Pacific Islands Oceanic
Fisheries Management Project
2007 Annual Review
4th Meeting of the Regional Steering Committee for the OFM Project
17 - 18 October 2008
Apia, Samoa

Introduction
This presentation relates to the 2007 Annual Review
ProDoc indicative monitoring & evaluation work plan (3
annual reviews)
1st Annual Review TORs:
-
identify specific issues, difficulties or problems in the
implementation and performance of the Project that involve risks to
the achievement of Project objectives, particularly any such aspects
that might not have been identified in the Project reporting and review
processes to date; and
-
make recommendations for necessary amendments and
improvements for the implementation of the project associated with
the risks identified.

Terms of Reference
Timing of review (early) in the project
implementation meant focus was on aspects
related to inputs, since it is too early to
comprehensively & realistically measure
achievements of outputs and outcomes
Also focused on specific issues identified
(review & highlight issues, difficulties, &
problems faced, lessons learned & sucesses,
specifically:

Specific issues identified
The level of project awareness by stakeholders;
Impacts of negative financial events (salary increases,
exchange rate losses etc) on the overall project budget;
The value and delivery of the project and overall progress by
countries in meeting their Commission commitments;
Identification of activities and outputs not on target and
recommend ways in which to address matters (briefly);
Impact of schedule of regional fisheries meetings on benefits
that Pacific SIDS should incur from the project; and
Level of communication across line ministries at national
levels on matters relating to the Commission and country
obligations.

Review Process
Preliminary review of project documentation
Informal interviews by consultant in the
margins of WCPFC4 (7 of 15 countries) not
taken as representing official government
views, nor cleared with governments
General discussions with SPC/OFP manager
Meetings with FFA staff and PCU
Draft report (reviewed by PCU, FFA & SPC)
Circulated wider for comments

Section 3 - Findings
Project design (ProDoc, financing, risk analysis &
management, linkages) issues to be addressed
Project delivery volume & quality of inputs,
management, coordination & ops issues, NCC
weakness, impact of regional meeting schedule,
participation, knowledge management, monitoring &
evaluation
Finances budget, disbursements, financial
management, co-financing issues to be addressed
Results Outcomes, sustainability & follow-up (WP8)

Outcomes (Page 25)
Too early to make firm assessments of core output gains
(capacity building & institutional development) but some
responses to key outcomes from interviews:
Is your delegation better prepared for WCPFC4 than WCPFC2 (2005)
or not?
Are your national oceanic fisheries management arrangements better
than in 2005 or not?
What progress has your country made in meeting its WCPFC
commitments?
Is the Commission being effectively established (in terms of staffing,
headquarters, budget, research etc ?
Is the Commission functioning effectively?
Are FFA Pacific Island Countries participating effectively in the work of
the Commission?

Summary of Outcomes
all felt their delegations were better prepared for the
Commission meeting in 2007 than two years earlier, and that
Pacific SIDS are participating effectively in the Commission
most reported improvement in their oceanic fisheries
management arrangements and others were optimistic about
future improvement
progress on meeting WCPFC commitments was mixed
the Commission is regarded as being generally effectively
established in terms of staffing budget etc but opinions vary
about whether it is functioning effectively

Recommendations
Recommendations & progress as at September 2008:
The key recommendation - implement a programme of targeted support to
PacSIDS struggling to participate at WCPFC (reporting requirements etc).
Other recommendations:
1. the IUCN contribution to the OFMP should be speedily re-designed and
committed, to include activities are appropriate, high quality, and can be
effectively implemented within the remaining Project life;
2. the OFMP should seek to create opportunities for improved linkages with
Indonesia and the Philippines;
3. there should be more engagement with SPREP and GEF focal points;
4. the opportunity provided by the quality of the Knowledge Management
Strategy Consultancy Report should be taken to seriously consider the
role and shape of information/ understanding/awareness/communication
in oceanic fisheries management generally, as well as within the OFMP
specifically;

Recommendations
1.
OFMP-supported meetings should be planned to reduce
the impact/burden of the regional meetings schedule
2.
a Baseline Study should be prepared
3.
revisions to OFMP budgets needed to manage the impact
of exchange rate movements and associated cost
movements should ensure that the planned level of
commitment to in-country activities is maintained
4.
consideration should be given to the preparation of a
simple analysis of co-financing to assist the Mid-Term
Review team.
5.
The Project should support the preparation of a simple
summary of the achievements and shortfalls of WCPFC
commitments by SIDS, based on the information in the
Annual Part II Reports.

RSC4 is invited to
ii) take the opportunity to further comment on
the first annual evaluation of the project noting
the recommendations and the progress made
towards addressing those recommendations