The Secretariat introduced the proposed programme of work, contained in document FCCC/SBI/1995/2, and a draft decision on agenda submitted by the Chair, contained in document FCCC/SBI/1995/L.2. SPAIN, on behalf of the EU, said that the bureaus of the two subsidiary bodies must work in close coordination to avoid delays. He said that the SBI has an important role to play in in-depth reviews and on initial communications from non-Annex I Parties and should ensure transparency. On the financial mechanisms, he mentioned that COP I only agreed on initial guidance and the SBI needed to compile information. Regarding transfer of technology, he said that the SBI should only focus on developing country Parties and only the most promising technologies. As for AIJ, he recalled that the COP should review these in the pilot phase. Regarding possible contributions to the Berlin Mandate process, he said that work requested by the AGBM should be considered a matter of priority.
JAPAN emphasized the importance of the issue of technology transfer. He noted the work done by the Japan International Cooperation Agency and other organizations on environmental technology transfer. He suggested that it was useful to have a database on "on-going" activities related to transfer of technology. MALAYSIA supported the creation of a report on inventory of technologies referred to in the programme of work and the SBI's work on AIJ. The REPUBLIC OF KOREA said that technology transfer should be a standing item on the SBI agenda. INDIA and CHINA said that technology transfer was an important issue that was reflected in the "irrefutable intent" of the FCCC. ZIMBABWE stressed the need for appropriate technologies for developing countries and the need for the SBI to consider the inputs of Southern NGOs to the NGO workshop.
Document FCCC/SBI/1995/L.2, entitled "Requests the Secretariat to revise the scheduling of the programme of work in light of the results of first session of SBSTA," and document FCCC/SBI/1995/2, Elaboration and scheduling of the programme of work, were adopted with minor amendments.
A representative from the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF), on behalf of the Climate Action Network (CAN), said that most Annex I countries have failed to develop and implement adequate national programmes and that most existing programmes are well behind schedule, but noted that the SBI is the forum in which Parties can reflect on mid-course corrections. She said that the SBI's short-term priorities should include providing guidance for Annex I Parties' second national communications and establishing appropriate working relations with the GEF.
The Chair then asked whether the SBI preferred to meet the following morning to approve an outline of the Report of the meeting, or to authorize the Rapporteur, Mr. Jorge Benavides de la Sotta (Peru) to incorporate the conclusions of the meeting and allow SBSTA negotiations to continue. Following assurances from the Chair that the report would contain nothing that was not discussed, the SBI chose to have the report completed and circulated. The Chair stated that the report will be considered as adopted and noted that because its elements have been adopted, there was no need to formally adopt the report at this stage.
[Return to start of article]