ENB:13:11
[Next] .
[Previous] .
[Contents]
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND MULTILATERAL INSTITUTIONS AND INSTRUMENTS, INCLUDING APPROPRIATE LEGAL MECHANISMS
The Secretariat introduced the report on programme element V (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/12), which provides a preliminary list of organizations and instruments, summarizes work of the interagency task force on forests and notes the Swiss/Peruvian initiative on work of international organizations, multilateral institutions and instruments in the forest sector. A more extensive document will be prepared for IPF-3.
The G-77/CHINA said the next report should include: relevant institutions and programmes in SFM and forestry including resources available; a basis for evaluating programmes; and a description of relevant legal instruments. Activities should be country specific. Assessment of this element must be carried out at a national level. The EU said strengthening cooperation among institutions requires analysis of gaps and should lead to an explanation of relevant instruments. The Swiss/Peruvian initiative should identify options and possible conclusions.
The US said international organizations, institutions and convention secretariats should focus forest activities where they have comparative advantage. SWITZERLAND supported references to the importance of forests to environmentally sound social development. Complexity and linkages underline the need to look at organizations' strengths. She noted that the Swiss/Peruvian initiative's first meeting was held 5-7 March. PERU noted participation in the initiative, stating that it was at a preliminary stage and expected to present ideas to IPF-3.
CANADA highlighted coordination, efficiency and effectiveness of international forest-related institutions, especially governance and leadership. The document should consider: options to mobilize institutions' strengths; models in other sectors; new and innovative governance structures; and coordination of multilateral and bilateral resources. MALAYSIA said IPF-3 should look at existing institutional linkages, inadequacies and improvements, and address activities under the Forest Principles on combating deforestation, as well as IPF programme elements.
AUSTRALIA said the Swiss/Peruvian initiative must take into account specific projections and draw on a broad range of information. PAPUA NEW GUINEA called for an assessment of all UN organizations providing leadership in forestry and proposed that a comprehensive report be prepared on this issue for IPF-3. The NETHERLANDS said the World Commission on Forests could make a valuable contribution and that IPF should identify organizations for implementation.
GREECE said the tremendous interest in forests highlights IPF's leadership role and the need for coordination between different international organizations. WWF said while many supportive statements on knowledge and contributions of indigenous people have been made, the list of NGOs in the report contains no indigenous peoples' organizations. He called for their addition to the report and to the initiatives. CASA said the report does not address the role of multilateral banks or their projects. He called for input from the IPCC regarding fragile ecosystems.
MEXICO said the increased attention to forests has led to competition among international organizations. IPF presents an opportunity to scrutinize international institutions. NEW ZEALAND supported statements in the report that note the necessity of reinforcing some existing institutions and the poor coordination between many international legal agreements, which results in a fragmented conservation approach.