LINKAGES JOURNAL
VOLUME 3, NUMBER 3
29 JULY 1998

PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE 
DEVELOPMENT (IISD)

Editor:	Chad Carpenter, LL.M.
chadc@iisd.org
http://enb.iisd.org/chad/chad.html

Managing Editor:	Langston James “Kimo” Goree VI
kimo@iisd.org
http://enb.iisd.org/kimo/kimo.html

The July edition of Linkages journal is now available at 
http://enb.iisd.org/journal/ in PDF, text and a new HTML 
format. 

This edition spotlights UNEP with articles on: 

- THE UNITED NATIONS TASK FORCE ON ENVIRONMENT AND HUMAN 
SETTLEMENTS 
By Klaus Töpfer, UNEP Executive Director 

- PROTECTION OF THE OZONE LAYER  - A SUCCESS STORY OF UNEP
By K.M. Sarma, Executive Secretary, Vienna Convention and 
Montreal Protocol

- WHY DO WE NEED A GLOBAL POPS TREATY? 
By Bo Wahlström, Senior Scientific Advisor, UNEP Chemicals

- PROFITABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY IN THE 21ST CENTURY 
By Mike Kelly, Coordinator, UNEP Financial Institutions 
Initiative

The journal also contains reports on recent meetings, an extensive list 
of upcoming meetings and a review of recent academic articles on 
climate. 
_________________________________________________

United Nations Task Force on Environment and Human Settlements
By Klaus Töpfer
Executive Director 
United Nations Environment Programme

Introduction
The UN Task Force on Environment and Human Settlements was 
proposed by the Secretary-General of the UN in his seminal report 
on Reform, "Renewing the United Nations: A Programme for Reform." 
The Task Force met four times under my chairmanship and completed 
its deliberations on 15 June 1998. The Task Force took as its 
departure point the conviction of the Secretary-General that the 
UN must take the lead "in building a new international system 
through greater unity of purpose, greater coherence of efforts 
and greater agility in responding to an increasingly dynamic and 
complex world." The Task Force also shared a common conviction 
that the institutional fragmentation and loss of policy coherence 
over the last few years had resulted in a loss of effectiveness 
in the work of the UN in the area of environment and human 
settlements.
The contribution of the Task Force to developing the 
institutional response to environmental and human settlements 
challenges has to be seen in the new international context within 
which the UN operates.
Following the end of the Cold War and the advent of a multi-polar 
international order and its rapidly shifting political 
environment, we have to come to terms with emerging trends that 
have far-reaching implications for international cooperation. The 
first is the globalization and liberalization of the world 
economy, which is causing major transformations in the patterns 
of world economic interdependence.
The rapid globalization of financial and capital markets with 
their attendant instabilities, the major changes in the content 
and direction of international trade, the rapid spread of 
technological innovations, the new challenges that nation states 
face as political units in being able to control the changes 
taking place, the emergence of new and influential actors 
including transnational corporations and non-governmental 
organizations, as well as the growing strength and new modes of 
expression of civil society at all levels, all pose challenges 
and opportunities to the international community.
However, we must also realize that while the new international 
order increases interaction among all States, it maintains deep 
divisions between different groups of countries and between 
people within countries. It effectively segregates a large 
portion of the world's population and prevents it from sharing 
and benefits provided by technological and scientific advances. 
The emergence of a disjointed world economy and divided global 
society must not be seen as an inescapable condition: instead we 
must seize the opportunities that exist to foster a new spirit of 
international cooperation based on a realistic assessment of our 
common interests.
It is in this context that all countries, developed and 
developing, face the challenge of environmental sustainability, 
in the awareness that we can no longer blindly trust in the 
regenerative capacity of ecosystems. The problems of 
environmental sustainability and resource use are closely linked 
to social demands, demographic pressures and poverty in 
developing countries, counterposed against the excessive and 
often wasteful consumption habits in developed countries.
One characteristic common to practically all developing countries 
is the mismatch between financial resources and social, environ-
mental and economic demands. In particular, as social demand for 
housing, nutrition, health and education grow, the financial 
capacity to meet them is diminishing rapidly, especially for 
countries burdened by debt.
These trends bring into sharp relief the urgent need for 
sustainable development based on meeting social, environmental 
and economic requirements. Sustainable development efforts will, 
in the coming millennium, face an increasingly heterogeneous set 
of situations as we come to the realization that general recipes 
no longer work. We need differentiated approaches, tailor-made 
solutions and specific answers that correspond more closely to 
unique circumstances, problems and situations. To achieve this 
and to make real progress in sustainable development will place 
enormous demands on policy design and implementation capacities 
at all levels.
A critical element of the sustainable development equation is the 
need to confront the relentless destruction of our planet's 
natural resources, increasing transboundary pollution and new 
global environmental problems that are creating flashpoints in 
international relations. We have to come to the realization that 
our world is being threatened either because people have too much 
or too little. The pollution of poverty remains one of the most 
destructive and inhumane forces on this planet.
Compounding national and international ecological degradation is 
the trend in environmental degradation at a planetary level. 
Ozone layer depletion, the prospect of global warming, increased 
toxic pollution, deforestation, soil erosion, desertification, 
the loss of freshwater resources, the proliferation of hazardous 
wastes are only some of the chronic problems for which we need 
institutions equal to the unprecedented task facing humanity: to 
slow down, stop and ultimately reverse the wasting of our planet.
If we allow these trends to continue unabated, new tensions will 
be created that will imperil the political stability of the 
world. The greatest danger will be that we will fail to see the 
environmental dimensions behind new conflicts and will seek 
resolution by force. We must accept that our notion of what 
constitutes "security" remains stubbornly narrow. The time has 
come to recognize the environmental dimension of individual and 
collective security. We must also realize that national, regional 
and global security are indivisible and that if we are to tackle 
environmental trends with serious implications for security, 
there is no alternative to the fostering of political will and 
global cooperation and the generation of new resources to an 
extent far beyond anything seen today.
For developing countries, far-reaching initiatives will be 
required to stop forest destruction, establish biological 
reserves, pursue environmentally sustainable energy and 
industrial policies and conserve land and water resources. This 
will require those countries to take decisions that have 
political and social risks. While the leadership to take these 
decisions must come from the developing countries themselves, the 
developed countries must assist. Global efforts for environmental 
protection must be part of a broader commitment by developed 
countries to help developing countries realize their economic 
aspirations. If decision-makers in developing countries believe 
that they can create jobs and meet economic objectives while 
addressing international and domestic environmental problems, 
their cooperation can be assured. These understandings between 
North and South must transcend the traditional environmental 
agenda and incorporate initiatives as diverse as international 
trade and debt, development and assistance, energy and technology 
transfer. In short, they must make development environmentally, 
economically and socially sustainable.
If we accept the above propositions, we must also rethink the 
role of multilateral institutions and review their capacity to 
address these issues. It is precisely in this perspective that 
the proposals of the Task Force must be viewed.

UNEP
Twenty-five years after the historic Stockholm Conference on the 
Human Environment, which established UNEP, and more than five 
years after the United Nations Conference on Environment and De-
velopment (UNCED) at Rio de Janeiro, the elevation of environment 
on the international political agenda has led to a proliferation 
of new programmes and institutional arrangements designed to ad-
dress environmental concerns, often without coordination. The in-
ternational community must begin to address in a coherent manner 
whether, in the new international political context at the end of 
the twentieth century, the institutions it has put in place to 
manage the critical questions related to the environmental 
integrity and sustainability of the planet have the capacity to 
deal with those problems in all their immensity.
In its more than twenty-five years of existence, UNEP has seen 
some impressive achievements, including rapid advances in 
scientific knowledge of environmental threats and the development 
of international policy and legal instruments, as well as 
national and regional institutions to respond to those threats. 
This work, however, has primarily taken a sectoral or issue-based 
approach. In the five years since Rio, we have struggled to 
inject the concept of environmental and social sustainability 
into the way we design and implement our economic development 
plans but, so far, with only moderate success.
The United Nations Conference in Vancouver in 1976 imparted a 
sense of urgency to the political leadership towards the process 
of urbanization. It stressed the moral imperative—to improve the 
living conditions of the urban poor through better architectural 
designs, low-cost housing and appropriate technologies. It 
translated the concern for human settlements by establishing 
national ministries of urban development.
 The United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (HABITAT II) 
in Istanbul identified the connections among the political, 
economic, environmental and social factors intrinsic to equitable 
and sustainable development of human settlements. The Conference 
was a watershed in the emergence of a new vision of urban 
development.
Ever since we initiated these conscious and cooperative ventures 
to rationally manage earth's natural resources and human settle-
ments, we are still confronted with indisputable evidence that 
the struggle to keep our planet habitable is still at a critical 
juncture.
The continuum that spans the Vancouver Conference with Habitat II 
at Istanbul has also been marked by far-reaching changes. The 
process of globalization of economic markets and trade has 
created new patterns of economic competition and environmental 
problems. Urban-based economies now contribute a major share of 
GDP in most countries.
From an economic standpoint, urbanization has led in some cases 
to improved standards of living from higher household incomes. 
From an environmental perspective, this growth has been achieved 
in the face of rapid urban deterioration. Urban environmental 
conditions are central to the economic prospects of all 
countries. It must be recognized that environment affects the 
productivity of labor through its impact on health, the 
availability of clean water, air and land.
As with other patterns of resource use on our planet today, the 
outstanding characteristic of urbanization is the great disparity 
between the conditions of the rich and the poor. The problems of 
urban environmental degradation are not the results of urban 
poor's attempt to make room in cities for their survival, but 
reflect the inability of the institutional structures to cope 
with their needs.
The solution of environmental problems and implementation of 
sustainable development provides a unique opportunity for 
integrating social and economic concerns with the ecological, 
cultural and aesthetic dimensions of the natural and built 
environment.
In the final analysis, the environment is a political issue. 
Whether or not solutions are effectively applied will continue to 
rely upon politics and policy, upon the aptitude of leaders, 
parties and their constituents and upon a complex cross-
referencing and cooperative system involving international 
agencies, national environmental agencies, non-governmental 
organizations, and international conventions and agreements. 

The Task Force
The report of the UN Task Force on Environment and Human 
Settlements is an attempt at addressing the commonly held convic-
tion that the institutional fragmentation and lack of policy 
coherence over the last twenty years had resulted in a loss of 
effectiveness in the work of the UN in the area of the 
environment and human settlements.
The group of distinguished policymakers, academics and members of 
the non-governmental community who formed the Task Force examined 
the existing organizational arrangements of the United Nations to 
determine how they might be changed to better meet international 
environmental and human settlements challenge. The goal of the 
Task Force was to make recommendations on how existing UN 
structures and arrangements could be optimally designed to deal 
with the problems that will concern the global community in the 
next decade.
In making its recommendations, the Task Force took the approach 
that what was required to address the immediate needs for 
revitalizing the work of the UN was an incremental and practical 
approach that could be implemented in the short to medium term 
and had the likelihood of finding political consensus around its 
objectives. In my view, the recommendations contained in the 
report should be seen as the commencement of a longer-term 
approach to equip the UN to concretely address the pervasive 
environmental and sustainable development problems both of the 
present as well as of the future. In this regard, the 
recommendations of the Task Force provide the first important 
building blocks to allow us to begin to shape the institutions 
that would be capable of meeting the immense challenges that the 
international community will face in the next century.
The main findings of the report are reflected in 24 recommenda-
tions contained in the 7 chapters of the report spanning inter-
agency, intergovernmental and programmatic issues and are 
designed to enhance coordinated action by the UN and begin the 
process of improving overall policy coherence. Decisions 
concerning the implementation of the recommendations fall within 
distinct areas, some within the purview of the Secretary-General 
or the Executive Director of UNEP, while others accrue to the 
General Assembly or the Governing Bodies of UNEP and HABITAT. The 
recommendations will undoubtedly be debated at some length, but 
again, in my view, they represent the sum of the measures that 
require to be taken now to revitalize the essential work of the 
UN on environment and human settlements.
The first set of recommendations has to do with improving the in-
teragency coordination within the UN. One of the paradoxes inher-
ent in the concept of sustainable development is the need to 
ensure that environmental considerations are integrated into 
broader economic and development policies. Sustainable 
development is a whole greater than its parts. And this is a task 
that no one agency can do on its own. But at the same time, there 
is always the danger of environmental issues getting immersed in 
competing and often contradictory claims. Clarification of the 
roles of the many players in the environment and sustainable 
development arena is crucial if we are to prove equal to the 
ecological challenges that we face today.
The Task Force was convinced that there was significant overlap-
ping and lack of coordinated action in the UN framework concern-
ing environment and human settlements policies. The Task Force 
recommended the establishment of an inter-agency Environment 
Management Group that would use an "issue management approach" 
that had been outlined by the Secretary-General in his report on 
"Renewing the United Nations." The Environmental Management Group 
will be chaired by the Executive Director of UNEP and would be 
designed to be a problem solving, results-oriented approach to 
achieving effective coordination and joint action on key 
environmental and human settlements issues throughout the UN sys-
tems. An important innovation would be the inclusion of non-UN 
international institutions on the development of specific issues.
The second important set of recommendations deals with the dif-
ferent conventions and protocols on the environment. One of the 
central mechanisms by which international cooperation can be fos-
tered is through the negotiation and agreement of international 
laws aimed at fostering the sustainable management of shared and 
common property resources.
After Rio, the development of a distinct international law of the 
environment has been nothing less than remarkable. The total num-
ber of such agreements is rising while the average time taken to 
negotiate each treaty is steadily decreasing. Within the same 
time frame, the scale of problems to be addressed has widened—
from the regional through the hemispheric to the global—while the 
total number of sovereign states that have to sit down to broker 
such deals has gradually burgeoned. New concerns and principles—
precaution, inter- and intra-generational equity, scientific 
uncertainty, sustainable development—have also arisen in recent 
years and now need to be factored into the negotiation process.
Clearly, the various conventions and protocols on the environment 
represent the most outstanding achievement of the global com-
munity to date. But the Task Force noted the lack of coordination 
among the conventions though there were many areas of common 
concern and distinct overlappings. The geographic dispersal of 
the various environmental convention secretariats is addressed, 
with the report suggesting their clustering and possible future 
co-location, as well as the possibility of negotiating umbrella 
conventions. Concern was expressed regarding the dispersal of 
environmental convention secretariats (such as in Bonn, Geneva, 
Montreal and Nairobi), which has resulted in inefficiencies, 
substantial costs through loss of economies of scale and 
fragmentation of common services. The Task Force recommended that 
Governments and the Conventions' Conferences of Parties consider 
the implications of these inefficiencies and additional costs and 
seek ways of addressing these problems. It also calls on UNEP to 
build its scientific and information capacity and networking in 
support of the Conventions. 
The third set of recommendations relates to Nairobi as the head-
quarters of UNEP and the United Nations Centre for Human Settle-
ments. Both these institutions have now been headquartered in 
Nairobi for 25 and 20 years respectively. The recommendation was 
not to merge these two institutions. They should continue to 
exist as two independent entities, but their work should be more 
integrated in administrative terms and take advantage of 
synergies at the programme level. There should only be one person 
responsible for UNEP, Habitat and United Nations Office in 
Nairobi. The Task Force emphasized that it was essential for the 
UN system to have a stable and strengthened headquarters in 
Nairobi and the elevation of the status of Nairobi to the same 
level as other headquartered stations in Geneva and Vienna. The 
Task Force also made a clear recommendation concerning the 
improvement of information and communication technologies and the 
achievement of a better security situation in Nairobi and Kenya.
The fourth major set of recommendations of the Task Force relates 
to the intergovernmental framework. There have been complaints 
that ministers of the environment and human settlements had to 
travel too much around the world to attend conventions and high 
level segments of international negotiations. Clearly, it was not 
possible for the ministers to be available for each one of them. 
In order to enhance intergovernmental policy coherence it 
recommends that an annual, ministerial-level, global 
environmental forum be convened biennially as part of the regular 
session of UNEP's Governing Council in Nairobi. In alternate 
years, this forum should be a special session of the Council and 
held in different venues, alternating between regions, and should 
provide a platform for Governments to regularly discuss and take 
action on important and emerging environmental and sustainable 
development issues. Regional issues would be included in the 
agendas of alternate meetings, which should be held before the 
meeting of the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD), which 
would also assist in providing a coordinated environmental input 
into the work of the CSD.
The fifth important issue was information, monitoring and assess-
ment. The Task Force recognized the critical need for monitoring 
and assessment leading to information for decision making and 
recommended that UNEP and HABITAT further develop their capacity 
to serve as an "environmental guardian" and transform Earthwatch 
into an effective, accessible science-based system that meets the 
needs of decision-makers. This could include the participation of 
non-governmental sources and the elaboration of result oriented 
indicators in the field of the environment and human settlements. 
This monitoring and assessment system should maximize its ability 
to provide early warning of possible environmental and human 
settlements emergencies and the basis for the development of 
measures for conflict prevention.
In my view, the need for such information systems is an urgent 
necessity, particularly in view of the nature of emerging issues 
that have to be dealt with in a timely manner. In particular, an 
early warning system that would help to mitigate the effects of 
recent emergencies such as forest fires and the massive 
environmental and financial cost involved is a necessity for the 
international community.
The sixth important issue relates to the participation of civil 
society. In all the millions of words written about UNCED, very 
little attention has been paid to the fact that governments' 
committed themselves to a political strategy for mobilizing their 
people and educating them on the need for a transition to 
sustainable development, through popular involvement in national 
and local level strategies for implementing the transition.
Chapter after chapter in Agenda 21, on issues such as poverty, 
urban settlements, health, population control as well as the 
mountain development, forestry, desertification, biodiversity, 
agriculture, management of water resources and the management of 
toxic wastes, national and local governments are committed to 
educate and work in consultation with local communities. The 
conclusions of the Earth Summit went well beyond a focus on NGOs, 
to develop a strategy for the involvement of much wider layers of 
society from transnationals down to local communities.
There are encouraging signs in the empowerment of communities and 
the growth of environment-oriented non-governmental organizations 
in civil society and their increasing recognition in all regions 
as powerful mechanisms to advance sustainable development. The 
Task Force recommended a greater involvement of non-governmental 
organizations as well as other major groups, such as industry, 
business and trade unions in the inter-governmental process. 
There were clear recommendations to involve these groups in 
intergovernmental deliberations and to develop further 
programmatic relationships utilizing the various perspectives of 
these groups.
The final set of recommendations provides for a more open and 
forward-looking process to address issues of the future. The Task 
Force proposed that wide-ranging consultations be undertaken by 
the UNEP Executive Director concerning institutional arrangements 
for dealing with the environmental and human settlements 
challenges of the next century. These consultations would include 
representatives of Governments, civil society and the private 
sector and would culminate in two-day "environment forum" to be 
held early next year. This forum would then provide forward-
looking proposals for the protection of the global environment, 
including future institutions, to the forthcoming Millennium 
Assembly and Forum in the year 2000.
I will be putting in place a flexible process through which inno-
vative ideas and proposals can be discussed widely among govern-
ment representatives, NGOs, the scientific and academic community 
and others with a view to making the "environment forum" an 
innovative source of ideas and proposals to contribute to the 
forthcoming Millennium Assembly and Forum.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the recommendations of the Task Force for 
strengthening the environmental and human settlements work of the 
UN may not be revolutionary, but should be seen as the first 
practical steps in laying the foundations of the institutions 
that are required for the next century. It is my hope that this 
will be the context in which they are discussed, in an open and 
honest manner, and that this provides the basis for the further 
essential work we still have to undertake internally within UNEP 
and HABITAT to make these institutions worthy of the support of 
the international community.

Membership of the Task Force

	Mr. Klaus Töpfer, (Chair), Executive Director, UNEP
Ms. Maria Julia Alsogaray, Minister of Natural Resources and 
Sustainable Development, Argentina
Dr. Christina Amoako-Nuama, Minister of Education, Ghana
Ambassador John Ashe, Ambassador/Deputy Permanent Representative, 
Permanent Mission of Antigua and Barbuda 
Ms. Julia Carabia Lillo, Minister of Natural Resources and 
Fisheries, Mexico
Mr. Nitin Desai, Under-Secretary-General, United Nations 
Department for Economic and Social Affairs
Ambassador Lars-Goran Engfeldt, Permanent Representative of 
Sweden to UNEP and UNCHS
Ms. Guro Fjellanger, Minister of Environment, Norway
Mr.  Jean-Pierre Halbwachs, Assistant Secretary-General, UN 
Office of Programme Planning, Budget and Accounts
Sir Martin Holdgate, United Kingdom
Mr. Ashok Khosla, Development Alternatives, India
Mr. Martin Khor, Director, Third World Network, Malaysia
Ambassador Tommy Koh, Ambassador-At-Large, Ministry of Foreign 
Affairs, Singapore
Ms. Julia Marton LeFevre, LEAD International., New York
Mr. James Gustave Speth, Administrator, UNDP 
Mr. Maurice Strong (ex-officio), Special Advisor to the Secre-
tary-General
Mr. Mostafa K.  Tolba, President, International Centre for 
Environment and Development, Cairo
Ambassador Joseph Tomusange, High Commissioner of the Republic of 
Uganda to India
Ambassador Makarim Wibisono, Permanent Representative of 
Indonesia to the United Nations
Mr. Timothy E. Wirth, President, United Nations Foundation
Mr. Michael Zammit Cutajar, Executive Secretary, UNFCCC 
Secretariat 

Advisors to the Task Force
Mr. Peter Thacher 
Hon. Eileen Claussen


For information about the Task Force contact UNEP in Nairobi; e-
mail: ipainfo@unep.org; Internet: http://www.unep.org

PROTECTION OF THE OZONE LAYER - A Success story of UNEP
K.M. Sarma
Executive Secretary for the Vienna Convention and the Montreal 
Protocol, UNEP, Nairobi

Background
The issue of depletion of the ozone layer was one of the first 
global environmental emergencies faced by UNEP. The stratospheric 
ozone layer protects the earth from excessive UV-B radiation from 
the sun. The atmosphere next to earth up to about 10 kilometres 
is called troposphere and stratosphere is above the troposphere, 
up to about 50 kilometres. The thin layer of ozone has been 
formed in the stratosphere by the action of solar radiation on 
normal oxygen. It is continuously formed and destroyed through 
natural processes leading to a natural balance. 
This ozone layer filters out excessive ultra-violet radiation 
from the sun and protects all life on earth from adverse effects. 
Its depletion has many adverse effects of increase in skin 
cancers and eye-cataracts, loss of immunity, lesser productivity 
of plants, deterioration of plastics etc.
Until the scientific discoveries in the 1970's, the ozone layer 
was considered to be a feature that naturally preserved itself. 
The pioneering work of Prof. Paul Crutzen in 1970 pointed to the 
possibility of nitrogen oxides from fertilizers and from 
supersonic aircraft affecting the ozone layer adversely. In 1974, 
Professors Rowland and Molina identified CFCs as ozone 
destroyers. Subsequent research has amply confirmed the 
significant role of CFCs in destroying the stratospheric ozone. 
In 1995, these three scientists received the Nobel prize for 
chemistry for their pioneering work. CFCs are very versatile 
chemicals invented in 1928 and used in many applications such as 
refrigeration, air conditioning, firefighting, metal cleaning, 
aerosols, etc. Their consumption was very small until the 1970's, 
but increased rapidly to a million tonnes in 1986. Most of the 
consumption was in industrialized countries but the developing 
countries, with their increasing populations and economic growth, 
were catching up and would have in time increased their 
consumption dramatically.
UNEP took up the issue of ozone depletion in 1976 and adopted a 
simple but effective approach. It first concentrated on 
assessment of the problem by convening a meeting of experts on 
the ozone layer in 1977. On the recommendation of this meeting, 
UNEP set up a Coordinating Committee of the Ozone Layer (CCOL) in 
cooperation with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). 
CCOL consisted of the leading experts of the world on the ozone 
layer.
Over the next ten years, this committee provided regular assess-
ments of the state of the ozone layer and coordinated further re-
search. These reports attracted international interest among the 
people and the Governments and UNEP provided the framework for 
harnessing this interest to promote international action. It mar-
shalled the information, options and legal expertise needed for 
decision making. This process led to the Vienna Convention for 
the Protection of the Ozone Layer in 1985 and the Montreal 
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer in 1987. 
The Protocol of 1987 arrived at a time when industry representa-
tives claimed that the theories of ozone depletion were mere 
speculation. Each country had its own industrial interest 
uppermost in their minds. The resulting control measures on the 
ozone depleting chemicals were very weak, a 50% cut in CFCs and a 
freeze of halons by the year 2000. Scientific analysis proved 
even then that these steps were grossly inadequate. What saved 
the Protocol were two unique features. One was a grace period of 
10 years for developing countries, with a view to attracting them 
to join the process, in addition to a provision for assistance, 
since it was realized that a cooperative effort of all the 
countries was necessary to save the ozone layer. The second 
unique feature was the very strong role given to science and 
technology in Article 6, which mandated periodic assessments 
regarding the ozone layer and response from the Parties to these 
assessments. Scientific information integrated into the 
negotiation process continuously. At every stage of negotiation, 
countries moved forward one step at a time based on the 
assessment, knowing fully well that the next assessments could 
recommend more steps.
These agreements followed a step-by-step approach and enabled the 
Governments to progress in step with the advice of scientists and 
technologists. What started as a general intent in 1985 through 
the Vienna Convention, progressed to a partial phase-out of some 
substances in 1987 with the Montreal Protocol. Total phase-out of 
those and even more substances in 1990 with London Amendment, 
which resulted from the 1989 assessment. An acceleration of 
phase-out and inclusion of control measures for new chemicals, 
HCFCs and methyl bromide came in 1992 in Copenhagen. This 
resulted from the 1991 assessment, in step with the discovery of 
the Antarctic " ozone hole" in 1985, further confirmations of 
ozone depletion, and emergence of viable alternatives to the 
Ozone-depleting chemicals. The 1995 adjustments followed the 1994 
assessments. The 1997 adjustments and amendment marked ten years 
of the Protocol
As of 30 June 1998, the Ozone Agreements had been ratified as 
follows:
	Vienna Convention - 166 Parties
	Montreal Protocol - 165 Parties 
	London Amendment - 120 Parties
	Copenhagen Amendment - 79 Parties

At present there are 95 chemicals controlled by the Protocol:
Chlorofluorocarbons
	CFCs, Halons, Hydrobromofluorocarbons 
	HBFCs, Other fully halogenated CFCs, Carbon tetrachloride, 
1,1,1 trichloroethane 
	methyl-chloroform, 

Hydrochlorofluorocarbons 
	HCFCs, Hydrobromoflourocarbons 
	HBFCs and Methyl Bromide.

Control measures for the chemicals
Developed countries - Phase-out of halons by 1994. Phase-out of 
CFCs, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform and HBFCs by 1996. 
Phase-out of Methyl Bromide by 2005. Phase-out of HCFCs by 2030. 
Developing countries - Phase-out of HBFCs by 1996. Phase-out of 
CFCs, Halons and Carbon tetrachloride by 2010. Methyl Chloroform 
and Methyl Bromide by 2015. HCFCs by 2040.

Multilateral Fund for Developing Countries
The Parties to the Montreal Protocol established at their second 
meeting (June 1990) a Financial Mechanism, which included a Mul-
tilateral Fund. The purpose of the Multilateral Fund is to enable 
developing countries to implement their commitments under the 
Montreal Protocol. Only the non-Article 5 (developed) Parties 
contribute to the Fund. The Fund pays the agreed incremental 
costs to be incurred by developing countries for the phase-out of 
their ozone-depleting substances (ODS) consumption and 
production. An Executive Committee of 14 countries, chosen by the 
Parties every year, administers it. Seven representatives come 
from developing countries and seven from developed countries.
UNDP, UNEP, UNIDO and the World Bank are the Implementing 
Agencies of the Fund. UNEP maintains a clearinghouse of infor-
mation and assists in training, setting up national ozone units, 
preparation of country programmes, networking and preparation of 
refrigerant, management plans. It has assisted over 100 countries 
so far. The other implementing agencies plan and implement 
investment projects to phase-out ODS.
The main achievements of the Multilateral Fund so far are:
	Nearly 90% of the contributions due have been paid. A large 
portion of outstanding contributions are from countries recently 
emerged as economies in transition;
	The Executive Committee has approved 86 country programmes, 
covering most of the production and the consumption of controlled 
substances of developing countries;
	So far, the Executive Committee has approved more than 
2,000 projects and activities with a planned phase-out of more 
than half of the consumption of developing countries and 
allocated US$730 million for their implementation in 111 Article 
5 countries;
	The Committee has allocated more than US$18 million for 
setting up country ozone focal offices, US$68 million for 
technical assistance and training programmes and US$39 million 
for the preparation of country programmes and project proposals 

Global Environment Facility (GEF)
GEF had been established by the world community to assist the 
developing countries on four global environmental issues—ozone 
depletion, climate change, biodiversity and international waters. 
GEF assists projects and activities for phasing-out ODS in 
Central and Eastern European countries and countries of former 
USSR with economies in transition that are not eligible for 
assistance from the Multilateral Fund since they are not 
recognized as developing countries. These countries have 
experienced many problems in their transition to market economy 
and found it difficult to implement the Protocol. Nearly US$130 
million has been sanctioned by GEF to assist Azerbaijan, Belarus, 
Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, the Russian 
Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine to implement the 
Protocol. The Implementing Agencies of GEF projects are UNDP, 
UNEP and the World Bank.

Results of the Protocol
The results of the Protocol in the last ten years have been star-
tlingly good and hailed by many as a shining example for solving 
other global environmental problems. The total consumption of 
CFCs was about 1.1 million tonnes in 1986. By 1996, this was re-
duced to about 160,000 tonnes. The consumption of the industrial-
ized countries, which stood at about a million tonnes in 1986, 
has been completely phased out but for a consumption of 11,000 
tonnes for essential uses approved by the Parties. The developing 
countries have increased their consumption by about 30 per cent 
in the last 10 years, as permitted by the Protocol. However, 
considering the high rates of economic growth in many of the 
developing countries recently, the Multilateral Fund has 
succeeded in preventing undue rise in the consumption of CFCs. 
Developing countries will begin the implementation of their 
control measures in July 1999 and phase-out thereafter. Of the 
120 developing countries, about 20 account for more than 90 per 
cent of the consumption of developing countries. Of these 20, key 
countries like Argentina, Chile, the Islamic Republic of Iran, 
Republic of Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines, the Syrian Arab 
Republic, Thailand and Venezuela started their reduction of 
consumption in 1996.
The Scientific and technological assessment process of the Proto-
col is organized to provide objective and foolproof indicators 
for the success of the Protocol. The members of the three Panels—
the scientific, the environmental effects and the technology and 
economic—are selected by the Parties to reflect expertise mainly 
and geographical balance only to extent expertise was available; 
recognizing that the ozone science and technologies are 
concentrated in the industrialized countries. The Panel members 
were allowed to co-opt experts as needed to advise them in their 
assessment. Governments can nominate members to the Committees, 
but the Panel members chose them only if the particular expertise 
was in need. The term of the members of the Panels and Committees 
is indefinite. They could be removed by the Parties (and, in the 
case of Committee members, by the Panels) for violating the 
prescribed code of conduct. Each member of the Panel or Committee 
should serve in his/her personal capacity and not represent 
his/her employer or any other interest. They should not take 
advantage of their position to obtain any favors. Their reports 
were factual and gave options to the Parties.
Each of their reports in 1989, 1991, 1994 analyzed all the data 
available throughout the world on the abundance of ozone 
depleting chemicals in the atmosphere, the extent of ozone 
depletion above different parts of the world. UV-B radiation, 
adverse impacts of ozone depletion, technological development of 
alternatives to CFCs, economic feasibility of alternatives and 
progress of adoption of alternatives in various sectors. Each of 
the assessments also analyzed options to minimize the ozone 
depletion and also the impact of alternatives on the environment, 
e.g. impact on global warming. The Panels use their data to judge 
the effectiveness of their models as well as of the decisions 
taken by the Parties to the Protocol and, more importantly, the 
implementation of these decisions. This is rather a unique case 
of an international agreement having clear indicators for its 
success and continuous measurement of these indicators.
The most recent scientific assessment brought out many interest-
ing indicators:
	The total combined abundance of ozone-depleting compounds 
in the lower atmosphere peaked in about 1994 and is now slowly 
declining. Total chlorine is declining, but total bromine is 
still increasing. 
	The observed abundance of the substitutes for the CFCs is 
increasing.
	The combined abundance of stratospheric chlorine and bro-
mine is expected to peak before the year 2000. 
	The rate of decline in stratospheric ozone at mid-latitudes 
has slowed; hence, the projections of ozone loss made in the 1994 
Assessment are larger than that has actually occurred.
	The springtime Antarctic ozone hole continues unabated.
	The late-winter/spring ozone values in the Arctic were 
unusually low in six out of the last nine years, the six being 
years that are characterized by unusually cold and protracted 
stratospheric winters.
	The understanding of the relation between increasing 
surface UV-B radiation and decreasing column ozone has been fur-
ther strengthened by ground-based observations, and new developed 
satellite methods show promise for establishing global trends in 
UV radiation. 
	Stratospheric ozone losses have caused a cooling of the 
global lower stratosphere and global-average negative radiative 
forcing of the climate system.
	Based on past emissions of ozone-depleting substances and a 
projection of the maximum allowances under the Montreal Protocol 
into the future, the maximum ozone depletion is estimated to lie 
within the current decade or the next two decades, but its 
identification and the evidence for the recovery of the ozone 
layer lie still further ahead.

What would have happened without the Montreal Protocol?
One measure of success of the Montreal Protocol and its subse-
quent Amendments and Adjustments, according to the Assessment, is 
the forecast of "the world that was avoided" by the Protocol:
	The abundance of ozone-depleting gases in 2050, the 
approximate time at which the ozone layer is now projected to 
recover to pre-1980 levels, would be at least 17 ppb of equiv-
alent effective chlorine (this is based on the conservative 
assumption of a 3% per annual growth in ozone-depleting gases) 
which is about five times larger than today's value;
	Ozone depletion would be at least 50% at mid-latitudes in 
the Northern Hemisphere and 70% at mid-latitudes in the Southern 
Hemisphere, about 10 times larger than today; and
	Surface UV-B radiation would at least double at mid-
latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere and quadruple at mid-
latitudes in the Southern Hemisphere compared to an unperturbed 
atmosphere. This compares to the current increases of 5% and 8% 
in the Northern and Southern hemispheres, respectively, since 
1980.
Furthermore, all of the above impacts would have continued to 
grow in the years beyond 2050. It is important to note that while 
the provisions of the original Montreal Protocol in 1987 would 
have lowered the above growth rates, recovery (i.e., an improving 
situation) would have been impossible without the Amendments and 
Adjustments (London, 1990; Copenhagen, 1992; and Vienna, 1995).
The implications of this increased ozone depletion would have 
been horrendous. There would have been nearly 19 million cases 
more of non-melanoma skin cancer up to the year 2060 and 3 
million more cases up to 2030. There would have been nearly 1.5 
million more cases of melanoma skin cancer by the year 2060. The 
number of eye cataracts would have increased by about 130 million 
cases by the year 2060, about 50 per cent of this in developing 
countries. There are many other unquantifiable effects such as 
loss of immunity, adverse impact on animals, lower productivity 
of crops, damage to aquatic eco-systems including fishing and 
degradation of plastics. A study by the Government of Canada 
calculated that while the world would ultimately spend many 
billions of dollars changing to ozone-safe technologies, the 
benefits would exceed these costs many times.

Future challenges
While the Protocol has been hailed as an extraordinary success so 
far, there is no room for complacency. There are still challenges 
to be faced.
Non-Parties
There are many Parties who have not ratified the London and 
Copenhagen Amendments, even though they supported adoption of 
these amendments. This implies that many countries are still not 
formally committed to the phase-out of HCFCs and methyl bromide.
Countries with economies in transition:
The implementation of the Protocol from 1989 has unfortunately 
coincided with massive changes in the political and economic sys-
tems of the former Soviet Union and Eastern European countries. 
Until recently, the instability in these countries made 
implementation very difficult. As a result, the Russian 
Federation and others admitted in 1996 that they would be unable 
to follow the phase-out timetable. They have, however, promised 
to complete the phase-out by the year 2000, if sufficient 
assistance is forthcoming. The Parties to the Protocol considered 
non-compliance by these countries and recommended assistance by 
the Global Environment Facility, which has so far disbursed $130 
million to 12 countries in this region. These countries accounted 
for a consumption of about 150,000 tonnes in 1986. It has fallen 
significantly to about 20,000 tonnes in 1996. It is hoped that 
these countries will complete their phase-out by the year 2000.
Illegal trade in CFCs
A concern that arose in the last few years is illegal trade. 
There are many factors that contribute to this problem. All new 
CFCs are now banned in all the industrialized countries. However, 
millions of pieces of equipment that use CFCs are still in 
service. Alternatives have been developed to service this 
equipment (car air-conditioners, etc.) whenever CFCs leak out. 
However, some consumers consider the alternatives costlier. Also, 
the Parties to the Protocol have permitted the use and trade of 
recycled CFCs to maintain the existing equipment and it is 
difficult to distinguish between new and recycled CFCs. The 
production of CFCs is continuing in many countries. In 
industrialized countries, the production is continuing to meet 
their essential uses and to supply developing countries, as 
permitted by the Protocol. The developing countries are allowed 
to produce subject to controls only from 1 July 1999. Hence, they 
have increased their production. Countries such as the Russian 
Federation are continuing production in non-compliance with the 
Protocol but have promised to phase-out by the year 2000. In the 
US, the market price of CFCs is very high due to a high tax. All 
these factors contributed to some traders illegally exporting new 
CFCs to the industrialized countries either in the guise of 
recycled substances or in the guise of export to developing 
countries. The profits are said to be higher than those obtained 
by exporting cocaine. The total illegal trade cannot be estimated 
accurately but, is perhaps in the region of about 30,000 tonnes.
The Parties have realized the seriousness of this problem. Coun-
tries such as the US are taking stringent action against these 
smugglers by imprisoning them and fining them heavily. The 
European Union recently introduced tough controls. The Parties 
have also mandated that each Party should have a Licensing System 
to import or export CFCs. This makes it easy for the Secretariat 
to compare the figures and inform governments regarding the 
source of illegal CFCs. The World Bank is also raising $25 
million from donors to buy off the production facilities in the 
Russian Federation and to close them down by the year 2000. This 
problem is one that will be cured by the closure of the factories 
throughout the world but, meanwhile, the Parties and the 
Secretariat will take all possible steps to minimize illegal 
trade.
Methyl bromide
Methyl bromide is an insecticide used for fumigation of soils 
structures and storage. Most of the use is in soil fumigation for 
high value crops. This chemical, apart from being an ozone 
depleter has many other toxic properties. Some countries like the 
Netherlands have banned its use because of these other toxic 
properties. Its significance as an ozone depleter was brought out 
only in 1992 and the developed countries are committed to phase-
out its consumption by 2005. The developing countries have 
accepted only in 1997 a phase-out date by the year 2015. The 
total world annual consumption of methyl bromide is about 70,000 
tonnes, most of it in the industrialized countries. At present it 
is used only in a small number of countries and only in high 
value crops. However, only 80 countries have ratified the 
Copenhagen Amendment of 1992 that introduced controls of methyl 
bromide. The other countries of the world have not formally 
accepted controls on methyl bromide. There is considerable 
danger, therefore, that the consumption of methyl bromide could 
spread to more countries and more uses. The challenge before the 
Parties is to stop this in time. Many alternatives are emerging 
for methyl bromide in various uses and the Multilateral Fund has 
taken up a $30 million programme to demonstrate these al-
ternatives in developing countries.
Implementation of Control Measures by Developing Countries
The Montreal Protocol allowed a grace period for developing 
countries in recognition of the fact that time will be needed for 
them to obtain and introduce alternative technologies. During 
this period they are allowed to increase their consumption to 
meet their basic domestic needs. They will have to implement the 
control measures from 1 July 1999. A number of countries, 
particularly in Asia and Latin America have been increasing their 
consumption in step with their high rates of economic growth. A 
time has come now for them to stop this increase and begin 
reversing the trend. The Multilateral Fund has been, and will be, 
of great help to these countries. It has to be remembered that 
the phase-out by the industrialized countries represents a phase-
out of only 20 per cent of the world population and that the 
ozone layer protection is assured only if the remaining 80 per 
cent of the world in developing countries follows suit. This is a 
crucial challenge for the next 10 years.
Kyoto Protocol - Implications for the Montreal Protocol
The halocarbons (CFCs) controlled by the Montreal Protocol, be-
sides being ozone-depleters, are also greenhouse gases and 
contribute to global warming. However, the ozone depletion has an 
opposite impact and stratospheric ozone loss since 1980 may have 
offset about 30% of the global warming induced by all the green-
house gases—carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxides and halocar-
bons. On the other hand, the increase of greenhouse gases may 
slow down the recovery of the ozone layer.
Another important aspect is that Kyoto Protocol mandates reduc-
tions, by the industrialized countries, of a basket of six 
greenhouse gases that includes HFCs, now used as substitutes for 
CFCs by many countries in some applications such as automobile 
air conditioning. The HFCs have a  Zero ozone depleting potential 
but a high global warming potential. The Montreal Protocol funds 
many HFC projects in developing countries in order to phase-out 
CFCs.
In his opening address to the recent meeting of the Open-ended 
Working Group of the Montreal Protocol, Klaus Töpfer, the Execu-
tive Director of UNEP, referred to these interconnections and ad-
vised the Parties to reflect on the implications. During the 
discussions, many Parties stressed the desirability of giving 
clear and timely guidance to industry on the issue of HFCs, 
rather than subject it to contradictory regulatory signals. The 
working Group requested the Technology and Economic Assessment 
Panel to consult the Inter Governmental Panel on Climate Change 
(IPCC) and the Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technical Advice 
(SBSTA) of the Climate Change Convention on the issues involved. 
A draft proposal was also made for further consideration in the 
tenth meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol in Cairo in 
November 1998.
Trade in Products relying on CFCs
A complaint frequently voiced by some developing countries is 
that used equipment relying on CFCs, such as refrigerators, are 
being increasingly exported to their countries by the 
industrialized countries where new models of CFC-free equipment 
have been introduced. The developing countries fear that this 
imported equipment will necessitate more imports of CFCs for 
their maintenance and thus interfere with the fulfillment of 
their obligations under the Montreal Protocol to phase-out CFCs. 
They would like exporting countries to regulate the exports of 
such used equipment. This issue has come up for discussion in the 
recent meeting of the Working Group. Some considered that even 
the exports of new equipment that relies on CFCs should be 
regulated. There was discussion of the application of GATT/ World 
Trade Organization rules in this regard. The matter will be 
further considered in the tenth meeting in Cairo.

Lessons of the Montreal Protocol
There are many lessons of the Montreal Protocol that can be ap-
plied to solving other global environmental issues.
The first lesson is the application of the "precautionary 
principle." When governments acted in 1985 and 1987 there had 
been no actual damage to human health proved to be caused by 
ozone depletion. However, governments heeded the advise of the 
scientists that if they wait longer for a 100 per cent proof, the 
ozone layer would have been destroyed to such an extent as to 
cause serious adverse consequences and these consequences would 
have continued for many decades. The lesson, therefore, is to 
take action in time to prevent damage rather than wait till the 
damage has been proved by which time the damage would have been 
great and irreversible.
The Protocol mandated specific timetables for every country to 
phase-out their profitable "wonder" chemicals. This signaled to 
industry that these chemicals have no future and led to 
development of alternatives quickly. This "technology forcing" 
accelerated the phase-out. The Protocol created markets for the 
alternatives.
Another important lesson of the Protocol is on how to act on 
issue when there is no scientific certainty. In 1987, there was 
considerable uncertainty about the extent of the ozone depletion, 
its adverse effects and availability of alternative technologies. 
The ozone-depleting chemicals were used in many industries and 
were considered irreplaceable. In order to deal with this 
uncertainty, governments took a small step first of a partial 
phase-out and involved the scientific community to advise them 
periodically on the further steps needed to protect the ozone 
layer and on the availability of alternate technologies. Four 
times so far in the last 10 years, the governments changed the 
Protocol in accordance with such scientific advice. For the first 
time, the scientific community has a front seat in environmental 
negotiations.
One more lesson of the Protocol is in promoting universal partic-
ipation, including of the developing countries in the Protocol by 
recognizing "common and differentiated responsibility." It was 
realized early that it requires global participation to protect 
the ozone layer. While the developing countries had a small share 
of the consumption in 1986 (and, hence little responsibility for 
ozone layer depletion), their increasing consumption would have 
nullified the efforts of the industrialized countries to phase-
out these chemicals. It was also realized that the developing 
countries may not have the skills, technologies or resources to 
implement the Protocol in time. Hence provision was made for a 
grace period, technology transfer and the Multilateral Fund. 
These steps resulted in almost all countries committing 
themselves to protection of the ozone layer.
Another lesson is the integration of science, economics and tech-
nology both in devising the control measures and in implementing 
them. The assessment panels of the Protocol with experts from all 
areas including industry have provided expertise to the Parties 
to take informed decisions. The involvement of industry ensured 
development of cheap and effective alternatives.
The evolution of the Protocol has proved the usefulness and 
indispensability of UNEP. UNEP provided the platform for 
countries with differing points of view to come together. It 
organized the scientific assessments, which not only identified 
the problem but also provided options to solve the problem. In 
the early 80's, even when Governments lost interest, UNEP 
persisted until consensus was achieved. It is continuing to work 
on the issue both as a Secretariat and as a clearinghouse for 
formation. Its activities help more than a hundred Governments to 
implement the Protocol. 

The Ozone Secretariat web site can be found at
http://www.unep.org/ozone/. For information via e-mail contact: 
ozoneinfo@unep.org. 

Why do we need a global POPs treaty?
By Bo Wahlström, 
Senior Scientific Advisor
UNEP Chemicals, Geneva, Switzerland

Introduction
Although the terms POPs and Persistent Organic Pollutants were 
not coined until years later, Rachel Carson’s 1962 classic Silent 
Spring described the deleterious effects of a number of 
pesticides that were later shown to be POPs, including DDT, 
aldrin and dieldrin.  Several toxic and persistent pesticides 
eventually recognized as POPs were banned by industrialized 
countries in the 1960s and 70s. It was thought at the time that 
such national measures would effectively limit or abolish the 
problem associated with these chemicals.  However, environmental 
monitoring programmes gradually made it clear that, after an 
initial decline, concentrations in the environment and in biota 
were not declining further.  It also became clear that some 
populations, such as the Inuit Eskimos, are at particular risk 
because there are high concentrations of some POPs in their 
traditional staple foods.
In response, the international community has launched action on a 
number of fronts.  First, developing countries are taking steps 
to adopt and strengthen national control regimes such as those 
existing in most developed countries.  They are starting to 
gather information, make inventories and explore options for 
replacing remaining POPs uses with alternatives.
Second, a series of global actions for strengthening and 
coordinating national efforts to reduce or eliminate releases of 
POPs are now underway.  The Global Programme of Action for the 
Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities, 
adopted in November 1995 in Washington DC, includes specific 
provisions to address POPs.  There are also a number of regional 
agreements in place directed at the reduction and/or elimination 
of POPs.  A legally binding Protocol to the Convention on Long-
Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP), completed under the 
auspices of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe 
(UNECE) and covering 16 POPs, was adopted on 24 June 1998 in 
Aarhus, Denmark. Days later, on 29 June 1998 in Montreal, 
negotiations began on a global agreement on 12 POPs.  These 
negotiations are being conducted under the auspices of the United 
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and are expected to be 
completed in the year 2000. 

What Are POPs?
POPs are chemicals or by-products that resist degradation in the 
environment.  They accumulate in the body fat of animals.  
Concentrations increase for each upward step in the food chain 
and can reach very high levels in, for example, seals and polar 
bears.  Fatty fishes, such as salmon, herring and eel, have 
higher concentrations than do fish such as cod or haddock.
Some human populations, such as the Inuit who eat salmon and 
seal, receive more than the Tolerable Daily Intake established by 
the World Health Organization (WHO).  One single meal may contain 
as much as 100 times the acceptable daily intake.  Breast-fed 
infants may also easily exceed the acceptable intake.  The 
effects of consuming POPs can be serious, including harmful 
effects on fertility and embryo development, damage to the 
nervous system (including intellectual and learning impairment) 
and cancer. 
Most POPs are banned, severely restricted or otherwise managed in 
industrial countries.  Many have been used as pesticides in agri-
culture and for the control of parasites.  Some of them are still 
manufactured and used in developing countries and countries with 
economies in transition.  In particular, thousands of tonnes of 
DDT per annum are manufactured in some developing countries, and 
PCBs appears to be still produced in some countries, e.g. the 
Russian Federation.

The Problem of Global Transport
In principle, a POP chemical released anywhere on earth may in 
time reach any other place of the globe.  However, there is a 
particularly large-scale redistribution of persistent organic 
pollutants from warmer to colder areas.  POPS can spread from 
tropical countries by evaporating into the atmosphere and then 
condensing over colder areas, similar to the way water vapor in 
air condenses as dew on a summer evening.
Because the circumpolar countries have large areas with low mean 
annual temperature, limited exposure to the sun, and a small 
biosphere, the humans and the higher animals in these regions 
tend to absorb unusually high concentration POPs in their bodies, 
particularly in body fats. 
As long as they continue to be used, POPs will find their way 
into the environment and stay there for a long time.  Even if all 
production were to stop immediately, the problems with POPs would 
persist for years or even decades.  Thus no single country can 
solve their national POPs problems alone.  Because POPs are 
migrants without passports, global agreements and global measures 
are essential.

The Developing Country Situation
There is a genuine lack of knowledge about POPs sources and re-
leases in many developing countries.  However, existing data from 
wildlife in Africa and other regions show concentrations of POPs 
equal to or higher than those in temperate or cold regions.   
There are also occupational health problems related to the use of 
POPs in developing countries. Thus, POPs problems also occur in 
the countries or regions where they are used.
Border controls are sometimes ineffective, which can lead to 
illegal trade in banned POPs.  The infrastructure for chemical 
management and enforcement is often weak and compliance with 
regulations limited.  Pesticide POPs often become a cheap and 
quick alternative for subsistence farmers with low levels of 
education and no modern equipment.
Indeed, many POPs pesticides are easy to use.  They are not 
acutely toxic and thus do not appear overtly hazardous.They do 
not require special knowledge or equipment.  They only need to be 
applied once during a crop’s growth cycle and the effect is 
immediate, visible and persisting. To persuade poor subsistence 
farmers to stop using these “benefactors,” intimate knowledge of 
local conditions and effective means of communicating information 
are needed.  Economic measures such as subsidizing the price of 
alternatives and offering training in new techniques are 
important.

Awareness Raising in Developing Countries.
Between July 1997 and June 1998 UNEP, in cooperation with the 
Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (IFCS), convened a 
series of eight subregional workshops in which 138 countries 
participated. The aim was to raise awareness on POPs issues in 
developing countries and countries with economies in transition, 
in preparation for the upcoming global negotiations. Participants 
from governments and other stakeholders met to discuss the nature 
and significance of the POPs problem, including what is known 
about releases and the risks they pose, recent regional and 
international policy developments and opportunities to address 
problems related to POPs at the national and regional levels. 

Issues Raised by Developing Countries 
In most regions, obsolete stockpiles of old chemicals, including 
POPs, are an important and difficult issue.  Some countries have 
established inventories of pesticide stockpiles with the support 
of FAO.  In a few cases, stockpiles have been destroyed or 
disposed of, sometimes by being exported to industrialized 
countries with proper incineration facilities.  The chemicals in 
obsolete stockpiles are often hard to identify, due to inadequate 
storage conditions, leakage and loss of labelling.  The 12 POPs 
targeted by UNEP constitute an unknown fraction of the 
stockpiles. Sharing expertise and experience between countries 
could save resources and facilitate the gathering of basic 
information on remaining stocks.
Developing countries emphasised the need for creating or 
strengthening national coordinating mechanisms, including inter-
sectoral and/or interministerial committees on POPs, and, as 
appropriate, non-governmental stakeholders. An important step in 
taking action against POPs was the clear designation of 
responsibilities between the appropriate ministries. 
Countries stressed the need to nominate UNEP national focal 
points for POPs, as well as focal points for IFCS, and to make 
sure that there is sufficient coordination between them and other 
focal points, such as those for the Convention on the Prior 
Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and 
Pesticides in International Trade (PIC).
Many countries requested more information on alternatives in or-
der to proceed with the phase-out of some currently used POPs. An 
ongoing UNEP project on developing guidance for selecting re-
placement for pesticide POPs would be of great help. Existing 
structures for regional co-operation should be used as much as 
possible. Although they might differ in mandate and scope from 
region to region, in all regions there were structures that could 
be used for discussing POPs issues.
The awareness-raising workshops sensitized countries to the POPs 
issue and encouraged new actions at both the national and re-
gional levels. Most countries are now aware of the global POPs 
issue, which facilitates their participation in the global 
negotiations.  Some countries have recently taken legal action on 
POPs.  New regional activities started as result of the 
workshops.  Regional networks have been established or 
strengthened. A clear list of needs and priorities for countries 
and regions emerged. The workshops offered countries a meeting 
ground to discuss common chemical issues in a positive and 
fruitful atmosphere. 

The Start of Global Negotiations in Montreal
The first session of the International Negotiating Committee 
(INC-1) for an International Legally Binding Instrument for 
Implementing International Action on Certain Persistent Organic 
Pollutants was held in Montreal from 29 June to 3 July 1998. A 
total of 94 governments were present together with a large number 
of UN bodies, intergovernmental organizations and NGOs 
representing industry, academia, and public interest groups.  
Several delegates had participated in the awareness raising 
workshops. The meeting was a great success for all participants, 
as well as for UNEP and the host country.
The meeting established a subsidiary body to be called the Crite-
ria Expert Group.  The CEG will develop science-based criteria 
and a procedure for identifying additional POPs as candidates for 
future international action.  Two co-chairs and a rapporteur were 
elected, and the meeting also agreed to terms of reference for 
the CEG, including working in all six official UN languages.  
This group will meet intersessionally and report to subsequent 
sessions of the INC.
The whole negotiating process for POPs is dependent on by con-
tributions from the participating governments.  Governments have 
been invited to contribute by sponsoring or hosting meetings. 
Canada hosted INC-1, and the US has offered to sponsor the first 
meeting of the CEG.  There is, however, a need for further offers 
to ensure that the negotiations can be completed by the end of 
2000.

Important Issues for the Negotiations
Most POPs pesticides have been banned in many countries, in-
cluding several developing countries.  The major remaining use is 
the spraying of DDT for controlling malaria spread by mosquitos, 
who transfer the parasite to humans.  Although both chemical and 
non-chemical alternatives are available, there is a continuing 
debate over whether these alternatives are economically, 
technically and socially viable. WHO has recently declared the 
eradication of malaria as a major goal, and it remains to be seen 
whether this goal can be made compatible with an early phase out 
of DDT. 
The use and, in a few exceptional cases, also the production of 
PCBs continues, although many countries have taken steps to phase 
out their use.  Economically and technically feasible 
alternatives are available for all uses, so the overarching issue 
in all countries is the environmentally sound destruction and 
disposal of old stocks.  In many countries incineration is a 
hotly debated method for destruction. Some suggest that it is a 
major source of dioxins, and that this is dependent on the 
chlorine content of the waste. Alternative methods still need to 
be more widely acknowledged for full-scale use.  In developing 
countries there is the added problem of identifying existing PCB-
containing equipment in a safe and adequate fashion.
The problem of abandoned stockpiles, although much broader than 
just a POPs issue, has come into focus as one of the major issues 
stressed by developing countries.  It is likely that this has to 
be dealt with in any global agreement.
Capacity building is essential if there is going to be a major 
shift away from presently used methods or technologies in 
developing countries.  There is also a basic need for developing 
the necessary infrastructure for the management and control of 
chemicals, including the enforcement of regulations.
Finally, there is great need for financial and technical 
assistance to developing countries and countries with economies 
in transition so that they can move to the sound management of 
POPs by either phasing them out or more strictly controlling 
emissions.  Whether this should be provided through existing 
sources or by establishing a new financial mechanism for POPs 
will be a key issue for the INC. At INC-1 a subsidiary group to 
consider technical and financial assistance and modalities to 
assist countries to implement the provisions of an 
internationally legally binding instrument for implementing 
international action on certain POPs was set up. This group does 
not yet have a name and will not be operational until the next 
INC. 

Conclusions
POPs are now understood to be one of the most dangerous threats 
to human health and the environment today.  The international 
community needs to respond in a coherent and cost-effective 
fashion with measures acceptable from a public health and socio-
economic perspective.  The global negotiations are off to a good 
start.  Time will show if the world can address the challenge of 
POPs in a way that will promote sustainable development as 
defined by the 1992 Rio Declaration.


More information on UNEP’s Chemicals Programmes and POPs can be 
found at http://irptc.unep.ch/pops/. For more information via e-
mail try: mwilliams@unep.ch. 

PROFITABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY IN THE 21ST CENTURY
Mike Kelly
Coordinator for the UNEP Financial Institutions Initiative 

Introduction
Concern about the environment is no longer an optional extra for 
the business community. More and more financial institutions—in-
vestors, bankers, and insurers—are realizing that their future 
depends on backing the right kind of economic development. If 
infrastructure, industries and trade are not built on principles 
of sustainability, it is not just bad for the environment; it is 
also bad business.
The United Nations Environment Programme, charged with en-
couraging partnership in caring for the environment, started 
working with forward-looking organizations in the financial 
services sector at the beginning of the decade. Since its 
creation in 1972, UNEP had always had a mandate to encourage 
economic growth compatible with protection of the environment. 
But this special element of UNEP’s role was considerably enhanced 
by the Earth Summit in 1992 and placed great emphasis on 
promoting development that did not compromise the quality of life 
of future generations.
UNEP was convinced that bankers and investors had a valuable 
contribution to make in protecting the environment while 
maintaining the health and profitability of their businesses. 
Many of the largest and most respected international banks 
responded to the call, working with UNEP to draw up statements of 
environmental commitment for the sector; promoting environmental 
issues and, through workshops, seminars and roundtable 
discussions, helping disseminate information about best 
environmental practice throughout the industry.
The financial services sector has an important stake in promoting 
sustainable development. Investments that take no heed of the fu-
ture, that destroy or deplete natural resources needed for future 
development, do not make economic sense. Environmental 
degradation and man-made ecological catastrophes threaten the 
very basis of the sector, which depends on being able to 
calculate and manage risks.
The negative environmental impact of some kinds of industry and 
some types of development is increasingly covered by 
international legislative frameworks. Bankers and insurers have 
to operate within this increasing global regulation.
As we approach the end of the decade and the end of a millennium, 
the interdependence of environmentalists and business makes 
itself more and more evident. It is not just a question of what 
the financial services sector can do for the environment but of 
what environmental awareness can do for bankers and insurers. 
The economic rewards of placing environmental concerns high on 
the agenda are considerable. Green investment is booming as 
concerned individuals and organizations look for environmentally 
sound ways to invest and plan for the future.  Sustainable 
development is good long-term investment. 
117 financial institutions have now publicly endorsed the princi-
ples of greener banking and investment. More than 70 major insur-
ance or reinsurance concerns have endorsed a similar commitment 
to the environment for the insurance industry. 

Financial Services Initiative
The Financial Services Initiative recognizes the common interest 
that environmentalists share with financial institutions daily 
responsible for investment decisions. Both are concerned with 
halting the degradation of the planet. UNEP formally launched the 
initiative for banks at the 1992 United Nations Conference on 
Environment and Development in Rio to agree a programme for 
sustainable development. 
The principal aim of the initiative is to generate a constructive 
debate between commercial banks, investment banks, venture 
capitalists, insurance and reinsurance concern, multilateral 
development agencies and asset managers all those involved in 
economic development and managing risks and environmentalists. A 
secondary objective is to foster private sector investment in 
environmentally sound technologies and services.
The idea was extended to insurance and reinsurance organizations 
at the end of 1995 with the launch of the Insurance Industry Ini-
tiative on the Environment.  Why were insurance companies 
interested? They’re not polluters. Insurers, like bankers, are 
major investors and manage large funds for their clients, so they 
share all the concerns of bankers. But, in addition, they have 
specific concerns about environmental degradation and 
catastrophes. Oil spills and chemical pollution, for example, 
cost huge amounts of money. Unpredictable storms and hurricanes 
threaten to cost even more. The core business of the insurance 
industry is to manage and assess risks, including environmental 
risks. The consequences of environmental catastrophes, 
particularly weather events arising from climate change for the 
stability of the industry could be very serious. Loss prevention 
is better for insurers bottom line than paying out claims for 
events that could have been avoided. 
Major banks and insurance groups from around the world have put 
their name to the statements. A major plank of both is a commit-
ment to sustainable development and support for the precautionary 
approach to environmental management that attempts to anticipate 
and prevent environmental degradation. The signatories also 
undertake to promote public awareness and communication. 
It’s more than a promise to be a bit more environmentally aware. 
The statements commit those who sign it to specific practices, 
such as energy efficiency, recycling and waste reduction. 
Signatories recognize the precautionary approach to environmental 
management, in other words anticipating the consequences of 
financial management decisions and thus avoiding potential 
environmental degradation. The statements also acknowledge the 
need for a continuing dialogue with customers, shareholders and 
employees.
In all this UNEP has played a catalytic role. The Financial 
Services Initiative is directed by a steering committee 
consisting of eleven representatives from member institutions, 
one representative from UNEP, and a non-voting representative 
from the International Finance Corporation of the World Bank. The 
Insurance Initiative has a steering committee of six 
representatives from leading insurance companies, plus a UNEP 
representative.
The first task of that small group working with UNEP was to pre-
pare a document that could be given to interested banks and 
investing organisations to help them focus on environmental 
issues and consider their possible roles. 
The result was the Statement by Banks on the Environment and 
Sustainable Development that was submitted to the Earth Summit in 
1992.  More than 30 banks immediately signed at that meeting. The 
statement promoted environmental management practices, encouraged 
environmental impact assessment as part of investment decisions 
and promoted the implementation of the precautionary principle; 
by mid-1997 the list of signatories had passed the one hundred 
mark and continues to grow. 
The statement, since revised on the basis of the complexities in-
volved in describing the entire world of finance, proved a useful 
tool for generating debate and discussion within the industry.  
It quickly led to the formation of the Advisory Group on Banking 
and the Environment and to the first of several international 
round table meetings aimed at bringing together bankers and 
investors from different commercial backgrounds and regional 
perspectives.  Many of the issues discussed at that first 
international event held in Geneva in September 1994 still top 
the agenda at workshops and seminars. They included environmental 
risk assessment in relation to credit procedures; opportunities 
in environmental financing and internal operations and 
environmental performance. 
Within a year of formation, the Advisory Group on Banking and the 
Environment set out to discover how the wider financial services 
industry was looking at environmental issues. With financial sup-
port from Salomon Inc of New York, UNEP commissioned a survey on 
current environmental policies and practices. 
Of 177 investment and commercial banks contacted, 90 responded. 
The results were highly informative and included the following: 
	31 per cent of respondents were involved in environment-
related investing or lending, and 
	88 per cent expected to be in the next 15 years 
	almost half did not monitor or evaluate environmental risks 
on projects to which they had committed funding 
	and the same percentage of respondents, all of whom con-
ducted business internationally, did not keep up with current 
developments on environmental practices and policies in other 
countries 
	all predicted that environmental issues would become more 
important many expected to add environmental criteria to 
procurement decisions and become involved in issues like energy 
conservation and recycling 
	69 per cent wanted better training for staff to help comply 
with regulations and almost the same number expected government 
regulatory requirements to become stricter over the coming five 
years.   
The results of that survey suggested a growing eagerness within 
the financial sector to learn more about environmental management 
and its relation to debt financing. In particular, it 
demonstrated that an increasing number of banks and investors saw 
the need to incorporate environmental awareness into their 
businesses. Issues such as sustainability, future ecological 
risks, environmental impact and conservation and recycling are 
all now firmly on the banking agenda, driven by the increasing 
complexity of national and international regulations, and the 
steady growth in consumer demand world-wide. 
There is evidence of deep public concern about degradation of the 
environment in both developed and developing countries. An inter-
national opinion poll in the mid-Nineties demonstrated that 
consumers in countries as diverse as Denmark, South Korea and 
Switzerland were all prepared to pay higher prices for better 
environmental quality. These trends are of direct significance to 
lenders. They are also informing the development of new 
international standards that bankers have to adhere to in their 
investment policies. More rigorous pollution control standards 
are the future. 

The Way Ahead
The third Roundtable held in New York in mid-1997 attracted more 
than 350 leading bankers and financial experts from around the 
world. The agenda also covered detailed issues of practical daily 
use to participants such as new International Standards 
legislation and methods for making financial assessments of 
environmental initiatives. The New York roundtable marked five 
years of informal UNEP involvement in the financial services 
sector. There was ample evidence that the cooperation had been 
beneficial to both partners, providing a debating forum for the 
sector. UNEP’s stewardship had been the catalyst for the 
emergence of a far more self-regulated organization. There was 
clearly the energy and expertise within the financial services 
sector to take a more directive role and to move from a small 
advisory group acting under the leadership of UNEP to an industry 
led and driven programme that could operate in partnership with 
UNEP. The financial sector was also beginning to get its voice 
heard in international fora.  
A more formal structure was needed. On the eve of the New York 
roundtable, the Financial Institutions Initiative was formally 
launched and its first Steering Group meeting was held. The new 
Initiative formally adopted terms of reference along with a 
revised and fuller Statement. Until then, promotion of the 
Statement and organization of the annual roundtable meetings had 
been the responsibility of UNEP and the Advisory Group. Now the 
structure included a formal steering group and specific sub 
groups dealing with implementation, outreach and a technical 
committee. Awareness and interest among financial services 
providers had grown to the extent where there was a significant 
demand for an active Initiative, undertaking a wider range of 
activities, for example production of a quarterly newsletter to 
keep the sector fully informed of developments. 
The Initiative’s terms of reference also underline how far the 
process has come. As well as promoting the revised statement, the 
Financial Institutions Initiative aims to promote education, 
research and information programmes and projects, share best 
practices and information, identify relevant principles and 
effective environmental tools and collaborate with other UN 
organizations, universities and institutions relevant to the 
industry. 

Questions About the Initiative
Do these initiatives do anything, or are they just talking shops? 
Talking is very powerful if the right people are doing it. When 
the world’s biggest investors and insurers discuss the future of 
the environment, everyone has to listen. Their investment and 
insurance strategies can literally change the world. The two 
initiatives organize international and regional meetings and 
collaborate with relevant institutions, government and non-
governmental organizations. 
In addition, the insurance sector has taken a prominent role in 
discussions on the framework convention on climate change. The 
two sectors also disseminate information through newsletters and 
special seminars about policies and approaches that have worked 
in practice. So the practical implementation of investment 
policies on the ground can encourage other companies. 
International roundtable meetings such as the New York meeting in 
May 1997 or the Moscow workshop in 1996 give companies in 
different circumstances around the world the chance to discuss 
different approaches and initiatives with each other.
Can big investors really afford to worry about the environment in 
today’s competitive marketplace?
More and more major corporations and financial institutions are 
asking whether they can afford not to. Of course, they have to 
work strictly within the framework of market mechanisms, but it 
is becoming clearer to the banking and insuring world that 
unsustainable development is bad business. 
It has been clear from the beginning of the decade that govern-
ments alone could not protect the environment. The private sector 
had a particular perspective on environmental issues and its 
expertise was needed if a radical shift in public attitudes about 
the compatibility of an ecological outlook and ordinary 
commercial and industrial life was to be achieved. Bankers and 
investors have crucial links with commercial activity including 
activity that degrades the natural environment. Furthermore, as 
enlightened banks were already aware; the sector has a long-term 
interest in sustainable development and in backing commercial and 
industrial practices that safeguard future resources. Quick 
profit with no thought for tomorrow is not in the interests of a 
sector that has to invest in the future. The banks that embarked 
on the Financial Services Initiative with UNEP in the first years 
of the decade had realized that they needed to take more account 
of future risks and the long-term opportunities offered by 
sustainable development. It was also becoming clear that it was 
possible to persuade other financial institutions that there 
could also be short-term benefits in working with 
environmentalists: first, so that both could keep up with the 
fast-changing national and international agendas, in particular 
the increasingly complex legal obligations covering finance and 
the environment; second, to satisfy the steadily growing demand 
from the financial sector’s clients for greener banking and 
investment. 
The recent past provides plenty of examples to demonstrate why 
banks need to be in the forefront of the ecological debate: The 
cost of cleaning up past mistakes is escalating, with major 
issues of lender liability remaining to be resolved. In the US 
alone an estimated 5,000 - 7,000 hazardous waste sites have been 
identified with an average clean-up cost per site of $31 million 
per site. In the Netherlands, clean-up estimates into the next 
millennium are estimated at $5.6 billion. A study by the 
University of Chile estimated in 1994 that $435 million was lost 
to the economy each year through health problems linked to air 
pollution. As governments continue negotiations on policy 
instruments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the demand for 
energy is increasing at a phenomenal rate requiring rapid 
development of clean technologies: new power generation capacity 
needed in developing countries and economies in transition is 
estimated at $1 trillion for the period 1997-2000. The market for 
environmental services in Western Europe was estimated at $94 
billion in 1992; the global market in waste management is 
predicted to reach $500 billion by the year 2000 
Isn’t this just about the banks trying to avoid becoming liable 
within environmental regulations?
Most industrialized countries began introducing pollution con-
trols in the 1970s. The early wave of legislation tended to look 
at clean-up and end-of-pipe solutions in other words, dealing 
with pollutants produced by traditional manufacturing methods 
only at the end of a process. By the 1980s, the emphasis had 
begun to shift to pollution prevention, and to incorporating the 
latest environmental technology and resources at every stage of 
manufacturing or engineering processes. More recently still, many 
of the areas covered by national legislation air and water 
contamination, land use, toxic waste management, transportation 
of hazardous wastes, mandatory labeling, etc., have become the 
subject of regional or international conventions or standards. At 
the regional level, there are other factors that lenders have to 
be aware of. Organisations such as the North American Free Trade 
Agreement grouping are attempting to standardize a range of 
environmental provisions. The European Union is harmonizing air 
quality standards for its member countries. Legislation covering 
lender liability for past environmental damage is emerging and 
developing in different directions in various countries. The 
European Union, for example, is establishing an integrated Union 
approach to environmental liability. During the Fifth Envi-
ronmental Action Programme (1993- 2000) it intends to establish 
Union-wide rules to implement the Polluter Pays Principle. With 
the legal debates on lender liability far from resolved, lenders 
and financial institutions will necessarily be heavily affected. 
As we enter a new millennium the international approach to 
environmental regulation is becoming more comprehensive. 
The trend now is to see the market as a friend rather than a 
negative unmanageable force. More emphasis is placed on the 
importance of market mechanisms than on strict governmental or 
international control mechanisms. The Organization of Economic 
Co-operation and Development (OECD), for example, has estimated 
that economic instruments to help environmental objectives dou-
bled or tripled in the first half of the Nineties.  A market 
mechanism that lending institutions increasingly have to take 
into account is the enthusiasm of consumers for green products. 
With a greater number of people claiming that they are willing to 
pay more for ecologically sound products, the opportunities for 
supplying that gap in the market become clear. Eco-labeling 
schemes have also become a force for change. If concerned 
consumers demand information about the environmental 
characteristics of products, then greener goods and services 
begin to have an explicit value.  

The bottom line
The short-term costs to investors of enforcing higher environ-
mental standards in industry have been widely debated. It has 
been argued by some industry lobbies in some countries that 
unilateral introduction of high standards would lead to 
industrialized countries losing their competitive edge: that high 
standards in the United States, for example, would drive 
polluting industries south of the border. It has been as 
forcefully argued by developing countries that, with no economies 
of scale, the cost of cleaner technologies hits their infant 
industries even harder. But there is growing evidence that 
neither of these pessimistic lobbies have reason on their side. 
The World Resources Institute has argued and demonstrated that 
higher standards are linked to stronger, not weaker, economic 
performance.  Japan and Germany, with strict environment 
standards, are highly competitive. Countries with ineffective 
environmental legislation can be shown to be uncompetitive in 
world markets. 
Some multinational groups may indeed seek out countries with weak 
legislative frameworks but the overwhelming evidence is that 
countries that have high environmental standards attract the 
greatest amount of direct foreign investment. At company level, 
many of the case studies discussed at UNEP/Financial Services 
Initiative roundtable meetings demonstrate that higher standards, 
including in developing countries, bring positive economic 
benefits. 

Information on the Financial Services Initiative can be found at 
http://www.unep.ch/eteu/envr-fin.htm. 

UPDATES
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
SECOND AFRICAN GOVERNANCE FORUM: The Second African Governance 
Forum (AGF II) was held in Accra, Ghana from 25-26 June 1998 and 
was organized by UNDP and the Economic Commission for Africa 
(ECA) in the context of the UN Special Initiative on Africa. The 
Initiative is a system-wide effort launched in March 1996 to 
coordinate and harmonize UN assistance to Africa in selected 
areas: Education, Food Security, Health, Water, Trade, 
Governance, Information Technology, Gender and Population 
Mainstreaming, and Poverty Reduction through informal sector em-
ployment.
The Forum sought to: 
• Provide a platform for African governments, civil society and 
the continent's external partners to engage in a dialogue on the 
state of good governance on the continent, viewed through the 
optic of national programmes; 
• Promote partnership among the participants and encourage shar-
ing and the exchange of experiences, information, and good 
practices on good governance; and 
• Assist African governments, through the programmatic approach, 
to develop programmes and strengthen coordination mechanisms to 
permit long-term resource mobilization to support nationally-
defined governance programmes, thereby ensuring sustainability. 
More than 80 participants - including high-level officials from 
of 10 African governments, bilateral partner countries, civil 
society organizations, experts from the UN system and a number of 
other international actors - took part in the dialogue. National 
reports presented by representatives of 10 countries--Benin, 
Burkina Faso, The Gambia, Ghana, Mali, Senegal, South Africa, 
Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia--formed the basis of the discussion. 
Regarding accountability and transparency, broad consensus was 
reached on a number of key issues: 
• Transparency and accountability were agreed to be crucial ele-
ments for promoting development, and as such they should not be 
the sole concern of governments, but should also involve civil 
society organizations as well as Africans at large; 
• Note was taken that in almost all the countries represented, 
institutions and measures for improving accountability and 
transparency had been put in place. The problem remained how to 
transform them into more effective instruments. Functional 
problems existed at varying degrees in all the countries under 
consideration and include the need for more political will, 
resources and capacity; 
• The need to revisit African traditions and culture in the 
effort to reduce the perverse effects of an alien culture in 
post-colonial Africa; 
• The establishment of processes, operations and institutions 
were undermined by political and socio-economic factors; 
• Both governments and civil society were responsible for the 
lack of transparency and accountability; 
• The application of sanctions alone would not be enough without 
appropriate incentives for transparency and accountability being 
put in place; 
• Transparency in decision-making on macro-economic issues could 
enhance the practice of accountability. Conversely, account-
ability for public resources at the micro level was a requirement 
in setting up a credible system of transparency; 
• There needed to be a concerted effort to establish legislation 
for assets disclosure of all leaders in government, civil 
society, and parliament. Enforcement mechanisms needed to be 
strengthened; 
• The possibility should be looked into for African Governments 
to sign on to international conventions as in the OECD/DAC coun-
tries; 
• The external dimension of problems of accountability and trans-
parency required the cooperation of external partners in the 
search for appropriate solutions. 
While the sustainability and credibility of the AGF process was 
seen as central to efforts by UNDP and ECA in supporting gover-
nance in Africa, it was stressed that the primary responsibility 
rested with the African governments themselves, with full 
participation from citizens at all levels. In response to the 
demands for a results-oriented approach as a sine qua non for 
sustaining the interest of stakeholders, it was noted that a 
pilot inventory on governance programmes presented by the UN 
Department for Economic and Social Affairs was one good effort in 
the right direction. In a bid to better coordinate and focus the 
various efforts currently underway towards the promotion of good 
governance in Africa, it was proposed that AGF should provide a 
continuing vehicle for promoting coordinated support in this 
area. It was agreed that AGF III, which the Government of Mali 
had offered to host in 1999, would focus on Conflict Prevention, 
Management and Governance. For more information contact: ECA; 
Communication Team; 9th Floor, Economic Commission for Africa, 
P.O. Box 3001, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; tel: + 251-1-515826 Or 251-
1-5172 00 ext 35486; fax: + 251-1-512233 Or 251-1-514416 (Addis 
Ababa) or + 1 212/963 4957 (New York); e-mail: ecainfo@un.org or 
dacosta@un.org or Internet: 
http://www.un.org/Depts/eca/news/finalc.htm
FOURTH MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE "ENVIRONMENT FOR EUROPE": The 
Fourth Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe” was held 
in Aarhus, Denmark, 23-25 June 1998 and attended by environment 
ministers from 52 countries. The "Environment for Europe" process 
is the political framework for cooperation on environmental 
protection in Europe. The major issues on the provisional agenda 
included: Europe's Environment--The Second Assessment; 
environmental problems in countries in transition, in particular 
in the newly independent States (NIS) with a view to sustainable 
development; specific aspects of the Pan-European Biological and 
Landscape Diversity Strategy; and protocols under the Convention 
on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution. 
Environmental Information: In Aarhus, thirty-five states from 
Europe and Central Asia signed the Convention on Access to Infor-
mation, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to 
Justice in Environmental Matters. The legally binding convention 
is an "environmental rights" treaty that guarantees the public a 
voice on green issues such as the state of their water, air, soil 
and food. It intends to give the public more say in decisions 
affecting their environment and more rights to sue industries and 
authorities who break environmental laws. It also obliges 
governments to provide the public with more information on the 
state of their surroundings, arguing that if they are better 
informed, citizens can become more involved in tackling issues 
such as pollution. The strong involvement of NGOs in the 
preparation of the Convention was seen by many as a commendable 
feature of the agreement.
Germany, Russia, the US, Israel, Turkey and most of the ex-Soviet 
republics declined to sign the treaty. The European Union signed 
the treaty but said it had not yet decided how to apply the rules 
to the bloc's decision-making bodies in Brussels. Officials said 
they expected more access to documents from the European Parlia-
ment and the EU's executive Commission. But the Council of EU 
Ministers would remain closed.
On 29 June, countries of the global environmental information 
exchange network operated by UNEP -- known as INFOTERRA -- met in 
Aarhus from 23-25 June 1998 to discuss the practical imple-
mentation of the Aarhus Convention. The meeting identified the 
following four priority actions to make the Aarhus Convention 
work: promotion of the convention; improving the availability of 
environmental information; improving access to available 
environmental information; strengthening the link between the 
information access and public participation pillars of the 
convention. For more information on the Convention contact: Mr 
Kaj Bärlund, Director or Mrs Eija Lumme; UN/ECE Environment and 
Human Settlements Division, Palais des Nations; tel: + (41 22) 
917 23 70 or + (41 22) 917 26 50; fax: + (41 22) 907 01 07; e-
mail: kaj.barlund@unece.org and eija.lumme@unece.org; Internet: 
http://www.mem.dk/aarhus-conference/ The Convention is available 
at
http://www.unicc.org/unece/env/europe/ppconven.htm
Protocols to the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air 
Pollution: Ministers also adopted Protocols to the Convention on 
Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution Both protocols, one on 
heavy metals, the other on persistent organic pollutants (POPs) 
were the culmination of a long preparatory process. 
The protocol on heavy metals targets three particularly harmful 
substances: lead, cadmium and mercury. According to one of its 
basic obligations, countries have to reduce their emissions of 
these three metals below their levels in 1990 (or an alternative 
year between 1985 and 1995). The protocol aims to cut emissions 
from industrial sources (iron and steel industry, non-ferrous 
metal industry), combustion processes (power generation, road 
transport) and waste incineration. It lays down stringent limit 
values for emissions from stationary sources and suggests best 
available techniques (BAT) for these sources, such as special 
filters or scrubbers for combustion sources or mercury-free 
processes. The protocol requires countries to phase out leaded 
petrol. It also introduces measures to lower heavy metal 
emissions from other products, such as mercury in batteries, and 
proposes the introduction of management measures for other 
mercury-containing products, such as electrical components 
(thermostats, switches), measuring devices (thermometers, manom-
eters, barometers), fluorescent lamps, dental amalgam, pesticides 
and paint.
The protocol on persistent organic pollutants focuses on a list 
of 16 substances, which have been singled out according to 
certain risk criteria:
Pesticides: aldrin, chlordane, chlordecone, DDT, dieldrin, 
endrin, heptachlor, hexachlorobenzene (HCB), mirex, toxaphene, 
hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) (incl. lindane);
Industrial chemicals: hexabromobiphenyl, polychlorinated bi-
phenyls (PCBs);
By-products or contaminants: dioxins, furans, polycyclic aromatic 
hydrocarbons (PAHs).
The ultimate objective is to eliminate any discharges, emissions 
and losses of POPs. The protocol bans the production and use of 
some products outright (aldrin, chlordane, chlordecone, dieldrin, 
endrin, hexabromobiphenyl, mirex and toxaphene). Others are 
scheduled for elimination at a later stage (DDT, heptachlor, 
hexachlorobenzene, PCBs). Finally, the protocol severely 
restricts the use of DDT, HCH (including lindane) and PCBs. 
Limited uses that are thought to be essential and for which there 
are no adequate substitutes, can be exempted. For instance, the 
use of substances like DDT will be allowed for public health 
emergencies. The protocol includes provisions for dealing with 
the wastes of products that will be banned. It also obliges 
countries to reduce their emissions of dioxins, furans, PAHs and 
HCB below their levels in 1990 (or an alternative year between 
1985 and 1995). It puts forward best available techniques to cut 
emissions of these POPs. For the incineration of municipal, 
hazardous and medical waste, it lays down specific limit values. 
The two protocols foresee the possibility of modifying the list 
of substances or the range of control and management actions 
without renegotiating the entire protocol. The protocols are 
available at http://www.unece.org/env/download/download.htm
WORLD BANK AND WORLD TOURISM ORGANIZATION CONFERENCE: The World 
Bank Group and the World Tourism Organization Business Council 
Leadership Forum met in Washington from 21-23 June 1998 to 
exchange ideas over the importance of tourism in international 
development. The “Leadership Forum” brought together some 50 
decision-makers from the tourism sector to help set World Tourism 
Organization's agenda for the 21st century. Following 
introductions by World Bank President James Wolfensohn and World 
Tourism Organization Secretary-General Francesco Frangialli, 
presentations were made on the roles of cultural heritage and 
tourism financing in promoting sustainable tourism development. 
The Leadership Forum agreed to share mutually beneficial economic 
information and statistics related to the tourism industry in 
countries where both are active. A committee will be formed be-
tween the Bank and the World Tourism Organization Business 
Council to foster this renewed cooperation. 
Many countries want to use tourism as a mechanism for attracting 
foreign exchange and investment, but do not know where to begin. 
The World Bank Group is able to provide the policy, legal and 
regulatory framework for the tourism sector, and can counsel 
countries in developing strategies for attracting investment. 
Once an attractive enabling environment for foreign investment in 
the tourism sector has been created, MIGA's Investment Marketing 
Services plays an important role in capacity-building of 
institutions in developing countries that are charged with 
attracting foreign direct investment by assisting them in 
devising and implementing a strategy for attracting foreign 
investment. 
The World Tourism Organization forecasts that the number of 
people travelling internationally will increase from 613 million 
in 1997, to 1.6 billion by the year 2020, and that earnings from 
international tourism will soar from US$443 billion in 1997 to 
more than US$2 trillion by 2020. Besides foreign exchange, 
tourism creates jobs. Participants noted that in countries with 
relatively developed local economies, the multiplier effect of 
tourism can be substantial, resulting from linkages with other 
economic sectors such as agriculture, building materials 
suppliers, furniture making, etc. On the other hand, in some 
smaller countries, much of this needs to be imported, depending 
on the foreign exchange impact. While the World Bank Group's two 
main lending arms, IBRD and IDA, do not finance tourism projects, 
the Group's affiliates, IFC and MIGA, do support tourism through 
equity investments, insurance, guarantees, and other mechanisms. 
For more information contact: Eric Chinje, +1 (202) 473-4467; 
Internet: http://www.worldbank.org/
FIRST EXECUTIVE DIALOGUE OF MINISTERS AND LEADERS IN THE PRIVATE 
SECTOR ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOR AFRICA'S DEVELOPMENT: The 
Economic Commission for Africa's (ECA) Food Security and Sustain-
able Development Division (FSSDD) held a two-day meeting of the 
First Dialogue of Ministers and Leaders in the Private Sector on 
Science and Technology for Africa's Development in Addis Ababa, 
Ethiopia from 18-19 June 1998. The meeting explored the fact that 
African per capita food production is fast declining, while 
population is growing faster than the rate of food production and 
environmental degradation is escalating. The Commission's vision 
is to develop a more effective function that catalyses the 
harnessing of science and technology by member states and 
mobilizes adequate resources to enable them access the 
technologies required for the new millennium.
By hosting the executive dialogue, the Commission hoped to: 
Understand the participants' perspective on the new thrust of ECA 
Science and Technology programme; 
Enhance awareness of the participants' concerns on how global 
trends and national policies affect technology development in the 
private sector; 
Promote continuous exchange of ideas between ministers and 
private sector participants; 
Gain a perspective on the activities that the Commission needs to 
undertake to address the concerns of member states; and 
Gain an insight into the ministers' perception on general science 
and technology issues of importance to the continent. 
The Commission will also foster links between research institu-
tions and industries, while spearheading the provision of real 
services to clusters of manufacturing small and medium 
enterprises in the region as such: bulk input procurement; 
product design facilities; special equipment rental-presses, 
special lathes, moulds, dies; and export packaging services. 
Seven out of the total 19 best practice cases commissioned will 
be out shortly, both in print and on the web. For more 
information see the UN Special Initiative on Africa web site at 
http://www.unsia.org
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND WAR: 
More than 150 international legal, scientific, military and 
political experts gathered in Washington on 11 June to discuss 
how to improve international frameworks for outlawing 
environmental destruction as a weapon of war. Delegates also 
debated the economic value of war-induced environmental damage, 
protecting national parks and wildlife refuges during war, and 
addressed the issue of responsibility for post-war environmental 
damages. The experts remained divided on whether international 
law provided adequate protection to the environment from the 
disastrous consequences of war.
Legal and military scholars disagreed over how best to halt envi-
ronmental destruction as a weapon of war. While some said 
existing international laws on war were adequate, and needed only 
better enforcement, others wanted new rules. Some argued that new 
frameworks are needed because the current standards have no bite 
and existing international law allows governments to use any type 
of military rational to destroy the environment. Others said 
efforts to negotiate new international regulations were ''doomed 
'' and argued that instead of creating new law, an improvement is 
needed in implementing existing law and improving the 
international culture of how the environment is viewed. 
Participants noted, inter alia, that often after war, civilians 
must live with the remaining environmental destruction. Water 
supply is poisoned, and the air fouled, birth defects multiply, 
chronic and acute suffering increases, and a host of cancers and 
respiratory illnesses multiply premature deaths. After US forces 
sprayed the cancer-causing herbicide Agent Orange over 10 percent 
of South Vietnam to destroy vegetation in order to reveal 
Vietnamese troop movements, countries worldwide negotiated 
treaties to prevent further environmentally-destructive war 
strategies.
Protocol I to the Geneva Convention of 1997 and the Environmental 
Modification Convention were added to the list of international 
war laws dating back to 1868, in order to prevent environmental 
destruction as a weapon of war. When Iraq blew up more than 700 
Kuwaiti oil wells during the 1990-91 Persian Gulf War, causing 
unprecedented fires, smoke and black rain in the region, policy 
makers began asking if the existing frameworks were adequate or 
if more were needed.
J. William Futrell, president of the Environmental Law Institute, 
stated that the use of Agent Orange and other chemical defoliants 
in Vietnam and Central America along with the destruction of oil 
wells in Kuwait during the Gulf War, showed how conflicts damaged 
the environment. Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev noted 
that for centuries, military leaders have destroyed the 
environment in order to gain an advantage on their enemies 
despite international condemnation of such tactics, they have 
continued as recently seen in the Persian Gulf War.
Participants discussed creating a United Nations “Declaration of 
Principles” on environmental protection in times of war that 
would be voluntary, but the UN peacekeeping missions must 
implement. Some also recommended the recognition of environmental 
war crimes and ''ecocide'' - the mass destruction of the 
environment - as distinct crimes to be addressed within the 
International Criminal Court. Some were not convinced that new 
laws and frameworks were needed. For information contact: the 
Environmental Law Institute, 1616 P St., NW, Suite 200, 
Washington, DC 20036; +1 (202) 939-3800; e-mail: futrell@eli.org; 
Internet: http://www.eli.org.
IMF CONFERENCE ON ECONOMIC POLICY AND EQUITY: The IMF’s Fiscal 
Affairs Department hosted a conference from 8-9 June 1998 on 
“Economic Policy and Equity.” Organized by the Fiscal Affairs 
Department, the sessions spotlighted the practitioners’ 
perspective and reflected an increasing concern within the IMF on 
how its policies could be better designed and implemented to pro-
mote and sustain equitable growth. With the participation of 
policymakers, clergy, and labor leaders as well as academics, the 
wide-ranging discussions underscored the importance of, and the 
synergy between, sound policies and good governance. The panels 
also highlighted the increasingly critical role that popular 
support plays in the successful implementation of major reforms.
In welcoming remarks, IMF First Deputy Managing Director Stanley 
Fischer noted that the conference represented another step in the 
organization’s efforts to better understand equity and to 
integrate equity considerations into its operational work. The 
IMF has tried, he said, to translate the lessons from the 1995 
conference into several concrete steps, notably greater attention 
to the design of effective social safety nets and the elimination 
of unproductive spending, an increased emphasis on “second 
generation” reforms, improved data collection on social 
expenditures, and the monitoring of social output indicators. The 
conference offered the IMF a rare opportunity to step back from 
its day-to-day work and listen to ideas about what more the IMF 
could do and what values it should bring to its daily business, 
Fischer said, and the IMF looked forward to drawing further 
practical implications for its operations from the discussions.
Participants engaged in discussion groups on: "Economic Policy 
and Equity: An Overview;" "Equity Issues in a Globalizing World;" 
"Addressing Equity Issues in Policymaking;" "Policy Responses: 
Design and Implementation;" and "Lessons for Countries and the 
IMF." For additional information about the conference, including 
the full text of Stanley Fischer’s opening remarks and an issues 
paper prepared by the Expenditure Policy Division of the IMF’s 
Fiscal Affairs Department, see the IMF’s web site at 
http://www.imf.org/external/np/fad/equity/index.htm. A volume 
covering the conference proceedings is being prepared.
WORKSHOP ON CONSUMPTION IN A SUSTAINABLE WORLD: The "Consumption 
in a Sustainable World" workshop convened from 2-4 June 1998 in 
Kabelvåg, Norway. The workshop was sponsored by the Norwegian 
Ministry of Environment and was attended by more than 50 
individuals from 28 countries, including government officials and 
representatives of international and non-governmental 
organizations, industry, labor and the scientific community, 
participating in their personal capacities. Joke Waller Hunter, 
OECD Director for Environment, chaired the workshop. 
The meeting is part of a consultative process undertaken by the 
Norwegian Ministry of Environment to encourage pioneers in sus-
tainable consumption from around the world to identify the best 
ways of accelerating international action to spread good 
practice, remove obstacles to further progress and monitor the 
results. The aims of the workshop were to: generate a shared 
understanding of sustainable consumption priorities; identify 
examples of good practice; lay the foundations for new 
international partnerships; and generate specific proposals to 
move the process forward. 
The starting point for discussion at the workshop was a back-
ground document produced by the International Institute for Envi-
ronment and Development (IIED), "Making Consumption Sustainable - 
Accelerating International Action," which provides orientation 
about the scope of the issue and the focus of the workshop. IIED 
collected written submissions by participants on the content 
prior to the meeting and incorporated these into a workbook, 
which served as the working document of the meeting. The workbook 
outlines elements for a shared understanding of sustainable 
consumption, points out areas of uncertainty and strategic 
priorities, provides numerous examples of good practice in 
improving products and changing consumption patterns, and 
identifies areas for international cooperation. 
Workshop participants engaged in Plenary sessions and four dis-
cussion groups on sustainable consumption priorities, lessons 
from current sustainable consumption initiatives, key factors for 
the success of initiatives as well as elements that are missing, 
and international action on sustainable consumption. They 
formulated a number of new initiatives and recommendations for 
action. The outcome of the workshop will be a revised version of 
the workbook that incorporates these initiatives and 
recommendations as well as the conclusions from their discussions 
on the above topics. The revised workbook will be presented to 
the seventh session of the Commission on Sustainable Development 
(CSD-7) in 1999, whose cross-sectoral theme will be changing 
consumption and production patterns. The participants also agreed 
to form a Kabelvåg Task Force to take further steps to implement 
their recommendations. Other highlights of the workshop included 
an address by Norwegian Secretary of State Jesper W. Simonsen and 
a site visit to a pilot sustainable community project in the 
municipality of Steigen.
In closing plenary, Chair Joke Waller Hunter summed up the con-
clusions of the conference. She highlighted that participants had 
forged a better understanding of what sustainable consumption is: 
it is more about looking at how and why we consume in the ways we 
do and not so much about consuming less. She noted their realiza-
tion that the experts' jargon of sustainable consumption is not 
understandable to policy makers or the public, and their 
commitment to formulating and delivering a simple message in a 
language that is comprehensible. She highlighted their agreement 
on the need for efficient consumption and the recognition that 
different approaches are needed to achieve efficient consumption 
in different countries as well as in different sectors and at 
different levels. As sustainable consumption is a rather young 
issue in policy making, the workshop recognized that at this 
early stage it is essential to analyze, exchange lessons and 
learn from experiences. The Chair stressed that this can only be 
done with monitoring mechanisms in place to make the analyses and 
lessons convincing and based on real experience, and said the 
modified Kabelvåg workbook would be a very useful tool in this 
respect. 
She said the revised workbook would be circulated to participants 
by the end of July for comments and would be finalized 
thereafter. She stated that it could be used as input for several 
upcoming events, including the OECD workshop on education and 
learning for sustainable consumption in September, the workshop 
on sustainable consumption indicators in Korea in spring 1999, 
and the publication of this year's UNDP Human Development Report, 
which will focus on sustainable consumption and production. The 
workbook would also provide input to the 1999 session of the CSD, 
which will also focus on sustainable consumption and production, 
as well as the Rio+10 review in 2002. She said the proposal to 
set up a Kabelvåg Task Force will keep workshop participants in 
contact and informed about next steps and will foster 
collaborative efforts. She announced that a CSD World Wide Web 
site on sustainable consumption patterns would soon be on-line 
and suggested that this site could be used to further these ends. 
The Sustainable Development report on the workshop is available 
at 
http://enb.iisd.org/crs/norway/sdvol16no1e.html
NORTH/SOUTH CONFERENCE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: "Solidarity 
for the Future: The North/South Conference for Sustainable 
Development" took place in Berne, Switzerland from 25-29 May 
1998. The conference, organized by the Swiss Coalition of 
Development Organizations, gathered more than 900 participants 
from 40 countries, including political and economic leaders and 
representatives from civil society and the scientific community.  
The objectives of the conference were to address aspects of 
political, economic and social change that will shape North/South 
relations in the 21st century, give broad public exposure to the 
concerns of the South with respect to solidarity and sustainable 
development, and formulate demands for sound future development, 
examining them from the perspectives of the North and the South 
and leading to conclusions relevant to Switzerland. A number of 
prominent personalities addressed the conference, including 
Julius Nyerere, former president of Tanzania, Nafis Sadik, Di-
rector of the United Nations Population Fund, and José Ramos 
Horta, winner of the 1996 Nobel Peace Prize. 
Each day the conference addressed different themes related to 
solidarity and sustainable development: Switzerland's Global 
Role; the Global Workplace versus the Swiss Workplace; 
Implementing the Aims of the Rio Earth Summit; A Closer Look at 
Solidarity; and Forward to 2050. Participants enjoyed cultural 
events each evening, and, on the final two days of the 
conference, visited a North/South Market for Sustainable 
Development, which featured information, products and 
entertainment from many parts of the world. The Sustainable 
Developments report is available at 
http://enb.iisd.org/crs/northsouth/sdvol15no6e.html
INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON COMMUNITY-BASED NATURAL RESOURCE 
MANAGEMENT: The Economic Development Institute (EDI) of the World 
Bank in conjunction with the International Development Research 
Center (IDRC), the Ford Foundation (FF) and the Rockefeller 
Brothers Fund (RBF), organized an international workshop on 
community-based natural resource management in Washington, DC, 
from 10-14 May 1998. The workshop involved policymakers and 
practitioners involved with some aspect of community-based 
natural resource management in developing and transition 
economies. The workshop focused on institutional innovations that 
enhance the community-based management of renewable natural 
resources (such as watersheds, forests, rangeland, soils, water, 
fisheries, and biodiversity), and that help to alleviate poverty 
among the world's poorest peoples. The objectives of the workshop 
were: to facilitate a learning dialogue among participants from 
all over the world concerning effective institutional 
arrangements that enhance the community-based management of 
natural resources; to identify and to promote awareness of key 
institutional issues with respect to the community-based 
management of natural resources; to generate information and to 
learn about viable institutional options for the community-based 
management of natural resources; and to enhance the capacity of 
existing networks, stakeholder groups, and international donors 
to bring about positive institutional reforms with respect to 
community-based management of natural resources.
Participants engaged in four Plenary sessions: the process of es-
tablishing an enabling policy and institutional environment; the 
participatory process of organizing effective community-based 
groups; effective operational linkages between the public sector, 
the private sector, and community-based groups in the management 
of natural resources; and alternative approaches to conflict 
management in the use of natural resources. Participants also 
discussed natural resource management in six parallel, regional 
working group sessions. For more information contact Christopher 
D. Gerrard, World Bank/EDI, Room G 5-141, 1818 H Street NW, 
Washington, DC 20433; fax: +1 (202) 676-0977; e-mail: 
cgerrard1@worldbank.org
TWENTY-SEVENTH SESSION OF ECLAC: The Twenty-seventh session of 
the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean 
(ECLAC) was held in Oranjestad, Aruba from 11-16 May 1998. 
Delegates from 37 regional Governments and other ECLAC member 
states passed a broad resolution supporting the Commission’s 
proposals on fiscal policy. In the "Aruba Resolution," delegates 
underlined the greater macroeconomic stability and improvements 
in public finances achieved in Latin America and the Caribbean as 
a result of the adjustments carried out in the region following 
the crisis of the 1980s. But, the resolution warns, "the region’s 
public finances still exhibit a significant degree of fragility 
which is periodically brought to light by external turbulence or 
domestic shocks." Further, "efforts to increase the efficiency 
and effectiveness of public expenditure have proven to be 
insufficient."
The resolution supports ECLAC’s proposals to encourage what it 
calls "the fiscal covenant" in the region, understood as a 
sociopolitical consensus allowing the achievements of adjustment 
to be consolidated and its failings overcome, while increasing 
social equity and strengthening democracy. This covenant implies 
five basic challenges: consolidating the fiscal adjustment now in 
progress, increasing the productivity of public management, 
enhancing the transparency of fiscal actions, promoting the goal 
of social equity in public revenue and expenditure, and 
encouraging the development of democratic institutions.
The "Aruba Resolution" requests ECLAC to give wide distribution 
to the document, "The Fiscal Covenant: Strengths, Weaknesses and 
Challenges," which was prepared for the meeting. It calls for an 
international seminar of high-level experts and policy-makers to 
give further consideration to these issues.
In a second resolution, the meeting approved the reform programme 
currently being carried out by ECLAC as part of the broader 
process of the same kind in the United Nations as a whole, 
especially by improving "the indicators for evaluating the 
activities of the Commission in terms of performance, 
productivity and impact." The meeting also approved ECLAC’s work 
programme for the next two years. Delegates took note of the 
Secretariat’s proposal to create a sub-programme to promote the 
inclusion of the gender perspective into the regional development 
process. They also asked the Executive Secretary to continue 
taking appropriate measures to ensure that the Caribbean and 
Central American member States participate meaningfully in the 
work programme. In addition, the meeting passed resolutions on 
poverty, population and fiscal expenditure, population and 
development, and technical cooperation between developing 
countries and regions, among other matters.
The Fiscal Covenant is available at
http://www.eclac.cl/english/aruba/lcg2024/summ.htm. This document 
can be obtained from ECLAC’s Document Distribution Unit, Casilla 
179-D, Vitacura, Santiago, Chile. E-mail: publications@eclac.cl 
For additional information contact; tel: +56 2 210-2000/210-2149; 
fax: + 56 2 208-0252/228-1947; e-mail: dpisantiago@eclac.cl; 
Internet: http://www.eclac.cl/index1.html.
SIXTH SESSION OF THE COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: The 
sixth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD-
6) met at UN Headquarters in New York from 20 April to 1 May 
1998. Participants considered the economic theme of industry and 
the sectoral theme of strategic approaches to freshwater 
management. They also reviewed implementation of the Programme of 
Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing 
States (SIDS) and discussed the cross-sectoral themes of 
technology transfer, capacity building, education, science and 
awareness raising. Negotiations on CSD decisions were preceded by 
a two-day Industry Segment, which consisted of dialogues between 
NGOs, business, trade union and other major group representatives 
and government delegates on four topics: responsible 
entrepreneurship; corporate management tools; technology 
cooperation and assessment; and industry and freshwater. 
A High-Level Segment met during the final three days of the two-
week session. On 1 May, after the close of CSD-6, CSD-7 convened 
briefly to elect its Chair and two of its Vice-Chairs. Three 
Drafting Groups negotiated seven CSD-6 decisions. Negotiations on 
texts addressing freshwater and industry issues occupied the 
majority of delegates' time. During the Industry Segment, NGOs 
encouraged the CSD to conduct a review of voluntary industry 
initiatives. A version of their proposal was agreed in the 
decision on industry and sustainable development. On freshwater, 
delegates debated at length questions related to technology 
transfer, financial resources and cooperation among riparian 
States.
The complete Earth Negotiations Bulletin report is available at 
http://enb.iisd.org/csd/csd6.html
INTERGOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE ON CULTURAL POLICIES FOR 
DEVELOPMENT: An intergovernmental conference on cultural policies 
for development was held from 30 March-2 April in Stockholm, 
Sweden. The conference was organized by UNESCO and hosted by the 
Swedish government. Over 140 states adopted an action plan to 
place culture and cultural policies at the center of their 
development strategies. During the discussions, participants 
heard the views of over 100 NGOs, foundations and representatives 
of youth and the business sector. 
UNESCO Director-General Federico Mayor said the conference marked 
a historic turning point in that, for the first time, political 
decision makers from all countries unanimously recognized the 
importance of culture for human dignity and the need to protect 
cultural identity and cultural diversity. 
The action plan defines five main objectives: 
	achieve make cultural policy a key component of develoment 
strategies;
	promote creativity and participation in cultural life; 
	reinforce measures to preserve cultural heritage and 
promote cultural;
	promote cultural and linguistic diversity in the 
information society; and 
	make more human and financial resources available for cul-
tural development. 
For more information contact: R. Isar, Director, Culture and De-
velopment Coordination Office, UNESCO; tel: +33 1 45 68 15 08; 
fax: + 33 1 45 68 57 07. 
UNDP AND UNCTAD JOINT PROGRAMME ON ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CHALLENGES 
OF GLOBALIZATION: The Administrator of UNDP, James Gustave Speth, 
and the Secretary-General of UNCTAD, Rubens Ricupero, signed a 
memorandum of understanding on 17 April 1998 designed to 
strengthen the capacity of developing countries to become fully 
integrated in the global economy. The Agreement focuses on 
collaboration in the areas of trade, enterprise development, 
investment and capacity building for sustainable human 
development (SHD). A US$4 million programme to address the impact 
of globalization on SHD will cement the new working relationship 
between UNDP and UNCTAD. The main objectives of the UNDP/UNCTAD 
memorandum of understanding are to:
•achieve greater synergy between UNCTAD’s work in trade, in-
vestment and related activities and UNDP’s vision of sustainable 
human development; 
•strengthen links between the organizations’ policy and opera-
tional activities, and; 
•improve collaborative programming. 
There is strong complementarity between the development activ-
ities of UNDP and UNCTAD. UNDP supports anti-poverty initiatives 
in 170 countries and territories, and has a network of Resident 
Representatives in more than 130 countries. UNCTAD is the focal 
point within the UN for the integrated treatment of development 
and interrelated issues in the areas of trade, finance, 
technology, investment and sustainable development. The priority 
focus of both organizations is the needs of the world’s poorest 
communities.
The programme on the impact of globalization on SHD will assist a 
group of 10-12 low-income countries to develop policy and insti-
tutional tools necessary for successful integration. Expanded 
international trade, increased capital flows and the greater 
mobility of enterprises and production offer important new 
opportunities to developing countries. But they can also cause 
short-term shocks and instability, accompanied by social and 
economic marginalization. The challenge is to build local 
capacity to exploit the opportunities and minimize the risks. 
Factors inhibiting economic integration include: deficiencies in 
human and institutional capacity; a lack of clarity and coherence 
in domestic policies; and inadequate information on which to base 
decision-making.
Countries participating in the programme will be equipped to 
monitor policy implementation and the impact of policy changes on 
SHD. A Global Resource Facility will link the relevant UNCTAD and 
UNDP divisions and provide a basis for more extensive cooperation 
with other organizations, academia, the business sector and civil 
society. At the international level, the programme will, also 
identify and share best practices in SHD in various countries; 
monitor economic growth and poverty; help coordinate 
international technical assistance programmes relevant to 
globalization; help develop a network of universities, policy 
think tanks, management schools and other groups to advise the 
private sectors and governments of the participating countries; 
and disseminate policy lessons from these countries through 
workshops and seminars. For information contact: UNCTAD; tel: +41 
22 907 12 34; fax: +41 22 907 00 43; e-mail: ers@unctad.org; 
Internet: http://www.unicc.org/unctad/
ASIA PACIFIC HIGH-LEVEL MEETING ON POPULATION AND SUSTAINABLE 
DEVELOPMENT: The High-level Meeting to Review the Implementation 
of the Programme of Action (POA) of the International Conference 
on Population and Development and Bali Declaration on Population 
and Sustainable Development was held from 24-27 March 1998 in 
Bangkok, Thailand. The meeting was jointly organized by Economic 
and Social Commission for the Asia and the Pacific [ESCAP] and 
the United Nations Population Fund [UNFPA] with the Royal 
Government of Netherlands agreeing to provide support for five 
participants from the countries of Central Asia. Ninety-four 
senior level officials, including the members of the Steering 
Committee, officials from Governments and NGO representatives 
from 29 countries participated. 
The objectives of the meeting were: to review the progress in the 
implementation of the ICPD POA and of the Bali Declaration, with 
particular focus on achievements and challenges; to identify con-
straints and obstacles faced by countries in the implementation 
of the recommendations contained in these documents, and develop 
strategies for future national and regional level action 
programmes that would contribute to national capacity building in 
overcoming the constraints and obstacles.
Participants stressed that the principles and recommendations of 
the ICPD POA adopted in Cairo in 1994 and the Bali Declaration of 
1992 remain valid. Participants further reaffirmed that "the 
implementation of the recommendations contained in the Programme 
of Action is the sovereign right of each country, consistent with 
national laws and development priorities, with full respect for 
the various religious and ethical values and cultural backgrounds 
of its people, and in conformity with universally recognized 
international human rights."
Participants also noted that the use of the term `Reproductive 
Health’ in the Key Future Actions, includes all those elements 
described in the Programme of Action, specifically "reproductive 
health care is defined as the constellation of methods, 
techniques and services that contribute to reproductive health 
and well-being by preventing and solving reproductive health 
problems. It also includes sexual health." Reproductive health in 
this definition includes family planning. The Meeting adopted the 
Report and Key Future Actions Required to Achieve the Goals of 
the ICPD POA and Bali Declaration on 27 March 1998. For more 
information contact: ESCAP; tel: +(66-2) 288-1234; fax: + (66-2) 
288-1000; 
e-mail: webmaster@unescap.org; Internet: http://www.unescap.org/
SECOND COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION OF FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT: From 
18-19 March 1998, a resumed session of the General Assembly's 
Second Committee (Economic and Financial) convened to consider 
financing for development. General Assembly (GA) resolution 
52/179, adopted in December 1997, established the resumed session 
to hear key elements on the topic of financing for development 
and put into motion the convening of the high-level international 
intergovernmental dialogue. The dialogue will lead to a high-
level international intergovernmental meeting -- a summit, 
international conference, General Assembly special session or 
other intergovernmental forum. 
During the resumed Second Committee session, delegates sought to 
narrow the scope of the agenda for the high-level review and 
listed essential issues the event should address. Several 
speakers said the Committee should strive to include a broad 
spectrum of views from governments, international financial 
institutions, United Nations agencies and programmes, and the 
non-governmental sector. The key elements that should be 
addressed include the decline in official development assistance 
(ODA), net transfer of resources between developing and developed 
countries, the external debt burden and the limited concentration 
of foreign direct investment (FDI). 
The inputs requested by governments will be compiled for the fif-
ty-third GA, which opens in September 1998. An ad hoc, open-ended 
working group will meet to undertake in-depth examination of the 
reports of the Secretary-General. The working group will make 
recommendations on the form, scope and agenda of the event, which 
will be taken up at the fifty-fourth GA in 1999. Governments will 
then decide about convening the high-level forum on the financing 
of development. 
The G-77/China said the lack of financial resources for develop-
ment was possibly the most constraining factor inhibiting 
development. The monumental changes in the 1990s -- driven 
largely by globalization, the liberalization of trade and 
investment, technical innovation and the erosion of 
multilateralism -- presented the international community with 
opportunities and challenges. In that context, the international 
community must answer the overall questions of development 
finance so that the goal of sustainable development for all could 
be achieved. 
He said the Committee should seek a broad spectrum of inputs on 
the key elements and topics to be included in the discussion 
leading up to the high-level intergovernmental forum. While the 
convening of an international conference on financing for 
development had not been agreed upon after seven years of 
negotiations, the Group was currently more encouraged in 
continuing with the process. The revitalization of ODA should be 
a top priority for the forthcoming preparations. ODA was an early 
casualty of globalization and had sharply declined in real terms. 
Aid fatigue and fiscal stringency in the developed countries had 
also contributed to that downturn. As a consequence of declining 
ODA, an enormous toll had been exacted on the social and economic 
development of the least developed countries. 
He said many of the countries that had successfully integrated 
into the world economy and had attracted private financial flows 
had seen their development achievements scuttled overnight. That 
phenomenon was largely a result of volatile investor confidence 
and the assumptions made by private and corporate money managers. 
Therefore, understanding the nature of private capital flows and 
how they could be harnessed to meet the development needs of 
developing countries should constitute a major theme in the 
Committee's deliberations in the coming years. 
He underscored that the adequacy of the Bretton Woods institu-
tions to effectively manage the world economy had become increas-
ingly strained. The global financial institutions were not able 
to predict the scope of the Asian crisis nor were they able to 
prevent it. The International Monetary Fund (IMF), which was 
designed to maintain a system of fixed but adjustable exchange 
rates, was now facing enormous challenges in effectively managing 
the current international financial and monetary system. He 
stressed that the international community must review the 
capabilities and modalities of those institutions to respond 
effectively and timely to financial crises induced by large-scale 
capital movements. The decision-making structures of the Bretton 
Woods institutions needs to be reviewed and made more democratic. 
The Committee should also explore the conditions that were re-
quired at both the domestic and international levels to ensure a 
supportive environment, he said. Macroeconomic policies should be 
coordinated. The IMF's role could also be strengthened to ensure 
that economic policies of the more powerful economies would not 
be detrimental to the growth and development of the developing 
countries. 
The EU suggested that the primary source of information on fi-
nancing needed were the governments of developing countries. Such 
material should show the steps those governments were taking to 
develop coherent and comprehensive strategies, in particular for 
the implementation of "pro-poor" policies in line with agreements 
reached at United Nations conferences. Income distribution and 
income concentration in developing countries should also be ad-
dressed. It would be useful to seek the views of recipient and 
donor countries on how to achieve maximum efficiency and 
effectiveness in the use of resources for development, including 
ODA. 
He said that the views of developing countries could be sought 
through a number of mechanisms, including through pilot pro-
grammes and dialogue with governments within the United Nations 
Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF). He noted that de-
veloping country governments were also actively engaged in policy 
dialogue with a number of other players, including the World 
Bank, the IMF, and regional development banks. The sustainable 
development strategies of governments should also be 
disseminated, as well as information on how those countries were 
pursuing policies on South-South cooperation and trade on 
regional and global levels with other developing countries. 
Information should also be sought from the industrialized coun-
tries, most of them aid donors, and from the newly industrialized 
emerging donor countries. They should provide not only details of 
ODA flows, but also on the ways and means by which they were at-
tempting to pursue a coherent approach to development, 
bilaterally and multilaterally. Included should be a description 
of their efforts towards international financial stabilization, 
better market access for developing countries and measures to 
alleviate the debt burden of developing countries. He said 
information on private financial flows from industrialized 
countries would also be essential. A range of institutions in 
those countries should also be consulted, including export credit 
and export guarantee agencies and private sector financial 
institutions such as banks, and firms concerned with portfolio 
and direct investment. He said that donor countries should supply 
information concerning efforts to improve consistency and 
coordination in their policies towards developing countries and 
maximize the effectiveness of financial flows. Multilateral 
institutions, including United Nations bodies and subsidiaries, 
should contribute a range of issues. 
The US said that while nations were individually responsible for 
their own economic and social development, the UN had a unique 
obligation to achieve international cooperation in solving 
economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems and in 
promoting human rights. The Committee was taking the first step 
in a multi-year process which, if successful, would result in a 
new global partnership for development. As delegations worked 
together during the coming year, they should repeatedly ask 
themselves what had been effective and what had not and why. 
Regarding ODA, he said States could exult in the gains over the 
last 20 years in life expectancy and declines in infant and child 
mortality. But the unmet agendas must also be acknowledged and 
the steady decline of ODA in recent years must also be noted. In 
that context, the international community must determine how 
bilateral and multilateral assistance could be improved to help 
attain global development goals in the future. 
He noted that private financial flows to developing countries had 
increased by a factor of more than five since the beginning of 
the 1990s. Yet, 80 per cent of those flows were currently 
concentrated in 12 developing countries, to the virtual exclusion 
of Africa. The international community must determine how private 
financial flows could be enticed to an expanded number of 
countries and how the private sector could be integrated more 
strategically into a global development agenda. It must also look 
for ways to help governments to mobilize domestic resources and 
make use of innovative financing mechanisms. 
He went on to say that the Committee's deliberations should also 
seek to engage a broad range of stakeholders to clarify the roles 
of governments, the private sector, NGOs and civil society in 
promoting and sustaining global development partnership. 
Countries should not try to accomplish what global markets were 
better qualified to do. But States could and should take steps to 
ensure that global markets operated efficiently and maximized 
opportunities for people-centered growth. 
Oscar de Rojas (Venezuela), Chair of the Committee, said the 
Committee's strong and meaningful debate had launched a process 
that would become part of the history of the consideration of 
international economic issues in the UN. Now it was the 
responsibility of governments to ensure that the momentum was 
maintained. For more information contact: Ian C. Kinniburgh, 
Director, Development Policy Analysis Division, Department of 
Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations, Room, DC2-2170, New 
York, N.Y. 10017, USA; tel:+1 (212)963-4723; fax: +1 (212) 963-
1061; e-mail: ffd@un.org. For information on the preparations for 
a high-level consultation before the end of 2001, 
see http://www.un.org/esa/analysis/ffd.htm. 
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT CHANGE RESEARCH NETWORK MEETING: The Asia-
Pacific Network for Global Change Research (APN) held its 3rd 
Inter-Governmental Meeting in Beijing from 11-13 March 1998. With 
16 countries represented, delegates decided on funding of about 
US$500,000 to support global change research in the region, on a 
number of improved organizational arrangements, and on priority 
in 1998/99 for climate change related work and "human dimensions 
of global environmental change." The APN is an inter-governmental 
network whose primary purposes are to foster research about 
global environmental change in the Asia-Pacific region, to 
increase developing country participation in that research, and 
to strengthen links between the scientific community and policy 
makers. It promotes, encourages and supports research activities 
on long-term global changes in climate, ocean and terrestrial 
systems, and on related physical, chemical, biological and socio-
economic processes. The 3rd Inter-Governmental Meeting in Beijing 
agreed on which projects to fund in the next year, and among 
other conclusions agreed to start a formal strategic planning 
process to guide the future development of the network in the 
rapidly evolving field of global change research.
The workshop discussed scientific agenda, organizational struc-
tures, and procedures for further APN development. Participants 
agreed on the projects to be supported by APN in 1998/99: Contin-
uation of Regional Climate Modeling (RCM) Development and Ap-
plication for Asia (research, database, training course); 
Vulnerability Assessment of Major Wetlands in the Asia-Pacific 
Region Indicators for Detecting Variation of Climate Extremes 
ECO-ASIA Asia-Pacific Eco-Consciousness Project, Phase II (1998-
99) (Workshop); Workshop - Toward an Integrated Regional Model of 
River Basin - Inputs to the Coastal Zones of Southeast Asia; 
International Workshops for Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) in 
Asia; Research Activities on Land Use in Temperate East Asia 
(LUTEA); Support for Organizing Committee Meeting for the 1999 
Human Dimensions Open Meeting in Japan; Workshop on Water and 
Human Security for Asia; Workshops on Industrial Transformation 
in South Asia and East Asia; Planning Workshop - Marine and 
Coastal Zone Studies in the Asia-Pacific Region; and Asia-Wide 
Workshop - Aerosol Studies of Asia-Pacific Region. For more 
information please contact APN Secretariat, c/o AIRIES, 3-1-13 
Shibakoen, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105 Japan; tel: +81-3-3432-1844; fax: 
+81-3-3432-1975; e-mail: airies@airies.or.jp; Internet: 
http://www.rim.or.jp/apn
PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINING DEVELOPMENT: The Wilton 
Park Conference "Protecting the Environment and Sustaining 
Development: Towards A Green Millennium?" was held from 9–12 
March 1998 in London. The conference explored the challenge of 
protecting the environment while securing sustainable 
development. The conference sought to bring together people from 
all relevant arenas to discuss their perspectives, to facilitate 
mutual understanding and to promote consensus on priorities for 
national, regional and global action. 
Regarding economic factors, participants noted that Northern 
countries on the whole see major benefits in globalization, but 
in the South opinion remains divided largely according to income.  
For the richer South, trade liberalization offers opportunities 
for enhanced economic growth through increased foreign 
investment.  Poorer neighbors, however, may regard it as a 
potential destroyer of local industries, encouraging unnecessary 
consumerism and spreading ‘western values’ which lead communities 
– and particularly the young – to reject traditional beliefs. 
There were concerns that trade liberalization and environmental 
protection do not mix.  Many find serious inconsistencies between 
multilateral environmental agreements and the rules governing in-
ternational trade.  The World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement 
on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), for 
example, is suggested by some in Southern countries to be in 
conflict with the Convention on Biodiversity, in not recognizing 
the contribution of indigenous peoples in patents on drugs that 
are based on natural products.  The Multilateral Agreement on 
Investment (MAI) drafted by the OECD aimed to encourage overseas 
investment by relaxing internal regulation, with unrestricted 
free trade as a route to higher economic growth for all.  Some 
Northern, and particularly Southern critics, as well as the 
majority of environmental and development groups, however, argued 
that the price for such growth could be too high, involving loss 
of democratic control, and environmental exploitation and 
degradation. It was feared that member countries would be unable 
to prevent overseas investment even where there was substantial 
fear of potential economic or environmental damage. 
On financing sustainable development, participants noted that de-
velopment finance has traditionally flowed from foreign aid and 
loans from governments and multinational institutions, but this 
is reducing and being replaced increasingly by private capital, 
mainly in the form of direct investment, which is not necessarily 
directed towards sustainable projects.  The number of projects 
financed by the World Bank from the GEF, its “green projects 
fund,” remains comparatively small, and the Bank spends more 
financing coal-fired power stations than on renewable energy 
projects. Moreover, the GEF is not popular in poor countries, 
despite being funded to the tune of nearly $2 billion dollars, 
partly because of criticisms that a large proportion of finance 
is spent on consultancy fees that flow back to the North.
On the other hand, businesses are increasingly coming to the view 
that environmental protection brings benefits.  New markets in 
environment-friendly goods, for example, could lead to more 
revenues.  Contrary to received wisdom, industry is keen that 
governments do not withdraw from financing sustainable 
development, since there are some areas where it feels it cannot 
itself operate. Governments themselves can be part of the 
problem. While donor governments pare down aid budgets, some 
recipient governments seem reluctant to explore ways of 
maximising the impact of their own finances, through for example, 
efficient tax-collecting structures, a leaner public sector, 
lower subsidies and reduced military expenditure, which could 
potentially save governments up to $1 trillion a year globally.
Some developing country administrations are also perceived as 
corrupt, and finance for development projects sometimes never 
reaches its intended destination.  Many donor countries and 
organisations now refuse to finance sustainable development 
projects unless a “credible” NGO is also involved.  Southern NGOs 
expressed regret that such a stipulation was not made earlier.  
The volatility of international capital flows make continuity of 
external finance uncertain. Innovative economic policies may help 
Southern governments reach goals of self-sufficiency. Resource-
generating ideas include taxes on foreign exchange transactions, 
(lucrative but difficult to collect); a tax on aviation fuel; 
micro-credit – already in widespread use – and, most 
controversially of all, international trade in greenhouse gas 
emissions.  Resources for sustainable development cannot be 
generated without powerful political support.  This means that 
ways need to be found to harness public opinion and the support 
of finance ministries for good ideas currently promoted by 
relatively weak environment ministries.
On achieving effective international action, participants noted 
that environmental protection has become a global industry. There 
are now twelve environmental conventions on the international 
statute book, each with its own conference of the parties, 
secretariat, subsidiary bodies, follow-up network, documentation, 
politics, and associated protocol. They said a summit to mark the 
tenth anniversary of Rio may be organized. If so, it is important 
that such an occasion makes a positive impact; a summit to 
celebrate a summit could be one summit too far. Conference 
fatigue may be setting in and some want to see resources re-
directed to less glamorous individual and local action which has 
been shown to be effective. For more information contact: Wilton 
Park Conferences, London; tel: +44 1903 817774; fax: +44 1903 
815931; 
e-mail: wilton@pavilion.co.uk.
TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT
WTO COMMITTEE ON SUBSIDIES AND COUNTERVAILING MEASURES: The WTO 
framework on "non-actionable" subsidies was completed on 2 June 
when the Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures 
adopted procedures for the conduct of binding arbitration 
regarding the status of these types of subsidies. The system, 
which enables governments to establish -- free from counter 
actions by other members -- certain subsidy programmes aimed at 
protecting the environment, helping disadvantaged regions, and 
promoting research and development, is now operational. The 
Committee previously had adopted the other elements of the 
framework, which are formats for the initial notification of such 
programmes and for updating notifications.
The WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures 
prohibits subsidies on exports or those conditioned on the use of 
domestic over imported goods. However, it specifically defines 
certain subsidies for the adaptation of existing facilities to 
meet new environmental requirements, for assistance to 
economically-disadvantaged regions of the country, and for 
research and development activities of firms or higher education 
establishments as "non-actionable", or protected from 
countervailing-duty or dispute-settlement actions by other WTO 
members. To qualify for non-actionable status, a subsidy 
programme must satisfy specific criteria set forth in the 
Agreement.
The Subsidies Agreement provides that governments may notify in 
advance of implementation subsidy programmes they consider to be 
"non-actionable". The Subsidies Committee then reviews these 
notifications. If there is no consensus in the Committee that a 
notified programme meets the Agreement's criteria for non-
actionability, any member may request binding arbitration to 
resolve the status of the programme. The arbitration body is 
required to present its conclusions within 120 days. The 
Procedures for Arbitration under Article 8.5 of the Agreement on 
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures are available at 
http://www.wto.org/wto/new/scm19.htm
WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE: At the Second 
Session of the Ministerial Conference of the WTO, held in Geneva 
from 18-20 May 1998, Ministers adopted a Ministerial Declaration 
(WT/MIN(98)/DEC/1). The Second Session took place on the fiftieth 
anniversary of the establishment of the multilateral trading 
system. In the Declaration, Ministers paid tribute to the 
system's contribution to growth, employment and stability by 
promoting the liberalization and expansion of trade, but agreed, 
however, that more remains to be done to enable all the world's 
peoples to share fully and equitably in these achievements. They 
underlined the crucial importance of the multilateral rule-based 
trading system, welcomed the conclusion of negotiations on basic 
telecommunications and financial services, noted the 
implementation of the Information Technology Agreement and 
renewed their commitment to achieve progressive liberalization of 
trade in goods and services.
Ministers noted that the fiftieth anniversary comes at a time 
when the economies of a number of WTO Members are experiencing 
difficulties as a result of disturbances in financial markets. 
They underlined that keeping all markets open must be a key 
element in a durable solution to these difficulties, rejected the 
use of any protectionist measures and agree to work together in 
the WTO as in the IMF and the World Bank to improve the coherence 
of international economic policy-making. They recognized the 
importance of enhancing public understanding of the benefits of 
the multilateral trading system in order to build support for it 
and agreed to consider ways to improve the transparency of WTO 
operations. They also pledged to continue their efforts towards 
the objectives of sustained economic growth and sustainable 
development.
Ministers renewed their commitment to ensuring that the benefits 
of the multilateral trading system are extended as widely as 
possible and recognized the need for the system to make its own 
contribution in response to the particular trade interests and 
development needs of developing-country Members. They expressed 
deep concern over the marginalization of least-developed 
countries and certain small economies, and recognized the urgent 
need to address this issue, which has been compounded by the 
chronic foreign debt problem facing many of them. They committed 
themselves to improving market access conditions for products 
exported by the least-developed countries on as broad and liberal 
a basis as possible and urged Members to implement the market-
access commitments that they have undertaken at the High-Level 
Meeting.
Ministers decided to establish a process under the direction of 
the General Council to ensure full and faithful implementation of 
existing agreements, and to prepare for the Third Session of the 
Ministerial Conference. The process will enable the General 
Council to submit recommendations regarding the WTO's work 
programme and will meet in special session in September 1998 and 
periodically thereafter to ensure full and timely completion of 
its work, fully respecting the principle of decision-making by 
consensus. The General Council will also submit to the Third 
Session of the Ministerial Conference, on the basis of consensus, 
recommendations for decision concerning the further organization 
and management of the work programme the will aim to achieving 
overall balance of interests of all Members. For more information 
try the WTO web site at http://www.wto.org/
OECD COUNCIL MEETING AT MINISTERIAL LEVEL: The OECD Council at 
Ministerial level met on 27-28 April 1998. Prior to the meeting, 
the Chair led consultations with the Business and Industry 
Advisory Committee (BIAC) and the Trade Union Advisory Committee 
(TUAC) to the OECD; both organizations submitted statements for 
the consideration of Ministers. Ministers discussed key policy 
challenges of the globalizing economy that they face in meeting 
the aspirations of their citizens -- promoting economic growth 
and employment through sound macroeconomic policies and 
structural reform; the better integration of environmental, 
social and economic policies; and the strengthening of the mul-
tilateral system -- thereby ensuring sustainable development and 
a durable improvement in living standards. They focused also on 
the global implications of the financial and economic situation 
in Asia. Against this background, Ministers discussed the OECD’s 
role, its achievements and future work.
Regarding economic growth, the global implications of the Asian 
crisis and the multilateral system, Ministers noted, inter alia, 
that the Asian financial crisis has highlighted the growing 
interdependence of countries in the world economy as well as the 
importance of having well-functioning markets and efficient 
economies and supportive mechanisms of international cooperation 
and solidarity. They welcomed reforms being undertaken by 
countries in Asia and recognized their growth potential over the 
longer term but also urged countries affected by the crisis to 
implement fully and expeditiously the recommended reforms agreed 
with the IMF, the World Bank and other relevant international 
institutions. Ministers also noted that the impact on trade and 
investment of the current financial and economic situation in 
Asia poses challenges for the multilateral system. Ministers 
discussed recent policy developments and challenges facing OECD 
countries and confirmed their commitment to pursue policies to 
achieve strong sustainable growth and reaffirmed the need for 
macroeconomic policies focused on sound public finances and 
effective control of inflation. 
Ministers also agreed that the achievement of sustainable devel-
opment is a key priority for OECD countries and  encouraged the 
elaboration of the Organization's strategy for wide-ranging 
efforts over the next three years in the areas of climate change, 
technological development, sustainability indicators, and the 
environmental impact of subsidies. They welcomed the Shared Goals 
for Action adopted by OECD Environment Ministers at their April 
meeting. Ministers recognized that all OECD countries, on the 
basis of their differentiated responsibilities, need to play 
their part in combating climate change by implementing national 
strategies, including measures such as clear targets and 
effective regulatory and economic measures, as well as through 
international co-operation. In this regard, OECD analysis will be 
critical in helping Member countries find the most efficient and 
effective ways to meet Kyoto targets. Ministers asked the OECD to 
enhance its dialogue with non-member countries in these areas and 
to engage them more actively, including through shared analyses 
and development of strategies for implementing sustainable 
development. Ministers further noted that, as part of the Shared 
Goals, Environment Ministers stressed the crucial importance of 
strong environmental policies in the implementation of 
sustainable development. Ministers agreed to interpret the term 
‘sustainable’ as including social and environmental, as well as 
economic, considerations. The Organization is well placed to 
exploit its multidisciplinary expertise in this area and to 
pursue the integration of economic, environmental and social 
policies to enhance welfare. In this regard, Ministers stressed 
the importance of promoting effective integration of 
environmental considerations in the multilateral system.
Ministers also adopted a Ministerial Statement on the 
Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI). According to the 
Statement, Ministers regarded investment, like trade, as an 
engine of economic growth, employment, sustainable development 
and rising living standards in both developed and developing 
countries. They re-affirmed the importance they attach to 
achieving a comprehensive multilateral framework for investment 
with high standards of liberalization and investment protection 
with effective dispute settlement procedures, and open to non-
member countries. Ministers welcomed the Report by the Chair of 
the Negotiating Group on the progress made since the Ministerial 
meeting of May 1997 in developing the MAI.
Ministers decided on a period of assessment and further consulta-
tion between the negotiating parties and with interested parts of 
their societies, and invited the Secretary-General to assist this 
process. Ministers noted that the next meeting of the Negotiating 
Group will be held in October 1998. Ministers directed the 
negotiators to continue their work with the aim of reaching a 
successful and timely conclusion of the MAI and seeking broad 
participation in it. In the same spirit, they support the current 
work programme on investment in the WTO and once the work 
programme has been completed will seek the support of all their 
partners for next steps towards the creation of investment rules 
in the WTO. Ministers recognized the need to complete work on MAI 
disciplines and exceptions with a view to achieving a high 
standard of liberalization and a satisfactory balance of 
commitments, which takes full account of economic concerns and 
political, social and cultural sensitivities. A solution is also 
needed for particular issues relating to extraterritoriality. 
Ministers noted the increased convergence of views on the need 
for the MAI to address environmental protection and labor issues, 
and the broad support for including a strong commitment by 
governments not to lower environmental or labor standards in 
order to attract or retain an investment. Ministers stated their 
commitment to a transparent negotiating process and an active 
public discussion on the issues. For more information contact: 
the OECD; 
e-mail: news.contact@oecd.org; Internet: http://www.oecd.org/
EXPERT PANEL ON TRADE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: The Fourth 
Meeting of the Expert Panel on Trade and Development (EPTSD) was 
held in in Hanoi, Vietnam from 6-8 April 1998. The panel produced 
a methodology for building policy packages that distinguishes 
between principles, guidelines and tools. These three elements 
are “integrated” in the sense that they are internally 
consistent, mutally reinforcing and cover the main issues. The 
group also produced a scheme of three different but interrelated 
products that it will promote among its target audience, i.e., 
government policy makers and the wider policy community: generic 
frameworks; sectoral toolboxes; and model applications of policy 
packages. 
The panel also discussed prospects of engaging policy makers to 
design and implement policy packages using the EPTSD methodology. 
There are two prospects that are particularly promising . First, 
EPTSD initiated discussions and generated interest and commitment 
to develop an Integrated Forestry Policy Project with key actors 
in Vietnam with a vew to feasible and speedy implementation. 
Second, there is interest in applying EPTSD lessons and 
recommendations to the electricity trade in the Mercosur region. 
In particular, these recommendations could be made in time for 
the FCCC COP-4 in Buenos Aires in November. For more information 
contact: Aimee Gonzales, WWF-International; tel: + (41 22) 995-
0302; fax: + (41 22) 364-8219; e-mail: agonzales@wwfnet.org. 
WTO COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT: The Committee on Trade 
and Environment (CTE) met from 19-20 March 1998 and adopted its 
work programme and schedule of meetings for 1998. Discussion was 
devoted to a sectoral analysis of the environmental benefits of 
removing trade restrictions and distortions. Members focused on 
the following sectors: agriculture, energy, fisheries, forestry, 
non-ferrous metals, textiles and clothing, leather and 
environmental services. As a starting point, several Members had 
contributed papers and the Secretariat had prepared a background 
document on the environmental benefits of sectoral trade 
liberalization. The Secretariat's document, WT/CTE/W/67 and its 
addendum, can be accessed at 
http://www.wto.org/ddf/ep/public.html. Canada presented a new pa-
per entitled Forests: A National Experience; Colombia contributed 
a new paper on the Colombian Flower Sector and Eco-labeling and 
its Market Access Impact. New Zealand also presented national 
experiences on the environmental benefits of agricultural 
liberalization and Brazil discussed sustainable soya plantations, 
ethanol fuel and eco-labeling programmes for leather and forest 
products. 
On the provisions of the multilateral trading system with respect 
to the transparency of trade measures used for environmental pur-
poses and environmental measures and requirements, the CTE agreed 
to develop a WTO Environmental Database on environment-related 
notifications under WTO Agreements, which would be updated 
annually by the Secretariat. The Chair said he would consult on a 
US proposal to de-restrict the Secretariat document, prepared for 
this meeting, which contained a review of environment-related 
notifications in the WTO in 1997. The report of the meeting is 
available at http://www.wto.org/wto/environ/te023.htm. 
CLIMATE AND ATMOSPHERE
CLIMATE CHANGE
WWF-JAPAN BUSINESS SYMPOSIUM: The Symposium "Green Electricity-
The Energy Vision to Mitigate Climate Change" was held on 13 July 
1998 in Tokyo. More than 100 people from 80 corporations 
representing various industries attended the symposium. The 
symposium focused on how to promote more renewable sources of 
energy in Japan, since the energy policy of Japan is focused only 
on oil and coal, and on nuclear to "solve the CO2 problem." More 
than three fourths of energy-related R&D budget is used for 
nuclear power and only 3% for renewables.  Even with the in-
creased subsidies and projects for new energy, the target figure 
for renewables in 2010 is only 3.7% as primary energy without 
hydro and only 2% for utility generation capacity.
Participants engaged in discussion sessions on: electric industry 
restructuring in the US; liberalization of electricity and 
natural gas market in Germany; the Tachikawa Town Wind Park; the 
current Japanese utility situation; and the role of the industry 
and the environmental NGOs. During the session, WWF Japan 
proposed: a legal obligation for the utilities to buy electricity 
generated by means of renewable sources of energy at a reasonably 
high price; a legal obligation for the utilities to generate 10% 
of their power by renewable sources of energy such as solar, 
wind, geo-thermal, biomass, and small-scale hydro by 2010; 
provisions for drastic increase of cogeneration from natural gas 
by 2010 to prevent dependence on coal, oil, and also nuclear; 
recognition by the consumers that renewable energy is the energy 
for the future that would mitigate global warming. For more 
information contact: Makiko Mizuno, WWF Japan; tel: +81 03-3769-
1714; or Yurika Ayukawa; tel: +81 03-3769-1713; e-mail: 
yurikaa@ibm.net. 
EMISSIONS TRADING IN INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE PROTECTION WORKSHOP: 
The working group Climate of the German NGO Forum on Environment 
and Development (Forum Umwelt & Entwicklung) and Climate Network 
Europe (CNE) organized a workshop in Bonn on International 
Emissions Trading from 25-26 June 1998. The seminar's aim was to 
allow more German and European NGOs to gain extended background 
knowledge on the subject of emissions trading and to debate the 
definition of the necessary trading rules and guidelines in the 
run-up to the Fourth Conference of the Parties (COP-4) in Buenos 
Aires. In view of the increasingly heated debate on the issue, 
and the importance attached to it by many governments, an in-
depth NGO discussion was felt to be necessary and timely. The 
discussion focused on four questions:
	Which criteria does an international emissions trading 
system have to fulfil to really become an instrument helping to 
reduce emissions?
	How far can these criteria be determined by the COP?
	How far and through which mechanisms and rules in the trad-
ing system can the problem of “hot air” be solved?
	How can further potential loopholes undermining the 
ecological efficiency of the Kyoto Protocol be prevented?
To encourage international participation, the second day’s debate 
was partially conducted in English and more than 50 persons 
attended.  The event attracted not only NGOs, but also several 
research institutes and academics. The views from different 
“constituencies” on the issues were quite diverse, which allowed 
a lively debate.
Most NGOs have a basic ethical concern about trading, noting that 
it allows some industrialized countries to avoid reducing do-
mestic emissions. Given that the aim of the Framework Convention 
on Climate Convention and the Kyoto Protocol is to limit climate 
change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it is not credible 
that many states avoid reducing their own emissions. It is 
especially questionable when the countries with whom trading is 
supposed to happen are poor and often desperate for monetary 
assistance. Furthermore, it is highly disappointing to NGOs that 
in consequence of allowing trading under the Kyoto Protocol, 
stronger targets for GHG reductions were not set, especially for 
countries such as Russia and the Ukraine, which opens up the 
trading regime to further abuse through “hot-air trading.”
NGOs want to see a transparent, equitable trading system that 
truly supports the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, with 
clear penalties attached if over-trading occurs, for both buyers 
and sellers. The rules and modalities for the trading regime need 
to be clear, monitorable and verifiable. As many questions are 
still open and politically sensitive, NGOs cautioned governments 
not to rush into trading. Enough time needs to be allowed for the 
development of the system to fulfil above-mentioned criteria. 
Countries in the meantime need to start implementing the policies 
and measures that make trading ultimately possible.
Many NGOs very strongly felt that the priority for implementing 
the Protocol must lie with domestic policies and measures, 
especially for the biggest polluters, such as the US, Canada, 
Japan and the EU. Most NGOs supported the position that where the 
Protocol states that flexibility mechanisms such as trading 
should be “supplemental” to domestic action, this supplementarity 
needs to be clearly defined. Most NGOs demanded that at COP-4, 
the Parties should decide that the flexibility mechanisms 
together should be limited to a specific percentage, e.g., a 
maximum of 30% of a country’s target. A definite ceiling is 
necessary to ensure that despite the weak targets in the 
Protocol, industrialized nations will be ready for the much 
deeper cuts required for the second budget period of 2012-2017. 
To achieve the ultimate aim of the convention—preventing 
dangerous climate change—it is those countries responsible for 
most of the world’s CO2 emissions that need to change the way in 
which they produce and consume energy. Their energy and transport 
infrastructure must be prepared for the needed reductions still 
to come, which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 
(IPCC) determined to be 60-80%, with further reductions 
thereafter. Many NGOs stated that it is obviously the rich 
nations that can research and develop, as well as promote to 
achieve economies of scale, the technologies for a sustainable 
energy society. This in turn will allow developing countries to 
pursue an environmentally benign energy path resulting in 
equitable energy services for all. The proceedings (in German) of 
this workshop will be published shortly. They can be ordered at 
the Forum Umwelt & Entwicklung; e-mail: forum.ue@t-online.de. 
EMISSIONS TRADING "BRAINSTORMING" FORUM: The IGES climate change 
project held an emissions trading "brainstorming" workshop from 
21-22 June 1998 at IGES in Hayama, Japan. The purpose of the 
forum is to start discussions on emissions trading. Japan has no 
experience in this field but must utilize the regime in order to 
meet the quantified commitment of the Kyoto Protocol. Around 40 
policymakers, industry representatives, researchers and 
environmental NGOs attended. Participants discussed international 
and general aspects of the emissions trading, such as: the 
ability of emissions trading to actually "reduce" emissions; the 
supplementarity issue; impacts on technology innovation and/or 
penetration; and seller's liability or buyer's (mixed/shared) li-
ability. They also focused on issues related to domestic regime 
making and allocation related issues, including: allocation 
criteria; auction-related issues; allocation level; "rent" issue 
related to up-stream allocation; and an early-reduction credit 
system. 
The IGES has also released a paper "Points and Proposals on 
Emissions Trading of Climate Change (ver.1)" by N. Matsuo. This 
report summarizes the points of the GHGs emissions trading and 
other flexibility measures accepted in the Kyoto Protocol aiming 
at identifying how the regime works efficiently and what points 
should be settled. Proposals are also mentioned especially 
focusing on the emissions trading based on the author’s current 
opinion. For more information contact the Institute for Global 
Environmental Strategies (IGES)  Climate Change Project; tel: 
+81-468-55-3812; fax:  +81-468-55-3809; e-mail: 
n_matsuo@iges.or.jp; 
Internet: http://www.iges.or.jp/
SUBSIDIARY BODIES OF THE UN FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE 
CHANGE: The subsidiary bodies of the UN Framework Convention on 
Climate Change (FCCC) met from 2-12 June 1998 in Bonn, Germany. 
These were the first formal FCCC meetings since the adoption of 
the Kyoto Protocol at the Third Conference of the Parties (COP-3) 
in December 1997. The eighth session of the Subsidiary Body for 
Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA-8) agreed to draft 
conclusions on, inter alia, cooperation with relevant 
international organizations, methodological issues, and education 
and training. The eighth session of the Subsidiary Body for 
Implementation (SBI) reached conclusions on, inter alia, national 
communications, the financial mechanism and the second review of 
adequacy of Annex I Party commitments. In its sixth session, the 
Ad Hoc Group on Article 13 (AG13) concluded its work on the 
functions of the Multilateral Consultative Process (MCP). After 
joint SBI/SBSTA consideration and extensive contact group debates 
on the flexibility mechanisms, delegates could only agree to a 
compilation document containing proposals from the G-77/China, 
the EU and the US.
After the colorful displays of prowess, endurance and dexterity 
at "the big game" in Kyoto, some delegations in Bonn found them-
selves drawn to the Piano Bar at the Maritim Hotel to recapture a 
sense of purpose and excitement by viewing the opening games of 
the World Cup displayed on a life-size screen. Participants at 
the first post-Kyoto subsidiary body meetings in Bonn encountered 
a distinct and worrying loss of momentum caused, in part, by 
unresolved negotiation of the priorities for the COP-4 agenda in 
Buenos Aires. Moreover, some key issues for discussion have 
generated at least two "world views" around their meaning and 
significance. The full ENB report is available at 
http://enb.iisd.org/vol12/enb1286e.html.
WORKSHOP ON “DEALING WITH CARBON CREDITS AFTER KYOTO: From 28-29 
May 1998, ETC Netherlands and JIN foundation organized an expert 
meeting on “Dealing with Carbon Credits” in Callantsoog, the 
Netherlands. The aim of the meeting was to discuss several issues 
that are linked to the introduction of flexibility instruments 
(Cooperative Implementation) in the Kyoto Protocol. The workshop 
was sponsored by the Netherlands JI Management Group, the 
Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the US Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA), and the US Harvard University. About 70 
participants from 26 countries discussed the three mechanisms of 
“Cooperative Implementation” (CI) under the Kyoto Protocol (KP). 
The presentations and discussions focused on various conceptual 
and practical issues related to the types of credits associated 
with these mechanisms (see box 1), such as: credit allocation: 
modalities of co-operation?; credit value, liquidity and banking; 
and institutional setting for dealing with credits. The central 
question for the discussion was how the mechanisms of CI can be 
made compatible in order to support the objectives of the FCCC. 
The discussions resulted in a range of opinions and possible 
answers 
With respect to credit allocation it was argued whether the 
sharing of credits from JI and CDM projects should be left to the 
Parties involved or should be guided by COP/MOP. Many 
participants felt that sharing JI and CDM credits should not be 
subject to fixed rules. They argued that a JI/CDM project is a 
package deal of which the GHG emission reduction is simply a 
component. In some projects this component will be larger than in 
other projects and some Parties may, for one reason or another, 
not even be interested in credits. A fixed rule for credit 
sharing determined by COP may therefore not always be beneficial 
for the Parties involved.
Other participants, however, argued that it is important that 
each Party involved in a JI/CDM project has sufficient 
institutional and personnel capacity to negotiate credit-sharing 
deals. Leaving aside fixed rules for credit sharing could hamper 
the negotiation position of host countries with insufficient 
institutional capacity. Furthermore, it was argued that monopoly 
and monopsony positions on the credits market should be 
prevented, so as to enable small parties to play a role as well.
Another question raised was the issue whether sinks should be el-
igible for CDM projects. Article. 12 of the Protocol only refers 
to emission reduction projects, whereas Article 6 explicitly 
includes the sinks option. There was also a more legal debate in 
which some participants argued that the term emission reduction 
in the Protocol does not necessarily imply that sinks are 
excluded. There were a considerable number of participants who 
believed that sinks should not be excluded as an option of CDM 
projects, provided that restrictions were made with respect to 
some technical issues that have to be addressed first.
There was a discussion on the issue of whether private sector 
parties should be able to participate in emissions trading under 
Article 17. Some participants argued that Article 17 implies that 
only Parties to the Protocol can settle emissions trading deals. 
Others argued that Parties could translate their national targets 
to individual, among other things private sector, targets and 
that such individual parties could –in principle– trade these 
“allowances” with private parties in other countries, either 
directly or via the national governments. Some participants, 
however, argued that in the latter case the distinction between 
the two options would only be a theoretical one.
Finally, with regard to modalities of credit allocation several 
participants argued that there should be no link between the 
credits that non-Annex I Parties receive from CDM projects and 
their possible future commitments under the FCCC. These 
participants argued that it should not be the case that non-Annex 
I Parties that acquire credits between 2000-2012 have to agree on 
tighter commitments at a later moment in time.
The section of the workshop on liquidity, value and banking 
mainly focused on the issue of how to deal with early reductions 
from JI and CDM projects. The Protocol allows for banking of 
emission reductions from CDM projects between 2000 and 2008 to be 
added to amounts assigned to Annex I Parties (during 2008-2012). 
Such a banking facility, however, does not exist for JI projects. 
The question was whether early reductions from JI projects should 
also be banked and added to the assigned amounts.
The discussion on this issue resulted in three different points 
of view: JI banking should only be allowed if the total assigned 
amount of Annex I Parties remains constant, e.g. if two Annex I 
Parties use early reductions from a JI project all Annex I 
Parties need to compensate for this through a reduction of their 
individual assigned amount. Thus inflation of the assigned amount 
can be prevented. JI banking should be allowed without 
compensation measures. First, early reductions could have several 
environmental positive side effects. Second, some participants 
argued that inflating the assigned amount did not appear to be a 
problem when banking was included in the Protocol for CDM: so why 
should it be a topic for JI now? JI banking should not be allowed 
as it may result in “swapping” deals, e.g. OECD Parties can 
invest in other OECD countries and obtain credits as of 2000 
instead of between 2008 and 2012 in case of domestic action. In 
general, it was argued that if banking of early reductions from 
JI projects were allowed without an “inflation correction”, an 
amendment to the Protocol is required since Art. 6 says that the 
transfer of emission reduction units has to come from the 
assigned amounts of Annex I Parties.
With respect to capacity building in potential host countries for 
CDM projects the participants argued that assistance should be 
given to enable host countries to be better able to absorb and 
negotiate about projects. However, such assistance should not be 
confused with the funding for administrative assistance and 
adaptation for developing countries as defined in Art. 12.8. 
There was a debate on whether funding for capacity building 
should come from the certified emission reductions or be provided 
via financial transfers.
Finally, there was a lively debate on the issue of compliance. 
The question was: who is responsible for the liability of 
emissions trading credits (Article 17) if the selling Party 
eventually does not comply with the commitments under the 
Protocol? The discussion resulted in the following answers: 
	The seller should be liable. If the buyers of emissions 
trading credits were liable, they will add different risk 
premiums to the price of the credits that the seller will have to 
compensate for through different prices. As a result emission 
reduction credits will not be a homogeneous good and therefore 
more difficult to trade. 
	The buyer of emissions trading credits should be liable. If 
the liability were left to the selling party, the system may not 
be closed: the buyer can still use the credits but it may be 
difficult to penalize the party that has oversold. It does not 
have to be a problem that buyers add different risk premiums to 
credits from different countries since this may stimulate the 
seller to comply. There should be a “yellow flag” shortly before 
2008 if there is any doubt about the compliance of potential 
sellers.
On 3 June 1998, the organizers of the workshop presented the 
findings at a special event at SBSTA- 8 in Bonn. The proceedings 
of the workshop are scheduled to be published in the autumn of 
1998. Fore more information contact: Wytze van der Gaast, JIN 
foundation, Meerkoetlaan 30A, 9765 TD Groningen, the Netherlands; 
tel/fax: +31 50 3096815; e-mail: jiq@northsea.nl; 
Internet: http://www.northsea.nl/jiq/confer.htm
CONFERENCE ON OCEAN CIRCULATION AND CLIMATE: A Conference, “Ocean 
Circulation and Climate,” was held in Halifax, Canada from 24-29 
May to discuss the successful conclusion of the observational 
part of WOCE, the International World Ocean Circulation 
Experiment. Nearly 400 oceanographers from 30 countries attended. 
They surveyed the current state of knowledge concerning the 
relation between the ocean circulation and the earth’s climate 
and reviewed what further was needed to meet the goals of the 
programme. These goals were to provide the basis for the design 
of a rational cost-effective observing system for detecting 
climate change and to develop and test ocean models useful for 
predicting climate change.
The format for the conference included both formal overview talks 
and informal poster sessions. Participants agreed that the intel-
lectual stimulation of the talks and the animated discussions 
over the posters bode well for the continuing momentum of the 
programme, which now enters a phase of analysis and synthesis of 
the results. To aid these new tasks each participant was 
presented with a set of 16 CD-ROMs containing data collected 
during the programme. The data ranged in type from that gathered 
from ships, from drifting and moored instruments and from 
satellite surveillance. A book of the conference is planned, 
describing the current state of the subject, and workshops will 
explore progress in different areas of the programme until the 
year 2002.  The Scientific organizing committee, the Inter-nation 
Project Office and the local organizers, have all been heartened 
by the enthusiasm with which the participants left to tackle the 
formidable remaining tasks. Further information on the World 
Ocean Circulation Experiment can be found at 
www.soc.soton.ac.uk/OTHERS/woceipo
LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN SEMINAR ON GREENHOUSE GASES: The 
UNEP Centre on Energy and Environment (UCCEE) is finalizing the 
Project “Economic Aspects of Limiting Greenhouse Gases,” 
sponsored by UNEP and funded by the GEF and the Danish 
International Development Assistance (DANIDA). The project is 
aimed at contributing to the development of the methodological 
groundwork for the preparation of the national communications 
envisaged in the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC). 
To discuss the results of the project in the region, the Latin 
American Energy Organization (OLADE) organized the Latin American 
and Caribbean Seminar on Greenhouse Gases, held in Quito, from 
21-22 May 1998.
The seminar sought to: present and discuss the methodologies and 
results of the UNEP-GEF Project; present and discuss important 
aspects of climate change problems, especially for the Latin 
American and Caribbean energy sector, and promote the exchange of 
experiences and contacts between representatives. There were 109 
participants from different institutions attending the seminar.
The event enabled representatives of the region’s energy sector 
to understand the growing implications of climate change problems 
for sector development in particular and the region’s economy in 
general. For those participants already acquainted with this 
topic, coming from the environmental sector, or representing 
entities involved in climate change negotiations, the seminar 
provided them with the opportunity to learn about the latest 
achievements and the recent evolution of this process.
As an event prior to the Seminar, on May 20, OLADE organized the 
Technical Meeting on Greenhouse Gases with representatives from 
its member countries. The Technical Meeting’s objective was to 
facilitate the task of defining, on the part of the member 
countries of OLADE, criteria to provide the groundwork for the 
Organization’s cooperation in the area of greenhouse gases. The 
Technical Meeting made recommendations that will be submitted to 
the upcoming Meeting of Ministers of OLADE, scheduled for 
November 1998 in the Dominican Republic, for its approval. For 
information contact: Latin American Energy Organization (OLADE), 
Quito, Ecuador; tel: +(5932) 539 675; fax: +(5932) 539-684, 539-
679, or 595-674; e-mail: gases@olade.org.ec; 
Internet: http://www.olade.org.ec/ingles/iolade.htm
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS TRADING: The 
International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading, 
held in Sydney, Australia from 21-22 May 1998, brought together 
leading climate change policy analysts, policy makers and 
negotiators, environmental specialists and business executives. 
Many questions will need to be resolved promptly if emissions 
trading is to become part of the climate change policy solution, 
such as: how much more cost effective than the alternatives could 
an emissions trading mechanism be; how big is the gap between the 
theory and the practical realities; what are the design and 
implementation issues that will need to be resolved; could there 
be losers as well as winners and, if so, what can be done about 
this; and what are the appropriate roles of government and the 
private sector in designing and implementing an optimal emissions 
trading scheme and what will be the necessary conditions for com-
mitted private sector involvement? 
To answer these questions, the conference brought together lead-
ing international climate change policy researchers; key Annex B 
climate change policy makers and negotiators, particularly from 
the Pacific Basin countries; representatives of industries likely 
to be strongly affected by climate change policy; representatives 
of finance sector institutions that could support an 
international emissions trading mechanism; and experts from 
environmental and other interested NGOs and community groups. The 
Conference was limited to 250 delegates.
 The conference was designed not only as a forum for the exchange 
of ideas and opinion, but also as a means of enhancing the 
international policy research effort and informing international 
policy development. To help achieve the intended outcomes, the 
conference combined plenary sessions and a number of parallel 
workshops devoted to in depth exploration of the key issues. The 
workshops were designed to identify the most important research, 
policy and institutional ways forward. The findings of the work-
shops were discussed at the concluding plenary session. For more 
information contact Australian Bureau of Agricultural and 
Resource Economics (ABARE); GPO Box 1563, Canberra ACT 2601, Aus-
tralia; tel: 61 +2 6272 2000; fax: 61 +2 6272 2001; e-mail: 
dflamia@abare.gov.au; 
Internet: http://www.abare.gov.au/service/emission/general.htm
CONFERENCE ON CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION IN AFRICA: This 
conference was held in Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe from 18–20 May 
1998. The Conference, which was attended by 70 participants, was 
held as part of the final stage of the UNEP/GEF project 
“Economics of Climate Change Limitation,” in parallel with 
regional conferences held in Latin America, Asia and Eastern Eu-
rope. The regional conferences were arranged to serve as fora for 
presentation of the methodological framework, results and experi-
ence of the national studies, and their relevance and 
replicability in the region. The countries involved directly in 
the mitigation studies presented comprised Botswana, Egypt, 
Mauritius, Senegal, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe, as well as the 
regional study of southern Africa. In all 24 African countries 
were represented at the conference as well as representatives 
from the UNEP Centre Denmark, DANIDA, GTZ, UNDP and UNEP.
Three presentations laid out the common methodology that has been 
used in the GEF/UNEP and DANIDA studies on national climate 
change mitigation. Questions of the presenters primarily focused 
upon specific details of the methodological process – that is, 
clarifications on particular elements of the guidelines.  
Participants asked, for example, for clarifications about how 
labor was costed, about the difference between short- and long-
run cost curves and about the macroeconomic assumptions employed 
by the models.
Participants and speakers also noted that mitigation is but only 
one element of climate change studies.  Among other elements, 
climate change impacts (and the “economics” thereof) would also 
be important in national decision-making; that is not explicitly 
investigated within the framework of this set of projects.
Many speakers stressed the importance of relating the mitigation 
options and scenarios to national development priorities.  
Moreover, not only is it important to relate the climate change 
options to developmental aspirations, but also to present those 
results in terms that are understandable by, and useful to, 
policy-makers.
The value of having stakeholders – government, business, NGOs and 
others – involved in the process from the beginning was stressed 
by many participants.  This will not only increase the potential 
impact of the findings, but it will also most likely improve the 
quality of the study as well. The dynamic nature of the 
mitigation analyses was stressed. If additional information is 
provided at some point, then elements of the study – that is, the 
baseline and the scenarios – should be amended appropriately.
The final day was devoted to regional mitigation and to a general 
discussion relating climate change mitigation activities to 
national development. The regional discussion was specifically 
devoted to the study of mitigation potential in Southern Africa 
within the UNEP/GEF project “Economics of Climate Change 
Limitation”. Ian Rowlands presented theoretical ideas on regional 
cooperation for climate change mitigation, followed by Norbert 
Nziramasanga and Peter Zhou on regional (SADC) power-sector and 
transport options, respectively.
The final session offered an opportunity for comments and con-
tributions from participants who had not been involved in 
mitigation analysis, or who were just starting. The general 
impression was positive. In particular, the major objective of 
the UNEP/GEF studies for capacity building within African 
countries in climate change mitigation analysis was demonstrated 
to have been successful. For information contact UNEP 
Collaborating Centre; tel: + 45 46 32 22 88; fax: + 45 46 32 19 
99; e-mail: gordon.mackenzie@risoe.dk; 
Internet: www.risoe.dk/sys-ucc.
THIRD GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS TRADING POLICY FORUM: The Third 
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Policy Forum, organized by the 
Earth Council and the United Nations Conference on Trade and 
Development (UNCTAD) was held in London from 13-15 May 1998. More 
than 170 representatives of business, government agencies and 
non-governmental organizations from 29 countries discussed ways 
of implementing a first-phase project for international trading 
of greenhouse gas emissions, a key element in the Kyoto Protocol. 
Participants agreed on a set of policy framework and market 
design principles to guide development of a draft international 
legal instrument for greenhouse gas emissions trading. 
In a plenary session, UNCTAD Secretary-General Rubens Ricupero, 
stressed the importance of using economic instruments to advance 
the goals of sustainable development. Other plenary speakers 
included Dr. Klaus Töpfer, Executive Director of UNEP and Chris-
tine Zurnkeller, of the UNFCCC Secretariat spoke to participants 
about the process leading from Kyoto to the Fourth Conference of 
the Parties (COP4) in Buenos Aires in November. A panel, includ-
ing business leaders and government officials, addressed the 
themes of emissions markets and climate protection. The managing 
director of British Petroleum presented BP's new "sustainability 
agenda," which includes a greenhouse gas emission trading scheme 
within the group. Ambassador Elsa Kelly of Argentina, chair of 
COP-4, outlined her goal of enabling certain elements of the 
Kyoto Protocol to come into effect soon after COP-4. This could 
include the proposed Clean Development Mechanism, which permits 
financial and technical flows to developing countries in return 
for action on climate change. 
Working Groups on markets and policy framework, wherein par-
ticipants focused on priority issues critical to developing a 
greenhouse gas trading system, including certification, 
verification and reporting, monitoring and accountability and 
associated legal issues. For more information, please contact: 
Stephanie Foster, Earth Council, Toronto, Canada; tel. +1 (416) 
498-3150, fax +1 (416) 498-7296, e-mail: ecfoster@web.net. 
IPCC WORKSHOP ON ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE AND VARIABILITY: 
The IPCC Workshop on Adaptation to Climate Change and Variability 
was held in San Jose, Costa Rica from 29 March - 1 April 1998 and 
hosted by the governments of Costa Rica, Canada, Japan and Earth 
Council. The workshop focused on adaptation science (theory) and 
adaptive management (practice) to both climate variability and 
climate change. Adaptation measures or options were part of both 
the science and adaptive management discussions. The format of 
the workshop was designed to help understand the current state of 
knowledge on adaptation science and adaptive management and the 
conditions under which adaptation measures or options can reduce 
vulnerability to climate variability and change. It also sought 
to develop an assessment framework for adaptation for possible 
use in the IPCC Third Assessment Report (TAR). The TAR will 
support the development and implementation of the FCCC. 
A Summary Report to IPCC that included recommendations was 
prepared following the workshop. A workshop summary, which 
compliments the Summary Report to the IPCC, is also available. 
Some countries are already using the Summary Report as a template 
for a possible national work plan on adaptation to climate 
variability and change. For more information contact: Don C. 
MacIver, Environment Canada; tel: +1 (416) 739-4391; fax: +1 
(416) 739-4882; e-mail: don.maciver@ec.gc.ca.
OECD/IEA FORUM ON CLIMATE CHANGE: The OECD and IEA sponsored the 
fourth Forum on Climate Change in Paris from 12-13 March 1998. 
The objective's of this year's forum were: to review the Kyoto 
Protocol to consider international priorities and analytical work 
to support implementation of the Protocol; to deepen 
understanding of some key issues, such as the new flexibility 
mechanisms and the possible role of technology cooperation with 
developing countries; and to consider next steps and implications 
of the Protocol for the broad FCCC audience. 
The Forum hosted more than 200 participants including delegates 
from 45 countries, as well as representatives from multilateral 
organizations, environmental NGOs, trade unions and industry. 
Discussion over the two days began with broad perspectives on the 
Protocol and priorities for its implementation. The programmes 
also covered, in some depth three issues: the flexibility 
mechanisms; approaches for technology cooperation and 
application; and the connection between climate change policy 
objectives and development cooperation and finance. The Forum 
provided a neutral setting for open dialogue and exchange among 
national government representatives and stakeholders. 
Participants identified a number of specific issues as priorities 
for future work for COP-4. 
The OECD has proposed to embark on a new high-level and in-
terdisciplinary effort to address climate change as a key 
component of a wider strategy for further OECD work on 
sustainable development. The Forum endorsed the integrated OECD 
work programme, which will involve several directorates, 
including IEA, the European conference of the Ministers of 
Transport, the Development Centre and the Nuclear Energy 
Association. The OECD wide work programmes spans a range of 
relevant policy areas, including macroeconomic analyses of policy 
strategies; technology assessment; technology collaboration and 
development of cooperation approaches. For more information 
contact: the OECD; 
e-mail: news.contact@oecd.org; Internet: http://www.oecd.org/
TUFTS UNIVERSITY CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE: Tufts University 
sponsored the conference "Where Do We Go From Kyoto" in Medford, 
Massachusetts, US on 27 February 1998 to explore the implications 
and opportunities of the Kyoto Protocol, not only as an 
implementation instrument for the FCCC, but as an agreement of 
far reaching consequences that has the potential to influence 
every sector of the economy around the entire world. Conference 
speakers included representatives from all levels of the US 
government, scientific research organizations, academic institu-
tions, business and industry groups and environmental NGOs. 
Participants recognized that successful implementation of the 
Protocol requires recasting it as a new basis for attaining 
sustainable development. The discussion suggested a more 
productive approach to implementing the provisions of the 
Protocol. The original view that was instrumental in the adoption 
of the FCCC needs to be brought back to the center stage, that 
the agreement and the Protocol should be seen as the first steps 
in a new approach to sustainable development. The question is how 
to utilize the provisions of the Protocol to most effectively 
assist the development process. 
Regarding the Clean Development Mechanism, participants discussed 
the need to clarify issues such as the administration of the CDM, 
how CDM agreements will be made, how baselines are worked out 
without national caps, which developing countries currently lack. 
Another mechanism, joint implementation, provides industrialized 
countries to act jointly to reduce their aggregate emissions. 
Participants expressed concern that the significant present 
reductions from 1990 levels that have occurred in Russia and 
other Eastern European countries not be utilized to offset the 
real reductions that are called for in Europe, North America and 
Japan. On emissions trading, key issues discussed were: how the 
permitting systems would be administered and enforced; whether 
permits would be traded among nations or among firms; how the 
permits would be issued to nations or firms; whether permits 
would be auctioned or given away; and whether the trading regime 
would be extended to developing countries. 
Participants concluded that there are competing views as to what 
is fair and affordable, and it is essential that a reasonable 
balance among these views be achieved. Industrial countries need 
to implement greenhouse gases domestically both to demonstrate 
their commitment, and to carry their share of responsibility. 
Developing countries and economies in transition can benefit if 
some reductions occur in a manner that assist their economic 
development process. For more information contact: Global 
Development and Environment Institute, Cabot Center, Fletcher 
School of Law and Diplomacy; tel: +1 (617) 627-3530; fax: +1 
(617) 627-3712; e-mail: gade@emerald.tufts.edu.

OZONE
OPEN-ENDED WORKING GROUP OF PARTIES TO THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL: The 
Open-ended Working Group of Parties to the Montreal Protocol met 
from 6-10 July 1998 in Geneva. Parties called for tougher action 
to protect the earth's ozone layer, including rapid 
implementation of new controls to tackle the growing illegal 
trade in banned substances. The meeting of officials from nearly 
100 countries also called for better cooperation with UN bodies 
working on climate change. Certain "ozone-safe" substitutes, de-
veloped to replace chlorofluoro-carbons (CFCs), and other "ozone-
gobblers" are now recognized to contribute to global warming, 
which scientists predict will slow the healing process of the 
ozone layer.
According to the latest scientific assessment published last 
month, the ozone shield will be at its thinnest by 2000 or 2001 
before slowly recovering over the next 50 years. Stratospheric 
ozone protects life on earth from the damaging effects of ultra-
violet light, which can cause skin cancers and cataracts. The 
"ozone-safe" substitutes, known as HFCs and PFCs, are targeted in 
the Kyoto Protocol , which requires governments to cut greenhouse 
gas emissions.
This has produced the paradoxical result that countries are being 
urged to use HFCs and PFCs under the 1987 Montreal Protocol and 
discouraged to use them under the Kyoto Protocol. The officials, 
meeting in Geneva, did not attempt to solve this contradiction, 
but asked the scientific experts for the Montreal Protocol to 
cooperate with their climate change counterparts. The issue will 
become more important from next year when developing countries 
must start the process of phasing out production of CFCs and 
other ozone-depleting substances by 2010. Most industrialized 
countries have already phased out such substances. China, India 
and Russia are the world's biggest producers of CFCs, which are 
used in refrigeration and air-conditioning systems.
The meeting also looked at how to bring into operation by 2000 an 
international trade registration system aimed at cracking down on 
a thriving black market in CFC gases, worth hundreds of millions 
of dollars annually. Officials fear that smuggling of cheap CFCs 
will become a more serious problem, once consumers in developing 
countries face controls on their use and a requirement to use 
often more expensive substitutes. 
National governments are also being urged to take action to re-
duce emissions of halons, which are used mostly in fire 
extinguishers, and stop two new substances - chloro-bromomethane 
and n-propyl bromide - from being marketed as "ozone-safe" 
substitutes. For more information contact: K. Madhava Sarma, 
Ozone Secretariat, UNEP, Nairobi; tel: +254-2-62-3851; fax: +254-
2-521930; e-mail: ozoninfo@unep.org.
FORESTS
INTERNATIONAL EXPERT CONSULTATION ON IPF PROPOSALS: The 
International Expert Consultation on "Putting the IPF Proposals 
for Action into Practice at the National Level," took place from 
29 June-3 July 1998 in Baden-Baden, Germany. The Consultation was 
the culmination of the International Forum on Forests (IFF) 
Government-led Six-Country Initiative. The Initiative, undertaken 
by Finland, Germany, Honduras, Indonesia, Uganda and the United 
Kingdom, aims to improve the implementation of the IPF Proposals 
for Action at the national level through the elaboration of 
recommendations based on the results of a case study exercise in-
volving countries from the six participating countries and the 
International Expert Consultation. 
The Consultation was attended by 109 experts from 37 countries, 
representing governments, international organizations, NGOs, the 
private sector and development agencies. Over the course of the 
week, participants met in plenary, participated in a panel 
discussion and took part in four parallel working groups. They 
heard and compared experiences from the case study exercise and 
developed ideas and recommendations on implementing the IPF 
Proposals for Action at the national level. Participants also 
took part in sustainable forest management excursions to three 
different forest sites in the surroundings of Baden-Baden.
The primary outcome of the Consultation was a summary report of 
the weeks discussions, conclusions and recommendations. This 
Report of the International Expert Consultation will be submitted 
as a conference paper to the second meeting of the IFF to be held 
24 August - 4 September 1998 in Geneva. The Report contains twen-
ty-two conclusions and ten recommendations pertaining to the 
international and national level.
The Report of the International Expert Consultation describes the 
Consultations' findings on aspects of implementing the Proposals, 
including mechanisms, stakeholder participation and standards, 
monitoring and reporting, and improvement of the effectiveness of 
international processes in implementing the Proposals. The Report 
draws twenty-two conclusions and makes ten recommendations to-
wards improving implementation of the IPF Proposals for Action at 
the national and international levels. 
Recommendations at the national level call for: 
	 Countries to undertake a systematic assessment of the Pro-
posals for implementation in the context of their national pro-
cesses for SFM, adapting the experiences of the Six-Country 
exercise to their situations, with an improved Practitioner's 
Guide
	Countries to implement the Proposals in the context of 
their NFP or similar instrument in a coordinated, participatory 
manner, with: measurable targets and indicators; continuing 
review of the policy framework for inter-sectoral planning, 
coordination and implementation; and adequate resource allocation
	Countries to set a focal point to guide and coordinate 
assessment and implementation of the Proposals, including facili-
tating participation and liaising with the international level
	Mechanisms for stakeholder participation to be improved, 
building on existing arrangements and applying a step-by-step 
approach beginning with awareness-raising on participation 
opportunities and the international agenda
	Countries to develop ways of organizing monitoring and 
reporting on Proposal implementation, possibly including 
implementation process and results, within the context of 
monitoring NFPs
Recommendations at the international level call for:
	Results of international processes to be communicated in a 
clear and practical manner, ensuring adequate participation of 
persons and institutions involved in the management of the forest 
sector at national and sub-national levels and key stakeholder 
groups
	The methodology of the Six-Country exercise, including the 
Practitioners' Guide, to be made available to other countries, 
with the Guide improved for use as appropriate in national 
assessment processes
	The IFF to consider inviting an independent body to prepare 
a comprehensible guide to the IPF report and its Proposals in all 
major languages, for broad dissemination
	The international community to assist developing countries 
and countries with economies in transition in assessing and 
implementing the Proposals as needed, using NFPs as a framework 
for channeling development assistance, particularly for building 
up participatory mechanisms and innovative financing instruments
	The IFF to encourage voluntary reporting to CSD on progress 
in implementation, and to develop a common methodology, based on 
national experiences and monitoring systems, for monitoring and 
reporting, which can serve as a tool for effective feedback
	The IFF to consider the possible implications of the Kyoto 
Protocol for SFM
	The IFF to assess the role and potential of international 
instruments in supporting national implementation of the Propos-
als.
The full Sustainable Developments report on the workshop is 
available at http://enb.iisd.org/forestry/badenbaden.html
BIODIVERSITY
RECONSTITUTED ECOSYSTEM CONSERVATION GROUP MEETING: The Inter-
agency Ecosystem Conservation Group (ECG), which met on 9 July 
1998 in Rome, was convened by UNEP and the FAO. Delegates 
discussed the future mandate and composition of the ECG, which 
was originally set-up to promote better cooperation and joint 
implementation of relevant ecosystem and genetic resources 
conservation activities. The reconstitution of the ECG was 
initiated by UNEP Executive Director at the fourth meeting of the 
Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological 
Diversity in Bratislava earlier this year. 
Since the ECG last met, a great deal has happened in the field of 
the environment. At the international level, Agenda 21 was 
adopted at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in 
1992, the UN’s Commission on Sustainable Development created, and 
various international legal instruments have come into force, 
notably, (for the ECG), the Convention on Biological Diversity. 
At the Bratislava meeting in May, Töpfer called for an active 
role for the ECG in the implementation of biodiversity-related 
agreements. He repeated his call for an ECG that would help 
enhance the substantive linkages between the various legal 
instruments now in place. He said a more focused ECG is needed to 
identify areas of cooperation in specific programmes and projects 
and in exchange of information, particularly in connection with 
the implementation of the work programme of the Intergovernmental 
Forum on Forests and biodiversity-related conventions. 
The new envisaged role of the ECG was mentioned in the report of 
the United Nations Task Force on the Environment and Human 
Settlement, submitted to Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, on 15 
June. The ECG was singled out as an example of a “working group” 
of representatives from the main institutions involved in a 
particular issue working together to solve important 
environmental problems. Groups such as the ECG would provide 
coordinated input on clusters of issues into a proposed high-
level inter-agency Environment Management Group (EMG), chaired by 
the Executive Director of UNEP, and reporting directly to the UN 
Secretary-General.  The establishment of the EMG, as recommended 
by the Task Force, would help achieve effective coordination and 
joint action in key areas of environmental and human settlements 
concern.
The ECG was established in 1974. Current members include: UNEP, 
FAO, the UN Educational and Scientific Organisation, UN 
Development Programme, the World Bank, World Conservation Union 
(IUCN) and the World-wide Fund for Nature (WWF). Observers 
include: the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, 
World Conservation Monitoring Centre and the World Resources 
Institute. For more information, please contact: Robert Bisset, 
Media and Communications Officer, UNEP; tel. +254-2-62-3084; fax. 
+254-2-62-3692; e-mail. robert.bisset@unep.org; 
Internet: http://www.unep.org
FOURTH MEETING OF THE CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES TO THE CONVENTION 
ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY: The Fourth Meeting of the Conference of 
the Parties (COP-4) to the Convention on Biological Diversity 
(CBD) took place from 4-15 May 1998 in Bratislava, Slovakia. 
Meeting for the first time in eighteen months, delegates to the 
COP had a broad agenda that included, inter alia: inland water, 
marine and coastal, agricultural and forest biodiversity; the 
clearing-house mechanism (CHM); biosafety; implementation of 
Article 8(j) (traditional knowledge); access and benefit sharing; 
a review of the operations of the Convention; national reports; 
administrative and budgetary matters; and a review of the 
financial mechanism. A Ministerial Roundtable was held on 4-5 
May. Ministers, Deputy Ministers and special guests discussed 
integrating biodiversity concerns into sectoral activities, 
tourism as an example for integration, and private sector 
participation in implementing the Convention's objectives. COP-4 
adopted work programmes on a number of thematic issue areas, 
established a working group on implementation of Article 8(j) and 
laid out the agenda for the next three COPs. 
The decision on biosafety provides for two more meetings to fi-
nalize the biosafety protocol, the first to take place from 17-28 
August 1998 and the second in early 1999, followed by an 
extraordinary meeting of the COP to adopt the protocol. The deci-
sion on inland water ecosystems stresses synergies with the 
Ramsar Convention and cooperation with the CSD, particularly with 
respect to its Strategic Approach to Freshwater Management. It 
requests SBSTTA to implement the work programme with respect to 
the timeframe outlined in Annex II and to provide a progress 
report to COP-5. On marine and coastal biodiversity, the draft 
decision considers threats to coral reefs as a possible 
consequence of global warming, urges cooperation with the UN 
Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) and the Ramsar 
Convention, and requests that SBSTTA analyze coral bleaching and 
report to COP-5. 
Delegates debated several issues on forest biodiversity at length 
including, language on the CBD's relationship to the GEF and the 
IFF, guidance to SBSTTA, and several alternative proposals for an 
intersessional body. The final decision calls for, inter alia: 
collaboration towards implementing the work programme; 
incorporation of forest biodiversity considerations in 
collaborative activities; a synthesized report on information 
provided in national reports; and advice on forest biodiversity 
from SBSTTA to the COP. The work programme's objectives include: 
complementing national forest and land use programmes; promoting 
traditional forest-related knowledge in sustainable forest 
management and the equitable sharing of benefits; identifying 
mechanisms to facilitate financing; contributing to other 
international processes, including the IFF; and contributing to 
access to and transfer of technology. It "reflects a rolling 
three-year planning horizon in three phases," leaving the COP to 
"identify a rolling longer-term work programme," and recommends 
periodic review and development of the work programme, with in-
terim reports after each phase. 
On agricultural biodiversity, debate centered on use of the term 
"terminator technology" and the approach SBSTTA should take in 
determining the effects such technology has on agrobiodiversity. 
Delegates agreed to a compromise, urging consideration rather 
than adoption of the precautionary approach, but deleted 
"terminator technology," and replacing "threats" with 
"consequences." The final decision also: emphasizes balance 
between production and conservation objectives; reaffirms harmony 
with the International Undertaking (IU) and urges completion of 
IU negotiations before the end of 1999; and calls on 
international funding agencies and the financial mechanism to 
support capacity building. The decision also requests the 
Secretariat to report on the impact of trade liberalization on 
agrobiodiversity and to apply for observer status in the WTO's 
Committee on Agriculture. 
On Article 8(j), delegates considered the development of an in-
tersessional work process or group, but opinions varied as to its 
form. Proposals were made for either a working group that is 
open-ended ad hoc, open-ended or ad hoc or for a small, tightly 
focused ad hoc expert panel. Many delegates also called for, 
inter alia, regional implementation, cooperation between the CBD 
and other fora to avoid overlap, and a work programme that 
remains within the parameters and mandate of Article 8(j) and 
related provisions. After the draft decision was distributed, one 
Party requested that observers be excluded when "discussions" 
turned to the "negotiation" of draft text, which she said should 
take place between Parties only. 
The draft decision included, inter alia, the establishment of an 
ad hoc open-ended intersessional working group and a mandate to: 
• advise on the application and development of legal and other 
appropriate forms of protection for traditional knowledge, 
innovations and practices relevant for the conservation and 
sustainable use of biodiversity; 
• provide advice to the COP on the development and implementation 
of a work programme at national and international levels; 
• develop a work programme based on the structure of elements in 
the Madrid report; and 
• advise the COP on measures to strengthen cooperation at the in-
ternational level. 
The draft decision also provided for, inter alia: representation 
from indigenous and local communities to the widest possible ex-
tent; annual working group meetings in conjunction with SBSTTA; 
direct reporting to the COP, and advising SBSTTA on relevant is-
sues; both a short- and medium-term work programme, with provi-
sions for the short-term work programme; and application for 
observer status for the CBD to WIPO and negotiation of a MOU with 
WIPO. 
It was agreed that the working group would meet in conjunction 
with SBSTTA, and that funding would be subject to decisions 
relating to the budget and financial mechanism. Brazil amended 
the paragraph on exclusion of observers from the Article 8(j) 
contact group. The amended paragraph reads: "one Party having 
indicated that as a matter of principle and according to the 
general practice in the UN, decision making, which includes the 
negotiation process, should be reserved to governmental 
negotiations," rather than that their participation "would not be 
acceptable." 
Benefit Sharing was addressed for the first time as a separate 
agenda item of the COP. Many delegates stressed: national access 
legislation, including enforcement and monitoring; establishment 
of an intersessional process; the importance of the private 
sector in creating benefits; access through prior informed 
consent (PIC), and the mechanisms to provide such consent; and 
guidance to the GEF for capacity-building support, and options 
for benefit sharing. 
When considering a draft decision on access and benefit sharing 
the main point of contention was a paragraph on whether ex situ 
collections acquired before entry into force of the Convention 
and not addressed by the FAO's IU should be brought under the 
scope of the CBD. The decision requested the Executive Secretary 
to get information on the ex situ collections and to make 
recommendations to help the intersessional meeting on future work 
for COP-5. In addition, the decision establishes a regionally-
balanced panel of experts, composed of representatives of the 
private and public sector and local and indigenous communities, 
to explore options for access and benefit sharing on mutually 
agreed terms, including codes of best practices, guiding 
principles and guidelines. It also requests the financial 
mechanism to support, inter alia: stock-taking activities; ca-
pacity building, including for economic valuation; and 
formulation of access and benefit sharing mechanisms at the 
national, subregional and regional levels. 
Regarding the relationship between the Convention and other In-
ternational Agreements: The COP adopted a decision on the rela-
tionship of the Convention with the CSD and biodiversity-related 
conventions, and other international agreements, institutions and 
processes of relevance (UNEP/CBD/COP/4/L.3/Add.5). In the deci-
sion, the COP, inter alia: 
• endorses the Joint Work Plan with the Ramsar Convention; 
• stresses the need to ensure consistency in implementing the CBD 
and the WTO agreements, including the TRIPs agreement; 
• emphasizes that further work is necessary to develop a common 
appreciation of the relationship between the CBD, IPR and the 
TRIPs agreement; and 
• requests enhanced cooperation with WIPO and strengthened re-
lationships with the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol and the CCD. 
The ENB report on COP-4 is available at http://enb.iisd.org/link-
ages/biodiv/cop4.html. 
AGRICULTURE
FIFTH EXTRAORDINARY SESSION OF THE COMMISSION ON GENETIC 
RESOURCES FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE: The Fifth Session of the 
Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (CGRFA-
EX5) was held at FAO Headquarters in Rome from 8-12 June 1998. 
During the week-long meeting, delegates continued negotiations on 
the Consolidated Negotiating Text of the International 
Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources to harmonize it with the 
Convention on Biological Diversity. The work was divided between 
an Open-ended Working Group and a Chair's Contact Group. The 
Working Group reviewed Article 12 of the IU relating to Farmers' 
Rights. The Contact Group reviewed elements of Article 11 of the 
IU relating to access to plant genetic resources for food and 
agriculture and introduced new text in relation to benefit 
sharing and financial arrangements. 
Overall, the Working Group made little progress on the issue of 
Farmers' Rights. Fundamental differences still divide key 
regional groups, particularly in relation to ascribing legal 
rights for farmers. The Contact Group made some progress on 
access, however, the relationship between facilitated 
multilateral access and Intellectual Property Rights remains 
problematic. Divergent models of benefit sharing were briefly 
considered. With negotiations faltering on the second day and 
coming to a grinding halt on the fourth day, delegates left the 
meeting concerned that the deadline for concluding negotiations 
is fast approaching and many issues remain to be discussed or 
elaborated upon.
The Commission stumbled into the same old obstacles, as it con-
tinued its attempt to coalesce the IU with the CBD. Compared to 
the momentum created by the CGRFA-EX4, many frustrated delegates 
said there had been very little progress, although some thought 
several innovative concepts had been introduced pertaining to 
access and financial benefit sharing arrangements. However, these 
few advancements on access were countered by considerable 
intransigence on benefit sharing and Farmers' Rights, with 
negotiations starting to falter on the second day and coming to a 
grinding halt in both groups on the fourth day. As one delegate 
explained, these issues are like a funnel, with a wide entry 
point on access, but a very narrow opening on benefit sharing. 
Furthermore, with the "three pillars" — access, benefit sharing 
and Farmers' Rights — still unresolved, all other aspects of the 
IU remain in a dormant state. The complete ENB report is 
available at: http://enb.iisd.org/biodiv/iu.html.
SECOND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON WOMEN IN AGRICULTURE: The 
Second International Conference on Women in Agriculture was held 
from 28 June -2 July 1998 in Washington, DC. The Conference drew 
1000 women from 50 countries and focused on learning from experts 
and other conference delegates in order to help women become 
better businesswomen and policy makers. The program featured a 
number of prominent speakers, including Tipper Gore, wife of US 
Vice President Al Gore; U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman; 
First Lady of El Salvador Elizabeth Aguirre de Calderon; Special 
Assistant on Poverty Alleviation Princess Irene Ndagire, Uganda; 
Senator Beatriz Paredes, Mexico; Under Secretary of Women’s 
Affairs at the Ministry of Foreign Relations Teresa Sola, 
Argentina; and U.S. House of Representatives members Eva Clayton 
(North Carolina) and Marcy Kaptur (Ohio). The conference 
continued the work of the first International Conference on Women 
in Agriculture, held in Melbourne, Australia in 1994, and was 
sponsored by President Clinton’s Interagency Council on Women. 
Organizers have posted a website on the conference and will 
distribute a newsletter for the next year. The next International 
Conference on Women is expected to be held in four years in 
Spain. 
The conference focused on practical solutions and strategies that 
women could take back to their communities. Participants shared 
success stories, heard from experts and developed networks that 
will help them tackle the challenges facing the agricultural 
community. The topics that were addressed included: Women 
Managing Environmentally Sustainable Agriculture, Insurance 
Purchasing Groups for Rural Women, Ethics of Modern Agriculture, 
Alternative Marketing Options, and Women Farmers and the Global 
Economy. Presenters for these 100 breakout sessions come from 20 
different countries. 
The meeting closed its program with an address from Sissel Ekaas, 
Director of Women and Population at the FAO, and a number of 
sessions with experts on rural agriculture, economic and commu-
nity issues. For more information contact: Jim Brownlee, USDA; 
tel: (202) 720-2091; e-mail: jim.brownlee@usda.gov; I
nternet: http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rd/icwa/.
AFRICAN MINISTERIAL MEETING ON AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND 
DEVELOPMENT: The Interministerial Conference on Sustainable 
Financing of Agricultural Research and Development in West and 
Central Africa, which was held from 2-3 April 1998 in Abidjan, 
Côte d'Ivoire, focused on the question of using agricultural 
research to improve productivity and rural incomes and the need 
to find sustainable financing mechanisms. Government leaders, 
representatives of development agencies, and agricultural 
research institutions agreed on the critical linkages that must 
be made between agriculture and economic development in Africa. 
Participants agreed that the contribution of agricultural 
research to the development of Africa has been far below 
potential. Two possible solutions were underlined: agricultural 
research institutions need to become more efficient, including 
through regional collaboration and partnerships with the users of 
technology; comprehensive and sustainable financing mechanisms 
need to be put in place, from greater contribution by governments 
to the provision of remunerated services to the private sector. 
Progress will also require more regional cooperation in research 
and technology development. 
Participants also focused on building synergies through regional 
cooperation to address common problems, noting that the need to 
put rural development at the center of all national development 
strategies and donor agency programs in Africa, and to develop 
financing instruments to support research and transfer of 
technology. One such instrument could be a self-sustaining 
regional fund for research that would provide grants to national 
and regional research institutions on a competitive basis. A 
presentation of an existing model in Latin America was made by 
the representative of the Inter-American Development Bank. The 
participants agreed to explore the establishment of a similar 
mechanism for West and Central Africa. 
The need for private sector participation in determining 
priorities and funding research was discussed and the conference 
suggested that partnerships with the private sector be actively 
pursued. Participants also agreed on the need to avoid wasteful 
duplication in research by looking at the rich pool of existing 
technologies and working to adapt some of them to local 
conditions. Such cross-fertility will be facilitated by the 
Special Program for African Agricultural Research (SPAAR) and the 
newly established Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa 
(CORAF). For more information contact: SPAAR Secretariat, 1818 H 
Street, NW, Room J3-155, Washington D.C., 20433, US; tel: +1 
(202) 473-9008; fax: +1 (202) 473-8231; Internet: 
http://www.worldbank.org/html/aftsr/index.htm
DESERTIFICATION
CONFERENCE ON THE SAHEL: The conference “The African Sahel: 25 
Years After the Great Drought - Assessing progress, setting a new 
agenda” was held at the Royal Geographical Society in London from 
13-14 May 1998. The conference was organized by Dr. Simon 
Batterbury (Brunel University, London) and Prof. Andrew Warren 
(UCL, London) and sponsored by the British Department for 
International Development (DFID), the Drylands programme of the 
International Institute for Environment and Development, and the 
RGS/IBG. This conference initiated reflection and assessment of 
the last quarter-century in the Sahel. It is now 25 years since 
the major droughts of the 1970s struck the Sahel region of West 
Africa. Their impacts were not uniform, for the region has a 
great diversity of soils, climates, livelihood systems, and 
ethnic groups. For many, these droughts are an especially grim 
historical marker, given their disturbing effects on food supply 
and human welfare in a semi-arid region so dependent on rainfall. 
They also marked the beginning of profound post-colonial economic 
and political reforms, as well as widespread international 
development assistance to the Sahelian nation states. 
Dr. Gaussaou Traoré a researcher at the Institut du Sahel in Bam-
ako, Mali, opened the conference with an assessment of the 
changes experienced in the nine countries that comprise CILSS 
(the Permanent Interstate Committee for the Fight against Drought 
in Sahelian Countries). He showed how the first responses to the 
image of a “dying Sahel” and its food deficits of the 1970s were 
focused on modernizing food production and distribution systems. 
There was a “a lot of aid, but a lot of aid mismanaged” in this 
period, because it was technically inappropriate, or poorly used.
In contrast, development thinking now revolved around carefully 
measured economic reforms, respect for cultural tradition and 
ethnic pluralism, obtaining value from better targetted aid, and 
support to local institutions (as in political decentralization 
programmes). The key challenges for policy-makers today included 
poverty alleviation, particularly in the growing urban centers; 
methods for sustained conflict alleviation for land, water and 
other resources; realistic rather than draconian population 
policies, and coming to terms with aggressive global markets that 
will continue to disadvantage Sahelian products. Traoré outlined 
the “Sahel 21” initiative, coordinated by CILSS, which was a re-
visioning of development priorities for the next century. The aim 
was to create a federated system with a “common market,” shared 
agricultural policies, and a Sahelian passport. Sadly, Nigeria is 
still missing from these initiatives. 
Claude Raynaut of CNRS, Bordeaux, drew on his recent book 
"Societies and Nature in the Sahel," (Routledge Press 1997) to 
stress that the diversity of the Sahelian landscape, and the 
global factors that affect it, should not be simplified or 
tackled with broad-brush policies. The social actors of the Sahel 
were its people, who were not “passive toys” of structural 
constraints. Gross generalizations about “overpopulation” driven 
by environmental overuse were simply inaccurate and misleading. 
Raynaut saw the Sahelian “crisis” as both the manifestation and 
the cause of profound social changes. Much could be gained from 
promoting an “enabling environment” to support these local 
responses. This will require negotiation; recognition of 
diversity; and a role for the state. 
Mike Hulme of the University of East Anglia described Sahelian 
climate as “perhaps the most dramatic example of climatic 
variability that we have quantitatively measured anywhere in the 
world”. Scientific understanding appeared depressingly deficient 
in the Sahel region. He showed how scientists in Africa and the 
West had persistently misunderstood the evolving climatic 
situation and had failed to predict the extent of the drought 
years, variously over-estimating or minimizing the extent of the 
“crisis.” He suggested that natural climatic variability, coupled 
with the known effects of changes of land cover and land uses, 
explained more variation than global climatic change effects. The 
need was for better science and building complex adaptive 
mechanisms for complex systems.
Rob Groot of AB-DLO, Wageningen Agricultural University, 
presenting a joint paper by himself, Henk Breman and Herman van 
Keulen, explored the significant “resource limitations” acting in 
Sahelian farming. They argued that the gap between aggregate food 
production and aggregate population growth had grown since the 
1970s, and variability in rainfall, between and within the short 
cropping season, posed the greatest problem. Some 40% of income 
from farming in the region resulted from the “mining” of soil 
nutrients, as farmers have been forced to extensify agriculture 
onto less suitable soils, and then to intensify production with 
reduced fallows. Groot and his colleagues felt that the rapid 
pace of resource depletion in the Sahel had left coping systems 
unable to respond quickly enough. Soil fertility decline was an 
invisible “time bomb” for Sahelian agriculture. Subsistence 
agricultural systems would require, at the very least, localized 
low-grade applications of inorganic fertilizer to sustain 
productive potential.
Mike Mortimore disagreed. He was based in northern Nigeria at the 
time of the 1970s droughts and at the time, coping strategies 
like migration, asset sales, and off-farm income generation were 
rational and widely used responses. International relief efforts, 
based on a too-cautious assessment, provided patchy and sometimes 
inappropriate support. Yet, today, usually without that support, 
“Sahelian farmers are still in business” and there were ample 
signs of recovery, adaptation, and innovation. His work in 
Northern Nigeria had identified a wide range of coping 
strategies. Indigenous technical change has been adequate to meet 
the new challenges, even in areas of high population densities. 
Farming systems commonly transform over time from an agricultural 
base, to include animals, off-farm income sources and marketing, 
and then economic migration. Mortimore believed that the 1970s 
and 1980s droughts had reversible effects, because Sahelian 
ecologies and economies were variable and had developed their own 
adaptations to that variability. 
Brigitte Thébaud saw the situation of pastoralists as precarious. 
Pastoralism was the dominant productive activity in the 
‘northern’ Sahel and Saharan fringe where mobility was vital to 
maintain access to water and fodder, and conflict over resources 
is growing. Thébaud saw forces other than drought as contributing 
to conflict. Borehole projects, and early technical 
interventions, had disallowed customary forms of negotiation over 
access. Accusations of degradation had circulated in governing 
circles and had blocked understanding of the importance of herd 
mobility and thus freedom of movement across patchy landscapes. 
It is essential that the ongoing discussion about land tenure 
rules and laws in the Sahel recognized the dynamism of common 
property regimes based on mobility.
Jean Marie Cour, a researcher at the OECD’s Club du Sahel in 
Paris and the coordinator of the WALPTS (West Africa long term 
perspective) study wanted to provide a challenge to doom-laden 
predictions of economic and environmental crisis. For him, it was 
vital to see the Sahel in its regional context; as part of the 
West African economy, increasingly linked to the global economic 
marketplace. Cour reminded us that it was cities, not rural 
areas, that were absorbing the largest percentage of West 
Africa’s population growth at present, because of jobs, 
opportunities and markets. Some 40% of the region’s inhabitants 
already lived away from the birthplaces of their parents. 
Migration was a solution to land degradation, as well as a 
reaction to it. Cour talked of a “silent Sahelian agricultural 
revolution” of increased cash crop production, particularly for 
specialized markets near to urban centers. That said, his 
optimism was directed to the accessible and richer environments 
in the region as loci for sustained growth.
The meeting provided realistic assessments of the challenges fac-
ing Sahelian peoples in the 21st century. Economic pessimism may 
be justified, but the adaptability of Sahelian ecologies and 
peoples was affirmed. Papers from the meeting will appear in 
Global Environmental Change (Human Dimensions) in 1999, and the 
detailed proceedings are soon to be made available on a web site 
at http://www.brunel.ac.uk/depts/geo). For more information con-
tact: Dr Simon Batterbury, Dept. of Geography & Earth Sciences, 
Brunel University; tel +1895 274000; fax +1895 3033217; e-mail: 
Simon.Batterbury@Brunel.ac.uk. Popular versions of some of the 
papers are available at www.ids.ac.uk/id21
FOURTH REGIONAL MEETING OF THE COUNTRIES OF LATIN AMERICA AND THE 
CARIBBEAN ON THE UNCCD: This meeting was held in St. John's, 
Antigua and Barbuda from 29 April - 1 May 1998. The Secretariat 
to the Convention to Combat Desertification in collaboration with 
the Government of Antigua and Barbuda organized the meeting in 
two parts: a Workshop for Focal Points on the Convention from 
Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Fourth Regional Meeting. 
The objectives of the Fourth Regional Meeting of the Latin Amer-
ican and Caribbean countries were to, inter alia: interchange 
experiences in the elaboration and implementation of national 
action programmes; establish an electronic information network 
for the implementation of the Convention; hear the progress made 
with the implementation of the Convention in the Region by the 
Secretariat. The meeting was attended by 48 governmental 
representatives of 28 countries in the Region and 35 
representatives of 22 international, regional and subregional 
agencies, nongovernmental organizations and representatives of 
other sectors. 
The representatives adopted a decision on the establishment of an 
information network, under which they would: adopt the project 
submitted by the Secretariat; make services available in the 
short term to the Regional Coordinating Mechanism or Unit; adopt 
the list of concepts included in the components of the network 
(DESELAC); initiate a survey of existing networks and the 
capacities of the countries proposed in the DESELAC project; 
organize a workshop for information systems administrators, 
recommend to countries in the Region that they make the necessary 
arrangements to have the required technical resources for 
connection to DESELAC. 
In a decision on national, subregional and regional action pro-
grammes and technical focal points, representatives: emphasized 
the need and expediency of developing participative mechanisms 
and flexible planning, recognizing the interests of communities 
in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas; ensure the active and 
effective participation of NGOs and baseline community 
organizations in the process of elaboration, implementation and 
monitoring of national action programmes; and establish the 
necessary inclusion of national action programmes in the policy 
and programmes of sustainable development of the respective 
countries of the Region. 
Regarding the Constitution of the Regional Executive Committee, 
decided to ensure composition of the Regional Executive Committee 
as follows: one representative from each subregion, one 
representative from the host country of the Regional Meeting, who 
will act as Chair of the Committee, plus one representative of 
the country previously chairing the Committee, to act as Vice 
Chair. Should the offices of Chair and Vice Chair fall to the 
same subregion, that subregion shall not elect another 
representative to the Regional Executive Committee. RIOD shall 
maintain permanent representation on the Committee. They also 
decided to continue to convene regional meetings on an annual 
basis and adopt the recommendations emanating from the Workshop 
of National Focal Points with regard to the usefulness of 
convening these workshops prior to regional meetings. 
Decisions were also taken on, inter alia: the Regional Coordinat-
ing Unit; the Third Session of the Conference of the Parties to 
the Convention; the Subregional Action Programme for Small Island 
Developing States in the Caribbean; support to Haiti; and 
indicators and parameters. For more information contact: Interim 
secretariat CCD; tel: +(41-22) 979 9111; fax: (41-22) 979 
9030/31; e-mail: 
secretariat@unccd.ch; Internet: http://www.unccd.ch/
WETLANDS
WETLANDS LEGAL FRAMEWORKS WORKSHOP: From 3-4 July 1998 in Geneva, 
the Ramsar Bureau hosted a gathering of experts to help develop 
guidelines for the review of law and institutions relevant to 
wetlands. This project, which will report its findings at COP-7 
in May 1998, is being undertaken by the IUCN Environmental Law 
Centre on behalf of the Ramsar Convention. Legislative and 
institutional review is a key part of the Ramsar Wise Use 
Guidelines, which was further promoted in the Strategic Plan. At 
the workshop there were experts in wetland law, policy and Ramsar 
implementation from Australia, Cameroon, Canada, Costa Rica, 
Denmark, India, Peru, Slovenia, Uganda, the UK and the US. The 
exchange of ideas and experiences, many of which are being docu-
mented as case studies for the project, should make for a 
detailed consideration of these issues. For information contact: 
the Ramsar Convention Bureau; tel. +41 22 999 0170; fax +41 22 
999 0169; e-mail ramsar@hq.iucn.org;
Internet: http://www.iucn.org/themes/ramsar/
REGIONAL MEETINGS OF THE CONVENTION ON WETLANDS (RAMSAR): In June 
and July 1998, three regional meetings helped focus Contracting 
Parties, observer states, and partner NGOs on the implementation 
of the Ramsar Strategic Plan 1997-2002 since the last Conference 
of the Parties, and on developing regional inputs on issues for 
the next COP in San José, Costa Rica in May 1999.  The 3rd Pan-
European Regional Meeting in Riga, Latvia from 3-6 June 1998, the 
1st Pan-American Regional Meeting in San José, Costa Rica from 17-
20 June 1998 and the 3rd Pan-African Regional Meeting in Kampala, 
Uganda from 6-10 July 1998 each brought together over 100 
participants and worked from their different perspectives to 
develop regional contributions for the next COP. They focused on: 
the COP’s technical sessions on Ramsar and the water crisis; 
national planning for wetland conservation and wise use; 
involving local people at all levels; tools for assessing wetland 
values; and frameworks for regional and international 
cooperation.  The conclusions and recommendations of each of the 
three meetings are now or will soon be available on the Ramsar 
Web site. An Oceania regional meeting is planned for December 
1998, and the Ramsar Bureau hopes to be able to announce the date 
and venue for an Asian meeting in the near future. For more 
information contact: Dwight Peck, Executive Assistant for 
Communications Convention on Wetlands, Rue Mauverney 28, CH-1196 
Gland, Switzerland; e-mail dcp@hq.iucn.org, Internet: 
http://ramsar.org/
RAMSAR STRP MEETING: The Ramsar Scientific and Technical Review 
Panel (STRP) convened from 22-23 April 1998 in Gland, Switzerland 
at the Ramsar Bureau in order to study several issues requiring 
clarification in the approach to the 7th Conference of the Parties 
next May. In addition to mapping out the documentation needed for 
the COP and assigning responsibilities for the work involved, the 
Panel proposed new definitions for key terms “ecological 
character” and “change in ecological character” and suggested 
improved wording for a reorganization of the existing Criteria 
for Identifying Wetlands of International Importance. Building 
upon an experts’ workshop on Early Warning Systems for Change in 
the Ecological Character of Wetlands, held just prior to the STRP 
meeting, the Panel and its NGO observers progressed the concepts 
needed for offering guidance to the Parties on the use of 
monitoring data in making wetland management decisions. For more 
information contact: Dwight Peck, Executive Assistant for 
Communications, Convention on Wetlands, Rue Mauverney 28, CH-1196 
Gland, Switzerland; e-mail dcp@hq.iucn.org, Internet: 
http://ramsar.org/
CHEMICAL MANAGEMENT
FIRST SESSION OF THE INC FOR AN INTERNATIONAL LEGALLY BINDING 
INSTRUMENT FOR IMPLEMENTING INTERNATIONAL ACTION ON CERTAIN 
PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS (POPs): The first session of the 
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-1) for an inter-
national legally binding instrument for implementing 
international action on certain persistent organic pollutants 
(POPs) was held from 29 June-3 July 1998 in Montreal, Canada. 
Delegates from 92 countries met in Plenary to consider the 
programme of work for the INC as well as possible elements that 
might be included in an international legally binding instrument 
on a list of twelve POPs grouped into three categories: 1) 
pesticide POPs: aldrin, chlordane, DDT, dieldrin, endrin, 
heptachlor, mirex and toxaphene; 2) industrial chemical POPs: 
hexachlorobenzene and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs); and 3) 
POPs that are unintended byproducts: dioxins and furans. The INC 
established a Criteria Expert Group (CEG), as well as a subsid-
iary body to examine implementation aspects of a future 
instrument, including issues related to technical and financial 
assistance. Two contact groups discussed terms of reference for 
the CEG and technical information needs for the INC. Based on the 
discussions at INC-1 and written comments to be submitted by 1 
September 1998, the Secretariat will prepare for INC-2 a document 
containing material for possible inclusion in an international 
legally binding instrument. 
To the satisfaction of many participants, POPs INC-1 enjoyed a 
smooth and relatively trouble-free start. Delegates met with a 
clear spirit of cooperation, mutual purpose, shared 
responsibility and voiced their determination to tackle what is 
universally acknowledged as a very real and serious threat to 
human health and the environment. Unexpectedly, many of the 
procedural issues that have typically required a full week at the 
commencement of other negotiations were resolved within the first 
few days. There was universal support for the sound and clear 
platform for progress established by prior activities. The INC 
quickly adopted its rules of procedure and began considering some 
initial elements that could be included in a draft convention. 
The INC created a Criteria Expert Group with terms of reference 
and a bureau, and a subsidiary body on technical and financial 
assistance was also established. Despite this progress, some 
delegates thought that given the work and experience on POPs 
leading up to the meeting, including a recently completed POPs 
protocol under the LRTAP Convention, greater efforts could have 
been devoted to the substance of a potential draft instrument in 
order to accelerate the process. The complete Earth Negotiations 
Bulletin report is available at: 
http://enb.iisd.org/chemical/pops1.html.
OCEANS AND COASTS
PAN-AFRICAN CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE INTEGRATED COASTAL 
MANAGEMENT: Ministers of Environment from 53 African countries 
met in Maputo, Mozambique from 23-25 July 1998 at the Ministerial 
segment of the Pan-African Conference on Sustainable Integrated 
Coastal Management (PACSICOM). The Government of Mozambique, 
UNEP, UNESCO and the Government of Finland hosted the Conference. 
It provided a unique opportunity for African countries to 
reinforce intergovernmental dialogue on the increasing threats to 
the marine and coastal environment and on the measures required 
to meet the complex challenges faced by countries across the 
continent. The Conference was organized in three parts: (i) 
technical workshops to address specific themes from 18-20 July; 
(ii) a workshop on crosscutting issues and linkages from 21-22 
July; and the Ministerial Conference, which considered political 
implications and socio-economic factors. 
The Maputo Conference launched the PACSICOM process, consisting 
of a series of Pan-African and Partnership Conferences aimed at 
moving the protection, management and development of Africa’s 
marine and coastal environment from the margins to the center 
stage of policy making in the region. Environment ministers 
signed the "Maputo Declaration," supporting measures to protect 
the 36,343 km of the continent's coast. The ministers also 
adopted a list of recommendations. Another Pan-African conference 
will be held on 30 November in Cape Town, South Africa to 
reinforce what was achieved in Maputo. In mid-1999, there will be 
a partnership conference between ministers and funding agencies 
to look at ways to finance the priorities for action defined by 
the Maputo and Cape Town conferences. The ministers also agreed 
to plan a third Pan-African conference in 2003 to review progress 
made since the Maputo Declaration. For information contact: 
Emidio Jose Sebastiao, PACSICOM Secretariat; tel: +1 (258-1) 
465843; fax: +(258-1) 466243; e-mail: pacsicom@ambinet.uem.mz.

OSLO PARIS CONVENTION (OSPAR) ON PROTECTING THE NORTH EAST 
ATLANTIC: A new strategy for preventing maritime pollution was 
unanimously agreed by 15 European signatories at the Second 
Ministerial Meeting of the contracting parties to the 1992 OSPAR 
Convention in Lisbon, held from 22-23 July 1998 during EXPO '98. 
European environment ministers adopted a strategy that was agreed 
described as an "historic breakthrough" and a "landmark 
agreement" by both governments and environmental groups. The 
Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the 
North-east Atlantic ("OSPAR Convention") was opened for signature 
at the Ministerial Meeting of the Oslo and Paris Commissions in 
Paris on 22 September 1992. 
Key elements of the strategy address the radioactive discharges 
that are released into the sea by Europe's three nuclear 
reprocessing plants and the 450 oil and gas platforms throughout 
the North Sea that will be taken out of service over the next 30 
years. The discharge of both radioactive and other hazardous 
substances into the sea is to be reduced to close to zero by 
2020, taking into account, among other issues, technical 
feasibility. Governments stated that the strategy grants them 
leeway to keep their nuclear reprocessing plants open, and that 
the technical challenge of reaching the target, as well as the 
other environmental objectives in the agreement, will be a 
stimulus to industry that will create investment and jobs. The 
Ospar meeting agreed, with provisos, that no more disused steel 
rigs would be dumped at sea. Exemptions could, on a case-by-case 
basis, be made to allow the foundations, known as "footings," of 
the 41 biggest platforms - those over 10,000 tonnes - to be 
disposed of at sea. 
Observers noted that the UK and Norway changed their previous 
positions on the issue of offshore platforms and the UK and 
France agreed to drop demands for possible future exemptions from 
a complete ban on emissions. One participant noted that the UK 
was under pressure from other European governments and 
environmental groups because it owns most of the offshore 
platforms and two of the three nuclear processing plants. 
Industry representatives from oil and gas industry argued that 
complete removal of the largest platforms could be dangerous and 
is both environmentally and economically unsound, with the new 
rules adding to removal costs. For more information contact: 
Paris Commission (PARCOM), New Court, 48 Carey Street, London 
WC2A 2JQ, UK; tel: +44-171-2429927; fax: +44-171-8317427; e-mail: 
secretariat@ospar.org. 
INTERNATIONAL WHALING COMMISSION: The 50th Annual Meeting of the 
International Whaling Commission was held from 16-20 May 1998 in 
Muscat, Oman. The conference called for increased research into 
potential environmental threats to whales, such as climate change 
and pollution. Full funding for the project was also agreed. The 
40-nation IWC called on Norway and Japan to halt all whaling 
activities and urged Canada not to issue whaling licenses. Member 
nations also adopted a resolution calling on Japan to refrain 
from issuing two permits to hunt threatened whales in the 
Southern Hemisphere and the western North Pacific. 
Some observers noted that the IWC is moving toward whale con-
servation and management, as opposed to a strict focus on banning 
all hunting. A Japanese fishermen's union had urged Japan to 
withdraw from the IWC if the group failed to lift its ban on 
commercial whaling. The All Japan Seamen's Union claims that the 
livelihoods of Japanese fishermen and their families are 
endangered by the 12-year-old ban. They also say whales are now 
so plentiful they can be hunted for commerce. If they continue to 
multiply freely, they will harm the marine ecosystem because they 
consume so much fish. The IWC also faces the possibility of a 
break-away group. Reports surfaced during the meeting that Japan 
may form a pro-whaling organization with Russia, China and South 
Korea. The new body, which would carry out whaling in the 
Northwestern Pacific, would clearly undermine the authority of 
the IWC. Japan has refused to deny or confirm the reports. 
A compromise plan, known as the "Irish proposal," for whaling 
that was debated at last year's meeting will be reconsidered at 
the 1999 meeting in Grenada. The plan would allow certain 
countries the right to hunt whales in their own coastal waters up 
to 200 miles offshore, but ban it elsewhere, turning the high 
seas in effect into a giant whale sanctuary. For more information 
try the IWC web site at 
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/iwcoffice/
EIGHTH SESSION OF THE STATES PARTIES TO CONVENTION ON LAW OF SEA: 
The States parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of 
the Sea held their eighth regular meeting from 18-23 May 1998 in 
New York. Delegates adopted the 1999 budget for the International 
Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and addressed a number of 
questions posed to them by the Commission on the Limits of the 
Continental Shelf. The States parties also approved supplementary 
appropriations to the 1998 budget of the Tribunal, and dealt with 
the financial rules of the Tribunal as well as the pension scheme 
for its members. It did not take a final decision on the 
financial rules and the pension scheme. 
The Convention on the Law of the Sea gives coastal States juris-
diction over the resources of their continental shelf up to 200 
miles from their coasts. In cases where the actual shelf (the 
natural prolongation of the land territory of a coastal States) 
extends beyond 200 miles, coastal States can claim jurisdiction 
over areas that may extend up to 350 miles or more provided they 
meet certain technical criteria established in the Convention. 
The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf is the body 
established in the Convention to assist coastal States wishing to 
claim extended continental shelf jurisdiction. 
The Commission had adopted its rules of procedure, with the ex-
ception of the two annexes to those rules. Annex I is entitled 
"Submissions in case of a dispute between States with opposite or 
adjacent coasts or in other cases of unresolved land or maritime 
disputes". Annex II is entitled "Confidentiality". The Commission 
decided it would not adopt Annex I until it had been considered 
by the meeting of States parties. With respect to Annex II, the 
Commission decided that it would be adopted if and when the issue 
of the privileges and immunities of its members, in dealing with 
confidential material, was resolved positively. 
With respect to the definition of a coastal State, it was 
suggested that the meeting of States parties was not competent to 
give a legal opinion, and that the Commission should address the 
question to the Legal Counsel. It was also suggested that it was 
preferable not to pursue the matter so long as it remained a 
theoretical problem, and that a legal opinion should be sought 
only when the problem actually arises. As to the question of a 
trust fund, the Commission decided that the Secretariat should 
explore the various possibilities that could be made available to 
allow all members to participate in the Commission. For more 
information contact the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of 
the Sea, Office of Legal Affairs; e-mail: doalos@un.org; 
Internet: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/.
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE LAW OF THE SEA: Legal experts, 
government officials, environmentalists and industry 
representatives addressed critical maritime issues at the 
University of Miami Law of the Sea Institute’s 31st Annual 
Conference from 30-31 March 1998. The conference examined a wide 
range of topics including what should be done to protect the 
oceans from environmental damage, who has the right to keep 
treasure from sunken ships such as the Titanic, and what will 
happen once the US relinquishes control of the Panama Canal in 
1999. The conference featured an address by the new US Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans, Mary Beth West. 
Effecting the Transfer of the Panama Canal, one of the panel 
sessions, addressed the issue of how the Panama Canal will be run 
after it reverts to Panama in 1999 and how this change will 
affect commerce throughout the hemisphere. The environmental 
cleanup of US military bases in Panama was discussed. 
Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage, another panel ses-
sion, explored the controversy of who owns salvaged treasure and 
other artifacts from sunken ships such as the Titanic, which was 
discovered off the coast of Nova Scotia in 1985, and the Spanish 
galleon Atocha, which was discovered in Florida waters in the 
mid-1980s with $400 million worth of jewelry and gold bars still 
aboard. One of the most pertinent issues was the ownership of 
salvaged objects..
A third panel session, Marine Scientific Research Under the Law 
of the Sea, explored what restrictions, if any, are appropriate 
to protect the sea yet still promote its research and the study 
of aquatic life forms. Other panel sessions addressed Traffic 
Regulation and Cost Sharing in Straits and Archipelagos and 
Reports on International Institutions Implementing the Law of the 
Sea Convention. There was a special report on the Strait of 
Hormuz in the Persian Gulf by Professor Djamchid Momtaz of the 
University of Tehran in Iran. For more information contact the 
Law of the Sea Institute; e-mail: 
losi@viper.law.miami.edu. 
Internet: http://aloha.net./~lsi/seaweb.htm
INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
SPECIAL SESSION OF UNEP'S GOVERNING COUNCIL: A Special Session of 
the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Governing Council 
ended on 22 May 1998 in Nairobi. Governments called for 
revitalization, reform and strengthening of UNEP and supported 
the reform proposals presented to them by UNEP Executive Director 
Klaus Töpfer. In a decision adopted by the Council, ministers and 
other senior government officials called for the revitalization, 
reform and strengthening of the organization. Responding to 
Töpfer's detailed plans for a new UNEP structure, the Council's 
unanimous decision welcomed his proposals that reflect new areas 
of concentration for the organization in the short and medium 
term, namely:
(a)	Environmental information, assessment and research, includ-
ing environmental emergency response capacity and strengthening 
of the early warning and assessment functions of UNEP;
(b)	Enhanced coordination of environmental conventions and de-
velopment of environmental policy instruments;
(c)	Freshwater;
(d)	Technology transfer and industry;
(e)	Support to Africa;
It was noted that further organizational reform must ensure a 
more rational, efficient and cost-effective functioning of the 
secretariat as a whole. The Council underscored the importance of 
adequate and predictable funding for UNEP and called upon all 
governments to contribute according to their financial 
capabilities. Financial contributions to UNEP have declined in 
recent years. One of Töpfer's principal objectives in the medium 
term is to restore the Environment Fund to at least its 1993 
level of over US $65 million. Addressing the financial issue in 
his closing remarks, the President of the Council, Arnaldo Jose 
Gabaldon (former Minister of Environment, Venezuela), reminded 
governments that in the past, they had pledged to increase their 
financial contributions to UNEP once the organization was on 
course again. This meeting was only the fifth special session of 
UNEP's Governing Council.  The 20th regular session of the 
Governing Council will be held in May 1999.
The UNEP Governing Council assesses the state of the world en-
vironment, establishes UNEP's programme priorities, and approves 
the budget.  It is composed of 58 members selected on the 
following basis: 16 seats for Africa; 13 seats for Asia; 6 seats 
for Eastern Europe; 13 seats for Western Europe and other States; 
and 10 seats for Latin America.  The Council is also open to 
other member states of the United Nations, United Nations 
agencies, NGOs and representatives of civil society. For more 
information contact: Tore J. Brevik, UNEP; tel: +254-2-62-3292, 
fax: +254-2-62-3927; e-mail: Tore.Brevik@unep.org; Internet: 
http://www.unep.org

UPCOMING
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 
EIGHTH STOCKHOLM WATER SYMPOSIUM: This meeting will be held from 
10-13 August 1998 in Stockholm, Sweden. For more information 
contact: the Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI); tel. 
+46-8-50616600; fax +46-8-109071; 
Internet: http://www.siwi.org/sws/sws1998/sws1998.html
INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNOLOGY AND GLOBAL 
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: This meeting will be held from 9 - 12 
August in Boston, MA, US. For information contact: Dr. Vincent 
Ogunro; tel.: +1 (508) 934-3185; fax: 1 (508) 934-4014; e-mail: 
ogunrov@woods.uml.edu. 
IEP ‘98: Issues in Environmental Pollution (IEP’98), the first in 
a new series of international symposia, will take place from 23 - 
26 August 1998 in Denver, Colorado, US. The symposium will focus 
on the state and use of science and predictive models. The main 
scientific issues in environmental pollution--persistent organic 
chemicals; metals and radioactivity; ozone and acidic deposition; 
particulates and global climate change--will be linked with the 
use of science and predictive models. For more information 
contact Lyn Quirke at the Conference Secretariat; tel.: +44-0-
1235-868380; fax: +44-0-1235-868420; e-mail: 
lynquirke@compuserve.com. Also try 
http://www.elsevier.nl/locate/iep98 
FOURTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON URBAN TRANSPORT AND THE 
ENVIRONMENT FOR THE 21ST CENTURY: This meeting will be held from 
31 August - 2 September 1998 in Lisbon, Portugal in conjunction 
with the Sixth International Conference on Computer Aided Design, 
Manufacture and Operation in the Railway and other Advanced Mass 
Transit Systems. For information contact Paula Doughty-Young, 
Conference Secretariat UT 98, Wessex Institute of Technology, 
Ashurst Lodge, Ashurst, Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK; tel.: + 44 (0) 
1703 293223; fax: + 44 (0) 1703 292853; e-mail 
paula@wessex.ac.uk.
WTO/UNEP CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE TOURISM ON SMALL ISLAND 
DEVELOPING STATES: This meeting will be held from 7-10 September 
1998 in Mauritius. Formore information contact: UNEP IE; tel.: 
+33-1-44-37-14-50; fax: +33-1-44- 37-14-74; e-mail: 
jaloisi@unep.fr
APEC/WORLD BANK JOINT ENVIRONMENT CONFERENCE: APEC's Pacific 
Basin Economic Council PBEC will hold a Joint Environment 
Conference with the World Bank from 13 - 16 September 1998 in Los 
Angeles, California, US. For information contact: For more 
information contact: APEC, 438, Alexandra Road, #14-01/04 
Alexandra Point, Singapore 119958; tel.: +(65) 276-1880; fax: 
+(65) 276-1775; e-mail: info@mail.apecsec.org.sg; Internet: 
http://www.apecsec.org.sg/
EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENT CONFERENCE: This event, to be held from 14-
15 September 1998 in Leeds, UK, focuses on improving 
environmental performance in a European context, covering such 
topics as waste management, energy, EU policy, and environmental 
liability. For more information, contact: Conference Manager, ERP 
Environment, P.O. Box 75, Shipley, West Yorkshire BD17 6EZ, UK; 
tel.: +44 1274 530 408; fax: +44 1274 530 409. 
BUSINESS STRATEGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT: This event to be held from 
17-18 September 1998 in Leeds, UK,  focuses on what industry is 
doing to improve its environmental performance, and covers 
strategic environmental management, eco-efficiency, supply chain 
management, and sustainable development. For more information, 
contact: Conference Manager, ERP Environment, P.O. Box 75, 
Shipley, West Yorkshire BD17 6EZ, UK; tel.: +44 1274 530 408; 
fax: +44 1274 530 409.
FIFTH INTERNATIONAL BOTANIC GARDENS CONSERVATION CONGRESS: This 
Congress, scheduled from 14 - 18 September 1998 in Kirstenbosch, 
Cape Town, South Africa, will have the theme "Plants, People and 
Planet Earth - the role of botanic gardens in sustainable 
living." The Congress will be hosted by the National Botanical 
Institute of South Africa and organized by Botanic Gardens 
Conservation International. For further information contact Prof. 
Brian J. Huntley, National Botanical Institute, Private Bag X7, 
Claremont 7735, South Africa; tel.: +27 21 762 1166; fax: +27 21 
761 4687; e-mail: bgci98@nbict.nbi.ac.za; or Botanic Gardens 
Conservation International, Descanso House, 199 Kew Road, 
Richmond, Surrey, TW 3BW, UK; tel.: +44 181 3325953/4/5; fax: +44 
181 3325956; e-mail: bgci@rbgkew.org.uk. 
UNEP FOURTH INTERNATIONAL ROUNDTABLE MEETING ON FINANCE AND THE 
ENVIRONMENT: This meeting will be held at Queen's College, 
Cambridge, UK, from 17-18 September 1998, with the theme " 
Profitability and Responsibility in the 21st Century." For more 
information contact: D. Vorhies, Initiative Coordinator; tel. + 
(41 22) 917-9288; fax + (41 22) 796-9240; e-mail: 
vorhiesd@unep.ch or L. Descano, Initiative Chair; tel. +1-212 783 
6928, e-mail: Linda.Descano@ssb.com Internet: www.unep.ch/eco/
ECO-ASIA: The Environment Congress for Asia and the Pacific (ECO-
ASIA) will be held from 19 - 20 September 1998 in Sendai-city, 
Japan. ECO ASIA (Environment Congress for Asia and the Pacific) 
is the congress, which consists of high-level government of-
ficials (including ministers), experts from international 
organizations and private organizations and environment 
researchers in the region, where they can freely exchange 
viewpoints in their personal capacities. The purpose of ECO AISA 
is to promote long-term activities for environmental protection 
by governments and relevant organizations in Asia and the Pacific 
Region toward the realization of sustainable development of the 
Region. For more information see http://www.ecoasia.org/
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INDUSTRY AND ENVIRONMENTAL 
PERFORMANCE: This conference will be held in Aalborg, Denmark 
from 23-25 September 1998. The themes to be discussed are: 
environmental management; environmentally sound product 
development; self-regulation versus public regulation; cleaner 
technology and prevention; and stakeholder management. For 
further information contact: the Secretariat at the Aalborg 
Congress & Culture Centre, tel.: +45 9935 5555, fax: +45 9935 
5580, e-mail: euro@akkc.dk; Internet: http://www.akkc.dk/uk/eu-
ro/envire/index.htm
34th INTERNATIONAL PLANNING CONGRESS ON LAND AND WATER: The 1998 
World Planning Congress in Azores, Portugal will be held from 26 
September - 2 October 1998. The theme of the Congress is the 
exploration of the inescapable correlation between the (spatial) 
planning for human settlements and the natural environment on the 
one hand and the planning and management of the earth's water 
resources on the other. For information contact: the ISoCaRP 
Secretariat; tel.: +(31-70) 346 2654; fax: + (31-70) 361 7909; e-
mail: isocarp@bart.nl; Internet: ht-
tp://www.soc.titech.ac.jp/isocarp
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING & MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE: This meeting 
will be held in Barcelona, Spain from 30 September - 2 October 
1998. The conference is being organized by the Wessex Institute 
of Technology, UK and Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, Spain 
and sponsored by:Department de Medi Ambient de la Generalitat de 
Catalunya, Spain, CIRIT- Generalitat de Catalunya, Spain, CICYT - 
Ministerio de Educacion y Cultura, Spain. This conference aims to 
attract papers on all aspects of environmental engineering and 
management. These will include strategic issues, environmental 
management tools, environmental technologies and cleaner 
production, environmental modelling and pollution prevention. The 
topics of education and training will also be addressed. For 
information contact the conference secretariat: Liz Kerr, ENVMAN 
98, Wessex Institute of Technology Ashurst Lodge,Ashurst, 
Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK; tel: +44 (0) 1703 293223; fax: +44 (0) 
1703 292853; e-mail: liz@wessex.ac.uk
ICTSD MEETING ON REGIONAL AGREEMENTS, TRADE AND SUSTAINABLITY: 
ICTSD is convening this international conference in Geneva on 
September 28-29 1998, the first in an annual series of 
conferences in Geneva focusing on regional integration approaches 
to addressing the issues of trade liberalization and sustainable 
development. It will be an opportunity for policy-makers and 
civil society representatives to exchange information and compare 
experiences on the sustainability objectives and performance of 
regional integration schemes; the management of sustainable 
development determinants at the regional level; and their 
relation to multilateral concerns and the global environment. For 
information contact Miguel Jiminez-Pont at tel: +(41-22) 979 94 
78; fax 979 9093; email ictsd@iprolink.ch 
SECOND APEC ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION WORKSHOP "CLEAN PRODUCTION 
FOR A SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ON MINERALS AND METALS": This 
meeting will be held from 28-30 September 1998 in Santiago, 
Chile. For more information contact: Ms. Francisca Reyes, Chilean 
Copper Commission, tel: +56-2-3828234; fax: +56-2-3828301; e-
mail: freyes@cochilco.cl. See also: http://www.dpie.gov.au/re-
sources.energy/energy/apec/ecworkshop/index.html
71ST ANNUAL WATER ENVIRONMENT FEDERATION CONFERENCE & EXPOSITION: 
This meeting will be held from 3 - 7 October 1998 and the Orange 
County Convention Center in Orlando, Florida US. The meeting is 
North America's largest water quality and pollution control 
conference and exposition is expected to attract more than 14,000 
of the world's leading water quality experts and over 700 
exhibiting companies for five days of technical education, 
information exchange, and networking opportunities. For more 
information contact: the Water Environment Federation, 601 Wythe 
Street, Alexandria, VA 22314-1994 US; tel.: +1 (703) 684-2400; 
fax: 1 (703) 684-2492; e-mail: webfeedback@wef.org; Internet: 
http://www.wef.org. 
VILLAGE POWER ‘98: This international conference for renewable 
energy for sustainable development will be held at the World Bank 
in Washington DC, US from 6-8 October 1998. For more information 
contact: Heather Bulmer; tel: +1 (303) 275-4317; e-mail: 
bulmerh@tcplink.nrel.gov; Internet: http://www.rs-
vp.nrel.gov/rsvp/tour/VPConference/VP98.htm 
THIRD MEETING OF APEC ENERGY MINISTERS: This meeting will be held 
in Okinawa, Japan from 9-10 October 1998. For more information 
contact: International Affairs Division, Agency of Natural 
Resources and Energy (ANRE), Ministry of International Trade and 
Industry (MITI); 1-3-1 Kasumigaseki Chiyoda-ku; Tokyo; tel: +81-
3-3501-6759; fax: +81-3-3595-3056; Internet: ht-
tp://lifeserver.co.jp/APEC/index.html
JOHANNESBURG WORLD CONGRESS ON LAND USE AND THE SUSTAINABLE 
DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES: This conference will be held 
from 18-24 October 1998 in Sun City, Johannesburg, South Africa. 
For information contact the International Secretariat, 10 Tonsley 
Place, London SW18 1BP; tel: (44-181) 871 1209; Fax: (44-181) 875 
0686; Internet: http://ltcweb.ltc.wisc.edu/joburg_congress.html
SECOND TOKYO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT 
(TICAD II): The Second Tokyo International Conference on African 
Development (TICAD II) will be held from 19-21 October 1998 in 
Tokyo, co-organized by the Government of Japan, the United 
Nations and the GCA (the Global Coalition for Africa). At this 
Conference, development experience of Japan and Asian countries 
relevant to Africa will be focused on. Discussions will be held 
stressing such priority areas as human development through 
education and health, women's participation in society, 
agricultural development and private sector development. The 
Conference will adopt "Agenda for Action." The secretariat for 
TICAD II has been set up in the Japanese Foreign Ministry. For 
more information see http://www.mofa.go.jp/announce/an-
nounce/1998/7/703-3.html.
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ALTERNATIVES TO GLOBALIZATION: The 
IBON Foundation Inc.and the BAYAN (New Patriotic Alliance) will 
convene the "International Conference on Alternatives to 
Globalization" from 8-11 November 1998 at the Development Academy 
of the Philippines (DAP) in Tagaytay City, Philippines. The 
conference aims to: provide a forum for developing the critique 
of global economic crisis and globalization; exchange experiences 
and views and explore alternatives strategies and paradigms in 
confronting globalization; develop linkages for greater 
cooperation and exchange among various organizations, networks 
and individuals in developing their understanding of and in 
confronting globalization. For more information contact the 
Conference Secretariat, International Conference on Alternatives 
to Globalization, Attn: Mr. Gilbert Sape, IBON Foundation Inc., 
3/F SCC Bldg. 4427 Int. Old Sta. Mesa, Manila, Philippines; tel + 
(63-2) 713-2737 or 713-2729; fax: +(63-2) 716-0108; e-mail: 
ibon@mnl.sequel.net
EUROPEAN ROUNDTABLE ON CLEANER PRODUCTION (ERCP 98): This event, 
to be held from 28-30 October 1998 in Lisbon, Portugal will 
include workshops on sustainable product development, sustainable 
consumption, resource productivity, trade and environment, 
turning products into services, the role of financial 
organizations, economic incentives, and environmental management 
systems. It also includes a pre-conference for African countries. 
For more information, contact: Rui Frazao, National Institute of 
Engineering and Industrial Technology (INETI), Portugal; tel.: 
+351 1 716 5141; fax: +351 1 715 4084; e-mail: 
rui.frazao@mail.ineti.pt; Internet: 
www.ineti.pt/ITA/Conferencia/ERCP1.html
PARTNERS FOR DEVELOPMENT: "Partners for Development" will be 
hosted by the city of Lyon and organized by UNCTAD from 9-12 
November 1998. The summit will bring together representatives 
from governments, NGOs, the private sector, academia, the media, 
and international organizations to launch joint projects where 
market forces serve the cause of development. There will be no 
negotiated texts or official statements, but the conclusion of 
operational partnerships bringing tangible benefits for 
developing countries. For information contact: Partners for 
Development, UNCTAD, Palais des Nations, 1211 Geneva 10 - 
Switzerland, tel.: + 41 22 907 55 55; fax: + 41 22 907 00 22; e-
mail: alessandra vellucci@unctad.org; Internet: 
http://www.unicc.org/unctad/en/special/tb44his5.htm.
SEVENTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE GREENING OF INDUSTRY 
NETWORK: This conference, "Building Alliances for a Sustainable 
Future," will be held in Rome, Italy from 15-18 November 1998. 
The focus of this conference will be the engagement of partners 
in the transition of society towards sustainability. The 
conferences of the Greening of Industry Network are a platform 
for people from diverse backgrounds to exchange ideas, 
experiences and to develop relationships, visions and practices 
for sustainability. For information contact: Ellis Brand, 
University of Twente; tel.: +31 53 489 3203; fax: +31 53 489 
4850; e-mail: M.L.Brand@CSTM.utwente.nl. 
LATIN AMERICAN ENERGY ORGANIZATION: The IV Conference of Latin 
America and the Caribbean will be held from 16 - 19 November 1998 
in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. For more information 
contact: the Latin American Energy Organization (OLADE); Av. 
Mariscal Antonio José de Sucre No. N58-63 & Fernández Salvador; 
OLADE Bldg., Sector San Carlos, P.O. Box 17-11-6413 Quito - 
Ecuador; tel.: +(593-2) 293-529/539-677/538-690; fax: +(593-2) 
539-684/293-530; e-mail: enerlac@olade.org.ec; Internet: 
http://www.olade.org.ec/enerlac/ing/enerlac98.htm
FOURTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND 
ENFORCEMENT: This meeting will be held from 16 - 20 November in 
Monterey, CA, USA. For more information contact: Cheryl 
Wasserman, US-EPA; fax: +1 (202) 260-0129. 
INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE - GLOBAL MEETING OF 
GENERATIONS: This meeting will be held from 13 - 15 January 1999 
in Washington, DC, US. For more information contact: 
International Development Conference; tel.: +1 (202) 884-8580, 
fax: 1 (202) 884-8499; e-mail: idc@idc.org.
1999 MEETINGS OF CSD AD HOC INTERSESSIONAL WORKING GROUPS: The Ad 
hoc Working Group (AHWG) that will address matters related to 
Consumption and Production Patterns, including recommendations 
for sustainable consumption for inclusion in the UN Guidelines 
for Consumer Protection (ECOSOC resolution 1997/53); and Tourism, 
will be co-chaired by Mr. T. Farago (Hungary) and Mr. N. Hanif 
(Pakistan). The meeting of this AHWG will be held in New York on 
February 22-26, 1999. The Ad hoc Working Group which will address 
matters related to Oceans and Seas; and Comprehensive review of 
the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development 
of Small Island Developing States will be Co-Chaired by 
Ambassador John Ashe and by a representative TBA. The meeting of 
this AHWG will be held in New York from 1-5 March, 1999. 
Open-ended consultations on possible recommendations for sus-
tainable consumption for inclusion in the UN Guidelines for Con-
sumer Protection will be chaired by Mr. N. Hanif (Pakistan) will 
begin in October, 1998. For information contact: Zehra Aydin-Si-
pos, Major Groups Focal Point, Division for Sustainable Develop-
ment; tel.: +1 (212) 963-8811 fax: +1 (212) 963-1267; e-mail: 
aydin@un.org; Internet: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/ 
FIFTH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH 
CONFERENCE: The Fifth Annual International Sustainable 
Development Research Conference, to be held from 25-26 March 1999 
in Leeds, UK, provides a forum for discussion and debate on how 
to move toward a more sustainable future. Discussion topics will 
include economic policy instruments, education, and corporate 
contributions to sustainability. For more information contact: 
Conference Manager, ERP Environment, P.O. Box 75, Shipley, West 
Yorkshire BD17 6EZ, UK; tel.: +44 1274 530 408; fax: +44 1274 530 
409. 
NATIONAL TOWN MEETING FOR A SUSTAINABLE AMERICA: The National 
Town Meeting For A Sustainable America will be held from 2-5 May 
1999 in Detroit, Michigan. The meeting will mark the end of a 
year long journey to catalyze a national movement towards 
sustainable development, with events in Detroit and points across 
America.  For more information contact: the President's Council 
on Sustainable Development, 730 Jackson Place, NW;  Washington, 
DC 20503; tel.: +1  (202) 408-5296; Internet: ht-
tp://www.sustainableamerica.org/
CSD-7: The Seventh Session of the Commission on Sustainable 
Development (CSD-7) will be held from 19-30 April 1999 in New 
York. For information contact: Zehra Aydin-Sipos, Major Groups 
Focal Point, Division for Sustainable Development; tel.: +1 (212) 
963-8811 fax: +1 (212) 963-1267; e-mail: aydin@un.org; Internet: 
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/ 
1999 OPEN MEETING OF THE HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL 
CHANGE RESEARCH COMMUNITY: This meeting will be held from 24-26 
June 1999 in Shonan Village, Kanagawa, Japan. An increasing 
number of researchers are interested in the human causes and 
impacts of global environmental change, as well as recognizing 
that local and regional scales are critical for their studies. 
Following two successful international meetings held at Duke 
University in 1995 and at IIASA in 1997, the 1999 Open Meeting 
aims to promote exchanges of information on current research and 
teaching and to encourage networking and community building in 
this emerging field. For more information contact IGES; fax: +81 
468 55 3709; e-mail: hdgec@iges.or.jp; Internet: 
http://www.iges.or.jp/
VI INTERNATIONAL RANGELAND CONGRESS: The Congress will be held in 
Townsville, Australia from 17-23 July 1999. The Congress 
structure and events have now been finalized, including a range 
of tours for the Congress Field Program, an Associate 
Delegates/Accompanying Partners Program and six Professional 
Workshops. The Congress will also have an associated Trade 
Exhibition. For information contact: the Secretariat in 
Townsville; tel: + 61-7-4771-5755 fax: + 61-7-4771-5455; e-mail: 
secretariat-irc@unsw.edu.au; Internet: 
http://irc.web.unsw.edu.au/
TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT 
THIRD LAWASIA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONFERENCE: The Third LAWASIA 
Intellectual Property Conference will be held from July 29-August 
2, 1998 in San Francisco, California. The meeting is sponsored by 
the Law Association for Asia and the Pacific (LAWASIA) and the 
International Law Section of the State Bar of California. 
Speakers include leading practitioners from the U.S., Asia and 
the Pacific, top level executives from leading multinational 
corporations, legal scholars, and key government officials in US 
international trade and intellectual property. Attendees will 
include legal practitioners, in-house counsel, government 
officials, scholars and students from around the world. For more 
information contact: John T.  McDermott ; tel.: +1 (213)-736-
1101; fax: +1 (714) 993-1473; e-mail; cdermo@lmulaw.lmu.edu; 
Internet: http://www.calbar.org/ils.htm. 
ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY IN WORLD TRADE: The British Council 
in London, UK, will hold this conference from 6-9 September 1998. 
The conference will provide senior figures in government, 
business and civil society with an update on prospects for 
environmentally responsible international trade, and will 
consider what policies and practices may be introduced to exploit 
these. For information contact the British Council; tel.: +44 (0) 
1865 316636; fax: +44 (0) 1865 557368; e-mail: international.sem-
inars@britcoun.org; Internet: http://www.britcoun.org/seminars/. 
CONFERENCE ON WORLD TRADE AND THE ENVIRONMENT: This symposium on 
world trade and the environment will be held on 10 September 1998 
from 7:00 - 9:00 pm in the Stimson Room of the House of the 
Association of the Bar of the City of New York, 42 West 44th 
Street, New York, New York. The symposium is sponsored by the New 
York Law School's Center for International Law, the Association 
of the Bar of the City of New York, Committee on International 
Trade, and Committee on International Environmental Law. For more 
information contact the New York Law School: tel.: +1 (212) 431-
2893.
OTHER APEC MEETINGS: The Third APEC Energy Ministers' Meeting 
will be held from 9-10 October in Okinawa, Japan. The Tenth APEC 
Ministerial Meeting will be held from 14 - 15 November 1998 and 
the Sixth 6th APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting will meet from 16-18 
November in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The Eleventh APEC Ministerial 
Meeting will be held from 10-11 September and the Seventh APEC 
Economic Leaders' Meeting will be held on 13 September in 
Auckland, New Zealand. For information contact the Asia-Pacific 
Economic Cooperation Secretariat, 438 Alexandra Road, #14-00, 
Alexandra Point, Singapore 119958; tel.: +(65) 276-1880; fax: 
+(65) 276-1775; e-mail: info@mail.apecsec.org.sg; Internet: 
http://www.apecsec.org.sg/
FIFTH MEETING OF THE EXPERT PANEL ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT: This 
meeting will be held from 19-21 October 1998 in Glion, 
Switzerland. For more information contact Aimee Gonzales, WWF-
International; tel: + (41 22) 995-0302; fax: + (41 22) 364-8219; 
e-mail: agonzales@wwfnet.org. 
ECOLABELING MEETING: "Green Goods 5: Ecolabeling for a 
Sustainable Future will be held from 26-28 October 1998 in 
Berlin, Germany. This OECD-organized event will focus on the 
concerns and needs of developing countries. For more information, 
contact: Green Goods V, OECD, 2 rue André-Pascal, 75775 Paris 
Cedex 16, France; e-mail: GreenGoods.Conference@oecd.org; 
Internet: www.oecd.org/env/divppc.htm
FIFTH INTERNATIONAL MEETING OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR 
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS: This meeting, Beyond Growth: Institutions 
and Policies for Sustainability," will be held from 15-19 
November 1998 in Santiago, Chile. For more information contact 
Osvaldo Sunkel; Organizing Committee, International Society for 
Ecological Economics (ISEE), Universidad de Chile, Diagonal 
Paraguay 265, Torre 15, of. 1303, Santiago, Chile; tel.: +56 2 
678 2308 - 56 2 678 2272; fax: +56 2 678 2581; e-mail: 
ISEEconf@abello.dic.uchile.cl; Internet: ht-
tp://www.uchile.cl/facultades/ISEE3.html.
CLIMATE AND ATMOSPHERE
CLIMATE CHANGE
SECOND EMISSIONS TRADING FORUM: The Institute for Global 
Environmental Strategies (IGES) will hold its second emissions 
forum from 7-8 August in Hayama, Japan. In the second forum, 
participants will discuss: (1) the seller's or buyer's liability 
issue; (2) CDM (topics have not yet specified); (3) Transitional 
measures (early reduction credit system); and (4) Domestic 
allocation. The discussion will be in Japanese, but those 
interested in participating should contact N. Matsuo. at IGES; 
tel.: +81-468-55-3812; fax: +81-468-55-3809; e-mail: 
n_matsuo@iges.or.jp; Internet: http://www.iges.or.jp/
SYMPOSIUM ON GLOBAL ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY: The Joint 
International Symposium on Global Atmospheric Chemistry, which 
will be held from 19-25 August 1998, includes the Ninth Symposium 
of the IAMAS Commission on Atmospheric Chemistry and Global 
Pollution (CACGP), and the Fifth Scientific Conference on the 
International Global Atmospheric Chemistry Project (IGAC). The 
Symposium will be held in Seattle, WA. The focus will be 
"Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Change." For further 
information, contact Patricia Quinn at the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration. 
FOURTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL 
TECHNOLOGIES (GHGT-4): This conference will be held from 30 
August - 2 September 1998 in Interlaken, Switzerland. For 
information contact: Dr. Baldur Eliasson, Head, Energy and Global 
Change, ABB Corporate Research Ltd., Baden-Dättwil , 
Switzerland.; tel.: + 41-56-486 80 31; fax: + 41-56-493 45 69 e-
mail: baldur.eliasson@chcrc.abb.ch. 
INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF THE ENVIRONMENT MEETINGS ON FLEXIBILITY 
MECHANISMS: A series of "policy dialogues" will be organized by 
the International Academy of the Environment in the first two 
weeks of September on the flexibility mechanisms of the climate 
change convention. These meetings are by invitation only and will 
gather about 30 experts from governments, the private sector, 
NGOs and universities with special expertise in these fields. The 
meetings will be held in Geneva and are meant to foster an 
exchange of ideas on some of the most controversial issues to be 
discussed in Buenos Aires. The schedule of these meetings is as 
follows: 28-29 Aug.: Are Joint Implementation and the Clean 
Development Mechanism opportunities for forest sustainable 
development through carbon sequestration projects; 6-7 Sept.: 
International Emissions Trading under the Kyoto Protocol: Rules, 
Procedures and the Participation of Domestic Entities; 7-8 Sept.: 
Can Attractive Models for Joint Implementation and the Clean 
Development Mechanism be Developed for Buenos Aires; 13-14 Sept.: 
Are Carbon Taxes an Alternative to Prevent Climate Change?; 14-16 
Sept.: Implementing Voluntary Initiatives to Mitigate Climate 
Change: Can Voluntary Initiatives Play a Role as an Environmental 
Management Tool?. For more information contact: the International 
Academy of the Environment, 4 chemin de Conches, 1231 Conches, 
Geneva Switzerland; tel.: +41 22 702 1800; fax: +41 22 702 1899; 
e-mail: iae@iae.org
SECOND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CLIMATE AND HISTORY: The 
Second International Conference on Climate and History: "Past and 
present variability - a context for the future," will be held 
from 7-11 September 1998 in Norwich, UK. For more information 
contact: Susan Boland, Climatic Research Unit, Univ. of East 
Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK; tel.: +44-1603-456-161; fax: +44-
1603-507-784; e-mail: s.boland@uea.ac.uk; Internet: 
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/conf
GREENHOUSE GAS BALANCES OF BIOENERGY SYSTEMS WORKSHOP: This 
workshop, "Between COP3 and COP4: The Role of Bioenergy in 
Achieving the Targets Stipulated in the Kyoto Protocol," will be 
held from 8-11 September 1998 at the Spa Hotel Rantasipi Eden in 
Nokia, Finland. The primary goal of IEA Bioenergy Task 25 
("Greenhouse Gas Balances of Bioenergy Systems") is to 
investigate all processes involved in the use of bioenergy 
systems, on a full fuel-cycle basis, with the aim of establishing 
overall greenhouse gas balances. The Task 25 workshop in Nokia, 
Finland, is part of a series of workshops within Task 25 and the 
predecessing Task XV taking place every 6 to 12 months. For more 
detailed information, see http://www.joanneum.ac.at/
CONGRESS OF THE WORLD ENERGY COUNCIL: This meeting will be held 
from 13-17 September 1998 in Houston, Texas, US. For more 
information contact: The Houston Congress; tel.: +1 (202) 331-
0415; fax: +1 (202) 331-0418; Internet: ht-
tp://www.wec98congress.org/
UNFCCC WORKSHOP: The workshop, "Practical Options on 
Methodological Issues for Project-based Mechanisms, including 
Activities Implemented Jointly (AIJ)," will be held from 14-16 
September 1998 in a venue TBD (most likely in Africa). The issues 
to be addressed will include: determination of environmental 
benefits; methodological/practical options for the identification 
of the baseline/reference case; issues related to measurement, 
assessment and reporting; modalities for monitoring, verification 
and certification; reporting requirements; institutional 
implications. From 17-18 September 1998, the workshop "Capacity-
building for Project-based Mechanisms, " to address: lessons from 
the AIJ Pilot Phase; identification of capacity needs in host and 
investor countries; and practical options for building and 
strengthening capacity. For information contact: Mr. Kai-Uwe B. 
SCHMIDT; FCCC Programme Officer; tel.: +49 228 815 1602; fax: +49 
228 815 1999; e-mail: kschmidt@unfccc.de.
INFORMAL CLIMATE NEGOTIATIONS: Ministerial-level officials from 
major industrialized and developing countries will hold informal 
talks in Tokyo from 17-18 September 1998 to find common ground on 
some divisive issues. The meeting will precede COP-4 by about two 
months. Among about two-dozen countries expected to attend the 
Tokyo meeting are: the US, Canada, Germany, Britain, Russia, 
Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, Argentina, China, India, 
Indonesia, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia. For information contact the 
Environment Agency of Japan. For information contact:  the Global 
Environment Department, Environment Agency, 1-2-2 Kasumigaseki, 
Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100 Japan; tel.: +81-3-3580-1375; fax: +81-3-
3504-1634; e-mail: globe.dep@eanet.go.jp
ELEVENTH WORLD CLEAN AIR & ENVIRONMENT CONGRESS (& EXPO): The 
Congress is schedule from 17-18 September 1998 in Durban, South 
Africa. For information contact: Conference Secretariat, PO Box 
36782, Menlo Park 0102, South Africa; fax: +27 12 460 170 e-mail: 
wissing@iafrica.com. 
WORLD RENEWABLE ENERGY CONGRESS: The World Renewable Energy 
Congress will be held from 20-25 September 1998 in Florence, 
Italy. For more information contact: Professor A.A.M. Sayigh, 
Conference Chairman, 147 Hilmanton, Lower Earley, Reading RG6 
4HN, UK; tel.: +44 118 961 1364; fax: +44 118 961 1365; Internet: 
www.netcom.net.uk/~asayigh/wren.html
ENERGY ECONOMY 98: This energy efficiency trade fair, to be held 
from 22-24 September 1998 in Amsterdam, Netherlands, will also 
feature seminars on sustainable energy and energy efficiency in 
construction, new industrial energy-saving technologies, and 
energy and small and medium-sized companies. For more informa-
tion, contact: Dorien Sibbel, Amsterdam RAI, Amsterdam, Nether-
lands. tel.: +31 20 549 1212; fax: +31 20 549 1894; e-mail: 
aquatech@rai.nl; Internet: www.aquatech-rai.com
SIXTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MODELING, MONITORING AND 
MANAGEMENT OF AIR POLLUTION: This meeting will be held from 28-30 
September 1998 in Genova, Italy. The meeting will be organized by 
the Wessex Institute of Technology (UK) and the Universita di 
Genova, Italy. The objective of this meeting is to bring together 
scientists working in industry, research organizations, 
government and academia who are working on monitoring, simulation 
and management of air pollution problems. For information 
contact: Sally Radford, Conference Secretariat, Air Pollution 98, 
WIT; tel.: +44 (0) 1703 293223; fax: +44 (0) 1703 292853; e-mail: 
sradford@wessex.ac.uk
WORKSHOP ON JOINT IMPLEMENTATION AND EMISSIONS TRADING: The 
workshop "Opportunities for International Cooperation under the 
Kyoto Protocol - Emissions Trading and Joint Implementation," 
will be held from 1-2 October 1998 in Moscow, the Russian 
Federation. The International Energy Agency and Russian Ministry 
of Fuel and Energy will organize the meeting, which will focus on 
project-based activities in Annex I countries and emissions 
trading. Participants will consider: project financing (including 
multilateral development banks), barriers to project, lessons 
from activities implemented jointly, and implementation of new 
flexibility mechanisms in countries with economies in transition. 
For more information contact IEA, 9 rue de la Fédération; 75739 
Paris Cedex 15, France; tel.: +33-1 40 57 65 54; fax: +33-1 40 57 
65 59; e-mail: info@iea.org. A workshop report will be posted on 
the IEA website at www.iea.org.
EXPANDING BIOENERGY PARTNERSHIP CONFERENCE: An international 
conference, hosted by the U.S. Department of Energy, will held 
from 4-8 October in Madison, WI. It will emphasize bioenergy 
mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and the implications of 
the Kyoto conference on greenhouse gas emissions. The conference 
also will explore financing issues, and innovative projects from 
around the world. Broad participation is encouraged from those 
studying biomass cultivation, policy issues, market op-
portunities, technical and economic assessments of cropping and 
production, and liquid biofuels. For more information, contact 
Fred Kuzel; e-mail: fkuzel@cglg.orgor 
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON TROPICAL FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE: 
This meeting will be held from 19-22 October 1998, Manila, the 
Philippines. For more information contact the Conference 
Secretariat, Environmental Forestry Program, UPLB College of 
Forestry, 4031 College, Laguna, the Philippines; tel.: + 63-49-
536-2342; fax: +63-49-536-2341; e-mail: 
Rdl@mudspring.uplb.edu.ph. 
1998 EARTH TECHNOLOGIES FORUM (formerly Climate Change 
Conferences and Ozone Protection Technologies Conference): This 
meeting will be held from 26-28 October 1998 in Washington, DC. 
The Forum will address climate change and ozone protection 
technologies and policies. it is co-sponsored by the 
International Climate Change Partnership (ICCP), the US Environ-
mental Protection Agency and the Alliance for Responsible Atmo-
spheric Policy. The conference will provide a forum for 
discussion of current technologies and efforts to bring them into 
the marketplace. It also offers an opportunity to learn more 
about the important linkage between technology issues and policy 
discussions prior to the next climate negotiations in Buenos 
Aires. For conference registration, program and exhibit 
information contact: Heather Tardel; tel.: +1 (703) 807-4052; 
fax: +1 (703) 243-2874; http://www.earthforum.com. 
OZONE
MONTREAL PROTOCOL: The Environmental Effects Assessment Panel 
will meet from 9-17 August 1998 in Hawaii, USA. The Aviation and 
the Global Atmosphere Committee will meet in March 1998 in 
Virginia, USA. The Ad Hoc Working Group of the Legal and 
Technical Experts on Non-Compliance will meet from 11-13 November 
1998 in Cairo, Egypt. The Tenth Meeting of the Parties to the 
Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer will 
be held from 17-27 November 1998 in Cairo, Egypt. For more 
information contact the Secretariat for the Vienna Convention and 
the Montreal Protocol in Nairobi, Kenya; tel: +(254-2) 62-
1234/62-3851; fax: +(254-2) 52-1930 /62-3913; Internet: 
http://www.unep.ch/ozone
BIODIVERSITY
WORLD FEDERATION FOR CULTURE COLLECTIONS (WFCC) WORKSHOP: "The 
Economic Value of Microbial Genetic Resources" will be held at 
the Eighth International Symposium on Microbial Ecology in 
Halifax, Canada, on 12 August 1998. The WFCC Executive Board and 
the Committee for Biodiversity are planning the above workshop as 
part of the on-going activities to resolve some of the 
uncertainties and develop procedures for the distribution of ex-
situ Microbial Genetic Resources (MGRs) within the framework of 
the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). An Information 
Document on Access to Ex-situ Microbial Genetic Resources within 
the Framework of the CBD was finalized and has been widely 
distributed. It is available from the WFCC Web Site ht-
tp://wdcm.nig.ac.jp/wfcc/wfcc.html or as hard copy from the WFCC 
Secretary (alan.doyle@camr.org.uk). Updated information on the 
workshop and background documents will be available at http://wd-
cm.nig.ac.jp/wfcc/index.html
OPEN-ENDED AD HOC WORKING GROUP ON A BIOSAFETY PROTOCOL: This 
meeting will be held from 17 - 28 August 1998 in Montreal, 
Canada. For more information contact: the CBD Secretariat; World 
Trade Center, 393 St. Jacques Street, Suite 300, Montreal, 
Quebec, Canada H2Y 1N9; tel: +1-514-288-2220; fax: +1-514-288-
6588; e-mail: chm@biodiv.org; Internet: http://www.biodiv.org
46th ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE SOCIETY FOR MEDICAL PLANT RESEARCH: 
This meeting will be held from 31 August - 3 September in Vienna, 
Austria. For more information contact: Dr. W. Kubelka/Dr. B. 
Kopp/Dr. J. Jurenitsch; Institute of Pharmacognosy, University of 
Vienna, Centre of Pharmacy, Althanstrahe 14, A-1090 Wien, 
Austria; Tel: +43-1-31336-8067; fax: +43-1-31336-772; e-mail: 
Pharmacognosy@univie.ac.at or johann.jurenitsch@univie.ac.at
XV EUCARPIA GENERAL CONGRESS: The meeting "Genetics and Breeding 
for Crop Quality and Resistance" will be held from 21-25 
September 1998 in Viterbo, Italy. For information contact: Dr. 
Mario A. Pagnotta, XV Eucarpia Congress, University of Tuscia, 
Via S.C. de Lellis, 01100, Viterbo, Italy; e-mail: eucar-
pia@unitus.it; Fax: +39-761-357256; Internet: http://www.uni-
tus.it/confsem/eucarpia/eu.html
INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON NATURAL SACRED SITES, CULTURAL 
DIVERSITY AND BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY: This meeting will be held 
from 22-25 September 1998 by UNESCO in Paris, France. For more 
information contact: Dr. Marie Roue; Director, URA 882 
Laboratoire d’Ethnobiologie, Museum National d’Histoire 
Naturelle, 57 rue Cuvier 75005, Paris, France; tel.: +33-1-40-79-
3668 or 3682; fax: +33-1-40-79-3669; e-mail: roue@mnhm.fr
CONFERENCE ON GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS IN NORDIC HABITATS-
SUSTAINABLE USE OR LOSS OF DIVERSITY: This conference will be 
held from 1-2 October 1998 in Helsinki, Finland. For more 
information, contact: Marja Ruohonen-Lehto; tel: +358-9-4030-
0541; e-mail: marja.ruohonen-lehto@vyh.fi; or Hans Erik Svart; 
tel.: +45-39-47-20-00; e-mail: hes@sns.dk.
SECOND ANNUAL EUROPEAN BIOTECHNOLOGY BUSINESS CONFERENCE: This 
conference will be held from 27-30 October 1998 in Brussels, 
Belgium. For more information, contact: EuropaBio, Avenue de 
l'Armee 6, B-1040 Brussels, Belgium; tel.: +32-2-735-0313; fax: 
+32-2-735-4960; e-mail: mail@europa-bio.be; internet: 
http://www.europa-bio.be.
MEETINGS UNDER THE CONVENTION ON BIODIVERSITY: A Liaison Group of 
Experts on Agro-Biodiversity meeting is tentatively scheduled for 
October/November 1998. A meeting on the Conservation and 
Sustainable Use of Inland Waters is tentatively scheduled for 
November. For more information contact the CBD Secretariat, World 
Trade Centre, 393 St. Jacques Street, Montreal, Quebec, Canada 
H2Y 1N9; tel.: +1-514-288-2220; fax: +1-514-288-6588; e-mail: 
chm@biodiv.org; Internet: http://www.biodiv.org. 
STRATEGIES AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR CONSERVATION OF SUSTAINABLE USE 
OF BIODIVERSITY IN WEST ASIA AND NORTH AFRICA LANDSCAPES: This 
meeting will be held from 7-12 November 1998 in Marsa Matrouh, 
Egypt. This international workshop is organized to focus on 
strategies and technologies for conserving and for sustainable 
use of biological diversity in plant communities in the Middle 
East. In addition, "hands on" training in the use of latest GIS 
software for plant genetic resources and ecosystem assessment, 
monitoring, managing and restoring plant resources and 
communities in the Middle East. For information contact: IPGRI-
WANA/CA; Regional Office, c/o ICARDA, P.O. Box 5466; Aleppo, 
Syria; e-mail: g.ayad@cgnet.com.
BIO-INDUSTRY CHALLENGE: This meeting will be held from 10-12 
November 1998 in Lyon, France. For more information contact: 
Anthony Artuso; BIOTRADE Initiative, University of Charleston, 66 
George Street, Charleston, SC 29424; tel.: +1-843-953-5825; fax: 
+1-843-953-8140; e-mail:artusoa@cofc.edu; or Juan A. de Castro; 
Coordinator, BIOTRADE Initiative, UNCTAD, Palais de Nations, 
Geneva CH10, Switzerland; tel: +41-22-907-5701; fax: +41-22-907-
0044; 
e-mail: juan.de.castro@unctad.org
SECOND ASIA-PACIFIC CONFERENCE ON BIOTECHNOLOGY: This meeting 
will be held from 23-27 November 1998 in Perth, Western Australia 
(WA). This conference will provide a blend of papers on basic 
scientific and conservation issues and the application of new 
biotechnologies to these. For more information contact 
Biodiversity, Biotechnology & Biobusiness, Congress West Pty Ltd. 
PO Box 1248, West Perth WA 6872, Australia; fax. +61 8 9322 
1734l; e-mail: biodiversity@science.murdoch.edu.au
SIXTH MEETING OF THE OPEN-ENDED AD HOC WORKING GROUP ON A 
BIOSAFETY PROTOCOL: This meeting is tentatively scheduled from 
15-19 February 1999 in Montreal, Canada. An extraordinary COP 
will be held from 22-23 February 1999. For more information 
contact: CBD Secretariat; World Trade Center, 393 St. Jacques 
Street, Suite 300, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H2Y 1N9; tel.: +1-
514-288-2220; fax: +1-514-288-6588; e-mail: chm@biodiv.org; 
Internet: http://www.biodiv.org
BIODIVERSITY, BIOTECHNOLOGY & BIOBUSINESS: The 2nd Asia-Pacific 
Conference on Biotechnology will be held from 23 - 27 November 
1998 in Perth, Australia. Organized by WA Branch, Australian 
Biotechnology Association with Department of Conservation and 
Land Management and Murdoch University. (Contact: Michael 
Borowitzca; Murdoch University, Biodiversity, Biotechnology & 
Biobusiness, Congress Werst Pty Ltd, PO Box 1248, West Perth WA 
6872, Australia; Fax: +61-8-9322-1734; e-mail: 
biodiversity@science.murdoch.edu.au
SIXTH EXTRAORDINARY SESSION OF THE COMMISSION ON GENETIC 
RESOURCES FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE: The Sixth Extraordinary 
Session for the revision of the International Undertaking will be 
held in the latter part of 1998 at FAO Headquarters in Rome. For 
date confirmation and more details, please contact: FAO, Viale 
delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy; tel: +39-6-52251; 
fax: +39-6-52253152; Internet: http://www.fao.org or 
http://web.icppgr.fao.org
EIGHTH SESSION OF THE COMMISSION ON GENETIC RESOURCES FOR FOOD 
AND AGRICULTURE: The next regular session of the CGFRA will take 
place in the second quarter of 1999. For more information, 
contact: FAO; tel: +39-6-52251; fax: +39-6-52253152; Internet: 
http://web.icppgr.fao.org.
FORESTS
XXI IUFRO WORLD CONGRESS: This meeting of the International Union 
of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO) will be held from 7 - 12 
August 2000 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. For more information 
contact the Chair of the Organizing Committee, Forest Research 
Institute, Kepong, 52109 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; fax: +603-636-
7753; e-mail: Iufroxxi@frim.gov.my; Internet: ht-
tp://frim.gov.my/iufro.html
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE INVENTORY AND MONITORING OF 
FORESTED ECOSYSTEMS: This meeting will be held in Boise, Idaho, 
US from 16 - 20 August 1998. The meeting will provide a forum for 
the exchange of information and new technologies pertaining to 
inventory, monitoring, and modeling of forested ecosystems. For 
more information contact: Mark Hansen, USDA Forest Service, 1992 
Folwell Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108; fax: +1 (612) 649-5285; e-
mail: hanse034@maroon.tc.umn.edu; Internet: 
http://dendron.fr.umn.edu/burk/boise/
IUFRO/FAO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE 
FOREST MANAGEMENT: This meeting will held from 24-28 August 1998 
in Melbourne, Australia. For more information contact: David 
Flinn, Centre for Forest Tree Technology, Australia; e-mail 
d.flinn@dce.vic.gov.au
CONTRIBUTION OF GENETICS TO THE SUSTAINED MANAGEMENT OF GLOBAL 
FOREST RESOURCES: IUFRO and FAO will sponsor this meeting, which 
will be held from 22 - 28 August 1998 in Beijing, China. The aim 
of the conference is to discuss accomplishments, trends and 
future developments, redefine the role of forest genetics and 
breeding in contemporary forestry and set priorities for future 
research and development. For more information contact: Prof. 
Hong Jusheng, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Wan Shou Shan, Beijing 
100091, China; fax: +86-10-62884229; e-mail: 
zhangbp@caf.forestry.ac.cn. 
INTERGOVERNMENTAL FORUM ON FORESTS: The Intergovernmental Forum 
on Forests (IFF) will hold its second session from 24 August - 4 
September in 1998 Geneva. The third session will be held from 3-
14 May 1999, Geneva, Switzerland.For more information contact the 
Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests, Two United 
Nations Plaza, 12th Floor, New York, NY 10017 USA; tel: +1 (212) 
963-6208; fax: + 1 (212) 963-3463; Internet: 
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/iff.htm.
INTERNATIONAL SUSTAINABILITY CONFERENCE: The Task Force on 
Sustainable Forest Management will sponsor this meeting, which 
will be held from 24-28 August 1998 in Heidelberg Victoria, 
Australia. For more information contact: David W Flinn, Centre 
for Forest Tree Technology, PO Box 137, Heidelberg, Victoria 
3084, Australial; tel.: +60-3-94508 666, fax: +60-394508 644, 
email: d.flinn@dce.vic.gov.au. 
SEMINAR ON FORESTRY RESEARCH: The seminar "Forestry research on 
the threshold of the 3rd millennium: the importance of research 
for teaching and everyday life in forestry" will be held in 
Opono, Czech Republic from 2-6 September 1998. The Seminar will 
be held under joint auspices of IUFRO Region 2 - Central Europe 
IUFRO Division 6 Forestry and Game Management Research Institute 
of the Czech Republic with the support of Forestry Division of 
the Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech Republic. The seminar 
will bring together researchers and heads of forestry depart-
ments, executives of forestry administrations responsible for re-
search from East- and West- European countries, but participants 
from other regions are not excluded. For more information 
contact: Karel Vancura; tel: +420 2 2181 2357; fax +420 2 2181 
2988; e-mail: vancura@mze.cz or vancura@vulhm.cz. 
INTERNATIONAL CONSULTATION ON RESEARCH AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN 
FORESTRY: This meeting will be held from 7-10 September 1998 in 
Ort/Gmunden, Austria and will be sponsored by Indonesia and 
Austria in cooperation with IUFRO, CIFOR, FAO and the IFF 
Secretariat. The First Steering Committee meeting was held in 
Vienna, Austria, 27-28 November. The second meeting of the 
Steering Committee was held 1-3 April at CIFOR in Bogor, 
Indonesia. For information contact: Heinrich Schmutzenhofer, 
IUFRO Secretariat, tel: 43-1-8770151; fax: 43-1-8779355; e-mail: 
hschmutz@forvie.ac.at; or Ingwald Gschwandtl, Ministry of 
Agriculture and Forestry, Vienna, Austria, tel: 43-1-21323 ext 
7207; fax: 43-1-21323 ext 7216; e-mail ing-
wald.gschwandtl@bmlf.gv.at
IN-DEPTH STUDY ON FOREST CONSERVATION AND PROTECTED AREAS: An 
International Experts Workshop is scheduled for 9-11 September in 
Canberra, Australia on an In-depth Study on Forest Conservation 
and Protected Areas, in support of the IFF, which will be 
sponsored by the Government of Australia. The tentative date of 
completion is the end of December 1998. For more information 
contact: Rod Holesgrove; e-mail Rod.Holesgrove@ea.gov.au
20th SESSION OF THE FAO LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN FORESTRY 
COMMISSION: This meeting will be held from 10 - 14 September in 
Havana, Cuba. For information contact: Secretariat, 
Intergovernmental Forum on Forests; Division of Sustainable 
Development, Department of Social and Economic Affairs, United 
Nations, Two UN Plaza, 12th Floor, New York, New York 10017 USA; 
tel: +1-212-963-6208; fax: +1-212-963-3463, e-mail: 
hurtubia@un.org
NORTH AMERICAN REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON UNDERLYING CAUSES OF 
DEFORESTATION: The North American Regional Workshop on the 
Underlying Causes of Deforestation and Forest Degradation will be 
held in Winnipeg, Canada in late September or early October 1998. 
The meeting is part of a joint NGO-government initiative 
contributing to the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF), the 
regional workshop will yield case studies and recommendations to 
be presented at a global workshop in Costa Rica, 18-22 January 
1999. For more information contact: Juliette Moussa, Biodiversity 
Action Network (BIONET); tel.: 202-547-8902; fax: 202-265-0222; 
e-mail: bionet@igc.org; Internet:http://www.igc.apc.org/bionet
20TH SESSION OF THE FAO LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN FORESTRY 
COMMISSION: This meeting will be held from 10-14 September 1998 
in Havana, Cuba. For information contact: FAO, Viale delle Terme 
di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy; tel.: +39(6) 57051; fax: +39(6) 
57053152; e-mail: Postmaster@fao.org; Internet: 
http://www.fao.org. 
GLOBAL CONCERNS FOR FOREST UTILIZATION - SUSTAINABLE USE AND 
MANAGEMENT: This meeting will be held from 5-8 October 1998 in 
Miyazaki, Japan. For more information contact: Kiyoshi Yukutake, 
Miyazaki University, Faculty of Agriculture & Forest Economics, 
1-1 Gakuen Kibanadai Nishi Miyazaki 889-21 Japan; tel.: +81-985-
582 811; fax: +81-985-582 884; website: http://www.miyazaki-
u.ac.jp/FORESEA
FOREST ECOSYSTEM AND LAND USE IN THE MOUNTAIN AREAS: This meeting 
will be held from 12-17 October in Seoul, Korea. For more 
information contact: Don Lee, Seoul National University, College 
of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Department of Forest Resources, 
103 Seodoondong, Suwon 441-744 Korea; tel.: +82-331-2902327; fax: 
+82-331-2931797; email: leedk@agri.snu.ac.kr.
ENVIRONMENTAL FOREST SCIENCE CONFERENCE: This meeting will be 
held from 19-23 October 1998 at Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. 
For more information contact: IUFRO8, Kyoto University, Uji, 
Kyoto 611, Japan; tel.:+81-774-384110, 384111, fax: +81-774-
384300, +81-774-325597; e-mail: iufro8-sec@bio.mie-u.ac.jp;
Internet: http://www.bio.mieu.ac.jp/iufro8/bulletin2.html.
29TH SESSION OF THE FAO EUROPEAN FORESTRY COMMISSION: This 
meeting will be held from 19-23 October 1998 in Finland. For 
information contact: FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 
Rome, Italy; tel.: +39(6) 57051; fax: +39(6) 57053152; e-mail: 
Postmaster@fao.org; Internet: http://www.fao.org. 
TOWARD A UNIFIED FRAMEWORK FOR INVENTORYING AND MONITORING 
FORESTECOSYSTEM RESOURCES: This North American Symposium will be 
held from 1-6 November in Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. For more 
information contact: Dr. Celedonio Aguirre-Bravo; Mexico Research 
Coordinator, USADA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research 
Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, 80526-2098 USA; tel: +1-970-498-
1164; fax: +1-970-498-1010; e-mail: caguirre/mrs@fs.fed.us
25TH SESSION OF THE INTERNATIONAL TROPICAL TIMBER COUNCIL: This 
meeting will be held from 3-9 November 1998 in Yokohama, Japan. 
For more information contact: International Organizations Center, 
5th Floor, Pacifico-Yokohama, 1-1-1, Minato-Mirai, Nishi-ku, 
Yokohama, 220 Japan; tel: +:(81-45) 223-1111; fax: +(81-45) 223-
1110; Itto@mail.itto-unet.ocn.ne.jp; Internet: 
http://www.itto.or.jp
19TH SESSION OF THE FAO NORTH AMERICAN FOREST COMMISSION: This 
meeting will be held from 16-20 November 1998 in Villahermosa, 
Mexico. For information contact: FAO, Viale delle Terme di 
Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy; tel.: +39(6) 57051; fax: +39(6) 
57053152; e-mail: Postmaster@fao.org; Internet: 
http://www.fao.org. 
13TH SESSION OF THE FAO NEAR EAST FORESTRY COMMISSION: This 
meeting will be held from 6-9 December 1998 in Damascus, Syria. 
For information contact: Jean Clement; tel +39-6-5705 3589; fax: 
39-6-5705 2151; e-mail: jeanclaude.clement@fao.org; Internet: 
http://www.fao.org.
CONTRIBUTIONS OF SCIENCE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF FOREST POLICIES: 
This meeting will be held from 7 - 15 January 1999 in Pretoria, 
South Africa. For more information contact: Perry J. Brown, 
Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station, School of 
Forestry, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana 59812, US; 
tel.: +1 (406) 243-5522; fax: +1 (406) 243-4845, e-mail: 
pbrown@selway.umt.edu.
NGOS/GOVERNMENT OF COSTA RICA INITIATIVE ON UNDERLYING CAUSES OF 
DEFORESTATION AND FOREST DEGRADATION: This meeting will be held 
from 18-22 January 1999 and will be hosted by Costa Rica and 
organized by NGOs and the Government of Costa Rica in cooperation 
with UNEP. For information contact: Global Secretariat, Ms. 
Simone Lovera, email: slovera@nciucn.nl.
EXPERT GROUP MEETING ON INTERNATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS AND MECHANISMS 
TO PROMOTE THE MANAGEMENT, CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE 
DEVELOPMENT OF ALL TYPES OF FORESTS: In support of IFF Category 
III, a small expert meeting with government nominated experts 
both from the north and from the south, as well as international 
experts invited in their personal capacity is envisaged for 
February 1999 (four days), in San Jose, Costa Rica. . Support for 
this initiative in the form of partnerships with other countries 
is being sought. For information contact: Ms. Patricia Chavez, 
the Permanent Mission of Costa Rica to the United Nations, tel: 
+1 (212) 986-6373; fax: +1 (212) 986-6842.
NEW APPROACHES TO INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY 
FORESTS FOR THE 21ST CENTURY: This meeting is scheduled for 
September 1999 in Belém, Pará, Brazil and is organized by 
CATIE/WWF/CIFOR. For more information contact: Dr. Natalino 
Silva; Brazilian Agricultural Research Corp., CP 48, CEP 66240 
Belém, Pará, Brazil; tel: +55-91-2266622; fax: +55-91-2269845; e-
mail: 
natalino@cpatu.embrapa.br, or natalino@amazon.com.br. 
ECOLOGICAL HISTORY - METHODS AND APPLICATIONS, A LABORATORY OF 
ECOLOGICAL HISTORY TOWARD THE YEAR 2000: This meeting will be 
held in Sardinia, Italy in September 1999. For more information 
contact: Prof. Alessandra Zanzi Sulli; Istituto di Selvicoltura, 
Via San Bonaventura 13, I-50145 Firenze, Italy; tel.: +39-55-3023 
1248, fax: +39-55-307 263, e-mail: zanzi@cesit1.unifi.it
DESERTIFICATION
MEETINGS UNDER THE CCD: Thematic Workshop on Promotion of 
Rational Use of Rangelands and the Development of Fodder Crops - 
4-7 August 1998 in Addis, Ababa, Ethiopia; CST Meetings on 
Benchmarks and Indicators - 1-3 September, 1998 in Geneva, 
Switzerland; International Expert Group Meeting for the 
Preparation of a Sub-regional Action Programme (SRAP) in Western 
Asia - 14-16 September 1998 in Muscat, Oman; Thematic Workshop on 
Promotion of a Network for the Integrated Management of 
International River Lake and Hydrogeological Basins - 29 Septem-
ber - 2 October 1998 in Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire; Africa, The 
Caribbean and Latin America Forum on Implementation of NAPs - 14-
16 October, 1998 in Recife, Brazil; Thematic Workshop n5: 
Promotion of new and renewable energy sources and technologies - 
26-29 October 1998 in Tunis, Tunisia; African Regional 
Preparatory Conference in context of the 2nd COP to the UNCCD - 
2-5 November, 1998 in Tunis, Tunisia; and International Expert 
Group Meeting on the Regional Action Programme (RAP) for Asia - 
10-13 November 1998 in Bangkok, Thailand. For more information 
contact: Interim secretariat CCD; tel.: +(41-22) 979 9111; fax: 
(41-22) 979 9030/31; e-mail: secretariat@unccd.ch; Internet: 
http://www.unccd.ch/
ASIAN EXPERT GROUP MEETING ON THE THEMATIC PROGRAMME NETWORKS: 
This meeting will be held from 9-12 November 1998 at the ESCAP 
Office in Bangkok, Thailand. The meeting will consider proposals 
on: Thematic Programme Network (TPN)1 on Desertification 
Monitoring and Assessment, to be hosted by China; TPN 2 on 
Agroforestry and Soil Conservation in Arid, Semi-arid and Dry 
Sub-humid Areas, to be hosted by India; and TPN 3 on Rangeland 
Management in Arid Areas including Fixation of Sand Dunes, for 
which the Government of Iran has officially expressed interest in 
hosting; and the RAP in Asia (PROCESS). For more information 
contact: Interim secretariat CCD; tel.: +(41-22) 979 9111; fax: 
(41-22) 979 9030/31; e-mail: secretariat@unccd.ch; Internet: 
http://www.unccd.ch/
SECOND CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES: COP-2 will be held in Dakar, 
Senegal from 30 November-11 December 1998. Contact: CCD 
Secretariat, Geneva Executive Center, 11/13 Chemin des Anémones, 
CH-1219 Châtelaine, Geneva, Switzerland; tel: +(41 22) 979-9419; 
fax: +(41 22) 979-9030/31; e-mail: Secretariat@unccd.ch; 
Internet: http://www.unccd.ch
OCEANS AND COASTS
EXPO ‘98: The 1998 Lisbon World Exposition (EXPO ‘98) will be 
held from 22 May - 30 September 1998 in Lisbon, with the theme 
"The Oceans, a Heritage for the Future." For information contact 
the Secretariat: e-mail: info@expo98.pt; Internet: ht-
tp://www.expo98.pt/pt/default.html
UN CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA: The Fourth Session of the 
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf - (CLCS) will 
be held from 31 August - 4 September 1998. The International 
Seabed Authority - (ISBA) - Assembly will hold its fourth session 
from 16 - 27 March 1998 (first part) and 17-28 August 1998 
(second part). The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea 
- (ITLOS) will hold its fourth meeting from 6-31 October 1998. 
For more information contact the Division for Ocean Affairs and 
the Law of the Sea, Office of Legal Affairs; e-mail: doa-
los@un.org; Internet: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/.
ORDER FOR THE OCEANS AT THE TURN OF THE CENTURY: The Fridtjof 
Nansen Institute will convene an international conference on the 
oceans from 7-11 August 1998 in Oslo, Norway. The Conference is 
intended as a forum for an informal and free exchange of ideas 
and perspectives between policy- and decision-makers and leading 
experts in the field of contemporary ocean policy and law of the 
sea. For information contact: the Fridtjof Nansen Institute, P.O. 
Box 326, N-1324 Lysaker, Norway; tel.: +47 67 11 19 00; fax: +47 
67 11 19 10; e-mail: conference@fni.no; Internet: 
http://www.tjener.uninett.no/~fni/los98.htm
SIXTH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON HISTORY OF OCEANOGRAPHY: This 
meeting will be held from 15-20 August 1998 in Qingdao, China. 
For information contact: G.K. Tan, First Institute of 
Oceanography, SOA, 3A Hongdao Branch Road, Qingdao 266003, P.R. 
China; tel: 86-532-288-3127; fax: 86-532-287-9562; e-mail: 
fioljc@ns.qd.sd.cn
CHALLENGES FOR THE NEW MILLENIUM: This meeting "Shaping the 
Future of Fisheries Science and the Fisheries Profession" will be 
held from 23- 27 August 1998 in Hartford, Connecticut, USA. For 
information contact: American Fisheries Society; Internet: 
http://www.esd.ornl.gov/socieities/AFS/annual98/index.html
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SATELLITES, OCEANOGRAPHY AND SOCIETY 
(ICSOS): This conference will be held from 17 - 21 August 1998 in 
Lisbon, Portugal. ESA, EXPO '98, IGBP, IOC, NASA, NOAA, SCOR and 
WCRP will sponsor the meeting. For more information contact: Dr. 
David Halpern, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, MS 300-323, California 
Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91109-8099, USA; e-mail: 
halpern@pacific.jpl.nasa.gov. 
INTERNATIONAL OIL SPILL CONFERENCE (SPILLCON'98): This meeting 
will be held from 17-21 August 1998 at the International 
Conference Centre, Cairns, Queensland, Australia. For information 
contact: Australian Maritime Safety Authority; e-mail: 
michael.julian@amsa.gov.au or j.morrison@meetingplanners.com.au. 
SIXTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PALEOCEANOGRAPHY (ICP-VI): This 
meeting will be held from 23-28 August 1998 in Lisbon, Portugal. 
This meeting is sponsored by EXPO’98, Instituto Geológico e 
Mineiro (IGM), the European Commission and IOC. For information 
contact: Dr. Fátima Abrantes, IGM, Associaçao Portuguesa de 
Paleoceanografia; tel.: 346 39 15; fax: 342 46 09.
THE ATLANTIC - PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE: This meeting will be 
held from 30 August - 2 September 1998 in Lisbon, Portugal and 
will be organized by the International Geographic Union. For 
information contact Prof. Carminda Cavaco, Centro de Estudos 
Geographicos (CEG); tel: + (351 1) 796 5469 / 794 0218; fax +(351 
1) 793 8690; e-mail: ceg@mail.telepac.pt; Internet: ht-
tp://www.geocities.com/athens/acropolis/2510/index.html
AQUACULTURE EUROPE '98: This conference will be held from 5-9 
June 1998 in Bordeaux, France. For more information contact the 
EAS Secretariat, Slijkensesteenweg 4, B-8400 Oostende, Belgium; 
tel.: +(059) 32 38 59; fax: +(059) 32 10 05; e-mail: 
eas@unicall.be. 
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SATELLITES, OCEANOGRAPHY AND SOCIETY: 
This meeting will be held from 17-21 August 1998 in Lisbon, 
Portugal. For more information contact: Dr. David Halpern, Cal 
Tech; fax: +1 (818) 393-6720;e-mail: 
halpern@pacific.jpl.nasa.gov.
OCEANS '98 - CONFERENCE ON COASTAL MANAGEMENT & OCEAN RESOURCES: 
This meeting will be held in Nice, France from 28 September - 1 
October 1998. The conference is organized by IEEE Oceanic 
Engineering, under the theme of "Engineering for Sustainable Use 
of the Oceans". The main subject is various marine aspects 
relating to " Green Enertopia" Centres, remote areas, on land or 
at sea, which serve as real-world models of sustainable 
development for their host countries. For more information 
contact: Hawaii Energy Institute; fax: +1 808 956 2335; e-mail: 
daver@hgea.org; Internet: http://www.ifremer.fr/oceans98/
FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON REMOTE SENSING FOR MARINE AND 
COASTAL ENVIRONMENTS: This meeting will be held from 5-7 October 
1998, San Diego, California, USA. This conference will cover 
various aspects of remote sensing of the marine environment and 
will highlight remote sensing applications focusing on solving 
real-world problems in marine and coastal environments. For 
information contact: ERIM Conferences; tel.: +1 (313) 994 1200, 
ext. 3234; fax +1 (313) 994 5123; e-mail: wallman@erim.org; 
Internet: http://www.erim.org/CONF/conf.html.
SYMPOSIUM ON MARINE POLLUTION: This Symposium will be held from 5 
- 9 October 1998 in Monaco. It will be organized by International 
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and co-sponsored by the IOC, UNEP and 
IMO, in cooperation with: CIESM and the Marine Environment 
Laboratory (MEL). For information contact: the Conference 
Secretariat, Vienna International Centre, Wagramerstrasse 5, PO 
Box 100, 1400 Vienna, Austria; tel: +(43 1) 2060 21312/21311; fax 
+(43 1) 20607, e-mail: Official.mail@IAEA.ORG.
COASTAL ENVIRONMENT 98: The Second International Conference 
(Coastal Environment '98), entitled "Environmental Problems in 
Coastal Regions," will be held in Cancun, Mexico from 8-10 
September 1998. The meeting will be organized by the Wessex 
Institute of Technology (WIT), Southampton, UK. For information 
contact Liz Kerr, WIT; tel: + 44 (0) 1 703 293223; fax: + 44 (0) 
1 703 292853; e-mail: liz@wessex.ac.uk.
INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IN 
OCEANOGRAPHY: This Symposium (ITO'98) will be held from 12-16 
October 1998 in Goa, India. For information contact: Shri. 
Vishwas Chavan, Organizing Secretary, National Institute of 
Oceanography, Dona Paula, Goa 403004, India; fax: +(91 832) 223 
340/229 102; e-mail: ito98@csnio.ren.nic.in; Internet: 
http://www.nio.org/ito98/
APEC OCEANS CONFERENCE - SUSTAINABLE OCEANS: The APEC Oceans 
Conference - "Sustainable Oceans: Realizing the Opportunities for 
Economies" is scheduled from 13 -16 October 1998 (tentative) in 
Honolulu, Hawaii, USA. For more information contact: APEC, 438, 
Alexandra Road, #14-01/04 Alexandra Point, Singapore 119958; tel: 
+(65) 276-1880; fax: +(65) 276-1775; e-mail: 
info@mail.apecsec.org.sg; Internet: http://www.apecsec.org.sg/
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MARINE DISASTERS: This meeting will 
be held from 2-5 November 1998 in Beijing, China. For information 
contact: Jihui Yan, National Marine Environment Forecasting 
Center, P.R. China, tel.: +(86) (10) 6217 3598; facsimile: +(86) 
(10) 6217 3620; e-mail: Yanjh@axp800.nmefc.gov.cn.or Max Coon, 
NorthWest Research Associates, Inc., tel.: + (425) 644-9660; 
facsimile: + (425) 644-8422; e-mail: max@nwra.com;
Internet: http://www.nwra.com/nwra/mar_dis_conf98/
FOURTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE MEDITERRANEAN COASTAL 
ENVIRONMENT: This meeting will be held in Anatalya, Turkey from 
2-6 November 1999. For information contact the MEDCOAST 
Secretariat; Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey; 
tel.: +90 312 210 54 29; fax: +90 312 210 1412; e-mail: 
medcoast@rorqual.cc.metu.edu.tr
CONFRONTING UNCERTAINTY IN THE EVALUATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF 
FISHERIES MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS: This meeting is scheduled for 16-19 
November 1998 in Cape Town, South Africa. This meeting is 
organized by ICES and co-sponsored by FAO and ICLARM. For 
information contact: Dr T.K. Stokes, CEFAS, Lowestoft Laboratory, 
Lowestoft, Suffolk NR33 0HT, England, UK; e-mail: 
kevinstokes@compuserve.com; or t.k.stokes@cefas.co.uk. 
OCEAN COMMUNITY CONFERENCE '98: This conference is scheduled from 
16-19 November 1998 in Baltimore, Maryland, USA and organized by 
the Marine Technology Society (MTS). For information contact 
ITCMS; tel. in US & Canada: +1 (800) 810 4333; tel. outside US & 
Canada: +1 (732) 562 6826; fax: +1 (732) 981 1203; e-mail: mts-
occ98@ieee.org; Internet: 
http://www.noaa.gov/public-affairs/MTS98.html. 
CLIVAR SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE - WORLD CLIMATE RESEARCH PROGRAMME: 
This conference is scheduled from 1 - 3 December 1998 and will be 
co-sponsored by IOC, WMO and ICSU. For more information contact: 
Art Alexiou, IOC/UNESCO; e-mail: a.alexiou@unesco.org or Dr. 
Andreas Villwock, International CLIVAR Project Office c/o Max-
Planck-Institut fur Meteorologie, Bundeststr. 55, D-20146 
Hamburg, Germany; tel.: + (49) 40 41173 414; fax: (49) 40 41173 
413; e-mail: andreas.villwock@clivar.dkrz.de; Internet: 
http://www.drkz.de/clivar/hp.html.
STATES PARTIES TO CONVENTION ON LAW OF SEA: The States parties 
are to meet again from 19-28 May 1999, to deal with a number of 
issues, including the election of seven of the 21 judges of the 
Tribunal and to consider its next budget. For more information 
contact the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, 
Office of Legal Affairs; e-mail: doalos@un.org; Internet: 
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/
WETLANDS
WETLANDS CONFERENCE: An international conference entitled "Ponds 
and Pond Landscapes of Europe: appreciation, conservation, 
management" will take place in Maastricht, the Netherlands, from 
30 August to 2 September 1998. For further details, contact Dr 
John Boothby at Liverpool John Moores University, UK: j.booth-
by@livjm.ac.uk
WISE USE OF WETLANDS: INDIGENOUS USE WORKSHOP: The Centre for 
Tropical Wetlands Management at the Northern Territory 
University, Darwin, Australia, will hold a workshop on "Wise Use 
of Wetlands by Indigenous People in Northern Australia" from 29-
30 September 1998 at Batchelor, approx 100 km south of Darwin. 
For further information contact Maryanne McKaige or Jenny Carter 
at the Centre for Tropical Wetland Management, Darwin.; tel +61-
(0)8-89466726; fax +61-(0)8-89466847; e-mail ctwm@ntu.edu.au
SECOND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON WETLANDS AND DEVELOPMENT: The 
Second International Conference on Wetlands and Development will 
be held from 8-14 November 1998 in Dakar, Senegal. The conference 
will be organized by Wetlands International at the invitation of 
the Government of Senegal in cooperation with the Ministry of 
Environment and Nature Protection of Senegal, IUCN, and the World 
Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). For more information contact: Maria 
Pierce, Wetlands International, Marijkeweg 11, PO Box 7002, 6700 
CA Wageningen, the Netherlands; tel. +31 317 474711; fax. +31 317 
474712; e-mail: pierce@wetlands.agro.nl; 
Internet: http://www.wetlands.agro.nl/wetl_sen.html
GLOBAL BIODIVERSITY FORUM: A session of the Global Biodiversity 
Forum will be convened in San José, Costa Rica from 7-9 May 1999, 
immediately prior to the 7th meeting of the Conference of the 
Parties to the Convention on Wetland (Ramsar, Iran, 1971), which 
meets from 10-19 May. For more information contact: contact the 
Ramsar Convention Bureau, Rue Mauverney 28, CH-1196 Gland, 
Switzerland; tel. +41 22 999 0170; fax +41 22 999 0169, e-mail 
ramsar@hq.iucn.org
RAMSAR COP-7: The 7th Ramsar COP is scheduled for San José, Costa 
Rica from 10 - 18 May 199. Information can be found at 
http://w3.iprolink.ch/iucnlib/themes/ramsar/index_cop7.htm. For 
information contact: the Ramsar Bureau; tel. +41 22 999 0170, fax 
+41 22 999 0169, e-mail ramsar@hq.iucn.org; Internet: 
http://w3.iprolink.ch/iucnlib/themes/ramsar/.
CHEMICAL MANAGEMENT
DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE FOR ADOPTION OF THE PIC CONVENTION: The 
Diplomatic Conference for the Adoption of an International 
Legally Binding Instrument for the Application of the Prior 
Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and 
Pesticides in International Trade is scheduled for September in 
Rotterdam, the Netherlands. For more information contact: UNEP 
Chemicals (IRPTC), tel: +41 (22) 979-9111; fax: +41 (22) 797- 
3460; e-mail: jwillis@unep.ch; Internet: ht-
tp://irptc.unep.ch/pic/ or contact: FAO, tel.: +39 (6) 5705 3441; 
fax: +39 (6) 5705 6347; email: niek.vandergraaff@fao.org; 
Internet: ht-
tp://www.fao.org/ag/agp/agpp/pesticid/pic/pichome.htm.
INTERNATIONAL PRTR CONFERENCE: This meeting will be held from 9-
11 September 1998 in Tokyo and will produce supplementary 
guidance to the PRTR Guidance Manual for Governments. For 
information contact: Claudia Fenerol, OECD; tel: +33/1 45 24 
1763; claudia.fenerol@oecd.org
23RD JOINT MEETING OF THE FAO PANEL OF EXPERTS ON PESTICIDE 
RESIDUES IN FOOD AND THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE WHO EXPERT GROUP ON 
PESTICIDE RESIDUES (JMPR): The meeting will be held from 21 
September - 1 October 1998 in Rome. For more information contact: 
Gerold Wyrwal, FAO; tel.: +39-6 / 5705 2753; +fax: 39-6 / 5705 
6347; e-mail: Gerold.Wyrwal@fao.org
EIGHTH MEETING OF THE PESTICIDE FORUM: This meeting will be held 
in Paris from 2-3 November 1998. This meeting will be held 
jointly with the 28th Joint Meeting of the Chemicals Group and 
Management  Committee. For information contact: Nicky Grandy; 
OECD; tel.: +33/1 45 24 16 76; fax: +33/1 45 24 16 76; e-mail: 
nicola.grandy@oecd.org
INTERGOVERNMENTAL FORUM ON CHEMICAL SAFETY: The Third Meeting of 
the Intersessional Group (ISG-3) will be held from 1-4 December 
1998 in Yokohama, Japan. For information contact: the IFCS 
Secretariat, World Health Organization, CH-1211 Geneva 27, 
Switzerland; tel: +41 22 791 3650/4333; fax +41 22 791 4875; e- 
mail: ifcs@who.ch; Internet: 
http://www.who.ch/whosis/ifcs/ifcshome.htm.
SEVENTH MEETING OF THE EXPERT GROUP ON CHEMICAL ACCIDENTS: This 
meeting will be held from 2-4 December 1998 in Paris. For 
information contact: Peter Kearns, OECD; tel.: +33/1 45 24 16 77; 
fax: +33/1 45 24 16 75; e-mail: peter.kearns@oecd.org
SECOND MEETING OF THE POPS INC: The Second Meeting of the 
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for POPS is scheduled for 
7-12 February 1999 in Geneva, Switzerland (tentative). For more 
information contact: UNEP Chemicals (IRPTC), tel: +41 (22) 979-
9111; fax: +41 (22) 797- 3460; e-mail: jwillis@unep.ch; Internet: 
http://irptc.unep.ch/pic/. Also contact FAO, tel.: +39 (6) 5705 
3441; fax: +39 (6) 5705 6347; email: niek.vandergraaff@fao.org; 
Internet: http://www.fao.org/ag/agp/agpp/pesti-
cid/pic/pichome.htm.
13th SESSION OF THE FAO GROUP ON REGISTRATION: The 13th Session of 
the FAO Group on Registration Requirements will be held from 7-11 
June 1999 in Rome. The 14th Session of the Panel of Experts on 
Pesticide Specifications, Registration Requirements, Application 
Standards and Prior Informed Consent will be held from 14-17 June 
1999. For information contact: Gerold Wyrwal, FAO; tel: +39-6 / 
5705 2753; fax: +39-6 / 5705 6347; e-mail: Gerold.Wyrwal@fao.org. 
GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION ON THE REVISION OF THE FAO CODE OF 
CONDUCT ON DISTRIBUTION AND USE OF PESTICIDES: This meeting will 
be held from 2-6 October 2000 in Rome and will consider the draft 
revised FAO Code of Conduct on Distribution and Use of 
Pesticides. For more information contact: Niek Van der Graaff, 
FAO; tel: +39-6 / 5705 3441; fax: +39-6 / 5705 6347; e-mail: 
Niek.VanderGraaff@fao.org
INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS 
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY: The next meeting of the GEF Council 
will take place from 4-6 November in Washington, DC. The meeting 
will be preceded by NGO Consultations. For more information 
contact Marie Morgan at the GEF Secretariat; tel.: +1-202-473-
1128; fax: +1-202-522-3240; Internet: http://www.gefweb.com.
UNCTAD: The third session of the Commission on Enterprise, 
Business Facilitation and Development will be held from 23-27 No-
vember 1998 in Geneva. The Trade and Development Board will hold 
its eighteenth executive session in June and its High Level Mid-
Term Review from 5-16 October. The Commission on Trade in Goods 
and Services, and Commodities will hold its third session from 
21-25 September 1998 in Geneva. The third session of the 
Commission on Investment, Technology and Related Financial Issues 
will be held from 14-18 September 1998 in Geneva. For information 
contact: the Office of the Secretary of the Board; tel.: + 41 22 
907 50 07; fax: + 41 22 907 00 56; e-mail: 
Awni.Behnam@unctad.org.

READINGS
Compiled by Peter Doran
University of Ulster, Derry, Northern Ireland; tel and fax: +44 
1504 268403; e-mail: pfdoran@ecology.u-net.com
CLIMATE CHANGE
“World carbon dioxide emissions: 1950-2050”. Review of Economics 
and Statistics, 1998, Vol. 80, No. 1, pp.15-27. R. Schmalensee, 
T.M. Stoker and R.A, Judson (US) present projections for 
emissions of carbon dioxide from the combustion of fossil fuels 
through 2050 using reduced-form models estimated with national-
level panel data for the period of 1950-1990. 

“Motivations and roles for sub-national governmental participa-
tion in managing climate change.” International Journal of 
Environment and Pollution, 1998, Vol. 9, No. 2-3, pp. 213-226. 
D.L. Feldman and C.A. Wilt (US) argue that states and regions 
provide flexibility and innovation in managing climate change. 
This is exemplified by energy conservation, transportation, 
forestry, land use, regional planning, waste management policies 
and programmes to promote lifestyle changes. Problematically, 
however, subnational government roles vary considerably among 
countries, depending on the division of authority between central 
government and regions. For example, in federal systems such as 
the USA, states can serve as policy ‘laboratories’. This may be 
less true in unitary systems. The authors explore sources of this 
variation and its significance for understanding subnational 
climate change activities. 

“Meeting the energy and climate challenge for transportation in 
the United States.” Energy Policy, 1998, Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 395-
412. J. DeCicco and J. Mark (US) begin with the observation that 
mitigation of global climate change will require a profound 
transformation of energy use sectors throughout the world. This 
will pose a particularly acute challenge for the United States’ 
transportation sector. Market forces alone are unlikely to change 
transportation-energy technologies and infrastructures 
sufficiently to address the demands of environmental 
sustainability. The authors analysed a number of policies geared 
to encourage technological advances and promote sustainable 
planning, operations and pricing of transportation services to 
establish their effects on the energy sector and GHG emissions. 
Baseline projections show the US transport sector GHG emissions 
increasing over the 1990 level by 28% by 2010 and by 58% by 2030. 
The combined impacts of the policies analysed would produce 
substantial emissions reductions that grow over time, with GHG 
emissions returned to the 1990 level by 2010 with further 
reductions of up to 35% by 2030. Economic benefits accruing from 
the energy cuts would outpace costs from the outset. 

“An evaluation of integrated climate protection policies for the 
United States.” Energy Policy, 1998, Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 357-374. 
S. Bernow and M. Duckworth (US) discuss an integrated set of 
policies designed to reduce carbon emissions in the United 
States. The policy package aims to promote environmental quality, 
particularly by reducing air pollutants, to reduce the country’s 
dependence on imported oil and to induce technological innovation 
and diffusion in energy production and consumption. The package 
could reduce economy-wide carbon emissions by 10% relative to 
1990 levels by 2010, and by 45% relative to 1990 levels by 2030. 

“Investing in industrial innovation: a response to climate 
change.” Energy Policy, 1998, Vol. 26, No. 5, pp.413-423. R.N El-
liot and M. Pye (US) review industrial energy use and energy 
intensity trends and discuss industrial decision making and how 
it relates to changes in energy intensity. They propose that 
policies that promote technology innovation and investment in 
process equipment are most likely to lead to greater industrial 
efficiency. Four policies and projects are analysed with the 
potential to reduce industrial energy consumption and carbon 
emissions by 12.4% and 12.1% respectively by 2010 with no impact 
on economic growth. Further decreases are projected by 2030. 

“Industrial metabolism and the linkages between economics, ethics 
and the environment.” Ecological Economics, 1998, Vol. 24, No. 2-
3, pp.311-320. S. Anderberg (EU) notes that material flows in the 
world have grown enormously, expanded geographically and become 
more open and complex with the process of industrialisation. 
Traditionally emissions have been strongly connected to earlier 
steps in the material flows processes (extraction and raw materi-
als-intensive industry) but during the last few decades the 
emissions from industrial point sources have decreased radically 
in the Western industrialised world. The result of the industrial 
‘clean up’ is a shift in attention towards the latter steps of 
the societal material flows. The relative importance of 
consumption emissions has increased. As indicated in studies of 
the Rhine Basin, important prerequisites for this development 
have been increasing environmental awareness and public opinion, 
putting pressure on legislators, authorities and companies and a 
dynamic industrial development with structural changes. Despite 
the often radical emission reductions, problems with 
acidification, eutrophication, diffusion of persistent organic 
chemicals and climate change persist on a regional and global 
basis. During the last decade there has been increasing emphasis 
on the international and global environmental problems. 
The materials flow perspective has experienced a major break-
through. Waste minimisation, recycling, life-cycle analysis and 
environmental auditing have become major themes in most European 
countries and have begun to influence industry. The importance of 
the consumer and her attitudes and actions, as well as the 
relationship between trade and the environment, are often 
emphasised in this context. The author concludes that the 
industrial metabolism approach requires further development. 
Consideration of the flows of a few elements or products in a 
limited region is insufficient. It is now necessary to develop 
the analysis of the context of these flows, including industrial, 
economic and geographical changes in the analysis, and to 
actively seek the connections with political and industrial 
decision-making and human behaviour  and attitudes. 

“A common sense climate change index: Is climate changing no-
ticeably ?”  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of 
the United States of America, 1998, Vol. 95,  No. 8, pp. 4113-
4120. J. Hansen, M. Sato, J. Glascoe, and R. Ruedy (US) propose 
an index of climate change based on practical climate change 
indicators. They find that in most regions the index is positive. 
In a few regions, especially in Asia and western North America, 
the index indicates that climate change should be already 
apparent but in most places climate change trends and variations 
are too small to stand out above year-to-year variability. The 
climate index is strongly correlated with global surface 
temperature, which has increased as rapidly as projected by 
climate models in the 1980s. The authors argue that the global 
area with obvious climate change will increase notably in the 
next few years. The growth rate of greenhouse gas climate forcing 
has declined in recent years, however, so there is an opportunity 
to keep climate change in the 21st. century below the rates 
projected in  “business as usual” scenarios. 

“Developing countries are combating climate change – Actions in 
developing countries that slow growth in carbon emissions.” 
Energy Policy, 1998, No. 3, pp.233-237.  W.V. Reid and J. 
Goldemberg (US and Brazil) observe that levels of greenhouse gas 
emissions from developing countries are projected to exceed those 
of developed countries by 2020. The authors review recent policy 
changes in developing countries and find that these countries are 
already taking little appreciated steps that reduce the rates of 
growth in carbon emissions. Indeed, since the 1992 signing of the 
UNFCCC, carbon emissions savings in developing countries may be 
greater than those attained in industrialised countries. A major 
source of these gains can be attributed to energy price reforms 
that are likely to have led to substantial gains in production 
and end-use efficiency. 

“Joint Implementation and the question of ‘additionality’ – a 
proposal for a pragmatic approach to identify possible joint 
implementation projects.” Energy Policy, 1998, Vol. 26, No. 4, 
pp. 275-279. H. Rentz (Germany) suggests that the theoretical 
concept of joint implementation and the idea of reducing GHG 
emissions at least cost is “still charming” and, at least for 
economists, no revolution. However one of the most critical 
aspects regarding joint implementation is the question of 
‘additionality’. Some argue that a ‘real’ joint implementation 
project may not have any commercial value at all, others propose 
that the value of emissions reduction credits shall bring about a 
positive return on investment where otherwise it would have been 
negative. 
Rentz concludes that it is not feasible to divide projects into 
joint implementation and non joint implementation candidates with 
regard to their financing. The result will be that any project 
which brings about real and measurable environmental and social 
benefits should be regarded as a possible joint implementation 
project, be it a pure donation or a highly profitable private 
investment.
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
“The right to say: the development of youth councils/forums 
within the United Kingdom.” Area, 1998, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 66-
78. H. Matthews and M. Limb (England) recall that Article 12 of 
the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child makes 
explicit reference to children’s right to say what they think 
about matters relating to the quality of their lives, and to have 
those opinions taken into account in accordance with their levels 
of competence and maturity. The authors note that despite the 
commitment of the UK government to this and other similar 
initiatives designed to empower young people, a culture of non-
participation is endemic within the UK in the context of 
environmental planning. Young people are seemingly invisible on 
the landscape. The paper reviews the case for children’s active 
involvement in their environmental future and considers attempts 
to engage young people through an incipient structure of youth 
councils and forums. 

“Towards community based indicators for monitoring quality of 
life and the impact of industry in south Durban.” Environment and 
Urbanization, 1998, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.233-250. R. Nurick and V. 
Johnson (England) present the findings of research carried out in 
residential communities adjacent to petrochemical and chemical 
industries in Durban, South Africa, during the period January-
March 1997. The purpose of the research was to begin the process 
of developing community based indicators for monitoring and 
evaluating industrial performance. This was done using a range of 
participatory methods with men and women in community groups and 
was part of a wider set of Local Agenda 21 activities within the 
city. 

“Towards sustainable city policy: an economy-environment tech-
nology nexus.” Ecological Economics, 1998, Vol. 24, No. 1, 
pp.103-118. R. Camagni, R. Capello and P. Nijkamp (Italy and the 
Netherlands) observe that a high percentage of the world 
population lives in cities, where quality of life and 
environmental concerns undermine the advantages associated with 
agglomeration economies. The vast amount of experience in terms 
of theoretical and empirical material which has been built up 
around the theme of  the ‘sustainable economy’ has only partially 
helped to generate a framework for ‘urban sustainable 
development.’ The city is an ‘artefact environment’ where well 
established concepts of ‘environmental economics (such as natural 
capital stock, natural environment) can hardly be transferred and 
applied in the way in which they are theoretically formulated. 
The first objective of this paper is to offer an analytical 
framework for ‘urban sustainable development’ and to present the 
main economic concepts hidden under this label. In particular, 
the authors argue, different ‘environments’ co-exist in a city: 
the natural, the artefact and the social. Each generates positive 
and negative externalities for the city because each of them 
represents ‘use advantages’ and ‘use costs’ for a city. If true, 
there is a plausible assumption that the integration of these 
three ‘environments’ has to be supported with specific 
intervention policies. The objective of the paper is to highlight 
the possible intervention policies that may be developed to 
achieve a balanced ‘sustainable development’ in terms of new 
policy principles that should govern the ‘sustainable city’.  

“Green businesses: Perspectives from management and business 
ethics.” Society and Natural Resources, 1988, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 
259-266.  D.B. Johnson (US) notes that management scholars, busi-
ness ethicists and social scientists are challenged to 
conceptualise and measure characteristics of the “green” business 
and the sustainable corporation. The article discusses two 
approaches identified in recent management literature on the 
“greening” phenomenon and places these approaches in context with 
major components of social science literature on green 
businesses. A set of 16 empirically tested hypotheses describing 
the “new ecological paradigm organization” is included as a 
started point for future research.  

“How to apply the concept of sustainability to a region.” Techno-
logical Forecasting and Social Change, 1998, Vol. 58, No. 1-2, 
pp. 63-81. O. Renn, R. Goble and H. Kastenholz (Germany and 
Switzerland) observe that “sustainable development” is a 
prophetic combination of two words which unites the aspects of 
economic progress and environmental quality in one vision. The 
attractiveness of such a term has its price. It  can become an 
empty phrase if it is not clearly defined and conceptualised. 
What is needed is a description of the concept that is as exact 
as possible, and details how to operationalize it. Such a 
definition should allow for flexibility, but not arbitrariness, 
in implementing the concept. A project at the Center of 
Technology Assessment in Baden-Wurttemburg, called “Qualitative 
Growth as Prerequisite for Sustainable Development in Baden-
Wurttemberg” is an attempt to accomplish this. The aim of the 
project is to develop a concept of sustainable development on a 
regional scale by developing general guidelines and conversion 
strategies for the various players involved. 

“Institutions, environmental management and long-term ecological 
sustenance.” Ambio, 1998, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp.112-117.  J. Huk-
kinen (Finland) observes that institutions are the social rules 
that guide the design of strategies such as environmental 
management. Institutions can therefore significantly facilitate 
or hinder the realisation of sustainable development. The article 
relies on case studies of long-term waste management in Finland 
and California to explore institutional arrangements that 
facilitate  the design of sustainable environmental management. 
Institutions influence the mental models with which individual 
decision makers understand environmental issues, and individual 
mental models in turn reinforce the institutional context. The 
main policy implication of the analysis is that long-term 
environmental considerations should, at the institutional level, 
be made the responsibility of independent social bodies that 
could pursue sustainability goals with autonomy and authority. 
The paper concludes with a discussion of potential technocratic 
and democratic modes of establishing autonomy for the long-term 
sustainability concerns in society. 

“The limits and promise of environmental conflict prevention: The 
case of the GEF.” Journal of Peace Research, 1998, Vol. 35, No. 
3, pp.363-380. R.A. Payne (US) argues that sustainable develop-
ment practices should be embraced not only to forestall 
environmental destruction and resource exhaustion, but also to 
prevent conflicts apparently triggered by these causes. 
Unfortunately, environmentally-caused conflicts are perhaps most 
likely to erupt in the world’s poorest states, which are least 
capable of pursing sustainable development without substantial 
external aid. The global assistance burden is felt primarily by 
multilateral development agencies, such as the World Bank, which 
distributes more than USD 20 billion annually. The Bank acts as 
Trustee for the Global Environment Facility which was 
specifically designed to add environmental dimensions to projects 
funded for more general development purposes. Before the GEF was 
created the World Bank was long criticised for funding un-
sustainable development, for ignoring its own environmental stan-
dards, for making decisions without the input of affected parties 
or NGOs, and for withholding vital project information from 
potential critics such as transnational environmental NGOs. While 
the danger of financing unsustainable projects and overlooking 
environmental standards is obvious, denying access to decision-
making and programme information also undermines environmental 
progress. In short, sustainable development depends upon the free 
flow of information and multiple inputs into decision-making. The 
article explores whether the GEF can be expected to identify and 
fund significant environmental projects in conflict-prone 
regions. It also examines the policies of GEF decision-making, 
with an emphasis on transparency, accountability and 
participation. 
FORESTS
“Evaluating the role of plantations as carbon sinks: An example 
of an integrative approach from the humid tropics.” Environmental 
Management, 1998, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 459-470.  F. Montagnini and 
C. Porras (Costa Rica and US) observe that despite their fast 
growth, tropical plantations are a small sink for atmospheric 
carbon because they occupy only a small area in relation to other 
land uses world-wide. Proper design and management of plantations 
can increase biomass accumulation rates, making them more 
effective C sinks. However, fast-growing plantations can extract 
large amounts of nutrients from the soil and site fertility 
declines may limit sustained plantation forestry after a few 
rotations. The authors conclude that examination of the role of 
tropical plantations as C sinks necessitates integrative 
approaches that consider rates of C sequestration, potential 
deleterious effects on ecosystem nutrients and economic, social 
and environmental constraints. 

“Zoning of timber extraction in the Brazilian Amazon.” Conser-
vation Biology, 1998, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 128-136. A. Verissimo, 
C.S. Junior, S. Stone, and C. Uhl (Brazil and US) note that the 
state of Para, in eastern Amazonia, produces 65% of Brazil’s 
roundwood. Logging is now spreading across the state in an 
unplanned and unregulated fashion. Using a geographic information 
system (GIS), the authors combined and analysed spatial 
information on forest cover, legal land classification, log 
processing industries, biodiversity and infrastructure for the 
entire state.  They use the GIS in combination with economic data 
to analyse the spread of logging activities. They found that in 
the mid-1990s, the potential already existed (in economic terms) 
to harvest timber from 80% of Para’s forested lands: 21% of 
Para’s forests was accessible for the harvest of all commercial 
species, including those of low value; an additional 30% was ac-
cessible for logging a select group of medium value species; and 
a final 29% of the state’s forests was accessible for the logging 
of mahogany, a high value special. Although 29% of Para’s lands 
are legally protected from logging, protection is weak: almost 
three quarters of these “protected lands” fall within the zone in 
which timber can now be profitably harvested. 

“Geothermal evidence for deforestation induced warming: Impli-
cations for the climatic impact of land development.” Geophysical 
Research Letters, 1998, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 535-538. T.J. Lewis 
and K.L. Wang (Canada) present analyses of temperatures from bore 
holes in previously forested areas in western Canada. These 
disclose sudden increases of one or two degrees in ground surface 
temperature at the times of deforestation at each side. The 
authors argue that this is the first clear evidence for 
deforestation induced warming. 
BIODIVERSITY 
“Biodiversity assessment and conservation strategies.” Science, 
1998, Vol. 279, No. 5359, pp.2106-2108. A.S. Van Jaarsveld et al. 
(South Africa) note that the efficient representation of all 
species in conservation planning is problematic. Often, species 
distribution is assessed by dividing land into a grid. 
Complementary sets of grids, in which each taxon is represented 
at least once, are then sought. To determine if this approach 
provides useful surrogate information, species and higher taxon 
data for South African plants and animals were analysed for this 
article. Complementary species sets did not coincide and 
overlapped little with higher taxon sets. Survey extent and 
taxonomic knowledge did not affect this overlap. Thus, the as-
sumptions of surrogacy, on which so much conservation planning is 
based, are not supported. 

“Defining goals and criteria for ecosystem-based management.” 
Environmental Management, 1998, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp.483-493. D.S. 
Slocombe (Canada) notes that the identification of goals and 
targets for landscape and ecosystem management is now a widely 
recognised need that has received little systematic attention. At 
a micro-level most planners and managers of both ecosystems and 
economies continue to pursue traditional goals and targets that 
miss many desirable characteristics of ecosystem-based management 
goals. Desirable characteristics of ecosystem and landscape man-
agement goals and targets include: addressing complexity, a 
trans-disciplinary approach, and the dynamic nature of natural 
systems; reflecting the wide range of interests and goals that 
exist; recognising goals and values and limits; involving people 
and being explainable and implementable in a consistent way to 
different people and groups. The author concludes that a 
parallel, linked system of substantive and procedural goals at 
different levels of complexity and disciplinary focus is needed 
to facilitate ecosystem-based management.

“Preserving natural capital in a world of uncertainty and scarce 
financial resources.” International Journal of Sustainable 
Development and World Ecology, 1998, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-42. E. 
Neumayer (England) argues that natural capital should be 
preserved because it exhibits features that distinguish it from 
all other kinds of capital. The notorious prevalence of risk, 
uncertainty and ignorance makes it difficult, however, to state 
which parts of it should be preserved. Some forms of natural 
capital are more likely to be substitutable than others. Another 
difficult question is how, to what extent and for how large a 
cost certain kinds of natural capital should be preserved. Both 
the ‘precautionary principle’ and the concept of ‘safe minimum 
standards’ are rather elusive, especially on the question of 
costs. Policy measures are discussed that allegedly preserve 
natural capital at low, or even negative, costs. It is argued 
here, however, that while there is some scope for policies that 
are good for the environment and for economic development at the 
same time, the relationship between the environment and the 
economy is likely to remain one of fundamental trade off. 
Resolving this trade off is beyond scientific research and should 
be left to democratic decision making. What science can do is to 
help base the democratic decisions on rational grounds.
GENDER
“Global environmental politics: putting gender on the agenda ?” 
Review of International Studies, 1998, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 85-
100. C. Bretherton (England) recalls that the salience of gender 
to global change issues has frequently been noted, given the 
necessity of analysis of the determinants of human behaviour. 
However, attempts to “put gender on the agenda” of global 
environmental politics have resulted in, not the incorporation of 
gender, but the addition of women. This article attempts to 
explain this apparently unintended outcome through examining ways 
in which human agency and social structures interact in framing 
issues and setting agendas. 
NEW BOOKS AND JOURNALS
Review of European Community and International Environmental Law 
(RECIEL), a journal from Blackwell Publishers (ht-
tp://www.blackwellpublishers.co.uk), edited by Philippe Sands, 
Ruth Khalastchi and The Foundation for International Environmen-
tal Law and Development (FIELD) in London. 

The  Earthscan International Law and Sustainable Development 
Series, co-developed with FIELD, aims to address and define the 
major legal issues associated with sustainable development and to 
contribute to the progressive development of international law. 
Recent titles in the series include: Greening International Law, 
(Ed.) Philippe Sands; Greening International Institutions, (Ed.) 
Jacob Werksman; Improving Compliance with International 
Environmental Law, (Eds.) James Cameron, Jacob Werksman and Peter 
Roderic; and Global Action for Biodiversity, by Timothy Swanson. 
Details of this series and others, including an Energy and 
Environment series published with the Royal Institute of 
International Affairs, available at: http://www.earthscan.co.uk.

NEW ON THE WEB
QUESTIONNAIRE ON FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT: At the request of the 
52nd General Assembly, the Department of Economic and Social 
Affairs is now compiling an index report indicating the themes 
that a broad range of stakeholders would like to see addressed in 
the preparatory meetings. This web site allows these and other 
stakeholders to complete a questionnaire to have their views 
reflected in the index report. DESA requests that applicants 
complete the questionnaire by indicating, under each heading, the 
themes that should be addressed in the preparatory process for 
this international consultation. 
The questionnaire is available: 
•on-line: at http://www.un.org/esa/analysis/ques2.htm, 
•in PDF format at http://www.un.org/esa/analysis/ffdpdf.pdf
•for browsing at http://www.un.org/esa/analysis/ques3.htm
The questionnaire and the related research reports should be re-
turned to DESA by 30 July 1998.
WRI PUBLICATION ON ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY AND GREENHOUSE GAS 
EMISSIONS: The report was released jointly by the Washington, DC-
based World Resources Institute (WRI), the Electronic Industries 
Alliance (EIA) and the International Cooperative for 
Environmental Leadership (ICEL). "Taking a Byte Out of Carbon" 
illustrates how "intelligent technologies" place the electronics 
industry in a prime position to provide practical solutions to 
the climate challenge. These technologies have led to the 
development of products that more precisely calibrate energy use; 
make cars, appliances, buildings, airplane engines, and in-
dustrial processes more energy efficient; and assist in reducing 
the need for energy-intensive travel. For more information 
contact: Frank Dexter Brown, Director of Media Relations, WRI; 
tel: +1 (202) 662-3484 The study can be accessed through the 
World Resources Institute's website at 
http://www.wri.org/wri/cpi/carbon/.
UN SPECIAL INITIATIVE ON AFRICA (UNSIA): The UN Special 
Initiative on Africa (UNSIA) Web site has been launched. The 
UNSIA Web site is one of the communication means SIA uses to 
disseminate its activities and relevant information on the 
various sectors world wide. The UNSIA web site has been running 
under the UNECA web site until it gets its own domain name and 
host. The UNSIA web site is now hosted in Bellanet Canada, with 
its own domain name which is http://www.unsia.org. 
OECD WORK ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: A discussion paper on work 
to be undertaken from 1998-2001 is at 
http://www.oecd.org/subject/sustdev/oecdwork.htm. This document 
provides information about and a road map for future OECD work on 
sustainable development. It is intended for use within the OECD 
and its affiliates, as a basis for exchange of views and coop-
eration with non-member countries and other international 
organisations, and as a catalyst for dialogue with business, 
trade unions, academia, research institutes and other NGOS. 
BIOTECHNOLOGY: A new report, Biotechnology for Clean Industrial 
Products and Processes: Towards Industrial Sustainability, is 
available on OECD's revised Biotech pages at
http://www.oecd.org/dsti/sti/s_t/biotech/index.htm. This report 
illustrates how modern process biotechnology is penetrating 
industrial operations, and highlights its environmental and 
economic advantages over other technologies. The report 
identifies technical and other bottlenecks, but also emphasizes 
that industry and governments must act together to address 
industrial sustainability. 
SIDSNET: The Sustainable Development Network Programme has just 
opened a listserv for SIDSnet - the Small Island Developing 
States Network. The current SIDSnet project is in Phase 1 from 
April 1998 - March 1999. This is an ongoing initiative and Phase 
2 - 3 is under formation. The phase 1 Project document is 
available on-line. To subscribe to the listserv, send a message 
to <majordomo@sade.sdnp.undp.org> with the one line message: 
subscribe sidsnet or send a message to Daniela Hartmann 
<dhartman@ff101.undp.org>.

_________________________________________

Submissions, corrections, request for subscription information 
and correspondence should be sent to the editors at 
chadc@iisd.org. The opinions expressed in /linkages/journal/ are 
those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of 
IISD and our funders. Excerpts from /linkages/journal/ may be 
used in other publications with appropriate academic citation.
/linkages/journal/ may not be reproduced, reprinted or posted to 
any system or service without specific permission from the 
International Institute for Sustainable Development info@iisd.ca. 
This limitation includes distribution via Usenet News, bulletin 
board systems, mailing lists, print media and broadcast. For more 
information, send a message to chadc@iisd.org