IWCAM INDICATORS MECHANISM
AND CAPACITY ASSESSMENT
PART ONE
Prepared by
Sherry Heileman & Leslie Walling, Consultants
for the
GEF Project on "Integrating Watershed & Coastal Areas
Management in Caribbean Small Island Developing States
(GEF-IWCAM)"
May 2008
GEF-IWCAM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................. i
ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS................................................................................................ ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..............................................................................................................1
1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................9
2. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE................................................................................................10
3. OUTPUTS ...........................................................................................................................11
4. ASSESSMENT
METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................11
4.1. Approach.....................................................................................................................11
4.2.
Sources of information ................................................................................................11
5. ASSESSMENT
FINDINGS .................................................................................................12
5.1.
INDICATORS MECHANISM ASSESSMENT..............................................................12
5.1.1
Atmosphere .........................................................................................................15
5.1.2
Biodiversity ..........................................................................................................15
5.1.3
Coasts and seas..................................................................................................17
5.1.4
Freshwater resources..........................................................................................20
5.1.5
Land and vegetation cover ..................................................................................21
5.1.6
Natural disasters .................................................................................................24
5.1.7
Sanitation and human health...............................................................................24
5.1.8
Waste ..................................................................................................................25
5.1.9
Tourism ...............................................................................................................25
5.1.10
Socioeconomics ..................................................................................................26
5.1.11
Environment and Sustainable Development .......................................................27
5.1.12
Governance.........................................................................................................32
5.2. CAPACITY
ASSESSMENT.........................................................................................38
5.2.1
Existing capacities and capacity building initiatives.............................................39
5.2.2
Systemic capacity................................................................................................41
5.2.3
Institutional capacity ............................................................................................43
5.2.4
Human resources ................................................................................................45
5.2.5
Data and information ...........................................................................................49
5.2.6
Technology..........................................................................................................51
5.2.7
Financial resources .............................................................................................53
6. GROUNDTRUTHING
EXERCISES ....................................................................................59
6.1. Dominican
Republic ....................................................................................................59
6.2. Barbados
....................................................................................................................64
6.3.
St. Vincent & The Grenadines.....................................................................................69
7. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................73
8. RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................................76
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...........................................................................................................80
REFERENCES ...........................................................................................................................81
ANNEXES...................................................................................................................................85
i
GEF-IWCAM
ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS
ACS
Association of Caribbean States
AGRRA
Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment
BPoA
Barbados Programme of Action for Sustainable Development of Small
Island Developing States
BSS Barbados
Statistical
Service
BWA
Barbados Water Authority
CANARI
Caribbean Natural Resources Institute
CAR/RCU
Caribbean Regional Coordinating Unit (UNEP)
CARDI
Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute
CAREC
Caribbean Epidemiology Centre
CARICOM Caribbean
Community
CARICOMP
Caribbean Coastal Marine Productivity Programme
CAST
Caribbean Alliance for Sustainable Tourism
CBD
Convention on Biological Diversity
CCCCC
Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre
CCD
Convention to Combat Desertification
CCDC
Caribbean Coastal Data Centre
CDERA
Caribbean Disaster Emergency Response Agency
CEHI
Caribbean Environmental Health Institute
CERMES
Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies
CFRAMP
CARICOM Fisheries Resources Assessment and Management
Programme
CIDA
Canadian International Development Agency
CIMH
Caribbean Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology
CITES
Convention on Trade in Endangered Species
CLAWRENET Caribbean Land and Water Resources Network
CMA
Caribbean Marine Atlas
CMS
Centre for Marine Studies
CPACC
Caribbean Planning for Adaptation to Climate Change Project
CRED
Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters
CRFM
CARICOM Regional Fisheries Mechanism
CRIS
Coastal Resource Information Systems
CRIS
Coastal Resources Information System
CSD
Commission on Sustainable Development (UN)
CTO
Caribbean Tourism Organization
CWSA
Central Water and Sewage Authority
CWWA
Caribbean Waste Water Association
CWWA
Caribbean Waste Water Association
CZM
Coastal Zone Management
CZMU
Coastal Zone Management Unit
DPSIR Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response
ECLAC
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean
EMA
Environmental Management Authority (Trinidad & Tobago)
EPD
Environmental Protection Department
EVI
Environment Vulnerability Index
FAO
Food and Agriculture Organization
GCRMN
Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network
ii
GEF-IWCAM
GEF
Global Environment Facility
GEO
Global Environment Outlook
GIS
Geographic Information System
GPA
Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine
Environment from Land-based Sources of Pollution
GPS
Global Positioning System
ICOM
Integrated Coastal and Oceans Management
ICRI
International Coral Reef Initiative
ICZM
Integrated Coastal Zone Management
IDB
Inter-American Development Bank
IITF
International Institute of Tropical Forestry
ILAC Latin
American and Caribbean Initiative for Sustainable Development
IMA
Institute of Marine Affairs (Trinidad & Tobago)
IOCARIBE-
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (Caribbean) Global
GOOS
Ocean Observing System
IODE
International Oceanographic Data and Information Exchange
ITTO
International Tropical Timber Organization
IUCN
World Conservation Union
IWCAM
Integrating Watershed and Coastal Areas Management
IWRM
Integrated Water Resource Management
JPOI
Johannesburg Plan of Implementation
MACC
Mainstreaming Adaptation to Climate Change
MDG
Millennium Development Goals
MEA Multilateral
Environment
Agreement
NALIN
National Land Information Project
NBSAP
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
NEPA
National Environment and Planning Agency (Jamaica)
NEPA
National Environment and Planning Agency
NSO
National Statistical Office
OAS
Organization of American States
OECS
Organization of Eastern Caribbean States
PAHO
Pan-American Health Organization
PC
Participating Country (in the GEF-IWCAM project)
REDESA
Network of Institutions and Experts on Social and Environmental
Statistics
ROLAC
Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean (UNEP)
SCCS
Standards Committee for Caribbean Statistics
SGD
St. George's Declaration of Principles for Environmental Sustainability
(OECS)
SIDS
Small Island Developing States
SLM Sustainable
Land
Management
SOPAC
South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission
SPAW
Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife Protocol
TNC
The Nature Conservancy
UNCED
UN Conference on Environment and Development
UNCSD
United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development
UNDESA
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs
UNDP
United Nations Development Programme
UNECLAC Economic Division of Latin America and the Caribbean
UNEP
United Nations Environment Programme
iii
GEF-IWCAM
UNFCCC
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
UNSD
UN Statistical Division
USGS
United States Geological Survey
UWI
University of the West Indies
VCD
Vector Control Division
WCMC
World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP)
WECAFC
Western Central Atlantic Fisheries Commission
WHO
World Health Organization
WRMA
Water Resources Management Authority
WSA
Water and Sanitation Authority
WSSD
World Summit on Sustainable Development
WTO
World Tourism Organization
iv
GEF-IWCAM
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A desk study that was conducted under the Project "Integrating Watershed and Coastal
Areas Management in Caribbean Small Island Developing States (IWCAM)", which is
funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF), co-implemented by the United
Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP), and co-executed by the Caribbean Environmental Health Institute
(CEHI) and the UNEP Caribbean Regional Coordinating Unit. (UNEP/CAR-RCU) The
objectives were to assess indicators mechanisms and capacity in the countries to utilize
and monitor indicators for the IWCAM approach, and to develop an indicators template
based on GEF International Waters indicators (Process, Stress Reduction, and
Environmental Status Indicators). Data and information sources included published and
unpublished documents and reports, internet searches, and a questionnaire distributed
among the countries. In order to validate the findings of the desk study, groundtruthing
was conducted in Barbados, Dominican Republic, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines.
A workshop to discuss the assessment findings was held in March 2008, in Ocho Rios,
Jamaica, and the report is available as one of the outputs of this study.
INDICATORS MECHANISMS
The results of the assessment are presented according to 12 themes, which reflect the
main issues of relevance to IWCAM, and which cover some of the main sustainability
concerns of the countries. Indicators/data and principal agencies and frameworks are
presented under each theme.
Atmosphere
National meteorological and hydrological datasets are among the most complete in all
the countries, and generally consist of long time series. The Caribbean Institute of
Meteorology and Hydrology maintains an archive of meteorological and hydrological
data from member countries. Arising from the GEF-funded Caribbean Planning for
Adaptation to Climate Change (CPACC) project, 18 sea level/climate monitoring
systems is the CARICOM Climate Change Centre, which is the official repository and
clearing house for regional climate change data. Countries that are Parties to the Kyoto
Protocol report on greenhouse gas emissions and inventory of greenhouse gases in
their national communications to the Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change. Monitoring of air quality is conducted in only a few of
the countries.
Biodiversity
The responsibility for the management of biological resources is fragmented among
several government ministries. A number of non-government organizations and
academic and research entities are also involved in biodiversity conservation and
biodiversity studies in the region. Biodiversity indicators have been proposed under a
number of national (e.g. National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans, regional (e.g.
1
GEF-IWCAM
Latin America and Caribbean Initiative - ILAC) and international frameworks (e.g.
biodiversity-related international conventions and protocols; Millennium Development
Goals). The Convention on Biological Diversity has compiled a large number of national
level indicators for biodiversity. The 2010 Biodiversity Indicators Partnership will
coordinate the development of a suite of indicators measuring progress towards the
2010 biodiversity target.
Coasts and seas
Fisheries: In all the PCs, the Department of Fisheries (or equivalent) routinely collects
fisheries landings statistics at the national level. Assessment of major commercial fish
stocks have been conducted on an ad hoc basis, using standard fisheries indicators.
Periodic assessment and monitoring of fisheries stocks are undertaken through the
Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism and by the Western Central Atlantic Fisheries
Commission, among others. The FAO, under its Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries, has provided guidelines for developing sustainability indicators for marine
capture fisheries. National catch data are submitted to the FAO, and are available by
countries in FAO online databases.
Coastal ecosystems: Countries are increasingly implementing monitoring programmes,
especially for coral reefs. The CPACC project developed coastal resources inventory
systems using a Geographic Information System (GIS) approach, and established coral
reef monitoring protocols. The Caribbean Coastal Marine Productivity Programme has
been monitoring coral reefs, mangroves, and seagrasses at a number of sites
throughout the region, including in eight of the participating countries (PCs). At the
international level, programmes for coral reef monitoring include Reef Check, the
International Coral Reef Initiative, and the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network.
Indicators related to mangroves at country level have been compiled by the United
Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) Forest Resource Assessment
thematic study on mangroves.
Water quality: Water quality is sporadically monitored in most of the countries, with few
countries routinely monitoring coastal water quality. Studies of coastal water quality are
undertaken by the national and regional institutions such as the Institute of Marine
Affairs (Trinidad and Tobago) and CEHI, using standard indicators. The UNEP Land-
based Sources Protocol (LBS) of the Cartagena Convention and the Global Programme
of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Sources of
Pollution (GPA) are important regional and international frameworks for the
development of benchmarks and indicators of coastal water quality.
Sea level: The CPACC project has installed 18 sea level/climate monitoring systems,
along with the related data management and information networks in 12 countries.
Freshwater resources
Monitoring programmes for freshwater for human use are among the most
comprehensive and best established in the countries. Monitoring is often carried out by
Ministries of Health and agencies responsible for water utilities. Several indicators are
2
GEF-IWCAM
routinely used in all the countries to monitor freshwater quality in ground and/or surface
water (bacteriological, chemical, and physical parameters) and quantity or availability.
The number of parameters monitored and the frequency of monitoring of freshwater
vary widely, and are dependent on the availability of human, financial, and other
resources in the respective countries. At the international level, the UNESCO World
Water Assessment Programme (World Water Development Report) and FAO Aquastat
and FAO Land and Water Development Division are among the principal sources of
data and indicators related to freshwater resources at country level.
Land use and vegetation cover
Countries are increasingly adopting the use of indicators on land use and vegetation
cover, as well as of land degradation, and are developing national capacity for use of
geo-referenced indicators. The larger countries generally have well-organized systems
for procuring land-use information. Existing databases relating to droughts, water use,
land degradation, and other physical or biophysical indicators generally cover only short
periods. Efforts to assist the countries in land cover mapping include the Caribbean
Vegetation and Landcover Mapping Initiative by The Nature Conservancy, International
Institute of Tropical Forestry, US Forest Service EROS Data Center, and the US
Geological Survey. The use of benchmarks and indicators in land degradation in the
Caribbean islands has received impetus from the UN Convention to Combat
Desertification. FAO is engaged in several ongoing efforts to update land use and
agriculture information for the Caribbean. The FAO State of the World's Forests Report
and Global Forest Resources Assessment provide forest indicators for some of the
countries.
Natural disasters
The Caribbean Small Island Developing States (SIDS) are highly vulnerable to extreme
climatic events. Common indicators relate to the incidence, intensity, as well as to the
social and economic impacts of natural disasters. Each country has a national agency
responsible for disaster preparedness and response. At the regional level, the
Caribbean Disaster Emergency Response Agency is the central disaster management
organization. The Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters maintains an
international database on disasters, with data available by country.
Sanitation and human health
The relevant Ministries and government departments collect information through
surveys for a number of indicators related to sanitation and human health. At the
international level, the major freshwater assessment programmes include the World
Health Organisation (WHO) United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) Joint
Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation and United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) World Water Assessment
Programme. The indicators used are based on data obtained from a number of sources,
including national surveys, global networks, and other UN and partner organizations.
These indicators are used to monitor the achievement of the relevant international
development targets. The biennial World Water Development Report aims to develop
indicators and monitors progress against targets for sanitation and wastewater. The
3
GEF-IWCAM
Caribbean Epidemiology Centre and the Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO)
are among the agencies that maintain databases on incidences of water-related
diseases.
Waste
Responsibility for waste management is shared among various agencies, depending on
the type of waste. Data for the development of pertinent indicators are available,
although limited in some of the countries, with the most commonly used including the
generation of waste by type and sector, waste treatment and disposal by method. The
LBS Protocol and the GPA are appropriate frameworks for development of benchmarks
and indicators for land-based pollution of the coastal zone.
Tourism
Data for a number of indicators related to tourism, including its social and economic
significance, are routinely collected. The identification of sustainable tourism indicators
is undertaken by the World Tourism Organization (WTO). The Caribbean Tourism
Organization (CTO) is collaborating with the Caribbean Alliance for Sustainable Tourism
(CAST) and others to identify suitable indicators for sustainable tourism. The Blue Flag
Programme rates the environmental quality of beaches and seeks to develop
sustainable development indicators on tourism. The CTO, Association of Caribbean
States (ACS), and Caribbean Epidemiology Centre (CAREC) are collaborating in an
initiative to develop indicators for the Sustainable Tourism Zone of the Caribbean.
Another tourism-related international organization is Green Globe, which benchmarks
its participants against specific Sector Benchmarking Indicators.
Socioeconomics
Socioeconomic factors are considered to be among the major driving forces of
environmental change. Population, demographic, and economic indicators have long
been in use in the countries. Most of the countries have relatively long time series of
demographic and socio-economic data, available at national level and by economic
sectors. The CARICOM Secretariat has compiled demographic and socioeconomic
indicators for its member states, while indicators for all the PCs are available through a
number of different sources, including UNDP Human Development Report and the
World Development Indicators (World Bank).
Environment and Sustainable Development
A number of national, regional, and international initiatives exist for the development of
indicators under the overarching theme of environment and sustainable development.
All the PCs are formulating sustainable development strategies and environmental
action plans (or their equivalent), and have made variable progress in identifying and
selecting associated indicators. Trends in a number of socioeconomic and
environmental indicators are reported in national state of environment reports and
environmental profiles. Indicator frameworks include the OECS St. George's
Declaration of Principles for Environmental Sustainability, Latin American and
Caribbean Initiative for Sustainable Development, Barbados Programme of Action for
4
GEF-IWCAM
Sustainable Development of SIDS and Mauritius Declaration and Strategy, and
Millennium Development Goals, targets, and indicators.
Governance
Governance indicators relate to institutional setting, policy/legislation,
technical/technological capability, stakeholder participation, etc. Among the governance
indicators are institutional and policy measures taken to implement the various
multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) of which the PCs are Parties.
Governance indicators could be placed in the GEF Process Indicators category. While
governance indicators are not explicitly mentioned in the various national frameworks,
these must be included and monitored in national IWCAM programmes.
CAPACITY ASSESSMENT
Development and implementation of an indicators mechanism requires capacity in a
number of aspects. An indicators mechanism requires monitoring and data collection to
calculate the indicators, and a mechanism for uptake of the information in decision-
making processes as well as for its reporting and dissemination to all stakeholders in an
open and transparent process. The assessment reviewed the existing capacities and
capacity development needs in the 13 PCs in relation to the systemic level, institutional
capacity, human resources, data and information, technology, and financial resources.
Existing capacities
All the PCs have the basic elements in place, although in varying stages of
development, for an IWCAM indicators mechanism. They include but are not limited to:
Government ministries and agencies; academic and research institutions; thematic
monitoring and assessment activities; and nascent national data collection and
management mechanisms. At the regional level capacities reside in several
institutions/organizations. A number of capacity building initiatives for environmental
statistics and indicators have been undertaken in the region, in collaboration with
regional and international organizations. As a result of these and other initiatives, some
capacity already exists in the PCs for indicators mechanisms development, although the
level of capacity varies among the countries. The existing capacity consists mainly of
capacity specifically for compilation of environmental statistics and indicators, and do
not focus on IWCAM indicators within an IWCAM framework. A number of capacity
gaps still remain.
Systemic capacity
Systemic capacities provide the enabling environment that promote or constrain the
development of capacity at the institutional and individual levels. Weakness and
deficiencies in the enabling environment for environmental monitoring and the
development and use of environmental indicators in the PCs has stymied the
development of a culture of, and capacities for, monitoring, evaluation and results-
based adaptive management. The absence of an overarching IWCAM framework in the
PCs, within which national development and decision-making processes take place has
far reaching implications for the development of IWCAM indicators mechanisms.
5
GEF-IWCAM
Institutional capacity
The institutional arrangements for natural resources management in general, and
IWCAM in particular, are characterized by multiple agencies and organizations, with
overlapping mandates and roles. National capacities for monitoring and systematic
observation vary with country, national agency, and the environmental resource or
system being monitored. Deficiencies in national institutional capacity are reflected by
inadequate equipment; insufficient financial resources; uncompetitive staff
remuneration; obstacles to effective staff recruitment and retention; inadequate and/or
un-sustained training; and limited coordination among agencies, among others. A
number of regional institutions and agencies exist that could contribute to IWCAM
indicators mechanisms (e.g. CARICOM, CEHI, Caribbean Institute of Meteorology and
Hydrology CIMH, UNEP CAR RCU). The lack of national and regional institutional
mechanisms to promote and coordinate the development of environmental indicators
mechanisms have been a major constraint.
Human resources
The skills and capacities required to establish and sustain a national IWCAM indicators
mechanism include knowledge of IWCAM concepts and approaches, of conceptual
frameworks for assessment, monitoring, and evaluation of IWCAM programmes, as well
as the skills and methodologies for selecting appropriate indicators, data collection and
analysis, interpretation of results, communicating and reporting of results, and their
utilization in adaptive management. In the PCs there is a pervasive lack of capacity to
develop indicators and undertake their monitoring, analysis, and reporting. Strategically
there is a need for a regional approach to the development of a cadre of trained
professionals to support the development and use of environmental indicators. This will
involve the development and introduction of continuing development programmes for
professionals in collaboration with a range of partners at national, regional, and
international levels. Human resource constraints in these areas might also be
addressed by adopting a regional or sub-regional model for the coordinated pooling
and/or sharing of trained staff with the assistance of the thematically appropriate
regional and/or inter-governmental agencies.
Data and information
An effective IWCAM indicators framework must be accompanied by supporting data and
information as well as appropriate data and information management systems and
analysis mechanisms to calculate, review, and revise the indicators on a continuous
basis. National policies for coordinated environmental data collection or national
development policies supported by explicitly identified environmental performance
indicators are rare in the PCs. As a result, monitoring and data collection have been
poorly funded and undertaken on an ad hoc or project basis. The data situation is
similar in the PCs: available data and information are usually scattered across various
agencies, and there are spatial and temporal gaps. Lack of standard methodologies for
data collection has resulted in often inconsistent and incompatible datasets. An
important issue relate to the quality control of data to ensure data reliability and
accuracy. Data handling and processing procedures have not kept pace with changes in
6
GEF-IWCAM
computer technology, data management, and decision support applications.
Furthermore, metadata and metadata standards are often lacking in the region.
Technology
In order to obtain accurate and timely data, a significant financial investment would be
required for transfer of technology and training. As mentioned above, new data
management, decision support applications, and computer technologies require
updated data collection, handling, and processing procedures, which has not taken
place. A substantial proportion of time-series data is stored in hard-copy formats. Full
benefit has not been taken of developing technological infrastructure for information
management. Much of the data relating to IWCAM has a strong spatial component and
GIS capabilities are important in managing and utilizing this information. All the PCs
have some capability for GIS, mainly related to land use. In the majority of cases the
introduction of Caribbean government agencies to GIS technology has been driven by
donor-funded technical assistance projects. Donor funded initiatives that provide
hardware and software without the requisite capacity development have given rise to
instances in which equipment has remained unused.
Financial resources
The lack of financial resources has been identified as one of the two most common
impeding factors for the development of both environment statistics and environmental-
economic accounting programmes. The majority of respondents to the survey indicated
that although data collection, processing and analysis activities were identified in annual
work plans and budgets, funding and staffing compliments were inadequate. While the
funds that are made available to government agencies with natural resource
management responsibilities tend to be sufficient to maintain staff compliments, they
may not meet the costs of implementation. The survey also revealed that data collection
and management activities identified in the annual budgets and work plans of
responding organizations received varying levels of financial support from their
respective governments. Indicators mechanisms have not historically been built into
programmes and projects, and as a result, budgetary allocation for this type of activity is
often not provided.
INDICATORS TEMPLATE
The indicators template constitutes Part II of the report. The selection of indicators for
the template was based on three main criteria: The objectives and expected outcomes
of the overall GEF-IWCAM project and of the demonstration projects; relevance to
regional and international frameworks; and the availability of data and statistics for
compiling the indicators. Six major IWCAM objectives, each with a number of issues
(see table below), were considered to be of interest under the project, based on the
project document. Core and supplementary indicators in each of the three GEF
indicators categories were arranged according to these objectives and issues. Among
the core indicators are those proposed under sub-regional, regional, and international
frameworks.
7
GEF-IWCAM
Major objectives and issues used to select stress reduction and environmental
status indicators for the template
IWCAM OBJECTIVE
ISSUE
1. Sustainable water resource use
Declining water resources; human health risks
2. Conservation/protection of
Forest loss; Land degradation; Coral reef, mangrove, seagress
ecosystems and natural living resources degradation/loss; Biodiversity loss; Degradation of water quality;
Beach loss; Unsustainable fisheries exploitation; Unsustainable
tourism development
3. Sustainable agricultural practices
Harmful agricultural practices
4. Pollution control/reduction
Solid waste; Industrial waste; Sewage/domestic wastewater;
human health risks; Atmospheric emissions
5. Improved water quality
Reduction in quality of coastal/marine waters; Reduction in
quality of freshwater
6. Reduction in exposure to natural
Increased vulnerability to natural disasters
disasters
The indicators template includes: Stress reduction indicators - core: 73, supplementary
28; Environmental status/socioeconomic indicators- core: 65, supplementary: 11;
Process indicators: 11 core indicators, with a number of supplementary indicators. Brief
descriptions are given for 17 core stress reduction indicators and 25 core environmental
state/socioeconomic indicators, the core process indicators.
CONCLUSION and RECOMMENDATIONS
The countries participating in the GEF-IWCAM project do not have monitoring
programmes and indicators mechanisms specifically linked to an IWCAM framework,
although a number of them plan to or have been developing indicators within other
national frameworks (e.g. National Sustainable Development Strategies; National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, National Environmental Action Plans), as well as
international frameworks (e.g. Millennium Development Goals MDGs, MEAs), and
which are pertinent to IWCAM. All the countries have some basic elements for
developing IWCAM indicators mechanisms, including relevant ministries and other
agencies, trained personnel (in some of them), data and information for a large number
of environmental and socioeconomic variables, elements of monitoring programmes,
and existing indicators, all of which could be used as a baseline to develop IWCAM
indicators mechanisms. The basis for such a mechanism also exists at the regional
level through a number of regional entities, as well as at the international levels in a
number of initiatives to develop environmental indicators.
A number of capacity gaps exist in several areas, and need to be addressed. The
countries have been engaged in a number of capacity building initiatives for
environmental statistics, but progress has been disparate, with the larger countries
and/or those with greater resources being more advanced than the others.
Opportunities should be explored for bringing all these indicator initiatives under a
common, well-coordinated framework or mechanism, for which IWCAM provides a good
opportunity. A number of the PCs have advanced indicators initiatives, and could assist
the other PCs in developing indicator frameworks. This means that there is already a
substantial basis in the region to provide the momentum for developing IWCAM
indicator mechanisms and the required capacity in the PCs.
8
GEF-IWCAM
A number of recommendations are proposed for development of national indicators
mechanisms in the PCs and strengthening the required capacity. Timeframes are also
proposed for implementing the recommendations: short-term (within 2 years) and
medium- to long-term (5 to 10 years). Actions to be implemented on the short-term
include:
- Each PC should identify a suite of basic, priority IWCAM indicators that address
national needs and priorities, i.e., develop national indicators templates. These
indicators should be administratively practical and cost effective;
- A minimum environmental monitoring system and required capacity for using these
indicators should be evaluated and the cost of such a system determined. Existing
data should be used as a baseline for the monitoring programme;
- A set of core indicators should be selected and tested in pilot studies in one of the
PCs with more advanced indicators initiatives and capacity, and lessons
disseminated to other PCs;
- The required capacity for implementing the indicators framework should be
determined and options and opportunities for strengthening capacity identified and
pursued, including creation of a cadre of trained personnel at national/regional
levels, and pooling of resources;
- National and regional data and information management systems should be
strengthened.
Medium- to long- term actions include addressing a number of deficiencies, including at
the systemic and institutional levels. These would include policy and institutional
measures at the national and regional levels required to underpin the IWCAM indicators
mechanisms.
1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a desk study conducted under the Project "Integrating
Watershed and Coastal Areas Management in Caribbean Small Island Developing
States (IWCAM)", which is funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF), co-
implemented by the United Nations Development Project (UNDP) and the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and co-executed by the Caribbean
Environmental Health Institute (CEHI) and the UNEP Caribbean Regional Coordinating
Unit (UNEP CAR-RCU). The overall objective of the Project is to strengthen the
commitment and capacity of the 13 participating Small Island Developing States (SIDS)
to implement an integrated approach to the management of watersheds and coastal
areas. In adopting IWCAM as a management approach, the countries will be required to
re-orient their systems and mechanisms as well as address the issue of policy and
legislative re-alignment to fully mainstream IWCAM at the national level.
The underlying concept of IWCAM is the management of watersheds and coastal areas
as a single management unit, using an approach that integrates economic, social,
cultural, governance, and environmental issues. This integrated approach implies the
9
GEF-IWCAM
involvement of all traditional sectors of economic and government activity, such as
economic planning, agriculture, health, energy, water, natural resources, industry,
education, and the environment at all levels government, non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), civil society, and the private sector.
As there is a wide range of natural forces and processes operating in watersheds and
coastal zones, there is a multitude of factors and variables that should be measured to
assess and monitor the state of the systems involved. In these small island states,
nearly the entire population lives and all economic activities take place on or near to
coastal areas. Because of their small physical size, the entire island mass is often
considered as coastal. As such, small island states need environmental management
that considers the whole island system, from ridge to reef. This concept is embodied in
the Island Systems Management approach (Nichols and Chase, 1998), which is seen
as the new paradigm for the management of the natural resources of SIDS. This
approach is structured around a participatory, multi-sectoral strategy within an
appropriate institutional and legal framework for integrated approach to natural resource
use and management, and was adopted by the First Ministerial Meeting (in 1997) on the
Implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action for Sustainable Development of
SIDS (BPoA) and further endorsed in the Mauritius Strategy.
Against this background, it is clear that an assessment of indicators mechanisms must
take into consideration the entire island system and a number of relevant environmental
and sustainable development themes. Effective monitoring of IWCAM programmes also
requires that the countries possess the necessary capacity (human, financial,
technological, etc.). Gaps in capacity must be identified and where capacity is lacking, it
must be developed and strengthened. Another component of this exercise focuses on
assessment of capacity in the countries to utilize and monitor indicators for IWCAM.
2. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE
The main objectives of this assessment were to:
- Conduct a review of national and regional indicators mechanisms for IWCAM and
identify gaps and weaknesses. This includes a desk exercise to review literature
on what participating countries have in place related to indicators.
- Identify Process, Stress Reduction, and Environmental Status/Water Resources
Indicators, and prepare a draft template of indicators (based on the evaluations
and assessments conducted).
- Conduct rapid assessment (groundtruthing) in 3 representative PCs, to confirm
and validate the findings of desk exercise and to update any previous work.
- Assess relevant institutional infrastructure/administrative protocols related to
indicator monitoring in PCs.
- Assess relevant human resource capacities and training needs related to
indicator monitoring in PCs.
- Make recommendations in order to bring capacity up to a level where indicators
can be utilized, manipulated, and shared among PCs.
10
GEF-IWCAM
3. OUTPUTS
The outputs of this assignment are:
Assessment Report containing findings of the assessment and evaluation of existing
indicators framework and mechanisms and of institutional and human capacities in the
PCs, and recommendations for strengthening capacities (Part I);
Preliminary Indicator Template of recommended Environmental Status/Water
Resources, Stress Reduction and Process Indicators (Part II);
Regional Workshop and workshop report.
This document presents Part 1, the Assessment Report.
4. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
4.1. Approach
In this study, an indicator mechanism is considered as consisting of the relevant
institutional framework, monitoring programme and associated indicators used, as well
as observation/data collection activities and data and information to calculate the
indicators. Assessment of indicator mechanisms would not be complete without the
consideration of the availability of data and information to support the indicators, and the
institutional mechanisms for implementing them. In general, established long term
monitoring programmes do not exist, but data and statistics are collected that could be
used to calculate indicators. These are also considered in this study. In addition, since
most of the countries do not have established IWCAM (or ICZM or its variants)
programmes, it was necessary to examine monitoring activities and data collection
within other programmes and initiatives that are relevant to IWCAM. At the regional and
international levels, while a large number of indicator initiatives exist, this report focuses
only on the major ones that are of relevance to IWCAM and/or in which the PCs
participate or contribute. Within government agencies, monitoring programmes are
conducted within the development and management framework of the respective
sectors.
The assessment of indicator mechanisms and capacity focused on identification of
existing monitoring programmes and associated indicators, data collection,
environmental, and other statistics and data/information management systems to
support these indicators, which were considered to be of relevance to IWCAM. Based
on the Island Systems Management approach, it was necessary to take a broad
approach to the indicators assessment, to include a wide number and diversity of
themes. This also reflects the integrated approach required for the management of
watersheds and coastal areas, particularly in SIDS.
4.2. Sources of information
11
GEF-IWCAM
Information for the indicators mechanism assessment and capacity assessment were
obtained from a variety of sources:
i) The desk study involved the review of published and unpublished reports,
preliminary IWCAM reports prepared for the IWCAM project, project reports, and
technical documents, country reports prepared under the BPoA, regional and
international organizations (e.g. CARICOM, UN organizations) and multinational
environmental conventions, national, regional and global state of environment
reports prepared under the UNEP Global Environment Outlook (GEO) programme,
and the UNEP Initiative for Latin America and the Caribbean (ILAC) on indicators
(UNEP/World Bank/University of Costa Rica 2004). Internet searches were
conducted for information on past and current initiatives involving the development
and/or assessment of indicators mechanisms. A valuable source of information was
the report of a workshop on Environment Statistics organized by the United Nations
Statistics Division (UNSD) in collaboration with the Caribbean Community
(CARICOM) Secretariat in Belize in 2000.
ii) A questionnaire was distributed by electronic mail at the national and regional levels
to solicit information on existing monitoring programmes, indicators, and existing
capacity and gaps. Following the first survey, a shorter questionnaire was distributed
to encourage further responses (Annex 1). Prospective respondents were identified
by the IWCAM Project Coordinating Unit (PCU) and the consultants, on the basis of
their involvement in watershed and coastal areas management and/or data
collection, monitoring, or research in watersheds or coastal areas. Responses were
received from 13 agencies in 9 of the participating countries, and from three regional
institutions (Annex 2).
iii) Groundtruthing was undertaken to verify the findings of the desktop study and
questionnaire survey in three representative countries: Barbados (representative of
the larger English-speaking countries and which has an advanced indicators
programme); Dominican Republic (representative of the non-English speaking
SIDS); and St. Vincent and the Grenadines (representative of the OECS and the
Bahamas - smaller islands). Visits to each of these countries were undertaken by the
consultants. Results of the groundtruthing exercises are given in Section 6.
5. ASSESSMENT
FINDINGS
5.1. INDICATORS
MECHANISM ASSESSMENT
The major national, regional, and international frameworks, including MEAs in which the
countries participate, and under which indicators are required for monitoring and
reporting purposes, are presented in Table 1. The results of the assessment are
presented according to 12 themes and sub-themes (Tables 2 to 13), which reflect the
main issues of relevance to IWCAM, and which cover some of the main sustainability
concerns of the countries. In these tables, indicators/data and principal agencies and
frameworks are presented under each theme. Responses to the survey are summarized
12
GEF-IWCAM
in Table 14. All responses are included by country and theme in one table for
comparative purposes. It must be noted that some of these responses might not reflect
the situation at the country level, and relate only to a particular theme (s), depending on
the respondent agency. This is as a result of responses being received from some
individual agencies, and not from all the relevant agencies within each country or
synthesized at the country level.
Because of the relatively large number of PCs involved in this project, the even larger
number of themes and sub-themes and indicators/variables, as well as the wide
disparity in the situation regarding indicators and data among the PCs, it is not possible
to present the assessment results in detail for individual countries and by themes.
However, Tables 2 - 13 provide an insight into the indicators and data available, as well
as major sources, which readers are encouraged to consult. Table 14 provides further
details by country and themes.
13
GEF-IWCAM
Table 1. Major national, regional/international frameworks of relevance to IWCAM, in which the countries participate and
under which indicators are required for monitoring and reporting.
(BPoA: Barbados Programme of Action; LBS: Land-based Protocol; SPAW: Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife Protocol; CBD:
Convention on Biological Diversity; CCD: Convention on Combating Desertification; UNFCCC: UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change; CITES: Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species; SGD: St. George's Declaration; MDGs:
Millennium Development Goals; NEMS: National Environmental Management Strategy; NEAPS: National Environmental Action
Plans)
Country BPoA
Cartag
ena Convention
CBD CCD UNFCCC Kyoto
CITES SGD MDGs Nat'l
SD
NEMS/
LBS SPAW Oil
Protocol
strategy
NEAPS
Spill
Antigua &
x x x x x x
x
x
x
x x x
Barbuda
Bahamas x
x x x
x
x
x x x
Barbados x
x
x x x x
x
x
x x x
Cuba x
x
x x x x
x
x
x x
Dominica x
x x x x
x
x
x
x x x
Dominican
x x x
x x x x
x
x
x x x
Republic
Grenada x
x x x x
x
x
x
x x x
Haiti x
x x x
x
x x x
Jamaica x
x
x x x x
x
x
x x x
St. Kitts & x
x x x
x
x
x
x x x
Nevis
St. Lucia
x
x
x x x x
x
x
x
x x x
St. Vincent &
x x
x x x x
x
x
x x x
Grenadines
Trinidad &
x x x
x x x x
x
x
x x x
Tobago
14
GEF-IWCAM
5.1.1 Atmosphere
Meteorological departments, government ministries (e.g. Ministry of Agriculture), as well
as airport authorities routinely measure meteorological and hydrological parameters. A
number of indicators under this theme have historically existed in all the countries,
especially those related to climate (Tables 2 and 14). National meteorological and
hydrological datasets are among the most complete in all the countries, and generally
cover relatively long time frames. CIMH maintains an archive of meteorological and
hydrological data from member countries, dating back to about 1970 but some earlier
records, particularly for rainfall, are also available.
Under the GEF-funded CPACC project, 18 sea level/climate monitoring systems, along
with the related data management and information networks, were installed in 12
countries. Arising out of this project is the CARICOM Community Climate Change
Centre (CCCCC), which is the official repository and clearing house for regional climate
change data.
The only report of monitoring of air quality was obtained in the survey response from the
Jamaica National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA) and the Trinidad and
Tobago Environmental Management Authority (EMA). These agencies monitor a
number of chemical compounds and particulate matter in air. The United States
Geological Survey (USGS) Centre for Coastal and Watershed Studies has been
conducting studies on Saharan dust reaching the Caribbean and its impact on corals.
Dust sampling stations are located in Barbados and Trinidad and Tobago. Countries
that are Parties to the Kyoto Protocol report on greenhouse gas emissions and
inventory of greenhouse gases in their national communications to the Conference of
the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Table 2. Atmosphere
Sub-theme
Indicator/data collected
Principal agencies/frameworks; data sources
Climate
Rainfall
CIMH (www.cimh.org)
Air Temperature
Air
Air quality (ambient pollution;
National level; USGS monitoring sites in Barbados
emissions)
and Trinidad (Saharan dust & impacts on corals)
Energy
Greenhouse gas emissions; GHG
Kyoto Protocol; Montreal Protocol
inventories; Ozone Depleting
Substances
Energy consumption
5.1.2 Biodiversity
The responsibility for the management of biological resources is fragmented among
several government ministries. There are also a number of non-government
organizations and academic and research entities involved in biodiversity conservation
and biodiversity studies in the region. Biodiversity indicators have been proposed under
15
GEF-IWCAM
a number of national (e.g. National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans - NBSAP),
regional (e.g. ILAC); and international frameworks (e.g. biodiversity-related international
conventions and protocols; Millennium Development Goals - MDGs).
The Convention on Biological Diversity Conference of Parties (CBD COP) has identified
22 indicators at the global level for assessing progress towards the 2010 biodiversity
targets, 13 of which are ready for immediate testing, while the others require further
development (Annex 3). The 2010 Biodiversity Indicators Partnership (2010BIP), a
GEF-funded project, has been launched. The Partnership will coordinate the delivery
and communication of a suite of indicators measuring progress towards the 2010
biodiversity target. Activities under this project will include developing and delivering the
range of indicators showing progress towards the 2010 target at a global scale and
increasing the capacity of national governments and regional organizations to develop
and use biodiversity indicators in the context of the 2010 target. The CBD has compiled
a large number of national level indicators.
Within the context of the CBD, indicators may be required to show status and trends of
biodiversity, progress on the implementation of the Convention, and the effectiveness of
the measures taken by the countries. In their reporting to the CBD, countries are asked
to provide information on indicators used in relation to the CBD targets, including
institutional measures undertaken to implement the Convention, which could be
interpreted as process indicators. Similarly, the countries that are Parties to the other
biodiversity-related MEAs and protocols (e.g. Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife
Protocol - SPAW - of the Cartagena Convention, Ramsar, CITES, Natural Heritage) are
required to submit national reports on progress made in their implementation, which
could be demonstrated by the use of appropriate indicators (Table 3).
The development of biodiversity indicators are at various stages of progress in the
different countries (Table 14). Eight of the countries have developed NBSAPs, within
the framework of the CBD. Most of these NBSAP do not specifically mention the
development and use of indicators in any detail, with few exceptions such as Barbados
and Grenada, which have proposed a number of key indicators for monitoring changes
in the environment and progress in achieving the objectives of their respective action
plans. Barbados has identified five indicators for measuring biodiversity in the context of
sustainable development.
At the national/local level, a substantial amount of data is available in descriptive
formats (e.g. presence/absence of a particular species). The Inter-American Biodiversity
Information Network (IABIN) was created in 1996 as an initiative of the Santa Cruz
Summit of the Americas meeting of Heads of State. It is developing an Internet-based
platform to give access to scientifically credible biodiversity information currently
scattered throughout the world in different institutions. IABIN's Five-year Project
Implementation Plan has a focus on the collection, exchange and use of biodiversity
data. Elements of the programme involve assisting countries to establish national
databases and the development of an information structure for data exchange. UNEP-
World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) and the World Conservation Union
16
GEF-IWCAM
(IUCN) are among the international organizations engaged in compiling databases on
species and protected areas (marine and terrestrial). These online databases provide
access to country-level data for most of the SIDS, although there are spatial and
temporal gaps in data (Table 3). Additionally, the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID) is funding the PERB project which plans on working with OECS
countries in the identification and management of indicators related to biodiversity.
Table 3. Biodiversity
Sub-theme
Indicator/data collected
Principal agencies/frameworks; data sources
Habitats
Protected areas (nos; % total
CBD (www.cbd.int/indicators/testedindicators.shtml); NBSAP;
habitat area); extent of
RAMSAR; CITES; UNEP-WCMC/IUCN world database of
loss/damage to ecosystems;
protected areas (www.unep-wcmc.org/wdpa/);
habitat area
IUCN (www.iucn.org); Global Biodiversity Assessment 2002
Species
Known/threatened/endangered (CBD); Country profiles (www.cbd.int/countries/default.shtml);
species
NBSAP (www.cbd.int/doc/world/default.asp);
IABIN (www.iabin.net/index.php);
SPAW Protocol; CCA, CANARI
5.1.3 Coasts and seas
Fisheries: In all the PCs, the Department of Fisheries (or equivalent) routinely collects
fisheries landings (by weight) of major species, and to a lesser extent, fishing effort data
(e.g. number of fishing vessels) at the national level (Table 14). Commonly used
indicators of the status of exploited fish stocks include landings (total and by major
species), catch rates (catch/unit fishing effort), maximum sustainable yield, and mean
sizes. There are uncertainties in these data, arising from a number of factors including
aggregation of species, under-reporting of catches, difficulties brought about by the
artisanal nature of the fisheries in the PCs, poor documentation of fishing effort, etc.
Catch production data are submitted to the FAO, and are available by countries in
online databases, including through the Sea Around Us Project of the Fisheries Centre,
University of British Colombia. Through this project, total catch and catch by major
species by country have been reconstructed from 1950 - 2003, and are available online
(Table 4a). Recording of size frequencies, mean sizes, length-weight relationships, and
trophic status of the catch is not conducted on a regular basis.
Assessments of major commercial fish stocks have been conducted on an ad hoc basis,
and provide information for a number of fisheries indicators. Much of the fisheries
assessment activities in the CARICOM countries have been conducted under the
CARICOM Fisheries Resources Assessment and Management Programme (CFRAMP).
Assessments of some of the main fisheries (shrimp and groundfish, large pelagics,
wahoo, dolphinfish, reef fish, flying fish, conch, lobster) have been conducted under
CFRAMP and the Western Central Atlantic Fisheries Commission (WECAFC). Periodic
assessment and monitoring of these stocks continue through the Caribbean Regional
Fisheries Mechanism (CRFM), which was established under CFRAMP, and by
WECAFC ad hoc working groups (Shrimp and Groundfish Resources in the Brazil-
Guianas Shelf, Caribbean Spiny Lobster, Flying fish of the Eastern Caribbean, and
Queen Conch). The FAO, under its Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (which
17
GEF-IWCAM
has been adopted by the PCs), has provided guidelines for developing sustainability
indicators for marine capture fisheries (FAO 1999).
Most of the countries have national fisheries management plans, but the level of
development, implementation, monitoring and enforcement varies. At the sub-regional
level, the OECS are developing a Fisheries Management and Development Strategy
and Implementation Plan for this area
(http://www.oecs.org/esdu/documents/Fisheries%20Strategy.pdf). CARICOM is also
developing a common fisheries policy for its member states (http://www.caricom.org).
Table 4a. Coasts and Seas: Fisheries
Sub-theme
Indicator/data collected
Principal agencies/frameworks; data sources
Fisheries
Fisheries landings; mean size; species
CFRAMP; CRFM (www.caricom-fisheries.com);
abundance
FAO State of the World Fisheries & Aquaculture;
FAO Yearbook of Fisheries Statistics; FISHSTAT
Plus; Figis (www.fao.org); Indicators for sustainable
development of fisheries
(www.fao.org/docrep/W4745E/w4745e0f.htm)
Mean trophic level of catch
Univ. British Columbia Fisheries Centre Sea Around
(adopted by CBD as an indicator)
Us project (www.seaaroundus.org)
Coastal ecosystems: Historically, studies on coastal habitats such as coral reefs,
mangroves, and sea grass beds have been conducted on an ad hoc, project basis by
government ministries, and academic and research institutions, with many of them
focusing on species inventories. More recently, however, countries are increasingly
implementing longer-term monitoring programmes, especially for coral reefs, in various
locations using indicators such as live coral cover, algal cover, and incidence of disease
and coral bleaching (Tables 4b and 14).
Among the achievements of the CPACC project were coastal resources inventory
systems based on a GIS approach and establishment of coral reef monitoring protocols,
which resulted in a significant increase in monitoring and early warning capabilities in
the countries. Two primary indicators were identified: change in live coral over time and
the percentage of bleached coral cover. The most comprehensive study on the state of
the region's coral reefs is the publication `Reefs at Risk in the Caribbean' (Burke and
Maidens 2004), which also provides information on threat levels from a number of land-
based sources. The Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment (AGRRA) programme
has conducted studies on the status of coral reefs and reef fish abundance in a number
of locations throughout the Caribbean, using standard indicators and protocols. At the
international level, programmes for coral reef monitoring include Reefcheck
(www.reefcheck.org), the International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI) and the Global Coral
Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN). Coral reefs at a number of sites in the region are
monitored using standard protocols, and online databases and map-based products at
country level are available on the Reefcheck website. These data could be used to
develop indicators of coral reef health.
18
GEF-IWCAM
Since 1993, the Caribbean Coastal Marine Productivity Programme (CARICOMP) has
been monitoring coral reefs, mangroves, and seagrasses at a number of sites
throughout the region, including in eight of the PCs. Data on biological and
environmental parameters are collected according to prescribed methods on a daily,
weekly, and twice-annual basis throughout the region using the same indicators and
monitoring protocols. Monitoring programmes of coastal habitats at the country level
include that of the Institute of Marine Affairs (IMA) of Trinidad and Tobago at a number
of localities in the country.
Indicators related to mangroves at country level have been compiled by the Forest
Resource Assessment 2005 thematic study on mangroves (FAO 2006), which was
coordinated by FAO and co-funded by the International Tropical Timber Organization
(ITTO). It provides an overview of the current extent of mangroves, their species
composition, uses and threats, and changes in the extent of mangroves over time for
the 124 countries or areas in which they exist, including the PCs. Data on mangrove
extent (estimated) is submitted by the countries to the FAO and used in its Global
Mangrove Assessment. The database by country is available through the FAO website
(Table 4b). Despite the economic and social implications of ongoing decline in
mangrove cover across the Caribbean region, there is little current data on the extent
and status of mangroves on which informed planning and policy decisions can be
based. The "most recent data" for 11 of the 14 CARICOM countries is over 10 years old.
Only Jamaica and St. Lucia have data that were collected after 1996
(http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file=/docrep/007/j1533e/j1533e00.htm
).
Table 4b: Coasts and Seas: Coastal Ecosystems
Sub-theme
Indicator/data collected
Principal agencies/frameworks; data sources
Coral reefs
Coral cover; algal cover; reef fish
CARICOMP (www.mona.uwi.edu/cms/caricomp.htm;
abundance; bleaching; diseases; socio-
www.ccdc.org.jm/caricomp.html); Reefs at Risk in the
economics
Caribbean; AGRRA (coral.aoml.noaa.gov/agra/); UNEP-
WCMC (www.unep-wcmc.org/GIS/coraldis/index.cfm);
Reefcheck (www.reefcheck.org);
GCRMN (www.gcrmn.org/default.aspx)
Seagrass
Areal extent, growth, productivity
CARICOMP; UNEP-WCMC World Atlas of Seagrasses
(www.unep-wcmc.org/marine/seagrassatlas/index.htm)
Mangroves
Areal extent, growth, productivity
FAO Global Forest Assessment; FAO Status & Trends in
Mangroves; FAO country mangrove extent
(www.fao.org/docrep/007/j1533e/J1533E03.htm#P1966_3
7230); UNEP-WCMC World Mangrove Atlas (bure.unep-
wcmc.org/imaps/marine/mangroves/viewer.htm);
CARICOMP
Beaches
Beach profiles (erosion/accretion)
National/local level
Water quality: Coastal water quality indicators are used in all the countries (Tables 4c
and 14), although water quality is sporadically measured in most of the countries, with
few countries routinely monitoring coastal water quality, except in the more popular
tourist beaches. The larger countries such as Cuba have a national network of
monitoring stations for both marine and fresh water. The GEF-IWCAM regional
synthesis report noted the absence of appropriate water quality standards and
guidelines for each of the uses of marine waters such as contact recreation,
propagation of marine life, protection of marine ecosystems, and assimilation of waste.
19
GEF-IWCAM
Studies of coastal water quality are undertaken by CEHI, using standard indicators. The
LBS Protocol of the Cartagena Convention, which is administered by UNEP CAR/RCU
in Jamaica, and the UNEP GPA are important regional and international frameworks for
the development of benchmarks and indicators of coastal water quality. Standards for
coastal water quality have been established by WHO and PAHO, but are not fully
implemented in the PCs.
Table 4c: Coasts and Seas: Water Quality
Sub-theme
Indicator/data collected
Principal agencies/frameworks;
(examples)
data sources
Water quality
BOD, COD
UNEP GPA; UNEP RCU Cartagena
Coliform
Convention LBS Protocol; CEHI;
Dissolved oxygen
National/local level
Turbidity
Nutrients
Chemical pollutants
pH, temperature
Sea level: Monitoring of sea level (Table 4d) is gaining momentum in the region, with
the installation of tidal gauges in a number of the PCs. As previously mentioned, the
CPACC project has installed 18 sea level/climate monitoring systems, along with the
related data management and information networks in 12 countries. Sea level is also
monitored by the UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (Caribbean)
Global Ocean Observing System (IOCARIBE-GOOS).
Table 4d: Coasts and Seas: Sea Level
Sub-theme
Indicator/data collected
Principal agencies/frameworks; data sources
Sea level;
Mean sea level; mean SST
CARICOM Climate Change Centre
SST
(//caribbeanclimate.bz/news.php); CPACC; IPCC; IOCARIBE-
GOOS
Integrated Coastal and Oceans Management (ICOM): IOC/UNESCO has produced a
toolkit on indicators for integrated coastal and ocean management (UNESCO 2006;
http//ioc3.unesco.org/icam). IOC has embarked on a pilot project to develop a marine
atlas for Caribbean SIDS, through its International Oceanographic Data and Information
Exchange programme. The atlas will depend heavily on indicators and supporting data
and information.
5.1.4 Freshwater resources
Monitoring programmes for freshwater for human use are among the most
comprehensive and best established in the countries, as a consequence of its
significance for human basic needs and human health. Several indicators are routinely
used in all the countries to monitor freshwater quality in ground and/or surface water
(bacteriological, chemical, and physical parameters) and quantity or availability. Focus
is essentially on meeting the required health standards for drinking water. A number of
the countries also monitor salinity in groundwater aquifers, where there is concern about
saline intrusion. Table 5 provides information on data related to freshwater.
20
GEF-IWCAM
The number of parameters monitored and the frequency of monitoring of freshwater
vary widely, and are dependent on the availability of human, financial, and other
resources in the respective countries (Table 14). For instance, the Water Resources
Authority (Water and Sewerage Authority of Trinidad and Tobago) regularly monitors at
least 18 water quality parameters throughout the country, including petroleum
hydrocarbon concentration (survey responses from WASA Trinidad & Tobago, and
Dept. Natural Resources and the Environment, Tobago; GEF-IWCAM Country Report).
In Cuba, the National Institute of Hydraulic Resources operates a water quality
observation network throughout the country. Similarly, in the Dominican Republic, the
National Hydrographic Institute (INDRHI) monitors the quality and quantity of fresh
water resources. In contrast, in some of the smaller countries, fewer indicators are
used, e.g. faecal coliform, nitrates, and water levels (survey responses from St. Kitts
and Nevis; GEF-IWCAM National Reports).
The responsible national agencies include water supply and sanitation agencies (e.g.
Water and Sewerage Authority, Water Corporation), as well as Ministry of Health. Water
quality standards set by the WHO are routinely used in these countries. The water and
sanitation authority in the various countries have fairly detailed databases on production
and abstraction/consumption of freshwater. At the international level, the UNESCO
World Water Assessment Programme (World Water Development Report) and FAO
Aquastat and FAO Land and Water Development Division are among the principal
sources of data and indicators related to freshwater resources at country level.
Table 5. Freshwater
Sub-theme Indicator/data collected
Principal agencies/frameworks; data sources
(examples)
Water
Coliform (total, fecal)
National/local level; CEHI;
quality
Nitrate, nitrite conc.
World Water Assessment Programme (UNESCO) World
BOD, COD
Water Development Report; FAO Aquastat
Heavy metals
(www.fao.org/ag/agl/aglw/aquastat/dbase/index.stm); CIMH
Sediments
Water
Ground water level
availability
Stream flow
and usage
Renewable water resources
Annual withdrawals, consumption by
sector (domestic, irrigation, etc.)
5.1.5 Land and vegetation cover
A number of agencies collect data on land and forest resources (Tables 6 and 14).
Countries are increasingly adopting the use of indicators pertaining to land use and
vegetation cover, as well as of land degradation, and are developing national capacity
for use of geo-referenced indicators. All the PCs have a Ministry with departments
responsible for agriculture, land, and forestry. The status of information for land use
planning is very different when comparing the larger states such as Jamaica and
Trinidad and Tobago, with the other countries. The larger countries have generally have
well-organized systems for procuring land-use information, and for integrating,
21
GEF-IWCAM
analyzing, and applying this information towards development planning. In the smaller
states, land-use information is spread out among various government ministry
departments (e.g. housing, agriculture, land evaluation, town, and county planning). In
the area of forestry Jamaica produces comprehensive forest cover information while a
number of the OECS members (Dominica, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines,
Grenada) have developed forest inventories or possess dated forest cover maps. By
comparison, there is no recent forest cover information available for Trinidad and
Tobago (from 1981), Barbados, Montserrat, and St. Kitts and Nevis.
In general, existing databases relating to droughts, water use, land degradation, and
other physical or biophysical indicators cover only short periods. Where longer time
series of data have been collected, the data resides externally, often in universities or
former colonial offices (Murray, undated1). Land degradation data for the Eastern
Caribbean is even more scant. Apart from crude geological maps of soil types and
characteristics found in Environmental Profiles of the islands, not much is published
about land degradation in the English Speaking Caribbean. Although
Ministries/departments of Agriculture in the various islands periodically conduct
agricultural censuses, none of the records include any reference to loss of topsoil, soil
fertility, structure, or integrity. Landslide hazard maps for St. Vincent were produced in
the 1980s under the Organization of American States (OAS). Similar maps exist for
other CARICOM countries including Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, and Antigua and
Barbuda.
There are a number of efforts and initiatives to assist the countries in land cover
mapping. Among these is an initiative to produce vegetation/land cover maps for the
Caribbean islands (Caribbean Vegetation and Landcover Mapping Initiative) by The
Nature Conservancy (TNC), International Institute of Tropical Forestry (IITF), US Forest
Service EROS Data Center, and the USGS. These maps are based on available
Landsat Thematic Mapper satellite images, other remote sensed data, and a
standardized vegetation classification system for the greater Caribbean region, based
on earlier work by UNESCO. A region-wide standard vegetation classification system
and a preliminary Atlas of existing vegetation/land cover maps for the Caribbean islands
have been completed. Past work has mapped land cover and forest formations for
Jamaica and Dominica. Recent work has included a pioneering international effort to
map land cover and forest formations of five countries (St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent
and the Grenadines, St. Lucia, Grenada, and Barbados).
FAO is engaged in several ongoing efforts to update land use and agriculture
information for the Caribbean. Among other efforts, FAO has developed a global
database on the state of soil, water, and plant nutrient resources in the Caribbean as
part of its Gateway to Land and Water Information project. This PROCICARIBE-
managed database is housed at the Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development
Institute (CARDI). PROCICARIBE also manages the Caribbean Land and Water
1 Physical and Bio-physical Indicators of Drought and Desertification in the Caribbean. R.Reynold Murray (unpubl)
22
GEF-IWCAM
Resources Network (CLAWRENET), which has developed a regional GIS database of
national land and water resources.
The countries occasionally conduct agricultural censuses, using standard indicators
under the FAO Programme for the World Census of Agriculture. The last round of
censuses was conducted in 1996 2005. FAO has also assisted Antigua and Barbuda,
Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, and St. Vincent and the
Grenadines to develop a Land Resources Information System which comprises a GIS
package (ArcView 8.1), as well as a database management system, to enter and
manage land attribute data and integrate the data with the GIS software.
FAO works with member countries to support the development and implementation of
national forest monitoring systems. FAO maintains an online database of national forest
statistics (Table 6), which are obtained through national surveys and other sources. The
FAO State of the World's Forests Report and Global Forest Resources Assessment
provide indicators such as forest area and area change over time, for some of the
countries. The data have been reported by the countries to FAO and are available
online.
The use of benchmarks and indicators in land degradation is a relatively recent
development in the Caribbean islands, with impetus from the UN Convention to Combat
Desertification (CCD). All the countries are Parties to the CCD, and are in the process
of developing National Action Plans, most of which have proposed benchmarks and
indicators related to land degradation and progress in implementation of this
convention. These countries are also required to submit national reports to the
Convention, which include information on biophysical indicators related to desertification
and drought, including vegetation cover, land use, land degradation, and land
rehabilitation, although a number of countries have not fully adopted the use of these
indicators. Institutional measures to implement the Convention are also required to be
included in the national reports, and could form the basis for the development of
process indicators.
A number of agencies, organizations, and entities exist in the region through which
lateral cooperation can be pursued for effective collaboration within a framework as
regards development of benchmarks and indicators for the monitoring of land
degradation and drought within the region (Sweeney, 2003). Through their mandates
and structures, as well as commonalities of interest, the possibilities exist for a strong
collaborative grouping to address these indicators.
Table 6. Land and Land Cover
Sub-theme
Indicator/data
Principal agencies/frameworks; data sources
collected
Forests
% cover; area/change;
CARDI/PROCICARIBE Caribbean Land and Water Resources
reforestation;
Network (www.procicaribe.org/networks/clawrenet/index.htm); FAO
deforestation; protected
Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005; Country data at
forest area
www.fao.org/forestry/site/country/en/; global database at
Urbanization
area
http://www.fao.org/forestry/site/43035/en/
Agriculture
Area; fertilizer &
FAO Aquastat (www.fao.org/ag/agl/aglw/aquastat/dbase/index.stm);
pesticide use; crop
State of the World's Forests 2007
23
GEF-IWCAM
type/area
(www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0773e/a0773e00.htm; Annex with country
Land
Area degraded; soil
level data: ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/009/a0773e/a0773e10.pdf;
degradation
erosion; soil fertility, rate National agriculture census (FAO); FAO Compendium of Agricultural
of topsoil loss
Indicators (www.fao.org/es/ess/os/envi_indi/part_11.asp); Caribbean
Vegetation and Landcover Mapping Initiative
(edcintl.cr.usgs.gov/tnc/index.html); Caribbean Vegetation Atlas by
country (edcintl.cr.usgs.gov/tnc/products/atlas.html);
CCD (www.unccd.int/cop/officialdocs/menu.php)
5.1.6 Natural disasters
The Caribbean SIDS are highly vulnerable to natural disasters, especially those related
to extreme climatic events, a number of which has been experienced in the region in
recent years. Common indicators relate to the incidence, intensity, as well as to the
social and economic impacts of natural disasters (Tables 7 and 14). Each country has a
national agency responsible for disaster preparedness and response. At the regional
level, the Caribbean Disaster Emergency Response Agency (CDERA) is the central
disaster management organization. The Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of
Disasters (CRED), maintains an international database on disasters, with data available
by country, type of disaster, and corresponding human and economic impacts.
Table 7. Natural Disasters
Sub-theme
Indicator/data collected
Principal agencies/frameworks;
data sources
Occurrence
Frequency & intensity
CDERA
Human Impacts
Loss of life; injuries; displacement
(www.cdera.org/doccentre/index.php);
Economic impacts
Economic losses
CRED global disasters database
Environmental impacts
Habitat damage
(www.em-dat.net/)
5.1.7 Sanitation and human health
The relevant Ministries and government departments (e.g. Ministry of Health, Public
Utilities) collect information through surveys at different time intervals for a number of
indicators related to sanitation and human health (Tables 8 and 14).
At the regional level, CEHI undertakes projects to assess water quality at specific
locations. At the international level, among the major freshwater monitoring and
assessment programmes are WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water
Supply and Sanitation; UNESCO World Water Assessment Programme and World
Water Development Report; and FAO Land and Water Development Division.
The indicators used in these assessments are based on data obtained from a number of
sources, including national surveys, global networks, and other UN and partner
organizations. These indicators are used to monitor the achievement of the relevant
international development targets, for instance the MDG related to freshwater and
sanitation. National statistics on freshwater for the PCs are available in databases on
these agencies websites and in various publications (Table 8). The biennial World
Water Development Report aims to develop indicators and monitors progress against
24
GEF-IWCAM
targets for sanitation and wastewater. The WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme
is the only one regularly conducting surveys on water supply and sanitation coverage
worldwide, and provides statistics on a number of indicators by country.
Indicators of water and sanitation related diseases are also used to monitor the impacts
of poor water quality on the human population. At the regional level, CAREC and
PAHO are among the agencies that maintain databases on incidences of water-related
diseases.
Table 8. Sanitation and Human Health
Sub-theme
Indicator/data collected
Principal agencies/frameworks; data
sources
Access to sanitation
Sanitation coverage (% population)
WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring
Access to freshwater
Freshwater coverage (% population) Programme for Water Supply and
Illness
Incidence of water/environment-
Sanitation
related illnesses
(www.wssinfo.org/en/25_wat_dev.html;
www.wssinfo.org/en/35_san_dev.html);
CEHI; PAHO/WHO; CAREC
5.1.8 Waste
Pollution prevention and waste management are critical issues in the PCs.
Responsibility for waste management is shared among various agencies, depending on
the type of waste. Data for the development of pertinent indicators are available (Table
9), although limited in some of the countries, with the most commonly used including the
generation of waste by type and sector and the disposal of waste by method
(CARICOM Secretariat 2003).
Point source pollution from industrial wastes and sewage, inappropriately located and
poorly managed solid waste disposal sites, and the inadequate disposal of toxic
chemicals are significant contributors to marine pollution and coastal degradation in the
region (CARICOM Secretariat 2003). In this regard, the LBS Protocol of the Cartagena
Convention and the GPA are appropriate frameworks for development of benchmarks
and indicators for land-based pollution of the coastal zone.
Table 9. Waste
Sub-theme
Indicator/data collected
Principal agencies/frameworks;
data sources
Waste generation
Waste generation, incl. wastewater
CEHI; LBS Protocol; GPA
Waste management
Wastewater treatment coverage;
waste handling; disposal methods (%
of waste)
5.1.9 Tourism
Because of the importance of tourism in the PCs, data for a number of indicators related
to tourism, including its social and economic significance, are routinely collected (Tables
10 and 14). However, it is only more recently that efforts have begun to qualify and
25
GEF-IWCAM
monitor the impacts of tourism on the environment. The identification of sustainable
tourism indicators began in 1992 with the launch of a taskforce by the WTO.
The CTO has conducted a study on the identification of indicators of sustainable tourism
in the Caribbean, categorized into Nature Environment, Social Aspects, and Culture and
Economy, which also includes topics such as data availability, comparability,
robustness, etc. CTO is collaborating with various agencies such as tourism Boards and
environmental agencies, as well as CAST, to identify suitable indicators for sustainable
tourism. CAST has implemented a project jointly with the CTO the Blue Flag
Programme which rates the environmental quality of beaches in the region, and seeks
to develop sustainable development indicators on tourism. The CTO, ACS, and CAREC
are collaborating in an initiative to develop indicators for the Sustainable Tourism Zone
of the Caribbean, to guide the development of and to measure the progress being made
in achieving sustainable tourism in the region.
Another tourism-related international organization is Green Globe, which is dedicated to
furthering sustainable travel and tourism. The Green Globe framework is currently
implemented in 52 countries worldwide. The Green Globe standard underpins its
programme and forms the basis to benchmark an operations environmental and social
performance. Each Green Globe participant is benchmarked against specific Sector
Benchmarking Indicators appropriate to their operations.
Table 10. Tourism
Sub-theme
Indicator/data collected Principal agencies/frameworks; data sources
Tourism intensity
Tourist arrivals; hotel
CTO; ACS (www.acs-
density.....
aec.org/Documents/Tourism/Projects/ACS_ST_000/Tourism_Stats0
Environmental
Natural resource
603.pdf); ACS project -Development of indicators for the Sustainable
impacts
consumption; waste
Tourism Zone of the Caribbean); WTO
generation, number of
ecotourism initiatives....
5.1.10 Socioeconomics
Socioeconomic activities impact the environment through the unsustainable use of
natural resources, the generation of pollution and wastes, and the infringement on, and
subsequent degradation, of ecosystems. In fact, socioeconomic factors are considered
to be among the major driving forces of environmental change. In SIDS, socioeconomic
activities in watersheds have severe impacts on coastal areas, and must be taken into
consideration in the development of IWCAM strategies and plans.
Population, demographic, and economic indicators have long been in use in the
countries. In fact, most of the countries have relatively long time series of demographic
and socioeconomic data, available at national level and by economic sectors (Tables 11
and 14). The CARICOM Secretariat (2003) has compiled demographic and
socioeconomic indicators for its member states, while indicators for all the PCs are
26
GEF-IWCAM
available through a number of different sources, including the UNDP Human
Development Reports and the World Bank World Development Indicators.
Table 11a. Socioeconomics
Sub-theme
Indicator/data collected
Principal agencies/frameworks; data sources
Population
Total population; density
CARICOM; UNDP Human Development Report 2006
Socioeconomic
Socioeconomic indicators
(indicators at
development
(GDP, GDP/cap; poverty;
hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/statistics/indicators/default.cfm); World
etc)
Bank country profiles at //web.worldbank.org;
Human
Human Development Index ILAC; CSD; MDG
development
5.1.11 Environment and Sustainable Development
While the themes and indicators discussed above are environmental and sustainable
development themes and indicators, a number of national, regional, and international
initiatives currently exist for the development of indicators under the overarching theme
of environment and sustainable development within an integrated framework. The PCs
have seen the onset of, inter alia, Agenda 21, BPoA, and multilateral environmental
agreements; meeting their obligations and reporting requirements all demand the
collection of environmental statistics and use of indicators.
All the PCs have formulated or are in the process of formulating sustainable
development strategies and environmental action plans (or their equivalent), and have
made variable progress in identifying and selecting associated indicators. For instance,
the Barbados Policy on Sustainable Development has adopted 170 core indicators for
sustainable development under its national indicators programme in three major
thematic areas (Human Well-being, Ecological Welfare, and Sustainable Interaction).
The first pilot study that was conducted in 1996 indicated that the major data sources
were widely spread across the different governmental institutions. In 1998, a workshop
on Sustainable Development Indicators further promoted the development of
environmental statistics. A Steering Committee is now implementing the Barbados
National Indicators Programme.
Countries have prepared national environment outlook reports (or equivalent) in which
trends in a number of socioeconomic and environmental indicators are reported.
Jamaica has a National Sustainable Development Plan, implemented by the National
Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA), which attempts to integrate development
and capital infrastructure investment decisions into a spatial context.
Initiatives and frameworks at the sub-regional and regional levels include:
- Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS): The OECS has embarked on an
initiative to establish a robust set of indicators of progress towards the goals of the
St. George's Declaration of Principles for Environmental Sustainability in the
Member States. The revised SGD and a draft SGD reporting instrument were
approved in November 2006 by the Environment Policy Committee of the OECS,
27
GEF-IWCAM
and both documents include a set of indicators (Annex 4). An assessment and
recommendations for each SGD indicator, as well as recommendations for
establishing baselines and frequency of monitoring are presented in Geoghegan and
Renard (2006). The OECS member countries have embarked on the development of
National Environmental Policies, National Environmental Management Strategies
and Action Plans (http://www.oecs.org/esdu/nems-docs.html), which include the
formulation and adoption of specific targets and indicators in all relevant sectors and
programmes
In 2003, the United Nations through its Department of Economic and Social Affairs
(UNDESA) and the OECS Secretariat entered into an agreement, through which the
OECS undertook the responsibility to manage the implementation of two projects
related to National Sustainable Development Strategies and Indicators of
Sustainable Development. Under this framework a national project for St. Lucia
("Integrated Planning for Sustainable Development and Supporting National
Sustainable Development Indicators for St. Lucia") resulted in a draft set of national
indicators for sustainable development and a first draft framework national
sustainable development strategy for this country.
- Barbados Programme of Action for Sustainable Development of SIDS: In April 1994,
the first Global Conference on Sustainable Development of SIDS was convened in
Barbados (www.sidsnet.org). The conference adopted the BPoA that sets forth
specific actions and measures to be taken at the national, regional and international
levels in support of the sustainable development of SIDS. The BPoA has been
adopted by the PCs. The 10-year review of implementation of the BPoA was held in
Mauritius in 2005, and resulted in the Mauritius Declaration and Strategy. Regional
programmes for implementation of the Mauritius Strategy include indicators of
progress and milestones under a number of themes of relevance to IWCAM
(including climate, natural disasters, waste management, coastal and marine
resources, freshwater resources, land resources, tourism). These indicators mainly
relate to process and stress reduction. The Caribbean Development Bank is
responsible for the coordination of the Sustainable Development Indicators
programme of the BPoA.
- CARICOM
Single
Market and Economy (CSME): The CSME seeks to foster regional
growth and development among its Member States through the creation of an
integrated market for goods and services and the free flow of capital and individuals
across traditional borders. In order to ensure the achievement of the objectives of
the CSME, the regular and timely production by all Member States of a broad scope
of statistics and indicators will be crucial. These statistics and indicators will provide
the essential tools to assist in monitoring and evaluating the achievement of the key
objectives of the CSME. A number of environmental indicators are proposed for the
CSME, and are pertinent to the development of IWCAM indicators mechanisms
(Annex 5).
28
GEF-IWCAM
- Latin American and Caribbean Initiative for Sustainable Development: At its 14th
Meeting, the Forum of Ministers of the Environment for Latin America and the
Caribbean agreed to support an initiative to produce a core set of national
environmental, economic, social, and institutional indicators to assess progress in
the implementation of the Latin American and Caribbean Initiative for Sustainable
Development (ILAC), within the framework of the WSSD. A project on the proposed
ILAC indicators is being undertaken by UNEP and the Government of Costa Rica,
with support from the World Bank. A number of the ILAC indicators are of relevance
to IWCAM (Annex 6).
- OAS Declaration of Santa Cruz de la Sierra and Action Plan: The OAS Heads of
States and Governments committed themselves to implementing the first Plan of
Action for the Sustainable Development of the Americas, based on the principles of
the 1996 Declaration of Santa Cruz de la Sierra
(www.oas.org/dsd/Summit/bolivia_declaration.htm). This plan calls for the
generation of basic information on environmental criteria and indicators at regional,
sub-regional, and national levels to evaluate progress toward sustainable
management of biodiversity and toward sustainable forest management. The plan
also calls for the development and strengthening of research and monitoring
capabilities pertaining to the conservation of inland, coastal, and marine water
resources, especially in relation to environmental health parameters. Data collected
will be incorporated into a study that will document the current state of health of the
coastal and marine environment; establish benchmark indicators for assessing the
effectiveness of national, regional, and international instruments and initiatives; and
identify and categorize land and marine-based sources of pollution.
- UNEP: UNEP has an ongoing initiative to develop environmental indicators under
the GEO project. The UNEP/GEO Core Indicators are a compact set of selected
quantitative parameters that reflect headline trends for the major global and regional
environmental issues addressed under the GEO assessment and reporting process.
Information and data on a wide range of environmental indicators relevant to each
country are available at http://countryprofiles.unep.org/profiles. UNEP has also
developed indicators of relevance to SIDS, and through the GEO project works with
countries to build capacity for environmental assessment and reporting
(http://islands.unep.ch/; http://islands.unep.ch/isldir.htm).
The GEO data portal (http://geodata.grid.unep.ch/) is the authoritative source for
data sets used by UNEP and its partners in the GEO report and other integrated
environment assessments. Its online database holds more than 450 different
variables, as national, sub-regional, regional, and global statistics or as geospatial
data sets, covering a number of themes.
UNEP is also collaborating with the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission
(SOPAC) and other partners to develop an Environment Vulnerability Index (EVI) for
the natural environment (http://www.vulnerabilityindex.net/index.htm). The EVI is a
dimensionless numerical indicator that reflects the status of a country's
29
GEF-IWCAM
environmental vulnerability. The first conceptual EVI for SIDS was presented by
SOPAC in 1999. The EVI is calculated based on 50 `smart indicators' that capture
the key elements of environmental vulnerability. EVI country profiles, including for
some of the PCs that are collaborating in developing the EVI, are available at
http://www.vulnerabilityindex.net/EVI_Country_Profiles.htm.
- UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD): Chapter 40 of Agenda 21 calls
on countries and the international community to develop indicators of sustainable
development. The CSD has been involved in the development of indicators of
sustainable development, in collaboration with other international organizations and
experts from developing and developed countries. The UN has also been focusing
on the use of indicators to monitor the implementation of National Sustainable
Development Strategies (NSDS). The revised CSD indicators set consists of 50 core
indicators, which are part of a larger set of 96 indicators of sustainable development.
These indicators and their detailed methodology sheets are available as a reference
for all countries to develop national indicators of sustainable development.
Information by countries (including Caribbean SIDS) is available at
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/ENVIRONMENT/qindicators.htm and
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/natlinfo.htm.
Based on the list of environmental indicators approved by the Statistical
Commission, UNSD, in collaboration with UNEP, has been conducting biennial data
collection in all countries (except OECD countries), which is intended to contribute to
the development of the UNSD International Environment Statistics Database. The
2004 data collection focused on water resources and pollution, air pollution, waste
generation and management, land use and land degradation. National information
includes information submitted biennially in national reports by member States to the
CSD. The first results from the 2004 UNSD/UNEP data collection on environment
statistics are available at
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/environment/q2004indicators.htm.
With regard to environmental accounting, conventional national accounts, in their
assessment of cost and capital, neglect new scarcities of natural resources, as well
as the degradation of environmental quality. A System of Integrated Environmental
and Economic Accounting was developed by UN Statistical Division as a satellite
system of the system of national accounting to analyze environmental and economic
concerns in a common and flexible framework. A Handbook of Integrated
Environmental and Economic Accounting was published by UNSD in 1993.
- Millennium
Development
Goals: To monitor progress towards the MDGs and targets,
the United Nations system, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund, as
well as the Development Assistance Committee of the Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development, came together under the Office of the UN Secretary
General and agreed on 48 quantitative indicators. The indicators built upon an inter-
governmental process to identify relevant indicators in response to global
conferences. Country data should be used for compiling the indicators where such
30
GEF-IWCAM
data are available and of reasonable quality. UN Country Teams have been helping
countries prepare national reports that measure progress towards the MDGs. The
emphasis is on national ownership as well as accurate benchmarking of progress,
so wherever possible these are done in close collaboration with the government as
well as civil society groups.
Monitoring of the MDGs is taking place globally, through annual reports of the UN
Secretary General to the General Assembly and through periodic country reporting.
For global reporting, use is made of indicators compiled by international
organizations. Internationally compiled indicators, based on standard concepts,
definitions and methodologies, more readily facilitate cross-country comparisons.
For country reporting, use is generally made of indicators compiled from national
sources, generally by the national statistical system. The metadata sheets for the
indicators reflect national and international standards. A number of these indicators
are very pertinent to IWCAM (Annex 7).
- Environmental Performance Index: The 2008 Environmental Performance Index
(EPI) was launched at the 2008 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. The
Index is produced by a team of environmental experts at Yale University and
Columbia University. The 2008 EPI ranks 149 countries on 25 indicators tracked
across six established policy categories: Environmental Health, Air Pollution, Water
Resources, Biodiversity and Habitat, Productive Natural Resources, and Climate
Change. The EPI identifies broadly-accepted targets for environmental performance
and measures how close each country comes to these goals. EPIs have been
calculated for Cuba, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago
(http://epi.yale.edu/Home).
Table 12. Environment and Sustainable Development
Frameworks of relevance to environmental and sustainable development to the PCs
BPoA http://www.sidsnet.org
Caribbean Action Plan
http://www.cep.unep.org
CARICOM
http://www.caricom.org
CEHI
http://www.cehi.org
Environmental Performance
http://epi.yale.edu/Home
Index
Environment Vulnerability
http://www.vulnerabilityindex.net/index.htm;
Index
http://www.vulnerabilityindex.net/EVI_Country_Profiles.htm
GEO data portal
http://geodata.grid.unep.ch/
ILAC
http://www.odd.ucr.ac.cr/ilac
MDG indicators
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/mdg/default.aspx;
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/mdg/Host.aspx?Content=Indicators/OfficialList.
htm
OAS Santa Cruz
http://www.summit-americas.org/boliviaplan.htm
Declaration & Action Plan
OECS St. George's
http://www.oecs.org/esdu/SGD.htm
Declaration
UN Commission on
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/ENVIRONMENT/qindicators.htm;
Sustainable Development;
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/environment/q2004indicators.htm
UN Statistical Div.
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/natlinfo.htm;
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/indicators/guidelines.pdf
UNDP Human Development http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr_20072008_en_complete.pdf
31
GEF-IWCAM
Report
UNEP GEO Country profiles http://countryprofiles.unep.org/profiles
UNEP island websites
http://islands.unep.ch/; http://islands.unep.ch/isldir.htm
World Bank
http://www.worlbank.org
5.1.12 Governance
Governance indicators include indicators related to institutional setting,
policy/legislation, technical/technological capability, stakeholder participation, etc.
Among the governance indicators are institutional and policy measures taken to
implement the various MEAs of which the PCs are Parties. All the PCs have begun
implementing policy and institutional reforms for environment and sustainable
development, have environment education programmes, and are increasingly
embarking on wider stakeholder participation. A few of the PCs also have limited
integrated watershed and coastal area management programmes, integrated coastal
areas management programmes and plans, and natural resource management plans
(e.g. fisheries management plans). Institutional and policy reforms and investments for
IWCAM are among governance indicators. In terms of the GEF-IWCAM project,
governance indicators could be placed in the Process Indicators category. While
governance indicators are not explicitly mentioned in the various national frameworks,
these must be included and monitored in national IWCAM programmes. The OECS St.
George's Declaration includes a number of governance indicators (Annex 4), as does
ILAC (Annex 6).
32
GEF-IWCAM
Table 14. Summary of indicators/data in the PCs, based on survey responses* and country reports** prepared for
the GEF-IWCAM project.
Group 1: OECS members and the Bahamas; Group 2: Larger English-speaking countries; Group 3: Non-English speaking
countries
THEME SUB-THEME
INDICATOR/DATA
COLLECTED
GROUP 1
GROUP 2
GROUP 3
a
adines
*Antigua &
Barbuda
*Bahamas
**Dominica
**Grenad
**St. Lucia
*St. Kitts &
Nevis
*St. Vincent &
Gren
**Barbados
*Jamaica
*Trinidad &
Tobago
*Cuba
*Dominican
Republic
*Haiti
1. Atmosphere
Climate & air quality
Rainfall
X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Air
Temperature
X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Evaporation
X
Wind
speed
&
direction
X
Air
quality
X
X
X
Greenhouse gas emissions; GHG
X
X
inventories; ODS
Energy
Energy
consumption
X
%
pop
using
solid
fuels
X
2. Biodiversity
Habitats
Protected
areas
(marine,
terrestrial)
X
X
X
X
X
% protected areas effectively
X
managed
Species
Threatened/endangered
species X
X
Invasive
species
X
Species
abundance
(flora,
fauna) X
X
X
Biodiversity
(unspecified)
X
X
3.
Coasts and seas
Fisheries
Fisheries
landings
X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Mean
fish
size
X
Species
abundance
X
Mean trophic level of catch
(adopted by CBD)
Fisheries management
X
X
plans/incentives
Coral reefs
Coral cover; algal cover; bleaching;
X
X
X
X
X
X
diseases
Fish
abundance
X
Seagrass
Cover
X
X
X
X
Biomass,
density,
productivity
X
33
GEF-IWCAM
Mangroves
Cover,
species
diversity
X
X
X
Biomass,
leaf
litter
X
Stem
diameter
X
Disease
X
Wetlands
restored
X
Beaches
Beach
profiles
(erosion/accretion) X
X
X
X
Sea level
Mean
Sea
level;
tidal
level
X
X
SST
SST
X
X
Water quality
BOD/COD
X
X
Coliform
X
X
X
Dissolved oxygen
X
X
Turbidity/suspended
solids
X
X
Chlorophyl a
X
Nitrates,
nitrites
X
X
X
Ammonia
X
X
Phosphates
X
X
Silicate
X
Dissolved oxygen
X
X
pH
X
X
X
Heavy metals
X
X
Petroleum
hydrocarbons
X
Chemical
pollutants
X
Temperature
X
X
Water
quality
(unspecified)
X
X
X
X
Other
Population density in coastal areas;
X
population within distance of coast
4. Freshwater
Water quality
BOD/COD
X
X
X
Coliform
X
X
X
X
X
X
Dissolved oxygen
X
X
Dissolved solids
X
Turbidity/suspended
solids
X
X
X
Nitrates,
nitrites
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ammonium
X
Chloride
X
X
Calcium
X
Magnesium
X
Phosphate
X
X
Sulphate
X
Silicate
X
pH
X
X
X
X
Salinity
X
X
X
Heavy metals
X
X
Petroleum
hydrocarbons
X
MTBE
(groundwater)
X
BTEX
(groundwater)
X
Chlorinated
pesticides
(groundwater)
X
34
GEF-IWCAM
Organophosphate pesticides
X
(groundwater)
Petroleum hydrocarbons
X
(groundwater)
Salinity
(groundwater)
X
Dissolved
oxygen
(groundwater) X
Chemical
pollutants
X
Temperature
X
X
X
Water
quality
(unspecified)
X
X
X
Water
treatment
plants
X
Water availability and
Ground water level
X
X
use
Stream
flow/river
discharge
X
X
X
X
X
Renewable
water
resources
Water
X
X
X
X
X
X
extraction/availability/production
Recharge
rate
(groundwater)
X
Incentives
for
sustainable
water
use
X
Integrated Water Resources
X
X
Management (IWRM) plans
5. Land
Forests
%
cover;
area
X
X
X
X
Reforestation;
deforestation
X
X
X
Lichen
cover
X
Forest fires
X
Area of watershed under
X
management
Urbanization
Area
Agriculture
Area
X
X
Yields
X
Fertilizer/pesticide
use
X
X
Incentives
for
sustainable
agric X
Land degradation/soil
Area degraded; soil erosion; soil
X
X
fertility
Land use
%
land
use
X
X
Land
use
planning
X
X
X
X
6. Natural
disasters
Occurrence
Frequency & intensity (hurricanes,
X
landslides, storm surges,
earthquakes, etc)
Vulnerable
areas
X
Dwelling
type
X
Environmental
vulnerability
X
Human Impacts
Loss
of
life;
injuries;
displacement
Economic impacts
Economic
losses
Environmental
Damage to habitats & natural
impacts
resources
7. Sanitation/
Access to sanitation
Sanitation
coverage
(%
population)
X
X
X
X
X
human health
Access to freshwater
Freshwater coverage (% population;
X
X
X
X
X
availability/capita)
35
GEF-IWCAM
Illness
Incidence of environment-related
X
diseases
Basic services
Access
to
basic
services
X
8. Waste
Waste generation
Waste
generation/discharge
X
X
X
Waste management
Wastewater
treatment
coverage
X
Waste collection, treatment &
X
X
X
disposal (incl. recycling)
9. Socio-economics Population/
Total
population;
density
X
X
X
X
demography
Socio-economic
Socio-economic indicators (GDP;
X
X
X
development
poverty; etc)
Human development
Human
Development
Index
Income
X
10. Tourism
Tourism intensity
Tourist arrivals; tourist penetration
X
X
X
ratio; hotel density
Environmental
Natural resource consumption; waste
impacts
generation....
11. Environment
&
NEMS
Sustainable
NEAPS
development
Env. Health
X
(unspecified)
12. Governance
Institutional;
Information available to develop a
X X X X X X X X X X X X X
policy/legislation
number of indicators (dependent on
technical/technologica
sector, issues, etc)
l; data & information;
capacity; stakeholder
participation, etc.
High level political
X X X X X X X X X X X X X
commitment
Legal, policy,
X
X
X
X
institutional reforms
Responsible
X
X
X
X
agency/committees
Environmental
X
X
X
X
X
X
education
programmes
Parties to MEAs (see
X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Table 1)
Monitoring
X
X
X
X
X
programmes
Valuation of natural
X
X
X
resources/
ecosystems
Economic
instruments
X
36
GEF-IWCAM
Stakeholder
X
X
X
participation
37
GEF-IWCAM
5.2. CAPACITY
ASSESSMENT
Another component of this desk study was a capacity assessment exercise, with the
following objectives:
- Assess current capacities and identify gaps and weaknesses in institutional
capacities for indicator development and application in the participating countries;
- Assess relevant institutional infrastructural and administrative protocols related to
indicator monitoring in the PCs. This includes, but is not limited to, assessing
agencies, staffing, structure, etc;
- Assess the relevant human resource capacities and training needs related to
indicator monitoring in participating countries;
- Provide recommendations for bringing capacities up to a level where indicators
can be utilized, manipulated, and shared among PCs.
Development and implementation of an indicators mechanism requires capacity at the
systemic, institutional, and individual levels, in a number of aspects ranging from the
existence of an appropriate policy and legal framework that creates an enabling
environment, institutional arrangements and means for its implementation, and human
as well as financial and technological resources. An indicators system also requires
monitoring and data collection to calculate the indicators, and a mechanism for uptake
of the information in decision-making processes as well as for its reporting and
dissemination to all stakeholders in an open and transparent process. An effective
indicators mechanism does not exist in a vacuum it must be an integral part of a
management framework (in this case IWCAM), with a comprehensive understanding of
the issues to be addressed, well-defined goals, objectives, and targets, as well as a
mechanism to facilitate feedback and adaptive management.
This assessment seeks to appraise the ability of institutions, organizations, and
individuals to perform tasks associated with indicator formulation and application, and
related monitoring and data collection, processing, information dissemination and
uptake, and management, in an effective, efficient, and sustainable manner. The
capacities required to perform these task can be broadly classified as systemic,
institutional, human, financial, data and information, and technical/technological
capacities. The assessment characterizes the existing capacities and capacity-
development needs at the national levels in the 13 PCs as they relate to the
employment of indicators for IWCAM. Capacity was assessed in relation to the systemic
level, institutional capacity, human resources, data and information, technology, and
financial resources.
Information related specifically to the capacity for developing and applying IWCAM-
specific indicators was scant in the PCs. Attempts were made to obtain information
through a questionnaire, as described in Section I. Responses on capacity are
summarized in Tables 15 and 16. Information on environmental statistics and indicators
developed in complementary thematic areas was available at the national and regional
levels. These statistics and indicators and the associated capacities and institutions
involved were viewed as representing the uncoordinated elements of an IWCAM
38
GEF-IWCAM
indicators mechanism. In this light, they were considered to be proxies for the capacities
required to develop and use IWCAM indicators, and are included in this report as
appropriate. An assessment of capacity for environmental statistics was undertaken
between 2006 and 2007 by the UNSD to determine the status of national
implementation of environmental-economic accounting and related statistics, priorities,
and future plans. Capacity development initiatives in support of the environmental
sector have direct implications for capacity development for IWCAM and the
development and maintenance of indicators mechanisms.
5.2.1 Existing capacities and capacity building initiatives
All the PCs have the basic elements in place, although in varying stages of
development, for an IWCAM indicators mechanism. They include but are not limited to:
· Government ministries and agencies with mandates for environmental/natural
resources assessment and management;
· Universities, research institutes, and national laboratories;
· National statistics offices and regularly produced statistical reports;
· Thematic monitoring, data collection, and assessment and reporting activities
conducted by government agencies, research and teaching institutions,
intergovernmental organizations, and international agencies;
· Nascent national data coordination and management mechanisms (national land
information agencies and GIS repositories);
· Legislation mandating government agencies to submit data to the national
statistical agency;
· National development policies that identify environmental statistics as measures
of performance;
· Trained and experienced personnel who have been involved in a number of
initiatives at national and regional levels.
Thematic indicator mechanisms exist at the national level in relation to natural living
resources management and productive sectors (e.g. water resources, fisheries, forestry,
agriculture), environment, and risk management (meteorology and human health). As
mentioned in the previous section (indicators mechanism assessment), countries are
parties to a number of MEAs (e.g. Cartagena Convention, CBD, CCD) that promote the
use of indicators for reporting purposes. In addition, some of the countries are also
developing indicators to track progress in achieving the MDGs. Some capacity for the
development and use of indicators is gradually being developed under these
frameworks.
At the regional level capacities reside in institutions/organizations such as CARICOM,
UWI, CIMH, UNEP CAR RCU, UNEP ROLAC, CEHI, and CANARI. A number of
capacity building initiatives for environmental statistics and indicators have been
undertaken in the region. These were promoted by a number of organizations including
UN organizations (e.g. UNDESA, UNCSD, UNSD, UNECLAC, and regional and sub-
regional organizations (e.g. UNEP ROLAC, OAS, CARICOM, OECS). At the
international level the Environment Statistics Section of the UNSD is engaged in the
39
GEF-IWCAM
development of methodologies, data collection, technical cooperation, and coordination
in the field of environmental statistics and indicators.
Capacity building efforts related to indicators and environmental statistics have
included:
· "CARICOM Programme on Strengthening Capacity in the Compilation of Social
Gender and Environment Statistics and Indicators" in the CARICOM Region"
(http://www.caricomstats.org/caricomprog.htm), which is supported by a data
dissemination strategy that makes use of developments in Information
Communication Technology. It is coordinated by the CARICOM Secretariat at the
regional level relative to the compilation of regional databases. The National
Statistical Offices (NSOs) coordinate data compilation at the national level;
· "Strengthening Capacity in the Compilation of Statistics and Indicators for
Conference Follow-up in the CARICOM Region", which was jointly carried out by
UNSD and the CARICOM Secretariat between 2000 and 2003
(http://unstats.un.org/unsd/environment/caricom.htm). The Project was executed
in the CARICOM Member States, which include all but two of the 13 PCs (Cuba
and Dominican Republic). The environment statistics component of the project
was launched at the workshop on Environment Statistics in Belize in 2000
(http://unstats.un.org/unsd/environment/envpdf/caricomrep.pdf). The Project
provided capacity building and led to the publication of environment statistics
compendia in Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Jamaica, St. Kitts and
Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago, as
well as the publication "The CARICOM Environment in Figures 2002 (CARICOM
Secretariat 2003a)";
· Two projects undertaken in 2003 - 2004 under a collaborative agreement
between UNDESA and the OECS: "Integrated Planning for Sustainable
Development and Supporting National Sustainable Development Indicators for
St. Lucia" and "Caribbean Regional Workshop on National Sustainable
Development Strategies and Indicators of Sustainable Development" under the
theme National Sustainable Development Strategies and Indicators of
Sustainable Development;
· "Capacity-Building in Creating Information Management Systems to Improve
Decision- making for sustainable development of SIDS". This pilot project, which
builds on the CARICOM/UNSD project, was undertaken by the OAS in
collaboration with UNDESA in November 2002 October 2003;
· UNEP Global Environmental Outlook: The GEO process has directly addressed
capacity needs for developing environmental indicators for use in regional and
global state of environment reporting. A number of the PCs have participated in
these efforts and have produced national state of environment reports. At the
regional level, two Environment Outlook reports for Caribbean SIDS have been
published (2003, 2005);
· UN,ECLAC REDESA: The UN Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean
(ECLAC) Network of Institutions and Experts in Social and Environmental
Statistics (REDESA) project aimed to strengthen the capacity of Latin American
and Caribbean countries to produce timely and reliable statistics on social and
40
GEF-IWCAM
environmental issues. Under this initiative the Dominican Republic has published
a compendium of 108 environmental and socioeconomic variables for the
country;
· Ocean and Data Information Network for the Caribbean and South America
(ODINCARSA, www.odincarsa.net/): ODINCARSA's mission is to strengthen
Ocean Data and Marine Information Management capacity in the Caribbean and
Latin America in order to contribute to ocean sciences, operational oceanography
development and integrated coastal management activities at regional level.
ODINCARSA's network includes the following PCs: Bahamas, Barbados, Cuba,
Dominica, Haiti, Jamaica, St. Lucia, and Trinidad and Tobago;
· Caribbean Marine Atlas (CMA): A number of Caribbean countries are embarking
on an initiative to develop a Caribbean Marine Atlas (CMA)
(www.iode.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=75&Itemid=11).
The purpose of the CMA is to identify, collect and organize available geo-spatial
datasets into an atlas of environmental themes for the Caribbean region, under
the sponsorship of the IOC International Oceanographic Data and Information
Exchange (IODE) and ICAM Programmes. A prototype version of the Caribbean
Marine Atlas will be prepared by nine participating countries (Barbados, Cuba,
Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, St Lucia, Trinidad and Tobago, Turks and
Caicos), and is expected to be released in October 2008. It is planned to extend
the Atlas to include other countries in the region. Personnel from the countries
are undergoing training in data management and other relevant skills at the IODE
Headquarters in Belgium.
As a result of these and other initiatives in the region, some capacity already exists in
the PCs for indicators mechanisms development. The level of capacity varies among
the countries, however, as confirmed by the groundtruthing exercises. The existing
capacity consists mainly of capacity specifically for compilation of environmental
statistics and indicators, and do not focus on IWCAM indicators within an IWCAM
framework. A number of capacity gaps still remain, and are discussed in the following
sections. The groundtruthing exercises in the three countries also confirmed these
capacity gaps and deficiencies. It must be noted that a number of other efforts to
evaluate capacity in the region for environmental indicators and data and information
have reported similar findings, particularly with respect to existing gaps.
5.2.2 Systemic capacity
Systemic capacities are of critical importance as they provide the enabling environment
that can facilitate and create incentives/disincentives that promote or constrain the
development of capacity at the institutional and individual levels. The enabling
environment can affect the performance of individuals, institutions, and sector
organizations. At the systemic level, the capacity assessment considered the overall
policy and legislative framework in which individuals and organizations operate and
interact, as well as the formal and informal relationships among institutions. The
systemic-level capacities confer legitimacy, provide appropriate incentives, establish the
norms, and facilitate the development, implementation, and maintenance of
41
GEF-IWCAM
environmental monitoring and indicators mechanisms in support of national decision-
making processes. For this reason, the results of the systemic assessment form the
overarching context in which the results of the institutional/organizational and human
resource capacity assessments can be interpreted.
Institutional and human capacity gaps are the direct and indirect consequences of
deficiencies in the enabling environment that supports natural resource management
and by extension, the associated evaluation, monitoring, and reporting processes. The
absence of an overarching IWCAM framework in the PCs, within which national
development and decision-making processes take place has far reaching implications
for the development of IWCAM indicators mechanisms. Systemic weakness and
deficiencies in the PCs have stymied the development of a culture of, and capacities for,
monitoring, evaluation and results-based adaptive management. There is also the
reluctance to set targets and to have greater accountability. Indicators are useful in
assessing progress towards or away from a specific target and can help achieve greater
participation and transparency in the planning and programming process in the
countries. Within the agencies with natural resources management mandates, the
needs for, and benefits from, appropriate indicators mechanisms may be clear, although
stymied by resource constraints. Until indicator mechanisms are mainstreamed into the
national development process framework, there will be no national development context
or purpose to prioritize, rationalize, guide, and focus environmental monitoring activities.
The need for environmental monitoring will continue to be driven by line agencies, and
will remain marginal and expendable unless environmental statistics and indicators are
recognized to be of critical strategic importance to national planning and sustainable
development processes.
National development polices supported by explicitly identified environmental
performance indicators as well as by coordinated environmental data collection are rare.
This has given rise to a syndrome of ad hoc data collection and monitoring. This
situation has created systemic barriers to awareness, and to the sharing of data and
information on environmental statistics and indicators. In the absence of a formally
articulated demand for environmental statistics and indicators to support sustainable
national development planning, most PCs demonstrated:
· The absence of an overarching national environmental/natural resources
management framework (specifically an IWCAM framework), with an integrated
indicators mechanism and supporting monitoring programme;
· The absence of a clearly identified role for environmental statistics and indicators
in the development planning and decision-making processes;
· Weak national oversight and coordination of environmental monitoring and the
development and use of environmental statistics and indicators;
· Uncoordinated and often ad hoc approaches to environmental monitoring and
indicators development at the national level;
· Chronic inability to effectively address undesirable environmental trends that
undermine sustainable development objectives;
· Gaps in environmental monitoring and indicators development capacity;
42
GEF-IWCAM
· Obstacles to the access and sharing of environmental data and information.
With the exceptions of a few of the PCs (such as Barbados, Cuba, Dominican Republic,
and Jamaica) there is limited oversight, leadership, and coordination at the systemic
level to support and facilitate the institutional arrangements that would permit integrated
management of watersheds and coastal areas (UNEP, 2001). The management of
natural resources has traditionally been approached from a sectoral perspective.
Mandates for the management of natural resources have been allocated among
government ministries and municipalities without regard to the spatial scope of the
supported natural systems and processes or the functional inter-relationship between
elements of the environment. Policies and programmes under various institutions have
traditionally been developed in isolation from one another, with the promulgations of
multiple laws dealing separately with various aspects of natural resource management
(UNEP, 2001).
As a result of this syndrome, data collection, monitoring, data processing and analysis,
and the utilization of indicators, has been approached in a similarly ad hoc manner.
Exceptions include the case of the Dominican Republic, where the Ministry of
Environment and Natural Resources is the primary institution with responsibility for
IWCAM. The same law that created the Ministry also established a National System of
Information on the Environment and Natural Resources. All Government Departments
are legally mandated to contribute data to this system. The legislation overcomes a
major hurdle to the development of national environmental indicators and access of the
designated central coordinating agency to environmental data generated by other
government agencies.
In the absence of a coordinated national approach to data collection, management, use,
and reporting to meet clearly defined conservation and development goals, there is
limited awareness of gaps and deficiencies in capacity to develop indicator
mechanisms. More importantly, there is limited appreciation of the negative impact that
these gaps and deficiencies have on national sustainable development planning. A
number of initiatives for capacity development in environmental statistics and indicators
have been undertaken in the PCs, mainly in collaboration with international
organizations. However, these initiatives have not catalyzed the high level commitment
to integrated approaches to natural resources management (UNEP, 2001). This high-
level commitment is essential if there is to be a demand for systematic monitoring and
reporting. Two significant factors contributing to the limited impact of extra-regional
initiatives at the systemic level have been the limited coordination between extra-
regionally driven initiatives on the one hand, and on the other, the limited or absence of
coherent visions for national development in which strategically important natural
resource management considerations are recognized and considered.
5.2.3 Institutional capacity
Capacity assessment at the institutional/organizational level focused on those factors
that contribute to overall performance and functional capabilities. These included the
43
GEF-IWCAM
tools, guidelines, and information management systems that enable the organization to
adapt to the changing information needs and demands of the organization and its
institutional partners while developing its staff and stakeholder clients. The institutional
arrangements for natural resources management in general, and IWCAM in particular,
are characterized by multiple agencies and organizations, with overlapping mandates
and roles (Box 1). Furthermore, the current capacities of national institutions to
effectively support their respective mandates to monitor environmental parameters and
report on findings and trends tend to be inadequate. National institutional capacities for
monitoring and systematic observation vary by country, agency, and the environmental
resource or system being monitored. In general, the culture of systematic monitoring
and data collection reside in those government ministries responsible for natural
resources with market values, as well as in national meteorological services and
freshwater resources agencies. As a result, extensive time-series data sets tend to be
rare outside of these entities. Inadequate institutional capacities appear to be a major
contributing factor to the fragmented approach to research and data/information
management on natural resources, and the difficulty in accessing information and data.
Few mechanisms existed to facilitate the inter-disciplinary and inter-sectoral exchange
of information and experiences for decision-making on sustainable development (IDSD,
2003).
At the institutional level, the commitment to environmental monitoring and data
collection has been weak and transient and driven by projects, research initiatives,
and/or donor funded initiatives. The fragmentation of institutional mandates for the
management of natural resources has given rise to institutionally compartmentalized
and uncoordinated data collection and monitoring. The impact of fragmentation of
natural resource management mandates on data collection and data quality was
revealed in the recently completed Integrated Water Resources Management Capacity
Needs Assessment for the Caribbean (CEHI, 2007). The assessment found that the
institutional arrangements for integrated water resources management (IWRM) in the
region were generally weak and in some cases non-existent. All of the countries
surveyed demonstrated
Box 1. Institutional Capacity Building: Trends in Freshwater and
fragmentation of the IWRM
Coastal Area Resources
mandate among institutions
Evidence suggests that with very few exceptions notably Barbados,
and agencies.
Cuba, and Jamaica, Caribbean countries are some distance away
from the ideal institutional arrangement that would permit integrated
A collaborative assessment
management of watersheds and coastal areas. The extent of the
integration that is required is one that would permit a continuous and
was undertaken by the
evolutionary process and that unites all stakeholders and disciplines in
UNSD and CARICOM in
the planning and management of coastal areas and watersheds,
1999 to determine
taking into account, traditional, cultural, spatial, and historical
perspectives and conflicting interests and uses.
Caribbean needs in the area
of social, gender, and
The Integrated Management ideal is not being enhanced in the current
environmental statistics, and
situation in the Caribbean given:
· The multiplicity of institutions and jurisdictions that deal with
information technology. This
various aspects of resource management, often developing and
assessment was undertaken
implementing policies and programmes in isolation of one
as part of an initiative to
another;
· The multiplicity of laws, each dealing separately with various
strengthen intra-regional
aspects of resource management, thus encouraging a
compartmentalized approach to environmental management;
· The institutionally divided approach to dealing with environment
and development;
44
· The absence of credible arrangements for sustained
involvement of civil society in sustainable development
initiatives.
GEF-IWCAM
cooperation among national statistical systems. The assessment found gaps in
statistical capacity, particularly in the area of coordination among the main data
producing and data using institutions in some of the countries.
Inadequacies in national institutional capacity are illustrated by insufficient, outdated, or
non-functional equipment; poor organization; high levels of dependency on outside
consultants; insufficient financial resources; uncompetitive remuneration; obstacles to
effective staff recruitment and retention; and inadequate and/or un-sustained training. At
the regional level, institutional capacity to gather and generate information was found to
be weak, with information and data on water resources, and on water demand and
supply being inadequate (CEHI, 2007).
Established units dedicated to coastal zone management, such as in Barbados (Coastal
Zone Management Unit - CZMU) and Jamaica (National Environmental Planning
Agency - NEPA), have played a leading role in the development and implementation of
environmental monitoring programmes to address national needs and priorities. In
countries without dedicated CZM units such as the Bahamas, St. Kitts and Nevis, St.
Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago most ecosystem monitoring is
conducted by government agencies with other natural resource management priorities
or foci. In the Bahamas, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent and the
Grenadines, the national Fisheries Departments are primarily responsible for coastal
ecosystem monitoring. Coral reef monitoring programmes have been institutionalized in
some of the countries such as Barbados (CZMU), Jamaica (NEPA), and Trinidad and
Tobago (Fisheries Division, Institute of Marine Affairs).
A number of regional institutions and agencies exist that could assume leading roles in
developing IWCAM indicators, with responsibility consistent with their respective
mandates. For instance, CARICOM, CEHI, and CIMH provide training and capacity
development, as well as a range of services pertaining to environmental indicators
development and monitoring and the development of associated capacities. Despite the
existence of a number of relevant institutions at the national and regional levels, the lack
of national and regional institutional mechanisms to promote and coordinate the
development of environmental indicators mechanisms have been a major constraint.
5.2.4 Human resources
This section deals with the assessment of current human resource capacities for
IWCAM indicator mechanism development and implementation, and the availability of
appropriate training opportunities and processes. A review of the intra-institutional
enabling environment served to provide information on the critical support areas of
management of resources, mechanisms for performance enhancement, staff motivation
and moral building, and accountability and responsibility, as they relate to the
development of capacities to develop and sustain indicator mechanisms in support of
IWCAM. Human resources were assessed in terms of the number of technical and
professional experts as well as the level of technical expert knowledge and skills for
indicator development and environmental monitoring and assessment.
45
GEF-IWCAM
The skills and capacities required to establish and sustain a national IWCAM indicators
mechanism include knowledge of IWCAM concepts and approaches, of conceptual
frameworks for assessment, monitoring, and evaluation of IWCAM programmes, as well
as the skills and methodologies for selecting appropriate indicators, data collection and
analysis, interpretation of results, communicating and reporting of results, and their
utilization in adaptive management. As previously discussed, while the PCs have been
involved in a number of capacity development initiatives that have led to the existence
of significant capacity for environmental indicators and statistics, important gaps still
exist.
A major constraint to the use of indicators is the poor understanding and lack of
consensus among technical experts of how economic, social, and environmental forces
interact. Considerable knowledge and research is required to better understand the
interactions among these three components, and the implications of these interactions
for sustainable development and the parameters that must be assessed.
Inadequate human and financial resources have been identified as the most common
impeding factor for the development of both environment statistics and environmental-
economic accounting programmes in the CARICOM countries (CARICOM, 2003;
UNSD, 2007). The non-English speaking PCs (Cuba, Dominican Republic, and Haiti)
also cite inadequate human resources as a serious constraint to environmental
monitoring. A report on the challenges and constraints to the development of a set of
indicators to track effective environmental management in the OECS countries found a
pervasive lack of capacity to undertake the monitoring of many important parameters
(Geoghegan and Renard, 2006). This deficiency has created a dependence on external,
project-driven support for monitoring activities, which has raised issues of data
relevance, monitoring frequency, and continuity of monitoring programmes.
The human resource capacities available to support effective indicators development
and use for IWCAM vary between countries and between organizations and agencies
within countries. The survey undertaken in this study found that, with the exception of
the Environmental Management Authority in Trinidad, all of the respondent institutions
indicated that the quality of monitoring, observation and data collection was affected by
human resource constraints (Table 15). Where the human resource capacity to support
IWCAM indicators was assessed to be adequate, productivity and effectiveness,
however, were frequently limited by the lack of appropriate facilities, well-trained support
staff and labour, or restrictive intra-ministerial organizational structures, such as in
Antigua and Barbuda (Government of Antigua and Barbuda, 2001).
In contrast, St. Kitts and Nevis reported a severe shortage of trained technical staff to
support IWCAM through water resources management, water quality monitoring, and
coastal areas management (Government of St. Kitts and Nevis, 2001). The Bahamas
reported limited technical expertise in hydrologic, meteorological, and water quality data
(CoB, 2003). Coastal resources management in Barbados was found to suffer from a
general lack of adequately trained manpower due to inadequate remuneration, failure to
46
GEF-IWCAM
retain qualified staff, and a corresponding lack of structured training programmes
(Government of Barbados, 2001).
The countries participating in the IWRM Capacity Needs Assessment for the Caribbean
(CEHI, 2007) lacked an adequate stock of skills to effectively manage their respective
water resource endowments. This problem was found to be gravest in the Eastern
Caribbean States. The CEHI assessment confirmed that human resource development
is a major concern in the water sector, with limited training and research programmes
at the tertiary level to meet the identified training needs. Available training opportunities
were found to be limited to short courses in one or two aspects of water resources
management. The CEHI assessment identified the main obstacles to the development
of capacity for IWRM in the region as:
· Limited interest in training programmes by persons involved in IWRM;
· Limited enrolment in the training programme;
· Insufficient financial resources to undertake the programme;
· Difficulty in finding trained personnel to act as instructors and/or tutors.
These findings have implications for the design of effective capacity development
initiatives for strengthening national and regional environmental indicators mechanisms
in support of IWCAM.
Where training is provided, the newly acquired knowledge, skills, and capacities make
the trained individuals more marketable. Consequently, they move on to other agencies
and organizations, both internally and externally. The end result is that trained
individuals may not remain in their positions long enough to fully implement skills
learned on the job or to train others. The impact of the loss of trained personnel is
illustrated in Barbados, where an extensive GIS database was developed by the
Environmental Management and Land Use Project with support from the IDB. Although
human resource capacity has been developed within the GIS community, the high rate
of staff turnover has hampered plans to establish a dedicated cadre of GIS personnel in
the country (CEHI, 2007).
An illustration of human capacity gaps in watershed/water resources management and
coastal areas management is provided by the assessment of current human resources
in relation to Trinidad and Tobago's future requirements in these areas. Capacity
(additional skills) needs were identified in 16 areas (Table 16), consistent with the
complexity of integrated watershed and coastal areas management. The analysis
demonstrated the existence of gaps between current and required staffing levels in
most of the technical areas. While all of these areas are not essential for the
development of an IWCAM indicators mechanism, it illustrates some of the deficiencies
in human capacity that is often faced by the PCs. Specific capacity development
strategies were suggested and ongoing training was identified as an additional capacity
development need for professional and technical staff. The requirements of smaller PCs
may differ substantially from those of larger PCs, where the staff complements of
government agencies tend to be smaller than those of the larger PCs, creating an even
47
GEF-IWCAM
greater challenge to cover all of the skills sets required for effective watershed and
coastal areas management, and indicators development and use.
Capacity development in support of indicators development and use, data analysis, data
storage, and reporting must be supported by training that is relevant and that prepares
professionals for the emerging trends in technology development. Advances and
changes in technology and in the structure of water and waste water operations were
seen as having growing implications for human resources development, with available
human resources, particularly at the technical level, likely to be largely untrained or
under-trained (CWWA, 2003).
IWCAM-related monitoring and indicators capacities, proficiencies, and staff
complements vary greatly among PCs. Human resource constraints in these areas
might be addressed by adopting a regional or sub-regional model for the coordinated
pooling and/or sharing of trained staff with the assistance of the thematically appropriate
regional and/or inter-governmental agency (Box 2). Strategically there is a need for a
regional approach to the development of a cadre of trained professionals to support the
thrust towards integrated watershed and coastal areas management, including
appropriate indicator mechanisms. This will involve the development and introduction of
continuing development programmes for professionals in collaboration with a range of
partners, including but not limited to CARICOM, CEHI, CIMH, UNEP CAR RCU, UWI
(CERMES, Centre for Marine Studies - CMS), in conjunction with international
organizations (e.g. UNDESA) and national environmental, public utilities, and statistical
agencies. The approach should be based on the thematic elements that contribute to
IWCAM, with each thematic area coordinated and supported by a designated institution
or group of institutions with demonstrated capacities and expertise.
Table 16: Skills gap analysis for watershed/water resources and coastal
zone management in Trinidad and Tobago (Gov't Trinidad & Tobago, 2001)
48
GEF-IWCAM
Box 2. Collaborative Solutions to Capacity Constraints
A number of precedents exist for this collaborative approach to meeting technical and human resource needs. For
a number of years the Barbados CZMU provided technical assistance to OECS countries in the area of coastal
zone management through a formal agreement, which is still in place.
To address capacity constraints in OECS countries the GEF-funded CPACC Project designated the CMS at UWI,
Jamaica, as a technical support node to provide assistance to participating countries (Bahamas, Belize, Jamaica)
in coral reef monitoring and the processing of the monitoring data. In 2007 the CMS expanded this model of
technical support under the Mainstreaming Adaptation to Climate Change (MACC) Project to include the OECS. A
number of options have been considered to address deficiencies in capacity to service and maintain the 18 sea-
level/hydro-meteorological monitoring stations established 1998 in 12 participating CARICOM countries under the
CPACC project. A specially trained technical support team comprising Senior Instrumentation Technicians from
Belize, Jamaica, and CIMH was formed to assist in inspections, repairs, and the submission of status reports.
Consideration has been given to designating one of the stronger national meteorological services in the OECS as
the technical support node to other OECS countries for the purpose of maintaining the sea-level monitoring stations
and recovering stored data. The CIMH and CCCCC would provide oversight and back-up support to the designated
entity.
5.2.5 Data and information
49
GEF-IWCAM
An effective IWCAM indicators framework must be accompanied by supporting data and
information as well as appropriate data and information management and analysis
systems and mechanisms to calculate, review, and revise the indicators on a
continuous basis. As previously mentioned, a number of initiatives have been
undertaken in the region to improve environmental statistics. The main agencies
involved in data collection and storage include the Central Statistical Offices and
government ministries and agencies, laboratories, universities (national, regional,
international), national research institutes (e.g. IMA), and regional bodies (e.g. UNEP
CAR RCU, CEHI, CARICOM). Data are also collected through a number of
programmes such as CARICOMP and Reefcheck, using standard methodologies for
which training is provided to persons involved. Environmental statistics have not
previously received high priority, as the focus had been on socioeconomic statistics, for
which relatively good datasets are available for the PCs. Furthermore, environmental
indicators and statistics have been historically more readily available for the terrestrial
environment (e.g. forests) and for meteorological parameters than for the aquatic
environments. The fisheries sector is an exception as government fisheries departments
have traditionally demonstrated a culture of data collection and analysis, with fisheries
datasets spanning periods of up to 30 - 50 years in the PCs.
A pivotal factor determining the ability of institutions to address environmental reporting
and national policy development issues are the availability of adequate social,
economic, and environmental information for planning and decision-making. The key
impeding factors to the compilation of environmental statistics and environmental-
economic accounting programmes were determined to be the availability and quality of
data (UNSD/CARICOM, 2000). This is underpinned by a number of contributing factors
including: lack of agreement on a standard list of environmental indicators on which to
focus data collection efforts; absence at national and regional levels of a policy-defined
demand for environmental data and indicators, as well as of the actual mechanisms that
allow data to be used in decision-making processes and the lack of understanding of
the value of such data in decision-making processes; and the fragmented and
overlapping institutional mandates for environmental management.
National policies for coordinated environmental data collection or national development
policies supported by explicitly identified environmental performance indicators are rare.
As a result monitoring and data collection have been poorly funded and undertaken on
an ad hoc basis. The required human and financial resources are usually inadequate,
and the absence of national data management and coordinating mechanisms severely
compromise the capacity of government agencies to efficiently retrieve and exchange
data and information. National capacities for monitoring and systematic observation
vary with country, national agency, and the environmental component or natural
resource being monitored. There is insufficient knowledge on how to extract and
manage environmental data in ways that are productive for decision-making. The large
data gaps and lack of time-series data have hampered efforts to track IWCAM-related
issues, identify emerging problems, assess policy options, and gauge policy
effectiveness.
50
GEF-IWCAM
Baseline environmental statistics were found to be lacking in most of the countries, with
fundamental gaps in environmental datasets still present. The data situation is similar in
the PCs: some relevant data and information are available but usually scattered across
various agencies, including research and academic institutions whose data do not enter
the country's data archives. Due to a lack of coordination and collaboration among
these agencies and in some cases proprietary and confidentiality factors, these data are
not easily accessible. Moreover, lack of standard methodologies for data collection has
resulted in often inconsistent and incompatible datasets. An important issue relate to the
quality control of data to ensure data reliability and accuracy. Where extensive time-
series datasets do exist the data tend to be stored in analogue or hard-copy formats.
Data handling and processing procedures have not kept pace with changes in computer
technology, data management, and decision support applications. Furthermore, even
existing datasets may not be properly described, that is, metadata and metadata
standards are often lacking in the Caribbean. As a result, institutions often do not know
what datasets exist or are held by others. This was confirmed by the GIS capacity
assessment, which found contradictions amongst institutions as to what datasets are
held and by whom.
The above is well-illustrated by the situation regarding the land-use datasets in the PCs,
as revealed by the GIS assessment: Available land-use datasets in all the countries
were outdated and most of the existing digital datasets lack metadata. In general, there
has been no infrastructure determined for standards, copyright, or ownership, and no
strategy had been developed for GIS use, sharing, and cost recovery in the region. An
assessment of the nine countries involved in the FAO Lesser Antilles Pelagic
Ecosystem Project found the geo-referenced data was fragmented, poorly documented,
and often limited in distribution.
Some countries have taken steps to promote environmental data availability and
coordination. For instance, the Dominican Republic has recently introduced a law that
requires all relevant government ministries and agencies to submit data to a centralized
system. The development of the GEF-IWCAM Project Information Management
System, which includes a clearing house mechanism, databases (including indicator
node), and possibly web GIS, is being considered. A number of capacity strengthening
initiatives for environmental data and information have been undertaken in the region,
as mentioned above.
5.2.6 Technology
As previously mentioned, the limited availability of comprehensive environmental data
and information is partly as a result of the failure to ensure that data collection, handling,
and processing procedures keep pace with changes in technology and decision support
applications. Various national and foreign agencies contribute to field data collection
and remote sensing. It is recognized that in order to obtain accurate and timely data, a
significant financial investment would be required for transfer of technology and training,
accompanied by appropriate mandates and policies. A number of constraints still exist
throughout the region. The majority of the data in long time-series data sets were
51
GEF-IWCAM
collected prior to the widespread availability of relatively inexpensive computer capacity.
As a result, a substantial proportion of time-series data is stored in analogue (hard
copy) formats such as computer cards, data cards, data sheets, or data log books. For
instance, approximately 70% of the region's meteorological data is stored in data cards.
The human, technical, and financial capacities required to digitize these data records is
substantial. In the absence of a comprehensive and coordinated programme of data
transfer and recovery, the analogue storage format presents a barrier to data use and
exchange.
The rapid increase in institutional capacity to develop and downscale climate change
scenarios and models to the sub-regional and national levels has created a significant
demand for computer memory. Medium- and long- term decision-making in support of
IWCAM can no longer rely solely on historical meteorological trend data, and climate
change scenarios and models are essential for the assessment of climate change
impacts on environmental, economic, and human systems. Whereas the CIMH has
excess capacity for storing modeling outputs, the two UWI departments involved in
scenario development and modeling (Physics Department in Jamaica, and Mathematics
and Computing Department in Barbados) have limited storage capacity.
Full benefit has not been taken of developing technological infrastructure for information
management. Where technological advances have been embraced, challenges remain
in the development of coordinated data networks and data exchange due to
incompatibilities in technology arising from the proliferation of diverse computer systems
and software programmes, and decision support applications. Capacity development
must be supported by changes in the way data is managed from collection though
archiving and dissemination. An information management system that encourages
continued updating/uploading of quality data is necessary.
The development of technical and human resource capacity does not guarantee the
technology and associated decision support system or database will facilitate the
process of IWCAM monitoring. For instance, the national Coastal Resource Information
Systems (CRIS) and associated human resource capacities developed by the CPACC
Project between 1998 and 2001 have not realized the goals of widespread application
within the countries and often only serve as static sources of data.
Much of the data relating to IWCAM has a strong spatial component and GIS
capabilities are important in managing and utilizing this information. All the PCs have
some capability for GIS, mainly related to land use. In the majority of cases the
introduction of Caribbean government agencies to GIS technology has been driven by
donor-funded technical assistance projects. A project funded by the Canadian
International Development Agency for the OECS countries provided funding exclusively
for hardware and software with little if any investment in training and data development.
The provision of hardware and software without the requisite capacity development has
given rise to instances in which GIS equipment has remained unused for prolonged
periods. The FAO Lesser Antilles Pelagic Ecosystem Project found that there was
limited maintenance of GIS capacity in the nine participating countries, as manifested by
52
GEF-IWCAM
stagnant databases, non-functioning equipment, and limited GIS analyses undertaken,
partly as a result of GIS not being fully incorporated into the workflow of the institutions
concerned.
A number of spatial data information and GIS initiatives have been undertaken in the
Caribbean at both the regional and national levels, with varying degrees of success.
The processes being guided by the GEF-IWCAM project probably represents the most
comprehensive regional initiative focused specifically on environmental issues. The
project has taken a strategic approach to the regional development of GIS capacity as a
tool for integrated data analysis and management for watershed and coastal
management with the goal of incorporating GIS technology in the various components
of the IWCAM project. Given the cross-cutting nature of IWCAM this would require the
expansion and use of GIS in all participating countries.
To this end the IWCAM Project commissioned an assessment of GIS capabilities in the
PCs. The capacity needs assessment examined the functions, procedures, products,
data, tools, and human resources available in national agencies and used this
information to determine GIS and Information and Communications Technology
requirements in relation to the performance of the functions of the agencies (CEHI,
2007). The assessment formed the basis for the formulation of a Caribbean GIS Road
Map. For further information on the outcomes of this assessment see the GEF-IWCAM
project website (www.IWCAM.org).
There is reluctance to create a central repository of GIS data in some of the countries.
Several of them have probably not yet considered the setting up of such an agency as
decision-makers often do not understand the value of the tool. GIS application is often
driven by one or two individuals or units for very specific purposes. Few countries
realize the benefits that a more coordinated approach, such as a central repository or
unit, might have. As such, it is often difficult to justify the cost of setting up a new
agency.
5.2.7 Financial resources
The lack of financial resources has been identified as one of the two most common
impeding factors in the development of both environment statistics and environmental-
economic accounting programmes (UNSD, 2007). This assessment is supported by the
national reports prepared for the GEF-IWCAM project and the survey conducted under
this study. Furthermore, indicators mechanism have not historically been built into
programmes and projects (but this is changing), and as a result, budgetary allocation for
this type of activity is often not provided.
Government funding for natural resource management has traditionally been
inadequate. With government revenues in many of the Caribbean SIDS being eroded by
the loss of preferential markets and rising fuel and energy costs, this situation is unlikely
to change, and will probably become more acute. A substantial proportion of the funding
to support IWCAM initiatives in the Caribbean is provided through projects and donor-
53
GEF-IWCAM
funded initiatives. The limited government funding to support IWCAM initiatives may
require agencies to develop capacities to financing IWCAM programmes and activities
through donor-funded projects. This will require considerable knowledge of, and
familiarity with the complex procedures and performance criteria of donor agencies.
Countries have resorted to a number of measures to deal with funding constraints. For
instance, in a number of countries such as Trinidad and Tobago data and information
are being collected through project-funded contracts with private consultants. This type
of arrangement has the potential to further divert capacity and resources away from the
continuous, programmatic approach to data collection, with data acquisition
opportunities becoming more project-specific and uncoordinated, and data holdings
being disbursed among various agencies, institutions, and/or ministry departments. The
PCs are often recipients of various funds that cover technical assistance and other
components on a project basis, but there is generally a lack of sustainable institutional
capacity building and human resources development, and limited implementation of the
projects' recommendations.
While the funds that are made available to government agencies with IWCAM-related
responsibilities tend to be sufficient to maintain staff levels, they may not meet the costs
of implementation. In St. Vincent and the Grenadines government funding for the
Environmental Services Unit (CCD National Focal Point) forms part of the budgetary
allocation to the Ministry of Health and the Environment. More than 75% of budgetary
allocations cover staff salaries, leaving minimal funding for project design,
implementation, and evaluation.
The sectoral approach to the allocation of natural resource management responsibilities
has adversely affected the financial capacity of government agencies to effectively
undertake and discharge natural resource management responsibilities. In Antigua and
Barbuda the fragmentation of responsibilities for the CCD-related activities precluded
the targeted budgetary allocation of funds to address land degradation issues. Although
the budget line items of several government agencies were intended to fund activities
related to the prevention of land degradation, only a fraction of the funds allocated to
non-salary expenditure was received. Similar reasons were given for the delays
experienced by the Forestry Unit and the Environment Division in initiatives for
reforestation, further development of the national database, and environmental capacity
building.
The capacity survey undertaken in this study revealed that data collection and
management activities identified in the annual budgets and work plans of responding
organizations received varying levels of financial support from their respective
governments (Tables 17 and 18). The following is a summary of the survey findings:
Data collection, processing, and analysis: The majority of respondents indicated that
although data collection, processing, and analysis were identified in annual work plans
and budgets, funding and staffing compliments were inadequate. The exceptions were
the IMA and the EMA in Trinidad and Tobago and CERMES. The EMA reported that
funding and staffing levels were adequate. In the case of the IMA, funding for monitoring
54
GEF-IWCAM
was considered to be adequate but staff compliments were considered to be
inadequate. Both funding and staffing in support of data processing and analysis were
considered to be adequate. In the case of CERMES data collection, processing, and
analysis activities were not considered in its annual work plan and budget. However,
adequate funding and staff compliments were available to undertake these activities.
The situation described in the survey response from CERMES was the converse to that
described in the majority of survey responses.
Data storage and access: The majority of the respondents reported that data storage
and access were identified in work plans and budgets, but were constrained by
inadequate funding and staffing. The exceptions were the EMA and NEPA, which
reported both adequate funding and staffing for this area.
Maintenance of observational monitoring equipment: The EMA, NEPA, and the Water
Resources Authority of Trinidad and Tobago were the only respondents that reported
adequate staffing and funding in support of the maintenance of observational monitoring
equipment.
Purchase of equipment and software: With the exception of the EMA all respondents
reported inadequate funding for the purchase of monitoring equipment; software and
technological aides for the processing and analysis of data; and the development and
maintenance of data storage and retrieval systems. The EMA reported adequate
financial and human resources in all areas except the development and maintenance of
data storage and retrieval systems for which both financial and human resources were
considered inadequate.
55
GEF-IWCAM
Table 17. Summary of survey responses: Financial support for data collection and
management
Question DR
REG
JA
SKN
SVG
TT
TT
TT
TT
Resour
Environme
Ministry.
CERMES
WAT
FORES
CAPACITY FOR ANALYSIS Financial Support
& Nat.
NEPA
RVICES
DEPT
DEPT.
DNRE
EMA
nt
IMA
WRA
E
ces
RSE
T
R
Are the monitoring, data-collection and sample-collection activities
performed by your institution:
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
o adequately
funded
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
o
supported by adequate staff complements
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Are the data (or sample) -processing, -analysis, and - reporting
activities performed by your institution:
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
o adequately
funded
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
o
supported by adequate staffing complements
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
Are the data storage and acquisition2 activities of your institution:
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
o adequately
funded
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
o
supported by adequate staffing complements
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Is the maintenance of observational or monitoring equipment:
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
o adequately
funded
N
Y
Y
N
N
Y
-
Y
o
supported by adequate staffing complements
N
Y
Y
N
N
Y
-
Y
Is the purchase of observational or monitoring equipment
2 Data Acquisition: the purchase of data sets (raw data, model outputs), remotely sensed imagery (aerial
photographs, satellite imagery).
56
GEF-IWCAM
Question DR
REG
JA
SKN
SVG
TT
TT
TT
TT
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
o adequately
funded
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
o
supported by adequate staffing complements
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Are the purchase of software, and technological aides for
processing and data analysis:
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
o adequately
funded
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
o
supported by adequate staffing complements
N
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Is the development and maintenance of data storage and retrieval
systems (hard copy or digital):
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
o adequately
funded
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
o
supported by adequate staffing complements
N Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
57
GEF-IWCAM
Table 18. Summary of survey responses: Constraints to monitoring and data
management
DR REG
JA SKN SVG TT TT TT TT
Environ
WATERSERV
Resour
ICES DEPT
FORES
CAPACITY FOR ANALYSIS
Ministry.
CERMES
& Nat.
NEPA
DEPT.
DNRE
EMA
IMA
WRA
ces
m
en
T
R
t
Is the quality of monitoring/observation/data
collection affected by:
o
human resource constraints
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
o
inadequate training
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
o funding
constraints
Y
N
Y Y
Y
Y
N Y
Y
o equipment
constraints
Y
N
Y Y
Y
Y
N Y
Y
o technology
constraints
Y
N
Y Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Is the quality of the analysis affected by:
o data
constraints
Y
N
Y Y
Y
N Y
Y
o
human resource constraints
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
o inadequate
training
Y
N
Y Y
Y
N Y
Y
o funding
constraints
Y
N
Y Y
Y
N Y
Y
o equipment
constraints
Y
N
Y Y
Y
N Y
Y
o technology
constraints
Y
N
Y Y
Y
N Y
Y
Is the quality of storage/archiving and
processing affected by:
o data
constraints
N
N
Y Y
Y
N N
N
o
human resource constraints
Y
N
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
o inadequate
training
N
N
N Y
Y
N Y
Y
o funding
constraints
Y
N
N Y
Y
N Y
Y
o equipment
constraints
Y
N
N Y
Y
N Y
Y
o technology
constraints
Y
N
N Y
Y
N N
Y
Is the quality of reporting affected by:
o data
constraints
Y
N
Y Y
Y
Y
Y
o
human resource constraints
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
o inadequate
training
Y
N
Y Y
Y
N
N
o funding
constraints
Y
N
Y Y
Y
N
Y
o equipment
constraints
Y
N
N Y
Y
N
N
o technology
constraints
Y
N
N Y
Y
N
Y
58
GEF-IWCAM
6. GROUNDTRUTHING
EXERCISES
6.1. Dominican Republic
Interviews: The agencies visited and persons with whom discussions were held are
shown in the table below. In addition, a number of publications were examined (Table
19). The consultant, Sherry Heileman (SH) also had a courtesy visit with officials of
UNDP.
Table 19. Agencies and persons interviewed in the Dominican Republic
Ministry
Official and Department
Ministry of
Ernesto Reyna Alcantara, Head, Gestion Ambiental,
Environment and
Subsecretario, Soil and Water (GEF-IWCAM National Focal Point, CCD
Natural Resources
Focal Point)
J. Felipe Ditrén Flores (GEF-IWCAM Technical Focal Point)
Director, Environmental Quality, Subsecretariat of Environmental
Management
Juan Alcantara, Deputy Head, Dept. of Project Formulation and Planning
Patricio Devers, Head, Dept. Environmental Statistics
Silmer Gonzalez Ruiz, Head, Dept. of Research
Miguel Espinosa, Environmental Auditing
Nina Lysenko, Director, Conservation and Management, Subsecretariat of
Coastal and Marine Resources
Victor Viñas Nicolas, Evaluator, Dept. Soil and Water
Ministry of Public
Lic. Luis Roa, Director General, Environmental Health
Health and Social
Assistance
UNDP (DR)
Sixto J. Inchaustegui, Maria Eugenia Morales
Major findings
Agencies responsible for natural resources and environment
1. Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (Secretaría de Estado de Medio
Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. http://www.medioambiente.gov.do/cms/
In the Dominican Republic the major responsibility for environmental and natural
resources management, and for IWCAM, lies with the Ministry of Environment and
Natural Resources (Secretaría de Estado de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales -
SEMARN). Within this Ministry, there are six principal departments or Subsecretariás
with responsibility for: environmental quality, water and soils, forestry, protected areas
and biodiversity, coastal and marine resources, and education and environmental
information (Table 20). In addition, a number of agencies are involved in land
management (Table 21). Each agency has its own data collection system, and basically
works individually, although they are moving towards greater collaboration and sharing
of data and information. One of the GEF-IWCAM pilot projects is being conducted in the
Dominican Republic, specifically within the Haina River Watershed.
59
GEF-IWCAM
Table 20. Ministries and departments responsible for natural resources, and their major
functions in the Dominican Republic
Sub-secretariats Major
Functions
Soils & Waters
Formulates and directs the soil and water national policy regarding its normative use and
management;
Establishment of rural communities' participation in plans, projects, and programmes on
watershed management;
CCD National Focal Point.
Forest Resources
Collaborates in the formulation of the country's forestry policy;
Plans the establishment of commercial forestry plantations;
Evaluates, approves, and monitors private forestry management plans.
Environmental Quality
Ensures that human activities are in accordance with regulations on established
Management
environmental quality criteria;
Implementation of prevention and mitigation system on natural disasters;
UNFCCC National Focal Point.
Biodiversity & Protected Areas
Coordinates the design and application of the national policy on development of protected
areas and the country's biological diversity conservation;
Development and application of the norms, regulations, and procedures for sustainable
management of protected areas and the biodiversity;
Manages the national protected areas system.
Coastal & Marine Resources
Establishment of the national marine and coastal policy;
Establishment of the necessary base and coordination for an adequate use and
management of the coastal and marine zones;
MARPOL National Focal Point.
Environmental Education &
Promotes the national environmental policy among the various sectors, through educational
Information
and cultural programmes;
(Directorate)
Establishes the environmental education policy;
Generates and analyzes environmental and natural resources geospatial information.
Table 21. Institutions involved in land management in the Dominican Republic
Institutions
Areas of intervention and relevant issues
Environment and Natural Resources Secretariat
Policy and Strategic orientation, Soil, Water, Forest, Biodiversity,
etc; Awareness Campaigns.
Agriculture Secretariat
Production, Planning, and Trade - Agricultural sector
Secretariat for Economics, Planning, and External Economic and social planning;
Cooperation, formerly the Technical Secretariat for the Annual national budget development;
Presidency and the National Planning Office
Zoning and mapping;
Land use planning, norms and regulation.
Public Works, Transportation and Communication Public works, Mines, Energy
Secretariat
Finance Secretariat
Public finances and taxation
Women's Secretariat
Gender Issues
Education Secretariat & Higher Education , Science & Education, research and extension
Technology
Public Health & Social Assistance Secretariat
Public health and sanitation
Foreign Relations Secretariat
International Environmental Conventions, Joint Bi-national
Commission
Superior Land Tribunal
Land - Legal Matters
General Directorate for Frontier Development
Sustainable development activities along DR-Haiti frontier
National Institute for Hydrological Resources
Water works infrastructure and regulations;
Water resources management: dams, rivers, canals, etc.
National Meteorology Office
Weather parameters, forecasts, etc.
Among the legal mandates of SEMARN is the development of a free-access information
system on the environment and natural resources. In 2000, the same law that created
this Ministry also established a National System of Information on the Environment and
Natural Resources. All Government Departments are legally mandated to contribute
data to this system. Further, in 2004, the law related to Free Access to Public
Information was established.
60
GEF-IWCAM
Since 2002 the Ministry has been engaged in an initiative under the Economic
Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) REDESA project to develop
a system of sustainable development indicators for the country. The objective of this
project was to strengthen the production of social and environmental statistics in the
Latin American and Caribbean countries. The Dominican Republic has also been
engaged in developing environmental indicators under the UNEP Global Environment
Outlook project for Latin America and the Caribbean (GEO LAC).
National environmental statistics for a large number of environmental indicators are
available on the Ministry's website
(www.medioambiente.gov.do/cms/index.php?option=com_mosforms&Itemid=278). The
Dominican Republic has published a number of reports and data products, including:
· The publication in 2004 by SEMARN of a compendium of 108 environmental and
socio-economic variables for the country (see list below). Where available, time
series of data are presented, although some discontinuities exist, and in many
cases, geographical coverage is limited. A number of these variables are of
relevance to IWCAM indicators (e.g. related to fresh water, forest cover, land
degradation, coastal water quality, marine natural living resources, etc).
· Publication of a compendium of indicators of environmental sustainability of
hydrological resources (2000 2005) in 2006. This was the first product of the
National System of Indicators of Hydrologic Resources, under the System of
Indicators of Sustainable Development. The compendium covers the sub-
themes: watershed management, administration and availability of potable water,
and water quality.
· National environmental profiles have been published (in 1981, 2001, 2002),
under the sponsorship of USAID.
(www.usaid.gov/dr/docs/resources/dr_environment_assessment092001.pdf).
These reports include data on a number of indicators under various themes (soils
and land use, water resources, forests, coastal and marine resources,
biodiversity and protected areas, environmental quality in urban and industrial
sector, institutions and regulatory framework). Although time series data are
presented for some of the indicators, discontinuities exist and geographical
coverage is limited.
· Atlas of Environmental Statistics (2004).
2. Secretaría de Estado de Salud Publica y Asistencia Social (Ministry of Public Health
and Social Assistance)
This Ministry has a national monitoring programme for a number of variables, for
example, water quality in recreational beaches, lakes, and rivers (e.g. under the Blue
Flag programme, chemical and biological parameters are monitored on 10 beaches
around the country); potable water; contamination of food and beverage, particularly
61
GEF-IWCAM
in imported products; chemical residues in agricultural produce and incidence of
poisoning; milk and dairy products along the production chain; contamination in fish
and meat.
3. Instituto Nacional de Recursos Hidráulicos (Institute for Hydrological Resources)
The national water resources development agency monitors water quality and quantity,
and has a water quality monitoring programme, which was launched in 1997, to
systematize water quality measurement. This agency makes wide use of GIS and
satellite data. There is a project for management of watersheds and coastal areas.
International Frameworks
The Dominican Republic is party to a number of multinational environmental
agreements - MEAs (Table 1), under which there are initiatives to develop and use
appropriate indicators for monitoring and reporting purposes. The country also
contributes national level data to global efforts, for example, sustainable development
indicators to UNCSD (through annual questionnaire), UNDP Human development
Report, WHO/UNICEF Status of Health and Sanitation in LAC, FAO fisheries statistics,
etc.
Monitoring activities
Programmes for regular monitoring and with wide geographical coverage are limited to
those for potable water and public health. In most other cases, data are collected on a
project basis (datos punctuales); projects are geographically localized and limited in
duration.
Monitoring activities at the national level include:
· Potable water quality, in which a number of variables are monitored (refer to
Table 14);
· Coastal water quality in tourist areas (e.g. Punta Plata). A number of biological
and chemical variables are monitored;
· Hydrological
resources;
· Public health (see above);
· Environmental auditing: a number of standards have been established for
industries and urban treatment plants, as well as for agriculture. SEMARN
conducts environmental auditing of industries, treatment plants and agricultural
activities, in which checks are carried out for compliance. A programme to
monitor heavy metals is being developed.
There are recommended parameters for monitoring of beaches, but these are not
implemented. Ecosystem criteria for monitoring of coastal ecosystems using a standard
set of indicators have been developed (using standards established by CARICOMP and
the AGGRA programmes), but monitoring is not conducted on a regular basis. In fact,
62
GEF-IWCAM
most of the data collection is project-based, and lack continuity. A CARICOMP site was
located in the Dominican Republic, but this is no longer in existence. A Reefcheck
proposal has been developed for coral reef monitoring, but has not been implemented.
Capacity
A number of relevant capacity building initiatives have been undertaken in the country.
Among these have been support to develop and implement an environmental indicators
system from UNECLAC REDESA and GTZ; development of environmental indicators
under the GEO-LAC project; and environmental accounting under UNSD. Capacity for
GIS is well developed in the country. As described above, a significant amount of data
on a large number of indicators of relevance to IWCAM already exists in the country.
A number of constraints regarding capacity for environmental (and IWCAM) indicators
exists. These include:
· Limited human capacity, including qualified persons;
· Sporadic training opportunities;
· Inadequate financial resources, although national fund for the environment and
natural resources is in existence;
· Limited laboratory facilities and lack of accreditation of existing laboratories. For
instance, samples for agricultural chemicals have to be sent to Puerto Rico for
testing;
· Limited technical capacity, especially for air and water quality;
· Absence of a committee at the national level for developing indicators;
· Poor implementation of indicators and monitoring system at the national level;
· Limited sharing of data among agencies (although this is improving).
Documents and website reviewed
Estadísticas Ambientales de América Latina y el Caribe. Caso: Republica Dominicana.
Secretaria de Estado de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, 2004.
Indicadores de sostenibilidad ambiental del recursos hídricos en la Republica
Dominicana 2000 -2005. Secretaria de Estado de Medio Ambiente y Recursos
Naturales, 2006.
Republica Dominicana. Objetivo Desarrollo del Milenio Numero 7: Garantizar la
Sostenibilidad Ambiental. Evaluación d necesidades para la Republica Dominicana.
Metas 9 a 11. Secretaria de Estado de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, 2006.
Environmental Atlas 2004. Secretaria de Estado de Medio Ambiente y Recursos
Naturales
SEMARN website: http://www.medioambiente.gov.do
63
GEF-IWCAM
Summary
The Dominican Republic has a number of initiatives to develop indicators and a
programme for environmental statistics is in place. In fact, the country has produced
significant sets of environmental data on a wide number of indicators, and has produced
several important publications and data products. Based on discussions held during this
exercise and publications and products examined, this country has a significant base for
the further development and implementation of IWCAM indicators. Nevertheless,
existing indicator mechanisms are not fully implemented at the national level, and data
collection and monitoring are sporadic, except for a few areas such as fresh water and
issues related to public health. Much of the studies and data are in the form of surveys
and inventories of natural resources, without regular and continuous monitoring of
trends using a standard system of indicators, except for resources such as fresh water
and fisheries landings. This is attributed to limited human, financial and technical
capacity.
Indicator frameworks and data collection are aimed at national priorities as well as to
contribute to global initiatives and frameworks. These indicators are used for policy
decisions, to help focus projects to investigate or address particular problems or issues,
for instance related to achieving the MDGs. However, the need was recognized to have
greater linkage between environmental indicators and decision-making. The view was
expressed that efforts should focus on using existing indicators and strengthening the
related methodologies. Moreover, indicators must be linked with ongoing efforts and
national priorities, and with existing global frameworks such as MEAs and MDGs.
6.2. Barbados
Interviews:
· Ministry of Environment: Travis Sincler, Senior Environmental Officer, Amrikha
Singh, Environmental Officer
· Statistical Department: Victor Brown, Senior Statistician
· Environmental Protection Department: Anthony Headley, Deputy Director
· Coastal Zone Management Unit: Angélique Brathwaite
Major findings
The elements of a national indicators mechanism are present in the form of institutions
and their respective mandates, their monitoring activities, as well as a list of national
indicators. There are instances of semi-formal agency-to-agency arrangements for the
coordination of monitoring activities and the sharing of data. An enabling environment is
required to formalize and extend these arrangements to encompass and coordinate the
environmental monitoring activities of all the government agencies. The creation of such
an enabling environment appears to be a national objective. The impetus to make this
objective a reality may be provided by a project to develop the capacity of the Barbados
Statistical Service (BSS) and update existing legislation.
64
GEF-IWCAM
Systematic data collection and monitoring is undertaken to inform the planning and
decision making processes as they relate to health, coastal development, planning,
infrastructure investment and design, and land use. Technical capacity and expertise is
of a high caliber. For the CZMU, the size of its staff complement has posed a challenge
to sustaining long-term coastal monitoring programmes. However, the challenge has
been overcome by establishing collaborative partnerships with UWI and the Bellaire
Research Laboratory. Similar partnerships among government agencies have provided
opportunities for coordinated monitoring and data collection, and data and information
sharing. These arrangements have in turn reduced duplication of effort.
A number of challenges exist for the development of a national indicators mechanism in
Box 3. Challenges to the development of a National Indicators Mechanism
The main issues thwarting the coordinated production, management, and
dissemination of statistics in Barbados include: (i) weak legal framework; (ii)
insufficient coordination among governmental agencies that produces statistical data;
(iii) inadequate timeliness and quality of data, particularly in the social field, but also in
the economic area; (iv) insufficient experienced staff; (v) outdated technical
infrastructure; and (vi) difficulties for the public, businesses, and government to access
relevant statistics and information.
this country (Box 3).
Agencies and monitoring programmes
IWCAM-related responsibilities and activities are vested in a number of government
agencies (Table 22). The types of data collected by the various agencies in Barbados
are shown in Table 23.
The Environmental Protection Department (EPD) and the Barbados Water Authority
(BWA) conduct a joint groundwater quality monitoring programme. Sampling is
conducted monthly at 22 potable supply and nine agricultural supply wells. Groundwater
samples are analyzed for 25 chemical parameters and three bacteriological parameters
and are compared with the WHO Drinking Water Quality Guidelines. Near-shore water
quality is monitored at 18 beaches on the north and south coasts on a weekly basis.
The samples are analyzed for enterococci and faecal coliform at the Sir Winston Scott
Polyclinic Laboratory and should conform to the standards of the proposed Marine
Pollution Control (Discharge) Regulations. Package and municipal wastewater
treatment plants are monitored periodically for biochemical oxygen demand,
biochemical oxygen demand removal rate, total suspended solids, and volatile
suspended solids.
The Solid Waste and Hazardous Substances Section monitors and regulates the solid
waste management and government-operated solid waste disposal sites. This Section
was developed with the aim of improving the regulation of solid waste management.
The Integrated Solid Waste Management Programme is a coordinated effort by a
number of Government agencies and the private sector to protect the environment,
65
GEF-IWCAM
improve the standard of public health in Barbados, and foster the participation of the
private sector in a structured manner.
The BSS was established in June 1956 and reports to the Ministry of Economic Affairs
and Development. In 1958 the Statistics Act was passed, empowering the BSS to
conduct any census in the country; to collect, compile, and publish statistics in a wide
array of topics; and to coordinate the statistical activities of other government agencies.
There is no specific reference to environmental data, although some relevant data may
be captured under agriculture, fisheries, health, and land-use. Much of the data and
statistics of national importance are produced by government agencies other than the
BSS.
Table 22. Institutions responsible for land, soil, water, and coastal resources in Barbados
(FAO, 2001).
Institution
Responsibility
Overall responsibility for development applications guided
Town and Country Planning Department
by the Physical Development Plan
Crops Section
Food crops and floriculture; plant/foodstuff quarantine at
air & sea ports
Fisheries Division
Fisheries resources
Soil Conservation Unit
Scotland District conservation; landslide and erosion
mitigation; Forestry
Ministry of Agriculture
Meteorological Department
Meteorological forecasting
and Rural
Analytical Services Lab.
Soil, plant, water analysis
Development
Pesticide Control Board
Agrochemical import certification
Quarantine Unit
Sanitary and phytosanitary certification
Land
and
Water
Use
Unit
Hydrology and agro-meteorological data; irrigation
extension and agronomy
Extension section
Crop husbandry advice and extension
Environmental
Unit
Environmental policy and international treaties;
environmental education
Ministry of the Coastal Zone Management
Coastal area management
Environment, Energy
Unit
and Natural
National Conservation Parks and beaches; Marine Museum Underwater Park
Resources
Commission
Caves of Barbados
Energy Division
Mined resources and energy
Environmental Protection
Water quality; hazardous waste disposal
Ministry of Health
Division
Solid Waste Unit
Landfills and solid waste disposal
Assessment, development, management, licensing of
Barbados Water Authority
water resources; potable water supply; Bridgetown
sewage treatment plant
Barbados Agricultural Development and Marketing
Government irrigation water supply schemes
Corporation
Barbados Agricultural Management Company
Manages sugar lands for Government
Lands and Surveys Department
Cartography, map production
Barbados Community Associate degree in Agriculture
College
Educational
SJP Polytechnic
General
institutions
Caribbean institute for
Certificates in meteorology and hydrology
Meteorology and Hydrology
66
GEF-IWCAM
Table 23: Types of data collected by various institutions in Barbados and their GIS
capability (FAO, 2001)
PARAMETER M
Land
Soil Co
Meteor
Marketin
Barbad
Manage
Barbad
Barbad
Unit
Coast
Environ
Hydrol
Caribbe
Private pla
Environ
Depart
To
wn an
an
al Z
ogy &
men
d W
nserva
olog
os Agr
os
os W
g Co
me
m
an I
m
Agric
en
d Cou
n
en
a
ical Depart
nt C
one
ta
t
ter
a
tal Eng.
tal Unit
ti
op
t
e
Me
ti
O
Mana
Use Uni
on U
o
r Aut
n
ons
n
NITO
eratio
i
c. Dev. &
mp
teorol
stit
try Planni
n
any
horit
Div.
ute
RE
it
men
n
u
geme
ogy
D
t
lt
y
t
ural
n
for
n
g
t
Rainfall (total)
Rainfall intensity
Wind speed
Sunshine
Temperature &
humidity
Evaporation
Groundwater
abstraction
Groundwater
quality
Spring/stream flow
rate
Spring/stream
water quality
Established GIS
Currently the BSS consists of four divisions: trade and national accounts, business
surveys, census and household surveys, and socioeconomic statistics. The national
objective is for the Statistical Department to serve as the central repository for
national statistics. This function would extend to the responsibility of the BSS to
securing, compilation, processing, and reporting of environmental data and/or
statistics. This objective may be addressed through the creation of a 5th subject
matter division, or by incorporating responsibility for environmental statistics into an
existing division. Some elements related to the capacity of the BBS are shown in
67
GEF-IWCAM
Box 4. Barbados Statistical Service
Human Resources
In order to meet current commitments and obligations as well as to position itself to fulfill the expanded role
envisaged under the vision of the Green Economy the capacities, competencies and experience of the BSS staff
needs to be developed in the areas of the collection, processing, and timely provision of statistical information to
support and facilitate improved results-based policy and decision-making, and management for green
development in Barbados
The inability of the BSS to provide competitive salary limits the ability of the BSS to retain some qualified
personnel, whose technical skills make them highly marketable. As a result the turnover of staff at the BSS is
high. This has implications for the maintenance of technical capacity, institutional memory, operational
continuity, and inter-agency collaboration and coordination. The situation is compounded by the lack of good
opportunities for career advancement through training and capacity development.
Technical Infrastructure
The computer equipment and statistical software being used by technical staff with the responsibility of
producing the statistical information is several years old and requires replacement or updating. Available
technologies need to inform and be incorporated into the institutions data collection, management, analysis, and
reporting processes. This includes, but is not limited to the use of GIS for managing, geo-referencing, querying,
analyzing, and reporting statistical information. There is also need for an appropriate system for data backup and
storage. In addition, the BSS does not have the equipment necessary to create digital maps that would allow the
institution to improve the use of its data for social programs targeting.
Given the objectives of the IDB project to strengthen the BSS (IDB, 2006) and the of the goals of the Green
Economy and Fiscal Proposals of the Government of Barbados (Government of Barbados, 2007), a data
management network will be required for the BSS to coordinate, access and use the statistics and indicators
produced by the various government agencies. This will in turn require the establishment of data standards and
formats, protocols, and mechanisms for effective and efficient data sharing and access.
A Clerical Officer has been assigned to follow up on activities identified for completion
under the UNSD/CARICOM project on environmental statistics. In the post-project
period the Statistical Department is depending on the Ministry of Energy and the
Environment to undertake the data collection necessary to generate the environmental
statistics. The intention of the Statistics Department is to develop a unit to deal with
environmental statistics. The capacity requirements for such a unit have not been
defined. It is anticipated that these and other details related to the establishment and
operation of a unit for environmental statistics will be addressed under the IDB project
"Modernization of the Barbados Statistical Service", designed to support the
improvement in the availability of gender and environmental related statistics, which is
expected to come on stream in 2008.
There are formal and informal arrangements for coordinating monitoring activities and
sharing monitoring data on an agency-by-agency basis. The EPD shares data on
groundwater quality with the BWA and data on coastal water quality with the CZMU.
However there is no national umbrella mechanism for coordinating monitoring activities
and data sharing and management (Box 5). Certain surveys required to generate
statistics for the BSS are not conducted by line ministries on a regular basis. The BSS
experiences difficulty in collecting information from the various agencies involved in data
production. There is a lack of priority in certain agencies for collection of data that may
be deemed relevant to national needs. As a result line-ministries tend not to provide the
BSS with operational statistics in a timely manner. Most information used by the BSS is
68
GEF-IWCAM
provided on demand or on a case-by-case basis (IDB, 2006). There is a lack of
consistency in the statistics that are produced, each agency having its own standards,
methodologies, definitions, and procedures. This situation confounds timely, efficient
collection, processing and dissemination of high quality data and indicators.
Box 5. Challenges to coordinated reporting of environmental statistics
The long-term vision to institutionalize the management and reporting of environmental statistics
began with the participation of the Statistical Department in the UNSD/CARICOM project to
develop capacity to generate social environmental statistics and indicators. In the process of
compiling data for the publication "CARICOM Environment in Figures 2002", the Statistical Division
became increasingly involved in the collection and compilation of environmental statistics from
government agencies. The Statistical Department requests environmental agencies to provide
environmental statistics in specific formats based on specifications provided by the CARICOM
Secretariat. Some of the requested datasets were provided. The operational links established
during the UNSD/CARICOM Project were not sustained because the statistical department did not
have the human resources in the post-project period to support the ongoing collection, compilation,
and processing of environmental statistics for reporting purposes.
Although environmental statistics are not officially reported, the 2007 Budget (Economic
and Financial Policies of the Government of Barbados 2007) presents Green Economy
and Fiscal Proposals which speaks to the notion of a green economy underpinned by a
philosophy of putting Barbados on a sustainable economic growth pattern that
incorporates prudent environmental management principles. A task force has been
created with representatives from the Ministries of Finance, Economic Affairs and
Development, and Energy and the Environment to develop targets and indicators of
Green Economics and of Sustainable Development to be published in the annual
reports of the Central Bank and of the Ministry of Economic Affairs. The indicators will
be internationally acceptable, objective, and technically sound, and will be applied to the
activities of all Barbadian private and public enterprises. The relevant indicators
mechanisms in Barbados were identified and assessed under the UNCSD testing
programme coordinated by UNDESA. The assessment is documented in the report
"Selections of Indicators for Sustainable Development for Barbados" (Singh, 1999). A
total of 133 indicators were evaluated: economic (6), Environmental (88), institutional
(9), and social indicators (30).
6.3. St. Vincent & The Grenadines
Interviews
· Ministry of Environment and Health: Neri James, Senior Health Officer, Vector
Control Division
· Ministry
of
Environment
and Health: Dr. Duncan, CHO
· Ministry of Environment and Health: Michael Bachas, CMO
· Forestry: Cornelius Richards, Deputy Director, Forestry Division; Fitzgerald
Providence, Amos Glasgow, Bradford Lather
Major findings
69
GEF-IWCAM
There are limited examples of IWCAM-related data collection and monitoring in this
country, although systematic data collection and monitoring have been established for
environmental health. Data collection and monitoring in the non-health sectors tends to
be sporadic and project driven. The placement of the small (two technical staff
members) Environmental Unit in the Ministry with responsibilities for health may have
led to environmental issues being overshadowed by health priorities. Communication
within and among government agencies has been identified as a major obstacle to
effective and coordinated monitoring.
The prospects of a formal overarching mechanism for coordinating IWCAM-related data
collection and monitoring seem remote. The small number of players and the limited
activity and capacity in this area presents an opportunity for establishing a modest,
coordinated IWCAM-related indicators mechanism among the agencies. This would
serve as a road map to guide, the development of enabling environment, institutional
strengthening, capacity development, and donor assistance.
The small size of the OECS countries permits consensus changes to be promulgated
quickly. The precedent for rapid and effective joint action and harmonization within the
OECS suggests that the mainstreaming of IWCAM might be approached more
effectively on a sub-regional level rather than on a country-by-country basis. It has been
pointed out that there are a number of coordination issues that need to be addressed.
The suggestion has been made that an advisory mechanism (Advisory Board) might
usefully guide and facilitate this process.
A senior person interviewed suggested that St. Vincent and the Grenadines might be 10
years behind Barbados in capacity for effective natural resources management and
monitoring. Given the progress that Barbados is making in the direction of establishing a
coordinated national environmental statistics mechanism, the opportunity exists to
formally share this experience for the purpose of developing a detailed road-map
adapted to the needs and conditions of St. Vincent and the Grenadines. A precedent for
this type of collaboration exists in the form of technical assistance in coastal zone
management, provided by the Government of Barbados to the countries of the OECS,
through the Barbados CZMU.
Agencies and monitoring programmes
IWCAM-related responsibilities and activities are vested in a number of government
agencies:
The Public Health Department of the Ministry of Environment and Health monitors
coastal water quality near two recreational beaches, three estuarine coastal locations,
and one off-shore location. Monitoring tends to be reactive rather than programmatic or
systematic, and is conducted upon request. A significant contributing factor to the
responsive, haphazard nature of the monitoring response is that no government agency
70
GEF-IWCAM
has formal responsibility for coastal water quality monitoring. Monitoring activities that
are undertaken are not linked to any MEA or protocol
The Vector Control Division has the capacity to monitor temperature, pH, salinity,
heterotrophic plate count, and total and fecal coliform concentrations. Field-kits for
water quality monitoring had been recently acquired to monitor ph, ortho-phosphate,
ionic conductively, conductivity, total dissolved solids, temperature, salinity, resistivity,
and dissolved oxygen. However, no person has the skills, or has been trained to use the
recently acquired water quality field kits. There is no programme with personnel
dedicated for environmental monitoring. While there are 12 environmental health
Officers with wide ranging duties, but no specific training in IWCAM-related monitoring.
As a result of this situation the task of monitoring falls to the Senior Environmental
Health Officer.
The Central Water and Sewage Authority (CWSA) and the Public Health Department of
the Ministry of Health both collect data on the quality of potable water for distribution.
Sampling is conducted by the Ministry eight times/month in each of 10 Public Health
Districts for the measurement of residual chlorine and detection of faecal coliform
bacteria. The CWSA carries out independent controls on water quality, particularly at
strategic points in the water distribution system. The CWSA reports its findings to the
CHO of the Ministry of Environment and Health. There are no standards for potable and
recreational water quality in the country's legislation although WHO guidelines are used.
Water quality analysis is conducted by the Bureau of Standards.
The Fisheries Division's primary monitoring activity is in the area of fish stock
assessments, which are conducted in collaboration with CRFM. Coral reef monitoring is
project driven. The Division comprises six units (Biology and Research, Quality
Assurance, Product Development, Conservation, Data Management, Extension, and
Public Education and Outreach). The biological data that is collected is primarily fish
catch data and coral reef condition data. There are 10 sites throughout the country that
have been monitored on an annual basis since 2004 using the Reefcheck methodology.
The Sustainable Grenadines Project has supported Reefcheck surveys at two locations.
The designated coastal conservation areas are not managed because of limited
personnel.
The Forestry Division is authorized to establish and manage forest reserves. Under the
Wildlife Protection Act the Forestry Division receives authority to manage flora and
fauna. However, the Act focuses primarily on the St. Vincent Parrot as opposed to
wildlife in general. The Forestry Division considers "Forestry" to encompass all
resources within the forest and not just the trees. The Forestry Division also collects
IWCAM-related data on forest cover. The Division tracks deforestations, performs trend
analyses, and monitors forest fires, particularly in the dry season. Records are kept of
fire occurrence and acreage damaged. A monthly report on deforestation incidents and
trends is produced. Forest plantation data is collected on the location of forest
plantations, management prescriptions, and sales. Under the Watershed Management
Project, the Forestry Division conducts critically important stream monitoring for turbidity
71
GEF-IWCAM
and stream flow. The Forestry Mapping and Inventory Unit is responsible for data
management and day-to-day analysis of forest cover and deforestation data. The Unit
has four professional GIS staff members.
The National Land Information (NALIN) Project serves as a repository for geophysical
data on land coverage. A JAICA volunteer has been involved in a project to identify and
map critical habitats for endemic species, geographic spread, and spatial overlap of
ranges and critical habitats. This information will be incorporated into the NALIN
database.
Capacity Development Initiatives, Gaps, and Needs.
Capacity Development Initiatives
Coral Reef Monitoring for Climate Change Adaptation
Under the Mainstreaming Adaptation to Climate Change (MACC) Project executed by
the CCCCC a regional capacity development and monitoring initiative in support of
climate change adaptation planning. The project began as a sub-regional pilot project in
1999 under the CPACC Project. The lessons learned from this project have been
applied to the extended regional programme of capacity building and systematic
monitoring. A programmatic approach has been taken to the development of technical
capacity and the provision of technical assistance to support in-country coral reef
monitoring through the pooling of regional expertise.
Forestry Development Project
The Forestry Development Project was a five-year capacity development initiative,
jointly supported by Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and the
Government. The objective of the project was the strengthening the Forestry
Department's capacity to formulate plans, implement policies and administer forestry
programmes also involving the communities in the development and implementation
stages. The public education component was designed to allow for the development of
a people-centered approach to forest planning and management.
Integrated Forestry Management Project
The Integrated Forest Management and Development Programme was developed to
spearhead the sustainable management of forest resources to ensuring protection of
the nation's water supplies, eco-tourism potential, biodiversity, and forest livelihoods.
The programme was established to address three major issues; the alarming rate of
deforestation from legal and illegal agricultural activities; the loss of coastal forest for
urban and other development; ineffective approach to enforcement against illegal
agricultural activities in the forest; and the negative impact of global economic changes
rural livelihoods.
Other Projects include:
· Sustainable Integrated Development and Biodiversity Conservation in the
Grenadines Islands (SVG and Grenada) Project: The purpose of this project is to
72
GEF-IWCAM
develop a participatory co-management framework for integrated sustainable
development and to implement those parts of the plan associated with the
environment and the use of marine resources;
· Integrated Watershed Management Project: This is a joint effort between farmers
in the Montreal and Majorca catchment area, the Forestry Department and the
OECS National Resources Management Unit to maintain farming below the
1,400 ft contour and to reforest and protect denuded areas.
Capacity Needs
A coordinated review process is needed to address the challenges to effective
monitoring resulting from insufficient staff, insufficiently trained staff, and poor intra- and
inter- institutional communications and coordination, and scarce funding.
· A review of national IWCAM-related data needs
· A ministry-by-ministry review of IWCAM-related data needs and the related
human resources and capacity requirements.
· A review and rationalization of the collective monitoring, human resource and
training needs.
· Establishment of an advisory mechanism for overseeing and coordinating
IWCAM-related parameters monitoring activities among government agencies.
Documents Reviewed
· St. Vincent and the Grenadines Report to the Regional Consultation on SIDS-
Specific Issues (Culzac-Wilson, 2003);
· Irrigation water management in St. Vincent and the Grenadines: Viable or
vulnerable? (Bons and Simon, 2005);
· National Report of St. Vincent and the Grenadines to the CCD (2002);
· The Conservation of the St. Vincent Parrot and the Integrated Forest
Management and Development Programme (Providence, 2003);
· St. Vincent & The Grenadines Environmental Management Strategy and Action
Plan 2004-2006 (Homer and Shim, 2004);
· Stabex '94, St. Vincent and the Grenadines Water Resources Management
Consultancy Draft Terms of Reference (Bons and Simon, 2005).
7. CONCLUSION
In the Caribbean SIDS, IWCAM is still in its infancy, although a number of these
countries have Integrated Coastal Zone Management initiatives, or separate
management programmes and plans for coastal areas and watersheds, or for natural
resources. Available information in the IWCAM national reports prepared for this GEF-
IWCAM project suggests that the countries do not have monitoring programmes and
indicators mechanisms specifically linked to IWCAM initiatives, although a number of
them plan to or have been developing indicators within other frameworks (e.g. National
Sustainable Development Strategies; National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan,
73
GEF-IWCAM
National Environmental Action Plans), and under international frameworks (e.g. MEAs
and MDGs), which are pertinent to IWCAM. The review revealed the lack of a suite of
well-established and standard indicators, with few exceptions, for almost all the themes
included in this study, both within and among countries. Where indicators are in use, it
was not clear if or how these are used in goal setting and adaptive management.
Nevertheless, while the development and use of indicators is not implemented within an
IWCAM framework, in all the countries a large number of indicators exist, and
environmental observations, data and information are collected, albeit generally in an
inconsistent and sporadic manner (except for themes such as freshwater resources),
that could be used as a baseline to develop IWCAM indicators.
Much of the data that are useful for developing IWCAM indicators are compiled by
regional or international organizations, which often makes them easily available through
online databases and also adds value through synthesis and analysis. In most cases,
these organizations simply use information provided by the countries; if countries lack
an adequate baseline, report infrequently, or base their figures on estimates, the data
may be quite unreliable. In addition to those regional and international institutions with a
mandate to compile environmental information, there has been an explosion in the
number of "independent" international databases on a range of environmental
parameters, and much of these data are available through the Internet. These data and
information relate mainly to social and economic sectors, as well as environmental or
ecological state of natural resources such as freshwater, fisheries, coral reefs,
mangroves, and forests.
Despite the constraints to data collection and management faced by the PCs, data are
available for a significant number of IWCAM-related indicators. While time series of data
exist, there are discontinuities; geographic coverage is also limited, and information is
outdated. Much of the data have been collected on a project basis, and as a result are
intermittent. The best established monitoring programmes in all the countries are for
potable water (although there are wide disparities among the countries in the number of
variables monitored and in geographic coverage), rainfall, and fisheries landings.
All participating countries demonstrate some level of capacity to undertake
environmental monitoring activities and to process and report the findings. As observed
in the results of the groundtruthing exercise and the results of the survey, capacities
varied considerably among PCs in various areas, which include but are not limited to:
· Enabling polices and legislation for natural resources management and
environmental data management;
· Institutions mandated to manage the environment and natural resources;
· National statistics programmes and institutions;
· Environmental monitoring and data-collection programmes;
· Environmental data processing, management mechanisms and programmes;
· Environmental reporting mechanisms in government agencies, research and
teaching institutions, inter-governmental organizations, and international
agencies;
74
GEF-IWCAM
· National development policies that identify environmental statistics as measures
of performance.
The countries have been engaged in a number of capacity building initiatives for
environmental statistics, and are increasingly aware of the need for developing and
implementing a system of environmental indicators. Progress has been disparate,
however, with the larger countries and/or those with the required resources being more
advanced than the others. Opportunities should be explored for bringing all these
indicator initiatives under a common, well-coordinated framework or mechanism. A
number of the PCs have advanced indicators initiatives, and could assist the other PCs
in developing indicators frameworks. A suite of standard, robust indicators could help to
focus data collection efforts, avoid the dispersion of effort on less meaningful data and
ad hoc data collection, and better inform decision-making. Indicators should be linked to
clearly defined goals and objectives, which themselves are sometimes not clear or
explicitly stated. There is a need to sensitize all stakeholders (especially decision-
makers) on the need for and utility of indicators.
The development of policy-relevant core indicators must be driven by national needs,
capacities, and priorities. There is a practical challenge that countries might perceive in
moving from the seemingly conceptual exercise of formulating indicators to applying
indicators in the national development context. A way of overcoming this challenge is
the recognition of the fact that countries are already collecting and using environmental
data that can serve as indicators. The transition from data collection to indicators
development and use is dependent on adoption of adaptive management practices that
require indicators of effectiveness.
One of the next steps should be the development of national indicators templates based
on the data that is already being collected within each country. The national indicators
templates could serve as the focus and point of departure for national capacity
development workshops designed to promote awareness and understanding of
indicators concepts and benefits, and the adoption and further development of a
national indicators template and mechanism. An indicators template should be seen as
an opportunity to identify a small, manageable suite of essential indicators to inform
sustainable national development. Countries should have the ability to choose
indicators based on specific goals and objectives. Indicators must be mainstreamed into
decision making-processes. Countries must decide if the issue of indicators should be
brought to the political level, and how this could be accomplished.
The development of environmental indicator mechanisms in the PCs is feasible and
achievable despite the apparent challenges. The success of implantation will be
dependent on the recognition within the countries of the benefits of the mechanism in
the critical support that it will provide to adaptive management processes. Commitment
to the IWCAM process will accelerate progress and efficiency in data collection,
monitoring, data analysis, data management and reporting, in the various sectoral and
thematic areas.
75
GEF-IWCAM
In conclusion, there are a number of ongoing initiatives within the PCs and at the
regional and international levels to develop indicators mechanisms and to strengthen
the required capacities. Moreover, a number of the PCs already have good capacity for
indicators. This means that there is already a substantial basis in the region to provide
the momentum for developing IWCAM indicator mechanisms and the required capacity
in the PCs, which should be fully taken advantage of.
8. RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations focus on development of national indicators templates
in the PCs and strengthening capacity for developing and using indicators in the region
(including human capacity, training, data and monitoring, institutional mechanisms, etc).
Recommendations arising from the GEF-IWCAM indicators workshop (March 2008,
Ocho Rios, Jamaica) are incorporated in these recommendations (see workshop
report). It is recognized that developing indicator mechanisms and mainstreaming of
indicators into national development and natural resources/environmental management
processes will be a long-term, iterative process with a number of components related to
such aspects as selecting appropriate indicators, aligning indicator mechanisms with
national development process and national/regional goals and priorities, development of
requisite capacities, undertaking appropriate legal/policy/institutional arrangements and
reforms to ensure that the indicator mechanism is implemented and sustained,
mobilizing resources, etc.
While the recommendations below are not arranged in any order of priority, they are
presented according to suggested timeframes for their implementation. These
timeframes, however, should be flexible, in view of the different priorities, needs, and
capacities of the PCs:
i). Short-term (ST): Recommendations that should be implemented within the first
two 2 years. These focus on development of national indicators templates, i.e.
selection of the indicators based on national needs, goals, objectives, and
capacities; and developing human and institutional capacities;
ii). Medium to long-term (MLT): Recommendations that should be implemented
within 5 years and beyond. These also include systemic and institutional aspects
that should underpin the indicator mechanisms.
National indicator mechanisms (ST)
1. Create awareness and commitment at all levels:
· The national indicators mechanism development process might best be initiated
and supported by a series of national/regional workshops, designed to develop
awareness, commitment, and action at the national level, through a participatory
processes of consultation, conceptualization, and planning. This should involve
medium to high level government officials to seek the necessary institutional
commitments and allocation of resources necessary to ensure effective
76
GEF-IWCAM
coordination, data sharing, and integration. Key stakeholders from governments,
economic sectors and others should also be involved.
2. Develop national indicators templates:
· National indicators templates (using the template developed under this activity
and other resources) should be developed, based on existing indicator
frameworks and ongoing initiatives in the PCs and regional and international
levels, as well as on data already being collected within the country. This will
require the identification of existing environmental monitoring initiatives and the
environmental indicators that are currently being used and reported.
· The national indicators template should be country-specific rather than Project-
specific in order to ensure that the initiatives and mechanisms developed under
the GEF-IWCAM project are sustained after the project has ended. National
indicators mechanisms must be linked to the overarching national policy
framework comprising well-defined national goals and objectives, and should be
designed to address priority issues, needs, goals and objectives at the national
(or even local) and regional levels, and clearly defined environmental
management goals and objectives. In addition, as far as possible, indicators
should be also linked to regional and global objectives and targets, which would
enable countries to report to several environmental frameworks using the same
sets of indicators.
· It is critical to include indicators that specifically monitor the pressures and the
conditions of the natural resource environment or ecosystem in which the specific
activities of the project or IWCAM programme take place, that is, an ecosystem-
based approach should be used for developing the suite of indicators, using an
integrated, multi-sectoral approach. An appropriate framework (e.g. DPSIR)
could help structure the indicator template.
· These indicators should be administratively practical and cost-effective to
populate, as well as SMART3. To be efficient and useful the indicator framework
should build on existing systems, target a few key specific and representative
indicators that can be confidently used to deliver robust assessments of the
impact generated by the project, as well as to be used in the post-project period
for monitoring, evaluation, and adaptive management.
3. Pilot testing of indicators:
· A national indicators mechanism can be developed incrementally from a pilot
scale initiative designed to integrate and make operational the basic elements of
the indicators mechanism. Pilot testing of a set of core indicators in one of the
PCs with more advanced indicators mechanisms, to be determined in
consultation with the IWCAM indicators working group, should be undertaken.
This activity could also build capacity and generate lessons for replication in
3 There is a so called "SMART" concept of indicators:
Simple (easily interpreted and monitored); Measurable (statistically verifiable, reproducible and show trends); Accessible
(regularly monitored, cost effective and consistent); Relevant (directly address issues or agreed objectives, such as those of the
Matters for Target for biodiversity conservation), and Timely (provide early warning of potential problems).
77
GEF-IWCAM
other PCs. The pilot project will allow the vertical integration among the various
stakeholder agencies to be tested and made operational at a manageable scale,
creating demonstrable achievements and benefits with a minimum of institutional
change or legal and policy formulation. The low institutional and political "cost" of
participating in the pilot project will allow the benefits of the mechanism to be
demonstrated without requiring immediate major institutional change, a barrier in
its own right.
Monitoring, data, and information (ST MLT)
1. Development of monitoring programme (ST):
· Once the national indicators template is developed and agreed, a minimum
environmental monitoring programme in support of the indicator framework
should be developed. This would include an evaluation of existing monitoring
programmes, methodologies, data collected, institutional arrangements, and
existing and required capacities.
· Existing data should be used as a baseline for the monitoring programme. Each
country would determine the appropriate baseline, depending on the theme and
data availability.
· Determine the cost of such a monitoring programme, and identify possible
sources of funding.
2. Implementation of the monitoring programme (MLT)
· Appropriate institutional arrangements, roles and responsibilities agreed and
mechanisms developed for coordinated implementation of the monitoring
programme at national level.
· Implementation of the monitoring programme, possibly using a phased approach.
3. Data and information:
· Develop national/regional inventories of environmental data holdings (e.g. of
government, private-sector, tertiary education institutions, research facilities),
records, statistics, indicators, and relevant reports. Use existing metadata
records (e.g. CPACC Coastal Resources Inventory Project) to jump-start ongoing
national data inventory and catalogue processes. The countries, in collaboration
with relevant partners, could work on the preparation of a meta-database and
protocol for sharing of and access to information (ST).
· Establish national and regional data recovery strategies to recover historical
data-sets that are stored in non-digital formats or that are at risk of being lost.
Funding for the recovery of strategically important environmental data would be
required. Initiate coordinated regional data recovery and data mining initiatives
through regional and intergovernmental agencies (MLT).
· Establish a centralized data management system for environmental data and
indicators, including centrally coordinated national data networks (MLT).
· Explore options for establishing national and regional protocols for collection,
exchange and sharing of environmental data and information. PCs should
identify key partners and explore options for entering into arrangements with
78
GEF-IWCAM
relevant regional and international organizations and programmes to collect,
compile, and analyze data for each indicator. They should also enter into
dialogue with data providers/owners on access to required data (ST MLT).
· Countries should work towards developing nationally and regionally consistent
and compatible frameworks of environmental statistics, as appropriate. This is an
essential step towards enabling the countries to share data and information and
to make progress in addressing common issues. A harmonized system within
and among PCs would allow for effectively acquiring comparable data and
comparative assessments and for the sharing of tools, expertise, and other
resources; this would allow efforts to be more cost effective and efficient (MLT).
Capacity (ST - MLT)
1. Identification of required capacity:
· The systemic, institutional, financial, and human resources and capacities
required for developing, monitoring, and reporting on the selected indicators
need to be identified. This will also include an evaluation of existing capacities,
skill sets, capacity gaps and deficiencies, etc. (ST).
· Capacity of decision-makers, in so far as understanding the need for indicators
and their application in decision making processes and adaptive management,
should also be evaluated, with a view to strengthening this capacity (ST MLT).
2. Capacity development:
· Identify training opportunities at regional/international levels in the support areas
for environmental indicators development and environmental statistics, and
develop a strategic plan to address the human resource deficiencies and
constraints (ST).
· Identify and document existing capacities in the PCs and at sub-regional and
regional levels (ST).
· Develop appropriate training programmes in environmental monitoring and
indicators development and use in consultation with stakeholders, technical
agencies, and regional and national tertiary teaching institutions. More focused
training should be provided on indicators (with appropriate partners) using
existing data and case studies and building on existing capacity strengthening
initiatives in the region. Training should also include concepts of monitoring and
evaluation and application of indicators (ST MLT).
· Develop collaborative solutions (national and regional) to capacity development
and the sharing of technologies, laboratory facilities, expertise, and human
resources, including for participatory monitoring and mapping. This would include
technical assistance through the coordinated pooling and sharing of technical
expertise, formal education at the secondary and tertiary levels, short courses,
skills training, staff secondments and exchanges, internships, creation of a cadre
of trained personnel, pooling of human resources, etc. The assistance of the
appropriate regional and/or inter-governmental agency (e.g. UNEP CAR RCU,
CEHI, CIMH, UWI, CCCCC, CARDI) would be invaluable in the conduct of these
initiatives (MLT).
79
GEF-IWCAM
· Document and share best practices and achievements in the development of
environmental monitoring programmes and environmental indicators
mechanisms development (SL MLT).
· Convene national workshops/seminars on indicators to inform decision-makers
and set up decision support systems (ST MLT).
Systemic and institutional levels (MLT)
· Mainstream IWCAM into national decision-making processes, and environmental
and natural resources management.
· Rationalize institutional mandates and responsibilities related to indicators
development and environmental monitoring. This would include more efficient
institutional modalities in support of national indicator mechanisms.
· Establish an inter-institutional, multi-sectoral mechanism at the national and
ultimately at the regional level (within the appropriate regional entity) to
coordinate the indicator mechanism, including monitoring, data analysis, and
reporting.
· Enact policies and legislation to create a national environmental indicators
mechanism, and that require relevant agencies to submit environmental data and
statistics to the designated national data repository and/or statistical agency.
· Review and revise the statistics legislations in the PCs within the constraints of
the confidentiality provisions, to allow National Statistical Authorities to submit
data at appropriate levels of detail to the CARICOM Secretariat on a timely basis
in support of a research and analytical programme at the regional level and of
regional negotiations.
· Review and rationalize governmental environmental monitoring and indicators
development responsibilities in the areas of management, monitoring, data
collection, data processing, reporting, and evaluation with a view to facilitating
targeted budgetary allocations for the implementation of the indicator
mechanism.
· Establish sustainable institutional and financial mechanisms to support and
coordinate capacity development within and among PCs. National governments
should identify modalities and mechanisms for ensuring funding at levels
proportional to the environmental monitoring and indicators responsibilities and
resource requirements of respective institutions.
· Develop mechanisms to integrate information provided by the indicators into
decision- making processes at all levels, and to facilitate adaptive management.
This would include incorporating quantifiable environmental objectives and
indicators in national development strategies.
**************************
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
80
GEF-IWCAM
The assistance and contribution of the following persons to the successful completion of
this assignment is gratefully acknowledged: The GEFIWCAM Project Coordinating Unit
(particularly Vincent Sweeney, Sasha Beth Gottlieb, and Donna Spencer); UNEP CAR
RCU (Nelson Andrade, Christopher Corbin, and Nadia Ferguson); CEHI (Christopher
Cox and Herold Gopaul); Respondents to the questionnaire; Reviewers of early drafts
of the report and indicators template; Persons from Barbados, Dominican Republic, and
St. Vincent & the Grenadines for assistance with the groundtruthing exercises (listed
above); Participants of the GEF-IWCAM/IABIN indicators workshop; and Hugh Graham
(NEPA, Jamaica).
REFERENCES
Burke, L. and Maidens, J. (2004). Reefs at Risk in the Caribbean. World Resources
Institute, Washington, DC.
Beltrán, J., Martín, A., Aguilar, C., Ruiz, F., Regadera, R., Mancebo, H. and Helen, A.
(2002). Control y Evolución de la Calidad Ambiental de la Bahía de La Habana y el
Litoral Adyacente. Informe Nal. Vigilancia Ambiental para la Bahía de La Habana.
Centro de Ingeniería y Manejo Ambiental de Bahías y Costas (Cimab), Cuba.
Bons, A., and C. McL Simon (2005). Irrigation water management in St. Vincent and the
Grenadines: Viable or vulnerable? Central Water and Sewerage Authority, St.
Vincent and the Grenadines.
CARICOM Secretariat (2003a). CARICOM Environment in Figures 2002. Caribbean
Community Secretariat, Georgetown, Guyana.
CBD (2003). Proposed Biodiversity Indicators Relevant to the 2010 Target. Convention
on Biological Diversity. UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/9/INF/26.
CEHI/UNEP (2003). A Directory of Environmentally Sound Technologies for the
Integrated Management of Solid, Liquid, and Hazardous Waste for Small Island
Developing States (SIDS) in the Caribbean Region. Caribbean Environmental Health
Institute, St Lucia.
CEHI (2007). Report on the Integrated Water Resources Management Capacity Needs
Assessment for the Caribbean. Prepared by the Caribbean Environmental Health
Institute for the Caribbean Water Partnership (CAP-NET Caribbean).
Chase V. and Nichols, K. (1998). Island Systems Management: A new Paradigm for
Small Island States. pp 6-11 in Natural Resources Management in the Caribbean:
Discussion Papers. Organization of American States.
CoB (2003). Report to Develop an Integrated Water Resources Management Plan for
the Commonwealth of the Bahamas (CoB).
Culzac-Wilson, L. (2003). Report to the Regional Consultation on SIDS Specific Issues.
Government of St. Vincent and the Grenadines. October 2003.
CWWA (2003). Caribbean Waste Water Association Strategic Plan 2010.
http://www.cwwa.net/strategic_plan.htm
Duda, A. (2002). Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators for GEF International Waters
Projects. Monitoring and Evaluation Working Paper 10. Global Environment Facility.
EEA (1998). Europe's Environment: The Second Assessment. EEA, Copenhagen.
http://reports.eea.eu.int/92-828-3351-8/en.
81
GEF-IWCAM
FAO (1999). Indicators for sustainable development of marine capture fisheries. FAO
Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries, No. 8.
(www.fao.org/docrep/W4745E/w4745e0f.htm).
FAO (2001). Land Resources Information Systems in the Caribbean. Proceedings of a
Sub-regional Workshop, Bridgetown, Barbados 2 - 4 October 2000. World Soil
Resource Report No. 95.
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/004/Y1717E/y1717e00.htm#toc
FAO
(2003a). State of the World's Forests.
http://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/005/y7581e/y7581e01.pdf.
FAO (2003b). Land Use Planning in the OECS using the Automated Land Evaluation
System (ALES). A presentation to the Meeting on Using Information in Decision-
making for sustainable development in Small Island Developing States. Hosted by
the Organization of American States and the United Nations Department of
Economic and Social Affairs. Saint Lucia, May 27-28th, 2003.
FAO
(2005). Global Forest
Resources Assessment,
2005.
http://www.fao.org/forestry/fo/fra.
GEF/UNDP/UNEP (1998). Planning and Management of Heavily Contaminated Bays
and Coastal Areas in the Wider Caribbean. Regional Project RLA/93/G41. Final
Report. Havana, Cuba.
Geoghegan, T. and Renard, Y. (2006). Report on indicators for the St George's
Declaration including definition of an initial set of indicators and recommendations on
further development of an indicator-based monitoring system. A Report to the
Environment and Sustainable Development Unit, Organization of Eastern Caribbean
States, St. Lucia.
GESAMP (2001). Protecting the Oceans from Land-based Activities - Land-based
Sources and Activities Affecting the Quality and Uses of the Marine, Coastal and
Associated Freshwater Environment. GESAMP Reports and Studies 71.
Government of Antigua and Barbuda (2001). National Report on Integrating
Management of Watersheds and Coastal Areas in Small Island Developing States of
the Caribbean. Prepared for the Caribbean Environmental Health Institute.
Government of Barbados (2001). National Report on Integrating Management of
Watersheds and Coastal Areas in Small Island Developing States of the Caribbean.
Prepared for the Caribbean Environmental Health Institute.
Government of Barbados (2007). Economic and Financial Policies of the Government of
Barbados. Presented by The Rt. Hon. Owen Arthur, Minister of Finance, March 14,
2007.
Government of St. Kitts and Nevis (2001). National Report on Integrating Management
of Watersheds and Coastal Areas in St. Kitts and Nevis. Department of
Environment, Ministry of Health and Environment. Prepared for the Caribbean
Environmental Health Institute.
Government of Trinidad and Tobago (2001). National Report on Integrating
Management of Watersheds and Coastal Areas in Trinidad and Tobago. Prepared
by the Water Resources Agency for the Caribbean Environmental Health Institute.
Homer, F. and Shim, D.(2004). St. Vincent and the Grenadines Environmental Strategy
and Action Plan 2004-2006. Environment and Sustainable Development Unit,
OECS.
82
GEF-IWCAM
IDB (2006). Institutional Development Sector Facility Profile: Barbados. Modernization
of the Barbados Statistical Service.
IDSD (2003). Priority Training and Capacity-Building Needs in the Generation and Use
of Information for CARICOM Small Island Developing States (SIDS) Sustainable
Development Decision-Making. A Preliminary Draft Report for the "Information for
Decision-making on Sustainable Development (IDSD) Project". Prepared by K.
Mustafa Touré, Priority Training Needs Consultant for the Unit for Sustainable
Development and Environment, Organization of American States.
OECD (1993). OECD core set of indicators for environmental performance reviews.
OECD Environment Monographs 83. OECD, Paris.
OECS/UNDP (1994). OECS Regional Position and Action Plan for Sustainable
Development. Global Conference on Sustainable Development of Small Island
Developing States, Barbados, 1994.
PNUMA (1999). Evaluación Sobre las Fuentes Terrestres y Actividades que Afectan al
Medio Marino, Costero y de Aguas Dulces Asociadas en la Región del Gran Caribe.
Informes y Estudios del Programa de Mares Regionales del PNUMA 172.
Providence, F. (2003). The Conservation of the St. Vincent Parrot and the Integrated
Forest Management and Development Programme. Proceedings of the International
Aviculturist Society.
Siung-Chang, A. (1997). A review of pollution issues in the Caribbean. Environmental
Geochemistry and Health, 19(2): 45-55.
Sweeney, V. (2003). Channels for lateral cooperation within the Caribbean region which
would allow for effective collaboration within a common framework as regards the
development of benchmarks and indicators for the monitoring of land degradation
and drought within the region. Presented at UNCCD Workshop on "Development of
Benchmarks & Indicators on Land Degradation and Drought in the Caribbean",
February 24-27, 2003, Castries, St. Lucia.
United Nations and World Bank (2001). Indicators of Sustainable Development:
Guidelines and Methodologies. United Nations, New York.
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/indicators/indisd/indisd-mg2001.pdf.
UNDP (2007). Capacity Assessment. Practice Note. http//:www.capacity.undp.org.
UNEP (1999). Assessment of Land-based Sources and Activities Affecting the Marine,
Coastal and Associated Freshwater Environment in the Wider Caribbean Region.
UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies 172. UNEP/GPA Coordination Office and
Caribbean Environment Programme.
UNEP (2000). GEO Latin America and Caribbean: Environment Outlook 2000. UNEP
Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean, Mexico, D.F.
UNEP (2001). Synthesis on Trends in Freshwater and Coastal Area Resources in the
Small Island Developing States of the Caribbean: Annex II. Integrating Watershed
and Coastal Areas Management in Small Island Developing States of the Caribbean.
Report of Second Regional Workshop, Jamaica Conference Centre, Kingston,
Jamaica, 6 - 9 February 2001.
UNEP (2004a). Villasol, A. and Beltrán, J. Caribbean Islands, GIWA Regional
Assessement 4. Fortnam, M. and P. Blime (eds.) University of Kalmar, Kalmar,
Sweden.
83
GEF-IWCAM
UNEP (2004b). Bernal, M.C., Londoño, L.M., Troncoso, W., Sierra-Correa, P.C. and
Arias-Isaza, F.A. Caribbean Sea/Small Islands, GWA Regional Assessment 3a.
University of Kalmar, Kalmar, Sweden.
UNEP (2005). Caribbean Environment Outlook. UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya.
UNEP/GEF (2002). Evaluación Regional Sobre Sustancias Tóxicas Persistentes.
Informe Regional De América Central y El Caribe.
http://www.chem.unep.ch/pts/regreports/Translated%20reports/Central%20America
%20&%20Caribbean%20sp.pdf.
UNEP/World Bank/University of Costa Rica (2004). Latin American and Caribbean
Initiative for Sustainable Development Indicators Follow-up. ILAC 2004 Indicators.
UNESCO (2006). A Handbook for Measuring the Progress and Outcomes of Integrated
Coastal and Ocean Management. IOC Manuals and Guides, 46; ICAM Dossier, 2.
UNESCO, Paris.
United Nations (2003). Indicators for Monitoring the Millennium Development Goals.
Definitions, Rationale, Concepts, and Sources. United Nations, New York.
United Nations and World Bank. 2001. Indicators of Sustainable Development:
Guidelines and Methodologies. United Nations, New York.
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/indicators/indisd/indisd-mg2001.pdf
UNSD/CARICOM (2000). Workshop on Environment Statistics. San Ignacio, Belize, 2-
11, August 2000. Workshop report.
UNSD (2007). Global Assessment of Environment Statistics and Environmental-
Economic Accounting. Presented at the 38th session of the United Nations Statistical
Commission. 27 February - 2 March 2007.
Vandermeulen, H. (1998). The development of marine indicators for coastal zone
management. Ocean & Coastal Management, no. 39, 63-71.
Webber, D. and Clarke, T. (2002). Environmental overview of Kingston Harbour,
Jamaica. P. 42-52 In Caribbean Basins: LOICZ Global Change Assessment and
Synthesis of River Catchement/Island-Coastal Sea Interactions and Human
Dimensions; with a desktop study of Oceania Basins. Kjerfve, B. and others: LOICZ
Reports and Studies 27, LOICZ IPO, Texel, The Netherlands.
WHO/UNICEF (2000). Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000 Report.
WHO/UNICEF.
World Bank (1996). Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines for World Bank-GEF
International Waters Projects. International Waters Series Paper 037. World Bank,
Washington, D.C.
84
GEF-IWCAM
ANNEXES
ANNEX 1. Questionnaire distributed during conduct of desk study
Global Environment Facility-funded
Integrating Watershed and Coastal Areas Management in Caribbean Small Island Developing
States (GEF-IWCAM) Project
INDICATORS MECHANISM ASSESSMENT SURVEY
Survey Objectives:
1. To identify existing IWCAM indicator frameworks and monitoring mechanisms at
national (and regional) levels;
2. To identify gaps in IWCAM indicator frameworks and monitoring mechanisms;
3. To identify and quantify the existing national human and institutional capacity for
indicators monitoring;
4. To identify the national human and institutional capacity building needs for indicators
monitoring.
Instructions:
This questionnaire is in two parts: Part 1 is related to objectives 1 and 2; and Part 2 to
objectives 3 and 4. All Sections may not apply to all respondents. Please provide
information/data in relevant sections. Please mark with `X' where appropriate and provide the
required responses/information in the allotted spaces (or `NA' where information not available).
Additional rows may be added as required. Where information is unavailable, indicate by `NA'.
All information provided would be used to fulfill the above stated objectives.
Please return completed questionnaire to sh_heileman@yahoo.com and
walling.leslie@gmail.com by July 6, 2007. You can contact Vincent Sweeney, Regional Project
Coordinator (vincent.sweeney@unep.org) or Sasha Beth Gottlieb, Technical Coordinator
(sgottlieb@cehi.org.lc) of the GEF-IWCAM Project Coordinating Unit for any clarification.
Thank you for your time and cooperation in completing this questionnaire. Without your
response, the objectives of this component of the project would not be fully met.
The information provided will be used in a regional report and will be treated with a high
level of discretion.
85
GEF-IWCAM
Questionnaire - PART 1
Indicators and monitoring mechanisms assessment.
1. GENERAL INFORMATION
Country
Agency/organization & type (e.g. government)
Mailing address
Respondent/designation
Email address
Telephone No.
Fax No.
Website
Instant Message (e.g. Skype) user name
2. MAJOR LAND USE/ ACTIVITIES IN WATERSHED & COASTAL AREAS
1Rank in order of importance from 1-5, with 1 being the most important.
2 List indicator used (if any). Add more rows as needed.
3Indicate the monitoring frequency, e.g. once per year.
4Indicate agency/institute responsible for monitoring.
5Indicate title of any relevant studies/reports and where available.
Land Use/
Rank1
Indicator2
Monitoring
Responsible
Additional information;
Activity
frequency3
agency4
Major studies & reports5
Others (specify)
3. SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS (to be supplemented by Table 2)
Parameter
Indicator
Monitoring frequency.
Responsible
Additional information;
agency
Major studies & reports
Others (specify)
86
GEF-IWCAM
4. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS INDICATORS.
These indicators demonstrate environmental/natural resources status. They are usually `static' snapshots of environmental conditions at a given point in time, and are
usually reported against a baseline year and level to show change/improvement.
1Each parameter may have a number of indicators add more rows as needed. The actual value of the indicator is not required.
2Location of monitoring sites rivers, coastal areas, etc.
3Baseline year and level against which indicator is reported to show change.
4Hypothetical example.
Parameter
System Indicator1 Monitoring
No. & location2 of
Baseline
Responsible
Additional
frequency
monitoring sites
year; level3
agency
information;
Major studies &
reports
Rivers.
Coastal/
Water quality.
marine water.
Groundwater.
Water
Rivers.
volume/flow.
Groundwater.
Rainfall.
Soil/sediment.
Rivers/land.
Coastal areas.
Liquid waste.
Rivers/land.
Coastal areas
Solid waste.
Rivers/land
Coastal areas
Air quality
Ecological status
Forest
Land
(degradation)
Coral reefs
Mangroves
Sea grass beds
Beaches
Biodiversity
Threatened
species
Algal blooms/ red
tides
Sea level
Sea surface
temperature
Others (specify)
Natural resources Fisheries
Diseases in
marine organisms
Fish kills
Contamination of
87
GEF-IWCAM
animal tissue.
Deforestation
Groundwater
abstraction
(potable &
irrigation)
Others (specify)
3Industrial Pollution Projection System
5. STRESS REDUCTION INDICATORS
These indicators characterize and quantify specific reductions in environmental/water resources stress (e.g. reduction in pollutant releases, improved freshwater
flows). Like Environmental Status indicators, Stress Reduction indicators are usually reported against a baseline year and level to show change/improvement.
1In absence of a specific indicator, simply state `yes' or `no' to show whether or not these measures have been implemented.
2Hypothetical example.
Parameter Indicator1
Baseline year; level
Responsible agency
Additional
information;
Major studies &
reports
Sustainable fisheries practices
Sustainable agriculture practices
Increased reforestation
Improved freshwater flows
Improved solid waste collection/disposal
Reduction in liquid waste pollution loads
Increased industrial cleaner production technologies.
Increased waste reduction/recycling programmes
Reduced releases of pollution to groundwater recharge zones
Reduction of point source pollution
Reduction of non-point source pollution
Improved air emission controls
Increased ecosystem restoration
Improved conservation/protection of land resources
Improved conservation/protection of marine living resources
Reduction in introduction of invasive species
Others (specify)
6. PROCESS INDICATORS
These indicators establish regional or national frameworks/conditions for improving environmental and natural resource status in the watershed and coastal
areas, but do not in and of themselves deliver stress reduction or improved status (e.g. reformed legislation does not reduce stress or improve the aquatic
environment until it is actually implemented/enforced).
Process indicator.
Yes
No
Additional information; Major studies & reports
Is there high-level political commitment to improving the status of watersheds and
coastal areas?
Is development guided by land use/and or land use zoning plans?
Have Integrated Water Resources Management Plans been implemented?
Have fisheries management plans been implemented?
88
GEF-IWCAM
Are incentives provided for sustainable agriculture?
Are incentives provided for sustainable fisheries?
Are incentives provided for sustainable water use?
Have the relevant multilateral environmental agreements been ratified (indicate
which ones)?
Are there environmental education programmes?
Are there institutionalized processes for stakeholder participation in watershed &
coastal areas development & management?
Have responsible agency/institute/committees, etc. been established?
Has the country adopted specific water, environment, or sector-related legal reforms,
policies, institutions, standards, and programmes to address the priority issues
related to watershed and coastal areas development & management?
Are there effective or improved implementation, surveillance and enforcement
related to watershed and coastal area management?
Are there economic instruments for environmental and natural resources
management (e.g. pollution and water use tariffs, taxes, etc)?
Is there an environmental/water quality monitoring programme?
Is there valuation of natural resources/ecosystems?
Others (specify)
89
GEF-IWCAM
Questionnaire - PART 2
Institutional and human capacity assessment
Question YES/NO
Status/
Comment
7. CAPACITY FOR ANALYSIS SYSTEMIC
Are the monitoring, data-collection and sample-collection activities performed by your
institution:
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget?
o adequately
funded?
o
supported by adequate staff complements?
Are the data (or sample) -processing, -analysis, and - reporting activities performed by
your institution:
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget?
o adequately
funded?
o
supported by adequate staffing complements?
Are the data storage and acquisition4 activities of your institution:
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget?
o adequately
funded?
o
supported by adequate staffing complements?
Is the maintenance of observational or monitoring equipment:
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget?
o adequately
funded?
o
supported by adequate staffing complements?
Is the purchase of observational or monitoring equipment
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget?
o adequately
funded?
o
supported by adequate staffing complements?
Are the purchase of software, and technological aides for processing and data analysis:
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget?
o adequately
funded?
o
supported by adequate staffing complements?
Is the development and maintenance of data storage and retrieval systems (hard copy
or digital):
o
identified in the annual work plan and budget?
o adequately
funded?
o
supported by adequate staffing complements?
8. CAPACITY FOR ANALYSIS - INSTITUTIONAL
Which unit within your institution is responsible for monitoring, data collection, or
observation?
Which unit within your institution is responsible for data analysis and reporting?
Is the quality of monitoring/observation/data collection affected by:
human resource constraints?
inadequate training
4 Data Acquisition: the purchase of data sets (raw data, model outputs), remotely sensed imagery (aerial photographs, satellite imagery).
90
GEF-IWCAM
Question YES/NO
Status/
Comment
funding constraints?
equipment constraints?
technology constraints
Other?
Is the quality of the analysis affected by:
data constraints?
human resource constraints?
inadequate training
funding constraints?
equipment constraints?
technology constraints
Other?
Is the quality of storage/archiving and processing affected by:
data constraints?
human resource constraints?
inadequate training
funding constraints?
equipment constraints?
technology constraints
Other?
Is the quality of reporting affected by:
data constraints?
human resource constraints?
inadequate training
funding constraints?
equipment constraints?
technology constraints
Other?
The following matrix has been developed to gather information on the type of activities that your institution undertakes and the level of capacity (numbers of individuals, training and
skills levels) available to undertake these activities. In order to capture the maximum amount of information with the minimum number of questions, a combination of activities has been
compiled to cover a reasonably wide number of disciplines:
e.g. "Species assessment and monitoring" might be an activity that is undertaken in the course of coral reef assessment, fish catch monitoring, invasive species monitoring, and
biodiversity mapping.
e.g. "Mapping" might relate to invasive species distributions, ecosystem boundary demarcation, and coastal inundation projections due based on sea-level rise scenarios.
e.g. "Data collection" might apply to the collection of data on fish length, ground water salinity, vegetation cover, or industrial effluent quality.
In cases where the same response might be provided for two different questions e.g. "Data collection, monitoring, or observation" and "Species assessment and monitoring" place an
asterisk (*) next to the activity that most accurately reflects your organizations/units mandate e.g. a Coastal Zone Management Unit would place the * next to "Species assessment and
monitoring" if referring to coral reef monitoring.
9. Which specific IWCAM-related functions does your institution YES
Number
Highest Level of
Human & institutional capacity status ( ) /
undertake ( ). How many staff are involved (number), and what levels of
( )
of Staff
Education Attained
Comment
education have they attained (scale)?
(Scale
/ NO (-)
1 On-the-Job Training
2 Secondary
3 Technical
4
A
i t D
91
GEF-IWCAM
Inadequate
Adequate Superior
DATA COLLECTION, PROCESSING AND APPLICATIONS.
Data and sample (e.g. water, soil, animal tissue) collection,
analysis or observation.
Data processing/analysis.
Sample analysis.
Database management.
Statistical analysis.
Development of indicators mechanisms & protocols.
GIS development and management.
Systematic observations.
Instrumentation and equipment maintenance.
Mapping.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS DATA COLLECTION/ MONITORING.
Watershed/catchment assessment and monitoring.
Ecosystem (e.g. coral reefs, mangroves) assessment and monitoring.
Species identification.
Species assessment and monitoring e.g. length, weight, abundance,
diversity indices, community structure.
Natural resources assessment and monitoring.
Plant and animal populations assessment e.g. fish-stock size or structure,
population size/structure, genetic diversity.
Animal tissue contamination monitoring.
Waste (solid or liquid) assessment and monitoring.
Waste (solid or liquid) assessment and monitoring
Water abstraction monitoring (potable water; irrigation)
Water quality monitoring (ground, surface, fresh, marine)
Water volume/flow monitoring (ground, surface water)
Soil/sediments monitoring
Air quality monitoring
Sea surface temperature monitoring
Sea level rise monitoring
Others (specify).
SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS DATA COLLECTION/MONITORING
Demographics
Social conditions(poverty, income, employment)
Human health
Social vulnerability
Human Development
Sustainable Development
Others (specify)
IWCAM-RELATED ACTIVITIES IN FULFILLMENT OF THE FOLLOWING:
Cartagena Convention
92
GEF-IWCAM
9. Which specific IWCAM-related functions does your institution YES
Number
Highest Level of
Human & institutional capacity status ( ) /
undertake ( ). How many staff are involved (number), and what levels of
( )
of Staff
Education Attained
Comment
education have they attained (scale)?
(Scale
/ NO (-)
1 On-the-Job Training
2 Secondary
3 Technical
4 Associate Degree
Inadequate
Adequate Superior
5 Degree
6 Post-graduate
7 Doctorate)
UNFCCC/Kyoto Protocol
Convention on Biological Diversity
Convention on Desertification and Land Degradation
UNEP GPA (Global Programme of Action for Protection of the Marine
Environment from Land-based Activities)
Law of the Sea
MARPOL
Barbados Programme of Action
OECS St. Georges Declaration
Caribbean Initiative for Sustainable Development
Millennium Development Goals
WSSD Plan of Implementation
Others (specify)
93
GEF-IWCAM
ANNEX 2. Respondents to questionnaire
Country Agency
Antigua & Barbuda
Environment Division
Bahamas BEST
Commission
Cuba
CIGEA
Centro Estudios Ambientales de Cienfuegos
Dominican Republic
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources
Haiti
Ministère De L'Environnement
Jamaica
Centre for Marine Sciences, UWI, Caribbean Coastal Data Centre
National Environment and Planning Agency
St. Kitts & Nevis
Water Services Department
St. Vincent & the
Forestry Department
Grenadines
Trinidad & Tobago
Water & Sewerage Authority
Institute of Marine Affairs
Environmental Management Authority
Department of Natural Resources and the Environment (Tobago)
Others (regional)
Caribbean Institute for Meteorology & Hydrology (Barbados)
Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies (CERMES)
UWI (Barbados)
94
GEF-IWCAM
ANNEX 3. Provisional CBD Indicators for Assessing Progress towards the 2010
Biodiversity Target (Non-italics: indicators considered ready for immediate testing and
use; Italics: require more work)
A: Focal Area
Indicator
Status and trends of the components of
Trends in extent of selected biomes, ecosystems, and habitats
biological diversity
Trends in abundance and distribution of selected species
Coverage of protected areas
Change in status of threatened species
Trends in genetic diversity of domesticated animals, cultivated plants, and fish
species of major socioeconomic importance
Sustainable use
Area of forest, agricultural and aquaculture ecosystems under sustainable
management
Proportion of products derived from sustainable sources
Ecological footprint and related concepts
Threats to biodiversity
Nitrogen deposition
Trends in invasive alien species
Ecosystem integrity and ecosystem
Marine Trophic Index
goods and services
Water quality of freshwater ecosystems
Trophic integrity of other ecosystems
Connectivity / fragmentation of ecosystems
Incidence of human-induced ecosystem failure
Health and well-being of communities who depend directly on local ecosystem
goods and services
Biodiversity for food and medicine
Status of traditional knowledge,
Status and trends of linguistic diversity and numbers of speakers of indigenous
innovations and Practices
languages
Other indicator of the status of indigenous and traditional knowledge
Status of access and benefit-sharing
Indicator of access and benefit-sharing
Status of resource transfers
Official development assistance provided in support of the Convention
Indicator of technology transfer
95
GEF-IWCAM
ANNEX 4. OECS St. George's Declaration Indicators (Geoghegan and Renard,
2006)
Indicators for which systems of monitoring and data collection already exist and which
can be tracked immediately:
1. Participation of Member States in the major international and regional
environmental conventions and protocols that they have ratified or been extended
to, particularly the Cartagena Convention and its Protocols and the so-called Rio
Conventions and their Protocols;
2. Extent, quality and availability of data in national State of the Environment
Reports;
3. Status and effectiveness of national consultative councils and forums related to
sustainable development;
4. Number of companies and government departments adopting ISO 14001
standards;
5. Extent of key ecosystems, including forests and coral reefs (but not mangroves,
the third ecosystem mentioned for this SGD indicator, for which no acceptable
baselines or adequate monitoring initiatives are in place);
6. Proportion of population with access to waste collection;
7. Annual consumption of CFCs;
8. Per capita carbon dioxide emissions;
9. Ratio of protected (terrestrial, coastal and marine) areas to total national territory;
10. Number of protected recognised and important natural and cultural heritage sites;
11. Energy consumption as a percentage of GDP;
12. Contribution of alternative sources of energy relative to total energy use;
13. Extent of capacity in MS to plan for, respond to and mitigate the effects of natural
disasters and other environmental emergencies;
14. Proportion of population with access to adequate sanitation and water supply,
disaggregated by sex, age, household income, disability status and geographic
location;
Indicators that require baseline assessments and further work:
1. Use of collaborative arrangements for the management of natural resources and
sites;
2. Extent and quality of environmental education programmes;
3. Levels of environmental responsibility evidenced by different sectors of society;
4. Water availability per capita;
5. Extent of key ecosystems, including mangroves;
6. Number of formal environmental impact assessments conducted and proportion of
these that had a formal consultative process;
7. Proportion of solid and liquid waste recycled, reused or properly treated and
disposed;
8. Number of economic trade agreements signed by Member States that make
provision for environmental safeguards and protection of natural assets;
96
GEF-IWCAM
9. Existence of legal provisions to guarantee access to sites and resources of public
importance.
ANNEX 5. Priority list of core indicators for the CARICOM programme
Environment component (CARICOM Secretariat)
I. POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS
1. Annual population growth rate
2. Population size urban / rural
3. Distribution of households by type of dwelling
4. Distribution of households by type of tenure
5. Distribution of households by type of materials of outer walls
6. Distribution of households by type of roof
(Note: Proportion of households with access to secure tenure - MDG)
II. TOURISM
1. Tourist intensity / growth
2. No. of tourist nights
3. Tourist penetration ratio
a. No. of cruise passenger arrivals
b. No. of cruise ships arrivals
4. No. of rooms, beds and employees
5. Room occupancy rate
6. Estimates of visitor expenditure
7. No. of hotels by size
8. No. of hotels occupied by land area
III. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
1. Number of reported cases and incidence of environmentally related diseases
(gastroenteritis, typhoid, malaria, dengue, cholera, accidental pesticide poisoning,
respiratory diseases)
2. Distribution of households by main source of drinking water
(Note: Proportion of population with sustainable access to an improved
water source, urban / rural - MDG )
3. Distribution of households by type of toilet facilities
(Note: Proportion of urban population with access to improved sanitation -MDG)
IV. NATURAL DISASTER
1. Frequency and type
2. Economic loss
3. Human loss
V. ENERGY
1. Consumption of energy and renewable energy (import/export)
(Note: Energy use (kilogram oil equivalent) per US$1 gross domestic
product (PPP) - MDG)
2. Distribution of households by fuel used for type of cooking
(Note: Proportion of population using solid fuels - MDG)
3. Distribution of households by type of lighting
VI. LAND USE
1. Total area
2. Land use
3. Land use change
97
GEF-IWCAM
VII. AGRICULTURE
1. Use of fertilizer by type (N,P,K), weight
2. Use of pesticides by type (weight)
(Note: total arable area and total area under Slash/Burn will be covered under
Land Use" section)
VIII. WASTE
1. Disposal of waste
a. Landfill
b. Incineration
c. Composting
d. Re-cycling
2. Generation of waste by type and source / sector (household, industrial)
3. Toxic / Hazardous material (imported / exported)
IX. FRESH WATER
1. Quantity of water available
2. Water abstraction, water supply and water use
a.
water
abstraction
b.
water
supply
c. Water use
3. Domestic consumption of water per capita
4. Water quality of rivers and lakes (concentration)
X. AIR / CLIMATE
1. Emissions of pollutants by stationary and mobile sources
a.
CO2
b.
NOx
c.
SO2
d.
CH4
e. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
f.
Pb
(Note: Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions (per capita) - MDG )
2. Consumption of ozone depleting substances CFC - MDG)
XI. COASTAL ZONES
1. Total marine area (territorial sea area)
2. Protected marine area
a. Protected marine area as % of total territorial sea area
3. Fish landings (weight)
4. Maximum sustainable yield for fisheries (weight/time)
5. Population growth in coastal areas
XII. BIODIVERSITY
1. Ratio of area protected (as defined in IUCN classification) to maintain biological
diversity to surface area - MDG
2. Total land area
3. Protected land area
a. Protected land area as % of total land area
XIII. FOREST
1. Total forest area
(deforestation and reforestation can be generated)
2. Protected forest area
3. Protected forest area as % of total forest area
4. Forest area as % to land area (excludes inland waters; rivers, lakes etc.)
(Note: Proportion of land area covered by forest - MDG)
XIV. MINERALS
1. Production of gold, Aluminum or Bauxite, Sand & Gravel, Limestone, Crude oil
98
GEF-IWCAM
ANNEX 6. ILAC goals and indicators (UNEP/World Bank/University of Costa Rica,
2004)
Goal Indicator
Increase of forest area
Proportion of land covered by forest
Territory included in protected areas
Ratio of areas protected with respect to total
territory
Genetic resources equitable sharing of benefits
Existence of national laws related to access to
genetic resources and the distribution of benefits
Marine diversity
Protected coastal and marine areas with respect
to the total costal and marine areas
Freshwater supply
The availability of water per capita and
consumption of water per capita
Watershed management
Percentage of water basin areas under
management
Management of marine and coastal areas and
Fish catch
their resources
Better quality of inland waters
Proportion of population with access to sanitation
Land-use planning
Proportion of municipalities with land-use plans
being implemented
Areas affected by degradation process
Proportion of degraded areas
Air pollution
Change in the density of the motor vehicle fleet
and carbon dioxide emissions
Water pollution
Proportion of population with access to drinking
water, and proportion of population with access to
sanitation
Solid waste
Proportion of population with access to waste
collection; production of solid wastes; and waste
collected and properly disposed
Vulnerability to anthropogenic disasters and those
Existence of national emergency commissions or
caused by natural phenomena
rapid response groups
Health and environment
Rate of morbidity attributable to acute respiratory
diseases; years of life lost due to incapacities as a
consequence of water-borne diseases; morbidity
from HIV/AIDS; size of urban green areas with
respect to the urban population.
Poverty and inequity
Proportion of population with income below the
purchasing power parity (PPP) of one dollar per
day; proportion of homes with access to secure
tenure; growth index of the number of small
enterprises; and social cost as a percentage of the
Gross Domestic Product.
Energy
Energy use per US$1 of GDP (PPP); proportion of
population using solid fuels; and percentage of
energy consumed from renewable sources with
respect to the total energy consumed.
Cleaner production
Consumption of chlorofluorocarbons that deplete
the ozone layer.
Environmental education
Total hours of teaching environmental science in
primary education.
Evaluation and indicators
Reports on the state of the environment and
Environment Statistics Systems
99
GEF-IWCAM
Participation of society
Existence of national sustainable development
councils
Annex 7. Official list of MDG indicators related to environmental sustainability,
after the 2007 revision. Effective 15 January 2008
(http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Resources/Attach/Indicators/OfficialList2008.doc)
Goals and Targets
Indicators for monitoring progress
(from the Millennium Declaration)
Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability
Target 7.A: Integrate the principles of sustainable 7.1 Proportion of land area covered by forest
development into country policies and programmes 7.2 CO2 emissions, total, per capita and per $1 GDP (PPP),
and reverse the loss of environmental resources
and consumption of ozone-depleting substances
7.3 Proportion of fish stocks within safe biological limits
7.4 Proportion of total water resources used
Target 7.B: Reduce biodiversity loss, achieving, by 7.5 Proportion of terrestrial and marine areas protected
2010, a significant reduction in the rate of loss
7.6 Proportion of species threatened with extinction
Target 7.C: Halve, by 2015, the proportion of
7.7 Proportion of population using an improved drinking water
people without sustainable access to safe drinking
source
water and basic sanitation
7.8 Proportion of population using an improved sanitation
facility
Target 7.D: By 2020, to have achieved a significant 7.9 Proportion of urban population living in slums
improvement in the lives of at least 100 million
slum dwellers
100
GEF-IWCAM
101