chrispian Olver, Delegation of South Africa, gave a detailed presentation on the preparations for the hosting of WSSD. He described the scope of the event, which will include the official UN summit as well as several peripheral events, such as the Global Forum when the major groups will meet and exhibit, and the Ubuntu Village. He overviewed the social, cultural, tourism and legacy programmes associated with WSSD. He said that the organizing committee expects some 65,000 people, including 20,000 UN accredited delegates, which will be made up of 5000 government delegates from 193 states, 10,000 representatives from major groups and 5000 from the media. He detailed the efforts made to ensure the conference is as environmentally neutral as possible. He detailed the layout of the Summit and the various zones in which it will be organized. Other topics covered in his presentation were registration and accreditation; protocol; transportation; accommodation, the Best Practices exhibit hall; and security.

The exhibition table for PrepCom IV to be held in Jakarta, Indonesia, 27 May-7 June, 2002.

For more information, visit: www.pc-wssd.com

Crispian Olver, South Africa

For more information, please visit:
www.joburgsummit2002.com
tourism.org.za
www.satour.com

During ensuing questions, Turkey requested information on registration for the Best Practices exhibit hall and hotel cancellations. Hungary urged that facilities such as transportation be made available 24 hours a day.

Ines Sukandar of the Indonesian delegation gave a presentation on preparations for PrepCom IV to be held in Jakarta from 27 May to 7 June at the Jakarta Conference Center. She gave details regarding the welcoming committee, arrival and departure handling for ministers and delegations, hotel accommodation, and pre- and post-conference tour arrangements. Hotel and tour arrangements may be made online at www.pc-wssd.com. An exhibition will be held from 4-7 June to coincide with World Environment Day on June 5.

Miscellaneous Photos

Kimo Goree, International Institute for Sustainable Development Reporting Services, and Tibor Faragó, Hungary

PrepCom Chair Emil Salim with Vice-Chair Kiyotaka Akasaka

Back to ENB's PrepCom-II main page

To listen to Real Audio files, you will need the free RealAudio player:

To view PDF files, you will need the free Adobe Acrobat Reader: