A/HRC/23/32 many representatives of indigenous peoples. From the business sector, a number of major multinational corporations participated from the mining, oil and energy, technology, chemicals, banking and finance, electronics and textiles industries. Participants also included representatives of 15 specialized agencies of the United Nations system, 17 intergovernmental organizations and 19 national human rights institutions, as well as other key leading organizations with regard to standards on business and human rights. 40. A summary of the discussions held during the 21 substantive sessions of the Forum was prepared by the chairperson of the Forum. 21 Additional materials, including session concept notes, statements received, written submissions and video recordings are also available for consultation.22 Action and priorities based on Forum discussions23 A. 41. On the basis of the presentations made and discussions held at the Forum, the Working Group has identified the priorities below, to be considered by States, businesses and other relevant stakeholders, as appropriate. 1. State duty to protect 42. The Working Group notes the diverse initiatives undertaken by States to fulfil their duty to protect human rights from adverse forms of impact of business activities, and identifies as a priority the need to obtain increased support to systematize and facilitate the exchange of lessons learned from such initiatives at the working level between States. Such exchanges will support existing initiatives and encourage States that have not started implementation. The survey conducted by the Working Group on State efforts partly addresses the need to systematize such experiences. Regional consultations (see also paragraph 58 below) and the use of online platforms would also offer further opportunities to identify and share lessons learned from such initiatives within and across regions. The Working Group also notes the key role that national human rights institutions can play in the implementation of the Guiding Principles, and encourages close cooperation between other State institutions and national human rights institutions. 43. The Working Group notes the multiple challenges faced in implementing the State duty to protect, and identifies as priorities the need: (a) To build the capacity of State officials, regulators and national human rights institutions in this field; (b) To explore with all stakeholders possible avenues to address the gap in situations of conflict and in the absence of effective State authority; (c) To collect evidence of good practices in overcoming the negative forms of impact of compartmentalization of responsibilities to implement within the State; (d) To collect evidence of good practices in establishing concrete requirements on companies on the basis of the State duty to protect. 21 22 23 A/HRC/FBHR/2012/4. See www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Forum/Pages/2012ForumonBusinessandHumanRights.aspx. See A/HRC/FBHR/2012/4 and the Forum website for additional details on each panel. 11