strengthening unfccc in depth reviews potential lessons from oecd n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Strengthening UNFCCC In-Depth Reviews: Potential lessons from OECD PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Strengthening UNFCCC In-Depth Reviews: Potential lessons from OECD

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 10

Strengthening UNFCCC In-Depth Reviews: Potential lessons from OECD - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 65 Views
  • Uploaded on

Strengthening UNFCCC In-Depth Reviews: Potential lessons from OECD. Jane Ellis, OECD Bonn, March 2001. Presentation aim. Explore potential changes to IDR process that could: deal with some of the challenges found to date strengthen process speed up process

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Strengthening UNFCCC In-Depth Reviews: Potential lessons from OECD' - truda


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
presentation aim
Presentation aim
  • Explore potential changes to IDR process that could:
    • deal with some of the challenges found to date
    • strengthen process
    • speed up process
    • draw on lessons from OECD reviews

OECD and UNFCCC IDRs are different - not all lessons may be applicable

Caveat

factors influencing idr process
Factors influencing IDR process
  • Secretariat organisation
  • IDR team
  • Pre-visit organisation
  • How visit is conducted
  • How report is prepared
secretariat organisation
Secretariat organisation
  • Context: OECD does periodic in-depth reviews … but aim is different
  • Timing of reviews also different (reviews evenly spaced and sequential)
  • 3+ Secretariat staff usually involved
  • Allocation of “country desk officers” helps information-gathering
idr team
IDR team
  • OECD: Secretariat, government experts and consultants
    • Consultants may help Secretariat write report
    • OECD experts nominated from member-country governments
  • Role and functioning of team during reviews similar to UNFCCC reviews
pre visit organisation
Pre-visit organisation
  • More up-front work for team in OECD reviews:
    • relevant information sent to review team 1-2 months prior to visit
    • experts draft their section of report before review starts

This allows review to focus on areas of special interest and on clarifying questions.

visit
Visit
  • Process generally similar to UNFCCC reviews, but:
    • >1 week for large countries
    • review includes meetings with regional/municipal governments
    • Parallel groups (possible as team is bigger)
    • Initial draft completed by end of visit
    • Generally able to meet all relevant people
finalising report
Finalising report
  • Timeline: visit to completed 1st draft 4-5 months
  • Large difference in OECD and UNFCCC process:
    • Other country influence on report much greater for OECD reviews: any substantive country comment is highlighted to group and can be discussed during “exam”
conclusions 1
Conclusions (1)
  • UNFCCC reviews could be strengthened by:
    • “front-loading” work of review team
    • increasing number of review officers in Secretariat (or adding support from consultants)
    • increasing number of review officers on each review (1 lead and 1-2 support on each visit)
    • increasing involvement of 3rd countries
    • ensuring team includes necessary range of expertise
conclusions 2
Conclusions (2)
  • Review process could also be speeded up, e.g. by:
    • using consultants to help write up reports (… but confidentiality problems?)
    • making review process less “bunched”
  • … but this has resource implications