Cleaner Production
Global Status 2002 

United Nations Environment Program Jun02

[Full Report in PDF format can be downloaded at http://www.emcentre.com/cpglblstatus/]

Foreword

The UNEP DTIE’s Cleaner Production Programme was launched in 1989. The immediate task then was to create awareness of the concept, build institutional capacities and demonstrate its benefits to foster sustainable development. Today, Cleaner Production is a flagship program of not just UNEP DTIE, but also of several organizations in the world that have adopted and adapted it. It has truly become a global movement. There is currently a global Cleaner Production network of more than 100 Cleaner Production Centres operating across 40 odd countries. This network today is more of a global alliance demonstrating a partnership between international agencies, national governments, financing and developmental institutions, business associations, environmental NGOs and academia. The emphasis on Cleaner Production today is more on action and the establishment of an enabling framework embodying the spirit of partnership. Cleaner Production has been a technology promoter, managerial catalyst, paradigm reformer and a bridge connecting economic improvement and sustainable development. But for all that has been accomplished under the banner of cleaner production, much more remains to be done. There are differences to the extent of adoption of Cleaner Production in various regions of the world, given the diversity in the social, economic and political systems. For instance, there are regions where Cleaner Production is already getting mainstreamed into the national policy and regulatory framework, while there are cases where it is still in its infancy and much work still needs to be done. In many places, Cleaner Production concept still appears to be donor driven. This report on the Global Status of Cleaner Production comprises two volumes, the first covers an overview, analyses and recommendations; the second is essentially a compilation of country specific compilations of initiatives undertaken on Cleaner Production. The overview is developed for the global as well as regional levels to understand relative spread of Cleaner Production. The information on which the second volume is based has been collated from the literature review, internet and contributions made by national Cleaner Production experts and focal institutions in the various countries covered. Finally, both the volumes are supplemented with annexes, footnotes and key references. This report is an attempt to capture what has been achieved in Cleaner Production so far, the lessons learnt and possible courses of future action. It is hoped that this report will serve as a reference for guiding and assisting the various stakeholders engaged in Cleaner Production. We seek your comments and contributions to this report to make it a living document and a truly ongoing exercise.

Executive Summary  

Evolution of Cleaner Production 

In 1987, the concept of sustainable development was proposed to steer Our Common Future. In theory, sustainable development implied meeting the needs of the present generation, without compromising the needs of future generations. The true challenge of sustainable development was how to put the theory into practice. Cleaner production provided a practical way to take clues from the conceptual framework of sustainable development towards action.  Cleaner production is not a new concept. It is a logical extension of our desire to conserve materials and reduce waste. It requires people to examine ways that result in increased productivity; reduced resource inputs and waste and, most importantly, reduced risk to the environment. CP is not just an environmental initiative; it supports other productivity oriented programs and strategies.  In 1992, Cleaner Production found mention at the Earth Summit as an important strategy to take forward the concept of sustainable development. Agenda 21 made significant references to Cleaner Production and, in fact, served as a blue print. It also provided a direction and focus to the adoption of CP on a multistakeholder and multi-partnership basis.  The UNEP DTIE’s Cleaner Production Programme was launched in 1989. The immediate task then was to create awareness of the concept, build institutional capacities and demonstrate its benefits to foster sustainable development. Today, Cleaner Production is a flagship program of not just UNEP DTIE, but also of several organizations in the world that have adopted and adapted it. It has truly become a global movement.  The emphasis on CP today is more on action and the establishment of an enabling framework embodying the spirit of partnership.  

What has been accomplished? 

In the last ten years, CP has led to a paradigm shift in environmental management at the level of governments, business and financing institutions, as well as local governments and communities. However, there have been a number of barriers in the promotion and adoption of CP, encompassing various issues such as problems in communication, resistance to change, lack of appropriate demonstrations of CP to prove its benefits, inadequate training, and a lack of CP related information and problems in accessing cleaner technologies. Other critical barriers include the lack of financing and, more significantly, a lack of CP orientation in the national policy and regulatory framework.  Typically, the progression of CP mainstreaming in a country has followed a strategy of moving from awareness creation to capacity building of institutions. As a next logical step, with the help of the key institutions, and by working in partnership, CP is demonstrated across various sectors to increase its acceptance. For a multiplier effect, information sharing mechanisms are then instituted by holding seminars, publishing manuals, conducting training and operating websites. To develop an enabling framework, suitable financing mechanisms and policy instruments are devised. Based on ground level experience and consultations with important stakeholders, reforms are then undertaken to mainstream CP in the national policy and regulatory framework. Some of the major highlights of the above achievements are summarized below. 

Raising Awareness 

Spreading awareness of the CP concept through examples has been one of the major strategies towards improving both acceptance and understanding of CP across a wide range of stakeholders. Numerous seminars and workshops have been conducted, and the development and distribution of brochures, posters, and videos done. In many cases CP is communicated through other programs and strategies such as eco-efficiency, green productivity etc. Some of the innovative approaches include Eco-Accounting Books in Japan, the 'Miljøhjemmevernet' programme launched in Norway for households and the Ecoefficiency Calendars for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) developed by the Wuppertel Institute in Germany in collaboration with UNEP. 

Obtaining Commitment 

Obtaining a commitment is an essential step to ensure moving from awareness to action. The International Declaration on Cleaner Production (IDCP) has been an excellent step to obtain commitment of a large number of stakeholders at various levels including national governments. The IDCP is a voluntary but public commitment to the strategy and practice of Cleaner Production. This Declaration was launched at the 5th International High-Level Seminar on Cleaner Production, held at Phoenix Park, South Korea in 1998. As of March 2002, the IDCP has over 300 signatories and has been translated in to 15 languages. 

Building National Capacities 

Recognizing a need to set up model institutions on CP at the national level, UNIDO and UNEP launched a National Cleaner Production Centers (NCPC) Programme There are now 22 NCPCs set up with the assistance of various donor agencies. Many international donors, notably the Swiss Government, the International Labor Organization, NORAD, USAID, the World Bank, and the Global Environment Facility (GEF) have identified NCPCs as highly competent partners for delivering their programs and projects on the national level. Taking the lead from NCPC Programme, several Cleaner Production Centres (CPCs) have been set up by many countries by allocating national funds and in some cases drawing assistance of donor agencies. There is currently a global Cleaner Production network of more than 100 CP Centres operating across 40 odd countries. This network today is more of a global alliance demonstrating a partnership between international agencies, national governments, financing and developmental institutions, business associations, environmental NGOs and academia. 

Demonstrating Cleaner Production 

More than 1000 demonstration projects have been launched to convince industries the economic and environmental benefits of CP. Sectors where most of the demonstrations were carried out have been textiles, pulp and paper, metal finishing and tanneries. Some trend setting demonstration projects have been DESIRE in India (implemented by National Productivity Council, New Delhi with support from UNIDO), ProduksiH in Indonesia (implemented by the BAPEDAL under support of GTZ), and SEAM in Egypt (implemented by EEAA with the support of DfID, UK). Multicountry demonstrations supported by agencies such as Asian Productivity Organization (APO), Tokyo under Green Productivity Programme, US AID under the EP3 project, World Environment Centre (WEC) and World Cleaner Production Society (WCPS) have also been noteworthy. 

Information Networking 

CP has been one of the major themes of discussion at regional and international arena. A momentum to international meetings focusing on CP was given by UNEP DTIE through its High-Level CP seminars. Across all the regions, several roundtables are now operated on CP. Prominent amongst these include National Pollution Prevention Roundtable (NPPR) in the US and the European Roundtable on Cleaner Production (ERCP). The Asia- Pacific region has organized three CP roundtables. Apart from holding CP roundtables, the Mercosur region has proposed the formation of a CP network. African region has initiated the regional consultation process by organizing the first CP roundtable in 2000. Most of these roundtables are now operating websites. The experience of CP networking worldwide induced several other agencies and programs to set up their own networks. Many of the themes for networking shared a common vision to CP. Examples include the Greening of Industrial Networks, International Green Productivity Association (IGPA), O2 International Network of Sustainable Design, World Cleaner Production Society etc. UNEP DTIE developed the International Cleaner Production Information Clearinghouse (ICPIC) that has today nearly 600 CP case studies and more than 150 CP contacts. Other important web based initiatives on CP include International Cleaner Production Cooperative launched by US EPA, websites of Environment Australia, Chinese NCPC and the Canadian Center for Pollution Prevention. 

Working in Partnerships 

CP is not an activity that is best done in isolation. This decade therefore witnessed a gradual movement from individual approaches to CP to common or collective approaches that are based on partnerships. The partnership models have taken different innovative forms of collaborations between disparate stakeholders. Consequently, there are numerous success stories and lessons learnt. Some of the examples of innovative partnerships include Victorian Environment Improvement Plan Programme in Australia, Asia- Eco-Best Programme promoted by the EU, Waste Minimization Circles in India, Corporate Synergy System in Taiwan and ECOPROFIT in Austria. 

Training and Education 

The need for training activities in building environmental awareness cannot be overstated, more so in the case of CP promotion. The Train the trainer approach is proved to be a far reaching strategy. One of the excellent illustrations of this approach is the Norwegian CP Capacity Building Programme. The Programme was initially conducted entirely by Norwegian expertise, but was progressively taken over by the Association of Managers for Cleaner Production (AMCP) in Czech Republic and by the Polish Cleaner Production Centre NIF-NOT in Poland. National Productivity Council in India has launched a facilitator training initiative through the programme on Waste Minimization Circles. There are now more than100 institutions that are offering 70 courses that interface with CP. Some institutions in Australia, United Kingdom and the United States have set up CP programmes at the graduate level and these programmes complement science, technology, economics and management related curricula. 

Technology Development and Cooperation 

An upcoming impetus to cleaner technology market is now evident due to some of the multilateral environmental agreements such as climate change, biodiversity and Montreal protocol. Several sectoral institutions have established initiatives to promote adoption of cleaner technologies in their own sectors by setting up business to business web sites, sponsoring technology development projects and by organizing thematic trade fairs. Increased foreign direct investments in developing countries have led to some extent cleaner technology adaptations and spillovers. Ecolables in particular have been one of the prime push factors in sectors such as textiles, leather tanning, metal finishing, food and pulp and paper. This has influenced substitution and elimination of hazardous chemicals and processes leading to CP interventions across the supply-chains. There have also been efforts on promotion of cleaner technologies on regional basis. Examples are the Asia Pacific Centre for Technology Transfer (APCTT) at New Delhi, Centre for Environmentally Sound Technology Transfer (CESTT) in China, International Centre for Environmental Technology Transfer in Japan and Ecolinks initiative operated by USAID for Central Eastern European countries. 

Financing CP Investments 

One of the critical elements of the CP enabling framework is the existence of financial support with adequate mechanisms that is set to promote CP related investments across various sectors. Recognizing this need, a number of innovative CP financing programs have been operated in various parts of the world. These include the NEFCO Revolving Facility set up by Government of Norway in Russia, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia that has shown a considerable success. In the Latin and Caribbean Region, the Multilateral Investment Fund (MIF) has recently introduced a major cluster financing programme on achieving eco-efficiency through Cleaner Production and Environmental Management. The United States has demonstrated the most innovation and maturity in its financial sector. Several states in the US have pollution prevention, recycling direct loan, or revolving loan fund programs. Examples are the P2 Loan program of Ohio State that targets small-to medium-sized businesses, the RENEW Loan Program in Colorado that emphasizes waste recycling or the Nebraska Dollar and Energy Saving Loan program that promotes small projects for "turning pollution prevention and energy efficiency into corporate assets". In the last decade, Development Financing Institutions such as the World Bank have set up several CP related Technical Assistance and Financing Programs. Notable amongst these are the Industrial Pollution Control and Prevention Project (IPPP) of the World Bank in India, Industrial Pollution Control Project in Brazil and in China. The World Bank publication, the Pollution Prevention Abatement Handbook - Towards Cleaner Production is used by several financing institutions today to assist in the project appraisal. There is however still a substantial segment of extremely small businesses and entrepreneurs who fail to qualify for these institutional mechanisms. To respond to such a need, the UNEP DTIE started a four-year project in 1999 on CP Financing. This project aims at increasing investments in cleaner production in developing countries by helping financial institutions understand the importance of cleaner production and by helping CP experts develop creditworthy investment proposals. The project, focusing on five demonstration countries - Guatemala, Nicaragua, Tanzania, Vietnam and Zimbabwe - operates under a trust fund created by the Norwegian government. The results obtained and lessons learned in the demonstration countries will be used at the global level to motivate key decision-makers in the financial sector to pursue cleaner production investments in developing countries. 

Development of CP oriented Policies and Strategies 

A number of countries have made progress, albeit to varying extent, in applying a mix of instruments for promoting CP. Markets have started influencing both production and consumption by building awareness on eco-labels, setting environmental and social codes for products throughout the supply-chain and asking for establishment of environmental management systems. This has shown signs of a more integrated approach to CP, encompassing process, product, services and consumption. More recently, countries mainly in the North Atlantic (notably USA) EU region (notably Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, and Spain) and Australia have placed an emphasis on reforming the legislative framework, stressing on promotion and recognition of voluntary instruments – especially CP. The European Union has already established the Industrial Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive and many of its member states are in the process of aligning their national CP related policies and strategies with the IPPC. One of the steps taken in the EU to increase the focus of CP on products and related markets, was the development of an Integrated Product Policy (IPP ) Some EU Member States have already developed, or are developing Environmental Product Policy (EPP) frameworks. The leading countries so far are the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Austria and Germany. EPPs are also beginning to emerge in countries such as Belgium, United Kingdom, Finland and Italy. On the supply-side, the leading countries have developed a number of measures to encourage eco-product development, such as product-oriented environmental management systems (POEMS), eco-design grants and awards and product take back and recycling requirements. These countries are also developing demand-side tools, such as eco-labels, product taxes and public procurement. The most advanced are also exploring multi stakeholder dialogue tools (such as Product Panels in the Denmark) to bring both sides together to work toward greener products. One of the publicly developed and discussed illustrations of a national CP strategy is that of Australia and the Czech Republic. Chile and Columbia offer other good illustrations of CP related policies in the Latin and Caribbean region. The Asian Development Bank supported a Regional Environmental Technical Assistance for the Promotion of Cleaner Production Policies and Practices in Selected Developing Member Countries. CP strategies are not limited within the national networks. The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) formally adopted a CP strategy in 1997. 

Findings of the Regional Overview 

There are differences in the adoption of Cleaner Production in various regions of the world, given the differences in the social, economic and political systems. For instance, there are regions where Cleaner Production is already getting mainstreamed into the national policy and regulatory framework, while there are cases where Cleaner Production is still at the infancy. The regional review shows a disconnect between the achievements made in CP and the existing situation of the enabling environment. In some regions, for instance, the enabling environment is rather weak and is plagued with significant barriers while at the same time, many CP related initiatives are reported. It may be therefore concluded that the CP sector is not still matured across the region and/or the CP interventions are less mainstreamed or strategic and are limited to project/programme level interventions. This observation is perhaps applicable to Africa, Asia-Pacific, Centre and Eastern Europe (CEE) and Latin and Caribbean (LAC) regions. For regions such as European Union and North Atlantic (NA), such a disconnect is not observed and the interrelationship between the enabling environment and the accomplishments in CP seem to be rather well structured and harmonious. More research is required into the enabling environment, and its influence on CP promotion in the different regions needs careful understanding. The regional review also shows differences in the context and opportunities for taking forward CP. The drivers to CP are indeed different. CP activities should focus on identifying key drivers that will enable greater penetration. It is important to understand that these drivers will differ for each region, and need to be factored in developing region specific action plans. The global market of environmental technologies and services is skewed across the regions and by composition still influenced by end of the pipe treatment technologies. By 2008, it is estimated that US and the EU countries will alone have nearly 70% of the global market share. If CP is to be promoted across the world, then the market must shift and change in composition, promoting CP solutions over the end of the pipe approaches. This will require creation of enabling environment in the other regions of the world. The African region needs to focus more on the agricultural and natural resource management sectors, integrating health and safety in the CP approach and stressing on the interrelationships between CP and sustainable consumption. The Asia-Pacific region needs to focus on the supply-chain models to influence CP in the SMEs and take up the infrastructure and service sectors as priority sectors for CP interventions. There is also a need in the Asia-Pacific region to convince the national governments towards mainstreaming CP in their policies and regulations. The LAC region can be an excellent pilot to demonstrate relationships between CP and the MEAs, given the commitments to MEAs in the region and the strong presence of regional trade associations. There is a great need however to build CP skills in this region. The CEE region has taken a lead on CP financing and mainstreaming CP in the policy and regulations and it is important that the experiences are shared with other regions. Energy efficiency seems to be the principle driver concept in the CEE countries. The EU and NA regions have played a key role to germinate the CP concept and promote its implementation across the world through Overseas Development Assistance (ODA). It is therefore important that the ODA moves to more strategic interventions on CP rather than provide assistance on project recourse basis. There are already signs of such a change over. Finally, the private sector, financing institutions and community seems to be rather at a distance from the global CP network. Efforts are needed to widen the network and strike multi-level partnerships with these important stakeholders. 

What needs to be done? 

Despite the progress made in the last decade, on Cleaner Production, much more still remains to be done. In the last decade, several strategies have been deployed to overcome some of these barriers. However, not all strategies have worked and some issues still remain to be resolved. Indeed, some these issues are not new; and have found mention in the discussions happening across the global CP network. Nevertheless, these issues are critical to be analyzed and strategies revisited if CP is to be strengthened, mainstreamed and maintained. Products and services form a critical link between Cleaner Production and Sustainable Consumption (SC). If these two concepts are to be strengthened, then there is a need to acknowledge this link by expanding the scope of CP to include SC. A formal integration between CP and SC may provide a concurrent framework that guides producers and consumer behavior on lines more aligned with the long-term objectives of sustainable development. Both the Malmo declaration and the Millennium Summit endorse such a concurrent framework. CP in many ways has helped inspire preventive thinking. The allpervasive nature of CP has enabled a wider dissemination of its core message across the world, albeit in multiple forms, depending on local interpretation. But in doing so, CP did not lay down its own formal system, or a common standard approach. Given the establishment of several other overlapping and competing programs, systems and strategies today, the discrete potentials of CP still remain unclear. CP needs to establish, document and communicate its own implementation principles and processes that can be commonly understood and applied across various sectors and by disparate stakeholders. It is critical to strengthen the global standing of CP, by driving it through overarching policies and agreements that are endorsed internationally. The IDCP has been an excellent step towards obtaining the commitment of a large number of stakeholders at various levels including national governments on CP. The implementation guidelines brought out by UNEP are the first step towards drawing up a plan to actively facilitate the implementation of the IDCP. In such efforts, it may be strategic to strike a synergy between CP and implementation of various Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs). The key needs are therefore to move towards more synergy and mobilization between national and regional implementing and coordinating agencies for MEAs and the CP network worldwide. The establishment and operation of CPCs/NCPCs has been one of the major outcomes of CP activity in the last decade, and demonstrates a true capacity building and partnership approach. It is important to expand the vision and agenda of the CPCs/NCPCs and equip them with skills to run the Centres like Strategic Business Units (SBUs) and set as model for future CPCs/NCPCs to follow. To achieve this objective, the CPCs/NCPCs need to be adequately positioned to mainstream CP in national policies and regulatory framework. In addition, it is necessary that CPCs/NCPCs operate on close partnerships with the financing institutions, technology development agencies and consumer based environmental NGOs. CPCs/NCPCs should focus now on the expanded vision of CP that links explicitly with Sustainable Consumption. CPCs/NCPCs should also start playing a proactive role in assisting local and national governments, businesses and communities to implement the various MEAs. The concept of CP germinated in the manufacturing sector. Given the global shift of economies to services and infrastructure, there is now a need for a corresponding shift in CP focus as well. While this has been achieved to some extent in the hospitality sector, much work still needs to be done in other sectors, especially those engaged in natural resource management, services and infrastructure. Potential of CP has been proven beyond any doubt via demonstration projects in diverse industrial sectors. Despite their good intent, the multiplier effect of demonstrations has been rather poor. Again, in most of the cases, demonstration projects are understood more as demonstrations of equipment or technology, not of methods and management systems or innovative partnership. It is important to transform the character, scope and mechanism of demonstration projects to foster multiplication. Focus should be on systems and life cycle thinking, and not merely technical retrofitting. Information exchange is important and several initiatives have been taken worldwide. However, most of these information clearinghouses have been supply driven and little work has been done to actually assess the information demand related to CP. The quality and depth of content of CP information clearinghouses in some cases could be questionable. Most information databases have tended to restrict themselves to the manufacturing sector and its needs. Information compilation must address issues of sustainable consumption; as the links with sectors such as services and infrastructure, and resource management run very deep. Future CP information networks will have to move from information to knowledge, and support field-based counseling units, especially to meet the needs of the SMEs. Networks should not remain mere conduits of generic information; there is a need to offer customized counsel to individual stakeholders, as a value addition on the information provided. Including local CP expertise into networks thus becomes especially relevant. A fair amount of economic activities related to small-scale manufacturing and services, today, are rural. These activities are critical from the protection and management of natural resources as well as to sustain livelihoods of the rural communities. This aspect has tended to get overlooked however in most of the CP initiatives. CP appears more as an urban affair. Rural innovation, in agriculture, dairy farming and mining are still vibrant traditions in many regions and need to be fostered by strategic interventions. There are also innovations made in recycling and reuse of wastes in urban areas, particularly in the informal sector that warrant some attention. Indigenous innovations are, finally, the most sustainable as they address local situations the best and in turn closely linked with sustainable consumption patterns. Consumer health and safety remain under-stated issues in many developing countries. CP could provide an excellent platform to address minimization of health and safety related concerns while meeting the market demands of codes of conduct, brands and eco-labels. Here the consumer interest organizations, trade unions and local governing authorities could play a vital to demonstrate economic and environmental benefits of the CP. SMEs are the mainstay of many of the regional economies where there is a need to initiate technology development and cooperation. In this regard, supply-chain based approaches may be more interesting as they are driven through economy and competition, allow participation of medium and large scale enterprises and are intricately linked with trade, health and safety. Private sector participation is a key element, and needs to be exploited for greater outreach across sectors, as well as in building multiplier effect of CP. Trade fairs remain influential avenues for information exchange and interactions between expertise, and have conventionally under-emphasized CP, despite its relevance in the promotion of technology that is resource, or energy efficient. The business to business (B2B) interactions in CP must be catalyzed to both widen and ripen the CP market. This may lead to increased CP related consulting, and engagement of performance related contracts on CP. Cleaner Production as such does not fit neatly into any one educational discipline. As a foundation to mainstream CP and to ensure that it influences all the stakeholders, inclusion of CP concepts is necessary in all forms of education. Unlike demonstration projects and industry based awareness programmes, CP training in universities has traditionally received little investment from multilateral or international aid agencies. Further, these courses are currently developed and supported entirely by the university, with little or no involvement of local NCPCs. The institutionalization of CP needs to be formalized through education, and development of specific training programs culminating in certification, to build a credible accredited pool of CP expertise. A CP Certification may prove a strong boost to developing a mature market for CP. CP formalization would receive a fillip if stressed through the national policy framework, as in the case of mandatory CP assessments for critical aspects of appraisal and risk analyses. Many financing activities have somehow not focused on widening outreach to small enterprises, services and local utilities, perhaps due to the high credit risks involved. Private sector participation in CP related financing is rather low and most fund streams are donor driven. Further, CP needs to be integrated in the standard project appraisal process as well as in the risk management framework when it comes to retrospective financing or operation of cluster loans. Programs of financial assistance should refocus to emphasize technology uptake and building of local capacity. CP is indeed an initiative that is best promoted in partnerships. In the last decade, a commonly struck partnership for CP promotion has been between government-donor agencies and business. Many of these partnerships have however been limited to a program or a project, or whither away on the withdrawal of, donor support. It is critical that we build local level multi-stakeholder partnerships that can promote CP on a self-sustaining basis. Increased role of the private sector and the community is necessary. Much of the experience in CP implementation has been in existing or given situations, to find means to improve environmental and economic performance through optimization, modernization/expansion or reengineering/reorientation. CP has been relatively less used in developing land-use related and operational plans for guiding project siting and development, deciding on natural resource extraction or building infrastructure to support mobility, energy supply and human settlements. If CP has to influence future development, and then it is necessary that CP principles be explicitly integrated into planning and related anticipatory environmental management tools. At the policy level, the presence of subsidies on natural resources, as well as poor legislative enforcement will continue to hinder CP absorption. Strategic interventions at the policy level would need to be made to enable greater success of CP promotion. In the past few years, focus has been laid on the formulation of national policies and strategies, and the orientation of regulatory frameworks for promotion of CP. Here, experiences from countries and regions such as Columbia and Chile, EU, Czech Republic and Australia have been rather encouraging. The use of innovative policy instruments and a mix of regulation have been evolving but these initiatives are somewhat restricted to developed economies. It is important that these initiatives are further documented and disseminated to the developing countries. Finally, many of the strategic interventions described above are interrelated and should not be independently considered. To draw on an action plan, it will be necessary to develop a situation specific operational framework by outlining possible stakeholders, identifying needed pre-requisites and managing possible barriers. An expanded charter of Cleaner Production along with Sustainable Consumption will perhaps show the way - by obtaining commitments at all levels and by setting new partnerships between government, business and communities - to take forward the agenda of sustainable development.

Acknowledgment
The initial draft of this report has been prepared by the Cleaner Production team at UNEP DTIE with assistance of Prasad Modak and his colleagues at the Environmental Management Centre, India.

UNEP DTIE extends its appreciation to all the representatives of the National Cleaner Production Centres and other CP related organizations of the Global CP Network whose contributions have greatly helped in the preparation of this report.

UNEP DTIE also thanks the members of the peer review committee for their critique and suggestions towards improving the content of this report.

source: http://www.emcentre.com/cpglblstatus/ 27jun02