30-31 March, Tiara Château Hotel Mont Royal Chantilly, France MEETING REPORT

Transcription

1 21 st Meeting of the ICSU Committee on Scientific Planning and Review (CSPR) March, 2011 Tiara Château Hotel Mont Royal Chantilly, France MEETING REPORT Present: I. Alcantara-Ayala, J. Asenjo, R. Balstad, L. Brito, C. Cesarsky, D. Chen (ex officio), H. Gupta, Y.T. Lee (ex officio), N. Nakicenovic, K. Raivio (Chair), C. de la Rey, J. Rockström, B. Salem, M. Tchuente (ex officio), H. Vessuri, Secretariat: P. Bates, M. Brennan, L. Goldfarb, G. Glaser, V. Lee, J. Legg, R. Meylan, H. Moore, M. Mokrane, P. Ocampo-Thomason, R. Quadrelli, C. Smith Regional Offices: M. Gupta, A. Gurib-Fakim, N. Hasan, E. Madela-Mntla, B. McKellar, K. Schmidt-Verkerk By Invitation: R. Johnson (Item 5), R. Kuroda Apologies: C. Leaver, Y. Lü, A. Whyte, J. Rockström(second day) 1. Opening of the Meeting The meeting was opened by the Chair, Kari Raivio. The overarching theme of the meeting was to finalize the ICSU second Strategic Plan, , and most agenda items fed into this discussion. 2. Adoption of the Agenda The Committee agreed the draft agenda. 3. of the 20th CSPR Meeting and 103rd Executive Board Meeting The draft decisions of the 20th CSPR meeting (CSPR20) had been circulated and a few corrections incorporated. The agreed decisions had been posted on the ICSU website, as had those of the 103rd Executive Board (EB103) which met in Oct Integrated Research on Disaster Risk (CSPR 20, item 7.4.7) At its 103rd EB Meeting, the Executive Board decided, on the recommendation of CSPR and on an exceptional basis, to extend the period of office of the Chair of the IRDR Scientific Committee, Gordon McBean, by six months until 31 October 2011 in order that he might present the report on IRDR to the 30th ICSU General Assembly in Rome. It did so on the understanding that, by that time, his successor would be named. 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 1

2 This decision was endorsed by the two IRDR co-sponsors, ISSC and UN-ISDR. In accordance with the Constitution of IRDR, the IRDR Scientific Committee now presented three nominations for the post of Chair, IRDR-SC. In addition, IRDR Scientific Committee was making nominations to fill three vacant membership seats. Details of all candidates were presented in document CSPR21/3.1. The Committee decided to endorse the preferences expressed by the Scientific Committee and make recommendations to the Executive Board accordingly. It was agreed that Harsh Gupta s membership of IRDR-SC might be considered once his term of office of CSPR comes to an end. Decision: To note the decisions of the 20 th meeting of CSPR have been posted on the ICSU website; to note the decisions of the Executive Board at its 103 rd meeting; to recommend that the Executive Board: - appoint Sálvano Briceño as the new Chair of the IRDR Scientific Committee for a period of three years, from 1 November 2011 to 31 October 2014; - appoint Anthony Oliver-Smith, Ferruccio Ferrigni, and Mark Pelling to the IRDR Scientific Committee for a period of three years, from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2014; - note that consultations with ISSC and UN-ISDR are necessary. 4. Urban Health and Wellbeing Human Health was a new priority included in the Strategic Plan, Following an initial scoping exercise that identified urban health as a potential niche for ICSU, a Planning Group was established by CSPR in 2008 to develop a science plan. In parallel, the regional offices for Africa and Asia & Pacific identified human health as a priority and had been developing regional plans. The draft global science plan for a new initiative, Health and wellbeing in the changing urban environment: a systems analysis approach was presented to CSPR at its previous meeting by the Planning Group Chair, Landis MacKellar. CSPR supported the plan in principal and asked that it be circulated to ICSU Members and Interdisciplinary Bodies for comment. This has been done and the received comments have been considered by the Planning Group and minor modifications made to the science plan in response to this input. Both the submitted comments and the revised science plan were presented now for consideration by CSPR. CSPR also asked that the interest of potential funders and partners be explored. Contacts had been made with NIH, which expressed a strong interest in the plan, and organised its own informal consultation exercise. The International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis, IIASA, which had been a partner in developing the science plan, continued to be strongly interested in extending this interest. Contacts were being made with WHO to gauge its interest. The Regional Office for Asia and Pacific had been using the draft global science plan to develop regional activities in this area. It had established a regional group of experts that included people involved with the global scoping and planning exercises and was focusing on implementation. This represented an interesting example of how the broader strategic issues relating to regional-global integration might be addressed in some instances. 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 2

3 The ROAP Director and Chair of the Regional Committee shared the information and experiences of the activities which ROAP had organized. Members of CSPR recognized the urgency and importance of this topic. The partnership with IIASA and involvement of the Regional Offices would be important in implementing the initiative. To approve the Science Plan for publication; to include urban health and wellbeing in the strategic plan, and recommend to the Executive Board that it propose a new 10 year initiative to the 30th General Assembly; to ask the Executive Board to consider soliciting nominations for a scientific committee prior to the General Assembly in order to accelerate the implementation of the plan and, to thank the Planning Group for its work 5. Science Education The ICSU Strategic Plan foresaw the establishment of an ad hoc group to... define ICSU s future role in relation to science education (ICSU Strategic Plan, pp.36-37), and contribute towards the development of ICSU s strategy for 2012 onwards. The Terms of Reference and process for such a review were agreed upon by CSPR at its 17th meeting and an ad-hoc Review Panel on Science Education (RPSE) duly appointed at the 18th meeting on September Since that time the 12-member RPSE had met three times in Paris, held extensive discussions, and worked on the text of its Report to CSPR. During the course of 2010 it consulted ICSU Members, Committees, Interdisciplinary Bodies and Joint Initiatives and Associates on two occasions; on the first, a questionnaire was sent out seeking information on the science education activities of individual members or bodies, as well as views on the role that ICSU itself might play in this field in the future; on the second, the draft of the Panel s Report was circulated with an invitation to Members to comment on both text and recommendations. Valuable feedback was received that helped the Panel to further develop its thinking and improve the Report. At its final meeting held on 2-3 February 2011 the Panel had approved its final Report, and this was set out in document CSPR21/5.1 for the Committee s consideration. The Chair of RPSE, Dr Roberta Johnson, gave a presentation on the Report and Recommendations of the Review Panel, including the survey responses and reflections, national achievements and attitudes toward science, workable educational approaches, recommendations, implementation considerations and essential partnerships. During the course of its discussions the Committee supported the conclusions of the Report and emphasized the need for direct involvement of scientists in science education and the use of innovative approaches. Science Education might form a required element in all future interdisciplinary programmes of ICSU. The Regional Offices have an important role to play in any science education initiative. On the understanding that modifications reflecting the CSPR discussions would be made to its text, it was decided to approve the Report of the Review Panel, and endorse the Recommendations therein. 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 3

4 : To approve the review report for publication following amendments to take account of the CSPR discussion; to endorse the recommendations in the report; to include science education in the Strategic Plan and recommend to the Executive Board that it propose a new initiative in this area to the 30 th GA; to thank the review panel for its work. 6. Earth System Visioning The goal of the Visioning process, launched at the 2008 ICSU General Assembly, was to engage the scientific community to explore options and propose steps to implement a holistic strategy for Earth system research, involving the full range of sciences and humanities and actively engaging stakeholders and decision-makers. The process, advised by a Task Team, was now at its final step of the three outlined by CSPR at its 17th meeting. During Step 1, an extensive consultation led in 2009 to the identification of the Grand Challenges for Earth System Science for Global Sustainability, described in the two documents developed by the Task Team: Grand Challenges in Global Sustainability Research: A Systems Approach to Research Priorities for the Decade, and Earth System Science for Global Sustainability: Grand Challenges (published in Science). During Step 2, the Institutional Framework meeting of June 2010 established that a new overarching structure was needed for integrated research to respond effectively to those Grand Challenges. During Step 3, on February 2011, ICSU, ISSC and the Belmont Forum (representing some of the world s main funders of global change research) convened the 3rd Earth System Visioning meeting to start designing a new initiative. Besides sponsors, participants comprised Chairs and Directors of the Global Environmental Change (GEC) programmes (DIVERSITAS, IGBP, IHDP, WCRP and their partnership ESSP, as well as START), representatives of affiliated or partner agencies (UNEP, WMO, IOC), regional networks (APN), other related international programmes and experts. The meeting discussed key points of the initiative design, based on draft conceptual paper, and agreed on the definition of a New Joint Strategy for Research. A Transition Team would oversee the implementation of the initiative for 18 months, before appointing a permanent governing body. The Initiative would build on and encompass current structures of the global change landscape by fostering unification of DIVERSITAS, IGBP, IHDP and ESSP, fully engaging START, and possibly integrating strategically some components of WCRP. External expertise would be sought for designing a flexible and distributed network, with strong regional nodes. The meeting agreed to aim to pre-launch the Initiative at the 2012 Planet Under Pressure Conference, and to launch it at the 2012 Rio +20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development. Following the third meeting, and with input from a nomination process concluded at the end of January, the Task Team had been working to prepare a proposed list of members for the Transition Team. The Chair of Task Team for the Visioning Process, Dr. Johan Rockström, made a presentation on the progress of the Earth System Visioning Process and the next step for developing a new initiative on Earth System Research for Global Sustainability. 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 4

5 The Committee acknowledged the progress of the Visioning process and the proposal to launch the Initiative in two stages in The Committee noted that the proposed list for the Transition Team could be more balanced with respect to gender and regional representation. CSPR suggested that an amended list, with increased representation of women and developing countries, be submitted to the ICSU Executive Board. To note progress of the Earth system Visioning process, including consensus to establish a major new integrated initiative; to endorse the concept paper for the new initiative; to endorse the plan to launch the Initiative in 2012 at the Planet Under Pressure Conference and at the Rio+20 Earth Summit; to submit to the Executive Board an amended list of nominations for the Transition Team; to thank the Task Team for its work. 7. United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) At its 20th meeting, the CSPR decided To welcome the additional funding and endorse the planned activities feeding into the Rio+20 process. ICSU s activities towards Rio+20 were proceeding well. Funding had been received, and a team has been set up to work specifically on Rio+20 preparations, consisting of Gisbert Glaser, Alice Abreu and Peter Bates. Preparations for the 4 regional science and technology workshops, which were planned to take place between April and August of 2011, were now well advanced. Strong partnerships had been established with the relevant ICSU regional offices, who had taken on most of the organizing responsibilities. A partnership has also been formed with UNESCO, though the extent of the organizations financial contribution remained unclear. Preparations had begun for the Forum on Science and Technology for Sustainable Development that would be held in parallel to the Rio+20 conference in Rio de Janeiro in June Partnerships were being sought with the Brazilian Government, the Brazilian Academy of Sciences, and other relevant organizations. A venue was being determined and draft programme prepared. The ICSU Secretariat had also begun work on mobilising its national and union members to facilitate and coordinate their role in national and regional preparatory work and in national delegations at regional and global preparatory meetings. A series of 7 policy briefs were being prepared for the Rio+20 preparatory process and would become available by August 2011, as part of the preparations for the Planet Under Pressure conference (London, March 2012). Contact has been made with the High-Level Panel on Global Sustainability, and modalities by which ICSU and its global environmental change research programmes can support the work of the Panel were being developed.. ICSU has participated actively in the Rio+20 preparatory process in 2011, attending both the First Intersessional Meeting in New York (Jan 10-11) and the Second Intergovernmental Preparatory Meeting in New York (Prepcom2, March 7-8). As co-organisers of the Scientific and Technological Community Major Group, ICSU made a number of statements in the plenaries of these meetings. ICSU also co-organised a side event on Planetary Boundaries 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 5

6 and the Urgent Need of Societal Transformations at Prepcom2, with IGBP and IHDP.. Members of the ICSU Secretariat prepared a think piece on Enhancing the science-policy interface which was published by the Stakeholder Forum, as part of a series of invited articles for their Rio 2012 publications. The next steps for ICSU s Rio+20 preparations included: the execution of the regional workshops and the preparation of materials from these for the intergovernmental Rio+20 preparatory process; organising representation of the regional workshops at the intergovernmental Rio+20 Regional Preparatory Meetings (possibly through side events); preparing a side event at the global preparatory meetings showcasing ICSU s regional workshops and the Planet under Pressure policy briefs; further coordination of ICSU national and union members; further development of the Forum on Science and Technology for Sustainable Development; highlighting the visioning process, with its proposed decadal research initiative on Earth System Science for Global Sustainability as providing a foundation for research efforts after Rio+20; ongoing involvement in the Rio+20 Preparatory meetings. The Committee emphasized that the participation of ICSU National Members and International Scientific Unions was crucial to drive ICSU parallel events successfully. It was noted that the activities organized by ICSU and its partners for Rio+20 are promising. The proposal by the Secretariat of the European group of ICSU National members to organise, in cooperation with UNESCO, a European Workshop on Science and Technology for Rio+20 was welcome. It was noted that links have been established between the work of the High- Level Panel on Global Sustainability and the international scientific organising committee for the Planet Under Pressure Conference. To note progress on ICSU s contribution to the Rio+20 preparatory process 8. Regional Offices The three reviews of the individual ICSU Regional Offices had been completed in At the 20th meeting (September 2010), CSPR decided that a sub-group (5 members) should be charged with conducting an integrated analysis of the outcomes of the three reviews and making strategic recommendations to the CSPR as a whole and to the Executive Board. CSPR requested the Secretariat to draft aims and procedures for the CSPR sub-group and agreed that the sub-group should meet prior to the 21st CSPR meeting and report to the full Committee. The members of the sub-group were: Juan Asenjo (Chile), Cheryl de la Rey (South Africa), Harsh Gupta (India), Maurice Tchuente (Cameroon) and Anne Whyte (Canada). The aims and procedures were drafted by the Secretariat and approved via by the sub-group and discussed during a teleconference (2 March). Requested additional information was compiled and distributed. The sub-group met on the 29 of March at the Secretariat; Cheryl de la Rey chaired this meeting and reported the outcome to CSPR. The sub-group analysis and recommendations were presented and focused on the key generic issues identified by the sub-group: the remit of the Regional Offices, governance and MoUs, resourcing and fundraising, the role and structure of regional committees, the 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 6

7 management of the Regional Offices, and communication. As indicated in the sub-group aims, the sub-group advised on the need for a Strategic Review of the ICSU s role in promoting science and technology in developing countries and the future of the Policy Committee on Developing Countries (PCDC). The detailed recommendations were discussed and endorsed by the CSPR and can be found at Annex 1. The CSPR also agreed that the recommendations should be sent to the three Regional Offices and their respective Regional Committees. Decision To endorse and forward to the Executive Board the recommendations from the CSPRsubgroup as detailed in Annex 1; To recommend to the Executive Board that the PCDC be formally disbanded. 9. Strategic Coordination Committee on Information and Data (SCCID) The SCCID committee met for the fourth time just two weeks ago (16-18 March 2010) in Paris. This was the last meeting of the first 3-year phase of the committee. The Interim Report before the CSPR was prepared prior to this fourth meeting and was still a work in progress. The efforts of the committee during the previous three meetings went first into shaping the recommendations. These were to be refined and illustrated with more specific actions after the fourth meeting. This interim report was accompanied by a cover note from the SCCID Chair. Ray Harris Chair of the SCCID joined the meeting via teleconference to inform the CSPR on progress made after the 4th meeting regarding the recommendations of the interim report and also to discuss the future of the SCCID committee and the terms and conditions of the possible renewal of its activities for a second period. To note the SCCID Interim Report and additional information provided by the Chair; to endorse the importance of the data and information issues to be emphasised in the strategic plan, to recommend to the Executive Board that the SCCID report be taken for endorsement to the ICSU General Assembly; to agree that CSPR should reconsider the report s recommendations at its next meeting, especially in the context of the future CODATA review; to thank the SCCID committee and the Chair for their work; and to recommend to the Executive Board not to extend the term of the SCCID committee. 10. Grants Programme Fourteen grant proposals were under consideration. Each proposal had been reviewed in depth by subgroups of CSPR in line with the normal procedure. The lead reviewer of each proposal reported the summary and consensus evaluation to the committee. Six proposals were approved to be funded, two proposals to be funded with conditions, and six proposals were declined. The Committee discussed that the main function of ICSU Grants Programme should not be to support business as usual activities and that the meaningful participation of regional 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 7

8 offices should be strongly encouraged, especially in Capacity Building programme. The possibility of regional offices being Lead Applicants was raised to be considered. The Committee also suggested that Grants Programme could be utilized to leverage Science Education activities. The ICSU secretariat was requested to make advanced screening of the proposals to ensure eligibility and avoid conflicts of interest. To fund the proposals from COSPAR, IGBP, IGU, IRDR, IUPsyS, IUTOX; to fund with conditions the proposals from IUGG, URSI; to not fund the proposals from CODATA, DIVERSITAS, GOOS, IUBS, IUPAC, and WCRP; to instruct the Secretariat that the 2012 Grants Programme announcement should emphasize meaningful engagement of Regional Offices in proposal development from the outset; and to amend the review criteria and selection process for the Grants Programme to clarify eligibility criteria and aims.. Thursday, 31 March 11. ICSU Foresight Analysis A CSPR task team has been working with the Secretariat to develop scenarios to explore the future of international science in 2031 (ICSU s 100th anniversary). This longer-term view was a complement to the 6 year Strategic Planning exercise. At the last CSPR meeting a draft report including four preliminary foresight scenarios had been presented for input by the chair of task team, John Marks. In the light of the comments from CSPR, and subsequently the Executive Board, these preliminary scenarios were refined and sent out the ICSU community for comment. The revised draft report (as sent to Members) and the responses from Members were provided now for consideration by CSPR. The aim was to finalise these scenarios in the light of the discussion at this meeting and to publish them as Part 1 of the current foresight exercise. [On the basis of this work, a paper had also been submitted and accepted for presentation at an international Foresight meeting in Seville in April] Part 2 of the Foresight exercise was to be the development of an ideal or normative scenario in which ICSU defined how it would like the World to be in 2031and looked back at the steps required to get there. This was the aim of the facilitated one-day workshop that took place immediately after the CSPR meeting. The four exploratory scenarios will not be revisited per se in this workshop but the drivers and issues identified in defining these scenarios will provide the basis for developing the ideal scenario. The CSPR identified four topics that merited further consideration in the exploratory scenarios. These were: education; migration; the role of the media; and science-diplomacy. To approve the Part I report for publication, following incorporation of input from the ICSU community and CSPR. 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 8

9 12. Strategic Plan, At its 19th meeting CSPR approved an outline for the 2nd ICSU Strategic Plan and at its 20th meeting a first (incomplete) draft was discussed in detail. The comments from CSPR and subsequently the Executive Board were incorporated into a revised complete draft that was circulated to ICSU Members, Regional Committees and Interdisciplinary Bodies for comment in January. This draft, together with the responses from the ICSU community, was provided here for consideration by CSPR. The finalised Strategic Plan was to be presented to the General Assembly in Rome in September for approval and so this was last opportunity for CSPR to consider the document in committee. As the Regional Directors and Chairs were also in attendance, it was also an important opportunity to get their perspectives on ICSU s global directions and priorities. on several of the other items under consideration at this meeting will help in clarifying specific aspects of the Plan. Nevertheless there were a number of areas, including sustainable energy, new horizons and regional and national policy mechanisms, for which the proposed goals and strategic actions needed to be further considered and confirmed by CSPR. The plan was to be further revised in the light of the CSPR discussion and taking account of the input from the ICSU community. It would then be presented to the Executive Board for consideration and approval in May and the final draft would be circulated to the ICSU community for editorial review. It was to be presented to General Assembly as a prepublication document for approval. The Draft Strategic Plan and comments from the consultation were discussed in detail during the meeting and all the goals, priorities and proposed actions were agreed. The Committee emphasized the role of International Scientific Unions, which could be strengthened at several places in the plan. Some changes to the report structure were also agreed. It was noted that the Executive Summary a critical part of the document had yet to be drafted. It was important that CSPR approved this, together with the final draft of the complete plan, before it went out for the General Assembly. To approve the draft strategic plan for presentation to the Executive Board, noting that the comments from CSPR and Members need to be incorporated before the final draft is circulated to Members; to agree to consider the amended final draft of the Plan and the Executive Summary electronically. 15. General Assembly Preparation Deliang Chen The preparations for the 30th General Assembly were reported to be progressing smoothly. The First Circular and Draft Agenda had been circulated to ICSU members, as had the call for nominations for Officers and Ordinary Members of the Executive Board. These documents had all been posted on the ICSU website: A concern was raised that both proposed Scientific Lectures were in the global change area. 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 9

10 16. Introduction to New ICSU Web The new ICSU website was launched on 1 March and its key features were presented to CSPR by Jacinta Legg. The website was part of the overall effort to be more strategic in communicating with Members and the wider scientific community. The Insight newsletter had been revamped and was integrated into the website, enabling subscribers to keep up to date with ICSU s global and regional activities, latest publications and events from ICSU s Members. An Online community had also been established which enabled community members to keep up to date with what ICSU is doing. It would also allow ICSU to contact community members, for example to invite comments on particular content or documents on the website. The website would keep evolving over the coming months with more features and resources being added. 17. Meeting Evaluation It was agreed that further consideration should be given to the use of e-tools to facilitate CSPR working, particularly between meetings. 18. Date of Next Meeting CSPR members had been invited to the 2011 General Assembly (27-30 September 2011) in Rome. At its previous meeting, CSPR decided to meet in the afternoon of Saturday 1 October for initial reflections on the GA discussions and implementation of 2nd ICSU Strategic Plan. To note that the next meeting would be on 1 October in Rome; to agree the final meeting for the current Committee will be on March Any Other Business 19.1 IGBP was seeking appointment of new Chair for its scientific committee and had submitted nomination. To recommend that the Executive Board appoint J Syvitski as the Chair of IGBP SC for the period 1 January December ; 19.2 IHDP was seeking appointment of a new Chair for its Scientific Committee and nomination had been discussed with the cosponsors and programme Director. To recommend that the Executive Board appoint P Dasgupta to the IHDP SC for the period 1 March Jan December 2013; to note that the other sponsors of IHDP, namely ISSC and UNU are in support of this appointment The committee invited Dr. Reiko Kuroda to share the experience of the serious earthquake and tsunami in Japan on 11 th September and expressed its sincere consolation to Japanese people. 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 10

11 Annex 1 Recommendations from the CSPR sub-group on the integral analysis of the three ICSU Regional Offices Reviews 1. The remit of the Regional Offices should be: Implementation of integrated science plans Capacity building Facilitation of networks, communication, databases Focus on inclusion of less developed countries 2. The Regional Offices should be integral part of the ICSU Structure: One ICSU with ROs Processes for integrating regional science plans with the ICSU global strategy and activities should be developed A common set of criteria across the Regional Offices for implementing science plans should be developed Integrated plans should be implemented by the ROs and IPOs together with help from the ICSU Scientific Unions Currently a retro fit is necessary but in the future integration should be at the outset Relevant regional activities under each individual item should be included in EB and CSPR agendas The annual meeting of ICSU Officers and Regional Chairs and Directors should continue The long term future vision should include the possibility of global programmes located in ROs 3. On governance and MoUs As is practiced all ROs should be hosted at a local institution The ICSU principle of universality of sciences should be in all MoUs Regional Offices should not be legal entities Highest decision making bodies should be identified in MoUs A checklist of requirements and expectations for ICSU and the host institutions should be developed 4. Resourcing and fundraising All ROs fund-raising should be done in ICSU s name ICSU should increase core support to a minimum of 50k 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 11

12 A common budget template should be developed and used for all ROs and should include an annex of in-kind contributions As is currently practiced all RO s accounting should be separate from the host. Travel costs, meetings and networks should be reported as budget items Set targets for increasing in-kind contributions from other countries Establish pool of ICSU funding for ROs to support capacity building and encourage region-led proposals 5. Regional Advisory Committees Regional Committees current size and standard 3 year term is appropriate, but members may be re-nominated and reappointed once but not renew automatically At least 40% of RC membership to be rotated off each time RCs should not have a management role but be advisory and focus on scientific matters The committees advisory role is directed to ICSU via the Regional Office The committee should have a geographic and gender balance. A charter for the RC members should be developed and all members should adhere to RC members should have a role in networking and fundraising 6. The management of the Regional Offices: The management of each office should be carried out according to the respective MoU The budget should be formally approved by ICSU and the host institution 7. On communication An operating guide on communication (external to ICSU and ROs, within the region, between ICSU Paris Office and ROs, and between the RO and host institution and between the Regional Offices) should be developed The guide should also make explicit the communication channels, procedures, and expectations (eg for RO and Union interactions and contact with media) An integrated one ICSU communication strategy is necessary (eg INSIGHT should cover regional activities) 8. The ICSU Policy Committee on Developing Countries should be disbanded. The Regional Committees can provide policy advice to ICSU when required. There is no need for a Strategic Review of ICSU s role in promoting science and technology in developing countries because strategy responsibility rests with CSPR. 21 st CSPR Meeting Report 12