EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (IISD) WRITTEN AND EDITED BY: Elisabeth Corell. Wagaki Mwangi Lynn Wagner Managing Editor Langston James Goree VI "Kimo" Vol. 4 No. 91 Tuesday, 10 September 1996 INCD-9 HIGHLIGHTS MONDAY, 9 SEPTEMBER 1996 Delegates continued to work in two working groups. Working Group I received and discussed a G-77 and China draft text on the Global Mechanism. Working Group II considered procedures for communication of information and scientific and technical cooperation. An informal group also met to discuss arrangements for the Permanent Secretariat. WORKING GROUP I GLOBAL MECHANISM: The G-77 and China distributed a document during the morning containing recommendations for changes in the Global Mechanism (GM) text. The Group adjourned so that regional groups could consult on the new text, which was taken up during the afternoon. France proposed that the introductory paragraph note that the GM, "in carrying out its mandate under Article 21, paragraphs 4 and 5, should perform the following functions subject to further guidance to be provided by the first COP on policies, operational modalities and activities." Several countries, including Senegal, Costa Rica, Tanzania, Lesotho, India, and Cuba, expressed concern with the proposal. France revised its proposal to call on the GM to function under the authority and guidance of the COP "on policies, operational modalities and activities" in order to adhere to Article 21, paragraph 7 of the CCD. Ghana stated that the change would restrict the GM from performing other functions under Articles 7 and 20. Germany proposed beginning the French proposal with "including," which was agreed. In paragraph 2 (analyzing and advising on request) delegates agreed to amend 2(a) to promote the matching of available resources "including" assisting affected developing countries to find new and additional resources. In 3 (facilitating cooperation and coordination), the G-77 and China proposed renaming the title "promoting cooperation and coordination," but the OECD countries’ proposal, derived from Article 21, paragraph 4 of the CCD, was accepted: "Promote actions leading to cooperation and coordination." The suggestion to delete "where appropriate" in 3(c) (encourage multiple source financing approaches) generated debate. The OECD countries were concerned that the deletion would mandate the GM to "coordinate" co-financing arrangements, becoming an intermediary body. No agreement was reached. Following a series of suggestions from the G-77 and China and the OECD countries, 3(d) (civil society participation) and the G-77 and China-proposed 3(h) (awareness raising) were merged. The text calls for action to increase awareness on and promote participation in implementing the CCD by foundations, academic institutions, NGOs and other private sector entities, and to facilitate contacts with them to contribute to the mobilization of financial resources. The G-77 and China proposal for a new (3)(e)(v), calling for promotion of the full use and continued improvement of funding sources was added. In (3)(f) (information and advice on technology) delegates added the G-77 and China reference to "environmentally sound, economically viable and socially acceptable" technologies "relevant to combating desertification and/or mitigating the effects of drought." Text calling for the promotion of partnership building as it relates to the support of mobilization of financial resources was also added. In 5 (reporting to the COP), 5(a) (nature of the reports to the COP) attracted debate regarding the need to refer to specific articles of the Convention. Delegates will negotiate informally. WORKING GROUP II PROCEDURES FOR COMMUNICATION OF INFORMATION: Delegates referred to A/AC.241/49/Rev.1, Procedures for Communication of Information and Review of Implementation, during their morning discussion. Youssef Brahimi of the Sahara and Sahel Observatory (OSS) presented a conference room paper (CRP) on benchmarks and indicators. The four sections of the text address the concept of indicators, implementation indicators, impact indicators and recommendations. Chair Shibata noted that the report was related to paragraph 10 (format of national reports) of the text on procedures for communication. Benin wanted to make the CRP a committee document. Germany, supported by Tunisia and France, suggested establishing a working group on indicators. France announced an international programme on follow-up to provide information to North-South research teams. Benin proposed that the informal group could work between the end of INCD-9 and the beginning of INCD-10. He noted that the group that worked on the CRP (OSS together with several African countries) could form the nucleus of the group, and add representatives from other regions. Germany proposed that interested countries join the group. Senegal suggested coordinating the group’s work with work on indicators by other intergovernmental groups. Tunisia suggested participation by actors at the subregional level and Benin called for participation of civil society and NGOs. China stressed the importance of methodology for indicators. The UK suggested that the open- ended working group should focus on implementation indicators prior to INCD-10, so that paragraph 10 could be completed, and then on methodologies for impact indicators. The Chair summarized the discussion, noting that the Secretariat should continue its work on indicators and involve other relevant countries and organizations, taking into account regional and subregional characteristics, prior to INCD-10. Voluntary contributions would be requested and no intergovernmental meeting would be convened. A Chair’s draft decision based on this discussion was distributed at the end of the day. The Group then considered paragraphs 10, 11, 19 and parts of 20. The brackets were removed and text was adopted without any substantive changes. ORGANIZATION OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL COOPERATION: The Group completed consideration of A/AC.241/57, resolving all remaining text. Procedures for the establishment of ad hoc panels: Delegates quickly reached agreement on paragraphs 2-8. In paragraph 3 (composition of panels) language was amended by the G-77 and China to reflect "a multidisciplinary approach, an appropriate gender balance and broad and equitable geographical representation." In 4 (number of panel members) the G-77 and China suggested that the number of members on any ad hoc panel shall not exceed twelve. Language already included in paragraph 3 on appropriate gender balance was deleted in paragraph 5 (importance of local and traditional knowledge). Paragraph 6 (the maximum number of panels) was amended by a combination of UK and G-77 and China proposals to read: "The COP shall determine the number of ad hoc panels which, in principle, shall not exceed three at any one time." The heading for paragraphs 7 and 8 was changed to "Reports of ad hoc panels." Paragraph 8 (public access to panels’ work) was amended by the G-77 and China to read "Reports of ad hoc panels shall be in the public domain and, where appropriate, be disseminated through different mechanisms to all interested parties." Establishment and maintenance of a roster of independent experts: The Group then returned to consider paragraphs 2 and 7, which were adopted ad referendum last week. The G-77 and China amended paragraph 2 (the diversity of experts) to include appropriate gender balance and broad and equitable geographical distribution. They also proposed deleting text stating that "each Party can nominate experts not only from its own country." The UK objected, emphasizing the need to make a distinction between the government appointed experts on the Committee on Science and Technology (CST) and the independent experts on the roster. However, the phrase was deleted. Paragraph 5 (CST representatives may not be on the roster as well) was deleted and 7 (disciplines to be represented) was adopted. The Working Group also considered the future work programme of the CST. Delegates agreed to propose that the Plenary should ask delegations and agencies to submit suggestions on the work programme by the end of October. The Secretariat would be requested to compile these views and draft a report on the work programme of similar UN bodies, their work related to desertification and suggestions for collaboration, all of which would be submitted to INCD-10. The UK observed that the CST work program shall follow that of the COP, and that it should include the implementation of Article 25 in the Convention (networking of institutions, agencies and bodies). Niger noted that experts need time to become familiar with the CCD. Canada warned that the Secretariat would not have time to make a thorough report on similar bodies. In fact, according to the CCD this is a task for the CST. DESIGNATION OF A PERMANENT SECRETARIAT A two-hour informal evening session, which was proposed last Friday, met Monday evening. The Chair re-presented his draft decision in the hope that it would move discussion forward. Some delegations stated that they could only contribute on the understanding that the G-77 and China draft decision (A/AC.241/WG.I(VII)/L.1) would be withdrawn and that the entire Chair’s draft would be bracketed. Some amendments to the text were made regarding the nature of the document to be transmitted to COP-1, but delegates hit a dead end when they got to the place in the text where the institution was to be named. Some felt all the institutions that have bid should be mentioned, but others wanted only one institution, stating that the arrangements of the CCD and Climate Change Convention should be similar because both have been under the aegis of the General Assembly. No agreement was reached and the relevant institutions were not asked to make contributions. Some delegates expressed frustration because they had hoped the organizations that were interested in hosting the Permanent Secretariat could clarify their bids. The Chair concluded that delegates should consult informally. The matter will be taken up in Working Group I later. IN THE CORRIDORS NGO participants were pleased that the G-77 and China draft proposal for the GM contained many of the suggestions they presented in ECO last week. They also were encouraged by the fact that the conference room paper on benchmarks and indicators was generally supported and incorporated into the work of Working Group II on procedures for the communication of information. Although a few NGOs have taken the floor during negotiations, most report that they have worked through private contacts with delegates and, based on Monday’s developments on the GM and indicators texts, their work appears to have had an impact on INCD-9. THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY WORKING GROUP I: The Working Group will continue its discussions in Conference Room 1 on the Global Mechanism during the morning and will take up financial rules in the afternoon. Look for a document circulated by the G-77 and China containing new proposals for paragraph 5 of the GM text. WORKING GROUP II: The Working Group is expected to meet during the morning and afternoon in Conference Room 2 to consider rules of procedure. Look for a Chair’s draft decision, which is expected to call for suggestions on the work programme for the CST during COP-1, and request the Secretariat to provide a compilation of these views, along with a report on similar work carried out in the UN system, at INCD-10. MOBILIZING PARTNERS: Solidarité Canada Sahel and UNSO/UNDP will describe lessons learned from the first campaign on the CCD in Canada from 1:00 to 2:30 pm in Conference Room A. This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin (c) is written and edited by Elisabeth Corell. , Wagaki Mwangi and Lynn Wagner . The Managing Editor is Langston James "Kimo" Goree VI . French translation by Mongi Gadhoum. The sustaining donors of the Bulletin are the International Institute for Sustainable Development , the Dutch Ministry for Development Cooperation and the Pew Charitable Trusts. General support for the Bulletin during 1996 is provided by the Overseas Development Administration (ODA) of the United Kingdom, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, the Swedish Ministry of Environment, the Swiss Federal Office of the Environment, the Ministry of the Environment of Iceland, and the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. Specific funding for coverage of this meeting has been provided by the UNEP Desertification PAC and the US Department of Agriculture. The authors can be contacted at their electronic mail addresses or at tel: +1- 212-644-0204; fax: +1-212-644-0206. IISD can be contacted at 161 Portage Avenue East, 6th Floor, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 0Y4, Canada; tel: +1-204-958-7700; fax: +1-204-958-7710. The opinions expressed in Earth Negotiations Bulletin are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD and other funders. Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin may be used in other publications with appropriate citation. Electronic versions of the Bulletin are automatically sent to e-mail distribution lists (ASCII and PDF format) and can be found on the gopher at and in hypertext through the Linkages WWW-server at on the Internet. The Earth Negotiations Bulletin may not be reproduced, reprinted or posted to any system or service outside of the APC networks and the ENB listserver, without specific permission from the International Institute for Sustainable Development. This limitation includes distribution via Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists, print media and broadcast. For more information, send a message to .