United NationsDepartment of Economic and Social Affairs Sustainable Development

Brazil and Nicaragua

10th Session of the Open Working Group on the Sustainable Development Goals
31 March - 04 April, 2014
Cluster 6 - Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Resources, oceans and seas;
Ecoystems and Biodiversity
3 April, 2014
Statement by Brazil and Nicaragua
Mr. Co-Chair,
Nicaragua and Brazil consider that targets on the conservation and sustainable use of oceans and
seas should be based on the legal framework and basic principles provided by the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea.
In item "d", since there are international instruments addressing straddling fish stocks by which
some countries abide, we suggest the addition of the phrase “in accordance with relevant legal
instruments on the matter”.
Item "c" should read “promoting sustainable use of marine resources, with due regard to the
needs of developing countries, including capacity-building and transfer of technology”. This
would ensure that every country, on an equal basis, is fully enabled to have proper access to
these resources. Regarding the language proposed, it should be underscored that “sustainable
exploitation” is not a term found in the Convention, neither is it a term of common use in oceans
and seas processes under the General Assembly.
Brazil and Nicaragua wish to recall, regarding item "i", that although the Johannesburg Plan of
Implementation calls for the implementation of a representative network of marine protected
areas, up to now there is only legislation allowing the establishment of these areas inside national
jurisdictions. It should be underscored that currently there is no applicable regime for the
establishment of marine protected areas in areas beyond national jurisdiction. For that reason, the
expression “in accordance with relevant legal instruments and regimes” should be added to the
language in this item.
Finally, with regard to item (j), that refers to “protecting marine resources in areas beyond
national jurisdiction”, Brazil and Nicaragua believe that this language should read “Conservation
and sustainable use of marine biological diversity beyond national jurisdiction”, in line with the
terminology adopted in the Ad-Hoc Working Group on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction.
Mr. Co-chair,
Brazil and Nicaragua are of the view that the three dimensions of sustainable development are
unbalanced in focus area 17. Social and economic dimensions are still missing. At the same time,
the environmental dimension is not sufficiently reflected in the other areas. Therefore, focus area
17 should be better integrated with other areas, especially agriculture and food security, poverty
eradication, promotion of equality, economic growth and infrastructure.
Mr. Co-chair,
In the chapeau, we suggest the deletion of the expression “the capacity of”, immediately before
“ecosystems”. The expression limits the role of ecosystems and is contrary to the holistic and
integrated approach adopted in Rio+20.
In item "c", Nicaragua and Brazil suggest the addition of the word "cultivated" immediately after
"farmed", in order to take into account also vegetal species. Still regarding item "c", we would
like to express our preference for the concept of agri-biodiversity, in order to include a broader
range of species relevant for agriculture and food secutiry.
Regarding item "e", dedicated to sustainable forest management, we would also suggest the
inclusion of expression "and sustainable use of biodiversity", at the end of the sentence, in order
to reflect the broader scope of the focus area.
Still regarding forest managament, we wish to recall paragraph 193 of “The Future We Want”, in
which we agreed to “improving the livelihoods of people and communities by creating the
conditions needed for them to sustainably manage forests”. Brazil and Nicaragua would like to
suggest the inclusion of this text, as a new item, immediately after item "e".
On item "f", and also bearing in mind the Rio+20 outcome document, we would like to request
the addition after the term deforestation of "forest degradation", which encompasses not only
crops, but all drivers of deforestation and degradation of forests. The role of specific drivers of
deforestation, such as crops, urban sprawl and climate change should be addressed at the level of
indicators and in a fair and balanced manner.
In item "i", Nicaragua and Brazil believe that the idea of "land degradation neutral world" cannot
be translated into targets and indicators. The expression was included in the Rio+20 outcome
document, but its meaning is still controversial, since the feasibility of a land degradation neutral
world has not been technically confirmed and is being discussed under UNCCD. In this regard,
Nicaragua and Brazil believe that any target on land degradation should adopt a more concrete
conceptual basis in order to be effectively translated into targets and indicators.
Regarding item "g", we suggest widening the scope to include the restoration and conservation
of other ecosystems. The new formulation would read as follows: "restoring degraded
ecosystems, including forests, and increasing areas under protection".
In relation to item "j", Nicaragua and Brazil believe that a target on the participation of
indigenous peoples and local communities in decision-making processes should focus on all
benefits related to biodiversity, not only to forests. Our proposal would read: "ensuring inclusion
of indigenous peoples and local communities in decision-making processes regarding
conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, as well as in sharing of benefits derived from
the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge".
Still regarding indigenous peoples, mentioned in items "j" and "k", it is necessary to standardize
the language. We suggest adopting "indigenous peoples and local communities".
We would also suggest two additional items aiming for the integration of biodiversity, poverty
eradication and education.
The first would read as follows: "integrating biodiversity conservation measures into national
and local development strategies, planning processes and poverty reduction strategies".
The second would be: "improving education and awareness raising on the values of biodiversity
and conservation and sustainable use measures".
Mr. Co-chair,
Brazil and Nicaragua also believe that item "L", on data and methodology, should be a sub-item
of the means of implementation for this focal area.
The item on means of implementation should also include the following sub-items, from the
Rio+20 outcome document:
1) implementing the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and achieving the Aichi
Biodiversity Targets – from Rio+20 paragraph 198;
2) implementing the strategy for resource mobilization in support of the achievement of the
objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity, including the commitment to substantially
increasing resources from all sources in support of biodiversity – from Rio+20 paragraph 200;
3) Supporting and strengthening the implementation of the UNCCD and the ten-year strategic
plan and framework to enhance its implementation (2008–2018), including by mobilizing
adequate, predictable and timely financial resources – from Rio+20 paragraph 207;
4) promoting capacity-building, extension training programmes and scientific studies and
initiatives aimed at deepening understanding and raising awareness of the economic, social and
environmental benefits of sustainable land management policies and practices – also from
paragraph 207;
I thank you, Mr. Co-chair.