EL PRESIDENTE : Vamos a continuar con el tema 8 de la Agenda.
S. PAM ANEGARA (indonesia) : Like many speakers before me, my delegation wishes to congratulate the Secretariat for having prepared for this Commission's review a highly useful document on Progress of International Agricultural Adjustment. Bearing in mind the scarcity of the necessary data that could be collected, the Secretariat has to be commended for the kind of report it has been able to produce.
This is the first time that my delegation is taking the floor on the subject. I may therefore be allowed to present my overall comments on the contents of the document in this one intervention.
On the increase in food production in the developing countries, at 4 -1 percent on the average during 1974/76, slightly exceeding the rate recommended in Guideline 1, the report suggests that applause for this achievement must be tempered by two considerations. First, that increased production is not sufficient for the eradication of hunger and malnutrition, if not accompanied by a more even distribution. Secondly, that the achievement was largely attributable to favourable weather during the three-year period.
My delegation would like to add to this a third consideration, that is the fact that the production increase has not been shared equally by the developing countries. That should give us cause for real concern to note that particularly the MSAs and the least developed countries fell tragically below anything approaching a 4 percent growth in food production. This is certainly a serious situation which warrants the fullest consideration and, where possible, remedial action by the international world.
The fact also that only a small minority of the people in the developing countries - only one out of five - is fortunate enough to live in countries where the growth of food output is approximate to or exceeds the rate in Juideline 1, should further temper the applause for the overall achievement in food production.
This can be seen in paragraph 35 of the document.
Paragraph 36 states that adjustment in the commodity composition of output in developing countries did not coincide very closely with those implied by projections of demand. This can be seen in Table 3. In particular, production of the kinds of food generally considered to represent an up-grading of the quality of the diet, like milk, meat, pulses and vegetables, all fell much below the growth projected for demand. The tame paragraph concludes by saying that:
"This reflected in part the much greater attention being given to cereals than other foods in most developing countries and may suggest a major future adjustment issue."
This conclusion, which sounds a very important one, is frankly not very clear to my delegation. Bearing in mind that shifts in consumption patterns, as referred to, are dictated by certain changes in income, is it not possible that adjustments in the commodity consumption do not coincide with those implied by projections of demand because of actual income growth in developing countries being different than what has been projected? However, I would appreciate it if the Secretary could further clarify the statement in paragraph 36 which I mentioned earlier.
Guideline 2 concerns the total flow of financial and other resources into agricultural production in developing countries.
My delegation agrees with the statement in paragraph 40 that inadequate reporting of the data concerned, as found in developing countries, could result in a most serious data gap during the course of monitoring. Hence reference had to be made to various separate data series relating to major resources and requisites like land use and irrigation, average yields, agricultural labour force, etc.
I would like to make one comment on growth in the agricultural labour force as presented in Table 6 on page 14. I suggest that not only quantitative growth is important in this respect but that qualitative growth should be equally, if not more, important. Here again, although measuring the progress made would not be easy, nevertheless such qualitative growth in the labour force, working for agriculture, which reflects the investment countries are making to develop human resources, is, in my delegations opinion, a highly important indicator which should be monitored very closely. This increase in the number of agricultural schools and students or graduates, in the number of trained extension workers, of agricultural research workers, etc, could provide useful indicators of the kind and size of investments countries are making in the agricultural sector. I suggest, therefore, that in the next report data be presented on the progress the developing world is making in this particular sector of development of human resources.
Likewise, the growth of institutional infra-structure, such as credit institutions for farmers, village cooperatives and agricultural marketing units, could provide useful supporting data in our monitoring of progress made under Guideline 2.
Regarding Table 9 on page 18, I would like to propose that: first, separate figures be given for wheat and rioe, in view of the substantial divergencies that may be found in the extended application of high yielding varieties of those two foodgrains; second, that the acreage under high yielding varieties could be expressed also in percentage of the total harvested acreage of rioe and of wheat respectively.
On Guideline 3, my delegation recognizes that the provision of appropriate incentives to the producers to expand production is one of the cardinal elements in national policies to be adopted by developing countries.
Table 10 on pages 22 - 23, which presents producer support prices for cereals in selected developing countries, provides highly interesting information in this regard. It is to be regretted that this valuable information is at the same time somewhat vague. How should one, for instance, explain or interpret the substantial decline in support prices in a number of countries on the list, such as Ghana, Kenya, India and Mexico, in contrast with the equally substantial increase in support prices in other countries such as Bangladesh, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Argentina?
Conversion of these prices into one common currency, say united States dollars, could help in making this Table more readable and digestible.
A better picture of the significance of support prices in individual countries could also be provided if such prices were expressed in relation to prices of agricultural inputs, fertilizers in particular, that farmers have to pay. Such relative support prices would provide a better indicator of the effectiveness of price incentives made available to farmers.
I agree that Guideline 3 on national policies by developing countries should be considered as a very important guideline, although not necessarily the most important one as suggested by number of speakers. After all, the effectiveness of such national policies in our world of interdependence is affected, if not dictated, by quite a number of external factors. Among such external factors can be mentioned notably actions and policies adopted by the developed countries and by the international world in general.
Here we touch in particular on guidelines relating the trade in agricultural commodities and guidelines relating to international assistance to developing countries as regards agriculture.
I do not wish to take more time of this Commission in commenting on these two groups of guidelines, bearing in mind also the large number of very useful suggestions already made in this regard by previous speakers. However, I wish to comment on one subject mentioned at the end of the Secretariat's report, paragraph 188, that is reduction of waste, including excessive food consumption and reduced use of food commodities as feed for livestock.
In the aftermath of the recent world food crisis, much has been said and suggested on the need for the ultra-rich countries to reduce the wasteful utilization of limited resources. Reduced consumption of meat, for instance, in countries where per capita consumption is already too high, could bring about substantial relief to millions of suffering people in the Third World, and at the same time contribute to improved health conditions in the rich countries. I suggest that I should only be more than relevant if development in this kind of reduction of waste could be reported also in the future.
C NTS.ANE (Lesotho): My delegation is grateful for this analytical document, which we regard as a good basis for individual countries to examine their own performance and contribution in respect of the 11 guidelines.
With regard to Guideline 10, we would like to underline that when such transfers occur, they should be of a self-perpetuating nature. Very often, as evidenced by many development projects, these transfers have been made without emphasis on institutional building to improve capacities and capabilities in recipient countries. Here, I am thinking of training at the site level, systems for local resource mobilization and the establishment of appropriate lending agencies.
Under Guideline 8, we welcome the establishment of a common fund by the UN CT AD North-South Conference, referred to in paragraph 131 on page 51. We hope that when this comes into operation it will pay sufficient attention to capitilization of marketing organizations so that farmers my not be discouraged at the terminal point of their production efforts.
My delegation has noted a point which could easily become sensitive and controversial. A comparison of the rate of increase in food production and the rate of population growth leaves much to be desired, especially in the spirit and circumstances in which the discussions of this Conference are proceeding. Without prejudice to those countries which have reason to do otherwise, it is the feeling of my delegation that respective countries may wish to examine their population policies very carefully.
G. VASTA (Observateur pour l'OCDE): Je voudrais tout d'abord féliciter le Secrétariat pour l'excellent document qui nous a été soumis ces jours derniers, et ce d'autant plus que le sujet est très diffi cile. Pour cette raison, le Secrétariat mérite toute notre gratitude.
Je m'en tiendrai strictement aux lignes générales et je dirai que ces problèmes intéressent beaucoup l'OCDE, et que les études qui sont en train d'être faites par l'Organisation entrent bien dans le cadre du tableau général des activités et des préoccupations de la FAO en vue de réaliser l'ajustement international agricole.
L'OCDE porte une attention particulière à l'agriculture en raison de l'importance économique que ces secteurs occupent dans tous les pays du monde mais aussi en raison des graves problèmes humains et sociaux posés à de larges couches de population dans de nombreux pays en voie de développement. Et, à cet égard, est bien connue aussi l'activité du Comité d'aide au développement et du Centre de déve loppement de l'OCDE. Les travaux de l'OCDE portent surtout sur les politiques que les gouvernements des pays membres adoptent en matière agricole et ceci sous tous les aspects politiques: politiques de prix, de revenus, politiques structurelles, politiques commerciales d'aide aux pays en voie de déve loppement, destinées à renforcer le secteur agricole et à améliorer la situation alimentaire.
Le but de tous ces travaux consiste à promouvoir sur le plan national une meilleure intégration de l'agriculture dans l'économie et sur le plan international un développement des échanges dans des conditions ordonnées et une plus grande solidarité entre pays favorisés et pays moins favorisés.
C'est dans ce contexte qu'ont été réalisées des études telles que des études sur les tendances de l'offre et de la demande mondiale des principaux produits agricoles ou encore des études sur l'utilisation des terres, sur le marché des produits laitiers, ou bien, comme il y a quelques années, sue le capital dans l'agriculture et son financement. Une place importante est donnée à la recherche agricole et à la vulgarisation agricole.
C'est avec beaucoup de plaisir et d'espoir que j'ai pu constater l'importance que l'on donne aux problèmes de la nutrition et je suis heureux que finalement ces problèmes d'importance vitale semblent avoir attiré, de façon accrue, l'attention des différents lays et des organisations internationales
les plus compétents et les plus responsables.
L'effort que fait la FAO est suivi par toutes les organisations internationales qui s'occupent de ces graves problèmes et je souhaite qu'elles aussi puissent finalement réaliser les buts de leurs efforts.
W.S. STEELE (United States of America):I would like at this time to follow up on the rest of the statement we had regarding guidelines 7-11.
Starting with Guideline 7, the Secretariat has employed a growth and volume of world trade as am indicator for progress in improvement of market and supply access. We feel this is an insufficient measure, as it does not take into account the factors which govern trade volume.Levels of protection and the use of export controls should also be monitored to gauge the access to markets and assurance of supplies. While this responsibility falls within GATT and not FAO, there nevertheless may be some cooperative efforts to develop information on this guideline.
Under Guideline 8, we would only like to point out that the United States has introduced a new proposal in the International Wheat Council to establish an international grain reserve system to moderate price swings, and we hope progress can be made in implementing such a system.
Regarding paragraph 134, the Secretariat has pointed out the two main stabilizing efforts going on now in UNCTAD and the IWC Commodity Agreement discussions.It however fails to point out progress in multilateral trade negotiations towards reducing trade barrierswouldenhance the degree of world price stability and food security.
Regarding Guideline 9 under paragraph 146, there is the observation that there is little meaningful linkage between international policy efforts regarding access to export markets and export promotion and those directed to increasing production for export.
The United States agrees with this observation, and believes the best available method for ensuring such linkage is togather information on anticipated markets for agricultural products and ensure that this information is related to anticipated production plans in developing countries.FAO could serve as a focal point in collecting appropriate market information and data but not duplicate the work of GATT-UNCTAD and the International Trade Centre.
Under Guideline 10, in this context we would like to point out that the United States is increasing its bilateral and multilateral commitments for food and agriculture development programmes. Our bilateral programme for 1978 will be substantially increased for the food and agriculture sector, about $50 million over the $536 million in 1976/77. Our contribution in 1978 to international financial institutions will be double what it was in 1976 and much of this will be on a concessional basis.
In conclusion we would like to encourage FAO to continue monitoring progress of International Agricul tural Adjustment and to develop the necessary statistics and methodology to do the job, but we should keep in mind that progress on international agriculture adjustment will depend on an outcome of negotia tions in a number of other international fora.
M.R. LEAR (New Zealand):I have just a few brief comments.
On Guideline 7, regarding the need for improved market access I think our views on the necessity for liberal access and for trade as far as possible for agricultural products are very well known, so I need not repeat.I only reiterate our hope that substantial progress will be made in GATT and UNCTAD to liberalize access for exports and stabilize commodity prices.
One other matter regarding Guideline 8. Again, in paragraphs 121 and 122 we have this implication that actions taken by some developed countries for domestic political reasons, in this case restricting market access, is to some extent justifiable, and it contributes to world food security by increasing supplies available to other countries outside that market.
I do not want to repeat what I said yesterday on the subject, but it seems to us that that is a fairly short-term static analysis of what world food security is all about.
On Guideline 8, we are very interested in particular in the terms of trade analysis in paragraph 135 onwards on the terms of trade of agricultural exports relative to manufactured goods in particular. It seems to us those figures show that for most agricultural commodities although terms of trade have
slumped since the boom of 1973 they are still higher overall than the early 1970s level. The problem for us is that this does not quite square with our experience in New Zealand as an exporter of agricul tural commodities, and I just wonder why this is so. Our terms of trade for about 20 years, from the 1950s onwards, although they fluctuated quite wildly because we are an exporter of agricultural commodities, nonetheless averaged at around 100 taking as a basis the figure of 100 in 1955. Since 1973 our terms of trade have not only slumped quite dramatically but appear to have stabilized at around 80, compared to the previous average of around 100 for the previous 20 years.
I wonder why this sort of experience, which I suspect has also happened to a number of exporters of agricultural commodities, is not reflected in these figures. I Wonder if it is because when we talk about agricultural commodity values relative to manufactured goods, whether or not oil is taken into consideration. I suspect if oil imports, or assuming they are not taken into consideration, if they were taken into consideration they would make a substantial difference. I wonder if the Secretariat could clarify this matter for me, whether fuel or oil imports in particular are included under manu factured goods. If not, could we have this and future work on terms of trade done by the Secretariat? I think it would be a more realistic picture of what the terms of trade of actual exporters really are.
I have no other comments on other guidelines. They seem to have been very well covered by other dele gates, but in conclusion I have one further question for the Secretariat, and that is, what are their intentions regarding future work on international agricultural adjustment that they have started so well with this document? We would favour its continuation as a matter of some importance.It seems to us it is comprehensive and sophisticated and does some pioneering conceptual and sophisticated work. As far as I know there is no other international body doing similar work, so it is appropriate for FAO to continue its work in this area and again I would commend it on an excellent first time study.
D. RITCHIE (Australia): I shall be very brief.It would seem at the end of the debate it is not totally inappropriate to offer comments of a very general nature.
The Australian delegation agrees in broad terms with the Secretariat's assessment. However we would have liked to have seen more attention paid to the problems faced by developed countries in recent years. The interdependence of their economies has resulted in the transference and multiplication of disloca tions arising from both natural and man-made events which has impaired their ability to institute measures that have been agreed at international meetings to be necessary.
I should point out however that Australia accepts of course that the. actions agreed at the World Food Conference and the two Special Sessions of the United Nations General Assembly in relation to food must be implemented.
We have some detailed comments on specific guidelines, but in the interests of brevity I think we should hand these to the Secretariat to be written into the record.
RAM SARAN (India): After listening to the delegate of New Zealand, I thought I might refer to one of his comments. He talked about the future programme of work,I did refer to this question in my last intervention but I thought I might raise another issue:that is, we have now an analysis on the basis of the guidelines that we formulated earlier.In this Conference some of the delegates have made observations on the guidelines as they are formulated.I was wondering whether it would not now be proper for us to look into guidelines again on the basis of the experience that we have had during the last two years or so. Therefore, my specific suggestion is that at the next conference the Secretariat might come up with specific proposals on the basis of the discussions held in this Conference, and on the basis of other experiences they will come up with specific proposals on the amendments or modifications that may be considered necessary in the guidelines themselves. This is my specific suggestion.
D. RITCHIE (Australia):In relation to Guideline 1, we would offer the observation that, because of the lead times involved in expansion of agricultural output, it is probably too early to discern anymeasurable effect of policy-induced changes.
On Guideline 3, the Australian delegation notes that the methodology used by the Secretariat represents an attempt to quantify the complex interaction of a wide range of policy measures. Therefore the results and their interpretation should be treated with caution.
In the case of the estimated trade volume effects, apart from the problem of using truly representative elasticities it is also important to keep clearly in mind that the calculated magnitudes are notional only - the effect of the policies is assumed to be instantaneous rather than gradual over a number of years.It cannot be concluded, therefore, that the estimates of trade volume effects represent actual tonnages of a particular product which were in reality available for or withheld from the export market in any one year due to the various support policies operated by developed countries. The Secretariat might have seen it appropriate to have mentioned that in the years prior to the food crisis the extra supplies of cereals available as a result of developed countries' policies helped to avert the more frequent occurrence of food shortages.
It is valid to ask whether the Secretariat's estimates of trade volume effects give an accurate indi cation of progress on Guideline 3. The commodities covered are all temperate zone products so that while the calculations may permit some conclusions to be drawn about food security needs, they are not particularly useful in judging whether the diversification interests of developing countries are being met, since most of these commodities offer only limited scope for diversification in many of these, countries.It should also be pointed out that the Secretariat's rather pessimistic conclusions about the degree to which the "special interests" of the developing countries have been met are not fully substantiated by the evidence presented in its monitoring of Guideline 9. Here it comes to the clear conclusion that recently there has been a marked diversification of developing countries' agricultural exports.
We also wonder whether the Secretariat's comments on the achievement of Guideline 3 have taken into account an inherent contradiction which it contains. On the one hand it proposes that the policies of the developing countries aim at a rational use of resources to allow for the special diversification of interests of the developing countries, while on the other hand it requires that these policies not be operated in a way which would harm world food security. At best this calls for a degree of policy balance which may in reality be difficult to achieve.So far as food security is concerned the important point is that when shortages appear, the developed countries have always responded positively to the needs of the developing countries.
Concerning the comments on the need for an equitable sharing of the incidence of international supply/ demand market adjustments, Australia, as a major agricultural exporting country, would agree that this is a desirable objective.Our recent experience with the contraction of the world beef market has been that the special restrictions imposed by a number of major importing countries have caused the Australian beef producers to bear a disproportionate amount of the adjustments necessary to meet the changed market situation.
Concerning Guideline 6, we feel that the analysis may be a little superficial and makes no more than a token attempt to identify countries with ''weak balance of payments''.
On Guidelines 7, 8 and 9, the Secretariat's monitoring reveals a number of positive developments for developing countries, viz. a marked improvement in the terms of trade of their agricultural products for manufactured products; a rapid rise in the value of agricultural exports from developing countries; and a substantial diversification of developing countries' agricultural exports, both in terms of pro cessed products and products competing directly with those exported by developing countries.
The trade policy issues raised in these three guidelines are, as the Secretariat recognizes, currently the subject,of discussions in a number of international fora.It is not appropriate in our view that these policy aspects be discussed in the current context and we would limit our comments to noting that recent trade data shows evidence of an improved position for the developing countries.
There are, however, several issues raised in respect of these guidelines on which we would like to comment.
In discussing world food security, the Secretariat concentrates almost exclusively on the issue of cereal stocks, expressing disappointment that progress has been slow in getting international agreement on a stockholding system.In our view, however, this question is only one of a number of elements in efforts to preserve world food security.In particular, we would disagree with the Secretariat's reference to the International Undertaking on World Food Security as basically constituting an under standing on the establishment of a system of stocks. A number of other equally important elements, some of which are listed in the International Undertaking, include the need to improve the food produc tion potential of developing countries;the need for a reduction of post harvest losses;the adequacy of transport, communications and marketing infrastructure in developing countries;the need for more timely and comprehensive information on supply prospects and the adequacy of storage capacity in food deficit' countries themselves.In Australia's view the establishment of FAO's Committee on World Food Security, its Global Early Warning System and the establishment of the Food Security Assistance Scheme all constitute very real advances in securing greater world food security.
The establishment of an internationally coordinated system of nationally held feed grain reserves has in fact been under consideration in international fora for some time and at a global level is closely associated with international trade in grains, particularly wheat.Deliberations to date have revolved around a set of complex problems, not the least of which is that of establishing an equitable arrange ment between grain exporting and importing countries regarding the financing of reserve stocks.It is Australia's view that an international reserve stock system of wheat should not be established in isolation but should be part of a new international wheat agreement to provide adequate safeguards for normal commercial trade.For its part, Australia has been an active participant in discussions on the possibility of negotiating such an agreement.
With respect to the Secretariat's comments on agricultural adjustment in developed countries, Australia has operated a rural adjustment scheme for a number of years.A new scheme introduced from 1 January 1977 provides financer for carry-on loans, debt reconstruction, farm build-up and rehabili tation assistance.
Concerning Guideline 10, Australia has consistently criticized the basis for the $5 billion "goal". This was a somewhat tentative estimate prepared for the World Food Conference in respect to food pro duction but has subsequently become enshrined in the documentation of FAO, the World Food Council and CGFPI. The final sentence in paragraph 154 is misleading - the figure of $8.3 billion is no more than an indexing for inflation of the original $5 billion and in no way represents a substantive revision.
In paragraph 155, the Secretariat notes the drop in commitments in 1976 (cf 1975) and the smaller share of total aid commitments that this represents.The key question"why?" has not been explored.Does the drop reflect a decrease in availability or a fall in demand fron developing countries? Did the developing countries change their priorities or did the large increases from 1973 to 1974 to 1975 approach the limits of absorptive capacity, requiring a pause in the rate of increase? If this is so what are the constraints? It would be illuminating to have answers to these questions.
On Guideline 11, Australia supported the establishment of the 10 million ton target for cereals at the World Food Conference. This target is intended to cover the "hard core" food aid needs of developing countries. Of course, actual quantities of food aid shipped vary from year to year because of random events - good or bad harvests due to weather, natural disasters and, on occasions, political developments. We recognize also that there is considerable scope for incorporating previously determined quantities of food aid intodevelopment programmes and support the work going on in the CFA to this end.
We note that the adequacy of the target is currently under study by the Secretariat of CFA Policies and Programmes and will be considered by the Committee at its Fifth Session in April 1978.1 /
B.E. MATAMOROS HUECK (Nicaragua): Mi delegación desea hacer algunos comentarios en relación al docu mento C 77/20, Progresos Realizados en el Reajuste Agrícola Internacional,
Sobre la orientación 1, Producción Alimentaria y la Orientación 3, Corriente Total de Recursos, deseo formular las siguientes observaciones:
El Plan Indicativo Mundial para el desarrollo agrícola de FAO señala que para lograr una tasa anual del crecimiento de la producción agrícola en el orden del 4%, los países en desarrollo necesitamos una corriente anual de recursos externos del orden de 8 300 millones de dolares EE.UU.(a precios de 1975) y a precios de 1977 10 000 millones.Sin embargo, la tasa de crecimiento de nuestra producción agríco la no ha alcanzado el 2,6%.
La ayuda oficial a la agricultura en 1975 alcanzo la cifra de 5 700 millones de dolares EE.UU., en 1976 disminuyeron a 4 750 millones de dolares EE.UU., y para 1977, debido a la inflación, la imagen resultan te es aún más preocupante.
Hasta ahora la asistencia a la agricultura ha sido en su mayor parte en capitales, sin embargo es nece sario evaluar la asistencia técnica, en su volumen como en su contenido, y encontrar dentro el contacto de la cooperación multilateral, métodos que beneficien en forma mas directa el sector agrícola tradi cional, particularmente los pequeños agricultores y los trabajadores sin tierra.
En la evaluación de proyectos deberá dársele mayor atención a los factores humanos e institucionales que influyen en la ejecución y en la complement ación de los mismos, tratando de incorporar en forma mas adecuada^la participación de las instituciones nacionales y regionales, así como la participación y capacitación del personal nacional en la ejecución de los mismos.
1/ Statement inserted in the verbatim records on request.
Orientación 3, Políticas Nacionales, incentivos a la agricultura.
La contribución del sector agropecuario en la formación del PIB alcanzo en mi país el 35%.
En cuanto al crédito otorgado por el sistema financiero de mi país al sector agropecuario, las institu ciones públicas cubrieron el 60% de sus exigencias, incrementándose en 1976 en un 16% en relación a 1975.
En cuanto a la Orientación 6, segunda parte, Seguridad Alimentaria Mundial, nos preocupa que aún no se ha alcanzado el objetivo de 10 millones de toneladas establecido por la CMA, en alimentos cereálicos, así como las reservas internacionales de emergencia solo han alcanzado tres quintos de la neta.
Comercio y Acceso a los Mercados. Orientación 7 y 8 .
Señor Presidente; el valor total de las exportaciones agrícolas permaneció estacionario en 1975, y los aumentos logrados en 1976 no fueron suficientes para compensar la subida de los precios de nuestras importaciones.
En los órganos internacionales la solución a estos problemas aún procede lentamente.
La necesidad de establecer precios a un nivel remunerativo para nuestras exportaciones aún no ha encon trado soluciones. Los precios de productos básicos tales como bananos, fibras duras, carne, semillas oleaginosas, arroz y otros productos, aún sufren de estas características en los mercados internaciona les, y en algunos casos ha disminuido inclusive su valor real.
En algunos casos esta situación es debida a la aplicación de subsidios a la. producción interna aplicada por los países desarrollados con el objeto de alcanzar la autosuficiencia, además de otras medidas restrictivas que obstaculizan las exportaciones de los países en desarrollo.
Esta situación ha sido agravada por el continuo desplazamiento de los productos naturales por los sin téticos y sus sucedáneos, además de las restricciones existentes en los países desarrollados, a los productos elaborados y semielaborados de los países en desarrollo.
A la base de esta situación es una precisa voluntad política que debería reorientarse en la ampliación del S.G.P., el apoyo al Fondo Común, del Programa Integrado de Productos Básicos, así como la implemen-tación de las directrices elaboradas por el grupo de la carne y otros Comités intergubernamentales. En este contexto la función del CPPB es muy importante, la aplicación de las normas alimentarias tienen efectiva repercusión en el comercio. Consideramos que el CPPB, por su naturaleza, debe vigilar las repercusiones de estas normas, en los intereses de exportación de los países en desarrollo ya que consi deramos que éstas deben promover prácticas comerciales justas en el comercio de alimentos y no provocar efectos negativos en el desarrollo de las industrias alimentarias y las exportaciones provenientes de los países en desarrollo. 1/
N. ISLAM (Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Policy Department): I would not venture to sum up the very wide ranging discussions which took place over the last two days. I would only confine myself to a few remarks giving some clarifications and comments on various suggestions.
I am very thankful to the distingished delegates for their appreciation of our document C 77/20 on monitoring the progress of international agricultural adjustment. The discussion on this item has, I believe, emphasized the importance which the Member countries attach to international agricultural adjustment, in terms of policy issues at national and international levels as well as an area in which FAO should contribute analysis and information.
The general assessment of progress presented by the Director-General in this document appears to bebroadly agreed to. Before I respond to the various suggestions made for improving the nature and content of the analysis of .our future reports as well as for strengthening the statistical basis of our analysis, I would like to make a few general points.There appears to be a unanimous agreement that the Secretariat should continue to monitor the progress of international agricultural adjustment and should make a progress report to the next session of the Conference. Apart from the improvements which I will discuss in a moment, the report should be of the same general nature, that is an assessment using quantitative data wherever possible but resorting wherever necessary to partial and qualitative analysis.Its length should be approximately the same as the document presented to you at this session C 77/20.
1/ Texto incluido en las Actas a petición expresa.
A number of delegates referred to the need to give an action orientation to FAO's work on international agricultural adjustment. We agree with this but perhaps I should stress that the report on assessment and monitoring is one distinct part of the work on international agricultural adjustment.We agree that the results of monitoring of progress on international agricultural adjustment could feed directly and indirectly into the action programmes of many kinds in the FAO. As time goes on we will be endeavouring to strengthen linkages between the results of our global monitoring work on the policy issues relating to the guidelines of international agricultural adjustment and concrete action programmes relating to various problem areas covered by the guidelines.
As a number of delegates have pointed out, the guidelines may eventually require adjustment in the light of the changing situation in the field of food and agriculture. The Conference may like to consider at a future date possible adjustments which are needed in the guidelines in the light of its assessment of progress in international agricultural adjustment. The distinguished delegate from India has just now shown considerable interest in this need for possible adjustments in the guidelines.
May I now make a few specific points relating to the comments made by distinguished delegates on the analysis contained in the report. In a way we see our task of monitoring certain aspects of international agricultural adjustment, especially relating to the domestic policy issues, as complementary to the attempts of individual Member countries to evaluate and monitor their progress in the achievement of targets and objectives within their countries. Our global monitoring efforts support and supplement their efforts both in the analysis of progress and in the improvement of data base required for evaluation and monitoring of progress. At this stage, however, I would like to point out that we do recognize, as mentioned by many distinguished delegates, that several developments in the field of trade negotiations and in the field of negotiation on a new internationa grains arrangement have occurred since the completion of our report. A few of these are mentioned in the introductory statement of the Director-General. We hope these negotiations will be successfully completed, keeping the Guidelines of international agricultural adjustment in mind.
As distinguished delegates have rightly emphasized, many guidelines are qualitative in nature and therefore are difficult to monitor. However, we will continue our efforts to try to formulate indirect quantitative indicators to help us monitor the. qualitative guidelines.
Furthermore, several suggestions have been made to improve the statistical data base. They will be considered by the Secretariat seriously for incorporation in our future report.
I may mention the specific suggestions made regarding evaluation of production performance such as comparison between peak year levels of output, analysis of irrigated land in relation to total irrigable land, use of total supply of agricultural machinery such as tractors rather than imports only, for the analysis of investment and distinction between food and non-food use of fertilizers, etc. All these suggestions will receive our close attention.Similiarly the suggestions for the use of public or government expenditures or budgetary allocations in agriculture as a proxy for investment flows into agriculture is certainly a very useful one. Again, under Guideline 6, index analysis of problems encountered in obtaining increased self-sufficiency in the most seriously affected countries would be worth-while. Monitoring of incentives provided by the various government policies for stimulating increased agricultural production is an intricate and difficult exercise. We are also grateful for the suggestions made in this regard.
Suggestions have been made for distinguishing in terms of estimates of output in and resource flows between subsistence farming or farming for self consumption, and farming for the market which is for sale outside the farming units.In general in developing countries estimates of output are obtained through subjective estimates made by crop reporters or objective crop-cutting observations in selected fields.They are of little basis for the developing countries to provide as a routine such estimates for distinguishing between subsistence farming and commercial farming.Therefore, we felt it might be unrealistic to include such questions in FAO's annual production questionnaire.However, the importance of this kind of information is undeniable. What appears to be called for is specific studies or central surveys in selected or interested countries to develop appropriate methodology for arriving at such estimates.In fact, a few developing countries have attempted to collect such information in the course of their household expenditure consumption surveys.Insofar as estimates of investment flows into these sectors are concerned, the exercise may prove to have been more difficult especially for food production for self consumption.I hope that the distinguished delegates from the developing countries Would indicate how practicable or feasible this would be for our next report. To a limited extent it may, however, be possible for commercial crops where a very large proportion of output is marketed and where flows of investment resources mostly pass through financial intermediaries. However, the Secretariat would be more than willing to explore this area of investigation and discuss it with interested countries or delegates.
Regarding guidelines on nutrition, we may inform the Commission that FAO is currently carrying out a survey of non-cereal food for submission to the next meeting of the Committee on Food Security. Non-cereal commodities are not at present included in food aid targets. They are under consideration by the Committee on Food Aid Policy and Programmes. If and when a consensus is reached on such targets they could be included in the guidelines.
Also with reference to the analysis of food aid for development purposes, including increases in food production, I may indicate that this is also a problem engaging the attention of the Committee on Food Aid.Suggestions for case studies of successfully applied nutrition projects is an excellent one and we will endeavour to have it carried out.
A number of suggestions have been made for improving the presentation of statistics in our various tables. We have taken due note of them and will try, to the extent possible, to incorporate them in future exercises. However, I hope you would agree that the analysis of cost and production by crop and by country all over the world in order to appraise the comparative advantages of individual countries for individual crops, is a vast undertaking. An exercise like this can possibly be best or most appropriately carried out at the country level. FAO would be most ready to help individual countries with such exercises.
Questions have been raised on matters of estimation of the terms of trade. The terms of trade analysis presented in the document are based on movements of the net terms of trade of individual commodities. Further work is in porgress, especially to analyse the terms of agricultural trade on a country basis. The results of this work will throw light on the net terms of trade of different groups of countries including the MSAs. We certainly agree with the emphasis laid, in the course of the discussions, on more detailed analysis of terms of trade by commodity groups as well as country groups. This will be taken up in our next report.
The suggestions made that the import substitution policies of the developing countries should also be considered under Guideline 9 is a very reasonable suggestion which we will certainly keep in mind in the course of our future reporting on the subject.
As regards the suggestion that FAO should help stabilize world supplies and demands of individual commodities by identifying trade opportunities, we would like to inform you that we are hoping to extend our work in this field, especially in helping individual developing countries in assessing their total world market outlook.
Reference has also been make to the analysis of growth in trade as an index of increase in access to markets and assurance of supplies. We agree that additional indicators in cooperation with other agencies in this area could be developed.
Regarding Guideline 3, on domestic policies, a suggestion has been made that the list of issues requiring response or action on the part of developing countries should be specified similar to the list for the developed countries. This could be done in the next report.
A few delegates have suggested that the progress report should also contain a deeper analysis of the reasons for short-falls in achieving targets and objectives, as well as suggestions for improving the policy and action programmes as part of the monitoring exercise. We shall do our best to extend the analysis in these directions. However, we may draw the attention of delegates to two facts, or considerations:first, we are required under a Conference resolution to keep our documents very short and succinct; secondly, a few of these issues, in the form of detailed analyses of reasons for short falls from targets, as a response to suggestions and policies and programmes, are covered in other documents which are presented to various Committees of FAO, such as the Committee on Food Aid, the Committee on Food Security, the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Commodity Problems. However, it would indeed be worth while, as delegates have recommended, to pull them together in a convenient form in the present document.
EL PRESIDENTE:Pregunto si hay algún ulterior comentario en relación con lo que el Dr. Islam nos acaba de expresar.
Bien, señores; yo creo que, con esta intervención del Dr. Islam, podemos dar por concluido este tema de la Agenda.El Dr. Islam hizo comentarios y respuestas a las intervenciones que se sucedieron durante el debate.Considero que ha puesto bien de manifiesto las orientaciones principales que se expusieron en nuestras discusiones y quizá ello me releve de la obligación de leer un largo resumen que yo tenía preparado aquí.
Quizá solo quepa señalar que este es un tema que ha merecido una considerable atención por parte de las delegaciones, lo cual indica la importancia que los países Miembros dan al reajuste agrícola inter nacional.Sería también necesario agregar la esperanza de que este proceso de reajuste agrícola inter nacional se concrete y sea un proceso tangible en beneficio del desarrollo de los países, a través de una manifiesta voluntad política por parte de aquellos países con mayores recursos, que tengan que sacrificar algo de lo que disponen, en favor del desarrollo de los países que más necesitan.
Convendría quizá también señalar (y en esto estoy seguro de interpretar el sentir de todas las delega ciones) que la Secretaría, a través del documento que nos ha presentado, ha hecho un esfuerzo digno del reconocimiento y del elogio de todos nosotros, porque ha hecho una evaluación cualitativa, y en algunos casos cuantitativa también, disponiendo no siempre de datos suficientes como para poder efec tuarla.He aquí por qué el esfuerzo adquiere mayor trascendencia.
Señores, si no hay otros comentarios adicionales, voy a declarar concluido el análisis de este tema, y vamos a pasar a la consideración del tema 9.
The meeting was suspended from 10.45 h ours to 11.00 hours
La seance est suspendue de 10 h 45 à 11 heures
Se suspende la sesión de las 10.45 a 11.00 horas
EL PRESIDENTE:El tema 9 tiene gran importancia y agradecemos la presencia del Sr. Director General junto con nosotros, el Sr. Jackson.
J.E. CARROZ (FAO staff):The document under reference is C 77/21.It has the same title as the item on the agenda.There is probabley no need for me to say very much about the considerable changes that are taking place in the regime of the oceans.
Delegates are familiar with the work of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.It is indeed a major international event and the FAO Conference has, since 1971, followed the preparations for that Conference and the progress achieved in its negotiations.
What needs repeating perhaps is that the FAO Conference has always stressed that it should not, and cannot, convert itself into a conference on the law of the sea but must limit its discussions to those aspects for which FAO has constitutional responsibility.
In the first part of the document will be found a brief and, I hope, factual account of the present state of negotiations, with particular reference to those provisions of the informal composite negotiating texts which relate to fisheries.As pointed out in paragraph 2 of the document, this composite text is not a negotiated text.It is still informal and will merely provide a basis for future negotiation without affecting the right of any State to suggest revisions in the search for a Consensus.
There is also in the document an indication of the action taken so far by numerous coastal States to extend their jurisdiction over fisheries.The document then reviews on very broad lines the implications of the new regime of the sea for the national management and use of fishery resources.
The point is made that while most resources occur in areas which are, or will be, under national jurisdiction, the biological characteristics of these resources and their migratory pattern will still make it advisable in a number of cases for governments to cooperate at the regional or sub-regional level.It is felt, therefore, that in many areas regional fishery bodies, and particularly those established within the framework of FAO, will still have a useful role to play in assisting with the assessment, management and development of resources.
The virtues of concerted action have in fact been re-affirmed at very recent sessions of our Fishery Commission for the East Central Atlantic and the Indian Ocean Fishery Commission. But this may vary from area to area and I am sure delegates realize how difficult it was to cover these complex topics on a worldwide basis, and in general terms.
The most important section of the document concerns the types of assistance that developing coastal States may wish to receive to take full advantage of the resources in extended zones of jurisdiction. It is apparent that in many cases coastal States will have increased opportunities for fishery development, but at the same time this will entail taking the necessary measures for the rational management and use of these additional resources.
A major decision of the Committee on Fisheries in April of this year was to request the Department of Fisheries to prepare a comprehensive programme to assist developing coastal States in merging and developing fisheries in their economic zones. The document before the Commission refers to the on-going, or proposed FAO activities designed to achieve this purpose.
I could mention the multi-disciplinary missions to assess the implications of the new regime on a region-by-region basis, the execution of studies leading to the formulation of fishery development plans, the assistance in drafting national legislation, and restructuring or establishing national institutions, including fishery develomment corporations, and the assistance in preparing for, or negotiating, joint ventures and bilateral agreements on fisheries.Some of these activities are already being carried out, sometimes within the framework of FAO regional bodies, and always of course at the request of the countries concerned.
As the document suggests, FAO has an important and continuing role to play, we believe, in identifying all the forms of assistance which will be requested by the developing coastal States, and in enlisting and coordinating the necessary financial and other support from both the United Nations system and from all appropriate bilateral and multilateral sources.
Lastly, the document before the Commission also provides some information on the potential contribution that the so-called unconventional resources could make to world food supplies.There are indeed fish species and other marine animals that are not at present harvested because it is as yet difficult, for technical and economical reasons, to catch them or to process and market them. These include small species of crustaceans and fish as well as deep ocean squids. Perhaps the best known of these resources is krill, which is abundant and widespread in the Southern Oceans.The document describes the present state of exploitation and utilization of krill.
In line with the recommendations made by the FAO Conference itself at its last session in 1975, FAO is endeavouring to promote the selection and exchange of information concerning the development of fisheries and unconventional resources in general, with a view to increasing animal protein supplies and ensuring the conservation and rational use of these resources.
The Conference may wish to note in this respect that, at its last session in April of this year, the Committee on Fisheries had a very wide-ranging debate on international cooperation in future developments of the living resources of the Southern Oceans, and particularly krill.A preliminary phase UNDP Southern Oceans Fisheries Survey Programme is just coming to an end, and has produced three reports on the living resources of the Southern Oceans and the harvesting and utilization of krill. Copies of these reports are available for you in the hall. It is obvious from these reports and from the experience of those countries which are carrying out specific operations in the area that a number of difficulties will still have to be overcome, particularly as regards product development and marketing, before any major commercial exploitation can be expected.
Realizing that FAO might act as a catalyst and assist in coordinating the necessary research and studies, the Committee on Fisheries, the session of which was attended by over 70 FAO Member Nations, recognized that the Organization has a proper and legitimate role to play in view both of its technical responsibilities and its special duty towards developing countries.
I should perhaps say that members of the Committee were fully aware that they were treading on somewhat sensitive ground, as was pointed out also by several countries in the Governing Council of UNDP.This is why the Committee stressed that in continuing its activities FAO should work in close cooperation with the coastal States in the area and other interested States, as well as the appropriate scientific bodies, and also in close cooperative working relations with the parties to the Antarctic Treaty as regards the area covered by that Treaty. This area extends to 60 degrees south latitude, while the Committee on Fisheries took the view that FAO's future studies should relate to the living resources which occur in the Southern Oceans up to 45 degrees south.
Consultations with the Antarctic Treaty parties, which the FAO Conference had also recommended at its last Session in 1975, have alredady started, and we are grateful to the countries concerned for having given us an opportunity to provide information on our activities to their Ninth Consultative Meeting in London last September.
The future work and studies of FAO concerning the living resources of the Southern Oceans as envisaged by the Committee on Fisheries are listed in paragraph 32 of the document before you.As mentioned in the document, the report of the Committee on Fisheries was endorsed by the Council at its Seventy-First Session last June.
To conclude my remarks, I would like to make it clear that when the Conference is invited, in paragraph 34 of the document, to offer comments or guidance, this request only refers to matters for which FAO has constitutional responsibility. Perhaps this point needs to be stressed in view of the admittedly delicate nature of some of the topics dealt with in the document.
EL PRESIDENTE: Antes de dar la palabra al primer orador quisiera pedir al Relator que nos informe sobre las opiniones que hayan expresado las delegaciones que han intervenido en el Plenario en rela ción con el tema que hoy tratamos.
L. RITTERSHAUS (Rapporteur from Plenary to Commission I):Compared with other more widely discussed topics, the problems of fishery and its development were not as fully in the limelight of Plenary Sessions of the Conference as may have perhaps been desired. However, several interesting points were touched upon in the statements of various more directly interested countries.
The problems of a new law of the seas, and in particular the establishment of a 200-mile fishing zone, were mentioned by the delegates of Japan and Chile, both seeing in this new feature of the law of the seas a positive and, in fact, indispensable step towards better protection of maritime resources.In the same vein, the delegate of Iceland analysed his country's measures towards the establishment of an exclusive fishing zone around the coasts of his country;he declared it was not only an economic necessity but was indispensable for the safeguarding of fish stocks from depletion.In his view, Iceland's policy might have saved the North Atlantic cod stock.He felt that more extensive protection measures were imperative.
Several delegates explained their countries' intention to expand fisheries programmes in the near future and appealed for greater assistance by FAO, both in the fields of research and expert advice as well as in those of technical support and investment.Among them were Gambia, Ghana, Somalia, Chile, Fiji and a few more.
Fiji also raised a very interesting point of more general economic relevance.Its delegate explained how small island countries like his own were subjected, due to the fact that they were bounded all round by the sea, to problems very similar to those of land-locked countries.He introduced a very appropriate neologism, that of "sea-locked'' countries.
The delegates of Japan and Norway, two countries with very highly developed fishing industries, also urgeQ FAO to widen its development assistance programmes in the field of fisheries, and offered their participation in association with our Organization.
EL PRESIDENTE :Quizá convenga hacer algún comentario en cuanto a lo que ha señalado el Dr. Carroz sobre la forma en que podríamos encarar el debate sobre este tema.Hay un requerimiento en ese sentido en el párrafo 34 del documento que es un tanto genérico. Quizá por ello pueda sugerir que tratemos de focalizar las intervenciones para poder llegar a conclusiones concretas en dos aspectos principales y en tanto se vinculen directamente con las responsabilidades de FAO en esta materia. Esos aspectos son la evolución del régimen del mar y las consecuencias para el sector pesquero, pero en este segundo caso, en especial, en cuanto a la asistencia y cooperación que la FAO puede ofrecer a los países costeros para tratar de optimizar la explotación de los recursos en su jurisdicción.
M.J. de OLIVEIRO RUIVO (Portugal): Mon intervention sera faite exclusivement au nom de la délégation portugaise. Nous considérons que ce fut une sage décision d'inclure ce point dans l'ordre du jour de la Conférence.En faisant cette intervention, je me concentrerai, pour le moment, sur la première partie du document qui nous a été présenté, c'est-à-dire les implications de la Conférence sur le droit de la mer et d'un nouveau régime des océans sur les pêches, tout en me réservant pour une seconde intervention sur le deuxième point concernant l'utilisation des ressources dans les mers australes.Soit dans l'intervention du Ministre de l'agriculture et des pêches du Portugal, en Plénière, soit dans no-
tre intervention en Commission I sur le Programme de travail et budget pour le biennium prochain, nous avons signalê le role que, de l'avis de ma délégation, la FAO, par l'intermédiaire de son Département des pêches, du Comité des pêches et des organismes régionaux des pêches aura à jouer pour faciliter l'implantation du nouveau régime pour les océans.
Le document C 77/21 et l'excellente introduction qui vient d'être faite par M. Carroz, dont nous appré cions la compétence professionnelle et l'objectivité maintes fois démontrées dans ses activités au sein de la FAO, et dans le cadre de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur le droit de la mer, nous donne le point de la situation et identifie quelques-unes des plus importantes implications pour le secteur de la pêche des négociations en cours dans la Troisième Conférence sur le droit de la mer, ainsi que du résul tat des mesures prises par un nombre croissant d'Etats pour établir et réglementer leurs zones économi ques exclusives ou d'autres espaces maritimes équivalents.
Pour mieux situer les questions sur lesquelles nous devons nous prononcer, je tiens à souligner que nous nous trouvons à un grand tournant historique en ce qui concerne les affaires océaniques internatio nales.Le vieux droit de la mer, créé dans le passé par les puissances maritimes traditionnelles, est en train de disparaître.Un nouveau régime pour les océans, créé par tous les Etats et traduisant les nouveaux besoins de la communauté internationale, est en train de s'affirmer.Fruit de longues négo ciations encore en cours -et dont l'objectif est d'arriver à une convention par consensus et d'une pratique- d'ailleurs fortement influencées par les principes et les dispositions élaborées dans le ca dre de la Troisième Conférence- le nouveau régime porte en soi les aspirations des pays du tiers monde et les objectifs d'un nouvel ordre économique international.Il reconnaît également que la nature des problèmes et leur complexité exigent un effort accru de coopération internationale. Ceci demande un role de plus en plus actif des organisations internationales appropriées, en particulier de celles faisant partie du système des Nations Unies, reconnu d'ailleurs dans beaucoup de dispositions du texte unique informel de négociation.
S'il existe encore des questions très controversées et sur lesquelles la Troisième Conférence est loin d'être d'accord., il y en a d'autres sur lesquelles les positions sont très proches et le consensus sem ble possible.Ceci s'applique en particulier aux dispositions concernant l'utilisation et la conserva tion des ressources vivantes du milieu marin, ainsi qu'aux principes régissant les nouveaux espaces de juridiction nationale généralement décrits comme zones économiques exclusives.
Tel que signalé dans le document C 77/21 et au cours des débats qui ont eu lieu sur cette matière pen dant la dernière session du Comité des pêches de la FAO, l'établissement par un nombre croissant d'Etats, de zones élargies de juridiction, a donné origine à des situations et des problèmes qui auront besoin d'être réglés dans les années à venir.Ainsi, l'une des premières conséquences, très importantes et positives, est liée aux opportunités nouvelles qui s'offrent aux Etats cotiers de promouvoir et d'accélérer l'utilisation des ressources situées dans leur zone économique ou espaces maritimes équivalents, à des fins de développement économique et social.Ceci exige un grand effort national et, en même temps, un effort accru d'assistance technique et de coopération internationale, de financement, d'aide mutuelle et de collaboration, pour mobiliser les moyens indispensables aux activités de recherche, de création d'infrastructures, de flottes, de personnel, -etc.
Une autre conséquence dont il faut tenir compte, c'est l'effet résultant de l'établissement des zones économiques exclusives, pour les activités de pêches lointaines effectuées pour des pays engagés dans ces activités.Ici, les implications plus immédiates, résultent des restrictions d'accès et exigent des mesurés destinées à faciliter des réajusteraents dans des opérations de pêche et à atténuer les consé quences économiques et sociales.
Finalement, dans cette phase de transition du vieux droit de la mer vers le nouveau régime por les océans, il est indispensable de prendre des mesures qui puissent atténuer d'éventuelles crises de pro duction, de façon à ne pas réduire le contingent d'aliments d'origine marine dans sa totalité et, d'au tre part, à ne pas affecter négativement le commerce mondial des produits de la pêche.
Ces trois implications majeures -et il y en a d'autres- du nouveau régime que je viens de signaler, sont celles qui, de l'avis de ma délégation, méritent une attention spéciale de la part de la FAO en tant qu'agence spécialisée des Nations Unies ayant compétence dans le domaine de l'utilisation et de la protection des ressources marines et des aspects associés de transfert de technologies.
Ceci va exiger de l'Organisation un role particulièrement actif dans les années à venir et la création d'une capacité de réponse proportionnelle à l'importance de la tâche.
Ceci va exiger, également, un effort de la part des Etats intéressés, soit en ce qui concerne la défi nition de leurs politiques de pêche, de leurs plans de développement et des priorités, de leur dispo nibilité à coopérer avec d'autres Etats voisins, dans la même région ou subrégion et, également, à l'échelle globale, selon le cas et les circonstances.
Je dois dire que, malgré la complexité de la tâche et les moyens qu'il faudra mobiliser, nous abordons cette problématique et ce débat avec la conviction que nous réussirons.
Tout d'abord, il est très encourageant de constater que le Directeur général, par les mesures qu'il a prises et par l'orientation qu'il a donnée à la FAO en vue de la préparer aux nouvelles tâches qu'elle aura à remplir dans les domaines de sa compétence, dans l'esprit d'un nouvel ordre économique interna tional; politique dont l'origine est la volonté des Etats Membres, collectivement approuvée par le Conseil et en voie de ratification par cette Conférence.
Nous sommes également encouragés par la capacité démontrée par le Département des pêches (sous l'orien tation de M. Watzinger, dont le sens pratique et la connaissance des problèmes des pays en voie de développement sont à souligner) à mettre en oeuvre la politique du Directeur général.
Non seulement le Département des pêches a su traduire dans la pratique l'orientation du Directeur général mais, en le faisant, il a su incorporer les aspects spécifiques au secteur des pêches, résultant de la diversité des situations nationales et régionales. Ceci démontre, également, la valeur du Comité des pêches et des organismes régionaux des pêches, comme mécanisme, non seulement de concertation d'efforts entre les Etats, mais également comme mécanisme générateur d'orientations spécifiques pour le Départe ment des pêches de la FAO,
Le Programme de travail pour 1978-79 et la stratégie y proposée pour les objectifs à moyen terme, consti tuent un solide point de départ pour les actions nécessaires en vue de faciliter aux pays et à la com munauté internationale, l'application du nouveau régime pour les océans en ce qui concerne l'utilisation et la protection des ressources marines.
Il est certain qu'il faudra encore raffiner la formulation des priorités et continuer le réajustement des moyens et du personnel en accord avec ces priorités. Il faudra continuer à appliquer les critères définis par le Directeur général en vue de réduire la bureaucratie, les activités marginales et sans impact immédiat pour le développement économique et social. Il faut intégrer dans un seul programme, au service des Etats Membres - en particulier pour les pays en voie de développement et ceux qui sont confrontés aux difficultés résultant de l'application du nouveau régime pour les océans - les compo santes du Programme régulier et du Programme sur le terrain.
En ce qui concerne celui-ci, fondamentalement financé par le PNUD et par d'autre sources internationales ou bilatérales, il y a également un effort à demander à chaque Etat pour que, dans cette période de transition du vieux droit de la mer au nouveau régime, une priorité soit accordée dans le plan de développement national au secteur de la pêche.
Pour conclure, et en m'excusant d'avoir peut-être été plus long que je le désirais dans mon interven tion, ma délégation proposerait comme sujets à développer dans le cadre de nos débats et, selon les cas, des organes appropriés de la FAO, les points suivants!
Le Département des pêches, tel que cela a été signalé dans l'introduction par le Secrétariat, doit poursuivre les consultations en cours et les contacts avec les pays membres en vue de préparer et de soumettre à la prochaine réunion du Comité des pêches, les bases d'un programme spécial d'action appuyé sur l'utilisation coordonnée et élargie des sources traditionnelles de financement international et bilatéral et, éventuellement, des contributions volontaires.Ce programme doit contribuer à la mobili sation d'autres fonds et moyens indispensables pour que les Etats côtiers en voie de développement et ceux qui sont confrontés aux difficultés conjoncturelles dans le domaine de la pêche, puissent utiliser les opportunités de développement économique et social résultant de la création des zones élargies de juridiction nationale.Ce programme, dont le besoin a été identifié à la dernière réunion du Comité des pêches, devra contribuer à accélérer le transfert de technologies indispensables au renforcement de la capacité de chaque pays dans le domaine de la recherche, de l'utilisation et de la gestion ration nelle des ressources marines.Il doit également contribuer à faciliter la participation de ces pays sur un pied d'égalité- et non de dépendance- dans les activités de coopération sous-régionales, régionales ou globales, selon les cas, en tenant compte des objectifs que je viens de signaler.
Sans entrer dans les détails, il est indispensable que, pour la mise en oeuvre de ce programme spécial, on puisse encourager également des efforts d'investissement accrus dans le secteur des pêches.Les chiffres dont nous disposons montrent qu'en réalité ce secteur ne reçoit pas la contribution qu'il mérite en fonction de son potentiel comme source d'aliments et de protéines, d'emploi et de devises extérieures.
Nous pensons également que la FAO, ayant en vue la future mise en oeuvre du programme spécial que nous venons de signaler, doit prendre des mesures destinéesà aider, dès maintenant, les Etats Membres, s'ils le sollicitent et je souligne ce point, s'ils le sollicitent à formuler le diagnostic de la situation de leurs pêcheries et à formuler des orientations en vue de leur développement.
Cette action du Department des peches pourrait prendre la forme de missions cela a été signalé par le Secrétariat dans ces pays ou par d'autres moyens jugés appropriés. Ceci exige, évidemment, un ren forcement des moyens dont dispose la FAO, peut-être, comme je l'ai déjà dit, par l'intermédiaire de contributions volontaires.Je tiens à souligner ici que l'expérience acquise par la FAO avec le Pro gramme de coopération technique, nous semble indiquer une ligne d'action très positive et fonction nelle.Il faut, évidemment, encourager la mobilisation de contributions volontaires extra-budgétai res.Le Secrétariat doit donc être en mesure d'avoir accès aux moyens nécessaires pour appuyer les gouvernements à développer leurs politiques.
Dans ce contexte, nous voulons signaler qu'il revient aux gouvernements des pays côtiers de prendre également les mesures internes qu'ils considèrent nécessaires en vue de créer des conditions favorables au succès des actions d'appui à prendre dans le cadre du programme spécial ou des missions de coopéra tion destinées à faciliter le diagnostic des problèmes et à faciliter l'élaboration des plans d'action. Il serait inutile de faire un effort substantiel de coopération internationale et d'aide mutuelle, s'il n'existait pas parallèlement un effort national correspondant. Il est indispensable de développer sur place les conditions qui rendront cet effort viable et productif.
L'élaboration,par le Département des pêches, des profils des pays qui compléteraient ceux qui existent déjà sur les activités économiques concernant les renseignements fournis par les pays eux-mêmes sur leurs structures et leurs plans de développement, pourrait se révéler utile dans ce contexte.
Outre les questions de priorité dans le programme de travail de la FAO, il y a des mesures à prendre également en ce qui concerne les structures et les mécanismes de façon à les adapter aux nouvelles fonctions.Ici la FAO a un role particulier à jouer pour la défense des intérêts de la pêche dans le cadre global des affaires océaniques internationales. Une coordination plus efficace entre les di verses agences spécialisées, en appui de la pêche et sous la leadership de la FAO, correspondrait aux besoins de la communauté internationale, en cette période de transition vers un nouveau régime pour les océans.
Nous voudrions encourager les gouvernements et notre Gouvernement est en train de se préparer à cet effet à préparer des propositions à présenter à la prochaine réunion du Comité des pêches en vue de déterminer quelle devrait être l'évolution du Comité lui-même, ainsi que des organismes régionaux asso ciés à la FAO, afin de les adapter aux tâches nouvelles qui seront demandées à l'organisation.
Nous pensons que la FAO a une double fonction à jouer dans ce contexte: d'une part comme forum de concertation entre les Etats traitant de problèmes d'intérêt commun, d'autre part, comme moteur des changements déterminés par la volonté des gouvernants et dans l'esprit de coopération internationale qui caractérise la Troisième conférence des Nations Unies sur le droit de la mer, en vue de faciliter l'application du nouveau régime pour les océans, en permettant de nouvelles opportunités qui s'offrent au développement de s'affirmer, et en même temps d'atténuer certaines de ces conséquences négatives de caractère conjoncturel et plus profond.
Finalement, ma Délégation pense que les Commissions régionales de pêches et les projets du PNUD à caractère régional, ainsi que d'autres formes de coopération bénéficieront d'une plus étroite association aux activités des officines régionales tel qu'il a été proposé dans le cadre général de la décentrali sation des activités de l'organisation. Mais, en le faisant, nous voulons signaler qu'il sera très important de s'assurer que la qualité technique ne soit pas affectée.Si d'une part, il est souhaita ble d'assurer une coopération très étroite entre les mécanismes régionaux de la FAO et les bureaux ré gionaux, il faut d'autre part, tenir compte du fait que l'efficacité de ces mécanismes dépend de la capacité dont dispose la FAO dans son ensemble; celle-ci est limitée et, par conséquent, le processus de décentralisation doit être mis en oeuvre en tenant compte de ces réalités.
Les organismes régionaux ont une vocation particulière à fournir un cadre pour la coopération entre les pays en voie de développement, à encourager et à faciliter la collaboration entre ceux-ci et, d'autres pays, autour des projets d'intérêt commun, qu'il s'agisse de transferts de technologie, des activités de recherche ou autres.
Pour conclure, nous pensons qu'il est temps de passer des paroles aux actes et de mettre en oeuvre des actions pratiques; mais ceci ne veut pas dire des actions primitives.L'action du Département des pêches doit avant tout contribuer à renforcer l'autosuffisance (''self-reliance") de chaque pays et à permettre sa coopération au niveau approprié avec d'autres pays.
Nous sommes confiants quant aux résultats de ce débat et pensons qu'ils aideront la FAO et son Départe ment, c'est-à-dire qu'ils nous aideront nous-mêmes, à trouver le juste chemin dans ce secteur très important de l'action de la FAO.
T.J, Kelly, Vice-Chairman of Commission I, took the Chair
T. J. Kelly, Vice-Président de la Commis s ion I, assume la présidence
Ocupa la presidencia T.J. Kelly, Vicepresidente de la Comision I
R. HART (Canada) :The Programme of Work and Budget made important references to new developments in the regime of the sea, particularly as these related to the developing countries.It emphasized the need to ensure that the poorer segments of society benefit from the new regime and it stated that FAO would help them to become self-sufficient and self-reliant.
The report of the 33rd Session of the Programme Committee of the Council clearly recognized that a new regime of the sea had emerged and that this had to be taken into account in planning FAO's official programme.
I now turn to the document C 77/21.It is an excellent document and Canada is generally well pleased with its contents.The Assistant Director-General is to be congratulated on the preparation of the document which clearly reflects his efforts to put into practice the policies outlined by the Director-General.There are a number of interesting points in this document and I would cite four of these.
The document indicates that the Department of Fisheries is hoping to play an increased role in pro moting international cooperation and accelerating the transfer of technology in connection with the implementation of the Law of the Sea.It also notes that already 53 coastal states have declared a 200 mile zone and what is even more important is the fact that the 200 mile zone covers 35 percent of the oceans and contains 90 percent of the living resources in that 200 mile zone, and it also emphasizes the fact that regional organizations will have an increasingly important role.
With respect to the developing countries, the document points out that coastal states will have to assume increased responsibilities which include the obligation to determine the total allowable catch, conservation measures, establishing the objectives of management, the promotion of the optimum use of living resources, the need to determine their capacity to harvest the resource, the obligation to give other states the resources which they cannot catch, the collection and analysis of data, the working-out of effective management measures, the formulation of national policies regarding foreign parti cipation in coastal fisheries and the establishing of joint ventures.
This is a major chance for the poorest countries, many of which have neither the personnel, the institutions or the money to undertake these responsibilities which have been placed on them by the international community.
The report also points out that the distant water fleets fishing in these coastal areas of the de veloping countries caught 5 million tons in recent years each year.Five million tons does not sound very much when it is said quickly, but this represents 10 billion pounds of fish or 20 pounds of fish per year per 50 million people, or 50 tons of fish per year per 20 million people.If the developing countries are to fully benefit from the resources now available to them, they will need boats, harbours, technology and institutions.It is noted that FAO will help countries to formulate de velopment plans and make studies which will give an evaluation of the resources, and thus enable them to have a basis for setting the objectives for development programmes.
The developing countries, in any terms, are facing a gigantic task over the next 10 years if they are to obtain the optimum benefit from their jurisdictional zones.What is needed initially is the development and transfer of what we might term soft technology which can be absorbed and applied by the smallest and poorest of the developing coastal countries, to ensure that the jurisdictional rights and privileges which are or will be theirs can be protected in their own interest.Such technology is not readily available, but it is neither difficult nor costly to create and transfer.Canada has already given a very clear indication of its appreciation of the problem facing the developing countries, by placing funds in trust in the hands of FAO for the purpose of assisting developing countries to develop an indigenous capability to develop and manage their own fishery.Canada has already committed some of its best fishery experts to assist developing countries in this task for varying periods of time. During the present fiscal year Canadian experts on the Law of the Sea and on problems relating to its implementation, will meet with over 100 specialists and administrators from 26 developing countries to assist them in coming to grips with the legal, institutional and management problems facing their respective countries.
Canada has also indicated its strong support for the development of regional organizations by making substantial contributions to such regional bodies in their task.Canada hopes that FAO will take appropriate action to place the regional bodies in a position to plan and execute their own fisheries development programmes.It is recognized that the Department of Fisheries of FAO will be called upon to undertake a major task of obtaining assistance from the countries, aid agencies, UNDP, IFAD and other international agencies in order to carry out its task in relation to the new regime of the sea. Canada was particularly glad to note that the Chairman of the Preparatory Committee of IF AD made specific reference to the inclusion of fisheries in the. range of projects qualifying for IFAD financing to enable developing countries to take advantage of the opportunities available to them.
We are talking of the Department of Fisheries taking the leading role in one of the first major steps forward in pursuit of a new international order affecting both the developed and the developing countries and designed to protect the fish resources of the world for future generations.The Law of the Sea debate has been going on for eight years, and now, with unilateral declarations of a 200 mile zone by 53 countries, the Department of Fisheries of FAO will be assuming new and important responsibilities.
This intervention by my delegation is directed to what is in our opinion a very important point, which I now wish to make. The next meeting of COFI will be called upon to give serious consideration to the implications of the new regime of the seas, and my delegation requests that the Department of Fisheries be asked to prepare proposals for a medium-term programme to meet the challenge.The establishing of a six-year programme which would set out achievable and measurable objectives to meet target dates would enable all donor countries, all international funding agencies, all countries engaged in TCDC activities, all non-governmental agencies and all United Nations agencies to see the nature and extent of the problem and thus be in a position to make an effective contribution to such a programme.Such an approach would also make it possible to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of the programme. Furthermore, when such a programme has been developed and defined to the satis faction of major funding agencies, individual developing countries or regional organizations will be assisted when requesting aid from these agencies to help meet their needs and discharge their obligations as they perceive them.Because this programme will be unlike any other programme under taken by FAO or the major funding agencies it should be approached in a bold, innovative and creative manner.
My delegation therefore requests:(a)that the Department of Fisheries of FAO be asked to prepare a six-year plan which will set out the specific medium-term objectives of FAO's role in the imple mentation of the new regime of the sea;(b)that the plan include information on priorities, timing of programmes and resource allocations;(c)that such a plan be in the hands of member countries of COFI six weeks in advance of the next COFI meeting, scheduled for June of 1978; and (d)that COFI be asked to consider the plan at its next meeting in June of 1978.
O. LUCO ECHEVERRIA (Chile): Mi delegación ha estudiado detenidamente el documento relativo a los temas pesqueros que analizará esta Conferencia, y ha seguido con vivo interés la presentación que de este tema ha hecho la Secretaría de esta Comisión. Ella ha sido altamente esclarecedora y estamos seguros que constituirá una valiosa guía para nuestras deliberaciones. Asimismo, estimamos que el documento en cuestión, el C 77/21 constituye un excelente trabajo del Departamento de Pesca de la FAO en el que se analizan aspectos fundamentales de la actividad pesquera mundial y que son importantes para los propósi tos de asegurar un crecimiento de la alimentación, y de un evidente interés para los países en vías de desarrollo.
Por ello, desearía en primer término hacer llegar al Departamento de Pesca de FAO y a la Secretaría de esta Comisión, la felicitación de mi delegación por la labor que han desarrollado en esta materia.
Me referiré a continuación a algunos de los aspectos fundamentales que contiene el documento que estamos analizando. Mi delegación desea expresar su satisfacción por la favorable acogida que ha encontrado en cuanto a la iniciativa propuesta por Chile, durante el 11° período de sesiones del Comité de Pesca, en orden a considerar como una función prioritaria de la Organización, la cooperación técnica y científica hacia los países en desarrollo para el cabal aprovechamiento de sus recursos pesqueros en sus zonas económicas exclusivas de 200 millas.
Al respecto, deseo expresar que coincido plenamente con el reconocimiento que hace el documento de FAO al hecho histórico de la ampliación de la zona jurisdiccional de pesca de los Estados ribereños, que constituye la costumbre internacional. Como se sabe, Chile junto con Perú y Ecuador fue el primer país que introdujo esta modalidad jurídica al ampliar, hace ya treinta años, sus aguas jurisdiccionales a una extensión de 200 millas, y nos complace pues que esta tesis, sustentada en un comienzo por sólo tres países, sea hoy día aceptada casi universalmente como una tesis legítima y justa.
Mi país, señor Presidente, tuvo que desarrollar sus actividades pesqueras sobre la base de enormes sacrificios con un gran gasto de recursos humanos y materiales, y haciendo frente a graves problemas derivados de la insuficiencia técnica, científica y financiera propia de los países en vías de desarro llo. Por ello, apreciamos en toda su magnitud y valor la labor que pueda desarrollar FAO en favor de los países costeros en desarrollo, que en un futuro próximo deban impulsar sus actividades pesqueras para lograr un aprovechamiento óptimo de los recursos que le brindan sus zonas jurisdiccionales ampliadas.
Por otra parte, consideramos que la labor que pueda desempeñar FAO en este campo, responde a un criterio realista y práctico cuyos beneficios podrán apreciarse en plazos relativamente cortos. Esta política de la Organización permitirá a los países beneficiarios conocer en términos tangibles cuáles son sus pro pios recursos y potenciales pesqueros y cuáles son sus posibilidades y limitaciones para su aprovecha miento y obtener la tecnología y financiamiento adecuado para su explotación.
Ello permitirá que recursos de FAO y otros Organismos Internacionales que se vierten en cantidades des proporcionadas hacia programas globales y de largo plazo cuya justificación no parece clara en la actua lidad o cuyos beneficios son inciertos, pasen a los países en vías de desarrollo. Ahora bien, estima mi delegación que en estas acciones, si queremos que ello sea eficaz y práctico, FAO deberá actuar aten diendo a los requerimientos específicos que le formulen los países receptores de la cooperación; espe cialmente en lo relativo a la forma que debe revestir la asistencia y a los campos específicos hacia los cuales debe ir dirigida.
Lo anterior no es sino el reconocimiento de los derechos soberanos que tiene el país sobre sus propios recursos y que estimamos debiera quedar reflejado en los acuerdos de esta Comisión. A este respecto, es evidente que Chile, país en desarrollo, está consciente de la responsabilidad que emana del ejercicio de sus derechos soberanos hacia la Comunidad Internacional, y en consecuencia, está dispuesta a aceptar aquellas obligaciones y responsabilidades que asuma libremente eñ el Nuevo Orden Jurídico relativo al mar y a los recursos oceánicos, actualmente en negociación en la Conferencia del Mar.
De ahí que a juicio de mi delegación, la acción de la FAO en su cooperación hacia los países costeros, deberá necesariamente estar condicionada a los acuerdos a que llegue la citada Conferencia en materia de derechos y de obligaciones de los Estados ribereños.
Con todo existen diversos elementos en el documento que estamos analizando que son orientadores y válidos para la cooperación que pueda prestar FAO. Me refiero concretamente a aquellos asuntos en que la competencia técnica y científica de la Organización puede entrar a suplir las deficiencias existentes de los países receptores de la cooperación. Es evidente que FAO tiene mucho que aportar en materias tales como la investigación pesquera, el análisis de datos, la evaluación y vigilancia de las poblacio nes, los métodos de captura y producción, la disminución de pérdidas después de las capturas, las mejo ras en las tecnologías pesqueras, el estudio de inversiones para el desarrollo de los recursos pesqueros y, en otro orden de cosas, en la asistencia para el mejoramiento de la infraestructura administrativa y jurídica de los países o en la cooperación para la celebración de acuerdos bilaterales o de formación de empresas mixtas que los países deseen libremente negociar con terceros países para el mejor aprove chamiento y adecuado ordenamiento de sus recursos.
Creemos también que es interesante la sugerencia que formula el documento en orden a cooperar con los países en desarrollo para la producción y mercadeo de los productos del mar. En este campo, Chile ha tenido una ayuda inestimable por parte de la FAO a través de un programa de control de calidad que ha sido altamente beneficioso para el país, y que en esta oportunidad aprovechamos para agradecerlo.
En todos estos sectores, así como en otros a que alude el documento, creemos que FAO tiene una capaci dad técnica y científica reconocida que debe volver hacia los países en desarrollo cuando esto se lo soliciten expresamente.
En síntesis consideramos que la función de FAO para el potenciamiento de la capacidad pesquera de los países en vías de desarrollo que han ampliado sus zonas económicas exclusivas, debe ser una acción prioritaria de la Organización y particularmente de su Departamento de Pesca. Esa acción debe efectuar se en estrecha coordinación con los países receptores de la ayuda y debe permitir un efectivo ejercicio de sus derechos soberanos sobre la explotación, conservación y administración de sus recursos pesqueros en concordancia con lo que se resuelva en la Conferencia del Mar sobre los derechos y obligaciones de los Estados ribereños.
Con esto señor Presidente, termina mi primera intervención y mi delegación se reserva el derecho a vol ver a intervenir si las circunstancias del debate así lo aconsejaran.
E.OSSINGA (Gabon): Ma délégation désire féliciter le Secrétariat pour le document C 77/21 qui porte sur "l'Evolution du régime des mers et incidences sur les pêches". Ce document nous donne des élé ments précieux d'informations générales, notamment sur l'avancement des travaux, sur le droit de la mer, où il est fait état d'un texte de négociations, composite et officieux, selon les termes traitant des propositions sur le nouveau régime halieutique, en même temps qu'il esquisse une approche du problème des pêches sur le terrain, au regard du nouveau droit de la mer.
Qu'il s'agisse d'orientations dans le domaine agricole, ou dans d'autres domaines, plusieurs déléga tions ont fait part de leur intérêt pour une approche par études de cas concrète et pratique des problèmes sur le terrain, par la FAO. Nous partageons cet avis.
Aussi voudrions-nous nous arrêter principalement sur le point traitant du potentiel halieutique dans les pays en voie de développement. Nul doute que l'extension de juridictions nationales des pêches soumettra les états côtiers à de lourdes charges en matière d'aménagement halieutique et de mise en place de vastes infrastructures liées à la pêche. Ceci aboutira fatalement à un réexamen des politiques nationales des pêches. La pêche, secteur économique encore marginal dans certains pays côtiers rejoindra alors le rang de toute première priorité qu'elle mérite. Le réexamen des politiques de pêche dans les pays côtiers en développement nécessitera un effort sans précédent de recherches par les équipes pluri disciplinaires: recherches dans la connaissance des stocks et dans la dynamique des populations, recherches en ce qui concerne les ports de pêche, les techniques de pêche, l'étude du problème des embarcations, recherches en ce qui concerne la fiabilité des investissements dans les pêches, recherches enfin en ce qui concerne les fonds pour le développement des pêches.
Il est inutile d' insister sur ce problème des fonds. Mon pays appuie d'une façon générale, les efforts de la FAO dans ce domaine et souhaite une adaptation adéquate et rapide de la structure régionale de la FAO, pour le secteur de la pêche qui nous intéresse, dans le cadre de ces nouvelles données.
Dans cette conjoncture, seul un effort intensif pourra sensibiliser les responsables des politiques de la pêche des pays côtiers en vue de provoquer une prise de décision pouvant débloquer le secteur éco nomique des pêches en zone côtière. Il est indispensable de multiplier les contacts des techniciens et des responsables des pêches des pays côtiers avec les experts de la FAO. Il est également indispensable d'associer davantage les structures de recherche et les experts disponibles dans les pays côtiers en vue de la réalisation des projets relatifs à la pêche, sur le terrain et de contribuer éventuellement à l'évolution de ces mêmes structures de recherche.
Il est également nécessaire de multiplier les séminaires et les commissions d'étude et dé travail dans le domaine des pêches au niveau de la région.
Voilà quelques indications que nous avons voulu apporter à ce niveau des débats.
J.L. MESEGUER SANCHEZ (España): Dado el número de oradores inscritos en la lista pretendo ser muy breve puesto que el contenido del documento C 77/21 es suficientemente explicativo de su importancia y del reflejo de la situación de los trabajos actuales de la Conferencia del Derecho del Mar y las consecuencias que se van a derivar en un futuro próximo para la pesca con motivo de este cambio de régimen de la libertad de pesca en alta mar a la situación al nuevo régimen jurídico de las zonas económicas.
Sí quiere señalar mi delegación que está plenamente de acuerdo con uno de. los aspectos que se derivan de este texto y es la trascendencia y la importancia de la cooperación internacional, cooperación internacional que no solamente tiene que reflejarse en un aspecto científico, y técnico, sino también de carácter económico. Esta cooperación, no cabe duda que estamos en una Conferencia de carácter mundial, esta cooperación tiene que ser a escala mundial, bien por vía bilateral o, a través de conve nios eutre los Estados interesados, mediante constitución de empresas pesqueras conjuntas, etc., y, sobre todo, a un nivel multilateral.
En la Tercera Conferencia sobre el Derecho del Mar, se ha venido diciendo que el nuevo régimen de las zonas económicas, podría suponer la muerte irremediable para las Organizaciones Internacionales. Opina mi delegación que es al contrario ya que el nuevo régimen de zonas económicas habrá y deberá potenciar el sistema de organismos regionales y subregionales si queremos llegar precisamente a cooperar y a establecer un desarrollo en aquellos Estados ribereños que hasta ahora no han tenido la posibilidad de pesca en zonas reducidas de sus aguas. Para llegar a esta cooperación multilateral, un aspecto que ho se refleja con la suficiente claridad en el documento,pero sin duda, y en esto estoy cierto que no se refleja porque ha sido el Departamento de Pesca quien lo ha efectuado, lo que se necesita es potenciar precisamente al Departamento de Pesca de la FAO para que pueda llevar y favorecer por la petición de cada Estado Miembro que le interese este desarrollo y esta cooperación.
El Departamento de Pesca nos ha venido demostrando a lo largo de todo este tiempo cómo ha ido creciendo su interés y posibilidades para llegar a un completo desarrollo en la cooperación pesquera internacional. En estos momentos vemos que en esta Conferencia Mundial de Alimentos organizada por la FAO, es solamente un tema de pesca el que se está tratando a lo largo de todas sus sesiones. La pesca, señor Presidente, constituye con la Agricultura las fuentes del presente y futuro abastecimiento de la humanidad.
Por ultimo, y aunque el Sr. Carroz ha dicho que no se iba a tratar de una Conferencia sobre el Derecho del Mar, sí estima mi delegación conveniente que esta Conferencia marque las directrices a la FAO para sus intervenciones en la tercera Conferencia sobre el Derecho del Mar. De forma que el nuevo régimen que se está estableciendo para los Océanos, por lo menos en relación con los recursos vivos, esté eminente mente coordinado con las posibilidades científicas y con las necesidades de alimentación de la población mundial.
S.M.L. MARIKAR (Sri Lanka):I am not capable of speaking at length like most of those who preceded me but unfortunately my Government has given me a little statement which I shall have to read out later.
Apart from the fact that Sri Lanka chairs the Law of the Sea Conference, we are also interested in the subject because of the non-protein intake of most of our people, and also because Sri Lanka is among the most seriously affected countries with balance of payments problems, and here is an area with vast potential for us.
Sri Lanka established an exclusive economic zone of 200 miles at the beginning of 1977.It appreciates the attendant responsibility for exploitation and management of fish resources in the zone and is anxious to utilize the opportunities offered by this action for improving its economy by the develop ment of its marine fisheries.Only the in-shore and near off-shore ranges of the zone are being exploited at present. A knowledge of the fish resources and determination of the most suitable capturing methods aré prerequisites for the exploitation of the outer ranges of the zone.
I will repeat a request made by the Minister of Agriculture and Lands of Sri Lanka when he spoke in the Plenary. He stated that we wish to have the assistance of FAO for conducting a comprehensive resources survey of the zone with a suitably equipped survey vessel. We understand that FAO is now providing this type of assistance to other countries.
We recognize the need to collaborate with developed countries for the best utilization of the resources of the zone in the interim period until our own fishing capability is sufficiently developed. We welcome advice from FAO to assist us in determining the strategies appropriate for this purpose. We are aware of the problem of common stocks in the Central Indian Ocean extending across the boundaries of the exclusive economic zones of Sri Lanka and those of its immediate neighbours.We believe that it is essential to discuss ways and means of rational exploitation of such common stocks and to establish an effective mechanism for management.
We strongly support an initiative by FAO in this regard, such as by bringing together a sub-regional group or committee, or other similar arrangements as may be appropriate.
We appreciate the role played in FAO in providing assistance to the Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council, which is one of FAO's oldest intergovernmental regional bodies. Measures are being taken by Member Governments to transform the IPFC into an action-oriented body.We request that these measures be supported by entrusting full responsibility for its administration to a secretary posted at the regional office in Bangkok and by granting a specific allocation for this work in the FAO budget.
There is one more point which we consider very important and that is the question of the survey and utilization of unconventional resources. We note in paragraph 28 of this very excellent brief docu ment, C 77/21, that considering the amount of research that must be undertaken, the level of the technology which will have to be employed and the magnitude of investment, it is probable that development will have to be initiated by developed countries, especially those with experience in long-range fishing. We agree wholeheartedly with the last sentence of paragraph 28, however, that steps will be taken to ensure the participation of developing countries from an early stage in this question of the utilization of unconventional resources.Sri Lanka has made this request in other fora as well.
B.F. DADA (Nigeria):The Nigerian delegation would like to express its appreciation to the FAO Secretariat and the Assistant Director-General for Fisheries for bringing into focus the topical issues contained in this valuable document, namely the recent developments in the régime of the sea and their implications for fisheries and the potential contribution of unconventional resources towards food supplies.
At this stage my contribution will be concentrated on the former, and my delegation will reserve its right to comment on the second issue at a later stage should we find it necessary.
The new developments in the regime of the sea, and especially the extension of national jurisdiction over fisheries, are most welcome. As we are all aware, one of the peculiar features of fisheries that has made it a difficult economic subject compared to the other sectors of agriculture has been the "international property nature" of the resource. With the new developments the stage is now set for changing the pattern from that of international free-for-all fishing to that in which a coastal state is able to exercise a more rational control over its marine fishery resources. This situation has been described by the document before us as offering increased opportunities to coastal states for fisheries development while at the same time placing increased responsibilities on them.
It is the view of my delegation that FAO has a great role to play in the new fisheries situation. This role should not be confined to its traditional activities of fishery research studies, analysis of data, stock assessment and monetary resources alone, but should be extended to cover concrete measures aimed at the development of these resources, for it is no longer sufficient merely to inform the developing countries what the fisheries potentials of their coasts are without assisting them to participate effectively in the exploitation of these resources.
The situation where about 66 percent of the fish production from the developing coastal states of a particular region are taken by foreign distant water fleets cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely. In line with the new FAO re-orientation policy approved by the Council, the Fisheries Department of FAO should now place greater emphasis on assisting the developing countries to derive maximum benefits from the resources of their coasts. The new policy objective should enable the developing countries to catch a greater proportion of fish by themselves.The development assistance required should cover increased fish production, improved fish preservation and processing techniques, as well as better fish marketing and distribution systems.
In that connection, my delegation would like to offer the following suggestions towards achieving the above goals.First, FAO should promote the quick transfer of technology in the fisheries sector through training at all levels. Most of the fishermen in the developing countries, including mine, are small-scale fishermen; they need to be trained in the use of modern fishing boats and gear, amongst other things, so that they can also benefit from the increased national jurisdiction over fishery resources.
Secondly, FAO should assist in attracting greater investments into the fishing industries of developing coastal states. Because the sea-fishing industry is intensive and carries much risk, it is difficult for these countries to provide the required financial resources by themselves, and through joint fishing ventures, the World Bank and other financial institutions, including the new IFAD, reasonable capital can be attracted to develop the local fishing industry in developed countries.
Thirdly, FAO should assist developing countries to develop an effective system of surveillance over their fishery resources.I notice that the document we are considering appears to be silent on this aspect which, in our opinion, is one of the increased responsibilities thrust upon the coastal states by the new development.Many of these countries will require an effective patrol system to prevent large-scale illegal fishing, which in the long run would jeopardize rational development of management and conservation of the fishery resources of the coastal states.
Finally, my delegation sees in the new developments of the ocean regime a unique opportunity for FAO to contribute in a practical way to the establishment of the new international economic order.The increased fishery resources available to developing coastal states should be utilized in such a way as to provide increased food for their teeming populations, better employment opportunities for their citizens, and increased income to enhance the social and economic conditions of their rural communities. It is in this light that Nigeria would like FAO to reorganize the priority of the fisheries programme in relation to recent developments in the regime of the sea.
Z.DUDIEWICZ(Poland):During the Eleventh Session of the FAO Committee on Fisheries which was held in Rome in April this year, the Polish delegation presented in' detail its position on many questions which are referred to in item 9 on the Agenda of this Conference, concerning the situation in the world fisheries.
In the present difficult situation which has arisen in the world fisheries, particularly for land locked and shelf-locked countries, Poland will support all initiatives which are aimed at rationa lizing the management of the marine living resources, both by the coastal states within their ex tended zones of fisheries jurisdiction, and internationally where such management methods appear essential.
We are well aware of the fact that proper management of marine living resources must be based on the results of intensive research activities which are scarce for some of the areas, and their conduct would require substantial manpower and financial input. For that reason, we are ready to continue the exchange of experience in this field as well as international cooperation which might concern survey of the living resources or experimental fishing, training of staff, making experts available for field work on missions, etc
We are also prepared to join the research efforts which, under international research programmes, are to be accomplished in the high sea and ocean waters. We particularly wish to support the acti vities of the Department of Fisheries in working out a programme for the development of EEZs as re commended by the last Session of COFI.
Many of those forms of the management of the living resources of the sea, which have been success fully applied within regional cooperation, we also consider worthy of further dissemination within the framework of FAO activities.This particularly refers to establishing and allocating total allowable catches for given areas and species of fish, measures of protection as well as proper fishing gear and catch technology.
We share the opinion of the FAO Department of Fisheries that in view of existing and increasing deficit of animal protein, and difficulties in increasing total catches in the world, the world fisheries should concentrate their efforts on intensive utilization of traditional fishing areas as well as on new conventional and unconventional resources primarily for human consumption purposes. This refers also to further development of catch technology and processing of unconventional fish species. Today, open sea fishing fleets have many difficulties in access to shelf waters, which certainly contribute to the deepening of the world's deficit of protein.
Another important problem, which all of us face today in the new regime of fisheries, concerns the rules and conditions of joint ventures. Such rules are practically established in bilateral agree ments, but there is a common demand for basic standards and guidelines which might be applied on a wider international cooperation scale.
In presenting here our position and views on some matters which we consider vital, we are of the opinion that FAO activities, supported by the conclusion of this Conference, should concentrate in the future on the directives of the Eleventh Session of the FAO Committee on Fisheries.
The meeting rose at 12.40 hours
La séance est levée à 12 h 40
Se levanta la sesión a las 12.40 horas
