CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): Before I give the floor to the speakers who have requested it, the representative of Germany wishes to add something to his earlier remarks.
Hans-Dietrich VON BOTHMER (Germany) (Original language German): I was the last speaker this morning, and it would therefore be useful that I should be the first speaker this afternoon.
Given the practical unified opinion on the Draft Resolution to be found in Appendix B to the reference document, my delegation feels that paragraph 4 of "Recognizing..." and paragraph 1 of "Endorses..." should be withdrawn.
However, I still have certain misgivings regarding the funding in the third and fourth sections of "Endorses" and I would like to keep these reservations in place.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): Before calling on the list of speakers who have asked for the floor, I would like to inform you that Kenya and Iraq have asked that their statements appear in the verbatim record.
Martti POUTANEN (Finland): Crucial decisions on the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources are being negotiated in the preparatory process of the UN Conference on Environment and Development. The delegation of Finland wants to associate itself with those who have urged further constructive participation by FAO in the UNCED process. Alongside with the management of land resources, the conservation and rational use of plant genetic resources is a sector in which FAO has a wide expertise and institution experience that should be fully utilized in the UNCED preparations, as well as in the implementation of the Conference decisions. The Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources and the well-established cooperation by governments in the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources provide a good framework for FAO's contribution.
Finland wishes to support the delegation of Sweden, as already supported by United States, Norway and many others, in proposing that an extraordinary session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources be held in the autumn of 1992, prior to the FAO Council. This decision would facilitate full participation by FAO in the early implementation of the UNCED decisions.
M. Hissem LAHOUCINE (Maroc): La délégation du Maroc tient à présenter ses félicitations à la FAO pour les activités qu'elle n'a cessé de poursuivre en vue de mettre en place un système mondial pour la conservation des ressources phytogénétiques. Consciente de l'importance de la biodiversité dans le développement d'une agriculture durable et d'une sécurité alimentaire, la délégation du Maroc, après avoir étudié le document C 91/24, apporte son appui aux objectifs définis et à l'approche proposée. Ainsi, la délégation du Maroc soutient la proposition de réunion d'une conférence technique internationale en vue de préparer les éléments nécessaires à l'élaboration d'un plan d'action mondial pour les ressources phytogénétiques. Vu la valeur et l'originalité que peut représenter toute ressource phytogénétique pour la sécurité alimentaire, la délégation du Maroc soutient également la proposition d'entreprendre les études urgentes nécessaires pour identifier tout danger possible pour le matériel phytogénétique existant.
Enfin, pour ce qui est du projet de Code de conduite concernant la collecte et le transfert de matériel phytogénétique, la délégation du Maroc, tout en adhérant aux principes énoncés en matière de conservation et d'échange des ressources phytogénétiques, estime qu'il est encore nécessaire d'en approfondir l'examen.
Sra. Mercedes FERMIN-GOMEZ (Venezuela): Es justicia que hagamos pública nuestra satisfacción por este excelente documento presentado por la Secretaria, que recoge la labor que ha venido desempeñando la Comisión y el grupo de trabajo en sucesivos años y en donde por fin viene plasmado no solamente la primera aspiración nuestra, que es el sistema mundial de la FAO para la conservación y utilización de los recursos fitogenéticos, sino la propuesta del Fondo Internacional y, sobre todo, el Código de Conducta. Nos complace porque están aqui resumidos de una manera casi perfecta los muchos esfuerzos y pensamientos que los miembros de la Comisión y del grupo de trabajo han venido tratando de concretar en un verdadero plan de acción que aqui se delinea de una manera correcta.
Sin embargo, debemos expresar algunas observaciones que nos merece el trabajo como participes del grupo que en el Consejo pasado fue designado por el señor Presidente para estudiar de una manera más detallada algunas de las dudas que teníamos algunos de los países participantes en ese momento.
Me refiero, en primer lugar, a la definición que se hace al referirse a los agricultores y a las comunidades de agricultores en el uso del término "custodio" de recursos fitogenéticos silvestres. No puede llamarse realmente custodio al propietario de una cosa. Es cierto que el propietario es un custodio, desde luego; con todo derecho. Si son dueños los países y está reconocido por la misma documentación, como en su soberanía, es lógico que ellos sean los custodios, pero no debemos definirlos simplemente como custodios. Por consiguiente, veríamos con agrado, y en eso apoyamos la sugerencia de México, que buscáramos un término un poco más digno para quienes son verdaderamente los propietarios originales de estos recursos fitogenéticos y que ahora ya, por lo menos, les hemos reconocido su derecho soberano como países.
En segundo lugar, por la misma razón que consideramos que este sistema global debe ser generalizado, bien conocido, estudiado, en lo que nos queda por ahora en adelante, vamos a apoyar la idea propuesta por la delegación de España sobre la creación de un grupo de contacto para estudiar más profundamente el Código de Conducta, el cual apoyamos, por lo demás, en todos sus aspectos.
En este sentido, estamos de acuerdo con que la participación para la actuación de este Código sea voluntaria; pero, con relación a los gobiernos, necesariamente tenemos que comprender que un gobierno no puede establecer un código para que cada quién actúe voluntariamente, porque se supone que un código es una ley, el establecimiento de unas normas que deben ser cumplidas, obedecidas, satisfechas, y en ese sentido es un poco incoherente que nosotros vayamos a hablar de un código y, al mismo tiempo, de una participación voluntaria. Dejamos esto sencillamente como una observación de nuestra parte, a merced de que ese grupo de contacto propuesto por España profundice el estudio y la pertinencia de nuestra observación.
Otro punto que queremos anotar - en aras del tiempo, queremos ser telegráficos - es que debemos profundizar realmente el perfeccionamiento de este sistema global propuesto por la FAO, haciendo énfasis en que eso debe llevarnos hasta esta Conferencia que está planeada y que en ella la apoyamos totalmente para lograr que alli, en esa Conferencia, puedan ser mejoradas las pequeñas observaciones y diferencias que estamos notando en este momento. En ese mismo sentido vamos a apoyar la propuesta presentada por Suecia, que contiene ideas interesantes que merecen que las estudiemos y las incorporemos, hasta donde sea posible, en el espíritu de este Comité preparatorio que tratamos de conducir a la convención para la diversidad biológica que tanto nos interesa y que realmente aspiramos a que llegue a una identificación con los propósitos y conceptos de la FAO.
Otro punto en el que queremos ser enfáticos es el que se refiere al libre acceso para el disfrute, uso o investigación de los recursos fitogenéticos. Los participantes en aquella reunión, nombrada en el Consejo pasado, recordarán que estuvimos opuestos a esa decisión, a ese concepto, porque sostenemos el criterio de que los países deben ejercer su soberanía sobre estos recursos, que han sido colocados allí por manos de la naturaleza, para aquellos que no creen en Dios. Entonces, si eso es así, si por razón de nuestra localización en el planeta, o en la superficie de la tierra, nos corresponden esos recursos - que, gracias a muchas circunstancias, todavía no han llegado hasta ellos los depredadores de siempre -, tenemos que protegerlos, debemos reservarlos para las generaciones futuras y que no llegue tan pronto a ellos el uso abusivo que se ha hecho de los otros recursos, que ya han desaparecido y es un leve recuerdo de las generaciones anteriores.
Por eso, pues, estamos en contra de la posición llamada "libre acceso a los recursos" que está recogida, creo que accidentalmente, y por esa razón desearíamos ver que es una revisión, así como se ha escapado aquí, en el Artículo 5, "Los objetivos del Sistema Mundial son garantizar la conservación y fomentar la disponibilidad sin restricciones", creo que Venezuela plantea su posición para ser consecuente y coherente con la posición que tuvimos en la Comisión de los ocho nombrada por el Presidente en el Consejo pasado.
No tenemos ningunas otras objeciones en cuanto a los contenidos en relación con el Fondo. Consideramos que es lógico que todas estas actividades a desarrollar por este sistema necesiten de un fondo, puesto que no sé si accidentalmente o por el destino histórico, la mayoría de los paises que aún son propietarios y soberanos de los recursos fitogenéticos, son al mismo tiempo países relativamente pobres, que no cuentan con los ingentes recursos con que deberían contar para poder desarrollar la actividad de conservación y protección y desarrollo de los recursos fitogenéticos.
Nos quedaría por ratificar nuestro apoyo a este proyecto, que esperamos que alguna vez llegue a contener el consenso total para que pueda ser realmente aprobado de una manera definitiva, y ojalá Venezuela pueda participar en las actividades que esperan a este desarrollo del sistema global y al cumplimiento en su territorio, bajo su soberanía, del desarrollo y de las restricciones limitadas o condicionadas, como es nuestro criterio, que deben ser decididas por los gobiernos haciendo uso de su soberanía.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic) : I agree with what the Ambassador from Venezuela said. I think it is important that every country musters its plant genetic resources. We must all undertake efforts here so that we can cooperate, and exchange constructive ideas.
Sra. María Eulalia JIMENEZ (El Salvador): Al referirnos al importante tema que nos ocupa, la delegación de El Salvador desea manifestar, en primer lugar, su satisfacción por los avances que se han hecho, tanto en la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenéticos como en su grupo de trabajo, del cual forma parte mi país, por lo que no podemos sino apoyar su intenso trabajo. El Salvador forma parte de la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenéticos y se ha adherido al Compromiso Internacional, con lo cual deseamos manifestar la importancia que mi Gobierno da a esta importante cuestión. La delegación de El Salvador desea, en esta ocasión, dar su pleno apoyo al proyecto de resolución contenido en el documento C 91/24, Apéndice B, con la modificación propuesta por la delegación de Turquía en el párrafo 3 de la misma. Esta resolución, como lo dijo el delegado de España esta mañana, es el resultado de intensas negociaciones y representa el consenso obtenido.
Consideramos muy apropiada, por otra parte, la convocatoria de parte de la FAO de la Cuarta Conferencia Técnica Internacional sobre Recursos Fitogenéticos, la cual, como se indica en el numeral 3 del párrafo 43, deberá financiarse con recursos extrapresupuestarios.
La delegación de El Salvador celebra el acuerdo de que en el proceso de preparación de dicha Conferencia se preparen tanto el primer estado de los recursos genéticos en el mundo como el plan de acción mundial sobre los recursos fitogenéticos. A este respecto, nos unimos a las interrogantes que ha hecho la delegación de México.
Nuestra delegación desea unirse, por otra parte, a aquellas que han solicitado que se dé a todo este trabajo el adecuado apoyo financiero con relación a la aprobación, en esta Conferencia, del Código Internacional de Conducta contenido en el Apéndice C del documento C 91/24. Nuestra delegación auspicia su aprobación en los términos planteados, por lo que creemos que, a fin de ultimar detalles que permitan su aprobación sin observaciones, debería analizarse detenidamente la propuesta hecha por el
delegado de España, a fin de que se cree un grupo de contacto en esta Comisión que nos permita llevar un texto sin observaciones a la Plenaria de la Conferencia.
Parviz KARBASI (Iran, Islamic Republic of): In the name of God, on behalf of the delegation of the Islamic Republic of Iran I extend my appreciation to FAO and the Secretariat for document C 91/24. I can support all the statements mentioned by the distinguished Ambassador of Venezuela in her statement.
Genes and DNA, the instruments for biotechnology, genetic resources, the heritage of mankind should be freely available for all human beings. In this case, the delegation of the Islamic Republic of Iran supports the global system with respect to the sovereign rights of each Member Nation. We feel that FAO should play the major role in plant genetic resources because agriculture is the main user of plant genetic resources. This is a very important point we have to consider on this issue.
We support the International Technical Conference. We also support the Draft Resolution for a third annex of the Undertaking. We agree with the establishment of an international fund to improve farmers' rights. We agree with the contact group to study the Code of Conduct in order to have sovereign rights for each Member State.
S. NAJMUS-SAQIB (Pakistan): The Pakistan delegation appreciates immensely the efforts of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources in putting together document C 91/24. It is an excellent document. I will make only two comments - one is technical, and the other is not so technical.
My first comment relates to paragraph 2 of page 1 of the Introduction. Here the use of biotechnology is projected as a substitute for conventional plant breeding. No matter what genetic recombination we may be able to produce through genetic engineering for the expression, stabilization and selection of those genes, the use of traditional plant-breeding methods are absolutely essential. Biotechnology is not a substitute for conventional plant breeding. Rather, it is a tool for enhancing plant breeding.
As for the use of biotechnology in conservation of genetic material, it is a highly technical subject and my delegation welcomes the suggestion for manpower training for the developing countries. Also the convening of the Fourth Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources will be very useful and we support it.
My second comment relates to the State of the World's Plant Genetic Resources. A few countries have done an excellent job but most developing countries have not yet fully appreciated the urgency for conserving and protecting their genetic resources. Only a few countries have established organizations that could cater for the valuable resources in their midst. The genebanks and the repositories established are by and large poorly equipped both in manpower and in material. The Code of Conduct developed by the FAO for collection and sharing of the genetic material among countries and the international agencies, when adopted, will go a long way in helping those countries which are not yet ready.
In this regard my delegation strongly endorses the idea of preparing a periodic report on the State of the World's Plant Genetic Resources for wider distribution.
The concept of in situ conservation and the implementation of the farmers' rights in our view are monumental tasks and will require moral and material support. The Islamic Republic of Iran and Indonesia have already pledged support and are ready to identify and establish areas for in situ conservation.
Pakistan, under a bilateral agreement with Japan, is establishing a Plant Genetic Resource Centre at Islamabad. This Centre will be operational in 1992. Pakistan will welcome the world community designating this centre as a focal point for a regional network on plant genetic resources.
J.M. SCOTT (United Kingdom): The United Kingdom delegation congratulates the Secretariat on paper C 91/24 and Dr de Haen for his clear and concise introduction.
The matters on which this Conference is being asked to decide have been discussed thoroughly by the Fourth Session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources and by the Ninety-ninth Session of the Council. The United Kingdom delegation does not, therefore, wish to reopen the wider discussion, and I will confine my remarks to the four items set out in paragraph 43 of document C 91/24.
The first of these items is to consider and possibly adopt a draft resolution that may become the third Annex to the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources. Whilst congratulating those involved in this delicate piece of drafting, the United Kingdom delegation retains its reservations about the text as drafted for two reasons.
Like the delegates from Australia and Germany, we are unhappy with line one of paragraph 3 of document C 91/24, Appendix B and the reference to an international fund. We would like to see this further clarified by the inclusion of the word "voluntary" in relation to this fund.
Secondly, and more generally, we are disappointed that the general presumption of rights of access has disappeared from the text. This is regrettable since the principle of free access has always been a balancing element to the principle of nations having sovereign rights.
I now move to the second item for decision, the Draft International Code of Conduct for Plant Germplasm Collection and Transfer. In the opinion of the United Kingdom delegation the draft Code of Conduct serves the valuable function of drawing together many of the best technical and administrative practices already in wide use by the international community. We would, however, like to see several amendments before being able to consider endorsing the text.
Our major concern relates to Article 8 (e) of Appendix C of document C 91/24. In our opinion, this should be deleted as it appears to be contrary to Article 1 of the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, which states that it is "based on the accepted principle that
plant genetic resources are a heritage of mankind and consequently should be available without restriction".
The United Kingdom delegation also feels that Article 1.8, which is poorly worded in our view, should be deleted or at least amended. At present the text suggests that the transfer and use of plant genetic resources by others necessarily undermines the rights and benefits currently enjoyed by the caretakers of wild plant resources. The United Kingdom does not accept this.
The United Kingdom delegation is also perplexed by the reference under Farmers' Rights (paragraph 2.9) to the rights "arising from the past, present and future contributions of farmers". It is difficult enough to understand how present and future rights might be recognized, but reference to past rights seems utterly impractical. Who, for example, should be compensated for exploitation of the cocoa bean or the potato?
In summary, we support the proposal from the delegate of the United States that the draft Code of Conduct should be withdrawn for further consideration by a working group.
May I now turn to the third item for consideration, which is to give guidance and approval on the convening by FAO of the Fourth International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources.
We support fully this proposal and note Council's statement that, during the preparatory process for such a Conference, both the first State of the World's Plant Genetic Resources and the Global Plan of Action on Plant Genetic Resources will be produced. We are also pleased to note FAO's recognition that the outcome of the UNCED Biodiversity Negotiations should be taken fully into account in preparing for the Fourth International Technical Conference.
I move to the fourth item for decision, and that is to consider and endorse the Council's recommendation that urgent studies should be undertaken by FAO to identify any possible danger to germplasm stored in genebanks. I can be very brief. The United Kingdom delegation welcomes these proposals.
Finally, to date FAO has collaborated and liaised effectively with other organizations, particularly UNEP, International Union for the Conservation of Nature, World Conservation Monitoring Center, Worldwide Fund for Nature and the International Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, on issues related to the in situ and ex situ conservation of plant genetic resources. We congratulate the Organization on this. However, FAO's proposed future activities in this area carry high potential for duplication of effort if collaboration and coordination does not continue to be of the highest order. For example, the proposed FAO report on the State of the World's Plant Genetic Resources should take account of the World Conservation Monitoring Centre/World Resources Institute work on the production of a Biodiversity Status Report, which will feed into UNEP in the context of the Biodiversity Convention.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic) : That was a very clear, frank and candid statement, which I think is important in our work. I may agree with some of the points that you raise, but I would take issue with others.
Robert LAMB (Suisse): Nous tenons à remercier le Secrétariat d'avoir mis à notre disposition le document C 91/24, qui parait très riche en informations. Cependant, ce document n'est pas parvenu à notre capitale avant notre venue à Rome et les différents services nationaux concernés n'ont pas pu être consultés. Nos propos et les commentaires préliminaires qui vont suivre seront donc brefs et se limiteront à l'essentiel.
Pour le premier point, nous soutenons le projet de résolution susceptible de devenir l'annexe 3 de l'Engagement international sur les ressources phytogénétiques, qui est le résultat d'un effort et d'un consensus affirmés.
S'agissant maintenant du projet sur le Code international de conduite concernant la collecte et le transfert de matériaux phytogénétiques, bien que ce Code constitue une bonne base de travail, nous rejoignons l'opinion d'autres délégations et nous pensons qu'il nécessite un travail supplémentaire. A notre sens, il devrait donc être renvoyé à la Commission.
En ce qui concerne la convocation de la quatrième Conférence technique internationale sur les ressources phytogénétiques, nous y sommes favorables et nous soutenons cette initiative.
Nous approuvons également la recommandation du Conseil selon laquelle la FAO devrait entreprendre des études pour identifier les dangers possibles sur les ressources phytogénétiques pour le matériel germinatif et proposer des solutions qui devraient être opérationnelles sur une large base nationale. A ce sujet, nous pensons qu'une approche régionale devrait être approfondie afin de pouvoir faire face aux différents besoins spécifiques en ressources phytogénétiques. Cette approche devrait notamment permettre de stimuler davantage un meilleur usage des connaissances locales. Voilà pour les quatre points essentiels.
Enfin, d'une façon générale, nous aimerions rappeler que nous avons toujours insisté sur une coopération, une coordination et une division étroites du travail de la FAO avec les autres agences du système international des Nations Unies. C'est dans cet esprit que nous soutenons les propositions de la délégation suédoise. En ce sens, nous pensons que les travaux sur les ressources phytogénétiques devraient faire partie intégrante des travaux préparatoires et du suivi de la CNUED, en particulier ceux concernant la conservation de la diversité biologique. Il s'agira, à ce sujet, d'introduire dans ce processus les travaux accomplis qui ont abouti à l'Engagement international sur les ressources phytogénétiques et qui ont fait l'objet d'un consensus après de longues discussions.
P. Natigor SIAGIAN (Indonesia): My delegation appreciates the document C 91/24 and we express our thanks to the Secretariat for the introductory matters, even though we received this document at a very late stage. Therefore, the comments of my delegation will be very brief.
The Commission on Plant Genetic Resources, and the Council in its last Session, had recommended for the Conference's consideration many important issues covering a wide range of matters on plant genetic resources. The Commission expressed the view that the time is ripe for them to exercise the coordinating and monitoring role provided for in its mandate in order
to assure the comprehensiveness and efficiency of the global system for the conservation and utilization of Plant Genetic Resources; and to allow the optimal use of the currently available resources, and those expected to become available in the near future.
My delegation is pleased to note that a great deal of progress had been made on Plant Genetic Resources activities; however, much remained to be done. In this connection we underline the support of the Councils that FAO convene a Fourth International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources and that the first State of the World and Plan of Action for Plant Genetic Resources be developed as part of the preparatory process. We do believe that this forum will also be valuable to discuss the strategies and methodologies for the in situ conservation of genetic resources.
The principle of nations' sovereign rights over plant genetic resources in their territories is vital and therefore the existence of this statement in various relevant resolutions and documents of FAO should be guaranteed. The efforts to weaken the true interpretation of this statement will not be accepted by my delegation.
My delegation notes with attention the views expressed regarding the need for coordination of works especially between international agencies in order to address the relevant international issues and its necessary follow-ups. My delegation welcomes the wish to strengthen coordination works between FAO and other international bodies in this regard. In this connection we note paragraph 36 of the document C 91/24. However, in the context of the preparatory work for the forthcoming UNCED meeting in Brazil, we note that UN General Assembly had agreed that the UNCED preparatory committee be fully mandated to implement its leading role to organize and coordinate all preparatory works.
As to the follow-up to the UNCED meeting it may be too premature to take any firm decision in the Conference on this matter but depending on the outcome of the UNCED itself we can have discussion on some agenda possibilities.
My delegation supports the views that efforts be increased in order to help build up and strengthen the national and local institutes involved in conservation programmes and activities. We underline the view of the Council on the urgent need to train the scientists and technicians of the developing countries in the use of biotechnoligies. Regarding the possible widening of the mandate of the Commission, we note paragraph 38 of this document. We also note paragraph 18 which stated that the Council agreed that the draft Code of Conduct on Biotechnology should be prepared in a step-by-step manner, in close collaboration with the appropriate organizations.
As had been conveyed to the Council, Indonesia offered their full collaboration in the establishment of well-focused pilot-scale activities on in situ conservation within the framework of activities coordinated by the Commission. As informed, these pilot schemes might serve as focal points for the development of regional in situ networks for various categories of priority species.
With regard to FAO future programmes on plant genetic resources, we support the view that FAO strengthen its programmes and its activities on the conservation and use of plant genetic resources in less-developed Member Nations.
We fully appreciate the efforts of Council in preparing the draft resolution on Annex 3 to the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources. Again here we welcome the statement of recognition of the nations' sovereign rights over the plant genetic resources. However, like other delegations we also have some points that need to be clarified. In the draft resolution it is stated on point 2 that the breeders' lines and farmers' breeding material should only be available at the discretions of their developers, etc., etc. We should note that much more effort needs to be taken in order really to make the farmer fully capable of safeguarding their breeding materials.
With regard to matters on implementation of the International Fund on Plant Genetic Resources we should also bear in mind that the international criteria to support the farmers perhaps cannot always be in line with the national policies and therefore there could possibly be a danger of conflict with the criteria of "national sovereignty rights".
With regard to point 4, we note the use of words "substantial" and "principle of equity". We should have very clear interpretations of this point.
Paragraph 12 and paragraph 37 of the document expressed a non-legally binding character of the International Undertaking. Therefore, much more needs to be done if we really wish to see this Undertaking and its annexes to become functional.
With regard to the Code of Conduct for Plant Germplasm Collecting and Transfer, we follow with attention the Thai delegation's and others' concerns on the consideration of this document. The complexity of the matters and its legal implications to the existing rules and regulations of each of our countries needs a careful and in-depth consideration of concerned parties.
We note from paragraph 17 of the document that the Code is independent of the International Undertaking and that Council agreed that the Code should be of a voluntary nature.
We look forward for possible positive solutions regarding the approval of the Resolution and Code of Conduct so as to pave the way for smooth implementation of FAO's work in this field.
Josaia MAIVUSAROKO (Fiji): May I first of all express our appreciation to the Secretariat of the Commission and to each working group for the very informative document C 91/24 which has been prepared for our discussion on this very important subject.
The Fiji Government supports the work being currently undertaken under the FAO's sub-programme on the work of the Commission on Plant Genetic resources. In particular the progress made to date on the implementation of, and follow-up action on, the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic
Resources through the International Undertaking, is particularly relevant in strengthening national and regional capabilities and programmes for the collection, conservation management, evaluation, documentation and use of plant genetic resources.
We have also noted with satisfaction the strong links which the undertaking on the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources maintains with organizations such as the International Board on Plant Genetic Resources and the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research centres.
However, we feel that more needs to be done in this area for smaller South Pacific Island countries of which Fiji is a part. We believe therefore that a special sub-regional effort for the South Pacific Island countries is presently needed. Such a Sub-regional effort would greatly enhance the support available to the South Pacific Island countries in strengthening their own plant genetic resource base.
In closing, my delegation would like to express its support to the draft resolution contained in Annex B; and also the convening of the Fourth International Conference on the Conservation and Utilization of Plant Genetic Resources.
Manuel VARA OCHOA (Perú): Resaltamos, señor Presidente, el esfuerzo de la FAO y sus vínculos establecidos dentro del trabajo de conservación y utilización de los recursos fitogenéticos como un medio de salvaguardar su utilización en bien de las generaciones presentes y futuras.
Apoyamos la realización de la Cuarta Conferencia Técnica Internacional en el marco de la elaboración del primer estado de los recursos fitogenéticos en el mundo y del primer Plan de Acción Mundial para los recursos fitogenéticos.
Apoyamos también el proyecto de resolución de la Conferencia al Compromiso Internacional sobre Recursos Fitogenéticos, sobre la base del cambio solicitado por Turquía en el punto 3. La fundamentación de la aprobación la realizamos, básicamente, considerando que contiene cláusulas importantes que respetan la soberanía nacional de los países y que se reconocen los derechos de los agricultores.
Resaltamos los esfuerzos realizados en la elaboración del Código Internacional de Conducta para la recolección y transferencia de germoplasma vegetal, sobre el cual existe un consenso, con el espíritu del Congo, a pesar de su complejidad; pero asimismo concordamos en la necesidad de realizar mejoras en la forma a través de un grupo de contacto.
Sra. Mercedes FERMIN-GOMEZ (Venezuela): Simplemente, señor Presidente, para una pregunta, ya que me quedó la duda de si el grupo de contacto propuesto por el señor delegado de España, al que he dado mi apoyo sincero, será solamente para trabajar hasta esta Conferencia o, si previendo que en la Conferencia no se pueda lograr el absoluto acuerdo, pudiera mantenerse para la próxima. Yo, personalmente, no creo que podamos llegar a un absoluto consenso para el final de esta Conferencia.
Solamente quería hacer esta pregunta, señor Presidente, para aclarar esta duda.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I just wanted to makesome remarks on this very point, i.e. on the contact group but I waited sothat we could listen to all the speakers. I will come back to this pointoncewehaveheadallthespeakers
Ali AYOUB (UNEP): In the run-up to the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development progress towards agreements on the mutually reinforcing conventions of climate change and biological diversity will test our collective commitments to serve the planet resources. While 1992 is a target date no one is willing to sacrifice content for expediency in preparing either conventions. However, in the negotiations towards these two global conventions on the arrangement of necessary financial mechanism and technology transfer agreements in this and other issues we have shifted gear from debating the necessity of cooperative action to defining the details.
There is a wide recognition that the strategies intended to hold ecological degradation cannot succeed unless they tackle the underlying economic and development causes of such destruction. There is little point in crusading for greener policies if they are consistently offset by powerful but shortsighted economic forces. We will not serve our planet's resources unless, first, ecological considerations become integrated into all facets of economic, fiscal, monetary and industry policies; and, second, market mechanisms are geared towards generating new revenues to address global environmental problems and, at the same time, the real causes of poverty.
UNEP continues to collaborate with FAO on the development and implementation of international programmes for the conservation and management of genetic resources of all types. UNEP has been the main catalyst in raising to a higher status the neglected animal genetic resources. UNEP also hopes that the genetic resources of aquatic systems will begin to receive the due attention they deserve.
Daniel D.C. DON NANJIRA (Kenya): My delegation would like to express its appreciation to the Secretariat for the excellent documentation and also to thank Dr de Haen for his illuminating introduction.
We acknowledge the efforts and achievements of CPGR in establishing a global network of genebanks and in situ protected areas, and in preparing a Global Information and Early Warning System on Plant Genetic Resources exploitation as well as a Code of Conduct for International Collection and Transfer, and a Code of Conduct on Biotechnology.
Kenya subscribes to the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources and welcomes the new arrangements for programme cooperation between FAO, IBPGR and CPGR under the Memorandum of understanding. The change in status of IBPGR to an autonomous body is another milestone which is fully endorsed by my Government.
We urge IBPGR and the Commission to articulate more strongly the needs of the developing countries, appreciating the preparation of crop-specific guidelines for the transfer of germplasm, but we wish to see a greater involvement of experts from developing countries in the expert groups.
Mr Chairman, Kenya supports the establishment of ex situ base collection genebanks and in situ protected areas. It is for this reason that we have offered FAO a space for a genebank as part of the international network of base collections. FAO should however endeavour to establish minimum standards for all genebanks in the international network and provide adequate resources to developing countries in ensuring the maintenance of requirements.
Mr Chairman, the value of genebanks is in the storage, exchange and transfer of germplasm and the sharing of the benefits of the genetic products. Developing countries, while constituting the main depositories of genetic resources, have benefited little from and often lost their germplasm for lack of technological capacity to safeguard and utilize these resources, lack of some legal mechanism to compensate or protect their interests. We would therefore welcome the establishment of a Code of Conduct for International Collecting and Transfer of Germplasm.
My delegation endorses the establishment of an International Fund for the implementation of Farmers' Rights. We however find it inappropriate at this stage to make the fund mandatory.
We welcome the preparation of a Code of Conduct on Biotechnology which we consider to be a necessary measure for controlled utilization of genetic resources and protection against manipulative or exploitative use of biotechnology. My delegation, however, feels that a Code of Conduct as such does not go far enough to make up for the serious disadvantage of lack of biotechnology know-how suffered in developing countries. We urge for practical measures and programmes for the building or improvement of national capacities through training and improvement of infrastructure and information base in developing countries to enable them to benefit fully from effective use of their own genetic resources for increasing agricultural production.
Finally, Mr Chairman, my delegation endorses the convening of Fourth International Technical Conference on Genetic Resources to assess the state of the world's genetic resources and to map out a Global Plan of Action on the conservation of genetic resources.1
Amer D. SALMAN (Iraq) (Original language Arabic): We should like to commend the Secretariat for a well prepared document on Genetic Resources. We attach great importance to the provision of advice and expertise to Genetic Resources banks in developing countries, and that FAO and IPBGR should underake this task
__________________
1 Statement inserted in the Verbatim Records on request
We also support the proposal in paragraphs 2-3 concerning the Fourth Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources in view of the vital importance of conservation of these resources, and their deterioration in many countries particularly in the Developing World. As to the principle of farmers' rights and the financing mechanism, it is our opinion that it should be further discussed during the proposed Fourth Technical Conference because of the existing differences and particularities of legislations in the various concerned countries.1
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): We have thus exhausted our list of speakers. As far as the question posed by Her Excellency the Ambassador of Venezuela on the contact group is concerned, this was a proposal submitted by Spain. Is there anyone who objects to such an idea of having such a group?
E. Wayne DENNEY (United States of America): If I understand your query, you are wondering whether or not a contact group to discuss the comments on the draft Code of Conduct on Collecting and Transfer of Germplasm is appropriate.
I guess we would question the value of doing that for two reasons. One is that, for our delegation, we would have to go back to our capital to get concurrence on the final Code in any event. Additionally, I thought that there were a number of delegations who very explicitly said that they were not prepared to offer their governments' views until this question had been reviewed in their capitals.
With those two points in mind, our preference would be not to have such a contact group.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): Is there anyone who wishes to support what the delegate of the United States has just said? Is there anybody who would agree with him?
J.M. SCOTT (United Kingdom): I would like to agree with what the delegate of the United States has just said.
H.E.J. JORRITSMA (Netherlands): I support the United States' point of view in postponing discussions on the code of conduct.
Praphas WEERAPAT (Thailand) : My delegation would like to support the views expressed by the United States.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I do not believe that we have a consensus on this matter. Therefore, I believe that we should not convene a contact group at present.
_______________
1 Statement inserted in the Verbatim Records on request.
H. de HAEN (Assistant Director-General, Agriculture Department): On behalf of all my colleagues in the Secretariat, I would like to thank all of you, especially those of you who took the floor, for the support, the suggestions and the constructive criticism which you have advanced. We will analyse this and consider it in our subsequent work. We feel encouraged to continue in our work towards a fully operational global system for conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources and, I would add, always keeping in mind the interests of today's and future generations.
I understand from all your interventions that emphasis will have to be placed in particular on the monitoring of the global and regional state of plant genetic resources, on the development of guidelines, codes and rules for conservation, use and exchange of plant genetic resources, and on action programmes to be developed both in situ and ex situ, both for agricultural plant genetic resources in the narrower sense and forestry resources as well.
We noted the request to collaborate closely with UNEP and with UNCED, in particular as regards the coordination between the Commission's work on plant genetic resources and the relevant legal or funding Instruments for biodiversity which may be the outcome of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development.
We have taken note in this context that several delegates, including Sweden, the United States, Canada and others, have proposed holding an Extraordinary Session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources in the fall of 1992, to plan immediate follow-up actions resulting from UNCED. We will take this up, but I must say that this will require extra funding, be it through reallocation of funds internally but more likely through extra-budgetary sources which we may have to draw on.
It may also, and probably will, require an internal reorganization of staff time. You are aware of the fact that the Working Group on Genetic Resources has a limited capacity and, as it stands, we are mandated to convene the next regular session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources in April 1993.
One of the options which I understand we may have to consider would also be a possible delay in the next regular session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources. I feel at least obliged to mention this, and if delegates wish to comment on this, we would appreciate their advice.
Let me now briefly try to answer some of the questions or comment on some concerns raised in connection with the three main items of the discussion. First, on the draft resolution, we noted the general support for the resolution apart from a minor amendment proposed by Turkey to replace the wording "Third World" by "developing countries".
We have also taken careful note of some more general questions and concerns raised by a number of delegates. Before I comment on some of the specific queries, let me say that you may have observed that those who expressed concern did this with the intention of proposing a more committing wording: on the one hand concerning the availability of germplasm without restriction; on the other hand concerning the nature, the amount or the size of the international fund.
On the wording regarding the availability of germplasm without restriction, I would like to stress that this was discussed at some length during the last Council and also during the last Commission on Plant Genetic Resources. A contact group was established during Council which had sessions of five to six hours. The result of these discussions was to propose leaving the wording open on purpose - the wording regarding the availability without restriction - and to propose a wording which was less committing than any other formulation.
The Council, on the other hand, requested the Secretariat to prepare a document on legal matters related to the free access, or access without restriction, to be presented to the next meeting of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources, and the Secretariat is working on that.
May I also mention in this context that, keeping the formulation of the draft resolution as it stands, we would not preempt the outcome of UNCED regarding any specific forms of access without restriction.
As to the other wording problem with the draft resolution - and that is the nature and the amount of the international fund - here again both the nature and the amount of the international fund were left open, in our understanding, on purpose. Having said this, however, I think I can respond to those delegates who expressed concerns about a fund being voluntary or mandatory. In our understanding - at least in my understanding, and in the Secretariat's understanding - the character of the fund, that is voluntary or mandatory, is a matter to be decided by our governing bodies. However, since there has not been any decision to make the fund mandatory, the Secretariat works under the implicit basic assumption that the fund is voluntary for the time being until an explicit decision is taken. I would like to reassure you of this understanding.
In this context, may I refer you to the concern expressed by the distinguished delegate from Denmark, that the establishment of a specific type of fund is preempted in the draft resolution. The Secretariat notes that any source of funding and any organizational arrangements, including the linkage of the fund to the Global Environment Facility, or for any biodiversity funding which may come out of UNCED, would be compatible with the current wording in the draft wording in the resolution in our understanding.
May I in this context raise a third point regarding Farmers' Rights? - a point just mentioned by the distinguished delegate of the United Kingdom, who said that the notion of the Fund where rights arose from past achievements of farmers was "utterly impractical". May I refer to Resolution 5/89, which Conference endorsed unanimously in its last Session, and quote from that Resolution which says: "The Conference endorses the concept of Farmers' Rights ("Farmers' Rights means rights arising frompast, present and future contributions in ….."), so this notion of aright arising from past achievements has already been endorsed in the previous Resolution, which is now annexed to the International Undertaking.
In summary, it is our interpretation that the draft resolution could find wide consensus, and if this were so it would be possible for the Resolution Committee to discuss and endorse the draft resolution, possibly with non-substantial minor amendments but not major amendments, and it would then go forward to the Drafting Committee.
As regards the Code of Conduct on Plant Germplasm Collection and Transfer, here again we noted wide support, but we also noted that some countries proposed further amendments and refinements. On the other hand, others indicated that they are already using the Code, unofficially, so to speak, as guidelines in their work. But referring to the decision which was reached just before I took the floor, I understand that we may have to refer the whole matter to the Working Group of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources, and not to a contact group of this Conference.
Under those circumstances, I do not have to go into too much detail of further questions regarding the Code of Conduct, because it will be discussed in the Working Group of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources at its next session.
I come finally then to the Technical Conference, where I can be very brief. We appreciate your full support, and we have noted that some countries - Spain in particular - are offering their support to activities in the preparation and holding of the Conference, in the case of Spain preferably in Latin America and Caribbean Region. In the Report, you have seen that mention is made of an advance group, which would be a technical working group to support the preparation and holding of the Conference. This group would be a group of scientists, not a group of government-designated experts. I just want to make this clear: the intergovernmental body guiding the preparation, execution and holding of the Conference would be the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources, not an extra intergovernmental body - at least not to our understanding.
Now that we have your unanimous support for the further pursuit of preparation of the Conference, the Secretariat would appreciate the support of those countries who have already indicated, or may want to indicate, their financial support, because, as I have said in my introduction, we think that about $3 million will be needed to prepare and hold the Conference. In this context, may I propose that those delegates whose governments are considering support in this regard contact me today or tomorrow so that we may use the opportunity of your presence to go into more detail regarding the further process, including the funding mechanism.
I have come to the end of my replies, but I owe one answer to the distinguished delegate of Madagascar, who asked about the state of preparation of the Code of Conduct on Biotechnology which was discussed in the last Session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources. Just to remind all of us: this Session concluded that it would be premature to endorse this Code, and requested the Secretariat to develop the details of the Code in close collaboration with other agencies and organizations which work on similar aspects, including bio-safety - for instance, UNIDO - and other components. You will recall that this Code not only addresses matters of bio-safety, but mainly aims at the introduction of the sustainable use of biotechnology in the developing countries. The Secretariat is planning a number of meetings with legal and technical experts and with other organizations which have interests and activities in this matter - UNIDO, UNEP, Unesco, WHO, WIPO, UNFPA, OECD, EEC, CGIAR, IBPGR, World Bank, IUCN -I could go on to give you a long list, if you are interested. This is such an acute matter that the number of organizations engaged in this field is almost unlimited. The first draft of the code may be available for discussion by the Working Group of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources by the end of 1992.
I hope I have answered most of your questions satisfactorily, but of course if further clarification is needed I shall be glad to come back.
Sra. María Eulalia JIMENEZ (El Salvador): Le ruego me disculpe, señor Presidente, pero es que mi delegación quisiera hacer una reflexión sobre la propuesta que se habia hecho de crear un grupo de contacto. Como nosotros dijéramos en nuestra intervención anterior, pensábamos que seria conveniente analizar detenidamente la propuesta de España de crear ese grupo de contacto en esta Comisión. Estimábamos que dicho grupo podría ayudar a que se hiciera un primer análisis de las diferentes posiciones que existan y que permita incluso a los países llevar a sus capitales esas diferentes posiciones. Como dijo la delegada de Venezuela, tal vez será difícil llegar a un acuerdo en esta ocasión, pero el resultado de ese grupo de contacto estimaba nuestra delegación que podría dar mayores elementos de juicio a la Comisión y al grupo de trabajo para que analizara esta cuestión en forma más amplia, aprovechando sobre todo la presencia, durante la Conferencia, de los expertos en la materia de los diferentes países. Le solicito me disculpe, señor Presidente, pero sólo quería hacer una reflexión sobre este asunto.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic) : We have already referred to the setting up of a contact group but there was no consensus on that. The Chair is certainly in the hands of member countries. If there were consensus on that, we would of course have taken the necessary steps to set up such a contact group. I asked you to help me in this area, and a number of objections were formulated in this regard.
Raphaẽl RABE (Madagascar): Je n'interviendrai pas sur ce point relatif au groupe de contact, mais si vous me le permettez, je désire simplement remercier M. de Haen pour les explications qu'il a données concernant l'intervention que j'avais faite et je souhaiterais que les précisions qu'il a données figurent dans le rapport; ceci est mon souhait.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): Thank you, Madagascar. The Secretariat will certainly take account of that request.
P. Natigor SIAGIAN (Indonesia): I have two points. First, with regard to the resolution, we propose that the complete explanation from the Secretariat be recorded as part of the Conference report. This will assist us in considering this resolution as this matter was not covered during the last Council meeting.
Secondly, with regard to your decision, Mr Chairman, that there will be no contact group: Although there are some points which I would like to raise, I accept your decision and assume that there will be no further discussion on the matter.
Jorgen Skovgaard NIELSEN (Denmark): I would like to thank Dr de Haen very much for his exhaustive explanation and the replies which he has given to us. There is however one matter I would like to raise.
We asked for comments on the early convening of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources next autumn. This was a sign of trust and confidence in FAO's abilities, and I would urge FAO to prepare at a very high level in order to respond to possible tasks created by the UNCED. Otherwise, there will be many competitors waiting to take over, and work in the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources would be of just an academic nature - and that would be a great pity. So - please be prepared.
Hans-Dietrich VON BOTHMER (Germany) (Original language German): I would like to support the suggestion of the distinguished delegate from Denmark, to the extent that if we are just pacing ourselves on a timetable and also want to have an extraordinary meeting which would have some point and content, as Dr de Haen said here, and because there will be certain costs involved in this, I think we have to consider that UNCED is going to be held in June of next year, and in March there will be a meeting in New York of PrepCom 4.
Therefore, I think it will be rather difficult for us actually to manage this logistically, to actually have the extraordinary meeting as well.
H. de HAEN (Assistant Director-General, Agriculture Department): While I appreciate very much the concern raised by the delegate of Germany about the capacity of the Secretariat to follow up a PrepCom 4 and UNCED meeting and then prepare an extraordinary meeting of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources, I can assure delegates with your support and with the request of several delegates to give this priority we think we will be able to manage. Of course, PrepCom 4 and UNCED are major events which keep the whole Organization busy, but not in particular the Secretariat of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources. We have to see these procedures in parallel, and we will try to do our best and convene this session.
I said earlier that this may have consequences for the funding available for the regular session of the Commission planned for April 1993. Whether or not we can stick to the schedule and convene that session as scheduled - we will have to do further homework on it, I would say, which may mean we have to ask some donors for extra funding. A delay of the next Commission on Plant Genetic Resources has another repercussion, because the Rules tell us clearly that sessions of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources should be held in conjunction with the Committee on Agriculture to facilitate the participation of as many delegates and experts as possible, so it has some implications.
However, my intervention is meant to assure you that we will accept and share the priority for the immediate need to follow up on the UNCED and will do our best to convene the extraordinary session of the Commission, as requested by you.
P. Natigor SIAGIAN (Indonesia): My delegation made a very clear statement on the issue relating to an early session of the Commission and the outcome of the UNCED meeting. I have given my statement on this matter to the Secretariat and hope it will be considered by them; otherwise we will open the debate on this.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): Certainly the Secretariat has noted those remarks, and they will be discussed by the Drafting Committee. If there are no other comments to be made, I shall summarize.
Paulo Estivallet de MESQUITA (Brazil): I asked for the floor before your final remarks, Mr Chairman, because sometimes you take a decision before the interpretation comes through. That is why I should like to speak now.
Firstly, I can agree with what was said by the delegate of Indonesia. His point of view should also be reiterated and taken into consideration in the preparation of the Report.
Secondly, I hope you can explain to me whether the draft resolution stands as it is or if it will be taken up in the Drafting Committee.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I do apologize. I did not see the delegate of Brazil asking for the floor.
The Secretariat has certainly made my task easier. They have summarized practically all the points raised during the discussion. I would simply like to add two points which have warranted our attention during this discussion, particularly with reference to the question asked by the delegate of Brazil regarding the resolution.
The question is whether this resolution is going to be amended or not. In the light of the discussion we have had, this resolution will be put directly to the Drafting Committee. Therefore, the Drafting Committee will be given any draft amendments such as that submitted by the delegate of Turkey. I think everyone agreed on that amendment because it does not really affect the substance of the text.
The delegate of the United Kingdom had a comment to make, and he put forward a number of things regarding the draft resolution. These will also be looked at by the Drafting Committee. This is what I have gleaned during the discussion. All delegates who have spoken supported this resolution.
Paulo Estivallet de MESQUITA (Brazil): I have mentioned in my statement that we had difficulties with some points of the resolution, but because we recognized the amount of work in drafting the resolution, we would not present amendments. My position is still the same. If the resolution goes as it is with the amendment of the delegate of Turkey I can live with it, but if there are to be other changes I suppose we will have an occasion to discuss them further, or should I present amendments now?
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I do not think any delegation objects to this draft. If anyone does they would have asked for the floor to discuss what those objections were.
J.M. SCOTT (United Kingdom): I cannot totally agree with the draft as it stands without the word "voluntary" being included, and will have to seek further guidance on that.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): Can I ask the United Kingdom delegate to discuss this matter with the Secretariat directly? Thank you. That means we can agree they record this draft resolution depending on the results of the discussion between the United Kingdom and the Secretariat.
As I have said, the Secretariat has facilitated my task to a very great extent. I think that the responses given by the Secretariat covered most of the points brought up during discussion. One point I wanted to add.
I think a number of developing countries themselves have brought up the question of the actual management, the actual monitoring, of plant genetic resources. A number of industrialized countries have asked that they be given facilities so that there can be some exchange of powers or competence in this area. I will not say any more on that. I feel we can now leave this item of our agenda.
développement agricole
10. Ayuda a los países menos adelantados para definir una estrategia de
F. RINVILLE (Assistant Director-General, Development Department): First, a correction which has to be applied to the English version only, page 1, paragraph 1, line 6, please read "closely" in place "clearly". And page 5, paragraph 20, line 5, after the words "lead to" please add "growing conflict between agriculture and environment exacerbated by" and the rest of the sentence is all right. The full sentence will now read "FAO is well aware that the energy shortages lead to growing conflict between agriculture and environment exacerbated by a population growth."
Le document C 91/26 que vous avez devant vous est la réponse du Directeur général à la Résolution 1/98 du Conseil de la FAO lors de sa 98ème session en novembre 1990. Le Conseil avait alors demandé au Directeur général de bien prendre en compte, dans le cadre de la FAO, les conclusions de la Deuxième Conférence des Nations Unies sur les pays les moins avancés qui s'est tenue à Paris en septembre 1990. Il devait en particulier proposer des principes d'action et des mesures qui permettent de mieux associer la FAO à la mise en oeuvre du programme d'action pour aider les pays les moins avancés qui le demandent, de façon à définir une stratégie de développement agricole pour les dix prochaines années. Cela est en ligne avec la paragraphe 86 du Programme d'action approuvé par la Conférence de Paris.
Je me limiterai à présenter les grandes lignes d'action de notre Organisation au profit des pays les moins avancés. La FAO a collaboré avec la CNUCED à la préparation de la Conférence de Paris et y a présenté un rapport sur l'agriculture et l'alimentation dans les pays les moins avancés lors de la dernière décennie relative aux années 80. L'Organisation a fait aussi quelques propositions pour la présente décennie des années 90. Le Directeur général a voulu être présent personnellement à la Conférence de Paris et il y a présenté une déclaration.
Dans le cadre de la collaboration interagence, la FAO participe au suivi et à la mise en oeuvre du Plan d'action.
Les économies les moins avancées sont principalement agricoles. L'agriculture y représente presque la moitié du produit intérieur brut et emploie près des trois quarts de la population active. C'est dire combien le Programme d'action, approuvé par la Conférence de Paris, fait du développement du secteur agricole sa plus haute priorité et a recommandé des mesures spécifiques dans le domaine du développement rural, de la modernisation de la production agricole, de la sécurité alimentaire, de l'aide alimentaire, du développement des pêches, de l'environnement, de l'atténuation des effets des catastrophes et de leur prévention.
Les mesures décrites dans la section II du document, paragraphes 5 à 28, figurent au programme des priorités de la FAO et entrent bien dans le cadre de ses politiques d'action et ses procédures. Bien que la FAO n'ait pas de programme spécial relatif aux pays les moins avancés, ces derniers sont au centre de ses préoccupations. Par exemple, plus de la moitié des ressources du programme de terrain leur sont affectées et les recettes majeures de l'Organisation au niveau mondial bénéficient principalement aux pays les moins avancés.
La stratégie de développement agricole présente un programme cohérent qui concerne tout le spectre des activités de la FAO. La section III du document détaille les initiatives de la FAO qui concernent les pays les moins avancés. Dans le cadre du renforcement des missions de la FAO dans le domaine de l'avis en matière de politique agricole, tel que l'a voulu et confirmé la Conférence de 1989, la FAO s'est de plus en plus impliquée dans cette catégorie d'activités au niveau des pays, souvent d'ailleurs dans le contexte des programmes d'ajustement structurel. La coopération avec les autres institutions, et particulièrement la Banque mondiale, le Fonds monétaire international et le PNUD, est renforcée. Le Directeur général a en particulier mis en place un système d'information sur les politiques agricoles qui permet la promotion et la coordination de cette nature au niveau des pays.
Dans la même famille d'action, les projets d'assistance à la planification sont développés. Ce sont principalement les études sectorielles, l'analyse des plans agricoles, les politiques et les stratégies et l'impact des politiques sur le développement et les revenus ruraux. En fait, une part importante des activités de la FAO vise essentiellement à améliorer les capacités des administrations publiques en matière d'analyse des politiques et consiste en cours de formation, séminaires, ateliers et diffusion de matériels de formation.
Si les études à caractère régional développées par la FAO, telles que "L'Agriculture Africaine: les 20 prochaines années" et "Agriculture: Horizon 2000", constituent un cadre pour le développement agricole des pays du tiers monde, elles concernent tout particulièrement les PMA.
Une stratégie appropriée de développement agricole est un élément clé de toute politique de développement global d'un pays dans son environnement économique international. Il est essentiel, par conséquent, que les politiques sectorielles et macro-économiques intérieures, ainsi que la répartition des crédits budgétaires ne défavorise pas l'agriculture. Dans le même temps, l'environnement économique international, l'accès au marché,
les flux financiers pèsent lourdement sur les programmes agricoles dans les pays. Telles sont les réalités qui ont été prises en considération dans la préparation et la mise en oeuvre de stratégies de développement agricole. Tandis que le Programme d'Action désigne bien les PMA, comme premier responsable de leur développement, il fait appel à la Communauté internationale pour renforcer les efforts des PMA avec ses ressources d'assistance.
Monsieur le Président, comme le document le montre, les PMA sont les principaux bénéficiaires de tout un ensemble d'activités de la FAO par la nature même du mandat de la FAO, par la nature même des problèmes qui sont principalement leurs difficultés. Les buts et objectifs de l'Organisation ainsi que les activités du Programme ordinaire et du Programme de terrain sont tout à fait en harmonie avec le Programme d'action approuvé par la Conférence de Paris. Le Directeur général souhaite assurer à la Conférence que la FAO, dans le cadre de ses ressources, continuera à intensifier son soutien aux PMA. Mes collaborateurs et moi-même sommes à votre disposition pour tout complément que vous pourriez souhaiter.
Horacio M. CARANDANG (Philippines): The Philippine delegation wishes to express its appreciation for the comprehensive enumeration and description in document C 91/6 of the activities and measures undertaken by FAO to help LDCs in their efforts towards agricultural development and to assist them to define an agricultural development strategy in compliance with the Resolution of the Second United Nations Conference on LDCs and the FAO Council Resolution 1/98. In the interests of brevity the Philippine delegation shall offer a few comments on the conclusion in paragraphs 45 to 47 which address most concisely the central issues related to the item.
Firstly, the Philippine delegation is in full agreement with paragraph 45 when it stresses the paramount importance for LDCs to adopt an appropriate agricultural development strategy as part of the country's overall development policy and for domestic sectoral and macroeconomic policies and budgetary allocations, not to discriminate against agriculture. In his statement in Plenary the head of the Philippine delegation described our national efforts to evolve an agricultural policy which has a positive bias toward agriculture to encourage activities in small farmers and fishermen to promote agro-industry and export of agricultural products. We are aware that many other developing countries are doing the same in spite of unfavourable conditions. However, as part of structural adjustment of developing countries, developing countries are being asked to reduce the government role in production, pricing and marketing of agricultural products, not without negative effects on farmers' income and ability to produce. Yet in certain developed countries the level of protection and subsidies to agriculture has not diminished and in fact has reached record levels. In the year 1990 there has again been an increase of 12 percent in subsidy equivalent to agriculture which has reached the staggering sum of US$299 billion
In connection with structural adjustment in developing countries I should like to reiterate our head of delegation's suggestion about the value of impartial advice from a neutral body like FAO to introduce social dimension and food security considerations in structural adjustment.
Secondly, the Philippine delegation agrees with paragraph 45 in its assertion regarding the severely limiting effect of the outflows required to service external debt of the developing countries on the investment required for rural infrastructures and institutional developments which are very necessary prerequisites for any efforts at rural development.
Thirdly, the Philippine delegation notes with serious concern the report that again in 1989 bothconcessional ODA in total inflows of external financial resources for agriculture declined to a value equivalent in real terms to that of 1986.
Fourthly, the Philippine delegation agrees with the point made in paragraph 45 that the future growth of LDCs inter alia will depend on the conditions governing agriculture, overall trade and market access.
There is no way LDCs can finance their agricultural development efforts if they are unable to export agricultural products where they have comparative advantage because of the high level protectionism which now prevails in world markets. No wonder the agricultural production efforts in developing countries are now faltering and registering a per capita negative growth in food and agricultural production.
Lastly, the Philippine delegation wishes to encourage FAO in its efforts to support developing countries in their efforts at evolving agricultural strategies and in carrying out technical programmes aimed at their implementation.
CHAIRMAN (Original Language Arabic): I welcome the statement by the delegate of the Philippines, especially the point he made concerning protectionism. Many developing countries in actual fact are confronted with this problem. Though they may develop their agriculture, they are still confronted with this protectionist problem.
S. NAJMUS-SAQIB (Pakistan): We wish to make a brief statement on this important item. Perhaps the root cause of the problem is given in paragraph 12, page 3 of the document. Lines 3 to 5 read: "Many LDCs have traditionally been subject to man-made and natural disruptive events affecting the course of their agriculture and economic development..."
We share FAO's recognition of the priorities of the LDCs and of their peculiar and unfortunate situations. Amongst others, the first and foremost priority is food security and, if I may add, it is their undeniable right to food. This, Sir, is God-given. All other priorities as laid out in the document are more or less related to the first priority. Unfortunately, as has been indicated in the Conference documents, the state of food and agriculture, of food security, is not satisfactory.
As has been conceded too, man-made disruptions as well as man-made barriers, are the main impediments, not only to food security, but to sustainable development in food and agriculture in the developing countries. These work against any developmental activities undertaken by these countries, where the most affected, unfortunately, are the least developed ones (the LDC's).
The fact is that all crises, be it war or, the imposition of tariff, non-tariff and other barriers imposed by the developed countries, directly affect the developing countries; hamper and, at times, totally disrupt the developmental activities undertaken. Interestingly, it is the developing countries which need to protect their trade - whereas, the situation is the other way around. The developed and the advanced countries of the world pursue stringent and ruthless trade protectionism and give subsidies both in production and export. As the Philippines rightly pointed out, this has reached a staggering sum.
Unfortunately, the developing countries, and most of all the least developed ones, have no choice but to import food to feed their people, and these very imports work against them in two ways: one, being short of funds, they have to obtain loans, etc., at terms in imposed by the lending countries; and, later, they have to buy food from the loan-giving country at a price fixed by that country which is much higher than the normal prevalent market prices; two, alternatively, these imports constitute a constant drain on their already depleted foreign exchange reserves which they have no hope of balancing through normal trade because of their totally disadvantageous position. In such hopeless situations, the vulnerability of the developing countries, and most of all of the LDCs, to external pressures, is totally exposed.
We feel that it is here that FAO can play an important role by providing an institutional framework to actively assist and help these countries overcome some of their problems. At the same time, the promotion of increased dialogue, technical help and quick response to emergencies is called for.
Finally, we would request that the FAO assistance plans, along with those of other agencies as well as governments, should also cover the middle-income countries, where structures and systems are also built on a fragile edifice.
LI ZHENG-DONG (China) (Original language Chinese): In the first place, I would like to thank the Assistant Director-General, Mr Rinville, for his introduction; and my thanks are also addressed to the Secretariat for preparing such a concise and brief document, namely, Helping the Least Developed Countries to Define an Agricultural Development Strategy. This is an important issue which calls for the attention of the whole international community. The undertaking of such work will help to narrow the gap between the North and the South, and therefore is of great importance and significance.
We have noticed that in the last several years this Organization, even without a special programme for LDCs has done a great deal of work to help the LDCs. These LDCs have won certain benefits from FAO's Regular and Field Programmes. By helping the least-developed countries to define agricultural development strategy, FAO can do a lot of work in this sense. We believe that FAO can shoulder an inevitable responsibility. Therefore, FAO should create a favourable environment at regional, national and international level, so as to help these countries in building up their self-development capacity.
The cases and situations of these LDCs vary from one to the other. We believe that international assistance and their indigenous efforts should take into account the existing realities and situations. It is believed that the LDCs and their economic environment should be studied further and this kind of study should be further strengthened. We hope that an integrated report will be presented in the coming meetings.
The international community, especially the countries with potential to help these LDCs, can list the LDCs at the top of their Governmental agenda.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): Thank you very much. Of course, the Organization does have a leading role to fulfil, and it is of the utmost importance that it helps the LDCs, but obviously there must be total coordination with other agencies and other organizations which have similar competence.
Jean-Paul RIVAUX (France): Après avoir eu l'honneur d'accueillir en 1990 l'importante Conférence sur les pays les moins avancés, la France se félicite de l'inscription à l'ordre du jour de ce point qui devrait nous permettre d'examiner l'effort fait par la FAO en faveur des pays les plus défavorisés. Comme vous le savez, l'action en faveur des PMA reste l'une des priorités de la politique française de coopération. C'est pourquoi ma délégation a examiné le document qui nous est présenté avec une attention particulière.
Le document appelle les remarques suivantes:
La première partie récapitule les activités et orientations de la FAO qui coïncident avec les directives de la dernière Conférence des PMA.
Les domaines d'intervention sont traditionnels. Il s'agit de la valorisation des ressources humaines, de l'intégration régionale, de la sécurité alimentaire, de la pêche, de la forêt, de l'environnement.
Sans doute aurait-il été préférable de présenter ces actions dans le cadre d'une stratégie globale et cohérente que ne reflète guère l'examen du rapport du Secrétariat.
Peut-être pouvait-on attendre de la part de la FAO, qui dispose d'une longue expérience dans le domaine de la coopération avec les PMA, un témoignage plus original et plus concret, mettant en évidence les efforts déployés par l'Organisation pour se hisser au rang du conseil effectif dans le domaine des politiques agricoles et alimentaires.
La deuxième remarque du document cherche à mettre l'accent sur l'assistance de la FAO aux PMA pour définir cette stratégie de développement que j'évoquais voici quelques instants. Sans être toujours très convaincant, le Secrétariat passe en revue les actions de la FAO dans les domaines suivants: la politique d'ajustement structurel, la planification et l'élaboration de stratégies, l'amélioration des capacités d'analyse des politiques et la coopération avec d'autres institutions en vue d'améliorer la coordination de l'aide.
Cette analyse trop descriptive pourrait être utilement complétée par une réflexion approfondie sur les conséquences sociales de l'ajustement structurel, selon un souhait maintes fois réitéré dans cette enceinte.
Ma délégation regrette également que le document ne précise pas davantage les analyses et les objectifs de la FAO dans le domaine des stratégies de développement agricole. Le paragraphe 86 du Programme d'action de la deuxième Conférence des Nations Unies sur les pays les moins avancés, cité dans le document, suggérait à cet égard certaines lignes d'action. Je rappellerai, en particulier:
- l'adoption de politiques de prix et de crédits agricoles tenant compte du marché et de la nécessité de prévoir des mesures d'encouragement;
- l'amélioration de la répartition des revenus;
- une participation du secteur public en faveur de l'approvisionnement des zones déficitaires;
- la diversification de la base agricole (intégration agriculture-élevage, promotion de la pêche, amélioration de la productivité);
- le développement et l'application de la recherche agricole;
- la réforme des modes de culture et du régime foncier;
- l'adoption de techniques agricoles tenant compte de la nécessité de protéger le milieu rural;
- la mise en place de services d'appui à l'agriculture (en particulier le crédit agricole).
Ces propositions, qui figuraient dans le document de 1990, pourraient servir de référence à l'Organisation dans la définition de ses programmes en faveur des PMA.
Le document que nous examinons aujourd'hui ne met pas suffisamment en lumière les conditions dans lesquelles les programmes de la FAO s'appuient effectivement sur les orientations de la Conférence des PMA.
Enfin, la délégation française souhaite rappeler qu'elle soutient le principe d'une coopération entre les PMA et les autres pays en développement dans le cadre des institutions régionales existantes.
Comme elle l'a précédemment déclaré, ma délégation se félicite des efforts qui sont faits pour la coordination de l'aide aux PMA et souhaite que la participation de la FAO aux tables rondes du PNUD et aux groupes consultatifs PNUD/Banque mondiale soit favorisée.
Pour en terminer, ma délégation souhaite qu'en dépit des limites budgétaires de l'Organisation, limites que nous connaissons, une priorité plus évidente en faveur des PMA soit affichée dans le Programme ordinaire dont les moyens seront d'autant plus facilement augmentés par des ressources extrabudgétaires que la stratégie et le programme-cadre d'intervention seront plus clairement définis.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabie): The Secretariat has listened very carefully to your proposals and suggestions. I believe that the Organization is giving considerable assistance to LDCs. This is very clear from the Programme of Technical Cooperation.
B.P. SINHA (Nepal): Along with my delegation, I fully endorse all the strategies included in the Report of the Director-General. However, we would like to make a few comments on the following:
In paragraph 2, specific measures under the sections dealing with agricultural and rural development, environment, disaster mitigation, preparedness and prevention are clearly mentioned. But in the context of Least-Developed Countries like Nepal there is little reference to policy issues like price support of the agricultural production of the farmers. Imported inputs are very important to increase the production and productivity of agricultural crops. Most of these Least-Developed Countries are importing fertilizers and plant protection chemicals and equipment at very high prices. The market for their products is not remunerative, so farmers are not getting motivated to increase their agricultural production. My delegation therefore believes that some sort of mechanism should be developed, to help these developing countries to have a system of relevant price support for the farmers.
Secondly, the matter of crop insurance: in most Least-Developed Countries, particularly Nepal, agriculture is totally dependent on nature. Frequently we have irregularities of rain, which affect agricultural production. If some kind of mechanism of crop insurance is going to be introduced, then farmers can get help and encouragement to increase their production.
Thirdly, the food security issue. My delegation does not like Food Aid, which gives no incentive to the farmer to increase food production. We would rather that FAO helped us in the establishment of food security and buffer stocks to meet food emergencies. Unless and until, especially in the Least-Developed Countries, people's purchasing power is increased, the provision of food either by import or by food aid will not be helpful or give any incentive to the farmers. It therefore seems to my delegation that this concept of food aid is going to be self-defeating.
CHAIRMAN: I would like to remind you of a Chinese proverb, "Do not give me a fish to eat, but give me a fishing rod and teach me how to fish."
François ROUX (Belgique): La délégation belge désire tout d'abord remercier M. Rinville pour son introduction et pour le rapport C 91/26 qui nous est soumis.
La Belgique a apporté tout son soutien, lors de la deuxième Conférence des Nations Unies sur les PMA, à Paris, en 1990, à l'adoption des dispositions du Programme d'action, notamment celles relatives au développement rural, à la modernisation de la production agricole et à la sécurité alimentaire dans les PMA.
Pour mon pays, la Section V du Programme d'action relève d'une conviction fondamentale: la nécessité pour les populations de disposer d'un approvisionnement suffisant et raisonnablement prévisible.
Il se fait que cette question se trouve au centre de la politique belge de coopération au développement. La déclaration gouvernementale de 1988 prévoyait déjà trois priorités dans l'octroi de l'aide. Je les cite:
- concentrer l'aide sur les PMA;
- renforcer les projets axés sur les besoins de base des populations, au premier rang desquels vient l'alimentation;
- accorder la priorité à l'agriculture et au développement des zones rurales dans le cadre des stratégies alimentaires et nutritionnelles sadaptés.
Au sein de la FAO, notre pays s'est attaché à réserver la priorité aux pays les moins avancés, notamment lors de la mise en oeuvre de nos projets de développement financés par des fonds fiduciaires. Un important projet forestier connaît un certain succès au Cap-Vert. Un projet régional de développement des cultures maraîchères est en cours au Sénégal avec diverses antennes en Guinée, notamment. En Asie, nous finançons un projet d'amélioration des semences en coopération avec le Danemark.
Enfin, depuis un an, les intérêts que génère notre fonds fiduciaire servent au lancement de projets et de programmes dans l'esprit du PCT. Il s'agit d'une expérience qui, jusqu'ici, a rencontré un certain succès. C'est ainsi que 14 de ces petits projets sont devenus, cette année, opérationnels.
Nous espérons que cette expérience belge fera d'autres adeptes et permettra, à terme, d'assurer la pérennité de l'assistance technique aux pays les moins avancés. Nous sommes cependant conscients du caractère extrêmement limité de cette expérience face aux problèmes des PMA. La Belgique oeuvre également dans d'autres enceintes pour assurer la mise en place d'un système d'échanges stable et équitable et elle a également fait des propositions pour régler le problème de la dette internationale de ces pays.
Praphas WEERAPAT (Thailand): The Thailand delegation recognizes that the Least-Developed Countries need help in defining the strategy for their agricultural development. Consequently, the Thai delegation would like to thank the Secretariat for the preparation of document C 91/26 for our discussion in this Commission. The Thai delegation would also like to support the FAO in its initiative in helping the Least-Developed Countries to define an agricultural development strategy, either through the FAO regional networks or cooperation with other institutions.
The Thailand delegation would like to identify the situation of the Least-Developed Countries by asking the question: "Are the Least-Developed Countries facing the food deficit and the low income of their populations?" If this question is applicable, the Thai delegation would like to suggest that the agricultural development for food and nutrition production, and increasing the income of populations on the basis of the availability of their natural resources, should be in the form of sustainability, a strategy for agricultural development.
The Thailand delegation wishes to express our view that we would like to cooperate with the Least-Developed Countries, either through the TCDC programme or bilateral agreements, in agricultural development for the well-being of the populations in the Least-Developed Countries.
Bo WILEN (Sweden): My delegation has read the Director-General's Report C 91/26 with much interest. We believe FAO is to be commended on the degree of attention it gives the least developed countries in allocating more than half of the resources destined for field activities to those countries. We also are of the view that the Organization made important contributions to the Paris Conference on LDCs in September last year and has participated actively and in a forward-looking manner in the follow up and implementation of the Conference's Programme of Action.
This said, we would like to comment on the chapter entitled Country Policy and Structural Adjustment Work. The last FAO Conference considered that the Organization should focus more closely on sector and sub-sector reviews, and structural adjustment work at country level.
We appreciate that FAO has increased its involvement in work related to these important tasks, but we note with concern paragraph 34 of document C 91/26. It reads: "Lack of assured funding is a serious constraint in assisting LDCs in analysing their food and agricultural situation in the light of their macro-economic environment and evolving appropriate strategies." This illustrates a difficult dilemma. We, the governing bodies of FAO, have in our priority setting created a situation where it lacks money for the Organization to perform its role as a centre of excellence within its mandate, in service for, among others, the LDCs. We, the governing bodies, have created a situation in which the expertise of FAO cannot be exploited fully for policy advice and formulation work.
My delegation does not think that in this case the solution is just more extra-budgetary resources. This is a matter of priority setting and for the governing bodies to get very concrete proposals from the Secretariat in dialogue with the Member States and furthermore, of all Member States fulfilling their obligations with regard to the assessed contributions.
Our view is, instead, that FAO should be further strengthened as regards its role as a centre of excellence. At the sacrifice of what? Of course, FAO also has an important role to play in the operational activities of the development cooperation. But my delegation is of the view that project administration should in principle be performed by the developing countries themselves; with the understanding, of course, that in certain phases in programme or project cycles technical assistance may be needed.
My delegation believes that the strengthening of FAO as a centre of excellence in agriculture, forestry and fisheries must continue so that it is natural for all relevant funding organizations to demand and utilize the expertise of FAO in policy advice and formulation. In that way FAO can act as a catalyst for operational activities financed either multilaterally or bilaterally. This is most important for the LDCs.
To sum up, FAO has a real advantage to act, within its mandate, in the fields of support for country policy and structural adjustment work, planning and strategy formulation, improving capabilities in policy analysis and for strengthening the LDCs capacity to coordinate internal and external inputs. Finance to cover the costs implied may come from UNDP, other international agencies and institutions and, of course, the Technical Cooperation Programme of FAO.
To that end my delegation welcomes FAO's efforts to further strengthen the cooperation with other multilateral institutions and bilateral agencies.
H.E.J. JORRITSMA (Netherlands): I have just a few remarks to make. Assistance to developing countries in formulating a development strategy for the agricultural sector is one of the main activities of FAO, and I suppose I have the impression that it will be increasingly so in the future.
The document presented by FAO gives an overview of the projects that have been excluded during the last few years in the sphere of food security, the role of development, fisheries, forestry, and the sustainable development of agriculture in developing countries. However, I have the impression that it is less explicit on the way in which important objectives, as far as our delegation is concerned, like human resource development, institutional development, support of farmers' organizations, and women's participation are realized, and on the concrete results of these activities.
Another aspect I would like to mention concerns the changing roles of government and the private sector in macro-economic development thinking in important institutions like the World Bank. It is not clear from the document what the position of FAO is or will be in this respect, and to what extent adaptations in its activities are foreseen.
In the second part of the document which deals with FAO assistance to the least developed countries, in formulating an agricultural development strategy there are other things lacking. In this context, recent developments in GATT in the field of liberalizing world markets should be taken into account when giving agriculture in developing countries a chance to be ecologically sustainable and economically viable in the long run.
Ms T.F. ADORO (Lesotho): My delegation wishes to reiterate its support for the Programme of Action as stipulated in the Report before us. We also wish to commend FAO for working closely through inter-agency mechanisms in the follow up and implementation of this Programme of Action. However, we are dismayed to learn that FAO has no special programme with the LDCs, a move which would be most welcomed by my delegation. It is our hope that FAO will consider establishing such a special programme in its future activities.
In most of the LDCs there already exists, although on a small scale, some form of participatory development in the form of cooperative and farmers' associations. We can only urge FAO to provide the technical assistance needed to enhance these initiatives and to make viable such things as manpower training.
While aligning ourselves fully with the efforts undertaken by FAO in food security and disaster mitigation, we would urge FAO to increase its assistance through its Global Information and Early Warning System on Food and Agriculture. We firmly believe prevention is better than cure. We applaud FAO for recognizing the interrelationship between forests and energy, and the need for integrating energy into the overall agricultural plans and strategies in the LDCs. My delegation hopes that the important initiative that is already under way in Asia will be extended soon to cover other regions as well, particularly in Africa.
On the question of the environment and sustainable agriculture and rural development, we support the Den Bosch Agreement. We are looking forward to FAO's assistance in helping the LDCs tailor their programmes to meet individual needs, as is stipulated in paragraph 26.
We urge FAO to continue to work closely with regional economic organizations as stated in paragraph 27. These organizations need assistance especially in manpower training in order to meet their goals and objectives.
We endorse fully the contents of paragraph 36. FAO should continue to provide information on this crucial matter.
My delegation applauds FAO on its policy analyses both at government and regional levels. We particularly should support the efforts to achieve this objective by way of training courses, workshops and discussion and training materials. We would be happy to see Lesotho included in these initiatives.
Art WRIGHT (Canada): Document C 91/26 deals with issues vital to the people and governments of less developed countries and therefore we thank the Secretariat for providing us with the opportunity to discuss these issues, and Mr Rinville for his helpful introduction.
Our own development assistance policy places great emphasis on the interrelated challenges of reducing poverty and stimulating agricultural productivity in the least developed countries. While FAO itself does not specifically structure its programmes to address the unique conditions of least developed countries, the Organization does have significant skills which we believe can be directed to assist least developed countries in devising their own agricultural development strategies.
The approach outlined in the Paris LDC Conference held in 1990, hosted by the Government of France, provides some useful guidelines for the manner in which such strategies can be put forward.
We would associate ourselves very closely with the remarks of the French delegation in commenting specifically on the document before us. Like France, my delegation believes that the Report would have benefited from a greater level of analysis and perhaps less description of projects that have been undertaken.
We recognize that Resolution 1/89 defined very specifically the mandate to be addressed, but we believe much of the document C 91/26 reviews projects and activities undertaken, but does not draw lessons from the experience in a way which is potentially most helpful. We would think that given the extensive experience of FAO, there is a great deal that can be contributed in cooperation with other appropriate agencies and organizations.
Just to illustrate this, it would be useful to reflect that the data that FAO has at its disposal because of its long association with agricultural programmes in least developed countries are perhaps as comprehensive as any particular data bank on these issues that exists anywhere. If these data were more effectively analyzed and perhaps shared with other relevant institutions, it could indeed be of great assistance to least developed countries who are attempting to develop a strategic approach which will
help them realize their agricultural potential. It is often not a total lack of data on agricultural performance, on production, on comparative advantage and market trends (raw data often do exist) but the analysis of these data and the putting of the data into a form useful to the particular problems encountered by individual countries is so often lacking.
If countries are to be asked to increase their efficiency and to assess market trends in a way that takes advantage of their comparative advantage, then they must have access to such analyses. They must also have assistance in assessing their resource base, the skills and financial resources available to them in order to document their own particular strengths and weaknesses. If, indeed, it is essential, as we all believe, for agricultural production to increase and to become more efficient, then it is necessary for countries to develop concrete, practical options that reflect the real world environment and the markets for their products.
These kinds of strategic decisions can only be taken in the context of an agricultural strategic plan. Obviously, that is the intention of many developing countries.
I think where the FAO can make the largest contribution is in working with other institutions that do have access to this basic data and ensuring that it is used in a way that assists countries to use the experience that has been gained in order to develop appropriate policies, local skills and capacities.
Hugh SMITH (United States of America): The United States delegation endorses and supports document C 91/26 on helping the least developed countries to define an agricultural development strategy. The review of FAO's work in the area of strategic planning is a continuing process that has as its goal improving FAO's overall institutional effectiveness in promoting worldwide sustained agricultural development. As such, the United States delegation encourages FAO to continue its efforts to build its own capacity, as well as that of the LDCs, to accomplish this goal.
Notwithstanding our support and endorsement of FAO's report, the United States delegation would nevertheless like to make the following observations and suggestions.
Although all of the activities described in the report help toward the attainment of the stated objective of assisting the LDCs to achieve sustained agricultural development, the report does not provide a clear and focused development paradigm upon which critical development constraints are identified and strategic choices are made. The report appears to reflect a broad, diffused approach to the problems of agricultural development, while at the same time excluding such important development issues as, for example, how to promote regional trade, how to improve the commercialization of agricultural inputs, marketing systems, and how to privatize parastatals.
In the critical area of building local capacity to undertake agricultural policy analysis, FAO's approach is one of building public sector capacity. Although this is important to the process, the United States delegation encourages FAO to also look for ways to develop capacities within the
private sector and within the academic community that is involved in the agricultural sector.
With respect to the section of the report on the development of fisheries, the United States delegation also encourages FAO to integrate into its fisheries programmes elements of environmental and natural resources management.
In terms of the energy sector, it is not clear from the report how energy planning is being integrated into overall agricultural development plans. We believe that this section should be improved.
With regard to sustainable agriculture, the US delegation believes that sustainable agriculture is very much a research issue. As such, FAO is encouraged to go beyond the Den Bosch Declaration and to leverage its resources for increased research efforts in sustainable agricultural development, especially on the flatlands of the world.
Finally, the United States delegation would like to suggest that FAO continue to assist those countries implementing major structural adjustment programmes. Special emphasis should be placed on monitoring programme impacts.
The challenge to FAO in its efforts to guide the LDCs will be how to achieve sustained agricultural growth. This will require increased investment not only in strategic planning but, more importantly, in infrastructure, human and physical capital, access to technology and financial markets in order to encourage the private sector to respond to the improved policy environment.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I would like to recommend your request to give the private sector a more important role and to assess the results of the structural adjustment and its impact on the LDCs.
Deddy SUDARMAN (Indonesia): My delegation is very pleased to note from Mr Rinville's introductory remarks and document C 91/26 before us that, although FAO has no special programme for the LDCs as such, they remain at the centre of FAO's concern in view of their needs with more than half of the resources allocated to field activities directed to the LDCs.
My delegation supports the FAO's activities in helping the LDCs, especially in the sectors related to sustainable agriculture and rural development.
With regard to the economic and technical cooperation among developing countries, which already has proved to be a very effective programme for cooperation among developing countries, such cooperation should be continuously promoted. In this connection, although the primary responsibility to implement ECDC/TCDC lies with the developing countries themselves, the continuing active role of UN bodies and developed countries, as well, is still very much needed and welcomed. My delegation therefore wishes FAO to continue its support on ECDC/TCDC activities.
As far as Indonesia is concerned, we have been extending technical cooperation under the Indonesia TCDC programmes to more than 20 developing countries, including LDCs, annually. Our TCDC programmes cover various fields such as industry, agriculture, public work, mining and energy, social welfare, nature conservation, public relations and family planning. For fiscal year 1991/1992 Indonesia has offered 18 TCDC training programmes facilities which can accommodate not less than 450 participants from other developing countries, including LDCs.
I would like also to state that the Indonesian Government in cooperation with UNDP conducted a TCDC Programming Exercise Meeting in Jakarta last year which was attended by 29 countries from Asia, the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, the Pacific and Europe, and seven international organizations such as ESCAP, FAO, UNDP, IDB, UNFPA, UNDTCD, and one international NGO, Foster Parents Plan.
In bilateral negotiations during the meeting 219 projects of technical cooperation were finalized. Of these, 165 projects were requested from Indonesia by the other participating countries, and 54 projects were requested by Indonesia to the other participating countries.
With regard to the FAO assistance to LDCs in defining agricultural development strategy at country level, my delegation believes that, in order to be more effective, such a development strategy should be deeply rooted in the conditions, interests, concerns and priorities of the LDCs themselves.
However, the successful attainment of this objective also needs a more favourable external environment, especially the availability of external financing, improvement of imperfect market structures and increased access to technology. All those factors would create a conducive environment for development of LDCs.
Takakata OKAMOTO (Japan): I would like to express our appreciation to the Secretariat for the concise and comprehensive introduction to document C 91/26. My comments will be very brief.
Agriculture is an integral part of the fundamentals of the national economy in the least developed countries, and it is indispensable to ensure sound conditions for agricultural production such as production skill, labour forces and land for cultivation through actual production activities in order to achieve a steady supply of foodstuffs.
We are well aware that many least developed countries have been striving against many difficulties. These difficulties are attributable to such causes as population growth, stagnating productivity of agriculture and inefficient economic management.
The document reports FAO's approaches and measures specifically, and its Conclusion in paragraph 45 indicates that an appropriate agricultural development strategy is a key part of the country's overall development policy. My country quite agrees with this view.
Japan has worked to expand its aid to least developed countries. The Fourth Medium-Term Target during the period of 1988 to 1992 clearly states further increases in its proportion of aid.
M. Virgilio MONALDI (Italie): Permettez-moi de remercier tout d'abord le Secrétariat pour le document intitulé "Aide aux pays les moins avancés en vue de définir une stratégie de développement agricole" qui nous a été proposé, et, ensuite, M. Rinville pour sa présentation sur ce chapitre de l'ordre du jour. Il s'agit d'un document fort intéressant, qui fait le point à la fois sur la participation de la FAO à la mise en oeuvre du Programme d'action de Paris et aussi sur les différentes formes d'assistance aux PMA pour définir une stratégie de développement au niveau des pays dans le cadre des PAS. Nous estimons que ce document est d'autant plus important dans la mesure où la FAO, bien qu'elle ne possède pas un programme spécial pour les PMA, consacre une part importante de ses ressources à ce groupe de pays.
Cela dit, je voudrais faire quelques remarques concernant l'approche stratégique générale en ce qui concerne les deux aspects susmentionnés, c'est-à-dire la définition d'une stratégie de développement agricole spécifique aux PMA dans le cadre de la mise en oeuvre du Programme d'action de Paris et le rôle de la FAO "vis-à-vis" des politiques d'ajustement structurel.
Il faut dire tout de suite que nous avons l'impression que les différentes activités menées dans les domaines de compétence de la FAO ne répondent pas véritablement à un dessin stratégique global, mais se concrétisent plutôt dans des actions ponctuelles qui, seulement par hasard et a posteriori, peuvent déboucher sur une stratégie spécifique de développement. Et pourtant, il est connu que les problèmes de la majorité des PMA sont bien différents des autres pays en voie de développement: il ne s'agit pas ici, de "gérer" une économie ou un secteur: il faut plutôt reconstituer les bases de la croissance à long terme, ce qui implique la définition d'une véritable stratégie agricole ad hoc.
Le deuxième volet de ce rapport est étroitement lié aux activités de l'Organisation "vis-à-vis" des PMA en ce qui concerne la définition et la mise en place des politiques nationales dans un contexte d'ajustement structurel. Il est évident que les politiques nationales nécessitent une analyse intégrée et approfondie d'un large éventail de questions touchant au développement (le cadre macro-économique, les politiques monétaires et commerciales, les aspects socio-économiques des politiques, la capacité nationale de formuler, mettre en oeuvre et suivre des politiques agricoles, etc.). Mais pour cela, il faut adopter une approche multidisciplinaire. Et pourtant, la lecture de ce document nous amène à la conclusion que cette approche, quoique dans les capacités de la FAO, ne semble pas s'être encore pleinement réalisée. En effet, il s'agit surtout d'actions isolées, bien souvent très utiles mais sans une véritable vision d'ensemble et qui répondent plutôt à la logique de "l'approche-projet" plutôt que de "l'approche-pays" ou, encore mieux, de l'approche de "développement régional ou sub-régional".
Il faudrait dire, entre parenthèses, que nous attachons, et on l'avait soutenu à plusieurs reprises lors de la Conférence de Paris, une importance spéciale à cette approche sous-régionale. En ce qui concerne plus
spécifiquement le contexte actuel de l'ajustement structurel et de l'action de la FAO à cet égard, il nous semble que des économies fragiles structurellement handicapées et fortement dépendantes de l'extérieur nécessitent un appui technique particulier, original, afin de les aider à définir une politique spécifique pour développer les potentialités agricoles sans, en même temps, risquer une trop forte distorsion de leur économie.
Dans le domaine de la privatisation, soutenue à l'origine d'une façon parfois dogmatique par certaines institutions financières internationales sans tenir compte de la spécificité des pays en voie de développement et en particulier des PMA, il nous semble aussi que la FAO devrait jouer un rôle plus actif pour éviter les conséquences négatives de ce processus. Ce n'est pas une surprise par exemple que dans certains pays une privatisation à tout prix peut marginaliser, et a en effet marginalisé, les zones agricoles à plus basse potentialité.
Avant de terminer, permettez-moi de mentionner encore trois points spécifiques aux PMA: d'abord, et pour ce qui a trait à certains aspects de la malnutrition dans ces pays, il nous semble que l'analyse des tendances de consommation, et plus particulièrement des variations des quantités consommées des différents produits, devrait constituer la contrepartie nécessaire de n'importe quel type de politique portant sur une approche équilibrée entre les besoins alimentaires et les quantités consommées.
Ensuite, il serait peut-être intéressant que la FAO se penche plus particulièrement dans le domaine de la sécurité alimentaire sur les problèmes de l'accès physique et financier à la nourriture de base pour tous les exclus du développement. Ceci concerne en priorité les nouvelles couches urbaines, sans oublier naturellement la paysannerie marginale.
Finalement et pour ce qui est de l'aide à l'agriculture, il va de soi que la réalisation de projets agricoles implique un montant de coût récurrent par unité d'investissement beaucoup plus important que dans d'autres secteurs. Nous sommes de l'avis que la FAO pourrait attirer davantage l'attention de la communauté internationale sur cet aspect étant donné l'impossibilité pratique de la plupart des PMA de faire face eux-mêmes à ce type de dépenses.
En conclusion, il nous semble que d'une façon générale la FAO devrait développer l'approche par pays et mettre en parallèle un programme d'analyse régionale et sous-régionale tenant compte de l'importance de la structure des échanges entre les pays. Ceci permettrait à notre avis de mieux cibler les problèmes spécifiques des PMA. En même temps, il faut aussi reconnaître qu'il faut que la FAO soit mise à même de pouvoir jouer pleinement son rôle fondamental d'organisation spécialisée dans le domaine agricole. A cet égard, nous estimons qu'il est nécessaire qu'elle soit associée dès le début à la phase préparatoire des négociations dans le cadre des tables rondes du PNUD ou des groupes consultatifs de la Banque mondiale. Il va sans dire que nous attachons une importance particulière à cet aspect. Voilà les quelques remarques que nous faisons.
Jorgen Skovegaard NIELSEN (Denmark): I thank Mr Rinville for his comprehensive introduction to this item.
Denmark appreciates the response given by FAO on the Programme of Action to help LDCs at their request, to define an agricultural development strategy.
This is a clear sign of FAO's intention to move more into up-stream activities. We have noted with pleasure that the TSS-1 facility established under the UNDP support costs successors agreements are mentioned specifically.
The international financial institutions should not tempt specialized agencies to fall back on their previous habit of expanding project execution at the cost of Regular Programme activities and thereby eroding the technical backstopping capacity of the technical divisions.
We therefore hope that FAO in the execution of World Bank projects is determined to stick to the selectivity mentioned in paragraph 44 on policy capacity building and resource management. This would be in good conformity with the Nordic UN Project.
Finally, let me emphasize that Denmark attaches great importance to sector policy analysis in liaison with economic adjustment programmes. We believe this is one of the most outstanding areas of comparative advantage of FAO.
Jung-il KANG (Korea, Republic of): It is clear to all of us that helping the least developed countries to define their agricultural development strategy would have a crucial impact on their overall development process because agriculture accounts for nearly half of the Gross Domestic Product of those and employs almost three quarters of their labour force.
The Korean delegation firmly believes that the actions taken by FAO in terms of implementing the Programme of Action have been adequate. Among others, the Country Policy Information System was a nice way to assemble relevant information on individual countries' policy work. Various countries as listed on document C 91/26 benefited from the policy-related training of FAO.
We believe, however, that more efforts are required to deal with the food security problems of least developed countries. Even if FAO is helping the LDCs to cope with food shortages, they need more systematic help from FAO to adjust their agriculture. Our delegation consider that the short-run emergency relief should be accompanied by the long-run structural adjustment approach.
In order to help the LDCs, the Korean Government offers to share her experience in agricultural and rural development by expanding training opportunities in Korea.
Christian BONAPARTE (Haïti): J'essaierai d'être bref et d'éviter les grands mots. Les délégations qui m'ont précédé ont fait des interventions bien spécifiques et très analytiques.
Nous remercions M. Rinville de sa présentation et la Direction générale pour cette réponse à la Résolution 1/98 qui faisait suite à la Conférence de Paris sur les PMA.
Notre délégation se félicite de ce que - et je cite - "les parties du Programme d'action qui traitent de la sécurité alimentaire, de l'atténuation des effets des catastrophes, de la préparation aux catastrophes et de la prévention correspondent parfaitement aux priorités de la FAO". C'est là un très bon point. Nous sommes heureux aussi de cette priorité indubitable qu'ont les PMA tel que précisé au paragraphe 12 et suivant la nouvelle option de la Direction générale.
Haïti fait malheureusement partie du groupe des pays les moins avancés, le seul PMA dans l'hémisphère Nord, et nous approuvons la démarche qui nous est présentée. Nous notons toutefois, aux paragraphes 8, 9 et 11, qu'il s'agit pour la plupart de pays d'Afrique. Nous en sommes heureux pour nos frères africains, mais notre pays souhaiterait également pouvoir bénéficier un peu plus de l'expérience de la FAO en matière d'aide aux PMA. Nous appuyons néanmoins le document.
Cependant, nous ne voyons pas comment le problème du développement agricole concernant l'élaboration de plans nationaux réalistes dans les pays les moins avancés pourra être résolu dans ces PMA qui se voient affublés du programme d'ajustement structurel. Beaucoup de ces pays n'ont pratiquement que leur bonne volonté et leur patience pour tout espoir de voir résoudre les problèmes multiples auxquels ils font face. Ajoutez à cela des conditions macro-économiques discutables.
Toutes les priorités mentionnées dans ce rapport sont très appropriées mais nous nous demandons quelle peut être leur efficacité sans l'établissement d'une échelle de priorités - il y en a tellement! - étant donné l'absence d'un environnement externe favorable tel que l'a mentionné le délégué de l'Indonésie.
Au niveau des conclusions - et toujours pour être bref - présentées dans ce rapport qui est soumis aux Etats Membres, nous devons relever quelques vérités de Lapalisse en ce qui concerne la stratégie du développement agricole, les affectations budgétaires, les politiques relatives à la dette et autres, dans le contexte actuel des préoccupations de la communauté internationale pour venir en aide aux PMA. On se demande, par ailleurs, comment sur la seule base du caractère prioritaire des principaux bénéficiaires, en l'absence d'un programme visant spécifiquement les pays les moins avancés, comme stipulé au paragraphe 47, l'assistance aux PMA pourra être efficace dans les diverses activités. Il y a là un besoin d'analyse interne dans une approche d'ensemble. Faisons cependant une suggestion qui pourrait nous aider à mieux connaître, à l'avenir, l'aide de la FAO aux PMA - disons l'utilisation de certains chiffres un peu plus statistiques. Sur les sommes allouées, par type de programme, aux PMA et aux autres pays en développement. C'est une suggestion, tout à fait gratuite, bien sûr.
Avant de terminer, j'ajouterai que nous avons souvent entendu ici les termes "pays les moins développés" utilisés par certaines délégations alors qu'il s'agit des pays les moins avancés. Je souligne cet aspect parce que la différence est de taille. Il s'agit effectivement, pour les PMA, de passer d'une misère quasi absolue au strict minimum indispensable et non du strict minimum à une multiplicité de moyens. Voilà encore un élément d'analyse pour le choix des priorités et l'orientation du programme.
Pour finir, M. le Président, vous avez cité tout à l'heure le proverbe chinois du poisson et de la canne à pêche, qui était fort approprié, d'ailleurs. Je me permettrai de citer un proverbe haïtien: "Chen gen kat Pat, li kouwi yon sél chemen", ce qui veut dire, en créole: "Le chien a quatre pattes, il court dans une seule direction".
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I thank the distinguished Representative of Haiti for his statement, particularly in so far as the proverb is concerned.
Parviz KARBASI (Iran, Islamic Republic of): My delegation wishes to thank the Secretariat, Mr Rinville, and the FAO for the preparation of document C 91/26.
As a UN family we are here, hopefully, to help each other to raise food production and to eliminate hunger and poverty. We agree in general with document C 91/26.
I would like to make a comment. The most important and vital help to LDCs is appropriate technology whilst also considering the improvement of traditional technology; education, education and education; training, training, and training; and, lastly, extension, extension and extension.
The emphasis should be strongly on ECDC and TCDC.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): The distinguished delegate from Iran was the last speaker on my list for this evening. The United Kingdom, Turkey, Portugal and Iraq have requested that their statements appear in the Verbatim Record of the meeting. We note this.
J.M. SCOTT (United Kingdom): The United Kingdom Delegation congratulates the Secretariat on paper C 91/26.
The United Kingdom fully accepts the important role FAO can and should play in helping agricultural developments in LDCs. However, FAO is but one - albeit an important - institution involved in collaborating with LDCs in the agricultural sector. It is vital that these efforts are coordinated to ensure that finite resources are used to maximum effect and that LDCs (and donors) obtain value for money.
As drafted the document provides an account of the whole range of FAO's activities from the perspective of the Least Developed Countries. This is, in itself, valuable. What is missing, in the opinion of the United Kingdom Delegation, is any clear indication of FAO's priorities. In times of financial stringency it is clearly important that FAO concentrates its efforts on activities which make the greatest impact and where it is at a comparative advantage over other institutions. Paper C 91/26 would have provided a good opportunity for Members to discuss these very issues.
The United Kingdom delegation considers that FAO should focus on policy, planning and strategic issues at a sectoral level information and normative functions, global or regional coordination and technical back-stopping for LDCs. Such prioritization would be at the expense of implementing country-specific field acvitities.1
Sūleyman SAYIN (Turkey) : Mr Chairman and the distinguished delegates of the Conference; it is clear that the basic goals and activities of FAO are based upon the agricultural development of the developing countries. That is why the Programme of Action gives high priority to the development of the agricultural sector. Because, agriculture accounts for nearly half of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and, 3/4 of labour force of the Less Developed Countries (LDCs). So, the funds allocated for development must be spent properly and effectively.
Mr Chairman, my delegation has some remarks and views on the report:
- Several aspects of agriculture must be covered for a better development strategy. Each LDC should have a reliable statistics of its existing natural resources including agriculture, forestry, fishery, land, water, mines and others. Human resource is a very important one on the ability to use the other resources that is the main factor for development. The training needs of the human resource must be considered as a part of development. FAO may play a great role for surveying of resources for a basic starting point. This might be done by increasing the TCP funds or creating other resources for larger long term projects.
- Economic and technical cooperation between LDCs and other developing countries and NGOs is very important for strategy making on agricultural development. As we know, some NGOs and developed countries have been helping LDCs in agricultural development efforts but some of them are still poor and in some areas many people are dying from starvation. There would be some mistakes on problems in helping policies.
- First, NGOs can make a global evaluation on the present helping situation. Those sort of technical or financial supports may be studied, evaluated and compared. By this work, it will be better to get some key notes to avoid making more mistakes in helping policies. This can be achieved by doing some office work and checking it in the field to point out the successful! and non successfull ones, and the reasons as well.
- Less developed countries might pay more attention to the cooperation with other developing countries. Because, developing countries have some recent similar experiences which may help them.
- Those countries may also cooperate between themselves to gather their powers and possibilities. Some successfull experiences can be used in one LDC obtained from other one. Also, the request should be coming from LDCs by their needs.
____________1 Statement inserted in the Verbatim Records on request.
- Some NGOs and developed countries are very jealous to support some very positive agricultural projects in developing countries. It is obvious that such projects shall be feeding more hunger people on the world.
- Another important point is to try to define as simple strategy as possible. Several results show that some helps are not effective and successfull. There is a lot of bureaucracy in NGOs and this creates very sophisticated procedures and programmes. Some technical helps are very high level. The technology given to the LDCs must be easily acceptable and applicable. Helping ones should not be thinking their benefits only.
In general, most of the points to define a better agricultural development strategy for LDCs has already been mentioned in the report by Director-General C 91/26. I am sure the report will be much improved by the recommendations of the Conference.1
Oscar Sales PETINGA (Portugal): Le document C 91/26, en comprenant le rapport de M. le Directeur général sur l'aide aux pays les moins avancés en vue de définir une stratégie de développement agricole, contient une série de points q'ont mérité le plus grand intérêt.
Ainsi, la délégation portugaise se permet de faire quelques commentaires, notamment, aux points 16 et 17, relatifs au développement des pêches.
Le travail que la FAO est en train de développer, depuis quelques années en tout cas, est appréciable et la situation est encore loin d'être considérée comme satisfaisante, en particulier en ce qui concerne l'Afrique, notamment aux pays qui se trouvent dans une situation difficile, résultant de la guerre (Angola et Mozambique) ou d'autres facteurs (Zaire), en quelques uns desquels la structure économique "traditionnelle" doit être reconstruite/restructurée.
Un plus grand effort en termes d'aide, sera nécessaire, notamment aux domaines liés à l'organisation, à la préparation des cadres locaux et à la divulgation.
D'autre part, la situation de crise relative dans le secteur des pêches mondiales a entraîné une croissante concurrence et a provoqué une situation des inégalités en ce qui concerne les activités à des eaux de certains pays côtiers (PMA). La FAO peut donner une importante aide, en stimulant les programmes de coopération bilatéraux (ou autres) dans deux domaines importants :
- divulgation de nouveaux modèles d'accords "joint-venture", type 2ème génération
- création de systèmes de contrôle et vigilance des activités de la pêche sous l'optique d'un certain Etat côtier ou selon un effort conjugué des pays insérés dans une même région.
___________1 Statement inserted in the Verbatim Records on request.
Une autre question qui nous semble importante et qui est liée aux conditions qui amènent au succès, ou non succès, d'un certain Programme, et qui sont relativement fréquentes: les erreurs résultant de la simple transposition des systèmes d'organisation techniques de travail et d'équipement, les uns et les autres non ajustés aux "cultures" et traditions locales ou même aux conditions climatiques.1
Amer D. SALMAM (Iraq) (Original language Arabic): The Iraqi delegation has studied this document and is of the opinion that it meets the expectations of the less-developed countries, particularly as related to assisting these countries through the Global Information and Early Warning System for Food and Agriculture, GIEWS. We are also of the opinion that these countries need further assistance from FAO, especially in the field of information and emergency preparedness.
In this connection, the Iraqi delegation would like to draw attention to an important and a serious issue, that is the severe shortage of foodstuffs experienced in Iraq. While appreciating the assistance provided by FAO to Iraq in this respect, though not enough to satisfy the basic needs of the Iraqi people, we call upon the Organization to provide further assistance in order to alleviate effects of the economic blockade imposed on the Iraqi people.
As concerns the development of human resources, serious efforts have been made, through an agricultural extension and education programme, for developing modern agriculture and increasing production. Great strides have also been made for the integration of women in rural development, through special extension programmes and women organizations. After the new developments in the field of reforming land tenure, land reclamation and the establishment of irrigation and drainage networks, as well as providing rural areas with potable water, rural development programmes in Iraq have been accorded greater attention.2
F. RINVILLE (Sous-Directeur général, Département du développement): Ma
tâche serait difficile, sinon impossible, de prétendre répondre aux commentaires qui ont été faits sur le document que nous vous avons présenté, dans la mesure où ils sont de nature très différente. Les uns sont des compléments dont nous prendrons soigneusement note de façon à améliorer, dans l'avenir, tout rapport que nous ferons sur nos activités; les autres sont des questions, et je m'efforcerai d'y répondre, et au moins de dire pourquoi les réponses ne semblent pas avoir été données dans le document qui vous a été présenté. Enfin, je vous remercie de toutes les suggestions que vous avez faites, qui ont été très positives, comme celles relatives, par exemple, à des fonds fiduciaires en vue de résoudre les problèmes d'une manière innovatrice dans les pays les moins avancés, ou relatives à la coopération technique entre pays en développement.
__________1 Texte reçu avec demande d'insertion au procès-verbal.
2 Statement inserted in the Verbatim Records on request.
J'ai senti que, dans certaines interventions, l'attente était peut-être d'un autre niveau que celui du document que nous avons présenté. Il nous a été demandé, dans ce document, d'indiquer comment la FAO s'associait à la résolution de problèmes et de questions posés par les pays les moins avancés lorsqu'ils cherchent à mettre en place une stratégie, par exemple, pour les dix prochaines années: quelles sont les actions concrètes menées par la FAO à leur demande, dans le cadre d'une politique de développement qu'il appartient aux pays les moins avancés de déterminer plutôt qu'à un document de la FAO? Quelles sont les solutions qu'il convient d'adopter dans tous les pays, en procédant à un examen complet?
Je m'explique: ce qui nous était demandé, c'était de proposer des principes d'action et des mesures permettant de mieux associer la FAO à la mise en oeuvre du Programme d'action pour aider les PMA qui le demandent à élaborer une stratégie de développement agricole pour les dix prochaines années. C'est bien ce qui figure en tête du paragraphe 86 du Plan d'action. C'est le développement qui sera engendré par les décisions des pays eux-mêmes. Il est certain que ce document ne contient pas l'ensemble des débats qui ont lieu à la Conférence de Paris. Il s'agit d'un document de référence dans lequel ont été identifiés l'ensemble des problèmes qui méritent d'être abordés, au niveau de chaque pays, et les solutions appropriées à leur apporter. Nous n'avons donc pas fait de duplication. Nous n'avons pas non plus présenté, dans ce document, ce qui est discuté, par ailleurs, au titre du Programme ordinaire de l'Organisation et des grandes orientations d'activités, notamment des divisions techniques s'occupant des problèmes économiques et sociaux.
Comme je l'ai dit dans ma présentation et comme cela figure au paragraphe 6 du document C 91/26, les mesures recommandées dans le Programme d'action qui ressortent du domaine de compétence de la FAO concordent avec les priorités et les objectifs fondamentaux de l'Organisation qui ont été établis par ses organes directeurs et sont pratiquement toutes couvertes par ses politiques et ses procédures. Le document n'a pas l'ambition de reproduir cela. C'est un choix que nous avons fait car, sinon, il prendrait les dimensions d'un livre et il ne serait plus seulement un document sur les mesures en cours. Ce document ne fait pas non plus un examen exhaustif du Programme de terrain - avec ses annexes ou une analyse pays par pays. Simplement, nous indiquons, comme cela nous est demandé, la manière dont nous nous efforçons de répondre aux demandes des pays. On peut dire que ce sont plusieurs partenaires qui se retrouvent pour répondre à ces demandes: d'abord, le partenaire principal, le pays lui-même; ensuite, la ou les agences sollicitées - comme cela a été dit, il doit y avoir une approche multidisciplinaire et la FAO n'est pas la seule organisation impliquée lorsque nous conseillons les pays les moins avancés, mais il y a également des agences et des institutions financières qui interviennent - et enfin les pays donateur ainsi que, lorsqu'il s'agit de la mise en oeuvre d'un projet de la FAO, la FAO elle-même. Ainsi, les approches sont non seulement pluridisciplinaires mais aussi collectives, avec de nombreux partenaires. Le document qui vous est présenté reflète donc un certain nombre d'exemples d'action dans les domaines cités au titre du Plan d'action pour les pays les moins avancés plutôt qu'un document complet des actions entreprises globalement par la FAO dans chaque pays, la FAO n'étant pas, comme je l'ai dit, seul partenaire en la matière.
Il est vrai que nous nous en sommes tenus davantage à une sorte de compte rendu des opérations effectuées ou en cours, pour montrer comment elles correspondent à la politique qui a été proposée à la Conférence de Paris. Il est vrai aussi - et j'insiste encore - que les propositions faites à la Conférence de Paris sont, pour beaucoup d'entre elles, superposables aux priorités établies dans le Programme de travail et budget de la FAO.
Il a été évoqué le sujet des activités de la FAO comme centre de documentation d'excellence et centre de fourniture de statistiques qui puissent servir de base à l'action.
La FAO, effectivement, d'une part rassemble toute la documentation qu'elle peut rassembler pour les pays les moins avancés, et a constitué la base de banque de données qui puissent être fiables et participer à la résolution des problèmes des pays les mois avancés. Mais elle s'est en outre lancée dans une action à long terme depuis plusieurs années qui est la mise en place d'un système d'alerte pour l'alimentation et l'agriculture, avec des applications qui se font au niveau sous-régional, notamment en Afrique. Ceci est en réponse à une question posée sur les actions qui sont déjà engagées et qui sont relatives pratiquement à tous les pays les moins avancés. Il est à noter que dans la liste des actions qui sont à entreprendre dans le cadre des pays qui ne sont pas dans la catégorie des pays les moins avancés, qui nécessitent aussi des actions du même genre, il n'y a pas exclusivité dans la liste fournie. Il n'y a pas de rupture pour les pays en développement intermédiaire.
Il est vrai aussi que le texte que vous avez devant vous, puisqu'il ressemble un peu mutatis mutandis à ce qu'était l'examen du programme de terrain, se réfère souvent à des actions engagées depuis déjà deux ans et souvent avant la Conférence des pays les moins avancés, et peut très bien cadrer avec ses directives, mais il faut aussi que l'ensemble des actions qui sont entreprises, notamment au niveau de l'analyse sectorielle et des conseils en matière de politique, puisse prendre beaucoup plus clairement et lister exactement, en accord avec les pays pour lesquels ces travaux sont faits, les repères qui ont été indiqués, qui sont essentiels, au titre et dans le cadre du plan d'action pour les pays les moins avancés. C'est un processus en cours.
Il est certain que compte rendu serait fait des mêmes problèmes dans deux ans. On veillerait, pour des raisons qui sont liées au plan d'action, mais qui sont liées aussi aux grandes directives et aux grandes décisions qui ont été prises, à avoir une approche beaucoup plus par programme que par projet pour assister les pays beaucoup plus au niveau des analyses sectorielles et des conseils en politique. Vous auriez donc un glissement des activités présentées ici vers cet aspect d'un niveau plus globalisant et plus programmatique.
Je crains de ne pas répondre à quelques questions très précises qui ont pu être posées. L'assistance a été souvent évoquée pour les pays qui sont l'objet de Programmes d'ajustement structurel. C'est vrai, cela est une préoccupation de la FAO depuis longtemps. Les conséquences de l'impact des Programmes d'ajustement structurel sur les couches les plus pauvres de la population dans le domaine de l'agriculture et le milieu rural sont certainement les plus dures à supporter. Nous nous efforçons de participer chaque fois que c'est possible à l'analyse de ces impacts et à la construction de propositions qui permettent d'en réduire les effets, de
façon à donner à ce Programme d'ajustement structurel une chance de réussir sans détruire le tissu social et sans écraser plus encore les couches les plus pauvres de la population. Il est évident, et cela nous a été demandé, que nous souhaitons être associés aux tables rondes du PNU et nous souhaitons être associés aux groupes consultatifs organisés par la Banque mondiale. Cela était d'ailleurs une conclusion de la FAO.
Malheureusement, malgré ce qui nous est rappelé ici par de nombreux délégués et à plusieurs autres occasions, notre souhait d'être associés à ces réunions n'est pas toujours partagé par les organisateurs mêmes de ces réunions. C'est donc aussi dans d'autres enceintes qu'il conviendrait de rappeler ce voeu qui a été souvent exprimé ici. Souvent nous ne sommes pas là et nous n'avons pas été invités, ou nous n'avons pas, malgré notre demande, pu nous faire inviter. Chaque fois que nous le sommes, nous participons activement.
Ayant bien conscience de n'avoir pas répondu de manière complète à chacune des interventions, nous pouvons dire par contre que nous analyserons l'ensemble de ce qui a été dit ici pour en tenir le plus grand compte, en particulier pour mieux préciser dans des informations ultérieures le cadre fixé à l'information, cadre que nous avons voulu coller à la proposition du Conseil de l'année dernière.
Je peux peut-être en terminer là et répondre ensuite à d'autres questions qui me seraient rappelées et auxquelles je n'ai pas répondu du tout.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): Thank you, Mr Rinville, for your replies to the questions raised. Are there any comments or suggestions concerning the Secretariat's response? If there is any point that you wish to raise, please go ahead. We can then take it that we have concluded our discussion of this agenda item.
The meeting rose at 19.00 hours.
La séance est levée à 19 heures.
Se levanta la sesión a las 19.00 horas.
