Distr. GENERAL
CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
UNEP/CBD/COP/3/3
7 September 1996
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
[ADVANCE UNEDITED TEXT]
CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES TO THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
Third meeting
Buenos Aires, Argentina
4 to 15 November 1996
Item 4 of the provisional agenda
REPORT OF THE SECOND MEETING OF THE SUBSIDIARY BODY
ON SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVICE
Introduction
1. Article 25 of the Convention
on Biological Diversity established the Subsidiary Body on Scientific
Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA).
2. In its recommendation I/1, made at its first meeting,
held in Paris from 4 to 8 September 1995, the SBSTTA recommended
that its meetings be held annually and sufficiently in advance
of each regular meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the
Convention on Biological Diversity. In its decision II/1, paragraph
2, the Conference of the Parties at its second meeting, held in
Jakarta from 6 to 17 November 1995, endorsed the modus operandi
of the SBSTTA.
3. At its organizational meeting held in Montreal
on 3 and 4 May 1996, the Bureau of the first meeting of the SBSTTA
reviewed preparations for the second meeting. The second meeting
of the SBSTTA was held at the Palais des Congres Montreal, from
2 to 6 September 1996.
AGENDA ITEM 1: OPENING OF THE MEETING
4. The meeting was opened at 10.20 a.m. by Prof.
Jameson H. Seyani (Malawi), Chairman of the SBSTAA for 1995, who
noted that the meeting was the first to be held at the seat of
the permanent
Secretariat. Recalling Article 25 of the Convention,
which established the SBSTTA, he underscored the Body's role in
addressing the scientific, technical and technological aspects
underlying the Convention. He further highlighted the SBSTTA's
effectiveness and emergence as an important organ of the Convention,
as evidenced by the adoption of its recommendations by the second
meeting of the Conference of the Parties. Pointing out that the
maturing of the body's modus operandi would allow for its
continued improvement and sophistication, he noted that the SBSTTA's
relevance and peer recognition was further reflected in the invitations
to participate in the activities of other conventions and organizations.
Underscoring the SBSTTA's complicated programme of work, he thanked
the Bureau, the Secretariat, the Parties and NGOs for their assistance.
5. The Chairman, Mr. Peter J. Schei (Norway), in
his opening statement thanked Prof. Seyani for his excellent work
as the first Chair of SBSTTA. He then stressed that it was important
always to have in mind the role of SBSTTA as a scientific, technical
and technological advisory body to the Conference of the Parties.
SBSTTA was neither a "mini-Conference of the Parties"
nor a "drafting committee" for it. He stressed that
it was essential for SBSTTA to practice and demonstrate scientific
integrity in its work and advice. The credibility of the body
was very much dependent on that. Mr. Schei further stressed the
need for SBSTTA to work together with and draw upon the knowledge
and experience of the scientific community and their existing
bodies, at the national, regional and international levels. In
that connection, the development of good working relations and
partnerships were crucial for the efficiency of SBSTTA. He underlined
the importance of developing similar relations and partnerships
with NGOs and other relevant groups for the development of the
best possible advice to the Conference of the Parties. He expressed
satisfaction with the increased interest in SBSTTA's work and
welcomed the input to SBSTTA participants from the fourth Global
Biodiversity Forum that had been convened just prior to the current
meeting of SBSTTA.
6. Mr. Jorge Illueca, the Assistant Executive Director
of UNEP, speaking on behalf of the Executive Director of UNEP,
welcomed the delegates and thanked the Government of Canada and
the City of Montreal for hosting the meeting. Noting that the
meeting had a full agenda with a number of critical issues, he
said that the Convention could succeed only if it were built on
solid scientific and technical foundations, and that it was the
responsibility of the meeting to provide those foundations. He
described UNEP's commitment to the objectives of the Convention
on Biological Diversity by pointing out its work in the preparation
of the Global Biodiversity Assessment, the Country Biodiversity
Studies and the assistance to Parties in the elaboration of National
Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans, all made possible with
the generosity of the Global Environment Facility (GEF). He said
that the headquarters agreement between UNEP and the Government
of Canada on the establishment of the Secretariat in Montreal
would be signed at the end of September.
7. Mr. Calestous Juma, Executive Secretary of the
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, after welcoming
the participants, expressed his apologies for the late arrival
of the pre-session documents and their translations, and regretted
any inconvenience caused. Mr. Juma said that the current meeting
marked the first substantive meeting under the Convention that
had been held at the seat of the newly relocated Secretariat.
Since the Secretariat had been established in Montreal, it had
been working extremely closely with the Government of Canada and
he had received tremendous support, particularly in the timely
provision of facilities, which had become operational at the beginning
of August. The Secretariat, he further stressed, had also received
the support of the Bureaus of both the Conference of the Parties
and the SBSTTA, which was indicative of the strong working relationship
which had developed. He concluded by assuring the meeting that
the Secretariat would continue to work with the SBSTTA under the
1996-1997 chairmanship of Mr. Peter Schei to the same degree as
per the 1995-1996 chairmanship of Professor J. Seyani.
AGENDA ITEM 2: ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS
A. Attendance
8. The meeting was attended
by representatives of the following countries Parties to the Convention
on Biological Diversity: [to be completed]
9. The following States were represented by observers:
[to be completed]
10. Observers from the following United Nations bodies
and specialized agencies also attended: [to be completed]
(a) United Nations bodies:
(b) Specialized agencies:
11. The following other organizations were represented:
[to be completed]
(a) Intergovernmental organizations:
(b) Non-governmental organizations:
(c) Other organizations:
B. Election of officers
12. At its first meeting,
held in Nassau, Bahamas, from 28 November to 9 December 1994,
the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological
Diversity, in accordance with rule 26, paragraph 3 of the rules
of procedure, by which the Conference of the Parties shall elect
the chair of each subsidiary body, elected Mr. P.J. Schei (Norway)
as Chairman for 1996.
13. The SBSTTA, at its 2nd plenary session on 3 September
1996, decided on the following composition of the Bureau:
Rapporteur: Ms. Setijati Sastrapradja (Indonesia)
Vice-Chairman: Mr. Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias (Brazil)
Mr. Edgar E. Gutierrez-Espeleta (Costa Rica)
Mr. Gabor Nechay (Hungary)
Mr. Mick N. Raga (Papua New Guinea)
Mr. Franceso Mauro (Italy)
Mr. Isa Omarovich Baitulin (Kazakstan)
Ms. Zeinab Belkhir (Tunisia)
Mr. Vilakati (Swaziland)
C. Adoption of the agenda
14. The provisional agenda submitted to the meeting
in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/1/Rev.1 was orally amended by the
Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity,
who reported that the Bureau had considered it inappropriate to
include for discussion an item on bio-prospecting of genetic resources
of the deep seabed, since the Secretariat had been unable to consult
with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
in time to coordinate their input. Following a further suggestion
from the floor that the language of item 3.6.1. be made consistent
with that of the Convention, the following agenda was adopted
by the meeting:
1. Opening of the meeting.
2. Organizational matters:
2.1 Election of the officers;
2.2 Adoption of the agenda;
2.3 Organization of work.
3. Matters on which advice from the SBSTTA is required
by the third meeting of the Conference of the Parties:
3.1 Assessment of biological diversity and methodologies
for future assessments
3.1.1 Review of assessment of biological diversity
made in 1995, and methodologies for future assessments, as well
as the minimum standard data required, as appropriate, to be applied
in accordance with national priorities and programmes.
3.2 Identification, monitoring and assessment of
components of biological diversity and of processes that have
adverse impacts
3.2.1 Alternative ways and means in which the Conference
of the Parties could start the process of identification, monitoring
and assessment of components of biological diversity, as well
as processes and categories of activities which have or are likely
to have significant adverse impacts on the conservation and sustainable
use of biological diversity, in accordance with Article 7.
3.3 Review and promotion of indicators of biological diversity
3.3.1 Review and promotion of indicators of biological
diversity to be used for assessment of effectiveness of measures
taken in accordance with the provisions of the Convention.
3.4 Practical approaches for capacity-building for
taxonomy
3.4.1 Consider advice to the Conference of the Parties
on ways and means to overcome the current lack of taxonomists
taking into account existing initiatives and being mindful of
adopting a practical direction to taxonomy linked to bio-prospecting
and ecological research on conservation and sustainable use of
biological diversity and its components.
3.5 Ways and means to provide and facilitate access
to, and transfer and development of technology, including biotechnology
3.5.1 Identification of sound technologies, including
biotechnology and description of ways and means to promote and
facilitate access to, and transfer and development of these technologies,
and the role of the clearing-house mechanism.
3.6 Knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous
and local communities
3.6.1 Ways and means to identify and protect the
knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities
embodying traditional lifestyles and to compensate through the
equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the use of such
knowledge, innovations and practices, in accordance with Article 8(j)
of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
3.7 Capacity-building for biosafety
3.7.1 Capacity-building in relation to safe transfer,
handling and use of living modified organisms resulting from biotechnology
that may have adverse effect on the conservation of biological
diversity and the sustainable use of its components.
3.8 The role of the clearing-house mechanism in
promoting technical and scientific cooperation
3.8.1 Role of the clearing-house mechanism in facilitating
and promoting technical and scientific cooperation in research
and development related to conservation of biological diversity
and sustainable use of its components.
3.9 Agricultural biological diversity
3.9.1 Scientific, technical and technological aspects
of the conservation of agricultural biological diversity and sustainable
use of its components.
3.10 Terrestrial biological diversity
3.10.1 Scientific, technical and technological aspects
of the future programme of work for terrestrial biological diversity
in the light of the outcome of deliberations of the third session
of the Commission on Sustainable Development in 1995.
3.11 Economic valuation of biological diversity
3.11.1 Scientific, technical and technological advice
on economic valuation of biological diversity and its components,
in particular in relation to access to genetic resources.
3.12 Coastal and marine biological diversity
3.12.1 Scientific, technical and technological aspects
of the conservation and sustainable use of coastal and marine
biological diversity.
4. Review of the modus operandi of the SBSTTA.
5. Review of the medium-term programme of work of
the SBSTTA, 19951997.
6. Draft provisional agenda of the third meeting
of the SBSTTA.
7. Date and venue of the third meeting of the SBSTTA.
8. Other matters.
9. Adoption of the report.
10. Closure of the meeting.
D. Organization of work
15. In line with recommendation
I/1, paragraph 8, of the first meeting of the SBSTTA, endorsed
by paragraph 2 of decision II/1 of the Conference of the Parties,
it was decided that two open-ended sessional working groups would
be established and operate simultaneously during meetings of the
SBSTTA.
16. On the basis of suggestions by the Bureau, the
following allocation of tasks between the two working groups was
decided:
Working Group 1
Agenda items: 3.1 Assessment of biological diversity
and methodologies for future assessments
3.2 Identification, monitoring and assessment of
components of biological diversity and of processes that have
adverse impacts
3.3 Review and promotion of indicators of biological
diversity
3.9 Agricultural biological diversity
3.10 Terrestrial biological diversity
3.12 Coastal and marine biological diversity
Working Group 2
Agenda items: 3.4 Practical approaches for capacity-building
for taxonomy
3.5 Ways and means to promote and facilitate access
to, and transfer and development of technologies, including biotechnology
3.6 Knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous
and local communities
3.7 Capacity-building for biosafety
3.8 The role of the clearing-house mechanism in
promoting technical and scientific cooperation Economic valuation
of biological diversity.
17. It was agreed that the following would act as
officers of the sessional working groups:
Working Group 1
Chairman: Mr. Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias (Brazil)
Rapporteur: Ms. Zeinab Belkhir (Tunisia)
Working Group 2
Chairman: Mr. Francesco Mauro (Italy)
Rapporteur: Mr. Gabor Nechay (Hungary)
18. It was agreed that the remaining items on the
agenda would be discussed in plenary.
19. The SBSTTA decided to adopt the organization
of work set out in the note by the Secretariat contained in document
UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/1/Add.2.
20. One representative deplored, officially and formally,
the late receipt of a significant volume of the pre-session documentation
which, he said, meant that his delegation had not been able to
receive all the required advice in preparation for the meeting,
thus affecting its participation. He hoped that in future an attempt
would be made to concentrate on the most salient documentation,
thus enabling a fuller consideration of a more limited amount
of information prior to a meeting.
21. In its consideration of those items of the agenda
entrusted to it, Working Group 2 held seven meetings from 2 to
5 September 1996.
22. After a brief discussion on the organization
of the work of Working Group 2, it was decided to modify slightly
the order in which the respective items were to be discussed,
thus amending the programme of work contained in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/1/Add
2.
23. At its 7th session, on 5 September 1996, Working
Group 2 adopted its report on the basis of document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/WG.2/L.1.
The Working Group also approved draft recommendations for transmission
to plenary on each of the agenda items entrusted to it.
24. In its consideration of those items of the agenda
entrusted to it, Working Group 1 held nine meetings from 2 to
5 September 1996.
25. At its 9th session, on 5 September 1996, Working
Group 1 adopted its report on the basis of document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/WG.1/L.1.
The Working Group also approved draft recommendations for transmission
to plenary on each of the agenda items entrusted to it.
AGENDA ITEM 3: MATTERS ON WHICH ADVICE OF THE SBSTTA
IS REQUIRED BY THE THIRD MEETING OF THE CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES
Agenda item 3.1: Assessment of biological diversity
and methodologies for future assessments
26. At its 1st and 2nd
sessions, on 2 September 1996, Working Group 1 considered under
agenda item 3.1 a Note by the Secretariat, UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/2,
entitled "Assessment of Biological Diversity and Methodologies
for Future Assessments." The representative of the Secretariat
said that the Note had been prepared to assist the SBSTTA in developing
its medium-term programme of work. It reviewed assessments of
biological diversity and provided an overview of existing and
future methodologies for them. The Chairman amplified the concept
that a specific method of assessment as called for by the Convention
was not yet in place, and invited the meeting to consider the
options offered by the document.
27. During the discussion of the item, statements
were made by representatives of the following countries: Argentina,
Australia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Democratic
People's Republic of Korea, Germany, Ghana, Indonesia, Jamaica,
Japan, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Malaysia, Marshall Islands, Netherlands,
New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Republic of Korea, Sri Lanka,
Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland, United States of America, Uruguay and Zimbabwe. A statement
was also made by the representative of the European Community.
28. See paragraphs 35 to 39 below.
Agenda item 3.2: Identification, monitoring and
assessment of components of biological diversity and of processes
that have adverse impacts
29. At its 2nd session, held on 2 September 1996, Working Group 1 considered the above agenda item. The representative of the Secretariat introduced document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/3, entitled "Identification,
Monitoring and Assessments of Components of Biological
Diversity and Processes Which Have Adverse Impacts." He pointed
to the information on the background to the production of the
document, as contained in the first three paragraphs of the document
itself, explaining that it offered some options for intersessional
work upon which the meeting might wish to reach a decision.
30. The Chairman pointed out that the issues raised
in the document related not only to Articles 7 and 25 of the Convention
on Biological Diversity, but also to Article 26, covering national
reporting.
31. During the discussion on this item, statements
were made by the representatives of the following countries: Argentina,
Australia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Canada, Costa Rica, Germany,
Ghana, Indonesia, Lesotho, Jamaica, Japan, Malawi, Marshall Islands,
Netherlands, New Zealand, Peru, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland,
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Uruguay,
United States of America and Zimbabwe. A statement was also made
by the representative of the European Community.
32. See paragraphs 35 to 39 below.
Agenda item 3.3: Review and promotion of indicators
of biological diversity
33. At its 2nd session,
held on 2 September 1996, Working Group 1 considered the above
agenda item. The representative of the Secretariat, introducing
document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/4, entitled AIndicators for Assessing
the Effectiveness of Measures taken under the Convention@, drew
attention to the information on the background to the production
of the document, contained in its first three paragraphs, and
explained that the document offered some considerations upon which
the deliberations of the meeting were invited.
34. During the discussion on this item, statements
were made by the representatives of the following countries: Australia,
Cameroon, Colombia, Costa Rica, Germany, Japan, Norway, Sweden,
Switzerland and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
A statement was also made by the representative of the European
Community. The representative of the World Bank also made a statement.
35. At the 3rd session of the Working Group, held
on 3 September 1996, the Chairman introduced an informal paper
setting out elements of agenda items 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3, which it
was hoped would form the basis for a draft recommendation. The
Chairman received general comments from the floor on this informal
paper and at the 4th session of the Working Group, also on 3 September
1996, presented a revised version of the informal paper, which
was the subject of further comments by representatives.
36. At its 5th session, on 4 September 1996, the
Working Group considered the second revision of the informal paper
covering aspects of agenda items 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3. The Chairman
stressed the need to produce a set of recommendations and called
on delegates to provide input on how SBSTTA could deliver the
tasks outlined in the informal paper. Statements were made by
the representatives of a number of countries.
37. At its 7th session, on 4 September 1996, the
Working Group continued its consideration of the informal paper.
A number of representatives made statements.
38. At its 8th session, on 5 September 1996, the
Working Group considered a draft recommendation submitted by the
Chairman on the agenda item, contained in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/WG.1/CRP.1/Rev
1. The recommendation, as orally amended from the floor, was approved
for transmission to the plenary.
39. At its 5th plenary session, on 6 September 1996, the meeting considered the draft recommendation on this item contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/L.3 and adopted it, as orally amended. The text of Recommendation II/1 can be found in the annex to the present report.
Agenda item 3.4: Practical approaches for capacity-building
for taxonomy
Agenda item 3.4.1: Consider advice of the Conference
of the Parties on ways and means to overcome the current lack
of taxonomists taking into account existing initiatives and being
mindful of adopting a practical direction of taxonomy linked to
bio-prospecting and ecological research on conservation and sustainable
use of biological diversity and its components
40. At its 5th session,
on 4 September 1996, Working Group 2 took up its consideration
of this agenda item. The group had before it a note prepared by
the Secretariat, UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/5, entitled "Practical
Approaches for Capacity-Building for Taxonomy." The representative
of the Secretariat said that the note, which reviewed the current
status of taxonomic capacity, particularly in developing countries,
considered alternatives for increasing taxonomic capacity and
suggested a number of options to assist the SBSTTA in developing
its medium-term programme of work. It addressed the problem of
the lack of taxonomists, who would be needed for the national
implementation of the Convention, and described the need to adopt
a more practical direction in taxonomy linked to bio-prospecting
and ecological research on conservation and sustainable use of
its components.
41. During the discussion of the item, statements
were made by representatives of the following countries: Argentina,
Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, China, Colombia,
France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Malawi (speaking on
behalf of the African Group), Malaysia, Netherlands, New Zealand,
Nigeria, Norway, Republic of Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand,
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States
of America and Zimbabwe. Statements were also made by representatives
of the following non-governmental organizations (NGOs): BioNet-International
Consultative Group (speaking on behalf of BioNet International),
Expert Center for Taxonomic Identification (ETI), Latin American
Plant Science Network (LAPSN) and DIVERSITAS (speaking on behalf
of Systematics Agenda 2000 International).
42. At its 7th session, on 5 September 1996, the
Group considered an informal paper submitted by the Chairman,
containing elements of a draft recommendation on the item. A number
of representatives commented on the paper. At its reconvened 7th
session, the Group considered a revised informal paper on the
subject, submitted by the Chairman, and containing elements of
a draft recommendation. The Group approved it for transmission
to the plenary.
43. At its 5th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered the draft recommendation on this item,
contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/L.2 and adopted it, as orally
amended. The text of Recommendation II/2 can be found in the annex
to the present report.
Agenda item 3.5: Ways and means to promote and
facilitate access to, and transfer and development of technology,
including biotechnology
Agenda item 3.5.1: Identification of sound technologies,
including biotechnology and description of ways and means to promote
and facilitate access to, and transfer and development of these
technologies, and the role of the clearing-house mechanism
44. At its 2nd session,
on 2 September 1996, Working Group 2 considered the above agenda
item. In its deliberations, the Group had before it a note by
the Secretariat, document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/6, entitled "Ways
and means to promote and facilitate access to, and transfer and
development of technology, including biotechnology". Introducing
the note, the representative of the Secretariat explained that
it presented an overview of the key issues related to the development
and transfer of technology as it explored the main issues related
to biotechnology, and outlined the key priorities relating to
opportunities for and obstacles to the transfer of technology.
The note underscored the importance of increasing technological
capacity in developing countries and emphasized the role of government
in promoting the participation of the private sector.
45. During discussion of the item, statements were
made by the following countries: Australia, Canada, China, Colombia,
Democratic People's Republic of Korea, France, Germany, India,
Japan, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Philippines, Republic of
Korea, Switzerland, Thailand, United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland, United States of America and Zimbabwe. A
statement was also made by the representative of the United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
46. At the 3rd session of the Group, on 3 September
1996, the Chairman submitted an informal paper containing elements
of a draft recommendation on the item. A number of representatives
made general statements on the content and format of the paper.
At the 5th session of the Group, on 4 September 1996, a revised
version of the informal paper was discussed.
47. At its 6th session, on 4 September 1996, the
Group considered a draft recommendation submitted by the Chairman
on the agenda item, contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/WG.2/CRP.1.
The recommendation, as orally amended from the floor, was approved
for transmission to the plenary.
48. At its 5th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered the draft recommendation on this item,
contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/L.2 and adopted it, as orally
amended. The text of Recommendation II/3 can be found in the annex
to the present report.
Agenda item 3.6: Knowledge, innovations and practices
of indigenous and local communities
Agenda item 3.6.1: Ways and means to identify
and protect the knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous
and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles and to
compensate through the equitable sharing of the benefits arising
from the use of such knowledge, innovations and practices, in
accordance with Article 8 (j) of the Convention on Biological
Diversity
49. At its 4th session,
on 3 September 1996, Working Group 2 took up its consideration
of the above agenda item. In its deliberations the Group had before
it a note by the Secretariat, document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/7, entitled
"Knowledge, Innovations and Practices of Indigenous and Local
Communities" and an information paper from the Secretariat,
document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/Inf.3, entitled "Traditional related
Knowledge and the Convention on Biological Diversity". The
representative of the Secretariat pointed out that document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/7
updated a previous note prepared by the Interim Secretariat for
the second session of the Intergovernmental Committee on the Convention
on Biological Diversity, UNEP/CBD/IC/2/14, entitled "Farmers'
Rights and Rights of Similar Groups - The Rights of Indigenous
and Local Communities Embodying Traditional Lifestyles: Experience
and Potential for Implementation of Article 8 (j) of the Convention
on Biological Diversity". The note before the present meeting
recalled the recommendations of the Open-ended Intergovernmental
Meeting of Scientific Experts on Biological Diversity, held in
Mexico City in April 1994, and analysed the threefold provisions
of Article 8 (j). It also noted the importance and complexity
of the issues surrounding the identification of options for the
implementation of Article 8 (j) and the need to provide
appropriate guidance to Parties.
50. During the discussion of the item, statements
were made by representatives of the following countries: Argentina,
Australia, Cameroon, Canada, Colombia, Denmark, Germany, India,
Indonesia, Japan, Madagascar, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Philippines,
Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland, United States of America and Zimbabwe (speaking
on behalf of the African Group).
51. In line with the wish, expressed by many representatives,
to have a representative of a group of indigenous people address
the Working Group, an Inuk representing the Inuvialuit Game Council
made a presentation outlining the background and activities of
the Council, the Co-management Committees and the Inuvialuit Final
Agreement.
52. Statements were also made by representatives
of the following NGOs: Four Directions Council, Indigenous Peoples'
Biodiversity Network, International Alliance of Indigenous Tribal
Peoples of the Tropical Forests, and COBASE (speaking on behalf
of the International Scientific Committee on Diversity).
53. At its 7th session, on 5 September 1996, a small
informal contact group, coordinated by New Zealand, was created
by the Chairman. The small group reported back to the Working
Group. Following discussion, the Working Group approved a draft
recommendation on the item for transmission to the plenary.
54. At its 5th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered the draft recommendation on this item,
contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/L.2 and adopted it, as orally
amended. The text of Recommendation II/4 can be found in the annex
to the present report.
Agenda item 3.7: Capacity-building for biosafety
Agenda item 3.7.1: Capacity-building in relation
to safe transfer, handling and use of living modified organisms
resulting from biotechnology that may have adverse effect on the
conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of
its components
55. At its 2nd session,
on 2 September 1996, Working Group 2 considered the above item
of the agenda. In its deliberations, the Group had before it a
note by the Secretariat, document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/8, entitled:
"Capacity-building in biosafety for developing countries".
Introducing the note, the representative of the Secretariat explained
that it stressed the importance of providing a perspective on
the breadth and depth of capacity-building requirements necessary
for achieving safety in biotechnology research, development and
application. The report of the first meeting of the Open-Ended
Ad Hoc Working Group on Biosafety was also made available to the
SBSTTA for its consideration.
56. During the discussion of this issue, statements
were made by the following countries: Argentina, Austria, Canada,
Colombia, Germany, India, Indonesia, Marshall Islands, Netherlands,
New Zealand, Nigeria, Republic of Korea, Switzerland, United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America.
57. At its 6th session, on 4 September 1996, the
Chairman submitted to the Group an informal paper containing elements
of a draft recommendation on the item. A number of representatives
commented on the paper.
58. At its 7th session, on 5 September 1996, the
Group considered a draft recommendation submitted by the Chairman
on the agenda item, contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/WG.2/CRP.2.
The recommendation was approved for transmission to the plenary.
59. Prior to the approval of the draft recommendation
on this agenda item, the delegate of Antigua and Barbuda sought
a clarification on the interpretation on the last two clauses
of the first sentence of paragraph 3, namely, "the Conference
of the Parties should consider the development of guidance to
the Global Environment Facility for the provision of financial
resources to developing countries in biosafety, including the
implementation by them of the UNEP guidelines". There was
agreement by the Chair with the observations of the delegate of
Antigua and Barbuda that the purpose of the financial mechanism
was to fund the implementation of the Convention by the developing
countries, and not the biodiversity programmes of United Nations
agencies. In this regard, it was agreed that paragraph 3 does
not set a precedent for the funding of any biodiversity-related
programmes of UNEP or other United Nations agencies.
60. At its 5th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered the draft recommendation on this item,
contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/L.2 and adopted it, as orally
amended. The text of Recommendation II/5 can be found in the annex
to the present report
Agenda item 3.8: The role of the clearing-house
in promoting technical and scientific cooperation
Agenda item 3.8.1: Role of the clearing-house
mechanism in facilitating and promoting technical and scientific
cooperation in research and development related to conservation
of biological diversity and sustainable use of its components
61. At its 3rd session,
on 3 September 1996, Working Group 2 took up its consideration
of this agenda item. The group had before it a note prepared by
the Secretariat, UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/9, entitled "Role of the
Clearing-House mechanism in Facilitating and Promoting Technical
and Scientific Cooperation in Research and Development."
The representative of the Secretariat said that the note, which
addressed the progress of the pilot phase of the Clearing-House
mechanism during the past eight months, had been prepared to assist
the SBSTTA in developing its medium-term programme of work. Another
representative of the Secretariat noted the rapid evolution of
the Clearing-House mechanism since July 1996, the deadline for
the note, and stressed the need for greater emphasis on the development
of a synergized and coordinated effort among members.
62. During the discussion of the item, statements
were made by representatives of the following countries: Australia,
Austria, Cameroon, Canada, China, Colombia, Republic of Korea,
Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malawi, Malaysia, Netherlands,
Norway, Peru, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Zimbabwe. A statement
was also made by the representative of the European Community.
Statements were also made by representatives of the following
United Nations bodies: the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and
the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). A statement was
also made by the representative of the World Conservation Monitoring
Centre (WCMC).
63. At the 5th session of the Group, the Chairman
submitted an informal paper on the item, containing elements of
a draft recommendation. A number of representatives commented
on the paper.
64. At its 6th session, on 4 September 1996, the
Chairman submitted to the Group a revision of the informal paper.
Comments on the paper were made by a number of representatives.
65. At its 7th session, on 5 September 1996, the
Group considered a draft recommendation submitted by the Chairman
on the agenda item, contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/WG.2/CRP.3.
The draft recommendation, as orally amended from the floor, was
approved for transmission to the plenary.
66. With regard to the draft recommendation, concerning
support to activities by the GEF at national, regional and subregional
levels, the representative of India noted that it should be ensured
that national plans were adequately covered in their own right.
67. At its 5th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered the draft recommendation on this item,
contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/L.2 and adopted it. The text
of Recommendation II/6 can be found in the annex to the present
report.
Agenda item 3.9: Agricultural biological diversity
68. At its 3rd and 4th
sessions, held on 3 September 1996, Working Group 1 considered
the above agenda item. The representative of the Secretariat noted
that the third meeting of the Conference of the Parties would
consider agricultural biodiversity within the context of the three
objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity. In addressing
this agenda item, delegates considered document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/10,
a note by the Secretariat entitled "Agricultural Biological
Diversity", which outlined the major issues related to the
conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity,
in the context of the objectives of the Convention on Biological
Diversity, and identified options for action.
69. The representative of the Secretariat pointed
out that the five-part document underscored the importance of
making the transition to sustainable agriculture, noting that
the obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity should
reinforce and guide the work already underway in relevant international,
regional and national institutions, in farming communities and
in the private sector. He also highlighted written submissions
by the Governments of Brazil and Sweden, as contained in documents
UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/Inf.18 and Inf.20, respectively.
70. Also available for the consideration of the meeting
was the "Report on the State of the World's Plant Resources,"
a document from the Fourth International Technical Conference
on Plant Genetic Resources (held from 17 to 24 June in Leipzig),
contained in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/Inf.15.
71. During the discussion of this issue at the Working
Group's 3rd session statements were made by the representatives
of the following countries: Australia, Brazil, Colombia, Netherlands,
Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland and Zimbabwe.
72. During the discussion of the issue at the Working
Group's 4th session, statements were made by the representatives
of the following countries: Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Canada,
Central African Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Ghana, Indonesia,
Japan, New Zealand, Malawi, Morocco, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, United
States of America and Uruguay. A statement was also made by the
representative of the European Community. Statements were also
made by the representatives of the World Bank and the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The representatives
of the following NGOs also made statements: CAB International,
Third World Network, Netherlands Committee for IUCN and RAFI.
73. At its 5th session, on 4 September 1996, Working
Group 1 considered an informal paper produced by the Chairman
covering aspects of agenda item 3.9. A number of countries commented
upon the informal text. Noting that during the previous session's
discussion, there had appeared to be confusion regarding the relationship
between FAO and the Convention on Biological Diversity in the
field of agricultural biodiversity, the Chairman considered that
the former represented a leading international agency on agriculture
which the latter might draw upon in the fulfillment of its three
objectives. An open-ended Contact Group was established to draw
up recommendations.
74. At its 8th session, on 5 September 1996, the
Working Group considered a new version of the informal paper prepared
by the Chairman on the agenda item. The informal paper, as orally
amended from the floor, was approved as a draft recommendation
for transmission to the plenary.
75. Noting that, although they would not oppose the
Working Group's general consensus on the document, the representatives
of Sweden and Germany expressed their reservation regarding Section
II, "The Impacts of Agricultural Practices on Biological
Diversity", on the basis that it did not reflect the scope
and seriousness of the issues.
76. The representative of Sweden requested that the
following text be inserted verbatim into the report of the Working
Group: "The delegation of Sweden expresses reservations regarding
Section II of the Decision on Argicultural Biodiversity. It does
not reflect either the huge extent of unsustainable agricultural
practices causing degradation of agrobiodiversity, nor the scope
of such degradation, well-documented by current environmental
sciences. In the view of Sweden the assessment in section II should
have presented the adverse impacts with greater accuracy made
possible by current knowledge in the international scientific
community. In particular, the Swedish delegation would like to
highlight the huge dimension of unsustainable use and management
of soil resources leading to soil compaction, decrease and loss
of soil organic matter, and soil erosion. This development, in
combination with excessive use of agrochemicals and unsustainable
irrigation practices, is leading to large-scale losses of agricultural
biodiversity, thereby undermining long-term productivity of agricultural
ecosystems. Furthermore, well-documented extensive losses of biological
diversity in other terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems are caused
by unsustainable practices, in particular in modern industralized
agriculture. Sweden cannot accept the unscientific assessment
of sustainable intensification of agriculture in paragraph 22.
Sweden does not share the assessement in paragraph 23 that strong
efforts to preserve are being made in current agriculture. The
description of paragraph 23 is much too optimistic and is not
supported by current scientific knowledge. Finally, SBSSTA should,
in the view of Sweden, carry out a major assessment of the adverse
impacts of unsustainable agricultural practices on biological
diversity to provide for a strong scientific basis for badly needed
efforts to promote sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity."
77. At its 5th plenary session, on 6 September 1996, the meeting considered the draft recommendation on this item, contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/L.3 and adopted it. The text of Recommendation II/7 can be found in the annex to the present report.
Agenda item 3.10: Terrestrial biological diversity
78. At its 5th session,
on 4 September 1996, Working Group 1 considered the above agenda
item. The representative of the Secretariat recalled that at the
third session of the Commission on Sustainable Development, an
open-ended ad-hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) had
been established, and that the third Conference of the Parties
had adopted in decision II/9 a statement from the Convention to
the IPF and had also requested the Executive Secretary to provide
advice and information pertaining to the relationship between
indigenous and local communities and forests. That advice was
contained in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/Inf.3. Decision II/9 had
also requested the Executive Secretary to produce a background
document on the links between forests and biological diversity,
and that document was contained in UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/11, entitled
"Biological Diversity in Forests."
79. The meeting also had before it document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/12,
"Future Programme of Work for Terrestrial Biological Diversity
in Light of the Outcome of the Third Session of the Commission
on Sustainable Development," UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/Inf.6, on
the management of northern coniferous forests, and UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/Inf.7,
on Finnish forest landscapes and ecosystems.
80. Statements were made by the representatives of
the following countries: Australia, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica,
Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Indonesia, Malaysia, Malawi,
Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation,
Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland and Zaire.
81. At the 6th session of the Working Group, on 4
September 1996, further statements on the documents were made
by the representatives of the following countries: Austria, Burkina
Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, C^te d'Ivoire, Germany,
India, Japan, Norway, Pakistan, Philippines and United States
of America. Statements were also made by the reprentatives of
the following NGOs: Biodiversity Action Network, Fundaci\n Pro-Sierra
Nevada de Santa Marta and International Alliance of Indigenous
and Tribal Peoples of the Tropical Forests.
82. At the 8th session of the Working Group, on 5
September 1996, the Chairman announced that an open-ended Contact
Group had been established to work on a paper covering the agenda
item.
83. At the 9th session of the Working Group, also
on 5 September 1996, the paper prepared by the Contact Group was
discussed. A number of representatives made comments. The paper
prepared by the Contact Group, as orally amended from the floor,
was approved as a draft recommendation for transmission to the
plenary.
84. At its 5th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered the draft recommendation on this item,
contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/L.3 and adopted it. The text
of Recommendation II/8 can be found in the annex to the present
report.
Agenda item 3.11: Economic valuation of biological
diversity
Agenda item 3.11.1: Scientific, technical and
technological advice on economic valuation of biological diversity
and its components, in particular in relation to access to genetic
resources
85. At its 6th session,
on 4 September 1996, Working Group 2 took up its consideration
of this agenda item. The group had before it a note prepared by
the Secretariat, UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/13, entitled "Economic
Valuation of Biological Diversity." The representative of
the Secretariat noted that advice on the economic valuation of
biological diversity was of particular relevance to the implementation
of Articles 11 (Incentive Measures) and 15 (Access to Genetic
Resources). The note, which highlighted the strong value placed
on genetic resources in agriculture and the pharmaceutical industry,
had been prepared to assist the SBSTTA in developing its medium-term
programme of work. The representative of the Secretariat added
that the SBSTTA might wish to consider how those values might
be more fully realized through the adoption of socially and economically
sound incentive measures, and to what extent access to genetic
resources might be regulated to serve both the objectives of the
Convention and the development goals of the members.
86. The representative of Chile presented to the
Working Group the Report of the Regional Workshop on the Economic
Valuation of Biological Diversity, which had been organized by
the Government of Canada and UNEP, in cooperation with the Government
of Chile, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean
and the Canadian Museum of Nature, and held in Santiago (Chile)
from 6 to 9 May 1996 as a contribution to the implementation of
the Convention on Biological Diversity in Latin America and the
Caribbean.
87. During the discussion of the item, statements
were made by representatives of the following countries: Argentina,
Australia, Cameroon, Canada, Colombia, France, Germany, India,
Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Malawi, Malaysia, Morocco, Netherlands,
New Zealand, Nigeria (on behalf of the African Group), Norway,
Peru, South Africa, Switzerland, United States of America, Uruguay,
Zambia and Zimbabwe. A statement was also made by the representative
of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
A statement was made by the representative of the Four Directions
Council.
88. At its 7th session, on 5 September 1996, the
Chairman submitted to the Group an informal paper on the item,
containing elements of a draft recommendation. A number of representative
made comments on the paper. A revised version, submitted to the
Group at the same session was, orally amended and approved for
transmission to the plenary.
89. At its 5th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered the draft recommendation on this item,
contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/L.2 and adopted it. The text
of Recommendation II/9 can be found in the annex to the present
report.
Agenda item 3.12: Coastal and marine biological
diversity
90. At its 6th session, on 4 September 1996, Working Group 1 considered the above agenda item. The Chairman recalled that decision II/10 of the Conference of the Parties had mandated meetings of experts to examine the issues of marine and coastal biodiversity. It had been intended that the present meeting of the SBSTTA would review the results of any such meetings held to date. Owing to a number of logistical difficulties, the group had made no progress during 1996, other than the nomination of its roster of experts. He introduced an informal draft recommendation on the item. Comments on the draft recommendation were made by a number of representatives.
91. At its 7th session, on 4 September 1996, the
Working Group continued its consideration of the draft recommendation.
A number of representatives made statements.
92. At its 8th session, on 5 September 1996, the
Working Group considered a draft recommendation submitted by the
Chairman on the agenda item, contained in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/WG.1/CRP.2.
The recommendation, as orally amended from the floor, was approved
for transmission to the plenary.
93. At its 5th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered the draft recommendation on this item,
contained in document UNEP/SBSTTA/2/L.3 and adopted it. The text
of Recommendation II/10 can be found in the annex to the present
report.
AGENDA ITEM 4: REVIEW OF THE MODUS OPERANDI
OF THE SBSTTA
94. At its 3rd plenary session, on 5 September 1996,
the meeting considered the above item of its agenda. Introducing
the item, the Chairman drew attention to the note by the Secretariat
contained in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/16, entitled "Modus
Operandi of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and
Technological Advice".
95. During the discussion of the item, statements
were made by the following countries: Australia, Burkina Faso,
Cameroon, Canada, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, C^te d'Ivoire,
Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Equatorial Guinea, France,
Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Lao People's Democratic Republic,
Malawi, Malaysia, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Monaco, Netherlands,
New Zealand, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Samoa, Switzerland,
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United
States of America. A statement was also made by the representative
of Zimbabwe Trust.
96. A number of representatives noted the importance
of SBSTTA managing its workload effectively. It was suggested
that this might be done, inter alia, by prioritization of issues
to be dealt with by SBSTTA, or by SBSTTA adopting a thematic approach
at its meetings.
97. The need for intersessional work to enhance the
work of SBSTTA was noted by a number of representatives. Some
representatives, however, expressed concern at the possible proliferation
of intersessional groups and at the capacity of developing-country
Parties to participate in those groups. The need to avoid undue
duplication of work and to coordinate the work of SBSTTA with
work being undertaken by other bodies was stressed by a number
of representatives.
98. A number of representatives, referring to the
documentation situation of the current meeting, stressed the need
for documentation for the SBSTTA to be ready well in advance --
preferably six weeks in advance -- of its meetings, in the working
languages of SBSTTA. One representative voiced his concern over
the statements that had been made concerning late and untranslated
documentation for the current meeting. He pointed out that the
Secretariat had established itself in Montreal only earlier in
the year and had not yet reached critical mass in terms of recruitment
of required staff. He sympathized with the difficulties the Secretariat
had faced and expressed hope that the situation would soon be
normalized.
99. Several representatives expressed the view that
Spanish should be added to the working languages of the SBSTTA
to facilitate effective participation.
100. After the discussion on the item at the 3rd
plenary session, it was decided to establish a Group of Friends
of the Chairman to draw up a draft recommendation on the item
and to report back to the meeting at a future time.
101. At its 4th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered a draft recommendation on the modus
operandi, as prepared by the Group of the Friends of the Chairman
and as contained in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/CRP.1. A small
drafting group was created to resolve some difficulties within
the text.
102. Statements were made by representatives of the
following countries: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia,
Austria, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Canada, China, Colombia, Dominica,
Germany, Hungary, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand,
Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland and United States of America. The representative
of the European Community also made a statement.
103. The draft recommendation, as orally amended
from the floor, was adopted by plenary, on the understanding that
two further paragraphs of text would be added. The document was
subsequently reissued and made available to the plenary as UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/CRP.1/REV.1.
104. The representative of Mexico, speaking on behalf
of Latin America and Spain, requested that, given the proportion
of Spanish-speaking Parties present in the SBSTTA, Spanish be
included as an official working language in its meetings.
105. The representative of China underscored his delegation's concerns regarding languages for the meetings.
106. The representative of Hungary, speaking on behalf
of the Eastern European Group, noted that many scientists from
Russian-speaking countries could not participate fully in the
SBSTTA meetings.
107. The representative of New Zealand requested
that the Secretariat prepare an information note for consideration
by the Conference of the Parties on the wider implications, financial
and otherwise, of expanding the working languages of the SBSTTA.
108. The representatives of Antigua and Barbuda,
Dominica and Jamaica recorded their concerns regarding the transitional
arrangements.
109. The Chairman stated that two additional points
regarding working language and transitional arrangements would
be reflected in the annexes to the recommendation for consideration
at the next meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
110. At its 5th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered a revised version of the draft recommendation
on the modus operandi, contained on document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/CRP.1/Rev.1.
111. The draft recommendation, as orally amended,
was adopted. The text of Recommendation II/11 can be found in
the annex to the present report.
112. The representative of Monaco registered her
delegation's dismay regarding the delay in receiving documentation
in French, especially since this was one of the agreed working
language of the SBSTTA.
AGENDA ITEM 5: REVIEW OF THE MEDIUM-TERM PROGRAMME
OF WORK OF THE SBSTTA, 1955-1997
113. At its 3rd plenary session, on 5 September 1996,
the meeting considered the above item of its agenda. Introducing
the item, the Chairman drew attention to a note by the Secretariat
contained in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/17, entitled "Review
of the Medium-term Programme of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific,
Technical and Technological Advice, 1995-1997".
114. During the discussion of this item, statements
were made by the representatives of the following countries: Australia,
Austria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Colombia, Germany, India, Indonesia,
Malawi, Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland and United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
115. At the suggestion of the Chairman, the meeting
combined its consideration of the medium-term programme of work
with its consideration of the draft provisional agenda.
AGENDA ITEM 6: DRAFT PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE THIRD
MEETING OF THE SBSTTA
116. At its 3rd plenary session, on 5 September 1996,
the meeting considered the above item of its agenda. Introducing
the item, the Chairman drew attention to a note by the Secretariat
contained in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/18, setting out a draft
provisional agenda for the third meeting of the SBSTTA. He said
that much of the previous discussion under other agenda items
clearly related to the content of the agenda of the next meeting,
including the recommendations being formulated in the working
groups, and would be reflected in it.
117. During the discussion of this item, statements
were made by the representatives of the following countries: Australia,
Austria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Colombia, Germany, India, Indonesia,
Malawi, Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland and United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
118. At its 4th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered a revised draft agenda, contained in document
UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/CRP.2.
119. During the discussion of this revised agenda,
statements were made by the representatives of the following countries:
Argentina, Australia, Austria, India and Netherlands.
120. At its 6th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting considered a revised version of the draft provisional
agenda, contained in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/CRP.2/Rev.1. The
revised draft agenda, as orally amended, was adopted. The text
of Recommendation II/12 is contained in the annex to the present
report.
AGENDA ITEM 7: DATE AND VENUE OF THE THIRD MEETING
121. At its 7th session, on 6 September 1996, the
meeting decided that the third meeting of the SBSTTA would be
held in Montreal, provisionally, from 14 to 18 September
1997. As it had been decided that future meeting of the SBSTTA
should take place sufficiently in advance of the meeting of the
Conference of the Parties, the dates of the 1997 meeting might
be amended in the light of the dates selected for the third meeting
of the Conference of the Parties.
AGENDA ITEM 8: OTHER MATTERS
122. The African Group desired the following statement
to be recorded in the report of the meeting:
"1. The SBSTTA should request the Conference
of the Parties to enhance financial support to the developing
countries to enable at least two representatives to attend the
SBSTTA and other related meetings, to ensure effective representation
given the dual nature of the working groups.
"2. In order for Parties representing developing
countries in Africa to effectively implement the UNEP Guidelines
on Safety in Biotechnology, the African Group would like to suggest
that the Conference of the Parties provide financial support to
these developing countries for the implementation of the Guidelines
through capacity-building and institutional enhancement before
the Protocol is put in place or finalized.
"3. The African Group would also wish to request
the Secretariat and the SBSTTA Chairman to take note of the rules
of procedure contained in document UNEP/CBD/COP/1/17 and Article
23 paragraph 5 regarding observers to Convention meetings. It
will be important that the rules of procedure at points 6 and
7 in the document being referred to are adhered to when conducting
our business at these meetings. For example, what are the limits
on a non-party, or an observer in the plenary, working groups,
etc? The African Group urges the Secretariat to note this.
"4. The African Group would like to thank the
Convention for supporting our Governments to enable us to attend
this important meeting here in Montreal. However, we request that
something should be done to facilitate the smooth and fast acquisition
of visas for Parties who come to attend meetings to countries
which require visas for that purpose."
123. Through the representative of the African Group,
the Malawi delegation thanked the Parties for the confidence and
trust demonstrated by nominating Malawi, in the person of Prof.
James H. Seyani, to the first chairmanship of the SBSTTA. With
the chairmanship now handed over to Mr. Peter Schei of Norway,
the Malawi delegation noted that it would leave Montreal with
pride and would inform the Head of State of the same.
AGENDA ITEM 9: ADOPTION OF THE REPORT
124. At its 6th plenary session, on 6 September 1996,
the meeting adopted its report on the basis of documents UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/L.1
and Add.1, UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/L.2 and UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/L.3 and
Corr.1. It was agreed that the Secretariat and the Rapporteur
would be entrusted with the finalization of the report of the
last part of the meeting.
AGENDA ITEM 10: CLOSURE OF THE MEETING
125. After the customary exchange of courtesies, the Chairman declared the meeting closed at 6 p.m. on Friday, 6 September 1996.
ANNEX
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SBSTTA AT ITS SECOND MEETING
Recommendation II/1
AGENDA ITEMS 3.1: ASSESSMENT OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY AND METHODOLOGIES FOR FUTURE ASSESSMENTS
3.2: IDENTIFICATION, MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF COMPONENTS OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY AND OF PROCESSES THAT HAVE ADVERSE IMPACTS
and 3.3: REVIEW AND PROMOTION OF INDICATORS OF BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY
1. General advice
1. There was broad agreement that agenda items 3.1,
3.2 and 3.3 were inextricably interlinked and should therefore
be considered together. It was acknowledged that the subject matter
dealt with was highly complex and central to the Convention, particularly
with respect to Article 7 but also to other Articles such as 6,
8, 16, 25 and 26. The background documents prepared by the Secretariat
(documents UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/2, UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/3, UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/4)
were generally considered to contain useful approaches to dealing
with these issues.
2. The importance of capacity-building, development
and enhancement of institutions (and concomitant financial support)
in assisting developing countries in all aspect of their assessments
was repeatedly emphasized.
3. The role the clearing-house mechanism should have
in improving the flow of information was stressed. The possible
need to develop interim measures within the clearing-house mechanism
was raised.
4. It was noted that improvement of taxonomic knowledge
was fundamental to the development of indicators and assessments.
5. It was emphasized that the assessment of biological
diversity was ultimately the responsibility of each Party, so
that national reporting should be the focus of assessment efforts.
When necessary, regional bodies should be called upon to provide
information to facilitate the assessment of biological diversity
beyond national jurisdictions. The question of how the Secretariat
and the SBSTTA would deal with national reports when they began
to arrive was raised.
6. There was wide agreement that assessments should
be: transparent; based on scientific principles; based initially
on existing knowledge; focused; pragmatic; cost-effective; within
a socio-economic context; management- or policy-oriented. Indicators
were recognized as being a vital aspect of such assessments with
the pressure-state-response framework being particularly useful.
A distinction was made between assessments of biological diversity
itself and the assessment of the state of knowledge of biological
diversity. The former was relevant principally at national level,
the latter principally at regional and global levels.
7. Calls were made for development and refinement
of guidelines for national reporting. The UNEP country studies
guidelines were mentioned in this context. The desirability of
harmonization was emphasized as this would allow comparisons with
similar ecosystems in different countries to be made, and also
facilitate the development of overviews such as the Global Biodiversity
Outlook. The need to develop a core set of indicators for national
reporting which should be easily and widely measurable and policy-relevant
was raised. Initially, emphasis should be laid on indicators already
known to be successful. Traditional knowledge could play a valuable
role in the development of indicators, as well as in monitoring
and assessment.
8. However, the need for flexibility in approach
to assessment, national reporting and indicator development in
response to widely varying ecological conditions and national
capacities was repeatedly raised. Regional or ecosystem approaches
to the development of guidelines and indicators were widely advocated
and it was noted that there was unlikely ever to be any one optimum
method for assessment. The annex to the document prepared by the
Secretariat (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/2) may be useful in this regard
as it sets out a series of methodologies, allowing choice of the
most appropriate for a given set of circumstances.
9. A two-track approach to assessment and indicator
development was suggested. In the short term actual assessments
should be carried out of sectors and components of biological
diversity which were already reasonably well known and understood;
longer-term programmes involving research and capacity-building
should be developed in areas needing advances in knowledge.
10. The distinction was made between inventorying
and assessment or monitoring of biological diversity. The latter
must be related to human impacts. It was also noted that, although
in themselves costly and difficult processes, inventories of biological
diversity were more straightforward than assessment of impacts
on and changes to biological diversity. The latter required both
improved knowledge and long-term monitoring. Biosphere reserves
were noted as being potentially extremely valuable in the latter
regard.
11. Coordination with related international conventions
and processes was considered of great importance. This should
serve to minimize duplication of effort. In addition, experience
gained in reporting to these could be used to develop guidelines
for reporting and indicator development within the remit of the
Convention on Biological Diversity.
12. The desirability of preparing thematic assessments
in line with the major themes and specific needs of the Convention
was underlined. In particular freshwater ecosystems were widely
recognized as being in urgent need of global assessment. Calls
for assessment of coastal and marine, grassland and wetland ecosystems,
in addition to those others mentioned in the Secretariat document
(UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/2), were also made.
13. The importance of assessing biological diversity
in agricultural systems was widely acknowledged. It was stressed
that such an assessment should take into account the work of the
FAO. It was noted that there exists an interdependence between
sustaining biological diversity and sustaining agriculture. It
was also recognized that agricultural practices may affect biological
diversity in agricultural ecosystems in both negative and positive
ways and that when individual activities of many producers are
considered in aggregate, the potential for significant offsite
impacts on biological diversity exists. Because agriculture takes
place across landscapes that often include other types of land-use,
an improved understanding of the role of agriculture in the overall
context of a region is needed.
14. It was also stressed that assessments of the
status of biological diversity should, as a matter of priority,
be incorporated into regional and global resource assessments
as the basis for management decisions in sectors which had serious
impacts on the status of biological diversity, particularly those
concerning marine, agricultural and forest ecosystems. This would
entail cooperation with agencies and organizations responsible
for regional and global resource assessments, such as the FAO,
and should operate with relevant conventions such as that covering
straddling and highly migratory fish stocks.
15. It was noted that coordinated thematic assessments by countries would allow development of thematic overviews within the Global Biodiversity Outlook.
16. The proposed framework of processes and categories
of activities that are or are likely to have significant adverse
impacts on biological diversity (paragraphs 39-41 of document
UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/3) received general support. A number of specific
recommendations for amendment or modification were made. Radioactive
contaminants were identified as an additional proximate threat,
improper land management was identified as an activity having
adverse effects on biological diversity, and national policy failure
was considered an additional utimate cause of threats. In addition,
it was noted that consumptive use of wild species could be a contribution
to conservation. It was suggested that assessments should be carried
out using this framework to set priorities, it being acknowledged
that these priorities would differ in different countries.
17. Some form of intersessional activity (for example
a liaison group or informal working group) was considered appropriate
to examine issues such as development of guidelines for national
reporting and a review of indicator initiatives. It was also suggested
that indicators and monitoring should be considered together as
a standing item on the agenda of the SBSTTA.
2. Conclusions and recommendations
18. The SBSTTA recognizes the vital importance of
monitoring and assessment of biological diversity, particularly
with regard to Article 7 of the Convention, and further recognizes
that the primary responsibility for undertaken monitoring and
assessment of biological diversity lies with individual Parties.
19. The SBSTTA advocates a two-track approach to
assessment and indicator development. In the short term, actual
assessment should be carried out of sectors and components of
biological diversity which were already reasonably well-known
and understood. Use should, in particular, be made of indicators
known to be operational. Longer-term programmes involving research
and capacity-building should be developed in areas needing advances
in knowledge.
2.1. Priority tasks
20. The SBSTTA considered that the following tasks
should be accorded a high priority:
(i) Enhancing capacity-building, strengthening of
institutions and funding in developing countries to carry out
identification, monitoring and assessment within the remit of
the Convention.
(ii) Development of the clearing-house mechanism
to improve the flow of information both from national reporting
and from the international scientific community.
(iii) Development and refinement of national guidelines
to include: assessment and monitoring methodologies; indicators;
thematic approaches; definition and clarification of terms; recommendations
for harmonization.
(iv) Provision of a critical review of methodologies
for inventory and assessment along the lines of that provided
in Annex 1 of document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/2.
(v) Development of a core set of indicators for
national reports. Such indicators should in the first instance
be based on those which are known to be operational.
(vi) Development of indicators in thematic areas
important to the Convention, particularly coastal and marine ecosystems
(including mangroves), agricultural biological diversity, forests
and freshwater ecosystems.
(vii) Development of an indicative framework of
processes and categories of activities that are or are likely
to have significant adverse impacts on biological diversity.
(viii) Development of methods to strengthen links
between natural resource assessments and assessments of biological
diversity by introducing biological diversity dimensions into
resource assessments, including assessments of forests, land resources,
soils and marine living resources.
21. The SBSTTA noted that development of a core set
of indicators would entail a review of current approaches to indicator
development and development of indicators in thematic areas important
to the Convention.
22. The SBSTTA considered that the following tasks
were also important:
(i) Development of regional- or ecosystem-based
guidelines for assessments.
(ii) Preparation of thematic assessments of knowledge
and status of biological diversity on one or more of the following
ecosystems: freshwater; coastal and marine; forests and woodlands;
montane systems; rangelands, arid and semi-arid lands; grasslands;
wetlands; agricultural systems.
(iii) Establishment of the costs and benefits of
the conservation of biological diversity and its sustainable use.
(iv) Assistance in preparation of the Global Biodiversity
Outlook.
(v) Elaboration and further interpretation of the
terms in Annex I of the Convention, as discussed in detail in
document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/3.
(vi) Development of a review of methods for monitoring
activities which have or may have adverse impacts on biological
diversity, particularly with regard to pressure indicators and
to the socio-economic context of the use of biological diversity
as well as the impact from technology including biotechnology.
Such a review should include options for mitigating the effects
of these activities.
2.2. Proposed specific recommendations
23. In response to these priorities, the SBSTTA recommends
to the Conference of the Parties that the Executive Secretary
be requested to produce in consultation with a liaison or expert
group, and for consideration by the next SBSTTA:
(i) A guideline report to assist Parties in addressing
these issues. Such a report should contain an elaboration of assessment
methodologies for meeting the requirements of the Convention,
taking into account the contents of those national reports already
prepared and reports to other conventions and international processes.
Such a report should also contain: information on indicators and
monitoring techniques; definitions and clarification of terms
and recommendations for harmonisation. Preparation of the guidelines
should not delay production of national reports already in progress.
(ii) A list of options for consideration by the
SBSTTA for capacity-building in developing countries in the application
of guidelines and indicators for subsequent national reports.
(iii) A listing of current approaches to indicator
development to be tabled at the next meeting of the SBSTTA and
recommendations for a preliminary core set of indicators of biological
diversity, particularly those related to threats.
24. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of
the Parties request that any guidelines or other products so produced
be peer-reviewed by a roster of experts and competent institutions.
25. The SBSTTA also recommends to the Conference
of the Parties that the Executive Secretary be requested to initiate
consultation with other regional and global organizations, particularly
the FAO, involved in assessments of biological resources within
relevant economic sectors, to attempt to ensure that biological
diversity is included in resource assessments undertaken by these
regional and global organizations with the aim of influencing
management decisions.
26. In view of the complexity of these issues and
their central importance in the implementation of the Convention,
the SBSTTA recommends that indicators, assessment and monitoring
should be considered together as a standing item on the agenda
of the SBSTTA.
Recommendation II/2
AGENDA ITEM 3.4: PRACTICAL APPROACHES FOR CAPACITY-BUILDING
FOR TAXONOMY
The SBSTTA,
Recalling paragraph 7 of decision II/8, which
requested the second meeting of the SBSTTA to address the issue
of the lack of taxonomists that are required for Parties to implement
the Convention and to advise the Conference of the Parties at
its third meeting on ways and means to overcome this problem,
taking into account existing studies and ongoing initiatives while
adopting more practical direction of taxonomy linked to bio-prospecting
and ecological research on conservation and sustainable use of
biological diversity and its components;
Recognizing that biological collections are
the basis of taxonomy and are also sources of genetic resources.
Having examined the note by the Secretariat
(UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/5) and finding an extraordinary level of agreement
that enhanced taxonomic capacity is a sine qua non for
the implementation of the Convention;
Recommends that the Conference of the Parties
consider the following:
1. There is a scarcity of taxonomists, taxonomic
collections, and institutional facilities, and there is a need
to take measures to alleviate this situation worldwide, to facilitate
and assist countries in implementing the Convention on Biological
Diversity. In particular, national institutions and regional and
subregional networks should be established or strengthened and
linkages enhanced with taxonomic institutions in developing and
developed countries. In strengthening the taxonomic base, consideration
must be given to the information needs for bio-prospecting, habitat
conservation, sustainable agriculture and the sustainable utilization
of biological resources.
2. Capacity-building for taxonomy should be linked
to the effective implementation of the Convention on Biological
Diversity, particularly the national identification of areas of
high diversity; improving the understanding of ecosystem functioning;
giving priority to threatened taxa, taxa that are or may be of
value to humanity, and those with potential use as biological
indicators for conservation and sustainable use of biological
diversity.
3. Development of guidelines and programme priorities
for funding, including for the financial mechanism under the Convention,
should take account of the specific needs for capacity-building
in taxonomy to serve areas such as bio-prospecting, habitat conservation
and the sustainable use of biological diversity. Such support
should recognize the need for adequate, long-term housing of collections
and records and long-term research.
4. For new taxonomists to be recruited, there is
a need to provide employment opportunities. It is urgent that
Parties take this need into consideration and integrate it into
the programme of capacity-building.
5. Where appropriate, national taxonomic needs assessment
and action plans should be developed by setting national priorities,
mobilizing available institutional resources, and identifying
available funds. Countries could benefit from regional and subregional
collaboration.
6. The importance of establishing regional and subregional
training programmes was recognized. Attention should also be given
to the training of specialists, parataxonomists, and technicians
in this field. The field of taxonomy must be integrated with training
activities such as biological monitoring and assessments. Maximum
use should be made of existing institutions and those organizations
active in these fields.
7. There is an urgent need to make the information
on existing taxonomic knowledge, including information about the
taxa in worldwide collections, available to countries of origin.
8. Taxonomic information to assist capacity-building
in taxonomy should be included within the clearing-house mechanism.
The taxonomic work embodied in existing archives and inventories,
field guides and publications needs to be updated and readily
accessible through worldwide services and the duplication of work
already conducted should be avoided. The dissemination of information
should further the objectives of the Convention and be linked
to user needs. This sharing of information will require greater
international collaboration. It should also be recognized that
traditional taxonomic systems offer a valuable perspective on
biological diversity and should be considered part of the total
taxonomic knowledge base at national, regional and subregional
levels.
9. Since taxonomy generally involves the use of biological
collections, those concerned should consider the adoption of mutually
agreed upon material transfer agreements or equivalent instruments
in accordance with the provisions of the Convention on Biological
Diversity for exchange of biological specimens and information
relating to them.
10. The Conference of the Parties should consider
instructing the Global Environment Facility to support a Global
Taxonomy Initiative, providing the necessary funds for the following
actions related to capacity-building in taxonomy:
(a) developing national, regional and subregional
training programmes;
(b) strengthening reference collections in countries or origin including, where appropriate, the exchange of paratypes on mutually agreed upon terms;
(c) making information housed in collections worldwide
and the taxonomy based on them available to the countries of origin;
(d) producing and distributing regional taxonomic
guides;
(e) strengthening infrastructure for biological
collections in countries of origin, and the transfer of modern
technologies for taxonomic research and capacity-building; and
(f) disseminating taxonomic information worldwide,
inter alia by the clearing-house mechanism.
Recommendation II/3
AGENDA ITEM 3.5: WAYS AND MEANS TO PROMOTEAND FACILITATE ACCESS TO,
AND TRANSFER AND DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNOLOGY, INCLUDING
BIOTECHNOLOGY
The SBSTTA,
Recalling the relevant provisions of the
Convention and, in particular, Article 25, paragraph 2 (c)
and Article 20, paragraph 4;
Having examined the note produced by the
Secretariat (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/6) and concluded that it met the
terms of decision II/4 of the Conference of the Parties, recommends
to the Conference of the Parties that:
(a) The work of the SBSTTA on access to and transfer
of technology should now adopt an integrated approach. It should
be conducted within sectoral themes related to the priority issues
under the programme of work of the SBSTTA, for example technologies
relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of, or making
use of, marine biological diversity or agricultural biological
diversity.
(b) The future work of the SBSTTA on access to and
transfer of technologies should examine technologies that do not
cause significant damage to the environment and are: (i) relevant
to the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity
and that (ii) make use of genetic resources, pursuant to Article
16 (1) of the Convention. In this respect, the role of the financial
mechanism to facilitate the transfer of technology to developing
countries should be explored.
(c) The work of the SBSTTA on technologies should
examine these categories of technology in the context of the three
objectives of the Convention, and should emphasize the importance
of the third objective, namely the fair and equitable sharing
of the benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources.
(d) The identification of appropriate technologies
relevant to the conservation and sustainable utilization of biological
diversity should be based on an assessment, at the national level,
of technological needs in the Parties, and should focus, inter
alia, on means of gaining economic and commercial value from genetic
resources.
(e) The SBSTTA should consider ways and means to
encourage the greater involvement of the private sector in its
work on access to and transfer of technologies by all Parties,
particularly by examining options for incentive mechanisms. The
Conference of the Parties should encourage all Parties to facilitate
the transfer of technologies from the private sector.
(f) The Clearing-House mechanism should facilitate
the sharing of information and experiences about technological
innovation available for Governments to fulfil their obligations
under the Convention.
Recommendation II/4
AGENDA ITEM 3.6: KNOWLEDGE INNOVATIONS AND PRACTICES
OF INDIGENOUS AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES
The SBSTTA,
1. Recognizes the importance of addressing
the issue of knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous
and local communities, and its importance for the implementation
of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
2. Encourages the Chairman of Working Group
2 to prepare a paper reflecting the diverse views and suggestions
discussed during the second meeting of the SBSTTA in time for
the next meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
3. Encourages the production and distribution,
by the groups representing local and indigenous communities participating
in the meeting of the SBSTTA, of information on their views and
recommendations on the implementation on Article 8 (j).
4. Recommends that the Conference of the Parties
request specific advice from the SBSTTA on any technical and scientific
issues relating to the implementation of Article 8(j).
5. Urges that the indigenous knowledge post
within the Secretariat be filled as soon as possible.
Recommendation II/5
AGENDA ITEM 3.7: CAPACITY-BUILDING FOR BIOSAFETY
The SBSTTA,
Recalling decision II/5 of the Conference
of Parties that capacity- building related to biosafety was recognized
as an area of priority requiring global attention as an element
that will facilitate the effective implementation of any biosafety
regulations, guidelines or future agreements on biosafety;
Recalling also decision II/5 of the Conference
of Parties that established an Open-ended Ad Hoc Working Group
on a Protocol for Biosafety, which held its first meeting from
22 to 26 July 1996 in Aarhus, Denmark, and its report contained
in document UNEP/CBD/COP/3/24;
Having examined the Note by the Secretariat (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/8)
and the report of the first meeting of the Open-ended Ad Hoc Working
Group;
Recommends the following for the consideration of the Conference of Parties:
1. It is necessary to avoid duplication between the
work of the SBSTTA and the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group. The
SBSTTA offers full support and will only provide input into the
work of the Ad Hoc Working Group upon request;
2. The UNEP International Technical Guidelines for
Biosafety in Biotechnology represent a useful tool with respect
to capacity-building and should not preempt the work of the protocol
on biosafety. The guidelines can be used as an interim measure
in view of the development of a biosafety protocol and to complement
it after its completion and in the course of its implementation
for the purpose of facilitating national capacities for risk assessment
and risk management, adequate information systems, and to develop,
through training, expert resources in the area of biotechnology.
3. Recognizing the importance of funding for capacity-building
in biosafety (including scientific capacity and impact assessment)
and considering its cross-sectoral nature, the Conference of Parties
should consider the development of guidance to the Global Environment
Facility for the provision of financial resources to developing
countries in biosafety, including the implementation by them of
the UNEP Guidelines. Furthermore, the Conference of Parties should
encourage funding within programmes from organizations such as
UNEP, the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations
Industrial Development Programme, World Health Organization, the
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and other
multilateral and bilateral sources, in the priority areas identified
by the Conference of Parties;
4. Capacity-building for biosafety should also be
discussed in conjunction with the issues of technology transfer,
risk assessment and risk management in order to ensure the safe
use of the products of biotechnology; and
5. Specific information related to biosafety capacity-building
should be included within the clearing-house mechanism as described
in decision II/3.
Recommendation II/6
AGENDA ITEM 3.8: THE ROLE OF THE CLEARING-HOUSE MECHANISM
IN PROMOTING TECHNICAL AND SCIENTIFIC COOPERATION
The SBSTTA,
Recalling decision I/3 of the Conference
of Parties that a clearing-house mechanism should be established
in accordance with Article 18, paragraph 3 of the Convention to
promote and facilitate technical and scientific cooperation;
Recalling also decision II/3 of the Conference
of Parties on the development of the clearing-house mechanism
through the establishment of a pilot phase for 1996-1997 and related
activities to promote technical and scientific cooperation;
Having examined the Note by the Secretariat
(UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/9) which emphasizes the main features of the
Operational Framework of the pilot phase of the clearing-house
mechanism: information linking and organization, visualization
and the decision support function;
Noting the recent developments among the
different active partners, and also noting the following:
1. Technical and scientific cooperation on all aspects
of biological diversity, including taxonomy and transfer of technology,
are crucial to ensuring the capacity of the clearing-house mechanism
to play an important role for the implementation of the Convention;
2. The need for the clearing-house mechanism to be clearly focused on the implementation of the Convention;
3. The need for the clearing-house mechanism activities
to include information exchange modalities additional to the Internet
to ensure the participation of Parties without Internet access;
4. The need for capacity-building for the purposes
of the clearing-house mechanism in developing countries, including
training on information systems technologies that will allow developing
countries to take advantage of the recent developments in electronic
communication, including the Internet;
5. The advantages of pilot projects focused on priority
areas identified by the Conference of Parties which would enable
developing countries to begin to implement the main features of
the pilot phase of the clearing-house mechanism;
Recommends to the Conference of Parties that
it
1. Request the Global Environment Facility to support
the activities in paragraphs 4 and 5 above as critical components
in the implementation of the clearing-house mechanism at the national,
subregional and regional levels, including in the pilot phase.
2. Request the Secretariat to facilitate regional
workshops with a view to clearly defining country and regional-level
scientific and technical information needs for the implementation
of the Convention. The workshops could also review ventures of
scientific and technical cooperation furthering the objectives
of the Convention to identify the ways in which the clearing-house
mechanism can best facilitate such cooperation. In view of the
Conference of Parties budget decision it will be necessary to
encourage voluntary contributions to enable the regional workshops.
3. Recognize the key characteristics of the clearing-house
mechanism, i.e. that it should be compatible with national capacities,
needs-driven, decentralized in nature, provide access to metadata,
provide support to the decision-making process, and involve the
private sector.
4. Recognize that ownership and control of all information remain with the providers, respecting the rights of countries of origin and of indigenous and local communities.
5. Endorse the proposal of the Secretariat for the
publication of a clearing-house mechanism newsletter.
6. Ensure that the clearing-house mechanism is helped
in its functioning by an informal advisory committee, constituted
and coordinated by the Executive Secretary in a transparent manner,
which will guide and integrate the development of the pilot phase
activities and ensure that all Parties can participate in the
pilot phase of the clearing-house mechanism.
7. Focus the work of the clearing-house mechanism
at the national level on providing relevant information linkages
to the National Focal Points and relevant thematic and international
agencies, in order to facilitate the fair and equitable sharing
of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources.
Linkages to patent offices in each country for up-to-date information
on new patent registrations and patents in the public domain provide
an example of one mechanism.
8. Focus the work of the clearing-house mechanism
at the international level on providing thematic focal points
for linking to the activities at the national and regional level.
9. Recognize that close cooperation is needed with
other conventions and agreements, and call for the Secretariat
to identify those activities and organizations which could support
the clearing-house mechanism.
10. Recognize the role of the Secretariat to coordinate
the successful implementation of the clearing-house mechanism,
and recommend that the clearing-house mechanism posts within the
Secretariat should be filled as soon as possible.
Recommendation II/7
AGENDA ITEM 3.9: AGRICULTURAL BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
ADVISORY STATEMENT
I. IMPORTANCE OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY TO AGRICULTURE
1. The new challenge for agriculture in the expanding
global economy is to achieve greater stability and productivity
on a sustainable basis, by introducing technologies and management
practices that would ensure a healthy environment, stability in
production, economic efficiency, and equitable sharing of social
benefits. Biological diversity conservation and sustainable use
is a non-detachable part of the concept of sustainability.
2. An understanding of the dynamic evolutionary and
environmental processes which shape and influence agricultural
biodiversity is fundamental to improving sustainable management
and conservation of agricultural ecosystems. Improved understanding
of the impacts, either positive or negative, of agricultural practices,
will depend upon the contributions of science and scientists,
including traditional knowledge.
a. Socio-cultural Importance
(i) Food Security and Poverty Alleviation
3. The conservation and sustainable utilization of
agricultural biological diversity makes a key contribution to
food security and poverty alleviation, through its application
to improving agricultural productivity.
(ii) Farmers' Knowledge
4. Actual and potential knowledge about local agricultural
ecosystems generated by farmer communities is an important key
to optimizing the management of those agricultural ecosystems.
Much of the agricultural practices and knowledge are performed
and maintained by women in local societies in many regions of
the world. The role of women for maintaining those skills and
knowledge is of fundamental importance.
b. Economic Importance
(i) Productivity
5. All domesticated crops and animals result from
human management of biological diversity. The adaptation of agricultural
biological diversity to different environments and uses has allowed
farmers to respond to new challenges for maintaining and increasing
productivity.
(ii) Biocontrol organisms
6. Biological diversity provides a reservoir of biological control organisms that can either naturally control pests or be used in integrated pest management, resulting in a reduction in the use of pesticides while maintaining high yields.
(iii) Genetic adaptation to biotic and abiotic stresses
7. Traditional landraces of crops and livestock and
wild species of plants and animals are a source of genetic variability
for the maintenance and recovery of resistant traits.
(iv) Insect Pollinators
8. A large proportion of crops depend on pollination
for good yield. It has been reported that one in every three mouthfuls
of food we eat depends on pollination by insects and other animals
to reach our kitchen tables.
(v) Soil biological diversity
9. The biological diversity of the soil ecosystem
is a prerequisite and a vehicle for nutrient circulation within
agricultural ecosystems. Related to this is a number of mutualistic
interactions where soil biota are involved, e.g. earthworms and
mycorrhizal functioning. The long-term productivity of the agricultural
ecosystem is directly dependent upon the integrity and function
of the soil=s biological diversity. It should be noted, however,
that the knowledge of the soil biota is very incomplete.
10. Soil organisms and micro-organisms respond to
the maintenance of organic matter of decomposition, nutrient cycling,
soil structure, water balance, and fertility of soils.
(vi) Market responsiveness
11. Diversified crops are a protection against uncertainties
in the market, especially for less capitalized growers.
12. Biological diversity is adding to the value and
variation of cultivated crops and offering new opportunities to
farmers.
(vii) New species of economic importance
13. New species are continuously being added to our
list of economically cultivated crops.
c. Environmental Importance
(i) Natural cycles/Life support
14. Living organisms play an important role in the
resilience of all natural processes (life support). They are essential
agents for nitrogen, carbon, energy and water cycles, inter
alia, and therefore the species composition and their relationship
may affect functioning and yields of agricultural ecosystems.
(ii) Wildlife management
15. Farmers all over the world have managed a variety
of wild species and habitats which benefit the sustainability
of agricultural ecosystems.
(iii) Buffer against perturbation
16. A diverse environment offers a shield for agricultural
ecosystems against perturbations, natural or manmade. The diversity
of species and habitats confer alternative structures and functions,
contributing to the resilience of agricultural ecosystems under
environmental pressure.
II. THE IMPACTS OF AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES ON BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY
17. Agricultural production utilizes natural resources
of diverse ecosystems worldwide and is the economic activity most
representative as far as extension of land is concerned - nearly
one third of the world=s land area is used for food production.
As a consequence, many adverse effects may occur on biological
diversity at on- and off-farm levels. Most of the world biological
diversity on land is harboured by areas under exploitation by
humans, so conserving biological diversity implies improving the
ways agricultural ecosystems are managed.
18. Different agricultural practices lead to diverse
impacts upon biological diversity. These impacts occur on ecosystem,
species and genetic levels.
19. Unsustainable agricultural practices have resulted
in the degradation of habitats by destruction of biotic and abiotic
resources as well as threats to the natural resource base to agriculture,
and socio-economic problems created by destruction of the local
resource basis.
20. Inappropriate reliance on monoculture, over-mechanization,
and misuse of agricultural chemicals diminishes the diversity
of fauna, flora and micro-organisms, including beneficial organisms.
Those practices normally lead to a simplification of the components
of the environment and to unstable production systems. In the
same way, expansion of agriculture to frontier areas, including
forest, savannas, wetlands, mountains, and aridlands, combined
with overgrazing, and inadequate crop management and pest control
strategies contribute to degradation of biological diversity,
as well as to the loss of cultural diversity of traditional communities.
21. The world is changing rapidly in modern times,
and agriculture along with it. The impacts of today=s agricultural
practices upon biological diversity are not all well known, neither
in the present nor if they are extrapolated into the future. Agriculture
has a history of over 10,000 years. The time perspectives for
sustainability of agriculture ecosystems must be of a similar
dimension.
22. Benefits to biological diversity have accrued
from sustainable intensification of agriculture around the world.
Hundreds of millions of hectares of land, often in fragile, biological
diversity-rich environments, would have had to be ploughed were
it not for the tremendous advances, often based on the use of
genetic diversity. Agricultural fields can also have positive
impacts in providing habitats for birds, insects and animals.
23. Agriculturalists have made strong efforts to
preserve biological diversity important to agriculture, both in
situ and ex situ. Currently, progress is being made
in many regions of the world in implementing biological diversity-friendly
agricultural practices in soil conservation, withdrawing production
from marginal areas, mastering chemical and nutrient runoff, and
breeding crop varieties which are genetically resistant to diseases,
pests and abiotic stresses.
RECOMMENDATIONS
III. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
24. The field of agriculture offers a unique opportunity
for the Convention on Biological Diversity to link concerns with
biological diversity conservation and sharing of benefits arising
from the use of genetic resources with the mainstream economy.
25. The SBSTTA activities in this field should focus
on the interface between agricultural sustainability and environmental
issues. They should promote the integration of social, economic
and environmental considerations and provide advice on common
problems relating to agricultural biological diversity.
26. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of
the Parties consider the contributions of conservation and sustainable
use of agricultural biological diversity to sustainable agriculture
as one of its key focal areas.
27. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of
the Parties instruct the Secretariat to establish a process which
may lead to the development of a work programme or activities
in this field. There is a need to determine what issues are not
being addressed in the activities and work programmes of other
organizations.
28. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of
the Parties take note of the willingness of FAO to continue serving
countries in implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity
in the area of agricultural biological diversity. It was noted
that the representative of FAO recalled, in particular, the mandate
of the FAO intergovernmental Commission on Genetic Resources for
Food and Agriculture as adopted in 1995 by FAO Council Resolution
1/110 which requested the Organization to Arespond to requests
from the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological
Diversity in the specific area of genetic resources of relevance
to food and agriculture, including the provision of information
and other services to the Conference of the Parties and its subsidiary
bodies, especially in the areas of early warning systems, global
assessment and clearing house facilities, in particular and as
appropriate, through the Global System for the Conservation and
Utilization of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture.@
29. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of
the Parties encourage Parties to actively implement the Leipzig
Global Plan of Action on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and
Agriculture. The SBSTTA further notes the important of the country-based
FAO Global Strategy of the Management of Farm Animal Genetic Resources.
30. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of the Parties encourage Parties to evaluate and promote research and extension partnerships in research and development processes and in evaluation of research and development programmes for sustainable agriculture. To achieve this, countries should be
encouraged to set up and maintain local level forums for farmers, researchers, and extension workers to meet, discuss and debate in a partnership which creates an atmosphere of mutual respect and a free flow of
information.
31. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of
the Parties encourage:
(i) the transformation of unsustainable agricultural
technological approaches into sustainable production practices
adapted to local biotic and abiotic conditions.
(ii) the development, maintenance and mobilization
of local knowledge of farmers and of farming communities, with
special reference to gender roles in food production for sustainable
development.
32. The SBSTTA recommends to the Conference of the
Parties the need to study the positive and negative impacts on
ecosystems and biomes of agricultural transformation resulting
from intensification or extensification.
33. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of
the Parties encourage at national and regional levels adequate
and appropriate services to farmers and responsiveness of public
research and extension services.
IV. SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
34. The SBSTTA should conduct a gap analysis of the
activities and instruments related to agricultural biological
diversity in order to promote the conservation and sustainable
use of biological diversity in the agricultural sector. The SBSTTA
recommends that the Secretariat invite the FAO's collaboration
in this task and consult other organizations as appropriate. The
results should be reported back to the SBSTTA with the objective
of developing a multi-year workplan. Other agencies would be invited
to participate, as appropriate, when the SBSTTA has identified
priority issues to address.
35. Issues to be considered during the gap analysis
could include, inter alia:
1. Pollinators, including consideration of the monitoring
of the loss of pollinators worldwide; the identification of the
specific causes of pollinator decline; the estimation of the economic
cost associated with reduced pollination of crops; the identification
and promotion of best practices and technologies for more sustainable
agriculture; and the identification and encouragement of the adoption
of conservation practices to maintain pollinators or to promote
their re-establishment.
2. Soil micro-organisms in agriculture, including
consideration of: the measurement and monitoring of the worldwide
loss of Symbiotic Soil Micro-organisms (SSM), in particular Nitrogen-fixing
bacteria and Mycorrhizal fungi; the identification and promotion
of the transfer of technologies for the detection of SSM and their
use to enhance Nitrogen fixation and Phosphorous absorption; the
estimation of the potential and actual economic gain associated
with reduced use of chemical N and P fertilization of crops with
enhanced use and conservation of SSM; the identification and promotion
of best practices for more sustainable agriculture; and the identification
and promotion of conservation measures to conserve SSM or to promote
their re-establishment
3. Biocontrol organisms
4. Wild sources of food
5. The relationship between biological diversity-friendly
agricultural practices and market forces
6. Integrated land and resource management
7. Traditional knowledge
8. Possibilities for restoring degraded landscapes
9. Role of botanical gardens as regards to agricultural
biological diversity
10. Interrelationship between agriculture and wildlife
36. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of
the Parties draw the attention of international funding agencies,
in particular the Global Environmental Facility, to the urgent
need to support the conservation and sustainable use of biological
diversity important to agriculture and invite these agencies to
provide information and feedback in this respect to the Conference
of the Parties.
37. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of
the Parties invite countries to share case study experiences addressing
the variety of sustainable agricultural production systems and
practices. These should be posted through the clearing-house mechanism
of the Convention.
38. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of
the Parties encourage relevant institutions to strengthen the
culture of indigenous communities to encourage in situ
conservation (sustainable use and management) of biological diversity.
39. The SBSTTA should consider agricultural biological
diversity in its work programme on indicators and methods of assessment
in collaboration with other organization as appropriate.
40. The SBSTTA recommends to the Conference of the
Parties that the development and transfer of technology relevant
to the conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biological
diversity be promoted through the clearing-house mechanism by
facilitating contacts among (i) groups needing solutions to specific
problems, (ii) holders of technologies developed and maintained
by many sources, including not only the private sector but also
universities, governments and farmers, (iii) technology-transfer
brokers, and (iv) enabling agencies which fund technology transfer.
41. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of the Parties encourage Parties to develop integrated resource management (IRM) to achieve sustainable high-yielding agricultural ecosystems, for instance, Integrated Plant Nutrition Management and Integrated Pest Management (IPM) with an emphasis on nutrient
recirculation at the agricultural ecosystem level,
including crop rotation and inter-cropping.
42. The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of
the Parties encourage Parties to:
1. Encourage the development of technologies/farming systems that not only increase productivity, but also arrest degradation as well as reclaim, rehabilitate, restore and enhance biological diversity. These could include, inter alia, organic farming, integrated pest management, biological control, no-till agriculture, multi-cropping, inter-cropping, crop rotation, agricultural forestry.
2. Encourage efforts to appraise and disseminate
knowledge used or retained by indigenous and traditional communities,
consistent with the Convention, in particular Articles 8 (j) and
10 (c).
3. Encourage ex ante and/or ex post
evaluation of impacts to biological diversity from agricultural
development projects, to assure the use of best practices to promote
the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.
4. Encourage development and adoption of methods
to assess and predict impacts on biological diversity of agricultural
technologies, practices and production systems.
5. Identify key components of biological diversity
in agricultural production systems responsible for maintaining
natural processes and cycles, evaluating the effects of different
agricultural practices and technologies on those components and
encouraging the adoption of repairing practices to attain appropriate
levels of biological diversity.
Recommendation II/8
AGENDA ITEM 3.10: TERRESTRIAL BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
The Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD)
at its third session, in its review of "sectoral cluster:
land desertification, forests and biodiversity", reviewed
progress in the implementation of chapters 10 to 15 of Agenda
21 and decided to establish an open-ended ad hoc Intergovernmental
Panel on Forests (IPF) to pursue consensus and formulation of
coordinated proposals for action.
In decision II/9, the Conference of the Parties
adopted a statement from the Convention to the IPF on biological
diversity and forests and requested the Executive Secretary to
provide advice and information pertaining to the relationship
between indigenous and local communities and forests.
Decision II/9 of the Conference of the Parties also
requested the Executive Secretary to produce a background document
on the links between forests and biological diversity, in order
to consider, at its third meeting, whether further input to the
IPF is required and to transmit this document to the Intergovernmental
Panel on Forests for information. This background document is
contained in UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/11 and was reviewed by the second
meeting of the SBSTTA.
1. SUMMARY OF INTERVENTIONS
There was substantial discussion of a full range
of issues arising from a review of the Secretariat note and the
following recommendations resulted.
Having contemplated the issues considered by the
CSD in light of the provisions of the Convention, the SBSTTA:
(a) recommends the Conference of the Parties to
ask the Executive Secretary to explore ways and means to cooperate
with the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in
those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification
particularly in Africa on matters relating to biological diversity
and drylands with a view to identifying common priorities for
further consideration at the next meeting of the SBSTTA;
(b) recommends that the Convention examines the
specific issues related to biological diversity arising out of
the implementation of chapter 13 of Agenda 21 and further recommends
that the Conference of the Parties asks the Executive Secretary
to contact those agencies and networks working on sustainable
mountain development with a view to examining forms of cooperation
and report back to the next meeting of the SBSTTA;
2. INPUTS TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON FORESTS
(IPF)
The SBSTTA also recommends the Conference of the
Parties to ask the Executive Secretary to explore ways and means
to cooperate with the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests on matters
relating to biological diversity and forests with a view to developing
common priorities for further consideration at the next meeting
of
the SBSTTA. In this process the Executive Secretary should take account of the research and technical priorities
listed at the end of this document.
Based on the statement on biological diversity and
forests sent from the second meeting of the Conference of the
Parties to the IPF and reviewing the background document on links
between forests and biological diversity prepared by the secretariat
(UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/11). The SBSTTA recommends that the following
additional inputs be sent to the IPF:
- Biodiversity considerations should be integrated
fully into the IPF recommendations and proposals for action. IPF
should also consider ways to deal with identified gaps in forest
biodiversity knowledge.
- In relation to the programme element 1.1 of the
IPF on national forest and land use plans, strategies for sustainable
forest management should be based on an ecosystem approach, which
will integrate conservation measures (e.g. protected areas) and
sustainable use of biological diversity. Methodologies need to
be developed to assist countries in identifying sites of high
interest for biodiversity. These recommendations should take into
account national financial circumstances, laws and regulations.
- In relation to the programme element of the IPF
dealing with criteria and indicators, conservation of biological
diversity and the sustainable use of its components, as well as
the maintenance of forest quality, as part of sustainable forest
management, should be substantively included in the deliberations
of the IPF.
The SBSTTA also identified the following research
and technological priorities:
- Building the scientific foundation and methodologies
necessary to advance the elaboration and implementation of criteria
and indicators for forest quality and biodiversity conservation
as part of sustainable forest management;
- Analysing the role of biodiversity in forest ecosystem
functioning;
- Analysing measures for mitigating the underlying
causes of biodiversity loss;
- Advancing scientific and technical approaches to
a) rehabilitating degraded and deforested ecosystems and b) enriching
biodiversity in forest plantations;
- Identifying gaps in knowledge in the areas of fragmentation
and population viability, to include mitigation options such as
corridors and buffer zones;
- Assessing ecological landscape models, the integration
of protected areas in the ecosystem approach to sustainable forest
management and the representativeness and adequacy of protected
areas networks;
- Analysing scientifically the ways in which human
activities, in particular forest management practices, influence
biodiversity and assessing ways to minimize or mitigate negative
influences;
- Developing assessment and valuation methodologies
for the multiple benefits derived from forest biodiversity.
Recommendation II/9
AGENDA ITEM 3.11: ECONOMIC VALUATION OF BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY
The SBSTTA,
Recalling that recommendation I/9 decided
that the SBSTTA would consider at its second meeting advice to
the Conference of the Parties on the economic valuation of biological
diversity and its components, in particular in relation to access
to genetic resources,
Recalling also that decision II/11 of the
Conference of the Parties requested the Executive Secretary to
compile an annotated list of studies and other relevant information
on the social and economic valuation of genetic resources, including
the demand by industry for genetic resources,
Having examined the Note prepared by the
Secretariat (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/13),
Recognizing that a better understanding of
the full value of biological diversity at the genetic, species,
and ecosystem level will greatly assist Parties in their efforts
to implement effective policy and management measures to meet
the threefold objectives of the Convention,
Recognizing that information on the economic
value of biological diversity and its components is severely deficient,
and that methods for providing this information need further development,
Recognizing also that biological diversity
and its components provide a wide range of benefits, representing
significant use and non-use values. Some of these values are difficult
to define fully in terms of economic value. These include intangible,
yet critical, socio-cultural values and existence values,
Further recognizing that, while more information
on economic values is needed, the lack of this information need
not delay the implementation of economically and socially sound
incentive measures to sustainably manage biological diversity.
In this regard, consideration of incentives having a perverse
impact on biological diversity and its components should be regarded
as a priority area; and
Recommends:
1. That future work should include regular review
and syntheses of current information, case studies of economic
value, research into appropriate and cost-effective methodologies
for determining these values, and means of facilitating access
to this information.
2. That economic valuation should be integrated
into the sectoral and thematic items under the Medium-Term Programme
of work of the Conference of the Parties, and should be reflected
as appropriate in relevant agenda items including, in particular,
incentive measures, and also agricultural biodiversity, genetic
resources, environmental impact assessments, inland water ecosystems,
and marine and coastal biodiversity, taking the ecosystem approach
as the primary framework of action to be taken under the Convention.
3. That the Conference of the Parties encourage
Parties to draw upon research into the economic valuation of biological
diversity produced by, inter alia, regional and economic groupings
in order to assist the appropriate development of policy and management
measures for conservation and sustainable use.
4. That the Conference of the Parties, in its consideration
of Incentive Measures at its third meeting, emphasize the importance
of developing well-targeted local level incentives, participatory
approaches to the design of new measures, and capacity-building.
Recommendation II/10
AGENDA ITEM 3.12: COASTAL AND MARINE BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY
The Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and
Technological Advice (SBSTTA) wishes to advise the Conference
of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity that
little substantial action on the area of marine and coastal biodiversity
occurred this year other than building the roster of experts.
The SBSTTA believes that decision II/10 on marine and coastal
biodiversity taken by the second meeting of the Conference of
the Parties should be implemented as quickly and efficiently as
possible. At the third meeting of the SBSTTA, the Secretariat,
on the basis of the outcome from the Meeting of Experts mentioned
in decision II/10, should provide an interim report on recommendations
for proceeding with positive action on the conservation and sustainable
use of coastal and marine biodiversity. Recommendations should
be made on the basis of priorities that consider (i) what resources
are or will be available; (ii) which of the five issues (integrated
marine and coastal area management, marine and coastal protected
areas, sustainable use of coastal and marine living resources,
mariculture, and alien species) the Convention on Biological Diversity
can have the greatest effect; (iii) which of the five issues other
non-Convention on Biological Diversity entities are adequately
addressing the topic or will be; and (iv) where other planned
or ongoing activities outside the Convention process can contribute
to Convention proposed actions.
The Secretariat is urged to take the following actions
towards implementing decision II/10:
1. Given the offer from Indonesia to host the first
Meeting of Experts on Marine and Coastal Biological Diversity
drawn from the available roster of experts, convene that meeting
very early in 1997, and refer any available information, including
document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/14, which the SBSTTA had before it,
and any comments from Parties, to that meeting for information
purposes.
2. Request that the Meeting of Experts assist the
Executive Secretary in identifying priorities for implementing
decision II/10, identifying options for a pragmatic but comprehensive
approach in addressing marine and coastal biological diversity,
and identifying products, timetables, and ways and means in line
with paragraphs 1(b), 1(c) and 7 of decision II/10. The Meeting
of Experts in formulating its recommendations shall have regard
to the views of the roster of experts more widely.
3. Strengthen and develop special partnership arrangements
with international organizations and institutions including regional
bodies with particular competence in specific areas of marine
and coastal biological diversity.
The SBSTTA recommends that the Conference of the
Parties ensure resources are available to (a) implement the work
of the Secretariat under the Jakarta Mandate and (b) fill the
posts within the Secretariat associated with this mandate as soon
as possible. The SBSSTA should encourage Parties to nominate candidates
for the roster of experts.
Recommendation II/11
AGENDA ITEM 4: MODUS OPERANDI OF THE SUBSIDIARY BODY ON
SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVICE
Recalling the relevant provisions of the
Convention on Biological Diversity, in particular Article 25,
and the principles contained in the preamble of the Convention;
Recalling also decision II/1 of the Conference
of the Parties and particularly paragraph 3 thereof which requested
the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological
Advice (SBSTTA) to keep under review its modus operandi
with a view to improving its functioning on the basis of experience
gained;
Taking into account the experience gained
so far in the operation of the SBSTTA
The second meeting of the SBSTTA, held in Montreal
from 2-6 September 1996:
1. Recommends that the third meeting of the
Conference of the Parties, to be held in Buenos Aires, Argentina,
from 4 to 15 November 1996, adopt the revised elements of the
modus operandi of SBSTTA contained in Annex I hereto; and
2. Invites the third meeting of the Conference
of the Parties to consider the further conclusions of the second
meeting of SBSTTA with regard to its modus operandi contained
in Annex II hereto.
Annex 1 of Recommendation II/11
MODUS OPERANDI OF THE SUBSIDIARY BODY ON SCIENTIFIC,
TECHNICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVICE
I. Functions
1. The functions of the SBSTTA are those contained
in Article 25 of the Convention. Accordingly, the SBSTTA
will fulfil its mandate under the authority of, and in accordance
with, guidance laid down by the Conference of the Parties, and
upon its request.
2. Pursuant to Article 25, paragraph 3, the functions,
terms of reference, organization and operation of the SBSTTA may
be further elaborated, for approval by the Conference of the Parties.
II. Rules of procedure
3. The rules of procedure for meetings of the Conference
of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity shall
apply, in accordance with rule 26, paragraph 5, mutatis mutandis
to the proceedings of the SBSTTA. Therefore, rule 18 on credentials
will not apply.
4. In accordance with rule 52, the official and working
languages of the SBSTTA will be those of the United Nations
Organization. The proceedings of the SBSTTA will be carried out
in the working languages of the Conference of the Parties.
5. In order to facilitate continuity in the work
of SBSTTA and taking into account the technical and scientific
character of the input of SBSTTA, the terms of office of members
of the Bureau of SBSTTA will be two years. At each meeting of
the SBSTTA one of the two regional representatives shall be elected
in order to achieve staggered terms of office. The members of
the Bureau of SBSTTA will take office at the end of the meeting
at which they are elected.
6. The Chairman of the SBSTTA, elected at an ordinary
meeting of the Conference of the Parties, shall take office from
the beginning of the next ordinary meeting of the SBSTTA and remain
in office until the beginning of the following meeting of the
SBSTTA.
III. Frequency and timing of the SBSTTA
7. The SBSTTA shall meet annually and sufficiently
in advance of each regular meeting of the Conference of the Parties,
for a duration to be determined by the Conference of the Parties
which should not normally exceed five days. The number and length
of the meetings and activities of the SBSTTA and its organs should
be reflected in the budget adopted by the Conference of the Parties
or other sources of extra-budgetary funding.
IV. Documentation
8. The documentation prepared for meetings will be distributed six weeks before the meeting in the working languages of the SBSTTA, will be concrete, focused draft technical reports and will include proposed conclusions and recommendations for consideration of the SBSTTA.
9. To facilitate the preparation of documentation,
and in order to avoid duplication of efforts and ensure the use
of available scientific, technical and technological competence
available within international and regional organizations, including
non-governmental organizations and scientific unions and societies,
qualified in fields relating to conservation and sustainable use
of biodiversity, the Executive Secretary may establish, in consultation
with the Chairman and the other members of the Bureau of the SBSTTA,
liaison groups, as appropriate. Such liaison groups will depend
on the resources available.
V. Organization of work during the meetings
10. Each meeting of the SBSTTA will propose to the
Conference of the Parties, in light of the programme of work for
the Conference of the Parties and the SBSTTA, a particular theme
as the focus of work for the following meeting of the SBSTTA.
11. Two open-ended sessional working groups of the
SBSTTA could be established and operate simultaneously during
meetings of the SBSTTA. They shall be established on the basis
of well-defined terms of reference, and will be open to all Parties
and observers. The financial implications of these arrangements
should be reflected in the budget of the Convention.
VI. Ad hoc technical expert group meetings
12. A limited number of ad hoc technical expert groups
on specific priority issues on the programme of work of the SBSTTA
may be established, as required, for a limited duration. The establishment
of such ad hoc
technical expert groups would be guided by the following
elements:
(a) The ad hoc technical expert groups should draw
on the existing knowledge and competence available within, and
liaise with, international, regional and national organizations,
including non-governmental organizations and the scientific community
in fields relevant to this Convention;
(b) The ad hoc technical expert groups shall be
composed of no more than fifteen experts competent in the relevant
field of expertise, with due regard to geographical representation
and to the special conditions of least-developed countries and
small island developing States;
(c) The SBSTTA will recommend the exact duration
and specific terms of reference, when establishing such expert
groups for the approval of the Conference of the Parties;
(d) Expert groups will be encouraged to use innovative
means of communication and to minimize the need for face-to-face
meetings;
(e) The ad hoc technical expert groups may also
convene meetings parallel to the proceedings of the SBSTTA;
(f) All efforts will be made to provide adequate
voluntary financial assistance for the participation of experts
in the expert groups from developing countries and countries with
economies in transition Parties; and
(g) The number of ad hoc technical expert groups
active each year will be limited to a maximum of three and will
depend on the amount of resources designated to the SBSTTA by
the Conference of the Parties in its budget or on the availability
of extra-budgetary resources.
VII. Contribution of non-governmental organizations
13. The scientific and technical contribution of
non-governmental organizations to the fulfilment of the mandate
of the SBSTTA will be strongly encouraged in accordance with the
relevant provisions of the Convention and the rules of procedure
for meetings of the Conference of the Parties.
VIII. Cooperation with other relevant bodies
14. The SBSTTA shall cooperate with other relevant
international, regional and national organizations, under the
guidance of the Convention of the Parties, thus building upon
the vast experience and knowledge available.
15. In this context, the SBSTTA emphasizes the importance
of research to further increase available knowledge and reduce
uncertainties, and recommends that the Conference of the Parties
consider this issue in relation to the financial resources required
for the effective implementation of the Convention.
IX. Regional and subregional preparatory meetings
16. Regional and subregional meetings for the preparation
of regular meetings of the SBSTTA may be organized as appropriate
for specific items. The possibility of combining such meetings
with other scientific regional meetings, in order to make maximum
use of available resources, should be considered. The convening
of such regional and subregional meetings will be subject to the
availability of voluntary financial contributions.
17. The SBSTTA should, in the fulfilment of its mandate,
draw upon the contributions of the existing regional and subregional
intergovernmental organizations or initiatives.
X. Focal points
18. A list of focal points and focal persons to the
SBSTTA shall be established and regularly updated by the Secretariat,
on the basis of information provided by Parties and other relevant
regional, subregional and intergovernmental organizations.
XI. Roster of experts
19. A roster of experts, in the relevant fields of
the Convention, will be compiled by the Secretariat on the basis
of input from all Parties and, as appropriate, from other countries
and relevant bodies. The roster of experts will be regularly updated
and will be made accessible through the clearing house mechanism.
20. The ad hoc technical expert groups and liaison
groups referred to above as well as the Secretariat should make
full use of such a roster of experts, inter alia, through scientific
peer review processes.
Annex 2 of Recommendation II/11
FURTHER CONCLUSIONS ON THE WORK OF
THE SUBSIDIARY BODY ON SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL
AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVICE
In addition to the recommendation on the modus operandi
of the SBSTTA contained in Annex I to Recommendation [ ], the
SBSTTA draws to the attention of the Conference of the Parties
the following broader concerns regarding the modus operandi
of the SBSTTA which the Conference of the Parties may wish to
consider:
1. While the SBSTTA has adopted, and the Conference
of the Parties has endorsed, a modus operandi for the SBSTTA,
the key challenge for the SBSTTA is to manage its workload effectively.
This requires the prioritization of issues to be dealt with by
the SBSTTA, linked to priorities identified by the Conference
of the Parties. The Conference of the Parties may wish to consider
criteria for establishing priorities of the SBSTTA, such as avoiding
duplication of efforts of other bodies, the urgency of issues
and the costs of measures required. Effective management of the
workload of the SBSTTA also requires that adequate resources are
made available for the SBSTTA to carry out its work;
2. The Conference of the Parties may wish to consider
whether in order to increase its effectiveness, the SBSTTA should
adopt a thematic approach to its work programme, as suggested
in paragraph 10 of Annex I to Recommendation [ ];
3. In order for the SBSTTA to fulfil its tasks, some
delegations felt that intersessional work is likely to be
necessary. Where possible, intersessional work should
be coordinated with relevant activities being undertaken by other
international conventions and institutions. Unnecessary duplication
should be avoided. Cross-representation between the SBSTTA and
the meetings of other bodies may be useful and the Secretariat
should be represented at such meetings;
4. However, some concern was expressed by delegations
to the SBSTTA about the possible proliferation of intersessional
activities of the SBSTTA, particularly with regard to the capacity
of developing country Parties to participate fully and effectively
in these activities, and the need to maintain transparency in
intercessional activities; and
5. In order for the SBSTTA to manage its workload
effectively and to assist coordination of work, it may be useful
to establish a global calendar of all relevant work being undertaken
by the different bodies of the United Nations and by other international
conventions and institutions in the medium-term (1997-2000). Such
a calender could be regularly updated by the Secretariat.
6. The SBSTTA noted the need for the Conference of
the Parties to consider satisfactory transitional arrangements
for the implementation of paragraph 5 of Annex I to the present
recommendation.
7. Concern was expressed by several delegations that
the proceedings of the SBSTTA are conducted only in the working
languages of the Conference of the Parties. These delegations
felt that this made adequate preparation for, and participation
in, meetings of the SBSTTA difficult for delegations who worked
in the other official languages, and therefore the latter should
be included as working languages of the SBSTTA.
8. It was suggested that the Secretariat should prepare
an information document for the Conference of the Parties on:
(a) The implications, including financial implications,
of adding to the working languages of the SBSTTA;
(b) The preferred languages of the Parties.
Recommendation II/12
AGENDA ITEM 6: DRAFT PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE THIRD
MEETING OF THE SBSTTA
The Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and
Technological Advice (SBSTTA)
Having reviewed the draft provisional agenda
for the third meeting of the SBSTTA included as the annex to this
recommendation,
Notes that the draft provisional agenda is
based on the suggestions contained in the medium-term programme
of work of the SBSTTA as adopted in recommendation I/2 of the
SBSTTA, the medium-term programme of work of the Conference of
Parties as adopted in decision II/18, and the specific recommendations
arising from the second meeting of the SBSTTA;
Considers that the draft provisional agenda
contains too many items for each to be given the necessary consideration
at the third meeting of the SBSTTA to allow the SBSTTA to advise
the Conference of the Parties adequately;
Considers also that the workload for the
Secretariat to prepare adequate documentation for the meeting
of the SBSTTA in good time bears the danger of hampering the functioning
of the Secretariat, taking into account that other meetings have
to be covered;
Concerned that the ability of the SBSTTA
to fulfil its function under the terms of Article 25 of the Convention
may thereby be compromised,
Requests the Conference of the Parties at
its third meeting to provide guidance on the setting of priorities
within those items on the draft provisional agenda for which it
seeks advice.
Annex to Recommendation II/12
DRAFT PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE THIRD MEETING OF
THE SUBSIDIARY BODY ON SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL
ADVICE
1. Opening of the meeting.
2. Organizational matters:
2.1 Election of officers;
2.2 Adoption of the agenda;
2.3 Organization of work.
3. Assessment of the status and trends of the biological
diversity of inland water ecosystems and identification of options
for conservation and sustainable use.
4. Other matters on which advice from the SBSTTA
is required by the third meeting of the Conference of the Parties:
4.1 Implementation of Article 7 on indicators and
monitoring
4.1.1 Advice to Parties in addressing issues of
monitoring and assessment, including an elaboration of assessment
methodologies for meeting the requirements of the Convention,
taking into account the contents of those national reports already
prepared and reports to other conventions and international processes.
4.1.2 Options for capacity-building in developing
countries in the application of guidelines and indicators for
subsequent national reports.
4.1.3 Current approaches to indicator development
and recommendations for a preliminary core set of indicators of
biological diversity particularly those related to threats.
4.2 Impact assessments
4.2.1 What kind of scientific and technical information
should be collected for impact assessment of projects and what
ways and means should be used to share this information to promote
minimisation of adverse impacts in accordance with Article 14?
4.3 Promotion of international technical and scientific
cooperation
4.3.1 Provision of advice on the scientific, technical
and technological aspects of international cooperation in the
area of conservation of biological diversity and sustainable use
of its components, in accordance with Article 18.
4.4 Alternative mechanisms for linking in-situ
and ex-situ conservation techniques
4.4.1 Identification of alternative models and mechanisms
for linkages between in-situ and ex-situ conservation.
4.5 Consideration of knowledge, innovations and
practises of indigenous and local communities
4.6 Review of the implementation of the pilot phase
of the clearing-house mechanism
4.7 Coastal and marine biological diversity
4.7.1 Scientific, technical and technological aspects
of the conservation and sustainable use of coastal and marine
biological diversity.
4.8 Terrestrial biological diversity
4.8.1 Ways and means to cooperate with the United
Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries
Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly
in Africa on matters relating to biological diversity and drylands
with a view to identifying common priorities.
4.8.2 Examination of specific issues related to
biological diversity and sustainable mountain development arising
out of the implementation of chapter 13 of Agenda 21.
4.8.3 Ways and means to cooperate with the Intergovernmental
Panel on Forests on matters relating to biological diversity and
forests with a view to developing common priorities.
4.9 Agricultural biological diversity
4.9.1 Gap analysis of the activities and instruments
related to agricultural biological diversity in order to promote
the conservation and sustainable us of biological diversity in
the agricultural sector.
5. Overall assessment of the SBSTTA's work and of
the effectiveness of its advice (1995-1997), in the light of possible
future work of the SBSTTA.
5.1 Review of the operations of the SBSTTA in light
of the Conference of the Parties' review of its medium-term programme
of work.
5.2 Review of the operations of the SBSTTA in light
of the Conference of the Parties' review of a longer-term work
programme.
6. Draft provisional agenda of the fourth meeting
of the SBSTTA.
7. Date and venue of the fourth meeting of the SBSTTA.
8. Other matters.
9. Adoption of the report.
10. Closure of the meeting.