EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN (enb@igc.apc.org) PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (IISD) WRITTEN AND EDITED BY: Johannah Bernstein Anilla Cherian Langston James Goree VI "Kimo" Richard Jordan Lynn Wagner A DAILY REPORT ON THE THIRD SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE FOR THE WORLD SUMMIT FOR SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT Vol. 10 No. 26 Tuesday, 17 January 1994 WSSD PREPCOM III HIGHLIGHTS MONDAY, 16 JANUARY 1995 PLENARY Amb. Somavi'a (Chile) opened the Plenary with three items for adoption under Agenda Item 1: adoption of the agenda (A/CONF.166/PC/24); organization of work (A/CONF.166/PC/L.24); and observer status for IGOs (A/CONF.166/PC/L.23). The Chair announced that the Plenary would be transformed into Working Group I to discuss the draft Declaration and Chapter V. Amb. Koos Richelle (Netherlands) will chair WG II, which will discuss chapters I to IV of the Programme of Action. The Plenary turned to Agenda Item 2, accreditation of NGOs, A/CONF.166/PC/11/Add.2 and A/CONF.166/PC/11/Add.3. China disputed inclusion of the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples' Organization (UNPO). The Chair asked the Secretariat to examine further documentation on this organization, noting that the list was provisional. On Agenda Item 3, the status of preparation for the WSSD (A/CONF.166/PC/25), Nitin Desai highlighted two October 1994 seminars in Beijing and Slovenia. The Chair added that more than 90 Heads of State or Prime Ministers have confirmed their participation at the Summit. Over 2000 NGOs have been accredited. WORKING GROUP I The Chair opened the first session of Working Group I, calling on delegates to identify areas of convergence and divergence. The Philippines, on behalf of the G-77 and China, made a proposal to divide L.22 into two distinct parts: the Declaration and the draft Programme of Action. PARAGRAPH 1: (highest priority to social development) Switzerland, Australia and the US suggested references to the significance of social development and human well-being for all, and stressed that they are the highest priorities. PARAGRAPH 2: (urgent need to address social problems) The Holy See said the language overstates what the international community is prepared to do. Japan called for stronger links between the three themes. Australia, the EU and the US supported the existing language. PARAGRAPH 3: (need for effective response) This paragraph was approved with no amendments. PARAGRAPH 4: (preconditions for peace and security) The EU added "respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms" after "social justice". PARAGRAPH 5: (interdependence of social and economic development) The US proposed the following language: "broad-based and sustained economic development and equitable social development are central to economic security and social progress". Australia, supported by Brazil, India and the US, proposed the deletion of the last two sentences. PARAGRAPH 6: (importance of social development) The EU proposed that economic policies be appreciated in terms of social progress, and stressed that gender equity be at the center of economic and social development. The US requested brackets around the first EU proposal. PARAGRAPH 7: (government commitment to social development) India and Algeria added reference to the rights of the poor, the excluded and the unemployed, to food, work, shelter, health, education, and information. The US called for brackets around this proposal. Canada's reference to "exercise rights, utilize resources and share responsibilities" was accepted. PARAGRAPH 8: (new era of international cooperation) The US added, after "cold war", "to promote social development and social justice". PARAGRAPH 9: (conviction that progress can be achieved) The Holy See suggested that world leaders should acknowledge their action and inaction in contributing to the current situation. The US noted that it would be too much to ask heads of government to indict themselves. PARAGRAPH 10: (commitment) Saudi Arabia suggested adding the word "implementation" in reference to the Declaration, which remains bracketed. PARAGRAPH 11: (on progress and poverty) The G-77 and China suggested replacing "misery" with "poverty". The US proposed adding the words "throughout the world in both developed and developing countries" before "unprecedented progress". The paragraph remains bracketed. PARAGRAPH 12: (globalization) The G-77 and China proposed some textual amendments including inserting the word "cultural" before the word "values". The paragraph remains bracketed. PARAGRAPH 13: (progress in some areas) The G-77 and China suggested deleting the word "sevenfold" with regard to the multiplication of the wealth of nations in 13(a). In 13(b) (increase in life expectancy), the US suggested reference to family planning practices. The Holy See added reference to basic health care. The G-77 and China requested brackets around these proposals. The Russian Federation called for a more global reference to average infant mortality. Delegates agreed to the G-77 proposal to replace sub-paragraph (c) with: "Democratic pluralism, democratic institutions and fundamental civil liberties have expanded. De-colonization efforts have seen much progress, while the elimination of apartheid has been an historic achievement". The US added a new sub-paragraph to refer to the decrease in absolute poverty in percentage terms. India questioned the justification of the US reference, since the absolute numbers are what must be brought down. PARAGRAPH 14: (growing distress) Japan suggested reference to the adverse impact of expected population growth. In 14(a) (income gaps), the EU emphasized the growth experienced by some developing countries, while noting the marginalization of LDCs. Slovenia called for a reference to the widening gap between developed and developing countries. The EU accepted the proposal although the G-77 would only accept it on the condition that their language regarding unequal structures was accepted. In 14(b) (problems of transition), Armenia, Poland, and the Russian Federation sought to retain the specific reference to countries with economies in transition. The text remains bracketed. In 14(c) (poverty), the G-77 and China amendment highlighting the position of women was accepted. In 14(d) (global unemployment), Norway proposed a reference to people with disabilities who are forced into poverty and unemployment, which was included in a separate sub-paragraph. The EU and US suggested references to the relationship between women and poverty. In 14(e) (on vulnerability), the EU proposed reference to environmental damage and India suggested reference to overconsumption. The US wanted a reference to the disabled and elderly. Mexico called for inclusion of minorities and indigenous peoples. PARAGRAPH 15: (developing countries) The Chair recommended that 14(b) be specific to countries in transition and that paragraph 15 include a broader reference to countries undergoing socio-economic changes. PARAGRAPH 16: (social distress) The US added "violence, particularly against women and children" to the list of sources of social distress. The G-77 and China added: chronic hunger and malnutrition, illicit arms trafficking and xenophobia. PARAGRAPH 17: (offenses to human dignity) India said that people cannot be subordinate to markets. PARAGRAPH 18: (people-centered framework) The G-77 and China, supported by Mexico, suggested replacing "framework" with "approach". The Chair recommended that the amendments be accepted ad referendum. WORKING GROUP II Working Group II, began negotiating on a paragraph-by- paragraph basis. Due to the time constraints they reverted to proposing amendments. After lunch, the Chair commented on the unproductive nature of this process and appealed to the delegates to submit written comments by Tuesday. Benin proposed an ad hoc, 7-member working group to review this Prep Com's work on January 27, to ensure proper translation for the Summit. PARAGRAPH 1: (introduction) Switzerland suggested presenting the purpose of social development. China countered that the draft Declaration does this. PARAGRAPH 2: (recommended actions) Iran, supported by Malaysia, questioned whether "favorable environment" refers to either national or international levels. The EU said that duties of all actors should be included. Switzerland suggested adding health to the list of basic needs. The US proposed incorporating environmental concerns into economic and social policies. PARAGRAPH 3: (relationship to other conferences) The US called for reference to the concept of food security and nutrition. Kuwait, supported by Egypt, suggested that implementation should be compatible with national laws. PARAGRAPH 4: (social development linkages) The Holy See proposed reference to the spiritual aspect of social development. The EU called for reference to the ICPD. PARAGRAPH 5: (interdependence and cooperation) The G-77 called for a reference to the severe food crisis. PARAGRAPH 6: (market forces and national policies) Norway stated that public policies are necessary to supplement market mechanisms and to protect social security. Canada added that public policies should correct environmentally destructive market failures. PARAGRAPH 7: (social development) The EU called for a partnership between men and women including man's full responsibility in family life. PARAGRAPH 8: (aspects of an enabling environment) The EU and South Africa emphasized access to productive resources. The G-77 and China, supported by the Holy See, called for strengthening the role of the family. Canada noted the importance of a people-centered approach to development. PARAGRAPH 9: (trade employment and incomes) The G-77 proposed a new sub- paragraph calling for an open, equitable, cooperative and mutually beneficial international economic environment. The US objected. Algeria said that the G-77 language was accepted in other fora, such as the ICPD. Switzerland, opposed by Benin, suggested that paragraph 9(a) (implementing policies) should also refer to sectoral policies. The EU proposed paragraph 9(a) bis, calling for favorable trade policies to facilitate job creation, for human resource development, and for democratic institutions and good governance. Switzerland introduced a paragraph 9(b) bis, encouraging private investments. The G-77 and China suggested that the text should focus on the poor and disadvantaged. The US suggested that 9(d) (international monetary coordination) be replaced with language on providing stability in financial markets. The G-77 added a new 9(g) on the sustainable development of small island developing States. PARAGRAPH 10: (even distribution of global growth) The G-77 and China said that global economic growth should be equitably distributed. The EU preferred the original wording. The EU, supported by the US, Japan and Norway, preferred a call for debt reduction rather than elimination. PARAGRAPH 10(b): (expanding and improving assistance) Canada called for reprioritizing development flows. The G-77 and China proposed a 10(b) bis, noting the unsustainable consumption patterns of the wealthy in all nations, especially the industrialized nations. PARAGRAPH 11: (priority countries) The EU proposed an additional subparagraph regarding national policies. The G- 77 and China preferred the original text. In 11(b) (external debt), the G-77 and China called for development-oriented solutions that are equitable, effective, and comprehensive. The EU and Japan had difficulty with references to debt cancellation. The G-77 and China added 11(c) bis, drawing attention to the negative effects of the Uruguay Round. The EU objected. In 11(d) (increased ODA), the EU favored a formulation increasing the impact of ODA. Norway suggested allocating a larger share to social development goals. PARAGRAPH 12(a): (open market opportunities) The G-77 and China, backed by Ethiopia, said that measures to open market opportunities should be implemented, especially for the poor. Norway suggested a new 12(b) bis on adopting and implementing policies to ensure equitable distribution of the benefits of growth. In 12(d) (access to technology) the Holy See stressed the importance of knowledge and access to it. The US proposed that access be promoted on mutually acceptable terms. The G-77 and China proposed a paragraph 12(d) bis encouraging transnational corporations to consider the social and cultural impacts of their activities. The EU suggested a new 12(f) bis to call for the safe interplay of small economies with larger ones. PARAGRAPH 13: (fiscal systems) The US and Japan expressed reservations on the entire paragraph. The EU stressed the need for more neutral terms rather than value-loaded terms. In 13(d) (accumulation of wealth), the G-77 and China suggested reference to the use of appropriate taxation. In 13(e) (subsidies), Canada called for examining the necessity in addition to the distribution of subsidies. In 13(f) (international tax agreements), the G-77 and China called for deletion of the reference to countries with economies in transition. The Russian Federation and the Ukraine objected to this deletion. THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY WORKING GROUP I: The working group will continue its first reading of the Declaration, starting with Part I B Principles and Goals. WORKING GROUP II: The Secretariat's compilation of all amendments should be ready this morning. The working group may begin negotiations on Paragraph 1 this morning, but might elect for regional group consultations. EU EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION WITH NGOS: 6-7 pm in Conference Room 5. UNRISD SUMMARY SESSION: UNRISD will hold a summary session on the results of its Seminar on Economic Restructuring and Social Policy at 2:45 pm in Conference Room 3. This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin (c) is written and edited by Johannah Bernstein , Anilla Cherian , Langston James Goree VI "Kimo" , Richard Jordan and Lynn Wagner . General funding for the Bulletin has been provided by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (iisd@web.apc.org), the Government of Denmark and the Pew Charitable Trusts through the Pew Global Stewardship Initiative.Funding for this volume of the Bulletin has been provided by CIDA, UNDP and the Government of the Netherlands. The authors can be contacted at their electronic mail addresses and by phone and fax at +1-212- 888-2737. IISD can be contacted by phone at +1-204-958-7700, by fax at +1-204-958-7710. The opinions expressed in Earth Negotiations Bulletin are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD and other funders. Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin may be used in other publications with appropriate citation. Electronic versions of the Bulletin can be found on the gopher at and in searchable hyptertext through the Linkages WWW-server at on the Internet. This volume of the Bulletin is uploaded into the APC conferences and . The Earth Negotiations Bulletin may not be reproduced, reprinted or posted to any system or service outside of the APC networks and the ENB listserver, without specific permission from the International Institute for Sustainable Development. This limitation includes distribution via Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists, print media and broadcast. For more information, send a message to .