- 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