23 February 2000

　The 7^th International Workshop for ECO ASIA Long-term Perspective Project

22-23 February 2000

Shonan Village, Kanagawa, Japan

CHAIR’S SUMMARY (Final Draft)

1.   The Seventh International Workshop on ECO ASIA Long-term Perspective Project (LTPP) took place in Shonan Village, Kanagawa, Japan, from 22 to 23 February 2000. The Environment Agency of Japan organized it and 44 participants from 13 countries and 7 international organizations attended it (refer to the Participants List attached).  The Opening addresses of Mr. Hironori Hamanaka, Director General of the Global Environment Department, Environment Agency of Japan was read, and Mr. Kazuo Matsushita, Acting Vice-President of Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) made his address.  Mr. Saburo Kato, President of the Research Institute for Environment and Society, chaired the Workshop.

2.   The objectives of the workshop were:

• To share information on progress made in research on the four Eco-concepts since the 6^th Workshop in accordance with the work plan for Phase II,
• To receive input from participants on each research activity,
• To discuss measures for invigorating the project, including the activities of the steering committee, and
• To discuss the future direction of advancements, including possible contribution of LTPP/ECO ASIA to the 4^th Ministerial Conference on Environment and Development in Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP/MCED4) from 31 August to 5 September 2000 in Kitakyushu, Japan.　　

3.   Five presentations on the following two topics were made for concurrent studies under the work plan for Phase II (refer to the Agenda):

　a)　Eco-Consciousness, by Dr. Terry Rambo, Senior Fellow, the East-West Center and Mr. Saburo Kato (Chairman), Japan, and

　b)　Outlook for the Environment, by Dr. Mikiko Kainuma, Dr. Toshihiko Masui and Dr. Kiyoshi Takahashi, National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Japan.

4.   Participants actively discussed the above topics.The main points of discussion were as follows:

• Many participants said they consider Eco-consciousness important; however, an in-depth study on cross-the-board standards could be most useful since eco-consciousness differs from country to country. In this context, the importance of comparative studies among countries on eco-consciousness was recognized.
• With regard to the Eco-consciousness, recognition of the inter-linkages with the Seoul Declaration of Environmental Ethics ’97 would be beneficial as it stressed that eco-consciousness would change in accordance with economic advancement. In this context, participants also stressed that religious background be taken into consideration while studying the eco-consciousness of each country, region and/or local community.
• Participants were informed about the Global Environmental Forum (the 4^th Special Session of UNEP Governing Council) in Malmo, Sweden during the last week of May, where Ministries from all over the world would be gathering to discuss environmental issues and responses for the new Millenium.
• Participants recognized that examining various channels for imparting environmental ethics and eco-consciousness, including education through families, is crucially important.
• Participants recognized substantial progress being made on the Environmental Outlook and Eco-Consciousness under the LTPP, and generally agreed to support further promotion of those sub-projects.
• The global environmental outlook for 2025, based on three scenarios which have been newly defined since the last workshop through involvement of scientists from developing countries and use of the latest socio-economic data, including that on the economic crisis, was presented by the NIES team making full use of the AIM model.
• Participants recognized many options for climate change mitigation which policy makers of developing countries of the region can choose from, by utilizing the AIM model.
• Participants made suggestions that political realities be taken into account, such as recent basic policy changes in water management and flood control in several countries of the region.

5.   Two presentations were made mainly focusing on environmental effects of the Asian economic /financial crises in the later 1990’s by the following 2 participants;

　a)　Dr. Saksit Tridech, Secretary-General of the Office of Environmental Policy and Planning, MOSTE, Thailand　

　b)　　　Mr. Kazuo Matsushita, Acting Vice-President of IGES　

6.   Participants actively discussed the two presentations on the above topic. The main points of the discussions were as follow:

• In accordance with the experience of Thailand, participants recognized the importance of more privatization, wider participation, technology transfer and some economic instruments in relation to introduction of comprehensive environmental policy and perspective plans under and after the economic/financial crises, even though such measures as privatization differed country by country.
• In relation to the experience of Thailand, participants recognized the importance of South-South cooperation.
• Participants stressed that even during economic crises, environmental programmes should not be compromised, following the example of Malaysia.
• In relation to the IGES Draft Policy Paper (1) distributed for the workshop, it was suggested that the existing international Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) should be taken into consideration and incorporated into the final document.

7.   According to the Agenda of the Workshop, the following three presentations by 7 participants were made at the Workshop regarding way for LTPP to contribute to the 4^th ESCAP Ministerial Conference on Environment and Development (MCED-4) in 2000:　

a)　Preparation for MCED-4, by Dr. Rezaul Karim, ESCAP,

b)　 Policy Papers of the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), were introduced by Ms. Aki Maruyama, on climate change, by Prof.. Hidefumi Imura, on urban environment, by Dr. Hiroji Isozaki, on forest, by Dr. Bishnu Bhandari, on environmental education, and by Ms. Wakana Takahashi, on governance, of 5 IGES project teams, and　

c)　Linkages between the results of the AIM model and IGES Policy Papers by the NIES/AIM team.

8.   Active discussion took place with regard to the above three presentations. The main points of the discussions were as follows:　

• Possible contribution of LTPP/ECO ASIA to the MCED-4 and preparatory work for the MCED-4.
• Suggestions that more quantified Pacific data be incorporated in the ESCAP conference documents and also in the Policy Paper of IGES.
• Recommendations that the synthesis paper based upon the present policy paper by IGES should be submitted to the MCED-4 through the channel of ECO-ASIA and/or Senior Official-level discussions of ESCAP by making full use of sub-regional preparatory meetings, like the ASOEN’s.
• Emphasis that the cooperative programmes on the sub-regional level be strengthened.  In this context, since the importance of the link of APN and the Acid Deposition Network with ECO ASIA was recognized, it was suggested that the progress and recent outcome of APN and Acid Deposition Network activities be reported to the MCED-4.
• In light of the importance of synergism among multilateral environmental agreements, suggestions that the inter-linkage issue be included in the agendas of the ECO ASIA 9^th Congress and of MCED-4.
• Participants are requested to give their comments to the ESCAP on revised Regional Action Programme, Ministerial Declaration and Kitakyushu Initiative for MCED-4.
• Participants reiterated the Asian region has the largest potential for green house gas emissions reductions which region could take a leading role in making cooperative emissions reduction efforts.
• Participants appreciated the effort by the IGES project team on urban environment management which outcome should be reflected in the draft Kitakyushu Initiative for clean environment for submission to the MECD-4.
• With regard to the subject area of forest conservation, necessity of coordination and synergy among relevant international/regional instruments, and of effective implementation and enforcement of domestic laws and regulations were emphasized.
• In relation to the enhancement of environmental awareness, knowledge, attitude, and value among various sectors and to the eco-consciousness studied in ECO ASIA/LTPP, importance of environmental education was reemphasized. In this context, emphasis was given to establishment of close linkage and network among environmental education and training programmes in sub-regional and regional level, including adaptation of local level.
• Participants recognized the MECD-4 would likely be to provide a good opportunity for strengthening of existing subregional instruments of environmental cooperation as well as for establishing of comprehensive framework in order to facilitate systematic cooperation in Asia and the Pacific region.

9.   For the purposes of facilitating the work of Phase II of the project in close cooperation with various activities in the region aimed towards the MCED-4, and the towards the Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly in 2002 (Rio+10), the participants expressed their appreciation of the efforts made by ECO ASIA/LTPP members to contribute to the b nnnpreparation of the Regional Action Programme (RAP) and State of the Environment Report in 2000 and formulation of the Kitakyushu Initiative as possible outcomes of MCED-4.  Participants also agreed to submit the Policy Paper drafted by the IGES project teams as a contribution of ECO-ASIA/LTPP to the MCED-4 as background /information documents.

10.   Participants shared the same view that the Rio+10 Conference to be hosted in Asia and the Pacific region, since the region was the focus of environment and development in the 21^st century.

11.   As the secretariat of the project, the Environment Agency of Japan announced that it would report the outcome of this Workshop and the progress to date on the Long-term Perspective Project at the ECO ASIA Congress to be held in Kitakyushu City, Japan, on 3 September 2000, and that the steering committee would meet again after the ECO ASIA congress as appropriate.

12.   Participants expressed their appreciation to the Environment Agency of Japan for hosting the Workshop and to Mr. Kato for his excellent chairing of the Workshop.