5. Fourth Session: Follow-up Mechanisms

The morning session began with reports back to plenary from the four working groups. Since the reports of the first three working groups had not met with major objections in the plenary session, the Facilitator proposed to cancel the proposed session on “The Fate of the Knowledge Base”^[2] and structure the morning’s working groups exclusively around the issue of the follow-up structure, with four parallel groups examining three broad options: 1) no structured follow-up with the Secretariat closing as planned on 31 March, 2) minimal follow-up focussing on dissemination until December 2001 and 3) more substantial follow-up over a couple of years.

The four parallel working groups addressed the issue of the design and content of the follow-up unit. While the focus and content of the four groups varied in accordance with the composition of the group and the interests of the group’s facilitator, a number of common threads began to emerge.

First, there was little support for the “zero option” of no structured follow-up. From across the stakeholder spectrum, there was strong support for a time-limited follow-up effort focused on ensuring that the report is disseminated, discussed, and used as a guide to future action.

Second, there was little support for a unit that would play a strong, proactive role. Instead, there was considerable agreement that the character of the unit should be one of co-ordination, catalysing action, collecting and transmitting information, and providing support on request to various stakeholder groups.

Third, there was strong consensus on the unit being light, time-limited, and governed by mechanisms that preserve the multi-stakeholder character of the WCD process. There was also broad consensus that functions set out by the working groups in the third session represented an adequate basis for a work programme for the unit.

Little progress, however, was made on the hosting arrangement, governance structure, and the role of the Forum. As a result, the Forum Liaison Group (a representative group of six Forum members who provided a liaison body working with the Secretariat to plan and structure the Forum meeting) met over lunch to work out a compromise proposal, taking into account the considerable area of common ground, and sought to meet the concerns expressed by key stakeholder groups.