Summary report, 6–17 June 1994

5th Session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee of the International Convention to Combat Desertification

Jump to Analysis

When weary delegates to the fifth session of the IntergovernmentalNegotiating Committee for the elaboration of an internationalconvention to combat desertification in those countriesexperiencing serious drought and/or desertification, particularlyin Africa, left UNESCO headquarters at 8:00 am on Saturday, 18 June1994, many were too exhausted to realize their accomplishment.After thirteen months of work and five two-week negotiatingsessions the international community had just adopted theConvention.

During the two-week session, which took place in Paris from 6-17June 1994, delegates negotiated the remaining bracketed text in theConvention, finalized the four regional annexes (Africa, LatinAmerica and the Caribbean, Asia, and the Northern Mediterranean)and adopted resolutions that recommend urgent action for Africa andinterim arrangements for the period between adoption and entry intoforce, which could take at least two years. There were times duringthis session that delegates thought they would never reachagreement on the financial provisions of the Convention. Afterthree all-night sessions capped by a closing Plenary that did noteven begin until 4:00 am, the Convention was finally adopted. Fewdelegates were totally pleased with the outcome, yet most werehopeful that this Convention could have some impact on the 900million people around the world affected by desertification.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE INCD

While the idea of a convention to combat desertification wasdiscussed during the UNCED preparatory process, it was only in Riowhere language was adopted requesting the General Assembly toestablish an intergovernmental negotiating committee for thepurpose of negotiating a convention. The General Assembly, duringits 47th session in 1992, adopted resolution 47/188 calling for theestablishment of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee forthe Elaboration of an International Convention to CombatDesertification in those countries experiencing serious droughtand/or desertification, particularly in Africa (INCD), and theconvening of five sessions in order to finalize the Convention byJune 1994. The organizational session of the INCD was held inJanuary 1993. At that meeting, delegates elected Bo Kjell‚n(Sweden) Chair of the Committee, elected the remaining members ofthe Bureau, adopted the rules of procedure, set the schedule ofmeetings and established two working groups.

FIRST SESSION

The first session of the INCD was held in Nairobi, Kenya, from 24May-3 June 1993. The first week of the session focused on thesharing of technical information and assessments on various aspectsof drought and desertification. Divided into seven sections, theinformation-sharing segment provided an opportunity for scientists,technical experts, delegates and NGOs to share relevant experiencesand learn more about the scourge of desertification and its globaldimensions. The second week focused on the structure and elementsto be contained in the Convention. Delegates also exchanged ideasabout the Convention and its objectives.

Negotiations stalled in Nairobi over the issue of related regionalinstruments, while still giving priority action to Africa. Kjell‚nproposed that an instrument on Africa, such as an annex, benegotiated once the main structure of the Convention had beendefined, and that similar instruments for other regions benegotiated subsequently. This proposal met with resistance fromseveral countries in regions other than Africa. They felt thattheir own problems with desertification deserved attention and thatsimilar instruments for their regions should be negotiatedsimultaneously with the instrument for Africa. The decision on thismatter was deferred.

SECOND SESSION

The second session of the INCD met in Geneva from 13-24 September1993. The Committee considered the compilation text of theConvention prepared by the Secretariat and agreed on the futureprogramme of work of the Committee, including the elaboration ofregional instruments for Africa, Asia and Latin America. As inNairobi, the most difficult issue to resolve was the negotiation ofregional instruments. At the conclusion of the second session, thetwo working groups completed their discussion of the Secretariat'scompilation text, identifying areas of convergence and divergence.There appeared to be consensus on a number of areas, including theneed for: a clear and concise preamble that refers to the historyof desertification in the UN system; clear and concise objectives;and implementable commitments that are central to the Conventionand articulated at different levels (national, regional andinternational). Delegates stressed the need for a public awarenessstrategy, improved education, and increased cooperation andcoordination between North and South, South and South, and amongdonors.

48TH UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY

The 48th session of the UN General Assembly adopted a resolutionsubmitted by the INCD that urged the Committee to successfullycomplete the negotiations by June 1994. The General Assembly alsodecided that the INCD should hold one session after the adoption ofthe Convention during the interim period. The objective of thissession, to be held in January 1995, will be to review thesituation before the Convention enters into force, in particularwith regard to the implementation of provisions that are to beadapted to the specific needs of each region.

THIRD SESSION

The third session of the INCD was held at UN Headquarters in NewYork from 17-28 January 1994. At this session, the two workinggroups focused on the draft negotiating text of the Convention thatwas prepared by the Secretariat and contained in documentA/AC.241/15. By the end of the two-week session, the working groupswere able to complete at least one and sometimes two readings ofeach draft article. Progress was made in shaping the Convention andin identifying the areas of convergence and divergence. The INCDalso discussed the regional instrument for Africa for the firsttime. After an initial discussion of the nature of this instrumentand its relationship to the Convention as a whole, delegatesrequested the Secretariat to prepare a draft text for considerationat the fourth session.

FOURTH SESSION

The fourth session of the INCD was held in Geneva from 21-31 March1994. The two working groups continued negotiating the draft textof the Convention, as contained in document A/AC.241/15/Rev.1. Bythe conclusion of the session, the substantive problems thatremained included: the need for an article on principles in thetext; all matters related to financial resources and mechanisms;categories of countries; subsidiary bodies; reservations orexceptions open to the Parties; and the obligations of awithdrawing Party. In order to have a more productive dialogue onthe issues of financial resources and mechanisms, the Chair invitedPierre-Marc Johnson (Canada) and Bolong Sonko (The Gambia) toundertake informal consultations among delegations on theprovisions of the Convention related to finance. The objective ofthese consultations was to develop a new negotiating text onfinance for the fifth session.

The fourth session was also the first time that delegates formallyconsidered the Regional Implementation Annex for Africa. Ingeneral, developed countries thought that the annex was too longand contained a number of articles that were better suited to oralready contained in the main Convention. The Africans felt thatthe level of detail was absolutely essential, otherwise theinstrument would not achieve its objective of providing prioritytreatment for Africa. After a series of informal sessions, theunresolved issues in this heavily bracketed text included: themandatory nature of the commitments to be taken by Parties;timetable for preparing action programmes; the necessity ofregional action programmes; the role of the UN and otherinternational institutions; financial arrangements; and follow-upand coordination.

The Asian and Latin American regional groups also produced theirown draft regional implementation instruments. Although theseannexes were not negotiated or even discussed in detail, initialreaction was positive. Delegates praised both annexes for theirbrevity and clarity and supported them as a good basis for furtherdiscussion.

REPORT OF THE FIFTH SESSION

The fifth session of the INCD opened on Monday, 6 June 1994 atUNESCO headquarters in Paris. The Committee first dealt withcertain procedural matters, including the adoption of the agenda(A/AC.241/22) and the accreditation of seven more NGOs to thenegotiating process (A/AC.241/9/Add.7). The Committee also heardopening statements from UNESCO Director-General Federico Mayor andAlain Lammassoure, France's Ministre D‚l‚gu‚ for European Affairs,who both welcomed delegates to Paris. President Mascarenhas Monteroof Cape Verde, and ministers from Benin, Mongolia and Senegal alsoaddressed the opening Plenary session.

INCD Chair Bo Kjell‚n emphasized the importance of negotiating aneffective Convention and announced the flexible work schedule forthe session. The Plenary was scheduled to meet informally toconsider the main body of the Convention, while at the same time anegotiating group under the chairmanship of Anne de Lattre (France)was going to examine the regional annexes. Pierre-Marc Johnson andBolong Sonko would continue consultations on financial issues.Kjell‚n made it clear, however, that delegates would have to beflexible and prepared for constant changes in the work programme,depending on the Committee's progress.

THE MAIN CONVENTION

While the majority of the Convention had been negotiated by the twoworking groups at the second, third and fourth sessions, there werestill a number of words, paragraphs and articles that remained inbrackets. The Plenary met in an informal session beginning onMonday, 6 June, to address the bracketed text. There were fourcategories of problems that remained in the text of the Convention:issues related to financial resources and mechanisms; issuesrelated to categories of countries; points related to institutionaland legal issues; and the inclusion of an article on principles.There were also a number of other sets of brackets that did notrelate to these four issues and the Committee tackled these first.Issues that were not easily resolved were assigned to small contactgroups. Financial issues were dealt with in an informal workinggroup chaired by Johnson and Sonko. Kjell‚n held his ownconsultations on principles and categories of countries. A smalllegal committee also met throughout the session, under thechairmanship of Fred Mallya (Tanzania), to review the entireConvention to ensure that it is legally and grammaticallyconsistent.

To facilitate greater understanding of the Convention, thefollowing is a summary of each article in the final text,A/AC.241/15/Rev.7.

PART I: INTRODUCTION

PREAMBLE: The 26-paragraph Preamble addresses a wide range oftopics related to desertification and drought. The most contentiousparagraphs addressed: the international community's commitment toattain the UN target of 0.7% of GNP for Official DevelopmentAssistance (ODA); the contribution that combatting desertificationcan make to achieve the objectives of the Climate Change andBiodiversity Conventions; special attention to problems ofcombatting desertification and mitigating the effects of drought incountries with economies in transition; and special provisions tomeet the needs of developing countries, including new andadditional financial resources and appropriate access to relevanttechnologies.

Of these four paragraphs, the one addressing the relationshipbetween the conventions on desertification, climate change andbiodiversity was the easiest to resolve, when the US agreed toaccept it on the first day of the session. The other threeparagraphs proved to be more troublesome.

After lengthy discussion in the contact group on finance that metduring the final three days of the session, delegates agreed toremove reference to 0.7% of GNP for ODA and state instead,"Reaffirming in this light the commitments of developed countriesas contained in paragraph 13 of chapter 33 of Agenda 21." Paragraph33.13 refers to this ODA target. Reference to the problems withdesertification in the territory of the former Soviet Unioncontinued to give problems until the final hours of the Plenary.The G-77, which did not want special reference to these countries,was finally able to accept the wording, "Expressing concern overthe impact of desertification and drought on affected countries inCentral Asia and southern Caucasus." At the final Plenary, however,the Russian Federation expressed its displeasure with thisformulation since it did not include any Russian territory. Thelanguage was modified and now reads "trans-Caucasus."

ARTICLE 1 -- USE OF TERMS:

This Article contains definitionsfor desertification, combatting desertification, drought,mitigating the effects of drought, land, land degradation, arid,semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas, affected areas, affectedcountries, regional economic integration organization, anddeveloped country Parties. These latter two definitions, as well asthe overall problem with categories of countries, were the subjectof discussion at INCD-5.

Paragraph 2 (establishment of a glossary) was deleted after theSecretariat explained that UNEP had already commissioned adictionary of terms related to desertification, making thisparagraph unnecessary. Definition of "other Parties in a positionto provide assistance" was deleted and replaced with a definitionof developed country Parties. It reads: "'developed countryParties' means developed country Parties and regional economicintegration organizations constituted by developed countries."Reference to affected country Parties eligible for assistance underthis Convention was also deleted. Thus, the categories of countriesare now affected countries, developed country Parties anddeveloping country Parties. There is no longer reference to Partiesneeding assistance, Parties in a position to provide assistance orParties providing assistance.

ARTICLE 2 -- OBJECTIVE:

Delegates agreed to the twoparagraphs in this Article at INCD-4. The first states that theobjective of the Convention is to combat desertification andmitigate the effects of drought in countries experiencing seriousdrought and/or desertification, particularly in Africa, througheffective actions at all levels, supported by internationalcooperation and partnership arrangements, consistent with Agenda21. The second paragraph stresses the importance of long-termintegrated strategies.

ARTICLE 3 -- PRINCIPLES:

By the conclusion of INCD-4,delegates reached agreement on the contents of this Article. The USinsisted on retaining the brackets around the entire article, sinceit was opposed to including principles in the Convention. On thefinal day of INCD-5, delegates agreed to delete the brackets andretain the Article. The sub- paragraph on the sovereign right ofnations to exploit their own resources was deleted since similarlanguage is contained in the Preamble.

The Article now lists four principles to guide the Parties inimplementing the Convention: the participation of local communitiesin the design and implementation of programmes to combatdesertification; cooperation and coordination at the subregional,regional and international levels; cooperation among all levels ofgovernment, communities, NGOs and landholders; and the specialneeds of affected developing countries.

PART II: GENERAL PROVISIONS

ARTICLE 4 -- GENERAL OBLIGATIONS: This Article lists theobligations of all Parties under the Convention, emphasizing theneed to coordinate efforts and develop a coherent long-termstrategy at all levels. These obligations include: adopting anintegrated approach in addressing desertification and drought;giving due attention to the situation of affected developingcountry Parties with regard to trade, marketing arrangements anddebt; integrating strategies for poverty eradication into effortsto combat desertification and mitigate the effects of drought;promoting cooperation among affected country Parties; strengtheningsubregional, regional and international cooperation; andcooperating within relevant intergovernmental organizations.

ARTICLE 5 -- OBLIGATIONS OF AFFECTED COUNTRY PARTIES:

ThisArticle sets out the obligations of affected country Parties asfollows: give due priority to combatting desertification andmitigating the effects of drought, including the allocation ofadequate resources; establish strategies and priorities; addressthe underlying causes of desertification; promote awareness andfacilitate participation of local populations; provide an enablingenvironment by strengthening relevant existing legislation or byenacting new laws and establishing long-term policies.

ARTICLE 6 -- OBLIGATIONS OF DEVELOPED COUNTRY PARTIES:

Thisparagraph proved to be one of the most contentious paragraphs inthe entire Convention. Agreement was not reached until earlySaturday morning, 18 June 1994, and, at times, it appeared as ifthe negotiations would end in deadlock.

When financial resources and mechanisms (Articles 20 and 21) werefirst discussed in the informal working group on finance, Algeria,on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, insisted on linking Article6 with Articles 20 and 21, since financial resources and mechanismsshould not be discussed separately from developed countryobligations. After a procedural debate that lasted all afternoon,Johnson and Sonko reported back the next day that they would opendiscussions with Article 6.

This Article was also linked to the ongoing discussions oncategories of countries. During the discussion, the G-77 insistedthat the title read "Obligations of developed country Parties,"while other options included "Obligations to provide assistance inimplementation" and "Obligations of country Parties able to provideassistance." Other issues that emerged during the discussionsduring the subsequent week were: the use of the phrase "as mutuallyagreed," which was the strongly supported by the OECD countries andopposed by the G-77; the reference to the mobilization of new andadditional financial resources; the reference to the target of 0.7%of GNP for ODA; and reference to the countries in the former SovietUnion.

ARTICLE 7 -- PRIORITY FOR AFRICA:

This Article calls onParties, in implementing this Convention, to give priority toaffected African country Parties, while not neglecting affecteddeveloping country Parties in other regions.

ARTICLE 8 -- RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER CONVENTIONS:

The firstparagraph encourages coordination of activities carried out underthis Convention and other relevant international agreements. Thesecond paragraph, which was retained after consultations with theUN Legal Office, says that the provisions of this Convention shallnot affect the rights or obligations of any Party under agreementsthat it has entered into prior to the entry into force of thisConvention.

PART III: ACTION PROGRAMMES, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICALCOOPERATION AND SUPPORTING MEASURES

SECTION 1: ACTION PROGRAMMES

ARTICLE 9 -- BASIC APPROACH:

This Article states thatexisting successful plans and programmes, as well as relevantsubregional and regional programmes, will be the basis for thepreparation of national action programmes. Parties shall notify thePermanent Secretariat in writing of their intention to prepare anational action programme. Such programmes will be updated througha participatory process and will be interlinked with other effortsto formulate national sustainable development policies.

The second paragraph states that in the provision of assistance,priority shall be given to supporting, as agreed, national,subregional and regional action programmes of affected developingcountry Parties, particularly those in Africa. The third paragraphsays that the Parties shall encourage organs, funds and programmesof the UN system and other relevant intergovernmentalorganizations, academic institutions and the scientific communityand NGOs in a position to cooperate, to support the elaboration,implementation and follow-up of action programmes.

ARTICLE 10 -- NATIONAL ACTION PROGRAMMES: This article statesthat the purpose of national action programmes is to identify thefactors contributing to desertification and practical measuresnecessary to combat desertification and mitigate the effects ofdrought. These action programmes shall: incorporate long-termstrategies to combat desertification and mitigate the effects ofdrought; allow for modifications to be made in response to changingcircumstances; give particular attention to the implementation ofpreventive measures; enhance national climatological,meteorological and hydrological capabilities; promote policies andstrengthen institutional frameworks; provide for effective popularparticipation; and require regular review of implementation.

ARTICLE 11 -- SUBREGIONAL AND REGIONAL ACTION PROGRAMMES:

This Article reads: "Affected country Parties shall consult andcooperate to prepare, as appropriate, in accordance with relevantRegional Implementation Annexes, subregional and/or regional actionprogrammes to harmonize, complement and increase the efficiency ofnational programmes. The provisions of Article 10 shall applymutatis mutandis to subregional and regional programmes.Such cooperation may include agreed joint programmes for thesustainable management of transboundary natural resources,scientific and technical cooperation, and strengthening of relevantinstitutions."

ARTICLE 12 -- INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION:

This Article statesthat the international community should cooperate in theimplementation of the Convention, especially in fields oftechnology transfer, scientific research and development,information collection and dissemination and financial resources.

ARTICLE 13 -- SUPPORT FOR THE ELABORATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ACTION PROGRAMMES:

Once the categories of countries andfinancial provisions were resolved, agreement was reached on thisArticle. It states that measures to support action programmesinclude: financial cooperation; cooperation mechanisms at the locallevel; flexibility in project design, funding and implementation;and more efficient administrative and budgetary procedures.

ARTICLE 14 -- COORDINATION IN THE ELABORATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ACTION PROGRAMMES:

This Article was also agreed to after thecategories of countries were resolved. The first paragraph statesthat the Parties shall work closely together in the elaboration andimplementation of action programmes. The second paragraph stressesthe need for coordination to avoid duplication, harmonization ofinterventions and approaches, and maximization of the impact ofassistance.

ARTICLE 15 -- REGIONAL IMPLEMENTATION ANNEXES:

This Articlehad been bracketed pending the elaboration of the regional annexes.Once the regional annexes had taken shape, delegates agreed todelete the three sub-paragraphs that listed obligations to be setout in the annexes. The chapeau was retained and it states:"Elements for incorporation in action programmes shall be selectedand adapted to the socio-economic, geographical and climaticfactors applicable to affected country Parties or regions, as wellas to their level of development. Guidelines for the preparation ofaction programmes and their exact focus and content for particularsubregions and regions are set out in the regional implementationannexes."

SECTION 2: SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION

ARTICLE 17 -- RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT:

This Article statesthat Parties will support research activities that: contribute toincreased knowledge of the processes leading to desertification anddrought; address the specific needs of local populations; protect,integrate, enhance and validate traditional and local knowledge,know-how and practices; develop and strengthen national,subregional and regional research capabilities in affecteddeveloping country Parties; take into account the relationshipbetween poverty, migration and desertification; promote the conductof joint research programmes; and enhance the availability of waterresources in affected areas.

ARTICLE 18 -- TRANSFER, ACQUISITION, ADAPTATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNOLOGY:

This Article, which was the result of intensiveconsultations at INCD-4, did not cause any problems in Paris. Itstates that Parties shall: fully utilize relevant existinginformation systems and clearing-houses for the dissemination ofinformation on available technologies; facilitate access totechnologies most suitable to practical application for specificneeds of local populations; facilitate technology cooperation amongaffected country Parties; and take appropriate measures to createdomestic market conditions and incentives conducive to thedevelopment, transfer, acquisition and adaptation of suitabletechnology, knowledge, know-how and practices. The Parties shallalso: make inventories of technology, knowledge, know-how andpractices and their potential uses; ensure that such technology,knowledge, know-how and practices are adequately protected;encourage and support the improvement and dissemination of suchtechnology; and facilitate the adaptation of such technology.

SECTION 3: SUPPORTING MEASURES

Most of this lengthy Article had been agreed upon atINCD-4. The first paragraph lists eleven capacity buildingactivities. Only sub-paragraph 1(f) -- the provision of appropriatetraining and technology in the use of alternative energy sources,particularly renewable energy resources -- remained bracketed atthe insistence of Saudi Arabia. After consultations, the Saudisagreed to retain the sub-paragraph in the text.

The second paragraph addresses an interdisciplinary review ofavailable capacity and facilities at the local and national levels.Paragraph 3 lists six types of public awareness and educationalprogrammes. Paragraph 4, the result of a fragile compromise betweendeveloped and developing countries, addresses the establishmentand/or strengthening of regional education and training centres.

ARTICLE 19 -- CAPACITY BUILDING, EDUCATION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS:

ARTICLE 20 -- FINANCIAL RESOURCES:

This Article was thesubject of intensive consultations throughout INCD-5. BothArticles 20 and 21 were first addressed in an informal workinggroup co-chaired by Pierre-Marc Johnson and Bolong Sonko. Thisgroup first met on Wednesday, 8 June 1994, and continued onThursday and Friday. The initial basis for discussion was a drafttext prepared by Johnson and Sonko (A/AC.241/L.19), based onconsultations held in Geneva and during the intersessional period.After consultations in the extended bureau over the weekend, it wasdecided that after one more meeting in the large working group, asmaller contact group, consisting of approximately eight developedcountries and eight developing countries would begin negotiatingthe text Monday evening. This group met late into the nightthroughout the second week and did not reach agreement on all ofthe financial provisions in the text until early Saturday morning.

With regard to Article 20, most delegations were in agreement earlyin the session that the Article should be developed based on threemain principles: partnership; differentiated responsibilities; andflexibility. Many developing countries expressed concern about theuse of the phrase "as mutually agreed." Others noted that while thetext outlined how available resources would be spent, there was noindication of how to mobilize new and additional resources.Furthermore, there was concern that no provision was made forconcessional loans, although it was clear that grants would notresolve current desertification problems. Since much of thenegotiation of this Article took place behind closed doors, it isnot certain how the final agreement was reached.

The first paragraph of the final text states that Parties shallmake every effort to ensure that adequate financial resources areavailable for programmes to combat desertification and mitigate theeffects of drought. Paragraph 2 says that developed country Partiesundertake to: mobilize substantial financial resources, includinggrants and concessional loans; promote the mobilization ofadequate, timely and predictable financial resources, including newand additional funding from the Global Environment Facility;facilitate the transfer of knowledge, know-how and technologies;and explore innovative methods and incentives for mobilizing andchanneling resources.

Paragraph 3 states that affected developing country Parties, takinginto account their capabilities, undertake to mobilize adequatefinancial resources for the implementation of the Convention.Paragraph 4 says that the Parties shall seek full use and continuedqualitative improvement of all national, bilateral and multilateralfunding sources and mechanisms. In paragraph 5, the Parties shall:rationalize and strengthen the management of resources alreadyallocated for combatting desertification and mitigating the effectsof drought; give due priority and attention within the governingbodies of multilateral financial institutions, facilities andfunds, to supporting affected developing country Parties inactivities to implement the Convention; and examine ways in whichregional and subregional cooperation can be strengthened. Paragraph6 says that other country Parties are encouraged to provide, on avoluntary basis, knowledge, know-how and techniques related todesertification and/or financial resources to affected developingcountry Parties.

ARTICLE 21 -- FINANCIAL MECHANISMS:

This Article wasinitially viewed as the most contentious article in the entireConvention. The key issue to resolve was the establishment of aglobal fund for combatting desertification. While the G-77 stronglysupported the idea of a fund, the EU and the US were opposed to theestablishment of a new institution. Instead, they stressed the needfor improved management, mobilization and coordination of existingfunds. Sweden pointed out that a global institution would have highadministrative costs, which would result in few funds getting tothe local level. Some of the Africans were also concerned that theestablishment of a global fund would strip the Convention of thepriority to Africa.

There appeared to be no way out of this deadlock until the smallcontact group met Monday night, 13 June, and Canada suggested theestablishment of a coordinating mechanism. The US then took thelead and circulated a proposal to identify an existing organizationto serve as a "Global Mechanism" to monitor and evaluate theactivities of financial mechanisms and facilitate the mobilizationof adequate and timely assistance. After lengthy discussions withinthe OECD and the G-77, delegates agreed to use the US proposal asthe basis for further negotiation. Thus, a breakthrough wasachieved and the door was opened for productive negotiations.

Paragraph 1 of the final text states that the Conference of theParties (COP) shall promote the availability of financialmechanisms and consider approaches and policies that: facilitatethe provision of necessary funding at national, subregional,regional and global levels; promote multiple-source fundingapproaches, mechanisms and arrangements; provide information onavailable sources of funds; facilitate the establishment ofmechanisms, such as national desertification funds; and strengthenexisting funds and financial mechanisms at the subregional andregional levels. In paragraph 2, the COP shall encourage theprovision of support at the national, subregional and regionallevels through the UN system and multilateral financialinstitutions. Paragraph 3 states that affected developing countryParties, when necessary, shall establish and/or strengthen nationalcoordinating mechanisms to ensure the efficient use of allavailable financial resources.

PART IV: INSTITUTIONS

The issues thatproved to be the most difficult included the COP's budget and theCOP's role in establishing criteria for compensation for the use oftraditional and local sources of knowledge. The first issue wasresolved by the contact group on finance. Rather than going intothe specifics on the source of budget funds, the sub-paragraphreads "approve a programme and budget for its activities, includingthose of its subsidiary bodies, and undertake necessaryarrangements for their financing." The issue of traditional andlocal sources of knowledge was resolved as part of a package dealwith Article 16 and the paragraph now states that the Conference ofthe Parties may request competent national and internationalorganizations, which have relevant expertise, to provide it withinformation relevant to Articles 16(g), 17.1(c) and 18.2(b). This,in effect, removes the responsibility for substantive deliberationson this issue from the mandate of the COP.

The rest of the Article sets forth the role of the COP in:reviewing implementation of the Convention; promoting exchange ofinformation; establishing subsidiary bodies; adopting rules ofprocedure; adopting amendments to the Convention; electing itsBureau; holding extraordinary sessions; and exercising otherfunctions deemed appropriate. The first session of the COP shall beconvened by the interim secretariat and shall take place not laterthan one year after the date of entry into force of the Convention.Unless decided otherwise, the second, third and fourth ordinarysessions shall be held yearly and, thereafter, ordinary sessionsshall be held every two years.

ARTICLE 22 -- CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES:

ARTICLE 23 -- PERMANENT SECRETARIAT:

A key problem in thisArticle had been the title of the institution. The African Grouphas requested the use of the word "permanent." The developedcountries argued that this expression did not agree with thewording in similar international agreements. In Paris, theSecretariat announced that, according to the UN Legal Office, itdoes not matter if the secretariat is referred to as "permanent."After consultations, the EU, Japan and Norway agreed to remove thebrackets and retain the word "permanent."

The Article states that the functions of the Permanent Secretariatshall be to: make arrangements for sessions of the COP and itssubsidiary bodies; compile and transmit reports; facilitateassistance to affected developing country Parties on request;coordinate its activities with the secretariats of other relevantinternational bodies and conventions; and perform other secretariatfunctions as determined by the COP. The COP at its first sessionshall designate the Permanent Secretariat and make arrangements forits functioning.

ARTICLE 24 -- COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY:

Therewere initially two versions of Article 24 in the text. The firstcreated a panel of experts in fields relevant to desertificationand drought selected by the COP. The latter created a council opento all Parties. Australia, the US, the EU and Canada supported thefirst option. Brazil argued that all countries interested inparticipating should be allowed to do so. The Chair asked Egypt tohold consultations. No progress was made in these consultations andthe issue was referred to the extended Bureau. On Wednesday, 15June, Kjell‚n circulated a non-paper, which proposed theestablishment of a committee on scientific and technologicalmatters along the lines of Article 9 in the Climate ChangeConvention. The non-paper also proposed the establishment of aroster of independent experts to be nominated by Governments. Somemembers of the G-77 supported this proposal, since it would givethem influence on the choice of scientists. Some OECD countriescontinued to express concern that such a roster of "experts" wouldtend to contain more policy makers and diplomats than scientists.After further discussions in the extended Bureau, a drafting groupmet and considered the text.

The final text establishes a Committee on Science and Technologyand states that the COP will establish and maintain a roster ofindependent experts. The COP may, as necessary, appoint adhoc panels to provide information and advice through theCommittee on specific issues regarding science and technology.

ARTICLE 25 -- NETWORKING AND EXISTING INSTITUTIONS, AGENCIES AND BODIES:

This Article calls for the Committee on Science andTechnology to "survey and evaluate the relevant existing networks,institutions, agencies and bodies willing to be networked."Pursuant to this process, the Article outlines the steps that theCOP shall undertake to identify units most appropriate fornetworking.

PART V: PROCEDURES

This Articleprovides for a reporting mechanism by the Parties to the Conventionon the activities they have undertaken to meet their obligations.Affected country Parties shall provide: a description of thestrategies established pursuant to Article 5 and detaileddescriptions of the programmes and their implementation. Developedcountry Parties shall report on measures taken to assist in thepreparation and implementation of action programmes, includinginformation on financial resources provided. The COP shallfacilitate the provision to affected developing countries, onrequest, of technical and financial support in compiling andcommunicating information.

ARTICLE 26 -- COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION:

ARTICLE 27 -- MEASURES TO RESOLVE QUESTIONS ON IMPLEMENTATION:

This Article stipulates that the COP shall consider and adoptprocedures and institutional mechanisms for the resolution ofquestions arising from the implementation of the Convention.

ARTICLE 28 -- SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES:

This Article sets outthe dispute settlement mechanisms under the Convention. Partiesshall settle any dispute between them concerning the implementationof the Convention through negotiation. Other mechanisms includearbitration, in accordance with a procedure adopted by the COP inan annex, as soon as practicable, and submission of the dispute tothe International Court of Justice.

ARTICLE 29 -- STATUS OF ANNEXES:

This Article states thatthe regional implementation annexes and other annexes form anintegral part of the Convention.

ARTICLE 30 -- AMENDMENTS TO THE CONVENTION:

Since there werestill outstanding questions with regard to Articles 30 and 31 atthe outset of this session, the Chair asked Patrick Szell (UK) tohold consultations on these articles. The final text states thatthe Convention can be amended at ordinary sessions of the COP. Thetext of any proposed amendment shall be communicated to the Partiesby the Permanent Secretariat at least six months before the meetingat which it is proposed for adoption. If consensus cannot beachieved, the amendment shall, as a last resort, be adopted by atwo-thirds majority vote of the Parties present and voting.

ARTICLE 31 -- ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF ANNEXES:

Afterconsultations, this Article now states that any additional annex tothe Convention and any amendment to an annex shall be proposed andadopted in accordance with the procedure set forth in Article 30.Annexes or amendments to annexes shall enter into force for allParties to the Convention six months after the date ofcommunication of the adoption of such an annex or amendment. Theannex or amendment shall not enter into force for Parties that havenotified the Depositary in writing within that six-month period oftheir non-acceptance of such annex or amendment.

ARTICLE 32 -- RIGHT TO VOTE:

This Article stipulates thateach Party shall have one vote. Regional economic integrationorganizations, in matters within their competence, shall exercisetheir right to vote with a number of votes equal to the number oftheir member States that are Parties to the Convention.

ARTICLE 33 -- SIGNATURE:

The Convention shall be opened forsignature in Paris this autumn. The exact dates were left blank,pending a decision by the French.

ARTICLE 34 -- RATIFICATION, ACCEPTANCE, APPROVAL AND ACCESSION:

This Article states that the Convention and anyadditional regional implementation annexes or amendments toregional implementation annexes will be subject to theratification, acceptance, approval or accession by States andregional economic integration organizations.

ARTICLE 35 -- INTERIM ARRANGEMENTS:

This Article states thatduring the interim period, the Secretariat functions, referred toin Article 23, will be carried out by the interim secretariat, asestablished by UN Resolution 47/188.

ARTICLE 36 -- ENTRY INTO FORCE:

After consultations by theChair, delegates agreed that 50 ratifications are necessary for theConvention to enter into force. The Convention shall enter intoforce 90 days after the date of deposit of the 50th instrument ofratification.

ARTICLE 37 -- RESERVATIONS:

No reservations may be made tothis Convention. The US stated for the record that it isreluctantly accepting this Article.

ARTICLE 38 -- WITHDRAWAL:

It was agreed that at any timeafter three years from the date on which the Convention has enteredinto force for a Party, that Party may withdraw from the Conventionby giving written notification to the Depositary. Any suchwithdrawal shall take effect upon expiry of one year from the dateof receipt of the notification of withdrawal.

ARTICLE 39 -- DEPOSITARY:

The UN Secretary-General is thedepositary of the Convention.

ARTICLE 40 -- AUTHENTIC TEXTS:

This Article states that thetexts in the six official UN languages are all equally authentic.

REGIONAL IMPLEMENTATION ANNEXES

The Convention contains regional implementation annexes for Africa,Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the NorthernMediterranean. The idea of regional annexes emerged during thefirst meeting of the INCD in Nairobi, where options were stillbeing explored on how to express the particularity for Africastipulated in resolution 47/188. This was interpreted by developingcountries in other regions as a blatant attempt to provide anoption for the developed countries to provide financial assistancein favor of Africa through an annex or instrument. Consequently,the Latin American and Caribbean Group and the Asian Groupemphasized that they also wanted their own annexes, a demand thatwas reluctantly approved, with a decision taken that any regioncould have an annex and the priority for Africa would bedemonstrated through the urgent action to be undertaken before theentry into force of the Convention.

Initially, it was not clear how multiple annexes could be finalizedsimultaneously by 17 June 1994. However, due to regional-levelinitiatives taken by the Asians, Latin Americans and the southernEuropeans, draft annexes were tabled at INCD-4 and negotiated inParis. The four annexes differ quite substantially in their contentin order to reflect the different regional realities. Despite thefact that all the annexes cover the same range of issues, it is theAfrican Annex that is the most elaborate in form and content.

REGIONAL IMPLEMENTATION ANNEX FOR AFRICA:

This Annexcomprises 19 articles and addresses a broad range of issuesincluding: scope; commitment and obligations of both African anddeveloped country Parties; strategic planning, framework andcontent of the national, subregion and regional programmes;technical assistance and cooperation, as well as the transfer,acquisition, adaptation and access to environmentally soundtechnology; financial mechanisms and resources; and coordination,partnership and follow-up arrangements.

The Annex highlights the particular conditions of the region, whichinclude its topography, the number of affected land-lockedcountries, political instability of the region, and the difficultsocio-economic factors, including poverty and debt. The Annex isunique in that it is the only regional instrument to articulateconcrete commitments for financial contributions. In addition, itprovides for the execution of the action programmes before theConvention's entry into force. This is to serve as an indication ofthe priority to be accorded to Africa under the main Convention.

The action programmes highlight the areas that need attention suchas: improvement of the economic environment; natural resourceconservation; and existing institutional organizations. The Annexalso provides the detailed actions to be undertaken under thenational action programmes.

However, it is only within the last three articles of the Annexthat a new approach is actually articulated. Explicit reference ismade with regard to technical assistance and cooperation to ensurethat preference is given to the utilization of the less-costlylocal experts. This important reference is in response to thesentiment among African Governments that the current disbursementof funds tends to be subsumed by foreign technical assistance andhigh overhead costs.

On the other hand, emphasis is placed on the need for increasedcoordination among the key players involved in desertificationactivities, including donors, national governments, NGOs and localpopulations. Hence, consultative groups and processes arerecommended at three different levels: national, subregional andregional. And finally, the Annex sets out procedures for thefollow-up arrangements of the Convention.

REGIONAL IMPLEMENTATION ANNEX FOR ASIA:

This Annex is muchshorter and more general in scope than the African Annex. The Asiancountries felt that the level of detail that characterizes theAfrican Annex would not be appropriate here, given the vast andvaried geographical expanse of the region. Hence, it only containseight articles: purpose; conditions of the region; framework andcontent of national action programmes; subregional and joint actionprogrammes; regional activities; financial resources andmechanisms; and coordination and cooperation mechanisms. The AsianGovernments decided not to articulate concrete commitments in theirAnnex since they did not want to be legally-bound to financialobligations. On the other hand, the financial resources andmechanisms provisions were not as elaborate as those in the AfricanAnnex. This was due in large part to the sentiment of the donorcountries that the Asian countries are better able to mobilizelocal resources to deal with drought and desertification,especially since the impact in Asia has not been as severe as inthe African region.

REGIONAL IMPLEMENTATION ANNEX FOR LATIN AMERICA AND THE

CARIBBEAN: This Annex is similar in content and scope to theAsian Annex. It is equally general and concise, containing onlyseven articles: purpose; particular conditions of the region;content of the national action programmes; technical, scientificand technological cooperation; financial resources and mechanisms;and institutional framework. Despite the similarities with theAsian Annex, this instrument aims at identifying the importantlinks between the desertification and biodiversity loss, as well asdebt issues, unfavorable international economic trade practices andother socio-economic factors. In technical cooperation, itemphasizes the issue of traditional knowledge, know-how andpractices.

REGIONAL IMPLEMENTATION ANNEX FOR THE NORTHERN MEDITERRANEAN:

This Annex mainly covers Greece, Portugal andSpain. It differs from the other annexes in its orientation. Whilethe other three tend to link desertification and drought-relatedproblems to socio-economic factors, this Annex addresses the issuefrom a more scientific approach. Only two economic issues areemphasized as causal factors: urbanization and agriculturalpractices. Another important distinguishing factor is the provisionthat clearly disqualifies the region for eligibility for fundsraised through the main Convention. The Northern MediterraneanAnnex is the only annex that provides for coordinated activity withother regions, particularly with North Africa, in the preparationand implementation of action programmes. Even the African Annexdoes not acknowledge this collaboration. It is noteworthy, however,that while this Annex was one of the least contentious, it appearedthat Spain, who had lobbied for it, initially met with considerableresistance from OECD countries.

CLOSING SESSION

The final session of INCD-5 got off to a late start. During this32-hour day, last minute consultations continued on severaloutstanding issues. The contact group on finance continued to meetin its small room. Participants periodically emerged to talk withother members of their delegations and regional groups.Consultations on local and traditional knowledge, urgent action forAfrica, the African Annex and other issues were underway throughoutthe day. Originally the Plenary was scheduled to convene at 5:00pm. Yet, as the day progressed and agreement on all of theprovisions in the Convention relating to finance had not beenreached, the meeting was postponed again and again. First, thetelevision monitors in UNESCO said Plenary would start at 7:00 pm,then 8:00 and 9:00. At 10:00 pm, Kjell‚n convened the Plenary toannounce that the French Minister of the Environment, MichelBarnier, wanted to meet with the African ministers who werepresent. He then suspended the meeting for 30 minutes.

ADOPTION OF THE CONVENTION:

Kjell‚n first began anarticle-by-article review of the Convention. During this review,some countries expressed their reservations with regard to certainarticles (see the description of the Convention above), but no oneobjected to the adoption of the Convention. When Kjell‚n arrived atArticle 40, which reads that this Convention was adopted on the17th day of June 1994, Benin and the US pointed out that it was the18th. The Chair informed the delegates that the clock hadofficially stopped at midnight and, thus, it was still the 17th.

Delegates then adopted the African Annex, with little discussion.The Asian Annex proved to be more troublesome as the Philippinestried again to reopen the text to ensure that the language did notmarginalize Asian countries who do not suffer from desertification.He had raised this issue during the meetings of the informalworking group, but had not achieved the desired outcome. Histenacity was not appreciated and his last minute amendments werenot accepted due to the late hour. He finally conceded, butindicated his delegation's "immense" dissatisfaction over the"exclusivity" of the Asian Annex. Delegates then finally adoptedthe Asian Annex, quickly followed by the Latin American andCaribbean Annex and the Northern Mediterranean Annex.

INTERIM ARRANGEMENTS:

The next item on the Agenda was theadoption of a resolution on interim arrangements. This resolution,which had been circulated during the first week as documentA/AC.241/L.20, was adopted without amendment. It calls upon Statesand regional economic integration organizations to sign theConvention in Paris. It also requests the Secretary-General to:make appropriate arrangements for the continuation of the signingperiod in New York during and after the 49th session of the GeneralAssembly; make the necessary arrangements to convene a session ofthe Committee from 9-20 January 1995 in New York; makerecommendations to the 49th General Assembly regarding arrangementsfor further sessions of the Committee until the first meeting ofthe COP; and make proposals so that the Secretariat can continueits activities on an interim basis until the Permanent Secretariatis designated by the COP.

URGENT ACTION FOR AFRICA:

The Committee then adopted aresolution on urgent action for Africa. This resolution, ascontained in document A/AC.241/L.22/Rev.1, was the product ofintense consultations held by Takao Shibata (Japan). This lengthyresolution: encourages all countries to disseminate information andpromote education and public awareness about the objectives of theConvention; invites affected African countries to take urgent stepsto prepare national and subregional action programmes; invites thedeveloped countries to provide support to the affected Africancountries in such actions; invites the international andmultilateral organizations, African subregional and regionalorganizations, and private sector organizations to provide supportand mobilize necessary resources; and recommends that the affectedAfrican countries designate coordinating bodies at the national andsubregional levels. The resolution also calls for theestablishment, at national and subregional levels, of partnershiparrangements with relevant developed countries, economicorganizations, NGOs and representatives of local populations tofacilitate the coordination of activities.

CONCLUDING REMARKS:

As the sun rose over Paris, theCommittee heard concluding remarks by UN Under- Secretary-GeneralNitin Desai; France's Environment Minister, Michel Barnier;Algeria's Minister of the Environment, on behalf of the G-77 andChina; Gisbert Glaser, on behalf of UNESCO; the Minister of theEnvironment and Tourism of Burkina Faso; Greece, on behalf of theEU; and Dominick Walubengo of KENGO, on behalf of the NGOs.Delegates also adopted the provisional agenda of the sixth sessionof the INCD, to be held in New York in January 1995, and the reportof the fifth session. After brief closing remarks, INCD Chair BoKjell‚n gavelled the final session to a close at 8:00 am.

A BRIEF ANALYSIS OF THE INCD

At 3:00 am on 18 June 1994 it appeared as though the negotiationson the Convention to Combat Desertification in those CountriesExperiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularlyin Africa, were on the verge of collapse. It was the third day thatthe contact group on financial resources and mechanisms met allnight. The negotiators were exhausted and tension permeated throughthe corridors of UNESCO. The negotiations were deadlocked and noone was sure what would happen next. When the final Plenary meetingconvened at 4:00 am and the compromise text was announced andaccepted, many were too exhausted to celebrate or even analyze theresults of their work. Despite certain concrete gains, theset-backs and shortcomings in the Convention and four regionalannexes resulted from the North-South chasm and intra-regionaldivisions that separated the negotiators on issues of substance,expectations and objectives.

THE SCENARIO

The North-South divide that had beengrowing throughout the 13 months of negotiations manifested itselfin numerous ways. The African countries came to the negotiatingtable with great expectations. They had hoped that this Conventionwould provide new and additional financial resources and technicalassistance to deal with the causes and effects of desertificationand drought. Other non-African developing countries came to thenegotiating table with varying agendas to ensure recognition ofassistance for their countries' desertification problems, to ensurethat the agreements reached at the Earth Summit were honored, andto ensure that they will not be obligated in any way to assist theAfricans. The OECD countries came to the table with the firmly-heldposition that new and additional resources would not be forthcomingand, instead, called for existing resources to be used moreefficiently. The difference of perceptions on the purpose of thisConvention and the provision of financial resources did notfacilitate the negotiating process.

NORTH-SOUTH DIVIDE:

DIVISIONS WITHIN THE REGIONAL GROUPS:

These complexNorth-South relationships were further exacerbated by divisionswithin the major negotiating groups. Although tribute should bepaid to Algeria for uniting the G-77 on many issues during thesenegotiations, which often pitted regional groups in directcompetition with each other, some divisions could not be overcome.The development of regional implementation annexes served in manyways to deepen the regional divide. Developing countries from Asia,Latin America and Africa were thrust into positions requiring themto support their own regional interests over the collectiveinterest of the G-77.

Throughout the negotiations, it was interesting to note how manycountries suddenly discovered they suffered from drought and/ordesertification. Even some Southeast Asian countries insisted thatthey felt marginalized and excluded from the Convention.Nevertheless, the African Group felt that attention divertedtowards other regional groups would have the effect of diluting thepriority that had been guaranteed to Africa. There were also times,particularly during the final days of the finance negotiations,when the Africans appeared ready to accept deals proposed by theOECD countries. However, several times these deals were scuttled byother G-77 members who maintained tougher positions on finance,since they had less to lose if the Convention was not adopted on 17June 1994.

The situation was no less fractious within the OECD. In general,certain delegates felt that the EU had displayed a rathernon-conciliatory and, at times, paternalistic attitude throughoutthese negotiations. By contrast, it was felt by several that theNordics, the US, Canada and Australia had demonstrated realcommitment to addressing the problems at hand, and appeared moreprepared to undertake concrete obligations and commitments. As aresult of the divergences in approaches and negotiatinginstructions, the OECD had difficulty in achieving and articulatinga unified position. This resulted in a leadership vacuum, whichmanifested itself most patently in the finance negotiations wherethere was an early deadlock on the establishment of a global fund.The EU maintained its objection to the fund. Other OECD countriestook a more conciliatory approach. The G-77 argued that the fundwas the centerpiece of the Convention and its establishment wasessential to ensure effective implementation. It was not until theUS stepped in, proposed the idea of a global mechanism, and thentook the lead in achieving support for this idea within the EU, theOECD and the G-77 that the leadership vacuum was filled andprogress could be made.

CONCRETE GAINS

Perhaps the most importantaccomplishment of the INCD process is the international attentionthat has been mobilized around the problem of desertification. Manyhave argued that regardless of the specificities in the finalConvention, the process itself has been a success in providing anetworking forum for those affected by desertification, withdonors, affected developing countries, UN agencies,intergovernmental organizations and NGOs. These numerous contactshave already laid the groundwork for future partnershiparrangements to combat desertification.

GLOBAL AWARENESS OF THE PROBLEM:

LEGITIMIZATION OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:

Another criticalgain is the acceptance by many governments of the importance of theparticipatory approach in the development of national actionprogrammes and, indeed, the recognition that this element is apre-condition to successful results. Many African countries havecome to accept that their national and regional action programmeswill not meet with real success unless affected local populationsare involved in the design, development and implementation of theseprogrammes. Twenty years ago, few countries would have evenconsidered the usefulness, yet alone the political importance andgood sense, of NGO involvement. Now there is an awareness thatdonors may very well steer money away from those programmes plannedin capital cities. This awareness may well lead to an attitudinalshift regarding the need to plan action programmes in afundamentally different way, with the full involvement ofNGOs and affected communities as an absolute prerequisite to thetrue achievement of sustainable development.

NGO IMPACT:

Likewise, NGOs were extremely positive about theopenness of the negotiating process and the extent to which theywere able to influence decision-making, especially around suchissues as national desertification trust funds and NGOparticipation in the development of national action programmes. Thewhole process translated into an important capacity-buildingexercise for the NGOs, many of whom had never attended aninternational negotiation before, let alone had the opportunity toplay an advocacy role in such a forum. At the first INCD session inNairobi, there were only 15 NGOs represented. By INCD-5 there wereover 50 NGOs actively participating, with over 230 accredited. Theimpact these NGOs had on the Convention and the role they arepreparing to play in its implementation have set an importantprecedent.

CHANGE IN DONOR ACTIVITIES:

This process has also stimulatedkey changes in the attitudes within the donor community. First,there has been an important change in the attitude of policy-makersregarding the socio-economic dimensions of the desertificationproblem and the need for incorporating these factors into actionprogrammes.

Second, this process has stimulated a new awareness on the need tocoordinate action and aid programmes. There has been a heightenedawareness of the problems in national and regional resourcemanagement and the need to build on the very concrete successes andto avoid replication of the failures of the 1977 Plan of Action.This process not only addressed the issue of the orientation ofdevelopment aid, but has prompted the need for pointed efficiencyin aid spending through the increased coordination and cooperationthat will be catalyzed by the new Global Mechanism. Through theMechanism aid flows should be better monitored and assessed, andefforts should be stimulated to increase aid coordination on theground, ensuring that good pilot programmes are developed andreplicated. The Mechanism should also help stimulate increasedawareness within the international financial institutions, such asthe World Bank, the IMF and the regional development banks,regarding the new approach that must be taken in combattingdesertification.

SHORTCOMINGS AND SET-BACKS

Perhaps the most concreteshortcoming of the Convention, according to many developingcountries, was the lack of commitment for new and additionalresources. During the finance negotiations, the G-77 stressed theneed for a desertification fund as well as new and additionalfinancial resources. On the other hand, donors were only preparedto discuss such matters as increasing the efficiency of current aidflows. Even with the increased coordination and efficiency that mayresult from the operation of the Global Mechanism, some felt thatthe monies freed up would not fully meet the large-scale costsneeded to combat desertification and mitigate the effects ofdrought. Given the realities of national sovereignty andinternational law, the most that could be achieved was thearticulation of a framework for action to be taken at the national,subregional or regional levels. Even the regional annexes were notable to set out specifics. As such, an international convention maynot have been best vehicle to bring about the concrete changesneeded at the regional and national levels to effectively combatdesertification.

NO NEW FINANCIAL RESOURCES:

DISSATISFACTION WITH THE GLOBAL MECHANISM:

There is alsoconcern about the Global Mechanism itself. OECD countries did notsupport the G-77's call for a desertification fund, citing thefailure of the fund to implement the 1977 Plan of Action, andcommenting that the overhead and administrative costs associatedwith such a fund would markedly reduce the amount of fundsavailable in the field. The compromise -- the establishment of aGlobal Mechanism -- met the concerns of the donors, however, manyAfricans were dissatisfied, arguing that such a mechanism would notcatalyze new and additional resource and would divert limitedresources to other regions. This led some to remark that "thethieves had got the banquet." Furthermore, the current languagealso provides a hazy picture of the functions of the GlobalMechanism, with no indication as to how it will be set up,administered, or implemented.

INSUFFICIENT SCIENTIFIC INPUT:

Many lamented the fact thatthe immense body of technical and scientific expertise on theproblem of desertification did not fully infuse the Convention asmuch as had been hoped. This may have resulted from the fact thatthe objective of most African delegates was to create a conventionthat would focus on development assistance and catalyze theprovision of new and additional resources, not one that would focuson science.

As the negotiations shifted from the scientific to the politicalrealm, many of the technical aspects of the causes and results ofdesertification got buried in a graveyard of brackets. As a result,delegates continually lost sight of the larger picture and theurgency of the problem despite the Chair's constant reminder of the900 million people whose survival depends on the Convention. Somedelegates thought that a greater infusion of scientific andtechnical expertise, along the lines of the IPCC in the climatechange negotiations, would have maintained a better balance betweenscience and politics. However, when the INCD was formed, manymaintained that over 50 years of research had already been done onthis subject, obviating the need for a new intergovernmentalscientific body to support the negotiations. Nevertheless, INCD-1'sinformation sharing segment raised the awareness of theinternational community of the scientific and technical aspects ofdesertification not only in Africa but in other parts of the world.This set the process in motion for the recognition and acceptanceof the need for instruments for other regions other than Africa.

LACK OF LINKAGES BETWEEN ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT:

Another criticism of the process was that stronger links shouldhave been drawn between the environment and development componentsof the problem. The Convention became a development conventionnegotiated largely by Northern aid specialists and Southernenvironmental experts and bureaucrats and diplomats, rather than anenvironmental convention. Although this may not be altogethernegative in the context of combatting desertification, it doesillustrate the fact that the linkage between environment anddevelopment -- sustainable development -- is still more of aconcept than reality.

LACK OF HIGH-LEVEL INVOLVEMENT:

Finally, INCD-5 did notinclude the high-level participation that had been anticipated,largely due to the low profile from which the desertificationproblem suffers in the international arena. This was especiallyproblematic where negotiations tended to slow or indeed break-downfor lack of mandates on the part of negotiators, necessitatingfrequent consultation with national capitals, even around"misplaced modifiers" and other grammatical changes. Perhaps higherpolitical profile and participation would have led to a strongerConvention. On the other hand, a Convention is only as strong asthe commitment of national governments to implement it. It willtake considerable political impetus at this point to ensure thatfocus remains on desertification and the Convention during thecrucial months to come. Based on the lack of political impetus todate in some developed countries, this could prove to be a majorchallenge.

CRITICAL NEXT STEPS

Now that the negotiation of the Convention and its four regionalannexes are complete, there are several crucial steps that must betaken to ensure that the Convention is ratified and that momentumis not lost before its entry into force.

PROMPT RATIFICATION:

The first step is to achieve promptratification of the Convention. While the process and difficultfinancial negotiations may be construed as an indication of thewillingness to support the Convention, most delegations, both fromdeveloped and developing regions acknowledged that one of thebiggest challenges now is the ratification of the Convention. Itwill be particularly important to sell the Convention in the Northand to ensure that it receives support at the highest politicallevels.

URGENT ACTION FOR AFRICA:

In the meantime, OECD and Africancountries must work together to ensure that the resolution onurgent action for Africa is implemented. The OECD countries mustwork together more productively, perhaps even through the formationof partnerships where funding from one country could be matchedwith technical expertise from another. This, in turn, could bematched with the very real needs of affected regions in Africa. Asthe negotiating process has demonstrated, there is an urgent needto channel more coordinated assistance to Africa. There is also aneed to: move from a traditional donor-recipient relationship to atrue partnership association; generate a more productive on-goingdialogue with the Africans; and increase the percentage offinancial assistance that actually reaches projects by reducing oreliminating such obstacles as tied aid and excessively highoverhead costs.

MOBILIZING PUBLIC AWARENESS:

Another important step is thenecessity of mobilizing local and community interest in theConvention and the preparation of national action programmes. Thekey challenge is that many governments do not have a tradition ofpopular participation. Access to information is very limited andbottom-up input is practically non-existent. NGOs and governmentsalike must embark on a major campaign to disseminate information tograssroots and community organizations to ensure that bottom-upinput is received and incorporated into the action programmes.Unless the actual needs of communities are taken into account inthe preparation of these action programmes, the Convention could beconsidered a failure.

The negotiation of this Convention was difficult, theimplementation process will not be any easier. The ill-will anddistrust that emerged from the negotiations on the financialprovisions of the Convention will have to be overcome. Developedand developing countries alike, along with support from the NGOcommunity, will have to work together to ensure that thisConvention has an impact on the 900 million people throughout theworld, particularly in Africa, who are the real foot soldiers inthe battle against desertification.

THINGS TO LOOK FOR DURING THE INTERSESSIONAL PERIOD

The Convention will be opened forsignature in Paris this autumn. The signing ceremony will be hostedby the Government of France and participation is expected to be atthe ministerial or heads of State level. Look for an announcementfrom the Government of France about the exact date of thisceremony. The Convention will also be opened for signature at UNHeadquarters in New York.

49TH SESSION OF THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY: As agreed in UNGeneral Assembly Resolution 47/188, the 49th General Assembly willreview implementation of the resolution and the Convention itself.In addition, the General Assembly will need to adopt a resolutionthat will enable the Secretariat to continue to function during theinterim period before the Convention enters into force. Currently,the Secretariat's mandate is due to expire in January 1995. TheGeneral Assembly will also have to make arrangements for furthersessions of the Committee until the first meeting of the Conferenceof Parties.

SIGNING CEREMONY:

INCD-6:

The sixth session of the INCD will meet in New Yorkfrom 9-20 January 1995. The provisional agenda for this session, asadopted in Paris, includes: adoption of the agenda and organizationof work; work programme for the interim period; preparation for theConference of the Parties; status of signature and ratification ofthe Convention; review of the situation as regards extrabudgetaryfunds; and adoption of the report.

NGO ACTIVITIES:

NGOs are now preparing for theimplementation of the Convention. To facilitate their participationin the preparation of action plans, the NGOs in Paris establisheda network to be known as "Reseau International des ONG sur laDesertification" (RIOD). RIOD will operate at the community,national, subregional, regional and international levels. Eachcountry, subregion and region will have a focal point. At theinternational level, the Environment Liaison Centre International(ELCI) in Nairobi will function as a member of an inter-regionalcommittee constituted of other NGOs -- one each from Latin America,Asia, Europe, Australia, North America and Africa. These focalpoints will serve on an interim basis until they are confirmed bya larger assembly of NGOs at a meeting to be held in Ouagadougou,Burkina Faso, this autumn. A planning committee has beenestablished and more information will be circulated when available.For more information, contact Heinz Greijn, Environment LiaisonCentre International, PO Box 72461, Nairobi, Kenya; phone: (254-2)562015; fax: (254-2) 562175; e-mail: elci@gn.apc.org.

Participants

National governments: UK; US
Negotiating blocs: African Group; African Union; Asian Group; Brazil, South Africa, China, India; European Union; Group of 77 and China; Latin American and Caribbean Group
Non-state coalitions: NGOs