Report

Third consultative meeting on the draft Strategic Framework 2012-2021 for the implementation of the Basel Convention

International Environment House 1, Geneva, Switzerland

8 and 9 February 2011

I. Opening of the meeting

The Executive Secretary welcomed the participants. She acknowledged gratitude that the meeting had been able to be held with the financial support of the Government of Canada provided through the Department of the Environment and underlined the importance of this consultation as the last face-to-face meeting before the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties (COP10) in October 2011 in Colombia. She explained the context in which this meeting was taking place. She referred in particular to the latest draft omnibus decision, prepared under the Country Lead Initiative (CLI) to improve the effectiveness of the Basel Convention; to the theme selected by the host country for COP10, namely “Minimising wastes and re-using them” (working title); to the importance ofproviding concrete output to the RIO+20 meeting and to the related issue of reporting requirements under the Convention through, for instance, the use of indicators. She referred the Strategic Framework, which will be a key issue for discussions at COP 10, as the document that will shape and give new direction to the Basel Convention.She also commented on the consultations she undertook in January with a group of independent experts in order to prepare a non-paper for the Host Government on the issue of the theme for COP 10.

II. Election of Co-Chairs

The Executive Secretary proposed, on the basis of and further to consultation with Parties, two Co-chairs: Ms Jacinthe Séguin from Canada and Mr Prakash Kowlesser from Mauritius. The participants agreed to this proposal.

The representative of Colombia welcomed this opportunity for the representative of the host country of COP10 to participate in this consultation,whichshe hoped would help bring a solid Strategic Framework for adoption by COP10.

Both Co-chairs expressed their thanks to the meeting. They introduced a number of elements they felt were important. The meeting had been convened as per the decision OEWG-VII/1 of the seventh session of the Open-ended Working Group (OEWG7) that requested, in its operative paragraph 4, the Secretariat to organize another consultative meeting to provide further guidance for integrating the means of implementation and indicators in the Strategic Framework. The basic foundation for the Framework had been agreed by the OEWG7 and is composed of the Vision, Guiding Principles, Goals and Objectives. It was therefore essential to build on these agreed elements.

The Co-chair emphasised the importance of identifying gaps and coming up with aninnovative Strategic Framework that promotes the value of the Convention. Emphasising the consultative nature of the meeting, the Co-Chair informed the meeting that the Secretariat had retained the services of a professional facilitator, Ms Ida Koppen, to help the Co-chairs and participants in their tasks. She explained that there would be a report of the meeting and that the Secretariat, based on the guidance provided by this meeting, wouldprepare a consolidated draft Strategic Framework document.

The Co-chair informed the participants that record of the meeting will be taken under the Chatham House rules that interventions would be reported but not attributed to individuals. The meeting agreed to this proposal.

III. Adoption of the agenda

The Co-chair introduced the draft agenda that had been proposed by the Secretariat. The following agenda was agreed upon:

TIME / 8 FEBRUARY 2011 (TUESDAY)
8.45 – 9.15 / Registration of participants
9.15 – 10.00 / Opening Session
  • Welcoming remarks by the Executive Secretary, SBC
  • Election of Co-chairs
  • Introductory remarks and ground rules (Co-Chairs)
  • Agreement on the organization of work for Day 1 (Co-chairs, facilitator)

10:00 – 10:45 / Objectives of the meeting and Update on the preparatory process (Secretariat, Co-Chairs, facilitator)
10.45 – 11.00 / Coffee break
11.00 – 11.15 / Session 1 (Plenary)
Presentation of the NSF Explanatory note and Tables (consultant)
11.15 – 11.30 / Introduction of SWOT analysis exercise (Facilitator, co-chairs)
11.30 – 12.30 / SWOT analysis – Small groups
12.30 - 14.00 / Lunch break
14.00 – 15.15 / Session 2 (Small groups and Plenary)
SWOT analysis – Small groups (continue in breakout session if needed)
15.15 – 16.10 / Report back to plenary by small groups on outcome of SWOT analysis (Chairs of small groups)
16.10 – 16.30 / Coffee break
16.30 – 17.45 / Session 3 (Plenary)
General discussion of Strategic Framework draft Means of Implementation and indicators
17.45 – 18.00 / Synthesis of days discussion and organization of work for day 2 (Secretariat, Co-Chairs, facilitator)
18.00 / End of day 1
TIME / 9 FEBRUARY 2011 (WEDNESDAY)
9.00 – 9.45 / Plenary Session
  • Presentation of Outcome of SWOT Analysis Exercise
  • Identify Means of Implementation and Indicators

9.45 – 11.00 / Breakup Group discussion on Indicators
11.00 – 11.15 / Coffee break
11.15 – 12.00 / Report back to Plenary by breakup groups
12.00 – 13.00 / Discussion on Means of Implementation (Plenary)
13.00 – 14.00 / Lunch break
14.00 – 15.15 / Brainstorming discussion on Means of Implementation (Plenary)
15.15 – 15.30 / Coffee break
15.30 – 17.30 / Closing session
  • Discussion on evaluation, reporting and monitoring
  • Synthesis by Co-chairs
  • Discussion on next steps (Secretariat)
  • Closure of meeting

17.30 / End of meeting

IV. Organization of the meeting

A. Attendance

A list of Participants is annexed to the present report as Annex III.

B. Organization of work

The Co-chair presented the objectives of the consultation. The meeting was intended to advance the preparation of the Strategic Framework by:

Confirming that the desired elements have been captured;

Identifying what is missing in the current draft Strategic Framework;

Discussing how to address the gaps;

Proposing solutions or ways forward;

Providing guidance to the Secretariat on how the Strategic Framework should be presented to COP10 bearing in mind linkages to other key initiatives or activities.

Some discussions took place regarding the matters to be worked on by the consultative meeting. In this regard, it was re-emphasized that the meeting would use the elements agreed by the OEWG7 but would not re-open them.

V. Consideration of the draft Strategic Framework

The Secretariat gavea presentation of the work done so far and work-in-progress regarding the preparation of the Strategic Framework.

A. General discussion

The Co-chair opened the floor for a general discussion. Several interventions were made capturing what the participants felt was important to consider in the ongoing work, such as the issue of financial resources and other resources, awareness-raising and capacity building. A number of participants highlighted some of their requirements for building a solid Framework. They referred to the need to have quality information to support and report on indicators, to seize this opportunity to link to other relevant issues such as climate change or contribute to solving POPs or mercury issues. The process to prepare the Strategic Framework and its implementation are seen as an opportunity to increase the profile of the Basel Convention that might attract more support. The enhanced cooperation among the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions was identified as an important component of the Strategic Framework. The Strategic Framework is an unique document that will identify and include missing elements of the strategic plan for the previous decade and build on those lessons learned to support implementation of the Basel Convention for the coming 10 years.

Part of the discussion centred on the draft means of implementation and indicators. A number of participants highlighted that some of the draftmeans of implementation contained in the note by the Secretariat look like objectives or activities and questioned the links with the programme of work under the Convention. Others said that they contain ideas on how to implement the Strategic Framework. Participantsdiscussedthe role ofthe means of implementation in linking the strategic goals and objectives with the indicators. The issue of the placement of the means of implementation was raised as a critical issue. Some participants indicated that it would be important to pick-up elements of the draft means of implementation in the programme of work to be submitted to COP10 (e.g. in the programme-budget, partnerships programme, etc.). They argued that a short, clear and punchy Strategic Framework is needed containing selected indicators that would attract attention of policy makers and would help mobilize additional resources.Consequently, it would be difficult to insert a long list of means of implementation as part of the Strategic Framework. Others were of the opinion that includingmeans of implementation as part of the Strategic Framework would be an important signal. The rationale is that it is essential to identify the means of implementation to provide a direction on how to implement the Strategic Framework.

Several comments were made about indicators. It was said that some indicators might be beyond the capacity of certain Parties, that numbers may not capture the entire idea behind indicators and it was emphasized that qualitative and quantitative information is important to provide a measurement of performance and assess trends. The existence and sources of data needed to populate and report on indicators came up as an issue for discussion, as well as data quality, reliability and comparability. Indicators may lead to additional reporting and it might be difficult to measure some indicators. The question in which timeframe to apply the indicators was raised. Also, it was considered useful to look at other fora to see how those fora use indicators.

There was some discussion amongst participants of the need for the Strategic Framework not to be a static tool. It needs to be able to evolve, based on a foundation, on which potentially new means of implementation and indicators could be added.

B. The SWOT analysis

The Co-chairs, having heard the views of the participants, introduced the SWOT (Strength, Weakness, Opportunities, Threat) analysis that was intended tohelp the meeting to progress in its discussions and provide guidance to the Secretariat on the preparation of the next consolidated draft of the Strategic Framework. The Co-chairsformed and invited four in-session working groups to meet separately with the task of looking at the two components of the development of the Strategic Framework, namely: the elements agreed by the OEWG7 that form the foundation; and the work–in-progress on means of implementation and indicators. The Co-chairs clarified that it was not in the mandate nor the responsibility of this group to re-open text on which the OEWG had reached agreement. The purpose was to collect input from participants ontheir perception of the strengths, opportunities, weaknesses and threats to the current text and about the draft means of implementation and indicators. The outcome of the SWOT analysis, as presented by the spokespersonsof the four working groups, is contained in Annex Ito the present report. The outcome of the SWOT analysis was fed into the work undertaken and discussions on means of implementation and indicators.

VI. Means of implementation

Through the general discussions and the SWOT analysis it became clear that the issue of the means of implementation necessitated the full attention ofthe whole group. The Co-chair, therefore, with support from the meeting, proposed to allocate time in plenary to discuss the means of implementation. Some participants mentioned that the draft means of implementation could be a good basis for further work and that the meeting could improve them as part of the Strategic Framework as a starting point for discussions. Several key points were discussed. These included the fact that the means of implementation are essential to the Strategic Framework and that a significant flow of resources and new and additional resources, especially to developing countries would be needed.

Some Parties considered and suggested anumber of key issues as means of implementation that would beneeded to achieve the goals and objectives of the Strategic Framework. The collection of suggestions is illustrated below, not being listed in any order of priority, in a synthetic manner:

Strengthening of the Compliance Committee;

Mobilizing resources;

Financial mechanism;

Raising awareness at the national, regional and global level;

Technical assistance, training, capacity building, transfer of technology and international cooperation;

Synergies with relevant institutions, organizations and initiatives, includingenhanced cooperation and coordination among the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions;

Partnerships (public and private);

Reinforcing the Basel and Stockholm Conventions regional and coordinating centres and their networking.

There were divergent views expressed about the proposed financial mechanism. Some participants felt that this issue was a separate issue from the discussion on the Strategic Framework while others supported it as an important message to flag out to the COP. Those participants in favour of the inclusion of a financial mechanism in the Strategic Framework as a door for financial support such as the Global Environment Facility, asserted that the omission of such a mechanism in the previous strategic plan was one of the failings of that document.

Additionally, the following remarks were retained as being useful, based on a submission by a Party, that the Strategic Framework:

  • Isa basic instrument for the implementation of the Convention during 2012-2021;
  • Should remain a stable and focussed document;
  • Would require political commitment, adequate capacity and resources in order to achieve the objectives;
  • Actions to execute the Strategic Framework should be agreed upon by Parties in the context of regular COP decisions;
  • At COP10 linkages with the programme-budget should bearticulated;
  • Means of implementation should be realistic, targeted and compatible with identifiable and appropriate resources;
  • The Strategic Framework should be consistent with earlier COP decisions and take into account related work under the Convention (i.e: CLI; review of Basel Convention regional and coordinating centres; cooperation among the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions).

VII. Indicators

The Group felt the need to further work on indicators in relation to the agreed goals and objectives of the Strategic Framework. The Co-chair invited the participants to break-up into three in-session working groups to further advance with the preparation of the indicators. Three in-session working groups were established, one working group per Strategic Goal, to advance with the development of indicators. The break-out groups were asked to consider a limited number of key and meaningful indicators they believed are essential to measure performance of the Strategic Framework, taking into account three factors: indicator of what; source of data and information; monitoring and frequency of reporting. The outcome of the break-out groups is contained in Annex IIto the present report.

While discussing the outcome of the in-session working groups, some participants highlighted the need to differentiate between indicators attached to the Goals and Objectives of the Strategic Framework from indicators to measure performance of the means of implementation. In this context, views were expressed on the value of developing measurements for the means of implementation.

VIII. Monitoring and evaluation

Several participants requested a discussion on the issue of monitoring and evaluation of the Strategic Framework, as they felt this was an important aspect that was currently missing in the draft Strategic Framework text and that needed to be discussed in plenary. The discussion that followed highlighted the following points:

There was support for having a monitoring and evaluation system that would form part of the Strategic Framework and that could be in place at the beginning of implementation;

Within a ten-year period, measurements at regular intervals (e.g. at the beginning, mid-term and final) would be necessary to check if Parties are on track to meet the objectives of the Strategic Framework;

The issues of the format, frequency and the data required to support reporting would require further attention.

It was felt useful to clarify what monitoring and evaluation imply or stand for. An evaluation plan is about setting clear objectives, clear indicators and capacity for collecting and using data. The process would be articulated in three phases, namely: collect data from indicators on a regular basis (monitoring). Then, see what is the picture, establish the baseline and trends and what to do with the data based on a series of questions in the context of the Strategic Framework (evaluation). As a result of the evaluation, undertake, as necesserary and useful, a review process of the implementation of the Strategic Framework. It would be helpful to evaluate both the process and the outcome at different time periods and check points for each category of evaluation.

IX. Remarks by the Co-chair

The Co-chair provided the meeting with hersummaryand understanding of the work accomplished by the group during the two days meeting. The group built its work on the outcome of the OEWG7 decision VII/1. She noted convergence among participants about the structure of the Strategic Framework and the fact that the OEWG-agreed elements represented a solid foundation. A lot of good ideas were presented and discussed that help the meeting to provide guidance to the Secretariat. She acknowledged that the work on indicators is not complete and that there were still different levels of scope and scales of possible indicators. The SWOT analysis identified a limited number of issues regarding indicators. The discussion on the means of implementation was useful and helped streamline the process. But, clearly, more work is needed to flesh out section IV of the Strategic Framework that would contain the means of implementation. She highlighted some outstanding issues such as what would be used as a measure of success and what might be done if expectations were not met.

The meeting discussed the way forward and affirmed the importance of establishing linkages in the preparation of the Strategic Framework and its eventual adoption at COP10 to the other relevant ongoing issues in the context of the Basel Convention that would be submitted to COP10.

X. Next steps

The Secretariat informed the meeting of the process leading to COP10. The draft report of the meeting will be made available by 18 February 2011 for a first reading by the participants. The comments provided by the participants, to be submitted to the Secretariat by 24 February 2011, would be captured to revise and finalise the report of the meeting that will be posted on the web site of the Convention ( by 28 February 2011. This outcome would then be open to further comments by all Parties and stakeholders until 31 March 2011