IAASTD BUREAU MEETING SAN JOSE, COST RICA

1

IAASTD BUREAU MEETING

SAN JOSE, COST RICA

DECISIONS OF THE BUREAU

NOVEMBER 1-3, 2006

2

Item 1: Bureau Comments on the Global & Sub-Global Assessments

• Decisions:– Bureau comments on each of the global

chapters will be communicated to the CLAs, LAs and Review Editors on Monday

– Bureau comments on each of the sub-global chapters will be communicated to the sub-global CLAs

3

Item 2: Flexibility regarding author assignments

• Action Item: Need to add authors to global and sub-global reports and/or move authors between chapters

• Decisions:– Secretariat has authority to coordinate and make

decisions with respect to skills required.– Secretariat has authority to assign new authors and

reassign current authors as needed– Secretariat will use “No Objection” method to provide

information to Bureau members– When skills gaps are identified – Secretariat will

request Bureau members advice on new authors

4


• Action Item: Can authors be dropped if they are not contributing to the process

• Decisions:– Following discussions between Secretariat and CLAs

- authors who have made no contribution to the process will be dropped and not invited to future meetings

– For authors who may have made some contribution which is not considered adequate in terms of quantity or quality – the CLAs will discuss issue with Secretariat and reach a final decision

– Team members writing the chapter will decide on the final authorship for each chapter

5


• Action Item: How do you deal with non-performing CLAs?

• Decisions:– Secretariat has substantive and serious

discussions with CLA and provides feedback from team members.

– Secretariat continues to monitor the situation closely

6


• Action Item: What recourse is there when CLA(s) disregard certain views and contributions made by chapter authors

• Decisions:– Secretariat discusses with author and review

editors to understand why views have not been taken into account and facilitates discussion with CLAs and Chapter Teams

7

Item 3: Global Report Section II – Plausible futures scenarios

• Action Items:

Serious concerns expressed on Section II (i.e. Chapters 4-6) of the Global Report

Bureau not comfortable with models used or multiple-scenario approach used in Chapters 5-6

8


• Decisions:– Options voted on:

• Option I:– Chapter 4 – Confirmed as a historical review and critical

analysis of drivers, models and tools and all projections which are already in the literature

– Chapter 5 – Short Chapter with a Baseline World (i.e. “Business as Usual”) with a set of variations and experiments around this baseline world.

– No Chapter 6• Option II:

– Chapter 4 – Confirmed as a historical review and critical analysis of drivers, models and tools and all projections, which are already in the literature

– No work on modelling and no Chapters 5 and 6

9


• Decisions Continued:– Majority of Bureau members voted to pursue Option 1– Sub-committee of Bureau members (Jim Harvey,

Harry Swain, Iain Mac Gillivray, Michel Dodet, Benedikt Haerlin) with the Secretariat will provide oversight and report back to the Bureau

- A note will be sent to the Bureau after the global authors meeting reporting back on their ability to deliver on the new approach – and which additional experts are required

- If the authors’ decide that the new approach cannot be adopted, then Option 2 will be the fallback

10

Item 4: Sub-Global Reports - Plausible Futures

• Action Item: Can the Sub-Global Assessments continue to use the plausible future approach if they wish?

• Decisions• Option I:

• All sub-global assessments will be consistent with what has been decided on Section II of Global Report - one single baseline with variations

• Option 2:• Sub-global assessments have the authority to make an independent

decision to pursue four MA type plausible future scenarios if they wish – but also use the approach of the global assessment

• Option 3:• Sub-global assessments have the authority to make an independent

decision to pursue plausible future scenarios if they wish.

11

Item 4: Sub-Global Reports - Plausible Futures

• Decision:– 13 Bureau members voted for Option 1 and

15 for Options 2 and zero for Option 3.– Therefore, Option 2 will be pursued.– Secretariat will advise sub-global CLAs on

Monday

12

Item 5: Preparation of Summary for Decision Makers

• Action Item: Decision on whether to retain original questions or approve list of revised questions

• Decision:– Bureau agreed (a vote of 16 to 2) to retain the Questions as originally

constructed for SDM – and not the revised version– The Bureau further agreed that it would be useful to reaffirm the context within

which these questions were postulated

• Questions confirmed are:– What are the development and sustainability challenges that can be

addressed through AKST?– What are the likely positive and negative consequences of AKST on the

development and sustainability goals?– What are the enabling conditions required to optimize the uptake and

diffusion of AKST?– What investments are needed to help realize the potential of AKST in

realizing the development and sustainability goals?

13

Item 5: Preparation of Summary for Decision Makers

• Action Item: Bureau to review and approve process• Decision:

– Bureau confirmed the process presented by the Secretariat with the addition of using a review editor for each SDM

• Prepared by the CLAs (or their designates) from the global and sub-global assessments in collaboration with co-chairs, director and members of the secretariat

• 10-15 page summary for the global assessment and 5-10 pages for each sub-global assessment

• Simultaneous expert and government review• Bureau to approve list of Review Editors who will participate in the

process – either from the existing set or a new person• SDM’s approved line by line at the plenary

14

Item 6: Preparation of Synthesis Report – Structure and Scope

• Action Item: Bureau review and approval of the Structure and Scope of the Synthesis Report

• Decisions:– Bureau Approved the following structure

• The Synthesis report will have an Introduction, Part I (20 pages) and Part II (30 pages)

• Good strong introduction – well written and dynamic which will set the stage

– Bureau Approved Structure and Scope of Part I• Synthesis of key global and sub-global assessment messages

(about 20 pages)– Synthesizes key findings from the global and sub-global assessments

in relation to the development goals– Summarizes findings that are globally relevant, while highlighting

regional/sub-regional differences

15


• Decisions Continued:– Bureau approved the list of thematic Issues to be

included in Part II (about 30 pages) of the Synthesis report

– Secretariat will provide individual paragraphs which will provide clarity on the scope of each of these issues and will be circulated to the Bureau for review and approval

– Bureau reconfirmed original listing:• Public and Private sector investments in AKST• Markets and Trade• Full range of NRM issues - availability and access including

emphasis on water, biodiversity, land degradation, etc.

16


• Decisions Continued: – Bureau confirmed addition of the following

issues• Additional thematic issues to be included

– Climate Change– Bioenergy– Human Health– Transgenics

• Additional cross cutting issues to be included– Community based innovation and traditional/indigenous

knowledge– Gender

17

Item 7: Preparation of Synthesis Report - Process

• Action Item: Bureau review and approval of the Process for the Synthesis Report

• Decisions:• Process approved for Part I:

– Prepared by a selection of CLAs and Review Editors– Secretariat will recommend the selection of CLAs, on a no-objection basis by the

Bureau– Timeline for submission of names to the Bureau: early January 2007

• Process approved for Part II:– Prepared by a selection of LAs and Review Editors and if appropriate CLAs who

may have worked on specific thematic issues– Secretariat will recommend authors for each issue after consulting CLAs– Normal procedures for author selection will prevail in requesting Bureau approval

(suggest more than total number needed, eg;., if we need 3-4 authors we would submit 6 names, if we need 2-3 authors we suggest 5 names)

– Timeline for submission of names to Bureau: early January 2007

18

Item 8: Conceptual Framework

• Action Item: Consolidated conceptual framework to be reviewed and approved by the Bureau

• Decision:– Attached Conceptual Framework Approved

19

Indirect Drivers

DemographicsEconomics / International tradeSocio-PolicyScience & technologyEducation, culture & ethicsBio-geophysical environment

Direct Drivers

Food demand, consumptionAvailability & management of natural

resourcesLand use

Climate changeEnergy

Labor

Agricultural Products & Services

AKSTResearch Policy

Innovation and IPR PolicyGeneration of AKST, including Local

Social Organizations

Access, control & distribution of:- Science

- Technology - Knowledge

- Inputs - Markets

- Credit, capital, assets

Development & Sustainability Goals

Decreased hunger & povertyImproved nutrition and human healthEnhanced livelihoods and equityEnvironmental sustainabilitySustainable economic development

Food Systems //Agricultural Products

& Services

Crops, livestock, fishTree products for food, fiber, biomass

Ecosystem services

Ne

two

rks

Institutio

ns

Processes

Knowledge

LearningIn

nova

tion

Actors

20

Item 9: Communications and Outreach

• Action: Need to create a dynamic and proactive Outreach and Communications Strategy which will be vital for success of the project

• Decisions:– Bureau confirmed the following Sub-committee

members: • Mark Holderness, Jeffrey McNeely, Momtaz Chowdhury,

Benedikt Haerlin, Daniel Rodriguez, Mark Zimsky, Iain MacGillivray, Dennis Lucey, Emile Frison, Catherine Rutivi

– Sub-committee agreed to bi-monthly teleconferences organized by the Secretariat

21


• Decisions continued:– Sub-committee to design strategy for:

• enhancing outreach so as to ensure a robust peer review process for 2nd order draft reports

• reaching out to other governments and stakeholders (not represented on the Bureau) to ensure awareness of IAASTD project, solicit participation in the peer-review process, attendance at inter-governmental plenary in November 2007, and uptake and use of the findings

• identifying and providing appropriate linkages with the other assessments ongoing or just completed

22


• Decisions continued:

• European and Canadian Bureau governments have agreed how to facilitate peer-review and outreach within their group

• European Bureau governments have agreed to identify names of other government officials within NAE and networks – possibly co-signed letter from governments and secretariat to mobilize participation

23


– Decisions Continued:• Secretariat agreed that the Assessments had to be more

user-friendly through an index of issues and a more comprehensive tables of content

• Bureau members agreed that they would put mechanism in place to facilitate peer-review prior to receiving the second-order drafts

• Outputs required for communication and dissemination:– User-friendly flyers, pamphlets and brochures– Self-standing Outreach Package which can be disseminated

and used broadly (e.g. power-point presentations, brochures, etc,)

– Press releases – Workshops, conferences, conventions, agency meetings, etc.

24

Item 10: Another Bureau Meeting prior to November 2007

• Action Item: Suggestion to have a Bureau meeting prior to final inter-governmental plenary in November 2007

• Decisions:– Agreement to hold an additional 2 day Bureau Meeting (the

Bureau recognized that this means an additional budget item of about $100,000

• The Director will try to raise the additional funds from otherl donors and offered to provide some support from the World Bank, if needed.

– To be held prior to the Meetings of the Global and Sub-global authors meetings in Capetown

– Attendance: Bureau members & a few CLAs to join this meeting– Timing and venue to be decided by the Secretariat and

communicated to the Bureau within the next few weeks

25

Item 11 – Intergovernmental Plenary November 2007

• Action Item: Agenda and Format for the meeting• Decisions:

• Bureau meeting prior to Intergovernmental Plenary –1 day• Review and approval global assessment - 2 days• Review and approve (simultaneously) the five sub-global

assessments – 1 day in a regional groups– Limited interpretation – SSA (French & English); LAC (Spanish

& English); CWANA (Arabic & English); NAE and ESAP (English only)

• Review and approve regional group recommendations – 0.5 days

• Review and approve Synthesis Report – 2 days

26

Item 12 – Budget

Decisions:– Bureau approved budget tables as presented in next

two tables– Bureau was advised that the Government of Sweden

has agreed to contribute $423,000 which would mitigate the shortfall.

– However, there is currently some uncertainty about the second contribution from the EC (Euro 250,000).

– If the EC contribution does not materialize – the Director will consult with the Bureau on how to meet the shortfall (including finding additional funding to meet the Bureau Meeting in April/May 2007

27

Original Budget vs. Actual & Projected Expenses

Item Original Budget Approved By Bureau

(US $)

Actual Expenses and Projections through June

2008 (US $)

Design Team, Plenary, Global and Sub-Global Authors Meetings

4.510,000 4,365,000

Sub-Global Institution Costs

Co-Chair’s Salary

720,000

-

844,000

80,000

Secretariat Costs 3,860,000 3,916,000

Communications and Outreach

Publications & Translation

Graphic Design of Synthesis Report

430,000

1,130,000

-

500,000

1,130,000

100,000

Honoraria and Stipend 150,000 204,000

Contingency 60,000 -

Total 10,860,000 11,139,000

28

Budget Summary

Item Original Budget

Approved By Bureau

(US $)

Actual Expenses and Projections through

June 2008 (US $)

Total 10,860,000 11,139,000

Funds Received and/or promised 10,715,408 10,715,408

SHORTFALL 144,592 423,592

29

Item 13 – Additions to Bureau Membership

Decisions:

– Bureau invites GFAR (executive secretary) to join the Bureau as an ex-officio member

– Bureau agrees to invite an additional NAE member (to replace Germany)

Documents

IAASTD BUREAU MEETING SAN JOSE, COST RICA