Status of capacity-building activities
The Conference of the Parties serving
as the meeting of the Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety,
Recalling its
decision BS-I/5 on capacity-building,
Welcoming the
note prepared by the Executive Secretary on the status of capacity-building
for the effective implementation of the Protocol (UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/2/4),
Reaffirming the critical importance of capacity-building for the effective implementation
and compliance with the provisions of the Protocol by developing country Parties,
in particular the least developed and small island developing States among
them, as well as Parties with economies in transition,
Noting
that the lack of adequate financial and technological resources is a significant
constraint to effective capacity-building,
Reiterating the importance of adopting needs-based, country-driven and target-oriented
approaches to capacity-building,
Noting
the urgent need to enhance human resources development and recognizing the
role of academic and other training institutions in addressing the needs of
different countries in this regard,
Emphasizing the need to ensure the sustainability of capacity-building activities,
Acknowledging that a lack of information in the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH) is
an impediment to implementation of the Coordination Mechanism,
A. Coordination Mechanism
1. Welcomes the progress report on the implementation of the Coordination Mechanism
prepared by the Executive Secretary (UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/2/4, section II);
2. Urges
Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations
to share their information through the Coordination Mechanism and the Biosafety
Clearing-House and to ensure reliable quality of that information;
3. Invites
regional and subregional institutions to contribute
to capacity-building in biosafety and to actively participate in the Coordination
Mechanism;
4. Welcomes
the generous offer by the Government of Norway
to sponsor and host a coordination meeting in early 2006 for representatives
of Governments and organizations implementing or funding biosafety capacity-building
activities;
5. Takes
note of the report of the coordination meeting
for academic and other institutions offering biosafety-related training and
education programmes, which was organized and hosted by the Government of
Switzerland in Geneva from 4 to 6 October 2004 (UNEP/CBD/COP-MOP/2/INF/9)
and the report of the coordination meeting for Governments and organizations
implementing or funding biosafety capacity-building activities, held in Montreal
on 26-27 January 2005 (UNEP/CBD/COP-MOP/2/INF/10);
6. Welcomes
the compendium of biosafety training and education
courses developed by the above-mentioned coordination meeting for institutions
offering biosafety-related training and education programmes made available
through the Biosafety Clearing-House;
7. Invites
Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations
to submit for the compendium information on existing biosafety training courses
and to use the compendium to identify and take advantage of available training
and education opportunities in biosafety;
8. Urges
countries to identify their biosafety training
and education needs and communicate the information to the Biosafety Clearing-House
to enable relevant institutions to design appropriate training programmes
and packages;
9. Invites
developed country Parties, other developed States,
the Global Environment Facility and relevant organizations to:
(a) Provide financial resources
and other support for training and education in biosafety, including the provision
of scholarships and fellowships for students from developing countries, in
particular the least developed and the small island developing States among
them, and countries with economies in transition as well as support for "training-of-trainers"
programmes and "re-training" courses;
(b) Assist countries to incorporate
specific components on training and education in their capacity-building project
proposals, for example for the implementation of the national biosafety frameworks;
10. Encourages
Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations
to:
(a) Endeavour to create opportunities
and career paths for local professionals trained in biosafety, especially
young graduates, in order for them to utilize their skills;
(b) Actively involve academic and
training institutions in relevant national and international biosafety processes,
including the development and implementation of national biosafety frameworks;
11. Invites
institutions offering biosafety training and education
courses to:
(a) Regularly update information
in the compendium regarding their courses;
(b) Take into account the training
needs of countries in order to develop appropriate (demand-driven) training
programmes, including those targeted for specific audiences or addressing
specific needs;
(c) Participate proactively in
relevant biosafety processes at the national, regional and international levels
in order to be acquainted with the emerging issues, needs and challenges in
biosafety;
(d) Establish collaborative partnerships
with other institutions, especially those in developing countries, with a
view to transferring skills, sharing experience and course materials as well
as fostering harmonization and mutual recognition of the course offerings;
(e) Develop and facilitate distance-learning
tools, such as online courses;
12. Requests
the Executive Secretary to further develop the
Coordination Mechanism, including needs assessment and coordination, taking
into account the Bali Strategic Plan for Technology Support and Capacity-Building
adopted by the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme
in February 2005 with a view to creating synergies and avoiding unnecessary
duplication of work;
B. Capacity-building needs and priorities and possible measures for addressing them
13. Takes note of the report on the needs and priorities
for building capacities for the effective implementation of the Protocol (UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/2/INF/7)
and requests the Executive Secretary to make it available to donor Governments
and relevant organizations;
14. Invites
developed country Parties, Governments and relevant
organizations to consider the information contained in the report in the development
of their assistance programmes;
15. Reminds
Parties and other Governments that have not yet
done so to submit to the Biosafety Clearing-House information on their capacity-building
needs and priorities and all those that have done so to update their records
on a regular basis;
16. Invites
developed countries and relevant international
organizations to provide support to developing country Parties, in particular
the least developed and small island developing states among them, including
countries among those that are centres of origin and centres of genetic diversity,
as well as Parties with economies in transition, in the field of capacity-building,
in particular for the development and implementation of national biosafety
frameworks;
17. Further
invites organizations and initiatives involved
in biosafety capacity-building which have in-country infrastructure, such
as biosafety projects funded by the Global Environment Facility, to assist
countries in assessing and submitting their capacity-building needs and priorities
to the Biosafety Clearing-House;
18. Urges Parties and other Governments to prioritize among the different possible
measures for addressing their needs and gaps in building capacities for the
effective implementation of the Protocol;
19. Encourages
Parties and other Governments that have not yet
done so to develop national strategies for capacity-building in biosafety,
prioritizing the needs for capacity-building activities in the different components
of the national biosafety frameworks, in order to facilitate a proactive,
systematic and coordinated approach addressing the country capacity-building
needs and gaps;
20. Further
encourages Parties and other Governments to address
the issue of sustainability of capacity-building by designing in their national
capacity-building plans and programmes elements that may help them to incorporate
follow-up actions as part of their regular national programmes;
21. Urges
Parties and other Governments and relevant organizations
to promote regional and subregional initiatives and approaches to address
common needs and priorities and encourages them to make effective use of locally
existing facilities and expertise, including through exchange of experts;
22. Invites
donor countries and relevant organizations to
assist developing countries, in particular the least developed and the small
island developing States among them, and countries with economies in transition,
including countries amongst these that are centres of origin and centres of
genetic diversity, to build capacity for conducting independent biosafety-related
research;
23. Further
invites donor countries and organizations supporting
capacity-building activities to:
(a) Consider simplifying the procedures
for making resources available, and harmonize them to the extent possible,
in order to improve access to resources for capacity-building by recipient
countries;
(b) Provide training in project-proposal
development to interested recipient countries;
(c) Consider requiring that countries
seeking support for capacity-building initiatives provide information on other
related ongoing initiatives in order to minimize duplication of capacity-building
assistance;
C. Comprehensive of the review of the Action Plan
24. Adopts
the terms of reference for the comprehensive review
of the Action Plan for the Effective Implementation of the Cartagena Protocol
on Biosafety contained in the annex to the present note;
25. Invites
Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations
to submit to the Secretariat, no later than three months prior to its third
meeting, progress reports on their initiatives contributing to the implementation
of the Action Plan, including their effectiveness, as well as views and suggestions
on desired revisions to the Action Plan, taking into account the terms of
reference for the review mentioned above;
26. Requests
the Executive Secretary to prepare a questionnaire
to assist Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations in submitting
information requested in paragraph 25 above;
27. Invites
relevant organizations and initiatives that have
in-country contacts and infrastructure, such as the biosafety-related projects
under the Global Environment Facility, to assist, in collaboration with the
Executive Secretary, countries in responding to the questionnaire;
28. Requests
also Executive Secretary to include in the questionnaire
referred to in paragraph 26 above elements to assess the constraints
encountered with the implementation of the Coordination Mechanism and the
possible reasons behind the limited use of the roster of biosafety experts;
29. Urges
Executive Secretary to complement the questionnaire
referred to in paragraph 26 above with results available from other relevant
assessments and evaluation studies of capacity-building programmes including,
inter alia, the evaluation by the Global Environment Facility of the
activities financed under its Initial Strategy for Assisting Countries to
Prepare for the Entry into Force of the Cartagena Protocol and the ongoing
assessment study by the United Nations University;
30. Further
requests the Executive Secretary to prepare, on
the basis of the submissions received, a background paper describing, inter
alia, the progress in, and effectiveness of, the implementation of the
Action Plan, the unmet needs/gaps and strategic recommendations to be taken
into account in the possible revision of the Action Plan at the third meeting
of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to
the Protocol;
31. Further
requests the Executive Secretary to prepare, depending
on the outcome of the review, a draft revised Action Plan for consideration
at the third meeting of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting
of the Parties to the Protocol.
Annex
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW AND
POSSIBLE REVISION OF THE ACTION PLAN FOR BUILDING CAPACITIES FOR THE EFFECTIVE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROTOCOL
A. Introduction
1. The Action Plan for Building
Capacities for the Effective Implementation of the Cartagena Protocol was
developed in 2002 by the Intergovernmental Committee for the Cartagena Protocol
on Biosafety and was endorsed in February 2004 by the first meeting of the
Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties. At the time
it was developed, a number of things were unclear. For example, the capacity
needs of countries were not well understood and the coverage of the few then
existing biosafety capacity-building projects was unknown. Since then, a
number of developments have taken place. Many countries have assessed and
submitted their needs and priorities to the Biosafety Clearing-House. As
well, a number of capacity-building projects have been initiated and some
operational experience gained.
2. In light of the new developments,
it is important to review and, if necessary, revise the Action Plan so that
it is relevant to the prevailing circumstances and response to the needs and
priorities of countries, taking into account experience gained and the lessons
learned.
B. Objectives of the review
3. The purpose of the review
is to examine the way and the extent to which the Action Plan has been implemented,
analyse the unmet needs and gaps, review the lessons learned and identify
areas that need to be updated or streamlined. The ultimate objective is to
ensure that the Action Plan is current, relevant and effective in providing a coherent framework for capacity-building efforts
consistent with the needs and priorities of Parties and other Governments.
C. Process of collecting information to facilitate the review
4. The review will be based primarily on information provided by Parties
and other Governments. Information submitted by relevant organizations will
also be taken into account. A questionnaire will be used as the main tool
for gathering the information. The Executive Secretary will design the questionnaire and send it to all Parties,
Governments and relevant organizations. The questionnaire
will be simple to complete and also easily accessible through the Biosafety
Clearing-House. For example check-boxes and yes/no questions will be used.
The preliminary set indicators for monitoring implementation of the Action
Plan, which were adopted in decision BS-I/5 of the Conference of the Parties
serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Protocol, will be used, as appropriate,
in the design of the questionnaire.
5. Respondents will be invited
to submit the completed questionnaire and any additional information to the
Secretariat no later than three months prior to third meeting of the Conference
of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Protocol. In
the preparation of their submissions, they will also be encouraged to use
preliminary set indicators for monitoring implementation of the Action Plan
6. The Executive Secretary
will collaborate with organizations and initiatives that have in-country
contacts and infrastructure, such as the GEF biosafety-related projects, in
order to assist countries in responding to the questionnaire so as to maximize
the number and quality of responses. The Executive Secretary will make use
of other relevant information, including reports and other information submitted
by countries under the biosafety projects funded by the Global Environment
Facility.
D. Type of information needed to facilitate the review
7. Respondents will be invited
to submit information particularly related to the following aspects:
(a) Overview of the progress made
in, and the effectiveness of, the implementation of the Action Plan, including
the extent of coverage of its different elements, the
specific achievements made, the experience gained and the
lessons learned;
(b) Elements of the Action Plan
successfully implemented and consequently considered to be secondary priorities;
(c) The gaps/weaknesses in the
implementation of the Action Plan elements;
(d) The unmet and emerging needs
and priorities requiring urgent
attention;
(e) The main
limitations and constraints encountered, including lack of institutional capacity;
(f) Constraints encountered with
the implementation of the Coordination Mechanism and the possible reasons
behind the limited use of the roster of biosafety experts;
(g) Existing opportunities that could be taken into account
while reviewing the Action Plan;
(h) Views on
the relevance of the different components of the current
Action Plan in relation to the needs and priorities
of countries;
(i) Suggestions on the desired
revisions and improvements to the Action Plan, including elements, processes and activities of the current Action Plan should
be removed or modified, and why, and new ones that should be added;
(j) Suggestions of measures to improve the delivery of capacity-building initiatives
and to enhance their effectiveness in responding to the needs and priorities
of countries.
E. Expected outcomes of the review
8. The main outcome of the
review process prior to the third meeting of the Conference of the Parties
serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Protocol will be a background
paper prepared by the Executive Secretary, on the basis of the above-mentioned
submissions, outlining strategic recommendations to be taken into account
in the possible revision of the Action Plan in order to enhance the effectiveness,
efficiency, timeliness and sustainability of capacity-building measures.
9. Depending on the submissions
received, the Executive Secretary may prepare a draft revised Action Plan
for consideration by the Conference of the Parties
serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Protocol at its third meeting.
