Welcome to MET

     Search

 

 

 

 

 

 

Details within the programme

 

Biosystematics Co-ordinator / Biosystematics Working Group, Update 6 February 2003

 

 

Following on the reporting meeting of 19 November, and the obstacles identified there, the BWG’s role was re-examined in the light of additional tasks brought on by last year’s User Workshop and the NBSAP. Analysis showed that the task has become much larger than originally thought. A detailed work plan was drawn up, and a request put to the NBP to have the previously part-time BSC consultancy changed into a full-time one. An application for UNEP enabling funds to cover the resultant extra costs is currently in the pipeline.

Working on the assumption that this new initiative will be approved, the proposed BSC workplan for the coming year is as follows.

 

2003

Jan– Jun

A1 – Process user workshop results

A2 – User workshop proceedings

A3 – Taxonomic Capacity Assessment

A4 – Namibian TCA completed

A5 – Liaise GEF/ GTI proposal

A6 – Draft GEF/ GTI proposal submitted

Jul- Dec B1 – Evaluate database infrastructure

B2 – Database feasibility study

B3 – Database report and plan

C1 – Priorities for taxonomic training

C2 – Foreign training opportunities

D1 – Evaluate library resources

Review

In practice, it is expected that all four main activities will proceed in parallel.

Overlaps with other working groups BWG activities are covered specifically in chapters 3.4 and 9.2 of the NBSAP, but since biosystematics underpins much of biodiversity, the BWG can expect to be at least marginally involved anywhere that ‘inventory’, ‘training’ or ‘database’ is mentioned in the NBSAP.

Besides numerous smaller references, large areas of overlap are in chapters 5.1 (Wetlands), 6.5 (Marine) and most of chapter 4 (Agriculture, Forestry, Biomes, Mountains). The diversity of interests here dictates that the BWG cannot simply ‘take over’ these tasks. It is rather suggested that they be treated as shared responsibilities, with the BWG’s responsibilities tending towards overall strategy, facilitation, standardisation and integration, while individual group responsibilities should tend towards implementation in their groups. There are no clear cut lines, though, and continued communication between all would be essential.

Back to Working Groups

 

 

 

   

Ministry of Environment & Tourism, Namibia. All Rights Reserved.

Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy