Environment and development in coastal regions and in small islands

U N E S C O

First Meeting of the Steering Group of the Five Chairpersons
(Paris, 5-6 October 2000)

Joint Communication of the Chairpersons
of the Five Scientific Programmes
International Geological Correlation Programme (IGCP)
International Hydrological Programme (IHP)
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC)
Man and the Biosphere (MAB)
Programme Management of Social Transformations Programme (MOST)

to the Director-General and to the 160th session of the Executive Board

The Steering Group of the Five Chairpersons was formed one year ago to strengthen further the links among our five programmes, reflecting our unity of purpose and our conviction that we can be considerably more effective by combining efforts and reinforcing synergies, against the backdrop of our ongoing work where clear progress has already been made in strengthening our cooperation. We set as a first task our contribution to the preparation of the new Medium-Term Strategy of UNESCO, and the first biennial programme and budget to translate this strategic direction into action. We were informed about the reform process in UNESCO, the rich debates that had taken place within the Natural Science and Social Science Sectors, and the new structure that had been put in place. We examined the preliminary proposals for 31 C/4 and 31C/5 (ref. documents 160 EX/5, Parts II and III) which were to be presented by the Director-General to the 160^th Session of the Executive Board.

From our discussions emerged the following comments and recommendations concerning the formulation of the new Medium-Term Strategy and the Programme and Budget for 2002-2003.

1. The world expects UNESCO to be a leader at the global level in promoting sustainable development in its fields of competence. Sustainable development is relevant to all the Major Programmes, and is the common vision adopted by the United Nations System as a whole. We strongly recommend that sustainable development become in both 31 C/4 and 31 C/5 a transverse theme which would provide a unifying concept and common framework not only for the five scientific programmes but also for the whole of UNESCO. We further recommend that specific intersectoral and interdisciplinary initiatives be foreseen to address education and science for sustainability.
   
   
2. In general, Documents 31 C/4 and 31 C/5 should reflect more explicitly the international consensus and action frameworks that have emerged from the major UN conferences of the 1990s that fall within the overall framework of sustainable development. These documents should also anticipate the results of the ten-year review and assessment of UNCED, to be undertaken in 2002, as well as the five-year reviews of the Beijing, Habitat and Copenhagen conferences.
   
   
3. There is a lack of coherence between the preliminary proposals for 31 C/4 and those put forward for 31 C/5. The C/5 should be derived from the Medium-Term Strategy.
   
   
4. We express disappointment that the preliminary proposals do not reflect adequately our Joint Statement made to the 30^th session of the General Conference. In particular we would like to reiterate the points made in the Joint Statement concerning:
   
   
   • The decision to increase joint activities in relation to the three post-Rio conventions (biological diversity, climate change and desertification) and other related multilateral agreements, integrated coastal area management and small islands, natural disaster reduction, freshwater, social transformations and sustainability, urbanization and city governance.
   • The intent to promote cooperative activities, including the development of joint projects in specific locations that lend themselves to an integrated approach from research and training to policy implementation.
   • The four overriding outcomes of our programmes: relevance to solving concrete problems, injection of research outputs into policy-making at the national and global levels, empowerment of people and communities, and education and public understanding.

5. We are also disappointed that the preliminary proposals do not reflect adequately the results of the World Conference on Science (Budapest, 1999).
   
   
   • Of particular concern are the themes of ethics, science policy, youth, gender issues, and the popularization of science.
   • Intersectoral themes, such as the ethics of science and technology and local and indigenous knowledge, have been presented as sectoral responsibilities whereas the strengths of UNESCO’s action should be intersectoral cooperation in these areas.

6. With regard to the proposals concerning the social and human sciences, it is felt that highest priority should be given to governance, and that the central role of the social and human sciences in poverty eradication should be highlighted more explicitly. The ethics of science and technology is an important concern for the social and human sciences as for the natural sciences. Therefore there should be a joint programme spanning the two sectors.
   
   
7. Because water resources and their supporting ecosystems are under great threat, we agree that water should be a principal priority for the natural sciences. To provide water security in the twenty-first century is a concern for all the programmes. Sustainable water resources use and development constitute, therefore, a major global challenge which requires interdisciplinary cooperation amongst all our programmes.
   
   
8. We agree that the massive demographic shift towards the coastal regions of the world makes it necessary for UNESCO to focus on an interdisciplinary effort in the coastal zones, including a strong participation of the social sciences. There needs to be effective follow-up to the Barbados + 5 conference for small islands, addressing issues central to developing sound science for sustainable development, especially across the land/sea boundary.
   
   
9. Interdisciplinarity is the essence of our five scientific programmes and of sustainable development in general. We therefore draw particular attention to para. 41 of document 160 EX/5, Part II, concerning “enhancing interdisciplinarity”. We recommend that interdisciplinarity as both a conceptual and operational reality be recognized as a strategic niche for UNESCO action, and that this should be reflected more clearly in 31 C/4. We also recommend that the C/4 envisage a faster progression of UNESCO towards greater interdisciplinarity, including providing the leadership, managerial and budgetary instruments, and incentives necessary to achieve this goal.
   
   
10. Given the intergovernmental nature of the Steering Group of the Five Chairpersons, and given our desire to contribute constructively to UNESCO’s strategic and programme planning process, we recommend that

• Our Steering Group become a high-level advisory body to the Director-General,
• An appropriate status be given to the group to allow it to fulfill that function to best effect.

11. We agree that enhanced financing capacity including new extrabudgetary financing and partnerships will be essential to achieving the cooperation envisaged among the five programmes. This point was made clearly in the Joint Statement presented to the 30^th General Conference, and needs to be addressed concretely in the future.

Chairpersons:

Javier Castroviejo Bolíbar, Programme on Man and the Biosphere (MAB)
Edward Derbyshire, International Geological Correlation Programme (IGCP)
Su Jilan, Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC)
Reinder A. Feddes, International Hydrological Programme (IHP)
Kenneth Wiltshire, Management of Social Transformations Programme (MOST)

	Introduction	Activities	Publications	Search
	Wise Practices	Regions	Themes