10 October 1997
ENGLISH ONLY
UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE
SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR IMPLEMENTATION
Seventh session
Bonn, 20-29 October 1997
Item 10 of the provisional agenda
1. In the light of the views expressed on documents
FCCC/SBI/1997/14 and FCCC/SBI/1997/14/Add.1 dealing with mechanisms
for consultation with non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the
Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI), at its sixth session,
invited all Parties to submit their views on this item by 25 August
1997. It further requested the secretariat to prepare a compilation
of the submissions made(FCCC/SBI/1997/17para.39).
2. Two such submissions have been received from Egypt and
Uzbekistan. In addition, the secretariat has received a submission
from each of the three non-governmental constituencies of business
and industry, environment and municipal leaders and local
authorities. It has also received a submission from the International
Relations Committee of the National Association of Regulatory
Affairs. In view of the nature of the agenda item under discussion,
the secretariat deemed it necessary to include the four
submissions(1) from the
non-governmental community.
4. Based on the recommendations contained in the documents prepared by the secretariat at the SBI at its sixth session (FCCC/SBI/1997/14 and FCCC/SBI/1997/14/Add.1), the SBI may wish to recommend a draft decision on this item for adoption by the
Conference of the Parties at its third session.
In accordance with the procedure for miscellaneous documents, these submissions are
attached and reproduced in the language in which they are received
and without formal editing.
FCCC/SBI/1997/MISC.7
GE.97-
Paper No. Page
Egypt 3
(Submission dated 31 August 1997)
2. Uzbekistan 4
(Submission dated 27 August 1997)
3. Business and industry 5
(Submission dated 27 August 1997)
4. Environmental NGOs 13
(Submission dated 15 September 1997)
5. Municipal leaders and local authorities 16
(Submission dated 15 September 1997)
6. The International Relations Committee 19
of the National Association of Regulatory Affairs
(Submission dated 19 August 1997)
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Egypt (Department of
Environment and Sustainable Development) presents its compliments to
the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change, and with reference to the recommendation of the Subsidiary
Body for Implementation in its sixth session, Bonn, 28 July-5 August
1997, to urge the parties to present their proposals concerning the
criterias related to "Mechanisms For Consultations with
Non-Governmental Organizations", has the honour to inform that the
criterias proposed to be fulfilled by the NGOs are as
follows:
On the institutional level:
- Legitimate status of the organization on the national level
(registration, and compliance with the national
legislation)
- Adequate capacities in the administrative and organizational
matters and sufficient qualifications to represent effectively the
national interests on the international level (languages, experience
in the negotiations etc..)
- Financial capacities to be able to participate in the
international conferences
On the technical level:
- The ability to cooperate with the government to implement the
environmental national policies
- The capacity to prepare and to apply the environmental projects
and programmes and to cooperate with the international organizations
to respond to the society needs.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Egypt (Department of Environment and Sustainable Development) avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change the assurances of its highest consideration.
It is recommended to encourage the participation of NGOs
(ecological business making group and local authorities) as an expert
in the process of the fulfillment of FCCC obligations by the
Parties.
At present it is expedient to follow the order of admittance of
NGOs to the participation in COP and its bodies providing them the
official accreditation at COP session. With this it is necessary to
follow the norms of NGO registration procedure existing in UN
system.
The accreditation conditions and criteria of NGO admittance to the
process of Convention implementation should be presented as the
separate COP decision.
The involvement of accredited NGOs to the consulting process is
possible at the stage of discussing the concerned issues before the
decision making. NGOs do not participate in the decision
making.
Participation of individual persons concerned as the experts in
consideration of special matters on FCCC implementation is
possible.
The widening of NGOs access to official information and
participation in discussions of Convention bodies is expedient during
discussion of the relevant issues.
The participation of NGOs in national delegations should be
determined by governments of Parties.
The information on accredited NGOs opinions and its presentation for Parties should be made on regular constant basis through Convention Secretariat.
In response to the request of Chairman Mohamed Ould El Ghaouth of
the Subsidiary Body on Implementation, we are writing to offer
further comments on SBI-6 Agenda Item 9, regarding mechanisms for
consultations with non-governmental organizations under the UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Our comments are based on: recommendations business NGOs have
shared with you over the past 18 months; the conclusions of the March
1996 NGO Workshop; comments offered on the Consultants' report;
previous oral interventions; as well as on our recent discussion with
you on August 6 in Bonn. We draw your particular attention to the
enclosed "Principles for a Business Consultative Mechanism" from the
March 1996 Workshop, which expresses our support for an arrangement
that permits unfiltered two-way communication of diverse business
views and expertise on climate change issues.
We understand that the next consideration of this topic could
result in a draft decision for consideration at COP3. In our view,
the full consideration that this topic warrants is best delayed until
after Kyoto. The high priority issues that face delegates in the
short period before the COP will demand their full attention. Most
importantly, any enhanced NGO consultative arrangements should be
tailored to whatever conclusion COP3 reaches, thus having that
conclusion in hand will better inform decision-making on this
issue.
With that in mind, we offer further suggestions at this time with
an aim to strengthening NGO consultative procedures so that they are
helpful to delegates and effective in bringing the expertise and
views of business NGOs into relevant discussions without burdening
the secretariat.
Geographical representation of non-governmental
organizations
Several delegations expressed concern that NGOs, including those representing business and industry, did not include participants from developing country. In fact, as we noted in our recent discussion with you, many business organizations such as the International Chamber of Commerce, IPIECA, and others, do represent companies that are headquartered, sited or have operations in developing countries. Our organizations speak for small- and medium-sized companies, as well as regional business associates in Africa, Latin America an Asia.
Every effort should continue to be made to consult and involve all
business group members to help ensure geographical balance and
representation from developed and developing countries. However,
these efforts should not discourage business representatives from
OECD countries who, in large measure, will be called upon to provide
the technology, capital and technical expertise necessary to
implement any new climate agreement.
Additional Information about NGOs. Criteria for Participation
and Support for UNFCCC Objectives.
It is not clear how additional information about NGOs would be
used once it was gathered or what benefit such information would
render. Furthermore, this exercise would be labor-intensive for the
secretariat, using time and resources that potentially could be
better spent elsewhere, given the pressures it is under.
The same concern would apply to mandating a statement of support
for the UNFCCC's goal from NGOs. As Article 7.6 provides, the
emphasis should be on engaging the fullest range of NGOs "which (are)
qualified in matters covered by the Convention". Instituting an
allegiance pledge, defining criteria, or increasing reporting burdens
would prove counter-productive for all involved, potentially
undermining business and public support for any new
agreement.
NGO Access to Documentation and Meetings
Numerous delegations supported a more predictable arrangement to
ensure that documentation is available to NGOs, namely that NGOs
would be given a few copies to reproduce and distribute more broadly
among themselves. Further, delegates stated their support allowing
access, as appropriate and agreed by the Chairman, for NGO
representatives to meetings, (including informal meetings), by
extending the "SBSTA" model. We look forward to working with the
secretariat to facilitate implementation of both
recommendations.
With regard to business NGO involvement in the remaining session
before COP3, and during and beyond COP3, we believe that the priority
should be to improve communication mechanisms. Doing so would enhance
the ability of business groups to provide the full range of views on
various issues before the UNFCCC. We appreciate the efforts you and
your staff have made to accommodate business NGOs and the daily
briefings by Ambassador Estrada and other subsidiary body chairmen
have been very helpful.
Nevertheless, we urge the Bureau to consider the importance to
business NGOs - whose members will called upon to implement the
conclusions of Kyoto - of hearing the discussions that lead to those
conclusions, and reconsider its decision to close AGBM non-group
meetings to observer organizations. Consultation with business will
be essential to draw on the resources that the private sector offers
in formulating and implementing climate change actions to ensure
competitiveness, social and economic growth and
employment.
We appreciate the opportunity to offer these comments, and look
forward to discussing the issue with you further. We will keep you
informed as we progress our discussions of how business groups can
continue to make a positive and constructive contribution to the work
of the Parties through improved communications at the national,
regional and international levels.
United Nations
Geneva
2 March 1996
Business groups, which include industrial and financial
organizations, have been present as accredited observers at all
meetings of the process which led to the development and
implementation of the framework convention on climate change. During
these meetings we have provided input on the topics under discussion.
However, under existing procedures, our ability to provide
information was often limited. We, therefore, welcomed the decision
at COP1 to hold a workshop on consultative mechanisms for
non-governmental organization inputs into the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Business NGOs began to discuss their input to the workshop soon
after the decision to hold one was reached. All business
organizations which had participated in the FCCC process were invited
to attend, and efforts were made to invite groups which had
participated in the FCCC process. Additional meetings were held and
there was also an extensive exchange of written information. As a
result of these efforts we now have agreed on a set of ten
principles, and I would like to spend the rest of this talk
presenting them.
The first principle is that a business consultative mechanism
should provide business with a convenient, direct and
effective additional channel of communication. Business
representatives strongly believe that if their input is to be of
value to the FCCC process, it must be transmitted to the relevant
FCCC body without filtering or editing of its content.
Our second principle is that a business consultative mechanism
should further enable business to both volunteer information
to, and respond to questions from, all the bodies established under
the Framework Convention on Climate Change in a timely
manner. The consultative mechanism must serve the needs of
the Framework Convention process by being responsive to requests for
information. However, as active observers of the FCCC process,
business has also identified many issues on which they can provide
useful input. The consultative mechanism will be far more valuable to
the FCCC process if it provides an additional means for business to
volunteer its expertise on these issues.
Third, a business consultative mechanism should further
enable business to provide information to all of the parties and to
the intergovernmental organizations participating in the FCCC
process. The parties to the FCCC are responsible for making
all of the decisions related to its implementation. Thus, the value
of information from business will be enhanced if it is shared with
all parties. Similarly, since input from other intergovernmental
organizations is an important source of information for the FCCC
process, the process will benefit if they receive information from
business for their deliberations.
Fourth, an industry consultative mechanism should further
enable business to provide its views on the full range (policy,
socio-economic, technological, etc.) of issues being addressed under
FCCC. Much of the discussion on consultative mechanisms has
focused on the input business can provide on the technological issues
being addressed by the FCCC process. Business has much to offer in
this area, but our potential contributions are not limited to
technological issues. The experience of implementing new enterprises
in both developed and developing nations has given business practical
expertise in the socio-economic impacts of the introduction of new
technology. This expertise is directly relevant to the policy
initiatives which the FCCC process will have to
consider.
Business also has experience in dealing with the implications of a
broad range of policy options. Our input on the practical
implications of policy-making can help achieve a positive outcome of
the FCCC process. The consultative mechanism should be broad enough
to benefit from the full range of business experience.
Fifth, a business consultative mechanism should be open to
all business NGOs accredited by the FCCC process who wish to
participate. The broader the range of business groups
providing input to the FCCC process, the greater the value of that
input. To date, business NGOs who have expressed interest and are
actively involved in the FCCC process are primarily from Annex I
countries. Several participating business NGOs represent
geographically diverse interests, including from non-Annex I
countries. However, we share the desire of the G-77 and China to
broaden that participation.
Sixth, a business consultative mechanism should be able to
convey the full range of business positions on an unfiltered
basis. Business may seek to develop consensus on the issues
before the FCCC process. However, a consultative mechanism which
conveys the diversity of business views will be more valuable to the
FCCC process than one which demands consensus on all items under
discussion. The full range of business views will demonstrate the
complexity of the issues which have to be addressed in making policy
decisions about climate change, and provide the FCCC process with
relevant, comprehensive and useful information.
Seventh, a business consultative mechanism should not be a
process for negotiation of commitments from business, or for the
selection of technology "winners and losers". Business view
the consultative mechanism as a method of facilitating communication.
The organization set up to facilitate that communication will not be
empowered to "represent" business and cannot enter negotiations with
the FCCC process.
Business feel strongly that the marketplace is the most effective
mechanism for determining the most suitable technology. Often this
choice is dependent on local circumstances, and can change, sometimes
rapidly, as innovative new approaches become available. The
consultative mechanism can, and should, provide information about the
performance and cost of technologies of interest to the FCCC process.
However, neither the consultative mechanism nor the FCCC process
should select technology "winners and losers", since that process
will not be able to anticipate all of the local circumstances which
could impact on the decision. More importantly, selection of
technology "winners" creates a significantly higher barrier to the
development and adoption of new generations of innovative technology
and can hinder the achievement of long-term policy
goals.
Eighth, a business consultative mechanism should be an
addition to, not a replacement for, existing or new business
consultation at the national and international level.
Members of the business sector have well-established channels of
communication with the governments of the countries in which they
operate, and regularly provide input on the full range of issues
affecting the sector. These channels have been used to provide input
on issues related to the FCCC process and they will continue to be
business' main vehicle for input. Communications at the national
level is critical to the on-going relationship between companies and
the governments of the countries in which they operate. However, a
comprehensive business consultative mechanism at the international
level will enhance communication with the FCCC process and will be a
valuable addition to existing communication at both national and
international level.
While the business sector visualizes a consultative mechanism that
provides an additional method for accredited NGOs to communicate with
the FCCC process, we also recognize that business NGOs may continue
using their existing modes of communication at the international
level or develop new ones.
Ninth, the business consultative mechanism should be
treated by the FCCC process in a manner comparable to all other NGO
consultative mechanisms, in terms of access and administrative
support, including funding for participants from developing
nations. The FCCC process will be best served by having the
active participation and support of the broadest range of
stake-holders. This goal is best achieved by treating all
stake-holders in an equitable manner.
Tenth, and finally, a business consultative mechanism must
be subject to and consistent with national and regional
anti-trust and competition laws and regulations. Clearly,
any activity which is undertaken as part of the FCCC process must
meet all national and regional legal requirements.
To summarize: A business consultative mechanism should:
1. Provide business with a convenient, direct and
effective additional channel of communication;
Further enable business to both volunteer information to,
and respond to questions from all of the bodies established under the
Framework Convention on Climate Change in a timely
manner;
Further enable business to provide information to all of
the parties and to the intergovernmental organizations participating
in the FCCC process;
Further enable business to provide its views on the full
range (policy, socio-economic, technological, etc.) of issues being
addressed under the FCCC;
Be open to all business NGOs accredited by the FCCC
process who wish to participate;
Be able to convey the full range of business positions on
an unfiltered basis;
Not be a process for negotiation of commitments from
business, or for the selection of technology "winners and
losers";
Be an addition to, not a replacement for, existing or new
business consultation at the national and international
level;
Be treated by the FCCC process in a manner comparable to
all other NGO consultative mechanisms in terms of access and
administrative support, including funding for participants from
developing nations; and
Be subject to and consistent with national and regional
anti-trust and competition laws and
regulations.
We believe that a consultative mechanism constructed in accordance with these principles will provide the FCCC with a valuable flow of information from business and help in achieving the goals of the Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Environmental NGOs look forward to working with the Secretariat
and the Parties to create a living Convention in which all
stakeholders are able to participate in a meaningful, dynamic manner
now and long into the future. Outlined below are the environmental
NGOs' ideas for how to move this issue forward in a constructive
manner.
Principles
The Note by the Executive Secretary in document
FCCC/SBI/1997/14/ADD.1, raises a number of interesting questions in
the discussion about NGO participation in the Convention process.
Environmental NGOs would like to open the dialogue on a number of
core issues. The truth is that we currently have a Convention with
many observers who we really do not know. Due to lack of specific
information on the participants, we are not clear on what their
specific interest is in participating in the process.
In order to get a clearer picture, we call for increased
transparency in the accreditation and registration process.
Specifically, each accredited observer should fill out a
questionnaire that asks for information on their membership and the
regions in which it is active, their funding sources and assets, how
many people work in the NGO's office and, in the case of business
NGOs, in which types of business activities the group is
active.
This would allow all of us to begin to understand who is already
participating and who, perhaps, we may wish to involve more fully in
the future. This picture could be later supplemented by requesting
each accredited NGO to submit a report or completed questionnaire on
its activities in relation to the Convention every 3 years . The
Secretariat could facilitate this process.
Environmental NGOs would also request the Secretariat to explore
other Conventions regarding requirements that an NGO support the
objective and the implementation of those Conventions before it is
granted accredited status. This would seem a consistent and logical
requirement in order to obtain observer status in the Climate
Convention. Indeed, governments that have ratified the Convention
bind themselves to working toward the objective of the Convention,
why should observers be given any different treatment? The current
accreditation process should be reviewed with the objective of the
Convention in mind.
When we look into the future of an operational Climate Convention,
environmental NGOs envision wider participation than we have today.
In order to build a foundation for inclusion of further
constituencies, we should ascertain who they are and who they could
be. We therefore ask the Secretariat to assess participation up to
this point, with an eye to the future to allow flexibility to include
additional constituencies, and propose a list of various
constituencies for consideration. As a matter of principle, any
participation mechanism should provide geographically-balanced input.
For example, it could be recommended that each constituency ensure
that it has participation from all of the UN-specified regions. This
would begin to address the extreme geographic imbalance of accredited
NGOs reflected in the Secretariat's document.
Improvement of Existing Mechanisms
In the view of environmental NGOs, the single most important thing
to improve the relationship between NGOs and the FCCC process would
be to move towards a more dynamic exchange between Parties and NGOs
during the meetings of the subsidiary bodies, the AGBM, and the COP.
We draw on the experience of the Montreal Protocol, the IPCC, the
Biodiversity Convention and the GEF. NGOs should, at the discretion
of the Chair, be able to intervene on specific agenda items - among
Party interventions - in order that their viewpoints become part of
the debate, not just after-the-fact statements. SBSTA has begun this
process with positive results. The other bodies should therefore
follow suit. This naturally requires access to the floor of all
Convention meetings. Disruptive activities in the past from other
constituencies should not have the effect of excluding access for
everyone else.
Access by NGOs to documentation
It goes without saying that all NGOs should have access to
documentation in a timely, effective manner. To reduce costs, a
choice could be given as to whether hard copy or electronic copies
are delivered. Participation by NGOs in national processes NGOs
should be included in the drafting of national communications, the
in-depth review process and capacity building activities. These
elements should be included in the revision of national communication
and in-depth review guidelines. The SBI should also encourage Parties
to implement this on the national level.
Participation by NGOs in National
Processes
NGOs should be effectively included in the drafting of national
communications, the in-depth review process and capacity building
activities. These elements should be included in the revision of
national communication and in-depth review guidelines. The SBI should
also encourage Parties to implement this on the national
level.
Public Education
Environmental NGOs are natural and essential partners in educating
citizens around the world about climate change. We would like to work
with the Secretariat on developing a long-term strategy on better
informing the public on the realities of climate change.
Possible New Mechanisms
The principle of parity is paramount not only in the Framework
Convention on Climate on Climate Change but throughout the entire UN
system. It is therefore beyond the environmental NGOs comprehension
why a mechanism for only business NGOs, which allows only them to
submit their views in an unfiltered manner to the Parties, is
currently part of the Secretariat document. We would like to believe
this element of the paper is an unnoticed error and will be deleted
immediately.
We could rather envision a process by which the Secretariat,
Parties or the Chairperson of a body to the Convention ask for NGO
input on specific issues, perhaps through an Internet list server.
Accredited NGOs could then respond to this request electronically or
manually which could then be placed on the UNFCCC Website. This would
provide for the inclusion of unfiltered views for each NGO in an
egalitarian manner. Anything else is, honestly,
unacceptable.
Policy Dialogue Forums
In short, we would be happy to be partners in the elaboration of
policy dialogue forums if a few elements were added:
Local authorities, given the important role they can play in
reducing local greenhouse-gas emissions, believe that better
communication between them and the Conference of the Parties to the
UNFCCC and Subsidiary Bodies could enhance the work of those Bodies,
since local government officials have many years of experience in
reducing emissions through a multitude of policies and
measures.
The Cities for Climate Protection Campaign comprises local
governments that to date represent 100 million people around the
world. Those local governments have pledged to reduce their local
greenhouse-gas emissions in order to abate global climate change. The
participants at the Second Municipal Leaders' Summit on Climate
Change in Berlin 1995 represented 250 million people and in their
Communiqué to COP-1 urged national governments to "reduce
their 1990 level of anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide by at
least 20% by the year 2005" and to "adopt specific targets and
timetables to limit or reduce greenhouse gases". This clearly
demonstrates the desire of local authorities to work with national
governments in climate protection to move the Convention forward and
this is the position that ICLEI, on their behalf, brings to the COP
and the meetings of the Subsidiary Bodies.
Local authorities are not really NGOs. They are legitimate
government authorities that should be classified, working through
their accredited international associations such as the International
Union of Local Authorities (IULA) and ICLEI, as "local government
organizations" or LGOs. The SBI should give serious consideration to
the application of the General Assembly's Rule 61 to the COP, which
provides for local authorities, through their accredited
international associations, to participate on a non-voting basis in
UN bodies. ICLEI will submit suggestions on how this modality could
be implemented in the context of the COP and its Subsidiary
Bodies.
ICLEI would like to offer the following comments regarding the
role of local authorities in the UNFCCC process and the criteria for
accreditation of local authorities:
Transparency should be incorporated into the
accreditation and registration process. Essential to
transparency is a due diligence review of the actual legitimacy of
any group seeking local authority accreditation to ensure that they
are an established, representative, democratic local authority
association. This issue was handled very well in both the UNCED and
Habitat II process, where accreditation was provided to established
international associations of local authorities. Such a litmus test
was critical in the Habitat II process to deal with situations in
which individual city council members with single issue agendas (in
one case, for instance, an anti-abortion lobby used a city councillor
from a small town in Utah, USA to speak on behalf of all local
authorities!). If the FCCC does not clearly define its criteria, any
number of lobbies will seek to usurp the local authority position for
their special positions, thereby also usurping the established
worldwide policy making processes of the international associations
of local authorities.
The FCCC does not need to look far to see what criteria are being
applied and which associations are being recognized by the United
Nations as local authority representatives. These associations tend
to have ECOSOC status, accreditation with the UN CSD and/or are
affiliated with the International Union of Local Authorities (IULA)
the World Assembly of Cities and Local Authorities Coordination
(WACLAC) established at Habitat II.
The accredited participants should be required to submit a
formal declaration of support for the Convention's
aims. We all recognize that this will exclude some groups. However,
if the Secretariat's charge is to implement the Convention and not to
debate its appropriateness etc., then the Secretariat should engage
those groups who are working on implementation. Those who are unable
to express their support should be "recruited" to become supporters
through special outreach programmes of the Secretariat.
Concerning participation from the floor, the
SBSTA approach should be used as a framework, but the process can
only work if the accredited local authority representatives are the
only ones invited to make interventions from the floor. Without this
discipline, the legitimate and serious local authority partners to
the FCCC will be discouraged from participating at meetings, as they
will constantly face efforts by single-issue or other front groups to
misrepresent developed local authority positions. In some countries
there is already well-documented experience of specific fuel lobbies
"seeding" national associations of local government with their
positions via individual city councillors. This will not produce
transparency, fair representation or quality inputs into the FCCC,
and we fear that the floor participation process has already been
compromised by such misuse. Again, the only way that legitimate
organizations will stay involved is if the process is disciplined;
otherwise the Convention process will be left with only those groups
that have recently put on a local authority hat as a means to lobby
for some non-transparent interest.
NGO and LGO participation from the floor should not be confined to
the one prepared statement per session. NGOs/LGOs should be allowed
to intervene on specific agenda items, as the respective Chair sees
appropriate, so that they can contribute constructively to the
debate. This should apply to all Bodies. NGOs/LGOs should be granted
access to all meetings.
The suggestion of sending out documents in
advance to the sector "coordinator" (item 19 of FCCC7SBI/1997/14) is
a good one, but again raises the issue of selecting and accrediting
the most legitimate coordinator. Presently, it is ICLEI's experience
that in some instances an organization posing as a local authority
representative has not been a legitimate representative, even at the
national level, of local authorities. We would submit documentation
on this if requested by the Secretariat.
The SBI should encourage national governments to include local
government expertise and experience in drafting their national
communications.
5. Concerning public awareness on climate change,
local government is that level of government closest to the people
and cities have undertaken a variety of community and stakeholder
projects to stimulate broader awareness of climate change, also
working together with local businesses and local NGOs. Hence local
authorities have a major role to play in educating the public on
climate change and can help the Parties and the Secretariat to move
this Article of the Convention forward.
Local authorities see no need for a new mechanism
for consultations, especially a mechanism that would be set up for
only one constituency.
As regards the geographic distribution of accredited NGOs, ICLEI would like to ask the Secretariat to note that ICLEI has regional offices in the following locations: World Secretariat, Toronto, Canada; European Secretariat, Freiburg, Germany; Asia Pacific Secretariat Japan Office, Tokyo, Japan; Office of the Africa Regional Coordinator, Harare, Zimbabwe; Office of the Latin America Regional Coordinator, Santiago, Chile, ICLEI US Office, Berkeley, California USA.
I offer the following reflections and hope that this will aid in
your consideration:
1. Transparency should be incorporated into the accreditation and
registration process. This may include a one-time background record
filing with the secretariat.
If one continues to assume that the desire to participate in
Convention deliberations signals support of Convention aims, then
there is no need for a formal declaration of support.
It is more than clear that NGO constituencies are not homogeneous
in their opinions on matters of concern. A broadening of
opportunities for the expression of differing views may be beneficial
for the future work of the parties as we move into the implementation
phase of the convention. This should not be used to make the process
more cumbersome but make officially available more than one source of
information for consultations and technical input.
The SBSTA model of NGO floor participation should be made
available at all meetings of the Convention. This would greatly
facilitate the flow of accurate information.
No new mechanisms for consultations are needed in order to reflect
the above points.
1. In order to make these submissions available on electronic systems, including the World Wide Web, these contributions have been electronically scanned and/or retyped. The secretariat has made every effort to ensure the correct reproduction of the texts as submitted.