Technical and Scientific Cooperation

A draft workplan for the TSC-IAG has been prepared based on requests from decisions 16/3, 16/9 A and B and 15/8, 15/16.

The TSC-IAG members are invited to review the plan in the attached file and share comments and suggestions in preparation for the in-person meeting. The deadline for receiving comments is 10 September 2025.

Dear,

Thanks a lot for this workplan. I'm a bit surprised that comments I made during the virtual meeting haven't been included in the workplan. I would like to remind the following actions asked for from the secretariat from Decision COP/15/8

-16 (h) To undertake, in collaboration with other biodiversity-related conventions and partners, a review of the long-term strategic framework for capacity building and development, in conjunction with the global review of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, including the means of implementation ......"
- 32 (j) To undertake a review of the technical and scientific cooperation mechanism, in conjunction with the global review of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, including the means of implementation, ........

The IAG could give advice to the Secretariat by having a first reading of the documents that will be prepared, before sending them for a peer review or straight to SBI6/7 and COP17.

With regards to the timelines for the different actions, there are quite some actions that shouldn't just end at a certain date but should continue as information becomes available. Also the start of workstream 3 and 4 seems very late. I'll join my comments in attachment

Han de Koeijer

Dear Co-Chairs and colleagues,

I wish to briefly introduce a set of recommendations aimed at refining our draft workplan for 2025–2027. The proposals focus on clarifying outputs and indicators, balancing timelines, reinforcing inclusive stakeholder engagement, and ensuring stronger linkages with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. They are intended to support a more coherent, practical, and impactful contribution of the IAG to Parties and stakeholders.

For workstream 4: Clearing-house mechanism
Task 1: Recommend developing a mid-term review (2027) to check progress of the 2024–2030 CHM programme of work.
Task 2: Propose introducing AI-driven search and translation features to improve accessibility of the central portal.
Task 3: Suggest piloting regional Bioland nodes with capacity-building for national CHM focal points, ensuring sustainability and usability at country level.

Dear Co-chairs and esteemed colleagues,
Thank you for the valuable contributions that have been shared. I would like to offer my own recommendations.

Regarding workstream 1, paragraph 5

I wish to build on the existing proposal for capacity-building for Indigenous Peoples and local communities. To ensure full alignment with Decision 15/8, which explicitly includes women and youth as key actors, I believe their inclusion in this paragraph is essential.

This leads to a point of clarity:
If the paragraph is intended to remain broad under 'issues related to the Convention,' then we must include women and youth to comply with the Decision 15/8 mandate.

If the objective is to narrowly focus on SB8J, then I suggest we create a separate, dedicated paragraph specifically for the SB8j purpose.
Finally, echoing the point made by Mr. Han, and considering that this work is time-sensitive, I support the idea of revisiting the start date for this crucial work and initiating it as soon as possible.