See more coverage of this event on the main IISD ENB website

We have launched a new website to better share our reports of global environmental negotiations.

As well as current coverage of new negotiations, you can find our original reports from this event by clicking here.


   

Special Session of the General Assembly to Review and Appraise the Implementation of Agenda 21

Late Breaking News from the Informal Consultations

Updated 17 June 1997

Reported by Peter Doran, Earth Negotiations Bulletin

On the second day of the informal consultations on the draft outcome of the Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly some progress was made on the bracketed text on cross-sectoral issues, in a working group under the chairmanship of Amb. Selso Amorim (Brazil). Discussions on sectoral issues, chaired by Derek Osborn (UK), were adjourned after just ten minutes to allow the G-77/China to hold internal consultations. The parallel meetings on sectoral and cross-sectoral issues will re-convene Wednesday morning.

Cross-Sectoral Issues

In paragraph 16 on implementation in areas requiring urgent action, delegations agreed that, although progress has been made in some areas, a major new effort will be required to achieve the goals established at UNCED "particularly in areas of cross-sectoral matters" where implementation has yet to be achieved.

On the integration of economic, social and environmental objectives (paragraphs 17-20), the G-77/CHINA agreed to consider a proposal from the US to add text from the UN Agenda for Development. The US opposed the selective adoption of a sentence on sustained economic growth, taken from the Agenda for Development, in isolation from the Agenda's text on the interdependence and mutual reinforcement of economic development, social development and environmental protection, and text on broad based growth to enable countries to improve living standards. Delegations heard that the Agenda for Development text had been the subject of difficult and prolonged negotiations. The G-77/CHINA explained that the Agenda for Development defines development. It was difficult for his group to equate development with sustainable development. Amorim said that sustainable development and development had shared objectives. He assured the G-77/CHINA that there was no attempt to define sustainable development in the section under discussion, on integration of economic, social and environmental objectives. The G-77/CHINA agreed to discuss the US proposal further.

In paragraph 18(b), NORWAY appealed to delegations to keep open a decision on referring to the involvement of all actors of civil society, including youth and "indigenous people[s]" to complement efforts of Governments for sustainable development. He explained that the issue of whether to refer to indigenous "people" or "peoples" was related to high level intensive discussions within the Norwegian Government. The G-77/CHINA preferred to refer to indigenous "people". No decision was taken.

Paragraph 18(c), on the enhanced opportunities for job creation resulting from the implementation of sustainable development policies was left in brackets pending related discussions on another paragraph. The G-77/CHINA asked for its deletion. SWITZERLAND, supported by the EU, sought to remove the brackets.

In paragraph 20 on fostering a dynamic and enabling international economic environment, the US and EU sought to link the Rio principle on common but differentiated responsibilities to environmental issues. The G-77/CHINA wanted to remove "in regard to environmental issues" but later conceded that the adoption of Agenda 21 language "taking into account that in view of differentiated contributions to global environmental degradation States have common but differentiated responsibilities."

On empowering people living in poverty by involving them in the implementation of strategies and programmes for poverty eradication and community development (paragraph 21(d)), the G-77/CHINA agreed that they should be involved in "evaluation, formulation and implementation" and that programmes should reflect their priorities.

In paragraph 21(e) on the disproportionate impact of poverty on women, the EU and CANADA supported a call for full implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action and deleting "consistent with the report of the Fourth World Conference on Women." The G-77/CHINA wanted to keep the reference to the FWCW report to accommodate those countries who recorded reservations in the report. Amorim asked the EU how delegations could agree anything inconsistent with the FWCW report. The EU agreed to consider their position.

In paragraph 22 on changing consumption and production patterns, delegations agreed to consider proposals to: drop a reference to "particularly excessive pollution from greenhouse gases" from a reference to environmental threats posed by unsustainable patterns in the industrialized countries; to replace a reference to similar patterns emerging in the higher income groups in some developing countries with a reference to an emergence of unsustainable patterns in the higher income groups in some developing countries; and to keep a reference to the strengthening of international "policies".

In the Corridors

A defining debate about the nature of development was carried over from the UN's Agenda for Development negotiations into discussion on cross-sectoral issues Tuesday. While the G-77 countries have preferred to stress and underline the importance of sustained economic growth others have embraced the three components of sustainable development, namely social development, economic development and environmental protection. Explaining his group's resistance to the idea of equating development with sustainable development, a G-77 representative recalled that the disagreements could be traced right back to 1987 and the publication of the Brundtland Report, Our Common Future. An NGO observer concluded that the disagreement boiled down to the G-77's refusal to accept the attempt to universalize a new concept of development incorporating the idea of sustainability. The G-77 continues to view sustainable development as a narrow and optional notion of development. The resulting contradictions explain some of the continuing tensions at the informal consultations. Out-going CSD Chair, Gechev, signalled the need to address the issue of contested definitions of sustainable development in his address to CSD-5.