My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP04191
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
4001-5000
>
WSP04191
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:54:08 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:12:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8054.100
Description
Water Salvage - Water Salvage Study - HB 91-1154
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Date
9/1/1991
Author
EESI
Title
Background Documents and Information 1991 - Earth Summit Update - September 1991
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />O!)05~~' <br /> <br /> <br />,Environmental and Energy Study Institute. 122 C Street, N.W., Suite 700, W...hington, D.C. 20001. (202) 628-1400 <br /> <br />Agenda 21 Negotiations Put Off to PrepCom 4 <br /> <br />The third preparatory meeting <br />of the ,United Nations Conference <br />on Environment and Development' <br />(UNCED) ended without any sub- <br />stantive negotiation on several of <br />the issues to be covered in its <br />, "Agenda 21: a framework for ac- <br />tion on the environment 'and <br />development. <br />No effort was made to resolve <br />the differences, in the negotiating <br />texts, shifting a much heavier bur- <br />den than expected onto PrepCom 4 <br />in New York beginning in March <br />1992. ' <br />Both developed and developing <br />countries pressed their maximum <br />positions and pet causes lit the third <br />Preparatory Committee, (PrepCom <br /> <br />3), :with no willingness to negotiate <br />any compromise, formulas. '''It's too <br />early to give anything up," said one <br />o .S. delegation member on the last <br />day of the conference. The, draft <br />texts on Agenda ,21 generally con- <br />sisted of an amalgamation or merely <br />compilations of the views of various <br />delegations. As a result, diametri- <br />, callyopposed positions on the,same ' <br />.issue often were juxtaposed. When <br />working groups had time to read <br />through'the documents paragraph <br />"by paragraph, the !.extswere 'full of <br />brackets, indicating that para- <br />'graphs or subparagraphs had been <br />rejected by one or more delegations. <br />Time simply ran, out before <br />there 'was an opportunity for sub: ' <br /> <br />Delegates Clash on Title, Procedure in <br />Charter Discussion <br /> <br />PrepCom 3 produced a compi- <br />lation of provisions suggested by <br />different delegations for a "charter" <br />or declaration of principles, but it <br />was unable to agree on whether the <br />,document should be called the <br />"Earth Charter" or the "Rio de <br />'Janeiro Charter 'on Environment <br />and Development." <br />The Group of 77 (G77) develop- <br />ing countries insisted on the "Rio <br />Charter" as the title, arguing that <br />the "Earth Charter" stiggested that <br />the emphasis was on envirorunent, <br />, rather than environment and de- <br />velopment. The "Earth Charter" <br />title hlld been suggested by UNCED <br />Secretary General Maurice Strong. <br />During the third week of the <br /> <br />PrepCom, the secretariat compiled <br />a consolidated draft from all coun- <br />tries wishing to make suggestions. <br />The draft includlJd a unified G77 <br />proposal and 144 other proposals <br />grouped under 17 general head- <br />ings. The G77 insisted that their ' <br />proposal 'be the basis of discussion <br />rather than the consolidated draft, <br />" but they did not prevail. <br />The 077 proposal called for the <br />document to include: <br />-: The "right to a sound environ- <br />ment." <br />- The need for ,developed coun- <br />tries to address "unsustainable' <br />patterns of production and con-, <br />sumption." <br />- The "right of development." <br /> <br />See Charter, page 3 <br /> <br />stantive negotiations on such sub- <br />jects as institutional reform and <br />forests. The PrepCo'm requested <br />only that countries submit their, <br />proposals on these subjects and com- <br />pile them in a document for <br />discussion at the next PrepCom. <br />Debates on biodiversity were <br />marked by"highly polemical state- <br />ments by, developing countries in <br />which the major themes were the <br />North's responsibility for environ. <br />mental degradation, the necessity <br />for the North to take financial re- <br />'sponsibility for 'conservation' and <br />demands for additional funding and, <br />transfer of technology to the South. <br /> <br />. See Agenda 2l. page 3 <br /> <br />PrepCom Makes <br />No Progress on <br />Financial Resources' <br /> <br />Delegates to PrepCom 3 failed <br />to begin negotilltions on the critical <br />is~ue of financia~ resources, agree- <br />ing only to begin those negotiations <br />at PrepCom 4 in New York next <br />March. <br />Until the final day of the <br />PrepCom, the developed countries <br />and the Group of 77 (G77) develop- <br />ing countries were deadlocked on <br />whether a G77 text on 'financial' <br />resources would be the basis for <br />negotiation in New York. The <br />Uruted States insisted that other <br />proposals should be given equal sta- <br />tus in negotiations at ?repCom 4, <br />while the G 77 demanded that nego~ <br />tiations begin with their text. Before <br />the final session, both sides agreed <br /> <br />See Financial, back page <br /> <br />Each article in this issue was written by Gareth Porter, woo attended PrepCom 3. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.