David Cooper

The Presidency and Secretariat work closely together to run a COP. How do the dynamics between them work?

One of the key factors to the success of any COP is good cooperation between the Secretariat and the Presidency. They really should be working as one integrated team so that delegates and observers don’t see differences between them. Of course, they have different but mutually supportive roles. So communication throughout the year or two ahead of the COP is crucial.

The collaboration happens at various levels. Early on, they have to make a Host Country Agreement (HCA) to make sure that all the practical and logistical arrangements are in place. That has to happen very promptly. 

Then there’ll be many ongoing and detailed discussions on the logistics, which the host government would normally be responsible for putting in place. That includes ensuring that all the facilities for the negotiations and other events are in place and functioning. The Secretariat will work alongside and advise on what is needed throughout that process.

On the substantive issues, the Presidency and Secretariat will discuss how to facilitate negotiations. This takes place at various levels. There will be visits from the Secretariat to the host country, and the President and his or her team may also visit the Secretariat. 

What can the Presidency do to ensure a strong relationship with the Secretariat? 

Make sure that they are available to the Secretariat. That will be at different levels: from the person who’s going to be the President to their wider team.

The President needs to empower their team to have discussions with the Secretariat and to make decisions at the right level

Often, of course, the President themselves — being a minister or senior minister — won’t have the availability to engage in every discussion during the preparation. So they need to empower their team to have those discussions with the Secretariat and to make decisions at the right level, so that not everything has to go to the minister.

The Executive Secretary needs to do the same thing on the Secretariat’s side, to make sure things can move along at the right level and all the pieces can be put into place. 

How important is the wider Presidency team? 

Very important. There’s a whole team behind the President who might get less public attention but still make a very big contribution. 

In the case of Japan and China, for example, we worked closely with individuals who were trusted by the leadership to ensure a good outcome. 

One was an experienced negotiator whom I worked very closely with in preparation for COP15. He also advised COP15 President Huang Runqiu on the final shape of the Global Biodiversity Framework when the Presidency had to produce a President’s text.

The other was an official seconded from the Ministry of Agriculture to the Japanese Presidency team in preparation for COP10 in Nagoya. He made many visits to Montreal, and we developed a very strong partnership that was critical to facilitating agreements on targets and the Nagoya Protocol.

On several occasions, delegates from Brazil have stepped in and played a very important role in facilitating consensus or bringing groups together. For example, on the last day of COP15 in Montreal, the Global Biodiversity Framework had been formally adopted early in the morning, but there had been some dissatisfaction from a few countries.

The Brazilian delegation played a very important role in the final stages of COP15 in facilitating a rapprochement between Minister Eve Bazaiba, the head of the delegation of the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Minister Huang Runqiu, the Chinese COP President. 

That sealed the deal, meaning we had not only a formal adoption, but one that everyone was truly behind.

Which past Presidencies did you find particularly effective to work with, and why?

I enjoyed working with all the Presidencies I worked with. Some of the ones I think were particularly productive include some of the bigger COPs where we were developing big frameworks and agreements. 

There was a strong engagement from the Presidency teams in trying to understand the difficult issues and where they could help broker agreement.

For illustration, we worked very closely with the Japanese Presidency for COP10, with the Mexican and Egyptian presidencies of COP13 and COP14, with the Chinese Presidency for COP15 (with the support of Canada as the host country for the second part of COP15), and with Susana Muhammad and the Colombian Presidency at COP16 in Cali and the resumed meeting in Rome.

In all these cases, there was strong engagement from the Presidency teams in trying to understand the difficult issues and where they could help broker agreement. I have to say that Susana Muhammad was particularly engaged in understanding all the details of the issues and helping broker agreements.

What can the UN's climate process learn from the UN’s biodiversity process?

Good question. A couple of things: 

First, I hear from some delegates who participate in both the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) processes that they see a stronger sense of community in the CBD. 

In both processes, you're going to have differences among regional groups and between North and South. But I think there is a strong common passion for biodiversity and nature that helps bring people together in the CBD process. And I think there’s a willingness to engage with the science in quite a detailed way.

The second thing, which I think is a great strength of the CBD process, is that it’s very open to participation from civil society. 

Indigenous peoples and local communities, in particular, have a well-acknowledged role and are respected by parties in the process. It’s not perfect; it’s still evolving, but there are efforts to make sure their views are heard and often acted upon.

How is civil society reflected in the process and outcomes?

I think it is reflected in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework itself across the agreement. And, of course, it’s reflected in the decision at COP16 in Cali to upgrade the dedicated working group on Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities on traditional knowledge to a permanent subsidiary body of the Convention. 

So the role of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities is particularly important. But the role of women’s groups, youth groups and civil society more generally is also quite strong.

For example, they’re nearly always allowed to participate in contact groups. That’s not so much the case in the climate process. Of course, this can take time and space in the agenda, but I believe it does help nurture a sense that the COP must succeed — and must succeed at a higher level of ambition.

Observers have often brought important aspects to negotiations. For example, work on indicators was strongly shaped early on by many of the conservation NGOs. 

More recently, I don’t think the recognition of the role of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, the concepts of intergenerational equity, and the strong focus on gender would have happened without inputs and pressure from the respective civil society groups.

If you were to write a letter of advice for a prospective Presidency, what advice would you give them?

The first piece of advice is to recognise that it's a large responsibility. But it’s a responsibility that can bring a lot of benefits in raising the profile and activities of the country. 

Then I’d say try your best to ensure your work with the Secretariat is seamless and make sure your Presidency works in a very transparent way.

Trust and equal treatment are essential. Such important elements of a successful COP include trust.

That doesn't mean that every detail should be shared with everyone. It does mean that information is shared regularly and is done so on a completely level playing field so no one feels that any party or regional group has been privileged. 

I think trust and equal treatment are essential. A successful COP must include trust.

Maintaining a positive negotiation environment is crucial — perhaps particularly among parties or groups with opposing views. The most encouraging signs are when you see that parties with different views and different interests are helping those with opposing views or interests to find a common solution.

“What I need to see in a President is not that you necessarily agree with me, but that you understand my position and understand what I need. If I think you understand, then I will trust you to come to a fair agreement” 

Another element is for the Presidency to trust the process. In other words, make sure that the negotiations are allowed to proceed, that countries are allowed to express their views, and indeed that the various groups have clearly heard the views of others. Not just that they've been stated, but that they've been heard. 

An experienced colleague from Argentina put it like this: “What I need to see in a President is not that you necessarily agree with me, but that you understand my position and understand what I need. If I think you understand my position and needs, then I will trust you to come to a fair agreement.” These are very important qualities in a President and a Presidency team.

Trusting the process means letting it take its course. At the correct time, the Presidency may have to try to put forward a compromise on some of the more difficult issues and push that forward.

The Presidency will need to ensure that the compromise is balanced. Not by looking for the lowest common denominator, but rather by looking for what each side wants and trying to make sure everyone gets something while maintaining a level of ambition that is commensurate with the task at hand.