[ECA] Planning for PESC-4
Dr. Török Katalin
torok.katalin at okologia.mta.hu
Thu Mar 23 13:45:41 CET 2017
Dear Agnes,
Thanks for the update. Please find my comments regarding the Agenda in
the text.
Best regard,
Kati
2017.03.23. 10:51 keltezéssel, Agnes HALLOSSERIE írta:
> Dear all,
>
> Thank you for all the feedback provided regarding the organisation and
> content of PESC-4, that is very helpful!
>
> Please remember to register on this address if you plan to attend the
> conference so that we have the number of people right:
> http://www.fondationbiodiversite.fr/fr/fondation/evenements/divers.html
>
> Regarding the review work on the draft assessment and SPM, it will
> need good preparation indeed. We got a proposal by the IPBES
> Secretariat to join forces and to include the regional
> capacity-building workshop targeting NFPs for reviewing and preparing
> the approval of SPM in 2018 within PESC-4, since our objectives are
> well in line. This would be a form of partnership between IPBES and
> PESC, and a nice way to acknowledge PESC contribution to the
> implementation of IPBES work programme, including its rolling plan for
> capacity-building. The Secretariat highlighted that they are very keen
> to work with us on that regional matter, especially since the Plenary
> at its 5th session recalled several time that they should really build
> on and partner with existing initiatives.
>
> They will be able to provide us with support on how to conduct best
> the review for NFPs, and we could adapt from there to work with the
> other participants. We could have designed more general info sessions
> running in parallel with the break-out groups but I am afraid that it
> would scatter the group too much, with only a handful of participants
> per group. Instead, I suggest to design the break out sessions in an
> incremental fashion. As we have 3 sessions of 1.5 hours each, we could
> take some time in the first session to present the draft versions,
> identify key issues and challenges and therefore guide more closely
> the input from and discussion with participants, with the help of the
> assessment co-chairs and CLAs.
>
> We definitely have learned some lessons from last year (both in terms
> of reviewing the draft documents and discussing stakeholders needs)
> and we should keep it in mind when designing the sessions. If there is
> an issue or session you are particularly interested in, and if you
> would like to take over the organisation of that session, please let
> me know as soon as possible so that we can share the work! Note that
> there is a new session in the concept note about the organisers of the
> meeting, and if you intend to contribute more actively in the
> organisation of PESC but have not let me know yet, please shout :-) We
> will close registration after a last reminder next week and we will
> then look at the registered participants we can support for travel. We
> are still looking for additional funding to support travel for
> participants from Eastern Europe and Central Asia so please let me
> know if you can contribute, even if this is a small amount, it can
> allow one or two persons to attend.
>
> You can find attached the updated version of the concept note, with
> some changes following what happened at IPBES-5 and the discussions we
> had with IPBES Secretariat as mentioned above. *Could you please let
> me know if you have specific feedback by COB Friday 24 March
> (apologies for the short delay!)* so that the concept note can be
> submitted to the ECA assessment management committee when they meet
> next week? They will need to decide whether they can go ahead with the
> option of the capacity-building workshop being integrated within PESC-4.
>
> Thank you very much in advance and all the best,
>
> Agnes
>
>
> De : <hr.eggermont at gmail.com <mailto:hr.eggermont at gmail.com>> on
> behalf of hilde eggermont <h.eggermont at biodiversity.be
> <mailto:h.eggermont at biodiversity.be>>
> Répondre à : "h.eggermont at biodiversity.be
> <mailto:h.eggermont at biodiversity.be>" <h.eggermont at biodiversity.be
> <mailto:h.eggermont at biodiversity.be>>
> Date : mercredi 1 mars 2017 13:23
> À : "elisabeth.marquard at ufz.de <mailto:elisabeth.marquard at ufz.de>"
> <elisabeth.marquard at ufz.de <mailto:elisabeth.marquard at ufz.de>>
> Cc : Agnes HALLOSSERIE <agnes.hallosserie at fondationbiodiversite.fr
> <mailto:agnes.hallosserie at fondationbiodiversite.fr>>,
> "gyorgy.pataki at uni-corvinus.hu <mailto:gyorgy.pataki at uni-corvinus.hu>"
> <gyorgy.pataki at uni-corvinus.hu
> <mailto:gyorgy.pataki at uni-corvinus.hu>>, "baldi.andras at okologia.mta.hu
> <mailto:baldi.andras at okologia.mta.hu>" <baldi.andras at okologia.mta.hu
> <mailto:baldi.andras at okologia.mta.hu>>, "molnar.zsolt at okologia.mta.hu
> <mailto:molnar.zsolt at okologia.mta.hu>" <molnar.zsolt at okologia.mta.hu
> <mailto:molnar.zsolt at okologia.mta.hu>>, "eszti.k.kovacs at gmail.com
> <mailto:eszti.k.kovacs at gmail.com>" <eszti.k.kovacs at gmail.com
> <mailto:eszti.k.kovacs at gmail.com>>, "palotas.brigitta at okologia.mta.hu
> <mailto:palotas.brigitta at okologia.mta.hu>"
> <palotas.brigitta at okologia.mta.hu
> <mailto:palotas.brigitta at okologia.mta.hu>>,
> "torok.katalin at okologia.mta.hu <mailto:torok.katalin at okologia.mta.hu>"
> <torok.katalin at okologia.mta.hu
> <mailto:torok.katalin at okologia.mta.hu>>, PERIANIN Laurence
> <laurence.perianin at iucn.org <mailto:laurence.perianin at iucn.org>>,
> "Mariam.Akhtar-Schuster at dlr.de <mailto:Mariam.Akhtar-Schuster at dlr.de>"
> <Mariam.Akhtar-Schuster at dlr.de
> <mailto:Mariam.Akhtar-Schuster at dlr.de>>, "hans.keune at inbo.be
> <mailto:hans.keune at inbo.be>" <hans.keune at inbo.be
> <mailto:hans.keune at inbo.be>>, "p.huybrechts at biodiversity.be
> <mailto:p.huybrechts at biodiversity.be>" <p.huybrechts at biodiversity.be
> <mailto:p.huybrechts at biodiversity.be>>, "amor.torre at ips.unibe.ch
> <mailto:amor.torre at ips.unibe.ch>" <amor.torre at ips.unibe.ch
> <mailto:amor.torre at ips.unibe.ch>>, "eca-network at bebif.be
> <mailto:eca-network at bebif.be>" <eca-network at bebif.be
> <mailto:eca-network at bebif.be>>
> Objet : Re: [ECA] Planning for PESC-4
>
> Dear Agnes, Dear all
>
> First of all great thanks for the efforts!
>
> As for the options on the target audience, not easy indeed. With
> Option 1 - you may get more input with regard to the actual review of
> the SOD (from both knowledge holders & end-users), whereas Option 2 is
> likely the most inclusive. As regards the latter, I agree with Lisa
> that the format will need to be adapted accordingly (i.e. allow space
> for more generic discussions). At the same time, we have to avoid
> running in circles (don't duplicate previous PESC meetings and
> pre-plenary Stakeholder Days)... That said, I think either option
> could work, as long as we have sufficient end-users on board. (my
> preferred option would be 1)
>
> I also agree that the organization of the review will require
> sufficient reflection and preparatory work. At EU level, MS are even
> considering to spread workload - so we should be realistic on what we
> can actually achieve during a 2-day meeting, knowing that (very
> likely) most won't have read the docs...
>
> Finally, I am also happy to confirm that both Estelle Balian and
> Angélique Berhault will attend the PESC4 meeting on behalf on the
> Belgian Biodiversity Platform. They can also provide helping hands for
> the facilitation and act as resource persons for the ECA-network
> <http://www.eca-ipbesnetwork.org/> and NPF-activities. Probably, I
> won't attend myself but remain available for input & preparations,
>
> Best wishes, and hope to see most of you in Bonn!
> Hilde
>
>
>
> 2017-02-10 12:16 GMT+01:00 Elisabeth Marquard <lisa.marquard at ufz.de
> <mailto:lisa.marquard at ufz.de>>:
>
> Dear Agnès, dear all,
>
> thank you very much your email and the concept note. This looks
> like a very interesting program. And I am very excited about the
> fact that PESC goes on!! Thanks for your efforts and the 'friendly
> takeover' by France and Hungary!!
>
> Just some thoughts from my side:
>
> Regarding the desired composition of participants: I don't know
> which of your 'scenarios' may work better but I always think that
> involving people from the administrations of different sectors
> could be fruitful since they are one of the main target groups of
> IPBES products, aren't they? Maybe they could contribute their
> view on how the ECA assessment or its SPM might be received more
> effectively? This would perhaps rather address the later
> dissemination and outreach than the SOD itself....
>
> In any case, the audience will probably be a mixture of people
> that are fairly well acquainted with IPBES and people that are
> newcomers to the process (unless you deliberately chose only
> IPBES-experienced experts?). And this remains a serious challenge,
> in particular when it comes to the 'reviewing exercise'. So I
> wonder whether it might be worth considering running the
> 'reviewing break-out groups' in parallel with some other break-out
> group that does not require familiarity with the SOD. You could
> e.g. have break-out groups for the Chapter 1-4 in parallel with
> one that addresses some other topic (e.g. the national platforms
> or other forms of national/regional coordination) and then later
> break-out groups for Chapters 5-6 in parallel with one that
> addresses the next IPBES work program. Otherwise, participants
> that have not prepared for reviewing a chapter might be a little
> lost during the afternoon of day 1 and 2?
>
> Regarding the organization of the review: One lesson that I
> learned during PESC-3 was that we had not prepared the review of
> the individual chapters sufficiently. I think you are already
> discussing this issue with the TSU for the ECA assessment and you
> are now more experienced than I was last year - so I am pretty
> sure that you will perform better than I did. And I like the idea
> that a CLA will give an intro to a chapter. But just some
> additional thoughts: Would it be possible to communicate some of
> 'what is expected from the 2nd review' to the participants already
> before PESC-4? Such as the degree of flexibility that still
> exists? Or to identify some key aspects they should concentrate
> on? Or to give them some more instructions such that each
> participant needs to fill in his/her own excel sheet (if this is
> required by the TSU)? Maybe, the participants will ignore this
> information but maybe it's worth a try? And, of course, as you
> know, the accessibility of the documents was really an issue
> before PESC-3.
>
> Regarding the stakeholder engagement and the discussion of
> stakeholder's needs: I wonder how the material that has already
> been collected on this issue could be used more effectively, i.e.
> how to avoid that the discussion on the needs and barriers is more
> or less the same as at previous meetings? I have not really a good
> idea how this could be done when there are many newcomers at the
> table.... Maybe some more knowledge holders could be given a
> voice? E.g. someone from the administration or some practitioner
> who is actually contributing to or USING an IPBES product?
>
> These are just some things that have come to my mind while reading
> the concept note. Please feel free to contact me if you would like
> to discuss some of this further.
>
> Best wishes
> Lisa
>
> --
>
> Am 09.02.17 17:01 schrieb *Agnes HALLOSSERIE
> *<agnes.hallosserie at fondationbiodiversite.fr
> <mailto:agnes.hallosserie at fondationbiodiversite.fr>>:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> As you may have seen, we have released a save-the-date earlier
>> this week regarding PESC-4 next June. Please feel free to
>> circulate the message within your network, and let me know if you
>> have not received it.
>>
>> I send you here the concept note with some updates, with two main
>> points I would particularly like your feedback on:
>>
>> * I suggested two scenarios regarding the participants we would
>> like to see at PESC-4 in order to achieve the meeting's
>> objectives. What do you think would be best? Other
>> combinations are possible so feel free to suggest one if you
>> think it would fit the purpose better;
>> * Regarding travel support for participants coming from Eastern
>> Europe and Central Asia countries, we estimated based on
>> previous PESCs costs that we would need a total budget of 18
>> 000€ to cover travel, accommodation and food for eligible
>> participants. The target of 30 funded participants (half of
>> total participants number) is based on the ratio of funded
>> participants from previous PESCs.
>>
>> I look forward to getting your views on this or any other point
>> related to PESC!
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Agnès Hallosserie
>>
>> Secretary of the French Committee for IPBES
>>
>> Foundation for Research on Biodiversity
>>
>> 195, rue Saint Jacques 75005 Paris
>>
>> agnes.hallosserie at fondationbiodiversite.fr
>> <mailto:agnes.hallosserie at fondationbiodiversite.fr>
>>
>> Tel : +33 (0)1 80 05 89 32 <tel:+33%201%2080%2005%2089%2032>
>>
>> http://www.fondationbiodiversite.fr/en
>> <http://www.fondationbiodiversite.fr/en>/
>>
>>
>>
>> De : Agnes HALLOSSERIE
>> <agnes.hallosserie at fondationbiodiversite.fr
>> <mailto:agnes.hallosserie at fondationbiodiversite.fr>>
>> Date : jeudi 26 janvier 2017 15:56*
>> *Objet : Planning for PESC-4
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> After some initial discussions with colleagues in NeFo and the
>> Hungarian Centre for Ecological Research, we would like to submit
>> you the idea of organizing the 4th edition of the pan-european
>> stakeholders consultation (PESC) in Hungary (specific location to
>> be decided in the coming days). The French Foundation for
>> Research on Biodiversity (FRB) would be happy to lead the process
>> for developing the meeting documents and organising the
>> logistics, with the support of the colleagues in Hungary who
>> kindly agreed to host the meeting around the dates of 12-14 June
>> 2017.
>>
>> You will find more details on the proposed work in the concept
>> note attached. I would greatly appreciate if you could have a
>> look at the concept note and send me feedback on the relevance of
>> the topics, objectives and programme for PESC-4, along with any
>> thoughts or suggestions you may have to make this meeting as
>> useful as possible for the stakeholders of the larger
>> pan-European region. This is a very first draft so feel free to
>> share any of your thoughts!
>>
>> I would also welcome any proposal for in-kind or in-cash support
>> for the organisation of the meeting. If there is a session or
>> area of work you're particularly keen to work on (facilitation,
>> chairing, presentation etc), please let me know! As for the
>> in-cash contributions, you may remember that PESC usually
>> provides some financial support for participants coming from
>> countries where budget can be an issue, like in some Eastern
>> Europe or Central Asian countries. Please let me know as soon as
>> possible if you would have a small sum to put in the common pot
>> so that I know early enough how many participants could benefit
>> from such a financial support.
>>
>> Do not hesitate to get in touch if you have questions on the
>> documents, otherwise I look forward to receiving your first
>> impressions on the concept note!
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Agnes
>>
>>
>> Agnès Hallosserie
>>
>> Secretary of the French Committee for IPBES
>>
>> Foundation for Research on Biodiversity
>>
>> 195, rue Saint Jacques 75005 Paris
>>
>> agnes.hallosserie at fondationbiodiversite.fr
>> <mailto:agnes.hallosserie at fondationbiodiversite.fr>
>>
>> Tel : +33 (0)1 80 05 89 32 <tel:+33%201%2080%2005%2089%2032>
>>
>> http://www.fondationbiodiversite.fr/en
>> <http://www.fondationbiodiversite.fr/en>/
>>
>>
> --
>
> Dr. Elisabeth Marquard
> Department Naturschutzforschung
>
> Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung GmbH - UFZ
> Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research GmbH - UFZ
> Permoserstraße 15 / 04318 Leipzig / Germany
> Telefon +49 341 235 1835 <tel:+49%20341%202351835> / Fax +49 341
> 235 1470 <tel:+49%20341%202351470>
> elisabeth.marquard at ufz.de <mailto:elisabeth.marquard at ufz.de> /
> www.ufz.de <http://www.ufz.de>
>
> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Leipzig
> Registergericht: Amtsgericht Leipzig, Handelsregister Nr. B 4703
> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: MinDirig Wilfried Kraus
> Wissenschaftlicher Geschäftsführer: Prof. Dr. Georg Teutsch
> Administrativer Geschäftsführer: Dr. Andreas Schmidt
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Netzwerk-Forum zur Biodiversitätsforschung Deutschland
> www.biodiversity.de <http://www.biodiversity.de>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Eca-network mailing list
> Eca-network at bebif.be <mailto:Eca-network at bebif.be>
> http://mailman.biodiversity.be/mailman/listinfo/eca-network
> <http://mailman.biodiversity.be/mailman/listinfo/eca-network>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Hilde Eggermont - OD Nature, Royal Belgian Institute for Natural
> Sciences <http://www.naturalsciences.be>, Belgium
> Coordinator of the Belgian Biodiversity Platform
> <http://www.biodiversity.be/>
>
> *WATCH OUR BELGIAN BIODIVERSITY PLATFORM MOVIES ON:*
> http://vimeo.com/114955090 (data publication activities)
> http://vimeo.com/114955160 (science-policy activities)
> http://vimeo.com/114955193 (our general mission)
>
--
Török Katalin (habil. PhD.) Katalin Török habil. PhD.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ökológiai Kutatóközpont Centre for Ecological Research
Ökológiai és Botanikai Intézet Institute of Ecology and Botany
MTA ÖK Hungarian Academy of Sciences
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2163, Vácrátót 2163 Hungary, Vácrátót
Alkotmány u. 2-4. Alkotmány 2-4.
tel: +36 28 360122/123 tel: +36 28 360122/123
fax: +36 28 360110 fax: +36 28 360110
torok.katalin at okologia.mta.hu torok.katalin at okologia.mta.hu
www.okologia.mta.hu www.okologia.mta.hu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.biodiversity.be/pipermail/eca-network/attachments/20170323/d923c32f/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 170323_Concept_note_PESC4_clean_TK.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 40288 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.biodiversity.be/pipermail/eca-network/attachments/20170323/d923c32f/attachment-0001.bin>
More information about the Eca-network
mailing list