






 |
|
AIDE-MEMOIRE
18th Montreal Process
Working Group Meeting
Buenos Aires, Argentina - November 25 - 29, 2007
The
Montreal Process Working Group on Criteria and Indicators for the Conservation
and Sustainable Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests held its 18th meeting in Buenos Aires, Argentina, November 25-29, 2007. The Montreal Process includes Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Russian Federation, United States of America, and Uruguay, which together represent 60% of the world's forests.
|
| |
|
- Participation.The
meeting included 25 participants, including representatives from 11 Montreal Process countries. A list of
participants is attached as Annex A
- Meeting Opening.Dr.
Tomas Schlichter, Chair of the 18th Montreal Process Working Group
meeting, opened the meeting. He introduced
dignitaries, Sr. Miguel Pellerano, Subsecretario de Planificacion y Politica
Ambiental, Secretaria de Ambiente y
Desarollo Sustentable and Dr. Nestor Oliveri, Director del Instituto Nacional
de Tecnologia Agropecuaria, who welcomed the group to Argentina and presented a
brief overview of their respective portfolios.
The
Chair introduced the tentative agenda, which was adopted by the Working Group.
The agenda is attached as Annex B.
Ing.
Lucila Grassi, a member of the organization committee of the World Forestry
Congress XIII, which will be held in Buenos Aries, October 18-25, 2009,
reported on the committeefs progress in preparing for this important event. The Congress is held every 6 years and over
6,000 participants from 150 countries are expected. Montreal Process members
were encouraged to attend, and contribute papers and other resources to the
meeting.
MSc
Gustavo Braier, a forest economist, reported on Argentinafs new forest
initiatives to improve dialog among stakeholders, such as professionals, forest
owners and managers, non-governmental organizations, and scientists, through
several fora.
- Country
Experiences with Criteria and Indicators. Countries
shared briefly their progress and achievements in 2007 related to criteria and indicators. Countriesf experiences and highlights are
attached as Annex C. The
opportunity to share and learn from other countries experiences was recognized
as a major benefit of meeting together. The
Working Group members agreed to add sharing experiences as a regular agenda
item for future Working Group meetings.
- Revised
Technical Notes for Criteria 1-6.Technical
Advisory Committee Convener Dr. Tim Payn, introduced a report on a proposed set
of revised Technical Notes for Criteria 1-6,
which included rationale statements and approaches to measurement for the
indicators agreed in Sapporo, Japan in July 2006. The Working Group reviewed and discussed the revised technical notes for
Criteria 1-6, and adopted a final set of technical notes. (See Annex D).
The
Working Group expressed its appreciation to China for hosting the 10th
Technical Advisory Committee meeting (Beijing, China - July 2007), as well as
to Dr. Payn, along with the Technical Advisory Committee members, for their
hard work and outstanding contribution.
- Montreal
Process Strategic Action Plan. Simon
Bridge (Canada) introduced the draft Strategic Action Plan, which a subgroup of
countries (Argentina, Australia, Chile, China, Japan, New Zealand, and United
States of America) had developed following the 17th Working Group meeting
in Sapporo, Japan.
The Working Group reviewed and discussed the draft Strategic Action Plan
and adopted the framework and basis for a Strategic Action Plan for the
Montreal Process (See Annex E) to guide and focus the work of
the Montreal Process for the period 2009-2015 under five strategic directions.
- Enhance
the relevance and use of the Montreal Process Criteria and Indicators for policy-makers, practitioners and others;
- Strengthen
member country capacity to monitor, assess, and report on forest trends and
progress toward sustainable forest management using the Montreal Process
Criteria and Indicators;
- Enhance
collaboration and cooperation with forest-related regional and international
organizations and instruments, and other criteria
and indicators processes;
- Enhance
communication on the value of criteria and indicators and the accomplishments
of the Montreal Process; and
- Enhance
the effectiveness and efficiency of the Montreal
Process Working Group and its Technical Advisory Committee and its Liaison
Office.
The
Working Group endorsed the five strategic directions and the associated
descriptions, and requested Canada to continue to lead the work, as the
subgroup chair, on contextual
sections of the
Strategic Action Plan, such as introduction, added values and conclusion, and the Implementation Plan for 2009 and 2010.
The following
schedule was agreed:
- an initial draft of the contextual sections and the
Implementation Plan of the Strategic Action Plan will be circulated by the subgroup chair to all Working Group members
for
review and comments by
March 1, 2008; and
- a
final draft will
be circulated
by the
subgroup chair to
all Montreal Process Working Group members no later than 30 days before the 19th
Working Group meeting for
final approval at that meeting.
The
Implementation Plan will be reviewed and
revised, as needed, at each Working Group meeting.
The
Working Group expressed its appreciation to Canada and Simon Bridge for their
hard work and outstanding contribution.
- Criterion
7
Sub-group
Chair Hiro Miyazono (Japan), introduced the draft revised Criterion 7 indicators
developed after an intersessional meeting in October 2006. The Working Group reviewed
and agreed to a process to finalize the revised Criterion 7 indicators as
follows:
- A
small group (Japan-Liaison Office, New Zealand-Technical Advisory Committee,
Australia, Argentina, USA, Canada) led by Australia, will work intersessionally
to develop a revised draft Criterion 7 document to be circulated to all Working
Group members by March 15, 2008. It will
work primarily by e-mail / telephone conference calls.
- Working
Group members will review and provide comments electronically to Australia on
the draft Criterion 7 document by April 15, 2008.
- The
small group will revise the draft Criterion 7 document based on comments
received and provide them to the Technical Advisory Committee by May 15, 2008.
- The
Technical Advisory Committee will develop rationale statements and approaches
to measurement for the Criterion 7 indicators, using the same format used in as
Criteria 1-6, and with no change to indicator language. The Liaison Office will circulate the draft
Criterion 7 document to Working Group members no later than 30 days before the
19th Working Group meeting for final approval at that meeting.
The
Working Group expressed its appreciation to subgroup Chair Hiro Miyazono for
his leadership and dedication to the intersessional work, and to the United
States for hosting the meeting.
- 3rd
Edition of the Montreal Process Critesria
& Indicator Booklet.Stephanie
Caswell (USA) introduced the draft revisions and updates for the 3rd edition of the Montreal Process Criteria and Indicators which was adopted by the Working Group (See Annex F). The Working Group recommended a web based
publication for 3rd Edition with existing Criterion 7 indicators and
a published 4th Edition with new Criterion 7 indicators ready for
World Forestry Congress. The United
States, in cooperation with the Liaison Office, will lead the effort in
producing both booklets in English, including a template for translation into other Montreal Process languages.
- 2009
Overview Report.The
Working Group agreed that the Technical Advisory Committee will develop a
format, desired content, and specific steps to produce the Montreal Process 2009
Overview Report for consideration and approval at the 19th Working Group
Meeting.
- Cooperation
Among MP Countries.The
Working Group welcomed a presentation by Iaconis Ariana (Argentinafs Secretaria de
Agricultura, Ganaderia Pescay Alimentos) on her 7-week course of study in
Japan on gCriteria
& Indicators and Forest Certificationh. The Working Group also
welcomed the new cooperative project between Argentina and New Zealand on adaptation
of forests to climate change, which is an outgrowth of relationships developed
through the Montreal Process.
- Liaison
Office. The
Working Group welcomed the successful transition of the Liaison Office from
Canada to Japan in January 2007 and the appointment of the new Liaison Officer,
Mr.Yuuichi Sato.
The
Working Group requested the Liaison Office to develop a calendar of international
events and distribute to member countries to enhance reporting on Montreal
Process activities.
- 11th
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting.The
Working Group welcomed the offer by Russia to explore the opportunities for
hosting the 11th Technical Advisory Committee meeting in August,
2008. At this meeting, the Technical Advisory Committee will:
- Develop
a format and desired content and the specific steps to produce the 2009
Overview Report; and
- Develop
draft technical notes for Criterion 7.
- 19th Working Group Meeting.The Working Group welcomed the offer by Russia to explore the opportunities
for hosting the Montreal Process Working Group 19 meeting in late September
/ early October 2008. At this meeting, the Working
Group will:
- Consider
the adoption of the Strategic Action Plan Contextual sections (A, B, and D) and
Implementation Annex to the Strategic Action Plan;
- Consider
the adoption of the new Criterion 7 indicators with rationale statements and
approaches to measurement;
- Finalize
preparations for Montreal Process activities at the World Forestry Congress
XIII;
- Finalize
the format, content, and the specific steps to produce the 2009 Overview Report;
and
- Conduct
other business as needed.
The
meeting expressed its deep appreciation to the chair of the Working Group, Dr. Tomas
Schlichter and to the people of Buenos Aires, and the Government of Argentina,
represented especially by the Instituto Nacional de Tecnologia Agropecuaria,
the Secretaria de Agricultura, Ganaderia, Pesca y Alimentos, and the Secretaria
de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sustentable for their hospitality in co-hosting the 18th
meeting of the Montreal Process Working Group.
Top of Page  |
| |
|
|