CSD-11: Main points made during informal consultations held on 24-26 March 2003 in preparation for CSD11
(Summary by the Vice-Chairs)

1.     Future Programme of Work of the CSD

• The GA resolution 47/191 and the CSD-related provisions of the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI) determine the functions of the Commission.
  
  

• The Rio Declaration, Agenda 21, the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21, the Johannesburg Declaration and the JPOI provide a comprehensive framework for the future programme of work of the CSD. 
  
  

• CSD should focus on those aspects of sustainable development where it can add value. It should avoid duplicating the work of other intergovernmental bodies and processes but should rather build on their results.
  
  

• Commitments and agreements in Agenda 21 and JPOI should not be reopened. 
  
  

• The CSD work programme should support implementation and provide for active involvement of all actors responsible for implementation.
  
  

• The deliberations should focus on operational questions. Such deliberations should be results-oriented.
  
  

• The work programme should combine predictability with some flexibility.
  
  

• CSD should focus on issues that integrate economic, social and environmental components of sustainable development.
  
  

• Specific attention should be provided to the goals, targets and timeframes contained in the JPOI.
  
  

• The work programme should attract involvement of all ministers with portfolios relevant to sustainable development.
  
  

• There is a need to ensure coherence between the work programme of the CSD and the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Integrated and Co-ordinated Follow-up to Major UN Conferences and Summits. 
  
  

• Discussions on means of implementation should be integrated in the discussions on all issues included in the work programme.
  
  

Issues which would require additional discussion/clarification

• Several delegations expressed a view that WEHAB areas should be among priorities for the work programme. It was also suggested that that the work programme should not be limited to these areas.
  
  

• Sustainable consumption and production patterns, poverty eradication and sustainable globalisation, including corporate social and environmental responsibility, were mentioned among priority issues.
  
  

• CSD discussions should provide an opportunity to consider linkages between natural resource/economic sectors (e.g. water, energy, oceans, land, etc.) and cross-sectoral/overarching issues (poverty, consumption and production patterns, globalisation, health, etc), as well as linkages among sectors (e.g. water and land; water and energy, water and health).
  
  

• It was suggested that means of implementation should also be included in the programme of work as a self-standing issue.
  
  

• It was stated that under the JPOI the means of implementation encompass a series of activities and ideas, pertaining inter alia to health, education, science and public participation in decision-making, taking into account a gender perspective.
  
  

• In order to have a durable, reliable and measurable implementation it is necessary to know who is going to do what and what are the means of implementation.
  
  

2.      Future Organisation and Methods of Work of the CSD

• Agenda 21 and the JPOI provide the framework for the work of the CSD. The future organisation and methods of work of the CSD should be designed in such a way that would advance implementation.
  
  

• In order not to lose focus on implementation, deliberations throughout each cycle should focus on a limited number of themes.
  
  

• The organisation of work should not lead to a proliferation of meetings.
  
  

• The regional and sub-regional dimension of implementation, along with implementation initiatives, need to be further recognised and supported. 
  
  

• There is a need to maintain the political engagement of ministers in the CSD. 

Issues which would require additional discussion/clarification

• The CSD work should be organised as a two-year cycle. Such cycles, which could be called "Implementation Cycles", would consist of a "Review Year" (to assess progress in implementation of the commitments, goals and targets of Agenda 21 and JPOI) and a "Policy Year" (to decide on measures required to overcome constraints and gaps and to address new challenges and opportunities in implementation).
  
  

• Reporting to the CSD should be comprehensive and based on national reports, regional and sub-regional inputs and contributions from international organisations, major groups and other stakeholders. Reporting should focus concretely on progress in implementation, or lack thereof. It should be streamlined to avoid duplication.
  
  

• The mechanism for selection of themes to be addressed in each of the two-year cycles needs to be further examined. While some supported Option 3 suggested in the report of the Secretary-General, or variations thereof, additional possibilities were suggested. For example, CSD11 could decide on the themes for the next 2-3 cycles, while CSD Policy Sessions held at the end of each cycle would decide on the themes to be addressed 2-4 years down the road. Another proposal was to address sequentially all Chapters of the JPOI.
  
  

• While many felt that the number of themes to be covered by each cycle should be limited (1 or 2-3), it was also noted that the decision on the number of such themes and the decision on the number of cycles to be determined at CSD11 are inter-dependant.
  
  

• Two criteria for selection of themes were proposed: whether the subject was previously addressed by the CSD, and the particular relevance for sustainable development. 
  
  

• The details of activities that would form the two-year cycle would need to be further discussed. This includes, for example, the following questions:
  
  

(i)    The role and modalities of the Regional Implementation Forums: for example, should Regional Implementation Forums be organised in the Regions (in conjunction with the meetings of Regional Commissions), or they should be organised as part of CSD Review Sessions.

(ii)    Should Ministerial Segments be held: (a) every year (to ensure political involvement both in the review and in fostering implementation) (b) once in two years (during CSD Policy Sessions); or (c) once in four years. The timing of Ministerial Segments during CSD sessions also needs to be considered.

(iii)    The role and modalities of the suggested Expert Forums.

(iv)    Modalities for innovative activities such as exchanges of best practice, lessons learned, establishing networks, etc.

(v)    Proposal to hold multi-stakeholder "Action Forums" in advance of the Policy sessions.

(vi)    The need for creating sub-commissions and thematic task forces, and the role of country-led initiatives.

(vi) Frequency/timing of CSD sessions, and of CSD's inter-sessional Forums.

• Specific modalities of review and monitoring (including the use of indicators, the need for "peer" reviews, etc.).
  
  

• How to deal with emerging/new issues.
  
  

• There is a need to consider ways of enhancing synergies between the work of CSD and ECOSOC and its other functional commissions, as well as their respective Bureaux taking into account the work currently underway on the Integrated and Co-ordinated Follow-up to Major UN Conferences and Summits.
  
  

• The failure of the effective implementation of Agenda 21 was mainly due to the lack of fulfilment of commitments by the international community and not due to organisational arrangements.
  
  

3.      Enhancing contributions from and participation of various implementation actors

• There is a need to strengthen international co-operation aimed at reinforcing the implementation of Agenda 21 and the JPOI.
  
  

• There is a need to promote coherence, synergies and co-ordination among all implementation actors with a view to supporting implementation, avoiding duplication and filling in the gaps. 
  
  

• All UN funds and programmes, specialised agencies, and other organisations of the UN system, including financial and trade institutions and Regional Commissions, need to be more actively involved in the work of the CSD.
  
  

• There is a need to monitor progress towards implementation by all implementation actors. This includes the need to enhance involvement of major groups, including their accountability for implementation.
  
  

• Contributions from major groups to the CSD, while respecting established rules of procedure, could be enhanced if major groups could be involved in main activities organised as part of future CSD meetings.
  
  

• There is a need to strive for a better balance in representation of major groups from the "North" and the "South" in the CSD. 
  
  

• Scientific contributions to the CSD need to be enhanced with a view to supporting implementation and providing an informed basis for decision-making. However, no new scientific bodies should be established for this purpose.
  
  

• The results of CSD work should not be limited solely to negotiated texts, but should include lessons learnt, exchanges of best practice, capacity-building activities, and partnerships that support implementation of JPOI.
  
  

Issues which would require additional discussion/clarification

• Some delegations felt there was a need to strengthen inter-agency arrangements aimed at supporting implementation and co-ordination, and to fill in the gaps in such areas as water and energy. Others questioned the rationale for establishing any additional inter-agency arrangements or collaborative groups.
  
  

• The status of the WEHAB initiative in relation to the JPOI and the references to this initiative in various paragraphs of the Secretary-General's report was questioned by many delegations. These delegations expressed the view that WEHAB initiative is not an outcome of the WSSD.
  
  

4.      Role of CSD as a "focal point" for partnerships

• Partnerships are a complementary instrument to enhance implementation and are not a substitute for inter-governmentally agreed commitments. Partnerships should support the implementation of goals and targets in the JPOI.
  
  

• There is a need for creating a transparent, participatory and credible monitoring mechanism on the partnerships, inter alia through such means as voluntary reporting, partnership reviews and other partnership-related activities during CSD meetings (including those focusing on regional implementation), information on the CSD web-site, etc.
  
  

• CSD efforts aimed at implementation of partnerships and fostering of new ones should promote a more balanced contribution of such partnerships to implementation (balanced both geographically and in terms of covering all programme areas of the JPOI).
  
  

• Involvement of UN organisations in partnerships should be in accordance with their mandates and priorities and should not lead to diversion of the resources allocated for their operational programmes.

Issues which would require additional discussion/clarification

• Some felt that there is a need to agree on parameters that would define partnerships. Others felt that that it could be done by application of the Bali guidelines. A view was also expressed that bearing in mind the voluntary nature of partnerships, more experience needs to be gained in terms of their practical contribution to implementation before any parameters are determined. 
  
  

• The need to explore modalities for making partnerships accountable for all involved should be considered.