Statement
Madam President,
I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS).
At the outset, AOSIS thanks the Executive Director of UNEP and the Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC for today’s briefing on UN80 work package 27 on environment.
As AOSIS noted during the previous briefing on this workstream, while we recognize the value of enhancing coherence and coordination on environmental issues, we stress that any structural changes to existing arrangements, particularly those with well-established mandates and intergovernmental processes, must fully respect prior agreements and decisions adopted by their respective governing bodies.
In this regard, proposals emerging from this process must be considered though a Member States-driven process.
Madam President,
Allow me to highlight a few reflections on the proposed goals and recommendations.
First, AOSIS welcomes the aim to elevate the environment in the multilateral system.
Nonetheless, we would welcome further clarification regarding several of the recommendations presented.
While AOSIS recognizes the value of UNEA as a universal convening platform, we emphasize that consideration of UNEA’s role and functions should remain fully consistent with the mandate established by Member States, including through UNEP’s Governing Council decision 27/2.
In this context, AOSIS recalls General Assembly resolution 55/198, which encourages the Conference of Parties, and the secretariats of the Rio Conventions and other Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), and UNEP, including through the involvement of the Environmental Management Group (EMG) to continue enhancing complementarities among them. Importantly, such efforts must fully respect the status of the Secretariats of the Conventions and the decision- making prerogatives of the respective Conference of Parties.
As such, AOSIS requests further details on the “Environment Management Group 2.0”; specifically how this differs from the coordination functions already mandated to the current EMG.
Second, on strengthening multilateral environmental governance, AOSIS recognizes the potential benefits of enhanced cooperation among MEAs where this can facilitate implementation and reduce burdens on Parties, particularly SIDS.
However, we recall that each MEA operates under distinct legal, institutional and governance arrangements. They do not all share the same secretariat structures, administrative frameworks, and reporting requirements.
Therefore, AOSIS stresses that any consideration of consolidation or enhanced synergies must be fully Member State-driven and respect the autonomy, mandates, governance arrangement and decision-making prerogatives of the governing bodies concerned.
We would appreciate further clarifications regarding the recommendations relating to consolidation options, programmatic synergies, administrative synergies and harmonized reporting, including how they would operate in a manner that fully respects the distinct institutional arrangements of the various MEAs, without altering treaty-specific arrangements.
Third, on scaling implementation of country commitments and priorities, AOSIS welcomes the focus on strengthening implementation support. For SIDS, the principal challenge is not a lack of commitments, but rather the persistent constraints related to finance, capacity-building, technology transfer and technical support. As such, we hope to see recommendations that address these particular challenges.
In this context, regarding Recommendation 8, what gap is the proposed “coordination architecture” intended to fill that is not already addressed by the EMG, and how is it related to the proposed “EMG2.0”?
Further, if this coordination architecture is intended to coordinate implementation across MEAs, then further clarification will be needed regarding its governance arrangements, especially considering the existing authority of individual MEAs and their respective governing bodies.
We are also keen to learn more on the proposed creation of AI-enabled Support Centers. Specifically, how does the proposed “Climate Support Centre” relates to and avoids duplication with technology mechanism under the UNFCCC, in particular the Climate Technology Center and Network?
For AOSIS, it is important that we avoid the creation of parallel or overcomplicated structures that duplicate existing functions or arrangements under various MEAs.
Any new tools should build on and strengthen existing mechanisms, remain Party- driven and support, rather than fragment, the current implementation support architecture.
Lastly, on next steps, AOSIS would appreciate further clarity on the timelines, fora and modalities for decision-making on each recommendation, as well as the appropriate decision-making mechanism.
Madam President,
We look forward to receiving, in greater detail, more concrete information regarding the recommendations contained in this work package.
AOSIS remains committed to working constructively with all Member States to ensure the United Nations is truly responsive to those who depend on it most.
I thank you.
