The main results of the Rio Conference can be summed up as follows:

1. The Rio Declaration. It amounts to the equivalent of the Stockholm Declaration of 1972 on "human environment"; it contains the acknowlegment of the need for sustainable development, common but diversified responsibility of the States, the world partnership and the application of the principle of precaution for the protection of the environment. It represents a weakness in respect of the initial goal of a true "Earth Charta": it is for that reason that the UN General Secretary proposed that such a "Charta" be drawn up in 1995 on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the United Nations.

2. Agenda 21. It constitutes the action programme of the international community in respect of environment and development for the 21st century. It closely links environment and development and contains 40 chapters, divided into 4 main parts: the social and economic dimension, conservation and management of resources, strengthening of the role of "major groups", means of implementation. The total financial cost for the implementation of the Agenda 21 was evaluated at 600 thousand million dollars per year, of which 125 thousand million should come from international aid. The Community decided to make a contribution of 3 thousand million ECU to ensure a quick start to the most urgent items on the Agenda 21. These credits will only come partially from the "new and additional" financial resources, the rest (350 million ECU) coming from the Community Budget. The Commission will be given the task of some coordination in the credits process. The Rio Conference gave its agreement for the creation of a "High Commi

ssion of United Nations for Sustainable Development". This Commission will be given the task of starting the Agenda 21 and of some coordination of the "environment" and "development" aspects in the United Nations.

3. The Convention on climate change. This convention was signed by 150 countries and by the Community. The latter added to its signature a declaration expressing the wish for a quick start to the Convention and affirming the Community's aim of stabilising CO2 emission by the year 2000 compared to the 1990 level and involving also the need for working out additional protocols.

4. The "Biodiversity" Convention. It gathered 155 signatures. The Community also signed this Convention, presenting at the same time an interpretative declaration. This declaration expresses regret for the inadequacy of environmental goals, which need further strengthening, the scrupulous respect for the financial provisions and the need to respect the rules concerning intellectual property. The United States was the only industrialised country, not to sign the "biodiversity" Convention.

European Environment towards the 21st century

In Spring 1992, the Commission adopted the fifth programme on policy and action in relation to the environment and on sustainable development and respect for the environment. By virtue of this programme, the Community confirms on European level the same approach as taken by Rio on world level in respect of Agenda 21.

Community environment policy, which began in 1972 on Altiero Spinelli's initiative, is now twenty years old. It has developed under four successive action programmes, the last of which runs until the end of this year. Over this period the Community has adopted about 200 pieces of legislation covering air, water and soil pollution, waste management, safeguards in relation to chemicals and biotechnology, product standards, environmental impact assessment and nature conservation. This impressive body of legislation has provided a sound basis for national and international initiatives in this area. Despite all these efforts, the state of the environment leaves much to be desired. First of all there are still considerable shortcomings where the monitoring and collection of environmental data are concerned. Moreover, the data available show that while the action taken has had some effects on the adverse trends observed in the past it has not succeeded in reversing them. The environment in the Community therefore c

ontinues to deteriorate, albeit less rapidly than before.

Up to now, environmental protection in the Community has largely been based on legislation, entailing a top-down approach. The new strategy proposed in the new programme presupposes a commitment on the part of all the social and economic players: it therefore also entails a bottom-up approach. The complementarity and effectiveness of these twin approaches will depend to a large extent on the nature and quality of the dialogue to be established in a context of partnership.

The action programme adopted by the Commission is therefore aimed directly at all the players concerned (consumers, heads of businesses and those in positions of responsibility in the public authorities) to ensure that environmental imperatives are taken into account in the behaviour of individuals, in the productive processes and in economic and sectoral policies.

Five target sectors have been selected for special attention under the programme: industry, energy, transport, agriculture and tourism. These are sectors in which the Community has a particularly important role to play and is the most efficient level at which to tackle some of the problems these sectors cause or face.

The programme combines the principle of subsidiarity - defined in article 3b of the Maastricht Treaty - with the wider concept of shared responsibility. This principle of subsidiarity is that the "Community shall take action only if and in so far as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved by the Community. This is not so much a question of choosing the appropriate level of implementation, to the exclusion of other levels, but rather a matter of establishing all the instruments and players involved at the various appropriate levels, without affecting the division of responsibilities between the Community, the Member States and the regional and local authorities.

The 5th programme constitues a turning point for the Community. Just as the challange of the 1980s was the completion of the Internal Market, the reconciliation of environment and development is one of the principal challenges facing the Community and the world at large in the 1990s.

This challenge faces the whole earth. The programme presented by the Commission is not geared towards environmentalists alone. It provides a framework for a new approach to environmental problems, economic and social activities and development prospects.In order to make it work, it will require positive will throughout the political and corporate spectra, and the involvement of all members of the public, as citizens and consumers.

The European Parliament

The "environment" committee of the EP, chaired by Mr. Ken Collins (SOC-UK), instructed Mrs. Carmen Diez de Rivera Icaza (SOC-Spain) to draft a report on the 5th programme. This report will be voted on by the "environment"committee on 25 September 1992, prior to its discussion and adoption during plenary either in October or November 1992. This report was preceeded by the adoption of the Vernier's report (cf. art. page ...) on the implementation of Community environment legislation, in which the EP underligned the disregard for Community laws. This disregard is said to be due to the vagueness of EC law itself, dealing as it does with imprecise concepts, or to be due to its undue uniformity or even to its tardy implementation in each Member State, not to mention the difficulties of transposing it in Member States of a federal nature and administrative difficulties as to control and prosecution.

The draft report of Mrs. Diez constitutes the new approach of the fifth programme compared to the three previous programmes (2nd, 3rd and 4th), by linking up with the 1st programme and the "Brundtland" report, drafted by the world Commission on the environment and development ("Our common future). According the European Parliament rapporteur, the programme of the Commission is a considerable step forward, and introduces significant new ideas notably on the issue of partnership involving all the social and economic operators. Great importance is given to local and regional authorities as well as to the concept of coresponsibility.

The programme is essentially a declaration of intent rather than a precise proposal for pratical alternatives. It seems, in fact, to be based on a model of society in which the market economy is still a goal in itself, to which sustainable development must be subordinated. In this way the environment is in danger of being considered as a dynamic element of competitivity.

The need to change the Community's growth model opens the way to measures, instruments and action whose principal aim is to correct environmental degradation, whislst maintaining unchanged the economic approach of the industrialised countries.

It seems, therefore, essential for the European Parliament to set now the deadline for the revision programme of the end of 1995 to cover the period 1996-2000. During this period, the procedure of legislative co-decision between European Parliament and the Council should be fully in force and the agreements signed in Rio as integral part of the Community's activity.

Europe's environment: much legislation, little action

Europe has legislated on the environment since 1970, well before environment itself had an official title in the Treaty of Rome and at the time of the entry into force of the Single Act In 1987. These environmental laws concerne pollution and damage to the environment (water, air, noise, waste), also nature ( trade and protection of wildlife and habitat) and public information (access to data basis, impact studies and ecological labels).

Despite this legislation , the firm application of all these laws leaves much to be desired for reasons which result principally from vagueness of Community law. In respect of pollution and damage, there exist, for example, framework-directives and other directives in this sectors of activity. The framework-directives sometimes deal with these vague concepts. The 1984 directive on air pollution only just covers "that best technology available". The 1975 directive on Waste underlined the need for " waste disposal without danger". Therefore,it is important to create new directives for industry, towns and agriculture.

In addition many directives give the Member States the mandate to choose for themselves those areas and special measures to be applied: bathing zones, fish or shell farming zones, special protection zones for wild birds, zones susceptible to air pollution and zones vulnerable to nitrates .... Some Member States "forget" to specify these vulnerable zones and as a consequence do not implement them into national Law.

Many directives require quality standards for the environment.These standards are difficult to apply and go unchecked, because the environment tends to belong, as one says, to everyone and noone and those responsible for pollution of the environment are difficult to trace.

Secondly, the application of these directives is difficult because of too much uniformity in Community law. This appears contradictory with the above points. Therefore it is clear that the environmental texts need to be flexible and adaptable to changing situations, for example protection of species or concerning objectives in atteining river quality. The species are endangered in different places and in different situations. Rivers, according to their flow, never react in similar wasy to pollution damage. Therefore, too much uniformity is sometimes misconcerted and badly apllied.

Thirdly, responsibility for application of Community law lies with the Member States. In each country, there tends to be delays in transposition. It is regrettable that mal-transposition or application will not be subject to sanctions: on this subject, the arrangement of the Maastricht Treaty let us look between the lines for a long term solution asked for by the European Parliament.

In those countries with Federal Systems (Germany, Belgium) or Regional Systems (Spain, Italy), there tends to be difficulties of transposition because the law to interpret does not come at a Federal level.

Finally,It is necessary to point out the weaknesses of those controlling administrations, their numbers and quality of personnel (lack of sufficient training for industrial inspectors or customs officials who control commercial waste and endangered spieces), and the weaknesses of those imposed sanctions in certain Member States.

The creation of a Community Environment Inspectorate within the European Environment Agency has been warmly welcomed by the European Parliament, in order to see these points carried out in each country.

Jacques Vernier, MEP

Environment on the Council Agenda

During the six month British Presidency of the Council, the environment themes will be discussed under the specific point of fiscal measures ("carbon-tax") and from a more general point of view of the entirety of Community action.

Fiscal measures will be examined by the Eco-Fin Council, on 13 July, 19 October and 14 December 1992. A definitive decision on "carbon-tax" and on "follow-up" of the working programme adopted in Rio will be taken on the occasion of the meeting on 14 December 1992.

The 5th programme will be examined by the Environment Council, during its meetings on 20 October and 15 December 1992. At the same time, the "foolow-up" of the Rio Conference will be submitted to the Ministers of Environment, including the CO2 reduction measures.

The "follow-up" of the Rio Conference will also be part of discussions in the Development Council, on 18 December 1992, and the C02 question will be examined by the Energy Council on 30 Novemeber 1992.

Relations between industrial policy and environment will finally be examined by the Industry Council, on 24 November 1992, on the basis od an ad hoc "communication" from the Commission.

Men and Women of the Environment in Europe

A. The MEPs of the Environment Committee (and public health and consumers protection)

President:

Vice-president:

Members:

B. The Ministers of the Twelve

C. The "Eurocrats"

(General Director and Directors of the Commisssion)