CHAIRMAN: Distinguished delegates, we continue with our discussion on the Medium-Term Objectives. The first speaker on my list is Denmark.
C. THOMSEN (Denmark): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for giving me the floor so early on this item which we have always considered to be of great importance for the planning of the work of this Organization.
My remarks will fall into two parts. The first part will be of a more general nature, and in making these remarks I shall speak on behalf of all the Nordic countries, that is, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark. The second part will contain some more specific comments on behalf of my Delegation only.
As far as the general remarks are concerned let me first say that we hope the period of calm, referred to by the Director-General, will lead to continued improvements and developments in this complicated but very important project area. At the same time we would like to pay our tribute to the Secretariat for the valiant efforts they have made in the past, and as a result of which it is only fair to say that the FAO has become a pioneer in this field of Medium-Term Objectives within the United Nations system.
With regard to the documents prepared for this Conference, we have already stated in connection with the discussion of the Programme of Work and Budget that we welcome the insertion of an introductory section on Medium-Term Outlook under each of the major programmes. We only wish that the section on agriculture would have been a little more explicit on priorities.
Neverthless, we believe there is scope for further progress and development in the pioneering work of the Organization. As stated by the Director-General, development in food and agriculture requires a long-term view, and this fact of life makes it imperative to have a framework within which to set our goals and targets. We also need a framework for our discussions of the future priorities within the activities of the Organization in order to look at these in their totality.
From this point of view there will, in our opinion, continue to be a need for a separate treatment, and probably a separate document on Medium-Term Objectives, to supplement the corresponding sections in the Programme of Work and Budget. The purpose of this document should be to provide a summary statement of objectives and priorities, which could form a better basis for the discussion of broad priorities than a more detailed examination of the separate sections in the Programme of Work and Budget will allow for.
As regards the quantification of objectives and priorities, the experience in the past and the results from the Programme Committee and the Council seem to leave little possibility, even for indicative figures. Nevertheless,we would suggest that consideration be given to the possibility of supplementing the presentation in the Programme Budget of the Summary of Estimates by Chapter and Major Programmes, in a compact table which includes figures in relative terms, percentage figures with a similar presentation in relative terms for the medium term. There is also a table, I think just before the one I just referred to, on proposed programme changes, also in relative terms, which in our opinion should form part of this total presentation. In this way it should be possible to provide a better overall picture of the proposed points of growth and of reduced priorities within the total Programme of Work in the Organization.
The separate document should also, we suggest, allow for further development of the present chapter on the Role of FAO, supplemented with a chapter on Medium-Term Priorities, which might be concentrated even more on the relative priorities for the different activities of the Organization than at present.
In this connect ion we fully support the statement of the Director-General to the effect that mandates for activities or priorities between them should be open to change, and that there is need for courageous thinking and action in the Secretariat and among Member Nations in this regard. In fact we believe that this is so important that it would be worthwhile to make extra efforts in order to allow for this.
Having made these remarks I should like to say that our main concern about the Medium-Term Objectives is to ensure that the Conference and the Commission II continue to have a separate discussion on the Medium Term Objectives of the Organization, and that there will be a written presentation of the total picture as I tried to describe it, which can link up with the situation in the present biennium, and in the coming biennium, with the relative changes involved.
We feel that the best way of obtaining this will be to continue to have a separate document on Medium - Term Objectives to supplement the Programme of Work and Budget, but if the same goals, objectives, could be obtained in a different way we can support that this may be a matter for further discussion.
I then come on to the second part of my remarks, which, as I said, are made on behalf of my own delegation only
We generally agree with the policy indications contained in Chapter 2 of the document before us, and I have no further comments on that.
With regard to Chapter 3 on other aspects of FAO functions, we share the desire to limit the amount of organizational change, and we welcome the plans for further examinations of the role and functions of the Regional Offices. We find it important that these continue to be looked at from the point of view of the managerial functions and their place in the managerial system of the Organization as a whole.
In relation to the section of Chapter 4 dealing with the role of the FAO during the Medium Term, we would like in a summary way to emphaisze the following areas of priority, and I do this just by listing the headings in order to save time.
First, investment support in collaboration with financing institutions, and I emphasize in collaboration with.
Secondly, promotion of improved technology, and particularly as regards development of seed production and seed industry; improved water management; utilization of natural fertilizers; integrated crop livestock systems and use of by-products from crops for feed.
Thirdly, implementation of field projects resulting from the meat and dairy schemes.
Fourthly, the training of technicians, workers and small farmers, including the promotion of extension services.
Finally, and fifthly, activities to prevent food losses.
As far as nutrition is concerned, I should just refer to the joint Nordic statement which was made on this particular issue earlier on.
J.A. BAKER (United States of America): The Medium-Term Objectives document contains a considerable amount of useful information. Several speakers have questioned the utility, however, of continuing the Medium-Term document. In our view, the document is intended to provide an overview of FAO member activities and problem areas for the next four to six years. The Programme of Work and Budget, although it does quantify resource allocation, it does not provide the desired coherent overview, therefore we would share the preference just stated by the distinguished representative of Denmark for the continuance of a separate Medium-Term document. I now would like to address ways in which the present document might have presented a more concise and meaningful overview ' for the benefit of FAO Member States.
The present document, in the general discussion contained in paragraphs 4.1 to 4.8, does not provide in our view sufficient focus for FAO's activities in the medium term. Also no priorities are assigned to the wide range of activities described in paragraphs 4.24 to 4.72 nor does the document provide in our opinion a basis for differentiating between higher priority activities and those of lesser importance. FAO, among specialized agencies in the U.N. system, should exercise the lead international role in combatting hunger and malnutrition. In order to do so effectively, its objectives and priorities should be clearly stated.
Concern for freedom from hunger should become FAO's overwhelming concern and, therefore, its operations should reflect this priority. FAO has increasingly concentrated its resources on food production and consumption problems of developing countries. In doing so, emphasis should be placed on facilitating adequate nutrition and access to food by the poor of the developing countries and particularly in the poorest of these countries.
The effective fulfillment of a FAO role and its related objectives which gives maximum concern to freedom from hunger requires the translation of policy into specific programme components and actions. These should be embraced by the FAO management and supported by the member countries, and to this end in the medium term, FAO, within its terms of reference, should in our view accord priority in the use of resources available to it for those programmes and policies which:
Firstly, increase food production in a way that will have a direct impact on domestic nutrition; Secondly, improve efficiency of distribution and consumption practices of households; Thirdly, attain more equitable distribution of food;
Fourthly, increase employment opportunities on and off farms in rural areas;
Fifthly, facilitate the flow of international resources to the agricultural sector, especially to those countries most in need of assistance, and promote the use of these resources in ways which facilitate adequate nutrition and the:access of the hungry to food.
With particular regard to achieving the objectives of increasing food production and consumption through increased employment opportunities, FAO, in concert with other development-oriented agencies, should, we believe, pursue a broadly participatory, employment-oriented strategy for agricultural production, with emphasis on two primary objectives: production and employment.
The primary purpose of increased production should be to expand the supply of basic agricultural consumption goods for the poor majority. In fact, the test of the new agricultural production strategy should be to what degree the benefits of increased production go to the poor.
Improved employment, including self-employment, should help put increased income in the hands of the poor,and this, in turn, will increase the effective demand for food. Increased incomes in the agricultural sector will have a multiplier effect, increasing the production of goods and services in other parts of the economy.
It is the view of our organization that the broad objectives we have outlined above should be reflected in the full range of FAO's activities. In addition, in exercising its leadership role, FAO should identify those activities most likely to have a direct and immediate impact on the problem of hunger and malnutrition, and accord to the activities so selected a high priority in the allocation of resources available to it.
The process of economic and agricultural development is, of course, a complex one. No single remedy can address and/or resolve the agricultural problems of all countries.
Obviously, FAO should and must tailor its assistance to individual countries and this assistance should complement ongoing national, bilateral and multilateral activities. However, we suggest that there is a need for a greater focus on certain high priority activities which would seem particularly useful for all developing countries. Among these might be:
Firstly, strengthening local institutions, especially training, extension and credit; Secondly, transfer of technology and its adaptation to local circumstances;
Thirdly, support of poverty-oriented planning in the agricultural sector, including monitoring the nutritional impact of all activities;
Fourthly, reduction of field and post-harvest losses;
Fifthly, increased efficiency in the use of available water;
Sixthly, promotion of utilization of various developmental resources in ways that are integrated with efforts to increase employment, improve domestic food production, and facilitate adequate nutrition and the access of the hungry to food.
The above mentioned list is not meant to be exhaustive. It simply reflects our belief that FAO should concentrate on those activities where its strengths can provide the most effective services for member nations.
As member governments, we cannot ask FAO to redirect or reemphasize certain parts of its activity without, at the same time, assuring the Director-General that these same governments will continue their regular and extrabudgetary support for FAO. Indeed, it is incumbent upon us to assist the Director-General in his efforts to make ongoing programmes more effective and efficient. We should help him identify additional activities which do not rank as high priority and then support him in eliminating them. Donor governments should examine their overall development assistance to determine if it can be more supportive of priotity issues agreed upon in FAO and those governments which are recipients of multilateral aid should bring their own priorities, as expressed in country programmes, as closely as possible into alignment with the medium-term plans of the FAO.
Because this will be a prolonged process, to attempt to set a budgetary target for FAO growth over the medium term would now be futile. Such a target would depend heavily on the re-direction and reexamination which we think is necessary. Our inclination is to believe that a close, realistic look at programme priorities and readjustment to bring FAO's current resources to bear on these most important areas of work will substantially reduce the need for other than minimal programme increases over the medium term.
I would now kike to make more specific comments on some of the major problem areas emphasized by the Secretariat in paragraphs 4.24 to 4.72 of the Medium-Term Document.
On increasing agricultural production, the United States applauds FAO's efforts in increasing food production and particularly supports its proposed special attention to the small farmer.
Increasing agricultural production is a prerequisite to solving the problem of world poverty. However, unless such production increases are devoted to resolving the problem of rural poverty, they may not improve the nutritional status of those most in need. Priority consideration should, therefore, be given to those agricultural increases directly related to this objective.
In particular, we believe that the most abundant factor of production in low-income countries, namely labour, should be brought into the production process more effectively. Unfortunately, developmental policies followed in many countries have often tended to exclude low-income producers from access to resources and to institutions. Women, in particular, have been often excluded from sharing in benefits commensurate with their role in the production process. Obviously, increased income generated by groups now excluded from the production process will result in heightened overall effective demand for food as well as other goods and services.
On investment, FAO's Investment Centre, working closely with IBRD and Regional Development Banks, has played a significant and valuable role in preparing and formulation projects. In line with our earlier comments, we believe FAO's Investment Centre should increasingly identify and develop projects which are closely related to the objectives of reducing hunger and malnutrition, particularly among the rural poor.
On seeds, the statements seem to confuse general global goals and FAO's goals in this area. Certainly there is a need for new breakthroughs in developing high-yielding varieties and work toward this end is in progress at the international research centres and elsewhere. The work is being shared by the research centres with individual countries and we would expect these efforts to continue and expand. We believe FAO should promote the on-farm use of such varieties by improvements in seed production systems and in extension and distribution systems.
On food reserves and food security, as Secretary Bergland has already indicated in his speech last Wednesday before the Plenary, the United States is taking active leadership in a proposed new internationally coordinated system of national reserve stocks to reduce excessive swings in world market prices and extend world food security. We believe that this undertaking, particularly as it relates to wheat, should be under the auspices of the International Wheat Council. At the same time, we recognize the important role FAO has to play in collecting and disseminating information on the overall world food situation, and in the implementation of the International Undertaking on World Food Security -taking care, of course, to ensure avoidance of overlap with the work of the International Wheat Council.
On fisheries, FAO activities in this area should emphasize:
1. Development and improvement of small-scale fisheries at the local level,
2. Increased fish production through utilization of living marine resources with the newly established 200-mile zone of coastal nations,
3. Improved data collection and analytical abilities of developing nations on a regional basis,
4. Efforts to reduce the waste which occurs by discarding unmarketable species.
On forestry, the FAO forestry programme should complement the new priorities of FAO; we would therefore urge increased Organization support of those forestry activities which increase food production and protect water supplies, produce energy and provide rural employment. The interdependence of forestry and farming is recognized by both the FAO Agriculture Department and the Forestry Department. This is an important point which has been neglected in the past.
The FAO forestry programme gives needed emphasis to "Forestry for Food" and other actions to increase crop or livestock yields, particularly in areas where shifting cultivation is currently practiced. Likewise, the programme recognizes that the protection of watersheds is essential for providing a reliable source of water for downstream development. Afforestration should be accelerated as the main tool for halting desert encroachment.
It must not be forgotten that many countries are just as concerned about dwindling fuelwood supplies as about scarce food. The forest as a source of producing energy should receive heightened attention in
FAO programmes.
Finally, wood is the most readily available raw material on which to base development of local industries in many tropical countries. In a select few, wood products could rapidly be developed for export on the world market.
Αll of these vital activities would provide needed rural area employment as well.
On trade in agricultural commodities, work in this area should be primarily concentrated on activities aimed at strengthening information systems in developing countries and those activities supporting UNCTAD's Integrated Programme for Commodities.
On education and training, we would like to emphasize the importance of small farmer extension training programmes as a means of ensuring effective utilization of technologies, appropriate to local conditions. This type of training is necessary to accelerate agricultural production by small farmers. We are aware that this subject will be dealt with more fully in a forthcoming document on the World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development.
It might also be noted that the Secretariat document did not address the highly important areas of support of planning in the agricultural sector in developing countries and nutrition. The United States believes that these activities should be accorded high priority in the medium term. We have made more extensive remarks on these subjects under our general observations and on other agenda items.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would like to repeat the theme, already touched upon by other delegations, the urgent need to facilitate adequate nutrition and access to food by the poor of the developing countries. The large number of men, women, and children who suffer the scourges of hunger and malnutrition when the ability to alleviate their suffering and to ensure their human dignity is within our grasp requires our utmost dedication. We can and should do no less.
C. ERICSSON (Sweden): Mr. Chairman, our opinions of the format content of this document and its relation to Programme of Work and Budget have just been raised by our colleague from Denmark
We will try to avoid duplication of what we have said in earlier interventions in this Committee. In the following I will mainly comment on some specific issues which we have not touched upon so far.
In respect of Chapter 2, Mr. Chairman, we have a few comments.
In paragraph 2.11 under policy advice, reference is made to assistance to countries in planning and policy analysis. We gave already in the 1975 Conference our support to the Perspective Study of World Agricultural Development which is now referred to as Agriculture Towards 2000. In the 1975 Conference we also supported Country Perspective Studies as a tool in the national development planning and as an input in the world perspective study. This was based upon positive reactions we had met in countries with whom we cooperate on a bilateral basis as well as in the preceeding COAG meeting. The Country Perspective Studies seem now to be almost banned.
We wonder if this is fully justified. Especially as there is a very positive reference made to the Perspective Study of the Sahel in the Review of Field Programmes which we discussed yesterday.
They may have been too sophisticated in some cases but in this respect corrective measures can be taken. We would appreciate some further explanation on this.
In the same Chapter 2, with regard to International Harmonization we also want to stress the importance of harmonizing different international projects on food through programmes such as the joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme.
Concerning the work of the joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme perhaps some less important Codex-committees could be abolished in agreement with the Director-General's statement in paragraph 2.4.
Even if we support the proposals for reducing the number of publications and meetings, we appreciate that the number of meetings within Codex Alimentarius has not been reduced. Of special importance we find the meetings within the Codex Committee on Food Additives, Codex Committee on Pesticides and Codex Committee on Food Hygiene. In our opinion these committees should meet annually.
As regards part 4 of Chapter 2, Technical Cooperation and Field Programme. we also want to make some short comments. In paragraphs 2.25 and 2.26 the coordination of external resources at country level is touched upon. In the discussion in this Commission it has not come out so clear as we want, that the coordination of external resources as such - as well with the ongoing development activities in the country - is a responsibility of the country itself. It should be a primary concern of the Director-General to support by all measures the strengthening of the country position in this regard.
In the Review of Field Programmes which we dealt with on Tuesday there are references made in paragraphs 2.7, 2.8 and 2.14 to the limited involvement of the countries in planning and execution of externallv financed projects. This can only be overcome if the FAO projects are looked upon as the identification of external resources to the national projects or programmes as such. Such an approach will secure the ongoing of activities even after the FAO projects have phased out. In this connection we support what has been said by some delegations of the need to further scrutinize the package of external resources, with the aim to reduce even more the foreign personnel component.
We appreciate what is stated in para. 2.27 that the linkages between Regular Programme and Field Programme activities - trust fund activities included - will be further strengthened. This could even be said the other way around: that the RP activities should more strongly reflect priorities and needs as demonstrated in the Field Programmes. I am not going to elaborate but will refer to what we said in our first intervention under Programme of Work and Budget.
We hope that these two points will be considered in the further planning of the FAO programme.
Coming to Chapter 4 Medium-Term Priorities, we have said the most already when discussing the Programme of Work and Budget. We thus refer to what we have said - and which is in line with the Director-General's proposal - on a further poverty and basic needs orientation by means of an integrated rural development on post-harvest losses, on forestry for local community development, on small-scale fishery and land and water resources and their utilization. We may add here the importance of labour intensive rural small-scale industries, which are referred to in paragraph 4.3.
Our view on nutrition has already been given by our colleague from Norway. As regards activities on the involvement of women in the rural development process we refer to what will be said later on by our colleague from Finland.
The said does not mean that we find some other activities less important, such as seeds, fertilizers, livestock production, etc. In these areas well-defined programmes are under way and we are confident that they will develop accordingly.
A. PAPASSARANTOPOULOS (Greece): Mr. Chairman, on behalf of my delegation I would like to join in congratulating you and the Vice-Chairman on your election.
We fully recognize the attempts that have been made so far by FAO in the field of medium-term planning. We endorse the view that medium-term planning in FAO should provide a framework within which the Organization's activities and programmes should be developed. We find that FAO's medium-term objectives are consistent with the preliminary findings of the study of the world economy in the year 2000 which is being carried out by the United Nations and aim at the achievement of medium-term goals as proposed in the Development Strategy for the Second Development Decade.
We agree that the medium-term objectives should be incorporated in the Programme of Work and Budget as an integral part of it. We also support the efforts made by the United Nations for harmonization and coordination of the medium-term planning of its Specialized Organizations.
Concerning the means, that is the resources that FAO needs to achieve these medium-term objectives, we appreciate the previous attempts at quantification of these resources.
Taking into consideration that FAO means are of economic, institutional and political nature, we think that the growth rate of budget should not be necessarily constant but a more flexible one. It all depends on strategy and priority which determines the budget level. This is also closely related to the optimal use of the available resources which reflect the efficiency of the activities and programmes of FAO in the medium term. We think that under the current world circumstances any attempt to determine numerically the resources required in the medium term will be proved fruitless.
In our opinion the FAO's medium-term objectives and priorities can contribute definitively to the achievement of the world's goals on food and agriculture.
J. BERTELING (Netherlands): Mr. Chairman, in this intervention my delegation will confine itself mainly to the form of the present document and on the future of medium-term planning in FAO. My delegation is aware of the directives of the Eighteenth Session of the Conference and agrees to them.
I therefore acknowledge the fact that in general the Director-General has followed up those directives. We have now studied the document before us; our guess is that everybody is satisfied. The question is, then, does that mean that it is a good document? We have some doubts. Mr. West asked in his introduction for some guidance for the future. In general, my delegation is in agreement with the delegate of Pakistan, particularly on the problem of flexibility.
In my government's view, a medium-term plan must be drawn up by the executive head of the Organization. He must base himself, amongst other things, on the needs and wishes of Member States, and attempt to formulate a coherent set of objectives to be attained by the end the period.
The draft medium-term plan should include an analysis of alternative and perhaps competing means of action to achieve these objectives, taking into account the activities undertaken or to be undertaken by other organizations within the United Nations system.
Furthermore, the draft plan should review the activities already embarked upon. In order to arrive at a comprehensive system of planning and budget preparation, the medium-term plan should also state the human and financial resources to be mobilized through assessed or voluntary contributions for carrying out the plan. Drawing up plans without reference to the financial means necessary for their implementation is unrealistic. The plan will then merely be like the document now before us, a list of intentions, and will not help Member States to select priorities.
On the basis of a planned proposal, including an approximation of future costs under the Regular Budget, and from extra-budgetary resources, a final decision is in the hands of Member States. In considering a proposal, they have to state their priorities, indicating which programmes should be expanded, remain unchanged or be curtailed. In order to create more room for the necessary new initiatives or existing activities, programmes which can be considered as obsolete or marginally useful or ineffective should be curtailed or cut.
Indicative planning figures may result from medium-term plans thus scrutinized, which are generally acceptable and which mean they give value for money, and these figures are usually in real terms the parameters within which the following Programme of Work and Budget has to be prepared.
The above outline of medium-term planning seems to be generally acceptable. The Director-General is right in mentioning the long discussions within the United Nations system, but last year the General Assembly - by and large the same governments as represented here - adopted, by a consensus - and I stress by a consensus - paragraph 3 of Resolution 31/93. In that paragraph, the same outline for future medium-term plans is given as I have just presented to you. Since all our governments have accepted that part of Resolution 31/93 of last year's session of the General Assembly, my delegation proposes formally to the Conference the adoption of the system of medium-term planning in FAO, based on that Resolution.
It will be clear, from what I have said, that my delegation is not in agreement with the recommendation of the Programme Committee to incorporate the document on medium-term objectives into the Programme of Work and Budget. We prefer, like various other delegations, a separate document.
I shall now go into the substance of the medium-term objectives of FAO. I have already indicated that my delegation is in general in agreement with that part of the document, but this is partly caused by the list of intentions.
The basic objectives also mentioned in the Director-General's Introduction to the Programme of Work and Budget have been commented upon by my delegation, and in general it agrees with them. Also, some specific objectives are welcomed, as in paragraph 2.25 and 2.26, FAO's commitment at the country level, and in paragraphs 2.9 to 2.12 on policy advice.
My delegation, like others, has already made some substantive remarks meant for the medium term, during the discussions on the Programme of Work and Budget, and that is why I am confining myself to the structure and format of the document on medium-term objectives. I suggest implementing the recommendation adopted by almost all of us at the last session of the General Assembly on medium-term planning.
Mrs. M. PEKKARINEN (Finland): I have the honour of speaking on behalf of the four Nordic countries, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland, on the subject of women in rural development within the context of medium-term objectives.
Whenever dealing with economic and social development, especially within the context of agriculture and rural development, the vital role of women must be remembered. At the 1975 FAO Conference held during the International Women's Year, the problem of women in development was dealt with under a separate item and a special resolution on the role of women in rural development was unanimously adopted. Since then, more emphasis seems to have been devoted to integrating women in rural development. We also noted with great interest the positive attitude expressed by the Director-General, in his opening statement, in wishing to recruit more women from developing countries to participate in the work of FAO. We welcome this initiative and hope that the Member States will do their best to provide FAO with suitable candidates.
Also the World Food Conference in its Resolution 8, recognized that the rural women in the developing world account for at least 50 percent of food production. Thus, complete rural development of any country requires the maximum participation of women as well as men. We can say that raising agricultural production and improving nutritional standards is not realistic, without reckoning with the work impact of women. If this is not recognized, very slow progress indeed is to be expected. Therefore, the fact that half the world's population is not given the possibility of making full use of their capacity and capability must be seen as an obstacle to social and economic development. We believe that FAO can work hard in helping member countries to overcome this problem. It is a matter of great concern that almost 80 percent of the developing countries themselves have no programmes or institutions to involve rural women in development. The vulnerable position of women has become even more precarious through the modernization process and they have to a limited extent so far been reached by activities designed to improve the conditions of the rural poor. Therefore, we find it necessary that FAO should to a greater extent take into consideration the position of women when planning and implementing projects. As it is now, it is difficult to find training projects other than in areas of nutrition and home economics.
Several studies have clearly indicated the potential for mobilizing women's energies to increase both food and cash crop production. We feel that this potential is best reached through training and education programmes. Another way is by providing women with adequate equipment, to reduce the unnecessarily large amount of time spent on, for example, processing foods and fetching water. We believe that such programmes would best benefit rural communities as a whole, if both women and men, on equal terms, are involved. Home economics and nutrition are fields where not only women but the whole family can be activated. Thus, a sense of shared responsibility for the welfare of the family is developed. The goal of such programmes would at the same time be to reach the vast majority of rural people, who are yet regrettably isolated from the mainstream of national development efforts. We know that this is not done in a short time. Also we must keep in mind that the role of women in development is an integrated one. To separate women's projects from other rural development projects would be against the nature of the activities that women, especially in rural societies, are responsible for.
This does not go against increased and speedily added efforts to increase projects in nutrition and home economics. These are fields in which development, to a large extent, depends on women. Other possible projects that could be based on women's activities, such as handicrafts and art, are activities through which rural women could become economically more independent. Such programmes should not be difficult to achieve in many developing countries where traditional culture cultivated by women is of real value.
The involvement of women in the planning, decision making and implementation process is an important factor in any project concerning women. Not only does this give the necessary dimension to such projects, but serves to increase women's motivation and provide for their engagement in the projects. Motivation comes slowly if no shared responsibility is allowed for. Neither is greater effort to be expected from women, if the result obtained is not in their interest or aimed to help them. Finally, by including women in the planning stage, we avoid the mistake of trying to implement projects, which were drawn up with the needs of male farmers in mind, in countries where women constitute the largest part of the agricultural workers. Likewise, female extension staff is a guarantee for productive contacts with the rural women. It is not encouraging to find that only about 5 percent of the fellowships granted by FAO in 1976 were for women. Here, we look for greater efforts, in line with the many resolutions already adopted.
In conclusion, I would like to refer back to the resolution on the role of women in rural development adopted by the Eighteenth Conference. We propose that the aspirations reflected in that resolution in the future be more definitely indicated in medium-term programmes aiming at the overall improvement of rural family life.
Sra. Doña A.C. BERTA de ALBERTO (Argentina): El establecimiento de los objetivos a plazo medio cobra especial relevancia en el marco de la FAO sobre todo si tenemos en cuenta que uno de los elementos centrales de su labor, o sea la actividad en el campo de los productos básicos y el comercio, es vital para alcanzar los objetivos contenidos en las resoluciones de la 6a y 7a Asambleas Generales Extraordinarias de las Naciones Unidas. En este sentido y sin perjuicio de las tareas que sobre este tema se llevan a cabo en otros foros internacionales como la UNCTAD y GATT, etc. mi delegación desearía enfatizar y realzar el papel de FAO no solo como centro de convergencia de los resultados que se obtengan en el campo de los productos básicos sino también como núcleo generador de las políticas de instrumentación correspondientes que permitan alcanzar los objetivos del segundo decenio para el desarrollo.
Si bien en el párrafo 2.11 del documento C 77/23 se señalan como elementos centrales de la labor de la FAO su actividad en materia de productos básicos y comercio en cooperación con la UNCTAD, etc., creemos que es conveniente subrayar la necesidad de conservar a la FAO como caja de resonancia de los progresos y tropiezos que se registren en otros foros. De esta manera no procuramos otra cosa que el afianzamiento de la FAO como nucleo de coordinación de todos los aportes que se hacen a la comunidad internacional en los distintos aspectos y niveles del ámbito alimentario y agrícola, función que por otra parte se ha visto reforzada por la creación relativamente reciente de organismos como el CMA, el FIDA y el GCPAIA. Y es precisamente por su función tradicional de núcleo que el establecimiento de objetivos a plazo medio cobra especial relevancia en el seno de la FAO. Es ella, como ya dijimos anteriormente, quién debe articular las modalidades más idóneas para instrumentar los lineamientos y alcanzar los objetivos del segundo decenio para el desarrollo en el ámbito de la agricultura y la alimentación. En este sentido observamos dos modalidades altamente oficiosas: en primer lugar el Programa de Cooperación Técnica y en segundo lugar las perspectivas que se abren en FAO para la cooperación técnica entre países en desarrollo. El Programa de Cooperación Técnica agrega realmente una nueva y promisoria dimensión práctica a la FAO, orientada a la acción y a la labor en el terreno. En cuanto a las perspectivas de la CTPD, o sea, en cuanto a la cooperación técnica entre países en desarrollo como una de las vías de quemar etapas hacia las metas propuestas, según consta en el párrafo 4.5 del documento que nos ocupa, nos congratulamos que sea la FAO uno de los organismos más antigu os de la familia de las Naciones Unidas, la Organización que más rápidamente ha acogido y proyectado esta idea relativamente nueva de la cooperación técnica entre países en desarrollo.
En este sentido, mi delegación desea manifestar su más amplia adhesión a la iniciativa mencionada en el párrafo 4.5 acerca de la necesidad de aumentar la cooperación técnica y económica entre los propios países en desarrollo y la necesidad de que se concrete rápidamente el apoyo de la FAO y de la Comunidad Internacional, a lo que se hace referencia en el informe.
Asimismo queremos en especial reiterar la disposición de nuestro país de brindar en forma activa asistencia técnica a otros países en desarrollo, si bien este tema podrá ser ampliamente debatido al considerarse el punto 13 de la agenda de la Conferencia.
Por otro lado, mi delegación desea destacar algunos aspectos del documento C 77/23 que nos preocupa especialmente. En primer lugar, el análisis que el mismo hace en el nivel regional, se ha limitado básicamente a un diagnostico parcial de la coyuntura actual sin mayor relación con los objetivos y prioridades a plazo medio.
En el caso de América Latina, específicamente, consideramos que el párrafo 4.21 no solo no explícita los objetivos a mediano plazo, sino que tampoco contiene un desarrollo adecuado a la importancia del tema.
En segundo término, y con relación al estudio de las Naciones Unidas sobre la economía mundial en el año 2000, a lo que se hace referencia en el párrafo 4.21, queremos manifestar nuestra total coincidencia con lo expresado en el punto 2.141 del informe del 33° período de sesiones del Comité del Programa, documento CL 72/4, en el sentido de que la FAO debe evitar estudios teóricos a largo plazo e irrealistas cuyo alto costo limita en gran medida la labor de la organización en las actividades prácticas y de corto plazo que son mucho más promisorias y efectivas.
Al señalar esto no hacemos más que reiterar una de las orientaciones indicadas por la 18a Conferencia y el 69° y 71° Consejos, que por otra parte se refleja en las pautas sentadas por el Director General en su introducción al programa de Labores y Presupuesto y al documento C 77/23 sobre Objetivos a Plazo Medio.
En tercer lugar y con relación al capítulo de Pesca, o sea los párrafos 4.50 y 4.55, quisiéramos insistir sobre la necesidad de no despilfarrar recursos en programas teóricos y de resultados aleatorios o cuyo aprovechamiento cabal requiere luego inversi ones de tal magnitud que se encuentran mucho más allá de las posibilidades de los países en desarrollo.
Finalmente, y en lo que respecta a la necesidad y utilidad en sí del documento C 77/23 en su conjunto, mi delegación quisiera expresar que tiene ciertas dudas acerca del aporte que el mismo representa, sobre todo teniendo presente que la mayor parte del Programa de Labores y Presupuesto para el próximo bienio fue concebido y presentado en su contexto a plazo medio. Como ya lo ha señalado muy bien el delegado de Jordania y otros oradores que me han precedido esta tarde y esta mañana también, ello hace inevitable la superposición entre ambos documentos. Al respecto deseamos expresar que compartimos en buena medida la reflexión del Director General en el párrafo 3° de su introducción al documento C 77/23 acerca de la mayor viabilidad y utilidad de una planificación a plazo medio que tenga en cuenta la fórmula original del Comité Especial de los Catorce, o sea: “programas y presupuestos para dos años con estimaciones correlativas de recursos para dos bienios consecutivos, que constituyan indicadores, no compromisos, en lugar de disponer de documentos separados de carácter bienal y de plazo medio.
En este sentido también debemos recordar que se expidió asimismo el Comité del Programa, en su ultimo período de sesiones, al convenir en el párrafo 2.146 de su informe, que consta en el documento CL 72/4, que el documento C 77/23 constituye una base útil para los debates de la Conferencia pero que en el futuro deberá incorporarse al Programa de Labores y Presupuesto.
P.G. STAVNUM (Norway): I apologise for taking the floor once again, but this time I would like to
make a statement on behalf of the Norwegian delegation, and I will concentrate on forestry and fisheries.
In his general statement, the Minister of Agriculture of Norway mentioned the need for investments in forestry. He also indicated the Norwegian Forestry Act, which says that every forest owner has the obligation to invest in the forest a part of the sales value of wood. This forest levy is for the time being 10 percent. The actual investment in forestry is substantially higher than this minimum. A sufficient investment in forestry is imperative for several reasons. In some parts of the world, this seemed to be the only way to rescue land productivity against erosion, desert encroachment, etc. The need for wood for industrial purposes is rising and seems to be a prerequisite for general economic • development. This increase in demand cannot be met without extensive investments several decades before the wood is needed.
Wood is the raw material for a substantial part of energy production in the world. In this respect, it gives three times as much energy as hydroelectric power. The productive forest areas are pressed by urbanization, traditional agricultural activities, recreation and mismanagement.
Investments, including the introduction of appropriate technologies that make new forest areas accessible and are made in a form that fits the local socio-economic conditions will create employment for rural populations where alternatives scarcely exist. An extensive investment programme is therefore necessary not only in the future but now. As these investments tend to be of a long-term character, the problems involved often do not reach the proper priority in governmental plans.
For the reasons mentioned, it is important that funds are made available for investments in forestry.
On the national level this can probably be done by securing a fixed part of the income from forestry to be ploughed back to the forests.
Internationally, it should be studied which existing funds could be used for this purpose. IFAD would certainly here find effective ways of approaching its goal.
Investment plans should be worked out with a view to the broad role of forestry in society: fibre for the world; income for the country; employment for the rural population; energy and shelter.
The type of investment in trees and equipment must be carefully planned to fulfill its purpose.
To facilitate a meaningful discussion on what can be done by FAO to improve the situation in this field, I would suggest that the Secretariat prepares a document on “investment in forestry including forest industries“ for the next meeting in the Committee on Forestry.
The document should preferably include discussion on: (1) The form or type of investment taking care of all the aspects of forestry. The question of employment is often forgotten. (2) The amount of actual and desirable investment is important and might need analysis that include timber trends, estimates on a world basis. (3) Financial sources available on national and international level.
Turning to fisheries, Mr. Chairman, the Norwegian delegation has with interest noted the policy proposals set forth in the document C 77/23 provided by the Secretariat and welcomes this opportunity to discuss broad policy objectives and offer guidelines for the development of global fisheries in the medium term.
It is our view that perhaps the greatest task before us is to review possible means and mechanisms for a better utilization of available fish resources. During the general debate last week the Norwegian Minister of Agriculture had occasion to stress the importance we attach to this matter: how best to exploit the substantial but equally finite resources of the oceans to maximize the protein and nutritional benefit that can be derived from world fisheries.
An increased emphasis on research, designed to develop new fish products in furtherance of this objective is required. Indeed a solid basis in this field is already created and we have with particular satisfaction noted the emerging interest in, and acceptance of, the fishmeal (FPC-B) for human consumption, a product which we hope will become a useful protein supplement in future food aid.
It is further necessary to assure that the new structure of control and management of the living resources, as introduced in the emerging new regime of the sea, will come to make the desired and intended impact on the pattern of harvesting of the fish resources.
In particular, there is a need to assist the developing coastal states to enable them to take advantage of the opportunities offered to them in their exercise of jurisdiction over substantial living resources situated off their coasts. In this work we feel that FAO itself should play a prominent part; both through the strengthening of its own regional fisheries bodies and further expansion of ongoing FAO projects, and also in serving the function of an intermediary between developing and developed coastal states to facilitate contact and cooperation between nations whose fisheries are presently at widely different levels of development. In particular the following modes of cooperation and development assistance should be encouraged: (1) transfer of appropriate technology, taking full account of prevailing conditions and pecularities in recipient countries. (2) Donor countries should make available their accumulated experience and expertise, for example through increased exchange of scientific and administrative personnel. (3) Help develop the general infrastructure of the fishery industry. (4) Assist in the formulation of general development plans.
All this is to be looked at as general efforts designed to promote an indigenious fishery capacity and thus lay the foundation for a long-term self-sustained growth process in these countries.
We thus feel that a main priority in the years to come will be to focus our efforts, either through bilateral agreements or under the auspices of FAO itself on the development of fisheries in the emerging economic zones of developing coastal states.
We must, however, be prepared, though this no doubt will be a venture to be viewed in a long-term context, to seek to develop presently unutilized unconventional resources, possibly under international auspices and similarly devise means to assure an equitable and effective distribution of such resources.
K. ITANO (Japan): I would like to make a very brief comment on the item we are now discussing. My delegation is in agreement in general with the Medium-Term Project priorities put down in the document C 77/23. Nevertheless, we feel that in view of the limited resources setting up of overall priorities sometimes leads to no priority. Therefore, it is desirable to identify top priorities so as to enable the Organization to carry out its objectives in an integrated manner. In this connection, my delegation is of the view that one of the top priorities should be promotion of integrated rural development by drawing on all-round in-depth studies related for the production, distribution and marketing, and also on food and agriculture information collected under FAO initiative all over the world. In this context, we also would like to stress the need of further improvement of global food and agriculture information systems.
S.S. MAHDI (India): We would also join the other speakers in expressing our appreciation for the document, within the limitations that were imposed by the directions of the last Conference. At the same time, Mr. Chairman, after having a look at this paper our delegation wonders whether we should continue with this document or not. When I make this observation I do not mean any criticism of the people who are involved in the preparation of this document. In fact, when I say this it is a comment of self criticism in the sense that so far unfortunately we as a collective body here, as the governing body of FAO, have not been able to make up our mind as to what we want we want in terms of medium-term objectives or plans. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, and I apologise very profusely, for saying this, I find myself in a very baffling situation. What are we discussing here? Are we discussing the Programme of Work and Budget all over again? Are we discussing a list of intentions? Are we dealing with some kind of a policy direction to the FAO Secretariat, or are we having a purely academic discussion? Mr. Chairman, these are not rhetorical questions. I know whatever we decide here has implications for the resources of the Organization, both in terms of money and personnel. In this confusing situation I cannot help but congratulate the small band of officers who have put together this document. So whatever I will say about this document will not so much be directed to the effort that has been made, but to the lack of clarity of thinking and cohesion and lack of unanimity consenses which has been very apparent in this forum in the past, and continues to be so even today.
Mr. Chairman, if you look at the document it is a brief paper of 18 pages. Three pages are devoted to the Introduction; three to the background of medium-term programming in FAO, as well as in the United Nations system; three pages to the reproduction of the various manifestos we have issued in the various regional conferences; that covers almost half the document. In the rest of the nine pages we have FAO's priorities and programmes for the medium term. And what does this medium term mean? That is also not very clear. Whether it is six years,ten years, end of the centry, next century. These things are not very clear. Now, within nine pages we want to discuss, quantificate and give guidance to FAO's Secretariat about what the Medium-Term Programme and Objectives should be. Mr. Chairman, it is not possible.
My delegation would be interested in a particular aspect. The other delegations may be interested in some other aspect, and then we again have a shoppire list. So I would very much appeal to you that if it is not possible to resolve the question of the future shape of this document in this Commission, let us make a recommendation that there should be some kind of a Working Group of this Conference which should go into the question a little more deeply and decide now once and for all, because I cannot say that, but at least once for the next five to six years, as to what kind of thing we want.
Whether we want this list of intentions, or we want a medium-term programme as is being prepared in some other organizations of the United Nations system, or we want to do away with this document and have only some indications of the medium-term developments in the Programme of Work and Budget.
I fully realize that in a debate like this it is not possible to resolve these questions, and therefore I make a very specific suggestion for your consideration, Sir, and for the consideration of other delegates present here: that we should go into this question deeply. There is no point in continuing
an activity the purpose of which is not well-defined. We come here; we look at the documents; we express our appreciation; we make a few comments; we comment on certain programmes - and that is all. All this gives a sense of unreality which we could well avoid.
I am sorry that my general observations about the document were a little lengthy. Now I would like to come to a few specific aspects.
The question of quantification has been raised from this floor. I fully appreciate the point of view of those who are not in favour of quantification, but at the same time I would like to say that we should not be too much afraid of quantification, especially when we know that quantification in a medium-term document does not mean commitment - and even if it did, why should we be so afraid of it? After all, we have a common objective, and we want to help and assist the developing countries in their development.
Therefore, I shall support the arguments which have been made from this floor for some kind of quantification of the medium-term programmes. Without quantification, the whole thing remains too amorphous, too general. Without that, such documents would be suitable material for academic seminars and not for decision-making government bodies.
The next question I would like to raise is that of coordination. I entirely agree with the comments of the Director-General in his Introduction, that the attempts in the United Nations system to coordinate the programmes of work and budget of different agencies at the programme, sub-programme and lower level, are fraught with difficulty. The only way out is to have a proper medium-term programme and document, where this kind of harmonization can take place. If this does not happen, I am afraid it will be unreasonable to demand that the FAO Secretariat, or any other secretariat, should coordinate its activities with other parts of the United Nations System. I emphasize that it is a very essential task, but we cannot do it on the basis of this kind of document that we have in our hands today.
As I have already said, when we look at the document we express our interest in this or that programme. In conformity with doctrine, I am also constrained to comment on two aspects which are missing from this document.
These observations are related to paragraph 4.3 which deals with the Lima Declaration and Plan of Action. This is a goal which has been set by the international community for the industrialization of the developing countries. This example again illustrates my point. In 4.3, we see the essence of a certain goal which has been set by the international community. After that, when we try to see what role FAO is going to play in achieving that goal, we can hardly find anything. This is an aspect which I would like to emphasize: that FAO should play its role in the field of industrialization insofar as it relates to its activities, which will be mainly agricultural industries; and they should find proper reflection in any medium-term programme that we make in future.
Secondly, I find that the document merely deals with the problems of production. But we are a little concerned that the subject of nutrition per se has been ignored. The question is, how can FAO claim to assist in tackling the colossal problem of malnutrition if, besides production, it does not have a medium-term programme on nutrition. This problem has been referred to by other delegations, and I would like to join my voice to theirs. As you know, the second session of the ad hoc Committee on Food and Nutrition will be held in Rome in March 1978, and it will give consideration to the subject. My delegation would like to state that it attaches great importance to those nutritional activities which have an impact on the hungry and malnourished, particularly in the rural areas, and which would affect our food supplies as well as consumers in rural and urban areas. In this context, I would name the activities which deserve to receive additional assistance in the medium term: these are nutrition surveillance, nutrition intervention such as feeding programmes, training and food control. Once again, we would like to emphasize the role of national institutions from developing countries in all these areas.
Mr. Chairman, if you have formed the impression that I have been rather negative, I would like to balance this by saying that in the document I find a very interesting new line of thought, which we would like to encourage. That deals with power and energy, and is described in paragraphs 4.37 and 4.38. We feel that this work deserves the greatest consideration by FAO, and any activity in this regard in the short and medium term will have our full support.
J.M. SCOULAR (United Kingdom): I am grateful for the opportunity of following immediately upon the delegate of India, who spoke so eloquently about the problem of the position of this particular paper in our deliberations, because it is a difficult question. As the Director-General pointed out in his Introduction, there is bound to be some overlap between documents such as the Programme of Work and Budget, Medium-Term Objectives, and so on; and I think we must accept that this kind of duplication will be part of our work.
Indeed, in many ways it seems to me that we have approached major problems in this Conference from a variety of angles, and have looked at them afresh from each of those angles. That said, I must say that we do feel in the United Kingdom that there is a place for a paper of this kind, which gives us an overview of the future as seen by the Secretariat - who are, I think, to be congratulated on the quality of the paper which they have produced.
Like the United States delegation, we were a little disappointed that priorities were not really assessed in any detail, although we accept that this is difficult to do when one is looking well into the future without the benefit of financial quantification of any of the activities proposed. Frankly, I again feel for the delegate of India here, and we would have wished for some quantification if this were possible. But we think it is not possible and that the present document gives us the best compromise that we can have. Within the limitations stated we think that it provides a very adequate framework for discussion of FAO's priority areas, provided that it is read, as intended, in conjuction with all the other major papers - the Programme of Work and Budget, the Review of Field Programmes, and the State of Food and Agriculture. The paper is an improvement on its predecessors; it is briefer, it has a very practical approach, especially in its qualification of the organizational side of FAO's activities.
We also support the emphasis given both here and in other papers to continuous evaluation, of both the regular programme and projects, and we welcome the Director-General's clear statement that such reviews of all activities will be carried out progressively in the future. In short, we think this is a good paper with limited aims which it achieves very well.
If I may now turn to a discussion of some of the contents of the paper, particularly section IV, which deals with medium-term priorities.
Again, we find the sector on major technical and economic problems a little sad in a way, in that the problems covered are so well known to all of us and seem so intractable. We feel also that the measures to be taken which can give physical increases in yields are largely known, and that to some extent the problem is one of applying the knowledge already gained. There has been great advance in research in agriculture in recent years, but the application of that research has lagged far behind.
There are one or two specific points under the heading of economic problems. In particular, improved technology is obviously a necessity, but it is not entirely a question of inputs alone to improve technology. A most important item also is a higher standard of husbandry. including timely sowing of seed, appropriate seed rates in the soil, weeding, and care of the crop. These things alone, without technological input, can do much for yields at the cost of a little more - and perhaps a little more skilled-work in conjunction with inputs from outside, which are essential if full benefit is to be obtained.
On seeds, which we regard as a very vital element in the development of agriculture, we take the view that without an organization or organizations capable of multiplying and supplying new seeds to the farmers, plant breeding is merely an interesting academic exercise. Indeed, we feel so strongly about this, that in 1976 the United Kingdom sponsored the setting up of a post-graduate course in seed technology, which is now training both United Kingdom and overseas workers in this vital field.
But it seems to me that, when we come down to it, the vital problem underlying all of this - the problem about which we have talked in many ways - is the farmers' attitude to change.
So long as all these new inputs, new education and new technology are merely a matter of teaching the farmer without consideration of the reasons which leave him in the situation which he finds himself today, we shall fail to get real improvement. This I think is now well understood, but it needs to be said because it is, I think, the vital point underlining all our deliberations. The farmer needs to be assured of minimum risk in any new development because his resources are slender and he cannot afford to fail. He must have a market for any increased produce which will not disappear as soon as he has it. He also needs a market in which he can buy the goods he needs for a better life with the cash he earns.
We must, I think, see the problems of the farmer and the society in which he lives, and these problems vary from place to place and from time to time, and perhaps a new species of extension work is required into this. We have here a problem of reeducation which affects both the teacher and the taught, and unless we can get to that level I think progress will be slow.
I am encouraged by the signs in this gathering and in the other Councils I have attended that this problem is very much recognized and the need for a true balance of interest between the farmer in the field, the new technology which can be applied to him, and the teachers who come to help him is really appreciated.
N.E. NORCOTT (Canada): Mr. Chairman, in our view document C 77/23 as far as it goes is a very useful document which sets out in broad terms the medium-term objectives of FAO, and we believe in that sense it is a good paper. However, we believe, as other delegates have mentioned, that an appropriate way to deal with the issue of medium-term objectives and plans still needs to be addressed by FAO. We recognize that the document is not a medium-term plan and that it was not meant to be one. However, it is the view of our delegation that the establishment of medium-term objectives is certainly one of the most crucial steps in the establishment of a medium-term plan.
Medium-term objectives are the basis on which programmes can be developed, and unless the objectives are set out in fairly precise terms it is extremely difficult not only to devise the most effective policy responses, but also to evaluate the efficiency and effective result programmes. While the document does provide information on areas for future action by the FAO, the objectives which it sets out to identify are phrased in such general terms that it is difficult to make effective use of the document for planning purposes.
C 77/23 represents an honest attempt to provide medium-term objectives. We feel it does not go far enough. Specifically if the objectives are to be of real value to Member States and the Secretariat it will have to be far more specific. Our delegation believes that the time has come for FAO to expand activities in this area beyond the mere establishment of broad general objectives. Medium-term objectives are not an end in themselves but only a means to develop the response to perceive needs. We think that FAO should strive to produce a true medium-term plan which includes specific medium-term objectives quantified where possible, details of priorities, timing of activities and an indication of the resource, requirement and allocations between programmes. Such a document would not only make it far easier to relate programme outputs to the objectives and priorities of the Organization, but would also allow the Organization to make the most efficient use of the resources available to it.
We recognize the development of a medium-term plan is not an easy task, but we think it is an essential one, specifically at the time in which we find ourselves. We would suggest over the next biennium the Director-General, in cooperation with the Council and other bodies such as Committee on Forestry, Fisheries, Agriculture, Programme and Finance Committee, develop a format for mid-term planning and begin the development of specific mid-term objectives which could be discussed at the next Conference.
Turning to the priorities outlined in the document, Mr. Chairman, I can say in our view the priorities listed are sound and we can support them. We have already had rather lengthy discussions on the Programme of Work and Budget, Review of Field Programmes and other agenda items, and we feel the discussions that have taken place on the questions of investments, food reserves, food security, reduction of food losses, education and training, international and agricultural adjustments; we believe that the discussions that have taken place on these matters certainly highlight the issues and long-term or medium-term objectives for the Organization, and we will be discussing fisheries later this week.
I would add, however, that in the forestry area the processes of desertification and agriculture are in our view destroying forests on a major scale, and this problem should be reflected and examined in FAO's medium-term planning.
Many of the other points I think I need not go into in any detail. I think that we would support the suggestions that have been made by several other delegations, that in view of the importance of this topic to the Organization a separate document on these medium-term objectives is essential, and naturally this will require an even closer relationship between this document and the Programme of Work and Budget and other related documents.
H. AL-AKHRAS (Syria) (interpretation from Arabic): Mr. Chairman, allow me to express my gratitude for what was said by the distinguished representative of India. Firstly, because he has saved me the need to make a lengthy statement and he has saved a lot of time for this Committee. Secondly, also because what he has suggested is in the view of my delegation an important turning point and a positive one in our discussion, but I would like to add a few remarks to what has been already said by the distinguished representative of India.
The increase of agricultural production, particularly food production, the reduction of food losses and the improvement of nutritional standards, all these remain long-term objectives and continous ones, as long as there is a problem of hunger and food shortage in the world, but the stage of agricultural development differs from one country to another, and therefore I believe that each country has its own objectives and its own priorities in the medium-term level, and each of course vary in accordance with the economic development and criteria set by each country. Secondly, they also vary in accordance with the system of the values, ideals and habits akin to the society of each country. No country can know the priorities of another country better than this latter country does.
Mr. Chairman, I share with my other colleagues the remarks concerning the importance of laying down most specific medium-term objectives which should be helpful to the Organization in assisting the different member countries of the Organization and helping them to carry out their own priorities. If it is necessary to do so my delegation suggests either that this should be carried out in a document which should be discussed before we discuss the document on the Programme of Work and Budget, or otherwise there would be no point in issuing the document to be discussed after discussing the document on the Programme of Work and Budget, or that it should constitute the first part of the document concerning Programme of Work and Budget.
Mme, E. MAMMONE LENER (Italie): La delegation italienne adresse ses félicitations aux auteurs du document traitant des objectifs à moyen terme. Plus que tout autre, ce document permet d'apprécier l'activité que la FAO exerce jour après jour pour rester fidèle à celui qui est son objectif institutionnel, à savoir permettre que tous les êtres humains, dans un avenir plus ou moins proche, puissent manger à leur faim.
La délégation italienne trouve que la formule actuelle du programme à moyen terme est satisfaisante. Elle permet de jeter quelque lueur sur ce que sera le développement futur de l'activité de l'Organisation.
Nous voudrions manifester aussi de façon particulière l'intérêt que nous prenons à participer au réseau d'instituts de recherches qui a été mis en place pour faciliter les échanges d'informations et les transferts de techniques entre pays ayant des problèmes communs, en particulier pour l'Europe, en vue de pouvoir faire face aux problèmes que posent les calamités naturelles dues à la détérioration géologique du pays.
En ce qui concerne les priorités, la délégation italienne voudrait insister pour que la FAO renforce la recherche dans les secteurs de l'énergie et de la mécanisation dont il est question aux paragraphes 4.37 et 4.38.
Pour répondre à l'invitation du Président, je vais arrêter ici mon intervention, mais je dois dire que chacun connaît les soucis que fait naître l'utilisation rationnelle des ressources d'énergie disponibles, et cela suffit à expliquer notre insistance pour que ce domaine soit toujours suivi et placé au centre des préoccupations de l'Organisation.
H. BAEYENS (Belgique): Je vais me borner à deux ou trois observations assez brèves. Ma délégation partage la préoccupation du Directeur général telle qu'il l'expose dans son introduction, à savoir: ne pas disperser une grande partie des ressources de l'Organisation dans des études de planification. Les plans n'ont jamais nourri personne si ce n'est les planificateurs, mais alors aux dépens des intéressés.
Il est clair également que le programme de travail et budget se place nécessairement dans un contexte à moyen terme, parce qu'il est inconcevable qu'une organisation élabore un budget tout à fait indépendant de ce qui précède et de ce qui suit. Ceci pour dire que nous estimons qu'il ne faut pas exagérer l'importance de cette planification.
Cela dit, je voudrais tout de même joindre mes remarques à celles d'un de mes prédécesseurs - en l'occurrence le délégué des Pays-Bas - qui a suggéré qu'on tienne compte à l'avenir de la résolution 51/93 de l'Assemblée Générale des Nations Unies, qui fait aux pays membres cette recommandation en matière de moyen terme.
Quant au document lui-même, qu'il me soit permis de faire une ou deux observations: d'abord, l'objectif à moyen terme comme l'objectif à long terme de la FAO est d'essayer de donner à manger aux populations du monde. Et le document contient toute une enumeration des moyens que la FAO met en oeuvre pour tenter d'atteindre cet objectif. Nous sommes généralement d'accord sur les moyens qui nous sont proposés, et que nous connaissons d'ailleurs fort bien, ce sont ceux qui sont actuellement déjà appliqués. Peut-être certains accents peuvent-ils être déplacés; les orateurs précédents en ont relevé certains. Je pense, par exemple, à la nutrition.
Ma délégation voudrait également mettre le Secrétariat en garde au sujet de l'importance attachée à la recherche. Nous estimons que la recherche doit être essentiellement laissée aux instituts régionaux et autres et que le rôle de la FAO doit être surtout de transférer le résultat de la recherche vers le terrain.
Je dois relever un dernier point qui figure dans la conclusion du document. Ma délégation n'est pas tout à fait du même avis que le Secrétariat en ce qui concerne les paragraphes 5.5 et 5.6. Le document dit: “Il semble peu probable que les fonds du PNUD et des fonds fiduciaires affectés à la FAO pour l'exécution de projets augmentent plus rapidement que les ressources totales disponibles pour l'aide au développement “. Ma délégation ne partage pas cette préoccupation. Elle ne partage pas non plus la conclusion que la FAO en tire au paragraphe 5.6 à savoir que ''il sera certainement nécessaire que les ressources mises à la disposition du programme ordinaire augmentent à un rythme régulier, et même exceptionnel''.
R. PASQUIER (Suisse): Les perspectives à moyen terme présentées par le Directeur général sont, à notre avis, conformes à l'esprit des délibérations de la Conférence de 1975. Le progrès en matière d'agriculture et d'alimentation dépend d'un ensemble de facteurs, d'un ensemble d'actions sectorielles complémentaires, qui doivent être menées de front, chacune pouvant devenir un élément imitatif. C'est pourquoi nous ne sommes pas surpris que le Directeur général n'ait pas tenté de les ranger dans un ordre de priorité. Nous sommes d'avis que dans bien des pays l'élément crucial du progrès en question est la commercialisation rationnelle des produits, fondée sur des prix adéquats à la production d'une part et à la consommation d'autre part. Le Directeur général mentionne ce facteur au paragraphe 4.26. Nous souhaitons que la FAO y donne l'importance voulue dans son programme d'action, en accord avec les pays intéressés.
En ce qui concerne la présentation, il nous semble justifié d'élaborer pour la prochaine Conférence un bref document traitant à nouveau de manière spécifique des objectifs à moyen terme.
0. MBURU (Kenya): My only reason for intervening at this stage is to express my delegation's support for the idea of having a document on the medium-term objectives. A few delegations have condemned the idea of such a document, some have condemned it in very strong language, and I thought in case the Secretariat is in a dilemma as to whether they should produce the document or not, I should express my delegation's support for it. I agree with those who have expressed the opinion that there is certainly room for a separate document on medium-term objectives.
My final comment is to support the proposal by the Norwegian delegation that, in connection with investment in forestry, the Secretariat should write a paper for discussion at the next Committee on Forestry meeting. We think that investment in forestry is a crucial issue, involving, as it does, employment and development in the rural areas and the introduction of industry, therefore increasing the value added to forest products, as well as the transfer of technology.
E.M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme and Budget): When the debate began rather late this morning, just before lunch, there was a certain reluctance to speak, and I was reminded of the two farmers sitting outside a pub in an English village. They sat there in quietness for some time, then one said to the other, “I think that is a bull over there “. A quarter of an hour later, the other one said, “No, it's a cow “. There was then silence for half an hour, the first one got up and started to go and the second one said, “Are you going home?“ He said, “Yes, too much argument here “.
After lunch, it proved to be rather different, and in fact, we have had 21 speakers, by my reckoning, fourteen from what one might call developed countries; I am not sure whether I have counted the Nordic countries twice or three times, because they have used a very interesting device of having one speaker for all or some of them on different subjects. This greatly facilitated our proceedings, although I am not quite sure to whom I am replying. There were seven speakers from developing countries.
I think everybody, in the end, including those who spoke in the morning, made a very thoughtful, critical but constructively critical debate, which has been, on the whole, a more rewarding experience than previous debates on this item, although, as in the past, more has been said about the format of the document than about the substance. However, I would like to begin with the substance.
On the question of priorities, it was pointed out by most delegations that they had said a good deal in the debates, whether in Plenary, or through their Ministers, or in the debate on the Programme of Work and Budget, on the priorities. But some gave interesting indications about priorities in broad terms over a medium-term period, and we shall study the verbatims and refer these comments to the substantive departments and divisions to take into account from now on.
One of the more immediate occasions on which they will have to take them into account is in the technical committees which are Committees of the Whole. The technical committees are the Committee on Agriculture, the Committee on Fisheries and the CCP. Those three consider medium-term documents. So I think this was rather missing from the debate, because it is there that a great deal of the hard work on deciding what are medium-term priorities is done, and is then reflected in these documents which you receive at the Conference.
In that connection, I would say that the suggestion was made about investment in forestry. This will be referred to the appropriate people, because there is a procedure, in consultation with the chairmen of those committees, for determining the agenda. So we shall look into that in a constructive way.
A number of delegations spoke about the omission of a reference to nutrition. In hindsight, I would agree with them that this is a missing section which ought to have been here, but I would like to come back to that point in a minute because it was also said by someone that they were disappointed not to find a separate section on the prevention of food losses. The problem here is that not only are these subjects discussed in the general debate, but some of them are discussed in Commission I. There is a whole document, and a great deal of trouble over a resolution going on in Commission I and in contact groups.
Would it really have made any difference to have a separate section on food losses also in this document? Nutrition or any other subjects, let us say the Law of the Sea, are being discussed in the general debate as a separate item in Commission I, in the Programme of Work and Budget, in Review of Field Programmes, in Medium-Term Objectives, in the State of Food and Agriculture. It is a lack of documentation here or is it something else?
India made some very forceful remarks on the dilemma with which delegates are presented because of this, and that I will deal with, if I may, when I come back to the question of format.
What I am doing at the moment is to indicate that if I do not discuss all priorities, it is because that we really do not need to do that at this stage, especially as we will take note of the remarks made by some delegations, and being meticulous bureaucrats, you can be sure that we will compare the rankings that were given by some delegations, if only to prove that they were different.
Now, on nutrition, I would like to come back and say that whilst it was an omission, which I admit and apologize for, not to have had a section in this paper. In fact what delegates said about the substance of what FAO should be doing is spelt out word for word in the Programme of Work and Budget, in the Medium-Term Section beginning the chapter, and in the programme on nutrition itself. So there is not any difference on substance, it is just a question of where to look for it, and we ought to be making things easier for delegates, not harder. So I am not quarreling with the criticism that it was not easy to find it.
On women in rural development, we had some very constructive and clear thinking actually provided by two feminime delegates, only one of whom is here at the moment. There is only one correction I would like to make to what Finland said. She referred to a remark made by the Director-General in his openning address about more women candidates in FAO. He did not in fact say from developing countries, he said from Member States.
On Planning I really have nothing I can add to what was said in the Director-General's Introduction on the top of Page VI of the document itself, and as regards Planning and Nutrition, I remember distinctly going through quite a lot of uncomfortable moments in this room two years ago when people criticized the very large increase in the budget for nutrition planning and for planning in general, and I remember the Council subsequently endorsing the Director-General's proposals for striking out most of the work or resources on the Regular Programme for Country Perspective Studies. We stand ready to help countries with Country Perspective Studies if they ask for them and if there are resources outside the Regular Programme for them, so the position is consistent with what the governing bodies have decided.
The only other question on priorities I would like to comment on is the one on basic needs, which figured largely in a number of speeches, particularly that of the USA. At first I thought that the USA was criticising an omission in the document but then I realised that the USA was agreeing with what the Director-General had to say in his opening address in the Plenary and in this document.
If you read his Introduction, you will find that a great part of the emphasis is precisely on the rural poor, on their having income and their having employment, on their having basic needs, in fact. This figures in the penultimate paragraph on the bottom of the Introduction, VI in the English text of the document, but he also added a thought there which we in the Secretariat keep in our minds very much, that we must be careful not to allow this concern with certain countries that we should concentrate on certain aspects of basic needs which however well-intended and however welcome generally might seem rather disproportionate or paternalistic in their approach. It is for the developing countries themselves to say what their basic needs are and to devise their plans to deal with them. It is for the Organization to assist them, on request, using national institutions as far as possible, rather than to try and dictate to them what they should be doing in these fields, so with that qualification, I was relieved to find that there was no real difference at all.
Turning now to the question of format, we have had a whole range of opinion embracing the extremes from the Netherlands and Belgium, on the one hand, to those like Jordan - not present - who supported the Programme Committee view on the need or otherwise of a medium-term document and what kind of document it should be.
I myself do not remember what it was that the General Assembly Resolution said exactly, and I doubt whether many delegations present are in possession of that Resolution, but it applied, as far as I remember, to the United Nations only. The last medium-term plan of the United Nations for 1978–81 consists of 510 pages in two volumes and I cannot really see you demanding the Director-General to go back on a policy which he has put forward to you and you have adopted for dispensing, forever if possible, with such a waste of paper for such a purpose.
The first volume of this 510 pages contains narrative statements for major programmes, sub-programmes and so forth. We have been through all that, and it was dismissed as a useless shopping list in FAO.
The second volume contains summary data on the current budget by major programmes showing growth rates for major programmes over the previous biennium, which you have, presenting various kinds of assessments and assumptions, but in this document no attempt is made to project absolute levels of resources and no indications are provided in order of priority.
I do not want anything I say on the subject about what other organizations do to be taken as criticism of what they do, because if that is what their governing bodies want, that is what they should do. I would only say that we in FAO have been through most of these stages that other people are developing. We have been through the narratives which we dismissed as shopping lists, we have been through the process of grading major programmes A, B, C, D, delete E, etc, and we have come to this stage because none of those exercises proved to be satisfactory. I see the distinguished delegate of Ireland nodding. I remember that when we had A, B, C, D, E, he or his colleague at that time declared that even if we had spent the whole week and had documents reaching to the ceiling, we still would not reach agreement as to what was A, B, C, D, E, etc. It was better not to do that. We have even had a Working Group of the Conference to sit down and try and determine what they really wanted. We had that about two biennia ago, and what they determined they wanted was broadly what we have now.
So I turn rather for inspiration if I want it - I am talking about inspiration, not about your instructions, Mr. Chairman, which will come later - to what I think was the majority view and I must avoid abrogating your task of summing up the debate, but it seemed to me that most people said, “let us have a separate document,“ and then they made suggestions about how to improve that document without going into quantification or at least without going into a degree of quantification such as I have just suggested, either in dollars or in percentages or otherwise, but some of indication which
would provide some kind of realistic framework for medium-term consideration, and I think that was more or less the majority view, but we shall see when you sum up and when the Drafting Committee come back and the Commissions speak on it. And I think this kind of majority view, if it is that, was initiated by Denmark, who was one of the early speakers, and then supported later. If I may say so, when Denmark began he said, “I ara going to make my comments in two parts, first on the format and then on behalf of the Nordic countries and then on priorities on behalf of Denmark “, and at that moment my heart sank a bit because I remembered the story of Rossini, the famous Italian composer, who was holding auditions for young aspiring composers, and they had to present to him two pieces and he would adjudicate which was better, and in one case the aspiring composer played his first piece on the piano and Rossini said, “That's enough, you can go “, and he said, “But I haven't played the second part “. Rossini said, “I've heard enough. I'm sure the second part is better. “
But in fact, it was not like that, and both parts were good, if I may say so. Now, I do not know which part was better, but anyway he began this process and he made a number of constructive suggestions about how we might continue with a separate document but do better next time, and this was followed by other delegations, so if that is the judgement of the Commission and it is adopted by the Conference, I am sure the Director-General will heed it and will give me instructions accordingly for the next occasion.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. West, for your very detailed answers to the questions and comments. I do not know wheter you have facilitated my task for making a summing up. I“ think you have given as good a summing up as any chairman could do.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Fed. Rep. of) (interpretation from German): just a point of clarification on what was said by Mr. West. It was my delegation which stated that we were a bit surprised that for the reduction of food losses there was no specific chapter in this document. This is perfectly true; we did say so but we did not say how long this chapter should have been. What we would have hoped was that food losses should have been at the beginning of the section dealing with major technical and economic problems, or that we might have found this subject even before we come to this section. In doing so, it would have stated quite clearly that priority had been given to this matter. We thought that there should have been a clearer statement of priorities, and I hope that this will be possible in future. This at least I think was the desire that was visible in this debate.
There was no lack of documentation about food losses. We have got documentation on this subject elsewhere. It was its priority position that we had in mind, and I think that in this we agree with a number of speakers this afternoon.
S.S. MAHDI (India): Mr. Chairman, before you come to the summary of the debate, I would like to eleborate a little on what I said and this for the simple reason that at the end of the debate and the reply we have received from the Secretariat, we are back to square one so far as this document on medium-term planning is concerned. It is still not clear to me when we assemble here for the next Conference, when I may or may not be here, what will we be discussing? Will we be discussing a similar type of document? Will we be having by then some kind of a medium-term plan, will it contain some quantification or what?
That is why I made my rather pragmatic suggestion that the Commission may consider recommending the creation of a small ad hoc Working Group consisting of certain governments. We should go into the question a little deeper and then come out with recommendations, otherwise we will be faced with the same dilemma and the same situation which we were faced with today, and this will happen year after year, and biennium after biennium.
CHAIRMAN: Any other comments? If not, I will make an attempt to very, very briefly sum up our discussions. I think I can be extremely brief since Mr. West has just given you such a detailed, I should say, summing up of our discussion himself. As far as I can see, there seems to be general agreement in this room on the importance and the need for defining Medium-Term Objectives for FAO, and many delegations have commended FAO on their efforts in this field and I believe one delegate even said FAO was a pioneer within the United Nations system with regard to this. There have, of course, been disagreements on whether to have a separate document or not. Some thought that it should be included in the Programme of Work and Budget, but several others thought it would be better to have a separate document as now. One delegate, or two delegates, termed this as the need for an overview for the future. I think the main point that was brought out from those who wanted to have
a separate document was really to ensure thorough discussion on the Medium-Term Objectives. I have the feeling that was really the main point. Some agreed it would not be possible to quantify Medium-Term Objectives, but others thought that at least an attempt should be made. Some delegations thought that FAO should expand upon just drawing up Medium-Term Objectives and look even a bit further and strive at medium-term planning, and as far as I understood it was suggested one should start with a mid-term plan. One delegation suggested that FAO should adopt the system of medium-term planning as agreed upon in UN Resolution 3193 of last year, but Mr. West has already commented on that. Otherwise I think it was general support for FAO's role and priorities as presented in the document C 77/23, and I shall not try to give you an account of all the activitivities to which the various delegations attached importance and felt that FAO should concentrate on in the future, in the medium-term. I should just mention a few points which were brought out during the debate, and which perhaps deserve special attention. One of these was the FAO's role in combating hunger and malnutrition, and it was stated that freedom from hunger should be FAO's main concern. Another point was concentration on the rural poor in the poorest food deficit countries, and on the projects which have a direct and immediate impact. Other points were increased food production and reduction of food losses. Some delegates also mentioned especially TCDC, which they thought FAO should give special attention to in future. There were, of course, some other items, or some other subjects that were the subject of special intervention, like nutrition and the role of women. As far as nutrition is concerned, it was pointed out that FAO had a special responsibility in this area, and referred to the FAO Constitution, and also that FAO itself had declared its preparedness to play an active role in this field. It was pointed out that this was not taken quite care of in the paper on Medium-Term Objectives and they hoped that this would be done in the future. As far as the role of women is concerned, it was said that FAO should to a greater extent take into consideration the position of women planning and implementing projects, and they pointed out especially important was training and education programmes.
As far as forestry is concerned, there was a concrete proposal by one delegation, supported by another delegation, that the Committee on Forestry should make a special paper on this.
Distinguished Delegates, I think this is as much as I can do to sum up our discussions. There were, of course, many, many other points that were brought out, but it would go too far, I think, to comment on these, and also Mr. West has already done so, so I think I will stop here.
B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is, in fact, I will not say a point of order but just that we understand, Sir, that you felt obliged to slightly change the order of business of the day in taking Medium-Term Objectives first. It happens many of the developing countries were prepared the other way around and, therefore, I would suggest, Sir, we have some flexibility in case any member has compelling points to make on Medium-Term Objectives. On such an important thing, I hope that you will alllow us to make very brief observations. I must say if at all I would make it extremely brief tomorrow. If members have on Medium-Term Objectives some points to make, would you allow them to make them tomorrow.
CHAIRMAN: Since, as you say, the delegate of Brazil, we had to change our timetable rather suddenly we have to allow for that.
A. Z. M. SHAMSUL ALAM (Bangladesh): I wanted to be sure there would be the opportunity to express views on the Medium-Term Objectives tomorrow also. In that case, we may take a few minutes of time.
CHAIRMAN: The delegate from Bangladesh, this point was raised by the delegate from Brazil. I understood there might be a few who wanted to speak on this item tomorrow. We would much prefer if you would hand your statement to us and we could include it in the Verbatim Record, but I do not feel in a position to refuse your demand because we have changed the timetable for the day, and I think if you insist you should have the right to do so.
R.I.TORRAS (Cuba): Mi delegación quiere apoyar lo que ha sido planteado por la delegación de Brasil y por la de Bangladesh. No creemos que el tema de los objetivos a plazo medio, que es un tema muy importante y que constituye el desarrollo futuro de la Organización, sea un exponente de que haya habido un debate exhaustivo sobre el mismo. El señor West nos ha dicho que las intervenciones han sido de 25 países desarrollados y de siete países en desarrollo y no creo que esto sea un exponente de que haya sido un gran debate sobre el tema. No creemos que el tema se haya cerrado y las conclusiones a las que se ha llegado son parciales en este momento porque hay varias delegaciones que desean hacer sus intervenciones y le rogaríamos, señor Presidente, que nos indicara cuando estima que se puede abrir el tema para su discusión.
CHAIRMAN: Distinguished delegates, there are requests for speaking tomorrow but you could, of course, speak today if you like. I simply had no other speakers on my list, that is why I closed the debate, because no one had indicated that they were going to speak, but I would, of course, prefer that you spoke now, and especially since Mr. West will not have the possibility to be present tomorrow, and I think it is important that he should hear your statements. Are you prepared to speak tonight? I ask the delegates of Brazil, Bangladesh and Cuba.
B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Unfortunately tonight I am not prepared. I was prepared to speak on TCDC. Thank you.
N. DIMITRIU (Roumanie): Monsieur le Président, je voudrais exprimer en premier lieu l'appréciation positive de la délégation roumaine pour la manière dont M. le Directeur général nous a présente les objectifs à moyen terme.
Nous apprécions avant tout ses efforts pour concevoir et présenter de façon intégrée les objectifs à moyen terme et le programme et budget. Ainsi que le Directeur général le souligne, on ne considère pas le programme de travail et budget comme un segment séparé, mais comme une partie d'une ligne continue, à savoir les objectifs à moyen terme et, plus loin, les objectifs à long terme. De cette manière, les objectifs à moyen terme de la FAO constituent le cadre pour les activités et les programmes de l'Organisation, tels qu'ils se reflètent dans le programme de travail et budget biennal.
Cela nous paraît d'une importance capitale afin que notre Organisation puisse s'acquitter avec succès des devoirs qui lui sont dévolus par son statut.
Je voudrais maintenant, Monsieur le Président, faire quelques remarques concrètes sur le document qui nous a été soumis au sujet des objectifs à moyen terme:
Premièrement, on mentionne dans le chapitre II, quand on parle du rôle de la FAO, la nécessité de l'harmonisation de l'activité de la FAO avec celle des autres Organisations internationales du système des Nations Unies. Nous sommes entièrement d'accord sur ce point, mais nous voudrions remarquer qu'il est en même temps nécessaire de définir les OMT et même les objectifs à long terme et que la FAO les harmonise également avec les objectifs de développement que chaque pays se propose dans le domaine de l'agriculture. C'est ainsi que l'Organisation pourrait mieux orienter ses ressources vers les besoins les plus importants des différents pays.
Deuxièmement, on précise au chapitre IV: priorités à moyen terme, la nécessité de concevoir les OMT de telle façon qu'ils correspondent aux objectifs du nouvel ordre économique international. Cela est tout à fait normal, parce que la FAO ne pourra vraiment contribuer à la solution du problème alimentaire que dans la mesure où toute son activité sera intégrée aux efforts visant à l'instauration du ΝΟΕΙ. La remarque que nous voudrions faire porte sur le concept de base du ΝΟΕΙ dont on fait mention au chapitre IV, paragraphe 4.1.
Si l'on fait une énumération suivant l'ordre des priorités, il nous semble que le premier objectif du ΝΟΕΙ, en ce qui concerne l'agriculture, doit résider dans l'accroissement substantiel de la production dans les pays en développement parce que seulement ainsi on pourra assurer le droit fondamental de l'homme à la nourriture.
Nous sommes heureux de constater que la FAO se propose d'accroître sa contribution à la réalisation de cet objectif de première importance.
Conscients du caractère absolument prioritaire de l'activité visant à l'accroissement de la production, ainsi que de l'importance des autres priorités mentionnées dans le document, nous voudrions quand même
relever qu'aurait dû être incluse parmi celles-ci l'activité de la recherche scientifique. Nous pensons qu'elle ne doit pas être absente des objectifs à moyen et à long terme, même si certains de ses aspects sont inclus dans les autres activités déjà mentionnées.
Pour ce qui est des priorités par région géographique, je me borne à réitérer ce que nous avons déjà dit à propos de l'Europe, quand nous avons discuté le programme de travail et budget. Cela nous paraît valable, et même davantage en ce qui concerne les OMT, Enfin, la délégation roumaine se déclare satisfaite de voir la FAO accorder une attention accrue au développement de la coopération technique et économique entre les pays en développement, et cela en priorité dans le cadre du ΝΟΕΙ.
Je n'entrerai pas dans le détail. La délégation roumaine se réserve de parler sur ce dernier point quand nous en discuterons ces prochains jours.
Je désire cependant mentionner que la délégation roumaine est prête à avancer toute une série de suggestions en ce qui concerne les actions à entreprendre pour développer davantage la coopération technique 1.
CHAIRMAN: May I then have an indication which delegations intend to speak on this subject and I think we ought to do that first thing tomorrow. Would you please raise your flags? After that, I think we could close the list of speakers so that we at least know where we stand. The delegations that have requested to speak tomorrow are: Iraq, Bangladesh, Cuba, Brazil and India. Any others? If not, the
list of speakers is closed
J.F, YRIART (Subdirector General, Departamento de Desarrollo): Tenemos delante dos documentos que se refieren a este tema: el documento C 77/4 en sus párrafos pertinentes y el documento C 77/LIM/17.
Principalmente deseo agregar en esta introducción a lo que se dice en dichos documentos el interés del Director General en la promoción por todos los medios posibles de la cooperación técnica entre países en desarrollo, o CPTD como lo llamamos normalmente, tanto en la agricultura como en los montes y en la pesca.
Quisiera también poder aclarar más las interpretaciones, así como las nociones erróneas que han surgido en discusiones sobre CPTD en otros foros. El concepto que caracteriza el CPTD no es nuevo, pero ha ganado importancia en los últimos años debido a la creciente toma de conciencia entre los países en vías de desarrollo de que la tecnología desarrollada en países industrializados no necesariamente es la más apropiada para sus propias necesidades. Esto es verdad sobre todo con respecto a la agricultura y sectores afines debido a causas ecológicas, así como debido a la gran diferencia en la estructura socio-económica del sector rural en países industrializados y en aquellos en vías de desarrollo.
La necesidad del CTPD se ha visto reforzada además por avances substanciales tecnológicos rápidos que han tenido lugar en las dos últimas décadas en el sector agrícola en varios países en desarrollo. El desarrollo y la introducción de variedades mejoradas de semillas en particular para el trigo, el arroz y el maíz, son ejemplos extraordinarios. El control de la langosta del desierto es otro ejemplo. Otros campos donde quizá el progreso no ha sido tan práctico o por lo menos no tan publicitado incluyen nuevas técnicas de conservación de suelos y aguas e irrigación y drenaje para el control tecnológico de la salinidad, producción de carne y leche, reciclaje de deshechos orgánicos para la producción de compuestos y gas metano, aquacultura, entrenamiento de científicos agrícolas y personal de campo, obras cooperativas y otros tipos de asociaciones de campesinos, dirección y transmigración de esquemas de asentamiento de tierras, desarrollo de cuencas, acuerdos sobre productos básicos y muchos otros. Esta no es una lista completa y no cubre el enorme potencial de desarrollo de pesca en profundidad y explotación de montes tropicales donde la FAO ya está trabajando activamente y forjando una cooperación entre países en desarrollo con intereses comunes en tales sectores.
__________
1/ Texte reçu avec demande d'insertion au procès-verbal.
Aun cuando el potencial del CPTD en la agricultura, en los montes y en la pesca es prácticamente ilimitado, hay que reconocer los inmensos obstáculos que los países en desarrollo tienen que superar para realizar dicho potencial. La barrera psicológica, es decir, la tendencia a mirar a los países industrializados como modelos de desarrollo en todas las esferas va disminuyendo. Sin embargo, hay una falta de información que podría ser designada por organizaciones como la FAO basándose en experiencias que han dado buenos resultados, así como en acciones realizadas en un país entre varios interesados. Existe el problema de crear instituciones técnicas en cada país que podrían ofrecer una red de cooperación autosuficiente para la promoción del CPTD en sectores específicos. Este es el punto esencial del rol actual de la FAO en la promoción del CPTD tal como ha sido ratificado por el Consejo de la FAO en su 70a sesión.
Una cuestión vinculada con lo antedicho que ha recibido considerable atención en recientes discusiones sobre el CPTD en el marco del sistema de las Naciones Unidas es hasta dónde la FAO y otras agencias especializadas pueden hacer uso con más énfasis de la experiencia así como de otros insumos de países en desarrollo para utilizarlas en otros países en desarrollo en el curso de la implementación de proyectos de asistencia técnica. El progreso en esta dirección se ve inhibido por una parte por el prejuicio bastante generalizado en países en desarrollo a favor de insumos provenientes de países industrializados; por otra hay que reconocer los contactos tradicionales que han sido establecidos a través de los años entre los miembros de estas organizaciones en los países en desarrollo e instituciones e individuos en Estados Unidos y Norteamérica. Las razones no son difíciles de explicar pero los remedios para corregir tales prejuicios, a mi modo de ver, no serán fáciles de lograr. El problema es nuevamente la falta de información que el Director General quisiera superar mediante medidas concertadas conjuntamente con el PNUD y otros organismos del sistema de las Naciones Unidas en los años venideros. La política de una discriminación positiva a la cual se hace alusión en el documento que tienen en sus manos, con respecto al uso de instituciones nacionales podría ser interpretada en general como aplicable al uso de los insumos de los países en desarrollo en la implementación de programas de asistencia técnica.
Estamos actualmente examinando recomendaciones específicas que han surgido de las discusiones en el Consejo de Administración del PNUD el verano pasado en este campo. Los reajustes que sean necesarios con respecto a reclutamiento, becas o procedimientos de contratación, con miras a promover un mayor uso de insumos provenientes de países en desarrollo tendrán que ser lo más expeditivos posibles, pero únicamente después de haberse asegurado que éstos no comprometen de ninguna manera los intereses de un país receptor o la calidad técnica de los servicios que se esperan de nuestra Organización. Cualquier medida que se tome para promover el CPTD tiene, efectivamente, que ser considerada con un criterio de factibilidad operacional, con consciencia de calidad de la asistencia técnica y trámites de acción por un lado, y también debe ser considerada la relevancia de estos insumos con respecto a la necesidad específica de cada país recipiente. El financiamento de iniciativas de interés general para los países en vías de desarrollo, imaginativas, y que requieren inversiones en el campo de la agricultura y del desarrollo rural es otro límite importante que debe afrontar el CPTD. Ejemplos que a uno se le ocurren de inmediato y que requieren inversiones son la utilización de la energía solar y del viento en la mayoría de los países en desarrollo; el procesamiento y conservación de la producción agrícola para evitar desperdicios y pérdidas de cosecha y así aumentar el ingreso agrícola y el empleo; la creación de industrias forestales y de pesca y el desarrollo de nuevas maquinarias e implementos agrícolas que armonicen con los parámetros específicos de trabajo y empleo de cada país.
Los países productores de petróleo se beneficiarían directamente de estas inversiones en algunos casos; y los países industrializados - incluyendo los países socialistas, contando, como cuentan, con el capital y la tecnología apta para las necesidades corrientes de los países en desarrollo - en muchos de los campos mencionados tienen un rol clave en la promoción del CPTD dentro de un marco más amplio de un nuevo orden económico internacional.
Desearía en este momento disipar algunas dudas que los países industrializados pueden tener con respecto al CPTD. No debemos ver al CPTD como un substituto de la cooperación técnica tradicional entre países desarrollados y países en desarrollo, sino como una ampliación de tal cooperación; no debemos verla como un desafío a intereses establecidos en los países industrializados sino como una búsqueda de tecnología que es más apropiada a la movilización de vastos recursos humanos y naturales en los países en desarrollo sin suplantar artificialmente sus esquemas sociales y culturales por otros de sociedades industrializadas.
CPTD es un esencia,una parte integral del empuje hacia un marco más racional de cooperación económica internacional, al cual darán su apoyo, sin lugar a duda, todos los países aquí presentes. Es también en este espíritu que el Director General quisiera hacer una contribución substancial al plan de acción y a la documentación que la Conferencia de Buenos Aires, ahora prevista para fines de agosto o principios de septiembre de 1978, deberá considerar. Los comentarios y las propuestas que se harán en el curso de la discusión que se desarrollará en esta Comisión servirán, seguramente, para ayudarnos a prepararnos mejor para la Conferencia y para nuestra actuación ulterior.
CHAIRMAN: I thank Mr. Yriart, the Assistant Director-General, for his introduction. We will take up the discussion of this item tomorrow morning after we have heard the speakers on the Medium-Term Objectives. In the afternoon we may possibly go on to discuss the World Food Programme, if time permits.
Composition of Drafting Group
Composition du Groupe de redaction
Composición del Grupo de Redacción
CHAIRMAN: I come now to the Drafting Group of Commission II. This has been the subject of consultation and I am now in a position to give the names of countries which have been suggested as members of the Drafting Group. They are: Bangladesh, Benin, India, Iraq, Mexico, the Netherlands and the United States. Are there any observations from the floor?
J.S. CAMARA (Guinée): Je voudrais proposer au nom du groupe africain la candidature comme président du comité de rédaction de M.F. D'Almeida, du Bénin; il est connu de vous tous puisqu'il participe aux travaux de cette commission.
Si nous avons accepté la procédure proposée, c'est uniquement pour faciliter votre tache. Connaissant les liens qui existent entre votre pays, la région nordique et les Etats africains, nous avons accepté cette procédure qui n'a pas été appliquée dans les autres commissions.
Nous voulons faire savoir pour que ce soit clair pour tous, que la région africaine n'est pas le paria de cette organisation. Nous n'acceptons que personne s'immisce dans nos affaire intérieures. Cette période est révolue. Je demande que mes paroles soient inscrites au procès-verbal et que tous les pays en prennent connaissance.
B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): My delegation fully and warmly supports the proposal made by our colleague from Guinea, that the representative of Benin, Mr. Francis d'Almeida, be Chairman of the Drafting Group. We are fully confident that he will do excellent work in this very important Drafting Committee. I must say that I am even more happy to recommend that particular proposal, since even the name of this candidate, d'Almeida, is a Brazilian one. This is perhaps a sample of the bridge of solidarity that exists between Africa and Brazil across the Atlantic.
CHAIRMAN: Mr. Francis d'Almeida has been suggested Chairman of your Drafting Committee. Are there any other comments? If not, I take it that you all agree. I congratulate the Chairman of the Drafting Group.
I hope that the Chairman of the Drafting Group will make contact with the Secretariat, because I think the Secretariat are very eager to load quite a lot of work onto him.
J.L. SAULT (Australia): Mr. Chairman, I notice on the list of countries that you read out that there is no representative of the South-West Pacific region included on the list of members of the Drafting Committee. It has been traditional for our region to be represented on the Drafting Committee for this Commission, and the countries of the region would wish that we again be represented on this occasion. I would, therefore, like to propose that New Zealand be added to the list of countries for the Drafting Committee.
CHAIRMAN: Distinguished Delegates, there is a proposal that New Zealand should be added to the list of members of the Drafting Committee.
J.S. KHAN (Pakistan): Mr. Chairman, first of all I wish to say that we are very happy to see our colleague from Benin as Chairman of the Drafting Committee and we are sure they will do an excellent job under his able guidance.
On the point of Australia I think the suggestion is a valid one because all the regions of FAO should have positions on the drafting groups and this is a practice followed, and we can go along with this proposition.
CHAIRMAN: Can I take it everyone agrees? This seems to be the case, so the name of New Zealand is added to the members of the Drafting Group.
F. D'ALMEIDA (Bénin): Je remercie les délégations de la Guinée et du Brésil qui ont proposé ma candidature au comité de rédaction, et je remercie toute la commission II qui a bien voulu accepter cette proposition II s'agit d'un honneur rendu au Bénin plutôt qu'à ma personne. Néanmoins, comme on ne peut travailler qu'en collaboration, je compte beaucoup sur votre collaboration. Ce n'est qu'ainsi qu'on peut travailler de façon correcte.
CHAIRMAN: This I believe concludes our discussion for today. We resume tomorrow at 09.30 hrs. with the discussion of the Medium-Term Objectives to be followed by the Technical Cooperation Amongst Developing Countries.
The meeting rose at 17.50 hours
La séance est levée à 17 h 50
Se levanta la sesión a las 17.50 horas
