The second debate on a global convention on forests revealed little shift in delegations positions from the IPF-4s first exchange of views. Delegates and observers were left wondering how the final action proposals will reconcile divergent positions. Some suggest that the best way out is a relatively extensive list of options that include all delegations proposals. Others suggest that there is still room to strike compromises between strong proponents of a convention and those advocating action not solely focused on a convention. While some prefer a more confined range of options, others fear that such limitations will increase the probability of movement toward a convention. Most concur that whatever options the IPF puts forward, the selection of any one path requires higher-level political authority.