Neil D. FRASER (New Zealand): Mr Chairman, I am fully aware of the time constraints of which you so eloquently remind us, so will therefore not traverse all of the issues in document C 91/30, but would like to comment briefly on two specific aspects and make a general comment.
Environment is not a stand-alone topic, but is a factor that should be incorporated into the ethos of all activities of the Organization, and of national policies. An integrated approach is called for, and my country supports the moves taken by FAO to meet this imperative.
I would like to briefly mention a recent development in New Zealand, namely, the enactment on 1 October this year of the Resource Management Act, which has as its expressed purpose the promotion of sustainable management of the nation's natural and physical resources, including those used in agriculture. Central government will participate as a partner with local government, communities and individuals to overcome a range of impediments to sustainable management. This accords with the stress given in paragraph 39 of document C 91/30 to the importance of devolving power and responsibility down to the local level. We believe that our experience with the application of this new and comprehensive Act will furnish valuable experience that we can later share with other countries in their policies and activities directed toward sustainable development.
I would like now to refer briefly to paragraphs 29, 34 and 35 of the document before us, each of which in its way draws links between intensity of production and environmental effects.
The negative environmental effects that can accrue to intensive forms of production, promoted by inappropriate pricing and support policies, often augmented by protectionist border measures, is well known. We join with the statement of the delegate of Argentina when he called for the dismantling of these policies. This would promote development in those countries, many of which are developing countries, where the comparative advantage based on an endowment of natural resources, climate, and other factors allows the development of an efficient and environmentally benign agriculture.
Finally, we congratulate the joint organizers of the successful den Bosch Conference. Further, we note the Draft Resolution proposed by the Netherlands, and while sympathetic with the direction of this resolution, we would like to study further the detail and wording of that resolution.
Manuel VARA OCHOA (Perú): Dentro del desarrollo de la agricultura y el desarrollo rural sostenible, apoyamos el concepto consignado en el párrafo 3, de establecer una politica demográfica y sobre la cual nuestra representación se pronunció anteriormente en esta misma reunión.
Apreciamos el párrafo 39 y que se esté fomentando cada vez más la participación popular en la adopción y ejecución de programas de desarrollo rural, es decir, en el fomento de los recursos humanos. Consideramos que esta medida correctiva es fruto de la experiencia adquirida por los organismos internacionales como una de las formas más importantes de liberar el potencial de los agricultores e instamos a la FAO a que se creen las condiciones necesarias en todos los proyectos de desarrollo para la auténtica participación de los beneficiarios en todos los componentes de los proyectos tendentes a la reducción de la pobreza en el marco de un desarollo de amplia base. Es necesario que el desarrollo de este nuevo concepto FAO de participación promueva a que el productor organizado sea protagonista de su propio destino y sea responsable de su propio desarrollo.
Confiamos que en la próxima Conferencia FAO tengamos un informe de los logros obtenidos dentro de esta estrategia innovadora de autogestión y autosostenimiento de nuestros campesinos por sus propios sistemas de extensión e investigación adaptativa, tendente a la ordenación sostenible de los recursos y la protección del medio ambiente.
Es asimismo importante la ordenación integrada de los sistemas de producción y diversificación de los ingresos rurales consignados en el párrafo 40, y en ese sentido preconizamos la integración de los diversos tipos de producción en las explotaciones agrícolas, brindando la oportunidad de reutilizar sus desechos agrícolas en la alimentación animal, de tal manera que la alimentación animal en nuestros países en desarrollo no compita en utilizar los mismos alimentos empleados en la alimentación humana, a la cual debemos orientar exclusivamente la utilización de granos y sus subproductos, por lo que estimamos que debe existir una complementariedad de la explotación agricola con la explotación ganadera, la cual seria la única forma de comercializar todos los desechos de la agricultura para ser transformados en alimentos humanos.
Por ello estimamos que esta experiencia debe ser aplicable por la FAO en forma prioritaria como una de las medidas de incrementar la producción de alimentos en forma simplificativa. Finalmente, apoyamos las recomendaciones propuestas en el párrafo 76 del documento de trabajo.
Horacio M. CARANDANG (Philippines): First of all, the Philippine delegation would like to endorse the recommendation of the FAO Council on the International Cooperative Programme Framework for Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development to be launched by FAO in cooperation with other institutions concerned. I say this because FAO has competence and comparative advantage in many of the areas that are taken up in this Programme.
First of all, FAO has competence with regard to the skills and know-how of the producers, the use of biological inputs, processes on the farms, which would emphasize the use of biological inputs rather than increase the amounts of inputs so as not to harm the environment. Likewise, FAO has
competence in the technologies and post-harvest and marketing processes that could be favourable to the environment. In addition, FAO has competence and expertise in the promotion of diversity. It has experience in promoting people's participation in land-use planning and soil conservation, improvement of water management, conservation and use of genetic resources, integrated plan nutrition systems, integrated plant pest management and integrated rural energy development and utilization. These are all topics that are handled by FAO and, therefore, I believe that FAO should be very much involved with the other organizations. In fact, I think it should take the lead in this matter.
Secondly, with regard to overall strategies and priorities and programme thrusts of the ICPF/SARD, I would like to say that we agree with the methodology as presented and the challenges and policy framework as outlined to us by the document C 91/30. However, it is common knowledge to all of us that, with regard to the challenges, there are some objectives that are more pressing for developing countries. The objective, for example, is how to feed the growing populations not only now but also in the future. We know that this is not exactly the same as in the developed countries. The problem is not altogether how to produce more food, but how to reduce their own production.
With regard to constraints, we know that to implement all of these programmes we have to have resources. Everyone is aware of the resources and constraints of the developing countries because of the economic situation of developing countries, the problem of debt, the problem of unfavourable terms of trade, which has been referred to by Argentina and New Zealand. These are problems that are not exactly the same as in the developed countries. Therefore, as far as the objectives, we should be very clear to make a distinction between these differences.
With regard to the policy framework, again when it comes to resources available, there is also a difference. The choice is very often letting your population go hungry and the choice of a means of how to produce more. Certainly the choices are limited because of the constraints and the objectives that developing countries have.
With regard to the available resources, the ways and means by which the development of the ICPF/SARD should proceed, I think that, if the commitment we have heard here in this Commission is really serious, we know that the developing countries are ready to give resources. We also know that the resources of the developing countries are limited. Therefore, we should like to appeal to our more fortunate brothers who are able to facilitate the establishment of this proposed action by the Conference.
Like many other delegations, we would like to request the FAO Secretariat to continue cooperating with the UNCED Secretariat as regards sustainable agricultural development and invite UNCED to give the necessary political and financial support to the ICPF/SARD and we look forward to the reports that will be furnished to us in the future.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): Thank you. I think FAO will play a leading role in the cooperation with other international organizations and I agree with him that the environmental problems differ from those faced by the developing countries and those faced by the developed countries.
Winston R. RUDDER (Trinidad and Tobago): Permit this brief intervention to articulate some concerns of small islands states typical of the one which I represent. We hope in the focusing of our views we would bring to your attention the particular concerns that we small island states have in respect to sustainability, environment and development. You would no doubt be aware that most of us small island states of Asia, Caribbean and Pacific are cooperating actively within the framework of the current climate change discussions under the Alliance of Small Island States, AOSIS. On matters related to sustainable development and environment, the stark reality of our narrow resource base quickly confronts us and therefore we are strong advocates of the precautionary principle since countries like ourselves have few degrees of freedom either of space or time. Indeed for us awaiting the proof before taking action may result in our demise.
We are heartened that the document C 91/30 reflects a mix of approaches comprising the preventive and the rehabilitative. Indeed in this regard FAO must be congratulated for its own activities as reflected in its review of its field programmes and its Regular Programme and the activities pursuant to its involvement in the UNCED process. We support the three challenges reflected in para. 29. We agree that action must be pursued at national, regional and international level. We assert more in-depth studies and analyses may yet force us to the realization that the current development paradigm which we are pursuing must be revisited, and early too, to accommodate more appropriately issues of natural resource conservation as they relate to development, and agricultural development in particular, if we are to take full account and realization of the economic costs of certain development practices.
We small island states are seriously concerned about the potentially adverse impacts of some current development practices, including agricultural production systems and technologies and while all the answers may not be available we do know and are fully aware that there are environmentally friendly technologies. The question is what about the costs of adjustment. How affordable are these clean technologies. It has been posited that re-direction of current development financing may put us in the position of affording environment sustainability and development. However, we wish to remind you of the United Nations General Assembly's Resolution 44/228 which spoke to the need for new and additional financial resources to facilitate changes and modifications in this particular area and in this regard we take the opportunity to renew our appeal for getting the revamped TFAP back on the road.
For us the issue then is one requiring urgency, requiring integration of approaches within nations across the various sectors and sub-sectors, cooperation and coordination amongst countries.
We support the recognition of the special interest of coastal zones and small island states. For us our entire islands are a coastal zone and we want to suggest that specific intervention strategies must be designed for treating with the problems which we particularly suffer. We support the ICFP/SARD process for its flexibility in respect of implementation and recommend its adoption for integration as part of FAO's contribution to the UNCED process.
May I conclude by saying the proposals contained in document C 91/30 can be fully endorsed. I appeal to this body to consider what specific assistance it may be able to provide to small island states in order that they may be able more fully to integrate the concepts and principles and global strategies here outlined as we seek to develop a set of arrangements and initiatives that are more particularly applicable to our own circumstances. In making this appeal I do so not only in the name of my particular country but the countries of the CARICOM, the countries of Asia and South Pacific which share similar circumstances.
Jorgen Skovgaard NIELSEN (Denmark): Denmark can fully associate itself with the Nordic statement made by Norway this morning. I only take this opportunity, with your permission, to state that Denmark puts special emphasis on developing the notion of organic agriculture in relation to the concept of sustainable agriculture. I would therefore like to hear the reaction of the Secretariat on the following questions also covered by the den Bosch declarations.
How far has FAO progressed in its work on describing the agro-ecological conditions in specific localities? To what extent is it already operational in support of projects? What is FAO's definition on the concepts "ecological" or "organic"? Can concrete local examples on ecology based cultivation tradition/techniques be given? Do they have a productivity potential that can match traditional input based systems? How can organic systems match the population pressure on marginal agro-ecological zones?
Let me finish by supporting inter alia the Canadian delegation in stressing the importance of focusing on indigenous low-cost production methods.
Parviz KARBASI (Iran, Islamic Republic of): The Islamic Republic of Iran would like to express its appreciation to the FAO for the preparation of the document C 91/30 addressing critical issues regarding the environment as sustainable agriculture. Sustainable agriculture and environment would be a very expensive action, and the developed countries should be willing to pay for that and developing countries cooperate in an international strategy.
Development of industry and transfer of manpower from agriculture sector to other sectors of the national economy, population growth have all caused problems in providing food, uncontrolled utilization of natural resources for further production of food, in addition to endangering natural resources, destroying the ecology and agricultural development and mechanization of agro-industries, altogether will create conflicts between agricultural development and natural environment, and suggest a national and scientific utilization of natural resources.
Identifying the required elements for adoption of a worldwide strategy for development of agriculture, based on severe differences in ecological, cultural, social and economic conditions should be highly emphasized. Furthermore in continuous process of persistent development farmers should be considered important factors in providing assurances for food security, employment opportunities and income.
Management and preservation of natural resources, modification in technology and organization should be carried out in a way to meet the needs of the present and generations to come. Such consistent development of agriculture and forestry would preserve soil, water and genetic resources, and it would be ecologically suitable, technically acceptable, economically efficient and socially applicable.
To materialize such a consistent development in agriculture the following measures have to be taken:
Reconstruction of agriculture in both developed countries to meet the continuous demand for agricultural and food products, and developing countries to arrive at rural income, and encouraging investments in agriculture should create certain modifications in the economic aspects of the continuous agricultural development.
The protection of continuous agricultural development in developing countries; firstly financial and technical assistance should be provided and ensured and secondly to ensure appropriate prices for agricultural commodities the legislations governing the international commerce should be reconsidered in favour of developing countries, and thirdly through encouragements made by the credit policies and international credit development, the right atmosphere for investments in agriculture should be provided.
Cooperation with all international organizations involved is essential.
In the long term, the consistent success of agricultural development and sustainability depends on policies adopted for population control, and these policies should be universally confirmed.
The role of the agriculture sector in providing assurances for food security and conservation of renewable natural resources should be highly recognized by governments and the international society through the allocation of financial resources, pricing policies, decentralization of management and strengthening of rural societies.
Considering that in most developing countries the agricultural sector faces disadvantage as far as terms of trade are concerned, therefore appropriate trade terms should be created among agricultural producers, industry and consumers for the transfer of technology, the training of farmers should be seriously considered and the necessity of agricultural development and its significance in food material should be brought to the attention of the public. For sustainability it is emphasized that FAO works heavily on the biological control of insects and pests in order to reduce the use of herbicides, pesticides and insecticides all over the world.
To materialize consistent agricultural development and to provide food through incrementing agricultural production, and higher income for farmers, the following factors should be considered as primary objectives of consistent agricultural development: providing food security for society through the creation of a balance between self-sufficiency and self-dependence in agricultural products; the creation of appropriate employment to elevate the level of income and standards of living in agricultural producing and rural areas.
In this regard, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran two years ago started a programme with the assistance of FAO for sustainable agriculture and rural development, to be implemented in Bakhtaran, one of our provinces, with 2 250 000 ha, mainly agriculture, livestock and forestry and small farmers, and we hope that this case study will bring information to the next Conference of FAO with the assistance of all the departments of FAO involved in agriculture and environment.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is planning to focus all UN bodies' activities in Bakhtaran Province, and we have offered this opportunity to FAO for the implementation of the policy of sustainable agriculture in this Province and hope this offer will be supported by the Conference.
Thank you.Paulo Estivallet de MESQUITA (Brazil): I would like to join others in thanking the Secretariat for the preparation of this document, and Mr Mahler for his presentation.
I would also like to thank the FAO for the elaboration of this proposal for an international cooperative programme framework for agriculture and rural development, as requested by the Council. The host countries of UNCED are pleased to bear witness to FAO's commitment to the environment and sustainable development.
Concern with environmental sustainability is not new to FAO. The document recalls a number of major initiatives taken in the past, but above all it reminds us, in paragraph 8, that sustainable development and environmental issues cut across most of the activities of the Organization.
We can, therefore, say that the discussion of environmental issues has become a tradition in FAO. There is every reason to be proud of it. However, tradition may sometimes generate a certain inertia. Once the body is set in motion, it requires a large amount of energy to redirect it.
Mr Chairman, the Ninety-ninth Session of the FAO Council stressed that the Organization should beware of concentrating too much attention on the environment in the developing countries, lest some people think that the problems are any less grave in the developed countries. Document C 91/30 gives the impression that these comments were not made forcefully enough or that perhaps they were made too late in the drafting stage.
I make this comment in a constructive spirit. The FAO must be responsive, and must be perceived to be responsive to the concerns of member countries regarding strategies and priorities if it is to receive the cooperation needed for the success of this rightly called cooperative of a programme framework.
Turning now to the substance of the document, let me start by agreeing with the perception of the challenges as presented in paragraph 29. The emphasis on the creation of an appropriate policy framework is also to be commended. Some suggestions may, however, be potentially contradictory. Paragraph 31, for instance, argues that terms of trade between the agricultural sector on the one hand and industry and services on the other should better reflect
the services rendered by agriculture to the general public. The same comment is made in the North-South context.
It is important to note that the effort made in Western Europe and in North America to resist or even reverse the historic trend for the relationship between agricultural prices and those of other sectors, has led to the enactment of agricultural policies which bear little connection to the market and are, therefore, not sustainable in the long term. Further, they have aggravated the situation for developing countries' producers of commodities. This contradiction between action at the national and the international level should be further examined by FAO and given prominence in the ICPF.
Along the same lines, Mr Chairman, let me comment briefly on the statement reproduced in paragraph 61 to the effect that "achieving sustainability in agriculture and rural development entails additional costs". Whilst this is to a large extent true, particularly in the development countries, it is certainly not an absolute truth. Of course, a complete shift from chemical to organic fertilizers, for instance, as suggested in a pamphlet distributed in the hall, would lead to higher unit costs. There is, however, ample scope for extensive production in the developed countries which would fall short of this extreme step. Far from entailing additional costs, this would most likely release resources which could be then used, for instance, to achieve the level of input use required to make agriculture sustainable in the developing countries.
It is clear, therefore, that the developed countries need some policy advice to help them achieve sustainable agricultural and rural development. The FAO should not shy from its responsibility in this regard within the context of the ICPF.
Having said this, I do not wish to contribute to an underestimation of the need for additional resources to finance SARD. Paragraph 34 gives an idea of the magnitude of the task before us. This task will require a clear definition of priorities which would be assisted by further elaboration and, to the extent possible, quantification of the funding requirements mentioned in paragraphs 61 to 64.
Finally, Mr Chairman, I would like to ask if the order of presentation of the areas for action described in paragraph 51 is our order of priorities in itself and, in this case, what is its connection with the priorities of FAO's Programme of Work and Budget? In asking this question, I wish to repeat that Brazil fully supports the emphasis on environmental sustainability but considers that this should not divert the Organization from its constitutional goals.
With regard to the draft resolution presented this morning, I would like to thank the Dutch delegation for this initiative. We would like, however, to have an opportunity to examine it in more detail and therefore reserve our right to comment on it at a later stage.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I would like to thank the delegate of Brazil.
I think that you have done very well to support the fact that the Organization should take into consideration the problems of the environment and not at the expense of, or to the detriment of, the essential principal activities of the Organization.
Mme Ioanna EFSTATHIOU (Greece): In the last four decades, agriculture has experienced a technological revolution which has profoundly changed farming practice with the expectation that the rate of such progress will even accelerate. Undoubtedly the interrelationships between agricultural practices and environment are obvious and the need to prevent the environmental damage is identical to the need to protect our lives.
In this context, we believe that environmental concerns should be considered in agricultural planning, not just as an afterthought but as an integral part of it. Environmental economic and social objectives are not necessarily in conflict but can often reinforce each other.
However, we are fully aware that efforts towards an integrated policy approach should take into account some problems such as: increasing the cost of agricultural policies with the consequence that many countries, especially the less developed, will not be able to afford it; reducing the farmers' income and possible conflicts arising between the aims of liberalizing and environmental protection. Under these circumstances, there is need to proceed at both national and international levels.
At the national level, incentives or payments are needed to be given to the farmers to follow practices compatible with the environmental protection and the continual use of productive resources.
At the international level, multilateral cooperation should be further promoted, first because environmental problems many times are of a transnational nature; and, second, because concerted action will soften the trade conflicts arising from the policy measures aimed at environmental protection.
Lastly, we should notice that the over-supply problem, especially in developed countries, means that it is time to consider new dimensions in agriculture, giving more emphasis to the diversification of production and the efficient use of natural resources. In this context, we support the efforts made by FAO concerning the establishment of the International Cooperative Programme Framework for a Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development.
Thank you.Sra. Mercedes FERMIN-GOMEZ (Venezuela): La delegación de Venezuela, siguiendo la solicitud del señor Presidente de que seamos breves, va a manifestar su pleno apoyo al documento presentado por la Secretaria, ya que consideramos que cubre perfectamente los puntos más esenciales de las estrategias para una agricultura y un desarrollo rural sostenible.
Como país en desarrollo Venezuela está interesado, precisamente, en poner en práctica estas estrategias que podrían recibir, desde las orientación de la FAO, un mejoramiento para el desarrollo de su agricultura. En ese
sentido estamos interesados en que se incorpore, efectivamente, dentro de las actividades preparadas por la FAO, el principio del interés por el desarrollo ambiental y por la agricultura sostenible.
En este mismo sentido, además de las estrategias para la agricultura, nosotros vamos a estar de acuerdo con la segunda parte de este documento en el cual se insiste en la necesidad de dar un marco para los programas cooperativos internacionales en una agricultura y desarrollo rural sostenible en cada uno de nuestros países. Este marco, que debería comprender la orientación y normativas técnicas, debería ser, en principio, a través de la gestión, no solamente de la cooperación técnica del Programa que la FAO mantiene, sino fundamentalmente a través del trabajo de campo que consideramos indispensable. Nosotros pensamos que el trabajo de campo de la FAO no debe dejarse de lado; debe ser enfatizado y por eso nosotros hacemos énfasis en ello, ya que las características del desarrollo de la agricultura sostenible no pueden ser cubiertas por un programa de índole general. Deben de ir de acuerdo con las características geográficas, ambientales y con las características de suelos y climas que en cada una de las regiones existe. Por estas razones el Programa de Campo de la FAO ha tenido éxito hasta ahora y, por ello, consideramos la necesidad de mantenerlos en vigencia para poder convertir en realidad este desarrollo agrícola sostenible.
De la misma manera, nosotros vamos a estar apoyando plenamente la proposición de los Países Bajos puesto que consideramos que ella cubre esencialmente el programa general que esperamos que se ponga en práctica dentro de ese marco que se ha considerado indispensable.
No creemos, señor Presidente, que nosotros podamos entrar en detalles con relación a estos puntos que cubre el programa que ha presentado la Secretaría en esta Comisión. Necesitaríamos disponer de más tiempo, y como han sido cubiertos los puntos que más nos interesan en las exposiciones de los Países Bajos, de Estados Unidos, de Canadá y de Francia, nos limitaremos a apoyar esas proposiciones por considerar que ellas satisfacen los intereses del desarrollo rural sostenible y la posibilidad de ampliar la cobertura de este desarrollo rural y de esta agricultura sostenible.
No nos extendemos más, señor Presidente, porque queremos cumplir con su petición y porque ya es demasiado tarde, además de que tenemos otras reuniones que atender.
Takakata OKAMOTO (Japan): My delegation would like to thank the Secretariat for the efforts it has made in presenting the document before us, C 91/30.
Agriculture, forestry and fisheries are, as the document mentions, mostly dependent upon environmental conditions, and conversely have caused and can cause further environmental change. Conference Resolution 3/89, on FAO activities related to sustainable development and the den Bosch Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development has responded to the growing public awareness that economic activities have environmental consequences. Continued environmental degradation threatens the attainment of FAO's main objectives of reducing poverty and promoting sustainable development.
We are convinced that in the field of agriculture every country is required to pay due attention not only to the economic aspect but also to the maintenance of the ecosystem and thus the maintenance and development of agricultural production in each region on a stable basis. Particularly, FAO Conference Resolution 3/89 calls for a task in which sustainable development and environmental issues cut across most of the activities of the Organization. The Japanese delegation is pleased to note that the Secretariat mentioned these aspects in Part I of the document.
My delegation recognizes that sustainable development is not merely connected with the environmental dimensions of development. The document mentions strategies for sustainable agriculture and rural development. We appreciate this basic approach. In particular, concerning the appropriate policy framework at national level I would like to stress the following points: Today, more than 500 million people suffer from malnutrition in this world: We are still far behind in finding the solution to world hunger and malnutrition problems.
The policy priorities of developing countries with food deficits should truly be the food and agricultural sector, and these countries should formulate and implement strategies including policies to assure that producers will obtain results commensurate with their endeavours. At the same time, these strategies should also include the adjustment of the social system related to food and agriculture, and to effectively eradicate hunger and poverty.
Japan has actively participated in the international effort to assist developing countries in their economic development and structural adjustment. Our priority is given to international cooperation in rural and agricultural development, especially pursuing the direct benefit of poor people, which would mitigate food shortages through increasing food production and improving the living standard of farmers. This is an effort to respond to basic human needs.
Concerning an International Cooperative Programme Framework for Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development, success in achieving sustainable agriculture and rural development will depend on large numbers of relevant farmers, communities, the government, etc.
The role of the international community should be to facilitate and support national and local activities, as indicated in paragraph 48 of the document.
Finally, my delegation supports the draft resolution proposed by the Netherlands.
Pascal BRIODIN (France): Les documents présentés par le Secrétariat ainsi que l'exposé de M. Mahler et les interventions des délégations ont mis en valeur un certain nombre de questions importantes sur ce point de l'ordre du jour. Je me réfère en particulier à l'intervention de la délégation néerlandaise, à celle de la Suisse ainsi qu'à l'intervention britannique.
Ma délégation souhaite, à cette occasion, rappeler quelles sont ses vues sur cette question prioritaire dans le prolongement de ce qu'elle a déjà
exposé lors de notre dernière réunion du Comité de l'agriculture et de la quatre-vingt-dix-neuvième session du Conseil en juin.
Tout d'abord ma délégation se félicite de ce que la FAO exprime son souci d'intégrer les préoccupations d'environnement dans l'ensemble de ses activités. C'est cette approche qui est certainement la plus efficace.
Ensuite, permettez-moi de vous exposer comment ma délégation interprète le document C 91/30 qui nous est présenté. Ce document doit constituer, de notre point de vue, une référence sur les activités de la FAO en matière d'environnement et de développement durables. Le PCCI est, comme son nom l'indique, un programme-cadre, mais en aucun cas il ne doit s'agir d'un programme supplémentaire de l'Organisation. Ce serait en effet diminuer sa portée que de le considérer comme le seul programme d'environnement de la FAO. La question de l'environnement pour la FAO, ce n'est pas seulement un nouveau programme, c'est surtout la prise en compte de la question d'environnement dans les activités opérationnelles de l'Organisation. Par exemple, en faisant la promotion de techniques particulières, respectueuses de l'environnement, en systématisant les études d'impact ou en repérant les systèmes de production qui respectent mieux le milieu naturel. Les moyens d'intervention sont donc nombreux. Pour nous, c'est dans le détail des activités opérationnelles que l'on mesurera le degré de prise en compte de l'environnement par notre Organisation. Pour assurer une cohérence à l'action de la FAO dans ce domaine, il nous semble bien sûr indispensable que les autres programmes de la FAO fassent référence à ce programme-cadre dont il est important qu'il garde par ailleurs le maximum de souplesse.
Pour ma délégation, c'est ainsi que la FAO pourra prendre en compte cette orientation prioritaire dans ses activités et jouer, comme l'a bien dit le délégué de la Suisse, un rôle de catalyseur.
Quelques mots sur la stratégie telle qu'exposée dans le document C 91/30.
L'intensification de la production agricole est certainement nécessaire mais il faut également, de notre point de vue, éviter de lier trop rapidement "intensification" et "dégradation du milieu naturel".
Des mesures récentes adoptées dans mon pays, comme dans l'ensemble de la Communauté européenne, ont montré que l'on pouvait concilier "intensification" et "bonne gestion de l'environnement".
Pour dire les choses brièvement, je pense que la prise en compte des questions d'environnement correspond à un niveau d'intensification et à un niveau de technicité supérieurs au niveau moyen actuel. En ce qui concerne les pays en développement, ma délégation rejoint donc ce qu'ont dit d'autres délégués: ce qui fait peser un danger sur l'environnement, c'est avant tout le problème de la pauvreté rurale. C'est donc ce point qu'il faut traiter en priorité.
Pour terminer, je voudrais rappeler que ma délégation appuie pleinement l'implication de la FAO dans la préparation et le suivi de la CNUED, en particulier, il est de notre point de vue fondamental de défendre cette opinion, et qu'il convient de respecter un équilibre entre les mesures de protection d'une part et les nécessités du développement d'autre part.
Enfin, ma délégation est tout à fait favorable à un projet de résolution sur ce point de notre ordre du jour et examinera avec intérêt le projet de résolution de la délégation néerlandaise.
M. Oscar Sales PETINGA (Portugal): Le document C 91/30 nous donne un résumé très complet de toutes les activités qui ont été réalisées sur le développement durable et l'environnement par les services de la FAO depuis 1989, selon ce qui a été décidé à la vingt-cinquième Conférence.
En ce qui concerne la stratégie pour une agriculture et un développement durables, deux situations s'affrontent tout d'abord:
Un nombre considérable de régions où les individus n'ont pas suffisamment d'aliments, mais où l'environnement ne pose pas encore de problèmes; et, d'un autre côté, des situations qui se créent en raison d'une intensification des moyens de production et qui risquent d'accentuer le risque de mettre en cause la conservation de l'environnement et du développement durable.
Il nous faut certainement trouver un autre ordre politique (que le Secrétariat accentue au point 30) envisageant que les agriculteurs puissent bénéficier d'un niveau de vie semblable à celui des travailleurs des autres secteurs.
Une nouvelle planification ainsi qu'une programmation plus objectives seront naturellement essentielles pour atteindre les objectifs de l'ADRD.
Cette stratégie entraîne des coûts supplémentaires à l'échelle nationale et internationale, ainsi qu'il est développé aux points 61 et 62; à ce sujet, nous appuierons les propositions faites par le Secrétariat aux points 64 et 65, y compris la liaison et la participation des dotations d'autres programmes qui sont en marche, notamment les programmes forestiers et les programmes des pêches.
Les aspects particuliers de la protection de l'environnement ont fait l'objet de notre attention lors de notre intervention sur la stratégie d'aménagement du développement des pêches.
Enfin, la délégation portugaise donne son appui à la stratégie définie par la FAO.
Johan BODEGARD (Sweden): Sweden is fully behind the Nordic statement on this agenda point, and with your permission, Mr Chairman, we would like to make some further specific comments on C 91/30. The following points we believe should be highlighted in a SARD Programme. Most of these points are already touched upon in the excellent document.
Firstly, Sweden notes that the importance of differences between nations is stressed in the document. This we believe should be a central feature and guiding principle in all international efforts to achieve sustainable development. All action must be firmly based at national level. Each nation must develop its own specific, integrated programme and should consider developing a concrete and detailed action plan for sustainable agriculture and rural development. In fact, all sectors utilizing natural resources
- specifically agriculture, forestry and fisheries - must be given a clear responsibility to achieve environmentally sound and sustainable development within this field.
Secondly, international cooperation must be focused on supporting national action to achieve an effective and integrated development. "Flexibility" of international agreements and cooperation is a key word to make such efforts compatible with national specificity.
Thirdly, national action should be based on two fundamental means of regulation, the first being environmental legislation and the second, economic incentives. As is pointed out in document C 91/30 public intervention should be kept at a minimum to allow the market to develop economically. Environmental and social considerations are areas of public interest that may need regulation.
Fourthly, the diversity of production systems as well as in genetic composition of crops should be favoured. A diverse production system has the advantage of being more stable in a changing market situation. A broad genetic diversity favouring horizontal resistance in species is a necessity in order to minimize the need for external input of inter alia chemical pesticides.
Fifthly, review and reformulation of plans and programmes must be as important as the action itself and must have allocated to it sufficient resources from the beginning. Sustainable development is a process in itself and the work to achieve this objective must be structured as a flexible process. Ecological systems as well as human behaviour evolves and changes. An International Cooperative Programme Framework for Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development must be equipped to adapt to change.
Therefore, Sweden would like to suggest that the Programme be strengthened, reflecting the central importance of these issues. Further, the practical relationship between FAO in its international and national efforts to attain sustainable development needs to be further developed and clarified.
Finally, we would also like to fully support and second the proposed resolution presented by the delegate of the Netherlands earlier this morning.
Hurrydeo UNMOLE (Mauritius): On behalf of the delegation of Mauritius I wish to commend the Secretariat on the preparation of this extremely valuable document, C 91/30. I would like to make some brief observations especially with regard to small island states and to further support the propositions made by the Delegate of Trinidad and Tobago earlier.
While Mauritius fully endorses the ICPF/SARD we feel there is a strong case to test the ICP Framework at national level in island countries because island states have special features, needs and requirements which have important bearings on possible programmes and projects regarding sustainable agriculture and rural development.
Small islands have severe handicaps such as trade constraints, geographical isolation, information flow, fragile ecosystems, over-exploited resource bases, food insecurity, high costs of imported fuels, high impact of
pollution, and other constraints with respect to optimum utilization of water resources, land and marine resources. Other typical characteristics of small island countries include the small size of farm land and a large predominance of small-scale producers, over-exploitation of inland marine resources, deforestation, and sudden exposure to pests and diseases.
Allow me briefly to say that in Mauritius, the Government has committed itself for some time now to projects based on the principle of sustainability, and I take the opportunity to say we are prepared to share our experience in this area with other friendly countries.
Let me just cite a few examples - protection of terrestrial and marine fauna and flora which is internationally known; creation of a national park; promotion of ecological agriculture; destoning of land and removal of boulders to increase land area and productivity to allow crop diversification, mechanization and irrigation in a systematic and planned way; promotion of integrated pest management; promotion of renewable projects such as biogas generation followed by composting and organic gardening; promotion of policies and technologies which are environmentally friendly, sociably acceptable and economically viable. One typical example would be the generation of grid electricity from sugar cane tops and sugar cane bagasse.
However, I believe that our effort, however small but important, should be further strengthened and consolidated. The role of FAO will be important in this attempt. Therefore, I wish to repeat once again that the ICPF is very interesting and a very valuable document, but given the very special conditions of small island states, it should be tested nationally and adapted to meet their needs.
Khaled J. AL-MUSAPEHI (Kuwait) (Original language Arabic): In the name of God the compassionate and merciful, my delegation would like to thank all those who have prepared these two documents, and I would also like to pay tribute to the efforts which have been brought to bear. We support and confirm the contents of these documents with respect to the aid given to developing countries, with respect to aid given to promote the use of natural resources, which would be rational from an ecological and economic point of view.
As everyone knows, my country has experienced a very difficult trial, a trial which could be experienced by any other country. On 2 August 1990 Iraqi forces invaded my country and occupied it for almost nine months. These occupation forces destroyed the infrastructure, and the agricultural sector did not escape from the destruction. It was greatly affected by the occupation. Our agricultural production was brought to a standstill on over 18 000 farms. Animal production, as well, was affected and the grazing lands covering some 40 percent of the country's needs. Several farms were destroyed and even bee-keeping was affected. Fodder plants were destroyed. Almost 4 000 head of livestock, 2 000 ewes and other animals were destroyed during the Iraqi occupation.
Much of these resources were used by the occupation forces. The occupation was only one of the crimes against my country; a second crime against the environment was the destruction and setting ablaze of 723 oilwells. This
led to extensive pollution and to destruction costing thousands of millions of dollars.
Thanks to unending efforts, thanks to the help of our friends in other countries, we managed to extinguish the last well in November 1991 after eight months of fires. There was very great pollution, but extinguishing the flames was the first challenge that my Government had to face.
The second challenge is to put an end to this pollution, the oil that has been spilled following destruction of the wellheads and the presence of 100 oilslicks with differing volume and content covering over 40 square kilometres. These slicks are a direct threat to the environment and are killing life forms and fodder.
We have an urgent need for technical assistance in order to deal with this pollution at present and in the future.
Ms Barbara DINHAM (Observer for Environmental Liaison Center International): The Environmental Liaison Center International has nominated the Pesticide Trust to attend this Conference on its behalf and to contribute to the debate on sustainable agriculture.
We welcome FAO's commitment to sustainable agriculture and rural development as confirmed in the den Bosch Declaration in April of this year. As a non-governmental organization and a participant in the Pesticide Action Network, the Environment Liaison Center International and the Pesticide Trust have a history of work on the impact of the pesticide trade and use. We support this initiative to allocate more resources for sustainable agriculture and to achieve systematic reductions in application of pesticide active ingredients. Like many other NGOs and NGO agencies, we wish to ensure that the health and environmental hazards of pesticides and the future for a truly sustainable agriculture are given major importance at the UN Conference on Environmental Development in Brazil next year.
In consultation with other non-governmental organizations we have submitted evidence to UNCED that makes five recommendations that we would like to share with this meeting: 1, that sustainable agriculture be guided by commitment to the reduction in pesticides use and to the principle of low external inputs; 2, that agricultural strategies place sustainability, equity and safety for workers above the principle of maximum inputs for maximum yields for agriculture; 3, that policies need to recognize that the requirements and access and distribution of food are not guaranteed by increased food production; 4, that priority be given to resources for education and training to ensure that not only are health and safety standards maintained but genuine alternatives to chemical pesticides are available rather than linking standards to safe pesticide use; 5, we would recommend that the FAO Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides be supported through the UNCED process and great consideration be given to the methods of enforcement. A full copy of our copy to UNCED is available.
We urge the FAO delegates to support the new directive for global agriculture production based on the principles of sustainability, pesticide reduction, access and distribution above maximum production and respect for health and safety of workers, communities, consumers and the environment.
Mrs Susan MILNER (Observer for Greenpeace): We agree with earlier speakers that inappropriate agriculture, economic and trade policies have trapped farmers in both industrialized and developing countries in agricultural systems that are eroding the very resource base on which food and fibre production is dependent.
The challenge is to generate the appropriate policy framework. Specifically, we would like to draw attention to several key policies and changes needed: 1, promote the end to current subsidy and price support systems that encourage environmentally-damaging and socially iniquitous systems of production and distribution; 2, instead, to promote policies and incentives to encourage agricultural production methods that are environmentally sound, socially just and economically-viable; 3, promote preferential market access and trade advantages for agricultural products produced by environmentally-sound methods; 4, promote the phase-out by the year 2005 of the use of pesticides that are acutely toxic, persistent or bioaccumulative.
At the technical level it is the careful design of the agroecological system that offers the key to environmental sustainability. We urge the Conference to adopt the precautionary principle approach in agriculture. In effect, this would mean that agriculture production systems are designed to minimize pest infestations and maintain and improve soil fertility so that agrochemicals are utterly not required. Models of such systems include traditional farming methods and organic agriculture. The role of traditional farmers' knowledge in achieving development needs to be recognized. Research institutions need to redirect their priorities to work with farmers utilizing environmentally agriculturally sound farming systems. Urgent measures are needed to ensure that indigenous knowledge is fully utilized for the benefit of the farmers themselves.
Therefore, we urge support for existing and developing independent networks of environmental and consumer NGOs, farmer associations and scientific institutions that have demonstrated a commitment and expertise in ecological agriculture. We urge support for the establishment of an international network on ecological agriculture. We fully support Denmark's intervention regarding organic agriculture, and hope a proposed meeting between FAO and the International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movement will provide some of the answers raised in the intervention from Denmark. We hope that this meeting might take place prior to the UNCED Preparatory Committee Meeting so that these answers may be incorporated into FAO's intervention. A full text of the Greenpeace paper is available.
P.J. MAHLER (Conseiller spécial du Directeur général, Sous-Directeur général pour l'environnement et le développement durable): La longueur et la richesse du débat - nous avons eu quarante interventions de gouvernements membres, plus quatre d'observateurs - témoignent de la priorité accordée actuellement à ce sujet. Je tiens à remercier les délégations qui ont bien voulu exprimer leur appréciation pour le travail effectué par le Secrétariat. Je dois dire que ces compliments doivent aller non seulement à toutes les divisions techniques avec lesquelles nous collaborons mais surtout à une petite équipe menée par M. Botero et qui a la charge de stimuler et de promouvoir ces activités.
En ce qui concerne la première partie du document, il y a eu peu de questions. On a remarqué que le rôle des femmes n'était peut-être pas suffisamment souligné en matière de développement durable. Je suis heureux de pouvoir dire que le Service qui s'occupe du Programme des femmes dans le développement a établi une équipe spéciale qui s'occupe des questions d'environnement et de développement durable. Cette équipe a contribué à la préparation des propositions pour la CNUED. La FAO sera également associée a des réunions qui vont avoir lieu prochainement dans ce domaine.
On a souligné l'importance de la coopération avec d'autres organisations intergouvernementales et les ONG. Je peux vous assurer que cette coopération est particulièrement active. C'est par souci de brièveté que nous ne sommes pas entrés dans les détails. Notamment en ce qui concerne la question du Représentant de la Pologne; je suis heureux d'informer ce dernier que la FAO était présente à une conférence homologue de la Conférence de Bois-le-Duc portant sur le développement industriel durable et qu'elle a été chargée, en particulier, d'y conduire la discussion sur la production des engrais phosphatés. Vous voyez donc que nous coopérons également avec l'ONUDI dans ce domaine.
On a souhaité que l'on mette un peu plus l'accent sur les conseils en matière de politique agricole. A ce sujet, là aussi, une équipe a été constituée et je peux indiquer, pour répondre à une question du délégué du Brésil, que c'est effectivement une priorité dans le programme-cadre qui est proposé dans la troisième partie.
On a également souhaité que l'on mette davantage l'accent sur les relations entre le commerce international, la dette, les questions d'environnement et la liaison avec les questions de protectionnisme. Je suis heureux d'informer la Commission que, l'année prochaine, la Division qui s'occupe des produits et du commerce va mener une étude sur le commerce, la dette et le développement durable, et que cette année déjà la Division de l'analyse des politiques a effectué une étude sur les relations entre le commerce et l'environnement. C'est certainement un aspect qui mérite notre attention mais, évidemment, il dépasse le domaine de compétence de la FAO. Nous chercherons donc à poursuivre notre coopération, d'une part avec le GATT et, d'autre part, avec la CNUCED.
Cette étude sur le commerce, la dette et le développement durable sera présentée au Comité de l'agriculture l'année prochaine.
En ce qui concerne la coopération avec le Secrétariat de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur l'environnement et le développement durable, certains ont peut-être pensé que nous avions été un peu trop discrets, que nous avions gardé un profil bas dans tous ces préparatifs.
Je peux vous assurer que la FAO est l'agence qui fournit les contributions les plus importantes en ce qui concerne l'agriculture, les pêches, les forêts, les zones côtières et d'autres domaines, en ce qui concerne par exemple les produits toxiques. Les préparatifs que nous avons faits pour la CNUED ont été menés conjointement avec ce que nous proposons ici sous la forme d'un programme-cadre de coopération internationale. En fait, les éléments de ce programme-cadre devraient, nous l'espérons, se retrouver dans le Programme d'action 21 de la CNUED. Pratiquement, c'est le Secrétariat de la FAO qui a apporté les principaux éléments de substance
pour la rédaction des propositions du Programme d'action 21 pour la CNUED dans ces domaines.
Il nous a été demandé également ce que nous avions fait pour le suivi de la Conférence de Bois-le-Duc en ce qui concerne l'agriculture organique.
Je rappellerai d'abord que le Bureau régional de la FAO pour l'Europe a tenu une réunion sur ce sujet l'année dernière. Nous sommes actuellement en train de lancer une étude sur ce sujet. Ce sont les divisions du Département de l'agriculture qui sont impliquées et également plusieurs organisations non gouvernementales. Il y a toutes sortes d'autres aspects qui touchent à cette question, notamment les études de capacité, de charge des populations sur les différentes terres. Nous avions conduit une étude en Afrique à ce sujet, il y a un peu plus de dix ans. Ces études vont être maintenant poursuivies plus en détail.
En ce qui concerne la deuxième partie, nous avons pris note de toutes les observations qui ont été faites. Effectivement les stratégies de développement durable de l'agriculture doivent être spécifiques à chaque pays. Nous avons cherché à dégager quelques orientations principales, mais il est certain que, dans le cadre de chaque pays et de ses ressources, on doit rechercher les approches les plus convenables et les plus adaptées.
J'en viens maintenant à la dernière partie du document qui a été l'objet de très nombreuses remarques.
Je dois d'abord, au nom du Directeur général, exprimer notre satisfaction de voir une large majorité soutenir les propositions pour un programme-cadre de coopération internationale. J'insiste sur ces mots, comme je l'avais fait dans mon introduction, pour bien indiquer qu'il ne s'agit pas d'un programme de la FAO. Il s'agit d'un programme qui trace les grandes lignes de ce que pourrait être la coopération de très nombreuses institutions qui doivent être effectivement impliquées dans ce domaine. En fait, nous avons voulu montrer les relations multiples entre les différentes facettes du développement agricole durable. Ainsi, il est apparu à certains que nous n'avions pas dégagé de priorités. Lorsqu'on traite des questions d'environnement, tout est lié à tout, et c'est justement lorsqu'il y a des lacunes que l'on crée des problèmes en matière d'environnement et de développement.
Toutefois, je dois insister sur le fait que l'objectif, en ce qui concerne la FAO, est bien de structurer, de focaliser, de concentrer nos programmes, en particulier à travers ce que nous appelons les Programmes d'action spéciaux. Donc, il ne s'agit pas de proposer une extension du mandat. Nous restons dans les domaines qui nous concernent: l'agriculture, les forêts et les pêches, et nous avons essayé de dégager les domaines sur lesquels nous devrions mettre l'accent à l'avenir, ceci évidemment non seulement dans nos programmes sur le terrain mais aussi dans le cadre du Programme ordinaire.
Donc, il ne s'agit pas d'un programme "environnement". Et là je me réfère à l'intervention du délégué de la France. Il s'agit d'un programme de développement durable et d'environnement dans le domaine de l'agriculture et du développement rural. D'ailleurs, je peux dire que je serais fort embarrassé pour définir, à l'intérieur de la FAO, dans le cadre de l'agriculture, ce qu'est un programme "environnement", où cela commence et
oú cela finit. Au contraire, ce que nous avons cherché, c'est à introduire ces considérations dans les diverses activités de l'Organisation.
Comment se feront la coordination et l'exécution?
Pour la coordination, nous avons déjà ses mécanismes qui ont été mis en place au début de 1990. Nous avons le Comité directeur, nous avons le Groupe interdépartemental de travail, nous avons un certain nombre de groupes de travail satellites et l'unité de coordination.
Quant aux aspects opérationnels, je pourrais me référer par exemple au Programme engrais qui est d'ailleurs en train d'évoluer actuellement. Ce Programme engrais existe depuis 30 ans et nous avons dans la maison des dispositifs pour gérer ce programme, pour lui assurer l'appui technique et aussi pour l'exécution des projets.
Je veux insister aussi sur le fait que dans l'optique que nous nous proposons dans le futur, ces Programmes d'action spéciaux seraient liés non seulement au Programme ordinaire, mais aux réseaux de coopération - ce qu'on appelle la CTPD.
Un certain nombre d'interventions, notamment de la Dominique, de Trinité-et-Tobago, de l'Ile Maurice, ont porté sur les aspects particuliers des petits Etats insulaires.
Le Secrétariat se préoccupe de ces questions. C'est une problématique particulière et nous cherchons avant la CNUED à organiser, si nous trouvons pour cela l'appui nécessaire des donateurs, une réunion des petits Etats insulaires qui devrait traiter des problèmes spécifiques de l'agriculture, des forêts et des pêches, de développement durable des îles, et aussi des problèmes connexes, notamment ceux du climat. Les délégations intéressées pourraient, si elles le souhaitent, se réunir avec le Secrétariat dans la salle des Philippines, demain à 9 heures 30 (Salle C 277) pour discuter de l'objet du contenu de cette réunion qui serait une réunion en quelque sorte préparatoire à la CNUED, et voir comment matériellement on pourrait l'organiser.
Dans les mois qui viennent, il y aura une série de consultations officieuses à New-York, au siège de l'Assemblée générale, entre les délégations pour discuter de tout l'ensemble du Programme d'action 21. La FAO ne va pas y participer directement mais à travers les contributions importantes qui ont été déjà faites par l'Organisation. C'est dans ce cadre-là que l'on touchera aux questions de financement, notamment de savoir si des ressources nouvelles et additionnelles sont nécessaires et comment les fournir.
Pour la réunion au sommet à Rio, je voudrais, si vous me le permettez, insister sur l'importance pour les délégations d'avoir, parmi leurs membres, des représentants des secteurs agricole, forestier et des pêches. Si nous souhaitons effectivement que l'agriculture, la foresterie et les pêcheries soient effectivement discutées à Rio, il est souhaitable que dans les délégations, les secteurs représentant ces intérêts soient aussi présents.
Après cette Conférence, nous étudierons quelles pourraient être les retombées sur les programmes. C'est pour cela que nous avons proposé un programme-cadre flexible et pouvant s'adapter aux décisions de cette grande Conférence. Si tel est le souhait de la Conférence, nous rendrons compte au Conseil, au mois de novembre, du suivi de cette Conférence.
En terminant, je voudrais remercier tous les délégués qui ont bien voulu s'intéresser à cette question importante et, je peux les assurer, de la part du Directeur général, que le Secrétariat continuera à faire le maximum d'efforts pour la mise en oeuvre des recommandations et des directives de la Conférence dans ce domaine.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I would like to thank Mr Mahler for his answers to the questions and queries raised by the delegates. Do you have any comments?
Igor MARINCEK (Suisse): Il s'agit peut-être d'un simple oubli, mais ma délégation avait fait une proposition qui consistait à suggérer au Secrétariat de faire un rapport sur l'ajustement des programmes de terrain de la FAO pour les mettre au service du développement durable. Nous avions suggéré qu'un tel rapport soit soumis au Conseil en 1992. M. Mahler ne nous a pas dit si un tel rapport était possible.
P.J. MAHLER (Conseiller spécial du Directeur général, Sous-directeur général pour l'environnement et le développement durable): Ce n'est pas un oubli, mais c'est une réponse incomplète que j'ai faite tout-à-l'heure. J'aurais dû préciser que lorsque nous étudierons les retombées des recommandations de la Conférence de Rio, nous étudierons ces retombées sur l'ensemble de nos programmes.
J'en profite pour informer la Commission que ce processus d'examen de nos programmes de terrain, du point de vue du développement durable, est en cours et que nous avons depuis le mois de juin une équipe qui travaille sur ce sujet. Donc nous serons, je l'espère, en mesure de répondre à l'attente du distingué délégué de la Suisse.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic). I would like to announce that the paper of the Observer from the EEC and the paper from the Associated Country Women of the World will be included in the verbatim record.
Gianpaolo PAPA (CEE): La Communauté a adopté, le 29 mai 1990, une Résolution du Conseil exposant sa politique pour une meilleure intégration des préoccupations environnementales dans l'aide au développement. Celle-ci se base sur les résolutions précédentes et sur les textes de Lomé IV. Cette Résolution promet aux pays en voie de développement l'appui de la Communauté afin d'améliorer leur compréhension de l'environnement local, de les préparer aux stratégies environnementales et de renforcer leurs institutions de l'environnement. Elle souligne l'importance de l'intégration de l'environnement à l'économie dans les plans de développement et de la participation des populations locales dans la prise de décision sur l'environnement. La résolution attire l'attention sur les
liens existants entre la dégradation de l'environnement d'une part et la pauvreté et la croissance démographique d'autre part. Elle établit la liste de quelques problèmes écologiques locaux à considérer comme priorités pour l'aide au développement. Pour la première fois le Conseil du Développement, par sa résolution, a également souligné l'importance de la participation des pays en voie de développement dans les efforts mondiaux à aborder globalement les questions de l'environnement. Le Conseil a reconnu que ceci ne pourrait se faire que par la croissance continue des pays en voie de développement eux-mêmes et par la fourniture de ressources additionnelles aux conditions concessionnelles.
Convention de Lomé IV: La Convention de Lomé IV a été signée le 15 décembre 1989 avec effet au 1er septembre 1991. Le développement soutenable, y compris la protection et l'amélioration de l'environnement, est le principe central dans la poursuite de la coopération.
Cette reconnaissance de l'importance des préoccupations environnementales tant par la Communauté européenne que par les partenaires ACP s'est affirmée par l'inclusion d'un titre spécial, le titre I, dans la Convention.
Ce titre exige que la Communauté et ses partenaires ACP adoptent un éventail de dispositions techniques et administratives pour assurer l'examen satisfaisant des conséquences sur l'environnement de tous les projets et programmes, ainsi que les listes de vérification conjointement convenues et l'introduction de procédures d'Evaluation d'Incidences sur l'Environnement (EIE, EIA en anglais).
Leur mise en oeuvre effective dépendra de la disponibilité d'une équipe entraînée aux techniques d'évaluation de l'environnement et de leur suivi, ainsi que de la modification des procédures existantes et des manuels. Ce point a reçu une attention prioritaire.
Les dispositions spécifiques du titre I traitant des déchets de pesticides, agrochimiques et dangereux sont à l'examen avec comme objectif de présenter en 1992 une vue générale de leur mise en oeuvre.
L'importance donnée aux problèmes écologiques locaux, à la fois dans le texte de Lomé IV et dans la Résolution du Conseil, se reflète dans les Programmes Indicatifs Nationaux (PIN) comme convenu avec les partenaires ACP. Un pourcentage significatif de programmes accorde la priorité à l'environnement soit comme une question horizontale reprise dans tous les secteurs soit comme projets spécifiques de protection de l'environnement et de conservation des ressources naturelles. La lutte contre la désertification et la protection des forêts tropicales reçoit une attention particulière.
PVD ALA: Au début de l'année 1991, le Conseil a adopté de nouvelles orientations, décennales, concernant la coopération avec les pays d'Asie et d'Amérique latine (PVD ALA). Ces orientations comprennent des engagements importants sur l'environnement et exigent que l'évaluation concernant l'environnement soit reprise dans tous les projets. Elles reconnaissent également l'importance pour les PVD ALA d'aborder les préoccupations environnementales, en particulier la détérioration de l'environnement urbain et de l'air, la pollution de l'eau, les risques industriels et la surexploitation des ressources naturelles. En outre, elles attirent
l'attention sur l'importance pour les PVD ALA d'aborder les questions globales de l'environnement. Cependant, pour la première fois, les orientations générales permettent l'aide aux PVD ALA plus développés pour ces secteurs spécifiques, qui incluent l'environnement. Le Conseil a accepté de réserver 10 pour cent des ressources disponibles au secteur environnement, et notamment pour la protection des forêts tropicales.
Pays méditerranéens: A la fin de 1990 la Communauté a mis à jour sa politique de coopération méditerranéenne. De nouveau, le Conseil a accepté d'augmenter sensiblement les fonds disponibles pour cette région et de réserver une part importante du budget à des projets nationaux ou régionaux en faveur de l'environnement. Les fonds pour l'environnement peuvent être attribués à des projets de démonstration, de formation, d'assistance technique et de renforcement d'institutions. Les ressources de la Commission seront utilisées en collaboration étroite avec la Banque européenne d'investissement qui fournira des prêts pour l'environnement à des conditions favorables.
Programme pilote brésilien: Pendant l'été 1990, la Commission a été chargée, ainsi que la Banque mondiale d'assister les autorités brésiliennes à formuler un projet pilote pour la protection des forêts tropicales. Le Conseil européen et le sommet G7 de 1991 ont approuvé, tous les deux, des aides financières pour la mise en oeuvre d'une phase préliminaire de neuf mois avant l'exécution d'une première phase opérationnelle complète. La Commission poursuit actuellement des contacts actifs avec des donateurs potentiels afin de mettre en oeuvre la phase préliminaire dès que possible. Un engagement financier spécifique a déjà été pris par la Communauté pour un montant de 15 millions de dollars E.-U.
Lignes budgétaires de la Commission: Tandis que la plus grande partie des dépenses de la Communauté pour l'environnement dans les pays en développement est acheminée à travers des programmes bilatéraux importants, les initiatives du Parlement se sont assurées qu'il y avait aussi deux lignes budgétaires spécifiquement consacrées aux questions de l'environnement et du développement. Celle qui concerne l'écologie dans les pays en voie de développement a été augmentée de 25 pour cent qui l'amène ainsi à 12 millions d'ECU pour 1991. Elle est utilisée dans des projets d'amorce, pour la recherche méthodologique et pour l'amélioration de la capacité propre de la Commission d'intégrer l'environnement dans ses activités internes. Elle est largement utilisée comme expression de sa politique. Une somme importante a été affectée pour le financement de Profils d'environnement de pays ACP et ALA dans la perspective de la Conférence de Rio en juin 1992. En 1991, le Parlement européen a alloué un autre crédit budgétaire qui s'élève à 2 millions d'ECU, destiné spécifiquement à la protection et à la gestion rationnelle des forêts tropicales, en particulier dans le contexte des problèmes écologiques globaux.
Travail actuel: La Commission contribue à la formulation de la politique générale des problèmes écologiques globaux et participe aux négociations destinées à la préparation de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur l'environnement et le développement de juin 1992.
Le 31 octobre 1992, la Commission avait approuvé une plate-forme commune pour la Communauté à la CNUCED. Ceci a été soumis au Conseil pour approbation.
Dans le cadre de cette plate-forme, diverses orientations politiques sont établies qui incluent les suivantes: adopter la Déclaration et le Programme d'action de la Conférence de la FAO/Pays-Bas sur l'agriculture et l'environnement comme politique de base de la Communauté; viser à la réalisation d'une agriculture durable dans les pays industrialisés, en concentrant son action, notamment sur la conservation des ressources naturelles et la protection de l'environnement; assurer que les projets de développement rural et agricole financés par la Communauté dans les pays en développement aient un impact environnemental positif; avancer sur la base des résultats du Congrès forestier mondial qui a eu lieu à Paris en septembre dernier, ainsi que d'autres fora, pour établir une série de principes qui devraient guider l'aménagement des forêts.
La Commission poursuit également activement l'étude des critères en matière d'environnement qui devraient être introduits dans les procédures d'évaluation des projets et des programmes. Ceci s'inspire de la recommandation du Conseil de l'OCDE de 1985 concernant l'évaluation, du point de vue de l'environnement, de l'aide au développement. La Commission précise les lignes directrices pour une bonne utilisation de l'évaluation des incidences sur l'environnement des projets de développement proposés par le CAD dans le groupe de travail ad hoc sur l'environnement et le développement, ainsi que la législation de la Communauté européenne et de ses Etats membres.
Une attention particulière est apportée à la cohérence entre les procédures adoptées par les Directions générales des relations extérieures et du développement.
La Commission s'attend à une coopération plus étroite avec la FAO également dans le domaine de l'environnement dans les pays en voie de développement, basée sur l'arrangement cadre de coopération entre la Commission et la FAO qui a été conclu au mois de juin de cette année.1
Ms R. Ayesha SAMAD (Observer for the Associated Country Women of the World): Sustainable agricultural and rural development (SARD) along with environmental conservation has become a crucial problem in our times mainly because of the demographic and economic pressures. The document C 91/30 points out, and Mr Mahler has also stated in his introductory statement, that the population of the world will increase by an additional 3 billion people by the year 2025. To see the problem in its grim perspective, it is useful to disintegrate this increase. Nearly all this increase will be in low-income countries where the population will increase from the present 4 billion to 7 billion. In the high-income countries, the projected increase would be from the present 0.8 billion to 0.9 billion. Therefore, it will be in the low-income countries, that most of the environment degradation will continue.
Coming to SARD strategies, it is true that the national actions have an important role to play. Equally, if not more important are the national policies which have an international bearing. It is in such policy actions that international for a like FAO could have a determining influence. However, in my view, the document C 91/30 pays relatively less attention to
______________1 Texte reçu avec demande d'insertion au procès-verbal
these policies. The document treats these policies in para 34. However the issues emerging from them are so crucial for the success of SARD, that they would merit a fuller analysis. To illustrate my point, I shall just state the problems connected with only one aspect of these policies, that is, trade and protection. Connected policies have resulted in providing a high degree of protection, both to agriculture and manufacturing in high-income countries. The result is a serious distortion in world trade and resource use.
First taking the farm trade policies including farm subsidies, price supports and direct payments in high-income countries. Initially they were argued for their environmental sustainability. Their actual result is an over-intensification of capital in agriculture, and use of intensive practices far beyond their optimal level. They have, thus, degraded rural environment they were supposed to conserve by causing ever-increasing problems of water pollution and waste disposal. On the international front, they have resulted in ever-worsening terms of trade against the agricultural produce of the low-income countries. In a scenario of continuation of these policies, the low-income countries will be forced to eke out whatever income they can, at the expense of natural resources, which are their sole asset. Driven by the worsening terms of trade and debt burdens, they will tend to use environment degrading chemicals, follow soil fertility-depleting farm practices and destroy the tropical rain forest.
Now coming to tariff and non-tariff barriers in high-income countries. Their main purpose is to discourage high value added processing, even when it is labour intensive in the low-income countries. These policies have resulted in a distorted and sub-optimal allocation of resources causing, inter alia, large segments of population tied to the agricultural sector in low-income countries. The result is an ever-increasing pressure on soil, leading to deforestation and breaking of ecological balance. In terms oi development, the result is to keep the low-income countries imprisoned in a low-income trap. Here I have just briefly touched upon this problem and would conclude that such problems merit a detailed analysis and discussion and their solution would be a prerequisite for SARD.
Coming to International Cooperative Programme Framework (ICPF) for SARD, at the rural community level, aimed at the development of local organizations and people's participation, such as FAO's projects on education, training and extension, and women's participation in agricultural development (para 51 i (b) C 91/30). NGOs, such as my organization, that is ACWW would be able to play a useful role in their implementation. It would be fruitful and cost-effective to involve them actively in the process.1
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I would like to thank the Secretariat. Does anyone have any comments to make? If no one has any comments to make, I would like to sum up the Agenda Item as I understood the discussions.
We have had an extensive, positive and constructive discussion. Four main points have arisen. Many delegates referred to the first of these points, which is the cooperation with other international organizations so as to avoid duplication.
_____________1 Statement inserted in the Verbatim Records on request
.The second point concerns the focus on the differences that exist insofar as environmental problems are concerned for the countries of the North and the developing countries because the developing countries are fighting on two fronts: they are trying to combat hunger and poverty; on the other front they are trying to preserve the environment.
The third point concerns the unanimous approval of the delegations to the initiatives taken by the FAO on the UNCED Conference which will be held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and also the desire expressed by all delegations that the issues of sustainable agriculture be included in the agenda of UNCED. There was a request made by some delegates that we avoid the establishment of new mechanisms. We have to develop and promote the existing programmes regarding the environment.
Therefore, we have concluded our discussion of this Item. This Item will only be open to discussion as far as the resolution proposed by the Netherlands is concerned. This proposal has been supported by a number of countries at this meeting. Therefore, we conclude our discussion on this Item which will remain open only in order to discuss the proposal made by the Netherlands when it comes back from the Resolutions Committee.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic) : I would now like to move to Agenda Item 8 on our Agenda which is the Third Progress Report on WCARRD Programme of Action.
I would like to give the floor to Mr Dutia, Assistant Director-General to introduce this Item.
B.P. DUTIA (Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Policy Department): I have great pleasure in introducing document C 91/19 which, as you know, consists of two parts. The first part is the Third Progress Report of WCARRD Programme of Action. The second part is in another document in the form of a supplement to the document bearing the number C 91/19-Sup.l. That is the Review of the FAO and United Nations Agencies experiences in implementing the WCARRD Programme of Action.
I would start with the Third Progress Report on WCARRD Programme of Action. This is the third report in a four-year cycle of reporting to the FAO Conference on the progress by countries in implementing the WCARRD Programme of Action which was adopted in 1979. The first two such reports were presented to the Conference in 1983 and 1987. Shorter versions of these reports were subsequently submitted to ECOSOC in 1984 and 1988. We plan to submit a similar shorter report to the ECOSOC at its session in 1992.
As in the previous reports, the Third WCARD Report draws heavily on the individual reports provided by member countries on their progress in implementing the WCARRD Programme of Action. I am pleased to report that
some seventy countries have provided reports for the current round of reporting to the Conference and the ECOSOC.
As in the past, the information provided in these country reports was also supplemented by a variety of other data sources which are acknowledged in the Progress Report at appropriate places. We have attempted in this Third Progress Report to provide a concise analysis of progress in implementing the WCARRD Programme.
The main theme underlying the entire Report before you is that of rural poverty alleviation. After dealing with trends and plans and strategies for rural poverty alleviation in the first chapters, the other five substantive chapters address specific issues in policies and programmes for poverty alleviation, again drawing on the reports submitted by the countries. These issues include landlessness and agrarian reforms; employment and wages; markets; prices; access to input, services and credit; human resource development; and the development. The general concerns for enhancing women's roles in rural development and people's participation have been addressed throughout the report where appropriate. The final chapter summarizes the main lessons which emerge from this analysis.
Our intention here is to highlight the most successful rural poverty alleviation policies and programmes pursued by countries, and to draw attention to possible adverse consequences that certain policies might have for specific groups of the rural poor.
I should also like to invite the attention of distinguished delegates to the Summary and Conclusions at the beginning of the Report. This attempts to summarize briefly the main findings of the analysis and to highlight the implications for national rural poverty alleviation policies. As distinguished delegates will note, there was a moderate reduction in the proportion of the population in 1987 relative to 1980. However, the total number of rural poor has increased over this period from more than 780 million to over 808 million. A large majority of the poor live in Asia. It is encouraging to note that available evidence indicates that a number of low-income countries made significant strides in reducing rural poverty. This highlights the vital need for public policies to stimulate growth while simultaneously taking positive steps to improve the access of the poor to social services, such as education and health, and to productive assets and improved inputs to enhance incomes.
The Secretariat would appreciate the views and comments of the delegates on the main findings of the Progress Report, and particularly on its conclusions and the lessons learned.
I should now like to turn to Document C 91/19-Sup.l, which contains the Director-General's comments and views on the Review of FAO's and UN Agencies' experiences in implementing the WCARRD Programme of Action. The Review itself is attached as Appendix A to the document.
The idea for a review of WCARRD-related activities originated from the Report of the Experts who reviewed FAO's Objectives, Role, Priorities and Strategies. Some two years ago this proposal was subsequently endorsed by the Programme and Finance Committees. While the Conference itself did not make any specific recommendation on this matter, the Director-General has taken the initiative to commission the Review of the WCARRD follow-up by a
team of three consultants and in collaboration with other UN Agencies participating in the ACC Task Force on Rural Development. At its meeting in May 1990, the ACC Task Force agreed on the scope, terms of reference and overall plan for the Review. That Task Force also considered the Review itself at its last meeting in May 1991 and its comments are in Appendix B of document C 91/19- Sup.1.
The main purpose of the Review of WCARRD experiences was to determine what FAO and other UN Agencies could do to reinvigorate those parts of the WCARRD Programme of Action which are essential for the alleviation of rural poverty.
The Review was conducted by the consultants during the period September 1990 to May 1991. The FAO Secretariat provided all necessary assistance to the Review team, including logistical support, background documents and technical information. After briefing in FAO, the team members visited seven countries, sixteen UN Agencies, and three Regional Commissions. The consultants also had the benefit of the replies to a questionnaire sent to members of the ACC Task Force on Rural Development, the relevant technical divisions of FAO and the five Regional Offices of FAO.
The Review covers all major aspects of the WCARRD Programme of Action and makes proposals for providing a fresh impetus to the process of rural development. In doing so, the Review has taken into account the developments and new concerns since the World Conference in 1979. The Director-General is broadly in agreement with most of the recommendations contained in Chapter VIII and the Agenda for Rural Development in the 1990s as set out in Chapter IX of the Review Report. In the few instances where he disagrees with the recommendations, he has explained his reasons. The ACC Task Force on Rural Development also expressed general support for the recommendations and Agenda for Rural Development and made a number of observations on several specific recommendations. The comments of the ACC Task Force are contained in Appendix B of Document C 91/19- Sup.1.
I should now like to invite the attention of the distinguished delegates to a few of the Director-General's comments and views on the conclusions and recommendations of the Review. The Director-General is pleased to note that according to the experts' findings, the activities undertaken by the UN Agencies to support governments in implementing the WCARRD Programme of Action were largely successful. He recognizes that these efforts have, at times, been overwhelmed by other developments both within and outside the countries, such as: the serious consequences of the debt situation in many developing countries, their diminishing share in world agricultural trade and the increasing shortage of funds for development purposes.
The Director-General agrees with the conclusion in the Review that the main principles of WCARRD remain as valid in the 1990s as they had been 12 years ago when they were formulated. This view has also been supported by the members of the ACC Task Force on Rural Development, as reflected in their comments. The Director-General also endorses the call for stronger interagency collaboration in the field of rural development and poverty alleviation, particularly through the ACC Task Force on rural development. In particular, he has noted the importance given to the inter-agency WCARRD policy missions by both the Review Team and the ACC Task Force on Rural Development, and agrees on the need for their further strengthening.
Comments of the delegates on this matter will be greatly appreciated, as also any guidance for future follow-up and action. In the light of these views and comments, the Director-General will consider, subject to the availability of resources, an appropriate follow-up to the Review, in cooperation with other Agencies which are Members of the ACC Task Force on Rural Development.
D.P.D. VAN RAPPARD (Netherlands): First of all, I would like to thank Mr Dutia for his extensive introduction of the documents. This brings me straightaway to the point that WCARRD has been a central issue in FAO since the end of the 1970s. My delegation therefore considers that Agenda Item 8 - Third Progress Report on WCARRD Programme of Action - is a very important item for discussion at the Twenty-sixth Conference.
A good discussion however needs good preparation. Unfortunately, my delegation received these documents only a few days in advance of the Conference, and this does not enable us to participate in the way we would like. I am sure it is not only the postmen of the Netherlands who are to blame, because a number of delegates here in this room have suffered this same problem.
This brings me to another point. I realize that we are rather tight in our time schedule, but we cannot postpone this agenda item forever.
In particular, the fact that the reports are coming up for action does worry me, and I would like to hear from you, Mr Chairman, how we are going to tackle the discussion here today. It is possible that we could restrict ourselves now to a preliminary discussion, and come later on perhaps, after the next ACC meeting - which could be beneficial as well - to this subject again at the Council meeting in November, where we can discuss proposals for a Plan of Action. This may perhaps be a solution to the problems which face my delegation and some other delegations.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I thank the delegate of Netherlands, who has proposed that we have a preliminary discussion on this matter and perhaps postpone a more definitive discussion until the November Council Session next year. Would delegations here present support that proposal? I would be very grateful to hear your opinions.
Vishnu BHAGWAN (India): Our distinguished colleague from the Netherlands has remarked that we have discussions regarding the Progress Report of WCARRD every fourth year. This is the fourth year, again, when this Report is before the Conference. I think that the Review of the post-WCARRD decade could be discussed when it comes before Council in November next year together with any follow-up action on it.
CHAIRMAN (Original Language Arabic): If I understand correctly, the delegate of India is proposing that we discuss the Third Progress Report on the WCARRD Programme of Action, document C 91/19 and a preliminary discussion on document C 91/19-Sup.l, and to have a more detailed discussion of the later document at the next Council Session. Is that what you are proposing?
Vishnu BHAGWAN (India): You are quite right, Mr Chairman.
Paulo Estivallet de MESQUITA (Brazil): I was going to support the suggestion that a definitive discussion be postponed to the November Council Session of next year. We have had the same difficulty with the late receipt of this document. We are in a difficult position to do justice to the considerable amount of effort and preparation that the Secretariat have devoted to these two documents. My position is that we should perhaps postpone discussion, or take the opportunity to have a deeper discussion at the November Session of Council.
E. CHENGU (Zimbabwe): The delegation of Zimbabwe has read both documents and is prepared to discuss the documents fully. At the same time, we do share the concern of others in saying that they need more time to read these documents. If we are to postpone discussion, do we need to postpone it to the Council session next year? Is it not possible to postpone the discussion perhaps to another time during the current Conference, during the Twenty-sixth Session? We could be given a few more days for people to read the documents. Do we really need to postpone discussion to next year's Council meeting?
Art WRIGHT (Canada): I find myself in considerable sympathy with the views expressed by other delegations in that the documents before us are, indeed, detailed documents. They cover concerns of great importance. We do feel we would not be doing justice to them if we were to proceed without being adequately prepared, and in that sense I would certainly agree with the suggestion put forward by the delegate of the Netherlands, and supported by others, that we perhaps revisit this report at the November 1992 session. This has the added advantage of enabling the Secretariat to prepare follow-up action to the contents of the document and to bring forward recommendations which at that time we could then take decisions on. My view is that it would be most helpful to have that interim period of time before we enter into detailed discussion.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I do believe we can now turn to our preliminary discussion - a preliminary discussion of the two documents.
D.P.D. VAN RAPPARD (Netherlands): As I have told you, Mr Chairman, we need a little time. Perhaps later on this evening?
LI ZHENG-DONG (China) (Original language Chinese): The document prepared by the Secretariat, C 91/19-Sup.l is very informative and is no doubt helpful to our deliberations. In the past four years - even in the entire 1980s -there has been some programme of WCARRD development. However, we are still far from the pre-set target. In this connection, we are basically in agreement with the Secretariat and its analysis. However, we would like to point out here that in the annual progress report the analysis should be made in a systematic way so- as to give us a clear understanding of what has happened in the past. Special emphasis should be given to the important
achievements and the existing problems. At the same time we are reducing the analyses relating to various issues.
Referring to the development programme in 1990, we are of the view that the thinking of the Secretariat is reasonable. We agree that at present we should take poverty alleviation as the main aim in WCARRD development. Practice has shown that there is no short-cut to poverty alleviation. We have to rely on the people of every country, and also the international community. Experience also tells us that the alleviation of poverty means an integrated development of rural economy, engagement in a diversified economy and developed non-agricultural industry to provide more job opportunities. We are also of the view that at international and country levels formulae for poverty alleviation should take practical reality into consideration. This is what we have done in the past, and it has brought tangible results.
In the Secretariat's document, the intensification of production as an implication for the environment has been mentioned. We think the scale of farming plays the most important role against the environment. While engaging in WCARRD development, the selection of economic development patterns should be in line with the actual realities of each country. We cannot just borrow indiscriminately patterns from other countries. In fact, it is impossible to do this.
Josaia MAIVUSAROKO (Fiji): In reviewing twelve years of WCARRD follow-up, Fiji has made commendable progress on all fronts, given the limited resources available, and the other constraints it faces. Fiji is fully committed to rural development and has been consistently working towards that objective in spite of the limited resources available, and the other constraints we face. The achievement so far is not, however, to be taken as an expression of complacency. Much more needs to be done to correct wide disparities in income between rural and urban zones. In particular we fully realize and appreciate the important role of women in our development processes.
The Declaration of Principles and the Programme of Action adopted by the World Conference twelve years ago continue to be relevant and therefore should be considered as an important development strategy by the countries of the third world. However, given the consensus which seems to have arisen that we will not go into detail or make any specific recommendations about the Progress Report provided by the Secretariat, I will limit my comments to what I have just said.
Hans BRENNER (Finland): We also want to thank Mr Dutia for his introduction of the background document. The Finnish delegation has studied with interest the background documents of this agenda item, including the document on the post-WCARRD decade and an agenda for the future. We want to state that we are in broad agreement with the conclusions reached in Part III, Chapter IX of document C 91/19-Sup.l, Agenda for Rural Development in the 1990s. Now we want to offer the following comments concerning both of the documents in front of us.
We appreciate the efforts made in preparing the Third Progress Report on the WCARRD Programme of Action. It is necessary to follow up the Programme so that Member Nations of FAO can be in a better position to adjust their national policies in the field of agrarian reform and rural development according to the experience gained. The practice of publishing reports at regular intervals on progress in this field is supported by my delegation. Even if we well understand the difficulties which confront the Secretariat in compiling the report, we still wonder if it would not have been possible to avoid basing the report on findings already published at the end of the seventies and at the beginning of the eighties. We kindly ask the Secretariat to make some comments on this issue.
The report presented in document C 91/19 contains a lot of valuable experience of agrarian reform and rural development issues. In reading the document we have found some issues that we consider more important than others.
It is interesting to note that the progress in alleviating poverty is not only dependent on the availability of natural and financial resources of a particular country. Political decisions in this context play a crucial role. Especially those concerning the share of public expenditure devoted to social services have an important influence on poverty alleviation.
Another question that seems crucial for progress in work for the rural poor is how to reach disadvantaged groups of the rural population, particularly women. The participation in programme and project planning by the target group concerned seems to be a prerequisite for the achievement of positive results. The design of extension programmes for women in which their specific needs are taken into consideration is something planners frequently tend to forget. It seems to be a frequent feature that more wealthy and better established groups of the rural population have been able to benefit more from special governmental programmes as opposed to the weaker members. It is also stated in the report that lending institutions often fail to reach disadvantaged groups, particularly women.
Turning now to the question of the relationship between agriculture and the environment, we want to emphasize the dependence between secure land tenure rights and positive results in the prevention of environmental degradation of land. Secure land tenure rights are a prerequisite for the work on sustainable development of agriculture. Therefore, it is regrettable to note the diminishing commitment to land reforms in the 1980s. It is not clear for us why the political decisions during the last decade have taken this direction.
In land reform implementation, countries of Eastern and Central Europe, including the recently independent Baltic countries, even if conditions differ from those of developing countries, could benefit from the knowledge accumulated in FAO through the monitoring of the progress made of the WCARRD.
The positive interrelation between primary school education, particularly of women, and progress made in the standard of living of rural people is striking. Also, education has a reducing effect on child mortality and family size. Knowing that, it is regrettable to see that Africa still is lagging behind in this field, even if some progress has been made.
Summing up, we want to state that, according to several indicators such as life expectancy, literacy percentages and primary school enrollment, some progress is being made in the general situation of the rural poor. Still we must remember that there is tremendous work in front of us, both for international organizations such as FAO, donor countries and, of course, first of all the countries and governments concerned. Let us hope that still more progress will have been made when the next report on progress of WCARRD is being discussed.
Suroso NATAKUSUMA (Indonesia): At the outset my delegation wishes to express their appreciation to the FAO Secretariat for the comprehensive document C 91/19. We also thank Mr Dutia for his introductory remarks.
Indonesia is one of the countries which submitted its country report. We have done so because we are of the view that the progress report on the WCARRD Programme of Action is one of the important reports for presentation at this Conference.
This status report relates to the world's poverty situation of today. Therefore, it is an important document for possible guidelines as to where the future activities should be directed. We hope that by presenting this report FAO can encourage all parties concerned to move toward closer cooperation in combating poverty. The success, if any, that we have achieved in raising a portion of our people out of the depths of poverty should actually inspire us to work more closely, cooperatively, harder in a more definable direction. Our aspirations should be none other than to arrive at the day where none of our brothers and sisters are compelled to live below the accepted level appropriate to preserving their dignity as normal human beings.
The implementation of national development in each of our countries will certainly raise the people's income and consequently help our efforts to reduce the number of our poor. However, this alone is not enough. There must be special and well directed endeavours aimed at reaching these rather unfortunate groups. We call on FAO, international organizations and all donors to place the programme on combating poverty as the top priority programme of activity.
As to Indonesia, as the date in this document referred to 1987, I would like to inform this Commission that the current number of people living under the poverty line is around 17 percent.
Although the primary responsibility of poverty alleviation rests with the country itself, we believe that for the benefit of all, prompt and cooperative action of the international community is urgently needed. Perhaps the Den Bosch Declaration will be a good basis for FAO's follow-up action.
As to document C 91/19-Sup.l, we note the Director-General's remarks on the Recommendations of the Review. As the Director-General stated in his comment, the large number of recommendations with regard to activities in support of government programmes, including those related to gender issues, sustainable agricultural and rural development, human resource development and people's participation.
We follow with attention the consultant's view on Chapter VI regarding the advocacy role for poverty alleviation, in particular on relaxing trade barriers and facilitating entry into markets, external funds for development, and technical cooperation among developing countries. We in general could agree with the thinking contained in this chapter. We could go along with the view that the role of agencies should not be restricted only to those listed in paragraph 8.15 of the consultant's report. However, these recommendations in our view contain important elements which should be placed as a priority for prompt action.
We welcome the report and we look forward to the Secretariat proposal regarding follow-up action as a result of having this in-depth study.
Sra. Grafila SOTO CARRERO (Cuba): Agradecemos al Dr. Dutia por la presentación que nos ha hecho de este tema tan importante.
Señor Presidente, el hecho de que el tema principal del Informe que nos ha presentado la Secretaria sea el alivio de la pobreza rural, es una muestra más de que nuestra Organización, o sea la FAO, se preocupa en primer orden de la situación desalentadora de la alimentación y la agricultura y en el mundo, cumpliendo asi con el mandato que le hemos dado dentro del Sistema de las Naciones Unidas.
En el documento C 91/19 se hace un análisis del marco en que se adoptan las políticas de alivio a la pobreza. En tal sentido, señor Presidente, la delegación de Cuba quisiera expresar que la crisis de la deuda externa y sus servicios, el intercambio desigual, el proteccionismo y las políticas de ajuste estructural, tuvieron importantes consecuencias negativas, repito, señor Presidente, consecuencias negativas para los países subdesarrollados y, en particular, para la población rural de esos países.
En el tema que tratamos con anterioridad se puso de manifiesto una afirmación muy pertinente de que los problemas de la pobreza, la población y el medio ambiente están interrelacionados.
La delegación de Cuba asistió a la reunión de seguimiento al Programa de Acción de la Conferencia Mundial de Reforma Agraria y Desarrollo Rural para América Latina y el Caribe, celebrada recientemente en Cochabamba, Bolivia. La misma resultó de gran provecho, ya que se pusieron de relieve los problemas más acuciantes de los hombres y mujeres de campo en nuestra región. También se hicieron propuestas de soluciones entre los países de la región, teniendo presente efectos de integración económica y de cooperación entre países en desarrollo, que consideramos pueden ser tomadas en cuenta por otras regiones y que la Secretaría pudiera ampliar en su Resumen.
Los indicadores de desarrollo social, señor Presidente, nos han dado a conocer la situación precaria por la que atraviesan las regiones del mundo en desarrollo; sin embargo, no encontramos propuestas concretas para continuar con el cumplimiento del Programa de Acción de la Conferencia Mundial de Reforma Agraria y Desarrollo Rural.
En tal sentido apoyamos a las delegaciones que expresaron que los documentos que analizamos hoy son de gran valor descriptivo, pero con pocas propuestas concretas. Este es un tema muy importante en el que la delegación de Cuba ha sido muy activa, pero, en realidad, mi delegación
también considera que el poco tiempo con que recibimos la documentación es un gran obstáculo para una discusión a fondo. Solamente quisiéramos destacar en esta discusión preliminar, que reiteramos la vigencia del Programa de Acción de la Conferencia Mundial de Reforma Agraria y Desarrollo Rural y solicitamos a la FAO que en el próximo Informe que nos presente nos hagan propuestas concretas para dar seguimiento a las acciones emprendidas.
En los planteamientos del Orden del Dia para la década de los años noventa se presentan interesantes propuestas que nuestra delegación apoya; pero nos parece que deberla abundarse más en los aspectos de la integración de la mujer y los jóvenes al desarrollo rural, a los créditos a los campesinos, a la organización de los trabajadores rurales, a la propiedad de la tierra y, en especial, para las mujeres, y debe prestarse más atención para el logro que todos anhelamos en el seguimiento del Plan de Acción que hoy volvemos a analizar.
E. CHENGU (Zimbabwe): First of all I would like to join other speakers before me in thanking the FAO for the great effort they have put into the preparation of this very clear document before us. I will just now limit myself to a preliminary reaction of the Zimbabwean delegation in line with what has been agreed, not perhaps to go into great details.
We would like to observe that Zimbabwe has been taking great interest in the implementation of the WCARRD programme. Zimbabwe has formulated a number of programmes to do with access to land and natural resources and it began to implement a big resettlement programme involving the acquisition of 4 million hectares of land and resettling of 100 000 families on this land. Zimbabwe has also embarked on programmes of people's participation, formation of groups and cooperatives and in this process has concentrated also on the involvement of women.
Zimbabwe has also taken great care to see that there is adequate provision of services, extension and research to the small farmers in particular in that there has been access to inputs, credits and markets. It has also come up with programmes on rural employment in non-farming activities and currently it is looking into trade liberalization, structural adjustment and negotiating tariff agreements.
The thrust of Zimbabwe's agrarian reform and rural development programmes is now aimed at bringing greater economic benefits to the rural people, particularly the small farmers and women farmers and also empowering the rural people to enable them to initiate programmes and to achieve economic benefits from programmes.
Zimbabwe would like to urge other countries, particularly in our region, to take practical steps to implement the WCARRD proposals and also particularly to report on the WCARRD achievements. We note that currently in the whole world a momentum has been generated, opportunities now exist for change. We must take advantage of this momentum and these opportunities that have now presented themselves. There is throughout the world a great groundswell of activity and move toward democracy. If we look at events in South Africa, events in other African countries, we find that the environment for change, for meaningful change, a change in which through people's participation, small farmers, rural farmers, through self-
initiation and management of programmes and projects, particularly given the very small resources of our governments, we can for the first time marshall the resources that can usually be found in the countryside among the small farmers and perhaps achieve something, achieve through people's participation a democratic control and management of resources. Perhaps this is a good opportunity which must not be missed to achieve something.
Vishnu BHAGWAN (India) : My delegation would like to thank the Secretariat for providing very special information about the progress of WCARRD Programme of Action. I would also like to thank Mr Dutia for a very lucid presentation.
I would like also to appreciate the presentation of the document providing the Summary and Conclusions and Chapter 7, lessons from experience, it facilitates the reading of the document in one place.
In India we accord great importance to rural development and we have adopted the WCARRD Charter for Farmers from the very beginning and we continue to make efforts in planning to eliminate the hunger of the rural poor and we have met with considerable success during the last decade. However, I would say we have a long way to go and we will have to continue our intensive efforts in this regard. In reading this report it leaves one with a mixed feeling and I would say that it is a similar feeling that one gets after reviewing the programmes in India. It is a mixed feeling of achievement as well as a challenge for the future since a lot more remains to be done. Although we have achieved considerable social progress in developing countries yet the stupendous problems continue to be faced in the agrarian sector. The proportion of the rural poor has moderately decreased but their absolute number has increased and this does cause concern.
I would like to say that in India during the last decade we have been able to reduce the proportion as well as the absolute number of the rural poor though we have not been able to achieve a balanced proportion of reduction in poverty factor on a regional basis and we have to do a lot of work in that regard. Presently we have been facing a lot of problems and our government has taken a few policy initiatives and we hope that we will be able to tackle our problems very soon so that we will be able to intensify our efforts in the rural sector also.
When we have a detailed discussion of this subject we will have a more detailed submission to make in the house.
Praphas WEERAPAT (Thailand): With regard to document C 91/19-Sup.l, the Thailand delegation would like to inform you that Thailand has paid much attention to poverty alleviation by conducting agricultural development programmes in the areas of rural poor for many years, but only little improvement was obtained. Because the poverty alleviation concerned many activities such as increasing production of food, agricultural production, marketing, employment, and natural resources and environments where they live. In the areas of unfavourable conditions for agriculture, the poor will move to the city for working as labourers, because they need cash for their families. So my delegation realizes that the poverty alleviation is a difficult task.
My delegation consequently appreciates very much the review of the post-World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development, and my delegation consider that the main principles of the World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development providing important roles in the alleviation of the poverty that we have to live with in these times.
S. NAJMUS-SAQIB (Pakistan): We commend the Secretariat for producing such a useful document and Mr Dutia for a clear presentation. The topic is so comprehensive that in the short time available at our disposal, one may not be able to discuss and deliberate upon all, or even most, of the aspects relating to development at the rural scene of the developing countries. Therefore, I would briefly comment on a few of the issues relating to rural development which perhaps are important to gauge development in this sector, if at all. These are, firstly, the alleviation of rural poverty and secondly, the formation of structures to be able to do so. In fact, these factors are inter-connected. As reported by the Secretariat in the document under review, during this period "the intensity of poverty remained acute in some of the developing countries. The formation of structures relates to the adoption of effective policies towards this end, whereby access to credit, markets and inputs is open and common to all. The question is as to how does this manifest itself into viable structures and which are the successful examples that could be followed or adopted. Experience differs from country to country. This relates to government, non-governmental, and at times, even to factors other than these two. Creation of institutional frameworks and farming structures built on the idea of increasing the direct participation of the rural masses into the development process is called for. In fact, direct benefits must accrue to them if the programme is to be successful.
In Pakistan there has been reduction in rural poverty. Our governments have progressively taken initiatives in this respect and introduced reforms from time to time. Besides, two important initiatives in this respect that have generated the process of change and have helped people at the village levels deserve mention in this forum. Firstly, large-scale overseas migration from the rural areas of Pakistan and the resultant remittances, as also indicated in paragraph 54, page 15, of the document. Interestingly, at times this has led to acute labour shortages during peak agricultural seasons, which is a new phenomenon. Secondly, the development process initiated by the Aga Khan Rural Development Programme (AKRSP) undertaken in some of the most remote Northern areas of Pakistan, namely Skurdu, Gilgit, Hunza and the like. Because of climatic conditions, these areas become inaccessible during part of the year. The success of the Programme has prompted the organizers to extend the development programmes in Chitral and other areas of the country.
This Programme undertakes not only direct participation of the rural people, but so organizes the Programme that local people also run it. Through the AKRSP, an effort has also been made to solve the problems of inputs like seed availability, production and distribution.
The most successful example of credit disbursement and availability at the village level is the Grameen Bank of Bangladesh. As pointed out earlier in my intervention on Guidelines, in most of the developing countries, credit availability and facilities are restricted to the affluent of the society, both at the rural and at the urban scene. Here, unfortunately, the default
rate is exceptionally high. The Grameen Bank experience has shown that: firstly, it directly operates at the village level; secondly, there is no problem of collateral, etc. for the poor people of the village; thirdly, rural people have greatly benefited; fourthly, and most interestingly, the recovery rate is more than 97 percent.
Sir, these two successful initiatives, as indicated, call for a further study by the FAO.
Bernardo PALESTINI (Italy): My delegation appreciates the contents of documents C 91/19-Sup.1. Interest in rural development is widely shared amongst national and international organizations throughout the world. We may well say that rural development policies affect not only rural populations but mankind on the whole.
In my country, notable experience has been acquired in the field of agrarian reform and rural settlement. If we look at the past decades (1970-1990) we note that in Italy, as in other industrialized countries, agricultural areas are continuously decreasing. On a total of 30 million hectares, arable land accounts for only 29.9 percent, while over 19 percent is unproductive for agricultural purposes. The diminished agricultural area has reached, in these decades, 14.3 percent of the whole, with a loss of 2.5 million hectares.
Land is thus becoming an ever more precious resource, especially in countries with high population density and lack of an alternative income. Inside certain boundaries, we can consider the shift from a basically rural economy to industrial and service-dependent to be a physiological one. We can say, therefore, that rather than try to arrest the trend, it is essential to ensure an increased well-being to resident rural populations. This would enable us, on the other hand, to keep farmers on the land, especially on marginal areas in hilly or mountain districts, so to arrest environmental destruction and desertification.
The progress report on the WCARRD Programme of Action well describes, particularly in Chapter 5, the main factors which can be improved for bettering the conditions of the rural poor.
I would like to add the importance of ameliorating also rural structures (e.g. rural transportation, electrification of rural areas, the making and maintenance of rural roads, etc.) as well as providing adequate information for the rural population.
Hüseyin Avni CINEMRE (Turkey): On behalf of the Turkish delegation, I would like to thank you for the concise progress report prepared for the meeting. It is apparent from the report that country papers on the matter were very well and fruitfully analyzed.
Turkey has been placing increasing emphasis on the rectification of interregional disparity in the nation's socio-economic development, but also based on unerring recognition that the realization of development potential in less developed regions will contribute also to the national objectives of sustained economic growth, export promotion and social stability.
Concomitant to the economic growth, provision of social services will have to be improved.
For a balanced development and resources distribution in the least developed regions, a review of land-human relations, mechanization of agriculture in an economic sense, improvement of marketing facilities, communication and transportation must be given primary consideration.
I wish to outline a few recommendations which have come in through the implementation of rural development projects.
Full and rational utilization of production resources depends basically on reduction of the structural problems. In reducing structural problems in developing countries, which basically depend upon agriculture, agrarian reform can be used as an efficient tool.
As has been mentioned in the progress report, the distribution of land cannot add much to the development of the agricultural sector. Agrarian reform to be useful has to be applied on all grounds and on an economic base.
In addition to distributing Government-owned land to the landless or small farmers, measures such as land consolidation, land-use planning, and encouragement of optimal input use, must be followed. For the new settlers to become viable farmers, vocational education and training is also of vital importance.
The distribution of land in uneconomic sizes to landless people does not add much to their well-being. In that case every farm will be equal in poverty; land must be provided on economic grounds. The major objective should be the best allocation of natural resources among alternative uses. The case must be based on an economic argument, not only social or political. Only by keeping this in mind rural poverty can be alleviated in the future through balanced development of agriculture as well as industry. The problem of landlessness is the problem of population pressure on the farm side. Unless this pressure is eased, no easy solution can be formulated.
Jung-Il KANG (Republic of Korea): The Korean delegation carefully reviewed the Third Progress Report and the Review of the post-WCARRD decade.
First of all, I would like to extend my congratulations to the Secretariat for their preparation of the thorough and impressive reports on this important topic.
It is rather regrettable to know that the intensity of poverty still remains acute in some developing countries. As we are all aware, the elimination of poverty, especially in rural areas, is one of the most crucial aspects for most socio-economic policy measures all around the world. In this context, it cannot be overemphasized that efforts by the Governments as well as international organizations - especially FAO -should be concentrated in helping people define their problems and in finding ways to deal effectively with the problem of poverty.
In terms of the rural credit system, we would like to emphasize that FAO should take steps to help member countries to provide access to credit at reasonable interest rates. Even if we knew that there were financial difficulties, there might be ways to use scarce funds more effectively.
We support the views of other distinguished delegates on FAO's efforts to improve equity and reduce poverty, such as increasing the access of the poor to land, developing and transferring sustainable agricultural technology, expanding non-farm employment, and promoting participation of the rural population, including women. All these activities are effectively designed and appropriately fulfilled up to this point of time.
Finally, the Korean delegation sincerely hopes that the international society will keep an eye on and help the progress made in terms of detailed plans proposed in WCARRD, since the agricultural and rural development is the fundamental basis for overall economic development of developing countries.
Thank you for your attention.
J.M. SCOTT (United Kingdom): The United Kingdom delegation had similar problems to other participants, in that it received the papers on this important agenda item of WCARRD only days before the start of this Conference. Hence it was only possible to obtain the hasty and preliminary comments of specialists in economics and women's issues. Any intervention I can make would, therefore, be more akin to a random selection from a menu than a coherent response to an important policy document. Such a piecemeal response would not do justice to the efforts of those who produced document C 91/19, just as the late distribution of the documents did not do justice to the Membership.
I have, however, submitted separately the preliminary comments of the United Kingdom delegation, but these are clearly subject to modification as we develop a complete picture.
Finally, the United Kingdom delegation hopes that it will be possible to discuss papers C 91/19 and C 91/19-Sup.1 in detail at next November's Council. At that time we hope the Secretariat will also produce a Plan of Action with clear objectives, targets and milestones.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I thank the distinguished delegate for the United Kingdom. The Secretariat has taken note of your remarks, Sir.
Ms Robin MEYER (United States of America) : The Report before us is an impressive compilation of information from some 70 country reports and other available studies and sources, including information on the benefits and costs of reform programmes. The United States delegation believes however that greater efforts could have been made to disaggregate the progress made in the past four years from that which may have occurred earlier in the decade.
The United States delegation also regrets the late arrival of these lengthy and detailed reports, a fact which prevents our comments from being as comprehensive as the documents merit.
We also regret that the Report does not make specific recommendations for future programmes. In this regard, the United States delegation supports the suggestion made by our colleagues from Canada and the United Kingdom that the Secretariat prepare proposals for follow-up actions for decision by the Council next November.
The United States delegation would suggest that future reports be strengthened by providing more analysis of the following issues: First, sustainability, not only of production systems, natural resources and the environment, but also of the programmes and projects themselves. Second, agro-business and private sector development. Third, technology generation, specifically for rural people and rural development. And fourth, access by rural populations to productive resources, marketing for their agricultural and other products, and off-farm employment opportunities.
François ROHNER (Suisse): Je voudrais remercier M. Dutia et ses collaborateurs du travail qu'ils ont fourni pour préparer les documents relatifs à ce point de l'ordre du jour.
Je tiens à rappeler ici que mon pays a toujours attaché beaucoup d'importance à la question de la réforme agraire et du développement rural.
Comme d'autres, ma délégation n'a cependant guère eu le temps d'étudier à fond les deux rapports très détaillés qui nous sont présentés. Ces deux rapports montrent que ce sujet n'a en rien perdu de son actualité, bien au contraire. Nous soutenons, à ce stade, la proposition faite par les Pays-Bas et d'autres pays de reporter l'examen de cette question cruciale à la session du Conseil de novembre de l'année prochaine, de même que la suggestion faite par le Canada et le Royaume-Uni d'inviter le Secrétariat à présenter, à cette occasion, des propositions de mesures concrètes. Il s'agirait, à cette occasion, de faire le lien avec un autre sujet important dont traite la Conférence, à savoir la participation des populations.
Inge GERREMO (Sweden): My delegation shares the proposal by the delegation of Netherlands and supported by others to postpone a thorough discussion to the November Council Meeting. Let me however share with you some general views.
The development efforts today seem to focus more than ever on the macro-economic situation in the respective countries. In many developing countries discussions are geared towards how to formulate and implement necessary structural adjustment programmes.
Changing policies in many of these countries towards privatization and liberalization of the economy can be seen. The roles of Governments are being reformulated.
At the end of the 1970s, before and after the WCARRD Conference, the situation was different. The development debate very much tried to emphasize rural development and the integration of both economic and social aspects. At local level poverty alleviation was a key issue.
Experience has shown that a number of these efforts were planned and carried out without a sound macro-economic basis which could provide growth. It is today more clear than ever that growth and equity must go together. There must be a balance between macro- and micro-economic development efforts. Today when emphasis seems to be very much on the macro-economic aspect, it is extremely important that the WCARRD principles are not forgotten.
We have studied the documentation on the WCARRD Programme with great interest, although, as has been the case for other delegations, there has been too short a time for any thorough scrutiny. The themes raised in the Reports are today very critical ones. It could be specifically noted that the issue on environment and poverty has received increasing attention during the last year's environmental discussions, and deserves special priority in the future.
The Progress Report in front of us highlights some very interesting experiences, but generally they are too aggregated to have a meaningful operational value. Their main importance is at national level and below.
The Swedish delegation would like to stress that FAO has an important role to gather and disseminate experiences in the field as part of its increasingly important normative role. FAO should be prepared, as part of its advisory functions, mainly to the developing countries directly but also to donor agencies, to assist in the continued work to implement the WCARRD principles.
It should be stated here that there must be an acceptable balance between the resources to collect necessary information and those who ultimately use the knowledge for operational purposes.
As to specific subjects, two of the most important ones are those of People's Participation and Gender. They will be dealt with separately by the Swedish and Nordic delegations under Items 12 and 13, during this Conference.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I would like to draw the attention of delegates to the fact that the proposal by the delegate of the Netherlands has been taken into account, and we are now discussing the two documents in a preliminary fashion.
Carlos BASCO (Argentina): Desde el punto de vista de Argentina, creo que el debate que se ha desarrollado anteriormente si bien no nos ha permitido revisar en profundidad los documentos, creemos que es muy importante porque de alguna manera se va a definir el programa de la FAO para el estudio del desarrollo rural en el decenio de los 90. Creo que la experiencia de los 80 es materia muy rica para establecer un poco las políticas futuras. El documento evalúa adecuadamente las experiencias de forma rural, de educación rural y salarios, el problema del acceso al crédito, a los
mercados y a los insumos, la extensión y organizaciones rurales. Esa experiencia, tal como ha sido destacada por otros delegados anteriormente, ha sido especialmente enriquecida por la experiencia de liberalización de los mercados que se ha desarrollado en algunos países en los últimos años, y la Argentina es un ejemplo de esto. Si bien la Argentina es un país con una riqueza agrícola importante, también tiene muchos pobres rurales, y la experiencia que ha tenido la Argentina en los últimos años aconseja que es un tema que debe ser seguido atentamente para ver cómo afectan estas políticas a los sectores más pobres del área rural y cómo tenemos que readecuar los mecanismos de acción para atender las necesidades de los mismos.
Brevemente quiero decir que las reformas se han desarrollado en dos aspectos: primero, con respecto al comercio exterior, tratando de que los productores rurales tengan las señales de precios internacionales; y segundo, con respecto a las señales de regular el mercado interno tratando de evitar cualquier tipo de intervención que no fuera absolutamente indispensable. Esto ha permitido ver claramente que muchas de las regulaciones no beneficiaban a los sectores más pobres, sino a los sectores medianos y grandes, e igualmente con cualquier tipo de control que se desarrollaba.
De esta manera existe ahora el desafio de ver cómo se soluciona el problema de los sectores realmente marginados y más pobres de la sociedad, a los cuales hay que llegar y asegurar llegar a través de la capacitación, de la extensión y de la organización de los productores, a los fines de darles condiciones de equidad para su participación en el mercado. Esto, que está empezando a funcionar en mi país y en otros, creemos que debe ser seguido atentamente por la FAO para intervenir en todas las acciones que que puedan ser necesarias. Creemos que un tema importante que se debiera incluir son las experiencias recientes que se están desarrollando en varios países y, a su vez, un tema que no nos cansamos de destacar, que es el impacto que tienen sobre los pobres rurales las políticas proteccionistas de los países desarrollados que tienden a reducir los precios de los productos agrícolas. Esto tiene un efecto inmediato sobre el pobre rural que no lo tiene sobre los grandes y medianos rurales que, de alguna manera, pueden salvar mejor su situación. Creemos que la FAO tiene que entrar activamente a analizar los impactos mundiales que tienen las políticas proteccionistas de subsidios a la producción y exportación sobre los sectores rurales más pobres del mundo.
Kiyoshi SAWADA (Japan): My comment will be very short because of the preliminary nature of the discussion. My Government really appreciates the Progress Report on WCARRD presented by the Secretariat. WCARRD is a great challenge for each developing country because it requires political decision to achieve its targets, such as rural development, alleviation of poverty and agrarian reform. All this takes a long time and much effort. We hope FAO will continue to promote efforts which will help us all towards that target.
I would like to take this opportunity to inform you, Mr Chairman, that my Government has started to focus its international cooperation on people's participation, including women in development.
Benmakhlouf MOHAMED (Maroc): Le Programme d'action arrêté en 1979 par la CMARADR a permis à de nombreux pays, dont le Maroc, d'adopter des stratégies d'intervention en faveur du développement rural et de la réforme agraire et de mettre en place des politiques économiques et sociales en faveur de la réduction de la pauvreté rurale et de l'amélioration des conditions de vie des populations rurales.
Le troisième rapport intérimaire qui nous est présenté par le Secrétariat de la FAO, que je remercie pour l'effort entrepris dans la préparation de ce rapport, nous permet de constater que malgré d'importants progrès enregistrés, nous sommes encore loin de l'objectif recherché aussi bien par la FAO que par le Gouvernement, à savoir l'élimination totale et définitive de la pauvreté rurale et de la malnutrition.
Le Maroc, qui a pris des mesures importantes sur le plan économique, social et juridique, depuis de nombreuses années, en faveur du secteur rural, connaît encore des difficultés pour enrayer la pauvreté rurale et atténuer les déséquilibres qui existent entre le milieu urbain et le milieu rural. L'exode rural est encore élevé et l'insuffisance des capacités d'accueil dans les villes entraîne des déséquilibres importants.
La réforme agraire et le développement rural sont une oeuvre de longue haleine, nécessitant la mobilisation de ressources financières importantes et une volonté politique permanente axée sur les ruraux vivant dans les régions les plus déshéritées.
La FAO et les autres institutions internationales intéressées par le développement rural sont appelées à poursuivre leurs efforts d'assistance technique et financière aux pays qui se sont engagés dans le processus de réforme agraire et de développement rural.
D.P.D. VAN RAPPARD (Netherlands): Mr Chairman, I promised you that I would come back later on this evening, and I would like to do so now.
My delegation has received these documents only recently and we have not been able to study them properly. At the moment, we can only make general remarks.
In the document the different matters are split up, which makes it possible to say something about it, but it is difficult to overview different contradictory processes at the same time.
The question is now which conclusion FAO is drawing from the information presented. In this respect the Report of the Review Team gives more clarity.
My delegation would like more attention paid to the consequences of the conclusions and recommendations, especially the challenge for formulating new rules for the relationship between the public and private sectors. Special stress could be put on the aspect of people's participation because of the fact that they have the needed know-how and have to do a lot themselves to achieve sustainable agriculture.
The Netherlands delegation also supports the recommendations of the Review Team regarding WCARRD Policy Missions. Both documents convinced us that technical matters cannot be divided from the people and their institutions if we want technical matters to make a contribution to the alleviation of poverty and sustainable development.
This means that FAO needs to pay more attention to human resource development and institution building in close relation with technical activities. These need to be really sustainable so that FAO can work together with other UN agencies in the field programmes.
With regard to people's participation and women-in-development, we would like to come back later on Agenda Items 12 and 13.
Oscar Sales PETINGA (Portugal): Les documents C 91/19 et C 91/19-Sup.l traduisent l'importance de la réforme agraire pour le développement du secteur agricole.
Mon pays apporte son témoignage en ce qui concerne l'importance globale et spécifique de ces questions. Nous en profitons pour saluer la FAO et les travaux qu'elle accomplit et nous soulignons l'importance pour les pays en développement de la mise en oeuvre des programmes de réformes agraires. Nous nous joignons à tous ceux qui ont félicité la FAO pour l'excellent travail réalisé dans un domaine aussi capital.
Cependant, devant l'impossibilité d'étudier dans un court délai ces deux rapports, la Délégation portugaise invite la FAO à présenter ce thème de manière plus approfondie au prochain Conseil de la FAO.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): The delegate of Denmark would like to have his statement appear in full in the verbatim report of these proceedings.
Jorgen Skovgaard NIELSEN (Denmark): Mr Chairman, on behalf of the Danish Delegation I take the opportunity to express our appreciation of the great work done by the Secretariat on the Third Progress Report and of the consultants in the report reviewing the post-WCARRD decade, and which has been amply commented by the Director-General in Sup.l.
However, like other delegates I find that we can only have a very preliminary discussion at this Conference, for a more substantial debate on the 102nd Council.
I promise to make my intervention quite short, and some detailed comments will be made in the context of the related items on People's Participation and Women-in-Development.
It augurs well for the future of WCARRD Activities, that the historical confrontation of poverty - and equity-oriented views with more liberalistic attitudes now will be followed by more holistic attitudes sponsored by the spread of democratization and market economies and growing awareness of environmental issues. However, as emphasized in the progress report, the
justified euphoria of economic liberalization must not overshadow the basic poverty - and equity-orientated in rural reform and development activities.
We also hope, the liberalization of attitudes will progressively be extended to include adoption and implementation of land reforms.
Mr Chairman, the Danish delegation is very pleased with the Director-General's views and comments on the consultancy report. It is one of the already many solid signs of concurrence with the attitudes expressed from our side on the reform process. Let me mention at random from para 14, and I quote: "(i) spelling out the objectives of each major programme and selecting those objectives where an agency has comparative advantages, (ii) exploring different types and mixes of intervention tasks (e.g. research, training, information sharing etc.), which make up programme content, (iii) assessing the suitability of different modalities (such as pilot projects, consultations, technical assistance, etc.) to accomplish these tasks, and (iv) monitoring of activities and utilizing opportunities for mid-season corrections.
I take these comments as a commitment to give upstream-activities a relatively higher priority.
Finally, Mr Chairman, the revelation of consultants of rivalries between ECOSOC-agencies and IFIs should not be allowed to develop into a new feud in this central area. We must urge the parties involved to cooperate according to decisions made in the ACC and to the principle of comparative advantages.
Thank you Mr Chairman.
B.P. DUTIA (Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Policy Department): May I first of all express my regret that the documents on this important item reached Member Governments at a very late time so that the comments which they would have liked to have made they could not deliver during this Session. I regret it, and I will certainly look into this matter of the lateness of the documents. However, we welcome wholeheartedly the remarks and comments, even though general and preliminary in their nature, that a number of delegates have made on these two reports. We have taken note of the information that several Member Nations have provided to us on the activities they are undertaking in the follow-up to the WCARRD Programme of Action. We thank them.
A very specific question was raised by the delegate of Finland about the use of some figures which are not up-to-date. We recognize that this is a short-coming. This is a limitation, but it arises because of the dearth of very recent quantitative information on a number of important programmes which are part of the WCARRD Programme of Action. We have tried to eliminate as much as possible the previous and very old figures, but still we could not in some cases obviate the need to quote some of the older figures, particularly late-1970s and early-1980s.
Of course, we are trying to improve on the situation by helping developing countries to collect information on the issues that are of relevance in reporting on the implementation of the WCARRD Programme. In particular, we have developed over the last several years the socio-economic indicators. We have circulated these to the Member Governments with a request to collect information on these socio-economic indicators. However, one has to be realistic because of the financial constraints, and because of the fact that in several countries the statistical systems are still not as developed as one would have liked them to be. The possibility of collecting up-to-date information on socio-economic indicators remains limited. However, we are trying our best and as progress is made in this field I hope that in future reports it will be possible to give the information on more up-to-date years.
We understand that the discussion during this Session and during this Conference on these two Reports, and comments that have been made, are preliminary. We also understand that Member Nations would like us to submit these documents once again to the FAO Council for a more thorough and in-depth discussion at its session in November next year. We shall follow this course.
We have also taken note of the request that while submitting these documents for discussion at the November Session of Council, we should also submit information on concrete activities, programmes and proposals on the follow-up to the recommendations contained in the Report of the Review Team, that is, in document C 91/19-Sup.1.
We shall try our best to respond to these requests. We will refer to as many specific activities and programmes as possible, and we will also consult with the sister agencies that are members of the ACC Task force on Rural Development when preparing this report. As you know, the next meeting of the Task Force on Rural Development will take place some time in April, so it should be possible. Of course, to the extent possible we will try to involve the other agencies in this exercise, but this depends on the time that they will be able to spare for this.
Some delegates also referred to some kind of a plan of action to be given. I should like to caution against the term plan of action for this kind of document that we will present to the November Council. First of all, one must recall that the Programme of Action which the WCARRD Conference adopted in 1979 is a plan of action itself. It has very specific suggestions on actions that should be taken in a number of areas that are important from the point of view of ensuring rural development. Further, I would add that there are two important activities within that Programme of WCARRD, one on women-in-development and the other on people's participation. On women-in-development, the FAO Conference has already adopted a plan of action on which the Secretariat is providing progress reports. You will consider the second progress report on this under Agenda Item 13. With regard to people's participation, again, a plan of action was submitted to the June 1991 Session of the Council. That was discussed by the Council, and in the light of the suggestions and comments made by the Council a revised plan of action is being submitted to your consideration under Agenda Item 12. Therefore, I would caution against using a term such as a plan of action, because it would mean going back to basics, in fact, unravelling what has been agreed in 1979 by the largest gathering that has ever taken place of Member Nations to consider rural development, which
adopted the Programme of Action. While I understand the wishes of the Member Nations to get more concrete information on the follow-up that we would be undertaking in response to the recommendations made by the review team, which we will try to do as best we can, let us not call it a plan of action.
I believe I have responded to most of the questions and observations that have been made by the delegates. However, if there is something I have missed out I will be very happy to respond to those questions.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I would like to thank Mr Dutia for his statement. Are there any comments? Since there are no comments, we can consider that we have concluded the discussion on Item 8 of the Agenda.
The meeting rose at 18.45 hours.
La séance est levée à 18 h 45.
Se levanta la sesión a las 18.45 horas.
