Strengthening UNFCCC InDepth Reviews: Potential lessons from OECD

1
Strengthening UNFCCC In-Depth ReviewsPotential
lessons from OECD
Jane Ellis, OECD Bonn, March 2001
2
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
3
Factors influencing IDR process

• Secretariat organisation
• IDR team
• Pre-visit organisation
• How visit is conducted
• How report is prepared

4
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

5
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

6
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.

7
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

8
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

9
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

10
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