Post on 03-Apr-2018
- 1 -
ERC/NAC/ME/8-10/010
Paris, 10 août 2010
Original: English
Regional Consultation with National Commissions
for UNESCO in Asia and the Pacific on
the Preparation of the Draft Programme and Budget
for 2012-2013 (36 C/5)
21 – 24 May,
Changwon, Republic of Korea,
- 2 -
CONTENT
Page
Agenda ………………………………………………………………………………………..3
List of participants...……………………………………….………………….…...…………6
Report…………. ……………………...…………………………………..………………….14
- 3 -
The Director-General’s Regional Consultation with National Commissions for UNESCO in Asia and the Pacific on the Preparation of the
Draft Programme and Budget for 2012-2013 (36 C/5) (Changwon, Republic of Korea, 21-24 May 2010)
Agenda and Timetable
Thursday, 20 May 2010
Arrival of Participants at Incheon International Airport Proceed to Gimpo Airport for Domestic Flight Drive to Changwon City Check-in at City 7 Pullman Hotel Friday, 21 May 2010 9:00-09:45
Official Opening of the Consultation
Welcoming address by: � Mr. Taeck-soo CHUN, the Secretary-General of the Korean NationalCommission for UNESCO � Mr. Sang-Keun AHN, Vice Governor for Political Affairs, Gyeongsangnam-do Provincial Government � Mr. Gwang-jo KIM, the Director of UNESCO Bangkok Office Photo Session
09:45-10:00 Coffee Break 10:00-12:00 Adoption of the Provisional Rule of Procedures
Election of the Bureau (Chairperson, Vice Chairpersons, Chief Rapporteur, Co-Rapporteurs)
Adoption of the Provisional Agenda and Timetable Overview of the 36C/5 Planning Process by Mr. Jean-Yves Le
Saux (DIR/BSP/PMR) Preliminary comments by National Commissions 12:00-13:30 Luncheon
� Hosted by Mr. Taeck-soo CHUN, the Secretary-General of the Korean National Commission for UNESCO
13:30-16:00 Cluster Consultations on the Draft 36 C/5 South East Asia - Bangkok / Jakarta
Pacific - Apia
- 4 -
Central Asia - Almaty South Asia - New Delhi East Asia - Beijing West Asia – Tehran
16:00-16:15 Coffee Break
16:15-18:30 Cluster Consultations on the Draft 36C/5 (continued) 19:00 Dinner
� Hosted by Mr. Tae-ho KIM, Governor of Gyeongsangnam-do Provincial Government
Saturday, 22 May 2010 09:00-11:00 Presentation of Cluster Reports in Plenary Session 11:00-11:15 Coffee Break 11:15-13:00 Plenary Discussion (based on the questionnaire) on the
preparation of the Draft 36 C/5 and regional programmatic priorities
13:00-14:30 Luncheon
� Hosted by Mr. Wan-su PARK, Mayor of Changwon City 14:30-16:00 Plenary Discussion on the preparation of the Draft 36 C/5 and
regional programmatic priorities (continued) 16:00-16:15 Coffee break 16:15-18:30 Plenary Discussion on the preparation of the Draft 36 C/5 and
regional programmatic priorities (continued) 19:00
Dinner � Hosted by Mr Hans d’Orville, Representative of the Director-General, Deputy Director-General a. i. and Assistant Director-General for Strategic Planning (ADG/BSP), UNESCO
Sunday, 23 May 2010 09:00-10:45
Plenary Discussion on the preparation of the Draft 36 C/5 and regional programmatic priorities (continued) and Adoption of the Final Report of the Consultation.
- 5 -
10:45-11:00 Coffee Break 11:00-12:30 Address by Mr. Davidson Hepburn, President of the General
Conference of UNESCO Address by Ms. Irina Bokova, Director-General of UNESCO, to be followed by an exchange of views on key issues relating to National Commissions: � involvement of National Commissions in enhancing UNESCO’s
intellectual role as well as in the UN “Delivering as One” reform process
� ways and means of improving National Commissions’ status, roles and capacities, as well as partnerships among them
� harmonization of the DG’s biennial consultations and regional conferences to enhance their relevance and impact
Official Closing
12:30-14:00 Luncheon
� Hosted by Mr. Taeck-soo CHUN, the Secretary-General of the Korean National Commission for UNESCO
14:00-14:30 Presentation on 2011 World Cultural Expo in commemoration of
the 1000th Anniversary of Tripitaka Koreana Field visit to Haeinsa (Temple Stay: Optional)
Monday, 24 May 2010 10:00-13:00
Bus ride from Haeinsa to Novotel Ambassador Gangnam
13:30 Check-in at Novotel Ambassador Gangnam
Proceed to the Korean National Commission for UNESCO 18:30-20:30 Dinner & 60th Anniversary Ceremony of the Republic of Korea’s
admission to UNESCO � Hosted by Mr. Byong-man AHN, Minister of Education, Science and Technology and Chairperson of the Korean National Commission for UNESCO (Head delegate from each National Commission will be invited to the dinner while other participants will be invited to an optional performance programme to be held in Ilsan)
Tuesday, 25 May 2010 Departure of Participants
6
The Director-General’s Regional Consultation with National Commissions for UNESCO
in Asia and the Pacific on the Preparation of the
Draft Programme and Budget for 2012-2013 (36 C/5)
Changwon, Republic of Korea, 21-24 May 2010
List of Participants
I. National Commission for UNESCO
Nation Name Post E-mail Telephone Fax
Afghanistan Mr Shafi Haqmal Secretary-General afghanistan_unesco@yahoo.
com 0093 20 2103848
Australia Ms Anthea Tinney Chairperson natcom.unesco@dfat.gov.au 61262888589 61 2 61122037
Australia Ms Lauren Patmore Secretary-General natcom.unesco@dfat.gov.au 61 2 6261 3190 61 2 6112 3190
Bangladesh Mr Abdul Khaleque Secretary abkhaleque85@yahoo.com 88 02 8627968 88 02 8613420
Bangladesh Mr Mohammad
Shahadat Hossain Programme Officer shahadat.bncu@gmail.com 88 02 8627969 88 01 8613420
Bhutan Ms Jamyang Choeden Deputy Secretary-General jamyangc@druknet.bt 00975 2 322912 00975 2 325069
Brunei Darussalam Mr Abdul Khalid
Mahmood
Head, Int'l Affairs & Public
Relations Unit
khalid.mahmood@moe.edu.
bn 673 2382129 673 2380703
Brunei Darussalam Mr Aminudin Mohd
Yaakub Officer
Aminudin.yaakub
@moe.edu.bn 673 2381846
Cambodia Mr Eang Yos Deputy Secretary-General camnac@hotmail.com 855 23 210 369 855 23 210 369
Cambodia Mr Sowath Muong Member camnac@hotmail.com 855 23 210 369 855 23 210 369
China Ms Jianhong Dong Director, Education Division jhd@moe.edu.cn 0086 10 6609 6649 0086 10 6601 7912
China Ms Lian Xue Programme Officer xuelian@moe.edu.cn 0086 10 6609 6649 86 10 6601 7912
Cook Islands Mr Sonny Williams Secretary-General sonny@oyster.net.ck 682 20725 682 23725
Fiji Mr Amani Cirikisuva Secretary-General amani.cirikisuva@govnet.g
ov.fj 679 3220415 979 3303511
7
India Ms Manisha Verma Secretary & Director, Ministry
of Education maniverma100@gmail.com 91 11 23383779 91 11 23383779
Indonesia Mr Jusman Sihombing Head, Section of Science jusman_04@yahoo.com 62215733127 62215709426
Indonesia Mr Suryo Prayudo Sri
Hargyanto Head of Secretary suryosp@indonatcom.org 62215733127 62215709425
Indonesia Ms Hasnah Gasim National Coordinator of ASPnet aspnetind@cbn.net.id 62215733127 62215733127
Iran Mr Mohammad Reza
Saeidabadi Secretary-General saeidabadi@irunesco.org 0098 21 2222 7825 0098 21 22 252536
Japan Mr Tetsuo Tamura Chairperson uemura@mext.go.jp 813 6734 2603 813 6734 3679
Japan Mr Isao Kiso Secretary-General uemura@mext.go.jp 813 6734 2553 813 6734 3679
Japan Mr Takashi Asai Deputy Secretary-General takasai@mext.go.jp 813 6734 2573 813 6734 3679
Japan Mr Masaki Uemura Unit Chief uemura@mext.go.jp 813 6734 2603 813 6734 3679
Japan Mr Toru Yoshida Official yoshidat@mext.go.jp 813 6734 2602 813 6734 3679
Kazakhstan Ms Assel Utegenova Secretary-General Utegenova_A@mid.kz 007 7172 72 03 47 007 7172 72 03 86
Kiribati Mr Toakai
Koririntetaake Minister of Education itimeon@meys.gov. ki 686 28091 686 28222
Kiribati Mr Ioataake Timeon Secretary itimeon@meys.gov. ki 686 28091 686 28222
Korea Mr Taecksoo Chun Secretary-General chunts@unesco.or.kr 82 2 755 0068 82 2 755 7477
Korea Mr Utak Chung Assistant Secretary-General utchung@unesco.or.kr 82 8 755 0116 82 2 755 7477
Korea Mr Youngkil Kim Chair, Education Sub-
Committee ygkim@handong.edu 82 54 260 1010 82 564 260 1019
Korea Mr Sunjae Lee Director, Division of Partnership
Projects sjlee@unesco.or.kr 82 2 755 2990 82 2 755 7477
Korea Ms Hyunsook Seo Programme Specialist hsseo@unesco.or.kr 82 8 755 1105 (Ext. 230) 82 2 755 4629
Korea Mr Myungsin Kim Assistant Programme Specialist mskim@unesco.or.kr 82 8 755 1105 (Ext. 210) 82 2 755 4629
Korea Ms Bogang Hong Assistant Programme Specialist bghong@unesco.or.kr 82 8 755 1105 (Ext. 340) 82 2 755 7477
Laos Mr Sisamone
Sithirajvongsa Secretary-General prsisamone@hotmail.com 856 21 212108 856 21 212108
8
Laos Mr Khamphanh
Philasavanh Deputy Secretary-General kphilasavanh@hotmail.com 856 21 212108 856 21 212108
Malaysia Mr Mohd Zulkifli
Mohammed Secretary-General
zulkifli.mohamed@moe.gov
.my 603 8884 6104 603 8889 5473
Maldives Ms Jameela Ali Khalid Secretary-General jameela@moe.gov.mv 960 334 1234 960 331 5254
Marshall Islands Mr Richard A Bruce Assistant Secretary for AFHR
Member rbruce@rmimoe.net 962 625 5261 692 625 3861
Micronesia Mr Wilson Kephas Administrator wilson.kephas@fsmed.fm 691 370 3008 691 370 7655
Mongolia Mr Dalaijargal Dorjbal Secretary-General mon.unesco@mongol.net 976 11 315652 976 11 322612
Nauru Mr John Tibwere
Aremwa Secretary-General john.aremwa@naurugov.nr 674 5573133 (Ext. 271)
Nepal Mr Raju Babu
Pudasaini Section Officer sbpudasaini@hotmail.com 977 1 4418782 977 1 442460
New Zealand Ms Edna Tait National Commission member ednatait@xtra.co.nz 0064 7 315 4943 0064 4 473 8628
New Zealand Ms Elizabeth Rose Secretary-General Elizabeth.rose@minedu.gov
t.nz 0064 4 463 8613 0064 4 473 8628
Niue Ms Janet Sipeli-
Tasmania Secretary-General educ.deputy@mail.gou.nu 00683 4703 00683 4301
Pakistan Mr Saqib Aleem Secretary-General pncuibd@dsl.net.pk 0092 51 9257225 0092 51 9257519
Palau Mr Dwight Alexander Secretary-General histpres@palaunet.com 680 488 2489 680 488 2657
Papua New Guinea Mr Yori Yei Secretary-General unesco_yei@datec.net.pg 675 3253718 675 3259663
Philippines Ms Preciosa Soliven Secretary-General pssoliven@yahoo.com 632 834 3447 632 831 8873
Samoa Ms Doreen Tuala Assistant Chief Executive
Officer droebeck@lesamoa.net 685 24614 685 20004
Singapore Ms Hui Lian Senior Officer/Secretariat lian_hui@moe.gov.sg 65 68796845 65 67752457
Singapore Ms Ruvini Ariyaratne
Senior Manager/Secretariat,
Culture & Information Sub-
Commission
Ruvini_Ariyaratne@mica.g
ov.sg 656837 9424 65 6837 9898
Solomon Islands Mr Matthew Timothy
Ngele Secretary-General us@mehrd.gov.sb 00 677 28803 00 677 22042
Sri Lanka Mr Rohan Prithiviraj
Perera Secretary-General slncu@slt.lk 00 94 11 2745180 00 94 11 2848998
Tajikistan Mr Sukhrob Mirzoaliev Counsellor unescotj@mail.ru 992 372 21 60 01 992 372 21 02 59
9
Timore-Leste Mr Armindo Maia Member, Education Committee kailako@yahoo.com 670 331 31 40
Tonga Ms Lucy Moala-Mafi Secretary-General lucymafi@hotmail.com 676 23511 676 23596
Tuvalu Mr Katalina Pasiale
Taloka Secretary-General Ktaloka@gov.tv 688 20834
Uzbekistan Mr Alisher Ikramov Secretary-General unesco@natcom.ccc.uz 998 71 2670561 998 71 2670538
Vanuatu Mr Narand Beerbul Director, Ministry of Education njbeerbul@vanuatu.gov.vu 678 22309 678 23289
Vietnam Mr Sanh Chau Pham Secretary-General unescochau@yahoo.com 084 437993510
Vietnam Mr Anh Pham Viet Officer vietanh2483@yahoo.com 084437993512
II. UNESCO
Institution Name Post E-mail Telephone Fax
UNESCO HQ Ms Irina Bokova Director-General i.bokova@unesco.org
UNESCO HQ Mr Davidson Hepburn
President, General Conference
d.hepburn@unesco.org
UNESCO HQ Mr Hans d'Orville
Assistant Director-General, BSP
h.dorville@unesco.org 33 1 45 68 19 19 33 1 45 68 55 21
UNESCO HQ Mr Akio Arata Director, ERC/CFS a.arata@unesco.org
UNESCO HQ Mr Jean-Yves Le Saux
Deputy Director, BSP jy.le-saux@unesco.org 33 1 45 68 13 48 331 45 68 55 21
UNESCO HQ Mr Kang Huang Deputy Director k.huang@unesco.org 33 1 45 68 12 80 33 1 45 68 55 06
UNESCO HQ Mr Xiaolin Cheng Chief, ERC/RSC/NAC X.Cheng@unesco.org 33 1 45 68 17 13 33 1 45 68 55 40
UNESCO HQ Ms Emiko de Marmier-Murai
Chief, ERC/RSC/NAC E.De-Marmier@unesco.org
UNESCO HQ Ms Astrid Gillet Chief, ED/EO/FS/SPM am.gillet@unesco.org
UNESCO HQ Ms Amita Vohra Executive Officer, ODG/DIR
A.Vohra@unesco.org
UNESCO HQ Mr Bobir Tukhtabayev
Programme Specialist, ERC/RSC/NAC
b.tukhtabayev@unesco.org
33 1 45 68 17 29 33 1 45 68 55 40
10
UNESCO HQ Ms Mary Lynn Hasan
Assistant ml.hasan@unesco.org 33 1 45 68 13 70 33 1 45 68 55 21
Almaty Office Mr Sergey Lazarev
Director & Representative
s.lazarev@unesco.org 7727 258 2643 (Ext. 1421)
7 727 279 48 53
Bangkok Office Mr Gwang-Jo Kim Director gj.kim@unesco.org 66 2 391 8474 66 2 391 0866
Bangkok Office Mr Etienne Clement
Deputy Director e.clement@unesco.org 662 391 0577 6623910866
Bangkok Office Mr Darryl Macer Regional Advisor d.macer@unesco.org 662 391 0577 141
Bangkok Office Ms Mami Umayahara
Programme Specialist m.umayahara@unesco.org
66 2 391 0577 66 2 391 0866
Beijing Office Mr Abhimanyu Singh
Director a.singh@unesco.org
Beijing Office Mr Min Bahadur Bista
Programme Specialist m.bista@unesco.org 15801355494 0086 10 65324854
Dhaka Office Mr Derek Elias Officer in Charge d.elias@unesco.org 66 23910577 (Ext. 106)
66 2 3910866
Hanoi Office Ms Katherine Muller-Marin
Head of Office k.muller-marin@unesco.org
84 4 914345484
Islamabad Office Mr Warren Mellor Director w.mellor@unesco.org 00 92 51 2611170 73 00 92 51 2611175
Jakarta Office Mr Hubert Gijzen Director & Representative
h.gijzen@unesco.org 62 21 7399818 62 21 72796489
Kabul Office Mr Shigeru Aoyagi
Director & Representative
s.aoyagi@unesco.org 0093 700283008
Kathmandu Office Mr Axel Plathe Head & Representative a.plathe@unesco.org 977 1 5554396 977 1 5554450
New Delhi Office Mr Armoogum Parsuramen
Director & Representative
a.parsuramen@unesco.org
91 11 267 13000 91 11 26713001
New Delhi Office Mr Bhanu R. Neupane
Regional Programme Specialist
b.neupane@unesco.org 91 11 267 13000 91 11 26713001
Phnom Penh Office Mr Teruo Jinnai Head & Representative t.jinnai@unesco.org 855 23 72 50 71 855 23 72 30 54
Apia Office Mr Visesio Pongi Director v.pongi@unesco.org 685 24276 685 26593
Tashkent Office Mr Jorge Ivan Espinal
Head & Representative ji.espinal@unesco.org 998 71 1207154 998 71 1207159
Tehran Office Mr Qunli Han Director & Representative
q.han@unesco.org 9821 2275 1315 8 (Ext.101~3)
0098 21 2275 1318
11
III. Observer
Institution Name Post E-mail Telephone Fax
Peruvian National Commission for UNESCO Ms Maria Miyan General Secretary mmiyan@minedu.gob.pe 51 1 2232284
Russian Federation National Commission for UNESCO
Mr Amir Bilyalitdinov
Deputy Secretary-General rusnatcom@mail.ru 74992442475
Turkish National Commission for UNESCO Mr Nihat Zal Secretary-General nzal@unesco.org.tr 90312 426 58 94
Asia-Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding
Mr Seunghwan Lee Director shlee@unescoapceiu.org
82 2 774 3956 82 2 774 3957
Asia-Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding
Mr Jonghun Kim Head, Office of Planning & Administration
jhkim@unescoapceiu.org
82 2 774 3956 82 2 774 3957
Asia-Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding
Ms Jihyang Lee Programme Specialist, Office of Planning & Administration
jhlee@unescoapceiu.org
82 2 774 3956 82 2 774 3957
Inter-City Intangible Cultural Cooperation Network
Ms Heekyung Choi Secretary-General Iccn2008@yahoo.co.kr 82 33 640 5475 82 33 640 4756
Intangible Cultural Heritage Centre for Asia and the Pacific
Mr Seongyong Park
Executive Director Js3114@gmail.com 82 42 820 3507 82 42 820 3500
Intangible Cultural Heritage Centre for Asia and the Pacific
Mr Wonmo Park Chief, Information & Research Division
pweonmo@hanmail.net 82 42 820 3502 82 42 820 3500
Intangible Cultural Heritage Centre for Asia and the Pacific
Ms Pilyoung Park Project Officer pilyoungpark@gmail.com
82 10 5444 1690 82 42 820 3500
The Korean National University of Cultural Heritage
Mr Kidong Bae President bkd5374@nuch.ac.kr 82 41 830 7006 82 41 830 7010
World Martial Arts Union Mr JungYeop Chun Deputy General-Secretary secretariat@womau.com 82 43 850 7977 82 43 850 7983
World Martial Arts Union Ms HyunSeon Bong Int'l Affairs Assistant secretariat@womau.com 82 43 850 7977 82 43 850 7983
World Martial Arts Union Mr Geunwon Choi Assistant gw87fun@hanmail.net 82 16 9855 5431 82 43 850 7983
12
IV. Gyeongsangnam-do Provincial Government
Institution Name Post E-mail Telephone Fax
Gyeongsangnam-do Mr Taeho Kim Provincial Governor 055 211 2001 055 284 9393
Gyeongsangnam-do Mr Mankeon Seo Administrative Vice Governor
mgseo54@korea.kr 055 211 2010 055 211 2018
Gyeongsangnam-do Mr Jongdae Bae Director-General, Bureau of Culture, Sports and Tourism
baejd@korea.kr 055 211 4800 055 211 4819
Gyeongsangnam-do Mr Jongin Jeong Chairperson, Executive Committee
jung1111@feelgn.net 055 211 6200 055 211 6259
Gyeongsangnam-do Mr Sungjae Park Director-General, Bureau of General Affairs
sung14@korea.kr 055 211 6250 055 211 6259
Gyeongsangnam-do Mr Seongkyu Mun Manager, Division of External Relations
skmoon60@korea.kr 055 211 6282 055 211 6259
Gyeongsangnam-do Ms Jongha Lee Staff jh915@feelgn.net 055 211 6283 055 211 6259
Gyeongsangnam-do Ms Chaeyoung Min
Staff m7416@korea.kr 055 211 6284 055 211 6259
Gyeongsangnam-do Mr Moongyo Jeong
Staff jmkkorea@korea.kr 055 211 6285 055 211 6259
V. Changwon City
Institution Name Post E-mail Telephone Fax
Changwon-si Mr Yoonsoo Kim Acting Mayor immi2040@korea.kr 055 212 2010 055 212 2019
Changwon-si Mr Huipan Jeong Director-General, Planning Bureau
daunne@korea.kr 055 212 2021 055 212 2109
Changwon-si Mr Taeyoul Kim Director, Lifelong Learning Division
tykim1491@korea.kr 055 212 2320 055 212 2109
Changwon-si Mr lecryeal Yoo Head, Lifelong Section yoo551101@korea.kr 055 212 2322 055 212 2109
Changwon-si Ms Mihye Baek Staff, Lifelong Section pmh0703@korea.kr 055 212 2323 055 212 2109
13
VI.Secretariat
Institution Name Post E-mail Telephone Fax
Korean National Commission for UNESCO Mr Jinsung Jeon
Head, Culture & Communication Team
jjs112@unesco.or.kr 82 2 755 9066 82 2 755 7477
Korean National Commission for UNESCO Ms Sunkyung Lee Programme Specialist sklee@unesco.or.kr
82 2 755 1105 (Ext. 530)
83 2 755 7477
Korean National Commission for UNESCO
Ms Soyoung Chung
Assistant Programme Specialist
soyoung@unesco.or.kr 82 2 755 1105 (Ext. 600)
84 2 755 7477
Korean National Commission for UNESCO Ms Myunghee Han
Assistant Programme Specialist
hanmh@unesco.or.kr 82 2 755 1105 (Ext. 650)
85 2 755 7477
Korean National Commission for UNESCO Ms Jaewoon Yoon Programme Assistant lavender@unesco.or.kr
82 2 755 1105 (Ext. 730)
86 2 755 7477
Korean National Commission for UNESCO Ms Eunhye Lee Programme Assistant carrie@unesco.or.kr
82 2 755 1105 (Ext. 710)
87 2 755 7477
Korean National Commission for UNESCO
Ms Hyelyung Hwang
Programme Assistant clink@unesco.or.kr 82 2 755 1105 (Ext. 710)
88 2 755 7477
Korean National Commission for UNESCO Ms Hyun Kwak Programme Assistant uccn@unesco.or.kr
82 2 755 1105 (Ext. 730)
89 2 755 7477
Korean National Commission for UNESCO Mr Albert Lee Minute Taker cafeangst@yahoo.com 82 10 8487 7885
14
The Director-General’s Regional Consultation with National Commissions for UNESCO in
Asia and the Pacific on the Preparation of the
Draft Programme and Budget for 2012-2013 (36 C/5)
Changwon, Republic of Korea, 21-24 May 2010
REPORT
Introduction
Delegations of National Commissions for UNESCO of the following 42 Member States of Asia and
the Pacific participated in the biennial Regional Consultation, along with representatives of Peru, the
Russian Federation and Turkey:
Afghanistan, Australia, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, Cook Islands,
Fiji, India, Indonesia, Iran, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall
Islands, Micronesia, Mongolia, Nauru, Nepal, New Zealand, Niue, Pakistan, Palau, Papua New
Guinea, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Samoa, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan,
Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, and Vietnam.
Mr Davidson Hepburn, President of UNESCO’s General Conference, was present at the Plenary of
the Consultation meeting on 22 May 2010, as was Mr Hans d’Orville, ADG/BSP and DDG a.i. Also
present at the meeting were 11 UNESCO HQ representatives, 14 Heads of Field Offices and other
UNESCO Field staff, and 5 Observer-Institutions.
Opening of the Consultation
The Regional Consultation was formally opened by:
• Mr. Taeck-soo Chun, Secretary-General of the Korean National Commission for UNESCO,
• Mr. Man-Keun Seo, Vice-Governor for Administrative Affairs, Gyeongsangnam-do
Provincial Government,
• Mr. Gwang-jo Kim, Director of the UNESCO Bangkok Office (Address on behalf of Ms
Irina Bokova, Director-General of UNESCO).
The texts of these speeches are annexed to this report.
The Provisional Rules of Procedure and the Provisional Agenda and Timetable were adopted
unanimously after slight editorial amendments to Articles 6 and 19.
The following county-representatives were elected as members of the Bureau:
Chairperson:
Mr. Taeck-soo Chun (Korea)
15
Vice Chair:
Hon. Toakai Koririntetaake (Kiribati)
Mr. Chau Pham Sanh (Vietnam)
Ms. Preciosa Soliven (Philippines)
Rapporteur-General
Mr. Saqib Aleem (Pakistan)
Co-Rapporteurs
Mr. Takashi Asai (Japan)
Ms. Janet Sipeli-Tasmania (Niue)
Overview of the 36 C/5 Planning Process
Mr. Jean-Yves Le Saux (Director, Programming Division, and Deputy Director of the Bureau of
Strategic Planning) provided an overview of the planning process for 36C/5. He noted that the 36
C/5 would be the last programme & budget for the period covered by the current medium-term
strategy (34 C/4) and should contribute to the achievement of its six-year goals and of the mission
assigned to UNESCO for sustainable development, the eradication of poverty, the promotion of
intercultural dialogue and the fostering of a culture of peace.
He also referred to the ongoing external evaluation of UNESCO, a member of the Independent
External Evaluation Team being present as an observer.
Upon request, the Secretariat also provided a brief summary of the recently completed Arab
Regional Consultation held on 10-13 May in Rabat, Morocco and of its recommendations.
When addressing the meeting, His Excellency Davidson Hepburn stressed that the Regional
Consultations are of considerable importance for UNESCO and reflect its attachment to the National
Commissions, which he called “the lifeblood of the Organization”.
In addition, the Deputy Director General a.i., Mr Hans d’Orville, stressed the importance which the
Director-General attaches to the relevance and visibility of UNESCO’s action, two themes which
should usefully guide the debates of this meeting. The UN “Delivering as One” process was also of
considerable importance for the future relevance of UNESCO at national level.
Preliminary Comments by National Commissions
Participants agreed to examine to address issues in the order in which they appear in the
Questionnaire, while keeping in mind the broader context and the goals of the Medium-Term
Strategy. In response to a request by the Chairman, the Secretariat reviewed the key points of the
Questionnaire in order
It was emphasized that the discussions provided a unique opportunity to gather the National
Commissions for UNESCO and to receive a substantive contribution from them on a biannual basis.
16
A preliminary round of discussion took place among participants. Some participants noted the
importance of the “new humanism” at the core of the Director-General’s vision for UNESCO, which
breathes new life into the intellectual and ethical mission of UNESCO, and focuses on the relevance
to today’s world of dialogue, culture of peace, mutual respect and understanding, human rights, and
other fundamental principles and values.
Participants expressed support for this new orientation given by the Director-General, returning to
what a participant called “the essence of the constitution.” The meeting concurred about the abiding
relevance of UNESCO’s constitution, one delegate expressing “awe” that it was written six decades
ago in language she described as not only “beautiful,” but “correct.” Delegates generally agreed
about the fundamental importance of UNESCO’s intellectual mission, which alone in the UN system
takes leadership for intellectual work, collecting, assessing and sharing knowledge, as well as about
its ethical mission – one delegate referring to it as a leader and conscience in the world.
Operationally, it was stressed that the National Commissions for UNESCO played a unique role as
national coordinating bodies working with the governments of Member States, in helping to carry
out UNESCO’s intellectual and ethical mission.
In this regard, and at the Chairperson’s request, a brief presentation was made by Darryl Macer,
Regional Adviser for Social and Human Sciences (UNESCO Office Bangkok) concerning the ethical
dimensions of climate change.
Several preliminary interventions focused on UNESCO’s relationship with its National
Commissions, particularly in the context of the new focus on Field operations and of UN reform.
Some delegates considered critical that decentralization be pursued in a more forceful fashion,
ensuring both better coordination between Headquarters and the Field, and a greater independence in
decision-making and budgetary control for Field offices, in order to take better advantage of
expertise in the field. Several delegates also expressed reservations with the current system of
representation on the Executive Board, considering that the Pacific island States should be
guaranteed to sit on the Board (it was agreed that the President of the ASPAC Group in Paris would
be invited to the next round of the Director-General’s Consultation with National Commissions in
2012).
Several interventions focused on the organisation’s role and comparative advantages within the
broader UN system, calling for a more clearly defined role for the organisation with a view to
enhancing its effectiveness, while ensuring greater cooperation between the “UNESCO family” and
other UN bodies on issues of common interest and expertise.
Cluster Consultations on the 36 C/5
Six Cluster Consultations were organized during the Consultation for the following UNESCO
clusters:
• South-East Asia (Bangkok and Jakarta)
• Pacific (Apia)
• Central Asia (Almaty)
• South Asia (New Delhi)
17
• East Asia (Beijng)
• West Asia (Tehran)
[N.B.: the reports of these Cluster Consultations are annexed for reference]
Recommendations concerning the 36 C/5
I) AFRICA AND GENDER EQUALITY – UNESCO’S TWO GLOBAL PRIORITIES
The participants agreed that UNESCO should continue to give global priority to Africa and Gender
Equality. They felt that these global priorities should be translated into regional recommendations so
that the countries include such recommendations into national policies and allocate appropriate
resources.
Q. 1 In what areas and how should UNESCO strengthen its support to the implementation of
AU decisions, the regional integration process and the priorities of the Regional Economic
Communities and African countries? What kind of support should UNESCO provide to
regional specialised institutions of the African Union?
Participants recommended the following:
• To ensure the global coherence of UNESCO’s action in favor of Africa with the goals of
African Union.
• To give priority to poverty reduction through education, science, skill training and transfer of
knowledge.
• To give special priority to Teacher Training in Sub-Saharan Africa (TTISSA).
• To promote North-South-South Cooperation and inter-country Cooperation in this area.
• Resources allocated appear sufficient but should be used efficiently and effectively (focused
on endogenous development)
Additional comments:
• The delegates also noted that the ASPAC region has the largest number of poor people and
that this situation should be taken into account in the programme and budget.
• It was recommended that UNESCO should also cooperate with the various regional and
subregional institutions and arrangements in ASPAC (for example, Shanghai Organization
for Cooperation in Central Asia).
Q. 2 Do you think that sufficient focus and resources are currently given to Africa in
UNESCO’s Programme and Budget?
Some participants considered that resources allocated appeared sufficient but should be used
efficiently and effectively, focusing particularly on endogenous development. Others felt that
resources could be increased but that it is essential to evaluate the impacts of the interventions to
date.
Some argued more generally that UNESCO should focus on priority countries and priority areas –
hence providing more focus to sub-Saharan Africa.
18
Q. 3 Would you have suggestions on how the impact of UNESCO’s action could be enhanced
and its approaches renewed, both in terms of Africa as a whole and at the country level?
The following steps were recommended:
• A priority on poverty reduction through education, skills training and transfer of
knowledge.
• North-South-South Cooperation and Inter-Country Cooperation in these areas,
• Strengthened South-South and North-South-South cooperation more generally,
including for the promotion of cultural exchanges and capacity building.
• Further strengthening the African NATCOMs.
• Improved Monitoring & Evaluation.
• Assessment of Bilateral assistance and UNESCO to provide technical assistance where
possible (Ex: to set up a training institute for education planning)
• Enhancement of teacher’s status (with the use of ICTs)
• Distance Learning
• Sharing of best practices and networking
Q. 4 Fifteen years after the Fourth World Conference on Women, held in Beijing, what
would you suggest or consider as strategically most important action(s) in order to progress
with the effective implementation of UNESCO’s Priority Gender Equality Action Plan (GEAP)
for 2008-2013 and scale up UNESCO’s commitment?
• Mainstreaming gender equality throughout all UNESCO Sectors.
• Give Education (MP I) the priority for gender mainstreaming, through already developed
UNESCO programmes/modules;
• Focus on poverty reduction through life skills education and transfer of knowledge for
women.
• Continue policy dialogue regarding gender equality and create new opportunities for
women empowerment through education, science & technology, and culture.
• Special focus for countries in transition and countries in post-conflict post-disaster
situations.
• At the national and sub-regional level , UNESCO to collect data about the situation on
gender parity in the Pacific to include such areas as migration, age, gender roles & socio
economic status.
• South-South and North-South-South cooperation.
• Establishing focal points on gender in National Commissions with the provision of
corresponding training.
• MDGs should cover culture and science for women’s empowerment.
Participants noted that « gender quality » should be understood as concerning both genders, and that
each country has its own challenges/needs in relations to gender priorities.
19
Q. 5 Do you think that sufficient focus and resources are currently given to Priority Gender
Equality in UNESCO’s Programme and Budget?
Participants generally considered that the current gender equality action plan should be
strengthened. Concerning resources, they considered that Gender Equality does receive
adequate resources, but that it needs to have more obvious results in implementation.
Q. 6 Given the international commitment to attain MDGs 2 and 3 by 2015, what initiatives
would you suggest or consider to mobilise all the Organisation’s competences in favour of
women and girls empowerment ?
In addition to replies under Q. 4:
• Advocacy for reservation in governance
• Recognition of domestic work in GDP
• Special focus on girl’s education
• Gender sensitive budgeting in education and other sectors
• Include gender-clauses in contracts
• Institute focused awards for women
Q.7 Which major initiatives and activities should be initiated to strengthen gender equality
in Africa, within UNESCO’s fields of competence, during the Decade for Women’s
Empowerment 2010-2020, declared by the African Union at its 12th summit?
Some participants mentioned the following steps:
• Special focus on girl’s education and female literacy
• Focus on women’s right to property and resources
Q. 8 How could UNESCO increase the relevance and effectiveness of its interventions
benefiting LDCs, SIDS and excluded and disadvantaged groups, including indigenous peoples?
Specifically, what initiatives and in which programme areas would you suggest?
Participants felt that for Least Developed Countries (LDC), Small Island Developing States (SIDS),
and excluded and disadvantaged groups, including indigenous peoples, these have different needs
and one response will not fit all. They also recommendend:
• More programmatic focus and attention by all Sectors
• Capacity building and human resource development
• Strengthening of concerned Field offices to meet the needs of these priority groups.
• Exchange of best practices.
• The Pacific should not be overlooked in initiatives that are carried out by UNESCO.
• Facilitate more donor interventions through in-house capacity building and mobilize more
resources for LDCs and SIDS.
• Strengthen cluster approach for SIDS.
• Advocate focused policies for endangered languages.
• Documentation of traditional/indigenous knowledge systems (especially under new
Intellectual Property Rights regime).
20
Participants generally recognized the relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of UNESCO's activities
for Post-Conflict Countries and Post-Disaster Countries.
Q. 9 How should UNESCO, drawing on action by all its Major Programmes and
intersectoral activities, respond to the needs of youth, give its action a higher profile and
enhance the impact of the various initiatives undertaken?
This group is considered a priority throughout the region (more than half of population of Central
Asia is youth). Participants recommended the following:
• Mainstream youth in all the programmes.
• More resourcing of youth programmes as a priority area for UNESCO.
• Involve youths in ESD programs.
• TVET for youth employment.
• Encourage Participation Programme in youth activities.
• Support countries to develop youth policies .
• More emphasis on and the raising of the profile of youth participation in all UNESCO
programmes, sectors and intersectoral programmes.
• A strengthening of existing effective programmes for youth, e.g. the UNESCO Associated
Schools and UNESCO Clubs.
• Increasing the opportunities for youth in creative industries.
• Enabling/strengthening the roles of youth in development at local and national levels and
international cooperation.
• Supporting technical, secondary and out of school education opportunities for youth for the
world of work.
• The Youth Conference before the General Conference to be continued.
• More support to youth exchange and contact including through social media and ICTs.
Participants noted that the action in favor of youth was of particular importance in the Pacific, where
youth are a key target group in every Pacific country, and where many Pacific countries have
national policies and programmes for youth development and leadership. Participants called for a
dedicated staff member for youth issues to be appointed into the Apia Office.
EDUCATION
Q. 10 (ED) Do you agree that, for the 36 C/5, UNESCO should pursue its focus on the four
priority areas, namely literacy, teachers, skills development for the world of work and sector-
wide policy, planning and management – with quality as an overarching requirement?
The participants all recognized education as the core mandate of the Organization. They agreed to
maintain the four priority areas of the 35 C/5, namely literacy, teachers, skills for the world of
work (which includes TVET) and sector-wide policy planning and management as the key priorities
of the 36 C/5, with some giving a stronger emphasis to education planning and management,
including education finance, both at national and decentralized levels.
All participants reconfirmed the importance of promoting a holistic and inclusive approach to
education, from ECCE to higher education, in the perspective of lifelong learning, and including
21
literacy (especially focusing on literacy skills for women). With five years left to the 2015 target,
UNESCO must accelerate its efforts to reach Education for All (EFA).
Q. 11 Which other area(s) should UNESCO’s Education Programme concentrate on in
support of countries’ priorities and in accelerating progress towards the six EFA Dakar goals
and the two education-related MDGs:
Participants were unanimous in considering that UNESCO should put a higher priority in the
following areas:
• Higher education; reflecting the high mobility of students in the region and the forthcoming
revision of the 1983 Regional Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and
Degrees in Higher Education in Asia and the Pacific.
• Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) as part of Education for All (EFA) and
EFA policies, further expanding and operationalizing ESD. It was recommended that the
ASPnet be systematically used as a hub for promoting ESD (including climate change and
biological diversity). UNESCO should also coordinate programmes to promote Education for
sustainable development in cooperation with other UN agencies as the leading agency of
DESD. Participants considered that UNESCO should promote climate change education
within the framework of ESD. Some delegates proposed that ESD should be adapted as an
MLA.
• Education for peace, tolerance and international understanding, some suggesting that
ESD should become EPSD (Education for Peace and Sustainable Development) – building in
the ASPAC region on the many resources available, including the Category 1 Mahatma
Gandhi Institute of Education for Peace and Sustainable Development (MGIEP) and the
Category 2 institute Asia-Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding
(APCEIU). Several participants highlighted the importance of human rights education was
also recommended to promote just and tolerant societies.
The following priorities were also supported by participants:
• Secondary Education.
• ECCE; reflecting its importance as a foundation for lifelong learning.
• Arts education. Participants expressed their support to Korea’s efforts to organize a
conference on the impact of Arts education (Second World Conference on Arts Education,
25-28 May 2010).
• HIV and AIDS education
• Application of ICTs to education.
• Skills development and life work pathways.
• Teacher training, but also in-service training for classroom work and responsibilities in later
careers.
Several participants noted the need for inter-agency cooperation -- one participant noted that ECCE
should be implemented jointly with UNICEF, HIV/AIDS preventive education with UNAIDS. They
agreed that UNESCO should provide policy advice and expertise in education sector.
22
Q. 12 What particular measures would you suggest to enhance the impact and visibility of
UNESCO’s action in the field of education at the global, regional and country levels?
UNESCO’s visibility can be enhanced through quality publications such as the Global Monitoring
Report (GMR) of EFA, celebration of specific UNESCO days and improved relations with media.
The impact at country level can be strengthened through increased field presence, more effective
coordination with partners, in particular donor groups, EFA convening agencies and other
stakeholders. UNESCO’s national education support strategy (UNESS) can also be used as a basis
for improved coordination with these partners.
Furthermore, it is necessary to strengthen monitoring and evaluation of UNESCO’s programmes
in order to ensure their impact. Development of national capacities for EFA data collection and
analysis at national and decentralized levels should also be strengthened.
It was considered crucial to improve UNESCO’s web-site as a resource for all countries (including
changing its protocols to make it possible for member states to download and adapt information to
their own situation).
Other recommendations included:
• Strengthening NATCOMs and Field offices
• Involving parliamentarians and other elected representatives
• Global monitoring of EFA
• Regional level networking, including that with established regional associations, such as the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the South Asian Association for Regional
Cooperation (SAARC) or the Forum of Asia Pacific Parliamentarians for Education
(FASPPED)
• Strengthen national level reporting
• Sharing of best practices at all levels
• Simplification of procedures and enhanced transparency
• Involvement of NGO and Media
• Strengthen in-house communication channels and making best use of events such as
launching GMR of EFA, Global EFA Week, Literacy Day, Teacher’s Day.
• Promote forward-thinking research and anticipatory studies (Laboratory of Ideas)
Q. 13 How could UNESCO play a more effective role at the country level in mobilizing and
coordinating partners in support for the education sector?
Pariticipants supported:
• the strengthening of the UNESCO National Education Support Strategy (UNESS), to help
UNESCO play a more effective role in mobilising and coordinating partners
• pooling of resources of multi/ bilateral partners
• Enhanced monitoring of process and delivery
• Promoting UNESCO’s concepts/modules /tools among partners
• Identifying and disseminating best practices
23
• Strengthening the relationship between field/cluster/regional offices, UN bodies and
NATCOMs
• Strengthening UNESCO’s role as the technical advisor in Education
• Communicating and lobbying legislative and policy making bodies such as parliament,
high council of education, ministry of education, ministry of planning
NATURAL SCIENCES
Q. 14 What are the priority areas to be pursued by Major Programme II in 2012-2013?
Participants supported all the activity areas listed, with special priority to:
• Science, technology, engineering and innovation (STI) policy and capacity-building.
• Freshwater management policies and governance (with adequate reflection on the role of
UNESCO Category 2 centers in this field).
• Disaster preparedness and mitigation, including floods and ocean-based hazards and related
climate science and services (some proposed that Disaster Risk Reduction should be adapted
as a Main Line of Action within Natural Sciences).
• Science education.
• Ecological sciences and ecosystem services including Man and the Biosphere (MAB).
• Ocean sciences and services as well as capacity development, including marine assessment
activities.
One participants supported greater support to Basic sciences. Some expressed concern over the focus
on Renewable and alternative energy policies. Several participants highlighted the importance of
local and indigenous scientific knowledge.
Q. 15 What particular measures would you suggest to enhance the impact and visibility of
UNESCO’s action in the field of natural sciences at the global, regional and country levels?
Several recommendations were made:
• The meeting expressed support to the intergovernmental science programmes, and to the
national committees of IOC, MAB, IHP, IGCP, IPBS. However, they considered that
UNESCO should make efforts to make these programmes more visible.
• Enhancing the clearing house function of UNESCO, especially through improved access
to and use of information in UNESCO’s virtual library.
• Supporting and mobilizing support of Category 2 centers.
• Strengthening NATCOMs and Field offices in scientific fields.
• Involving parliamentarians and other elected representatives.
• Regional level networking, including that with established regional associations, such as
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) or the South Asian Association for
Regional Cooperation (SAARC).
• Strengthen national level reporting.
• Sharing of best practices at all levels.
24
• Involvement of NGO and Media.
• Strengthen in-house communication channels.
• Promote forward-thinking research and anticipatory studies (Laboratory of Ideas).
• Joint research and collaborations.
• Increasing engagement with private sector.
Several participants recommended that the regional flagship programs (COMPETENCE, BREES,
SWITCH, Disaster preparedness) be piloted with relevant ministries in Member States in the clusters
and made visible in full coordination with national commissions and other UNESCO field Offices
Q. 16 How could partners, including non-governmental stakeholders and the private sector,
be mobilized for a broader support of science for development, at global, regional and national
levels?
• Enhance partnership with Category 2 centers.
• Replicate the UNESS model to mobilise broader support for science for
development.
• Develop special recognition for Corporate social responsibility (CSR) in UNESCO’s
science programmes.
• Create Institute special recognition and awards.
• Create opportunities for business incubation.
• Involve private universities /NGOs.
• Develop roster of private sector and NGO partners who may be interested in
UNESCO’s Science programs at national, regional and global levels.
• Increased dissemination of Science activities.
SOCIAL AND HUMAN SCIENCES
Q. 17 What are the priority areas which the Social and Human Sciences Sector should pursue
in 2012-2013:
Participants agreed that UNESCO should dedicate more funds to priority SHS programmes in
the 36 C/5, and that the SHS programme be more focused. Participants identified as priority
areas:
• MOST – participants recommend that MOST (covering also migration) budget be
strengthened, as it is considered the most important priority area of SHS programs and
currently underfunded.
• Youth Development (including sports and physical education)
• Ethics of science and technology, in particular bioethics. N.B.: While work on the ethical
implications of climate change was appreciated, several participants expressed concern about
a possible Declaration on Ethics of Climate Change.
25
It was also suggested that UNESCO may wish to set up a high-level International Commission or
Forum to study and make recommendations in the areas of tolerance or promotion of mutual
understanding in the world.
Q.18 What particular measures would you suggest to mobilize partners for and enhance the
impact and visibility of UNESCO’s action in the field of social and human sciences at the
global, regional and country levels?
Participants recommended: a strengthened and improved clearing house function; cutting-edge
research in the areas of SHS, e.g. concerning management of cities and migrant labour;
strengthening national level implementation and evaluation; engaging parliamentarians and other
elected representatives; regional level networking, including that with established regional
associations; involvement of NGO and Media; strengthening in-house communication channels;
strengthening partnership with private sector.
Q. 19 How can UNESCO through the social and human sciences help catalyze international
cooperation?
Several suggestions were made:
• Focusing on issues of global/regional importance, such as: youth, ethics and doping in
sports
• Focusing on the areas UNESCO has unique and global leading role: ethics of science, Social
transformations, fighting against racism and discrimination.
CULTURE
Q.20 What specific measures would you suggest to increase awareness of the interaction
between culture and development and achieve a better integration of culture in national
development processes and policies?
Participants noted that culture is a key element for sustainable development (together with economy,
society and environment) and that the links between culture and development were insufficiently
recognized. They highlighted the close relationship between culture and economic development and
recommended:
• To promote cultural industries, e.g. promotion and marketing of creativity, traditional and
local handicraft, folk music, micro-financing policies to cultural activities.
• To develop and promote culture and heritage tourism policy and more generally support the
development of policies and legislation for the protection and promotion of culture, along
with guidelines that would harmonize the needs of cultural heritage preservation with local
development goals.
• Museum management, Records and Archives management.
• Strengthening arts/culture education in school – some mentioned the Children’s Performing
Art Festival in East Asia (CPAF) as a successful example of contribution to culture of peace.
• Supporting existing national legislation protecting intangible cultural heritage.
• Promotion of intercultural dialogue and exchange programmes.
26
• Documenting the culture-development relation through improved collection and
dissemination of existing information such as cultural mapping, raising awareness about the
contribution that cultural heritage makes to development.
• Highlighting the necessity of promoting the cultural rights and dimensions in national
development.
• Encouraging UNDP and others to link development strategies with cultural elements.
• Promoting regional cooperation through both tangible and intangible cultural heritage.
Q. 21 What are the priority areas which UNESCO's Culture Programme should pursue in
2012-2013?
All priority areas were supported, with special emphasis on the areas linked to culture and
development on the one hand, and cultural heritage in all its forms on the other hand. This includes:
Promotion of culture and heritage as a key driver for sustainable development; Promotion of
community involvement in heritage conservation; Protection and/or conservation as well as
safeguarding of heritage in all its forms; Promotion of cultural diversity; Dialogue among cultures
and culture of peace; Museums development and protection of cultural objects; Development of
cultural and creative industries; Promotion of cultural expressions; Cultural policies and
development of cultural data/indicators. However, some participants suggested that these priorities
be reformulated and merged.
Q.22 Are there particular approaches to intercultural dialogue, including interreligious
dialogue, which UNESCO should pursue? If yes, please specify
Participants highlighted the strategic importance of intercultural dialogue and its development,
including through:
• Research, publication and dissemination programme on universal values and human values
underlying all religions/minority cultures/civilizations
• Recognition of institutions and individuals promoting intercultural understanding
• Organize Fora on intercultural dialogues
• Mobilizing ASPNet, Schools and UNESCO Clubs
• interreligious dialogue (follow-up to the forum on interreligious dialogue to be held in the
Pacific in 2011).
• Supporting the established networks and NGOs active in intercultural and interfaith dialogue
nationally and globally.
• Promoting intercultural and interfaith dialogue at different layers within the society, as
well as the educational use of UNESCO publications on "Histories…" (for culture of peace)
The activities of Asia-Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding (APCEIU)
were particularly commended, including its capacity development activities.
Q. 23 What concrete initiatives would you suggest to support Member States in the
implementation of the seven Culture conventions:
27
Participants stressed the importance of capacity building for the development of expertise in heritage
conservation. They also recommended that priority be given to the ratification of the Conventions,
that UNESCO should provide technical support and expertise to the Member States for ratification
and implementation and translating the Conventions into national policies and guidelines, and that
efforts be made to improve the evaluation and monitoring of implementation of the Conventions.
Participants also recommended media campaigns to create awareness, the development of
inventories of heritage (tangible and intangible), a consistent follow up of conventions in countries
where these have already been ratified, and policy dialogue. Translation in local languages of all
Conventions was urged.
Some participants mentioned the importance of a harmonization of listing within 1972 Convention
(Seville recommendation), 2003 Convention (Abu Dhabi recommendation) and "Memory of the
World" Programme (Canberra recommendation).
Participants urged support to mobilise resources for the Pacific World Heritage fund, with a
dedicated post for world heritage in the Apia office, and capacity building for various kinds of
conservation of cultural heritage (training institutes having particular consideration for Pacific
applicants).
Q. 24 What particular measures would you suggest to mobilize partners for and enhance the
impact and visibility of UNESCO’s action in the field of culture at the global, regional and
country levels?
Participants recommended many venues for improving visibility and impact (strengthening
NATCOMs and Field offices; involving parliamentarians and other elected representatives; regional
level dialogue, including cross-border nominations; strengthen national level reporting and
replication measures; sharing of best practices at all levels; involvement of NGO and Media;
strengthen in-house communication channels; enhance cultural exchange programmes at various
levels; promote forward-thinking research and anticipatory studies (Laboratory of Ideas) as well as
using UNESCO visibility). The new role of Category 2 institutes, in particular in the area of
intangible heritage. The Intangible Cultural Heritage Centre for Asia and the Pacific (ICHCAP) was
emphasized as an example of positive progress.
COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION
Q. 25 What are the priority areas in the field of communication and information which
UNESCO should pursue in 2012-2013?
Participants recommended to reconfirm all the identified priority areas, but also to focus on freedom
of expression and freedom of information (including application of internationally recognized legal,
safety, ethical and professional standards) and the development of free independent and pluralistic
media (on the basis of the UNESCO-IPDC Media Development Indicators), as well as media and
information literacy, the building of capacities for media professionals, media and ICTs for dialogue,
reconstruction and peace building and development of free, independent and pluralistic media.
28
In addition, participants recommended activities such as preservation of documentary heritage
(MOW), the promotion of digital heritage, mobile ICT for community empowerment in remote areas
and cooperation with ITU on introduction of broadband Internet.
Q. 26 What particular measures would you suggest to mobilize partners for and enhance the
impact and visibility of UNESCO’s action in the field of communication and information at the
global, regional and country levels?
As for other Sectors, participants recommended a strengthened clearing house role for UNESCO,
advocacy, strengthening NATCOMs and Field offices, involving parliamentarians and other elected
representatives, regional level networking, sharing of best practices at all levels, involvement of
NGO and Media, strengthening in-house communication channels, building capacities of media
professionals through media information literacy, initiating recognition programs for
institutions/individuals promoting RTI. A participant recommended the holding in 2012 of a regional
conference on the development of pluralistic media, to coincide with the 20th anniversary of the
Almaty “Declarations on Promoting Independent and Pluralistic Media”.
Q. 27 What further measures would you suggest to help support the formulation of inclusive
national communication and information strategies and to make them a point of reference for
UN common country programming?
Participants stressed in particular: RTI as a pillar in UNDAF; develop a framework of inclusive
national CI strategies and supporting its replication
Q. 28 Which should be the main objectives as well as the programme components that should
comprise the new coherent, targeted and innovative intersectoral and interdisciplinary
programme for a culture of peace in the 36 C/5?
Participants were supportive of the Director-General’s new emphasis on the Culture of Peace.
They recommended grass-root activities, contribution by all sectors for peace-building, and a
reflection of the role of the category 1 institute in New Delhi (Mahatma Gandhi Institute of
Education for Peace and Sustainable Development, MGIEP) and related category 2 centers.
They stressed art education (possibly as a separate intersectoral platform) and World Heritage
Education and the activities of Asia-Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding
(APCEIU). UNESCO should use media and information programme for culture of peace.
Intersectoral Platforms
Participants agreed to maintaining this modality, but with fewer platforms, better focused.
Extrabudgetary sources should be attracted (not only regular budget). Networking (partnership
programs) and institualization (UNESCO Chairs, UNESCO Category 2 centers) should be
encouraged for better functioning of platforms. participants called for dedicated resources for these
in 36/C5.
Several participants approved of continuing the Coordinating Intersectoral Platform on Small
islands Developing States and Support to countries in post-conflict and post disaster situation.
29
Q. 29 Do you have suggestions for approaches and modalities of implementing such a
programme – globally, regionally and at the country level – and to contribute to its visibility?
These included: Promotion of special training modules by category I and II institutions; Advocacy
for curtailing military and nuclear arms expenditure; Promote national policies and action plans on
EPSD.
Q.30 What is your perception about of the work of the intersectoral platforms and do you
favour their continuation? Which other modality/ies would you suggest for intersectoral
engagement by UNESCO?
Participants generally supported their continuation, but with review of the results and
products achieved during 34 and 35C/5. Some suggested that the national level may be the
best for achieving intersectorality.
Q.31 If the intersectoral platform modality shall be continued, would you
The participants favoured the following option (c): “ limit the number of intersectoral
platforms to three or four priority themes/topics – accompanied by a definition of specific
high-level objectives, expected results and the allocation of specific budgetary and human
resources for their functioning”.
Those most mentioned were ESD (including climate change and Science education), Contribution to
dialogue among civilizations and cultures and to culture of peace, Climate Change and ICT-
enhanced learning.
Q.32 In a context of increased harmonization of UN activities at the country level, do you
have particular suggestions for further enhancing UNESCO’s contribution to the attainment of
development goals and objectives at the country level?
Participants stressed the need for more attention to UN Joint programming, better and clearer
relevance of UNESCO programmes to national development plans. MOUs between UNESCO and
Member State should reflect the partnership with other UN agencies.
Participants agreed that National Commissions are an integral part of UNESCO. UNESCO should
make effort to strengthen capacity building of national commissions such as organizing a seminar in
each cluster office and fundraising to create a fellowship or exchange programme for the staff
members of national commissions. UNESCO should pay attention to the opinion of national
commissions. Cluster offices should more follow up the activities of national commissions. National
Commissions also evaluate the activities of regional offices and cluster offices.
Participants recommended as a modality to appoint an UNDAF local consultant where there is no
UNESCO office presence, and that the UN Resident coordinator be informed and reminded of the
provision of the agreement between UNESCO and UNDP giving the possibility to the Resident
Coordinator to invite National commission as observers to the meetings of the UN country teams in
particular in countries where UNESCO does not have an office, and also to pursue the discussion in
order for Natcoms to be full members of the UNCT in the future.
30
Q. 33 Do you have suggestions for initiatives or modalities that could further strengthen the
role of and cooperation among National Commissions globally, regionally and at the country
level?
Many suggestions were made, including in particular: better coordination and interlinks between
NatComs and Field Offices; the establishment of an on-line forum for Natcoms for the exchange of
views and information on issues of common interest, and the revitalisation of the standing committee
of Natcoms. Several participants recommend that National Commissions ensure that they include
representatives of all Governments ministries involved in UNESCO, and that they conduct more
exchange programs among Natcoms in Asia Pacific, in particular to foster mutual assistance and
training.
It was recommended to formalize the meetings between the Natcoms and the Secretariat during the
Executive Board and the General Conference. Some participants recommended that a regular budget
for Natcoms be allocated to increase their capacities.
It was also recommended that the Director-General send a letter to all Governments to raise
awareness about National Commission and requesting them to give their full support to National
Commissions.
Other suggestions included: regular Subregional/cluster level dialogues; promote regional projects;
sharing best practices; exchange programs between the NATCOMs; encourage all NATCOMS to
have specialists in all areas of UNESCO competence; One participant recommended that evaluation
of UNESCO category 2 centers/institute should be implemented by respective NatComs (host
countries).
Q.34. Do you have specific suggestions on programme areas in which UNESCO should seek to
develop further partnerships to achieve greater impact and results?
Participants noted that partnerships should seek greater impact and results and should be
dependent on the needs, relevance and objectives of the work. Areas of high potential
identified were: ESD, Inclusive education, Technical and vocational Education, Technology for
Innovation, Media Education, Climate Change and Disaster mitigation.
Q.35 How could UNESCO draw more effectively on the capacities, work and contributions of
category 2 institutes and centres in the pursuit of its strategic programme objectives and
expected results of programme action?
Participants considered that Category II institutes held considerable potential for capacity
development (however, it was recommended that these bodies should ensure that participants
from the Pacific are included in their training programmes). They considered that cooperation
between category 1 & 2 centers and field offices should be further strengthened, and that
UNESCO should encourage the development of networks of category 1 & 2 centers. Also,
UNESCO should make linkage of website between UNESCO and category 2 centers clearly.
More evaluation and monitoring was called for. Participants also recommended more linkage,
31
interaction and consultation with Program Sectors particularly through strategic and technical
planning processes.
Q.36 Would you have specific suggestions how the Secretariat and national actors, including
National Commissions, could promote the Organization’s visibility, including through media
outreach and the development of strategic relations with the media globally and in your region
and country?
Beyond recommendations already made above: media capacities sustematically introduced
into Field Offices and NatComs, better website maintenance, provision of expert articles to the
media, support of the media units of the ministries concerned, media kits already developed
by UNESCO on ESD and EFA, regular press briefing on UNESCO activities, and the enhancement
of NATCOM’s and Category 2 Centres web presence.
Optimizing UNESCO’s Delivery Mechanisms
The following recommendations were made:
For Member States: —Strengthen National Commissions
—Incorporate statutes
—Enhance Staffing
—Enhance Length of service for staff
—Popularize UNESCO concepts, modules and models
—Forge close ties with parliamentarians and other elected leaders
—Improving support for Pacific Island states
For UNESCO: —Strengthen Field Offices
—Appoint Experienced staff
—Ensure specialist for each sector
—Enhance clearing house functions and sharing of UNESCO models/ modules and publications
—Ensure follow up on missions/training/workshops
—Placements of UNDAF consultant where there is no field office
—Find solutions to staff not performing to expectations
—Motivate staff through career progress