Group Session Day 4

Session Structure Some perspective To keep in mind Immediate Steps - Working Groups Actions from UNU-INWEH Timeline Co-chairs and group discussion on way forward

We want you for your minds.... Both as scientists and for the networks you have You were recommended to be part of a WG because of the contributions you could make Searching for documents is not your job, it is not IW:Science’s job Missing documents does NOT reflect badly on IW:Science or on your efforts as an individual and a group

Perspective In 2 weeks (?) time each WG member to provide; Relevant documents that you/your institution may have Directions if you cant locate documents immediately Listing of known documents that are missing Known recommendations on contacts within you networks Then WG members move on

Perspective MUST capture and report the missing documentation and the problems this poses to the project outputs.

There is no preordained outcome for the IW:Science Project. You have the opportunity to examine the results of the $5 billion spent over the last decade by GEF on International Waters and offer world-class advice to GEF on what science needs to be addressed in the future. This is really important because: 1) you can help improve the quality of work done by GEF in the future, no matter who does it; 2) you can help get GEF to fund the work you consider important, and; 3) you can improve the protection and management of those ecosystems you work with and consider to be of global importance. The GEF needs your positive, honest, and open contribution.

There are three levels of advice that GEF seeks from the participants in the Working Groups 1. Quality of documentation of past and current projects. If the information on the science done in past projects is not adequate to conduct a comparative assessment, WGs should say so and openly advise how best to rectify this deficiency. What’s missing from the database and what is the best means of retrieval? Should GEF spend money to retroactively document the science content better? The project secretariat has seen that the compilation of past work has been problematic and is prepared to adjust the work plan, if necessary, to deliver a stronger outcome.

There are three levels of advice that GEF seeks from the participants in the Working Groups 2. Comparative assessment of past and current IW science. What new scientific generalizations emerge? Should this comparative work continue in the future through the proposed Science Learning Network, or other means? 3. The big unknowns of water science – the core questions the WGs are being asked to address. Even if the comparative assessment of past GEF project science is inadequate to address these questions, the WG members can draw on their own world-class experience to offer concrete advice to GEF on how it can best contribute in future to answering these generic, global challenges. Best judgment of participants, presented openly and candidly, is the goal.

Immediate steps – ok? In 2 weeks time provide; Relevant documents that you/your institution may have Directions/contacts if you cant locate known-to-exist documents immediately Already compiling documents !!!

Actions 1. Common synopsis template per project in on IW:Science 2. Ability to search within a project 3. Unique PID 4. GEF TLA’s 5. Inauguration of LN group working spaces and assistance with forum design

Actions 6. Once WG missing/known document input received connect with IA’s and GEF 7. 1 page summary of other Learning Projects available 8. Coordination with WG co-chairs on 2nd WG meeting locations/timing 9. GEF-specific documents. eg. STAP review 10. Meeting Report

Project Timeline Dec 08 - Mar 09 Apr - Jul 09 Aug - Nov 09 Dec 09 - Mar '10 Arp '10 - Jul '10 Aug '10 - Nov '10 Dec '10 - Feb '11 Mar '11 - May '11 Meetings WG Meetings Project Inception Conference (all WG members) Working Group second meeting SC Mid-point review meeting SSG Meetings SSG first meeting SSG second meeting Activities Working Group Activities Activity Provision of baseline inventory output to WG members (raw information) Activity WG co-chairs and relevant GEF, and external, contacts involved with analysis of inventory and preparation of IW System Type Synopsis Report Activity 1.10 – The WGs and Steering Committee meet at the Project Inception Conference. Activity 1.11 – Discussion and analysis via teleconference and within the WGs, facilitated and supported by the PCU. Activity 1.12 – WGs attend second WG meeting to complete their analysis and consolidate their findings. Activity 1.13 – Preparation of ecosystem specific state-of- the-art summary reports by each WG