Economic and Social Council

 Distr. GENERAL
July 2000
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH

Economic and Social Council
Official Records, 2000
Supplement No. 9

Commision on Sustainable Development
Report on the eighth session
(30 April 1999 and 24 April-5 May 2000)

United Nations, New York, 2000

Contents

Matters calling for action by the Economic and Social Council or brought to its attention

 

A. Draft decision recommended by the Commission for adoption by the Council

 

1. The Commission on Sustainable Development recommends to the Economic and Social Council the adoption of the following draft decision:

 

Report of the Commission on Sustainable Development on its eighth session and provisional agenda for the ninth session of
the Commission

 

The Economic and Social Council takes note of the report of the Commission on Sustainable Development on its eighth session and approves the provisional agenda for the ninth session of the Commission set out below:

 

Provisional agenda for the ninth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development

 

1. Election of officers.
2. Adoption of the agenda and other organizational matters.
3. Energy.
4. Atmosphere.
5. Transport.
6. Information for decision-making and participation.
7. International cooperation for an enabling environment.
8. High-level meeting.
9. Other matters.
10. Adoption of the report of the Commission on its ninth session.

B. Matters brought to the attention of the Council

 

2. The attention of the Council is drawn to the following decisions adopted by the Commission:

 

Decision 8/1
Preparations for the 10-year review of progress achieved in the implementation of the outcome of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development

The Commission on Sustainable Development decides to bring to the attention of the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly the following recommendations:

(a) The Commission on Sustainable Development underscores the political importance of the forthcoming 10-year review of progress achieved since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. The Commission stresses that the review should focus on the implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21, adopted by the nineteenth special session of the General Assembly in 1997 and other outcomes of the Conference. Agenda 21 should constitute the framework within which the other outcomes of the Conference are reviewed. Agenda 21 should also be the framework from within which new challenges and opportunities that have emerged since the Conference are addressed;

(b) The Commission stresses that Agenda 21 should not be renegotiated and that the review should identify measures for the further implementation of Agenda 21 and the other outcomes of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, including sources of funding;

(c) The Commission recommends that the review should focus on areas where further efforts are needed to implement Agenda 21 and other outcomes of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development and should result in action-oriented decisions and renewed political commitment and support for sustainable development;

(d) The Commission stresses the importance of early and effective preparations for the 2002 review and assessment of progress achieved in the implementation of Agenda 21 and the other outcomes of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, to be carried out at the local, national, regional and international levels by Governments and the United Nations system, so as to ensure high-quality inputs to the review process. The Commission encourages effective contributions from, and involvement of, all major groups;

(e) While specific decisions on the preparatory process will be determined by the General Assembly at its fifty-fifth session, the Commission invites early preparations at the local, national and regional levels which should commence immediately after the conclusion of the eighth session of the Commission. In this context, the Commission invites all Governments to undertake national review processes as early as possible. The national reports that have been prepared by Governments since 1992 on national implementation of Agenda 21, and to which major groups have contributed, could provide a fair basis for guiding the national preparatory processes;

(f) The Commission invites the United Nations Secretariat, working in close cooperation with the United Nations Environment Programme, the regional commissions, and the secretariats of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development-related conventions as well as other relevant organizations, agencies and programmes within and outside the United Nations system, including international and regional financial institutions, to support preparatory activities, in particular at the national and regional levels, in a coordinated and mutually reinforcing way. The Commission, while allowing for the originality of regional contributions, has agreed that a certain uniformity is needed in regional preparatory processes. The Commission also underscores the importance of using the high-level intergovernmental processes that exist at the regional level;

(g) The Commission invites the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme, in line with the Nairobi Declaration on the Role and Mandate of the United Nations Environment Programme, to promote the coherent implementation of the environmental dimension of sustainable development in the United Nations system and to provide its views to the Commission at its tenth session as an important input to the preparatory process on the environmental aspects of the implementation of Agenda 21 and the other outcomes of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development;

(h) The Commission requests the Secretary-General, in preparing his report on the 2002 review to be submitted to the fifty-fifth session of the General Assembly in accordance with Assembly resolution 54/218 of 22 December 1999, to take fully into account the views expressed during the Commission’s high-level segment on preparations for the 10-year review of progress achieved since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development and the recommendations of the eighth session of the Commission, and to include in his report further information on specific activities and actions undertaken and planned in the United Nations system in support of the preparatory process;

(i) The Commission recommends that the General Assembly at its fifty-fifth session give consideration to organizing the 2002 event at summit level and to holding it outside United Nations Headquarters, preferably in a developing country;

(j) The Commission also recommends that the General Assembly decide that the meetings of the tenth session of the Commission are to be transformed into an open-ended preparatory committee that would provide for the full and effective participation of all Governments. The Commission acting as the preparatory committee should undertake the comprehensive review and assessment of the implementation of Agenda 21 and the other outcomes of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. It should identify major constraints hindering the implementation of Agenda 21 and propose specific time-bound measures to be undertaken, and institutional and financial requirements, and identify the sources of such support. The Commission invites all relevant United Nations organizations and the secretariats of Conference-related conventions to review and assess their respective programmes of work since the Conference and to report to the Commission at its tenth session on progress made in the implementation of sustainable development-related objectives. The comprehensive review and assessment of the implementation of Agenda 21 and the other outcomes of the Conference should also address ways of strengthening the institutional framework for sustainable development and define the future programme of work of the Commission;

(k) The Commission recommends that the General Assembly, in light of paragraph (j) above, invite the Economic and Social Council to decide that the first meeting of the tenth session of the Commission, to be held immediately after the closure of the ninth session of the Commission, in accordance with Council resolution 1997/63 of 25 July 1997, should be expanded, so that the Commission could thereby start its work as the preparatory committee for the 2002 event;

(l) The Commission stresses that the preparatory meetings and the 2002 event itself should be transparent and provide for effective participation and input from Governments, and regional and international organizations, including financial institutions, and for contributions from and active participation of major groups, consistent with the rules and regulations established by the United Nations for the participation of major groups in intergovernmental processes;

(m) The Commission recommends that necessary steps be taken to establish a trust fund and urges international and bilateral donors to support preparations for the 10-year review through voluntary contributions to the trust fund and to support participation of representatives from developing countries in the regional and international preparatory process and the 2002 event itself. The Commission encourages voluntary contributions to support the participation of major groups from developing countries in regional and international preparatory processes and the 2002 event itself;

(n) The Commission invites the Economic and Social Council to consider, at its substantive session of 2000, the reports requested by the General Assembly in its resolution 54/218 and submit its views to the Assembly at its fifty-fifth session;

(o) The Commission invites the General Assembly at its fifty-fifth session to decide on the agenda, possible main themes, timing and venue of the 2002 event, the number of intergovernmental preparatory meetings and other organizational and procedural matters related to the 2002 review including the clarification of the term "United Nations Conference on Environment and Development-related conventions" as referred to above, taking into account the views of the Commission, the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme and the Economic and Social Council.

Decision 8/2
Report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests on its fourth session

The Commission on Sustainable Development:

(a) Welcomes the report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests on its fourth session and endorses the conclusions and proposals for action contained therein;

(b) Invites the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly, as appropriate, to take action on the proposed terms of reference for an international arrangement on forests, as recommended by the Forum and contained in the appendix to chapter III of the report of the Forum on its fourth session, and as reproduced in the annex to the present decision;

(c) Invites the President of the Economic and Social Council to initiate, before the substantive session of 2000 of the Council, informal consultations on options for placing the United Nations Forum on Forests within the intergovernmental machinery of the United Nations system.

Annex

International arrangement on forests

 

I. Objective

1. The main objective of this international arrangement on forests is to promote the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests and to strengthen long-term political commitment to this end. The purpose of such an international arrangement would be to promote the implementation of internationally agreed actions on forests, at the national, regional and global levels, to provide a coherent, transparent and participatory global framework for policy implementation, coordination and development, and to carry out principal functions, based on the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Non-legally Binding Authoritative Statement of Principles for a Global Consensus on the Management, Conservation and Sustainable Development of All Types of Forests (Forest Principles), chapter 11 of Agenda 21 and the outcomes of the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF)/Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF) process, in a manner consistent with and complementary to existing international legally binding instruments relevant to forests.

II. Principal functions

2. To achieve the objective, this international arrangement on forests will perform the following functions:

(a) Facilitate and promote the implementation of the IPF/IFF proposals for action as well as other actions that may be agreed upon, inter alia, through national forest programmes and other integrated programmes relevant to forests; catalyse, mobilize and generate financial resources; and mobilize and channel technical and scientific resources to this end, including by taking steps towards the broadening and development of mechanisms and/or further initiatives to enhance international cooperation;

(b) Provide a forum for continued policy development and dialogue among Governments, which would involve international organizations and other interested parties, including major groups, as identified in Agenda 21, to foster a common understanding on sustainable forest management and to address forest issues and emerging areas of priority concern in a holistic, comprehensive and integrated manner;

(c) Enhance cooperation as well as policy and programme coordination on forest-related issues among relevant international and regional organizations, institutions and instruments, as well as contribute to synergies among them, including coordination among donors;

(d) Foster international cooperation, including North-South and public-private partnerships, as well as cross-sectoral cooperation at the national, regional and global levels;

(e) Monitor and assess progress at the national, regional and global levels through reporting by Governments, as well as by regional and international organizations, institutions and instruments, and on this basis consider future actions needed;

(f) Strengthen political commitment to the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests through: ministerial engagement; developing ways to liaise with the governing bodies of international and regional organizations, institutions and instruments; and the promotion of action-oriented dialogue and policy formulation related to forests.

III. Structure

3. To achieve the objective and to carry out the functions outlined above, the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly would:

(a) Establish an intergovernmental body which may be called the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF);

(b) Invite the executive heads of relevant organizations of the United Nations system and heads of other relevant international and regional organizations, institutions and instruments to form a collaborative partnership on forests to support the work of UNFF and to enhance cooperation and coordination among participants;

(c) Within five years, on the basis of the assessment referred to in paragraph 2 (e) above, consider with a view to recommending the parameters of a mandate for developing a legal framework on all types of forests. This process could develop the financial provisions to implement any future agreed legal framework. The process could also consider recommendations made by expert groups (see para. 8 below) on the establishment of mechanisms on finance, technology transfer and trade;

(d) Take steps to devise approaches towards appropriate financial and technology transfer support to enable the implementation of sustainable forest management, as recommended under the IPF and IFF processes.

IV. Working modalities of UNFF

4. UNFF should be open to all States and operate in a transparent and participatory manner. Relevant international and regional organizations, including regional economic integration organizations, institutions and instruments, as well as major groups, as identified in Agenda 21, should also be involved.

5. UNFF would initially meet annually, for a period of up to two weeks, subject to the review referred to below. UNFF would have a high-level ministerial segment for two to three days, as required. The high-level segment could include a one-day policy dialogue with the heads of organizations participating in the collaborative partnership, as well as other forest-related international and regional organizations, institutions and instruments. UNFF should ensure the opportunity to receive and consider inputs from representatives of major groups as identified in Agenda 21, in particular through the organization of multi-stakeholder dialogues.

6. UNFF would work on the basis of a multi-year programme of work, drawing on the elements reflected in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the Forest Principles, chapter 11 of Agenda 21 and the IPF/IFF proposals for action.

7. At its first meeting UNFF will adopt its multi-year programme of work and develop a plan of action for the implementation of IPF/IFF proposals for action, which will address financial provisions.

8. UNFF may recommend, as appropriate, the convening of ad hoc expert groups of limited duration, involving experts from developed and developing countries, for scientific and technical advice, as well as to consider mechanisms and strategies for the finance and transfer of environmentally sound technologies; and encourage country-sponsored initiatives, such as international expert meetings.

V. Institutional coordination and cooperation for implementation

9. The collaborative partnership referred to in paragraph 3 (b) above could build on a high-level informal group, such as the Inter-Agency Task Force on Forests, which would receive guidance from UNFF; facilitate and promote coordinated and cooperative action, including joint programming and submissions of coordinated proposals to the respective governing bodies; and facilitate donor coordination. Such a partnership would submit coordinated inputs and progress reports to UNFF, operate in an open, transparent and flexible manner, and undertake periodic reviews of its effectiveness.

VI. Secretariat

10. A compact secretariat, comprised of highly qualified staff, constituted in accordance with established rules and procedures of the United Nations and strengthened through staff from secretariats of international and regional organizations, institutions and instruments, should be established to support the work described above.

VII. Financial support

11. The funding for the functioning of the arrangement should be mobilized from the regular budget of the United Nations, within existing resources, resources of organizations participating in the partnership and extrabudgetary resources provided by interested donors. Specific modalities would be determined by relevant bodies of the United Nations and the governing bodies of the other organizations concerned.

VIII. Review

12. The international arrangement on forests should be dynamic and adapt to evolving conditions. Accordingly, the effectiveness of this arrangement would be reviewed in five years.

 

Decision 8/3
Integrated planning and management of land resources

1. Introduction

1. The main objectives of activities in the area of integrated planning and management of land resources must be pursued in full accordance with Agenda 21 and the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21. It is important that countries address sustainable development through a holistic approach, such as ecosystem-based management. This approach would address interactions among land resources, water, air, biota and human activities, in order to meet the priority challenges of desertification and drought, sustainable mountain development, prevention and mitigation of land degradation, coastal zones, deforestation, climate change, rural and urban land use, urban growth and conservation of biological diversity. Integrated watershed management provides one of the commonly understood frameworks for achieving a holistic approach to sustainable development. The application of the ecosystem-based approach should take into consideration the livelihood opportunities of people living in poverty in rural areas, and a balance should be found through the use of policy instruments between environmental conservation and rural livelihood.

2. The importance of integrated planning and management of land resources derives from the unprecedented population pressures and demands of society on land, water and other natural resources, as well as the increasing degradation of resources and threats to the stability and resilience of ecosystems and the environment as a whole, in part as a result of climate change. These trends highlight the need for each country to ensure for its citizens within the limit of its national legislation, equal access and rights to land, water and other natural and biological resources, and to resolve competition among various domestic sectors for land resources.

 

3. The challenge is to develop and promote sustainable and productive land-use management systems as part of national and local strategies for sustainable development and to protect critical natural resources and ecosystems through balancing land, water and other natural resources. Governments are encouraged to provide transparent, effective, participatory and accountable governance conducive to sustainable development and responsive to the needs of people. Social and health aspects of land-use systems deserve particular attention and should be integrated into the overall planning process.

2. Priorities for future work

4. The review of implementation of Agenda 21 in 2002 will benefit from the outcome of the eighth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development. Priority areas for future work should be defined by CSD and should include the following:

• Prevention and/or mitigation of land degradation;

• Access to land and security of tenure;

• Critical sectors and issues: biodiversity, forests, drylands, rehabilitation of mining areas, mountain areas, wetlands and coastal zones, coral reefs, natural disasters, and rural-urban and land management interactions;

• Access to information and stakeholder participation;

• International cooperation, including that for capacity-building, information-sharing and technology transfer;

• Minerals, metals and rehabilitation in the context of sustainable development.

3. Prevention and/or mitigation of land degradation

5. Governments and the international community are urged to make concerted efforts to eradicate poverty and to review unsustainable patterns of production and consumption as a crucial means for reducing land degradation, desertification, deforestation and destruction of biological diversity. Appropriate policies for planning and development are essential for ensuring the sustainable livelihoods of people living in poverty, inter alia, among rural communities.

6. Governments and the international community are encouraged to promote soil, water and vegetation conservation, protection, restoration and enhancement measures as a prerequisite of sustainable land management, agricultural production, food security and the protection of biological diversity, as well as of the prevention and mitigation of land degradation and natural disasters. In this regard, Governments, the international community, international organizations and other stakeholders are encouraged to develop partnerships to share information on and promote access to appropriate technologies and traditional knowledge.

7. The Commission recognized the important role that the international community, particularly States involved in the deployment of mines, can play in assisting mine clearance in mine-affected countries through the provision of necessary maps and information and appropriate technical and material assistance to remove or otherwise render ineffective existing minefields, mines and booby traps. Governments, the international community and other relevant actors are encouraged to formulate and implement strategies that specifically deal with the rehabilitation of land degraded by landmines, which cause human and environmental hazards and obstruct development plans, in accordance with international norms, standards and agreements.

8. Governments are encouraged to strengthen national, regional and local institutional frameworks for cross-sectoral cooperation in the formulation and implementation of land policies, taking into account specific national conditions and legislation.

4. Access to land and security of tenure

9. Recognizing the existence of different national laws and/or systems of land access and tenure, Governments, at appropriate levels, including the local authorities, are encouraged to develop and/or adopt policies and implement laws that guarantee to their citizens well-defined and enforceable land rights and promote equal access to land and legal security of tenure, in particular for women and disadvantaged groups, including people living in poverty and indigenous and local communities.

10. Governments are encouraged to develop adequate land administration systems supporting sustainable land tenure on the basis of land cadastres, land management, land valuation, land planning and monitoring and supervision of land use, where appropriate.

11. Governments are encouraged to include traditional landowners, land users and the landless, when undertaking land tenure reform, including the development of land cadastres, so as to focus on making traditional landowners and the landless active participants in the planning and development of land resources.

12. The international community and United Nations agencies and organizations are encouraged to provide technical and financial support to Governments’ efforts to minimize socio-economic obstacles related to access to land and security of tenure.

5. Critical sectors and issues

 

(a) Biodiversity

13. Governments are urged to sign and ratify the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity and to support its effective implementation.

14. Governments and United Nations organizations are encouraged to promote only those applications of biotechnology that do not pose unacceptable risks to public health or the environment, bearing in mind ethical considerations, as appropriate.

15. Appropriate authorities are encouraged to ensure that land management plans and policies reflect priority consideration of: (a) areas containing high concentrations of biological diversity; (b) threatened ecosystems; and (c) species at risk.

(b) Forests

16. Governments and the international community are urged to effectively implement proposals for action emanating from the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF)/Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF) to promote the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests.

(c) Drylands

17. Governments and the international community are urged to undertake appropriate measures to address recurring droughts, desertification, the degradation of fragile land resources, and the depletion of scarce water resources in drylands. Priority is to be given to areas where there are high-population pressures and droughts.

(d) Mountain areas

18. Governments are urged to adequately plan and manage land resources in mountainous areas and associated lowlands, whose ecological processes are highly interdependent, and which are crucial for the integrated management of watersheds. In this regard, Governments and other mountain key players are also urged to recognize that small-scale livelihood systems are best suited to the niche economies that characterize fragile and complex mountain environments.

19. In cases where general use of mountain resources occurs, Governments are further urged to ensure that a significant proportion of derived benefits is reinvested locally for continued conservation and sound management of these critical land areas by local communities.

(e) Wetlands and coastal zones

20. Governments at all levels are encouraged to take into account the importance of conserving wetlands and critical coastal zones, including protected areas and other fragile ecosystems, in the formulation of national and subnational sustainable development strategies. Governments and the international community are encouraged to implement the recommendations of the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities.

(f) Natural disasters

21. Governments and the international community are encouraged to formulate and implement strategies, in particular preventive ones, both short-term and long-term, for disaster management — including the development of appropriate early warning systems and intervention plans — to address phenomena associated with natural disasters, which result, inter alia, in land degradation and other negative social and economic impacts. In this regard, Governments and relevant regional and international organizations are urged to provide financial and technical assistance for relief and remedial support to developing countries and those with economies in transition.

(g) Rural-urban and land management interactions

22. Governments at national and local levels are urged to take strategic land management approaches aimed at creating enabling conditions, inter alia, for rural-urban interactions in which the development of human settlements can benefit disadvantaged groups, especially people living in poverty in rural and urban areas. Governments at national and local levels should also take strategic urban planning approaches aimed at managing urban growth and limiting urban sprawl.

23. Governments at national and local levels are encouraged to take into account land-use interdependence between rural and urban areas, and undertake implementation of integrated approaches to their administration, which is essential to sustainable rural and urban development and a more sustainable livelihood for people living in poverty. Governments at national and local levels and the international community are encouraged to adopt strategic urban planning approaches and to integrate them into urban land management planning with strategies for sustainable development, with particular reference to transportation, housing, infrastructure and urban agriculture. In this context, Governments are also urged to promote sustainable development at the peripheries of existing urban areas including informal settlements and urban sprawl.

24. Governments are urged to take into account the strategic role and responsibilities of local authorities and stakeholders in sustainable land use and are encouraged to empower local governments and local communities in the formulation and implementation, through, inter alia, financial and technical support, of sustainable land-use practices that promote interaction between rural and urban areas.

(h) Minerals, metals and rehabilitation in the context of sustainable development

25. Governments, the international community and other relevant actors are urged to examine the social, economic, and environmental impacts of minerals extraction and metals production and are encouraged to formulate and implement strategies that provide for the rehabilitation of land degraded by mining.

6. Stakeholder participation

26. Governments are urged to develop and strengthen capacity and institutional frameworks for effective participation of all stakeholders, including women, land workers, people living in poverty, indigenous and local communities and young people, in rural and urban land-use planning and management, and their access to information thereon.

27. Governments are invited to pursue or strengthen, as appropriate, the participation of all stakeholders in land-use planning and management.

7. International cooperation, including that for capacity-building, information-sharing and technology transfer

28. Governments and the international community are urged to fulfil the financial commitments as set out in chapter 33 of Agenda 21 to effectively support the implementation of integrated planning and management of land resources in developing countries, taking into account priorities identified by those countries.

29. The United Nations system is urged to support Governments in further promoting the implementation of the Habitat Agenda, adopted by the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) (Istanbul, June 1996) and in linking it to the implementation of Agenda 21, including local Agenda 21 programmes. Support for the five-year review of Habitat II is encouraged.

30. Governments, in particular those of developed countries, and international organizations are further urged, inter alia, through appropriate arrangements, to provide technological assistance to developing countries and countries with economies in transition in implementing the integrated planning and management of land resources, as recommended in Agenda 21.

31. Governments and relevant international institutions are encouraged to develop and to use at all levels appropriate land-use indicators, best practices and related monitoring systems.

32. Governments are invited to consider cooperating, as appropriate, in the area of integrated planning and management of land resources, through information- and experience-sharing.

33. Governments, in particular those of developed countries, are urged, through appropriate arrangements, to further strengthen the use and transfer of appropriate technologies that are best adapted and suited to local conditions in developing countries, including decision support systems, such as geographical information systems (GIS) and global positioning systems (GPS), for integrated planning and management of land and other natural resources. In addition, Governments are urged to strengthen the capabilities of developing countries for the application of these technologies.

34. Governments are urged to promote land-related research, and extension and dissemination of technological information and innovative practices, and to undertake training programmes for land users, including farmers and agro-food industries, women and local communities, where appropriate, and other relevant stakeholders. In this regard, developed countries and the international community are urged to improve access to up-to-date information and technology by developing countries.

35. Governments are encouraged to sign, ratify and support the effective implementation of relevant international agreements, including the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa, as vital instruments for achieving integrated planning and management of land resources, and calls for additional support for their implementation.

36. States that have not yet done so are encouraged to sign and ratify the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa, the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and to take account of the complementarities among the relevant international instruments in order to improve land-use and land management, to promote sustainable forest and land-use practices and to generate the multiple benefits that may accrue from the implementation of these instruments, in particular with respect to combating desertification, loss of biodiversity and degradation of freshwater resources and carbon sequestration.

37. Governments are urged to ratify the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

38. The United Nations and other international development organizations are urged to assist developing countries in their efforts to achieve integrated planning and management of land resources, through financial support, transfer of environmentally sound technologies on mutually agreed terms, capacity-building and education and training.

39. Governments are encouraged — taking into account work being done by, inter alia, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat), the regional commissions, other United Nations bodies and the Commission on Sustainable Development, as well as national and regional organizations, as appropriate — to further consider the development and use of appropriate land-use indicators and monitoring systems for the purpose of assessing progress in the implementation of programmes for sustainable development, with special attention to the gender perspective.

 

Decision 8/4
Agriculture

1. Introduction

1. Agriculture as an economic sector is being considered by the Commission on Sustainable Development at its eighth session from the broad perspective of sustainable development, highlighting the linkages between economic, social and environmental objectives. As contained in Agenda 21, particularly chapter 14, and the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21, adopted by the General Assembly at its nineteenth special session, agriculture has to meet the fundamental challenge of satisfying the demands of a growing population for food and other agricultural commodities, especially in developing countries. The particular focus of the discussion has been promoting sustainable agriculture and rural development (SARD), in accordance with the principles of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and the internationally agreed objectives contained in chapter 14 of Agenda 21 as well as, inter alia, the Rome Declaration on World Food Security and the World Food Summit Plan of Action adopted by the World Food Summit (Rome, November 1996). The basis for achieving SARD in all countries is contained in these and other commitments; what is needed is their full implementation at all levels.

2. Agriculture has a special and important place in society because it ensures the production of food and fibre, is essential to food security and to social and economic development, employment, maintenance of the countryside, and conservation of land and natural resources, and helps sustain rural life and land. The major objectives of SARD is to increase food production and enhance food security in an environmentally sound way so as to contribute to sustainable natural resource management. Food security — although a policy priority for all countries — remains an unfulfilled goal. About 790 million people living in developing countries and 34 million in industrialized countries and in countries with economies in transition are undernourished. While some improvement in the situation has recently been noted, the international community must be concerned that the average annual decrease of undernourished people is insufficient to achieve the target set at the 1996 World Food Summit to reduce by half the number of undernourished by 2015 (Plan of Action, para. 7).

3. Progress in poverty eradication is critical to improving access to food and promoting food security. About 1.5 billion people in the world live in poverty and recent trends indicate this number could rise to 1.9 billion by 2015. In addition, the gap between rich and poor is widening, and the poor in general — especially women, disadvantaged groups, rural people living in poverty and indigenous communities — are being increasingly marginalized. The inextricable link between hunger and poverty means that the goals of achieving food security in the context of SARD and pursuing the eradication of poverty, among both urban and rural people living in poverty, as agreed, inter alia, at the World Summit for Social Development (Copenhagen, 1995), have to be addressed in an integrated manner. It remains essential to continue efforts for the eradication of poverty, through, inter alia, capacity-building to reinforce local food systems and improving food security. The concept of SARD offers such an approach.

2. Priorities for action

(a) Implementation of sustainable agriculture and rural development (SARD) goals

4. Governments are encouraged to complete the formulation and elaboration of national strategies for sustainable development by 2002, as agreed in the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21. Local Agenda 21 and other local sustainable development programmes should also be actively encouraged. In this regard, Governments are encouraged to integrate agricultural production, food security and food safety, that upholds food security, environmental protection and rural development as central elements in those strategies.

5. All Governments are urged to reaffirm their individual and collective commitments to achieving food security, particularly through sustainable development of domestic food production, combined with the importation, where appropriate, and storage of food, and to reaching the important goal of reducing the number of undernourished people by one half by 2015, as agreed at the World Food Summit. In this regard, Governments and international organizations are encouraged to make available and provide technical and financial assistance to effectively support the achievement of food security in developing countries.

6. Governments are urged to develop coherent national policy and legal frameworks for sustainable rural development, with the emphasis on, inter alia, socio-economic diversification, employment, capacity-building, participation, poverty eradication, empowerment and partnerships. Governments should take a cross-sectoral approach to integrating agriculture in rural development frameworks and strategies so as to maximize synergies and improve coherence. In particular, Governments are encouraged to assess the effects of agriculture on ecosystems.

7. Governments are urged to promote agricultural practices based on natural resource management, inter alia, through integrated farm input management, agro-ecological, organic, urban and peri-urban agriculture and agroforestry, with a view to providing sustainable management of all types of production systems and other benefits, such as soil, water and land conservation and agro-biodiversity enhancement and recognizing the need for technical and financial assistance to developing countries to this end. Environmentally sound traditional and local knowledge should be recognized, protected and promoted.

8. Governments are encouraged to continue studying the economic, social and environmental aspects of SARD, the major objective of which is to increase food production in a sustainable way and enhance food security, based on chapter 14 of Agenda 21, avoiding unjustifiable trade barriers and taking into account the discussions in the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and other international organizations.

9. Governments are encouraged to pursue an ecosystem approach to SARD, taking into account, inter alia, the actions necessary to mitigate the negative impacts and to enhance the positive impacts of agriculture and animal production on natural ecosystems, in particular on those with high biodiversity. In this regard, it is important that Governments and international agencies continue developing studies on the impact of agriculture on forests with the objectives of identifying appropriate activities and recommendations. The international community is urged to support, inter alia, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa, and its Global Mechanism which should also contribute to conserving and rehabilitating the natural resources in lower-potential land and to controlling land degradation, especially in developing countries.

10. Governments are urged to pay particular attention to the social dimension of SARD, including health protection. Governments should take fully into account the interests of small-scale farmers and agricultural workers, including the effects of agricultural practices on human health and safety in terms of both consumption and production.

11. Taking into account countries’ common but differentiated responsibilities and their specific national and regional development priorities, objectives and circumstances, the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, within its operational requirements, is encouraged to promote the use of its relevant mechanisms to support initiatives in line with national programmes promoting SARD that result, inter alia, in reduced greenhouse emissions or carbon sequestration, as well as increased investments in energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources.

12. The Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa, and the governing body of the Global Environment Facility (GEF), within their established work programmes and operational programmes, are encouraged to promote the use of their relevant mechanisms to support SARD-related initiatives, in line with national programmes, that result, inter alia, in the conservation and sustainable use of agro-biodiversity.

13. The Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity and Governments are encouraged to support the strengthening and effective implementation of the work programme of the Convention on agricultural biological diversity and to support FAO and other relevant institutions in their roles in the implementation of this work programme.

(b) Access to other resources

14. Governments are encouraged to adopt and implement measures that guarantee access to technology and research, in particular for women, disadvantaged groups, people living in poverty, and indigenous and local communities, in order to ensure a sustainable use of land and water resources. Access to credit, particularly through rural microcredit schemes, is also important.

(c) Poverty eradication

15. All Governments and the international community are urged to implement the relevant commitments they have entered into for the eradication of poverty, including those contained in the Copenhagen Declaration on Social Development and Programme of Action of the World Summit for Social Development adopted by the World Summit for Social Development, and to further promote income-generation through agriculture to achieve this goal in accordance with SARD. Special emphasis should be given to those zones with high levels of poverty and high biodiversity.

(d) Financing for SARD

16. The financing for the implementation of Agenda 21 is expected to be met, in general, from domestic resources. All Governments are urged to provide an enabling environment for mobilizing domestic and international resources.

17. Additional international financial support will be very important for developing countries. The international community is urged to fulfil the commitments undertaken for the provision of financial assistance for promoting SARD as set out in Agenda 21. Developing countries and their partners should make particular efforts to ensure that a substantial share of official development assistance (ODA) is directed to the agricultural and rural development sectors in developing countries, especially in the least developed countries and net food importing countries, in accordance with national development strategies in recipient countries, given that ODA provided to these sectors has been steadily declining during the past two decades.

18. The international community, including the United Nations system and the international financial institutions, is urged to provide support to institutional reform and development of market infrastructure and access for achieving SARD in developing countries, in particular the least developed countries, and countries with economies in transition.

19. Governments and the international community, including the United Nations system, are urged to assist developing countries, in particular the least developed countries, in developing strategies and implementing measures to attract and to promote private capital flows and investment in SARD directed to a wider range of developing countries, in particular the least developed countries, and countries with economies in transition, and to support the private sector’s decision to direct a larger share of this capital to agriculture and rural development.

(e) Technology transfer and capacity-building

20. Governments, relevant international organizations and the private sector are urged both to continue and to increase their contribution to capacity-building and the transfer of appropriate technology, in particular environmentally sound technology, to developing countries and countries with economies in transition, as well as to promote partnerships for fostering sustainable agriculture and food security and promoting rural development.

21. International financial institutions are encouraged to further promote the transfer of technology and capacity-building, with emphasis on the allocation of funds to enable developing countries to achieve food security through enhanced agricultural production, including food storage systems and agro-food industries.

22. Relevant international, regional and national bodies and the private sector are encouraged to support developing countries in their efforts to increase research and to achieve national integrated natural resource management, appropriate technology and sustainable agricultural methods to achieve the objectives of food security and SARD, including participatory approaches, and to disseminate information on the results of their research and its applicability. Research should be carried out in a cooperative way involving both developed and developing countries.

23. Governments and the international community are encouraged to promote and share natural disaster early warning systems and enhance national capacities to prevent and mitigate the effects of natural disasters.

(f) Biotechnology

24. Governments are encouraged to explore, using transparent science-based risk assessment procedures, as well as risk management procedures, applying the precautionary approach, as articulated in principle 15 of the Rio Declaration and recalled in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity, the potential of appropriate and safe biotechnology for enhancing food security for all and sustainable agricultural techniques and practices, taking into account possible effects on the environment and human health.

25. Governments are urged to sign and ratify the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity and to support its effective implementation.

26. Governments are encouraged to develop the appropriate legal frameworks, and administrative and other measures and put into action appropriate strategies for SARD, the protection of biodiversity, and the risk analysis and management of living modified organisms.

27. Governments and United Nations organizations are encouraged to promote only those applications of biotechnology that do not pose unacceptable risks to public health or the environment, bearing in mind ethical considerations as appropriate.

(g) Genetic resources

28. Governments are urged to strengthen their efforts for the sustainable use, conservation and protection of genetic resources. In this regard, Governments are urged to finalize the negotiations on the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, as soon as possible, and to implement the Global Plan of Action for the Conservation and Sustainable Utilization of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture adopted by the Leipzig Technical International Conference on Plant Genetic Resources, and to implement and actively contribute to the further development of the Global Strategy for the Management of Farm Animal Genetic Resources. Governments are further encouraged to strengthen their efforts in effectively implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity, with the support of their development partners.

(h) Integrated pest management and integrated plant nutrition

29. Governments are urged to promote only the safe and sustainable use of plant protection products and plant nutrition in agricultural production and to strengthen practical ways to enhance the application of integrated pest management and integrated plant nutrition. All stakeholders, including farmers, the private sector and international organizations, are encouraged to form effective partnerships with Governments, including those that provide capacity-building assistance for this purpose.

30. Sanitary and phytosanitary measures are relevant to SARD. Their implementation must be in accordance with World Trade Organization agreements.

(i) Desertification and drought

31. Combating desertification and mitigating the effects of drought are crucial elements of SARD. Governments and relevant international organizations should promote the integration of national action programmes to combat desertification, developed under the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa, into national strategies for sustainable development.

(j) Access to land and security of land tenure

32. Recognizing the existence of different national laws and/or systems of land access and tenure, Governments, at appropriate levels, including the local authorities, are encouraged to develop and/or adopt policies and implement laws that guarantee to their citizens well-defined and enforceable land rights and promote equal access to land and legal security of tenure, in particular for women and disadvantaged groups, including people living in poverty and indigenous and local communities.

(k) Emergency preparedness

33. International agencies and other relevant organizations should assist Governments and regional entities, as appropriate, in developing and building capacity for the development and effective use of systems for early warning, natural disasters and environmental monitoring. Efforts to improve resilience of both agricultural and social systems dealing with natural hazards are also encouraged.

(l) Water resources

34. Water resources are essential for satisfying basic human needs, health and food production, energy, and the restoration and maintenance of ecosystems, and for social and economic development in general, and SARD.

3. International cooperation

 

(a) Trade

35. Commodity exports, particularly primary commodity exports, are the mainstay of the economies of many developing countries in terms of their export earnings, the livelihood of their people and the dependence of general economic vitality on these exports. Commodity earnings instability continues to be problematic. Programmes that enhance commodity-based diversification in developing countries, in a manner supportive to sustainable development, inter alia, through improved market access, particularly for least developed countries, can contribute to increase foreign exchange earnings and employment, as well as provide increased income from value-added production.

36. The Commission stresses the need to implement the Marrakesh Ministerial Decision on Measures Concerning the Possible Negative Effects of the Reform Programme on Least Developed and Net Food-importing Developing Countries, the comprehensive and integrated Plan of Action for the Least Developed Countries of the World Trade Organization and the joint commitment by the heads of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the World Trade Organization to work together to assist developing countries in their adjustment process.

(b) Information exchange and dissemination

37. Governments and relevant international organizations are urged to disseminate widely, and to promote the access of farmers and those engaged in agriculture to, information on relevant sustainable agricultural practices, technologies and markets, inter alia, through capacity-building programmes, by utilizing information technology. In this context, special attention must be paid to the needs of women, marginalized groups and indigenous and local communities.

(c) United Nations and other international activities

38. FAO and other relevant international organizations, particularly the World Bank and IMF, are urged to assist countries in developing concrete policies and actions for the implementation of Agenda 21 concerning sustainable production and farming methods aimed at achieving the goals of the World Food Summit and of SARD. In particular, FAO is encouraged to develop a cross-sectoral programme on organic agriculture as part of its contribution to SARD.

39. Relevant international organizations are also urged to assist countries in developing policies for providing food security.

40. The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) is encouraged to strengthen its assistance to rural communities in developing countries in support of their efforts to achieve SARD, primarily as a means to eradicate rural poverty.

41. Relevant organizations and bodies are encouraged to make further efforts, with special attention to the gender perspective, in developing methodologies and improving coordination for data collection, indicators analysis, monitoring and evaluation of public and private efforts to support SARD.

42. Governments are urged to ratify the relevant legal international instruments, if they have not already done so, and to implement them in order to promote SARD.

43. In this regard, Governments are urged to finalize the negotiations on the international legally binding instrument for the implementation of international action on certain persistent organic pollutants (POPs) as soon as possible.

44. The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) is invited to increase research and pursue partnerships in integrated natural resource management and to disseminate the results.

(d) Participation

45. Effective implementation of the SARD objectives requires participation of a wide range of stakeholders. Empowerment, participation and partnerships are critical to success in achieving SARD, in particular involvement of women, bearing in mind their important role in SARD. Governments and relevant international organizations are therefore urged, as appropriate, to further develop innovative institutional mechanisms to ensure effective stakeholder participation in decision-making related to SARD.

46. As part of the ongoing review of progress towards SARD and within existing structures and resources, FAO and the Commission secretariat, in consultation with Governments, relevant international organizations and all major groups, are invited to continue the stakeholder dialogue on SARD, including facilitating the adequate and meaningful participation of stakeholders from developing countries. In preparing for the tenth session of the Commission and the 10-year review of the outcome of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, this dialogue should emphasize the identification of specific examples and the development of case studies that illustrate or support the principles of SARD.

 

Decision 8/5
Financial resources

 

Introduction

1. The principal objectives of activities in the area of financial resources and mechanisms should be pursued in full accordance with Agenda 21 and paragraphs 76-87 of the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21. It is important that all countries take a holistic approach to sustainable development, taking fully into account the interconnectedness of the trade, financial, economic, environmental and social aspects of sustainable development; in view of the different contributions to global environmental degradation, States have common but differentiated responsibilities as stated in principle 7 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. One of the main challenges is to promote social equity and ensure that economic growth does not result in environmental degradation.

2. The rapid process of globalization and liberalization provides countries with opportunities, as well as brings risks and challenges for the mobilization of adequate and more stable resources for sustainable development. Globalization may have contributed to the increased supply of private capital flows, including foreign direct investment (FDI), to developing countries; however, this investment has been concentrated in a small number of developing countries. It has also been accompanied by a decline in official development assistance (ODA) during the 1990s. In some cases, developing countries have benefited from globalization, while others, in particular least developed countries, face further marginalization. There is a need to strengthen international cooperation efforts and to further reform and improve the existing international financial system, with a view to preventing recurrence of financial crises and providing better mechanisms for financial crisis management in order to support and reinforce sustainable development.

3. As a result of the process of globalization and its economic, social and environmental consequences, an increasing number of issues cannot be effectively addressed by countries individually. The financing for the implementation of Agenda 21 is expected to be met, in general, from domestic resources; additional international financial support will also be very important for developing countries. So far, the provision of financial resources required for the implementation of Agenda 21, particularly in developing countries, has fallen far short of needs. Therefore, all financial commitments entered into under Agenda 21, particularly those contained in chapter 33, and the provision with regard to new and additional resources that are both adequate and predictable need to be urgently fulfilled. As recognized in Agenda 21, the cost of inaction could outweigh the financial costs of implementing Agenda 21.

Priorities for future work

4. The Commission will continue to address financial resources and mechanisms within the context of the themes to be discussed in 2001. The next comprehensive discussion of financial resources and mechanisms for sustainable development will take place at the comprehensive review, in 2002, of progress since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. The review will benefit from the outcome of the high-level international intergovernmental event on financing for development which will take place in 2001. In support of the preparatory process leading up to the comprehensive review, a further meeting of the Expert Group on Finance for Sustainable Development is planned to be held in 2001 in Budapest, Hungary.

5. Priority areas for future work of the Commission will include the following:

(a) Mobilization of domestic financial resources for sustainable development;

(b) Promotion of international cooperation and mobilization of international finance for sustainable development;

(c) Strengthening of existing financial mechanisms and exploration of innovative ones;

(d) Improvement of institutional capacity and promotion of public/private partnerships.

Mobilization of domestic financial resources for sustainable development

6. Considering the importance of mutually supportive international and national enabling economic environments in the pursuit of sustainable development, Governments are urged:

(a) To promote the mobilization of domestic financial resources and to establish the basis for an enabling environment through, inter alia, sound macroeconomic policies; a dynamic private sector; and transparent, effective, participatory and accountable governance, conducive to sustainable development and responsive to the needs of the people;

(b) To increase cooperation for addressing capital flight and for considering issues related to capital repatriation in order to broaden the domestic resource base for financing sustainable development;

(c) Taking into account their levels of development and institutional capacity, to consider ways and means to integrate environmental considerations into the management of public policies and programmes, including public finance;

(d) Where they have not already done so, to continue to design and implement national sustainable development strategies, which are due by 2002, in accordance with the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21;

(e) To conduct studies and research on ways and means of implementing a range of economic instruments, including, inter alia, the application of the polluter pays principle, and fiscal instruments, including wider use of environmental taxes and charges; such policies should be decided by each country, taking into account its own characteristics and capabilities, especially as reflected in national sustainable development strategies, and should avoid adverse effects on competitiveness and on the provision of basic social services for all;

(f) To provide the necessary incentives for sustained private investment, including macroeconomic, legal, environmental policy and regulatory frameworks that would reduce risks and uncertainty for investors; assistance for capacity-building should be provided to developing countries and countries with economies in transition to enable them to design effective environmental regulation and market-based instruments and to use them widely, taking into account their different levels of development.

Promotion of international cooperation and mobilization of international finance for sustainable development

7. Sustainable development requires that countries pursue consistently pro-sustainable development policies in all areas. Developed countries should work in partnership with developing countries to help develop, adopt and implement effective strategies to achieve sustainable development. Developed countries should integrate into their strategies effective and concrete measures to support developing countries in achieving sustainable development, in accordance with commitments made at Rio, taking into account the sustainable development policies of recipient countries to the maximum extent possible.

8. Governments are encouraged to develop policies to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of aid; policy dialogue; transparent, effective, participatory and accountable governance, conducive to sustainable development and responsive to the needs of the people; sound management of public affairs; and the participation of civil society, in cooperation, as necessary, with donors and international organizations.

9. For many developing countries, in particular least developed countries, ODA is the main source of external funding. Donors are urged to improve the allocation of ODA to more effectively reduce poverty. Governments of developed countries are urged to increase the quality and quantity of ODA. Governments of developed countries that have not yet fulfilled the commitments undertaken to reach the agreed United Nations target of 0.7 per cent of gross national product (GNP) for ODA are urged to do so as soon as possible, and where agreed, within that target, to earmark 0.15 to 0.20 per cent of their GNP for the least developed countries. In this regard, new ODA should preferably be provided in the form of grants, taking into account, inter alia, the needs and financial situation of recipient countries. All aid should be carefully targeted to achieve maximum effectiveness, taking into account the specific circumstances of the recipient countries. The eradication of poverty, the enhancement of productive employment and the reduction of unemployment, and the fostering of social integration through sustainable development in the framework of international development are important elements in achieving the targets derived from the United Nations conferences and summits of the 1990s.

10. Creditor countries and international financial institutions are urged to implement speedily the enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative to provide "deeper, broader and faster" debt relief to the eligible countries in order to allow as many countries as possible to benefit from assistance under the initiative as soon as possible. In this regard, donors are urged to implement their financing pledges for the enhanced HIPC Initiative, and without further delay agree on an overall financing plan for the HIPC Trust Fund, and to provide cancellation of bilateral official debt to countries qualifying for the enhanced HIPC Initiative. In this context, it is noted that multilateral debt-relief funds can have a positive impact in respect of assisting Governments in safeguarding or increasing expenditures on priority social sectors, and donors are encouraged to continue efforts in this regard.

11. HIPC countries are urged to develop their national poverty strategies in a participatory way so that debt relief is linked with poverty eradication and allows debtor countries to utilize budgetary savings for social expenditures in order to have maximum impact on poverty eradication. Eligible countries that have not yet entered the HIPC process are urged to implement the necessary policy measures to enable them to participate as soon as possible. The debt-relief programme should form part of a comprehensive macroeconomic framework to facilitate the release of substantial resources for financing for development and to enable debtor countries not to fall back into arrears. Efforts should be undertaken to eliminate the structural causes of indebtedness. Debt relief alone is not enough and should be complemented, inter alia, by increased market access for developing countries, taking into account existing agreements and arrangements for special and differential treatment for developing countries, provision of ODA and promotion of private investment, as well as by necessary domestic reforms.

12. It is recognized that the highly indebted middle-income developing countries and other highly indebted middle-income countries have difficulties in meeting their external debt and debt-servicing obligations, and it is noted that the worsening situation in some of them in the context, inter alia, of higher liquidity constraints, may require debt treatment, including, as appropriate, debt reduction measures. Concerted national and international action is called for to address effectively debt problems of middle-income developing countries with a view to resolving their potential long-term debt sustainability problems through various debt-treatment measures, including, as appropriate, orderly mechanisms for debt reduction. All creditor and debtor countries are encouraged to utilize to the fullest extent possible, where appropriate, all existing mechanisms for debt reduction, including debt swaps.

13. In order to attract foreign investment, including FDI, Governments are urged to put in place the policies, institutions and capacities needed for their economies to function in a predictable, transparent, non-discriminatory and stable fashion to facilitate market-driven investment within the appropriate regulatory framework. The international community should support the efforts of developing countries, in particular the least developed countries, and countries with economies in transition, to develop their capacity to deepen this process to attract FDI and to devise appropriate measures by providing assistance in capacity-building, in developing and implementing sound economic policies, and in promoting the transfer of environmentally sound technology, including publicly owned technologies, to developing countries as stipulated in Agenda 21 and the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21. Ways and means of utilizing ODA for the leveraging of private investment in sustainable development should be further explored.

14. Given the potentially important role that private capital flows play in supporting sustainable development, Governments, in cooperation with international organizations, are urged to consider and implement appropriate measures to increase and enhance their productivity through prudent macroeconomic management and financial sector supervision, and to promote regional and subregional cooperation in this regard. There is also a need to address the destabilization of countries arising, in part, from volatile, speculative and rapid movements of private capital. In this regard, measures are also needed in order to promote stable and transparent financial systems at the national and international levels.

Strengthening of existing financial mechanisms and exploration of
innovative ones

15. Innovative approaches should be pursued in order to further strengthen the existing financial mechanisms of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) in a stable and predictable manner. The global mechanism of the Convention on Biological Diversity also requires strengthening.

16. Governments are encouraged to promote the use of innovative financial mechanisms. In this regard, Governments in cooperation with international organizations and major groups should continue to engage in study and research on ways to make such mechanisms more practical and effective, inter alia, by learning from the experience of others, and to adapt those mechanisms to the particular circumstances of individual countries. These mechanisms are not a substitute for other sources of finance for sustainable development, namely, ODA, FDI, funding from international financial institutions, foreign portfolio investment and domestic resources.

17. The Global Environment Facility (GEF), which is an important mechanism for providing funding to developing countries and those with economies in transition for projects and activities targeting global environmental benefits in sustainable development, should be strengthened and broadened within its mandate.

Improvement of institutional capacity and promotion of public/private partnerships

18. The private sector can play a major role in promoting and contributing to sustainable development. International organizations and Governments should initiate further innovative pilot projects and partnership arrangements that encourage the private sector and other major groups to finance sustainable development.

19. International organizations are urged to better coordinate their work in the area of finance for sustainable development in order to avoid duplication and to raise their effectiveness, focusing on their respective areas of competence where they have a clear comparative advantage. In this regard, better cooperation and dialogue are needed between international organizations, including the Bretton Woods institutions, the World Trade Organization, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and GEF.

20. Governments and international organizations should improve their coordination efforts, using the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF), the Comprehensive Development Framework proposed by the World Bank and the poverty reduction strategy process initiated by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), taking into account all aspects of sustainable development.

21. International organizations, Governments and major groups are encouraged to undertake further research and other activities in the following areas:

(a) The relationship between FDI and sustainable development, with a view to identifying how FDI can best promote sustainable development;

(b) Capacity-building for the mobilization of foreign and domestic financial resources for sustainable development;

(c) "Green" budget reforms as well as the various aspects of an effective implementation of environmental taxes and charges;

(d) Innovative international financial mechanisms.

22. The Commission discussed the proposal of convening an ad hoc intergovernmental panel to undertake an analytical study of the lack of progress in the fulfilment of the commitments made in the areas of finance, with a view to making recommendations to synchronize the progress on sectoral issues with cross-sectoral areas, but no agreement could be reached on the convening of such a panel.

Decision 8/6
Economic growth, trade and investment

Introduction

1. Activities regarding economic growth, trade and investment should be pursued in accordance with Agenda 21 and the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21, with the overarching objective of sustainable development. Further steps to achieve this should also build on the outcome of the tenth session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), taking also into account developments in other international forums. In this regard, cooperation and coordination between UNCTAD, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), the World Trade Organization, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and other relevant institutions should be strengthened.

2. Trade and investment are important factors in economic growth and sustainable development. Both economic growth and the lack of it can have adverse environmental effects. Poverty and environmental degradation are closely interrelated. While poverty results in certain kinds of environmental stress, the major cause of the continued deterioration of the global environment is the unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, particularly in industrialized countries, which are a matter of grave concern, aggravating poverty and imbalances.

3. In consequence, there should be a balanced and integrated approach to trade and environment policies in pursuit of sustainable development, taking into account the economic, environmental and social aspects, as well as the different levels of development of countries, without undermining the open, equitable and non-discriminatory character of the multilateral trading system or creating disguised barriers to trade. Developed countries should take the lead in addressing unsustainable production and consumption patterns, taking into account common but differentiated responsibilities as set forth in principle 7 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. One of the main challenges is to promote social equity and ensure that economic growth does not result in environmental degradation. Improved market access for products from developing countries, particularly least developed countries, would make a valuable contribution to sustained economic growth and sustainable development in accordance with the relevant General Assembly resolutions and the outcomes of recent United Nations conferences.

4. In particular, for developing countries and countries with economies in transition it is an important challenge to stimulate domestic investment and attract foreign direct investment (FDI) to promote sustainable development, taking into account the rights and obligations of investors and host countries. At the same time, the international community should strive to avoid the risks that can be associated with the volatility of short-term private capital flows and to enhance the contribution that investment can make to sustainable development.

Priorities for future work

5. Economic growth, trade and investment will be considered as part of the 10-year review of progress since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Priority areas for future work will include the following:

(a) Promoting sustainable development through trade and economic growth;

(b) Making trade and environment policies mutually supportive;

(c) Promoting sustainable development through investment;

(d) Strengthening institutional cooperation, capacity-building and promoting partnerships.

Promoting sustainable development through trade and economic growth

6. Governments and international organizations are urged to support efforts of developing countries, in particular the least developed countries, in building capacity to eradicate poverty, expand productive employment, and improve living standards with a view to achieving sustainable development. The promotion of trade, investment and sustained economic growth is essential to support such efforts. Furthermore, appropriate policies have to be implemented at the national level to ensure environmental protection and sustainable resource management, equitable distribution of benefits and provision of basic social services to all.

7. Governments, particularly in developed countries and, as appropriate, international organizations, are also urged to improve market access, provide technical assistance and establish capacity-building initiatives in favour of developing countries and countries with economies in transition with a view to helping them to increase export opportunities, promote diversified export-oriented production and enhance their ability to trade, and to implement their commitments in existing multilateral agreements, including World Trade Organization agreements. The international community should continue to assist countries seeking integration into the world trade system, in particular accession to the World Trade Organization. Governments and international organizations are encouraged to continue studies and work on impacts of trade liberalization on developing economies in a manner that promotes the equitable distribution between nations of gains from trade in order to achieve sustainable development.

8. Commodity exports, particularly primary commodity exports, are the mainstay of the economies of many developing countries in terms of their export earnings, the livelihoods of their people and the dependence of general economic vitality on these exports. Commodity earnings instability continues to be problematic. Programmes that enhance commodity-based diversification in developing countries, in a manner supportive to sustainable development, inter alia, through improved market access, particularly for least developed countries, can contribute to increased foreign exchange earnings and employment, as well as provide increased income from value-added production.

9. Governments and international organizations should endeavour to improve the functioning of commodity markets with the aim of achieving greater transparency, stability, and predictability, particularly with regard to commodity export earnings. In this regard, UNCTAD should enhance its support to developing countries in accordance with the Plan of Action adopted at the tenth session of UNCTAD. There should be further evaluation of mechanisms for reducing the impacts of price volatility in primary commodities. Countries, particularly developed countries, should provide improved market access for primary commodities from developing countries and particularly from least developed countries, especially in their processed forms. Developed countries should endeavour to respond favourably to requests for technical assistance aimed at enhancing the diversification of exports, in a manner supportive of sustainable development, in those developing countries that are highly dependent on the export of a limited number of commodities. Existing mechanisms for helping to stabilize commodity export earnings should be improved so as to respond to the real concerns of developing-country producers.

10. Governments are urged to pursue continued trade liberalization through, inter alia, the elimination of unjustifiable and discriminatory trade practices and non-tariff barriers to trade, notably in order to improve market access for products of export interest to developing countries. Governments in developed countries should devise policies and measures to assist developing countries, and in particular least developed countries, in diversifying their export base in a sustainable manner taking into account existing agreements and arrangements for special and differential treatment for developing countries.

11. Market access conditions for agricultural and industrial products of export interest to developing countries, in particular least developed countries, should be improved on as broad and liberal basis as possible. Concrete steps need to be urgently taken to implement the commitments by developed countries to grant duty-free and quota-free market access for essentially all exports originating in least developed countries and to further examine options for other proposals to maximize market access for least developed countries. Consideration should also be given to proposals for developing countries to contribute to improved market access for least developed countries’ exports. Modernization and operationalization of special and differential treatment, in particular in terms of maintaining and expanding export opportunities for developing countries, may be needed to adapt it to changing international trading conditions and to make special and differential treatment a better instrument for development, enabling developing countries, in particular the least developed countries, to gradually integrate into the multilateral trading system.

12. Food security as a priority area for sustainable agricultural development should be strengthened, in particular both by and for developing countries. More focused financial and technical assistance, as well as the transfer of agricultural technology that is environmentally and economically viable, upon mutually agreed terms, should be provided to address effectively the issue of food security, including development of an enabling policy environment and the problems of net food importing countries, as outlined in the Rome Declaration on World Food Security and the World Food Summit Plan of Action.

13. Governments and international institutions are encouraged to ensure that the benefits arising from increased trade liberalization are equitably distributed and reach those living in poverty, in particular in developing countries, by establishing policies and programmes that will enable their participation. Measures are required to ensure enhanced trade opportunities for developing countries and to provide greater security and predictability in a liberalized trading system, with particular emphasis on vulnerable groups like women and children, and that trade contributes to employment-generation and social development.

14. Governments and international organizations are encouraged to examine ways and means to promote the indigenous development of environmentally sound technologies (ESTs) in developing countries and the transfer and dissemination of ESTs to developing countries. In this regard, Governments are encouraged to implement relevant provisions in the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs).

15. Governments should fully implement the Plan of Action adopted at the tenth session of UNCTAD and, in particular, examine the use and effect, particularly on trade, of incentives to attract FDI with high technological content. UNCTAD should analyse all aspects of existing international agreements relevant to transfer of technology to be supported, as appropriate, by developed-country funding.

16. Governments and international organizations, in collaboration with the business community and other representatives of civil society, are encouraged, where appropriate, to promote markets for environmentally friendly products, environmentally sound technologies and environmental services.

Making trade and environment policies mutually supportive

17. Governments and international organizations, such as the World Trade Organization, and the secretariats of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), are encouraged to cooperate and to continue to explore ways to enhance the complementarities between trade liberalization and environmental protection and to make the multilateral trading system more responsive to sustainable development concerns. All relevant parties are encouraged to identify and pursue opportunities where trade liberalization holds particular promise for promoting sustainable development, including actions to address subsidies with the aim of eliminating effects that are both trade-distortive and environmentally harmful, in a way that would result in trade, environmental and developmental benefits.

18. Certification and labelling schemes can be important tools for the promotion of sustainable consumption and promotion patterns. If introduced, such schemes, whether voluntary or mandatory, should be designed and implemented in an open and transparent manner and should not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade. Governments and international organizations are urged to facilitate effective participation of developing countries in the standard-setting process. They are also urged to further explore the concept of equivalency and its application.

19. The pursuit of effective environmental policies should be ensured both nationally and internationally. However, environmental measures must not be used for protectionist purposes. Governments should also avoid imposing unilateral measures that are inconsistent with the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, in particular principle 12.

20. Governments and international organizations are urged to further consider the relationship between MEAs and World Trade Organization agreements, including the relationship between the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Agreement on TRIPs, recognizing the importance of trade and environment agreements’ being mutually supportive, and taking into account that both trade agreements and MEAs are developed and negotiated in pursuit of legitimate multilateral objectives in support of sustainable development. In this regard, it is essential to improve dialogue and cooperation between trade, environment and other relevant policy makers at the national level, as well as among relevant international organizations, including secretariats of MEAs. UNEP and UNCTAD are urged to continue to study and examine economic and development implications of MEAs.

21. Developed countries and international organizations, in accordance with their commitments under multilateral environmental agreements, are encouraged to assist developing countries in implementing the agreements by promoting the transfer of environmentally sound technology, in particular those arising from publicly funded research and development, as well as promoting capacity-building.

Promoting sustainable development through investment

22. Governments are encouraged to promote a stable, predictable, non-discriminatory and transparent investment climate nationally and internationally that encourages domestic investment and foreign capital flows, including FDI, while addressing, as appropriate, the rights and obligations of investors in order to promote sustainable development. Governments in developed countries and international organizations are encouraged to provide adequate support for developing countries in their efforts to formulate and implement the appropriate domestic policies.

23. Governments and international organizations are encouraged to address the potential risks that may arise from the volatility of short-term capital flows.

24. It is recommended that in order to enhance the potential of investment, including FDI, to contribute to sustainable development, Governments and international organizations, in cooperation with relevant private sector organizations and stakeholders:

(a) Explore ways to ensure that a larger number of developing countries and countries with economies in transition benefit from investment, in particular FDI;

(b) Seek to promote the use of environmental management systems in and transfer of environmentally sound technologies to developing countries and countries with economies in transition;

(c) Encourage companies to take responsibility to promote sustainable development by applying best practices and promoting environmentally responsible corporate behaviour and information policies, especially those related to public disclosure procedures;

(d) Explore the potential for improving environmental performance along the supply chain and in waste management;

(e) Explore the potential role of voluntary guidelines for making investment more broadly supportive of sustainable development.

25. Governments and international organizations are encouraged to develop, as appropriate, mechanisms for the environmental assessment of export credit projects.

Strengthening institutional cooperation, capacity-building and promotion of partnerships

26. The Commission noted that the tool of environmental impact assessment, following previous recommendations, is being used by many countries and that some are developing other assessment tools. The Commission also noted the work under way in UNEP and UNCTAD on this issue. In response to the concerns expressed by many countries, the Commission stressed that the assessments of trade policies should be conducted with a view to promoting sustainable development and should not serve as a disguised barrier to trade.

27. Governments and international organizations are urged to improve policy coherence and coordination in promoting sustainable development through trade and investment. Countries are also urged, with the full participation of international organizations, to improve coherence and coordination to ensure that technical assistance and capacity-building in developing countries and countries with economies in transition enable them to benefit from globalization and trade liberalization and to better integrate into the world economy. Governments and international organizations are further encouraged to promote capacity-building with a view to enabling recipient countries to implement and enforce effectively environmental policies, inter alia, through the design and use of economic instruments, taking into account the specific conditions and the different levels of development in individual countries.

28. Governments and international organizations should foster partnerships between the public and private sectors at the national and the international level for the promotion of trade and economic growth in a manner conducive to sustainable development. Dialogue, consultations and information-sharing with stakeholder and civil society organizations should also be promoted.

29. International cooperation and support for capacity-building in trade, environment and development policy formulation should be strengthened through renewed system-wide efforts and with enhanced responsiveness to sustainable development objectives by the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the Bretton Woods institutions and national Governments.

 

Decision 8/7
Subprogramme entitled "Sustainable development" of the draft medium-term plan of the United Nations for the period 2002-2005

 

The Commission on Sustainable Development takes note of the proposed subprogramme entitled "Sustainable development" of the draft medium-term plan of the Division for Sustainable Development of the United Nations Secretariat for the period 2002-2005, and requests the Economic and Social Council to invite the Committee for Programme and Coordination and the Fifth Committee of the General Assembly to take into account the provisional nature of these proposals in the light of the forthcoming review of progress achieved in the implementation of Agenda 21, which is likely to have an impact on the programme of work of the United Nations in the area of sustainable development.

 

Decision 8/8
Matters related to the inter-sessional work of the Commission

 

The Commission on Sustainable Development:

(a) Decides, pursuant to Economic and Social Council resolution 1997/63 of 25 July 1997 on the programme of work of the Commission for the period 1998-2002 and future methods of work of the Commission, that in order to assist the Commission in its deliberations at its ninth session, the 2001 sessions of its inter-sessional working groups will be devoted to the following issues:

(i) Information for decision-making and participation;

(ii) International cooperation for an enabling environment;

(iii) Atmosphere;

(iv) Transport;

(b) Invites the Bureau of the Commission’s ninth session, in consultation with Governments, to elaborate specific proposals for organization of work during these sessions that would ensure effective preparations for the ninth session of the Commission on the above issues;

(c) Also invites the Bureau of its ninth session, in order to ensure an effective division of work between the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Intergovernmental Group of Experts on Energy and Sustainable Development and the inter-sessional working groups, to consult with the Bureau of the Group of Experts, which is preparing for the ninth session of the Commission, on the issue of energy, and will hold its second session immediately before the 2001 sessions of the inter-sessional working groups;

(d) Decides, in accordance with paragraph 133 of the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21, that the Bureau of the Commission shall continue conducting transparent and open-ended consultations in a timely manner on matters related to preparations for the ninth session;

(e) Reiterates that, in order to enable the Bureau to carry out its functions effectively, consideration should be given to providing financial support, through extrabudgetary contributions, to members of the Bureau, particularly those from the developing countries, to enable them to participate in the meetings of the Bureau, the inter-sessional meetings of the Commission and the sessions of the Commission itself.

 

Decision 8/9
Report of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for Development on its first session

 

The Commission on Sustainable Development, in pursuance of General Assembly decision 54/452 of 22 December 1999, takes note of the report of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for Development on its first session and notes that the Secretary-General, in his reports submitted to the Commission, in accordance with Economic and Social Council resolutions 1999/47, 1999/48 and 1999/49, all of 28 July 1999, took note of the recommendations included therein.

 

Decision 8/10
Provisional agenda for the second session of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Intergovernmental Group of Experts on Energy and Sustainable Development

 

Agenda for the second session of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Intergovernmental Group of Experts on Energy and Sustainable Development

The Commission on Sustainable Development endorses the agenda for the second session of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Intergovernmental Group of Experts on Energy and Sustainable Development as adopted by the Expert Group at its first session as follows:

Provisional agenda

1. Adoption of the agenda and other organizational matters.

2. Consideration of the key issues of energy for sustainable development, with due consideration given for each issue to the means of implementation: capacity-building, technology transfer and financial resources:

(a) Accessibility of energy;

(b) Energy efficiency;

(c) Renewable energy;

(d) Advanced fossil fuel technologies;

(e) Nuclear energy technologies;

(f) Rural energy;

(g) Energy-related issues in transportation.

3. Regional initiatives and endeavours.

4. Learning from each other: success stories in the promotion of energy for sustainable development.

5. Enhancing international cooperation for energy for sustainable development.

6. Adoption of the report.

 

Decision 8/11
Documents considered by the Commission at its eighth session

 

1. At its 13th meeting, on 5 May 2000, the Commission took note of the following documents:

(a) Report of the Secretary-General on financial resources and mechanisms (E/CN.17/2000/2);

(b) Note by the Secretary-General on the multi-stakeholder dialogue on sustainable agriculture (E/CN.17/2000/3 and Add.1-4);

(c) Report of the Secretary-General on economic growth, trade and investment (E/CN.17/2000/4);

(d) Report of the Secretary-General on sustainable agriculture and rural development: trends in national implementation (E/CN.17/2000/5 and Add.1);

(e) Report of the Secretary-General on integrated planning and management of land resources (E/CN.17/2000/6 and Add.1-4);

(f) Report of the Secretary-General on the implementation of the work programme on education, public awareness and training (E/CN.17/2000/8);

(g) Report of the Ad Hoc Inter-sessional Working Group on Financial Resources and Mechanisms and on Economic Growth, Trade and Investment, New York, 22-25 February 2000 (E/CN.17/2000/10);

(h) Report of the Inter-sessional Ad Hoc Working Group on Integrated Planning and Management of Land Resources; and on Agriculture, New York, 28 February-3 March 2000 (E/CN.17/2000/11);

(i) Report of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Intergovernmental Group of Experts on Energy and Sustainable Development, New York, 6-10 March 2000 (E/CN.17/2000/12);

(j) Report of the Secretary-General on the progress made in providing safe water supply and sanitation for all during the 1990s (E/CN.17/2000/13);

(k) Report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests on its fourth session, New York, 31 January-11 February 2000 (E/CN.17/2000/14);

(l) Report of the Secretary-General on the preliminary views and suggestions on the preparations for the 10-year review of the implementation of the outcome of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (E/CN.17/2000/15);

(m) Report of the Secretary-General on national reporting to the Commission on Sustainable Development (E/CN.17/2000/16);

(n) Report of the Secretary-General on the follow-up work on voluntary initiatives and agreements (E/CN.17/2000/17);

(o) Note by the Secretary-General on the review of the ACC Subcommittee on Water Resources (E/CN.17/2000/18).

Chapter II

Chairman’s summary of the multi-stakeholder dialogue on agriculture

Introduction

 

1. The Commission on Sustainable Development at its eighth session continued the tradition of including a multi-stakeholder dialogue as part of its official proceedings. The multi-stakeholder dialogue segment on agriculture, held on 24 and 25 April 2000, involved representatives of business and industry, workers and trade unions, farmers and non-governmental organizations, as well as representatives of indigenous people and scientists. It was noted that this dialogue would inform the subsequent discussions of the Commission both in the high-level segment and in the remainder of the Commission’s work on sustainable agriculture.

2. The agriculture segment followed the format previously agreed by the Bureau of the Commission. Lead organizations, invited by the Commission secretariat, were responsible for consulting with their constituencies to draft the "dialogue starter" papers and to organize the participation of the delegations from their sectors. These lead organizations included the International Agri-Food Network for business and industry; the International Federation of Agricultural Producers and Via Campesina for farmers; the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions/Trade Union Advisory Committee to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the International Union of Food, Agricultural Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations (IUF) for workers and trade unions; and the Sustainable Agriculture/Food Systems Caucus of the NGO Steering Committee to the Commission for non-governmental organizations.

3. The segment focused on four themes: (a) choices in agricultural production techniques, consumption patterns and safety regulations: potentials and threats to sustainable agriculture; (b) best practices in land resource management to achieve sustainable food cycles; (c) knowledge for a sustainable food system: identifying and providing for education, training, knowledge-sharing and information needs; and (d) globalization, trade liberalization and investment patterns: economic incentives and framework conditions to promote sustainable agriculture. The first hour of each session started with short presentations by the stakeholder groups followed by reactions by two Governments, with the remainder of the time allocated for the interactive dialogue. The summary below is not a verbatim record but seeks to reflect the issues raised, areas that would benefit from further dialogue and elaboration, and specific initiatives announced or proposed by the participants.

I. Choices in agricultural production techniques, consumption patterns and safety regulations: potentials and threats to sustainable agriculture

 

4. The business and industry delegation stressed the importance of increasing agricultural production per unit area of agricultural land, identifying locally adapted and integrated farming practices as the most appropriate method of sustainable agriculture.

5. Farmers stated that peasants and small-scale farmers were traditionally under-represented in decision-making related to agricultural production, and stressed the importance of shifting the focus of international agricultural strategies from corporate-driven food production to the small-scale family farmer. Uncertainties surrounding genetically modified organisms (GMOs) were emphasized, and land tenure was identified as a prerequisite of sustainable farming. It was also pointed out that agriculture did not operate in isolation but was affected by the constraints and aspirations of the society that surrounded it.

6. Trade unions underscored the need to examine debilitating and exploitative working conditions, called for recognition by the Commission of waged agricultural workers as a distinct stakeholder category, and called upon the Commission to adopt International Labour Organization (ILO) code and agricultural labour standards as part of the practice, definitions and measurement of sustainable agriculture. They stressed questions surrounding job security, training, compensation, and poverty eradication associated with the development of biotechnology, and emphasized possibilities through education and new participatory terms of labour relations to promote changing relations in the workplace. They also called for a special recognition of the plight and role of agricultural workers in the food system.

7. Non-governmental organizations representatives identified the threats to sustainable agriculture as being unbridled trade liberalization, intensive use of agrochemicals, and mono-cropping, stating that technical fixes represented by GMOs posed actual and potential hazards that would undermine agricultural biodiversity. Consideration of social issues, security of land tenure as the basis of food security, research and development targeting needs of men and women and small-scale farmers, and support for indigenous knowledge were cited as essential components of sustainable agriculture.

8. The interactive dialogue focused on two key questions: (a) how could we benefit from new technologies while preventing their negative social and environmental impacts? and (b) could organic agriculture contribute to sustainable agriculture?

9. In response to the first question, many participants called for a moratorium on environmental releases of GMOs, based on the precautionary principle, expressing concerns about public-health risks, adverse environmental impacts, biodiversity loss, and control of new technologies by multinational corporations. One participant noted that the opinions of scientists on GMOs differed widely, and that a moratorium should be put in place until a consensus and further research on their possible effects could be realized. Others advocated further study of applications of biotechnology, supporting responsible use and strict regulatory frameworks.

10. Industry representatives highlighted the potential positive social impacts of biotechnology. Partnerships between public and private industries were cited as one way to use technology to enhance social development. They also emphasized the need for additional research and the right to choose from a level playing field where new technologies could be accepted or rejected, favouring sound science over emotional reaction. Other stakeholders raised concerns over who would benefit from the development of biotechnology. Some emphasized that the playing field today was not level and noted that farming systems that were not based on purchased inputs were unattractive for private agri-businesses and were therefore not supported by them. Those concerned with the lack of information on GMOs also emphasized the rights of the consumer, encouraging links between all levels of food production and consumption and calling for increased transparency in the market place, and clear labelling of genetically modified foods.

11. Organic agriculture was noted by many as equal or superior to other modes of production in terms of productivity, sustainability, respect for social and cultural diversity, and addressing local needs. Others believed that inorganic inputs were equal to organic practices in terms of nutrient balance. Some pointed out that there was insufficient organic material available in many countries to make this the exclusive basis of agricultural production. Others noted that organic and inorganic inputs might be appropriate for different local conditions. Examples were presented for and against the industrial inputs to agricultural processes; some advocated their effectiveness while others pointed out the diminishing yields from high-input agriculture over time.

12. There was general agreement that the diversity of the world’s farming systems called for a variety of technologies and approaches, and that organic farming could play an important role. It was noted that there was not a miracle technology that could be applied in all areas, and that the tendency to homogenization within the global market would not address diverse agricultural needs. Most participants agreed that more research and development were needed to deliver site-specific solutions. Proponents of organic farming called for increased funding for research on ecological approaches to farm management and noted the relatively small percentage of funding for agro-ecological research. An enabling environment, corporate citizenship, and independent consumer information were identified as necessary for consumers in respect of making informed choices that would affect production practices, and the role of workers and trade unions was noted in this regard. The practices and unique relationship of indigenous peoples to the land and agricultural knowledge were stressed. A number of participants emphasized sustainable working conditions that addressed the needs of the producer, including education and participation in decision-making. It was proposed that an ad hoc multi-stakeholder working group involving all major groups be established to continue discussion on these issues.

13. Specific recommendations of stakeholder groups included:

(a) Further attention directed to the holistic nature of agriculture and food security including the social, cultural, health and environmental dimensions of agricultural production;

(b) Support for mechanisms to ensure land tenure, in particular national and international legal mechanisms to protect indigenous peoples, land and territory rights;

(c) Recognition of core labour standards including the rights of workers to organize and bargain collectively;

(d) Placing of a moratorium on GMOs until adequate research on their impacts was complete;

(e) Establishing regulatory frameworks for biotechnology and deepening public understanding through multi-stakeholder participation;

(f) Increased clarity over liability issues for farmers using GMO technology;

(g) Increased financial resources for research and development of organic agriculture;

(h) Increased government support and resources to develop environmental and socio-economic indicators for sustainable agriculture;

(i) Support for a need-driven participatory approach to appropriate innovation;

(j) Support for participation of indigenous people as a distinct major group in the Commission process;

(k) Promotion of a world sustainable food system;

(l) Further consideration of the question who benefits and directs innovations in agricultural technology.

 

II. Best practices in land resource management to achieve sustainable food cycles

 

14. Business and industry participants proposed that the challenge in determining, using and promoting best practices was to balance ecological concerns and the increased productivity required by a growing world population. Best practices require continued investments in research and development in the agro-food industry and integrated management approaches that improve efficient use of seeds, nutrients and resources.

15. Farmers presented the case of women in the agriculture sector and proposed that conversion to sustainable agriculture should be a gradual process with support mechanisms put in place for the farmers, particularly women, engaged in this change process. Access to credit would be critical for small farmers and title to land is essential as collateral for credit.

16. Trade unions argued that there was a need for new levels of workplace cooperation to reduce and properly use resource inputs, including human resources, and production of sustainable products. They highlighted the growing impact of multinational corporations in the agriculture sector, called upon the Commission to develop guidelines for multinational corporations in the food sector and called for its support for improving capital flows for capacity-building at the local level.

17. Non-governmental organizations argued that best production practices for sustainable agriculture and rural development (SARD) were those that were ecologically based, and that conventional agriculture was inherently unsustainable. Land reform can both address the inequities in land tenure patterns and enable broad-based economic development by creating local markets. Indigenous peoples’ representatives contended that a basic principle of best practices was that the recognition of their lands and territories constituted a protective measure for achieving SARD.

18. The subsequent dialogue between major groups and Governments started with the question raised by the non-governmental organizations how to define "sustainable agriculture" in contrast with "agriculture". Various definitions were proposed including: responsible use of resources available to meet the energy, food, and fibre needs of the population (industry); production in environmental, economic and social harmony with surrounding areas (farmers); agricultural practices that were sustainable over time (a Government); agricultural practices that were socially just and environmentally and culturally sound (non-governmental organizations and indigenous peoples). Trade unions stated that conventional agriculture was fundamentally unsustainable and that, while it was promoted as a means to address hunger, the latter was an issue of poor distribution of, and poor access to, food rather than one of productivity. Some farmers also expressed the view that conventional agriculture was not sustainable because of its high use of non-renewable fossil fuels and its inability to help sustain farming families or communities despite increases in productivity. While the discussion did not lead to a common definition, there was consensus among stakeholders on the need to continue the debate, inter alia, through their ongoing cooperative projects and programmes involving multiple partners. Stakeholders agreed that there was a need to further inform, debate and share information on the different agriculture systems and the "best practices" that could be identified in different locations around the world.

19. Additional specific recommendations made by different stakeholder groups included:

(a) Adopting an agro-ecology and organic approach to research and development and balancing investments in conventional agriculture research with research on alternative agricultural techniques;

(b) Training for scientists, farmers, workers and consumers on identifying best practices and creating participatory approaches to implement the identified best practices;

(c) Establishment of a multi-stakeholder mechanism to enable ongoing dialogue on land management and land access as well as on criteria and indicators for best practices;

(d) Development of national and international mechanisms to achieve secure and equitable land tenure;

(e) Promotion and support of partnerships among all stakeholders in the agriculture sector;

(f) Adoption of food security as a primary challenge in sustainable agriculture;

(g) Promotion of policies and measures to stop unsustainable agricultural practices;

(h) Setting joint workplace target-setting, monitoring and reporting efforts by workers, trade unions and employers.

III. Knowledge for a sustainable food system: identifying and providing for education, training, knowledge-sharing and information needs

 

20. Industry and business participants noted that the agri-food sector had increasingly taken up research and development activities in part owing to declining public investments and a rising need for productivity increases. They recognized education, training, information and extension activities as being necessary for comprehensive knowledge and sustainable food systems.

21. Farmers stressed that research must be farmer-driven and built on traditional knowledge, and that training should support and enhance traditional practices. An increase in public sector funding and available resources was called for to support farmer-to-farmer extension programmes and information centres.

22. Trade unions stated that the waged agricultural workforce was a skilled workforce with generations of knowledge about growing food and commodity crops and that this knowledge remained largely untapped. Unions provide education and training programmes for their members to further develop these skills and knowledge. If expanded with additional resources and in partnerships with other stakeholders, these programmes can provide further training on sustainable agriculture as well as on other relevant areas such as core and agricultural labour standards, the employment potentials in sustainable agriculture, and management-worker training on health and safety.

23. Non-governmental organizations emphasized developing education and information policies to disseminate knowledge of sustainable food systems and their relationship to food security, raising awareness on the part of consumers and other non-farmer stakeholders, and recognizing the central role of farmers and indigenous peoples in research and development.

24. It was acknowledged that training, education, research and capacity-building needs, including their cultural and spiritual dimensions, must be approached and supported in a holistic way. Many participants emphasized the importance of farmer-driven agricultural research, and stressed the role of Governments in providing increased financial resources. Indigenous peoples’ representatives proposed the use of their education programmes, founded on their cosmovisions, as models for other education programmes for sustainable food systems. Consumer education and access to information were also mentioned as key to sustainable food security.

25. Differences on interpretation of intellectual property rights (IPRs) were noted. Some views attached importance to the integration of people and nature, emphasizing concepts of heritage inherent in food production. Attempts to patent life forms were said to disregard traditional knowledge and cultures, and rights of indigenous people. Many participants felt that the present system of IPRs tended to limit the use of traditional and local knowledge and raised issues such as biopiracy, ethics and ownership of knowledge in the workplace. Business and industry participants noted that patents applied to products developed using genetic knowledge rather than to genes, and that patenting provided a "right to use" rather than ownership. However, other participants considered that the right to exclusive use was the same as ownership. The multi-stakeholder working group on IPRs established under the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) was noted and the Commission was asked to support the work of this group.

26. Promises of higher yields at lower costs presented by multinationals offering GMOs put pressure on traditional knowledge systems in indigenous communities. The role of non-governmental organizations in documenting and popularizing traditional knowledge, specifically of women, was noted. Better balance between public and private sector funding for research was called for, and access to a full range of information was cited as necessary if farmers were to make informed choices in small-scale production. Trade unions emphasized the importance of workplace-based education programmes that fostered participation of workers, trade unions and employers, and recognized their right to information, participation, refusal to work in dangerous or injurious environments, and whistle-blower protection when reporting unacceptable practices.

27. The need for exchange of knowledge between countries, fair as well as free trade, policies that did not protect multinational corporations but promoted full access to information, and increased communication were highlighted. Trade unions encouraged the Commission to build upon current health and safety training and education programmes to promote sustainable food systems and to consider the industrial process as a tool to facilitate implementation of programmes.

28. In response to the question how to integrate traditional and scientific knowledge, many suggested that indigenous knowledge and science could work hand in hand. One participant said that knowledge was power and information could be used to benefit specific interests of science while marginalizing small farmers and neglecting social needs. Support for increased focus on IPRs, indigenous rights, protection of indigenous cultures, and new codes of conduct was included in the linking of science to traditional knowledge.

29. In considering mechanisms to establish traditional knowledge use in various sectors, it was agreed that multi-stakeholder dialogue sessions should continue, that establishment of participatory processes should be promoted, and that research organizations and universities should be strengthened in that role. The adoption of rights for prior informed consent (PIC) and benefit-sharing, establishment of a clearing-house mechanism through voluntary funding, and assurance of land tenure rights through legal recognition of indigenous lands were also put forth as necessary to effective and appropriate use of knowledge.

30. In conclusion, participants emphasized:

(a) The importance of education as a capacity-building tool;

(b) Full and effective participation by all stakeholders;

(c) New partnerships to create new local knowledge systems that enhanced production systems;

(d) The importance of relying on indigenous peoples’ systems for protecting their knowledge;

(e) The importance of ratifying and implementing national and international legal mechanisms to protect indigenous peoples’ rights to lands and territories;

(f) Strengthened flows of information;

(g) Compensation to communities for use of genetic resources;

(h) Increased agricultural extension services;

(i) Open and sustainable IPR processes with full participation of indigenous people;

(j) Greater use of Internet resources.

 

IV. Globalization, trade liberalization and investment patterns: economic incentives and framework conditions to promote sustainable agriculture

 

31. The business and industry delegation supported market-oriented approaches that stimulated entrepreneurship and facilitated economic growth as the best means to promote sustainable agriculture. Proposed policies included aligning food prices, dismantling government price support systems, promoting trade and investment in the agri-business sector, and harmonizing control systems.

32. Farmers outlined a number of essential elements necessary for a sound trade regime that supported sustainable agriculture. These included a stable policy environment, adequate rural infrastructure, an appropriate regulatory framework, effective stakeholder participation mechanisms, increased resources for development, and improvements in technology transfer mechanisms.

33. Trade unions stated that current patterns of control and distribution were the most pressing issues, and called for change in the rules governing trade and investment that increase poverty and widened gaps between the rich and the poor. They asked the Commission to work towards fundamental changes in trade through support for ILO instruments and achieving agreed goals for official development assistance (ODA). They also emphasized the need for trade and investment regimes to promote social and employment transition programmes that ensured that intended programmes did not aggravate obstacles to, or hinder, the implementation of the social dimension of sustainable development.

34. Non-governmental organizations noted that globalization did not necessarily enhance sustainable development, that subsidies and cheap imports undermined local productivity, and that ongoing multi-stakeholder meetings should continue to address issues of trade liberalization. They called for a reassessment and examination of the true impact of globalization on social, ecological, technological and economic grounds. They expressed the view that the World Trade Organization had been used to undermine international environmental agreements, and called for a new global cooperation based on common but differentiated responsibilities. Indigenous peoples’ representatives expressed concern over national laws that allowed the unhampered exploitation of their lands and territories.

35. Participants recognized that the concept of sustainability meant different things to different people. For example, a developing-country delegate indicated that, while for developed countries sustainable development might be a matter of lifestyle, for developing countries it was primarily a matter of livelihood. Many agreed that social and environmental concerns raised by free trade should be addressed through policy measures, but there was no consensus on how to develop a viable policy environment for open markets. Protectionist measures and certain agricultural subsidies were seen as detriments to developing countries in most, but not in all, cases.

36. The Chairman asked stakeholders to identify instances where subsidies could promote sustainable agriculture. Some believed that sustainable production could be achieved only without subsidies. Others noted that withdrawal of subsidies might cause difficulties. Several representatives agreed that to force open markets and do away with subsidies would destroy the competitive advantage of many developing countries. They advocated a more gradual adjustment to new trading frameworks, but did not share one view on how to go about constructing an architecture involving all stakeholders. Some said subsidies must be linked to tariffs. Several noted the unfair advantages given to industrialized countries by the World Trade Organization and the disadvantages of countries implementing structural adjustment programmes. Distinctions between trade distorting and non-trade distorting subsidies were made and the need to establish new policies to promote sustainable development before dismantling the old ones was affirmed. Others suggested the use of targeted subsidies combined with increased government spending to address social impacts of change.

37. The World Bank representative expressed concern that high-income country policies linking subsidies to the volume of production induced farmers to employ unsustainable farming practices, noting that national and international investment in agriculture was declining in many countries.

38. Lack of foreign exchange due to increasing imports, distortion of market prices by direct and indirect subsidies, neo-liberal policies driving exports to benefit multinational corporations, and a preoccupation with market competition replacing a focus on local production needs, were some of the primary concerns raised by participants in this dialogue. Certain participants called for more transparency and multinational cooperation as well as for enforceable guidelines that promoted greater accountability.

39. Regarding how to mitigate the social and environmental impacts of subsidies, some participants made a distinction between governmental policies that were designed to address social needs, and the use of subsidies. Participants also felt that it was important to distinguish between subsidies that were supportive of sustainable development and those that worked against it.

40. With respect to the question how to improve investments in developing countries, so as to promote sustainable agriculture, many participants stressed debt cancellation to mobilize domestic investment in developing countries, and land ownership or security of tenure to enhance benefits of investment at the local level. Investments in agricultural processing facilities, education, training, and infrastructure were cited as essential to an enabling environment for sustainable agriculture. It was noted that current political realities required increased mobilization by rural people to secure a stronger voice in government so that needs would be adequately reflected in investments made at the national level. It was also suggested that the Commission promote a better understanding of capital flows within the food system.

41. It was recognized that trade liberalization was based on competitive standards. Some felt this was inherently disadvantageous for small farmers, since investments normally flowed towards the highest returns provided by the most productive lands, where products were often geared for export and their production entailed unsustainable practices. As a result, while agricultural production increases, small farmers continue to be marginalized. This is a basic dilemma of the market system.

42. Overall conclusions and recommendations presented by participants advocated:

(a) Multi-stakeholder meetings or processes to assess impacts of trade liberalization measures on sustainable development based on the SARD indicators adopted by the Commission at its third session;

(b) Clearer definition of sustainability through a set of science-based indicators and criteria for success against which progress could be measured;

(c) Fair and open trade to achieve sound and sustainable agriculture;

(d) Policies to reduce agricultural trade barriers that worked against sustainable development;

(e) Investment in small-scale organic and other ecological systems of agriculture;

(f) Reform of the World Trade Organization Agreement on Agriculture and other related agreements, and institutional reform of the World Trade Organization through cooperation, collaboration and participation;

(g) Allocation of better lands to small farmers for the practice of sustainable agriculture for domestic consumption and food security;

(h) Commission support for international rules that incorporated core labour standards as contained in the relevant ILO instruments.

Chairman’s summary of the high-level segment

 

Land and agriculture

 

Expert presentations

1. Conrad Conway, President of the Rockefeller Foundation, and Miguel A. Altieri, University of California at Berkeley, made introductory presentations for the high-level segment session on the theme "Land and agriculture".

2. Mr. Conway noted that the problem with the concept of sustainable agriculture is that it does not have the same meaning for everybody, causing problems for its implementation on the ground. He first defined the concept as agriculture that is resistant to stress and shock, and as an approach that combines productivity, stability and equity. He advocated integrated pest management, the integration of organic and non-organic applications and the development of expert capacity, in particular in the areas of ecology and biotechnology. Investment in infrastructure, such as roads, and access to fertilizers and seed, are also needed. He also stressed the importance of participatory processes in the design, analysis and implementation of a sustainable agriculture approach.

3. Mr. Altieri outlined the achievements, trends and impacts of modern agriculture and the focus of modern agricultural science on a small number of crops and products, input-intensive large-scale monocultures and patentable high-yielding varieties and technologies. He also addressed the challenges for sustainable agriculture, including poverty alleviation; enhanced productivity while conserving natural resources; enabling policies and the engagement of farmers’ organizations and non-governmental organizations in research; and the limitations of biotechnology.

Government statements and dialogue

4. Ministers reaffirmed their continued support for the concepts of the integrated planning and management of land resources and of sustainable agriculture and rural development, as described in chapters 10 and 14, respectively, of Agenda 21. It was generally the view that the goals and commitments agreed to at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992 as well as at other recent conferences, such as the World Food Summit (1996) and the World Summit for Social Development (1995), remain valid, however, their inadequate implementation has been disappointing. In particular, most speakers noted with concern that the lack of implementation of these goals has contributed to continued environmental degradation and persistent and unacceptably high levels of global poverty, hunger and malnutrition, and they urged the full commitment of the international community, including the Commission on Sustainable Development, to reversing the situation.

5. In considering the integrated planning and management of land resources, the interrelated factors of soil, water, air, biological diversity and landscape are all crucial elements. It was suggested that these interlinkages be considered within a more holistic framework. Participants also urged that the economic, social, environmental and cultural aspects of land use must also be taken into account, including support for traditional knowledge and techniques. Compliance with the relevant international instruments is also considered essential.

6. Equal access to land and legal security of land tenure for all people, especially women, the poor and indigenous communities, was stressed. A number of participants noted the relevance of the Habitat Agenda, adopted by the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II), held at Istanbul in 1996. Local control and responsibility for land management is considered to be a key priority, as is the linkage to local Agenda 21 programmes. One initiative discussed, the land care approach, features community-based partnerships for sustainable land management. A few speakers reported on their national policies for more equitable distribution of land, including land reform and restitution.

7. Growing urbanization throughout the world, particularly in developing countries, continued population pressures and unsustainable agricultural practices were cited as causes for increasing land degradation. It was suggested that the Commission address the interdependence between urban and rural areas in considering the planning and management of land resources.

8. In addition, the special ecological vulnerability of small island developing States was stressed, and the negative impact on land and food production caused by recent serious natural disasters, many associated with the El Niño phenomenon, was noted with concern. Full implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States was urged, as well as the provision of more scientific information on climate change.

9. Transparent, participatory and accountable decision-making in land-use planning was seen as essential in all countries. The involvement of civil society, women, the poor and indigenous communities is considered essential. Some participants also stressed the importance of improved institutional frameworks and "good governance"; others emphasized the need to develop and support research, assistance and outreach programmes that focus on the priorities and needs of small farmers.

10. With respect to sustainable agriculture and rural development, while noting that each country has its own needs and requirements participants stressed that the primary objective is to increase food production in a sustainable way and enhance food security for all, in accordance with chapter 14 of Agenda 21. Particular concern was raised about recent projections by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) that, at the current rate of progress, efforts to achieve the target set by the 1996 World Food Summit to reduce by half the number of undernourished by 2015 are unlikely to be successful. The international community, which recommitted itself to this target at the special session of the General Assembly held in 1997 to review the implementation of Agenda 21, was urged to demonstrate more tangible support, including increased flows of financial resources, especially official development assistance (ODA), and the transfer of technology to developing countries, in particular to the least developed countries.

11. It was further noted by many participants that, although total ODA flows have fallen sharply over recent years, assistance to the agricultural sector has also declined considerably since the 1980s. Efforts to reverse this situation were called for, including increased support for international agricultural research focusing on the needs of developing countries. The importance of support for the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) was stressed. In order to increase financing for sustainable agriculture, more private/public sector partnerships as well as North-South partnerships and better donor coordination were also called for.

12. Some speakers regretted the fact that agriculture seems to have lost some priority in the political agenda at both the national and international levels. This is a particularly worrisome development in the many countries where food security is most threatened. It was noted by a number of developing countries that although the concept of sustainable agriculture has come to be widely accepted, poorer countries have encountered many difficulties in promoting it due to financial and technological constraints. Participants urged action-oriented decisions by the Commission at its eighth session to revive the sense of urgency needed to give agriculture its proper place in the political agenda.

13. It was noted that the implementation of sustainable agriculture requires the full participation of consumers as well as producers. As agriculture becomes more demand-driven, the issues of food safety and environmentally sound technology are crucial. While the potential productivity gains resulting from biotechnology products may be encouraging, full information concerning their effects on human health and the environment has yet to be made available. Support was expressed for the recently concluded Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity, and Governments were urged to sign, ratify and implement this new instrument as soon as possible.

14. Many participants urged a more open multilateral trading system and the elimination of protectionist trade practices, including trade-distorting subsidies. Developing countries spoke of the need to achieve better market access for their agricultural commodities. Speakers called on the international community to commit itself to open, equitable and non-discriminatory international trade policies. Further research on the linkages between trade liberalization and sustainable development was suggested.

15. A number of speakers addressed the concept of the multifunctionality of land and agriculture, which was the focus of the FAO/Netherlands conference held at Maastricht in September 1999. While some participants saw the term as meaning that agriculture has many functions in addition to food production, including the conservation and protection of the rural environment and rural way of life, others saw it as justification for countries to institute trade-distorting measures. The different interpretations resulted in a lively debate about the usefulness of considering the concept as an additional or alternative one to sustainable agriculture and rural development. The majority of participants preferred not to divert the attention of the Commission to the multifunctionality issue since the concept had not gained international acceptance.

16. In considering possible follow-up actions to the discussion that the Commission could initiate in the area of sustainable agriculture and rural development, participants noted the very fruitful exchange of views during the two-day multi-stakeholder dialogue that had preceded the high-level segment. It was suggested that an informal ad hoc open-ended working group of major groups on sustainable agriculture and rural development issues, bringing together FAO and other relevant United Nations organizations, governments and major groups, be set up under the name "Consultative Forum on Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development". Other initiatives proposed include the further development of measurable indicators to assess compliance of targets to achieve integrated land management and sustainable agriculture; and a call for the Commission to conduct a comparative study of different country experience in the integrated planning and management of land resources. In addition, the Deputy-Secretary-General, in her opening statement, referred to the proposal contained in the Secretary-General’s millennium report (A/54/2000) that a high-level public policy network be convened to address the controversies concerning the risks and opportunities associated with the increased use of biotechnology and bioengineering.

 

Report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests

 

17. Ambassadors Bagher Asadi (Islamic Republic of Iran) and Ilka Ristimaki (Finland) made the presentation on the work done by the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF) of the Commission on Sustainable Development between 1997 and 1999.

18. In their remarks, they indicated that the process had lasted two years, during which three programme elements were analysed:

I. Promoting and facilitating the implementation of the proposals for action of the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF), and reviewing, monitoring and reporting on progress in the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forest;

II. Matters left pending and other issues arising from the programme elements of the IPF process;

III. International arrangements and mechanisms to promote the management, conservation, and sustainable development of all types of forests.

They also indicated that after long hours of negotiation, final consensus was reached in all three areas. They then presented the report of IFF on its fourth session (E/CN.17/2000/14) to the high-level segment of the Commission for its consideration.

Government statements

19. The participants expressed satisfaction with the progress achieved by IPF and IFF processes. Ministers expressed their strong commitment to implement the proposals for action by IPF and IFF. These proposals provide a solid basis for action to achieve sustainable forest management at the national, regional and global levels as well as for support and cooperation efforts by bilateral and multilateral institutions and international and regional organizations to achieve the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests.

20. The participants welcomed the consensus reached by IFF and its outcome. The participants recommended that the Commission endorse the report of IFF on its fourth session and forward it to the Economic and Social Council for action, particularly the recommendation to establish a new international arrangement on forests, including the proposed United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF). FAO offered to host the secretariat of UNFF.

21. The participants called for an early establishment of the international arrangement on forests, as outlined in the report of IFF, in order to seek long-term political commitment to the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests.

22. The participants stressed that UNFF should be established as early as possible and called for convening its first meeting in late 2000 or early 2001. UNFF should be established at a sufficiently high level to provide high visibility, political status and authority. It should be open to all States and operate in a transparent and participatory manner. UNFF should also maintain close links with the Commission and the governing bodies of other forest-related international and regional organizations, institutions and instruments. It was suggested that the consideration of the report of IFF by the Council could benefit from prior informal consultations.

23. The thematic multi-year programme of work of UNFF should be result- and action-oriented and place a high priority on facilitating the implementation of IPF and IFF proposals for action, particularly in the areas of financial resources, the transfer of technology, capacity-building and international trade in support of sustainable forest management. UNFF should monitor, assess and report on progress achieved in their implementation.

24. The support by the informal, high-level Inter-agency Task Force on Forests (ITFF) to the IPF and IFF processes was particularly commended. The collaborative partnership on forests, called for by IFF, should build on ITFF in order to enhance coordination and synergies among international organizations, institutions and instruments.

25. Many participants emphasized the need to mobilize financial resources to support the development and implementation of national forest programmes and other country-driven strategies.

26. NGOs endorsed the need for an open, transparent and participatory process and reiterated their readiness to contribute to the work of UNFF, including in consultations in the coming month prior to Council discussion. Non-governmental organizations also discussed the need for UNFF to be action-oriented, focusing on implementation of IPF and other commitments.

 

Preparations for the 10-year review of progress achieved since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development

 

Expert presentations

27. The Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs expressed the view that the 10-year review of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development event should focus on the implementation of Agenda 21 and the implementation of the various environmental conventions and agreements. He indicated that an effective analysis of the barriers to full implementation should be made. He also stated that, in order to ensure the success of the event, countries should undertake a national process to prepare for such meeting. He also highlighted the need to mobilize political will to achieve concrete results.

28. Yolanda Kakabadse, President of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, asked a series of questions related to the main objective of reviewing the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development process and Agenda 21, including: "Do we need a new objective for the 2002 meeting?", "Do we want to have a follow-up or make an evaluation?", "Is it necessary to develop a new vision for the next 10 to 20 years?", "Do we need a review of Agenda 21 and its conventions?" and "Is it necessary to revise the term ‘sustainable development’?". She also stressed the need to concentrate on the preparatory process for the 10-year review rather than on the event itself. She noted the need for a body to serve as a counterbalance to the World Trade Organization (WTO).

29. Klaus Topfer, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), began his presentation by noting that for the preparatory process of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, the international community had reviewed the problems that concerned it. He suggested adopting the same approach for the 10-year review, based on the question "What is the situation now?". He stressed the need to not reopen Agenda 21, and noted that the assessment of Agenda 21 should be made before the event. The name of the conference should send a special message, in the same way that "environment and development" sent a message for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. He noted that one of the main issues to be discussed should be poverty eradication in the sense that overcoming poverty should not be at the expense of the environment.

Government statements and dialogue

30. Ministers recognized that the 10-year review would be an opportunity to mobilize the political support of the international community for the further implementation of Agenda 21 and the outcomes of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Presentations and interventions emphasized that the 2002 review process would have the potential of increasing the level of commitment to sustainable development by Governments and civil society partners.

Political level

31. Ministers agreed that the 2002 event should provide for high political visibility and attract participation at the highest possible political level.

Venue

32. Participants were of the view that the 2002 event should be held in a developing country. The representatives of South Africa, Brazil and the Republic of Korea announced the willingness to host the 2002 event should the international community so decide.

Title of the 2002 event

33. Several proposals were made to add substance to the title of the 2002 event. The options included "World Summit of Sustainable Development", "World Summit on the Quality of Life", "Sustainable development in the era of globalization" and "Eradication of poverty, development and environment".

Participation

34. Ministers stressed the importance of ensuring a productive dialogue among all partners. The involvement and participation of the private sector, non-governmental organizations, youth groups, the scientific community and other major groups as identified in Agenda 21 would be crucial, and should be supported not only in the event itself but also throughout the preparatory process.

Financing

35. Ministers agreed that financing of developing countries, in particular the least developed countries as well as economies in transition and stakeholders, is critical to ensure adequate involvement in the preparatory process and during the 2002 event. A proposal was made to establish a trust fund for voluntary contributions for this purpose. Some delegations expressed the willingness of their Governments to make a financial contribution to the process.

Goals of the 2002 event

36. Participants recognized the need to establish clear goals for the 2002 event in order to ensure a meaningful outcome and to emphasize the political importance of the 2002 event in the eyes of the public at large and high-level policy makers. Such goals could include: (a) the global commitment to a renewed North-South partnership and a higher level of international solidarity to further promote sustainable development, and (b) the adoption of a focused and forward-looking agenda for an effective and efficient follow up to the 10-year review, including strengthening the institutional capacity of the United Nations system to promote sustainable development, and a future work programme of the Commission. A number of participants suggested that the 2002 event would provide an excellent opportunity to promote, at the highest political level, the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention Climate Change and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

37. There was consensus among the participants that Agenda 21 continues to provide a solid and vital foundation on which to build. All participants agreed that Agenda 21 should not be renegotiated. The 2002 review should, however, not be limited to Agenda 21 but also take into consideration new and emerging issues that would warrant consideration given changing global conditions after the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, including globalization and its impact on sustainable development as well as the challenges and opportunities that have resulted from technological advances, in particular in the area of communication technology.

Agenda of the 2002 event

38. Ministers highlighted the need for a focused and action-oriented agenda, which would greatly facilitate the preparatory process, provide a point of departure for addressing priorities and new challenges in the field of sustainable development, and allow for substantive and forward-looking results. Many emphasized that sustainable development should remain the main framework for the discussion. Therefore, an integrated approach to the 2002 review and assessment should be applied.

39. A variety of issues on which the agenda of the 2002 event could be focused was suggested, such as poverty and sustainable development; climate change; biodiversity, including biosafety; the protection and sustainable management of water resources; energy; sustainable forest management; access to financial resources and technology; education; distribution equity; and environmental security.

40. In choosing priorities for focusing the agenda for 2002, participants considered the following:

• Promoting more sustainable patterns of production and consumption patterns continues to be of great importance;

• Poverty and the interrelationship between poverty reduction and sustainable development need to be adequately addressed;

• The agreed target for countries to adopt a national sustainable development strategy by 2002 should be reviewed to learn from experience gained and further explore ways of improving the quality and relevance of such strategies;

• Enhancing the quality of life in line with considerations of environmental impact on health, employment and human well-being remains essential in the overall context of achieving sustainable development objectives;

• Assessment of existing environmental institutions.

Preparatory process

41. Participants also agreed that high-quality and early preparations at all levels would be essential to the success and the outcomes of the 2002 event.

42. Ministers discussed options for the organization of the preparatory process leading up to the 2002 event. It was proposed that for the intergovernmental preparatory process for the 2002 review an open ended format be applied to allow for participation by all Governments, non-governmental organizations, the private sector, scientists and other relevant stakeholders. It was suggested that the Commission on Sustainable Development could be transformed into a open-ended preparatory committee so that it could coordinate and integrate various inputs into the review process. Many agreed that the intergovernmental process should include a number of preparatory sessions, which should prepare but "not prejudge" the 2002 event. Many participants agreed that the comprehensive review and assessment should be carried out in the context of the preparatory process not at the event itself.

43. Ministers emphasized the importance of the country- and region-based review processes, which should commence as soon as possible.

44. It was emphasized that countries need to make their own assessments through a collective effort, including Governments and all other stakeholders. A proposal was made to establish national participatory processes to facilitate a coordinated review process at the country level and facilitate inter-linkages with regional preparatory processes. The national councils for sustainable development or their equivalents could play an important role in facilitating national preparations.

45. Regional preparatory processes should be established to determine, based on the outcome of the national preparatory processes, regional priorities and new initiatives for the further implementation of Agenda 21. Reviews and assessments should be carried out by Governments and all other stakeholders, with the support of the United Nations system. Action taken to implement Agenda 21 and constraints that have hampered its effective implementation need to be addressed, along with measures to accelerate the further implementation of Agenda 21. These reviews and assessments should serve to identify (a) areas where progress has been made, (b) areas where further effort is needed and (c) new challenges and opportunities that have emerged since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. It would be useful if a common format for regional preparations could be prepared to promote greater comparability of reviews and assessments undertaken.

46. The elements for future work in the field of sustainable development that were identified during the national and regional preparatory processes should inform the intergovernmental preparatory process. Regional institutions, including the regional commissions, could also greatly facilitate regional preparations.

47. The participants stressed that the 2002 review should benefit, as much as possible, from the preparations and outcomes of the review processes of other relevant major United Nations conferences held since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development as well as the high-level consultation on finance for development scheduled to take place in 2001.

48. Ministers also discussed options regarding the secretariat support for the 2002 review. Many expressed the view that the Commission secretariat is in a position to undertake, in close cooperation with UNEP and other parts of the United Nations system, the role of facilitating the preparatory process. It was also suggested that the Commission secretariat, in close cooperation with UNEP and other agencies of the United Nations system, be assisted by a group of eminent persons and experts and a full-time coordinator, for the organization of the 2002 event and preparatory process.

 

Panel on trade and indigenous people

 

49. The high-level segment included in its proceedings a panel of indigenous people on 26 April 2000. The panel discussions focused on the topic "Trade and indigenous people". Indigenous panelists included Victoria Tauli-Corpuz (Igorot, Philippines), Tomas Alcaron (Peru), Ella Henry (Maori, New Zealand), Juan Leon (Maya, Guatemala) and Tonya Gonella Frischner (Pine Ridge Reservation, United States of America). Ms. Tauli-Corpuz moderated the presentations of the panellists. Other indigenous representatives participated from the audience. Full texts of the presentations of the panellists are available on the web site of the Commission secretariat.

50. Ms. Henry provided a brief history of the Maori and explained that they are attempting to build a participatory economy founded on sustainable economic growth that is both quantitative and qualitative, capacity development and enhancement, self-determination, physical and spiritual well-being of the community, and enduring and equitable partnerships with the non-Maori. She challenged the Government of New Zealand to work in partnership with the Maori in this endeavour and the World Trade Organization to have the courage to hear the pleas of indigenous peoples.

51. Mr. Alcaron focused on the impact of globalization on the indigenous peoples of the Andean region. He argued that development programmes in the area, such as intensive agricultural production, growing tourism and overuse of natural resources are largely at the expense of the local indigenous communities, and that distorted applications of the Southern Cone Common Market (MERCOSUR) agreement is endangering the cultural identity and diversity of these communities. Indigenous peoples of the Andes have conducted agricultural production that has been sustainable for generations based on their particular cosmic vision, which emphasizes protection of nature. He felt that regional and international trade policies lack cultural and spiritual values, making them weak in the long term.

52. Mr. Leon argued that the prevailing economic principles have led to loss of human sensitivities and ethical values, while increasing materialistic and ultimately self-destructive approaches to life. He said humanity couldn’t continue being materialistic, insensitive and selfish if it wants to embark on a sustainable path. He explained the Mayan cosmic vision, which emphasizes harmony, balance and respect for all elements of nature, of which humans are merely a part. The Maya perspective takes on a long-term view that aims to provide for the young and future generations with a useful existence and a path clear of obstacles.

53. Ms. Frischner mentioned that indigenous peoples’ lands are often undeveloped or underdeveloped, making them prime targets for development projects. However, these projects are often unresponsive and abusive of the natural, cultural and spiritual values of indigenous people. She felt the term "sustainable development" is contradictory since development could inherently not be sustainable. Regional trade agreements, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and international trade regimes under the World Trade Organization, create industry-driven trade rather than trade that aims to fulfil the needs of the people. She made a number of recommendations, including the creation of a permanent forum of indigenous people within the World Trade Organization, the public review of current trade policies, establishing North-South dialogue that considers the North’s need for standards and the South’s need for sustainability, and the implementation of and support for ILO Convention No. 169 and the draft declaration on the rights of indigenous people.

54. Subsequent discussion acknowledged the potential benefits of learning from indigenous people’s vision and wisdom, particularly for modern society, in which the social and environmental fabric is increasingly decaying. Indigenous people embody an important and fundamental conflict: the gap between their extraordinarily high spiritual wealth versus their utter lack of material wealth. Bridging this gap is a challenge not only for indigenous people but also for all humanity, as it has the potential to renew a set of common cultural values around the world.

55. A recommendation was put forward to create and strengthen existing spaces.

 

Finance and Investment

 

Expert presentations

56. Konrad von Moltke, Senior Fellow at the International Institute for Sustainable Development, and José Antonio Ocampo, Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, made introductory presentations for the high-level segment session on the theme "Finance and investment".

57. Mr. Von Moltke highlighted the need to ensure a balance between investors’ rights and public obligations in a non-discriminatory manner. He noted that an investment regime needed a different approach from a regulation of goods. He also noted the need for a regulatory framework for investment to be considered outside the World Trade Organization, and that the multilateral environmental agreements offered an opportunity to advance the international investment debate. He also highlighted the role of the Commission in pursuing this debate.

58. Mr. Ocampo noted five major trends affecting financing of sustainable development: decline in ODA; increase in private capital flows, but with volatility and high concentration in developed countries, which has further marginalized the poor countries; slow evolution of domestic financial quality for sustainable development, which has affected the fragility of relevant State institutions; and the operation of international multilateral funds of a concessional nature. Mr. Ocampo called for the fulfilment of commitments made at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Regarding foreign direct investment (FDI), he called for developing criteria for FDI and to direct it to clean energy projects. He advocated strengthening public institutions, including taxation, and felt that international agreements on taxation duties should be obtained for the full implementation of environmental instruments. On public good and global environmental services, he used the example of the clean development mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol as constituting a way for developing countries to meet commitments with lower costs.

Government statements and dialogue

59. Delegations emphasized the importance of ODA for the financing of sustainable development in developing countries and countries with economies in transition. Donor countries reiterated their commitment towards the fulfilment of the agreed United Nations commitment of 0.7 per cent of gross national product (GNP) and 0.2 per cent of GNP for the least developed countries. Many delegations emphasized that the economies of developing countries, particularly the least developed countries, lack the capacity to implement the programme of sustainable development as envisaged by Agenda 21. The international community was called upon to take immediate and decisive action to deal with the issue of ODA in order to reverse the declining trend and increases in the levels of ODA by the time of the 10-year review of United Nations Conference on Environment and Development.

60. Some delegations emphasized that not only the quantity but also the quality of ODA needs to be enhanced, and that ODA should be focused on poverty eradication. These countries expressed the view that the Commission should recognize the need for more efficient delivery, with clearer links to international development targets. They also stated that there is a need for improved allocation between countries and sectors, which takes account of the prevalence of poverty and the policy environment in recipient countries, and a need for better coordination between Governments, donors and multilateral organizations.

61. Some delegations noted that there should also be efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of ODA, and stressed in this regard the role of "good governance" and the rule of law. One delegation pointed out that it is important to define what is meant by good governance. ODA can also be used for capacity-building in this area, which may in turn lead to an increase in capital flows.

62. With respect to debt, it was generally agreed that debt relief is an important part of a financial strategy for sustainable development. The debt of a large number of the poorest countries is a drain on the resources they need for investment in poverty alleviation and social and environmental advancement. Many countries stated that the debt burden is totally unsustainable, and that the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative has not brought sufficient relief to the marginalized group of countries. They proposed that the debt burden either be written off or substantially reduced for developing countries, in particular the least developed countries.

63. Some countries also stated that the enhanced HIPC Initiative will now provide deeper, broader and faster debt relief to indebted countries committed to eradicating poverty. They encouraged all eligible countries to implement the policy measures necessary to enter the process, and called upon donors to implement their financing pledges and forgive bilateral aid debts for qualifying countries. One country noted that considerable progress has been made in securing funding for the uncovered multilateral costs of the enhanced HIPC Initiative through the initial phase, and that it will be seeking an additional contribution to the HIPC Trust Fund.

64. As regards investment, it was noted by some delegations that increased investment flows are one of the most important economic forces contributing to sustainable development. In particular, they noted that FDI is playing an increasingly important role in fostering economic development in many developing countries, but that it requires a stable, predictable and transparent investment climate. They emphasized that through partnerships, the transfer of knowledge and environmentally sound technologies and the adoption of effective environmental management practices, such investments assist in achieving economic, environmental and social objectives. The role of capital flight, particularly from developing countries, was raised. Multilateral regimes on investment supportive of sustainable development, balancing rights with obligations of investors, could facilitate this. Regional economic groups, such as the European Union, NAFTA and MERCOSUR, might develop such regimes more quickly than could be done at the global level.

65. However, it was also noted that there is concern over the fact that there is a large concentration of FDI and other capital flows to only a small number of developing countries, which combined with the generally lower levels of ODA is of particular concern for the least developed countries that remain heavily dependent on external finance.

66. One participant proposed that investment provisions be included in multilateral environmental agreements. A proposal supported by one delegation, which suggested that the idea merited further consideration.

67. There was a statement by one delegation that there is a need for the international community to financially assist countries which have suffered economic damage caused by military conflicts in their region and natural disasters. It was emphasized that military conflicts in that region have had a highly negative influence on both its economic development and on its environment.

68. With regard to domestic resources, it was recognized that the main source of financing for the implementation of Agenda 21 is expected to be domestic resources. It was emphasized by some that since domestic resources are the main source of financing they should be addressed first and given priority when discussing financing for the implementation of Agenda 21. However, it was also expressed by many delegations that the economies of developing countries, particularly the least developed countries, lack the capacity to implement the programme of sustainable development as envisaged by Agenda 21. In addition, these same countries emphasized that the innovative financial mechanisms meant to support the flow of resources to developing countries should not be a substitute for ODA and the assistance expected from developed countries.

 

Trade

 

Expert presentations

69. In a videotaped message to the Commission, Michael Moore, Director-General of the World Trade Organization noted that the World Trade Organization objectives are fully compatible with Agenda 21 and that the World Trade Organization may contribute to sustainable development through trade agreements with non trade-discriminatory environmental objectives. He stated that although the World Trade Organization is not an environmental protection agency, it deals with aspects of environment that might affect trade. As to how the World Trade Organization contributes to sustainable development, he mentioned the activities of the World Trade Organization Committee on Trade and Environment, whose aim is to explore ways and means to make trade and environmental policies mutually supportive. He also noted the need to take into consideration the evolving relationship between multilateral environmental agreements and multilateral trade agreements, and called for strengthening the international trade system, noting that agricultural negotiations could make a significant contribution to both economic and environmental sustainability. He expressed his confidence that the Commission would elaborate action plans in a way that is mutually supportive of the World Trade Organization.

70. Martin Khor, Director of the Third World Network, emphasized that the following issues had been made clearer by the World Trade Organization process: many developing countries were not aware of what they signed at the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations; developing countries are generally against introducing more issues into the World Trade Organization; the North has not implemented some of its major commitments to the South; the South itself faces major problems from having to fulfil its own obligations, which hinder development opportunities; implementation problems arise from the Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Agreement; other World Trade Organization agreements and procedures require review and changes, including the services and subsidies agreements and the dispute settlement system; the approach towards trade liberalization needs to be rethought; and there are legitimate concerns that unbridled free markets and trade can and have contributed to unsustainable patterns of production and consumption. Mr. Khor noted that the Commission can play a useful role in the trade policy process since it is the guardian of the interrelation of environment and development, the rich concept of sustainable development and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. He also noted that the Commission’s deliberations should be fed back to the World Trade Organization.

Government statements and dialogue

71. There was general agreement that trade is one of the best means to achieve and promote sustainable development, and that trade and investment must be strengthened as vehicles for poverty eradication, social equity and sound environmental management. Many delegations noted that a certain number of requirements have to be met in order to ensure that trade liberalization plays a positive role in sustainable development. International rules and regulations, codes of conduct, and technology transfer and capacity-building between countries and regions are important to this end. The pursuit of trade and environmental policies should be complementary, and environmental measures should not act as unnecessary obstacles to trade and should not be intentionally protectionist. Delegates agreed that it is also necessary to make the World Trade Organization more responsive to environmental concerns.

72. Developing countries, in particular the least developed countries, must be better integrated into the multilateral trading system, and must be able to reap the benefits of trade liberalization for development and poverty eradication. Improved market access, special and differential treatment, technical and financial assistance and their increased participation in World Trade Organization work and negotiations are essential. Developing countries should fully participate in the decision-making process on issues related to trade and environment, including the international standards-making process. Many delegations emphasized that the principle of common but differentiated responsibility, as worked out through the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development process, should also be recognized.

73. Some delegations suggested that a new comprehensive round of World Trade Organization trade liberalization is the best way to promote a more open, equitable and transparent trading system, taking into account interests of all countries, in particular the developing countries. They also stated that it is necessary to prevent and offset potential transitory negative effects of trade liberalization and maximize its benefits for all members of society, with particular attention to those living in poverty and vulnerable groups, such as women and children. These same countries reiterated their commitment to grant duty-free and quota-free access to essentially all exports of least developed countries.

74. One delegation indicated that the Commission must give a clear signal that relevant multilateral agreements in the areas of trade and environment must contribute to sustainable development. Another delegation noted that the relationship between multilateral environmental agreements and World Trade Organization agreements deserves more attention. Some delegations stressed the importance of recognizing that multilateral environmental agreements and World Trade Organization agreements are of equal status, and that the use of trade measures in MEAs should be given broad recognition in the World Trade Organization. They expressed the view that the relationship between trade rules and United Nations Conference on Environment and Development principles, particularly the precautionary principle, needs to be clarified. The compatibility of labelling schemes with trade rules needs to be recognized.

75. Some delegations stressed that new and ongoing initiatives can significantly contribute to promoting the mutual supportiveness of trade and environmental policies. They also stressed that sustainability impact assessments can be an effective tool for policy makers at the national level to develop more consistent policy responses that integrate environment and development concerns. Continuing exchange of experience in the development of this tool should be encouraged. Some delegations stressed that sustainability impact assessments should not be used as a barrier to trade and investment.

76. Many delegations stressed the need for the developed countries to eliminate trade-distorting policies, protectionist practices and non-tariff barriers to trade in order to improve market access for exports from developing countries. It was also emphasized that efforts should be undertaken to remove subsidies related to fisheries and agricultural exports since this would be beneficial for trade, economic growth, and the environment.

77. The transfer of environmentally sound technologies to developing countries should involve the sharing of knowledge and expertise required to manage technological changes and the development of human resources. This would enhance the ability of developing countries to respond to environmental challenges. Some delegations noted that the transfer of such environmentally sound technologies has not been as widespread or as rapid as needed.

78. Many countries noted that the long-term effects of the products of biotechnology on environment and sustainable development must be established before they are introduced into markets or exported to developing countries.

79. It is necessary to enhance cooperation at the international level, keeping in mind the need for technical assistance and capacity-building in developing countries. It is essential to promote cooperation and complementarity of work within and outside the United Nations system.

80. Delegates also addressed the question of rebuilding trust between developed and developing countries. One way of doing this is to encourage joint work between various organizations and groups. One delegation pointed out that trust should also be built through assistance with capacity-building and transfer of technology. Several delegations commented favourably on the UNEP-United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) capacity-building initiative. Furthermore, developing countries must be treated as equals, particularly in World Trade Organization negotiations.

81. Several delegations emphasized the need for coherence between environment and trade policies at the national level as well as in the positions adopted at the international level.

Chapter IV
Sectoral theme: integrated planning and management of land resources

 

1. The Commission considered item 3 of its agenda at its 2nd and 13th meetings, on 24 April and 5 May 2000. It had before it the following documents:

(a) Report of the Secretary-General on the integrated planning and management of land resources (E/CN.17/2000/6);

(b) Addendum: combating deforestation (E/CN.17/2000/6/Add.1);

(c) Addendum: combating desertification and drought (E/CN.17/2000/6/Add.2);

(d) Addendum: sustainable mountain development (E/CN.17/2000/6/Add.3);

(e) Addendum: conservation of biological diversity (E/CN.17/2000/6/Add.4);

(f) Report of the Inter-sessional Ad Hoc Working Group on Integrated Planning and Management of Land Resources; and on Agriculture, New York, 28 February-3 March 2000 (E/CN.17/2000/11).

2. At its 2nd meeting, on 24 April, the Commission considered the item jointly with item 4 and heard presentations by Patrick McDonnell (Ireland), Co-Chairman of the Inter-sessional Ad Hoc Working Group on Integrated Planning and Management of Land Resources; and on Agriculture, as well as by Choi Seok-young (Republic of Korea), Co-Chairman of the Ad Hoc Inter-sessional Working Group on Financial Resources and Mechanisms and on Economic Growth, Trade and Investment (see chap.V, para. 2).

3. At the same meeting, the representatives of the Netherlands, Australia and Switzerland reported on government initiatives.

4. Also at the 2nd meeting, the observer for Honduras made a statement.

5. At the same meeting, the Officer-in-Charge of the National Information, Strategies and Institutions Branch, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, reported on the results of the Forum of National Sustainable Development Councils.

 

Action taken by the Commission

 

Integrated planning and management of land resources

6. At its 13th meeting, on 5 May, the Commission had before it a draft decision entitled "Integrated planning and management of land resources", submitted by the Vice-Chairman of the Commission, Patrick McDonnell (Ireland), on the basis of informal consultations.

7. At the same meeting, the Vice-Chairman, Patrick McDonnell (Ireland), reported on the outcome of final consultations on the draft decision.

8. Also at the 13th meeting, the Commission adopted the draft text (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/3).

Agriculture

9. At its 13th meeting, on 5 May, the Commission had before it a draft decision entitled "Agriculture", submitted by the Vice-Chairman of the Commission, Patrick McDonnell (Ireland), on the basis of informal consultations.

10. At the same meeting, the Vice-Chairman, Patrick McDonnell (Ireland), reported on the outcome of final consultations on the draft decision.

11. Also at the 13th meeting, the Commission adopted the draft text (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/4).

12. At the same meeting, the Commission took note of documents E/CN.17/2000/6 and addenda 1-4 and E/CN.17/2000/11.

Cross-sectoral theme: financial resources/trade and investment/economic growth

 

1. The Commission considered item 4 of its agenda at its 2nd and 13th meetings, on 24 April and 5 May 2000. It had before it the following documents:

(a) Report of the Secretary-General on the financial resources and mechanisms (E/CN.17/2000/2);

(b) Report of the Secretary-General on economic growth, trade and investment (E/CN.17/2000/4);

(c) Note verbale dated 14 February 2000 from the Permanent Mission of Kenya to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General (E/CN.17/2000/9), transmitting the Chairman’s summary of the Fifth Expert Group Meeting on Financial Issues of Agenda 21, held at Nairobi from 1 to 4 December 1999;

(d) Report of the Ad Hoc Inter-sessional Working Group on Financial Resources and Mechanisms and on Economic Growth, Trade and Investment, New York, 22-25 February 2000 (E/CN.17/2000/10).

2. At its 2nd meeting, on 24 April, the Commission considered the item jointly with item 3 and heard presentations by Choi Seok-young (Republic of Korea), Co-Chairman of the Ad Hoc Inter-sessional Working Group on Financial Resources and Mechanisms and on Economic Growth, Trade and Investment, as well as Patrick McDonnell (Ireland), Co-Chairman of the Inter-sessional Ad Hoc Working Group on Integrated Planning and Management of Land Resources; and on Agriculture (see chap. IV, para. 2).

3. At the same meeting, the representatives of the Netherlands, Australia and Switzerland reported on government initiatives.

4. Also at the 2nd meeting, the observer for Honduras made a statement.

5. At the same meeting, the Officer-in-Charge of the National Information, Strategies and Institutions Branch, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, reported on the results of the Forum of National Sustainable Development Councils.

 

Action taken by the Commission

 

Financial resources and mechanisms

6. At its 13th meeting, on 5 May, the Commission had before it a draft decision entitled "Financial resources", submitted by the Vice-Chairman of the Commission, Choi Seok-young (Republic of Korea), on the basis of informal consultations.

7. At the same meeting, the Vice-Chairman, Choi Seok-young (Republic of Korea), reported on the outcome of final consultations on the draft decision.

8. Also at the 13th meeting, statements were made by the representatives of Japan, the United States of America, New Zealand and the Sudan, as well as by the observers for Nigeria (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China) and Australia.

9. At the same meeting, the Commission adopted the draft text (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/5).

Economic growth, trade and investment

10. At its 13th meeting, on 5 May, the Commission had before it a draft decision entitled "Economic growth, trade and investment", submitted by the Vice-Chairman of the Commission, Choi Seok-young (Republic of Korea), on the basis of informal consultations.

11. At the same meeting, the Vice-Chairman, Choi Seok-young (Republic of Korea), reported on the outcome of final consultations on the draft decision.

12. Also at the 13th meeeting, statements were made by the representatives of the Sudan, the United States of America and New Zealand, as well as by the observers for Australia, Nigeria (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China) and Norway.

13. At the same meeting, the Commission adopted the draft text (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/6).

14. Also at the 13th meeting, the Commission took note of documents E/CN.17/2000/2, E/CN.17/2000/4 and E/CN.17/2000/10.

15. At the same meeting, the representative of Japan made the following statement:

"My delegation has a specific problem with the draft decision put forward for adoption, as the set of brackets in paragraph 10 indicates.

"It is not the time to engage in a long debate.

"My delegation would like to point out, however, that Japan is fully committed to implementing the enhanced HIPC Initiative. Last month, Japan decided to take additional measures that include enhanced debt relief of up to 100 per cent of non-ODA claims for eligible HIPCs and further contributions of up to US$ 200 million in total to the World Bank’s HIPC Trust Fund.

"My delegation’s insistence on the three words in paragraph 10 is another indication of how seriously Japan takes the issue of debt relief.

"Having stated the above, my delegation reiterates that it does not intend to prolong the debate. And in the spirit of compromise, my delegation is fully prepared to join the consensus on the text of the draft decision, agreeing to delete the three words in brackets in paragraph 10, with the following understanding:

"Namely, that my delegation takes it that the term "cancellation" used in paragraph 10 includes the relief that is being recognized as being equivalent to cancellation.

"Mr. Chairman, my delegation requests the statement just made be duly reflected in the report of this session of the Commission on Sustainable Development."

Chapter VI
Economic sector/major group: agriculture

 

1. The Commission considered item 5 of its agenda at its 3rd to 6th and 13th meetings, on 24 and 25 April and 5 May 2000. It had before it the following documents:

(a) Note by the Secretary-General on the multi-stakeholder dialogue on sustainable agriculture (E/CN.17/2000/3);

(b) Addendum: discussion paper contributed by the International Agri-Food Network (E/CN.17/2000/3/Add.1);

(c) Addendum: discussion paper contributed by the International Federation of Agricultural Producers and Via Campesina (E/CN.17/2000/3/Add.2);

(d) Addendum: discussion paper contributed by the trade unions (E/CN.17/2000/3/Add.3);

(e) Discussion paper contributed by the non-governmental organizations (E/CN.17/2000/3/Add.4);

(f) Report of the Secretary-General on sustainable agriculture and rural development: trends in national implementation (E/CN.17/2000/5);

(g) Addendum: some highlights on national trends in sustainable forest management (E/CN.17/2000/5/Add.1);

(h) Report of the Secretary-General on sustainable agriculture and rural development (E/CN.17/2000/7);

(i) Addendum: urbanization and sustainable agricultural development (E/CN.17/2000/7/Add.1);

(j) Addendum: biotechnology for sustainable agriculture (E/CN.17/2000/7/Add.2);

(k) Addendum: linkages between agriculture, land and water (E/CN.17/2000/7/Add.3);

(l) Report of the Inter-sessional Ad Hoc Working Group on Integrated Planning and Management of Land Resources; and on Agriculture (E/CN.17/2000/11).

2. At its 3rd meeting, on 24 April, the Commission heard presentations by representatives from industry, farmers, trade unions, indigenous peoples and non-governmental organizations groups on sustainable agriculture.

3. At the same meeting, the representatives of Bolivia and the Netherlands made statements in response to the stakeholders’ presentations.

4. Also at the 3rd meeting, statements were made by the representatives of Egypt, France, the United States of America and Canada, as well as the observers for Nigeria and Bolivia.

5. At its 4th meeting, on 24 April, the Commission heard presentations by representatives from industry, farmers, trade unions, indigenous peoples and non-governmental organizations groups on best practices in land resource management to achieve sustainable food cycles.

6. At the same meeting, the representatives of Egypt and Japan made statements in response to the stakeholders’ presentations.

7. Also at the 4th meeting, statements were made by the representatives of Brazil, Canada and Egypt, as well as the observers for Bolivia and Nigeria.

8. At its 5th meeting, on 25 April, the Commission heard presentations by representatives from industry, farmers, trade unions, indigenous peoples and non-governmental organizations groups on knowledge for a sustainable food system.

9. At the same meeting, the representatives of Nigeria and Germany made statements in response to the stakeholder’s presentations.

10. Also at the 5th meeting, statements were made by the representatives of the Russian Federation and France, as well as the observers for Bolivia, Australia and Nigeria.

11. At the 6th meeting, on 25 April, the Commission heard presentations by representatives from industry, farmers, trade unions, indigenous peoples and non-governmental organizations groups on globalization, trade liberalization and investment patterns.

12. At the same meeting, the representatives of South Africa and Australia and the observer for the European Commission made statements in response to the stakeholders’ presentations.

13. Also at the 6th meeting, statements were made by the representatives of the Sudan, France, Japan, Germany, Sweden, the United States of America and Tunisia, as well as by the observers for Senegal and Honduras.

14. At the same meeting, the representative of the World Bank made a statement.

 

Action taken by the Commission

 

15. At the 6th meeting, the Commission decided to take note of documents E/CN.17/2000/3 and addenda 1-4 and E/CN.17/2000/5 and Add.1 (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/11).

Chapter VII
Report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests

 

1. The Commission considered item 6 of its agenda at its 12th meeting on 5 May 2000. It had before it the report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests on its fourth session (E/CN.17/2000/14) (see also chap. VIII, below).

 

Action taken by the Commission

 

2. At the 12th meeting, on 5 May, the Vice-Chairman, Zvetolyub Basmajiev (Bulgaria) drew the attention of the Commission to the recommendation contained in the report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests on its fourth session (E/CN.17/2000/14) and introduced a draft decision entitled "Report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests on its fourth session" contained in document E/CN.17/2000/L.9.

3. At the same meeting, the Secretary of the Commission read out a statement regarding the programme budget implications associated with draft decision E/CN.17/2000/L.9 and a correction to document E/CN.17/2000/14 (see annex III).

4. Also at the 12th meeting, statements were made by the representatives of Canada, the Russian Federation, the Sudan, Brazil, the United States of America, Portugal (on behalf of the European Union) and Cuba, as well as the observers for Nigeria (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China), Honduras and Morocco.

5. At the same meeting, the Commission adopted the draft decision (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/2).

6. Also at the 12th meeting, the Commission decided to take note of the report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests on its fourth session (E/CN.17/2000/14) (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/11).

Chapter VIII
High-level meeting

 

1. The Commission considered item 7 of its agenda at its 7th to 11th and 12th meetings, on 26 and 27 April and 5 May 2000 (see also chap. VII, above). It had before it the following documents:

(a) Report of the Secretary-General on financial resources and mechanisms (E/CN.17/2000/2);

(b) Report of the Secretary-General on economic growth, trade and investment (E/CN.17/2000/4);

(c) Report of the Ad Hoc Inter-sessional Working Group on Financial Resources and Mechanisms and on Economic Growth, Trade and Investment, New York, 22-25 February 2000 (E/CN.17/2000/10);

(d) Report of the Inter-sessional Ad Hoc Working Group on Integrated Planning and Management of Land Resources; and on Agriculture, New York, 28 February-3 March 2000 (E/CN.17/2000/11);

(e) Report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests on its fourth session, New York, 31 January-11 February 2000 (E/CN.17/2000/14);

(f) Report of the Secretary-General on the preliminary views and suggestions on the preparations for the 10-year review of the implementation of the outcome of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (E/CN.17/2000/15);

(g) Letter dated 5 April 2000 from the Permanent Representatives of Ecuador and the Netherlands to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General transmitting the Conclusions of the Chair of the International Experts Meeting on Sustainability Assessment of Trade Liberalization, held in Quito, Ecuador, from 6 to 8 March 2000 (E/CN.17/2000/19);

(h) Note by the Secretariat on the draft medium-term plan of the Division for Sustainable Development of the United Nations Secretariat for the period 2002-2005 (E/CN.17/2000/CRP.1).

2. At the 7th meeting, on 26 April, the Deputy Secretary-General addressed the Commission.

3. At the same meeting, statements on land and agriculture were made by the Minister of Environment and Land-Use Planning of Portugal and Franz Fischler, member of the European Commission responsible for Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries (both speaking on behalf of the European Union, as well as Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta); the observer for Nigeria (speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China); the Minister of State of the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development of Ireland; the Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs of South Africa; the Secretary of State of Argentina; the Permanent Representative of China; the Deputy Secretary, Department of Agriculture of the United States of America; the Minister for the Environment and Heritage of Australia; the Permanent Representative of Samoa (on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS)); the Minister of Environment of Iceland; the Minister of Agriculture and Lands of Sri Lanka; the observer for Uruguay; the Permanent Representative of Tonga (on behalf of the members of the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC)); the Deputy Minister for Environment, Natural Resources and Forest Development of Bolivia; the Minister for Agriculture and Environment of Austria; and the Permanent Representative of Belarus.

4. Also at the 7th meeting, the Commission heard expert presentations by Gordon Conway, President of the Rockefeller Foundation, and Miguel Altieri of the University of California, focusing on land and agriculture.

5. At the same meeting, the Commission engaged in an interactive dialogue and the following intervened: the Republic of Korea, Indonesia, France, Canada, Japan and Egypt.

6. Also at the 7th meeting, the observer for the Helsinki Commission, an intergovernmental organization, made a statement.

7. At the 8th meeting, on 26 April, the Commission heard presentations by Nitin Desai, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, Yolanda Kakabadse, President of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, and Klaus Töpfer, Executive Director, United Nations Environment Programme.

8. At the same meeting, the Commission engaged in an interactive dialogue and the following intervened: Mexico, the Netherlands, Denmark, New Zealand, France, Egypt, Guyana, the United States of America and Belgium, as well as the observers for Argentina, Bolivia, South Africa, Honduras and Nigeria.

9. Also at the 8th meeting, statements were made on the preparations for the 2002 review of progress achieved since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development by the Minister of Agriculture of Nigeria (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China), the Minister of Environment and Land-Use Planning of Portugal (on behalf of the European Union, as well as Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta); the State Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Japan; the Minister of the Environment and Development Cooperation of Finland; the Minister of Environment of Canada, the Minister of Environment of Luxembourg, the Minister of the Environment of the Czech Republic; the Minister for Environment, Nature Protection and Nuclear Safety of Germany; the Deputy Permanent Representative of Cuba; the Minister for the Environment of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; the Minister of Environment of Poland; the Director of the Federal Office of Environment, Forests and Landscapes of Switzerland; the Vice-Minister, Ministry of the Environment of Brazil; the Deputy Minister of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of Kazakhstan; the Minister Plenipotentiary in Charge of International Cooperation for the Development and Environment of Monaco; the State Minister of Environment Affairs of Indonesia; the Minister of Environment of the Republic of Korea; the Minister for the Environment of Sweden; and the Chairman of the State Committee for Environmental Protection of the Russian Federation.

10. At the same meeting, statements were made by the observers for the Youth Delegation of the Netherlands and the United Nations Environment and Development-United Kingdom Committee, non-governmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council.

11. At the 9th meeting, on 26 April, the Commission heard presentations by the Co-Chairmen of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests at its fourth session, Ilkka Ristimaki (Finland) and Bagher Asadi (Islamic Republic of Iran).

12. At the same meeting, the Commission engaged in an interactive dialogue and the following intervened: the United States of America, Peru, the Russian Federation, Brazil, Denmark, Canada and New Zealand, as well as the observers for Bolivia and Chile.

13. Also at the 9th meeting, statements were made on the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests by the observer for Nigeria (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China); the Secretary of State of Portugal (on behalf of the European Union, as well as Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey); the representative of Costa Rica; the Permanent Representative of Spain; and the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management of Austria.

14. At the same meeting, the representative of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations made a statement.

15. Also at the 9th meeting, a statement was made by the observer for the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, an intergovernmental organization.

16. At the same meeting, a statement was made by the observer for the Sierra Club, speaking on behalf of non-governmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council.

17. At the 10th meeting, on 27 April, the Commission heard presentations by Konrad von Moltke, Director of International Affairs, Dartmouth University, United States of America, and Senior Fellow, International Institute for Sustainable Development; and José Antonio Ocampo, Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean.

18. At the same meeting, the Commission engaged in an interactive dialogue and the following intervened: the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Egypt, the Philippines, Japan, Guyana, Indonesia, Germany, India, New Zealand, the Sudan, the Czech Republic and Cameroon, as well as the observers for Honduras, Finland, Argentina, Morocco and Kenya.

19. Also at the 10th meeting, the Commission heard statements on finance and investment by the Minister of Environment of Nigeria (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China); the Secretary of State of Portugal (on behalf of the European Union, as well as Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Cyprus, Malta, Turkey and Iceland); the Minister of Environment of Turkey; the Permanent Representative of Haiti; the Deputy Permanent Representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; the Secretary of State of the Environment of Morocco; the Minister for Development Cooperation of Denmark; the Deputy Minister of the Environment of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; the Deputy Permanent Representative of Italy; the Minister of Environment and Forests of India; and the representative of Kenya.

20. At the same meeting, the representatives of the World Bank and the International Fund for Agricultural Development made statements.

21. Also at the 10th meeting, the Under-Secretary-General for the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the presenters and the Chairman made final remarks.

22. At the 11th meeting, on 27 April, the Commission heard a videotaped presentation by Michael Moore, Director-General of the World Trade Organization, and by Martin Khor, Director of the Third World Network.

23. At the same meeting, the Commission engaged in an interactive dialogue and the following intervened: Germany, Indonesia, Japan, Guyana, the Philippines, Brazil, Canada, the United States of America, India, New Zealand and Egypt, as well as the observers for Honduras, Sweden, Bolivia, Finland and Ecuador.

24. Also at the 11th meeting, the Commission heard statements on trade by the Minister of the Environment of Nigeria (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China); the Director-General of Environment of the European Commission (on behalf of the European Union, as well as Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey); the Minister of the Environment of Norway; the Minister of Environment of Ecuador; the Minister of Environment of Cameroon; the Chief of Delegation of Chile; the Permanent Representative of Pakistan; and the Representative of the Philippines.

25. At the same meeting, the observers for the United Nations Environment Programme and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development made statements.

26. Also at the 11th meeting, a statement was made by the observer for the International Chamber of Commerce, a non-governmental organization in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council.

27. At the same meeting, the spokespersons on behalf of the Women’s Caucus, the Indigenous Peoples and the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, made statements.

 

Action taken by the Commission

 

28. At the 12th meeting, on 5 May, the Commission had before it a draft decision submitted by the Vice-Chairman of the Commission, Zvetolyub Basmajiev (Bulgaria), on the basis of informal consultations, entitled "Preparations for the 10-year review of progress achieved in the implementation of the outcome of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development" (E/CN.17/2000/L.7).

29. At the same meeting, the Commission adopted the draft decision, as orally corrected (see chap. I, sect. B , decision 8/1).

30. Before the adoption of the draft decision, statements were made by the representatives of the United States of America, Japan, the Sudan and Mexico, as well as the observers for Nigeria (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China), Honduras and Argentina.

31. Also at the 12th meeting, the representative of the United States of America made the following statement:

"We fully understand the viewpoint that Rio +10 should be held as a global conference and that it should be held outside New York.

"The United States strongly supports a 10-year review that takes into consideration major changes since the Rio Conference and that advances those areas of Agenda 21 where progress has been slow.

"However, in light of more general United States policy related to United Nations matters, the United States must disassociate from consensus on this matter. We also note that the United States would be unable to pay its share of United Nations funding for such a conference if current United States legislation were renewed and as a result United States policy is not to support the convening of new global conferences in the United Nations system."

32. At the same meeting, the Commission decided to take note of documents E/CN.17/2000/15 and E/CN.17/2000/16 (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/11).

Chapter IX
Other matters

 

1. The Commission considered item 8 of its agenda at its 12th meeting, on 5 May 2000. It had before it the following documents:

(a) Report of the Secretary-General on the implementation of the work programme on education, public awareness and training (E/CN.17/2000/8);

(b) Report of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Intergovernmental Group of Experts on Energy and Sustainable Development, New York, 6-10 March 2000 (E/CN.17/2000/12);

(c) Report of the Secretary-General on the progress made in providing safe water supply and sanitation for all during the 1990s (E/CN.17/2000/13);

(d) Report of the Secretary-General on national reporting to the Commission on Sustainable Development (E/CN.17/2000/16);

(e) Report of the Secretary-General on the follow-up work on voluntary initiatives and agreements (E/CN.17/2000/17);

(f) Note by the Secretary-General on the review of the ACC Subcommittee on Water Resources (E/CN.17/2000/18);

(g) Draft medium-term plan of the Division for Sustainable Development of the United Nations Secretariat for the period 2002-2005 (E/CN.17/2000/CRP.1).

2. At the same meeting, the Co-Chairpersons of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Intergovernmental Group of Experts on Energy and Sustainable Development, Mohammad Reza Salamat (Islamic Republic of Iran) and Irene Freudenschuss-Reichl (Austria) made statements.

 

Action taken by the Commission

 

Report of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for Development on its first session

3. Also at the 12th meeting, the Commission adopted the draft decision contained in paragraph 1 of the report of the Group of Experts (E/CN.17/2000/12), entitled "Agenda for the second session of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Intergovernmental Group of Experts on Energy and Sustainable Development" and took note of the report (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/10).

4. At the same meeting, the Commission had before it a draft decision entitled "Report of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for Development on its first session" (E/CN.17/2000/L.4), submitted by the Vice-Chairman of the Commission, Zvetolyub Basmajiev (Bulgaria), on the basis of informal consultations.

5. Also at the 12th meeting, the Commission adopted the draft decision (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/9).

Subprogramme entitled "Sustainable development" of the draft medium-term plan of the United Nations for the period 2002-2005

6. At the same meeting, the Commission had before it a draft decision entitled "Subprogramme entitled ‘Sustainable development’ of the draft medium-term plan of the United Nations for the period 2002-2005" (E/CN.17/2000/L.5), submitted by the Vice-Chairman, Zvetolyub Basmajiev (Bulgaria), on the basis of informal consultations.

7. Also at the 12th meeting, the Commission adopted the draft decision (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/7).

Matters related to the inter-sessional work of the Commission

8. At the same meeting, the Commission had before it a draft decision entitled "Matters related to the inter-sessional work of the Commission" (E/CN.17/2000/L.6), submitted by the Vice-Chairman, Zvetolyub Basmajiev (Bulgaria), on the basis of informal consultations.

9. Also at the 12th meeting, the Commission adopted the draft decision (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/8).

10. At the same meeting, the Commission took note of documents E/CN.17/2000/8, E/CN.17/2000/13, E/CN.17/2000/17 and E/CN.17/2000/18 (see chap. I, sect. B, decision 8/11).

Chapter X
Provisional agenda for the ninth session of the Commission

 

1. The Commission considered item 9 of its agenda at its 13th meeting, on 5 May 2000. It had before it the provisional agenda for the ninth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development (E/CN.17/2000/L.8).

2. At the same meeting, the Commission approved the provisional agenda and recommended it for adoption by the Economic and Social Council (see chap. I, sect. A).

Chapter XI
Adoption of the report of the Commission on its eighth session

 

1. At the 13th meeting, on 5 May 2000, the Rapporteur introduced the draft report of the Commission on its eighth session (E/CN.17/2000/L.1).

2. At the same meeting, the Commission adopted the draft report and entrusted the Rapporteur with its completion.

Chapter XII
Organization of the session

 

A. Opening and duration of the session

 

1. The Commission on Sustainable Development held its eighth session on 30 April 1999 and from 24 April to 5 May 2000, in accordance with Economic and Social Council decision 1999/280. The Commission held 13 meetings (1st to 13th meetings).

2. At the 2nd meeting, on 24 April, the Chairman, Juan Mayr Maldonado (Colombia), made an opening statement.

3. At the same meeting, the Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat made an introductory statement.

 

B. Election of officers

 

4. At its 1st meeting, on 30 April 1999, the Commission elected the following members of the Bureau by acclamation:

Chairman:
Juan Mayr Maldonado (Colombia)

Vice-Chairmen
Zvetolyub Basmajiev (Bulgaria)

Patrick McDonnell (Ireland)

Choi Seok-young (Republic of Korea)

5. At its 2nd meeting, on 24 April 2000, the Commission elected Abderrahmane Mérouane (Algeria) as Vice-Chairman, by acclamation. Choi Seok-young (Republic of Korea), in addition to serving as Vice-Chairman, was also elected to serve as Rapporteur.

 

C. Agenda and organization of work

 

6. At its 2nd meeting, on 24 April, the Commission adopted its provisional agenda, as orally corrected, contained in document E/CN.17/2000/1, and approved its organization of work. The agenda was as follows:

1. Election of officers.

2. Adoption of the agenda and other organizational matters.

3. Sectoral theme: integrated planning and management of land resources.

4. Cross-sectoral theme: financial resources/trade and investment/economic growth.

5. Economic sector/major group: agriculture.

6. Report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests.

7. High-level meeting.

8. Other matters.

9. Provisional agenda for the ninth session of the Commission.

10. Adoption of the report of the Commission on its eighth session.

7. At the same meeting, the Commission agreed to establish three drafting groups to be chaired as follows: Drafting Group I, by Patrick McDonnell (Ireland); Drafting Group II, by Choi Seok-young (Republic of Korea); and Drafting Group III, by Zvetolyub Basmajiev (Bulgaria).

 

D. Attendance

 

8. The session was attended by representatives of 50 States members of the Commission on Sustainable Development. Observers for other States Members of the United Nations and for the European Community, representatives of organizations of the United Nations system, and secretariats of treaty bodies, as well as observers for intergovernmental, non-governmental and other organizations, also attended. A list of participants is contained in annex I.

 

E. Documentation

 

9. The documents before the Commission at its eighth session are contained in annex II.

States Members of the United Nations represented
by observers

Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Central African Republic, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Ecuador, Eritrea, Estonia, Finland, Gabon, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iceland, Iraq, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Mali, Malaysia, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nauru, Nepal, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Suriname, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Republic of Tanzania, Zimbabwe

Entities represented by observers

European Community

Non-member States maintaining permanent observer status

Holy See, Switzerland

Regional commissions

Economic Commission for Africa, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean

Specialized agencies and related organizations

International Labour Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, World Health Organization, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, International Fund for Agricultural Development, United Nations Industrial Development Organization, World Trade Organization

Secretariats of treaty bodies

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa

Intergovernmental organizations

Caribbean Community, Commonwealth Secretariat, Helsinki Commission, International Tropical Timber Organization, International Organization of la Francophonie, League of Arab States, Organization of African Unity, Organization of the Islamic Conference

 

United Nations

 

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme

Non-governmental organizations

International Chamber of Commerce, International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), Sierra Club, Third World Movement against the Exploitation of Women, United Nations Environment and Development —United Kingdom Committee, spokespersons on behalf of the Women’s Caucus and the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development

 

List of documents before the Commission at its
eighth session

Annex III

Programme budget implications of decision 8/2^*

1. The annex to the draft decision recommended for adoption by the Commission on Sustainable Development, by the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF) at its fourth session entitled "Programme elements of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests" (see E/CN.17/2000/14, chap. II), contains a number of provisions that entail programme budget implications. These provisions are the following:

(a) An intergovernmental body that may be called the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) would be approved by the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly;

(b) UNFF would be open to all States, operate in a transparent and participatory manner and meet annually for a period of up to two weeks; it would also have a high-level ministerial segment for two to three days; it would have a multi-year programme of work expected to be adopted at its first meeting, which would draw on elements reflected in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the Forest Principles, chapter 11 of Agenda 21 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF)/IFF proposals for actions;

(c) A compact secretariat would be established in accordance with established rules and procedures of the United Nations and strengthened through staff secondments from the secretariats of international and regional organizations, institutions and instruments;

(d) The funding of the arrangement should be mobilized from the United Nations regular budget, within existing resources, from resources of organizations participating in the partnership and from voluntary contributions provided by interested donors.

2. Currently, the secretariat of IFF consists of a Coordinator and two General Service posts (funded from the Trust Fund to Support the Work of the Commission on Sustainable Development); five Professional Officers (one seconded from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), one from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), one from the International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO), one from the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat and one from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); and one Junior Professional Officer (JPO) (funded by the Government of Finland).

3. Given the scope and complexity of the activities to be carried out under the aegis of the proposed UNFF, the Secretary-General recognizes that the staff resources currently servicing IFF would need to be strengthened in order to provide the necessary support services to UNFF.

4. A preliminary review of the resources that would be required for the new compact secretariat based on past experience with IFF, on the functions to be performed as described in the report of IFF on its fourth session and on an initial preliminary assessment of what the multi-year programme of work of UNFF might include, concluded that the staff resources of the compact secretariat should include up to eight Professional and three General Service posts.

5. The United Nations has been carrying out consultations with the organizations participating in the partnership and interested donors, in order to determine the staff and/or non-staff resources that these organizations and donors would be in a position to provide on secondment to the compact secretariat. These consultations have not yet been finalized. As a result, it is difficult to provide at this stage a clear and precise indication of the staff and non-staff resources that would be made available by these organizations and donors and those that, as appropriate, would need to be funded by the United Nations. It should be noted in this connection that, at this stage, it is not possible to indicate whether the resources to be funded from the United Nations would be made available from within existing resources or whether there would be a need for an additional appropriation. The determination of the level of the resources to be funded by the United Nations would be made only at the end of the ongoing processes of consultations when the organizations and interested donors had indicated the resources that they would be in a position to second to the UNFF secretariat. It is expected that the consultations with the organizations and donors will be finalized shortly.

6. In view of this situation, it would not be meaningful to issue a full programme budget implications statement at the present session of the Commission on Sustainable Development. Such a statement would be issued for the consideration of the Economic and Social Council, at its substantive session of 2000, when the Council will be reviewing and discussing the report of the Commission on its eighth session. The statement would include proposals regarding the level of staff and non-staff resources that would be necessary to support UNFF, and the sources of financing of these resources (United Nations regular budget and extrabudgetary), as well as an indication whether the resources to be funded from the United Nations regular budget would be provided from within existing resources or would have to be appropriated through the contingency fund.

*0046448*

Date last updated: 01 August 2000 by DESA/DSD
Copyright © 1999 United Nations