(b)Recalls paragraph 11 of
decision XI/20, in which the Conference of the Parties noted that the application of the precautionary approach as well as customary international law, including the general obligations of States with regard to activities within their jurisdiction or control and with regard to possible consequences of those activities, and requirements with regard to environmental impact assessment, may be relevant for geoengineering activities but would still form an incomplete basis for global regulation;
(c)Recalling paragraph 4 of
decision XI/20, in which the Conference of the Parties emphasized that climate change should primarily be addressed by reducing anthropogenic emissions by sources and by increasing removals by sinks of greenhouse gases under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, noting also the relevance of the Convention on Biological Diversity and other instruments, and
also recalling paragraphs 8 (j)-(t) of
decision X/33, and paragraph 5 of
decision XII/20,
reaffirms its encouragement to Parties to promote the use of ecosystem-based approaches to climate change adaptation and mitigation;
(d)Notes that very few Parties responded to the invitation to provide information on measures they have undertaken in accordance with
decision X/33, paragraph 8(w), and further invites other Parties, where relevant, to provide such information;
(e)Also notes that more transdisciplinary research and sharing of knowledge among appropriate institutions is needed in order to better understand the impacts of climate-related geoengineering on biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, socio-economic, cultural and ethical issues and regulatory options;
(f)Recognizes the importance of taking into account sciences for life and the knowledge, experience and perspectives of indigenous peoples and local communities when addressing climate-related geoengineering and protecting biodiversity.
