During the morning, delegates met in Working Group One to
conclude discussions on marine and coastal biodiversity, and to
review draft recommendations on alien species and agricultural
biodiversity, and in Working Group Two to discuss draft
recommendations on indicators and the ecosystem approach. In the
afternoon, delegates met in Plenary to discuss draft recommendations
on the Global Taxonomy Initiative, inland waters biodiversity and
national reports. The Working Groups then reconvened to conclude
discussions on draft recommendations.
WORKING GROUP ONE
MARINE AND COASTAL BIODIVERSITY, INCLUDING CORAL BLEACHING:
Several countries stressed cooperation with the UNFCCC and Ramsar
Convention, and coordination with the International Coral Reef
Initiative and the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network. GERMANY
called for implementation of the Kyoto Protocol, identifying coral
bleaching as an early warning sign of global warming. SLOVENIA asked
for reference to the joint work plan with the Ramsar Convention. The
US requested efforts to monitor and minimize local impacts. The
SEYCHELLES stressed that the recommendations need to emphasize the
primary role of climate change and transmit this view to UNFCCC. The
RAMSAR CONVENTION said coral bleaching is of common interest to the
CBD, UNFCCC and Ramsar that there will be funds available for
addressing site management issues for coral reefs. The NETHERLANDS
called for cooperation with Oslo and Paris Convention.
NEW ZEALAND, ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA and SWEDEN supported Seychelles’
Wednesday statement calling for action rather than further research.
CANADA noted that the programme of work should be cost effective and
not duplicated. ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA and DOMINICAN REPUBLIC called
for case studies on the biological and socio-economic impacts of
coral bleaching, as well as capacity-building for small island
developing states. PHILIPPINES and INDONESIA stressed
capacity-building for human resources development. On implementation
tools for marine and coastal biodiversity, BANGLADESH stressed the
need for capacity-building regarding many countries’limited
financial capacities, expertise and access to electronic means. NEW
ZEALAND and AUSTRALIA suggested an analysis of progress made with
these proposed tools. INDONESIA suggested a research programme on
socio-economic impacts. FRANCE called for identification of methods
and financial means to combat impacts of coral bleaching. A small
informal group was established to draft the recommendation based on
a Chair's text.
After lunch, the informal group presented an "Informal Group
Chair’s Text." GAMBIA highlighted changes, including:
emphasis on collaboration with international bodies with experience
on the issues; deletion of reference to the GEF regarding resources
for implementation; and other minor textual changes. The UK proposed
a new formulation regarding resources, to avoid giving financial
guidance to the COP. Some editorial comments were made, and the
group came to agreement.
DRYLANDS: On drylands, delegates considered draft recommendation
(UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/5/WG.1/CRP.2). The NETHERLANDS suggested text on
the relationship between poverty and biodiversity loss. ARGENTINA
requested reference to including a meta-database on relevant dryland
information in the Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM).The changes were
accepted.
ALIEN SPECIES: On the draft recommendation (UNEP/CBD/ SBSTTA/5/WG.I/CRP.1),
delegates agreed not to address the guiding principles contained in
the annex, since they had not been revised to reflect previous
deliberations. Delegations agreed to submitting written comments on
the principles to the Secretariat, which along with comments made
during SBSTTA-5, would be incorporated and available for
consideration at SBSTTA-6. COLOMBIA suggested that Parties should
"take into account," rather than use, the guiding
principles since they have not been finalized. The COOK ISLANDS
proposed language urging Parties to implement alien invasive
strategies as soon as they are developed, in order not to delay
action until SBSTTA-6 or 7. Regarding an outline for case studies,
GERMANY suggested that case studies be disseminated through the CHM.
NORWAY suggested including case studies focusing on thematic
assessments. PORTUGAL requested written copies of comments made on
alien species during SBSTTA-5. These changes were accepted. The
principles will be further considered in subsequent SBSTTA meetings.
HUNGARY suggested a reference to the impact of alien species on
human health.
AGRICULTURAL BIODIVERSITY: In the afternoon, the Secretariat
introduced the draft recommendation (UNEP/CBD/ SBSTTA/5/WG.I/CRP.3),
noting ten hours of informal deliberations to produce the text.
MALI, supported by ETHIOPIA and KENYA, requested inclusion of
references to "participatory breeding and selection
processes" under the capacity-building rationale to accommodate
concerns about genetic engineering. On the overall objectives,
ETHIOPIA raised concern about reference to the ecosystem approach
which listed some, but not all, elements of this approach. BRAZIL
said that the inter alia placed prior to the list could accommodate
this concern. EL SALVADOR requested clarification on a formulation
under adaptive management, referring to interactions between
different genetic resources. To clarify the text, POLAND suggested
replacing "genetic resources" with "components of
agricultural biodiversity," which was accepted. With minor
amendments, the text was accepted.
The revised recommendations will be forwarded to Plenary for
adoption.
WORKING GROUP TWO
INDICATORS OF BIODIVERSITY: Delegates considered the Chair’s
draft recommendation (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/5/WG.II/ CRP.1). The EC
proposed "framework for selecting" instead of
"menu" of potential indicators. NEW ZEALAND recalled from
COP discussions that principles and questions and the menu together
should provide a framework. On this issue, CANADA, supported by the
NETHERLANDS, suggested developing an indicator manual, guidelines
and training. NORWAY, ZIMBABWE and NEW ZEALAND noted that this is
premature and more experience is needed. Based on proposals by COSTA
RICA and BRAZIL, "to develop a key set of standard questions
and a list of available and potential indicators" was accepted.
ZIMBABWE and KENYA proposed language on capacity-building, training,
establishing networks and sharing experiences. The NETHERLANDS
suggested an interim progress report for consideration at SBSTTA-6
or 7. Both proposals were accepted.
ECOSYSTEM APPROACH: Apart from minor textual changes, discussions
on the Chair’s draft recommendation (UNEP/ CBD/SBSTTA/5/WG.II/CRP.2)
focused on the annex containing a description of the approach, its
management principles and operational guidance. Regarding the
definition, ROMANIA, supported by ECUADOR, suggested referring to
the interrelationship between natural capital and socio-economic
systems. The NETHERLANDS, GERMANY, RWANDA, COLOMBIA and GHANA
expressed concern about changing an agreed definition. It was
decided to note ongoing conceptualization in a glossary. Regarding
the precautionary principle, ROMANIA noted that the wording was
inconsistent with its broader understanding. The wording was
simplified to avoid misinterpretation. The UK suggested changing the
heading for a provision in the operational guidance on sharing
benefits derived from ecosystem biodiversity, to "distribution
of services," arguing that benefit-sharing under the Convention
addresses genetic resources, not ecosystem services. Some
delegations expressed concern about changing the spirit of the text
and the notion of distribution of services. In the afternoon,
delegates agreed to change "sharing of the benefits" to
"access to the benefits" of ecosystem services.
Although COLOMBIA, the RUSSIAN FEDERATION and NORWAY raised
concern about opening discussion on the principles, ZIMBABWE’s
proposal to delete reference to "management" in the
headings of the 12 principles was accepted. With regard to the first
principle stating that management objectives are a matter of
societal choice, the EC requested deletion of language on ecosystem
management for human benefit, citing a contradiction with the CBD’s
explicit reference to the intrinsic value of biodiversity. ECUADOR,
COSTA RICA, PERU, ZIMBABWE, HAITI and BRAZIL opposed this and later
agreed on a modification, reflecting the EC’s concerns. The last
paragraph on other management and conservation approaches was moved
to the more prominent heading "description of the ecosystem
approach;" and a reference to "traditional" protected
areas was deleted. CANADA proposed including reference to underlying
causes mentioned in the rationale of a principle on the economic
context of ecosystem management and, lacking support, agreed to note
their concern in the meeting’s report.
SUSTAINABLE USE: The Chair introduced recommendation (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/5/WG.II/CRP.3).
AUSTRALIA suggested deleting language on integrating sustainable use
into sectoral and cross-sectoral plans, programmes, policies and
national strategies and action plans, as it duplicates CBD Article
6. The UK supported the tabled text, as it links sustainable use
with COP decisions and the ecosystem approach. The language was
maintained. On experiences to draw upon, NORWAY proposed to delete
reference to the CSD and the OECD and, supported by the US, stressed
that cooperation with the private sector is of high importance. The
NETHERLANDS proposed to include FAO. References to the organizations
were retained.
The revised recommendations will be forwarded to Plenary for
adoption.
PLENARY
GLOBAL TAXONOMY INITIATIVE (GTI): Chair Cristián Samper
(Colombia) introduced draft recommendation (UNEP/CBD/ SBSTTA/5/CRP.3).
The UK requested addition of assessing national and regional
taxonomic needs, as well as submission of projects and initiatives
for consideration as pilot projects to the Executive Secretary and
the GTI coordination mechanism. SWEDEN requested the Executive
Secretary with the GTI to facilitate the formulation of projects to
meet identified needs. Regarding capacity-building in developing
countries, MALAWI suggested including cooperation with national,
regional and global taxonomic centers. NORWAY requested that the GTI
coordination mechanism work closely with the CHM and that national
taxonomic focal points be linked with other national focal points.
SWEDEN announced it would support two regional meetings in Africa
and Central America. NEW ZEALAND requested that the Executive
Secretary develop terms of reference for the GTI coordination
mechanism for COP-5’s consideration. The changes were accepted.
INLAND WATER BIODIVERSITY: Delegates discussed draft
recommendation (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/5/CRP.4). Discussion focused on text
related to the endorsement of the joint work plan with the Ramsar
Convention. ZIMBABWE and the SEYCHELLES took issue with reference to
Ramsar-defined sites for implementing work programmes on inland
water and marine and coastal biodiversity, as it prejudices those
not Party to the Ramsar Convention. ECUADOR called for inclusion of
education and public awareness within the same sentence. The text
was deleted, but the work plan endorsed.
NATIONAL REPORTS: Delegates considered the Chair's draft
recommendation (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/5/CRP.6). The UK suggested changing
wording on resources for preparation of reports, to avoid giving
financial guidance to the COP. IRELAND requested including the need
for information on the status of biodiversity. The SEYCHELLES
requested reference to the capacity of developing countries. At the
EC and NEW ZEALAND's suggestion, wording on preparation of reports
through a consultative process including all relevant stakeholders,
changed to a more flexible formulation. The EC proposed new language
on preparation of thematic reports for the COP�s consideration.
MEXICO suggested making the reports and their compilation available
to national focal points and the CHM. The GEF asked for a preambular
reference to its contribution to the reporting process, rather than
one in the recommendations. Minor textual changes were also made.
COOPERATION WITH OTHER BODIES AND CLEARING-HOUSE MECHANISM (CHM):
Chair Samper introduced final recommendations on cooperation with
other bodies (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/5/L.2) and the CHM (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/
5/L.3). NEW ZEALAND requested a note in the record regarding the
unfocused nature of the CHM�s development and that demands on
participation will be a drain on resources. The recommendations were
adopted.
IN THE CORRIDORS
Wednesday�s deliberations on agricultural biodiversity and the
concept of multi-functionality finally concluded at 6:00 am
Thursday. Reflecting on the various negotiating positions, some
participants wondered whether the previous week�s deliberations on
biosafety had carried over. One delegate expressed dismay that
SBSTTA seemed embroiled in political debates, resulting once again
in a mini-COP.