ENB:04:10
[Next] .
[Previous] .
[Contents]
WORKING GROUP II
The Group met in the afternoon to consider draft decisions emanating from its work at this session, A/AC.241/WG.II(X)/L.1-6.
Document L.1 (Rules of procedure of the Conference of the Parties), which now contains an additional rule, was adopted with the amendment that the number of the document that will contain the final decision will be left blank so that an amendment can be made orally in the INCD Plenary when all, or parts, of the outstanding issues in Rule 6, paragraph 1, Rule 22, paragraph 1, Rule 31 and Rule 47, paragraph 1, have been sorted out. Results from informal consultations on these issues were expected to emerge.
Document L.2 (Committee on Science and Technology: reports on modalities and timing of future work on inventories of research, traditional and local technology, knowledge, know-how and practices and on the establishment of research priorities) was adopted without comment.
Document L.3 (Report on work of other bodies performing work similar to that envisaged for the Committee on Science and Technology) was adopted without comment.
Document L.4 (Report on work being done on benchmarks and indicators) was adopted with amendments. The UK proposed references to: the valuable assistance provided by the competent organizations already working on this topic; the Interim Secretariat continuing the “facilitation of” work on benchmarks and indicators; participation of “competent organizations, regional and/or subregional groups and interested INCD members;” and putting “emphasis on the further elaboration of implementation indicators and the development of a methodology for determining impact indicators.” NIGER called for a reference to the pre-established programme of work for the group. CANADA added a reference to NGO participation in the consultation process. BENIN and CHINA did not support calling for the Interim Secretariat’s “facilitation of” work, and the UK did not insist. Delegates agreed to note that participation would be by interested members of the Committee from any regional or subregional group and competent governmental and non-governmental groups.
SOUTH AFRICA noted the importance of the bottom-up approach and supported the NGO proposal calling for a small working group on local area development. The group would work in the same manner as the group on benchmarks and indicators and begin to develop a survey for input to the CST. The Chair stated that if a group is established, participants would have to pay for it, which is why an informal consultative process has been used for benchmarks and indicators. He thought the NGO proposal was for the CST to deliberate at its first meeting. The UK also suggested that the proposal should be discussed at the first session of the CST, and noted that L.2 invites members to make written submissions on, among others, inventories of traditional and local technology and knowledge, for discussion at that session.
Document L.5 (Committee on Science and Technology: work to be undertaken on networking of institutions, agencies and bodies) contains four parts: the draft decision of INCD-10; a recommended decision for COP-1 to adopt; the terms of reference for work to be undertaken on networking of institutions; and a list of organizations that could be asked to draft proposals for conducting the networking survey.
UGANDA questioned the wisdom of the INCD recommending a draft decision for COP- 1 to adopt. He stated that the list of organizations is not exhaustive and asked what the implications would be for other organizations if the list were adopted. The Secretariat noted that the terms of reference and the list of organizations contain recommendations from INCD members. The UK agreed it is premature to decide on a draft for the COP to adopt. She noted that the terms of reference proposed would not be the final ones, but may be reconsidered based on the proposals submitted by the bidding organizations. She also stated that the disadvantage of a long list of organizations is that the group would have to look at a large number of proposals. A number of new organizations were suggested, including the OSS (Mauritania) and CILSS (Senegal). MEXICO suggested that the organization selected “develop a database with the possibility of remote consultation using infrastructure that already exists.” He noted that such a database is being developed in the Latin American and Caribbean region. SOUTH AFRICA and BENIN suggested that regional groups should be given time to consult prior to taking a decision on L.5, and the Group adjourned.