WORLD COMMISSION ON DAMS:
CHINA, also speaking for INDIA, TURKEY, NEPAL, PAKISTAN, and BRAZIL, introduced an alternative draft resolution on the WCD report, with TURKEY stressing that he opposed any reference to the WCD report. While the EU said that the raison d'être of the resolution was the WCD report, IRAN, CHINA and TURKEY explained that the original draft and the WCD report did not balance environmental and development needs, with IRAN stating that the WCD report was not widely accepted internationally. WWF, supported by COLOMBIA, noted that reference to water diversions as a source of conflicts was a key element and should be retained.

Informal consultations produced a compromise wording omitting specific factual information on dams' impacts, but recognizing both beneficial and negative impacts, including as a source of potential conflicts. Delegates bracketed it until relevant countries could consult with their capitals.
Delegates could not agree on whether to retain a quote from the WCD report regarding dams' impacts, and bracketed the relevant paragraph. SOUTH AFRICA and the EU opposed deleting reference to conflict resolution processes in text on water use. WWF proposed, and delegates agreed to, compromise wording on "a forum for interaction and conflict resolution."

Parties were unable to agree on text referring to the WCD guidelines as an advisory tool to support decision making, and the relevant paragraph remained bracketed. Delegates bracketed a compromise text referring to using "all available information, including information provided by the WCD" in one of the operative paragraphs. until countries could consult with their capitals. Negotiations continued into Saturday evening, with Parties reportedly reaching a compromise formulation on the remaining outstanding text.