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. 82 Monday, 28 April 1997 SUMMARY OF THE FIFTH SESSION OF THE COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: 8-25 APRIL 1997 The fifth session of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD-5) convened at the United Nations Headquarters in New York from 8-25 April 1997 to complete preparations for the UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) that is to review implementation of Agenda 21 in June. The fifth session began with a High-Level Segment and a review of reports from its Ad Hoc Intersessional Working Group and the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests. At the end of the first week, a series of dialogues with the major groups began in parallel meetings to negotiations on the text to be adopted by UNGASS. Negotiations took center stage during the final week, with two Drafting Groups and numerous informal groups meeting late into the night. CSD-5 Chair Mostafa Tolba (Egypt) and Vice-Chair Monika Linn- Locher (Switzerland) also conducted consultations on a draft political statement for the signature of Heads of State and Government expected to attend the Special Session. Delegates continued to identify the emerging priority issues that they considered at the CSD’s Intersessional Working Group: freshwater, energy/atmosphere and forests as sectoral foci, and poverty eradication and changing consumption and production patterns as cross-sectoral foci. The voluminous amendments to the text generated some concern that the three weeks of negotiating time at CSD-5 would be too short. Nevertheless, delegates rose to Chair Tolba’s challenge not to leave the UN before reaching agreement on almost everything and adopted a text with fewer brackets than some thought possible. Critical debates on whether to move forward with a forests convention, how to balance financial resource language, and the as-yet- unnegotiated political statement of Heads of State and Government were left pending for consideration at UNGASS. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CSD The Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) was envisioned in Agenda 21, the programme of action adopted by the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). Agenda 21 called for the creation of the CSD to: ensure effective follow- up of UNCED; enhance international cooperation and rationalize intergovernmental decision-making capacity; and examine progress in the implementation of Agenda 21 at the local, national, regional and international levels. In 1992, the 47th session of the UN General Assembly set out, in resolution 47/191, the terms of reference for the Commission, its composition, guidelines for the participation of NGOs, the organization of work, the CSD’s relationship with other UN bodies and Secretariat arrangements. The CSD held its first substantive session at UN Headquarters in New York from 14-25 June 1993. Amb. Razali Ismail (Malaysia) was elected the first Chair of the Commission. Delegates addressed, inter alia: the adoption of a multi-year thematic programme of work; the future work of the Commission; and the exchange of information on the implementation of Agenda 21 at the national level. The second session of the CSD met in New York from 16-27 May 1994. The Commission, chaired by Klaus Töpfer (Germany), discussed cross-sectoral chapters of Agenda 21, including: trade, environment and sustainable development; consumption patterns; and major groups. On the sectoral side, delegates considered health, human settlements, freshwater resources, toxic chemicals and hazardous, solid and radioactive wastes. The CSD held its third session from 11-28 April 1995 in New York. The revised format of the Commission, which included numerous panel discussions, enabled the participants to enter into a dialogue. The Day of Local Authorities, combined with the NGO and government-sponsored panels and workshops throughout the session, enabled the CSD to examine the local aspects of implementing Agenda 21. Chaired by Henrique Cavalcanti (Brazil), CSD-3 examined the second cluster of issues according to its multi-year thematic programme of work: planning and management of land resources; combating deforestation; combating desertification and drought; sustainable mountain development; promoting sustainable agriculture and rural development; conservation of biological diversity; and environmentally sound management of biotechnology. The Commission also established the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF). CSD-4, held from 18 April-3 May 1996, completed the Commission’s multi-year thematic programme of work and began considering preparations for UNGASS. The Commission, chaired by Rumen Gechev (Bulgaria), examined: financial resources and mechanisms; consumption patterns; technology transfer; education and training; capacity-building; trade, environment and sustainable development; combating poverty; demographic dynamics; information for decision-making; major groups; institutional arrangements; international legal instruments and mechanisms; national reporting; and protection of the atmosphere and oceans. In reference to the Special Session, most delegates agreed that the CSD should continue and that it should not conduct another review of Agenda 21. Suggestions as to its future work varied from concentrating on certain sectors (e.g., oceans) to cross- cutting issues (e.g., poverty) and specific problems (e.g., megacities). Many held out hope that the CSD could redefine its role and accelerate progress in achieving the promises made in Rio. The CSD’s Ad Hoc Open-Ended Intersessional Working Group met from 24 February-7 March 1997 in New York. The Working Group focused on the format and substantive contents of the document to be considered at UNGASS. The main output was a draft "Proposed Outcome of the Special Session" prepared by Co-Chairs Derek Osborn (UK) and Amb. Celso Amorim (Brazil) after feedback from delegates on a first draft. The re-draft provided a basis for consultations prior to CSD-5. Most delegates highlighted freshwater, energy and transport, forests and oceans as issues of new or priority concern. Delegates noted the importance of the cross-sectoral issues of poverty and changing consumption and production patterns. REPORT OF CSD-5 CSD-4 Chair Rumen Gechev (Bulgaria) opened CSD-5 on Tuesday, 8 April. He called for a reconfirmation of the definition of "sustainable development" as it emanated from Rio and for a balance of actions so the economic, social and environmental components can reinforce each other. Delegates elected Dr. Mostafa Tolba (Egypt) as CSD-5 Chair. He noted that the concept of sustainable development is still open to interpretation, and identified challenges with regard to climate change, biodiversity, desertification, official development assistance (ODA), technology transfer, protection of the ozone layer, consumption patterns, population and poverty. Joke Waller-Hunter, Director of the UN Division for Sustainable Development, said the Special Session must reaffirm the highest levels of support for sustainable development, recognizing the interdependence of its economic, social and environmental components and reaffirming the developmental dimension of sustainable development. She said UNGASS should emphasize to the UN system, the World Bank, IMF and WTO the need for partnerships at national, regional and global levels. Delegates elected to following Vice-Chairs: Monika Linn-Locher (Switzerland) from the Western European and Others Group, John Ashe (Antigua and Barbuda) from the Latin American and Caribbean Group, Bagher Asadi (Iran) from the Asian Group and Czeslaw Wieckowski (Poland) from the Eastern European Group, who served as Rapporteur. Following a number of introductory reports on the Ad Hoc Intersessional Working Group, the IPF, the High-Level Advisory Board, UNEP, GEF and the Earth Council’s Rio+5 Forum, delegates launched into a three and one-half day High-Level Segment, during which ministers, ambassadors and NGOs offered statements on the reports of the Ad Hoc Intersessional Working Group and the IPF. During the second week of the CSD, delegates offered amendments to the Co-Chairs’ draft outcome of the Special Session, prepared during the Intersessional Working Group. Dialogues with major groups took place in parallel sessions. Two Drafting Groups and numerous informal groups were created during the final week as delegates attempted to craft the document their Heads of State or Government will adopt at the United Nations General Assembly Special Session in June. HIGH-LEVEL SEGMENT The High-Level Segment was held from 8-11 April. Many delegations emphasized financial issues and offered a range of views, particularly on declining ODA and the effect of globalization on sustainable development efforts. TANZANIA, on behalf of the G-77/CHINA, called on developed countries to reaffirm at UNGASS their commitment to reach the target of 0.7% of GNP for ODA by 2000. He cautioned against the assumption that Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) can substitute for ODA and stressed the need to ensure that FDI reaches marginalized and least developed countries. He called for a multilateral regime for FDI to assist in the pursuit of environmentally sustainable development. A number of developing country officials, including MOROCCO, GABON, INDONESIA, MOZAMBIQUE and NICARAGUA, echoed these concerns and noted that: private sector resources only assist some countries; ODA is the only source of external financing for many countries; and a flexible approach to debt relief is needed to assist heavily indebted countries in implementing sustainable development. The WORLD BANK highlighted the need for changes in the pattern and efficiency of financing and market transformation through partnerships. FINLAND stated that ODA should be channeled to the poorest countries and used to improve the enabling environment for private sector operations. The US said the CSD should make clear to the private sector that investment must aim for sustainable development while encouraging sustainable capital investment. JAPAN stated that developing countries should bear the primary responsibility for their own development with the assistance of developed countries. MALAYSIA proposed adding globalization as a cross-cutting issue for annual CSD consideration. PANAMA called for consideration of globalization in any CSD examination of progress in implementing Agenda 21. NORWAY said social and environmental concerns must be taken into account by the global trading system, and liberalization should not be allowed to weaken environmental standards and agreements. EGYPT noted developing countries’ concern that environmental protection not be used as a guise for protectionism. CUBA said there would be no equity in sustainable development if countries focus only on privatization and pursuit of the perfect market. On energy, the EU called for a common strategy for a sustainable energy future. The US said the CSD should lead an effort within the UN system to develop a programme of action for sustainable energy use. NORWAY and ICELAND called for increased use of renewable energy sources. SWITZERLAND and DENMARK proposed an intergovernmental panel on energy. The WORLD BANK noted the need to reform the energy sector. HUNGARY suggested that the CSD coordinate and synthesize existing energy sector initiatives and programmes within the UN. The NGO ENERGY CAUCUS called for the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies and increased programmes for energy efficiency. The EU, supported by FRANCE and AUSTRIA, proposed a global freshwater initiative to ensure access to safe drinking water and sanitation for all within ten years. Other ministers and ambassadors highlighted: the need for a multilateral fund to support efforts in water resource management, technology transfer and information exchange; disparities in access to clean water and sanitation in many African countries; and freshwater as a CSD priority. They also emphasized sustainable production and consumption patterns and noted: eco-efficiency; codes of conduct for promoting sustainable development; internalization of environmental costs of production at the international level; and disparity in national efforts to modify consumer behavior. The EU also called for a new initiative on eco-efficiency to address unsustainable production and consumption patterns. On atmosphere, delegates focused on the desired outcome of the third Conference of the Parties (COP-3) to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) and stressed: the importance of reaching agreement on legally-binding commitments for greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions at COP-3; realistic, achievable and legally-binding emissions targets for developed nations, including maximum flexibility in reaching targets and the participation of all countries; and implementing early and substantial reductions in GHG emissions. The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) called on the international community to actively support the Barbados Programme of Action for Small Island Developing States (SIDS). SPAIN, ALGERIA and EGYPT emphasized the importance of addressing desertification. Other issues highlighted included: UNEP restructuring, GEF replenishment, toxic chemicals and confirmation of the CSD as the central coordinating body on oceans issues. Several countries supported the recommendation that the CSD establish an Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) to elaborate a global convention on forests. The EU, supported by PORTUGAL, FRANCE, GERMANY, AUSTRIA and GREECE, said a convention could: fill gaps in existing forest-related instruments; address trade in products from all types of forests; offer a framework for improved mobilization and more effective use of resources and technology transfer; strengthen national and international policies for sustainable forest management; enhance the priority of forestry in national budgets and among the donor community; enable countries to leverage more funding from multilateral organizations; and be completed by the year 2000. CANADA said the CSD should recommend launching negotiations this year. She noted that a convention would help coordinate ODA and promote new and innovative sources of finance and technology transfer. MALAYSIA supported seeking consensus on a time-bound schedule leading to an equitable and comprehensive global forest convention. RUSSIA favored a convention, even if such an instrument could not work perfectly. BRAZIL, the REPUBLIC OF KOREA, NEW ZEALAND, JAPAN, the US, AUSTRALIA and the GLOBAL FOREST POLICY PROJECT suggested that the CSD establish an open-ended intergovernmental forum on forests that is transparent and participatory and focuses implementation and follow-up of the IPF’s recommendations. INDIA emphasized countries’ sovereignty over their resources and, with URUGUAY, COLOMBIA, PERU, CHILE, ARGENTINA and ECUADOR, did not support a convention until its basis is fully established and necessary consensus emerges on its objectives. Many delegations, such as the PHILIPPINES and VENEZUELA, said any possible convention must include all types of forests and reflect varying national circumstances. DIALOGUES WITH MAJOR GROUPS For the first time at the CSD formal dialogue sessions were convened with each of the major groups identified in Agenda 21. These dialogue sessions took place in parallel to the negotiations from 11-18 April. YOUTH: Speakers from youth-based NGOs highlighted: local environmental initiatives; youth NGO networks; educational seminars; local fund-raising drives; scientific research projects; and a children’s version of Agenda 21. Delegates commented on a number of issues, such as: employment, education and political empowerment for youth; action on AIDS and drugs; influence through voting; malnutrition; and the work of Rescue Mission on sustainable development indicators. When asked what youth would like to result from UNGASS, many panelists responded that they seek access to information, increased support for awareness, skill-sharing and empowerment, and support for new and innovative ways of actively involving youth and NGOs in the sustainable development debate. In the final Plenary, delegates adopted the summary report of the dialogue session with youth (E/CN.17/1997/L.2). SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES: Panelists in the dialogue session with scientific and technological communities considered NGO mechanisms for international cooperation in science and technology and highlighted partnership programmes, including the World Climate Research Programme. Panelists said sustainable development depends on scientific knowledge and domestic capacity, local solutions and local experts, and full and effective participation of scientific communities from both North and South. Other statements focused on: bio-resources as an opportunity for developing countries to increase their wealth; the responsibility of engineers in sustainable development; programmes on capacity-building strategies; and scientific support for policy formulation. Panelists proposed that UNGASS engage in a "real" dialogue session. They also called for support for international research and national-level scientific education. In the final Plenary, delegates adopted a summary report of the session (E/CN.17/1997/L.3). WOMEN: Panelists highlighted a number of issues, including poverty, globalization, free trade and biotechnology. CSD delegates were asked to: call for 1-2% of developed country aid and World Bank funding to be set aside for micro-credit; resist the language of "agricultural sustainability" associated with export-driven agriculture; uphold the right to food rather than its commodification; identify "hot spots" of industrial contamination; address the effect of commercial advertising on unsustainable production and consumption; and examine practices to better integrate women into local councils in cities and towns. Topics addressed during the dialogue included: changing the way men perceive their own roles in society; links to the Commission on the Status of Women; nuclear contamination and women’s reproductive health; the precautionary principle; human rights abuses; transboundary movements of hazardous materials; national efforts to include women in government; and reflecting the "paradigm shift" of the Beijing Conference at UNGASS. The summary of the session is contained in document E/CN.17/1997/L.5/Rev.1. TRADE UNIONS: This session focused on, inter alia, sustainable development through "collective engagement," a process of education and action that puts workers at the center and promotes action. Panelists provided examples concerning: a national accord reached through consultation that helped thousands of workers suffering from benzene contamination; a case study on workplace and community partnerships that incorporated environmental concerns into all aspects of production; and health and safety training programmes that build environmental awareness. Panelists also highlighted: environmental remediation programmes and recycling; cooperation with local authorities and local communities to research and address housing and unplanned urban growth; ratification of ILO conventions; and initiatives on eco-labelling for computers and green and ergonomic offices. The dialogue session focused on a number of other topics, including: the relationship of eco- auditing and the ISO 14000 approach to environmental management; the adaptability of the auditing system to developing countries; and "informal" economies. The summary of this session in contained in E/CN.17/1997/L.4. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES: Panelists noted that the Intersessional Co- Chairs’ text failed to reflect the lack of progress on critical issues of concern to indigenous peoples. They stressed, inter alia: the need for political empowerment, self-determination, and control over natural resources; the problems of poverty, homelessness and unemployment; recognition of indigenous political institutions, ancestral lands and intellectual property rights (IPRs); and mechanisms for participation in decision-making beyond "tokenism." Panelists called for: corporate responsibility for transnational corporations (TNCs); priority for the draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; a permanent UN forum for indigenous peoples; expanding the scope of the indigenous peoples’ fund for participation; inclusion of indigenous peoples on a par with industry in the CSD’s work; and a moratorium on bio-prospecting until IPR are protected. They also called for: coordination with the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Center for Human Rights during review of the Trade-Related Intellectual Property (TRIPs) agreement; establishment of a CSD body to examine mining issues; examination of the effect of globalization on indigenous peoples; and conclusion of a biosafety protocol. In final Plenary, delegates adopted the summary of the session (E/CN.17/1997/L.6). NGOs: On Agenda 21 implementation in the South, panelists noted that governments are treating the superficial manifestations of unsustainable practices rather than the underlying causes. They stressed: mechanisms for NGO consultation and collaboration; capacity-building; lack of awareness about environmental issues; and promotion of community-level initiatives. Proposals included: developing a green credit system to assist environment projects; providing documentation on all initiatives proposed at the CSD; viewing poverty eradication as a global problem; and prioritizing education. On national and regional implementation, panelists reported on progress in Europe and South Africa. Presentations on the CSD’s role in the next five years focused on: trade, environment and sustainable development; a forest convention versus stronger implementation of the CBD; and TNC accountability. One panelist noted that the CSD is perhaps the most appropriate international institution to address globalization. In final plenary, delegates adopted the summary of the session (E/CN.17/1997/L.7). 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, 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 final Plenary, delegates adopted the summary of the session (E/CN.17/1997/L.9). FARMERS: The dialogue session on farmers included representatives from the US, Denmark, Sweden, Canada, Burkina Faso, Nicaragua, India and Russia. 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 World Trade Organization (WTO). Some discussants noted problems with equitable distribution of food as opposed to its production. Delegates adopted the summary of the session in the final Plenary (E.CN.17/1997/L.8/Rev.1) BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY: The dialogue included panelists from a range of industries and covered: business concepts; company management practices; small- and medium-sized enterprises; new business opportunities; transparency and commitments; awareness- raising in business; and partnerships and cooperation. In discussing future action, participants considered the role of business, government frameworks for change and business strategies. Panelists described: recycling and waste minimization; the chemical industry’s "Responsible Care" initiative; independent verification of environmental management schemes; environmentally-oriented investment funds; and the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Business Charter for Sustainable Development. Panelists also discussed: capitalizing on the ability of business to adapt rapidly; "command and control" versus "performance-based" regulations; environmentally-damaging subsidies; cost internalization of environmental damage; tax reform; and technology transfer. In the final Plenary, delegates adopted the summary of the session (E/CN.17/1997/L.10). After the nine dialogue sessions, the CSD convened a synthesis session to review the comments and recommendations made during the week. In the final Plenary, delegates also adopted a summary report of the synthesis session (E/CN.17/1997/L.11). DRAFT OUTCOME OF THE UNGA SPECIAL SESSION Delegates negotiated the draft outcome of UNGASS in two Drafting Groups and numerous informal groups. The Co-Chairs of the Ad Hoc Intersessional Working Group, Derek Osborn (UK) and Amb. Celso Amorim (Brazil), chaired Drafting Groups I and II, respectively. Drafting Group I considered text on "Sectors and Issues" and "Assessment of Progress Reached After Rio." Drafting Group II considered text on "Integration of Economic, Social and Environmental Objectives" and "Means of Implementation." After the first reading of the text developed by the Co-Chairs of the Intersessional Working Group, a compilation text containing all amendments was issued, which formed the basis of negotiations for the second reading. Vice-Chair Monika Linn-Locher conducted informal consultations on the statement of commitment/declaration, drafts of which were informally circulated during the final week of negotiations. On the basis of input to the draft, Chair Tolba and Vice-Chair Linn-Locher presented a "proposed draft political statement" on 24 April, which was added to the report of CSD-5 as a Chair’s draft. Informal groups on forests, institutional arrangements and the CSD programme of work, chaired by Vice-Chairs Bagher Asadi (Iran), John Ashe (Antigua and Barbuda) and Czeslaw Wieckowski (Poland), respectively, met regularly during the final week of negotiations and contributed text on those issues to the draft final document that CSD-5 delegates adopted during the closing Plenary. The following discussion elaborates on the positions taken at CSD-5 and summarizes the agreed text and bracketed issues that delegates will revisit in the Committee of the Whole during UNGASS. PROPOSED DRAFT POLITICAL STATEMENT The draft statement for Heads of State and Government and other Heads of Delegation attending the Special Session expresses deep concern that the overall outlook for sustainable development is not much better today than it was in 1992, especially in the least developed countries (LLDCs). The accelerating pace of globalization, poverty and the growing gap between developed and developing countries are stressed, and UNCED commitments are reaffirmed. The statement contains commitments to: move from words to deeds; promote international cooperation and work at the national level; ensure good governance and human rights; support empowerment and full participation of major groups, in particular, women; change patterns of production and consumption based on cultural, moral and environmental ethics; reduce by half the numbers living in absolute poverty by the year 2015; support the establishment of achievable time-bound goals and targets within the next five and ten years for moving towards sustainable development; expeditiously conclude ongoing international environmental negotiations, e.g., climate change; mobilize domestic resources for sustainable development; provide support from developed countries for developing countries and countries with economies in transition using adequate financial resources from all sources; reaffirm the target of 0.7% of GNP for ODA; work to ensure that investment, including domestic and foreign direct investment, contributes to sustainable development; provide assistance of developed countries to facilitate EST transfers; integrate sustainable development within the framework of the WTO and the multilateral trading system; and promote the CSD as a main UN forum for ensuring full integration of economic and social development considerations with those of environmental protection. The Statement ends with the call: "Time is of the essence. We need every hand to reverse the deterioration trend" and a commitment to ensure that the public at large feels ownership of the outcome of the Special Session. ASSESSMENT OF PROGRESS REACHED AFTER RIO The Assessment describes the effects of: globalization; economic, social and environmental trends; major group activities; recent international environmental agreements and conferences; finance and ODA trends; and technology transfer. The final draft contains no brackets. The 15-paragraph assessment notes the accelerated pace of globalization and the uneven impact of recent globalization trends on developing countries. The EU called for national and international environmental and social policies to ensure that globalization trends have a positive impact on sustainable development. CANADA added that many developing countries still require international assistance for sustainable development, and the least developed in particular continue to be heavily dependent on declining volumes of ODA. BELARUS highlighted the need for international support to help economies in transition become integrated in the world economy. The text recognizes that although economic growth has allowed some countries to reduce the proportion of people in poverty, marginalization has increased for others. Too many countries have seen economic conditions worsen, public services deteriorate, and the total number of people living in poverty increase. However, population growth rates have declined, access to education has expanded, infant mortality has declined and life expectancy has increased in most countries. The state of the global environment has continued to deteriorate. Overall, polluting emissions have increased, only marginal progress has been made in addressing unsustainable production and consumption patterns, and insufficient progress has been made in environmentally sound management of hazardous and radioactive wastes. Conditions in fragile ecosystems are deteriorating and renewable resources continue to be used at unsustainable levels. Extensive efforts have been made by governments and international organizations to integrate environment and economic and social objectives into decision-making. The major groups have demonstrated what can be achieved by taking committed action, sharing resources and building consensus, reflecting grassroots concern and involvement. Achievements since UNCED include: entry into force of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD); conclusion of the agreement on straddling and highly migratory fish stocks; the adoption of the Programme of Action for Small Island Developing States; the elaboration of the Global Programme of Action for Protection of the Marine Environment from Land Based Activities; and the restructuring and replenishment of the GEF. The G-77/CHINA added a reference to the insufficiency of GEF replenishment. Progress has been made in incorporating the principles contained in the Rio Declaration, including common but differentiated responsibilities, which forms the basis of international cooperation, the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle in various legal instruments. UN organizations and programmes have played an important role in the implementation of Agenda 21. However, much remains to be done to activate the means of implementation set out in Agenda 21, in particular in the areas of finance and technology transfer, technical assistance and capacity-building. ODA levels have declined, but there has been a sizeable expansion of private flows of financial resources to a limited number of developing countries and efforts in support of domestic resource mobilization have also occurred. The debt situation remains a major constraint on achieving sustainable development. Similarly, technology transfer and technology-related investment from public and private sources has not been realized as outlined in Agenda 21. IMPLEMENTATION IN AREAS REQUIRING URGENT ACTION The introductory paragraph to this section states that Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development established a comprehensive approach to sustainable development. Underlining national responsibility, this paragraph calls for reactivation of international cooperation and a major effort to implement UNCED goals [particularly] [including] cross-sectoral matters. The US and NORWAY objected to a G-77/CHINA-proposed reference to the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, which was altered to note that international cooperation is essential, recognizing, inter alia, the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities as stated in Principle 7 of the Rio Declaration. INTEGRATION OF ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES This paragraph recognizes a mutually reinforcing relationship between economic, social and environmental objectives. The text calls for full sharing of the benefits of growth, guided by equity, justice, social and environmental considerations. It also addresses: policy-making integration; the responsibility of industry, agriculture, energy, transport and tourism for their impact on human well-being and the environment; elaboration of national sustainable development strategies by 2002; and country-specific policy instruments. Bracketed text includes a G-77/CHINA proposal noting that sustained economic growth is essential to the economic and social development of all countries, in particular developing countries, and an EU proposal noting the indispensable nature of democracy, respect for all human rights and fundamental freedoms. SWITZERLAND proposed text on labor rights, which also remains bracketed. [Enabling International Economic Environment]: This new section, based on a G-77/CHINA proposal, calls for a mutually supportive balance between the international environment and the national environment, under conditions of globalization. The EU objected to a G-77/CHINA amendment that globalization has tilted the balance of responsibility for development toward the international level. Delegates agreed to recognize that external factors have become critical for developing country efforts. Eradicating Poverty: Poverty eradication is stated to be an overriding theme of sustainable development for the coming years. During the final Plenary the US withdrew an amendment referring to implementation of the "relevant portions" of the Beijing Platform for Action. The text calls for: implementation of the Programme of Action of the World Summit on Social Development, including the 20/20 initiative, and access to sustainable livelihoods and basic social services. Brackets remain around references to involving people in poverty in monitoring and assessing strategies and reflecting their priorities, and, at ARGENTINA’s request, to implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action [consistent with the report of the UN Fourth World Conference on Women]. Changing Consumption and Production Patterns: This paragraph identifies unsustainable patterns of production and consumption, particularly in the industrialized countries, as the major cause of continued environmental deterioration. Discussion addressed policies to: encourage changes in consumption patterns (US); encourage consumer awareness (CANADA); and reduce damaging subsidies (NORWAY). The G-77/CHINA objected to a CANADIAN amendment to address consumption patterns in "rapidly industrializing countries." The G-77/CHINA and the US deleted references to timetables and targets. The text calls for action on the polluter pays principle, encouraging producer responsibility and consumer awareness, eco-efficiency, cost internalization and product policies. Brackets remain around references to: meeting basic needs in developing countries; higher income group consumption in some developing countries; full cost pricing of natural resources; environmental and social audits; core indicators [particularly in the industrialized countries]; [targets, goals, or actions]; proposals to increase resource productivity by factors of 10 and 4; a lead role for developed countries; and avoiding negative impacts on exports. Making Trade and Environment Mutually Supportive: This paragraph identifies a need for the establishment of macroeconomic conditions enabling all countries to benefit from globalization. The G-77/CHINA introduced concerns about discriminatory trade practices. A European Community (EC) proposal on using the General System of Preferences to enhance market access was deleted. The text calls for: system-wide efforts involving the UN, WTO and Bretton Woods institutions and governments; removal of trade obstacles to resource efficiency; environmental management policies alongside trade liberalization; and full implementation of the Uruguay Round and the WTO Plan for LLDCs. Bracketed text includes references to: elimination of discriminatory practices affecting developing countries; "sustainable development and trade liberalization should be mutually supportive;" and an entire subparagraph calling for WTO action to ensure that trade rules do not prevent or undermine environmental policies. Population: This relatively short paragraph states that the impact of the relationship between economic growth, poverty, employment, environment and sustainable development has become a major concern. The paragraph calls for recognition of the critical linkages between demographic trends and factors and sustainable development. The US, CANADA, the EU and NORWAY called for language on reproductive health care. ARGENTINA and MALTA preferred the original text on family and maternal health care. Both options remain in brackets. Health: This paragraph notes that an overriding goal for the future is to enable all people, particularly the world’s poor, to achieve a higher level of health and well-being, and to improve their economic and social potential. The paragraph prioritizes protection of children from environmental health threats and infectious disease, eradication of major infectious diseases, improvement of basic health and sanitation and safe drinking water. The G-77/CHINA bracketed US text on the effects of lead poisoning on children and on tobacco awareness strategies. SECTORS AND ISSUES The introductory paragraph notes that all sectors covered by Agenda 21 are equally important and thus deserve attention by the international community on an equal footing. It notes the importance of integration in all sectors, particularly energy and transport, agriculture and water use, drought and desertification, and management of marine resources. Delegates added a G-77/CHINA-proposed reference to the need for international cooperation and support of national efforts, within the context of the principles of UNCED, including, inter alia, the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. Freshwater: This section contains a chapeau, eight subparagraphs and an additional paragraph on a freshwater initiative. The one bracketed reference in the section occurs in this final paragraph. The chapeau highlights: widespread lack of access to safe drinking water and sanitation; the importance of water for satisfying basic needs in developing countries; concern about increasing stress on supplies caused by unsustainable use; and the need to ensure optimal use and protection of freshwater resources so the needs of all can be met. The chapeau also stresses that given the growing demands on water, it will become a limiting factor on socioeconomic development unless early action is taken, and calls for the highest priority to freshwater problems. Subparagraphs stress the need to: formulate and implement policies for integrated watershed management; strengthen cooperation for technology transfer and financing of integrated water resource programmes and projects; ensure continued participation of local communities in management of water resource development and use; provide an enabling environment for investments to improve water supply and sanitation services; consider gradual implementation of pricing policies; strengthen information collection and management capabilities; support developing country efforts to shift to higher-value, less water- intensive modes of agricultural and industrial production; encourage development of international watercourses to attain sustainable utilization and appropriate protection thereof and benefits therefrom. The final paragraph containing the EU proposal for a freshwater initiative states that, considering the urgent need for action in the field of freshwater and building on existing principles and instruments, arrangements, programmes of action and [sustainable] customary uses of water, governments call for a CSD dialogue to begin at CSD-6. The dialogue will aim at building consensus on the necessary actions and in particular on tangible results and the means of implementation in order to consider initiating a strategic approach for the implementation of all aspects of sustainable use of freshwater. The G-77/CHINA said the EU proposal should: mention the means of implementation before mentioning results; include a reference to water for social and economic uses; and place safe drinking water and sanitation as the priorities for action. EGYPT said that "customary use" carried a specific legal implication and "sustainable customary use" was an unknown term. The US noted that not all customary uses are sustainable and those that are should be distinguished, and bracketed the reference. In the final Plenary, the US withdrew the brackets on the understanding that customary uses of water can be superceded by customary international law and treaties. Delegates discussed at length the incorporation of the G-77/CHINA proposal on international cooperation. They agreed in the final Plenary to add to the text that the intergovernmental process will only be fully fruitful if there is a proven commitment by the international community for the provision of new and additional financial resources for the goals of this initiative. In a subparagraph on investments to improve supply and sanitation, delegates agreed to providing an enabling "national (US) and international (G-77/CHINA)" environment for investment and added G-77/CHINA language on commitments to support developing countries’ efforts to provide access to safe drinking water and sanitation for all, with the deletion by the EU and the US of "time-bound" commitments. In a subparagraph on pricing policies, delegates agreed to an EU proposal recognizing water as a social and economic good. The G- 77/CHINA added that economic valuation of water should be seen in the context of its social and economic implications. Delegates agreed that gradual implementation of pricing policies could be considered in developing countries when they reach an appropriate stage in their development. The US added that strategies must include programmes to minimize wasteful consumption. Oceans and Seas: This bracket-free section contains a chapeau and seven subparagraphs. The chapeau highlights: progress in the negotiation of agreements to improve the conservation and management of fishery resources; declining fish stocks; rising marine pollution; and the need to improve decision making on the marine environment. Subparagraphs stress the need to: ratify or accede to relevant agreements; strengthen implementation of existing marine pollution agreements; identify global priorities to promote conservation and sustainable use of the marine environment; cooperate to support strengthening of regional agreements for protection and sustainable use of oceans; prevent or eliminate overfishing; consider subsidies’ impacts; and improve scientific data. Although the section has no brackets, TURKEY stated in the final Plenary that they planned to revisit it in the future. Delegates debated fair access to marine resources, overcapacity of fishing fleets and subsidies at length. In the chapeau, text on assisting developing countries to implement relevant agreements "with a view to securing fair access to marine resources" was changed "to participate effectively in the sustainable use, conservation and management of their fishery resources" by the US. The MARSHALL ISLANDS, ICELAND, AOSIS, PAPUA NEW GUINEA and JAMAICA supported this amendment. The G-77/CHINA preferred the fair access language, but ultimately agreed to the amendment, noting strong dissent within the G-77 on its implications. Based on proposals by the EU and CANADA, the issues of eliminating or reducing excess fishing capacity and of subsidies were separated into distinct paragraphs. After a lengthy debate on overfishing and excess capacity, the Chair prepared a compromise formulation calling for the elimination or prevention of overcapacity (CANADA) through the adoption of management measures and mechanisms to ensure (NORWAY) the sustainable management and utilization (G-77/CHINA) of fishery (US) resources (ICELAND) and to undertake programmes of work (JAPAN) to achieve the reduction of wasteful fishing practices wherever they occur, especially in relation to large- scale industrialized fishing (G-77/CHINA). NORWAY, JAPAN, CANADA and the US emphasized that these problems are not applicable only to developed countries. The G-77/CHINA noted the need to increase developing countries’ fleet capacity. Delegates accepted CANADA’s subparagraph stating that governments should consider the positive and negative impact of subsidies. The G-77/CHINA said they are opposed to phasing out subsidies in developing countries. The G-77/CHINA, supported by the MARSHALL ISLANDS, added language on institutional links between mechanisms developing and implementing integrated coastal zone management. Language was added on strengthening implementation of existing agreements on marine pollution toward better contingency planning and liability and compensation mechanisms. In a subparagraph on government action, NORWAY, supported by CANADA, added language on, inter alia, improving the quality and quantity of scientific data and greater international cooperation to assist developing countries. The G-77/CHINA added a call for assistance to developing countries, particularly SIDS, to operationalize data networks for information-sharing on oceans. Forests: Delegates negotiated the forests text informally in a contact group. The final draft, which contains bracketed text, has three preambular paragraphs, stating the importance of forests for sustainable development, noting progress in sustainable forest management since Rio, particularly through the IPF, and calling for political commitment to encourage and facilitate the intergovernmental policy dialogue. The text also contains six subparagraphs stressing the need for: implementation of the action proposals; national forest programmes; enhanced international cooperation; further clarification of issues arising from the IPF; continued collaboration through the Interagency Task Force on Forests; and guidance for international institutions to incorporate the IPF’s action proposals into their work programmes. Delegates debated at length whether the subparagraph on further clarification of issues should identify issues "arising from the IPF" or solely issues that remain unresolved from the IPF, and which issues should be highlighted. It was ultimately agreed to use "international cooperation in financial assistance and technology transfer and trade and environment in relation to forest products," the IPF report’s chapter headings under which unresolved issues appear. Several developing countries preferred adding traditional forest-related knowledge to this list, but some developed countries objected to specifying issues other than those unresolved from IPF, so this reference remains bracketed. While the paragraph on institutional follow-up was not negotiated, a G-77/CHINA position was presented in the contact group. Some G-77 countries expressed their reservations. The final draft contains two of the three options from the IPF report plus the G-77/CHINA proposal: establish an Intergovernmental Forum on Forests to promote and monitor implementation of the IPF action proposals and either consider and advise on the need for other mechanisms, including legal arrangements, or build consensus for and elaborate possible elements of a legally-binding instrument and report to the CSD in 1999; establish an Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a forest convention as soon as possible; or establish an Intergovernmental Forum to, inter alia, consider matters pending by the IPF and to identify possible elements of arrangements and mechanisms or a legally-binding instrument, reporting to the CSD in 1999 (G-77/CHINA). These three options, along with a footnote on developing terms of reference for an intergovernmental process, remain bracketed, as does the earlier reference to traditional forest-related knowledge. Energy: The chapeau on energy notes that: fossil fuels will continue to dominate the energy supply situation and international cooperation is required to reduce environmental pollution and local health hazards; sharp increases in energy services are required in developing countries; the situations of countries highly dependent on fossil fuel exports or those vulnerable to adverse effects of climate change should be considered; and advances toward sustainable energy use are taking place. The final draft contains several brackets and subparagraphs on: intergovernmental work and a sustainable energy future; provision of adequate energy services in developing countries; policies and plans; increasing the use of renewables; promoting renewable energy technologies; technology in the context of fossil fuel; and energy pricing and subsidies. In the chapeau, the US, CANADA and AUSTRALIA proposed deleting the G-77/CHINA’s call for enhanced international cooperation in the provision of concessional finance for capacity development and technology transfer. The reference is bracketed. 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. An alternative formulation, calling for expert meetings to prepare for discussion in an upcoming CSD session, which, in line with Agenda 21, should contribute to a sustainable energy future, was supported by JAPAN, SWITZERLAND, the G-77/CHINA, VENEZUELA, IRAN and SAUDI ARABIA. Both options are bracketed. In a subparagraph on energy policies, delegates accepted revised G-77/CHINA text on promoting policies and plans that take into account economic, social and environmental aspects of production, distribution and use, bearing in mind the specific needs and priorities of developing countries. In a subparagraph on renewables, the G-77/CHINA’s call for "[time-bound commitments]" to transfer relevant technology to developing countries to enable increased use of renewables is bracketed. The agreed text calls on countries to systematically increase the use of renewables according to their specific social, economic, natural, geographical and climatic conditions and to improve efficiency in energy-intensive industrial production processes. A G-77/CHINA-proposed subparagraph was added on further research, development, application and transfer of technology in the context of fossil fuels. The G-77/CHINA opposed the US’ insertion of "cleaner and more efficient" technology, and the final draft contains brackets, qualifying "technology, [preferably] of a cleaner and more efficient nature." In a subparagraph on pricing policies, the EU, the US, JAPAN and AUSTRALIA deleted a reference to eliminating subsidies for fossil and nuclear energy within ten years. CANADA deleted nuclear energy and added movement towards energy pricing that reflects full economic and environmental costs. JAPAN preferred "reduction" rather than elimination of subsidies. The G-77/CHINA preferred deleting the entire subparagraph. A reformulation, 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 and respecting their special and differential treatment agreed in the WTO regarding subsidies, remains bracketed, along with a bracketed call for its deletion. A subparagraph calling for the development of a reference framework for better coordination of energy-related activities within the UN system is also bracketed, along with a bracketed call for its deletion. Transport: The final draft notes that the transport sector and mobility in general have an essential and positive role to play in economic and social development. It notes the need for: promotion of integrated transport policies that consider alternative approaches; integration of land use and rural and urban transport planning; measures to mitigate the negative impact of transportation on the environment; and the use of a broad spectrum of policy measures to improve energy efficiency and efficiency standards in the sector. The final text contains a bracketed EU proposal for an international tax on aviation fuel, following opposition from the G-77/CHINA, the US, AUSTRALIA, CANADA, RUSSIA and JAPAN. A proposal calling for an accelerated phase-out of leaded gasoline remains bracketed in light of the G-77/CHINA’s statement that it must be accompanied by technical and economic assistance to developing countries. The text also contains bracketed language on promotion of guidelines for environmentally friendly transport and actions for reducing vehicle emissions, preferably within the next ten years. Atmosphere: Discussions centered on the message that should emanate from UNGASS regarding the desired outcome of COP-3 of the FCCC. Delegates debated every line of the paragraph on this issue. The final text contains a bracketed reference noting that insufficient progress has been made by the developed countries in meeting the aim to return GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2000, stemming from a disagreement between the US and the PHILIPPINES on whether the lowered emissions represent an aim or a commitment. A sentence on the Berlin Mandate contains a bracketed reference noting that the FCCC commitments are inadequate (US) and a reference specifying that commitments in Articles 4.2 (a) and (b), which apply to developed countries, are inadequate (CHINA). The final text also contains a "menu" of five bracketed proposals for consideration at UNGASS. The US proposed language noting that UNGASS should recommend that the FCCC accelerate negotiations, produce a satisfactory result and recognize the global nature of the problem. The EU, supported by SWITZERLAND, proposed specific emissions reduction targets (15% reduction below 1990 levels by 2010). AOSIS underscored its protocol (20% reduction below 1990 levels by 2005) as consistent with the Berlin Mandate. JAPAN called for agreement on quantified objectives for emission reductions and agreement to elaborate on policies and measures. The US, AUSTRALIA, JAPAN, CANADA, COLOMBIA, IRAN, RUSSIA, VENEZUELA, NIGERIA and SAUDI ARABIA objected to including specific negotiating positions in the text and cautioned against prejudging the COP-3 outcome. In the final Plenary, the US added a proposal to the "menu" that urges: member States to adopt the strongest possible agreement, including legally-binding budgets or targets for developed nations; maximum flexibility in reaching budgets or targets; and participation of all countries in taking meaningful actions to address the problem. This section also contains a paragraph on ozone, which states that the ozone layer continues to be severely depleted and the Montreal Protocol needs to be strengthened. The EU proposed a specific reference to methyl bromide and earlier phase-out in developing countries. The G-77/CHINA said the prioritization of issues should be left to the COP and noted the failure to include language on providing resources. Delegates accepted an EU reformulation mentioning that the Multilateral Fund was recently replenished to provide funds for, inter alia, the earlier phase-out of methyl bromide in developing countries. The text also notes that future replenishment should be adequate to ensure timely implementation and calls for a focus on capacity- building programmes in developing countries. Toxic Chemicals: Delegates made a range of proposals on toxic chemicals in the Drafting Group as well in informal consultations. The final text, which contains no brackets, states that all those responsible for chemicals, throughout their life cycle, bear responsibility for achieving sound chemical management. It notes substantial progress since UNCED, particularly the establishment of the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (IFCS) and the Inter-organizational Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC). The text also notes that much remains to be done and that particular attention should be placed on cooperation in the development and transfer of technology of safe substitutes and in the development of capacity for their production. A reference to the decision of the 19th session of the UNEP Governing Council on the sound management of chemicals should be implemented in accordance with the agreed timetables for the negotiations on PIC and POPs conventions. The text notes that inorganic chemicals possess roles and behaviors that are distinct from organic chemicals. Hazardous Wastes: Delegates discussed this issue in the Drafting Group and in informal consultations. The final text, which contains no brackets, highlights Basel initiatives on illegal traffic, regional training centers and the "proximity" principle, under which hazardous wastes are treated and disposed of as close as possible to their source of origin. It also calls on States to complete work on defining hazardous chemicals and negotiate a protocol on liability and compensation from damage resulting from transboundary movements and disposal of hazardous wastes. The text also states that land contaminated by disposal of hazardous wastes needs to be identified and remedial actions put in hand. Radioactive Wastes: Delegates discussed this issue in the Drafting Group and in informal consultations. In final Plenary, RUSSIA stated its reservation to all paragraphs on the issue. The final text, which contains no brackets, states that each country has a responsibility for radioactive wastes that fall within its jurisdiction and that export to or storage of radioactive waste in countries where no storage facilities exist is undesirable. Governments are called upon to finalize negotiations under the IAEA on the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management. The text also states that transportation of irradiated nuclear fuel, high level waste and plutonium by sea should be guided by the INF-Code. The text calls for further consideration of potential transboundary environmental effects of activities related to the management of radioactive wastes and the question of prior notification with States that could be effected. Technical assistance to developing countries to develop or improve procedures for disposal of radioactive wastes should be provided. Land and Sustainable Agriculture: The final draft highlights the need to, inter alia: combat or reverse soil degradation; continue poverty eradication efforts by improving food security and providing adequate nutrition; formulate policies that promote sustainable agriculture; and implement the World Food Summit commitments. Delegates agreed on the need for an integrated approach to the protection and sustainable management of land and soil resources, as stated in decision III/11 of the CBD COP, including identification of land degradation that involves all interested parties. A reference to indigenous people[s], as one of the interested parties, remains bracketed. The EU added action to ensure secure land tenure and access to land. The G-77/CHINA opposed NORWAY’s call for measures to improve food security for the urban poor. Brackets remain around references to both "sustainable food security among both urban and rural poor should be a policy priority" (NORWAY) and "developed countries and the international community should provide adequate resources and technical assistance to developing countries to this end" (G-77/CHINA). The EU, JAPAN and the REPUBLIC OF KOREA objected to an AUSTRALIAN proposal for continued WTO work to liberalize international trade and remove distortions to sustainable development in agriculture. In the final draft, three options are bracketed on the need to: continue WTO work to liberalize international trade in agriculture, to pursue food and overall trade policies that encourage producers and consumers to use available resources in an economically sound and sustainable manner taking account of the special and differential treatment for developing countries, especially LDCs and net food importers (AUSTRALIA); further analyze the benefits of removing trade restrictions (JAPAN); or effectively implement the WTO agriculture agreement (REPUBLIC OF KOREA). Desertification and Drought: This section urges governments to ratify, accept, approve and/or accede to and implement the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD), and to actively participate in the first COP in September 1997. The second, almost entirely bracketed paragraph contains optional references to the global mechanism. The G-77/CHINA called for the global mechanism to "have the capacity to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of and ensure new and additional financial resources." The EU, supported by CANADA, AUSTRALIA and the US, called for the international community to support the global mechanism in its work to facilitate the mobilization of adequate financial resources. The G-77/CHINA’s text calling for the transfer of "environmentally sound, economically viable and socially acceptable technologies" also remains bracketed. Biodiversity: The final draft, which contains no brackets, emphasizes the need for conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and fair and equitable sharing of benefits from genetic resource utilization. It calls for action to, inter alia: ratify and implement the CBD; facilitate technology transfer; rapidly complete the biosafety protocol; recognize women’s role in biodiversity conservation; and strengthen national capacity-building. In a subparagraph on technology transfer, the G-77/CHINA proposed language from CBD COP-3 calling for "special attention to the need to provide new and additional financial resources for the implementation of the CBD." The US agreed provided it was stated in a separate subparagraph. In a subparagraph on equitable sharing of benefits arising from traditional knowledge, the EU deleted the G-77/CHINA’s addition of "including, where appropriate, payment" and the US added "consistent with the CBD provision, in accordance with the COPs’ decisions." Delegates did not support SWITZERLAND’s call for the elaboration of national biodiversity action plans by 2002. Sustainable Tourism: This section, which contains no brackets: highlights the growth of the tourism industry and the increasing reliance of developing countries on it; calls for international assistance to broaden tourism to include cultural and eco- tourism; recommends strengthening national policy development and capacity in physical planning, impact assessments and the use of economic and regulatory instruments; calls on the CSD to develop an action-oriented international work programme; and stresses the need for international cooperation to facilitate tourism development in developing countries. Small Island Developing States (SIDS): The final draft, which contains no brackets: reaffirms commitment to implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of SIDS; outlines CSD’s review of the Programme; and calls for effective financial support for implementation and for the operationalization of the SIDS information network and technical assistance programme. Natural Disasters: The final draft, which contains no brackets: notes disproportionate consequences for developing countries; calls for higher priority for the implementation of the 1994 World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction commitments; and stresses the need to promote and facilitate transfer of early- warning technologies to countries prone to disasters. Delegates highlighted the disproportionate consequences for SIDS and countries with extremely fragile ecosystems, and emphasized the need for capacity-building for disaster planning and management in particular to developing countries and economies in transition. Delegates accepted revised G-77/CHINA text acknowledging the need for further work, particularly further assistance to developing countries to: strengthen mechanisms to reduce the effects of natural disasters and integrate natural disaster consideration into development planning; improve access to relevant technology and training with hazard and risk assessment; and provide support for disaster preparedness and response. [Technological and Man-made Disasters]: Delegates agreed to add a separate paragraph using UKRAINE’s text, which notes that such disasters impede the achievement of sustainable development in many countries. The text also calls for intensifying cooperation on disaster reduction, relief and rehabilitation. The PHILIPPINES bracketed "technological and man-made disasters," stating that the reference should conform with agreed language from the UNGA decision on natural and similar disasters with adverse impacts on vulnerable communities, including their environments. MEANS OF IMPLEMENTATION Financial Resources and Mechanisms: This section notes the key role of financial resources and mechanisms in implementation of Agenda 21 and elaborates on: ODA, the GEF, private sector investment and FDI, domestic resources and innovative financial mechanisms. The initial proposals offered by delegates from developed and developing countries were divergent and lengthy. The G-77/CHINA stressed the need to fulfill all financial commitments in Agenda 21. The EU and US stressed the importance of national legal and financial systems. The EU also called for "satisfactory" replenishment of GEF resources, with a view to equitable burden sharing. The US noted that, in general, financing for Agenda 21 will come from a country’s own public and private sectors. Bracketed text includes references to: a catalytic role for ODA in encouraging country-driven policy reform efforts; the need for the effective use of an increased level of resources; World Bank and IMF collaboration with UNCTAD and the UN Secretariat to consider the relationship between indebtedness and sustainable development; and subsidy reductions "bearing in mind the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities." The US, supported by AUSTRALIA, added a reference to an intergovernmental process on finance in the paragraph on innovative financial mechanisms after the initial compilation of amendments was prepared. The G-77/CHINA expressed concern about the late addition of the new proposal. MALAYSIA offered a similar proposal during the closing Plenary. Chair Tolba said the proposals will appear in the CSD report, but not as bracketed amendments to the text. Also during the closing Plenary, NORWAY and MALAYSIA reserved their right to revisit the innovative financial mechanisms paragraph at UNGASS. A paragraph on domestic resource mobilization was agreed to ad referendum during the Drafting Group, but individual members and the G- 77/CHINA’s spokesperson indicated during the closing Plenary that it did not adequately reference the need for international cooperation. The EU and US supported the paragraph, which was bracketed. The agreed text calls for the urgent fulfillment of all financial commitments [and objectives] (EU) of Agenda 21. It notes that the underlying factors that have led to the decrease in ODA should be addressed by all countries. Donor countries are "urged to engage in providing new and additional resources, with a view to an equitable burden sharing, through the satisfactory replenishment of the GEF." Consideration should be given to exploring the flexibility of the GEF’s mandate and efforts should be made to streamline the decision-making process. To stimulate higher levels of private investment, governments should aim to ensure macroeconomic stability, open trade and investment policies and well-functioning legal and financial systems. Debt relief is suggested in the form of debt rescheduling, debt reduction, debt swaps and, as appropriate, debt cancellation. Consideration of innovative funding mechanisms is encouraged, but they are not spelled out. Transfer of Environmentally Sound Technologies (ESTs): The section regarding technology transfer addresses: relevant UNCED agreements; the role of governments; an enabling environment for transfer; the role of public-private partnerships; South-South cooperation; and global electronic information. The G-77/CHINA called for fulfillment of all commitments in Chapter 34 of Agenda 21, but the EU said the chapter contained "objectives" not "commitments." Both options were bracketed. The G-77/CHINA said the market approach cannot be relied on to assure that such technologies will become widely available, to which the US added a reference to intellectual property rights. The entire sentence is bracketed. Delegates added a G-77/CHINA proposal noting the contribution that the creation of centers for transfer of technology at various levels, including at the regional level, could make. A NORWEGIAN proposal calling for support to cleaner production programmes in public and private companies was added, as was a US proposal calling for technology needs assessment as a tool in identifying technology transfer projects. Capacity-building: This three paragraph, bracket-free section calls for renewed commitment and support to national efforts for capacity-building in developing countries and economies in transition. UNDP, inter alia, though its Capacity 21 Programme, should give priority attention to building capacity. Delegates added a US proposal calling on both developed and developing countries to strengthen efforts for sharing environmental expertise and data. Science: This four paragraph, bracket-free section calls for significant increases in public and private investment in science, education and training, and research and development. A CANADIAN call for full and equal participation of girls and women in this regard was added, as were JAPANESE calls for the promotion of existing regional and global networks and of innovations in information and communication technologies. Education and Awareness: This two paragraph, bracket-free section notes that a fundamental prerequisite for sustainable development is an adequately financed and effective education system at all levels, accessible to all. Delegates added calls for: attention to the training of teachers, youth leaders and other educators (US); inter-generational partnerships and peer education (CANADA); and support for universities and promotion of cooperation among them (PERU). International Legal Instruments and the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development: This section calls for regular assessment of the implementation and application of the principles contained in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. The G-77/CHINA was not prepared to discuss the compilation text, so all amendments to this section will be forwarded to UNGASS for consideration. A MEXICAN amendment calls for progressive development and codification of international law on sustainable development. An EU amendment calls for judicial and administrative channels to seek redress from decisions that are socially and environmentally harmful or violate human rights. The US, EU and NORWAY added proposals noting that compliance with international commitments can reduce conflict. Information and Tools to Measure Progress: The section addresses issues related to tools to collect and disseminate information for decision-makers, indicators for sustainable development and national reports. The G-77/CHINA was not prepared to discuss the compilation text, so all amendments to the section will be forwarded to UNGASS for consideration. Amendments include calls for: gender-disaggregated data (CANADA); collaboration on high- tech info-communications infrastructure (JAPAN); environmental impact assessments (NORWAY); and peer reviews (CANADA, US and NORWAY). INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS The text on institutional arrangements addresses four issues: greater coherence in various intergovernmental organizations and processes; the role of relevant UN organizations and institutions; the future role and programme of work of the CSD; and the CSD’s methods of work. The entire text was negotiated informally. The introductory paragraph notes that, "in light of the ongoing discussions on reform" within the UN, international institutional arrangements in the area of sustainable development are intended to contribute to the goal of strengthening the entire UN system. In the section on greater coherence in intergovernmental organizations and processes, arrangements for convention secretariats are called on to provide effective support and efficient services, and "appropriate autonomy." Delegates deleted a reference to convening regional meetings to review national reports. The revised text only states that regional meetings of experts are to be supported by UN regional commissions. In the section on the role of UN bodies, the resident coordinator system is to be enhanced "in full consultation with national governments." The 4 April 1997 decision of the UNEP Governing Council on governance and other related decisions are relevant in the context of UNEP’s role as the leading global environmental authority that sets the global environmental agenda. A reference to UNEP assistance in addressing countries’ environmental problems, including through the provision of policy and advisory services, was deleted. Delegates retained a call for "a revitalized UNEP" to be supported by "adequate, stable and predictable funding." UNCTAD’s role in Agenda 21 implementation is "in accordance with General Assembly resolution 51/167 and relevant decisions of the Trade and Development Board on the work programme." The text calls for "adequate" replenishment of the International Development Association and "new and additional resources, with a view to an equitable burden sharing," for the "satisfactory" replenishment of the GEF. The operationalization of the global mechanism of the CCD is called for. The section on the CSD programme of work states that the CSD "has a role to play" in assessing the challenges of globalization on sustainable development and it should "coordinate" with other ECOSOC subsidiary bodies, rather than act "as a kind of ‘main commission’ of ECOSOC" as one delegation suggested. Delegates agreed that the CSD should avoid unnecessary duplication and repetition of work undertaken by other relevant fora, rather than focus on issues "not adequately addressed in other international fora." In the section on CSD methods of work, delegates called for "the possible development of modalities for reviews by and among those countries, which voluntarily agree to do so, within regions," rather than regional peer reviews. The text calls for strengthened interaction with representatives of major groups and encourages major groups to adopt arrangements for coordination and interaction in providing inputs to the CSD. The Secretary-General is invited to review the functioning of the High-Level Advisory Board and present proposals on ways to promote more interaction between it and the CSD. ECOSOC is asked to consider how to make the work of the Committee on New and Renewable Sources of Energy and on Energy for Development and the Committee on Natural Resources compatible and supportive with the work of the CSD. Finally, the next UNGA review of Agenda 21 implementation is to take place in 2002, the modalities of which are to be determined at a later stage. The final draft contains bracketed options calling for designation of the GEF as the permanent financial mechanism for the FCCC and the CBD, or for funding for Agenda 21 to be provided in a way that maximizes the availability of new and additional resources and uses all available funding sources and mechanisms. CSD Multi-Year Programme of Work: The CSD programme of work is noted in this section and annexed to the text. Poverty and consumption and production patterns are to be overriding issues for each session’s consideration. The issues to be considered in 1998 are: [integrated freshwater management]; transfer of technology/capacity-building/education/science/awareness- raising; and industry. Issues for 1999 include the review of the Programme of Action for SIDS and: oceans and seas; consumption and production patterns; and tourism. Issues for 2000 are: integrated planning and management of land resources; financial resources/trade and investment/economic growth; and agriculture, possibly to include forestry. The 2001 issues are: [atmosphere][energy]; information for decision-making and participation; and [energy]/transport. A comprehensive review is scheduled for 2002. CLOSING PLENARY The Closing Plenary began at 4:00 pm on 25 April 1997. CSD Chair Tolba introduced the summaries of the dialogues with major groups (E/CN.17/1997/L.2-11), which were adopted. Tolba said they would appear as the Vice-Chairs’ summaries of the sessions in an annex to the negotiated text, along with the Chair’s summary of the High-Level Segment. The EU said the timing of major group dialogues did not allow sufficient input to the negotiations and suggested that future major group dialogues address the CSD’s thematic issue at an earlier stage, possibly during the Intersessional Working Group. Amb. Amorim introduced the agreements Drafting Group II reached on cross-sectoral issues and means of implementation. Derek Osborn reported on the results of negotiations on sectoral issues and the assessment of progress since UNCED in Drafting Group I. Delegates then considered the negotiated text paragraph by paragraph and made corrections as necessary. Many developing countries expressed their desire to return to the "agreed" paragraph on mobilization of domestic resources, which the Plenary bracketed. Delegates also discussed whether to annex three proposals that were introduced after the initial compilation of amendments was made (US-Norway-Malaysia regarding an intergovernmental process on financial issues; Bangladesh on micro-credit; and Australia on NGO dialogue with the WTO’s Committee on Trade and Environment). Chair Tolba said he would reference the proposals in the CSD’s report, but not in an annex. Delegates adopted two draft decisions. On the CSD programme of work, the CSD took note of document E/CN.17/1997/CRP.1 containing the proposals of the Secretary-General regarding the programme of work under the sub-programme "Sustainable Development" to be included in the Proposed Programme Budget for the biennium 1988-1999. The CSD noted the preliminary nature of these proposals, and invited the Committee for Programme Coordination, the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions and the Fifth Committee in their deliberations on the Programme Budget for the next biennium to take due account, as appropriate, of the outcome of the Nineteenth Special Session of the UN General Assembly, as well as of the results of the ongoing reform of the UN Secretariat. The CSD also adopted a decision on modalities for the full and comprehensive review of the Barbados Programme of Action adopted by the Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States. In the decision, the CSD, inter alia: recognizes the need to review outstanding chapters of the Programme of Action prior to full review in 1999; decides that its sixth session in 1998 will undertake the review of all the outstanding chapters and issues of the Programme of Action; and urges all governments, intergovernmental bodies and major groups to commence preparations for the full review and comprehensive assessment of progress made in implementation. It also: recommends that the General Assembly convene a two-day special session immediately preceding its 54th session for an in-depth assessment and appraisal of the implementation of the Programme of Action; and decides that the seventh session of the CSD (1999) will carry out the full review of the Programme of Action within its approved work programme. This review will be considered as the preparatory process for the special session on SIDS. The decision also states that the preparatory process for its seventh session shall assist the Commission in carrying out the review and appraisal. Rapporteur Czeslaw Wieckowski (Poland) then presented the draft report of CSD-5 (E/CN.17/1997/L.1 and the informal, English-only papers containing the final draft). Delegates adopted the report, taking note of the informal papers and authorizing the Rapporteur to incorporate the proceedings of the closing Plenary. Chair Tolba introduced the "proposed draft political statement," authored by the Chair and Vice-Chair Monika Linn-Locher. He explained that several iterations had circulated during CSD-5 and proposed that it be brief and in language accessible to the media. He asked delegates to send their amendments to the Secretariat, on the basis of which a redraft would be distributed two weeks before UNGASS. He suggested that informal consultations take place immediately prior to UNGASS so that the Committee of the Whole could adopt the text early in its deliberations. The EU supported Tolba’s anticipated procedure and said the draft is proceeding in a positive and balanced way. He said negotiations would take too long if a compilation of all amendments were used as the basis for negotiations. The G- 77/CHINA said the Chair’s draft contents have been very different from their inputs and expressed frustration with the drafting process. He demanded that the text be formally negotiated. INDIA, VENEZUELA, CUBA and NIGERIA called for an open-ended negotiation process. Chair Tolba thanked the Drafting Group Chairs, the Vice-Chairs and the Secretariat. He declared CSD-5 adjourned at 9:45 pm. A BRIEF ANALYSIS OF CSD-5 In reflecting on the complexity of the three weeks of CSD-5, it may be useful to recall the mandate delineated by the General Assembly for CSD-5 and the Special Session: "discussions at both the preparatory meetings and the Special Session should focus on the fulfillment of commitments and the further implementation of Agenda 21 and related post-Conference outcomes." Did CSD-5 make any progress toward completing this mandate? On the opening day of CSD-5, delegates were given a useful set of criteria by which to measure the success of the session. Joke Waller-Hunter, Director of the Division for Sustainable Development, pointed out that CSD-5 was, in essence, a PrepCom for the Special Session and would to a large extent determine its outcome and success. She presented three criteria in a set of questions: does the assessment reflect the urgency of the situation; is the assessment followed by a unequivocal commitment to concrete action; and have partnerships been acknowledged, renewed and strengthened? Some answers to these questions emerge below. COMMITMENT TO ACTION: From the beginning of the preparatory process for the Special Session, delegates heard repeated calls for the CSD to establish targets and timetables in order to elevate the process toward sustainable development to a higher level. In the Intersessional Working Group, Mostafa Tolba called for a number of measurable targets, such as a 10% increase in alternative energy source investments over ten years, stressing that setting concrete goals is the way to move beyond rhetoric to action and provide a baseline against which progress toward the goals agreed at Rio can be better assessed in future reviews of implementation. A number of delegations called for specific targets and timetables at CSD-5 as well, such as Iceland’s call for a 50% reduction of fishing subsidies by 2002 and the US’ call for phasing out lead in gasoline within ten years. However, few if any targets remain in the text. Delegates and NGOs alike have expressed frustration at this apparent lack of political will to move forward and rue that this does not bode well for the "special-ness" of the Special Session or hopes that it would reinvigorate commitments to operationalize sustainable development. Targets aside, a number of concrete action plans were tabled at CSD-5. Three EU initiatives, on freshwater, eco-efficiency and energy, were announced during the High-Level Segment and elaborated upon during the subsequent weeks. Some expressed an interest in their further elaboration prior to UNGASS, which will be necessary if the latter two initiatives, which are currently bracketed, are to survive in the text. It is promising that the forward-looking freshwater initiative emerged bracket- free. The existing target of 0.7% of GNP for ODA was of special interest for many. Developing countries and NGOs especially sought a reaffirmation of commitment on financial issues. They were disappointed as the related discussion was one of the most polarized debates since Rio. Developing countries called for renewed donor commitment and objected to policy reforms that appeared to be recommended for developing countries only or would create conditionalities for assistance. The EU distinguished between UNCED "commitments" and "objectives," while the US stressed domestic resource mobilization and private sector resources. The result seemed to be a narrowing of the interpretation of Agenda 21 rather than its reaffirmation. One delegate noted that this debate is taking place during a critical point in the post-Cold War discussion regarding multilateralism. Prior motives driving development assistance have disappeared and the developed world is reevaluating the role of ODA specifically, and more generally its desire to remain engaged globally. Many expressed concern regarding the future that the CSD’s debates portend. The same delegate noted that while multilateralism is contagious, so is unilateralism. The amendments that donor countries added, calling for "equitable burden sharing," point to a decreased willingness of Northern States to play the "godfather," championing the CSD’s objectives and encouraging others to follow. The Northern retreat has been perceived in other UN fora as well, engendering concern among developing countries that the burden for multilateralism is shifting towards them. NORTH-SOUTH SCHISM: Ambassador Razali Ismail, President of the General Assembly, told UNEP’s High-Level Segment in February, "Agenda 21 and the CSD will only bring about sustainable, equitable and ecologically sound development if we can break out of the North-South schism...the real political challenge is to reshape North-South relations." The negotiations on finance during CSD-5 suggest that States are not only failing to break out of the North-South schism but that the schism is increasingly polluting the UN’s response to sustainable development with suspicion. For developing countries the decline in ODA since 1992, and attempts during CSD-5 to switch the burden of international funding for sustainable development to private sector investment, which developed countries would argue is a case of acknowledging actuality, have helped to discredit the very concept of "sustainable development." An illustration of the unraveling of the UNCED agenda, under the pressure of competing priorities and interpretations, was the debate on the cardinal principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" (Principle 7 of the Rio Declaration). The US, Canada and the EU view this principle in the context of global environmental responsibilities. The G-77/China tried, unsuccessfully, to incorporate it into a paragraph on fostering a dynamic and enabling international economic environment for sustainable development. The exchanges demonstrated just how far apart (at least rhetorically: a senior European commentator ventured to suggest that part of the problem is that the G-77 no longer exists in reality outside the UN) the so-called parties to the Rio global compact can be when it comes to interpreting the core elements of the UNCED agreements. The fragility even threatens the integrity and use of the concept of "sustainable development" itself. During negotiations on finance, one delegate resorted to warning his fellow negotiators that they should not begin to treat sustainable development as a pariah concept. He was responding to repeated attempts to accompany, qualify or replace references to sustainable development with a reference to each of its three components — economic growth, social development and environmental protection. The Chair, in a frank explanation of a phenomenon that often goes unstated, explained that developing countries fear that sustainable development has become, in the mouths of developed country advocates, a code for environmental protection while the social and economic dimensions are under-valued. An experienced European participant conceded later that five years after Rio the words "sustainable development" were not so acceptable. This is a major step backwards. A number of industrialized countries questioned the validity of a reference to the widening gap between developed and developing countries and would concede only to single out the least developed countries. One observer noted that developing countries at the CSD, by maintaining alliance despite their diversity, often seem to take "helpless" negotiating stances reminiscent of their position in the 1970’s. A contemporary developing country finance minister, another observer noted, would not likely take this position that denies the importance of infrastructure for investment. To genuinely move the concept of sustainable development from the margins to the center will require that the negotiating positions on all sides more accurately mirror economic realities and the ensuing changes in needs and responsibilities that are taking place in the real world. PARTNERSHIPS: The question of acknowledgement, renewal and strengthening of partnerships extends to a number of actors and issues. Partnerships with major groups received a significant amount of attention at CSD-5. One tangible development since UNCED has been the considerable growth of partnerships in and among the major groups and the resulting improvement in their organization, communication and activities. During the dialogue sessions, panelists supplied a catalogue of activities and voiced a number of concise and specific recommendations for action. Discussants at the dialogue with local authorities noted that in 1995 they were struggling for recognition of their role in sustainable development. They are now discussing obstacles to implementation of over 1800 Local Agenda 21s in 64 countries. Major groups also reported accomplishments ranging from establishing networks, strategies for gaining credit, conducting studies and educational efforts and mobilizing members. All groups noted a heightened awareness of sustainable development issues among their members and some noted increased partnerships among major groups. The partnerships between these major groups and CSD delegates, however, continue to leave something to be desired. While major groups have gained an increasingly high profile in the CSD as partners in sustainable development, some were left with the impression that major groups were talking among themselves and not making a real impact on the negotiating process. While major groups were allotted an unprecedented amount of space and time within the official CSD session with the innovation of the dialogue sessions, there was little genuine dialogue. Few delegates even attended the dialogues, in part, because they were scheduled in parallel to the official negotiations. The recommendations emanating from the dialogues came too late to be included in the "critical" compilation negotiating text. Some observers, including major group representatives themselves, have pinpointed some of these problems. For instance, it has been noted that major groups often expend a great deal of time and energy drafting their own alternative declarations rather than drafting amendments to the text under negotiation and lobbying delegations to take these on board. One method for developing the vital relationship between the CSD’s agenda-setting role and civil society’s contribution to operationalizing sustainable development was proposed by a group of Canadian NGOs. This proposal, which found its way — after some diversions and alterations — into the agreed text on CSD Methods of Work, is based on the idea of extending the task manager system to the world at large. In other words, major groups would be invited to "adopt arrangements for coordination and interaction in providing inputs to the Commission." The idea presents a major organizational challenge to NGOs and other major groups. CONCLUSION: The sense of urgency at CSD-5 was best measured in quantities of frustration at the pace and progress of the negotiations. As Amb. Razali noted during the High-Level Segment, the compact at Rio has eroded along with much of the high-profile attention to sustainable development generated by the Earth Summit itself. The most promising results of Rio are taking place at anonymous and local meetings around the world — anonymous but keenly monitored and cited as proof that Agenda 21 is alive and well by officials at the UN Division for Sustainable Development. One observer recalled that, in 1992, one could scarcely escape the news of UNCED and/or the environment in the media. This is not the case today. In international relations, perceptions are everything, and if UNGASS is ultimately billed as a non-event it will not bode well for the future of sustainable development or the UN in general during this critical time in its reform. The most that can be expected, in terms of urgency perhaps, is that the Special Session will not permanently damage the historic accomplishment of UNCED itself. On the final day of CSD-5, a UN official privately recalled a Bee Gees song that sums up a process that has generated over 400 pages of negotiated text since 1993: "It’s only words..." And words they will remain until one more official translation becomes embedded in the business of the CSD: the translation of words into action. The most valuable role for the Special Session will be to critically reflect on Waller-Hunter’s criteria for success and deliver a renewed political mandate to translate popular concern into urgent and concrete instructions to politicians, translate the information-rich assessments into unequivocal action plans, and translate illusions of top-down sovereign authority and competence into partnerships that span a globalizing world. THINGS TO LOOK FOR THINGS TO LOOK FOR BEFORE UNGASS GEF COUNCIL: The next GEF Council meeting will take place from 30 April – May 1997 in Washington, DC. It will be preceded by NGO consultations on 29 April. A replenishment meeting will take place in 2 May. For more information contact Marie Morgan at the GEF Secretariat, tel: +1-202-473-1128; fax: +1-202-522-3240. The GEF Web Site is at: http://www.worldbank.org/html/gef . APEC MEETINGS: The Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum Trade Ministerial Meeting will be held from 9-10 May in Montreal. For information contact the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, APEC Division; fax: +1-613-944- 2732. The APEC Meeting of Environment Ministers on Sustainable Development will be held 9-11 June in Toronto. For information contact Gloria Yang, Environment Canada; fax: +1-613-991-6422. INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON DESERTIFICATION: This workshop, entitled, "Combating Desertification: Connecting Science with Community Action," will be held from 12-16 May in 1997 in Tucson, Arizona, USA. For information contact Dr. Jim Chamie, International Arid Land Consortium; tel: +1-520-621-3024; fax: +1-520-621-3816; e-mail: chamie@ag.arizona.edu. WTO SYMPOSIUM ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT: The WTO Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) will host a symposium on trade, environment and sustainable development from 20-21 May in Geneva. For more information contact the CTE; tel: + (41 22) 739-5111; fax: + (41 22) 739-5458. Also try http://www.wto.org. CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY: The Ad Hoc Expert Group on Biosafety is scheduled to meet from 12-16 May in Montreal. For more information contact the CBD Secretariat, World Trade Centre, 413 St. Jacques Street, Office 630, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H2Y 1N9; tel: +1-514-288-2220; fax: +1-514-288-6588; e- mail: biodiv@mtl.net. PRIOR INFORMED CONSENT: The third session of the intergovernmental negotiating committee for the preparation of an international legally binding instrument for the application of a prior informed consent procedure for certain hazardous chemicals in international trade (INC-3) will be held in Geneva from 26-30 May 1997. The UNEP Governing Council, at its last meeting, adopted a decision calling for completion of negotiations on a legally binding agreement by the end of 1997. For more information contact: UNEP Chemicals (IRPTC); tel: + (41 22) 979 9111; fax: + (41 22) 797 3460; e-mail: IRPTC@unep.ch. PATHWAYS TO SUSTAINABILITY: This international conference on local initiatives for cities and towns will take place from 1-5 June 1997 in Newcastle, Australia. The conference objectives are to: showcase exemplary Local Agenda 21 case studies; provide opportunity for debate; and engage local communities in progress towards local and therefore global sustainability. For further information, contact the Conference Secretariat at Capital Conferences Pty Ltd., PO Box N399, Grosvenor Place, Sydney NSW 2000, Australia; tel: +61 2 9252 3388, fax: +61 2 9241 5282, e- mail: capcon@ozemail.com.au. Also visit the World Wide Web site at http://bicentenary.ncc.nsw.gov.au. ACTIONS FOR SUSTAINABILITY: In conjunction with the UN Forum "Pathways to Sustainability," the people of Newcastle will host the "Actions for Sustainability" conference and festival from 2- 7 June 1997. There will be day and evening sessions, as well as exhibitions, stalls and artistic and creative activities. "Actions for Sustainability" will be held in close proximity to the main conference to provide an opportunity for participants to address an international audience and local community groups. For information contact: Cathy Burgess, PO Box 550, Wallsend NSW, 2287 Australia; tel: + 61 14 633 552 or +61 14 073 591; e- mail: lrene@hunterlink.net.au CITES: Zimbabwe will host the CITES Conference of the Parties from 9-20 June 1997 in Harare. For more information contact: the CITES Secretariat, Geneva Executive Centre, 15 Chemin de Anemones, CP 456, CH-1219 Chatelaine-Geneva, Switzerland; tel: +(41 22) 979-9139/40; fax: +(41 22) 797-3417; e-mail: cites@unep.ch. Also see http://www.unep.ch/cites.html or http://www.wcmc.org.uk/convent/cites. KNOWLEDGE FOR DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE: The World Bank and Canada will host this conference in Toronto, Canada, from 23-25 June 1997. The conference, co-sponsored by Switzerland, the US, UNDP and UNESCO, among others, will focus on the vital role of information and knowledge in sustainable development. Participants will explore the opportunities and challenges posed by new information/communication technologies, how developing counties and the world’s poor can gain access to them and opportunities for new partnerships. For information contact the Conference Secretariat, Global Knowledge ‘97, the World Bank Economic Development Institute; tel: +1-202-473-6442; fax: +1- 202-676-0858; e-mail: globalknowledge@worldbank.org. The conference web site is located at http://www.globalknowledge.org A French version is available at http://www.savoirmondial.org SPECIAL SESSION OF THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY: The Special Session of the UN General Assembly is scheduled for 23-27 June 1997. The session will conduct an overall review and appraisal of progress in implementing the UNCED agreements since the 1992 Earth Summit. For more information, contact: Andrey Vasilyev, UN Division for Sustainable Development; tel: +1-212-963-5949; fax: +1-212-963-4260; e-mail: vasilyev@un.org. Also visit the Home Page for the Special Session at http://www.un.org/DPCSD/earthsummit/. THINGS TO LOOK FOR AFTER UNGASS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE: The next sessions of the subsidiary bodies are scheduled to take place in Bonn from 28 July to 7 August 1997 at the Hotel Maritim. SBSTA, SBI and AG13 will meet from 28-30 July and will likely meet once more the following week. The AGBM will begin on Thursday, 31 July. The subsidiary bodies are scheduled to meet again from 20-31 October 1997 at a conference facility in Bonn to be determined. At present, all subsidiary bodies except for AG13 are scheduled to meet in October. The third Conference of the Parties is scheduled for 1-12 December 1997 in Kyoto, Japan. COP-3 will immediately allocate the completion of decisions of the Berlin Mandate process to a sessional Committee of the Whole, open to all delegations. The political negotiations will be finalized in a ministerial segment, which will be convened from 8-10 December and where the final text of a protocol or other legal instrument will be adopted. For all meetings related to the FCCC, contact the secretariat in Bonn, Germany; tel: +49-228-815-1000; fax: +49-228-815-1999; e-mail: secretariat@unfccc.de. Also try the FCCC home page at http://www.unfccc.de and UNEP’s Information Unit for Conventions at http://www.unep.ch/iuc.html. INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM OF MAYORS GOVERNANCE FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTH AND EQUITY: This colloquium will be held from 28-30 July 1997 in New York and will be hosted by UNDP, the Ministerial/Senior Officials Forum, Forum for Parliamentarians and Civil Society Organization Dialogue. The colloquium is a follow-up activity of Habitat II. For more information contact Jonas Rabinovich, UNDP; tel: +1-212-906-6791; fax: +1-212-906- 6973. CONVENTION TO COMBAT DESERTIFICATION: The resumed session of INCD-10 is scheduled from 18-22 August 1997 in Geneva. COP-1 is currently scheduled for 29 September -1 October 1997 in Rome. For more information, contact the CCD Secretariat; Geneva Executive Center, 11/13 Chemin des Anemones, CH-1219 Chatelaine, Geneva, Switzerland; tel: +41 (22) 979-9419; fax: +41 (22) 979- 9030/31; e-mail: secretariat@unccd.ch. Also see the INCD World Wide Web site at http://www.unep.ch/incd.html. FOURTH EUROPEAN ROUNDTABLE ON CLEANER PRODUCTION: The Fourth European Roundtable on Cleaner Production (ERCP 97) will take place in Oslo, Norway, from 1-3 November 1997. The meeting intends to contribute to the critical evaluation and dissemination of cleaner production options and programmes and to highlight the mechanisms aimed at accomplishing the shift from supply driven to demand driven cleaner production. For information contact: Jostein Myrberg, National Institute of TechnologyAkersveien, 24 CP.O. Box 2608, St. Hanshaugen, N-0131 Oslo; tel: +47 22 86 51 07; fax: +47 22 11 12 03; e-mail: myrj@teknologisk.no. Also try the Conference web site at http://www.teknologisk.no/ercp97. SECOND ECO-BALTIC CONFERENCE: The Second Eco-Baltic Conference on Environmental Management for the Baltic Sea Region will be held from 9-11 October 1997 in Gdansk, Poland. The conference aim at providing business and industry in the Baltic Sea region with the environmental management instruments they need to improve their performance and their competitiveness in European markets. For information contact the Eco-Baltic Secretariat, Osterstrasse 58, D-20259, Hamburg, Germany; tel: +49-404907-404; fax: +49-40-4907-401; e-mail: eco-baltic@on-line.de. 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 .