Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technology Advice

SUBSIDIARY BODY ON SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVICE

Sixth meeting

Montreal, 12-16 March 2001

Item 5.1 of the provisional agenda[*]

/…

SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENTS

Development of methodologies and identification of pilot studies

Note by the Executive Secretary

Addendum

REPORT OF THE BRAINSTORMING MEETING ON SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT, OSLO, 17-19 NOVEMBER 1999

Note by the Executive Secretary

1.The Executive Secretary is circulating herewith, for the consideration of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice under item 5.1 of the provisional agenda for its sixth meeting, the report of the report of the report of the brainstorming meeting on scientific assessment that was held in Oslo from 17 to 19 November 1999.

2.This report was initially circulated, in English only, as an information document for the fifth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention. By paragraph28 of its decisionV/20, the Conference of the Parties noted the report and referred it to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice for consideration and, where appropriate, use in its work.

1

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/6/9/Add.1

Page 1

REPORT OF THE BRAINSTORMING MEETING ON

SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT

Oslo, 17 - 19 November 1999

1. OPENING OF THE MEETING

1.The Meeting was opened by Mr. Hamdallah Zedan, Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity who briefly introduced the issue of scientific assessment within the framework of the Convention. He also thanked the Government of Norway for hosting and co-sponsoring the meeting.

2.Mr. Ivar Baste, Deputy Director General of the Ministry of Environment welcomed the participants on behalf of the Government of Norway.

3.Mr. Peter Johan Schei, Director of International Negotiations, Directorate for Nature Management of Norway was unanimously elected chairman for the Session.

4.The provisional agenda for the meeting was approved as attached in annexI.

5.The list of participants is attached in annex II.

2. REVIEW OF RELEVANT DECISIONS OF THE CONFERENCE OF PARTIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SUBSIDIARY BODY ON SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVICE (SBSTTA)

6.The Convention on Biological Diversity, in its preamble, recognizes "the general lack of information and knowledge regarding biological diversity and of the urgent need to develop scientific, technical, and institutional capacities to provide the basic understanding upon which to plan and implement appropriate measures". Article 25 requests the SBSTTA, inter alia, to "provide scientific and technical assessments of the status of biological diversity" and "prepare scientific and technical assessments on the effects of types of measures taken in accordance with the provisions of this Convention".

7.Several decisions of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention (see annex III below) and recommendations from the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA) and the Inter-Sessional Meeting on the Operation of the Convention (ISOC) relevant to scientific and technical assessment and peer-reviewing, also address the assessment need for the Convention on Biological Diversity.

3. LESSONS LEARNED FROM PREVIOUS ASSESSMENTS AND PEER REVIEW MECHANISMS

8.Presentations on the experiences of scientific assessments within the IPCC and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer were given by representatives of these programmes.

9.Assessment activities within the Global International Waters Assessment (GIWA), the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the Global Biodiversity Assessment, CITES, IUCN, and AustralianNationalLand and Water Audit were also presented by participants familiar with these initiatives.

4. ELEMENTS FOR A DRAFT PROPOSAL ON A SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT PROCESS WITHIN THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY

10.Since the Convention on Biological Diversity came into force in December 1993, it has focused on the implementation of its three basic objectives namely the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources. The Convention is hence the first global, comprehensive agreement to address all aspects of biological diversity: genetic resources, species and ecosystems. It recognizes for the first time that the conservation of biological diversity is a "common concern of humankind" and an integral part of sustainable development. The Convention also addresses for the first time matters related to equity and shared responsibility.

11.The Convention addresses biodiversity issues in six thematic areas (inland waters, marine/coastal, agro-biodiversity, forest, drylands, and mountains), as well as cross-cutting issues such as access and benefit-sharing, the ecosystem approach, alien species, Global Taxonomy Initiative and indicators.

12.A lot of information has already been gathered on biodiversity issues in international projects and through national inventories and research projects. However, information needs to be accessible; comparable; and regularly updated to constitute a reliable basis for policy decisions and actions taken by the Parties to the Convention. This is presently not the case and therefore there is a need for an assessment process which is continuously ongoing; transparent; independent; and scientifically and politically credible. Moreover, much of the existing data are not comparable across continents or are inadequate to answer assessment questions at the global or regional scale. A credible and scientifically-based global biodiversity assessment will necessarily involve the scientific community not only to consolidate and assess existing data but also to generate, on a timely basis, the necessary new data to answer the questions posed by the Convention.

13.The meeting identified the need to address the following main issues to develop the scientific-assessment process under the Convention on Biological Diversity:

(a)Needs and scope of assessments;

(b)Assessments within the framework and operations of the Convention on Biological Diversity;

(c)Linkages with relevant existing and planned assessments;

(d)Joint assessments;

(e)Involvement of the scientific community;

(f)Assessment process and mechanisms;

(g)Financing.

Needs and scope of assessment

14.There are multiple needs for assessments within the Convention, including regular in-depth status and trends assessments within thematic areas and cross-cutting issues, comprehensive assessments from time to time, and assessments of the effectiveness of measures taken at regional and national level (which are already part of SBSTTA’s mandate). There may also be need for technology assessments and assessment of the impact of specific issues (e.g. trade, alien species, biotechnology, etc) on biodiversity.

15.The assessment process within the Convention should be commissioned and managed by SBSTTA and be linked to the work-programme. The activities under the Convention, such as existing work programmes, the Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO), and national reports may need to be adapted in order to be able to take full advantage of the assessment process. The results from the assessments would also help formulate future work programmes within the Convention.

16.The aim and purpose of assessments must be precise and clear, and the findings must be policy-relevant but not policy-prescriptive. The objectives of the assessment are to:

(a)Review the current state of, and gaps in, knowledge on critical policy-relevant scientific issues;

(b)Outline scenarios and consequences of various policy options in terms of, inter alia, trade-offs between different values of biodiversity; and,

(c)Draw attention to those issues where scientists have reached a consensus of view and those where uncertainty has lead to conflicting view points and therefore need further research.

Assessments within the framework and operations of the Convention on Biological Diversity

17.Article 25 of the Convention on Biological Diversity has already mandated SBSTTA with two specific assessment responsibilities and the Conference of the Parties has already endorsed the general advice of SBSTTA on some aspects of this issue (decision III/10). SBSTTA recommendation IV/1B further addresses the issue of peer review and scientific assessment.

18.The need for an authorizing environment for a CBD assessment and ownership was stressed. The SBSTTA and ISOC recommendations constitute a good basis for a decision by the Conference of the Parties that would give SBSTTA the authority and flexibility to carry out any necessary assessments in the future.

19.The existing structures, such as the ad hoc technical expert groups, liaison groups, expert panels, roster of experts, the Secretariat of the Convention and its clearing house mechanism (CHM), and the financial mechanism could be used in carrying out the assessment process. It was noted that, at its fifth meeting, SBSTTA was to consider a note by the Executive Secretary on ad hoc technical expert groups: terms of reference, and roster of experts and proposal on a uniform methodology for their use (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/5/15). In order to carry forward the assessment process, a proposal to establish a steering mechanism to function as a Scientific Assessments Panel should be presented to the Conference of the Parties at its fifth meeting.

20.The Scientific Assessments Panel and the implementation of the assessment process should be designed to guarantee a scientifically independent and credible assessment process, striving for the highest possible quality.

21.The roster of experts should be used to the extent possible in the assessment process, but the selection of experts should not be limited to those included in the roster.

22.The clearing-house mechanism should be used to help identify experts that could participate in the assessments and to facilitate exchange of relevant information, peer review of documents and dissemination of results. The clearing-house mechanism should be used to promote international scientific and technical cooperation in support of assessments under the Convention on Biological Diversity, including the overcoming of language barriers.

23.Every assessment should identify gaps in knowledge and joint scientific and technological cooperation ventures that would promote the implementation of the Convention.

Linkages with relevant existing and planned assessments

24.There are several assessments, monitoring programmes, and projects which potentially could provide input to the assessment process under the Convention. An inventory of existing assessments, including their relevance to the Convention is needed. This inventory will build on recent surveys carried out.

25.It is important to identify which assessment needs of the Convention on Biological Diversity can be met by existing initiatives and how they can be expanded to better meet those needs. The mechanisms for collaborating with ongoing initiatives such as providing lead authors, responsibilities for chapters, participation in steering committees, necessary buy-in and acceptance by the Convention on Biological Diversity, quality assurance, etc., should be developed in rules of procedure.

26.The areas that are of importance for the Convention on Biological Diversity but not presently covered by ongoing activities (gaps) should be identified.

27.The co-sponsoring of assessments or participation in joint assessments with several authorizing authorities may need the approval from the Conference of the Parties.

Joint assessments

28.Some assessments, like the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and others, may be designed and established in partnership with other institutions where assessment needs are complementary and to address inter-linkages among issues.

29.The process and mechanism used for joint assessments should meet the criteria established for assessments established within the Convention, recognizing that the governance of the process will be shared with other institutions.

30.Likewise, assessments may be required on specific topics and issues linked to other environmental conventions and related international agreements, and could be carried out jointly or in close consultation with their respective secretariats and relevant bodies. Such an initiative is the ongoing follow-up to the first Interlinkages Assessment report entitled "Protecting our Planet - Securing our Future: Linking Global Environmental Issues to Basic Human Needs".

Involvement of the scientific community

31.The involvement of the scientific community is crucial. The scientific community should engage itself both in the decision-making process under the Convention and in that way become part of the authorizing environment for the assessment process, as well as in the elaboration of the assessments themselves, including the gathering of new data and the consolidation of existing data. The assessment process is conducted to create an arena for the interaction between the scientific community and policy makers. The Convention, through SBSTTA and its other bodies, should develop mechanisms to engage the scientific community to adapt its research programs to meet the needs of the Convention, including the gathering of standardized and comparable new data to answer the questions posed by the SBSTTA under its assessment framework.

32.The experiences to mobilize the scientific community within the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Montreal Protocol could be used also within the assessment process for the Convention.

33.The assessment process should be designed to allow for scientific independence.

The assessment process and mechanisms

34.An outline for a possible structure for the assessment process is presented in annex IV below. The proposed structure would ensure the authorizing environment, scientific independence, and quality control by extensive peer review. Regarding the approval and acceptance of the assessment findings, there are two possible options that differ in their levels of scientific independence and political ownership:

(a)Option 1:The Executive Summary of the assessments containing main policy relevant findings would be presented to SBSTTA for consideration and action. This option would avoid a potentially lengthy approval process, but would not have the full governmental endorsement. The SBSTTA recommendations would draw on the findings of the executive summary;

(b)Option 2:The executive summary would be presented to SBSTTA for approval. This process would close the loop between the governmental authorizing environment for the assessment process, the scientific independence, and the ownership, endorsement and political commitment to the findings of the assessment. However, because the same body that would make policy recommendations drawing on the findings would also be negotiating the findings themselves, the negotiation of the findings would become the de facto negotiation of the policy recommendations thereby diminishing the scientific independence of the findings.

35.It was recommended to develop an assessment strategy for SBSTTA, including the need for assessments within the Convention, relation to ongoing activities (within and outside the Convention), mechanisms for collaboration with other initiatives and mechanisms to engage the scientific community, to be presented to the Conference of the Parties at its fifth meeting (see annex V below).

36.Also, in addition to the assessment strategy, rules of procedures based on the IPCC procedures for the preparation, review, acceptance, adoption, approval and publication of IPCC reports should be developed and presented to the Conference of the Parties at its fifth meeting. A first draft is attached in annex VI below.

Financing

37.The strategic assessment framework needs to identify the financial needs for the assessment process under the Convention on Biological Diversity. Funding may be easier to obtain for comprehensive assessments than for repeated in-depth assessments of specific topics. Funding may come from:

(a)Trust Fund for the Convention on Biological Diversity;

(b)The Global Environment Facility (GEF);

(c)Support from Parties who buy into the assessment process and who would contribute in kind (institutions, staff, etc.) and money.

38.A forum for interaction with science funding agencies should be established to promote funding in areas relevant to the need of the assessment process, as well as the work programmes of the Convention.

39.Cost-efficiency should be sought by participating in joint assessment initiatives.

5. CLOSURE

40.In closing, the Chairman thanked the participants for their valuable contributions and active participation in the discussions.

41.The Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity thanked the Government of Norway for the excellent facilities provided for the meeting. He also thanked the participants for dedicating their time and provide their very valuable inputs to assist the Secretariat to bring the assessment process forward.

42.The Chairman closed the meeting on Friday, 19 November 1999 at 1p.m.

Annex I

AGENDA

1. Opening
2. Review of relevant decisions of the Conference of the Parties and recommendations of SBSTTA
3. Lessons learned from previous assessments and peer review mechanisms
4. Elements for a draft proposal
5. Closure

Annex II

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

Mr. Rueben Olembo

Former Deputy Executive Director

UNEPTel: 254-2-568-695

Nairobi – KENYAFax: 254-2-562-949

Prof. Abdul Habid Zakri

Deputy Vice Chancellor

University of MalaysiaTel: 603-825-343

43600 UKM Bangi, SelangorFax: 603-825-6484

Darul Ehsan – MALAYSIAE-mail:

Dr. Braulio Dias

Director, Biodiversity and Genetic Resources

Ministry of Environment

Esplanada dos MinisteriosTel: 55-61-317-1120

Bloco B, Sala 653Fax: 55-61-323-7936

Brasilia, DF 70068-900 – BRAZILE-mail:

Mr. David Brackett

Director General, Canadian Wildlife Services

Environment Canada

Place Vincent Massey, 3rd FloorTel: 819-997-1301

351 St. Joseph BoulevardFax: 819-953-7177

Hull, Qc K1A 0H3-CANADAE-mail:

Mr. Gabor Nechay

Senior Counselor

Ministry for EnvironmentTel: 361-395-6857

Kolto u. 21Fax: 361-395-7458

1121 Budapest – HUNGARYE:mail:

Dr Walter Reid

World Resource Institute Tel: 206-782-7963

731 N. 79th St. Fax: 206-782-5682

Seattle,WA98103 – USAEmail:

Mr. Robert Watson

Chairman IPCCTel: 202-473-6965

The World Bank GroupFax:202-477-0565

Washington D.C. USAE-mail:

Mr. Nelson Sabogal

Programme Officer, Secretariat for the Vienna

Convention and the Montreal Protocol

UNEPTel: 254-2-623-856

P.O. Box 30552Fax:: 254-2-623-913

Nairobi – KENYAE-mail: