null
Lucia A Keegan  08/02/2006 03:06:57 PM  From  DB/Inbox:  Lucia A Keegan

Cable 
Text:                                                                      
                                                                           
      
UNCLAS        PARIS 05170

SIPDIS
cxparis:
    ACTION: UNESCO
    INFO:   ECON POL AMBU AMB AMBO DCM SCI

DISSEMINATION: UNESCOX
CHARGE: PROG

APPROVED: AMB: LVOLIVER
DRAFTED: SCI: NCOOPER
CLEARED: POL:DOSTROFF

VZCZCFRI036
PP RUEHC RUEHGV RUCNDT RUEHZN
DE RUEHFR #5170/01 2121454
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 311454Z JUL 06
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9953
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA PRIORITY 2453
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 0835
RUEHZN/ENVIRONMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 07 PARIS 005170 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FROM USMISSION UNESCO 
 
STATE FOR IO/T WINNIE ROBERTS, EB PAUL ACETO, OES/STAS ANDREW W. 
REYNOLDS, OES/OA LIZ TIRPAK, IO/UNESCO KEVIN PILZ 
STATE FOR USAID RICHARD VOLK 
STATE FOR NSC GENE WHITNEY 
STATE FOR NOAA RICHARD SPINRAD AND ARTHUR PATTERSON 
STATE FOR OFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH GLOBAL OFFICE, OCEANOGRAPHER OF 
THE NAVY 
STATE FOR EPA 
STATE FOR NSF MARGARET LEINEN AND ROSE GOMBAY 
STATE FOR NASA ERIC LINDSTROM 
 
E.O. 12958:  N/A 
TAGS: UNESCO AORC TSPL EAID SENV KSCI IZ
SUBJECT:  INTERNATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC COMMISSION (IOC/UNESCO) 
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL ADVANCES U.S. GOALS ON DISASTER RISK MITIGATION, 
EARTH OBSERVATION 
 
REFTELS:  A. STATE 090815, B.  STATE 104969 
 
¶1.  Summary and Key Accomplishments:  At the 39th Session of the 
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) Executive Council 
-- which took place June 21-28, 2006 at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris 
-- the U.S. delegation (USDEL) met all of its objectives.  These 
included: encouraging fiscal transparency and accountability in IOC 
budgets and programs; further integrating the mission of the IOC 
with that of UNESCO's science and education sectors through 
crosscutting initiatives (paras 7, 9); and enhancing development of 
the Global Oceans Observation System (GOOS), particularly tsunami 
warning systems (paras 10-19), within the context of the Global 
Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS, paras 22-25). 
 
¶2.  USDEL participation in the drafting of IOC's Medium Term 
(2008-2013) Strategy ensured consistency with the draft U.S. Oceans 
Research Priorities Plan and timely delivery in light of the ongoing 
review of UNESCO's Sciences programs.  To facilitate the development 
of consistent and measurable program performance metrics for these 
objectives prior to the 2007 IOC Assembly, the U.S. will explore 
means to provide performance management expertise to the Secretariat 
(para 8).  At the close of the meeting, UNESCO DG Matsuura announced 
that IOC Executive Director Dr. Patricio Bernal's term was extended 
two years, postponing his retirement until the close of 2009. 
 
¶3.  USDEL, led by U.S. Representative to the IOC and NOAA Assistant 
Administrator for Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, Dr. Richard 
Spinrad, was comprised of experts from NOAA (National Marine 
Fisheries Service, International Affairs, National Ocean Service, 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, National Weather Service) and 
State (Secretariat of the U.S. National Commission to UNESCO, U.S. 
Mission to UNESCO, OES/Oceans Affairs) (Ref A).  The USDEL worked 
closely with US Mission's Science and Technology Officer, Nancy 
Cooper, who accompanied them at many of their meetings.  The Council 
of 40 (out of 136) IOC Member States ran in parallel with three 
programmatic discussion sessions (GOOS, JCOMM, WESTPAC) and three 
intersessional committees (Budget, Resolutions, Medium Term 
Strategy).  Several sidebar meetings with UNESCO staff and a 
reception co-hosted by the US Permanent Delegate to UNESCO, 
Ambassador Louise V. Oliver, were conducted to reinforce the goals 
of the USDEL. 
 
¶4.  Full text of the report and resolutions can be found at 
unesco.ioc.org (or contact Liz Tirpak DOS/OES/OA, 
tirpakej@state.gov, 202-647-0238).  Major decisions and resolutions 
are highlighted in the following paragraphs.  End Summary 
 
Strategy, Budget, Management & Performance Audit 
 
¶5.  The Executive Secretary's report underscored that while overall 
IOC funding received a substantial increase in the current biennium 
(2005-2006) due to monies allocated by UNESCO to the IOTWS Program, 
the 2006-2007 agreed budget cuts, coupled with mid-course 
corrections, will cause critical short- and medium-term impacts on 
IOC Programs.  The 2005 Assembly decision forced the IOC to identify 
$320,000 in the regular biennial budget in order to fully address 
commitments to the World Climate Research Program and a shortfall in 
funding for the IODE position in Ostend.  Accordingly, Member States 
must now take a hard look at IOC priorities in the new biennium and 
Medium Term period (2008-2013) and in preparation for budget 
decisions at the 2007 Assembly. 
 
¶6.  To enhance budget transparency,  the EC agreed to develop a 
framework and set of guidelines and principles for budget reporting 
that define the scope of the activity/investment; links to the Main 
Lines of Action and sub-objectives; the roles, functions and 
responsibilities of participants including IOC Secretariat; and 
budget details including a profile of the resources.  Further, the 
IOC was instructed to enhance its budget reporting to reflect 
indirect financial and in-kind contributions that do not enter the 
budgetary flow of the IOC.  Member States were encouraged to suggest 
mechanisms to make the funding system of the Commission more 
sustainable, prompting some to raise the question of whether the IOC 
should follow the World Heritage Convention's model of developing a 
convention to increase the contribution of member states to core 
programs. 
 
¶7.  Capt. Javier Valladares (Argentina) successfully negotiated 
consensus text for the IOC contribution to the UNESCO Medium Term 
Strategy (2008-2013).  Due to USDEL participation in initial 
drafting, the identified "high level objectives" were directly 
relevant to priorities identified in the draft USG Oceans Research 
Priorities Plan (see 
ocean.ceq.gov/about/sup_jsost_prioritiesplan. html) and USG 
priorities for UNESCO (Ref B).  The IOC high level objectives are: 
 
- Prevention and reduction of the impacts of natural hazards; 
- Mitigation of the impacts and adaptation to climate change and 
variability; 
- Safeguarding healthy oceans ecosystems; and 
- Management procedures and policies leading to the sustainability 
of coastal and ocean environment and resources. 
 
¶8.  To facilitate the development of consistent and measurable 
program performance metrics for these objectives prior to the 2007 
Assembly, the U.S. will explore means to provide performance 
management expertise to the Secretariat.  USDEL met with John 
Parsons, Director of the UNESCO Internal Oversight Service, to 
discuss UNESCO's practice in performance evaluation.  (Note: 
Parsons' office trains UNESCO staff to help create a results-based 
management culture.  End Note.)  Parsons indicated that though the 
IOC had received an excellent review six years ago, it might benefit 
from another review.  He welcomed U.S. interest in assisting IOC in 
the development of performance metrics and agreed to offer his 
Office's support to such an effort.  Parsons noted that UNESCO's 
strategic planning/management tool (SISTER) is inadequate and 
remains a troubled management tool for UNESCO's leadership. 
 
¶9.  US Ambassador Oliver, VADM Lautenbacher and Dr. Spinrad met with 
Deputy Director-General, Mr. Marcio Barbosa to underscore U.S. 
interest in the UNESCO Medium Term Plan and Science Review Process, 
highlighting IOC's contributions - particularly on natural hazards - 
to UNESCO's visibility and programs. 
 
Q&A with the DG of UNESCO 
 
¶10.  UNESCO DG Koichiro Matsuura addressed the Council on the final 
day of the meeting, during which Member States were provided an 
opportunity to explore the status of IOC in UNESCO's next Medium 
Term period (2008-2013) and the related documents (Medium Term 
Strategy 34/C4, Program and Budget 34/C5).  Following his 
presentation, which focused mainly on UNESCO's successful leadership 
of global/regional tsunami warning coordination, the DG opened the 
floor for questions.  Belgium, China, Italy and the US pressed for 
explanation on the connectivity among visibility, program 
prioritization and budget allocations, while the UK pressed the DG 
to provide suggestions so as to assure that IOC is appropriately 
considered in the current review process.  South Africa made an 
appeal for more support for the African continent. 
 
¶11.  DG indicated that although IOC is a high-visibility "flagship" 
program, it is unlikely that additional resources will be provided 
without an increase in the overall UNESCO budget.  (Comment:  This 
was the first indication that the DG would pursue such an approach 
at the fall UNESCO Executive Board meeting; this is unfortunate, as 
the U.S. has championed a ZNG budget to stimulate the elimination of 
many low-impact UNESCO programs.  End Comment.)  The DG encouraged 
Member States to reconsider linkages between IOC programs and other 
UN organizations, UNESCO Sectors, and programs within the UNESCO 
Science Sector.  The DG noted that the UN "Coherence Panel", 
established to consider development, humanitarian and environmental 
programs within the UN system, could very well impact UNESCO's 
future agenda. 
 
Tsunami Warning System (TWS):  Global Coordination Group Convenes to 
 
SIPDIS 
coordinate regional efforts 
 
¶12.  Delegates from over 20 countries, the IOC Secretariat, the four 
existing Tsunami Warning System Intergovernmental Coordination 
Groups (ICGs) and other bodies including the GEO, WMO, JCOMM, IGOOS, 
IODE, met as an ad hoc Working Group and agreed on the content and 
methodology to develop a "Framework Document for a Global 
Ocean-related Hazards Warning and Mitigation System."  The 
background paper tabled by U.S. Delegate Dr. David Green (NOAA 
Tsunami Program Manager), which addressed a framework for 
 
SIPDIS 
integration building on specific synergies and best practices among 
and between the ICGs, received prior concurrence from the IOC and 
the WMO and was adopted by the ad hoc Working Group as the 
introduction section for the Framework Document.  JCOMM proposed an 
outline for the Framework Document that was also adopted, consisting 
of 7 sections:  1) Harmonization, standardization and best 
practices, 2) Outreach, 3) Research requirements and input, 4) 
Synergies, 5) Rationalization and streamlining of IOC Secretariat 
support requirements and services, 6) Reporting and coordination 
mechanisms for ICGs, and 7) Guidelines for a global ocean-related 
hazard warning system.  The group agreed this would be drafted by 
the IOC Secretariat Tsunami Unit with a small steering group (that 
will include U.S. representation).  The draft document will be 
reviewed and revised through the ad hoc Working Group and at 
regional ICG Meetings in the January-March 2007 timeframe.  The 
Group agreed to finalize the framework document for presentation at 
the 24th IOC Assembly in June 2007. 
 
¶13. USDEL held a sidebar meeting with Dr. Badaoui Rouhban, Chief of 
the Section for Disaster Reduction, UNESCO Natural Sciences Sector, 
to discuss opportunities for greater coordination with IOC 
priorities in tsunami and related natural disasters, especially in 
the areas of capacity development, hazard assessment, and seismic 
research.  The delegation was informed of the UNESCO campaign 
entitled "Disaster Risk Reduction Begins at School" with two main 
objectives: to promote disaster reduction education curricula and 
improve related safety standards and resilience in school 
construction.  This identified opportunities to link with U.S. 
efforts in community resilience and follow-up actions including the 
exchange of documentation on relevant projects. 
 
¶14.  Indian Ocean: UNESCO Director-General Koichiro Matsuura 
announced that the "initial" Indian Ocean Tsunami Warning System is 
operational this July with improvements to more quickly detect, more 
precisely locate, confirm the presence of waves, issue regional 
watches, and cancel transmitted information as required.  Matsuura 
acknowledged that the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration National Weather Service (NOAA NWS) Pacific Tsunami 
Warning Center (PTWC) is the interim warning center issuing 
information bulletins for the IOTWS, with backup provided by NOAA's 
West Coast and Alaska Tsunami Warning Center (WC/ATWC), in 
cooperation with the Japan Meteorological Agency until a final 
decision is made on the location of regional centers in the Indian 
Ocean. But Matsuura made it clear that this was just a milestone by 
saying "However, this successful work is far from being finished." 
He then called for greater coordination, consistent with US policy. 
In particular, he called for the testing of new systems, 
interoperability of national systems, long-term investment to secure 
the flow of information, and capacity building for national 
preparedness. 
 
¶15.  The USDEL met with the new IOC Tsunami Unit Head, Dr. Peter 
Koltermann (Germany), and Unit members to emphasize that the IOC 
should outline a regional design and core architecture for the 
Indian Ocean TWS (IOTWS).  While assurances were given from the IOC 
Secretariat that this was a top priority of the Unit and a draft 
 
SIPDIS 
would be circulated soon after the ICG/IOTWS meeting in Bali in 
July, the Chair of the ICG provided no such assurance.  The IOTWS 
Chair (Dr. P.S. Goel, India) did not acknowledge the contribution of 
the U.S. to a proposed regional design nor U.S. supporting efforts 
in capacity building, monitoring, modeling, and warning services. 
Dr. Goel also confused matters by speaking for India and presumably 
not the whole ICG, when he declared limits and thresholds on the 
availability of real-time observational data for early warnings; 
this position is not supported by the US.  A request to clarify this 
position was raised in the U.S. intervention, but the position was 
not clarified by the Chair, Head of Unit, or IOC Secretary. 
 
¶16.  USDEL questioned the utility of a trust fund to maintain DART 
and other observational platforms and ensure data availability 
during a sidebar with the IOC Tsunami Head of Unit, ITIC Director, 
JCOMM Vice Chair, and WMO representatives.  Both IOC and WMO agreed 
that this was a valuable strategy to be coordinated with JCOMM and 
considered by each ICG, not just the IOTWS, but could be addressed 
by the Global Coordination working group. The U.S. delegation 
recommended that this be discussed at the ICG/IOTWS meeting in Bali, 
July 31-August 2, 2006, and a recommendation be forwarded to the 
other ICGs as well as to the Data Buoy Coordination Panel of JCOMM 
(meeting in October 2006). 
 
¶17.  Pacific Ocean: South Korea confirmed its commitment to working 
with the U.S. in the Pacific TWS, specifically towards the operation 
and maintenance of the deep ocean monitoring network.  Canada 
confirmed support for siting a monitoring station in their EZ. 
Canada also made an intervention praising the U.S. Tsunami Warning 
Centers in Alaska and Hawaii, especially the success of the recent 
Pacific-wide system test.   However, discussions with Australia did 
not advance commitment towards warning center coverage or monitoring 
station maintenance for the South Pacific.  The IOC passed a 
resolution to establish an Intergovernmental Coordination Group for 
the Pacific Tsunami Warning System (essentially converting the 
former "ITSU" body to an ICG to provide consistency with other 
regional ICGs).  The resolution also recommended that the 
U.S.-hosted International Tsunami Information Center (ITIC) be 
formally established as an IOC Program Office. 
 
¶18.  Caribbean Sea/Gulf of Mexico: A final decisions has not been 
made by the ICG/CARTWS on the regional requirements and 
interoperable design for the early warning and mitigation systems. 
In the interim, the regional watch and information bulletins are 
being provided from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration National Weather Service (NOAA NWS) - the Pacific 
Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC) in Hawaii and the West Coast and 
 
SIPDIS 
Alaska Tsunami Warning Center (WC/ATWC). The U.S. delegation 
encouraged the IOCARIBE Secretary Cesar Toro and the ICG Vice Chairs 
(Gustavo Malave, VZ; Israel Matos, US) to accelerate the focus on 
the regional design problem by ensuring the action items from the 
first ICG meeting (Barbados January 2006) are completed. It was 
noted by the IOC Executive Secretary and the IOCARIBE Secretary that 
lack of funds in the CARTWS were constraining the ability of working 
groups to meet intersessionally to address the actions needed for 
hazard detection, modeling, interoperability and community 
resilience.  Dr. Green, along with Malave, Matos, and Toro, proposed 
holding a preparatory meeting of ICG Chairs, Vice Chairs and Working 
Group leads to address the status of these actions, funding sources, 
and coordination, prior to the next ICG meeting in Venezuela 
(January 2007). 
 
¶19.  North Atlantic/Mediterranean:  USDEL had brief meetings with 
the Chair of the ICG, Stephano Tinto, and the IOC Tsunami Head of 
Unit, Peter Koltermann, regarding concerns that the NEATWS ICG needs 
to work more closely with the existing IOC warning center (PTWC), 
information center (ITIC) and ICSU World Data Center (Boulder), 
centers hosted by the U.S., to avoid costly duplication of efforts, 
facilitate harmonization of hazard maps, and ensure the 
interoperability of warning guidance and sea level standards.  Dr. 
Koltermann, as well as IOC Secretary Patricio Bernal, provided 
assurances that they would follow up on these concerns.  Another 
topic of discussion was concern for adequate coverage of issues in 
the Atlantic and the recommendation to have a joint meeting of the 
Caribbean & Adjacent Atlantic group and the North East Atlantic to 
evaluate Atlantic-wide hazards.  The Chair did not want to support 
this recommendation. 
 
Capacity Building Program: IOC progress and growth 
 
¶20.  Since the establishment of the IOC Capacity Building program in 
2005, the Secretariat has raised over $1 million from Sweden, France 
and the U.S. for related initiatives.  As a result, a two-year 
series of leadership training/networking and proposal writing 
seminars have commenced throughout Africa and the Caribbean.  This 
immediate success prompted the Secretariat to urge the EC to invite 
the Director-General of UNESCO to establish one professional and one 
administrative post in the IOC Secretariat to ensure the continuity 
of these capacity-building initiatives.  However, the USDEL 
facilitated an EC resolution requesting the Executive Secretary 
provide the 2007 IOC Assembly an assessment of the deployment of 
staff resources to meet effectively and efficiently the IOC's 
objectives identified in the 2008-2013 Medium Term Strategy, prior 
to making such a request to the DG for any additional staffing. 
 
¶21.  In addition, the EC requested the establishment of additional 
Chairs under the UNESCO Chairs Program to address IOC-CB related 
activities.  Since its inception in 1992, the UNESCO Chairs Program 
in the Natural Sciences has established almost 200 university Chairs 
and networks, to enhance academic solidarity and excellence in both 
North-South and South-South relations.  These Chairs and networks 
are partners for the Natural Sciences Sector of UNESCO in its quest 
for promoting Science, environment and sustainable development, 
aimed to improve human security through a better management of the 
environment. The UNESCO Natural Sciences Chairs from the U.S. are: 
 
UNESCO-Cousteau Ecotechnie Chair in Global Coastal Assessment, 
established in 2004 at the University of Rhode Island, Narragansett 
(United States of America) 
 
UNESCO-Cousteau Ecotechnie Chair in Coastal Resources, established 
in 2004 at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, New Jersey 
(United States of America) 
 
UNITWIN Network for Improving Biological Sciences Education through 
the Development and Use of Information Technologies in some Arab 
States Universities, established in 1997 at Purdue University 
(United States of America) 
 
UNESCO Chair in Bioethics, established in 2005 at the Ethics and 
Public Policy Center, Washington D.C. (United States of America) 
 
IOC's GOOS and the Global Earth Observation System of Systems 
(GEOSS) 
 
¶22.  Not only is the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) the 
largest program of the IOC, but - consistent with U.S. policy - it 
has also been recognized as the oceans component of GEOSS.  During 
the Council meeting, Vice-Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, co-Chair 
of GEO and Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, 
presented the latest update from the Group on Earth Observations 
(GEO), underscoring IOC's role and highlighting how GEO and GOOS 
jointly contribute to marine multihazard warning systems.  (Note: 
While in Paris, VADM Lautenbacher and Dr. Spinrad also met with Dr. 
Thomas Roswall, Executive Director of the International Council for 
Science, to discuss ICSU's contributions to the 2006 GEO Work Plan 
and other climate research issues.) 
 
¶23.  Early USDEL interventions and sidebars with GOOS leadership and 
UNESCO DDG Barbosa resulted in the EC request to the Secretariat to 
seek prioritization and reduction of tasks assigned to the IOC in 
the GEO Implementation Plan, since the current list of tasks is too 
broad in scope and ill defined to tackle with limited resources. 
This outcome was consistent with the feedback provided in USDEL 
sidebars with Executive Director Patricio Bernal and GOOS Program 
Manager, Keith Alverson. 
 
¶24.  The Intergovernmental Committee for GOOS (I-GOOS) established a 
joint committee on coastal implementation ("J-PICO") between GOOS 
and the Global Terrestrial Observing System (GTOS).   Member states 
offered diverse opinions on the establishment of J-PICO, with most 
expressing the opinion that they had not had sufficient time to 
evaluate the proposal.  The EC decided to discuss this program 
further at I-GOOS VIII (March-April 2007). 
 
¶25.  The EC supported IOC's participation and coordination of 
oceans-related International Polar Year (IPY) research programs. 
Although there were a few interventions in support of the formation 
of an Arctic GOOS Regional Alliance with EuroGOOS and Canada, there 
was not a clear resolution initiating any further action on this 
matter, which will likely be discussed in more detail at I-GOOS 
VIII. 
 
Advisory Body of Experts on Law of the Sea (ABE-LOS) 
 
¶26.  During the spring 2006 meeting of ABE-LOS, a subsidiary body 
created to explore the convergences of the Law of the Sea with the 
scientific initiatives of the IOC, a lack of consensus persisted 
with regards to the legal framework for the collection of 
oceanographic data for GOOS, particularly concerning the deployment 
of profiling floats by a nation in international waters that may 
later enter into EEZs of another nation.  Regardless of IOC 
Resolution XX-6, which placed the IOC in charge of notifying coastal 
states about deployments, there continue to be differences of 
opinion as to the appropriateness of this procedure (e.g. Argentina 
feels that notification is the responsibility of the float-deploying 
country, not the IOC).  Germany and the United Kingdom questioned 
the effectiveness of ABE-LOS to resolve this issue; however, due to 
the large number of countries who favor ABE-LOS as a venue for 
vetting their preferences, the Executive Council adopted a 
resolution to continue the discussions at the next meeting of ABELOS 
in Gabon next spring.   The Chair agreed to inventory other topics 
that ABE-LOS could address and present it to the 2007 Assembly. 
 
The Joint IOC-World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Technical 
Commission for Oceanography and Marine Meteorology (JCOMM) and the 
World Climate Research Program (WCRP) 
 
¶27.  JCOMM Chair Dr. Jean-Louis Fellous (FR) presented the results 
of the second session of JCOMM (Halifax, Canada, October 2005); this 
session realigned JCOMM's efforts into three program areas: 
Observations, Services, and Data Management.  Regardless of the 
intersessional working group discussion, there remains a need for 
substantial, extra-budgetary support to implement the IOC component 
of the JCOMM Work Plan (each of the three Program Areas are 
developing Plans that are due 1 October, in time for the next JCOMM 
Management Committee meeting).  Consistent with U.S. objectives, the 
resulting EC resolution fully endorsed the conclusions of JCOMM II 
and called for JCOMM and Member State contributions to marine 
multi-hazard warning systems. 
 
¶28.  (NOTE:  In 1993, WMO, IOC and ICSU (International Council of 
Scientific Unions) jointly agreed to fund the World Climate Research 
Program.  The IOC contribution has been small, since the total WCRP 
budget dwarfs the entire budget of the IOC Climate program. 
However, in response to the 2005 Assembly decision, the EC funded 
the WCRP at the level of $125,000 per year through the IOC Budget 
"Main Line of Action #3: Governance, Capacity Building and Regional 
Bodies", not with extra-budgetary funds.  The U.S. is aware that 
this decision will impact MLA 3 programs as well as compromise IOC's 
ability to fully implement the Medium Term Strategy.  Per year the 
U.S. provides one-third  of the ICSU contribution to WCRP 
(approximately $90K) and 22% of the WMO contribution (approximately 
$1.3M).  It is likely this funding level will be reassessed during 
planning for the next Medium Term Strategy, in light of further cuts 
in capacity building to support climate research.  The U.S. will 
reassess its program and budget priorities for the IOC, including 
WCRP, prior to the 2007 Assembly.  End Note.) 
 
Future of the International Oceanographic Data and Information 
Exchange (IODE) Program 
 
¶29.  Dr. Lesley Rickards, Chair of IODE, made a presentation on the 
progress made in developing a comprehensive, integrated, ocean data 
and information system; standards for data exchange and construction 
of a unified discovery metadata system were identified as products 
essential to the delivery of data and products to a broad range of 
users. Although there is wide appreciation of the work of IODE, 
particularly in light of the rapidly expanding volume and types of 
data being generated by new technologies and observing systems 
(e.g., cabled observatories), the status of financial support for 
IODE activities is such that existing activities cannot be 
maintained and new activities (e.g., expansion to new data types, 
collaboration with JCOMM) cannot be undertaken.  Interventions 
focused on (1) urging nations to increase their support and (2) 
encouraging IODE to focus on regional implementation of its 
activities in the hope of gaining additional support through those 
activities.  Member States (esp. Italy) voiced support for the IOCs 
engagement with biological networks, as can be pursued through 
established links between Census of Marine Life (CoML) Ocean 
Biogeographic Information System (OBIS) and the IOC's Ocean Data and 
Information Networks (ODIN).   The EC instructed the Executive 
Secretary to continue support for the Oostend post through 2006-07 
 
SIPDIS 
from the regular budget, within the relevant Main Line of Action. 
 
IOC's Role in the Global Marine Assessment (GMA) 
 
¶30. The GMA, an initiative of Iceland called for in the Johannesburg 
Plan of Implementation resulting from the 2002 World Summit on 
Sustainable Development, will be an "Assessment of Assessments" that 
is comprehensive in scope (i.e., based on an ecosystem and 
science-based approach with the inclusion of living marine 
resources) and also supports placing emphasis on the regional nature 
of the (global) assessment.  The IOC Executive Secretary presented 
the report from the July 5th GMA "Regular Process" Ad Hoc Steering 
Group, which included budget requirements (for IOC and UNEP), a 
tentative work plan and a national profile and criteria for the 
Group of Experts.  The IOC, along with UNEP, continues to be 
centrally involved with GMA planning and intends to hire a P3/P4 
consultant to assist.  The U.S. and other Executive Council members 
are supportive of the IOC's role in the GMA, but expressed concern 
with the significant budget and staff requirements.  In sidebar 
conversations, members of the Secretariat indicated that continued 
IOC leadership in the GMA will be contingent on provision of new 
extra-budgetary funding.  The U.S. extended an offer to financially 
support the first meeting of the Group of Experts; USDEL is not 
aware of any other national contributions to the IOC for this 
initiative. 
 
Ocean Science Section Overview 
 
¶31.  Since the 2005 Assembly, a group of experts convened to rethink 
the priorities of the IOC science section.  The three U.S. 
participants in this review were Dr. Andy Rosenberg (Univ. New 
Hampshire), Dr. Biliana Cicin-Sain (Univ. Delaware), and Dr. Michael 
Reeve (National Science Foundation).  IOC Vice Chair Dr. Neville 
Smith (Australia) chaired the effort and provided an overview of the 
group's recommended themes of emphasis:  1) impacts of climate on 
marine ecosystems; 2) coastal research to support coastal management 
and mitigation of coastal hazards; 3) Global Marine Assessment; 4) 
marine modeling; and 5) cooperation and integration among these 
themes.  The EC supported the report and included the 
recommendations in the IOC Medium-Term Strategy.  The Executive 
Secretary, referencing the recently-concluded ecosystems discussions 
 
SIPDIS 
at the UN Informal Consultative Process on the Law of the Sea (Ref 
A), suggested that the IOC could provide scientific support to the 
ecosystem approach through contributions to science programs such as 
the Census of Marine Life (CoML), Global Oceans Ecosystems Dynamics 
(GLOBEC) and Integrated Marine Biodiversity and Ecosystems Research 
(IMBER).  The Secretariat will circulate the Advisory Group Report 
prior to the 2007 Assembly. 
 
IOC Regional Programs:  Improving Coordination and Accountability 
 
¶32.  The EC agreed to continue the Intersessional Working Group on 
Regional Programs in light of the dynamic tension in the IOC over 
how to harmonize and integrate priorities and funding through global 
or regional programs.  The WG was encouraged to provide input to the 
IOC Medium Term Strategy, assess the efficiency and effectiveness of 
regional programs through quantifiable indicators, and assess the 
role of the Regional Subsidiary Bodies in the implementation of IOC 
programs of work with due consideration of budgetary, staffing and 
other requirements. 
 
¶33.  A working group on WESTPAC, the regional coordination body for 
IOC programs in the western Pacific area, highlighted decisions made 
at the WESTPAC-VI Session in Vietnam in May 2005.  Actions were 
developed to address membership needs for intersessional groups 
including SEAGOOS (the South East Asian GOOS Regional Alliance) and 
development of a Scientific Symposium Committee (consisting of 
Japan, China, Vietnam, Korea, and the Secretariat) for WESTPAC-VII. 
The nomination of U.S. representative, Bill Thomas (Director, NOAA 
Pacific Services Center), was welcomed.  The group also discussed 
the relationship of WESTPAC to the IOC Medium Term Strategy and Main 
Lines of Action. 
Oliver