UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/6
Page 1
Introduction
1.
The Action Plan for the Protection, Management and Development of the Marine and Coastal
Environment of the Northwest Pacific Region (NOWPAP) and three supporting Resolutions were adopted at the
First Intergovernmental Meeting (Seoul, Republic of Korea, 14 September 1994).
2.
The Second Intergovernmental Meeting on NOWPAP was held in Tokyo on 20 November 1996 to
approve the Programme Document, and Workplan and Budget for the biennium 1997/1998. However, it was
decided that further Trust Fund arrangements and establishment of a Regional Coordinating Unit (RCU) were to
be discussed at a later time.
3.
The Third Intergovernmental Meeting, held in Vladivostok, the Russian Federation, on 9 April 1998,
endorsed the revision of the Workplan and Budget for the biennium 1997/1998, and decided on the procedure
for the establishment of a network of Regional Activity Centres.
4.
The Fourth Intergovernmental Meeting held in Beijing, the People's Republic of China, on 6 and 7 April
1999, decided on the need to establish a Regional Coordinating Unit (RCU) in the future, and requested the
Executive Director of UNEP to prepare a proposal for its creation for the consideration of the Fifth
Intergovernmental Meeting.
5.
In accordance with Resolution 2 of the Fourth Intergovernmental Meeting, the Fifth Intergovernmental
Meeting was held at Inch'on, Republic of Korea, on 29 and 30 March 2000.
6.
This document is the record of the discussions and deliberations of the Fifth Intergovernmental Meeting.
7.
Representatives of the States in the Northwest Pacific region, namely Japan, the People's Republic of
China, the Republic of Korea and the Russian Federation participated in the meeting. Observers were also
present from the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); Northwest Pacific
Environment Cooperation Centre; Pollution Monitoring Regional, Activity Centre; Environmental Information
Centre of the Pacific Institute of Geography, Far-Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Science; State
Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA); Marine Environmental Emergency Preparedness and
Response Regional Activity Centre; North Pacific Marine Science Organization (PICES); National Fisheries
Research and Development Institute (NFRDI); Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute (KORDI);
Toyoma Prefectural Government; and Toyoma City. The full list of participants is attached as ANNEX I to the
present report.
Agenda item 1:
Opening of the meeting
8.
On behalf of Mr. Klaus Toepfer, UNEP Executive Director, the meeting was opened by Mr. Jorge Illueca,
Assistant Executive Director, Division of Environmental Conventions (DEC), United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP). In his opening remarks, he said that on behalf of Mr. Toepfer he welcomed all the
participants and wished them every success in their deliberations.
9.
He recalled that in the new UNEP corporate profile, the work of regional seas programmes and their
action plans was now the responsibility of the Division of Environmental Conventions, and he was sure that that
change would mean the revitalization of those programmes and plans. In 1999 and 2000, UNEP was providing
support to all 12 of the regional seas programmes in which it had been involved. Major progress had been
made with the implementation of the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment
from Land-based Activities and links between the regional seas conventions and action plans and global
environmental conventions such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the
UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/6
Page 2
Convention on Biological Diversity and the International Coral Reef Initiative. The meeting would afford top
priority to the establishment of a Regional Coordinating Unit (RCU), and other options for accelerating the
implementation of the Northwest Pacific Action Plan (NOWPAP). He wished the meeting every possible success.
10.
The representative of the Government of the Republic of Korea, Mr. Hong Seoung-yong, Vice Minister
of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, made a welcoming statement, in which he said it was an honour and a
pleasure for him to extend a sincere welcome to all the participants on behalf of the Ministry of Maritime Affairs
and Fisheries. He said that the importance of oceans could not be overemphasized as they constituted a fragile
realm and impacted on the quality of life of everyone and on the environment. He pledged the full support of his
Ministry and the Government for the efforts to contribute to the environmental conservation of the Northwest
Pacific.
11.
A welcoming address was given by Mr. Nam Ki-myong, Acting Mayor of Inch'on Metropolitan City. He
said that it was a great honour for Inchon to be hosting the Fifth Intergovernmental Meeting of the Northwest
Pacific Action Plan in the first spring of the new millennium. He described the city, and spoke of the many plans
in hand to make Inchon a model environmental city, where people could live with nature in peace. He hoped
that the meeting would be a successful and fruitful one for all the participants.
12.
The meeting was also addressed, respectively, by representatives of Japan, the Republic of Korea, the
Russian Federation, and the People's Republic of China. The opening statements are recorded as ANNEX II to
the present report.
13.
The representative of Japan made a statement, in which he expressed his appreciation to the
Government of the Republic of Korea as the host country and to the UNEP secretariat for organizing the
meeting and making such thorough preparations. He said that in Japan the development of the environmental
monitoring technique using remote sensing had started, as a positive step towards the activity of the Coastal
Environmental Assessment and Regional Activity Centre. Japan considered the establishment of a Regional
Coordinating Unit (RCU) as a necessity for the enhancement of NOWPAP and the further implementation of its
projects. Japan was very keen to have the RCU located in Japan, and he respectfully asked for support from
other countries for its bid to host it.
14.
The representative of the Republic of Korea said he was honoured to deliver an opening statement at
the Fifth Intergovernmental Meeting of he Northwest Pacific Action Plan on behalf of the Government of Korea.
He stated that the member countries of NOWPAP should consider NOWPAP's vision and develop a long-term
strategy to pursue it. Among others, he mentioned the necessity of the RCU, the normalization of the RAC
operation and collaboration with other regional seas programmes. With regard to the RCU, he announced that
Korea would strive to host the RCU after the establishment procedure had been finalized. He emphasized that
all countries in the region should participate in the management and development of the marine and coastal
environment. He said that he was confident that all delegates would strive to make the Fifth Intergovernmental
Meeting of the Northwest Pacific Action Plan a success.
15.
The representative of the Russian Federation expressed the sincere gratitude of all to the Government
of the Republic of Korea for organizing the present Intergovernmental Meeting. The Russian Federation
attached great importance to the implementation of the Action Plan as a major tool for providing protection and
improvement of the state of the environment in the region. His country had, among other actions, established a
regional activity centre on pollution monitoring in Vladivostok and in 1999 had organized the holding of the Third
Meeting of the NOWPAP Forum on marine pollution preparedness and response in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk. He
hoped that the present meeting would provide significant input for the implementation of NOWPAP and its
further development. On behalf of the Russian Federation he wished success to all delegates and participants
in their common goal, protection and improvement of the marine and coastal environment in the region.
UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/6
Page 3
16.
The representative of the People's Republic of China extended his warm congratulations and
appreciation to those convening the meeting, particularly to UNEP and to the Government of the Republic of
Korea. The importance of the place that the oceans had in this planet meant that the oceans were a very
important component of the global environment. On behalf of the Chinese delegation, he said he was
heartened to see that further progress had been made since the previous Intergovernmental Meeting, and the
preparations for the establishment of a Regional Coordinating Unit (RCU) had been listed in the agenda for the
meeting; in that regard, his Government was engaged in a feasibility study on the possibility of inviting the RCU
to locate in China. Wherever located, however, the RCU would be expected to facilitate the progress of the
Northwest Pacific Action Plan.
17.
All the representatives who took the floor expressed their gratitude to the Government of Korea,
particularly the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, for its excellent arrangements for the meeting.
Agenda item 2:
Organization of the meeting
18.
The meeting participants elected a Chairman, two Vice-Chairmen and Rapporteur, as follows:
Chairman:
Mr. Oh Haeng-kyeom (Republic of Korea)
Vice-Chairman:
Mr. Alexander Solovianov (Russian Federation)
Vice-Chairman:
Mr.Fan Yuansheng (People's Republic of China)
Rapporteur:
Mr. Makito Takahashi (Japan)
19.
The Chairman proposed for the meeting's consideration that the rules of procedure of the UNEP
Governing Council, as applicable to the meetings convened by the Executive Director, would apply mutatis
mutandis, for this meeting. The meeting approved the proposal.
20.
The Chairman proposed that the meeting carry out its work in plenary session in principle. The meeting
approved the proposal. Furthermore, the proposed timetable was introduced.
21.
The meeting was conducted in English. The secretariat introduced the provisional list of documents
(UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/Inf.1). The final list of documents is attached to the present report as ANNEX III.
Agenda item 3.
Adoption of the agenda
22.
The Provisional Agenda (UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/1) and the Annotated Provisional Agenda
(UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/2) were introduced by the Chairman.
23.
The meeting adopted the proposed agenda. The adopted agenda is attached to the present report as
ANNEX IV.
Agenda item 4. Report of the Executive Director on the implementation of the Northwest Pacific Action
Plan
24.
Upon the invitation of the Chairman, the UNEP representative presented the report of the UNEP
Executive Director, on the implementation of the Northwest Pacific Action Plan (UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/3). He
said that the implementation of the workplan for 1999-2000 had suffered from delays; UNEP believed that the
implementation of NOWPAP would continue to progress slowly until the member States established the
Regional Coordinating Unit; the other factor, however, that had contributed to the delays had been the
restructuring of UNEP, which had not been completed until January 2000.
25.
UNEP was proposing that the NOWPAP biennium workplan and budget be synchronized with the
UNEP biennial programme of work, which would greatly facilitate coordination. In the ensuing debate, the
UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/6
Page 4
delegates agreed to this, and with re-phasing of the 1999 commitments that had been delayed, the NOWPAP
biennium workplan and budget would be for the biennium 2000-2001. All delegates expressed their hope that
the implementation of projects would be speeded up in that biennium.
26.
The meeting revisited the question of the three options set out for the NOWPAP budget in paragraph 28
of the Executive Director's report on implementation of the Action Plan (document
UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/3). There was consensus in favour of Option 1, with some modifications. The modified
Option, with a total amount of $1,211,050, is as follows: $661,050 for the 2000-2001 workplan; $200,000 for co-
financing for GEF PDF B project on land-based sources of pollution; $100,000 for a possible project to be
considered at the Sixth Intergovernmental Meeting; $100,000 for Operating Reserve; and, $150,000 for RCU
professional and general service staff (2001).
27.
In response to various delegates' concerns about speeding up project implementation, particularly in
regard to NOWPAP/3 (Establishment of a collaborative, regional monitoring programme), it was agreed that the
First Meeting of the Coordinating Committee, postponed late in 1999, would be held at an early date, possibly in
July 2000. Similarly the NOWPAP/1 project (Establishment of a comprehensive database and information
management system) Coordinating Working Committee, at the suggestion of the representative of the People's
Republic of China, would also meet at an early date, possibly in May or June 2000.
28.
In connection with the two projects mentioned in the previous paragraph, a representative of the
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) made a statement on behalf of Mr. Patricio Bernal,
Executive Secretary of IOC in which he expressed the willingness of IOC/WESTPAC, which had played the role
of implementing agency for phase one of NOWPAP/1 and NOWPAP/3, to continue its assistance into phase two
of those projects, as well as supporting the NOWPAP Regional Activity Centres and sharing its expertise in
marine environmental monitoring. The representative specifically mentioned two projects under IOC/WESTPAC
which would provide potential fields for investigation, namely the North-East Asian Regional-Global Ocean
Observing System (NEAR-GOOS) and the Health of the Ocean Module of GOOS (HOTO) in the West Pacific
region.
29.
A further offer of assistance to NOWPAP in regard to awareness-raising, monitoring science and
technology and collective action was made in a presentation by Mr. Surendra Shresta, Regional Coordinator of
the UNEP Environment Assessment Programme for Asia and the Pacific, in which was described the modelling,
information technology and financial sourcing strategy used in the course of the work of that Programme.
30.
With some budgetary allocations remaining to be resolved, the meeting noted the report of the UNEP
Executive Director.
Agenda item 5. Status of NOWPAP Trust Fund and contribution to it by Members States
31.
At the invitation of the Chairman, the UNEP representative introduced document UNEP/NOWPAP
IG.5/4 Rev.1, Table II of which showed that cumulatively for the period 1995-1999, there was a positive balance
of $648,775 in the Trust Fund.
32.
The representative of Japan, while stating that his country would make its contribution of $125,000 in
2000, queried the figure of $125,000 set down for Japan for 1998, since in that year it had not contributed
because of the country's financial situation, whereas the figure for 1999 was zero, in a year in which they had
contributed. A representative of UNEP said that the United Nations system always showed arrears in
contributions, unless the member State had been specifically exonerated from payment.
33.
The representative of the Russian Federation said that its contributions for 1997, 1998 and 1999 had
not been shown, although it had instructed UNEP to take the contributions from its total contribution to the
UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/6
Page 5
Environment Fund. The UNEP representative in reply said that evidently the Russian Federation's wishes had
not been sufficiently clearly articulated in writing. A note would be sent saying how countries should designate
funds sent to the Trust Fund.
34.
The representative of Korea stressed the need for the mobilization of outside financial resources,
including GEF, and UNEP should use its best efforts to do that. The UNEP representative said that UNEP
would welcome the reflection of that concern in one of the resolutions of the present meeting.
35.
The representative of China stated the following principles for contributions:
(a)
The common but differentiated principle;
(b)
The level of economic development should be commensurate with the obligations to be assumed;
(c)
The voluntary and proactive principle;
(d)
The principle of honouring the pledged contribution;
(e)
Mobilizing other financial resources for funding.
Agenda item 6. Review and adoption of the proposed procedure for the establishment of a Regional
Coordinating Unit for NOWPAP
36.
Upon the invitation of the Chairman, the UNEP representative introduced document UNEP/NOWPAP
IG.5/5, on the proposed procedure for the establishment of a Regional Coordinating Unit for the Northwest
Pacific Action Plan (NOWPAP/RCU), and said that the document was the result of a series of informal
consultations with the NOWPAP member States. The establishment of an RCU was agreed by all as being
urgent, so that the procedure for its establishment should be decided upon at the present meeting, and a final
decision taken at the Sixth Intergovernmental Meeting of NOWPAP.
37.
The representative of Japan recalled that it was reaffirming its intention to invite the RCU to Toyama,
Japan, and in that regard asked for the support of delegates and wished to recall that his country had already
indicated its main stand in this issue at the Fourth Intergovernmental Meeting of NOWPAP, as set out in
document UNEP(WATER)/NOWPAP IG.4/Inf.3. He sought and obtained permission from the Chairman for a
brief presentation on the case for setting up the RCU in Toyama, Japan; the presentation was made by Mr.
Naotake Onaga, Vice Governor of Toyama Prefecture, who said that the Environmental Cooperation Center in
Toyama had been designated as a Regional Activity Centre, and the Prefecture had excellent facilities of all
kinds.
38.
The representative of the Republic of Korea said that his country also reaffirmed its interest in inviting
the RCU to be set up in the National Fisheries Research and Development Institute in Pusan, Korea. He made
a brief presentation on the facilities available in Pusan, saying that it was the largest port in Korea, a centre for
fisheries, with a population of four million people; it also could be said to be at the geographical centre of the
Northwest Pacific area, and was well communicated by land, sea and air. He said that his delegation had
serious reservations about Step 3 of the procedure for establishing an RCU, as set out in paragraph 38 of the
document under review; that step states that in the absence of consensus, voting should take place according
to the rules and regulations of the UNEP Governing Council. In this regard, he presented three options: the
establishment of a selection committee, the introduction of the rotating secretariat concept, and a combination of
the aforementioned options with modifications. The representative of UNEP said that such voting procedure
was common practice in those cases where more than one country was bidding to host a secretariat.
39.
The representative of the People's Republic of China said that his country was engaged in a feasibility
study in regard to the RCU, and would request a little more time than the five months envisaged in Step 2 of the
procedure (paragraph 37 of document UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/5), and suggested at least six months. As the
discussion following this revealed, the original time period of five months was determined by the need to present
UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/6
Page 6
documents in time for the Sixth Intergovernmental Meeting of NOWPAP ("the six weeks rule"), and the
representative of Japan said that as the intended host of that meeting, his country was compelled for several
reasons to plan the meeting for early December 2000 at the latest. After the discussion, the Chairman said that
it seemed better to leave the originally mentioned period of five months in place.
40.
Several suggestions for minor changes to the procedure for the establishment of the RCU and to the
Terms of Reference contained in Annex I of the document before the meeting were referred to the ad hoc open-
ended drafting committee of the meeting, which would meet the following day, to finalize the document. Subject
to that, the meeting approved the proposed procedure, including the proposed budget and terms of reference.
The final document is attached to the present report as Annex V.
Agenda item 7. Review and adoption of the programme of work for the year 2000-2001
41.
The UNEP representative, at the invitation of the Chairman, introduced the subject with reference to
Section IV and Annex I of the Report of the Executive Director, as well as to the key points that arose from the
earlier discussion of the issue under Agenda item 4.
42.
All delegates were agreed that the uncompleted projects from 1999 should be rescheduled for the
biennium 2000-2001, and that NOWPAP would benefit from synchronization of the NOWPAP biennium period
with the UNEP programme of work biennium. There was a consensus also in favour of the allocation of the
$661,050 budget figure to the programme of work for that biennium.
43.
The representative of Japan said that phase two of the programme of work called upon the NOWPAP/1
Coordinating Working Group and the NOWPAP/3 Coordinating Committee and Working Groups to play their
role; those Groups and Committee, however might not be able to work effectively, as their terms of reference
were not decided; they should be given an interim mandate, and their terms of reference decided upon at the
Sixth Intergovernmental NOWPAP meeting.
44.
The meeting revisited the question of the three options set out for the NOWPAP budget in paragraph 28
of the Executive Director's report on implementation of the Action Plan (document UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/3).
There was consensus in favour of Option 1, with some modifications. The modified Option, with a total amount
of $1,211,050, is as follows: $661,050 for the 2000-2001 workplan; $200,000 for co-financing for GEF PDF B
project on land-based sources of pollution; $100,000 for a possible project to be considered at the Sixth
Intergovernmental Meeting; $100,000 for Operating Reserve; and, $150,000 for RCU professional and general
service staff (2001).
45.
The representatives of Japan and Korea stated that support for the RCU could be provided from the
Trust Fund. The representative of Japan also stated that this approach should be used cautiously. The UNEP
representative said that once the RCU was established, the Intergovernmental Meeting would decide how it
should be paid for and from what sources.
46.
The meeting agreed to adopt the programme of work.
Agenda item 8. Preparation for the Sixth Intergovernmental Meeting
47.
The Chairman invited the delegates to discuss the timing and topics to be dealt with at that meeting.
48.
The representative of Japan said that his Government was inviting the meeting to hold the Sixth
Intergovernmental NOWPAP in Tokyo, Japan at the end of November or very early December 2000. The
Chairman and in turn the other delegates expressed their appreciation and acceptance of Japan's offer.
UNEP/NOWPAP IG.5/6
Page 7
Agenda item 9 Other matters
49.
An ad hoc open-ended drafting group was set up and met on Thursday morning, 30 March 2000, under
the chairmanship of the Rapporteur,to consider the drafting of resolutions and some other minor drafting of
documents; the group reported back to the Plenary later that day.
Agenda item 10. Report on the credentials
50.
The Chairman reported to the meeting that the credentials of three member State representatives had
been presented and reviewed prior to and during the meeting by the Chairman, Vice-Chairmen and Rapporteur,
together with the secretariat, and that those credentials had been accepted; the Russian Federation informed
that it would provide credentials within two weeks.
Agenda item 11. Adoption of the report of the meeting
51.
The Rapporteur presented the draft report and the draft resolutions to the meeting.
52.
The meeting approved the report and adopted the resolutions (ANNEX VI).
Agenda item 12. Closure of the meeting
53.
The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 3.00 p.m. on 30 March 2000. He thanked all the
representatives for their active participation.
-------------