CHAIRMAN: Ladies and Gentlemen, the first meeting of Commission II is called to order. I will start by making a few general comments on our way of working but, firstly, I want to express the thanks of my Government on my being elected Chairman of Commission II. I shall do my best to make things work well and I hope you will help me throughout.
I had hoped to be able to announce the names of the Vice-Chairmen but this matter is not yet ready and will be taken up tomorrow morning at the beginning of the meeting.
We have a very heavy schedule, of course, and a very tight timetable. Speaking frankly, we cannot allow ourselves a delay of half an hour in starting the meeting. Please help me in this respect. The tight timetable also means that I must ask delegates to be very concise in giving their statements. This is the more so because we have an extra problem on Thursday morning when there is an audience with the Pope at 12 o'clock which means we have to finish our meeting at 11. My suggestion is, and you can think a little about it, that we start Thursday morning at 9 am.
Further, we come on tomorrow afternoon to discuss the Programme of Work and Budget. The end of that debate must conclude by Thursday evening since the report on this matter has to be put to Plenary the following week. There has to be a vote on the level of the budget and, therefore, we are in a rather tight situation. I reserve the right to say from the very beginning that if we are getting into trouble with the timetable we must foresee night sessions.
So far as documents for the individual items are concerned I would ask you to look at the Journal of the Conference. You will have a list of the documents there and please note that in addition to the Regular Programme which we will be discussing this morning there is a document, C 91/LIM/12 to be included. If any delegate wishes to make a written statement he is welcome to do that and hand the report to the Secretary of the Commission. Information on that will be announced toward the end of the afternoon meeting.
The Commission has to establish a Drafting Group and the Drafting Group has to start work fairly early. Therefore I urge on the Chairman of the Group of 77 and the Chairman of the OECD Group to get together as quickly as possible so as to come forward with a proposal for the Drafting Group.
Finally we get on to the first item of the Agenda which is the Review ofthe Regular Programme 1990-91 and the documents are C 91/8 and C 91/LIM/12. I think we can start on the first item of the Agenda and I give the floor to Mr Shah.
V.J. SHAH (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): Mr Chairman, as you begin the work of Commission II, permit me to say at the outset that it is an honour to serve the Commission and I look forward to extending every support on the part of the Secretariat together with my colleagues. May I also say, Sir, that with you as Chairman it is a particular personal pleasure to be associated in serving you.
The document before the Conference you have already drawn attention to it. This document was examined very carefully by the Programme and Finance Committees at their session in September and by the Council at its Hundredth Session last week.
In view of the valuable comments offered by the Programme and Finance Committees, the Council thought it fit to draw these to the attention of the Conference. These comments of the Programme and Finance Committees are accordingly submitted to you in the document to which you have referred.
This is the seventh edition of the Review of the Regular Programme since its inception in 1979. The Review is the main mechanism in informing the Governing Bodies on the achievements of the FAO programme implementation and it forms part of the Review process of past and proposed Programmes of Work and Budget. For this reason, the Conference has always preferred to consider the Review before considering the proposed Programme of Work and Budget. This time you consider it also before looking at the future of the Medium-Term Plan.
May I now draw attention to three aspects of the Review. Firstly, the Review is a part of the overall mechanism for evaluation and the evaluation system, in addition to the Review, comprises the review of Field Programmes (which you will be examining later), the auto-evaluations conducted by programme managers, the evaluation of selected programmes, including evaluations by the Joint Inspection Unit and evaluation of field projects, which are always carried out on a tripartite basis of the governments concerned, the funding government or organization and the representatives of FAO.
Secondly, the format of the Review; we have maintained the basic format because that has met with the general satisfaction of the Governing Bodies in the past. So you have the three parts, Mr Chairman, Part One, which is an implementation report; Part Two which covers four selective Sub-programmes which are evaluated in some depth and Part Three, which is an in-depth evaluation and this time we have taken the subject of technical cooperation networks.
The third aspect, Mr Chairman, is that although the Review is entitled a Review of the Regular Programme it also reports on activities under the Field Programmes where appropriate and that is because, as you know, the two programmes, the Regular and the Field Programmes, are linked in substance and because tangible results of the Regular Programme is observed at the field level.
I have said that the structure of the Review remains the same but always there are improvements which we try to introduce. This time in Part One a section has been added containing objectives and priorities for each Programme. This is to provide a context - a base - for the Performance Report. Major inter-disciplinary activities are highlighted for each of the Major Technical Programmes. In Chapter 4, you have a comprehensive report
including the existing data bases in FAO. Part Two includes findings of project evaluations. There again this is in response to your special requests in the past. In Part Two I would also point out that paragraphs 66-74 draw attention to common themes and issues arising from the in-depth reviews.
The four Sub-programmes which are reviewed in Part Two have a common theme and the common theme this time is the rational and sustainable use of natural resources for agricultural production, a topic which is of priority interest to most Member Nations. Part Three, on the Technical Cooperation Networks, is also a subject of widespread interest. As distinguished members will have noticed, a large number of Technical Cooperation Networks are promoted and supported by FAO with the cooperation and involvement of institutions, particularly in developing countries. Despite their widespread use, the approach and method of promoting networks and an assessment of their performance have not been reviewed until now. So I hope, Mr Chairman, the Commission will find this in-depth review of topical interest and that Review ends with some conclusions and lessons for the future which, if endorsed by the Conference, we would look forward to implementing.
Mr Chairman, I keep my introduction short in order to give maximum discussion of the issue but my colleagues and I will be ready to respond to any question or request which the Commission may wish to address.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr Shah, for a very concise introduction. Before giving the floor to the first delegate I just want to say that I think it would be practical now for you to concentrate mainly on Parts Two and Three of the Report. Part One has a lot to do with the Programme of Work and Budget to be discussed later but I give you some leeway on this. I must point out we have to finish this item this morning. I give the floor to the first delegate.
Gerard P. KHOJANE (Lesotho): Being the first speaker, allow me to congratulate you on your election to the high office of this important Commission. You can count on our delegation's full support for this important task. I also want to congratulate Mr Shah for his illuminating introductory remarks, with his usual eloquence.
It is pleasing to learn that Regular Programme implementation during the biennium 1990-91 in general shows an improvement over the biennium 1988-89. We hope this is the beginning of an upward trend of the curve and we can expect further improvements in the future.
In the field of environment and sustainable development, favourable conditions for success have no doubt been created with the appointment of a Special Advisor to the Director-General for Environment and Sustainable Development Issues who will also chair a high-level FAO Secretariat Steering Committee for the purpose. We are already encouraged that the inputs of the Regional Conference on Environment and Sustainable Development have been taken into consideration. As a result it has been possible to produce the special Action Programme of Conservation and Rehabilitation of African Lands and the studies on sustainable management of fragile eco-systems in Latin America and the Caribbean.
The Den Bosch Declaration and Agenda for Action on Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development are another good outcome of a follow-up on the deliberations of the Regional Conferences. We have strong reasons to believe that meticulous implementation of the priority areas of the Den Bosch Declaration and Agenda for Action on Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development as listed in paragraph 1.13 of document C 91/8 should make a desired difference.
It is, however, most disappointing that the International Fertilizer Supply Scheme received no new pledges of fertilizer during the period under review. The scheme has made a remarkable contribution to the improvement of agriculture in Lesotho. It would be a pity if it could be deprived of the necessary resources at this critical time of the need for agricultural rehabilitation, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa where long spells of natural disasters reduced agricultural production to far below average. It has always been our hope that the donor community would heed to long appeals from the developing countries to support the campaign for aid-in-kind for agricultural inputs and, in that context, contribute generously to the International Fertilizer Supply Scheme.
With respect to livestock development, the Lesotho delegation strongly supported the idea of prosopis bushes and leguminous shrubs on the marginal lands and under arid saline conditions when the subject was first discussed during the Twenty-fourth session of the FAO Conference in 1987. At that time, experiments were being conducted with the kind assistance of the Government of Italy. It is obvious from the contents of document C 91/8 that the experiments have been successful. We are therefore happy to learn that the rehabilitation and development of arid and semi-arid grazing lands, through the introduction of leguminous fodder trees and shrubs, especially those of high-yielding and drought-tolerant ecotypes, are now an established priority. Like we expressed keen interest in 1987, we are once more looking forward to a day when Lesotho will be included among the beneficiaries of this activity.
While we accept that the promotion of cooperative organizations in general is the responsibility of the International Cooperative Alliance, we nevertheless feel that FAO has a role, too, to play, particularly with regard to agricultural cooperatives. This is why we warmly welcome the news that FAO has conducted country studies in the field of agricultural cooperatives with the purpose of offering alternative participatory arrangements for the provision of inputs and services to small farmers and for alleviating poverty.
As it has already been proven in other parts of the world, there can be no better way of involving small farmers in research, extension, training, credit, input supplies and marketing than through cooperative arrangements. We therefore urge FAO to persist in its resolve to encourage formation of cooperatives wherever it is feasible to do so, and to help revive the spirit of cooperation where unfortunately the negative forces have succeeded to kill this spirit. It is a difficult task, which may sometimes render FAO unpopular among certain groups of society, but it is certainly worth pursuing.
We do not know what techniques FAO employs to sell an idea and to make it attractive for acceptance. But we certainly know that such a technique is required to demonstrate the importance of the joint FAO/WHO/Food Standard Programme (Codex Alimentarius) particularly for the developing countries.
In our humble observation, participation by developing countries in the Codex Alimentarius Commission's sessions is disappointingly low. It could be better.
As we hail the recommendations and conclusions of the FAO/WHO/International Conference on Food Standards, Chemicals in Food and Food Trade, held in Rome during March 1991, in cooperation with GATT, we remain concerned as to how the benefits of this important Conference will reach the desired maximum number of developing countries if the attitude of most of them towards the Codex Alimentarius Commission is not changed. We therefore appeal to the FAO Secretariat to do everything possible to highlight advantages of active participation in the Codex Alimentarius Commission's sessions to all countries, including the developing ones. We, of course, recognize that the two Secretariats' task could be made easier if the donor community would come forward with generous extra-budgetary resources to finance attendance of the developing Member countries at the meetings of the Codex Alimentarius Commission as recommended.
With reference to the Technical Cooperation and Development Support Programmes, we first of all wish to reiterate our long-felt satisfaction with the performance of the TCP Programme as a politically neutral facility for FAO to quickly respond to requests for urgent and unprogrammed assistance. Although the ceiling for TCP projects' allocation is low, the impact of the Programme is significant and visible. This is the reason why its popularity among the developing countries is ever increasing. We also wish to commend donor countries which operated joint programmes with FAO during the 1990-91 biennium. Special remarks are addressed to the Governments of the Netherlands, Italy and Kingdom of Saudi Arabia which have been listed as the largest donors of trust funds to the FAO Development Support Programme.
While Lesotho is disappointed that she is not a beneficiary of these trust funds, we consider them to be a welcome arrangement. We hope efforts will be made by donors to cover as many developing countries as possible, including Lesotho, in their trust funds programmes.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr Delegate of Lesotho. Before giving the floor to the next delegate I want to read out the list of those who have asked for the floor: the Netherlands, India, Denmark, Congo, Germany, China, Angola, Belgium, France, United Kingdom, United States, Yugoslavia.
C.B. HOUTMAN (Netherlands): Mr Chairman, I would like to join first of all the former speaker who so expressed satisfaction with your acceptance of the appointment of being our Chairman. We think the Conference took a wise decision in putting this heavy duty on the shoulders of such an "old hand" in FAO affairs as you are.
In his foreword to the document before us, the Director-General states that he attaches importance to evaluation as a tool for sound management. Evaluation of FAO's activities requires more and more attention and the Review of the Regular Programme is part of such a continuous evaluatory process; and indeed, Mr Shah just confirmed that idea.
We find the document very useful and when making some critical remarks here we only do so in order to try to improve future editions of the Review of the Regular Programme.
The document gives an overview of the activities of the biennium 1990-91. The severe financial situation of our Organization had implications on the achievements of the Programme that was accepted during the Conference two years ago. As a result of the crisis, vacancies were not filled or appointments postponed; there were delays in the start of new activities or existing programmes experienced delays. But delays or changes were not the result of the financial situation only. The rapidly changing political scenery of the world since the 1989 Conference had influence on the execution of the Programme too. We therefore think it would have been good when changes or cuts in the Programme were presented together with the reason for such changes. It would have enabled us to appreciate better the influence of the various factors on the execution of the Regular Programme, and that is important in an attempt to improve evaluation. Therefore, we request to do so when the next Review of the Regular Programme is being prepared.
Now I am coming to more specific points of the Review. We appreciate the improved cooperation with other organizations and we are particularly pleased with the increased cooperation and discussions with NGOs. We also noted with satisfaction the increased attention for more horizontal subjects such as sustainable development and women in development and we encourage FAO to continue and increase this attention.
We also appreciate FAO's activities in the sub-areas of sustainable development such as Integrated Pest Management (IPM), so very appropriately emphasized yesterday by giving the Sen Award to. Dr Kenmore who is working and stimulating IPM in the rice-growing areas of South-east Asia. Also the activities of biodiversity. Further we would like to mention the good work of FAO for the Global Information and Early Warning Systems. A special word of appreciation should be voiced on the alertness of FAO in the fight against the locusts and screwworm. Successes in this are admirable. The Netherlands will continue to attach great importance to policy advice, including support to countries in transition from centrally planned to market-oriented economies. The critical food and agricultural situation in many parts of the world and especially in Africa rightly receive and received much attention. In the fisheries sector progress has been made with collection of information and activities in the framework of women in fisheries development.
An important subject is training and the Review presents many data on training activities. It is good to see that these activities have increased after a decline in recent years, though still lower than in the 1984-85 biennium. The presented data would have been even more valuable if training activities connected with women in development would have been given. We request to do so for the next biennium.
Finally, Mr Chairman, we as a major donor for field activities, saw with much satisfaction that backstopping activities for field projects is on the increase again after the sharp decline in the former biennium and we express the hope that the same level as before should be reached shortly.
R.C.A. JAIN (India): I too would like to congratulate you on your election to the Chair. I am confident that under your outstanding leadership and guidance the Commission will be able to deliberate on various substantive developmental issues with a fruitful outcome.
Permit me to record my appreciation for the quality of document C 91/8 brought out by the FAO Secretariat for discussion under Item 14 of the Agenda. The document provides a succinct overview of the objectives, programmes and activities of the FAO during the previous biennium as well as the progress of selective development issues. We express our support for the basic overall priority in FAO's Major Agricultural Programme of Africa, some small-scale producers and other disadvantaged groups, including the very poor and women, as well as the emphasis on the establishment of national institutional capability to plan agricultural and rural development.
The period 1990-91 has shown greater integration of the Organization's work on environment and sustainable development, particularly as a result of Resolution 3/89 of the 1989 Conference. We also welcome the strengthening of the FAO with the appointment of an Assistant Director-General, the establishment of a Steering Committee, and the restructuring of the Interdepartmental Working Group on Environment and Sustainable Development and the activation of a number of working groups for this cross-sectoral concern.
It is a matter of great concern that the planned Programme of Work during the previous biennium could not be executed in full because of financial constraints. The situation has been further compounded by the new demands arising from the external review on sustainable development. We welcome, however, the strengthening of cooperative arrangements between FAO and other institutions which was an unintended benefit of the financial crisis.
The studies and preparations of the Interdisciplinary Conference have been facilitated by drawing resources from several programmes and managing these as internal projects. These approaches have led to the advantages of pooling resources to achieve common objectives. This process is to be further accelerated for undertaking collaborative programmes with other institutions. We fully support the proposal to establish a coordination mechanism for cross-programme responşes, particularly in the areas of sustainable development, policy analysis and planning.
FAO's contribution to the successful conclusion of the Netherlands Conference on Agriculture and Environment in May 1991 is commendable. It is also gratifying to note that the recommendations of the Conference are being given due consideration and the follow-up action has been initiated. It is suggested that a time-bound action plan may be formulated to implement its recommendations.
We appreciate the FAO's leading role and support for its international campaign on the New World screwworm from North Africa. We understand that the spread of the pest has been contained and its reported attacks have declined significantly in recent months. We would like to have details on the measures taken to contain this pest menace and request FAO keep a watch and take prompt action in eradicating such potential threats to livestock and crop production systems in vulnerable zones in other countries.
Despite not providing funds in the 1990-91 Programme of Work and Budget, support was given to preparatory activities for the International Conference on Nutrition planned for 1992. This action amply demonstrates FAO's commitment to tackling the issues of hunger and malnutrition. We fully support the initiatives taken by FAO in this regard and hope that the outcome of the Conference will be a concrete programme of action for the common good of the world's hungry and malnourished people.
While appreciating the achievements made in implementing the various programmes in the fisheries sector, we would like to suggest that an integrated coastal management programme may be formulated so the vast potential of this untapped fishery-related resource is harnessed for the benefit of a large fishery community, especially in developing countries.
With regard to the Tropical Forestry Action Plan, we appreciate that the ad hoc meeting of experts agreed on general goals and objectives of forestry development, and endorsed the concept that TFAP could be a country-led process. In agreeing with this approach, we believe that natural resources, including forestry resources, should be managed in accordance with the national priorities of Member Nations of FAO.
The document devotes one full chapter to the review of Technical Cooperation Networks. We feel that TCNs have served as a very cost-effective vehicle in catalyzing more self-reliant inter-country cooperation. We suggest that a suitable formulation mechanism may be evolved to involve participating countries through the project formulation, implementation and evaluating stages in order to obtain the fuller benefit of the network programmes.
Carl THOMSEN (Denmark): We understand that there will be an opportunity later to comment on the first part of the document under discussion, C 91/8, so in accordance with your wishes we shall concentrate our comments on Parts Two and Three of the report. We would, however, like first to express our appreciation of the efforts which have gone into the preparation of the report and for the introduction by Mr Shah. We particularly welcome the summary to the report, which has facilitated us in obtaining an overview of the report's contents. We fully support the view that programming for the future should be based on past experiences. The lessons learned should be an important tool of management for the Secretariat, as has already been said, and of governance on the part of the Governing Bodies. It is from this point of view that we particularly appreciate Part Two, covering in-depth reviews of selected Sub-programmes over the three biennia.
We have studied the sections on impact and effect as well as the sections on issues and critical factors with special interest. We very much liked this part of the text, but we would have liked the tabular information on resources allocated to the Sub-programme selected to be accompanied by corresponding figures for the actual expenditure under the Regular Programme. This would enable us to see how much has in fact been made available to the Sub-programme. We suggest that consideration be given to the possibility of including such information in future versions of the report. We would also suggest, as we have before, that more emphasis be given to the quality as compared to the quantity of information provided. This of course is where the results of the evaluations performed are particularly valuable.
It appears that the question of technical back-stopping to the field programme is a common issue and we fully support the statement that a clear assessment of the carrying capacity of the technical programme is needed. We submit that this should be an important challenge for the management in the future in connection with this close collaboration of the field programme and technical programmes which we support. With regard to the Sub-programme on crop improvement and management, we have noticed that there is a need, as is stated, for a more selective approach in setting priorities in this Sub-programme and efforts should be made to meet this need. In our view, this is probably not the only Sub-programme where such efforts are needed. We commend the report for its frankness in dealing with this and other issues, and hope that this type of approach in drafting such reports will gain preponderance in future.
Part Three of the report, on Technical Cooperation Networks, deals with a very important aspect of the work of the Organization. The selection of this topic is thus especially pertinent. The results of the internal study are very intéresting indeed and will provide a good guide to the future works on such networks. Among the critical factors referred to, we would particularly emphasize the point that networks should be targeted on critical areas of perceived need and that an incremental approach will most often be preferable. We also agree with the general conclusion to this part that caution is required in setting up new and numerous - sometimes perhaps too numerous - and that efficiency is not the only criterion to be applied to the operation of networks. In short, we find that this is an excellent part of the report and look forward to more examples of this kind of evaluåtion as part of the Review process.
Michel MOMBOULI (Congo): Prenant la parole pour la première fois au sein de cette Commission II de la vingt-sixième session de la Conférence de la FAO, sur l'adoption du point 14 de son ordre du jour, permettez à la délégation congolaise ici présente, de vous adresser ses vives et chaleureuses félicitations à l'occasion de votre élection.
Comme d'habitude, c'est avec une attention particulière que notre délégation a procédé à l'analyse du sujet en cours de débat, à savoir l'examen du Programme ordinaire 1990-91 de la FAO, sujet dont la présentation vient de nous être brillamment faite par M. Shah.
Deux documents principaux ont servi de base à notre analyse de ce point 14 de notre ordre du jour. Ces documents sont: C 91/8 qui vient de nous être présenté par M. Shah et le document C 91/LIM 12, contenant les extraits du rapport de la soixante-treizième session du Comité du Programme, des extraits de la soixante-douzième session du Comité financier tous consacrés au sujet à l'examen, ainsi que des extraits de la centième session du Conseil de la FAO toujours relatifs à l'examen du Programme ordinaire 1990-91 de notre Organisation.
L'essentiel de mon commentaire étant axé sur la première partie que nous aurons l'occasion de voir ultérieurement, pour les parties à l'examen actuellement, à savoir les Parties 2 et 3 nous serons brefs, d'autant plus que nous sommes tout à fait solidaires des commentaires très détaillés qui ont été faits au plan technique par les délégations du Lesotho et de l’Inde.
Au terme de notre analyse des divers documents suscités sur le sujet à l'examen, nous avons abouti aux considérations ci-après, que nous aimerions partager avec les autres délégués participant aux travaux de notre Commission, tout comme le Comité du Programme et le Comité financier.
D'une manière générale et globale nous nous déclarons nous aussi satisfaits du travail accompli par le Secrétariat dans l'exécution du Programme ordinaire 1990-91 de notre Organisation.
En effet, compte tenu des graves problèmes financiers qui ont dominé le biennium qui s'achève, les résultats obtenus sont à nos yeux des résultats fort appréciables.
Le document C 91/8 qui nous rend compte de cette exécution du Programme ordinaire nous a paru bien structuré, synthétique et à la fois équilibré.
Nous avons noté avec un réel plaisir certaines modifications et améliorations apportées à cette septième édition de l'Examen dans le but de répondre de mieux en mieux aux voeux des organes directeurs de notre organisation.
Les progrès accomplis par l'Organisation dans les domaines prioritaires tels que l'agriculture et l'environnement nous ont paru encourageants. De même le succès éclatant obtenu dans la lutte contre la lucilie bouchère en Lybie et les pays voisins est sans doute parmi de nombreux exemples du bon travail de la FAO.
La faim n'étant toujours pas éradiquée de la surface de notre planète comme nous n'avons cessé de l'espérer, nous estimons que malgré les succès déjà accomplis la FAO a encore beaucoup à faire pour relever lęs nombreux défis qui pèsent sur les domaines relevant de son mandat.
Devant la tâche ardue qui nous attend tous au cours des prochains mois nous encourageons la FAO à redoubler d'efforts et à persévérer dans la voie difficile qu'elle a choisie, mais qui est à notre entendement une voie sûre pour assurer à chaque humain son pain quotidien et sa dignité, même si c'est dans un avenir encore lointain. Aussi est-ce la raison pour laquelle nous regrettons vivement que l'exécution du Programme 1990-91 ait eu à pâtir des conséquences de problèmes financiers graves rencontrés par l'Organisation au cours du biennium qui s'achève. Nous espérons que cette situation ne se répétera pas pour le prochain exercice biennal et pour y contribuer nous exhortons tous les Etats Membres de notre organisation à assurer à cette dernière une base financière stable en s'acquittant à temps de leurs cotisations.
Harald HILDEBAND (Germany) (Original language German): Mr Chairman, thank you for calling me to speak. Might I be permitted to start by warmly congratulating you, Sir, on your election. I can assure you that my delegation is prepared to play an active and constructive part in dealing with the comprehensive Agenda of Commission II.
I should like to thank the Secretariat of our Organization for submitting a document which is well structured and easy to read. I should also like to thank Mr Shah for his introduction to this particular Agenda Item.
Could I support the suggestion made by the Danish delegate that in future, when reviewing the Regular Programme, there should be a table indicating sums allocated to, and spent on, the individual parts of the Programme?
When we spoke to the same Agenda item two years ago during the Twenty-fifth session of the Conference we expressed our regret at the fact that the financial situation of FAO had not made it possible for the full 1988-89 Work Programme to be implemented as it had been decided on. At that time we spoke about the resulting dangers-, particularly in terms of FAO's ability to keep or to recruit highly qualified specialists.
Alas, Sir, that trend has persisted although the Organization, as the document submitted to us demonstrates, has caught up in important fields as far as Programme implementation is concerned. Nonetheless, there are many activities which were decided on and which were important in terms of their priorities which have not been implemented. Bearing in mind the increasing worldwide need for agricultural services in the multilateral field, we do very much regret that development. We would like to express our hope here that FAO's financial crisis will soon be over, and that we shall accordingly be in a position in which we can make further progress.
We approach the role of the Regular Programme first and foremost from the angle of maintaining and developing an effective infrastructure which will enable FAO to play a lead role in overcoming world agricultural problems. That necessarily involves being able to analyse the many and varied present and future problems of world-wide agriculture, and helping Member Governments to overcome them. Accordingly, we are glad to see that the advice and assistance to Member Nations has increased considerably, as have training activities, over the last biennium, when compared with a certain low point in 1988-89.
We are also very glad to see that the information system called WAICENT has now started operating worldwide. We regard the system as being one of the central activities of the Organization and one of the most important services. It concerns the collating of agricultural data and processing, and publishing them in a user-friendly way. The smooth operation of its administration which is so important for the Organization will, we hope, be enhanced by the coming on-stream by FINSYS/PERSYS data processing system.
As far as FAO's programmes and activities are concerned, we can indeed say that the Organization has worked well within the framework of its financial resources and possibilities. In the biennium concluding now, we believe that we have seen the future problems of world agriculture and world food security thrown into sharper focus. Thus, in particular, the question of the load that can be borne by existing natural resources has come to play more of a central role. The necessary consequence of this is the call for the establishment of sustainable agriculture: that is to say, the production system whereby foodstuffs are produced in a way which maintains the limited natural resources available to us, rather than using them up.
We are convinced that the work of FAO must increasingly bear the stamp of that need; that is, the supplies to its work and the consequences of its work. Of course, this also concerns a problem of the maintenance and the proper use of tropical and temperate forests, and the maintenance and use of fishery resources. We expect FAO to be even more actively committed in
-13 -
these fields than it has been in the past and to play the part appropriate for it, bearing in mind all the specialist skills assembled in the Organization.
The report before us could be the subject of many further comments but, because of the limited time available to us, I will leave it there, thanking you for your attention.
DONG QING-SONG (China) (Original language Chinese): This is the first time the Chinese delegation has spoken in Commission II. Therefore, I should like to take the opportunity to congratulate you on your election as Chairman of Commission II. I am sure that under your leadership and the leadership of the Vice Chairmen to be elected, the work of Commission II will be successful. I should like to thank Mr Shah for his very clear introduction just now.
The Chinese delegation has carefully studied document C 91/8. We feel that it is a document which is rich in content, which reflects the successes achieved, and also presents problems which exist and recommendations for improvement. This is useful for our full understanding of FAO's Regular Programme and for our study of ways in which to perfect the work of our Regular Programmes.
I should now like to make the following observations in this regard. Firstly, we are pleased to note the progress in many areas of the activities of the Regular Programme in the current biennium. In particular, activities of the three Major Programmes of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry have seen a marked improvement compared with the previous biennium. This is a result of FAO, under difficult financial conditions, taking measures to adjust the programmes, streamline personnel, reduce administrative expenditure and ensure the carrying-out of Major Programmes.
However, we have also noted with concern that, because of staff vacancies and the reduction of non-personnel expenditure due to financial difficulties, the implementation of some substantive programmes has been adversely affected. Therefore, we hope that FAO and Member States will make concerted efforts and their due contribution to overcoming these adverse effects caused by financial difficulty.
Secondly, the first part of the document reviews the implementation of the Regular Programme in the current biennium. We have noted that there are two prominent characteristics in the activities of the Regular Programme of the current biennium: one is that many activities have been carried out in the environment and sustainable development and can be found in the Major Programmes of Agriculture, Fishery and Forestry, and in particular, in the great deal of work which has been done for the preparation of the World Conference on the Environment and Development. The second characteristic is that support for field programme activities has been further strengthened. At the same time we hope that FAO will further strengthen coordination of Regular Programmes and Field Programmes, improving coordination between Regular Programme activities and Field Programmes, according to changes in the way in which projects in the field are implemented, so as to increase efficiency further and extend the impact.
Third, Chapter Eleven of the document exclusively reviews the Technical Cooperation Networks. We are satisfied to note that FAO has made progress in providing support to these networks. Facts have proved that activity in these networks is of vital importance to the strengthening of technical cooperation among developing countries. For FAO these networks are an effective way of promoting the exchange of experiences and carrying out technical cooperation among developing countries, as they require low investment that generates high benefits. The Review points out the achievements made and, at the same time, elaborates on key problems to be solved for future improvement - for instance, formulation of practical work programmes and seeking more resources. We hope that efforts will be strengthened to this end.
Fourthly, Part II of the document makes an in-depth review of four Sub-programmes. We are satisfied with FAO for activities carried out in this regard. Here, I wish to emphasize Sub-programme 2.3.1.4 - that is, forest food, fodder and fuelwood system. At a time when the present world forest resources are diminishing and the ecological environment is being destroyed, forestry development is of great strategic and practical significance for the sustainable development of food and agriculture. Some of the developing countries, in particular, are suffering from a shortage of energy in rural areas. There is an urgent need and broad prospects for the development of fuelwood and the integrated utilization of forest techniques. It is our hope that FAO will continue its efforts in this field.
Pedro Agostinho KANGA (Angola): Prenant la parole pour la première fois dans cette Commission, permettez-moi, M. le Président, de vous adresser mes vives félicitations à l'occasion de votre élection à cette importante Commission ainsi qu'à vos deux Vice-Présidents. Nos félicitations s'adressent aussi à M. Shah pour son exposé clair et précis du document dont nous sommes saisis.
Ce document est très clair et d'une grande utilité car il nous fournit des informations très importantes sur l'activité et les objectifs atteints par l'Organisation.
A cet égard, nous nous félicitons des nouvelles améliorations apportées à la présentation de ce programme ordinaire et nous ne pouvons que reconnaître les efforts toujours déployés par le Directeur général pour renforcer la capacité d'évaluation et de suivi de l'Organisation.
C'est avec beaucoup d'attention, M. le Président, que nous avons lu ces documents; comme on peut le constater, les contraintes budgétaires ont rendu difficile la réalisation de certains programmes et sous-programmes. Malgré les difficultés financières, la FAO s'est efforcée d'atteindre ses objectifs afin de pouvoir satisfaire les besoins de ses Etats Membres et particulièrement des pays en développement.
Nous n'allons pas entrer de manière très détaillée dans l'analyse de toutes les questions dont l'ensemble constitue le Programme ordinaire. En fait, nous tenons à exprimer ici notre satisfaction d'une manière globale.
Nous nous félicitons des efforts déployés par la FAO pour soutenir la campagne internationale de lutte contre la lucilie bouchère en Afrique du Nord et son éradication complète. Bien que cela n'ait pas été prévu dans, le
Programme de travail et budget de 1990-91, nous nous félicitons également du soutien qui a été accordé par le Programme ordinaire aux préparatifs de la Conférence internationale sur la nutrition. Mais nous regrettons seulement le retard causé par les difficultés financières à la création d'une unité spéciale chargée de favoriser la coopération entre la Commission du Codex Alimentarius et le GATT. Nous nous réjouissons aussi de la coopération de la FAO avec d'autres organisations comme la Banque mondiale, le PNUE, l'OMS et le GATT dans les domaines prioritaires et souhaitons qu'elle soit de plus en plus renforcée. Nous aimerions exprimer notre satisfaction face à la poursuite de la mise en oeuvre de la stratégie d'aménagement et de développement de la pêche approuvée en 1984 par la Conférence mondiale de la FAO ainsi que les cinq programmes d'action. Nous regrettons seulement qu'un de ces programmes n'a pas été mis en oeuvre et que certaines activités relatives au développement de l'aquaculture ont dû être interrompues.
Nous nous réjouissons de l'achèvement de l'étude sur les besoins de la recherche halieutique internationale pour les pays en développement; celle-ci permettra une utilisation rationnelle de nos ressources. Nous remercions les institutions qui l'ont coordonnée et nous sommes aussi d'avis que pour sa mise en oeuvre la FAO devrait jouer un rôle de premier rang.
Pour terminer, nous nous félicitons de la participation très active de ce grand programme aux préparatifs de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur l'environnement et le développement.
En ce qui concerne le Programme de coopération technique nous réitérons notre appui et nous souhaitons le renforcement de ses ressources. Quant au Fonds fiduciaire, nous ne pouvons que féliciter et remercier les Pays-Bas, l'Italie, pour leurs contributions et exhortons les autres donateurs à suivre l'exemple de ces derniers.
François ROUX (Belgique): Ma délégation a étudié avec beaucoup d'intérêt l'Examen du Programme ordinaire 1990-91. Le document C 91/8 constitue l'un des outils indispensables pour évaluer l'action de la FAO.
En ce qui concerne la première partie c'est-à-dire celle qui analyse les grands programmes de la FAO, nous aurons bien sûr l'occasion de nous pencher à nouveau sur ces programmes. Nous aimerions ici saluer les efforts de présentation qui permettent de passer systématiquement en revue les objectifs principaux, les priorités et surtout l'aspect interdisciplinaire des programmes ainsi que des Sous-programmes qui s'y rattachent. C'est cependant avec quelque frustration que nous avons lu la partie de l'Examen consacrée au service financier; je veux parler du Programme 5.2.2 et du Programme 5.2.3, service ordinateur. Nous aurions en effet aimé en savoir un peu plus et voir par exemple figurer sous ces chapitres des indications chiffrées sur ce qu'a coûté jusqu'ici l'installation de FINSYS-PERSYS.
Pour ce qui concerne la deuxième partie de l'examen qui passe en revue ce qui a été fait pour quatre sous-programmes, nous apprécions là encore la présentation, et ce, d'autant plus qu'il s'agit d'activités prioritaires appelées à connaître des développements dans les années à venir. Nous sommes particulièrement intéressés par le Sous-programme 2.1.4.4: télédétection et agrométéorologie. Nous continuons de plaider en faveur d'une coopération étroite entre ces deux domaines auxquels la Belgique participe.
Quant au réseau de coopération technique auquel est consacrée la troisième partie de cet Examen nous considérons que leur déploiement constitue une étape essentielle dans le processus d'application des autorités nationales des pays bénéficiaires aussi bien au niveau du financement qu'au niveau du savoir-faire. Toutefois, nous sommes relativement inquiets sur le mode de financement de ces réseaux, et nous aimerions notamment demander au Secrétariat une évaluation de l'impact des nouvelles modifications des modalités d'exécution des projets de terrain sur les ressources disponibles pour la constitution des réseaux sachant que ces activités sont financées principalement par des ressources extrabudgétaires.
En conclusion, cet examen tend à prouver à ceux qui en doutaient encore l'étroite imbrication qui existe entre les activités techniques du programme ordinaire et celles bénéficiant du financement extrabudgétaire.
Nous restons d'avis que cette étroite liaison est saine pourvu qu'elle reste équilibrée. Elle démontre la complémentarité du rôle normatif et du rôle opérationnel de la FAO.
Jean-Pierre POLY (France): M. le Président, laissez-moi vous dire tout d'abord combien mon pays se réjouit de vous voir présider les travaux de cette importante Commission. Merci également à M. Shah pour sa présentation claire comme à l'habitude du rapport qui rend compte à notre Conférence de l'exécution du Programme ordinaire sur la période précédente.
Conformément à vos souhaits, ma délégation analysera plus en détail les activités de l'Organisation dans une perspective d'avenir, lors de prochains points de l'ordre du jour de nos travaux. Je me bornerai, à ce stade, à faire quelques commentaires de portée générale.
Le rapport C 91/8 rend compte à notre Conférence de l'exécution du Programme ordinaire sur la période 1988-89.
Cette période, comme la précédente, s'est inscrite sous le signe, à la fois des difficultés de trésorerie persistantes de l'Organisation et de la mise en oeuvre des recommandations de l'examen de certains aspects des buts et opérations de la FAO.
Ma délégation, cependant, se félicite que le taux d'exécution du Programme au cours de l'exercice en voie d'achèvement soit en amélioration sensible par rapport à celui constaté lors des deux dernières sessions de notre Conférence, au cours desquelles avaient, trop souvent, été relevés, dans les activités de l'Organisation, de sévères abattements et des impasses préjudiciables à la situation financière de la FAO.
Ma délégation considère également que le récent examen de notre Organisation a largement contribué au renforcement souhaitable de la coordination des programmes dans les domaines prioritaires de la FAO comme le développement agricole durable, l'analyse et la planification des politiques, la mise en place d'une base de données intégrées.
Cette coordination intersectorielle et interdisciplinaire a contribué à la réussite des manifestations auxquelles a participé la FAO comme la Conférence FAO/Pays-Bas sur l'agriculture et l'environnement et au rôle
- 17 -
qu'elle joue dans les préparatifs d'autres manifestations importantes comme la Conférence des Nations Unies sur l'environnement et le développement (CNUED).
Comme à l'habitude, la plupart des activités des programmes techniques (agriculture, forêts, pêches, programmes de soutien au développement...) interviennent en appui direct au Programme de terrain de l'Organisation.
Ma délégation se félicite de cette orientation qui traduit le souci de la FAO d'apporter une aide concrète aux Etats Membres sous la forme de services consultatifs ou d'appui technique et opérationnel aux projets de terrain. Ce constat nous conduit à penser que la FAO, dont la qualité des services est généralement reconnue et qui justifie souvent d'avantages comparatifs bien établis, continuera à jouer un rôle important de conseil et d'appui aux pays en développement dans le nouveau contexte de l'exécution nationale des projets.
Toutefois, ma délégation relève que les difficultés financières persistantes de l'Organisation durant cet exercice n'ont pas permis au Programme de terrain de mettre un terme à son intervention dans certains secteurs du Programme ordinaire pour y colmater les brèches, obérant ainsi en partie ses capacités purement opérationnelles.
Il serait souhaitable, par exemple, que le Programme ordinaire, dans la perspective d'une meilleure gestion de l'ensemble des activités de l'Organisation, participe plus largement à la gestion informatisée du Programme de terrain; j'entends par là de l'ensemble des activités opérationnelles de l'Organisation.
Dans de prochaines interventions, ma délégation reviendra sur les relations qu'il convient d'établir entre le Programme de terrain et le Programme ordinaire, qui se complètent mais poursuivent en fait des objectifs différents dans des perspectives à plus ou moins long terme.
Ces considérations me conduisent cependant à souligner dès à présent à la fois l'intérêt du Plan à moyen terme, dont notre Commission s'apprête à examiner le projet, et l'importance du Comité du Programme de la FAO, qui doit garantir la cohérence du Programme ordinaire et du Programme de terrain.
Ma délégation se félicite, enfin, de la poursuite de l'effort accompli par l'Organisation dans le domaine de l'évaluation et reconnaît la pertinence du choix opéré dans les activités soumises, lors de cette session, à un examen approfondi. Qu'il s'agisse des quatre sous-programmes figurant dans la seconde partie du rapport (et notamment la gestion des ressources naturelles, des systèmes forestiers intégrés, de la conduite rationnelle des cultures...) ou du rapport sur les réseaux de coopération technique, il s'agit bien là de thèmes particulièrement liés aux activités de la FAO en matière de développement durable, priorité s'il en est pour notre Organisation.
Ma délégation y voit la démonstration des capacités d'évolution de la FAO pour mettre à la disposition de la communauté internationale, confrontée à de nouveaux défis, une expertise de qualité.
Je veux également pour preuve de cette expertise les succès que l'on ne peut passer sous silence dans la lutte contre les grands fléaux: les acridiens, la lucilie bouchère, ou dans la gestion de systèmes globaux d'information ou d'alerte rapide.
Ray ALLEN (United Kingdom) : I recall commenting at the Conference two years ago that very few, if any, other organizations produced such an excellent retrospective Review of the Regular Programme. I still think that the production of a document such as the one we have before us today is a wise practice and should continue.
I should like to congratulate the Secretariat on the production of the document, and I should like to thank Mr Shah for his very clear and concise introduction to the paper. There is a wealth of detail in this document, and again it raises many interesting issues about what the Organization has and has not accomplished with the assessed contributions paid by Member States.
As in previous reviews, the link between the Regular and Field Programmes and the extent to which they are reliant on each other is quite evident. Here I should like to support the comments made by the Belgian delegation regarding the need to ensure an appropriate balance.
The Regular Programme includes FAO's core activities. It incorporates the fundamental raison d'être for the Organization's existence. In the opinion of my delegation FAO has a comparative advantage in many of the functions it performs within the Regular Programme, particularly those of policy advice and global information systems. However, we again found it difficult to disentangle those activities which would and should go on irrespective of the Field Programme.
With the introduction of new arrangements for agency support costs, it will be even more important that we have a detailed breakdown of these activities. Of course we shall be addressing the support costs issue under another Agenda item.
FAO has undergone an extremely difficult period in terms of available finances, and the Organization is to be congratulated for the way in which it has protected the priority areas and the back-up of Field Programmes. That said, there is still a tendency for the objectives and priorities set for each programme to be all-embracing.
In our view, there is insufficient discussion of the Organization's comparative advantage and of the methods used to determine priorities. By and large, the paper fails to set clear milestones or targets against which to measure the progress made by FAO towards achieving its objectives. The quantification of the outputs and impact of the Programme is by and large retrospective. Allow me, Mr Chairman, to cite the Livestock Programme as one of the many examples. Paragraph 1.56, Basic Objective, and paragraph 1.57, Priorities, cover a whole range of objectives and priorities without mentioning the words "dairy" and "dairying". However, paragraph 1.70 on Sub-programme Implementation is devoted to dairying, although prior to reaching the paragraph the reader could well have assumed that dairying was not a priority. Paragraph 1.70 does quantify the number of courses held, projects supported and so on, in recent years, but no targets or milestones are set for the future. My point here is that we
should like to see FAO set clear targets against which progress could have been, and for the future can be, monitored and evaluated. It would then be possible for Member States to review progress against agreed criteria.
The sort of thing we have in mind can be seen in the Livestock Programme where an example of an objective with a clear time-bound target is the global eradication of rinderpest by the year 2000. This can be found in paragraph 1.64. We welcome this example of a target and will monitor progress with interest, but even here we should like to have seen some milestones along that road such as eradication from all West African countries by, say, 1994, and from Ethiopia, Sudan and Somalia by 1997.
Part Two of the document gives a very welcome effort to carry out an in-depth review of selected Sub-programmes, but again because no quantifiable targets were set in the previous period it is difficult, and in some places impossible, to assess the extent to which the achievements of the last five years or so compare with what it was hoped would be achieved.
The point was made by the External Auditors that we also consider the results of evaluation so that lessons learned will provide an input into future planning projects. And here I would like to support the comments of the Danish delegation. This is another point made by the External Auditors. I will not labour these points any further.
The Organization's commitments to fully integrated environmental concerns within the activities of the Regular Programmes are to be commended. My delegation considers that such an approach is essential. Environmental issues pervade all activities and care must be taken to ensure they are not marginalized. We welcome the establishment of a departmental working group on fisheries and environment, the formation of.an inter-departmental task force on integrated coastal zone management and the introduction of a system approach to aquaculture development. These initiatives acknowledge the necessity of adopting an integrated approach to fisheries sector and management and recognize the key cross-cutting issues of environment stability and socio-economic impact.
The formation of these groups reveals a welcome awareness that problems and programmes in the fisheries sector cannot be addressed in isolation by technical solutions.
FAO's programme of networks is held in very high regard by my delegation. We are. however, concerned with what we see as an explosion of new networks around the developing world. There is a very distinct danger of duplication and we hope that FAO will continue to collaborate closely with other organizations to ensure that this does not happen.
In conclusion, my delegation welcomes the advances made in the presentation of this document and the information it contains, but we would like to stress once more the advantages of setting quantifiable targets.
CHAIRMAN: Before giving the floor to the next delegation I will read out the list again: United States, Yugoslavia, Cuba, Canada, Kenya, Mexico, Iran, Indonesia. I give the floor to the delegate of the United States.
E. Wayne DENNEY (United States of America): Mr Chairman, thank you very much and we would also like to thank Mr Shah for his very succinct opening introduction.
The biennial Review of FAO's Regular Programme provides members with the unique opportunity to render judgements on how FAO is doing its work, looking at highlights and shortfalls, measuring accomplishments versus plans, assessing how responsive the Organization is to changing member requirements, and evaluating what FAO's main contributions have been during the past two years.
Taking a look at the Regular Programme performance will enable us to make more sound judgements when we consider the 1992-93 Programme of Work and Budget later this week.
The views of the United States regarding FAO's most important activities have been stated many times at many FAO fora during the past year. Several of them were reinforced during Secretary Madigan's address today. To reiterate a few of them: activities of the Codex Alimentarius Commission data and information-related activities, pest and disease eradication, policy analysis and advice, establishment of an IPPC Secretariat and other activities in support of GATT, environment and sustainable development, GIEWS, Global Information and Early Warning System, and various activities relating to genetic resources. Thus, we generally agree with the priorities as described in the Review.
Reading the Report from cover to cover is extremely informative; the issues and outlook sections are particularly valuable; the increased emphasis on environment and sustainable development throughout the Regular Programme is commendable; but the Report is also very time-consuming. Perhaps a way could be found to shorten the Review without significantly reducing the substance. We note here that comments thus made so far have tended to point out where additions could be made and so this will be a difficult task indeed.
It is useful to know the ratio of extra-budgetary to Regular Programme resources in each Programme. This information is provided for all programmes in a tabular form but is not discussed in each programme review.
We are pleased to see that resource constraints had a less severe impact on Programme implementation this biennum than it did the previous two. In instances where resource constraints are given as a reason for not being able to carry out a programme, those things omitted suggest where priorities lie. We are generally not sympathic to difficulties encountered in delivering field programmes as a result of shortfalls in Regular Programme resources. A case in point is the Forestry Department where extra-budgetary resources account for about 85 percent of the total. While we recognize that the Regular and Field Programmes must be mutually reinforcing, we do not believe the primary function of core programmes should be to service Field Programmes. Plus, we support comments made in the Expert Review of FAO which suggested that the ratio of field to core programme resources should not be too large within any programme.
We have been looking forward to the full implementation of WAICENT for some time. This should enable the Organization to provide data and information which is more reliable and more timely. External users will benefit from more direct information access. Will WAICENT include the Geographic
Information System? What about forestry statistics? From the statement on page 35, we presume environmental data will also be included to a greater degree.
FAO's contributions to the UNCED preparatory process have been noteworthy. The issues are often controversial, so it is important that the scientific and technical expertise that is unique to FAO be made available to the process. These activities should be no less important following UNCED.
FAO's efforts in the livestock area are supported by the United States. The programme for conserving animal genetic resources is off to a good start. We look forward to the expert consultation on animal genetic resources in early 1992. We are pleased to have collaborated with FAO to eradicate the New World screwworm. Under FAO's leadership, and with good donor response, this potentially devastating outbreak was effectively curtailed.
As we get closer to a GATT agreement, it becomes more essential that FAO be prepared to backstop it through scientific input. Work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission has progressed to the point where Codex food standards have achieved widespread acceptance. They will provide a solid basis for reducing non-tariff trade barriers. In this regard, we believe that FAO/WHO scientific evaluations of substances including food additives, pesticides and veterinary drugs, should be accelerated to provide the sound scientific basis needed to promote harmonized international trade of food and food products. Progress in establishing the IPPC Secretariat has been less satisfactory. The Secretariat must be put in place as soon as possible. It needs to be adequately staffed and highly visible.
FAO's increased focus on environment and sustainable development is commendable. It is evident throughout the programs in agriculture, forestry, and fisheries. We presume that these increased activities have not seriously detracted from other work. Is the Sub-program on sustaining resource potentials supposed to be the cornerstone of FAO's involvement in this area?
Rapid population growth is a continuing concern in many regions of the world. We would like to know more about the role of Regional Population Advisors, as noted on page 26.
Integration of the World Food Report into the State of Food and Agriculture appears to have been a move resulting in greater efficiency. The Commodity Review and Outlook and Special Reports on Africa continue to be high quality releases. We look forward to seeing the study on "Agricultural Commodity Prospects" for the 1990s when it is made available next year. Presumably, the results of this study will feed into the next update of Agriculture Towards 2000.
The United States commends FAO for exploring ways in which to assist Eastern European countries in their transition to market-based economies. We hope that FAO has been able to analyse policy that will be useful to these countries. The important role of the private sector is demonstrated in this and other areas FAO has engaged in over the past biennium. Involving the private sector in FAO's Intergovernmental Commodity Groups is commendable. A study of selected Asian countries once again reveal that the private sector can play a pivotal role in implementing price policies.
Finally, the expansion of collaborative activities by FAO during the current bienium is commendable. It enables FAO to use its resources efficiently and to focus on areas where it has a comparative advantage.
Ms Ljiljana VELASEVIC (Yugoslovia) : In the interests of moving the Agenda along as quickly as possible I will be exceedingly brief in this item.
Firstly we would like to congratulate you on your election as Chairman of Committee II. We would also like to congratulate Mr Shah for his clear and detailed information. I would like to express our deep appreciation to the FAO Secretariat for the outstanding work carried out in the preparation of document C 91/8. As the previous delegate said most of our observations I will not repeat them and at the end I would say only that Yugoslovia supports the Review of the Regular Programme 1990-91.
Marcos I. NIETOS LARA (Cuba): Por ser la primera vez que hago uso de la palabra, permítame felicitarlo sinceramente por su elección. Estamos seguros que bajo su sabia dirección, podremos debatir con amplitud y objetividad los temas esenciales para el funcionamiento de nuestra Organización.
Permítame expresar también nuestra satisfacción por encontrar de nuevo al Sr. Shah en la presentación de estos temas con la brillantez y claridad con que siempre lo ha hecho, constituyendo ya una valiosa tradición de nuestra Organización. En esta misma Sala lo hemos visto en múltiples oportunidades conducir y expresar las principales actividades de la Organización, con absoluta claridad. Felicitaciones.
Entrando en materia sobre el tema en debate, mi delegación considera que este documento sobre el Programa Ordinario está suficientemente actualizado, y recoge en esencia las propuestas que en esta misma Sala plantearon los Países Miembros en el pasado período de sesiones de la Conferencia. Por ello, reconocemos el esfuerzo de la Secretaría en este sentido y reconocemos su acción.
El Programa Ordinario 1991 concedió una atención muy importante a la asistencia a los Estados Miembros en materia de política y planificación del desarrollo agrícola y rural, teniendo como telón de fondo el concepto de desarrollo sostenible. Este tema por su importancia fue ampliamente debatido en la Conferencia Regional para América Latina y el Caribe celebrada el pasado año, partiendo del hecho de que la mayoría de los programas de desarrollo agrícola y rural dirigidos a los sectores de la población más pobres, realmente ocurren en ecosistemas frágiles en los que siempre estará presente el riesgo de que continúe deteriorándose el medio ambiente, especialmente en lo que hace referencia a los recursos de suelo y agua.
El tema de la protección del medio ambiente también ha tenido una atención prioritaria por parte de la FAO, respondiendo con eficacia y con rapidez a las demandas planteadas por los países desarrollados y en vías de desarrollo, armonizando sus intereses para llevar adelante el Programa de Acción Forestal Tropical, como acción concreta en materia de proteger el medio ambiente en los países tropicales caracterizados por la extensión de los ecosistemas frágiles.
Otro asunto que merece nuestra atención es, sin duda, el relativo al establecimiento, desarrollo y fortalecimiento de las Redes de Cooperación Técnica que han sido un sistema eficaz y de bajo costo para aprovechar e intercambiar las experiencias positivas que hemos alcanzado los países en desarrollo movilizando recursos nacionales e internacionales en beneficio directo del desarrollo agricola y rural.
Debemos señalar que dada la importancia concedida por todos a las Redes de Cooperación Técnica, inclusive dentro del Programa Ordinario, seria conveniente que hubiera una mayor disponibilidad de fondos extrapresupuestarios para aumentar la capacidad de acción de las Redes de Cooperación Técnica, y extender estas experiencias positivas.
Por último, nos referimos en términos encomiásticos al Programa de Cooperación Técnica, el cual como se pone de relieve en el Examen del Programa Ordinario, ha demostrado ser un mecanismo eficaz y dinámico para actuar en casos de emergencia o como factor catalitico para movilizar recursos nacionales e internacionales en favor del desarrollo.
Mi delegación desearía volver de nuevo sobre algunos aspectos del Programa Ordinario en el debate de otros temas del Programa de la Organización, por la estrecha vinculación y complementariedad que existe entre ellos.
David SHERWOOD (Canada): Thank you, Mr Chairman, for this opportunity to provide a few brief supporting comments on the Review of the Regular Programme. Canada would also like to take this opportunity to warmly congratulate you on your election to the Chairmanship of this Commission and also to express our appreciation to the Secretariat in the presentation of its report C 91/8. We would also like to thank Mr Shah for your concise introduction.
Canada recognizes the importance of the Review of a Regular Programme as the principal means for reporting on work implemented and results achieved in the Organization. We recognize the improvements that have been made to the format and the structure of this Report and we encourage the Secretariat to continue its efforts in this area. This is a particularly useful tool in assessing decisions taken regarding Programme changes as a result of budgetary adjustments.
We are pleased with the attention that has been given to priority areas as set out in the Programme of Work and Budget. The organizational changes along with the range of activities designed to place increased emphasis on environment and sustainable development is very much welcomed. As well, steps have been taken to strengthen FAO's work in the gathering and dissemination of information through WAICENT and the Geographic Information System (GIS).
We encourage continued progress in improving performance data. Canada recognizes that as a result of financial cuts, adjustments and reallocations have had to be made. The impact of these changes needs to be recorded and assessed. Consequently, it remains a shared objective to both monitor and evaluate the real impact of the Regular Programme on agricultural and rural development. We would like to join other delegations in commending FAO for the results its work has achieved in combatting the outbreak of the New World screwworm in North Africa. Regarding the future, despite progress that has been achieved, we are well aware of the
challenges FAO faces in the future, and this is nowhere more apparent than in the forestry sector, which will be the centre of international attention both in the context of the Tropical Forest Action Plan and in the broader context in discussions in UNICED.
We would also like to commend the FAO for its support of the WHO Codex Alimentarius and express the hope that this support will be increased.
There are other items which we would like to highlight, but in the interest of brevity we will bring them forward when the discussion of the Programme of Work and Budget occurs.
In conclusion, Mr Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to provide these supporting comments.
B.K. KISILU (Kenya): This is the first time my delegation has taken the floor and I take this opportunity to congratulate you on your election as Chairman of the Commission II. I congratulate Mr Shah for his clear introductory remarks. My delegation compliments FAO for keeping the established format of the Regular Programme during the 1990-91 biennium while at the same time injecting in new features. Second for working out objectives to be achieved by each programme.
However, my delegation is concerned that FAO is constrained in its efforts to carry out the set objectives and even inject further new features into the Regular Programme because of the failure of Member States to honour their obligations. I call upon the Member States without exception to live up to their promises. Above all, the appeal should be taken seriously by the major contributors whose continued failure to make contributions to FAO may weaken not only the Regular Programme but the whole Organization. I wonder how FAO is supposed to establish an active system of review with strong links to further improvements in the Organization's work as suggested earlier if Member States are not contributing regularly.
FAO should be commended for the results it has achieved in the alleviation of hunger and poverty in the world and especially in North Africa through the elimination of the screwworm and the constant threat to agricultural production by locusts.
However, in its efforts to combat environmental degradation and conservation of environment for sustainable agriculture, FAO should always identify the important role played by women in development. I say this because women in general constitute the bulk of the population handling agriculture in the developing countries. Here FAO should be concerned with the technological developments that save women time in other chores in order to give them more time for agricultural production.
My delegation on the whole is satisfied with this presentation and feels it should be adopted by consensus in the Conference.
Elías REYES BRAVO (México): Gracias, señor Presidente, gracias a la Secretaria por este documento que establece las actividades sustantivas del Programa Ordinario en este bienio 1990-91, poniendo de relieve una
diversidad considerable de temas que en su mayor parte tienen una correspondencia directa con los tres Programas Técnicos principales de la Organización.
En particular, México realizó en el marco de la FAO múltiples actividades en este periodo, que alentaron el quehacer de las instituciones nacionales.
Mi pais participó regularmente en los foros de la FAO en este periodo, desde el Consejo, sus Comités, asi como otros muy especializados en materia agricola, forestal y pecuaria, destacándose entre ellos la Conferencia FAO/Países Bajos sobre Agricultura y Medio Ambiente, la cual constituye para nuestro pais una experiencia valiosa al propósito de incorporar a los procesos productivos criterios de sostenibilidad ambiental.
En julio de este año se realizó en la ciudad de México, la Tercera Reunión del Comité de Frutas y Hortalizas Frescas de Origen Tropical, perteneciente a la Comisión del Codex Alimentarius cuya sede se encuentra en mi capital. Esperemos que sea un foro que permita avances en beneficio de la salud de los consumidores y de los flujos comerciales para este tipo de productos de que se ocupa dicho Comité
Mi pais participó en varios eventos del Codex, lo cual es fundamental para que avancemos en materia de normalización, tema que junto al de la sanidad fitopecuaria, ha merecido una atención particular de mi Gobierno.
En el marco del Programa Ordinario que nos ocupa, México ha impulsado la celebración del Dia mundial de la Alimentación, cuyos alcances a nivel central y estatal se han acrecentado con carácter institucional y social, buscando la participación de los sectores sociales y privados.
El lema de este año del Dia Mundial de la Alimentación fue el de "El árbol fuente de vida" y en México se realizó con ese propósito un acto central, presidido por el Secretario de Agricultura y Recursos Hidráulicos con la representación del Presidente de la República; en dicho acto se instaló el Comité Nacional para la Conferencia Internacional de Nutrición. Se organizaron también una exposición gráfica y un coloquio con el lema "El árbol, desarrollo y cooperación internacional".
Reconocemos la labor que ha realizado la Secretaria de la FAO en el ámbito de los sistemas de información y en particular la labor ya emprendida para la constitución del WAICENT. Se trata de una labor que responde a las funciones originales de la FAO de interés permanente para nuestro pais.
Asimismo, reconocemos el esfuerzo de la Secretaria en la integración de los estudios mundiales y regionales sobre la situación agricola y alimentaria. Con ese propósito México, recientemente ha proporcionado información y datos a la Oficina Regional para América Latina y el Caribe.
En el ámbito de montes, México participó en el Décimo Congreso Forestal Mundial celebrado en Paris en septiembre pasado y cuya realización contó con el importante apoyo de la FAO.
El documento refleja el número considerable de Redes de Cooperación Técnica que operan con apoyo de la FAO y que constituyen un mecanismo útil de cooperación.
Durante este bienio que está por concluir, México ha participado de manera importante en el Sistema de Redes de Cooperación Técnica y ha constituido un mecanismo importante para alcanzar muchos objetivos del Programa Ordinario.
Ebrahim MAYGOLINEJAD (Iran, Islamic Republic of): I would like to express my appreciation to the FAO for its excellent activities, especially in developing countries, and to thank the Secretariat for the excellent document C 91/8 and Mr Shah for his excellent explanation and guidance. TCP has a great role in developing countries, especially through the implementation of project training courses and workshops. TCDC is also something I would like to mention and ask for more collaboration by the FAO on this. Fisheries and agriculture play an important role in most developing countries but it has not been given enough attention in the 1992-93 Programme. National self-sufficiency is essential in order to obtain sustainable development, management of resources and optimum utilization has been emphasized in all sessions and most documents. We believe that the upgrading of national experts, especially researchers, is the most important action that can be taken through seminars, short-term training courses and workshops organized by FAO. The developing countries need more assistance in coastal fisheries management, especially at the moment.
Finally, I would like to express once again the highest appreciation of the excellent job done by FAO in the developing countries and a wish for better international collaboration and cooperation through UN networks.
P. Natigor SIAGIAN (Indonesia): As this is the first time my delegation has had the floor, allow me to begin my statement by congratulating you on your election to the Chair of this important Committee. My delegation has read carefully document C 91/8, and would like to congratulate the Secretariat for successfully preparing such a comprehensive document and Dr Shah on his clear and concise explanation of the salient points needing Council's attention and consideration. We welcome the Director-General's report telling us that programme implementation during the biennium shows in general an improvement over the last biennium, reflecting efforts to pursue full programme implementation despite continuing resource constraints. We greatly appreciate this goodwill. It is also a reflection of the kindness shown by the leadership by the FAO, who have made the utmost efforts to adjust the implementation of the Programme, in line with reality, i.e., the current financial situation of FAO. We note with satisfaction that within the Major Programme Agriculture, significant adjustments have been made within individual programmes in order to implement the decisions of the 1989 Conference to place greater emphasis on work for environmental and sustainable development and on FAO's policy advisory role. We look forward to the speedy implementation of the decisions of the very successful FAO/Netherlands Conference on Agriculture and the Environment.
We welcome the achievements under the Livestock Programme. We feel that the basic objectives and priorities of this programme are still valid for the future activities of our forthcoming PWB. As regards work in the field of animal genetics, we record our support for the views of the Committee on Agriculture in the last Council on this matter, which are clearly stated in paragraph 1.68 on page 19 of the document.
On the Rural Development Programme we note guidelines are being developed in various programme areas to assist with the inclusion of Women in Development concerns in project design and implementation. It is our hope that work in this field can be continued, including the current work on assisting the strengthening of WID units in mainline ministries. We follow with close attention the work of FAO in food and agriculture policy planning and the agricultural planning assistance which, among other work dealing with analyses of policy options as a basis for structural adjustment programmes, is of value to our country. We note that advisory activities are being completed in seven countries, including my own, and we hope this programme will continue to be of real help to developing countries in implementing their structural adjustment programmes.
We note the progress of work on the improvement of national capabilities to foster sustainable fisheries development. We welcome further information from the Secretariat on the complete action undertaken to strengthen national capabilities under the programme of fisheries exploitation and utilization.
With regard to work on forestry, we note the report on the work of FAO on the preparation of UNCED. However, my delegation have their own opinions on issues in this field, which we will explain under other Agenda items.
We note the report on the implementation of TCPs. We note the biggest areas of assistance are advisory services (48.2 percent) and training (27 percent), which is a better percentage as compared with 1989. Both the areas and the percentage figures clearly identify the merits of TCP, meaning that TCP is becoming more and more a beneficial investment for further developmental activities. We also note the regional distribution of the funds, as clearly shown in paragraph 5.7 on page 90 of the document. We express the hope for a more balanced distribution of TCP in the forthcoming PWB in view of the pressing need to help small and poor farmers, the majority of whom live in the Asian and Pacific Regions. Once again, my delegation expresses its appreciation for the work of FAO and is pleased to endorse this report on the Regular Programme for 1990-91. We will be back again to discuss related matters on the Regular Programme under other Agenda items.
António MAGALHÄES COELHO (Portugal): Permettez-moi tout d'abord M. le Président, de vous féliciter de votre élection.
Le document C 91/LIM/12 que nous sommes en train d'analyser est constitué par des extraits de la centième session du Conseil qui a eu lieu du 5 au 8 novembre. Le Portugal, pays membre du Conseil, a donné Son approbation au Rapport, incluant les paragraphes reproduits ici et qui concernent l'Examen du Programme ordinaire 1990-91.
La délégation portugaise confirme son appui aux propositions du Comité financier, lesquelles figurent aux paragraphes 3.24 et 3.25 du document C 91/LIM/12, notamment à la proposition du Directeur général.
La délégation portugaise pense que ce procédé vient faciliter la vision globale des activités de la FAO en tenant compte du fait que ces deux aspects son intimement liés. De la même façon, la délégation portugaise donne son appui aux modifications introduites dans les textes présentés au
Conseil qui sont citées au point 2.8 du LIM/12 et qui constituent desformes propices à une analyse plus profonde de la situation et de l’actuation de la FAO, en ce qui concerne ces deux domaines fondamentaux.
Igor MARINCEK (Suisse): J'aimerais remercier M. Shah de son excellente introduction dans ce premier point de l'ordre du jour de notre Commission. Nous avons devant nous un bon document, qui est plus analytique que par le passé et nous invitons le Secrétariat à progresser encore dans cette direction. Mon pays accorde une haute priorité aux travaux de la FAO sur l'utilisation rationnelle et durable des ressources naturelles en général et sur une agriculture durable en particulier. Nous encourageons notre Organisation à travailler en étroite coopération avec les autres organisations internationales compétentes en cette matière. Nous considérons les résultats de la Conférence FAO/Pays-Bas de Den Bosch comme un bon départ dans ce domaine. Rappelons qu'il doit être profitable pour les paysans de s'améliorer dans la direction d'une agriculture durable. Le problème n'est donc pas seulement de caractère technique mais aussi d'ordre politique, économique et agricole.
Face à l'immense défi de l'élimination du fléau de la faim et de la pauvreté rurale, la FAO dispose seulement de ressources limitées. Nous sommes d'avis que la FAO essaie de couvrir un trop vaste éventail d'activités et que nous courrons ainsi le risque de suggérer au monde et à nous-mêmes que tout ce qui est nécessaire est déjà entrepris.
Parlant d'avantages comparatifs, nous apprécions par exemple le rôle indispensable de catalyseur que la FAO joue dans les actions qui nécessitent une collaboration transfrontières.
J'aimerais notamment féliciter notre Organisation pour son travail dans la récente éradication de la lucilie bouchère en Afrique du Nord, pour ne citer qu'une activité que seule la FAO pouvait organiser et mener à bien.
Nous regrettons que le Secrétariat ne nous fasse pas de proposition claire de réduction d'activités qui ne sont pas centrales pour le mandat de la FAO. Si de telles activités étaient reprises par d'autres organisations qui s'en occupent déjà activement, des ressources pourraient être libérées en faveur d'activités plus prioritaires de notre Organisation. Nous pensons qu'il est nécessaire de concentrer l'activité de la FAO en fonction des ressources disponibles et des avantages comparatifs.
Bien qu'il soit peut-être facile de tomber d'accord sur ce principe, des divergences surgissent quand il s'agit de déterminer dans quel domaine la FAO dispose d'un avantage comparatif. Rappelons que les avantages comparatifs sont liés à la compétence, cette dernière étant le fruit de l'expérience et de la compétition, qui permettent d'atteindre un haut degré de productivité. Il est dommage que nous ne disposions pas d'informations concrètes sur le développement de la productivité de la FAO dans tel ou tel domaine. Nous le regrettons car c'est en améliorant la productivité que l'on parviendra à une utilisation efficace de ressources limitées. Dans un numéro récent de la publication "Développement rural" de la FAO, nous trouvons un graphique fort intéressant sur l'évolution des coûts par participant dans un projet de participation populaire en Zambie, coûts qui, d'après le graphique, sont tombés de 120 dollars en 1985 à 28 dollars en 1989.
C'est un constat réjouissant qui prouve de manière éclatante que la productivité s'acquiert à coup de répétitions et grâce à la spécialisation. Il serait fort souhaitable que la Conférence puisse disposer dans le futur d'une information valable sur le développement de la productivité dans les diverses activités de la FAO. Ce genre d'informations faciliterait sans doute la discussion entre Etats Membres et la recherche d'un consensus dans la prise de décision sur les priorités du Programme de travail. Nous savons tous que les problèmes de développement sont très complexes, et qu'il est nécessaire de les aborder de manière horizontale, ce qui nécessite beaucoup d'efforts de coordination. Nous nous posons alors la question de savoir si les structures essentiellement verticales de notre organisation nous permettent encore d'aborder des problèmes horizontaux de manière efficace. Nous invitons la FAO à réfléchir sur cette question. Il nous semble que les Programmes d'action spéciaux seraient un bon instrument pour organiser les activités dans une approche thématique et assurer en même temps le lien nécessaire entre programme ordinaire et programme de terrain. Une structuration et organisation des programmes et activités dans des Programmes d'action spéciaux pourraient peut-être faciliter une approche intégrée des problèmes horizontaux. Et finalement, dans ce contexte nous pensons que le PCT (Programme de coopération technique) peut jouer un rôle utile justement comme lien entre le programme ordinaire et le programme de terrain, par exemple dans le domaine de l'analyse et des conseils en matière de politique.
F. A. Shahim AHMED (Bangladesh): At the outset I should like to congratulate you on your election to the Chairmanship of the Commission. On behalf of my delegation, I assure you of our fullest cooperation as you guide our deliberations to a successful conclusion.
I should also like to compliment the FAO Secretariat for producing document C 91/8 entitled Review of the Regular Programme 1990-91, and express our admiration of Mr Vikram Shah for his lucid presentation of the subject. The document provides a biennial overview of FAO's programme of implementation and assesses the performance of selective activities with respect to the objectives, implementation efficiency and effectiveness in achieving results. All the subjects covered in the document are of profound importance to Bangladesh in its endeavours in agricultural development. We have perused with particular interest the chapter on Technical Cooperation network and we hope to continue to benefit from FAO's expertise in this field.
Mr Chairman, we shall return to this subject at a later stage.
Mansur MABRUK SEGHAYER (Libya) (Original language Arabic) : Allow me to begin by congratulating you on your election to the Chair of this Commission. I should also like to thank the Secretariat for the work they have done in the preparation of document C 91/8. I should also like to congratulate and thank Mr Shah for his excellent introduction to this document.
This is a document which contains a whole wealth of very useful information. It is a document which establishes the link between the various areas of work of the Organization. In going through it, my delegation is very pleased to see great advances that have been made in FAO's activities in these various areas, as well as the excellent results
that have been achieved in the implementation of the Organization's Programme. This is despite the financial problems which the Organization has been facing during this biennium.
The success of the implementation of the Programme is, I think, an excellent example of the Organization's performance. I think this is particularly true if we take a look at the specific example of FAO's programme to control the screwworm fly in North Africa. The same could be said of FAO's programme as regards desert locust.
We have studied this document in detail, not only here but also in the Finance and Programme Committees. The Council has given its support to this document after making some minor changes.
Therefore, my delegation would simply like to support this Programme and the review which is made of it.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Señor Presidente, usted sabe cómo me complace personalmente verle como Presidente de esta importante Comisión. Nos une una vieja y gratísima amistad desde principios de los años sesenta, cuando yo fui su discípulo, como Vicepresidente del entonces Comité Intergubernamental del Programa Mundial de Alimentos, que usted presidió con el brillo y la inteligencia de siempre.
A través de todos esos años he seguido con admiración y complacencia la manera ascendente y meritoria en que usted ha seguido contribuyendo a estas actividades, y a lo mejor usted piensa que yo pude resultar un alumno medianamente aprovechado. Estoy seguro de que con la inteligencia, las capacidades, la experiencia y los conocimientos que todos le reconocemos, está asegurado el buen éxito de los trabajos de esta Comisión.
El Sr. Shah nos tiene acostumbrados a sus magníficas presentaciones, que facilitan nuestra intervención.
Este Examen del Programa Ordinario 1990-91 es un ejercicio de evaluación sobre lo que la FAO ha hecho en el pasado, aunque nos interesa como desglose de experiencias, a fin de aprovechar los aspectos positivos para mejorar en el futuro las actividades de nuestra Organización.
Los representantes de Colombia pensamos que la observación principal sobre el bienio que está a punto de terminar está basada en el hecho de cómo la grave crisis financiera afectó a la ejecución del Programa adoptado para esos dos años, después de haber sido aprobado por la pasada Conferencia.
¿Podría la Secretaría cuantificar en porcentaje, qué incidencia total tuvo sobre la ejecución del Programa la falta de recursos y las reducciones que forzosamente debieron aplicarse?
¿A qué porcentaje equivale la expresión: "los efectos de una grave contracción financiera dieron lugar a cortes y reajustes sustanciales en el Programa de la FAO"?
A este respecto, nos llamó la atención que en el prólogo de este documento sólo se diga: "la posición financiera de la Organización ha continuado sometida a fuertes tensiones", aunque ya, más adelante, en el resumen se habla de: "persistentes limitaciones de recursos" hasta que, por fin, se
afirma claramente que: "los efectos de las dificultades financieras se dejan todavía sentir en muchos programas y dependencias en forma de puestos vacantes, trabajo retrasado y aplazamientos en el comienzo de nuevas actividades".
Todo lo cual representa graves perjuicios para los países beneficiarios, que en sus planes nacionales de desarrollo contaban con la asistencia de la FAO, frustrada así por la falta de recursos. Creo que en nuestro informe debemos apoyar la opinión del Comité del Programa, que aparece en el documento C 91/LIM/12, párrafo 2.13 según el cual "el Comité del Programa lamentó los graves efectos perjudiciales que las limitaciones financieras por las que atravesaba la Organización habían tenido en la ejecución de los programas.
Sobre los Programas Principales 3.1, 3.4. PCT: Cooperación técnica y Apoyo al desarrollo, a los representantes de Colombia nos complace que los proyectos del PCT aprobados en 1990, representen un diez por ciento de incremento con respecto a 1988 y que el monto de esos proyectos se haya incrementado, pues 42.4 millones de dólares divididos entre los 289 proyectos irroja un promedio aproximado de 150 000 dólares, aunque las cifras conocidas al mes de marzo de este año indiquen una nueva disminución de ese promedio, que bajaría a 125 000 dólares al dividir 9 millones por 71 proyectos aprobados en los tres primeros meses de 1991.
Consideramos que es importante, en la medida de lo posible, tratar de mantener niveles significativos para los PCT, a fin de que éstos representen reales beneficios para los países.
Reiteramos nuestro apoyo a los servicios de asesoramiento y capacitación, dentro de los PCT. Son los dos aspectos de mayor importancia para los países beneficiarios.
Particularmente, ante la incertidumbre de cual será la parte de la financiación del PNUD que se dedique a la FAO en el sector agrícola, en el bienio que estudiamos los Fondos Fiduciarios adquirieron mayor importancia y por eso los representantes de Colombia señalamos, con satisfacción, el buen ejemplo de un Estado como Países Bajos, que se convirtió en 1990-91, en el mayor contribuyente individual a los Fondos Fiduciarios. Destacamos también la actitud siempre positiva de los países nórdicos en esos Fondos Fiduciarios, e igualmente señalamos las importantes contribuciones de Italia y Arabia Saudita.
A los representantes de Colombia nos parece muy bien que la parte tercera de este documento se haya dedicado a las Redes de Cooperación Técnica.
Los datos que se nos ofrecen, confirman la forma en que durante el bienio 1990-91 las Redes de Cooperación Técnica, cumplieron importantes funciones que vienen permitiendo a muchos países aprovechar los recursos y las capacidades técnicas locales e ir disminuyendo la dependencia de la asistencia exterior.
Los representantes de Colombia pensamos que en el bienio 1990-91, el impulso que la FAO dió a las Redes ha sido uno de los aspectos más sobresalientes del Programa.
Esa importancia de las redes sobresale aún más, frente al hecho de que, como afirma este documento: "los efectos a largo plazo de la crisis han causado un grave retroceso en la capacidad técnica general de la Organización y se necesitarán esfuerzos intensivos y estabilidad financiera para recuperar y volver a ganar el tiempo perdido".
Es asi como las redes pueden seguir contribuyendo a que los países intercambien sus informaciones, conocimientos y experiencias y mediante acuerdos flexibles, compartan los gastos y aseguren hasta donde sea posible el rendimiento y la eficiencia.
Este séptimo Examen del Programa Ordinario demuestra la permanente evolución que se cumple en las actividades de nuestra Organización. La "revisión constructiva de los resultados", de que se habla en el prólogo permitirá que las experiencias del pasado bienio se reflejen en sus aspectos positivos en los próximos Programas de Labores y también que aquellos aspectos negativos o deficientes sean rectificados, revisados para ir asegurando, cada vez más, la mejor ejecución del Programa Ordinario.
Vamos aqui a concluir nuestra intervención porque éste es el primero de los cuatro importantes documentos que van a ser considerados en esta Comisión, y será necesario que nuestras declaraciones las hagamos con cuidado para no incurrir en repeticiones.
U. Tin HTUT OO (Myanmar) : Mr Chairman, may I warmly congratulate you on behalf of my delegation on your election to this important Commission.
We have a very comprehensive and frank review before us. We highly commend the progress made by FAO in implementing its Regular Programmes effectively and efficiently despite the persistent financial constraints. We are also glad to note that FAO's Regular Programmes are now being planned and implemented under wider perspectives, giving more emphasis to environmental and natural resource aspects and sustainable development, and at the same time in close coordination with other related agencies and organizations.
We generally agree and endorse the areas of priority mentioned in the document, but would like to see more consolidated efforts in order to assert its comparative advantages and avoid duplications as FAO is carrying out a very wide range of activities in different fields.
CHAIRMAN: Before giving the floor to Mr Shah to answer, I give the floor to the Secretary about written statements.
Ms C. FORTHOMME (Secretary, Commission II): We have received written statements from Botswana, Pakistan and Turkey. These will be inserted in the verbatim records.
A.A. MOKGARE (Botswana): I recognize you in that Chair and hope you will guide us wisely in the deliberations this morning. Turning to the Review document, C 91/8, I would like to confine my remarks to the three Major Programme thrusts contained in the document namely, Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Programmes, in that order.
I note with gratitude that the FAO programme implementation has improved somewhat compared with the previous biennium, 1989-90, and commend the Organization in that regard!
Regarding Agriculture - Major Programme 2.1, I note with gratitude that FAO continues to make strides in facilitating crop and livestock activities, research and development, as well as promoting rural development and improving information systems in Member countries.
Major Programme 2.2: Fisheries. Botswana supports the objectives and strategy under this programme and further welcomes FAO's initiative in assuming the aquaculture programme, previously sponsored by UNDP under its Regular Programme financing. Botswana has vested interest in aquaculture programme and in that regard, Botswana would like to be assisted in developing information systems associated with this activity - namely fish stock level assessments, investigations relating to suitability of local resources for manufacturing aquafeeds.
Mr Chairman, Botswana is interested in promoting aquaculture in order to provide nutrition to its citizenry. I am happy to learn of an increasing endeavour in fish production in order to alleviate undernutrition and that Southern Africa is the target area for these activities. Botswana recognizes the Director-General's judgement in that regard and will avail itself of any assistance towards that goal in concert with its domestic policy of food security at household level.
Major Programme 2.3: Forestry. Botswana recognizes the objectives and strategy with respect to this Major Programme as valid. We welcome FAO's role in TFAP and its recognition under UNCED as having a major role in the search for global consensus on the management, conservation and development of world forests.
The establishment and management of forests, trees and woodlots in agroforestry systems are priorities which Botswana shares. The potential of afforestation activities in reversing the threat of desertification in the arid parts of Botswana is recognized widely.activities in reversing the threat of desertification in the arid parts of Botswana is recognized widely.
Programme 2.3.2 Forest Industries and Trade. Botswana supports the basic objective, relating to environmentally sound and sustainable utilization of forest resources and such processes as would enhance benefits to local people. In that regard, we recognize the potential for forest-based industries to generate employment multipliers necessary to address unemployment problems in the country as well as the potential gains from trade in forest products. Although Botswana has benefited through bilateral assistance with NORAD and USAID in undertaking studies in this area, we specifically request FAO support in training activities associated with the programme. In particular we would want FAO to encourage an extension of Finnish trust-funded training programme to include Botswana.
TCP Programmes 3.1 - 3.4. An improvement of 10 percent TCP approved projects for the 1990-91 biennium over the previous biennium is indeed commendable. Mr Chairman, Botswana has recently benefited immensely through this programme. We therefore support increased provisions under this programme to enable the Director-General to respond timely to requests from Member Governments.
Natural Resources Programme: Assessment and Planning. Botswana welcomes an enhanced interest and promotion of this sector by FAO. We note for the record our appreciation of FAO assistance to Botswana in developing its natural resources information systems.1
S. Najmus SAQIB (Pakistan): Please allow me at the outset to congratulate you on your election as Chairman of this Commission. In deference to your instructions, I would not only be brief, but I am handing over a written statement as part of my effort to save time.
I would, Sir, take this opportunity to commend the FAO Secretariat for the preparation of such a comprehensive and informative review of document C 91/8. Mr Shah is also to be complimented for his clear presentation of the subject.
Our delegation has studied the document under review and it is our contention that an effort has been made to present a balanced picture of the Programme as well as activities carried out and as envisaged for the present biennium. These cover a vast range of subjects, the basic underlying idea is: as to how best Member Nations are to be served. Special emphasis has been and should continue to be to assist the developing nations when they undertake the developmental activities. Programme implementation during the biennium reflects an improvement over the last biennium in spite of the resource constraints. FAO deserves our support when it undertakes the activities outlined in the programme with renewed emphasis for the developmental activities of the developing countries, especially in biotechnology advances in crops, livestock, animal genetic resources, eradication of the screwworm from North Africa and integrated dairy development. We feel that these should remain priority areas. Programmes on remote sensing and agro-meteorology should also be further developed. We may add that the Forestry Sector has rightly been attached importance.
Lastly, we may add that a Programme reduction situation is perhaps directly linked with resource constraints and FAO should be assisted to correct the adverse financial situation to enable it to carry out its programmes as outlined in the said Review.2
Mustafa DOYUK (Turkey): First I would like to congratulate you and the Vice-Chairmen on your election.
It is very much appreciated by the Turkish delegation that -FAO has been assisting the nations which are affected by the famine, civil wars and natural catastrophes within its mandate despite the limits of available resources.
Painful increase of the world population is accordingly unwelcome, but existing conditions are well known by all of us. FAO has got important duties to improve conditions.
1. Statement inserted in the Verbatim Records on request.
2. Statement inserted in the Verbatim Records on request.
First of all FAO should continue to help countries to adopt and utilize improved agricultural technologies. Their promotion can help solve the problem of the inadequate nutrition of the increasing population.
We totally agree with the challenges stated by Mr Saouma at the introduction of the Medium-Term Plan. We consider that the most important challenge for mankind remains the alleviation of poverty.
But since this problem is heavily related to the protection of the environment, increasing productivity in agriculture and using the resources rationally must be considered as a package and solutions should be sought with it.
The aim is to provide food self-sufficiency for the world and to assure an adequate distribution of foodstuffs to all people. What will be the amount of the realization rates of the nations in this self-sufficiency? What are the major constraints for the low degree of success? All these have to be identified by' individual countries.
As it is known more than half of the world's population lives in countries which are dependent on agricultural sectors. In order to support their activities trying to increase the quantity and quality for production, it is desired that technical and economical FAO programmes must be more effective.
Mr Chairman, the 6 percent decrease of world wheat production has been estimated in 1991 comparing to the last year.
The latest political and economic reforms and changes in some parts of the world and increasing oil prices owing to the Gulf crisis have resulted in raising cost of agricultural inputs and products. On the other hand the subsidies of developed countries to their agricultural sector have negatively affected the export of developing countries.
Another important challenge is the existing situation of the women in rural areas. In contrast to the important role of the female population in agriculture a woman has no social security and economic freedom. To change this undesirable situation additional works are needed.
Consequently we agree with all activities planned in the FAO Medium-Term Plan. However if the order of the priorities is given to the subjects mentioned to above, it will be more useful to the developing countries.
Mr Chairman, distinguished delegates, I would like to conclude my speech by wishing you success in your efforts.1
V.J. SHAH (Assistant Director General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): Mr Chairman, first may I express through you to the Commission the gratitude of the Secretariat for the consideration that you have given to the Review. The comments have been extremely thoughtful. They stimulate us in the Secretariat to reflect on them and to respond to them.
1 Statement inserted in the Verbatim Records on request.
As always, I shall try to group a number of questions in order to be able to answer as many questions as possible in the limited time available. There are four sets of comments which I would propose to take together because they all deal with the reactions of the Commission tô ways in which this document could be improved in the future. Let me say at the outset that I am greatly encouraged by the whole tone of discussion that you have had this morning, because on the one hand a number of delegations have expressed their satisfaction with the improvements that we have been able to make, and on the other hand a number of representatives have indicated improvements which are still possible to make. Quite frankly - and I say this with my eyes open and looking you in the eyes - if they are intended as criticisms I take them as constructive criticisms. I think that is the spirit in which you would like me to take them.
The first comment in this category is that, when we indicate that there have been changes or cuts in programmes for financial reasons, of course, we must recognize that there are also changes in programmes for other reasons and that we should explain these more to you in the future. I believe that the first delegate to raise this point was the representative of the Netherlands, but it was then taken up by other speakers. Related to that also is the point raised by the Ambassador of Colombia, who wanted to know about the percentage of programmes which were affected by the financial problems. My answer to the first part is that certainly in future versions of the document I think we should develop the analysis further. I can give you one example. As you know, we report to the Council once a year on the meetings which were unscheduled but held and on the meetings which were supposed to be held but which were cancelled. Interested members will find that in that report, where we give the reasons for holding unscheduled meetings or reasons for cancelling meetings, there is a very interesting analysis where a meeting may have been justified in the Programme of Work and Budget but then for a number of reasons, either the action of another organization or the fact that extra-budgetary funds could not be mobilized, or because the same problem was addressed in another way there was no need for the meeting, or there was a need for a meeting which had not been envisaged. I give that as an illustration of the kind of analysis which I think should be possible and which we should try to do in the future.
Responding to the point of the distinguished Ambassador of Colombia, I think it is worth drawing attention to the degree to which the approved programme has been effected and let me do that now even if I do so very quickly. The approved Programme of Work and Budget for this biennium is US$568 million but out of this US$273 million is for the Major Programmes of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. I draw attention to this figure, Mr Chairman, because when there are financial problems, and programmes are affected, bear in mind that the other budgetary chapters are not affected or are affected only to a limited extent.
For example, Chapter I which deals with the Governing Bodies, Policy and Direction there is no margin to cut it or to cut it substantially. Chapter 4, Technical Cooperation Programme, the Director-General preserves that. We do not allow the TCP to be affected by the financial problems. Chapters 5 and 6, support services, common services, we cannot cut those because those are basic overheads of the house. So the programmes which are really affected are the Technical and Economical Programmes. When you think about the magnitude of a financial problem in any one year let us not apply that to the overall budget but to the technical and economical programmes because that is where the bite is essentially.
What is the magnitude for this biennium? I will be able to give you definitive figures only when the biennium closes, of course, but I can give you reasonably good approximations. During this biennium we are being forced to reduce our programme delivery by some US$26-27 million. It is US$27 million over the budgetary revision of US$273 million, roughly 10 percent. That bites hard. I will stop there, Mr Chairman, because surely this is an aspect which may come up also in the Programme of Work and Budget and I do not want to prejudge any discussion you may have.
The next point, about possible future improvements, is the request again of a number of distinguished delegates for expenditure figures in addition to the budgetary provision. I have taken careful note of this, Mr Chairman. May I point out that in Chapter 4 of this Review where we give the information related to performance for agriculture, forestry and fisheries we have given you this information on expenditure for 1990. Of course, we will have to wait for the present year to finish before we can give corresponding information in future documents. The comment was also made in relation to Part Two of the Review which deals with the Sub-programmes and their expenditure over the last three biennia. It was the distinguished representative of Denmark, I believe it was, who first raised this point and I have taken careful note of it in order to try and satisfy that request in the future.
The third aspect of possible future improvements was about milestones to measure targets and that was a point reiterated by the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom. A similar point was also made by the distinguished representative of Switzerland about whether one can analyse the productivity of FAO. I have taken careful note of those requests. Mr Chairman, the milestones to measure targets I understood particularly well because the distinguished delegate was kind enough to give a specific example. I would offer the explanation that yes, we shall do our best to pursue better in the future but I hope that Member Nations will have noted that in the Programme of Work and Budget which has been presented, and which you will be discussing from tomorrow onwards, we have tried to be much more specific than in the past. We will discuss that, of course, tomorrow but I draw attention to that already. The Programme of Work and Budget proposals are much more specific so that in the future when we come to monitoring and assessing the results of that implementation I hope we can be much more specific also in our assessment.
I have a little trouble analysing the suggestion that we should give more information about the productivity of FAO. We can understand well the example given that where there are training courses in a particular field for a number of trainees, the average cost per trainee can be monitored better over a period of time in order to see whether there are gains in efficiency or gains in productivity, but I think we have to bear in mind the nature of our programmes, the nature of our services are such that we are not measuring, shall we say, the ticking of the minutes or the number of watches produced in an hour but a great variety of services which do not lend themselves to comparative statistics of productivity but I take note of the suggestion and have no wish to be negative about it.
The fourth aspect of possible future improvements, Mr Chairman, is the suggestion of the distinguished delegate of the United States of America that reports such as this, while appreciated, could be shorter in the future. It is a question of balance, Mr Chairman, but may I here point out when we think about future versions of the Review of the Regular Programme
the Conference will be considering under the discussion of the Programme of Work and Budget some suggestions which the Director-General has made and which have been very strongly supported by the Programme and Finance Committees. Among those suggestions are the improvements in precisely the documentation such as this and the specific suggestion I now refer to is that in the future it is suggested you do not get just a Review of the Regular Programme and the Review of the Field Programme but you get a Programme Implementation Report and a Programme Evaluation Report, and both of these reports would deal simultaneously with the Regular and Field Programme. I only flag this now because the discussion of this suggestion you will have under the Programme of Work and Budget but I think I detect in the debate this morning receptiveness towards this suggestion. The number of delegations who recognize the linkages between the Regular and Field Programmes is precisely the kind of point which the Secretariat feels and the Director-General feels can be well addressed through the changes in documentation.
Then I deal with five questions which were specific. India, Angola, Switzerland and Libya, their distinguished representatives referred to the Screwworm Eradication Campaign and some asked for an update of the information. The programme began in early February this year and lasted for eight months. During that period 1.3 billion sterile flies were distributed in the infested zone in Libya. The Programme appears to have successfully achieved its objectives. There is no evidence of surviving screwworms which have been found since late April. A further so that in the future when we come to monitoring and assessing period of intensive surveillance will continue until June 1992 and at that point we expect the Government of Libya in that area, we hope, will be able to declare that the country is free of the screwworm.
On the financial aspect there has been a substantial expenditure by Libya of some US$25 million and the Programme has involved US$38 million in international funds. This is less than half of the cost originally envisaged.
The next point is a request from a number of distinguished delegates for information on training activities relating to women and relating to programmes of Women in Development and I am pleased to report, Mr Chairman, that under our work planning procedures my colleagues and I have asked all the technical departments and divisions to analyse their work programme in terms of every element of the work programme which affects women and women in the work programme so that in the future we will be able to report to you on specific activities throughout our Programme of Work which will have been undertaken for the benefit of women in the rural and developing world.
The next point is one raised by the distinguished representative of the United States of America about sustainable development and sustainable resource potentials. This precise question was dealing with the place or the role of the Sub-programme 2.1.1.6, Sustaining Resource Potentials. Let me clarify this is not the only core activity on sustainable agriculture and rural development. In fact all the Sub-programmes under Programme 2.1.1.6, Natural Resources, concentrate on environment, rehabilitation and sustainable use. The particular characteristics of the Sub-programme 2.1.1.6 are that it provides for formal inter-divisional cooperation with a budget contribution from the other agricultural divisions. It provides for demonstration programmes for sustainable farm practices at the farm and field level. It provides for the international
action programme for sustainable agricultural development and it deals with soil policies and climate change. In all cases inputs deal with the technical fields, the farming systems, the institutional changes and the policy guidance.
The next question was on the expenditure involving the financial and personnel management information systems FINSYS and PERSYS and I respond to the question raised by the distinguished representative of Belgium. The Conference will be aware that regular reports have been submitted to the Finance Committee on the implementation of FINSYS/PERSYS but the last such report was in April 1990. I think it is very useful I have this opportunity to provide this up-to-date information. It may be useful to separate the costs of FINSYS and PERSYS firstly into the development costs. The development costs of the system which were based on the use of outside consultants, outside specialist firms, amounted to US$8.3 million. Those were the development costs.
The second aspect of the costs were the implementation costs. These amount to US$2.2 million gross so a total of US$10.5 million. Then the third aspect is the cost of the computer hardware and software and the total, I can only give you a brief estimate, since the hardware and software procured for the Organization are not only for use on fiscal purposes but also for other uses, but the total was US$10 million of which US$7.5 million I would ascribe to fiscal purposes.
The next point I would deal with is with regard to the Technical Cooperation Programme. I have taken careful note of all the comments made on that. I will not try to reply to each one of the comments made because the subject will come up for discussion in the discussion of the Working Budget. At this time I would only like to draw attention to the evaluation of the TCP projects which we provided in the Review of Field Programmes which we will be discussing later.
The tenth point I would address and the last is I had a question from the distinguished representative of the United States of America about the role of Regional Population Advisers. I have information but in the interests of time may I suggest to the delegation of the United States that we give this information directly to them. We have a text of an agreement between the UN Fund for Population Activities and the major specialized agencies including FAO on this subject, which I would be pleased to share with the delegation.
I hope in trying to be brief I have not overlooked anything, and I am once again very grateful to the Commission for the debate that we have had.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr Shah. We have had 28 country statements including the written ones, and I think we have had a very good discussion with a good report as a basis. When the Chairman has to sum up he can do it in a number of ways. My way of doing it is to be very brief. Let me start out by saying that the first four points which Mr Shah raised I consider to be very valuable in the context of the report. What I would like to add is really to stress that in commenting on this Review the important thing is how to make it better in future and I think a number of good comments have been made on that, but basically we should not forget what was said on my right that the Review should, if anything, be short, not lengthy.
The other point I would make, which is a point we will get back to later on, not once but several times, is the need which has been stressed in the report of better cooperation inside the FAO Secretariat. You have gone a long way during the past few years and with other international organizations. Many of the subjects with which we are dealing, which are priority subjects, can only be solved if you cooperate with other organizations.
I think these are the main points. I could mention more but I think it should be brief.
C.B HOUTMAN (Netherlands): Just on the last remark, Mr Shah said he was going to communicate bilaterally with the United States. I think the subject is quite interesting and possibly there are other delegates who would like to have this information.
CHAIRMAN: That can surely be managed. We meet again at 2.30 pm and start on the next item.
The meeting rose at 13.00 hours.
La séance est levée à 13 heures.
Se levanta la sesión a las 13.00 horas.
