GA/EF/2925

SECOND COMMITTEE, CONTINUING DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, CONCLUDES DISCUSSION OF IMPLEMENTATION OF AGENDA 21

The adoption of a biosafety protocol was a milestone for the international community, the representative of Nigeria told the Second Committee (Economic and Financial), as it met this afternoon to continue its consideration of the environment and sustainable development.

Speaking on behalf of the �Group of 77� developing countries and China, he welcomed the establishment of an all-embracing regulatory framework for the conservation of biological diversity. While the objectives of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity were laudable, the effective implementation of arrangements under it depended on the commitment of the international community to provide the necessary financial mechanism.

Hamdallah Zedan, Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity, introducing a report on the Convention, said the Protocol was the first legally binding international instrument to explicitly include a precautionary approach as a fundamental element of decision-making. It was also a highly technical instrument, whose implementation would require extensive capacity- building in developing countries and countries with economies in transition.

Speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated States, the representative of France said that the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety should make it possible to control transboundary movements of living modified organisms, whose dissemination could harm the environment. He called on all partners to sign and ratify the Protocol so that it could enter into force as soon as possible.

In the first part of the meeting, the Committee concluded its consideration of the implementation of Agenda 21 �- the Plan of Action adopted at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro.

During the related discussion, the representative of Japan said his country was committed to assisting developing countries in their capacity-building efforts in the field of the environment. Japan would continue to fulfil its long-standing and strong commitment to providing such assistance. Regarding �Rio+10�, there was a need for a comprehensive review of progress in the implementation of Agenda 21. Rapid changes and new environmental problems had emerged, and the pace of globalization had accelerated. It was essential to develop new polices that addressed both present and future environmental conditions.

Second Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/EF/2925 18th Meeting (PM) 19 October 2000

Statements were also made this afternoon by the representatives of India, Nepal, Egypt, Jordan, Republic of Korea, Burkina Faso, Gabon, Oman, Uganda, Norway, Colombia (on behalf of the Rio Group), Libya and Guatemala.

In addition, Hama Arba Diallo, the Executive Secretary of the Convention to Combat Desertification, and Joanne Disano, the Director of the Division for Sustainable Development of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, introduced reports to the Committee.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Friday, 20 October, to continue its consideration of environment and sustainable development.

Second Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/EF/2925 18th Meeting (PM) 19 October 2000

Committee Work Programme

The Second Committee (Economic and Financial) met this afternoon to continue its consideration of sustainable development and the environment. For background on reports before the Committee, see Press Release GA/EF/2924, which was issued this morning.

Statements

KIYOTAKA AKASAKA (Japan) said that his country was mindful of the problems and difficulties that developing countries had and was committed to assisting them in their capacity-building efforts in the field of the environment. Japan would continue to fulfil its long-standing and strong commitment to providing such assistance. He drew attention to the fact that in 1998 about $3.2 billion, or one fourth of the total official development assistance (ODA) Japan provided to developing countries, went to projects relating to the preservation and improvement of the environment.

Regarding Rio + 10, there was a need for a comprehensive review of progress in the implementation of Agenda 21, he said. Rapid changes and new environmental problems had emerged during that time and the pace of globalization had accelerated. It was essential to develop new polices that addressed both present and future environmental conditions. It was also important to enhance and promote synergies and coordination among activities stemming from environment-related conventions and protocols. With respect to the preparatory process, Japan believed that a group of experts should be established and a meeting of eminent persons convened. Last, but not least, Japan strongly hoped that Rio + 10 would be held in Asia.

KRISHNA BOSE (India) said that at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992, the international community had collectively launched a global partnership for sustainable development and environment. It was recognized that economic growth and poverty eradication required substantial resources. If developing countries were to meet the environmental objectives of Agenda 21, without any external assistance from the international community, it would be at the cost of their developmental activities. Rio had forged a balance between developmental and environmental imperatives and had created a framework for assistance by the international community. This was to be done through the transfer of new and additional resources and environmentally sound technologies on concessional and preferential terms to developing countries.

Developing countries had done commendable work in the implementation of Agenda 21, he said. The promised resources and technologies from developed countries had failed to materialize. Against the background of the disappointing performance of the last eight years, the preparations for the 10-year review process for Rio had now begun. India was of the view that the preparatory process for Rio + 10 should be open-ended, transparent and participatory. Inputs should be drawn from governments and from other sources. India welcomed the consensus that the Rio + 10 review meeting should take place in a developing country and looked forward to the conclusion of discussions during the current Assembly session.

RAMBHAKTA P.B. THAKUR (Nepal) said that there had been a growing awareness of the co-relationship between sustainable development and environmental preservation in the wake of the Rio Summit. Unsustainable exploitation of natural resources and growing population had led the world to a point where the future of the planet was at stake. Environmental problems did not recognize national boundaries. The toxic acid spewed by industry into the atmosphere in one country caused acid rains in another. Over the past eight years, some progress had been made in implementing the outcomes of UNCED, particularly in institutional development and consensus-building. Apart from that, the Rio commitments remained largely unimplemented.

Poverty eradication was a core and credible basis for sustainable development in developing countries, he said. Nepal urged the global community to make poverty eradication the highest priority on the international agenda. All countries must do everything possible to avoid unsustainable patterns of population and consumption. Countries also had to display stronger political will and greater commitment to implementation of Agenda 21, the Kyoto Protocol and other global compacts. Those who had the resources and technology to make a difference had to come forward with stronger resolve to help those who could not afford it.

IHAB GAMALELDIN (Egypt) said that the review conference would be a landmark event. The review should cope with the challenges encountered in the implementation of sustainable development commitments through the participation of all States, both from the North and the South. It should not simply be a repetition of the negotiations on Agenda 21 or a reopening of them, but rather a reaffirmation of the commitments and principles adopted regarding the collective responsibility of all countries. Achieving that would require funding for developing countries from developed countries and the transfer of environmentally sound technologies.

He welcomed the decision taken by the eighth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development to transform the Commission�s tenth session to the preparatory committee for the review conference. The agenda of the review should involve both sectoral and intersectoral issues, including financing, transfer of technology, terms of trade and the debt burden. He supported the creation of a United Nations fund to finance the participation of representatives from developing countries in the preparatory process. What was needed was not so much to come up with new concepts for sustainable development, but rather to focus on the implementation of established ones. He welcomed the initiative of Tajikistan with regard to the International Year of Fresh Water, which was a timely contribution to raise international awareness of that issue.

WALID AL-HADID (Jordan) said that the world was seeing dangerous ecological developments. Chemical fertilizer and biological wastes were a danger for humans and nature. The revision of the institutional role in that area would reduce the danger that was facing the international community. It was important to aid developing countries in their efforts to fight desertification. It was also important to pay attention to the implementation of the conventions relating to the environment. Finally, nuclear weapons constituted a serious threat to the environment. That was why Jordan had called for a Middle East free of nuclear weapons.

SEOK-YOUNG CHOL (Republic of Korea) said that the agenda and themes of the 10-year review should be focused, action-oriented and forward-looking in order to ensure a meaningful outcome and to place emphasis on the political significance of the event. The agenda could comprise sectoral issues such as water and energy, as well as cross-sectoral issues such as financial resources and the transfer of technology, including information and communication technology. With regard to the theme, he suggested "global partnership to promote sustainable development in the era of globalization".

He was concerned about the time constraints for holding substantive sessions, since the first substantive session of the preparatory process was not to be held until early 2002, according to the preliminary schedule. He proposed holding the first substantive session in late 2001. He also attached great importance to the organizational session to be held sometime next year. In that regard, he noted that, unless the session could provide concrete guidelines for the final event and preparatory process, national and regional preparation in the latter half of next year might not produce satisfactory outcomes.

DER KOGDA (Burkina Faso) said the deterioration of the ozone layer and population growth were urgent problems that needed to be addressed. The millennium would be decisive in terms of the state of the environment. Rich countries had to reduce their consumption of natural resources. A radical change was possible, but it would take the political will of all international actors. The rebuilding of a habitable world would require the commitment of regional and national authorities, as well as the private sector.

Although Burkina Faso was faced with serious development problems, it had given great attention to the preservation of the environment. The private sector and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were actively operating in the field. More than 100 NGOs were working in all development sectors. Because of the deteriorating environment of the world, it was important for the international community to support the many activities of the United Nations in the area of the environment. The recommendations by the Commission on Sustainable Development regarding the organization of Rio + 10 were all welcomed by his delegation. That review should serve as a framework for the progress achieved over the past eight years.

GREGOIRE LOMBA (Gabon) said that UNCED had been a decisive step in improving the living standards for all people and had led to better management of ecosystems. The Declaration and Agenda 21 adopted in Rio had affirmed the international community�s commitment to face up to environmental concerns. He asked the international community to consider what had been accomplished since then.

Gabon, he said, supported the specific initiatives of the Global Environmental Facility and other partners with a view to reducing negative impacts on the environment from human activities. Specifically, it supported the Facility�s work with regard to the funding of the Convention on Biodiversity and the Framework Convention on Climate Change; assisting the Central Asian States in their efforts; reducing the emission of greenhouse gases; promoting agricultural and rural development; giving micro-credit loans, particularly to women; and preserving biological diversity by creating and reinforcing protected areas.

Developing countries still needed significant aid to implement international environmental agreements, he said. He appealed to the international community to increase its assistance to developing countries to support their environmental activities. He hoped that the United Nations Forum on Forests would set up a global framework that was of a transparent and participatory nature. Of particular concern was that the anti-desertification Convention continued to suffer from a lack of funding. Increased international cooperation with a greater sense of solidarity was more important now than ever before.

ABDULLAH AL-RIYAMI (Oman) said that even though years had gone by since UNCED, it was evident that the international community had not changed its methods of consumption and production. This had contributed to the deterioration of the world�s environment. Given the gap between developed and developing countries, Oman believed that an extra effort should be made to create a more favourable economic environment to encourage effective international cooperation. He urged the developed countries to comply with their commitments to facilitate the flow of funds to developing countries.

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) had paid tribute to the role that Oman had taken to limit pollution and to protect the environment, he said. Oman had decided, among other things, to create facilities for oil spills on its coast. In terms of toxic waste, his Government had proposed laws and established a standing committee that was in touch with the major international conventions. His delegation urged further assistance and technical cooperation by the developed countries. He hoped that the international community could work together to achieve the results expected in the area of the environment and sustainable development.

L.B. LUKWIYA (Uganda) said that the collective environmental goal must be to meet the economic needs of the present without compromising the planet�s ability to provide for the needs of future generations. While environmental sustainability was everyone's challenge, responses had been too short of what was necessary. The goals and targets agreed on by the international community were not being implemented in a timely fashion, and the required resources were not being mobilized. It was a matter of concern that many sustainable development projects, painstakingly designed and formulated, had been shelved due to lack of commitment from the international community to fund them.

He believed that a number of countries had made great sacrifices at the national level, he said. His country had established a National Environment Action Plan under the supervision of the National Environment Management Authority. The Plan laid down a clear policy framework for addressing environment concerns in accordance with the agreed objectives of Agenda 21. Financial constraints, however, had remained a major impediment to meeting the urgent requirements of the environment agenda. In that context, assistance was urgently needed for successful implementation.

Introduction of Reports

HAMA ARBA DIALLO, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, introduced the report of the Secretary-General on the implementation of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (document A/55/31). The third session of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention had been held in Recife, Brazil, from 15 to 26 November 1999. The Parties had adopted important decisions, which provided further policy guidance on how best to continue facilitating the Convention�s implementation process.

During the period under review, high priority had been placed on the facilitation of the action programmes for the implementation processes at national, subregional and regional levels. The awareness raising and outreach activities had been successfully intensified with the aim of widening the global support to the Convention. He invited countries that had not yet done so to ratify the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. He hoped that decisions made by the General Assembly would help to further enhance the efficiency of the Convention�s implementation.

HAMDALLAH ZEDAN, Executive Secretary, Convention on Biological Diversity, introduced the report on that Convention (document A/55/211). The new millennium had begun with the adoption in January of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. To date, 74 States and the European Community had signed the Protocol. He called on all those who had not yet done so to sign and ratify the Protocol as soon as possible. It was the first legally binding international instrument to explicitly include a precautionary approach, as set out in the Rio Declaration, as a fundamental element of decision-making. It was also a highly technical treaty, whose implementation would require extensive capacity-building in developing countries and countries with economies in transition.

He also highlighted the results of the fifth meeting of the conference of the parties to the Convention, which was set out in the report.

As noted in the report, the Secretariat had continued to cooperate with other organizations and environmental conventions, he said. That cooperation was essential to the implementation of the Convention. Of particular note was the development with the secretariat of the Convention to Combat Desertification of a programme of work on the biological diversity of dry and sub-humid lands, which had been adopted by the Conference of the Parties in May.

The Secretariat, he continued, had also concluded a memorandum of cooperation with the Coordination Office for the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities. The memorandum�s purpose was to ensure harmonization of implementation activities at the national, regional and global levels, particularly to facilitate the implementation of programmes dealing with the conservation and sustainable use of marine and coastal biodiversity with measures to prevent and reduce physical alterations and habitat destruction from land-based activities.

JOANNE DISANO, Director of the Division for Sustainable Development of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, introduced the report on progress made in providing safe water supply and sanitation for all during the 1990s (document E/CN.17/2000/13). The report highlighted some of the major areas of concern for the international community. In rural areas of Africa, a majority of people still lacked access to a safe water supply. That was also the case with many parts of the Caribbean, and was clearly unacceptable. Governments, the international community and NGOs had to take concrete and decisive steps to implement chapter 18 of Agenda 21.

She also introduced the report on the outcome of the global conference on the sustainable development of small island developing States. The report called on governments to actively support integrated management efforts in the context of sustainable development. Inputs had been based on the outcome of meetings between the United Nations system and the Caribbean Community (CARICOM).

Introducing the report on promotion of new and renewable energy resources, including the implementation of the World Solar Programme 1996-2005 (document A/55/91), she said that the General Assembly had called for further action so that the programme could be brought fully into the mainstream of the United Nations system. It was widely acknowledged that 2 billion people had inadequate access to energy. Renewable energy programmes could provide new energy sources to rural areas and thereby improve the quality of life in those areas. Although not exhaustive, the report showed that there was an increasing worldwide interest in the use of renewable energies.

OSITADINMA ANAEDU (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the �Group of 77� developing countries and China, said that the adoption of a biosafety protocol marked a milestone in the quest by the international community to establish an all-embracing regulatory framework for the conservation of biological diversity. While the objectives of the Protocol were laudable, the effective implementation of arrangements under it depended on the commitment of the international community to provide the necessary financial mechanism. To achieve the desired goal, the Group was of the view that priority should be given to developing countries in the transfer of environmentally sound technology and information sharing. It was also important to ensure that the capacities of technical experts from the developing countries were enhanced.

The Group was worried about the limited progress made in the implementation of the Convention to Combat Desertification. It was evident that the Convention was lacking the support enjoyed by other UNCED-related conventions, particularly in the area of financial assistance of the international community. The critical issue of energy development was also very important to the developing countries. The promotion of new and renewable sources of energy required active and collaborative involvement of relevant stakeholders, including governments, concerned entities of the United Nations system, multilateral funding agencies and the private sector.

PHILIPPE BOSSIERE (France), speaking on behalf of the European Union, Bulgaria, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey, said that the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety should make it possible to control transboundary movements of living modified organisms, whose dissemination could harm the environment. He called on all partners to sign and ratify the Protocol so that it could enter into force as soon as possible.

He welcomed the results obtained in Nairobi last May at the Fifth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, during which significant progress had been made both on the issue of access to genetic resources and on the protection of practices and knowledge of indigenous peoples.

Six years after the adoption of the Barbados Programme of Action, much remained to be done to promote the sustainable development of small island developing States, he said. They were faced with major challenges, including preservation of their marine environment against various types of pollution, scarcity of fresh water, integration into the world economy and diversification of their exports. He welcomed the Economic and Social Council�s decision to replace the economic diversification index by an economic vulnerability index as a criterion for identifying least developed countries. That was important since it implied that explicit account was taken of vulnerability -� a particularly important concept for small island States.

OLE PETER KOLBY (Norway) said that growing water scarcity was leading to increased competition for water in many parts of the world, particularly affecting the lives of the poor. Therefore, one of the main priorities in Norwegian development cooperation policy was to help facilitate access to clean water and sustainable sanitation. Integration and cooperation between agencies was needed to ensure efficient use of water and coherent policies for water management. Cooperation and coordination must continue to be promoted within existing mechanisms, particularly the United Nations system, the international financial institutions, regional bodies and bodies established under the intergovernmental treaties, in order to strengthen water-related policies and programmes to enhance water security.

Degradation of productive land, he said, was a serious problem and posed an urgent challenge to the world community. Land degradation and food insecurity reinforced poverty, which was often the result of a lack of power and control over resources. The participatory approach outlined in the Desertification Convention was, therefore, essential. At the same time, the poorest and most severely affected countries, particularly in Africa, continued to need substantial international assistance in order to effectively combat desertification. More than 50 per cent of Norway's bilateral assistance, and a substantial part of its multilateral assistance, was already being allocated to sub-Saharan Africa. It would continue to contribute its share.

MAURICIO BAQUERO (Colombia), speaking on behalf of the Rio Group, said that the heads of State who had met last June in Cartagena had underscored the importance of sustainable development. The Rio Group reaffirmed the need to encourage environment friendly technologies. With regard to climate change, the Group called upon the developed countries to ratify the Kyoto Protocol by 2002.

The Rio Group was aware of the threat that climate change posed for future generations, he said. Recent research had shown that there had been an increase in the deterioration of the ozone layer. In that light, the Group called upon States to adopt the basic measures to fulfil the Montreal Protocol. It also called upon States to provide adequate resources for the multilateral aspects of that Protocol and invited countries that had not yet signed it to do so.

The Rio Group welcomed the recent resolution adopted by the Economic and Social Council on the United Nations Forum on Forests. The Group would be ready to play an active role in the discussions within the Forum. For the Group, the adoption of a long-term strategy to reduce the impact of the El Ni�o phenomenon was extremely important. He underscored the importance of international cooperation and invited the international community to continue its financial support for these initiatives. The current problems demanded joint action by the international community and all of the agencies within the United Nations system.

SILVIA CRISTINA CORADO-CUERVAS (Guatemala) said that her country had a great wealth of natural resources. However, that wealth was being threatened by demographic pressures. During the past decades, there had been considerable migration to the rural areas, which had given rise to the occupation of land within fragile ecosystems. Guatemala had taken a number of actions to address that issue, including the inclusion in the design of economic policy of ways to protect the environment and achieve sustainable development. Also, it had tried to legally harmonize a strategy for the conservation and sustainable management of water resources. Further, it had included civil society in the design and implementation of such policies.

The peace agreements signed in 1996 had not only ended civil conflict, but had set in motion economic and social reforms whose aim was to drastically transform Guatemalan society, he said. Central America constituted 10 per cent of the world�s biodiversity, and it was trying to implement a special project in the region to protect that wealth -� the establishment of a Central American Biodiversity Corridor. The Rio Conference had changed the traditional focus of dealing with the environment and assigned to the United Nations a fundamental role in its preservation.

ABDUSSALAM O. IBRAHIM (Libya) said desertification was a growing phenomenon which threatened the well-being of human beings, especially in Africa. It was no longer a seasonal phenomenon, but had become a permanent condition in certain countries. Developing countries had to deal with desertification and drought in addition to other problems, such as poverty, in their efforts to achieve sustainable development.

Internal displacement was one of the problems resulting from desertification, he said. That phenomenon led to social destabilization, the breakup of families and the deterioration of living standards. Another problem was that of refugees crossing into neighbouring countries, thereby putting additional pressures on the resources of receiving countries. All of that required cooperation and efforts at the national and regional levels. It also required the international community to increase its financial and technical assistance to help countries cope with those problems.

Libya, he continued, had ratified the Desertification Convention and was making tireless efforts to combat desertification, including a major water project. The problem of desertification and drought required joint efforts by Members of the United Nations and the intensification of study and research on the desalinization of seawater. Also crucial was the transfer of modern technology to safeguard water resources and ensure their better use.

* *** *

United Nations