ENB:13:03
[Next] .
[Previous] .
[Contents]
ITEM V — REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND MULTILATERAL INSTITUTIONS AND MECHANISMS
The Co-Chair opened the floor to comments on Item V, recommending that given the impracticability of discussing item V.2, relating to the development of other instruments, that comments be limited to issue V.1.
SWITZERLAND announced a joint proposal with Peru to organize and host a working group to study work conducted by international organizations, multilateral institutions, and under existing legal instruments. The proposed working group would be comprised of twelve members, including two independent experts from each of the five UN regions as well as two experts from the NGO community to be selected among themselves. The group's function would be to provide an objective review of all forest-related work, activities and legal documents while identifying areas of gaps and overlap. She noted that the process should be as transparent as is practical. A contact group for the proposed working group had already been formed and that copies of the proposal were available for review.
CANADA expressed the need for the compilation of previous work to be transparent and independent of international agencies and organizations, but was supportive of the Swiss-Peruvian proposal. AUSTRALIA also supported the joint proposal.
The JAPAN TROPICAL FOREST NETWORK stated that the Panel could not fully address the issue of sustainable forest management without considering issues related to climate change and the role of consumption patterns. In response to the Swiss-Peruvian proposal, ECUADOR stated that the working group would probably not be the only one of its kind and that any such group must be transparent and participatory.
FINLAND stated that the proposal could provide useful information and requested time for further study. The US said that work should be undertaken in an objective manner and focus on ongoing processes related to forests, including comparative strengths and advantages. MEXICO reminded delegates of the transparency that all levels of this process should have in order to be successful. He added that the mandate should be confined to an overall view and any other substantive consideration will be addressed within this view.
CO-CHAIR'S SUMMARY: The Co-Chair noted that delegates accept that the mandate demands a thorough overview and evaluation of work in all institutions that bear on forests. Delegates want a transparent participatory process. While delegates supported the establishment of an expert group, they insisted that such a group work in close cooperation with the Panel. Delegates agree that Item V.2 should be discussed when the work is far advanced, with comments at the third and fourth sessions.