United Nations
Commission on Sustainable Development

Background Paper


               Commission on Sustainable Development                          

      
                   Background Document No. 18
                          Sixth Session
                      20 April - 1 May 1998


         Status Report on the Implementation of the 
  CSD Work Programme on Indicators of Sustainable Development


                     Background Paper No. 18


                Division for Sustainable Development
              Department of Economic and Social Affairs


         Table of Contents


                  1.       Objectives of the Programme
                  2.       Main Phases and Elements of Implementation
                  3.       Follow-up of the National Testing
                  4.       Lessons Learned and Next Steps
                  5.       Use of Indicators in National Reporting

         Annexes

                  1.       List of international meetings 
                  2.       List of national focal points


I. Objectives of the Programme

1.     This report reviews the status of implementation of the Work
Programme on Indicators of Sustainable Development as adopted by the
Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) at it■s Third Session in
1995. The programme addresses one of the objectives set out in Chapter
40 of Agenda 21: Information for Decision-Making, that calls for -
recommendations for a harmonized development of sustainable development
indicators at the national, regional and global levels, and for
incorporation of a suitable set of these indicators in common, regularly
updated, and widely accessible reports and databases, for use at the
international level, subject to national sovereignty considerations■
(Agenda 21, para. 40.7).    

2.       The goal of the Work Programme on Indicators of Sustainable
Development is to develop a list of indicators of sustainable development
accessible to decision makers at the national level by the year 2000. 

3.       The outcome of the CSDV and the Special Session of the General
Assembly/Earth Summit+5 strongly re-emphasized the importance of
indicators of sustainable development to support national decision-
making. Sector specific indicators as well as gender disaggregated
indicators, where appropriate, should get more attention in the future. 
The indicators of sustainable development are  addressed explicitly in
the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21:  Means of
Implementation (paras. 111 and 114), and in the -Future Role and
Programme of  Work of the Commission on Sustainable Development,■  (para.
133.b) as well as in relation to Changing Consumption and Production
Patterns (para. 28.c). Based on the adoption of the new programme of work
for the CSD at the Earth Summit+5, an in depth review of the cross-
sectoral issue -Information for decision making and participation■ will
take place in 2001 and include the indicators programme.       

II. Main Phases and Elements of Implementation

4.       The  approach to indicator development as adopted by the CSD, is
supported by more than 30 organizations of the United Nations system, and
other  intergovernmental,  non-governmental and major group organizations
acting as lead organizations for the development of particular
indicators. An Expert Group of approximately 45 members representing
these organizations, was established to secure close collaboration and
consensus on the methodological approach and modus operandi of the
project. From May 1995 to April 1996, (the first phase), this cooperative
arrangement resulted  in the preparation of  a working list of 134
indicators of sustainable development, a framework for their organization
and methodology sheets for each of the indicators. The indicators include 
social, economic, environmental and institutional aspects of sustainable
development  and  are placed within a Driving-Force-State-Response-
Framework. The use of the DSR framework does not imply that it is
possible at this stage to identify any causal relationships among driving
force, state and response indicators. Rather it is seen as a way of
categorizing indicators to fit the needs of the producers and the users.

5.       To facilitate understanding,  the methodology sheets provide a
definition of each indicator, its meaning and applicability.  After a
first version was presented as a background paper to CSD at its fourth
session in 1996 (background paper #15),  the completed methodology sheets
were published by the United Nations in October 1996, as: "Indicators of
Sustainable Development: Framework and Methodologies" and includes for
each indicator: (a) an introduction that provides a statement of purpose,
the policy relevance of the indicator and its relationship to sustainable
development; (b) a methodological description of the indicators and the
underlying definitions, including a short description of the indicator
in relation to the framework and information on interpretation and design
of the indicator; (c) an assessment of the availability of data from
national and international sources; and (d) further readings and other
references for additional information and points of contact. The
methodology sheet publication is expected to be released in the first
quarter of 1998 in French and Spanish.

6.       Lead agencies have to date successfully completed the task of
developing and elaborating methodology sheets for 125 of the 134
indicators in the current working list of indicators. Nine indicators in
the framework are still in bookmark form  providing the initial title and
placement in the framework. Work is still ongoing to develop the
remaining indicators, though finalization is uncertain due to
methodological or conceptual difficulties. The 9 indicators include: 1)
Proven Mineral Reserves; 2) Groundwater Reserves; 3) Population Growth
in Coastal Areas; 4) Discharge of Oil into Coastal Waters; 5) The Algae
Index; 6) Chemically Induced Acute poisonings; 7) Number of Chemicals
Banned or Severely Restricted; 8) Sustainable Development Strategies;
and, 9) National Councils for Sustainable Development.   

7.       The second phase of the programme from May 1996 to December 1997,
focused on issues of capacity-building, training  and the inauguration
of  national testing of the indicators.  At the fourth session of CSD in
1996, the CSD invited governments to test, develop and use the
indicators, stressing the usefulness of twinning arrangements and other
voluntary partnerships for further  implementation of national indicators
programmes. Criteria for selecting countries to be monitored were
suggested by the second and third meetings of the Expert Group in 1995
and 1996. It was agreed that monitoring should begin in a few interested
countries, on a voluntary basis, taking into account equitable
geographical distribution, ecosystem diversity, the presence of adequate
institutional infrastructure and, to the extent possible, the
availability of information related to the indicators. Testing was to
proceed in countries based on national interests and priorities of
sustainable development. 

8.       Subsequently, The governments of Belgium and Costa Rica,  in
November 1996 hosted the Second International Workshop in Indicators of
Sustainable Development in Ghent, with the objective to structure and
launch the testing process.  The workshop succeeded in harmonizing the
methodological approach to the testing and endorsed a set of Guidelines
for National Testing prepared by DPCSD in consultation with the Expert
Group.  The countries that have confirmed their participation in the
three year testing phase, includes from: Latin America and the Caribbean:
Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Mexico and Venezuela; From Africa:
Ghana, Kenya, Morocco and South Africa; From Asia and the Pacific: China,
Maldives, Pakistan and the Philippines; and, from Europe: Austria,
Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, France and the United
Kingdom. India has recently indicated its interest to become a testing
country.  Several twinning arrangements were established during the first
year of national testing, including between Finland and South Africa,
between Brazil and Germany and, between France and Tunisia. Several other
countries including Canada, USA, The Netherlands and Japan have noted
that they already have indicator initiatives active at the national level
and expressed their continued interest in the CSD indicator programme. 

9.       To address the need for training and capacity building at the
regional and national levels, a series of  regional briefing and training
workshops were initiated from November 1996 through June 1997. These were 
hosted by the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
(ESCAP) supported by the Government of the Netherlands and DPCSD for the
Asian and Pacific Region; by the Government of Costa Rica for the Latin
American and Caribbean region; and, by the Government of Ghana for the
African region. The African regional workshop was co-organized with
UNDP■s Capacity 21 Programme and DPCSD. 

10.      The main objective of all the workshops was to provide an
introduction and in-depth training in the use of indicators as tools for
national decision-making, to explore the related methodologies and review
the Guidelines for National Testing.  Participants included government
officials and experts from testing countries as well as other interested
countries, one representing the planning office, the other representing
either the National Council for Sustainable Development or the ministry
responsible for the environment or sustainable development.  

11.      Several similarities in the outcomes of the regional meetings can
be highlighted. There was a consensus and recognition of the framework
and methodology sheets as valuable tools in assisting countries to get
national indicators programme off the ground. The  Guidelines for
National Testing were acknowledged as useful for organizing the testing
programme, though concern was raised about the tight timetable for
participating in the testing process. The need for further capacity-
building and technical assistance to secure implementation and follow-up
at the national level was stressed with possible solutions proposed as
a way to further link indicator programmes to national planning
activities in order to promote mobilization of resources. Availability
of the methodology sheets in French and Spanish was also seen as crucial
for the national implementation, as well as further development of
institutional and sector specific indicators according to regionally
identified priorities. 

12.      In contrast to the similarities observed from the three regions,
differences were viewed to be fewer although fundamental. It became clear
that the current level of indicator knowledge and use  differed not only
between but within regions as well. National priorities and goals of
sustainable development were seen as less harmonized. Moreover, the 
possibilities or concrete  action taken to coordinate indicator efforts
at the regional level differ substantially.  It was noted that for Asia
and the Pacific region, ESCAP has taken the lead in guiding the regional
process towards developing indicators of sustainable development, with
some support available for national governments to facilitate the
implementation.  A set of Terms of Reference for national implementation
in the region were developed based on the Guidelines for National
Testing, and seed money had been made available to support national
training workshops and other related activities. For other regions, the
possibilities for, and current regional follow-up was less elaborated. 
  

13.      For the European region, Eurostat undertook a pilot study following
the CSD methodology using statistics from European Union Member States. 
The compilation has been made available in the publication -Indicators
of Sustainable Development■ in July 1997, and presents 46 indicators from
the CSD list, illustrating trends over time, and comments on trends
observed, where relevant.  9 economic, 14 social, 21 environmental and
2 institutional indicators were selected. Future activities of  EUROSTAT
include comparison of experiences with the European testing countries and
feedback of results for the revision of the CSD indicators and
methodology sheets, improvements of data availability and quality of
environmental indicators, cooperation with other international
organisations and a possible follow-up indicator publication.

III.  Follow-up of the National Testing
 
14.      The status of national implementation was the main focus of
discussion at the Fourth international Workshop on indicators of
Sustainable Development, hosted by the Government of the Czech Republic
in January 1998. A full report of the meeting will be submitted to the
sixth session of the CSD by the Czech Government.   Nineteen of 21
testing countries participated and the results and issues discussed, in
addition to interim reporting by countries to the CSD Secretariat,
provides the basis for the conclusions and recommendations highlighted
in the following section. All interim reports received have been made
available at the indicators programme website at:
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/isd.htm.

A.  National organization of testing 

15.      To date, almost all of the 21 testing countries have reported the
name of the Focal Point and Coordinating Mechanism as requested in the
Guidelines for National Testing. It is seen as crucial for the
implementation of the testing programme, that all countries facilitate
the communication and coordination among all actors participating in the
project.   In most cases the national Focal Point has been located in
ministries of environment, planning, or statistical offices.  However,
irrespective of location,  it is vital that the focal point have close
working partnerships with all departments in government, including the
national CSD focal points to ensure consistency and involvement in the
process.   
                  
16.      In many cases, making use of existing structures, such as national
committees or Councils for Sustainable Development was seen as useful in
organizing the National Coordinating Mechanism. On the other hand, in
some countries, the testing of indicators acted as a positive catalyst
in the establishment of new mechanisms for the development of both
national indicators programmes and sustainable development strategies. 
   
17.      The involvement of major groups and stakeholders has  been
recognized as essential to secure a full integration of user needs in the
elaboration of national sustainable development initiatives and indicator
programmes to monitor the implementation of such initiatives. In many
cases, the involvement of NGOs, the private sector and other major groups
referred to in Agenda 21, can provide continuity and long term stability
for national priorities, independent of changes in national governments.
It has been noted that in many developing countries, NGOs, the private
sector and other major groups are already involved in the national
coordinating committees for environment and sustainable development, and
their participation has given impetus to the national process. 

18.      As recommended by the CSD and the Expert Group, twinning
arrangements have been established in  various forms, ranging from
cooperation among -equal partners■ where twinning merely involved sharing
of information and expertise, and partnerships where one country was
providing significant support and advice to enable testing to be carried
out by their counterpart.  A main recommendation that can be drawn from
the experience in this first year of testing, is the need, in developing
countries, for technical support and expertise to carry forward the
indicators development and use.  Countries such as Kenya and Ghana have
explicitly called attention to the need for  twinning arrangements, with
emphasis on the fact that twinning need not be limited entirely to
indicator development, but could cover broader sustainable development
issues.                    

B.  Implementation

19.      In the incubation phase of organizing the national testing, some
countries found it useful  to establish a clear mandate or legal
framework as a basis on which to initiate work on sustainable development
indicators. The complexity of the legal process has been mentioned as a
drawback in some countries, while providing a context for enabling
legislation was found useful in others.  The active involvement of
Ministries of Planning or other Governmental agencies, is essential in
emphasizing the wider government responsibility for indicators of
sustainable development. In this regard, broad public awareness,
understanding and support for the process was seen as important to the
institutional strength and continuity of the national programme. 

C.  National Strategies and Indicator Selection

20.      It is recognized among participating countries, that national
experience with regard to the adoption of national strategies (or other
methods to establish national priorities) for sustainable development is
quite diverse though required for selecting and testing indicators of
sustainable development.  However, the use of indicators can contribute
to improved policy formulation and priority setting nationally. 

D.  Assessment and evaluation of the CSD ISD working list

21.      The indicator list has proven to be a good starting point, as it has
built awareness of indicators and of sustainable development issues. It
has been clear from the initiation of the programme that countries needed
to select those indicators that are relevant to their national priorities
and goals.  While some indicators may be common to most countries, others
may vary in relevance depending on local conditions or levels of
development. A main point in the revision of the current indicators is
exactly to establish commonalities, while allowing for regional or
national disparities. Relatively few countries have experience in
developing linkages or  aggregated measures at this stage, however it is
clear that a political demand exists for arriving at a few key
indicators/indices measurable at the national level,  to limit the
current information flow that national decision makers are presented
with.  This demand is likely to guide the required work on linkages and
aggregation in the present framework and list of indicators.  

22.      Data availability is often a problem, particularly with
environmental data where there is no tradition of national compilation,
and departments holding data may not be willing to share them. 
Statistical offices should be more involved in the assessment of data
sources and collection of data required for the compilation of indicators
of sustainable development.  Indicators can help to define clear data
requirements.  Guidelines for quality assurance of data are needed. 
Countries should select important indicators even if the data are not
immediately available.

E.  Reporting Requirements

23.      The CSD Secretariat developed a format for annual reporting in
consultation with the Expert Group to secure some harmonization in the
structure of information to be received. This is seen as essential to
make sure adequate detailed information exists that will allow for the
final revision of indicators and methodology sheets, by the end of the
testing period. To date, only a few countries have actually used the
reporting format and further experience and comments are expected to be
available as the testing progresses. It is however recommended, to go
through regular review of reporting requirements for the testing process
in order to adapt to national/international needs regarding other
reporting requirements on sustainable development. It is essential in
this process, to secure, through adequate internal organization in the
countries, a regular reporting process to the CSD Secretariat.

IV.   Lessons Learned and Next Steps 

24.      The indicator development process has promoted the establishment of
coordinating mechanisms and cooperation among other agencies and bodies
at the national and international level, which has improved the overall
knowledge and interrelationship between sectors and institutions at
various levels. Indicator development has in some cases been an important
catalyst in the debate on major sustainable development issues and a good
opportunity to involve major groups to increase public acceptability and
understanding of indicators. It has influenced policy identification and
implementation both  inside and outside the government. 

25.      The indicator process has provided a good opportunity to bring
together users and producers of indicators, and therefore deserves
increased attention and support. An indicator development process needs
highly dedicated people with adequate resources, and clear institutional
support, to secure satisfactory implementation.

26.      Next steps of the implementation should focus, inter-alia on: the
provision of appropriate technical assistance, where needed, for
launching and implementation of the indicators development programme in
interested countries; encouragement of twinning arrangements with
appropriate technical assistance and start-up funding;  hosting and
organizing international meetings related to the issue, in order to
promote national acceptance of the process and promote the exchange of
information and experiences both nationally as well as internationally.
It is recommended that international organizations play a more active
role in this capacity building effort.  Greater support could be provided
by the Regional Economic Commissions, UNDP■s Capacity 21 Programme as
well as the regional programmes, and the regional development banks. 
Additional resources could be provided to DSD/DESA to help meet the
capacity building needs of the testing countries.

27.      All experiences show clearly that the development of national
indicators of sustainable development, is indeed a complex iterative
process, which requires commitment, time and funds from all parties
involved. In each experience countries have established a programme or
project to define and construct the indicators, usually consisting of
different phases, which will take several years to complete.  Although
further elaboration exists, the experiences gained to date mainly concern
the first steps of the development process of indicators.  

A.  Phase III of the work programme

28.      Phase III of the work programme is scheduled for implementation from
January 1998 to January 2000 in accordance with the Implementation Plan
adopted by the CSD in 1995.  It focuses on the development of the Driving
Force - State - Response framework (DSR), possible linkages and
aggregation and further refinement of the indicators contained in the
current list. Working partners were invited to the Fourth Expert Group
Meeting on Indicators of Sustainable Development in October 1997, to
review current initiatives relevant to phase III of the work programme,
solicit inputs for a longer term strategy and how these  parallel 
programmes  may  compliment  and fit into the CSD indicator process.  The
meeting proposed an implementation plan for phase III by identifying key 
research  and  indicator  development needs that should be pursued and
discussed how the multiple indicator initiatives may converge into
something useful for the CSD and National Governments.

29.      Building on the pragmatic consensus driven approach pursued since
the beginning of the CSD work on indicators, and drawing on the work
already undertaken by a large number of organizations in the areas of
linkages and aggregation, a proposed implementation plan for phase III
was drafted and discussed at the recent Czech International Workshop. The
proposed implementation plan is included in the current version of the
work programme, as of January 1998.  The implementation plan includes
elements such as continuing close follow-up and information exchange
related to the national implementation of the indicators programme,
revision of the current working list of indicators and methodology
sheets, information exchange and follow-up of parallel national and
international initiatives and processes also underway to define
additional sectoral and cross-sectoral indicators. Work in the context
of the Conventions and i.e. in the areas of forestry, land management,
vulnerability of small island developing states, biodiversity and
changing consumption and production patterns is proceeding and should be
incorporated at a certain stage.  More work is needed, and will be
pursued,  to understand the interlinkages between indicators and to
integrate their economic, social, environmental and institutional
dimensions in more aggregated measures. 

V.   Use of Indicators in National Reporting

30.      Once the testing has been completed, the indicators of sustainable
development, as used in national policies, may also be used in voluntary
national reporting and country profiles to the CSD and other
intergovernmental bodies.  This could complement the qualitative
information now provided by Governments and provide a more succinct basis
for tracking trends and monitoring progress.

31.      The success of this, however, will depend to a large extent on
availability of data and coordination of data collection.  This is
particularly true for those indicators for which information is not
already collected and reported to the relevant organizations of the
United Nations System.  For this reason, the Secretariat, in formulating
guidelines for reporting to the sixth session of the Commission, has
included indicators with the following properties: (1) they are among the
CSD indicators of sustainable development; (2) they are relevant to the
agenda of CSD VI; and (3) data for these indicators are not yet being
reported to the United Nations System. These indicators are now being
used to augment the national information data base and, more importantly,
to encourage countries to improve their data collection capabilities to
assist their policy-makers in national decision-making.


Annex I:  List of International Meetings:

First  Workshop  on  Indicators  of  Sustainable  Development  for 
Decision-Making  (Ghent), 9-11 January 1995, hosted by the Governments
of Belgium and Costa Rica, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP),
and Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE).

First   Expert   Group   Meeting   on  Indicators  of  Sustainable 
Development   (New  York), 14-15 February 1995, hosted by UN DPCSD/DSD
in cooperation with UN DESIPA/UNSD.

Expert  Workshop  on  Methodologies for Indicators of Sustainable
Development (Glen Cove, New York), 6-8 February 1996, hosted by the
Environment Agency of the Government of Japan in cooperation with UN
DPCSD/DSD.

Second Expert Group Meeting on Indicators of Sustainable Development (New
York),  25-26 July 1996, hosted by UN DPCSD/DSD.

Third Expert Group Meeting on Indicators of Sustainable Development
(Geneva), 23 September 1996, hosted by UN System-wide Earthwatch in
cooperation with the UN DPCSD/DSD.

Second International Workshop "Launching the Testing of Sustainable
Development" (Ghent),  20-22 November 1996, hosted by the Governments of
Belgium and Costa Rica.

ESCAP Regional Consultative Meeting on Environmentally Sound and
Sustainable Development Indicators (Bangkok), 26-29 November 1996, hosted
by ESCAP, in cooperation with the Government of the Netherlands and UN
DPCSD/DSD.

Regional Workshop on Indicators of Sustainable Development for Latin
America and the Caribbean (San Jose), 10-12 March 1997, hosted by the
Government of Costa Rica in cooperation with UN DPCSD/DSD.

Regional Workshop on Capacity-Building in Developing and Implementing on
Indicators of Sustainable Development (Accra), 3-6 June 1997, hosted by
UN DPCSD/DSD and UNDP Capacity 21 Programme.

Fourth  Expert  Group  Meeting  on  Indicators  of   Sustainable 
Development  (New  York),  23-24 October 1997 hosted by UN DESA/DSD.

Fourth International Workshop on Indicators of Sustainable Development
(Prague), 19-21 January 1998, hosted by the Government of the Czech
Republic supported by the European Commission.


  Annex II:  Testing of the CSD Indicators of Sustainable Development

                             Focal Points

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Region          Country              Focal Points
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Latin America  Barbados   The Permanent Secretary (Environment)
and the                   Ministry of Health and the Environment
Caribbean                 Sir Frank Walcott Building, 
                          Culloden Road, St. Michael, Barbados
                          Tel.:  (246) 431-7680,  Fax:  (246) 437-8859
                          E-mail:  envdivn@mail.caribsurf.com

                Bolivia   Mr. Jorge Gonzalez Roda, 
                          Director and Coordinator
                          Capacity 21 Project, 
                          Ministry of Sustainable Development 
                          and Planning
                          Av. Arce No. 2147, La Paz, Bolivia
                          Tel.:  (591-2) 372-063/372-378
                          Fax:  (591-2) 361-855
                          E-mail:  CAP21@cap21.rds.org.bo

                Brazil    Dra. Marilia Marreco Cerqueira
                          Diretora do Departamento de Gesta"o Ambiental
                          Ministerio do Meio Ambiente, dos Recursos
                          Hidricos e  Amazo^nia Legal
                          Esplanada dos Ministe'rios, bloco "B", Sala 838
                          Brasilia, Brazil CEP 70068-900 
                          Tel.: (55-61) 317-1215,  Fax: (55-61) 317-1352
                          E-mail:  mmcerqueira@mma.gov.br

                Costa     Dr. Adrian G. Rodriguez, General Coordinator
                Rica      National System for Sustainable Development 
                          Advisor to the Minister of National Planning
                          Oficina de Asesores, P.O. Box 10127-1000, 
                          San  Jose', Costa Rica 
                          Tel.: (50-6) 221-9524/256-3340,
                          Fax:  (50-6) 221-3282
                          E-mail: adrianr@ns.mideplan.go.cr/
                          arodrigu@cariari.ucr.ac.cr

                Mexico    Ms. Luz Maria Gonzale'z, 
                          Deputy Director of Environmental Indicators
                          National Institute of Ecology,Me'xico City,  
                          Me'xico
                          Tel.: (52-5) 624-3454/55,  
                          Fax:  (52-5) 624-3584
                          E-mail:  lmgonzal@chajul.ine.gob.mx

                          Mr. Roberto Lo'pez Pere'z, Deputy Director 
                          of Environmental Statistics
                          National Institute of Statistics, Geography and
                          Informatics
                          He'roe de Nacozari 2301, puerta 11, 
                          primer nivel
                          Aguascalientes,  Me'xico 
                          Tel.:(52-49)181-169, Fax no.:(52-49)182-650
                          E-mail:  rlopze@cnes.inegi.gob.mx

                Venezuela Ms. Maria Legorburu, Director
                          Centro de Informacion y Estadisticas
                          Ambientiales
                          Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Tecursos
                          Naturales Renovables
                          Esquina y Edif. Camejo, Mezzanina Este, 
                          Caracas 1010, Venezuela
                          Tel.: (58-2) 541-4364, Fax: (58-2) 541-3820
                          E-mail:  mlegorb@marnr.gov.ve
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Africa          Ghana     Mr. Edwin P. D. Barnes, Director
                          Policy, Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation
                          Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology
                          P.O. Box M 232, Ministries Post Office, 
                          Accra, Ghana
                          Tel.:  (233-21) 666-049/662-013/780-305
                          Fax:  (233-21) 666-828
                          E-mail:  barnes@africaonline.com.gh

                Kenya     Mr. B. O. K'Omudho, Director
                          National Environment Secretariat
                          Box 67839, Nairobi, Kenya
                          Tel.: (254-2) 229-261
                          Fax: (254-2) 216- 951/214-175

                Morocco   Mr. Ahmed Gouitaa, Chef de la Division 
                          des Programmes Sociaux
                          Minister de'le'gue' aupre`s du Premier Ministre
                          charge' de la Population
                          Rabat, Morocco
                          Tel.: (212-7) 761-490/765-165
                          Fax:  (212-7) 766-462/763-585

                South     Dr. J Rudi Pretorius, Director,
                Africa    Sustainable Development
                          Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
                          Private Bag X447, Pretoria, South Africa
                          Tel.: (27-12) 310-3713
                          Fax:  (27-12) 322-6287
                          E-mail:  omd_jrp@ozone.pwv.gov.za
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asia and        China     Mr. ZHANG Kunmin, Deputy Administrator
the Pacific               National Environmental Protection Agency
                          No. 115, Xizhimennei Nanxiaojie
                          Beijing 100035, The People's Republic of China
                          Tel.:  (86-10) 6615-1933
                          Fax:  (86-10) 6615-1762

                Maldives  Mr. Mohammad Khalil, Deputy Director,
                          Environmental Affairs
                          Ministry of Planning, Human Resources and
                          Environment
                          Government of Maldives, Male, Maldives
                          Tel.: (960) 313-039, Fax:  (960) 327-351

                Pakistan  Mr. Melsboob Elahi, Director General
                          Ministry of Environment Local Government and
                          Rural Development
                          Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, Pakistan
                          Tel.: (92-51) 920-1145, Fax:  (92-51) 920-2211

              Philippines Mr. Raphael Perpetuo M. Lotilla, 
                          Deputy Director-General, NEDA Coordinator,
                          Philippine Council for Sustainable Development
                          NEDA sa Pasig Building, Amber Avenue, Pasig
                          Metro Manila 1600, Philippines
                          Tel.: (63-2) 631-2187, Fax: (63-2) 633-6011
                          E-mail:  rml@nedamis.neda.gov.ph
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Europe          Austria   Ms. Ingeborg Fiala
                          Ministry of the Environment, Youth and Family
                          Affairs/Executive Department/Unit 7,
                          Stubenbastei 5, A-1010 Wien, Austria
                          Tel.:  (43-1) 51522-2545/51522-2549
                          Fax:  (43-1) 51522-7548
                          E-mail:  ingeborg.fiala@bmu.gv.at

                Belgium   Ms. Nadine Gouze'e, Coordinator
                          Task Force "Sustainable Development" - Federal
                          Planning Office
                          47/49 Avenue de Arts, B-1000 Bruxelles, Belgium
                          Tel.: (32-2) 507-7311, Fax: (32-2) 507-7373
                          E-mail:  ng@plan.be

                Czech     Dr. Bedrich Moldan, Director 
                Republic  Charles University Environmental Center
                          Petrska 3, CZ - 110 00 Prague 1, Czech Republic
                          Tel.: (420-2) 231-5334, Fax:  (420-2) 231-5324
                          E-mail:  bedrich.moldan@ruk.cuni.cz

                Finland   Ms. Ulla Rosenstrom, Research Scientist
                          Monitoring and Assessment Division, Finnish  
                          Environment Institute
                          P.O. Box 140, FIN-00251 Helsinki, Finland
                          Tel.: (358-9)40-300-329, Fax: (358-9)40-300-391
                          E-mail:  ulla.rosenstrom@vyh.fi

                Germany   Ms. Christa Ratte, Deputy Head of Division
                          Division G I 4 (Economic Aspects of
                          Environmental Policy)
                          Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature
                          Conservation and Nuclear Safety, 
                          Bernkasteler Str. 8
                          53175 Bonn, Germany
                          Tel.: (49-228)305-2453, Fax: (49-228) 305-3524
                          E-mail:  g14-2002@wp-gate.bmu.de.

                France    Mr. Thierry Lavoux 
                          Institut Franc'ais de l'Environnement (IFEN)
                          61, Boulevard Alexandre Martin, 45058 - Orleans
                          Cedex 1, France
                          Tel.: (33-2)3879-7885, Fax:  (33-2) 3879-7870
                          E-mail:  Thierry.Lavoux@ifen.fr

                United    Mr. John Custance, Statistician
                Kingdom   Environmental Protection Statistics and
                          Information Management Division, Department of
                          the Environment, Transport and the Regions
                          Romney House, Room A 121, 43 Marsham Street
                          London SW1P 3PY, United Kingdom
                          Tel.: (44-171)276-8421, Fax: (44-171) 276-8748
                          E-mail:  john.custance@nfp-gb.eionet.eu.int
------------------------------------------------------------------------


This document has been posted online by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). Reproduction and dissemination of the document - in electronic and/or printed format - is encouraged, provided acknowledgement is made of the role of the United Nations in making it available.

Date last posted: 8 December 1999 15:15:30
Comments and suggestions: DESA/DSD