One means of measuring political commitment is the development of strategies, programmes and action plans on sustainable development (SD), or elements of it, at the regional and national level. These include the launch of eg Five Year Plans by Governments. Those measurements should include identifying new policies implemented and existing ones reformed to deliver enhanced environmental and social outcomes.

Political commitment can also be measured by the level of improved governance, establishment of inter-ministerial committees for SD, by promotion of participatory approach and by opening up to multi-stakeholders dialogues. To this one could add transparency and reporting results on an ongoing basis.

Operationally, commitment is reflected in the level of budgetary allocation for action in advance of sustainable development. This needs to be accompanied by appropriate regulatory and financing measures, that facilitate the flows of investment to action-oriented programmes started as part of national development plans. This aspect confirms the importance of involving finance and economic planning ministries along with technical ministries.

Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) can be taken as an example. Commitment to CP was demonstrated at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992, where principle 8 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development affirmed that ?to achieve sustainable development and a higher quality of life for all people, states should reduce and eliminate unsustainable patterns of production and consumption and promote appropriate demographic policies?. Further, at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002, the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI) called to ?encourage and promote the development of a 10-Year Framework of Programmes in support of regional and national initiatives to accelerate the shift towards sustainable consumption and production.?

Since these two major summits, political commitment as regards SCP has continually and steadily increased. At the regional level, this has been apparent in all regions. The Latin American and Caribbean Regional SCP Strategy was endorsed by the Forum of Environmental Ministers of Latin America and the Caribbean in 2003. Likewise, a Regional Council of Government Experts on SCP has been set up to promote and support the implementation of policies and strategy. The African 10-Year Framework of Programmes on SCP was launched in Addis Ababa, in May, 2006, with the support of the African Union, the African Ministerial Conference on Environment, the New Partnership for Africa's Development, the UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA), UNEP and UNDESA. The Arab Regional Strategy on SCP was launched in Cairo, Egypt, in September, 2009, and was supported by the League of Arab States, the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia and UNEP. The Council of Arab Ministers Responsible for the Environment (CAMRE), during the XXth session in 2009, approved the SCP strategy, and agreed to hold a regional roundtable on SCP at regular intervals, with each focusing on one the priorities identified in the Strategy.

Within the European Union, an action plan on SCP and sustainable industrial policy was endorsed by governments in late 2008. The governments of US and Canada held a regional consultation in November, 2008 In Asia and the Pacific, UNESCAP?s Strategy on Green Growth encompasses sustainable consumption and production, and has become a vehicle for SCP work in the region, with the five main tracks of green tax and budget reform, sustainable infrastructure, sustainable consumption, green business, and ecological efficiency indicators.

In terms of national initiatives, a large number of countries have developed national SCP programmes or have mainstreamed SCP in national development strategies. However, the extent to which these strategies and policies have been implemented varies substantially, and in many cases is limited.

UNEP developed the Guidelines for planning, developing, implementing and monitoring National SCP Programmes: Planning for Change and an online Clearing House of SCP programmes in 2005(see www.unep.fr/scp/nap/) and assisted in the elaboration of national SCP programmes or the mainstreaming of SCP in national development strategies in Mauritius, Senegal, Indonesia, Tanzania, Egypt, Mozambique, Colombia, Brazil, Ecuador, Kazakhstan, Croatia, Cote d?Ivoire, Mali, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Uganda, Zambia, St Lucia and Dominica; and at city level in Maputo, Mozambique, and Cairo, Egypt. The Online Clearing House identified more than 30 countries (including the Czech Republic, Finland, UK, Ethiopia, Senegal, Argentina, Jamaica and Thailand) that had developed or were developing national programmes on SCP. This number is steadily increasing.

The Marrakech Process (see www.unep.fr/scp/marrakech/), a global and informal multi-stakeholder process jointly led by UNEP and UNDESA, has facilitated international, regional and national dialogue and cooperation on SCP issues among representatives of all levels of government, major groups, UN agencies, and other stakeholders. The Process provides a global platform for SCP knowledge and experience sharing, and has made substantial progress supporting the implementation of SCP policies and measures. The Marrakech Process has supported the establishment of regional roundtables and regional consultations on SCP in all regions, and national roundtables on sustainable consumption and production in Brazil, China, India, and South Africa (with a Mexican Roundtables due to take place in November 2010). UNEP and the Marrakech Process have also assisted the elaboration of national SCP programmes and in mainstreaming SCP in national development strategies in a number of countries, and also conducted regional and national workshops on SCP programmes in Latin America and the Caribbean, South Asia, and Africa.

UNEP developed the Guidelines for planning, developing, implementing and monitoring National SCP Programmes: Planning for Change and an online Clearing House of SCP programmes in 2005(see www.unep.fr/scp/nap/) and assisted in the elaboration of national SCP programmes or the mainstreaming of SCP in national development strategies in Mauritius, Senegal, Indonesia, Tanzania, Egypt, Mozambique, Colombia, Brazil, Ecuador, Kazakhstan, Croatia, Cote d?Ivoire, Mali, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Uganda, Zambia, St Lucia and Dominica; and at city level in Maputo, Mozambique, and Cairo, Egypt. The Online Clearing House identified more than 30 countries (including the Czech Republic, Finland, UK, Ethiopia, Senegal, Argentina, Jamaica and Thailand) that had developed or were developing national programmes on SCP. This number is steadily increasing.

The Marrakech Process (see www.unep.fr/scp/marrakech/), a global and informal multi-stakeholder process jointly led by UNEP and UNDESA, has facilitated international, regional and national dialogue and cooperation on SCP issues among representatives of all levels of government, major groups, UN agencies, and other stakeholders. The Process provides a global platform for SCP knowledge and experience sharing, and has made substantial progress supporting the implementation of SCP policies and measures. The Marrakech Process has supported the establishment of regional roundtables and regional consultations on SCP in all regions, and national roundtables on sustainable consumption and production in Brazil, China, India, and South Africa (with a Mexican Roundtables due to take place in November 2010). UNEP and the Marrakech Process have also assisted the elaboration of national SCP programmes and in mainstreaming SCP in national development strategies in a number of countries, and also conducted regional and national workshops on SCP programmes in Latin America and the Caribbean, South Asia, and Africa.

Energy, its efficient use and renewables, has been an obvious area of political focus due to the climate negotiations. UNEP?s Global Trends in Sustainable Energy Investment 2010 and REN21 Renewables 2010 Global Status Report have shown growing investment in renewable energy over the last ten years. In 2009, for the second year in a row, both the US and Europe added more power capacity from renewable sources such as wind and solar than conventional sources like coal, gas and nuclear. Water is also receiving increasing attention because of increased water stress in various regions in the world, irrigation system challenges and more efficient water distribution systems in cities and between industries. This has been confirmed at the World Water Forum in Turkey and the Stockholm Water Weeks, attended by delegates from all regions.

National level commitments has often shown the strongest at the level of cities and local authorities, taking the form of new transport infrastructure and environmental services such as water and waste management. The joint UN-HABITAT ? UNEP Sustainable Cities Programme is promoting environmental, social and economic sustainability of cities through an Environmental Planning and Management (EPM) approach which is characterized by a broad-based, participatory decision-making process.

The success story of the Vienna Convention and Montreal Protocol since the 1980s in combating ozone layer depletion shows the advantage of having a problem that global yet less complex and for which industry has had technological solutions available. The support of key industries and stakeholder groups, as well as a sense in the public of being directly affected by its health implications, has all helped to raise awareness and mobilise action with regulatory standards and market-based tools (including ozone friendly labelling). Its experience of targeting different sources step-by-step and providing grace periods for action by different categories of countries has provided important insight. It inclusion of possible trade measures and settlement of claims about lack of compliance has provided important lessons for other conventions and environmental regimes to follow. Its network of focal points in government ministries world-wide has been key in ensuring continual improvement in phasing out the production and use of ODSs in different countries and industry sectors. UNEP and other implementing agencies have been active in supporting this. (see www.unep.fr/ozonaction/)

UNEP?s priority areas are defined in its medium-term strategy for 2010-2013. UNEP will therefore continue to focus its efforts during the biennium 2012-2013 on the six cross-cutting thematic priorities, namely: climate change, disasters and conflicts, ecosystem management, environmental governance, harmful substances and hazardous waste, and resource efficiency - sustainable consumption and production (RE-SCP).

The expectation is for major reforms to improve the convergence and integration of the three pillars sustainable development as well as complimentary strengthening of the individual pillar for the environment.

Unlike the traditional vision of sustainable development and its three pillars, where the goal is to integrate the environmental and social dimensions into economic development, UNEP?s approach is to demonstrate that natural capital (the environmental pillar) is a pre-requisite for social and economic development.

A focus on convergence and integration of the three pillars should be accompanied by the strengthening of the individual pillar and in particular the environment where discussions on the international institutional architecture need to be concluded and transformed into concrete action.

Long-term assessments on progress and the state of the global environment can be found in the UNEP Global Environmental Outlook Reports (GEO ? see //www.unep.org/geo/). Major threats to the planet such as climate change, the rate of extinction of species, and the challenge of feeding a growing population are among the many that remain unresolved, and all of them put humanity at risk. This warning came from UNEP?s Global Environment Outlook: environment for development (GEO-4) report published in 2007 - 20 years after the World Commission on Environment and Development (the Brundtland Commission) produced its seminal report, Our Common Future. GEO-4, the latest in the UNEP series of flagship reports, assessed the current state of the global atmosphere, land, water and biodiversity, described the changes since 1987, and identified priorities for action. GEO-4 was the most comprehensive UN report on the environment, prepared by about 390 experts and reviewed by more than 1 000 others across the world.

Building on the GEO research, the UNEP Yearbooks provide annual progress reports. Focused on climate change, the 2010 report highlighted opportunities associated with Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD), which gained political support in the climate negotiations. REDD, which involves supporting developing countries to conserve rather than clear tropical forests, could make an important contribution not only to combating climate change but also to overcoming poverty and to a successful UN International Year of Biodiversity (2010). The Year Book estimated that investing $22 billion - $29 billion in REDD could cut global deforestation by 25 per cent by 2015.

UNEP has facilitated reportback by business & industry on how it implements Agenda 21 by 2002 and 2007: For WSSD 2002: see the industry reports online at http://www.unep.fr/scp/csd/wssd/home.htm , For WSSD / Johannesburg +5 at CSD14/15 (2006), see the report at: http://www.unep.fr/scp/csd/csd/

Despite the fact that progress on the whole has not been sufficient to reverse the negative trends, the industry Report Cards published by UNEP in 2006 were a powerful reminder of the huge potential of industry to contribute to sustainable development. Whether in terms of helping build consumer awareness of the issue (e.g. the Advertising Sector), generate the necessary finance and investment (e.g. the Finance Sector), develop the necessary environmentally sound and socially acceptable technologies (e.g. renewable energy), or providing the jobs, mobility and economic growth, industry has a central role to play.

The fifth Global Environment Outlook (GEO-5) report is currently under development and is directly responding to an intergovernmental mandate from UNEP?s Governing Council (UNEP GC Decision 25/2).

To date the following milestones for the development of the GEO-5 report have been met:

1. Nominations and selection of global experts for GEO-5 has taken place.
2. The High-Level Intergovernmental Advisory Panel has been established.
3. The Science & Policy Advisory Panel has been established.
4. The Data & Indicators Working Group has been established.
5. The 1st Meeting of the High-Level Intergovernmental Advisory Panel was held from June 28-30 2010 Switzerland and agreed on a set of internationally agreed goals in order to track progress towards and gaps in meeting them as well as acting as reference points throughout GEO-5.
6. Regional Consultations took place to identify environmental challenges and goals (see below for further details).
7. Nominations and selection of regional experts for GEO-5 took place (based on the priority environmental challenges).
8. Currently UNEP is drafting the GEO-5 outreach strategy and communication plan.
9. The 1st Production Meeting is scheduled to take place in Cairo, Egypt from 8 to 11 November 2010 to agree on the annotated chapter outlines.

FINDINGS OF THE GEO-5 REGIONAL CONSULTATIONS

Regional Consultations for Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, North America, Europe and West Asia took place between August ? October 2010 and were tasked to:

(i) Identify what are the major and highest-priority environmental challenges and challenges faced by their respective regions at this time and in coming years, taking into consideration the overall environmental situation, including state and trends, and sub-regional differences;
(ii) Select related internationally agreed environmental goals, which need to be addressed through improved environmental policies and their effective implementation, now and in the near future.
(iii) Identify existing environmental policies available (within and outside of the region), that have the potential to help accelerate realisation of the selected goals.
(iv) Identify policy gaps along with promising policies that show effectiveness in addressing the challenges.

The following highest priority environmental challenges were identified, including their respective internationally agreed goal(s).

Highest priority environmental issue No. of Regions which selected these challenges Selection of related internationally agreed goal(s)
Freshwater 6 ? JPOI para 26(c)
? UN Millennium Declaration, GA Res 55/2 para 23

Biodiversity 4 ? CBD Articles 1, 10
Climate Change 4
? UNFCCC Articles 2, 3 para 1-3
Environmental Governance 4 ? Johannesburg Declaration on SD para 5
? JPOI para 40(b)
? Nusa Dua Declaration ? green economy
Land Use and Land Degradation 4 ? UNCCD Article 2
? JPOI para 40(b)
Oceans and Seas 3 ? UN Convention on the Law of the Sea Article 192
? Jakarta Mandate of CBD
? JPOI para 30(a)
Energy 2 ? JPOI Para 20(e)
? 2005 World Summit Outcome, GA Res 60/1 para 55(a)

Chemicals and Waste 2 ? JPOI para 23
Air pollution 1 ? Agenda 21 Chapter 9 Para 27

PROPOSED FINDINGS OF THE GEO-5

The GEO-5 report will be undertaking assessment working relating to the following
a. Review the literature of existing policy approaches, institutional arrangements and capacities for environmental and natural resources management available globally that could have a significant impact on achieving selected goals.
b. Review and assess case studies of policy options that incorporate environmental, social and economic data and information that have facilitated and/or have the potential to facilitate speeding up achievement of internationally agreed goals by providing their indicative costs and benefits for each region, taking into account in the analysis, regional diversity, cross-regional commonalities and build on existing regional and national processes to avoid duplication.
c. A review of existing scenarios and a potential challenge scenario to help meet internationally agreed goals and what can be achieved at the global level.

The fourth Global Environment Outlook (GEO-4) highlighted the following environmental challenges by region.

Region Key regional priority issues selected for GEO-4
Africa Land degradation and its cross-cutting impacts on forests, freshwater, marine and coastal resources, as well as pressures such as drought, climate variability and change, and urbanization
Asia and the Pacific Transport and urban air quality, freshwater stress, valuable ecosystems, agricultural land use, and waste management
Europe Climate change and energy, unsustainable production and consumption, air quality and transport, biodiversity loss and land-use change, and freshwater stress
Latin America and the Caribbean Growing cities, biodiversity and ecosystem threats, degrading coasts and polluted seas, and regional vulnerability to climate change
North America Energy and climate change, urban sprawl and freshwater stress
West Asia Freshwater stress, land degradation, degrading coasts and marine ecosystems, urban management, and peace and security

The fifth Global Environment Outlook (GEO-5) highlighted renewed priority environmental challenges and these can be found on the GEO website (http://www.unep.org/geo/GEO_Meetings.asp).

NEXT KEY MILESTONES

1. Develop drafts of the GEO-5 report
2. Undertake expert and government peer review
3. 2nd Production Meeting
4. Finalise the GEO-5 report and author sign off
5. Develop the GEO-5 Summary for Policy Makers
6. Intergovernmental consultation to ?negotiate and endorse? the Summary for Policy Makers
7. Production of final GEO-5 report
8. Outreach and communication of GEO-5 findings
9. Capacity building

UNEP supported the development of a number of national development strategies including, NSDS, PRSP, NEAPs.

UNEP has developed a manual on Mainstreaming Sustainable Consumption and Production and Resource Efficiency in Development Planning in 2009 in order to provide countries with support in integrating SCP approaches and tools into policies and strategies, thereby ensuring SCP is considered at all levels of development planning. UNEP is currently providing advisory services and building capacity on mainstreaming SCP in national development policies in (among others): Mali, Burkina Faso, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, St Lucia, Cote d?Ivoire, Brazil, Kazakhstan, Croatia, Uganda, Zambia, Bhutan, Vietnam, Laos, Ghana, Dominica.

UNEP and UNDP have also developed a partnership on integration of sound management of chemicals into national development policies such as PRSPs. The integration requires a close consultative process between the line ministries and the ministries of finance and planning.

UNEP and UNDP have cooperated under the Poverty and Environment Initiative to mainstream environment in national poverty reduction and economic development strategies in countries in Africa, LAC and Asia Pacific (http://www.unpei.org/).

UNEP assists countries in the preparation of post-conflict environmental assessments, post-conflict environmental recovery, environmental cooperation and disaster risk reduction services. The support ranges from one-off environmental assessments to long-term, in-country support, such as capacity building of ministries, mainstreaming of environment and integrated water resources management, etc. with country presence. UNEP currently supports seven countries, in two of which it maintains country offices.

UNEP also supports UNDG?s efforts to mainstream environmental sustainability in the UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF).

Since the 1990s, UNEP has partnered with key industries in developing international voluntary initiatives and partnerships. These included partnership activities with industry sectors such as finance, information and telecommunications technology, advertising and communications, tourism, automotive manufacturing, mining, oil and gas, and retail industry. A more recent addition was the UNEP Sustainable Building and Construction Initiative (SBCI), launched in 2006. The SBCI has published a range of materials on buildings and climate, contributed to the climate negotiations and worked with green building councils and others to develop a sustainable buildings index and common metrics for measuring and reporting on building energy efficiency. UNEP?s work with the tourism industry and partners such as the UN-WTO and UNESCO has more recently resulted in the launch of the Global Partnership for Sustainable Tourism, which is benefitted from the work of the Marrakech Task Force on sustainable tourism that was chaired by France.

The aim with UNEP industry partnerships has always been to involve a group of leading companies in a collective effort to address common challenges and do demand driven projects that demonstrate corporate commitment to sustainable development in the field. UNEP is currently developing new partnerships with the agrifood as well as the mining and metals industries. A historical example of its approach has been the Global e-Sustainability Initiative (GeSI), where ICT companies developed a suppliers? sustainability questionnaire for common usage in their industry and supported by a shared, web-based data gathering system. This has become a market-based tool that facilitates the sharing and tracing of social responsibility and environmental performance information.

Promoting voluntary initiatives and partnership also involved joining fellow international organisations and UN agencies in joint projects. A notable example has been the UN Global Compact. Following the joint launch of responsible investment reports at the Global Compact Leaders Summit in 2004, the UNEP Finance Initiative (UNEP FI) and the Global Compact Office worked jointly in developing the Principles for Responsible Investment (UN-PRI) initiative. This resulted in some of the world?s largest pension funds committing themselves to agreed PRI, launched at the New York Stock Exchange. At its Global Roundtables, UNEP FI involves financial professionals in discussing new developments in its work activities, including asset management, climate change, biodiversity, sustainability reporting and micro-finance.

In the area of oil & gas industries, UNEP?s Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles was launched at the WSSD in Johannesburg in 2002. There are over 90 partners in the PCFV, which include Governments, Civil Societies, International Organisations and Institutions of Higher learning. The Partnership aims to support developing countries in their efforts to improve fuel and vehicle technologies that reduce air pollution. The Partnership builds on current trends and efforts in the development of fuel and vehicle technologies. Worldwide, 90% of the gasoline produced is unleaded. Australia, Canada, South Africa, many European countries took a slow phase-out approach to eliminating leaded gasoline. However, it is possible and preferable to completely replace leaded with unleaded gasoline in a very short period of time. This approach has been taken in the last ten years by an increasing number of countries and is considered the most cost effective approach and the quickest way to bring airborne lead levels from the transport sector to near zero. This approach was taken by, inter alia, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Mauritania, Mauritius, Vietnam, and the Central American countries. Thus, experience has shown that governments of all sizes and capabilities can successfully develop and execute a programme to eliminate lead in gasoline and achieve significant health and environmental benefits.

?Q MDGs
?Q Water
?Q Energy
?Q Health
?Q Agriculture
?Q Biodiversity
?Q Forests
?Q Climate change
?Q Jobs creation
?Q Other (please specify)_Cleaner Production (eco-efficiency)____________

In the field of energy, technical assistance has been key in linking technological considerations with financing considerations. This included the use of intermediaries to link public and private sector financing. UNEP's Rural Energy Enterprise Development Programme (REED) has for some years now offered enterprise development services and start-up financing to 'clean energy' enterprises in developing countries. The UNEP and UNEP Risoe Centre on Energy and Environment have also started an effort with the World Bank's Energy Efficiency and Environment Thematic Group to conduct in country investigations and preparation for project work on helping developing countries overcome barriers hindering loans for energy efficiency. (see www.unep.fr/energy/activities/)

Sustainable production methods, practices and techniques are recognized as the way to achieve a sustainable industrial society and contribute to a Green Economy. For over 15 years, UNEP and the United Nations lndustrial Development Organization (UNIDO) have supported the provision of provide technical assistance to establish national capacities and demonstrate the potential of preventive environmental strategies in developing countries. Building on previous efforts, the UNIDO and UNEP joint Resource Efficient and Cleaner Production programme has resulted in more than 50 National Cleaner Production Centers (NCPCs) and programmes established worldwide; technical tools and training manuals produced, technical demonstration projects carried out; preventive policies integrated at the national level, national and industrial experts trained; and regional roundtables and networks of NCPCs established and promoted in Africa, Asia and Latin America. The UNEP/UNIDO NCPCs contribute to more productive use of natural resources (energy, water and materials), reductions in waste and emissions (including greenhouse gases) and reductions of risks to workers, communities and consumers. (see www.unep.fr/scp/cp/)

UNEP also uses its work with business and industry partners to provide technical assistance in issue specific areas such as water accounting and green jobs creation. The UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative has a network of research and industry experts that develops guidance and capacity building materials on the use of life cycle management tools. The initiative has collaborated recently with the CEO Water Mandate and Water Footprinting Network to analyse new approaches in water footprinting. New activities seek to improve the reliability of methodologies employed, and working with volunteer companies to pilot test water accounting with business partners in developing countries. In the area of employment, safer production and decent work, UNEP has collaborated with the ILO, ITUC and IOE in hosting the WILL2006 Labour and Environment Assembly at UNEP headquarters. This event has led to the publication by UNEP, ILO and others of the widely recognised Green Jobs Report in 2008. This paved the way for further research conducted under the Green Economy Initiative today.

While a large number of various SCP initiatives are underway in different regions and countries, these need to be scaled up and replicated. The 2010/2011 implementation cycle of the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) has as one of its main themes the Ten Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production (10 YFP), called for by the JPOI, and for which the Marrakech Process has been developing inputs over the past few years through regional expert meetings and consultations. Delegations at the 18th session of the CSD in May 2010 noted that actions are often fragmented, resulting in lack of coherence in policy instruments and missed opportunities to realize synergies. The 10-year Framework of Programmes could support existing initiatives, giving them impetus, incentives, direction and cohesion. It could also strengthen cooperation and coordination among existing and new initiatives, and foster partnerships between the wide range of actors carrying out SCP initiatives. The Framework could provide a platform for wide sharing of experiences, lessons learned, best practices and knowledge at multiple levels, and allow for replications and scaling up of successful initiatives. It can include the mobilization of targeted capacity building to improve the ability of public and private institutions in all regions to improve their collection and interpretation of relevant data. The 10YFP is therefore an ideal opportunity to deliver change and accelerate the shift to SCP.

There is a language barrier between technical ministries, such as health and environment and the ministries. This relates in part to officials coming from different discipline backgrounds. A related complication is the lack of relevant data and capacity to interpret relevant data, including integrated indicators that do not treat the three pillars of SD in isolation.

In most countries, another difficulty relates to the relative weakness of Environment Ministries. This is also reflected in their allocation of national budgets. Key is therefore to involve other Ministries with environmental authorities, including ministries of finance, commerce and planning.

Actions include better use of communications tools to raise awareness, including use of self-regulatory tools such as standards and accountability reporting tools such as sustainability reporting based on use of the GRI Guidelines. UNEP?s analysis of the 2006 Report Cards identified the following issues that warrant further consideration by industry groups, public institutions and civil society stakeholders.

A) Building capacity to share and implement best-practices:

The challenge of sustainable development is one that requires a global response. While innovation and development of new business practices, technologies and production processes will always be an important component of industry?s contribution to sustainable development, a significant amount could also be achieved if more companies implemented the best-practices and used the technology and guidance that is already available. A follow-up process could consider how industry, government, labour and other civil society stakeholders can best work with sector-based industry groups to build their capacity to share information on, and to provide support for, the implementation of best-practices in developing countries and by SMEs. Possible options could include a ?twinning system? for providing support to business and industry organisations from industrialising regions through staff exchanges, training and sponsoring participation in international forums.

B. Setting common priorities and action-plans:

The nature of certain sustainable development challenges is such that, in the absence of coordinated action, the efforts of a few companies will have little real impact on resolving the problem. As a result, if companies coordinate their activities and work together to address common problems the net impact may be substantially greater. What is unclear, however, is the extent to which the marketplace encourages or discourages cooperation between what are, in effect, competitors. Many sector-based industry groups already set common priorities and develop joint action plans on key issues. It would be worthwhile to consider whether this practice could be improved, including by linking them with international priorities. Accountable reporting against targets included in action plans will remain key, as promoted by indicators included in the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Guidelines.

C. Cooperation and integration between sectors:

No company exists in isolation from other companies, including from companies in other sectors. Be it through supply-chain relationships, shared technology or common standards, companies interact with other sectors every day. It would be important to consider how more intra-sectoral cooperation could help facilitate the transmission of experience and learning. Certain environmental, social and economic challenges can only be resolved through cross-sectoral cooperation. For instance, the promotion of sustainable mobility will require cooperation between road transport, railways, public (urban) transport, aviation and shipping. It will also require cooperation between public transport bodies and private suppliers.

D. Identifying how other stakeholders can help to build the economic and business case:

The economic and business case for sustainable development is not static: it changes in response to, among other things, changing regulations and public policies, consumer preferences, NGO expectations, labour priorities and supply chain requirements. Maximizing the effectiveness of voluntary measures to promote sustainable development requires a maximization of the business case. It could be worthwhile to analyze in greater detail the components that determine the scope of the business case, and to enter into partnerships with other stakeholders to seek to maximize it. In particular, it would be useful to consider how governments can exert their impact on the market in a way that is more supportive of sustainable consumption and production, for example through the use of public procurement policies.

The Rio agenda will succeed only of there is a continued willingness of business and industry, including labour, as well as other stakeholder organisations, to undertake joint partnerships to speed up implementation of key sustainable development goals. Progress in the development of Framework Agreements between large corporations and Global Union Federations, is one innovative example in building partnership cooperation to address not only labour but also broader sustainable development issues. The willingness of unions to introduce environmental - along with health and safety - principles in these agreements shows greater awareness of the business case at the workplace level. Progress at this level forms an essential part of advancing social responsibility as defined in the new ISO 26000 standard.

We need to underline the role of natural capital and the natural resource base as a foundation and driver for sustainable economic growth and sustainable development.

Key emerging challenges include the following:
?« Climate change, as new evidence has emerged to suggest that the danger is a more imminent one than previously thought
?« Rising water scarcity and increased desertification
?« Food crisis, caused by the rapid escalation of food prices
?« Degradation of ecosystems services, as a result of inefficient and wasteful patterns of consumption and production leading to the waste society in increasingly urbanising communities.
?« The change of production and use of chemicals from developed to developing countries without increasing the capacity of developing countries to manage the chemicals, adding to the risks associated also with the use of hazardous substances and wastes.
?« Reductionist approaches: e.g. carbon footprinting versus comprehensive sustainability assessment which leads to burden shifting and unbalanced assessments.

UNEP has put in place a process for identifying emerging issues through a science consultations process. A selection of emerging environmental issues is presented every year as part of the UNEP Year Book (www.unep.org/yearbook), an annual report that aim at raising awareness of emerging issues from scientific sources and others. The following issues that may have significant implications for sustainable development over the next decade are currently being developed: Plastic debris in the ocean; Phosphorus and food production; Threats to forest biodiversity. Other emerging issue that have been considered in the process include electronic waste and emerging energy technologies. The next Year Book will be launched in February 2011 at the UNEP Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum in Nairobi, prior to the 3rd PrepCom. The 2012 edition will be prepared with the specific focus to inform Rio +20.

UNEP is currently developing a biennial foresight process with the office of the Chief Scientists to inform its programme of work, major fora, and other agencies in the UN-system. The outcomes of this process will feed into the development of products such as the UNEP Year Book and targeted publications.

In addition, a Global Environmental Alert Service is set up to inform various target audiences and the public at large of emerging environmental issues on a regular basis.

Finally, UNEP hosts the secretariat of the Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel of the GEF (STAP). STAP has convened a number of meetings and commissioned work through its panel members on emerging environmental issues, such as the interaction between nitrogen, climate change and other factors in coastal zones.

Taking sustainable waste management as example, UNEP?s waste programme focuses on capacity building and support for technology identification, assessment and implementation at national/local level and is built around three main areas: (i) Waste minimization and prevention, (ii) Maximizing resource recovery through Integrated Solid Waste Management including effective management of remaining solid and hazardous waste, (iii) Management of specific waste streams.

Waste minimization and prevention is promoted especially in the private sector through cleaner production and life cycle management of materials and products. UNEP and UNIDO have recently developed a Joint Programme on Resource Efficient and Cleaner Production in Developing and Transition Economies with a purpose of up-scaling and expanding the coverage of the technical support services. UNEP has set up with the Life Cycle Initiative with the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) to enhance global consensus of existing and emerging methodologies for life cycle based approaches based on sound science and to facilitate the use of life cycle approaches by encouraging life-cycle based decisions in business, government and the general public about natural resources, materials and key products.

UNEP has developed the Integrated Solid Waste Management Approach, which focuses on the ?3Rs? (reducing, reusing and recycling) that have been promoted by Governments such as that of Japan. UNEP has carried out demonstration projects and assisted local governments in various countries, including Brazil, China, India, Lesotho, Kenya and Sri Lanka to develop integrated waste management plans, with encouraging results. Current projects have shown that as much as 70 percent of waste could be diverted from landfill and simultaneously generate valuable resources, create jobs, and avoid tens of thousands of tons of GHG emissions each year. Demonstration projects are also being carried out for management of specific waste streams, such as E-waste management in Cambodia, converting waste plastics into fuel in India, Thailand and the Philippines, and Converting waste agricultural biomass into a resource in Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines and Sri Lanka.

UNEP has developed several guidelines, manuals, training packages and technology compendiums (available on-line) for its three main areas of its waste programme and has delivered training programmes and capability activities for the Africa, Asia-Pacific, Latin America-Caribbean and West Asia regions. UNEP is working towards establishing a Global Platform on Waste Management. This Partnership will be a platform for international agencies, governments and various organizations including inter-governmental, public-private, and non-governmental forums. There will be three major activity areas: Information Clearinghouse to collect and disseminate knowledge and to support other four areas, Policy Dialogues at international and national level among various stakeholders including MEA/GC/COP and CSD on range of issues related with waste management, and Partnerships to strengthen cooperation among all stakeholders (private sector, civil society, governments).

UNEP maintains a dataportal where environmental indicators are updated on a regular basis. The socio-economic and environmental indicators support UNEP?s assessment work on keeping under review the state of the environment. The 2011 Year Book will present a snapshot of our changing environment by presenting a set of key indicators.

With respect to methodologies and integrated indicators used for measurement and reporting, UNEP is engaged in a number of activities aiming at reconciliation and convergence of approaches and methodologies. The main target for the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative is to put life cycle approach into practice and enhance the global consensus on existing and emerging life cycle methodologies. The Carbon footprinting project is to ensure the ongoing standardization efforts for carbon footprint methodologies in cooperation with international standardization projects such as WBCSD/WRI and ISO. In the area of water footprinting, UNEP is engaged in stocktaking exercise to clarify commonalities and differences among existing and emerging water accounting methods and tools being used in the private sector.
The UNEP Sustainable Building and Climate Initiative has the mission to develop a common definition of sustainable buildings and propose an index of common metric based on lifecycle approach to be used to report on progress made in addressing key building related sustainability issues. The UNEP publication ?Communication of Lifecycle Information in the Building and Energy Sectors? is based on the outcomes of the Task Force on Communication of Lifecycle Initiative. It provides a comprehensive overview of the state of the art in Environmental Product Information Systems in the construction and energy sectors. In particular, it contains information on type III ecolabelling, including an updated discussion of the main existing programmes in this field world-wide.
The Tourism Sustainability Council aims to foster the increased knowledge and understanding of sustainable tourism practices, promoting the adoption of Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria. To develop these criteria, in all more than 4,500 criteria from more than 60 existing certification and voluntary sets of criteria were reviewed and analyzed. The resulting criteria have been consulted with over 2500 stakeholders. One of the TSC?s objectives is to accredit certification programs using the GSTC as the basis for sustainable tourism standards, and also to ensure conformity with internationally accepted guidelines such as ISO, ISEAL.

UNEP has developed extensive scientific work on emerging challenges (as listed above) and is committed to support Member States in this discussion.

UNEP has already been working to enhance many of the above mentioned success factors, in a number of areas. This includes its scientific and macro-economic assessment work related to for example resource use, ecosystem services and macro-economic trends.

UNEP resource Panel and Green Economy Initiative serve to strengthen the link between scientific analysis and policy development. Science-Policy interface is at the core of UNEP?s work. The IPCC is a clear example of the importance and how the interface can be strengthened and made effective. The IPBES is also a promising platform to link science on biodiversity and ecosystem services to policy making.

The above emerging challenges clearly pose a risk to development, particularly from the perspective of sustainable development.

As extensively documented, the poor are the most impacted by lack of implementation of sustainable development strategies, in particular those without proper consideration of the environmental dimension of development.

The following working definition is being used: a Green Economy is one that results in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities. (see www.unep.org/greeneconomy/)

This definition builds on a conceptual framing presented in a background paper for the ministerial consultations of the 11th special session of the Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum (February 2010), as per document UNEP/GCSS.XI/10/Add.1.

Growth in a green economy is understood to be increasingly driven by investment in greening economic sectors. The most relevant indicator is the share of the ?greened? segments of these sectors, for instance renewables in total energy, in GDP overtime.

The focus on investment policies and policy reforms to drive and enable investment recognizes that increasing the share of the greened segments in the economy is a strategy to improve the environment and this growth path is only of interest if it also contributes to equity and poverty eradication.

While green economy is a relatively new concept, UNEP already has vast experience in promoting a number of policies that are also considered to be ?green economy? policies under its activities in the field of Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP).

- A green economy is characterized by substantially increased investments in green sectors, supported by enabling policy reforms. These investments, both public and private, provide the mechanism for the reconfiguration of businesses, infrastructure and institutions, and the adoption of sustainable consumption and production processes. Such reconfiguration leads to a higher share of green sectors in GDP, more and decent green jobs, lower energy and materials intensities of production, lower waste and pollution, and much lower greenhouse gas emissions.

A green economy sets new priorities for macroeconomic policy, with growth being generated by economic sectors that are critical or highly material for greening the global economy. A portfolio of fiscal, regulatory and information-based policy measures will likely be required to promote an effective and fair transition to a green economy. Such a portfolio will need to be carefully coordinated to ensure measures are complementary and neither counteract each other nor generate unintended consequences.

Fiscal policy plays a critical role in a green economy. The means by which tax revenues are generated has a fundamental effect on the structure of incentives facing businesses and households, in both consumption and investment decisions. Secondly, how government spends these revenues not only on recurrent costs, but also investments in public infrastructure or supporting technology development, plays a critical role in shaping the path of economic development.

Effective policy implementation requires cooperation across different parts of government, particularly finance and environment departments. Building relevant administrative capacity, for example in environment as well as customs and revenue agencies, is also likely to be an important dimension, particularly in developing countries. A well-designed set of indicators can help assess interactions between the environment and the economy, and evaluate progress towards a green economy.

- Delivering robust and fair economic growth is essential, particularly given the critical and urgent priority of poverty reduction and economic development in low-income countries.

A green economy implies realizing growth and employment opportunities from less polluting and more resource efficient activities, including in energy, water, waste, buildings, agriculture and forests; and managing related structural changes such as potentially adverse effects on vulnerable households and traditional economic sectors. The concept of a GE, and its policy implications, will apply differently across countries, reflecting national circumstances and priorities. However, for developing countries in particular, widespread opportunities exist to strengthen economic development, including poverty reduction as well as food and water security in developing countries, through improved environmental and natural resource management.
The recent UNEP publication ?A Brief for Policymakers on the Green Economy and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)? (2010) shows numerous cases where green strategies are paying multiple dividends in respect to the eight MDGs. The report underlines that the environmental goods and services that underpin the global economy - and in particular the GDP of the poor - are shrinking at a rapid rate. It underscores how this loss of ecological infrastructure is undermining not only MDG7 on environmental sustainability but most if not all of the other MDGs and their associated targets. (see http://www.unep.org/Documents - press release 20 September 2010)
Employing a set of indicators capturing different aspects of the economic transition can help encourage and evaluate progress towards a green economy. A well-designed set of indicators can help measure key interactions between the environment and economy at the macro level, and guide policy management. Aggregate indicators of economic progress and well being, including poverty alleviation and natural capital depreciation will, in this sense, be particularly relevant. A range of initiatives are investigating alternatives to traditional economic measures such as GDP as the principal compass for economic policy making and assessment. The depreciation of ecosystems and natural capital can be reflected in net savings rates, including for example an accounting of the drawdown of fossil fuel stocks.

At the regional and country level, UNEP, through its advisory and technical assistance services, is committed to advancing national green economy initiatives through its advisory and technical assistance services. These include assisting in the development and assessment of green economy reforms, providing analytical and research support, drawing on international experience and best practices, as well as strengthening analytical capabilities at the national level, in particular in developing countries.
As part of the Chief Executives Board Joint Crisis Initiative, a UNEP-led initiative on green economy resulted in the formulation of an inter-agency plan of action providing a platform for a joint effort within the UN system to respond to the economic crisis. The Environment Management Group (EMG), in September 2009, established an Issue Management Group (IMG) on Green Economy, which will produce a report on interagency cooperation and common messaging (More information is available at http://www.unemg.org/MeetingsDocuments/IssueManagementGroups/GreenEconomy/tabid/3055/language/en-US/Default.aspx).
Within UNEP, the Resource Efficiency subprogramme works to ensure natural resources are produced, processed and consumed in a more environmentally sustainable way, paving the way towards a green economy (more information is available at http://www.unep.org/resourceefficiency/). The Green Economy Initiative work by UNEP is rooted in its Resource Efficiency Subprogramme.

With its Green Growth Strategy, the Republic of Korea has launched a US$38 billion economic stimulus package with over 80 percent allocated to green investment, further expanding its "Green New Deal" into a five-year US$83.6 billion Green Growth Plan. Its Four Major River Restoration Project, which is one of the key components of the Five-Year Green Growth Plan with a total budget of US$13 billion, is expected to contribute to securing water resources, improving water quality, preventing floods, and enhancing regional development. Climate benefits from this project are also foreseen.

National strategies can guide a country as it emerges from recession, drive economic recovery and growth and lead to future prosperity and job creation, while at the same time addressing social inequalities and environmental challenges.

National documents such as the Medium Term Development Strategy of Barbados 2010 - 2014 and the 7th Egyptian Competitiveness Report, titled ?Green Egypt : A vision for Tomorrow?, are also worth highlighting. In 2007, the Barbados Ministry of Economic Affairs & Development published the National Strategic Plan of Barbados 2006-2025. The six strategic goals of the Plan include Building a Green Economy - Strengthening the Physical Infrastructure and Preserving the Environment. The Plan points to the need to put in place policies to: facilitate the development of renewable energy resources such as wind, sun, biomass, solid and liquid waste and environmentally friendly forms of fossil-based fuels such as natural gas; promote the recycling of solid and liquid waste; protect coastal waters and coastline and the purity of water supply and atmosphere; ensure the efficient construction of our roads and infrastructure through best-practice environmental and infrastructural technologies; and enhance public education and enforcement.

Building and expanding on previous work on the greening of fiscal stimulus packages (as per the proposal for a Global Green New Deal in 2009), UNEP is currently focusing on a number of ?sectors? which are particularly important in terms of their economic, employment, poverty alleviation and environmental benefits. These include Agriculture, Buildings, Cities, Renewable Energy, Fisheries, Forests, Manufacturing, Tourism, Transport, Waste, and Water. With respect to resource efficiency, UNEP is paying particular attention to the resource intensive industry value chains of building and construction, agriculture and food, as well as metals and manufacturing.

UNEP work is also focusing on more general enabling conditions for a transition to a green economy as well as issues surrounding the mobilisation and channelling of finance and investment in green sectors. The enabling conditions call for improved use of tools such as control regulations, fiscal instruments, economic instruments, as well as information and voluntary tools introduced with public-private collaboration.

Many individual green economy policies and initiatives have already proven highly effective. A recent UNEP publication, for instance, listed the following success stories: renewable energy in China; feed-in tariffs in Kenya, organic agriculture in Uganda; sustainable urban planning in Brazil; rural ecological infrastructure in India; forest management in Nepal; ecosystem services in Ecuador; and solar energy in Tunisia. Some of these represent established broad-based policies and investment programmes, others are newly initiated pilot projects or local ventures.

? For instance, the case of renewable energy in China provides an example of policy-led growth in renewable energy that has created jobs, income and revenue streams for nascent low carbon industries. Passed in 2005, China?s Renewable Energy Law serves as the principal framework for development of the sector. The law offers a variety of financial incentives, such as a national fund to foster renewable energy development, discounted lending and tax preferences for renewable energy projects, and a requirement that power grid operators purchase resources from registered renewable energy producers. The combination of investments and policy incentives has encouraged major advances in the development of both wind power and solar power. The energy sector as a whole generates output worth US$17 billion and employed an estimated 1.5 million at the end of 2009, of which 600,000 were in the solar thermal industry, 266,000 in biomass generation, 55,000 in solar photovoltaics and 22,200 in wind power. In 2009 alone, an estimated 300,000 jobs were created.

? The case of Feed-in tariffs (FIT) in Kenya, also provides an example of how forward-looking energy policy could contribute to matrix diversification, improved benefit streams to small rural producers, and enhanced local development. In January 2010, Kenya revised its Feed-in tariff (FIT) policy, which resulted in the addition of three renewable energy sources: geothermal, biogas, and solar energy resource generated electricity. In addition, the revised policy extended the period of the power purchase agreements from 15 to 20 years and increased the fixed tariffs per kilowatt-hour for pre-existing wind, biomass and small-hydro power under the FIT.

In a more general sense, both fiscal policy and public finance can be key drivers of a country?s transition to a greener economy?or a brake on green growth and low carbon job creation.

Available evidence suggests past environmental tax reforms have often been successful in improving environmental sustainability in specific sectors. A green economy needs to be based on a broader and more robust implementation including, for example, through more systematic taxation of fossil-fuel-based energy and other natural resources.

Environmentally-related charges currently raise only modest amounts of revenue in many countries, but could potentially make a major contribution to restoring fiscal positions in many countries, provided any compensation arrangements are carefully targeted. Indeed, many developing countries are highly dependent on natural resource tax revenues.

Green subsidies are likely to be less effective than pollution pricing measures, but well targeted, transitional measures may facilitate the shift towards a GE in cases where market barriers and positive social spillovers clearly exist, or where there are technical or political obstacles to the alternatives.

Reforming environmentally harmful subsidies?which fuel unsustainable economic activity, are fiscally expensive, and often confer limited benefits on poor households? should be a key priority, particularly in the agriculture, energy, fisheries, forest and water sectors. Better information on the magnitude and distributional consequences of such programmes could help with designing and implementing more effective transitional measures.

Direct public expenditure has a key role in promoting more sustainable economic growth, including through cleaner infrastructure provision, support for research and development in environmental technologies. Indirect support, for example through different forms of public guarantees, may also help leverage green investment by households and firms.

In the area of sustainable buildings and construction, the UNEP-CEU report ?Assessment of Policy Instruments for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Buildings? (www.unep.org/sbci/pdfs/SBCI_CEU_Policy_Tool_Report.pdf) reviews 20 different types of policy instruments applied in 56 different countries worldwide. The report identifies costs and savings associated with these instruments, as well as enabling conditions for their use.

Public spending normally represents between 8 and 30% of national GDP, making most governments the largest single consumers in their countries. Sustainable Public procurement provides a major opportunity to shift towards more sustainable production and consumption patterns through the example that governments can provide to other consumers, through increased demand and the creation of new markets for sustainable products.

The target set for the European Member States is 50% green public procurement (GPP) by 2010. A recent study measuring the levels and impact of Green Public Procurement in the seven best performing Member States (Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom) demonstrated that efforts undertaken thus far in these countries have lead to an average overall level of 45% GPP of the total procurement value and 55% GPP of the total amount of contracts. Conclusions from the experiences of these countries showed that GPP contributes to an average reduction of CO2 emissions of 25% in the main product groups of Cleaning products & services, Construction, Electricity, Catering & food, Gardening, Office IT Equipment, Paper, Textiles, Transport and Furniture. In addition, in contrast to common perception, this study shows that GPP can lead to decreases in costs for the purchasing organisation instead of increases. When using a Life Cycle Costing (LCC) approach in calculating the financial impact of GPP, the outcome is that with an average level of GPP of 45%, the average financial impact of GPP is -1% .

The implementation of Sustainable Public Procurement through the Marrakech Process Task Force on Sustainable Public Procurement Approach allows for a comprehensive evaluation of existing conditions in a particular country (Status Assessment, Market Readiness Analysis, Legal Review) in order to capitalize on the existing strengths and address the current shortcomings in the application of such policies. This approach is currently being tested and implemented in 10 pilot countries (Colombia, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Costa Rica, Mauritius, Tunisia, Lebanon, New Zealand, and the UK Local Authorities).

In a recent study, drawing on green economy success stories in developing countries, UNEP highlights this connection, including:

? Organic agriculture in Uganda. In 2004 the Uganda Organic Standard was adopted, while in 2007, as part of the East African Community, Uganda adopted the regional standard, the East African Organic Products Standards (EAOPS) developed under a joint UNEP-UNCTAD initiative. In July 2009, the government released a Draft Uganda Organic Agriculture Policy. The draft policy describes the vision, mission, objectives and strategies to support the development of organic agriculture as ?one of the avenues for delivering self-sustaining growth as it provides mechanisms for individual farmers to improve productivity, add value and access markets which are keys to achievement of the Poverty Eradication Action Plan objectives?. The strategy put in place to implement the policy is based on interventions in nine policy areas: the promotion of organic agriculture as a complementary agricultural production system; the development of a system of standards, certification and accreditation; the promotion of research, to enable technology development and dissemination; support to the development of local, regional and international markets for organic products; the generation of information, knowledge and skills through education and training; the improvement of post-harvest handling practices, preservation, storage and value addition; the sustainable use of natural resources; and participation of the special interest groups such as women, youth, and the poor and vulnerable. Uganda has thus taken an apparent liability ? limited access to chemical inputs ? and turned this into a comparative advantage by growing its organic agriculture base, generating revenue and income for smallholder farmers.

? Rural ecological infrastructure in India. India?s National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 2005 (NREGA) is a guaranteed wage employment programme that enhances the livelihood security of marginalized households in rural areas. The NREGA directly touches the lives of the poor, promotes inclusive growth, and also contributes to the restoration and maintenance of ecological infrastructure. In its short history, it has produced many such success stories across the country. In promoting to inclusive growth and the restoration of ecological infrastructure, the programme also has a strong impact on empowerment of poor or marginalized groups. It has contributed to boosting the average wage for agricultural labourers more than a quarter over its three-year history.

? Forest management in Nepal. Community forestry occupies a central place in forest management in Nepal. The Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation (MFSC), as the lead institution for creating an enabling environment for forest resource management, has implemented two policies, including Community Forestry and the Leasehold Forestry Policy, that have helped the government of Nepal achieve significant success in forest conservation and environmental protection. The Master Plan for the Forestry Sector prepared in 1989, the Forest Act of 1993, the Forest Regulations of 1995, and the Forestry Sector Policy of 2000 were developed and implemented to support the community forestry programme, after earlier efforts at centralized control. The Forest Act and Forest Rules accelerated the transfer of forests to forest user groups; they provide the legal basis for the implementation of community forestry and recognize Community Forest User Groups as ?self-governing autonomous corporate bodies for managing and using community forests?. The remarkable turnaround in forest management in Nepal is directly attributable to the benefits generated for community groups, in the form of goods, services and welfare enhancements.

Reference: UNEP, 2010. ?Green economy: developing countries success stories? (http://www.unep.org/pdf/GreenEconomy_SuccessStories.pdf)

Experience in implementing Sustainable Consumption and Production policies, which, although pursued under a different approach, are often the same or similar policies as those promoted under green economy, can provide an insight into the potential social benefits of such policies.Greater efficiency in resource use and reduced environmental impact from the production of goods and services over their life cycle result in improved productivity and reduced costs. In short, it allows more to be done with less. Growth in consumer demand for sustainable products can provide sustainable producers in developing countries with access to new markets as well as price premiums for their products. Provision of cleaner and more resource efficient services (such as water, energy and food) allows more people to meet their basic needs.

By better understating the social impacts along the life cycle of production and consumption, social and socio-economic improvements can be identified for global product chains. The UNEP / SETAC publication ?Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products? is a ground breaking development in the sustainability international arena. It provides a powerful framework to assess and report about social and socio-economic impacts and benefits of product life cycle from the extraction of the natural resources to the final disposal .

Poverty eradication through proper waste management -- Waste management with a focus on converting waste into resources contributes directly and indirectly to poverty alleviation and gender equality. The direct impacts on poverty alleviation and gender equality can be briefly summarised as:
? Increased direct job opportunities in waste segregation recycling/reuse industries/activities. For example, in a waste management project done by UNEP in Pune, India, community level waste segregation programmes alone were likely to provide 2,500 jobs.
? In the long-term, increased availability of segregated waste constituents (such as segregated plastics, paper, metal etc.) will attract business to set up recycling industries based on such segregated waste as raw materials. This will create further job opportunities. For example, in a similar project carried out by UNEP in Matale, Sri Lanka, the establishment of a recycling industry park is expected to provide about 100 jobs.
? Better working conditions for rag pickers/scavengers ? The pathetic conditions under which rag pickers and scavengers (mostly women and children) work are well known. Diseases and injuries are very common. Proper waste management including setting up of properly designed transfer and sorting stations can provide rag pickers and scavengers much safer working conditions.
? Establishing business-to-business partnerships in using waste agricultural biomass will result in setting up of industries in rural areas where creation of job opportunities is crucial for many developing countries. In rural farming areas such job opportunities will be preferably used by women as men are mostly engaged in direct farming activities.
The indirect contribution of proper waste management on poverty alleviation and gender equality are even greater. Increased reuse/recycling of waste results in waste acquiring a value. The wastes therefore become a source of revenue to households. Community level composting plants generate a product which could be sold for community gardens, kitchen gardens etc. For example, in the domestic organic waste composting project in Dhaka, Bangladesh the community compost plants set up by the households provide an additional income of US10 per year to household as profits from sale of compost. Recognizing the potential of material/energy recovery from waste, in the long run more industries based on ?waste? as a raw material can come up thus providing additional job opportunities.

Specific divisional inputs:
EDD: Green growth and green economy policies are to be pro-poor, inclusive and poverty eradicating.
EPO: Self-help

The aforementioned UNEP publication ?Green economy: developing countries success stories? highlights encouraging signs and results of many initiatives around the world, that if scaled up and integrated into a comprehensive strategy, could offer an alternative development pathway, one that is pro-growth, pro-jobs and pro-poor. Some of the examples mentioned in this publication represent established broad-based policies and investment programmes, others are newly initiated pilot projects or local ventures.

In this sense, the collection of examples underlines that a green economy strategy is not limited to national or other government policy levels but can take root wherever there is the leadership and vision to make this transformation.

Achieving a green economy will only be possible through the collective vision, creativity, action and support from a broad cross-section of society, including governments, the private sector and consumers. It will also require an understanding by different ministries how longstanding work on issues such as health, safety, cleaner production and consumer education related to macro-economic policies and tools that can be used to mainstream and scale up the pace of transformation.
A critical component in transitioning to a green economy is ensuring that enabling conditions are attended to. Enabling conditions are at present heavily weighted in favour of the old ?brown economy? model. However, as perverse subsidies are removed, incentives and taxes re-aligned, behavioural hurdles reduced through education and legislation, and natural capital (i.e. ecological infrastructure) recognized as an ?asset class? to be optimized in for its returns (largely public goods and services) then we find that a transition to a ?Green Economy? is not only desirable, but necessary.
UNEP is committed to engaging with, and stimulating collaboration between, these stakeholders in the realization of a low-carbon, resource-efficient future. The UNEP Green Economy Initiative is, in fact, the result of a joint effort by numerous experts from UN organizations, academic institutes, think tanks, businesses and environmental groups. For example, UNEP partnered with the International Labour Organisation, the International Confederation of Trade Unions, and the International Employers Organisation in the development of a Green Jobs Report (published in 2008). UNEP has also been working closely with civil society and the business community, for example by supporting the establishment of a Green Economy Coalition (more information available at http://www.greeneconomycoalition.org/).

There is a growing literature on green economy and related issues. Such references include:

(1) Joan Canton, Ariane Labat, and Anton Roodhuijzen, An indicator-based assessment framework to identify country-specific challenges towards greener growth (Directorate General Economic and Monetary Affairs, European Commission, February 2010), http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2010/pdf/ecp401_en.pdf. The abstract reads: ?The paper sets the basis for an indicator-based analytical framework to assess Member States' policies to promote "green growth". An illustrative application of this new analytical framework reveals that it can be used to provide a nuanced economic assessment of Member States' environmental performance. This framework can serve to highlight country-specific strengths in addressing environmental challenges in a way that best fosters growth and jobs. To prepare for future economic policy monitoring at the EU level, a test was also run to analyse performance in various dimensions of environmental policy in combination with information about macroeconomic performance. Overall, this framework can contribute to identify country-specific challenges to create new sources of green growth; it may therefore serve to encourage relevant structural reforms bringing about a competitive greener economy.?

(2) Alain de Serres, Fabrice Murtin, and Giuseppe Nicoletti, ?A framework for assessing green growth policies? (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), June 2010), http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/a-framework-for-assessing-green-growth-policies_5kmfj2xvcmkf-en. The abstract reads: ?This paper proposes an analytical framework for assessing policies that will contribute to a better integration of environmental externalities in the pursuit of economic efficiency and growth objectives. The framework consists of two parts. The first part lays out principles and criteria for the identification and selection of policies that will benefit both income and the environment or that will boost income at the least cost in terms of the environment (and vice-versa). In general putting a price on a pollution source or on the over-exploitation of a scarce resource is found to be the most efficient single policy to address many environment externalities. However, given that environmental damage often result from several interacting market failures, an appropriate policy response will in many cases involve a mix of complementary instruments.

The second part focuses more on issues of structural adjustment related to the transition towards a greener economy. It finds that green growth policies could lead to significant re-allocation of resources within and across broad economic sectors. A policy framework facilitating the re-deployment of labour across firms and sectors, as well as the entry of new firms and the exit of firms in declining industries will thus be important in order for countries to seize the opportunities brought about by green growth policies.?

Potential outcomes to be decided by Member States could involve the following:
New MDG or similar type goals for the Green Economy: Set targets for efficiency / resource productivity improvements (in key sectors & basic services: energy, natural resources, waste, health, education, etc.) and define indicators related to Green GDP. UNEP is developing related partnerships with relevant multilateral agencies, for example UNIDO (green growth / industrial development), UNCTAD (trade), WB (welfare indicators), OECD (Green Growth, Beyond GDP) and Eurostat (environmental goods & services / EGS).
Financial commitments: For example a commitment of x% of GDP/national budgets to GE investments, as well as possible a universal tax on financial transactions for GE. UNEP could also convene regional Green Investment Forums, with Davos format discussions where green entrepreneurs and business is connected with public finance institutions.
The Marrakech Process Ten Year Framework / 10YFP on SCP transformed into a Green Economy delivery mechanism: building on sectoral initiatives and partnerships, developed for example by the Marrakech Task Forces (cf the Global Partnership for Sustainable Tourism).
New major partnerships, and a platform for enabling countries to lead change: This may include a new Global Initiative on Sustainable Mining and Metals, initiated at request by Governments during CSD18/19, as well as an International Resource Efficiency and Eco-Innovation Platform launched by UNEP with UNIDO and building on its capacity building support to small and medium sized enterprises but with a focus on green entrepreneurship.
An overarching outcome of the UNCSD would be a general agreement on the need to transition at the global level to a green economy. This agreement could take the form of set of mutually agreed goals and targets to track progress towards a green economy; or it could simply result in a statement of its importance for members and allow each to choose its own preferred pathway. In either case, support will be needed to facilitate the transition and so a desirable outcome would be the launching of a programme of action at national, regional and global levels to develop and support a ?roadmap? towards a green economy.

Indeed, reaching an international agreement in 2012 would be only the first step towards a global green shift, a shift in policies, investments, markets and SCP patterns. More challenging is to translate agreements of principle into programmatic action from a global to sectoral context and local scale. This is where the development of a ?roadmap? for implementing a global green shift is needed, mobilizing also financial institutions. In developing this roadmap, special consideration will need to be given to an approach that follows these basic principles:

? A focus on ?mainstreaming? the green economy in planning and policy processes, involving not only Environment but a range of governmental departments and mainstream market actors;
? A response especially to poverty, equity and welfare dimensions, with decent job creation and small business development at the core of the social link, and health and education perspectives;
? A preference for quantitative information (empirical indicators), where possible accompanied by monetary figures, to more effectively measure and track progress, as defined by each country;
? A focus on likely market (supply & demand) reactions to different policy, regulatory, management and technology interventions;
? A focus on the mobilization of all forms of investments for greener infrastructures, products and services at all levels and the promotion of multistakeholder partnerships;
? A view of institutions, businesses and consumers as actors that respond to price or other economic signals but whose capacity to learn and change is influenced by habits and past history.

Given the linkages between sustainable consumption and production and green economy, the 10 Year Framework of Programmes (10YFP) could also provide an important building block for an ambitious international agreement at the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Brazil 2012) on advancing sustainable development. It could serve as a delivery mechanism for the transition to a Green Economy.

Achieving a transition to a green economy will require substantial policy reforms at the international, national and local levels in order to help realize the economic opportunities arising from a shift to less polluting or resource efficient patterns of production and consumption, including new sources of employment. It also implies managing related structural changes including, for example, potentially adverse effects on traditional economic sectors underlying the ?brown? economy.

A green economy sets new priorities for macroeconomic policy, with growth being generated by green or environmental sectors.

National fiscal policy plays a critical role in a green economy. The means by which tax revenues are generated has a fundamental effect on the structure of incentives facing businesses and households, in both consumption and investment decisions. Secondly, how government spends these revenues not only on recurrent costs, but also investments in public infrastructure or supporting technology development, plays a critical role in shaping the path of economic development.

Paragraph 157 of the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation provides a clear mandate for governments to keep the UN?s sustainable development institutions under review, stating:
?Strengthening of the international institutional framework for sustainable development is an evolutionary process,? and that ?it is necessary to keep relevant arrangements under review; identify gaps; eliminate duplication of functions; and continue to strive for greater integration, efficiency and coordination of the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development aiming at the implementation of Agenda 21.?
While periodic reviews of the CSD cycles are undertaken, there has been no comprehensive review of the institutional framework for sustainable development. There has also been no review of CSD since 1992. The current mandates for action on sustainable development are not limited to the CSD, but in fact cover several normative and operational bodies dealing with sustainable development. The institutional framework outlined in the JPOI includes a set of nine objectives and measures on: strengthening the institutional framework for sustainable development at the international level; the role of the GA and ECOSOC; the role and function of the CSD; the role of international institutions; strengthening institutional arrangements for sustainable development at the regional level and national levels, and the participation of Major Groups.
More recently, the 2006 Report of UN Secretary General?s High-Level Panel on System Wide Coherence (better known as ?Delivering as One?) stressed that ?[t]he status of sustainable development should be elevated within the UN institutional architecture and in country activities,? and that ?the UN system must strive for greater integration, efficiency and coordination of the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development.? It also called for ?continuing reform of the Commission on Sustainable Development that truly leads to integrated decision-making on economic, social and environmental issues.?
This reform is yet to take place and there needs to be an assessment for how best to structure the institutional framework for sustainable development governance, including whether or not CSD is the most effective mechanism going forward.

UNEP has been assisting in implementation of the regional NSDS project ?National Sustainable Development Strategies and Action Plan towards Mainstreaming Sustainable Development into Decision Making Process? to facilitate preparation of the National Sustainable Development Strategies and activate National Councils for Sustainable Development (NCSDs) where relevant (please refer to one page briefs for 17 countries and three subregions posted at: http://www.rrcap.unep.org/nsds/ ). You may find the assessment of main outcomes of the national, subregional and regional processes reflected at the regional workshop in September 2009 at: http://www.rrcap.unep.org/nsds/1503.cfm. For example:
? the assessment of NSDS implementation in Mongolia and political and institutional levels is posted at: http://www.rrcap.unep.org/nsds/130100.cfm
? Vietnam NSDS respective materials at national level are posted at: http://www.rrcap.unep.org/nsds/130305.cfm
? The charter for NCSD in Vietnam was developed http://www.rrcap.unep.org/nsds/uploadedfiles/file/gms/vn/reference/NSDS-VN-Operational%20charter%20of%20NCSD.pdf
The terminal report of the project could be found at: http://www.rrcap.unep.org/nsds/1503.cfm
For your easy reference the copy of the MSWord version is enclosed.

Sixth Ministerial Conference on Environment and Development in Asia and the Pacific of ESCAP, conducted on 27 September- 2 October 2010 in Astana, Kazakhstan has adopted the Ministerial Declaration on Environment and Development and the Regional Implementation Plan for SD in Asia and the Pacific 2011-13, where the national and subregional strategies were referred as part of the implementation plan ( please ref: http://www.unescap.org/esd/mced6/documents/Documents/MCED6_12E.pdf ). Please refer to the main outcome documents posted at: http://www.unescap.org/esd/mced6/documents/final_documents.asp

The negotiation process of the outcome documents, especially the Regional Implementation Plan for SD showed that there is a strong need to address intersectoral gaps within Governments to address the sustainable development priorities, especially for the success of the issues within ?green economy? and ?green growth? policy tools.

Overall, within the framework of the Resident Coordinator, UNEP supported the establishment and work of NSDCs in seventeen countries in 4 subregions in Asia: Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal-2 districts, Pakistan, Sri-Lanka, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkmenistan, Vietnam, Yunnan Province of PR China.

Establishment of NSDCs occurred through a multi-stakeholder process, involving relevant line ministries, in particular, planning ministries, as well as civil society organizations. The planning framework focused on a time horizon of 50 years.
In particular, UNEP, through the Regional Resource Centre of its Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific has strengthened the capacity of the Asia and the Pacific region and assisted national governments in formulating National Sustainable Development Strategy and Action Plans (NSDSAP) with mainstreaming sustainable development issues in the decision making processes. Besides, Subregional National Development Strategies (SSDS) have been developed for Central Asia, South Asia and the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS).
Specifically, UNEP supported governments to:
a. Build national capacity through training and provision of guidelines to prepare NSDSAPs and assist national governments in translation of sustainable development strategy into concrete local actions.
b. Strengthen the role and capacity of National Council for Sustainable Development (NCSD) (wherever it exists) to deal with and address the issues related to sustainable development in the line of WSSD outcome and recommendations.
In addition, UNEP also entered into an agreement with the Asian Development Bank to implement the Regional Technical Assistance with GMS countries on Capacity Building for Promoting Sustainable Development in the Greater Mekong Subregion. The main objective of the project is to build capacity of GMS countries to integrate social, economic, and environmental objectives into existing planning mechanisms for sustainable development on both national and subregional levels.

The involvement of NSDCs in countries? preparations for UNCSD is crucial and should be promoted.

The institutional set up is a very important tool to achieve sustainable development. The NSDS project have analyzed the institutional set up for GMS subregional levels posted at: http://www.rrcap.unep.org/nsds/130305.cfm

Still in many countries the activation of NSDS depend on the dynamic NCSDs and often this is a project centered approach. At the same time the attempts to activate self-sustainable NCSD were made in Kazakhstan, Thailand, Vietnam, Mongolia, Sri Lanka, etc (ref project scope countries only), where the government tried to allocate the funding support out of other than UN project funds and other countries. The continued work in this area would progress the work further. Special projects addressing the need to elaborate the institutional framework for SD through active involvement in governance and legal projects would be needed to be implemented at national, subregional and regional levels.


The NSDS project has made substantial progress in building capacity of target countries in formulating an NSDS, operationalizing sustainable development at national level and establishing a multi-stakeholder participatory process to address the sustainable development challenges, thereby supporting them in their efforts to meet international commitments on SD, in particular, the Agenda 21, MDGs and JPOI.

The NSDS Project assisted national stakeholders in undertaking a long-term strategic approach for sustainable development. The Project has been providing training and awareness raising activities to identified target multi-stakeholders at the national and sub-regional levels. Training on overall sustainable development issues, NSDS and innovative SD tools and instruments was delivered through the training manual developed by the Secretariat and inception and consultation workshops. National focal points and lead institutions could gain knowledge and expertise to integrate sustainable development principles into existing national and sectoral strategies and plans.

At the sub-regional level in Central Asia, GMS and South Asia, the project helped each sub-region develop the Sub-regional Sustainable Development Strategy (SSDS), which can serve as a sub-regional framework of action for sustainable development. Each subregion faces a number of common- and trans-boundary issues to be tackled through joint efforts. The SSDS project provided a much-needed and unique opportunity to build joint capacity in identifying common SD challenges, developing a common vision and agreeing on shared responsibilities and framework for cooperative actions to overcome such challenges which include poverty, trans-boundary health problems, human trafficking, climate change, air pollution, watershed management, biodiversity transportation, tourism and food, water and energy security.

Two outstanding examples are Thailand and Kazakhstan, where planning policies are based on the work of their respective NSDCs for the next 50 years. In Thailand, the 50-year plan has been divided into 5-year plan segments, which provide the basis for the government¡¦s medium-term policy-making (The green five-year plans).

One challenge of the NSDCs has been their separate development from the UNDAF process. Better integration of the two would lead to more effective engagement of stakeholders and ultimately better planning outcomes.

NSDS and integrated decision making:

NSDS is a country driven process and effectiveness depend on many factors and dimensions: economic, social, environmental and effective governance and how all this work at national circumstances. The active cooperation between sectors within Government and dynamic visionary inputs of stakeholders could be facilitated further by international agencies. In this regard, the fostered partner roles would activate further the informed decision making process, for example:

?X Governments: need to lead the SD process, especially in policy coherence
?X Civil society and NGOs: to support the paradigm shift and be part and parcel of the transition for SD by using effective environmental and social tools.
?X The private sector: PPP must be forged to internalize environmental costs and promote sustainable production patterns, as integral part of sustainable development strategies. Private sector can explore & utilize market for environmental goods and services and mobilizing investment
?X The academic and scientific communities: can offer all stakeholders opportunities for guidance on innovative measures for promoting SD
?X Multilateral cooperation: to foster partnership for change, to assist Governments and to encourage good financing decisions of private sector

Yes

MGSB has close collaboration with all major groups as the name of our Branch indicates. MGSB through the Global Major Groups and Stakeholders Forum cycle provides a platform for exchange and consultation around key environmental issues to be addressed by the Member states during the GC/GMEF, and to facilitate Major Groups? contribution to the GC/GMEF and other international environmental forums - through participation in regional consultations and the global major groups and stakeholder forum which is an associate meeting of the GC/GMEF as well as the GC/GMEF itself. The cycle is also meant to build the capacities of major groups and stakeholders from developing regions and from regions with economies in transition, in the field of Environment and International Environmental Governance. Further collaboration with particular major groups like is outlined below.

Indigenous Peoples - MGSB has prepared in collaboration with indigenous communities and other relevant partners, an Indigenous Peoples Strategy titled "Enhancing Indigenous People?s Engagement in the Work of UNEP" that is awaiting review and approval by SMT. Through the Indigenous Peoples? Participation in Mapping of Traditional Forest Resources for Sustainable Livelihoods and Great Ape Conservation project, UNEP assessed and demonstrated the role of indigenous peoples in ensuring the sustainable use of forest resources for their own survival and well being while preserving the natural habitat of the great apes and enhanced indigenous people?s involvement and participation in decision making of protected area management.

Workers and Trade Unions - Through the ?Strengthening Trade Union Participation in International Environmental Processes? 2007-2010 and ?Towards Green and Decent Jobs: Enhancing Workers and Trade Unions Capacity? 2010-2013, UNEP is strengthening the capacities or workers and trade unions to address environmental and sustainable development issues.

Business and Industry - UNEP has partnered with Business and Industry mainly through the Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (DTIE) in many aspects to develop partnerships with the private sector and corresponding outreach activities. Below are some projects highlighted:

Industry Outreach
DTIE's Industry Outreach activities seek to promote responsible entrepreneurship among various stakeholders - industry, business, governments, and NGOs. Focus areas include voluntary initiatives, environmental reporting, and technology transfer.

Industry and Environment - a quarterly review
DTIE's quarterly publication that covers policy, technological and scientific developments related to business and the environment. Each issue of the review focuses on a particular theme in the field of sustainable industrial development.

Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)
GRI is an international, multi-stakeholder effort to create a common framework for voluntary reporting of the economic, environmental, and social impact of organisation-level activity.

UN's Global Compact
UN Secretary-General Kofi A. Annan's challenge to world business leaders to "embrace and enact" a set of 9 principles that cover topics in human rights, labour and environment in their individual corporate practices. UNEP contributes the environmental portion of this site, which is maintained by the United Nations Global Compact Network.

The Production and Consumption Unit
Fosters the development of cleaner and safer production and consumption patterns that lead to increased efficiency in the use of natural resources and reductions in pollution.

Cleaner Production
DTIE's Cleaner Production activities promote strategies, policies and practices to prevent pollution from processes, products and services, increasing overall efficiency and reducing risks to humans and the environment.

Promoting Cleaner Production Investment
Promoting investment in sustainable businesses and CP in developing countries, this project aims at demonstrating to financial institutions the financial and environmental benefits inherent in CP investments as well as helping entrepreneurs and CP experts develop creditworthy CP investment proposals.

APELL: Awareness and Preparedness for Emergencies on a Local Level
APELL aims at improved accident prevention, community awareness and emergency preparedness.

Environmental Management Tools
An introduction to a number of environmental management tools

Industrial Estates
Promoting Eco-Industrial Development

Pollutant Release and Transfer Register
A clearinghouse of systems developed by several national and regional government organisations to collect and disseminate data on environmental releases and transfers of toxic chemicals from industrial facilities.

Industry Sectors

Finance Initiatives
The initiative's goal is to enhance the capacity of the financial services sector as a whole in integrating environmental and sustainability considerations into all their policies and business operations.

GeSI - The Global e-Sustainability Initiative
An initiative of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) service providers and suppliers, with the support of UNEP and International Telecommunication Union.

Regional Initiative on ICT and the Environment Promoting e-Sustainability in Asia-Pacific
Helping improve regional environment and sustainable development within the framework of the Malmö Ministerial declaration and the UNEP Global e-Sustainability Initiative(GeSI) by catalysing local and national initiatives

Tourism
Focusing on policies, tools, and best practices for environmentally-sound tourism.

The Tour Operators Initiative
A joint initiative between UNEP, UNESCO, WTO and tour operators. The initiative assists the members develop and implement environmental management and practices that minimize negative environmental and social impacts while optimizing benefits.

The Mineral Resources Forum - Environment
An internet framework for international co-ordination on the theme of minerals, metals and sustainable development, promoting the exchange of knowledge, experience and expertise in the impact of mining, mineral processing and metals on the natural environment; the mitigation of environmental damage; and planning for mine closure and disposal of hazardous wastes.

UNEP Offshore Oil and Gas Environment Forum
A multi-stakeholder initiative to create a medium to locate and disseminate environmental information concerning the sustainable development of the offshore oil and gas industry.

Sustainable Agri-food Production and Consumption Forum
Provides a network of key information sources on agri-food production and consumption, related environmental impacts and practices to prevent or respond to these impacts.

AREED - African Rural Energy Enterprise Development Initiative
Seeks to develop new sustainable energy enterprises that use clean, efficient, and renewable energy technologies to meet the energy needs of under-served populations, thereby reducing the environmental and health consequences of existing energy use patterns.

Brazil Rural Energy Enterprise Development (B-REED)
Seeks to develop energy enterprises that use clean, efficient and sustainable energy technologies to meet the energy needs of under-served populations, thereby reducing the environmental and health consequences of existing energy use patterns and stimulating local economic growth. B-REED will initially focus in Brazil's Northeast, specifically in Bahia and Alagoas.
Trade

Economics and Trade Programme
A programme of research, consensus-building, assessment of trade-related policies and capacity-building on integrating trade, environment and development policies. Activities range from country projects to international meetings which enhance synergies between multilateral environmental agreements and the World Trade Organisation.

Implementation Of Environmental Law Branch
Consists of the Compliance and Enforcement Unit and the Pilot Projects Unit. Work focuses on ensuring compliance with and enforcement of established national, regional and international environmental policy instruments, with a particular emphasis on illegal trade in violation of international environmental instruments.

World Conservation Monitoring Center
Provides information for policy and action to conserve the living world. Programmes concentrate on species, forests, protected areas, marine and freshwaters; plus habitats affected by climate change such as polar regions. Also address the relationship between trade and the environment and the wider aspects of biodiversity assessment

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)
CITES is an international agreement between governments that aims to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival
Regions

Unidad de Tecnología, Industria y Economía
Technology, Industry, and Economics in the Latin American and Caribbean Region

Scientific and Technological Communities - This major group has worked with the Division of Early Warning and assessment in development and production of GEO repots, Atlases etc as experts, consultants, reviewers etc.

A positive institutional development over the last couple of years is the reinvigoration of the interagency cooperation under the Environment Management Group (EMG). This has yielded a report on the contribution to advancing the biodiversity agenda which was well received by the CBD COP 10. Similar reports are underway on drylands and green economy. The first ever green house gas (GHG) footprint of the UN system was presented last year. Work is also underway on international environmental governance, sustainable management systems and environmental and social safeguards.

Increased efforts to interface the interagency work with the intergovernmental processes was an important success factor in revitalizing EMG. It helped focus attention on utilising the combined expertise of the system to address needs of Member States. Openness, consultations and predictability are key to successful processes. Joint conceptual thinking from a multi-sectoral perspective advanced the thinking on biodiversity mainstreaming, with human well-being being identified as the common system-wide denominator and the ultimate goal of sustainable development. Joint efforts to develop common tools for GHG inventories mobilised unexpected combined expertise in the system. Such UN wide concepts and tools can inspire and be used to support action at country level.

There is much scope for strengthening the interface between the interagency and multilateral processes in a manner which can enhance both sustainable development and environmental governance. A consortium approach such as the one indicated in the documentation for the consultative meeting in Helsinki on IRG reform serves to illustrate potential approaches in this regard, which are based amongst others on the EMG experience.

While in general we do not deal with major groups at national level, we believe that the sensitization, awareness and capacity building we perform strengthens the major groups to address environmental and sustainable development issues in their individual countries particularly in working with their governments to streamline environment in development plans or strategies.

There are two main challenges in the system:

1) The balance between the three pillars of sustainable development is skewed, with the environmental pillar being much weaker than the other two pillars. As indicated above, there is an urgent need to defragment the current international environmental governance system and to strengthen the authoritative voice for the environment through the creation of a World Environment Organisation or UN Environment Organisation. By balancing the three pillars of sustainable development, organistions working in the respective areas could better coordinate their work and guarantee the integration and mainstreaming of the other thematic areas in their own work.

2) There is a lack of coordination among the organisations and agencies dealing with the various aspects of sustainable development. Providing each pillar has equal strength, an intergovernmental platform (as per suggestions above) could provide information exchange among the three pillars and ultimately policy guidance for the entire UN system.

The UNCSD should take decisions that will effectively address the above mentioned challenges to the achievement of sustainable development. This would particularly include measures to strengthen the environmental pillar, based on the suggestions made above.

The greatest risk to a successful outcome of the Conference is that not enough focus is laid upon concrete results. Sufficient evidence of the shortcomings of the framework for sustainable development exist as well as concrete proposals to make it more effective, which allow the Conference to take effective and pragmatic decisions