[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 15]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 20660-20661]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    HOUSE COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES RECEIVES INFORMATION ON THE UNITED 
                   NATIONS' MAN AND BIOSPHERE PROGRAM

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. RICHARD W. POMBO

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Monday, October 4, 2004

  Mr. POMBO. Mr. Speaker, the United Nations' Man and Biosphere Program 
(MAB) is managed by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and 
Cultural Organization (UNESCO) headquartered in Paris, France. Although 
there are 47 United Nations' Biosphere Reserves in the United States 
that comprise a land area larger than Colorado, this program is not 
authorized by even a single U.S. law or international treaty. This lack 
of legal authority is even more remarkable when one considers that 
millions of acres of private property in the United States are 
contained within the boundaries of biosphere reserves.
  To better understand the workings of this program, it was necessary 
for me to write to Dr. Nataran Ishwaran, Director of UNESCO's Division 
of Ecological Resources in Paris, France, who oversees the Man and 
Biosphere Program. I desired to learn more about the process for 
establishing and terminating biosphere reserves as well as the 
monitoring UNESCO requires for these designations.
  Dr. Ishwaran's reply indicated ``Member States wishing to remove the 
biosphere reserve in its country notifies the UNESCO Secretariat which 
in turn informs the Man and Biosphere International Coordinating 
Committee (ICC). . . .The ICC is an intergovernmental body made up of 
34 countries, elected in a rotational system by the UNESCO General 
Conference.''
  I commend my colleagues to learn more about the United Nations' 
Biosphere Reserves by reading this letter by Dr. Ishwaran, Director of 
UNESCO's Division of Ecological Resources.

         United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural 
           Organization,
                                                  August 24, 2004.
     Mr. Richard W. Pombo,
     Chairman, Committee on Resources,
     House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Pombo:  I should like to acknowledge your letter 
     of 3 August 2004 and to thank you for your kind words on my 
     new appointment.
       Our replies to your questions regarding biosphere reserves 
     follow below. They are based on the ``Statutory Framework'' 
     for biosphere reserves, a text negotiated by over 400 experts 
     (including US experts) in 1995 and adopted by the UNESCO 
     General Conference under 28 C/Resolution 2.4 in the same 
     year. This Resolution is considered a ``soft law'' and is not 
     an internationally binding treaty as is for example the World 
     Heritage Convention. The Statutory Framework, and the 
     accompanying ``Seville Strategy'' can be found on the MABnet 
     under http://www.unesco.org/mab/publications/document.htm.
       It is important to understand that before this Statutory 
     Framework was adopted in 1995, nomination and designation of 
     sites did not follow such a formal legal procedure, and that 
     the criteria for biosphere reserves were much more oriented 
     to either nature conservation or scientific research. As you 
     can see from the definition and ``vision'' for biosphere 
     reserves, the emphasis now is on the combination of three 
     functions of conservation, scientific research and 
     development. This evolution in the biosphere reserve criteria 
     means that the World Network of Biosphere Reserves, which 
     began in 1976, contains a legacy of ``old'' sites nominated 
     by their MAB National Committees but which do not necessarily 
     conform to the 1995 criteria. This is the case in the USA, 
     where sites were designated from 1976 up till 1991.
       (1) Designation procedure--(see Article 5 of the Statutory 
     Framework): UNESCO Member States make nominations for the 
     designation of new sites as biosphere reserves through their 
     MAB National Committees. The nomination form (http://
www.unesco.org;/mab/docs/brnomform.htm) requires endorsement 
     at the local and national levels. The nominations are sent to 
     the UNESCO Secretariat, which submits them for technical 
     evaluation by the Advisory Committee for Biosphere Reserves 
     (a 12 person group of experts nominated by the UNESCO 
     Director-General). The nominations are then decided upon in 
     the light of the recommendations from this Advisory Committee 
     by the MAB International Coordinating Council (ICC). The ICC 
     is an intergovernmental body made up of 34 countries, elected 
     in a rotational system by the UNESCO General Conference. In 
     practice the ICC devolves the decision on new nominations to 
     its Bureau (the Chair and the five Vice-Chairs) that meets 
     about once a year. The UNESCO Secretariat then informs the 
     Member State on the decision. As is stipulated under Article 
     2.3, individual biosphere reserves remain under the sovereign 
     jurisdiction of the States (countries) where they are 
     situated.
       (2) Monitoring--The Statutory Framework makes provision 
     under Article 9 for a ``periodic review'' every ten years 
     after designation. This is a self-evaluation, carried out by 
     the ``concerned authority'' which in practice is usually the 
     administrative body responsible for the biosphere reserve. 
     The format for this periodic review report is voluntary, but 
     countries generally use the form designed by the UNESCO 
     Secretariat for this purpose (available on: http://
www.unesco.org/mab/publications/document.htm). The periodic 
     review reports follow the same process of technical 
     evaluation and examination as for new nominations. The MAB 
     Bureau makes a recommendation to the Member State concerned 
     on each periodic review report: these recommendations are 
     very often suggestions as to the types of measures which 
     could be taken to improve the functioning of the site under 
     question as a biosphere reserve.

[[Page 20661]]

       (3) Terminating biosphere reserve designation--Technically, 
     this can happen in two ways. As is said under Article 9.8, a 
     Member State wishing to remove a biosphere reserve in its 
     country notifies the UNESCO Secretariat which in turn informs 
     the MAB ICC. A second procedure follows the periodic review 
     process as is stated under Article 9 paragraphs 5 and 6: if 
     the ICC finds that a biosphere reserve does not satisfy the 
     criteria after a reasonable period of time in which the 
     Member State concerned could have taken measures to improve 
     it, the site concerned ``will no longer be referred to as a 
     biosphere reserve which is part of the Network'' (please 
     refer to Article 9, paragraph 6 of the Statutory Framework). 
     In practice this second means has never been used. To date, 
     four countries have asked that non-functional sites be 
     removed from the Network. The UK, for example, undertook a 
     periodic review of all its sites with the biosphere reserve 
     designation (dating from 1977). It recognized that four of 
     these did not and could not meet the 1995 criteria and asked 
     the ICC to remove them from the Network. This was hailed by 
     the ICC as a positive result of the periodic review.
       (4) Reduction in size of a biosphere reserve--There is no 
     formal provision for this, but logically it should follow the 
     same procedure as for an extension, which is given under 
     Article 5.2. De facto, this means following the same 
     procedure as for new nominations.
       I trust this answers your questions satisfactorily: if you 
     have any other questions, do not hesitate to contact us.
           Yours sincerely,
                                                      N. Ishwaran,
     Director, Division of Ecological Sciences.

                          ____________________