GEF SPECIALLY MANAGED PROJECT
REVIEW (SMPR) - 2004
Summary Report on the Review of the GEF/UNEP Project:
Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends
in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand
Date of the Review: December 2004
What are SMPRs?
Specially Managed Project Reviews (SMPRs) are
project reviews by panels composed of members
from the GEF Office of Monitoring and
Evaluation, the GEF Secretariat focal area teams,
external consultants and implementing agencies.
SMPRs aim to (a) assess whether projects are
implemented in compliance with project
objectives and GEF policies and standards and (b)
identify systemic lessons in project design and
implementation that are of relevance to the overall
GEF portfolio.
From the EIA Country Analysis Brief
Project Description
management of the marine and coastal habitats,
and improve the integration of fisheries and
Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South
biodiversity management in the Gulf of Thailand.
China Sea and Gulf of Thailand is a GEF/UNEP
project currently executed by 43 specialized
The project was originally developed based on a
executing agencies in 7 countries.1 This five-year
request from the Coordinating Body on Seas of
project was started in 2002 under the GEF
East Asia (COBSEA), which includes
operational program OP8 Waterbody-based
representatives of the seven governments
Operational Program.
participating in this project. The project is being
implemented in line with the East Asian Seas
The overall goals of this project are: to create an
Action Plan (Regional Seas Action Plan). The
environment at the regional level in which
project also reports to COBSEA.
collaboration and partnership in addressing
environmental problems of the South China Sea,
Through the implementation of nine
between all stakeholders and at all levels, is
demonstration activities in particular, this project
fostered and encouraged; and to enhance the
was originally designed to achieve the following
capacity of the participating governments to
six main outcomes:
integrate environmental considerations into
·
national development planning. The project is
Adoption of improved mechanisms for
designed to improve regional coordination of the
regional cooperation in the management of
management of the South China Sea marine and
the South China Sea environment;
coastal environment, improve national
· Jointly agreed-upon actions relating to
fisheries and the environment in the Gulf of
1 Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines,
Thailand;
Thailand and Vietnam.
GEF Office of Monitoring and Evaluation
SMPR Report Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand
· Adoption of the Strategic Action Program at a
It is too early to assess actual replication, as the
regional level;
demonstration sites are not yet operational.
Nevertheless, the project has approached
· Acceptance of the Transboundary Diagnostic
replication in a very systematic manner through
Analysis and Strategic Action Program at
scientific criteria; ensuring local buy-in into the
national levels;
demonstration sites; broad national-level
· Implementation of components of the
cooperation through the national technical
Strategic Action Program; and
working groups and the inter-ministry
committees; and strong regional cooperation
· Establishment of a regional database for
through the regional working groups, the Regional
planning and management.
Scientific and Technical Committee and the
The GEF allocated US$335,000 for the
Project Steering Committee. This rigorous and
preparation of this project and contributed
transparent process--combined with the strong
US$16.4 million for its implementation. The co-
regional cooperation and exchange of
financing originally proposed by the governments
information--would suggest high replication
and other co-donors was over 16 million US
potential within the region.
dollars.
In addition, while the demonstration sites focus
on a specific habitat (mangroves, seagrass, coral
Project Achievements to Date
reefs, wetlands), there have been some good
attempts at integrating various aspects into a single
This is a highly innovative project, which fully
demonstration site. For example, mangroves can
utilizes an ecosystem approach focusing on critical
serve numerous purposes, including biodiversity
habitats. The project effectively promotes regional
conservation, spawning grounds for fish and
cooperation and the sharing of experiences within
mollusks, pollution filtration, storm protection,
and between the participating countries. These
alternative income generation (e.g., tourism), etc.
factors are likely to have a positive influence on
The project ensures a good combination of
effective demonstration and replication. It is also
involvement from government institutions and
likely that the project will have a significant policy
academic organizations. Additionally, one of the
impact both in the individual countries and at the
specialized executing agencies is an NGO. This
regional level. Overall, project progress is
has brought about horizontal cooperation
considered highly satisfactory.
between academic institutions and reoriented
Generally speaking, the project is being
them towards applied work. In its early phase the
implemented as planned at the time of CEO
project had a strong tilt towards research and
endorsement. Some delays as well as some
academic work.
negative changes have occurred (such as delays in
The project is already demonstrating a certain
the implementation of demonstration activities
level of policy impact. For example, China and
and decreased efficiency of the Fisheries
Indonesia had no policy or strategy concerning the
component). However, several significant
conservation and management of seagrass beds
additions have been made that have enhanced the
prior to the project. Now , both countries have
quality of project outputs and outcomes, such as:
recognized their importance and are working
the addition of a Regional Task Force on Legal
towards this goal.
Affairs and a Regional Task Force on Economic
Valuation of Natural Resources and Habitats; the
In addition, the work of the Economic Valuation
creation of a GIS database; and the creation of an
Task Force is contributing to the recognition of
internship program to support the work of the
the value of the coastal and marine resources.
Project Coordination Unit and to develop capacity
While much work has already been done with
in the participating countries. Overall, the project
respect to coral reefs, the project is expanding to
has demonstrated the ability to adapt well to
cover new areas, such as those in the South China
changing circumstances during implementation.
Sea (Natuna) in Indonesia.
2
SMPR Report Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand
Strong Aspects
structure is the Project Steering Committee, which
consists entirely of government officials from the
The project design, project implementation
participating countries. The main scientific and
approach and stakeholder participation is
technical forum, the Regional Scientific and
considered highly satisfactory.
Technical Committee, forms the bridge between
the Project Steering Committee and the regional
One of the strong features of the project
working groups dealing with the scientific and
design is the division of the project into clear
technical aspects of the project. The Regional
preparatory and implementation phases. The
Scientific and Technical Committee makes
preparatory phase has been essential in ensuring
recommendations to the Project Steering
that all the necessary work related to the selection
Committee with respect to appropriate actions,
of the demonstration sites through scientific
based on the scientific work carried out within the
analysis and wide consultations at all levels was
regional working groups and at the national level.
performed. The selection of the demonstration
Hence, a particularly important feature of this
sites has been done very carefully and based on
project is the clear delineation of scientific
scientific criteria developed by the regional
and political roles and functions, which has
working groups. The selection was done through a
resulted in the strong scientific basis for
participatory process involving both the national
policy making. This structure has allowed the
and local levels, including sub-national
Project Steering Committee to make its decisions
administrations (and legislative bodies in countries
based on accurate and appropriate scientific and
like Indonesia, where there has been an extensive
technical advice.
decentralization policy) and local communities.
At the national level, there is coordination within
The elaborate process of listing a relatively large
particular sectors through the national technical
number of possible candidates (altogether 136) for
working groups, as well as across sectors, through
review, comparison and final selection (of 9), and
the inter-ministry committees, which bring to the
the fact that the demonstration sites are of
table all of the sectoral ministries with a stake in
importance not only nationally but also regionally,
the project. The management structure is
are factors that are likely to contribute to the
exemplary, as it combines both top-down and
replication of successful models. For instance, the
bottom-up approaches, involving participants
Filipino officials are actively considering how to
and stakeholders not only from the highest levels,
expand the impact of and replicate the project's
sub-national governments and the scientific and
demonstration sites (which are all naturally located
technical communities, but also NGOs and local
on the South China Sea coasts within the country)
communities, in decision-making and
to other areas of the country.
implementation processes and the selection of
Similarly, the demonstration sites will serve all
demonstration sites.
Another important
countries in the region through the project and
characteristic of this project is that the
other exchange mechanisms. A good practice
scientific and technical expertise employed by
initiated by the project is that all Regional
the project are local resources from
Working Group meetings are held at different
participating countries (except for two experts
demonstration sites, allowing for the hands-on
in the Project Coordination Unit).
exchange of experiences and lessons learned.
Strong country ownership has been secured
The management structure at the national and
through various mechanisms including the inter-
regional levels can be considered innovative,
ministry committees, national technical working
highly efficient and cost-effective.
groups and the systematic involvement of
local/sub-national authorities and stakeholders in
The management structure has been very
the selection of demonstration sites.
effective in several areas. In fact, the clear
separation of roles of the policy and decision-
At many levels, the project appears to be
making structures from scientific and technical
highly cost-effective. For example, the Project
functions has been a key aspect of the success of
Coordination Unit was established directly under
the project. The highest-level decision-making
UNEP with key personnel hired as UNEP staff.
3
SMPR Report Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand
This decision has proven cost-effective as it
PEMSEA project (Partnerships in Environmental
reduces transaction costs between the project and
Management for the Seas of East Asia),
UNEP headquarters, as well as with the UNEP-
implemented by UNDP. However, coordination
GEF Division. In addition, the Project
between the two projects has not been adequate.
Coordination Unit is located in the same building
PEMSEA involves cooperation with the same
as UNEP's Regional Office for Asia and the
seven, as well as an additional five countries.
Pacific and the East Asian Seas Regional
While there is little duplication between the two
Coordinating Unit, which can provide
projects, they have not taken full advantage of
opportunities for synergies and efficiency.
potential complementarity. Whereas the South
In addition, at the country level, the various
China Sea project focuses more on the protection
components have been incorporated into the
of specific habitats, PEMSEA is more directed
regular work of the specialized executing agencies,
towards addressing pollution and hazardous waste
which have been selected on the basis of their
and the overall health of the ecosystems; and
experience and expertise in their respective fields.
while the South China Sea project is primarily
The demonstration projects are designed to be
linked up with national environmental ministries,
implemented in collaboration with local
PEMSEA cooperates more with sectoral and
authorities at the sub-national level with a view to
planning ministries. PEMSEA prepared a
mainstreaming them at the local level. At the same
"Sustainable Development Strategy for the Seas of
time, the project design--comprised of both
East Asia," which was approved by ministers of
national- and regional-level cooperation--would
the participating countries in December 2003 as a
appear to be very conducive to the cost-effective
basis for national strategies and action programs.
dissemination of the results of the
A regional mechanism for follow-up of the
demonstrations. All Regional Working Group
strategy has been accepted. In sum, the full
meetings take place in the field, in locations
potential for coordination of the South China
proposed as demonstration sites within the
Sea project and PEMSEA has not been
project. In this way, a regional exchange of
exploited so far.
information, experiences and lessons learned
The project design includes a centralized structure
between the proposed demonstration sites and
to coordinate the participation of the 7
relevant stakeholders is built into project
governments and the direct engagement of 43
implementation, and thereby facilitates an ongoing
specialized executing agencies. This entails a very
connection and exchange of information and staff
high workload for the Project Coordination Unit.
between various demonstration sites and areas
In fact, the Project Coordination Unit is
where activities would be replicated throughout
currently overworked, which has to a degree
the region.
contributed to a slow-down in some of the work
as time allocation conflicts arise between, for
The independent Midterm Evaluation of the
example, the organization of periodic meetings
project (July 2004) stated that: "By comparison
and administrative duties such as the clearing of
with similar GEF projects elsewhere, this project
semiannual reports by the specialized executing
is a model of cost-effectiveness."
agencies. This is partly a result of the project
design and partly because some of the positions in
Key Challenges
the Project Coordination Unit have remained
vacant for extended periods of time. Addressing
The Fisheries component experienced a
the issue of inadequate staffing in the Project
setback due to the inability of the relevant
Coordination Unit will be crucial to
Malaysian institutions to participate. Other
maintaining satisfactory project progress. The
components seem to be less affected by the
Project Coordination Unit plays an important role
somewhat weak project participation
in the project by facilitating the various processes,
demonstrated by these institutions.
preparing documentation, organizing meetings,
supporting the regional working groups and
The project document emphasizes the need for
participating in the proceedings of the Project
close coordination with ongoing related GEF and
Steering Committee. Its role is seen as essential in
other projects in the region, especially the
4
SMPR Report Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand
supporting and prodding all the participants along.
past. Regional sustainability would also be further
The project's success therefore depends on the
improved through closer collaboration with
continued effective functioning of the Project
PEMSEA and other projects.
Coordination Unit and also on solving the
institutional matter of regional coordination
Main lessons learned:
following project expiration in 2007.
Ø One of the key systemic lessons learned so far
Concluding Remarks/
through this project regards the separation of
scientific/technical and political/decision-
Key Lessons
making spheres of the project. This distinction
The project has fostered regional cooperation
has proven important to ensure that the main
through the involvement of renowned scientific
forums for each--the Regional Scientific and
institutions and participating country governments
Technical Committee and the Project Steering
in the protection and sustainable use of common
Committee--are able to focus on their
waterbodies. It has created a framework for
respective areas of expertise. This separation
transparent cooperation--involving the sharing
has also helped to ensure that the scientific
and comparison of information--within and
and technical considerations have not been
across countries, and has also enabled scientists
diluted by political considerations;
and governments to make common decisions on
consequently, the Regional Scientific and
the basis of agreed-upon environmental and
Technical Committee has been able to provide
socioeconomic criteria. The project also
sound advice to the Steering Committee.
emphasizes awareness-raising and stakeholder
Ø Regarding the demonstration sites, there is a
involvement at all levels on relevant issues.
need to consult both local/subnational
Areas for improvement:
government authorities as well as other
stakeholders, including those from productive
Although the project is efficient and cost-
sectors. Involvement of local/subnational
effective, the Project Coordination Unit's role in
authorities as well as other stakeholders
the project is pivotal and its capacity is currently
increases the buy-in and impact of the
overstretched. It is therefore important to
demonstration sites.
strengthen the Project Coordination Unit, most
Ø
importantly by filling the vacant posts.
Using regional mechanisms to systematically
promote the ongoing exchange of experiences
The project has very actively promoted and
and lessons learned in combination with visits
fostered inter-country cooperation amongst
to demonstration sites enhances the potential
scientific and government stakeholders, which
for replication beyond individual countries.
could bode well for regional cooperation. It has
also very effectively mobilized regional experts
Panel members for this review:
Jarle Harstad, Panel Chair, GEF M&E
and champions. However, it has come to rely on a
Sara Gräslund, GEF Secretariat
very active Project Coordination Unit for its
Juha Uitto, UNDP-GEF
implementation, the funding for which was
approved only until 2007.
IA Observer:
Takashi Otsuka UNEP-GEF
Although the overall sustainability of the project
outcomes at the national level appears highly
This document has been adapted from the SMPR
questionnaire report prepared by the panel members by:
likely, sustainability is not as likely at the regional
Le Groupe-conseil baastel ltée., December 2004
level, which would provide the main global
environmental benefits of the project. Regionally,
For questions and comments, please contact:
the project was initially endorsed by and will end
GEF Office of Monitoring and Evaluation
with the approval of the Strategic Action Program
1818 H Street, NW
by COBSEA. Ensuring regional sustainability
Washington, DC 20433 USA
Telephone: (202) 458-2548
would require further efforts to ensure that
Fax: (202) 522-1691
COBSEA would play a more active role in
www.gefweb.org
coordinating environmental efforts than in the
5