Compilation Document - Rio+20 - United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development

Transcription

1 1 of 266 Compilation Document - Rio+20 - United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development At its Second Preparatory Meeting in March 2011, the Preparatory Committee for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) requested the Bureau to initiate an open, transparent and inclusive process, led by member States, to prepare in a timely manner a draft text, based upon all preparatory inputs, to serve as the basis for an outcome document for the Conference. The second Preparatory Committee Meeting invited all member States, relevant United Nations system organizations, and relevant stakeholders to provide inputs and contributions to the Secretariat in writing by 1 November 2011, for inclusion in a compilation text to be presented by the Bureau to member States and other stakeholders for their comments and further guidance at the second Intersessional Meeting on December This compilation document is to serve as basis for the preparation of a zero-draft of the outcome document, to be presented for consideration by member States and other stakeholders by January Inputs received by the Secretariat are contained in a web-based Compilation Document, available at in their unedited versions, preceded by an index of terms to facilitate analysis of material submitted. Part IV. United Nations & IGOs - Submissions A Blueprint for Ocean and Coastal Sustainability (IOC/UNESCO, FAO, IMO, UNDP) Advisory Group of the UN International Year of Cooperatives Advisory Group on Environmental Emergencies (AGEE) Alpine Convention Asian Development Bank Collaborative Partnership on Forests Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space ECESA Plus Cluster on Social Development Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) European Economic and Social Committee - EESC General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean Global Environment Facility (GEF) Inter-Agency Consultative Group for SIDS Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC) Inter-Parliamentary Union Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) International Association of Economic and Social Councils and Similar Institutions (AICESIS) International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) International Labour Organization (ILO) International Law on Sustainable Development Partnership (IDLO) International Maritime Organization (IMO) International Monetary Fund (IMF) International Olympic Committee to the United Nations International Organization for Migration (IOM) International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) International Telecommunication Union (ITU) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) North-East Asian Subregional Programme for Environmental Cooperation (NEASPEC) Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Organisation internationale de la Francophonie (OIF) Rome-based agencies : FAO, IFAD, WFP and Bioversity International South Centre Specialist Group on Soils and Desertification of the IUCN Commission on Environmental Law Theme on the Environment, Macroeconomics, Trade and Investment (TEMTI) of the Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP), IUCN - International Union for the Conservation of Nature UN Group on the Information Society (UNGIS) UN Interagency Committee for the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (IAC DESD) UN System Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB) UN-Water UN-Water Decade Programme on Advocacy and Communication United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) United Nations Department of Public Information (DPI) United Nations Development Group (UNDG)

2 2 of 266 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women) United Nations Environment Management Group (EMG) United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) United Nations Global Compact United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT) United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the Population Division (DESA) United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) United Nations SG's Advisory Board on Water and Sanitation (UNSGAB) United Nations Statistics Division United Nations University - Institute for Water, Environment & Health (UNU-INWEH) United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS) United Nations Volunteers (UNV) World Bank World Health Organisation (WHO) World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) World Meteorological Organization (WMO) World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) World Trade Organization (WTO) A Blueprint for Ocean and Coastal Sustainability (IOC/UNESCO, FAO, IMO, UNDP) This document is a SUMMARY of A Blueprint for Ocean and Coastal Sustainability, an interagency paper that provides context for the Rio+20 discussions, through analysis of current challenges in ocean and coastal management around the world. Our ocean covers over 70% of the globe. Its health and the wellbeing of humanity and the living environment that sustains us all are inextricably linked. Yet neglect, ocean acidification, climate change, polluting activities and over exploitation of marine resources have made it one of the earth s most threatened ecosystems. This has put in peril not only the life forms that inhabit the planet, but the aspirations of humankind for prosperity and economic growth within the context of sustainable development. The good news is that considerable, albeit incomplete, progress has been made in reaching some of the goals set in Rio twenty years ago, and in the decisions made via a number of modalities, including the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI) and by the Commission on Sustainable Development, to name but two. The Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of UNESCO, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) are among the agencies responsible for substantive progress made to date. Almost two thirds of the Global Ocean Observing System is now in place. The Large Marine Ecosystem Program has been actively engaged in meeting marine-related targets to promote ecosystem-based integrated ocean and coastal management. A mechanism for the global reporting and assessment of the oceans has been set in motion. Major agreements have been reached to protect threatened fish stocks and new Regional Fisheries Management Organizations have been set up. Substantial investment has been made in capacity building for Small Island Developing States. Guidelines on the ecosystem approach to fisheries and aquaculture have been developed and are being incrementally implemented in several areas. The IMO now has in place no less than 21 international treaties dealing with the protection of the environment from international shipping activity, including the first ever, global and mandatory greenhouse gas reduction regime for an entire economic sector. The bad news is that despite international efforts and initiatives, to date only a little over 1% of the ocean is protected. The implementation of many international agreements in place has been slow. The commitment to maintain or restore depleted fish stocks to levels that can produce their maximum sustainable yield has not been met - notwithstanding progress with some stocks. Deterrence of Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing remains marginal at best. Marine pollution from land-based sources continues to be a serious problem. One of the primary vectors for the introduction of aquatic invasive species hull fouling has yet to be resolved. Commitments made regarding biodiversity and Marine Protected Areas have fallen short of expectations. In addition, a number of emerging issues since the JPOI threaten progress toward sustainable development of ocean and coastal areas. They include increased nutrient over-enrichment contributing to habitat degradation, lack of ocean-based renewable energy use, continuing threats to coral reefs, the existence of vast areas of marine debris particularly in the form of plastics, and a lack of systematic data exchange across nations. Technological advances and the impact of climate change, as well as increased intensification of human development have all reduced ocean productivity. This has led to significantly increased risks to food security from fisheries, particularly in the warmer latitudes around the globe. In short the world is not keeping up with its commitments with the result that a large percentage of global fish stocks are under pressure. Aquatic invasive species are expanding. Hypoxic (dead) zones are increasing. Coral reefs are disappearing. Coastal habitats have been lost or are being degraded and there is an overall loss of marine biodiversity. However, the recovery power of the ocean is still in place and it is not too late to act. There are emerging opportunities for the global community to protect our ocean and at the same time enhance its potential contribution to sustainable development. Those opportunities include increased recognition of the concept of a Blue-Green Economy and its relationship to the environmental, social, and economic pillars of

3 3 of 266 sustainability. Renewable blue energy, marine genetic bio-resources, and ecosystem services, are but a few of the options to consider in meeting the twin goals of marine conservation and economic stability of of all nations, not just those with coasts. It is clear that the ocean choices made by world governments and the agencies they support will be critical to the welfare of future generations, in supporting poverty reduction, economic growth and environmental improvement. Ocean governance gaps, institutional failures and problems in the implementation of global and regional conservation measures, as well as the need to harness the expertise of scientific institutions are likely to feature prominently on the Rio+20 agenda. There is therefore a strong case for the UN system to provide leadership through the fostering of enhanced dialogue, coordination and cooperative action among UN agencies, funds and programmes, possibly leading to a proposal on a reformed mechanism for ocean coordination to be put forward at Rio. Implementation, political and institutional willingness, capacity and desire to change at all levels of both government, industry and civil society are now needed. The changes that will be required to transition to a Blue-Green Economy will be a mix of physical, behavioural and institutional factors. The matrix, objectives, and proposals below summarise the nature of the required changes. Each of the proposals presented in detail in the sections that follow are compared against the objectives in the matrix. The purpose in this approach is to show how broadly relevant each proposal is across the spectrum, which in turn serves to re-emphasise the interconnected nature of the future transition. Executive Summary A Blueprint for Ocean and Coastal Sustainability Transmission Note Advisory Group of the UN International Year of Cooperatives INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF COOPERATIVES ADVISORY GROUP Proposed text on cooperatives for consideration as input to the outcome Document of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development ( Rio+20 ). The Advisory Group of the UN International Year of Cooperatives recommends the following text on cooperatives for consideration as input to the outcome document of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 4-6 June 2012): to promote the growth of cooperatives as enterprises that can contribute to sustainable development, eradication of poverty, and improved livelihoods in various economic sectors in urban and rural areas and to provide support for the creation of cooperatives in new and emerging areas. The above text is from GA resolution 64/136 (paragraph 4) on Cooperatives in social development. It is hoped that the integration of the text will help promote the role of cooperatives in moving towards a green economy and the advancement of sustainable development. Advisory Group on Environmental Emergencies (AGEE) Input from the Advisory Group on Environmental Emergencies For the Compilation Document in preparation for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development ( Rio+20 ) 26 October 2011 The world has seen an increase in the frequency and severity of natural and human-made disasters that severely affect lives, livelihoods and the environment. The impact of these disasters, including degradation of vital ecosystems, creates additional vulnerabilities, which in turn undermine the attainment of sustainable development. Climate change has led to an increase in the frequency, intensity and unpredictability of extreme hydrological and meteorological events, and global challenges such as environmental degradation, extreme poverty, urbanization, water scarcity, the rising need for energy, migration and population growth disproportionally affect the world s most vulnerable populations. Environmental emergencies1, are on the rise due to these global challenges and the impact of industrialization. Emergency response meets additional challenges in a context of acute threats to human health and life such as through the release of toxins, radiation etc. For these cases, governance and institutional frameworks for international emergency response are inadequate and specific operational difficulties emerge. There is a lack of awareness, notification procedures, and of clear responsibilities and coordination. As a result there is an increasing need for measures to be taken at the national level and demand for international assistance in the areas of prevention, preparedness, response, recovery and risk reduction. In order to meet these challenges, sustainable funding, improved coordination at the national and international level and inter-linkages between disaster risk reduction, pro-action2, prevention, preparedness, mitigation, response, recovery, environmental management and sustainable development efforts are necessary. In the current non-favorable global financial and economic situation, it is becoming ever more important to make wise investment decisions. Prevention, preparedness and risk reduction have shown to produce very good returns on investment, both in the context of natural disasters and in the more specific context of environmental emergencies. In order to meet development goals, risk reduction, prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery mechanisms have to also address the environmental aspects of disasters and accidents such as environmental degradation, pollution, disaster waste etc. Lessons from disaster risk management should be identified and taken into account by policy makers as an important avenue for contributing to a more sustainable development. The increased frequency and severity of natural disasters, humanitarian and environmental emergencies, and the related need for enhanced resilience, disaster prevention and preparedness have been identified as one of the emerging challenges to be discussed at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in Brazil in June 2012 ( Rio+20 ). In the following, specific inputs on strengthening prevention, preparedness, response and risk reduction relating to environmental emergencies are given for inclusion into the Compilation Document for the Rio+20 Conference. 1. What policy measures on environmental emergencies should be incorporated into the menu of policy options? Currently, countries and international organizations have a patchwork of agreements, institutions and guidelines to arrange environmental emergency response. While one country might be covered by an agreement for industrial accidents or wildfires, it might not be covered in case of a nuclear emergency or an oil spill. As there is no mechanism to connect these specialised systems with each other, fragmentation, gaps and limited coordination result. Fragmentation needs to be overcome in order to make the multilateral system more robust and effective. As mandated by UNEP Governing Council decision UNEP /GC.26/15 of February 2011, UNEP, in cooperation with OCHA, is mapping the different roles and responsibilities of international organizations in environmental emergency response and outlines where there are gaps and possible overlaps in their activities. Ngo/IRIN)

4 4 of 266 There is a need to raise awareness of and promote cooperation on the environmental dimensions of natural and human-made disasters and of the environmental implications of humanitarian and other international response. Linkages and coordination between emergency response, early recovery and development need to be improved from the onset of an emergency. Regular expert meetings on environmental emergencies to promote the application of voluntary guidelines for environmental emergencies among member states, for example through regional platforms, are encouraged. Recognizing the inherent link between humanitarian and environmental emergencies and their negative impact on sustainable development, environmental emergency aspects should be an integral part of planning and implementation in development, risk reduction, prevention, preparedness, humanitarian response and recovery. Reducing disaster risk should be made a high priority and efforts should be redoubled to fully address environmental aspects within the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action. The impact of natural and human-made disasters on industrial and nuclear facilities should be incorporated into risk reduction strategies and multi-hazard contingency planning. Guidance for such planning should be adapted accordingly. The Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction in its Third Session in May 2011 formulated as a critical next step to identify and prepare for emerging risks, including those associated with technological hazards and pandemics, through scientifically-informed multi-hazard risk assessments and scenario development. More awareness needs to be created for the inter-linkages between the impact that humanitarian emergencies and response efforts can have on the environment, and of increased vulnerability of affected communities due to the resulting environmental degradation. Awareness needs to be raised within the private sector for the consequences of environmental emergencies and the responsibility of potential polluters for prevention, preparedness, response and recovery in relation to environmental emergencies caused by them. Private sector companies in hazardous industries, insurance companies etc. should actively engage in pro-active, preventive and preparatory action. Also, governments should inventorise polluted sites that pose a threat to public health and social and economic development and ensure and monitor clean up by the responsible parties. Properly maintained / protected ecosystems and environmental services / natural infrastructure, are contributing to cost-effective disaster risk reduction and local resilience. For instance, efficient management and protection of stable vegetation cover against degradation will reduce the risk of erosion, land and mud slides, rockfall, and surface runoff with subsequent flooding. The general public should be well informed and awareness should be raised on environmental aspects of disasters. To this end, a closer and more systematic cooperation with the education system, mass media and other multipliers is required. Existing evaluation mechanisms such as environmental impact assessments should be reviewed and improved to include environmental aspects in emergencies in order to be able to identify lessons and measurable proposals for prevention. The identified lessons should feed into policy making and therewith contribute to sustainable development. Cross-sectoral cooperation that makes best use of available information and technology is encouraged. There is a need for a more equally distributed worldwide network of actors on prevention, preparedness, response and recovery related to environment and emergencies. 2. What good practices in addressing environmental emergencies should be included in the implementation of the outcomes of the Conference? At the national level, specific capacities for environmental emergency response should be available, drawing on public and private sector resources. Countries need safety nets, in particular with bordering countries sharing common economic and environmental interests. Regional response is often more cost-effective, faster, and better preserves the environment. Pursuing a better distribution of environmental emergency service providers globally, through outreach and capacity development at national and regional levels, a regional approach for capacity building should be pursued with interested regional organizations and member states. The ASEAN member states have voiced interest to be the first regional organization to pilot a regional approach. In needs and damage assessments, as well as in strategic planning and appeals processes, environmental aspects should systematically be included. In this regard, existing networks (such as the Good Humanitarian Donorship Initiative (GHD), the International Search and Rescue Advisory Group (INSARAG), as well as the United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination (UNDAC) mechanism, the Military, Civil Defense and Civil Protection Assets (MCDA) network, the Framework Convention on Civil Defence Assistance and others) should consider integrating environmental concerns. Environmental aspects should also be raised during humanitarian aid and international development cooperation conferences as well as be included in multilateral and bilateral training courses for response, preparedness, prevention and development actors. In order to strengthen coordination and accountability in risk reduction, preparedness and response related to environmental emergencies, governance and the institutional framework need to be improved. Taking into account the possible trans-boundary effects of environmental emergencies, awareness needs to be built and notification and early warning procedures be established. Responsibilities in environmental emergency response and preparedness need to be clarified, coordination be improved and operational difficulties such as customs clearance for equipment and samples of hazardous material be overcome. Scenarios established for the purposes of Contingency Planning and Disaster Risk Reduction need to include environmental impacts and secondary effects of disasters e.g. on industrial facilities. Strategic approaches addressing sustainable management / protection of ecosystems and ecosystem services with regards to disaster impact and disaster risk reduction should be included in pro-active national and multilateral policies. 3. How would Member States conduct reviews of their response to environmental emergencies, if they agree on peer review or voluntary review? The prevention of and preparedness for environmental emergencies should be integrated as permanent criteria of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) peer review process as a model. Donors and development agencies providing multilateral and bilateral development assistance should be guided by the criteria of the review process in their funding decisions. A voluntary global certification procedure should be established and supported to reflect adequate prevention and preparedness in relation to environmental emergencies. A learning community should be established to enable the exchange of experiences, and lessons identified on environmental emergencies in response, preparedness, prevention and recovery. These lessons should adequately feed into further prevention and preparedness activities and should serve as a basis for decision-makers. 4. If Member States agree on the idea of sustainable development goals, what kind of goals on environmental emergencies could be included, while bearing in mind the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities? By 2015 establish an appropriate international framework that addresses fragmentation by coordinating among regional and thematic governance systems for responding to environmental emergencies. By 2020 establish and operationalize national multi-hazard management plans in all countries for prevention, preparedness, and response that address environmental emergencies. By 2030 national and regional response capacities are significantly reinforced to enable them to adequately respond to environmental emergencies without the need for international assistance. 5. Do you think the current inter-agency arrangement, which includes the JointUNEP/OCHA Environment Unit, is sufficient for coordinating multilateral response to environmental emergencies? The current inter-agency arrangement could be sufficient for coordinating multilateral response to environmental emergencies if the partnership of UNEP and OCHA is reinforced. The partnership should be provided with adequate human and financial resources to be able to exercise a more prominent role in multilateral response, preparedness and prevention related to environmental emergencies, and to be able to coordinate better with important response, preparedness and prevention actors including regional economic integration organizations such as the European Union, regional organizations, intergovernmental organizations, United Nations entities, international financial institutions, the Red Cross / Red Crescent movement, non-governmental organizations etc. 6. Should the inter-agency arrangement include other UN entities, such as UN-HABITAT,UNDP, FAO, UNIDO, WHO, WMO, and other agencies?

5 5 of 266 Additional stakeholders (Governmental organizations, Intergovernmental organizations, United Nations entities, the Red Cross/Crescent movement, Non-Governmental Organizations, civil society, academia, industry, private sector) should be associated with the work of the UNEP and OCHA arrangement through partnerships. In particular, the partnership initiative Integrated Approach to Prevention, Preparedness for and Response to Environmental Emergencies in support of Sustainable Development that was launched during the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002 should be revitalised. The partnership envisages integrated approaches to environmental emergencies to ensure that all aspects of emergency management, preparedness, prevention and risk reduction are addressed in a systematic way. Partnerships are suggested to be established with governmental agencies, United Nations entities (such as UNISDR, UNDP, UNECE, UN-HABITAT, UNITAR and its Operational Satellite Applications Programme UNOSAT, UNV, ILO, IMO, WHO), networks operating under the umbrella of the UN (such as the Partnership for Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction (PEDRR), the Global Wildland Fire Network etc.), Intergovernmental organizations (such as European Union (EU), Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), International Civil DefenseOrganization (ICDO) etc.), major groups and non-governmental organizations, industry and professional groups and others. 7. Should there be better, improved coordination mechanisms at the global, regional and national levels, including with civil society? Awareness, notification procedures, governance, ownership, capacities, and coordination mechanisms need to be improved in order to make the system of multilateral response and preparedness for environmental emergencies more robust. Coordination at the global, regional, national, and local levels should be strengthened. At the global level, the UNEP and OCHA partnership for environmental emergencies should be strengthened, and additional relevant stakeholder should be associated with the work of the mechanism through partnerships. Furthermore UNEP and OCHA should be strengthened in the fulfilment of their mandate for environmental emergencies. Strengthening measures could include ensuring tenure of the executive heads of at least four consecutive years. Member states should nominate designated national focal points to an Advisory Group on Environmental Emergencies that is officially mandated, bringing together environmental and disaster managers from around the world to share information, experiences and lessons learned to improve prevention, preparedness and response to environmental emergencies. At the regional level, regional bodies are essential in establishing regional capacities for response and preparedness to environmental emergencies. Coordination systems at all levels, including at the national level, should encompass all relevant stakeholders, such as Governmental organizations, Intergovernmental organizations, United Nations entities, the Red Cross/Crescent movement, Non-Governmental Organizations, civil society, academia, industry and the private sector. 8. In the scenario that Member States agree on elevating the current Commission on Sustainable Development into a Sustainable Development Council, will the Council be mandated and equipped to review the sustainable development goals, including possibly those on environmental emergencies? In case Member States agree on elevating the current Commission on Sustainable Development into a Sustainable Development Council, the Council should be mandated and equipped to review the sustainable development goals, including those that may relate to environmental emergencies. Environmental emergency aspects should be included in the high level and humanitarian segments of ECOSOC or any successor Council or Committee. Alpine Convention From Rio 1992 to 2012 and beyond: 20 years of Sustainable Mountain Development What have we learnt and where should we go? The Alps Submission by the Alpine Convention for UNCSD 2012 KEY MESSAGES On the basis of their experience in the field of Sustainable Development, their role in wider contexts and their specific economic, environmental and social contexts, the Contracting parties of the Alpine Convention, through the Permanent Secretariat, recommend the United Nations, in the discussion at UNCSD to be held in Rio in 2012: to take into consideration the specific role of mountains and corresponding need for policies, in particular by strengthening transboundary institutional frameworks, to promote, where relevant, the establishment of regional mechanisms for coordinated and integrated transboundary cooperation for sustainable mountain development; strengthen existing mechanisms, such as the Alpine Convention and the Carpathian Convention, and promote the exchange of experiences and lessons learned, to recognise the role of mountain ecosystems to sustain and enhance the Earth s sustainability by developing a reliable valuation framework including concepts of payment and compensation for ecosystem services as well as considering the economic value of services provided in the general interest (green accounting), to integrate challenges and assets of mountain regions on the way to a Green Economy framework in the conviction that a geographical differentiation is needed, to adopt a multi-sectoral, multi-level and multi-stakeholder approach enabling the UN to direct its Sustainable Development policy towards concrete areas of interest and to identify entities for cooperation and implementation of such policies at a regional level, to promote networks and partnerships of mountain stakeholders at all levels (governmental, civil society, and especially the private sector) and support the consideration on mountain related concerns within the relevant national and international organisations, to support mountain specific observation, knowledge and awareness on mountain specific environmental, economic and social aspects, to use the availability of the Alpine Convention to share its manifold experience in a specific regional Sustainable Mountain Development process for the purpose of knowledge exchange. GREEN ECONOMY 1. Vision Mountains and their economies are particularly exposed to Global Change. This means that greening economy is important for mountain economies to reduce their vulnerability and to increase local added value and employment as well as reconcile economic growth with environmental protection and social progress. Mountain regions worldwide are rich in natural and environmental assets and have been recognized as particularly suitable for Green Economy with their natural and cultural diversity and importance for downstream regions in terms of resources and ecosystem services. Mountain areas are important innovation engines for sustainable development: be it in the

6 6 of 266 field of sustainable mobility and transport, renewable energy supply, sustainable tourism or in other domains. Therefore the vision is to make the Alps becoming a model region for greening the economy in order to serve as a blueprint for other mountain areas in the world. 2. Toolbox By acknowledging the need for economic interests to be reconciled with ecological requirements, the Alpine Convention gives a clear statement for Sustainable Development in the Alps. The multi-sectoral approach proposed by the Alpine Convention and put into practice in the protocols and other instruments fully meets the requirements as defined in the UNEP Green Economy Report. This approach aims, inter alia, at recognizing and adequately compensating the services provided by mountain areas in the general interest, where necessary by correcting market failures related to the specificities of mountain territories. The Alpine Convention proposes the selection of key sectors for mountain regions, reflecting its activities as by the Multiannual Programme : Water and Energy: The Alps are a water tower for Europe and large areas including metropolises are dependent on this resource; in many mountain areas responses to the challenge of bringing into accordance highland necessities with downstream needs already exist. Due to topography, altitude and large forest surfaces, the renewable energy potential in mountain regions is higher than that of many lowland areas. The development of this potential at the same time represents a challenge for landscape and biodiversity. The rough mountain climate has always made it necessary to rely on decentralised solutions and on energy efficiency, even more under the effect of climate change. The Alps are thus a laboratory of innovation and good practices. The Action Plan on climate change and the guidelines for small hydropower are examples of actions by the Alpine Convention aimed at building on innovation and spreading good practices Biodiversity, landscape, agriculture and forestry: The Alps constitute within Europe the second largest reservoir of biodiversity after the Mediterranean Sea. Mountain agriculture and forestry have a special duty to conserve biodiversity and ensure connectivity for habitats and species. By a high share of products and services of high quality, including organic farming and extensive rangelands, mountain agriculture may serve as an example for conserving biodiversity in balance with human use of resources and interest. Tourism and transport infrastructures: By their landscape diversity, their remoteness and quietness, the mountain-specific offers and the high quality of natural resources, mountain regions such as the Alps attract an increasing number of tourists, leading to a pressure on the environment and a multiplication of secondary residences. Transport infrastructures and traffic flows cause noise, GHG emissions, air pollution and landscape fragmentation, as reflected also by the Alpine Convention study on external costs of transport. Green economy solutions include the shift of current freight transport systems to more eco-friendly systems, such as the railway and the improvement of public transport of passengers. INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK 1. Vision The Alps have a long experience of Sustainable Development through various key actors at all levels (European, national, regional and local), including a lively participation from alpine-wide regional networks. The birth of the Alpine Convention itself, the first international legally binding instrument for a mountainous area, has been very much influenced by the alpine-wide NGO network CIPRA in the early 1950s. The Alpine Convention s Contracting Parties and Observers have been working to spread the Convention s spirit through local communities and regions and this experience has been considered with great interest also by other mountains regions worldwide. The functional connectivity of mountain regions with the neighbouring areas is on the rise and requires due consideration in the relevant institutional frameworks. The Alpine Convention, in its 20 years of activity, developed a rich governance toolbox based on transboundary cooperation, partnerships and networks. This allows a stronger vertical and horizontal involvement of stakeholders ranging from political decision-makers to NGOs and civil society actors from different areas, so that emerging issues may be better tackled at their specific functional level. 2. Toolbox In light of the experience of the Alpine Convention, the UN might progress in institutional framework reforms by supporting a multi-stakeholder multi-level approach suitable for mountain regions: Multi-stakeholder approach: In the Alpine arc, cooperation between the various actors takes place through a political process involving regular exchanges (international Working Groups and Platforms under the umbrella of the Alpine Convention, conferences, meetings, joint studies and projects). The numerous networking entities, be it at the governmental, NGO or research level, demonstrate a strong common intention in the search for sustainable development solutions in the Alps. The UN can build on the Alpine expertise, but also on emerging institutions in mountain research (e.g. ICIMOD in the Himalaya) and policy developments (e.g. Carpathian Convention). The Memorandum of Cooperation between the Alpine Convention and the Carpathian Convention reflects the capacity of institutional knowledge-transfer of the Alps. Multi-level approach: Alpine networks and organisations, in several cases a direct effect of the presence and of the activities of the Alpine Convention, have successfully supported the Alpine Convention contribution to actions taken at the local and regional level. Questions of a multilevel governance are discussed and a more global perspective is currently being developed, whereby the Alpine Convention aims at intensifying cooperation with and between local stakeholders while also strengthening the implementation of Sustainable Development on a supra-national level. The Alpine Convention is convinced that the focus on functional areas such as mountain ranges can help UN Sustainable Development policies to approach environmental and Green Economy challenges on a regionalised level, according to the Local Agenda 21 concept (thinking globally, acting locally). Asian Development Bank Introduction ADB s long-term strategic framework (ADB Strategy 2020) identifies environmentally sustainable growth, together with inclusive economic growth, and regional integration as the three strategic agendas for the Asia-Pacific region to achieve poverty reduction and improve the quality of life for its people. ADB s efforts in greening economic growth aim at promoting environmentally sustainable and inclusive growth while addressing climate change. This agenda is generally consistent with the green economy and green growth concepts as discussed in the Rio+20 process. ADB considers the UNCSD summit as a crucial milestone in the global agenda towards sustainable development and has supported the Rio+ 20 process in collaboration with several partners and in particular with UNESCAP and UNEP. In this context ADB has co-sponsored a series of regional and subregional consultations including the recent Asia Pacific Major Groups and Stakeholders Meeting and the Asia-Pacific Regional Preparatory Meeting, with both UNCSD preparatory events held in Seoul, Republic of Korea from 17 to 20 October This brief submission is organized in five parts as follows: (i) review of the implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme for Further Implementation of Agenda 21 and the

7 7 of 266 Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific; (ii) the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; (iii) the institutional framework for sustainable development; (iv) conclusions; and (v) annex on relevant ADB initiatives and publications on sustainable development. (i) Review of the implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme for Further Implementation of Agenda 21 and the Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific During the last couple of decades, the Asia Pacific region has built significant economic momentum. It has been for several years now the fastest growing region in the world. Hundreds of millions have been lifted out of extreme poverty. Yet our region still remains home to a majority of the world's poor. Progress in meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is uneven with almost two billion Asians living without basic sanitation and nearly half a billion without safe drinking water. Infant mortality in some countries is more than 10 times higher than that in developed countries. Rising food prices continue to place severe pressure on Asia's poor. In addition, there are widening disparities in incomes with rapid economic growth often disguising deepening inequality. Fueled by increasing resource-intensive growth, Asia-Pacific countries are struggling with rapid urbanization and industrialization and associated air and water pollution, the degradation of natural resources and loss of biodiversity, worsening water stress, and increased generation of solid, industrial, and hazardous waste. By 2030, demand for water in Asia is anticipated to exceed supply by 40% and since 80% of the water is consumed in agricultural production, water shortage may lead to food shortage. This year, food price inflation within the region has averaged around 10%, and economists at ADB predict that this could push an additional 64 million people into extreme poverty. Climate change is exacerbating these challenges while raising new ones, such as rising sea levels and increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events including floods and droughts. In recent years a number of countries in the region have pursued and invested in green strategies and policy reform with many also making policy statements supporting green growth and low carbon development. While some progress has been made, sustainable development is an unfinished agenda and much more needs to be done. ADB shares the responsibilities of promoting more inclusive and environmentally sustainable growth and is firmly committed to support the region in fulfilling its sustainable development objectives. As a contribution to the assessment of regional progress and ADB s assistance towards sustainable development, the annex provided in part (v) below contains a list of relevant ADB supported initiatives, programs and knowledge products. (ii) Green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication Greening economic development in the region needs to be centered around two major implementation directions: (i) promoting transitions to sustainable infrastructure investments and (ii) improving natural resource management and the integrity of ecosystem services. Addressing climate change is also a cross-cutting priority area for action in the transition towards green economies. Sustainable Infrastructure: According to ADB estimates, the region needs about $8 trillion of infrastructure investment over the next ten years to cope with rapid urbanization, industrialization and other challenges. Two thirds of this will be for new stock, which presents tremendous opportunities to build infrastructure that is more accessible, efficient, and inclusive. Making the right choices now can lock the region into more environmentally sound, low carbon and climate resilient infrastructure that will be around for many decades to come. To help make this a reality, ADB has initiated major programs to promote clean energy, public and non-motorized transport, low carbon and climate resilient urban development and integrated water resource management [see part (v)]. Improving natural resource management and the integrity of ecosystem services: The second priority concerns the region s globally significant biodiversity and natural resources, which currently face significant degradation and loss. Our region has several large-scale ecosystems which are central to the future well being of Asia-Pacific due to the ecosystem services they provide and the importance of these to human welfare and economic development. These include for example the Coral Triangle also known as the Amazon of the Seas, the Greater Mekong Subregion forest and biodiversity complex, the Heart of Borneo rainforest and the living Himalayas sometimes referred to as the Water Towers of Asia. In these areas there are new opportunities for enhanced regional cooperation and local action, and as indicated by the TEEB Report (2010), economic returns from efforts to sustainably manage these ecosystems can be worth ten to one hundred times the cost. Success in these areas will however require strong national leadership, country driven programming, and innovative partnerships among financiers, civil society and local level communities. The focus should be on integrated approaches i.e. reducing poverty reduction while improving natural resource management, as many rural poor are directly dependent on ecosystems for a substantial portion of their incomes and are also highly vulnerable to the impacts of land and water degradation and climatic variability and change. Climate Change and Disaster Risk Management: There is also a need to address the climate change challenge and support the region s transition to low-carbon and climateresilient growth. ADB s climate change program focuses on five region-wide priorities: (i) expanding the use of clean energy; (ii) encouraging sustainable transport and urban development; (iii) managing land use and forests for carbon sequestration; (iv) promoting climate-resilient development; and (v) strengthening related policies and institutions. Tools and methods are also required to help countries better address disaster risks and current climate variability risks while anticipating and adapting to future climatic conditions. To this end, countries poverty reduction strategies and targets including gender equality and other social development objectives should take better account of changing climatic conditions and disaster risks, and build measures to enhance the resiliency of poor communities, women, and other vulnerable groups. (iii) Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development More effective institutional arrangements are key to achieving sustainable development. At the international level, there is certainly scope for a more coherent interface among the MEAs, which will greatly facilitate regional and country level action. At the regional level, stronger arrangements for facilitating regional cooperation would also be very welcome. At country level, many countries have adequate environmental laws and regulations, but effective compliance and enforcement continues to be elusive. Governments need to join forces with communities and work together with industry and other stakeholders. And there is scope for better incentive frameworks for environmentally responsible action. The time is ripe for improved policies, including fiscal reforms, removal of perverse subsidies such as the large subsidies for fossil fuels, and much better valuation of critical ecosystem services. Support to strengthening environmental governance and management capacities in the region must also continue. Policy and market failures must be corrected to improve incentives for sound environmental management. In most cases, no one single policy tool can bring about the needed changes in behaviour. Thus, a range of approaches are necessary, including regulations, market-based instruments, voluntary schemes, and information disclosure. At local level, more policy and legal reforms that strengthen community rights and create incentives for sustainable local resource management are needed. At the country level there is a need to strengthen and clarify roles and mandates of environmental and sector ministries and agencies, as well as provincial and local authorities. At the regional level, it will be crucial to build on the experience from regional and national networks such as the ADB-supported Asian Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Network. Environmental impact assessment and social safeguards processes are also important. Under its Safeguard Policy Statement, ADB is providing support towards strengthening and effective application of country safeguard systems (CSS) with a focus on the capacity development of borrowers/clients. This is being pursued also by facilitating knowledge exchange and dissemination through existing and well-functioning regional networks. ADB is coordinating with other development agencies in supporting and mobilizing resources toward CSS capacity development activities. Regional cooperation and integration is also a crucial area for action to maintain Asia's growing prosperity and move towards sustainable development. Recognizing that many of the region s critical ecosystems transcend political boundaries and that several pollution issues have a transboundary nature, governance arrangements at the regional and subregional level are also increasingly becoming a necessity. Key elements needed here are effective regional cooperation and institutions, strong national leadership, country driven development planning and investments programming, and innovative partnerships among financiers, civil society, and others key players. Regional