|
National Implementation of Agenda
21 |
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
IMPLEMENTATION
OF AGENDA 21: REVIEW
OF PROGRESS MADE SINCE THE UNITED
NATIONS CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENT
AND DEVELOPMENT, 1992 Information Provided by the
Government of United States to the United Nations Department for
Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development |
UNITED
STATES This country profile has been
provided by: Name of Ministry/Office: US Interagency Group for UNCSD Date: December 1996 Submitted by: Mark G. Hambley Mailing address: OES Bureau, Room 7831, Department of State, Washington, D.C. 20520 Telephone: (202) 647-3489 Telefax: (202) 647-0217 E-mail: Note from the Secretariat: An
effort has been made to present all country profiles within a common format,
with an equal number of pages. However, where Governments have not provided
information for the tables appended to Chapters 4 and 17, those tables have
been omitted entirely in order to reduce the overall length of the profile
and save paper. Consequently, there may be some minor inconsistencies among
the formats of the different country profiles. All statistics are rendered as
provided by the respective Governments. |
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS |
|
OVERVIEW |
|
FACT SHEET |
|
AGENDA 21 CHAPTERS |
|
2. |
|
3. |
|
4. |
|
5. |
|
6. |
|
7. |
|
8. |
|
9. |
|
10. |
Integrated approach to the planning and management of land
resources |
11. |
|
12. |
Managing fragile ecosystems: combating desertification and
drought |
13. |
Managing fragile ecosystems: sustainable mountain
development |
14. |
|
15. |
|
16. |
|
17. |
|
18. |
|
19. |
|
20. |
|
21. |
Environmentally sound management of solid wastes and
sewage-related issues |
22. |
Safe and environmentally sound management of radioactive
wastes |
23-32. |
|
33. |
|
34. |
Transfer of environmentally sound technology, cooperation
and capacity-building |
35. |
|
36. |
|
37. |
National mechanisms and international cooperation for
capacity-building in developing countries
|
38. |
|
39. |
|
40. |
ACRONYMS
APELL |
Awareness and Preparedness for
Emergencies at Local Level |
CFC |
chlorofluorocarbon |
CGIAR |
Consultative Group on
International Agriculture Research |
CILSS |
Permanent Inter-State Committee on
Drought Control in the Sahel |
EEZ |
exclusive economic zone |
ECA |
Economic Commission for Africa |
ECE |
Economic Commission for Europe |
ECLAC |
Economic Commission for Latin
America and the Caribbean |
ELCI |
Environmental Liaison Centre
International |
EMINWA |
environmentally sound management
of inland water |
ESCAP |
Economic and Social Commission for
Asia and the Pacific |
ESCWA |
Economic and Social Commission for
Western Asia |
FAO |
Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations |
GATT |
General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade |
GAW |
Global Atmosphere Watch (WMO) |
GEF |
Global Environment Facility |
GEMS |
Global Environmental Monitoring
System (UNEP) |
GEMS/WATER |
Global Water Quality Monitoring
Programme |
GESAMP |
Joint Group of Experts on the
Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution |
GIPME |
Global Investigation of Pollution
in Marine Environment (UNESCO) |
GIS |
Geographical Information System |
GLOBE |
Global Legislators Organisation for
a Balanced Environment |
GOS |
Global Observing System (WMO/WWW) |
GRID |
Global Resource Information
Database |
GSP |
generalized system of preferences |
HIV |
human immunodeficiency virus |
IAEA |
International Atomic Energy Agency
|
IAP-WASAD |
International Action Programme on
Water and Sustainable Agricultural Development |
IARC |
International Agency for Research
on Cancer |
IBSRAM |
International Board of Soil
Resources and Management |
ICCA |
International Council of Chemical
Associations |
ICES |
International Council for the
Exploration of the Sea |
ICPIC |
International Cleaner Production
Information Clearing House |
ICSC |
International Civil Service
Commission |
ICSU |
International Council of
Scientific Unions |
IEEA |
Integrated environmental and
economic accounting |
IFAD |
International Fund for
Agricultural Development |
IGADD |
Intergovernmental Authority for
Drought and Development |
IGBP |
International Geosphere-Biosphere
Programme (ICSU) |
IGBP/START |
International Geosphere-Biosphere
Programme/Global Change System for Analysis, Research and Training |
ILO |
International Labour Organisation |
IMF |
International Monetary Fund |
IMO |
International Maritime
Organization |
INFOTERRA |
International Environment
Information system (UNEP) |
IOC |
Intergovernmental Oceanographic
Commission |
IPCC |
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change |
IPCS |
International Programme on
Chemical Safety |
IPM |
integrated pest management |
IRPTC |
International Register of
Potentially Toxic Chemicals |
ITC |
International Tin Council |
ITTO |
International Tropical Timber
Organization |
IUCN |
International Union for
Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources |
MARPOL |
International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships |
OECD |
Organisation for Economic
Cooperation and Development |
PGRFA |
plant genetic resources for
agriculture |
PIC |
prior informed consent procedure |
SADCC |
South African Development
Co-ordination Conference |
SARD |
sustainable agriculture and rural
development |
UNCTAD |
United Nations Conference on Trade
and Development |
UNDP |
United Nations Development
Programme |
UNDRO |
Office of the United Nations
Disaster Relief Coordinator |
UNEP |
United Nations Environment
Programme |
UNESCO |
United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization |
UNFPA |
United Nations Population Fund |
UNICEF |
United Nations Children's Fund |
UNIDO |
United Nations Industrial
Development Organization |
UNU |
United Nations University |
WCP |
World Climate Programme
(WMO/UNEP/ICSU/UNESCO) |
WFC |
World Food Council |
WHO |
World Health Organization |
WMO |
World Meteorological Organization |
WWF |
World Wide Fund for Nature (also
called World Wildlife Fund) |
WWW |
World Weather Watch (WMO) |
OVERVIEW Summary
of U.S. Views five years after UNCED The U.S. Government remains
committed to promoting sustainable development consistent with UNCED's
outcomes. U.S. efforts since UNCED have included the following: UN Commission
on Sustainable Development (CSD): The U.S. strongly supported the
establishment of the CSD, as called for in Agenda 21. The U.S. believes that
the CSD should continue to serve as a focal point for monitoring the
implementation of Agenda 21 at local, regional and international levels. President's Council on Sustainable
Development (PCSD): The U.S. completed its national effort to explore the
implications of pursuing sustainable development through the PCSD. The
recommendations outlined in the PCSD's 1996 report to the President are
currently under review within the Administration. National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA): The U.S. continues to implement NEPA. This law provides a broad
mandate for federal agencies to create and maintain conditions under which
society and nature "can exist in productive harmony and fulfill the
social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of
Americans." NEPA requires federal agencies to integrate environmental
values into their decision-making processes. Foreign Assistance: The U.S.
Agency for International Development (USAID) the principal U.S. Agency for
foreign assistance activities was reorganized to make the promotion of
sustainable development one of its principal objectives. Post-UNCED Conferences: The U.S.
has played an active role in helping produce successful outcomes to a number
key post-UNCED sustainable development conferences, including: the World
Conference on Human Rights (Vienna); Small Island Developing States
Conference (Barbados); Population Summit (Cairo); Social Summit (Copenhagen);
Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing); Habitat II (Istanbul); Miami
Summit; La Paz Summit; and APEC Sustainable Development Ministerial
Conference (Manila). Climate Change: In 1996, the U.S.
took the lead in calling for accelerated negotiations on the text of a
legally-binding protocol or other legal instrument on limiting greenhouse gas
emissions to be completed for adoption by the late 1997. GLOBE: In 1994/95, the U.S.
spearheaded the international initiative proposed by Vice President Gore
known as "Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Environment
(GLOBE)". The GLOBE program is a hands-on, school-based international
environmental and education program composed of a world-wide network of
students that take a core set of measurements in the areas of
atmosphere/climate, hydrology, and biology/geology. To date, over 90
countries have expressed interest in becoming involved in the GLOBE program. International Fisheries: The U.S. was
a key player in developing the UN Convention on conservation of highly
migratory and "straddling" fish stocks, and among the first group
of countries to ratify the convention. Marine Pollution: The U.S. hosted
a UNEP organized conference on landbased sources of marine pollution in
Washington in November 1995 that resulted in a Global Plan of Action to deal
with this serious problem. The U.S. spearheaded international efforts in
1993/94 to call for a ban on radioactive waste dumping at sea. Toxic Substances: Concerned with
the health impacts of human exposure to lead, the U.S. took the lead in
identifying problems posed by leaded gasoline and co-hosted an international
workshop with Mexico in 1995 that resulted in recommendations to the CSD
calling for a phase-out of lead in gasoline. |
OVERVIEW
(Cont'd) Biodiversity and Forests: The
U.S., through USAID, currently supports one of the largest international
biodiversity conservation effort of any bilateral
donor. The U.S. continues to promote forest conservation and sustainable
management world-wide. Since UNCED, the U.S. has committed to the national
goal of achieving sustainable management of federally managed forests by the
year 2000. International Coral Reef
Initiative (ICRI): The U.S. was a major actor in spearheading the
establishment of ICRI in 1994. Agenda 21 identifies coral reefs, mangroves
and seagrass beds as high priority marine ecosystems in need of protection.
ICRI's plan of action is an innovative, long-term approach aimed at
protecting fragile coral reef ecosystems. Desertification: The U.S.
Administration is committed to the implementation of the Desertification
Convention. The U.S. was an active participant in the successful negotiations
on the Convention and signed it in October 1994. Trade: The U.S. is committed to
pursuing trade agreements that promote sustainable development. Included
among U.S. efforts since UNCED are the U.S. contributions to the successful
conclusions of the Uruguay Round and the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA). NAFTA incorporates provisions relating to environmental issues. It
was the first trade agreement to specifically address such issues. Environmental Technology: Since
UNCED, the U.S. has undertaken a multi-million dollar Climate Country Studies
Program with thirty countries, and is working with these countries to define
appropriate U.S. financial and technical assistance to help the countries
analyze their situations and opportunities in relation to global climate
change issues. The Administration released a major report, "Technology
for a Sustainable Future" which outlined a national strategy on
environmentally sound technology development and cooperation. The U.S.
remains one of the leading contributors to the Montreal Protocol fund
designed to help developing countries and countries with economies in
transition find alternatives to ozone depleting substances. Major Groups: Based on
long-standing U.S. democratic processes and institutions, the U.S. federal
government remains committed to public policy development that involves all
elements of U.S. civil society, including those major groups identified in
Agenda 21. Regional Initiatives: In the
western hemisphere, the U.S. played a strong role both at the 1994 Miami
Summit, as well as the 1996 La Paz Summit in Bolivia, to seek greater efforts
in the regional promotion of sustainable development. The U.S. also
encouraged the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) to increase its
sustainable development and environment-related activities. In June 1996,
President Clinton wrote to his fellow APEC leaders urging that a cooperative
work program be advanced to promote greater sustainability in the region. A
work program focusing on sustainable cities, a Clean Pacific initiative, and
cleaner production processes was subsequently endorsed at the APEC
Sustainable Development Ministerial in July 1996. Executive Orders: To lead by
example, and use the federal government's enormous purchasing power, the
President signed a number of Executive Orders to drive markets for more
environmental products related to the following: Recycled paperand
environmentally preferable goods for federal purchases; Alternative fuel
vehicles for federal car and truck fleets; Energy-efficient computers for all
government uses; Accelerated government phase-out of ozone depleting
chemicals; Pollution Prevention federal facilities to cut toxic emissions by
50 percent and report them under the Community Right-to-Know laws. The
President also signed an Executive Order on environmental justice that will
help to ensure that hazards are controlled in such a way that all communities
receive environmental protection regardless of race or economic circumstance. |
UNCSD
- NATIONAL LEVEL COORDINATION STRUCTURE OF AGENDA 21 ACTIONS
(Fact
Sheet)
UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA 1. Key National Sustainable
Development Coordination Mechanism(s)/Council(s). President's Council on Sustainable
Development Contact point (Name, Title,
Office): Keith Laughlin, PCSD Acting
Executive Director, Council on Environmental Quality Telephone: (202) 408-5296 Fax: (202) 408-6839 e-mail: Mailing address: 730 Jackson Place NW, Washington, DC 20503 2.
Membership/Composition/Chairperson:
25-members from industry, government, and NGOs 2a. List of ministries and
agencies involved: US Department of Energy, US
Department of Agriculture, US Department of Commerce, US Department of the
Interior, US Environmental Protection
Agency, US Department of State, US Department of Education, Council on
Environmental Quality, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2b. Names of para-statal bodies
and institutions involved, as well as participation of academic and private
sectors: Ciba-Geigy Corporation; Pacific
Gas & Electric Company; Georgia-Pacific Corporation; Chevron Corporation;
Citizens Network on Sustainable Development; General Motors Corporation; S.C.
Johnson & Son, Inc.; Enron Corp.; Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. 2c. Names of non-governmental
organizations: National Resources Defense
Council; Sierra Club; The Nature Conservancy; AFL-CIO; National Wildlife
Federation; Environmental Defense Fund; Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish
Commission. 3. Mandate role of above
mechanism/council: The Council's mission is to:
develop and recommend to the President a national sustainable development
action strategy that will foster economic vitality; develop an annual Presidential Honors Program recognizing outstanding
achievements in sustainable development; raise public awareness of
sustainable development issues and participation in opportunities for
sustainable development. Council members serve on 8 main task forces:
Eco-efficiency; Energy and Transportation; Natural Resources Management and
Protection; Principles, Goals and Definitions; Population and Consumption;
Public Linkage, Dialogue and Education; Sustainable Agriculture. 4. If available, attach a diagram
(organization chart) showing national coordination structure and linkages
between ministries: Submitted by (Name): Mark G. Hambley Signature: Signed. Title: US Special Representative to the UNCSD Date: December 1996 Ministry/Office: United States Interagency Group for UNCSD, OES Bureau,
Room 7831, Department of State, Washington, DC 20520 Telephone: (202) 647-3489 Fax: (202) 647-0217 e-mail: |
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: U.S. trade with developing countries is considerable.
According to the most recent data, US imports from Third World countries
accounted for 41 percent of U.S. world imports in 1991/92 (two year average),
as compared to a total Development Assistance Committee (DAC) average of 23
percent in the same period. In the five year period 1986/87-1991/92, US
imports from developing countries grew 6 percent annually in real terms,
whereas exports to these countries increased by 14 percent. The U.S. runs a substantial
developing country deficit, which in 1991/92 amounted to $58.7 billion in
imports reported on cost insurance freight (c.i.f.) exports reported on free
on board (f.o.b.) basis. The
regional distribution of US trade with Third World countries shows a heavy
concentration of trade with developing countries in Southern and Eastern
Asia. With an absolute amount of $118 billion in 1991/92 (two year average),
22 percent of total US imports came from that region, with an average annual
growth rate of 7 percent in real terms over the preceding five-year period.
The main trading partners are China, Hong Kong, Singapore, the Republic of
Korea and Taiwan. Central and South America rank second among the main
regions, accounting for 13 percent in the same period. The largest trading
partner, by far, in this region is Mexico. In Africa, a substantial amount of
U.S. imports are derived from Angola and Nigeria. The
U.S. General System of Preferences (GSP) provides preferential duty-free
treatment to developing countries. The programme covers over a 140
beneficiary countries and territories and includes 4,400 products (textiles,
watches, some leather goods, steel, glass and electronic articles are
excluded). In 1993, the U.S. imported nearly $20 billion of duty-free products
under the GSP programme, an increase of 17 percent over 1992. GSP imports
represented about 16 percent of overall U.S. trade with beneficiary countries
in 1993. United States duties forgone were approximately $900 million. This
programme represented about 3 percent of total U.S. imports in 1992. Most GSP
benefits go to a small number of more advanced developing countries. In 1992,
85 percent of duty-free imports under the GSP programme were from 10
countries. Mexico accounted for 29 percent but graduated from the GSP
programme when NAFTA was implemented on 1 January 1994. The other top
beneficiaries were Malaysia, Thailand, Brazil and the Philippines.
Administrative exclusions have limited the impact of GSP so that in 1992, for
example, 45 percent of GSP-eligible imports entered with duties applied to
them. These administrative exclusions apply when a product fails to meet
requirements that the beneficiary country's export contain at least 35
percent domestic content. The product must also be shipped directly from the
beneficiary country. The
US remains a major proponent of liberalized trade as a means to promote
sustainable development and has consistently advocated such an approach in
numerous fora (most recently in APEC). In
the PCSD's report, goal 9 calls upon the U.S. to take a leadership role in
the further development of global sustainable development policies. Goal 7 of
the same report recommends that the U.S. continue efforts to promote economic
and national security by actively participating in and leading cooperative
international efforts to encourage democracy, support scientific research,
and enhance economic development that preserves the environment and protects
human health. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1.
Decision-Making Structure: By law, the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR)
plays the leading role in the development of policy on trade and
trade-related investment. This organization, as it has evolved over the
years, consists of three tiers of interagency committees that constitute the
principal mechanism for developing and coordinating US government positions
on international trade and international trade-related investment issues. The
first two tiers are the Trade Policy Review Group (TPRG) and the Trade Policy
Staff Committee (TPSC), both chaired by USTR, are sub-cabinet interagency
trade policy coordination groups that are central to this process. The final
tier of the interagency trade policy mechanism is the National Economic
Council (NEC), chaired by the President and whose members include the Vice
President and the Cabinet Secretaries and other senior-level Administration
officials. The NEC considers policy matters referred to it by the TPRG. As
policy decisions are made, USTR assumes responsibility for directing the
implementation of that decision. 2.
Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: Not applicable 3.
Major Groups: USTR is generally seeks views of major groups, including
from industry and key sectors, including the environment community and
others, in decisionmaking efforts undertaken through the process. 4.
Finance: Not applicable 5.
Regional/International Cooperation: The U.S. cooperates in numerous
regional and international fora dealing with trade issues and remains a
strong proponent of liberalized trade in support of sustainable development. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
|||||
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 3: COMBATING POVERTY
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: In order to provide a safety net for disadvantaged,
elderly and disabled persons in American society, the federal government
administers a range of social insurance and social assistance programs,
including Medicare, unemployment insurance, worker's compensation, and
temporary disability insurance. Also included are an array of "income
support programs" such as supplemental security income (SSI), aid to
families with dependent children (AFDC), Medicaid, food stamps, low-income
home energy assistance programs, public housing, special nutritional programs
and general assistance. Federally-administered social programs were not
developed all at once to fulfil a specific agenda of national need. Rather,
they are a range of legislation passed over the years to help meet the needs
of particular groups of citizens at particular times. In August 1996,
President Clinton signed into law the "Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996", which will virtually revamp
many elements of key programs, including the AFDC and SSI. Further debate on
the implementation of this legislation will likely continue in the
President's second Administration. U.S. poverty thresholds are set to
determine whether a person or family is eligible for assistance under a
particular federal programme. The poverty threshold is established each year
by increasing the previous year's threshold according to the change in the
Consumer Price Index. The original poverty threshold was devised in the 1960s
and was equal to three times the amount of money needed to buy the least
expensive "nutritionally adequate" diet. In addition to federal
efforts, there are a wide-range of poverty alleviation programs by States,
religious and charitable institutions, businesses and local communities.
By-and-large, these non-federal government efforts play an essential role in
helping to assist individuals and groups affected by poverty in the US.
Economic Prosperity and Equity are Goal #2 and Goal #3 respectively of the
President's Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD). By economic
prosperity, the PCSD means to "sustain a healthy U.S. economy that grows
sufficiently to create meaningful jobs, reduce poverty, and provide the
opportunity for a high quality of life for all in an increasingly competitive
world." Measuring economic prosperity will be facilitated via a variety
of yardsticks, including: economic performance, employment figures, poverty
rates, savings and investment rates, natural resources, environmental
accounting and productivity. Equity is defined as to "ensure that all
Americans are afforded justice and have the opportunity to achieve economic,
environmental, and social well-being." Equity is measured via income
trends, environmental equity (environmental justice) and social equity. As
part of its strategy to foster broad-based economic growth in developing
countries, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) is committed
to expanding access and opportunity for the poor and ensuring disadvantaged
people have access to resources and technologies. USAID works with local
governments and institutions to make regulatory, legal and institutional
environments more equitable. USAID efforts in this regard include expanding
access to formal financial services for micro-entrepreneurs; expanding access
to technology, information and outreach services; and expanding economic
opportunities for women and disadvantaged groups. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1.
Decision-Making Structure: The Congress and the Administration make up the basic decisionmaking
structure at the federal level. Federal Agencies involved in implementing
programs legislated by Congress include the Department of Health and Human
Services, the Department of Labor, the Department of Agriculture, the
Department of Housing and Urban Development and others. 2.
Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: At the federal level, there are
several programs, including those related to job training, that are aimed at
helping train income disadvantaged individuals. 3.
Major Groups: Major groups play an important role in developing and
implementing numerous wide-ranging programs aimed at alleviating poverty in
the US. 4.
Finance: In 1995, federal expenditures on key social programs such
as OASDI, Medicare, Medicaid, Food stamps, AFDC, and SSI amounted to over
$740 billion. 5.
Regional/International Cooperation: See description of USAID efforts
on previous page. NB:
Developed countries, where domestic poverty alleviation is not a major
concern may wish to briefly describe their position regarding global poverty
alleviation. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
|||||
1985 |
1990 |
1992 |
1995 |
||
Unemployment
(%) |
7.2 |
5.5 |
6.1 |
5.6 |
|
Population
living in absolute poverty |
14.0 |
13.5 |
13.2 |
13.2 (Est) |
|
Public
spending on social sector % |
49.9 |
49.4 |
59.5 |
60.8 |
|
Other
data |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 4: CHANGING CONSUMPTION PATTERNS
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: The President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD)
sought to identify the factors influencing U.S. demographic consumption and
waste generation trends. Since 1993, a policy debate on consumption and
production was held at the national level. A preliminary report comprised of
information compiled on U.S. demographic consumption and waste generation
trends was presented to the Council at the April 1994 meeting. Following this
report, the Council decided the Task Force would convene a series of public
roundtable discussions among members of the Council, experts in the field and
the interested public to identify substantive opportunities for intervention.
The first roundtable was held on October 27, 1994 in which fertility and
migration issues were discussed. The U.S. government collects and
disseminates extensive data on consumption and production of goods and
services. This data is available in the annual "Statistical Abstract of
the United States" prepared by the U.S. Census Bureau, as well as in
other U.S. data publications. In the PCSD report, policy recommendation 3 in
Chapter 2 on "Extended Product Responsibility" calls for the U.S.
to adopt a voluntary program that ensures responsibility for the
environmental effects throughout a product's life cycle by all those involved
in the life cycle. As stated in Vice President Gore's address at CSD I in
1993, the issue of sustainable patterns of consumption and production is an
important one for the United States. Among the steps that the United States
has taken, or will be taking related to sustainable consumption are:
Increased Energy Efficiency; encouraging recycling programs; fostering
pollution prevent programs; using federal government procurement and
practices to better promote sustainable development goals related to
consumption and production, and promoting environmental education,
sustainable agriculture practices, and achieving sustainable forest
management practices by the year 2000. From the U.S. perspective, it is clear
that it is possible to promote more sustainable production and consumption
patterns while promoting economic growth. In many cases, production processes
which are more environmentally sound are also more economically efficient.
Many U.S. companies have found that investing in pollution prevention and
energy efficiency has provided significant cost savings in the long term. The
internalization of environmental and social costs associated with production
(including use of the polluter pays principle) provide a mechanism whereby
market forces can be harnessed to increase the production of goods and
services while reducing environmental damage. Another key component in
promoting more sustainable patterns of production includes subsidy reform,
which is an ongoing process in the U.S. USEPA has in place a number of
programs that promote more sustainable production and consumption patterns,
including the Energy Star Building Program, the Green Lights Program, and the
Design for the Environment Program. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1.
Decision-Making Structure: No specific decisionmaking structure currently exists.
Questions dealing with development of any federal role in addressing
consumption issues in an overarching manner would need to be addressed by the
Congress in consultation with the Administration. Questions of cleaner, more
environmentally sound production methods are addressed at the federal level
mainly by the USEPA. Questions involving energy efficiency and renewable
energy policy issues are also addressed by the U.S. Department of Energy. 2.
Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: Most technology issues related to
federal government activities are addressed in regard to cleaner production
processes work of USEPA and USDOE. 3.
Major Groups: Major groups have been involved in discussions related to
sustainable consumption and production that have been undertaken in the PCSD
process. 4.
Finance: Federal budget outlays are made mainly through USEPA and
USDOE on cleaner production methods. 5.
Regional/International Cooperation: U.S. representatives have been
involved in the work of the OECD and UNEP and other international
organizations on sustainable production and consumption patterns. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
|||||
1985 |
1990 |
1992 |
1994 |
||
GDP
per capita (current US$) |
16,776 |
21,737 |
23,340 |
25,774 |
|
Real
GDP growth (%) |
3.1 |
1.1 |
2.4 |
3.1 |
|
Annual
energy consumption per capita (Kg. of oil equivalent per capita) |
7,644a |
7,524 |
7,516 |
NA |
|
Motor
vehicles in use per 1000 inhabitants |
717.3 |
754.8 |
751.5b |
NA |
|
Other
data a
= 1989 b = 1993 |
Government policies affecting
consumption and production.
1. Goals and Agents (Stakeholders)
Indicate with a (X) those agents which your Governments
policies are meant most to influence.
Agents
Goals
|
Producers |
Local authorities |
Central Government |
Households |
Civil society |
Material
efficiency |
|||||
Energy
efficiency: |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Transport
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Housing
|
X |
||||
Other
|
|||||
Waste: |
|||||
Reduce
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Reuse
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Recycle
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Comments:
2. Means & Measures and Agents (Stakeholders)
Indicate with an (R) those agents who assume primary
responsibility for any of the policy measures indicated; indicate with an
(I) the agents for which the impact is expected to be especially
significant.
Agents
Means
& Measures |
Producers |
Local authorities
|
Central Government |
House- holds |
Civil Society |
Improving
understanding and analysis |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Information
and education (e.g., radio/TV/press) |
|||||
Research
|
|||||
Evaluating
environmental claims |
|||||
Form
partnerships |
|||||
Applying
tools for modifying behaviour |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Community
based strategies |
|||||
Social
incentives/disincentives (e.g., ecolabelling) |
|||||
Regulatory
instruments |
|||||
Economic
incentives/disincentives |
|||||
Voluntary
agreements of producer responsibility for aspects
of product life cycle |
|||||
Provision
of enabling facilities and infrastructure (e.g.,
transportation alternatives, recycling) |
|||||
Procurement
policy |
|||||
Monitoring,
evaluating and reviewing performance |
|||||
Action
campaign |
|||||
Other
(specify) |
Comments:
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 5: DEMOGRAPHIC DYNAMICS AND SUSTAINABILITY
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: The U.S. does not have an official population policy, in
part because population density is low in the United States and large regions
of the country are sparsely populated. In addition, there is little public
consensus about either the need for population-based policies, or their
nature. According to the U.S. National Report to the International Conference
on Population and Development (April 1994), much of the need for family
planning in the United States can be met with current contraceptive methods.
However, the development of new methods will expand individual's choices and
improve options for families. Most
family planning interventions are conducted by NGOs such as Planned
Parenthood. In preparation for the International Conference on Population and
Development, public meetings were held throughout the U.S. to facilitate the
participation of NGOs and individuals. In Cairo, governmental and non-governmental
participants collaborated together to draft an Action Programme that
encompasses quality family planning and reproductive health services, women's
empowerment, involvement of men in gender-specific issues, expanded access to
education and health care services, and the reduction of wasteful resource
consumption. The
U.S. has no specific policies to modify the spatial distribution of the
population. The
Office of Population Affairs (OPA) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) provides resources and policy advice on population, family
planning, reproductive health, and adolescent pregnancy issues. OPA also
administers two grant programs under the "Public Health Service
Act" (Public Law 91-572) under Title X, known as the national Family
Planning Program, and Title XX, known as the Adolescent Family Life Program. The
Title X program supports grants to provide comprehensive family planning and
reproductive health services contraceptive services and supplies, basic
gynecological care, cancer and general medical screening, infertility
services, education, counselling and referral to all eligible persons. Each
year, the program serves nearly 5 million persons through a nationwide
network of 4,800 clinics. Priority is given to persons from low-income
families. Services are voluntary and provided on a confidential basis. Under
Title X, OPA also maintains a clearinghouse on population and reproductive
health issues. The OPA clearinghouse collects, develops, and distributes
information on family planning, adolescent pregnancy, abstinence, adoption,
reproductive health care, and sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV
and AIDS. The
Title XX program supports grants for demonstration projects that (1) develop
innovative programs to provide health, education and social services to
pregnant and parenting adolescents, and (2) develop and test programs for
preadolescents, adolescents and their families to delay the onset of
adolescent sexual activity and thus reduce the incidence of pregnancy and STD
infection. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1.
Decision-Making Structure: The U.S. Bureau of the Census, the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID), the National
Center for Health Statistics of the Centers for Disease Control, the U.S.
Department of Labor, the National Institute of Health's Center for Population
Research and the Immigration and Naturalization Service are most directly
concerned with demographic issues. USAID, the Department of Health and Human
Services, and the Department of Education manage and operate programmes
related to comprehensive population stabilization efforts. An interagency
working group composed of representatives of the U.S. Department of State,
National Security Council, USAID, Center for Disease Control, USEPA,
Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Labor, Treasury
Department, Office of Science and Technology Policy, CEQ, Department of
Commerce, U.S. Bureau of Census and the Office of the Vice President
coordinate population, environment, and development policies. 2.
Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: No information 3.
Major Groups: Women retain a key role in each of the major U.S.
domestic and international agencies concerned with population and sustainable
development, and constitute more than 50 % of the staff of some units with
management responsibilities in these areas. Women constituted more than 50 %
of the U.S. delegation to ICPD. A number of steps have been taken to involve
women at all levels in programmes supported by USAID. 4.
Finance: In fiscal year 1993, the United States spent
approximately $25 million on the development of new contraceptive methods. A
total of $144 million was spent on all aspects of population research. 5.
Regional/International Cooperation: U.S. population assistance has
been provided through both bilateral and multilateral channels under the
Foreign Assistance Act. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
is the principal organization responsible for carrying out U.S. population
assistance programmes. The U.S. works multilaterally through the United
Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) which supports family planning and
reproductive, maternal and child health programmes in about 60 countries,
many of which do not receive direct assistance from the U.S. The U.S. - Japan
Common Agenda is an initiative which began in July 1993 and includes the
following goals: maximize the impact of each country's population and health
assistance interventions, increase technical capacity to provide assistance,
and increase opportunities to share lessons learned. The Summit of the
Americas, The International Research and Training Program, Multilateral
Development Banks (MDBs) are other examples of bilateral and multilateral
programmes. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1990 |
1993 |
1995 |
||
Population
(Thousands) mid-year estimates |
249,924 |
258,233 |
263,081 |
|
Annual
rate of increase (1990-1993) |
1.1 |
|||
Surface
area (Km2) |
9,363.5 |
9,363.5 |
||
Population
density (people/Km2) |
27.6 |
28.1 |
||
Other
data |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 6: PROTECTING AND PROMOTING HUMAN HEALTH
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: The Health People 2000 plan, developed by the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services since UNCED, links national health objectives
through three goals: to increase the span of healthy life for Americans,
reduce health disparities among Americans, and to achieve access to
preventive services for all Americans. According
to the U.S. National Report to the International Conference on Population and
Development (April 1994), in the early 1990s, one-tenth of the non-elderly
were covered by Medicaid, a federal insurance programme for the poor, and 9.5
million children (15 percent) and 17 percent of all non-elderly people were
without any health insurance. The
major federal programmes serving children and pregnant women are Medicaid,
the Maternal and Child Health Block Grant Programme, the Special Supplemental
Food Programme for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), and the Community and
Migrant Health Center Programme. Funding from several public programmes
support family planning services. The President's Council on Sustainable
Development (PCSD) maintains that one of its primary objectives is to ensure
that every person enjoys the benefits of clean air, clean water, and a
healthy environment at home, at work and at play. The PCSD seeks to decrease
the number of people who live in areas that fail to meet air quality
standards; limit the number of persons whose drinking water fails to meet
national safe drinking water standards; reduce toxic emissions and decrease
the incidence of diseases and deaths that are related to environmental
exposures. For
a broad national goal like reducing smoking, the U.S. has adopted a
combination of measures, including regulating smoking in public places and
increasing taxes on tobacco. HIV
infection and AIDS is a national priority for disease prevention, as diseases
related to personal behaviours have become critical components of health and
mortality indicators. The National Commission on AIDS was established by
public law "for the purpose of promoting the development of a national
consensus on policy concerning AIDS and of studying and making
recommendations for a consistent national policy." President Clinton has
named a national AIDS Policy Coordinator to facilitate implementation of
federal AIDS control programmes. In
recognition of current trends, the Department of Health and Human Services
has set a goal for the year 2000 to "increase to at least 90 percent the
proportion of sexually active, unmarried people aged 19 and younger who use
contraception." In other words, policy has shifted from discouraging
contraception on the basis of age and marital status to promoting it to all
who do not have access to services. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1.
Decision-Making Structure: Decision-making on federal policy and programs on human health
issues are arrived at through the deliberations of the Congress in
consultation with the Administration. Key federal agencies involved include
HHS, USEPA, the Food and Drug Administration and others. 2.
Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: The U.S. is a world leader in
training of medical personnel and in the development and of health related
technologies. 3.
Major Groups: Major groups play an active role in debate on health care
issues at the federal, state & local levels. 4.
Finance: National expenditures for health care reached an
estimated $900 billion in 1993, which, on a per capita basis, is equivalent
to $3,500 per person per year. The government's share of this spending was
almost 44 percent of the total in 1991, and is projected to exceed 50 percent
by the end of the decade. Therefore, containing health care costs while
increasing the number of beneficiaries equitably is a major goal of the
President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). By the end of 1993,
the federal government had spent approximately $17 billion in the fight
against HIV infection. One in ten of non-elderly Americans are covered by
Medicaid, a federal insurance programme. The Maternal and Child Health Block
Grant Programme which supports the direct delivery of services in public
health care settings receives funding from states which contribute $3 in
matching funds for every $4 in federal funds received. 5.
Regional/International Cooperation: The United States plays an active
role in both regional and international health organizations, including WHO,
UNICEF, UNAIDS, and the Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO). The U.S.
also provides multilateral and bilateral assistance to promote and protect
human health under the Foreign Assistance Act. USAID is the principal U.S.
Agency responsible for carrying out these programs. In addition, the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the National Institutes for Health
(NIH) also support international health programs. USAID provides bilateral
assistance for health programs in almost 50 countries. Closely linked with
population and family planning programs, USAID's health efforts are focused
on three strategic areas: reducing child mortality by expanding access to and
improving the quality of basic preventative services & supporting
research for the development of new and better child health technologies;
reducing maternal mortality through increased use of family planning,
improving maternal health & safe delivery, & improved management of
obstetrical complications; & reducing the spread of sexually transmitted
infections, especially HIV/AIDS by focusing primarily on prevention of
transmission of other sexually transmitted infections, increased information
& increased availability and use of condoms. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1980 |
1990 |
1993 |
||
Life
expectancy at birth: male/female |
69.4/77.2 |
71.6/78.5 |
72.1/78.9 |
|
Infant
mortality (per 1000 live births) |
14 |
10 |
8.5 |
|
Maternal
mortality rate (per 100000 live births) |
9 |
8a |
7.8(1992) |
|
Access
to safe drinking water (% of population) |
100 |
|||
Access
to sanitation services (% of population) |
98 |
|||
Other
data |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 7: PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE HUMAN SETTLEMENT
DEVELOPMENT
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: The U.S. has no specific policies to modify the spatial
distribution of the population. The American population has become largely
urban and increasingly suburban and exurban. Cities across the country have seen
population grow in the suburbs and beyond, rather than in city centers. In
addition, large-scale migration during the 1970s and 1980s shifted the
regional distribution of the population from the North and Midwest to the
South and West. Growth
management has thus become an important concern for urban planners,
particularly since fiscal resources have become increasingly constrained.
Local governments are being more assertive in requiring developers of new
housing or business facilities to bear the costs of providing streets,
utilities, and other services. Local governments are also developing or
revising regulations that determine where new buildings can be constructed,
and how many people they may shelter. Most
decisions related to land-use are made at the local level, such as the case
of Washington State, home to Seattle, one of the country's fastest growing
metropolitan areas. In 1990, Washington passed the Growth Management Act,
which is designed to provide incentives for well-planned growth. The legislation
has led to broad-based citizen participation. Sustainable Seattle, a
non-profit organization of citizens, initiated a process to evaluate the
city's livability and environmental health via its project on indicators.
Using a broad and open process, the group led the community in identifying
social, economic and environmental indicators and conducted research to
measure Seattle's environmental progress or deterioration. The
federal government's role in human settlement issues falls under the responsibility
of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HUD administers
mortgage programs to help families become homeowners. HUD also fosters
construction of new housing and renovation of existing rental housing and
provides aid for low-income families who cannot afford their rent. HUD enacts
programs to prevent housing discrimination, and encourages a strong private
sector housing industry. HUD also cooperates with state and local
authorities, as well as local non-governmental groups, to address problems
posed by homelessness in many urban areas throughout the country. HUD
maintains a number of programs, including the Empowerment Zones and
Enterprise Communities program. This latter program seeks to empower local
citizens to become more involved in their communities and aware of
environmental technology benefits that result from attracting new business
and industries to depressed areas. HUD also has a Land Use Systems Technology
program which involves research and technical aspects of urban development,
land use, open space, environmental protection and other contexts of
development. HUD's Office of Community Planning and Development also has a
Sustainable Communities Development System aimed at providing overall policy
and technical purview of technologies affecting all dimensions of the
ecological, land, natural resources, industrial, and development aspects of
urbanization. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1.
Decision-Making Structure: Federal policy on housing is based on programs enacted by
the Congress and administered by HUD. However, virtually the entire housing
development process land acquisition, construction, sale and financing is market driven. Typically, zoning regulations for
housing are developed and administered at local levels, with little or no
federal involvement. 2.
Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: 3.
Major Groups: No information 4.
Finance: No information 5.
Regional/International Cooperation: The U.S. played an active role in
Habitat II. USAID's urban programming approaches promote the principles of
sustainable human settlements development agreed to at Habitat II. These
principles include: 1) decentralization and empowerment of local governments
to enable them to carry out local environmental improvements; 2) creation of
enabling financial and institutional/legal frameworks and environments which
foster autonomy of local governments and increase participation of the
private sector in the financing and delivery of urban services, housing and
improved environmental management; and, 3) increasing citizen participation
in the decision-making of local governments in urban services delivery. USAID
programs are aimed at increasing access to water, sewerage, solid waste
disposal services and basic shelter within unserviced low-income
neighborhoods and squatter settlements; improving the quality and capacity
for expansion of water supply and sanitation systems; increasing the
efficiency and commercial viability of water and wastewater utilities or
introducing public-private partnership models to support those services;
improving old and/or introducing new cost recovery mechanisms for
infrastructure investments; introducing proper legal and regulatory
frameworks to facilitate the private sector's ability to finance and deliver
shelter and infrastructure services; and increasing the participation of the
public, with particular emphasis on the poor and on women, in planning and
decision-making of municipal services. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
|||
1990 |
1995 |
||
Urban
population in % of total population |
75.2 |
76.2 |
|
Annual
rate of growth of urban population (%) |
1.1 |
1.3 |
|
Largest
city population (in % of total population) |
6.4 |
6.2 |
|
Other
data |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 8: INTEGRATING ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
IN DECISION-MAKING
(See pages vii and viii at the beginning of the profile)
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: Following UNCED, the U.S. has sought to better integrate policy
considerations through closer coordination of environmental and economic
agencies. The President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) is the
key national sustainable development coordinating mechanism of the United
States. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) continues to provide a
broad mandate for federal agencies to create and maintain "conditions
under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony and fulfill the
social, economic and other requirements of present and future generations of
Americans." In
1993, the Office of Environmental Policy was created in the Executive Office
of the President to better ensure that environmental considerations are
appropriately incorporated in Administration policies. In addition, environmental
agencies have begun to play a greater role in policy coordination through
bodies such as the National Economic Council, the Trade Policy Review Group
and the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee. This participation has
resulted in innovative policies in such high-profile areas as trade policy,
climate change and technology development. The results of this coordination
can be seen in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and its
supplemental agreements on labor and environment, entered into with Canada
and Mexico. The
President's Climate Change Action Plan represents another government-wide
effort to strategically integrate environment and development objectives over
the coming years. The plan consists of nearly 50 initiatives designed to reduce
greenhouse emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. It is estimated that
these efforts will save $260 billion in energy bills by the year 2010 while
promoting economic efficiency and competitiveness. Many initiatives are
largely voluntary programmes designed to spur cost-effective actions without
additional regulations and bureaucracy. One of these, The U.S. Initiative in
Joint Implementation, jointly chaired by the Department of Energy and the
Environmental Protection Agency, is a voluntary pilot programme designed to
contribute to international understanding to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
in different geographic regions through joint U.S. and foreign partnerships.
In cooperation with other federal agencies and through meetings with federal,
state, tribal and local officials, the EPA is developing a detailed set of
measurable, national environmental goals in such areas as clean air,
ecological protections, safe drinking water, and improved understanding of
the environment. The 1993 Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) requires strategic plans for all agencies containing
long-range goals and objectives, as well as performance indicators for all
government programmes. Most agencies are involved in strategic planning. A
number of strategic plans put out by Agencies since Rio, including the
National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration (NOAA), the Department of
Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and agencies within the
Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture, emphasize
sustainable development as a conceptual framework for their activities.
Several agencies, including the Department of Energy and the U.S. Forest
Service, are setting goals for achieving sustainability in the use of those
resources which are the responsibility of their respective agencies. In
addition, agencies are developing joint strategies to address particular
issues such as pesticide management and ecosystem maintenance. In general,
agencies have made a marked effort since Rio to better integrate
environmental and economic considerations into their decisions. For example,
agencies which have traditionally emphasized resource development (such as
the Bureau of Reclamation, the Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Forest
Service) are now stressing the integration of conservation and resource
management objectives as well to ensuring that such development is
sustainable. The
Common Sense Initiative, administered by the EPA, reflects another example of
a targeted approach which emphasizes increased attention to partnerships.
Teams made up of industrial representatives, environmental advocates and
federal regulators are developing sector-specific approaches through a review
of existing environmental regulations, available pollution prevention and
compliance strategies, and the promotion of innovative technologies, among
other activities. Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) are usually used
for policies, programmes and projects. EIA's are required under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for all major federal actions that
significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Approximately 500
EIAs are carried out each year. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1.
Decision-Making Structure (please also refer to the fact sheet): Created by a 1993 Executive
Order, the President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) is xplicitly
charged with recommending a national action plan for sustainable development
to the President. The PCSD submitted its report, "Sustainable America: A
New Consensus", to the President in early 1996. A presentation of the
PCSD report was provided to delegates at CSD IV in May 1996. In the absence
of a multi-sectoral consensus on how to achieve sustainable development in
the United States, the PCSD was conceived to formulate recommendations for
the implementation of Agenda 21. The Council's expressed mission is to:
develop and recommend to the President a national sustainable development
action strategy that will foster economic vitality; develop an annual Presidential
Honors Programme recognizing outstanding achievements in sustainable
development; raise public awareness of sustainable development issues and
participation in opportunities for sustainable development. Council members
serve on 8 main Task Forces : Eco-efficiency; Energy
and Transportation; Natural Resources Management and Protection; Principles,
Goals and Definitions; Population and Consumption; Public Linkage, Dialogue
and Education; Sustainable Agriculture. The Council has been asked to follow
up with policy recommendations. The
mission of the PCSD was prescriptive in nature, and emphasized agenda-setting
rather than policy implementation. Accordingly, its
Report "Sustainable America for the Future: a New Consensus for
Prosperity, Opportunity and a Healthy Environment" is not the United
States' National Agenda 21. The fundamental objective of the Council was to
forge a consensus among the various stakeholders (government, business and
industry, private citizens, non-profits, labor etc.) and create a viable
sustainable development strategy that articulated the interests and concerns
of all groups. Through a vigorous consensus-building process, the report was
adopted unanimously by all participants. U.S. laws and regulations covering
environmental protection, natural resource management and socio-economic
development are administered by many federal agencies. Federal natural
resource management is overseen, for example, by a number of different
agencies in the Departments of Interior, Agriculture, Defense, Energy,
Commerce, among others. Environmental pollution is regulated by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Oceanic and Atmosphere
Administration (NOAA), the Department of Justice, and other agencies. While
this division of labor has resulted in a clear mission on the part of
individual agencies, (and the U.S. has long had a coordinated inter-agency
process for decision-making), the current arrangement has at times resulted
in the fragmentation of policy approaches. Accordingly, several
government-wide activities have been initiated since UNCED to identify
weaknesses and improve national coordination and decision-making capability. 2.
Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: No information 3.
Major Groups: The PCSD is composed of leaders from government and
industry, as well as from environmental, labor and civil rights
organizations. 4.
Finance: No information 5.
Regional/International Cooperation: In addition to the CSD, the U.S.
has cooperated in numerous fora to promote better integratioon of environment
concerns into development in decision-making, including APEC, the Bolivia
Sustainable Development Summit, and other international bodies and
conferences. |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 9: PROTECTION OF THE ATMOSPHERE
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: The
Montreal Protocol and its Amendments Montreal
Protocol (1987) signed in 1988 London
Amendment (1990) signed before 1992. Copenhagen
Amendment (1992) signed after 1992. The
latest report(s) to the Montreal Protocol Secretariat were prepared in 1996. United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UNFCCC
was signed in 1992. The
latest report to the UNFCCC Secretariat was submitted in 1994. Additional
comments relevant to this chapter: The President's Climate Change
plan includes nearly 50 different initiatives (see chapter 8). In July 1996,
the U.S. announced interest in achieving a binding agreement to reduce
emissions of greenhouse gases. The U.S. government will attempt to reduce
emissions through market-based solutions such as pollution trading permits
and energy efficiency measures. The
U.S. Government promotes policies and programmes in the areas of "energy
efficiency", "environmentally sound and efficient transportation",
"industrial pollution control", "sound land-use
practices", "sound management of marine resources" and
"management of toxic and other hazardous waste". The government,
scientific community and NGOs have conducted studies on the cumulative impacts
of air pollution and the depletion of the ozone layer on public health. To
date, one of the most important studies conducted is the EPA's Regulation
Impact Analysis which was undertaken in 1994. The
private sector and the government have developed methodologies to identify
threshold levels of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. In the area of
environment and transport, emissions monitoring is comprehensive and
systematic. In the area of transboundary atmospheric pollution control, the
government has facilitated the exchange of data and information at national
and international levels. Regarding the programme area of energy, transport
and industry, the U.S. Government has reviewed current energy supply mixes. The
U.S. Government is involved in the development and use of terrestrial and
marine resources and land-use practices that will be more resilient to
atmospheric changes and fluctuations. The U.S. government supports the
conservation and enhancement of sinks and reservoirs of greenhouse gases, including
biomass, forests and oceans, as well as other terrestrial, coastal and marine
ecosystems. Regarding the programme area of preventing stratospheric ozone
depletion, national goals concerning the phase-out of CFCs and other ozone
depleting substances are outlined in the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990.
The U.S. Government has also strengthened early warning systems and response
mechanisms for transboundary air pollution resulting from industrial
accidents and natural disasters. Money-saving
pollution prevention initiatives have been implemented at the facility level.
The Pollution Pilot Project is led by a core group from the Natural Resources
Defense Council (NRDC), Amoco Petroleum, The Dow Chemical Company, Monsanto
Company, Rayanier and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.
The group has begun to identify opportunities to cut production and
environmentnal costs while reducing and preventing pollution at two chemical
manufacturing facilities - a Dow Chemical plant in La Porte, Texas and a
Monsanto plant in Pensacola, Florida. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1.
Decision-Making Structure: The Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department
of Energy, and the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office
are full-fledged members of the President's Council on Sustainable
Development and are primarily responsible for the "protection of the
atmosphere". The Clean Air Act and its amendments have been reviewed. 2.
Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: The national early detection
system, the national capacity to predict changes and fluctuations and
capacity building for performing systematic observations and fluctuations are
rated "good". These actions are primarily governmental and
undertaken by the private sector. The U.S. Government has provided training
opportunities in the area of transboundary atmospheric pollution control and
encourages industry to develop environmentally safe technologies. The
country's capacity for observation and assessment, research and information
exchange are rated "very good". 3.
Major Groups: The Government, scientific community and NGOs have
conducted studies on the impacts of air pollution and the depletion of the
ozone layer on public health. 4.
Finance: In 1994, the U.S. contributed US$34 million to the
Montreal Protocol. Air pollution abatement and control expenditures in the
United States was estimated at $31.9 billion in
1993. 5.
Regional/International Cooperation: Regarding the programme area of
transboundary atmospheric pollution, the U.S acceded to the UN/ECE Convention
on Long-Range Transboundary Pollution in 1979. In October 1993, the U.S.
announced the "U.S. Initiative on Joint Implementation" (USIJI) to,
among other things, encourage the development and implementation of
cooperative, cost-effective voluntary projects between U.S. and foreign
partners, especially projects that promote technological cooperation and
sustainable development. USIJI also aimed at fostering private sector
investment and innovation in the development and dissemination of
technologies for reducing or sequestering greenhouse gas emissions. One of
USIJI's objectives is also to encourage participating countries to adopt more
complete climate action programs, including national inventories, baselines,
policies and measures, and appropriate specific commitments. Complementing USIJI, is the U.S. Country Studies Program (CSP), an
interagency program designed to provide technical and financial support to
developing countries and countries with economies in transition for climate
change studies. In 1994, USAID funding for projects to reduce global
greenhouse gas emissions was at approximately $143 million, a more than 200
percent increase over similar funding expended in 1991 before UNCED. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1980 |
1990 |
1993 |
||
CO2
emissions (eq. million tons) |
4,520 |
5,095 |
||
SOx
" |
25.9 |
22.4 |
21.5 |
|
NOx
" |
23.3 |
23.0 |
23.3 |
|
CH4
" |
27.0 |
27.0 |
27.0 |
|
Consumption
of ozone depleting substances (Tons) |
NA |
200(Est.) |
46(1995) |
|
Expenditure
on air pollution abatement in US$ equivalents (million) |
26.3(1981) |
28.1 |
28.6 |
|
Other
data: The U.S. Government actively participates in strengthening the Global Climate
Observing System at national levels. |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 10: INTEGRATED APPROACH TO THE PLANNING
AND MANAGEMENT OF LAND RESOURCES
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: There are no mandatory national or
regional land use planning policies in the United States. Except on
federal lands, or through federally-funded development projects, major land
use decisions are made by private investors working within a regulatory
framework established by state and local governments. Certain federal laws,
notably the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and various Civil Rights
Acts, can strongly influence local decision-making but do not determine it.
With respect to federal lands, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and
the U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI) have embraced the Ecosystem
Approach to land management. The Ecosystem Approach to land management
entails a comprehensive evaluation of all natural resource areas when making
land management decisions within both federal and non-federal territory. The
collaboration of state and local governments, private citizens as well as
other federal agencies has facilitated sustainable land management practices
throughout the nation's territory. The
USDA and USDI have undertaken several steps to initiate the implementation of
the ecosystem approach, having participated in broader interagency efforts in
this regard. These initiatives include assessing current organizational and
budget structures to encourage interdisciplinary management and the
establishment of interagency committees to address concerns such as data
integration and the inter-agency programme coordination of activities, e.g.
in the Pacific Northwest and the Florida Everglades. An example of the
implementation of the ecosystem approach is the USDA National Resources
Conservation Service's incorporation of ecological principles into its
conservation planning assistance with non-federal land owners. All resources,
(soil, water, air, plant and animal), as well as social, cultural and
economics concerns are integrated into a planning approach to better
recognize and avoid any negative environmental, social and economic
consequences as a result of inappropriate land management applications. When
natural resource conflicts go beyond the scope of non-private landowners,
mechanisms are available to facilitate the intervention of federal, state and
local governments. It is common for non-government organizations such as The
Nature Conservancy, Native Plant Society, Society for Range Management and
others to be involved in the planning process. Coordinated Resource
Management Planning (CRMP) is a decision-making process that is designed to
improve and maintain natural resources via means that are congruent with the
objectives of landowners, interest groups, and land management agencies. CRMP
is a process which encourages people within a defined geographical area (such
as a watershed), to identify mutual problems, needs, and opportunities. With
the assistance of technical advisors, they develop a written action plan.
This process has been embraced by several land management and technology
transfer agencies in areas where natural resource conflicts have occurred. State
and local governments serve as direct land managers for numerous wildlife
management areas, forests, parks, and water recharge areas through networking
and coordination with federal, state and local agencies and as well as
non-governmental organizations. In watersheds outside of New York City,
federal, state, local, and non governmental organizations have implemented
initiatives to encourage farmers to voluntarily establish conservation
practices that will result in cleaner drinking water. Another
example of such activities is found in a 3,000 square mile watershed in South
Dakota where poor grazing management practices on adjacent rangelands were
identified as the primary cause of sedimentation in the Bad River (which
empties into Lake Sharpe and the Missouri River). The state water board and
the Governor identified the sedimentation of the Bad River as one of the
state's most serious water quality problems which adversely impacts the
quality of life of inhabitants of the city of Fort Pierre while concurrently
causing diminishing hydrologic power generation in the area. Through a joint
effort of local Soil and Water Conservation Districts, funding from a water
quality programme of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was obtained
to assist local landowners in creating grazing management and soil
conservation programmes to reduce sedimentation in the river. As a result,
the restoration of native prairie ecosystems is occurring. |
STATUS REPORT (Cont'd) Private
special interest groups such as The Nature Conservancy, Ducks Unlimited and Trout
Unlimited have taken a pro-active role in assuring that the conservation and
improvement of the natural resource base is being achieved on federal and
non-federal lands. A good example of this kind of activity is the
Malpai-Borderlands Project in southeastern Arizona and neighbouring New
Mexico. This project revolves around a ranch purchased by The Nature
Conservancy and a non-profit organization of 36 local ranchers, called the
"Malpai Borderlands Group". This project covers approximately 1
million acres of an native grasslands (a rangeland
ecosystem). The Malpai Borderlands Group and TNC have combined efforts to
strive towards the common goal of long-term sustainability of fragile and
native grasslands. To effectively sustain these grasslands and the endangered
species present, coordinated grazing management and strict adherence to
forage allocations is necessary so that ranchers have an opportunity to
develop ecologically sound and sustainable ranching enterprises. Federal
agencies have joined state and local agencies to help develop this project.
TNC has also helped establish a network of "Heritage Programmes"
which are in place in all fifty states. These programmes inventory endangered
and threatened species and provide the scientific basis for prioritizing and
guiding development away from critical habitat areas. The
National Crop Residue Management Alliance is a partnership of government
agencies, agribusiness, and concerned citizens which helps farmers obtain
information about crop residue management. State alliances and local
conservation groups are working together at the local level in providing this
information exchange. Private industry, the farm media, and USDA agencies are
working together to promote responsible independent farming. The National CRM
Alliance was established to assist local farmers in planning conferences on
conservation systems installation, field demonstrations, and one-on-one
consultations. By sharing resources and expertise, state and local
organizations have organized farmer-to-farmer meetings designed to help
implement sustainable farmland management practices. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: A number of U.S. federal agencies
fulfil resource assessment and monitoring roles, and each land management
agency has a different mandate. The USDA and USDI administer lands requiring
direct land management allocation. On many of these lands, the USDA and USDI
allow (for a fee) private enterprise to engage in the competitive use of
timber, forage, wildlife, minerals, oil, gas, and water. Other lands, such as
those administered by the U.S. FWS, are either strictly non-consumptive, or
allow for a lesser degree of consumptive use (such as wildlife hunting). The
National Park Service (NPS) administers a variety of parks, monuments, and
historical landmarks, which all operate under the policy of preserving the
natural and cultural resources that are indigenous to these sites. The USDA
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and National Resources Inventory
(NRI), assess the condition and resource management concerns of non federal
land within the lower 48 states every 5 years. Land classes inventoried
include cropland and highland, pastureland, rangeland and small streams and
bodies of water. USDA-Forest Service (FS) conducts Forest Inventory and
Analysis (FIA) and Forest Health Monitoring (FHM) throughout federal and
non-federal U.S. territory. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
currently developing the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Programme
(EMAP) which would provide a statistical framework for the national
assessment of the health and condition of natural resources (the programme
will eventually include international data). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS), conducts surveys and monitoring of migratory birds throughout
the United States, and utilizes computer analysis to identify voids in
critical habitat areas. The USDI National Biological Service (NBS) is
establishing mechanisms to collect and assess biological information that will
assist decision makers in developing management and protection strategies.
The Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), an interagency committee, has
been established to define data collection standards in an effort to provide
"shared information" among agencies. As agencies continue to
develop databases into geographic information systems, it will be necessary
to have a common set of rules for digitizing data so that information between
agencies can be readily exchanged. State and local representatives have also
been included in the design and proposals coming from the FGDC. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: The USDA has two primary
technology transfer mechanisms. The NRCS provides conservation technical
assistance to private landowners and the Extension Service (ES) distributes
university research findings to private landowners. This transfer of
technology application and information is vital for non-federal landowners,
so that they can recognize existing or potential natural resource conservation
problems and conflicts. This multifaceted effort facilitates the sustainable
management of non-federal land. Sustainable land management requires data
collection, monitoring, assessment and interpretation of information and its
effects on environmental, social and economic stability. As databases and
modelling become more comprehensive, and as cooperative efforts continue
internationally, it is expected that the link between sustainable land
management will extend beyond the U.S. border and embrace a more holistic and
global approach. 3. Major Groups: Refer to Status report of chapter
10 for information on NGO participation. 4. Finance: No recent information available
as to total federal, state and local expenditures on sustainable land management
issues. 5. Regional/International Cooperation: USAID cooperates in several
developing countries with respect to promotion of sustainable land management
practices. |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 11: COMBATING DEFORESTATION
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: The U.S. has the fourth largest forest area, exceeded
only by Russia, Brazil and Canada. The U.S. defines a forest as land with at
least 10 percent crown cover by forests trees of any size, including land
that formerly contained 10 percent tree cover and tree cover that is
artificially generated. Forest land includes transition zones and
non-forested lands that are at least 10 percent stocked with forest trees and
forest adjacent to urban build-up areas. This includes pinyon-juniper and chaparral
areas of the west. The minimum area classified as a forest is .4 hectare and
forest strips must be at least 37 meters wide. Forests
in the U.S. range from the dry chaparral "forests" of the Pacific,
the oak-hickory forest of the east to the old growth Douglas fir and Sitka
spruce forests of the Pacific Coast rain forest. The U.S. has numerous
organized advocates for forest conservation and use, having a profound effect
on American forestry and forest policy. Forest legislation has recently been
revised to help combat deforestation envisaged under chapter 11 of Agenda 21
and includes The Forest Stewardship Act of 1990, the Cooperative Forestry
Assistance Act of (1990), America the Beautiful (1990), National Indian
Forest Resources and the Management Act. The U.S. has experienced a net
growth in the area covered by forests since the 1920's. Although there have
been areas of local concern with respect to deforestation, nationally,
deforestation in not perceived as a problem, for natural and artificial reforestation
overcompensates for forest loss. Therefore, reforestation is not an issue.
However, the reforestation of marginal forest lands, the large number of
private landowners and competing agricultural uses presents an obstacle to
localized reforestation. In the U.S., the term "deforestation" is
used to refer to the conversion of forest land to other uses or to a
permanent non-forest condition. All USDA- Forest Service programme results
are reported locally to national levels. Projects are evaluated at the local
level. The real challenge to forestry management is monitoring the cumulative
landscape effects of site-specific activities. This "outcome"
perspective addresses the effects of human activities and government
intervention on biological diversity and forest health. The extension
function of the USDA Forest Service and the USDA Agricultural Extension
Service is to educate, train and assist private forest owners and the States
in conservation and sustainable management of forest lands. Current
assessments of the health and conditions of U.S. forests show that in many
cases resource conditions are not satisfactory. For example, tree mortality
as a result of exotic forest disease is so extensive that the composition of
forest ecosystem across the U.S. has changed. Acid forming air born chemicals
are having observable impacts on tree health. Large forested landscapes have
an unnatural distribution of trees of different ages because of previous
harvesting practices. Although older age forests are important to the
biodiversity of forest ecosystems, the growing number of
aging and over stocked forest landscapes are becoming vulnerable to
insects and disease. The list of threatened and endangered species is
increasing and some fish habitat and populations are limited by problems of
water quality and quantity. The focus of U.S. forest conservation strategy is
to concentrate on being sensitive to ecosystem needs, reducing demand for
wood fiber through recycling, efficient harvesting and utilization and
increasing the productivity of managed forests. This will reduce the impacts
on forest ecosystems, decrease the area impacted and increase the value of
all forest related resources. The
U.S. is moving forward to enforce its commitment to sustainable forestry by
several measures, including: establishing an ecosystem approach to
sustainable forest management, inventorying forest area by ecosystem, and
adjusting the balance between environmental and commercial use of publicly
owned lands. It also includes developing domestic criteria and indicators for
sustainable management of U.S. forests and participating in the development
of internationally agreed criteria and indicators for the conservation and
sustainable management of temperate and boreal forests. The development of
criteria and indicators for temperate and boreal forests was undertaken in
partnership with those countries and non-governmental groups that have a
stake in temperate and boreal forests. |
Status Report (Cont/d) The
best example of policy following UNCED Forest Principles is the ecosystem
management approach to the stewardship of public forest lands. The
President's office has established an interagency coordinating committee for
ecosystem management. By using this approach, concerted efforts have been
made over the last 18 months in the Pacific Northwest to resolve issues
centred on forest protection and timber harvest, the preservation of old
growth ecosystems, scenic values, and the livelihoods of local communities.
In April 1994, following a process of participation with all stakeholders and
the completion of an environmental impact statement, the President's Forest
Plan was adopted for all federal lands in the Pacific Northwest region. The
President's Forest Plan has three components: An Aquatic Conservation
Strategy aimed at restoring and maintaining the ecological health of the
region's watersheds, a Terrestrial Conservation Strategy aimed at maintaining
late successional and old growth species habitat and the biological diversity
associated with such ecosystems, and an initiative to help local communities
adjust to new forest ecosystem protection management. The Fish and Wildlife
Service is involved in the implementation of conservation and management
programmes for forest dwelling neotropical birds. The Fish and Wildlife
Service has developed partnerships with dozens of federal and State agencies,
private conservation organizations and local governments to restore and
manage forest habitats for these migratory species. The Texas Gulf Coast Wood
Lot Initiative (important to migrating birds crossing the Gulf of Mexico) and
the 12 million hectare Tennessee Valley Project are examples. In
October of 1994, the American Forest and Paper Association, which represents
95% of the industrial forest land in the U.S., approved a set of Sustainable
Forestry Principles and Guidelines. Through these guidelines and measures,
the aggregate performance of member companies will establish new standards
for the entire industry and industrial forest landowners. The initiative
includes performance measures for reforestation, and the protection of water
quality, wildlife, visual quality, biological diversity and areas of special
significance. The State Foresters are responsible for the establishment of
State Stewardship Committees in every state which will include representation
from a range of natural resource disciplines as well as the public and
private sectors. Each State has also developed and is implementing state
resource plans which will ultimately bring millions of hectares of
nonindustrial private forest lands under stewardship management. The
Stewardship Incentives Programme, a companion programme to the Forest
Stewardship Programme, began in 1992 and provides cost-share assistance for
private landowners to implement a broad range of practices recommended under
their Stewardship Management plans. Landowners with approved plans are
eligible to receive up to 75 percent cost-share assistance for practices that
include wildlife, fish habitat improvement, soil and water improvement,
forest recreation enhancement, riparian and wetlands protection,
reforestation, among other activities. During the first two years of
implementation (through FY 1993), more than 16,200 hectares were planted in
trees, windbreaks and shelterbelts were established or improved on
approximately 3,200 hectares and wildlife habitat enhancement activities took
place on an area encompassing 7,300 hectares. The
U.S. Forest Service, in partnership with 13 other Federal agencies, is
leading the development of scientific protocols for implementing national and
regional scale ecological assessments. The protocols will be tested in 1995
in the Columbia River Basin, the Southern Appalachian Mountains and the
Mid-Atlantic states. This will augment the current forest inventory system of
over 100,000 plots that are sampled on a 11 year
cycle. The
U.S. Forest Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Bureau of Land
Management and the States have begun an annual assessment of the health and vitality
of the Nation's forests, which will serve as an early warning system for the
broad areas effected by insects and diseases, atmospheric deposition,
meterological events, human activities and climate change. The current
programme includes 14 states. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: The U.S. Agency primarily
responsible for the forestry sector is the USDA Forest Service. Other
departments that are actively involved in forestry matters include, at the
federal level: the National Park Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs; Fish and
Wildlife Service; National Biological Survey, Bureau of Land management;
Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Defense. At the State
level, 50 state forest and park agencies are involved in forestry matters. At
the local level, hundreds of counties own and manage forest and park areas.
The USDA Forest Service publishes an "Assessment of U.S. Forests"
every ten years with 5 year updates. A corresponding Programme is also
published every five years that provides broad guidance to more specific
national forest plans, statewide resource plans, and research plans. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: In 1994, the USDA consisted of a
total staff of 28,000 (15,471 professionals) and a budget of $3,264 million.
Staffing and funding for the forestry services have not increased since
UNCED. Forty thousand trained foresters are working on forestry management
and protection. Seven thousand persons graduate as foresters each year. At
federal, state and local levels, the forestry staffing situation is rated as
"properly staffed". The federal government is focusing on
reorienting the way professional foresters fulfil their resource management
objectives. Indicators are being developed to measure the ecological
sustainability of forests. The indicators will include information on
disease, soil condition, wildlife, etc. The last forest inventory took place
in 1992. The
US Forest Service has initiated a national programme to establish a network
of Urban Tree Houses. The Urban Tree House is a cooperative community-based
programme designed to bring an understanding of natural resource concepts and
careers to urban children. The first Urban Tree House, inaugurated in
Atlanta, serves as a working model for several other U.S. cities that are
interested in operating their own Urban Tree House Programmes such as
Washington, D.C.; Portland, Oregon; Nashville and Memphsis, Tennessee, among
other locations. The U.S. Extension Service's Logger Education to Advance Professionalism
Programme (LEAP) promotes silviculture and environmental education for
loggers so they better understand the logic and philosophy involved in sound
forest management. Currently, the majority of timber
harvesting operations on private lands are carried out without the
assistance or guidance of a professional forester of any kind. It is
estimated that as much as eighty percent of all harvesting operations are
planned and executed by only the logger, who is often unaware of the impact
logging activities have on soil or water quality. Another
institutional improvement has been the use of electronic mail networks which
is proving to be a very powerful communication tool for NGOs, government
agencies and business. 3. Major Groups: The American public is becoming
increasingly involved with forest management in the United States.
Non-governmental organizations continue to draw attention to disparities
between sustainable goals and current practices. Environmental laws from the
early 1970s that facilitated public access to government and the growth in
public dissatisfaction with forest management practices has generated a new
era of public participation in forest matters. Today, the American public is
demanding different forest goods and services than in the past, reflecting an
increased desire for clean water, the ecological management of forests,
biological reserves for rare ecosystems, and a variety of other environmental
values. Many in the NGO community are also campaigning for the establishment
of explicit ecological, social, economic and institutional objectives to
better measure progress in sustainable forest management. A lack of resources, however puts NGOs at a disadvantage in their
ability to address immediate issues. Government at all levels, however, is
striving for a more efficient and effective working relationship with the
public. The private sector is a full participant at federal, state and local
levels. Labor unions are full participants at state levels and are not
involved at the grassroots. Rural cooperatives participate as advisory
participants at the state level and full participants at the grassroots. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues (Cont'd) 4.
Finance: Funding for forest management at the state and federal levels has not
increased in the last few years. With inflation, actual budgets have
decreased. Federal, state and local annual spending on forest management is
approximately $6.4 billion. 5. Regional/International Cooperation: The United States participates in
all major international, most regional and dozens of bilateral programmes.
Programme effectiveness in the area of sustainable forest management goals
has become a timely issue. The U.S. participates as a member of the Informal
Working Group on Criteria and Indicators for the Conservation and Sustainable
Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests, which includes primarily
non-European temperate and boreal forest countries. The U.S. hosted an
informal technical meeting of the Working Group in Olympia, Washington in
September 1994 to advance these discussions. The U.S. also participates as an
observer of the Helsinki process for developing pan-European national level
criteria and indicators. From the U.S. perspective, an international
consensus is needed to establish a common understanding, language and
definition regarding what constitutes sustainable management of non-tropical
forests. It is also an important step in implementing the UNCED Forest
Principles and to furthering the joint commitment made by tropical timber
consumer countries to sustainable manage their respective forests by the year
2000. In March 1993, the U.S., in conjunction with Australia, Sweden and
Switzerland, entered into a sponsorship agreement to establish the new Center
for International Forestry Research in Boger, Indonesia. U.S. bilateral
assistance, through USAID, USDA and other federal agencies includes more than
150 projects in 95 countries throughout the world. Of particular interest is
the focus on assistance to Russia which possesses 20 percent of the world's
forests. The Peace Corp's environmental programmes have been expanded to
include 900 volunteers working in 51 countries through all regions of the
world. Nearly 50 percent of these volunteers are assigned to forestry related
projects. As a member of the North American Forestry Commission (NAFC),
institutional strengthening and capacity building for sustainable forestry
has been a focus through training and technical exchanges. General projects
include training and cooperating in fire suppression, cooperation to develop
monitoring projects for migrating species, increasing the populations of
endangered species, e.g. protection of monarch butterfly habitat,
reintroducing the Mexican Grey Wolf, and improving neotropical bird habitat. Participatory
management, important in the United States, has become the mechanism for
including the perspectives and needs of all members of local communities. The
International Intertribal Conference on Sustainable Forest Management,
jointly sponsored by the U.S. Forest Service and USAID, also promotes
participation and sustainable forest management by indigenous people. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1980 |
1990 |
1994 |
||
Forest
Area (Km2)a |
3,000,663 |
2,980,850 |
2,981,360 |
|
Protected
forest areaa |
126,915 |
142,512 |
143,899 |
|
Roundwood
production (solid volume of roundwood without bark in mill m3)b |
458.3c |
512.8 |
495.8d |
|
Deforestation
rate (Km2/annum)b |
1,590 |
NA |
NA |
|
Reforestation
rate (Km2/annum)a |
11,869 |
11,583 |
10,296 |
|
a
= data from national report b
= data from UN Statistical Yearbook 1995 c
= 1985 d
= 1992 Other data: The percent of the total work
force earn their living from the forestry sector in 1994 - 1.3; National income
from the Forestry sector - 8%; Income from export of forest products in $US
in 1994 - $13.9 billion; Import of forest products in $US - $17.4 billion;
Area logged in 1994 - 30,848 Km2 ; Number of professionals involved in
research - 27,000; Today, 33 percent (298.4 million hectares) of the U.S. is
forested, constituting two-thirds of the original 445,344 million hectares of
forest at the time of European settlement. 39 percent of U.S. forests are in
public ownership; 61 percent are privately owned. |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 12: MANAGING FRAGILE ECOSYSTEMS: COMBATING
DESERTIFICATION AND DROUGHT
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: International Convention to Combat Desertification in
Countries Experiencing Drought and/or Desertification Particularly in Africa Convention: Signed in 1994; but not yet
ratified Additional comments relevant to this chapter: Significant areas susceptible to
desertification comprise approximately 37% of the United States. Numerous
federal, state and local land use plans have been prepared for areas
susceptible to desertification. These plans generally fall into three broad
categories: functional or sector-specific plans, such as highway construction
plans; resource specific plans, such as plans to manage fishery resources or
plans to reduce soil erosion; and local comprehensive land use plans. The
U.S. has only begun to undertake planning on an ecosystem-wide basis. There
are no national or regional plans or strategies to combat desertification. In
August 1993, Legislation was revised to combat desertification and drought.
In order to raise the overall level of knowledge of the causes and effects of
drought and desertification, the Departments of Interior, Commerce (NOAA),
and Agriculture, in coordination with other appropriate U.S. agencies, agreed
to explore the feasibility of a domestic demonstration programme aimed at the
optimum management of drylands for sustainable use. The
impact of improper farming, land use, natural causes and water withdrawals on
desertification are rated as "modest"by the Government. Grazing has
a "moderate" impact while fuel wood collection is rated
"insignificant or none". Improper grazing practices in the 1800's
and early 1900's resulted in the degradation of large areas of the western
part of the United States. These areas have been slow to recover. In
order to address identified problems associated with desertification, Federal
natural resource agencies, in cooperation with State, Tribal and local
governments, non-governmental organizations and private land owners are
gradually developing ecosystem based approaches to restore degraded areas.
Social, economic and cultural incentives exist so that farmers undertake
conservation and regenerative measures. Rangeland Reform '95 reduced grazing
fees for good stewardship on federally-owned grazing lands. The
U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and Interior, in coordination with
other U.S. agencies, actively participated in activities to negotiate an
International Convention to Combat Desertification in those countries
experiencing serious drought and/or desertification (particularly in Africa)
and co-sponsored an International Symposium and Workshop on Desertification
in Developed Countries in October of 1994. The departments are currently
developing a number of ecosystem based demonstration projects in the arid and
semi-arid areas of the United States. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: There are a wide variety of federal
agencies involved in combatting desertification and drought in the western
part of the United States. These agencies include the Bureau of Land
Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Environmental Protection Agency,
the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Forest Service, the Geological Survey, the
National Biological Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, the National Science Foundation, and the Soil Conservation
Service. There
are thousands of professional staff members in these agencies whose jobs
involve combatting desertification and drought in one form or another. There
also are a significant number of state, local and
tribal units of government and a wide variety of non-governmental
organizations involved in combatting desertification and drought. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: There are approximately 25,000
hydrological monitoring stations. Their coverage is rated as
"good". There
is "adequate" staff dealing with desertification issues at the
Federal and State levels, while at the grassroots level, staffing is
"below par". In general, there is a shortage of trained field level
staff. A
number of workshops and conferences on the topics of desertification and
drought have been proposed, including : the
International Symposium and Workshop on Desertification in Developed
Countries (October 1994) and the Fifth International Rangeland Congress (July
1995). An International Symposium and Workshop on desertification in
Developed Countries has been proposed for May 1997. 3. Major Groups: NGOs are advisory participants at
the field/grassroots level and ad hoc participants at National Planning and
Middle levels. Women are ad hoc participants at National, District and
grassroots levels. Youth are involved in national or district level planning
and are "seldom" involved at the grassroots level. 4. Finance: Total federal, state and local
spending on desertification is not available. 5. Regional/International Cooperation: The major international, regional
and bilateral programmes active in the U.S. include UNESCO's Man and the
Biosphere Programme (MAB); National Science Foundation LTER sites; U.S. /
Mexico Border Environmental Issues Field Committee and the International
Sonoran Desert Alliance. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1980 |
1990 |
1992 |
||
Area
susceptible to desertification |
37% of US |
37% of US |
37% of US |
|
Land
use and ecology |
1982 |
1987 |
1992 |
|
Desert
area of no or minimial value |
near zero |
near zero |
near zero |
|
cultivated
land area |
396,200Km2 |
370,500Km2 |
332,500 Km2 |
|
Pasture
land area |
57,500 Km2 |
58,500 Km2 |
58,600Km2 |
|
Other
data |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 13: MANAGING FRAGILE ECOSYSTEMS:
SUSTAINABLE MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: Federal Agencies responsible for federal lands in
mountainous areas are pursuing ecosystem approaches to land management. See
chapter 10 summary. The
Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) was established in 1965 pursuant to the
Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965. Its purpose was to help build a
better economy and better quality of life for the people in the Appalachian
Mountain region. An important element of the program is its unique
partnership of federal, state and local governments. This structure helps put
responsibility in the hands of citizens at the local level. In this process,
initiatives from local citizens become part of each state's annual overall
plan that is then approved by the ARC. This results in a "from the bottom
up" approach to addressing local needs, rather than from the top down.
Funds that have been distributed through ARC programs have been used for
improving water and sewer systems, work force training programs, adult
literacy programs, improving access to health care, and in construction of
the Appalachian highway system. Since 1965, the 13-state region within the
ARC has received $6.5 billion in special federal funding, which in turned has
leveraged funds from state and municipal sources. In 1965, one in three
people living in Appalachian Mountains were considered impoverished. Since
then, the overall poverty rate has diminished to closer to that of the
federal average. The number of adults who have received high school
educations in the area has risen from one in 3 in 1965, to two in three; and
the infant death rate has been cut in half over that same time period. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: Most all decision-making is taken
at state and local levels. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: No unique technology situations
in the Appalachian mountain area. 3. Major Groups: Major groups generally involved
at local and state levels. 4. Finance: About $6.5 billion of federal funds
provided through the ARC since 1965 in the Appalachian region. 5. Regional/International Cooperation: No information |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 14: PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND
RURAL DEVELOPMENT
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: The U.S. Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act
of 1990 (7 USE 3101) defined sustainable agriculture as "an integrated
system of plant and animal production practices having a site-specific
application that will, over the long term, satisfy human food and fiber
needs; enhance environmental quality and the natural resource base upon which
the agriculture economy depends; make the most efficient use of nonrenewable
resources and on-farm resources and integrate, where appropriate, natural
biological cycles and controls; sustain the economic viability of farm
operation; and enhance the quality of life for farmers and members of rural
communities, and society as a whole." The
U.S. government continuously reviews policy, research programmes, extension
programmes and other activities related to food production, marketing and
consumption. The most recent national legislation on agricultural and rural
development is the "Federal Agricultural and Improvement Act of 1996",
more commonly referred to as the 1996 Farm Bill. This bill extended the
Conservation Reserve Program until the year 2002. It also established the
Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) which combines functions of
four other conservation programs, and a new Farmland Protection Program to
purchase conservation easements om 68,800 - 137,600 ha to limit
non-agricultural uses of land. To encourage the economic development of rural
communities, the U.S. Government has an alternative Agricultural Research and
Commercialization Programme. This programme seeks to enhance farm income by
developing and commercializing non-food, non-feed uses of traditional and
non-traditional agricultural products. A revolving loan fund, established to
encourage this work has granted loans for purposes as diverse as the
establishment of standards and common terminology for biofuels, the
manufacture of paper from straw, the manufacture of high quality furniture
from low-quality and small diameter logs, the use of kenaf as a mat for seeding
lawn grass and making newsprint and fiberboard, and the use of milkweed as a
filler for pillows and comforters. Under
the USDA's Sustainable Agriculture Research Extension (SARE) programme,
research and education projects are funded that facilitate scientific
investigation and education. Over 100 producer grants have been awarded
through this programme to date. Farmers and ranchers must initiate and
conduct these research grants. In one programme, feed savings of $233 per
dairy cow was achieved with rotational grazing as compared to confinement
feeding the Northeast Region. In addition, labor has been reduced by 59% and
profits increased 32%. Monthly meetings and pasture walks helped
participating dairy producers and neighbours make a smooth transition to
pasture-based dairying, which required a small fraction of the chemical
inputs used to produce grain for confinement dairy systems. One
example of the U.S. Government's effort to establish land reclamation programmes
for degraded land is the Conservation Reserve Programme. The purpose of the
programme is to assist land owners in the conservation and improvement of
highly erodible land, fragile lands (including land with associated ground or
surface water that may be vulnerable to contamination) and wetlands from
annual cropping. Through long-term contracts and easements, approximately 36
million acres are incorporated in this programme. The
National Plant Germplasm Advisory Committee has been in operation for over 20
years. The U.S. Government, maintains the world's
most extensive germplasm storage network. The base collection is housed in
the National Seed Storage Laboratory. Active genebanks are located in more
than 20 locations around the country. Compared
to plant germplasm initiatives, the conservation and sustainable utilization
of animal genetic resources for sustainable agriculture is in its infancy.
The U.S., however, has begun collecting a national inventory of available
animal genetic resources. |
STATUS REPORT (Cont'd) The
U.S. Government's research and education on Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
includes research on pests, pesticide resistance, biological controls,
cultural controls and sterile insect release programmes. IPM involves the exploration
and utilization of biological cycles and genetic diversity of agricultural
pests, host resistance, naturally occurring pathogens and parasites. It also
includes the study and use of reduced toxicity pesticides. IPM involves
training and education to foster a variety of pest control techniques in
order to keep pesticide intervention to a minimum. The
U.S. Government has many programmes that collect data, establish databases,
and provide network access to these databases. Databases are developed and
maintained for germplasm information, pests, pesticide and fertilize use,
production practices, soil types, forest types, insect infestations, and crop
coverage/production. Economists analyze the data to compare input use and
profitability of different production practices. These databases are accessed
by research scientists, extension agents, farmers, and others through the
National Agricultural Library's computer system through SANET (Sustainable
Agriculture Network) over the INTERNET. The National Agricultural Library
supports the Alternative Farming Systems Information Center, which provides
information in print and other media in response to thousands of inquires on
numerous subjects related to sustainable agricultural practices. A National
Soil Survey and the Natural Resources Inventory contain information on soil
types and conditions and land degradation. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: The United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) is the leading US agency charged with implementation of US policies
for the provision of food, fiber and forest products. This includes
responsibility for research, development, and dissemination of knowledge
about systems and sustainable methods of obtaining food, fiber, and forest
products. To accomplish this mission, the USDA works in concert with many
other groups including the President's Council on Sustainable Development,
the National Science and Technology Council, the Committee on Food Safety and
Health, other Federal agencies, State agricultural and forest experiment
stations, State land-grant colleges and universities, extension services,
non-profit organizations, among others. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: There are four SARE host
institutions that administer regional programmes; the University of Nebraska,
the University of Vermont, the University of Georgia, and Utah State
University. These host institutions establish and oversee training activities
(at various regional locations) administered by the USDA Extension Service
and educate federal and state Cooperative Extension Agents and other
professionals. Those trained can better impart sustainable agriculture
concepts and practises to farmers and urban residents. The
U.S. Government is dedicated to making available all necessary knowledge and
technology to farmers, extension agents and planners. USDA maintains a number
of databases available to all users through the National Agricultural
Library. The Extension Service retains agents in virtually every county of
the United States. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) formerly
the Soil Conservation Service) has resource planning specialists in virtually
every county, to assist landowners with resource planning. Through the
Sustainable Agriculture Network (SAN) funded by the SARE programme,
information is being provided in many forms, including printed reports and
databases that demonstrate research findings to farmers with computers and to
information providers world wide. The Department of
the Interior operates the Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas
(ATTRA) programme which transfers information about sustainable agriculture
to farmers. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have formed
a partnership with a number of groups and companies representing agricultural
and non-agricultural pesticide users to promote environmental stewardship of
pesticide use in the United States. In
order to improve farm productivity while minimizing risk to the environment,
the U.S. Government manages a programme in Integrated Farm Management (IFM)
Systems. The purpose of the IFM programme is research and education on crop
and livestock management programmes that will enhance productivity while
minimizing impacts on water quality, soil quality, and the environment. 3. Major Groups: A number of associations and NGOs
are involved in the process associated with USDA programs as well as the
legislative process pertaining to the farm bills developed and acted upon by
the Congress, in consultation with the Administration. 4. Finance: No information 5. Regional/International Cooperation: The U.S. Government participated
in the exchange of scientific personnel for education, training and
cooperative efforts related to sustainable agricultural practices in
developing countries. It also provides scientific, technical and educational
assistance addressing issues of agricultural sustainability. USAID has
supported sustainable agriculture practices through the International
Agriculture Research Centers (IARCs), which receives their funding through
the Consultative Group on International Agriculture Research (CGIAR). The
U.S. is also one of CGIAR's leading contributors. The U.S. has also worked at
FAO to support greater diffusion and action on programs that promote
sustainable agricultural practices. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1985 |
1990 |
1995 |
||
Agricultural
land (thousands of acres - rounded) |
1,012,000 |
987,000 |
972,000 |
|
Number
of farms |
2,293 |
2,146 |
2,073 |
|
Acreage
per farm |
441 |
460 |
469 |
|
1989/90 |
1992/93 |
1993/94 |
||
Consumption
of fertilizers (Kg/Km2 of agricultural land as of 1990) |
4,337.0 |
4,400.6 |
NA |
|
Other
data |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 15: CONSERVATION OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: Convention on Biological Diversity Signed
in 1993; but not yet ratified Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora Convention
signed in 1993 and already ratified. Additional comments relevant to this chapter: Post-UNCED domestic policy has
focused on promoting partnerships among Federal, state and private programmes
concerned with biological diversity, coordinating government-wide research,
data systems, and technology development, and demonstrating ecosystem-based
management approaches, while concurrently establishing protected areas,
maintaining ex situ repositories for genetic resources and improving public
education. Federal systems of national parks, forests, grasslands, wildlife
refuges, marine sanctuaries, wilderness areas, and other management categories
and special designations play a major role in situ conservation of
biodiversity. Federal programmes and facilities also play a major role in
collection and ex situ preservation of crop germplasm and other genetic
resources of potential or actual economic importance. In
1993, the Federal Government established the National Biological Service
(NBS) to provide information and technology for managing biological
diversity. NBS is a catalyst for developing methods and protocols for
biological inventory, monitoring, research and data management. Through
partnerships with other agencies and private organizations, the NBS will
coordinate access to biological information by Federal, state and other land
managers and other sectors of society, document diversity trends, and feature
the causes of biological impoverishment. In 1994, the NBS began to develop
and synthesize biological information to support cooperative management of 10
ecosystems and initiated a review of national and regional biodiversity issues
and trends based on existing data sources. Under the auspices of the
interagency Committee on the Environment and Natural Resources established by
the White House in 1993, a Subcommittee on Biodiversity and Ecosystem
Dynamics has been charged with developing an integrated government-wide
strategy and implementation plan for R&D on biodiversity and ecological
dynamics to support management and conservation of renewable resources. The
Federal government launched an interagency effort in 1993 to develop a baseline
synthesis of the current knowledge of major eco-regions in the U.S. In 1993,
the White House Office of Environmental Policy established the Interagency
Ecosystem Management Task Force to coordinate the implementation of a
comprehensive Ecosystem Management scheme. The Task force seeks to promote a
consistent approach to environmental management by learning from large scale
ecosystem-based management efforts, and strengthening the ongoing development
of an ecosystem management approach for federal lands and federally managed
programmes. This approach entails involving multiple agencies within larger
ecological boundaries. It also relies on finding ways to increase voluntary
participation of state, tribal, and local governments as well as
nongovernmental organizations and the public. Through the Ecosystem
Management Initiative, multi-agency Ecosystem Management Teams are being
established to work with local and regional stakeholders in developing
"New Initiatives Laboratories" as cooperative demonstrations of
ecosystem management in areas where such management is not well developed,
yet where significant opportunities for demonstrating integrated management
exist. Ecosystem management strategies have been adopted in the Departments
of the Interior, Agriculture, Defense and Energy, as well as in the USEPA and
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. In some cases,
broad-scale organizational frameworks are being implemented. For example, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the Department of the Interior has defined
approximately 50 ecosystem "units" across the country as a basis
for future planning related to sustainable management and endangered species
conservation. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: In the U.S., all levels of
government, the private sector and individuals share major responsibilities
for conservation and biological diversity. The federal government has broad
responsibility for managing terrestrial and marine biodiversity of public lands
(approximately one-third of the U.S. land area), coastal waters, as well as
specific responsibilities for regulating private uses of resources of
national interest that have important biological values (e.g. estuaries,
wetlands, floodplain, critical habitat for endangered species). State
governments have broad responsibilities for regulating uses of land and
natural resources (e.g., hunting and fishing) not subject to Federal
reservation. State and local parks and reserves are important in biodiversity
conservation. In states that lack large federal landholdings, NGOs, private
institutions and individual landowners protect large numbers of tracts,
maintain significant ex situ facilities such as arboreta and zoological parks
and play an increasing role in conservation. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: National Biodiversity Databases
on Ecosystems include: National Wetlands Inventory, National Coastal Wetlands
Database, Wetlands Creation and Restoration Database, Gap Analysis Database,
Global Ecosystems, Biospherics Programme, Earth Resources Observation
Systems, Data Atlases (Coastal/Marine Ecosystems) and the National Estuarine
Inventory. Databases on Species include: Wetland Plant List and Species
databases, Candidate Plant and Animal species, Endangered Species Country
List, BIOS, Federal Interagency Sensitive Wildlife Information System,
National Contaminant Biomonitoring, National Biomonitoring Inventory, North
American Breeding Birds, Bird Banding and Band Recovery, Waterfowl Breeding
Populations, Waterfowl Harvest, Winter Waterfowl, Marine and Waterbird
Colonies, Fisheries Statistics, Living Maritime Resources Programme, Forest
Inventory and Analysis. Other Databases include: Biosphere Reserve Integrated
Monitoring Programme, National Resource Inventories in National Forests and
Grasslands, National Park flora, National Park Fauna, Land Condition and
Trend Analysis (U.S. Army). Taxonomy Databases include: Smithsonian Taxonomic
Databases, Plant List of Accepted Nomenclature, Taxonomy and Symbols, EPA
Taxonomic and the National Oceanographic Data Center Code System. Regional
databases include: Endangered Plants of Northwestern states, New England
Animal Species, raptors, Fish Stocking, Commercial Fish Catch. In 1991, 4,542
Ph.D Awards were granted in the biological sciences. 3. Major Groups: Cooperative efforts involving
various levels of government and the private sector are underway to implement
the biosphere reserve concept in several regions. For example, in the diverse
forest ecosystem of the southeastern highlands, the Southern Appalachian Man
and the Biosphere Programme is being implemented as a joint undertaking of
the SAMB Cooperative and the SAMAB Foundation. The former organization
includes representatives from Federal and state agencies, and the latter from
private institutions, nongovernmental organizations, and local communities.
Working together, these organizations enable ecosystem stakeholders to
consult, share capabilities, and pool resources to address conservation and
development problems in a biologically diverse and culturally distinctive
area that includes territory of six states. The International Sonoran Desert
Alliance is a public-private partnership, established in 1992 in an area of
the western Sonoran desert that includes a cluster of biosphere reserves in
northwestern mexico and Arizona. The Alliance includes residents, business
leaders, state and federal resource managers and conservationists from the
United States and Mexico, and offers an ecosystem-based forum for local communities
to develop shared goals and joint projects for community development and
protection of the cultural and biological diversity of one of the largest
intact arid ecosystems in the world. The Nature Conservancy (TNC), has pioneered development of methods and data systems
to support biodiversity conservation. 4. Finance: No discrete information
available. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues (Cont'd) 5.
Regional/International Cooperation: The U.S. expanded participation in
international programmes to support the conservation of native migratory
species that require seasonal habitats in multiple countries through the
Partners in Flight Programme. Government agencies and private organizations
are establishing national, regional, state, and physiographic working groups
to coordinate monitoring, research, and public education efforts to conserve
neotropical migratory birds and their habitats, and to link these efforts
with those of other nations in the Hemisphere. In 1994, the U.S., Canada, and
Mexico signed an update to the North American Waterfowl Management Plan that
expanded their commitment to restoring continental waterfowl populations and
conserving the biological diversity of critical wetlands. From 1990 through
1993, the cooperative programme to implement the Plan has protected,
restored, or enhanced 2.26 million acres in the U.S. and 1.19 million acres
in Canada, and launched 15 projects in 9 Mexican states (1990 - 1994), as
well as implemented mapping, planning and educational projects covering an
additional 3 million wetland acres. The State Department has coordinated
development of the interagency Coral Reef Initiative to build domestic and
international partnerships, provide coordination and integration of existing
and new activities, and develop the technical and human resources needed to
conserve, protect, and manage coral reef ecosystems in the United States and
the world. The CRI was launched through an international workshop in early
1995. By 1996, plans called for implementation of an expanded Coral Reef
Research Programme, a global monitoring programme, a comprehensive programme
of research and conservation of reef ecosystems under U.S. jurisdiction and
an international programme of capacity-building focusing on partnerships for
effective management of coral reef ecosystems, taking into account the full
range of threats from local land-based pollution to the potential effects of
global change. The Biodiversity Conservation Network,
funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), works with
NGO and private sector partners in host countries to develop and implement
economically viable approaches for conserving biodiversity at the local
level. Grants support development and marketing of new sustainable nonforest
timber products, ecotourism enterprises, cooperative biodiversity prospecting
and other innovative projects. In cooperation with the World Bank, USAID in
1994-1995 helped establish funding organizations to strengthen country
institutions and support biodiversity activities in Indonesia (Indonesia
Biodiversity Foundation) and Mexico (Mexican Conservation Fund), and recently
provided a $3 million grant to Conservation International to conduct rapid
biodiversity assessments in the Andean region of South America and insular
Southeast Asia and the Pacific. Through the International Cooperative
Biodiversity Groups Programme, USAID is collaborating with the National
Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation to award grants to
U.S. and developing country partners for discovering bioactive agents for the
pharmaceutical industry while encouraging biological conservation and
sustainable economic development. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
|||
1992 |
1995 |
||
Protected
area as % of total land area |
10.5 |
10.5 |
|
1990 |
Latest
199_ |
||
Number
of threatened species |
2,379 |
2,500 |
|
Other
data |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 16: ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANAGEMENT OF
BIOTECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: Through the use of advanced tools such as genetic
engineering, biotechnology is expected to have a dramatic effect on the world
economy over the next decade. Development of the uses of biotechnology is not
just a U.S. government program, but a partnership of federal, state, and
private sector resources. To date, the federal investment in biotechnology
has been focused primarily on the health field. The results of this research
are having a profound impact on medicine and health care, providing improved
approaches to the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease. A major
report from the Biotechnology Research Committee (BRS) of the National
Science and Technology Council (NSTC a cabinet-level council which serves as
the principal means for the President to coordinate science, space, and
technology policies across the federal government), was released in 1995 on
biotechnology. This report, "Biotechnology for the 21st Century: New
Horizons", identifies priorities for federal investment and specific
opportunities in four specific areas: 1) agricultural biotechnology; 2)
environmental biotechnology, with a focus on bioremediation; 3)
manufacturing/bioprocessing, including energy research; and, 4) marine
biotechnology and aquaculture. The report focused on these areas, and did not
include the health field in light of all the efforts already undertaken in
that area. The BRS has identified three overarching priorities for federal
biotechnology research in the areas highlighted in the report as follows: 1)
Expand research to discover, characterize, modify, and control the genetics
and biochemical products and processes of a broad range of terrestrial and
marine organisms for applications in biotechnology; 2) Apply the tools of
modern biotechnology to problems in agriculture, the environment, and
manufacturing to facilitate the development of new and improved products,
processes, and test methods; and 3) Strengthen and enhance facilities,
repositories, databases, reference standards, and human resources to ensure the
future vitality of the U.S. biotechnology enterprise. The report can be
accessed on the World - Wide- Web browser to http://www.nalusda.gov.bic/bio21
The
U.S. believes that an area of particular interest to countries in the field
of biotechnology relates to the agricultural sector. Both research and
potential commercial use of biotechnology for plants in the environment can
be obtained from the database for permits and deregulation developed by the
U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
(APHIS). Most of the 48 species of plants, including trees, have been
engineered for pest and disease resistance, and some for tolerance to
environmental conditions. The database also allows researchers, governments,
and industry to identify work of common interest. This information is
available in the Internet. The
U.S. has a comprehensive system to review the food, agricultural, and
environmental safety of transgenic organisms and products. This is effected by the USDA/APHIS, USEPA, and the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration. Animal vaccines are also reviewed for human and
environmental safety and licenses by USDA/APHIS. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: The Biotechnology Research
Subcommittee (BRS) of the Committee on Fundamental Science under the White
House's National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) serves as a federal
agency coordinating function on biotechnology issues among the 13 federal
departments and agencies involved in biotechnology issues applicable to broad
and diverse government missions and goals in this area. The Federal
Government is one of three partners, along with the industrial and academic
communities, in the collaborative venture that is biotechnology research and
development. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: Available information in the
report highlighted on the previous page. 3. Major Groups: Of all the major groups
identified in Agenda 21, the U.S. scientific and technological community
plays the largest role in biotechnology issues. U.S. NGOs also are involved
in the debate of biotechnology issues that has occurred with respect to
certain biotechnology issues. 4. Finance: Federal investment in
biotechnology research was estimated at nearly $4.3 billion in fiscal year
1994. 5. Regional/International Cooperation: The U.S. has cooperated and
intends to continue to cooperate in numerous international organizations and
fora that address biotechnology issues, including the FAO, UNEP, OECD, and
the North American Plant Protection Organization (NAPPO). USAID has
implemented a model program for international technology transfer that helps
developing countries gain access to the benefits of agricultural
biotechnology. The six-year Agricultural Biotechnology for Sustainable Development
(ABSP) project features unique research collaborations targetting domestic
and tropical varieties of a wide-range of crops. U.S. participants include
the Federal Government, four universities, a law school, two companies, an
international research institute, and a biotechnology trade association.
Training and expert consultation in intellectual property and biosafety
regulations are offered to micro-propagation companies from Indonesia and
Costa Rica and public institutions in those countries as well as Egypt and
Kenya. To ensure that mutual benefits ensue, legal agreements for ownership,
product distribution, and royalties are established early in the process. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea: Signed but not yet ratified by
the U.S. See also the attached tables on the next pages. The
UN Convention on the Law of the Sea continues to serve as a comprehensive framework
with respect to the uses of the oceans. It creates the structure for the
governance and protection of all marine areas, including the air space above
and the seabed and sub-soil below. The U.S. signed the accompanying Agreement
Relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the Convention on July 29, 1994,
and intends to apply the Agreement provisionally pending ratification. The
U.S. has a national policy on oceans as well as an integrated coastal area
management programme. Existing coastal zone and area management plans
encompass all marine activities within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
Prior assessment of the impact of major activities on oceans is required
under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act. Under the programme area of marine environmental protection, a
tradeable permits programme for SO2 emissions and a cradle-to-grave hazardous
waste management scheme has been introduced. Activities under this programme
area are rated "very important" or "important". The
Government has access to technologies that serve to identify the major types
of pollution of the marine environment from land-based sources. The
Government participates in the development of socio-economic and
environmental indicators, systematic observation systems, mussel watch
programmes and clearing-houses, as well as capacity building and training
programs. There are several databases (National Estuarine Inventory, National
Coastal Discharge Inventory, National Status and Trends Programme, etc.) used
by the U.S. Government, private sector or universities. These databases cover
all relevant issues in coastal zones and are rated as "adequate".
Since the 1972 enactment of the Coastal Zone Management Act, environmental
assessments of coastal and marine areas are undertaken at least every two
years. The U.S. is able to measure improvements and changes in the coastal
and marine environment primarily through the National Status and Trends
Programme. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: The National Security Council
(NSC) Interagency Working Group on Global Environmental Affairs, including
but not limited to all U.S. maritime and coastal agencies, has primary
responsibility for ensuring the integrated planning and implementation of
costal management policy. The NSC is fully integrated in the President's
Council on Sustainable Development. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: The U.S. National Oceanic and
Atmosphere Administration is working on a number of
indices of nutrient enrichment, including an algae index. The U.S. noted,
however, that an algae index alone, without other indices, is not very
useful. 3. Major Groups: Major Groups have an advisory
role in the national and local agenda-setting processes. These groups include
the private sector, small-scale artisanal fishermen and indigenous people. 4. Finance: Bilateral and multilateral
financial assistance has been provided by the U.S. Government since 1992 to
implement activities to address the sustanable development of small islands
and developing states (SIDS). 5. Regional/International Cooperation: The U.S. supports the
Clearinghouse Concept in the Global Plan of Action for the Protection of the
Marine Environment from land-based activities. Adoption of a UNGA resolution
would facilitate coordination among the UN agencies and international
organizations. The ratification and implementation of IMO treaties also
requires international cooperation. The U.S. Mineral Management Service
coordinates with counterpart agencies abroad with respect to offshore oil and
gas operations. The United States fully supports the Agreement for the
Implementation of the Provision of the United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of
Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, as well as the 1993
Agreement to promote Compliance with International Conservation and
Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas. The U.S. also fully
supports the Code of Conduct of Responsible Fishing which impacts the
conservation and management of marine fisheries within the U.S. EEZ. The
Government recently helped launch a process to establish a multinational
initiative for an International Research Institute (IRI) and network
dedicated to world-class scientific research and education on forecasting on
year-to-year climate variability. The U.S. took the lead on developing the
clearinghouse activity called for in the Global Programme of Action (GPA) on
land-based activities and hosted the conference in 1995 which developed and
adopted the GPA. The U.S. plays a significant role in the IOC, IPCC, World
Weather Watch, Earth Watch, and International Mussel Watch. The U.S. notes
the importance of para. 17.118 of Agenda 21 that calls
for the UNGA to provide for regular consideration within the UN system on
general marine and coastal issues, including environment and development
items. The U.S. Government participates in the Global Ocean Observing System.
USAID's Water and Coastal Resources Program addresses the vital and strategic
interests in promoting the sustainable development of freshwater, coastal,
and marine resources. USAID is playing a leadership role in providing
direction and impetus to international efforts to address the needs for
integrated coastal and freshwater resources management, preservation of
aquatic biodiversity and reduction of pollution from land-based activities.
As part of its strategy, USAID is actively supporting the International Coral
Reef Initiative (ICRI), which stems in part from a U.S. initiative. In
addition USAID actively supports the sustainable management of mangrove and
other coastal ecosystems. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1980 |
1990 |
1994 |
||
Catches
of marine species (metric tons) |
4.987 (1984) |
5.868 |
5,939 (1993) |
|
Population
in coastal areas |
119,833 |
133,396 |
138,519 |
|
Population
served by waste water treatment (% of country's total
population) |
65.51 |
78.94 (1991) |
80.83 (1993) |
|
Discharges
of oil into coastal waters (metric tons) |
12.64 |
13.91 |
1.54 (1993) |
|
Releases
of phosphate into coastal waters (metric tons) |
223,400 (1991) |
|||
Releases
of nitrate into coastal waters (metric tons) |
190,000 (1991) |
|||
Other
data
|
Chapter 17 (Oceans) Continued:
Check
the boxes in the column below left: |
Check
the boxes in the column below right: |
For
level of importance use: |
For
level of implementation use: |
***
= very important |
***
= fully covered |
**
= important |
**
= well covered- gaps being addressed |
*
= not important |
*
= poorly covered |
N
= not relevant |
O
= not covered; N = not relevant |
TABLE I. THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE
APPROPRIATE COORDINATING MECHANISM FOR INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT OF COASTAL AND MARINE AREAS AND THEIR RESOURCES.
LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE |
ACTIVITY AS DESCRIBED IN AGENDA 21 |
LEVEL OF IMPLEMENTATION |
** |
a.
Preparation and implementation of land and water use and siting policies. |
* |
*** |
b.
Implementation of integrated coastal and marine management and sustainable
development plans and programmes at appropriate levels. |
** |
c.
Preparation of coastal profiles identifying critical areas including eroded
zones, physical processes, development patterns, user conflicts and specific
priorities for management. |
||
*** |
d.
Prior environmental impact assessment, systematic observation and follow-up
of major projects, including systematic incorporation of results in
decision-making. |
*** |
*** |
e.
Contingency plans for human induced and natural disasters. |
*** |
f.
Improvement of coastal human settlements, especially in housing, drinking
water and treatment and disposal of sewage, solid wastes and industrial
effluents. |
||
g.
Periodic assessment of the impacts of external factors and phenomena to
ensure that the objectives of integrated management and sustainable
development of coastal areas and marine environment are met. |
||
h.
Conservation and restoration of altered critical habitats. |
||
I.
Integration of sectoral programmes on sustainable development for
settlements, agriculture, tourism, fishing, ports and industries affecting
the coastal areas. |
||
** |
J.
Infrastructure adaptation and alternative employment. |
** |
** |
K.
Human resource development and training. |
** |
*** |
L.
Public education, awareness and information programmes. |
** |
** |
M.
Promoting environmentally sound technology and sustainable practices. |
** |
** |
N.
Development and simultaneous implementation of environmental quality
criteria. |
** |
TABLE II. TECHNOLOGY (MARINE ENVIRONMENT)
LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE |
ACTIVITY AS DESCRIBED IN AGENDA 21 |
LEVEL OF IMPLEMENTATION |
*** |
A.
Apply preventive, precautionary and anticipatory approaches so as to avoid
degradation of the marine environment, as well as to reduce the risk of
long-term or irreversible adverse effects upon it. |
*** |
*** |
B.
Ensure prior assessment of activities that may have significant adverse
impacts upon the marine environment. |
*** |
*** |
C.
Integrate protection of the marine environment into relevant general
environmental, social and economic development policies. |
** |
** |
D.
Develop economic incentives, where appropriate, to apply clean technologies
and other means consistent with the internalization of environmental costs,
such as the polluter pays principle, so as to avoid degradation of the marine
environment. |
** |
** |
E.
Improve the living standards of coastal populations, particularly in
developing countries, so as to contribute to reducing the degradation of the
coastal and marine environment. |
** |
*** |
F.
Effective monitoring and surveillance within the exclusive economic zone
(EEZ) of fish harvesting and transportation of toxic and other hazardous
materials. |
** |
TABLE III. SEWAGE RELATED ISSUES
LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE |
ACTIVITY AS DESCRIBED IN AGENDA 21 |
LEVEL OF IMPLEMENTATION |
*** |
A.
Sewage related problems are considered when formulating or reviewing coastal
development plans, including human development plans. |
*** |
*** |
B.
Sewage treatment facilities are built in accordance with national policies. |
*** |
*** |
C.
Coastal outfalls are located so as to maintain acceptable level of
environmental quality and to avoid exposing shell fisheries, water intakes
and bathing areas to pathogens. |
** |
*** |
D.
The Government promotes primary treatment of municipal sewage discharged to
rivers, estuaries and the sea, or other solutions appropriate to specific
sites. |
*** |
*** |
E.
The Government supports the establishment and improvement of local, national,
subregional and regional, as necessary, regulatory and monitoring programmes
to control effluent discharge. Minimum sewage effluent guidelines and water
quality criteria are in use. |
*** |
TABLE IV. OTHER SOURCES OF MARINE POLLUTION,
THE GOVERNMENT HAS:
LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE |
ACTIVITY AS DESCRIBED IN AGENDA 21 |
LEVEL OF IMPLEMENTATION |
*** |
A.
Established or improved upon, as necessary, regulatory and monitoring programmes
to control emissions, including recycling technologies. |
** |
*** |
B.
Promoted risk and environmental impact assessments to help ensure an
acceptable level of environmental quality. |
*** |
** |
C.
Promoted assessment and cooperation at the regional level, where appropriate,
with respect to the input of point source pollutants from the marine
environment. |
** |
** |
D.
Taken steps to eliminate emissions or discharges of organohalogen compounds
from the marine environment. |
** |
** |
E.
Taken steps to eliminate/reduce emissions or discharges or other synthetic
organic compounds from the marine environment. |
** |
*** |
F.
Promoted controls over anthropogenic inputs of nitrogen and phosphorous that enter coastal waters where such problems as
eutrophication threaten the marine environment or its resources. |
** |
*** |
G.
Taken steps to develop and implement environmentally sound land-use
techniques and practices to reduce run-off to water courses and estuaries
which would cause pollution or degradation of the marine environment. |
** |
*** |
H.
Promoted the use of environmentally less harmful pesticides and fertilizers
and alternative methods for pest control, and considered the prohibition of those
found to be environmentally unsound. |
** |
*** |
I.
Adopted new initiatives at national, subregional and regional levels for
controlling the input of non-point source pollutants which require broad
changes in sewage and waste management, agricultural practices, mining,
construction and transportation. |
** |
*** |
J.
Taken steps to control and prevent coastal erosion and siltation due to
anthropogenic factors related to, inter alia, land-use and construction
techniques and practices. |
** |
TABLE V. ADDRESSING CRITICAL
UNCERTAINTIES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE. IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT THIS
PROGRAMME AREA THE GOVERNMENT IS CARRYING OUT THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES:
LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE |
ACTIVITY AS DESCRIBED IN AGENDA 21 |
LEVEL OF IMPLEMENTATION |
** |
A.
Coordinating national and regional observation programmes for coastal and
near-shore phenomena related to climate change and for research parameters essential
for marine and coastal management in all regions. |
* |
** |
B.
Providing improved forecasts of marine conditions for the safety of
inhabitants of coastal areas and for the efficiency of marine operations. |
** |
* |
C.
Adopting special measures to cope with and adapt to potential climate change
and sea-level rise. |
* |
* |
D.
Participating in coastal vulnerability assessment, modelling and response
strategies particularly for priority areas, such as small islands and low-lying
and critical coastal areas. |
* |
* |
E.
Identifying ongoing and planned programmes of systematic observation of the
marine environment, with a view to integrating activities and establishing priorities
to address critical uncertainties for oceans and all seas. |
* |
* |
F.
Research to determine the marine biological effects of increased levels of
ultraviolet rays due to the depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer. |
* |
* |
G.
Carrying out analysis, assessments and systematic observation of the role of
oceans as a carbon sink. |
** |
TABLE VI. RATING OF ACTIVITIES IN THE AIR AND
MARITIME TRANSPORT SECTORS IN THE SMALL ISLANDS DEVELOPING STATES (SIDS)
AIR TRANSPORT |
RATING |
MARITIME TRANSPORT |
RATING |
1.
Frequency (external flights) |
NA |
1.
Frequency (external shipping) |
NA |
2.
Frequency (in-country flights) |
" |
2.
Frequency (in-country shipping) |
" |
3.
Cooperation at regional level in air transport and civil aviation |
" |
3.
Cooperation at regional level in shipping |
" |
4.
Cooperation at international level |
" |
4.
Cooperation at international level |
" |
5.
Economic viability of national air line |
" |
5.
Economic viability of national shipping line(s) |
" |
6.
Economic viability of regional air line |
" |
6.
Economic viability of regional shipping line (s) |
" |
7.
national level training in skills for air transport sector |
" |
7.
National level training in skills for maritime transport sector |
" |
8.
Access to training in skills for air transport sector within the region |
" |
8.
Regional level training in skills for maritime transport sector |
" |
9.
Access to international training for air transport sector |
" |
9.
Access to international training for maritime transport sector |
" |
10.
Supportive of ICAO |
" |
" |
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: Watersheds are a primary concern of the President's
Council for Sustainable Development's (PCSD) research. The Task Force on
Natural Resources facilitates the integration of assessing and analyzing the
social, environmental and economic sustainability of people's activities.
Chapter 18 sets ambitious objectives to meet the goal of satisfying the
freshwater needs of countries for their sustainable development. The concept
that is central to Chapter 18 is for countries to move toward integrated
water resources management, a holistic approach that treats water resources
as an integral part of the ecosystem. The United States is working towards
this goal. Many projects are being undertaken in the areas throughout the
United States - such as the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin, the
Columbia River system, the Missouri River system, the
Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa and Apalachiola-Chattahoochee-Flint River basins,
and the Everglades that take a more integrative look at managing these
resources than has been done in the past. A watershed management approach is
being proposed for incorporation into the primary federal statute regulating
water quality. Although the federal government administers a significant
portion of the nation's water storage and conveyance facilities, water
allocation and administration rests principally with the states. Despite
droughts and chronic water shortages in some locales and record floods in
others, the U.S. has an abundance of high-quality fresh surface water and
groundwater. Protection of both surface water and groundwater supplies are
addressed at both local and state levels, as well as at the federal level.
Federal statutes that provide protection for both surface and/or groundwater
include the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Resource
Conservation and Management Act, and the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act. The
Clean Water Act has as its goal the "restoration and maintenance of the
chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Nation's waters."
Under this Act, it is illegal to discharge pollutants from a point source
into any surface water without a National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System permit. Most states have legal authority to implement and enforce the
provisions of the Clean Water Act, while USEPA retains oversight
responsibilities for most state water programs. Water quality standards,
criteria to assure that streams are "fishable and swimmable", are
set by each state, with USEPA oversight and approval. The Safe Drinking Water
Act, which was reauthorized in 1996, has been established to protect the
quality of drinking water in the U.S. This law focuses on all waters actually
or potentially designated for drinking use, whether from above ground or
underground sources. The Act authorizes USEPA to establish safe standards of
purity and requires all owners or operators of public water systems to comply
with primary (health-related) standards. While at the federal level, USEPA
has primary responsibilities under both the Clean Water and Safe Drinking
Water Acts, many agencies of the federal government are involved in water
resource management activities, including the U.S. Geological Survey, the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS). State and local governments are also involved in water resource
issues. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: Most decision-making on
allocation and administration of freshwater resources rests with states and local
governments. However, federal statutes pertaining to environmental protection
of surface water and groundwater supplies are principally under USEPA
oversight. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: Not a significant issues in the United States. The U.S. is
a major world leader in the development and use of state of the art
technology pertaining to water management and use. The U.S. Geological
Service (USGS) usually produces a major water use report for the country
approximately every five years. 3. Major Groups: Most interaction of major groups
with respect to water allocation and administration is done at state and
local levels. USEPA and the Congress also interact with major groups in the
development and implementation of federal programs dealing with freshwater
issues. 4. Finance: USEPA expended approximately $47
million in implementing the Safe Drinking Water and Clean Drinking Water Acts
in 1994. However, billions are spent each year in the United States at
federal, state and local levels with regard to protecting, allocating and
administering U.S. water supplies. 5. Regional/International Cooperation: The U.S. has longstanding
cooperative programs with Canada and Mexico on water issues in border areas.
The U.S. has also participated at international meetings dealing with
freshwater issues (most recently at the Dublin and Noordwijk conferences
several years ago). USAID's Water and Coastal Resources Program includes
support for freshwater resources management, wetlands protection, and
agricultural water use efficiency activities. USAID is providing technical
assistance/expertise to promote the integrated, equitable, and participatory
management of water resources in developing countries and countries with
economies in transition. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1980 |
1990 |
Latest
199- |
||
Fresh
water availability (total domestic/external in million m3) |
||||
Annual
withdrawal of freshwater as % of available water |
||||
Other
data |
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: The foundation of the chemicals control programs in the
United States is based on the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) and Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Non-pesticide chemical
uses are covered by TSCA, which requires pre-manufacture notification and
testing in some cases. FIFRA requires the registration, based on the review
of testing data, of the domestic use of any pesticide. A related statute, the
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) establishes tolerance levels for
pesticides residues on foods, including imported foods. The Consumer Product
Safety Act (CPSA) and the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA) address
consumer exposure to hazardous chemicals and products, including those
manufactured abroad. Occupational Safety and Health Act and the Mine Safety
and Health Act address occupational exposures to hazardous chemicals. The
most significant innovations in chemical management in past 10 years have
been the result of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA) and the Pollution Prevention Act. EPCRA set up networks of local and
state-level committees with the mission to develop plans to prevent, prepare
for and respond to chemical accidents. EPCRA also established the toxics
release inventory (TRI), which is a publicly available national database of
routine annual emissions of over 300 toxic chemicals to air, water, land and
off-site disposal. Early in 1993, the President ordered previously exempted
federal facilities, including military installations, to report TRI emissions
as well as stockpiles of chemicals stored on-site. EPCRA, complemented by
related voluntary programs, has, in many instances, resulted in greater
reductions in environmental risk than more traditional command-and-control approaches.
A significant change in the FHSA since UNCED has been the inclusion of
guidelines for evaluating chronic hazards from the exposure to carcinogenic,
neurotoxic and reproductive/developmental toxic substances. These guidelines
facilitate better interagency and international coordination of policies
regarding exposure to such substances. The Pollution Prevention Act
established a bold national objective that "Pollution should be
prevented or reduced at the source whenever feasible." The USEPA
Administrator has made this ethic a central consideration of all EPA
programs. In
1996, the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) was adopted which amended FIFRA.
The new law establishes stronger health-based safety standards for pesticide
residues in all foods. It uses a "reasonable certainty of no harm"
as a general safety standard. The single, health-based standard eliminates
long-standing problems posed by multiple standards for pesticides in raw and
processed foods. It requires USEPA to consider all non-occupational sources
of exposure, including drinking water, and exposure to other pesticides with
a common mechanism of toxicity when setting standards. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: In response to growing public awareness
and concern over environmental threats to human health posed by toxic
chemicals and substances, the U.S. Congress has established over the past 25
years a number of agencies to address different aspects of environmental
health issues. The network of federal agencies, moreover, involves numerous
constituent and participating groups. At the national level, the federal
agencies - including USEPA, the Department of Labor's Occupational and Health
Administration and 7 different agencies within the Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS), USDA, and the Department of Transportation -- play a
large role in defining and pursuing environmental health goals pertaining to
toxic chemicals and substances through research, administration and service
programs, as well as via regulation and enforcement activities. These
agencies also provide valuable assistance to state and local environmental
departments and health agencies. State and local agencies must address many
of the same environmental health issues as the federal government. The scope
and responsibilities of state agencies are extremely diverse and vary from
state to state. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: By-and large, the United States
is a world leader in development and utilizing the latest state-of-the-art
technology related to administering toxic chemicals and substances. 3. Major Groups: Non-government entities,
predominately from the science and technological community as represented by
colleges and universities, address a range of environmental health research
and policy issues related to toxic chemicals and substances. Environmental
NGOs are also actively involved in national and local debates involved in
governmental efforts aimed at addressing problems posed by toxics. 4. Finance: Total amount of federal financing
related to research, administration and regulation of is not available at
this time, but increasing resource constraints are of concern. 5. Regional/International Cooperation: The United States has been
successful in having fundamental democratic principles accepted as part of
the foundation for international toxic chemical work in numerous fora,
including OECD, UNEP, UNECE, IFCS, etc. In contributing to the CSD process,
the United States co-hosted with Mexico a workshop on lead. The results of
that workshop were instrumental in getting the CSD to call for governments to
phase-out the use of leaded gasoline. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary
Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal: signed in 1990, but not yet
ratified. At
the federal level, the United States continues to pursue the environmentally
sound management of hazardous wastes under key laws, including the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) also known as the
"Superfund" Act. RCRA is a nation-wide program to protect human
health and the environment from the risks of improper management of hazardous
and solid waste, and it provides a "cradle-to-grave" system of
regulations for hazardous waste to promote the cleanup of sites that have
been contaminated with hazardous substances while ensuring that, to the
extent possible, the polluter pays principle is adhered to. This program is,
to a large extent, administered by State governments with federal oversight.
CERCLA is designed to promote clean-up of sites and other areas where past
disposal practices of hazardous substances may now pose a threat to the
environment and/or human health. Under this law, a large portion of the
cleanups are conducted by the polluters; States participates in the cleanups
as well, but there is no delegation of authority in CERCLA that permits
States to administer the program. Most States and many localities also have
their own laws and regulations concerning hazardous and solid waste disposal.
Since
UNCED, the Clinton Administration has made pollution prevention, including
waste minimization one of its highest priorities for the USEPA. To further
this goal, USEPA has pursued several policies, including issuing new
guidelines for hazardous waste reduction programs that include community
right-to-know features; convening a task force of USEPA and State officials
to develop economically sound source reduction strategies and technical
controls; and restructuring hazardous waste recycling programs. USEPA
has also focused RCRA initiatives since UNCED on environmental justice
through siting, permitting, public involvement, corrective action,
disproportionate impacts and Native American tribal issues. For example, the
USEPA expanded public involvement and improving its own ability to include
environmental justice in public health considerations and to assure that
priority-setting methods adequately address environmental justice concerns.
Much of the USEPA action related to environmental justice are done in line
with the Executive Order issued by President Clinton in February 1994 on
"Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations". Current
disposal capacity is sufficient to handle expected amounts of hazardous waste
safely until at least 2013. Combustion rules for hazardous waste were
considerably tightened in 1994. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: The U.S. is strongly committed to
public participation in environmental decision-making, and believes that
federal programs dealing with hazardous waste issues are run better when
there is significant public input into the process. As noted above, there are
both federal programs as well as many state and local government programs
that address hazardous waste issues. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: Federal agencies have established
programs to encourage development of new hazardous waste cleanup
technologies. The U.S. is generally recognized as a world leader in the
development and utilization of advanced technologies associated with both
pollution prevention and hazardous waste treatment. 3. Major Groups: Major groups play a key role in
policy, scientific and technological issues involved with hazardous waste
issues at federal, state and local levels. The predominant major groups
involved include environmental NGOs, business and industry, and those from
the scientific and technological field. 4. Finance: Information on total federal,
state and local expenditures on hazardous waste issues are not available. 5. Regional/International Cooperation: The U.S. has worked closely with its
North American neighbors to address hazardous waste issues. Although the U.S.
has not ratified the Basel Convention, it actively participates in Basel
technical meetings and has attended every meeting of the Basel Conference of
Parties held to date. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1980 |
1990 |
1991 |
||
Generation
of hazardous waste (million t) |
276 |
|||
Percentage
of total hazardous waste managed in aqueous physical-chemical treatment units
|
76.0 |
|||
Percentage
of total hazardous waste managed vid land disposal |
9.0 |
|||
Percentage
of total hazardous waste receiving thermal treatment |
1.1 |
|||
Percentage
of total hazardous waste in recovery operations |
2.2 |
|||
Other
data |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 21: ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANAGEMENT OF
SOLID WASTES AND SEWAGE-RELATED ISSUES
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: At the federal level, the U.S. continues to pursue the environmentally
sound management of solid wastes through implementation of key federal laws
including, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) also known as the Superfund Act. The national goal for solid waste
management continues to be the reduction of the amount of wastes through
source reduction and recycling programs. USEPA is implementing a national
program for businesses that provides extensive guidance on waste prevention
and recycling, and for improving and expanding markets for recycled products.
The federal government is helping States and localities plan for safe and
cost-effective waste prevention, recycling and disposal by facilitating
information exchange, providing technical assistance, setting minimum
standards governing the safe management of municipal waste, as well as loans
and other support for efforts to promote source reduction and recycling. More
than 30 States have quantitative recycling targets for municipal solid waste
ranging from 15 to 30 percent. Once a State has put into place the means to
oversee and enforce RCRA rules, it may petition the federal government for
the right to operate the RCRA program. To date, 46 States have received this
right. The
U.S. still records the largest per capita generation of municipal solid waste
among OECD countries. Municipal solid waste is expected to decline slightly
on a per capita basis by 2000 mostly as a result of source reduction efforts.
The pursuit of the RCRA goal of promoting waste reduction, reuse and
recycling is succeeding in gradually reducing quantities of municipal waste
being incinerated and landfilled: the proportion of waste recovered tripled
between 1970 and 1993 and now stands at about 22 percent. Despite the fact
that 38 States have enacted more than 140 recycling laws, with some having
also established tax incentive programs for recycling, overall U.S. recycling
rates are lower than those seen in other OECD countries. For example, nationwide
about 34 percent of paper and 22 percent of glass were recycled in 1993 as
compared to other OECD countries who have reached 40 percent and more in
their paper and glass recycling efforts. The RCRA goal of cradle-to-grave
management of waste is broadly being met. In spite of some slow efforts in
some localities, most municipal waste is now disposed of in lined landfills,
incinerated, or composted. Unsound disposal operations have been shut down.
The share of incineration is not expected to grow and is likely to remain at
about 16 percent, while landfilling is projected to decrease by about 10
percent between 1993 and 2000. With respect to sewerage issues, the federal
response continues to focus on implementation of the Clean Water Act. Under
this Act, federal funding contributed about three-quarters of the investment
cost of local waste water treatment facilities. Over the past two decades,
the Clean Water Act's "Construction Grants Program" provided a
total of nearly $60 billion in federal assistance for the construction of
municipal sewage treatment works, while states and local governments
contributed over $20 billion. This has resulted in the U.S. as a leader among
OECD countries with respect to state-of-the-art sewerage treatment. In 1991,
the U.S. ceased dumping sewerage sludge in coastal waters. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: State and local governments in
the United States continue to have the primary responsibility for municipal
solid waste management. Invariably, based on the strong democratic system of
government in the U.S., various stakeholders are included in the
decision-making structure at the State and local levels. Solid waste
management is typically provided or regulated by local governments with
funding from general tax revenues. The federal government, through USEPA,
establishes performance standards for State and local efforts to ensure
protection of human health and the environment. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: USEPA cooperates with State and
local communities in a number of programs to improve solid waste management
and prevent pollution. One example of technology cooperation deals with
Underground Storage Tanks. 3. Major Groups: Business and industry, the scientific
and technological community, and environmental NGOs tend to be the most
active of the major groups on solid waste management issues in the United
States. 4. Finance: Under current policy, it is
estimated that the RCRA program will cost $234 billion between 1990 and 2020.
5. Regional/International Cooperation: The United States cooperates with
its neighbors, Canada and Mexico, in addressing solid waste and
sewage-related issues as they may arise. USAID strives to alleviate problems
arising from poor sanitation and contaminated drinking water by assisting
local governments in developing countries and in countries with economies in
transition to improve and expand urban environmental services and related
infrastructure, primarily water supply, sanitation and drainage, and solid
waste management. USAID programs are aimed at increasing the volume of
wastewater collected and treated from poor neighborhoods; introducing
municipal and industrial performance standards for disposal of waste; and
increasing capacity for compliance and enforcement of pollution standards.
USAID activities have resulted in improved access to waste collection
services and supported private-public cooperation in solid waste management.
These activities have resulted in better sanitation, particularly for the
urban poor. The United States adheres to the OECD Council Decision governing
trade in recyclable waste with other OECD countries. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1980 |
1990 |
1993 |
||
Generation
of municipal waste (thousand t) |
137,429 |
165,162 |
187,732 |
|
Waste
disposed(% of municipal waste generation) |
95+ |
95+ |
95+ |
|
Federak
expenditure on pollution control/abatement (US$ billions) |
5.5 |
5.1 |
6.7 |
|
Municipal
waste recycling rates (%) |
9.6 |
14.5 |
18.6 |
|
Municipal
waste disposal after recovery (%) |
90.4 |
83.4 |
78.3 |
|
Other
data |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 22: SAFE AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND
MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTES
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: United States policy continues to emphasize the safe
storage of radioactive wastes, the development of permanent solutions to
radioactive waste disposal and the present generation's accountability for
current radioactive waste inventories. The U.S. Department of Energy is
continuing its efforts to develop a waste-management system for spent nuclear
fuel and high-level radioactive waste from both civilian and government
facilities. The system will consist of a geologic repository, a monitored retriveable storage (MRS) facility, and a
transportation system to support storage and retrieval. The U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) will license civilian facilities. A conceptual
design has been completed for the MRS, which will handle and store fuel until
it is permanently disposed of in a repository. Scientific feasibility
investigations continue at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, which Congress has
selected as a candidate for the geologic repository. The construction of an
underground Exploratory Studies Facility is underway at Yucca Mountain to
enable scientists to examine the geologic, hydrologic, and geochemical
characteristics of the potential host rock. U.S. radioactive waste policy and
program missions continue to be mandated by legislation passed by Congress
and signed into law by the President. The following is the list of major
legislation governing U.S. radwaste policy: the Atomic Energy Act; the Marine
Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act; the Energy Reorganization Act; the
Department of Energy Organization Act, the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation
Control Act; the Low-level Radioactive Waste Act, the Nuclear Waste Policy
Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Through this and other
legislation, the storage and disposal of most commercially generated
low-level waste is assigned to the States, and all other wastes, including
low-level waste of non-commercial origin and all greater than class C
low-level waste, are the responsibility of the federal government. The U.S.
has not dumped low-level radioactive waste in the ocean since 1970. In
November 1993, the U.S. called for an international prohibition of ocean
dumping of low-level radioactive waste which was subsequently adopted by most
parties to the London Convention. |
Cross-Sectoral Issues 1. Decision-Making Structure: Federal agencies involved: DOE,
NRC and the USEPA. 2. Capacity-Building/Technology Issues: U.S. considered a world leader in
radwaste technology development. 3. Major Groups: Mostly, environment NGOs, business
and industry and scientific and technological community involved at various
levels of debate (i.e., local, state and national) 4. Finance: No information 5. Regional/International Cooperation: The U.S. cooperates in the IAEA,
the London Convention, the NEA, and under numerous bilateral cooperation
agreements. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
No
information |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTERS 23-32: MAJOR GROUPS
The role of major groups are also covered
under the various chapters of Agenda 21. The following is a summary of main
objectives outlined in Agenda 21. Please check the appropriate boxes and
describe briefly any important steps or obstacles.
STATUS REPORT ON PARTICIPATION BY MAJOR GROUPS AT THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL LEVELS |
|
Ch.
24: GLOBAL ACTION FOR WOMEN TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women was Signed
in 1980; not yet ratified. 24.b Increasing the proportion of
women decision makers. Percentage
of women: in
government % 50.2 (1990) >50.5 (Est. 1992) in
Congress % 6 (1992) 10 (1995) at
local government level % 42.8(1991) 43.0(1991) 24.2.e assessing, reviewing, revising
and implementing curricula and other educational material with a view to
promoting dissemination of gender-relevant knowledge. Curricula
and educational material Many local educational systems already promote relevant
knowledge (Note: The U.S. Women's Educational Equity Act Program
promotes educational equity for women and girls, including those women and
girls who suffer multiple discrimination based on gender
and race. There is also a variety of federal statutes prohibiting
discrimination by recipients of federal funds based on gender and other
criteria (e.g., race, age, color, etc.) 24.2.f and 24.2.c formulating and implementing
policies, guidelines, strategies and plans for achievement of equality in all
aspects of society including issuing a strategy by year 2000 to eliminate
obstacles to full participation of women in sustainable development.
Policies/strategies etc. have been No plans at present (no obstacles foreseen) 24.2.d establishing mechanisms by 1995 to assess implementation
and impact of development and environment policies and programmes on women No plans at present Brief comments on this chapter (maximum 100 words)
(please, do not exceed this page): According to the President's
Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD), expanded opportunities for women
are an important component of sustainable development initiatives, especially
those that give "special attention to socio-economic factors that result
in disproportionately high levels of unintended and teen pregnancy among
disadvantaged segments of society." |
STATUS REPORT ON PARTICIPATION BY MAJOR GROUPS AT THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL LEVELS |
|
Ch.
25: CHILDREN AND YOUTH IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. 25.4 establishing processes that promote dialogue between the youth
and government at all levels and mechanisms that permit youth access to
information and opportunity to present their views on implementing A21. Name
relevant youth fora (3-4 most important): No information Describe their role in the national process: Ad hoc 25.6 reducing youth unemployment Youth
unemployment (16-19 years old) 1992:20.0% 1994: 17.6% 25.5 ensuring that by year 2000 more than 50% of youth --
gender balanced -- have access to appropriate secondary education or vocational
training. The
goal set in Agenda 21: has been reached Brief comments on this chapter (maximum 100 words)
(please, do not exceed this page): Various U.S. Agencies have
programs for children and youth. For example, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA), through 4-H Youth Development Programs of the Cooperative
State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) enrolled more than
5 million youth each year throughout the U.S. in programs dealing with such
issues as Environmental Stewardship, Environmental Education, Earth Sciences
and Natural Resource Conservation. The federal Government has also sought to
reach out to children and youth through environmental education programs such
as GLOBE (Global Learning and Observation to Benefit the Environment) which
was launched by Vice President Gore in 1994/95. |
STATUS REPORT ON PARTICIPATION BY MAJOR GROUPS AT THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL LEVELS |
|
Ch.
26: RECOGNIZING AND STRENGTHENING THE ROLE OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE AND THEIR
COMMUNITIES. 26.3.a establishing a process to empower indigenous people and
their communities -- through policies and legal instruments: in place at the
federal level under programs of the Bureau of Indian Affairs 26.3.b strengthening arrangements for
active participation in national policies: indigenous people participate on
an ad hoc basis. 26.3.c involving indigenous people in resource management
strategies and programmes at the national and local level: See below Brief comments on this chapter (maximum 100 words) (please,
do not exceed this page): The Bureau of Indian Affairs is responsible for helping
train American Indian and Alaska native groups to manage their own affairs
under trust relationship to the federal government. In many/most instances,
both groups were already pursuing traditional sustainable management
practices on their lands with respect to natural resource stewardship. |
|
Ch. 27: STRENGTHENING THE ROLE OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS: PARTNERS FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. 27.5 developing mechanisms that allow NGOs to play their
partnership role responsibly and effectively. 27.6 reviewing formal procedures and mechanisms to involve
NGOs in decision making and implementation. 27.8 promoting and allowing NGOs to participate in the
conception, establishment and evaluation of official mechanisms to review
development of national sustainable development strategy: NGO inputs are
important. 27.7 establishing a mutually productive dialogue by 1995 at
the national level between NGOs and governments. Brief comments on this chapter (maximum 100 words)
(please, do not exceed this page): The government has included
representatives of NGOs in the National delegation to every session of the
CSD as well as at other major international meetings. The government also
collaborates with international non-governmental organizations and other
international institutions in national and regional sustainable development
programmes. In the U.S., major group organizations participate occasionally
in national and local impact assessment projects and the design and
implementation of national sustainable development agenda-setting. NGOs
participate on a wide range of environmental, economic, and social activities
that contribute to and promote sustainable development in the U.S. and
abroad. The Government interacts with international PVOs, NGOs and other
international organizations in sustainable development programmes
internationally, mostly through the work of the U.S. Agency for International
Development. There are also several bilateral and multilateral collaborative
initiatives with international major groups in national and regional
sustainable development programmes. The contribution of local major groups to
national sustainable development activities is rated "essential", the
contribution of national major groups is rated "constructive and
helpful," and the contribution of regional and international major
groups and NGOs is rated "quite helpful". |
STATUS REPORT ON PARTICIPATION BY MAJOR GROUPS AT THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL LEVELS |
|
Ch.
28: LOCAL AUTHORITIES' INITIATIVES IN SUPPORT OF AGENDA 21. 28.2.d encouraging local authorities to
implement and monitor programmes that aim to ensure participation of women
and youth in local decision making. There
are at least NA local agenda 21s. NA% involve representation of women and/or
youth They
involve NA% of population The
administration encourage local agenda 21 initiatives: Brief comments on this chapter (maximum 100 words)
(please, do not exceed this page): Sustainable
communities involving local authorities is a major area for
concentration recommended by the PCSD. |
|
Ch.
29:
STRENGTHENING THE ROLE OF WORKERS AND THEIR TRADE UNIONS. 29.2 full participation of workers in implementation and
evaluation of A21. 29.3 a to e (By year 2000, (a) promoting
ratification of ILO conventions; (b) establishing bipartite and tripartite
mechanism on safety, health and sustainable development; (c) increasing
number of environmental collective agreements; (d) reducing occupational
accidents and injuries; (e) increasing workers' education and training
efforts: Workers take some part in National Agenda 21
discussions/implementation Brief comments on this chapter (maximum 100 words)
(please, do not exceed this page): No information |
STATUS REPORT ON PARTICIPATION BY MAJOR GROUPS AT THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL LEVELS |
|
30:
STRENGTHENING THE ROLE OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY. 30.6 increasing the efficiency of resource use, including reuse,
recycling, and reduction of waste per unit of economic output. There
are governmental policies encouraging the above objective. 30.18.a encouraging the concept of
stewardship in management and use of natural resources by entrepreneurs. List any actions taken in this area: No information 30.18.b increasing number of enterprises that subscribe to and
implement sustainable development policies: No information Brief comments on this chapter (maximum 100 words)
(please, do not exceed this page): The U.S. believes that for
sustainable development to succeed both at home and abroad, the involvement
of business and industry is critical. That is why members of
business/industry were included on the PCSD. |
STATUS REPORT ON PARTICIPATION BY MAJOR GROUPS AT THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL LEVELS |
|
Ch.
31: SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL COMMUNITY. 31.3.b improving exchange of knowledge
and concerns between s&t community and the general public. There
is some effort in this direction. 31.9 developing, improving and promoting international
acceptance of codes of practice and guidelines related to science and
technology and its role in reconciling environment and development. No
information Brief comments on this chapter not already described in
chapter 35 (maximum 100 words) (please, do not exceed this page): See chapter 35 comments |
|
Ch. 32: STRENGTHENING THE ROLE OF FARMERS. 32.5.c promoting and encouraging
sustainable farming practices and technologies. 32.5.e developing a policy framework
that provides incentives and motivation among farmers for sustainable and
efficient farming practices. 32.5.f enhancing participation of
organizations of farmers in design and implementation of sustainable development
policies. Brief comments on this chapter (maximum 100 words)
(please, do not exceed this page): The 1985 Farm Bill passed by the
U.S. Congress authorized the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to
establish a federal competitive grants program in the areas of sustainable
agriculture, research and education (SARE). The SARE program's mission is to
increase knowledge about and help farmers and ranchers adopt sustainable
practices that are profitable, environmentally sound and beneficial to society.
A total of $23 million were appropriated by USDA in 1995 and 1996 for
hundreds of projects throughout the U.S. that will develop information for
producers about how to farm more profitably while protecting the natural
resource base and enhancing their communities. |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 33: FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND MECHANISMS
Financial resources and mechanisms are also covered under
each sectoral chapter of Agenda 21 where relevant. This summary highlights broader
national financial policies, domestic and external (including ODA)
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: Since 1992, the Government has provided new and
additional grant funds for sustainable development and has developed and strengthened
bilateral and multilateral initiatives in the area of finance. The
Development Cooperation Policy has been reviewed since UNCED. The government
is framing and coordinating foreign assistance expenditures in terms of six
major objectives through the collaboration of various Agency heads under the
chairmanship of the Secretary of State. The six objectives are
: promoting sustainable development, building democracy, promoting
peace, providing humanitarian assistance, promoting US prosperity and advancing
diplomacy. Within the rubric of sustainable development, the four major
programmes are: broad-based economic growth, protection of the global
environment, stabilization of world population growth and support for
democratic participation. USAID
spending represents .5 per cent of the Federal budget and the US has the
lowest ODA/GNP ratio among DAC members. As is the case with other DAC
Members, public expenditure constraints and new claims on aid funds are the
chief determinants of the US aid budget. Aid appropriations managed by USAID
amount to approximately $7.5 billion and compete with the other $250 billion
in discretionary programmes. In terms of ODA, US aid disbursements fell in
1993 by some $2 billion or 19 percent in real terms to $9.7 billion,
reflecting a downcycle in multilateral payments. In terms of geographical and
functional allocation, the most dramatic changes in the appropriations for
1995/96 are the increases in emergency and humanitarian aid and the cuts to
Asia and Latin America. Official aid to the countries of Central and Eastern
Europe has begun to decline. New economic instruments: Pursuant to the 1993
Budget Law, the U.S. increased the federal tax by 4.3 cents to 18.4 cents per
gallon of gasoline and 24.4 cents on diesel fuel on 1 October 1993. The tax
was estimated to help reduce the U.S. budget deficit by 32.2 billion over a
5-year period. Elimination of environmentally unfriendly subsidies:
The phasing out of environmentally unfriendly subsidies is currently under
review in the United States. |
ODA
policy issues No
information |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||||
1991 |
1992 |
1993 |
||||
ODA
funding provided or received (Total US$million) |
11.26 |
11.7 |
9.7 |
|||
Average for 92-93 |
Average for 94-96 |
|||||
Net
flow of external capital from all sources as % of GDP |
||||||
Other
data |
Transfer of environmentally sound technology, cooperation
and capacity-building is also covered under each sectoral chapter of Agenda 21
where relevant. This summary highlights broader national policies and actions
relating to chapter 34.
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT ON LINKS BETWEEN NATIONAL, REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL INFORMATION
NETWORKS/SYSTEMS: The federal government plays an important role in funding
basic and applied research and development that is key in the development of
future generations of environmentally critical technologies. The federal
government also facilitates private sector and cooperative investments in
needed research and development, by reducing uncertainties caused by
regulatory and verification systems. The government seeks to increase the
overall productivity of the nation's energy, food, manufacturing,
transportation, construction and service sectors through environmental
technologies and practices that significantly reduce the use of energy,
materials and other inputs. MEANS OF IMPLEMENTATION: During 1995, the federal
government, in collaboration with the private sector and state and local
governments, updated research, development and demonstration priorities for
environmental technologies. The federal government continues to work with the
private sector to establish a market-based verification process for
environmental technologies. This process will be available nationally for
environmental technologies within three years. In addition, the federal
government recently launched the Rapid Commercialization Initiative (RCI),
which is intended to accelerate the commercialization of near-commercial
environmental technologies. Over the coming years, ten technologies will be
commercialized through this new programme. Another priority of U.S.
environmental technology is to increase its export to support and create new
high-paying U.S. jobs and to contribute to the achievement of sustainable
development. In
1995, the White House National Science and Technology Council, and key
federal agencies, released a 90-page "National Environmental Technology
Strategy". The Administration's plan is a blueprint working with
indsutry, states, communities and workers to help drive U.S. economic growth
while solving environmental problems. To carry out this strategy, the federal
government is implementing plans to, among other things, do the following:
promote innovation by providing federal sites where U.S. companies can test
and demonstrate the effectiveness of promising new environmental
technologies; reinvent environmental regulations to allow businesses to
develop and use the most efficient and effective technologies to meet high
environmental standards, improve information and education for potential
users throughout the U.S. and abroad; and provide assistance to U.S.
environmental businesses so they can succeed in the global marketplace and
assist developing countries in building capacity for addressing critical
environmental challenges. There
are over fifty federal programs involved with environmental technologies
among 10 different federal agencies. |
Describe
any work being undertaken at the national or local level regarding efforts to
promote clean production processes and/or the concepts of eco-efficiency. These
processes may include training, preferential financial arrangements,
information dissemination and changes in legal or regulatory frameworks. No
information Provide information on the adoption of environmental
management systems. National reaction to environmental management system
standards such as the ISO 14000 Series and others. Please note efforts made
at the national level to promote their adoption and the creation of
certification infrastructure in order to facilitate access to these standards
to local industry. No
information List and describe programs or work under way to facilitate
the transfer of ESTs to small and medium sized enterprises. Please note
efforts to facilitate access to financial resources and other transfer
strategies. No
information |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 35: SCIENCE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT ON NATIONAL SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, RESEARCH NEEDS AND PRIORITIES: The Administration is committed to
maintaining economic growth that creates jobs, protects human and ecological
health, and promotes conservation of natural resources for existing and
future generations. Scientific research and technological development are the key for sustainable development, that is,
maintaining and enhancing environmental quality while continuing to
strengthen our nation's economic economy and security. In 1993, President
Clinton established the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) to
reinvent how research and development (R&D) is conducted in the United
States. In
March 1995, the NSTC, through its Committee on Environment and Natural
Resources (CENR), released a 75-page interagency strategy plan,
"Preparing for the Future through Science and Technology: An Agenda for
Environmental and Natural Resource Research". The interagency plan
focuses the federal R&D dollars on the most pressing societal needs of
the United States. As a result of the process of developing strategic and
implementation plans for the CENR, the following areas of research have been
identified for enhanced emphasis in the research and budget planning cycles
of the CENR federal agencies with environment and natural resources research:
Ecosystem Research--to promote the efficient use of natural resources while
sustaining ecosystem integrity for future generations; Observations and data
management to ensure that the necessary measurements are made efficiently and
that the data are widely available to all stakeholders in easily usable
forms; Socioeconomic dimensions of environmental change to understand the
underlying human influences on the environment and the potential responses of
society to change; Environmental Technology to protect the environment while
stimulating economic growth and capturing emerging global markets; and,
Science Policy Tools to improve integrated assessment and risk models so
policymakers can make informed decisions on complex environmental and
societal issues. To
meet the challenge for sound and cost-effective management of the environment
and natural resources of the U.S., the Administration has undertaken
significant changes in how we plan and fund federal research in support of
sustainable development. The traditional single agency and single discipline
approach to problem solving is being replaced by a coordinated, multiagency
interdisciplinary approach. The NSTC, through the CENR, is coordinating
decentralized agency programs to address environmental issues in an
integrated manner. The CENR has seven sub-committees: Air Quality;
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics; Global Change; Natural Disaster
Reduction; Resource Use and Management; Toxic Substances and Hazardous and
Solid Wastes; and Water Resources and Coastal and Marine Environments. These
sub-committees coordinate the federal agency programs within their particular
environmental area. In addition, there are three crosscutting methodological
issue sub-committees: Environmental Technology; Social and Economic Sciences;, and, Risk Assessment. Advice has been, and will
continue to be, sought from a wide range of stakeholders from academia,
industry, other private-sector groups, Congress, and state and local
governments. The
Global Learning and Observation to Benefit the Environment (GLOBE) program
also attempts to encourage greater scientific education on environment issues
at pre-college levels (see chapter 36 summary). |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
|||
Year |
|||
Number
of scientists, engineers and technicians engaged in research and experimental
development |
960,500 |
1991 |
|
Total
federal expenditure on environment area research and development (US$billion)
|
$5.3 |
1995 |
|
Total
federal expenditure on all forms of research and development (US$billion) |
$69.9 |
1993 |
|
Other
data: |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 36: PROMOTING EDUCATION, PUBLIC AWARENESS
AND TRAINING
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT: The United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
Office of Environmental Education is a full member of the National Coordinating
Body for Sustainable Development and is responsible for activities falling
under chapter 36 of Agenda 21. The National Environmental Education Advisory
Council, consultative body of the Department of Education, is comprised of
eleven individuals who are appointed by the Administrator of the EPA. The
Council serves as an important communication mechanism which links the
federal government with educators around the country. The EPA encourages
partnerships, mobilizes resources, provides information and assesses the
needs of different population groups. It also works with United Nations
agencies and organizations to provide guidance on policy development and
technical assistance to benefit developing countries. For example, the EPA is
currently working in conjunction with UNEP in the area of air quality
monitoring with INFOTERRA. Regarding the use of tools for environmental
education, printed material is often used at the primary school level, the
university level, and occassionally in secondary schools. Audio visual tools
are often used in primary and secondary school and at the university level.
In vocational schools, audio visual materials are used occasionally. a) Reorientation of education towards sustainable
development: The Biodiversity and Ecosystems Network (BENI) was launched in October 1994 to utilize electronic
communication networks to foster collaboration among partners in ecosystem
management. The Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Environment
(GLOBE) was initiated to enable elementary and secondary school students to
collect environmental data, report the data through the Internet, and receive
synthesized reports from national environmental centers. As of mid-1994, 14
nations had agreed to collaborate with the U.S. on this initiative. According
to the PCSD Task Force on Public Linkage, Dialogue and Education "an
educated public is our most powerful resource to meet the challenges created
by increasing environmental, economic and social demands." Recognizing
the importance of education, the Council created the Public Linkage, Dialogue
and Education Task Force to serve as the vehicle through which the work of
the Council is accessible to the public for information, review and comment.
In addition to information dissemination on sustainable development, the PCSD
and its activities, the Public Linkage Task Force promotes dialogue and
outreach between the PCSD and community networks. Through its efforts, the
Task Force hopes to foster national understanding of sustainable development.
To
meet its mandate, the Task Force seeks to engage the business, environmental,
labor, civil rights, educational and religious communities in the PCSD
process. The Task Force is identifying and creating outreach opportunities
for the Council through the use of print, audio and visual media, as well as
via satellite. Once key communications networks are identified, they can be
used to disseminate a variety of information pieces, including a newly
developed Spanish/English brochure highlighting the work of the Council and
Task forces. The
national strategy on education is prepared by the Department of Education and
includes such programmes as Goals 2000 and School to Work. Although there is
no single network for either schools or universities, there are many examples
of national programmes at both levels. At the primary school level, school
curricula has already been reviewed and revised, and at the secondary school
level, the revision of school curricula is being undertaken currently to
address environment and development as a cross cutting issue. There are no
plans to revise school curricula in vocational schools. The topics of
"environmental health", "safe drinking water",
"sanitation", "food", "ecosystems",
"recycling" and "energy saving" are taught on an ad hoc
basis at all school levels. b) Increasing public awareness: The U.S. has been involved in
several awareness raising programmes and activities aimed at the population
at large (Earth Day, industry supported campaigns, Ad Council, Program KAB, Arbor
Day, GLOBE Program, Discovery Channel, National Geographic programmes, CNN,
ZooQ, As it Happens, water clean-up programmes, etc.). |
c)
Promoting training: Although the EPA is not directly involved in a national strategy
on education, it has been involved with the National Science and Technology
Council's Committee on Education and Training (NSTC/CET). There are many
in-service programmes available to teachers and other environmental education
professionals through state education agencies, the federal government, NGOs,
non-profit education and professional associations, the academic community,
and tribal government agencies. Training takes place in both in-formal and
non-formal settings. The EPA sponsors a variety of teacher-training
programmes through the Environmental Education Division. On the other hand,
there is very little pre-service training available to environmental
educators beyond single courses. ROLE OF MAJOR GROUPS: Women, NGOs, Local Authorities,
Business and Industry and the Scientific and Technical Communities are
members of the National Environmental Education Advisory Council. They
provide the Administrator of EPA with independent advice on how the Agency
implements the National Environmental Education Act. FINANCING AND COST EVALUATION OF THE LABOR ACTIVITIES: No specific information
available. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1980 |
1990 |
1994 |
||
Adult
literacy rate (%) Male |
90+ |
90+ |
90+ |
|
Adult
literacy rate (%) Female |
90+ |
90+ |
90+ |
|
Population
reaching grade 5 of primary education (%) |
97 |
98 |
98 |
|
Mean
number of years of schooling |
12.5 |
12.7 |
12.9 |
|
%
of GNP spent on education |
6.8 |
7.4 |
7.5 |
|
Females
per 100 males in secondary school |
100 |
98 |
96 |
|
Women
per 100 men in the labour force |
73 |
81 |
82 |
|
Other
data: Enrolment
of students: see footnote "A" See "B" |
First/Primary School Level |
Secondary School Level |
Vocation Schools |
College/University
level |
|||||
Male |
Female |
Male |
Female |
Male |
Female |
Male |
Female |
|
1980%
|
99 |
100 |
94 |
93 |
N/A |
N/A |
33 |
30 |
1990%
|
99 |
100 |
96 |
96 |
N/A |
N/A |
40 |
39 |
1994%
|
99 |
100 |
96 |
97 |
N/A |
MN/A |
43 |
47 |
Footnote: "A" students enrolled
in vocational programmes at the secondary level are included in
"secondary school enrolments". "B" percent of 20 and
21-year-olds enrolled in school. Source: All information from National Report
to the CSD 1996 |
National capacity building is also covered under sectoral
chapters.
Donors: You may wish to describe here how Agenda 21 has
influenced your ODA policies in this area.
Developing countries: You may wish to describe any new
national mechanisms for capacity building - and any changes in technical
cooperation.
NATIONAL
PRIORITY: |
|
STATUS
REPORT ON NATIONAL ENDOGENOUS CAPACITY BUILDING: Building human skills and
capacities throughout a society is essential for sound economic growth,
poverty reduction, and improved quality of life. USAID is supporting programs
in developing countries that address inadequate health services, particularly
in the area of basic, preventive, and reproductive health care; education
systems, especially primary education for girls and women; technical and
business skills and access to technology; and other related social services
and institutions that facilitate broad-based participation, especially by
women, indigenous people, and disadvantaged groups. USAID believes that
sustainable, broad-based development requires investing in people to improve
their health and productivity, enhance their skills, protect their human
rights, and help them to be full participants in society. The
acquisition of economically valuable skills plays a central role in the
empowerment of individuals. Education increases social mobility and thus
serves as a formidable mechanism of conflict resolution. Moreover, rising
education levels are critical to democratic governance and peaceful political
discourse. USAID's education programs give particular emphasis to the quality
and availability of primary education, especially for the poor, women and
girls, and minorities. USAID capacity-building programs also support
targeted, market-oriented interventions, aimed at technical and vocational
training, the free flow of technology and technical information; and training
in business skills. |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 38: INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL
ARRANGEMENTS
Ch.
38: Brief summary of any particular UN System response affecting this
country/state: No information to report |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 39: INTERNATIONAL LEGAL INSTRUMENTS AND
MECHANISMS
Ch.
39: International Legal Instruments are covered under the relevant sectoral
chapters. This is a listing of major agreements/conventions (not already
covered) entered into and relevant to Agenda 21: --
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation under NAFTA, 1993 --
Convention for the Conservation and Management of Pollock Resources in the
Central Bering Sea, 1994 --
North Pacific Anadromous Stocks Convention, 1993 --
UN Straddling and Highly Migratory Fishery Stocks Convention, 1995 |
AGENDA 21 CHAPTER 40: INFORMATION FOR DECISION-MAKING
This chapter is also covered under sectoral and other
chapters of this profile. The matrix below gives an overview of how national authorities
rate the available information for decision making.
Rating of available data and information suitable for
decision-making
Agenda 21 Chapters |
Very good |
Good |
Some good data but many gaps |
Poor |
Remarks |
|
2.
|
International
cooperation and trade |
X |
||||
3.
|
Combating
poverty |
X |
||||
4.
|
Changing
consumption patterns |
X |
||||
5.
|
Demographic
dynamics and sustainability |
X |
||||
6.
|
Human
health |
X |
||||
7.
|
Human
settlements |
X |
||||
8.
|
Integrating
E & D in decision-making |
X |
||||
9.
|
Protection
of the atmosphere |
X |
||||
10.
|
Integrated
planning and management of land resources |
X |
||||
11.
|
Combating
deforestation |
X |
||||
12.
|
Combating
desertification and drought |
X |
||||
13.
|
Sustainable
mountain development |
X |
||||
14.
|
Sustainable
agriculture and rural development |
X |
||||
15.
|
Conservation
of biological diversity |
X |
||||
16.
|
Biotechnology
|
X |
||||
17.
|
Oceans,
seas, coastal areas and their living resources |
X |
||||
18.
|
Freshwater
resources |
X |
||||
19.
|
Toxic
chemicals |
X |
||||
20.
|
Hazardous
wastes |
X |
||||
21.
|
Solid
wastes |
X |
||||
22.
|
Radioactive
wastes |
X |
||||
24.
|
Women
in sustainable development |
X |
||||
25.
|
Children
and youth |
X |
||||
26.
|
Indigenous
people |
X |
||||
27.
|
Non-governmental
organizations |
X |
||||
28.
|
Local
authorities |
X |
||||
29.
|
Workers
and trade unions |
X |
||||
30.
|
Business
and industry |
X |
||||
31.
|
Scientific
and technological community |
X |
||||
32.
|
Farmers
|
X |
||||
33.
|
Financial
resources and mechanisms |
X |
||||
34.
|
Technology,
cooperation and capacity-building |
X |
||||
35.
|
Science
for sustainable development |
X |
||||
36.
|
Education,
public awareness and training |
X |
||||
37.
|
International
cooperation for capacity-building |
X |
||||
38.
|
International
institutional arrangements |
X |
||||
39.
|
International
legal instruments |
X |
||||
40.
|
Information
for decision-making |
X |
Additional Comments The
U.S. government does not have a formal plan that addresses information for
sustainable development decision-making. There is, however, an informal
effort, spearheaded by the Interagency Working Group on Sustainable
Development Indicators (IWG/SDI), to develop a national set of sustainable
development indicators. The group was created in January 1994 and has strong
ties to the White House Office of Environmental Policy and the President's
Council on Sustainable Development. A
number of U.S. agencies have identified the gathering, application, and
dissemination of credible data as priorities in their strategic planning
process. For example, the Bureau of Economic Analysis in the U.S. Department
of Commerce has developed a framework for integrated economic and
environmental accounts (IIESAs). Federal, State and local governments have
programmes for gathering and sharing environmental data. At the Federal
level, the Mission to Planet Earth Programme, the Global Earth Observing System
and the Data and Information System of the National Aeronautics Space
Administration provide data about the earth's land surface, water, and other
characteristics to a broad range of users. The Department of Agriculture
maintains a variety of ground-based environmental monitoring networks for
water quality and quantity, forest cover, and other parameters. Information
collected and managed for decision-making is highly dispersed within the U.S.
government. At the federal level, a number of U.S. agencies are responsible
for collecting environmental, health, demographic, economic and social
information through a variety of statistical and reporting programmes. For
example, the Interagency Working Group has over twenty representatives from
various departments and agencies, most of which have some responsibility for
gathering information. The same type of information is also collected at the
non-federal level by state and local agencies. The
major principles in the U.S. EPA's new 5-year strategic plan, released July,
1994, (including, in part, ecosystem protection, environmental justice,
pollution prevention and partnerships) are reflected in the EPA's data
collection and management activities. The EPA has several data bases,
including: the Inventory of Information Systems, Access EPA, The Guide to Federal Water Quality Programmes and A Guide
to Selected National Environmental Statistics in the US Government. The data
are not qualified as to their relevance to sustainable development, however.
The EPA and Department of Interior are completing internal surveys of their
data capabilities to contribute to the development of resource and
environmental sustainable development indicators. The Dept of Commerce has
initiated a survey process and other agencies are considering undertaking a
similar activity. The IWG/SDI is coordinating this effort. The
Department of Energy has undertaken several initiatives to enhance data
relating to energy production, importation and consumption in the United
States. The department has recently issued guidelines for compiling an
inventory of greenhouse gas emissions and new and existing data sets have
been used to develop and expand the Department's integrated Dynamic Energy
Analysis Simulation (IDEAS) model. IDEAS provides
detailed projections of U.S. energy supply, demand, prices, cost and
emissions for up to 40 years. Data
and information pertaining to environmental quality, human and ecological
health and social and economic welfare are relevant to sustainable
development and are collected by a variety of government agencies and
institutions. This data has not yet been integrated into a unified data
management system for sustainable development. In the United States, NGOs and
federal, state and local level governments are leading efforts to define and
apply sustainable development principles and develop indicators to measure
progress. Through partnerships and outreach, however, other sectors of
society are fast becoming users of sustainable development information. In
addition to government sources of data and information, academic
institutions, NGOs and industry are major sources of environmental
information. The major foreign sources of information for sustainable
development include UNEP's GEMS, GRID, GCOCS, IRPTC and INFOTERRA. Computer
networks are generally available throughout both the public and private
sectors, and many have access to international services. Hardware and
software compatibilities are the key obstacles to electronic communication in
the United States. Although the government retains the capability to access
remote sensing data, the cost of the data is a constraint to usage. The
President signed an Executive Order on Environmental Justice on 11 February
1994 that, among other things, directs all federal agencies to ensure that
low-income and minority communities have access to better information about
their environment and have the opportunity to participate in shaping
government policies that affect their community's health. |
STATISTICAL DATA/INDICATORS |
||||
1980 |
1993 |
1995 |
||
Number
of telephones in use per 100 inhabitants |
53.3 |
57.4 |
62.7 |
|
Other
data |
Home
| Search | Parliament | Research | Governments | Regions | Issues
Copyright
© United Nations
Department of Economic and Social
Affairs
Comments and suggestions: esa@un.org
1 November 1997
http://www.un.org/esa/earthsummit/usa-cp.htm#ch23
Free counters provided by Andale