text: article 2 (f). If the definikion of activities with harmful effects faJled to include aotivitfee which caueed harm although the risk of harm was not antrcipated, the scope of the topic! would have been coneiderably narrowed and that was already rejected by moet membors of the Commiaaion st prev.ioue sessions. Another narrowing element, according to this view, was the list of dangerous aubatance8. JQJ/ 476. A few members maintained the view that the topic should build upon the concept rf risk and not harm. It was the coiicept of risk which imposed certain obligations of prevention on Statea, and traneboundary harm normally wouid not occur unless there wae a risk in an activity. This approach, in their view, was R more commonly accepted practice. They felt it would be unrealistic to expect States to accept reeponsibility for any transboundary harm of any activities whether or not they posed a risk of caueing such harm, 477, A few members felt that, despite the Special Rapporteurs’ euggestions, it might be more appropriate to treat aotivitiee involving risk and those causing harm in separate chapters, (b) Fl\rther of BCQDB 478. During the last debate in the Commission and in the Sixth Committee of the General Aeaembly comments were made by a few members and Qovernments about the further clarification of the scope of the topic by having a list of activities covered by the topic. The Special Rapporteur explained that he had not reached a different conclusion, after further examination of the matter, and that he still believed that a list of activitiesr was inappropriate for a global convention of the nature anticipated for the topic, He, however, wae well aware of the concern which had been expressed for the need of further clarity in the scope of the topic, epecifically about the type of activitiee
analysis: The text appears to be discussing a topic related to international law and environmental protection, specifically the scope and definition of activities that can cause harm to the environment. The language used is formal and technical, suggesting a context of international diplomacy and treaty-making.