Mr. José Antonio Ocampo
1
Statement by José Antonio Ocampo
Under-Secretary General for Economic and Social Affairs
At the Twelfth Session of the Commission on Sustainable Development
April 19, 2004
It gives me great pleasure to address the Commission on Sustainable
Development for the first time in my capacity as Under-Secretary General for Economic
and Social Affairs. I would like to begin by congratulating you, Mr. Chairperson, and the
other members of the Bureau, on your hard work in preparation for this session, and look
forward to the debates and the renewed commitment to the objectives of sustainable
development in the weeks to come.
The Commission has played a catalytic role in promoting sustainable
development since its creation in 1993, the year following the United Nations Conference
on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. The World Summit on Sustainable
Development, held in Johannesburg in 2002, has given a renewed impetus to the
Commission?s work.
This session of the Commission marks the start of the multi-year programme of
work agreed at its 11th session, addressing progress that the international community has
made in implementing commitments, with a focus on water, sanitation, and human
settlements. This session also inaugurates the new working format for the Commission?s
two-year cycle, and will focus on assessing what has been achieved, where progress has
been inadequate, what lessons can be learned, and what are the major challenges ahead.
Recalling the report of the 11th session of the Commission, the discussions at this session
should lead to an ?improved understanding of priority concerns? in the thematic cluster
and ?facilitate an effective policy discussion in the course of the policy year?.
I note the keen interest in the work of the Commission, with high levels of
participation from capitals, the significant representation of United Nations entities and
the large numbers of major groups participating in your work. I would also like to thank
the UN Regional Commissions for their effective preparations for this session of the
Commission through the organization of regional implementation meetings.
*****
Let me turn now to a consideration of the three themes before us, and present the
Secretary-General?s reports on water, sanitation, and human settlements. These reports
indicate that there has been progress towards meeting internationally agreed goals and
targets in several areas.
· Over the past decade, roughly one billion people ? almost one-sixth of the world?s
population ? has gained access to improved drinking water and sanitation.
Progress has been impressive in East and South Asia, where the majority of the
world?s poor people live, but disappointing in much of Sub-Saharan Africa.
2
· Thanks in part to improved access to safe water and sanitation, deaths from
diarrhoeal diseases have declined by 60% over the past two decades; even so,
almost 2 million people, mostly children, still die annually from this cause.
· Slum upgrading ? including provision of low-cost housing and infrastructure ?
has taken place in a number of countries, with Brazil, Philippines, and South
Africa deserving special mention.
· While less easily measured, there has been some progress towards more efficient
management of scarce water resources, for instance, through strengthened water
user associations and improved allocation mechanisms.
Nevertheless, meeting the goals and targets set out in Agenda 21, the Millennium
Development Goals, and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation remains a major
challenge.
· More than one-third of the world?s population still lacks access to improved
sanitation, and one-sixth lacks access to improved drinking water sources.
· To achieve the 2015 targets of halving the proportion of people without access,
another 2 billion people will need access to sanitation and 1.6 billion access to
safe drinking water.
· With rapid urbanization of the developing world, by 2020 an additional half
billion people could join the ranks of the 900 million currently estimated to be
living in slums. Clearly, even meeting the target of improving the lives of 100
million slum dwellers would represent very modest progress. The international
community needs to be more ambitious in this regard.
A number of serious deficits need to be redressed as the international community
responds to these challenges.
First, there has been underinvestment in rural sanitation ? relative to water supply
and relative to urban areas. The rural-urban sanitation access gap is almost twice what it
is for water supply, and rural sanitation coverage is 30 percentage points lower than rural
water supply coverage.
Second, within the sanitation area, too little attention has been given to shaping
hygienic behavior, for instance, through education and awareness raising, relative to
infrastructure investment. Hygiene education in schools can be particularly effective,
notably when supported by on-site sanitation facilities that accommodate the needs of
female students.
Third, underinvestment in wastewater treatment is commonplace, partly due to
high capital costs and difficulties of cost recovery. Ninety percent of wastewater in
developing countries goes untreated into local rivers and streams. Untreated municipal
sewage and wastewater is often used for small- scale irrigation, despite the human health
risks.
3
Fourth, water quality is a serious and growing problem, even in the case of
supposedly ?improved? sources. Meanwhile, water quality monitoring networks are
grossly inadequate and poorly maintained.
Fifth, few countries have put in place the elements of a process for integrated
water resources management, designed to address the multiple dimensions of water
management in a manner that is at once efficient, equitable and environmentally
sustainable. Only a handful of countries will meet the 2005 target for developing
integrated management systems, which can serve as mechanisms by which the alternative
uses of water are jointly evaluated, thus taking into account the interests of the different
parties but also the priorities that society should assign to the use of this scarce resource.
Finally, in the case of informal urban settlements, only limited progress has been
made in regularizing land titles, which holds back investment both in housing
improvements and in water, sanitation and other infrastructure.
A lack of political will at both international and national levels hampers progress,
notably in a few key areas. Misuse and overuse of irrigation water is a prominent case
in this regard. As two-thirds of extractive water use is for agriculture, small efficiency
gains here could free up large volumes of water for other uses. In many developing
countries, this problem is associated directly to subsidies to water use that encourage
overuse and resultant soil damage. In the developed countries, on the other hand,
agricultural subsidies contribute to heavy pesticide and fertilizer use, causing serious
water pollution and health risks, while also distorting world markets with adverse effects
on many developing countries.
In relation to municipal water supply, tariff reform with a view to fuller cost
recovery and well-targeted subsidies for the poor has also been politically fraught, even
though the rationale is compelling: not only to reduce water losses by providing resources
for network maintenance, but to permit greater investment in network expansion. Such
investment is essential to serve the as yet unserved, that is, primarily the poor who
otherwise must depend on high-priced vendor-provided water or unsafe sources.
Many governments have also had a patchy record with enforcement of laws and
regulations to address worsening water pollution problems . Incentive measures to
encourage greater pollution reduction at source could lessen the scale of investment
needed in municipal wastewater treatment.
With respect to human settlements, greater attention could be given to forward
planning in order to be able to meet the increased demand for affordable urban housing
that will accompany rapid urbanization. Elements should include strategic land
acquisition and development ahead of real estate price escalation, and efficient public
transport links from peri-urban communities to centers of economic activity.
The affordability of basic amenities to the poor ? whether water, sanitation, or
decent shelter ? remains an overriding priority. Broad economic policy needs to focus on
4
pro-poor, employment-generating growth, which will go a long way towards making
basic services affordable to the poor. In addressing the agenda before us, however, we
should focus on ways of reducing the costs of providing water, sanitation, and housing to
the poor, while not undermining the financial viability of the providers. In this regard, the
suggestions gleaned from the reports include:
· ensuring the choice of low-cost technologies wherever possible, cons idering not
just upfront but lifetime costs, not just internal but external costs; examples for
drinking water supply include low-cost well-drilling methods, simple pump
designs, and rainwater harvesting; examples for sanitation include ventilated
improved pit latrines, pour- flush toilets with septic tanks and, where culturally
acceptable, ecological sanitation which yields useful and marketable byproducts;
· mobilizing private sector, NGO and community resources as far as possible to
supplement public investment, as for example with condominial sewers and wellmanaged
public sanitation facilities, including in slum communities;
· better targeting subsidies to reach the poorest and most vulnerable households
and communities;
· for both sanitation and water, low-cost loans paid back in small installments could
render access more affordable to the poor, since the upfront investment is often
the biggest deterrent to access, not the monthly user fees;
· microcredit has an important and growing role to play in financ ing incremental
home improvements by the poor, notably slum dwellers, including the addition of
amenities like piped water and sanitation.
Stronger political will and more effective institutions, however crucial to
progress, must be matched by additional financial resources. Let me just suggest some
rough orders of magnitude, recognizing that estimates can vary widely depending on
technology and other assumptions. Even with the lowest-cost solutions, financial
requirements for supplying clean drinking water and sanitation should roughly double in
order to meet the 2015 targets ? i.e., $33 billion rather than the $16 billion currently
invested. While urban water supply could well attract substantial additional financing,
including from private sources, concerted effort will be needed to raise financing for rural
water supply and, especially, for sanitation in both rural areas and urban informal
settlements.
Adequate provision for municipal wastewater treatment could, with current
technologies, require a tripling of investment over current levels, or roughly $50 billion a
year. Funding on this scale seems doubtful in the near term, reinforcing the need to
develop and apply lower-cost treatment methods and to introduce stronger incentives for
reduction of water pollution loads at source.
In the case of slum upgrading and construction of affordable housing, global
estimates are few and far between. Let me offer here a very rough ?and conservative?
back-of-envelope calculation, making use of data on costs per unit upgraded for several
projects in Latin America and adjusting for differences in per capita income between that
region and the rest of the developing world. Based on a cost per housing unit upgraded of
between $1,300 and $1,950, and assuming an average of six persons per household, then
halving the current slum population of 900 million would require between $100 and $150
billion of public investment. To this we should add the private investments in home
improvement. This is also quite apart from the investments for provid ing housing and
basic infrastructure to an anticipated half billion more low-income urban residents over
the next 15 years.
Housing finance improvements, including extension of housing-related
microcredit programmes, and development of capital markets (e.g., for municipal bonds)
can facilitate more effective domestic resource mobilization for sustainable human
settlements, but there is still a need for greater international resource commitments. In
close consultation and cooperation with developing countries, donor governments,
international financial institutions, the private sector, NGOs, and international civil
society need to explore innovative sources and methods of finance.
No doubt, there will be much interesting discussion and exchange of ideas on new
approaches to resource mobilization for water, sanitation and human settlements in the
coming days. Perhaps even some exciting new partnerships will be forged. I look forward
to joining you in two weeks of hard work and hard thinking on some of the most
important sustainable development challenges facing the international community today.
Statement by José Antonio Ocampo
Under-Secretary General for Economic and Social Affairs
At the Twelfth Session of the Commission on Sustainable Development
April 19, 2004
It gives me great pleasure to address the Commission on Sustainable
Development for the first time in my capacity as Under-Secretary General for Economic
and Social Affairs. I would like to begin by congratulating you, Mr. Chairperson, and the
other members of the Bureau, on your hard work in preparation for this session, and look
forward to the debates and the renewed commitment to the objectives of sustainable
development in the weeks to come.
The Commission has played a catalytic role in promoting sustainable
development since its creation in 1993, the year following the United Nations Conference
on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. The World Summit on Sustainable
Development, held in Johannesburg in 2002, has given a renewed impetus to the
Commission?s work.
This session of the Commission marks the start of the multi-year programme of
work agreed at its 11th session, addressing progress that the international community has
made in implementing commitments, with a focus on water, sanitation, and human
settlements. This session also inaugurates the new working format for the Commission?s
two-year cycle, and will focus on assessing what has been achieved, where progress has
been inadequate, what lessons can be learned, and what are the major challenges ahead.
Recalling the report of the 11th session of the Commission, the discussions at this session
should lead to an ?improved understanding of priority concerns? in the thematic cluster
and ?facilitate an effective policy discussion in the course of the policy year?.
I note the keen interest in the work of the Commission, with high levels of
participation from capitals, the significant representation of United Nations entities and
the large numbers of major groups participating in your work. I would also like to thank
the UN Regional Commissions for their effective preparations for this session of the
Commission through the organization of regional implementation meetings.
*****
Let me turn now to a consideration of the three themes before us, and present the
Secretary-General?s reports on water, sanitation, and human settlements. These reports
indicate that there has been progress towards meeting internationally agreed goals and
targets in several areas.
· Over the past decade, roughly one billion people ? almost one-sixth of the world?s
population ? has gained access to improved drinking water and sanitation.
Progress has been impressive in East and South Asia, where the majority of the
world?s poor people live, but disappointing in much of Sub-Saharan Africa.
2
· Thanks in part to improved access to safe water and sanitation, deaths from
diarrhoeal diseases have declined by 60% over the past two decades; even so,
almost 2 million people, mostly children, still die annually from this cause.
· Slum upgrading ? including provision of low-cost housing and infrastructure ?
has taken place in a number of countries, with Brazil, Philippines, and South
Africa deserving special mention.
· While less easily measured, there has been some progress towards more efficient
management of scarce water resources, for instance, through strengthened water
user associations and improved allocation mechanisms.
Nevertheless, meeting the goals and targets set out in Agenda 21, the Millennium
Development Goals, and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation remains a major
challenge.
· More than one-third of the world?s population still lacks access to improved
sanitation, and one-sixth lacks access to improved drinking water sources.
· To achieve the 2015 targets of halving the proportion of people without access,
another 2 billion people will need access to sanitation and 1.6 billion access to
safe drinking water.
· With rapid urbanization of the developing world, by 2020 an additional half
billion people could join the ranks of the 900 million currently estimated to be
living in slums. Clearly, even meeting the target of improving the lives of 100
million slum dwellers would represent very modest progress. The international
community needs to be more ambitious in this regard.
A number of serious deficits need to be redressed as the international community
responds to these challenges.
First, there has been underinvestment in rural sanitation ? relative to water supply
and relative to urban areas. The rural-urban sanitation access gap is almost twice what it
is for water supply, and rural sanitation coverage is 30 percentage points lower than rural
water supply coverage.
Second, within the sanitation area, too little attention has been given to shaping
hygienic behavior, for instance, through education and awareness raising, relative to
infrastructure investment. Hygiene education in schools can be particularly effective,
notably when supported by on-site sanitation facilities that accommodate the needs of
female students.
Third, underinvestment in wastewater treatment is commonplace, partly due to
high capital costs and difficulties of cost recovery. Ninety percent of wastewater in
developing countries goes untreated into local rivers and streams. Untreated municipal
sewage and wastewater is often used for small- scale irrigation, despite the human health
risks.
3
Fourth, water quality is a serious and growing problem, even in the case of
supposedly ?improved? sources. Meanwhile, water quality monitoring networks are
grossly inadequate and poorly maintained.
Fifth, few countries have put in place the elements of a process for integrated
water resources management, designed to address the multiple dimensions of water
management in a manner that is at once efficient, equitable and environmentally
sustainable. Only a handful of countries will meet the 2005 target for developing
integrated management systems, which can serve as mechanisms by which the alternative
uses of water are jointly evaluated, thus taking into account the interests of the different
parties but also the priorities that society should assign to the use of this scarce resource.
Finally, in the case of informal urban settlements, only limited progress has been
made in regularizing land titles, which holds back investment both in housing
improvements and in water, sanitation and other infrastructure.
A lack of political will at both international and national levels hampers progress,
notably in a few key areas. Misuse and overuse of irrigation water is a prominent case
in this regard. As two-thirds of extractive water use is for agriculture, small efficiency
gains here could free up large volumes of water for other uses. In many developing
countries, this problem is associated directly to subsidies to water use that encourage
overuse and resultant soil damage. In the developed countries, on the other hand,
agricultural subsidies contribute to heavy pesticide and fertilizer use, causing serious
water pollution and health risks, while also distorting world markets with adverse effects
on many developing countries.
In relation to municipal water supply, tariff reform with a view to fuller cost
recovery and well-targeted subsidies for the poor has also been politically fraught, even
though the rationale is compelling: not only to reduce water losses by providing resources
for network maintenance, but to permit greater investment in network expansion. Such
investment is essential to serve the as yet unserved, that is, primarily the poor who
otherwise must depend on high-priced vendor-provided water or unsafe sources.
Many governments have also had a patchy record with enforcement of laws and
regulations to address worsening water pollution problems . Incentive measures to
encourage greater pollution reduction at source could lessen the scale of investment
needed in municipal wastewater treatment.
With respect to human settlements, greater attention could be given to forward
planning in order to be able to meet the increased demand for affordable urban housing
that will accompany rapid urbanization. Elements should include strategic land
acquisition and development ahead of real estate price escalation, and efficient public
transport links from peri-urban communities to centers of economic activity.
The affordability of basic amenities to the poor ? whether water, sanitation, or
decent shelter ? remains an overriding priority. Broad economic policy needs to focus on
4
pro-poor, employment-generating growth, which will go a long way towards making
basic services affordable to the poor. In addressing the agenda before us, however, we
should focus on ways of reducing the costs of providing water, sanitation, and housing to
the poor, while not undermining the financial viability of the providers. In this regard, the
suggestions gleaned from the reports include:
· ensuring the choice of low-cost technologies wherever possible, cons idering not
just upfront but lifetime costs, not just internal but external costs; examples for
drinking water supply include low-cost well-drilling methods, simple pump
designs, and rainwater harvesting; examples for sanitation include ventilated
improved pit latrines, pour- flush toilets with septic tanks and, where culturally
acceptable, ecological sanitation which yields useful and marketable byproducts;
· mobilizing private sector, NGO and community resources as far as possible to
supplement public investment, as for example with condominial sewers and wellmanaged
public sanitation facilities, including in slum communities;
· better targeting subsidies to reach the poorest and most vulnerable households
and communities;
· for both sanitation and water, low-cost loans paid back in small installments could
render access more affordable to the poor, since the upfront investment is often
the biggest deterrent to access, not the monthly user fees;
· microcredit has an important and growing role to play in financ ing incremental
home improvements by the poor, notably slum dwellers, including the addition of
amenities like piped water and sanitation.
Stronger political will and more effective institutions, however crucial to
progress, must be matched by additional financial resources. Let me just suggest some
rough orders of magnitude, recognizing that estimates can vary widely depending on
technology and other assumptions. Even with the lowest-cost solutions, financial
requirements for supplying clean drinking water and sanitation should roughly double in
order to meet the 2015 targets ? i.e., $33 billion rather than the $16 billion currently
invested. While urban water supply could well attract substantial additional financing,
including from private sources, concerted effort will be needed to raise financing for rural
water supply and, especially, for sanitation in both rural areas and urban informal
settlements.
Adequate provision for municipal wastewater treatment could, with current
technologies, require a tripling of investment over current levels, or roughly $50 billion a
year. Funding on this scale seems doubtful in the near term, reinforcing the need to
develop and apply lower-cost treatment methods and to introduce stronger incentives for
reduction of water pollution loads at source.
In the case of slum upgrading and construction of affordable housing, global
estimates are few and far between. Let me offer here a very rough ?and conservative?
back-of-envelope calculation, making use of data on costs per unit upgraded for several
projects in Latin America and adjusting for differences in per capita income between that
region and the rest of the developing world. Based on a cost per housing unit upgraded of
between $1,300 and $1,950, and assuming an average of six persons per household, then
halving the current slum population of 900 million would require between $100 and $150
billion of public investment. To this we should add the private investments in home
improvement. This is also quite apart from the investments for provid ing housing and
basic infrastructure to an anticipated half billion more low-income urban residents over
the next 15 years.
Housing finance improvements, including extension of housing-related
microcredit programmes, and development of capital markets (e.g., for municipal bonds)
can facilitate more effective domestic resource mobilization for sustainable human
settlements, but there is still a need for greater international resource commitments. In
close consultation and cooperation with developing countries, donor governments,
international financial institutions, the private sector, NGOs, and international civil
society need to explore innovative sources and methods of finance.
No doubt, there will be much interesting discussion and exchange of ideas on new
approaches to resource mobilization for water, sanitation and human settlements in the
coming days. Perhaps even some exciting new partnerships will be forged. I look forward
to joining you in two weeks of hard work and hard thinking on some of the most
important sustainable development challenges facing the international community today.