COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 12.11.1996 
COM(96) 569 final 
COMMUNICATION FROM THF, COMMISSION 
A COMMON PLATFORM: 
GUIDELINES FOR EUROPEAN UNION PREPARATION FOR THE 
UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY SPECIAL SESSION 
TO BE HELD IN NEW YORK IN JUNE 1997 
TO REVIEW 
AGENDA 21 AND RELATED OUTCOMES OF THE 
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT 
HELD IN RIO DE JANEIRO IN JUNE 1992 

Key Proposals for the Common Platform 
I Background 
1. The UN General Assembly will hold a Special Session ("UNGASS") in June 1997, 
at the highest possible level, to review the implementation of Agenda 21 and the related 
outcomes of the UN Conference on Environment and Development held in 1992. There is 
consensus that UNGASS should not renegotiate Agenda 21, but should review successes, 
failures and gaps in implementation, identify new issues, and result in an action-oriented 
political Declaration. The EU hopes that UNGASS will raise the public profile of the Rio 
process and renew political support for it, so that implementation of the agreements made can 
move from the preliminary to the fully operational phase. 
2. The EU has developed a domestic agenda for sustainable development, which is likely 
to be pursued irrespective of UNGASS. The main potential of UNGASS for the EU therefore 
lies in promoting sustainable development globally. Emerging and growing global 
environmental problems make this increasingly important. 
3. However, developed and developing countries will approach UNGASS with different 
expectations. "Sustainable development" as formulated at Rio and subsequent conferences 
melds social and economic development with environmental protection. Developed countries 
have tended to concentrate on the environmental aspects. Developing countries stress the 
need for economic growth and are disappointed that the developed world has not fulfilled its 
Rio commitments on financial assistance. 
4. Experience before and since Rio has shown that European Union leadership will be 
essential to a successful outcome at UNGASS. Leadership needs to be built on a strong, well 
prepared, and united position. This Communication therefore proposes a Common Platform 
for the EU. (As UNGASS will not lead to any legal agreements, no Council Decision under 
Article 228 is necessary). 
5. An accompanying Working Document of the Commission Services presents an 
analysis of progress since Rio at the international level and explores a series of achievable 
objectives for the EU to guide its preparations for UNGASS. The resulting recommendations 
are set out below. The detailed justification for each recommendation is found in the relevant 
paragraphs of the Working Document whose numbers are shown besides each paragraph 
below. This divided format has been chosen in order not to overload this text which sets out 
the essence of the proposed position and is intended to be the basis for Ministerial debate. 
6. The recommendations are consistent with the proposed Decision on the Review of the 
Fifth Environmental Action Programme and EU policy on development cooperation and UN 
reform. They cover both ideas which tine EU should seek to include in the UNGASS political 
Declaration and also the future operation of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development, 
which has the responsibility for monitoring the implementation of Agenda 21. The 
Communication does not deal with possible action within the EU to follow up the results of 
UNGASS since that cannot be foreseen at present. 
1 
n Recommendations for EU aims on the Nature of UNGASS and on UN coomunation 
1. The EU should support moves to hold UNGASS at Head of State or Government level 
in order to give the Rio process a political kick start. Participation by government leaders 
would also emphasise the over-arching nature of sustainable development, and allow 
agreement on cross-cutting issues which affect many sectors. (I.8)1 
2. There should be agreement on another review, Rio + 10, in five years to maintain 
momentum. (1.7) 
3. Now mat most of the environmental and other frameworks for international action are 
in place, the priority for UNGASS should be on implementation and making Agenda 21 more 
operational. Prime responsibility for different Chapters of Agenda 21 needs to rest with a 
wide range of different fora. UNGASS needs to encourage processes other than CSD by 
giving them an Agenda 21 seal of approval. (V.29, VII.26) 
4. UNGASS should set the Work Programme for the next cycle of CSD. The Work 
Programme must allow CSD to continue to benefit from the involvement of Ministers. It 
should reflect CSD's responsibility for monitoring the broad theme of sustainable development 
and its success as a forum for the exchange of experience. CSD decision-making should 
concentrate on fewer issues and specific objectives. CSD's work needs to be coordinated with 
that of the other ECOSOC Functional Commissions. (1.11, IV. 15, VII.9, 27, 28, 34-37, IX.2) 
5. The future role of CSD will be affected by the results of a number of on-going UN 
reform processes. EU negotiators preparing UNGASS will therefore need to coordinate with 
those dealing with UN Reform, to ensure a consistent approach. (IV.6-10, V.24, VII.30-35) 
6. UNGASS will also need to consider the future role of UNEP and the institutional 
aspects of environment policy more generally. From the EU's viewpoint, UNEP Governing 
Council Decision 18/7, sets out a very satisfactory division of labour between UNEP and CSD 
and the need now is to ensure that UNËP can play its role effectively. This will be much 
easier if the 19th Governing Council manages to reform UNEP's Governance sufficiently to 
restore confidence and attract funding, and if UNEP achieves a satisfactory relationship with 
complementary organisations such as UNDP and IUCN. Once the Governing Council ends 
on 7 February it will be essential to take stock and make proposals for UNGASS. (VI.30 & 
31,VIL36) 
7. UNGASS should also consider the scope for involving non-UN Centres of Excellence 
on a regular basis in the work of bom UNEP and CSD to maximise the effective use of scarce 
environmental expertise. (VI.32, VII.37) 
8. "Major Groups" (civil society) must have the opportunity to contribute to UNGASS. 
(L12, V.5, VÏÏ.7 & 8) 
Those bracketed numbers refer to the relevant paragraphs in the Working Document of the Commission services 
(SEC (96)2069) 
m Recommendations for EU aims for the Political Declaration 
The Declaration should: 
General Conclusions 
1. acknowledge that only by integrating the economic, social and environmental 
components of sustainable development in a transparent, accountable and democratic 
framework which respects and empoweis all sectors of society and takes account of common 
but differentiated responsibilities at the international level, as well as of common but 
differentiated needs, will it be possible to ensure healthy development (VII.2-4) 
2. stress the importance of the Regional Level in an approach based on subsidiarity to 
improve operational coordination and implementation and urge UNEP to pay renewed 
attention to the regional level. (VI.16-19, VII.10 & 11) 
Resources for Developing Countries and Economies in Transition 
3. welcome the recent large increase in private flows, notably in foreign direct 
investment, to certain countries which have meant that total resource flows in real terms are 
at an all time high. However, UNGASS should also acknowledge that these flows are guided 
to a large extent by market signals and so have not benefitted all countries or all sectors 
equally. UNGASS should ask CSD to consider means of attracting private sector investment 
in the field of environmental management. (VI.4) 
4. include a commitment by all DAC donors not to Set the level of development aid fall 
further and to start reversing the trend especially in relation to the least developed countries. 
Given that aid as a proportion of GNP fell to the lowest level ever recorded in 1995 and 
dropped by 14% in real terms between 1992 and 1995, such a commitment would be 
significant progress. If all Member States could so commit themselves, the EU would be in 
a strong position to approach other major donors seeking a similar pledge, Discussions at 
UNGASS will need to take account of the outcome of the preceding negotiations on 
replenishing the Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund, the Global Environmental Facility and 
the UNEP Environment Fund, as well as of parallel discussions in ECOSOC on the UN 
Secretary General's proposals on New and Innovative Ideas for Generating Funds. The 
discussions on aid will be difficult, but the EU could show positive leadership in committing 
itself to renewed emphasis on development education to engender positive but realistic public 
support for aid directed at a more sustainable globalised world. (IV. 1-5, VII. 12-18) 
5. acknowledge the progress that has been made since the Brtmdtland JReport and Mo 
in ensuring greater environmental appraisal of development aid, and urge the generalisation 
of existing best practice which would considerably enhance aid's contribution to sustainable 
development, even within existing budgets. UNGASS should also stress that aid is most 
effective when accompanied by a viable policy framework, stakeholder participation and 
capacity building. (V.30-33, VII.19) 
6. welcome the attention paid in the Copenhagen Declaration to integrating social 
development goals in structural adjustment programmes, and call for equal attention to be 
paid to environmental protection. UNGASS should emphasise that if the environmental 
dimension is not properly integrated into the design of structural adjustment programmes there 
can be unintended negative environmental effects which often harm the poor in particular. 
UNGASS should urge governments to strengthen the environmental dimension of their macro-
economic policies, and invite the international financial institutions including the IMF to pay 
greater attention to this aspect in their macro-economic advice. (V.31, VII.20) 
7. draw attention to the need for coherence in national actions, to implement the plethora 
of plans which have emerged from the round of UN Conferences, and stress the need for 
assistance in capacity building in developing countries, and for coordination across the UN 
system and with the Bretton Woods institutions. UNGASS should also call for better 
coordination in the field between donor agencies within and outside the UN system. (VI.28-
29, VII.21) 
8. acknowledge that advocating a stronger regional aspect in implementing Agenda 21 
will require donor support for poorer regions and pledge that action at the regional level will 
not divert resources from global problems. (VI. 19, VII. 10) 
Joint Implementation and Activities Implemented Jointly 
9. launch a process, perhaps through an Expert Panel mandated to report to the CSD and 
ECOSOC, to advance the debate on these activities, building on work already underway in 
individual Conventions. The aim would be to try to build confidence and set some generally 
applicable ground rules. (VII.22) 
Debt 
10. acknowledge the progress which has been made since Rio, with the launch of the 
World Bank/IMF Debt Initiative, in which all creditors, including multilaterals, will play their 
part to ensure that the debt burdens of the highly indebted poor countries in adjustment are 
brought down to sustainable levels. (V.27, VII.23) 
Trade 
11. reaffirm that trade and environment can play a mutually supportive role in favour of 
sustainable development (i.e. if effective environmental policies and sustainable development 
strategies are in place, an open multilateral trading system makes possible a more efficient 
use of natural resources). UNGASS should stress the need for progress in the WTO and 
confirm that UNEP and UNCTAD must be fully involved in the work. Trade and environment 
should be included in CSD's 1998 Work Programme to provide a forum for a high-level fully 
integrated political debate involving Trade, Environment and possibly Development 
representatives before the Second WTO Ministerial Conference. (VI. 11 & 12, VII.24) 
Investment and the Private Sector 
12. stress the role of the Private Sector, particularly the need for greater business 
participation in the sustainable development dialogue, and international efforts to promote 
voluntary greening of domestic and foreign investment while respecting national sovereignty. 
UNGASS could urge banks and insurance companies to subscribe to the UNEP Statements 
of Environmental Commitment, urge all major companies to undertake environmental 
reporting and draw attention to the OECD Guidelines for Multilateral Enterprises, as well as 
any environmental clause inserted into the Multilateral Agreement on Investment. Private 
Investment should be included in CSD's 1998 Work Programme as a timely input to the 
Second WTO Ministerial Conference. (V.5-7, VII.25) 
Environmental Priorities 
The Chapters of Agenda 21 which deal with the conservation and management of 
environmental resources are its unique contribution to the cause of sustainable development. 
These Chapters must be considered in depth by UNGASS, with a view to establishing which 
issues are already well catered for at the international level, and which need further impetus 
via CSD or other processes. The outcome of this deliberation should be a major component 
of UNGASS and the EU should press for the Declaration to: 
13. draw attention to the implications of the IPCC Second Assessment Report and 
stress the importance of a successful outeome to the Berlin Mandate negotiations at the 3rd 
Conference of the Climate Change Convention in Kyoto. UNGASS should call for the 
adoption of a legal instrument aimed at strengthening the original provisions of the 
Convention for the period beyond the year 2000. This should contain legally binding 
objectives for emission limitation and significant overall reductions for greenhouse gases 
within specified time frames, as well as policies and measures to achieve these. However, 
CSD V and UNGASS should not be used as a parallel negotiating forum for Climate Change. 
(V.ll, VII.41) 
14. send a positive message to the Montreal Protocol meeting welcoming the work done 
over the last 10 years and stressing the need for strengthened efforts by all. (V.19, VII.42) 
15. stress the need to give greater attention to renewable energy conservation and self-
sustaining energy conservation. (VII.43) 
16. regret that few other regions have initiated discussions on regional instruments for 
dealing with transboundary air pollution, charge UNEP with catalysing appropriate action, 
inter alia by reminding appropriate regional organisations of the serious health and 
environmental problems created by such pollution, and ask UN ECE to share its experience 
with others. (VI.18 & 19, VII.44) 
17. highlight the importance of forests which are likely to be one of the key topics for 
UNGASS, recognise the very substantial work on forests undertaken since UNCED, stress the 
need for continued international consideration of the issues and, depending on the outcome 
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests, urge the rapid implementation of its 
recommendations or seek to strengthen them. To ensure the best possible outcome from the 
Panel, the December Council should build on the high level of agreement already achieved 
within the Union and reiterate the main policy statements agreed so far. The EU should 
express its support for the emerging international consensus which has already allowed the 
IPF to identify a number of important issues for action. The EU should urge the IFF to make 
unambiguoiis Becommendations to CSD V and UNGASS on the following key aspects where 
mere is still a wide divergence of views between groups in the negotiations; 
effective institutional mechanisms to ensure strong political commitment and to 
address technical issues; 
mechanisms to improve international coordination and cooperation and enhance 
assistance to developing countries to promote sustainable forest management; 
making more effective use of public and private financial resources at the domestic 
and international levels; 
ensuring that trade supports sustainable forest management, including through policies 
related to the internalisation of key environmental costs, and the potential positive 
relationship between sustainable forest management, trade and voluntary certification 
and labelling schemes. 
While expressing a willingness to maintain a constructive dialogue with our partners on the 
issue of legal arrangements, the Council should reconfirm its support for a specific legally 
binding instrument which would allow a comprehensive approach taking account of all the 
environmental, economic, social and cultural aspects of forest issues. Once the Panel has 
made its Recommendations, the EU will need to adjust its position for UNGASS. Close 
liaison will continue to be needed between the EU's IPF and UNGASS negotiators. (V.14, 
VÏI.45) 
18. warmly welcome the entry into force of the Convention on Combatting Desertification 
and urge all parts of the international community, States and Major Groups to work with this 
new instrument especially in Africa Strenuous efforts should be made to solve the remaining 
contentious issues at the next INCD session in 1997. Attempts to defer them to UNGASS 
should be firmly resisted. (V.13, VII.46) 
19. confirm the need for a regional approach to sustainable mountain development and 
call upon appropriate organisations to consider issues which require regional solution. 
UNGASS should also call for CSD's future work on the socio-economic driving forces of 
environmental change to pay attention to effects on mountain areas. (VII.47) 
20. take account of the outcome of the November 1996 Rome Food Summit in the 
conclusions on sustainable agriculture and rural development, and stress the interactions 
between freshwater, soil erosion, demography and food security. UNGASS should urge the 
effective and correct implementation of the Uruguay Round Agreements, including the 
Marrakesh decision on measures relating to the possible adverse effects of the reform 
programme on least developed countries and countries which are net importers of food. It 
should stress the need for industrialised countries to adjust their own production in a balanced 
way which takes account of the need to protect natural resources and landscapes, of 
international competition based on comparative advantage in natural conditions, and of their 
own need for food security. UNGASS should also call for the strengthening of agricultural 
research and extension systems, and improved dissemination of research results. Equally it 
should call for coherence between activities undertaken by the FAO in the context of the 
Global Plan of Action on Plant Genetic Resources For Agriculture and actions under the 
Convention on Biological Diversity. (V.15 & 16, VI.23, VII.48) 
21. welcome the work done by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the 
production of the Global Bio-Diversity Assessment UNGASS should call for rapid progress 
in the negotiations on the CBD Bio-safety Protocol with a view to conclusion in 1998 and 
welcome the adoption of the UNEP Technical Guideline* for Bio-safety. It should call upon 
all countries to ratify the CBD and ask the UN Secretary General to bring this call to the 
attention of non-parties. This would help to ensure that the issue was given a higher profile 
in the USA. (V.l 1, VI.20, VII.49) 
22. welcome the coming into force of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 
adoption of the various international fisheries instruments agreed since Rio. Equally UNGASS 
should welcome the Washington Global Plan of Action and stress the need for cooperation 
from all the intemational organisations mentioned therein. It should also endorse the CSD IV 
coordination decision, sponsored by the EU, thereby ensuring that oceans feature on CSD's 
agenda on a regular basis, and that an integrated approach is taken in examining marine 
resource and pollution issues. (V.l7, VII.50) 
23. draw attention to the increasing problem of freshwater scarcity with its implications 
for intemational security and food production, as well as to the growing danger of water 
pollution and inadequate sanitation in an increasingly urbanised world. UNGASS should pay 
particular attention to the Global Water Assessment which will be available before the Session 
and should promote a regional approach, based on river-basins and watersheds, to water 
management. UNGASS should also welcome the inauguration of the Global Water Partnership 
and encourage its regional and river basin approach to water management. (VI. 18 & 23, 
VII.51) 
24. welcome the work of the Interorganisation Programme for the Safe Management of 
Chemicals (IOMQ and of the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety as well as the 
opening of negotiations on Prior Informed Consent (PIQ and, if all goes well at the UNEP 
Governing Council, Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). The need for coherence in the 
chemicals agenda should be tackled if this has not been dealt with at UNEP GC 19 which will 
also consider the question of further measures beyond PIC. Any proposals on greater 
coherence should take account of the need to complete and implement the PIC agreement as 
soon as possible, and bear in mind the differences between POPs and the list of substances 
subject to PIC. UNGASS should also stress the need to ensure coherence between global 
initiatives on POPs on the one hand, and regional atmosphere and marine related initiatives 
on the other. (V.19, VI.20, VII.52) 
25. welcome the progress made under the Basle Convention and call for the timely 
implementation of the ban on the export of hazardous waste for any purpose to non-OECD 
countries. UNGASS should urge all countries to ratify the Convention and request the UN 
Secretary General to bring this call to the attention of non-parties. Again this would help to 
ensure that the issue was given a higher profile in the USA. (V.20, VI.20, VII.53) 
26. stress me importance of minimising solid waste and the role of economic instruments 
and the principle of producers' responsibility in so doing. Where waste nevertheless arises and 
cannot be recovered, UNGASS should stress the need for safe disposal methods. UNGASS 
should also point to the links with the Habitat Agenda, the Copenhagen Programme, the 
Washington Global Programme of Action and the Global Freshwater Assessment. (VII.54) 
27. draw attention to the forthcoming negotiations for the Convention on the Safety of 
Radioactive Waste Management and point to the problem of the safe management of naturally 
radioactive waste material as an issue to be addressed at a later stage. (V.21, VI.27, VII.55) 
28. welcome the unprecedented degree of local authority participation in Habitat II and 
press for adequate coordination at all levels in efforts to promote Local Agenda 21 and local 
level implementation of me Habitat Agenda. UNGASS should point out that the world will 
enter the new rmllermium with more than half of its population urbanised. (VI.29, VII.57) 
Institutional Matters 
29. recall the responsibility for the coordination of intemational environmental law given 
to UNEP by Agenda 21. UNGASS should ask all States and Convention Secretariats to assist 
in this task especially in an era when Secretariats are being dispersed with all the advantages 
and disadvantages mat this entails. UNGASS should also take account of, and probably 
endorse, UNEP*s recommendations following the Review of the Montevideo Programme. (1.7, 
V.22, VI.20, 30-31, VII.58) 
30. recognise the relative weakness of intemational environmental institutions and the 
need for adaptation in a globalising and increasingly interdependent world. While it would 
not be appropriate to propose new institutions or fundamentally alter the institutional roles set 
out in Chapter 38 of Agenda 21 at this stage, there is likely to be a need and a willingness 
for reform in another five years. UNEP should be charged with drawing up proposals for 
encouraging participation in, and compliance with, international sustainable development law 
for consideration at a further Special Session of the UNGA. (1.7, VI.30-31, VII.59) 
31. recall that CSD is the leading Functional Commission of the ECOSOC in the follow-
up of Rio and confirm CSD's role in harmony with recent ECOSOC decisions. (VII.29-36) 
Treatment of Cross Sectoral Issues 
32. endorse the proposal to refocus much of CSD's Work Programme on economic sectors, 
as the driving forces of environmental change. This could help to make the international 
debate more operational on issues such as the integration of environment into other policies, 
consumption and production patterns, technology transfer, financial mechanisms, awareness 
raising and research. It would also reduce the potential areas of duplication between CSD and 
other Functional Commissions. Nevertheless, UNGASS will also need to stress the continuing 
importance of the cross-sectoral issues identified at UNCED. In particular UNGASS should 
reiterate the need to change long term trends in consumption and patterns and to integrate 
the environmental dimension in decision-making in all sectors. (VI.8-10, 13-15, VII.60-63) 
8 
IV Recommendations for EU Aims for the CSD and its Future Work Pmpmme 
1. In addition to reducing significantly the number of CSD's Decisions, strenuous efforts 
are needed to make them more operational. At present Decisions too often rewrite parts of 
Agenda 21 or are undirected desiderata. Any general statement should be directed at someone 
for action. CSD's Decisions should also identify much more clearly the actions requested from 
different UN agencies and establish priorities for a more coordinated implementation of its 
recommendations by the UN system as a whole. Further efforts are also needed to produce 
clearer texts. (VIII.2 & 3) 
2. Further, but modest, donor funding is needed to allow adequate G 77 representation 
at the government sponsored workshops which are such an important feature of CSD's method 
of building the consensus needed for important Decisions. (VIII.4) 
3. If UNGASS is to encourage more regional activity, CSD will need to respond. CSD 
should play a part in promoting regional approaches to solving problems. It might also be 
appropriate to hold alternate CSD sessions outside New York in a major regional centre. 
(VIII.5) 
4. CSD's role as a forum for exchanging ideas needs to be strengthened and donors 
should consider earmarking funds to allow relevant officials from developing countries to 
attend what for them would be valuable opportunities to meet professional colleagues. The 
idea of using "discussants" to lead the questioning on national reports, which was introduced 
by OECD countries in CSD IV, should be promoted. (VIII.6) 
5. The CSD Secretariat should be assisted to make greater use of the opportunities 
offered by the Internet to provide information on CSD's own Work Programme and on 
progress in implementing all the Chapters of Agenda 21. (VIII.8) 
6. National reports to CSD must be prepared well in advance of sessions to allow the 
Secretariat to produce a useful synthesis drawing out the main lessons. (V.l-8, VIII.9) 
7. The UN Secretary General should be invited to produce a consolidated annual report 
on UN efforts to promote sustainable development. (VIII. 10) 
8. The timetable for appointing the Bureau of CSD still needs to be changed so that the 
new team is installed at the end of each Session and has a year to prepare the session over 
which it will preside.This question needs to be taken up before UNGASS by the EU in New 
York.XVm.ll) 
9. CSD should start its new approach of looking at the socio-economic driving forces of 
environmental change by considering energy, transport and agriculture. Clear objectives need 
to be defined before UNGASS if the EU is to succeed in getting its chosen sectors on CSD's 
Work Programme, since there is likely to be severe competition for the limited time available. 
This is an area where the Commission and the Member States need to divide up the 
preparatory work. (V.l5, VI.25 & 26, IX.5 & 6) 
10. There are other areas major of major concern. Oceans, forests (unless UNGASS 
launches negotiations for a future instrument), and freshwater with a focus on both urban and 
agricultural issues, and links to soil erosion and food security, should all be included in the 
next cycle. (V.14,18, VI.23, IX.8-10) 
11. Trade and Environment, and Investment and the Private Sector both deserve a high 
priority in the agenda. In addition to discussion in the context of the economic sectors, there 
will need to be a general debate on consumption and production patterns, notably to draw 
attention to the implications of long term trends. Work on testing Indicators will need review 
at some time in the cycle. The legal and institutional questions proposed for UNEP will need 
to be brought back to the CSD immediately prior to a further Special Session. (V.9-10, 22, 
VI.5-7, 11-15, Vn.60-63, IX.11-16) 
1. This paper attempts to set out an achievable list of objectives for the EU at UNGASS. 
If all the recommendations made were implemented, Agenda 21 would receive a significant 
political boost and could complete its transition to the operational phase. 
2. Forests and finance are likely to be the most critical issues at UNGASS. There should 
be agreement on another review of Agenda 21 in five years time. The Session should also 
stress the importance of the Third Conference of the Parties of the Climate Change 
Convention and the need for it to complete the Berlin Mandate negotiations. 
3. Freshwater, and its connections to soil erosion and food security as well as the urban 
environment, need increased attention which CSD is well placed to give. The EU has already 
identified oceans as requiring CSD's integrated approach. The EU also has a strong interest 
in keeping trade high on CSD's agenda and giving greater prominence to private sector 
investment. The EU should support the introduction of a sectoral approach in CSD's work. 
4. UNGASS provides a rare opportunity for world leaders to concern themselves with 
long term issues rather than immediate crises. Three years before the dawn of a new 
millenium this is particularly appropriate. There is no doubt that globalisation and 
interdependence will be the hallmarks of the new century and that these should be the themes 
for leaders at UNGASS. Leaders should look back, perhaps not simply to Rio but also to the 
Stockholm Conference of 1972, and by assessing progress towards sustainability since then, 
determine the priorities for action now. They should give strong political endorsement to the 
many fora which are tackling the issues and urge them to move beyond awareness-raising and 
setting the broad framework of policy, to drawing up operational decisions which will make 
a real difference to the detiorating trends in the world's environment. Leaders should stress 
that the environmental concerns of all countries are important to sustainable development. 
They should also highlight the need for an effective institutional framework at the world level 
to ensure an integrated approach in which social, economic and environmental concerns all 
receive proper attention. 
5. Agreement on key priorities and strong and united EU leadership will help to drive 
forward the negotiations to the benefit of sustainable development, and will be essential to 
the success of UNGASS. 
10 

ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(96) 569 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 11 14 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-96-570-EN-C 
ISBN 92-78-11435-9 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg 
yV\