Gray is the theory, but green is the tree of life.

An eleventh hour compromise at "Earth Summit +5", held in New York from 23 to 27 June, just managed to keep hopes alive that countries might yet agree to a legally binding timetable of cuts in greenhouse gases when they meet in Kyoto, Japan, in December for the third climate change conference.

The General Assembly's Special Session--intended to move forward the global commitments to sustainable development adopted in 1992 at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio--instead ended in New York in the early hours of 28 June, with only one clear consensus: in the five years since Rio, the planet's health is generally worse than ever and the "Spirit of Rio" is in serious jeopardy.

Earth Summit +5--dubbed by some of "Rio Minus 5"--ended after contentious negotiations, characterized by conflicting interests among and between developed and developing countries, about core issues of sustainable development. In the end, while world leaders did not adopt a proposed political statement, they did agree on a final document that look small steps forward on a number of general goals, including combating climate change, forest loss and freshwater scarcity, but which also disappointed many by containing few new concrete commitments on future action.

This competing interests were all but acknowledged in the final text, which said there is "already widespread but not universal agreement that it will be necessary to consider legally binding, meaningful, realistic and equitable targets" for developed countries that would result in "significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions within specified time frames, such as 2005, 2010 and 2020". In addition to establishing targets, the document said it would be necessary to consider ways and means for achieving them and to take into account the economic, adverse environmental and other effects of such response measures on all countries, particularly developing countries.

With no integral breakthroughs, delegates had to be satisfied with general goals and few concrete actions. Sustainable development remains an uphill battle.

Razali Ismail of Malaysia, President of the fifty-first session and the Special Session of the General Assembly, in a wrap-up press conference, called the results "sobering" and said these pointed to "the enormous difficulties of overcoming short-term and vested interests that would enable concrete commitments to specific targets and to global programmes. Our words have not been matched by deeds." In having recognized this lack of progress, "this special session will at least go down as an honest attempt to appraise the implementation of Agenda 21", the plan of action that emerged from Rio, he said.

During the plenary, speakers underlined the importance of a development process that is sustainable, equitable and that protects the environment for present and future generations. According to Mr. Razali: "We have reaffirmed the continuing vitality and relevance of the agreements reached at Rio. And for the first time, non-governmental organizations stood alongside Governments in the General Assembly as partners in our task of implementing sustainable development. There was a clear acknowledgment by all who took part that progress to operationalize sustainable development remains insufficient."

The President, who intervened personally in the final negotiations, cited as important conclusions of the special session "a reassertion of the need to support efforts of developing countries to achieve sustainable development through means of international cooperation. This includes an appeal to intensify efforts to reverse the declining trend in official development assistance, and to implement commitments on concrete measures for the transfer of environmentally sound technologies to developing countries." Poverty eradication, he went on, reasserted its position as an essential and fundamental requirement. "We have advanced our understanding on the need for action on freshwater, forests, climate change and energy."

For the United Nations, the results were telling. The Organization must deal with the hard-core issues of economics and the driving forces of unsustainability, such as financial resources and their availability, and the implications of an unequal playing field and their effect on implementation of global programmes, Ambassador Razali stressed. "The United Nations cannot be allowed to deal only with the so-called soft issues. The political and financial marginalization of the United Nations will not only weaken its ability to ensure implementation of the Rio commitments, but those of the other summits too."

North-South divisions dominate

While 53 Heads of State or Government, 65 ministers of environment and other fields, as well as other high-level officials, made speeches in the General Assembly Hall, an Ad Hoc Committee of the Whole and many smaller working groups met under the chairmanship of Dr. Mostafa Tolba of Egypt to hammer out the final document.

It was clear when negotiations began at preparatory meetings in March and April 1997 that North-South differences would dominate the talks, as they had in Rio. In what many saw as a breakdown of the global partnership declared at the Earth Summit, pledges made at Rio by donor countries to increase official development assistance (ODA) and make environment-friendly technologies available on concessional terms had not been kept. Rather, ODA had declined from an average 0.34 per cent of donor country gross national product (GNP) in 1991 to 0.27 per cent in 1995.

Minister Msuya Waldi Mangachi of the United Republic of Tanzania, speaking for the "Group of 77" --representing 132 developing countries--said in an interview that dissension arose because "developing countries were expecting reaffirmation of commitments for financial support made at Rio, while developed-country partners came to fine tune Agenda 21--the Rio action plan--and add new areas". Negotiations became stalemated, he said, because "we saw those new areas as additional obligations, with no means proposed by donors for implementation and no movement on redressing unfulfilled commitments".

Continued deterioration

Based on reports prepared for the session, Governments acknowledged that the global environment has continued to deteriorate since Rio, with rising levels of greenhouse gas emissions, toxic pollution and solid waste. Renewable resources, notably fresh water, forests, topsoil and marine fish stocks, continue to be used at rates that are clearly unsustainable.

On the positive side, growth in world population is slowing, food production is still rising, local air and water quality have been improving in many developed countries, and the majority of people are living longer and healthier lives. But the number of people living in poverty has increased, and gaps between rich and poor have grown, both within and between countries.

Comparing this assessment with the lack of a sense of urgency among Governments evident in the session's outcome, one environmental activist, Barbara Bramble of the National Wildlife Federation (United States), commented that there seemed to be a "total disconnect" of diplomacy from reality. Mr. Razali also expressed his frustration that the nature of diplomatic consensus-building is "too slow, too laborious".

`Programme for Agenda 21'

The final document adopted by consensus at the close of the session--called a Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21--contains much painstakingly worded compromise language to patch over differences. Key elements of the document, including follow-up action and other relevant initiatives, are summarized below.

Unable to reach agreement on a self-standing political declaration that was to be a popular-style summary of the outcome, delegates substituted a Statement of Commitment as a preamble to the final document. In a brief six paragraphs, Governments reaffirmed Agenda 21 and the principles adopted in Rio, and recommitted themselves to the global partnership established there.

Preparing the way for the December conference in Kyoto, Governments, after heated negotiation, compromised and agreed to consider "legally binding, meaningful, realistic and equitable targets" for developed countries that will result in "significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions within specified time-frames, such as 2005, 2010 and 2020". The European Union (KU) had urgently sought a specific target--to reduce emissions by 15 per cent below 1990 levels by 2010--and many European leaders, including United Kingdom Prime Minister Tony Blair, challenged the United States to do likewise. Acknowledging that the United States produces 20 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions and needs to "do better", President Bill Clinton pledged to hold a national conference on climate change to build domestic public support for strong action in Kyoto.

Although 166 countries have ratified the Climate Change Convention, signed in Rio, only a few developed countries, including the United Kingdom and Germany, are in line to meet the current voluntary targets of reducing emissions to the 1990 levels by the year 2000.

An Intergovernmental Forum on Forests will be formed by the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) to monitor and promote implementation of over 130 action proposals made in March 1997 by a United Nations panel on forests, as well as build consensus for international mechanisms, for example, a legally binding instrument. The Forum is to report back to the CSD in 1999. In hotly contested debate, Canada and the European Union had strongly favoured a new convention, but the United States, Brazil, India and most major environment organizations had expressed opposition. The World Bank announced that it would work with the World Wide Fund for Nature to achieve by 2000 a network of protected areas amounting to at least 10 per cent of each of the world's forest types.

Based on a recent UN assessment of the world's freshwater resources that shows a possible impending water crisis, Governments called for discussions at the 1998 session of the CSD to consider a global strategy to preserve and protect freshwater supplies. They gave the issue "highest priority" in light of the report's finding that, unless action is taken, by 2025 two thirds of humanity will live in countries facing moderate to severe water stress.

A greater number of Governments should ratify and implement the Convention to Combat Desertification, according to the Programme. But while developing countries urged donor countries to provide "new and additional financial resources" to the Global Mechanism to fund the Convention's implementation, developed countries preferred to support a mechanism that would be able to promote the"mobilization and channeling of substantial resources". Despite protracted talks, a compromise could not be reached and both points of view were reflected in the text. The financing issue is likely to be revisited at the first Conference of Parties to the Convention in September 1997.

An EU initiative on eco-efficiency--to consider setting a target of achieving a tenfold improvement in productivity in the long-term, with a possible fourfold increase in the next two or three decades--was agreed after it was specified that the targets were intended for industrialized countries.

On energy subsidies and pricing--still another contentious issue--it was agreed to encourage Governments and the private sector to consider ways to promote internalization of environmental costs in energy prices, and to recognize the need to encourage the reduction and gradual elimination of subsidies that inhibit sustainable development. The need was recognized for "evolving commitments" for the transfer of clean technologies to developing countries. It was also agreed that talks on how to advance sustainable production and use of energy should take place at the CSD in the year 2001.

On issues relating to oceans and seas, Governments agreed on the urgent need to eliminate over fishing and excess fishing capacity, consider the impact of subsidies to fishing fleets, and strengthen implementation of existing agreements on marine pollution and sustainable use of oceans.

On poverty, a major issue since the 1995 World Summit for Social Development, Governments agreed that full implementation of the Summit's programme of action was essential, and listed priority actions. After a draft political statement was dropped, a proposal it had contained, that Governments would halve by the year 2015 the proportion of people living in absolute poverty, did not resurface.

Although no new specific financial commitments were made, Governments agreed to a general statement that developed countries should fulfil their commitment made in Rio to reach the UN target of 0.7 per cent of GNP for ODA, and that "intensified efforts" should be made to reverse the downward trend in ODA since 1992. A ministerial-level contact group that had sought to set target dates for ODA increases as part of a finance package ended without agreement. The final text does not provide a mechanism for reversing the decline in ODA, with language dealing with the need to reverse that decline having been deleted. Donor countries were urged to provide new and additional resources through a "satisfactory" replenishment of the Global Environment Facility.

Governments called for an enhanced role and adequate funding for a revitalized United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), weakening a German proposal for a restructuring of United Nations environmental bodies. The 1998-2002 work programme was decided for the CSD, which will continue to be the central forum for reviewing implementation of Agenda 21. The next review by the General Assembly was set for 2002. A joint initiative by the Heads of State of Brazil, Germany, Singapore and South Africa, proposing the creation of a global environmental umbrella organization under the United Nations, with UNEP as a major pillar, was not reflected in any official decisions.

Finally, on another initiative, Governments agreed to phase out the use of leaded gasoline as soon as possible.

RELATED ARTICLE: Kyotowards

A week-long meeting on a common international strategy for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases from developed countries closed in Bonn, Germany, on 7 August. The meeting came only a few weeks after emissions targets and timetables dominated the agenda of the General Assembly's "Earth Summit +5" and the Denver "Summit of the Eight".

The focus of the largest negotiating session was a text of over 100 pages, compiled by the Chairman of the Ad hoc Group of the Berlin Mandate (AGBM), Ambassador Raul Estrada-Oyuela of Argentina. Negotiators refined and streamlined the text containing some possible targets, including a proposal by the European Union that developed countries cut their emissions by 15 per cent by the year 2000.

"We are leaving Bonn today with the various options fully articulated and clarified for all to see and understand", said Mr. Estrada-Oyuela. "When we come back for our final session in October, Governments will be well positioned to choose from among them."

Michael Zammit Cutajar, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, said: "We should all be concerned about the slow progress at this meeting. There is only a short time remaining to build the necessary political will for producing an effective agreement in Kyoto."

After a final negotiating session in Bonn in late October, Ministers will gather in Kyoto, Japan, in early December to finalize the resulting amendment or protocol to the Convention. Under the Convention, developed countries had agreed to take measures aimed at reducing their greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000.

RELATED ARTICLE: Spirit Spurred in Special Spaces

If the "Spirit of Rio" seemed to be on life-support in the negotiating rooms, it seemed fully alive in the hallways, cafes, auditoriums and parks near the General Assembly, where people gathered to network and strategize. In addition to over 2,500 government delegates, about 1,000 representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), as well as some 1,000 journalists, attended Dozens of side events advanced new ideas, and NGOs set up tents in a nearby park for a "global gathering".

Access for NGOs and business groups was unprecedented. For the first time in history, the General Assembly Plenary heard statements by representatives of the "major groups" defined in Agenda 21, including NGOs working on behalf of environment and development, women, indigenous people, farmers, trade unions, scientists, local government officials, the private sector and youth.

A Business Roundtable brought together chief executive officers from a dozen corporations with Government Heads and Ministers and the United Nations Secretary-General to consider how the private sector could be a more active partner in sustainable development.

The active interest of the major groups has been seen by many as one of the best signs of progress since Rio. Over 1,800 cities and towns have drawn up a local Agenda 21, based on the UN document, and some 150 countries have established national councils on sustainable development or similar bodies, many of which bring together government officials, business executives, environment activists and other major group leaders, to recommend national policies.