EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (IISD) WRITTEN AND EDITED BY: Chad Carpenter, LL.M. Peter Doran Kira Schmidt Lynn Wagner Editor Pamela Chasek, Ph.D. Managing Editor Langston James Goree VI "Kimo" Vol. 5 No. 76 Thursday, 17 April 1997 CSD-5 HIGHLIGHTS WEDNESDAY, 16 APRIL 1997 CSD-5 delegates completed their first reading of Sections C.3 (Means of Implementation) and B (Assessment of Progress Reached After Rio). Informal consultations were held on institutional arrangements, the CSD programme of work and forests. Delegates also conducted dialogue sessions with local authorities and farmers. PLENARY ASSESSMENT OF PROGRESS REACHED AFTER RIO: The G-77/CHINA had not completed consideration of this section and will submit written amendments. In paragraph 2 (globalization), CANADA noted that developing countries still require international assistance for sustainable development, and the least developed in particular continue to be heavily dependent on it. In 4 (progress since UNCED), the US modified the text regarding emissions in "the industrialized countries" to "many developed and developing countries as well as in economies in transition" and changed the text regarding "their" wasteful production and consumption patterns. CANADA and the EU offered similar amendments. In 7 (major groups), the US added references to sustainable development programmes in addition to Local Agenda 21s. The EU added references to NGO involvement in increased public awareness. PERU added reference to the scientific community. In 8 (global agreements), the EU deleted text noting that GEF funding is still not sufficient. The US changed the text on insufficient "funding" to an insufficient "amount of approved projects." MEXICO called for coordination between the CSD and implementing agencies and PERU for strengthened mechanisms for implementation. On 9 (incorporating the Rio Principles), CANADA proposed deleting a specific reference to the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. On 12 (means of implementation), CANADA added that tangible progress has been made in activating the means of implementation. On 13 (ODA), the US proposed language noting that most developed countries "have not set aside 0.7% of GNP for ODA nor 0.15% for least developed countries" to replace text referring to these figures as UN targets. CANADA called for more efforts at the domestic level to mobilize financial resources and noted that the expansion of private financial flows is an encouraging trend. In 15 (technology transfer), the EU added that developing countries have not always created favorable conditions to attract technology transfer. CANADA said private flows have not kept pace with rapid scientific and technological progress, which may have widened the gap between developed and developing countries. IMPLEMENTATION IN AREAS REQUIRING URGENT ACTION. Integration of Economic, Social and Environmental Objectives: On 22 (health), the G-77/CHINA deleted a reference to "major" infectious diseases and said the lack of information on the health impact of environmental pollution should be addressed. In 23 (sustainable settlements), the G-77/CHINA added references to "economic" stress and both "rural and urban" areas, and called for new and additional resources to improve infrastructure. Means of Implementation: In 66 (education and awareness), the US added text on: life-long learning; interdisciplinary and multicultural education; systems thinking; and training of educators. CANADA called for full and equal access to education for women and girls and, with NORWAY, recommended formulating sustainable development education plans. PERU recommended strengthening universities. The EDUCATION CAUCUS proposed establishing an Education 21 Programme. The YOUTH CAUCUS expressed concern that critical analysis of the current system and of the media is difficult in countries lacking strong education systems. On 67-69 (international legal instruments), NORWAY highlighted the interlinkage between human rights and the environment and called for development of international law regarding liability and compensation for victims of environmental damage originating extra-jurisdictionally. The G-77/CHINA proposed the deletion of text stating that implementation and compliance require further improvement. The EU replaced "require further improvement" with "is an urgent priority". The US redraft noted that "adequate," rather than "secure, sustained and predictable," financial support promotes implementation of international instruments. CANADA stressed that science-based decision making enhances implementation of multilateral environmental agreements. In 70 (information tools), the US called for identification and prioritization of gaps in data collection and dissemination. NORWAY added text on environmental impact assessments for national and international investment. JAPAN added text on public access to global environmental data through information and communication networks. PERU emphasized the need to make scientific and technological databases available on electronic media. CANADA called for "gender-disaggregated data." In 71 (indicators), the G-77/CHINA deleted the target year of 2000 for national adoption of indicators and introduced text on taking account of national conditions. The US preferred to retain the reference to 2000. In 72 (national reporting), the G- 77/CHINA replaced a reference to peer reviews with text on exchanging information and experience. The US, NORWAY and CANADA preferred to retain the peer review. CANADA called for greater emphasis on results and milestones clearly demonstrating commitment. DIALOGUES WITH MAJOR GROUPS LOCAL AUTHORITIES: Panelists in the dialogue session with local authorities shared experiences in developing Local Agenda 21s in Dubai, London, Marrakech, Barcelona, Cajamarca (Peru) and Leicester (UK). They highlighted: partnerships between local authorities internationally; decentralization and local governance; and the progress of the Local Agenda 21 movement. Panelists proposed that the CSD focus on: the human settlements sector and the Habitat Agenda; application of Agenda 21 principles by TNCs; capacity-building; harmonization of policies between different levels of government; initiatives to improve coordination of agencies; and developing local authority networks. Panelists also called for: a meeting between local authorities and global leaders; a global target for Local Agenda 21s; partnerships on all government levels dealing with freshwater issues; a study prior to CSD-6 to investigate barriers to local sustainable development imposed by central authorities; and language pertaining to local authorities in the Co-Chairs' text on capacity-building. Presenters also described: green spaces programmes; increased public transport; air quality improvements; privatization of water and sanitation departments; housing programmes; and institutional frameworks for consensus- building. FARMERS: The dialogue session on farmers included representatives from the US, Denmark, Sweden, Canada, Burkina Faso, Nicaragua, India and the Russian Federation. Panelists discussed: farm management techniques and voluntary programmes; partnerships; farmers’ organizations; and priorities and strategies. Discussants highlighted: farming as an economic activity; environmentally-friendly production measures; the impact of agriculture on water use and conservation; industrial encroachment into prime farmland; poverty among small-scale farmers, especially women; the public image of farmers; the role of organic farming; the definition of "sustainable agriculture;" and local product distribution. Discussants also noted: the implications of international trade and private sector investments on production; long-term land tenure as an incentive for sustainable practices; and the role of the WTO. Some discussants noted problems with equitable distribution of food as opposed to its production. Others underscored: farmers as a component of rural communities; IPR- related problems; low net income for farmers leading to short- term survival plantings; and "irresponsible" feed technologies. One participant noted that the Co-Chairs’ text does not refer to the Leipzig meeting on plant genetic resources, the FAO International Undertaking or the upcoming biosafety protocol under the CBD. Panelists also highlighted the need for: increased farmers’ income; agricultural research, including biotechnology; strengthened farmers' rights; completion of the biosafety protocol; elimination of TRIPs from agriculture; a moratorium on bio-prospecting; and an international convention on food security. INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS CSD PROGRAMME OF WORK: Several delegates offered initial comments on the proposed CSD programme of work. Many expressed general agreement with the Secretariat’s draft, which lists sectoral, cross-sectoral and economic themes to be considered during the next five years. Among delegates’ comments were calls for: a focused work programme and linkages between the issues considered each year; consideration of freshwater and oceans and seas issues; focusing oceans and seas consideration, for example on pollution control issues; and a mechanism for follow-up on financial and technology transfer issues. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS: Delegates considered text on greater coherence in intergovernmental organizations and processes, the role of relevant UN organizations and institutions and the future role of the CSD. Proposed amendments included: how and if to reference the ongoing UN reform process; enhancing the role of regional organizations; co-location of Rio Convention Secretariats; CSD promotion of increased regional implementation; strengthening the role of resident coordinators; predictable and secure funding for UNEP; FCCC and CBD COP designation of the GEF as the permanent financial mechanism; CSD attention to effects of globalization on environment; and CSD attention to areas that do not attract attention in other fora. FORESTS: A new draft text containing three preambular paragraphs and eight operational subparagraphs was circulated and used as a basis for discussion. Proposed amendments to the preamble were: making the text consistent with language from the Forest Principles; noting the economic and social functions of forests; and a restructuring of the text on continuing the international policy dialogue. One delegate suggested that national forest programmes be in accordance with national sovereignty, specific country conditions and national legislation. Delegates proposed amendments to a subparagraph on clarifying issues related to international trade in forest products, including: stressing the mutually supportive role of trade and environment; emphasizing trade-related measures and the potential role of enhanced trade in promoting SFM; and specifying issues arising out of the IPF. Pending the G-77/CHINA's consideration of the new draft, consultations are expected to continue Friday. IN THE CORRIDORS With more than the usual time to hang out in the corridors Wednesday due to unscheduled adjournments, delegates and NGOs marked the CSD-5’s half-way point with the now obligatory speculation on the pace of negotiations and likely quality of the outcome. In a telling admission, at least one developing country delegate indicated he has not yet made up his mind on whether to recommend that his Head of State would find it worthwhile to attend the Special Session, given the continued absence of movement on resourcing Rio commitments. This has sparked fears that a downgraded, not-so-"Special" Session could be the price developed countries will pay for their record on funding Rio commitments over the past five years. Others have voiced growing frustration at the developing countries’ "prolific" demands for financial commitments. Meanwhile, with concerns that the sheer volume of text to negotiate (latest estimate: 60 pages) could result in an inconclusive CSD session, members of the Bureau have been quashing "rumors" that extra negotiating time has been penciled in for the week before the Special Session. Observers note that such denials are also becoming a tradition at some UN meetings. THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY PLENARY: The Plenary will begin discussion on the compilation text in Conference Room 2. INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS: Informal consultations are expected on the work programme in the morning and on institutional arrangements in the afternoon. Consultations may also be held on forests. DIALOGUES: The dialogue session with business and industry will take place in Conference Room 1 during the morning. A summary session on all the dialogues will take place during the afternoon. This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin is written and edited by Chad Carpenter, LL.M. , Peter Doran , Kira Schmidt and Lynn Wagner . The Editor is Pamela Chasek, Ph.D. and the Managing Editor is Langston James "Kimo" Goree VI . French translation by Mongi Gadhoum . The sustaining donors of the Bulletin are the International Institute for Sustainable Development and the Netherlands Ministry for Development Cooperation. General support for the Bulletin during 1997 is provided by the Overseas Development Administration (ODA) of the United Kingdom, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, the Ministry of Environment of Sweden and the Swiss Federal Office of the Environment. Specific funding for coverage of this meeting has been provided by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Norway. Funding for the French version has been provided by ACCT/IEPF with support from the French Ministry of Cooperation and the Department of Environment of Quebec. The ENB can be contacted at tel: +1-212-644-0204; fax: +1-212-644-0206. IISD can be contacted at 161 Portage Avenue East, 6th Floor, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 0Y4, Canada; tel: +1-204-958-7700; fax: +1-204-958-7710. The opinions expressed in Earth Negotiations Bulletin are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD and other funders. Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin may be used in other publications only with appropriate citation. Electronic versions of the Bulletin are sent to e-mail distribution lists (ASCII and PDF format) and can be found on the Linkages WWW- server at http://enb.iisd.org/. For further information on ways to access, support or contact the Earth Negotiations Bulletin send e-mail to . The Earth Negotiations Bulletin may not be reproduced, reprinted or posted to any system or service outside of the APC networks and the ENB listserver, without specific permission from the International Institute for Sustainable Development. This limitation includes distribution via Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists, print media and broadcast. For more information, send a message to .