2005-IGM-SPG 10.pdf - Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change ...

IGM/10/17
SPG/10/17
Resources Development
Report of a meeting of the Ad Hoc Resources Development Committee held on
Tuesday 12 th April 2005, Kobe
The Ad Hoc Resources Development Committee (Ad Hoc RDC) met to discuss the
issue of the development of APN’s future resources. Delegates from the following
member countries participated in the Ad Hoc RDC: Australia, China, Indonesia,
Japan, Malaysia, ROK and Thailand (and an observer from NSF). The Ad Hoc RDC
recognised a major challenge facing the APN was the restricted funding base of the
organisation and that strenuous efforts were needed to find new sources of financial
support.
The Ad Hoc RDC recalled that the APN was established as an inter-governmental
body charged with distributing funds provided by the Japanese and USA
Governments. The 10 th anniversary of its foundation is an appropriate time for it to
examine how it can diversify the sources of funds it needs to expand its programmes
and its relevance to the nations in the Asia-Pacific region. The Ad Hoc RDC noted
that the organisation needs to develop the capacity to identify research projects and
seek funding, in addition to its role in the distribution of research funds.
The Ad Hoc RDC recommends the establishment of a formal Resources Development
Committee (RDC), to report to the Steering Committee, charged with developing
APN’s funding base. It recommends the RDC should consist of 5 or 6 members,
being large enough to share its workload but not so large as to be unworkable. It
considered the issue of who should chair the RDC and recommends that a Chair be
appointed by the Steering Committee. The Ad Hoc RDC expected that the task facing
the RDC, and particularly its Chair, would be very onerous requiring a high level of
drive, energy and commitment to the aims and future of APN.
In considering how the RDC might approach its task the Ad Hoc RDC considered that
there were at least three major areas in which the RDC would have to work.
1. The RDC would have to identify what value APN provides to a project that
would not be provided by one, or more than one country working together. In
other words, the RDC would have to define and clearly articulate the ‘product’
that APN is able to offer investors. To be successful the APN had to be seen to
be offering a research capability that is clearly distinct and different from
‘products’ offered by other global change organisations. This was considered
to be a key – if not the key - requirement for obtaining funds.
2. The RDC would need to know from APN’s member countries what priority
projects those countries would wish to pursue, with a view to obtaining
earmarked funds to support those projects. It may need to consider hitherto
novel ways of building funding packages perhaps utilising matching funds
from the country or countries involved, and the APN.
3. The RDC would have to build partnerships and alliances with political bodies
in the region (e.g. ASEAN, APEC) in order for those bodies to be able to
support APN’s activities to obtain funds from international funding agencies
such as the GEF, EU etc. Partnerships with other global change bodies, such
as IGBP, IHDP, and DIVERSITAS would strengthen the RDC’s ability to obtain
funds from major international funding bodies.
The issues for future discussion listed in the meeting document IGM/10/05-03 and
SPG/10/05-03 were considered a useful initial agenda for the RDC over the coming
months.
�109�