14 May 1996
ENGLISH ONLY
UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE
CHANGE
Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice
Third session
Geneva, 9 - 16 July 1996
The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice
(SBSTA), at its second session, held at Geneva from 27 February to 4
March 1996, took note of the request by the Philippines (on behalf of
the Group of 77 and China) to have their position on the subject of
the establishment of intergovernmental technical advisory panel(s)
reflected for the record.
The SBSTA further took note of the request by the United States of
America to have its position on the same subject reflected for the
record.
The two positions are reproduced in the present note. In
accordance with the procedure for miscellaneous documents, they are
reproduced in the language in which they were received.
FCCC/SBSTA/1996/MISC.3
GE.96-
Page 2
The representative of the Philippines, as Coordinator of the G-77
and China on this item, explained that the Group of 77 and China had
spent long hours of discussion, examined all possibilities, made all
possible concessions without prejudicing basic interests of
the developing countries in the issue of global climate change. The
Group was fighting for survival, physical and economic, in the
context of the Convention. Climate was global, with varying
specificities. A technical advisory panel must reflect all
these.
The Group was deeply disappointed that the ITAPs had not been set
up despite the Group's willingness to make all possible compromises,
short of endangering basic interests.
The Group felt that the ITAPs had an important role to play in the
implementation of this Convention, and in advancing the interests of
developing countries. It therefore suggested that the Secretariat
should undertake the setting-up of a roster of experts, nominated by
Parties, with a full curriculum vitae for each. This would allow
members time to get their nominations together, a task which is not
an easy one for a number of developing countries.
The position of the Group of 77 and China is as
follows:
The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological
Advice,
Recalling the relevant provisions of the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change, in particular Articles 9 and
4.1(c) and (e),
Pursuant to the relevant decisions of the Conference of
the Parties at its first session, in particular decisions 3, 4, 5, 6,
and 13, and to the relevant conclusions of the Ad Hoc Group on the
Berlin Mandate (FCCC/AGBM/1995/2, conclusions (j), (k), and
(l)),
1. Decides that:
(a) An intergovernmental technical advisory panel on methodologies
and technologies is hereby established on a provisional basis,
functioning under the terms of reference of the Subsidiary Body for
Scientific and Technological Advice, decision 6/CP.1. It will
implement the initial programme of
Page 3
work, on the basis of the list of tasks attached hereto. The
future operations of the panel will be reviewed by the SBSTA in 1997.
The members of the panel will serve for the period leading up to the
third session of the Conference of the Parties; they will be
technical and scientific experts nominated by the Government of the
Parties;
(b) The panel shall be composed of twenty experts: four from each
of the five UN regional groups. The panel shall be co-Chaired by two
of its members.
(c) Each regional group shall nominate four experts for the panel
within their group, taking into account the initial work programme.
The list of these experts would be sent to the Bureau of the SBSTA,
which would present it to the SBSTA for adoption. A full curriculum
vitae of each proposed expert shall be provided. In finalizing the
names of experts, each group may take into account the need for
representation of the different areas of expertise bearing in mind
the initial work programme.
(d) The terms of the panel members may be extended, taking into
account the need for stability, the need to rotate members, and the
review by the SBSTA in 1997;
(e) A roster of experts, nominated by Parties, shall be maintained
for specialized tasks that cannot be undertaken by panel members.
Each Party may nominate up to ten experts for the roster and will
provide a full curriculum vitae of each nominee. Whenever such
specialized tasks that cannot be undertaken by panel members are
entrusted, on an ad hoc basis, to experts from the roster,
equitable representation should be ensured;
(f) The panel shall organize its own work in accordance with the
priorities of the initial work programme. The panel may seek
cooperation and advice from other competent international bodies to
complement and facilitate its work. Reports from the panel shall be
advisory; they will be circulated to all Parties prior to their
consideration by the SBSTA. The panel shall operate in a
cost-effective manner, taking advantage of all possible means to
communicate among members and to facilitate its work.
2. Authorizes its Bureau to convene an initial panel
meeting as early as practicable after all the UN regional Groups have
sent in their nominations, and further authorizes two meetings of the
panel to be held in both 1996 and 1997.
3. Notes that funding the participation in the panel
meetings shall be ensured to experts participants from eligible
Parties in accordance with normal practice and subject to the
availability of resources.
Page 4
The SBSTA decides on the following initial work programme in the
following order of priority:
1. Technology inventory and assessment and assessment of its
development and transfer for non-Annex I Parties:
(a) Specific innovative, efficient and state-of-the-art
technologies and know-how
(b) Adaptation technologies and processes
2. Assessment of terms of technology transfer
3. Development of technologies for working out regional climate scenarios and impact assessment, especially socio-economic impacts on non-Annex I Parties.
Page 5
The delegate of the U.S.A. expressed his appreciation for the
efforts by the Chairman with respect to the proposed establishment of
the technical Advisory Panels. He recalled Decision 6/CP.1, which
called to go beyond the recently completed work of the IPCC, to
establish technical advisory panels that would "identify innovative,
efficient, and state-of-the-art technologies and know-how, and advise
on the ways and means of promoting development and/or transferring
such technologies." He indicated four principles for the work of
these panels. (1) they must draw extensively from the expertise of
the private and public sector, including industry, academia and other
NGO organizations; (2) members of the panel must serve as independent
experts, not representatives of any Government or region, industry,
or private organization; (3) the work of these experts must undergo
independent peer review as part of the work process and be presented
as objective information to the SBSTA and the AGBM, as appropriate,
for use by these bodies in their deliberations; and (4) participants
in these panels should reflect geographic and technical balance to
insure that concerns and perspectives of all are reflected in their
work.
He offered also the following comments:
-- Its mandate should necessarily extend well beyond
COP 3.
-- Initially, the core work of the TAP should focus on an assessment of innovative technologies, though the areas of review should be broader in order to avoid too narrow a focus
among a wide array of technical opportunities with differing
applicabilities that exist throughout the world. The other items
on the proposed work program can best be carried out by existing
organizations on a time-frame consistent with COP 3.
-- Members of the panel should be "technical and scientific
experts, advising in their personal capacities" and therefore they
should be selected on the basis of their expertise, seeking to insure
that the panel members represent technical and geographical
diversity. While geographical diversity is critical to the successful
functioning of the TAP, members should serve as independent experts
not representing any organization or region.
-- The panel should be permitted the flexibility to operate how
best it sees fit (for example, holding workshops, establishing
subcommittees, reviewing others' reports, preparing its own
reports).
Page 6
Summarizing, he thought it to be important to reach a conclusion
on the establishment of a technical advisory panel and that the Panel
should initiate its work as quickly as feasible. One option, which he
believed has considerable merit, is to request that the IPCC initiate
these tasks. The IPCC has a proven track record in delivering sound,
independent scientific and technical analysis to the SBSTA and the
Parties. Under this option, the SBSTA would define the parameters of
the work and request that the IPCC take on this effort with increased
participation by technical experts from industry and others with
hands-on knowledge of relevant technologies.
If, as an alternative, an independent technical advisory panel
under SBSTA would be established, the proposal prepared by the
Chairman would need to be modified at three points:
1. To establish the 20 members of the TAP, all Parties should submit nominations within 8 weeks to the secretariat, along with supporting information describing the nominees' expertise. In suggesting nominations, Parties should take into consideration the potentially significant demands that will be placed on members of the TAP. The Bureau will sort
through the nominations, in consultation with the Bureau of the
IPCC and make recommendations to SBSTA at its next meeting. These
recommendations should reflect the technical and geographical
diversity critical to the successful functioning of the
TAP.
2. The work programme should be refocused to emphasize assessment of the use and transfer of existing and innovative technology and technology transfer. It should be divided into broad categories for investigation, allowing the technical experts involved to identify specific issues and questions that
would be addressed within those broad areas for detailed review. We suggest as a starting point the following areas: (1) energy supply; (2) industrial energy demand; (3) agriculture; (4) buildings; (5) transport; (6) carbon sinks; (7) other
sectors. It would be critical that the expertise of the TAP members would reflect these broad areas of technical knowledge. Members of the TAP with expertise in one of these particular areas would be designated the chair for this area, and be
charged with preparing and implementing a work program specific to that area. The work plan for each area would be approved by the TAP and would focus on issues related to technologies and not on specific policies and measures. It would: identify innovative technological options; evaluate technical, economic and institutional barriers to commercialization; and identify opportunities for, and barriers to technology transfer. the work program in each area would determine the need for and process for establishing subcommittees, identify interim products and propose a timetable for initial reports.
Page 7
3. In place of a roster of experts, and in order to facilitate the work of the TAP, Parties should be requested also to submit
nominations, along with qualifications, for participants in each
of the seven work areas identified above. The names would be
forwarded to the TAP for its consideration as one source in
identifying participants for activities they undertake under the work
program.