English  |  Español  |  Français
Knowledge Base

Search criteria

Information Types

  • Decisions (430)

Treaties

Meetings

Subjects

MOP Decision

. Status of capacity-building activities

BS-V/3.Status of capacity-building activities

The Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety,
Recalling decision 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/TaskTimeframe/deadlineResponsibility
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.