Summary report, 3–14 May 2010
The 18th session of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD 18) convened from 3-14 May 2010, at UN Headquarters in New York. Delegates focused on the thematic cluster of transport, chemicals, waste management, mining, and sustainable consumption and production patterns. CSD 18 delegates also conducted a one-day preparatory committee meeting for the five-year high-level review of the Mauritius Strategy for the Implementation of the Barbados Plan of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States, which will take place in September 2010, and participated in a High-Level Segment. A Partnerships Fair, Learning Center and many side events also took place during the two-week meeting.
The CSD meets annually in two-year “Implementation Cycles,” with each cycle focusing on one thematic cluster alongside cross-sectoral issues. This approach was outlined in a multi-year programme of work (2004-2017) adopted at CSD 11 in 2003. Each cycle is comprised of a Review Year and a Policy Year. CSD 18 thus conducted a review of barriers and constraints in implementation, as well as lessons learned and best practices, in relation to the thematic cluster. CSD 19 will convene in May 2011 as the “Policy Year” for this thematic cluster, when delegates will negotiate policy recommendations based on CSD 18’s review of the issues.
CSD 18 delegates expressed general satisfaction with their discussions on the thematic cluster, especially for mining, transport and sustainable consumption and production, which do not fall under other any other international bodies for policy coordination. Many expressed an interest in intersessional work on sustainable consumption and production to ensure that well-prepared proposals for further international collaboration on this topic can be tabled at CSD 19. A suggestion to evaluate ways to improve implementation of CSD decisions was also received with interest, as many participants privately questioned the utility of a long CSD “review” year. The preparatory process for the 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD or Rio+20), which commences the week following CSD 18, also occupied delegates’ minds, as they began considering links between the Rio+20 and CSD agendas, and possible decisions by Rio+20 on the CSD’s future.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CSD
The Commission on Sustainable Development emerged from Agenda 21, the programme of action for sustainable development adopted in June 1992 by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), also known as the “Rio Earth Summit.” Agenda 21 called for the creation of the CSD to ensure effective follow-up of UNCED, enhance international cooperation, 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 adopted resolution 47/191, which established the CSD’s terms of reference and composition, organization of work, relationship with other UN bodies, Secretariat arrangements, and guidelines for the participation of Major Groups. The CSD is a functional commission of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), and its decisions are forwarded to ECOSOC. The CSD has 53 member states, although all UN member states are invited to participate in its sessions. The Division for Sustainable Development (DSD), within the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), serves as the CSD’s Secretariat.
The CSD held its first substantive session in June 1993 and has convened annually since then at UN headquarters in New York. During its first five years, the CSD systematically reviewed the implementation of all chapters of Agenda 21. In June 1997, five years after UNCED, the 19th Special Session of the UN General Assembly (UNGASS-19), also known as “Rio+5,” was held to review the implementation of Agenda 21. Negotiations produced a Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21. Among the decisions adopted at UNGASS-19 was a five-year CSD work programme organized around sectoral, cross-sectoral and economic thematic issues. The economic, sectoral and cross-sectoral themes considered, as determined at UNGASS, were as follows: industry, strategic approaches to freshwater management, and technology transfer, capacity building, education, science and awareness raising (CSD-6); tourism, oceans and seas, and consumption and production patterns (CSD-7); sustainable agriculture and land management, integrated planning and management of land resources, and financial resources, trade and investment and economic growth (CSD-8); and energy and transport, atmosphere and energy, and information for decision-making and participation and international cooperation for an enabling environment (CSD-9).
The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) met from 26 August-4 September 2002, in Johannesburg, South Africa, and adopted two main documents: the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI) and the Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development. The Plan of Implementation is designed as a framework for action to implement the commitments originally agreed at UNCED and includes chapters on: an introduction; poverty eradication; consumption and production; the natural resource base; health; SIDS; Africa; other regional initiatives; means of implementation; and institutional framework. The Johannesburg Declaration outlines the path taken from UNCED to the WSSD, highlights present challenges, expresses a commitment to sustainable development, underscores the importance of multilateralism and emphasizes the need for implementation.
The WSSD called for the CSD to meet in seven two-year “Implementation Cycles,” and a multi-year programme of work for the 2004-2017 period was adopted at CSD 11 in 2003. CSD 12 and 13 adopted recommendations to address water, sanitation and human settlements. CSD 14 and 15 considered energy, industrial development, air pollution/atmosphere and climate change, but this cycle did not reach agreement on recommendations for action. CSD 16 and 17 adopted recommendations related to drought, desertification, agriculture, land, rural development and Africa.
CSD 18 REPORT
Opening the 18th session of the Commission on Sustainable Development on Monday, 3 May 2010, CSD Chair Luis Alberto Ferraté, Minister of the Environment and Natural Resources, Guatemala, encouraged a constructive and pragmatic dialogue. Jomo Kwame Sundaram, Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development, on behalf of Sha Zukang, UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, stressed, inter alia: significant new challenges have arisen since transport was last considered by the CSD; chemicals issues remain under-resourced; the dearth of quality data is a global obstacle for waste management; subsidies for mining decrease incentives for green activities; and capacity building is needed at national and local levels to achieve sustainable consumption.
Delegates then elected the following Vice-Chairs by acclamation: Tania Raguž (Croatia) and Ulf Jaeckel (Germany), and Eduardo Meñez (Philippines) to replace Hilario Davide (Philippines). Meñez was also elected as Rapporteur. Delegates recalled that Mohamed Al-Mabrok Alahraf (Libya) had been elected during the first session of CSD 18 in 2009. They also adopted the agenda and organization of work without amendment (E/CN.17/2010/1). Delegates proceeded to discuss the thematic cluster of issues in opening statements, regional discussions, thematic discussions, interactive dialogues and a High-Level Ministerial Segment.
OPENING STATEMENTS: Yemen, for the Group of 77 and China (G-77/China), called for delinking growth from environmental degradation. The European Union (EU) stressed that the 10-year framework of programmes (10YFP) on sustainable consumption and production (SCP) patterns can be a major response to green our economies. Nepal, on behalf of the Least Developed Countries, emphasized links between the themes and the paucity of financial resources to address them. Chile, for the Rio Group, cautioned developed countries about maintaining a culture of overconsumption. Lebanon, for the Arab Group, called for implementing governmental commitments, especially based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. Paraguay, for the Group of Landlocked Developing Countries, highlighted the challenges of high transportation costs faced by them. The Solomon Islands, for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), stressed the unique situation of “sea-locked” countries especially in accessing markets. The Federated States of Micronesia, for the Pacific small island developing states (SIDS), underscored the possibility that some islands would be made uninhabitable due to climate change. St. Vincent and the Grenadines, for the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), called for concrete financing plans to support development efforts. Nigeria, for the African Group, underscored that Africa remains the world’s most vulnerable continent. The US emphasized tailored solutions, good governance and involvement of all affected parties. The Russian Federation stressed concrete data and analysis taking into account economic and social aspects of various issues. Switzerland noted that all current themes are vital elements of the green economy.
STATEMENTS BY MAJOR GROUPS: Women called for gender equality in sustainable development, Children and Youth stressed awareness, education and empowerment, and Indigenous Peoples noted the overexploitation of natural resources. NGOs called for an organic change in society’s structure, and for an ethic of reciprocity. Local Authorities noted their instrumental role in implementation, and Workers and Trade Unions urged decent work and safer conditions. Business and Industry highlighted the ability of the private sector to develop innovative solutions. The Scientific and Technological Community said applying sound scientific knowledge must be central to solutions for the CSD 18 themes. Farmers urged a substantial increase in agricultural investment.
The Earth Negotiations Bulletin’s coverage of these statements can be found at: http://enb.iisd.org/vol05/enb05283e.html
On Monday and Tuesday, 3-4 May, delegates discussed the Regional Implementation Meetings (RIMs) and regional perspectives on the thematic cluster of issues. CSD 18 Vice-Chairs presented the results of the relevant RIMs, panelists presented regional perspectives on the CSD 18 thematic cluster, and delegates proceeded to discuss obstacles and challenges to implementation, current activities and linkages to other international processes, and proposals for further action. A summary of these discussions is available online at http://enb.iisd.org/vol05/enb05283e.html and http://enb.iisd.org/vol05/enb05284e.html.
LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN: On Monday afternoon, 3 May, CSD Chair Luis Alberto Ferraté chaired a panel discussing outcomes from the Economic Commission for Latin American and the Caribbean (ECLAC) RIM (E/CN.17/2010/10/Add.4).
Obstacles and challenges to implementation noted by delegates included: social inequality and diverse productive structures; challenges related to inter- and intra-regional transportation; the issue of transboundary shipment of hazardous material; the lack of clarity regarding the concept of green economy and its relationship with poverty eradication; the need to balance growth of food and biofuel crops; inequalities between consumers with different levels of income; and the special vulnerability of SIDS.
Current national and regional activities described by delegates included: development of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems; biofuel production; investment in public transportation systems and capacity building; and programmes combating social inequality and improving production patterns. Delegates also noted the Stockholm, Rotterdam and Basel Conventions and upcoming negotiations for a mercury convention.
Delegates proposed the need for: enhanced sound chemicals management through implementation of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM); attention to public transportation; effective financial mechanisms for chemical management; increased education for waste management; energy efficient mining programmes; and inclusion of green technology in economic recovery strategies.
AFRICA: On Monday afternoon, 3 May, Vice-Chair Alahraf chaired discussions of Africa in relation to the thematic issues. South Africa summarized the outcome of the African RIM (E/CN.17/2010/10/Add.1).
The Economic Commission for Africa highlighted the need for systems and mechanisms that promote integrated planning. The African Union Commission (AUC) underscored the important role of regional economic communities, noting they provide effective links between national and regional level priorities.
In the ensuing discussion, participants highlighted the need to: connect the issues of sustainable consumption and African food systems; ensure integrated development and management of natural resources; develop a waste management strategy for Africa; facilitate access to technologies; evaluate the private sector’s role in managing chemicals and wastes; adapt and replicate good practices in sound management of wastes and chemicals; shift to more sustainable consumption patterns; reuse and recycle resources; and move to a low-carbon economy.
ASIA AND THE PACIFIC: This session was chaired by Vice-Chair Meñez, who presented the outcomes of the Asia and Pacific RIM (E/CN.17/2010/10/Add.2). Delegates noted challenges facing this region are related to unsustainable consumption and production patterns. Countries also expressed concern with challenges of managing current waste streams such as persistent organic pollutants (POPs), nuclear waste and air pollution, safely managing the disposal of legacy waste, in particular from the mining sector.
Initiatives and partnerships were noted to include: green growth activities; circular economy work; reduce, reuse and recycle (3Rs) activities; and the Partnership on Clean Development and Climate.
The Institute for Geo-Resources and Environment, Japan, advocated the concept of “geoethics,” which takes into account indigenous knowledge on local mining and conservation. The UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP) discussed sustainable development in the region, and called for a paradigm shift to sustainable growth patterns.
Participants: stressed the need to ensure corporate social responsibility is implemented in a harmonized manner; highlighted a willingness to share experience in promoting green development; urged incorporating the interests of indigenous peoples in mining activities; urged helping farmers get their produce to market; and appealed to businesses, governments and consumer activities to work together to achieve sustainable development.
UNECE REGION: Vice-Chairs Raguž and Jaeckel outlined the outcomes of the fourth UN Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) RIM, which was held on 1-2 December 2009 in Geneva (E/CN.17/2010/10/Add.3).
In the discussion, participants noted different rates of progress on the themes in Europe’s subregions, and pin-pointed several regional constraints and implementation gaps, among them: ensuring accessible and sustainable transport; waste management, in particular, electronic waste (e-waste); pollution control and the impacts of chemical production, including pharmaceuticals; and reducing the environmental footprint. Some highlighted their understanding of how mining, in particular, “green mining,” can benefit sustainable development and social needs. While underlining the interlinkages among the sectoral themes in the UNECE region, participants accorded special importance to SCP and stressed its overriding role, and called for integrating it into sustainable development strategies. Current constraints regarding SCP patterns were singled out including: slow transition from consumerism and the need for more incentives and financial support for relevant initiatives, such as inclusion of education on SCP in school curricula. They also noted the need for: transformative education; more research, including new indices that go beyond the GDP, and transparency and corporate social responsibility of business, environmental impact assessments, and partnerships.
Many stressed the importance of having a mix of regulatory, voluntary and market approaches, and the development of education for sustainable development. They also emphasized the importance of the UNECE Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters.
WESTERN ASIA: The regional discussion on Western Asia took place on Tuesday, 4 May. The UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia presented outcomes from the RIM (E/CN.17/2010/10/Add.5), and highlighted regional priorities including: moving into mass transport systems; the adoption of an international finance mechanism to support the implementation of SAICM; and the need to address e-waste.
Among the challenges that delegates highlighted were problems in transport and waste management in the occupied territories, and the need for technology transfer to farmers in the region. One country discussed progress achieved in the region including success in mining of non-ferrous minerals. Areas for further action were highlighted to include: the need for real breakthroughs in renewable energy technologies; addressing the effects of natural resource mining on indigenous peoples and children; and clarification of the definition of “green economy.”
CROSS-REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES: On Tuesday, 4 May, following the discussions on each specific region, CSD 18 discussed cross-regional perspectives. Panelist Marco Keiner, UNECE, highlighted cross-regional programmes such as: the development of Euro-Asian inland transport links by UNECE and UNESCAP; ECLAC and UNESCAP cooperation on the promotion of sustainable urban infrastructure; and the Global Energy Efficiency Project. He also discussed South-South cooperation including projects such as the BRT system in Latin America and Africa, regional cooperation in Latin America and the Caribbean in implementing the Marrakech 10YFP, and the Arab Countries Water Utilities Association fostering inter-Arab dialogue between suppliers and stakeholders. The AUC discussed cooperation with the EU on food security and disaster reduction, and the UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) discussed cleaner production activities.
Challenges and opportunities were discussed in relation to the need to: move from pilot projects and experiments to broad reform of agricultural activities to replenish nutrient deficient soil; follow through and implement past decisions; and associate the CSD with the Financing for Development Process. Nigeria expressed concern with the problem of transboundary movement of waste. Switzerland highlighted that many speakers identified a connection between the topics under the thematic cluster of CSD 18 and 19 and the “green economy.”
Delegates at CSD 18 conducted their review of the implementation of the thematic cluster for the 2010-2011 cycle from 4-7 May in parallel thematic discussions that focused on each issue individually during two half-day meetings. During the High-Level Segment, roundtable ministerial discussions also addressed the thematic topics in parallel sessions. Each session was opened with panel presentations, which provided expert views on the issues to be addressed. Detailed summaries of these discussions are available at http://enb.iisd.org/vol05/enb05284e.html, http://enb.iisd.org/vol05/enb05285e.html, http//enb.iisd.org/vol05/enb05286e.html and http://enb.iisd.org/vol05/enb05287e.html.
CHEMICALS: Vice Chair Raguž chaired discussions on this topic on Tuesday, 4 May, and Wednesday, 5 May. Muhammad Chaudhry, DSD, introduced the Secretary-General’s report on chemicals (E/CN.17/2010/5).
Panelist Ivan Eržen, Slovenia, said the world has not reached an optimum relationship between the benefits and risks of chemicals. The G-77/China expressed concern over the dumping of chemicals and radioactive waste in developing countries. Uganda and Botswana noted constraints in chemicals management, including: lack of information, resources, capacity, technology and alternatives. Workers and Trade Unions stated the main barrier to chemicals management is lack of regulation and enforcement.
The US described steps taken to identify safer alternatives. Austria described activities involving chemicals leasing, noting the strategy is applicable to a multitude of industry sectors. China explained it has established import-export registration of toxic chemicals. Kenya highlighted efforts to develop an analysis and needs assessment in line with the Libreville Declaration.
Panelist Ivan Eržen stressed the need for increased cooperation with the World Health Organization (WHO). Panelist Jamidu Katima, International POPs Elimination Network, highlighted the importance of access to information, political will, capacity building and financial resources in implementing SAICM. Panelist Pat Mooney, ETC Group, said impacts of nanotechnology, and geo-engineering on the environment, health and security should be assessed and managed. Panelist Gillian Guthrie, Jamaica, highlighted the need to, inter alia: move from a project approach to an integrated lifecycle approach; promote national risk management policies and programmes; and promote access to green technologies.
The EU highlighted the need to integrate chemicals management into countries’ sustainable development strategies and, supported by Indonesia, requested CSD 18 to reflect the outcomes of the Simultaneous Extraordinary Meetings of the Conferences of the Parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions (ExCOPs). Slovenia suggested involving WHO country offices in chemical management. Canada and Cuba highlighted the importance of effective implementation of existing global agreements, and using SAICM. Children and Youth called for commissioning a comprehensive chemical pollution repercussions study.
Poland, for the Central and Eastern Europe Group (CEE), highlighted the importance of the Globally Harmonized System for Classification and Labeling of Chemicals.
Indigenous Peoples recommended that awareness and sensitization be undertaken with communities to empower them to manage chemicals related risks. Women advocated a “no data, no market” policy. AOSIS called on countries to ratify the Basel Convention Ban Amendment. Farmers highlighted the need to educate farmers in the use of crop protection products. AUC called for implementation of the Bamako Convention. UNEP said that Rio+20 could be utilized to consider future challenges, including the need for a legally binding framework to succeed SAICM.
TRANSPORT: On Tuesday afternoon, 4 May, and Wednesday morning, 5 May, delegates discussed transport. Vice-Chair Meñez chaired the discussion that followed the introduction of the UN Secretary-General’s report on transport (E/CN.17/2010/4). Transport obstacles highlighted by the panelists focused on the need to change attitudes, with Panelist Andre Lago, Brazil, denouncing the “new colonialist mentality” regarding biofuels and Panelist Allison Davis, Arup Consultant, noted that improving public transport is a political, not technical, issue. Africa noted: limited implementation of subregional and regional agreements; funding gaps; and the need for technical and institutional capacity assistance. Uganda said there is agreed definition of “green economy.” Mexico identified challenges occurring when land use planning and infrastructure development authorization fall under different government purviews. AOSIS and Barbados noted the unique difficulties faced by SIDS. Japan identified the difficulty of appropriating emissions from international maritime and air transport.
BRT systems were identified as an existing option for sustainable public transport, with Brazil, South Africa, Nigeria, Argentina and the Republic of Korea highlighting their use of national initiatives to build them. Norway and Switzerland described taxation programmes and economic incentives used to reduce private car use and efforts to improve public transport systems. France described efforts to modernize river transport. The US highlighted public-private partnerships like the Smart Wave Programme. Canada discussed the creation of sustainable transport stimulus funds and new emissions standards. The Arab Group described efforts to improve fuel and oil, infrastructures and emissions standards. Business and Industry noted that airline and road transport industries are working to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Many proposals were related to increased transport accessibility, with Panelist Eran Feitelson, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, calling for transportation measures to be combined in coherent packages. The G-77/China noted the need to establish and improve multi-modal transport systems and expand all-weather road networks in rural areas. Pacific SIDS called for the development of an international standard for infrastructure for shipping and aviation facilities and the capacity to maintain this. Guatemala said road safety and safety of public transport users should be considered when promoting alternative means of transport. Farmers and Women noted the need for improved transport infrastructure between farmland and markets while NGOs stressed that food security should be achieved at local levels and called for reducing animal movement. Brazil emphasized attention to biofuel production. Indigenous Peoples suggested examining the practice of “land grabbing” during biofuel production and its effects on indigenous communities. The EU promoted sustainable forms of mobility and called for internalizing the environmental costs of transport. Israel noted the need for fuel taxation and management mechanisms to internalize costs of transport. UNEP suggested using both regulatory standards and market-based instruments.
WASTE MANAGEMENT:This issue was addressed on Wednesday, 5 May, and Thursday, 6 May, and was chaired by Vice-Chair Meñez. Nikhil Chandavarkar, DSD, introduced the Secretary-General’s report on waste management (E/CN.17/2010/6).
Participants identified challenges in waste management, including: lack of proper urban waste management planning; lack of resources, technologies and infrastructure; insufficient availability of information and data; problems associated with incineration and landfills; lack of awareness on the importance of waste management; the approximately 15-20 million tonnes of e-waste transferred from developed to developing countries annually; the pollution of radioactive waste; and drinking water contaminated by waste.
Delegates shared experiences in environmentally sound management of solid wastes highlighting recycling and reuse activities. China reported that it had enacted a Cleaner Production Promotion Law and Circular Economy Promotion Law. Zambia said it is implementing the Keep Zambia Clean and Healthy Campaign. Turkey highlighted its efforts to establish a system to collect and recycle waste oil. Norway reported that it had reduced greenhouse gas emissions from landfill sites by recovering energy from these sites.
Nigeria described efforts to identify illegal e-waste import and return it to its port of origin. Thailand provided information on its industrial waste information clearinghouse, which identifies waste generators and processers. Cambodia outlined activities to produce methane gas from dumping sites. Japan announced that, from 2000-2015, it is aiming for a 60% improvement in resource productivity. India introduced its experience in using high thermal value waste in the cement industry. The AUC noted it is working with UNEP in developing policy guidelines to sensitize Heads of State on the importance of ratifying the Bamako Convention. Farmers spoke of women’s groups in India who have organized municipal collection, resulting in improved livelihoods and cleaner cities.
Delegates made following proposals for the sound management of wastes: implementing the 3R principle, and waste prevention and minimization for achieving zero waste; adopting economic instruments such as resource taxes and household user fees; supporting robust public-private partnerships at the national level; combating illegal shipments of waste; promoting research, redesign and responsibility; greening supply trains and applying “polluter pays principle” in managing wastes; full implementation of the Basel Convention, and the outcomes of the recent ExCOPs; and adopting take-back options for e-waste in line with the extended producer responsibility principle.
MINING: CSD 18 discussed mining during half-day meetings on 5 and 6 May, chaired by Vice-Chair Alahraf. David O’Connor, Division for Sustainable Development, introduced the UN Secretary-General’s report on mining (E/CN.17/2010/7). Panelists Patrick Chevalier, Natural Resources, Canada, and Juana Kuramoto Huamán, University of Maastricht, highlighted the challenges of ensuring good governance, building partnerships and capacities, and improving accountability, fiscal transparency, performance indicators and monitoring, among others. Panelist Gavin Hilson, University of Reading, UK, urged a realistic focus on the social needs of people, and, as one measure, simplifying licensing for artisans, while Panelist Victoria Lucia Tauli-Corpuz, Tebtebba Foundation, called for a ban on uranium mining and for controlling industries that use inordinate amounts of energy.
Delegates identified challenges such as: enhancing management of revenues by developing countries to avoid “Dutch disease” (G-77/China); ensuring good governance and protection of undervalued ecosystems and regions of biodiversity (EU); and considering social factors when using natural resources through mining (Arab Group). Switzerland stressed the human rights dimension, objected to mining practices that cause social problems for artisans, and emphasized better information for consumers and market transparency. Ghana highlighted that, although mining itself is not sustainable since the resource exploited would be exhausted at some time, mining has a demonstrated capacity to promote sustainable development.
Examples of activities and partnerships were noted including: the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative; the United Nations Environment Programme Global Mercury Partnership; and the Methane-to-Markets Partnership. Workers and Trade Unions supported the Kimberly Process.
UNEP called for a global initiative for mining developed in the context of sustainable resource management. Bolivia supported developing indicators on the benefits of mining and assessment and monitoring processes. Women called for compensation for damages, and Children and Youth said governments should provide incentives to shift from reliance on child labor. Some delegates cited a role for corporate social responsibility, while Indigenous Peoples stressed voluntary programmes are not working and there should be a change in focus to corporate liability.
10-YEAR FRAMEWORK FOR SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION PATTERNS: This item (E/CN.17/2010/8) was taken up on Thursday, 6 May, and Friday, 7 May, and was chaired by Ulf Jaeckel (Germany).
The general sentiment was that this topic, focusing on resource use and reasonable consumption, was of fundamental value to the goal of sustainable development. Some said it must be regarded as a cross-cutting issue, as it reaches across many sectoral themes. The challenges SCP presents were described by participants: for example, Uganda and Libya said overspending and poverty are two extreme unsustainable patterns of consumption, and others queried how to address both over- and under-consumption. Nigeria noted the lack of a level SCP playing field and the transfer of polluting technologies by developed countries. The EU thought the challenges in SCP were slow rates of behavior change and fragmentation of strategies. The African Group noted that an integrated implementation of SCP can help countries achieve overall development plans and help eradicate poverty.
There was general agreement that the Marrakech process on the 10YFP was the main vehicle for addressing SCP comprehensibly. Countries that are chairing the seven 10YFP task forces explained their concrete activities. The EU, US, Republic of Korea, Japan and several other developed countries, as well as UNEP and UNIDO, described in detail their current and planned programmes, activities, and legislation.
The role of awareness raising and education in changing consumption patterns was stressed by Norway, Australia and several others, while Brazil called for attaining “conscientious consumption.” Switzerland suggested including in the 10YFP, procurement, agro-food systems and market transparency. The Republic of Korea proposed the development of green partnerships, green purchasing guidelines and an environmental information disclosure system. Argentina and Brazil cautioned against “green protectionism,” and the G-77/China said all countries have a right to choose their growth patterns. Many delegates called for support, including financial, for the Marrakech process, with the EU, G-77/China, Switzerland and several others calling for intersessional work before CSD 19, to reach more ambitious agreements, including establishing an ad hoc open ended working group. The US did not support this suggestion, and proposed using a broad range of policy instruments and giving consumers choices to act sustainably, rather than limiting them.
On Monday, 10 May, CSD 18 Chair Ferraté explained that the discussion during SIDS Day would consider the CSD 18 thematic topics as they relate to SIDS and conduct a review of the implementation of the Mauritius Strategy for the Implementation (MSI) of the Barbados Plan of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States (PrepCom for MSI+5). DSD Director Tariq Banuri presented the Secretary-General’s report on the Review of the Implementation of the Mauritius Strategy (E/CN.17/2010/9). Panelist Cheik Sidi Diarra, High Representative for the Least Developing Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and SIDS, highlighted the need to scale up efforts, provide new and additional resources to SIDS, and help SIDS build resilience. Panelist Thomas Stelzer, Assistant Secretary-General for Policy Coordination and Inter-Agency Affairs, said MSI+5 offers an opportunity for further action, and discussions at CSD 18 would lay the foundation for the high-level deliberations at the 65th session of the General Assembly.
Samoa said isolation poses an impediment to Pacific SIDS’ development. Fiji noted the effects of extreme weather events. Indigenous Peoples stressed that local communities in SIDS cannot adapt to the magnitude of disasters occurring. The EU described its commitment of US$30 million under the Fast Start climate initiative, and stressed the potential of a revitalized SIDSnet. Australia described an initiative to build stronger links between Pacific and Caribbean SIDS. Italy reported it has supported over 30 projects and initiatives for mitigation and adaptation of climate change that are being implemented in the Caribbean and Pacific regions. Japan discussed support to SIDS including 50 billion Yen for the Pacific over the next three years and US$15 billion in the “Hatoyama Initiative.” India highlighted that it has committed project aid of US$70 million to SIDS.
Grenada, for AOSIS, stressed the need for: immediate support for SIDS; adoption of a legally binding instrument at the Cancun Climate Change Conference at the end of 2010; consideration of security and human dimensions of climate change; establishment of SIDS as a special category within the UN system; and action revisiting the graduation matter of SIDS before the UN. Jamaica, for the G-77/China, said MSI+5 should focus on tangible results.
In the SIDS thematic discussion, Tariq Banuri introduced the UN Secretary-General’s report on the integrated review of the thematic cluster of CSD 18 in SIDS (E/CN.17/2010/14). He outlined some special challenges for SIDS, including transportation and energy costs, coastal impact of wastes, climate change and tourism development.
Jamaica said climate change is the biggest challenge to SIDS and expressed hope that MSI+5 would reiterate the international community’s commitment to supporting SIDS. The EU emphasized the need to control transboundary movements of hazardous wastes within the framework of the Basel Convention and appealed for reaching a legally binding instrument on climate change.
Under the work of the PrepCom for MSI+5, Chair Ferraté presented the proposed agenda for MSI+5, scheduled to convene on 24-25 September 2010. The Secretariat explained that GA resolution 64/199 agreed the general modalities for the meeting and that two multi-stakeholder sessions and an interactive dialogue on cross-regional perspectives were anticipated.
Chair Ferraté introduced the draft resolution on the organization of the high-level review of the MSI. The resolution requested the GA conduct further consultations with states to determine modalities of the review to assess progress. Grenada questioned the term “modalities,” and Jamaica proposed, and delegates agreed, to amend the text to state “the procedural aspects of the high-level review.” The resolution was adopted by PrepCom MSI+5.
Final Resolution: In the resolution, the GA, requests: the President of the General Assembly with member states, with a view to determining the procedural aspects of the high-level review, to assess progress made in addressing the vulnerabilities of SIDS through interpretation of the Mauritius Strategy to be held on 24 and 25 September 2010. For more information visit http://enb.iisd.org/vol05/enb05288e.html
PARTNERSHIPS FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: On Tuesday morning, 11 May, CSD 18 participants discussed opportunities for partnerships in sustainable development. Vice-Chair Jaeckel opened this session and Tariq Banuri introduced the Secretary-General’s report on partnerships for sustainable development (E/CN.17/2010/13). Obstacles and challenges to implementation identified by Switzerland included the need for quality criteria to ensure concrete outcomes are achieved. Major Groups lamented the lack of gender mainstreaming in partnership arrangements and emphasized the need for greater partnership cooperation with governments. Partnership activities and goals highlighted by panelists included: a partnership on sustainable low carbon transport; “Smart Philanthropy” projects such as the Haiti Hopes Project; the Global Island Partnership; and the need for global, instead of sector-based, partnerships. The US highlighted its successful partnerships, including the Clean Fuels and Vehicles partnership. Senegal discussed the New Partnership for African Development. Major Groups outlined the successes of the Global Alliance for Ecomobility and European Sustainable Cities partnerships and described partnerships to improve supply chain efficiency. Mauritania noted that areas of energy and education should not be marginalized in partnerships. Major Groups underscored the need for criteria, goals, timetables and accounting for UN partnerships and said the CSD should continue to serve as a forum for ideas and learning.
IMPLEMENTATION OF CSD DECISIONS: On Tuesday afternoon, 11 May, participants discussed implementation of CSD decisions, under Vice-Chair Raguž. Panelist Luc Gnacadja, Executive Secretary, UN Convention to Combat Desertification, noted weak interaction between the CSD and UN agencies and the need for improved coherence between the CSD process and the three Rio Conventions. Panelist Felix Dodds, Stakeholder Forum, noted a decline in the importance of the CSD in government and stakeholder priorities. Nigeria said there is a lack of strong leadership in the UN on sustainable development and the DSD is “deemphasized,” while UN agencies are delinked from the CSD. Major Groups urged greater involvement of all stakeholders and lamented the limited discussion of means of implementation. Panelist Thomas Foster, International Partners for Sustainable Agriculture, described current local implementation projects including the Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development-Kenya Livestock working group. The US listed its priority areas of implementation, including: agriculture and food security; strengthening urban and rural linkages; and strengthening knowledge-based practices. Benin identified the need for consistency and coherence among UN operational agencies and the local level. Senegal suggested linking implementation of CSD decisions with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and implementation of multilateral environmental agreements. Brazil said the eradication of poverty and hunger should remain central priorities. WHO suggested that CSD should position itself to make more substantive contributions to meeting the objectives of sustainable development and MDGs. Major Groups stressed that civil society organizations have an important role to play in implementation and an interagency mechanism dedicated to the coordination of sustainable development strategies is required.
On Wednesday, 12 May, delegates met in the UN General Assembly Hall for the opening of the High-Level Segment to discuss the obstacles, constraints and challenges to implementation and the way forward.
CSD 18 Chair Ferraté noted that the biggest challenges have been to reconcile environment with social and economic interests. UN Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro said the CSD 18 themes are directly linked to the fight against climate change, efforts to restore weakened economies and work towards the MDGs. Hamidon Ali, President of the Economic and Social Council, highlighted the importance of empowering women and integrating gender equality into all aspects of sustainable development. Leslie Kojo Christian, Vice-President of the 64th session of the General Assembly, said sustainable development is an overarching element of the UN’s work and the UNCSD in 2012 provides an opportunity to renew our commitment to achieve sustainable development. Gerda Verburg, CSD 17 Chair, suggested exploring ways to improve implementation of CSD decisions.
In the panel discussion, Ernst Ulrich von Weizsacker, International Panel for Sustainable Resource Management, addressed the challenges of decoupling environmental degradation and economic development. Ashok Khosla, IUCN, said the global economy is currently using more than 40% of the Earth’s resources and the MDGs are not likely to be achieved. Nigeria said developing countries have become dumping grounds for end-of-life e-wastes.
Several countries introduced their experiences in environmentally sound management of chemicals and wastes, and national initiatives for sustainable development. Many developing countries stressed technology transfer, capacity building, and new and additional resources, and requested support for capacity building in cleaner production, establishment of national centers, use of market-based instruments, and public policies for sustainable development. Many countries highlighted the importance of the 3Rs, and a “cradle to grave” approach for waste management, and supported development of a 10YFP on SCP. Several countries called for reaching a global legally binding instrument on climate change, as well as the development of a legally binding agreement on mercury.
The EU said a well-structured process with a clear and accepted mandate should be set up and initiate work right after CSD 18 to develop a proposal for a 10YFP on SCP. The Least Developed Countries said it is urgent to pursue a new development model taking into consideration the needs of the most vulnerable people. Italy called for the definition of a common global framework for action promoting regional and national initiatives in SCP. Mozambique stressed national ownership and government leadership in the achievement of MDGs.
Other proposals for the way forward included: involving stakeholders, especially industry, as a key to successful policy development; coherence and synergy among chemicals and wastes conventions; and more sophisticated early warning systems for an adequate response to short-, medium- and long-term events.
MINISTERIAL LEVEL DIALOGUE WITH THE UN SYSTEM AND MAJOR GROUPS: The High-Level Segment continued on Thursday, 13 May, with a dialogue with the UN system and major groups, chaired by Chair Ferraté. UN Under-Secretary-General Sha Zukang highlighted increased financial assistance by UN agencies and technology transfer among other issues. The EU called for full integration of the principles agreed at the CSD into UN system activities, highlighted further linkages in chemicals, and urged continued discussion of SCP implementation. UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner discussed the recent 11th Special Session of the Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environmental Forum decisions, and described UNEP initiatives, including partnerships, on the five themes of the CSD cycle.
The Stockholm, Rotterdam and Basel Conventions highlighted the ExCOPs’ outcome as a “shining example” of enhanced international environmental governance (IEG). Pakistan announced the formation of a National Sustainable Development Commission. WHO described work done in the sound management of chemicals. The Global Environment Facility announced the recent decision on its replenishment. UNEP reported on collaboration with UNIDO on National Cleaner Production Centers, and with UNDP on mainstreaming chemicals. Business and Industry highlighted its Responsible Care Global Charter and the Global Products Strategy.
Major groups: noted the link of the themes with food security and appealed for dissemination of technologies to reduce the footprint of agriculture; highlighted the importance of ensuring sustainable post-mining use of land; suggested the CSD consider supporting partnership implementation workshops; called for attention to violations of human rights and the social impact of mining; and stressed transitioning from words to action.
Ireland suggested that Rio+20 should develop an institutional framework for sustainable development. Argentina stressed the need to reduce “red tape” in the system, and focus on outcomes. The US asked UN agencies to report on their follow-up to CSD 17 decisions. Kazakhstan called for incentives for transferring and employing green technologies. Kenya stressed waste reuse, and urged international cooperation for achieving the MDGs. Viet Nam emphasized UN agency coordination. Serbia called for strengthening UNEP’s role in IEG. India said reliance on markets is insufficient, and governments will have to take center stage in financing climate change technologies and adaptation. Ghana stressed policy coordination, coherence and support for partnerships. Switzerland supported proposals for a task force to monitor the implementation of CSD decisions and an intersessional process on SCP, and said SAICM could be a model for 10YFP. Colombia said science must be bolstered at the regional level. Mexico noted Rio+20 is an opportunity to enhance the work of institutions.
Ministerial roundtables: Sustainable Production and Consumption Patterns: On Wednesday afternoon, 12 May, Stefania Prestigiacomo, Minister of Environment and Protection of Land and Sea, Italy, and Sherry Ayittey, Minister of Environment, Science and Technology, Ghana, co-chaired this roundtable. Panelists: stressed the importance of a long-term development perspective; emphasized that research and innovation agendas be shifted from an emphasis on labor productivity to increased resource productivity; described aspects of sustainable building; and methods to improve sustainable consumption patterns. The G-77/China called for intersessional work to develop the 10YFP prior to CSD 19, while the US did not support intersessional work on SCP. The EU said the 10YFP should be ambitious and Switzerland supported a transparent process to develop concrete proposals for a 10YFP. Nigeria said corporate social responsibility is a key to sustainable development. Indonesia said poverty reduction should be a main component in SCP. Thailand described the use of economic tools to make SCP more feasible for consumers and producers. Turkey noted the need to meet the demand side, as well as the supply side, of SCP. The Philippines said the development of an accessible financing facility is necessary. The ILO noted the potential for social dialogue and alliances at all levels to achieve better policy responses. The Republic of Korea said it would play a bridging role between developed and developing countries on SCP. Argentina said measures that distort trade should be avoided and any strategy should include the food sector. Major Groups stressed: training, education, extension programmes, and recycling schemes.
Managing Mining for Sustainable Development: On Wednesday afternoon, 12 May, László Borbély, Minister of Environment and Forests, Romania, and Susan Shabangu, Minister of Mineral Resources of South Africa, co-chaired the roundtable on mining. Panelists: called for fostering social development; discussed governance challenges in artisanal and small-scale mining; presented efforts for poverty reduction, revenue management, human rights and dispute resolution; and discussed challenges related to the fair distribution of mining’s surpluses. The G-77/China discussed: that developing countries have yet to realize benefits from mining; the task of mining clean-up; transparency; and good governance and strong regulatory frameworks. The EU said access to raw materials is necessary for the functioning of the world economy. Belgium emphasized conflict prevention in mining and ending child labor. Australia said mining can be an economic driver in indigenous communities. Argentina said developed countries should provide support to developing countries so that mining activities can be developed. Guatemala underscored the need for ethics and respect in negotiation processes for extraction. Ghana said the UN should develop guidelines for mining sector good governance. Thailand described its “green and clean” mining policy, including strategic environmental assessments of mining activities. Tanzania highlighted key challenges in artisanal and small-scale mining, including the absence of access to fair market arrangements while Sudan outlined challenges of artisanal and small-scale gold miners’ use of mercury. Major Groups: called for an international tribunal on the effects of uranium mining and tailings; emphasized a life-cycle approach to mining; said child labor should be addressed; and called for rehabilitation of mine sites.
Transport: On Thursday afternoon, 13 May, Humberto Rosa, Secretary of State for the Environment, Portugal, and Clifford Everald Warmington, Minister of State for Water and Housing, Jamaica, co-chaired the roundtable on transport. Panelists: noted commitments to reduce CO2 emissions; described work to improve transport data in developing countries; said regional cooperation is a lever for change; and discussed federal programmes on spatial planning. The G-77/China stressed that adequate, accessible and affordable transport is crucial for eradicating poverty. South Africa called for innovative funding mechanisms. Ukraine proposed establishing regional and national efficient transport centers. Germany said electric power used to achieve climate goals must come from renewable sources. Sudan looked forward to the proposal from CSD 17 Chair Verburg regarding the creation of a task force to boost implementation of CSD decisions. Brazil supported efforts to consolidate an international market for biofuels. Libya noted efforts to increase transportation links with other countries on the African continent. Argentina spoke of the use of bioethanol and biodiesel. Peru called for affordable transport and promotion of ecotourism. Major Groups said: transport must be decoupled from fossil fuel use; improved pedestrian, bicycles and other non-motorized transportation choices are necessary; spatial planning should be emphasized; improved animal care in rural areas where animals are an important means of transportation is necessary; and waterways should be used widely.
Sustainable Chemicals and Waste Management: This session, held on Thursday afternoon, 13 May, was co-chaired by Kazuhiko Takemoto, Vice Minister for Global Environmental Affairs, Japan, and Oliver Dulić, Minister for Environment and Spatial Planning, Serbia. Panelists: noted use of waste transfer stations; discussed sustainable environmental service systems; highlighted challenges for chemical management; and advocated a balanced combination of regulations and voluntary programmes for chemical management. The G-77/China noted developing countries lack sufficient scientific information and resources. The EU said substitution needs to become a driving force of chemical and waste policy. Sweden discussed the complexity of products and waste. Estonia explained how taxes on businesses had forced industry to reduce waste. Thailand highlighted the usefulness of incentives and economic instruments. Spain stressed the importance of good governance at the local level. Poland recognized the need for collective action in the management of chemicals and wastes. Iran stressed waste minimization and recycling, and development of zero-waste technologies and transfer of technology. Switzerland said CSD 18 should give a clear signal to strengthen the international chemicals and waste legal regime. South Africa said key unresolved challenges include limited capacity to complete risk assessment in developing countries. Turkey underscored global cooperation against illegal trafficking as a key challenge.
Mexico called for developing capacity for risk management in developing countries. The Czech Republic stressed strengthening the Basel Convention Regional Centers, and their regional ownership. UNDP highlighted the issue of equity and urged pro-poor approaches, while Major Groups encouraged increased focus on food security. Japan suggested that the new mercury convention should be called the Minamata Convention.
MINISTERIAL INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE: IDENTIFYING KEY ISSUES TO BE FOCUSED ON DURING THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PREPARATORY MEETING AND CSD 19: On Friday morning, 14 May, Chair Ferraté led this discussion, noting the common vision for sustainable development and calling for mechanisms to help achieve that vision. Argentina said we must be as aware of our risks as we are of upcoming football events of the world. Yemen, for the G-77/China, identified the need to continue the discussion on the creation of a 10YFP for SCP at an intersessional meeting before CSD 19. The EU, Guatemala, Mexico, and others supported the proposal for an intersessional process on SCP. The EU also noted that many measures for sustainable development are low-tech, require little additional finance and resources and represent win-win scenarios. Grenada, on behalf of AOSIS, identified the need to, inter alia: examine the international macroeconomic framework; review the status of middle income countries and graduation matter of SIDS; and stress South-South cooperation.
Indonesia and South Africa underscored the importance of adequate and reliable financial resources, access to technologies and capacity building. Spain said the CSD should focus on defining the objectives of the 10YFP. She said transportation models should become more efficient, use less energy and ultimately realize zero emissions.
Iran said adequate and efficient transportation systems are necessary, and all kinds of wastes should be recycled and reused. Sweden said the themes under review should be addressed in an integrated and coherent manner. Switzerland said the next IPM should conduct interactive and in-depth discussions in small groups.
India noted that domestic discourse is emerging as the primary driver of sustainable development policy. Barbados defined green economy as “an integrated production, distribution, consumption, and waste assimilation system that, at its core, reflects the fragility of our small island ecosystems as the basis for investment choice, human development programming, and facilitating export market development for indigenous environmental services.”
Pakistan said the policy framework should be based on a people-centric approach. The US said we need to ask how government can facilitate actions that promote sustainable development actions by stakeholders. Norway highlighted a number of actions to pursue, including green taxes, applying the 3Rs and incorporating the gender dimension.
Guatemala called for the revaluation of “natural” chemical products and knowledge. Libya called for closer cooperation between the public and private sector. Kenya said national priorities must be taken into consideration and that there is “no size that fits all.” Senegal said themes of the modes of SCP must lie at the “heart” of the discussion of the green economy and the Rio+20 Summit. UNEP said emerging issues such as e-wastes and nanomaterials deserve attention and expect this to be announced through CSD decisions. Indigenous Peoples, NGOs and Women called for: restoring the Earth to natural health; freeing the environment of toxic chemicals and wastes; and moving towards a value-based economy. The Scientific and Technological Community noted that the still-widening gap between North and South must be bridged through means such as developing countries enhancing investment in higher education in science and technological capacity development. Local Authorities said they are focusing on sustainable procurement in the public and private sector and believe that SCP should be closely linked with environmental education.
Business and Industry stressed stakeholder engagement, partnerships, collective action and transparency. Farmers said the most positive thing they had seen at CSD 18 is abundant knowledge, which should be disseminated. Workers and Trade Unions suggested innovative sources of financing, including tax and international finance transaction.
Nigeria said any new agreement on chemicals should not impose new obligations and burdens on developing countries, and called for the full implementation of the Basel and Bamako Conventions. Children and Youth highlighted empowerment, participation, education and awareness raising. UNIDO noted the importance of national cleaner production centers, best practices, strengthening partnerships, and a global network to share knowledge and information.
DISCUSSION OF THE CHAIR’S SUMMARY
PART I: A 27-page draft of the Chair’s Summary (Part 1) was circulated on Monday, 10 May, on which delegates offered factual comments on Tuesday, 11 May. Most delegates said the Summary provided a good overview of the discussions and offered specific comments on its contents. The US and Canada suggested the paper should include a chapeau explaining that it is not negotiated and reflects the views of the Chair. The G-77/China stressed the need to maintain the integrity of both CSD 18 and the UNCSD. Highlighting repetition of calls for further financial resources, the EU said the Summary should also reflect the low-cost solutions offered. The US underscored the need to implement existing programmes and mechanisms, as well as develop innovative financial mechanisms.
Canada requested reference to the work of the Intergovernmental Forum on Mining to Promote Sustainable Development and exploration of innovative solutions to fill gaps in funding and technical assistance. Argentina, Brazil and Cuba suggested that the concept of “green economy” requires clarification. Ghana said although mining is not sustainable, since the resource exploited would be exhausted at some time, it has a demonstrated capacity to promote sustainable development. Cambodia proposed additional references to sound mining management, as well as the need to ensure fair distribution of benefits and revenue.
Switzerland stressed that the chemicals section should reflect the need to make use of existing instruments, rather than suggesting new ones. Japan and Indonesia suggested reference to the regional 3R Forum and enhancing relevant regional initiatives. Mexico proposed referring to the Basel Convention Regional Centers. Nigeria contested references to progress in transport infrastructure with development partners in Africa, noting progress was not being made. Norway stressed that good governance is a prerequisite for sustainable development. Brazil recalled that discussions to include mercury in the synergies process had been rejected.
PART II: Part II of the Chair’s Summary was distributed at 1:30 pm on Friday, 14 May. Later that afternoon, Chair Ferraté invited delegates to make factual comments on the summary. Most delegates said the summary reflected the CSD 18 discussions well. The EU requested references to the need for a 10YFP to use the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation wording. Australia noted references to assisting SIDS in developing a comparative advantage to trade inaccurately reflected the discussion. Cuba said the implications of recommendations for SCP go well beyond the CSD’s mandate. Also on SCP, Argentina noted that developed countries need to provide guidance and to lead work on this. Chile stressed the need to further strengthen investment in capital markets or materials. Canada noted that a Global Initiative for Sustainable Mining was proposed by an intergovernmental organization. The US underscored the uneven approach in the document and requested it be revised to clearly differentiate between suggestions made by states, panelists and others. Nigeria stressed the importance of the issue of transboundary movement of toxic and hazardous waste.
Grenada and Barbados, supported by Mauritius, suggested strengthening the SIDS part, including means of implementation, and mentioning the Barbados Plan of Action. The G-77/China recorded reservations on the “green economy,” and added e-waste. Japan lamented the reference to “failed” means of implementation. Indonesia proposed mentioning the Nusa Dua Declaration and clarifying that developed country governments should take the lead in creating an enabling environment for SCP. Switzerland proposed mentioning SAICM as a model for the 10YFP, and support for synergies in the chemicals conventions. India proposed mentioning aiding the developing countries in the chemicals conventions.
The Chair’s Summary is divided into two parts. The 27-page Chair’s Summary (Part I) reviews the opening of the session, summarizes the general statements, proceeds to regional discussions (on Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia and the Pacific, Western Asia and the ECE Region). Afterwards, it reviews the thematic discussions of the current CSD cycle, organizing each around the following subsections: obstacles, constraints and challenges; best practices and lessons learned; and way forward. Among the measures highlighted are the following:
On transport: a modal shift and greater development and use of public transport; integration of transport into urban development policies; development of cleaner, affordable and sustainable energy systems, including renewables; strengthening infrastructure; and improvement of safety and security.
On chemicals: full implementation of existing arrangements, including SAICM; new financing arrangements; preventing transfer of obsolete technologies to developing countries; better education and information on chemical safety matters; sanctioning countries for illegal export; a global system for communicating risk and hazards; and strengthening national legislation.
On waste management: integrated approaches through reducing, recycling and reusing waste and materials; enforcement of existing conventions and bringing mercury into the “synergies” process; criminal provisions for violation of hazardous waste regulations; and addressing e-waste.
On mining: respect for human rights, relevant ILO conventions and creating regulatory frameworks, including on health and safety; sharing benefits with local communities; support for artisanal and small-scale miners; no-go areas for mining and rehabilitation; and a global initiative for sustainable mining.
On the 10YFP on sustainable consumption and production patterns: support for the development of 10YFP, building on the Marrakech Process with stronger linkages to eradicating poverty; placing SCP within the context of a green economy; packages of policies and measures (voluntary, market-based and regulatory); multistakeholder partnerships; and life-cycle and cradle-to-cradle approaches.
On interlinkages, cross-cutting issues and means of implementation: raising priority of the five sectors; additional and predictable resourcing, including innovative sources of funding; quality data; linking the results of CSD meetings to the outcomes of the forthcoming international meetings; relating the five sectors to MDG goals; changing patterns of consumption and production; defining green economy and making it sensitive to concerns of sustainable development and poverty eradication; better international cooperation and coordination; capacity building; education, awareness raising and information sharing that changes consumer behavior; research and science; accountability frameworks; greater corporate social and environmental responsibility; traditional knowledge and indigenous peoples’ contribution and rights; and gender equality.
The 14-page Chair’s Summary (Part II) contains a review of the SIDS Day, the Multistakeholder Dialogues and the High-Level Segment. It summarizes discussions during the SIDS Day, and describes the special perspectives of SIDS in relation to the CSD 18 themes, explaining their vulnerabilities to climate change and other factors.
In the section on the Multistakeholder Dialogues, partnerships are referenced as a useful tool for enhancing implementation of sustainable development goals, and the further mainstreaming of partnerships into the work of the CSD is encouraged. Under the subsection on advancing the implementation of CSD decisions, areas of concern are mentioned, in particular, loss of dynamism and less vigorous pursuit of coordination and coherence. Suggestions for action are proposed, inter alia, stronger coordination and giving sustainable development a higher political and institutional platform.
The section on the High-Level Segment contains a factual description of the opening session and statements, and the interactive ministerial dialogue with the UN system and major groups. It recounts a number of new initiatives at all levels in the five thematic areas, such as the Global Fuel Initiative, a Global Initiative for Sustainable Mining, the 10YFP, and others.
The section on the ministerial thematic roundtables summarizes the main initiatives and actions proposed for consideration at CSD 19. It is broken down into five subsections (in line with the five themes), each with an introduction and a “moving forward” portion.
On chemicals, the summary highlights SAICM and the synergies decisions of the Bali ExCOPs.
On waste management, the 3Rs is stressed, as well measure to deal with hazardous wastes, and e-wastes.
On managing mining for sustainable development, emphasis is on assessments, restoration of land, the conditions of miners and regulatory frameworks. It also mentions an independent monitoring body for uranium mining.
On SCP, the summary recommends an “ambitious” 10YFP, building on the Marrakech process, and an intersessional meeting in advance of the IPM and an open-ended working group. It also suggests possible elements of a 10YFP.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon spoke at the beginning of the final meeting of CSD 18, on Friday afternoon, 14 May. He said sustainable development is among his highest priorities and stressed: the need to focus on practical decisions that can be translated into action and scaled-up; all important decisions should be concrete, with time-bound goals; more links should be built with other international bodies and key fora and processes; and there should be continual assessment of performance and progress. Secretary-General Ban announced he has decided to designate Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs Sha Zukang as Secretary-General of the 2012 UNCSD. He concluded stating “The time for delay is over. The time for delivery is now.”
After delegates offered their comments on the Chair’s Summary (Part II), they were invited to adopt the report. Chair Ferraté introduced the agenda item, and Rapporteur Eduardo Meñez (Philippines) introduced the draft report (E/CN.17/2010/L.3). The report was adopted without amendment.
Delegates were then invited to offer closing statements. Yemen, for the G-77/China, thanked participants for making this session a success. The EU stressed the need to establish a clear process to complete a 10YFP for SCP, immediately following CSD 18. Mauritania highlighted the issue of desertification as pressing. Brazil thanked Chair Ferraté for his extraordinary Chairmanship. Kazakhstan said the outcomes of CSD should correspond to the expectations of humanity.
Children and Youth highlighted that the CSD is shaping the way in which the world works, and designing the future. Indigenous Peoples stressed the need to look at indigenous communities for models of “walking gently upon the Earth.” NGOs underscored that SCP is at the material heart of sustainable development and the need to translate words into action. Local Authorities stressed the central role of cities in CSD main themes. Workers and Trade Unions highlighted the need to ensure environmental outcomes of the green economy. Business and Industry stressed that it provides solutions to sustainable development. The Scientific and Technological Community said the way forward requires innovation and enhancement of investment in research science and technology. Farmers urged the use of farm organizations to further sustainability goals. In closing, Chair Ferraté thanked delegates and invited participants to visit him in Guatemala. He gavelled the meeting to a close at 5:09 pm.
CSD 19 REPORT
Immediately following the close of CSD 18, Chair Ferraté called CSD 19 to order and invited delegates to consider the only order of business: election of the Bureau. Delegates elected by acclamation László Borbély, Minister of Environment and Forests, Romania, as CSD 19 Chair. CSD 19 Chair Borbély underscored that the CSD provides a unique platform for dialogue, and pledged to guide it to a consensus decision. He stressed the international community should listen and learn from one and another’s experiences. He also highlighted the need to consider how the CSD could contribute to Rio+20 and encouraged all participants to begin preparations for CSD 19.
CSD 19 Chair Borbély announced the nominations of CSD 19 Vice-Chairs Javier Arias, Panama, for the Latin American and Caribbean Group, and Andrew Goledzinowski, Australia, for the Western Europe and Others Group, who were elected by acclamation. CSD 19 Chair Borbély said nominations from the African and Asian regions had not been completed, and would be presented at the next session of CSD 19. He adjourned the meeting at 5:21 pm.
A BRIEF ANALYSIS OF CSD 18
The 18th session of the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD 18) convened in a temporary structure on the North Lawn of the UN complex as the Headquarters building is being renovated and modernized. While the smaller conference rooms introduced some logistical challenges, delegates’ task remained large: they sought to bring forth countries’ concerns and articulate constraints and barriers to progress on an important set of issues—mining, transport, chemicals, wastes and sustainable consumption and production (SCP). The use of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) Day as the preparatory committee meeting for the September 2010 five-year review of the Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island States (MSI+5) and the undercurrent of anticipation over the first Rio+20 PrepCom, which was to convene immediately following CSD 18, also occupied delegates’ minds and influenced discussions.
Adding further complexity to the first two weeks in May, CSD 18 convened in the same premises where parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty were meeting for their own major review conference. This concurrent event appropriated some of CSD’s visibility and attendance, with many New York mission staff too busy looking after their Presidents and Ministers to attend the CSD sessions. CSD 18 also occurred during a crowded phase in the international calendar the multilateral activities, with 2010 one of the busiest years in UN history.
This brief analysis looks at the key events and trends discerned at CSD 18, the review stage of the 2010-2011 thematic cycle, as well as the influence that the start of preparations for Rio+20 exerted on the session.
REVIEWING THE THEMATIC CLUSTER
While the CSD 18 thematic discussions could not be described as truly “interactive,” with prepared country sound bites still common, many praised the informative content of the exchanges and the quality of the panelists. CSD 18 was not limited to formal deliberations, but also included several side and learning center events, which served to raise the profile of the themes and educate participants. Some noteworthy initiatives were presented, like the 3R (reduce, reuse, recycle) transformation to a material-cycle society. Many of those activities presented were considered to have potential to spur replication, including partnership.
As mining, transport and SCP lack formal institutional homes in the UN system, CSD 18 provided an opportunity to improve international cooperation on these issues. Many point to this CSD role—discerning international interest and direction for issues that do not have an institutional custodian—as its most important contribution to sustainable development policy. On mining and transport, delegates shared experiences and described the challenges their countries were experiencing. “Doing more with less” in mineral, energy and other resource extraction and eliminating child labor and dangerous practices of small artisanal miners were some key messages. A strategic shift to affordable, accessible and fuel efficient transport was the recurring theme in many delegates’ statements, with a strong focus on promising public transportation alternatives, like Bus Rapid Transit systems. Transport and mining were termed as a sine qua non for economic and social progress, especially in developing countries. The session’s message was unanimous: the adoption of sustainable mining and transport practices is critical for efforts to eradicate poverty and achieve the MDGs.
Chemicals and wastes issues do not lack institutional homes in the UN System, so on these issues the CSD provided a good platform to highlight the “shining example” of the existing instruments, including the synergies process between the Basel, Stockholm and Rotterdam Conventions. Some gripes were heard, including that the Basel Convention Ban Amendment has yet to enter into force. Others, including Canada, the Czech Republic, Norway, and Senegal, used the CSD to “re-legitimize” and promote UNEP’s Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM) as a coherent framework for chemicals management to better coordinate endeavors. Further highlighting the relevance of SAICM, Switzerland said the comprehensive, voluntary, and successful framework approach could be used as a model for discussions on a 10-year framework of programmes (10YFP) on SCP. The increasing profile of UNEP Chemicals appeared to push participants to look forward 10 years, when we reach (or do not reach) the WSSD 2020 goal that chemicals are produced and used in ways that minimize significant adverse impacts on human health and the environment. One suggestion was that Rio+20 could consider the need for a legal framework to succeed SAICM.
Time and again, delegates referred to SCP as an overarching theme for sustainable development that brings together and embraces all themes of the 2010/2011 CSD cycle. The heart of the matter is the conflicting relationship between the unbridled consumption of the Earth’s resources and keeping production within reasonable and sustainable bounds. The dilemma is how to de-link economic growth from environmental degradation and, in the process, the generation of vast amounts of waste, including electronic waste (e-waste).
The Marrakech Process, which is elaborating the 10YFP, includes the development of concrete programmes on sustainable construction, tourism, education and other areas. There was consensus on the broad sweep of SCP, as it addresses use of minerals, water and energy. The objectives—resource and waste minimization and maintaining environmental sustainability—were clear. However, one important aspect of SCP, sustainable life-styles, showed divisions, with some appearing to regard attempts to negotiate the life-styles of the rich North as “communism.” And, despite the Marrakech Process’ work, many called for an intersessional meeting to ensure that CSD 19 arrives at a decision to carry this issue forward. By the close of CSD 18, the exact modalities for intersessional activities were unclear, but insiders expected a meeting of experts would convene late in 2010, possible in the Republic of Korea.
A TALE OF TWO PREPCOMS
In addition to its review of the 2010-2011 cycle’s thematic cluster of issues, CSD 18 will also be remembered for contrasts noted in relation to two PrepComs in which delegates officially and unofficially engaged: the PrepCom for the 5-year review of the Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island States (MSI+5) and the PrepCom for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD).
“Tangible actions,” as opposed to a long and hotly contested political declaration, were called for by many in the lead up to SIDS Day, which acted as the MSI+5 PrepCom. Donor governments, including Australia and the US, proffered their keen interest and were eager to hear details. However, after a slew of opening statements stressing the urgent need for assistance to SIDS, definitive proposals for tangible actions were thin. On the heels of their inter-regional weekend meeting, SIDS were expected to be well briefed and actively preparing for MSI+5, but this did not always seem to be the case. Speculation included possible internal wrangling within AOSIS over the timing and content of the political declaration. UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolution 64/199 states that the UNGA President will present a draft political declaration at an “appropriate date,” which apparently caused confusion and conflict among AOSIS members, and served to stall substantive discussion. Others thought the UN Division for Sustainable Development had not done sufficient strategic planning and should have engaged earlier with the UNGA President to clarify issues, prevent confusion and ensure the most was made of the allocated time on SIDS Day.
The prevention of wasted time is especially relevant, recalling CSD 16, when “SIDS Day” was reduced to a half-day discussion. This led to protests from SIDS, and assurances that a full day would be afforded in the future. Despite continued insistence on the urgency of SIDS issues, SIDS Day at CSD 18 ended an hour early, after interventions from the floor were exhausted. This frustrated many, particularly panelists, who had been asked to cut their presentations in order to make room for interactive discussion, as well as Convention Secretariats, who had been told there would not be time for them to take the floor.
Although preparations for the UNCSD did not figure on the CSD 18 agenda, this topic inevitably became a conversation piece, especially given that the first PrepCom convenes immediately following CSD 18 and many CSD 18 delegates were also attending the PrepCom. Despite objections from some that the two processes are separate, issues on the Rio+20 agenda were increasingly raised from the floor. As a delegate noted, the preparatory process seemed to increase in stature by the day. In the first week, the Secretariat announced the establishment of two informal UNCSD PrepCom contact groups, but they never met, due to some delegates’ insistence that the processes remain separate. The feeling in the hallways was that CSD 18 themes, especially SCP, fed into the laconic Rio+20 agenda. According to some observers, Rio+20 is quickly overtaking climate change as the focus of attention among UN agencies and stakeholders. The question commonly asked was what added value can the CSD bring, or is already bringing, to the preparatory process, which will focus on the two agenda items of Rio+20, the in the view of some ambivalent “green economy” and the complex question of future institutions?
CAN THE CSD LOOK AHEAD?
As the CSD is being inexorably drawn into a new preparatory process for what may be another summit, some delegates paused to ponder the Commission’s future. The Rio+20 process is bringing into relief the weaknesses and advantages of the CSD. By 2012, the CSD will have traversed almost 20 years of substantive debate on the broadest range of sustainable development issues. But yet again, this session failed to capture public and media attention. Ministerial attendance is on the decline, the review of past decisions looked half-hearted and erratic, and most UN agency heads were not present. Several participants went so far as to claim that the “dismantlement” of the post-UNCED Inter Agency Committee on Sustainable Development and the task managers system (for example UNESCO task-managed education) was a mistake that allowed the UN agencies to drift away on individual courses.
Although the CSD has been providing, through its decisions, recommendations and guidance to governments and the UN system on what course to follow, but responsibility and accountability for implementation is lacking. Admittedly, the CSD has become a proven arena for stakeholders. It is in the side events, learning centers, and partnership fairs where the voice of experts and civil society is vividly heard, but they lead to few practical actions at national and local levels.
In one delegate’s a humorous aside, the 3Rs, in a CSD context, might mean reducing strengths, reusing old ideas, and recycling the same people—but can this go on? The overall sentiment seems to indicate that the CSD has potential to continue, although it needs to improve its working methods and governments need to steer its connections to implementing agencies, if action is to take place in the UN system. But can it reform and, if yes, in what direction? Better integration with other processes? Shortening or scrapping the biennial format, especially the snail-like review session? Resetting its agenda to attract development ministers? Repackaging decisions into a form usable at all levels? These were some of the thoughts that occupied delegates’ minds as they contemplated the temporary UN conference structure and the uprooted statues in the North Lawn, a landscape that seemed to beg for renovation, and a swift one.
FIRST PREPCOM FOR THE UN CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (RIO+20): This meeting, which will take place at UN Headquarters in New York from 17-19 May 2010, will convene in preparation for the UN Conference on Sustainable Development to be held in Brazil in 2012. For more information, contact: UN Division for Sustainable Development, fax: +1 212 923 4260; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/rio20/
REGIONAL CAPACITY-BUILDING WORKSHOP ON NEW POPS AND THE PROCESS FOR REVIEWING AND UPDATING NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION PLANS UNDER THE STOCKHOLM CONVENTION: Held in São Paulo, Brazil from 18-21 May 2010, this workshop aims at raising awareness of the steps to be taken by parties to comply with their new obligations, including the process to review and update their national implementation plans. For more information, contact: Lady Virginia Traldi Meneses, CETESB Coordinator, tel: +55-11-3133-3862; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://chm.pops.int/default.aspx
SECOND MEETING OF THE INTERIM STEERING COMMITTEE OF THE GLOBAL ALLIANCE FOR DEVELOPING ALTERNATIVES TO DDT: Meeting in Delhi, India from 19-21 May 2010, this meeting will discuss development and deployment of products, methods and strategies as alternatives to DDT for disease vector control. For more information, contact the Stockholm Convention Secretariat: tel: +41-22-917-8729; fax: +41-22-917-8098; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://chm.pops.int/default.aspx
FOURTH GEF ASSEMBLY: This meeting will be held in Punta del Este, Uruguay from 24-28 May 2010. The Assembly is an opportunity for GEF stakeholders to meet, take stock and collectively strengthen strategies and actions for protecting the global environment and achieving sustainable development. For more information, contact: GEF Secretariat; tel: +1-202-473-0508; fax: +1-202-522-3240/3245; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://gefassembly.org/j2/index.php
INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORT FORUM ON TRANSPORT AND INNOVATION: UNLEASHING THE POTENTIAL: This meeting will take place in Leipzig, Germany from 26-28 May 2010. The 2010 Forum will emphasize the role that innovation will play in the future of the transport sector. For more information, contact OECD: tel: +33-1-4524-9718; fax: +33-1-4524-1322; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/2010
RESILIENT CITIES 2010: FIRST WORLD CONGRESS ON CITIES AND ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE: Taking place in Bonn, Germany from 28-30 May 2010, this meeting will offer an opportunity for participants to share the latest scientific findings, state-of-the-art approaches and effective programmes on climate change adaptation and resilience-building in cities and urbanized areas. For more information, contact: ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability; tel: +49-228-976-299-28; fax: +49- 228-976-299-01; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://resilient-cities.iclei.org/bonn2010/home/
FIRST SESSION OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE TO PREPARE A GLOBAL LEGALLY BINDING INSTRUMENT ON MERCURY: The meeting, occurring in Stockholm, Sweden from 7-11 June 2010, is the first session to prepare a global legally binding instrument on mercury. For more information, contact: UNEP Mercury Programme; tel: +41-22-917-8183; fax: +41-22-797-3460; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://www.chem.unep.ch/mercury/INC/INC1/INC1_homepage.htm
TRAINING PROGRAMME ON STRENGTHENING COUNTRY CAPACITIES TO IMPLEMENT AN INTEGRATED VECTOR MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME TOWARD REDUCING THE RELIANCE ON DDT IN SELECTED COUNTRIES IN AFRICA: This training programme will be held in Nairobi, Kenya from 7-11 June 2010 and is organized by the Secretariat of the Stockholm Convention in collaboration with the International Center for Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE). For more information, contact the Stockholm Convention Secretariat; tel: +41-22-917-8729; fax: +41-22-917-8098; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://chm.pops.int/default.aspx
G-20 SUMMIT: Taking place in Toronto, Canada from 26-27 June 2010, the G-20 Summit will address measures to promote financial stability of the world and to achieve sustainable economic growth and development. For more information, contact: e-mail: G[email protected]; internet: http://g20.gc.ca/home/
GEF COUNCIL MEETING: This meeting, to be held from 29 June-1 July 2010 in Washington, DC, will develop, adopt and evaluate GEF programmes. For more information, contact: GEF Secretariat tel: +1-202-473-0508; fax: +1-202-522-3240/3245; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://www.thegef.org/gef/council_meetings/1
SECOND INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR SUSTAINABLE ASIA AND THE PACIFIC (ISAP2010): This forum, to be held in Yokohama, Japan from 12-13 July 2010, will explore pathways to low-carbon development and appropriate measures which incorporate the needs of developing economies in Asia and the Pacific and setting the direction for a new growth paradigm. For more information, contact: ISAP Secretariat; tel: +81-46-855-3720; fax: +81-46-855-3709; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://www.iges.or.jp/en/news/event/isap2010/index.html
E-waste2010: South Pacific Regional E-waste Workshop: This workshop, to be held in Brisbane, Australia on 21 July 2010, will bring together corporate stakeholders, government authorities and researchers in e-waste to collaborate on the development of future management of e-waste in the South Pacific Region. For more information, contact: Workshop Coordinator Lainie Groundwater; tel: +61-7- 3735-4378; e-mail: e[email protected]; internet: http://www.ewaste2010.org/
SECOND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CLIMATE, SUSTAINABILITY AND DEVELOPMENT IN SEMI-ARID REGIONS (ICID+18): This meeting, to be held in Fortaleza, Brazil from 16-20 August 2010, is part of Brazil’s preparatory process for Rio+20. For more information, contact: Executive Secretariat; tel: +55-61-3424-9634; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://www.icid18.org/index.php
2010 WORLD YOUTH CONFERENCE: This conference, convening in Mexico City, Mexico from 23-25 August, aims to bring together government representatives and civil society organizations to identify priorities of action on youth, and youth policies, to be addressed before the deadline set by the international community to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. For more information, contact the Secretariat: e-mail: i[email protected]; internet: http://www.youth2010.org/
NVMP-STEP E-WASTE SUMMER SCHOOL 2010: This summer school, held in Eindhove, Netherlands from 29 August-7 September 2010, aims to provide a platform to young scientists involved in e-waste related research to share their knowledge, interact with experts and develop collaborative partnerships fostering high quality cutting edge scientific research on all areas related to e-waste. For more information, contact the Summer School Team: e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://sites.google.com/site/ewastesummerschool/Home
MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS SUMMIT: Taking place at UN Headquarters in New York, from 20-22 September 2010, this meeting will focus on accelerating progress to achieve all the MDGs by 2015, taking into account progress made through a review of successes, best practices, lessons learned, obstacles and opportunities and leading to concrete strategies for action. For more information, visit: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/calendar.shtml
MAURITIUS STRATEGY +5 REVIEW: This conference will be held at UN Headquarters in New York from 24-25 September 2010. Member states will undertake a 5-year review of the Mauritius Strategy for the Implementation of the Barbados Plan for Action for Sustainable Development of Small Island States. For more information, contact: Hiroko Morita-Lou, SIDS Unit, UN Division for Sustainable Development; tel: +1-212-963-8813; fax: +1-212-963-4260; e-mail: m[email protected]; internet: http://www.sidsnet.org/msi_5/index.shtml
SECOND REGIONAL 3R FORUM IN ASIA: This meeting will be held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia from 4-6 October 2010 to explore achieving a healthy, sustainable and sound material cycle society or resource efficient society. For information, contact: Nadzri bin Yahaya; e-mail: [email protected]
SIXTH MEETING OF THE PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANT REVIEW COMMITTEE (POPRC-6): This meeting will be held in Geneva, Switzerland, from 18-22 October 2010 and will review chemicals proposed for listing in Annex A, B, and/or C. For more information, contact the Stockholm Convention Secretariat; tel: +41-22-917-8729; fax: +41-22-917-8098; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://chm.pops.int/
DELHI INTERNATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY CONFERENCE (DIREC): Scheduled to be held in Uttar Pradesh, India from 27-29 October 2010, this conference will be the fourth global ministerial level conference on renewable energy. For more information, contact: Rajneesh Khattar; tel: +91-11-4279-5054; +91-11-4279-5098/99; e-mail: r[email protected]; internet: http://direc2010.gov.in/index.html
G-20 SUMMIT: The G-20 Summit will take place in Seoul, Republic of Korea from 11-13 November 2010. Participants will discuss measures to promote the financial stability of the world and achieve a sustainable economic growth and development. For more information, contact: e-mail: G[email protected]; internet: http://www.g20.org/index.aspx
SECOND SESSION OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE TO PREPARE A GLOBAL LEGALLY BINDING INSTRUMENT ON MERCURY: This meeting, in a location to be determined, will be held from 7-11 February 2011 will be the second of five Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee meetings to negotiate a global legally binding instrument on mercury. For more information, contact: UNEP Mercury Programme; tel: +41-22-917-8183; fax: +41-22-797-3460; e-mail: m[email protected]; internet: http://www.chem.unep.ch/mercury/default.htm
TWENTY-SIXTH SESSION OF THE UNEP GOVERNING COUNCIL/GLOBAL MINISTERIAL ENVIRONMENT FORUM: This meeting will be held in Nairobi, Kenya from 21-25 February, 2011. This constitutes the annual ministerial-level global environmental forum in which participants gather to review important and emerging policy issues in the field of the environment. For more information, contact: Secretary, Governing Bodies, UNEP: tel: +254-20 762-3431; fax: +254-20 762-3929; e-mail: s[email protected]; internet: http://www.unep.org/resources/gov/overview.asp
INTERGOVERNMENTAL PREPARATORY MEETING FOR CSD 19: Scheduled to convene at the UN Headquarters in New York from 28 February – 4 March 2011, this meeting will prepare for the policy-year session of the Commission on Sustainable Development, which will negotiate policy options related to the thematic cluster for the CSD 18-19 cycle: transport, chemicals, waste management, mining and the Ten-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production Patterns. For more information, contact: UN Division for Sustainable Development; tel: +1-212-963-8102; fax: +1-212-963-4260; e-mail: d[email protected]; internet: http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/
SECOND PREPCOM FOR UN CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (RIO+20): This meeting, which will take place at UN Headquarters in New York from 7-8 March 2011, will convene in preparation for the UN Conference on Sustainable Development to be held in Brazil in 2012. For more information, contact: UN Division for Sustainable Development, fax: +1-212-963-4260; e-mail: [email protected]; internet: http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/rio20/
FIFTH MEETING OF THE CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES TO THE STOCKHOLM CONVENTION: This meeting is expected to convene in the second quarter of 2011 in Buenos Aires, Argentina. For more information, contact the Stockholm Convention Secretariat: tel: +41-22-917-8729; fax: +41-22-917-8098; e-mail: s[email protected]; internet: http://chm.pops.int/
INTERSESSIONAL AD HOC OPEN-ENDED WORKING GROUP OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CHEMICALS MANAGEMENT (ICCM OEWG): This meeting is expected to convene in the second quarter of 2011. For more information, contact the SAICM Secretariat: tel: +41-22-917-8532; fax: +41-22-797-3460; e-mail: s[email protected]; internet: http://www.saicm.org
CSD 19: This policy-year session, scheduled to be held at UN Headquarters in New York from 2-13 May 2011, will negotiate policy options related to the thematic cluster for the CSD 18-19 cycle: transport, chemicals, waste management, mining and the Ten-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production Patterns. For more information, contact: UN Division for Sustainable Development; tel: +1-212-963-8102; fax: +1-212-963-4260; e-mail: d[email protected]; internet: http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/
This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin © <[email protected]> is written and edited by Stephanie Aktipis, Ph.D., Melanie Ashton, Andrey Vavilov, Ph.D., Lynn Wagner, Ph.D, and Kunbao Xia. The Digital Editor is Leila Mead. The Editor is Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. <[email protected]>. The Director of IISD Reporting Services is Langston James “Kimo” Goree VI <[email protected]>. The Sustaining Donors of the Bulletin are the United Kingdom (through the Department for International Development – DFID), the Government of the United States of America (through the Department of State Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs), the Government of Canada (through CIDA), the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU), the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the European Commission (DG-ENV), and the Italian Ministry for the Environment, Land and Sea. General Support for the Bulletin during 2010 is provided by the Government of Australia, the Austrian Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, the Ministry of Environment of Sweden, the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, SWAN International, Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the Japanese Ministry of Environment (through the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies - IGES), the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (through the Global Industrial and Social Progress Research Institute - GISPRI), the Government of Iceland, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the World Bank. Funding for translation of the Bulletin into French has been provided by the Government of France, the Belgium Walloon Region, the Province of Québec, and the International Organization of the Francophone (OIF and IEPF). Funding for translation of the Bulletin into Spanish at this meeting has been provided by the Spanish Ministry of the Environment and Rural and Marine Affairs. The opinions expressed in the Bulletin are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD or other donors. Excerpts from the Bulletin may be used in non-commercial publications with appropriate academic citation. For information on the Bulletin, including requests to provide reporting services, contact the Director of IISD Reporting Services at <[email protected]>, +1-646-536-7556 or 300 East 56th St., 11A, New York, New York 10022, USA.