COMMUNICATION FROM THE 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
Date: 1996-11-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: UN Conference, UNO, economic development, environmental policy, environmental protection

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. 

The EU has developed a domestic agenda for sustainable development, which is likely 
2. 
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). 

An  accompanying  Working  Document  of  the  Commission  Services  presents  an 
5. 
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. 

The recommendations are consistent with the proposed Decision on the Review of the 
6. 
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 

There  should  be agreement  on another review, Rio  +  10,  in five  years  to  maintain 

2. 
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) 

UNGASS should  also consider the scope for involving non-UN Centres of Excellence 
7. 
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) 

"Major Groups" (civil society) must have the opportunity to contribute to UNGASS. 

8. 
(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 

welcome  the  recent  large  increase  in  private  flows,  notably  in  foreign  direct 
3. 
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) 

include a commitment  by all DAC donors not to Set the level of development aid  fall 
4. 
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) 

draw attention to the need for coherence in national actions, to implement the plethora 
7. 
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) 

acknowledge that advocating a stronger regional aspect in implementing Agenda 21 
8. 
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) 

stress  the need to give  greater attention to renewable energy  conservation  and self-

15. 
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) 

welcome the coming into force of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 
22. 
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) 

draw attention to the increasing problem of freshwater scarcity with its implications 
23. 
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) 

welcome the unprecedented degree of local authority participation in Habitat II and 
28. 
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) 

that CSD is the leading Functional Commission of the ECOSOC in the follow-
31.  recall 
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) 

Further, but modest, donor funding  is needed to allow  adequate G 77  representation 

2. 
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) 

CSD's  role  as  a  forum  for exchanging  ideas  needs  to  be  strengthened  and  donors 
4. 
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) 

National reports to CSD must be prepared well  in advance of sessions to allow the 

6. 
Secretariat to produce a useful  synthesis drawing out the main lessons. (V.l-8,  VIII.9) 

The  UN Secretary General should be invited to produce a consolidated annual  report 

7. 
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) 

This paper  attempts to set out an achievable list of objectives for the EU at UNGASS. 
1. 
If all the recommendations  made were implemented, Agenda 21 would  receive a  significant 
political  boost  and  could  complete its transition to the operational  phase. 

Forests and finance are likely to be the most critical issues at UNGASS. There should 
2. 
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. 

UNGASS  provides  a rare opportunity  for world leaders  to  concern themselves  with 
4. 
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. 

Agreement on key priorities and  strong and united EU leadership will  help to drive 
5. 
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\