World Summit Renews Commitment to Enforcement
The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), held this past August in Johannesburg, South Africa, set specific targets and timetables for implementing the commitments made at the Rio Summit in 1992 and therefore dramatically re-focused attention on the need to strengthen environmental enforcement and compliance. This provides INECE with an important opportunity to position itself as the key global network for enforcement and compliance, and to form new strategic alliances to carry out its work.

The official goal of the Summit was not to establish new principles, commitments, or institutions, but rather to review progress towards the existing principles and commitments set at the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development. (UNCED). Also known as the Earth Summit, the 1992 conference adopted the Rio Principles, Agenda 21, new conventions on climate and biodiversity, a set of forestry principles, and created the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) to assist with implementation.

The governments of the world recommitted themselves in Johannesburg to implementing the Rio Principles and the full scope of Agenda 21, and set specific targets and timetables for several critical issues, including:

• Significantly reducing the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010;
• Cutting in half those without access to clean water and sanitation by 2015;
• Returning fisheries to maximum sustainable yield levels by 2015; and
• Minimizing the adverse effects of chemicals on human health and the environment by 2020.

The Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development, and the Plan of Implementation ("the Plan") were the major substantive accomplishments of the Summit. The Plan, discussed in more detail below, consists of eleven chapters spelling out the framework for action to implement the commitments made at the 1992 Earth Summit, including the ratification and effective implementation of several multilateral environmental instruments.

In addition it calls for the mobilization of financial and technological resources, including capacity building programs to strengthen implementation in developing countries. It also highlights several specific areas where assistance is needed, including the following, which are relevant to INECE's work:

• Enforcing forest laws and halting illegal trade in forest products;
• Implementing regional sustainable development programs in Africa, Latin America, and Asia;
• Formulating and implementing environmental protection policies;
• Ensuring access to environmental information, judicial and administration proceedings, and participation by civil society and the general public; and
• Developing indicators for sustainable development.

In response to the Plan, new official development assistance and "type two" partnerships were announced. "Type two" partnerships are so-called "partnerships of the willing" between various countries and stakeholders that were agreed to outside the formal Summit negotiation process. It is anticipated that at least some of these partnerships will receive funding in the form of development assistance.

Despite its successes, the Johannesburg Summit was criticized by some participants for merely repeating many of the commitments made in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, including those dealing with income and drinking water, which are taken almost verbatim from the 2000 Declaration. Others have criticized the Summit for failing to include targets and timetables for implementing renewable energy resources, while at the same time maintaining the legitimacy of pursuing fossil fuel technologies. Additionally, some believe that the Summit did not adequately address the $350 billion in annual agricultural subsidies paid by developed nations, and virtually overlooked education for sustainable development as a critical strategy.

Nevertheless, the Summit commitments, particularly regarding biodiversity, chemicals, and fisheries, present a tremendous challenge for those responsible for implementing the Rio commitments and enforcing environmental law and policy.

To assist in meeting this challenge, INECE announced at the Summit that it is launching the INECE Enforcement Indicator Project to develop a set of indicators to measure and manage enforcement and compliance efforts. See "Enforcement Indicators Project Gains Momentum."

In addition to improving the performance of enforcement, INECE contemplates using the indicators to identify opportunities to expand training and capacity building programs. Other strategies for helping enforcement practitioners meet the targets and timetables set by the Summit are included in INECE's recently adopted three-year strategic plan (See "INECE Approves Ambitious Three-Year Plan"). For more news about the WSSD, visit http://www.johannesburgsummit.org.

UNEP Addresses Environmental Liability and Compensation
The UNEP Division of Environmental Policy Implementation issued a comprehensive review of liability and compensation regimes. The review was prepared for the experts meeting on Liability and Compensation for Environmental Damage held from May 13-15 in Geneva, Switzerland. The study detailed the liability and compensation provisions of approximately 27 multilateral environmental agreements, two draft multilateral environmental agreements, 26 regional environmental agreements, 26 national environmental laws, as wells as a number of national and international cases.

This was followed by discussions on recent trends in the field and an analysis of the environmental problems to be addressed by liability and compensation regimes. The experts discussed a number of specific issues including: insurance, standing, access to information, the role of the judiciary, and capacity building. The meeting concluded with the identification and assessment of gaps in existing regimes and recommendations for further actions. Specifically, the experts recommended that UNEP:

• Develop guidelines, best practices or recommendations that otherwise facilitate the development and effective use of national and international environmental liability systems;
• Develop capacity building programs for public authorities including the judiciary (and where appropriate, the establishment of environmental courts and chambers), lawyers (litigating and defending), NGOs and other stakeholders, in particular, to promote and facilitate the use of national and international environmental liability systems;
• Promote research to enhance continued improvement of liability regimes including identification of the reasons why some agreements covering environmental liability and compensation have not attracted wider State acceptance; and
• Develop new international agreement(s) on environmental liability and compensation.

Copies of the UNEP-DEPI review of liability and compensation regimes, as well as the meeting agenda and minutes, are available at http://www.unep.org/depi/LiabilityandCommpensation.asp.