United Nations Distr. restricted
Environment Programme
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
11th May 2002
Global Environment Facility
Original: ENGLISH
Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends
in the
South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand
REPORT
First Meeting of the Regional Working Group for
the Coral Reef Sub-component
Bangkok, Thailand, 9 11 May 2002
___________________________________________________________________________
UNEP/GEF
Bangkok, May 2002
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Table of Contents
1. OPENING OF THE MEETING................................................................................................ 1
1.1 WELCOME ADDRESS........................................................................................................ 1
1.2 INTRODUCTION OF MEMBERS............................................................................................... 1
2. ORGANISATION OF THE MEETING...................................................................................... 1
2.1 DESIGNATION OF OFFICERS................................................................................................ 1
2.2 ORGANISATION OF WORK.................................................................................................. 2
3. ADOPTION OF THE MEETING AGENDA ............................................................................... 2
4. TERMS OF REFERENCE, MEMBERSHIP AND RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE REGIONAL
WORKING GROUP ON CORAL REEFS (RWG-CR) ............................................................... 2
4.1 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP..................................................... 2
4.2 MEMBERSHIP OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP.................................................................. 3
4.3 RULES OF PROCEDURE..................................................................................................... 3
5. MANAGEMENT AND OVERALL OBJECTIVES OF THE UNEP/GEF PROJECT ENTITLED:
"REVERSING ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION TRENDS IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA AND
GULF OF THAILAND"......................................................................................................... 4
5.1 REPORTING RELATIONSHIPS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP AND ITS
ROLE IN ACHIEVING PROJECT OBJECTIVES .............................................................................. 4
5.2 FISCAL RESPONSIBILITIES (RECORDING & REPORTING) OF THE NATIONAL FOCAL POINTS OF
EACH SPECIALISED EXECUTING AGENCY ............................................................................... 4
6. OVERALL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE COMPONENT "HABITAT DEGRADATION AND
LOSS" AND THE "CORAL REEFS" SUB-COMPONENT........................................................ 5
6.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES CONTAINED IN THE PROJECT BRIEF...................................... 5
6.2 OTHER RELEVANT ACTIVITIES IN THE REGION .......................................................................... 6
7. DATA AND INFORMATION NEEDS FOR THE CORAL REEFS SUB-COMPONENT................... 7
7.1 REVIEW OF THE CORAL REEF RELATED SECTIONS OF THE NATIONAL REPORTS AND THE
TRANSBOUNDARY DIAGNOSTIC ANALYSIS, PRODUCED DURING THE PREPARATORY PHASE OF
THE PROJECT.................................................................................................................. 7
7.2 NATIONAL AND REGIONAL SOURCES OF DATA AND INFORMATION................................................ 7
8. DISCUSSION AND ADOPTION OF THE WORKPLANS FOR THE NATIONAL COMMITTEES
AND REGIONAL WORKING GROUP FOR 2002-2003 ............................................................ 8
9. ANY OTHER BUSINESS....................................................................................................... 9
10. DATE AND PLACE OF THE NEXT MEETING OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP FOR
CORAL REEFS ................................................................................................................. 10
11. ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE MEETING................................................................. 10
12. CLOSURE OF THE MEETING ............................................................................................. 10
List of Annexes
ii
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 1
List of Participants
Annex 2
List of Documents
Annex 3
Agenda
Annex 4
Financial Rules and Financial Reporting Requirements for National Focal Points
Operating in the Framework of the UNEP/GEF Project entitled: "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand"
Annex 5
Flow chart of National and Regional Actions for the Coral Reefs Sub-component of
the UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project
Annex 6
Review of the Coral Reef Sections in the National Reports prepared for the Trans-
boundary Diagnostic Analysis of the South China Sea
Annex 7
Details of Parameters, Data and Information requirements for Coral Reef Site
characterisation
Annex 8
Workplan Timetable and schedule of meetings for the Regional Working Group on
Coral Reefs, 2002-2003
iii
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
page 1
Report of the Meeting
1.
OPENING OF THE MEETING
1.1
Welcome address
1.1.1 The Project Director, Dr. John Pernetta, opened the meeting on behalf of Dr. Klaus Töpfer, the
Executive Director of UNEP and Dr. Ahmed Djoghlaf, the Director, Division of GEF Co-ordination. He
welcomed participants to the first meeting of the Regional Working Group on Coral Reefs (RWG-CR) and
noted the high importance accorded this project by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
and the Global Environment Facility (GEF). He informed the meeting of the strong desire of the
Executive Director that the project stimulate renewed interest in regional, co-operative management of
the most biologically diverse shallow water marine area in the world. In addition, Dr. Pernetta noted that,
the importance accorded this project by the GEF was reflected in the size of the GEF grant (16.4 million
US$).
1.1.2 Dr. Pernetta briefly reviewed the process of project development from the initial approval of the
project concept by the 12th meeting of the Co-ordinating Body for the Seas of East Asia (COBSEA) in
Manila, 1996, to the final approval of the project document by the Chief Executive Officer of the GEF, in
December 2001. He noted further that, the project was large and complex and that this working group
was central to the regional level co-ordination and management of national contributions to the coral reef
sub-component. This initial meeting is important in providing guidance to the National Focal Points and
through them to the National Committees regarding the work to be undertaken and in ensuring that the
data and information assembled at the national level are comparable and compatible between all
participating countries. It will be important to ensure that this scientific and technical guidance is
collective, not only at the regional, but also equally importantly, at the national level.
1.1.3 He informed the meeting that the Regional Working Group on Coral Reefs was composed of six
participating countries, since China will not participate in this sub-component during the initial stages of
the project. He expressed the hope that with the implementation of the project and demonstration of its
benefits, China would participate in this sub-component at a later stage.
1.1.4 On behalf of the Executive Director, the Project Director reiterated the strong support of UNEP
for this initiative and to assisting the countries of the region in developing more regionally co-ordinated
approaches to addressing the problems of the marine environment. He noted that this project was
viewed in many quarters as being both significant and well designed and expressed the hope that the
meeting would be successful in providing the necessary scientific and technical guidance required for
successful execution of the coral reef sub-component.
1.2
Introduction of members
1.2.1 The participants were invited to introduce themselves and to provide the meeting with a brief
outline of their expertise and experience, and their roles in the project. The list of participants is attached
as Annex 1 to this report.
2.
ORGANISATION OF THE MEETING
2.1
Designation of officers
2.1.1 In accordance with the rules of procedure for the Project Steering Committee, participants were
invited to nominate a Chairperson, Vice-chairperson and Rapporteur for the meeting.
2.1.2 Mr. Vo Si Tuan, National Focal Point for Coral Reefs in Viet Nam nominated Mr. Kim Sour,
Focal Point for Coral Reefs in Cambodia, as Chairperson of the meeting. The nomination was seconded
by, Mr. Abdul Khalil, Focal Point for Coral Reefs in Malaysia and Mr. Sour was duly elected
Chairperson.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
page 2
2.1.3 Mr. Abdul Khalil, Focal Point for Coral Reefs in Malaysia nominated Mr. Suharsono, Focal Point
for Coral Reefs in Indonesia as Vice chairperson of the meeting. Mr. Suhasono was elected by
acclamation.
2.1.4 Mr. Suharsono, Focal Point for Coral Reefs in Indonesia, nominated, Mr. Porfirio Alino, Focal
Point for Coral Reefs in the Philippines, as Rapporteur of the meeting. Mr. Alino was duly elected by
acclamation.
2.2
Organisation of work
2.2.1 The Project Director introduced the list of documents (UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/INF.1), and
informed the meeting that the documents in front of the working group included the National Reports,
and Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis prepared during the PDF-B phase in both hard copy and
electronic form; the report of the First Meeting of the Project Steering Committee held in October 2001;
and the reports of the First Meetings of the Wetlands and Mangroves Regional Working Groups. He
introduced the discussion documents prepared by the Secretariat for the meeting. The list of documents
available to the meeting is attached as Annex 2 to this report.
2.2.2 He noted that the meeting would be conducted in plenary as far as possible, although sessional
working groups could be formed as deemed necessary. The meeting would be conducted in English.
3.
ADOPTION OF THE MEETING AGENDA
3.1
The Chairperson presented the draft agenda prepared by the Secretariat as document
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/1, and invited discussion and proposals for any amendments or additions
that members might wish to make.
3.2.1 The meeting agreed to adopt the agenda as drafted by the Secretariat and contained in Annex 3
to this report.
4.
TERMS OF REFERENCE, MEMBERSHIP AND RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE
REGIONAL WORKING GROUP ON CORAL REEFS (RWG-CR)
4.1
Terms of reference for the Regional Working Group
4.1.1 The Chairperson invited the Project Director to introduce document UNEP/GEF/SCS/PSC.1/3
and in particular the Terms of Reference for the Regional Working Group on Coral Reefs of the project
entitled "Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand"
contained in Annex VIII of that document, and reproduced for this meeting as document
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR/INF.7. In introducing this document the Project Director noted that, the
Terms of Reference had been approved by, the Project Steering Committee, and that any proposals for
amendment would need to be referred back to that committee.
4.1.2 The question was raised as to how the transboundary significance of coral reefs could be dealt
with during project implementation. The Project Director informed participants that the Terms of
Reference for RWG-CR were intended to cover the entire 5 years of the project. He further emphasised
that one of the elements of the criteria for the selection of the demonstration sites has to be
transboundary significance in order to meet the requirements of the GEF. What this working group
needed to do was to identify appropriate indicators of transboundary significance, and this should be
considered further under agenda item 7.
4.1.3 With regard to the tasks of public awareness and production of information materials concerning
the national and regional importance of coral reef ecosystems, the working group agreed that the project
should focus its activities in the field of public awareness on the regional and global importance of the
reefs and issues of transboundary significance, since numerous other materials were already available in
the region.
4.1.4 During the review of the Terms of Reference for the working group, participants noted the
importance of the economic valuation of coral reef ecosystems, and noted further that there are a
number of interesting and activities and published documents addressing the economic valuation of
coastal resources in the region. The National Committees should make efforts to compile information on
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
page 3
existing national and regional initiatives in this field. One potential outcome of the economic valuation
activities might be provision of a sound economic basis for evaluating the economic, social and cultural
importance of coral reefs to the people of the region.
4.1.5 A question was raised concerning how the task of providing guidelines for national legislation
should be carried out at the national and regional levels. In clarifying this matter the Project Director
noted that, preparation of regional guidelines will be based on existing national legislation, including
information regarding which elements should be considered and how to prepare national legislation.
4.1.6 Following some discussion and clarification, the Terms of Reference were accepted as detailed
in Annex VIII of the 1st Project Steering Committee meeting report.
4.2
Membership of the Regional Working Group
4.2.1 The meeting noted that, the membership of the RWG-CR as detailed in the Terms of Reference
for the Regional Working Group on Coral Reefs, included the National Focal Points for Coral Reefs from
the six participating countries, one member of the Project Co-ordinating Unit, and up to four regional
experts nominated by the Project Co-ordinating Unit (PCU) in consultation with the National Technical
Focal Points.
4.2.2 The Project Director informed the meeting that, Dr. Annadel Cabanban, expert in Project Co-
ordinating Unit would serve as the PCU designated member of the working group.
4.2.3 The meeting examined the situation of the working group regarding fields of expertise, and
recommended that additional experts should be added to the group to cover the fields of economic
valuation and legislation.
4.2.4 The meeting encouraged the members of the working group to provide nominations, before 8
June 2002, of experts in the light of the requirements of the working group. It was agreed that such
nominations would be provided in the form of the expert roster entries prepared by the PCU. The full list
of experts for all the working groups of the project components and sub-components will be circulated to
the National Technical Focal Points for comment.
4.3
Rules of Procedure
4.3.1 The RWG-CR noted that the Project Steering Committee had, at its first meeting in October
2001, adopted rules of procedure for the conduct of its meetings. The Rules of Procedure of the Project
Steering Committee are contained in Annex XIII of document UNEP/GEF/SCS/PSC.1/3.
4.3.2 The Project Director noted during discussion that rule 16 was not appropriate for the RWG-CR
since the group would hold two sessions between each meeting of the RSTC. It was proposed and
agreed that the Chairperson, Vice-chairperson and Rapporteur of the RWG-CR would serve for one
calendar year in order to ensure proper representation of the RWG-CR during the next meeting of the
RSTC. The RWG-CR agreed to adopt, subject to the change to rule 16, and subject to the replacement
of references to the Project Steering Committee with Regional Working Group, the Rules of Procedure
for the PSC contained in sections IV, V, VI and VII as rules for the conduct of its sessions.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
page 4
5.
MANAGEMENT AND OVERALL OBJECTIVES OF THE UNEP/GEF PROJECT ENTITLED:
"REVERSING ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION TRENDS IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA
AND GULF OF THAILAND"
5.1
Reporting relationships and responsibilities of the Regional Working Group and its role
in achieving project objectives
5.1.1 The Project Director was invited to introduce the management framework of the project outlined
in document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.1/INF.4. He explained that the primary purpose of the RWG-CR
was to ensure that the National Committees for the Coral Reef sub-component conducted their work in a
comparable manner such that the outputs could be synthesised at a regional level.
5.1.2 In addition, it was noted that the Chairperson of the RWG-CR would serve as a member of the
Regional Scientific and Technical Committee (RSTC) and would therefore be responsible for ensuring
that the recommendations of the group were presented to the RSTC.
5.1.3 The question was raised, by the National Focal Point for the Seagrass and Coral Reef sub-
components in Cambodia, as to whether he should establish two national committees in Cambodia, or a
combined national committee. The Project Director stated that based on the MOU signed between
Cambodia and UNEP, there is a requirement to establish a single National Committee with responsibility
for the two sub-components.
5.1.4 During the discussion it was noted that the MOUs signed between the Specialised Executing
Agencies (SEAs) and UNEP, represent institutional agreements such that in the event of a Focal Point
leaving the Institution, the SEA has a responsibility to identify a replacement.
5.1.5 It was further noted that the National Committee for the coral reef sub-component should report
to the National Technical Focal Points, and not directly to the Inter-ministry Committees (IMCs). This is
to ensure a clear separation between the policy and technical levels of decision-making.
5.1.6 The meeting noted that the management framework was well designed and should lead to a
better integration of activities at the national and regional level regarding the sustainable management of
coral reefs. The hope was expressed that this structure would prove its value such that it would be
maintained after the completion of project activities.
5.2
Fiscal responsibilities (recording & reporting) of the National Focal Points of each
Specialised Executing Agency
5.2.1 The Project Director was invited to introduce document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.1/INF.5 on
financial rules and financial reporting requirements to secure anticipated cash flows in accordance with
the budgets contained in the MOUs. This document is included as Annex 4 to this report.
5.2.2 The Project Director outlined the process of budget approval and fund disbursement and noted
that the Project Steering Committee had overall responsibility for budget allocations and planning within
the framework approved by the GEF Council in the Project Brief. He further noted that the responsibility
for authorizing and certifying project expenditures and disbursements lay with PCU, operating under the
guidance and decisions of the PSC. He noted that initially project activities had been approved by
COBSEA and on the basis of that approval, an estimated budget was prepared by UNEP, submitted and
approved by the GEF Council, which determined the allocations by project component. The Project
Steering Committee had approved the overall framework budget for the five years of the project and the
detailed budget including allocations to the Specialised Executing Agencies (SEAs) for the first two
years.
5.2.3 Disbursement of funds by UNEP is facilitated by ESCAP under authorisation from the PCU and
takes place in advance of the SEAs incurring expenditures in line with the budgets attached to the
MOUs. These budgets clearly indicate the purpose for which the funds are provided by UNEP, on behalf
of the GEF, to the Specialised Executing Agencies. The SEAs are authorised to spend the cash
advances in accordance with the detailed budget, and the meeting noted that UNEP will not reimburse
expenditures for items not detailed in the approved budget. It was noted further that, during project
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
page 5
execution there might be unplanned costs, over-expenditures and/or under-expenditures that would
require revision of the budget, in these cases, the Focal Points in the SEAs should contact the PCU to
seek a budget revision.
5.2.4 The Regional Working Group noted that funds had been disbursed to all the Specialised
Executing Agencies in all countries except Malaysia, which had yet to sign the MoUs. The working
group expressed the hope that these would be signed as soon as possible in order to enable UNEP to
disburse funds to the SEA and ensure prompt initiation of project activities in Malaysia. In this
connection the Project Director informed the meeting that he had offered to go to Malaysia at the
convenience of the Government to facilitate the finalisation of the MoUs.
5.2.5 In respect of reporting requirements, every six-months the SEA is required to provide three
documents to the PCU as follows: six monthly expenditure statement; cash advance request; and six
monthly progress report. The six monthly expenditure statements should report the actual expenditures
to 30th June and 31st December in the form provided in the MOUs Necessary supporting documentation
for expenditures were outlined as contained in Annex 4. The Six Monthly Progress Report in the form
provided, should contain details of the substantive activities and outputs of the SEA and National
Committees. On the basis of this report and the substantive outputs, UNEP judges whether the terms of
the MoU have been met in a satisfactory manner.
5.2.6 The question was raised with regard to the engagement of services of individuals in project
implementation. The Project Director provided clarification that as a result of the negotiations of the
current MOUs with SEAs, no consultants budget lines exist in any MoU, rather the monies have been
placed in a sub-contracts budget line which can be used only for sub-contracting institutions or
organisations. However, if the Focal Points feel it necessary to engage individuals in some aspects of
project implementation, then the signatory to the MoU should write to the Project Director to request a
revision of the project budget. The Project Director would examine the situation and justification of the
request and the revised budget would be sent to the SEA.
5.2.7 A question was raised regarding the auditing of the project expenditures, the working group was
informed that government auditors should be used for government institutions. In a case where a
government audit is not available, it is possible to engage the services of an external accounting firm
with international credentials to conduct the annual audit.
5.2.8 Clarification was also provided that the unspent balance of the project budget within the six
months period could be moved to the next period. However at the end of the second year of the project,
the unspent balance would be re-allocated by the Project Steering Committee for other purposes within
the project component.
6.
OVERALL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE COMPONENT "HABITAT DEGRADATION
AND LOSS" AND THE "CORAL REEFS" SUB-COMPONENT
6.1
General description of activities contained in the Project Brief
6.1.1 The Project Director gave a presentation on the GEF expectations regarding the project, with
some explanation of incremental and baseline costs, and national, regional and global, environmental
benefits. He also informed the working group of the nature of the constraints resulting from the GEF
conditions and requirements, and outlined the opportunities presented by the project.
6.1.2 The working group noted that the overall intention of this sub-component of the project was to
build capacity at the national and regional level to sustainably manage coral reef ecosystems in the
South China Sea, thus providing long term benefits to the participating countries.
6.1.3 The Project Director noted that, at the time of the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human
Environment the over-riding concern in protection of the marine environment was pollution. He noted
further that whilst various regional action plans and conventions had resulted from this United Nations
Conference the quality of the marine environment had continued to decline over the last thirty years. He
expressed the view that this reflected in part, an understanding of what needed to be done but no clear
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
page 6
guidance to governments on how the situation might be rectified. The Project Director indicated that one
of the lessons to be learnt from this was that the project must focus on the provision of tools that would
enable the governments to clearly understand how the situation might be rectified, what the costs of
action and non-action would be, and the overall long term benefits that might derive from intervening. He
noted that the demonstration sites identified during the first two years should be chosen to demonstrate
successful use of specific tools for reversing environmental degradation in the South China Sea.
6.1.4 The Project Director presented an outline of the habitat related activities described in the Project
Brief and summarised in discussion document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/4. He also introduced the
draft flow chart for this sub-component of the project, contained in document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-
CR.1/5.
6.1.5 The National Focal Points for Coral Reef in the participating countries were invited to make
presentations on the status of activities of their respective National Committees. The RWG-CR was
encouraged to note that most participating countries have established National Committees in one form
or other, and are seriously considering the mechanisms for executing project activities. Noting with
appreciation the efforts made by the participating countries, in particular the National Focal Points for
this sub-component, the meeting reiterated that the effective operation of the National Committees would
be crucial in ensuring the success of the project.
6.1.6 Following an extensive discussion of how to classify the coral reefs in the region in order to
better compare data and information, the working group agreed on the following five classes: fringing
(mainland and island); barrier; patch; atoll; and, others.
6.1.7 The Project Director introduced the draft flow chart contained in document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-
CR.1/5, and noted that the Regional Working Group for Mangroves had accepted this without change,
whilst the Regional Working Groups for Seagrass and Wetlands had modified the flow chart. The RWG-
CR decided to use the chart prepared by the RGW-S as a template since this more clearly separated
the national and regional responsibilities.
6.1.8 Clarification was requested regarding the preparation of regional guidelines for legislation. It was
noted that different counties have different procedures for the preparation, discussion, and approval of
legislation and hence it would be very difficult for the working group to prepare guidelines on how to
adopt national legislation.
6.1.9 The Project Director responded that the purpose of preparing regional guidelines was to provide
guidance based on national experiences in protecting and managing coral reefs and to provide a source
of information regarding the nature, content and effectiveness of different forms of legislation for
consideration by those countries in the region that currently lacked such legislation; or for countries
which found it necessary to amend existing legislation in order to improve its effectiveness. The
guidelines would include the necessary elements, which should be considered for inclusion in preparing
new, or amending existing national legislation designed to protect coral reefs.
6.1.10 Following discussion and amendment, Dr. Ridzwan, invited expert from Malaysia, presented a
revised flow chart that he had prepared over night. The working group felt that the revised chart provided a
clearer indication of the responsibilities at different levels and a better indication of the flow and
relationships between the various activities and outputs. This version was discussed, revised, and
agreed upon by the working group, and is attached as Annex 5 to this report.
6.2
Other relevant activities in the region
6.2.1 Under this agenda item, the Chairperson invited the National Focal Points to provide brief
information on the relevant activities in the participating countries.
6.2.2 The National Focal Points provided a brief overview of national activities in their countries,
executed by non-governmental organisations, governmental institutions, and other organisations. The
working group noted that national institutional, infrastructure for coral reef management in the
participating countries are in different stages of development. Most countries had not established
National Coral Reef Committees before the start of this project. In order to ensure co-ordination and co-
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
page 7
operation amongst and between activities at the national level, the national committee established under
this project will need to include, representatives from governmental institutions, local governments and
NGOs.
6.2.3 The meeting requested that the National Focal Points provide to the PCU a listing of the
members of the National Committees once these are established, and details of past and ongoing
activities at national level. This information will be utilised together with the relevant regional information
as input to the national and regional meta-database.
7.
DATA AND INFORMATION NEEDS FOR THE CORAL REEFS SUB-COMPONENT
7.1
Review of the Coral Reef related sections of the National Reports and the
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis, produced during the preparatory phase of the
project
7.1.1 Dr. Cabanban presented a table providing an analysis of the information regarding coral reefs
contained in the national reports and Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis prepared during the PDF-B
phase of the project which was discussed and amended and is attached as Annex 6 to this report.
7.1.2 It was widely recognised by the National Focal Points that the data and information contained in
the national reports are too general and needed to be updated as there are a lot of new activities carried
out, and new data and information generated since the preparation of the reports about 4 years ago.
7.1.3 The National Focal Points for the Coral Reef sub-component were invited to present overviews of
the present status of coral reef research, management, and conservation in the participating countries.
During the presentations, it was noted that activities in capacity building are urgently needed throughout
the region in order to effectively initiate and execute the project activities.
7.1.4 The National Focal Points invited the Project Director to explore the possibility of providing
satellite images to the participating countries to fill the gaps of data and information required for the
project. The Project Director confirmed that he would communicate with UNEP's Division of Early
Warning and Assessment in Nairobi to explore the possibility of providing satellite images to the relevant
national institutions, participating in the project activities, at no cost to the countries and the project.
7.1.5 In discussing initial guidelines on detailed parameters, data and information requirements for
coral reef site characterisation, the meeting examined the similar formats prepared by the RWG-SG and
RWG-M. The participants agreed to use the table prepared by RWG-M as a template. An initial
tabulation was produced and discussed extensively by the plenary session. It was agreed that this
tabulation would be worked on by small groups and re-presented to the meeting for their consideration.
Three small sessional working groups were established to consider specific sub-sets of data, namely:
social & use information; biological data; economic valuation. This tabulation was discussed in
considerable detail, amended, and revised as contained in Annex 7 of this report.
7.2
National and regional sources of data and information
7.2.1 Mr. Yihang Jiang, Senior Expert presented the regional GIS database being developed by the
Southeast Asian Regional Centre for the System for Analysis, Research, and Training of the
International Geosphere Biosphere Programme (SEA-START RC) in Chulalongkorn University. He noted
that this was under construction and that numerous datasets had yet to be entered into the database.
He noted further that no data regarding habitat distribution in the South China Sea had been entered into
the system and noted that with the agreement of the participating countries, the information provided by
the National Committees for Coral Reefs would provide a basis for developing habitat layers within the
system. He informed the meeting that this would be made available free of charge to all Specialised
Executing Agencies contracted within the framework of the UNEP/GEF Project.
7.2.2 The meeting requested the PCU to make arrangements for copies of the GIS database on CD
ROM to be made available to the National Committees for their review. In this context it was noted that
the database that would be made available was in fact, only a sub-set of the entire database and that
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
page 8
individual National Focal Points could request specific additional datasets. It was proposed that the PCU
communicate with Dr. Anond, Director of the SEA-START RC, and request a list of the existing data in
the database, and the National Focal Points could specify those sub-sets, which they required, based
on the information provided.
7.2.3 The Senior Expert also presented a recent product, Reefs at Risk in Southeast Asia, produced
by the World Resource Institute, that includes relevant information on coral reef and mangrove habitats.
The meeting was informed that communication was on-going with regard to the possible incorporation of
these data into the GIS database.
7.2.4 Mr. Suharsono from Indonesia informed the meeting of the outcome of recent discussions at the
National Committee for Coral Reefs in Indonesia, and informed the meeting that it was considered urgent
to organise a regional technical workshop to discuss and agree on a regional technical format for GIS
databases, in order to ensure effective collation of national data and information such that they are
provided to the regional level in an agreed GIS format.
7.2.5 The meeting requested the PCU to discuss this matter with SEA-START RC, and organise a
regional technical workshop as soon as possible.
8.
DISCUSSION AND ADOPTION OF THE WORKPLANS FOR THE NATIONAL COMMITTEES
AND REGIONAL WORKING GROUP FOR 2002-2003
8.1
The Project Director presented the meeting schedule for 2002-2003 contained in document,
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/6 and the draft workplan for the RWG-CR prepared overnight in accordance
with the contents of the original flow chart.
8.2
Two queries were raised by Dr. Tuan, the National Focal Point for Coral Reefs in Vietnam. The
first was in regard to the task listed in the MoU concerning the testing of a blast fishing detection device,
that was not indicated in the present work plan and the second concerning the fact that in his opinion
the task relating to the review of national data and information would require longer than the planned
time. He suggested that the workplan for 2002 should be extended to the end of the first quarter of 2003.
8.3
In responding to the question of extending the time allowed for the initial tasks, the Project
Director indicated that the Project Steering Committee has determined an overall schedule for project
implementation that requires the demonstration sites to be selected during their meeting at the end of
2003. In order to meet this schedule, it would be necessary for every regional working group to
commence the process of developing regional criteria for site selection during the first quarter of 2003.
This could only be commenced once an initial compilation of site characterisations had been completed.
He noted that it was not a pre-requisite that the meta-database and GIS maps be finished before the
regional level site comparisons were made and that these would be ongoing activities throughout the life
of the project. What was need was a good initial compilation that would enable the RWG-CR to
commence its regional level tasks during the second meeting of 2002.
8.4
Dr. Pernetta also indicated that as the Second Meetings of the Regional Scientific and
Technical Committee and the Project Steering Committee will be organised in mid December 2002, all
documents, including the reports of the working group meetings should be sent to the National Focal
Points and National Technical Focal Points 6 weeks before the meeting. The RWG-CR is scheduled to
have its second meeting at the end of October, which is the latest time at which it can be convened in
order to meet the requirements of the PSC for distribution of meeting documents. By the time of the
second meeting it would be necessary to have the bulk of the site characterisations available at least in
draft form in order to commence the process of regional comparisons and development of the criteria for
site selection.
8.5
Concerning the question of the task relating to the blast fishing detection device, the Project
Director informed the working group that this was a somewhat separate and distinct activity within the
project framework that would require co-ordination with national enforcement agencies and that in the
light of the heavy work load currently facing the National Committees at this point in time consideration
of this activity had been deferred.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
page 9
8.6
Clarification was requested by the National Focal Point in Cambodia regarding, which schedule,
the National Committees should now follow, the one attached to the MoU, or the workplan that had just
been adopted. The Project Director confirmed to the working group that the National Committees should
follow the schedule set in the workplan just adopted. In the next revision of project budget, the new
workplan will be attached.
8.7
Taking into account the overall project schedule approved by the Project Steering Committee,
and with a full understanding that there is no requirement to have final products for reviewing national
data and information and inputting into GIS system by the time of the second meeting of the Regional
Working Group, the proposed workplan was adopted and is attached as Annex 8 to this report.
9.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
9.1
Two issues were raised raised under this agenda item including:
(i)
which species should be included in this regional project as the "key species" itemised in
the flow chart
(ii)
Will this project focus on biodiversity conservation or management
9.2
During discussion of the issue of "key species" the working group realised that it is very difficult
to agree on a uniform, regional list of key species for the sub-component of coral reefs. After serious
discussion, it was agreed that the National Committees should provide data and information on
"common" species in the Southeast Asia region to the maximum extent possible. Recognising that in
some instance specific identifications could not always be provided the working group also agreed to
change the words "key species" to "key taxa".
9.3
Concerning the question of the project focus, the Project Director informed the meeting that the
mission statement of GEF focuses on supporting priority actions within the framework of the Convention
of Biological Diversity and that in order to achieve conservation objectives in the field of biological
diversity it was necessary to improve management of habitats for sustainable use. Hence one might
consider that "biological diversity conservation" was the primary focus of the project using sustainable
management as the tool to achieve this goal.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
page 10
10.
DATE AND PLACE OF THE NEXT MEETING OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP FOR
CORAL REEFS
10.1 The Project Director informed the meeting that the other regional working groups had decided to
extend the length of their meetings to four days and to incorporate a field visit. The working group agreed
to extend the length of their meeting by one day, such that the dates would be 23 26th October 2002
and requested the PCU to develop a programme that incorporated a field visit to an appropriate coral reef
site.
10.2 The Project Director also informed the meeting that the RSTC and PSC would meet in Viet Nam,
as would the regional working groups for seagrass and mangroves; that the Regional Working Group for
Land-based Pollution would meet in Indonesia and the Regional Working Group for Wetlands in China.
10.3 Following some discussion of possible locations the Chairperson invited the Regional Working
Group to convene in Cambodia and this offer, was gratefully accepted by, the participants. It was agreed
that the Project Co-ordinating Unit would liaise with the Chairperson, Mr. Sour regarding logistic
arrangements and inform the members once these had been finalised.
11.
ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE MEETING
11.1 The Chairperson invited the Rapporteur, Dr. Alino, to present the draft report of the meeting,
which was considered paragraph-by-paragraph, amended and approved as contained in this document.
11.2 Mr. Kalil proposed, and the meeting agreed, to adopt the report.
12.
CLOSURE OF THE MEETING
12.1 Dr. Pernetta thanked the participants for their hard work and constructive approach to the
business of the meeting. He informed members that should they have any queries or questions they
should not hesitate to contact the PCU. In order to ensure that all matters were responded to as
promptly as possible, it was recommended that correspondence should be directed to the Project
Director and copied to Dr. Cabanban who would serve as the focal point in the PCU for substantive
matters.
12.2 Mr. Sour thanked the participants for their support and hard work during the course of the
meeting and noted that he looked forward to hosting them in Cambodia in October. On behalf of the
participants he thanked all members of the PCU for their support to the meeting.
12.3 The meeting was closed at 1400 on 11th May 2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 1
page 1
ANNEX 1
List of Participants
Focal Points
Cambodia
Indonesia
Mr. Kim SOUR
Dr. SUHARSONO
Department of Fisheries
Puslit OSEANOGRAFI
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
Research Center for Oceanografi
186 Norodom Blvd., P.O. Box 582
Pasir Putih 1 Ancol Timur
Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Jakarta UTARA
Tel:
(855 23) 215796
Indonesia
Fax: (855 23) 215796
Tel: (62 21) 683 850
E-mail: catfish@camnet.com.kh
Fax: (62 21) 681 948
sourkim@hotmail.com
E-mail: shar@indo.net.id
Malaysia
Philippines
Mr. Abdul KHALIL, Head
Dr. Porfirio ALIÑO
Marine Parks Branch
Professor
Department of Fisheries Malaysia
Marine Science Institute
Jalan Sultan Salahuddin
University of the Philippines
50628 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines
Tel: (603) 2695 4591
Tel: (632) 922 3949; 920 5301 loc.7426
Fax: (603) 2691 3199
Fax: (632) 924 7678
E-mail: abkhalil@hotmail.com
E-mail: pmalino@upmsi.ph
Thailand
Viet Nam
Dr. Thamasak YEEMIN, Lecturer
Dr. Vo Si TUAN, Vice Director
Marine Biodiversity Research Group
Institute of Oceanography
Department of Biology, Faculty of Science
01 Cau Da Street
Ramkhamhaeng University
Nha Trang City
Huamark, Bangkok 10240, Thailand
Viet Nam
Tel: (662) 319 5219 ext. 240
Tel: (84 58) 590 205; 871 134
Fax: (662) 310 8381
Fax: (84 58) 590 034
E-mail: thamasakyeemin@yahoo.com
E-mail: thuysinh@dng.vnn.vn
thamasakyeemin@hotmail.com
Invited Regional Experts
Mr. Ridzwan Bin Abdul RAHMAN
Professor & Director
Borneo Marine Research Institute
Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS)
Locked Bag 2073
88999 Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia
Tel:
(6088) 320121; 320266; 013 8644011
Fax:
(6088) 320261
E-mail: ridzwan@ums.edu.my
Project Co-ordinating Unit Designated Member
Dr. Annadel CABANBAN
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 1
page 2
Expert Community Based Management
UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit
United Nations Environment Programme
9th Floor, Block A, United Nations Building
Rajdamnern Avenue, Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Tel:
(66 2) 288 2279
Fax: (66 2) 281 2428
E-mail: cabanban@un.org
Project Co-ordinating Unit
Dr. John PERNETTA, Project Director
Mr. Yihang JIANG, Senior Expert
UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit
UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit
United Nations Environment Programme
United Nations Environment Programme
9th Floor, Block A, United Nations Building
9th Floor, Block A, United Nations Building
Rajdamnern Avenue
Rajdamnern Avenue
Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Tel:
(66 2) 288 1886
Tel: (66 2) 288 2084
Fax: (66 2) 281 2428
Fax: (66 2) 281 2428
E-mail: pernetta@un.org
E-mail: jiang.unescap@un.org
Ms. Charuvan KALYANGKURA
Ms. Unchalee KATTACHAN
Administrative Assistant, EAS/RCU
Secretary, UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit
United Nations Environment Programme
United Nations Environment Programme
9th Floor, Block A, United Nations Building
9th Floor, Block A, United Nations Building
Rajdamnern Avenue
Rajdamnern Avenue
Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Tel: (66 2) 288 1894
Tel: (66 2) 288 1670
Fax: (66 2) 281 2428
Fax: (66 2) 281 2428
E-mail: kalyangkura@un.org
E-mail: kattachan.unescap@un.org
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 2
page 1
ANNEX 2
List of Documents
Working documents
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/1
Provisional agenda.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/2
Annotated provisional agenda.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Draft report of the meeting (to be prepared during the meeting).
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/4
Outline of Coral Reef Related Activities Described in the
UNEP/GEF Project Brief and Project Document entitled:
"Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South
China Sea and Gulf of Thailand.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/5
Flow Chart of Actions for the Coral Reef Sub-Component in the
UNEP GEF South China Sea Project.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/6
Elements for consideration by the Regional Working Groups
for habitats in developing criteria for prioritising areas of
intervention.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/7
Workplan for calendar year 2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/8 Anticipated Activities in the Framework of ICRAN Regional Project and
the Regional Coral Reef Monitoring Project: Their
Complementarities and Synergies
Information documents
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/INF.1
Provisional list of documents.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/INF.2
Provisional list of participants.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/INF.3
Draft programme.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/INF.4
Management Framework and Reporting Structures for the
UNEP/GEF Project entitled: "Reversing Environmental
Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of
Thailand".
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/INF.5
Financial Rules and Financial Reporting Requirements for
National Focal Points Operating in the Framework of the
UNEP/GEF Project entitled: "Reversing Environmental
Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of
Thailand".
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/INF.6
Terms of Reference for the Regional Working Group on Coral
Reefs (as approved by the First project Steering Committee,
Bangkok, Thailand, October 22-23rd 2001).
UNEP/GEF/SCS/PSC.1/3
First Meeting of the Project Steering Committee for the
UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing Environmental Degradation
Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand". Report
of the First Meeting. UNEP/GEF/SCS/PSC.1/3. UNEP,
Bangkok Thailand, 2000.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 2
page 2
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.1/3
First Meeting of the Regional Scientific and Technical
Committee for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and
Gulf of Thailand" Report of the First Meeting. UNEP/GEF/
SCS/RSTC.1/3 Pattaya, Thailand, 14-16 March 2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.1/4
Expectations of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) with
Respect to Project Execution; Constraints and Opportunities.
The following documents are available to participants as both hard copies and on CD Rom
Talaue-McManus, L.
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis for the South China Sea.
EAS/RCU Technical Reports Series No. 14. UNEP,
Bangkok, Thailand, 2000.
UNEP/EAS/RCU
National report of Cambodia on the formulation of a
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and preliminary
Framework of a Strategic Action Programme for the South
China Sea. UNEP. Bangkok, Thailand, 2001.
UNEP/EAS/RCU
National report of China on the formulation of a Transboundary
Diagnostic Analysis and preliminary Framework of a Strategic
Action Programme for the South China Sea. UNEP. Bangkok,
Thailand, 2001.
UNEP/EAS/RCU
National report of Indonesia on the formulation of a
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and preliminary
Framework of a Strategic Action Programme for the South
China Sea. UNEP. Bangkok, Thailand, 2001.
UNEP/EAS/RCU
National report of Malaysia on the formulation of a
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and preliminary
Framework of a Strategic Action Programme for the South
China Sea. UNEP. Bangkok, Thailand, 2001.
UNEP/EAS/RCU
National report of the Philippines on the formulation of a
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and preliminary
Framework of a Strategic Action Programme for the South
China Sea. UNEP. Bangkok, Thailand, 2001.
UNEP/EAS/RCU
National report of Thailand on the formulation of a
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and preliminary
Framework of a Strategic Action Programme for the South
China Sea. UNEP. Bangkok, Thailand, 2001.
UNEP/EAS/RCU
National report of Viet Nam on the formulation of a
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and preliminary
Framework of a Strategic Action Programme for the South
China Sea. UNEP. Bangkok, Thailand, 2001.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 3
page 1
ANNEX 3
Agenda
1.
OPENING OF THE MEETING
1.1
Welcome address
1.2
Introduction of members
2.
ORGANISATION OF THE MEETING
2.1
Designation of officers
2.2
Organisation of work
3.
ADOPTION OF THE MEETING AGENDA
4.
TERMS OF REFERENCE, MEMBERSHIP AND RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE REGIONAL
WORKING GROUP ON CORAL REEFS (RWG-CR)
4.1
Terms of reference for the working group
4.2
Membership of the working group
4.3
Rules of procedure
5.
MANAGEMENT AND OVERALL OBJECTIVES OF THE UNEP/GEF PROJECT ENTITLED:
"REVERSING ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION TRENDS IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA
AND GULF OF THAILAND"
5.1
Reporting relationships and responsibilities of the Regional Working Group and
its role in achieving project objectives
5.2
Fiscal responsibilities (recording & reporting) of the National Focal Points of
each Specialised Executing Agency
6.
OVERALL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE COMPONENT "HABITAT DEGRADATION
AND LOSS" AND THE "CORAL REEFS" SUB-COMPONENT
6.1
General description of activities contained in the Project Brief
6.2
Other relevant activities in the region
7.
DATA AND INFORMATION NEEDS FOR THE CORAL REEFS SUB-COMPONENT
7.2
Review of the Coral Reefs related sections of the National Reports and the
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis, produced during the preparatory phase of
the project
7.3
National and regional sources of data and information
8.
DISCUSSION AND ADOPTION OF THE WORKPLANS FOR THE NATIONAL COMMITTEES
AND REGIONAL WORKING GROUP FOR 2002-2003
9.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
10.
DATE AND PLACE OF THE NEXT MEETING OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP FOR
CORAL REEFS
11.
ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE MEETING
12.
CLOSURE OF THE MEETING
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 4
page 1
ANNEX 4
Financial Rules and Financial Reporting Requirements for National Focal Points
Operating in the Framework of the UNEP/GEF Project Entitled:
"Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand"
Background
During the first meeting of the Regional Scientific and Technical Committee held in Pattaya, March 22-
25 2002 members requested that the Project Co-ordinating Unit provide some notes for guidance of the
individuals in the Ministries and Specialised Executing Agencies regarding the management of the funds
and reporting requirements. This document has been produced by the PCU in response to that request.
What follows therefore is a simple outline of the budgetary constraints and reporting requirements, rather
than a full detailed listing of the United Nations financial rules and regulations.
Budget Planning and approval
The overall project budget was estimated by UNEP on the basis of planned activities approved by
COBSEA and the participating Governments. These estimates were summarised in the Project Brief at
the time of submission to the GEF Council for approval as total costs for each component and
subcomponent of the Project. Hence variations in allocation between components of the Project can
only be made with authority of the GEF Council.
Subsequently, during the appraisal phase from December 2000 to October 2001 extensive negotiations
were undertaken between UNEP and the Focal Point Ministries in each participating country regarding
the allocation of resources to activities within each component. The overall project budget, broken down
by object of expenditure in UNEP format was approved by the first Project Steering Committee meeting,
held in Bangkok, Thailand, October 22-23rd 2001. This meeting also approved the government
commitments of in-kind contributions to the project.
Overall Budget Control
The body with over-riding authority with respect to the entire project budget is the Project Steering
Committee, which approves on an annual basis the workplans and budgets for the project. In practical
terms what this means is that, at the end of each year the Project Steering Committee decides how any
unspent balance should be reallocated, and makes decisions regarding the budget allocations for
demonstration sites. The Project Steering Committee must however operate within the framework budget
presented in the Project Brief by component and approved by the Global Environment Facility Council at
the time of submission of the Project Brief. Effectively this means that the Project Steering Committee
has authority to move funds between activities in each component but not to transfer funds from one
component to another.
For example: money approved by the GEF as grant support to activities in the coral reef component
cannot be transferred to the mangrove component, for example.
The Project Steering Committee has approved the initial budgetary allocations to the Specialised
Executing Agencies at National level for the first two years on the basis of which the first instalment of
funds has been transferred to all Specialised Executing Agencies with which UNEP has signed
Memoranda of Understanding.
Responsibilities of the Specialised Executing Agencies
The responsibilities of the Specialised Executing Agencies are detailed in each Memorandum of
Understanding and include inter alia responsibility for Chairing and convening meetings of the National
Committees, for producing the national inputs to the regional level activities and for advising at the
national level, the National Technical Focal Point and National Technical Working Group of priorities
activities which should be undertaken within the framework of the Project. In addition the Specialised
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 4
page 2
Agencies are responsible for presenting the national perspective at the Regional Working Groups and
providing to the Regional Working Groups and Regional Scientific and Technical Committee the data and
information required to make decisions and recommendations at the regional level. The substantive
needs will be more closely defined during the first sets of meetings of the Regional Working Groups.
Disbursement by UNEP to the SEAs
In order to undertake the substantive work described in the MoU's the GEF has provided grant funds for
project execution. These monies will be disbursed by ESCAP on behalf of UNEP at six monthly intervals
according to the terms given in the MoU. As noted above the first instalment of funds has been disbursed
as a cash advance following joint signature by UNEP and each SEA, of the MoUs.
In terms of fiscal responsibility within the United Nations System the Project Director authorises financial
expenditures including disbursement of funds to the SEAs, in accordance with the project document, and
the workplans and budget approved by the Project Steering Committee. The Senior Expert certifies that
adequate funds exist to support the payments authorised. These authorities are delegated from the Head
of the United Nations Office at Nairobi (UNON), and UNEP headquarters, Nairobi.
Each MoU contains a budget in UNEP format, which indicates the purpose for which the funds are
provided by UNEP to the Specialised Executing Agencies. Funds have been allocated in these budgets
to the production of the required national level information, for the convening of meetings, for translation
and for other purposes as indicated by the UNEP budget code; for example the extract below is taken
from the budget table for a National Specialised Agency serving as the Focal Point for Land Based
Pollution and represents the anticipated reporting costs. No expenditures on publications are foreseen
during 2002 hence these funds will be transferred in 2003 in two separate allotments around January and
June 2003.
Table 1.
Example extract from the budget for a Specialised Executing Agency acting at National
level as the Focal Point for the Coral Reef sub-component of the Project (US$
thousands)
2002
2003
TOTAL
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
5200
Reporting costs - publications,
maps, newsletters, printing.
5216
Translation
2.00
2.00
4.00
Publication of National Review of Water
3.00
3.00
5217
Quality data
5218
Publication of evaluation of costs and
3.00
3.00
benefits of alternative courses of action
and pre-feasibility studies
5299
Total
0.00
0.00
5.00
5.00
10.00
Expenditures by the SEAs
Each SEA is authorised under the terms of the MoUs to spend the cash advances in accordance with
the detailed budget, which forms part of each MoU. Since the money in the budgets of the MoUs is
provided to the SEAs by UNEP in advance of the SEAs incurring any expenditures, UNEP will not
reimburse expenditures for items not detailed in the approved budget.
Unplanned costs
In undertaking the work agreed by the Regional Working Groups Specialised Executing Agency may find
that they need to spend money on items not currently listed in the budgets of the MoUs. Under such
circumstances the Focal Point in the SEA must contact the Project Director to seek changes in the
budget to accommodate these un-planned expenditures.
Over-expenditures
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 4
page 3
Where an item or an activity costs more than originally estimated then the Specialised Executing
Agency would need to examine the budget and see whether cost savings can be achieved in other parts
of the budget. Any such savings could then be transferred between lines to prevent an over-expenditure
occurring. In cases where quotations are obtained which exceed the allocations the Focal Point should
contact the PCU to arrange for a revision of the budget. Such a revision should be completed before the
over-expenditure is incurred. Focal Points should note that reallocation of funds between lines, which fall
into the same component (i.e. 5000 numbers) is generally accepted automatically, but reallocation of
funds from 2000 to 3000 lines for example should only be done with the agreement in writing of the
Project Director.
Under-expenditures
At the end of a six-month period the Specialised Executing Agency might find that the anticipated costs
of a particular activity have been less than originally planned. For example in the Table presented above
the SEA might find that only 1,800 US$ had been spent on translation by June 30th 2003, hence 200 US
$ would remain unspent in budget line #5216. This money can be carried forward on the same budget line
if for example it was expected that the costs of translating of the second publication would be more than
the planned 2,000 US$. Alternatively the unspent funds can be reallocated internally, for example to
produce more copies of the publication, subject to the approval in writing of the Project Director. In this
case the funds would be removed from budget line #5216 and reassigned to budget line #5217 or #5218
as appropriate.
Revising the budget
In the event that unplanned expenditures, under-expenditures or over-expenditures are foreseen the Focal
Point in the Specialised Executing Agency is advised to contact the Project Co-ordinating Unit promptly
to seek a budget revision, since as noted above UNEP cannot reimburse expenditures which are not part
of the approved budget contained in the MoU.
Reporting requirements
At the end of each six-month period the SEA is required under the terms of the MoU to provide three
documents to the Project Co-ordinating Unit as follows:
· Six Monthly expenditure statement
· Cash advance request.
· Six monthly progress report
Without these three documents the Project Co-ordinating Unit cannot authorise the cash advance for the
next six months.
The six monthly expenditure statement should report the actual expenditures which have
occurred up to the 30th June and 30th December in the form provided in an Annex to the MoU and
reproduced here as Table 2. At this time any under expenditures will become apparent and a revision of
the budget may be undertaken as necessary.
At the same time that the SEA reports the actual expenditures for the previous six months it completes
a cash advance request in the form annexed to the MoUs and reproduced here as Table 3. This
constitutes a request from the SEA to UNEP to advance monies against the expenditures anticipated in
the next six months.
Supporting documentation for expenditures
If an item of equipment has been purchased, then the original receipt for payment must be
dispatched with the six monthly expenditure statement, since until the time of completion of the project
the equipment remains the property of the United Nations (Transfer to the partner institution is normally
automatic on completion of the project).
If a consultancy contract has been issued for a specified piece of work then a copy of the signed
contract should also be supplied with the expenditure statement, together with a copy of the original
product produced by the consultant.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 4
page 4
If expenditures are incurred in organising a meeting then a copy of the report of the meeting and any
substantive outputs must be supplied to UNEP.
If travel by air has been paid for then an original receipt must be supplied with the expenditure statement.
Whilst UNEP does not require that original receipts for all expenditures be submitted at the time the
expenditure report is dispatched they must be retained by the Specialised Executing Agency until
such time as the external audit report of the organisation has been submitted to, and receipt
acknowledged by, the PCU. Ideally receipts should be retained on file until completion of the project and
financial closure of the MoU. In the event of an audit the Specialised Executing Agency may be required
to produce the original receipts by the United Nations auditors.
It is strongly recommended therefore that each SEA retain original documentation demonstrating the
nature of each expenditure until such time as the terms of the MoU have been fulfilled.
Substantive Reporting:
One further report is required from each SEA on a six monthly basis. This is the Six Monthly Progress
Report in the form as annexed to the MoUs and attached here as Table 3. In this report the substantive
activities and outputs of the SEA and National Committees are detailed and it is on the basis of this
report together with the substantive outputs (copies of which should be sent to the PCU) that UNEP
judges whether or not the terms of the Memorandum have been met in a satisfactory manner.
Without the six monthly expenditure report, the six monthly progress report and cash advance
request the PCU cannot authorise any subsequent cash advances. It is important therefore that the
Focal Points adhere as closely as possible to the reporting requirements in order to ensure a steady flow
of funds and smooth operation of the project.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 4
page 5
Table 2
FORMAT OF SIX MONTHLY PROJECT EXPENDITURE ACCOUNTS FOR SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS
Project statement of allocation (budget), expenditure and balance (Expressed in US$) covering the period
from............................to................................
Project No.:...........................................
Supporting organization...............................................................................
Project title:
Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand
Project commencing:...............................
(date)
Project ending:.................................... (date)
Object of expenditure in accordance with UNEP budget
Project budget allocation for the half year ending .......
Expenditure incurred for the half Unspent balance of budget for
codes
year ending .....
the half year ending ............
Amount (1)
Amount (2)
Amount (1-2)
1100 Project personnel
1101
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
1200 Consultants
1201
Consultants .....
.....
.....
.....
.....
etc. etc. etc.
(USE OBJECTS OF EXPENDITURE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE SIGNED
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING)
99 GRAND TOTAL
Signed
_______________________________________________________
Designation:
______________________________________________
Duly authorised official
NB: The expenditures should be reported in line with the specific object of expenditureas as per project budget.
File ID: K:\FORMATS\APP4SOQE.WQ1 me\ag
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 4
page 6
Table 3
CASH ADVANCE REQUEST
Statement of cash advance as at
____________________________________________________
And cash requirements for the six month period ending _______________________________________
Name of co-operating agency/
Supporting organization
__________________________________________________________
Project No.
____________________________________________________________________
Project title:
Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand
I
Cash Statement:
1.
Opening Cash Balance as at ________________US$__________________
2.
Add: cash advances received
Date:
________________US$___________________
Date:
________________US$___________________
Date:
________________US$___________________
Date:
________________US$___________________
3.
Total cash advanced to date
US$___________________
4.
Less: total cumulative expenditures incurred US$___________________
5.
Closing cash balance as at__________________US$___________________
II Cash requirements forecast
6.
Estimated disbursements for period ending
7.
Less: closing cash balance (item 5, above)
8.
Total cash requirements for the period ending
Prepared by________________________ Request approved by:
___________________
Name: ________________________
___________________
Duly authorized official of co-
operating agency/ supporting
organization
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 4
page 7
Table 4
UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME
SIX MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT
SECTION 1 - BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1.1
Project Title: Reversing Environmental degradation in the South China Sea and Gulf
of Thailand.
1.2
MOU Number:___________________________________________________
1.3
Responsible Office:
South China Sea Project Co-ordination Unit, Bangkok
1.4
Specialised Executing Agency (Supporting Organization):
_________________________________________________________________________________
1.5
Reporting Period: (the six months covered by this report) ___________________________
1.6
Focal Point Name: ___________________________
SECTION 2 - PROJECT STATUS
2.1
Status of the Implementation of the Activities and Outputs Listed Under the Workplan in
the Memorandum of Understanding (check appropriate box)
Project activities and outputs listed in the Project workplan for the reporting period have been material
completed and the responsible Office is satisfied that the project will be fully completed on
time (give reasons for minor variations as Section 3 below).
Project activities and outputs listed in the Project Workplan for the reporting period have been altere
(give reasons for alterations: lack of finance; project reformulated; project revisions; other at
Section 3 below).
Project activities and outputs listed in the Project Workplan for the reporting period have not been fully
completed and delays in project delivery are expected (give reasons for variations in Section
3.1 and new completion date in Section 3.2 below).
Insufficient detail provided in the Project Workplan.
2.2
List Actual Activities/Outputs Achieved in the Reporting period: (check appropriate box)
(a) MEETINGS (Duplicate this box for each meeting individually)
Inter-Ministry mtg
Expert Group Mtg.
Training Seminar/Workshop
Others
Title:__________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
________________________
Venue and
dates_____________________________________________________________________________
Convened by ____________________________ Organized by ____________________________
Report issued as doc. No/Symbol_______________ Languages _____________Dated __________
For Training Seminar/Workshop, please indicate: No. of participants _____________and attach annex
giving names and nationalities of participants.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 4
page 8
(b) PRINTED MATERIALS (Duplicate this box for each printed item)
Report to IG Mtg.
Technical Publication
Technical Report
Others
Title:
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
______
____________________________________________________________
___
____________________________________________________________
___
Author(s)/Editor(s)
_________________________________________________________________________________
Publisher
_________________________________________________________________________________
Symbol (UN/UNEP/ISBN/ISSN)
_______________________________________________________________________
Date of publication
_________________________________________________________________________________
(When technical reports/publications have been distributed, attach distribution list)
(c) TECHNICAL INFORMATION
PUBLIC INFORMATION (posters, leaflets, broadcasts
etc.)
Description
_________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________
Dates
_________________________________________________________________________________
(d) SERVICES
Description
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
Dates _____________________
(e) OTHER OUTPUTS
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 4
page 9
SECTION 3 - PROJECT DELIVERY
3.1
Summary of the Problems Encountered in Project Delivery (if any)
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3.2
Actions Taken or Required to Solve the Problems (identified in Section 3.1 above)
_________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________
Signed:
_____________________________
Name:
_____________________________
Designation: _____________________________
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 5
page 1
ANNEX 5
Flow chart of National and Regional Actions for the Coral Reefs Sub-component of the UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project
National Action Programme
Regional Strategic Action Programme
Establish National
Committees
Develop Regional Criteria
for Site Selection
Review Site
Review Nat'l Data & Info.
specific
Assemble Regional Set of site-
specific data
characteristics
Geographic Distrb'n at habitat
Cluster regionally on basis of
level
Cluster nationally by
similarity indices
class: fringing, barrier,
Geographic Distrb'n of key
patch, atoll, other
taxa
Determine regional, global and
Inputs to National meta-
transboundary significance
Social, Stakeholders, use,
database; regional GIS
Determine national
ownership
and Economic Valuation
priority/rank for
biodiversity Cons.
Select sites for
Threats: present & Future
demonstration activities
Define site specific
management regimes
Nat'l Mgmt, Inst'l & Legal
Inputs to regional metadatabase;
frameworks, governments
regional GIS; and Economic
valuation
Guidelines for Legislation
NATIONAL CORAL REEF COMMITTEE
REGIONAL WORKING GROUP ON CORAL
REEFS
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 6
page 1
ANNEX 6
Review of the Coral Reef Sections in the National Reports prepared for the Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis of the South China Sea
The following tabulation indicates the presence (+) or absence (-) of data and/or information on five key elements required for the revision of the Regional Strategic
Action Programme and the determination of criteria for priority ranking of regional demonstration sites.
Country
Diversity
Transboundary
Legislation
Financial support
Economic Remarks
Relevant
Significance/Impacts
(for management)
Value
pages in
National
Reports
Cambodia
+
-
-
-
-
Needs to be updated with
54-56
data/information from activities
and projects with international
agencies (e.g., SIF, ADB,
DANCED-ICZM)
Indonesia
-
+
+
-
-
Need update data on diversity;
90-93; 109-
(sustaining fisheries,
need estimate on live fish trade;
111, 114
regiona/global
need location and extent of
biodiversity)
major oil spill events; need
details and sources of
information on transboundary
imptce.; update info. on
economic value (e.g., Cesar,
2000?)
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 6
page 2
Malaysia
+
-
+
+
-
Need update on all aspects from
30-31; 53
activities and projects in MY
(e.g., DANCED-ICZM; Reefs at
Risk in SEA; Reefs at Risk in
Sabah; DoF activities; MIMA
reviews; GCRMN summaries;
UNEP/EAS RCU activities on
coral reefs; activities/projects of
nat'l. agencies, research
institutions, NGOs: DoF, UMS,
WWF, etc.
Philippines
+
+
+
+
-
Metadabase of existing
30-33; 39; 71-
data/information will be useful;
72
update on economic value from
research institutions, NGOs:
CRMP, UP-MSI, etc.
Thailand
+
-
-
-
-
Need to assemble existing data
22-24
and information from past and
current activities and projects
(e.g., ASEAN-Australia LCR
Project; UNEP-EAS/RCU;
ICLARM; etc); need for econ.
valuation
Viet Nam
-
+
-
-
-
Need to assemble data on
73-74; 83
diversity; need to provide more
details on transboundary
imptce.; need to estimate
economic value of coral reefs
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 7
page 1
ANNEX 7
Details of Parameters, Data and Information requirements for Coral Reef Site characterisation
Coral Reef: location name
Parameter
Data & Information needed
Remarks
Geographic
Latitude & Longitude central position of areas, GPS
information
Co-ordinates
Boundary or number (min 4) of paired co-ordinates for larger Include a suitable map
areas; end points for linear strips.
Area
(Units Km2 or Ha)
Physical Environment
Reef type
Fringing (mainland & island), barrier, atoll, patch, other
Volcanic, non-volcanic
Slope Degrees (tangent)
Bathymetry
Depth contour
Climate
Prevailing wind; sea surface temperature, (seasonal mean, Specify length of records, anomaly
max & min); rainfall Mean monthly rainfall (mm)
sea surface temp.
Current pattern
Seasonal current pattern
River discharge
Sediment load, quantity of freshwater discharge salinity
Tidal regime
Range (m)
Diurnal, semi-diurnal, mixed
Water quality
Nutrients, total P, N, nitrite, Total suspended solids
Turbidity,
Other parameters as available
Environmental state
information
Present status
Live coral cover, dead coral cover, algea, abiotic
Level of exploitation (indicator species, catch per unit)
Reference of R @ R if any
Present threats
sedimentation
Quantitative or qualitative
descriptions in last 5 yrs
destructive fishing (no. of cases, both bombing & poising,
received per year
Pollution (no. pop'n & distance to the sources of pollutants) Reference to R@R
COT infestation (density of COT, no. of cases, and infested
areas)
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 7
page 2
Parameter
Data & Information needed
Remarks
Bleaching (% bleaching of live coral, % of covered )
Quantitative historical data
others
Trends
Increase or decrease of live coral cover
Pressure (threats) future
Development plan & distance to the coral reef area
Social & use
Ownership
Description: Federal, State, Community, private, common
information
property
Management regime
Description: Land-use planning and coastal zoning,
Description
Institutional framework, stakeholder co-ordination,
restoration, stakeholder investment, fishery practices.
Current use
Description: Commercial, subsistence, fishing ground,
For MPA, when declare, types of
tourism and/or MPA
MPA and the size
Traditional use
Description of
Potential use
Tourism and MPA (sustainable use)
Significance/national importance
Use designation in national/state master plans
Biological data
Species diversity
No. of species and coverage of hard coral
No. of species and coverage of soft coral
Molluscs species and density (no. per m2
If available
Crustacean- species and density (no. per m2
Fish coral reef fish, species abundance
Fish Transient for breeding, species abundance
Mammals
Reptiles
Echinoderm
No. species of algae
Other species
Diversity index
Genetic diversity
Unlikely to be available
SCS Endemic species
List species and abundance
Endangered or threatened species List species and abundance
(IUCN criteria)
Source & sink of larvae
Location & types (breeding ground), density of larvae
Migratory species
List species and abundance
Ecosystem diversity
Description of complexity of habitats
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 7
page 3
Parameter
Data & Information needed
Remarks
Interaction with other ecosystems Description of associated ecosystems
Economic valuation1
Extractive
Reef related fish landing (mt/$$)
Subsistence fishery (no. of fishes living on reefs mt/$)
Commercially (live fish and fish landing mt/$)
Non extractive (tourism)
No. of visitors. ($ generated)
No. of people involved in industry (income generated)
no. of chalets/hotels
operators
- no. ferry/boats operator
- no. guide/agents
Environment services
Upon the advise of the environment
economist
Education
Others
1 Barbier, E.B. 1997. Economic Valuation of wetlands: A guide for policy makers and planners. RAMSAR Convention Bureau, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 8
page 1
ANNEX 8
Workplan Timetable and schedule of meetings for the Regional Working Group on Coral Reefs, 2002-2003
Table 1
Schedule of Meetings for 2002
M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F
S S M T
1 2 3 4 5
6
7
8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
January
N.Y.
1 2
3
4
5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
February
Chn N.Y.
1 2
3
4
5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
March
RSTC-1
1
2 3 4 5 6
7
8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
April
RWG-LbP-
Thai N.Y.
RWG-W-1
RWG-M-1
1
1 2 3 4
5
6
7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
May
RWG-SG-1 RWG-Cr-1
RWG-F-1
1
2
3
4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
June
1
2 3 4 5 6
7
8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
July
1 2 3
4
5
6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
August
1
2
3
4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
September
RWG-W-2
RWG-M-2
RWG-LbP-2
GEF-IW
1 2 3 4 5
6
7
8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
GEF Assembly
October
RWG-F-2
RWG-Cr-2
RWG-SG-2
1 2
3
4
5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
November
Ramadan
1
2
3
4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
December
Ramadan
RSTC-2
PSC-2
Xmas
Official United Nations Holidays in Thailand
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 8
page 3
Table 2
Workplan and Timetable for completion of agreed activities in the Coral Reefs Sub-component: 2002
2002
2003
April
May
June
July
August
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
National Committee meetings
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
NTWG Meetings
X
X
Review National Reports
Review Regional database and respond
National Activities
Review of past & ongoing projects
st
1
draft
Final draft
Review National Data & Information
Creation of National meta-database
Identification & characterisation of "sites"
st
nd
1
draft
draft
2
Review National Criteria
Review economic valuation data & information
Review threats at site level
Review National legislation
st
1
Final
draft
draft
Review National level management regimes
Identify proximate to ultimate cause by source
National Prioritisation
Identify priority points of intervention
Evaluate barriers to action & possible solutions
Preparation/revision of National Action Plan
Regional Co-ordination
Regional Criteria development
Second meeting RWG-CR
X
Development of Regional Priorities
Finalisation of elements of the SAP
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
Annex 8
page 4
Table 3
Workplan and Timetable for completion of agreed activities in the Coral Reefs Sub-component: 2002 - 2003
Year
2002
2003
Quarter
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
National Committee meetings
NTWG Meetings
X
X
X
X
Review National Reports
Review Regional database and respond
Review of past & ongoing projects & activities
1 F
Creation of National metadatabase
Identification & characterisation of "sites"
1 F
Review National Criteria
Review Economic valuation data & information
Review threats at site level
Review National legislation
1 F
Review national level management regimes
Identify proximate to ultimate cause by source
National Prioritisation
Identify priority points of intervention
Evaluate barriers and possible solutions
Development of NAPs to Implement the SAP
Regional Criteria development
2nd, 3rd & 4th meetings RWG-CR
x
x
x
Development of Regional Priorities
Finalisation of elements of the SAP