open to participation by other interested Governments. It will elect a Chair and one from a developing and the other from a developed country, at its first meeting. The Executive Secretary of CMS will participate as an advisor to the Group. of Reference for the Working Group Discuss a comparative analysis of best practices of existing review mechanisms of MEAs, including the CMS Family agreements, taking into account advantages, disadvantages and the cost involved; Discuss an assessment of the feasibility for an existing body within CMS to exercise the functions of a review process (e.g. Standing Committee); Prepare options for a CMS review process, including: determination of what of the instrument and its resolutions be part of the review process; cost analyses; and financial and institutional implications for CMS. All options will be considered under the principles of cost-efficiency and effectiveness as well as practicality and practicability for the Convention. The option of retaining the status quo (‘zero option’) will also be considered. Working Arrangements The Working Group will determine the structure of its work at its first meeting. Where at all possible, the Working Group will utilize existing meetings to conduct its work in order to reduce costs. The Secretariat will make available all expertise as required, including that of external consultants and experts if needed. Budgetary Implications The Executive Secretary is requested to seek resources, if required, in order to facilitate the participation of the developing countries that are represented on the Standing Committee in the meetings of the Working Group and for outsourcing some of the work. Timeline Activity Timing Adoption of Terms of Reference for and establishment of Working Group 44th Meeting of the CMS Standing Committee (14-15 October 2015) Determination of structure of work and consideration of existing review mechanisms; Discussion of options for review mechanism and recommendations to CMS Conference of Parties First Meeting of Working Group – stand-alone (June 2016) Submission of review of progress Second Meeting of Working Group back-to-back with 45th Meeting of the CMS Standing Committee (2016) Continuation of discussion started at First Meeting if required If required - Third Meeting of Working Group (First half of 2017) Submission of Report 12th Meeting of the CMS Conference of Parties (October/November 2017) The Secretariat invited nominations from Standing Committee members for each region to be represented on the Working in accordance with paragraph 3) of the Terms of reference. The following Standing Committee members were nominated by their regions to the Working Group:
Africa: Uganda Asia: Mongolia Europe: France & Central America and the Caribbean: Argentina Oceania: Australia In accordance with paragraph 3) of the Terms of reference, the Working Group remained open to participation by other interested Governments. The following Governments participated in the Working Group on that basis: Norway Switzerland The Secretariat convened two meetings of the Working Group with the financial support of Switzerland. The first meeting was held from 19-20 September 2016 in Bonn, Germany. In accordance with the Terms of reference, the Working Group elected Australia as Chair and Uganda as Vice-Chair (para. 3) and determined the structure of its work (para. 5)). The second meeting was held from 7-8 November 2016 in Bonn, Germany, back-to-back with the 45th meeting of the Standing Committee. As further financial resources were available from Switzerland, additional members of the Standing Committee were able to participate in the second meeting of the Working Group: Africa: Africa Asia: Kyrgyzstan Europe: Ukraine South & Central America and the Caribbean: Bolivia and Costa Rica Oceania: The Philippines Documents relating to the meetings can be here: ; . Best practices identified from established review mechanisms At its first meeting, the Working Group discussed and compared the features and methodologies of existing review mechanisms of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), taking into account their advantages, disadvantages and the costs involved, in accordance with its Terms of reference. The review mechanisms of the following MEAs were presented at the meeting: AEWA (CMS, African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement) ACCOBAMS (CMS, Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans in the Sea Mediterranean Sea and Contiguous Atlantic Area) CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity - Cartagena and Nagoya Protocols) Bern Convention Ramsar Convention CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) Aarhus Convention UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) Presentations on the review mechanisms of the respective MEAs can be found . Following a comprehensive discussion, the Working Group compiled and agreed on a list of best practices, found in the mechanisms presented at the meeting and structured them according to the following key questions (): What are the benefits of a review process?