1 / 25

Method of work and Guidance for Authors Chul Park Member of Group of Experts

Method of work and Guidance for Authors Chul Park Member of Group of Experts for the Regular Process (GOERP). Issues Who does the work? What work has to be done? How do we organize the work? How do we get the work done by the deadline of 2014?. How do we organize the work?

slade-sampson
Download Presentation

Method of work and Guidance for Authors Chul Park Member of Group of Experts

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Methodof work and Guidance for Authors Chul Park Member of Group of Experts for the Regular Process (GOERP)

  2. Issues Who does the work? What work has to be done? How do we organize the work? How do we get the work done by the deadline of 2014?

  3. How do we organize the work? UNGA has agreed two phases: Phase I (to 2012): the development of the strategy and timetable regional workshops creation of the Assessment team Phase II (to 2014): production of an integrated assessment of the oceans

  4. Who does the work? Creating the Assessment team the Group of Experts under the supervision of the AHWGW/Bureau Pool of Experts Lead Drafters for working papers Lead Drafters for chapter / sections Consultors Peer reviewers Member states > DOALOS(secretariat)/Bureau

  5. Creating the Assessment team The Group of Experts of the Regular Process (GOERP)has been set up as “an integral part of the Regular Process” 5 persons per region / 22 at present The Pool of Experts is being created to “support the work of” GOERP Peer Reviewers may either be members of the pool of experts who have not worked on the chapter in question, or may be people not previously involved

  6. Proposed role of GOERP “To organize necessary inputs and develop the first integrated assessment.” GOERP will therefore: - Allocate the lead on each chapter to one of its members - Propose, for approval by Bureau/AHWGW the assignment of tasks to members of the pool of experts - Organize production of working papers and review results - Organize production of draft chapters - Review results and produce draft First Integrated Assessment Report - Propose, for approval by the Bureau/AHWGW, arrangements for peer- review - Agree final text of First Integrated Assessment Report and present to AHWGW

  7. Appointment of other contributors - Criteria for nomination of members of the pool of experts have been approved by the UN General Assembly. http://www.un.org/Depts/los/global_reporting/global_reporting.htm - Nomination of experts by States, through the UNRP secretariat (DOALOS) - Assignment of tasks by GOERP, subject to the approval of the secretariat (Bureau/AHWGW)

  8. Number of experts appointed African States : 7 Asia-Pacific States : 74 Eastern European States : 3 Latin American and Caribbean States : 59 Western European and Other States : 65 Total : 208

  9. Criteria for the appointment of experts Internationally recognized expertise, to be demonstrated by one or more of the following: (i) A record of scientific publications on the relevant issues, preferably in peer- reviewed publications; (ii) Experience at a high level in global, regional or national assessments relating to the marine environment (iii) Experience at a high level in the design and management of other major global, regional or national initiatives related to the marine environment Demonstrated effective participation in international processes relevant to the marine environment or integrated assessment and other relevant areas, including socio-economic aspects The ability to serve in an independent, individual capacity.

  10. How do we organize the work? UNGA has agreed two phases: Phase I (to 2012): the development of the strategy and timetable regional workshops creation of the Assessment team Phase II (to 2014): production of an integrated assessment of the oceans

  11. Stages of Assessment • Write working papers to provide a basis for given subject and to provide guidance for other issues and other regions • Write the draft chapters identified in the Outline, on the basis of the identified existing assessments and the working papers • Produce the Draft First Integrated Assessment Report • Peer-review the Draft First Integrated Assessment Report • Identify existing assessments that can be used as they stand, as a basis for some issues (or for some issues in some regions) • Produce the final version of the First Integrated Assessment Report • AHWGW considers the First Integrated Assessment Report and agrees recommendations to UNGA

  12. Working Papers • Purpose: to provide considered statements on issues identified in the Assessment Outline • - some existing assessments may serve • - some may be synthesized at global level from existing assessments and regional working papers • Prepared by: Lead Drafter(s) • teams drawn from the GOERP and the pool of experts, under the leadership/responsibility of a member of GOERP • Reviewed by: panels of Consultors drawn from the pool of experts • Revised by: Lead Drafter(s) in the light of comments • GOERP reviews and acts to fill gaps or resolve contradictions

  13. Draft Chapters Process similar to that for Working Papers: Purpose: to provide concise, clear and coherent components for the First Integrated Assessment Report Prepared by: Lead Drafter(s) with the assistance of Contributing Drafters invited by the Lead Drafter(s) Reviewed by: panels of Consultors drawn from the pool of experts Revised by: Lead Drafter(s) in the light of comments GOERP reviews and acts to fill gaps or resolve contradictions

  14. From Drafts to Report • GOERP consolidates draft chapters into the draft First Integrated Assessment Report • Peer Review • by experts from States and intergovernmental organizations • peer reviewers, to be proposed by the GOERP and approved by Bureau/AHWGW • GOERP agrees the final text of the First Global Integrated Marine Assessment, in the light of peer-review comments

  15. Guidance for Authors Status of authors DPSIR Information (Level of detail) Characterizing and communicating uncertainty Treatment of risk Handling divergent views Ethics in authoring and evaluating

  16. Status of authors Those involved will act in their personal capacity as independent experts They are not representatives of a Government or any other authority or organization. They should neither seek nor accept instructions regarding their work for the Regular Process They are free to consult widely with other experts and with government officials, in order to ensure that their contributions are credible, legitimate and relevant.

  17. DPSIR Drivers – the underlying forces that drive change in the environment. Pressures – the channels through which these forces affect the environment; States – the resulting states of the environment; Impacts – the resulting impacts of these pressures and states on biological diversity and human well-being. Responses – the ways that society has responded and the results of those responses But we must NOT get into discussions of policy.

  18. Information • Baseas much as possible on publicly available information • Other information can be used, but (as far as practicable) • steps are needed to give access to it • Drafts may rely on literaturethat has not been peer-reviewed • Where non-peer-reviewed sourcesare used, they must be assessed and • reviewed • The objectives are to ensure that all information used by the Regular • Process • - receives critical evaluation • - its use is open and transparent • all references used in the reports are, as far as possible, easily • accessible.

  19. Uncertainty • Several different ways to express uncertainty: • - Likelihood (e.g., “extremely likely”) • - Confidence (e.g., “high confidence”) • Level-of-understanding (described in terms of the • amount of evidence available and the degree of • agreement among experts) • Standard terms to qualify the level of confidence and risk. • GOERP will need to agree a glossary of such standard terms.

  20. Treatment of Risk “Risk” is the product of the likelihood of an event and the seriousness of the event if it occurs Both aspects should be made clear How this will be done is case-specific Assessments will have to accommodate a wide range in data quality and quantity, and in knowledge of relationships and impacts. No single best approach to risk quantification and communication.

  21. Divergent views What alternative viewpoints warrant mention is a matter of professional judgment. Lead drafters can influence which viewpoints will be discussed in the process. To ensure a full range of views, authors with diverse viewpoints need to be involved Combat “confirmation bias” - the tendency of authors to place too much weight on their own views relative to other views. Document the range of scientific viewpoints considered Give due consideration to properly documented alternative views

  22. Ethics in authoring and evaluating Citepublished work of others correctly Representthe conclusions of cited work accurately Disclose any conflict of interest.

  23. Final comment For the creation of the Assessment team, ocean scientists as well as experts in the field of socio-economic aspects need to be recommended (or enrolled) to the Secretariat by the Member States. It is an open-ended process. Member States need to designate a focal point, to which the Assessment team can contact for Data access.

More Related