| | english | español | français |
  Home|The Cartagena Protocol|Capacity Building|Portal|Implementation   Printer-friendly version

Online Forum on the Implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety

Return to the list of threads...
Forum closed. No more comments will be accepted on this forum.
Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6071]
In my country also there is not specific budget for biosafety activities. As a result there is always problem with implementing the protocol and even national biosafety law. I hope this problem could be solved as a result of participating in capacity building project for implementation of national Biosafety Framework because different stakeholders involved in this project now are working in integrating biosafety in their national development plans but it is at the draft stage.
Until that time I think every institute, university or company involved in biosafety has to allocate some of its biotechnology budget  to biosafety activities such as risk assessment and risk management.

Kind Regards
Nasrin Esmaeilzadeh
posted on 2014-05-25 10:03 UTC by Ms. Nasrin Sadat Esmailzadeh, Iran (Islamic Republic of)
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6072]
The implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety must be seen as a national priority in all  of the parties who have signed on that that very important protocol. In that regard, there is an urgent need, at the national level, to work in a very cohesive manner where different institutions and organizations (including governmental and non governmental organizations) would put all resources together and work towards the implementation of the protocol. A good strategy that could be pursued is that  during preparation of the budget cycle, allowances could be made for allocation of some resources for biosafety implementation. Clearly, for persons to understand fully the reason for such an allocation in the budget, there has to be a concise understanding of the protocol and in that regard, building awareness among the population on the biosafety and what it is aiming to achieve must be forcefully articulated. Another strategy that could be adopted is that when projects (those that could possible have biosafety implications) are written for funding, allowances must be made for some aspect of biosafety support whether in building awareness or any aspect deem necessary.
For those who are at the forefront in leading the implementation of the biosafety protocol in their respective countries, I am fully aware of the frustration that arises as a result of the lack of funding, and given the financial challenges of Governments these days, the problem would persist for a while but we have to be innovative and strategic and so it would require thinking outside the box and finding solutions. The policy makers have to understand the need for implementing the protocol and so as a strategy we have to consistently keep them at arms length. The argument have to be made quite forcefully, how the country could be negatively impacted if the protocol is not implemented.
On another level, there is need to work with civil society, academia, the youths, ordinary people, funding agency who have to be convinced that implementing the protocol must be seen as a national priority and is inextricably linked to national development and security.
(edited on 2014-05-25 15:41 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis)
posted on 2014-05-25 15:32 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6087]
Dear Daniel

Thanks for your wonderful ideas. With regards to Topic one, countries should be sharing their experiences on how they have integrated biosafety into their NBSAPs and other national development plans and I can see your views are along countries making resources available for the implementation of the Protocol. Can you please share with us your country's experiences in integrating biosafety into the NBSAPs and other national development plans and how this has contributed in resolving challenges in the implementation of the Protocol (Success stories and challenges).
posted on 2014-05-26 21:58 UTC by Ms. Malta Qwathekana, South Africa
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6107]
Dear Malta

We need as countries to tie biosafety to the triple bottom line for more attention to be given to it by policy makers.  That is why in Saint Lucia, we have shown that it is invaluable in developing new products from modern biotechnology for socio-economic development, while safeguarding human and animal health and the environment.  Consequently we can work at attracting investors to assist with modern biodtechnology developments, having ensured that the biosafety systems are critical to the success of their ventures.
(edited on 2014-05-27 16:51 UTC by Ms. Anita James)
posted on 2014-05-27 16:51 UTC by Ms. Anita James, Saint Lucia
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6215]
Dear colleagues,
This is our contribution with regard to mobilization of resources for the implementation of the Protocol. 

Early in 2000 Mexico applyed for a GEF funding in order to build up biosafety technical and institutional capacity. The activities of this project included training worshops for public officials on the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol and LMO risk assessment. It also allowed for strengthening the capacities of some government agencies on their IT infrastructure for construction of the national information system. It was also useful for acquiring equipment and training personnel of the laboratories for LMO detection, identification and quantification; as a result it was possible for the receiving lab to go through the full certification process. Getting this inicial resources was a tipping point for capacity building on biosafety in our country.

In all, the funding experience and capacity building was successful, most goals were achieved, yet challenges were faced on retaining the trained personnel at the receiving institutions because of some difficulties experienced to incorporate them as staff. At the time there were few job opportunities in the government agencies to recruit them. On the other hand, reporting and administrative management was dificult and cumbersome, and it required outsourcing of accountancy due to the lack of personnel paperwork that these actions involve.

After the implementation of the GEF project and with the entrance into force of the Biosafety Law the national mechanisms for the mobilization of resources have been established. With the mandate from the Biosafety Law for the different Secretaries involved in biosafety activities, and the regulations derived from it, the need for having competent officials allowed for hiring personnel (slowly). A federal budget is now allocated every year for different actions mandated in the biosafety law and performed by officials in the SEMARNAT and SAGARPA and in the Secretary of Health. For example there are officials on charge of the administrative and technical processes related to risk assessment for decision making. There also officials on charge of the National Information System and the National Register of GMOs that, among other information, includes the applications for intentional release to the environment of LMOs. We have worked on the development of the National Laboratory Network that involves the participation of government laboratories, but also laboratories for public institutions and Universities; also with federal Budget. Another important component for mobilizing resources is that the Biosafety Law mandates for a financing mechanism for research on biosafety and biotechnology. Improving communication with relevant stakeholders for example with Senators and Deputies (within the legislative power), was very important during the whole process.
All these improvements have taken quite some time and there are still many gaps to be covered, but the mechanisms are now available.
posted on 2014-06-14 05:59 UTC by Ms. Sol Ortiz García, Mexico
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6217]
A wonderful account of the experience of Mexico with regards to the strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the protocol. What is particularly instructive of Ms. Garcia's intervention that I took note of is the fact that despite initial challenges and problems, the Mexican authorities were able to find some practical solutions in overcoming some of the difficulties encountered during the early period of implementation of the protocol. Mention was made about the usefulness of the GEF funding for human resource capacity building as well as laboratory improvements. Many of the participants on this forum have expressed the immense impact of the GEF's funding on the implementation  of the protocol in their respective countries and that must be placed on record as one of the very successful stories of the implementation of the protocol thus far.
Sometimes even after rigorous training and capacity building programmes are conducted, lack of financial resources to employ the beneficiaries allow the exodus of these skilled persons to seek employment outside the biosafety network. To avoid such an occurrence, parties must, in a strategic way, develop some mechanisms to retain these skilled persons so that they contribute in a meaningful and sustainable way   in the implementation of the protocol.
Mexico's experience in dealing with some of the challenges of resource mobilization for the implementation of the protocol has been duly noted and I hope others could learn from that country's experience.
posted on 2014-06-14 13:38 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6218]
Some of our Laws/Acts have some specific chapters devoted on how to mobilize resources from relevant stakeholders on Biosafety matters be they industries,MDAs,NGOs,importers/exporters,Universities/Research institutions etc and they are constantly be enlightened on these aspects
R A Usman
posted on 2014-06-14 14:01 UTC by Mr. Raheef Ademola Usman, Nigeria
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6221]
Thank you very much Mr. Usman for sharing what is happening in Nigeria with respect to strategies for mobilization of resources for the implementation of the protocol. It is very good to know that the Laws/Acts in Nigeria have specific chapters in relation to mobilization of resources for the protocol implementation. But what I want to ask you Mr. Usman, is how effective has the mobilization of resources been in Nigeria? You may well realize that it is one thing to have the laws on the book but it is a totally different thing to enforce those laws.
posted on 2014-06-14 15:04 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6073]
In the Philippines, biosafety regulation started in 1990 by way of an Executive issuance. During that time until 2002, regulations of the products of modern biotechnology, from contained use up to field testing was handled by the National Biosafety Committee of the Philippines, members of which included ex-officio officials of the Agriculture, health and environment and natural resources. Funds for its operation were provided under the yearly General Appropriations Act in the Science Department. Funding was  very small, enough to provide for the supplies and materials for its operations. As years passed, and the activities increased, funding remains very minimal. Starting 2002, applications for field tests, propagation and use of GMOs for direct use was handled by the Agriculture Department.

In 2006, another Executive Order was issued this time strengthening the existing biosafety framework to address other types of GMOs other than agricultural crops as well as delineate the responsibilities of the CNA. Sad to say that despite the new issuance and the numerous activities in implementing the domestic and international framework on biosafety, no regular government funding has been provided to support the regulatory agencies’ mandated functions.  Moreover, regulatory work are add on to the existing resposibilities of the members of the regulatory agencies.

I believe that information on biotechnology and biosafety regulations is not lacking, in fact, IEC’s were being carried out since 1998 for all stakeholders, specificially our lawmakers,  but it seems that this area is not in the list of high priorities in the government’s in addition to the little interests generated on biosafety  how it impacts our imports and national interest. Representations were continuously being made with the budget Department for the institutionalization of the Biosafety regulatory system. What was frustrating was that  these inititatives to create an informed choice and decisions are all drowned  in the activities of other  interests groups who would appeal to emotions of the people. Nevertheless, despite the lack of funds, the CNA’s are able still able to efficiently and effectively carry out their respective mandates.

Based on our experience,  more efforts should be undertaken in providing accurate and timely information to all stakeholders on the country decisions on GMOs’ the regulatory process that each and every applications went through for them to realize that the country has a robust science-based risk assessment process in dealing with applications from contained to placing on the market. Another strategy to be considered is the creation of  “champions” : for the members of the public to create  awareness and greater understanding on the technology and its regulations; for members of the legislative branch of government for the provision of budget to the CNA’s.  Initiatives should likewise be initiated for the “greening of the bench” to create greater understanding by the members of the judiciary on the science of biotechnology in order to come up with an impartial, objective and science-based approach in their decisions. Hopefully with these sustained efforts, the appropriate government Department and other stakeholders would appreciate the importance of implementing our domestic framework on LMOs and the provisions of the protocol.    

Julieta Fe. L. Estacio
Project development Office, DOST
Head Secretariat, NCBP
and National Focal Point, BCH Pilipinas
posted on 2014-05-26 04:33 UTC by Ms. Julieta Fe L. Estacio, Philippines
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6084]
I am happy with these current topics for discussion.

Saint Lucia has seriously considered the provision of funds to manage biosafety in the country as we implement our biosafety framework. The country is currently establishing a sustainable financing mechanism for biodiversity conservation and it is hoping that the biosafety systems will be able to benefit from this mechanism.  The country also hopes to contribute to its national conservation fund which forms part of the mechanism, through the fees that it will charge for its biosafety management processes, as the mechanism will work in the long run as well, based on how much money is injected into the fund, in order for one to draw down from it.

Otherwise government will fund staff positions for the management of biosafety but because of these challenging economic times, it will be most unlikely that government will be able to fund too many activities in biosafety.  Hence it is hoped that the GEF and other funding agencies will continue to be sourced as well, to help implement biosafety management activities on the ground in the country.
posted on 2014-05-26 20:53 UTC by Ms. Anita James, Saint Lucia
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6088]
Dear Anita

St Lucia is doing very well and thanks for sharing this information with the forum. Can you please go back to topic 1 on the national experiences and lessons learned in integrating biosafety into NBSAPs and national development plans and share with us your country's experience because if biosafety activities are integrated into NBSAPs and other national development plans they gain more recognition and prioritisation. They can also benefit from other funds other than national budgets, for example the GEF allocated to respective countries. Please go to topic 1 and share with us what your country's experience in this regards has been.
posted on 2014-05-26 22:06 UTC by Ms. Malta Qwathekana, South Africa
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6095]
Anita I think St. Lucia clearly has a very good strategy and vision for mobilizing financial resources for the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and I sincerely hope that other parties could learn from your experience.
posted on 2014-05-27 01:43 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6108]
Daniel, we are excited about the possibilities of this new funding mechanism and are looking forward to the establishment of the national conservation fund, in this direction, very soon. We really think that it will help us fund biosafety management systems in the country.
posted on 2014-05-27 16:54 UTC by Ms. Anita James, Saint Lucia
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6109]
Anita that is exceedingly good news and I know that that new funding mechanism would bring some good and quality funding for biosafety related activities in St. Lucia
posted on 2014-05-27 17:20 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6091]
Dear Julieta

Thanks for sharing us this information. In Topic 1 the issue of integrating biosafety issues in NBSAPs is being discussed. Can you please check how that integration into NBSAPs and national development plans can be linked with what you have raised here in topic 4 and in the process share with us your country's experiences, successes and challenges in this regard
posted on 2014-05-26 22:33 UTC by Ms. Malta Qwathekana, South Africa
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6100]
Posted on behalf of Ke Wattana
------------------------------------
Sent: May-26-14 9:47:25 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)

Dear Sir/madam,

For mobilization of resources for implementation of the protocol, firstly you should develop national law on biosafety, national action plan on biosafefty and then, you can get financial support to implement the protocol.

Best regards,

Ke Vongwattana
posted on 2014-05-27 08:27 UTC by Mr. Giovanni Ferraiolo, UNEP/SCBD/Biosafety
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6101]
While the ultimate goal of every party that has signed up to the Cartagena Protocl on Biosafety is to ensure that the pertinent laws are passed and that all the necessary action plans are developed to implement the protocol and of course, that should be done with expedition, I do feel that mobilization of resources to support biosafety activities could be done simultaneously given the urgent  need for the development of a plethora of activities including capacity building in risk assessment and management, awareness building etc. In other words, it would be a fatal mistake to just sit by and wait for the necessary laws to be passed in Parliament before real action on the ground is put in motion.
(edited on 2014-05-27 11:40 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis)
posted on 2014-05-27 11:37 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6094]
The points raised in your comments are reflective of some of the intractable problems experienced in many countries in implementing the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. The issue of public awareness has to be placed on the front burner. The suggestion of identifying a champion to assist in public awareness is a strong suggestion. The general public must be made aware of the protocol and all its intricacies.
The lack of sufficient budgetary allocations has been identified as a major constraint in implementing the multiplicity of activities of the protocol in many countries. In addition to financial support received from the national coffers, the persons who are associated with the implementation of the  biosafety protocol must be creative in finding innovative ways in mobilizing resources whether it is from corporate citizens, Governmental agencies etc. I know that many Governmental bodies provide key services to many clients involved in the agri-food sector such as issuance of import permits for planting materials, food and feed products, pharmaceuticals etc.  (including LMOs etc.), could  a portion of these fees be diverted for development of biosafety related activities etc.
Another key points raised in your comments is the need for different agencies to work together in a very cohesive manner, that is an issue that must be solved at the national level.
posted on 2014-05-27 01:38 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6211]
I certainly agree that public awareness especially targeting policy and decision-makers will help mobilize resources for biosafety. Collaboration is also essential

Regards,

Johansen Voker

National Focal Point for CPB/Liberia
posted on 2014-06-13 23:59 UTC by Mr. Johansen T. Voker, Liberia
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6212]
Yes indeed esteem Voker, there has been overwhelming consensus among all participants who shared their views in this online discussion that public awareness is exceedingly important as a major tool in implementing the protocol and that the policy makers endorsement and understanding of all the issues revolving around biosafety are absolutely necessary to achieve the goals and aspirations of the protocol.
posted on 2014-06-14 01:07 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6086]
Dear Nasrin. My name is Malta and the co-chair for this discussion forum.
Thank you very much for your inputs and sharing the Iranian experience in this regard. I would appreciate having your views and experiences in integrating biosafety into NBSAPs and other national development plans as that might be one of the solutions on non allocation of national budgets to biosafety activities. Because NBSAPs is a policy document, national activities, projects and programmes included into it and other national development plans happen to gain better recognition and prioritization. This can be captured in response to topic 1 question one. Please go there and share your National experiences with the group.
(edited on 2014-05-27 18:10 UTC by Ms. Malta Qwathekana)
posted on 2014-05-26 21:46 UTC by Ms. Malta Qwathekana, South Africa
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6138]
Dear Malta
Thanks for your suggestion and sorry to reply to you with delay.
Actually these days are very busy days for biosafety in Iran. A National Biosafety Council session  will be held in near future and to prepare the materials for that session, the secretariat of NBC have organized  different meetings . As well as that, secretariat of Capacity building project for implementation of NBF have organized several meetings with lots of homework for different stakeholders. As you know the first phase of the project  is  "Integration of biosafety into relevant national development plans, biodiversity strategies and biotechnology strategy/policy/action" . As a result we (secretariat of Ministry of Science biosafety committee) also have organized a Ministerial biosafety committee session to determine the policy of Ministry of science in biosafety. I hope after these series of sessions I could share better our National experiences in integrating biosafety into NBSAPs with the group.
Thank you very much
Kind Regards
Nasrin
posted on 2014-06-02 07:37 UTC by Ms. Nasrin Sadat Esmailzadeh, Iran (Islamic Republic of)
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6139]
Ms. Nasrin it is heartening to be made aware of the plans which are in place to move the biosafety agenda forward in Iran.
From your experience, I would like to ask you what specific capacities (human resources, institutional and other capacities) are required as a priority to integrate biosafety into NBSAPs and national development plans?
From all the discussions we have had thus far on this online forum, most participants have pointed out that there is a lack of financial resources available for the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. In light of the foregoing, from your perspective, how could external partners (including bilateral and multilateral institutions, non-governmental organizations and private sector) support Cartagena Protocol national focal points in their efforts to integrate biosafety into NBSAPs and national developments plans?
(edited on 2014-06-02 10:55 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis)
posted on 2014-06-02 10:31 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6170]
While in Bolivia it is a need to update the regulation on this topic, it is important to consider how to generate financial support for these activities and how to promote research in this area. Right now there is only one person in charge of this topic with very limited resources, and for the same reason not much can be achieved in this area. There is a wish to start with a GEF project and start building finally a national policy in biosafety, but decision makers have to agree first.

Personally I find the process that Ecuador had, very stimulating as all the decision making group in the government had a good explanation about biosafety and they were able to start with their national biosafety framework construction. This could also be a good starting point in Bolivia and later reach society in general with a clear and easy communication program, as sometimes they also have been an obstacle with their fear while the National Biosafety Committee had some meetings during 2010-2011. So unless there is an awareness about this topic it will be difficult to include this topic in the NBSAP elaboration and implementation.

Cecilia González
Biosafety
DGBAP - VMABCCGDF
Environment and Water Ministry
Plurinational State of Bolivia
posted on 2014-06-11 22:21 UTC by Sra. Cecilia Gonzalez, Bolivia (Plurinational State of)
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6172]
Senora Gonzalez, it was again a great pleasure for you to share some of your ideas on this important topic of strategies for mobilization of resources for the implementation of the Protocol. It appears, as you suggested, that your South American neighbour, Ecuador has put in place a good strategy in ensuring that the Political Directorate and other Government officials were properly sensitized on biosafety issues which makes it easier for political buy in. This is a fantastic way to move the biosafety agenda forward. But to achieve that there is need for a biosafety champion who could begin the process. I do not know what is your specific role with regards to Biosafety in Bolivia, but it appears to me that you are very passionate about biosafety. Could you therefore use your enthusiasm to effect changes in Bolivia as far as the implementation of the protocol is concerned?
posted on 2014-06-12 10:23 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6174]
Experience in Pakistan is that there appears to be so much anti GM stuff and the de marche so strong that it is for a common educated person very difficult to discern  fact from fiction. Many environmentalist who do not have adequate knowledge on biotechnology keep on forwarding stuff  from international press and NGOs believing that they do a service for the environment. Any scientist who defends GM is labelled as one who is on payroll of multinationals and in many cases they are gagged.
I wonder if a knowledge based and bias free service is available that the society at large can trust
posted on 2014-06-12 14:32 UTC by Mr. Syed Mahmood Nasir, Pakistan
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6175]
Mr. Nasir, I do understand the challenges that Pakistan faces with respect to building awareness in matters related to Biosafety in light of what you so eloquently highlighted. But the salient question could be asked..What is the strategy of persons who are intimately involved with the Implementation of the protocol doing about this intractable situation? There must be a way of counteracting the negative campaign and I personally feel that the policy makers and officials who are entrusted with biosafety development must devise an efficacious strategy in informing and educating the public.
posted on 2014-06-12 14:49 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6098]
Posted on behalf of David Hafashimana
---------------------------------------------
Sent: May-26-14 1:11:24 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)

Like the previous writer, in Uganda to mobilizing resources for implementation of the Biosafety Protocol is still a challenge.

The draft national law which is still before Parliament would be the instrument which, if passed would pave way for inclusion of Biosafety Protocol-related activities i  the Budgets for the implementing Ministries/ agencies. Short of a law, it is extremely difficult to get funds allocated for Biosafety in the national budget.

That leaves biosafety at the mercy of the development partners/ donors which has its own challenges as well.

DR. DAVID L.N. HAFASHIMANA (Ph.D)
DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH
NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH ORGANIZATION,
BULINDI ZONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE,
(18 KM HOIMA - MASINDI ROAD)
P.O.Box 101,
HOIMA, UGANDA
Tel (Off.): +256- (0) 465443276
Mobile: +256- 782 964 358 / +256-750576280
Email (Off.) bulindizardi@yahoo.com
Email (private): davidhaf2000@yahoo.com
posted on 2014-05-27 08:24 UTC by Mr. Giovanni Ferraiolo, UNEP/SCBD/Biosafety
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6102]
In my country, for resource mobilization we need first to mainstream biosafety into the EDPRS which means "Economic Development & Poverty Reduction Strategy". This requires to have the valid law; today there is a draft under process to review it prior to submission to the parliament.
When biosafety will be fully integrated into national planning process, it can be possible to be funded through national budget mechanisms. Otherwise there will be challenges because of scarcity of existing budget.

Emmanuel Kabera
Project Management Officer
Rwanda Environment Management Authority (REMA)
+250788510733
(edited on 2014-05-27 11:41 UTC by Mr. Emmanuel Kabera)
posted on 2014-05-27 11:39 UTC by Mr. Emmanuel Kabera, Rwanda
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6104]
Mr. Kabera, I do understand your point of view with respect to the need to integrate biosafety issues into the national mainstream priorities such as poverty reduction to ensure that resources are made available for its implementation. In light of the foregoing, it is therefore of important that biosafety issues must be incorporated  into the national plan of action. The strategy therefore is for the leaders (implementers of the protocol) to strategize the way forward by making that vital link
posted on 2014-05-27 12:03 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6112]
Dear Daniel. Thanks for raising this important issue of mainstreaming with other plans and hence I would request Mr Kabera to please go to Topic 1 and share his national experiences in integrating Biosafety into the NBSAPs and other national development plans.
posted on 2014-05-27 18:22 UTC by Ms. Malta Qwathekana, South Africa
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6103]
Dr. Hafashimana while I do understand the challenge in Uganda as is the case in many other jurisdictions in getting the respective Governments to commit sufficient  resources for the implementation of the Biosafety Protocol, it is vitally important that innovative strategies are developed by Parties as far as it relates to the mobilization of resources for the  implementation of the protocol. There is no doubting that the pervasive economic difficulties faced by countries today are limiting the extent to which financial support could be provided for the implementation of the protocol by the national coffers when one takes into account the competing interests for these scarce resources and therefore, it is imperative that  a strategy for mobilizing non-Government resources for implementing the protocol is an absolute necessity.
(edited on 2014-05-27 11:56 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis)
posted on 2014-05-27 11:54 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6111]
Thanks Uganda for sharing your experience on resource mobilisation. Can you also please go to topic one and share with the group Ugandas experience in mainstreaming Biosafety into NBSAPs and National Development Plans. What are the successes and challenges.
posted on 2014-05-27 18:00 UTC by Ms. Malta Qwathekana, South Africa
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6115]
I thank to everyone who provided invaluable comments on this topic. In practice, we cannot reply on outside fund to make the established institution like biosafety survive. State must make a special budget for biosafety. In Cambodia, the government has set aside budget for Biosafety, it is small but at least we are committed to resource mobilization to implement the CPB. We need other partners to implement the CPB, we need private sector to make them understand how important CPB for them. We mainstreamed biosafety into the national development plan but not widely. We need UNEP/GEF to continue support the capacity building for Cambodia.

Pisey Oum, Cambodia/MOE.
posted on 2014-05-28 04:35 UTC by Mr. Meng Monyrak, Cambodia
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6119]
I absolutely agree with Mr. Oum from Cambodia in saying that we cannot rely on outside resources to make the biosafety institutions work but rather both Government and the private sector have to commit resources. I applaud the Government in Cambodia who continue to make budgetary allocations for the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. When countries signed up as Parties to the protocol that clearly meant that  commitment had to be made in meeting all the stipulated requirements in its implementation. Finally, I agree that the continued support from UNEP/GEF funding must continue to provide support especially to countries which are financially challenged.
posted on 2014-05-28 10:26 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6118]
Dear all,

I am Letchu from the Department of Biosafety, Malaysia. My input is as follows:

It is true that biosafety gets low funding. Accordingly it has fewer number of staff and very few technically capable ones as the subject matter is relatively new for developing countries. Fortunately Malaysia started working on GMO since 1996 – by an administrative mechanism to approve LMOs (FFP). The biosafety unit then received a small budget from the Biodiversity Division. When Biosafety Act 2007 was passed, a Biosafety Core Team consist of 15-25 people was established to operationalise the Act and so it gradually allocated with increased operational budget. In 2010, the Department of Biosafety, the National Biosafety Board and the Genetic Modification Advisory Committee were formed. We continue to be allocated with more budget as we start to fill vacant posts. In 2014, we also received allocation under the National Development Plan. The Department of Biosafety are currently undergoing restructuring exercise – perhaps we may get extra manpower which means increased operational budget will follow.
With the Secretary General of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment being the  Chairman of the National Biosafety Board and the Approval Committee on GEF allocations – we also managed to get some allocations under GEF 5 funds (for focal area biodiversity).
We also try to apply for funding from APEC, work closely with Malaysian Biotechnology Corporation and Malaysia Biotechnology Information Centre (MABIC) – all of which promote biotechnology as and where appropriate. In public awareness too we accept free invitation to do exhibitions on biosafety in any biotechnology seminar etc. As the budget for public awareness programme is low – to make it financially effective – all the departments including the Department of Biosafety under the ministry will participate in the programme.
posted on 2014-05-28 09:11 UTC by Mr. Ramatha Letchumanan, Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6120]
Mr. Letchumanan, there is no doubting that in Malaysia you have had a very impressive experience thus far in relation to  the implementation of the Biosafety Protocol. It appears from every indication that there is a well organized system in place and the promotional work both on biotechnology and biosafety seem to be working well.I think other parties could learn quite a lot from your very rich experience.
posted on 2014-05-28 10:36 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6127]
Sir, Thanks for the complements.
In reality a lot has been achieved under GEF4 funding. The project got delayed by about 1.5 years but it was worth the money spent as it was used in the right way to build capacity of the people involved directly rather then spending it according to schedule by training just anybody from any agency. I feel if countries get GEF funding - they should focus on training  a permanent core group - slowly and surely - never mind if the project is delayed a little.
posted on 2014-05-29 08:33 UTC by Mr. Ramatha Letchumanan, Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6131]
Mr. Letchumanan it is very heartening to know that the GEF4 funding has been spent in the right way in your country Malaysia and consequently, has had the desired impact. I totally agree with you that training has to be targeted both at the agencies/Departments level and at the personnel level to ensure sustainability. It is pointless to train persons just for training sake. The trainees must be prepared to use these acquired skills as part of the strategy in implementing the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. Malaysia is definitely a model for which many countries must endeavour to learn the way you have developed your programme and seek to  replicate that rich experience.
posted on 2014-05-29 11:49 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6133]
The following is my view on Nigeria as regards the questions raised ;
(i) To what extent have existing NBSAPs and national development plans taken biosafety issues into account and to what extent are biosafety issues being taken into account in the revision of the NBSAPs?
In Nigeria, Biosafety is an emerging issue with policy in place and a biosafety bill before the Parliament. The actualization of a biosafety law will actualize the mainstreaming of biosafety into our national system and it will be budgeted for. In a bid to further mainstream biosafety into the national system for proper funding and effectiveness, the National Council on Environment has approved that all state’s should establish a biosafety desk. Institutes that have ability to carry out modern biotechnology activities have also been requested to establish Institutional Biosafety Committees and be accredited. Federal Agencies and Ministries that have related biosafety functions have also establish biosafety desks and BCH User authorization ID issued to them. The NBSAP captured the national biosafety system with mandate to management it vested in the Federal Ministry of Environment. The review of the NBSAP has also taken biosafety into account.


(ii) What are the main obstacles and challenges to integrating biosafety into NBSAPs and national development plans and how have they affected the process and how could they be addressed?
The main obstacles in Nigeria are that:
a. The absence of a biosafety law which has made it difficult appropriation for biosafety.

             The actualization of a biosafety law is the solution
b. Lack of modern biotechnology activities in the country due to lack of biosafety  law,


(ii) What do you see as potential benefits for integrating biosafety into NBSAPs and national development plans?

The potentials benefits are :
i) active modern biotechnology activities for national economic development,
ii) More biodiversity conservation consciousness regard modern biotechnology activities.

Rufus Ebegba,
National Biosafety Office,
Federal Ministry of Environment,
Abuja-Nigeria
posted on 2014-05-29 12:09 UTC by Dr. Rufus Eseoghene Ebegba, Nigeria
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6134]
Dear Rufus. Thank you very much for sharing with the group the Nigerian experiences, obstacles and challenges as well as benefits of integrating Biosafety into the NBSAPs and National Development Plans. Can I please request that you upload your comment under Topic 1 rather than Topic 4 for other participants to follow discussions and make use of your very important information.
Thank you very much once again for your comments and inputs

Regards
Malta
posted on 2014-05-29 14:35 UTC by Ms. Malta Qwathekana, South Africa
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6135]
Thank you for every one posted on their countries' experiences in implementing the CPB. Through this discussion, I observed a discrepancy in terms of capacity to implement the protocol as we are Parties. Sometimes, not only the lack of capacity but the lack of political will when it comes to financing. Question is that Joining as Party is a Pretending? Of course they would reply NOT.  But why cannot their government fund the activity? Moreover, struggling between CBD work and CPB also happened among institutions. Effective work for CPB is mostly on PAEP and risk assessment in Cambodia. Remarkably, We've done the LMOs detection capacity which supported in decision making. In general, issues have not been clearly divided the work among CPB with other sectorial policy. The review of work for the CPB is important for the next 10 years or more toward effectively implementing the protocol.

Pisey Oum, Cambodia/MOE.
posted on 2014-05-30 03:36 UTC by Mr. Meng Monyrak, Cambodia
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6136]
Mr. Oum you are quite right, the importance of political will is a crucial factor for the successful implementation of the protocol. That is a reality that cannot be ignored. Even if we have all the requisite human resource and even the financial resources, there must be political support from the executive. Therefore, there must be an effective way in getting the political directorate to get involved. Through their contacts and commitments,  they can be an efficacious instrument in helping to mobilize resources (both financial and human) for the protocol's implementation. The concerns you raised about the CPB with other sectoral policies  has been articulated by other persons on this online forum. You can further share your views on that aspect in sessions 1 and 2 with my friend Malta from South Africa who is the moderator of these two sessions.
posted on 2014-05-30 13:13 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6159]
Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol

      It is obligation of each country – Party to the Cartagena Protocol to mobilize their resources for implementation of the Protocol. The most important resources are human resources involved in the implementation of obligations but they will not be successful if have no financial resources to conduct activities. In Belarus, some ways to get them are as follows:
- We encourage scientists to apply for research grants to study GMO effects on biodiversity and to participate in social and economical programs: national and international.
- Most people involved in the conduction of activities for the Cartagena Protocol implementation in Belarus emphasized the importance of integration of the biosafety educational course in the university and school programs. If people clearly understand the biosafety problems at those education levels less efforts will be made to reach the positive result – careful handling of biodiversity, of the environment on the whole.
       The same opinion is true in relation to the governmental bodies’ and committees (especially for the personnel of the State Customs Committee). Annual seminars on biosafety issues for them should be the rule.
posted on 2014-06-06 07:55 UTC by Assoc. Prof. Elena Makeyeva, Belarus
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6160]
Professor Makeyeva thank you very much for sharing some perspectives on some innovative approaches which can be adopted in mobilizing resources for the Cartagena Protocol on biosafety implementation. The approach in Belarus in encouraging scientists to apply for research grant to study the effects of GMOs on biodiversity appears to be a practical solution to mobilize resources and the integration of bioscfety courses in the University curriculum is as far as I am concerned is a fantastic idea which other parties can replicate.
posted on 2014-06-06 11:00 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6162]
Thank you, Daniel. I would like to add a little bit more information concerning mobilization of human and other resources: 
        The National Co-ordination Biosafety Centre (NCBC) at the Institute of Genetics and Cytology of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus participated in the State program for exchange by scientific and practical proposals with other countries under patronage of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  The participation in that program resulted in three international projects: 1) Belarus (NCBC) – Venezuela (NAI) “Development and Improvement of the Biosafety System at the National Agricultural Institute of Venezuela”;  2) Belarus (NCBC) – Ukraine (“Khamadei” Co.) “Establishment of the Laboratory for GMO Detection” (2013); 3) Belarus (NCBC) – Russia (Russian Academy of Sciences) “Consulting Services on Biosafety Issues: Scientific, Legal and Administrative Aspects” (2013). Nowadays we are discussing a joint project on biosafety issues between Belarus (NCBC) and Bolivia (the Education Ministry).
        So, we (NCBC personnel) are aimed at the active participation in national and international programs and projects (I said about it),  and we are open for any country (institution, company) worldwide to collaborate in biosafety area for implementation of the Cartagena Protocol.

Best regards,
Elena
posted on 2014-06-06 12:29 UTC by Assoc. Prof. Elena Makeyeva, Belarus
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6164]
Colleagues this is the last week for exchanging your views on this online forum and there is still a few days left for you to share your experience as far as the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety is concerned.
With regards to Strategies for mobilization of resources for the implementation of the protocol, I wish to pose 3 key questions:
1.What experience has been gained with regard to mobilization of resources for the implementation of the Protocol including: the main source of funding, success stories, opportunities and challenges/obstacles encountered thus far, and examples of good practices and lessons learned?

2. To what extent and how has biosafety been incorporated into the national resource mobilization plans for meeting the  three objectives of the Convention? and

3. How could national- level coordination and collaboration among key stakeholders with regard to resource mobilization be improved?
posted on 2014-06-10 09:27 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6178]
The  following strategies for resource mobilization for implementation of the CP may be considered:
1. Supported by the national strategies and policies
2. intersectorial coordination mechanisms ensuring efficiency and coordinated work of different governmental bodies
3. governmental-private parteneriate
4. collaboration between governrmental and non-governmental sectors
5, cooperation between budget and nonbudgetar sources for financing of biosafety activities, including ecological funds
6. attraction of foreign fundings for national and regional capacity building activities
7. synergy between biodiversity and biosafety activities
8. public information and public involvement

A.L.
Moldova
posted on 2014-06-12 17:56 UTC by Ms. Angela Lozan, Republic of Moldova
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6179]
Dr. Lozan thank you very much for some of the ideas shared with respect to strategies for resources mobilization for implementation of the protocol.
With respect to biosafety capacity building strategies, what do you think parties can do to enhance  that area which is obviously crucial for the successful implementation of the Protocol
posted on 2014-06-12 21:24 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6180]
Dr. Lozan,
Like Daniel I think you summarize very important elements. Initially the overarching biosafety policy must be established and publicized.
St. Lucia also has some excellent and practical solutions. Sustainable mechanisms be explored. Multiple sources of funding must be viewed as important factors in the successful implementation of the CP, be it locally generated or donor funding especially in the smaller developing states.  Given that biosafety issues impact on a number of line Ministries the policy can be so fashioned to  allow for each entity to take responsibly for designated roles which can be incorporate in their annual work plans. In this way a percentage of the burden can be shared by Department and Ministries once there is a good coordinating mechanism in place. In addition the private sector has a great role to play and they can be engaged as part of their corporate responsibility.
posted on 2014-06-13 02:51 UTC by Mr. Marcus L. Richards, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6187]
In India, separate allocation of funds for biosafety is provided in the budget of the Ministry of Environment & Forests and Climate Change as part of the conservation and survey programme under the Five Year Plan.  Similarly, separate funds for implementation of Biotechnology and Biosafety Programmes is also provided under the budget of Department of Biotechnology in the Ministry of Science and Technology.

However limited utilization of resources due to scarce trained and dedicated manpower and inadequate communication and coordination between inter-Ministerial agencies have been noted to be a major constraint.   For a large country like India, dedicated manpower and institutions with core competence in biosafety is necessary to ensure sustained flow of resources.
posted on 2014-06-13 11:23 UTC by Dr. Ranjini Warrier, India
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6193]
On behalf of Alphonse Wouamane mbele:

1.      What experience has been gained with regard to mobilization of resources for the implementation of the Protocol including: the main sources of funding, success stories, opportunities and challenges/obstacles encountered; and examples of good practices and lessons learned?
During the elaboration of the National Biosafety Framework Law, the main external source of funding was GEF. A major challenge encountered was obtaining counterpart funds from the Government.  One of the lessons learned is that biosafety is a part of a wider biosecurity situation and therefore, the requirements of the Protocol are being covered within the biosecurity framework; however means are not obviously made available for biosafety issues, as they are for biodiversity issues.

2.      How could awareness of the GEF Operational Focal Points regarding the significance of biosafety and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety be increased?

Awareness of the GEF Operational Focal Points could be significantly increased through participation in meetings/committees on biosafety and they should be given instruction from GEF committee to pay more attention to biosafety: in this line, I would expect a fixed quota of funding be allocated to biosafety issues. They should also participate more in the organisation of radio/ television talks, production of awareness raising materials such as newsletters etc.

3.      To what extent and how has biosafety been incorporated into the national resource mobilization plans for meeting the three objectives of the Convention?

It is incorporated to the extent that it is part of the biosecurity framework through the ongoing biosecurity project funded by GEF and co-funded by the Government of Cameroon. Looking at the present situation in Cameroon, the funds for the smooth functioning of the National Biosafety Committee is being made available by the Government of Cameroon at a very slow speed. Hence there is a need to address this issue.

4.      How could national-level coordination and collaboration among key stakeholders with regard to resource mobilization be improved?

National-level coordination and collaboration among key stakeholders with regard to resource mobilization can be fostered by emulating the initiative of the Cameroon Biosecurity Project which has integrated within its Project Advisory Committee, key institutions such as the Ministry of Economy, Planning and Regional Development (MINEPAT) and the Ministry of Finances (MINFI) responsible for allocating and managing the State’s budget; although the expected results are being awaited, there are strong promise and hope. It could even be envisaged to involve a representative of the Prime Minister Office, to make sure that the issues are well captured at a very high level of the government.
(edited on 2014-06-13 14:46 UTC by Mr. Andrew Bowers)
posted on 2014-06-13 14:46 UTC by Mr. Andrew Bowers, UNEP/SCBD/Biosafety
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6194]
Media whether print or electronic is a game changer these days, any sector that can find ways to get knowledge based messages on prime pages/ time is bound to succeed. I am watching a recent trend in Pakistan that if we get some science based segment in popular TV shows the message goes to the masses. And ultimately play a role in building support of the decision makers  when we the time comes for resource allocation
posted on 2014-06-13 15:01 UTC by Mr. Syed Mahmood Nasir, Pakistan
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6195]
On behalf of Carlos Almendares
PFPC-Honduras

Hello gentlemen, my apologies for late entry to this forum but for reasons beyond our reach just going to be with you this time, I'll try to be brief and tell a little of what happened in Honduras:

We have an emphasis on biosafety regulation in transgenic plants derived from the Phytosanitary Law, competition in the Ministry of Agriculture and right here the focal point of the Cartagena Protocol is located. Is currently reviewing the regulation in question to incorporate everything that has to do with the Cartagena Protocol.

As for attracting financial resources to make implementation process has not been possible since the GEF funds go directly to the Ministry of Environment and they prioritize in other projects that deal with biodiversity and directly subordinate instead the issue of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety is located in another ministry (Agriculture) then don´t  enter in his prioritization plans. We hope that within this forum is taken into account this observation and some alternate way to make possible the transfer of funds to countries with this same situation and to make direct support to contribute fully to implement these processes is discussed.

I appreciate this opportunity.

Best regards
posted on 2014-06-13 15:33 UTC by Mr. Andrew Bowers, UNEP/SCBD/Biosafety
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6199]
On behalf of Ivy Wellman (Defra)

The UK has fully implemented the Cartagena Protocol and has a National Bio-diversity Strategy which is supported by policy makers and Government. A lack of resource has been high-lighted as a barrier to implementation by a number of Parties. While it is re-assuring that funding will be available where needed in order to pump-prime capacity building and compliance activities, it is important that Parties become empowered to mobilise their own resources. This might be achieved by a focusing funding on training to, later, allow Parties to better partake in collaborative working and innovative ways of using available resources.
posted on 2014-06-13 15:40 UTC by Mr. Andrew Bowers, UNEP/SCBD/Biosafety
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6204]
It is very heartening to have received some information from  someone from the UK and its even more wonderful to know that that country has fully implemented the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. There is no doubting that the UK has taken the implementation of the Protocol very seriously as evidenced by the full support provided by policy makers and the Government. This is an example that must be emulated by other parties. While its a reality that not many countries could match the financial and human resources  which are at the disposal of the UK, it is equally true that many times, it takes political will and commitment to make things happen.
posted on 2014-06-13 16:38 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6203]
The experience in Honduras as highlighted here is similar to that of many parties where there appears to be a lack of coordination among agencies who should be communication with each other in a very strategic way. A piece meal approach in developmental and implementation plans particularly as it relates to biodiversity and biosafety could prove detrimental to parties. Therefore it is of paramount importance that a more coordinated approach is adopted by parties in managing issues related to biosafety, biodiversity and national development plans.
posted on 2014-06-13 16:11 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6219]
I am using this forum to inform the participants that each party to the protocol should as a matter of urgency try and incorporate Biosafety matters into their National budget for the effective implementation of NBFs instead of depending solely on international donors
R A Usman
posted on 2014-06-14 14:07 UTC by Mr. Raheef Ademola Usman, Nigeria
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6222]
But Mr. Usman, you seem to suggest that resources for the implementation of the protocol must come exclusively from the national budget. Do you think there is a need to look for alternative sources of financial support for implementing the protocol, e.g. from the private sector, from services provided to clients, through licenses etc.?
posted on 2014-06-14 15:11 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6223]
I only lay emphasis on the Law and how effectively it can be implemented though in collaboration with industries, NGOs MDAs and other stake holders in terms of funding. I am also to add that right from the beginning when the Biosafety regulations are being developed all those mentioned added their voices because it is a collective responsibility of all and sundry to move the technology forward for the betterment of all without necessarily imposing too much levies on the applicants
R A Usman
posted on 2014-06-14 15:30 UTC by Mr. Raheef Ademola Usman, Nigeria
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6224]
Thank you very much Mr. Usman for your kind clarification. From your perspective, could you say that in Nigeria there has been sufficient efforts placed in resources mobilization for the implementation of the protocol? If not, what has been the major challenges?
posted on 2014-06-14 15:39 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6226]
It cannot be concluded at this point in time that sufficient efforts  had been made due to the following
i the issue of awareness among the stakeholders is still a limiting factor. On our part, we continue to spread the gospel using all resources at our disposal
ii those that are even aware, some are sill on the fence
R A Usman
posted on 2014-06-14 17:12 UTC by Mr. Raheef Ademola Usman, Nigeria
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6233]
Dear esteem colleagues who have sacrificed your most invaluable time and effort to participate in this very important online forum on the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, let me take this opportunity on behalf of my co moderator Malta and indeed, the CBD Secretariat, in expressing our very deep appreciation and gratitude to all of you. Sharing your own experiences have been a great lesson for all of us. Many of you have provided very thoughtful and useful suggestions on the 4 main topics discussed and I am supremely confident and optimistic that the Secretariat would, during its analysis of the results of the forum,  use these in some ways  to advice parties in improving the implementation of the protocol in their respective countries.

It has certainly been for me a most enjoyable and wonderful experience.
posted on 2014-06-15 00:39 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6227]
Dear Raheef
Thanks for your advice. Can you please share with the group how your country has done that and successes and challenges.
Regards
Malta
posted on 2014-06-14 22:35 UTC by Ms. Malta Qwathekana, South Africa
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6202]
The use of the electronic media is no doubt an effective mechanism which can be used to educate the population and to build awareness concerning biosafety. I hope in the case of Pakistan that can be done effectively given some of the problem you articulated earlier with respect to the pervasive misconception of biotechnology/biosafety in the society.
posted on 2014-06-13 16:03 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6200]
Dr. Warrier thank you very much for sharing some of the challenges experienced in India as far as the implementation of the Protocol is concerned. One of the points highlighted that drew my attention is the fact that irrespective of separate allocation of funds  for the implementation of biotechnology and biosafety programmes,  these were not optimally utilized because of the limited human resources and the lack of coordination and communication between and among the various agencies and institutions. It therefore points to the fact that while financial resources is a necessary condition for successful implementation it also requires other crucial factors that must be put in place such as adequate quality human resources and coordination among pertinent institutions.
I am very delighted Dr. Warrier that that experience was shared.
posted on 2014-06-13 15:49 UTC by Mr. Daniel Lewis, Grenada
RE: Topic 4: Strategies for mobilization of resources for implementation of the Protocol [#6205]
On behalf of Carlos Almendares:

Dear Daniel:

In our case, is not it takes a coordination process that actually exists in everything that has to do with implementation of activities and their distribution, what really happens is that when looking for how to distribute the funds, prevailing  for order of importance which directly compete to this Ministry (Environment) and if surplus could support any activity related to the strengthening  the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which suggest in this case is that if want to see concrete results on the implementation of the Protocol, may looking for other mechanisms by the Secretariat that make this possible because it will not just happen to think of a simple coordination are sought.

Carlos Almendares
posted on 2014-06-13 18:26 UTC by Mr. Andrew Bowers, UNEP/SCBD/Biosafety