POSTED ON BEHALF OF THE MODERATORS OF THE FORUM

Dear Forum Participants,

We are pleased and honoured to have been invited to moderate these online discussions.

Please note that a draft text that will be developed into an e-learning module on public education regarding LMOs has been made available as an attachment. 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 elements of public education is in line with your national experience (e.g. comprehensive, useful, clear, applicable and/or complete)

Lesson 1: Meaning of public education

1. How does your country’s Education Act and/or other legal frameworks define public education?
2. What may be the general aim of biosafety education and training?
3. In your opinion, who is or should be considered to be the public in term of public education and training of biosafety issues (e.g. type of scholars, specialists, indigenous and local communities)?
4. Does your government recognize vocational training as public education?
5. Does your government recognize public biosafety education as part of environmental education and/or biodiversity education?

Does the exercise support you in identifying the needs in your country/situation?

Lesson 2: Characteristics of public education

Does the exercise assist you in reflecting on formal education in your county?

6. Are the general characteristics in line with your national experience of secondary education?
7. Are there general characteristics in line with your national experience of higher education?

Does the exercise assist you in reflecting on informal education in your county?

Lesson 3: The importance of public education

8. How important is public education in biosafety?
9. Is the list of general importance of public education in line with your national experiences?
10. Is the list of importance of biosafety in public education in line with your national experiences?

Lesson 4: Context of public education

11. Are the external factors in line with your national experiences?
12. Are the internal factors in line with your national experiences?
13. Would it be useful to include a SWOT analysis in this section or in Topic 3 when reviewing and developing a resource guide for educational institutions and a training strategy for other educators?

Please note that the discussions for Theme 1 is from 3 April 2017 (9:00 a.m. EDT) to 7 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 report of the second joint Aarhus Convention/CBD round table on public awareness, access to information and public participation regarding LMOs/GMOs also had a component of public education and is now available at http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/wgp/WGP-21/Documents/AEC/ece.mp.pp.wg.1.2017.8_aec.pdf?dowload

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)
• 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)

Publicado en nombre de Sol Ortiz Garcia:

Estimados participantes del foro,

Es nuestro placer y honor haber sido invitados a moderar estas discusiones en línea.
Por favor noten que se encuentra disponible como un archivo adjunto un borrador que será desarrollado en un módulo de aprendizaje electrónico respecto a educación pública de OVM. Los participantes del foro están invitados a revisar el texto de este borrador y responder las siguiente preguntas guías que serán moderadas en este foro.

Nos gustaría saber si esta sección del módulo sobre elementos de educación pública está alineada con sus experiencias nacionales (ejemplo, incluyente, útil, clara, aplicable y/o completa).
Lección 1: Significado de la educación pública

1. ¿Cómo define la Ley u otros marcos legales de su país “educación Pública”?
2. ¿Cuál sería el objetivo general de la educación y capacitación en bioseguridad?
3. En su opinión, ¿quién es o debería ser considerado “el público” en términos de aspectos de la educación pública y capacitación sobre temas de bioseguridad (ejemplo tipo de académicos, especialistas, comunidades indígenas y locales)?
4. ¿Reconoce su gobierno la capacitación vocacional como educación pública?
5. ¿Reconoce su gobierno la educación pública en bioseguridad como parte de la educación en medio ambiente y/o biodiversidad?
¿Le ayuda este ejercicio en identificar las necesidades en su país /situación?

Lección 2: Características de la educación pública
¿Le ayuda este ejercicio en reflexionar sobre la educación formal en su país?
6. ¿Están las características generales alineadas con su experiencia nacional sobre educación secundaria?
7. ¿Están las características generales alineadas con su experiencia nacional sobre educación superior?
¿Le ayuda este ejercicio en reflexionar sobre la educación informal en su país?

Lección 3: La importancia de la educación pública
8. ¿Qué tan importante es la educación pública en bioseguridad?
9. ¿Se encuentra alineada la lista general de importancia sobre educación pública con sus experiencias nacionales?
10. ¿Se encuentra alineada la lista de importancia en bioseguridad sobre educación pública, con sus experiencias nacionales?

Lección 4: Contexto de la educación pública
11. ¿Están alineados los factores externos con sus experiencias nacionales?
12. ¿Están alineados los factores internos con sus experiencias nacionales?
13. ¿Sería útil incluir un análisis SWOT en esta sección o en el tópico 3 cuando se revisen y se desarrolle una guía para instituciones educativas y una estrategia de capacitación para otros educadores?

Por favor note que las discusiones del Tema 1 serán del 3 de abril de 2017 (9:00 a.m. EDT) al 7 de abril de 2017  (5:00 p.m. EDT).

Por favor note que los participantes deben registrarse y firmar en el CIISB (BCH) para poder publicar sus comentarios.

Las personas que deseen participar a través de correo electrónico, después de estos mensajes iniciales pueden elegir “observar” las discusiones que tendrán lugar bajo diferentes temas. Estas personas recibirán copia de los mensajes publicados en su correo electrónico.

Estaremos atentos y esperamos ver sus sugerencias y comentarios.

También queremos hacer de su conocimiento que el segundo informe conjunto de la mesa redonda sobre concienciación pública acceso a la información y participación pública con relación a los OVM/OGM de la Convención de Aarhus /CBD también tiene un componente sobre educación pública y está disponible en:
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/wgp/WGP-21/Documents/AEC/ece.mp.pp.wg.1.2017.8_aec.pdf?dowload

Saludos cordiales,

Sol Ortiz García

Ok. Thank you very much

Muchas gracias estimada Sol, también adjunte algunas cosas que hacemos en el país, espero los demas colegas compartan sus experiencias, para nosotros es necesario aprender de sus experiencias.
Saludos

Muchas gracias estimado Angel por tomarte el tiempo de participar, esperemos que otros colegas de Latinoamérica y el Caribe participen en la discusión.
Si gustan también poden comentar sobre los insumos de todos los colegas participantes.
Que tengan un lindo día.
Sol Ortiz

Publié au nom de Yosra Mekni:


Chers participants au forum,
Nous sommes heureux et honorés d'avoir été invités à modérer ces discussions en ligne.
Veuillez noter qu'un projet de texte qui sera développé dans un module d'e-learning sur l'éducation publique concernant les OVM a été mis à disposition en pièce jointe. 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 les éléments de l'éducation publique est conforme à votre expérience nationale (par exemple, complète, utile, claire, applicable et / ou complète)

Leçon 1: définition de l'éducation publique
1. Comment la Loi sur l'éducation de votre pays et / ou d'autres cadres juridiques définissent-ils l'éducation publique?
2. Quel est l'objectif général de l'éducation et de la formation en matière de Biosécurité?
3. À votre avis, qui est ou devrait être considéré comme public cible en terme d'éducation publique et de formation sur les questions liées en enjeux de la Biosécurité (par exemple, les universitaires, les spécialistes, les populations autochtones et locales)?
4. Votre gouvernement reconnaît-il la formation professionnelle comme éducation publique?
5. Votre gouvernement reconnaît-il l'éducation publique en matière de Biosécurité comme composante de l'éducation environnementale et / ou de l'éducation à la biodiversité?
Est-ce que vous trouvez que cette réflexion vous aide-t-il à identifier les besoins de votre pays / situation?

Leçon 2: Spécificités de l'éducation publique
L'exercice vous aide-t-il à réfléchir à l'éducation formelle dans votre pays?
6. Est-ce que l’éducation publique est intégrée dans le programme national de l'enseignement secondaire?
7. Est-ce que l’éducation publique est intégrée dans le programme national de l'enseignement  supérieur?
L'exercice vous aide-t-il à réfléchir à l'éducation informelle dans votre pays?

Leçon 3: L'importance de l'éducation publique
8. Quelle est l'importance de l'éducation publique en matière de Biosécurité?
9. l’accès à l’éducation publique peut permettre d’augmenter le degré de compréhension des enjeux, d’augmenter l’employabilité  dans des domaines spécifiques, réduire les frais de formation sur le marché, etc. Est-ce que ces éléments ont pris en considération dans vos expériences nationales?
10. Spécifiquement à la biosécurité, est ce que l’aboutissement de l'éducation publique en terme de facilitation de l’accès à l’information, l’amélioration de la formation et des recherches scientifiques en Biosécurité, renforcement de capacités, etc, est-il pris en considération dans vos expériences nationales?
Leçon 4: Contexte de l'éducation publique
11. Est-ce que vos expériences nationales en matière d’éducation public ont tenu compte des facteurs externes tels que le système d’éducation national, facteurs sociaux, économiques, technologique et politiques, société civile, etc)
12. Est-ce que vos expériences nationales en matière d’éducation public ont tenu compte des facteurs internes (mécanisme national d’éducation en biosécurité, compétence des formateurs, budget alloué aux projets dédiés à la formation en matière de Biosécurité, programmes et formations existants en matière de Biosécurité, etc)?
13. Selon vous, est-il utile d'inclure une analyse SWOT dans cette section (leçon 4) ou dans
le module (3) lors de la révision et l'élaboration d'un guide de ressources pour les établissements d'enseignement et dans la stratégie de formation pour les autres enseignants ?

Veuillez noter que les discussions pour le thème 1 sont du 3 avril 2017 (9h00) jusqu'au 7 avril 2017 (17h00).

Veuillez noter que les participants doivent s'inscrire et accéder au site BCH afin de poster des messages.

Les personnes souhaitant participer par courrier électronique après ces messages initiaux peuvent choisir «watch» 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 le rapport de la deuxième table ronde conjointe Aarhus Convention / CBD sur la sensibilisation du public, l'accès à l'information et la participation du public à l'égard des OVM / OGM a également une composante liée à l'éducation publique et est maintenant disponible à http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/wgp/WGP-21/Documents/AEC/ece.mp.pp.wg.1.2017.8_aec.pdf?dowload

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)
• 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)
(Édité le 2017-04-03 14:56 UTC par Mme Ulrika Nilsson)
Affiché aujourd'hui à 10:49 UTC par Mme Ulrika Nilsson, PNUE / SCBD / Biosécurité

Vous devez être connecté pour poster des messages dans ce forum. Selon le forum, vous pouvez également avoir besoin des informations d'identification appropriées afin de poster des messages.

Madame Suzan
j'ai rencontré un problème pour télécharger le document du theme 1 et cela m'empêche d'intervenir comment faire pour le faire?

C'est peut-être parce que la session est terminée. Je vous conseille d'adresser votre demande à ulrika.nilsson@cbd.int

je pense pour des documents et rapports, j'estime qu'il est important de penser aussi aux pays francophones, car, tous les documents ou presque sont en anglais, cela pose quelques difficultés pour la traduction

Cher Monsieur Guy,

Je comprends parfaitement votre soucis. Merci pour votre remarque pertinente.
En effet, la convention sur le diversité biologique (CDB) dispose de fonds limité pour assurer la traduction de tous les modules en plusieurs langues.
Pour le présent module, les fonds affectés sont uniquement pour la version en langue anglaise.

Par ailleurs, je serai à ta disposition si vous aurez besoin de compléments d'informations sur le document ou sur certaines rubriques dont vous jugez importantes pour vous.

Bien à vous

Hello Dear Colleagues from the Asia Pacific Region,  based on the various questions indicated under theme 1,  we highly encourage your active participation in the discussion. Best.

L'éducation du public est une thématique importante, elle implique les modules ou outils, un public cible connu des thématiques connues comme c'est le cas des LMOs. Dans mon pays le Gabon, bien que c'est important, des stratégies d'éducation du public doivent élaborées. L'avantage actuel est le fait que la nouvelle Loi sur l'Environnement prend en compte les aspects de LMOs.

Bonjour Monsieur Mikissa. Si vous pensez que cela peut vous être utile, en Belgique nous avons des experts (membres de l'association belge de biosécurité (http://www.ebsaweb.eu/bbp-belgian-biosafety-professionals) qui seraient certainement heureux de vous faire bénéficier de leur expérience dans le domaine de l'éducation à toutes les questions qui touchent aux LMOs. La langue de travail de cette association est l'anglais, mais je pourrais vous servir d'intermédiaire dans le cas où vous souhaiteriez entrer en contact avec cette association. Vous aurez aussi sans doute des informations très utiles auprès de Mohammed Benbouida, fondateur de l'association de biosécurité marocaine http://www.ambs-maroc.com/membres_bureau.php. Cette association me semble très active dans le domaine de la sensibilisation et de la formation. Je reste à votre disposition pour continuer cette discussion.

Je suis plus qu'honoré et je suis totalement d'accord avec votre proposition. J'attends que vous me mettiez en contact avec l'Association et voir comment un partenariat peut se développer. Même si la langue de travail est l'anglais il n'y aura pas de problème.

C'est entendu je vous mets sur ma liste des sujets à discuter lorsque je me présenterai à la prochaine réunion. Avez-vous une "liste de priorités" (par exemple, êtes-vous surtout intéressé par le gestion des LMOs végétales, par les pratiques dans les laboratoires de biotechnologies, par les approches dans les laboratoire de diagnostic ?....). En fonction, de votre réponse, nous verrons comment préparer la prochaine discussion.

Bonjour Suzan
je profite de cette occasion pour vous demander aussi de mettre en contact avec cette équipe car ce problème est général presque dans tous les pays africains

Bonjour M. Mboma Akani, vous trouvez facilement mes coordonnées sur le site de mon université (https://directory.unamur.be/staff/sloret). Le mieux est de m'y contacer par mail pour envisager la façon de maintenir de contact.

Merci M. Missika pour votre partage. Je trouve que déjà que c'est très intéressant qu'il y un projet de loi en cours qui s'intéresse à l'éducation public et particulièrement aux LMOs. Est-ce que la loi prévoit d'intégrer l'éducation publique en matière de Biosécurité comme cursus officiel dans le programme national d'éducation?
Par ailleurs, je crois également que le rôle de la société civile dans la formation et la sensibilité de la population à la biosécurité est cruciale...
Madame Suzanne, merci également de nous partager l’expérience Belge en matière d’éducation public en général et en matière de biosécurité.

Chère Ms Yosra Torjmen Mekni, en Belgique, les initiatives d'éducation à la biosécurité p"artent du terrain" vers les personnes qui souhaitent se former. Plus précisément, nous sommes un groupes de professionnels de la biosécurité, avec une formation de base pour le travail de recherche ou d'assistance technique de recherche/production et - surtout - avec une expérience professionnelle importante. Cela nous permet de dialoguer avec les experts techniques belges pour la biosécurité: le Service Biosécurité et Biotechnologie (SBB http://www.biosafety.be) de l'Institut de Santé Publique (http://www.wiv-isp.be), pour définir les priorités en matière d'éducation. Par conséquent, nous proposons des formations internationales telle celle qui aura lieu en Septembre à Anvers (en anglais): https://www.uantwerpen.be/en/summer-schools/principles-of-biosafety/ ou en français (http://www.cefoscim.be/formations/biosecurite2017/formation-en-biosecurite). Les collègue du SBB participent à nos formations. A l'université de Gand, il y a aussi une possibilité de suivre un module de formation complet en ligne (http://ipbo.vib-ugent.be/training/postgraduate-studies). A nouveau, la langue d'enseignement est l'anglais. Je serais ravie de vous mettre en contact avec les organisateurs de ces différents formations.

Bonsoir  tout le monde,
Bruno, comment vas tu mon ami, ca fait longtemps que nous ne sommes pas vu depuis nos dernières rencontres en Uganda, heureux que la nouvelle loi sur l'environnement en Gabon a tenu en considération les OVM. Sinon pour que le rôle que peut jouer la société civile en matière d'éducation et de sensibilisation de public dans le domaine de la biosécurité en particulier les OVM, je pourrais vous citer l'expérience Tunisienne qui se repose sur la synergie entre la partie gouvernementale à savoir le ministère chargé de l'environnement et une ONG qui opère ans ce domaine qui est l'ATB2E ( Association Tunisienne de Biosécurité et de l'Education Environnementale). En fait nous avons organisé l'année dernière la caravane de la biosécurité et on s'est déplacé au niveau de plusieurs universités Tunisiennes pour présenter le concept de biosécurité dans son sens global y compris les OVM. Déjà la modératrice de ce forum francophone Mrs Mekni est la responsable de cette partie éducation environnementale au sein de cette association Tunisienne. Sinon un grand merci à Madame Suzanne pour toutes ces informations relatives aux différents opérateurs belge en matière d'éducation et tous ces liens, j'étais il y'a 5 ans à l'Institut de Santé Belge lors d'une visite d'étude organisée pour un groupe de la commission Tunisienne de la Biosécurité et j'ai découvert de prés leur travail en matière d'éducation. Peut être ma question à Mme Suzanne est ce que cette formation et éducation touche les OVM aussi car d'après mes connaissances sur l'exemple que vous avez cité sur l'ONG marocaine, leur domaine de compétence est les agents pathogènes plutôt que les OVM ? Merci

Cher Monsieur Hatem Ben Begacem. Oui, effectivement, au niveau du ministère de la santé publique belge, l'expertise est surtout orientée sur la gestion du risque lors de l'utilisation des organismes pathogènes, mais l'expertise OVM y est également présente. En Belgique, les experts des OVMs végétales sont surtout concentrés dans la région de Gand, car l'université de Gand est le berceau d'un des "Pères" de la biotechnologie végétale (Marc Van Montagu). C'est en raison de la grande expertise acquise par ces chercheurs que le module de formation à la biosécurité dans ce domaine y a été développé (http://ipbo.vib-ugent.be/training/postgraduate-studies). Il y a également une expertise dans ce domaine à l'Université de Liège (Site de Gembloux), où le Professeur Patrick du Jardin, qui est un expert reconnu à l'échelon international pour l'évaluation du risque lors de la culture de plantes GM (http://www.gembloux.ulg.ac.be/biologie-vegetale/pr-patrick-du-jardin-head-of-laboratory-professor/), assure un cours (VEGE0034-1) portant sur les risques chimiques, biologiques et environnementaux liés aux productions végétales.

Merci beaucoup chère Madame Suzanne pour toutes ces explications et ces liens très utiles, je sais bien que les experts belges ont une très bonne réputation dans ce domaine, déjà Mr Philippe Stroot nous a assuré plusieurs sessions de formation sur l'évaluation et la  gestion des risques liés à l'utilisation des OGM's  et on a même préparé un guide technique en la matière que vous pouvez le télécharger via ce lien https://bch.cbd.int/database/record.shtml?documentid=109178
Sinon je serai ravi de voir avec vous les possibilités de coopération ensemble que ce soit dans un cadre gouvernemental ou associatif

Cher M. Hatem Ben Belgacem, je suis joignable très facilement (https://directory.unamur.be/staff/sloret) pour envisager toute forme de coopération.

Merci chère Suzanne,
Effectivement nous apprenons beaucoup sur le terrain. C’est la meilleure occasion pour découvrir comment la population réagit avec la thématique de la biosécurité et surtout comment ajuster nos actions d’éducation au public visé.
Ceci qui nous emmène, en fait,  directement à la question 12 du module à savoir si nos expériences nationales en matière d’éducation public ont tenu compte des facteurs internes du pays (mécanisme national d’éducation en biosécurité, compétence des formateurs, budget alloué aux projets dédiés à la formation en matière de Biosécurité, programmes et formations existants en matière de Biosécurité, etc)?
En d’autres termes est ce que les initiatives nationales sont conçues sur la base des résultats d’analyse des facteurs internes du pays afin que les actions d’éducation public ou liés aux LMOs s’inscrivent dans le même objectif.
Merci pour vos réflexions et échanges afin d’enrichir le module.

Chère Ms Yosra Torjmen Mekni, oui les initiatives nationales sont généralement dictées par les conditions locales. En Belgique, l'utilisation des LMOs est limitée à des activités de recherche, ce qui restreint le débat au confinement de ces LMOs. Des LMOs en provenance de l'étranger se retrouvent toutefois sur le marché alimentaire, ce qui a suscité un débat sur la sécurité des consommateurs qui a abouti à l'obligation de mentionner clairement un produit génétiquement modifié dans son étiquetage. Il arrive aussi que des débats soient organisés à propos de questions éthiques posées par l'application de nos biotechnologies dans d'autres pays, telle l'effet du "monopole des graines" par les firmes biotechnologiques sur les agriculteurs locaux.

Dear colleagues,

It has been very pleasant when reading the pubic education module. Public education on biosafety is very important, especially for countries with commercially released LMOs and those boarded with LMOs countries and those importing LMOs products from abroad.

One important element for public education is that the information shall be correct and scientifically sounded, it is true also for other education. For instance, some public education materials in China only advocated the benefits of LMOs and denied any risk. They always tell the public that there are lots of LMOs in United States and the American people have eaten transgenic foods for decades. Certainly, it is true that US has lots of LMOs. But most LMOs in US are for industrial use and only a very small amount may escape into human food chain (directly for fresh food).  they do not mention anything of this in their official education materials. The purpose of their public education purely aims for wide acceptance of LMOs in China. This kind of education is not correct and shall not be encouraged.

The education shall be conducted by experienced biosafety experts other than the biotechnologists who developed LMOs with a wish for commercialization and to make profits. Biosafety shall also consider both human health and environment. That safety for eat does not necessarily mean safety for environment and for release into the local nature.

Public event maybe another name of the informal public education. Participants may be invited for seminars or to come to the biosafety study sites and even involved in conducting experiments. By this way, they maybe able to learn the concept and risks.

Sincerely

Wei

Dear Dr. Wei Wei. Yes indeed the information about LMOs risks should be complete, based on a scientific evaluation and easely available to the public. In Belgium, the risk assesment is done by the Biosafety Advisory Council (http://www.conseil-biosecurite.be/Pages/Home.aspx). From this platform you can have a look at the ongoing dossiers and learn about the competetences of council members. Moreover, in the case of commercialization of edible LMOs, the labeling of foodstuffs must mention that they are genetically modified, so that people have the choice to decide to consumme them or not. The sensitisation of the public through seminars, visits and even practical exercises is probably a good idea. However, site visits could breach the containment of LMOs leading to their accidental dispersal with a possible detrimental effect in environment. Moreover, practical exercises are not possible at large scale. In a system where biosafety officer are well trained and the information correctly done, people could trust the biosafety professionals and risk assessment procedures, likewise they do when they undergo a risky medical treatment.

Dear Mrs. Suzanne LORET,

Many thanks!

In my opinion, public education is different from the education in school and in university. The audience of public education is public people who my have no knowledge in biosafety, in biology and even in sciences. Training is also different from public education that teaches people a way to do something.

For example, the training manual of risk assessment and risk management is aiming to train the biosafety officials etc. for their own job. It may need modification/revision when use for public education for lay people.

Dear Dr. Wei Wei,
Yes, there is a need for a vulgarization of the training manual used to educate biosafety professionals at the attention of the public. Alternatively, instead of producing a manual needing frequent updatings (since the biotechnology is continuously evolving), governments could produce internet platforms offering a general information to the public with differents links towards more spefic explanations (but still in a simple language) for each of the sectors of biosafety. In Belguim, we have such platform for LMOs (https://www.belgium.be/nl/node/9068 ; I am sorry everything is in French/Flemish)

I agree with your input to some extend esp in developed countries  where electricity and interest services is reliable, Most African countries are still finding means to meet this, am from Ghana and  i know how frustrating this is especially searching for information even on the government website, Ghana just completed it information centre last year and its is yet to be equipped, I will suggest a different form of information transfer (Oral and community based ) in such areas where electricity is not reliable.

Dear participants,

If I try to summarize the major information excanged so far, I would retain four points:
1. As pointed out by Miss Naana Daaku, not all countries can adopt the same strategy to reach the public. While the e-technologies will be the easiest way to keep the public informed with regularly update information about LMOs, it will be the less efficient way in countries facing unreliable electricity networks. Those countries have thus to adopt more conventional approaches: meeting, booklet diffusions, ... which is more demanding in terms of number of available instructors, logistics aspects and is also less friendly for the environment when it comes to consume large amounts of paper material;
2. When we think about public education on biosafety, our first reflex is to refer with structured teaching organizations (schools, universities, lifelong learning training, ...), which is not the good reflex, since those structures only target a small proportion of the population (i.e. students enrolled in scientific programmes mostly). To this respect, yes indeed, most of the times scientists with deep knowledge about biosafety are those who are familiar with biotechnology approaches and are then not the good advocates for an impartial information to public. It is thus clear that the public education must be organized by governments, in collaboration with representatives of all stakeholders (environmentalists, biotech companies, citizens, teaching institutions, biosafety experts, ...). Maybe the learning module should insist more on the "informal" way to reach largely the public.
3. Certain countries have developed adequate strategies to educate the public on the topic of LMOs. More precisely, it seems that Moldova is already largely in line with the learning module proposed here (see the message of Angela Lozan). we could also certainly consider the example of the 3N strategy developed in Niger (kindly described by Dr. Gado).
4. We have also raised the importance to consider the consumer protection in biosafety trainings. Though, we have to keep in mind that the development of a material on consumer protection is a bit out of scope of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. However, CBH is in the process of developing a resource guide and a training strategy in Topic 3 that will have a template on how to teach or train people on handling, transport, packaging and identification of LMOs (for more information, please contact Ulrika Nilsson).
Personally, I have learned a lot through our discussion so far, thank you to all!

Thanks for your insights.

Dear Colleagues:,

Finally, in response to Dr. Wei Wei’s statement (#8250), (“But most LMOs in US are for industrial use and only a very small amount may escape into human food chain (directly for fresh food).  They do not mention anything of this in their official education materials.”) we note that the United States has been growing, exporting,  and safely consuming ingredients derived from genetically engineered (GE) soybean, corn, sugar beet, cotton, and canola for over 20 years.  The same food that is exported from the United States to other countries is the same food and feed consumed in the United States. Soybean, corn, and cotton products are routinely used in food production in the United States.  Almost all bread in the U.S. contains ingredients such as lecithin derived from soybeans. GE squash and papaya have also been safely consumed directly as produce for over 15 years. Recently approved  new varieties of GE potatoes and apples are now entering the United States market.  There have been no scientifically substantiated adverse effects to human and animal health from consuming food from GE plant varieties.  Also, there have been no scientifically substantiated cases of environmental harm caused by GE crops.

Dear Mr Wayne Schmidt,
With the exception of the identification of a Brazil-Nut Allergen in Transgenic Soybeanst (N Engl J Med 1996; 334:688-692), there have been no scientifically substantiated adverse effects to human and animal health from consuming food from GE plant varieties. However, exception remind us, that the "no risk paradise"  doesn't exist in the LMOs land. Similarly, I can send you references of scientific papers showing that new vegetal species wre spontaneously created in the environment by the crossing between wild type and GM plants. If this is indeed not "really" dommageable to the environment, it reminds us that the conservation of biodiversity must keep a priority in the risk asessement procedure.

Thank you, Dr. Loret for your message (#8285). 

A component of public education should be an understanding of the processes used by the breeders of new varieties and the processes used by government regulatory agencies to ensure safe products are brought to market.  Consumer confidence and acceptance can be built on understanding of the science, agriculture, and confidence in the regulatory institutions.

The case of soybean engineered to express Brazil nut protein is a great example for how the regulatory system works to ensure products that reach the market place is as safe as its conventional counterpart.  The transgenic soybean engineered to express the 2S albumin protein from the Brazil nut was never close to reaching the marketplace, for cultivation or FFP.  Both the developer and the regulators assessing the product expressed concern that consumers would not expect the presence of Brazil nut allergen in soybean, and the product was never commercially released.  Let me note, no one has banned the consumption of food containing known allergens, several examples of which include: eggs, Brazil nuts, peanuts, kiwis, and mangos.  There are also examples where conventional breeding has resulted in varieties with unsafe levels of naturally occurring toxins detrimental to human and animal health.  Statements around “no risk paradises” do not get to the heart of the issue—which is that genetically engineered products receive much more governmental regulatory oversight with regards to safety than their conventionally developed counterparts.

Finally, I agree that biodiversity conservation and germplasm conservation are important.  We should look at both potential negative impacts, as well as positive contributions of GE corps to biodiversity.

Dear Mr. Wayne Schmidt,

Thanks for your message. It is very interesting to have such a discussion with a colleague from US, although I am not sure if it is the right place to discuss this issue. As far as I know most transgenic corn, soybean. canola are going for industrial processing for Ethanol or say Biodiesel. When they are processed for cooking oil etc, the protein has been cleared and nearly no transgenic component remained.  The oil could be assumed as the least risky transgenic products for human food use. However, in the countries where their people like to eat in fresh, like the soybean sprout, tofu, the amount of transgenic products intake will be high and risky for people health. Obviously, the dose really matters. Although the bread in US may contain kind of transgenic ingredients, the amount shall be too tiny to cause an effect. In addition, the potatoes and apples are entering into the market, but we do not know yet how much the market share. Unfortunately the USDA does like to have such data.

Additionally, even the transgenic product is safe to eat, the environmental release of such organism in the field will not be always safe. The environmental condition varied among countries and regions, the environmental risk will depend on the actual circumstance.

All the best

Wei

Dear Dr Wei,

Yes indeed, the topic of consumer protection is a bit out of scope of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. BCH is in the process of developing a resource guide and a training strategy in Topic 3 that will have a template on how to teach or train people on handling, transport, packaging and identification of LMOs.

Also, keep in mind that untill now, with rare exceptions the risk for consummers is really unlikely (regardless of the dose).

Best regards, Suzanne Loret

Dear Dr. Wei and Mr. Schmidt

Thank you for broaching an important topic on LMOs from  the perspective of consumers and discussing it with a slight touch on environmental worry. I think your discussion can be referred as a kind of material to help people enlightening themselves about their unanswered querries on consuming LMOs. However, we need to bear in mind that this forum is focusing on public education regarding LMOs and the module, which was also kindly pointed out by Mrs Suzanne LORET.

In response to post #8289.  For the record – the regulatory agencies within the United States are not the only competent authorities that have examined the environmental, food, and feed safety of the current GE crops in commerce.  I refer the participants to the GMO Crop Database curated by ILSI Research Foundation http://www.cera-gmc.org/GMCropDatabase; as well as the FAO GM Food Platform http://www.fao.org/food/food-safety-quality/gm-foods-platform/en/

Thank you Ms Ulrika for the ppt on the public education,Consumer protection is also one key factor to be consider during the process of public interaction, there are case where field trials are on going and there has not been enough impact assessment and public consultation. There consumer should be aware of the current changes which can inform them of their choice.

Dear Miss Naana Daaku,
You are right: consumer protection is also one key factor to be considered during the process of public interaction. I understand your concern regarding the lack of information to the public on the procedure used to develop vegetal LMOs. The field trials are part of a risk assessment procedure aimed at both preventing environmental issue (conservation of the local biodiversity) and checking the safety of the consummers. The principle of the whole procedure should be clearly explained in a communication readely accessible to the public.

Thank you for granting us this opportunity, and may I welcome all colleagues from Africa and abroad.

In Swaziland, the public education system falls under the Ministry of Education and Training, whose primary mandate is to provide access to relevant quality education at all levels to all Swazi citizens; taking into account all issues of efficacy, equity and special needs.
Recognizing the key role of education in economic and social development, the country has made remarkable undertakings towards providing quality education to all its citizens at all levels through formal and non-formal approaches. In carrying out its mandate, the Ministry has been charged with the under-listed portfolio responsibilities:

•    Early Childhood Care and Development
•    Primary Education
•    Junior and Senior Secondary Education
•    Technical and Vocational Education and Training
•    University Education
•    Teacher Training
•    Special Education
•    Adult and Non-formal Education
•    Open and Distance Education

In its endeavor to extend educational opportunities to all, particularly at basic education level, the Ministry has made remarkable efforts to aligning itself with global, regional and national policy initiatives. At international level, efforts have been made to attain the Education for All (EFA) targets and the Millennium Development Goals (MDG's). In carrying out these responsibilities the following crosscutting issues arise:

•    Guidance and Psychological Services
•    Curriculum Development
•    Examinations
•    Management Information Systems
•    International Relations

In implementing Article 23 of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety with relevance to public education, the Biosafety Competent Authority in the country, which is The Swaziland Environment Authority (SEA) has had workshops and trainings with almost all the stakeholders of the Ministry of Education and Training in its bid to mainstream “Modern Biotechnology and Biosafety” into the curriculum in Swaziland. These stakeholders include:

• The National Curriculum Centre (collaborating Partner)
• Inspectorate Division
• Exams Counsel of Swaziland
• In-Service Teacher Training
• The MESA Chair of The University of Swaziland (UNISWA) (collaborating Partner)

The Swaziland Environment Authority has been working in collaboration with the National Curriculum Centre and the MESA Chair of UNISWA (after signing memorandum of agreements), to work on mainstreaming “Modern Biotechnology and Biosafety” into the programmes and processes, rather than having and subject or course on its own. This approach has been prompted by various reasons and has been so far working well for our system.
The story continues…..

Colleagues are welcomed for discussions and also to tell us their national processes

Good day

South African education is characterized by a system of cooperative governance, with clearly articulated power sharing between the national and provincial governments. At the national level, the Department of Basic Education (DBE) provides the framework for school policy with administrative responsibility being held by the nine provincial education departments. School governance has been further decentralized, with greater autonomy devolved onto school governing bodies. The DHET department deals with further education and training (FET) colleges, adult basic education and training (ABET) centres, and higher education (HE) institutions. This also cater for Voacationa and community education as well as skills development.

Key Policies and Public Programs

South African Constitution (1996): enshrines the right to basic education, including adult education and to further education, which the state, through reasonable measures, must make progressively available and accessible.

South African Schools Act (1996): provides a uniform system for the organization, governance and funding of schools.

Further Education and Training Colleges Act (2006): regulates further education and training. Adult Basic Education and Training Act (2000): provides for the establishment of public and private adult learning centres, funding, governance and quality assurance mechanisms.

White paper for Post-School Education and Training (2013): provides for the establishment of community education and training colleges that targets post-school youth and adults who wish to raise the base for further learning, improve their skills for employability.

Action Plan to 2014: Towards the realisation of schooling 2025 – A long-term plan for transforming basic education in South Africa: 27 national goals at the heart of the government’s long-term vision for schools.

Regulations relating to minimum uniform norms and standards for public schooling infrastructure (2013): these cover areas such as minimum space per learner in a classroom, toilets, electricity and the like.

National Education Collaboration Trust (2013): a civil society-government partnership dedicated to supporting educational reform and school improvement

Dear colleagues
Many thanks to the Secretariat for these important on line discussions.
In Niger republic the elements of public education are included in the 3N Strategy Nigeriiens feed Nieriens which integrated all biosafety issues. It is an initiative of   the government using a communication guide involving  education  and comunication programm  conducted by  various national experts from agricuture, breeding, commerce; universities, biotechnology institute  research institutes, education, health, civil society sectors to improve Public understanding. The guide presents  some challenges like : 
How to build public trust and connect with audiences, .
How to position the benefits of biotechnology that will resonate with the public.
How to stay focused and engage in respectful discussions with opponents of food biotechnology.
How to balance the dialogue on food biotechnology using social media.
Best regards
Dr Gado

Good Day Ntakadzeni Tshidada

Your education public education system is quite interesting and the way it is simplified and supported by your policies makes it quite easy to follow. In a system like yours, how are the prospects of integrating biosafety and at which levels would it be best suited? Beyond the public education system, I am sure the South Africa has taken great strides with regard to public awareness on the technology and I am sure we will learn a lot as the discussions progress to the next themes.
Thanks for sharing

Hi Bongani

Thank you for the complement, South Africa has a dedicated programme called Public Understanding of Biotechnology aims to ensure that there is a clear, balanced understanding of the scientific principles, related to the issues and potential of biotechnology and also to stimulate public debate around its applications in society. in addition, the  PUB programme ensures broad public awareness, dialogue and debate on its current and potential of Biotech and its  future applications. this also take into account issues of Biosafety. The target audience includes all facets of society, with an emphasis on consumers, educators and learners.

As you have indicated, i will provide more information going forward.

Thanks,
Ntaka

Hello Colleagues from Asia-Pacific Region.

We would like to encourage you once again to participate in the discussion by answering the questions as stated under Theme 1.

Many thanks

Ruel

Dear Participants from CEE Region.
We would like to encourage you to participate in this round of discussions.
Your active participation is very important and we look forward to reading your valuable suggestions and comments.

Thank you very much,

Galina Mozgova

Kia ora. I would like to thank the Moderators, Secretariat and fellow Participants for this opportunity to comment.

Lesson 1: Meaning of public education

1. How does your country’s Education Act and/or other legal frameworks define public education?

I have accessed the New Zealand Education Act (1989). It provides no definition of public education.

The module’s definition of ‘public education’ is not consistent with my understanding in the context of my society. The module says: “The concept of ‘public education’ refers to government education that is entirely or partly funded and overseen. National education systems vary in each country. However, all educational systems promote learning between two or more persons or medium of persons.”

In my view, public education refers to a system that is answerable to the government, not just funded entirely or in part by it. This distinguishes it from private providers, even those contracted by governments to serve as providers of education or support services. While the government may or may not determine the content of the curriculum, it does at a minimum establish quality assurance procedures and as a legitimate government acts in the interest of the public rather than to investor interests. This further distinguishes public education using institutions of validated quality from other institutions of learning.

The module’s description of “Sustainable development and environmental education instruments and agreements” is also inconsistent with what I observe at my university and in my society. In contrast to the focus on “biology, chemistry, ecology and earth science”, environmental education and sustainability includes legal, cultural and socio-economic issues. We have an aim to create a pathway for knowledge from the community to contribute to the curriculum and competence of educators and assist the public in defining the environmental challenges rather than in selecting from a limited set of offered solutions.

Given the intended receiving audience of the materials for people in New Zealand, it may be relevant to consider the definitions of New Zealand institutions of higher learning.

“In recommending to the Governor-General under subsection (2) of this section that a body should be established as a college of education, a polytechnic, a specialist college, a university, or a wananga, the Minister shall take into account-
(a) That universities have all the following characteristics and other tertiary institutions have one or more of those characteristics:
(i) They are  primarily  concerned  with  more  advanced learning, the principal aim being to develop intellectual independence:
(ii) Their research and teaching are closely interdependent and most of their teaching is done by people who are active in advancing knowledge:
(iii) They meet international standards of research and teaching:
(iv) They are a repository of knowledge and expertise:
(v) They accept a role as critic and conscience of society; and
(b) That-
(i) A college of education is characterised by teaching and research required for the pre-school, compulsory and post-compulsory sectors of education, and for associated social and educational service roles:
A polytechnic is characterised by a wide diversity of continuing education,  including vocational training, that contributes to the maintenance, advancement, and dissemination of knowledge and expertise and promotes community learning, and by research, particularly applied and techno- logical research, that aids development:
(iia) a specialist college is characterised by teaching and (if relevant) research of a specialist nature that maintains, enhances, disseminates, and assists in the application of knowledge and expertise:
(ii) A university is characterised by a wide diversity of teaching and research, especially at a higher level, that maintains, advances, disseminates, and assists the application of, knowledge, develops intellectual independence, and promotes community learning:
(iii) A wananga is characterised by teaching and research that maintains, advances, and disseminates knowledge and develops intellectual independence, and assists the application of know- ledge regarding ahuatanga Maori (Maori tradition) according to tikanga Maori (Maori custom).

2. What may be the general aim of biosafety education and training?

For individuals, to achieve and demonstrate competence in biosafety, tailored to their intended role(s) and aspirations. For example, an intended role may be to work for a government authority regulating the use or release of LMOs. An intended aspiration may be for a citizen to participate in the risk evaluation of an LMO intended for release in her country.

For countries, to have (1) competent personnel to enforce biosafety regulations and meet domestic and international obligations for safe use and handling of LMOs; (2) a capacity in its public education system to sustain training programs and engage in research that helps to ensure the environmentally sound application of biotechnology, making it possible to derive maximum benefit from the potential that biotechnology has to offer, while minimizing the possible risks to the environment and to human health; and (3) a citizenry with the skills and access to knowledge and resources needed to safely and competently consult in the decision-making process regarding living modified organisms.

3. In your opinion, who is or should be considered to be the public in term of public education and training of biosafety issues (e.g. type of scholars, specialists, indigenous and local communities)?

The public are real people (not eg, legal persons). Public education foremost should be in the service of the public, expressed through the conduct and communication of research, expressing controversial or unpopular opinions particularly when they conflict with concentrated political or financial power, the transfer of skills that improve the lives of students and tailored to the needs of different learner communities.

4. Does your government recognize vocational training as public education?
Yes
5. Does your government recognize public biosafety education as part of environmental education and/or biodiversity education?
I don’t know.


Lesson 2: Characteristics of public education


6. Are the general characteristics in line with your national experience of secondary education?
Yes

7. Are there general characteristics in line with your national experience of higher education?

Yes. However, I don’t know why this is a characteristic of tertiary education: “The quality of related programmes or courses can be enhanced”. This is almost a meaningless statement. I would say that a characteristic of both secondary and tertiary public education is quality oversight.

Furthermore, this statement “For biosafety, these may be included in degrees in biodiversity, sustainable development, biology, biotechnology, legal aspects and science.” is too limited because biosafety may be included in more degrees than these, including degrees not fundamentally about ‘science’ first. I recommend a change to “For biosafety, these may be included in, among others, degrees in biodiversity, sustainable development, biology, biotechnology, legal aspects and science.

Does the exercise assist you in reflecting on informal education in your county?
Yes

Lesson 3: The importance of public education

7. How important is public education in biosafety?

Critical. However, as described in slide 15 it is inconsistent with my understanding of the New Zealand Education Act. One of the defining characteristics of a university is its service as ‘critic and conscience of society’. This service is above other aspirations such as ‘nonpartisan’ or ‘impartial’ which are not defining of the institution. Indeed, for academic staff and students to bring forth ‘controversial and unpopular opinions’ as is their right and responsibility in accepting academic freedom in the New Zealand Education Act, there will always be potential for a choice made to be perceived as partisan or partial. It is not the role of education or educators to establish a hypothetical balance of views on biotechnology in order to avoid such an outcome. Instead is their role to equip the public and students, as appropriate to their needs and aspirations, to think critically about biotechnology and the context in which it is used.

The challenge is to ensure that universities have sufficient staff capacity and provide adequate protection for all staff to ensure that alternative views can be effectively communicated. 

8. Is the list of general importance of public education in line with your national experiences?
Yes

10. Is the list of importance of biosafety in public education in line with your national experiences?
Yes, except I don’t think we have well developed contributions to South-South or North-South collaborations, nor particularly well developed collaborations between indigenous and university communities, where different.

Lesson 4: Context of public education

11. Are the external factors in line with your national experiences?
Yes
12. Are the internal factors in line with your national experiences?
Yes
13. Would it be useful to include a SWOT analysis in this section or in Topic 3 when reviewing and developing a resource guide for educational institutions and a training strategy for other educators?
No opinion.

My view is that there is increasing pressure to adopt curricula (including in biosafety) that include materials with embedded promotion of biotechnology rather than dedicated to biosafety itself.

Ngā mihi,
Jack

Dear participants,

I would like to thank you for your participation so far.
May I encourage you to answer the guiding questions? This will indeed allow more discussion.

Best regards,
Suzanne LORET (Western Europe and other States)

Dear all,

Thank you the Secretariat for offering the draft module on biosafety public education for discussion  at the on-line forum. I would like to thank the moderators for their efforts to make the discussion useful and interesting. 
 
Lesson 1: Meaning of public education

1. How does your country’s Education Act and/or other legal frameworks define public education?
In Moldova there is the Educational Code (2014) ensuring the legal framework for public education and provide rules for general education (i), including pre-scholar, primary school, gymnasium and lyceum education, professional technic education (ii), as well as higher education (iii). The higher education is composed from two components: academic and advanced professional is structured into three cycles: license, master degree and doctoral degree, based on scientific research, development and innovation. At the same time along with the formal education based on systemic organizational process, there are accepted non-formal education extra-scholar, and the informal education in social medium, community or mass media.

2. What may be the general aim of biosafety education and training?

In my opinion the aim of biosafety education and training is to improve knowledge and professional skills of different national actors, stakeholders and public to make able to ensure biosafety in the country in line with the international requirements. The science based specific topics should be point of attention of biosafety education, as ex. risk assessment/management, identification and detection of LMOs, regulation and policy, legal aspects of decision making and procedures of notification, liability and redress, public information and BCH, emergency measures, unintentional and illegal transboundary movement etc.

3. In your opinion, who is or should be considered to be the public in term of public education and training of biosafety issues (e.g. type of scholars, specialists, indigenous and local communities)?

It should be addressed to the competent biosafety regulators and decision makers, academia and trainers, laboratory research people involved in detection and identification, risk evaluators, inspection and custom control people, non-governmental sector to be able to participate in the decision making process, mass-media, young people, community people, local administration, consumer’s associations, business circles, importers/exporters, ecologists, farmers and agricultural associations etc.

4. Does your government recognize vocational training as public education?
- Yes, in main cases.
5. Does your government recognize public biosafety education as part of environmental education and/or biodiversity education? – There is the right of universities to decide the spectrum of topics and courses to be studied within the curricula approved by the Ministry of Education. For instance, a university course on GMOs is teaching for license degree and a course of Biosafety and sustainable development is teaching for master degree students of the Molecular Biology curricula of the State University of Moldova. Elements of Biosafety are involved in the curricula of molecular biology and agronomy at the University of the Academy of Sciences and the Agrarian University of Moldova.  
The suggested draft of module is supporting in identifying the further needs to perform the educational process on biosafety  in my country.

Lesson 2: Characteristics of public education

Yes, the exercise would be very helpful to assist me in reflecting on formal biosafety education in my county.

6. Are the general characteristics in line with your national experience of secondary education?
The general characteristics are mainly in line with the domestic experience and could be positive for improvement involving the new elements and technics.

7. Are there general characteristics in line with your national experience of higher education?
Does the exercise assist you in reflecting on informal education in your county?
Yes.

Lesson 3: The importance of public education
8. How important is public education in biosafety?  - I consider it is very much important as for public officers and political people as well as for academia, students, non-governmental sector, general public, local public and communities. A big part of population has limited information and knowledge of the LMOs and the adverse risks on the environment and human health.  The professional expertise in not sufficient and should be improved for a number of decision makers and regulators, especially in different relevant sectors. 
9. Is the list of general importance of public education in line with your national experiences?
-Yes
10. Is the list of importance of biosafety in public education in line with your national experiences?
-Yes.
Lesson 4: Context of public education

11. Are the external factors in line with your national experiences?
12. Are the internal factors in line with your national experiences?
13. Would it be useful to include a SWOT analysis in this section or in Topic 3 when reviewing and developing a resource guide for educational institutions and a training strategy for other educators?
A SWOT analysis is very much welcome to assist in identification of positive experience and work and also the weaknesses and needs to improve educational system for biosafety.

My general opinion that  this section of the module on elements of public education is in line with our national experience, it is useful, clear, applicable can be helpful for us to promote a strategy on biosafety communication and education in the country.

Sincerely,
Angela Lozan
MD

Dear Angela,
Thank you very much for your valuable contribution to the discussion and good educational practice. From regional workshops held in Moldova and Belarus I am aware of high level of education in the Republic of Moldova in the field of biosafety for the target groups listed by Angela in her answer to the question 3, which we also consider in our country as the «public» in term of public education and training of biosafety issues.
I also know that other CEE countries have very clear educational system and good practice of public education in the field of biosafety. It would be very good if these countries share with us an undoubtedly very important country experience in the remaining time of our discussion.
Kind regards,
Galina.

Dear Galina and Angela,
In the framework of the Key Action 2 of the Erasmus+ programme, I collaborated to the submission, with colleagues from CEE countries, to develop a biosafety learning module for higher Education Institutions in these countries. Though this initiative is not directly aimed at "Public education" (since the main targets are students enrolled in medical and biomedical studies and Biosafety Professionals), on the long term one could anyway expect a positive impact on Public education in these countries. Though, there is no indication that the Erasmus progarmme will actually support the initiative, this submission procedure allowed us to identified motivated partners in CEE countries: SSU, UNPMMU, PIB, UBA and the Ministry of Health (Center of Educational Testing) in Ukraine, TSMU, DTMU and GeBSA in Georgia and SUMPh and KDU  in the Republic of Moldova. I share  your opinion that it would certainly be interesting to get their participation to the present forum.

Dear Suzanne and Galina,
it is nice to learn from your recent experience and efforts to promote biosafety education in the CEE region. It is a very interesting initiative to develop a learning module for biomedicine and biosafety under the Erasmus program. The student's mobility is one of the important and motivating educational practice and should have further develop for specific topic as Biosafety. We would also be interesting to initiate bilateral and subregional collaboration between educational centers and universities to build capacities for long and short term training on specific topics of biosafety, as well as  e-learning, student's mobility, visiting professors program and better accessibility for scholarship support.  The EU educational experience in Biosafety is very much appreciated and helpful to be expread in the non-EU countries of the region.

Best wishes,
Angela

Dear Jack,

thank you for your precious contributions!

Thank you Yosra!

I'd like to suggest an addition to the UNESCO resources listed on 6:
Records of the General Conference 29th Session 12 November 1997
Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education
Teaching Personnel

best wishes
Jack

Dear Jack,

SA law also don't provide for the definition of public education, however it provides for a definition of "education" which means instruction, teaching or training provided to learners as defined by the Act.

Ntaka

Dear CBD,

Please recieve my responses to Theme 1.

Attached.

Evelyn Lutalo
Uganda

Dear Participants,

I would like to thank all the countries for their valuable dialogue, exchange and mutual enrichment to improve the content of the module.
Other suggestions, ideas or proposals?

Chers Participants,

Je voudrais remercier tous les pays pour leurs contributions, la qualité d'échange et pour l'enrichissement du module.
J'attends d'autres retours si disponibles afin de pouvoir résumer toutes les initiatives?

Merci beaucoup pour votre réactivité

Bonjour Ulrika
Je ne comprend pas le problème persiste toujours, le document apparait vide

Hola estimados colegas de la región de Latinoamérica y el Caribe, agradecemos mucho los comentarios de todos y los invito a participar activamente compartiendo sus experiencias  o visiones para responder las preguntas guía del Tema 1.
Para que se animen a participar, les comparto algunas de las experiencias en México, relativas a las primeras tres preguntas de la Lección 1: Significado de la educación pública.

1. ¿Cómo define la Ley u otros marcos legales de su país “educación Pública”?
En México la Constitución Política y la Ley General de Educación no tienen una definición tal cual de educación pública, pero se entiende como educación pública aquella que imparte el Estado, en contraste con la educación privada. La Educación Pública  debe ser gratuita y laica, además en México la ley establece como obligatoria a la educación preescolar, primaria y secundaria. En este sentido la educación pública es diferente que la educación al público.

La ley de bioseguridad establece como parte de sus principios  por un lado que “Los conocimientos, las opiniones y la experiencia de los científicos, particularmente los del país, constituyen un valioso elemento de orientación para que la regulación y administración de las actividades con OGMs se sustenten en estudios y dictámenes científicamente fundamentados, por lo cual debe fomentarse la investigación científica y el desarrollo tecnológico en bioseguridad y en biotecnología”; y por otro lado determina que: “Es necesario apoyar el desarrollo tecnológico y la investigación científica sobre organismos genéticamente modificados que puedan contribuir a satisfacer las necesidades de la Nación”. Estos dos elementos requieren un componente importante de educación a varios niveles.

2. ¿Cuál sería el objetivo general de la educación y capacitación en bioseguridad?
La Ley General de Educación no hace mención explícita al tema de bioseguridad. La ley de bioseguridad indica que en materia de biotecnología se debe apoyar proyectos de investigación y desarrollo e innovación, formación de recursos humanos especializados y fortalecimiento de grupos e infraestructura de las universidades, instituciones de educación superior y centros públicos de investigación, que se lleven a cabo para resolver necesidades productivas específicas del país y que beneficien directamente a los productores nacionales.
Mientras que en materia de bioseguridad la ley indica que se debe fomentar la investigación para obtener conocimientos suficientes que permitan evaluar los posibles riesgos de los OGMs en el medio ambiente, la diversidad biológica, la salud humana y la sanidad animal, vegetal y acuícola; para generar las consideraciones socioeconómicas de los efectos de dichos organismos para la conservación y el aprovechamiento de la diversidad biológica, y para valorar y comprobar la información proporcionada por los promoventes. Asimismo, se debe impulsar la creación de capacidades humanas, institucionales y de infraestructura para la evaluación y monitoreo de riesgos.
Adicionalmente la ley de bioseguridad establece, que para lograr el fomento a la investigación científica y tecnológica en materia de bioseguridad y biotecnología, se debe formular un programa que incluya entre otros aspectos: formación de investigadores, tecnólogos y profesionales de alto nivel; apoyo a los centros públicos de investigación; difusión del conocimiento científico y tecnológico y fortalecimiento de la cultura de la bioseguridad.

3. En su opinión, ¿quién es o debería ser considerado “el público” en términos de aspectos de la educación pública y capacitación sobre temas de bioseguridad (ejemplo tipo de académicos, especialistas, comunidades indígenas y locales)?
En nuestra experiencia tenemos actividades de educación al público en donde se seleccionan tanto los medios idóneos como el diseño de los contenidos de los mensajes, dependiendo  del objetivo de comunicación y en función de los diferentes públicos objetivo a los que está dirigida.
Para dar dos ejemplos representativos tenemos por un lado, la participación dentro de la Semana de la Ciencia y la Tecnología, con un stand sobre temas de bioseguridad que tiene actividades lúdicas-educativas tanto para niños y niñas de nivel preescolar, como para alumnos de primaria y secundaria. Por otro lado en colaboración con el Laboratorio Nacional de Referencia en Detección, Identificación y Cuantificación de OGMs, se organizan cursos teórico-prácticos para el fortalecimiento de capacidades en esta temática, dirigido a miembros de la comunidad académica, reguladores u otros interesados.
Dadas las dimensiones de México, sus contrastes y su enorme diversidad cultural, muchos de los esfuerzos en educación y comunicación de la ciencia en general y de la bioseguridad en particular, son aún limitados en sus alcances.

Dear friends,

At first my appreciation to the Secretariat for developing a well-structured   draft module on biosafety public education for discussion at the on-line forum. I would also like to thank the moderators for their sustained efforts and reminders to participate in the discussion. 
 
Lesson 1: Meaning of public education

1. How does your country’s Education Act and/or other legal frameworks define public education?

The Constitution of India provides for free and compulsory education to all children in the age group of six to fourteen years as a Fundamental Right. This fundamental right is implemented through the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009 which lays down specific responsibilities for the centre, state and local bodies for its implementation. The RTE Act is the first legislation in the world that puts the responsibility of ensuring enrolment, attendance and completion on the Government. The Right to Education of persons with disabilities until 18 years of age is laid down under a separate legislation- the Persons with Disabilities Act.

While there is no legal definition of ‘Public Education”,  the  essence and role of education is articulated in the Indian National Policy on Education (NPE), 1986/92 which clarifies that education is fundamental to the Nation’s  all-round development and self-reliance as it  refines sensitivities and perceptions that contribute to national cohesion, a scientific temper and independence of mind and spirit and develops manpower for different levels of the economy thus furthering the goals of socialism, secularism and democracy enshrined in our Constitution.

Public Education in India is of two types – formal and informal. The formal education is of four categories (i) elementary/primary age 6-10; (ii) secondary age 11 to 16; (iii) higher secondary age 17-18 and (iv) University/college.  These educations are mainly government funded. However, several private schools / colleges also operate in urban areas after due accreditation process. Qualified teachers training and accreditation are part of this process. 

The main challenge the Government is facing is to sustain interest in school education at the elementary and high school.  At the elementary level, several initiatives such as road connectivity in rural areas, mid-day meal, sanitation facilities etc have provided improved literacy rate.  In high school including school dropout, access to informal education is  provided as an incentive.

The informal education both through govt funding and joint partnership with private sector / NGOs focus on vocational training, skill development, adult education, women education, special programs for girl child etc to overcome social, economic and gender  inequity

The curricula for formal education up to secondary school is set up by the National Council for Education Research and Training (NCERT) and for the university level by the University Grants Commission through an extensive consultation process involving several think-tanks.    Environmental Education is a compulsory part of the syllabus in schools throughout the country.

In addition, there are some flagship programs of Ministry of environment, Forest and Climate Change, National Museum of Natural history, Indian Council of Forestry Research and Training, Wild Life Institute, Centre for Environmental Education and several others organizations are involved in environment awareness and biodiversity conservation activities. These platforms may be tapped for building biosafety awareness and education.  

While I may appear to be a bit out of context, my aim of providing a detailed national scenario is to emphasize two aspects (i) For developing countries, the first step would be to achieve literacy and (ii) Mainstreaming:  identify cross-sectoral linkages, entry points and opportunities to integrate biosafety at various level of education both formal and informal. 

2. What may be the general aim of biosafety education and training?

Experience and knowledge in the use of modern biotechnology is very limited.  The aim of the biosafety education and training should focus on developing in-country expertise for effective environmental and food safety assessment, management and communication among various stakeholders as per the commitment under Biosafety Protocol.  The specific areas of education and training may focus on risk assessment, LMO detection and information sharing. 

3. In your opinion, who is or should be considered to be the public in term of public education and training of biosafety issues (e.g. type of scholars, specialists, indigenous and local communities)?

There would be a wide range of stakeholders which include Politicians, Competent National Authorities,  Civil Servants, Members of the regulatory agencies,  scientists, developers, experts,  enforcement agencies (Customs, Plant Quarantine officials, Seed Inspectors, Food Inspectors), importers/ exporters,  farmers,  academia, students,  members of agriculture  extension system,  industry,  lawyers, media,  local community and consumers, seed producers and distributors.  

4. Does your government recognize vocational training as public education?

Yes, there is extensive focus on vocational training as part of public education in several fields.

5. Does your government recognize public biosafety education as part of environmental education and/or biodiversity education?

While Environmental Education is a compulsory part of the syllabus in schools throughout the country, the concept of biosafety being relatively new has not received much attention in school curricula.  It has also not received much attention under the various environment awareness or biodiversity conservation programs.

Under the University programs leading to undergraduate or graduate programs in biotechnology; do cover some aspects of biosafety.   

Currently most of the awareness programs are informal education which is linked to capacity building programs from time to time under the GEF funded programs..  

Lesson 2: Characteristics of public education

6. Are the general characteristics in line with your national experience of secondary education?    Yes

7. Are the general characteristics in line with your national experience of higher education?  Yes

Does the exercise assist you in reflecting on informal education in your county?  Yes.

Lesson 3: The importance of public education

8. How important is public education in biosafety? 
Public education is very important for several reasons-  garners Political will, improves informed decision making, enhance trust in Government’s decision,  people will have access to validated and reliable information,  improve the inhouse capacity of professional risk assessors, promote public awareness on biosafety,  improve infrastructure and human resource capacity  for LMO detection,  possibility of improved resource commitments etc;.

9. Is the list of general importance of public education in line with your national experiences?   Yes

10. Is the list of importance of biosafety in public education in line with your national experiences? Yes

Lesson 4: Context of public education

11. Are the external factors in line with your national experiences? Yes

12. Are the internal factors in line with your national experiences? Yes

13. Would it be useful to include a SWOT analysis in this section or in Topic 3 when reviewing and developing a resource guide for educational institutions and a training strategy for other educators?

In my view, India has a well-tested legal framework and policies which would provide ample  opportunities for integrating biosafety as part of Public education programs. The SWOT analysis would provide the impetus in identifying the gaps as well as areas which require restructuring.

General remarks:

Overall the draft module on elements of public education is in line with our national policies and would be useful to develop a biosafety communication and education strategy in the country.   However, I feel we could add few questions to focus on the importance of Mainstreaming of biosafety into NBSAPs as this area has received Government’s attention in several countries.  Also, some guiding questions on establishing linkages between cross sectoral programs would be useful.

regards

Ranjini Warrier

The United States would first like to note that this module is intended for government officials and other educators who are responsible for promoting public education regarding LMO’s.   As outlined within the U.S. Constitution’s Tenth Amendment, the majority of education policy and curricular content within the United States is decided by state and local governments, not by the U.S. Federal Government at the national level.  The United States Federal Government has enacted federal legislation that is designed to promote broad standards for elementary, secondary, and higher education:
• The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended (http://www.ed.gov/essa?src=policy),
• The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (https://legcounsel.house.gov/Comps/Individuals%20With%20Disabilities%20Education%20Act.pdf )
• The Higher Education Act (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ315/html/PLAW-110publ315.htm). 
There is a wide array of educational programs available in the United States to promote public knowledge regarding of science in general, including biotechnology.  These programs are offered by the academic, public, and private sectors, as well as various levels of government.  There are over 35 Agricultural Engineering or Biotechnology Engineering higher education degree programs in the United States.
The U.S. Federal Government also engages with the public regarding genetically engineered (GE) organisms during the regulatory process, before a GE product is released to market.   Rules for public participation during this process are outlined within the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. Sec. 553 - Rule making). 
The APA provides the foundation for regulatory transparency and accountability in the United States.  The APA requires that “the agency shall give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making through submission of written data, views, or arguments with or without opportunity for oral presentation.”   In practice, the APA requires that agencies undertake a notice and comment process open to all members of the public, both foreign and domestic, for all rulemakings. 
In accordance with the APA, Federal Agencies publish proposed rules in the Federal Register and solicit public comment.  Proposed rules currently open to public comment are also centrally located on one Federal website (http://www.regulations.gov). The public can use this site to send their comments electronically to agencies on proposed rulemakings published for comment in the Federal Register. Agencies consider the public comments and publish the final rule in the Federal Register.  An announcement of when the rule will take effect, the basis and purpose of the rule, and a response to the public comments on the proposal are also released at this time.  In addition, The United States notifies proposed rules falling under the scope of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreements on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) and Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) to the WTO accordingly to alert our trading partners of the opportunity to provide comments.

Dear Participants

In continuation to my earlier intervention, I have one specific intervention relating to reference to synthetic biology in slide No 15 of PPT under “Specific to biosafety, public education can lead to: 

- Opportunity to increase the understanding of benefits and concerns of new developments such as synthetic biology “

I am of the view that there is no reference to synthetic biology neither in Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety nor in the Programme of Work on Public Awareness, Education and Participation. Therefore it may not be appropriate to include the reference to synthetic biology under this module.  To achieve an effective strategy, it is best to stick to familiar issues which we have been discussing so far.

I also thank all Participants for their inputs which is both interesting and impressive.

Best wishes

Ranjini Warrier

Synthetic biology is a very important issue. The CBD has started to seek the strategies for risk assessment. It is good to be included in public education material.

Best wishes

Wei

Dear Dr Wei, Dear all,

To my knowledge, up to now no synthetic organism can replicate. Consequently, the synthetic biology will never lead to the production of LIVING modified organisms. Consequently, they are a little bit out of the scope of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. However, they fall in the scope of "biological hazards" since they mimic molecular characteristics of living cells. For this reasons we take them into account when performing a biorisk assessment in a laboratory.

Dear Participants,

As a representative of the Western Europe and other States, I would like to thank Mr. Schmidt and Mr. Wei for their interventions regarding LMOs. However, the focus of this forum is on public education regarding LMOs and the module.
We  really appreciate the focus of participants on the guiding questions.

Thank you again for your active participation.

Suzanne Loret

Dear Dr. Wie,

While I see your point in the inclusion of Synthetic Biology, I support the position of Dr. Ranjini Warrier that this subject should not be included in this theme's discussion. I understand that Synthetic Biology is now being discussed extensively under the CBD, nevertheless, this subject is not even covered in the Public Awareness Plan of the Cartagena Protocol.

Thank you and kind regards,
Julieta Fe L. Estacio

Thanks Dr. Ranjini for your contribution.  Looking forward to more of your inputs for the other themes in the next days.  Indeed your experience in biosafety over the years is a rich source of insights.

Best regards.

Ruel

Thank you Dr Ruel

Best

Ranjini

Buenos días estimados colegas.
Muchas gracias a la Secretaría por esta excelente oportunidad de aprender y compartir nuestras experiencias en este importante tema.
Con respecto a la primera pregunta relacionada con la definición de la educación pública en los diferentes marcos legales, me permito brevemente indicar que en el caso de Ecuador, la Constitución de la República establece que “La educación es un derecho de las personas a lo largo de su vida y un deber ineludible e inexcusable del Estado. Constituye un área prioritaria de la política pública y de la inversión estatal, garantía de la igualdad e inclusión social y condición indispensable para el buen vivir. Las personas, las familias y la sociedad tienen el derecho y la responsabilidad de participar en el proceso educativo”. Además, entre otros aspectos menciona que “El aprendizaje se desarrollará de forma escolarizada y no escolarizada. La educación pública será universal y laica en todos sus niveles, y gratuita hasta el tercer nivel de educación superior inclusive”.
En relación a la segunda pregunta ¿Cuál sería el objetivo de la educación y capacitación en bioseguridad?. En el país no tenemos experiencias continuas con programas de educación y capacitación en los citados temas, sin embargo hemos realizado talleres especialmente a nivel de profesionales de diferentes instituciones y hemos  buscado un enfoque de tres temas en forma integral: biotecnología, organismos genéticamente modificados y bioseguridad. En este sentido sería importante que en nuestro caso el objetivo este encaminado a impulsar la investigación, la ciencia y la tecnología,   priorizando nuestras necesidades nacionales.
En referencia a la tercera pregunta sobre el público meta, la educación pública y temas de bioseguridad, sin duda alguna habrá que diferenciar muy bien a dos grupos; el primero que sería el grupo escolarizado (estudiantes de escuelas, colegios, universidades); y el segundo sería un grupo no escolarizado.
Aprovecho la oportunidad para compartirles que en el presente año el Ministerio del Ambiente tiene previsto oficializar la “ESTRATEGIA INSTITUCIONAL DE EDUCACIÓN AMBIENTAL 2017 – 2022” la cual en uno de sus ejes prevé el “Fortalecimiento de procesos educativos ambientales no formales e informales para la participación ciudadana en la gestión ambiental”. En este eje hemos incluido un tema macro sobre Acceso a Recursos Genéticos y Bioseguridad y entre lo subtemas está previsto desarrollar tres posibles módulos: Biotecnología; Organismos genéticamente modificados; y Bioseguridad.

Saludos.

Dr. Ángel Onofa

We are posting the answers of the Head  Secretariat and Staff of the National Biosafety Committee of the Philippines.

Thanks Ms. Julieta Fe Estacio, BCH Focal Point, Philippines, for your contribution.

Ruel

==========


1. How does your country’s Education Act and/or other legal frameworks define public education?
Article XIV of the 1987 Philippine Constitution elaborates on the right to education. It vows that the State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels and shall take appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all. In addition, the State shall establish, maintain, and support a complete, adequate, and integrated system of education relevant to the needs of the people and society. Furthermore, the State shall commit to the establishment and maintenance of a system of free public education in the elementary and high school levels. Public education in the Philippines is a centrally-managed service delivered through the Department of Education (DepEd) for primary and secondary levels and by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) for the tertiary level.
In the National Biosafety Framework (Executive Order No. 514), concerned government departments and agencies are likewise mandated to promote, facilitate, and conduct public awareness, education and participation in the development and adoption of biosafety policies and in making biosafety decisions. 

2.    What may be the general aim of biosafety education and training?

The main objective of biosafety education and training is to increase the level of awareness and understanding of the general public as regards the issues and concerns surrounding products of modern biotechnology. Various strategies to educate the public including the development of information materials, the use of tri-media (print, radio and television), internet and social media, and the conduct of face-to-face consultations, public hearings, seminars, trainings, symposia and other awareness-raising activities may be employed to effectively convey basic concepts on modern biotechnology and clarify issues pertaining to its applications particularly its safety to the environment and human and animal health. The need for the government to take the lead in these initiatives which must be augmented with efforts from other non-government entities/organizations is imperative in order to effectively inform and educate the public. Through these strategies, the public shall be empowered, thereby enabling them to make sound and unbiased choices and decisions.  

Another objective of biosafety education is to strengthen the implementation of the National Biosafety Frameworks (NBFs), legal frameworks and biosafety policies and guidelines through the enhanced cooperation of the public. A more thorough understanding of the guidelines governing the use of GMOs and the regulatory framework shall increase the trust and confidence of the public in the concerned agencies implementing these regulations thereby encouraging more support and participation.

3. In your opinion, who is or should be considered to be the public in term of public education and training of biosafety issues (e.g. type of scholars, specialists, indigenous and local communities)?

In the Philippines, we believe that various levels of stakeholders must be involved in public education and training of biosafety. These can be further categorized as internal and external stakeholders.

External Stakeholders: 

These are the partner agencies/individuals in biosafety implementation. They have to be continuously involved in the decision-making process and crafting of significant documents regarding the biosafety regulatory process. Thus, their knowledge about modern biotechnology, and other related news or policies must be kept up-to-date.

Internal Stakeholders;

These are the ones who are directly affected by the regulatory policies as well as the ones expected to comply the biosafety regulatory system. Thus, they are the primary audience at the external level. The following are Institutional Biosafety Committees, public and private research institutions, industry, among others.

In addition, external stakeholders are also comprised of the general public who has the right to come up with informed decisions in shaping their own perception about the products of modern biotechnology. Pursuant to Section 7 of the E.O. 514 (Public Participation), the following stakeholders must also be involved:

·         Farmer groups
·         Non-government organizations
·         Religious groups
·         Legislators and policymakers
·         Academe
·         Youth sector (ages 15-24)
·         Indigenous peoples and local communities

Dear moderators, thanks, interesting debate. First: I do not think the headline is really apppropriate: in short, it is not about public education, it is about a rather complex process of discourse, all details presented in:

Ammann Klaus and Papazova Ammann Biljana 2004 and rev. 2017   Factors Influencing Public Policy Development in Agricultural Biotechnology   Wiley and Sons   Ed. Paul Christou (Editor-in-Chief), H. K. E.-i.-C., Chapter 9: (Ed.) Shantaram, S.  Hoboken, NJ, USA  1552 ISBN: 0-471-85199-X/ISBN: 0-471-85199-X

Dear Professor Klaus Ammann,

Though the discussion on Topic 1 is officially closed, I thank you very much to provide us  the reference of your article, which reminds us the possibles clivages between (1) the "man of the street" and the scientific community interested to develop new tools using biotechnology, (2) those two groups with the scientist who have concerns about the evironmental possible impact of LMOs and (3) those three groups with policy makers. In other words, there is many possible levels of incomprehension rendering the implementation of a common education objective very challenging.

Posted on behalf of Ms. Martha Kandawa-Schulz, NFP Namibia:

I would like to thank the Secretariat for developing such an informative module on the elements of public education – concept, characteristics, importance and context.

In Namibia, the supreme law gives the right to education to all Namibians. This is supplemented by the Education Act, 2001, Namibia Vocational Act, 2008, Higher education Act, 2006 to ensure  accessible, equitable, qualitative and democratic national education services in all forms to every Namibian. Namibia has gazzetted its Biosafety Act in 2006 and supplementing regulations in 2016.

Looking at the elements of the public education module, our country has also recognized that public information is of great importance and plays a big role in decision making. As per the Biosafety Act, public participation is incorporated in the GMO permit application process at two stages. Hence public understanding regarding biosafety and biotechnology goes beyond normal basic education or tertiary education curricula. 

Therefore, our national biosafety public awareness strategy has various components including informal education i.e. targeting the public (e.g. using brochures translated in various local languages). It is believed that this will help the Biosafety Council making informed decisions based on inputs from the public. Inputs will only be valuable if there is further public understanding.

Other element of public education includes tertiary education; Namibia has managed to incorporate biosafety as an elective course in one of the Namibian University Curriculum. The challenge of incorporating public education in either schools or tertiary education is the frequency of curriculum review which normally takes a long time.

It is will be of great benefit to hear how other Parties integrate public education in vocational institutions as this is the area that we also believe that public education can further be expanded to.

Thank you
Martha