UNEP Expert Think-tank Meeting on Establishing an Intergovernmental Panel on Global Environmental Change

OSLO, 15 January 2003

Mr. Børge Brende, Norwegian Minister for the Environment

Dear friends,

• Let me wish you all a warm welcome to Norway – and to this very important Think Thank-meeting on the establishment of an Intergovernmental Panel on Global Environmental Change.
• • Discussing global environmental change could not be more up-to date after a year with abnormal weather in many areas of the world. Some of you come from countries in Europe where we have seen large floods over the last months. Or from India – a country that has had enormous droughts and floods the last year, affecting millions of people. In parts of Central Asia, we are currently experiencing what could be the coldest winter in man's memory. And due to lack of rainfall this autumn, and for the first time in decades, we could be facing power rationing in Norway.
  • The present situation shows us that the global environment is highly unpredictable. We need more scientific knowledge on various scenarios in order to implement appropriate action. We need a mechanism to address the inter-linkages between climate change, loss of biodiversity, pollution of water resources, desertification and degradation of the marine life.
• The present situation also shows us in a very effective way the imminent need for a strong global environmental authority - a strong UNEP. The Johannesburg Summit stressed the importance of a holistic approach to sustainable development. Our objective is to upgrade UNEP, and an important vehicle to reach this objective it to strengthen UNEP's scientific base – through the establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Global Environmental Change - IPEC.
• The World Summit in Johannesburg demonstrated the complex environmental challenges that we all are facing. My predecessor, Mrs. Gro Harlem Brundtland, used to say "Everything is connected to everything". I believe that our challenge is to dismantle this complexity, and then to identify key issues and inter-linkages between the different elements of "everything", so that policy options can be identified and actions being taken.

• • We need solid scientific information to build our political decisions upon. Science may bring to light unexpected consequences of the increasing human impacts on nature and biological processes and production capacity. We have to act in a precautionary way, because cleaning up afterwards can be costly – and even impossible.
  • Species are being lost at a scale of 100 to 1000 times higher than the natural expected loss. Invasive alien species are the second leading cause of biodiversity loss after habitat destruction.
  • In the Artic, the warming trend is reducing the ice habitat for species such as the polar bear and walrus, and is causing more severe climatic episodes such as ice storms that raise mortality rates. At the same time, the polar bear is also being transformed into a bisexual creature – possibly due to chemical pollution.
  • And in part of South Asia, the Asian brown cloud has developed over the last years, and the Monsoon may be on its way from one area to another, causing devastating effects both as regards droughts, floods and food production.
• If we look backwards and count our successes in the environmental area, these have come in areas where political decisions have been founded on solid scientific recommendations. Good examples in this regard are the international work related to ozone, the achievements reached on stopping acid rain in Northern Europe, and of course, the action taken as regards climate change.
• Although there have been many excellent, scientifically credible sectoral assessments of environmental change, these have not always responded to governments' needs.

• • In addition, they have not always included government participation, or communicated their findings effectively to governments and the public in general. Consequently their findings have not always fed into the policy cycle or had policy impacts as warranted.
  • People, including politicians, need to realize what is happening and what is at stake. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has shown that science can be a partner in politics, providing the basis for sound decisions and effective action in policy-making.
• The challenges lying before us are related to a number of different environmental aspects and areas, and we need a mechanism that can guide us when addressing such crosscutting issues.

• • We need a mechanism that can identify and address existing gaps in our scientific knowledge.
  • We need a mechanism that can bring out key issues and inter-linkages relating to climate change, depletion of the ozone layer, loss of biodiversity pollution of water resources, and degradation of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.
  • We need a mechanism that can recommend action in order to reduce the consequences of chemicals on human health
  • We need a mechanism that can give directions on how the living natural resource base can be used in the fight against poverty.
  • We need these recommendations fast.
• Based on these pressing needs, the GMEF in Cartagena last February adopted a recommendation from the Open-ended Intergovernmental Group's report on International Environmental Governance on establishing an Intergovernmental Panel on Global Environmental Change. This decision was further endorsed by the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in September 2002. At the upcoming Governing Council we need to deliver on this decision, and to agree on the concrete modalities for this Panel.

• • In particular, Norway strongly feels that the process of establishing IPEC needs to go far beyond UNEP's own intellectual, technical and financial resources and be highly inclusive in every way.
  • The Panel must highlight the scientific linkages and synergies between the multilateral environmental conventions.
  • The Panel must comprise of a good representation of scientists from the developing countries, and must ensure that these scientific resources are effectively utilized.
  • I believe the Panel will attract high calibre scientists and policymakers, save considerable resources, and would advance the goal of making these deliberations truly scientific and technical rather than political.
• Although UNEP has done some excellent preliminary work in conceptualizing and outlining the scope, functions, responsibilities and working modalities for the Panel in the documentation for the upcoming twenty-second Governing Council, a great deal of work still remains before IPEC becomes a reality.
• For these reasons Norway is very pleased to host this Expert Think Tank Meeting at Losby Gods, as a first step in the process to establish an Intergovernmental Panel on Global Environmental Change (IPEC). We have high expectations that your participation in this meeting will provide valuable and innovative ideas that UNEP can nurture and incorporate into what is, I believe, a mile-stone development for the environment.