| | english | español | français |
  Home|The Cartagena Protocol|Awareness|Portal|Public Education Forum regarding LMOs   Printer-friendly version

Return to the list of threads...

Online Discussions: Review of a module on public education regarding LMOs

Forum closed. No more comments will be accepted on this forum.
Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8327]
POSTED ON BEHALF OF THE MODERATORS OF THE FORUM

Dear Forum Participants,

We would like to thank you for the active participation of the discussions of Theme 1 and 2.

To continue the discussion, under Theme 3, we will continue to discuss a draft text that will be developed into an e-learning module on public education regarding LMOs and has been made available as an attachment in the Online Forum. Forum participants are invited to review the draft text and then answer the guiding questions below that will be moderated.

We would like to know if this section of the module on planning for public education is in line with your national experience (e.g. comprehensive, useful, clear, applicable and/or complete)

Lesson 1: Key components and steps of a resource guide for a training/educational activity

1. Overall, are the key components and steps in line with your national experience or useful in planning for public education?
2. Are the methods recommended by past International Meetings of Academic Institutions and Organizations involved in Biosafety Education and Training still relevant (e.g. biosafety training needs matrix, list of topics, guidance on developing biosafety education and training and the common format for a compendium)?
3. What are/should be the goals in your educational or training activity?
4. What type of educational or training materials does your country have? (Please also post these in the BIRC-BCH at http://bch.cbd.int/database/results?searchid=676672 )
5. What case studies or examples do you have of biosafety issues integrated in courses, programmes or other training activities (e.g. environment management, science, political science, legal studies, business administration)?
6.  How does your country promote biosafety education to women, indigenous peoples and local communities and other stakeholders?
7. What other national experience can you share regarding developing and/or delivering biosafety training or educational activities (e.g. exercises, assessments/quality control, follow-up, ongoing support, participatory practices)?
8. Were you able to develop clear learning objectives using the verbs? Please share these.
9. Could you share some descriptions and rationale of content for a curriculum or training activity with participants in the forum?
10. Is the “Sample Modules on Biosafety Issues” comprehensive, useful, clear, applicable and/or complete?

Lesson 2: Key components of an education strategy/action plan

1. Were you able to easily identify the components and definitions for an education strategy/action plan?
2. Why is a biosafety education strategy/action plan important based on your national experience or useful in planning for public education?
3. What are some inputs (e.g. visions, goals and objectives) of an education strategy/action plan based on your national experiences?
4. What were the major outputs and outcomes as a result of the education strategy/action plan?
5. Would it be useful with short-term, medium-term and long-term activities instead of just one component on activities?
6. How do you or could you monitor and evaluate the implementation of a strategy/pan?
7. Could you share some questionnaires or surveys that facilitate monitoring or evaluation of implementation of a strategy/plan related to education?
8. If possible, could you share educational strategy/action plan on biosafety in the forum?
9. Is the template exercise of a strategy/plan comprehensive, useful, clear, applicable and/or complete?

Please note that the discussions for Theme 3 is from 24 April 2017 (9:00 a.m. EDT) to 28 April 2017 (5:00 p.m. EDT).

Please note that participants must register and sign into the BCH in order to post messages.

Individuals wishing to participate via e-mail after these initial messages can choose to “watch” the discussions taking place under the different themes. These individuals will then receive copies of the posted messages by e-mail.

We look forward to reading your suggestions and comments.

We would also like to announce that the importance of participating in the other modules to understand how the final product of the module will be developed as a storyboard and to ensure that you may be selected to upcoming workshops on the priority areas/activities of the programme of work. Please find the link to these modules at https://scbd.unssc.org/course/index.php?categoryid=9 

Best regards,

• CEE: Ms. Galina Mozgova, (g.mozgova@yandex.by)
• Western Europe and other States: Ms. Suzanne Loret (suzanne.loret@unamur.be)
• Africa: Mr. Bongani Nkhabindze (English)  (bongani@SEA.ORG.SZ) and Ms. Yosra Mekni (yosratorjmen.mekni@gmail.com) (French)
• GRULAC: Ms. Sol Ortiz García (sortiz@conacyt.mx) (Spanish) and Mr. Fred Phillips (parhelion1@gmail.com)
• Asia and the Pacific: Mr. Pisey Oum (poum39@gmail.com), Mr. Ruel Maningas (rvmconsult@yahoo.com) and Mr. Ho-Min Jang (hmjang@kribb.re.kr)
• UN Environment: Mr. Alex Owusu-Biney (bineya@gmail.com)
(edited on 2017-05-03 21:15 UTC by Ms. Ulrika Nilsson)
posted on 2017-04-24 13:01 UTC by Ms. Ulrika Nilsson, UNEP/SCBD/Biosafety
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8328]
Publicado en nombre de Sol Ortiz Garcia:

Estimados Participantes,

Queremos agradecerles por su activa participación en las discusiones de los Temas 1 y 2.

Para continuar con los trabajos bajo el Tema 3, seguiremos discutiendo el texto borrador que será desarrollado en un módulo de aprendizaje electrónico sobre educación pública sobre OVMs, que se encuentra disponible como un anexo en el Foro en Línea. Los participantes del Foro están invitados a revisar este texto borrador y responder las preguntas guía siguientes, mismas que serán moderadas.

Quisiéramos saber si esta sección del módulo "Planeación para educación pública" se encuentra alineada con sus experiencias nacionales (Ej. integral, útil, clara, aplicable y/o completa)

Lección 1: Componentes clave y pasos hacia una guía para actividades educacionales / capacitación.
1. En general, los componentes clave y pasos, ¿están alineados con sus experiencias nacionales o útiles en la planeación para educación pública?
2. ¿Son aún relevantes los métodos recomendados por las reuniones internacionales previas de instituciones académicas y organizaciones involucradas en educación en bioseguridad y capacitación (Ej. matriz de necesidades de capacitación en bioseguridad, lista de temas, guías sobre el desarrollo de educación y capacitación en bioseguridad  y el formato común para un compendio?
3. ¿Cuáles son o deberían ser las metas en sus actividades de educación o capacitación?
4. ¿Qué tipo de materiales de entrenamiento o educación tiene su país? (Por favor también publique esos materiales en el BIRC-BCH en la liga:  http://bch.cbd.int/database/results?searchid=676672)
5. ¿Qué casos de estudio o ejemplos tiene usted en aspectos de bioseguridad, integrados en cursos, programas u otras actividades de entrenamiento (Ej. gestión ambiental, ciencia, ciencias políticas, estudios legales, administración de negocios)?
6. ¿Cómo promueve su país la educación en bioseguridad a mujeres, comunidades indígenas y comunidades locales y otros actores?
7. ¿Qué otras experiencias nacionales puede usted compartir respecto al desarrollo y/o entrega de capacitación en bioseguridad o actividades educativas (Ej. Ejercicios, evaluaciones/control de calidad, seguimiento, respaldo continuo, prácticas participativas)?
8. ¿Fue usted capaz de desarrollar objetivos de aprendizaje claros utilizando los verbos? Por favor comparta.
9. ¿Podría compartir con los participantes en el foro algunas descripciones y la racional de contenidos para un currículo o actividad de entrenamiento?
10. ¿Son los "Módulos de Muestra en Aspectos de Bioseguridad" integrales, útiles, claros, aplicables y/o completos?

Lección 2: Componentes clave de una estrategia educativa/plan de acción.
1. ¿Fue capaz de identificar fácilmente los componentes y definiciones de un plan de acción educativo?
2. ¿Por qué es importante que la estrategia educativa/plan de acción con base en sus experiencias nacionales?, o es útil en la planeación para educación pública?
3. ¿Cuáles son los insumos (Ej. visiones, metas y objetivos) de una estrategia educativa basado en sus experiencias nacionales?
4. ¿Cuáles fueron los mayores logros o salidas como resultado de la estrategia o plan educativo?
5. ¿Sería más útil desarrollar actividades a corto mediano y largo plazo en lugar de actividades en un único componente?
6. ¿Cómo monitorea o podría monitorear y evaluar la implementación de una estrategia?
7. ¿Podría compartir algunos cuestionarios o encuestas que facilitan el monitoreo o evaluación de la implementación de una estrategia o plan relacionado a la educación?
8. ¿Si es posible, podría compartir estrategias educativas / planes de acción en bioseguridad en el foro?
9. ¿Es el ejercicio de "molde de estrategia" integral, útil, claro, aplicable y/o completo?

Note que las discusiones para el Tema 3 son del 24 de abril 2017 (9:00 a.m. EDT) al 28 de abril 2017 (5:00 p.m. EDT).

Por favor note que los participantes deben registrarse y acceder al CIISB (BCH) para publicar sus mensajes.

Las personas que deseen participar vía correo electrónico después de los mensajes iniciales pueden elegir "observar" las discusiones que tendrán lugar bajo temas distintos. Estas personas recibirán copias de los mensajes publicados por correo electrónico.

Estamos atentos a sus sugerencias y comentarios.

Quisiéramos también anunciarles que es importante participar en los otros módulos para entender cómo el producto final del módulo se desarrollará como un guión, y asegurar que usted pueda ser seleccionado a talleres próximos en las áreas/actividades prioritarias del programa de trabajo. Por favor encuentre el vínculo a los módulos citados en:  https://scbd.unssc.org/course/index.php?categoryid=9 

Atentos saludos,

• CEE: Ms. Galina Mozgova, (g.mozgova@yandex.by)
• Western Europe and other States: Ms. Suzanne Loret (suzanne.loret@unamur.be)
• Africa: Mr. Bongani Nkhabindze (English)  (bongani@SEA.ORG.SZ) and Ms. Yosra Mekni (yosratorjmen.mekni@gmail.com) (French)
• GRULAC: Ms. Sol Ortiz García (sortiz@conacyt.mx) (Spanish) and Mr. Fred Phillips (parhelion1@gmail.com)
• Asia and the Pacific: Mr. Pisey Oum (poum39@gmail.com), Mr. Ruel Maningas (rvmconsult@yahoo.com) and Mr. Ho-Min Jang (hmjang@kribb.re.kr)
• UN Environment: Mr. Alex Owusu-Biney (bineya@gmail.com)
(edited on 2017-05-03 21:15 UTC by Ms. Ulrika Nilsson)
posted on 2017-04-24 20:39 UTC by Ms. Ulrika Nilsson, UNEP/SCBD/Biosafety
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8329]
Publié au nom de Yosra Mekni:

Chers participants au forum,

Nous tenons à vous remercier pour votre participation active dans les discussions du thème 1 et 2.
Pour poursuivre la discussion, dans le cadre du thème 3, nous continuerons à discuter du projet de texte qui sera développé dans un module d'e-learning sur l'éducation publique concernant les OVM et a été mis à votre disposition en pièce jointe dans le Forum en ligne. Les participants au forum sont invités à examiner le projet de texte et à répondre aux questions suivantes ci-dessous qui seront modérées.
Nous aimerions savoir si cette section du module sur la planification de l'éducation publique est en ligne avec  votre expérience nationale (par exemple, complète, utile, claire, applicable et / ou complète).
Leçon 1: Principales composantes et étapes dans l’élaboration d’un guide/support de base pour une formation / activité éducative
1. Dans l'ensemble, les composantes  et les étapes clés sont-ils conformes à votre expérience nationale ? Sont- ils utiles et pertinents dans la cadre de planification de l'éducation publique?
2. Est-ce que les méthodes recommandées par les dernières réunions internationales des institutions académiques et les organisations concernées dans l'éducation et la formation en matière de prévention des risques biotechnologiques sont-elles toujours pertinentes/d’actualités (par exemple, la matrice des besoins en matière de formation à la prévention des risques biotechnologiques, la liste des thématiques, les conseils sur le développement de l'éducation et de la formation en matière de prévention des risques biotechnologiques ainsi que le format standard pour le compendium)?
3. Quels sont /devraient être les objectifs de votre activité éducative ou de formation?
4. Quel type de matériel éducatif ou de formation votre pays possède-t-il?
(Vous êtes vivement inviter à les publier dans le BIRC-BCH  sur  http://bch.cbd.int/database/results?searchid=676672)

5. Quelles sont les études de cas ou exemples dont vous disposez  concernant les problématiques de la biosécurité et intégrés dans des cours, des programmes ou d'autres activités de formation (par exemple, gestion de l'environnement, sciences, sciences politiques, études juridiques, administration des entreprises)?
6. Comment votre pays encourage-t-il l'éducation à la prévention des risques biotechnologiques au profit des femmes, les peuples autochtones,  les communautés locales ainsi que d'autres parties prenantes?
7. Quelle autre expérience nationale pouvez-vous partager en ce qui concerne le développement et/ou la réalisation des sessions de formation ou des activités éducatives liées à la Biosécurité (exemple : exercices, évaluations / contrôle de la qualité, suivi, soutien continu, pratiques participatives)?
8. Avez-vous l’occasion d’identifier des objectifs d'apprentissage clairs en utilisant les verbes? Vous êtes aimablement invités à les partager.
9. Pourriez-vous partager quelques exemples de contenu publiés/utilisés dans le cadre d’un programme académique ou une activité de formation avec les participants au forum?
10. Les «Modules d'échantillonnage sur les problèmes de biosécurité» sont-ils compréhensives, utiles, claires, applicables et / ou completes?
Leçon 2: Les composantes clés d'une stratégie d'éducation / plan d'action
1. Avez-vous été en mesure d'identifier facilement les composantes et les définitions  d’un plan d'action éducatif?
2. Pourquoi une stratégie d’éducation / plan d'action pour la prévention des risques biotechnologiques est-elle importante en fonction de votre expérience nationale  et pertinente  dans la planification de l'éducation publique?
3. Quels sont les principales éléments d’entrée  (tels que la visions, buts et objectifs) d'une stratégie / plan d'action éducatif en se basant sur vos expériences nationales?
4. Quels ont été les résultats à court et moyens terme d’une stratégie/ plan d'action de l'éducation?
5. Serait-il utile de diviser les activités en court, à moyen terme et à long terme ou se limiter à une  seule composante pour toutes les activités ?
6. Comment avez-vous ou pouvez-vous suivre et évaluer la mise en œuvre d'une stratégie / plan?
7. Pourriez-vous partager quelques questionnaires ou des enquêtes qui facilitent le suivi ou l'évaluation de la mise en œuvre d'une stratégie / plan lié à l'éducation?
8. Si possible, pouvez-vous partager une stratégie / plan d'action éducatif sur la biosécurité dans le forum?
9. Est-ce que le modèle d'exercice d'une stratégie / plan est-il compréhensible, utile, clair, applicable et / ou complet?
Veuillez noter que les discussions pour le thème 3 se déroulent à partir du 24 avril 2017 (9h00 à midi) jusqu'au 28 avril 2017 (17h00)
Veuillez noter que les participants doivent s'inscrire et se connecter au BCH afin de poster des messages.
Les personnes souhaitant participer par courrier électronique après ces messages initiaux peuvent choisir de «suivre» les discussions qui se déroulent sous les différents thèmes. Ces personnes recevront ensuite des copies des messages affichés par courrier électronique.
Nous sommes impatients de lire vos suggestions et commentaires.
Nous aimerions également annoncer que l'importance de participer aux autres modules pour comprendre comment le produit final du module sera développé en tant que storyboard et pour que vous puissiez être sélectionné pour les ateliers à venir sur les domaines / activités prioritaires du programme de travail.
Veuillez trouver le lien vers ces modules à l'adresse : https://scbd.unssc.org/course/index.php?categoryid=9
Meilleures salutations,
• CEE: Mme Galina Mozgova, (g.mozgova@yandex.by)
• Europe occidentale et autres États: Mme Suzanne Loret (suzanne.loret@unamur.be)
• Afrique: M. Bongani Nkhabindze (anglais) (bongani@SEA.ORG.SZ) et Mme Yosra Mekni (yosratorjmen.mekni@gmail.com) (français)
• GRULAC: Mme Sol Ortiz García (sortiz@conacyt.mx) (espagnol) et M. Fred Phillips (parhelion1@gmail.com)
• L'Asie et le Pacifique: M. Pisey Oum (poum39@gmail.com), M. Ruel Maningas (rvmconsult@yahoo.com) et M. Ho-Min Jang (hmjang@kribb.re.kr)
• Environnement de l'ONU: M. Alex Owusu-Biney (bineya@gmail.com)
(edited on 2017-05-03 21:16 UTC by Ms. Ulrika Nilsson)
posted on 2017-04-26 14:09 UTC by Ms. Ulrika Nilsson, UNEP/SCBD/Biosafety
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8330]
Dear participants,

With this short message, I would like to encourage you to share with us your experience about the planning of public education.
Are you aware of any key components and steps of a resource guide for a training/educational activity in your country(region)? Is there a strategy / an action plan for the Public education in biosafety in your country?
Biosafety being a rather young discipline (at least, in the laboratory code of practices), the first step of education, if any, was developed at the attention of people involved in research focused on the LMOs developments.
In my country, the manipulation of LMOs (or pathogenic organisms) doesn’t require any certification. Consequently, the education is organized on a voluntary basis (companies seeking for a proper training  for their laboratory staff or individuals willing to learn how to manage biosafety correctly in their daily work). Consequently, the education of the Public is not yet well organized in terms of components and strategy. Informal initiatives (such as invitation to conferences and workshop) are regularly taken with the aim to  offer to the Public the opportunity to learn, but most of the time the audience of these events is already trained in this domain.

What is the situation in your region? I would be glad to discuss this question with you.

Best regards, Suzanne Loret
Moderator for "Europe occidentale et autres États" (suzanne.loret@unamur.be)
posted on 2017-04-26 17:47 UTC by Mrs Suzanne LORET, University of Namur
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8331]
Dear colleagues,

Thank you for the guiding materials and questions under the topic 3. In my understanding the proposed module is quite comprehensive and involves a lot of important details and aspects in order to develop the resource guide and the key components for a strategy/action plan for training and educational activity in the field of biosafety. It can be very useful and helpful to improve or develop the domestic capacities in this regards.

A continuous short or long term trainings should be develop under the stand alone courses on biosafety, biosafety integrated in some general programs, training workshops on specific topics and for specific audience, state and private education, general public education from pre-university education through the university education and doctoral studies et. It is important to organize the various specters of courses on different topics, with various grades of complicity and skills and addressed to various audiences, depending of their level of education, professional activity involvement, sectorial interest, as well as targeted also to general public, consumers, women, youth, community people etc.

In the case of my country the requirements for public information, awareness and participatory issues are stipulated in the national policy and regulation – the Law on Biosafety, art. 39, (draft new law on GMOs), as well as in the NBSAP for 2015-2020, specific objective B. It is also covered by the Law on public access to information (2000), Law on free access to the information of the public interest (2001), Regulation on public access to environmental information (2005). Moldova is also Party to the Aarhus Convention and is applying the art 6 and 6bis concerning the information on GMOs and decision making requested by the convention.

A mechanism for public biosafety communication and a long term action plan for public education and training is considered to be useful and necessary to develop on a sustainable base that will have cross-sectorial cooperation and multidisciplinary approach. A challenge to be successful in this initiative would be human and limited financial resources available to focus the topic.

I am of opinion that regional and sub-regional cooperation and capacity building initiative could be very much helpful to meeting this objective. A number of previous successful case studies and trainings in the CEE can be a good argument in the favor of this idea.

Best wishes,
Angela
posted on 2017-04-28 11:33 UTC by Ms. Angela Lozan, Republic of Moldova
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8332]
Dear Angela,

Many thank for this detailed information.

I think that a visit of the EBSA (European BioSafety Association) website, could be a good start to find links where education initiatives in Europe ou comptetnt contact persons http://www.ebsaweb.eu/.

I am pleased to let you know that I ma part of the EBSA council and thus in a good position to help you.

Best regards,

Suzanne Loret
posted on 2017-04-28 12:52 UTC by Mrs Suzanne LORET, University of Namur
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8334]
Dear  Suzanne, thank you very much for your suggestion. The EBSA seems to be very much helpful for our scopes and activities.

Best wishes,
Angela
posted on 2017-04-29 08:42 UTC by Ms. Angela Lozan, Republic of Moldova
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8333]
Dear All,

My thanks to the moderators for stepping up to facilitate these discussions.

In response to the question whether the module on planning for public education is in line with our experience: over the last 30+ years I have provided scientific and regulatory support for biotechnology regulation in over 50 countries and to many national and international organisations. On the basis of that experience I would first of all agree with Suzanne Loret that public education in this field is often done on a bit of an ad hoc basis.

Second, I very much support the general observation made by Lucia de Souza in an earlier theme discussion that it is essential that education about biosafety starts with education about modern biotechnology, including the reasons why governments worldwide have invested and are investing many millions in research  in modern biotechnology, i.e. because if the anticipated socio-economic, environmental and health benefits.

Third, I believe that it is essential that a key part of this education is explaining what role science has, and what role it does not have. Science provides society with the ingredients for informed decision making in weighing potential risks and anticipated benefits. Yet, science itself does not make those decisions.

It will also be important to explain, in general terms, the process of scientifically sound risk assessment, including the fact that risk assessment is comparative, i.e. that in addition to assessing potential risks of certain applications of modern biotechnology, it should also be assessed what the risks are of not deploying those applications.

Looking forward to the further debate and wishing you all a most excellent weekend,

Piet
posted on 2017-04-28 20:57 UTC by Mr. Piet van der Meer, Ghent University, Free University of Brussels, Belgium, PRRI
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8335]
Thanks Angela, Suzanne and Piet for your valuable inputs which I fully support.

I also take this opportunity to share some national experience.

As mentioned in my earlier interventions, in India, RTE and RTI are part of our constitutional rights for which several enabling legal provisions, strategies and programs for public education and information are in place.

About developing biosafety resource material for public education, there are some limitation:
1. It is a relatively new area and has not received much attention in educational programs.

2. ‘Education’ and ‘Information’ though intrinsically linked are different from the stand point of goals and objectives. Therefore, biosafety education and biosafety Information needs different strategies to avoid the current ad-hoc approach.  Currently the focus is on Biosafety information only.

3. Biosafety education can’t be regarded as a stand-alone program. It is an integral part of various multi-disciplinary science programs such as life sciences, micro-biology, bio-chemistry, bio-medical etc.  Biotechnology is an extension of these disciplines and therefore introduction of biosafety in the context of LMOs would be more effective if it part of biotechnology course.   Similarly for non-science based programs at the undergraduate level and so on, biosafety can be introduced in the context of science policy advocacy, IPR,  law, MEAs, regulations and so on.  It is therefore extremely important, for the biosafety educational programs to be effective, we shift from a broad macro-level planning to micro-level designing.

4. Currently the biosafety resource materials are prepared by biotechnology / biosafety experts.   As the context, content and duration of the different educational programs would vary, it is important to engage with experienced educationalist involved in curricula development and communication specialist involved in educational program. 

5. About informal biosafety education, I noticed questions related to biotechnology, biosafety, GM crops, Biosafety Protocol, MEAs etc have been part of prestigious National Science Olympiads programs as well as part of National Competitive exams for admission to prestigious university courses as well as civil service examinations.  The students and schools participating in these initiatives are enormous. 

6. Another form of informal education which is gaining support is through NBSAPS. Implementing the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 is through an impressive network of the National Biodiversity Authority, State Biodiversity Boards, Biodiversity Management Committees and People’s Biodiversity Register. This platform provides a good opportunity for informal education to different stakeholders including women, tribal and local communities etc

There is a reference to a list of topics that may be considered for inclusion in the curriculum of biosafety education and training courses and programmes in Theme 3 PPT.  Sequencing of the topics may be re-aligned on the basis of four categories beginning with  Science Policy Advocacy followed by  Basic Science,   Biotechnology concepts,   Problem Formulation and Risk Assessment & Management and lastly Socio-economic, Trade and Liability.  Restructuring would help in customizing courses and training programs for different stakeholders.

Best

Ranjini
posted on 2017-04-30 06:57 UTC by Dr. Ranjini Warrier, India
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8336]
Thanks Angela, Suzanne and Piet for your valuable inputs which I fully support.

I also take this opportunity to share some national experience.

As mentioned in my earlier interventions, in India, RTE and RTI are part of our constitutional rights for which several enabling legal provisions, strategies and programs for public education and information are in place.

About developing biosafety resource material for public education, there are some limitation:
1. It is a relatively new area and has not received much attention in educational programs.

2. ‘Education’ and ‘Information’ though intrinsically linked are different from the stand point of goals and objectives. Therefore, biosafety education and biosafety Information needs different strategies to avoid the current ad-hoc approach.  Currently the focus is on Biosafety information only.

3. Biosafety education can’t be regarded as a stand-alone program. It is an integral part of various multi-disciplinary science programs such as life sciences, micro-biology, bio-chemistry, bio-medical etc.  Biotechnology is an extension of these disciplines and therefore introduction of biosafety in the context of LMOs would be more effective if it part of biotechnology course.   Similarly for non-science based programs at the undergraduate level and so on, biosafety can be introduced in the context of science policy advocacy, IPR,  law, MEAs, regulations and so on.  It is therefore extremely important, for the biosafety educational programs to be effective, we shift from a broad macro-level planning to micro-level designing.

4. Currently the biosafety resource materials are prepared by biotechnology / biosafety experts.   As the context, content and duration of the different educational programs would vary, it is important to engage with experienced educationalist involved in curricula development and communication specialist involved in educational program. 

5. About informal biosafety education, I noticed questions related to biotechnology, biosafety, GM crops, Biosafety Protocol, MEAs etc have been part of prestigious National Science Olympiads programs as well as part of National Competitive exams for admission to prestigious university courses as well as civil service examinations.  The students and schools participating in these initiatives are enormous. 

6. Another form of informal education which is gaining support is through NBSAPS. Implementing the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 is through an impressive network of the National Biodiversity Authority, State Biodiversity Boards, Biodiversity Management Committees and People’s Biodiversity Register. This platform provides a good opportunity for informal education to different stakeholders including women, tribal and local communities etc

There is a reference to a list of topics that may be considered for inclusion in the curriculum of biosafety education and training courses and programmes in Theme 3 PPT.  Sequencing of the topics may be re-aligned on the basis of four categories beginning with  Science Policy Advocacy followed by  Basic Science,   Biotechnology concepts,   Problem Formulation and Risk Assessment & Management and lastly Socio-economic, Trade and Liability.  Restructuring would help in customizing courses and training programs for different stakeholders.

Best

Ranjini
posted on 2017-04-30 06:57 UTC by Dr. Ranjini Warrier, India
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8337]
Dear participants,

Please note that the online discussions under Theme 3 will be extended to 5 May 2017 to ensure that more participants have the possibility to post messages.

The forum will be on "watch" forum for all participants during the last week of the forum. Individuals wishing to not participate recieving e-mails in their inbox can choose to turn the “watch” off in order not to recieve automatic emails.

The forum will be closed on 5 May 2017 (5:00 p.m. EDT).

Best regards,

Ulrika Nilsson
posted on 2017-05-01 12:15 UTC by Ms. Ulrika Nilsson, UNEP/SCBD/Biosafety
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8338]
Lesson 2: Key components of an education strategy/action plan
In 2012 GenØk-Center for biosafety worked on developing biosafety eduction at masters level. The attached document outlines proposed course structure, teaching goals and module description (including learning objectives). Although the strategic plan was finalised, the program was never implemented due to lack of financial support.
posted on 2017-05-05 07:42 UTC by Katrine Jaklin, GenØk - Centre for Biosafety
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8339]
Dear participants of the forum,
On the basis of the Czech Republic experience I fully support some ideas expressed in the preceding contributions:
The biosafety education can´t be regarded as an stand-alone theme, but the inclusion in a broader environmental education concept is recommendable. This helps also in development of resource materials, financial support etc. As to publications those need to be tailored to target audience.
Biosafety education needs to be connected with education on modern biotechnology development, with these technology advantages and possible risks, as well as measures to deal with these risks (which are questions in which general public is highly interested).
Corresponding national legislation, policy and strategic documents are very important.
In the Czech Republic, a special State environmental education programme has been developed and is periodically updated. Different centres of environmental education, nature protection information centres and NGOs are involved in its implementation. Two Acts enable access to information -  general   Act on Free Access to Information (which regards State administration) and special Act on the Right to Environmental Information. The Act on the Use of Genetically Modified Organisms and Genetic Products covers different aspects in the area of GMOs.
In biosafety education and information sharing, the cooperation with corresúponding experts are crutial (in CR e.g. members of the Czech Commisssion on GMOs).
Basic information can be found on the websites of the Ministry of the Environment and Ministry of Agriculture and in publications issued by these Ministries.
Milena Roudna.
posted on 2017-05-05 09:22 UTC by Ph.D. Milena Roudna, Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8340]
Thanks Milena for your useful comments.

In planning for public education it is important to do a thorough stock taking or review of approaches used by different national education systems be it formally or informal.  In doing that certain key questions would have to be looked at? What are the policies and strategies available? Are there other examples or models in environmental, regulatory or development related education programs?  Which institutional set up will best be a fit for modern biotechnology and set up?  Do we use approaches only for informal or formal education? What are the cost implications?

For formal education, it is absolutely important that the training fits into the approaches for curriculum development in the case of degree programmes to ensure the various academic bodies can peer review and fit if it is for higher education.  For lower education levels, the material would have to be modified and simplified usually with a lot of visuals to help at the secondary and as show in some cases for lower level.  I like also the approach in Cambodia where some focus was put in training the Secondary School teachers who will deliver the courses.  In the case of Swaziland they did a two pronged approach, Education at the Higher education through the University system and at the other levels through a partnership with the National Curriculum Center.  For people in the field like regulators - it seems short term and well structured periodic courses on biosafety with practical examples and case studies on new developments and best practices is more helpful.  For sectors including media, policy makers and civil society, simplified and structures materials using visuals including study tours and field engagements seems to help a lot in grasping issues of Modern biotechnology and biosafety.
posted on 2017-05-05 10:19 UTC by Alex Owusu-Biney, Ghana
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8341]
Dear Forum Members,

As a follow up to Katrine's example from own experience, it seems it works quite well when developed university programs are made to sit within existing Biology or Biotechnology programs, faculties or schools.  This helps in ensuring uptake and ownership by academic boards of national institutions. 

Best wishes

Alex Owusu-Biney, UNEP
posted on 2017-05-05 10:29 UTC by Alex Owusu-Biney, Ghana
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8342]
Dear Katrin,
Thank you very much for sharing with us program of GenØk course. I strongly support Alex that it is very important to develop such programs and approve them at different Academia levels. In our country and in other countries from CEE region we also have such programs or academic hours within Biotechnology courses at University level and during Master courses. I think that such approach could give good trainers and NGOs representatives that can successfully participate and defend the opinion of civil society in the discussion of ecologically important issues and especially when making state decisions. Unfortunately not always small countries have finance support to train the specialists of high level – masters or PhD. From this point of view, the preparation of such courses can be done on the basis of other countries and support for such courses, for example as those which offers Gönok, is very important. It is also would be very good to have support in the field of regional cooperation in training of specialists with the issuance of certificates and the development of thematic courses for different target groups on a regional level (e.g. regional courses for risk assessors which was done by Gönok and TWN was very successful and helpful).

Best wishes,
Galina
(edited on 2017-05-05 12:56 UTC by Dr. Galina Mozgova)
posted on 2017-05-05 12:55 UTC by Dr. Galina Mozgova, Belarus
RE: Theme 3: Feedback on the topic on planning for public education [#8343]
Theme 3 has been very educative and if all steps to develop a strategy/action plan are followed, I believe that we shall be able to develop biosafety training and education programmes successfully.

Thanks for the efforts.

The completed questionnaire is attached.
posted on 2017-05-05 13:12 UTC by Evelyn Lutalo, National Environment Management Authority
Attachement Theme 3.docx - 17 KB