COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT HOLDS HIGH-LEVEL SEGMENT WITH FOCUS ON LAND AND AGRICULTURE

Press Release
ENV/DEV/542

COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT HOLDS HIGH-LEVEL SEGMENT WITH FOCUS ON LAND AND AGRICULTURE

Deputy Secretary-General Tells Commission Agenda 21 ‘Road Map’ to Sustainable Development

The road map to sustainable development existed in Agenda 21, Deputy Secretary-General Louise Fréchette told the Commission on Sustainable Development this morning, as it held the first of its high-level segments, focusing on land and agriculture.

Agriculture is among the main themes being addressed by the two-week session of the Commission, which monitors implementation of Agenda 21 -- the plan of action adopted at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), held in Rio de Janeiro.

Continuing, the Deputy Secretary-General said that, as with economic and social development, the presence of an urgent and unfinished agenda must be acknowledged. Unsustainable development practices remained embedded in daily life. The responses to challenges had been too little, too late. Among other things, the Kyoto Protocol needed to be ratified and “green accounting” incorporated into national accounts. While advances in agricultural technology might help in land and agriculture issues, the full impact of that technology had not been fully evaluated.

Speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, Nigeria’s representative said that the goals of sustainable development could only be achieved through a holistic approach. Special attention must be paid to addressing the major constraints faced by developing countries in responding to environmental challenges, identifying the specific capacity-building needs of developing countries, and finding a comprehensive solution to debt overhang of those countries. That was absolutely essential for the sustainable use of its resources.

In addition, he continued, innovative financial mechanisms were not substitutes for other sources of financial resources, such as official development assistance, foreign direct investment and foreign portfolio investment. Official development assistance remained the most likely and steady source of resources for the implementation of sustainable development. He added

Sustainable Development Commission - 1a - Press Release ENV/DEV/542 7th Meeting (AM) 26 April 2000

that the Group had difficulty with the concept of the “multifunctional” character of agriculture.

Robert Hill, Australia's Minister for the Environment and Heritage, speaking on behalf of the Cairns Group (18 agricultural fair trading countries), expressed concern at the reintroduction of protectionism, under the guise of the concept of multifunctionality, which would be counter-productive to achieving the goals of sustainable development. While he recognized the legitimate non-trade concerns and objectives of countries, the key issue was which policy would achieve those objectives. Multifunctionality was being used to justify high levels of protectionism by some countries. Trade distorting policies reduced the availability of efficient resources for global food production.

Speaking on behalf of the European Union, Franz Fischler, member of the European Commission responsible for Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries, said that agriculture had a multiple role to play, encompassing the production of food and fibre, ensuring food security and safety, maintaining the countryside, as well as preserving natural resources, biodiversity and soils. Sustainable agriculture must be efficient, using inputs and technology sustainably. Water was a resource of critical importance and an integrated- water-resources management approach was needed, addressing both quality and quantity. He emphasized the importance of balancing the need to increase food production with the carrying capacity of ecosystems.

The Union also supported an open multilateral trading system, as well as a significant and progressive reduction of all forms of export support for agricultural commodities, he added. Further, to promote sustainable production and consumption, agriculture had to respond to consumers' expectations.

Expert presentations were made this morning by Gordon Conway of the Rockefeller Foundation and Miguel Altieri of the University of California, Berkeley.

Statements were also made by government ministers and representatives of Portugal (on behalf of the European Union), Ireland, South Africa, Argentina, China, United States, Samoa (on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States), Iceland, Sri Lanka, Uruguay, Tonga, Egypt, Hungary, Bolivia, Mexico, Netherlands, Austria, Tunisia, Belarus, Republic of Korea, Indonesia, France, Canada, Japan and Egypt. A representative of the Helsinki Commission also spoke.

The Commission will meet again at 3 p.m. today to hold its second high-level meeting, focusing on preparations for the 2002 review of progress since UNCED.

Sustainable Development Commission - 3 - Press Release ENV/DEV/542 7th Meeting (AM) 26 April 2000

Commission Work Programme

The eighth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development met this morning to begin its high-level segment, with a thematic focus on land and agriculture. The Commission monitors implementation of Agenda 21, the plan of action adopted at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro. (For further background on the session, see Press Release ENV/DEV/536 issued on 20 April.)

For its high-level segment, the Commission had before it the report of the Inter-sessional Ad Hoc Working Group on Integrated Land Management and Agriculture (document E/CN.17/2000/11), which met in New York from 28 February to 3 March. The report contains possible elements for draft decisions on the land and agriculture issues, which could serve as starting points for further discussion during the current session, as well as summaries of discussions that will serve as reference material on the given issues.

According to the report, the challenge is to develop and promote sustainable and productive land-use management systems as part of national strategies for sustainable development. A further challenge is to protect critical resources and ecosystems through balancing land, water and other natural resource uses with the participation of stakeholders. Social and health aspects of land use deserve particular attention and should be integrated into the overall planning process. Priorities for future work include prevention and/or mitigation of land degradation, access to land and security of tenure, stakeholder participation and international cooperation.

According to the Co-Chairmen’s summary, the goals of integrated planning and management of land resources are protection of the environment, economic development, poverty eradication, employment creation, conservation of natural resources, food security, protection of critical ecosystems and biodiversity, and ensuring access to land for vulnerable and marginalized groups. A number of delegations described their national efforts to develop systems for integrated planning and management of land resources, including decentralization of land management to local levels, with broad stakeholder participation.

With regard to agriculture, the report states that the major objective of sustainable agriculture and rural development is to enhance food security in an environmentally sound way, so as to contribute to sustainable natural resource management. Food security, although a policy priority for all countries, remains an unfulfilled goal. Food security and poverty are interrelated and sustainable progress in poverty eradication is one of the critical elements in improving access to food. It remains essential to continue efforts for poverty eradication, through, among other things, capacity-building to reinforce local food systems and improving food security. The concept of sustainable agriculture and rural development offers such an approach.

Priorities for future action include implementation of sustainable agriculture and rural development goals, financing for such goals, access to resources, poverty eradication, technology transfer and capacity-building and biotechnology. A number of delegations described their national efforts to attain food security for their populations and their efforts to reduce the number of undernourished people. Agriculture sector policy reforms were meant to provide a stable legislative framework and to guarantee ownership of, and access to, productive resources, especially on land; improve the functioning of markets; and sanction property rights and create risk-reduction, among other things. The multifunctional aspects of agriculture were emphasized by some delegations, while some underlined that consensus on the concept had not been achieved.

The Commission also had before it the report of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests on its fourth session, held in New York from 31 January to 11 February (document E/CN.17/2000/14). It contains programme elements on matters calling for action by the Commission at its current session, including promoting and facilitating the implementation of the proposals for action of the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests, and reviewing, monitoring and reporting on progress in the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests.

Among the matters left pending and other issues arising from the programme elements of the Panel are the need for financial resources, trade and environment and the transfer of environmentally sound technologies to support sustainable forest management. The report elaborates on issues that need further clarification, such as the underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation, forest research, economic instruments, tax policies and land tenure, and the future supply of and demand for wood and non-wood forest products and services.

Also before the Commission is the report of the Secretary-General on preliminary views and suggestions on the preparations for the 10-year review of the implementation of the outcome of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) (document E/CN.17/2000/15). It states that the main challenge of the 2002 review is to organize an effective and efficient, participatory event of high political profile and visibility. Effective preparations should start from a clear set of ideas about the goals and substantive focus of the review, its desired outcome and the organization of the preparatory process.

According to the report, many governments stressed that there is a need to revitalize the international dialogue on, and the international community’s commitment to, sustainable development. The review should be seen as an opportunity to mobilize political support for the further implementation of the outcome of UNCED, particularly Agenda 21, which continued to provide a solid and vital foundation on which to build. While Agenda 21 should not be renegotiated, the review process should identify new and emerging areas that were not included in Agenda 21 and would warrant consideration.

Several governments emphasized that the review will have the potential to increase the level of commitment to sustainable development by civil society partners if it is based on the notion of shared responsibility, the report continues. The involvement and participation of business and industry, non-governmental organizations, the scientific community and other major groups will be crucial and should be supported, not only in the event itself but also throughout the preparatory process.

The report also presents governments’ views on the format, participation and venue of the 2002 event. While most are of the opinion that the event should be organized as a special conference, organizing it as a special session of the General Assembly is another suggestion. Several proposals were also made on the form and the title of the event to acknowledge its importance and high political profile. Various governments suggested that the Commission, at its current session, should determine the basic elements for the review process. The Assembly, at its fifty-fifth session, should elaborate on the form, scope and nature of the process and adopt a resolution in that regard.

Further, the report presents proposed goals and priorities that the review could focus on, and describes preparations at the national and regional levels. Also, annexed to the report are the main issues on the agenda of the ninth session of the Commission.

Statements

Deputy Secretary-General LOUISE FRÉCHETTE said the high-level segment had become an increasingly dynamic part of the Commission’s sessions. The Commission was doing its part to ensure the participation of civil society, the private sector and other stakeholders, which accurately reflected the character of sustainable development itself. The timing of the session provided a golden opportunity, as it came on the eve of a series of millennium events, culminating in the Millennium Summit in September. While there were many issues jostling for attention, few had such global repercussions as the quest for sustainable development. Yet, in the nearly 18 months during which the General Assembly debated which subjects to include in the Millennium Summit, environmental concerns did not receive much attention.

The Secretary-General, she continued, in his Millennium Report, had devoted much attention to environment and development. He had stated that environmental freedom was on par with the other freedoms for which the United Nations had long struggled. He called on the international community, at the highest level, to adopt the target of halving the proportion of people living in extreme poverty by 2015. However, poor countries lacked the resources to implement environmentally sound policies, which compounded the effect of poverty. That cycle must be broken.

As with economic and social development, the presence of an urgent and unfinished agenda must be acknowledged, she said. Unsustainable development practices remained embedded in daily life. The responses to challenges had been too little, too late. Among other things, the Kyoto Protocol needed to be ratified and “green accounting” incorporated into national accounts. The work being done in the Commission’s current session was an essential part of the big picture. The Commission could ensure that the international community move forward in an integrated and holistic manner.

She said that advances in agricultural technology might help in land and agriculture issues, but the full impact of that technology had not been fully evaluated. Regarding globalization, deeper insight into the relationship between foreign direct investment and sustainable development was necessary. Also necessary was making trade liberalization and environmental protection mutually supportive. The roadmap to sustainable developed existed in Agenda 21. Since its adoption in 1992, the Commission had sought to build effective coalitions to help the world’s people reach their destination -– an equitable world where everyone’s needs were met in an ecologically sound manner.

JOSE SOCRATES CARVALHO PINTO DE SOUSA, Minister of Environment and Land Use Planning of Portugal, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that food security, food safety and maintaining natural resources were essential in order to promote the eradication of poverty. All faced the challenge of implementing policies. Integrated planning and management of land resources should take into account the economic, social and environmental dimensions, noting interrelations amongst natural resources, land use and people.

Good governance was an essential issue, he said. Domestic resources remained the main source of finance for sustainable development in all countries. Civil society should have access to information and should have the right to appeal against planning decisions. There was also a need for the use of appropriate land-use indicators and monitoring systems. Equal access to land and legal security of tenure for all people, including women, indigenous communities and the poor.

Governments should develop sustainable cross-border spatial planning strategies, especially where national land-use decisions had potential transboundary effects, he continued. Rapid global urbanization often led to unplanned land-consuming urban sprawl and the degradation of the urban environment. The interdependence between urban and rural areas should be addressed. Governments must sign, ratify and implement relevant international instruments.

FRANZ FISCHLER, member of the European Commission responsible for Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries, also speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the European Union was committed to dual targets of halving the proportion of people living in absolute poverty and the number of food-insecure people by 2015. The Commission should endorse those targets. It should also urge governments to make progress on sustainable agriculture and rural development through accountable, efficient and stable institutions, which were essential elements of good governance.

Emphasis should also be given to access to credit for small farmers and developing the food chain, he added. Improved donor cooperation was also of utmost importance. Donors should support the development of scientific and decision-making networks, sharing information and experience. Development and transfer of environmentally sound technology required strong partnership between all stakeholders.

He said agriculture had a multiple role to play, encompassing the production of food and fibre, ensuring food security and safety, maintaining the countryside, as well as preserving natural resources, biodiversity and soils. Sustainable agriculture must be efficient, using inputs and technology sustainably. Water was a resource of critical importance and an integrated- water-resources management approach was needed, addressing both quality and quantity. The European Union emphasized the importance of balancing the need to increase food production with the carrying capacity of ecosystems.

The Union also supported an open multilateral trading system, as well as a significant and progressive reduction of all forms of export support for agricultural commodities, he said. It also stressed the need to provide benefits to developing countries and assist their integration into the international trade system. Furthermore, to promote sustainable production and consumption, agriculture had to respond to consumers' expectations.

TENIOLA OLUSEGUN APATA (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China said that the goals of sustainable development could only be achievable through a holistic approach. All aspects of environment -- economic or social -- shaped development and had to be addressed. Special attention must be paid to addressing the major constraints faced by developing countries in responding to environmental challenges, identifying the specific capacity-building needs of developing countries, and finding a comprehensive solution to debt overhang of those countries. Further problems that had to be addressed included: bringing stability to and cushioning the impact of financial volatility; examining ways to promote market access for the exports of developing countries; and transferring environmentally sound technologies, as well as promoting their indigenous development.

A comprehensive and urgent solution had to be found to the debt problem of developing countries, he said. The ultimate solution was the write-off of the debt stock of all developing countries. That was absolutely essential for the sustainable use of its resources. In addition, the thorny issue of new and additional resources for sustainable development should also receive the urgent attention of the session. Innovate financial mechanisms were not substitutes for other sources of financial resources, such as official development assistance, foreign direct investment and foreign portfolio investment. Official development assistance remained the most likely and steady source of resources for the implementation of sustainable development.

In line with a holistic approach to sustainable development, the Group reaffirmed the need for balance in integrated planning for economic growth, trade and investment in relation to environment, he said. It was necessary to take into account the levels of economic, environmental and social conditions of different countries and regions in the formulation and application of national and international trade and investment measures. In that way, the open, equitable and non-discriminatory character of the multilateral trading system would not be undermined and no disguised barriers and conditionalities to developing countries would be created.

While the Group was not opposed to new studies, research and concepts, it could not accept any attempt to introduce new concepts or even the application of existing ones that had not had its relevance to sustainable development established through the intergovernmental process. The Group had difficulty with the concept of the multi-functional character of agriculture. It also expressed concern that the concept of sustainability impact assessment was still at the exploratory level and would resist any attempt to renegotiate Agenda 21. Rio + 10 should be held at the summit level and in a developing country. Further, the Commission should be transformed to a preparatory committee with equal and total participation of all Member States.

NOEL DAVERN, Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development of Ireland, said that in his country agriculture continued to be the major driving force in the rural economy. As in developed economies in general, however, its overall importance was in decline. That had resulted in an increasing emphasis on a multi-sectoral approach in support of Ireland’s rural communities allied to policies favouring balanced regional development.

The objectives of sustainable agriculture and rural development were best achieved by coordinated action at an international level, he said. The alleviation of poverty in the developing world was central to any policy on international sustainable development. Ireland strongly supported efforts to promote policies expanding trade opportunities for developing countries, including appropriate safeguards in social and environmental terms. Progress on sustainable development was also enhanced by a commitment to the values of partnership, technology development and transfer, capacity-building, an enabling environment, access to land and security of tenure.

Sustainability was a key consideration in the management of scarce resources, he continued. Opportunities should be availed of at every level to increase the awareness of sustainability among consumers and participants in the decision-making process in relation to food production, and among rural communities on the need for best practices. There was still a need to further develop and refine the mechanisms for integrating sustainability criteria into many policy areas.

Ireland, he said, was very conscious of the need to respond to the consumer’s demand for food produced to a safe and reliable standard. The Food Safety Authority of Ireland had as its primary objective the development and promotion of a food safety culture covering every link in the food chain. The multilateral process had a key role to play in promoting improved food safety and food quality standards.

DIRK C. DU TOIT, Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs of South Africa, said that developed countries, developing countries and least developed countries all were living together in his country. Agenda 21 was at the heart of enlightenment, in a century in which mankind had sunk to its deepest levels. The world was now in a new century and Agenda 21 must be implemented. His country realized that implementation was the hard part. Once implementation had begun, everyone fought for their own interests at the expense of the rest. When a government started implementing, it must deliver basic goods and services to all, which put pressure on available resources. Land reform and restitution enjoyed primacy in South Africa.

There could be no solution or progress if the capital resources of the world were not distributed more equitably, he said. The first step in moving forward was to democratize. The value of greater stakeholder participation was shown in the Commission’s deliberations. Further, the principle of the commonality of humankind must be realized. The values that led to the creation of an organization such as the United Nations should be rediscovered. South Africa was beginning to implement an integrated strategy for rural development. On a global scale, sustainable development must be approached in a holistic manner, linking problems and integrating the means of addressing those problems. South Africa had offered to host the 10-year review of UNCED, if it was decided to hold it outside New York.

ELSE KELLY (Argentina) said that the topic being discussed today was particularly important to her country, whose wealth as a nation was based on agriculture. Argentinian farmers had been using the most available modern technology and knowledge compatible with the country’s climate. Sustainable development was key to a series of ecological and economic concerns. Sustainable agriculture required economic viability, technological feasibility, political commitment, respect for environmental integrity and adequate technology. Many possibilities existed to reach a consensus to promote international cooperation aimed at establishing better conditions to attain sustainable agriculture. A pragmatic discussion would be helpful in clarifying what activities had adverse effects and should be modified or eradicated.

In the debate, there was a point of discord, she said. That point was the attempt to incorporate the concept of multifunctionality of agriculture and distorting what was stated in Agenda 21. Argentina was interested in reaching a serious and responsible agreement on the sustainability of agriculture. She asked that the Commission eliminate from all its documents the words “multifunctionality of agriculture”.

WANG YINGFAN (China) said that sustainable agriculture should start by promoting stable agricultural development and ensuring food security. The majority of the world’s poverty-stricken population lived in areas with a lack of food and agricultural production facilities and a serious degradation of resources and the environment, while poverty itself caused a further ecological and environmental deterioration. Official development assistance had an irreplaceable role to play.

He said that integrated planning and management of land, water resources and the ecological environment must be strengthened to promote agricultural sustainability. Advanced technology should be made available and applied widely, so as to improve agricultural productivity. Modern biological technology had raised agricultural productivity, but it also entailed risks for which technologically backward developing countries lacked the monitoring and controlling capacity.

The Commission should conduct a comparative study on the different experiences of countries in their integrated planning and management of land resources and introduce to them the good decision-making models and planning methods, he continued. As to the land-tenure regime, countries should explore ways suitable to their own national circumstances. The role of official development assistance, capable of directly entering specific fields of sustainable development, was irreplaceable. Developed countries must demonstrate sincerity, take effective measures and realize the goal set at 0.7 per cent of gross national product for official development assistance. In that regard, private funds could play a more active role in promoting sustainable development.

Trade and export should be mutually supportive, he continued. Increasing exports was an important means by which developing countries integrated themselves into the world economy, achieved economic growth and eradicated poverty. The international community should commit itself to establishing an open, equitable and non-discriminatory multilateral trade regime. Research should be carried out on the relationship between trade liberalization and sustainable development.

RICHARD E. ROMINGER (United States) said that the United States was committed to the goals of sustainable agriculture and rural development and to achieving the goals of the World Food Summit. The United States was working to implement those goals through improved production and profitability, stewardship of the natural resource base and ecological system, and enhancement of the vitality of rural communities. Much depended on the viability and sustainability of small farms. Women made up the largest category of beginner and small farmers in the United States. The United States was also revitalizing commitment to the international agricultural research systems. In international assistance programmes, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) supported links between sustainable agriculture and natural resource management.

The United States was working to ensure that the use of biotechnology products was safe and environmentally sound, he said. Objective scientific and regulatory review and consumer involvement contributed to that transparent decision-making process. Corporate citizenship was encouraged by promoting research to address the most compelling needs, like hunger and food security. A wide range of production and consumption patterns existed around the world and a wide variety of approaches must be employed to achieve sustainable agriculture and rural development, food security and sustainable food systems. Some had argued that progress had been slow, yet the discussions taking place would not have happened at the Rio+5 conference just three years ago. Changing ways of thinking and acting did not happen overnight. It took perseverance and cooperative action.

ROBERT HILL, Minister for the Environment and Heritage of Australia, said that in implementing the concept of sustainable land management, his country had found that it was important to empower and educate local managers and communities. Partnership was necessary between those in authority and those responsible for land management. Australia had a land care programme, which had been successful. It had now established an Internet-based international land care clearinghouse to assist other countries.

On behalf of the Cairns Group (18 agricultural fair trading countries), he expressed concern at the reintroduction of protectionism, which would be counter-productive to achieving the goals of sustainable development. It was reintroduced into the documents before the Commission, under the guise of the concept of multifunctionality. He was concerned about the introduction of such a divisive issue, while at the same time recognizing the legitimate non-trade concerns and objectives of countries. However, the key issue was which policy would achieve those non-trade objectives. Multifunctionality was being used to justify high levels of protection by some countries. As it had been long recognized, such policies did damage to many countries, particularly developing countries.

Trade distorting policies, he continued, reduced the availability of efficient resources for global food production. The Group supported the food security and rural development objective of developing countries. The concept of multifunctionality put forward did not serve the interests of developing countries. It would only serve to perpetuate hunger and environmental degradation. It was disappointing that the issue should arise at the Commission after the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Ministerial Conference held in November 1999 concluded that there was no agreement on the definition of the concept. The Group could not accept the references to multifunctionality made in the possible elements for draft decisions for adoption by the Commission.

TUILOMA NERONI SLADE (Samoa), on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island Developing States (AOSIS), said that agriculture continued to be the backbone of the economies of many small island developing States, providing the main source of livelihood for their inhabitants, as well as being a major export earner. It remained the single largest sector in some countries, accounting for over 85 per cent of foreign exchange and contributing substantially to total employment and gross domestic product. In almost all regions, the agricultural sector was dominated by small-scale semi-subsistence farm households with few large commercial plantations. Yet, small island developing States faced major problems with respect to their agriculture and production.

Sustainable agricultural and forestry practices in small island developing States were under increasing pressure from the need to provide for growing populations, from industrial development and the effects of tourism, he said. All those activities placed significant demands on limited land and natural resources, especially water. The smallness of those States meant that the effects of the expansion of settlements and infrastructure, the increasing trend of “urban drift”, the intensification of agriculture, and the expansion of agriculture into marginal areas or fragile ecosystems, all contributed to the increasing rate with which degradation of resources was occurring. It also increased the threats to the stability and resilience of ecosystems and environment as a whole.

It was essential for small island developing States to have in place sensible and sustainable plans and management schemes, he added. The prospect of integrated planning and management of land-based resources in reality gave way to a more holistic and geographic notion of Island Systems Management, which recognized the need for the management of terrestrial and marine resources within a framework that would take into account the linkages between biological systems.

SIV FRIDLEIFSDOTTIR (Iceland) said the issue of land management had great implications for world food security. Since human settlement began in Iceland over 1,100 years ago, the country had lost up to 99 per cent of its forest cover. Land use pressure was the main cause of soil erosion. Her ancestors could hardly be blamed, since they had little knowledge of the environment and were guided by the need to sustain life. The Government had attempted to halt and reduce soil erosion. It had succeeded in reclaiming vegetation in some parts of the country, but the task ahead was huge.

It was stated in the Secretary-General’s report that a quarter of the earth’s land was affected by deforestation, she continued. The loss of the productivity of the land was very serious and solutions must be sought to halt that process. Agricultural research, including biotechnology, would be an important part of the solution. There were many “win/win” solutions available. Iceland had learned many important lessons from its land use and was now working to pay back its debt to the land. Land degradation affected the living standards of millions of people. That situation could and must be corrected.

D.M. JAYARATNE (Sri Lanka) said that the problems in agriculture in developing countries were well known. Farmers in poor countries could not sell their products, while it was reported that 800 million people went hungry every day and many were dying of starvation. Families in both Sri Lanka and other developing countries had met with new challenges from uneven development. Comparative advantage, ability to invest and ability to compete had become key determinants of the prosperity of agricultural communities. Broadened market access was what was promised in liberalization efforts.

He said the three major problems farmers experienced were: the high cost of production; low productivity; and low standard of products. Farmers who were well aware of the need to change and who had a willingness to change realized the fact that possession of technology could change comparative advantage. Poor countries did not have the capacity to provide the required technologies to the farmers. The international community should ensure the availability of technology, experts and equipment required by the developing countries through grants to increase sustainable productivity and quality, enabling them to acquire the capacity to compete in markets.

In the land sector, a major concern in developing countries was the lack of long-term investments on land by individuals, since the land belonged to governments, he said. Practices for sustainable agriculture needed long-term investment for conversation.

JULIO BENITEZ SAENZ (Uruguay) expressed concern over the fact that no tangible progress on the global level could be seen in terms of the analysis of the implementation of Agenda 21. At the end of a decade of economic liberalization, malnutrition and hunger had worsened. At the beginning of the 1990s, world agricultural production had begun to stagnate, so that today over 30 countries had a food deficit. Increasingly, countries must display greater social and environmental protection, taking into account the close link between agriculture and environment. It was also necessary to protect natural resources and avoid the non-sustainability of chemical agriculture.

Agricultural production in Uruguay had grown in a sustainable manner due to many factors, including the opening of the economy to competition. It displayed a high potential for the continued expansion of the export of foodstuffs. However, that could be undermined if developed countries continued to apply subsidies on agricultural products. They had applied new barriers to the food trade, to the detriment of developing countries. Instituting technical barriers to the export of food from developing countries could not be justified. The application of protectionist policies in agriculture must not be allowed.

SONATANE TUA TAUMOEPEAU TUPOU (Tonga), speaking on behalf of the South Pacific Group, said that agriculture was of critical importance to that subregion. It was also a substantial source of foreign exchange and, in many instances, the main source of employment and livelihood for growing populations. The food systems of the subregion were fragile under normal conditions. El Niño weather patterns had changed delicate ecological balances. In parts of the South Pacific region, rapidly growing populations, urbanization and the spread of cash economies affected access to nutritious foods. Many food-importing Pacific countries faced the prospect of increased prices for imported food staples. Lack of access to affordable food was a very real concern. Policies that in a framework of sustainability would increase domestic production, reduce poverty and improve food distribution within developing countries would do much more to improve food security.

The South Pacific region was also concerned with aspects of the intellectual property regime, he said. The question of who owned and who benefited from the endemic plant genetic resources within national borders was of crucial importance. Competition for knowledge had intensified. The Pacific would remain open to unprotected acquisition of its resources if traditional knowledge was not adequately addressed.

Expert Presentations

GORDON CONWAY, Rockefeller Foundation, said that one of the problems with the concept of sustainable agriculture was that it meant all things to all men and all things to all women. That meant problems when it came to implementation on the ground. He defined sustainable agriculture as an agriculture that was resistant to shocks and as one that persisted. There were serious trade-offs between sustainability and productivity. The challenge was to find a system that combined both productivity and sustainability. There were in the world today over 800 million undernourished people. In 2020, there would be 1 billion more people to feed.

He said that it had been shown that the increasing yields were declining. One technique to address that issue was integrated pest management, of which he was one of the founders over 40 years ago. Another technique was the integration of organic and non-organic nutrients into agriculture. Most of Africa was under a form of organic agriculture that was not sustainable. Yields per capita were declining at an alarming rate in Africa. Addressing the challenge required a high level of expertise in ecology and biotechnology, which, if carefully designed and chosen, had an important role to play in sustainable agriculture. There was an enormous potential for biotechnology to produce new crops that were resistant to stress, disease, pests and drought. At the same time, the risks associated with biotechnology needed to be properly addressed.

In addition to science, he said that a more participatory approach to agriculture was needed. Also necessary were farmer-participatory research and farmer-to-farmer extension programmes. Sustainable agriculture could not be achieved unless farmers themselves participated in the design, production and implementation of policies. Access to the right kind of inputs and to markets was also important. The best way to get sustainable agriculture off the ground in Africa was to provide decent roads and markets for local products.

MIGUEL ALTIERI, from the University of California at Berkeley, said that in the years to come 70 per cent of the world’s poor would live in rural areas. If the rural poor were not dealt with, sustainable agriculture would not be possible. Many changes were needed to reach food security. While agricultural production had risen in the last 20 years, hunger had persisted. High productivity had been accomplished at the expense of the environment. Challenges included poverty alleviation, enhancing productivity while conserving resources and implementing enabling policies, including land reform and land security.

While biotechnology held many promises, it also had its limitations, he said. There was an unrealized potential to increase yields, but other natural resource management programmes were needed to complement that increase. The accumulation of toxins in soil was among the environmental risks associated with biotechnology. It was important to put small farms at the heart of national agricultural policies. Innovations for small farmers must be risk-reducing, cost-effective and environmentally sound.

MUSTAFA TOLBA (Egypt) said that the Commission had been established to monitor the implementation of Agenda 21. What was the Commission trying to achieve on the issue of sustainable development? he asked. The two sides -- North and South -- had agreed on the target of achieving 50 per cent less undernourished people and poor people by 2015. Was it enough to endorse decisions already taken or should the Commission look into the methodologies of achieving that? What was the role of the Commission and how could those clear- cut targets be reached? Was the Commission in the process of setting targets that could not be achieved? The presentations had shown that the techniques for achieving sustainable development could be achieved. Could the targets of Agenda 21 be looked at in light of those presentations?

PAL PEPO, Minister of the Environment of Hungary, said that environment and agriculture were closely interrelated in many ways. Increasing economic activities, human consumption and consequences exploit the available land faster than ever, expanding social pressure and placing an ever-increasing stress on the environment. The interdependence of environmental protection, agriculture, and rural development made the establishment of an integrated land-use system inevitable. The aim should be a sustainable agriculture, land resource management feasible for the long term, and environmental management that produced pesticide-residue free, safe and marketable food, raw materials and renewable energy sources.

The multifunctionality of agriculture could fulfil its production, consumption, social, regional and protective functions, he continued. Rural development projects were highly influenced by the agri-ecological features, agricultural traditions and the environmental, regional, development, local employment and social tasks of a region.

NEISA ROCA HURTADO, Deputy Minister for Environment, Natural Resources and Forest Development of Bolivia, said that agriculture should be used to contribute to the fundamental right of all people to food, on the basis of equitable access to the earth’s resources. Sustainable development differed in the way it was viewed in the North and South. Sustainable development must be achieved without copying models not compatible to the needs of the countries of the South. The commitments on financial assistance and technology transfer, as spelled out in Agenda 21, must be implemented.

She was distressed by the fact that much of the financial resources of the United Nations was allocated to peacekeeping, to the detriment of matters related to development. Greater security and peace was based on the eradication of poverty. Investing in development was investing in the future world peace. It was necessary to achieve, with due caution, the proper use of technology that led to better productivity, while taking into account its economic benefits and costs. The purely monetary definition of productivity had led multinational corporations to introduce genetically-modified organisms into economies such as hers.

JULIA CARABIAS, Minister for the Environment, Natural Resources and Fisheries of Mexico, said she was surprised at the insufficient mention of the Bio-Safety Protocol in the Commission’s discussions and documentation. It was necessary to discuss how agriculture was impacting on the sustainable development of the planet. Agriculture was not sustainable today and led to deforestation. In Mexico, some 800,000 hectares were being lost yearly, the main cause of which was the non-sustainability of agriculture. That fact was not being mentioned in the discussions. The key question was how long the planet could stand before its biophysical systems broke down. What were the bottlenecks of sustainable agriculture? she asked.

LAWRENCE GAN BRINKHORST, Minister of Agriculture of the Netherlands, said he was concerned about the fact that global trends in agriculture and rural development were leading to a situation of a lack of interest. There was a serious decline in official development assistance spent on agriculture. Confidence-building was also an important issue. He was surprised that the Cairns Group could not endorse further work on multifunctionality. It was not a question of trade distorting subsidies. Follow-up was needed with regard to the multi-stakeholder dialogue and the FAO and World Bank should be entrusted with creating a consultative forum on agriculture. Rio+10 would not be about evolving new concepts. The concepts of sustainable development were well known. The question now was how to implement them. Agriculture was no longer a question of producers, particularly in developed countries. Increasingly, it was becoming consumer-driven.

WILHELM MOLTERER (Austria) said that multifunctionality did not mean market distortion. It was not a strategy only for developed counties. While it was true that agriculture had to produce food, feed and fibre, it also had environmental, social and economic aspects that it had to fulfil. Without multifunctionality, sustainable agriculture could not be achieved. It was a common target for both developing and developed countries. It was a concept for both the European Union and all countries. The common global target was sustainable development.

A non-governmental organization had rightly said the day before that different aspects in different regions meant that different relations were necessary, he said. Implementation must be at the regional level and within the global framework at the same time. The question should not be multi- functionality or no multifunctionality. Multifunctionality was a common goal that would lead towards sustainable development.

SAID BEN MUSTAPHA (Tunisia) said that the results have not lived up to expectations following the creation of Agenda 21 and the World Food Summit. Those countries able to adequately manage the assistance that had been given to them had achieved progress. The main objective of the World Food Summit was to guarantee food security. Agriculture occupied a special place in Tunisia and had played a social and civilizing role since ancient times. In spite of certain constraints, Tunisia had been able to improve its yield and provide independently for agricultural output. Agricultural production went hand in hand with traditional agriculture and farming. The Commission was invited to give new impetus to the actions being carried out by different countries.

ALYAKSANDR SYCHOV (Belarus) said that there were many obstacles to sustainable development. The only way to address them was through solidarity, and realizing that territory was not only for the purpose of industrial production, but also to provide for the needs of people. For countries like his, which were still forming their economic systems, it was important to select a large-scale method for development. Effective systems for agriculture were those based on environmentally friendly technology. His country had begun to implement pilot projects in that area. It had set up a new system for production involving new uses of energy and local land use. Those projects were being conducted in a range of scientific institutions. He hoped their results would be an invaluable contribution to the 10-year review.

CHOI SEOK-YOUNG (Republic of Korea) said that in order to meet the World Food Summit’s objectives, there was an urgent need for significant changes in agricultural policies. A great deal of work was still needed to achieve the food security goals of Agenda 21. Agricultural production differed from industrial production. The world food market was very volatile and each country should augment their efforts to increase food production. Trade liberalization by itself would not suffice.

SONNY KERAF (Indonesia) said that the declining trend in world agricultural production should be the main focus of international cooperation. The difficulties of farmers were due to the lack of access to land, resources and markets. Lack of access to environmentally sound technology and financial assistance were also factors. The international community should ensure the acceleration of the application of environmentally sound agricultural technology.

The delegate from France said that broader discussion was needed with non-governmental organizations and industry. It was not about commercial negotiations, but it was about finding a working method. Institutions that could support such a debate should be established. A network should be established on sustainable agriculture. The problem of sustainable agriculture was too global to deal with it in any other manner.

The delegate from Canada said that multifunctionality had nothing to do with Agenda 21.

The delegate from Japan said that on the concept of multifunctionality, he supported the statement made by Australia. Japan could also not accept any change to Agenda 21.

MIECZYSLAW S. OSTOJSKI, Executive Secretary of the Helsinki Commission, said that there was a need for structural change in the agricultural sector. That change could take place through the introduction of pilot projects.

Mr. TOLBA (Egypt) said that he was surprised that some delegations objected to the views of other delegations. He appealed to his colleagues to refrain from attacking one another’s positions. Focus should be on helping poor farmers, who constituted the majority of undernourished people, if the goal of halving the number of undernourished people by 2015 was to be achieved.

The Chairman, JUAN MAYR MALDONADO (Colombia) said he was frustrated, since the session had not been able to move from a series of speeches to a dialogue. The purpose of the Commission was to dialogue to find solutions together. He recommended that a mechanism for follow up be established, so that delegations could continue the discussion and then move forward towards concrete action.

* *** *