UNCLASSIFIED Page 4 of 5  Sharing of best-practice crisis-management procedures. At this stage, we see greater benefit in ensuring current CBMs are delivering effectively, and that their benefits are accruing to all states, rather than looking to create new CBMs. To this end we think we are better off ensuring existing regional CBMs can be taken up by a broader range of states; operationalising existing commitments, and encouraging best practice CBM implementation; and exercising to ensure CBMs are working effectively. We support the call for the development of a global repository of existing CBMs. This would inform both regional and global engagement on CBM development. Capacity-Building As with CBMs, we believe outcomes on capacity-building would deliver meaningful progress on global cyber stability. We heard this clearly through nearly all interventions during the February session of the OEWG. We welcome that there is an increased interest in providing cyber security capacitybuilding, and encourage further mobilisation of resource. With increased efforts comes a heightened need to coordinate efforts. We hear this clearly from the partners with which we work on capacity-building. New Zealand comes to this issue from a particular perspective – that of a capacitybuilding provider. We do not bear the brunt of the consequences of poor coordination. We welcome the views of those recipients most affected by a lack of coordination in this space. One of the ways in which we think we can address the issue of coordination is by ensuring donors and recipients are working in partnership on activities. If we are attentive to the needs of our partners – and shaping our support accordingly – we should be less likely to duplicate our efforts. One way in which we could promote this way of working is through adopting principles of capacity-building, which may include a focus on taking a partnership approach (see below). We also know there are existing mechanisms for coordination, and that these have taken strides in recent years. The GFCE, for example, has achieved a lot in the fewer-than five years it has been in existence. We see these initiatives as having an ongoing important role, and encourage them to continue to broaden the geographic scope of their activities – including in the Indo-Pacific. We think it may be at the regional level that activities could be best-coordinated. Regional coordination is potentially more manageable and effective. This group’s report INTS-37-1285 UNCLASSIFIED