Twenty-eighth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA-28) - Evening Session

Dear colleagues, please take your seats. Please take your seats. Now we'll start our meeting. Good day, dear delegates. Welcome back. We have not been together in this room since Wednesday morning. However, I know that we have all been very busy. During this plenary, we will hear from— report back from the co-chairs of the contact group that have met since our last plenary. We will then return to item 2, election of officers. And then consider our first conference room papers. We have a considerable amount of work to do in this session, so I count on your spirit of cooperation and compromise to get us through. We'll begin with report— report back from co-chairs of each of the contact groups that met since our last plenary on Wednesday morning. I will proceed in order of agenda number. Let us begin with a report from the Contact Group on item 3. Now I would like to invite Ms. Sané. Ms. Sané, you have the floor. Please give the microphone to Netherlands.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. My co-chair, Paulina Stoa of Chile, and I are very pleased to report back to you on the progress made in the Contact Group on Agenda Item 3, on planning, monitoring, reporting, and review, and its 2 sub-items, 3A, on the global report, and 3B, on the monitoring framework. The group has met 3 times since our last report to plenary. On 29th of July from 8:15 to 11, on 30th of July from 3 to 6:10 PM, and the third meeting was this evening from 5 to 7 PM. Based on agreement at the second session, my co-chair and I, with the support of the Secretariat, have restructured the first non-paper in line with the key messages of the Global Report. This non-paper was revised for the 3rd and the 4th meeting of the Contact Group. All of the meetings we had a full room with over 150 people and about 25 parties taking the floor and allowing observers as needed. We are very pleased to report that a great amount of progress has been made on this agenda item. We mainly addressed the operational part of the decision, and only a few sets of brackets are left in that part. We do still have work to do on the PPs, so we will require an additional contact group, which we'll have tonight. And we're looking forward to complete our work tonight. Please note that our group has decided to split the recommendation into 2 recommendations, and thus I will be presenting 2 recommendations back to plenary tomorrow. These will be labeled as A and as B, which is already reflected in the non-paper. Regarding the monitoring framework, the co-chairs of the Friends of the Chair on item 3B reported to the contact group. They met twice and have largely completed their work, including a review of the terms of reference of a possible ad tech. We greatly appreciate the work of Barbara Engels from Germany, and Ntaka Tsidada from South Africa. I thank all the delegates for their constructive inputs and their strong engagement on this agenda item. We're looking forward to finalize this tonight with as much clean text as possible. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Sané, and your co-chair, Ms. Paulina of Chile, and all the members of the contact group. Next, let us hear a report from the contact group on item 4, E-BASE. Mr. Dixon of Zimbabwe, you have the floor. Give the microphone to Zimbabwe.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, my co-chair, Mr. Jan Plesnik of the Czech Republic, I am pleased to report back to you on the progress made yesterday and this morning in the Contact Group on Agenda Item 4, relating to matters related to the work of IBIS. Chair, we had good discussions based on the non-paper that you prepared for us and other delegates. Thank you very much to everyone's constructive spirit. We were able to go through the entire document and made good progress. It is clear from the discussions that the parties place great importance on the work of IBIS and in particular the business and biodiversity assessment for the implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework. While several parts of the text were agreed, we were unable to reach consensus on all parts of the text in the contact group despite the very collegial and constructive and very encouraging atmosphere. The issues in the text of the CRP that are still in brackets will require further consultations and discussions to resolve. The brackets are of a similar nature to those from Sub-27 recommendation on IBIS this body adopted last year, but on a much lesser scale. Whilst my co-chair and I are confident that the unresolved issues in the CRP can be resolved in time, our suggestion, Mr. Chair, would be not to discuss the CRP this evening or further during this meeting, and instead leave the unresolved issues for COP17 to address. In closing, I would like to thank all the delegates for their constructive inputs and strong engagement during the contact and for the trust they have shown in my co-chair and myself. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Dixon, and your co-chair, Mr. Jane of Republic— the Czech Republic, and all the members of the Contact Group. Next, I will hear a report back from the co-chairs of the Contact Group on Item 5, Synthetic Biology. Ms. Martha of Namibia, you have the floor.

Good evening, Chair, distinguished delegates. My co-chair and I met 4 times. So the contact group on synthetic biology met for the 3rd time on Thursday, 30th July, from 19:30 to 23 hours, and the 4th time on Friday, today, 31st July, from 11 to 2:30.

Thank you.

The Contact Group completed its considerations on the draft recommendation contained in the non-paper on item 5, Synthetic Biology. To consider the full document, the session was divided into 2 90-minute segments, with the first dedicated to advancing the discussions on the draft recommendations and the second to make our Sorry, Chair, I need to repeat that one. To consider the full document, the session was divided into 2 90-minute segments, with the first dedicated to advancing the discussions on the draft recommendations and the second to make our best attempt to finalize the thematic action plan. The Contact Group worked very hard and had robust and enriching discussions. My co-chair and I were heartened to see the flexibility and willingness to advance the discussions and make the best use of our time here at this meeting. As such, the progress during the session was substantial. And the Contact Group concluded consideration of the draft recommendations, which will be forwarded to the Conference of the Parties. The group also almost finished addressing the thematic action plan. In terms of the future work, the Contact Group agreed that a stocktake report which compiles, synthesizes, and reviews the work conducted on synthetic biology since 2010 should be conducted. The report will also take into account the important work of other international organizations. The text related to this section only was almost clean. However, views differed on the further process involving the ad hoc technical expert group and further exploration of specific topics of synthetic biology, and a potential methodology for assessing its impact remained. The discussions resulted in many brackets. Regarding the thematic action plan, the contact group decided— considered the majority of the plan. Only the last sections from 3.1b to 3.4 remain unaddressed. However, a limited number of brackets remain in the plan itself. Following the last sessions, a conference room paper who was prepared to reflect the outcome of the discussions and to facilitate further considerations by the subsidiary body. In closing, my co-chair and I would like to sincerely thank all delegates for their collegial atmosphere, the cooperative spirit, and constructive engagement. We believe that we have made good progress. And finally, I would like to thank my co-chair, Ms. Valeria Giovannelli from Italy, for assisting me with this task. And our heartfelt appreciation, I and my co-chair, goes to the Secretariat for all the assistance we received. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Martha, and your co-chair Valeria of Italy. and all the members of the Contact Group. Next, we will hear a report back from Ms. Leticia of South Africa, co-chair of the Contact Group on item 6, Sustainable Wildlife Management. Ms. Leticia, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are grateful for the third contact group opportunity that we were given on item 6 regarding sustainable wildlife management. This helped us address the task that you gave us, which included addressing the draft recommendation and the annex containing the draft global guidance. As you have seen, Chair, Many technical issues were resolved through the work of the Contact Group, even though we still have some brackets. My co-chair and I are happy to report that with today's session, we managed to complete the discussions of the whole document, which we believe has positioned us in a good place with significant progress. I want to thank all delegates for the hard work and for a positive and cooperative spirit of compromise that prevailed throughout the work of the Contact Group. I also want to thank my co-chair, Ms. Carolina Caceres from Canada, for her invaluable support. Finally, Chair, we would like to thank The Secretariat for their dedication and commitment in providing support to us. Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, Miss Letitia, and your co-chair, Miss Carolina of Canada, and all the members of the contact group. Maintenant, je vais donc now.

We will hear the report from the co-chairs for the group on item 7, strategic review and the work program on protected areas. So I will give the floor to Ms. Adele Fardieu of France. Ms. Adele Fardieu, you have the floor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Chair.

On behalf of Mrs. Juliana Susanti of Indonesia and myself, I wish to report that the contact group on item 7 met 3 times over the recent days. The group first met on Wednesday afternoon, beginning with an exchange of views on the proposal to add a 5th program element on ecological connectivity. As views diverged on how to address it, we invited interested parties to meet informally and report back at the next session. The group then turned to the complementary actions in the annex of the draft decision. Of the 34 actions across the 23 KMGBF targets, it considered the first 10 related to targets 1, 2, and 3. This allowed some fundamental issues relevant to the entire draft decisions to be addressed at the outset. The group met for a second time on Thursday evening and heard a report back from the informal consultation on the proposed 5th programme element on ecological connectivity. Regrettably, the group was unable to produce agreed text and the issue remains unsolved. The group then continued by considering the remaining complementary actions and addressed 20 in the time available. The group held its final session this afternoon. It completed its consideration of the proposed activities related to the updated programme of work, resolved some of the brackets remaining from earlier sessions, and considered the preambular and first few operational paragraphs of the draft recommendation. Throughout, the atmosphere in the group remained constructive, and while divergent views persisted on some texts despite various efforts, there was an overall willingness to find ways forward, constrained mainly by the time available. As co-chair, we wish to thank all colleagues for their careful and constructive efforts and the Secretariat for their support. Merci, Monsieur le Président.

Thank you, Chair.

Merci.

Thank you, Ms. Adèle Fardou of France. Thank you also to your co-chair, Ms. Liana, and to all the members of your group.

Let us hear from the Contact Group on Item 8, Marine and Coastal Biodiversity. Ms. Ollie of the United Kingdom, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. The Contact Group on Marine and Coastal Biodiversity, which I had the pleasure to co-chair with Ms. Patsy Contardo, met 3 times this week with its final meeting taking place yesterday from 10:00 AM to 1:00 PM. Text proposals in the early submission of statements, as well as proposals raised in the first reading of this document, indicated many common views amongst parties on most of the issues addressed in the document, as well as new proposals for new paragraphs and some divergent views on the annexes of the document that dealt with voluntary guidelines and a new informal advisory group. Over the course of its 3 meetings, the Contact Group was able to work through the whole document, including the 2 annexes, multiple times, and as such made all efforts to resolve areas of divergent views reflected in the brackets. I'm pleased to note that we made significant progress thanks to a strong spirit of collaboration and compromise by the delegates, and we were able to find consensus on most of the issues in the document. Nevertheless, brackets remain in the document, including in both annexes, reflecting issues that the Contact Group could not resolve. It was clear that these issues can likely only be resolved at the Conference of the Parties, as most are generally of a political nature, and many of the brackets are related to the same underlying issues, such as perspectives on agreement under UNCLOS on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction. Overall, we made good progress, and that contact group has fulfilled its mandate. I would like to thank all delegates for their hard work, flexibility, and spirit of compromise in the contact group, my co-chair Patsy for her collaboration, and the team within the Secretariat for their superb support. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Kelly, and your co-chairs, Ms. Contardo and all the members of the Contact Group. Colleagues, before we take up our final substantive agenda item, we have some unfinished business from Monday— from Monday morning to complete. Let's move We now move to item 2, organizational matters, election of officers. Colleagues, when we consider item 2, election of officers, on Monday morning we heard nominations from African states. Latin American and Caribbean states, and Western European and other states. I encourage members of the Bureau from the Asia-Pacific states and from the Eastern European states to continue consultation with their respective regional groups so they would be ready with their nominations. I would like now to return to this item. I now open the floor to the Asia-Pacific states and the Eastern European states to present their nomination. Now I call India— Indonesia, please.

Thank you, Chair. The Asia-Pacific region is delighted to share an update. The group has agreed that Mr. Obaid Ali Al-Samsi from the United Arab Emirates will serve as a new bureau member representing the region, succeeding Ms. Juliana, which is me, from Indonesia. Mr. Al-Samsi is a biodiversity expert at the Ministry of Climate Exchange and Environment of the United Arab Emirates. With over 10 years of experience in biodiversity conservation and the implementation of multilateral environmental agreements. He has represented the UAE in numerous meetings and negotiations under the Convention on Biological Diversity, contributing to scientific, technical, and policy discussions on the implementation of KMGBF. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Indonesia. Now I give the floor to Armenia.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Could you please give the floor to Czechia, please? Mr. Plesnik will introduce our candidate.

Thank you, Armenia. I give the floor to Mr. Jen from Secretary-General, you have the floor.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. The regional group from Central and Eastern Europe is pleased to announce its nomination of Dr. Stijana Prokić from Serbia. Snejana has been not only respected scientist, but also displays a rich experience in policy, having been involved in various activities at national, pan-European, and global level, among others serving as CBD Bureau member So she combines in a reasonable way science policy and science policy interface. So we are very sure that she contribute— will contribute to the various activities of the bureau. And at the end, allow me also on behalf of my co-chair to express deep appreciation to colleagues from our group when seeking for the consensus and for very nice spirit of cooperation and friendship. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Czech Republic. Therefore, I would like to read out the nominated candidates for the African States, the nominated candidate is Mr. Joseph Sapunka from Sierra Leone. For the Asia-Pacific States, the nominated candidate is Mr. Ubaid Ali from the United Arab Emirates. For the Eastern European States, the nominated candidate is Ms. Snezana from Serbia. For the Latin American and Caribbean states, the nominated candidate is Mr. Ezequiel from Mexico. For Western European and other states, the nominated candidate is Julie from France. In accordance with the established practice of the subsidiary body, and if there are no objections, I propose that the nominees from these regions be elected by acclamation. Thank you, colleagues. The following are now duly elected members of the Bureau of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical, and Technological Advice. I will then read again the name. Mr. Joseph from Sierra Leone, Mr. Obeid Ali from the United Arab Emirates, Ms. Snezana from Serbia, Mr. Ezequiel from Mexico, and Ms. Julie from France. The new Bureau members are elected I extend my congratulations to them and invite them to attend the last Bureau meeting tomorrow morning as observers until the commencement of their terms of office at the end of SAPSAG 28. Colleagues, we have now completed agenda item 2. Let's move to the consideration of conference room papers. As we consider— as we consider our first conference room papers, I would like to emphasize the hard work that has gone into each and every one of them. They are all the outcomes of contact groups that spent considerable time and effort to reach this stage. The first CRP will be on Agenda Item 8, Marine and Coastal Biodiversity. I now propose that we begin our discussion, as I said earlier, with CRP 1. on Agenda Item 8, Marine and Coastal Biodiversity. The CRP was developed by the contact group, which met 3 times and advanced the text significantly, as explained by the co-chair of the contact group. Given that the document was reviewed multiple times on the contact group, I suggest that we approve CRP 1 as whole, as whole. Before doing so, I wish to invite the Secretariat to provide a minor clarification regarding a footnote in the document. Secretariat, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. This clarification is regarding footnote 7 on paragraph 1. We have received questions regarding the long and complicated link shown at the end of the footnote. As such, this link will be changed to the following: www.cbd.gov.

Thank you.

.int/marine/ebsa/revised-tor-iag-on-ebsa.pdf.

It's, it's actually shorter.

This will be reflected in the L document.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Secretariat. Colleagues, the Contact Group worked hard on the text before us and has produced a balanced text that seems to take us as far as we can at this meeting. Colleagues, I see requests for the floor. Unfortunately, it is not my intention to open the floor for interventions. Colleagues, I once again ask if we can approve CRP 1 as a whole.

Aye.

Understanding that there will be ample opportunity at COP to work further on this document. Delegates, I appeal to you to please work with me. As we have heard, the Contact Group worked very hard with multiple reviews through the document and that the remaining bracketed text is related to issues that can only be resolved at COP. We have heard that there was a positive spirit of collaboration, and compromise in the Contact Group sessions. As such, I urge that we move to approve this item and respect the hard work of the Contact Group. Colleagues, can we please approve CRP 1 as whole? I see no more requests for the floor. CRP 1 is approved. We will produce— We will produce— Thank you. We have received an L document for this item. Now let's move to the next item, CRP 2, on Agenda Item 4, Matters Related to the Work Program of the Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Dear colleagues, We will now take up CRP 2 on item 4, matters related to the work program of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. This CRP was developed by the contact group, which met twice and advanced the text significantly, as explained by the co-chair of the contact group. The CRP before us has gone through a detailed review by the contact group. As such, and given the time pressure we are under, I suggest that we adopt CRP as a whole. Before I will do so, I will give the floor to the Secretariat for a correction to the CRP. Thank you, Secretariat, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair.

So a technical correction is required in paragraph 6 of the document. So on the second line in the English version, the word other should be added before the word deliverables so that that part of the sentence or paragraph would read invites parties, other governments, and relevant organizations to engage in the review process for the preparation of the assessments and other deliverables, where relevant, of the platform. This is to match the same language that's used in paragraphs 8 and paragraphs 10 of the CRP. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Secretariat. Colleagues, as the recommendation from Sub-SAT 28 already contains brackets, we'll need to come back to this topic at Thank you. To save our time during this plenary, I will urge us to not reopen this document at this stage. I will urge you to adopt the draft decision as it is. Colleagues, I once again ask if you can adopt CRP 2 as a whole. Delegates, I ask you to please— I see no more requests for the floor. CRP 2 is approved. We will produce an L document for this item. Dear delegates, that exhausts our time in plenary for this evening. Before we adjourn, I would like to give the floor to the Secretariat For some announcements. Secretariat, you have the floor.

Uh, thank you, Chair. Um, the contact group on item 3 will continue, um, following the adjournment of this plenary.

Actually, it's supposed to start at 9 PM.

Yes, in Conference Room 3-4 behind this room.

I remind you that audio and video recording during contact groups is prohibited. Still photographs are also not generally permitted in contact groups. Exceptionally, still photographs of text projected on the screen may be allowed in contact groups for use during the contact group discussions only.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Secretariat. Thank you, dear colleagues. The meeting is adjourned.