Recallingdecision
BS-III/3 that adopted an updated Action Plan for Building
Capacities for the Effective Implementation of the Protocol and
decided to undertake a comprehensive review of the Action Plan
every five years,
Welcoming the initiatives undertaken
by various Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations in
support of the Action Plan,
Recalling decisions
BS-I/5,
BS-II/3
and
BS-IV/3
inviting Parties and other Governments to submit their
capacity-building and training needs to the Secretariat and the
Biosafety Clearing House,
Also recalling paragraph 3 of
decision
BS-IV/16 which invited the Coordination Meeting for Governments
and Organizations Implementing or Funding Biosafety
Capacity-Building Activities to further consider possibilities for
cooperation in identifying needs for capacity-building among
Parties for research and information exchange on socio-economic
impacts of living modified organisms,
Recognizing the need for cooperation
among Parties in the development of capacities for the
implementation of the Protocol, particularly at regional and
subregional levels,
Emphasizing the need to maximize
synergies and efficient use of the limited available
resources,
I.Status of the implementation of
the Action Plan and country capacity needs
1.Takes
note of the status report on the implementation of the Action
Plan contained in the note by the Executive Secretary (
UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/5/4, section II);
2.Urges Parties and other Governments that have
not yet done so to submit reports on their capacity-building
activities undertaken in support of the Action Plan within the next
six months using the online format available in the Biosafety
Clearing-House to facilitate the comprehensive review of the Action
Plan;
3.Takes
note of the report on the training and capacity-building needs
of Parties and other Governments prepared by the Executive
Secretary (
UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/5/4, section III);
4.Invites developed country Parties, other
Governments and relevant organizations to take into account the
specific capacity needs identified by Parties in their bilateral
and multilateral assistance, targeting such assistance to where
resources are needed for the implementation of the Protocol;
5.Invites Parties and other Governments to
develop institutional frameworks and long-term research-based
knowledge for the purpose of assessing relevant information and
regulating, managing, monitoring and controlling risks of living
modified organisms;
6.Urges Parties and other Governments that have
not yet submitted their prioritized needs to the Biosafety Clearing
House, and those Parties and other Governments that have already
submitted but wish to revise their submissions, to do so within six
months, to enable the Secretariat to prepare a more representative
and comprehensive needs assessment report to facilitate the next
comprehensive review of the Action Plan;
7.Requests the Executive Secretary to undertake
a comprehensive needs assessment every four years and invites
Parties to complete the needs assessment at least 12 months before
the meeting of the Parties that would consider the needs assessment
report;
8.Requests the Executive Secretary to publish
and make available to Parties a toolkit on regional and subregional
approaches to capacity-building in biosafety based on the guidance
developed by the fifth Coordination Meeting;
II.Biosafety education and
training
9.Takes
note of the report of the Third International Meeting of
Academic Institutions and Organizations Involved in Biosafety
Education and Training (
UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/5/INF/7);
10.Commends the Government of Japan for
organizing and hosting the above meeting;
11.Invites Parties and other Governments to:
(a)Support existing biosafety
education and training initiatives, including mobility support, and
facilitate the development of new initiatives;
(b)Establish coordination
mechanisms for education and training in biosafety at national,
subregional and regional levels;
(c)Commission country
surveys/studies to establish baseline data on the current situation
regarding education and training related to biosafety and make the
information available to the Biosafety Clearing House;
(d)Make available to academic
institutions relevant documents (including "real-life" dossiers and
full risk assessment reports), where available, for educational
purposes, while respecting the need to protect confidential
information in accordance with Article 21 of the Protocol;
III.Comprehensive review of the
Action Plan and approaches to capacity-building
12.Endorses the terms of reference for the
comprehensive review of the updated Action Plan contained in the
annex hereto;
13.Invites Parties, other Governments and
relevant organizations to submit to the Executive Secretary, by 30
June 2011, relevant information that might facilitate the
comprehensive review of the updated Action Plan as well as views
and suggestions on possible revisions to the Action Plan;
14.Requests the Executive Secretary to
commission an independent evaluation of the effectiveness and
outcomes of capacity-building initiatives implemented in support of
the Action Plan to facilitate the comprehensive review of the
Action Plan;
15.Reiterates its invitation to Parties, other
Governments and relevant organizations, made in paragraph 17 of
decision
BS-IV/3, to submit to the Executive Secretary information on
their experiences with, and lessons learned from, the use of the
revised set of indicators in monitoring and evaluating
capacity-building activities implemented in support of the Action
Plan;
16.Requests the Executive Secretary to prepare
a working document to facilitate the comprehensive review of the
Action Plan, taking into account the submissions made in accordance
with paragraphs 13 and 15 above, the information provided in the
second national reports, and the findings of the independent
evaluation referred to in paragraph 14 above;
17.Welcomes the report on the expert review of
the effectiveness of various approaches to biosafety
capacity-building and the lessons learned produced by the United
Nations Environment Programme (
UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/5/INF/9);
18.Invites Parties, other Governments and
relevant organizations to take into account, as appropriate, the
findings and recommendations of the expert review in the design and
implementation of their biosafety capacity-building initiatives and
support programmes;
19.Requests the Executive Secretary to organize
an online forum to identify strategic approaches to
capacity-building and develop a capacity assessment framework and a
framework for monitoring and evaluation, and submit the outcomes to
the Parties at their sixth meeting;
20.Requests the Executive Secretary to develop,
with advice from the Liaison Group on Capacity Building for
Biosafety, toolkits to assist Parties and relevant organizations to
improve the effectiveness of their capacity-building initiatives
and approaches;
IV.Cooperation on identification of
capacity-building needs for research and information exchange on
socio-economic considerations
21.Takes
note of the recommendations of the sixth Coordination Meeting
for Governments and Organizations Implementing or Funding Biosafety
Capacity-Building Activities regarding possibilities for
cooperation in identifying needs for capacity-building among
Parties for research and information exchange on socio-economic
impacts of living modified organisms (
UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/5/INF/4);
22.Invites Parties and other Governments to
submit to the Biosafety Clearing-House their capacity-building
needs and priorities regarding socio-economic considerations;
23.Urges Parties, other Governments and
relevant organizations to submit to the Executive Secretary
relevant information on socio-economic considerations, including
guidance material and case studies on, inter alia,
institutional arrangements and best practices;
24.Requests the Executive Secretary to convene
regional online conferences to: (i) facilitate the exchange of
views, information and experiences on socio-economic considerations
on a regional basis; and (ii) identify possible issues for further
consideration;
25.Requests also the Executive Secretary to
convene, prior to the sixth meeting of the Conference of the
Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Protocol,
subject to the necessary financial resources being made available,
a regionally-balanced workshop on capacity-building for research
and information exchange on socio-economic impacts of living
modified organisms, with the following main objectives:
(a)Analysis of the
capacity-building activities, needs and priorities regarding
socio-economic considerations submitted to the Biosafety
Clearing-House by Parties and other Governments, and identification
of options for cooperation in addressing those needs;
(b)Exchange and analysis of
information on the use of socio-economic considerations in the
context of Article 26 of the Protocol;
26.Welcomes the offer from the Government of
Norway to support activities on socio economic considerations
referred to in paragraph 25 above;
27.Requests the Liaison Group on
Capacity-Building for Biosafety to give advice to the Executive
Secretary on the organisation of the workshop referred to in
paragraph 25 above;
28.Requests the Executive Secretary to
synthesize the outcomes of the online conferences and workshop
referred to in paragraphs 24 and 25 above and submit a report to
the sixth meeting of the Parties for consideration of further
steps;
29.Invites Parties, in collaboration with
regional bodies and relevant organizations, to organize regional
workshops to facilitate sharing of information and experiences
regarding socio-economic considerations;
30.Welcomes the report of the survey on the
application of and experience in the use of socio-economic
considerations in decision-making on living modified organisms
conducted by the United Nations Environment Programme and the
Secretariat (
UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/5/INF/10);
31.Invites the United Nations Environment
Programme and other organizations to conduct additional case
studies to document experiences and lessons learned in different
regions.
Annex
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE
COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF THE UPDATED ACTION PLAN
A.Introduction
1.In
its
decision
BS-III/3, the meeting of the Parties adopted an updated Action
Plan and decided that a comprehensive review of the Action Plan
would be conducted every five years, based on an independent
evaluation of the initiatives undertaken in support of its
implementation. The first review of the Action Plan was undertaken
in 2005 and the results were presented in documents
UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/3/4 and
UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/3/INF/4.
2.The
next comprehensive review process will take place in 2011 and its
outcomes will be considered by the Parties at their sixth meeting,
expected to take place in 2012. The following terms of reference
have been developed to facilitate the review process. They outline
the objectives of the review; the scope and schedule of activities
to be undertaken and the indicative responsibilities of various
stakeholders; the information sources to support the review; and
the expected outputs.
B.Objectives of the review
3.The
objectives of the comprehensive review are to:
(a)Assess the progress made in
implementing the Action Plan (including key results and impacts)
and examine the effectiveness of the Action Plan in facilitating
the development and/or strengthening of human resources and
institutional capacities in biosafety;
(b)Identify the gaps in the
implementation of the Action Plan and the obstacles and constraints
limiting its full implementation and propose possible measures for
overcoming them;
(c)Identify best practices and
lessons learned in the implementation of the Action Plan;
(d)Propose, as appropriate,
revisions to the Action Plan, taking into account the additional
emerging needs and priorities of Parties and other Governments and
the new Strategic Plan for the Protocol (2011-2020);
(e)Propose options for enhancing
the implementation of the Action Plan and for improving the
monitoring and evaluation of its progress and effectiveness.
4.The
overall objective of the review will be to ensure that the Action
Plan is relevant and effective in providing a coherent framework
for capacity-building efforts in response to the needs and
priorities of Parties and other Governments.
C.Scope and schedule of activities
to be undertaken
5.The
review process will include the following activities/tasks:
| Activity/Task | Timeframe/deadline | Responsibility |
|---|
| 1. | Submission of reports on capacity-building
activities undertaken in support of Action Plan | 15 Apr 2011 | Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations |
| 2. | Submission of capacity-building and training needs
using the questionnaire in the BCH | 15 Apr 2011 | Parties, other Governments |
| 3. | Submission of experiences with, and lessons learned
from, the use of the revised set of indicators | 30 June 2011 | Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations |
| 4. | Submission of views and suggestions on possible
revisions to the Action Plan | 30 June 2011 | Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations |
| 5. | Independent evaluation of the initiatives undertaken
in support of the Action Plan | June-Oct 2011 | Consultant |
| 6. | A review of the above submissions and preparation of
discussion documents to facilitate the review | Sept-Oct. 2011 | Secretariat; Liaison Group on Capacity-Building |
| 7. | Preparation of a working document to facilitate the
comprehensive review by the Parties at their sixth meeting | June 2012 | Secretariat |
D.Information sources for the
comprehensive review
6.The
review will draw from various information sources, including the
following:
(a)Status reports on
implementation of the Action Plan prepared by the Secretariat for
the meetings of the Parties;
(b)Reports on the training and
capacity-building needs of Parties and other Governments;
(c)The second national reports on
the implementation of the Protocol;
(d)Information, views and
suggestions submitted by Parties, other Governments and relevant
organizations;
(e)Expert review report on the
effectiveness of various approaches to biosafety capacity-building
produced by the United Nations Environment Programme;
(f)Previous evaluations and
assessments of biosafety capacity building initiatives and other
relevant documents; and
(g)Report on the independent
evaluation of the initiatives undertaken in support of the
implementation of the Action Plan.
E.Expected outcomes of the
review
7.The
expected outcomes of the comprehensive-review process are:
(a)A draft revised Action
Plan;
(b)A new monitoring and evaluation
framework for the Action Plan, incorporating a revised set of
indicators;
(c)A revised capacity-building
needs assessment framework;
(d)A guidance document on
strategic approaches to biosafety capacity-building at national and
regional levels.
