ENB:05:81
[Next] .
[Previous] .
[Contents]
DRAFTING GROUP I
SECTORS AND ISSUES: On 39 (natural disasters), delegates agreed, inter alia, to the need for capacity-building for disaster planning and management (AUSTRALIA) in developing countries and economies in transition (RUSSIA). Delegates agreed to a separate paragraph on man-made disasters using revised UKRAINE text.
On 24 (introduction), the G-77/CHINA added health, desertification and water as issues of widespread concern. On 25 (freshwater), the EU said the freshwater initiative should be viewed as a joint concern and proposed that the CSD take early action. The G-77/CHINA supported early action in the CSD or a world conference and said developed countries must remove their “embargo” on references to financial resources. The US reiterated that financial issues should be addressed in chapters on finance. On 25(c) (management), delegates called for continued participation of local communities, particularly women, in water resource management (G-77/CHINA). On 25(h) (international watercourses), CANADA, supported by the US, the EU and SWITZERLAND, proposed to develop “and protect” international watercourses. The G-77/CHINA objected. Delegates agreed to “sustainable utilization and protection thereof.”
On assisting developing countries to implement relevant agreements in 26 (oceans), the US, supported by the MARSHALL ISLANDS, ICELAND, AOSIS, PAPUA NEW GUINEA and JAMAICA, replaced “to secure fair access to marine resources” with “to participate effectively in the sustainable use, conservation and management of their fishery resources.” The G-77/CHINA objected and bracketed the text. In 26(e) (overfishing), NORWAY proposed “adoption of management measures and mechanisms to ensure” sustainable management and utilization of fishery resources.
On 28 (energy), the US, CANADA and AUSTRALIA proposed deleting G- 77/CHINA text on finance for capacity development and transfer of technology. The G- 77/CHINA objected. An EU proposal for a high-level CSD forum on environment and energy to prepare an upcoming CSD session dedicated to establishing a common strategy for a sustainable energy future was not supported by the US, CANADA, AUSTRALIA and the G-77/CHINA. CANADA’s alternative formulation, calling for expert meetings to prepare an upcoming CSD session devoted to discussing a framework for future consideration of energy issues, was supported by several delegations. The EU proposed bracketing both options. In 28(c) (renewables), the US, CANADA and the EU deleted a G-77/CHINA call for “time-bound commitments” for technology transfer. The G-77/CHINA objected. On a revised 28(e), which encourages movement towards energy pricing that better reflects economic, social and environmental costs and benefits, including reduction and gradual elimination of energy subsidies inhibiting sustainable development, taking into account specific conditions of developing countries, the G-77/CHINA said developing countries are not exempted clearly enough.
ASSESSMENT OF PROGRESS SINCE UNCED: On 2 (globalization), the EU emphasized that globalization is more an opportunity than a threat. The US noted the range of developing countries and the “widening gap” is between the developed and least developed countries. The G-77/CHINA stressed the need to link globalization to environmental and development goals. BELARUS emphasized the needs of countries with economies in transition. On 3 (effects of globalization), the G-77/CHINA proposed that international political factors have contributed to the deterioration of social services in some developing countries. The US, supported by the EU, found the concept too “conspiratorial.” The EU added a reference to “worsening social and environmental” conditions. The G-77/CHINA proposed deleting a reference on expecting a stabilization of population in the middle of the next century.
On 4 (global environmental trends), the EU and the US objected to G-77/CHINA text noting that overemphasis on the environment would undermine development. JAPAN proposed deleting text on depletion of renewable resources. In 7 (major groups), a reference to indigenous “people/peoples” remains bracketed. PAPUA NEW GUINEA replaced EU-proposed text on limited participation of women with a call for more opportunities for women to participate as equal partners in all sectors of the economy. On 8 (agreements since UNCED), delegates disagreed on references to the GEF.
On 9 (Rio Principles), the CHAIR, supported by the EU, proposed text noting that progress has been made toward incorporating the Rio Principles, including common but differentiated responsibilities (which forms the basis of international cooperation (G- 77/CHINA)), the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle (EU) into international legal instruments. On 9bis (implementation), delegates accepted text on implementing UNCED commitments through international law, but bracketed G-77/CHINA references to technology transfer and financial resources.
On 12 (means of implementation), the EU and the US accepted G-77/CHINA text stressing that the provision of adequate and predictable financial resources and transfer of ESTs are critical for Agenda 21 implementation. In 13 (ODA), delegates agreed that most developed countries have still not reached the UN target, reaffirmed “by most countries” at UNCED. CANADA’s 13bis (domestic efforts to increase resource mobilization and expansion of private flows) and 14 (debt) were bracketed pending decisions on related text in Drafting Group II. On 15 (technology transfer), the G-77/CHINA emphasized that technology does not automatically flow South and most developing countries have been left out. The EU and US stressed that developing countries have not always created favorable conditions to attract technology transfer. Delegates continued into the night.