![](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/eot2008/20090109110145im_/http://cec.org/images/splash/spacer.gif) |
REPORT TO COUNCIL: NO. 98-02
Re: Summary of Round Table Discussion on the Commission for Environmental
Cooperation's (CEC) Three-Year Program Plan 1999-2001
Introduction
JPAC is pleased to present this report to the Council members of the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). It has been prepared taking into account
the decisions between of the Joint Public Advisory Committee (JPAC) members and the public
during a round table on the CEC's Three-Year Program Plan 1999-2001 on 3 December
1998 in Washington, DC. It is recognized that the Three-Year Program Plan will undergo
changes and further iterations in the months and years ahead, and these comments should
help inform those changes.
Overview
The Interim Executive Director of the CEC, Janine Ferretti, provided an
overview of the Three-Year Program Plan.
The Program Plan is driven by the Shared Agenda for Action,
which contains the priority areas identified by Council. It provides the vision and thrust
for the CEC's activities. The Secretariat has taken this framework and translated it
into programs and projects.
It is not yet a strategic plan. It attempts to provide a logical flow
from concept to project.
It is by no means perfect. There is a need to better define the
relationship between projects; project results need to flow from the objectives, and we
need to achieve measurable results in relation to those objectives.
It begins to elaborate the role of the CEC in relationship to other
institutions: that of catalyst, convener, information hub.
It lays out our intentions and does not substitute for the annual
program which is "our license to operate". However, the 1999 annual program
looks much like the Program Plan. In 1999 we are trying to force a context between the
valid, on-going work of the CEC and the new priorities set out in the Shared Agenda for
Action.
We are hoping for approval of the Program Plan in December so that
the 1999 Annual Program and Budget can be approved.
The Program Plan is a "living
document" and will be continually modified and improved. We will make revisions in
February and submit a new draft to Council in May for approval by Council in June. This
schedule anticipates input from JPAC and the public.
For example, comments received today which cannot be taken into
account for the December approval date will be brought forward for review during the next
revision.
The following is a summary of the points raised by the participants to
inform a review of the Three-Year Program Plan
General Comments
Continue the emphasis on public participation. Clarify how this will
be achieved in the 1999 projects.
Indicate where revisions are made in future drafts to facilitate
review.
There is concern about the speed at which this was put together. It
should be made explicit that this is a "work in progress."
There is confusion about the difference between the Program Plan
details and the 1999 Program. It does not look like a strategic plan. It is difficult to
separate old initiatives from new ones. More explanatory material is required.
There is a need for more focus. The number of projects has in fact
increased from 18 to 21.
How will this document be made public?
More detail is required on how capacity building will be achieved in
each project.
The preparation of comparisons (key elements) to previous years would
assist in measuring progress.
JPAC is impressed with the progress made since Council Session of
Mérida, so any criticisms should be set against this progress and the strong leadership
shown by the Interim Executive Director.
There is a need to have as a clear objective the more effective
enforcement of environmental laws in each country.
It appears that organization of the projects is
built around the organization of the CEC staff. Is this the case? This could steer us away
from strategic thinking.
The Program Plan should more clearly capture
linkages between priorities established by the Shared Agenda for Action. Projects
should be tied together by this shared vision. Where is the strategy? The CEC should put
the Shared Agenda for Action up front and build from there.
Identify funds allocated and actions taken in
previous years to show how projects are evolving, i.e., growing or phasing out. This would
help give a sense of strategic context.
Should also include the JPAC Vision Statement.
Long-term strategic planning and attention to
value added work is needed.
There is a need to facilitate public comments. How
can NGOs and special interests groups submit further comments? We require a contact.
JPAC should continually consider ways to improve
public involvement in this process.
Environmental education is lacking as a permanent
objective. This should be included.
The program elements should try to articulate the
interrelation of elements within the projects.
Environment, Economy and Trade Program
Emerging Trends in North America is the linchpin of the CEC. We need
a broader look toward the future, versus identifying what is happening now in order to
improve our ability to act quickly before the impact occurs or is irreversible. Broad
thinking is required to inform environmental decision-making.
Should clarify why there is a need to better understand the
relationship between trade and environment. For example, is this to influence public
policy decisions or decisions about social impacts and implications?
We urge continuation of the NAFTA Environmental Effects project. JPAC
should have a structured conversation about the purposes of Article 10(6) and advise
accordingly.
Who decides, and according to what criteria, and how is it decided
that there is a trend versus a short-term incident? These can be value judgments. This
whole area requires some very hard thinking and has to be carried out in a responsible
manner.
Investment as part of the trade issue should be clearly stated in the
NAFTA Environmental Effects Project.
There is a need to deal with the trade and environment "head
on." This is the heart of the CEC's mandate. The NAFTA Free Trade Commission and
the CEC could act as a model by reinforcing the positive effects and mitigating the
negative.
Conservation of Biodiversity
What is sustainable and organic? There is a need to go beyond coffee
as a project. This recommendation has been made in previous meetings. There is also a need
to make a link with poverty issues.
Standards are required for certification of sustainable tourism
agencies.
Research should be expanded to include trinational work on gray and
humpback whales.
The Strategic Directions for Conservation of Biodiversity work should
include a wider group of stakeholders in the identification of priorities.
It is very important to identify the commercial value of wildlife,
but with caution by proceeding on a case-by-case basis. One criterion should be how
actions benefit people on the ground and the wildlife species concerned, versus middlemen.
Social and environmental sustainability both require evaluation before moving to stimulate
or promote markets.
Also, with sustainable tourism, economic and social value on the
ground should be criteria, taking into account grass roots needs and realities.
Pollutants and Health
The Improved Air Quality in North America project should continue and
be part of the CEC's strategic planning effort for the next three to five years.
More detail is required on the Clean Development Mechanism.
Attention should be paid to endocrine disrupters.
There should be a focus on energy efficiency, credits for voluntary
reduction and energy conservation.
Infuse prevention throughout the document as integral to the
promotion of sustainability.
Coordinate with the National Round Tables on Pollution Prevention.
Regarding the Clean Development Mechanism, use the North American
trading block as a model for international efforts, i.e., joint implementation on
emissions.
If the CEC wants to be relevant, the main environmental issue on the
public mind is climate change. This should be a source of work and the CEC should be very
aggressive.
The CEC has a political as well as a technical responsibility to keep
the issue of climate change on the political agenda.
Law and Policy Program
Law enforcement should move beyond industry to other sectors.
A diagnosis of the capability of Mexican laboratories is required to
quickly assess needs for technical assistance.
Indicators are very important. What is the rationale for reducing the
budget?
APPROVED BY JPAC MEMBERS
3 December 1998
|