You are viewing our old site. See the new one here

ENB:09:28 [Next] . [Previous] . [Contents]

OVERALL ADVANCES AND GAINS

Despite the overburdened agenda, many delegates and NGOs felt that decisions reached at this COP have laid the groundwork for moving on with the business of biodiversity conservation. Notwithstanding some of the problems and setbacks, most delegates demonstrated the political will to move forward into the implementation phase. This is in part reflected in some of the key decisions. The Medium-term work programme: After protracted negotiations, a medium-term work programme has been put in place to guide the work of the COP over the next three years. The standing issues will include: the financial mechanism; the administration and budget for the Secretariat; SBSSTA; national reports on implementation; the clearing-house mechanism; relationship to the CSD and other biodiversity-related conventions. The rotating agenda will be developed in a flexible manner. It was also agreed that the Secretariat will compile information regarding measures related to IPRs, and technology transfer in the area of access to genetic resources. Designation of the Permanent Secretariat: The Interim Secretariat has been transformed into a permanent body, entrusted with important work in advance of COP-II, including studies on alternative funding sources and the clearing-house mechanism.

Clearing-house mechanism: There is general agreement on the need for a clearing-house mechanism, despite the fact that the scope of its operations is yet to be finalized. It is expected that the Secretariat’s study on the terms of reference of this body will help to identify where other institutions can coordinate action in the exchange of information.

The SBSTTA: The SBSTTA has been given a clear mandate and work programme to deal with such issues as: identification of threatened biodiversity; technology transfer, national reporting; coastal and marine biodiversity; and the FAO initiative on plant genetic resources. Many governments feel that this subsidiary body is off to a good start with a workable agenda, which balances conservation and sustainable use issues. It is hoped that the SBSTTA will be able to provide important objective scientific input, including definitions, criteria, indicators and guidelines, into the political decision-making process. There was broad-based support for the two Chairs, Dr. J.H.Seyani and Dr. P. Schei, who have been designated for 1995 and 1996, respectively.

Tentative agreement on the GEF: There was heated debate during the first week of the meeting regarding the GEF and whether it should be selected as the interim or the permanent institutional structure for the financial mechanism of the Convention. Most Northern countries argued that since it had been adequately restructured, the GEF should be designated as the permanent financial structure. Most G-77 countries did not feel that the restructuring adequately met their concerns. They also expressed considerable concern regarding the potentially limited ability of  the COP to influence GEF project decisions. In the end, delegates agreed to the designation of the GEF as the interim structure with a decision on its status to be made at the next COP. On a positive note, the GEF debate, although contentious at times, stimulated a frank exchange of views and provide an opportunity for the venting of deeply held positions. Delegates have come to realize that the GEF, although far from perfect, plays a significant role in funding biodiversity projects. Therefore, many have argued that it is in the best interest of the Convention that a concrete relationship be forged between the COP and the GEF so that the COP can maintain a positive influence on GEF decision-making. Further delay could adversely affect future replenishment. It was largely felt that the Secretariat study on alternative sources of funding, coupled with the GEF review, indicates that most governments do want the Convention to succeed and recognize the extent to which financial support will be a key factor.

Priority for conservation: Many NGOs welcomed the priority given to the conservation of components of biodiversity, particularly those which are under threat, in both the medium-term work programme of the COP, as well as the work programme of the SBSTTA. These matters are also included in the list of programme priorities for the financial mechanism. There was some concern that these issues could have been dealt with more substantively at this COP, although it is expected that future COPs will be better equipped to address these matters, now that many of the procedural and organizational issues have been dealt with.

[Return to start of article]