Status of capacity-building activities
The Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the
Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety,
Recalling its decision BS-I/5 on
capacity-building,
Welcoming the note prepared by the Executive Secretary
on the status of capacity-building for the effective implementation
of the Protocol (UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/2/4),
Reaffirming the critical importance of
capacity-building for the effective implementation and compliance
with the provisions of the Protocol by developing country Parties,
in particular the least developed and small island developing
States among them, as well as Parties with economies in
transition,
Noting that the lack of adequate financial and
technological resources is a significant constraint to effective
capacity-building,
Reiterating the importance of adopting needs-based,
country-driven and target-oriented approaches to
capacity-building,
Noting the urgent need to enhance human resources
development and recognizing the role of academic and other training
institutions in addressing the needs of different countries in this
regard,
Emphasizing the need to ensure the sustainability of
capacity-building activities,
Acknowledging that a lack of information in the
Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH) is an impediment to implementation
of the Coordination Mechanism,
A. Coordination
Mechanism
1. Welcomes the progress report on the implementation
of the Coordination Mechanism prepared by the Executive Secretary
(UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/2/4, section II);
2. Urges Parties, other Governments and relevant
organizations to share their information through the Coordination
Mechanism and the Biosafety Clearing-House and to ensure reliable
quality of that information;
3. Invites regional and subregional institutions to
contribute to capacity-building in biosafety and to actively
participate in the Coordination Mechanism;
4. Welcomes the generous offer by the Government of
Norway to sponsor and host a coordination meeting in early 2006 for
representatives of Governments and organizations implementing or
funding biosafety capacity-building activities;
5. Takes note of the report of the coordination meeting
for academic and other institutions offering biosafety-related
training and education programmes, which was organized and hosted
by the Government of Switzerland in Geneva from 4 to 6 October 2004
(UNEP/CBD/COP-MOP/2/INF/9) and the report of the coordination
meeting for Governments and organizations implementing or funding
biosafety capacity-building activities, held in Montreal on 26-27
January 2005 (UNEP/CBD/COP-MOP/2/INF/10);
6. Welcomes the compendium of biosafety training and
education courses developed by the above-mentioned coordination
meeting for institutions offering biosafety-related training and
education programmes made available through the Biosafety
Clearing-House;
7. Invites Parties, other Governments and relevant
organizations to submit for the compendium information on existing
biosafety training courses and to use the compendium to identify
and take advantage of available training and education
opportunities in biosafety;
8. Urges countries to identify their biosafety training
and education needs and communicate the information to the
Biosafety Clearing-House to enable relevant institutions to design
appropriate training programmes and packages;
9. Invites developed country Parties, other developed
States, the Global Environment Facility and relevant organizations
to:
(a) Provide financial resources and other support for training
and education in biosafety, including the provision of scholarships
and fellowships for students from developing countries, in
particular the least developed and the small island developing
States among them, and countries with economies in transition as
well as support for "training-of-trainers" programmes and
"re-training" courses;
(b) Assist countries to incorporate specific components on
training and education in their capacity-building project
proposals, for example for the implementation of the national
biosafety frameworks;
10. Encourages Parties, other Governments and relevant
organizations to:
(a) Endeavour to create opportunities and career paths for local
professionals trained in biosafety, especially young graduates, in
order for them to utilize their skills;
(b) Actively involve academic and training institutions in
relevant national and international biosafety processes, including
the development and implementation of national biosafety
frameworks;
11. Invites institutions offering biosafety training
and education courses to:
(a) Regularly update information in the compendium regarding
their courses;
(b) Take into account the training needs of countries in order
to develop appropriate (demand-driven) training programmes,
including those targeted for specific audiences or addressing
specific needs;
(c) Participate proactively in relevant biosafety processes at
the national, regional and international levels in order to be
acquainted with the emerging issues, needs and challenges in
biosafety;
(d) Establish collaborative partnerships with other
institutions, especially those in developing countries, with a view
to transferring skills, sharing experience and course materials as
well as fostering harmonization and mutual recognition of the
course offerings;
(e) Develop and facilitate distance-learning tools, such as
online courses;
12. Requests the Executive Secretary to further develop
the Coordination Mechanism, including needs assessment and
coordination, taking into account the Bali Strategic Plan for
Technology Support and Capacity-Building adopted by the Governing
Council of the United Nations Environment Programme in February
2005 with a view to creating synergies and avoiding unnecessary
duplication of work;
B. Capacity-building
needs and priorities and possible measures for addressing
them
13. Takes note of the report on the needs and
priorities for building capacities for the effective implementation
of the Protocol (UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/2/INF/7) and requests the
Executive Secretary to make it available to donor Governments and
relevant organizations;
14. Invites developed country Parties, Governments and
relevant organizations to consider the information contained in the
report in the development of their assistance programmes;
15. Reminds Parties and other Governments that have not
yet done so to submit to the Biosafety Clearing-House information
on their capacity-building needs and priorities and all those that
have done so to update their records on a regular basis;
16. Invites developed countries and relevant
international organizations to provide support to developing
country Parties, in particular the least developed and small island
developing states among them, including countries among those that
are centres of origin and centres of genetic diversity, as well as
Parties with economies in transition, in the field of
capacity-building, in particular for the development and
implementation of national biosafety frameworks;
17. Further invites organizations and initiatives
involved in biosafety capacity-building which have in-country
infrastructure, such as biosafety projects funded by the Global
Environment Facility, to assist countries in assessing and
submitting their capacity-building needs and priorities to the
Biosafety Clearing-House;
18. Urges Parties and other Governments to prioritize
among the different possible measures for addressing their needs
and gaps in building capacities for the effective implementation of
the Protocol;
19. Encourages Parties and other Governments that have
not yet done so to develop national strategies for
capacity-building in biosafety, prioritizing the needs for
capacity-building activities in the different components of the
national biosafety frameworks, in order to facilitate a proactive,
systematic and coordinated approach addressing the country
capacity-building needs and gaps;
20. Further encourages Parties and other Governments to
address the issue of sustainability of capacity-building by
designing in their national capacity-building plans and programmes
elements that may help them to incorporate follow-up actions as
part of their regular national programmes;
21. Urges Parties and other Governments and relevant
organizations to promote regional and subregional initiatives and
approaches to address common needs and priorities and encourages
them to make effective use of locally existing facilities and
expertise, including through exchange of experts;
22. Invites donor countries and relevant organizations
to assist developing countries, in particular the least developed
and the small island developing States among them, and countries
with economies in transition, including countries amongst these
that are centres of origin and centres of genetic diversity, to
build capacity for conducting independent biosafety-related
research;
23. Further invites donor countries and organizations
supporting capacity-building activities to:
(a) Consider simplifying the procedures for making resources
available, and harmonize them to the extent possible, in order to
improve access to resources for capacity-building by recipient
countries;
(b) Provide training in project-proposal development to
interested recipient countries;
(c) Consider requiring that countries seeking support for
capacity-building initiatives provide information on other related
ongoing initiatives in order to minimize duplication of
capacity-building assistance;
C. Comprehensive of the
review of the Action Plan
24. Adopts the terms of reference for the comprehensive
review of the Action Plan for the Effective Implementation of the
Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety contained in the annex to the
present note;
25. Invites Parties, other Governments and relevant
organizations to submit to the Secretariat, no later than three
months prior to its third meeting, progress reports on their
initiatives contributing to the implementation of the Action Plan,
including their effectiveness, as well as views and suggestions on
desired revisions to the Action Plan, taking into account the terms
of reference for the review mentioned above;
26. Requests the Executive Secretary to prepare a
questionnaire to assist Parties, other Governments and relevant
organizations in submitting information requested in paragraph 25
above;
27. Invites relevant organizations and initiatives that
have in-country contacts and infrastructure, such as the
biosafety-related projects under the Global Environment Facility,
to assist, in collaboration with the Executive Secretary, countries
in responding to the questionnaire;
28. Requests also Executive Secretary to include in the
questionnaire referred to in paragraph 26 above elements to assess
the constraints encountered with the implementation of the
Coordination Mechanism and the possible reasons behind the limited
use of the roster of biosafety experts;
29. Urges Executive Secretary to complement the
questionnaire referred to in paragraph 26 above with results
available from other relevant assessments and evaluation studies of
capacity-building programmes including, inter alia, the
evaluation by the Global Environment Facility of the activities
financed under its Initial Strategy for Assisting Countries to
Prepare for the Entry into Force of the Cartagena Protocol and the
ongoing assessment study by the United Nations University;
30. Further requests the Executive Secretary to
prepare, on the basis of the submissions received, a background
paper describing, inter alia, the progress in, and
effectiveness of, the implementation of the Action Plan, the unmet
needs/gaps and strategic recommendations to be taken into account
in the possible revision of the Action Plan at the third meeting of
the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties
to the Protocol;
31. Further requests the Executive Secretary to
prepare, depending on the outcome of the review, a draft revised
Action Plan for consideration at the third meeting of the
Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to
the Protocol.
Annex
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE
COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW AND POSSIBLE REVISION OF THE ACTION PLAN FOR
BUILDING CAPACITIES FOR THE EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
PROTOCOL
A.
Introduction
1. The Action Plan for Building Capacities for the Effective
Implementation of the Cartagena Protocol was developed in 2002 by
the Intergovernmental Committee for the Cartagena Protocol on
Biosafety and was endorsed in February 2004 by the first meeting of
the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the
Parties. At the time it was developed, a number of things were
unclear. For example, the capacity needs of countries were not well
understood and the coverage of the few then existing biosafety
capacity-building projects was unknown. Since then, a number of
developments have taken place. Many countries have assessed and
submitted their needs and priorities to the Biosafety
Clearing-House. As well, a number of capacity-building projects
have been initiated and some operational experience gained.
2. In light of the new developments, it is important to review
and, if necessary, revise the Action Plan so that it is relevant to
the prevailing circumstances and response to the needs and
priorities of countries, taking into account experience gained and
the lessons learned.
B. Objectives of the
review
3. The purpose of the review is to examine the way and the
extent to which the Action Plan has been implemented, analyse the
unmet needs and gaps, review the lessons learned and identify areas
that need to be updated or streamlined. The ultimate objective is
to ensure that the Action Plan is current, relevant and effective
in providing a coherent framework for capacity-building efforts
consistent with the needs and priorities of Parties and other
Governments.
C. Process of collecting
information to facilitate the review
4. The review will be based primarily on information provided by
Parties and other Governments. Information submitted by relevant
organizations will also be taken into account. A questionnaire will
be used as the main tool for gathering the information. The
Executive Secretary will design the questionnaire and send it to
all Parties, Governments and relevant organizations. The
questionnaire will be simple to complete and also easily accessible
through the Biosafety Clearing-House. For example check-boxes and
yes/no questions will be used. The preliminary set indicators for
monitoring implementation of the Action Plan, which were adopted in
decision BS-I/5 of the Conference of the Parties serving as the
meeting of the Parties to the Protocol, will be used, as
appropriate, in the design of the questionnaire.
5. Respondents will be invited to submit the completed
questionnaire and any additional information to the Secretariat no
later than three months prior to third meeting of the Conference of
the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Protocol.
In the preparation of their submissions, they will also be
encouraged to use preliminary set indicators for monitoring
implementation of the Action Plan
6. The Executive Secretary will collaborate with organizations
and initiatives that have in-country contacts and infrastructure,
such as the GEF biosafety-related projects, in order to assist
countries in responding to the questionnaire so as to maximize the
number and quality of responses. The Executive Secretary will make
use of other relevant information, including reports and other
information submitted by countries under the biosafety projects
funded by the Global Environment Facility.
D. Type of information
needed to facilitate the review
7. Respondents will be invited to submit information
particularly related to the following aspects:
(a) Overview of the progress made in, and the effectiveness of,
the implementation of the Action Plan, including the extent of
coverage of its different elements, the specific achievements made,
the experience gained and the lessons learned;
(b) Elements of the Action Plan successfully implemented and
consequently considered to be secondary priorities;
(c) The gaps/weaknesses in the implementation of the Action Plan
elements;
(d) The unmet and emerging needs and priorities requiring urgent
attention;
(e) The main limitations and constraints encountered, including
lack of institutional capacity;
(f) Constraints encountered with the implementation of the
Coordination Mechanism and the possible reasons behind the limited
use of the roster of biosafety experts;
(g) Existing opportunities that could be taken into account
while reviewing the Action Plan;
(h) Views on the relevance of the different components of the
current Action Plan in relation to the needs and priorities of
countries;
(i) Suggestions on the desired revisions and improvements to the
Action Plan, including elements, processes and activities of the
current Action Plan should be removed or modified, and why, and new
ones that should be added;
(j) Suggestions of measures to improve the delivery of
capacity-building initiatives and to enhance their effectiveness in
responding to the needs and priorities of countries.
E. Expected outcomes of
the review
8. The main outcome of the review process prior to the third
meeting of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of
the Parties to the Protocol will be a background paper prepared by
the Executive Secretary, on the basis of the above-mentioned
submissions, outlining strategic recommendations to be taken into
account in the possible revision of the Action Plan in order to
enhance the effectiveness, efficiency, timeliness and
sustainability of capacity-building measures.
9. Depending on the submissions received, the Executive
Secretary may prepare a draft revised Action Plan for consideration
by the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the
Parties to the Protocol at its third meeting.
