Common use of General Introduction Clause in Contracts

General Introduction. The UN scale of assessments was applied to calculate AEWA contributions at MOP1, MOP2 and MOP3. Since MOP4 (2008), however, the apportioning of annual contributions to the AEWA core budget has not strictly followed the UN scale of assessments. At MOP4, the contributions to the remaining budget - after deduction of the minimum contributions and the amount to be withdrawn from the reserve – were negotiated among the Parties. The contributions calculated at MOP4 were then frozen for the next ten years (same figures used at MOP5 and at MOP6) regardless of the evolution of the economic situation of the individual countries. The strict application of the UN scale of assessments for the AEWA budget 2019-2021 would create considerable increases in the case of a number of Parties, even if the budget was maintained at a zero nominal growth level. Other countries, however, would benefit from the application of the UN scale of assessments, although they might be willing to, at least, maintain the current level of financial commitment. The Secretariat would like to point out that it will be crucial for the further functioning of the Agreement to choose a scale which will have no negative impact on the total budget to be shared by Parties. For this reason, the AEWA Standing Committee has advised the Secretariat to apply the following criteria for the development of the scale of contributions for 2019-2021: To keep the minimum contribution at 2,000 EUR; To fix the EU contribution at the original 2.5 %; To retain the maximum threshold at 20 %; To return to the UN scale of assessments while implementing a gradual transitional period consisting of two MOP cycles (six years); To freeze the contributions which would otherwise decrease; To direct contributions from new Parties into the AEWA Trust Fund. To follow up on Resolution 6.18 and the intersessional decisions of the AEWA Standing Committee, the Secretariat has developed a scale of contribution which returns to the UN scale of assessments gradually. The minimum contribution of 2,000 EUR was kept; the EU contribution was fixed at 2.5 % and the maximum threshold of 20 % was retained (see above a) - c)). The following additional measures were taken to calculate the final contributions (step d) and e)) of the above criteria): All contributions that would decrease compared to MOP6 were frozen at their current amount. This has led to a "saving" of 121,428 EUR. The amount of 121,428 EUR was used to decrease those Parties' contributions that would otherwise contribute more than 10 % to the total budget; contributions that fell below the amount adopted at MOP6 through this exercise were again frozen and the "saving" was used to further decrease the most affected contributions (i.e. with the highest increase). Thus, the proposed scale represents an approach which progressively moves towards the UN scale of assessments with integration of the above-mentioned criteria and additional measures taken for the transitional period. On the basis of the new UN scale of assessments, published before MOP8, Parties will have to decide whether they wish to fully adopt this scale. Annex 1 provides a table comparing the MOP6 to the MOP7 figures (Scenario 1 - zero nominal growth). The first column with contributions ("MOP6 proposal") shows the contributions as they were calculated at MOP6 without withdrawal from the Trust Fund and using the ratio used at MOP4. The second column with contributions ("MOP6 adopted") reflects the actually adopted MOP6 budget after the withdrawal of 310,000 EUR which has led to an overall decrease of the budget to be shared between the Parties. The last column ("MOP7 proposal (Scenario 1") shows the Parties' contributions calculated for MOP7 Scenario 1 (zero nominal growth, compare document AEWA/MOP 7.38). The MOP7 proposal can best be compared to the MOP6 proposal, as both do not take into account any Trust Fund withdrawal. It is obvious that, due to the progressive move towards the UN scale, some Parties experience a high increase. The Secretariat wishes to highlight that the withdrawal of 310,000 EUR has led to a general decrease of contributions at MOP6 (compare MOP6 proposal to MOP6 adopted). The adoption of a budget without withdrawal at MOP7 will naturally lead to increased contributions per se, and even at zero nominal growth level. Nonetheless, a withdrawal from the Trust Fund should be adopted only on an exceptional basis and does not represent a practice that is advised in the long term. For the 2019-2021 budget, the Secretariat has applied a transitional period, through which the Parties experiencing an increase, will see their contributions increase gradually year per year, respectively an increase of 30, 33 and 37 %. It should, however, be noted that applying the same method for returning to the UN Scale of assessments in six years is practically not feasible due to the following factors: The UN Scale of assessments is updated triennially, which is applied to all Parties to the Agreement; therefore, contributions to the total budget for each Party will vary due to the revised UN Scale of assessment in the following MOP cycle. New Parties will join the Agreement, which results in more Parties sharing the approved budget compared to the previous MOP cycle. The budget for the period 2022-2024 will not be available at the time of adopting the budget for 2019-2021, therefore the amount to be shared by all Parties will not be known or cannot be estimated beforehand. Thus, the request from the Standing Committee to implement a gradual transitional period consisting of two MOP cycles (six years) will be implemented in two steps. The decision made at MOP7 will pave the way for returning to the UN scale of assessment at MOP8.

General Introduction. The UN scale of assessments was applied to calculate AEWA contributions at MOP1, MOP2 and MOP3. Since MOP4 (2008), however, the apportioning of annual contributions to the AEWA core budget has not strictly followed the UN scale of assessments. At MOP4, the contributions to the remaining budget - after deduction of the minimum contributions and the amount to be withdrawn from the reserve – were negotiated among the Parties. The contributions calculated at MOP4 were then frozen for the next ten years (same figures used at MOP5 and at MOP6) regardless of the evolution of the economic situation of the individual countries. The strict application of the UN scale of assessments for the AEWA budget 2019-2021 would create considerable increases in the case of a number of Parties, even if the budget was maintained at a zero nominal growth level. Other countries, however, would benefit from the application of the UN scale of assessments, although they might be willing to, at least, maintain the current level of financial commitment. The Secretariat would like to point out that it will be crucial for the further functioning of the Agreement to choose a scale which will have no negative impact on the total budget to be shared by Parties. For this reason, the AEWA Standing Committee has advised the Secretariat to apply the following criteria for the development of the scale of contributions for 2019-2021: : a) To keep the minimum contribution at 2,000 EUR; ; b) To fix the EU contribution at the original 2.5 %; ; c) To retain the maximum threshold at 20 %; ; d) To return to the UN scale of assessments while implementing a gradual transitional period consisting of two MOP cycles (six years); ; e) To freeze the contributions which would otherwise decrease; ; f) To direct contributions from new Parties into the AEWA Trust Fund. To follow up on Resolution 6.18 and the intersessional decisions of the AEWA Standing Committee, the Secretariat has developed a scale of contribution which returns to the UN scale of assessments gradually. The minimum contribution of 2,000 EUR was kept; the EU contribution was fixed at 2.5 % and the maximum threshold of 20 % was retained (see above a) - c)). The following additional measures were taken to calculate the final contributions (step d) and e)) of the above criteria): All contributions that would decrease compared to MOP6 were frozen at their current amount. This has led to a "saving" of 121,428 EUR. The amount of 121,428 EUR was used to decrease those Parties' contributions that would otherwise contribute more than 10 % to the total budget; contributions that fell below the amount adopted at MOP6 through this exercise were again frozen and the "saving" was used to further decrease the most affected contributions (i.e. with the highest increase). Thus, the proposed scale represents an approach which progressively moves towards the UN scale of assessments with integration of the above-mentioned criteria and additional measures taken for the transitional period. On the basis of the new UN scale of assessments, published before MOP8, Parties will have to decide whether they wish to fully adopt this scale. Annex 1 provides a table comparing the MOP6 to the MOP7 figures (Scenario 1 - zero nominal growth). The first column with contributions ("MOP6 proposal") shows the contributions as they were calculated at MOP6 without withdrawal from the Trust Fund and using the ratio used at MOP4. The second column with contributions ("MOP6 adopted") reflects the actually adopted MOP6 budget after the withdrawal of 310,000 EUR which has led to an overall decrease of the budget to be shared between the Parties. The last column ("MOP7 proposal (Scenario 1") shows the Parties' contributions calculated for MOP7 Scenario 1 (zero nominal growth, compare document AEWA/MOP 7.38). The MOP7 proposal can best be compared to the MOP6 proposal, as both do not take into account any Trust Fund withdrawal. It is obvious that, due to the progressive move towards the UN scale, some Parties experience a high increase. The Secretariat wishes to highlight that the withdrawal of 310,000 EUR has led to a general decrease of contributions at MOP6 (compare MOP6 proposal to MOP6 adopted). The adoption of a budget without withdrawal at MOP7 will naturally lead to increased contributions per se, and even at zero nominal growth level. Nonetheless, a withdrawal from the Trust Fund should be adopted only on an exceptional basis and does not represent a practice that is advised in the long term. For the 2019-2021 budget, the Secretariat has applied a transitional period, through which the Parties experiencing an increase, will see their contributions increase gradually year per year, respectively an increase of 30, 33 and 37 %. It should, however, be noted that applying the same method for returning to the UN Scale of assessments in six years is practically not feasible due to the following factors: The UN Scale of assessments is updated triennially, which is applied to all Parties to the Agreement; therefore, contributions to the total budget for each Party will vary due to the revised UN Scale of assessment in the following MOP cycle. New Parties will join the Agreement, which results in more Parties sharing the approved budget compared to the previous MOP cycle. The budget for the period 2022-2024 will not be available at the time of adopting the budget for 2019-2021, therefore the amount to be shared by all Parties will not be known or cannot be estimated beforehand. Thus, the request from the Standing Committee to implement a gradual transitional period consisting of two MOP cycles (six years) will be implemented in two steps. The decision made at MOP7 will pave the way for returning to the UN scale of assessment at MOP8.

General Introduction. The UN scale of assessments assessment was applied to calculate AEWA contributions at MOP1, MOP2 and MOP3. Since MOP4 (2008), however, the apportioning of annual contributions to the AEWA core budget has not strictly followed the UN scale of assessments. At MOP4, the contributions to the remaining budget - after deduction of the minimum contributions and the amount to be withdrawn from the reserve – were negotiated among the Parties. The contributions calculated at MOP4 were then frozen for the next ten years (same figures used at MOP5 and at MOP6) regardless of the evolution of the economic situation of the individual countries. The strict application of the UN scale of assessments assessment for the AEWA budget 2019-2021 would create considerable increases in the case of a number of Parties, even if the budget was maintained at a zero nominal growth level. Other countries, however, would benefit from the application of the UN scale of assessments, although they might be willing to, at least, maintain the current level of financial commitment. The Secretariat would like to point out that it will be crucial for the further functioning of the Agreement to choose a scale which will have no negative impact on the total budget to be shared by Parties. For this reason, the AEWA Standing Committee has advised the Secretariat to apply the following criteria for the development of the scale of contributions for 2019-2021: To keep the minimum contribution at 2,000 EUR; To fix the EU contribution at the original 2.5 %; To retain the maximum threshold at 20 %; To return to the UN scale of assessments while implementing a gradual transitional period consisting of two the MOP cycles (six years); To freeze the contributions which would otherwise decrease; To direct contributions from new Parties into the AEWA Trust Fund. To follow up on Resolution 6.18 and the intersessional decisions of the AEWA Standing Committee, Committee the Secretariat has developed a scale of contribution which returns to the UN scale of assessments graduallyassessments, as primarily foreseen by the Agreement, but with a gradual transitional period consisting of two MOP cycles (six years). The minimum contribution of 2,000 EUR was kept; the EU contribution was fixed at 2.5 % and the maximum threshold of 20 % was retained (see above a) - c)). The following Following additional measures were taken to calculate the final contributions (step d) and e)) of the above criteria): All contributions that would decrease compared to MOP6 were frozen at their current amount. This has led to a "saving" of 121,428 EUR. The amount of 121,428 EUR was used to decrease those Parties' contributions that would otherwise contribute more than 10 % to the total budget; contributions that fell below the amount adopted at MOP6 through this exercise were again frozen and the "saving" was used to further decrease the most affected contributions (i.e. with the highest increase). Thus, the proposed scale represents an approach which progressively moves towards the UN scale of assessments assessment with integration of the above-mentioned criteria and additional measures taken for the transitional period. On the basis of the new UN scale of assessments, published before MOP8, Parties will have to decide whether they wish to fully adopt this scale. Annex 1 provides a table comparing the MOP6 to the MOP7 figures (Scenario 1 - zero nominal growth). The first column with contributions ("MOP6 proposal") shows the contributions as they were calculated at MOP6 without withdrawal from the Trust Fund and using the ratio used at MOP4. The second column with contributions ("MOP6 adopted") reflects the actually adopted MOP6 budget after the withdrawal of 310,000 EUR which has led to an overall decrease of the budget to be shared between the Parties. The last column ("MOP7 proposal (Scenario 1") shows the Parties' contributions calculated for MOP7 Scenario 1 (zero nominal growth, compare document AEWA/MOP 7.38). The MOP7 proposal can best be compared to the MOP6 proposal, as both do not take into account any Trust Fund withdrawal. It is obvious that, due to the progressive move towards the UN scale, some Parties experience a high increase. The Secretariat wishes to highlight that the withdrawal of 310,000 EUR has led to a general decrease of contributions at MOP6 (compare MOP6 proposal to MOP6 adopted). The adoption of a budget without withdrawal at MOP7 will naturally lead to increased contributions per se, and even at zero nominal growth level. Nonetheless, a withdrawal from the Trust Fund should be adopted only on an exceptional basis and does not represent a practice that is advised in the long term. For the 2019-2021 budget, the Secretariat has applied a transitional period, through which the Parties experiencing an increase, will see their contributions increase gradually year per year, respectively an increase of 30, 33 and 37 %. It should, however, should be well noted that applying the same method for returning to the UN Scale of assessments in six years is practically not feasible due to the following factors: The UN Scale transitional period of assessments is updated trienniallysix years, which is applied to all Parties to the Agreement; therefore, contributions to the total budget for each Party this method will vary due to the revised UN Scale of assessment in the following MOP cycle. New Parties will join the Agreement, which results in more Parties sharing the approved budget compared to the previous MOP cycle. The budget for the period 2022-2024 will not be available at the time of adopting the budget for 2019-2021, therefore the amount need to be shared by all Parties will not be known or cannot be estimated beforehandcontinued at MOP8 to fully reach the objective. Thus, the request from present budget proposal described in document AEWA/MOP 7.38 reflects a 50 % move towards the Standing Committee to implement a gradual transitional period consisting of two MOP cycles (six years) will be implemented in two steps. The decision made at MOP7 will pave the way for returning to the UN scale of assessment (three of six years in total). Continued at MOP8MOP8 in 2021, the new scale will be introduced without transitional measures at MOP9 in 2025.

General Introduction. The UN scale of assessments assessment was applied to calculate AEWA contributions at MOP1, MOP2 and MOP3. Since MOP4 (2008), however, the apportioning of annual contributions to the AEWA core budget has not strictly followed the UN scale of assessments. At MOP4, the contributions to the remaining budget - after deduction of the minimum contributions and the amount to be withdrawn from the reserve – were negotiated among the Parties. The contributions calculated at MOP4 were then frozen for the next ten years (same figures used at MOP5 and at MOP6) regardless of the evolution of the economic situation of the individual countries. The strict application of the UN scale of assessments assessment for the AEWA budget 2019-2021 would create considerable increases in the case of a number of Parties, even if the budget was maintained at a zero nominal growth level. Other countries, however, would benefit from the application of the UN scale of assessments, although they might be willing to, at least, maintain the current level of financial commitment. The Secretariat would like to point out that it will be crucial for the further functioning of the Agreement to choose a scale which will have no negative impact on the total budget to be shared by Parties. For this reason, the AEWA Standing Committee has advised the Secretariat to apply the following criteria for the development of the scale of contributions for 2019-2021: : a) To keep the minimum contribution at 2,000 EUR; ; b) To fix the EU contribution at the original 2.5 %; ; c) To retain the maximum threshold at 20 %; ; d) To return to the UN scale of assessments while implementing a gradual transitional period consisting of two the MOP cycles (six years); ; e) To freeze the contributions which would otherwise decrease; ; f) To direct contributions from new Parties into the AEWA Trust Fund. To follow up on Resolution 6.18 and the intersessional decisions of the AEWA Standing Committee, the Secretariat has developed a scale of contribution which returns to the UN scale of assessments gradually. The minimum contribution of 2,000 EUR was kept; the EU contribution was fixed at 2.5 % and the maximum threshold of 20 % was retained (see above a) - c)). The following additional measures were taken to calculate the final contributions (step d) and e)) of the above criteria): All contributions that would decrease compared to MOP6 were frozen at their current amount. This has led to a "saving" of 121,428 EUR. The amount of 121,428 EUR was used to decrease those Parties' contributions that would otherwise contribute more than 10 % to the total budget; contributions that fell below the amount adopted at MOP6 through this exercise were again frozen and the "saving" was used to further decrease the most affected contributions (i.e. with the highest increase). Thus, the proposed scale represents an approach which progressively moves towards the UN scale of assessments with integration of the above-mentioned criteria and additional measures taken for the transitional period. On the basis of the new UN scale of assessments, published before MOP8, Parties will have to decide whether they wish to fully adopt this scale. Annex 1 provides a table comparing the MOP6 to the MOP7 figures (Scenario 1 - zero nominal growth). The first column with contributions ("MOP6 proposal") shows the contributions as they were calculated at MOP6 without withdrawal from the Trust Fund and using the ratio used at MOP4. The second column with contributions ("MOP6 adopted") reflects the actually adopted MOP6 budget after the withdrawal of 310,000 EUR which has led to an overall decrease of the budget to be shared between the Parties. The last column ("MOP7 proposal (Scenario 1") shows the Parties' contributions calculated for MOP7 Scenario 1 (zero nominal growth, compare document AEWA/MOP 7.38). The MOP7 proposal can best be compared to the MOP6 proposal, as both do not take into account any Trust Fund withdrawal. It is obvious that, due to the progressive move towards the UN scale, some Parties experience a high increase. The Secretariat wishes to highlight that the withdrawal of 310,000 EUR has led to a general decrease of contributions at MOP6 (compare MOP6 proposal to MOP6 adopted). The adoption of a budget without withdrawal at MOP7 will naturally lead to increased contributions per se, and even at zero nominal growth level. Nonetheless, a withdrawal from the Trust Fund should be adopted only on an exceptional basis and does not represent a practice that is advised in the long term. For the 2019-2021 budget, the Secretariat has applied a transitional period, through which the Parties experiencing an increase, will see their contributions increase gradually year per year, respectively an increase of 30, 33 and 37 %. It should, however, be noted that applying the same method for returning to the UN Scale of assessments in six years is practically not feasible due to the following factors: The UN Scale of assessments is updated triennially, which is applied to all Parties to the Agreement; therefore, contributions to the total budget for each Party will vary due to the revised UN Scale of assessment in the following MOP cycle. New Parties will join the Agreement, which results in more Parties sharing the approved budget compared to the previous MOP cycle. The budget for the period 2022-2024 will not be available at the time of adopting the budget for 2019-2021, therefore the amount to be shared by all Parties will not be known or cannot be estimated beforehand. Thus, the request from the Standing Committee to implement a gradual transitional period consisting of two MOP cycles (six years) will be implemented in two steps. The decision made at MOP7 will pave the way for returning to the UN scale of assessment at MOP8.