Distr.
GENERAL
FCCC/SBSTA/1997/11
22 September 1997
Original: ENGLISH
SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVICE
Seventh session
Bonn, 20-29 October 1997
Item 7 of the provisional agenda
ROSTER OF EXPERTS:
EXPERIENCE OF THE SECRETARIAT IN ITS USE
CONTENTS
Paragraphs Page
INTRODUCTION 1 - 5 2
Mandate and scope of the note 1 2
Background 2 - 4 2
Possible action by the Subsidiary Body for Scientific
and Technological Advice (SBSTA) 5 3
II. THE ROSTER 6 - 15 3
Current roster 6 - 8 3
Use of the roster 9 - 11 4
Processes of invitation and conduct of meetings 12 - 15 5
III. DISCUSSION 16 - 21 5
GE.97-
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Mandate and scope of the note
- The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice
(SBSTA), at its fifth session, requested the secretariat to
produce a report on its experience in using the roster of experts,
for its seventh session. This note responds to that request. It
describes how the nominees were obtained, the use of the roster
and the process of invitation. It also identifies several
procedural issues that have affected the use of the roster at this
early stage and provides a number of suggestions for improving the
process. It should be noted that the roster has only been used for
a few tasks. Therefore, the experience of the secretariat is
limited. An accompanying document
(FCCC/SBSTA/1997/INF.6) provides an overview of nominations to the
roster.
B. Background
- At its second session, the Conference of the Parties (COP), in
its decision 7/CP.2,(1) requested
the secretariat to expedite the preparation of reports on
adaptation technology and the terms of transfer of technology and
know-how conducive to mitigating and adapting to climate change,
and, in preparing these reports, to draw on nominees with
expertise in these fields from Parties. It further noted that such
a roster of experts and its use in facilitating the work of the
Convention secretariat should be evaluated by the SBSTA and the
Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI), taking into account the
ongoing discussion on Intergovernmental Technical Advisory
Panel(s) (ITAPs). The COP also requested the SBI to evaluate and
report on the transfer of technologies being undertaken between
Annex II Parties and other Parties, and to do so by drawing on a
roster of experts as referred to above.
- At its fourth session, the SBSTA noted that many
methodological topics are complex issues that could benefit from
the advice of experts. As in the case of technology and technology
transfer, the SBSTA requested the secretariat to draw on nominees
with expertise in these fields from Parties to provide advice on
methodological issues and to consider, inter alia, the
use of round tables, briefings and other means to facilitate
understanding of methodological issues by Parties, particularly
developing country Parties (FCCC/SBSTA/1996/20).
- At its fifth session, the SBSTA recalled the need as expressed
in decision 7/CP.2 to evaluate the use of the roster of experts in
facilitating the work of the Convention secretariat, taking into
account the ongoing discussion on ITAPs. It took note of the plans
of the secretariat to make use of the roster for preparing reports
on technology and technology transfer by,
inter alia, the seventh session. It requested the
secretariat to also prepare a report on its experience in using the
roster, for the seventh session (FCCC/SBSTA/1997/4).
C. Possible action by the SBSTA
- The SBSTA may wish to:
(a) Take note of this report as well as the information note on
nominations to the roster and, where necessary, provide guidance to
the secretariat on the use of the roster of experts;
(b) Recall its intention to expand the roster to include experts
in the field of methodologies as provided for at its fourth session
and, in so doing, urge the secretariat to seek additional nominees
with methodological expertise from Parties, reflecting the priority
areas in the work programme;
(c) Request Parties to review the information on the current
roster and points of contacts, and to submit, as soon as possible,
additional nominations to the secretariat, particularly of experts
with backgrounds related to the economic and financial aspects of
transfer of technology and know-how, such as bilateral aid
programmes, multilateral lending, and private sector banking, and to
nominate experts with the particular methodological expertise that
would be sought by the secretariat; and
(d) Develop a recommendation for a draft decision regarding the
roster of experts, to be adopted by COP 3 and, in accordance with the
division of labour with the SBI, keep the SBI informed about such
recommendation.
II. THE ROSTER
A. Current roster
- In response to decision 7/CP.2, the secretariat sent on 22
August 1996 a letter to Parties requesting the nomination of
experts to be included in a roster on technology transfer. The
letter included guidance to the Parties concerning the nomination
procedure and the criteria for inclusion. It included a list of
over a hundred specific fields of expertise considered by the
secretariat to be relevant to the assigned tasks. It also
requested Parties to forward to the secretariat a curriculum vitae
and an application form for each nominee. Subsequently, at its
fifth and sixth sessions, the SBSTA invited Parties to forward
additional nominees to the roster.
- A preliminary list of nominees was made available to the
Parties in a conference room paper during the fourth session of
the SBSTA. An updated list on nominees and the points of contact
for each Party is provided in FCCC/SBSTA/1997/INF.6.
- The current roster contains 312
nominees(2) from 44 Parties of
which 184 are from
Annex I Parties(3) and 128 from
non-Annex I Parties. The five most frequently represented fields of
expertise in the present roster include the following:
Number of experts
- Energy, technology and know-how 47
- Natural resources management 44
- Mitigation, planning and management 38
- Water resources management 27
- Environmental economics 24
B. Use of the roster
- The secretariat has used the roster to obtain assistance with
three reports, that is, on adaptation technologies, terms of
transfer of technology and know-how, and technology information
centres and networks. In order to do so, the secretariat convened
three meetings as reported in documents FCCC/SB/1997/3 and
FCCC/SB/1997/4. In the process of holdings these meetings, the
secretariat used 15 nominated experts from non-Annex I Parties and
six from Annex I Parties. In addition, four experts from
international organizations participated. In one case, a meeting
was held in conjunction with a meeting of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in order to encourage
co-ordination. The secretariat provided funding for participation
by experts from eligible Parties in accordance with normal
practice and the availability of resources.
- The secretariat has sought advice from the experts on the
broad direction of its work and on activities underway within
national institutions and international organizations. It has also
used the experts to review, via electronic means, technical papers
on adaptation (TP/1997/3), temperature adjustments (TP/1997/4) and
activities of Parties included in Annex II related to technology
transfer (FCCC/SBSTA/1997/13). In so doing, it has sought to
involve experts at other stages in the preparation of technical
reports. In the future, the secretariat may seek to involve
experts in other activities such as the preparation of draft
material.
- Because of the emphasis given to the methodological work
programme in the budget for the next biennium (FCCC/SBI/1997/16
and FCCC/SBSTA/1997/6), the secretariat will, in the near future,
seek nominees from governments with expertise reflecting the
priorities for the programme as identified by the SBSTA.
C. Processes of invitation and conduct of
meetings
- The meetings held by the secretariat were limited in size to
encourage discussions, but also because of available resources.
The goal was to have meetings with 10-12 participants. In
selecting participants for meetings, the secretariat sought to
balance scientific and technical expertise on the one hand, and
regional experience on the other.
- The invitation process for the meetings included the
following:
(a) An identification of the objectives of the
meeting;
(b) A review of the roster to identify experts with the required
scientific and regional backgrounds;
(c) An inquiry via an informal letter/e-mail to the expert to
determine his/her availability and interest;
(d) The issuance of a formal invitation, after availability and
interest are confirmed;
(e) The transmittal of a letter to the nominating government to
inform it of the
invitation and to request financial support for travel, as
necessary; and
(f) The provision of assistance with travel
arrangements.
- The agenda for each meeting was flexible. It was designed to
meet the information needs of each report. However, two common
elements were the election of a chairperson from among the experts
and initial presentations by the
experts.(4) The purpose of the
first element was to emphasize the independent role of the experts
vis-a-vis the secretariat, while the purpose of the second element
was to ensure that each expert was given an opportunity to provide
information based on his/her experience.
- After each meeting, all participants received a draft copy of
the meeting report for comments. The final meeting reports may be
found in documents FCCC/SB/1997/3 and FCCC/SB/1997/4.
III. DISCUSSION
- The experience of the secretariat in using the roster has
been positive except for the procedural issues listed below.
In all cases, the participants demonstrated a high level of
competence and a great deal of interest. They provided
presentations that were well prepared and contributed thoughtfully
to the discussions. The chairpersons also made special
contributions by guiding the deliberations of the groups and
ensuring that meeting reports were prepared for use by the
secretariat.
- The secretariat encountered three difficulties with the
process of using experts.
- First, it was difficult to ensure a balance among
scientific and technical areas of expertise and regional
experience in each specific meeting. The secretariat can only
afford to issue a limited number of invitations because it is
necessary to keep the size of its meetings rather small. If some
invited experts are not able to attend a meeting at the last
minute, it may be impossible to invite substitutes and the balance
of a meeting can turn out to be different than anticipated. In the
case of the meeting on terms of transfer, the secretariat has
sought the participation, over the course of two and a half
months, of 22 experts from 13 countries and four international
organizations. Of these, 16 invitations were declined because of
conflicting schedules or other factors, including acts of war, so
that the secretariat had to reconsider the scientific and regional
balance of the meeting. In the future, the secretariat will try to
ensure adequate participation by issuing invitations earlier and,
within the budgetary possibilities, by inviting several more
experts than would be strictly necessary.
- Second, the roster contains only a limited number of
experts in some fields, particularly those related to the
economic and financial aspects of transfer of technology. As the
secretariat is requested to provide information on such topics in
the future, it may be necessary to update the roster with
additional nominees.(5)
- Third, it was difficult to obtain sufficient participation
of experts from Annex II Parties. One reason may be that the
secretariat does not cover the travel expenses of such
participants and another reason may be that experts often do not
fully recognize the importance of their potential contribution.
The secretariat will modify the invitation process identified in
paragraph 13 so as to inform government contact points whenever an
inquiry of availability is sent to the expert. This may enable
countries, if necessary, to provide early support to the process,
including considering the financing of travel.
- Finally, the roster has many more nominees in some fields than
the secretariat may be able to use in the next biennium. Parties
should be aware that nominating experts may raise expectations
among them concerning their participation. Some experts may in the
future be less willing to be on a roster, unless they are called
upon to actively participate.
- - - - -
1. For decisions adopted by the Conference of
the Parties at its second session, see document
FCCC/CP/1996/15/Add.1.
2. Nominees who have not provided a curriculum
vitae or an application form have not been included. Also, two
nominees did not specify their field of expertise. Therefore, only
310 nominees are listed in document
FCCC/SBSTA/1997/INF.6.
3. One Annex I Party nominated over 60 experts.
4. In the case of the meeting on terms of
transfer, the group decided that no chairperson was necessary due to
the limited number of attendees.
5. In a few cases, the review of the roster, as
indicated under step (b) in paragraph 13, caused the secretariat to
informally request additional nominees from national contact points.