Draft

RETA 6198
Capacity Building on Promoting Sustainable Development in the GMS

Sustainable Development Strategies in the Greater Mekong

Subregion: Status, Needs and Directions

Cielito F. Habito and Ella S. Antonio

June 2007
 Table of Contents

Acronyms ........................................................................................................................ 3
List of Tables, Figures, Boxes & Annexes....................................................................... 6
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 7
1. Introduction: The Sustainability Challenge in GMS ................................................ 15
2. Assessment Approach and Framework ................................................................. 17
3. NSDS and NCSDs: Responses to Rio ............................................................... 19
3.1 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS A COMMITMENT....................................................................................19
3.2 GMS INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSES .............................................................................................................21
3.3 NCSDS: PREREQUISITE TO NSDS .............................................................................................................22
4. NSDS: What Is It? .................................................................................................. 25
4.1 NSDS FRAMEWORK ..................................................................................................................................25
4.2 NSDS PRINCIPLES .....................................................................................................................................26
4.3 NSDS PROCESSES .....................................................................................................................................26
4.4 SUMMARY NSDS CRITERIA/INDICATORS..................................................................................................27
5. NSDS Readiness in GMS: Overall Assessment..................................................... 29
6. NSDS Readiness in GMS: Country Assessments.................................................. 33
6.1 CAMBODIA ................................................................................................................................................33
6.2 LAO PDR ..................................................................................................................................................47
6.3 MYANMAR ................................................................................................................................................61
6.4 THAILAND .................................................................................................................................................77
6.5 VIETNAM ...................................................................................................................................................94
6.6 YUNNAN PROVINCE OF CHINA ................................................................................................................109
7. SDS Readiness at the GMS Sub-regional Level.................................................. 125
7.1 SUB-REGIONAL INSTITUTIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ..........................................................125
7.2 PLANNING INITIATIVES AT THE SUB-REGION LEVEL ...............................................................................130
8. Conclusions and Recommendations.................................................................... 136
8.1 TOWARDS EFFECTIVE NATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL SD MECHANISMS ......................................................136
8.2 TOWARDS AN EFFECTIVE SUB-REGIONAL COORDINATION MECHANISM .................................................140
8.3 TOWARDS EFFECTIVE NATIONAL AND SUBREGIONAL SD STRATEGIES ..................................................146
Annexes ...................................................................................................................... 149
References.................................................................................................................. 164

2
Acronyms

5YPESD – Five-Year Plan for Economic and Social Development

ACCA 21 – Administrative Center for China’s Agenda 21
ADB – Asian Development Bank
ALGAS – Asian Least-Cost Green House Gas Abatement Strategy
AMME – ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on the Environment
ANDPC – ASEAN National Development Planning Committee
ASEAN – Association of Southeast Asian Nations
ASEAN-CCI – ASEAN Chamber of Commerce and Industry
ASOEN – ASEAN Senior Officials on the Environment
BANCA – Biodiversity and Nature Conservation Association
BCSD – Business Council for Sustainable Development
CA 21 – China’s Agenda 21
CAS – Country Assistance Strategy
CBIK – Center for Biodiversity and Indigenous Knowledge
CBNRM – Community-Based Natural Resource Management
CDC – Council for the Development of Cambodia
CMDGs – Cambodia Millennium Development Goals
CPI – Committee on Planning and Investment
CPC – Communist Party of China
CPRGS – Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy
CSOs – Civil Society Organizations
DANIDA – Danish International Development Agency
D&D – Decentralization and De-concentration
DSENRE – Department of Science, Education, Natural Resources and Environment
DFID – Department for International Development
DONREH – Departments of Natural Resources, Environment and Housing
EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment
EOC - Environment Operations Center
EPA – Environmental Performance Assessment
EPB – Environmental Protection Bureau
EPL – Environmental Protection Law
ESCAP – Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
ESD – Environmental and Sustainable Development
FORM – Friends of Rainforest Myanmar
FTI – Federation of Thai Industries
FR – Feasibility Reports
FREDA – Forest Resources Environment and Development Association
FYPEREP – Five-Year Plan for Ecological Rehabilitation and Environmental Protection
GAP – Governance Action Plan
GDP – Gross Domestic Product
GMS – Greater Mekong Sub-region
GMSARN – Greater Mekong Sub-region Academic and Research Network
GMS-BF – Greater Mekong Sub-region Business Forum
GMS Program – Greater Mekong Sub-regional Economic Program
GO-NGOs – Government Organized NGOs
HIV/AIDS – Human Immunodeficiency Virus /Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
IBC – International Business Club
ICC – International Chamber of Commerce
IDRC – International Development Research Centre
IHLCA – Integrated Household Living Conditions Assessment Project
INGO – International Non-Government Organization
IMR – Infant Mortality Rate

3
IUCN – International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
JEQC – Joint Economic Quadrangle Committee
JPOI – Johannesburg Plan of Implementation
LA21 – Local Agenda 21
LDC – Least-Developed Country
LEP – Law on Environmental Protection
LEPNRM – Law on Environmental Protection and Natural Resource Management
LNCCI – Lao National Chamber of Commerce and Industry
LPRP – Lao People's Revolutionary Party
MA 21 – Myanmar Agenda 21
MARD – Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
M&E – Monitoring and Evaluation
MDG – Millennium Development Goal
MEF – Ministry of Economy and Finance
MFA - Myanmar Floriculturist Association
MMR – Maternal Mortality Ratio
MNPED – Ministry of National Planning and Economic Development
MOC – Ministry of Construction
MOE – Ministry of Environment
MOH – Ministry of Health
MOFA – Ministry of Foreign Affairs
MOP – Ministry of Planning
MONRE – Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
MOSTE – Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment
MPI – Ministry of Planning and Investment
MRC – Mekong River Commission
NCC – National Coordinating Committee
NCCE – National Coordination Committee for Environment
NCEA – National Commission for Environmental Affairs
NCSD – National Council for Sustainable Development
NDRC – National Development and Reform Commission
NEA – National Environment Agency
NEAP – National Environmental Action Plan
NEB – National Environment Board
NEC – National Environment Committee
NECC – National Environmental Conservation Committee
NEM – New Economic Mechanism
NEQA – National Environmental Quality Act
NERIS – National Economic Research Institute
NESAC – National Economic and Social Advisory Council
NESDB – National Economic and Social Development Board
NESDP – National Economic and Social Development Plan
NGPES – National Growth and Poverty Eradication Strategy
NMC – National Mekong Committee
NPC – National People's Congress
NPED – National Plan for Environment and Development
NPLs – Non-Performing Loans
NPRS – National Poverty Reduction Strategy
NRM – Natural Resources Management
NSC – National Statistics Centre
NSDP – National Strategic Development Plan
NSDS – National Sustainable Development Strategy
NSEDP – National Socio-Economic Development Plan
ODA – Official Development Assistance
OECD – Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
PARDYP – People and Resource Dynamics (in Mountainous Watersheds) Project

4
PIP – Public Investment Program
PEAP – Provincial Environment Action Plan
PEPB – Provincial Environmental Protection Bureau
PM&E – Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation
Politburo – Political Bureau
PPC – Provincial Planning Commission
PRSP – Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
REAM – Renewable Energy Association of Myanmar
RGC – Royal Government of Cambodia
RRCAP – Regional Resource Center for Asia Pacific
RS – Rectangular Strategy
SAF – Sustainable Agriculture Forum
SDAPs – Sustainable Development Action Plans
SDI – Sustainable Development Indicators
SDS – Sustainable Development Strategies
SEDP – Socio-Economic Development Plan
SEDP I – First Socioeconomic Development Plan
SEDP II – Second Socio-Economic Development Plan
SEDS – Socio-Economic Development Strategy
SEPA – State Environmental Protection Administration
SLORC – State Law and Order Restoration Council
SNEC – Supreme National Economic Council
SPDC – State Peace and Development Council
STEA – Science, Technology and Environment Agency
TA – Technical Assistance
TB – Tuberculosis
TBCSD – Thailand Business Council for Sustainable Development
TCC – Thai Chamber of Commerce
TDRI – Thailand Development Research Institute
TEI – Thailand Environment Institute
TNC – The Nature Conservancy
TWG18 – Technical Working Group on Planning and Poverty Reduction or TWG-PPR
UMFCCI – Union of Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry
UNCCD – United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
UNCED – United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
UNCSD – United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development
UN-DESA – United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs
UNDS – UN Development System
UNDP – United Nations Development Programme
UNEP – United Nations Environment Program
UNICEF – United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund
USDA – Union Solidarity and Development Association
VA 21 – Vietnam Agenda 21
VACNE – Vietnam Association for Conservation of Nature and Environment
VCCI – Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry
VNCSD – Vietnam National Council for Sustainable Development
VNGO – Vietnam Non-Government Organization
VUSTA – Vietnam Union of Science and Technology Associations
WCS – Wildlife Conservation Society
WHO – World Health Organization
WSSD – World Summit for Sustainable Development
WWF – World Wildlife Fund / World Wide Fund for Nature
YEDP – Yunnan Environmental Development Program
YPEPB – Yunnan Provincial Environmental Protection Bureau
YNPRA – Yunnan Participatory Rural Association
YPG – Yunnan Provincial Government

5
List of Tables, Figures, Boxes & Annexes

Tables

Table 1 : NSDS Readiness Scorecard for the GMS Countries

Table 2 : Institutional Bodies Involved in Sustainability Agenda in Cambodia
Table 3 : Progress Towards the Millennium Development Goals and Targets,
Cambodia (As of 2005)
Table 4 : Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals and Targets,
Lao PDR (As of 2005)
Table 5 : Myanmar Government Agencies Involved in Environmental
Concerns
Table 6 : Progress Toward the Millennium Development Goals and Targets,
Myanmar (As of 2005)
Table 7 : Progress Toward the Millennium Development Goals and Targets,
Thailand (As of 2004)
Table 8 : Progress Toward the Millennium Development Goals and Targets,
Vietnam(As of 2005)
Table 9 : Progress Toward the Millennium Development Goals and Targets,
China (As of 2005)
Table 10 : Summary Description of Institutional Mechanisms in Mekong River
Sub- region
Table 11 : National and Local Environment and Sustainable Development
Institutions in GMS

Figures

Figure 1 : NSDS Framework

Figure 2 : The Institutional Arrangement for the NSDP Formulation
Figure 3 : Current Sub-regional Institutional Set-Up
Figure 4 : Proposed Sub-regional Sustainable Development Mechanism

Boxes

Box 1 : National Council for Sustainable Development

Annexes

Annex A : Relevant Institutional Mechanisms in Greater Mekong Sub-region

and Southeast Asia Region
Annex B : UN System Bodies Covering the GMS Sub-region

Annex Table 1 Cambodia MDGs Indicators and Targets

6
Executive Summary

The study assesses the state of sustainable development strategies (SDS) in the
Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) – within each of the six member-countries and in the
subregion as a whole – with a view towards identifying appropriate improvements that
would bring about strong national SDS (NSDS) and a subregional SDS (SSDS)
responsive to present and future SD challenges therein.

The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN-DESA) defines
NSDS as “a coordinated, participatory and iterative process of thoughts and action to
achieve economic, environmental and social objectives in a balanced and integrated
manner at the national and local levels.” NSDS thus refers to a process, and not merely
a document. Formulating a NSDS need not entail producing a new plan or inventing a
new process, but means transforming and adapting existing processes to become
consistent with sustainable development principles. Recognizing the above, assessing
“SDS readiness” of the GMS countries and of the sub-region as a group entailed a
consideration of both the content of sustainable development strategies and/or related
development strategies/plans, along with the institutional context within which these
have been formulated.

While the GMS countries had been prompt in setting up various mechanisms to address
environment and sustainable development concerns especially after the 1992 Rio Earth
Summit, the inter-sectoral nature of sustainable development challenges necessarily
implies involvement of multiple ministries and agencies. A common challenge has been
the need for stronger coordination, with different offices and ministries sometimes
pursuing overlapping, contradictory or conflicting policies or initiatives. Weak
accountability systems have also fostered incompetence and corruption in the
bureaucracy. Meanwhile, lack of coherence in laws and policies governing environment
and natural resources has hampered effective implementation and enforcement of
regulations.

NSDS Assessment Criteria

The rich literature that has emerged on NSDS have defined desirable attributes of a
NSDS. These may be summarized in nine key criteria or indicators, which the study
has employed as bases for the assessment of the status of the GMS countries’ “NSDS
readiness. These are the following:

(1) Policy integration - national strategies give consideration to environmental,

economic, and social concerns in integrated approaches and plans.
(2) Intergenerational timeframe - national strategies adopt long-term time frames
that enable inclusion of intergenerational principles and indicators.

7
 (3) Analysis and assessments - integrative assessment tools are used to identify
the environmental, economic and social costs and benefits of policy and
strategy options.
(4) Indicators and targets - strategies are based on structured indicator systems to
assist in monitoring progress and to serve as quantitative targets.
(5) Co-ordination and institutions - a wide range of government departments and
agencies are involved in the formulation and implementation of national
strategies, with overall leadership from the office of the head of government.
(6) Local and regional governance - local and regional authorities are fully
involved in the development of national strategies, with certain delivery
aspects devolved to sub national levels.
(7) Stakeholder participation - stakeholders (e.g. business, unions, NGOs) actively
participate with government representatives in councils/commissions respon-
sible for developing and implementing national strategies.
(8) Monitoring and evaluation - independent bodies or processes are established
to act as watchdogs monitoring implementation of national strategies and
providing recommendations for their improvement.
(9) Resource mobilization – adequate, predictable and regular financial resources
from domestic and international sources are available through a suitable mix of
public finances, private sector funds, and external donor support.

An assessment was also made of the subregion’s prevailing situation and progress
towards attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which are key goals
in the pursuit of sustainable development in any country.

Assessment Results

The individual GMS countries are in varying states of NSDS readiness, owing to
variations in their economic, social, political, institutional and environmental circums-
tances. GMS countries need to go through the exercise of formulating holistic national
sustainable development strategies (NSDS) that address economic, social and environ-
mental concerns comprehensively and integratively. While some member countries
(Vietnam, Myanmar and China) have come up with some form of a sustainable
development strategy or agenda, there is need to incorporate new emerging issues that
were highlighted in the 2002 Johannesburg WSSD, as well as address new challenges
arising from more recent developments within the sub-region and its vicinity.

For the GMS countries, it is an appropriate time to respond to the call made in global
Agenda 21 and in the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI) for countries to
integrate sustainable development in their national development plans, policies and
programs. And as environmental stresses impinge on the Mekong River ecosystem
that binds together the six economies comprising the GMS, such national exercises
must be undertaken in coordination with one another, and with due consideration for the
intra-GMS implications of national and sub-national initiatives in pursuit of economic
growth and sustainable development.

8
Table 1 summarizes the results of national assessments of NSDS readiness among the
six GMS countries, based on the nine indicators enumerated above as gleaned from the
NSDS literature.

Table 1. NSDS Readiness Scorecard for the GMS Countries

Criteria Cam Lao Mya Tha Viet Yun

Policy Integration 3 1 3 5 3 3
Intergenerational Timeframe 3 3 3 3 3 3
Analysis & Assessments 1 1 1 1 1 3
Indicators & Targets 5 5 3 5 5 3
Coordination & Institutions 4 3 1 3 3 3
Local & Regional Governance 5 5 4 5 5 3
Stakeholder Participation 3 2 3 5 3 3
Monitoring & Evaluation 1 3 1 4 3 1
Resource Mobilization 4 1 1 5 4 3

Overall Assessment 3 3 2 4 3 3

*Scale of 1 (Lowest) to 5 (Highest)

Policy integration is deemed weakest in Lao PDR, where there is candid admission
that economic growth is the dominant concern of government in its development
strategy at this time. This comes through both in official documents and in statements
of government officials. On the other hand, Thailand shows the strongest level of policy
integration, having made such a holistic and integrative approach an explicit strategy
since its Eighth Plan in the 1990s. The rest appear to be well on the way to achieving
satisfactory integration of the economic, social and environmental dimensions of
sustainable development.

All six countries partly address the need for an intergenerational perspective in their
development planning horizons, but mostly rely on five-year plans and ten-year
strategies to guide their development initiatives. All of the countries possess at least
one open-ended planning document; however, this does not necessarily mean that their
development strategies have adequately addressed inter-generational equity issues and
long-term structural change.

Most of the GMS countries remain ill-equipped to undertake integrative situation and
policy analyses to inform their formulation of national strategies for sustainable
development. Thailand, and to some extent Yunnan province of China (with the help of

9
external assistance), have obtained a level of capability to employ analytical tools for
such integrative analysis over their neighbors.

All six countries have developed indicator systems to systematically monitor

implementation and outcomes of their sustainable development initiatives, with
Myanmar and Yunnan lagging somewhat behind. The latter two have embarked on
formulation of sustainable development indicators relatively more recently than the
others. However, all are now able or well on the way to being able to systematically
track their progress in pursuing the MDGs and wider sustainable development
objectives in the years ahead.

Institutional coordination remains a major challenge in all six GMS countries, with
Myanmar apparently having greatest difficulty at effecting inter-agency coordination and
collaboration, particularly in ensuring proper consideration of environmental implications
of its various development initiatives. On the other hand, Cambodia appears to be
making better progress in this regard, with a planning process that explicitly involves all
key agencies of government and local governments starting at the earliest stages of the
planning cycle.

The role of local governments in sustainable development efforts appears strong in all
six GMS countries. In all six countries, decentralization and devolution figure
prominently in the overall development thrust. Notwithstanding this, there is still a
tendency for governance in China and Myanmar to be more strongly top-down and
centralized in nature, with the key policymaking and relevant implementation resources
still largely controlled by the central government.

Participation by non-government stakeholders has also been strengthening in all six

GMS countries, with Thailand being the most advanced in this regard. Lack of a sizable
domestic NGO community continues to be a constraint, particularly in Lao PDR and
Cambodia, where international NGOs tend to be more prominent in engagements with
the government.

With the exception of Thailand, monitoring and evaluation systems continue to be

generally weak, and especially lack the systematic involvement of independent
stakeholders in monitoring both implementation and outcomes/impact of government
initiatives. This also relates to the presence or absence of a good performance
indicator system, along with an active civil society community prepared to undertake
such M&E work, whether within or outside government’s monitoring mechanisms. Lao
PDR’s M&E mechanism benefits from a good indicator system in place, while Vietnam’s
serious efforts to make its new national council for sustainable development (NCSD)
work put it in better position to move towards participatory M&E.

Ultimately, funding resources to support SD initiatives and public investments can

spell the ability of the GMS countries to achieve their SD goals. Thailand appears to
have the best capability to support the public investments required to pursue its SD
objectives, followed by Vietnam and Cambodia. The latter two have the advantage of

10
being able to attract more substantial external assistance from the donor community.
Lao PDR and especially Myanmar appear most constrained of resources to support
their SD strategies, the former because of weak revenue-raising capability, and the
latter because of a virtual cut-off from any significant external financing.

Overall, Thailand emerges to be in the most advanced state of NSDS readiness among
the six GMS countries, even as it still continues to work towards having a document to
articulate its national strategy. Myanmar, on the other hand, appears to be in the
weakest level of NSDS readiness, even with its early promulgation of an NSDS
document (Myanmar Agenda 21) as much as ten years ago. This further underscores
the fact that an NSDS is not merely a document, but comprises a system of processes
and conditions that are conducive to a holistic, comprehensive and integrative approach
to development. The rest of the GMS countries are making good progress and are well-
positioned and equipped to be able to assert possession of strong national sustainable
development strategies in the near future. All these suggest that the countries as a
group are amply prepared to move on to a higher level of SDS formulation, i.e. at the
collective level of the GMS sub-region.

Subregional SD Coordination

Four existing mechanisms are logical candidates to be the basis for a subregional SD
coordination mechanism. ASEAN covers all but one (i.e. China) of the GMS countries,
although China has been a dialogue partner for years. The MRC covers only the Lower
Mekong countries of Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam, but has dialogue
arrangements with Myanmar and China. It is a mechanism for effecting coordinated and
cooperative utilization, management and conservation of the water and related
resources of the Mekong River Basin. The GMS Economic Cooperation Program
was established by the GMS governments and the ADB in 1992 as a mechanism for
cooperation and coordination among the GMS countries on a broad set of development
concerns including trade and tourism, infrastructure, human resource development,
investment and environment. GMSARN is a network of academic institutions within the
GMS countries that have agreed to address development concerns in the sub-region
through academic and research cooperation.

Except for GMSARN, which under the UN definition would be considered a civil society
organization, the institutional mechanisms in the region are observed to have the
following common features:

• They are inter-governmental bodies bound by norms of conduct and bureaucratic

rules and procedures.
• They are sector-oriented, with their agenda and structures following sectoral lines
such that integration and assimilation of strategies, policies and programs
necessary for the pursuit of sustainability is not likely to happen.
• Stakeholder participation in their respective programs and activities remains
limited, with stakeholders’ involvement largely confined to consultations. Their

11
 charters, norms and practices usually constrain them from expanding the roles
and levels of participation of civil society organizations.

An appropriate institutional mechanism at the sub-regional level has yet to be found to

ensure coordination, promote integration and expand participation and cooperation of
stakeholders. There is thus a need to identify and designate a mechanism, preferably
built on one of the existing ones, to assume the over-all coordinating role.

Subregional Planning Initiatives

There have been a number of planning initiatives at the subregional or regional level
addressing the needs of GMS, undertaken by the GMS Program, the Mekong River
Commission, and the ASEAN. A ten-year GMS Strategic Framework (2002-2012)
currently serves as guiding basis for the initiatives under the GMS Program, further
fleshed out in a GMS Plan of Action (POA). Meanwhile, ADB’s assistance to the GMS
is guided by its three-year rolling Regional Cooperation Strategy and Program (RCSP),
whose current cycle covers 2007-2009. MRC has formulated a Strategic Plan for 2006-
2010, fleshed out further in the Mekong Basin Development Plan (BDP) that had been
developed through a participatory process. Covering the ten ASEAN countries is the
ASEAN Vision 2020 strategy, which has been fleshed out through two Programmes of
Action so far, Hanoi Plan of Action (HPA) adopted in 1998, and the current Vientiane
Action Programme (VAP) adopted November 2004. To specifically address
environmental challenges in the region, ASEAN environment ministers and senior
officials prepared and adopted Strategic Plans of Action for the Environment (SPAE) for
1994-1998 and 1999-2004. Notwithstanding the existence of all these strategies and
plans, none of them fully captures the essential elements of a subregional SDS. The
ongoing work by the Thailand Environment Institute to spearhead the formulation of a
Subregional Sustainable Development Strategy (SSDS) for the GMS under the UNEP-
ADB initiative promises to fill this gap.

Recommendations

Towards strengthening national institutional mechanisms for sustainable development in

the GMS member countries, the following recommendations emerge from the
assessment:

• Establish an institutional development strategy. The development of such a

strategy may consider a number of principles such as: (a) use of or building on
existing bodies, to the extent possible; (b) strengthening or reengineering of
existing bodies; (c) creating a new body only if the first two principles do not
apply; (d) abolition or folding into new ones redundant or overlapping bodies; and
(e) selecting or creating a body within an oversight agency such as the planning
ministry.

• Learn from other NCSDs. It would be instructive to refer to the experiences of

other countries especially those in the region (i.e. Korea, Philippines and

12
 Vietnam) and learn from their strengths and weaknesses. The European models
may also be used as references.

• Stengthen stakeholder participation. Countries must establish a legislative or

regulatory framework that widens stakeholder participation in recognition of their
value and usefulness in ESD initiatives. Governments may wish to consider
adding civil society strengthening and development as a sixth thrust to the GMS
Strategic Framework.

Specific recommendations for individual countries have also been identified within the
discussions on national assessments in Chapter 6 of the report.

Towards achieving a strong and effective coordination of sustainable development

initiatives at the subregion level, the following are recommended:

• Designate the Ministerial Conference of the GMS Program as the SD

coordinating and integrating mechanism, with membership expanded to include
CSOs and other key stakeholders in the sub-region. In addition to its current
functions, the Ministerial Conference could serve as the venue for dialogue,
information sharing, and integration and consistency check of sector plans,
strategies, programs and projects.

• Designate the Senior Officials Meeting as the technical-level SD support

mechanism. To ensure thoughtful prior analysis and deliberation of agenda
items taken up by the Conference/Forum and to minimize unnecessary
discussions in the Ministerial Conference itself, the Meetings of Senior Officials
could pre-process the agenda items in partnership with stakeholder
representatives.

• NCSDs to serve as the National SD Coordinators. The Conference/Forum must

receive strong national support through the respective countries’ NCSDs. The
NCSD, which mirrors the multi-sectoral and multi-stakeholder composition of the
Conference, must coordinate its agenda with those of the Senior Officials and
Ministerial Conference. This implies that the current National Committees would
form part of the NCSDs to minimize the number of national mechanisms to
improve coordination and integration.

• Establish a strong oversight secretariat. The Conference secretariat could thus

be made a composite of its current secretariat and focal points of the secretariats
of the senior officials and the working groups. The focal points would serve as
the link between the Conference and the sectoral groups and would ensure the
free flow of information and knowledge between them and among each other.

• Consider a transition phase only if extremely necessary. During this transition

period, SD matters may be kept within the ambit of the environment program and
WGE while establishing an annual Forum that involves the other eight working

13
 groups in addition to all those already identified above. The EOC, being the
secretariat to WGE, could be the Forum secretariat.

• Establish a phase up-phase down program. To calibrate the transition process

and keep the period short, a definite program for phasing up country ownership
and control while phasing down those of ADB and other donors, must be
established to guide all the players in the GMS. It must be very clear about the
institutional framework it would adopt over a definite time frame.

Finally, towards attaining effective national and subregional SD strategies, he following

recommendations are put forth:

Build capacities. Deliberate capacity building efforts to widen and strengthen

understanding and appreciation for the concept of sustainable development remains
imperative throughout the subregion. The NCSDs would be best placed to
coordinate such capacity building efforts particularly because they can draw on the
strengths and reach of their civil society and business members.

Strengthen capacity for integration. There is felt need among planners for improved
capacity in employing integrative tools of analysis that permit proper consideration of
the economic, social and environmental implications of policies. A deliberate effort to
identify, study, adopt and apply such tools employed elsewhere should be pursued.

Peer review/sharing of NSDS among the GMS member countries would help
strengthen not only SD planning capacities, but strengthen the strategies/ plans
themselves. As each member country is given the opportunity to review and share
each others’ NSDS, a two-way learning process is facilitated that benefits everyone
involved.

Promote joint projects. A program for joint project identification and development
among the member countries would facilitate translation of the sub-regional and
national SD strategies into tangible projects on the ground that would be of mutual
importance and benefit to the countries involved.

Encourage peer-to-peer mentoring. The more advanced member countries,

particularly Thailand, Yunnan (China) and Vietnam, are well-positioned to provide
peer-to-peer mentoring assistance to the less advanced countries, especially in the
areas for capacity building mentioned above.

Organize NCSD gatherings. Finally, it would be worthwhile to invest in periodic

gatherings of NCSD members from each of the member-country NCSDs, preferably
with guests from other NCSDs within Asia and other regions, to foster “cross-
fertilization” that would promote continuous learning on innovative approaches to
sustainable development and sustain the levels of enthusiasm among the
government and non-government stakeholders.

14
1. Introduction: The Sustainability Challenge in GMS

1. The countries that make up the Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS) are
inextricably bound together by an ecosystem base that is among the most sensitive in
the world. The economic, social, political cultural and environmental interlinkages
among Cambodia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam
and Yunnan province of the People’s Republic of China make it imperative that they
plan their respective development initiatives in close coordination with one another.

2. Cooperation and coordination among the GMS countries poses particular

challenges in the face of the significant variation among the circumstances of these
countries. Overall poverty in the sub-region remains high, and the bulk of the poor are
led to seek their livelihood from direct utilization of the natural resources supported by
the Mekong River basin. And as part of the region experiencing one of the most rapid
rates of economic growth today, heavy pressure is being exerted on their environment
and natural resources. This has already been manifested in serious environmental
consequences like widespread deforestation, pollution of water bodies, poor air quality
in urban areas, degradation and indiscriminate conversion of agricultural lands,
declining fish and wildlife population in the hinterlands, and even dislocation of
populations.

3. The challenge facing these nations, then, is how to avoid the “grow now, clean
up later” approach that marked the experiences of the more advanced economies in the
region and elsewhere in the world. Those countries realized, too late, that neglect for
the non-economic dimensions of development (i.e. social, environmental, cultural,
political and spiritual) could be quite costly, and in many cases irreparable. Another
challenge is posed by the fact that the benefits and costs of development have been
spread unevenly, due, among other things, to: (a) unequal levels of development, (b)
unequal social structures within the countries, (c) social, spatial, temporal and
environmental externalities, and (d) development that puts economic growth before
equity and sustainability (Azimi et al. 2000).

4. How equipped have the GMS countries been to respond to these challenges?
How well have they come up with appropriate strategies to address them? How holistic
and integrative have been their approaches and strategies, given the acknowledged
need to address the economic, social and environmental dimensions for the effective
pursuit of sustainable development? What are the obstacles to a more strategic and
effective pursuit of sustainable development at the national and sub-regional levels?
What vertical and horizontal mechanisms have the governments put in place for the
promotion and coordination of policies and initiatives pertaining to sustainable
development? What are the mechanisms for stakeholder participation in sustainability
processes and initiatives? What are the options for a multi-stakeholder sub-regional
mechanism in GMS? What capabilities need to be strengthened within the GMS

15
countries towards the formulation of effective national strategies for sustainable
development (NSDS)? These are among the questions addressed in this assessment,
with a view towards guiding the GMS countries on appropriate courses of action that
may be taken individually as nations and collectively as a sub-region. The assessment
may also help guide external development partners as they seek to assist these
countries and the sub-region as a whole as they formulate and implement coherent and
effective strategies for sustainable development.

5. The organization of this assessment report is as follows. Chapter 2 describes

the assessment framework employed and applied in this study. This is followed in
Chapter 3 by a discussion of the institutional responses of the GMS countries to the
agreements made in the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, and subsequently the Johannesburg
World Summit on Sustainable Development, thereby setting the stage for their work
towards sustainable development strategies (SDS) at the national and sub-regional
levels. Chapter 4 defines and describes NSDS on the basis of worldwide experience
and emerging norms and desired attributes. A set of indicators is also defined as the
basis for the country-by-country assessment that follows. The summary assessment
across the GMS countries is presented in Chapter 5, which includes a “scorecard” on
NSDS readiness. The detailed country-by-country assessment supporting this is
presented in Chapter 6. An examination of sustainable development institutions and an
assessment of SDS readiness is made at the sub-regional (GMS) level in Chapter 7.
Finally, Chapter 8 summarizes the conclusions and recommendations gleaned from the
study.

16
2. Assessment Approach and Framework

6. This assessment of national sustainable development strategies and associated

institutional mechanisms consists of two major components: (a) information and
knowledge collection; and (b) determination and application of assessment parameters.
These are applied at both the national and sub-regional levels in the course of
undertaking the assessment.

2.1 Information and Knowledge Collection

7. A number of methods have been employed to obtain information on the current

SDS situation in the GMS, inasmuch as no one method is sufficient to cover the six
countries given limited resources and varying phases of implementation in each of the
countries. These methods include the following:

a. Literature review. A scan was undertaken of available literature pertaining to

development plans, environment, plans and policies, sustainable development
strategies, and institutions concerned with environment, development planning
and sustainable development. On the latter, focus was on institutional
mechanisms at the national and sub-regional levels, and analysis of their
mandates, compositions, roles of players, etc. Unfortunately, there is a dearth
of literature on this subject, especially on specific details of countries in the
GMS. Information gathered were mostly sections that provide institutional
backgrounders to specific studies such as those on the national environmental
situation or sustainable strategies.

b. Internet research. The Internet was extensively used for search of literature,
institutions and people. It was useful in the search for other relevant information
such as the socio-political situation in the focus countries.

c. Visits and meetings. These were most useful because (i) studies on SD
institutional mechanisms are few and generally non-existent in the focus
countries; (ii) the thrust of the study is to build on existing mechanisms, rather
than create new ones, which makes it crucial to determine the configuration,
functions, areas of influence, etc. of relevant existing mechanisms and
institutions that can be used for SD promotion, coordination and
implementation; and (iii) it is important to determine the critical players, their
levels of understanding and appreciation of SD and its need to have a coherent
institutional mechanism, and to gauge their preparedness and commitments to
pushing SD processes including setting up the appropriate mechanism. Two
visits covering four countries were undertaken:

Visit 1: Vietnam and Cambodia on September 13-20, 2006 in conjunction with

the multi-stakeholder consultation on the proposed Vietnam National Council for

17
 SD (NCSD) and SD indicators in Hai Phong, as well as the RETA project
inception meeting in Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Visit 2: Thailand and Lao PDR on October 23-28, 2006 in conjunction with the
consultation workshop on the first draft of the Greater Mekong Sub-region
Environment Outlook in Vientiane.

d. Key informant interviews. During the visits, key players and informants from
different units of government, stakeholders and international development
institutions were interviewed. Focal points of countries not visited were inter-
viewed during Consultation Meetings conducted as part of project activities.

2.2 Determination and Application of Assessment Parameters

8. The assessment of “SDS readiness” of the GMS countries and of the sub-region
as a group entailed a consideration of both the content of the sustainable development
strategies and the institutional context within which these have been formulated.
Inasmuch as the SDS is a system of processes and not merely a document (as further
elaborated below), the assessment must examine both institutions and content together
as inseparable parts of the SDS.

9. Since the 1992 Rio Earth Summit and its adoption of global Agenda 21,
numerous conferences, workshops and meetings had taken place at the national,
regional and global levels on the subject of NSDS. Meanwhile, a rich literature on
NSDS had developed in the 1990s, building up to and following the 2002 World Summit
on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg. Taken together, this body of literature
permits one to glean common desirable features of a NSDS and circumstances
conducive to good NSDS formulation. These in turn provide a suitable basis for
assessing “SDS readiness” at both country level and at the subregional and regional
levels. This is the approach taken in this study.

10. Chapter 4 derives and explains the assessment parameters that are
subsequently applied in the assessment of SDS readiness in the GMS, particularly at
the individual country levels. For the subregion-level analysis, the assessment is
undertaken on the basis of a broad consideration of the institutional context and the
state of development planning undertaken at the sub-regional level, including the scope
and nature of sub-regional plans/strategies already existing.

18
3. NSDS and NCSDs: Responses to Rio
3.1 Sustainable Development as a Commitment

11. The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development

(UNCED), more widely known as the Rio Earth Summit, called upon countries to
address economic, environmental and social dimensions in the overall development
process in a comprehensive, holistic and integrative manner. Agenda 21, the global call
to action issued by the Rio Summit, urged every country to come up with a national
strategy for sustainable development (NSDS) – i.e. a national Agenda 21 – to manifest
this new and broadened perspective of planning for development. Furthermore, the
world leaders called on countries to promote participation, partnership and consensus
among stakeholders in the pursuit of sustainable development.

12. Ten years later, during the review of the Rio Summit commitments undertaken in
the World Summit for Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg, less than
half of the 191 member states of the UN had heeded the call. WSSD renewed the call
for NSDS, and set yet another target: states should begin implementing their NSDS by
2005. To this date, only half of the six member countries of the Greater Mekong Sub-
region (namely China, Myanmar and Vietnam) have formulated and issued an official
national Agenda 21 document. Meanwhile, only Vietnam has formally established a
working multi-stakeholder and multi-sectoral mechanism (i.e. a national council for
sustainable development or NCSD) that would coordinate the formulation and
implementation of said national Agenda 21.1

13. The Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI) reiterated the calls to

formulate sustainable development agenda that integrate economic, social and
environmental dimensions, as well as the establishment or strengthening of institutional
mechanisms at all levels. In particular, it emphasizes the need to ensure multi-
stakeholder participation in sustainable development processes. These processes refer
to the whole range of activities spanning the formulation of sub-regional, national and
local strategies for sustainable development; translating these into action agenda,
policies and investment programs and projects; putting these into effective
implementation; and ensuring proper monitoring and evaluation.

14. Among other things, Chapter 10 of the JPOI calls for the following:

• Formulation, elaboration and implementation of NSDSs by 2005, which is one of

the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) targets;
• Extension of support to the development, enhancement and implementation of
regional development strategies and action plans;

1
Thailand, through the Office of Environmental Policy and Planning, unofficially created an NCSD by
calling the multi-stakeholder Sub-committee on Agenda 21 of the National Environment Council as the
“Thai NCSD”. Soon after WSSD, the government formally established a purely governmental NCSD with
leadership from NESDB. However, the NCSD has remained largely non-functional to date.

19
 • Strengthening and better integration of economic, social and environmental
dimensions of development in plans, policies and programs at all levels;
• Improvement of coordination and cooperation among UN regional commissions,
agencies and programmes, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and other
regional and sub-regional bodies;
• Promotion of multi-stakeholder participation and partnership in implementing
Agenda 21 at the national, regional and sub-regional levels; and
• Promotion of coherent and coordinated approaches to national institutional
frameworks through the establishment or enhancement of national councils for
sustainable development (NCSDs) or coordination structures at the national level.

15. In response to the JPOI and to step up efforts in the sub-region, the first GMS
Summit in November 2002:

• reaffirmed commitment to sub-regional cooperation and in the shared vision of

equal partnership in the joint pursuit of growth equity and prosperity;
• committed to coordinate their respective national strategies as well as integrate
GMS programs into their national agenda; and
• pledged to continue active partnership with development institutions, civil society
and business in the pursuit of development goals.

16. Having mostly fallen behind among the more dynamic economies in the region
(i.e. with the exception of Thailand) while witnessing continued degradation of the
ecosystems critical to their development, the leaders recognized the strong need to
synchronize and coordinate their strategies and establish an institutional support
mechanism that will guide the sub-region’s environmental management and sustainable
development. Such coordinated approach is made even more imperative by the fact
that the countries have attained a significant level of interdependence that warrants
intra-regional cooperation and governance mechanisms.

17. Countries vary in their levels of accomplishment on heeding Agenda 21 and the
JPOI for a number of reasons, including varying degrees of political support, institutional
rigidities, availability of resources, levels of understanding of sustainable development,
and external and/or internal pressures. A common obstacle to a more holistic and
integrative approach to sustainable development is the tendency for pre-eminence of
the economic dimension in the hierarchy of government priorities for development.
While the link between the social and economic dimensions is more evident to most,
there is a common view that addressing environmental concerns comes at the expense
of economic objectives, and that there is a tradeoff between the two. For the poorer
countries of the GMS, for whom catching up with the neighboring dynamic economies is
a prominent concern, this appears to continue being a serious obstacle to the advocacy
for NSDS.

20
3.2 GMS Institutional Responses

18. In the aftermath of and even prior to the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, the GMS
countries had begun taking steps in pursuit of the ideals of Agenda 21, the global
agenda for action for sustainable development that was adopted in Rio. The degree and
nature of progress has varied across the GMS countries, conditioned by differing
political, economic, institutional and cultural circumstances. The institutional responses
included (a) establishment of high-level institutional structures and mechanisms to
address environmental concerns; (b) establishment of relevant legal frameworks and
promulgation of policies and guidelines for incorporating environmental considerations
in development planning and processes; and (c) providing opportunities for greater
participation of stakeholders, particularly civil society and the private (business) sector,
in various sustainable development initiatives.

19. The GMS countries have all undertaken moves to establish appropriate high-
level institutional bodies and mechanisms to ensure appropriate consideration of the
environmental dimension in sustainable development. Most of them established
Cabinet-level ministries to deal with environmental concerns, while the others
established high-level councils directly under the office of the prime minister for the
purpose.

20. Cambodia’s Ministry of Environment (MOE) takes charge of environment and

sustainable development (ESD) concerns, and represents the country in international
discussions on the subject. The Lao People’s Democratic Republic has a Science,
Technology and Environment Agency (STEA) attached directly to the Office of the
Prime Minister. The inter-agency National Environment Committee (NEC) advises the
government on environment matters and coordinates planning, management and
monitoring of environment protection activities. Myanmar established the National
Commission for Environmental Affairs as the key coordinating mechanism for
environmental protection and sustainable development. A National Coordination
Committee for Environment (NCCE), with members from ministerial agencies and local
authorities, was recently created to promote horizontal and vertical coordination.
Thailand currently has a Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment (MONRE) that
oversees environmental management and natural resources conservation. The
National Environment Board (NEB) coordinates government initiatives in environment
and natural resources conservation. The Thai National Committee on Sustainable
Development (NCSD) has also been established for broader coordination of ESD
concerns, but has so far been inactive. Vietnam also has a Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environment (MONRE) with counterparts at the provincial level called
Departments of Natural Resources, Environment and Housing (DONREH). The
Vietnam National Council for Sustainable Development (VNCSD), which includes both
government and non-government representatives, is tasked with providing advice to the
Prime Minister on ESD matters. China has its ministerial-level State Environmental
Protection Administration (SEPA) to oversee environmental concerns at the national
level, and the Yunnan Provincial Environmental Protection Bureau (YNPEPB) at the
level of Yunnan province. While the latter is under the administrative supervision of the

21
Provincial Government, it is under the technical guidance of SEPA. After the 1992 Rio
Earth Summit, the Chinese government assembled the Leading Group for China’s
Agenda 21, backed up by an inter-agency body called the Administrative Center for
China’s Agenda 21 (ACCA21), to formulate the country’s response to the Rio summit.

21. From the above discussions, it appears that there is no lack of institutions to deal
with environmental and sustainable development challenges within the GMS countries.
However, effective implementation of Agenda 21 and the JPOI remains hampered by
limitations in these institutions, in their capacities and in their resources. Difficulties
common among the GMS countries include the following:

• Weak coordination among government agencies

• Overlapping responsibilities and authorities, and unclear accountabilities
• Problems in governance including corruption
• Fragmented legal frameworks
• Ineffective or limited implementation of existing laws and policies
• Lack of meaningful non-government participation
• Inadequacies in human resources and institutional capacities
• Limited financial resources
• Limited availability or unreliability of existing data
• Limited access to technology

22. While the GMS countries had been prompt in setting up various mechanisms to
address environment and sustainable development concerns especially after the Rio
Earth Summit, the inter-sectoral nature of sustainable development challenges neces-
sarily implies involvement of multiple ministries and agencies. A common challenge in
this situation has been the need for stronger coordination, with different offices and
ministries sometimes pursuing contradictory or conflicting policies or initiatives. Related
to this is a tendency for overlapping responsibilities and authorities, which has led to
situations of inaction on important concerns due to unclear definition of who has the
final authority on specific issues. Weak accountability systems have also fostered
incompetence and corruption in the bureaucracy. Thus, a common problem has been
undue control by powerful officials over natural resources, like forest and mining
concessions. Meanwhile, lack of coherence in laws and policies governing environment
and natural resources has hampered effective implementation and enforcement of
regulations.

3.3 NCSDs: Prerequisite to NSDS

23. Another reason integration of policies and coordination of programs and activities
have remained weak is the fact that the institutions involved are mainly governmental
and participation from non-government stakeholders has been very limited. There
remains wide scope for meaningful participation by non-government stakeholders in
sustainable development processes, spanning planning all the way through
implementation, and on to monitoring and evaluation. While the presence of foreign

22
NGOs has helped spur a greater non-government role, home-grown NGOs are only
beginning to assert meaningful participation in most of the sub-region. Formal
mechanisms to permit such meaningful participation remain inadequate or absent. In
particular, multi-stakeholder bodies at the national or sub-national levels to address
environment and sustainable development concerns in the form of NCSDs have yet to
be established in most countries of the sub-region. While such NCSDs now exist in
more than 100 countries around the world to permit meaningful civil society and private
sector participation in SD processes, very few countries in Asia, and none of the GMS
countries except Vietnam, have functioning NCSDs.

24. Engaging stakeholders in SD initiatives at the national level can take a number of
forms, which could be employed individually or in combination:

Consultative Forum. This is the most common participation modality observed in

GMS countries. It comes in the form of oral or written comments, positions and
recommendations espoused in meetings and conferences organized in the course of
formulation of plans or policies.

Civil Society/NGO Section or Desk. In some countries, this has become a common
feature in government ministries and offices, in both sectoral (e.g. Environment,
Natural Resources, Industry) and oversight (e.g. Planning, Foreign Affairs, Budget)
agencies, as well as in donor agencies and private enterprises. The NGO sections
usually serve as the liaison and coordinating mechanism between the concerned
ministry, agency or office and the civil society community. This modality appears to
be rare, if at all present, within the GMS countries.

Multi-stakeholder Mechanism. Such body could be formal or informal, standing or

ad-hoc, and established at various governance levels and areas, depending on the
requirements of the situation. For stability and continuity, a formal standing body
such as the NCSD is preferred. In many cases, this body is lodged in either the
environment or planning ministries or the office of the head of government (Prime
Minister or President).

25. Many countries employ the first mode, some have the first two, but only a handful
have the third mode, i.e. a multi-stakeholder body or NCSD. The first mode is
commonly used because it is politically acceptable and yet does not tie the hands of
government. When government does not agree with any of the recommendations, it
simply does not consider it. Nonetheless, people attain some level of satisfaction
because their views are heard and solicited. The second mode, while appearing
accommodative on the part of the concerned office, is often viewed by stakeholders as
highly reactive and bureaucratic. The last mode is least common because it is often
seen as threatening especially to authoritarian governments, as it provides some
measure of power to non-government stakeholders. It also directly exposes
government to direct engagement with the stakeholders. All these reflect the still
relatively low level of partnership among government, civil society and business in the

23
sub-region. This also helps explain why integration of environmental concerns with
other development dimensions has remained relatively weak over the past years.

Box 1
National Council for Sustainable Development
In response to a call of the Rio Earth Summit, some countries initiated the establishment of respective national
coordinating mechanism to bring together civil society, business and government to implement the Earth Summit
agreements. In September 1992, the first NCSD was created in the Philippines, followed closely by the
Dominican Republic and Hungary. To date, NCSDs in various forms exist in more than a hundred countries.
In Asia Pacific, many countries have established such mechanisms. Some are multi-sectoral but purely
governmental (e.g., China, Cook Islands, Khazakstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Marshall Islands, Nepal, Tajikistan,
Thailand, Uzbekistan and Vanuatu) while others are both multi-sectoral and multi-stakeholder (e.g., Iran, Japan,
Korea, Mongolia, Philippines and Vietnam). Some countries have attempted to organize NCSDs but have not
been successful to date (e.g. Australia, Bangladesh, Fiji, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka).
NCSDs vary widely in mandate, mission, composition, mode of operation, programmes and activities. However,
they have evolved to operate along three thrusts:
a. Ensure and facilitate the participation of civil and economic societies in pursuing sustainable development;
b. Promote integration of economic, social, political, cultural, spiritual and environmental dimensions of
sustainability in planning, and project implementation and monitoring.
c. Localize global environment and sustainable development agreements especially Agenda 21.

NCSDs have also assumed some or all of the following roles:

a. Mechanism for cooperative action and forging of commitments among stakeholders
b. Voice for sustainability and mechanism for localizing and implementing Agenda 21 and JPOI
c. Advocate for holistic and integrated approach to sustainable development
d. Venue for discussing issues & solving problems
e. Vehicle for promoting education, awareness & information dissemination
f. Link between local and regional/global bodies
g. Monitor and reviewer of national implementation of Agenda 21

There are no hard and fast rules on establishing NCSDs and guaranteeing their success. Countries have wide
contextual and situational differences that a template for an NCSD is not expected to work in many countries. A
review of experiences of NCSDs actually serves as a useful guide to those attempting to establish their own.
Hereunder are some practices that have worked well in many countries and may be adapted to their national
situations by others:

• Stakeholders that are active participants of the whole formation process develop a sense of ownership and
commitment to the NCSD and its agenda
• An NCSD created by law is more stable than one created by an executive fiat.
• The NCSD is best led by the head of state or government. A second best is the head or Minister of an
oversight agency such as the planning ministry.
• Major stakeholder groups have equal voting rights and privileges
• It is useful to have an agreed upon code of conduct and process rules
• A technically competent and proactive secretariat is important, It is preferably lodged in an oversight
agency .
• Adequate and sustainable financial support is a must.

24
4. NSDS: What Is It?

26. The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN-DESA)
defines NSDS as “a coordinated, participatory and iterative process of thoughts and
action to achieve economic, environmental and social objectives in a balanced and
integrated manner at the national and local levels.” 2 Similarly, the Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has defined NSDS as “a co-
ordinated set of participatory and continuously improving processes of analysis, debate,
capacity strengthening, planning and investment, which integrates the economic, social
and environmental objectives of society, seeking trade offs where this is not possible”.
Both definitions indicate that NSDS refers to a process and not merely a document,
although it is usually summarized in one. Formulating a NSDS need not entail
producing a new plan or inventing a new process, but means transforming and adapting
existing processes (e.g. national development plans or poverty reduction strategies) to
become consistent with sustainable development principles.

4.1 NSDS Framework3

27. A NSDS proceeds from a defined sustainable development vision that is

manifested in society’s sustainable development goals, and translated into
corresponding policies, strategies and plans to attain them (Figure 1).

SD VISION
Process of integration

SD GOALS

SD Principles

POLICIES, STRATEGIES,
PLANS

NSDS Process

Figure 1
NSDS Framework

2
This definition was based on the outcome of the International Forum on National Sustainable
Development Strategies, Accra, Ghana, 7-9 November 2001 (UN 2002). The author served as Chairman
of this particular forum.
3
The succeeding discussion on NSDS framework, principles and processes draws from Subrato Sinha
(2006), “National Sustainable Development Strategy,” Powerpoint presentation, UNEP Regional Office for
Asia-Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand. The presentation represents a consolidation and summary of the rich
literature on NSDS that has emerged over the years.

25
4.2 NSDS Principles

28. The following are key principles that are considered desirable attributes of a good
national sustainable development strategy:

 People centered
 Country led and nationally owned
 Consensus on long term visions
 Comprehensive and integrated
 Specifies clear targets and budget priorities
 Based on comprehensive and reliable analysis
 High level government commitments and influential lead institutions
 Links national and local levels
 Builds on existing mechanism and strategies
 Develops and builds on existing capacity
 Incorporates monitoring, learning and improvement

4.3 NSDS Processes

29. As indicated above, NSDS is a group of processes that comprise political,

technical, participatory and resource mobilization processes, all converging towards
attainment of sustainable development for the country.

 Political
- Identify key stakeholders, including media
- Organize seminar or workshop to build awareness
- Create a national coordinating structure like National Council of Sustainable
Development
- Establish a Secretariat to facilitate the process
- Ensure engagement of Planning, Finance and Environment Ministries and
other key Ministries
- Engage local level institutions
- Develop legal provisions for stakeholders’ participation

 Technical
- A knowledge base on existing policies and strategies
- Identify requirements for effective policies and strategies
- Develop short, medium and long term strategies and activities
- Framework for building human and institutional capacity
- Methodological framework for strategy development at national, local and
sectoral levels
- Facilitate integration of SD objectives
- Develop SD indicators for monitoring progress

 Participatory

26
 - Mechanism for systematic participation of relevant stakeholders
- Identify relevant stakeholders
- Ensure transparent participatory process
- Effective involvement of media
- Develop innovative approach for building awareness

 Resource mobilization
- Ensure adequate, predictable and regular financial resources
- Resources from domestic and international sources
- Domestic resources for country ownership
- Engagement of private sectors for resources
- Investment plan for implementation of strategies
- Involvement of donor agencies for international sources

4.4 Summary NSDS Criteria/Indicators

30. The above may be captured in nine key criteria or indicators that can be
considered to characterize a satisfactory NSDS, described in turn below:4

(10) Policy integration - national strategies give consideration to environmental,

economic, and social concerns in integrated approaches and plans.

(11) Intergenerational timeframe - national strategies adopt long-term time frames

that enable inclusion of intergenerational principles and indicators.

(12) Analysis and assessments - integrative assessment tools are used to identify
the environmental, economic and social costs and benefits of policy and
strategy options.

(13) Indicators and targets - strategies are based on structured indicator systems to
assist in monitoring progress and to serve as quantitative targets.

(14) Co-ordination and institutions - a wide range of government departments and

agencies are involved in the formulation and implementation of national
strategies, with overall leadership from the office of the head of government
(Prime Minister or equivalent).

(15) Local and regional governance - local and regional authorities are fully
involved in the development of national strategies, with certain delivery
aspects devolved to sub national levels.

(16) Stakeholder participation - stakeholders (e.g. business, unions, non-

governmental organisations) are able to actively participate with government
4
The first eight of these are in the list identified in OECD (2005), National Strategies for Sustainable
Development: Good Practices in OECD Countries, Paris (3-4 October), SG/SD(2005)6.

27
 representatives in councils/commissions responsible for developing and imple-
menting national strategies.

(17) Monitoring and evaluation - independent bodies or processes are established

to act as watchdogs monitoring implementation of national strategies and
providing recommendations for their improvement.

(18) Resource mobilization – adequate, predictable and regular financial resources

from domestic and international sources are available through a suitable mix of
public finances, private sector funds, and external donor support.

31. These nine criteria/indicators are employed as bases for the assessment of the
status of the GMS countries’ “NSDS readiness,” which are summarized in the next
section and elaborated for each individual country in Chapter 6. In addition, the
individual country discussions also feature an assessment of the prevailing situation and
progress made towards attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),
which are key prerequisites in the pursuit of sustainable development in any country.

28
5. NSDS Readiness in GMS: Overall Assessment

32. The individual GMS countries are in varying states of NSDS readiness, owing to
variations in their economic, social, political, institutional and environmental
circumstances. It is imperative at this time that the GMS countries go through the
exercise of formulating holistic national sustainable development strategies (NSDS) that
address economic, social and environmental concerns comprehensively and
integratively. The possible exception is Vietnam, which has an existing NSDS
document (Vietnam Agenda 21) that was released relatively recently and remains
current. Likewise, China and Myanmar each have respective existing national Agendas
21, both of which were promulgated in the 1990s. Both are already dated and call for
major revisions and updates given rapid developments in the past decade. In particular,
there is need to incorporate new emerging issues that were highlighted in the 2002
Johannesburg WSSD, as well as address new challenges arising from more recent
developments within the sub-region and its vicinity.

Table 1. NSDS Readiness Scorecard for the GMS Countries

Criteria Cam Lao Mya Tha Viet Yun

Policy Integration 3 1 3 5 3 3
Intergenerational Timeframe 3 3 3 3 3 3
Analysis & Assessments 1 1 1 1 1 3
Indicators & Targets 5 5 3 5 5 3
Coordination & Institutions 4 3 1 3 3 3
Local & Regional Governance 5 5 4 5 5 3
Stakeholder Participation 3 2 3 5 3 3
Monitoring & Evaluation 1 3 1 4 3 1
Resource Mobilization 4 1 1 5 4 3

Overall Assessment 3 3 2 4 3 3

*Scale of 1 (Lowest) to 5 (Highest)

33. For the rest of the GMS countries, it is an appropriate time – belated as it may be
– to respond to the call made in global Agenda 21 and in the Johannesburg Plan of
Implementation (JPOI) for countries to integrate sustainable development in their
national development plans, policies and programs. And as environmental stresses
impinge on the Mekong River that binds together the six economies comprising the

29
GMS, such national exercises must be undertaken in coordination with one another,
and with due consideration for the intra-GMS implications of national and sub-national
initiatives in pursuit of economic growth and sustainable development. Table 1
summarizes the results of national assessments of NSDS readiness among the six
GMS countries, based on the nine indicators enumerated above as gleaned from the
NSDS literature.

34. Among the six GMS countries, policy integration is deemed weakest in Lao
PDR, where there is an unabashed admission that economic growth is the dominant
concern of government in its development strategy at this time. This comes through
both in official documents and in the candid statements of government officials. On the
other hand, Thailand shows the strongest level of policy integration, having made such
a holistic and integrative approach an explicit strategy since at least the Eighth Plan in
the 1990s. The rest are on the way to achieving satisfactory integration of the economic,
social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development, as evidenced in their
planning documents.

35. All six countries partly address the need for an intergenerational perspective in
their development planning horizons, but mostly rely on five-year plans and ten-year
strategies to guide their development initiatives. All of the countries possess at least
one open-ended planning document; however, this does not necessarily mean that their
development strategies have adequately addressed inter-generational equity issues and
long-term structural change.

36. Most of the GMS countries remain ill-equipped to undertake integrative situa-
tion and policy analyses to inform their formulation of national strategies for sustain-
able development. Thailand, and to some extent Yunnan province of China (with the
help of external assistance), have obtained a level of capability to employ analytical
tools for such integrative analysis over their neighbors.

37. All six countries have developed indicator systems to systematically monitor
implementation and outcomes of their sustainable development initiatives, with
Myanmar and Yunnan lagging somewhat behind. The latter two have embarked on
formulation of sustainable development indicators relatively more recently than the
others. However, all are now able or well on the way to being able to systematically
track their progress in pursuing the MDGs, and wider sustainable development
objectives in the years ahead.

38. Institutional coordination remains a major challenge in all six GMS countries,
with Myanmar apparently having greatest difficulty at effecting inter-agency coordination
and collaboration, particularly in ensuring proper consideration of environmental
implications of its various development initiatives. This traces to lack of adequate
authority on the part of NCEA to enforce coordination. On the other hand, Cambodia
appears to be making better progress in this regard, with a planning process that
explicitly involves all key agencies of government and local governments starting at the
earliest stages of the planning cycle. Environmental concerns are also addressed at a

30
ministerial level, giving the Ministry of Environment greater authority in ensuring
coordination and proper consideration of environmental implications of development
programs and projects.

39. The role of local governments in sustainable development efforts appears

strong in all six GMS countries. In all six countries, decentralization and devolution
figure prominently in the overall development thrust. Notwithstanding this, there is still a
tendency for governance in China to be more strongly top-down and centralized in
nature, with the key policymaking and relevant implementation resources still largely
controlled by the central government. The same is true to some extent in Myanmar,
where the central government tends to be strong and dominant in the ultimate decision-
making processes.

40. Participation by non-government stakeholders has also been strengthening

in all six GMS countries, with Thailand being the most advanced in this regard. Lack of
a sizable domestic NGO community continues to be a constraint, particularly in Lao
PDR and Cambodia, where international NGOs tend to be more prominent in
engagements with the government. There is growing recognition of the importance of
stronger stakeholder participation in sustainable development processes, from planning
to implementation and on to monitoring and evaluation. The democratic space appears
to be widening to permit such participation to grow further in the near future.

41. With the exception of Thailand, monitoring and evaluation systems continue to
be generally weak, and especially lack the systematic involvement of independent
stakeholders in monitoring both implementation and outcomes/impact of government
initiatives. This also relates to the presence or absence of a good performance
indicator system, along with an active civil society community prepared to undertake
such M&E work, whether within or outside government’s monitoring mechanisms. Lao
PDR’s M&E mechanism benefits from a good indicator system in place, while Vietnam’s
serious efforts to make its new national council for sustainable development (NCSD)
work put it in better position to move towards participatory M&E.

42. Ultimately, funding resources to support SD initiatives and public investments

can spell the ability of the GMS countries to achieve their SD goals. Thailand appears
to be the best endowed among the group in terms of capability to support the public
investments required to pursue its SD objectives, followed by Vietnam and Cambodia.
The latter two have the advantage of being able to attract more substantial external
assistance from the donor community. Lao PDR and especially Myanmar appear to be
the most constrained of resources to support their SD strategies, the former because of
weak revenue-raising capability, and the latter because of sanctions from most of the
donor community and its virtual cut-off from any significant external financing.

43. Overall, Thailand emerges to be in the most advanced state of NSDS readiness
among the six GMS countries, even as it still continues to work towards having a
document to articulate its national strategy. Myanmar, on the other hand, appears to be
in the weakest level of NSDS readiness, even with its early promulgation of an NSDS

31
document (Myanmar Agenda 21) as much as ten years ago. This further underscores
what had been emphasized at the outset: that an NSDS is not merely a document, but
comprises a system of processes and conditions that are conducive to a holistic,
comprehensive and integrative approach to development. The rest of the GMS
countries are making good progress and are well-positioned and equipped to be able to
assert possession of strong national sustainable development strategies. All these
suggest that the countries as a group are amply prepared to move on to a higher level
of SDS formulation, i.e. at the collective level of the GMS sub-region.

32
6. NSDS Readiness in GMS: Country Assessments
6.1 Cambodia

6.1.1 Institutional Context

44. The Royal Government of Cambodia is described by its 1993 Constitution as a

parliamentary, representative democratic monarchy. The government is headed by the
Prime Minister, who is appointed by the King who is in turn head of state. Executive
power is exercised by the Prime Minister and his ministerial appointees, while legislative
power is vested in both the executive and the two chambers of parliament, the National
Assembly of Cambodia and the Senate.

SD Coordination

45. The Ministry of Environment (MOE) has traditionally taken the lead in global or
international SD discussions in the Cambodian government. MOE’s exposure to global
discussions on sustainable development has given it full appreciation for the need to
mainstream environment in social and economic development. Notwithstanding this,
MOE finds difficulty with mainstreaming and integrating environment in Cambodia’s
development strategy given the government’s sectoral orientation and the ministry’s
limited mandate focused on the environment. 5 Compounding this is the weak
understanding of the concept of SD within MOE, the government as a whole and the
general public. Hence Cambodia’s approach towards SD is predominantly environ-
mental in orientation. As in most countries, the MOE ranks low in the hierarchy of
government, thereby limiting its ability to coordinate other ministries (see Table 2).

Planning Mechanisms

46. The Ministry of Planning (MOP) undertakes plan formulation work through the
inter-agency and multi-stakeholder Technical Working Group on Planning and Poverty
Reduction (TWG 18). A review of the structure, functions and processes of MOP and
responses by key informants indicate that MOP is not adequately equipped to formulate
the preparation of a long-term integrated sustainability agenda on its own, but needs
technical support from other agencies. As is true anywhere, development planning
requires the active participation and inputs of concerned sectors and stakeholders, with
the planning agency’s critical role and competence lying primarily in the coordination
and integration of the various concerns and inputs into a coherent and internally
consistent whole. This requires that the planning agency take a strategic view of the
past, present and future circumstances of the country both in the internal and external
contexts, and possess the capacity for such strategic analysis. In Cambodia,
respondents indicated that the Supreme National Economic Council (SNEC, discussed
further below), a high-level technical advisory body to the Prime Minister, may be better
placed to undertake such strategic analysis.
5
Interview with Minister of Environment Mok Mareth, Phnom Penh, September 18, 2006.

33
 Table 2. Institutional Bodies Involved in Sustainability Agenda in Cambodia

TWG-PPR (18) MOP MOE MEF SNEC CDC

Nature Multi-stakeholder; Ministry Ministry Ministry Advisory Group Inter-agency;
multi-sectoral task governmental
group
Area of Concern Formulate the Socio-economic Environment Economy & Economic ODA, Public & Private
SEDP Planning Finance development Investments
Composition 40 Gov’t; 16 Government Government Government Experts 42 Gov’t; 1 business;
Donors; 10 CSO; officials officials officials Chair: Prime Minster
Chair:
SecState,MOP
Influence to High but confined High High Very High Very high Very High
policy & to planning
decision-making
Reach and National level but National with National with National Office of PM National level but some
Accessibility some members provincial reach provincial reach level members have local
have local reach reach
Stability Average High High High Average (can High (created by law)
(Created by PM (created by (created by (created by Law; technically be
Circular) Law) Law) senior Ministry) abolished anytime)
Scope for Very high; CS Low; possible Low; possible Low; possible N/A Very high; business
stakeholder already only in some of only in some of only in some of its already represented
participation represented its activities its activities activities
47. TWG 18 was created through a Prime Minister’s Circular to implement the
decision of the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) to consolidate the SEDP
and the National Poverty Reduction Strategy (NPRS) 2003-2005 within the
framework of the Cambodia Millennium Development Goals (CMDG). TWG 18
aims “to support the Government in promoting a more efficient and effective
planning process for the achievement of its poverty reduction goals as committed
within the framework of the Millennium Declaration and the Cambodia Millennium
Development Goals.” The MOP (through the Secretary of State) chairs TWG 18
and serves as its technical secretariat.

48. The Prime Minister’s Circular and resulting Prakas6 from MOP are quite
focused on the formulation of the NSDP as the role of TWG 18. This is in spite
of the fact that the Terms of Reference accompanying the Prakas state that TWG
18 was created “as a consultative and coordinating mechanism to support the
formulation, implementation and monitoring of NSDP.” 7 While implementation
and monitoring are important elements in the development planning process,
these were only mentioned in passing.

49. TWG 18 is composed of representatives from 40 ministries and agencies,

16 donor institutions (including 2 facilitators), and 10 civil society organizations
(CSOs). Interestingly, donors are more heavily represented than CSOs, and
business is not at all represented. This appears to reflect the government’s
continuing strong reliance on external assistance and its expectation and desire
to continue as such for time to come.

50. The Circular creating TWG 18 instructed MOP to undertake all its tasks
related to the formulation of the NSDP in collaboration with the SNEC. Thus, the
SNEC Secretary General, who is concurrently the Secretary General of the
Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF), was designated as one of the TWG’s
three Deputy Chairpersons. The strong presence and lead roles of SNEC and
MEF indicate that the NSDP is primarily an economic agenda, not necessarily by
design, but borne by the orientation of its institutional mechanism. MOE, through
its Secretary of State, is a member.

51. As Table 2 and Figure 2 indicate, TWG 18 can be a potent coordinating

mechanism for planning, endowed with influence and a focused mandate. It is
confined at the center because it is meant to be a national coordinator. While its
member agencies have the organizational capacity to elicit inputs and feedback
from stakeholders at sub-national levels, this is not always true for other
stakeholders in the group. The TWG was created through an executive fiat,
which technically makes it less stable than the other agencies created by law.
However, this has the advantage of flexibility to make changes in structure,

6
A regulation or circular issued by a Minister or senior official of government.
7
Royal Government of Cambodia, “National Strategic Development Plan, 2006-2010”, Annex IV
(Terms of Reference of Technical Working Group on Planning and Poverty Reduction).

35
membership, tasks, etc. for purposes of strengthening planning processes and
integrity of sustainable development strategies.

CENTRAL SENATE/ Decision-Making

Level
GOVERNMENT ASSEMBLY

GOV’T-DONOR
TWG ON Policy-Dialogue /
PLANNING & Consultative Level
POVERTY

DONOR SECRETARIAT LINE MINISTRY

WORKING (MOP) WORKING
Policy/Program
GROUP GROUP
Formulation,
Implementation,
Implementation Coordination/ Implementation
M&E Level
(Inputs, Process, Facilitation (Inputs, Process,
Outputs) Outputs)

Source: National Strategic Development Plan, 2006-2010

Figure 2
The Institutional Arrangement for the NSDP Formulation

Related Government Bodies

52. The substantive content of development plans, particularly those

pertaining to the economy, are mainly contributed by the MEF, SNEC and the
Council for the Development of Cambodia (CDC). As the name indicates, MEF
takes care of Cambodia’s economic and financial matters. It is influential and
high in the Ministerial totem pole. MEF works closely with SNEC and CDC.

53. SNEC is described as small group of high caliber experts that gives direct
advice to the Prime Minister on economic matters. Among other things, it
develops the economic targets, maintains quantitative models for economic
projections, and recommends economic policies. The composition and functions
of the SNEC appear to be not widely known even among the government people.

36
SNEC apparently works quietly and does not appear in the government’s organic
structure. Nonetheless, its influence permeates through the highest levels.

54. The CDC was established in 1994 under the chairmanship of the Prime
Minister. Its membership includes ministers and representatives of relevant
agencies and local governments. It has one representative from business. Its
prominent roles include (a) serving as the "Focal Point" and "One Stop Service"
of the RGC in its relations with donor countries, agencies and NGOs, particularly
in the areas of aid coordination, allocation and utilization; (b) acting as the “Etat
Major” and “One-Stop Service” in rehabilitation and development of public
investments, private investments, and management of Special Economic Zones;
and (c) taking the lead in the formulation of development vision and strategies
that get into the formulation of the Strategic Framework on Development
Cooperation Management8. CDC is a powerful agency as it controls ODA, which
continues to dominate the resources for development, and public and private
investments in all sectors.

55. The foregoing indicates the important roles and participation of MEF,
SNEC and CDC in crafting SD strategies. As members of TWG 18, they provide
a strong economic pillar while strengthening the integrative nature of the
technical working group. At the same time, the participation of environment and
social sector agencies such as MOE and MOH completes the SD pillars. The
only missing element is the active participation of the business sector.

Civil Society

56. Civil society has been vibrant and plays an important role in Cambodia.
From its first civil society organization (CSO) that registered with the RGC in
1991, the number grew to about 600 in year 2000. They now come in various
forms, sizes, orientations, ideologies, etc. Cambodia has been a favored site for
international NGOs (INGO), which currently number about 200. In recent years,
the strength and importance of local NGOs have gained ground, largely with the
help of INGOs, which have been investing substantially in capacity building.
They have mobilized and trained local people in the course of their work. Some
have phased out of the country but left organizations composed of capable and
well-trained people. The high level of ODA investments, which often required
the participation of civil society, also substantially helped in its robust
development.

57. Owing to their large number, many NGOs in Cambodia have federated
and coordinated their initiatives. These federations further strengthened civil
society, particularly in dealing with the government and facilitating vertical and
horizontal coordination and feed backing. One of the biggest federations is The
NGO Forum on Cambodia, which has 79 full (34 international and 45 local) and

8
Royal Government of Cambodia, “Strategic Framework for Development Cooperation”, January
2006.

37
two affiliate member organizations that cover a wide range of sectors and issues
such as environment, trade and economy, agriculture, gender, indigenous people,
children, education, land resources and livelihood.

58. The government as a whole indicates openness to civil society

participation in some aspects of governance (e.g. planning) as demonstrated by
the membership of 10 CSOs in TWG 18. However, the relationship between the
two is sometimes strained by differences in paradigms and appreciation of
respective positions on certain issues. The lack of appreciation of civil society’s
role by some bureaucrats also affects this relationship.

Business and Industry

59. Right after the ratification of the Constitution in 1993, the government
instituted a policy of fiscal and monetary discipline and opening up of its
economy. It is now one of the more liberal economies having some of the most
generous investment incentives in Asia and allowing investments in almost all its
sectors. Its economy is also not as burdened by inefficient state-owned
corporations and assets unlike in other countries in the region. The level of
commercial and industrial activities, therefore, has been on the uptrend
especially in urban Phnom Penh.

60. Prolonged internal strife, however, greatly weakened institutions, systems

and processes such that despite the rapid growth of investments, the spread of
economic activities have been slow, thus largely confining big business activities
in Phnom Penh. To date, there is only one domestic business formation, the
Phnom Penh Business of Commerce, which was created by government, not by
the business establishments themselves. It was established to conform to the
calls for multi-stakeholder participation in governance in global discussions and
by development institutions.

61. Another formation is the International Business Club (IBC), which was
founded in 1993 to address the need for a discussion forum among international
investors. Its main objective is to foster closer relationships among the
Cambodian Government, the business community, and international
organizations to ensure that sound economic policies and laws encouraging
foreign investment are implemented. Its membership currently consists of 33
international companies.

62. The participation and influence of business in environmental and SD

matters remain weak, perhaps because of its pre-occupation in managing the
business and generating profits. This could explain why business is not
represented in TWG 18.

38
6.1.2 State of Development and Environmental Planning

63. Formulation of the First Socioeconomic Development Plan or SEDP I

(1996-2000) provided the opportunity to formally enunciate the Cambodian
government’s recognition that the environmental task is an encompassing one –
that is, “to manage, conserve and protect Cambodia’s environment and natural
resources in an ecologically sustainable manner to assist in alleviating poverty
throughout the nation.” Prior to that, environmental concerns were addressed
through specific laws and decrees, including a government decree on the
Creation and Designation of Protected Areas issued in 1993, the Law on
Environmental Protection and Natural Resource Management (LEPNRM)
enacted in 1996, and other specific laws on water pollution, solid waste
management, forestry and management of protected areas.

64. The Second Socio-Economic Development Plan (SEDP II, 2001-2005),

sought to reduce poverty in the country through its Three Pillars of (a) broad
based, sustainable economic growth with equity; (b) social and cultural
development; and (c) sustainable management and use of natural resources and
the environment. SEDP II explicitly addressed Cambodia’s key environment
concerns, particularly forestry, fisheries, and water and land resources. Special
attention is given to the role of natural resources in supporting rural livelihoods
and national economic growth.

65. Other key planning documents of recent years include the National
Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) adopted in 1997, the Governance Action Plan
(GAP I) adopted in 2001, the Cambodia Millennium Development Goals
(CMDGs), the National Poverty Reduction Strategy (NPRS) adopted in 2002, and
the recently completed Education Sector Strategic Plan (2006-2010).

66. The third and current plan, now called the National Strategic Development
Plan or NSDP (2006-2010), seeks to capture all elements of all earlier planning
documents. The NSDP has been declared by the Royal Government of
Cambodia (RGC) as “the single overarching, guiding and reference document for
pursuing prioritized goals, targets and actions over the current five-year period.”
NSDP asserts the Rectangular Strategy (RS) philosophy of the government
launched in 2004, which is anchored on the pursuit of growth, employment,
equity and efficiency. At the core of the strategy is good governance, supported
by enhancement of the agricultural sector, infrastructure rehabilitation and
development, employment generation through private sector development, and
capacity building and human resource development.

39
6.1.3 NSDS Readiness Assessment

Policy Integration

67. The Rectangular Strategy, being the cornerstone of the current master
development plan (NSDP), is holistic in its framework and philosophy, and is
clearly shaped by Cambodia’s unique history and culture. What is striking about
the RS and NSDP is that the economic dimension does not dominate the
development framework, as it commonly does in other development plans and
strategies elsewhere, but nevertheless plays a key supportive role in the overall
development thrust (i.e. “favourable macroeconomic and financial environment”
is a key prerequisite in the core rectangle of good governance). Still, integration
of environment into the various components of RS and NSDP is not readily
evident from a cursory examination of the documents. This is in contrast to
SEDP II, in which “sustainable use of natural resources and sound environmental
management” prominently figures as one of the three pillars on which the plan
was anchored.

68. However, various critical environmental concerns appear adequately

addressed within the component sectoral strategies in the NSDP, just as in its
predecessors SEDP I and SEDP II.9 In an interview, the environment minister
expressed general satisfaction with the handling of environmental concerns in
the overall planning process. Still, he expressed the belief that in the detailing
and operationalization of the plan through sectoral initiatives, environment still
tends to come as an afterthought to his government colleagues rather than as a
conscious concern at the outset.10

Intergenerational Timeframe

69. The NSDP is a five-year plan, hence covers a short- to medium-term time
frame. While it adequately addresses key environmental and natural resource
management concerns in its component strategies, its relatively limited time-
frame does not permit it to address inter-generational concerns in a significant
way. Hence, there remains a need for fuller articulation of the intergenerational
implications of current development thrusts, through a more forward-looking
strategy than the NSDP or RS makes possible.

9
Cambodia Ministry of Environment and Project Secretariat, UNEP Regional Resource Center
for Asia and the Pacific (2006), Cambodia: National Environmental Performance Assessment
Report, ADB T.A. No. 6069-REG: National Performance Assessment and Subregional Strategic
Environment Framework in the Greater Mekong Subregion. This report details how SEDP I and
SEDP II addressed key environmental challenges confronting Cambodia through sectoral
initiatives.
10
Interview with Minister of Environment Mok Mareth, Phnom Penh, September 18, 2006.

40
Analysis and Assessments

70. There is no indication, whether from examination of planning documents

or from interviews of key Cambodian officials, that integrative tools of analysis
(i.e. to examine interactive effects of the economic, social and environmental
dimensions) have been employed in any significant way in the course of
formulating the NSDP or its predecessor plans. Indeed, this is one area that was
actually identified by interviewed officials as a gap that needs to be addressed
through capacity building.

Indicators and Targets

71. The NSDP includes a chapter on Monitoring and Evaluation, which refers
to a set of performance indicators to be developed and employed in the
monitoring system. A two-tier structure of indicators is envisaged, with national-
level “core indicators” as one level, and ministry/agency-level indicators as
another. The latter will also include the CMDG indicators within a
ministry/agency’s jurisdiction. Table 3.2 of the NSDP (reprinted as Annex Table
1 to this paper) presents 43 indicators and corresponding targets that cover the
various key sectoral concerns, spanning measures of performance in poverty
and hunger eradication, agricultural productivity, health, education, rural
development, environmental sustainability, gender equity, governance,
macroeconomic performance, and sectoral economic performance, among
others. Amply addressed in the list are CMDG goals and targets, which are the
eight global MDGs with the addition of a ninth goal that is specific to Cambodia,
namely “De-mining, UXO11 and Victim Assistance.”

Co-ordination and Institutions

72. TWG 18, with MOP, MEF, CDC, SNEC as Core Group members, is the
venue for inter-sectoral coordination in the planning process. The inter-agency
and multi-sectoral membership of TWG 18 makes it a critical mechanism for
coordinating development initiatives of the various sectoral instrumentalities of
the Cambodian government. As described by Ministry of Planning officials
interviewed, formulation of the NSDP started from “two-page” inputs from the
sectoral ministries which were consolidated into the draft plan document, and
which had subsequently undergone numerous revisions through the TWG’s
consultative process. From all this, it would appear that an adequate
coordinative/consultative mechanism had been put in place to address the need
for inter-sectoral coordination in formulating the development plan.

73. On the other hand, problems with coordination and duplication have been
acknowledged on the side of the donor community over the last decade. Major
donors have taken steps to address the problem, through deliberate efforts to

11
Unexploded ordnance.

41
coordinate formulation of their country assistance programs for the years ahead.
This issue is further discussed below.

Local and Regional Governance

74. Decentralization and de-concentration (D&D) is a major thrust of

government and the donor community in Cambodia, and is articulated as a key
thrust in the NSDP. There are two mechanisms by which local government units
participate in and contribute to the planning process. First, the local (provincial)
analogues (departments) of the various sectoral ministries provide their inputs
early in the planning process to the respective ministries’ contributions to the
TWG 18 initial plan draft. Second, the public ceremonial launch of the NSDP is
attended by all ministers and governors, at which time their respective work to
flesh out the plan into sectoral and provincial plans is officially mobilized. As the
NSDP document itself asserts, the master plan finds more concrete
manifestation in the more detailed sectoral and local plans that are developed
under the overall directions and strategies that the NSDP provides. A critical
aspect of planning, i.e. land use planning, is in fact undertaken at the local (i.e.
commune) level.

Stakeholder Participation

75. The importance of the role of civil society in the pursuit of sustainable
development has increasingly been recognized by the Cambodian government,
and this has been translated into increased opportunities for participation in
development processes. A representative from the NGO Forum who was
interviewed affirmed that NGOs are indeed now being invited to actively
participate in planning processes, although this has been a relatively recent
development. Civil society representation in TWG 18, which crafted the NSDP
was an important manifestation of this more open policy.

76. The NGOs have been active participants in the shaping and implementa-
tion of the national sustainable development agenda. Besides various forms of
field involvement, especially in education and environmental awareness, the
NGOs had participated actively in the formulation of the National Environmental
Action Plan and the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. SEDP II had
likewise benefited from meaningful stakeholder participation in its formulation. In
the preparation of SEDP II, for example, 169 focused group discussions were
reportedly convened among low-income groups in 154 villages in the rural areas
and 15 non-rural socially disadvantaged groups in order to gain a deeper
understanding of the lives of the poor.

Monitoring and Evaluation

77. The NSDP chapter on monitoring and evaluation sets forth an organized
M&E framework and expresses openness to stronger participatory mechanisms

42
in this work. Meanwhile, the mechanism provided for appears to rely on the
inter-agency and multi-sectoral TWG to coordinate the M&E work that will be
undertaken through the individual ministries and agencies. Mechanisms for more
participatory and independent monitoring have yet to be developed and
operationalized, however.

Resource Mobilization

78. Cambodia now receives about US$700 million in official development

assistance (ODA) annually. The bigger part (about 70 percent) of Cambodia’s
annual capital expenditures is financed from foreign assistance, with Japan as
the single largest foreign donor. ADB, The World Bank, the United Nations
agencies, the European Commission, Sweden, France, Australia, DANIDA, and
about 400 non-government organizations are also working in Cambodia. Grants
account for about 80 percent of ODA received by Cambodia. On a per capita
basis, Cambodia has received significantly more ODA than other low-income
countries in the past decade.12

79. Both the World Bank and ADB have recently lowered their aid allotments
for Cambodia due to revisions in the policy on performance-based allocations,
specifically the greater weight given to governance, on which Cambodia has
scored weakly. Allocations for sub-regional projects under the GMS program can
supplement the country allocation. Some grant support in the form of technical
assistance for capacity building is also made available to Cambodia, with such
assistance from ADB averaging $3.3 million per year.

80. Expenditures for environment management in 2005 amounted to just 3.6

percent of the capital budget of the government, while public infrastructure like
roads, bridges and port facilities tend to take a dominant share. Japan in
particular provides the bulk of its assistance in the form of infrastructure projects,
with other bilateral donors and multilateral institutions supporting the rest of the
development requirements of the country.

81. Over the last decade, there has been an acknowledged lack of
coordination among Cambodia’s donors, and a preponderance of donor-led
assistance, which has often slowed or even undermined the evolution of good
governance. Increasing recognition of this problem led to a government-donor
consensus in 2004 on an agenda for harmonization and alignment, to which the
World Bank Group has contributed actively. It is a central principle of this CAS to
work through strategic partnerships to reduce transaction costs, improve
accountability, and support the development of core state capacities. The first
two sections of this CAS document are shared with the new country strategies of
the Asian Development Bank (ADB), UK Department for International
Development (DFID), and the UN Development System (UNDS), with whom the

12
World Bank (2005), Country Assistance Strategy for the Kingdom of Cambodia.

43
World Bank has collaborated closely. The ADB, Japan and the World Bank have
also worked over the last year to improve synergies among their programs.

6.1.4 MDG Outlook

82. Cambodia has made significant progress in restoring peace and security,
rebuilding institutions, stabilizing the macroeconomic environment, and putting in
place a liberal investment regime. Nonetheless, poverty remains widespread,
with 35–40% of the population remaining below the poverty line, while inequality
appears to be worsening. Recent economic growth has been narrowly based,
and has yielded only a modest reduction in poverty. Achieving many of
Cambodia’s MDGs; the ADB believes that attainment of the overall goal of
halving poverty by 2015 is unlikely. Many of the other non-income targets are
also believed to be unattainable. 13 Table 3 summarizes status of MDG
accomplishment in Cambodia as of 2005.

Table 3. Progress Towards the Millennium Development Goals

and Targets, Cambodia (As of 2005)

Goals and Targets Status

Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger

Target 1: Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the
proportion of people whose income is less than
$1per day.
Target 2: Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the
proportion of people who suffer from hunger.
Poverty dropped from 39% in 1993 to 36% in
1999. If direct trends are continued, the poverty
rate will drop to 28% by 2015, compared with a
target of 19.5%. Thus, attainment of target by
2015 is very difficult/ unlikely.
Benchmarks: prevalence of underweight children
under five years of age was 45.2% in 2000;
prevalence of stunted children under five years
of age was 44.6% in 2000; and proportion of
population below the food poverty line was 20%
in 1993. Target is to reduce by half the
benchmark figures in 2015.

Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education

Target 3: Ensure that, by 2015, children The net primary school enrollment rate has
everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to increased from 76% in 1997 to 91% in 2003.
complete a full course of primary schooling.

Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women

Target 4: Eliminate gender disparity in primary and The ratio of girls to boys in primary, lower
secondary education, preferably by 2005, and in secondary and upper secondary education was
all levels of education no later than 2015. 87.7%, 66.9% and 50.1% respectively for school
year 2002–2003.

13
Asian Development Bank (2005), Country Strategy and Program 2005-2009: Kingdom of
Cambodia.

44
Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality
Target 5: Reduce by two thirds, between 1990 and
2015, the under-five mortality rate.
The child mortality remains stable at about 120
per 1,000 live births. Cambodia is unlikely to
meet its target of reducing under-five mortality to
65 per 1000 live births in 2015.

Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health

Target 6: Reduce by three quarters, between 1990 The MMR was estimated at 437 per 100,000 live
and 2015, the maternal mortality ratio (MMR). births in 2000, down from an estimated 590 in
1995.
Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Other Diseases
Target 7: Have halted by 2015, and begun to The HIV prevalence rate in the age 15 to 49
reverse, the spread of HIV/AIDS. population has dropped from 3.9% in 1997 to
2.6% in 2002. A linear trend extrapola-tion would
suggest that Cambodia will meet its target of
1.8% in 2015.
Target 8: Have halted by 2015, and begun to Poliomyelitis has been eradicated from
reverse, the incidence of malaria and other major Cambodia, and immunization has increased
diseases. substantially since 1990. Malaria remains a
significant health problem.

Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability

Target 9: Integrate the principles of sustainable Cambodia has a serious problem with
development into country policies and programs unsustainable and illegal logging and fishing.
and reverse the loss of environmental resources. However, since 1998 the Government has
increased the proportion of fishing areas
released for community fisheries to 56%.
Cambodia is on track to meet its CMDG target of
60% by 2015.
Target 10: Halve, by 2015, the proportion of The population with access to safe drinking
people without sustainable access to safe drinking water increased from 20% in 1995, to 26% in
water. 2000. The country is unlikely to meet its target of
80% by 2015.
Target 11: By 2020, to have achieved a significant Urban poverty (excluding Phnom Penh) has
improvement in the lives of at least 100 million dropped from 36.6% in 1993 to 29.9% in 1997,
slum dwellers. representing 80,000 people.
Sources: Royal Government of Cambodia (2003), Cambodia Millennium Development Goals Report 2003, Phnom Penh;
United Nations (2005), United Nations Development Assistance Framework 2006–2010 for Cambodia (Draft).
As compiled in ADB (2005). Country Strategy and Program 2005-2009: Kingdom of Cambodia

6.1.5 Overall Country Assessment

83. Cambodia already possesses much of the attributes and elements needed
for its own NSDS. However, it still lacks a longer-term (intergenerational)
framework that goes beyond the five-year time-frames of its existing plans. A
promising development is that appreciation of the meaning of sustainable
development now appears to be gradually permeating the various sectoral
ministries and agencies of the RGC, especially with the impetus provided by joint

45
initiatives undertaken by international development partners like UNEP, ADB and
others.

84. Much remains to be done, however, in further widening the constituency

and strengthening the capability for sustainable development within the various
government ministries and agencies. It is important to ensure that this
appreciation is not confined to a few isolated individuals within these offices, but
reaches the individuals and officials critical to setting policy directions taken by
the government. Thus, it was affirmed in interviews with various officials that
capacity building efforts need to be directed at widening understanding and
appreciation of sustainable development. Such efforts need to be directed
towards government officials and workers, ranging from the top levels to
technical working levels. Furthermore, it is deemed necessary to provide training
to planners on integrative tools of analysis and planning to facilitate more holistic
and integrative planning.

85. Cambodia professes full appreciation of the value of participation and

coordination in sustainable development planning and implementation. It had
initiated attempts to establish an NCSD as early as 2000. In 2005, it established
TWG 18 for the specific purpose of integrating existing strategies. It has
demonstrated its readiness to improve internal coordination among its agencies
and encourage the participation of stakeholders in planning. Nonetheless,
coordination within government is still deemed weak by government people
themselves, and as observed by donors. This is especially true in the
implementation of plans, programs and projects. One possible reason is the
absence of a mechanism that would orchestrate, monitor and evaluate
implementation. TWG 18 was created only as the planning mechanism, but has
strong potentials to coordinate implementation and undertake monitoring and
evaluation (M&E) as well, both of which are necessary in the over-all
development process.

86. If TWG 18 can indeed be tasked to take on broader responsibilities in

Cambodia’s SD agenda, thereby turning it into the country’s de facto NCSD, the
following suggestions may be considered:

• Expand the TWG 18 mandate and composition. TWG 18 must also be

tasked to (a) formulate an NSDS that builds on NSDP, 2006-2010; (b)
coordinate the implementation of NSDP and NSDS; and (c) M&E of both
NSDP and NSDS to yield important inputs to policy-making and periodic
corrections or updating of the two strategies. The stakeholder
participation in TWG 18 must also be widened to include business and
other sectoral CSOs;

• Strengthen the role of MOE in TWG 18 perhaps by making one of its

officials a Deputy Chairperson and include some of its staff as members of
the secretariat;

46
 • Cause the creation of sub-national counterparts to strengthen the vertical
integration process;

• Strengthen technical support to TWG 18 by turning its secretariat into a

composite secretariat with members drawn from other sectors or agencies,
and building their capacities in areas such as strategic planning,
implementation and M&E, policy analysis, sector integration and
mainstreaming;

• Transform and possibly upgrade the status of TWG 18 into a Council,

Committee, Roundtable or Commission and possibly designate it as the
country’s NCSD; and

• Provide the body a dedicated annual budget.

87. The on-going formulation of NSDS for Cambodia seeks to come up with a
longer-term, more balanced and integrated sustainability agenda. In this work,
the MOE is taking the lead in cooperation with MOP. One difficulty with this is
that both ministries are not adequately equipped to undertake the integration task
given their organizational limitations as described earlier. It may be worthy of
serious consideration to have the process handled by TWG 18, preferably
already reconstituted as proposed above. The draft NSDS from MOE could
serve as the starting point of broadened SDS process under the auspices of a
redefined TWG 18.

6.2 Lao PDR

6.2.1 Institutional Context

88. The Lao People’s Democratic Republic is governed by the 52-year old Lao
People's Revolutionary Party (LPRP), which is under the direction of the Party
Congress. The main decision-making body is the Political Bureau (Politburo),
composed of nine members chosen by the Central Committee of 49 members.
The National Assembly approves all laws, although the executive branch retains
the authority to issue binding decrees. It elects the President, the Prime Minister
and the Cabinet. The foundation of the current legal system is the 1991
Constitution.

SD Coordination

89. The agency primarily responsible for sustainable development concerns in

Lao PDR is the Science, Technology and Environment Agency (STEA), a sub-

47
ministerial office under the Office of the Prime Minister. STEA was created in
1993 as the government’s research and service agency on science, technology
and the environment. Among other things, its functions include the expansion of
policies and programs of the government and the party into plans, projects,
regulations and laws.14

90. STEA has represented Lao PDR in meetings and initiatives related to
environment and sustainable development at the international level. Thus, it
possesses the knowledge and appreciation for the preconditions and requisites
for pursuing SD in Lao PDR. Owing to this knowledge, STEA recognizes that it
is not the appropriate body to lead SD initiatives in Lao PDR.15 As a younger and
more junior body, STEA has been constrained in effectively exercising a
coordinative role, which is imperative in promoting and pursuing sustainable
development. STEA is also unable to effectively exercise vertical coordination,
having no offices at the sub-national local levels. It has a very specific sector
focus (i.e., science, technology and environment), thus limiting its capability to
undertake multi-sectoral integration and mainstreaming. These weaknesses are
exacerbated by the lack of awareness and understanding of sustainable
development within STEA, the government as a whole, and the general public.
In order for STEA to play the role of an SD coordinator, therefore, it must be
vested with a stronger authority, provided with substantial resources for capacity
building, and given support and cooperation by all stakeholders.

Planning Mechanisms

91. Overall development planning is the primary function of the ministerial-

level Committee of Planning and Investment (CPI), which is tasked to coordinate
the development, implementation and monitoring of national socio-economic and
poverty reduction plans and strategies. CPI also serves as the government think
tank, which conducts research, analyzes and reviews socioeconomic
development issues, and provides policy recommendations to the government. It
covers planning administration, public investment, statistics, and domestic and
foreign investment. It also disseminates socio economic information to the public.

92. CPI coordinates development planning in Lao PDR both vertically and
horizontally. Its provincial offices coordinate with those of sector agencies at the
local levels, which assist in sectoral planning, plan implementation, monitoring
and evaluation. In the area of environment planning or integration of
environment in the socio-economic plan or poverty reduction strategy, CPI is
dependent on the inputs of STEA. But given STEA’s constraints, the quality of
these inputs may be somewhat compromised.

93. CPI has expressed concern over the lack of proactive coordination among
government agencies since this has been affecting its effectiveness as over-all

14
Prof. Dr. Bountiem Phissamay, Message from President, STEA website (www.stea.gov.la)
15
Interview with STEA Deputy Permanent Secretary Keobang Keola.

48
coordinator.16 It also claims to have inadequate personnel thereby limiting its
ability to undertake closer monitoring and evaluation. Notwithstanding this
constraint, CPI has been doing its best to strengthen coordination downstream
and upstream by creating coordination mechanisms such as the Steering
Committee for the National Growth and Poverty Eradication Strategy (NGPES),
discussed further below. The Committee is composed of CPI; Ministry of
Finance; Ministry of Education; Bank of Laos; Ministry of Health; Ministry of
Agriculture and Forestry; Ministry of Communication, Transport, Post and
Construction; STEA; National Statistical Centre; the Ethnic Minority Committee of
the National Assembly; and three mass organizations. The committee approach,
particularly in the formulation of cross-cutting strategies, and STEA’s participation
in the process, are important in building capabilities for integration.

94. Lao PDR recognizes the need to strengthen inter-sectoral coordination

beyond the national scope. In its Country Paper during the Fourth ASEAN
Senior Officials Meeting on Development Planning in 2005, the government
stated that CPI was considering the establishment of an “ASEAN National
Development Planning Committee (ANDPC),” that would ensure the consistency
of Lao PDR’s development objectives with those of ASEAN. ANDPC is
proposed to be composed of representatives from planning units of sectoral line
ministries, which would closely mirror the Steering Committee for NGPES.

Related Government Bodies

95. Lao PDR also has a National Environment Committee (NEC) that was
created by the Decree of Prime Minister No. 09/PMf dated February 2, 2002. It is
tasked to provide advice to the government on environment matters and to
coordinate planning, management and monitoring environment protection
activities. It is chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister with Vice Ministers of line
agencies and CPI as members, with STEA serving as the secretariat. It has
analogs at provincial level.

Civil Society

96. Civil society in Lao PDR is composed of (a) mass or people’s

organizations and (b) international NGOs (INGOs). Mass organizations were
created as part of the Party system, hence are very much involved in government
processes. They are funded or sustained by the government and are thus fully
supportive of government. They are large nationwide unions of sector- or cause-
oriented organizations that include the Lao Women’s Union (estimated at 1.5
million in 2005), Lao Trade Union, Lao Youth Organization, and the Lao Patriotic
Front for Reconstruction. Their intricate but centralized governance structure
allows them to have wide and controlled local presence.

16
Based on interview with CPI officials.

49
97. Lao PDR so far lacks significant home-grown NGOs because its political
system does not provide the environment for it. While its Constitution allows the
formation of organizations, there has been no enabling law passed for said
constitutional provision to date. Thus, the establishment of domestic NGOs is
seen as having no legal basis. The very few local NGOs that currently exist were
established with support from or involvement of international NGOs, hence are
tolerated by government. They usually undertake numerous small projects, most
of which are foreign funded. An example of this is the Sustainable Agriculture
Forum (SAF), which was founded in March 1991 by some Laotian employees of
international NGOs. SAF is an autonomous coalition of INGOs and Laotian
development workers engaged in sustainable agriculture, community forestry and
other environmentally sound and participatory approaches17.

98. A study on governance issues in Lao PDR 18 stated that reluctance of

government to encourage the formation of NGOs stems from the view that they
are “potential threat to its monopoly of power.” Government’s withdrawal of
permission to operate an NGO Forum that attempted to improve coordination
between NGOs and government sometime in the 1990s is an indicator of this
fear. This unfortunate event has since then inhibited any attempt to organize
local NGOs and form a vibrant civil society in Lao PDR.

99. In contrast, the government welcomes INGOs because they provide

developmental and humanitarian assistance and employ local people as they
operate in the country. INGOs are formally recognized as development partners
through Presidential Decree No. 71/PM issued by the Prime Minister on April 28,
1999. The Decree provides the guidelines for the entry and operations of INGOs
in Lao. It designated the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as the focal point for INGOs.

100. There are at least 70 INGOs that cover a wide array of advocacy areas
such as agriculture, children, and indigenous people. Only a few of them deal
with environmental protection, such as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). The
strengths of INGOs, however, have barely been utilized by government in
governance, particularly in seeking alternative views, concerns and inputs from
the public in crafting the nation’s development directions and implementing
development projects. This may be attributed to a number of factors that include:
(a) cultural differences between Lao people and INGOs, (b) traditional view that
INGOs’ role is to provide humanitarian and development assistance, (c)
existence of mass organizations, which could indeed play the role but are
currently party-oriented and not normally expected to provide alternative
perspectives, (d) lack of know-how and mechanism to have two-way
engagement between government and the people, and (e) the long tradition of

17
Khankeo Oupravanh and Charlie Pahlman, Eucalyptus and Rural Development in Lao PDR -
An NGO Perspective, FAO Corporate Document Repository (www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/
AC772E/ ac772e0b. htm)
18
Clay G. Wescott (ed), Key Governance Issues in Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand, and Viet Nam,
Asian Development Bank, April 2001.

50
government- or Party-centered governance that makes the people look up to the
government or Party for all concerns. The last three factors may have been
behind the perception that government is wary of NGOs or civil society.

101. The opening up of Lao PDR and the on-going GMS integration process
have rapidly been influencing the cooperative relationship between the state and
stakeholders, particularly civil society. More and more INGOs have been getting
involved in environment issues as the country pursues its development objective
of graduating from least developed country status. One of its strategies is to
implement large foreign-funded projects that generally utilize its natural
resources. This has led many INGOs to take up the cause of the environment
and local communities, thus prompting government to engage them in project
development processes. The standard requirement of donors for social
acceptability and stakeholder participation in project preparation and
implementation forces the establishment of this new form of relationship between
government and civil society. For example, INGOs are now actively involved in
the development and implementation of the Theun Hinboum and Nam Theun 2
hydropower projects.

Business

102. In 1986, Lao PDR introduced the New Economic Mechanism (NEM) that
aims to open up the economy by easing numerous restrictions on private
enterprises and privatizing state enterprises, among others. This allowed the
small and medium enterprise sector to grow by about 13,000 businesses per
year.19 Big private business and industry have shied away, however, because of
uncertainty in policies (e.g., government kept many state enterprises from being
privatized) and bottlenecks and difficulties of doing business in the country.
Government’s backpedaling on NEM appears to support the perception that it
also fears that a substantial growth of the private sector would erode the Party’s
and government’s authority and economic dominance.

103. Private business has thus remained small and dominated by Chinese and
Thai enterprises. While business associations exist, all of them are linked to or
under the supervision of the Party or government. For instance, the Lao National
Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LNCCI), which has been in existence since
its establishment in 1989, operates under the guidance of the Ministry of
Commerce and Tourism. LNCCI aims to strengthen cooperation among traders,
farmers and manufacturers. It serves as the center of coordination among and
between the nine trade associations under its purview, as well as between
business and government. It has about 470 members that represent a broad
cross-section of business enterprises. Despite its size and because of its
attachment with government, LNCCI is perceived to be a weak organization that
could not effectively and independently represent the interests of its members,
and thereby has little influence on policy-making.
19
Wescott (2001).

51
104. It was also noted from interviews that the private business sector has
mainly focused on business activities, and has had very little involvement in
environment matters. This is clearly indicated by its much closer ties with the
Ministry of Commerce, whereas there is virtually no linkage pertaining to
environmental management with STEA.

6.2.2 State of Development and Environmental Planning

105. The Sixth National Socio-Economic Development Plan (NSEDP) 2006-

2010, formulated by the Committee on Planning and Investment, is currently
considered to be the guiding document for the country’s current development
efforts. Together with the Fifth NSEDP (2001-2005), it has laid out the road map
for fulfilling the Socio Economic Development Strategy (2001-2010) approved by
the 7th Party Congress in March 2001. Prior to that, the 6th Party Congress in
1996 had defined the country’s long-term development objective of graduating
from least-developed country (LDC) status by 2020.

106. The Sixth Plan professes to be based on (a) the Long-Term Strategy of
Socio Economic Development to the Year 2020; (b) the Strategy on Industriali-
zation and Modernization; (c) the National Growth and Poverty Eradication
Strategy (NGPES); (iv) the Regional Development Strategy; and (v) the analysis
of the international and domestic contexts for the development of the Lao PDR.
The NGPES, formulated at the impetus of the donor community, appears closest
to having the attributes of an NSDS, being of an open-ended time-frame, while
also being comprehensive and integrative in its approach and strategy. It is has
been endorsed by the donor community in the last regular Round Table of
donors to the Lao PDR and is used as basis for the donors’ respective country
assistance programs. Because of this, it is considered to be an influential
planning document, possibly more so than the Sixth Plan.

107. The Lao economy has been growing relatively rapidly in recent years, at
up to 7.5 percent annual GDP growth, and averaging 6.3 percent annually in
2001-2005. Its per capita income of US$500 in 2005 is still among the lowest in
the region, and its poverty incidence remains high at 38.6 percent (as of 2004).
The low income level appears to explain the tendency to put the economic
dimension at the forefront of development planning in the country. A cursory
reading of the Sixth NSEDP makes this immediately apparent, with economic
concerns dominating its goals and targets, overall directions, and main
approaches. This is notwithstanding the guidance provided by the 7th Party
Congress that the socio-economic development of the country must be balanced
between economic growth, socio-cultural development and environmental
preservation.

52
108. The 1991 Lao Constitution provides that environmental protection is
everybody’s responsibility, and it is against the law to degrade natural resources
that are in principle owned by the State. The Environmental Protection Law
(Decree 068/PM) established the STEA in 1993, and defined its broad mandate
over environmental policy and sustainable development. Subsequently, in 1994,
a National Environment Action Plan was completed by the government. The
government also passed a Forestry Law (1996), a Water Resources Law (1997),
and the Environmental Protection Law (1999). It formulated the National
Forestry Strategy 2020 (in 2002), a Sustainable Forestry and Rural Development
Program, the National Environment Strategy and the National Biodiversity Action
Plan (2004).

6.2.3 NSDS Readiness Assessment

Policy Integration

109. As indicated above, the 7th Party Congress in 2001 had provided the
guidance that the socio-economic development of the country must be balanced
between economic growth, socio-cultural development and environmental
preservation. However, the Sixth Plan conveys the distinct impression that
economic growth, and industrialization in particular, assumes overriding
importance in the overall development thrust; natural resources and the
environment are relegated to a section within a chapter on thematic and cross-
cutting areas in the Sixth Plan.20 It was indicated by officials from the Committee
on Planning and Investment (CPI) that STEA’s environment plan was simply
submitted to CPI at the outset and integrated into the Plan like any other line
ministry or agency’s sectoral plans.

110. Given the economy’s low level of development and minimal

industrialization, environmental concerns appear to be considered more of an
emerging issue for the future: “Currently, the Lao PDR does not have many
environmental problems like other countries, but in the future this will change as
the country develops socio-economically, natural resources will reduce (sic) and
waste will increase.” 21 Nonetheless, the Sixth Plan recognizes that “it is
…important that the country takes early action in maintaining and protecting its
environment.” The environment-economy linkage, particularly interdependence
of the management of renewable resources and improved livelihoods, is clearly
acknowledged in the context of primary production, e.g. in linking rural
development with forestry. However, the linkage has not been made in other
economic thrusts in the plan (e.g. industrial development policies).

20
Further indication of this was the candid admission by a high government official that where
tradeoffs occur between economic priorities and environmental considerations, government
decision-makers would readily choose the former.
21
NSEDP, p.86.

53
111. Environmental considerations do feature more prominently in the NGPES
than in the Sixth Plan (NSEDP). Meanwhile, STEA, for its part, has been given
the strong mandate by the Prime Minister to ensure that the various development
initiatives of the government are consistent with environmental protection. In
particular, STEA is tasked to undertake environmental impact assessment (EIA)
on all major government investment projects. According to CPI officials
interviewed, 111 government projects had undergone such EIA.

Intergenerational Timeframe

112. There has tended to be a proliferation of various plans and strategies with
different time frames prepared by the Lao government. The last two five-year
socio-economic development plans have provided the road maps for the Ten-
Year Socio-Economic Development Strategy (SEDS) covering 2001-2010.
Preparation of a new longer term SEDS covering up to 2020 is reportedly in
progress, and has been mentioned in the Sixth Plan. The NGPES professes to
be the strategy towards achieving the 2020 vision of graduating from LDC status
set in the 6th Party Congress in 1996. Being open-ended in time frame, it is the
only current planning document most closely meeting the required
intergenerational time frame of an NSDS.

Analysis and Assessments

113. Background research and analysis in support of the plans formulated

under the leadership of the CPI are undertaken by the National Economic
Research Institute (NERIS). There is virtually no research support for
development planning that is accessed by CPI from the academe, according to
interviewed planning officials. While NERIS reportedly employs analytical tools,
especially econometric models, in its analyses in support of the NSEDP,
integrative tools of analysis that examine economic-social-environmental
interdependencies do not as yet form part of the NERIS toolkit. Indeed, the
observations made above about inadequate consideration of environmental
implications of economic policies are indicative of lack of prior analysis and
assessment of an integrative nature.

Indicators and Targets

114. The National Statistics Centre (NSC) in the CPI is tasked with monitoring
and evaluation of outcomes and impacts of the various plans. A list of 100 core
indicators for monitoring the impacts of the NSEDPs, the NGPES and the MDGs
has been drawn up and incorporated in LaoInfo 4.1, a software statistical
database system developed for the Lao government with donor support. The
system allows for decentralized inputting of information to the ministry, agency
and provincial levels. The indicators span the range of statistics to measure
macroeconomic performance; poverty, inequality and hunger; education; gender

54
equality; health, water and sanitation; housing security; infrastructure; and
environment, among others. Notwithstanding these, CPI officials indicated that
further capacity building on the formulation and tracking of sustainable
development indicators would be useful.

Co-ordination and Institutions

115. The NSEDPs have been prepared by the CPI based on prior submissions
by the line ministries and agencies of their respective sectoral plans.
Consultation meetings were subsequently convened to deliberate on the
consolidated draft Plan as prepared by CPI. The process of preparing the
NGPES appears to have been more participatory, with a Steering Committee
having been created in 2003 composed of all key ministries and agencies, as
already described above. This permitted closer inter-agency and inter-sectoral
coordination in the course of plan preparation. Plan implementation, however,
can present formidable challenges, particularly when there are duplicating,
overlapping or conflicting mandates among ministries/agencies. For example,
the lead roles for poverty reduction and MDG monitoring lie under two different
ministries, i.e. Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and CPI.

Local and Regional Governance

116. The Sixth Plan is reputed to be the first socio-economic development plan
to be subjected to wide consultation, having begun with local-level consultations
on the implementation of the Fifth Plan. At the same time, work on priority
programs for poverty reduction in focal development areas in ten pilot districts
was undertaken jointly with the communities themselves, through a participatory
planning process. A second round of local consultations was also undertaken on
the evolving Sixth Plan. This “two down-one up” planning process now appears
to be the favoured mode for plan formulation as adopted by CPI. In this manner,
local authorities and communities are able to contribute and participate more
meaningfully, with two distinct opportunities to do so, in the national development
planning process. The NGPES was likewise prepared in a participatory manner
with conscious participation of localities (provinces, districts and villages).

Stakeholder Participation

117. As indicated above, local NGOs are virtually non-existent in Lao PDR,
where the NGO community is composed entirely of international NGOs.
However, people participation in planning and other development processes is
effected through mass-based organizations, of which there are four who are
dominant and active (see paragraph 97). These organizations are meant
primarily to serve as conduits for communicating and obtaining mass support for
Party initiatives, hence are unlikely to offer independent views on government
policies and initiatives. These same mass-based organizations have been
represented in the Steering Committee for the preparation of the NGPES, and in

55
the consultations for the NSEDP. There are also non-profit organizations (NPOs)
that are recognized and accredited by the government subject to rigid
requirements, and claimed to represent civil society. However, such
organizations reportedly include government officials and party cardholders as
members, and are provided office space at the STEA. Thus, it is unlikely that
such organizations would be truly independent.

118. On the other hand, the international NGOs operating in the country have
been vigilant particularly in monitoring donor-funded projects in Lao PDR. This is
particularly true especially in the light of prominent donor initiatives with strong
environmental and natural resource significance, such as in forestry, water
resources, agro-forestry and land management.

119. Private sector participation is more readily incorporated in the plan

formulation process; at least one consultation forum is held with the business
community in the course of plan formulation.

120. With international pressure, the Lao government is reportedly preparing a

decree on the establishment of domestic civil society organizations that is
expected to bring about home-grown NGOs who will take a more independent
stance in development policy discussions and in monitoring government
initiatives and projects.

Monitoring and Evaluation

121. The CPI through its Department of General Planning takes responsibility
for the monitoring and evaluation of the progress on implementation of the
development plans. CPI relies on periodic reports submitted by the line minis-
tries, agencies and localities (provinces, districts and villages) to gather
information on plan implementation progress. Work is reportedly underway, as
provided in the Sixth Plan itself, to improve the implementation monitoring and
evaluation system. Meanwhile, improvement of the monitoring and evaluation of
outcomes and impacts is also being addressed through the LaoInfo 4.1. system
mentioned above. The NGPES recognizes the value of village-level data on
poverty and welfare indicators, and pursues the “Village Statistics Book” as a
useful instrument for monitoring the socio-economic profile of village
communities.

Resource Mobilization

122. The Lao PDR government derives its revenues from tax and non-tax
revenues and timber royalties. With a revenue-to-GDP ratio of 11.2 percent in
2004, its revenue effort, along with tax effort (8.9 percent) is among the lowest in
the region. Recent improvements in tax effort have been somewhat offset by
declines in collections from timber royalties, non-tax revenues and import duties,
the last due to tariff reductions under the ASEAN Free Trade Area commitments.

56
Weak technical capacity in revenue administration and a highly decentralized
revenue system where provinces have weak incentive to collect and remit
revenues to the national government will continue to slow progress in improving
Lao PDR’s fiscal situation.

123. ODA resources support more than 60 percent of the country’s Public
Investment Program (PIP). Donor assistance is mostly focused on the economic
sectors such as agriculture, forestry and communication, accounting for 63
percent of ODA in 2002-03. Although only 10.3 percent and 7.8 percent of
foreign funds are allocated to the education and health sectors respectively,
these funds make up 72.4 percent (41.2 percent for Education and 31.2 percent
for Health) of the total public expenditure in the socio-cultural sectors. The Lao
PDR Environmental Performance Assessment estimated that only about 0.6
percent of the government budget had been allocated to environmental concerns
in 2001-02.

124. It is generally perceived that weak public finances will be an important

constraint in Lao PDR’s efforts to meet the MDGs. Considerable efforts need to
be undertaken to boost the country’s public finances, coupled with more efficient
expenditure management and donor coordination.

6.2.4 MDG Outlook

125. Lao PDR statistics indicate that the incidence of poverty declined in the
country to 32.7% in 2003 from 39.1% in 1998. 22 Robust economic growth,
averaging 6-7 percent in real GDP growth, is expected to reduce the incidence of
poverty further. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) progress report
was officially launched in Vientiane in October 2004, which indicated that
progress toward achieving income and non-income MDGs is broadly on track,
although performance varies among the individual targets (see Table 4).

Table 4. Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals

and Targets, Lao PDR (As of 2005)

Goals & Targets Status

Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger

Target 1: Halve, between 1990 and 2015, Achievable. Poverty incidence has significantly
the proportion of people whose income is declined from 48% in 1990 to 32.7% in 2003. While the
less than $1 a day national target is achievable, accelerated development
interventions in highly impoverished provinces,
particularly in the North, is required to narrow the
poverty gap.

22
Third Lao Expenditure and Consumption Survey (LEC III).

57
Target 2: Halve, between 1990 and 2015,
the proportion of people who suffer from
hunger
Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education
Target 3: Ensure that, by 2015, children
everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able
to complete a full course of primary
schooling.
Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality And Empower Women
Target 4: Eliminate gender disparity in
primary and secondary education preferably
by 2005 and to all levels of education no
later than 2015
Difficult. In 1998, 29% of the population suffered from
nutritional deficiencies, compared with 31% in 1990.
Income-generating activities are imperative to improve
the nutritional status of people in the upland areas
Difficult. The proportion of children reaching grade 5
had increased to 62% in 2000/2001. The quantity and
quality of education needs to be improved to attract and
maintain increasing numbers of students, particularly in
rural areas
Achievable. The ratio of girls to boys in primary and
secondary education increased from 74.9% in 1990 to
90% in 2002. The ratio of literate females to males (15–
24 years of age) increased from 76% in 1990 to 85% in
2002

Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality

Target 5: Reduce by two thirds, between Achievable. Under-5 mortality rate declined from 170
1990 and 2015, the under-5 mortality rate per 1,000 live births in 1990 to 106 in 1999. Infant
mortality rate dropped to 87 (per 1,000 live births) in
2002. The target is likely to be met

Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health

Target 6: Reduce by three quarters,
between 1990 and 2015, the maternal
mortality ratio (MMR)
Achievable. MMR dropped to 530 (per 100,000 live
births) in 2000. Progress towards this MDG is on track,
but further improvements in nutrition and reproductive
health care will be needed if the present positive trend is
to be sustained until 2015.

Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Other Diseases

Target 7: Have halted by 2015, and begun HIV prevalence currently remains low at 0.06%. With
to reverse, the spread of human increasing regional integration, increased efforts and
immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune awareness are needed.
deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDSa)
Target 8: Have halted by 2015, and begun The death rate associated with malaria decreased from
to reverse, the incidence of malaria and 9 per 100,000 in 1990 to 3.5 in 2002. The Lao PDR was
other major diseases declared polio-free in 2000
Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability
Target 9: Integrate the principles of Environmental management is a pillar of the National
sustainable development into country Growth and Poverty Eradication Strategy
policies and programs and reverse the loss
of environmental resources
Target 10: Halve, by 2015, the proportion of Improvements have been stalled on the percentage of
people without sustainable access to safe the population with access to safe water. In 2004, the
drinking water percentage was 37%. Achievement of the goal will not
be easy
Target 11: By 2010, to have achieved a Slum dwellers are not a serious problem. The
significant improvement in the lives of at percentage of the urban population with access to
least 100 million slum dwellers sanitation increased significantly from 30% in 1990 to
67% in 2000
Source: ADB Country Strategy & Program Update 2006-2008, Lao PDR

58
6.2.5 Overall Country Assessment

126. Lao PDR, being in a relatively early stage of economic development

among more dynamic economies in its neighbourhood, finds itself prominently
preoccupied with the pursuit of economic advancement, particularly through
industrialization. Its relatively rapid rate of economic growth over the last six
years, exceeding that of most of its neighbors, indicates that this initiative is
yielding results. While government professes recognition of the need to balance
economic with social and environmental concerns, there are indications that
more conscious effort is required to achieve a more holistic and integrative
orientation in its strategy for sustainable development.

127. The pursuit of sustainable development in Lao PDR is affected by a

dilemma faced by the government and the Party, which to a large extent may be
considered as one and the same. On one hand, the government wants to pursue
rapid economic development, which requires massive macro-economic and
structural reforms. On the other hand, it appears bent on maintaining its current
level of power and control, which would not be consistent with the needed
reforms. The pressures of globalization and GMS integration have already been
upon the nation so the government does not have much option but to open up
and share its power to the people, especially business and civil society. There
are indications that it has recently been trying to do so albeit at a very slow pace.

128. It is not yet clear at this point if the globally prescribed practices of
integration and participation practices would blend well or effectively work in the
Laotian culture and political system since all these are new to Lao PDR. It is
quite clear though that Lao is serious about getting out of least developed
country status, but there are preconditions to this such as: (a) shifting paradigms
from command and control to participatory and consultative governance; (b)
enabling the production sectors by adopting a market-oriented economy while
providing the necessary policy and program support for investment and
production; (c) empowering the people to become active development agents
that would help government push its development agenda. The government
needs to reform itself or adjust to the requirements of the development
paradigms, particularly in the following areas:

• Information and transparency. Stakeholders of development and public in

general need timely and accurate information. They can only participate and
help in the development process if they are clear about what is going on
(country status), where the nation wants to go and how it can get there. The
government and the Party must promote sharing of true information and being
transparent about its processes and transactions. It should be easy to do so
given the wide network of the Party and mass organizations.

59
• Vertical and horizontal coordination. Weak coordination is well acknowledged
both in government and donor community. Government processes have
been unidirectional. Decision-making is top-down (i.e., no consultation);
reporting is bottom-up (i.e., no horizontal coordination and feedback);
communication and exchange of information among and within government
units are very limited. Agencies generally work on their own resulting in the
lack of coherence in many aspects of their work. Coordination with other
sectors of society has virtually been non-existent. Government must address
this problem very quickly by issuing appropriate policies and setting up the
right mechanisms. One important coordination mechanism is a multi-
stakeholder and multi-sectoral NCSD with local chapters. The government
may refer to NCSDs and their experiences in neighboring countries (e.g.,
Philippines and Vietnam), and find the most appropriate form and substance
for Lao PDR. It would be most helpful to look at possibilities of just
strengthening existing bodies (e.g. Committee for NGPES) and already
engaging other stakeholders in the process of establishing the NCSD.

• Awareness and capacity building. The lack of capacity to pursue its objective,
particularly in a sustainable way, is a well-known fact in Lao PDR. This is true
for all stakeholders and sectors of society at all levels. Interviews indicate
that there was common view that there is very little knowledge and
appreciation of SD in the country. Officials of key agencies admit that they
need some orientation on SD and assistance to promote and pursue SD in
their country. In this regard, a comprehensive information, education and
communication program needs to be seriously undertaken. The program
could focus on the concept of SD and how it is pursued. Good practices
particularly within the country may be used as demonstration cases to
facilitate the understanding of the complexities of SD. There is also need to
acquire, use and apply integrative tools of analysis to help policymakers
appreciate the critical inter-linkages among the economic, social and
environmental dimensions of development. Further help is also deemed
useful by the planning authorities in strengthening the country’s system of
sustainable development indicators.

• Stakeholder empowerment. Given current capacity of government, the

preceding three issues would be insurmountable without the help of the
stakeholders. The government must recognize and make them active
development partners. Already, the INGOs are undertaking numerous
awareness and capacity building activities at no cost but at maximum benefit
to government. The mass organizations are likewise engaged in similar
initiatives. Still, these are not enough in view of factors already stated above.
Government must thus recognize and appreciate that, among other things,
local NGOs can (a) facilitate and maximize the delivery of assistance
extended by INGOs since they know the language and culture of the people;
(b) bring to the government people’s sentiments and concerns, which are
important inputs to policy and decision making; and (c) mobilize resources

60
 necessary to address the above problems and create jobs in the process.
The government must thus encourage and facilitate the development and
operations of independent (i.e. from government) local NGOs so that these
may supplement and complement the initiatives of INGOs and mass
organizations. It must allow the participation of civil society (people’s
organizations, INGOs and home-grown NGOs) and business in planning, plan
implementation, monitoring and evaluation.

129. The National Growth and Poverty Eradication Strategy (NGPES) is the
closest candidate to exemplify the country’s NSDS, and properly articulates to
some extent the critical inter-linkage between poverty and the environment.
However, a significant improvement in public finances is needed to ensure
faithful implementation of the NGPES. The pursuit of an aggressive
development process has both substantial positive and negative implications to
the people and environment of Lao PDR. The government, in partnership with
stakeholders, must thus find the formula with greatest positive impact to Laotians
and their environment.

6.3 Myanmar

6.3.1 Institutional Context

130. Myanmar has been ruled by a military government since the military
assumed power on September 18, 1988. The ruling government called itself the
State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) then, later renamed the State
Peace and Development Council (SPDC) in 1997. It has been functioning as
both the legislative and executive body in Myanmar.

SD Coordination

131. The lead agency for promoting sustainable development in Myanmar is

the National Commission for Environmental Affairs (NCEA), a relatively young
agency established in 1990. Its creation was considered a milestone and the
strongest indication of government’s concern and commitment for environmental
protection and management, considering that Myanmar never had a body that
looked after the environment in a holistic manner. Prior to that, the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs (MOFA) and the Cabinet together played that role in an interim
basis. It is a milestone because even Myanmar’s current (1974) Constitution
has no specific provision for environmental protection, a factor that may have
contributed to the lack of attention for the environment in the earlier years.

132. NCEA’s main mission is to ensure sustainable use of environmental

resources and to promote environmentally sound practices in industry and in
other economic activities. Its key functions are to:

61
 (1) Formulate policies on natural resource management,
(2) Prepare environmental legislation (standards and regulations) for
pollution control, monitoring and enforcement, and
(3) Promote environmental awareness through public education and to
liaise as necessary with international organizations in environmental
matters.

133. These tasks are implemented with the help of its 19 members who
represent departments from various sectoral ministries. Supporting the
Commission are four sub-committees that cover: Conservation of Natural
Resources; Pollution; Research, Information and Education; and International
Cooperation, each of which is chaired by a Director-General or the Head of a
relevant government department. This arrangement ensures wider
representation and promotes closer coordination among units concerned with
these specific focus areas. The NCEA Office provides technical and
administrative secretariat support to NCEA. The NCEA Director liaises directly
with the NCEA Chairman, Secretary and Joint Secretary.

134. NCEA attempts to play a coordinating role among government agencies

and offices concerned with various aspects of environmental and natural
resources management. However, NCEA could not fully enforce coordination as
it lacks the legal mandate to do so. This was true even when NCEA was still
under the direct supervision of MOFA, a powerful and influential agency, from
1990-2005. This arrangement had, in fact, been questioned at the time. MOFA’s
power and influence had indeed been useful, particularly in providing stature to
NCEA internally and externally. However, there was a perceived incompatibility
between the nature of their respective mandates and their respective areas of
competence, which tended to compromise the efficacy of NCEA and ability of
MOFA to manage the environment. This issue was finally addressed by lodging
NCEA within the Ministry of Forestry in 2005 and making the Minister of Forestry
the Chairperson of NCEA.

135. There are a number of government agencies that are directly concerned
with various aspects of environmental management such as the Ministries of
Health, Industry, Transport and Industry as shown in Table 5 below.23 These
agencies needed to coordinate their activities for better synergy.

136. Thus, in addition to NCEA, a number of coordinating mechanisms were

put in place to address specific concerns or issues such as the National
Committee for Combating Land Degradation, and the National Water Committee.
In 2004, the National Coordination Committee for Environment (NCCE) was set-
up to promote horizontal and vertical coordination. The members of NCCE are
representatives from ministerial agencies and local authorities. To strengthen

23
Alan K.J. Tan, Preliminary Assessment Of Myanmar's Environmental Law Asia Pacific Center
for Environmental Law, 1998.

62
spatial coordination, sub-committees were established in eco-regions (e.g.
Northern Forest Region, Ayeyarwaddy River Region, and Central Plain Zone and
Coastal Zone) to support the NCCE. In the survey submitted to Environment
Watch of UNEP, 24 the respondent from NCEA indicated the existence of a
National Environmental Conservation Committee (NECC) as one of two existing
national coordinating mechanisms in Myanmar (with the second being NCEA). It
is not clear if this yet another distinct body different from NCCE, but the report
only indicates the proliferation of “coordinating bodies.” The establishment of
new mechanisms for specific tasks is not necessarily wrong if such addresses
certain unmet needs without complicating systems and procedures or creating
overlaps. But ensuring this requires a clear institutional framework for
environmental management, which Myanmar does not appear to have at the
moment. This need is much more profound in pursuing the even broader
mandate of sustainable development.

Table 5. Myanmar Government Agencies Involved in

Environmental Concerns

Ministry Area of Competence

Environmental management; forestry matters;
Ministry of Forestry / NCEA
wildlife conservation
Ministry of Livestock,
Marine and freshwater fisheries management
Breeding and Fisheries
Economic and industrial planning and foreign
Ministry of National Planning
investment (with the Myanmar Investment
& Economic Development
Commission)
Ministry of Industry Pollution from industrial activities
Ministry of Agriculture Environmental issues arising from agriculture
Ministry of Health
(Department of Occupational Health issues in relation to factories and vehicles
Health)
Ministry of Road Transport Vehicular emissions
Ministry of Labour Health concerns of workers
City Development Air pollution, waste disposal, general
Committees of Yangon and environmental issues in the cities of Yangon and
Mandalay Mandalay

137. Placing NCEA under the Ministry of Forestry was a move towards
improving the institutional set-up and tightening integration. Still, Myanmar’s

24
http://science.unep.org/environmentwatch

63
institutional strategy for environment and sustainable development (ESD)
remains fragile and continues to have wide scope for further rationalization,
owing partly to continuing lack of a comprehensive legislative and legal
framework (i.e. a national environmental law remains pending) and unclear
systems and processes. It also continues to have a wide gap in the area of
stakeholders’ participation at all levels.

Planning Mechanisms

138. The Ministry of National Planning and Economic Development (MNPED)

is responsible for the over-all management of the social and economic
development of Myanmar. It is tasked to evaluate the country’s situation and use
the results to coordinate the formulation of plans, recommend policies, and
orchestrate and monitor the implementation of development plans. It is also
responsible for managing external assistance and socio-economic statistics.

139. MNPED is crucial agency in the pursuit of sustainable development, being

responsible for the other two pillars of SD. The linkage and cooperation between
MNPED and NCEA must thus be very close in order to effectively pursue SD.
This appears not to be the case, however. MNPED appears to have had very
little participation in the formulation and implementation of Myanmar Agenda 21,
while NCEA does not seem to be closely involved in the affairs of MNPED.

Civil Society

140. Myanmar civil society organizations may be classified into mass (or
political) organizations, sector-specific NGOs, and international NGOs. Mass
organizations are party-organized and supported organizations that have large
nationwide membership. They are generally concerned with and involved in
political matters but also undertake activities that would uplift the quality of life of
their members. An example of these is the Union Solidarity and Development
Association (USDA), which was formed by SLORC (now SPDC) in 1993 to rally
support for the current rulers of Myanmar. It counts tens of thousands of
members covering all levels including townships and villages. A women’s
association also exists but this is closely affiliated with USDA. Unlike other
countries with similar political orientation, trade unions are banned in Myanmar.

141. Social NGOs are organized independently of government in defined

sectors and for specific purposes. There are currently about a hundred such
NGOs 25 engaged in religious activities, medical missions, social welfare,
environmental protection, community work, etc. There are about 10 NGOs
involved in environment work but only half of these are exclusively focused on
environment.26 The other five are faith-based groups that are also involved in

25
Based on a conversation with Mr. U Myint, Secretary of FREDA.
26
Paper prepared by Myanmar environment NGOs for the ASEAN CSO Forum on Environment
and Sustainable Development, Kuala Lumpur, May 2-4, 2007.

64
education, agriculture, religious promotion, etc. Environment NGOs include the
following, with corresponding areas of interest:

• Forest Resources Environment and Development Association (FREDA) –

forest management, conservation, wildlife protection, community
development
• Biodiversity and Nature Conservation Association (BANCA) – nature
conservation
• Friends of Rainforest Myanmar (FORM) – plantation in dry zones,
mangrove areas and creek banks
• Renewable Energy Association of Myanmar (REAM) – renewable energy
technology
• Myanmar Floriculturist Association (MFA) – studies on diversity, ecology
and population distribution of orchids

142. These NGOs are non-political although government engages their

services from time to time. They are funded through membership fees and
external funds, usually from international NGOs. Many of their members are
technically equipped (e.g. FREDA whose organizers were retired personnel from
the Ministry of Forestry), and are thus occasionally asked to undertake certain
activities under foreign-funded projects. The biggest is FREDA with about 300
members, followed by BANCA with about 150. The other three have less than
50 members each.27

143. There are also INGOs in Myanmar such as Care, Oxfam, Save the
Children, Food for the Hungry. They are generally involved in poverty alleviation
activities such as those that enhance productivity and improve health and
education. These INGOs usually work with local NGOs on specific projects and
pay for their time and services. Despite these collaborative activities, there is no
coordinating mechanism among NGOs and there is very little interaction among
them.

144. There has been no specific legislation that governs civil society
organizations in Myanmar. However, there are regulations that require local
NGOs to submit their statutes to relevant agencies (e.g. Ministry of Forestry for
environmental NGOs) for clearance to operate. INGOs, on the other hand, need
to seek permission from the Higher State Administrative Organ to operate, and
the National Intelligence Bureau and District authorities for in-country travel.28

Business

145. The only over-all business body in Myanmar is the 88 year-old Union of
Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry (UMFCCI),
27
Ibid.
28
Riska, Gunilla, “NGOs in the GMS: Involvement Related to Poverty Alleviation and Watershed
Management, Asian Development Bank RETA 5771 (www.mekonginfo.org)

65
founded in 1919. UMFCCI has committed to represent and safeguard the
interests of the private business sector and its members. It provides the
members various services such as human resource development in different
aspects of business, trade information, business facilitation, business matching,
consultancy, trade fair organization, etc.29 UMFCCI serves as the link between
the State and the private sector, a role made possible by the stature and
influence it is able to generate from its vast network of business associations and
close relationship with the government. It participates in national social and
economic development discussions and activities and supports small and
medium industries and enterprises.

146. Business and industry in Myanmar have been largely owned or controlled
by the military government. This and the economic embargo imposed by
developed countries due to human rights violations, have stymied the growth of
foreign investments in Myanmar. Thus, its business and industry sector has not
developed at pace with its neighboring countries. To a certain extent, this
situation could be advantageous to the environment since depletion of natural
resources could be slower and pollution lesser compared to a situation of rapid
development. Nonetheless, Myanmar’s economy is propelled by the production
and trade of natural resources-based raw materials and its natural resources are
already facing a number of issues such as depletion of forest cover, loss of
biological diversity, hunting of wildlife and erosion of fertile soil. It is still very
important, therefore, to strengthen the management of natural resources and
install more environmental safeguards with the help, even leadership, of private
business.

147. UMFCCI has been a member of various international business

organizations such as the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), ASEAN
Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ASEAN-CCI) where it became president in
2002, Greater Mekong Sub-region Business Forum (GMS-BF) where it served as
presiding organization, and Joint Economic Quadrangle Committee (JEQC).

6.3.2 State of Development and Environmental Planning

148. As indicated above, overall development planning in Myanmar is the

responsibility of the MNPED, particularly the Department of National Planning,
which has led the formulation of four short-term development plans so far.
Myanmar’s transformation from a centrally planned economy to a market-
oriented economic system since 1988 led the government to embark on a series
of short-term plans, with the professed objective of pursuing multi-sector
development towards the achievement of sustainable economic growth. The
First Four-Year Plan (1992-93 to 1995-96) was implemented and achieved an

29
Website of the Union of Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry
(http://www. umfcci.com.mm/foreword.html)

66
average annual economic growth rate of 7.5 percent, well beyond the targeted
5.1 percent. The Second Four-Year Plan (1996-97 to 2000-01) achieved an
even higher average annual growth rate of 8.4 percent, against a target of 6
percent. The Third short-term Five-Year Plan (2001-02 to 2005-06) was targeted
with an even higher annual GDP growth rate of 11.3 percent, and official
statistics indicate that even this target has been exceeded in recent years. The
government is now implementing the Fourth Five-Year short-term Plan (2006-07
to 2010-11).

149. The government of Myanmar had enacted several environmental laws

since the early 1990s, including the Pesticide Law (1990), Marine Fisheries Law
(1990), Tourism Law (1990), Forests Law (1992), Protection of Wildlife and Wild
Plants and Conservation of Natural Areas Law (1994), and the National
Environment Policy Law (1994). Myanmar has yet to promulgate a
comprehensive law on environmental protection; while a draft National
Environmental Protection Law has been drafted, it continues to await approval.

150. Since its inception, NCEA had undertaken various initiatives to integrate
environmental concerns into economic development. These included formulation
of a national environmental policy in 1994, and of Myanmar Agenda 21 as a
framework for adopting multi-sectoral approaches to sustainable development.
Myanmar Agenda 21 was completed in 1997, making Myanmar among the first in
GMS together with China to produce a national Agenda 21 or national
sustainable development strategy (NSDS) in accord with the global Agenda 21.
NCEA has also drafted the draft National Environmental Protection Law that is
awaiting approval, as mentioned above.

6.3.3 NSDS Readiness Assessment

Policy Integration

151. The creation of NCEA was in itself a major step towards the integration of
environmental considerations into Myanmar’s development planning process.
The national environmental policy issued by NCEA in 1994 and promulgated into
law clearly articulates the need for integration of environment in the development
process:

“…The objective of Myanmar’s environmental policy is … the integration of

environmental considerations into the development process to enhance the
quality of the life of all its citizens. …It is the responsibility of the State and
every citizen to preserve its natural resources in the interests of present and
future generations. Environmental protection should always be the primary
objective in seeking development.”

67
152. Actual performance since the mid 1990s has been mixed, reflecting the
persistent and intensifying environmental challenges arising from the rapid rate of
economic development attained since then. The Environmental Performance
Assessment Report for Myanmar30 indicates, for example, that while access to
safe water had substantially improved from 1995 to 2003, solid waste
management had either stagnated or deteriorated in areas outside the two main
cities of Yangon and Mandalay. Policy integration should improve further once
the draft National Environmental Protection Law is finally passed.

Intergenerational Timeframe

153. The four “short-term” 4- or 5-year development plans issued so far by the
Ministry of National Planning and Economic Development are deliberately short
term in nature. Myanmar Agenda 21, on the other hand, is open-ended, and thus
intergenerational in time-frame, as an NSDS should be. It has been described as
“a very far-sighted, far-ranging policy document,” 31 and benefited from the
technical support of UN organizations operating in Myanmar which had longer
term concerns of the country in mind. However, inasmuch as the document is
now ten years old, an update and revision is probably warranted and desirable,
given rapid developments and changes within Myanmar and in the sub-regional
and international arena within the past decade.

154. The degree to which integrative analysis and assessments had formed the
basis for the four short term development plans and Myanmar Agenda 21 is not
likely to have been substantial. This is because of the general dearth of (1)
baseline data on the various dimensions of Myanmar’s development, and (2)
integrative analytical tools available to planners in the region. Capacity building
initiatives must therefore directly address these inadequacies.

Indicators and Targets

155. There appears to be no official comprehensive set of sustainable

development indicators adopted by Myanmar so far, whether to track imple-
mentation of the short term development plans, or of Myanmar Agenda 21. The
government had reported to the UN Commission on Sustainable Development in
2003 that such an indicator system was still being developed at that time through
the GMS-wide project for developing SDIs for the six GMS member-countries.

156. The short term national development plans have included numerical
targets on economic growth (i.e. GDP growth rate), but it is not clear from
30
National Commission for Environmentral Affairs, Myanmar and Project Secretariat, UNEP
Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (2006), “Myanmar: National Environmental
Performance Assessment (EPA) Report,” ADB T.A. No. 6069-REG: National Performance
Assessment and Subregional Strategic Environment Framework in the Greater Mekong
Subregion.
31
Helen James (2003), “Cooperation and Community Empowerment in Myanmar in the context of
Myanmar Agenda 21,” Asian-Pacific Economic Literature 17 (1), 1–21.

68
available documents what other specific quantifiable targets for various sectoral
concerns have been specified. The main objectives of the Third Short-Term Five
Year Plan (2001-02 to 2005-06) have been stated as follows:

(1) To establish an agro-based industry and other required industries as a

first step in order to set up and industrialized nation
(2) To develop the electric power and energy sectors to be in line with the
expansion of industry
(3) To expand the agriculture, livestock and fishery sectors for self
sufficiency and export promotion
(4) To carry out afforestation works and greening of nine zones
(5) To expand the educational and health services for the development of
human resources
(6) To develop the rural areas
(7) To understand all-round development of other sectors
(8) To attain a firm foundation for economic and financial development

It is not clear how these may have been translated into quantifiable targets, for
purposes of monitoring and evaluation.

157. Under its commitment to the Millennium Development Goals, the

Myanmar government has recently worked to develop a set of MDG-based
indicators with UNDP assistance under the Integrated Household Living
Conditions Assessment Project (IHLCA). The database to be generated is
expected to be the largest and most important source of information on the
nature, extent and causes of poverty in Myanmar.32

Co-ordination and Institutions

158. The Myanmar EPA Report (see footnote 28) observes that environmental
management in Myanmar had traditionally been undertaken in a fragmented
manner by specific line agencies within their respective mandates. For example,
the Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Forestry took responsibility managing
the natural resources falling under agriculture and forestry, respectively.
Mandates were sometimes combined, with the Irrigation Department, Water
Resource Utilization Department, Yangon/ Mandalay City Development
Committees, the Department of Development Affairs, and Environmental
Sanitation Division under Department of Health sharing the responsibility for
water supply management, for example. For management of urban environment,
responsibility was shared by City/ Township Development Committees,
Government Affairs Department, Department of Human Settlement and Housing
Development, Department of Health, and Directorate of Industrial Supervision
and Inspection. On the other hand, no clear responsibility is assigned for national
air and water quality management.

32
UNDP (2005), Human Development Initiative: Report of the Independent Assessment Mission.

69
159. Establishment of the NCEA in 1990 facilitated stronger coordination
among government agencies and offices concerned with various aspects of
environmental and natural resources management. However, as indicated
earlier, NCEA does not have the authority to enforce coordination. Thus, inter-
ministerial and departmental committees have been set up to address cross-
sectoral environmental issues. Apart from the National Committee for Combating
Land Degradation and the National Water Committee already mentioned earlier,
a pollution control committee was formed under Ministry of Science and
Technology Development to monitor and regulate industrial pollution in urban
environment at the operational level. The establishment of the National
Coordination Committee for Environment (NCCE) in 2004 helped further promote
horizontal and vertical coordination. Spatial coordination was strengthened
through sub-committees in eco-regions to support the NCCE.

Local and Regional Governance

160. At the local level, local authorities (State & Division, District, Township and
Village Tract Peace and Development Councils) take responsibility for the
implementation of environmental programs and initiatives within their respective
territories. Coordination with local offices of national government agencies is
carried out through committees formed at the local level. The Inle Watershed
Conservation Committee is one such committee addressing the issues of land
degradation, deforestation and species biodiversity in Southern Shan and Kayah
States.

161. Up until 2004, these local committees created to coordinate natural

resource management and land use had no direct link to NCEA. Creation of the
NCCE in 2004, with representation from both ministerial agencies and local
governments, was a valuable step towards achieving both horizontal and vertical
coordination in addressing environmental concerns nationwide.

Stakeholder Participation

162. There is a strong tradition of community participation in local development

initiatives in Myanmar, particularly in the rural areas and hill tribal communities.
These take the form of contributing labor and other resources to provision of
common facilities such as community water supply, maintenance of village
infrastructure (schools, roads) and improving village sanitation.

163. While there is no strong tradition of NGO involvement in national-level

sustainable development initiatives in Myanmar, NGO presence has been
increasing. More prominent local and international NGOs have been named
earlier. Local NGOs are working primarily in rural areas and are less involved in
urban environmental issues like air pollution and solid waste management.
While FREDA was involved in the formulation of Myanmar Agenda 21, there

70
remains very limited engagement between local NGOs and the government
through NCEA.

164. The other significant agencies/bodies outside of the Myanmar government

who are actively involved in sustainable development initiatives are international
development institutions and non-governmental organizations like UNEP, UNDP,
ESCAP, UNICEF, Hanns Seidel Foundation and the Ozone Convention
Secretariat (funding for regional projects such as ALGAS (Asian Least-Cost
Green House Gas Abatement Strategy). All have been helping NCEA lay the
foundations for a more integrated approach to environmental management as
espoused in Myanmar Agenda 21. Nonetheless, there remains much scope for
improving the culture of collaboration between economic decision-makers,
environmental specialists and especially the local civil society community.

Monitoring and Evaluation

165. Monitoring and evaluation of implementation of the short term national

development plans is a stated mandate of the Department of National Planning
of the MNPED. This function is described in official documents as “monitoring,
reviewing and analyzing the plan implementation situation to submit to the higher
authorities on a monthly and quarterly basis.” It does not appear that such
monitoring and evaluation involves any systematic participation of independent
non-government stakeholders, however. Nor is there any indication that any
independent monitoring of sustainable development performance is undertaken
outside of government in any regular or systematic way. Similarly, Myanmar
Agenda 21 lacks a set of clear indicators with which to assess its effective
implementation.

166. Indeed, the observed lack of a comprehensive set of indicators for

sustainable development so far, or of quantifiable targets for the short term plans
other than the GDP growth rate, limits the effectiveness of any such attempts at
monitoring and evaluation, whether from within or outside the government. The
situation suggests a need for capacity building towards developing a satisfactory
sustainable development indicator system for use by the Myanmar government
and by non-government stakeholders alike. This could build on the MDG
indicator system developed under the IHLCA Project.

Resource Mobilization

167. A major constraint to Myanmar’s ability to raise resources to support its

NSDS is its very limited access to international donor assistance. At present,
official development assistance (ODA) to Myanmar is channeled almost
exclusively toward humanitarian assistance. As such, there are very minimal if
any loans or grants available from the international financial institutions in
support of environmental or sustainable development initiatives. This implies that
domestic resources would have to be relied on almost exclusively to finance the

71
country’s sustainable development strategy. With the government fiscal deficit
running at about 4 percent of GDP, the fiscal imbalance will continue to constrain
public investments for sustainable development. And because of the absence of
a well-developed market for foreign debt, the government deficit is financed by
highly inflationary Central Bank financing. All these suggest that the current
levels of public spending are unsustainable, and public finances are likely to be
severely constrained in the years ahead.

6.3.4 MDG Outlook

168. Lack of solid benchmark data makes it unclear what quantitative targets
on the MDGs that Myanmar is pursuing by 2015. It is only recently that the
government has begun to attain the capability to monitor MDG performance more
completely and more systematically, via the IHLCA project with UNDP assistance.
While the performance record appears mixed, available data suggest that good
progress is being made on a number of the targets (Table 6). However, good
performance on the national aggregate data may conceal considerable
challenges to attaining the MDGs at the local levels, especially in more remote
upland areas. Constrained financing will present a formidable challenge to MDG
performance in the years ahead, but earnest government efforts to uphold
commitments to the MDGs can help sustain recent gains, notwithstanding
funding constraints.

Table 6. Progress Toward the Millennium Development Goals

and Targets, Myanmar (As of 2005)

Goals and Targets Status

Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger
Target 1: Halve, between 1990 and Poverty rate as of 2001 is estimated at 20.7 per cent for urban,
2015, the proportion of people 28.4 per cent for rural and union rate was 26.6 per cent, based
whose income is less than $1/day. on the survey conducted by the Central Statistical Organization,
Ministry of National Planning and Economic Development. It is
not clear what the 1990 benchmark figure was.

Target 2: Halve, between 1990 and Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age
2015, the proportion of people who declined from 38.6% in 1997 to 31.8% in 2003. Target of 19.3%
suffer from hunger. by 2015 appears attainable. Prevalence of goiter has
dramatically dropped from 33 per cent in 1994 to 5.5 percent in
2004.
Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education
Target 3: Ensure that, by 2015, Net Enrollment Ratio in Primary Education rose from 65.7% in
children everywhere, boys and girls 1990 to 84.5% in 2005. Proportion of Pupils starting grade 1 who
alike, will be able to complete a full reach grade 5 rose from 24.5% in 1990 to 74.5% in 2005.
course of primary schooling. Literacy rate of 15 - 24 years old rose from 80.9% in 1990 to
96.5% in 2005. The apparent substantial progress on these
indicators suggests that the country is broadly on track in
achieving this goal.

72
Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women
Target 4: Eliminate gender disparity Ratio of girls to boys in primary education was 92.8% in 1990
in primary and secondary and 98.4% in 2004; in secondary education, 93.6% in 1990 and
education, preferably by 2005, and 95.8% in 2004, after having risen to 105.0% in 2003; in tertiary
in all levels of education no later education, 150.6% in 1990, 151.6% in 2004. Ratio of literate
than 2015. females to males 15-24 years old was 101.4% in 2004 (no 1990
benchmark data).
Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality
Target 5: Reduce by two thirds, Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) was 130 in 1990,
between 1990 and 2015, the under- 66.6 in 2003; infant mortality (per 1, 000 live births) was 98 in
5 mortality rate. 1990, 49.7 in 2003; proportion of 1-year old children immunized
against measles was 67.7% in 1990, 87 in 1998. The data
suggest that substantial progress is being made, and this target
is achievable.

Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health

Target 6: Reduce by three quarters,
between 1990 and 2015, the
maternal mortality ratio (MMR).
WHO estimates put MMR (per 1000 live births) at 1.9 in 1990,
2.55 in 2001. UNICEF estimated it at an average of 2.3 in 1995-
2002, and 3.6 in 2000. While these estimates suggest a
worsening situation, the figures are relatively low compared to its
neighbors. Proportion of births attended by skilled health
personnel was 50.8% in 1990, and rose to 67.5% in 2003.

Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Other Diseases

Target 7: Have halted by 2015, and HIV prevalence among pregnant women aged 15-24 years was
begun to reverse, the spread of 2.7% in 1992, 1.2% in 2003.
HIV/AIDS.
Target 8: Have halted by 2015, and Malaria deaths per 100,000 population (all ages) were 12.6 in
begun to reverse, the incidence of 1990, 4.7 in 2003. Prevalence per 100,000 population (all ages)
malaria and other major diseases. was at 24.4 in 1990, 13.5 in 2003. TB prevalence per 100,000
was 103 in 1994 and 155 in 2003. TB deaths per 100,000 were
32.6 in 1990 (urban) and 18 in 2003.

Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability

Target 9: Integrate the principles of Myanmar Agenda 21 was formulated and passed in 1997.
sustainable development into Ratio of area protected to maintain biological diversity to surface
country policies and programs and area (%) was 1.06% in 1990, and 3.77% in 2005.
reverse the loss of environmental
resources.
Target 10: Halve, by 2015, the Percent of population with access to safe drinking water was
proportion of people without 38% (Urban), 30% (Rural) and 32% (Total) in 1990; in 2000, the
sustainable access to safe drinking percentages were 89% (Urban), 66% (Rural) and 72% (Total).
water. The numbers suggest substantial progress, and attainment of
the target ahead of schedule.
Target 11: By 2020, achieve a Proportion of people with access to improved sanitation was
significant improvement in the lives 40% (Urban), 35% (Rural) and 36% (Total) in 1990, and
of at least 100 million slum dwellers. improved to 87% (Urban), 82%(Rural) and 83% (Total) in 2000.
Source: Myanmar MDG Report 2005, MNPED and UN Country Team

73
6.3.5 Overall Country Assessment

169. Myanmar has taken significant steps towards managing its environment
and pursuing sustainable development. It was among the first countries in GMS
to formulate a national Agenda 21, essentially the country’s NSDS, and created
necessary institutional mechanisms that include NCEA, NECC, NCC and other
sector-specific coordinating bodies. There is a strongly professed recognition of
the need to integrate environmental and social dimensions of development with
the economic dimension. Notwithstanding this, certain key elements of a
complete NSDS remain lacking or inadequate.

170. Myanmar needs to strengthen its structures, systems, and procedures to

brace itself against the enormous pressures created by its own development path,
regional integration, and globalization. Clearly, its governance framework,
particularly in the areas of legislation and institutional system, need to adapt very
quickly to all these pressures including to the impending changes in its political
paradigm that will be brought about by the new Constitution that is currently
being finalized.

171. One area that requires priority attention is the lack of vertical and
horizontal coordination and integration. Too many bodies and mechanisms are
currently involved in environmental management. Unfortunately, this has
resulted in overlaps, resource conflicts and instances of inconsistent approaches.
Ministries and departments act pursuant to their respective mandates and
budgetary allowances such that environmental protection efforts are conducted
on a sectoral and patchy basis. There has also been lack of coordination
between central authorities and the divisional and state authorities. Enforcement
of laws and regulations in the divisions and states is conducted largely by the
provincial offices of the relevant sectoral Ministries, but these offices usually
come under the direct authority of the provincial governments. Many committees
and sub-committees have not been very active and effective at the local levels
and do not have a direct relationship with NCEA.

172. The problem of coordination and integration is magnified when over-all

sustainability is considered. NCEA, which has been acting as the SD coordinator,
is environment-focused, hence is ill-equipped to integrate the economic and
social dimensions in environmental management and protection. On the other
hand, MNPED is more concerned with economic development than social
development and environmental management. This lack of coordination and
integration is quite evident in the strong environmental orientation of Myanmar
Agenda 21 (MA 21) because NCEA led its preparation. The linkage between MA
21 and the country’s socio-economic development plans is also unclear.

173. In addition, stakeholders have been undertaking sustainability initiatives

without the benefit of an over-all framework and without coordination with
government. Stakeholder participation in sustainable development processes

74
remains limited in Myanmar. While limited NGO participation was provided in the
formulation of Myanmar Agenda 21, there is little if any engagement between
local NGOs and the government in sustainable development initiatives, whether
at the national or local levels. This is obviously a function of the continued
narrow democratic space in the country, compared to its GMS neighbors. On the
other hand, international organizations, including NGOs, have had greater
opportunity for cooperative engagement with the government in planning or
implementing programs or projects for sustainable development.

174. To address the above problems, the following are recommended:

• Develop a comprehensive legislative framework for environment and

sustainable development that would provide, among others, the
mechanism for an integrated and coordinated approach to strategy
formulation, policy- and decision-making, program/project development
and implementation, and M&E. The framework law can provide effective
consultative and participatory processes amongst agencies, between
central and divisional/state authorities, and among stakeholders. In line
with this, review, update, and consolidate into a framework law the
disparate laws that currently exist.

• Prioritize the strengthening of the NCCE systems and procedures and use
it as the coordinating mechanism for environmental planning,
programming and monitoring and evaluation (M&E).

• Establish clear coordinating system and procedures among NCEA,

MNPED and other concerned agencies and instrumentalities at all levels.

• Strengthen the participation of business and civil society in environment

and SD. Corollary to this, establish a clear policy and procedural
framework for stakeholder participation.

• In the process of undertaking the foregoing, explore the possibility of

enabling (e.g., expanding the role, membership, capability, and local
reach) an existing body (e.g. NCCE) to serve as the sustainability
coordinating and integrating mechanism. Refer to the experiences of
neighboring countries (i.e., Vietnam and Philippines) for adaptation to
Myanmar’s situation.

• Develop a set of comprehensive sustainable development indicators (SDI).

The MDG indicator system developed under the UNDP-assisted
Integrated Household Living Conditions Assessment Project (IHLCA) is a
useful starting point. The current ADB-UNEP GMS project is likewise
providing support for formulation of SDIs.

75
• Give priority to allocating budget resources for capacity building. There is
a general lack of trained personnel and financial resources to perform
mandated functions within government. There have been weaknesses in
formulating and implementing integrated plans, enacting and enforcing
policies and regulations, developing and undertaking projects, and
monitoring and evaluating performance and status. In this regard, the
government needs to proactively seek assistance from non-traditional
sources, as well as take advantage of UNEP’s capacity building programs
especially for GMS since the current political situation in Myanmar makes
it difficult to access other external resources and assistance.

• Improve the political environment. The above recommendations would

not be easy to pursue if the current political environment persists. The
long-standing clamor for the military government to cede power, allow the
democratic installation of a civilian government, and end human rights
abuses, has remained unheeded. This had prompted many governments
worldwide to impose various kinds of sanctions such as economic
embargo, exclusion from donors’ ODA programs, and travel restrictions.
Therefore, the Myanma people lose the ability to access investments,
expand trade, travel, and generate external assistance to improve their
quality of life. The situation inhibits the people from exercising their
human rights and improving their capability to sustain themselves.

• Facilitate the passing of a new Constitution. The biggest constraint to

Myanmar’s sustainable development strategy and initiatives over the
years ahead will be inadequate financing, borne out of the country’s
severely restricted access to external financing, whether public or private.
Addressing the political circumstances that have brought about this
situation would have to be given serious consideration by the authorities,
especially given the unsustainability of the current status of government
finances. Beyond financing, the pursuit of sustainable development is
substantially affected by the current political situation as indicated by
growing poverty and environmental pressures. In this regard, the
government needs to facilitate the passing of a new Constitution that
would have the widest inputs and support from the people, and the rapid
transition to a civilian government as soon as possible. While easier said
than done, everybody must have the will to move towards the same
direction and set aside vested interests for the benefit of Myanmar and its
people.

• Update Myanmar Agenda 21. Inasmuch as Myanmar Agenda 21 is now

ten years old, it is timely and appropriate to revisit the country’s NSDS
with a view towards pursuing the requisites and ingredients of a complete
and satisfactory NSDS more fully. With available indicators showing
mixed progress toward the MDGs and sustainable development objectives

76
 in general, efforts to renew and reinvigorate Myanmar Agenda 21 would
be desirable at this time.

6.4 Thailand

6.4.1 Institutional Context

175. Thailand's government structure has evolved with the changing

environment into one of Asia’s strongest democracies even with the preservation
of the kingdom’s monarchical system established over 700 years ago, and the
frequent changes in government in the last 50 years.

SD Coordination

176. Thailand environment and SD institutions are more mature compared to

those in the rest of the GMS. Its three major sectors – government, civil society
and business – are better established and participating more in governance.
Within government, Thailand has established or restructured a number of bodies
to strengthen coordination and improve governance. Each one is discussed in
turn below.

177. National Environment Board (NEB). Thailand has recognized much

earlier the importance of coordinating efforts related to environmental protection
and management. As a manifestation of this recognition, the NEB was
established in 1975 through the National Environment Quality Act as a
coordinating mechanism that enhances links and communication among sectoral
agencies and between the national and local levels, as well as situates
environmental management within a larger framework of sustainable
development. It is mandated to recommend plans, policies (including financial
and fiscal), laws and regulations for environmental enhancement, protection, and
conservation; prescribe environmental quality standards; and supervise the Thai
Environment Fund.

178. The NEB is a high-level body chaired by the Prime Minister himself. It is
composed of the Deputy Prime Minister as the vice-chairman, nine Ministers
(Environment, Defense, Finance, Agriculture, Transport and Communications,
Interior, Education, Public Health, Industry), Secretaries-General of the National
Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB) and the Board of Investment,
Director of the Budget Bureau, and eight individuals or organizations that have
stature or expertise in environmental matters. There are thus 14 government
and eight private sector representatives.

179. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE). The

Permanent Secretary of MONRE is a member of NEB and serves as its

77
Secretary. This means that MONRE is the technical and administrative arm of
NEB that provides technical inputs and recommendations necessary for decision-
making. It undertakes the usual reviews and researches that are necessary in
formulating plans, policies and programs. It also coordinates and monitors the
implementation of said plans, policies and programs for reporting to NEB and
support to its technical inputs.

180. The MONRE and its predecessor (Ministry of Science, Technology and
Environment) has traditionally been viewed as the lead body in SD matters,
having been representing Thailand in sessions of the UNCSD and other global
discussions and institutional mechanisms on SD. But as the technical arm of
NEB, MONRE has actually been carrying its policies, views and positions on
specific environmental issues. The strong sector orientation and competence of
NEB and MONRE limits their abilities to mainstream environment in socio-
economic planning and policy-making.

181. National Committee on Sustainable Development (NCSD). Discussions

pertaining to the establishment of a coordinating mechanism for SD (hereinafter
referred to as NCSD) were initiated by Thailand Environment Institute (TEI)
sometime in mid-1990s. But due to the existence of NEB, the government (i.e.
MOSTE, later MONRE) did not support the creation of NCSD then even as it
recognized the need for a strong coordinating and integrating mechanism. As a
compromise, the Agenda 21 Committee of NEB was referred to as the “Thai
NCSD”. It was a multi-stakeholder committee that was supported by MONRE,
which served as its secretariat.

182. In late 2002, soon after the World Summit for Sustainable Development
(WSSD), the Prime Minister established the NCSD in compliance with the
provision of the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation. The new NCSD is a
higher level body with the Prime Minister as the Chair and the two Deputy Prime
Ministers as Assistant Chairs. It also adequately covers the three SD pillars with
the membership of the Ministers of Natural Resources and Environment,
Agriculture and Cooperative, Foreign Affairs, Industry, Interior, Tourism and
Sport, Energy, Social Development and Human Security, and two officials of
National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB; see further below):
the Secretary General as NCSD Secretary and one Officer Level 10 as Assistant
Secretary. Its functions include:

1. Establishing the policy guidelines and framework for integrated SD

strategies.
2. Promoting the use of SD strategies and action plans through public
participation and integrated planning of concerned agencies.
3. Approving the action plan, projects and budget that implement SD plan.
4. Monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the SD plan.
5. Establishing the institutional support and working process of the NCSD.

78
183. The NCSD has good features, namely: high-level, multi-sectoral and
supported by an oversight agency acting as secretariat. Its two major
weaknesses are the absence of representation from business and civil society,
and the inability of its secretariat to take it off ground. Since its creation almost
five years ago, the NCSD only met once for the sole purpose of organizing itself.
Interviews with key informants indicate that the main reasons for the inactivity are
NESDB’s inability to exercise the NCSD mandates without duplicating those of
NEB/MONRE and NESDB, and the absence of budget for this new function has
also been a factor. The first reason is common to many countries, proving that
SD continues to be a difficult concept to grasp and undertake. Hopefully,
NESDB would be able to internalize the concept and translate it to concrete
actions through the NCSD upon the completion the Thai NSDS.

Planning Mechanisms

184. The NESDB is an agency under the Office of the Prime Minister, which is
primarily responsible for orchestrating the formulation of the National Economic
and Social Development Plans and translating them into action programs. It also
monitors and assesses the progress of plan implementation that provides
important data and information that are necessary in making adjustments on the
plan and in decision-making. It undertakes special analyses or studies on
specific issues and provides recommendations to for policy-making.

185. NESDB is divided in two levels: the Board and the Office. The Board is
chaired by a distinguished elder statesman and consists of five ex-officio
members (i.e., Governor of the Bank of Thailand, Secretary General of the Civil
Service Commission, Director of the Bureau of the Budget, Director General of
the Fiscal Policy Office and the Secretary General of NESDB); and nine
members appointed by the Cabinet. It is the policy and decision-making body
that draws technical support from the Office. The NESDB Office is headed by a
Secretary-General who serves as the Secretary for the Board.

186. In exercising its mandate, the NESDB needs to closely coordinate with the
various sectoral and oversight ministries and agencies. This has not been very
easy, however, because the NESDB is a sub-ministerial body and does not have
representation from sectoral ministries. Merely judging from the composition of
its Board, the economic and fiscal matters could have the tendency to dominate
Board discussions, not because the members are biased but because their
competencies and interests are along those lines. It would thus probably take
urgent issues and strong representation from concerned ministries for NESDB to
dwell more on specific sectors. This flaw in the composition of NESDB is seen
as contributing to the apparent slow assimilation of NESDB in SD matters, hence
environment in socio-economic strategies and programs. There has also been a
continuing misconception within NESDB that SD is merely concerned with
environment, hence largely the responsibility of MONRE33.
33
As gathered from key informant interviews within and outside NESDB.

79
187. Very recently, there has been a strengthening of linkage and coordination
between MONRE and the NESDB on SD initiatives. NESDB has also been
engaging itself more in environmental discussions. The current preparation of
Thailand’s NSDS has been an excellent opportunity for both NESDB and
MONRE to work closely together and develop a mechanism for integrating the
social, economic and environmental dimensions of sustainable development.
There seems to be a trend towards much closer partnership and cooperation
between the two agencies as Thailand proactively pursues sustainability.

188. Apart from NESDB, another body that oversees national development
concerns is the National Economic and Social Advisory Council34 (NESAC). The
NESAC was created by The National Economic and Social Advisory Council Act
of B.E. 2543 signed by the Prime Minister on November 15, 2000. It is a
government body that maintains the status of a government department under
the authority of the Prime Minister, but it is neither within the Office of the Prime
Minister nor any ministry. NESAC is vested with the following functions:

• To provide advice on economic and social matters to the Council of

Ministers
• To provide comments on the National Economic and Social Development
Plans and other plans prescribed by law to be reviewed by the National
Economic and Social Advisory Council prior to their official implementation.

197. The Law provides that NESAC shall have 99 members carefully chosen to
represent various sectors according to the following distribution:

• Economic sector - 50: Agriculture (16), Industry (17), Services (17)

• Social sector -19
• Natural resources sector – 16
• Resource persons - 14

The NESDB Secretary General initially assumed the duties of the NESAC
Secretary-General. The arrangement ceased under B.E. 2547 or NESAC Act No.
2 issued by the Prime Minister on July 19, 2004.

189. NESAC appears to be a suitable coordinating and integrating mechanism

for SD. It was created by law and has wide representation from various sectors
of society. However, it is composed of private individuals although NESAC itself
is considered an agency of government. The NCSD was created after NESAC,
which indicates that government does not see NESAC as the appropriate SD
mechanism.

34
NESAC website (http://www.nesac.go.th/english/)

80
Civil Society Participation

190. Thailand has an established civil society community that is currently

estimated to consist of about 27 INGOs and 10,000 35 -14,000 36 local NGOs.
These come in all types (e.g. policy advocacy, developmental, research,
religious) and sizes (from less than 10 to more than 20 employees) and cover a
wide variety of areas and issues (e.g. livelihood, education agriculture, health). A
good number of these NGOs undertake activities at the community level that
round up the SD concept, including in the areas of livelihood (economic),
education (social) and reforestation (environment). The so-called environmental
NGOs or those that primarily deal with environmental protection are estimated to
number about 200.

191. The growth of the NGO population in environment and SD was at its
highest in the 1980s when there was strong dissatisfaction about the
government’s development strategy, which hinged prominently on
industrialization. Many saw this strategy as highly influenced by the Bretton
Woods institutions and multi-national companies. Concerns had been expressed
that the economy was growing too fast to the detriment of the environment and
the rural sector.

192. The civil society movement became very strong during the period and the
scale tipped in its favor during the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis that made
government rethink its development strategy and listen to alternative views.
While government had a traditional cautious attitude towards civil society, it
began to appreciate their importance and potentials especially for environmental
management. Through the 1992 Environment Act, the government officially
recognized and provided a legal basis for the role of NGOs in the conservation of
the environment, and spelled out their rights and duties in the enhancement of
national environmental quality. The law established the policy guidelines for
government-environmental NGO interaction and cooperation. It designated the
Department of Environmental Quality Promotion of MOSTE as the NGO registrar,
and encouraged the voluntary registration of NGOs. While registration was not
compulsory, it served as an incentive since only those registered can apply for
financial support for development activities.

193. The engaging stance of government towards civil society was reinforced
by the 8th NESDP (1997-2001), which called for the participation of the people in
the decision-making processes at the sub-national or local levels. In response to
this call, the NESDB made the participation of civil society an inherent part of the
planning process. Succeeding NESDPs underwent extensive consultation

35
Gunilla, Riska, “NGOs in the GMS: Involvement Related to Poverty Alleviation and Watershed
Management (Thailand)”, Asian Development Bank (RETA 5771)
36
Clay G. Wescott (Editor), Key Governance Issues in Cambodia, Lao, Thailand and Vietnam
(Chapter IV), Asian Development Bank, April 2001.

81
processes particularly at the local levels. The establishment of NESAC may
have been encouraged by this policy.

194. Local NGOs are generally small, usually having less than 10 members.
They are very fluid, coming and going within relatively short periods, since many
are not registered and operate only on a per issue or case-to-case basis. They
generally rely on external funding, and tend to cease operations when such funds
run out. Lately, the flow of external assistance to Thailand has been substantially
declining because its level of development has already been high. Hence, the
number of NGOs is expected to dwindle further to only those that are currently
bigger and stronger. One such example is TEI, which has managed to grow to a
large non-profit research organization with more than 100 highly technically-
equipped staff. TEI has attained a certain level of stature and respect from
government and other sectors of society because of its demonstrated
competence in its areas of work. It has been a member of an NEB Committee
and many other inter-agency bodies, is often consulted by MONRE, has close
relations with the Thai Business Council for SD, and is prominent in the lists of
NGOs and research institutions of many development institutions.

195. After operating in Thailand as early as the 1960s and rapidly growing in
numbers within the following two decades, the number of INGOs active in
Thailand has likewise dwindled for the same reason. The remaining number (27)
of INGOs referred to earlier, however, does not fully reflect the actual level of
their operations. INGOs need to be represented by Thai citizens or organizations
in order to register their operations Thailand. There are many cases where such
INGOs just operate through their representatives to avoid additional bureaucratic
hurdles. INGOs remaining in the country are mostly operating in areas where
pressures of poverty, environmental degradation and other issues remain high.

Business Participation

196. The economic growth and development of Thailand has been phenomenal.
Gross domestic product was growing steadily at an average annual rate of about
9% for a decade before the Asian financial crisis. After a two-year hiatus, growth
has again been accelerating at around 5% per year. This growth was fueled by
foreign direct investments across all its economic sub-sectors, with industry
taking up the bulk. This led to the equally phenomenal growth in business and
industry, which has boosted the rate of increase in number of business
associations in Thailand.

197. There are at least three main umbrella associations, scores of industry
specific business associations, and several foreign chambers of commerce
currently active in Thailand. The key umbrella organizations include the
Federation of Thai Industries (FTI), Thai Chamber of Commerce (TCC), and
Thailand Business Council for Sustainable Development (TBCSD). FTI was
transformed from the then 20-year old Association of Thai Industries through the

82
enactment of the Federation of Thai Industries Act, 1967. This Law aims to
strengthen the private sector by promoting sustainable industrialization,
synchronizing business processes with those of national economic development,
and properly protecting the national interest in the world economic environment37.
The TCC was founded in 1933 but its charter was ratified in 1966 through the
Chamber of Commerce Act B.E. 2509. It promotes trade, industry, agriculture,
finance and the economy by being the a spokesman for the private sector and as
a coordinator between government and business38. On the other hand, TBCSD
was established in November 1993 to promote environmental awareness within
the business sector under the concept of sustainable development39.

198. It may be noted from the objectives and activities of these organizations
that business has consciously been strengthening its relationship with
government; coordinating and aligning their plans and activities with those of
government; and actively undertaking activities that promote sustainability of their
sector. In addition to taking care of their members, they have been very much
involved in ESD processes such as planning, policy development, capacity
building, awareness raising, greening the supply chain and other similar activities.
They have also been mandated by government to handle specific tasks such as
issuance of Certificates of Origin as a service to exporters (TCC); and conduct
product testing and issuance of certificates of origin and quality assurance (FTI).
BCSD, on the other hand, promotes the concept of SD and assist its members in
assimilating this in their operations. All in all, business has become a close
partner in pursuing environmental integrity and socio-economic sustainability in
Thailand.

6.4.2 State of Development and Environmental Planning

199. Thailand is now on its Tenth (10th) National Economic and Social
Development Plan (NESDP), covering 2007 to 2011. While it has a five-year
time frame, it is intended to embody Thailand’s strategic development directions
for the next 10-15 years. As presented by the National Economic and Social
Development Board (NESDB), the Plan continues to be guided by the Philosophy
of a “Sufficiency Economy” of His Majesty the King, built on sufficiency, modera-
tion, economizing, rationalization, and the creation of “social immunity” for the
majority of the people who are in the rural sector. The Plan professes a
development strategy that is “People-Centered,” addressing all dimensions of
human welfare, and promoting peaceful coexistence among people and between
people and nature. The vision behind the 10th NESDP is a “Green and
Happiness Society,” indicating primacy of environmental health and human well-
being. The strategy underpinning the Plan is strengthening and utilizing the
social, economic and natural resource capitals in pursuit of the vision, reflecting

37
Federation of Thai Industries website (http://www.fti.or.th)
38
The Chamber of Commerce website (http://www.tcc.or.th/)
39
Thai Business Council for Sustainable Development website (http://www.tei.or.th/tbcsd)

83
the economic, social and environmental integration that marks the thrust for
sustainable development.

200. The Tenth Plan builds on and is consistent with its predecessor plans. In
the Ninth Plan, major emphasis was placed on balanced development of human,
social, economic, and environmental resources. A priority goal was the pursuit of
good governance at all levels of Thai society in order to achieve real sustainable
people-centered development. The Eighth Plan had similarly advocated a
holistic people-centered development approach.

201. In 1996, the Thai Cabinet approved the National Policy and Perspective
Plan for the Enhancement and Conservation of National Environmental Quality,
1997-2016, the first formal environmental policy approved by the Cabinet. NEQA
further mandated that the policy be translated into environmental quality
management plans of varying durations. The Environmental Quality Manage-
ment Plan 1999-2006 was the vehicle for implementing the policy in recent years.
The law also requires each province to prepare a Provincial Environment Action
Plan (PEAP) in conformity with the National Environmental Management Plan
outlined by the NEB.

202. Efforts to produce a national Agenda 21, particularly in preparation for the
2002 Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development, had been
initiated by the Thailand Environment Institute (TEI) working within a
subcommittee on sustainable development under the NEB. However, this
remained a working document that never found official adoption. Efforts are now
underway that effectively revive this initiative under the current UNEP-ADB
NSDS project for GMS.

6.4.3 NSDS Readiness Assessment

Policy Integration

203. Environmental considerations have long found their way into Thai
development planning, and even more so with social dimensions of economic
development. Social and environmental challenges arising from Thailand’s rapid
economic growth in the 1980s and 1990s brought forth the imperative for
safeguarding human development and environmental welfare, and natural
resource conservation. These concerns have been articulated at the highest
levels by the Royal Family and manifested in the Eighth, Ninth and Tenth
NESDPs. Thailand has moved past a general acceptance of the notion of
integrating social, economic and environmental dimensions in development, to
shaping the actual mechanisms for effecting such integration. In the Tenth Plan,
this three-dimensional integration is reflected in the thrust of strengthening social,
economic and natural resource capitals of the country. The Tenth Plan

84
strategies reflect a holistic approach to the country’s sustainable development,
viz:

(1) Develop human resource quality and prepare for knowledge society
(2) Strengthen local communities for better income distribution
(3) Restructure economy towards balance and competitiveness for the Asia
Century
(4) Improve natural resource base and good environment for the country
development based on biodiversity
(5) Increase good governance for peaceful and orderly society

Intergenerational Timeframe

204. The NESDP has always had a 5-year time-frame, although the various
plans have addressed development directions and strategies well beyond that
limited time frame. On the other hand, the National Policy and Prospective Plan
for the Enhancement and Conservation of National Environmental Quality (1997-
2016) covers a much longer 20-year time frame, enough to address
intergenerational issues.

205. The Ninth Plan is admitted by NESDB to have been more preoccupied
with short-term challenges, particularly those arising from the after-effects of the
Asian financial crisis. These included, in particular, predominantly economic and
financial challenges like the high level of non-performing loans (NPLs) in the
banking system and high levels of debt.40 But having largely overcome these
short-term challenges by 2006, the current Tenth Plan has become more
consciously forward-looking in its orientation, particularly in the way it addresses
a key emerging concern for longer term planning for Thailand, that of the aging
society. Given the dramatic drop in the population growth rate and fertility rate in
the past two decades, Thailand is increasingly conscious of impending profound
demographic changes. These are expected to have dramatic implications on the
social, economic and environmental challenges that will face Thai society in the
not-too-distant future.

206. The Tenth Plan also recognizes biodiversity conservation as a key

objective in strengthening the natural resources capital of Thailand, further
reflecting a forward-looking, intergenerational orientation that was not as
prominent in the previous plan.

Analysis and Assessments

207. According to NESDB, the work to formulate the Tenth Plan began with a
comprehensive review on the past seven development plans. A budget was also

40
Interview with Dr. Porametee Vimolsiri, NESDB Offices, Bangkok, Thailand, on October 24,
2006.

85
provided for background research, particularly to analyze trends and outlooks
beyond 2010. Thailand, through NESDB and non-government think tanks like
the Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI) and TEI, possesses a
relatively higher level of sophistication in analytical research capabilities and
assessment tools at its disposal. As such, it is able to back up its development
planning and public investment programming work with empirical analysis.
Nonetheless, integrative analytical tools remain scarce anywhere, and largely
untapped for sustainable development planning work especially in the Asian
region.

Indicators and Targets

208. Thailand has made deliberate efforts to devise quantitative indicators and
targets for its development plans. The Ninth Plan (2002-2006), for one,
quantified several key natural resource and environmental objectives as follows:

By 2006, Thailand is to

- Have at least 25% of the country area under protected forests

- Have at least 1.25 millions rai (200 km2) of mangrove areas
- Reduce the area prone to soil erosion to no more than 9.7% of the
country’s total land area
- Bring the area degraded (acidic, saline, other) soils to no more than
9.5% of the country’s total
- Ensure that all main rivers have the level of dissolved oxygen of at
least 2 mg/liter
- Collect and treat at least 50% of all hazardous waste generated
- Properly dispose of at least 50% of solid waste generated in the
provinces
- Recycle at least 30 % of the total solid waste generated
- Bring air quality in all urban area to within existing (and quantified) air
quality standards

209. In 2003, the NESDB supported TEI and the Kenan Institute of Asia to
develop a set of sustainable development indicators for Thailand. The result was
a first set of 37 SD indicators adopted in 2004, composed of 13 indicators for the
environmental dimension, 12 indicators for the economic dimension, and 12
indicators for the social dimension. A second set of 39 indicators was
subsequently developed in a second phase to include indicators on culture,
public participation, and governance, among others.

210. A composite index of sustainable development was formulated out of the

indicators developed, but using only a subset of the indicators inasmuch as some
of the indicators either lacked data collection methods or up-to-date data. Thus,
the composite index derived from the first set of 37 indicators only made use of
23 of the indicators. The 39 second phase indicators permitted a composite

86
index comprising 24 indicators: 9 economic, 7 social and 8 environmental. This
made possible a quantitative assessment of Thailand’s Sustainable Development
performance in recent years, results of which are reported in the project report
(“The Development of Thailand’s Sustainable Development Index Project: Phase
II”).

Co-ordination and Institutions

211. As in other countries, Thailand has had difficulty with dispersed authorities
and uncoordinated government mandates, even within environment and natural
resource concerns alone, and even more so with inter-sectoral concerns. Before
the NEQA established the NEB in 1975, there were nine major laws related to
water pollution, at least four to solid waste management, five to toxic
contamination, six to land degradation, four to water resources and six to forest
resources. This complex legislative framework led to sector fragmentation, gaps
in coverage, inconsistent terminology, and dispersion of supervision
responsibilities across different agencies.

212. The establishment in 1975 of the National Environmental Board (NEB)

chaired by the Prime Minister brought together relevant sectoral ministries, heads
of relevant government boards and the private sector, thereby fostering inter-
agency communication and policy coherence. NEB’s stated objective is also to
improve the vertical line of communication between the central and local levels of
the government. The restructuring of MOSTE into MONRE in late 2002 further
reduced the overlap of responsibility and authority among government agencies.
The organizational re-alignment placed environmental policy development on a
problem-solving (rather than technical) basis. On the whole, the new institutional
structure was deemed conducive to effective implementation of policies, plans
and strategies at both national and local levels as well as enforcement of laws
and regulations.41

213. Meanwhile, efforts to establish a national council for sustainable

development (NCSD) spearheaded by the TEI were directed at attaining better
inter-agency and multi-sectoral coordination in SD concerns. The earlier “Thai
NCSD” in the form of a subcommittee on sustainable development within the
NEB failed to function. Subsequently, the Thai NCSD chaired by the Prime
Minister that was created after the 2002 Johannesburg World Summit on
Sustainable Development has not gone beyond an organizational meeting. The
recent change in government has further cast doubt on the future of the Thai
NCSD, whose existence remains on paper but not in actual function.
41
Department of Environmental Quality Promotion, MONRE, Thailand and Project Secretariat,
UNEP Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (2006), “Thailand National Environ-
mental Performance Assessment (EPA) Report,” ADB T.A. No. 6069-REG: National Perform-
ance Assessment and Subregional Strategic Environment Framework in the Greater Mekong
Subregion.

87
Local and Regional Governance

214. Decentralization has been a key thrust in Thailand since the Eighth
NESDP. Integration of environmental decisions into the economic mainstream at
lower levels of government has been part of a much wider effort by Thailand to
improve and decentralize governance. Effective decentralization is also
expected to improve environmental performance in areas such as wastewater
management and general natural resource management.

215. The 1997 Constitution provides for substantial fiscal and administrative
decentralization. Passage of the Decentralization Act in 1999 paved the way for
the formulation of concrete steps to implement decentralized governance, define
institutional relationships between the central and local governments, and
improve local tax and revenue mobilization. However, progress on these steps
has been deemed slow. Meanwhile, the Tenth Plan embodies thrusts and
strategies that include asserting the roles and responsibilities of local
governments and local communities. Good governance is to be pursued, among
other things, through local and regional administration based on the Area-
Function-Participation concept. One of the five key strategies of the Plan is to
strengthen local communities for better income distribution.

Stakeholder Participation

216. The Eighth NESDP, unlike the plans before it, represented a major
change in the development planning process in Thailand, wherein a deliberate
effort to undertake more consultative and participatory planning was undertaken.
As mandated by the NESDB board itself, a more consultative process was
provided for the formulation of the Eighth Plan, a process that has been
maintained through the current Tenth Plan.

217. Consultative mechanisms are employed at the working technical levels,

including at the local levels, in the early stages of plan formulation. There are no
fixed institutional mechanisms for stakeholder participation at these levels, where
consultations are primarily undertaken on a one-off basis. However, a more
formal, higher-level mechanism exists for participation by non-government
stakeholders in plan formulation through the National Economic and Social
Advisory Council (NESAC), an advisory body to the NESDB. While the NESAC
may not necessarily include members to represent all interested stakeholder
groups, this body deliberates on the draft plan prior to its formal adoption by the
government, and provides an opportunity for non-government perspectives to be
heard and considered towards the final shaping of the development plan.

218. Beyond plan formulation, various stakeholder groups including business,

civil society and the academe are represented in an annual review now being
undertaken by the NESDB on the progress of implementation of the development

88
plan. This forum provides an opportunity for stock-taking and necessary
adjustments to the Plan and its implementation in the face of actual
developments. The Thailand Business Council for Sustainable Development
(TBCSD) and the TEI in particular are prominent non-government entities that
work in close partnership with government through MONRE and NESDB in
planning and implementing programs in pursuit of sustainable development.

Monitoring and Evaluation

219. The adopted set of sustainable development indicators as described

above facilitates monitoring and evaluation of the implementation, progress and
outcomes of the development plan, as led by NESDB. An important element in
the independent monitoring and evaluation of the progress of the 5-year plans is
the annual review mentioned above, participated in by a broad spectrum of Thai
society. This helps ensure a more independent and objective assessment, while
helping secure multi-stakeholder cooperation and partnerships towards faithful
implementation of the Plans.

Resource Mobilization

220. Thailand’s budget for FY2007 (ending 30 September 2007) projects a

deficit of B142.6 billion, equivalent to a relatively low 1.7% of GDP. Revenue
collections fell short of target in 2006 due to weaker economic growth, a
consequence of the political upheaval brought about by the overthrow of Thaksin
Shinawatra by a military coup. Meanwhile, large public investment projects in
infrastructure that had been programmed to require an aggregate of US$42
billion within the period 2005-2009 have been put on hold due to the weaker than
projected public finances. Notwithstanding weaker public finances, government
will be able to maintain fiscal sustainability, with a projected debt-to-GDP ratio of
41% in 2007, well below the 50% ceiling set under the Government’s fiscal
sustainability framework.

221. While Thailand continues to receive a significant amount of ODA, it is at

much lower relative magnitudes compared to its GMS neighbors, and the
amounts have declined over recent years. The country is in fact now a donor
country in its own right, with about 0.13 percent of its gross national income
being given in support of its less-endowed ASEAN neighbors, including in the
GMS. Thus, it is not expected that financing will be a constraining factor in the
pursuit of Thailand’s NSDS in the foreseeable future.

6.4.4 MDG Outlook

222. Thailand has already achieved a number of the MDGs and is well on track
towards achieving the rest. Rapid and relatively broad-based economic growth
in the 1990s prior to the Asian financial crisis made it possible to halve the

89
country’s poverty incidence within the decade. Thailand’s successive five-year
development plans, especially from the Eighth Plan to the current Tenth Plan,
have also been deliberate in emphasizing the need to address the social and
environmental dimensions of development along with the continued thrust for
rapid economic growth. These appear to be bearing fruit in the achievement of
most MDGs well ahead of schedule (Table 7).

Table 7. Progress Toward the Millennium Development Goals

and Targets, Thailand (As of 2004)

Goals and Targets Status

Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger
Target 1: Halve, between Achieved. Between 1990 and 2002, the incidence of poverty dropped
1990 and 2015, the from 27.2 percent to 9.8 percent and the number of poor dropped from
proportion of people whose 15.3 million to 6.2 million.
income is less than $1/day. Measured by 1 US$ PPP/day benchmark (the international
measurement for the MDGs) the proportion of the poor in Thailand
declined from 12.5 percent to 5.2 percent over the decade 1990 to
2000.
Target 2: Halve, between Achieved. Except for the crisis years, the proportion of undernourished
1990 and 2015, the people in Thailand declined steadily from 6.9 percent in 1990 to 4.2
proportion of people who percent in 2000, hitting an all-time low of 2.5 percent in 2002. Protein
suffer from hunger. and calorie deficiency among children under 5 dropped from 18.6
percent in 1990 to 8.6 percent in 2002. A National Nutrition Survey in
1995 indicated that second- and third-degree malnutrition in Thailand is
negligible but first-degree malnutrition (weight for age) has been high in
the general population.

Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education

Target 3: Ensure that, by Highly Feasible. Gross enrolment at the primary level has been over
2015, children everywhere, 100 percent since the early 1990s, reflecting increases in target student
boys and girls alike, will be populations, other factors such as overage
able to complete a full students (due to late enrolment) and class repetition. Gross enrolment in
course of primary schooling. the upper secondary level has more than doubled from 27 percent to 55
percent over the decade 1992 to 2002. Still of concern is the retention
rate at each successive level of schooling. Recent figures show that 86
percent of students that enrolled in first grade stayed on until sixth
grade, while 63 percent and 42 percent stayed on until ninth grade and
twelfth grade respectively. The result is that less than half of the
students complete the full twelve years of schooling.

Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women

Target 4: Eliminate gender Achieved. Thai girls and boys have equal educational opportunities.
disparity in primary and This includes the Muslim-predominant provinces in the South and also
secondary education, the poorer Northern provinces. There is a small gender gap at the
preferably by 2005, and in primary level. Girls tend to perform better in school. In tertiary
all levels of education no education, at the universities women outnumber men.
later than 2015.

Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality

90
Target 5: Reduce by two
thirds, between 1990 and
2015, the under-5 mortality
rate.
In progress. Between 1989 and 1995-1996, the infant mortality rate
(IMR) declined from 38.8 to 26 per 1,000 live births representing a drop
of about one third. Progress was slightly more rapid in urban areas. At
the beginning of 2001 the IMR was estimated at 22 and the Ministry of
Public Health plan is aiming to reduce this to 15 by 2006.

Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health

Target 6: Reduce by three In progress. Despite some inconsistency, all data sources support the
quarters, between 1990 and same trend that maternal mortality rates declined by about two thirds in
2015, the maternal mortality the decade from 1990 to 2000. The MMR dropped from 36 per 100,000
ratio. live births in 1990 to an all-time low of 14 per 100,000 live births in 1999.
The increase to 17.6 per 100,000 live births in 2001 and 24 per 100,000
live births in 2002 is a result of an endeavour to expand the coverage
and improve the technical aspects of data collection. With this in mind
the Ministry of Public Health set a target of 18 per 100,000 live births by
2006, as on MDG Plus target.

Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Other Diseases

Target 7: Have halted by Achieved. Thailand had already begun to reverse the spread of
2015, and begun to reverse, HIV/AIDS in the early 1990s and was among the very first countries to
the spread of HIV/AIDS. meet this MDG target. However, the epidemic still poses a major threat
to Thailand. Unrivalled success in HIV/AIDS Thailand has made
extraordinary progress in reversing the spread of HIV/AIDS. Yearly new
infections have fallen dramatically from an estimated 143,000 in 1991 to
about 19,000 in 2003. Thailand therefore has already surpassed MDG
Target 7.

Target 8: Have halted by
2015, and begun to reverse,
the incidence of malaria and
other major diseases.
Achieved for malaria, achievable for TB. The malaria-related
mortality rate has continued to drop to the point that the disease is no
longer life-threatening for a large part of the population. More cases of
TB have been reported since the emergence of the AIDS epidemic. It is
estimated that there were 80,000 to 100,000 tuberculosis cases in 1997
of which about 30,000 were HIV/AIDS coinfection. The percentage of
HIV/AIDS to tuberculosis coinfection rose from 14.5 percent in 1989 to
31.8 percent in 2001, making tuberculosis the number one cause of
death among HIV/AIDS patients.

Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability

Target 9: Integrate the Achievable. Protected forest areas, which help maintain biological
principles of sustainable diversity, increased from 12.4 percent to 17.6 percent of total land area
development into country between 1990 and 2001. In honour of the Royal Golden Jubilee, 5
policies and programs and million rai of conserved area is being reforested over the period 1994 to
reverse the loss of 2007.Evidence from satellite images suggest that mangrove forests
environmental resources. have increased to 2,400 square kilometres in 2002 from 1,500 in 1998,
although this figure has not been verified by on-land inspection.An
important development is the shift toward a more participatory approach
in forest management. Local communities and forest conservation
networks now play a much more active and informative role in the
management of forest and other natural resources.

91
Target 10: Halve, by 2015,
the proportion of people
without sustainable access
to safe drinking water.
Achieved. Access to safe drinking water increased from 80 percent to
93 percent of the population from 1990 to 2000, with improvement in
both urban and rural areas. The increase was more prominent in rural
areas rising 76 percent to 91 percent over the decade. Regional
disparities have been effectively closed. It should be noted that only a
small proportion of the population (particularly among rural dwellers)
have access to piped water, which means they must rely on nature (rain
water) and improved water storage. The proportion of households using
bottled water also increased significantly from 5 percent to 19 percent
between 1990 and 2000 – a result of higher income and prosperity.

Target 11: By 2020, achieve
a significant improvement in
the lives of at least 100
million slum dwellers.
Achievable. The majority of both urban and rural dwellers have secure
tenure in Thailand. Since 1990, over 90 percent of Thais own, lease or
rent their homes. With the exception of Bangkok
and its vicinity, and industrial areas that serve as temporary residences
for education and employment, most Thais own their own home. In
2000, one third of Bangkok residents rented their houses, as did 16
percent of people in the Central region, Thailand’s industrial hub.
Housing structures are in good condition with only 7 percent of the
population living in houses built with nonpermanent materials.

Source: Thailand MDG Report 2004, NESDB and UN Country Team

6.4.5 Overall Country Assessment

223. In many ways, Thailand appears to be well ahead among its GMS
neighbors in terms of its NSDS capability and initiatives, including in the
attainment of and progress towards the MDGs. It had been leading the sub-
region in economic performance in terms of income and employment growth
since the 1980s, which had also translated into fairly rapid progress in reducing
poverty. It has already been taking the lead in the integrated development of the
sub-region, having the capacity to supply the goods and services required by the
other countries. It also has the advantage of having the resources that are
extended as technical assistance to neighboring countries. In view of these,
expectations are high on Thailand’s ability to lead in the pursuit of sustainable
development in the GMS as well.

224. Even without a distinct document representing the country’s national

Agenda 21 or explicitly articulating the country’s national sustainable
development strategy, most of the essential elements of an NSDS appear to be
in place in Thailand. The Tenth NESDP could very well be the country’s NSDS,
except for its short 5-year time frame. NESDB has recently considered planning
over a longer time horizon given the pressing need to anticipate the implications
of demographic changes in Thailand.

225. Thailand already has the necessary institutional mechanisms to pursue

SD effectively. The legislative and institutional framework for environment and
SD in Thailand is largely in place and has already been yielding some positive
results. For instance, the economy has continued to grow at a rapid rate,

92
poverty level has gone down, and forest cover has improved. However, there
remains scope for improvement, with continuing challenges in inter-agency and
inter-sectoral coordination within the government and between the government
and non-government sectors. The future of the Thai NCSD remains a question,
and hinges on whether its designated secretariat, the NESDB, proactively works
to make it function as originally envisaged. There is thus need for NESDB to
assert its critical role in operationalizing the NCSD and in the overall NSDS
initiative.

226. Much of Thailand’s remaining weaknesses could best be addressed by

undertaking improvements and adjustments in institutions and processes. It
would be worth looking at the following areas:

• Rationalize the institutional framework. In its desire to improve

coordination among its sectors and stakeholders at national and local
levels, Thailand strengthened and empowered a number of governmental
and non-governmental bodies and created new ones. In many cases, the
creation of said bodies is enshrined in laws thus making them difficult to
adjust or abolish. There are also indications that in certain instances, the
creation of bodies or assignment of functions to a specific body did not
benefit from an in-depth review of the over-all institutional structure and
process vis-à-vis current and future demands. Most stated roles and
functions of institutions are expressed in very general terms, which
permitted flexibility but became subject to many interpretations. With
hindsight, some government bodies may not have been created at all if
these roles had been properly and precisely defined. These oversights
had resulted in functional gaps and overlaps and sometimes, non-
functioning of a created body. To address these difficulties, Thailand may
explore the following:

• Conduct an in-depth review of all existing institutions concerned with ESD

with the end in view of finding institutional gaps and overlaps and
identifying bodies that have unclear roles or are not functioning well.

• Formulate a comprehensive but tight institutional framework that would

draw from lessons of above review and be guided by the NESDP and
NSDS.

• Design and undertake an institutional rationalization program based on the

institutional framework. The program may prioritize the sharpening of
mandates and roles and the reengineering of ineffective bodies over
creating new ones.

• Strengthen civil society. The changing structure and profile of civil society
must be carefully studied in relation to future sustainability demands and
capacity of government. There is already a need to review the legislative

93
 and regulatory regime and adjust it to new trends. Meanwhile,
government’s process of NGO selection or identification of representatives
to consultative processes must also be looked into. These studies imply
the need for improvement in NGO database and linkages.

• Activate and expand the NCSD. After almost five years, the Thai NCSD
established in 2002 remains on paper, which does not reflect well on
government, especially NESDB which is its designated technical
secretariat. Possible explanations for keeping the NCSD inactive are (a)
NESDB sees some flaws in the NCSD or (b) the NESDB does not know
how to operate it. The Thai NCSD does have weaknesses that include (a)
purely government membership, (b) unclear roles and functions in relation
to NESDB and NEB/MONRE (possibly the reason why NESDB could not
activate it), and (c) absence of provision for budget. It is thus
recommended that these three issues be resolved and the NCSD be
activated and made to function as soon as possible. More importantly, the
membership of the NCSD must be expanded to include other stakeholders.
Their inputs could even help NESDB resolve above issues.

227. On the whole, producing a NSDS document as currently being undertaken

under the leadership of TEI would be a mere formality that would document and
clarify the processes already in place and progress being made. While some
weaknesses inevitably remain, there is much that other GMS countries could
learn from Thailand’s NSDS experience so far. These must be harnessed for the
benefit of the entire sub-region.

6.5 Vietnam

6.5.1 Institutional Context

228. The Socialist Republic of Vietnam is governed through a highly centralized

system, dominated and controlled by the Vietnamese Communist Party (Viet
Nam Cong San Dang). The party exercises leadership in all matters and
provides direction to the government. The government manages state affairs
through a structure that parallels the party's apparatus. All key government
positions are filled by party members42.

SD Coordination and Planning Mechanisms

229. Vietnam is the only GMS country whose lead agency for SD is not the
environment ministry but its planning ministry, i.e. the Ministry of Planning and
Investment (MPI). It is also the only country with a dedicated office for SD

42
Country Studies (http://www.country-studies.com/vietnam/government.html)

94
coordination and implementation of its national Agenda 21. The MPI is
Vietnam’s state planning and investment management agency. Its major tasks
include: providing comprehensive advice on national socio-economic
development strategies, programs and plans; national and sectoral economic
management mechanisms and policies; management of domestic and foreign
investments and industrial and export-processing zones; programming of official
development assistance. It also manages public services provided in sectors
that were legislated to be under its jurisdiction. 43 MPI was also tasked to
spearhead the formulation and coordinate the implementation of Vietnam
Agenda 21 (VA 21).

230. MPI has 20 departments and six so-called “non-business organizations”

under its supervision.44 The departments represent sectors, functions or themes.
One of the sector departments is the Department of Science, Education, Natural
Resources and Environment (DSENRE), which is primarily responsible for SD
matters and representing MPI in SD discussions. It also supervises the Office
for Sustainable Development Coordination that is more commonly-known as
Vietnam Agenda 21 Office (VA21 Office). This office was established in June
2004 to undertake the following major tasks:45

• Formulate SD action programs and synthesize 5-year and annual plans;

• Coordinate the management, implementation and monitoring and
evaluation of VA 21 in cooperation with ministries, sectors and localities;
• Coordinate and promote international cooperation programs on SD;
• Conduct communication advocacy and capacity building on SD; and
• Establish the National Council for Sustainable Development

231. All these strongly suggest that Vietnam has been responding well to the
calls of UNCED and JPOI for coordinated and integrated planning and pursuit of
sustainable development. It is commonly acknowledged that oversight agencies
such as MPI are better-positioned to assume the role of SD coordinator than a
sectoral agency such as the Ministry of Environment. The MPI Minister himself
reiterated the Vietnamese government’s full commitment to SD and assured that
MPI shall continue to spearhead SD initiatives and processes such as in planning
and monitoring and evaluation. He also believes that Vietnam should take an
aggressive, even a lead role, in the integration of GMS.46

232. It is against this backdrop that Vietnam, through MPI, formulated VA 21

and soon after established its national multi-stakeholder mechanism, the Vietnam
43
Ministry of Planning and Investment website: www.mpi.gov.vn
44
Decree No. 61/CP: Decree of the Government Prescribing the functions, tasks, powers and
organizational structure of the Ministry of Planning; Hanoi, 06 June 2003.
45
Summary of tasks in Decision 685/QD-BKH: Decision from Minister of Planning and
Investment on the Establishment of Sustainable Development Office, June 28, 2004; Agenda 21
Office, Hanoi, Vietnam
46
Interview with Vietnam Minister for Planning and Investment Vo Hong Phuc, September 15,
2006.

95
National Council for Sustainable Development (VNCSD) to coordinate the
implementation of VA 21. On the recommendation of the MPI, the Prime Minister
created VNCSD through Decision 1032 issued on September 27, 2005 47
primarily to:

• Assist him steer and direct and monitor the implementation of VA 21

throughout the country;
• Undertake cross-sectoral and cross-regional planning, programming and
project development and implementation.
• Undertake information, education and awareness raising on SD;
• Propose new initiatives and mobilize resources for SD initiatives.

233. The NCSD consists of 45 members representing the Communist Party

and government agencies, major mass organizations, some localities and
enterprises. The Chairperson or President of the Council is the Standing Deputy
Prime Minister. The NCSD signifies Vietnam’s full recognition of the importance
of involving and forging cooperation with various stakeholders and commitment
to integrate the different sectors of society. It shows its appreciation of the
importance of engaging stakeholders so that they would develop ownership of
plans, policies and programs.

234. Vietnam has moved even one step further by going through the legislative
process to give the NCSD Operational Charter the force of a law. The MPI,
which serves as the technical secretariat of the NCSD, drafted the Operational
Charter that expounded and provided details on Decision 1032 and subjected it
to a wide consultation process. The Charter spells out the functions, tasks, rights,
budget allocation and organizational structure of the Council. As of this writing,
the NCSD Charter has been approved by the Council of Ministers for
endorsement to the National Assembly for passing into law. Even while this
process is ongoing, Vietnam actively pursued the localization of NCSD by
creating analogs in about 14 of its provinces. These local councils have been
promoting and implementing VA 21 at the local level.

235. All this has made Vietnam the only country in GMS that has an officially
established and functioning multi-stakeholder governance mechanism for SD.
This is a notable achievement since adopting and operationalizing a participatory
and multi-stakeholder process and mechanism denotes a substantial paradigm
shift for Vietnam. It also demonstrates that MPI believes that a participatory
process that is undertaken by a multi-stakeholder mechanism is a necessary
element in pursuing sectoral integration, and hence sustainable development.

236. For addressing environmental concerns, the Ministry of Natural Resources

and Environment (MONRE) was created in 1994, initially as Ministry of Science
and Technology and Environment, through the Law on Environmental Protection
47
Prime Minister Decision 1032/QD-Ttg dated September 27, 2005: Decision on the
Establishment of National Council for Sustainable Development; MPI, Hanoi, Vietnam

96
(LEP). The law spelled out the national approaches to natural resources
management and protection of ecological diversity. Among others, the LEP
tasked MONRE to coordinate environmental management and to develop and
enforce environmental policies and regulations in Vietnam. MONRE undertakes
these through its National Environment Agency (NEA) and provincial arms or
departments, in coordination with the Departments of Natural Resource &
Environment of line ministries at the local levels.

237. As a relatively young agency, however, MONRE has limited institutional

and financial capability to fully implement some of the provisions of LEP (e.g.,
pollution control policies)48. It has yet to structure and tighten coordination with
other line ministries to effectively undertake its mandate. In other words,
MONRE is not in a position to lead sectoral and institutional coordination that is
crucial in pursuing SD.

Civil Society

238. Civil society in Vietnam consists of two major groups: mass organizations
and “social” NGOs. The first group is composed of organizations created by
government as part of the Party system. They are large nationwide political
networks that serve as the party’s mechanism for communication and delivery of
services to its constituents. They include organizations for women, youth, and
trade unions, etc.

239. The second group is composed of social, scientific, professional or other

sector organizations, which consider themselves independent NGOs since they
do not get direct support from government and they conduct activities without
government intervention. They also claim to be apolitical since they undertake
substantive, scientific and community work regardless of politics. There are
around 400 NGOs in Vietnam. Many of them belong to federations of NGOs
such as the Vietnam Association for Conservation of Nature and Environment
(VACNE), which has about 43 member organizations, and Vietnam NGO
(VNGO), which has about 40. These federations often have overlapping
memberships. VACNE is a member of the Vietnam Union of Science and
Technology Associations (VUSTA), a people’s organization.

240. On closer examination, the supposed independence of these

organizations is actually confined to the aspect of funding support, i.e. they are
supported by membership dues rather than direct public resources. Still, a
number of these organizations were established by the government or
government officials. VACNE, for instance, was established by the Chairperson
of the Council of Ministers through Decision No. 299 (CT of November 23, 1998).
Said Chairperson eventually became the Prime Minister. According to its statute,

48
Vietnam National Environmental Performance Assessment Report, MONRE-Vietnam and
UNEP-RRCAP, March 2006.

97
VACNE is under the supervision of MONRE, which actually makes it a
government “NGO.”

241. Apart from membership dues, the funds of these NGOs come from
payments for their services (e.g. government-commissioned activities) and
official development assistance. These organizations often conduct studies or
undertake projects that are commissioned by government for its policy-making
and other governance activities. In many instances, these services are funded
through ODA, a funding source completely controlled and managed by
government.

242. Both the mass organizations and social NGOs are consulted by
government in some of its activities and processes. In the formulation of Agenda
21 and the creation of NCSD, VUSTA and VACNE were strongly involved. Given
their relationships with government, these organizations could be expected to
readily support government plans, policies and initiatives.

243. In light of the above, VNGO claims that it is the only truly independent
NGO network in Vietnam. Its members raise their own resources and do not
have any direct relationship with government; as such, government itself appears
barely aware of VNGO. Consequently, VNGO has never been a part of
government processes and laments their inability to access ODA.49

Business Sector

244. The “Doi Moi” or the reform program of Vietnam towards socialist market
economy, which includes diminishing the state’s participation in business in
industry, has substantially increased private investments and heightened the role
of the private sector in development. Private business has emerged as the
biggest contributor to the rapidly-growing economy of Vietnam. It has expanded
so rapidly that business registration reached 56,000 during the period 2000-
200250. A large percentage of this number is accounted for by foreign direct
investments.

245. The dynamism of business and industry was likewise reflected in the rapid
expansion rate of the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI), an
organization composed of representatives from business community, employers
and business associations of all economic sectors in Vietnam. VCCI aims “to
protect and assist business enterprises, to contribute to the socio-economic
development of the country and to promote economic, commercial and
technological co-operations between Vietnam and the rest of the world on the
basis of equality and mutual benefit.”51 As a relatively young organization, the

49
Interview with Prof. Nguyen Dac Hy, Chairman of VNGO, September 15, 2006.
50
Informality and the Playing Field in Vietnam’s Business Sector; Stoyan Tenev, Amanda Carlier,
Omar Chaudry, Quynh-Trang Nguyen; International Finance Corporation; Washington D.C.; 2003.
51
Vietnam Business Forum Website (http://vibforum.vcci.com.vn/)

98
focus of VCCI has been on serving its growing membership and not so much on
partnering with government and civil society towards the pursuit of SD.

6.5.2 State of Development and Environmental Planning

246. The Five-Year Socio-Economic Development Plan (SEDP) 2006-2010 is

the current master plan guiding the development thrusts of the Vietnamese
government. The Ministry of Planning and Investment has been responsible for
preparing the country’s five-year socio-economic development plans. The plan
spells out the last five years of the 10-year (2001-2010) socio-economic
development strategy issued by the 9th Congress of the Communist Party of
Vietnam. The strategy aims to accelerate the process of socialist-oriented
industrialization and modernization to attain for Vietnam the status of an
industrialized nation by 2020. The current plan for 2006-2010, like the plans that
preceded it, was formulated through a process that began with issuance by MPI
of a Framework Plan, on the basis of which the various ministries formulated
their respective sectoral plans. MPI then integrated the various sectoral inputs
into the overall master plan.

247. In 2002, the Vietnam government also prepared its own poverty reduction
strategy paper (PRSP), the Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth
Strategy (CPRGS). The open-ended CPRGS described itself as the document
that elaborates all general objectives, institutional arrangements, policies and
solutions of the 10-Year Strategy and 5-Year Plan into detailed action plans. It is
also the document that seeks to fulfill Vietnam’s commitment to implement the
Millennium Development Goals.

248. Vietnam had formulated a National Conservation Strategy in 1984 and a

10-year National Plan for Environment and Development (NPED) in 1991, and
had passed the 1991 Law on Forest Protection, and the 1993 Land Law, which
had specified the role of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
(MARD) in natural resources and land management. The passage of the Law on
Environmental Protection (LEP) in 1994 provided the legal basis for a more
systematic approach to pollution control, natural resources management and
protection of ecological diversity. The LEP created the Ministry of Science,
Technology and the Environment (MOSTE, later transformed into the Ministry of
Natural Resources and the Environment or MONRE) and defined its duties and
responsibilities at the central level and of the People's Committees at provincial
level (with the DONREH). The LEP mandated a national EIA system, national
pollution standards, a comprehensive system for auditing industrial facilities, and
an annual reporting process on the state of the environment to the Legislative
Assembly.

249. In August 2004, the government promulgated the Strategic Orientation for
Sustainable Development in Vietnam, or Vietnam Agenda 21 (VA21). Prepared

99
under the leadership of MPI, VA21 explicitly states that it “cannot replace existing
strategies, overall planning and plans, but serves as a basis to concretize the
socio-economic development strategy in the period 2001-2010, the National
Strategy for Environmental Protection until 2010 and the visions towards 2020
and to develop the 5-year plan 2006-2010 and overall development strategies
and plans for sectors and localities….” Consistent with the above declaration,
MPI officials indicated that VA21 was consciously input into the preparation of
SEDP 2006-2010. Along with China and Myanmar, Vietnam is the only other
country in the GMS that has produced a national Agenda 21 document referred
to as such. This was motivated by the need to comply with international
commitments, apart from fulfilling the directive of the 9th National Communist
Party Congress that “fast, effective and sustainable development, economic
growth should occur in parallel with the implementation of social progress and
equality and environmental protection.” The stated time frame for VA21 was ten
years.

6.5.3 NSDS Readiness Assessment

Policy Integration

250. As is the case elsewhere, integration of the economic and social dimen-
sions in Vietnam’s development strategies and plans is well addressed and
properly articulated. This is readily evident in the SEDP and CPRGS, which
provide the basis for ministries and agencies to collaborate in programs to
reduce poverty in its economic and social dimensions, and to achieve economic
and social upliftment of the lives of the Vietnamese people in general.

251. However, integration of environmental concerns into economic and social

decision-making and vice-versa remains weak. Integration of the environmental
dimension is not as evident in the above planning documents, where mention of
the environment is sparse, isolated and treated as a sectoral concern. VA21
represents the attempt to correct this deficiency. But while it is meant to provide
the proper integrative strategic orientation for sustainable development to the
SEDP and the various sectoral and local plans, SEDP 2006-2010 (into which
VA21 was claimed to input) still falls short of manifesting an integrated treatment
of environment. The economic dimension dominates the content of the plan, and
reflects the government’s explicit vision of becoming an industrialized nation by
2020. Vietnam may be succeeding in pursuing this economic ambition, but
having this come at significant expense to the environment remains a real risk.
This is especially so given the rapid rate of economic growth that Vietnam is
experiencing, averaging 7.5 percent annually in recent years.

252. The mechanism is in place, however, for proper consideration of the

environmental implications of policies, programs and projects to pursue dynamic

100
economic growth. MONRE’s three departments have environmental manage-
ment responsibilities, namely:

the Environment Department, which is responsible for policy formulation, stra-

tegy and legal regulations for environmental protection,
the Environmental Protection Department, which oversees the implementa-
tion of policies, strategies and legal aspects of environmental protection,
and
the Department for Environmental Impact Assessment and Evaluation, which
is in charge of environmental assessment of investment projects.

253. The challenge lies in ensuring that these responsibilities are faithfully
carried out, and respected by the other ministries and agencies of government.
The 2006 Environmental Performance Review (EPA), for example, notes that the
EIA, while supposedly a requirement for development projects, is not imposed
very strictly (see further below).52

Intergenerational Timeframe

254. While the development vision of Vietnam, as articulated by the Communist

Party Congress, looks to 2020 as a time frame for achieving industrialized
country status, none of the major planning or strategy documents, including
VA21 itself, goes beyond 10 years in time frame. CPRGS is open-ended, but
remains preoccupied with poverty in the present generation. Nonetheless, VA21
takes a strategic perspective that seeks to influence short- to medium- term
initiatives in such a way as to safeguard the welfare of future generations of
Vietnamese, even if not articulated explicitly.

Analysis and Assessments

255. The MPI, by admission of its officials interviewed, remains ill-equipped to

employ integrative tools for assessing progress in its development efforts and
poverty-reduction initiatives, and for analyzing prospective policies, programs
and projects for inclusion in its upcoming strategies and plans. The integrative
framework and perspective of sustainable development remain to be understood
and appreciated by those in the various ministries and agencies. Even within the
MPI, it is only the VA21 unit that possesses a good level of understanding and
appreciation. MPI thus needs adequate orientation and capacity building in
sustainable development for it to be an effective exponent of the integrative
analysis and assessments that a faithful implementation of VA21 requires.

52
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Vietnam and Project Secretariat, UNEP
Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (2006), “Vietnam National Environmental
Performance Assessment (EPA) Report,” ADB T.A. No. 6069-REG: National Performance
Assessment and Subregional Strategic Environment Framework in the Greater Mekong
Subregion, p. 53.

101
Indicators and Targets

256. SEDP and CPRGS provide respective sets of indicators for assessing
progress, with the latter consciously addressing and incorporating the MDGs.
Both sets of indicators include economic, social and environmental indicators, but
in both cases, environmental indicators represent a relatively small portion.
Efforts are currently underway to develop and adopt a set of sustainable
development indicators for monitoring progress of VA21, in tandem with efforts to
formalize the charter and mandate of the National Council for Sustainable
Development (NCSD).

Co-ordination and Institutions

257. While MONRE plays a key role in the formulation and enforcement of
environmental policies and regulations, line ministries play important roles as well.
Implementation of forest policy and related measures lies with the Ministry of
Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD); management of urban solid sewage
and air pollution are the responsibility of the Ministry of Construction (MOC);
management of ecological diversity and agriculture is with MARD; and
management of coastal and marine ecological diversity and aquaculture are the
responsibility of the Ministry of Fisheries.

258. However, in spite of VA21, actual integration of environmental concerns

into economic decision-making remains to be undertaken in Vietnam. MONRE
continues to be regarded as a sectoral ministry, and has yet to acquire the
authority and capability to assess various economic policies and programs for
their environmental implications. Furthermore, the MPI, as the key agency that
approves investment proposals in Vietnam, has not faithfully enforced the
requirement for EIA with all development projects of government. It has been
observed that project feasibility reports (FS) do not always include an appropriate
EIA, but sometimes only a chapter devoted to environmental issues, thereby
avoiding a complete review of the environmental impacts of the proposed
development project. Decree 175-CP on EIA requires that the EIA permit be
issued only upon approval of the EIA report at the construction stage. In practice,
however, the EIA approval often does not come in time to permit monitoring of
the construction stage of the project.

259. The establishment of the Vietnam National Council for Sustainable

Development (VNCSD) is a promising development for improved coordination in
sustainable development initiatives among government ministries and agencies,
and between government and various sectors in society.

Local and Regional Governance

260. Local (provincial) governments formulate their own development plans

based on the guidelines set by the SEDP. DONREH is the local arm of the

102
MONRE at the local level, and is tasked with ensuring proper consideration of
environmental concerns in local development undertakings. Meanwhile,
initiatives are underway to localize VA21. A Circular guiding sectors and
localities to formulate Sectoral and Local Agendas 21 was promulgated in 2005
and two National Conferences on SD were conducted in 2005 and 2006.
Measures to raise SD awareness have reportedly been carried out in many
localities. Local Agenda 21 (LA21) has been piloted in Son La, Thai Nguyen,
Ninh Binh, Quang Nam, Lam Dong and Ben Tre. The provincial LA21s have
been approved and a number of SD demonstrations have been developed.
Other provinces/cities are in the process of formulating their own LA21, including
Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City, Thua Thien-Hue, Yen Bai and Lang Son. Some
provincial governments are also represented in the new NCSD.

Stakeholder Participation

261. Government reports that broad participation from major groups has been
harnessed in the formulation of VA21 and in SD initiatives, including monitoring,
through the mass-based organizations (representing women, youth, ethnic
minorities, farmer, fishermen, businesses, and labor). Dozens of workshops and
trainings were reportedly carried out in various parts of the country to
disseminate VA21 to different target groups. Communication campaigns are
implemented with various publications. However, independent CSOs appear not
to be adequately involved in such consultative processes. An interview with a
leader of such an organization lamented that active participation in these
processes tends to be confined to government or Party-sponsored mass
organizations. An independent representative from the academe likewise
indicated limited opportunity for more independent-minded academics to
participate in consultative processes and mechanisms, even in the new NCSD.

Monitoring and Evaluation

262. As indicated above, non-government participation in monitoring and

evaluation of development efforts is provided through the mass organizations
sponsored by the government. Monitoring indicators have been or are being
defined in the major planning documents (SEDP, CPGRS, VA21), to facilitate
monitoring by government agencies, local governments, and communities.
Some independent CSOs are known to have undertaken their own monitoring,
assessment and evaluation of government programs, but have had to work with
meager resources as they are unable to access government support and
information.

Resource Mobilization

263. Public finances in Vietnam are relatively sound and have been
strengthening in recent years. The government deficit was around 3.8 percent
of GDP, and external debt-to-GDP ratio at a manageable 34 percent as of 2004.

103
264. The country has enjoyed ample access to ODA, and has been a favored
object of assistance by the donor community in general. Substantial public
investments have been made in infrastructure development in recent years.
Human development initiatives have also received wide support from external
donors and the national government, which has facilitated strong progress
towards the MDGs (see below).

265. Data from the MPI indicate that government environmental expenditure in
Vietnam ranged between 0.5-0.7 percent of total government expenditures in the
latter half of the 1990s, or between 0.1-0.2 percent of GDP. However, these
figures are likely to be an underestimate, inasmuch as they do not account for
many categories of government expenditure (e.g. those on components of urban
infrastructure, water management, etc.) that have major environmental
implications. In general, growth in official expenditures on the environment
appeard to lag behind overall economic growth measured in GDP.53 Still, it is
noteworthy that the Vietnamese government has established a number of special
environmental funds, including the National Environmental Fund, the Coal Sector
Environmental Fund, and local environmental funds in Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City,
Danang and Baria Vungtau province, among others.

6.5.4 MDG Outlook

266. Vietnam has made good progress in reducing overall poverty (Table 8),
and has already achieved the overall MDG poverty target well ahead of schedule.
Similarly, it is on the way to achieving most of the other targets ahead of the
2015 deadline. The only possible exception to this is the child mortality target,
but this is because its 1990 benchmark of 58 deaths per 1,000 live births was
already much lower than that of most of its GMS neighbors. Having made such
impressive progress on its MDG targets, Vietnam has raised the bar and has
adopted more ambitious targets for 2015, embodied in the MDG Plus initiative.

6.5.5 Overall Country Assessment

267. Vietnam has emerged to be one of the most dynamic economies in the
region in the past decade. As it attains rapid economic gains with its drive for
industrialization and international competitiveness, it also appears to be moving
ahead of most of its GMS neighbors in initiatives to promote integrative and
holistic sustainable development. In an interview, the MPI Minister indicated
willingness to take an active, possibly even leadership role in the sub-regional
initiative to formulate and adopt a sub-regional sustainable development strategy,
and establish a sub-regional mechanism for SD.

53
Ibid.

104
 Table 8. Progress Toward the Millennium Development Goals
And Targets, Vietnam (As of 2005)

a
Goals and Targets Status
Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger
Target 1: Halve, between Achieved. The proportion of people living on less than $1 per day fell
b
1990 and 2015, the from 50.8% in 1993 to 10.6% in 2004. Viet Nam has set ambitious
proportion of people whose targets for the next decade: (i) to reduce poverty incidence to 19% by
income is less than $1/day. 2010; and (ii) to reduce the proportion of poor households from 17.2% in
2000 to 10% in 2005, then to 7% in 2010. Viet Nam has met the target
of halving poverty rates between 1990 and 2015 well ahead of
schedule. The country is on track to meet the national target of reducing
the share of households below the poverty line by 2010.
Target 2: Halve, between Achieved. The proportion of the population with below-minimum
1990 and 2015, the dietary intake was reduced from over 30% in 1990 to 11% in 2002.
proportion of people who However, a worrying situation has emerged whereby ethnic minorities
suffer from hunger. account for 41.5% of the food poverty incidence in 2002 compared with
10.9% of the national average. Viet Nam targets eradicating hunger in
the next decade and reducing food poverty incidence (consumption
below 2,100 calories per day) to less than 4% in 2010.

Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education

Target 3: Ensure that, by Feasible. Current net primary enrolment rates in Viet Nam stood at
c
2015, children everywhere, some 92% in 2002, according to the Ministry of Education and Training.
boys and girls alike, will be The Government targets the following: (1) quality basic education for all
able to complete a full by 2010, with consolidation of universal primary education (primary-
course of primary schooling. education completion rates of 85–95% by 2010); and (2) universal lower
secondary education by 2010 (enrollment rates of 80% by 2005 and
90% by 2010).
Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women
Target 4: Eliminate gender Achievable. The ratio of girls to boys declined from 99.6% in 1992 to
disparity in primary and 98.1% in 2000 in primary school, but increased from 86.1% to 93% in
secondary education, lower secondary school. Viet Nam has almost achieved gender balance
preferably by 2005, and in in primary education enrolment. The new Education for All Action Plan
all levels of education no emphasizes providing equal access for girls to affordable and quality
later than 2015. formal education services. The plan aims to ensure all adults, and
especially women, have access to quality literacy and post-literacy
programs, and lifelong learning opportunities.

Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality

Target 5: Reduce by two Difficult. Under-5 mortality rates have declined rapidly from 58 deaths
thirds, between 1990 and per 1,000 live births in 1990 to an estimated 38 deaths in 2002. To
2015, the under-5 mortality achieve the target, the rate should be reduced to about 19% in 2015.
rate. Viet Nam had a much lower 1990 benchmark than its neighbors, and
therefore a more rigid 2015 target to meet.
Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health
Target 6: Reduce by three Achievable. The ratio has declined from 249 per 100,000 live births in
d
quarters, between 1990 and 1990 to 165 in 2002, although reliability of estimates is uncertain. On
2015, the maternal mortality this basis, Viet Nam might be on track to reduce the ratio by three
ratio. quarters, effectively bringing rates to 62 deaths per 100,000 live births in
2015. The Government targets 80 per 100,000 in 2005, and 70 per
100,000 in 2010.

105
Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Other Diseases
Target 7: Have halted by In Progress. The HIV/AIDS epidemic has not yet matured. HIV
2015, and begun to reverse, prevalence among adults (15–49 years old) is officially estimated at
the spread of HIV/AIDS. 0.28% at the end of 2002. Ability to halt and reverse the trend will
depend upon whether effective preventive steps are taken in the next
few years. The Government goal is to halt HIV/AIDS transmission by
2005 and halve it by 2010.
Target 8: Have halted by In Progress. The Viet Nam Malaria Control Program has successfully
2015, and begun to reverse, reduced the number of malaria cases and the morbidity rate by 83%
the incidence of malaria and between 1991 and 2002. The Government target for malaria morbidity is
other major diseases. 200 cases per 100,000 inhabitants in 2010.
Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability
Target 9: Integrate the In Progress. Viet Nam's first sustainable development strategy was
principles of sustainable drafted in 1991, and the 2001–2010 National Environment Strategy and
development into country 2001–2005 Action Plan are in place. Development of key legal
policies and programs and instruments and institutions is in progress. Vietnam Agenda 21 was
reverse the loss of approved in late 2005. The National Council for Sustainable
environmental resources. Development has been established.
Natural forest cover increased from 27% in 1990 to 35.8% in 2002,
although the overall quality weakened due to natural forest destruction
and loss of biodiversity associated with the introduction of nonnative
flora species. The Government targets forest cover of 43% in 2010.

Target 10: Halve, by 2015,
the proportion of people
without sustainable access
to safe drinking water.
Feasible. In 2002, 56% of the population had access to clean and safe
water supply compared with 48% in 1990. To meet the Government’s
goal of 85% overall safe water coverage by 2010 and 100% coverage
by 2020, Viet Nam needs an average annual growth rate of 3.3% per
year from now to 2010 and 1.5% per year in the next decade.

Target 11: By 2020, achieve Latest available estimates show that the percentage of households
a significant improvement in living in temporary houses, including rural households, has been
the lives of at least 100 reduced from 36.5% in 1993 to 23.63% in 2002.
million slum dwellers.

HIV/AIDS = human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.

a
National goals and targets are based on the Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy
approved by the Prime Minister on 21 May 2002.
b
Ministry of Planning and Investment. 2004. Viet Nam Development Report 2004. Hanoi.
c
UNDP. 2003. Millennium Development Goals: Closing the Millennium Gaps. Hanoi.
d
Based on Ministry of Health statistics.

268. Vietnam’s commitment to pursue SD has been apparent in both the words
and deeds of its leaders in government and civil society. It already has the three
key elements to pursuing SD: (a) a clear vision and agenda (VA21); (b) the
appropriate institutional mechanism (NCSD) that will move and implement the
agenda ; and (c) the people’s will and resolve to push the agenda and participate
in their own little ways to pursue SD (participation and ownership).

106
269. With its VA21, Vietnam can be considered to already have an NSDS of its
own. It is also unique in the GMS in having formally established and organized
an operational NCSD which is actively working to clarify and firm up its functions
and mandate. Still, much remains to be done to attain the desirable attributes of
an NSDS and NCSD. There remains lack of understanding of the true meaning
of sustainable development in key areas of the government, including in the MPI
and MONRE themselves. Integration of environmental concerns with the
economic and social policies and initiatives under the development plan remains
inadequate, as analytical tools for operationalizing the integration are as yet
absent.

270. Vietnam seeks to strengthen the NCSD by legislating its Operational

Charter; strengthening its technical capability; and establishing local analogs.
The NCSD, even without a legislated Charter, has an edge over other NCSDs
elsewhere, owing to the following features:

• It was created by the Prime Minister. In a socialist set-up, this Decision is

almost as binding as a law and its implementation would be definite and
faster.

• It is chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister, which balances the tension

between the advantages of having a high level presiding authority and
need for closer supervision by said authority. Experience shows that an
NCSD that is chaired by the Head of State or Government has better
chances of getting its job done and faster. However, the head of
government normally has a heavy work load and faces numerous
concerns that the management of NCSD is either delegated or altogether
set aside. The head of government also changes, sometimes frequently,
that commitment to push SD through NCSD also changes. A number of
NCSDs had such problems that eventually caused their demise. The
current chairperson has the rank and authority. He presumably has fewer
concerns and could provide more attention to Vietnam NCSD compared to
the Prime Minister.

• Vietnam NCSD has already been localized. This is very important and
useful since this is the best way the NCSD may reach out to, have a feel
for, and get feedback from as many people throughout the country.

• The coordination and secretariat responsibilities rest with MPI, an

oversight body. Again, experience shows that such responsibilities are
better handled by a body that has a macro and integrated view than one
with a linear concern such as a sector agency.

• Decision 1032 provides that the NCSD budget would come from the State
budget and integrated in MPI budget. Ensuring budget support is a key

107
 element in the sustainability of the NCSD. Budget uncertainties in many
developing countries have rendered their NCSDs inactive.

271. The above notwithstanding, it is recommended that Vietnam undertake the

following:

• Immediately settle a number of issues and surmount difficulties attendant

to the introduction of the NCSD such as those described below. The
immediate passing of the NCSD Charter would pave the way for the
speedier pursuit of SD in Vietnam.

o Role of NCSD. Some want the NCSD to have a decision-making

function to make it effective. Others see this as inappropriate as
decision-making is the role of the Prime Minister.

o Vertical and horizontal coordination. About 14 provinces have already

set up SD Committees that are supposed to coordinate the promotion
and implementation of VA21. This creates coordination problems
since there are already existing systems of coordination and reporting
between the national and local levels (vertical), and among sectoral
agencies (horizontal) both at national and local levels. On top of these,
there are also numerous sectoral bodies such as fisheries, national
parks, construction, industry and tourism that also have their own
coordination and reporting systems.

o Sectoral orientation. The NCSD is proposed to operate using the

sectoral committee approach. This approach poses strong possibilities
of duplication or overlap of functions with line agencies. The NCSD
could consider adopting a thematic approach that focuses on matters
or issues pertaining to or emanating from the nexus of various sectors
to minimize duplication and enhance integration.

• Continue to enhance awareness and understanding of SD and to build the

capacity of its people especially those in government and NCSD through
the following:

o training of NCSD members and secretariat particularly in planning,

policy-making, tools for integration, monitoring and assessment;

o expanding and capacitating its base of stakeholders and partners,

particularly the civil society; and

o stepping up communication and advocacy for SD.

• Improve coordination within government. MONRE needs to take on

greater authority and responsibility in ensuring that sectoral line ministries

108
 and agencies consciously address the environmental implications of their
respective development policies, initiatives and projects. MPI, as the
coordinative ministry for overseeing the entire development process, also
needs to consistently enforce environmental requirements, particularly the
EIA system for investment projects.

• Firm up an agreed set of sustainable development indicators. Once

completed, the statistical capabilities of relevant government agencies
need to be strengthened to ensure an efficient monitoring and evaluation
system. There is an important role for local governments and non-
government organizations to play in such monitoring, which can be further
enhanced and clarified through the NCSD as it undergoes its own
institutional strengthening. By virtue of its own achievements in recent
years, Vietnam’s moves on sustainable development will be watched
closely by its neighbours in the years ahead; it is thus crucial that it sets a
worthy example for the rest of the Greater Mekong Sub-region.

6.6 Yunnan Province of China

6.6.1 Institutional Context

272. The Communist Party of China (CPC) holds exclusive political power and
serves as the administrative and policymaking center of the government of the
People's Republic of China. The Chinese Government, which has always been
subordinate to the CPC, implements party policies. The primary organs of state
power are the National People's Congress (NPC), the President who is the head
of state, and the State Council. Under the Chinese constitution, the NPC is the
highest organ of state power in China. The provincial governments such as that
of Yunnan mirror that of the State.

SD Coordination and Planning Mechanisms

273. The institutional coordinating mechanism for SD in China has evolved

since 1992 when China started responding to the call of UNCED to develop a
national Agenda 21. The State Council then created the Leading Group for
China’s Agenda 21 to coordinate the formulation and implementation of the
National Agenda 21 – White Paper on China's Population, Environment and
Development in the 21st Century (also known as China’s Agenda 21 or CA21)
that was approved by the State Council in March 1994. The Leading Group had
54 members composed of state and government ministries bodies (41), media
(2), business councils (6) and mass organizations (5). 54 These members
represent all relevant sectors such as environment, trade and industry. It was

54
Administrative Center for China’s Agenda 21, http://english.acca21.org.cn

109
co-chaired by the State Science and Technology Commission and State
Planning Commission.

274. The Administrative Center for China’s Agenda 21 (ACCA 21) was created
in 1994 to facilitate the localization and implementation of CA21. It naturally
became the secretariat support for the Leading Group. Among other things,
ACCA 21 (a) conducts policy research on SD as input to decision-making; (b)
fosters international cooperation and exchange in SD; (c) promotes development
of sustainable communities; and (d) provides information and build capacity and
awareness on SD matters especially at the local levels.

275. Meanwhile, the State Planning Commission was renamed as State

Development Planning Commission in 1998 and then to National Development
and Reform Commission (NDRC) after its merger with the State Council Office
for Restructuring the Economic System in 2003. The NDRC is the agency
primarily responsible for planning and macroeconomic management in China.
Three of its major tasks are the (a) formulation and implementation of economic
development plans, policies and strategies for economic and social development;
(b) maintenance of balance of economic aggregates; and (c) promotion of a
sustainable development strategy and coordinated development of the regional
economy.55

276. Upon the completion of the CA21, the State Council instructed
government institutions at all levels, to consider CA21 as an overarching
strategic guideline for the formulation of national economic and social
development plans, and to prepare local Agenda 21s. To facilitate the
implementation of the directive, local Leading Groups for CA 21 were created
and ACCA 21 conducted training programs and helped in planning. All these
were coordinated at the province level by the respective Provincial Planning
Commissions.

277. At the regional level, there is yet another body that was tasked to study
and recommend strategies, development plans, major issues and policies, laws
and regulations56 for the development of China’s western region, which covers
Yunnan. This is the Leading Group for Western Region Development, which was
created by the State Council under the supervision of NDRC. It is expected to
coordinate the overall economic and social development of the Western Region
by way of recommendations on key infrastructure development, environmental
protection and improvement, resource management and development, and other
development concerns.

278. The foregoing discussion shows that the institutional mechanism for SD in
China is rather elaborate. However, it also indicates that the formulation and

55
Excerpts from functions of the National Development Reform Commission,
http://en.ndrc.gov.cn
56
National Development Reform Commission website: http://en.ndrc.gov.cn

110
implementation of the SD agenda have been a cooperative and collaborative
undertaking.

279. The responsibility of coordinating the management of the environment is

vested in the State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA). Its
upgrading to ministerial level in 1998 appeared to manifest recognition of the
importance and priority of environmental protection and management especially
at a time when China’s environmental situation had started to rapidly deteriorate
due to fast-paced development. SEPA’s responsibilities include formulating and
implementing plans, policies, programs, projects, rules and regulations for
protecting and managing the environment; supervising the development and
utilization of natural resources; monitoring and evaluation of the environmental
situation and reporting such to concerned bodies and the public.

280. The local implementation of plans, policies and regulations emanating

from SEPA, and addressing particular local environment concerns rest with the
local authorities through the Provincial Environmental Protection Bureau (PEPB)
at the province level. The PEPBs are under the administrative authority of the
provincial governments, while subject to technical and policy guidance by the
State Environment Protection Agency (SEPA).

Civil Society

281. Contrary to common belief, NGOs are not new in China’s society since
they existed as early as the Sui, Tang and Song Dynasties57. They were known
as “social organizations” and later evolved through time into what they are today.
NGOs became mass organizations during the wars of 1930s and 1940s when
Mao Zedong encouraged a united front against Japan and the Koumintang.
They then came to be known as Government Organized NGOs or GO-NGOs
upon the establishment of People’s Republic of China when Mao declared
proletarian “dictatorship” that meant punishment to disobedience or
“counterrevolutionary” activities. Opposition groups were cracked down while
pro-communist groups were amalgamated and mainstreamed into the
Communist Party. These surviving groups included the Women’s Federation and
Trade Union, and Youth League. No new NGOs came about during the Cultural
Revolution except for a few that were organized by the Party for its purposes.

282. Civil society participation took a positive turn when China opened up and
adopted economic reforms. The people became more conscious and assertive
of their rights, while decentralization and market orientation diminished the role
and control of the State. NGO activities became robust, dampened somewhat
when government tightened control after the Tiananmen incident. They
managed to gain importance and influence in spite of government restrictions,
which were slow to adjust to necessary changes in the face with rapid economic

57
Zhang, Ye. “China’s Emerging Civil Society,” The Brookings Institution, 2003
(http://www.brook.edu/fp/cnaps/papers/ye2003.htm)

111
development. Government began to recognize their usefulness as it struggled
with adverse impacts of development such as environmental degradation. Many
independent NGOs came to being while the GO-NGOs became more and more
independent of government as they mobilized their own funds and government
loosened its grip. The open door policy also encouraged INGOs, e.g. Rockefeller
and Ford Foundations, to establish a major presence in China. World Wildlife
Fund (WWF), The Nature Conservancy (TNC), and Oxfam Hongkong now have
divisions or project offices in Yunnan.

283. NGOs are now present in most of China such as in Yunnan where a
significant number of both local and international NGOs operate. The Chinese
Environmental NGOs Online58 alone lists 13 local NGOs that include Kunming
EarthWatch, Institute for Sustainable Development of Natural Resources,
Yunnan Participatory Rural Association (YNPRA), Pesticide Eco-Alternatives
Center Yunnan China, Yunnan Environmental Development Institute, Yunnan
Man and Nature Foundation, Yunnan EcoNetwork (YEN), and Center for
Biodiversity and Indigenous Knowledge (CBIK). The directory of China Develop-
ment Brief,59 on the other hand, has over 200 INGOs and 45 of these operate in
Yunnan such as World Wildlife Fund, The Nature Conservancy, Conservation
International and Greenpeace.

284. Notwithstanding its already vibrant civil society community, independent

NGOs have very limited participation in SD initiatives and processes. For
instance, the Leading Group for CA 21 only had GO-NGOs (e.g. Women’s
Federation and Youth League) as members. Consultations have become part of
certain processes, to a large extent because they are required by donors and
global community. However, it has still been evident in many cases that those
invited to the consultations are pre-selected or hand-picked to minimize
opposition and facilitate completion of a certain output or activity. Obviously,
these have to change.

285. There is more interaction and cooperation between government and

NGOs in Yunnan. Two INGOs, for instance, financed and undertook two projects
with YPEB: the HK-Oxfam’s 1million RMB Project on Poverty Alleviation and
Environment Recovery in Lancang-Mekong Watershed in 2000-2002, and
WWF’s 360,000 RMB Project on Environmental Awareness and Project Life
Cycle Management Training in 1998-1999.

Business and Industry

286. As in most countries, business and industry have a better relationship with
government in China. Governments consult and cooperate with them more than
with NGOs. The composition of the Leading Group for CA 21 is illustrative. It
has more (6) business representatives compared to NGOs (5) even if these are

58
Chinese Environment NGOs Online (http://www.greengo.cn)
59
China Development Brief (http://www.chinadevelopmentbrief.com/dingo/Province/Yunnan)

112
GO-NGOs. The ministries and state bodies represented are mostly those
concerned with industry and the economy, e.g., mineral resources, construction,
electronics, coal, machine building.

287. There are numerous industry associations in China. Yunnan itself has the
Federation of Industry and Commerce of Yunnan Province, which is also called
the Yunnan Province Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber covers the entire
province with 144 county level organizations and about 36,000 members.60 In
addition to serving its members, the Chamber undertakes the following activities:

• Participate in consultations and provide inputs to address economic and

social issues and formulation and implementation of relevant laws,
decrees and regulations.
• Implement national laws, decrees and regulations at local level.
• Promote exchange and interaction between industrial and commercial
organizations and persons, inside and outside of Yunnan Province, and
also domestically and abroad.

288. It may be noted from above key roles and activities that the Chamber is
actively involved and a key participant in governance processes. It provides
inputs and advice to improve the social and economic conditions of the province
based on its experiences and sentiments of its members.

6.6.2 State of Development and Environmental Planning

289. With a land area of 394,100 square kilometers and population of 44 million
(as of 2004), Yunnan province of China is about as large as Laos and Cambodia
combined, and a population about three times the combined population of the
two. It is considered to be among the least developed provinces of China, with a
per capita income of less than $600 in 2001, marked by a wide disparity between
urban ($829) and rural incomes ($187). Agriculture remains the most important
economic sector, with industrial activity largely confined to the capital city of
Kunming, and the industrial towns of Yuxi, Qujing, and Hong River.

290. The sheer size of China makes it inevitable that a large degree of
autonomy resides in the provincial governments. While the State Council
exercises overall authority over the affairs of the state at the national level, each
provincial People’s Government is given substantial leeway in determining
sustainable development strategies within the confines of the provincial territory.

291. Yunnan province is no exception to this. Like all provinces of China, it has
a Five-Year Plan for Economic and Social Development (formerly called Plan for
Social and Economic Development, 5YPSED), formulated by the Provincial
60
GMS Business Forum and Directory, “Yunnan Province Chamber of Commerce” (http://www.
gmsbizforum.com)

113
Planning Commission, more formally known as the Provincial Development and
Reformation Commission. This mirrors the Five-Year Plans issued by the
National Development and Reformation Commission (State Planning
Commission) at the national level. The current plan in effect is the 11th Five-Year
Plan at the national level, and Yunnan’s 11th 5YPESD at the level of the province.
Supplementing this is a Five-Year Plan for Ecological Rehabilitation and
Environmental Protection (FYPEREP), which is also prepared by all provinces to
support their 5YPESDs. The Yunnan Provincial Government and the Yunnan
Provincial Environmental Protection Bureau (YNPEPB) is currently guided by the
province’s 11th FYPEREP.

292. At the national level, China’s professed commitment to environmental

protection is embodied in Article 26 of its 1954 Constitution. In 1989, it passed a
revision of the Environmental Protection Law (EPL) that created the government
body now known as State Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA). While
originally prepared in 1979, the law went through a ten-year gestation (“trial
period”) within which several other laws related to natural resources
management (NRM) were also enacted or updated. These included laws on
water pollution (1984), forests (1984), fisheries (1986), air pollution (1987), and
water (1988). Subsequent to the passing of the EPL there have been laws
passed on other environment protection issues, such as on water and soil
conservation (1991), energy utilization (1997), and land resource administration
(1998). All these laws have been promulgated by the Standing Committee of the
People’s Congress (SCPC). In addition, the State Council has passed a key
resolution on environment protection (1996) and regulations on environment
protection in construction (1988).

293. But it was the formulation and promulgation of CA21 that brought into
sharp focus the integration of environment with economic and social
development. After completion of CA21 in 1994, local governments from the
provinces down have been directed to implement CA21 and formulate their own
local Agendas 21. In line with this, open-ended Sustainable Development Action
Plans (SDAPs) have been formulated by the different provinces through their
respective provincial development planning commissions. Provinces have been
given flexibility in formulating their own SDAPs to suit their own peculiar
circumstances. Yunnan’s provincial SDAP was done by the Provincial Planning
Commission in close coordination with the YNPEPB, with technical support from
the UK Department for International Development (DFID).

6.6.3 NSDS Readiness Assessment

Policy Integration

294. In Yunnan, the Provincial Government has identified environmental

damage as a key factor in the incidence of poverty in the province, as well as

114
being important to the broader issues of sustainable development.61 Promotion
of holistic integration of economic, social and environmental dimensions is an
explicit thrust of the provincial government. 62 Unfortunately, no English
translation of the 5YPESD, FYPEREP or provincial SDAP is available to permit a
first-hand assessment of policy integration embodied within the provincial plans.
However, limited available descriptions indicate the following:

• The 11th Plan incorporates the two basic state policies of saving resources
and protecting the environment, setting forth the strategic tasks of building
a resources-saving, environment-friendly society as well as concrete
measures to be taken in their pursuit.

• The Plan goals cover not only economic areas but also those concerning
people's life, social development and environment.

• Political civilization, cultural development and social construction are

discussed in exclusive chapters, with special stress on putting people first
and solving the significant problems that concern people's vital interests.

• The Plan targets to achieve remarkable progress in energy consumption

efficiency. Energy consumption per unit GDP is targeted to fall by 20
percent, and water consumption per unit industrial value added is targeted
to drop by 30 percent.

295. At the national level, China’s Agenda 21 (CA21) has served as guide for
subsequent development plans for the integration of the economic, social and
environmental dimensions of development. As its preamble states: “China's
Agenda 21…will function as a guide document for drawing up medium and long-
term plans on economic and social development. Its goals and contents will be
embodied in the Ninth Five-Year Plan (1996-2000) and the Plan for 2010.”

296. Still, the primacy given to economic development comes through clearly in
CA21:

“Because China is a developing country, the goals of increasing social

productivity, enhancing overall national strength and improving people's
quality of life can not be realized without giving primacy to the
development of the national economy and having all work focused on
building the economy.” (Section 1.2)

“For a developing country like China… the precondition for sustainable

development is development. The path of relatively rapid economic growth

61
http://www.scottwilson.com/Default.aspx?page=8927
62
Interview with Mr. Zhou Bo, Environmental Protection Bureau of the Provincial Government of
Yunnan Province, January 30, 2007.

115
 and gradual improvements in the quality of development must be taken in
order to meet the Chinese people's current and future needs for basic
necessities and their desires for higher living standards, and in order to
consolidate the nation's strength. Only when the economic growth rate
reaches and is sustained at a certain level, can poverty be eradicated,
people's livelihoods improved and the necessary forces and conditions for
supporting sustainable development be provided… And while it is
necessary for China to embark on a gradual path to sustainable
development, it must do this at the same time as it is improving economic
conditions and structures, enhancing their effectiveness and maintaining
an annual average GNP growth rate of between 8 and 9%.” (Section 2.1)

297. Even the renaming of the former national and provincial Social and
Economic Development Plans to Economic and Social Development Plans
appears indicative of the government’s premise that developing the economy
must come as a prerequisite to effectively addressing social and environmental
concerns. Still, one of CA21’s explicit objectives is to “accelerate the shift in
China's economic development to a sustainable development model, where the
socialized economy is coordinated and stabilized with resource and
environmental considerations.”

Intergenerational Timeframe

298. The national and provincial development plans have a five-year time
frame, but are supposedly guided by the open-ended CA 21 at the national level
and the provincial SDAPs at the provincial level. It is thus the SDAPs, which are
considered to be the local Agendas 21, that provide the intergenerational
timeframe for the respective blueprints for local sustainable development.

Analysis and Assessments

299. As the Yunnan Provincial Government set out to formulate its Sustainable
Development Action Plan in 2000, it sought the assistance of DFID (UK) in taking
a more participative and integrated strategic approach to its plans and
interventions, and to improve prioritization and co-ordination of its activities. The
Yunnan Environmental Development Program (YEDP), a five-year effort from
2000-2005, became the mechanism for providing such support. Among the
components of YEDP was the formulation of sustainable development “toolkits”
to, among other things, “address environment-poverty linkages and assist YPG
to take participative and gender sensitive approaches in identifying and
prioritizing appropriate interventions.” Thus, there appear to have been efforts to
undertake more integrative analyses of the sustainable development challenges
facing the province.

116
Indicators and Targets

300. Formulation of Sustainable Development Indicators (SDIs) was explicitly

provided in both CA21 at the national level, and the Yunnan SDAP at the
provincial level. YEDP’s package of technical support for the Yunnan SDAP
formulation included support for the development of such SDIs for the province.

301. As observed by the Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) report

on the province,63 the tradition of taking a longer view of environmental outcomes
had been weak in Yunnan province, as reflected in an apparent inability of most
Provincial Government agencies to generate long enough and compatible time
series of some key environmental variables. The above initiatives, along with
China’s commitment to the MDG targets and indicators and their systematic
tracking, have helped mitigate this traditional weakness. These are now making
it possible to track the province’s progress on sustainable development more
adequately and systematically.

Co-ordination and Institutions

302. Besides SEPA and PEPB, a large number of other central and provincial
bodies play a role in determining environmental outcomes. Forestry, water
resources, and agriculture departments play important roles in the management
of water resources, forests, biodiversity, and soil conservation. These agencies
often work jointly to address the management of resources under multiple
jurisdictions. For example, the twin objectives of biodiversity protection and
management of soil erosion are being managed as part of the Conversion of
Farmland to Forest project carried out under by the Agriculture and Forestry
departments.

303. Aside from governmental bodies, a number of other institutions and

enterprises sometimes perform public management functions, such as the
Yunnan Environmental Monitoring Central Station, Environment Supervision and
Management Station, Yunnan Environmental Science Institute, Radioactivity
Supervision and Management Institute, and Rare and Endangered Plant
Introduction and Propagation Center. These have also played corresponding
roles in the province’s sustainable development efforts.

304. As mentioned above, CA21 was formulated with the direct participation of
54 government ministries, public entities and non-government bodies. After the
initial draft of 40 chapters was completed in 1993, extensive consultations were

63
Yunnan Provincial Environment Protection Bureau and Project Secretariat, UNEP Regional
Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (2006), “Yunnan Province, PR China: National
Environmental Assessment (EPA) Report,” ADB TA No. 6069-REG: National Performance
Assessment and Subregional Strategic Environment Framework in the Greater Mekong
Subregion.

117
undertaken with appropriate ministries and agencies, along with Chinese and
foreign and experts. The revisions suggested in these consultations considered
to the final version with 20 chapters and 78 program areas.

305. The Yunnan SDAP was formulated with direct involvement of various
sectoral departments, who were initially asked to formulate their respective
SDAPs for their sectors. These were subsequently integrated by the Provincial
Planning Commission, after which the document was referred back to the
sectoral departments for comments and validation. In this manner, incorporation
of various sectoral concerns was ensured, while the PPC exercised its
coordinative role in the integration of sectoral thrusts in the provincial SDAP.

306. The Yunnan EPA64 observes that over the years, the YPEPB has had a
much greater involvement in matters pertaining to economic development, which
continues to assume primacy in provincial decision making. Still, its ability to
place environmental safeguards on all the economic decisions in the province is
seen to have been somewhat compromised.

Local and Regional Governance

307. The provincial PEPBs are under the administrative authority of the
provincial governments, while subject to technical and policy guidance by the
SEPA. As one of line agencies of Yunnan’s Provincial Government, the YPEPB
has the overall responsibility of implementing national policies and managing
environmental protection activities at the province level. In this, it is supported by
local environmental protection bureaus in 16 prefectures and 90 counties (rural
districts). At the prefecture level, there are 14 EPBs in 16 prefectures. At the
county level there are 49 independent EPBs in 127 counties. Prefecture and
county EPBs are smaller, but their functions are quite similar to those of the
YPEPB. There are 90 environmental monitoring stations, one environmental
supervision and law enforcement team and 102 environmental supervision and
management offices in the province.

308. Overall, the legal and policy framework is still observed to be top-down
and centralized, with the key policymaking and relevant implementation
resources still controlled by the central government. However, there are clear
general trends of reform related to environmental governance, particularly on
decentralization and promotion of greater transparency.65

Stakeholder Participation

309. China officially recognizes the importance of public participation in

sustainable development, asserted in both CA21 and in planning documents at

64
Ibid.
65
Zuo Ting (undated), “A Perspective on China’s Yunnan Province,” The Regional Environment-
al Forum for Mainland Southeast Asia (http://www.ref-msea.org/yunnan.pdf)

118
the provincial level. Environmental NGOs and individuals have been increasingly
drawn into sustainable development initiatives. The pollution-related legislation
of the late 1990s include provisions authorizing and even requiring consultation
with the residents of prospective locations of evaluated projects.

310. In the preparation of CA21 itself, there appeared to have been some
limited direct participation of the non-government sector, especially independent
non-government organizations. The list of members of ACCA21 includes All-
China Federation of Trade Union, All-China Women's Federation, Central
Committee of the Communist Youth League of China, China Science and
Technology Association, and the National Patriotic Public Health Campaign
Committee. Oxfam Hongkong was a direct participant in the preparation of the
Environmental Performance Assessment undertaken under an ADB project for
GMS (see footnote 63). Various NGO initiatives are considered to have
increased environmental awareness especially among the young generation of
Yunnan, and this has had a positive effect on the overall environmental
performance of the province.66

Monitoring and Evaluation

311. While ACCA21 was mandated to prepare China’s Agenda 21, there is no
clear mandate given for the monitoring and evaluation of CA21’s implementation.
This lack of a clear M&E mechanism is reflected at the provincial level as well,
where a provincial official acknowledged that M&E is not a regular activity of the
provincial government. 67 Monitoring and evaluation is seen to be the
responsibility of the Provincial Planning Commission, but appears to be a limited
activity that does not benefit from participation of independent non-government
stakeholder groups. This appears to be a continuing weakness of the existing
NSDS system in China and in Yunnan province.

312. There have been initiatives in Yunnan from outside of government on

participatory M&E, arising from the work of the International Development
Research Centre (IDRC) of Canada on a Community-Based Natural Resource
Management (CBNRM) program. The program promotes an interdisciplinary and
participatory approach to solving problems related to natural resource
management at the local level. A pilot project to train local stakeholders was
undertaken with partner institutions working with the CBNRM program, namely
the Kunming Institute of Botany and the Chinese Academy of Sciences-PARDYP
(“People and Resource Dynamics in Mountainous Watersheds” project) team in
Kunming. 68 While some capability at such participatory M&E has apparently
been developed in the non-government sector, there remains no apparent move

66
Yunnan EPA Report.
67
Interview with Mr. Zhou Bo, Yunnan Provincial Environmental Protection Bureau, January 30,
2007.
68
Ronnie Vernooy, Sun Qiu, and Xu Jianchu (eds.) (2003), Voices For Change: Participatory
Monitoring and Evaluation in China, Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.

119
to involve such efforts in any systematic M&E process for the provincial-level
development plans (5YPESD or SDAP).

Resource Mobilization

313. CA21 commits the Chinese government to establish three Agenda 21

Development Funds required for its implementation. These funds will include a
fund for building China's capacity for sustainable development, a technology
transfer fund and a technological cooperation fund, all of which will fully absorb
and effectively utilize the investments from both at home and abroad. Overall
fiscal resources of the government are ample, and funding of SD initiatives is not
likely to be constraining at the national level.

314. At the level of Yunnan province, departments with functions bearing on

environment and sustainable development who are relatively well-endowed
include (1) Forestry, (2) Agriculture, (3) Water Resources, (4) Land Resources,
(5) Health (6) Earthquake Bureau, and (7) Meteorological Bureau. The volume of
funds available for environmental management and sustainable development
initiatives and projects in Yunnan is supplemented by the financing by the Central
Government of activities that are national in scope but implemented by local
authorities.

315. The 10th FYPEREP had projected expenditures of 7.8 billion Yuan to be
invested in 26 projects. A dominant item (4 billion Yuan) has been pollution
control, including pollution management of Dianchi Lake, one of the severely
polluted lakes in China. This represents almost 4 per cent of the total provincial
budget during the corresponding period.

6.6.4 MDG Outlook

316. Data indicate that at the national level, China had achieved the overall
poverty reduction goal as of the early 2000s (Table 9). However, progress since
1990 appears slow in reducing hunger and improving health indicators. Like
Vietnam, 1990 benchmarks on child and maternal mortality rates had already
been relatively superior to those of most of their GMS neighbors. This makes
halving the already good indicators quite challenging, even up to 2015.

317. Relatively favorable numbers at the national level mask wide internal
disparities, however. Coastal and urban centers tend to be better off on MDG
performance, while the western and central regions have much poorer conditions.
Yunnan in particular tends to be at or near the bottom among the provinces,
especially in health and nutrition indicators. A UN report attributed poor nutrition
in western China more to lack of information on nutritional matters rather than

120
from lack of food.69 A 1995 World Bank report considered China to be off-track
on the majority of the health MDGs, citing the poor health service system as a
major impediment.70 Gender equity in education also appears to be one of the
more challenging goals.

Table 9. Progress Toward the Millennium Development Goals

and Targets, China (As of 2005)

Goals and Targets Status

Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger
Target 1: Halve, between 1990 and 2015, Rural population below $1 per day: 31.3% in 1990; 16.6%
a.
the proportion of people whose income is in 2001
less than $1 a day
Target 2: Halve, between 1990 and 2015, Prevalence of underweight children under ages 5: 17.4%
b
the proportion of people who suffer from in 1990; 14.3% in 2002
hunger
Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education
Target 3: Ensure that, by 2015, children Net primary enrollment ratio: 97.4% in 1990; 98.6% in
everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be 2002
able to complete a full course of primary Youth literacy rate: 95.3% in 1990; 97.9% in 2001
schooling
Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women
Target 4: Eliminate gender disparity in Ratio of girls to boys in primary education: 86% in 1990;
primary and secondary education, 90% in 2002.
preferably by 2005, and in all levels of Ratio of girls to boys in secondary education: 85% in 2002
education no later than 2015
Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality
Target 5: Reduce by two thirds, between Under-5 mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 49 in 1991;
1990 and 2015, the under-5 mortality rate 38.1/34.9 in 2002.
Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 38 in 1990;
30.0/29.2 in 2002
Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health
Target 6: Reduce by three quarters Maternal mortality ratio (per 100,000 live births): 88.9 in
between 1990 and 2015, the maternal 1990; 56.0 in 2001.
mortality ratio Proportion of births attended by skilled health workers in
hospital: 50.3% in 1990; 79.4% in 2003
Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Other Diseases
Target 7: Have halted by 2015, and begun HIV/AIDS incidence rate (age 15–49) as of 2002 is 0.06-
to reverse, the spread of HIV/AIDS 0.11%, or 700,000–1.5 million cases.
76,000 children orphaned by HIV/AIDS in 2001
Target 8: Have halted by 2015, and begun Malaria (per 100,000 people): 1 in year 2000.
to reverse, the incidence of malaria and Tuberculosis (per 100,000 people): 107 in 2001; 367 in
other major diseases 2000 using active pulmonary tuberculosis definition

69
UN China Team (2003), Millennium Development Goals – China’s Progress: An Assessment
by the UN Country Team in China, Office of the United Nations Resident Coordinator in China,
Beijing.
70
World Bank (2005), “China’s Progress Toward the Health MDGs,” Rural Health in China:
Briefing Notes Series.

121
Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability
Target 9: Integrate the principles of China’s Agenda 21 was promulgated in 1994; provinces
sustainable development into country including Yunnan province have likewise formulated their
policies and programs and reverse the own provincial Sustainable Development Action Plans
loss of environmental resources (SDAP).
Land covered by forest: 12.98% in 1990; 18.2% in 2004.
Carbon dioxide emissions (per capita): 2.1 tons in 1990;
2.3 tons in 1999
Target 10: Halve, by 2015, the proportion Rural population with clean water source: 31% in 1990;
of people without sustainable access to 58% in 2003
c
safe drinking water and basic sanitation Urban population with clean water source : 87% in 1990;
94% in 2000 (see also Table A1.4)
Target 11: By 2020, achieve a significant Urban population with access to improved sanitation: 56%
improvement in the lives of at least 100 in 1990; 69% in 2000
million slum dwellers Rural population with access to improved sanitation: 8%
in 1993; 51% in 2003

HIV/AIDS = human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.

a
2001 is the latest available year from the World Bank. In 2004, 75.9 million rural people were living on
a per capita income below the officially defined low-income threshold of CNY924, which is roughly
equivalent to the international $1 per day standard.
b
Numbers in italics represent PRC Ministry of Health official figures, available online at
http://www.moh.gov.cn/public/open.aspx
c
Excluding agriculture water users in urban area, used by the Ministry of Construction until 2000
Sources: United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2004. Human Development Report 2004.
New York: Oxford University Press; UNDP. 2004. Millennium Development Goals: China Progress.
Beijing: Office of the United Nations Resident Coordinator in China; World Bank Development
Indicators Database (online version at http://devdata.worldbank.org/idg/ IDGProfile.asp); United
Nations. 2004. Common Country Assessment (20 November 2004 draft); Beijing. Ministry of Health,
PRC. China Health Statistics 2004. National Bureau of Statistics, PRC. 2005. 2004 China Statistical
Yearbook. Beijing: China Statistical Press.

6.6.5 Overall Country Assessment

318. China’s rapid economic growth in the past decade, with GDP growth
exceeding 10 percent in recent years, clearly puts pressure on the environment
and natural resources and is likely to be causing certain social stresses as well.
The primacy placed by the Chinese authorities on economic development in
recent development plans has been deliberate, as reflected in both official
documents and in government initiatives and projects, even as concern for social
and environmental impacts has also been asserted. In Yunnan province,
integration of the social, economic and environmental dimensions of
development has been an explicitly professed objective, especially given the
province’s still heavier reliance on resource-based economic activities.

319. Yunnan province is beginning to possess the key requisites of a good

NSDS system. With external assistance, it has set up a system of sustainable

122
development indicators and has acquired some capability for sustainability
analysis and assessments. There appears to be an improved atmosphere for
interagency coordination and collaboration for sustainable development, and the
YPEPB’s involvement in development initiatives of other sectoral departments
has reportedly increased. Civil society has become more active in the province,
although there remains much scope for greater engagement between
government and civil society organizations.

320. The need to pursue sustainable development on a holistic and integrated

basis appears well recognized by the government of China at the national level
and Yunnan province at the provincial level. Both are currently guided by open-
ended sustainable development strategies, embodied in China’s Agenda 21
(CA21) and the Yunnan province Sustainable Development Action Plan (SDAP)
respectively. CA21, which was promulgated in 1994 as a prompt response of the
country to the Rio Earth Summit, is now dated and merits a revisit and thorough
update.

321. The institutional support needed to pursue SD efectively in Yunnan is fairly

developed. Government, business and civil society are well established and
seemingly working together. The situation is far from perfect though as there
remain a number of issues, some of which are within the purview of national
government such as the need for closer vertical and horizontal coordination
among agencies and sectors, and the development of a better NGO policy
regime. Still, Yunnan has the capacity to improve its institutional situation in
order to facilitate and speed up its SD process. The following may be
constructive :

• Improve coordination and integration. While there may be some difficulty

in improving coordination with national agencies, local agencies must
strive to coordinate their plans, policies, programs and initiatives. The
experience in the prepartion of the YEDP where a Leading Group was
organized and allowed closer working relationship among YEPB, Yunnan
Poverty Alleviation Office, Yunnan Development Refrom Commission and
others. This cross-sectoral coordination widens perspectives and
promotes integration of development approaches. It is thus recommended
that an appropriately-mandated multi-stakeholder coordinating mechanism
be organized within the province to improve coordination and promote
closer sectoral integration in all governance processes (e.g. plannning,
policy-making and M&E). This mechanism may emanate from
strengthening existing bodies (e.g. Leading Group), including
representatives from other stakeholders, organizations, and capacitating
them with technical know-how and adequate funding.

• Strengthen civil society. Yunnan is poor in terms of income but rich in

terms of natural resources. There is need to manage the resources and
address poverty effectively. Civil society can help substantially in this

123
 regard. It has the flexibility, capacity and commitment to undertake
important tasks such as community mobilization, capacity building and
reaching out to people in far-flung areas. It would thus be to the
advantage of Yunnan to provide an environment that would be conducive
to the flourishing especially of local civil society organizations.

• Update CA21 and SDAP. China’s Agenda 21, now 13 years old, calls for
a major update. Similarly, the provincial SDAP merits revision seven
years after it original release. With more of the requisites for a good
NSDS now present, it is opportune for China and Yunnan province to
embark on a renewed NSDS exercise. This time around, it would have
added value if undertaken with proper consideration of its interrelationship
with the rest of its GMS neighbors.

124
7. SDS Readiness at the GMS Sub-regional Level
7.1 Sub-regional Institutions for Sustainable Development

322. There are a number of regional entities and programs, both bilateral and
multilateral, and various stakeholder groups working to assist the GMS countries
individually or as a group. These include international organizations and multila-
teral development agencies, national government bodies, provincial and local
level government organisations, and civil society organisations including unions,
cooperatives and conservation groups. Effective coordination of their efforts has
always been a major challenge because of the absence of a sub-regional
institutional framework for the purpose. A recurrent sentiment expressed in
interviews is that there is enormous scope for increased regional cooperation and
coordination, and that this must be properly addressed soonest.

7.1.1 Leading Development Mechanisms

323. For the purposes of this study, focus is confined to those that directly and
specifically address sub-regional development concerns, and provide a
mechanism for coordination among the member countries. These are the
following: the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN); Mekong River
Commission (MRC); the institutional framework for the Greater Mekong Sub-
regional Economic Program (GMS Program), and the Greater Mekong Sub-
region Academic and Research Network (GMSARN). There are other
mechanisms that address the sub-region’s development, particularly those under
the aegis of UN agencies, and are also mentioned below. Each mechanism is
described in detail in Annex A and briefly introduced hereunder. Their interrela-
tionships are depicted in Figure 3 below.

324. ASEAN covers all but one (i.e. China) of the GMS countries. However,
China has been a dialogue partner of ASEAN for years. ASEAN’s mechanism
for addressing environment and sustainable development is the regular ASEAN
Ministerial Meeting on the Environment (AMME) and its Senior Officials on the
Environment (ASOEN). At the outset, this tilts the orientation of sustainable
development discussions prominently towards environment. At the same time,
having a distinct forum for environment ministers and officials also deprives other
ASEAN instrumentalities and processes of inputs from the environment sector.
The MRC covers only the Lower Mekong countries of Cambodia, Lao PDR,
Thailand and Vietnam, but has dialogue arrangements with Myanmar and China.
It is a mechanism for effecting coordinated and cooperative utilization, manage-
ment and conservation of the water and related resources of the Mekong River
Basin. The GMS Economic Cooperation Program was established by the
GMS governments and the ADB in 1992 as a mechanism for cooperation and
coordination among the GMS countries on a broad set of development concerns

125
including trade and tourism, infrastructure, human resource development,
investment and environment. An institutional mechanism for the program was
subsequently established to facilitate its implementation, with the Working Group
on Environment (WGE) and the Environment Operations Center (EOC)
addressing environment and sustainable development concerns. GMSARN,
unlike the other three, does not involve an intergovernmental mechanism, but is
a network of academic institutions within the GMS that have agreed to address
development concerns in the sub-region through academic and research
cooperation. Table 10 below summarizes the features of these institutions.

Figure 3
Current Sub-regional Institutional Set-Up

ASEAN
Support Institutions

* Multi-Lateral Bodies
(ADB; WB)
* Bilateral Bodies
* Un System
G G G * GMSARN
Cambodia Lao PDR Myanmar * Mekong Institute

G G G
Thailand Vietnam Yunnan
China

MRC

GMS Program Institutional Mechanism

325. In addition, four United Nations bodies concerned with environment and
sustainable development include the sub-region within their overall geographic
purview and have been involved or provided assistance in certain projects and
activities. These are the UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the
Pacific (ESCAP), the UN Environment Program (UNEP) through its Regional
Office in Asia Pacific and Regional Resource Center for Asia Pacific, the UN
Development Program (UNDP) and the UN Commission on Sustainable
Development (UNCSD). Annex B provides more details on these UN bodies.

126
326. Except for GMSARN, which under the UN definition would be considered
a CSO, the institutional mechanisms in the region are observed to have the
following common features:

• They are inter-governmental bodies bound by usual norms of conduct and

rules and procedures of the governments that created them to serve
specific purposes and address defined needs.

• They are sector-oriented, with their agenda and structures following

sectoral lines such that integration and assimilation of strategies, policies
and programs necessary for the pursuit of sustainability is not likely to
happen. Despite its cross-cutting nature, environment is regarded as a
specific sector with its own set of stand-alone substantive agenda and
institutional structure, instead of being integrated or subsumed in those of
other sectors. This tendency has been a major stumbling block in
pursuing SD, which requires a holistic approach that integrates, at the very
least, the economic, social and environmental dimensions of development.

• Stakeholder participation in their respective programs and activities

remains limited, with stakeholders’ involvement largely confined to con-
sultations. Their charters, norms and practices usually constrain them
from expanding the roles and levels of participation of civil society
organizations. They continue to seek the best approach to providing more
direct participation by stakeholders in their key activities (e.g., formulation
of strategies; implementation and monitoring of programs and projects)
without violating their charters and compromising standard procedures.

327. The foregoing only means that the national and sub-regional agenda,
processes and structures have not yet been fully supportive of or compliant with
the calls of JPOI and the GMS Leaders for coordination, integration and multi-
stakeholder participation. An appropriate institutional mechanism at the sub-
regional level has yet to be found to ensure coordination, promote integration and
expand participation and cooperation of stakeholders. There is thus a need to
identify and designate a mechanism, preferably built on one of the existing ones,
to assume the over-all coordinating role.

328. Sub-regional coordination and networking should be on top of the agenda

of CSOs in GMS. There are already existing mechanisms that they can use for
this purposes such as the South East Asian Committee for Advocacy, which is
already in the ASEAN NGO Roster; ASEAN Civil Society Conference, which
meets parallel to ASEAN Summits and has been calling for direct participation of
CSOs in ASEAN discussions; the Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and
Rural Development, and Pesticide Action Network for Asia Pacific, both of which
are sector-specific formations but cover a wide range of issues.

127
 Table 10. Summary Description of Sub-regional Institutional Mechanisms in GMS

ASEAN MRC GMS PROGRAM GMSARN

INSTITUTIONAL MECH
MEMBER NATIONS 10 nations incl. 5 GMS Cambodia, LaoPDR, Thailand, Cambodia, LaoPDR, Myanmar, Academic & research
countries w/ China as a Vietnam with Myanmar and Thailand, Vietnam, China nstitutions in 6 GMS countries
dialogue partner China as dialogue partners
BASIS OF Bangkok Declaration ASEAN 1995 Mekong Agreement Declaration of Leaders; Project Agreement among academic &
CREATION Concorde Document and project research institutions
requirements
TIME FRAME Open Open 10 years (of 20) 4 years with extension
NATURE Intergovernmental Intergovernmental Intergovernmental Academic and research
OBJECTIVE To promote peace and stability, To cooperate in the utilization, To promote economic and To help attain sustainable
and accelerate economic management & social development thru infra development by fostering multi-
growth, social progress and conservation of the water and development, intra trade & disciplinary research and
cultural development in SEA related resources of the investment, among others. academic development
Mekong River Basin.
INSTITUTIONAL • AEM/ASOEN/ WG • Council • Ministerial Conference • International Board
SET-UP (Environment) • Joint Committee • Working Groups • Council of Advisors
• Other ASEAN sectors esp • National Mekong Committee • National Coordinating
economic & social Committee
REPRESENTA- Environment & related Planning, infra or water Oversight ministries, e.g., Academic & research
TIVES ministries/agencies ministries planning, finance institutions
SECRETARIAT Full secretariat office in Jakarta Full secretariat office in EOC and Agri, Env’t & NR Secretariat Office located at AIT
Vientiane division of ADB in Bangkok
FUNDING Gov’t contributions and external Gov’t contributions and external Development assistance mainly External development
dev’t assistance dev’t assistance from ADB assistance
STRENGTHS Developed structure, systems, Developed structure, systems & Developed structure, systems, Research and scientific
procedures; stature & influence; procedures; w/ established procedures; stature & influence; competence
established secretariat; secretariat established secretariat; w/
w/financial commitments financial & tech’l support
WEAKNESSES Covers 10 countries; sector Limited authority, membership, ADB driven; sectoral approach; Limited scope; resource
approach; slow & bureaucratic resources, scope weak inter-sectoral coordination constraints

128
329. Civil society’s clamor for participation in ASEAN processes has consider-
ably strengthened, particularly now that the ASEAN Charter is being drafted. One
tangible result of this is establishment of the Southeast Asian Civil Society
Environment Alliance (SEACSEA) on May 4, 2007. Its creation was a concrete
response by the environment unit of ASEAN Secretariat, which mounted the civil
society consultation forum precisely to organize the environmental CSOs in the
region. SEACSEA aims to (a) enable CSOs to enhance synergies and
approaches to ESD; (b) facilitate dialogues and partnerships between civil society
and ASEAN; and (c) enhance environmental quality by preventing and responding
to key regional, transboundary and shared ESD issues.71 CSOs in GMS countries
appear to be adequately represented in SEACSEA. Each country has a
designated national coordinator that would undertake the national organization
and provide the link to the regional Alliance. SEACSEA has also been recognized
by UNEP, which will help link this closely with its own CSO network. The sponsors
of the consultation, USAID and Hanns Seidel Foundation, have also indicated
strong interest to help Alliance in its activities.

330. Shortly thereafter (on May 7, 2007), the Southeast Asia Public Interest and
Labor Organizations Chemicals Network (SEApChemNet) was organized in a
CSO consultation on chemicals organized by the United Nations Institute for
Training and Research. It also had adequate representation from GMS countries,
which identified their respective national coordinators who will organize national
CSOs that may be linked into the network. These two regional organizations
would be useful platforms for organizing and strengthening civil society in GMS,
and improving their capability to engage government and business in ESD
discourses and development activities.

7.1.3 Business Organizations

331. Private sector development was added as the 9th priority area of the GMS
Program in 2000 in recognition of the critical role of private sector in the sub-
region’s economic development. The main activity for this is the establishment of
the GMS Business Forum (GMS-BF), a joint initiative of ESCAP and ADB under
the framework of the GMS Program. The GMS-BF is an independent non-
government organization composed of the National Chambers of Commerce of the
six GMS countries. As indicated earlier in the country-level discussions, at least
three countries in GMS are considered to have a weak business sector. The
GMS-BF could thus serve as a vehicle for more advanced countries to help
strengthen the private sector in lagging countries, which would ultimately redound
to mutual benefits for all.

71
Draft Report of The Asean Civil Society Organisations Consultative Forum On Environmental
Protection and Sustainable Development, 2-4 May 2007, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

129
332. In his speech during the Inception Meeting of GMS-BF, UNESCAP
Executive Secretary Kim Hak-Su stated that the GMS-BF “is intended to promote
networking among business associations and enterprises in the subregion and to
enhance public and private sector partnership by providing a direct and regular
channel for the private sector to communicate with the GMS governments.”72 He
further indicated that ESCAP has developed three projects to support this
initiative: (a) Strengthening GMS Business Associations; (b) Management Training
Courses for the GMS Business Sector; and (c) Establishment of the GMS
Business Support Centre.

7.2 Planning Initiatives at the Sub-region Level

333. The GMS Program was initiated by the Asian Development Bank in 1992 to
foster stronger and closer economic cooperation among the six member-countries.
It initially identified eight priority areas, namely: transport, energy, telecommunica-
tions, environment, human resource development, tourism, trade, and agriculture.
In October 2000, private sector development was added as a ninth priority area.
The program’s primary intervention started out mainly in the form of infrastructure
support to the six countries in a way that would maximize their potential economic
impact, given the close inter-linkages among their respective economies. Through
the years, the program has matured into a more holistic approach to the
sustainable development of the sub-region. As such, the first ten years of GMS
were marked by an apparent absence of an overarching framework to guide
earlier interventions by the development partners in the sub-region. The program
was primarily a public investment program then – a package of projects, mainly
infrastructure – that were to be supported with ADB lending and other
complementary donor resources.

7.2.1 GMS Strategic Framework 2002-2012

334. Ten years into the program, in November 2002, on the occasion of the first
GMS Leaders’ Summit in Phnom Penh, the leaders endorsed the ten-year GMS
Strategic Framework (2002-2012) that henceforth sought to provide a coherent
direction to development initiatives in the sub-region. The new framework focuses
on five development thrusts to achieve this goal:

• strengthen infrastructure linkages through a multi-sectoral approach

• facilitate cross-border trade and investment
• enhance private sector participation in development and improve its
competitiveness
• develop human resources and skill competencies
• protect the environment and promote sustainable use of the sub-region’s
shared natural resources.
72
ESCAP Website (www.unescap.org/oes/state/)

130
335. The ten-year GMS Strategic Framework has the appearance of an NSDS
document; however, it does not claim to be more than just a “framework,” and thus
undertakes only a very general, “broad-strokes” treatment of the subregion’s
development needs. At this level of generality, it appears to address economic,
social and environmental dimensions with the proper balance. It is not clear,
however, what degree of stakeholder participation was involved in its preparation.
The document is only described to have been prepared by the six countries in
2001 with the assistance of ADB. Thus, the level of ownership by stakeholders for
the document’s substantive contents is likewise unclear.

7.2.2 GMS Plan of Action

336. To further put flesh on the GMS Program Strategy, at the 13th GMS
Ministerial Conference at Kunming in December 2004, the Ministers promulgated
for the first time a Plan of Action (POA) to guide the program’s activities in the
medium term. Endorsed subsequently by the Second GMS Leaders Summit in
Kunming in July 2005, the POA serves as the road map for joint actions and
initiatives in the medium-term in the various priority areas of cooperation defined in
the program. It laid out concrete projects and activities that are focused, prioritized,
coordinated, and having clear timelines. It has in turn provided a basis for the
working groups and senior officials to monitor progress in implementation of the
sub-regional agenda.

337. The POA is what its name denotes: it is an action plan that puts into
concrete activities the broad strategic directions spelled out in the overall GMS
Strategy. It therefore forms part of the subregion’s de facto NSDS package.

7.2.3 Regional Cooperation Strategy and Program

338. ADB’s assistance to the GMS is guided by its Regional Cooperation

Strategy and Program (RCSP), the subregional analog of the Country Strategy
Programs (CSPs) normally prepared for each ADB developing member country.
At the country level, the Country Strategy and Program (CSP) is usually prepared
once every five years, in active consultation with stakeholders, including the
government, NGOs, civil society groups, the private sector and other development
agencies. An update is normally prepared every year to reflect any important
developments and adjustments to the program.

339. The RCSP spells out a three-year assistance strategy for the subregion in
the context of its agreed development priorities. The current RCSP in force covers
2007-2009, the third in a series of rolling RCSPs, following the five-year RCSP
2004-2008 and the previous three-year RCSP 2006-2008.

131
340. While prepared by the ADB for its own assistance programming purposes,
the RCSP benefits from consultation with key stakeholders in the same way that
the Bank’s Country Strategy Programs now routinely do. Its professed aim is to
help achieve the GMS vision of a prosperous, integrated, and harmonious
subregion through the pursuit of four strategic pillars, namely: (a) strengthening
connectivity and facilitating cross-border movement and tourism; (b) integrating
national markets to promote economic efficiency and private sector development;
(c) addressing health and other social, economic, and capacity building issues
associated with subregional linkages; and (d) managing the environment and
shared natural resources to help ensure sustainable development and
conservation of natural resources.

341. Having been prepared by ADB primarily for its assistance programming
purposes, the RCSP cannot be considered a comprehensive and integrated plan
or strategy. It is also unlikely that the countries of the subregion would feel as
much ownership for the document and its contents as they would for a more
home-grown strategic planning document.

7.2.4 Mekong River Commission Strategic Plan

342. On another front, the Mekong River Commission has formulated and used a
MRC Strategic Plan 2006-2010 (succeeding its earlier 2001-2005 version) as the
basis for coordinated actions towards achieving a balance between socio-
economic development and environmental concerns in the sub-region. The
Strategic Plan pursues four goals that correspond to the four roles of the MRC with
regard to water and related resources, viz:

Goal 1: To promote and support coordinated, sustainable, and pro-poor

development.
Goal 2: To enhance effective regional cooperation.
Goal 3: To strengthen basin-wide environmental monitoring and impact
assessment.
Goal 4: To strengthen the Integrated Water Resources Management
capacity and knowledge base of the MRC bodies, NMCs73, Line
Agencies, and other stakeholders.

343. The MRC website, in describing the Strategic Plan, states that “the most
pressing priority for all the Member States is to achieve higher levels of economic
and social development. The role of the MRC in serving the joint interests of its
Member States is to promote sustainable development in the Mekong River
Basin.” Thus, MRC, through the Strategic Plan, seeks to play an important role in
ensuring that economic and social development are not pursued at the expense of
sustainability and environmental protection.

73
National Mekong Committees

132
7.2.5 Mekong Basin Development Plan (BDP)

344. In the pursuit of the operationalization of the earlier MRC Strategic Plan
2001-2005, the Mekong Basin Development Plan (BDP) had been developed
through a participatory process and was expected to take on a pivotal role in
ensuring a highly integrated and coordinated approach to the basin’s development.
BDP Phase 1 started in October 2001 as a three-year project. In 2003, it was
decided to extend Phase 1 until the end of June 2005. Financial support to the
BDP formulation was provided by Denmark, Sweden, Japan, Switzerland and
Australia.

345. The immediate objectives of the BDP Phase 1 were: (1) To establish and
maintain a participatory form of basin planning; and (2) To draft and obtain agree-
ment on a basin development plan aiming at a balanced mix of social, economic
and environmental factors. Phase 2 of BDP is now currently in force, and focuses
on enhancing the planning capacity and refining the Strategy developed during
Phase 1. The Plan, being primarily a list of public investment projects benefiting
the subregion, uses the principles of integrated water resources management
(IWRM) to achieve a balance between socio-economic development and
environmental concerns and to create a framework for development based on
technical knowledge as well as public, stakeholder and political views. In
particular, the BDP provides models for future water needs of the Lower Mekong
Basin through the formulation of planning scenarios, from which strategies and
planning guidelines can be developed to assist member countries plan their
development in a sustainable way.

346. The BDP is in the process of developing a comprehensive IWRM Strategy

which will provide a development intervention and investment plan for the Lower
Mekong Basin to (a) foster sustainable development, (b) respond to the needs of
the poor, and (c) ensure economic growth and development that is in harmony
with the environment.

347. While both the MRC Strategic Plan and the BDP use all the right words to
denote a broad and integrative view of sustainable development for the Lower
Mekong countries, they remain limited by their being primarily a strategy and plan
for harnessing management of water resources for sustainable development.
Given MRC’s membership, which lacks the two Upper Mekong countries of
Myanmar and China, the MRC Strategic Plan and BDP could at best be subsidiary
plans to a more comprehensive and integrative sustainable development strategy
for the subregion.

7.2.5 ASEAN Plans

348. An inventory of planning initiatives covering the GMS would not be

complete without mentioning the ASEAN-wide planning initiatives. While the

133
ASEAN plans cover all ten ASEAN countries, only half of which are part of GMS,
these plans set directions and define strategies for the Southeast Asian region in
general that have direct implications on the GMS subregion in particular.

349. ASEAN Vision 2020 provides the overarching vision and strategy for the
collective efforts of the ASEAN member-countries in pursuit of the Southeast
Asian region’s sustainable development goals. The vision sees ASEAN as “a
concert of Southeast Asian nations, outward looking, living in peace, stability and
prosperity, bonded together in partnership in dynamic development and in a
community of caring societies.” These attributes are in turn to be pursued via
specific strategies that would give tangible meaning to these otherwise abstract
notions characterizing a prosperous and united ASEAN.

350. Translating Vision 2020 into more concrete strategies and initiatives is a
series of Programmes of Action, the current one in force being the Vientiane
Action Programme (VAP) adopted and endorsed by the ASEAN Leaders in
November 2004 at the Tenth ASEAN Summit. This was preceded by the Hanoi
Plan of Action (HPA) adopted in 1998, which was the first in the series of “road
maps” charting the region’s journey to ASEAN Vision 2020. The HPA was, in
effect, ASEAN’s first attempt at drawing up a comprehensive region-wide
development plan.

351. The various sectoral mechanisms within ASEAN have likewise yielded
more focused strategies/plans for their sectors. The regular ASEAN Ministerial
Meeting on the Environment (AMME) and accompanying Senior Officials on the
Environment (ASOEN), for example, came up with Strategic Plans of Action for the
Environment (SPAE) for 1994-1998 and 1999-2004.

352. Stakeholder participation had traditionally been weak in ASEAN processes,

leading to planning documents that had been seen primarily as products of
government initiatives. As discussed above, it is only relatively recently that
ASEAN has opened the way for more systematic civil society involvement in its
deliberations leading to intergovernmental agreements.

353. It would seem that the planning processes and the development
strategies/plans produced under ASEAN cannot be expected to be responsive to
the particular needs of GMS for a sustainable development strategy at the
subregional level. First, ASEAN covers much more beyond the five GMS
countries that are members of the regional grouping; at the same time, it does not
cover the sixth country within GMS, namely China. Second, there remains
inadequate integration in the work and outputs of ASEAN, which continues to be
organized along sectoral lines. Third, stakeholder participation in ASEAN
processes had traditionally been weak, and it is only recently that this has begun
to change.

134
354. All the above imply that none of the current available planning documents at
the sub-regional level fully captures the essential elements of a subregional SDS.
The ongoing work by the Thailand Environment Institute to spearhead the
formulation of a Subregional Sustainable Development Strategy (SSDS) for the
GMS under the UNEP-ADB initiative promises to fill this gap.

135
8. Conclusions and Recommendations
8.1 Towards Effective National Institutional SD Mechanisms

355. The GMS countries have been responding to the calls of various global
discussions and agreements for attaining sustainability at varying levels and
modalities. These responses are influenced by many factors such as the extent of
understanding and appreciation of SD, preparedness (or lack of it) of institutions to
undertake integrated and coordinated sustainability planning and implementation,
and level of capability to undertake programs and projects. However, the two
factors that are standing out to date in terms of actually shaping national
responses and achieving sustainability goals are (a) the strength of the
government’s commitment and ability to undertake changes and shift paradigms
even at the expense of its power and control; and (b) the way external assistance
are designed and implemented. The latter has strong influence because most
GMS countries have been highly dependent on external sources for their financing
and technical capacity building.

356. The case of Vietnam may be instructive. Vietnam adopted market economy
and useful democratic processes (e.g., participation of stakeholders) and adapted
them to its socialist setting for the sake of sustainability. Through Capacity 21 of
UNDP, Vietnam first developed its long-term sustainability agenda through a
consultative process and implemented it systematically. It used this opportunity
and those of other ODA programs to build capacities and promote SD. In addition
to the long-term strategies, VA 21 spelled out the institutional framework for its
effective implementation, hence the creation of the VA21 Office and NCSD.
Integration among plans, especially SEDP and VA 21, was ensured through MPI,
which serves as their secretariat or coordinator. Sectoral and vertical integration
also happened through the participatory and consultative mechanisms and
processes Vietnam employed. Since their completion, VA 21 and SEDP have
been serving as the framework for all assistance coming into Vietnam.

357. Institutionally, the following have been observed:

• Government bodies abound so lack of coordination and integration has

been a common complaint among stakeholders at all levels.

• Bodies were created due to a felt need but without the benefit of being
guided by a strategic agenda framework that would dictate the needed
institutions or an over-all institutional framework that would minimize gaps
and overlaps in institutional structures.

• Most bodies that have been assigned to handle sustainability agenda and
initiatives are not compliant with or supportive of the GMS Leaders’ pledge
to promote active partnership with civil society and business in the pursuit

136
 of development goals74. This is in line with JPOI’s call to promote multi-
stakeholder participation in implementing Agenda 21 through the
establishment or enhancement of NCSDs or coordination structures.

• SD institutional mechanisms organized by or technically and administra-

tively supported by an environment ministry are automatically regarded as
an environment body, oftentimes losing priority or support from other
agencies. In some cases, an SD body is still considered an environment
even if it is under another agency. These stem from lack of understanding
of the SD concept, which has always been equated to environment.

358. National institutional assessments indicate that much of the subregion has
a fairly young civil society community, particularly in reference to local CSOs,
although the situation is rapidly changing. Local CSOs have largely been working
independently (i.e. with little intra-GMS interaction) within their respective countries.
Intra-GMS coordination and networking are usually confined to INGOs who
maintain presence in most countries such as World Conservation Union (IUCN),
the WWF, CARE International and OXFAM International. INGOs have traditionally
enjoyed an advantage in engaging the governments and the donor community,
such that they, rather than local CSOs, tend to dominate consultations and other
participatory processes conducted by the latter two. While INGOs can well
represent the concerns and views of their constituents, it is important for local
CSOs to be empowered to actively participate and represent their constituents in
such processes. Official pronouncements indicate that the value of active civil
society participation is already well understood and appreciated by all GMS
governments. Thus, assistance must be extended to help them improve their
capability for meaningful contributions to the sustainable development of GMS.

359. GMS countries may thus consider the following recommendations in

addressing the above observations:

• Establish an institutional development strategy. The NSDSs that are

currently being prepared in the countries must have a strong component on
institutional analysis and a coherent institutional development strategy. The
development of such a strategy may consider a number of principles such
as: (a) use of or building on existing bodies, to the extent possible; (b)
strengthening or reengineering of existing bodies; (c) creating a new body
only if the first two principles do not apply; (d) abolition or folding into new
ones redundant or overlapping bodies; and (e) selecting or creating a body
within an oversight agency such as the planning ministry. Table 11
provides an inventory of relevant bodies and recommends those that may
serve as coordinators or NCSDs.

74
GMS Leaders, First Summit Declaration, November 2002.

137
 • Learn from other NCSDs. It would be instructive to refer to the experiences
of other countries especially those in the region (i.e. Korea, Philippines and
Vietnam) and learn from their strengths and weaknesses. The European
models may also be used as references. Sharing of successes and
difficulties among GMS countries may also help in this regard.

• Stengthen stakeholder participation. Countries must establish a legislative

or regulatory framework that widens stakeholder participation in recognition
of their value and usefulness in ESD initiatives. And inasmuch as private
sector development is already among the five development thrusts in the
GMS Strategic Framework, the GMS governments may wish to consider
adding civil society strengthening and development as a sixth thrust.

360. Specific recommendations for individual countries have been listed within
the discussions on national assessments in Chapter 6, and need not be repeated
here.

138
 Table 11
National and Local Environment and Sustainable Development Institutions in GMS
Environment Planning Others Lead SD Civil Society Business Best Possible Coordinating
Body SD Mechanism
Cambodia MOE MOP TWG PPR; MOE Represented in Chamber of Expanded TWG PPR to include
SNEC; CDC TWG PPR Commerce business
Lao PDR STEA MPI SC - NGPES STEA Mass LNCC Expanded SC-NGPES to include
organizations business & civil society
Myanmar NCEA MNPED NCCE; NECC NCEA Social NGOs UMFCCI Expanded (include sector
agencies, business & NGO) &
upgraded (ministerial) NCCE
Thailand NEB; NESDB NCSD; MONRE NGOs; Many; Expanded NEB or activated and
MONRE NESAC consulted consulted expanded NCSD to include other
stakeholders
Vietnam MONRE MPI NCSD NCSD/MPI Members of VCCI; NCSD NCSD (already functioning & still
NCSD Member being strengthened)
Yunnan SEPA; N/PDRC LG CA 21; SEPA; LG Many; some Many; some Expanded Yunnan LG CA21 to
(China) YPEB ACCA21; CA 21 consulted consulted include civil society and business
LGWRD
Cambodia Thailand:
• MOE: Ministry of Environment • NEB: National Environment Board
• MOP: Ministry of Planning • MONRE: Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment
• TWG PPR: Technical Working Group on Planning and Poverty • NESDB: National Economic & Social Development Board
Reduction • NCSD: National Council for Sustainable Development
• SNEC: Supreme National Economic Council • NESAC: National Economic & Social Advisory Council
• CDC: Council for the Development of Cambodia
Lao PDR Vietnam
• STEA: Science, Technology and Environment Agency • MONRE: Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment
• CPI: Committee of Planning and Investment • MPI: Ministry of Planning & Investment
• SC–NGPES: Steering Committee for National Growth and • NCSD: National Council for Sustainable Development
Poverty Eradication Strategy • VCCI: Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry
• LNCCI: Lao National Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Myanmar Yunnan (China)
• NCEA: National Commission for Environmental Affairs • LG CA21: Leading Group for China’s Agenda 21
• NCCE: National Coordination Committee for Environment • ACCA: Administrative Center for China’s Agenda 21
• NECC: National Environmental Conservation Committee • N/PDRC: National/Provincial Development and Reform Commission
• MNPED: Ministry of National Planning and Economic Development • LGWRD: Leading Group for Western Region Development
• UMFCCI: Union of Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce • SEPA: State Environmental Protection Administration
and Industry • YPEPB: Yunnan Provincial Environmental Protection Bureau

139
8.2 Towards an Effective Sub-regional Coordination Mechanism

361. As indicated in the above discussions, several existing subregional

mechanisms may be considered as the basis for a strengthened institutional
mechanism for coordinating sustainable development efforts in GMS. In working
towards the desired institutional mechanism for the sub-region, the following
guidelines are well worth considering:

• Identify the best suitable existing mechanism or body to the extent possible,
using the following minimum criteria:

- vested with the appropriate mandate

- high-ranking and with oversight and coordinating functions,
- multi-stakeholder and multi-sectoral,
- has manpower and financial resources,
- backed up by a competent secretariat;

• Build on or strengthen the existing mechanism or body if there are

impediments to its outright use;
• Create a new body only if the first two approaches do not apply; and
• Abolish redundant mechanisms or bodies or merge those with overlapping
functions.

8.2.1 Limitations in Mandate

362. Table 10 shows the strengths and weaknesses that the identified bodies
would have if they would assume the task of serving as SD coordinating body for
the subregion. The feasibility and ease of amending the mandates of GMS
institutional mechanism, MRC and ASEAN are very weak because being
intergovernmental bodies, they are bound by certain limitations in mainstreaming
the participation of major groups in their respective organizations and processes.
Their current approach is to have stakeholder meetings parallel to official meetings
(ASEAN), invite stakeholders to meetings (MRC, GMS Program), or allow them to
participate in project definition and implementation (MRC, GMS Program). To
ensure ownership and stronger and more consistent participation, the stake-
holders (business and CSO) must have official and permanent representation in
these bodies. To do so, MRC would need to amend its Charter, while ASEAN and
GMS Leaders would need to decide and pass a Resolution on this give during
their respective Summits. These efforts could take considerable time especially in
the case of MRC, which would require Charter amendments.

363. It seems timely to push this issue with ASEAN inasmuch as its Charter is
currently being developed. However, resistance from some of the members may
be anticipated. Should participation of civil society be allowed, it is likely to be

140
limited, i.e. not to the extent of full membership in concerned bodies. The creation
of SEACSEA represents a big step towards participation, making it incumbent for
CSOs to strive to make it work as an organization, as its success would ultimately
enhance their effectiveness in their advocacies for the people and the region.

364. The GMS Program is deemed more flexible in this regard since project
documents that spell out the program implementation mechanism do not have the
same level of force as charters or norms of procedures, and changes are generally
easier to make if they are for the good of the project. However, a more binding
agreement or fiat would probably be needed in order to make the institutional
mechanism more durable and effective.

365. Likewise, it would be relatively easy to modify the agreement that created
GMSARN. However, using it as starting point for a multi-stakeholder body would
imply a dramatic transformation in both mandate and sectoral membership (i.e.
beyond academic institutions) that would completely depart from its original
character.

8.2.2 Linkage to National Mechanisms

366. ASEAN, MRC and the GMS Program body have national coordinating
mechanisms that are usually composed of representatives from sectoral and
oversight government agencies. GMSARN has no national mechanism as it is a
network of specialized country-based institutions. The national mechanism for the
GMS Program appears to lend itself best to the requirements of Agenda 21 and
JPOI follow-up. It has National Coordinating Committees that are headed by high
ranking officials with cross-sectoral responsibilities such the GMS minister or
planning and finance officials. The presence of a national mechanism facilitates
vertical integration and coordination. ASEAN has national coordinating mecha-
nisms as well but these are headed by Ministries of Foreign Affairs, whose
competencies may not necessarily be in line with the requirements of the current
GMS development thrusts.

8.2.3 Sub-regional Coordinating Mechanisms

367. The GMS Program has the Ministerial Conference, which serves as its
executive body that makes operational decisions and approves plans, programs
and projects. The Conference is composed of high ranking officials of oversight
and coordination agencies of Ministerial level (e.g. planning, finance). This is
important in ensuring integration of the various development dimensions in
planning and policy-making, and coordination of various sectoral concerns.
Unfortunately, SD has already been lodged in the environment sector and under
the auspices of the WGE, thus limiting the connection with the economic and

141
social sectors. The MRC has the Council for these purposes while ASEAN has
the ASEAN Ministers Meeting.

8.2.4 Relevance of Scope

368. In terms of scope, that of ASEAN is the broadest and covers practically all
aspects of sustainable development, including security and other political concerns.
In contrast, GMSARN’s scope is the most limited. MRC’s scope is broader than
that of GMSARN but still narrower compared to GMS Program. Expansion of the
roles and functions of either MRC or GMSARN to meet the requirements of
Agenda 21, as well as to cover all six countries in the case of MRC, would entail
more dramatic changes and require much more resources and organizational
adjustments. The GMS Program covers economic, social and environmental
concerns focused on the sub-region.

8.2.5 Secretariat and Financial Support

369. All four bodies have corresponding secretariat support but this study is not
in a position to assess the effectiveness of the respective secretariats. Taking into
account the requirements of a sub-regional mechanism, the GMS Program
secretariat, which is largely assumed by ADB, seems to have the more
appropriate technical expertise and adequate financial resources to support the
necessary tasks. However, it is not clear how long ADB’s active role as secretariat
should last. While the GMS leaders have called on ADB to continue and even
broaden its coordinating and supporting role, there is merit in having ADB phase
down its secretariat role in the interest of helping the sub-regional formation
outgrow its dependency and build greater self reliance and stronger ownership of
their program of cooperation.

370. In the environment sector wherein SD matters are currently lodged, a well-
equipped secretariat, the EOC, is fully in place and funded by ADB. EOC should
have a clear plan of phasing in the administration and control of the GMS
environment program by the member countries and keep the role of ADB well
within its mandate.

8.2.6 Stakeholder Participation

371. ASEAN has been one of those inter-governmental organizations that has
welcomed and encouraged the involvement of CSOs in its processes, programs
and activities, albeit mainly in the form of consultations. In 1986, it issued the
Guidelines for ASEAN Relations with Non-Governmental Organizations, which
includes the process and requirements for accreditation of NGOs by the ASEAN
Secretariat. A number of civil society groups have been accredited and are

142
involved in ASEAN activities pertaining to the sectors that they represent from time
to time. Notwithstanding this, a large number of CSOs have opted to remain
outside the ASEAN’s civil society engagement initiatives. One reason for this is
the alleged long and tedious process of accreditation. The other is the fear among
some organizations of losing their independence, hence ability to effectively assert
their own advocacies and positions on specific issues. The GMS Program and
MRC also openly welcome CSOs’ participation in their processes and initiatives.
But just like ASEAN, their institutional structures do not allow a more meaningful
participation by stakeholders, including business.

372. Business has far greater participation in ASEAN, MRC and GMS Program.
Business organizations have been closely working with ASEAN in a number of
issues. The GMS Program has a set of activities dedicated to business. MRC
engages business as well in a number of its activities.

8.2.7 Implications

373. Based on the foregoing review of institutions and guided by the above
criteria, the following may be deduced:

• No one existing body or mechanism fully meets the criteria for a suitable
coordinating structure.

• The GMS Program institutional framework appears to provide the most

preferable option at this time. It has the mandate and competence deriving
its authority from the Leaders, and is suitably focused on the sub-region. It
also has the greatest flexibility for institutional adjustments. Despite
broadened participation by stakeholders, especially of government and
other donor institutions, the Program is still dominated by ADB. The major
reason for this is the lack of technical and financial capabilities in most
member countries.

• The mechanism most responsive to the institutional requirements of SD

appears to be the Ministerial-Level Conference of GMS Program. It has the
over-all knowledge and view of all plans, strategies, programs and activities
in the region, hence is best placed to coordinate and integrate them. It is
worth noting that this Conference already includes high level government
representatives, all donors and the private sector. CSOs do not appear to
be represented and have not been put in the mainstream.

• SD is currently within the ambit of the WGE, although there should not be
any impediment in moving it to any group or body if deemed necessary and
appropriate.

143
8.2.8 Recommendations

374. In view thereof, the following recommendations are offered for consider-
ation:

• Designate the Ministerial Conference of the GMS Program as the SD

coordinating and integrating mechanism. It should be expanded to include
CSOs and other stakeholders in the sub-region such as ASEAN (through
the ASEAN Secretariat), MRC, GMSARN, and Mekong Institute. In addition
to its current functions, the Ministerial Conference could serve as the venue
for dialogue, information sharing, and integration and consistency check of
sector plans, strategies, programs and projects. To reflect its actual
composition and role, it may be named as the “GMS Sustainable
Development Forum,” although such renaming is not critical. Any legal or
official acts such as signing of agreements may be undertaken among the
relevant parties with the other stakeholders serving as witnesses. All these
are aimed at strengthening ownership and commitment to the pursuit of the
development program for the subregion.

• Designate the Senior Officials Meeting as the technical-level SD support

mechanism. To ensure thoughtful prior analysis and deliberation of agenda
items taken up by the Conference/Forum and to minimize unnecessary
discussions in the Ministerial Conference itself, the Meetings of Senior
Officials could pre-process the agenda items in partnership with stakeholder
representatives. This implies that the Senior Officials Meeting must also be
opened to representation and participation by stakeholder groups.

• NCSDs to serve as the National SD Coordinators. The Conference/Forum

must receive strong national support through the respective countries’
NCSDs, as recommended in Chapter 6 and depicted in Figure 4 below.
The NCSD, which mirrors the multi-sectoral and multi-stakeholder
composition of the Conference, must coordinate its agenda with those of
the Senior Officials and Ministerial Conference. This implies that the
current National Committees would form part of the NCSDs to minimize the
number of national mechanisms to improve coordination and integration.

• Establish a strong oversight secretariat. The Secretariat is crucial in

ensuring quality deliberation and analysis, and promoting coordination. It
should have close linkages with all the working groups and stakeholders,
and must have a good grasp of all the issues and concerns in the sectors.
The Conference secretariat could thus be a composite of its current
secretariat and focal points of the secretariats of the senior officials and the
working groups. The focal points would serve as the link between the
Conference and the sectoral groups and would ensure the free flow of
information and knowledge between them and among each other.

144
• Consider a transition phase only if extremely necessary. Figure 4 schema-
tically illustrates the envisaged arrangement. It has the advantages of
approximating the optimal set-up and would not require much additional
resources and adjustments to pursue since it merely builds on existing
mechanisms and processes. Still, it is expected that the proposed
arrangement would meet some resistance from some government officials,
at least in the near term, i.e. until they become confident that they can
handle the tasks themselves, and until a few governments would overcome
the fear of losing control and power. This arrangement would also require
that ADB, which handles much of the substantive and secretariat work and
coordination with all those involved, already begin passing on these
responsibilities to the countries themselves. During this transition period,
SD matters may be kept within the ambit of the environment program and
WGE while establishing an annual Forum that involves the other eight
working groups in addition to all those already identified above. The EOC,
being the secretariat to WGE, could be the Forum secretariat. It must
coordinate closely with all other working groups and must have the capacity
to look beyond environment or to mainstream environment in the other
sectors.

• Establish a phase up-phase down program. The transition period must be

extremely short, if at all necessary. Among other things, it can be costly
since the holding of the Forum could be entirely different from any of those
already being held regularly by the different bodies within the GMS
institutional framework. Also, it may not be given priority by the other
working groups or stakeholders because it would continue to be viewed as
purely an environment- or sector-specific concern. Moreover, the process
of integration would be constrained from proceeding faster. To calibrate the
transition process and keep the period short, a definite program for phasing
up country ownership and control while phasing down those of ADB and
other donors, must be established to guide all the players in the GMS. This
program must be integrated in the Sub-regional Sustainable Development
Strategy and reflected in the programs of ADB, other donors and
stakeholders. It must be very clear about the institutional framework it
would adopt over a definite time frame; on this, the one presented by this
study is strongly recommended. The process must be used to encourage
reluctant countries to become more open through experiences in other
countries such as those of Vietnam. The phasing down-phasing up
program would correspondingly apply to the secretariats as well.

145
 GMS Leaders ASEAN + 3

GMS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE (FORUM)

(GMS Program Ministerial Conference)

Senior Officials Meeting

GMS Program
“Composite Secretariat”

Cambodia Lao PDR Myanmar Thailand Yunnan

NCSD NCSD NCSD NCSD PCSD
Vietnam
(Expanded (Expanded (Expanded & (Expanded & NCSD* (Expanded
TWG PPR*) SCNGPES*) Upgraded activated LGCA21*)
NCCE*) NCSD*)

*Expansion must include the National Coordinating Committees for the GMS Program. Vietnam must also
do so with its NCSD.

Figure 4
Proposed Sub-regional Sustainable Development Mechanism

8.3 Towards Effective National and Subregional SD Strategies

375. After 15 years of cooperation through the GMS program, the six member
countries are poised to take their cooperation to a higher level, and move it
beyond distinct initiatives in joint infrastructure planning, water resource
management, trade and investment cooperation, law enforcement, social
development and poverty reduction. Challenges besetting each country and the
sub-region as a whole have made it imperative for the GMS countries to undertake
a comprehensive and integrative approach to the pursuit of sustainable
development at the sub-regional, national and sub-national levels. Pursuit of the
Millennium Development Goals is best done under such a comprehensive and
integrative framework, best effected through a deliberate strategy for sustainable
development that musters the resources and efforts of all the stakeholders, in and
out of government.

146
376. This assessment shows that the countries in the sub-region are at varying
levels of readiness for pursuing a SD strategy, borne out of differing resource
endowments, technical preparation, and even political orientation. What is clear is
that all GMS countries possess the basic requisites for embarking on or
strengthening their respective NSDS, with the strengths of some being
weaknesses in the others. Thus, there is wide scope for cooperative and
collaborative action, drawing on the strengths of more advanced or better
endowed members to fill in for weaknesses in the others.

377. The assessment points to a number of recommendations that could

optimize the existing circumstances, capabilities and resources within the
subregion towards an effective pursuit of sustainable development therein, as
follows:

Build capacities. Deliberate capacity building efforts to widen and strengthen

understanding and appreciation for the concept of sustainable development
remains imperative throughout the subregion, in varying degrees of intensity.
Such understanding and appreciation remains weak whether within
government – including within environment or planning ministries – or among
the general citizenry. The undue emphasis on economic growth especially in
less developed member countries is as misplaced as inordinate emphasis
placed on the environmental dimension by others. SD represents the
appropriate integration of the economic, social and environmental dimensions
of development, and doing so can be a complex challenge to development
practitioners. The NCSDs would be best placed to coordinate such capacity
building efforts particularly because they can draw on the strengths and reach
of their civil society and business members.

Strengthen capacity for integration. There is felt need among planners for
improved capacity in employing integrative tools of analysis to permit such a
three-dimensional approach to SD. Methodological tools for problem and
policy analysis that permits proper consideration of the economic, social and
environmental implications of policies remain absent from the toolkits of
planning and environment ministries in the region. A deliberate effort to identify,
study, adopt and apply such tools employed elsewhere would be an important
element in promoting successful NSDS formulation.

Peer review/sharing of NSDS among the GMS member countries would help
strengthen not only SD planning capacities, but strengthen the strategies/
plans themselves. As each member country is given the opportunity to review
and share each others’ NSDS, a two-way learning process is facilitated that
benefits everyone involved. Apart from permitting the sharing of ideas, such
peer review process facilitates identification of opportunities for further comple-
mentation and synergy among the initiatives of individual countries or even
communities. As each GMS member country completes their respective NSDS

147
 formulation, it is thus recommended that a program of “exchanging papers” be
institutionalized, culminating in a workshop wherein participants can share their
observations, critiques, and lessons learned from the peer review exercise. It
is further recommended that such peer review and sharing process involve not
only government planners, but non-government stakeholders from civil society
and business as well. The NCSDs or bodies identified by this study as
possible precursors of NCSDs must spearhead this exercise. This would
facilitate the process of developing the desired NCSDs in each country.

Promote joint projects. A program for joint project identification and

development among the member countries would facilitate translation of the
sub-regional and national SD strategies into tangible projects on the ground
that would be of mutual importance and benefit to the countries involved. The
idea is to deliberately identify cooperative public investments that would entail
cooperation and pooling of efforts and resources among two or more (“two
plus”) GMS members. By undertaking public investment programming in this
mode, the sub-regional SD strategy is given flesh and meaning.

Encourage peer-to-peer mentoring. The more advanced member countries,

particularly Thailand, Yunnan (China) and Vietnam, are well-positioned to
provide peer-to-peer mentoring assistance to the less advanced countries,
especially in the areas for capacity building mentioned above. Such capacity
development efforts undertaken on a peer mentoring level would not only be
efficient and effective, but would also help fortify friendship and cooperation
among peoples of the sub-region.

Organize NCSD gatherings. Finally, to sustain the levels of enthusiasm among

the government and non-government stakeholders, and foster continuous
learning on innovative approaches to sustainable development, it would be
worthwhile to invest in periodic gatherings of NCSD members from each of the
member-country NCSDs, preferably with guests from other NCSDs within Asia
and other regions. The “cross-fertilization” that this will permit would form a
valuable component in the continuing education and capacity building of SD
practitioners from the GMS member countries, apart from widening the reach
and impact of the SD advocacy within and even beyond the sub-region.

000

148
Annexes
Annex A

Relevant Institutional Mechanisms in

Greater Mekong Sub-region and Southeast Asia Region

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)

Except for China, all five countries in the GMS are members of ASEAN. Of the
five, one (Thailand) is a founding member of the 36-year old Southeast Asian
formation, an indication that ASEAN has historical influence and perhaps some
degree of control over the sub-region.

Under the ASEAN Declaration, the Association aims to: (1) accelerate economic
growth, social progress and cultural development in the region; and (2) promote
regional peace and stability through abiding respect for justice and the rule of law
in the relationship among countries in the region and adherence to the principles
of the United Nations Charter75. ASEAN Leaders agreed on a shared vision of
ASEAN as a concert of Southeast Asian nations, outward looking, living in peace,
stability and prosperity, bonded together in partnership in dynamic development
and in a community of caring societies. They also resolved that the ASEAN
Community shall comprise of three pillars, namely, ASEAN Security Community,
ASEAN Economic Community and ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community.

ASEAN does not have a defined institutional framework for sustainable

development. Matters pertaining to UN Conference on Environment and
Development (UNCED), Agenda 21, Johannesburg Plan of Implementation and
UN Commission for Sustainable Development (UNCSD) are handled by its
institutional mechanism for environment. Nonetheless, the ASEAN Ministerial
Meeting, which serves as coordinating mechanism for all of ASEAN’s organic
bodies, and the various sectoral and thematic bodies within ASEAN, could very
well be considered ASEAN’s institutional framework for sustainable development
matters.

Environmental cooperation in ASEAN formally started in 1978 when the first

regional Environmental Programme (ASEP I) for 1978-1982 was developed and
subsequently approved by the newly-formed Experts Group on Environment. The
environmental agenda was further strengthened by several plans and programs
such as ASEP II (1983-1987), the Strategic Plan of Action on Environment
(ASPEN, 1994-1998), ASPEN II, 1999-2004, as well as other thematic and
sectoral plans.

75
ASEAN website (http://www.aseansec.org)

149
ASEAN’s institutional set-up on environment has evolved into what it today (Fig. 1)
is based on experiences generated during its long history of environmental
cooperation. It has four levels, namely:

• Heads of State/Government (ASEAN Summit) provides the vision and broad

thrust for ASEAN co-operation in various sectors

• Environment Ministers are primarily responsible for policy matters related to the
environment. They provide support and recommend policies on environment
to Heads of States/Government and Ministers Foreign Affairs

• Senior Officials of the Environment (ASOEN) are heads of national

environmental bodies tasked with the formulation, implementation and
monitoring of regional programs and activities on environment.

Annex Figure 1

ASEAN ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION INSTITUTIONAL

FRAMEWORK

ASEAN Summit
(ASEAN Heads of
State/Government)

ASEAN Ministerial Meeting ASEAN Ministerial Meeting Secretary-General of

(AMM) on the Environment (MME)
ASEAN
(Foreign Ministers) (Environment Ministers)

ASEAN Standing ASEAN Senior Officials Secretary Secretariat

Committee on the Environment (Bureau of Economic and
(ASC) (ASOEN) Functional Co-operation)

Working Group Other Working Group Haze Working Group

on Nature Environmental on Marine & Technical on Multilateral
Conservation Activities Coastal Task Force Environmental
and Biodiversity (ASEAN Environment (HTTF) Agreements
(AWGNCB) Secretariat) (AWGCME) (AWGMEA)

Source: ASEAN Website

150
• Working Groups. These are thematic subsidiaries that provides inputs and
recommendations to ASOEN and eventually, to the Ministerial-level meetings
on Environment (AMME).

In addition, ASEAN has specialized bodies that promote inter-governmental

cooperation in specific areas as agreed upon by the Ministers. These include
ASEAN Regional Center for Biodiversity Conservation, ASEAN Earthquake .

The ASEAN Secretariat provides support to above-mentioned groups in terms of

advice, information and coordination of activities.

Mekong River Commission (MRC)

MRC was established through the “Agreement on the Cooperation for the
Sustainable Development of the Mekong River Basin” signed by Cambodia, Lao
PDR, Thailand and Vietnam in April 1995. While China and Myanmar are not
signatories to the Agreement, the MRC maintains regular dialogue with them in
matters pertaining to the Mekong River Basin. The Agreement calls for the
cooperation of the signatories on the “sustainable development, utilization,
management and conservation of the water and related resources of the Mekong
River Basin…” MRC’s mandate is thus confined within the basin.

The MRC operates through an institutional framework (Figure 2) that has the
following components:

• Council. A ministerial body that makes policy decisions and provides

guidance on the promotion, cooperation and coordination of sub-
regional or joint activities and programs.

• Joint Committee. A senior-level body tasked to implement the policies

and decisions of the Council, and to supervise the activities of the MRC
secretariat. It approves budgets and strategic plans.

• National Mekong Committee. A body within each member-country that

serves as the link between the Commission and the national
governments and focal points for MRC-related activities. NMCs are
governmental bodies that provide technical advice and support to the
nation’s highest policy-making body. Their areas of focus are planning,
policy-making, project development and implementation of Basin
resources.

151
 • Secretariat. It is a full bureaucracy of about 120 persons that provides
technical and administrative support to the Council and Joint Committee,
and works closely with member-countries. It is under the direction and
supervision of a Chief Executive Officer. The secretariat is currently
based in Vientiane.

Annex Figure 2
MEKONG RIVER COMMISSION
INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

Government of Government of Government of Government of

Cambodia Lao PDR Thailand Vietnam

Council

Donor National
Consultative Mekong
Group Committee
Joint
Committee

Secretariat

Source: MRC Website

In terms of development agenda, the MRC first had the Strategic Plan for the
period 1999-2003. This was reviewed in 2000 resulting in a shift from “project” to
“programme” approach in order to situate MRC programs and activities within the

152
comprehensive basin-wide strategies that complement and support national and
bilateral development initiatives. MRC is now implementing Strategic the Plan for
2006-2010, which defines the specific strategies and activities for the Mekong Programme
within a five-year period. The Mekong Programme is a Regional Cooperation
Programme for the sustainable development of water and related resources in the
Mekong Basin. Its goal is to achieve more effective use of water and related
resources to alleviate poverty while protecting the environment.76

The MRC operations are funded through member contributions, which amount to
about US$1.0 million per year. The programs are funded through external
assistance from bilateral and multi-lateral sources, which amounted to about
US$39.4 million77 in 2006.

The GMS Program and the

Asian Development Bank and Working Group on Environment

The countries in GMS formalized their economic development program for the
sub-region in 1992 with assistance from the Asian Development Bank (ADB),
which has taken a keen interest due to the sub-region’s high level of poverty
incidence vis-à-vis huge development potentials that could wipe out said poverty.
ADB launched the GMS Economic Cooperation Program, which has evolved and
currently covers Myanmar and two provinces in China (Yunnan and Guangxi) in
addition to the four countries under MRC. The GMS Program was designed
mainly to strengthen economic linkages among the six countries by dismantling
physical barriers to trade. It initially focused on the development of infrastructure
(transport, energy and telecommunications) to allow freer flow of goods and
people and sharing of resources for industrial development. The Program has
since deepened and broadened and now also covers human resource
development, tourism, trade, investment, environment, and private sector
development.

The GMS Program has been operating within an institutional framework consisting
of the following:

• Ministerial Conference, the policy-level forum that sets the strategic

directions, coordinates the sub-regional cooperation and provides over-all
guidance and support. It generates its inputs from meetings of the Senior
Officials’ Meeting.

• Forum or Working Group, the mechanism created for each priority area or
focus sector that is tasked to recommend approaches to issues affecting
the various aspects of Program implementation.

76
Mekong River Commission website (http://www.mrcmekong.org)
77
MRC Annual Report, 2005

153
 • National Coordinating Committee in each country that ensures coordination
at the national level and between countries and the Program movers. In
each Committee, a National Coordinator was designated to serve as the
focal point of the country to the Program. The National Coordinators, as
well as the Ministers, generally come from oversight agencies responsible
for planning, finance or development cooperation. These agencies are the
usual national partners of ADB.

Annex Figure 3
GMS Program Institutional Arrangement

National Coordinating Ministerial-level

Committee in Each Country Conference

Senior Officials’
Meeting

National Coordinators Working Groups

Secretariat
(ADB GMS Unit)

Source: ADB website

• Secretariat is currently assumed by ADB. As Program facilitator, ADB

provides technical, administrative, and logistical support to the different
players in the institutional framework.

Role of ADB

Secretariat support is just one of the multifaceted roles of ADB in the GMS
Program. As Progam coordinator, ADB facilitates continuing sub-regional

154
dialogue at both the political and operational levels, and among the key
stakeholders of the GMS Program. It also serves as a financier that extends loans
and technical assistance, which have so far amounted to US$1.6 billion for its 19
assisted projects. It has mobilized about US$2.2 billion on co-financing of the
investment projects. In the process, ADB also provides technical and advisory
support to the implementers of the projects.

Institutional Support for Cooperation in Environment

In the first GMS Summit held on November 3, 2002, the leaders of the six
participating countries strongly endorsed the Strategic Framework for the next 10
years of the GMS Economic Cooperation Program as well as its accompanying 11
Flagship Programs. These have been the bases of all activities in the sub-region
from 2003-2012. A key component of this strategy is shared management of the
environment and natural resources. Environmental management became an
important component of the Program with the realization that the economic
development efforts and some infrastructure projects could pose adverse impacts
on the sub-region’s environment and very rich natural resources. Along with this is
the heightened environmental awareness that highlighted the strong need to
manage the environment and ecosystems by integrating environmental and social
concerns with economic development. This resulted in the development of the
Core Environment Program that was endorsed by the Leaders in July 2005.

The cooperation on environment led to the creation of the Working Group on

Environment (WGE) is one of these working groups. It was established in 1995 as
the advisory body on sub-regional issues in the environment and natural resources
management sector. Apart from facilitating the implementation of projects, the
WGE also ensures that environmental concerns of all projects are properly and
satisfactorily addressed, and that the environmental dimension is considered in
discussions and concerns of the other working groups. Each country is
represented by two senior officials from environment and natural resource
management agencies.

To ensure the effective implementation of the Core Environment Program, ADB

established the Environment Operations Center (EOC) early 2006 in Bangkok.
Specifically, the EOC was tasked to undertake the following78:

• Serve as the information and knowledge center for environmental

management in the GMS. Among others, monitor and analyzes data and
issues, share information with others, and report to WGE, ADB and other
stakeholders.

78
Environment Operations Center website (http://www.gms-eoc.org)

155
 • Coordinate environmental management and conservation mainly through
the management of the Core Environment Program. Part of this task is the
convening of consultative meetings with partners, stakeholders.
• Undertake environmental assessments and reviews of strategies in the
countries and among sectors; contribute to the design and sustainability of
projects; and monitor project performance.
• Act as the secretariat for the WGE. It serves as the technical and logistical
support unit, largely assuming the tasks carried out by the ADB in pursuing
the environment related activities of the GMS Program.

GMS Academic and Research Network79

The Greater Mekong Subregion Academic and Research Network (GMSARN) was
officially established on 26 January 2001 with the following institutions as
members: the Asian Institute of Technology; the Institute of Technology of
Cambodia and the University of Phnom Penh in Cambodia; Kunming University of
Science and Technology and the Yunnan University in Yunnan Province, China;
National University of Laos; Yangon Technological University, Myanmar; Khon
Kaen University, Thailand; Thammasat University, Thailand; and Hanoi University
of Technology and Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology of Vietnam.
GMSARN aims to:

• enhance the roles and functions of regional academics in project evaluation

and development planning to achieve self-reliance and sustainable
development in the region;
• foster multi-disciplinary research and academic development within and among
academic and research institutions in the GMS through relevant joint activities;
• formulate and resolve, scientifically and objectively, complex problems
covering both cross-border issues and issues that are common to GMS
countries; and
• take stock of intellectual assets developed for the GMS so as to ensure
transparently accessible reference and utilization among the GMS countries.

GMSARN undertakes human resource development, generation and distribution of

information, joint research and resource mobilization. GMSARN is mainly funded
through external assistance from development institutions, private sector and other
academic institutions.
Institutionally, GMSARN is composed of an International Board that provides
strategic direction and a Council of Advisers that provides advice on policy,
planning and technical matters. The Board consists of Presidents, Rectors, or
79
GMSARN website (http://www.ait.ac.th)

156
Directors of member institutions, a representative from ADB, Chairman of
GMSARN Council of Advisors, and the Director of GMSARN Secretariat.

157
 Annex B

UN System Bodies Covering the GMS Sub-region

The global discussions and initiatives towards sustainable development have been
a United Nations process. Hence, all its organic bodies are directly and actively
contributing to said process at local, national, regional and global levels. UN
bodies have been particularly active in causing and strengthening the integration
of social, economic and environmental dimensions in planning and policy-making,
as well as in ensuring public participation in sustainable development initiatives.

Many UN bodies have been very active in the GMS sub-region albeit their
influence and impact vary in degree because their interventions also very in nature
depending on their functions, organizational objectives and available resources.
Four of them, namely; UNCSD, ESCAP, UNDP and UNEP, are worth mentioning,
not as possible institutional mechanism for GMS, but rather, to determine how best
they may synergize and contribute to the effective governance of the sub-region.

UN Commission for Sustainable Development (UNCSD)

All six countries are active participants of UNCSD sessions and activities. They
all try to comply with commitments in UNCED and participated in the World
Summit for Sustainable Development (WSSD). They submit and present reports
pertaining to national initiatives, progress of compliance to commitments and other
similar matters. Their current mandate is to ensure implementation of
agreements in the WSSD, which includes the formulation of National Strategies for
Sustainable Development (NSDS) and establishment of participatory and multi-
stakeholder mechanisms and processes at all levels.

UNCSD is a mechanism that enables countries to pursue sustainable

development initiatives despite the absence of incentives (usually in the form of
technical assistance) and sanctions. It does not have national nor regional
presence because the tasks agreed upon in its sessions are implemented by the
countries themselves with assistance from various development bodies.
Whenever necessary, UNCSD or its secretariat, the Department of Economic and
Social Affairs (DESA), works through the other UN bodies (e.g., ESCAP, UNDP,
UNEP) and bilateral and multilateral development institutions. DESA’s presence
in the region has been in the form of workshops that exchange experiences in the
formulation and implementation of the NSDS. Two workshops were organized
with ESCAP since WSSD and these involved the GMS countries.

158
 Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)

The responsibility to forge regional and sub-regional cooperation and integration in

Asia and Pacific region rests with ESCAP. Among others, ESCAP exercises this
mandate by providing the substance and venue for discussion of issues and
experiences among countries in the region. In the area of environment and
sustainable development, ESCAP contributes to the strengthening of national
capacities to design and implement policies and strategies.

Some of its initiatives that are relevant to this discussion include a 2-phase project
that provided useful examples and procedures for integrating environmental and
socio-economic planning and for establishing multi-stakeholder institutional
mechanisms (commonly called national councils for sustainable development);
the formulation of the Asia-Pacific Regional Platform for Environment and
Sustainable Development that was adopted in the Ministerial Conference on
Environment and Development in 2000; and the institutionalization of GMS
cooperation via the Decade of GMS Development 2000-2009 and the GMS
Private Sector Business Forum (the latter being done in partnership with ADB
under the GMS Program). It is actively promoting the formulation and
implementation of NSDS in cooperation with DESA and UNEP.

UN Development Program (UNDP)

Owing to its national presence, wider scope and coordinating role for UN matters
at the national level, UNDP’s involvement in national and local sustainable
development initiatives are far more comprehensive than those of other UN
agencies. Its sub-regional/regional analogs also cooperate closely with ESCAP
to promote and implement the UN agenda.

UNDP’s activities in environment and sustainable development are undertaken

through the various projects funded under the Global Environment Facility and
capacity building initiatives such as the now concluded Capacity 21 Program. The
latter has provided assistance to over 75 countries in implementing Agenda 21
principles. It was a key element to the formulation and implementation of
numerous local and NSDS or Agenda 21. Through both GEF and Capacity 21,
UNDP has helped established multi-stakeholder and participatory processes and
mechanisms in the sub-region. Vietnam Agenda 21 and NCSD were concrete
outputs of UNDP assistance.

UNDP, in partnership with the Earth Council, an NGO, assisted about 40 countries
in the region in reviewing their implementation of UNCED commitments and
preparing their reports for WSSD. Most countries in GMS were part of this
process.

159
 UN Environmental Program

UNEP operates in the region through its Regional Office for Asia and Pacific
(ROAP) and Regional Resource Center for Asia and Pacific (RRCAP). While
UNEP's main area of responsibility is the environment, it has been quite actively
helping pursue sustainable development, mainly through the mainstreaming of
environment in development initiatives in the GMS. UNEP has been undertaking
meaningful projects in partnership with development institutions and stakeholders.
For instance, UNEP/RRCAP has been a major partner of ADB in the environment
component of the GMS Program, co-implementing some of the projects such as
the Strategic Environment Framework and the Protection and Management of
Critical Wetlands in the Lower Mekong Basin. UNEP/RRCAP is one of the UN
programs that has been supportive of and promoting the formulation of NSDS and
establishment of NCSDs, despite its limited national presence. It is currently
undertaking the project, Capacity Building on Promoting Sustainable Development
in the GMS, in cooperation with ADB. This project is assisting GMS countries
formulate their NSDS and organize their sustainable development coordinating
mechanisms or NCSD. It also is developing the Sub-regional Strategy for
Sustainable Development for the GMS.

160
Annex Table 1

161
162
163
References

Administrative Center for China Agenda 21 website (http://english.acca21.org.cn).

Asean Civil Society Organisations Consultative Forum On Environmental

Protection and Sustainable Development (May 2007). Draft Report. Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia.

Asian Development Bank (2005). Country Strategy and Program 2005-2009

Kingdom of Cambodia.

Asian Development Bank (2005). Country Strategy & Program Update 2006-2008:
Lao PDR.

Association of Southeast Asian Nations website (http://www.aseansec.org)

Azimi, Ali et al. (2000). Environments in Transition: Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand,
Vietnam. Asian Development Bank, Programs Department (West). Manila,
Philippines.

Cambodia Ministry of Environment and Project Secretariat, UNEP Regional

Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (2006). “Cambodia: National
Environmental Performance Assessment Report.” ADB T.A. No. 6069-REG:
National Performance Assessment and Subregional Strategic Environment
Framework in the Greater Mekong Subregion.

China Development Brief website (http://www.chinadevelopmentbrief.com/)

Chinese Environment NGOs Online website (http://www.greengo.cn)

Country Studies website (http://www.country-studies.com)

Department of Environmental Quality Promotion, MONRE, Thailand and Project

Secretariat, UNEP Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific
(2006). “Thailand National Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA)
Report.” ADB T.A. No. 6069-REG: National Performance Assessment and
Subregional Strategic Environment Framework in the Greater Mekong
Subregion.

Earth Council (2003). Country Reports to WSSD. Prepared for a GEF-funded

Project to promote National Councils for Sustainable Development in Asia-
Pacific.

Federation of Thai Industries website (http://www.fti.or.th)

GMS Business Forum website (http://www.gmsbizforum.com)

164
GMS Environment Operations Center website (http://www.gms-eoc.org)

GMS Leaders First Summit Declaration (November 2002), ADB

Greater Mekong Subregion Academic and Research Network (GMSARN) website

(http://www.ait.ac.th)

Gunilla, Riska. “NGOs in the GMS: Involvement Related to Poverty Alleviation and
Watershed Management (Thailand)”. Asian Development Bank RETA 5771
(http://www.mekonginfo.org)

James, Helen (2003). “Cooperation and Community Empowerment in Myanmar

in the context of Myanmar Agenda 21.” Asian-Pacific Economic
Literature. 17 (1), 1–21.

Mekong River Commission Annual Report, 2005, MRC, Vientiane, Lao PDR.

Ministry of Health, PRC. China Health Statistics 2004 (http://www.moh.gov.cn)

Ministry of National Planning and Economic Development and United Nations

Country Team (2005). Myanmar Millennium Development Goals Report
2005.

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Vietnam and Project Secretariat,

UNEP Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (2006). “Vietnam
National Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Report.” ADB T.A.
No. 6069-REG: National Performance Assessment and Subregional
Strategic Environment Framework in the Greater Mekong Subregion.

Ministry of Planning and Investment (2004). Viet Nam Development Report 2004.
Hanoi.

Ministry of Planning and Investment (Vietnam) (http://www.mpi.gov.vn)

National Bureau of Statistics, PRC (2005). 2004 China Statistical Yearbook.

Beijing: China Statistical Press.

National Commission for Environmentral Affairs, Myanmar and Project Secretariat,

UNEP Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (2006). Myanmar:
National Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Report.” ADB T.A.
No. 6069-REG: National Performance Assessment and Subregional
Strategic Environment Framework in the Greater Mekong Subregion.

National Development and Reform Commission (PRC) website

(http://en.ndrc.gov.cn)

165
National Economic and Social Advisory Council (Thailand) website
(http://www2.nesac.go.th)

National Economic and Social Development Board and United Nations Country
Team (2004). Thailand Millennium Development Goals 2004.

OECD (2005). National Strategies for Sustainable Development: Good Practices

in OECD Countries. Paris (3-4 October). SG/SD(2005)6.

Oupravanh, Khankeo and Pahlman, Charlie. Eucalyptus and Rural Development

in Lao PDR - An NGO Perspective. FAO Corporate Document Repository
website (http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/AC772E/ac772e0b.htm)

Phissamay, Dr. Bounteim. Message from President. Science Technology and

Environment Agency; STEA website (http://www.stea.gov.la/)

Royal Government of Cambodia (2003). Cambodia Millennium Development

Goals Report 2003, Phnom Penh

Royal Government of Cambodia. National Strategic Development Plan, 2006-

2010. Annex IV (Terms of Reference of Technical Working Group on
Planning and Poverty Reduction).

Royal Government of Cambodia (January 2006). Strategic Framework for

Development Cooperation.

Scott Wilson Group. Environmental Development Programme, Yunnan, China;

website (http://www.scottwilson.com)

Sinha, Subrato (2006). “National Sustainable Development Strategy.” Powerpoint

presentation, UNEP Regional Office for Asia-Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand.

Tan, Alan K.J (1998). “Preliminary Assessment of Indonesia's Environmental

Law”. Asia Pacific Centre for Environmental Law Report.

Tenev, S., Carlier, A., Chaundry, O., and Nguyen, Q. (2003). Informality and the
Playing Field in Vietnam’s Business Sector. International Finance Cor
poration. Washington D.C.

Thai Business Council for Sustainable Development website (http://www.tei.or.th)

The Chamber of Commerce (Thailand) website (online: http://www.tcc.or.th)

Toda, Hirohito (undated), “The Planning Process in Cambodia,” Development

Research and Policy Analysis Division, ESCAP.

Union of Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry website

(http://www.umfcci.com)

166
United Nations (2002). Guidance in Preparing a National Sustainable Develop-
ment Strategy: Managing Sustainable Development in the New Millennium,
Background Paper, Outcome of the International Forum on National
Sustainable Development Strategies, Accra, Ghana, 7-9 November 2001,
n°13, DESA/DSD/ PC2/BP13, New York.

United Nations (2004). Common Country Assessment (Draft). Beijing

United Nations (2005), United Nations Development Assistance Framework 2006–

2010 for Cambodia (Draft).

United Nations China Team (2003). Millennium Development Goals – China’s

Progress: An Assessment by the UN Country Team in China. Office of the
United Nations Resident Coordinator in China, Beijing.

United Nations Development Programme (2003). Millennium Development Goals:

Closing the Millennium Gaps. Hanoi.

United Nations Development Programme (2004). Human Development Report

2004. New York: Oxford University Press

United Nations Development Programme (2004). Millennium Development Goals:

China Progress. Beijing: Office of the United Nations Resident Coordinator
in China

United Nations Development Programme (2005). Human Development Initiative:

Report of the Independent Assessment Mission

United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific website
(http://www.unescap.org)

Vernooy, R., Qiu, S., Jianchu, X., eds. (2003). Voices for Change: Participatory
Monitoring and Evaluation in China. Ottawa: International Development
Research Centre.

Vietnam Business Forum website (http://vibforum.vcci.com.vn)

Wescott, Clay G., ed. (April 2001). Key Governance Issues in Cambodia, Lao
PDR, Thailand, and Vietnam. Asian Development Bank.

World Bank (2005). “China’s Progress Toward the Health MDGs.” Rural Health in
China: Briefing Notes Series.

World Bank (2005). Country Assistance Strategy for the Kingdom of Cambodia.

World Bank Development Indicators Database (http://devdata.worldbank.org)

167
Yunnan Provincial Environment Protection Bureau and Project Secretariat, UNEP
Regional Resource Center for Asia and the Pacific (2006). “Yunnan
Province, PR China: National Environmental Assessment (EPA) Report.”
ADB TA No. 6069-REG: National Performance Assessment and
Subregional Strategic Environment Framework in the Greater Mekong
Subregion.

Zhang, Ye (2003). “China’s Emerging Civil Society.” The Brookings Institution

website (http://www.brook.edu)

Zuo Ting (undated). “A Perspective on China’s Yunnan Province.” The Regional

Environmental Forum for Mainland Southeast Asia (http://www.ref-
msea.org)

168