ENB:04:92 [Next] . [Previous] . [Contents]

WORKING GROUP I

GLOBAL MECHANISM: The Group considered the outstanding issues on the Global Mechanism during the morning and afternoon, although the afternoon meeting began late, to enable the regional groups to consult on the sticky points. With few amendments to the Secretariat’s text, the Group reached consensus on all the issues except the first three paragraphs of the section on the GM’s function of mobilizing and channelling resources.

Functions of the Global Mechanism: The two most difficult issues to resolve related to the mobilization and channelling of resources and the report to the COP on future funding.

The OECD countries proposed inserting “promote actions leading to” wherever the text referred to mobilize or channel financial resources (paragraph 4), and to delete subparagraph (c) on increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of existing financial resources. Otherwise, the OECD countries said the Group would be renegotiating the Convention because the GM should not have resources of its own. Some, including Senegal, disagreed saying denying it resources makes the CCD a second-rate convention. Mexico highlighted the need to distinguish between facilitation funds and funds to facilitate the activities of the GM. He suggested providing text for this later.

When the Group resumed discussion of the issue in the afternoon, Costa Rica, on behalf of the G-77 and China, said the Group’s reluctant acceptance of the Secretariat’s text demonstrated their flexibility. However, negotiations on the GM were a package and he requested placing the entire text on the GM in brackets. France, on behalf of the OECD countries, regretted the turn of events. She said although her group understands the need for resources, there should be no ambiguity in the text, which should be in the letter and spirit of the Convention. She said the OECD countries had a new set of proposals on the section.

Under paragraph 4 (d)(ii) (use of indigenous knowledge and technologies) some OECD countries preferred “traditional” to “indigenous” knowledge, since it is a wider concept. Both words were included.

With respect to reports to the COP, the Group conceded that it should include an assessment of the future availability of funds, instead of stating “the likely future availability of funds” because the latter prejudges the content of the report.

The outstanding paragraph 3 (c) (facilitating cooperation and coordination) was resolved and now reads: “encourage and facilitate coordination, including through provision of information and other measures concerning relevant multiple-source funding....”

Criteria for selecting an institution to house the GM: In paragraph 1 (functional capacity) all subparagraphs were agreed to with minor amendments and rewording. The debate focused on the G-77 and China’s three new proposals requiring the institution to demonstrate its capacity to: provide finance and/or facilitate the financing of research and the transfer, acquisition and adaptation of technology; deal with poverty eradication and development issues; and exhibit principles of transparency, neutrality and universality in its management and operations. With a few amendments, delegates agreed to include these criteria.

Closing Comments: The Chair expressed optimism as he adjourned the afternoon session early to facilitate informal negotiations on the section regarding the mobilization and channelling of financial resources. He said he would prepare a draft decision inviting the two institutions bidding to host the GM to update their offers, which would enable INCD-10 to choose one. The draft decision will request delegates to submit comments on the updated offers in time to enable the Secretariat to submit all documents by 28 October 1996 to meet UN requirements to translate and circulate the texts.

[Return to start of article]