submission by nepal in rio+20

1

SUBMISSION TO RIO+20 BY THE GOVERNMENT OF NEPAL

I. Introduction

This document follows the guidance note of the Co-chairs of the UNCSD Bureau and is based on the

outcome of discussions and deliberations with representatives from civil society, government and non-

governmental organisations, communities and parliamentarians. A Steering Committee chaired by the Vice-

Chair of National Planning Commission (NPC), Government of Nepal, with representation of 11 secretaries

from line ministries, development partners, INGOs, NGOs, CBOs, experts and other stakeholders was

formed for the preparation of Rio+20 Country Status Paper. The Steering Committee formed a Task Force

Committee (TFC) under the Chairpersonship Secretary at the NPC, with seven Joint Secretaries of key

ministries to facilitate and coordinate the process. An expert panel backed up the whole preparatory process

in consultation with parliamentarians, government agencies, development partners, NGOs, CBOs, media and

youth.

Twenty-five representatives from major stakeholder groups, government agencies and technical partners

attended the first meeting of the TFC(23 September 2011) and finalised the process, scope, methodology

and timelines for document preparation. Based on the TFC guidelines, an expert group prepared the first

draft during September and October 2011 that was reviewed by the TFC, Steering Committee members, and

national experts. The second draft was shared at the national expert group meeting to ensure that all the three

pillars of sustainable development – economic, social and environmental were adequately addressed.

A National Multi-stakeholder Consultation workshop (20 October 2011) was attended by more than 100

representatives of different stakeholders groups which included parliamentarians, former ministers and high

level policy makers, government secretaries, senior government officials, the resident representative of the

UNDP, ICIMOD and representatives of media, youth, I/NGOs, CBOs, the business community, independent

experts, and major groups. The workshop discussed the key questions in the "General Content" of the

Guidance Note as well as the specific aspects of least developed and mountainous countries. It also dwelt on

the issues and themes under the "Specific Elements" of Guidance Note. The following sections summarise

key messages from Nepal to Rio+20 Conference.

II. General Content

1. What are the expectations for the outcome of Rio+20, and what are the concrete proposals in this

regard, including views on a possible structure of the Outcome document?

Nepal‟s main expectation from Rio+20 is a renewed commitment of Member States for preserving the Rio

principles and fostering implementable consensus for fulfilling the implementation gaps in the Rio

declaration and other associated commitments, and addressing new and emerging challenges in a fair and

equitable manner based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR). Nepal also

expects a clear articulation of the objective of Rio+20 to ensure a balanced and integrated approach for

addressing all the three pillars of sustainable development with poverty alleviation and inter-generational

2

human wellbeing at the centre of the Rio+20 commitments. Nepal‟s position on the two themes of Rio+20

and other components are elaborated below.

A. ON GREEN ECONOMY

i. The “green economy” should be an instrument, or a means to an end for sustainable development,

poverty reduction and inclusive and equitable economic growth. Economic growth must be

sustainable supported by well-functioning markets, and preferential access to green products at

prices that reflect the scarcity value of natural resources; and property rights must be clearly defined

to enable and encourage true stakeholders to utilize natural resources sustainably - both individually

and collectively.

ii. There must be a provision for technology adaptation and transfer, easy finance, capacity building and

favorable terms of trade and transit facilities to LDCs for the economic transformation and

ultimately contributing to sustainable development.

iii. The proven people-centred, sustainable, and green development interventions should consider the

rights of indigenous people and local communities to land and other natural resources. This would

also require national commitments to enacting appropriate legal and policy frameworks.

iv. Developing countries in general and mountainous LDCs in particular need support for adopting and

customising policies and strategies that need to be provided through special provisions for meeting

the additional financial resources, technology and capacity building requirements.

v. There is a need to radically change unsustainable consumption patterns, particularly in developed

countries that is also gradually catching up in urban centres of developing countries.

vi. Green economy should encourage the formulation and implementation of policies and mechanisms

that are conducive to engaging the government, private sector and the civil society to work together

to support green enterprises. Training and targeted interventions including financing and credit

facilities can help increase the participation and enable the poor, women and socially excluded

groups so as to promote gender and social equity in education, skills and entrepreneurship

development, health care, child welfare and social security.

vii. The LDCs and mountainous countries have very low capacity to control and manage expanding

ecological footprints of economic globalisation. There is a need for special safeguard measures, and

global commitment to ensure the protection of environmental resources of the environmentally

vulnerable countries, and safeguard the livelihoods of these countries from the pressures of economic

globalisation and global climate change.

B. ON INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

i. There is an emerging consensus to build coherence, coordination and improved service delivery

systems into multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), intergovernmental bodies, the UN

system and other international organisations. There is a realisation that the environmental pillar is

relatively weaker among the three pillars of sustainable development, because of its fragmented

governance structure. In this regard, Nepal considers the importance and relevance of creating a

3

specialised agency, a World Environment Organisation, as global technical arm of the UN system.

This agency could focus its attention on the implementation of multi-lateral environmental

agreements, building in-country capacity for addressing existing and emerging threats of

environmental degradation, and promote sustainable means for poverty reduction. The proposed

global agency should have presence at both the regional and country levels. Nepal also believes on

“one UN approach” and calls for a coordinated and efficient working systems and mechanism at all

levels.

ii. Most of the green technologies in developed countries are in the private domain and come under the

Intellectual Property Right (IPR) regime generally making the technologies costs prohibitive. In

this regard, an appropriate mechanism is urgently required for ensuing affordable access to

appropriate technologies to developing countries, and for providing necessary technical and

financial support for establishing technology research and development centres in LDCs for

developing, adapting and transferring technologies suitable to their contexts, priorities and needs.

C. ON ADDRESSING NEW AND EMERGING CHALLENGES

For addressing new and emerging challenges, there is a need to agree on a framework of action by Rio+20

participants which could include, among others, a timeline for implementing more robust and sustainable

development commitments and a set of action oriented goals. Some of the actions recommended are as

follows:

i. The poor and mountainous countries, although contribute least to global warming, are the most

vulnerable to climate change and erratic weather patterns, and have least capacity to address the

problems. Therefore, the global communities should specially support most vulnerable countries to

effectively address the adverse impacts of climate change and utilize the opportunities created from

it to improve livelihoods and achieve climate-resilient physical, social and economic development.

ii. The ability to address financial, food and energy crises in a least developed and mountainous,

countries are limited; there should be a mechanism to help these countries to come out of the crises

and improve their future resilience. In this regard, Nepal calls for proper and effective integration of

Istanbul Program of Action for the LDCs into the global sustainable agenda.

iii. While utilizing natural resources (such as hydropower generation and biodiversity conservation) for

economic benefits, the fair and equitable benefit sharing should be ensured for the local communities

and indigenous people, whose life and livelihoods are directly or indirectly dependent on these

resources or ecosystem services.

iv. For addressing income inequality and poverty reduction in a sustainable manner, it is crucial to

democratize ownership, control and decision making over productive resources and assets which are

mostly in the domain of natural resources. We should move towards an appropriate mix of more

community-based, democratic and inclusive modes such as cooperative, collective and

community‐based and driven approaches, public–private joint venture types of ownership to ensure

that economic activities generated provides sustainable livelihoods and meets the developmental

goals of the community and society.

4

v. LDCs such as Nepal should be supported to strengthen national innovation capacity to generate

appropriate technologies, enhance extension services and improve market infrastructure to increase

the productivity of agriculture and natural resources. It is also necessary to develop the adaptive and

resilient agricultural technologies that meet the need of poor, women and excluded groups and

communities in less-favored regions such as wet and dry hills and mountains.

vi. Recognizing the role of formal and informal sector, the farm and non-farm linkages should be

strengthened by improving connectivity, creating post-harvest infrastructures and facilities,

promoting value adding small and micro enterprises (SMEs) and increasing marketing and

distribution efficiency.

vii. Despite many constraints, Nepal has made progress in the implementation of programs related to

natural resources management, renewable energy, health and education and poverty reduction.

Nepal has comparative advantage in developing sustainable agriculture, tourism, water resources,

renewable energy, non-timber forest products, community forestry and biodiversity conservation.

For sustaining the achievements and scaling up successful interventions in these and other potential

areas, the country needs additional support in terms of financing, technology transfer and capacity

building.

2. What are the comments, if any, on existing proposals: e.g., a green economy roadmap, framework

for action, sustainable development goals, a revitalized global partnership for sustainable development, or others?

i. A green economy should offer new trade opportunities to all countries, and not become a pretext for

“green protectionism”. This should be used as an opportunity to promote and enhance the technical

and institutional capacity in LDCs to pursue a green-growth-based development agenda.

ii. The transition process to a greener economy has to be gradual and inclusive of all stakeholders, and

that the unavoidable employment and social costs of the transition should be shared by all in the

spirit of "just transition".

iii. National accounting systems need to measure the significant human welfare benefits, or true value of

ecosystem services that benefits national, regional and global economy and environment. Valuation

of environmental services though difficult, is a precondition for establishing payment for

environmental services.

iv. Considering the increasing importance of mountain ecosystems for downstream communities, the

high incidence of poverty and unequal access to resources in mountain areas, the growing

vulnerability of both upstream and downstream populations, and the threats to the availability of

mountain ecosystem services, all global stakeholders should agree on updating the mountain agenda

in Chapter 13 of the Agenda 21.

v. The international community is called upon to support enhanced policies, institutional structures,

funding mechanisms and support systems that recognise upstream- downstream interdependency,

and promote multi-stakeholder involvement in the management of trans-boundary resources for the

benefits of both upland and low-land communities.

5

vi. The contribution of mountain ecosystems needs better recognition in terms of ecosystem services

they provide, and this would require greater attention on the livelihood issues of mountain

communities and on maintaining/enhancing the ecosystem services. The concerns of the mountain

regions, particularly those of the developing and LDCs, remain to be addressed by the existing

framework of the green economy. This omission needs to be corrected by,

a. Recognising the direct and indirect benefits derived from the Himalayan mountains by

national and regional plans and policies;

b. Incorporating the value of ecosystem services in national development planning, GDP

accounting and decision making;

c. Establishing global, regional, national, and local mechanisms to compensate and reward

Himalayan mountain communities for the services they provide;

d. Establishing favourable conditions for improving markets for mountain ecosystem goods

and services; and for inclusion of equity concerns in the green economy in hills and

mountains; and

e. Ensuring access to resources and property rights for mountain communities especially

women, indigenous communities, and marginalised groups.

vii. The efforts of mountain communities needs to be complemented to ensure a continued availability of

the fresh water, biodiversity (including agro biodiversity), cultural diversity, and space for tourism,

recreation, and spiritual renewal, as well as for coping with the consequences of climate and

environmental changes.

viii. Nepal‟s experience in promoting community-based resources management approaches and

instruments, such as community forestry, are considered to be appropriate models for improving both

the livelihoods of mountain communities and mitigating and adapting to the adverse impacts of

climate change. These can be further enhanced to promote low-carbon socio-economic development

by creating green jobs and environmental services related businesses such as REDD+ and Payment

for Ecosystem Services.

3. What are the views on implementation and on how to close the implementation gap, which relevant

actors are envisaged as being involved (Governments, specific Major Groups, UN system, IFIs,

etc.);

i. The LDCs are lagging behind in sustainable development as the international support measures

are not fully effective and adequate in terms of scale, scope and quality. The progress of these

countries has slowed down due to the lack of the proper and timely implementation of the

commitments made by the international community in the earlier summits, including in

Stockholm (1972), Rio de Janeiro (1992) and Johannesburg (2002). The LDCs have been

experiencing high difficulty in their development mainly due to capacity constraints, inadequate

as well as poor access to financial support, partial fulfillment of ODA commitment, constant

marginalization in the international trading system, lack of substantial debt relief measures,

negligible FDI inflows, and lack of holistic approach to development. Commitments from the

North in the form of adequate financing (according to common but differentiated responsibility),

6

appropriate technology cooperation, and need-based capacity building are of utmost importance

to support developing countries to make a just transition to sustainable development pathways.

ii. There is a critical need to fulfill all the previous commitments made by the developed countries,

particularly the ODA commitment of providing the 0.15-0.20 per cent of their Gross National

Income (GNI) to the LDCs. The LDCs need to be given due priority in allocating necessary

funds as well as devising innovative programs.

iii. It is necessary to promote community-driven green enterprises such as organic farming, bio-gas

and solar energy; and seed-banking, watershed management and on-farm improvement of crop

varieties and animal breeds through collective and GESI sensitive value chain approaches.

iv. We support the call on the renewed commitment and political will of the international

community to support financing for development and national capacity-building efforts, in

particular for least developed countries (LDCs) and predominantly mountain countries. All the

stakeholders should be made accountable towards fulfilling their commitments. Partnerships and

collaboration with all Major Groups and financial institutions should be strengthened.

4. What specific cooperation mechanisms, partnership arrangements or other implementation tools are

envisaged and what is the relevant time frame for the proposed decisions to be reached and actions to be implemented?

i. In order to fill the implementation gaps and meet the new and emerging challenges, there is a need

for more coordinated, integrated, and results-oriented efforts at both national and international levels

for arranging adequate finances, ensuring appropriate technology generation and transfer, supporting

capacity building, promoting sustainable consumption and production patterns – where the

developed countries should take the lead.

ii. It is necessary to promote sharing of good practices, information and knowledge and experiences for

replicating and scaling up of successful models; for empowering women; and enhancing scientific

and technological cooperation with participation of scientists from LDCs for collaborative research

and studies.

iii. The developed countries must take concrete steps to reduce and cancel debt, remove trade barriers

and open up their markets, and build capacity in the LDCs.

iv. A global mechanism needs to be developed to assess the impacts of new technologies on health,

biodiversity and environment. Such mechanism should provide resources for building capacity of

countries and communities, especially LDCs, for assessing and monitoring the impacts of new

technologies.

v. Climate-smart policies need to be adopted for promoting economic development, reducing the

vulnerability, and financing the transition to low-carbon growth paths.

vi. Sizeable investment will need to flow into the green sectors as well as for “greening” of all possible

sectors in LDCs. While domestic resource mobilisation will play a key role, enhanced access to

international finance as well as to new and additional resources, will be crucial. There is also an

7

urgent need for greater synergy and complementarities between financing for climate change and

sustainable development.

vii. There has been an increased remittance inflow in developing countries such as Nepal, which can be

mobilised through improved investment policies and rural enterprise development programmes that

provide incentives to migrants and attract investment in the productive sectors. This requires more

political commitment at the national level and capacity building, training and infrastructure and basic

services at the local level. Nepal‟s new development vision incorporates these elements and can

complement the anticipated international support for attaining the sustainable development goals.

III. Specific Elements

Objective of the Conference: To secure renewed political commitment for sustainable development,

assessing the progress to date and remaining gaps in the implementation of the outcomes of the

major summits on sustainable development and addressing new and emerging challenges, Nepal‟s

sectoral priorities based on good practices and lesson learned are:, hydro and renewable energy, food

security and sustainable agriculture, community-based forest resources management, sustainable

tourism, water resources management, sustainable urbanization including greening of transportation

and urban waste management sectors, disaster preparedness and climate change adaptation and

value chains that contribute to integrate the three pillars of sustainable development.

In green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication, we

propose that concrete mechanisms, tailor-made for LDCs must be promoted at the global, national,

and local levels to reward and compensate communities for conservation and provision of ecosystem

services.

It is necessary to create incentive mechanism and provide support for market-driven investments and

flow of financial resources (including remittances) for sustainable development.

International organisations, intergovernmental organisations, and the private sector should contribute

to the promotion of niche products and services of LDCs through mechanisms such as value chains,

branding, labeling, and standards.

Traditional knowledge and practices need to be documented, evaluated, and built upon to solve local

problems and conserve and develop ecosystem services.

1. Institutional framework for sustainable development: Priorities and proposals for

strengthening individual pillars of sustainable development, as well as those for

strengthening integration of the three pillars, at multiple levels local, national, regional and

international.

Nepal strongly feels that the three pillars of sustainable development should be further strengthened as well

as fully integrated and a proper balance among them is properly maintained. IFSD in the context of the LDCs

should aim to identify the actors at national, regional and global levels and set out the functions of

institutions for achieving better coherence and coordination among agencies implementing sustainable

development programs, especially in vulnerable and low-capacity regions.

A. Economic pillar

8

i. Nepal's experience is somewhat similar to the global experience. Whereas it has made good progress in terms

of poverty reduction and achieving most of the time-bound MDGs, there is a long way to make the

development sustainable as the economic pillar is facing new and emerging challenges.

ii. The focus of Nepal during the last 20 years remained on economic development and poverty reduction. For

the first 15 years, the policy and legislations attempted to create environment for the free market economy

with some shallow social protection measures for disadvantaged groups. During these years, private sector

investments came in hydropower, transportation, education, health, telecommunication, civil aviation,

banking and financial institutions, telecommunication and mass communication. However, social conflict,

growing inflation, food shortages, and high transportation and energy costs have depressed the national

economic growth rate as well as increased income inequality.

iii. Multi-dimensionality of poverty and its complexities should be taken into account for initiating future

poverty alleviation measures. Reinvigorating rural agriculture and financial sectors, universal access to safe

and nutritious food, water, health and energy services, education, and sanitation in urban areas are necessary

for improving the quality of life of the poor and marginalized groups. Hence, there is a need of focused

approach in these sectors by creating more investment friendly environment and promotion of public-private

partnership.

B. Social pillar

i. An integrated and GESI sensitive value chain approaches promoting in collaboration with the government,

private sector, NGOs and CBOs with adequate resources, targeted activities, well trained and oriented human

resources on both technical and social aspects, enhancing coordination and collaboration with all relevant

actors can help increase their participation and improve benefits accrued from the natural resources.

ii. Social inclusion was considered as one of the pillars of Poverty Reduction Strategy and Program since

Nepal‟s Tenth Plan (2002-07). After the second „„People‟s Movement‟ in 2006, issues of social and

geographical inclusion and gender equality have gained further prominence in public discourse and state

policies of Nepal. Various social movements gained momentum, giving rise to interests of excluded and

marginalized groups. The political commitment has gained momentum and systematic attempts were made

to inject gender equality and social inclusion into economic and environmental policies and plans.

iii. We call for promotion of good governance and decentralization with concrete policies, plans and programs

that can benefit and reach women, socially and geographically excluded groups and indigenous people.

iv. Potential small green enterprises where Nepal has the comparative advantages are: promotion of collective

organic farming – vegetables, vegetable seeds, spices, cash crops etc. through contract/ leasehold and

cooperative farming; production of organic essential oils such as chamomile, grass and natural fibers;

tourism – rural/home-based/eco-tourism with training and investments on diversifying the tourism products;

in the urban areas – recycling of urban wastes.

C. Environment pillar

i. The Tenth Plan (2002-2007) internalized the SDAN strategies for sustainable development. Adhering to the

SDAN commitment, Government of Nepal adopted people-centric Forest Act. (1993) and forest regulations

(1995), Buffer Zone Regulation (1996), which led to Community and Leasehold Forestry Policy Guidelines,

2003; Collaborative Forest Management Guidelines, 2003 - 2004; and revised the Water Resource Policy,

2003. Government established Climate Change Council 2009; announced Climate Change Policy 2010,

9

approved National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) 2010 and also incorporated climate resilient

planning in current Three Year Plan (2010/11-2012/13), which are policy commitments for sustainable

dvelopment. All of these policies and guidelines focus on community participation, resource sharing,

sustainable use of resource and privatization of services, good governance and transparency. The

Environment Protection Act (1997) and Environment Protection Rules (1997) were adopted for incorporating

environmental concerns in development and the sustainable management of natural resources.

ii. Nepal has some proven environmental conservation models such as community forestry,

conservation and Buffer Zone area management; farmer managed irrigation and integrated

watershed management.

iii. High dependency of majority of people on natural resources in a developing country like Nepal has been

creating a vicious cycle of poverty and destruction of environmental resources such as deforestation,

biodiversity loss, land degradation and scarcity of water etc. In order to pursue green economic path, global

communities specially developed countries must help developing countries in developing alternative

livelihood opportunities and appropriate technologies which help reduce dependency of poor people on

natural resources. The programme like climate resilient planning, poverty-environment initiative and disaster

risk reduction should be strengthened so that developing countries like Nepal can shift towards green

development path by breaking the vicious cycle of poverty-environmental degradation and maximizing

social benefits to the majority of the people. Global communities can invest in creating `green

infrastructures‟ including forest conservation and watershed management and water storage

development that can create alternative livelihood opportunities and help reduce dependency of

poor people on natural resources.

2. Any proposals for refinement of the two themes. Recall that Resolution 64/236 describes the focus of

the Conference: "The focus of the Conference will include the following themes to be discussed and refined during the preparatory process: a green economy in the context of sustainable development

and poverty eradication and the institutional framework for sustainable development".

i. In the advent of global commercialization of environmental goods and services, resource

management policies should take into consideration of controlling unsustainable commercial

exploitation of ecosystems services in the name of promoting green economy.

ii. Sound environmental and climate resilient policies should be formulated by coordinating and

harmonizing the provisions of various Conventions. It should facilitate to develop environmental

standards and mainstream environmental issues to various developmental activities, monitor

environmental compliance, and conduct research, training and awareness raising programs.

iii. Topography and climatic regime make the mountainous country like Nepal particularly

vulnerable to the impacts of climatic change, such as glacial lake outburst, floods and landslides. Similarly, LDCs have also least internal capacity to cope with these vulnerabilities. The new

sustainable development paradigms should take into account of these situations and devise

policies which help vulnerable countries and regions to access required funding mechanism, technology, skills and promote south-south and north-south collaboration in managing such

risks.

Received: 2 November 2011, Wednesday