REPORT ON CCICED BUD GET AND FINANCES

Xie Zhenhua

Secretary General

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,

On behalf of the Council secretariat, I am now presenting this report on CCICED Budget and Finances for your review and comments. The budget is reported on a calendar year basis and in American dollars. Table I represents the actual disbursements for 1992 and 1993 and forecasts disbursements for 1994, 1995 and 1996 .Th e cumulative total for the five-year program is estimated at U.S $ 6millin, The total contribution which has been committed is about U.S.$ 5.7million and therefore there will be a shortfall in firm commitments of U.S.$ 300,000 in 1996.

I.1992-1994 Budgets

The final cumulative disbursement for 192 and 1993 was U.S.$ 7,751,000 U.S $ 72 0,000 disbursed in 1992 were mainl7y startup costs including the first annual meet in but there was virtually no working group activity and therefore these figures are not typical. 1993 was the first normal year including considerable working group activities and totaled U.S $ 1,031, 000.Of the funds spent in 1992 and 1993, U.S $ 1,074,000 + was from CIDA contribution, U.S $ 387,000 from China's contribution and U.S $ 290,000 from other sources including British ODA, Ford Foundation and the Japanese government. There were some other countries and organizations which have financially supported the council and it’s working groups. For example, the Rockefeller Foundation paid the consultant fee, the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment of the Netherlands supported the activities of the Working Group on Pollution Control, Monitoring and Data Collection and the Japanese Government supported the activities of the Working Group of Scientific Research, Technological Development and Training through GISPRI, Since the figures of these contributions have not been reported to the secretariat, they are not included in the financial table and figures mentioned above. However their contributions are duly acknowledged and highly appreciated. Canada and China made multi-year, core contributions which permit their contributions are duly acknowledged and highly appreciated. Canada and China made multi-year, core contribution s which permit their funds to be used flexibly and moved from one activity to another depending on where the need is greatest while other donors designated specific purposes for their funds. The figures for Working Groups listed in Table I understate the level of activities because they only cover actual cash disbursements but do not include the valuable services in din donated by many Chinese and international experts and institutions.

1994 is expected to follow the same pattern as in 1993 except that the cost of Working Group activity will increase form U.S $ 350.000 per year to over U.S $ 700,000 because four of the six groups have taken on heavier programs including more frequent meetings, workshops and modest study tours. Some Working Group s have got financial support from the government of some related countries .The budget for 1994 is U.S $ 1,406,000,an increase of U.S $ 375,000 as compared with 1993. In 1994,in addition to the foregoing contributions, important new contributions have been committed. German DTZ has committed to contribute Dm 8000,000 (=U.S $ 470,000) of which DM 698,000 (=U.S $ 410,000) will be used for the two council meetings of 1994 and 1995 and DM 102,000 (= U.S $ 60,000) for NEPA secretariat. The Rockefeller Foundation has committed U.S $ 133,000 to support the Working Group on Energy Strategies and Technologies and the Netherlands Ministry of Environment has committed U.S $ 65,000 to support the Working Group on Pollution Control, Monitoring and Data Collection in 1994 (and more funds were promised for 1995). In addition, the British ODA increased its annual contribution form 70,000 pounds to 90,000 pounds.

II. Financial Framework for 1995-1996

Because of additional contributions and a better ability to forecast Working Group expenditures, it is now possible to do financial planning for a healthy level of activity up to the end of the five-year period in 1996 (including annual Council Meetings and busy Working Group programs). We have made the budgets for 1995 and 1996 at U.S $ 1,431,000 and U.S $ 1,429,000 respectively. To meet this nee s there is a shortfall of U.S $ 300,000 in 1996. As of now, we do not have firm pledges from any donors other than Canada and China in 1996, but it seems reasonable to project that we can secure this level of contribution from other sources in that year.

In the light of the foregoing, the Council can afford to continue all the existing Working Groups, and to sponsor the creation of one new group for 1995 and 1996. Annual expenditures for each Working Group vary considerably depending on t he composition of the group, the area it works on and the level of the financial support it can get.

III. The Finical Needs of the Council

I have reported to you the budget and finances for carrying out normal activities of the Council and its Working Groups. However, the financial needs of the Council are not just the figures mentioned above. The Council produced some good suggestions and recommendations at its previous meetings on how to integrate environment and development in China and will produce moue and concrete recommendations at this meeting and future ones .In order to turn the recommendations into actions, it is suggested that a programme of priority demonstration projects be formulated, which the Council will support. If the Council approves this suggestion, additional financial resources will be needed, It is our hope that our Council members will make effort in this direction and multilateral and bilateral donors and international financial agencies will provide their support.

Thank you.