The first International Technical Conference on Animal Genetic
Resources for Food and Agriculture took place from 3-7 September 2007, in
Interlaken, Switzerland.
This was the first intergovernmental conference to focus exclusively
on animal genetic resources (AnGR). The meeting was divided into three
parts. On the first day, delegates convened in a scientific forum to hear
presentations and engage in discussions on the scientific aspects of AnGR.
The following morning, a final version of the report, The State of the World?s
Animal Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, was presented. Based on
169 country reports, the new publication was welcomed by participants as an
authoritative survey of the sector.

However, most of the conference was taken up with negotiations on the
draft Global Plan of Action for Animal Genetic Resources and on the
Interlaken Declaration on Animal Genetic Resources. The draft Global Plan of
Action, which contains four ?priority areas? and 23 ?strategic priorities?
for action, was the subject of earlier discussions, including during the
eleventh regular session of the United Nation?s Food and Agriculture
Organization?s (FAO) Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and
Agriculture (CGRFA) in June 2007. However, the CGRFA did not finalize the
draft, which was forwarded to Interlaken for further consideration. After
lengthy negotiations, the Global Plan was adopted, including a section on
implementation and financing that had been the subject of considerable
discussion. Delegates also adopted the Interlaken Declaration, which
stresses the importance of AnGR and confirms the adoption of the Global
Plan.

The successful completion of the Global Plan and Interlaken
Declaration provides a framework for future action and represents the
beginning of a challenging long-term process for countries and the FAO to
sustainably manage the world?s AnGR for food and agriculture.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS TO ADDRESS ANIMAL GENETIC
RESOURCES

The effective management of animal genetic resources for food and
agriculture is considered highly important for global food security,
sustainable development, and the livelihoods of over one billion people
worldwide. The FAO has classified over 7600 different domestic livestock
breeds currently in existence. These different breeds have been developed by
farmers and pastoralists since animals were first domesticated around 12,000
years ago.

During the past two decades, however, concerns have grown about the
future of livestock biodiversity. Twenty percent of classified breeds of
cattle, goats, pigs, horses and poultry are now considered to be at risk of
extinction, as the world?s livestock production has become increasingly
based on a limited number of breeds. Since 2001, an average of one breed per
month has become extinct, while genetic diversity within even the most
common breeds is in decline. Animal genetic resources are also perceived to
be at risk from major disease epidemics and from disasters brought on by
emerging threats such as climate change. The rapid growth in global demand
for livestock products also represents a major challenge for the effective
and sustainable management of livestock.

During the 1990s, the international community began to respond to
these concerns. In 1990, the FAO Council recommended the preparation of a
comprehensive programme for the sustainable management of AnGR at the global
level. As a result of this recommendation, in 1993 the FAO launched its
Global Strategy for the Management of Farm Animal Genetic Resources. The
Global Strategy contained four elements: an intergovernmental mechanism for
direct governmental involvement and policy development; country-based global
infrastructure to help nations plan and implement national strategies; a
technical support programme aimed at the country level; and a reporting and
evaluation system to guide the Strategy?s implementation, maximize
cost-effectiveness and facilitate collaboration, coordination and policy
development. While the Global Strategy was not formally adopted, it has
helped guide and focus efforts in this area. It also contributed towards the
ongoing development of a Domestic Animal Diversity Information System (a
global information system on AnGR) and the establishment of national and
regional focal points.

As a result of an FAO review of progress in 1995, the CGRFA initiated
a process to help further develop and implement the Global Strategy. A
subsidiary body ? the Intergovernmental Technical Working Group on Animal
Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture ? was established, and met for
the first time in 1998. The Working Group reiterated concerns about the
state of the world?s AnGR and recommended the development of country-driven
efforts and progress on an internationally-agreed framework.

In 2001, the FAO gave further direction to this process by inviting
countries to submit national reports on the state of their AnGR. These
reports were to include assessments of the contribution of farm animals to
food, agriculture and rural development, the state of national capacity to
manage these resources, and a list of ?priority actions.? In all, 169
Country Reports were submitted. These reports highlighted the importance of
farm animals to food security and sustainable development, and underscored
the erosion of genetic diversity in both developed and developing countries.

Based on these Country Reports, the first global report on The State
of the World?s Animal Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture was
drafted, as well as a report on Strategic Priorities for Action for the
Sustainable Use, Development and Conservation of Animal Genetic Resources
for Food and Agriculture. At its fourth session in December 2006, the
Intergovernmental Technical Working Group on AnGR considered these two
documents. The Working Group also recommended the development of a Global
Plan Action for AnGR, to be considered at a conference on AnGR in
Interlaken, Switzerland, in September 2007. Following this session, a
Friends of the Chair group convened in March 2007, in Freibourg,
Switzerland, to continue consideration of strategic priorities for AnGR. At
the eleventh regular session of the CGRFA in Rome in June 2007, discussions
on strategic priorities resulted in a draft Global Plan of Action and a
draft Declaration on AnGR. The Global Plan of Action was intended to create
an internationally-agreed strategic framework for addressing AnGR.

REPORT OF THE INTERLAKEN CONFERENCE

On Monday morning, 3 September 2007, Samuel Jutzi, Director, Animal
Production and Health Division, FAO, opened the meeting and thanked the
Swiss Government for hosting the event. He explained that there would be
three components to the event: a scientific forum on AnGR during the first
day; a presentation of The State of the World?s Animal Genetic Resources for
Food and Agriculture report on Tuesday morning; and discussions on the draft
Global Plan of Action for AnGR and draft Interlaken Declaration during the
remainder of the week.

Delegates elected Manfred Bötsch, Director-General of the Swiss
Federal Office for Agriculture, as conference Chair. The Vice-Chairs elected
were Hussein Ibrahim Abu Eissa (Sudan), Daniel Semambo (Uganda), Arthur da
Silva Mariante (Brazil), David Hegwood (US), Paul Trushell (Australia), and
Vanida Khumnirdpetch (Thailand).

Conference Chair Bötsch stressed the importance of AnGR and asked
delegates to consider the agenda and annotated agenda (ITC-AnGR/07/1 & 2).
He explained that the agenda item on the Global Plan of Action would cover
the three annexes under the relevant document (ITC-AnGR/07/3), which
included a draft Global Plan of Action (Annex I), text on implementation and
financing the Global Plan (Annex II), and the Interlaken Declaration (Annex
III). Canada noted its understanding that Annex II was being proposed as an
element of the Global Plan, and delegates adopted the agenda as proposed.

Delegates convened in plenary sessions throughout the week, and in a
limited number of small-group consultations on the Global Plan of Action and
the Interlaken Declaration, which took up most of the week?s work. This
summary outlines the discussions and outcomes under each agenda item.

SCIENTIFIC FORUM

On Monday, a Scientific Forum on AnGR was held, chaired by Fritz
Schneider, Swiss College of Agriculture. The Forum provided an informal
occasion to discuss specific AnGR issues, and involved presenters and
panelists who outlined and discussed reports on four specific topics (as
contained in document ITC-AnGR/07/Inf.2):

a.. the dynamics of animal production systems and AnGR ? drivers of
change and prospects for AnGR;

b.. inventory, characterization and monitoring;

c.. sustainable use and genetic improvement; and

d.. conservation of AnGR ? approaches and technologies for in situ
and ex situ conservation.

A more detailed summary on the Scientific Forum can be found at:
[www.iisd.ca].

WELCOMING CEREMONY

On Tuesday morning, 4 September, a ceremony was held to officially
welcome delegates to the first International Technical Conference on Animal
Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. The ceremony included a
performance of traditional Swiss alphorn music and presentations from
invited speakers.

Doris Leuthard, Federal Councilor and Head of the Federal Department
of Economic Affairs, Switzerland, noted that agriculture has a key role to
play in fighting hunger and meeting the Millennium Development Goals. She
called for a focus on conserving AnGR and ensuring sustainable use, and
urged delegates to adopt the Global Plan of Action and Interlaken
Declaration to reflect a commitment to structured management of AnGR for
food security and sustainable development.

Alexander Müller, Assistant Director-General, Natural Resources
Management and Environment Department, FAO, stressed the need for wise
management of AnGR to address challenges such as climate change, rapid
economic and social change, globalization, diseases, socioeconomic
instability and armed conflict. Noting that changes affect every country, he
said AnGR are particularly important for livelihoods in developing
countries, and that at least one livestock breed has become extinct each
month over the past seven years. Müller called on delegates to set the basis
for international efforts to promote sustainable use and improve livelihoods
in developing countries.

Ahmed Djoghlaf, Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD), noted that parties to the CBD recognize AnGR as essential
for food security. He looked forward to the adoption of the Global Plan and
Interlaken Declaration and said these would help further the objectives of
the CBD. He highlighted a number of relevant issues, including ongoing work
under the CBD on access and benefit sharing, the importance of indigenous
peoples and traditional knowledge, the fruitful partnership with FAO, and
the significance of the 2010 biodiversity target.

André Nietlisbach, Secretary-General, Direction of Economic Affairs,
Canton of Bern, Switzerland, welcomed participants to Interlaken and the
region. He noted the Canton?s commitment to sustainable development and its
unique animal breeds, observing that ?once genetic material is lost, it is
lost forever.?

Urs Graf, Mayor of Interlaken, welcomed participants to his city and
wished delegates a successful outcome.

PRESENTATION OF THE STATE OF THE WORLD?S ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES FOR
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE

On Tuesday morning, delegates considered the agenda item on the new
report, The State of the World?s Animal Genetic Resources for Food and
Agriculture. Irene Hoffmann, Chief of FAO?s Animal Production Service and
Conference Secretary, introduced the report, observing that it would be an
important reference tool for the next five to ten years. Highlighting that
the report was the result of a process initiated in 2001, she underscored
the concerted effort at the national level to prepare 169 Country Reports.
She expressed her gratitude to all involved and said the report provided an
important baseline for decisions on the Global Plan of Action.

Barbara Rischkowsky, International Center for Agricultural Research in
the Dry Areas (and formerly of FAO), outlined the content of the report,
explaining that it contained five sections, which addressed: the status of
AnGR; livestock sector and trends; the state of capacities, institutions and
stakeholders; the need for research; and needs and challenges in AnGR
management. She expressed hope that a clear Global Plan of Action would be
adopted that included implementation mechanisms, along with a strong
Interlaken Declaration supporting immediate action to maintain AnGR.

Many delegates welcomed the report and called for its wide
dissemination and translation into other UN languages. Colombia emphasized
that the Global Plan would need to contain a solid financial mechanism that
addressed the needs identified in the report. The International Federation
for Organic Farming highlighted the contribution that organic farming can
make towards maintaining genetic resources through market systems.

Irene Hoffmann described the report as a ?starting point? and
requested that delegates keep the global breed database updated. She thanked
China for producing a Chinese version and appealed for funds to facilitate
other translations.

CIVIL SOCIETY PRESENTATION

At the invitation of Conference Chair Manfred Bötsch, a civil society
representative, Maryam Rahmanian, Centre for Sustainable Development and
Environment, Iran, presented the Wilderswil Declaration on Livestock
Diversity on behalf of 30 organizations of pastoralists, indigenous peoples,
smallholder farmers and NGOs who had met in parallel to the Interlaken
Conference at the ?Livestock Diversity Forum: Defending food sovereignty and
livestock keepers? rights.? Rahmanian described the global livestock crisis
caused by the imposition of industrial livestock breeding and production
systems, and highlighted the consequences for local communities, including:
loss of small and family-based production, smallholder bankruptcies and
suicides, and economic dependency. She affirmed the Livestock Diversity
Forum?s commitment to fighting for the rights of livestock keepers,
including land, water, culture, education and training, rights and access to
local markets. Rahmanian commended the analysis in The State of the World?s
Animal Genetic Resources report of the key causes leading to the destruction
of biodiversity and highlighted that it identified industrial livestock
systems as a primary cause. However, she expressed concern that the draft
Global Plan of Action fails to address these causes. Rahmanian said it is
unacceptable for governments to agree on a plan that does not challenge
policies that lead to biodiversity loss, adding that civil society
organizations have no interest in a plan that provides ?weak support for a
collapsing livestock production system.? She reaffirmed civil society?s
commitment to organizing itself in order to save livestock diversity and
concluded that ?defending livestock diversity is not a matter of genes, but
of collective rights.?

GLOBAL PLAN OF ACTION FOR ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES

On Tuesday afternoon, delegates turned their attention to the agenda
item on the ?Global Plan of Action for Animal Genetic Resources.? In their
work, Conference Chair Bötsch asked participants to focus on a document
forwarded by the Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
(CGRFA) at the conclusion of its eleventh regular session, held in June 2007
(CGRFA-11). This document (ITC-AnGR/07/03) contained three annexes. The
first two annexes contained text relating to the Global Plan of Action,
while a third annex contained a draft ?Interlaken Declaration? that stressed
the importance of AnGR and confirmed the adoption of the Global Plan.

Annex I contained a draft Global Plan of Action that included an
Introduction and a second, longer section entitled ?Strategic Priorities for
Action.? This second section detailed four ?priority areas? and 23
?strategic priorities? for action. Annex I was the subject of lengthy
discussions, particularly on the final strategic priority, which dealt with
resources and financing. Discussions on this final strategic priority in
Annex I were also linked to talks on Annex II, which contained related text
on ?implementation and financing of the Global Plan.? After lengthy
negotiations throughout Wednesday and Thursday, both on the content of these
annexes and how they should fit together, delegates finally agreed to a
revised document that included both Annex I and Annex II as part of the
Global Plan.

The final version of the Global Plan (ITC-AnGR/07/Report) includes the
Introduction (Section I) and Strategic Priorities (Section II) originally
contained in Annex I of the draft. In addition, the original Annex II, on
implementation and financing, was added to the Global Plan as Section III. A
summary of the negotiations and the final text of the Global Plan of Action
is outlined below.

SECTION I: INTRODUCTION: The introduction to the Global Plan had
largely been approved in the draft forwarded by CGRFA-11, with questions
remaining primarily over text addressing traditional rights of livestock
keepers and international transboundary breeds. In addition, a footnote in
the introduction that sought to define the term ?animal genetic resources?
was also the source of some disagreement in Interlaken.

Concerns over the definition of AnGR contained in a footnote to the
introduction were first raised by Brazil on Wednesday. He expressed concern
about the broad definition used in the footnote and suggested inserting a
specific reference to ?farm? animals. Irene Hoffmann, FAO, noted previous
discussions on this topic and explained the rationale behind the current
formulation. After two days of discussions, Brazil accepted the original
footnote, but added text requesting FAO to ?further develop these working
definitions.?

Delegates also discussed text referring to ?transboundary breeds,? in
particular the legal implications of this term. After some discussion,
delegates agreed to language proposed by Chair Bötsch based on input from
the FAO Legal Counsel. This text, contained in a footnote, stated that ?it
is intended that the use of the term ?transboundary breeds? does not affect
the sovereign rights of countries within their national jurisdictions,?
which delegates accepted. Delegates also agreed to delete language
requesting the FAO to further develop this terminology.

Another area of debate was the subject of livestock keepers? rights
and whether these existed in all countries. Representatives of Africa and of
Latin America and the Caribbean supported inclusion of text referring to
national legislation supporting such rights, with Kenya questioning whether
rights could exist in the absence of legislation. However, Asia and Peru
countered that many countries lack national legislation addressing livestock
keepers? rights. After some discussion, delegates agreed to compromise text
proposed by Chair Bötsch that recognized the important ?role? of livestock
keepers, pastoralists and local communities in utilization and development
of livestock resources, and noted that ?in some countries, livestock keepers
have specific rights, in accordance with their national legislation, or
traditional rights, to these resources.?

Final Outcome: The introduction to the Global Plan of Action stresses
that AnGR for food and agriculture are an essential part of the biological
basis for world food security, and contribute to the livelihoods of over one
billion people. It presents the background to the development of the Global
Plan, including the work of CGRFA and the country-driven process that led to
the preparation of The State of the World?s Animal Genetic Resources report.
The introduction also sets out the rationale behind the Global Plan, noting
the issues and concerns regarding AnGR raised in the State of the World
report, including the loss of AnGR and the challenges facing policy-makers,
rural communities, livestock keepers and other groups, as well as issues
relating to capacity building and human and financial resources.

The introduction also outlines its aims and strategies, explaining
that it is intended as a ?rolling plan? with an initial time horizon of ten
years and provisions for the sustainable use, development and conservation
of AnGR at the national, regional and global levels. It also states that
countries are fundamentally interdependent with respect to AnGR for food and
agriculture, and consequently international cooperation is necessary.

SECTION II: STRATEGIC PRIORITIES FOR ACTION: This 20-page section of
the Global Plan of Action sets out a series of four ?strategic priority
areas? that contain a total of 23 individual ?strategic priorities.? Below
is a summary of the negotiations and outcomes from each of these four
priority areas.

Strategic Priority Area 1: Characterization, Inventory and Monitoring
of Trends and Associated Risks: This section required very little discussion
in Interlaken, as the draft text forwarded from the CGRFA had been cleared
of almost all brackets. Only one issue required any substantive discussion,
relating to national species and breed development strategies (Strategic
Priority 4). The original text noted that, while plans and programmes are
formulated at the national level, cooperation among countries may be needed.
Some delegates were sensitive to reference to ?transboundary? issues,
however, and participants agreed to delete text referring to some issues
being ?transboundary in nature? in favor of language noting that ?in some
cases cooperation with other countries may be required.? With this
agreement, delegates rapidly finalized this section of the Global Plan of
Action.

Final Outcome: The final text of Strategic Priority Area 1 stresses in
its introduction the importance of understanding the diversity,
distribution, basic characteristics, comparative performance and the current
status of each country?s AnGR. It notes current gaps in data and
information, and sets a long-term goal of improved understanding of these
issues, to facilitate and enable decision-making for their sustainable use,
development and conservation.

The text under this section also outlines two ?strategic priorities?
relating to characterization, inventories and monitoring, and specific
?actions? in each case. The two strategic priorities are as follows:

a.. Strategic Priority 1: Inventory and characterize AnGR, monitor
trends and risks associated with them, and establish country-based early
warning and response systems; and

b.. Strategic Priority 2: Develop international technical standards
and protocols for characterization, inventory and monitoring of trends and
associated risks.

Strategic Priority Area 2: Sustainable Use and Development: This
section required very little discussion in Interlaken, as the draft text
forwarded from the CGRFA had been largely agreed. The section was quickly
approved by delegates.

Final Outcome: The final text of Strategic Priority Area 2 notes in
its introduction the growing challenge of achieving food security and
sustainable development, and the challenges facing developing countries in
particular. It sets a long-term goal of enhancing sustainable use and
development of AnGR in all relevant production systems, as a key
contribution to achieving sustainable development, poverty eradication and
adaptation to the effects of climate change.

The text under this section also outlines four ?strategic priorities?
relating to sustainable use and development:

a.. Strategic Priority 3: Establishing and strengthening national
sustainable use policies;

b.. Strategic Priority 4: Establishing national species and breed
development strategies and programmes;

c.. Strategic Priority 5: Promoting agro-ecosystems approaches to
the management of AnGR; and

d.. Strategic Priority 6: Supporting indigenous and local production
systems and associated knowledge systems that are of importance to the
maintenance and sustainable use of AnGR.

Strategic Priority Area 3: Conservation: Delegates discussed elements
of Strategic Priority Area 3 on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. While most
priorities under this area did not require negotiation, delegates spent
significant time on two contentious elements. These focused on the specific
strategic priorities that dealt with ?national conservation policies?
(Strategic Priority 7) and ?establishing or strengthening in situ
conservation programmes? (Strategic Priority 8).

Regarding the text on national conservation policies, debate focused
on reference to ?non-trade distorting? incentives in support of AnGR
conservation. Delegates were divided over the inclusion of this reference.
While India, Pakistan, the African regional group, and others preferred to
remove the text, the North American region, South-West Pacific, Argentina,
Brazil and others supported retaining it. After further discussion, Chair
Bötsch proposed compromise text, which stated that ?providing support for
such measures is consistent with existing international agreements,? rather
than referring to ?non-trade distorting.? Delegates agreed to this
formulation.

Another issue that was debated in relation to the strategic priority
on national conservation policies was the issue of providing and catalyzing
incentives for producers and consumers to support conservation of AnGR
considered ?at risk.? Representatives of Africa, Asia and Europe favored
deletion of the term ?at risk,? while the Near East, North America and the
South-West Pacific preferred to maintain the reference. After lengthy
discussions, delegates agreed to retain the reference to AnGR ?at risk,?
qualifying that this should be ?as evaluated by individual countries? and
consistent with existing international agreements.

Regarding text on in situ conservation programmes, discussion focused
on language suggesting that, in cases where market-based approaches to in
situ conservation are not possible, ?non-trade distorting? direct payments
may be necessary. Delegates were again divided on the inclusion of reference
to ?non-trade distorting.? After extensive debate, delegates agreed to
alternative text proposed by Australia stating that in cases where
market-based approaches are not possible, support for in situ conservation
of animal resources may be necessary.

Final Outcome: The final text of Strategic Priority Area 3 notes in
its introduction the long-term threat that the erosion of AnGR poses to food
security and rural development, and the finding of The State of the World?s
Animal Genetic Resources report that 20 percent of all reported breeds are
at risk of extinction. It sets a long-term goal of securing the diversity
and integrity of the genetic base of AnGR by better implementing and
harmonizing measures to conserve these resources, both in situ and ex situ,
including in the context of emergencies and disasters.

The text under this section also outlines five ?strategic priorities?
relating to sustainable use and development, which are:

a.. Strategic Priority 7: Establishing national conservation
policies;

b.. Strategic Priority 8: Establishing or strengthening in situ
conservation programmes;

c.. Strategic Priority 9: Establishing or strengthening ex situ
conservation programmes;

d.. Strategic Priority 10: Developing and implementing regional and
global long-term conservation strategies; and

e.. Strategic Priority 11: Developing approaches and technical
standards for conservation.

Strategic Priority Area 4: Policies, Institutions and Capacity
Building: Delegates discussed elements of Strategic Priority Area 4 on
Wednesday and Thursday. While most priorities under this area did not
require negotiation, delegates did discuss language on two of the twelve
strategic priorities contained in Strategic Priority Area 4. The two topics
related to the roles and values of AnGR and the contribution of livestock
keeping communities (Strategic Priority 18) and strengthening efforts to
mobilize resources, including financial resources (Strategic Priority 23).

On Wednesday, delegates considered the roles and values of AnGR and
the contribution of livestock keeping communities. The European regional
group, supported by Latin America and the Caribbean and by North America,
observed that ?rights? with respect to these communities had not been
defined. Africa, the Near East and others proposed referring to the ?needs
and rights of livestock communities.? An informal group was established to
resolve the issue and on Wednesday evening Jimena Nieto (Colombia) reported
back to plenary on the results of the group?s discussions, introducing
compromise text referencing livestock keepers? rights ?at the national
level.? This formulation was agreed to by delegates.

Discussions on strengthening efforts to mobilize resources for AnGR
(Strategic Priority 23) were considered in parallel with the discussions on
a separate text on implementation and financing (which ultimately was added
to the Global Plan as a new Section III). These two related texts were
negotiated together in an informal group facilitated by David Hegwood (US)
(see the section on Implementation and Financing below).

On Thursday afternoon, Hegwood reported to plenary on the results of
the informal discussions, indicating that that Strategic Priority 23 and
Section III reflected two elements of the same issue, with the former
addressing financing and resource needs and the latter dealing with
implementation. He outlined the result of deliberations and said that
textual changes to Strategic Priority 23 had been kept to a minimum wherever
possible. Delegates then adopted the text as forwarded by the informal
group.

Final Outcome: The final text of Strategic Priority Area 4 notes in
its introduction that in many cases national policies and regulatory
frameworks for AnGR are still partial and ineffective, and that policy and
legislative development is required. It sets a long-term goal of
establishing cross-cutting policies and legal frameworks and strong
institutional and legal capacities for successful medium and long-term
planning.

The text under this section also outlines twelve ?strategic
priorities? relating to policies, institutions and capacity building. The
twelve strategic priorities are:

a.. Strategic Priority 12: Establishing or strengthening national
institutions, including national focal points, for planning and implementing
AnGR measures, for livestock sector development;

b.. Strategic Priority 13: Establishing or strengthening national
education and research facilities;

c.. Strategic Priority 14: Strengthening national human capacity for
characterization, inventory, and monitoring of trends and associated risks,
for sustainable use and development, and for conservation;

d.. Strategic Priority 15: Establishing or strengthening
international information sharing, research and education;

e.. Strategic Priority 16: Strengthening international cooperation
to build capacities in developing countries and countries with economies in
transition, for characterization, inventory, and monitoring of trends and
associated risks; sustainable use and development; and conservation of AnGR;

f.. Strategic Priority 17: Establishing regional focal points and
strengthening international networks;

g.. Strategic Priority 18: Raising national awareness of the roles
and values of AnGR;

h.. Strategic Priority 19: Raising regional and international
awareness of the roles and values of AnGR;

i.. Strategic Priority 20: Reviewing and developing national
policies and legal frameworks for AnGR;

j.. Strategic Priority 21: Reviewing and developing international
policies and regulatory frameworks relevant to AnGR;

k.. Strategic Priority 22: Coordinating the Commission?s efforts on
AnGR policy with other international forums; and

l.. Strategic Priority 23: Strengthening efforts to mobilize
resources, including financial resources, for the conservation, sustainable
use and development of AnGR.

SECTION III: IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCING: Disagreement over financial
matters had been anticipated at the onset of the meeting, given that two
extensively bracketed texts were forwarded to Interlaken from CGRFA-11 One
of these texts was the draft Global Plan of Action?s Strategic Priority 23
(ITC-AnGR/07/3, Annex I), and another, longer text focused on
?implementation and financing of the Global Plan of Action? (ITC-AnGR/07/3,
Annex II).

In Interlaken, delegates focused first on the text on implementation
and financing (Annex II), before considering Strategic Priority 23. These
matters were taken up on Wednesday in plenary, and at length on Thursday
both in plenary and in a small informal group chaired by David Hegwood (US).

A key issue was what to do with these two texts on financing. North
America proposed keeping the entire text on implementation and financing
(Annex II) bracketed, expressing concern over duplication with the
Interlaken Declaration and the text in Strategic Priority 23. He questioned
the relevance of the document and asked for rationalization and
consolidation of all financial items. However, the European regional group,
Asia, the Near East, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Africa supported
incorporating Annex II as an integral, third section (Section III) of the
Global Plan, emphasizing that a framework on implementation and financing
should form an essential outcome of the conference. Participants also
debated the text contained in Strategic Priority 23. The Near East preferred
to retain the text, while Europe supported deletion on the grounds that
financial issues would be addressed under implementation and financing in
the proposed Section III of the Global Plan. Asia disagreed, observing that
Strategic Priority 23 identified needs, while Section III would deal with
implementation. North America again called for financial matters to be
consolidated.

These disputes were eventually resolved in an informal group, which
considered financial issues as a ?package? and discussed how to avoid
perceived duplication. On Thursday evening, Hegwood reported back to plenary
that the group had identified three pillars that the text should address,
namely technology transfer, capacity building, and financing and resources.
He explained that the Global Plan?s Strategy Priority 23 and Section III
(formerly Annex II) reflected two elements of the same issue: perceived
needs under Priority 23 and implementation under Section III. Therefore,
both would be included in the Global Plan of Action. He also explained that
textual changes had been kept to a minimum wherever possible, although some
regrouping and amendment of text had been required to make the text flow and
for consistency. Participants approved of the proposal to address financing
under both Strategic Priority 23 and Section III.

As well as the discussions on how to structure the outcomes on
financing, delegates also deliberated on the specific text. In Section III,
a paragraph on strategic investments and incentives was the subject of
disagreement. While the Near East and Europe supported reference to this,
the South-West Pacific proposed ?maintenance of incentives.? North America
added ?provided that such incentives are consistent with relevant
international agreements,? and delegates ultimately agreed to North America?s
formulation.

Discussion was also required on the subject of ?new and additional?
resources. Latin America and the Caribbean sought inclusion of text
referring to this, but not all regional groups could agree. In particular,
some developed countries were cautious about committing to language on ?new?
resources. After further discussion, delegates agreed to a compromise
proposed by Peru to refer to ?additional? but not to include a reference to
?new.? With agreement on this issue, the entire text was agreed by delegates
on Thursday evening, and formally adopted in plenary the following day.

Final Outcome: Section III of the Global Plan, on implementation and
financing (ITC-AnGR/07/Report), states, inter alia, that:

a.. the implementation of the Global Plan will require substantial
and additional financial resources and long-term support for national,
regional and international AnGR programmes and priority activities, provided
such incentives are consistent with relevant international agreements;

b.. it will be necessary to periodically assess the status and
trends of AnGR, especially in light of the large number of breeds that are
at risk of being lost globally;

c.. the Conference requests the CGRFA to develop a Funding Strategy
for the implementation of the Global Plan of Action;

d.. the main responsibility for implementing the Global Plan rests
with national governments, with each country determining its own priorities
in light of those agreed in the Global Plan;

e.. the FAO?s essential role in supporting country-driven efforts to
implement the Global Plan, especially to support developing countries and
countries with economies in transition, is recognized;

f.. the importance of developing and transferring
environmentally-sound technologies related to the inventory,
characterization, sustainable use, development and conservation of AnGR is
recognized; and

g.. despite efforts to increase public awareness through national
governments, international organizations and agencies, the necessary
financial resources for the implementation of the Global Plan by developing
countries and countries with economies in transition are insufficient.

In addition, the section states that countries should make every
effort to provide, in accordance with their capacities, support with respect
to national strategic priorities that are intended to achieve the objectives
of the Global Plan. It adds that governments of developed countries should
attach due attention, including funding, to the implementation of activities
within the strategic priority areas of the Global Plan. Finally, it
concludes that voluntary contributions should be encouraged, in particular
from the private sector and non-governmental organizations, for the
implementation of the Global Plan.

INTERLAKEN DECLARATION

Chair Bötsch introduced the draft Interlaken Declaration
(ITC-AnGR/07/3, Annex III) on Wednesday. With a significant amount of the
text already agreed by CGRFA-11, delegates focused on resolving issues
around remaining bracketed text, which addressed issues including
responsibilities, ownership of AnGR, access to technologies, and new and
additional resources. By Thursday evening, delegates had finalized text on
all these outstanding issues.

On the interdependence of countries (paragraph 3), participants agreed
to amend a reference to ?common and differentiated? responsibilities to
refer instead to ?common and individual? responsibilities.

Regarding text on local and indigenous communities (paragraph 11),
delegates were divided over two alternate formulations. There was particular
discussion over a reference to the impact of ?ownership and management? of
AnGR, with the European regional group seeking to delete the reference to
ownership, while other groups favored retention of the term. Participants
agreed to a formulation that retained reference to ?ownership and management
of the genetic resources of their livestock.?

Delegates devoted considerable time to language on access to
technologies (paragraph 14). Discussions focused on transferring or sharing
technologies, including whether to include text on providing ?concessional
and preferential terms.? Participants finally agreed on a shorter
formulation proposed by Peru referring to facilitating technology for
sustainable use, development and conservation of AnGR consistent with
relevant international obligations and national laws.

On Thursday afternoon, delegates addressed text acknowledging that
provision of new and additional resources can increase the world?s ability
to address sustainable use (paragraph 17). Participants negotiated text in
the remaining brackets, focusing on whether or not to refer to ?new?
resources and whether to ?strongly? recommend concrete steps to ensure a
?significant? increase in financial resources. Brazil stated that its
agreement to delete ?new? in other parts of the text had been contingent on
the term being retained in this paragraph, but agreed to the deletion of
?strongly.? The US suggested a ?substantial? rather than ?significant?
increase in finances, but the South-West Pacific preferred an ?adequate?
increase. Delegates eventually agreed to include a reference to ?new? and
additional resources and an ?adequate? increase in financial resources.

Shortly after 8:00 pm on Thursday, delegates finalized the text for
the Interlaken Declaration, which they adopted formally in the closing
plenary on Friday (ITC-AnGR/07/Report).

Final Outcome: The final text of the Interlaken Declaration recognizes
the essential roles and values of AnGR for food and agriculture, in
particular their contribution to food security for present and future
generations. The text of the Interlaken Declaration contains nineteen
paragraphs that, inter alia:

a.. confirm the ?common and individual responsibilities? for
conservation, sustainable use and development of animal genetic resources
for food and agriculture;

b.. welcome The State of the World?s Animal and Genetic Resources
report and acknowledge that it provides a basis for the Global Plan of
Action;

c.. acknowledge that the sustainable use, development and
conservation of AnGR for food and agriculture will make a vital contribution
to achieving Goal One (Eradication of extreme poverty and hunger) of the
Millennium Development Goals;

d.. adopt the Global Plan of Action for Animal Genetic Resources;

e.. acknowledge that provision of new and additional resources can
make a substantial difference in the world?s ability to address the
sustainable use, development and conservation of AnGR for food and
agriculture;

f.. recognize that the main responsibility for implementing the
Global Plan of Action rests with national governments; and

g.. acknowledge the essential role of FAO in supporting country
driven efforts in implementing the Global Plan of Action.

CLOSING PLENARY

On Friday afternoon, delegates reconvened for the final plenary
session to consider the draft report of the conference (ITC-AnGR/07/Report).
The report contained an outline of discussions under all agenda items, as
well as two appendices. Appendix 1 contained the text of the Global Plan of
Action for Animal Genetic Resources, while Appendix 2 contained the final
version of the Interlaken Declaration. Delegates adopted the report with
only minor amendments.

José María Sumpsi Vi?as, Assistant Director-General, Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Protection, FAO, described it as a ?good day? for
the FAO and congratulated delegates on behalf of Jacques Diouf,
Director-General of the FAO, for a ?historic result? that will ?define
action on AnGR for many years to come.? He described the Global Plan as the
first concrete international instrument to address AnGR-related challenges
in a systematic way, and called for sustained efforts by all stakeholders to
ensure its implementation. He concluded by thanking FAO colleagues and Chair
Bötsch for their work.

Many delegates thanked the Bureau, the Secretariat and other
organizers, and colleagues for their hard work before and during the
conference.

Reflecting on next steps, Australia, speaking for the South-West
Pacific region, thanked all participants and other members of the South-West
Pacific regional group. The Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) said
he would support implementation of the Global Plan among the 22 members of
his regional group, and that SPC would act as a focal point to coordinate
efforts. He underscored the need for fair and equitable sharing of the
benefits of the sustainable utilization of AnGR, and expressed concern about
their misappropriation.

Côte d?Ivoire, speaking for Africa, expressed hope that the Interlaken
Declaration would not become a ?dead letter,? but would serve as a compass
to facilitate the sustainable use of AnGR. Poland, speaking for the European
regional group, said the Interlaken Declaration was ?highly significant? and
that ?everyone has a common interest and passion in securing a more
sustainable future for AnGR.?

Thailand, on behalf of Asia, expressed satisfaction with the
conference outcome, noting the Global Plan?s significance for the region and
the importance of implementation at the country level. Canada, for North
America, described the Global Plan as a ?starting point? and ?milestone,?
underscoring the need for sustainable use and conservation of AnGR for food
security, sustainable agriculture and agro-biological diversity. Argentina,
for Latin America and the Caribbean, reiterated the importance of the Global
Plan, which he said concluded a long period of negotiation.

Conference Chair Manfred Bötsch thanked delegates for their excellent
spirit of openness and cooperation, which he labeled the ?spirit of
Interlaken.? He noted that discussions had not always been easy, but that
they had certainly been productive. He said the Global Plan was an important
step forward, and would provide a framework for future action. However, he
added that there was still a long way to go to achieve the sustainable use,
development and conservation of AnGR for food and agriculture, which he said
would require political will and human and financial resources. He noted
Switzerland?s commitment to this ongoing work, and that it was now ?up to
all of us? to move forward. He thanked participants, the FAO team for
organizing the conference, Australia, Germany, Ireland, Norway and Spain for
their financial contributions, the interpreters, the conference center
staff, and the organizing Swiss team of François Pythoud, Barbara Rychen and
their colleagues. He presented Irene Hoffmann of FAO with a Swiss bell that
he had used to summon delegates to plenary sessions, to thank her for her
contribution to this process.

Irene Hoffmann, FAO, said the development of the State of the World?s
Animal Genetic Resources report and the Global Plan was the result of a long
process, and she was delighted at the success of this conference. She
thanked the organizers of side events and noted the ?space? given at this
conference for learning and networking, as well as for the negotiations. She
thanked the Swiss Government, Manfred Bötsch for his effective chairing of
the meeting, the CGRFA, and everyone involved, and looked forward to
implementing the outcomes of this conference.

Clive Stannard, CGRFA, said this conference had launched a whole new
series of activities that would play an important role at a critical time.
He noted a desire to conduct similar work to review the state of the world?s
genetic resources, expanding studies into other related fields. He thanked
his colleagues at FAO and in the Swiss Government, and congratulated
participants on a successful conference.

Chair Bötsch declared the conference closed at 2:35 pm.

A BRIEF ANALYSIS OF THE INTERLAKEN CONFERENCE

The Interlaken Conference was the first intergovernmental meeting to
focus exclusively on animal genetic resources. The State of the World?s
Animal Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture warns of the serious
erosion of livestock genetic diversity and resulting risks to food security
and the livelihoods of over one billion people. It was up to delegates in
Interlaken to reach agreement on a Global Plan of Action and a political
Declaration to address these real and pressing problems.

The successful completion of the Global Plan and Interlaken
Declaration provides a framework for future action, but did not resolve all
of the issues on the table. As the meeting drew to a close, Conference Chair
Manfred Bötsch labeled the outcome as one important step in the right
direction. Bötsch was right. With major concerns over defining livestock
keepers? rights and questions over intellectual property yet to be addressed
in any meaningful way, the Global Plan and Interlaken Declaration represent
the beginning, not the culmination, of a challenging long-term process for
countries and the FAO of sustainably managing the world?s animal genetic
resources for food and agriculture. This analysis reviews the Conference?s
two most contentious issues, which were financing and implementation, and
provides commentary on the future challenges relating to livestock keepers?
rights and intellectual property rights.

FROM LEIPZIG TO INTERLAKEN AND BEYOND

Some participants observed the striking resemblance between Interlaken
and the Leipzig Conference on plant genetic resources for food and
agriculture (PGRFA). Held in 1996, Leipzig launched the report on the State
of the World?s Plant Genetic Resources, finalized the Global Plan of Action
on PGRFA and adopted the Leipzig Declaration. This in turn ultimately led to
the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources. Modeled on the Leipzig
Conference, the Interlaken Conference aimed to achieve analogous outcome
documents for animal genetic resources. Similarities also exist between the
issues that were raised: both conferences focused particularly on financing,
and while farmers? rights and access and benefit sharing were contentious at
Leipzig, livestock keepers? rights and intellectual property rights were
divisive in Interlaken. Yet despite the parallels, delegates in Interlaken
were keen to emphasize the differences between protecting animal and plant
genetic resources for food and agriculture. For instance, while
publicly-owned gene banks hold comprehensive stocks of plant genetic
resources, animal genetic resources are privately owned by livestock
keepers. In addition, the challenge for plant genetic resources is
controlling their removal, while for animal genetic resources the major
problem is the introduction of exotic breeds. Such differences have led to
commentators asking whether the Interlaken Conference is the start of a
process that will culminate in an international treaty on animal genetic
resources or whether another avenue is more appropriate.

FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION

Disagreements over financing are an inevitable part of multilateral
environmental negotiations and this also proved to be the case in
Interlaken. From the outset it was clear that there was a significant gulf
between developed and developing countries. The document on implementation
and financing forwarded to the Conference by the CGRFA was fully bracketed,
reflecting developed countries? reluctance to take on further commitments.
This was evidenced by North America?s position at the start of the
conference, calling into question whether a separate text on finance was
necessary and, if it was, whether it should form a part of the Global Plan.

In Interlaken, two particular finance-related issues stood out. The
first relates to whether there should be ?new? or ?additional? financial
resources. North America and Europe?s opposition to ?new? sources of funding
stems from their reluctance to open up the possible establishment of new
processes or institutions. Latin America, Africa and Asia reiterated their
insistence at the eleventh regular session of CGRFA in June 2007 that
without funding commitments from developed countries the Global Plan of
Action would represent nothing more than a restatement of aims. According to
many participants, the eventual compromise to remove any reference to ?new?
from the Global Plan, but to include it in the Interlaken Declaration,
reflects the tacit understanding between North and South. While developed
countries would not cede on language specifying the need for ?new?
mechanisms for funding in an action plan, developing countries required a
strong statement in the political outcome (the Declaration) on the
importance of addressing funding issues. The outcome was acceptable to North
America and Europe and provides developing countries with the political
leverage they require to access new funding.

The second major issue was trade-related. Australia, speaking for the
South-West Pacific region, pushed for language limiting the ability of
countries to provide domestic subsidies under the guise of incentives for
the conservation of species ?at risk.? The argument, which to some extent
echoed WTO debates, arose over a section dealing with national and in situ
conservation policies and programmes. India, Switzerland, Europe and Africa
objected to North America, Australia, Iran, Argentina and Brazil?s calls for
any reference to incentives to be qualified that they be ?non-trade
distorting.? The latter group?s insistence on the insertion was intended to
deny countries the option of circumventing trade agreements under the guise
of environmental payments. The final version of the text refers to
consistency with existing international agreements, thus guaranteeing for
Australia, North America and others that the Global Plan does not provide
room for evading any trade obligations while allowing room for countries who
decide to provide incentives for in situ conservation measures to do so
under the exceptions contained in trade agreements.

LIVESTOCK KEEPERS? RIGHTS

Unlike financing, one issue that did not receive as much of a focus as
some felt it deserved was livestock keepers? rights. The concept of
livestock keepers? rights is not internationally recognized and developed
counties in particular were wary of creating rights and obligations in the
absence of an accepted definition. This factor led to those advocating for
the concept?s inclusion, such as Asia and the Near East, having to accept a
watered down recognition of livestock keepers? ?contributions? to animal
genetic resources and to ?relevant rights that may exist at the national
level.? This result did not please many civil society groups, for whom
livestock keepers? rights are a fundamental issue. To them, the guardians of
much of the world?s animal genetic resources need to be protected and
supported if the Global Plan is to have any meaningful impact on the ground.
For some government and UN experts, though, the compromise text merely shows
that the Global Plan is just one step forward, and that these issues are
playing out in other forums, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity.
?Those hoping for a definitive answer on this issue in Interlaken were
always going to be disappointed,? said one veteran.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

Another topic that received little attention in Interlaken was the
subject of intellectual property rights. Delegates agreed that the issue is
more appropriately dealt with in forums such as the World Intellectual
Property Organization. Accordingly, reference to these rights in relation to
technology transfer was dropped from the Interlaken Declaration in favor of
language stipulating that any transfer should be ?consistent with relevant
international obligations and relevant national laws.? However, most experts
also agreed that this is a topic that cannot be pushed back indefinitely,
given the advances of biotechnology and genetic sciences that are raising
the importance of intellectual property rights for the future of animal
genetic resources.

CHALLENGES AHEAD

In Interlaken, as in Leipzig, the CGRFA launched a progressive agenda
on genetic resources for food and agriculture. It has used a ?State of the
World? report to galvanize international efforts to conserve and sustainably
use genetic resources, helped broker a Global Plan that balances a number of
competing agendas and achieved what most view as a reasonably strong
Declaration. It is a positive start to the Commission?s recently agreed
multi-year programme of work and provides a solid basis for ongoing efforts
in the area. All of this flies in the face of commentators who before the
meeting had warned that the conference might be ?premature.?

Yet countries are now responsible for the implementation of the Global
Plan they have adopted and in this regard they face significant challenges.
The Strategic Priorities set out in the Global Plan require major policy
consideration at the national level, and despite the inclusion of a section
on implementation and financing, developing countries expect difficulties in
leveraging the necessary funding. Civil society groups excoriated the
outcome for not being sensitive enough to the needs of small-scale livestock
breeders in developing countries, the custodians of most of the world?s
animal genetic resources for food and agriculture. The further articulation
of the concept remains a significant challenge. At the same time, countries
will be forced by the inexorable advance of technology to address the
increasingly complex world of biotechnology and intellectual property
rights. Related to these questions is the uncertainty of the future of the
process, with different views on whether an international treaty is an
obvious next step or an unnecessary distraction from the newly-adopted
Global Plan.

Despite the positive outcome of the Conference, many major policy
issues remain on the table. The public backing given by governments to the
CGRFA has greatly increased the odds of it making a useful contribution to
the resolution of these multifaceted issues. Considering the stakes for the
future of the world?s animal genetic resources, there is still everything to
play for.


[www.iisd.ca]