Technical and Scientific Cooperation

In decision 16/3 par. 8(b), the Conference of the Parties requested the Secretariat to further identify and map, in collaboration with the regional and subregional support centres, relevant initiatives and partnerships supporting capacity-building and development for the implementation of the Framework, in order to provide a global overview of their coverage, identify gaps, minimize the duplication of efforts and foster coordination and collaboration.

The list of key initiatives and partnerships is available here: https://www.cbd.int/cb/initiatives-supporting-implementation-kmgbf.pdf.

The SCBD is exploring the use of Artificial Intelligence, especially Large Language Models (LLM) to assist in this exercise. The attached short paper  outlines the proposal's focus.

The TSC-IAG is invited to provide input into this initiative by answering the following questions:
1. What are the most relevant databases or platforms (e.g. GEF, UN project databases, regional hubs) that could be prioritized for integration or analysis?
2. Which institutions or partnerships currently generate or hold this information and could collaborate on data access and validation?
3. Which expert groups, networks, or communities of practice can support contextualization, review and interpretation of AI-derived insights?

Please provide your inputs by 10 September 2025.

Dear all,

As no one yet gave input yet on this thread, let me give a first reply to start the discussion.

Some additional initiatives that aren't taken up yet in the list of initiative supporting the implementation of the KMGBF could be:
- Congo Basin Forest Partnership
- COMIFAC which is also a TSCC
- Panorama
I could add some more in the coming week to this list.

With regards to the use of AI, I'm not a specialist.
Q1: I guess that the databases of UNEP-WCMC, FAO, GBIF, MEA's and regional conventions, Panorama, are the low hanging fruits that everybody knows.
Q2. See Q1
Q3. I guess the IAG?
I might have some additional thoughts  the coming week.

Best regards

Han

Q1. Of these initiatives on strengthen LMO biosafety, and gathering and sharing information on developed LMOs and synbio organisms (Target 17 of the GBF), the key one is actually the Biosafety Clearing-House which is the key tool for facilitating the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, through which a huge amount of training, information, discussions are carried out, as well as the FAO-GM platform, the OECD BioTrack Product Database, ISAAA.  BCH regional advisers network supported by GEF project also has made significant contributions to LMO biosafety education and has created a website of training materials. In addition, the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration (INSDC) that contains nucleotide sequence data, from raw to assembled and annotated sequences, from around the world is also important initiative related to all genetic resources which is good to collaborate in developing standards.
In relation to the question of biotechnology transfer, international initiatives related to the GBF targets and Decision 15/8 need to be labelled to address this.
Q 2. See the answer to the Q 1.
Q 3. On the third question, it also seems to me that this is IAG.

Best regards,
Galina

Depending on how 'relevant initiatives and partnerships' are defined, this could be a very big and complicated map. Other entities that are often mentioned in CBD meetings and fora include IPBES, IUCN, ASEAN and some of which host TSCs. If we look across all four goals and 23 targets, the list would be extensive. Is the intent to provide a distilled source (?for each target) that Parties could use?

On AI, whilst I can see that it certainly does have potential, it is also a risk (in my view) unless everyone who uses the outputs understanding how AI works, and, therefore, knows where outputs needs checking, refining, modifying etc. They are not a final project.

On the questions:
1. An initiative (typically focussed on a specific outcome and time limited) and a partnership (ongoing and flexible) are quite different things and could lead to a long combined list. As with a comment on Thread 1, is there a need to consider all 23 targets? Or could be simply find a way to identify a 'good' set of initiatives, partnerships and resources to begin with, and accept that it will not be comprehensive, but would be suitable for the diversity of Parties.

Q2 Han's suggestions seem appropriate. Is IUCN's Contributions for Nature appropriate, and other IUCN knowledge products, such as the IUCN Red List?

Q3. It would seem to make sense for the IAG to contextualise AI in the CBD context, and possibly to reach out to others for any specific (techncial) guidance.

I hope that this thoughts help.

Other initiatives that could be added to the list are
- IUCN Academy
- PANORAMA
Regarding the use of AI several issues must be explored before taking a decision:
- Data sovereignty
- IP rights on the content generated by AI
- CBD Parties' legislation that may restrict the use of AI by civil servants
- Capacity and right to access data to feed the AI model (authorisation form 3rd parties).
I hope this helps

Happy to add the databases maintained by UNEP-WCMC, but we would need a list of the datasets and we would need to sign a data agreement so that we can ensure that all data used is for non-commercial use.

I suggest that we also add to the list of initiatives: the National Monitoring Support initiative to this list: https://www.international-climate-initiative.com/en/project/leveraging-the-biodiversity-indicators-partnership-to-strengthen-national-biodiversity-monitoring-systems-for-enhanced-implementation-of-the-post-2020-global-biodiversity-framework-22-iv-125-global-m-biodiversity-indicators-partnership/

I also see that the Bio-Bridge initiative is included in this list of initiatives. Since I understand that Bio-Bridge is the interim Global Coordination Entity, perhaps there should be a more specific note on this.