The Malmö declaration asked the forthcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development to review the requirements for a greatly strengthened institutional structure for international environmental governance based on an assessment of future needs for an institutional architecture that has the capacity to effectively address wide-ranging environmental threats in a globalizing world. For the European Union this issue is of key importance.
I think that it can be safely said that no other branch of multilateral diplomacy has evolved faster in the last 30 years than the environmental one. As an important result of the Stockholm Conference, UNEP was established. The environmental agenda is still rapidly expanding with a growing interconnectedness between issues and there have been some notable successes. Many important environmental agreements have been reached, both at the regional and global level. The adoption and signing of the Stockholm Convention on POPs will be one example of further global progress.
Globalization of the world economy with the attendant environmental risks and opportunities require effective international institutions to adopt new approaches and to en gage the major actors in constructive partnerships. Issues that need to be tackled with urgency, and where effective international environmental governance is a prerequisite, include for example:
the underlying causes to climate change, for example unsustainable consumption and production patterns in particular when it comes to energy use and transportation systems;
the diffuse spreading of chemicals in manufactured goods;
the exploitation of the natural resource base with detrimental consequences for the livelihoods of in particular the poorest people.
Yet, the approach to international action after the historic Rio Conference unfortunately remains fragmented and also suffers from inadequate political and financial support, while key environmental trends still point in the wrong direction. In Johannesburg, we will have a unique opportunity to establish a reinforced and strengthened international system for environmental governance in support of sustainable development.
Today, I think that we can all agree that the entire system for international environmental governance is under severe strain. The proliferation of meetings in various bodies with uncoordinated schedules, plans and strategies places unreasonable demands on personnel, time and limited financial resources at all levels, particularly for national governments. As colleagues from developing countries have pointed out several times, this is creating an impossible situation particularly for their countries. We must aim for a system, which enables all countries to participate on an equal basis, thus ensuring the legitimacy of our decisions.
This basic analysis was the main underpinning for the work undertaken within the EU last year and which resulted in the EU Council Conclusions adopted in December.
On behalf of the European Union I would like to commend the Executive Director for his rapid and determined follow-up to our recent successful deliberations in Nairobi and the adoption of GC decision 21/21. We are particularly pleased that you have been able in such a short time to present such a concise and well-documented report. We have a heavy work schedule before us to finalise our conclusions on options for further action to be considered by the next global Ministerial Environment Forum early next year.
The EU is pleased with the timely establishment by the UNEP Governing Council of this ministerial group. This should increase prospects for moving towards a more coherent and integrated management framework that is both perceived as legitimate by all actors and that can respond adequately to the challenges of the 21st century. However, a word of caution is called for: The degree of success in this endeavour will be measured by the extent to which reform measures will have been felt and implemented on the ground.
The EU generally agrees with the description of the state of international environmental governance and the analysis of its strengths and weaknesses. We recommend that in the further refinement of the report more attention be given to the present situation of, and the needs for, regional cooperation. The environmental challenges facing us require action on an unprecedented scale. To create the necessary conditions for the strong leadership that is now required, decisive steps will have to be taken to improve the system of environmental governance at all levels.
The EU appreciates that an extensive section of the report is devoted to the crucial issue of financing for the global environment. Since UNCED several new sources of financing beside ODA have come into play, including the GEF and the dramatic growth of private flows. Progress is necessary both in quantitative and qualitative terms. Also, conditions need to be created that are conducive to mobilising private capital for improving the environment. The increasing concern for the environment that can now be observed in the private sector should hopefully facilitate these endeavours.
In the chapter on needs and options, the EU agrees that proposals for reform of international environmental governance would have to respond to the need for credibility, authority, adequate financial resources as well as the participation of all actors. To this one can add coherence which is a key requirement for arriving at a more integrated framework in the environment field.
The EU has a high level of ambition for our further work. To increase chances of success, we favour an approach which should be based on existing structures, particularly UNEP in Nairobi. Already now UNEP has a key role, which has been strengthened in recent years. But, let us be honest and see the facts as they are. UNEP essentially has two major handicaps. It remains severely underfunded in relation to the tasks it is asked to perform and it has not yet in practice been given sufficient authority to be able to fully fulfil even the largely catalytic mandate it has today. What we wish to aim for is a more central role for UNEP within the UN system, also in the broader context of implementing the key priorities of the Millennium Declaration in a coherent fashion.
In the EU Council Conclusions, we have put forward options for greatly improved coordination under the aegis of UNEP of all relevant institutions to harmonise activities on a thematic basis. We wish to see a strengthened coherence and improved cooperation between Conventions and between their Secretariats. We have also suggested options for a strengthened financial foundation of the international environmental architecture including UNEP and GEF. The development of effective regional environmental institutions and agreements is clearly a priority.
With the general agreement that seems to be emerging that a much stronger UNEP is indispensable, it is vital to find ways to stabilising and strengthening its financial base. This is a prerequisite for possible further measures involving a change of UNEP's formal status.
The EU is ready to play its part in order to make UNEP's resources more stable, more predictable and more adequate to its needs. To this end, the EU will look into the possibilities of increasing its contribution to UNEP for a fixed number of years, on the condition that other contributors also commit themselves on a comparable basis.
Other areas highlighted in the EU Council Conclusions relate to the importance of participation by all actors, including major groups, as well as ensuring greater consistency, both at the national level and within international fora and better implementation of environmental standards.
We further believe that an important key to success will be to strengthen the ability to integrate environmental concerns in the work programmes of relevant international institutions not least in the trade and financial fields and in sectoral policies of national governments. Such an integration as well as improved coordination at the global and national level by bringing closer together different competences is essential for improved efficiency, implementation and governance. The role of development assistance in that respect should also be addressed, including issues such as capacity building and technology transfer.
International environmental governance is an important aspect of the broader issue of creating a more integrated and coherent institutional framework for the area of sustainable development as a whole. The outcome of the UNEP process on international environmental governance will be presented to CSD 10, where the totality of these matters should be discussed in an integrated way.
We are presently studying the options in the report for reform at the level of organisational structures and at the MEA level. They represent a summary of proposals that have previously been presented in various contexts. The general direction of these proposals is supported by the EU. Obviously, there is a need for further reflection on these and the additional suggestions included in the report.
In conclusion, I see six key areas where concrete measures will be needed:
A strengthened role and status for UNEP as the core of the system
Stable, predictable and adequate funding of UNEP
Strengthened coherence and improved cooperation between Conventions and between their Secretariats
Integration of environment concerns in all policy areas
Participation of all stakeholders
International development cooperation, including technology transfer and capacity building
The EU looks forward to hearing the views of partners on these and other issues.