CHAIRMAN: (Original language German): I welcome delegations to this afternoon's meeting. Once again may I urge you all to be as specific and brief as possible in your address, because we have so many speakers.
J.J. NEETESON (Netherlands): The Netherlands delegation appreciates very much the document on activities related to sustainable development and the environment. We also thank Mr Mahler for his introduction.
This document presents an extensive and useful review of the many activities FAO has undertaken as a follow-up to the Agenda 21 of UNCED. As is mentioned in the introduction, the document adds little to the already available information contained in documents available to the Governing Bodies of FAO.
When sustainability directions and criteria, as formulated by UNCED, are in the process of being integrated into FAO programmes and activities as requested by the previous Conference Resolution 2/91, then this is the way it should be. The integration process has to show up in documents such as the Medium-term Plan, the Programme of Work and Budget, the Programme Implementation Report, and the Programme Evaluation Report. These documents have already been discussed under other agenda items. However, I recall that some delegations pointed out that sustainability criteria are not included, for instance, in the Programme Evaluation Report.
One may get the impression from the document - and this has caused us some concern - that the implementation of the UNCED objectives depends to a large extent on extra-budgetary financing of the Special Action Programmes. We believe that a regular programme could be adjusted to include UNCED objectives without budgetary consequences. A good example of this is the follow-up given to the chapter in Agenda 21 on biological diversity through the FAO Plant Genetic Resources Programme.
It should be realized that consequences do attach to this integration process, namely, the setting of priorities and follow-ups. I noted that out of the twelve Special Action Programmes under the ICPF/SARD the ones on integrated pest management and integrated plant nutrition systems to a large extent have completed the process of integration of the Agenda 21 objectives. We find it important that a great deal of coherence betweeen the Special Action Programmes, of which many are new, could remain too much directed to one often technical sub-sector. Economic and institutional aspects should be taken into account from the outset.
In this respect, I want to make a plea for intensive collaboration with farmers' organizations in the implementation phase. For this, I should like to refer to the Report of the Non-Governmental Organization Meeting held on 9 November contained in document C 93/INF/1 and also to the statement made by the Representative of the International Federation of Agricultural Producers made in Plenary yesterday.
Upon further development of the Special Action Programmes there is also scope for collaboration and exchange of information between FAO and experts and other representatives from Member States on the policies and activities of the various Special Action Programmes. With regard to peoples' participation, we support the suggestion made by a delegate of Sri Lanka this morning that the progress reports on the Action Plan on peoples' participation be presented soon to the relevant FAO bodies.
In conclusion, I should like to say that FAO is well under way in the process of reorienting its programmes and activities towards the objectives and criteria set out by Agenda 21 of UNCED. But I realize that this process is not yet completed. We appreciate the lead role FAO is playing in inter-agency meetings concerning the various chapters of Agenda 21 which are relevant to FAO, such as sustainable agriculture, forestry and also fisheries. Cooperation with other organizations such as UNDP with respect to its programme Capacity 21 is appreciated and should continue to be sought.
My country attaches great importance to the work of the Commission on Sustainable Development in monitoring the progress made in the implementation of Agenda 21. Meetings of this Commission are at political level, and representation of FAO at the highest level is therefore justified.
Christian COURCOL (France): Le document présenté par le Secrétariat ne se limite pas à lister les chapitres du Programme de travail de l'OAA correspondant à l'Agenda 21 et en ce sens la délégation française le juge intéressant.
Il suscite cependant, de notre part, un ensemble d'appréciations sur la façon dont les activités relatives au développement durable et à l'environnement doivent être appréhendées.
La nouvelle approche, énoncée lors de la CNUED, insiste sur la compatibilité et l'interdépendance du développement durable et de l'environnement. Sa dimension certainement la plus importante pour les pays en développement n'est pas tant la question des pollutions que celle de la gestion des ressources naturelles.
En effet, l'essentiel de la production agricole des pays en développement, notamment des pays les moins avancées, se fait avec peu d'intrants extérieurs et repose principalement sur l'exploitation des ressources naturelles (fertilité naturelle des sols, ressources en eau, bois et pâturages naturels, gibier).
Dans ces conditions, la permanence du développement rural dans ces pays repose, du moins pour les quelques années à venir, sur une meilleure gestion des ressources naturelles. Il conviendrait donc de focaliser d'ici l'an 2000 les programmes environnementaux sur l'aspect "gestion des ressources naturelles".
L'application de ce concept relève de niveaux de responsabilités différentes :
- au niveau local, elle repose sur l'appropriation par les villageois de ces ressources et sur leur responsabilisation en vue d'une gestion plus durable.
- au niveau national ou régional, il s'agit de planifier à plus long terme l'utilisation des ressources, processus qui relève d'une démarche "d'aménagement du territoire". Il s'agit principalement des questions foncières et du zonage de l'utilisation des sols.
Les atouts dont dispose l'OAA, dans ce domaine, lui permettent de jouer un rôle stratégique.
La capacité de l'Organisation de mobiliser une expertise reconnue en matière de développement agricole lui permet en effet de traduire les nouvelles orientations du développement en concepts opérationnels, en méthodologies appropriées, en flux d'informations organisés.
En conséquence, la délégation française considère que la mission essentielle de l'OAA dans les années à venir devrait être de mettre sa capacité d'expertise au service de la concrétisation opérationnelle des concepts d'application "du développement durable et de l'environnement" et plus particulièrement de la gestion des ressources naturelles.
Dans ce cadre, il nous apparaît fondamental que l'OAA réoriente ses programmes actuels autour des thèmes évoqués ci-dessus et cherche à leur donner une priorité plus forte que celle qui apparaît dans le document C 93/10.
De notre point de vue, elle ne doit pas envisager de créer de nouveaux programmes pour lesquels elle trouverait probablement difficilement des ressources additionnelles.
Dans le contexte de contraintes budgétaires il est primordial de fixer clairement des priorités et de faire des choix.
Ces réorientations sont importantes car le risque que d'autres agences internationales accaparent cette mission essentielle est réel. Nous l'avons déjà constaté dans le domaine forestier où des tendances se sont manifestées en faveur de la création de nouvelles enceintes internationales pour la mise en oeuvre de l'Agenda 21.
Permettez-moi, Monsieur le Président, après ces considérations générales sur les orientations stratégiques des programmes de l'Organisation, de formuler des observations et des questions sur les quatre points suivants:
Premièrement, comme déjà évoqué ci-dessus, la promotion d'un développement durable fondé sur une approche participative est une priorité. Mais il faut éviter, tant au niveau national qu'international, de créer de nouvelles structures. Il est préférable de privilégier l'option présentée au paragraphe 58 qui consiste en un renforcement et en une adaptation des institutions existantes afin d'intégrer les préoccupations environnementales dans leurs activités principales.
Deuxièmement, ma délégation souhaiterait avoir des précisions sur les modalités d'action de l'OAA dans le cadre de la préparation de projets financés par le Fonds pour l'environnement mondial. Il nous intéresserait
également de connaître les modalités de collaboration entre la Banque mondiale et l'OAA depuis la remise en cause du programme de coopération entre la Banque mondiale et le Centre d'investissement. Je remercie le Secrétariat pour les informations qu'il nous apportera sur ce point.
Troisièmement, la France apporte son soutien aux travaux préparatoires, sous la conduite de l'OAA, de la quatrième Conférence technique internationale pour la conservation et l'utilisation des ressources phytogénétiques.
Elle encourage vivement l'Organisation à mener ces actions en étroite collaboration avec les centres internationaux de recherche agronomique membres du CGRAI.
Enfin, la délégation française se réfère à la dernière partie du document sur le partage des coûts du développement durable. Elle considère que la libéralisation des échanges n'est pas la panacée. Un seuil de protection des secteurs économiques les plus fragiles semble une condition indispensable à un développement durable.
En conclusion, la France continuera à aider l'OAA dans ces efforts notamment par la mise à disposition de compétences dans le domaine de la lutte contre la désertification, au travers de l'Observatoire du Sahara et du Sahel, la gestion durable des forêts en soutenant le Plan d'action forestier tropical, et dans celui de la lutte contre les criquets.
Koen ADAM (Belgique) : Le développement durable se révèle être pour nous un problème crucial pour l'avenir. C'est dès aujourd'hui qu'il est nécessaire de construire cet avenir.
A la lecture du document C 93/10, préparé par le Secrétariat de la FAO, nous sommes frappés par le grand nombre de partenaires institutionnels et financiers associés au suivi de la CNUED. Il nous paraît indispensable dans ce contexte que la répartition des tâches soit opérée avec vigilance, en gardant à l'esprit l'application concrète des engagements pris.
Nous saluons le fait que, dans certains domaines, la FAO soit, en quelque sorte, le "maître d'oeuvre" du suivi de la CNUED. Nous sommes convaincus que la FAO sera en mesure d'accomplir cette tâche et qu'elle apportera une contribution décisive dans le domaine de l'agriculture et de la foresterie. Dans le domaine de la pêche, le rôle de la FAO, récemment mis en lumière lors de l'élaboration du projet de Convention pour le respect des mesures de conservation des ressources halieutiques, témoigne d'un capital d'expertise qui pourra être mis à profit dans des programmes d'activités spécifiques.
Par ailleurs, la Belgique a déjà confirmé son appui au plan à moyen terme, et à tous les efforts entrepris pour intégrer les critères de durabilité dans les activités de la FAO.
Le rôle multifonctionnel de l'agriculture s'insère directement dans le concept du développement rural. Il est admis par tous désormais que l'agriculture doit, à la fois, assurer une fonction de production et donc de sécurité alimentaire, tout en maintenant les ressources naturelles pour l'avenir.
Le devoir des décideurs politiques est de concilier de manière optimale les impératifs d'un développement qui réponde aux besoins croissants des populations, en préservant l'héritage biologique pour les générations de demain. Pour satisfaire ces objectifs, à première vue divergents, nous devons mettre au point des instruments politiques courageux, qui respectent les contraintes globales sans méconnaître les besoins des communautés locales.
Il est, en effet, inconcevable de mettre en place des politiques nouvelles qui n'obtiennent pas l'assentiment des populations concernées.
Quelles sont les lignes directrices qui vont à l'avenir sous-tendre ces politiques? Le débat n'est pas clos. D'aucuns préconisent le laisser-faire, convaincus que les lois du marché opèrent en toutes circonstances une allocation optimale des ressources au niveau mondial, tout en assurant également leur pérennité. Toutefois, de nombreux exemples démontrent que le recours à ce type de politiques peut provoquer de graves problèmes environnementaux. Nous serions dès lors enclins à une approche plus nuancée.
Pour le développement durable, nous pensons également que les intérêts particuliers ne peuvent intégrer tous les coûts et avantages d'un mode de production agricole spécifique. En conséquence, leur somme peut difficilement constituer une réponse appropriée aux intérêts de la société dans sa globalité. Les contraintes du développement durable débordent largement les logiques commerciales. Nous pensons qu'il est nécessaire pour relever le défi du développement durable, de mettre en phase les lois du marché avec ces objectifs multiformes.
Dans cette problématique, l'apport de la biotechnologie et de l'informatique est d'un grand secours, à condition que celles-ci soient utilisées au service d'une biodiversité la plus large possible, dans le respect de pratiques agricoles, forgées par les contraintes locales.
Certes, la mise en oeuvre des principes du développement durable est encore lacunaire. La récolte de données statistiques fiables est un préalable essentiel à l'élaboration de politiques appropriées à long terme. La FAO a, à cet égard, une responsabilité importante. Malheureusement, l'inventaire alarmant des dégradations irrémédiables infligées au patrimoine naturel, comme l'étude sur l'Agriculture 2010 le mentionne, nous oblige à élaborer dans les brefs délais des solutions pragmatiques.
En ce qui concerne les relations entre les consommateurs et les producteurs, nous sommes d'accord avec les vues du Secrétariat exposées aux paragraphe 53 et suivants du document C 93/10.
Effectivement, les objectifs de durabilité dans le domaine de l'agriculture se heurtent aux pratiques d'intensification et d'homogénéisation de la production. Toutefois il nous semble que le producteur agricole et le consommateur ont plus d'intérêts en commun que de raisons de s'opposer. Par exemple, les mesures phytosanitaires: elles garantissent au consommateur un niveau de qualité convenable mais, aussi, évitent à l'agriculteur la propagation de maladies qui affecteraient sa production. Pour développer une meilleure compréhension entre milieu rural et consommateurs, nous proposons de valoriser l'image de marque de l'agriculture par des actions menées auprès du grand public, afin de souligner le rôle multifonctionnel du producteur agricole.
Pour conclure, Monsieur le Président, nous voudrions inciter tous les gouvernements à adopter d'urgence des politiques pragmatiques, conformes aux critères de durabilité. Bien sûr, l'immensité et la complexité du défi peuvent inspirer un sentiment d'impuissance, voire de découragement.
La FAO, par son expertise, contribue à un meilleur diagnostic de la situation mondiale de l'agriculture et peut fournir une aide efficace à cette fin.
D.A. TROTMAN (United Kingdom): The United Kingdom Delegation welcomes FAO's efforts to incorporate post-UNCED developments and their implications in the context of sustainable development and environment.
We welcome FAO's response in Part II of the document to the post-UNCED challenge and are encouraged to see good integration of environment and sustainable development considerations into the proposed programme of future activities. The main difficulty, however, is that expression of interest and response cuts across a very wide spectrum of activities: it will be important for FAO to focus on key issues and select activities accordingly. FAO should be reminded of the Council agreement in paragraph 2 that "... although FAO was concerned with many programme areas of Agenda 21, it should concentrate efforts selectively in a number of key programme areas where the Organization had a definite mandate and comparative advantage in playing a lead role in UNCED follow-up". Criteria for identifying priorities and responsibilities need to be carefully considered, and reviewed, against a general need for closer collaboration and cooperation between UN and other agencies.
Part III of the report identifies emerging issues and major challenges. The analysis is sound. As paragraph 41 indicates, the most immediate challenge (not just at national level!) is to set priorities and ensure appropriate distribution of responsibilities among the institutions concerned. Integrating environmental concerns into "upstream aspects of policy, plans and programmes" (paragraph 42) should be part of a systematic approach, not regarded as an "add-on".
We acknowledge that integrating sustainable development and environmental considerations into all activities will require shifts in policy and procedures, and better coordination. It would be wrong for FAO to suggest, as in paragraph 59, that the only means of achieving these objectives is through additional funding.
Finally, the United Kingdom delegation welcomes the emphasis given by FAO to the environment as a cross-cutting issue in its training programme, as referred to in paragraph 31. Activities of FAO headquarters staff, field staff and, indeed, by planners within the Member Nations themselves, might be further enhanced by the production of an "environment manual" setting out FAO's environmental policies and procedures for project and programme approval. The manual might include an environmental checklist for decision-makers - questions to be asked at the earliest stages of project and programme design - and provide guidance on the need for, and likely content of, environmental impact assessments, etc. A manual or guidance document of this type would further demonstrate FAO's commitment to sustainable development.
Winston RUDDER (Trinidad and Tobago): The particular agenda item which concerns us comes as we reflect on the events which took place at the UNCED conference in June 1992. May I at the outset indicate that Trinidad and Tobago has in many respects been addressing the several themes that were raised during that conference and seeking to address policy and programmes within the country to take account of the sustainable development issues which were discussed and the positions arrived at in Brazil in 1992. I will merely instance a few examples of what is being done at present to indicate the continuing interests of the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago in this regard.
We have been moving rather swiftly to institutionalize a mechanism to coordinate environmental management at the national level, and we anticipate that by the end of 1993 the legislation will have been drafted and passed for the establishment of an environmental management agency within Trinidad and Tobago. At the same time, both forestry and fisheries legislation and policy are under very serious review. Indeed, a new draft Forests Act has already been put together and is being examined currently. With the assistance of FAO we are currently reviewing our fisheries policy and seeking to rationalize fisheries legislation. At the same time we have for the consideration of the Cabinet and ultimately our Parliament a draft food and agriculture policy which seeks to incorporate within its many aspects issues related to sustainable development of agriculture, fisheries and forestry. These are but a few of the current initiatives being undertaken by the Government of Trinidad and Tobago in the area of sustainable development. .
Having said that, there are a few specific matters which arise in the document for consideration which I should like to address. Agriculture, forestry and fisheries continue to be the remit of this Organization. Agriculture, forestry and fisheries, it is acknowledged, are responsible for the management of the largest proportion of the renewable natural resource base.
In respect of small island states, the management of the natural resource base poses a major problem in the whole area of sustainability. For small island states, the interface between agriculture, forestry and coastal zone regions is a continuum. They are merely zones of transition, they are not rigid boundaries, and therefore it is incumbent upon us to take a holistic view and approach to the management of the renewable natural resource base in our countries. No doubt it was with that in mind that UNCED recognized the need for a special focus on the small island states. It is with that in mind that actions are being taken and preparatory discussions are under way in respect of the proposed Global Conference on Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States scheduled for Barbados in April 1994. Sad to say, those small island states who have gathered for the 27th Conference and who have met over the last week note with alarm that the conclusions and recommendations which emanated from the FAO Inter-Regional Conference on Small Island States in Barbados in 1992, which sought to give due recognition to the issue of the development of food, agriculture, forestry and fisheries within the context of sustainable development in small island states, seem to have been observed more in the breach in terms of what we observe will be on the agenda - at least as proposed thus far - for the Globel Conference on Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States.
We are very much concerned about that. In our individual capacities as members of FAO, members of the United Nations family, we aim to draw this
to the attention of our respective governments. However, we would hope, having regard to the fact that FAO is part of the overall preparatory arrangements for this Conference, and in fact sponsored and supported these discussions in Barbados in 1992, that it would play a very key and important role in bringing to the attention of all the partners involved in that global conference in 1994, the concerns that we the small island states share, because, as we said earlier, agriculture, forestry and fisheries constitute the major responsible areas in the management of renewable natural resource bases in our countries. You could not have a global conference dealing with sustainable development of small island states and not speak to the issues of agriculture, forestry and fisheries development.
Another point to which I wish to draw attention relates to -one of the principal areas where FAO has been given a task management role arising out of UNCED 1992. I refer specifically to the area of forestry and forestry development.
It pains me to raise this issue in this forum, an issue which we have been addressing since 1990, as I recall, at many sessions of Council and the last Conference. I have to bring it up again today at the 27th Conference. It relates very critically to the status of the Tropical Forest Action Programme. Where is the Tropical Forest Action Programme in all of this? Where is that momentum which was called forth some three years ago? We have gone through many a contortion in trying to deal with this particular issue and it seems to me that it is, in fact, the task manager's role that FAO must play in this area of forestry and forestry-related issues emanating from UNCED. I would sincerely hope - and in that regard I am not being cynical - that when we come to report at the 1995 discussions of the Commission on Sustainable Development, when we come to report on issues related to land, forest, desertification and biological diversity, I would trust that in the case of the tropical forests we would not be reporting on what might have been, but in fact on what we have done.
In this regard, I would urge that all actions be taken to put on the front burner issues related to the establishment of the consultative group on whatever arrangements we have agreed and for God's sake let's get action started to get the Tropical Forests Action Programme off the ground. Many of the countries, including those of the Caribbean, are now hopefully finalizing the National Forests Action Programme in the eager expectation that donor conferences will be held, will be able to attract funds and will get action going, not in the committees and the conferences, but on the ground. That is to say, trees will have been planted which will yield protection and cover and perhaps also production in our several countries. I trust that the Conference gives a clear signal to all the relevant parties that the time for talk is long past in respect to this particular matter.
It is not extremely clear to the delegation of Trinidad and Tobago what is the specific role that FAO, as one of the cooperating agencies within the UN system, will play, will play in respect of the GEF and in respect of the UNDP's Capacity 21. I note that in paragraphs 35 and 36 and in Boxes 2 and 3, reference being made to the role of the UN agencies, and some specific reference being made to FAO providing assistance to member countries in certain specific activities. However, it is not clear to me that FAO has, what I would call, a catalytic role to play in the activities of these two major areas from which we expect financial support. Perhaps in the ensuing discussions the Chair will be able to assist through the
Secretariat by giving a clear indication of whether FAO has to await some action on the part of another agency before its role is defined, or rather whether FAO can in fact take some lead action to ensure that it plays an effective role in the GEF and the UNDP's Capacity 21.
These are but a few of the observations the delegation of Trinidad and Tobago would like to make on this particular agenda item.
CHAIRMAN: I can assure you that your comments have been taken on board by the Secretariat and note will be taken of what you have said in the course of the responses.
Ms Janet D. GARCIA (Philippines): I shall try to be brief as you requested, Mr Chairman.
In my delegation's intervention I will focus on a few points relating to the document before us. With regard to the Philippine's follow-up actions to Agenda 21 of UNCED, appropriate sectors in the Philippines are now reorienting activities towards sustainable development to address concerns on environmental protection, food, agriculture and forestry. Our policy-makers are reviewing existing policies to discard those inconsistent with the attainment of sustainable development and formulating new policies to serve as a basis in the design of strategies to promote this.
To address the need for closer interaction and cooperation with other sectors, the Philippine Council for Sustainable Development or PCSD, was created on 1 September 1992. The PCSD provides directions in the formulation of policy reforms, programmes and new legislation that respond to continuing and emerging issues, and the charting of future actions related to the environment and development. It is mandated to ensure that the country's commitments to the Earth Summit and Agenda 21 are implemented, periodically monitored and coordinated at global level.
With regard to the programme areas under Agenda 21, we are giving priority to the following areas of concern: firstly, conservation of environment and natural resources considering the current problems we have on environmental degradation and the depletion of natural resources which exacerbate the problem of meeting the needs of the growing population. Activities geared towards this goal include enforcing conservation policies that protect the country's land, water and marine resources to ensure the long-term sustainability of the resource base; promoting cultivation methods for the judicious use of land, forest and marine resources; providing livelihood opportunities for the landless, shifting cultivators in the uplands, occupants of forests and subsistence fisherfolk in overfished coastal waters; and conducting intensive educational campaigns with regard to citizenry's responsibility to protect the environment.
Secondly, the development of appropriate technologies in support of sustainable development and the promotion of those that enhance and preserve the environment such as the Integrated Pest Management approach.
Thirdly, the design of relevant production programmes attuned to food sustainability toward the attainment of food security.
Fourthly, conservation of biodiversity and the enrichment of genetic resources by carrying out research and varietal improvement, agronomy,
horticulture, plant pathology, plant entomology, and biotechnology suitable in any farming system, as well as selection and development of superior crop varieties.
With regard to fisheries, the sector is encountering problems which are consequences mainly of the open policy in fishery exploitation and the rapid increase in the size of poverty-stricken communities where the exploitation of natural resources is most intense. Thus, policy formulation and implementation of activities are geared toward:
1) the regulation of fishing efforts within the maximum sustainable yield levels and redirecting these away from identified overfished and degraded areas and towards activities consistent with sound resource management.
2) the strict implementation of existing laws, regulations and management programmes on environmental maintenance and resource rehabilitation, particularly where coral reefs and mangroves are concerned.
3) intensification of aquaculture production to make up for the shortfalls resulting from reduced efforts in over-fished fishing areas through the provision of improved aquaculture technologies, measures and inputs.
4) the conduct of more research, training and extension work on fisheries resource management and aquaculture technologies.
Z.O. ADESINYAN (Nigeria): My delegation would like to recall the fact that Nigeria actively participated in the various preparatory committee meetings of UNCED, including the UNCED Conference itself, because of the importance it attached and still attaches to the various issues the Conference deliberated on and on which it took decisions. Because Nigeria believes in what UNCED stands for, she appended her signature to the Convention on Climate Change and Biodiversity during the Conference in Rio in 1992.
As a follow-up action to UNCED agreements, my delegation would like to report on the steps Nigeria has taken so far. Immediately after the Rio Conference, Nigeria held a post-Rio national conference particularly to consider Agenda 21 and its implementation. This conference was well attended.
Nigeria is seriously considering the ratification of the two conventions of which she is a signatory. My delegation is optimistic that this will be realized in due course.
Nigeria is actively participating in the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Drought and Desertification. Because this subject is dear to Nigeria, my delegation hopes that Member Nations of FAO will support this just cause and make the Convention on Desertification by 1994 as scheduled during the Rio Conference.
Nigeria has reorganized its focal agencies responsible for the environment and sustainable development. The Federal Environmental Protection Agency has been rejuvenated, leading to the coalescing of the agency and the National Resources Conservation Council with a broader mandate. The Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the Federal Ministry of Water and Rural Development have been reorganized and revitalized. All the changes were effected for the proper streamlining of mandates, resulting in cost-effectiveness, the reduction of overlaps and duplication of effort as
they relate to the formulation of national policies and the implementation of plans for sustainable development.
In order to ensure adequate funding of environmental projects in the spirit of UNCED, Nigeria has increased its ecological fund set aside from the National Conservation Fund for Effective and Dynamic Environmental Management.
My delegation is happy to report that for the realization of Nigeria's potential, the UNDP in its period of UNCED has commenced project identification exercises on biodiversity, the environment and forest resource surveys in Nigeria. It is hoped that these projects will materialize and be supported adequately in terms of funding and infrastructure support by FAO and other UN bodies.
In many developing countries there is a dearth or paucity of data. There is an inadequacy of accurate and reliable data; this is a problem. In most cases assessments carried out are mostly assumptions or guesstimates because of the lack of essential infrastructure facilities. It is for these reasons and in order to correct these shortcomings that my delegation supports paragraph 4.3 of this document and urges that FAO makes this a top priority.
In Nigeria, for example, through workshops we have agreed with all national agencies in agriculture and related areas, FAO, UNDP and the World Bank, to harmonize and streamline all agricultural and related data collected and the method of collection in the country.
Nigeria has put in place a National Agro-Statistics Coordinating Committee at federal level. However, the business of data collection, processing, storage and dissemination structurally in developing countries is expensive. My delegation is, therefore, going to suggest that assistance in this area to developing countries should be stepped up, especially in the area of capacity-building, infrastructural and institutional support.
My delegation agrees with paragraph 46 of document C 93/10 that increasing demands for land at the agricultural and forestry interface in developing countries are real rather than a potential source of conflict between those two sectors. It also agrees that the forest principles and agenda item 21 which were adopted in Rio addressed the two sectors separately and do not give sufficient recognition to the attendant problems of deforestation arising from the expansion of the agricultural frontier in various forms, such as ranching, subsistence and cash-crop production.
In view of this shortcoming, my delegation hopes that FAO will address this issue adequately in its areas of mandate in order to bridge the gap.
In paragraph 54 my delegation supports FAO. However, we hope the reality of conservation versus survival in the developing world, whose main resources for development and sustenance are natural resources, would be considered and appropriately advised and assisted.
Finally, my delegation would like to draw attention to the low priority that FAO is currently placing on forestry in its programmes. I wish to indicate that the responsibility placed on developing countries by the Conventions on Climate Change and Biodiversity, and particularly the non-legally binding principles on forests, is great. By implication, the poor economic base and financial resources of the developing countries will
mean they find it difficult to cope with expectations if they are not assisted. It is in this regard that my delegation wants FAO to increase its emphasis and accord a higher priority to forestry as a matter of cost in order to facilitate a balanced march toward forestry management, conservation and development.
During the COFO meeting held in March 1993 my delegation drew attention to the agonizingly slow pace of TFAP implementation, particularly in developing countries, and called on FAO and the lead agencies to address the issue. My delegation would like FAO to comment on the progress achieved in this area so far.
Zahir Shah MOHMAND (Pakistan) : The role of FAO toward achieving the objectives of UNCED is laudable. In fact, this international agency is uniquely placed to combine and integrate the sustainable agriculture consideration with a clean environment and conservation of natural resources.
Achieving the objectives of a sustainable development and environment is a task which will continue as long as man exists. These are not projects which can be completed by a certain point in time. Vigilance and sustained effort globally will be required.
The two paths of sustainable development and maintaining a clean environment are sometimes mutually complementary and often mutually exclusive but more often they are mutually negating.
FAO’s efforts, as outlined in document C 93/10, after the Rio Conference are praiseworthy. The Chinese saying goes that a journey of 1 000 miles begins with the first step; thus, the steps taken by FAO in the short span of one year are great strides in the right direction.
Although the role of FAO and other UN agencies in this connection is to provide technical assistance and guidance, and this is significant, the main responsibilities devolve on national governments.
The Pakistan delegation approves and endorses all the actions taken by FAO and will continue to do so in the future, provided there is no discrimination against the trade of any country or group of countries under the guise of policy measures for environmental or sustainability considerations.
I would now like to share with Conference the steps taken in this regard on the home front and on the international front in my country.
In Pakistan we have prepared a National Conservation Strategy (NCS) which is a comprehensive policy document encompassing the following policy parameters: conservation of natural resources and their optimimum utilization; pollution management; institutional development, including capacity-building and mass awareness; education and training.
The NCS has recommended 14 programme areas for priority implementation. These are: increasing irrigation efficiency; protecting watersheds; supporting forestry and plantations; restoring rangelands and improving livestock; protecting water bodies and sustaining fisheries; conserving biodiversity; increasing energy efficiency; development and deploying renewables; preventing pollution; managing urban wastes; supporting
institutions for common resources; integrating population and environmental programmes and preserving the cultural heritage.
Pakistan has also signed the Convention on Biological Diversity, ratification of which is in process.
Pakistan has been a member of the Commission on Sustainable Development (CDS) for a period of three years, and participated in the session held in June 1993. We have expressed agreement with the decisions of CSD on the Multi-year Programme of Work, annually reviewing the progress of governments and international organizations in the implementation of cross-sectoral items of Agenda 21. When established, Pakistan would be willing to participate in the two international working groups, the first of which is financial resources mobilization; and, secondly technology transfer, cooperation and capacity building group.
Pakistan, in line with the call of CSD, also urges international agencies to play an increased and more effective role in providing financial and technical resources to the developing countries for the implementation of Agenda 21.
In order to work out the restructuring of the Global Environment Facility (GEF), a meeting of the Participant Assembly was held in Abidjan in December 1992 which adopted eight principles in future dealings with the GEF. The most important of these were: one, additional grants and concessional funding of the agreed incremental costs of achieving agreed global environment benefits; second, financial support to land degradation issues, especially desertification and deforestation; three, financial support to global environmental conventions, including climate change and biological diversity conventions; four, funding programmes and projects which are country-driven and consistent with national priorities designed to support sustainable development.
In addition to these activities on the national front, our two ministries -that is, the Ministry of Food and Agriculture and the Ministry of Environment - are setting priorities to ensure appropriate distribution of responsibilities among the institutions concerned.
Efforts are also being made to associate various groups and NGOs in sustainable development. The thrust of the activities is being taken to the rural areaas so as to give more and more roles to rural people.
Zhang XIGUI (China) (Original language Chinese): The Chinese delegation wishes to thank the Secretariat for having prepared the very informative document C 93/10 and also to thank Mr Mahler for his presentation.
At the global level, the issue of sustainable development and environment is attracting more and more attention. After UNCED, the UN system and national governments have adopted relevant measures to implement the agreements reached at the Conference which are fully reflected in document C 93/10.
As regards the new problems and major challenges on the part of the advance opened up by the Rio Conference, including assessment and monitoring of sustainability, interaction and mutual influence of management sectors as well as the new problems facing the relevant institutions, we endorse the analysis and recommendations of the Secretariat.
The Chinese Government has always taken agriculture as the foundation of national economic development. It has adopted a series of effective measures to promote sustainable development and conserve environment. For example, we have followed a policy of integrated development of agriculture, livestock production, fisheries and township enterprises. Efforts have been made to enhance forestation and control desertification to help our farmers in the poor and remote areas to get rid of poverty.
In doing so central and local governments provide technology and financial resources to these areas so as to help to increase farmer's income, and through combining to help the poor with sustainable development to strengthen the farmer's capacity for self-development. All these measures have gradually reduced the massive influx of the population from the poor areas to the cities.
We would here like to make mention of the financial implications of sustainable development as concluded by the Secretariat. Sustainable agricultural development, forestry and fisheries need a lot of additional resources. These resources can be shared in a better way through reforms in trade. However, as paragraph 61 of the document points out, "Making trade and environment/sustainable development policies mutually supportive is of the utmost importance but it is not likely to be sufficient." Therefore, it is absolutely necessary to increase assistance to developing countries and lessen their debt burdens, transfer technology and resources to these countries so as to promote the implementation of policies for sustainable development.
The Head of the Chinese delegation rightly emphasized in his statement at the Plenary a call for joint efforts of both developed and developing countries to solve the problems of sustainable development and environment, and the agricultural sector needs to take cautious steps towards sustainable development. For example, problems such as the eradication of poverty, the creation of job opportunities, the control of massive influx of rural populations into urban areas, environmental degradation and diminishing natural resources often caused by ever-increasing populations, need to be given high priority by national governments and international organizations. FAO should play a leading role and a coordinating role in this field.
Finally, the Chinese Government is willing to strengthen its coordination with FAO and other countries.
Will you please allow me, in conclusion, to quote the last sentence of the document to conclude my intervention. "In the long run., the cost of inaction could outweigh the financial cost of implementing Agenda 21."
Mrs Hannelore A.H. BENJAMIN (Dominica): My delegation is pleased to participate in this important work on environment and sustainable development and would like to give its views on the document before us.
Dominica's environment can only be protected through the right ecosystem and if UNCED can be successfully completed. Dominica is often asked, "How can a country such as Dominica protect a fragile ecosystem?". We would like to share with you some of our domestic work, and our answer is that Dominica does it through high national cost and through well thought-out ecotourism where people and visitors still appreciate the fauna, flora, lakes and rivers, the marine life and rare birds, and through it help to
protect and preserve its environment, by helping men and women to live in harmony with nature as well as by providing general information on environmental settings of the country by constantly updating its brief reviews on its historical economic and demographic features.
The reforestation programmes conducted to date in Domenica have relied heavily upon exotic tree species because the gammie trees and other high quality native timber species simply grow too slowly by comparison, and thus are unsuitable for maintaining a vital timber industry.
At this point, I must not fail to congratulate, and thank openly here in the forum, Dr Murray, the Assistant Director-General of FAO Forestry, because due to his efforts and those of his staff it means that what at one time looked like a very limp TFAP is finally getting off the ground in Dominica and is finally making slow but steady progress.
Qualitative and quantitative observations contribute to understanding the complexity of agro-chemical pollution, and Dominica and the Caribbean Islands pay very close attention to that. In particular, Dominica watches closely water pollutants, including pesticides and their use, because the latter have caused fish to be killed in local streams and rivers.
The Forestry and Wildlife Division in Dominica has developed a capacity to monitor wildlife pollutant impacts and provides descriptive information on this to its people. However, the FAO Interregional Conference on Small Island Countries on Sustainable Development and Environment in Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries which was held two years ago to provide the political framework within the small island states, and to make it available that notice was given for further actions, did not get off the ground as we had thought and we rely now on your new policy recommendations.
My delegation would also have liked to have seen those recommendations outlined in document C 93/10 for small coastal islands. Unfortunately, FAO failed to do this and therefore all the other Member States cannot now fully understand what the small island states are trying to achieve.
However, FAO must make a major contribution by not hesitating to set up a special programme for small island states that would include the following. First, procedures to ensure water quality for multiple uses for fisheries habitats and waste disposal. Second, construction and maintenance of sea defences. Third, implementation of impact assessment for development projects in the coastal zones. Fourth, the setting up of a policy strategy on oil spills and the dumping of hazardous wastes. Fifth, coordinated and broad-based participation in coastal resources management. Sixth, genetic diversity and climate changes. Seventh, ranking of problems and targeting of issues which require priority attention in forestry, agriculture and fisheries. Specific attention should be given to indicators for forestry resources, carrying optimal capacity for recreational areas, and therefore an essential infrastructure is very much needed in all three sectors of sustainable development. Perhaps I should stop on seven!
However, FAO should address in this context further human resources development and the stabilization of earnings for various raw materials, as well as the setting-up of a programme for the use of coconut wood from dead groves to upgrade housing for rural people. This initial step needs to be taken up by FAO. That includes the right framework where provision should be made for essential infrastructure for a major development affecting the
environment and by paying attention to the development of public infrastructure and its facilities.
My delegation was happy to notice that Australia fully supports a Conference on small island states development. This will take place in Western Samoa in September 1994. I would here like to thank the Australian delegate for his understanding and kind words.
Much work needs to be done and if FAO wants to have a maximum outcome for this coming conference, it cannot afford to lose even one day on the matter in preparing this with full speed for the Conference on small island states in 1994.
That must control upland erosion, marine environment, sustainable development in forestry and nutrition. There should be measures to protect beach vegetation; to view the uncertain status and management difficulties associated with migratory pelagic stocks; to focus on environmental impact assessments as part of the planning and land-use optimization process by focusing on a regional coastal development for all small islands with a networking arrangement for sustainable development which includes, besides agriculture, fisheries and forestry, rural development for small farmers, fishermen, foresters and women in rural development.
My delegation places emphasis on pesticides and fertilizers. We also emphasize that legislation must not just be on a piece of paper; it should be a forceful process. I could not agree more.
The time for change and challenge has finally come. We need to understand that everything is based on educational and training programmes that include genetic resources, agro resources and international trade, and that only then will it open the doors to new cooperation with inter-regional and rural development for all.
Finally, I wish to fully support the statement from the delegate from Trinidad and Tobago and share with him his deep concern. I only hope that FAO will place more emphasis on what is important to us in the small island states.
Hitoshi ASAKI (Japan): Firstly, my delegation much appreciates the well prepared document before us and we thank Mr Mahler for his explanation.
UNCED was an epoch-making event. It was called for the purpose of formulating a basic policy framework within which to address the related issues of environment and development in a way that would contribute to the prosperity and welfare of people in the world. Particularly for agriculture, forestry and fisheries the environmental issue was put forward as a key factor for their further development.
If the world population increases rapidly as predicted by the United Nations, further deterioration of the global environment is anticipated through agricultural development, mainly in the developing countries. Since agriculture, forestry and fisheries are industries which use the maximum capacity of the natural ecological system, the basic strategy is to increase natural productivity and to realize a sustainable production system.
I would like to stress the need for a concentrated effort by every country in research and extension activities to achieve sustainable development in response to the increasing demand for food production. My Government would also like to emphasize that the efforts of individual countries to increase food production would not be unreasonably prevented by excessive consideration of environmental conservation in the international community.
Finally, Japan firmly believes that FAO should strengthen its scientific observation of environmental change and based on that, we believe that FAO will achieve balanced coordination between environmental conservation and agricultural development.
With regard to plant and genetic resources, their conservation and effective utilization are firmly recognized as indispensable measures for securing food production for future generations, and international activities on this matter are earnestly needed. My Government highly appreciates the efforts of FAO in this area based on its expertise.
As for animal genetics, my Government would like to offer congratulations on the publication of the "World Watch List" which was requested by Agenda 21 and would inform you that Japan is supporting FAO's project concerning animal genetic resources in the Asian region.
MAUNG MAR (Myanmar): My delegation very much appreciates the broad coverage given in document C 93/10. We would like to support the proposed action of UNCED.
I wish to emphasize only matters relating to deforestation, erosion and the use of chemicals. Deforestation may be caused by the encroachment of agriculture, cutting for firewood and urbanization. However, deforestation is also related with poverty. The rural poor have no other alternatives for their energy requirements. Through the poverty alleviation programme of FAO, we are optimistic that the Organization can prevent or lessen deforestation.
With regard to sustainable agricultural development, erosion is a serious problem which can degrade arable land. It is correlated with mismanagement practices and is aggravated if combined with deforestation. Effective education and extension of preventive cultivation methods are necessary. We would recommend that there should be more FAO activities and involvement in this area.
As more food is needed for the growing population of the world, more utilization of chemical fertilizers and pesticides are to be expected. This will bring about a threat to the environment. Therefore, environmentally-friendly technology should be effectively extended to the farmers, so more research on integrated nutrition management and integrated pesticide management will be needed. There should be more assistance from FAO in this area.
With regard to the prevention of deforestation, FAO should provide assistance or recommendations for a national land use plan. My delegation wishes to say that we appreciate the broad coverage of the document. We would like to say that we are also encoruaging activities related to sustainable development and environment for various areas such as integrated nutrient management, sloping land technology, least disruptive agriculture, selective timbering practices in order to prevent
deforestation; agromanagement and water management systems to prevent salinization; reafforestation, agroforestry systems and watershed management. Moreover, we are also dealing with methods which will help to sustain our fisheries.
Recently, the Myanmar Government has begun an integrated national programme for nine districts of the dry zone area which is a pocket of rural poor. This is a multisectoral approach. The programme includes the establishment of irrigation facilities, better usage of cropping and farming systems, land reclamation, agroforestation and poverty alleviation programmes.
Finally, I would like to support FAO in its activities relating to sustainable development and the environment.
Eberhard SCHMAUZ (Germany) (Original language German): With this document, the Secretariat has given us an interesting and wonderful document for consultation, and an excellent work base. We think we can draw from this document for the FAO and its Member Nations the necessary task priorities and responses which come under the areas of nutrition, agriculture, forestry, and so on. They are a follow-up to the UNCED Conference.
Full account has been taken of the demands of sustainable agriculture and rural development as well as the protection of natural resources. We welcome the comprehensive portrayal in Appendix I of the work of FAO as well as the work of the specialized divisions in the programme areas of Agenda 21.
Because of the variety of the problems it is clear that we need close cooperation between FAO and other organizations. Therefore, the overview in Appendix I ought to be complemented by means of a list of the United Nations organizations which, because of their leading roles, are ideal partners for FAO in individual programme areas.
The multi-year programme of work decided by the Commission on Suitable Development (CSD) on which enclosed clusters up to 1997 of all the issues dealt with under Agenda 21 shows good cooperation for FAO in its activities, especially because the United Nations General Assembly in 1997 hopes to make a kind of half-way assessment of the whole situation on the basis of the UNCED decision. Therefore, my delegation supports the steps provided in the document for FAO which are in coordination with other organizations like UNDP and UNEP which is to help us make progress in priority areas - for example, finance, transfer of technology, the framework function on biological diversity and climatic change, the forest declaration, afforestation, sustainable development, small island states and other programme areas of Agenda 21 in which the FAO has an important role to play.
However, my delegation is also aware of the limits from which FAO is suffering in the face of this great challenge, and because of financial reasons. We hope this approach will be executed in phases because it is the only way in which we can achieve concrete results in priority areas.
Thanks to its information and early warning systems, including remote-sensing techniques, FAO has a great deal of information and many opportunities to monitor the situation of the environmental and agricultural resources round the world and at a regional level. In the opinion of my delegation, we have to give thought in those countries where
measures are to be applied to guaranteeing administrative, legal and socio-economic preconditions for the correlation of data.
The Federal Republic of Germany attaches great importance to the National Action Plans for Sustainable Development. Therefore, we welcome the fact that the FAO is employing political consultations as well as Special Action Programmes in order to help many Member Nations to formulate such action plans for the areas of agriculture and nutrition.
As regards the implementation measures adopted by Germany, we can sum this up in the following way. The two framework Conventions on Climatic Change and Biological Diversity were ratified by most of the corresponding constitutions and came into force on the 14th and 10th September 1993. The handing-over of all the solemn documents of ratification to the United Nations, together with the other EC states, is to follow in the near future.
As regards the framework Convention on Climatic Change, 50 ratification documents have to be provided before it can come into force. This may well be achieved by the time of the first conference of contracting nations, for which my Goverment has issued an invitation for the 20th March through to 7th April 1995.
My government is in favour of early implementation of the Convention of Biological Diversity. All these are provided for under Agenda 21. We have provided additional funding for cooperation in this area so that in developing countries we can promote country status national assessments on plant and animal genetic resources as well as local conservation authorities.
Germany is actively involved in the preparatory work for the first all-nations conference on biological diversity. The session of the negotiating committees held this year in Geneva showed clearly how important it is to deal with the questions touched on at the 103rd Council Session regarding changes necessary in the commitments of FAO regarding plant genetic resources. This must be adapted to the new Convention on Biological Diversity.
Changes are necessary in order to make sure that we have financial security for the protection measures within the framework of the overall FAO System for plant genetic resources (within the financing mechanisms of the convention).
The planned Fourth International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources is a very important contribution by FAO for the implementation of the UNCED decisions. Problems with extra-budgetary financing and other circumstances have slowed down the process of preparation. On the occasion of the 103rd Council meeting the German delegation pointed to the need to deal at the same time as the Fourth Technical Conference with the subject of biological diversity within the 1995 CSD meeting. Unfortunately there is not much time for working out the documents to be dealt with in the Technical Conference. However, despite this, the Federal Government stands by its offer to organize the Conference in Germany. It is vital and urgent that we take a definitive decision within the FAO Secretariat on the conference dates.
Only two-thirds of the extra-budgetary financing has been guaranteed, despite the worldwide importance of these measures. The Secretariat should look at the possibility of taking further funding from the Budget of
1994-95 in order that this Conference can be brought about. We hope that the Secretariat will succeed in obtaining more funding from donor countries.
My delegation believes it is possible to conclude Phase I of the programme before the CSD meeting in 1995. Phase II, which includes the worldwide Action Plan, should be concluded with the holding of the conference in the second quarter of 1996. By then we have to create financial regulations within the framework of the GEF or other instruments in order to be able to implement the measures of the Action Plan.
In the area of forestry, Germany has a great deal of interest in further progress being made in the worldwide area of forest conservation within the framework of the follow-up to the Rio conference. We therefore welcome the stepping up of FAO’s forest activities. FAO can take a leading role in this respect because it can analyse the worldwide expert discussions and can steer them along the lines of UNCED and therefore make sure that they are given an efficient shape and form.
Against this background, we suggest that we set up a comprehensive special working group within the FAO Secretariat to deal with sustainable forest management. The CSD meeting in June this year talked about stepping up our activities in this respect. The time we have before we can achieve a proper worldwide forestry convention must be used effectively. We must go beyond national levels of activity. Therefore we must have well coordinated international cooperation in order to implement the decisions taken in the Rio conference. There is very little time before 1995 to obtain initial results from the CSD.
Against this background, we welcome and support the considerations put forward by the Swedish delegation. In principle, the main aim is for us, as well, to use existing structures more effectively instead of creating new institutions. The role of the regional forestry commissions should be stepped up and we should increase cooperation between the regional commissions.
In Part III of the document mention is made of the new challenges, including the need for new and better instruments in environmental monitoring. We agree with the idea of fine-tuning environmental impact studies, and we would also like to offer our collaboration in that area.
Finally, paragraphs 53 and 54 deal with the overlap of the interests of international trade and proper sustainable environmental policy. Even greater importance needs to be attached to negotiations between individual states.
Orhan DOGAN (Turquie): Au nom de la délégation de la Turquie, je voudrais tout d'abord remercier le Rapporteur, M. Malher et le Secrétariat, pour le document rédigé et présenté parfaitement. Je ne veux pas entrer dans les détails et je ne veux pas non plus répéter ce qu'ont dit les différents délégués jusqu'à présent. Cependant, je suis entièrement d'accord avec mes chers collègues sur le sujet de notre Conférence.
Si vous me le permettez, Monsieur le Président, je voudrais donner quelques informations sur mon pays, premièrement en ce qui concerne l'importance de l'agriculture durable et le développement rural; et je vais également résumer quelques propositions sur ce que la FAO doit contribuer à faire dans les années à venir concernant le domaine de l'agriculture rurale et le
développement rural. Croyez-moi, Monsieur le Président, les problèmes de l'agriculture durable et du développement rural sont plus ou moins les mêmes pour tous les pays en développement, soit dans la région méditerranéenne, soit dans les autres pays. La Turquie participe également à quelques projets internationaux contre la désertification, et à la cartographie de l'état de l'érosion ainsi que sur les risques de l'érosion. Je voudrais en citer quelques-uns:
- Le projet de la détermination de la méthodologie de la cartographie de l'érosion des sols pour les pays méditerranéens. Celui-ci est un projet financé par le PAP/PNUE. La Turquie, la Tunisie et l'Espagne travaillent ensemble, avec l'aide technique de la FAO.
- Le projet contre la désertification. Nous avons maintenant un projet de l'Avicenne de la Communauté européenne avec la France et le Maroc
- Nous avons déjà commencé à travailler sur le projet de la diversité biologique et génétique financé par la Banque mondiale.
- Le projet de la formation des agriculteurs, la vulgarisation des paysans dans 32 provinces du pays.
- Le projet de l'aménagement des bassins versants de la rivière de l'Euphrate, aux versants du barrage d'Ataturk.
- Et encore plusieurs travaux pour protéger les sols contre l'érosion hydrique et éolienne.
Comme vous le savez, Monsieur le Président, la Turquie est un pays méditerranéen dont la superficie est de 780 000 km2. Elle a environ 60 millions d'habitants. Dans l'ensemble du pays, 28 millions d'hectares sont réservés à l'agriculture, 23 millions aux bois, aux forêts, en partie au maquis, 22 millions aux prairies et aux pâturages.
Les terres cultivées occupent environ 36 pour cent de la superficie totale du pays. Bien que 31 pour cent des terres cultivées soient irrigables, actuellement seulement 4 millions d'hectares sont irrigués. Autrement dit, 47 pour cent des terres économiquement irrigables sont actuellement irriguées. Lorsque le projet du Sud-Est anatolien sera achevé, 1,6 million d'hectares supplémentaires de terres seront irrigués.
Les problèmes qui sont nés de l'utilisation incontrôlée et intensive des ressources naturelles de la Turquie, considérée comme le berceau des civilisations et qui a vu la naissance de l'agriculture, sont indiqués dans le tableau suivant.
|
Types de Problème |
En hectares (1000) |
En pourcentage |
|
Erosion hydrique |
57 149 |
63,2 |
|
Erosion éolienne |
466 |
0,5 |
|
Sol à alcalis et sol salin |
1 519 |
1,7 |
|
Sol hydromorphe |
2 775 |
3,1 |
| Sol à graviers |
28 484 |
31,5 |
Pour regagner ces terres à l'agriculture, il est absolument nécessaire de faire des travaux raisonnables et efficaces en utilisant les critères de l'agriculture durable. Pour cela, il faut créer les programmes principaux afin de protéger, développer et utiliser raisonnablement les ressources naturelles, dans le cadre de l'intégration de l'agriculture et de l'environnement. Parce que le développement durable dans les secteurs de l'agriculture, des forêts et des pêcheries doit conserver le sol, l'eau et les ressources génétiques végétales et animales et ne pas dégrader l'environnement.
En particulier, il sera absolument utile et nécessaire:
- de faire l'agriculture en respectant les principes de la .conservation du sol et de l'eau;
- d'adopter des pratiques et des technologies souples, spécifiquement adaptées aux exigences de l'écologie;
- d'appliquer le labour de conservation, le terrassement, la culture intercalaire étagée, la culture en bandes alternées plus intense des rotations de cultures, la culture légumineuse, l'agroforesterie;
- de faire le labour minimal ou nul combiné avec le semis direct de la culture de printemps sur les résidus de la culture de couverture précédente;
- d'utiliser efficacement et rationnellement les intrants agricoles (les engrais chimiques, les pesticides, l'irrigation);
- de développer les modèles de la production alternative protégeant l'environnement.
En Turquie, l'agriculture devient de plus en plus intensive; mais l'augmentation des intrants agricoles (engrais chimiques, pesticides, fumier, etc.) est très basse par rapport à celle de certains pays développés. Cependant, dans certaines grandes plaines, l'excès des intrants en secteur de culture intensive provoque des dégradations lentes mais irréversibles.
Il faut résoudre immédiatement les problèmes indiqués ci-après dans leurs lignes principales afin d'empêcher la pollution de l'environnement et d'assurer l'agriculture durable et le développement durable. Il sera nécessaire de procéder comme suit:
- faire une planification régionale et nationale de l'utilisation des terres;
- prendre des mesures juridiques qui empêchent le morcellement des exploitations agricoles par héritage ou pour d'autres raisons. Les exploitations d'une taille suffisante pour fournir un revenu adéquat et une occupation à temps complet seront déterminées selon les conditions écologiques et socio-économiques;
- faire une planification de la production selon les demandes du marché, établir l'équilibre entre la production, le marché et la consommation, construire les infrastructures nécessaires pour réaliser ces objectifs;
- empêcher l'utilisation de terres très primitives en dehors de l'agriculture. Pour cela, il faudra déterminer des sites alternatifs;
- déterminer les mesures juridiques et techniques pour l'utilisation des terres marginales en dehors de l'agriculture; exécuter des programmes de remembrement largement déterminés par le niveau de développement économique, social et culturel de la population. Le remembrement doit se faire dans l'ensemble des terres agricoles en commençant par les terres irrigables.
Ainsi, il sera possible de relier les parcelles disséminées; de construire des accès et des routes de desserte; de prendre les mesures nécessaires pour la conservation du sol et de l'eau; d'appliquer un projet d'irrigation et de drainage qui respecte les critères de préservation de l'environnement; d'améliorer les terrains ruraux destinés à la récréation et au travail; de combiner toutes sortes de travaux d'infrastrusture liés à la réorganisation des exploitations; d'orienter l'habitation urbaine et industrielle vers les plaines infertiles; de préserver et développer les ressources naturelles, comme le sol et l'eau, et génétiques ainsi que notre richesse constituée par la biodiversité; de contrôler l'augmentation démographique du pays et diminuer le taux de croissance démographique afin de ne pas dégrader les ressources naturelles à cause du surpleuplement; et de prendre les mesures juridiques, institutionnelles et éducatives nécessaires dans les domaines indiqués ci-dessus.
En plus, la formation, la recherche, la vulgarisation agricole, la coopération, l'accréditif et la coordination entre les institutions sont très utiles pour augmenter la production agricole en respectant les principes de l'agriculture durable et du développement rural. C'est pour ces raisons qu'il faut préparer des programmes de formation et de vulgarisation pour les agriculteurs afin qu'ils puissent appliquer la technologie moderne de l'agriculture en conformité avec l'environnement. Ainsi, grâce à l'agriculture durable et au développement rural, il sera possible de diminuer les pertes en sol qui correspondent actuellement à 500 millions de tonnes par an et de transmettre aux générations futures des ressources naturelles protégées et un potentiel élevé de production agricole.
Noah M. NKAMBULE (Swaziland) : I would like to commend Mr Mahler for an excellent summary of the document before this Commission.
My delegation welcomes the integration of Agenda 21 into the FAO Agenda. We believe strongly that agricultural development must be based on ecological principles. It must be based on the principle of sustainable development. This is particularly important for small countries such as Swaziland which have to pursue their agricultural development programmes on very limited land resources. Every square metre of land must be utilized optimally for the benefit of society.
Sustainable development is an indispensable principle for us in the developing countries. In the majority of cases these countries are faced with acute problems of land degradation which are largely attributable to non-sustainable agricultural practices.
Unfortunately, environmental degradation which is prevalent in the Third World is, to a large extent, a direct result of poverty. The rural populations have very few options open to them for survival, other than to
till the land, cut the trees for energy and graze their livestock, even if it means denuding landscapes as a result. With the increasing population numbers, there has been a simultaneous increase in demand for crop land, forests and grazing areas which, in many instances, has far exceeded the supply. Consequent to the above, alarming land degradation problems are now engulfing the developing world.
We appeal to the international community for meaningful interventions which will aggressively address land degradation problems in the developing world. We appeal for assistance in developing institutional capacities in these countries, as embraced in the spirit of Agenda 21.
My delegation welcomes the establishment of financial mechanisms such as the Global Environment Facility and the UNDP Capacity 21. Nevertheless, we strongly urge the custodians of these funds to put in place administrative structures which will minimize the bureaucratic red tape which could frustrate ready access to these funds by target groups in the developing countries. We further welcome the position projected in paragraph 4.4 on precautionary principles to prevent conflicts, not only between environment and agricultural development, but also amongst sectors competing for the same resource base to meet their respective sustainability goals. Conflicts must be minimized as much as possible if we are to achieve our intended goals. We must address ourselves rationally and not radically to the subject of protecting the environment and the earth's ecosystems. Gone are the days of environmental fanatics. The pragmatic approach embraced in the spirit of UNCED must now be given a chance.
Marian BRZOSKA (Poland): Poland faces environmental problems which can be solved both in cooperation with other countries, and by the Polish Government and citizens alone.
Full comments on the document and our position are submitted for the verbatim records.
In my intervention, I should like to underline a few issues. Firstly, the new situation in the level of intensification of agriculture and forestry production in Poland and in the rest of East and Central European countries. After removal of subsidies for agriculture in 1990 and for energy and agricultural inputs, the level of inputs, especially chemicals, is currently two to three times lower than in the 1980s. We change artificially-intensified agriculture to an almost biological one, and this will be the situation up to 2000.
Secondly, the crucial problem in our region is caused by the annual influx of approximately 5 million tons of sulphur dioxide from western industrialized countries into the Polish atmosphere. It is especially dangerous for the forest. In a few regions the Polish forest has been transformed into dead deserts.
Thirdly, there are many national sources of danger to agriculture, water and forest - mainly industry. The Government has prepared a programme "Pro-ecological Orientation in Agricultural Policy in the Twentieth and Twenty-first Centuries". We have established a monitoring system of soil, agricultural products and food. A special national fund and an environmental protection bank have started to operate.
Fourthly, the ecological protection of rural areas in my area at the present moment is based on the development of community infrastructure, mainly sewerage systems. The installations are subsidized by the State up to 50 percent of the cost. This is very important for the Baltic Sea protection.
Fifth, international cooperation in ecological protection of agriculture and forestry is the basic condition of effective work. Poland supports the growing role of FAO in this field.
We are looking, as are other East European countries, for more effective aid, for relief from debts, and for environmental protection, especially forest and Baltic Sea protection.
Mlle Adelaide Manuela RIBEIRO (Cap-Vert): Nous aimerions nous associer aux félicitations qui ont été adressées à M. Mahler pour son excellente présentation. C'est avec une grande satisfaction que nous constatons que la Résolution 2/91 adoptée par la Conférence, à sa vingt-sixième session, et visant à introduire les critères de durabilité dans tous les programmes et activités de la FAO, commence à voir le jour. Effectivement, des priorités ont été accordées au développement durable et à l'environnement, soit dans le Programme de travail et budget pour 1994-95, soit dans le Plan à moyen terme 1994-99.
Dans sa première partie, le document présente une analyse des grandes incidences de la CNUED et des décisions prises aux niveaux national, régional et international. Les réalisations ont été nombreuses mais beaucoup reste à faire.
Aux niveaux national et international, des mesures ont été prises et des activités menées, notamment la demande de ratification de la Convention de la part des autorités concernées, la création de la Commission du développement durable en vue de la formulation de politiques et de plans nationaux en faveur du développement durable et une demande d'évaluation des besoins en matière de renforcement des capacités pour assurer un suivi effectif de la CNUED.
Nous nous réjouissons de l'aide apportée par la FAO à la mise en place des plans forestiers nationaux dont mon pays bénéficie. Nous nous réjouissons également de l'accord de la FAO en ce qui concerne l'élaboration des plans nationaux de lutte contre la désertification dans la région soudano-sahélienne.
Nous partageons l'avis que la Commission du développement durable peut guider le suivi de la CNUED et nous soutenons le programme de travail adopté à sa première session, conformément au paragraphe 11. Nous soutenons aussi la demande faite à la FAO et aux institutions nationales, régionales et internationales de fournir des rapports et de faire d'autres contributions. A ce propos, nous sommes conscients de la remarque faite par M. Mahler au sujet du mécanisme de financement international pour l'application des accords de la CNUED. S'agissant du Fonds mondial pour l'environnement, du Programme "Action 21", du PNUD, du Fonds pour l'environnement du PNUE, nous sommes d'avis que plus d'informations devront être fournies aux pays, surtout pour ce qui est de leur manque de fonctionnement.
Nous appuyons avec satisfaction les initiatives prises par la FAO et la suite donnée à la CNUED, tel que mentionné dans la deuxième partie du document. Nous pensons que la FAO devrait continuer à insister sur l'intégration des questions d'environnement et de durabilité dans tous les programmes et sur la formulation de projets visant le développement durable et l'environnement pour qu'ils puissent être financés par les fonds disponibles.
On s'attend aussi de la FAO qu'elle continue à fournir des services de consultation en matière de politique et de stratégie dans les secteurs de l'agriculture, des forêts et des pêches, entre autres. Ce qui précède montre l'importance accordée à la mise en oeuvre des activités et des recommandations du Programme "Action 21" de la CNUED. Vous conviendrez que l'aide financière de la communauté internationale est indispensable et précieuse pour ce faire.
Pour terminer, nous appuyons la déclaration faite par le Représentant de Trinité-et-Tobago, surtout en ce qui concerne les résolutions relatives aux petits Etats insulaires, en attirant l'attention de leurs partenaires sur l'importance de l'agriculture, des forêts et de la pêche en tant que bases du développement de ces petits pays insulaires.
Abdelouhab KERMOUNI (Maroc): Je voudrais tout d'abord remercier le Secrétariat pour la qualité du document qu'il nous a livré. J'en profite également pour remercier M. Mahler de la présentation complète qu'il nous a faite de ce document.
L'environnement et le développement durable sont devenus aujourd'hui des concepts inséparables et la communauté internationale en prend chaque jour davantage conscience. L'activité économique qui influe le plus sur l'environnement et qui en dépend le plus est sans aucun doute l'agriculture.
L'ampleur accrue des besoins alimentaires de l'humanité et la nécessité de l'intensification agricole, d'une part, et la dégradation des ressources naturelles et des écosystèmes, d'autre part, constituent deux facettes d'un même défi que la communauté internationale se doit de relever. Ce défi est celui de la conciliation entre le développement économique et social pour l'eradication de la pauvreté et de la malnutrition et la protection de l'environnement ainsi que la gestion durable des ressources naturelles qui sont indispensables.
L'Agenda 21 constitue l'instrument le plus adéquat pour gagner l'enjeu du développement durable, et la FAO est l'organe tout désigné pour assurer le suivi de la CNUED.
Mon pays, le Maroc, qui a donné une suite favorable aux recommandations de la CNUED, essaie de définir une stratégie pour l'application de l'ADRD, notamment dans les zones fragiles; terres de parcours, forêts, bassins versants où il faut protéger les ressources phytogénétiques. Il dispose, grâce à la participation de la FAO, d'un plan national de lutte contre la désertification, d'un plan national de reboisement qu'il convient bien entendu d'actualiser et de faire en sorte qu'il réponde aux recommandations de l'Agenda 21. Un plan national des bassins versants est en cours d'élaboration. De même est en cours d'étude une monographie pour tous les sites remarquables à protéger, en vue d'y créer des réserves biologiques ou des parcs nationaux pour augmenter les zones protégées de notre pays.
A ce sujet, je voudrais attirer l'attention du Secrétariat sur les problèmes que pose la mise en valeur des ressources phytogénétiques des pays en développement. La collecte et la conservation de ces ressources, au niveau de nombreux pays en développement, ont un caractère d'urgence et posent un certain nombre de problèmes à ces pays qui ne disposent pas d'organes de recherche performants et ne peuvent tirer profit de leur patrimoine génétique. C'est pourquoi il serait souhaitable que la FAO donne son appui à ces pays pour la création de banques de gènes leur permettant notamment de créer des variétés adaptées à leurs propres conditions agro-écologiques et d'élever leur productivité tout en assurant une meilleure sécurité alimentaire. Je profite de cette occasion pour attirer également l'attention du Secrétariat sur les problèmes que posent les pesticides.
En effet, l'interdiction par de nombreux pays de pesticides hautement toxiques, notamment de la famille des organochlorés et la présence dans de nombreux pays de pesticides périmés constituent dans de nombreux cas des dangers graves qui menacent l'environnement. Là aussi, il serait souhaitable que la FAO apporte un appui urgent à l'élimination de ces pesticides devenus obsolètes ou périmés.
Mon pays apprécie les activités de la FAO, notamment dans la lutte contre la désertification et notamment en ce qui concerne la forêt. Il appuie les efforts de la FAO visant à la protection de l'environnement marin et la protection des ressources halieutiques à travers la mise en place d'une politique globale de développement durable.
S'agissant des pêches en particulier, la délégation marocaine accorde une importance particulière à la préparation, sous l'égide de la FAO et dans un délai raisonnable, d'un Code de conduite pour une pêche responsable. Ce Code attendu constituera sans nul doute le moyen le plus adéquat pour répondre aux aspirations des gouvernements de nombreux pays, des techniciens responsables et des décideurs en matières de pêche, en vue de préserver les ressources vivantes de la mer pour les générations futures et présentes.
Nous accordons beaucoup d'importance à la coopération internationale. Elle seule peut permettre le développement intégré et entraîner un transfert de technologie susceptible de favoriser une vision globale et unifiée en matière de protection de l'environnement à travers le monde.
En ce sens, le renforcement des capacités techniques des pays dans le domaine de l'environnement, de la forêt et de la biodiversité paraît indispensable, en particulier dans le domaine de la formation, dans le domaine de l'information, dans celui de la sécurité alimentaire, dans celui de la lutte contre les ravageurs...
La FAO, en collaboration avec les autres institutions internationales, notamment le PNUD et le PNUE, a à jouer un rôle de pointe pour aider ces pays dans la bonne gestion de leurs ressources naturelles. C'est pourquoi mon pays remercie la FAO pour ce qu'elle nous offre comme appui, comme compétences, et il souhaite qu'elle trouve les ressources dont elle a besoin pour continuer son oeuvre, particulièrement dans le domaine sensible de la protection de la nature.
Alcir CARVALHO REBELLO (Brazil): First of all, let me commend the Secretariat on document C 93/10 and Mr Mahler on his excellent introduction to the item.
Brazil believes that FAO has a major role to play in the coordination and implementation of actions and programmes on food, agriculture, forestry and fisheries, as set out in agenda item 21 in the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on Climate Change.
With regard to forests in particular, we believe that FAO has a leading role to play among the intergovernmental organizations in promoting the observance of the non-legally binding authoritative statement of principles for a global consensus on the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests.
It is also our hope that the aims and goals of the Rio Declaration will be the aims and goals of FAO and of all countries towards sustainable development.
UNCED has given us the instruments for a new era of international cooperation, that of achieving development in a sustainable way. Brazil thinks it essential that we move to action at once. Resources must be allocated to the sustainable development of agriculture, forestry and fisheries. Of course, responsibilities to this end rely primarily on our governments but FAO, alongside the Commission on Sustainable Development and other fora such as UNDP and UNEP, will set the pace of measures for the realization of the goals selected by the international community in Rio.
We are happy to see that FAO is willing to prove its capacity as a centre of excellence by integrating environmental concerns in its agriculture, forestry and fisheries activities.
In our view FAO needs to strengthen further its cooperation and partnership with the CSD, UNEP, the Convention on Biodiversity and the Convention on Climate Change. That will ensure greater efficiency and avoid the overlapping of actions. The contribution of FAO will be particularly important in the review work that is to be carried out by CSD in 1995.
Regarding plant genetic resources, Brazil follows with great interest the work that is being undertaken by our Organization. The preparation for the Fourth International Conference on Plant Genetic Resources in particular will need the mobilization of our technical skills and financial resources. This preparatory process for the Conference will include the harmonization of the international undertaking on plant genetic resources with the Convention on Biological Diversity which Brazil considers to be of the utmost importance.
We have a long way to go in the attainment of sustainable development. We will only be able to reach our goal if we strengthen the partnership among countries and create a positive international climate, free from discriminatory measures and labels.
Gheorghe APOSTOIU (Roumanie): Mon intervention est inspirée, et même encouragée, par le paragraphe 43 dont je me permets de citer quelques mots: "Il incombe à la FAO et aux ministères concernés de renforcer les capacités d'évaluation et de suivi de la viabilité à long terme du développement de l'agriculture, de la foresterie et des pêches dans le contexte global".
Cela m'autorise à rendre hommage à tous ceux qui ont rédigé le document, et je rends hommage également à M. Mahler qui a bien voulu nous faire une introduction de ce document.
Ma délégation appuie les mesures envisagées par la FAO pour le développement durable et l'environnement.
Si je prends la parole, c'est que je viens d'un pays où il y a un manque de moyens, comme l'a remarqué l'honorable représentant de l'Allemagne, pour la mise en application des programmes, même si la volonté politique s'exprime ouvertement et sincèrement.
Nous sommes d'accord avec les initiatives de la FAO tendant à faire siens certains projets de la CNUED dans les domaines de l'alimentation et de l'agriculture. Nous sommes appelés à définir les besoins en la matière pour établir l'interaction nécessaire entre les institutions nationales du secteur agricole et les autres institutions, et entre les organes directeurs de la FAO et d'autres organismes intergouvernementaux, en particulier la Commission du développement durable des Nations Unies.
Durabilité dans le domaine du développement, c'est le désir politique de tout pays. C'est un axiome, plutôt. La question qui se pose est de trouver les moyens, et ce n'est pas uniquement la politique qui est le responsable du bien et du mal. L'accès à la science et à la recherche et au programme pragmatique, avec l'assistance de la FAO, a son importance, notamment pour les pays en développement.
Puisque je viens d'un pays en transition ayant conceptuellement une agriculture suffisamment mise au point, mais qui aujourd'hui est en pleine restructuration, je crois que notre expérience et, de plus, nos potentiels et capacités de recherche scientifique pourraient être pris en considération. Pour la mise en valeur de ce potentiel, nous avons besoin de projets d'investissements qui portent spécifiquement sur la conservation des ressources naturelles, la protection de l'environnement et l'amélioration des méthodes de l'aménagement des terres, idée qui ressort du paragraphe 39 de notre document.
En d'autres termes, nous avons besoin de bénéficier de l'intervention de notre Organisation pour refaire de l'agriculture de la Roumanie un secteur viable de l'économie dans la perspective d'un développement durable.
Hans POPP (Switzerland): The Swiss intervention comprises two short parts: firstly, I shall briefly develop the Swiss strategy on sustainability in agricultural policy; secondly, my colleague will make some comments on document C 93/10, and our views on FAO's role in this field.
On the first point, the strategy and the main elements of Swiss policy on sustainability, the Swiss Government goal in its policy programme, and has taken policy measures in this field many years before the Rio Conference. I shall limit my remarks to the respective agricultural programme and related policy fields.
Our strategy to support sustainability contains three main elements: one, dissemination of knowledge, education and training in agricultural schools - by the way, they are compulsory for all young farmers; extension services; research and research dissemination. The basic idea is that the farmer has to know the environmental risks and damage of unsustainable production practices, and he has to learn sustainable production methods. Most importantly, he has to be convinced himself that only sustainable production methods are in his long-term interests. This is the primary policy line.
The second one consists of government regulations based on all kinds of legislation. I shall not repeat all this legislation here but just put forward a few examples. The use of pesticides and other chemical inputs in farming is regulated. There is legislation on water protection, animal protection, and you name it. There are regulations protecting forest land, biotopes and alpine passes, and others.
I shall pass to the third line of our strategy which I would call or name economic incentives and disincentives. This is the most promising line. This is the line which is the least developed and this is the line which follows the principles of a market economy. The basic idea is that sustainable production methods have to be profitable. They have to be economically and financially interesting to the farmers. They must be at least as profitable as the non-sustainable practices of the conventional farmers in the short run and not only in the long-term, because the basic problem, as I see it, is that sustainable production practices are often and mostly more costly or less remunerative than conventional production practices, especially in the short term. This is the basic problem we have to resolve. Unless we do that, unless we make sustainable production practices as profitable as conventional practices, all our preaching and all our talking will be in vain.
How can we resolve this problem? The Swiss Government has developed two policy measures, two main policy lines. The first one is the line of the marketing system. That is to say, we have to get a better price for those agricultural products coming from sustainable and more expensive protection practices. It can be done through protection differentiation, through product differentiation; it can be done through better marketing and other measures. It also has a trade dimension and trade implications.
We are of the opinion that agricultural produce coming from sustainable production practices needs and deserves a certain protection - protection against competition from imports from countries or farmers where the standards and the regulations for sustainability and environmental protection are lower. That is an element we have brought into the GATT negotiations because we are convinced that the GATT rules have to be amended in such a way that they allow an adequate protection for those farmers, respectively countries, which practise protection methods which are in the long run sustainable but methods which, as we know, are in the short term more costly.
To sum up, we must assure a fair market price for agricultural products stemming from sustainable production practices. This has to be the long-term solution. We could invite the FAO to develop this line of thought and policy approach. In the meantime, the Swiss Government has introduced an order - I would call it a second-best line - of policy approach which is to stimulate sustainable production methods through direct income payments. In 1991-92 the Swiss Parliament passed new legislation with demands by the Federal Government to give direct income payments to those farmers who practised such sustainable production methods. I name it biological farming, integrated farming, practices and other things. The idea behind this is that the direct payments have to be of such magnitude that those farmers who respect such practices, which are more costly, are competitive with so-called conventional farmers.
This new programme on a voluntary basis has so far had enormous success. Farmers are not only interested, farmers are asking for information and farmers are applying to participate.
Finally, I would mention a few further policy instruments we have introduced or which we are going to introduce. There is a tax on certain fertilizers and certain environmental damaging inputs. Then there is the obligation to pay for sewage disposal costs and others.
To sum up, I wish to repeat my main thesis which so far has not been put forward by many people here. If we want to have sustainability in agricultural production,- and we need it, that is obvious - we must introduce policy measures which make sustainable production methods for the farmers attractive and profitable. That means measures at national level but also at the international level, especially trade rules which stimulate and protect sustainable production practices, rules which eliminate policies that discourage these sustainable production practices, as is often the case today. To put it another way, we must help and support those farmers who think and act on a long-term basis.
My colleague will make some further comments on document C 93/10.
Anton KOHLER (Switzerland): The challenge to which FAO is planning to respond is well reflected in document C 93/10. It is a long-term effort which sets high expectations beyond the year 2010. However, the Swiss Government hopes that well before 2010 the results achieved in the FAO programme will be substantial and tangible.
The paper before us shows that sustainability has already become an integral part of the whole FAO programme. Together with FAO and many other partners in the field of agricultural development and forestry, the Swiss Development Corporation stands in the midst of a process towards achieving sustainability in its programme of collaboration with developing countries. Switzerland is very interested to share its experiences with FAO. We do not intend to enter into a theoretical debate only, but into a practical exchange of concrete experience in the field. First of all, we are interested to know how much of its budget FAO intends to make available in its programme for field activities and for the total activities related to sustainable development and environment. This is not reflected in the paper C 93/10 submitted to us.
Secondly, we would like to suggest a practical exchange of experience on sustainable management of natural resources by visiting one another's projects, for instance in the field of human resource development, agricultural development, watershed development and afforestation.
This is in order to broaden the scope of environmental impact assessment according to paragraphs 41, 42 and 43 of the document and also to evaluate sustainable management of natural resources in the sense of a joint learning process between FAO, the Swiss Development Corporation and our partners in the respective countries.
Here, I see a link with yesterday's Agenda point on women and sustainable agricultural development. Millions of farmers, especially women farmers in the developing countries, still practise traditional agricultural methods consistent with the demands for sustainable management of natural resources. These must be taken into account when planning field activities to achieve sustainable development.
CHAIRMAN (Original language German) : At the end of our morning meeting I closed the list of speakers. During the course of the meeting I have requested delegations again and again to be as brief as possible in their statements. I much regret the fact that my recommendation was not taken up. Since my recommendation was not followed, could I ask those delegates who have spoken in the course of the afternoon to give their statements in to the Secretariat in writing so that the full content can be added to the verbatim record.
I have some speakers left, and we must finish on time. I have to tell you that the delegate of Cuba has other commitments so he did not give his statement personally. Therefore, we will put the Cuban statement into the verbatim records.
Ms Naima AL-SHAYJI (Kuwait): I promise I will be very brief and respond to your request, Mr Chairman.
I would like just to say specifically that on reading document C 93/10 about the activities relating to sustainable development and. the environment, while I enjoyed reading it - and it is very, very comprehensive - I failed to find anything in any part of the document relating to the assessment or the monitoring of some very special cases which need actual monitoring or assessment; namely, no doubt all of you are aware of the environmental crisis and the catastrophe that took place three years ago in our region in the Gulf which left quite a lot of negative impact on the fisheries, marine life, the soil and the groundwater of the region. While there is still quite a lot of effort both from the regions and from bilateral institutions and international organizations in conducting soil studies and evaluations of the impact of what happened, it seems to me it is important that that region should be considered by the world as a laboratory for learning from that bitter experience. Therefore, it needs special attention from an organization like FAO for an impact assessment of the marine environment, specifically the fishery resources, the soil degradation, and the resource of ground water.
Jagan Nath THAPLIYA (Nepal): My delegation first of all would like to thank the Secretariat and Mr Mahler for presenting document C 93/10, which was such an excellent overview.
Given the agrobased economy of Nepal, the agricultural sector needs to be developed in order that food security is maintained, raw material for the agro-industry is provided, and foreign exchange is earned through exports. Thus, the sooner this sector is able to develop its capability the earlier it will lead to the development of other sectors and eventually to a sustained development of the entire economy.
While talking about sustainable development, environmental issues are sometimes considered as constraints to the development process, which is not so. In fact, failure to incorporate environmental considerations into projects and programme planning has adversely affected the natural resource base. This has caused over-exploitation of natural resources, such as loss of soil fertility, deforestation, degradation of forest, and watershed degradation. The current Five Year Plan has taken into consideration agro-ecological diversity, farmers' resource endowment, peoples' participation and integration of women farmers in the development activities. Similarly, agricultural diversification, intensification, commercialization,
geographical comparative advantages and other infrastructural facilities are accounted for in sustainable development.
At this moment, however, we would like technical assistance from FAO in implementing the programmes in order that our economic development process is environmentally friendly and sustainable.
Parviz KARBASI (Iran, Islamic Republic of): In the name of God You are a tough Chairman, Mr Chairman. You have not even given us a break! After 40 interesting interventions, I do not know how much of my intervention will be observed by the Committee. Anyway, I have to deliver my statement and I hope the Commission will listen to me.
I would like to thank Mr Mahler and your colleague for the efforts you have made on the issue of sustainable development in FAO and your activities to integrate the sustainability criteria in all the programmes and activities of FAO. We congratulate you on your hard work.
The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has a strong commitment to Agenda 21. The issue of the UNCED follow-up is under the supervision of the Vice-President of the country and this indicates the high priority that the Government places on sustainable development. At the last Conference it was agreed that a sustainable development programme be initiated in one of the provinces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, with the assistance of FAO and Iranian experts. In this regard, the Government assigned one of its estates, with an area of 2 250 000 hectares as a pilot programme for the implementation of a plan of action for sustainable development. It is a great pleasure for me to thank FAO for its technical assistance in the preparation of the documents. With assistance from our experts, the plan is ready and work is going on. We welcome any technical cooperation for this pilot plan of action.
Regarding the follow-up of Chapter 12 of Agenda 21, managing fragile eco-systems and combating desertification and drought, it is my pleasure to inform the commission that during the last 25 years the Islamic Republic of Iran has done extensive work in the sphere of sand-dune fixation to combat desertification. We have rehabilitated more than three million hectares of an arid and desert area.
For the next five years, social and economic development will mean that over seven million hectares of desert area will be converted to productive land. These activities in our country have led to extensive experience and expertise output. Recognizing this, at its 102nd Session of Council FAO accepted the invitation of the Islamic Republic of Iran to make use of this country's expertise and long-standing experience in the implementation of large-scale combating-of-desertification plans. It is our honour to inform you that the Islamic Republic of Iran is ready to share this experience with all Member States concerned, and the international community.
As indicated in paragraph 18 of the document before us, the United Nations General Assembly in its Resolution 77/188 of 22 December 1992 established an intergovernmental negotiating committee for the elaboration of an international convention to combat desertification in countries experiencing serious drought and/or desertification, particularly in Africa. FAO contributed to this issue. This was highly appreciated and we urge FAO to continue to make its contribution to the preparation and implementation of this Convention.
My delegation congratulates FAO on its designation as task manager in Chapters 10, 11, 13 and 14 of Agenda 21. This is a major achievement and a recognition by the international community that FAO has an important role to play in environment and sustainable development. My delegation requests FAO to mobilize sufficient human and financial resources to implement the programme relating to these major chapters and as task manager to report on achievements to the next FAO Council.
We know about the establishment of the Commission on Sustainable Development to monitor and guide the follow-up to the Agenda 21 of UNCED, which has 40 chapters with 115 programmes. As I mentioned before, FAO is designated as a task manager in Chapters 10, 11, 13 and 14 of Agenda 21. My delegation believes that the Commission on Sustainable Development needs advice and assistance from FAO Member States regarding the follow-up action of Agenda 21 and those chapters whose implementation is mainly for FAO. In this regard, I hope the Commission agrees with me that the Conference takes steps for the establishment of a working group from the regional groups of FAO to have a look at FAO activities, and as an advisory working group to assist the Commission on Sustainable Development. This would enhance the Plan of Action and give appropriate views to CSD.
Regarding document C 93/10, we fully support paragraph 5, particularly the emphasis on combating poverty, which is the main cause of environmental degradation, and we believe that close policy coordination of Member States for food security and adequate population and human settlement policies is essential for streamlining the work of Agenda 21.
We should also like to emphasize paragraphs 59 to 61 of the document on sharing the cost of sustainable development and paragraph 34 on the importance of TCDC. We also hope to see more activities in FAO regarding programmes D and E of Chapter 14 of Agenda 21 concerning water.
We believe the essence of any activity is research, particularly on the complex issue of sustainable development. In this regard, we call for close collaboration and coordination with international agricultural research centres and with CGIAR, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research. FAO is a co-sponsor of the CGIAR and should recognize the strength of international agricultural research centres in research. In the same way, CGIAR should look on FAO as the main player in sustainable development for agriculture. We believe CGIAR should not duplicate FAO's work and that FAO should play a major role as the interface between international agricultural research centres, national agricultural research centres and NGOs.
Shri H. PRADEEP RAO (India): I should briefly like to detail some key aspects of our own national experience in this critical area of environment and sustainable development. As mentioned in the document, the outcome of UNCED has placed multiple demands for action at international, national and regional levels on governments, intergovernmental organizations and NGOs. With specific reference to paragraph 5(i), I should like to mention that India's current policies and programmes in the area of forestry have been broadly in conformity with the activities highlighted in Agenda 21, especially Chapters 12, 13 and 15. The National Forest Policy of 1988 embodies many of the aspects which have been emphasized in these chapters.
With reference to paragraph 7 of the document, I should like to mention that Agenda 21 concerns relating to food, agriculture, forestry and
fisheries sectors have also been reflected in our government's own National Conservation Strategy, which lays down the guuidelines for development of policies and programmes in agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry and other sectors and also the strategy for the conservation of land, water and biomass resources. We have also embarked upon a project to formulate our own National Forestry Action Programme, under which various inter-sectoral linkages will be taken into consideration.
India also proposes to participate in the two inter-sessional working groups of the CSD which will be making recommendations in the key areas of financial resource mobilization, technology transfer and cooperation and capacity building. We have always believed that the complete implementation of the Rio agreement, including Agenda 21 and the non-legally binding Forest Principles, would only be possible when resources and technology are available to developing countries. We feel that FAO can certainly play a major role from this angle. While on the subject of the CSD, I should like to mention that we agree with the suggestion made by the distinguished delegate from the Islamic Republic of Iran that there should be proper coordination and flow of inputs from the Member Nations of the FAO to the CSD to ensure a proper and broad perspective in the work of the CSD.
In so far as paragraph 15 relating to funding mechanisms is concerned, India has been participating in the debate on restructuring and replenishment of the Global Environment Facility (GEF). There should be openness and transparency in the functioning of GEF and also some dedication of funds within this facility to meet the requirements of the Conventions on Biodiversity and Climate Change. I may mention here that India has already ratified the Convention on Climate Change. We are formulating our Environmental Action Programme and it is likely to be completed very shortly.
Paragraphs 47 to 49 of the document highlight key aspects of the agriculture-forestry interface. We are aware of the need to make sustainable agriculture and forestry mutually supportive, and our National Forest Policy of 1988 recognized the complementary roles of agriculture and forestry. The National Forestry Action Programme, which I mentioned earlier, is being formulated and will specifically dwell on these linkages.
We agree with the point made in paragraph 58 of the document that a balance has to be struck between the requirement for creating new institutional capacities to address issues relating to environment and sustainable development and the need to strengthen and adapt existing capacities, especially in a period of scarce resource availability.
Ricardo LEON-VALDES (Chile): En primer término, quisiera expresar el reconocimiento de mi delegación al señor Mahler y su equipo por la presentación de tan completo documento que refleja la preocupación, atención y seguimiento que ha venido dando la FAO a los temas relacionados con la Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente, materia que resulta ser de la mayor importancia en la formulación de políticas en mi país.
En efecto, ante la constatación del grado de deterioro ambiental, en 1990 se creó en Chile la Comisión Nacional del Medio Ambiente, instancia responsable de definir una política ambiental para nuestro país, y como respuesta a la Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente se ha preocupado de perfeccionarla.
Entre sus preocupaciones, destaca la de formular un cuerpo legal que dé organicidad a la profusa legislación ambiental existente, buscando incorporar la variable "Evaluación del Impacto Ambiental", instrumento llamado a prevenir los posibles impactos de un proyecto sobre su área de influencia.
Lo anterior tiene como objeto básico el asegurar un crecimiento económico sostenido, sujeto a consideraciones ambientales, a fin de hacer sustentable la estrategia de desarrollo global.
En este sentido, señor Presidente, mi delegación quisiera agradecer al señor delegado de Alemania por su ofrecimiento de compartir su experiencia en lo que se refiere al análisis del impacto ambiental.
Del mismo modo quiero aprovechar esta oportunidad para ponter a disposición de aquellos países que lo requieran, lo que ha sido nuestra experiencia en esta materia.
Asimismo, coincido con India y la República Islámica de Irán en cuanto a la necesaria cooperación y coordinación que debe existir entre la FAO y los países miembros.
Sin duda existe consenso en que el desarrollo económico, y particularmente el agrícola, debe basarse en criterios ecológicos que aseguren el desarrollo sustentable.
Al respecto, mi delegación, junto con apoyar lo expresado en el párrafo 54, considera de la mayor importancia los esfuerzos que se puedan realizar a fin de sensibilizar a la población rural frente a los desafíos que plantea la degradación del medio ambiente, por ser estos los usuarios directos, a través de una adecuada capacitación, entregándole los conocimientos para un adecuado manejo de los recursos naturales a los que se le podrían entregar financiamientos a través del propuesto Fondo para la Protección del Medio Ambiente.
Hayim BAR-SHAI (Israel) : I was much impressed by the diversity and multiplicity of bodies and actions having to do with sustainability and environmental preservation, as well as with their view and the programme of work and coordination represented in document C 93/10, which means that we have a very important and promising subject. In Israel, too, we have a surge of activity in this area, although it is not new - we have been dealing with it for several years - and I would like to name a few of the subjects that are being dealt with through academe and in the field. Work is being carried out on purification of water for use for certain purposes and crops - in general better utilization of water resources, including desalination. Work is being carried out on integrated pest and insect management - in other words the use of insects for insecticides. A large part of our agricultural export is grown under this system. Work is being carried out on development of arid areas through suitable crops and products from desert animals and so forth. Afforestation is being carried out in Israel, mostly for recreation. There is work on intensive fisheries breeding, mostly in inland ponds, where complementary species are growing simultaneously.
We have been attaching much importance to regional cooperation and, like my colleague from the Islamic Republic of Iran, I support the concept of
stronger representation of regional aspects in the world or conference framework.
I am also glad to note that talks are currently being held in Cairo within the framework of the multilateral peace talks on environmental issues of mutual interest to the nations in the area. Many national and international bodies have shown much interest in assisting and cooperating.
Sustainability and environmental care are very lengthy and costly processes. We must carefully find rational and safe modes for using safe agricultural fertilizers, insecticides and other accessory materials and tools in optimal methods. Many aspects of these materials have still to be studied and researched. We should also bear in mind that, after all, different climates demand different treatments and solutions and for many countries the immediate priority is production of more, and sufficient, food, pure and simple.
We have to be careful not to create new impediments to international trade under the cover of sustainability and environmental considerations. The suggestion we heard here for the taxing of certain fertilizers is an example of a device which can be very useful but which often turns out to have negative results. On the whole, we hope that FAO will assume an increasing and fruitful role in promoting this issue. Israel will, of course, cooperate with FAO and the world and regional bodies on this very important issue on which, after all, our future depends.
Bandar AL-SHALHOOB (Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of) (Original language Arabic): I should like to thank the Secretariat for the preparation of this excellent document and for all the activities concerned with sustainable development, which will have positive impacts on agricultural policies and forestry policies. The efforts exerted by FAO are quite clear in the follow-up activity to UNCED. Taking into account the pioneering role of the Organization, in cooperation with other organizations and non-governmental organizations, we should like to express our satisfaction on what has been included in paragraph 24, particularly with what has been undertaken by the Director-General in including the component of sustainability in all activities.
Here we should never forget the main task of the Organization, namely the alleviation of poverty and hunger all over the world. This enhances this concept when we come to lay down the guidelines of sustainable development and environment.
In paragraph 34, the rationalization of the activities in the Organization is a source of satisfaction for our delegation.
In paragraph 39 and the investment projects that aim at achieving sustainable development, here we can see the benefits of cooperation between the agencies in the field. It also highlights the importance of complementarity at regional and country levels, as well as at international level.
I agree with what has been included in paragraph 61 and the positive effects of liberalization of trade on the prospects of development and sustainable development in the environment. Sustainable development is an important issue in my country in our future plans for development. We also
have the National Authority on Sustainable Development and we are working to develop all aspects of life in Saudi Arabia.
In conclusion, I support what has been said by the distinguished representative of Kuwait.
CHAIRMAN (Original language German): I would especially like to thank the representatives of the OECD and IFAD. Both representatives indicated that their declarations would be put in the verbatim report.
I would like to call upon Dr Hartmans, as representative of the International Consumers and Chairman of the NGO Group.
Edmond HARTMANS (Observer of Caritas Internationalis) : I am speaking for some 25 organizations and I will try to make it as brief as possible. At the same time, I have to recognize that I need to satisfy some of the delegations which made certain important points.
Although structural adjustments and Rural Development involve usually important technical measures, such measures often touch the very essence of life in the family and in the community or the region. As can be expected, these social and economic aspects were of main concern to the NGOs in their meeting of 9 November. In order to be very brief in this intervention, I will restrict myself to some of these aspects only, and will not deal with any technical matters which have been raised by delegates already.
Throughout the lively debate, emphasis was placed on the necessity for the participation of farmer peasants and rural people's organizations. Participants urged governments to encourage the organization of rural people for self-reliance and urged FAO to assist governments in this respect. Strengthened people's and farmers' organizations and their participation will certainly more effectively achieve the objectives of SARD.
Participants in projects and programmes should be involved in all project stages including formulation, implementation and evaluation on an ongoing basis.
It is proposed that in the 70 countries with national coordinating committees on sustainable development, a study be made to ascertain to what extent non-governmental and peasant farmers' organizations are included. This study should also cover the 14 countries which have a draft and/or final Agenda 21 plan of action. It would be particularly useful if the difficulties encountered regarding the participation of NGOs and farmers' organizations could be pinpointed so that possible corrective action could be taken in the future.
The NGOs felt, as some of the delegates, and particularly the delegate of Iran, have said, that more research is needed on the very complex structural and socio-economic questions of sustainable development and the environment related to nutrition, agriculture, forestry and fisheries. More emphasis should be placed in national and international research centres on farming systems and on-farm research, and especially on agro-forestry systems. In determining the workplan of the organizations and in conducting agricultural research farmers'/peasants' organizations should be involved
and the necessary framework should be established for the continuous interchange and sharing of available know-how with rural communities.
Participants considered that in developing countries poverty is the major cause of environmental degradation. As long as absolute poverty experienced disproportionally by women and children is not eradicated, fragile ecosystems will be under threat. Millions of the world's poorer women face the cruel dilemma that activities vital to the survival of their families in the short term, can also damage the environment on which long-term survival depends. The lady delegate of Jamaica dealt with this problem very eloquently indeed.
Participants suggested that FAO use its influence to find a better balance between the demands of industrialized markets and affluent consumers on the one hand, and meeting the basic minimum quantities of food for the undernourished. This would include more emphasis on staple foods such as roots and tubers and pulses, and the strengthening of local and regional markets which provide outlets for such local production.
In this connection participants stressed that the diversity of agricultural systems should be maintained in order to support the local markets of traditional food supplies. NGOs felt further that the structural adjustment programmes are pushing producers very often toward an ever greater degree of specialization and monoculture, including the use of potentially harmful chemicals. Concern was expressed about the impact of trade liberalization in destabilizing markets. It was noted that structural adjustment policies may have a negative effect on world market prices of agricultural products. FAO was urged to continue to draw attention to contradictions between the goals of SARD and structural adjustment policies.
Many other matters were raised which are contained in the report of the meeting, C 93/Inf. 1, pages 13-35, which I hope delegates will find time to read. The NGOs worked very hard and diligently on this and I myself believe it is a rather valuable report.
I wish to end this intervention with a pledge that NGOs are anxious and ready to collaborate with FAO, governments and other organizations for consultation and participation in SARD-related activities, especially at the local field level. Many NGOs have considerable expertise, and experiences, which are readily available to improve the life of rural people. They are generally very familiar with local conditions and are also very cost effective.
CHAIRMAN (Original language German): Mr Hartmans, did you also speak on behalf of the Consumers' Union? Is that correct?
Edmond HARTMANS (Observer of Caritas Internationalis) : In this meeting I am representing Caritas Internationalis, but I only spoke at this time as Chairman of the INGO Group, not for the Consumers' Union.
Sra. Elsa NIVIA (Observadora de la Organización Internacional de las Uniones de Consumidores): Voy a hablar en nombre de la Organización Internacional de las Uniones de Consumidores. Agradezco al señor Presidente la oportunidad de dirigirme a la Conferencia. Voy a tratar de abreviar la declaración que había preparado, en razón de la hora, y espero que todos
los delegados hayan tenido la oportunidad de leer el informe C 93/INF/1, sobre el cual nos acaban de informar, sobre la reunión de ONGs donde están consignadas nuestras discusiones acerca de la implementación de la Agenda 21.
La Organización Internacional de Uniones de Consumidores IOCU, la Red Internacional de Acción en Plaguicidas PAN, el Instituto de Políticas al Consumidor, la Red de Acción en Plaguicidas de América Latina RAP-AL, RAPALMIRA y muchas otras Organizaciones no Gubernamentales, celebramos esta política de la FAO y su compromiso de apoyar la Agenda 21, y hacemos un llamado a los gobiernos para que se reconozcan también los Tratados Alternativos propuestos por las ONGs en Río, para que la agricultura sustentable sea decretada como política nacional y se asignen los fondos adecuados para la investigación, difusión e implementación de estos programas.
El concepto de la agricultura sustentable va más allá de las definiciones estrechas tradicionales de manejo de plagas. La agricultura es sustentable cuando es económicamente viable, ecológicamente sana, culturalmente apropiada y socialmente justa. Y no son precisamente éstos los principios del modelo de agricultura predominante, la cual se basa en el uso de productos químicos como plaguicidas y fertilizantes sintéticos que degradan el ambiente y los recursos naturales y agravan los problemas de las plagas a los que se suman los efectos tóxicos agudos y crónicos en hombres mujeres y niños de familias campesinas o en trabajadores del campo que están expuestos directamente a estos venenos, además de los riesgos a largo plazo como el cáncer y otras enfermedades a que está expuesta la totalidad de la población, incluso quienes asistimos a esta Conferencia y nuestras familias, por ser consumidores de agua y alimentos contaminados.
A causa de estos problemas solicitamos a los gobiernos reconocer la urgencia de implementar la Agricultura y el Desarrollo Rural Sustentables, disminuir la disponibilidad de químicos de alto riesgo en los mercados aplicando el principio de prevención, eliminando químicos obsoletos, como ya lo propuso aquí el representante de Marruecos en la tarde de hoy, y asegurar lo fondos necesarios para empezar a aplicar sin demora los 12 Programas Especiales de Acción propuestos por la FAO, con la participación de los campesinos y la comunidad rural, ONGs y universidades, destacando la salud humana como objetivo primordial de la protección ambiental y de los recursos naturales. La agricultura sustentable es necesaria para lograr la seguridad alimentaria, no sólo en términos de cantidad sino también en términos de calidad de los alimentos, para cumplir el objetivo principal de la agricultura de satisfacer las necesidades básicas de nutrición y salud de los pueblos.
Un componente clave de la Agricultura y el Desarrollo Rural Sustentable es el Manejo Integrado de Plagas, apoyado por la FAO hace casi 30 años, pero cuyas definiciones han sido tan débiles y poco claras que no han resuelto realmente nuestros problemas agrícolas y sí se han prestado para que el concepto sea manipulado por la industria agroquímica, para que se relacione en muchos casos sólo como rotación de químicos para combatir la resistencia en las plagas y para mantener el comercio de plaguicidas de alto riesgo, muchos de ellos ya prohibidos en varios países por sus efectos de salud y ambientales.
Solicitamos a la FAO definir nuevamente en términos agroecológicos el Manejo Integrado de Plagas, adecuado al concepto de sustentabilidad, donde se determine claramente la necesidad de reducir los insumos externos como
plaguicidas y fertilizantes químicos, y de promover la biodiversidad y los métodos biológicos, orgánicos y naturales en el manejo de los cultivos. Una buena base para empezar esta redefinición de Manejo Integrado de Plagas podría ser el concepto incluido en la Circular de Programas de Campo de la FAO N° 8, de diciembre de 1992, por todos ustedes conocida.
Recomendamos tener en cuenta los resultados positivos que se están logrando en los países del Sur y Sureste de Asia, con un nuevo enfoque del Manejo Integrado de Plagas enmarcado dentro del manejo integrado del cultivo del arroz, donde la FAO y los gobiernos están trabajando con los campesinos, ONGs y universidades, a través de los cursos llamados "Entrenamiento de Entrenadores" y "Escuelas de Campo de Agricultores". Allí muchos gobiernos han asumido el programa de Manejo Integrado de Plagas como política nacional, lográndose el mayor éxito donde además se han prohibido los plaguicidas más peligrosos y se han eliminado los subsidios, como en Indonesia.
Solicitamos incluir al menos cuatro observadores de ONGs con experiencia en Manejo Integrado de Plagas y agricultura sustentable, en el Panel de Expertos FAO/PNUMA sobre Control Integrado de Plagas en la Agricultura. Estos representantes de ONGs pueden ayudar a identificar, investigar y documentar aquellos plaguicidas, políticas gubernamentales y prácticas de la industria que socavan la efectividad y viabilidad de los programas de Manejo Integrado de Plagas.
Cuando proponemos la presencia de ONGs en el Panel de Expertos sobre Control Integrado da Plagas, debemos aclarar que nos referimos a ONGs sin ánimo de lucro desde sus orígenes, como ONGs ambientales y de desarrollo o asociaciones de agricultores, y no a ONGs formadas por personas u organizaciones orientadas al lucro como consultores privados, corporaciones transnacionales o vendedores de fertilizantes y plaguicidas, quienes están interesados en vender sus productos y no en promover la sustentabilidad, por tanto no pueden ser jueces de sí mismos.
Respecto al Código de Conducta sobre Distribución y Uso de Plaguicidas, el cual fue aprobado por la FAO en 1985 y enmendado en 1989 para incluir el "Consentimiento con Previa Información" o principio PIC: Recomendamos la revisión y fortalecimiento de este Código de Conducta para adaptarlo a los nuevos criterios de la Agricultura y el Desarrollo Rural Sustentables y la Agenda 21, y usar el PIC para seleccionar los productos obsoletos que deben ser retirados de todos nuestros mercados. El Panel de Expertos sobre Control Integrado de Plagas en la Agricultura, en el que hemos propuesto cuatro observadores de ONGs, debería trabajar con el Panel de Expertos sobre el PIC del Código de Conducta sobre Plaguicidas, con el fin de incluir en la lista PIC los plaguicidas nocivos para el Manejo Integrado de Plagas, por causar desequilibrios en las poblaciones de plagas y de agentes benéficos.
Respecto a la Políticas de Ajuste Estructural y Agricultura, la FAO como entidad asesora de los gobiernos en la definición de políticas, debe asegurarse que no haya contradicción entre los objectivos de la Agricultura y el Desarrollo Rural Sustentables y las Políticas de Ajuste Estructural del Banco Mundial y el Fondo Monetario Internacional.
Por último, quiero referirme a los recursos genéticos y biodiversidad. Actualmente existen personas y compañías que están saqueando nuestros recursos genéticos sin autorización. Es urgente apoyar el Código de Conducta sobre Colección y Transferencia de Germoplasma de Plantas. Los
gobiernos deben darle alta prioridad, como elemento crucial en su compromiso con la Agricultura y el Desarrollo Rural Sustentables.
P.J. MAHLER (Conseiller spécial du Directeur général, Sous-Directeur général pour l'environnement et le développement durable): La longueur de ce débat témoigne de la richesse des informations que les délégations ont bien voulu partager entre elles et aussi communiquer au Secrétariat.
Le Secrétariat est très reconnaissant aux délégations qui ont bien voulu appuyer l'action qui a été menée par la FAO jusqu'à présent, et surtout nous donner des orientations pour l'avenir. Nous avions besoin de ces orientations politiques devant un sujet aussi vaste. A ce propos, je voudrais dire combien j'ai apprécié les déclarations en particulier de la Jamaïque et de la Suisse. Il y en a eu beaucoup d'autres. Mes collègues et moi-même avons noté scrupuleusement tout ce qui a été dit et nous ferons en sorte que ce débat soit reflété dans le rapport.
Pour limiter mes réponses à cette heure tardive, je voudrais, si vous le voulez bien, laisser de côté le sujet des ressources phytogénétiques, puisqu'il va être abordé au point suivant. Mais nous avons noté que beaucoup de délégations ont aussi appuyé l'action de l'Organisation en ce qui concerne les ressources génétiques animales, et aussi ce que nous faisons dans le cadre de la conservation et de l'utilisation de la biodiversité, et de notre coopération avec les organes intergouvernementaux qui assurent la mise en place de la Convention internationale sur la biodiversité.
Nous avons reçu de la part des délégations de nombreuses directives en ce qui concerne nos priorités et le poids qu'il faudrait donner à tel ou tel secteur. Et j'ai relevé évidemment de nombreuses interventions sur les forêts. A ce propos, j'ai été informé que, en Commission II, demain, une résolution devrait être présentée sur ce sujet. Je crois que l'équilibre de nos activités entre différents secteurs relève principalement des travaux de la Commission II sur notre Programme de travail et budget, et notre plan à moyen terme. Donc, si vous le voulez bien, Monsieur le Président, je ne vais pas m'étendre là-dessus. Mais nous avons évidemment noté les orientations qui nous ont été données à ce sujet, et aussi la requête qui a été faite par de nombreuses délégations de pousser notre analyse d'Action 21, de façon à aller plus loin dans le choix des priorités. Nous avons indiqué dans l'annexe de ce document quels étaient les choix que nous entendons faire et nous avons reçu des orientations supplémentaires ici. Je voudrais quand même faire deux remarques: la première, c'est que je peux vous assurer que, dans des conditions de croissance zéro, il n'est guère possible à l'Organisation d'empiéter sur le mandat d'autres organisations. Et, donc, nous nous concentrerons sur nos priorités.
La deuxième remarque que je voudrais faire, c'est que tout l'effort qui a été conduit pour la restructuration de nos programmes de terrain, ce "streamlining" qui avait été demandé il y a déjà quatre ans, cet effort a été aussi orienté vers une meilleure définition de nos priorités. Et si nous avons choisi, dans le Programme-Cadre de Coopération Internationale pour l'ADRD, 12 programmes d'action spéciaux, 12 programmes qui correspondent à des rubriques bien précises d'Action 21, je pense que c'était dans le même but de poursuivre le choix des priorités.
La délégation des Etats-Unis s'est inquiétée, à juste titre d'ailleurs, de la façon dont nous allions nous organiser pour le suivi de la CNUED et de
la façon dont nous allions procéder à la mise en place de la coordination nécessaire. Dans sa déclaration, la délégation des Etats-Unis a naturellement évoqué les dispositifs qui existent déjà, à savoir un conseiller spécial auprès du Directeur général, un comité directeur, un groupe interdépartemental de travail sur l'environnement et le développement dont M. Zehni, qui est à mes côtés, est le Président, et un certain nombre de groupes de travail. Mais je pense que la question portait plutôt sur les autres aspects, en particulier sur la mise en oeuvre de ce programme cadre et des programmes d'action spéciaux. A ce sujet, je voudrais attirer l'attention sur le document C 93/8 dans lequel, dans le chapitre 6, nous faisons référence, aux paragraphes 303 à 309, (à cette heure tardive, je ne vais pas détailler cela) aux unités techniques principales qui vont avoir la responsabilité de guider ces programmes d'action spéciaux. Nous poursuivons là le même effort de décentralisation de notre coordination et nous assignons à des unités techniques la responsabilité d'assurer la coordination dans certains domaines précis.
Quant aux dispositions que nous devons prendre pour jouer le rôle de "maître d'oeuvre", je veux informer la Commission que nous avons déjà désigné, dans les départements concernés, un point focal pour chacun des chapitres d'Action 21 pour lesquels nous avons la responsabilité de "maître d'oeuvre". Ces points focaux auront la tâche particulièrement difficile de rassembler les informations sur ce que fait le système des Nations Unies dans leurs domaines respectifs, de proposer des stratégies communes, d'identifier les lacunes ou les doubles emplois et aussi de proposer des activités de coopération.. Je ne vous cacherai pas que mes collègues et moi-même sommes très préoccupés par cette charge de travail supplémentaire. Mais nous avons ici eu confirmation de la volonté de nos pays membres de nous voir coopérer avec la Commission du développement durable et répondre à leurs demandes de rapport et d'information pour la mise en oeuvre d'Action 21. Nous allons faire le maximum. Et à ce sujet, je voudrais aussi rappeler que nous avons déjà utilisé certains de nos mécanismes (le Comité de l'agriculture, le Comité des forêts) pour essayer de favoriser cette coopération inter-agences. Et nous avons l'intention de continuer. A ce sujet, référence a été faite aux commissions forestières régionales. Nous avons d'autres mécanismes. Je ne vais pas tous les citer ce soir. Mais c'est aussi à travers ces mécanismes que nous pouvons demander à nos pays membres de guider plus spécifiquement notre coopération et notre coordination dans certains domaines spécifiques, y compris au niveau régional.
Plusieurs délégations nous ont demandé de préparer des lignes directrices, des indicateurs de durabilité, de développer nos systèmes d'information, et même un manuel pour nos activités de terrain. Je suis heureux d'informer la Commission que dans tous ces domaines, nous avons déjà des travaux en chantier. Certains vont être publiés prochainement. C'est aussi notre ambition à terme d'avoir des lignes directrices, des "guidelines" pour chacun des programmes d'action spéciaux du Programme-Cadre de Cooperation Internationale pour l'ADRD.
Par exemple, pour l'aménagement des zones côtières: dans le cadre d'une coopération avec le PNUE et la Banque mondiale, nous nous occupons spécifiquement des aspects de la gestion des zones côtières en ce qui concerne l'agriculture, les forêts et les pêches; et nous allons publier prochainement des directives dans ces domaines. Il en va de même pour l'association, la coordination que nous essayons de mettre en place entre les systèmes d'information géographique et les statistiques
conventionnelles dans les domaines de l'agriculture, des forêts et des pêches.
Plusieurs délégations ont fait référence à l'importance de la participation populaire. Je dois dire que le document que nous avons présenté étant plutôt un rapport plutôt d'activités, nous n'avons pas essayé de développer la doctrine. Cela avait été fait dans un document que nous avons présenté à la dernière Conférence. Je peux vous confirmer qu'il s'agit d'un axe fondamental de notre action. Et nous pensons d'ailleurs qu'il ne s'agit pas seulement de mettre en oeuvre, le Plan d'Action pour la Participation Populaire qui avait été approuvé il y a deux ans: c'est une approche qui doit être appliquée dans chacun des secteurs, pour la conservation des sols, pour la lutte intégrée contre les ravageurs, etc. Et c'est ce que nous faisons. Vous avez certainement entendu parler de ce projet de lutte intégrée contre les ravageurs du riz en Indonésie. Ce programme se fait avec la participation des riziculteurs et c'est ce qui en a fait d'ailleurs, le succès. La participation populaire est un des programmes d'action spéciaux dans le programme cadre de l'ADRD. Et je suis heureux à ce propos de confirmer l'étroite coopération que nous avons avec de nombreuses ONG, et notamment celles qui s'occupent plus spécifiquement des petits agriculteurs, avec lesquels nous avons des relations étroites.
Le délégué des Pays-Bas a indiqué qu'à l'avenir, il nous faudrait surtout compter sur les ressources du Programme ordinaire, plutôt que des ressources extrabudgétaires. Je voudrais quand même dire que c'est grâce à ces ressources extrabudgétaires, que nous ont données généreusement les Pays-Bas, que nous avons pu démarrer toute cette activité avec la Conférence Den Bosch. Et nous espérons que nous pourrons continuer (d'ailleurs, j'ai enregistré un appui à ce sujet de la délégation de la Suisse), que nous pourrons bénéficier de ces ressources extrabudgétaires, parce que les programmes d'action spéciaux sont essentiellement des familles de projets, de projets de terrain. Et pour mettre en oeuvre ces programmes d'action spéciaux, avec naturellement tout l'appui nécessaire du Programme ordinaire, c'est avec des ressources extrabudgétaires que nous pourrons le faire.
Pouvons-nous indiquer dans notre Programme ordinaire quels sont (et je crois que c'est une demande de la délégation suisse) les montants que nous allouons à l'environnement et au développement durable? Je dirai qu'il nous serait extrêmement difficile de le faire maintenant que nous avons réussi (et cela a été dit) à intégrer ces notions dans chacun de nos programmes. Mais en ce qui concerne l'augmentation de nos activités dans ces domaines-là, je voudrais me référer au paragraphe 25 du Programme de travail et budget. Vous avez là des tableaux sur trois pages qui indiquent quelles ont été les ressources additionnelles qui ont été consacrées à ces domaines.
Plusieurs délégations ont posé des questions en ce qui concerne les nouvelles sources de financement. Il s'agit du Fonds mondial pour l'environnement (FEM) d'une part, et le Programme Capacité 21. En ce qui concerne le Fonds mondial pour l'environnement, je rappellerai que c'était d'abord une opération pilote de trois ans. Elle est actuellement en train d'être évaluée. On envisage de restructurer le dispositif des organes directeurs du FEM. Dans les mois qui viennent, nous devrions avoir le résultat de tout ce processus. A part trois projets je dois dire que, pour le moment, nous n'avons pas réussi (alors que nous avons présenté plus d'une douzaine de demandes) à obtenir des financements suffisants dans les domaines qui nous intéressent. Nous insistons beaucoup auprès du FEM sur le fait que la biodiversité n'est pas seulement à conserver in situ mais
concerne aussi les ressources génétiques. Nous espérons que, avec la mise en place de la Convention sur la biodiversité, nous pourrons avoir plus de succès en présentant des requêtes de la part de nos pays membres pour ces activités.
En ce qui concerne les activités pour le renforcement des capacités nationales, c'est un programme qui est regí par le PNUD. Il est actuellement en voie de démarrage. Quarante millions de dollars ont été promis. Pour le moment, les activités, les projets à financer concernent principalement les ministères de l'environnement. Là aussi, nous insistons pour que les secteurs de l'agriculture, des forêts et des pêches bénéficient de Capacité 21. Nous pensons en particulier, dans notre rôle de "Task Manager", de maître d'oeuvre, pour chacun des chapitres de l'Agenda 21 sur les forêts, sur l'agriculture, etc, il faut promouvoir le renforcement des capacités nationales. Et, dans nos rapports, dans nos relations avec la Commission du développement durable, nous ferons en sorte d'insister sur ces aspects.
Plusieurs délégations ont fait référence au Plan d'action pour les forêts tropicales. Sans vouloir m'étendre à ce sujet, je voudrais informer la Commission de ce qu'il y a actuellement près de 90 pays qui font partie du PAFT. Que le PAFT a déjà mobilisé 2 343 000 000 dollars; qu'au cours des six derniers mois, le PAFT a mobilisé 317 millions de dollars; et que la répartition des fonds du PAFT (qui dépendent des donateurs; ce n'est évidemment pas la FAO qui contribue à ces fonds) se fait de la façon suivante: 68 pour cent à.l'Asie et au Pacifique, 18 pour cent à l'Amérique latine, et 13 pour cent à l'Afrique.
Au sujet des petites îles, je voudrais d'abord rappeler que c'était l'initiative du Directeur général de convoquer une réunion sur l'agriculture, les forêts et les pêches dans les petites îles, à la Barbade avant la Conférence de Rio. Et je crois que cette initiative n'a pas été sans effet à la CNUED puisque la CNUED a demandé à ce qu'il y ait une Conférence sur les petites îles traitant de tous les secteurs. Doit-on dire que nous avons échoué à donner un suivi à cette Conférence? Je tiens à la disposition des délégations des listes de projets que nous executons dans ces pays. Nous avons préparé ces listes comme l'une des contributions pour la préparation de la Conférence qui se tiendra au mois d'avril de l'année prochaine. Nous avons aussi fait un rapport d'activités et pendant 2 semaines, un de nos hauts fonctionnaires a participé, au Comité préparatoire de cette Conférence. Nous étions d'ailleurs la seule agence à avoir envoyé quelqu'un du Siège. Nous avons fait le maximum, mais nous devons avouer que dans les délégations nationales, les secteurs de l'agriculture, des forêts et des pêches étaient peu représentés; et donc il nous était très difficile, malgré les très nombreuses interventions que mon collègue a faites, de faire passer le message de l'importance de l'agriculture, des forêts et des pêches pour les petites îles. Cela a été dit ici. Mais il faut que ce soit dit dans le Comité préparatoire de cette Conférence. Il faut que ce soit dit à la Conférence elle-même. Et ceci permettrait d'avoir des recommandations d'action, donc un programme d'action, et certainement un accroissement de nos activités dans ce domaine.
Je crois que j'arrive à la dernière question (j'en ai peut-être oublié et je m'en excuse à l'avance): au sujet de l'impact écologique de la guerre du Golfe. Nous avons participé à une étude générale d'impact conduite sous l'égide du Programme des Nations Unies dans cette région. Nous avons aussi proposé, dans le cadre du Sous-Comité des pêches pour les pays du Golfe,
une action conjointe des pays concernés. Et nous sommes disposés, si des ressources extra-budgétaires sont disponibles, à poursuivre notre action dans ce domaine.
Monsieur le Président, en terminant je veux encore une fois remercier les délégations des gouvernements et des observateurs pour la richesse de ces débats. Nous avons engrangé énormément d'informations et d'idées. Et je peux vous assurer que cela nous aidera énormément à jouer ce rôle de "maître d'oeuvre" qui nous est confié. Je vous remercie.
Sra Grafila SOTO CARRERO (Cuba) : La delegación de Cuba agradece a la secretaría de la FAO por la preparación de este documento referido a las actividades de medio ambiente y desarrollo sostenible.
Consideramos que la FAO debe continuar siendo uno de los protagonistas principales en la ejecución del Programa 21 aprobado en la Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas sobre medio ambiente y desarrollo, dando continuidad a la labor que en ese sentido despliega conjuntamente con los Estados Miembros y en los Estados Miembros fundamentalmente en la aplicación del marco internacional del Programa de Cooperación para la Agricultura y el Desarrollo Sostenible.
Mi país, señor Presidente, presta una atención prioritaria al seguimiento de la Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas sobre medio ambiente y desarrollo y este aspecto ha sido tenido muy en cuenta en las recientes modificaciones de la constitución de la república, donde se incluyó el cumplimiento del Programa de acción de esta Conferencia.
Las actividades que en mi país se realizan están regidas por un comité nacional intersectorial presidido por la presidenta de la Academia de Ciencias e integrado por todos los organismos nacionales, que de un manera o de otra tienen que ver con las tareas planteadas en el Programa 21, y donde el papel de las mujeres y los jóvenes es muy importante pero siempre respondiendo a las necesidades y prioridades de nuestro país, para su entera ejecución dentro de nuestros planes nacionales de desarrollo en los diferentes sectores.
Señor Presidente, mi delegación apoya los planteamientos que se han hecho a favor de aprovechar al máximo las posibilidades de los órganos y organismos internacionales que ya realizaron actividades en favor del medio ambiente y el desarrollo sostenible, considerando innecesario la creción de nuevas instituciones que tal vez solamente nos llevarían a duplicar los esfuerzos que ya se están realizando. Apoyamos pues, el contenido del Párrafo 58 del documento que analizamos en el sentido de reforzar el alcance de las instituciones existentes.
Señor Presidente, mi delegación considera muy pertinente los planteamientos contenidos en el Párrafo 54 del documeto C 93/10 puesto que el aumento de la pobreza y de las dificultades económicas hace necesario que se obtengan pautas de consumo y producción y de estilo de vida sostenible. En tal sentido consideramos necesario que se deberán ejecutar las acciones concretas, que al respecto están contenidas en el Plan de Acción de la CIN y de lo cual tal vez la FAO puede ocuparse también de manera prioritaria en el futuro.
Señor Presidente, para concluir, reiteramos que nuestro país trabajará tenazmente a fin de lograr que nuestra población y nuestras instituciones
participen de forma individual y colectiva en los esfuerzos encaminados a conseguir el desarrollo sostenible en un medio ambiente adecuado.
Quisiéramos, señor Presidente, que se tengan en cuenta las solicitudes hechas por las delegaciones de Trinidad y Tabago y Dominica para las pequeñas islas del Caribe1.
David KING (Observer for the International Federation of Agricultural Producers): Sustainable development is not only the responsibility of governments, it is the responsibility of society as a whole. Farmers' organizations, represented in IFAP, therefore have a responsibility to play a leadership role in the conservation of natural resources and in the sustainable development of human society.
IFAP’s concept of sustainable agriculture is based upon three principles, namely:
1. Agriculture must be considered first and foremost an economic activity, producing an adequate and safe supply of food, feed and renewable raw materials. Only an economically-viable agriculture is capable of effectively meeting environmental objectives.
2. Agriculture must be based upon environmentally-sound production methods and must assure the economic and social health of the rural economy. There must be a direct responsibility of individual farmers for the environmental effects of their farming practices.
3. Where society makes additional demands on farmers, adequate additionl remuneration must be assured.
At the heart of any sustainable development policy must be measures to alleviate poverty, since poverty is strongly connected to the destruction of the environment. Such measures include: secure land tenure, remunerative prices for farm products, reduction of foreign debt burdens, fair terms for internationi trade, enhanced valued-added through farmer-owned cooperatives.
At the heart of any programme of action must be a political commitment to involve the people in their own development. In the farm sector, this means recognizing representative farmers' organizations as essential partners in the establishment and implementation of rural development strategies.
Finally, Mr Chairman, at the heart of technological progress must be effective agriculture research, development and extension services focused on site-specific, sustainable farming methods and the development of renewable resources.
In order to ensure progress, action must be undertaken in a systematic fashion within an agreed time-frame and a stable, long-term policy.
In its work on sustainable development, IFAP has been fortunate to enjoy excellent cooperation with FAO, especially through Dr Mahler. We greatly
_______________
1 Texto incluido en las actas a petición expresa.
appreciate this, and look forward to continuing cooperation with FAO in adressing these key issues.1
Gérard VIATTE (Observateur de l'Organisation de coopération et de développement economiques): Je félicite Vous et les Vice-Présidents pour Votre élection et le Secrétariat pour l'excellente documentation qu'il nous a présentée. Je remercie M. Mahler pour son intéressante présentation. L'OCDE se félicite que la Conférence de la FAO accorde une haute priorité aux relations entre l'agriculture, l'environnement et le développement durable, notamment dans le cadre du suivi de la Conférence de Rio. Pour sa part l'OCDE participe activement à l'analyse de ces relations et la réflexion sur l'orientation de politiques à la suite de la CNUED, notamment dans ses Comités de l'environnement, de l'agriculture et des pêcheries.
Lors de la réunion du Comité de l'agriculture au niveau ministériel, tenue en mars 1992, les Ministres de l'agriculture de l'OCDE avaient identifié les relations entre l'agriculture et l'environnement comme l'un des défis majeurs auxquels sont confrontés les décideurs politiques. Ils avaient souligné que l'agriculture peut avoir à la fois des effets positifs et négatifs sur l'environnement.
L'agriculture pourrait contribuer de plus en plus à assurer la viabilité écologique et la conservation des ressources rurales. La réforme des politiques agricoles, à laquelle se sont engagés les pays de l'OCDE, pourrait avoir des effets positifs sur l'environnement, et il serait judicieux d'intégrer les coûts et bénéfices environnementaux dans les prises de décision dans le domaine agricole. A cet effet, il faudrait réouvrir à la fois à des mesures réglementaires, déjà largement utilisées dans les pays de l'OCDE, et à des instruments économiques basés sur le marché, notamment des accords de gestion de l'environnement, des mesures financières et la reconnaissance de la valeur des services environnementaux fournis par l'agriculture.
Le principe pollueur-payeur, qui est l'un des fondements de la politique de l'environnement, développée par l'OCDE, devrait s'appliquer autant que possible à l'agriculture.
La création en septembre 1993 d'un Groupe de travail mixte des Comités de l'agriculture et de l'environnement de l'OCDE souligne l'importance attachée à l'intégration des politiques agricoles et environnementales. Il traduit bien l'orientation fondamentale des travaux de l'OCDE en matière d'environnement, axée sur l'analyse économique et sur l'intégration des politiques générales et des politiques sectorielles. Dans ce contexte, les travaux engagés portent principalement sur les relations entre la réforme des politiques agricoles et l'environnement (par exemple, par des payements directs), sur la mise au point d'indicateurs agri-environnementaux, sur les possibilités de développer le recours aux instruments économiques et de mieux appliquer le principe pollueur-payeur, et sur les relations entre les politiques commerciales et les politiques de l'environnement dans le domaine agro-alimentaire.
Les conditions de développement de l'agriculture durable et des relations entre agriculture et forêts sont aussi traitées.
________________
1 statement inserted in the Verbatim Records on request.
Dans le domaine des pêcheries, une attention particulière a été portée à la gestion des ressources côtières, qui a fait l'objet d'une recommandation du Conseil de l'OCDE en 1992. Le Comité des pêcheries va poursuivre ses travaux en recherchant les moyens de surmonter les conflits entre utilisateurs des ressources côtières.
Monsieur le Président, dans toutes ces activités, l'OCDE maintient des contacts très étroits avec les services et comités compétents de la FAO et de la Commission économique pour l'Europe. D'une manière plus générale, l'OCDE est pleinement engagée dans le suivi de la Conférence de Rio sur de très nombreux sujets, tels que la désertification, le changement climatique, la gestion des ressources marines, etc.
L'importance des enjeux en cause, qui est bien mise en lumière par la présente Conférence, exige en effet une coopération internationale très étroite, à laquelle chaque Organisation doit contribuer selon sa compétence et sa vocation1.
The meeting rose at 18.30 hours.
La séance est levée à 18 h 30.
Se levanta la sesión a las 18.30 horas.
_________________
1 Texte reçu avec demande d'insertion au procès-verbal.
