Commission on Sustainable Development

Intergovernmental Preparatory Meeting

7^th & 8^th Meetings (AM & PM)

INTERGOVERNMENTAL PREPARATORY MEETING ON COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

WRAPS UP THEMATIC CONSIDERATION WITH DEBATES ON DESERTIFICATION, AFRICA

Rounding out its in-depth consideration of the six thematic priorities of the Commission on Sustainable Development, that body’s Intergovernmental Preparatory Meeting today held two panel discussions on policy options to address barriers and constraints to desertification and Africa, respectively.

The Meeting, intended to lay the foundation for the Commission’s seventeenth session (4 to 15 May), had previously highlighted obstacles, best practices and lessons learned with regard to agriculture, drought, land and rural development in four interactive sessions held earlier in the week.

Opening this morning’s panel discussion was Alemneh Dejene, Senior Officer for Sustainable Development Policy in the National Resource Management and Environment Department of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), who underscored the role of desertification as a major driver of land degradation in much of the world, particularly Africa.  While there was a particular need for synergies between sustainable land management and climate-change adaptation mechanisms, it was equally clear that there was a need for increased investment in national resources that maximized field-level synergies, such as those involving crop-livestock interactions.  Of existing policy options for increasing sustainable land management to combat desertification, livelihood diversification was particularly important in reducing poverty and boosting fragile ecosystems.  As such, it should be a focus in the post-Kyoto era.

Underlining the role of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification as a tool for strengthening the resilience of land, Melchiade Bukuru, Chief of the Convention’s New York Liaison Office, said the instrument aimed to improve the livelihoods of affected populations and ecosystem conditions while generating global benefits.  Regrettably, however, policies and programmes to prevent and combat degradation were not sufficiently well developed.  Countries should give priority to mainstreaming the fight against land degradation into national policy frameworks, while the Global Environmental Facility could provide project funding for controlling deforestation and desertification.  Many such projects cut across the focal areas of biodiversity, climate change, international waters and ozone depletion.  The real challenge was to be able to disseminate and scale up best practices so that others could replicate them at no cost.

During the discussion that followed, several delegates said the challenge in combating desertification lay, not in developing more policies, but in bridging persistent implementation gaps.  There was no robust, widely accepted and harmonized scientific base for desertification information and monitoring systems, which were essential for informed policy decision-making.

A number of other speakers said the Global Environment Facility did not sufficiently focus on anti-desertification efforts.  Like other delegates, South Africa’s representative noted that, of the three Rio Conventions, the anti-desertification instrument remained particularly undersourced, and he suggested that its procedures for securing funding should be simplified and its global mechanisms leveraged more actively towards local implementation.

Opening the afternoon discussion on Africa, Kobie Brand, Regional Director of the ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability Africa Secretariat, pointed out that the continent faced many interlinked humanitarian, environmental and social crises that had contributed to overall ecosystem degradation and loss.  Yet many African communities were much more ready to embrace change than people often thought.  Africa had many successful programmes that addressed land degradation, agriculture, biodiversity, water management and infrastructure development.  Nevertheless, science and technology were of key importance to its development, and there was a need for scientists and engineers to find cutting-edge solutions to its problems.  In terms of climate change and energy, the continent was especially vulnerable due to its low capacity, particularly in coastal cities.  To combat that, Africa needed access to funding mechanisms that would benefit communities directly.

Emphasizing that Africa’s ecosystems could not be separated from the health of its peoples, Kaddu Sebunya, Director of Programme Technical Design with the African Wildlife Foundation, said those ecosystems and biodiversity would not be protected unless their sustainable use was made the central goal of policy efforts.  To do so, policies should seek to harmonize trade and facilitate the flow of resources towards conservation, good governance and human health, while further promoting conservation at scale.  Sustained investment in natural resources and ecosystem management was critically important.  Local communities should be granted a financial stake in conservation plans so as to promote private investment.  To meet the challenges posed by climate change, Africa should “leapfrog” expensive technologies and embrace lighter ones like micro-generators and mobile networks.

In the ensuing dialogue, delegates called for a green revolution across Africa and underlined the environmental and socio-economic challenges hindering the continent’s ability to achieve poverty eradication, sustainable development and the other Millennium Development Goals by 2015.  Several speakers pointed out, however, that a green revolution in Africa could not be achieved if the current trend to reduce international aid for agriculture continued.

Echoing the sentiments of several speakers from Africa, the representatives of Senegal and Nigeria called for the continent-wide cancellation of bilateral and multilateral debt to facilitate the channelling of financial resources into sustainable development and poverty eradication.

The Intergovernmental Preparatory Meeting will reconvene at 10 a.m. tomorrow, Friday, 27 February, to consider policy options and possible actions to expedite implementation of interlinkages and cross-cutting issues.

Background

Convening this morning to continue its consideration of policy options to address barriers and constraints on the thematic issue of desertification, the Intergovernmental Preparatory Meeting for the seventeenth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development considered reports of the Secretary-General on desertification (document E/CN.17/2009/7) and on interlinkages and cross-cutting issues (document E/CN.17/2009/9).  In the afternoon, members were expected to take up the thematic issue of Africa (document E/CN.17/2009/8).

Panel Discussion on Desertification

Gerda Verburg ( Netherlands), Commission Chairperson, presided over the morning discussion, which featured panellists Alemneh Dejene, Senior Officer for Sustainable Development Policy, National Resource Management and Environment Department, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO); and Melchiade Bukuru, Chief of the Liaison Office, United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa.

Mr. DEJENE launched the discussion by describing desertification as a major cause of land degradation in much of the world, particularly in Africa.  The message of the Convention to Combat Desertification -- which had grown out of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, or Earth Summit, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and entered into force in December 1996 -- emphasized investment in sustainable land management, which in turn stressed agro-ecological principles centred on people and ecosystems, and involved multiple stakeholders.  Individually, many countries were actually creating frameworks for sustainable land management, but they needed political will and partnerships to ensure success.  There was particular need for synergies between sustainable land management and climate-change adaptation mechanisms.

Pointing out field-level constraints, he said they involved implementing improved land-management options and new ways to harvest water; combining organic and inorganic sources by looking at them in new ways; and group management of land resource at the watershed level and payment for ecosystem service.  It was important to maximize synergies, especially those entailing crop-livestock actions, and to provide more support for the livestock revolution in developing countries.  There was also a need to establish or strengthen social safety nets in that regard.

Of the policy options on the table with respect to increasing sustainable land management to combat desertification, he said there was certainly a need for greater diversification of production systems, but crop rotation might not be a particularly reliable option.  Among other options, livelihood diversification was particularly important.  Findings in Ethiopia and elsewhere showed that broadening livelihoods outside agriculture was a viable option for reducing poverty and boosting fragile ecosystems.  In the post-Kyoto era, that should be a particular focus.  Equally clear was the need to increase the investment of national resources.  In the Maputo Declaration, the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) called on African Governments to allocate 10 per cent of national resources to agriculture.

Mr. BUKURU said the anti-desertification Convention could help address poverty, adding that degraded land must be restored to health in order to combat poverty and maintain forest ecosystems.  The Convention was an important tool for adaptation and mitigation, and for strengthening the resilience of land.  Biodiversity conservation was beneficial for sustainable land management.  People left their land because it was no longer capable of yielding any produce, but the migratory process could be stopped through efforts to prevent land degradation.  The Convention aimed to improve the livelihoods of affected populations and ecosystem conditions while generating global benefits and mobilizing resources through effective partnerships.

Describing land degradation as the long-term loss of ecosystem functions from which land could not recover, he expressed regret that local, national and regional policies and programmes to prevent and combat degradation were not very well developed.  Countries must make the goal of combating land degradation a priority and mainstream it into national policy frameworks.  Donors must integrate issues of drought, land and desertification into development cooperation frameworks.  The technical and financial capacity of different actors must be strengthened.  Land degradation was cross-sectoral in nature, and Governments must draw on the lessons and good practices of ancient civilizations to ensure good water management and develop drought-resistant crops.  Knowledge, technology and good management had important roles to play in implementing the goals of the three climate-change-related Conventions.

The real challenge was to be able to disseminate and scale up best practices so that others could replicate them at no cost, he said.  People from dryland areas had strong knowledge about managing land.  Though drylands were not the same as wetlands, they did provide opportunities and it was necessary to value what they produced in order to improve the livelihoods of African populations.  The anti-desertification Convention sought the advice of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) to understand how best to value dryland products.  As for financing, in addition to national budgets, the Global Environmental Facility provided Governments with project funding for controlling land degradation, particularly deforestation and desertification.  Many such projects cut across the focal areas of biodiversity, climate change, international waters and ozone depletion.

In the panel’s interactive portion, delegates underlined the serious implications of desertification for poverty eradication, socio-economic stability and sustainable development.

Sudan’s representative, speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, said populations living in areas undergoing desertification faced income loss, food insecurity, weakening health, insecure land tenure systems, lack of rights to natural resources, and an absence of access to markets.

Nigeria’s delegate said it was imperative that the major climate-related Conventions address those cross-cutting issues, stressing that the challenge to doing so lay not in developing policies but in bridging persistent implementation gaps.

South Africa’s representative said that, of the three Rio Conventions, the anti-desertification instrument remained particularly undersourced, and he called for enhanced synergies between the treaties in order to combat land degradation.  Specifically, the global mechanisms of the anti-desertification Convention should be leveraged more actively towards local implementation and its procedures for secure aid funding simplified.

A number of other speakers further emphasized that the Global Environment Facility, as the designated financial mechanism for the global environmental conventions, did not sufficiently focus on anti-desertification efforts.

Canada’s representative noted that another critical gap arose from the lack of a robust, widely accepted and harmonized scientific base from which to develop measurable information and monitoring systems for desertification.  Such systems were essential for informed policy decision-making and effective measurement of efforts to combat desertification.  Without a strong scientific base, full implementation of the Convention and its 10-Year Strategic Plan would be impossible.

Echoing calls for better use of science and technology, the representative of the Russian Federation called for the use of remote sensing systems to predict drought and desertification.

Several delegates, including those of Barbados, India and Iran, outlined specific national initiatives, with the latter describing a highly successful carbon-sequestration project.

A representative of the indigenous people major group called for the strengthening of the means for disseminating information to the local level to ensure that community action was harmonized with national best practices.  A representative of business and industry called for increased efforts to promote incentives that would encourage farmers to limit land degradation, and for access to drought-resistant crops and fertilizers.

Several speakers called for specific, concrete solutions to desertification to come out of the Commission’s seventeenth session.  Several European countries called for action, under the aegis of the anti-desertification Convention, to restore natural capital to arid zones.  Possible areas of focus included the production of solar power, the development of aquaculture and eco-tourism, carbon capture and agro-forestry.

Also participating in the discussion were representatives of the Czech Republic (on behalf of the European Union), Oman (on behalf of the Arab Group), Cape Verde, France, Spain, United States, Chile, Switzerland, Algeria, Argentina, China, Japan, Morocco, Mexico, Republic of Korea, Malawi, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Libya, Bolivia and Brazil.

Speaking on behalf of the major groups were representatives of non-governmental organizations, science and technology, children and youth, farmers, and women.

Mr. DEJENE, responding to those interventions, said there was almost unanimous agreement among the three Rio Conventions on how to support anti-desertification efforts.  The post-Kyoto regimes focused on deforestation, but it was necessary to broaden them to include many agricultural lands, particularly drylands.  A clear message from the Commission in that regard would indeed be beneficial.  Agro-forestry, water harvesting and other areas, such as water cropping and the role of livestock would be important, particularly in Africa.  The role of technology was also important, and it was to be hoped that new and innovative approaches would improve the lives of women farmers in particular.

Mr. BUKURU said he viewed very seriously the participation of children and youth in the debate on desertification, which gave assurance that today’s efforts would create a better future.  Science had been the “lame duck” of the anti-desertification Convention process.  While the involvement of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had been instrumental in leading to policy decisions, the anti-desertification Convention must “speak” science and not politics.  Desertification must be included in national development frameworks and policies.

Ms. VERBURG ( Netherlands), Commission Chairperson, highlighted the salient points made during the discussion, particularly the need to integrate desertification issues into national action plans and support traditional knowledge and land-use practices; to strengthen the scientific base and knowledge of desertification and drought; and to promote agro-forestry and reforestation, which had multiple benefits for soil stability and carbon sequestration.  Also important were desertification-related early-warning systems; the promotion of secure access to land and land rights, particularly for women; and local, national and regional plans that integrated scientific knowledge.  Delegates had also emphasized the need for adequate and predictable resources, support of the anti-desertification Convention and its related 10-Year Strategic Plan, and enhanced linkages with the other two Rio Conventions.

Panel Discussion on Africa

Javad Amin Mansour ( Iran), Commission Vice-Chairperson, presided over the afternoon discussion, which featured panellists Kobie Brand, Regional Director, ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability Africa Secretariat; and Kaddu Sebunya, Director, Programme Technical Design, African Wildlife Foundation.

Ms. BRAND, pointing out that Africa was a continent and not a topic, stressed the importance of recognizing that it faced many interlinked humanitarian, environmental and social crises that had resulted in overall ecosystem degradation and loss.  Its insufficient infrastructure was ageing and not conducive to economic growth and stability.  Sub-Saharan Africa in particular would not necessarily meet the Millennium Development Goals if business continued as usual.  Global action was needed to obtain immediate support for practical initiatives that would result in long-term benefits for local communities.

She said the African Union had embraced NEPAD as a continent-wide development programme.  It had eight regional communities that acted as implementing bodies as well as sector-specific networks.  The Partnership’s priorities were closely interlinked with those of the Commission.  Africa had many success stories and programmes that addressed land degradation, agriculture, biodiversity, water management and infrastructure development, among other areas.  However, it was still in the process of building nation-States and the African Peer Review Mechanism was necessary in pushing that process forward.  The African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Government must advance further, as should Government decentralization and reform.  Africa also needed horizontal checks and balances, a strengthening of judiciary capacity, and ways to improve drastically the delivery of local services.

Describing institutional challenges, she noted that NEPAD was not yet fully integrated into African Union structures and processes.  The proliferation of institutions, conventions, agreements and commitments was not conducive to focused intervention that could bring real change on the ground.  Limited local and national capacity and resources must be addressed through local donor communities and participatory policies.  Environmental resource management -- including good management of water, waste and energy, among other areas, to create a sustainable environment -- should be part of all budgetary processes.  Planning processes and policy frameworks must include investment in resource protection through schemes that directly rewarded local communities.  Education and public awareness were essential in building much needed leadership.  The African Union had committed to a Second Decade for Education in Africa; capacity-building was needed at all levels and in all sectors.

Highlighting the need for sustainable living environments for individual communities, she said many African communities were poor and much more ready to embrace change than people often thought.  Science and technology were of key importance to development, and there was a need for scientists and engineers to find cutting-edge solutions for Africa.  In terms of climate change and energy, the continent was especially vulnerable due to its low capacity, particularly in coastal cities.  While Africa had many examples of successful local government initiatives on the ground, including lasting and sustainable local biodiversity programmes in cities, the continent needed access to funding mechanisms that would benefit communities directly.  Many cities and towns across Africa were ready and able to change, but they needed international community support to deliver.

Mr. SEBUNYA screened a three-minute video to illustrate what was at stake in African wildlife conservation before sharing policy recommendations based on the Foundation’s decades of on-the-ground work.  Programmes and policies were needed to encourage African Governments to conserve natural habitats, upon which Africans depended for natural resources, food production, watersheds, livelihoods and income generation, among other things.  In the global arena and nationally, the first Millennium Development Goal -- halving poverty by 2015 -- was the prime focus of development efforts, while Goal 7 -- ensuring environmental sustainability -- received much less attention.  However, the production capacity of ecosystems directly impacted economic growth and clearly depended on policy choices, investment, trade and regulation.

The African Wildlife Foundation called for policies to harmonize trade and facilitate the flow of resources towards conservation, good governance and human health, he said.  They should further promote conservation at scale.  The Foundation had found that a few large-scale ecological and tourism destinations, such as the Ngorongoro Crater, would reap more benefits than fragmented, local-level initiatives.  Because ecosystems did not recognize borders, collaboration should also cross frontiers.  Ecosystem functions and biodiversity would not be protected unless sustainable use was made the central goal of policy efforts.  There was also a need for community arrangements and legal frameworks to support tenure rights.  Local communities should be granted financial stakes in conservation plans in order to promote private investment.

He went on to say that, while climate change posed a major threat to the continent, Africa could meet the challenge by leapfrogging expensive technologies and embracing lighter ones like micro-generators and mobile networks.  However, Africa’s ecosystem could not be separated from the health of its people, and the African conservation agenda should be developed and implemented by African leaders.  Where the necessary political will did not already exist, partnerships could fill the gaps.  The Foundation, alongside its partner organizations, called for sustained investment in Africa’s natural resources and ecosystem management.

In the ensuing discussion, delegates called for a green revolution across Africa, underlining the environmental and socio-economic challenges hindering the continent’s ability to achieve poverty eradication, sustainable development and other Millennium Development Goals by 2015.

Sudan’s representative, speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, underscored the need to transform Africa’s rural sector, noting that at least two thirds of poor Africans lived in rural communities, depending on agriculture for their livelihoods.  An integrated, holistic approach was needed to improve agricultural productivity and efficiency at all stages of the commodity value chain.  Drought and desertification were at the heart of the continent’s development challenges, and combating them could go a long way towards helping to end poverty, attain food security, fight disease and ensure environmental sustainability.

The representative of the Czech Republic, speaking on behalf of the European Union, stressed the importance of applying the aid effectiveness principles defined in the Paris Declaration to fund rural development and food security across Africa.  Such funding should be used to implement sustainable public agriculture policies, strengthen smallholder farms and focus on such critical areas as land tenure, sustainable management of natural resources, infrastructure, training and education, and women’s empowerment and access to financial resources, among other areas.

Echoing the sentiments of several speakers from Africa, the representatives of Senegal and Nigeria called for writing off Africa’s bilateral and multilateral debt so it could channel financial resources into sustainable development and poverty eradication.  A true global partnership for development was needed, including agricultural diversification and investment to achieve food security, greater investment in productive sectors, technology transfer at affordable cost, free market access and equitable trade, and the urgent fulfilment of all aid commitments.

The delegate from the Solomon Islands, speaking on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), said Africa’s small island developing States and other nations faced such climate-change-related threats as water insecurity and desertification, noting that the continued health of coastal and marine ecosystems was essential for food security and rural development.

The representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo said a green revolution could not be achieved if the current trend of reducing international aid for agriculture continued.  On the contrary, more funding was needed, including for building vocational rather than traditional schools in rural areas.  International aid must become more effective, integrated and better coordinated among Governments.

A representative of trade unions said drought, deforestation, desertification, water and air pollution, and other environmental ills negatively impacted the health and livelihood of workers in Africa.  There was a need to promote decent work and social protections for all Africans and to reject the double standards of some international enterprises that exported social, environmental, labour and economic measures to Africa that were illegal in their own countries.  A complete ban on asbestos was also needed in Africa.

A delegate of children and youth called on Government representatives to make good on their promises and practise what they preached in terms of sustainable development and poverty eradication in Africa.

A representative of the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) said technical assistance for the African Union and regional communities was needed for the continent’s stability and democratization.  For that to happen, there must be better donor coordination and use of policy tools.

Also participating in the discussion were representatives of Italy, Morocco, Portugal, Indonesia, Oman (on behalf of the Arab Group), United States, Libya, France, Algeria, China, Netherlands, Chile, Malawi, India, Japan, Argentina, South Africa, Israel, Canada, Mexico and Norway.

Speaking on behalf of the major groups were representatives of business and industry, non-governmental organizations, science and technology, women and farmers.

Mr. SEBUNYA, responding to a question about the link between landscape preservation and local ownership, said there was a need for policies that empowered local communities with the ability to protect the wildlife on their lands.  Unless people benefited from wildlife, it would disappear.  Hopefully, the mutual interdependence between sustainability and the environment was understood.  Likewise, health, education, environment, agriculture and livelihood generation were interlinked and there was no choice but to invest in all of them to further Africa’s development.

Ms. BRAND said the international community should know by now who was most needed to implement sustainable development on the continent: the women of Africa.  However, they needed help.  Furthermore, investment in the next generation of African leadership should be made now.  Accelerated, new, additional and multiple global actions were needed to support policies aimed at delivering tangible benefits for local communities.  On a positive note, many African communities were already taking a leading role in developing their societies in sustainable ways.

Ms. VERBURG ( Netherlands), Commission Chairperson, summarized the discussion, highlighting key points, including the need for peace as a prerequisite for sustainable development; for an end to conflict; and for all possible efforts to ensure that ODA commitments were kept.  Africa needed investment in rural infrastructure and energy; and revitalization of agriculture as a basis for sustainable rural development, which deserved the highest political priority.  Other critical needs included the Maputo Declaration target of allocating 10 per cent of national budgets to agriculture, and increasing private investment.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record