REQUEST FOR CEO ENDORSEMENT/APPROVAL
PROJECT TYPE: FSP
THE GEF TRUST FUND
Submission Date: 30 June 2008
Re-submission Date: 25 November 2008
PART I: PROJECT INFORMATION
GEFSEC PROJECT ID: 1346
Expected Calendar
GEF AGENCY PROJECT ID:
Milestones
Dates
COUNTRY(IES): México
Work Program (for FSPs only)
July 2007
PROJECT TITLE: Integrated Assessment and Management of
Agency Approval date
the Gulf of Mexico Large Marine Ecosystem
June 2007
GEF
Implementation Start
AGENCY(IES ): UNIDO
Jan 2009
OTHER EXECUTING PARTNER(S): SEMARNAT
Mid-term Evaluation (if planned)
Jan 2011
GEF FOCAL AREA(S): International Waters
Project Closing Date
Jan 2013
GEF-4 STRATEGIC PROGRAM(S): IW SP1; IW SP2
N
AME OF PARENT PROGRAM/UMBRELLA PROJECT:
1
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
A. PROJECT FRAMEWORK (Expand table as necessary)
Project Objective : To set the foundations for LME-wide ecosystem-based management approaches for the rehabilitation of marine and coastal ecosystems, recovery of depleted fish stocks,
and reduction of nutrient overloading.
Indicate
GEF Financing
whether
Expected Outcomes
Expected Outputs
Co-financing
Project
Total ($)
Components
Investment
($)
%
($)
%
, TA, or
STA**
1. Analysis of
Capacities and gaps in regional
A regional assessment of monitoring capacity
427,500
1.7
24,700,000
98.3
25,127,500
transboundary
Technical
monitoring methods/standards
gaps completed; A regional assessment of
issues and
assistance; identified; Key ecosystem
ecosystem and management capacity gaps
definition of
Scientific
assessment and management
completed; A regional assessment of
priorities
&
gaps identified (Biodiversity hot
biodiversity hot spots completed; Assessment
Technical
spots in the GoM LME assessed
of status and trends in GoM fisheries,
Analysis
and key knowledge gaps
particularly commercial aspects of shrimp,
identified; Existing information
reef fish, blue crab, red snapper, mackerel and
and data on status and trends in
anchovies fisheries finalized; A regional
fisheries assessed; Ecosystem-
assessment of nutrient and contaminant
wide nutrient over-enrichment
sources completed; A regional report on the
and contaminant sources, flows
Status of the Gulf of Mexico completed;
and levels assessed;
Integrated analysis of nutrient over-
Environmental impacts of
enrichment and related HABs undertaken;
transboundary pollution on the
Detailed regional and national level
GoM ecosystem assessed;
governance analysis completed; Preliminary
Information on nutrient over-
assessment of value of environmental goods
enrichment and related HABs
and services completed; TDA, published and
collected and integrated);
broadly disseminated, provides basis for
Governance analysis of relevant
informed management decis ions at a regional
policy and regulatory
level.
frameworks completed; Analysis
of the socioeconomic impacts of
priority transboundary issues,
including a preliminary LME
wide economic valuation of near
shore and marine goods and
services, undertaken; TDA
revised, finalized, published and
disseminated.
2. Formulation
Country agreement on and
Regional Plan of Action for the Yucatan Peninsula
1,130,000
11.2
9,000,000
88.8
10,130,000
and adoption
Technical
commitment to regional and
RPA-YUCATAN developed by Mexico as a major
of the SAP and assistance; national policy, legal, and
contribution to reduce land based sources of
2
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
associated
institutional reforms to address
pollution into the GoM LME; Strategic
NAPs.
Scientific
the agreed priority
Partnerships between GoM LME programme and
&
transboundary issues.
institutions responsible for integrated management
Technical
of the major GoM river basins, as well as the main
Analysis
coastal cities, developed; Stocktaking of the
Papaloapan watershed Commission to define
opportunities for replication in the Grijalva-
Usumacinta and Panuco river basins in order to
provide for strong inter-linkages between
watershed management authorities and coastal
managers; Strategies for harmonizing legislative,
policy and regulatory frameworks on agricultural
practices at LME wide levels developed, building
upon the Gulf of Mexico Governors Alliance; Bi-
lateral initiatives for regional surveying of
productivity and oceanography, stock assessment
and population assessments encouraged and
strengthened; Review of the effectiveness of
compliance measures with existing fisheries legal
and regulatory frameworks in both countries,
especially with regards to IUU, excessive fishing
capacity, and enforcement and surveillance, and
propose appropriate reforms and measures,
completed; Fisheries management plans for
selected key commercial fisheries developed;
Recovery plans for depleted priority non-
commercial species and associated marine flora and
fauna developed for additional species not currently
addressed; Management and capacity building
requirements to restore degraded marine coastal
wetlands defined; Marine and coastal spatial zoning
processes in individual countries strengthened and
implemented; LME-wide strategies for conserving
biodiversity and habitats in the coastal zones of
GoM LME supported and harmonized at a regional
level; The Strategic Action Programme (SAP) and
National Action Programmes (NAPs) formulated
and endorsed at the highest level; Commitments to
SAP implementation obtained and sustainable
financing arrangements formulated.
3
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
3.
Technical
Pilot Project on Natural Habitat
Specific project sites with emphasis on critical
2,160,000
4,9
40,474,780
95,1
42,634,780
Strengthening
assistance; and Ecosystem Conservation of
habitats such as mangrove ecosystems,
of the LME-
Scientific
Coastal and Marine Zones of the wetlands, sea grass beds and sand dunes
wide
&
Gulf of Mexico: Wetlands,
rehabilitation actions implemented and coastal
ecosystem-
Technical
Mangroves, Sea Grass Beds and
ecosystems health improved; Strategies and
based
Analysis
Sand Dunes effectively
actions for conservation in selected sites using
management
implemented; Pilot Project on
ecosystem approach developed; Cost effective
approaches
Enhancing Shrimp Production
strategies to mitigate impacts from erosion,
through the
through Ecosystem Based
meteorological events developed; Recovered
successful
Management effectively
depleted stocks through an ecosystem based
implementatio
implemented; Pilot Project on
management approach, focusing mainly on the
n of the Pilot
Joint Assessment and
shrimp fisheries; Strengthened capacities for
Projects
Monitoring of Coastal
improved stock assessments and data
Conditions in the Gulf of
collection; Established effective and
Mexico effectively implemented. coordinated surveillance and enforcement
mechanisms; Improved knowledge of current
socioeconomic conditions derived from
shrimp fisheries; Joint monitoring, assessment
and evaluation of the coastal environment of
the Gulf of Mexico Large Marine Ecosystem
capacity developed.
In keeping with established IW practices, the
project will establish close cooperation with
IW:Learn and explore possibilities to develop
learning tools for EBM management for the
Gulf of México LME. Consistent exchange of
lessons learned and good practices through
IW:Learn as well as other fora at national and
bi-national will facilitate the dissemination of
information thus assisting in the creation of an
enabling environment for furthering project
outcomes. The project will participate, with
project funds, in the GEF Biennial
International Waters Conferences (2009,
2011). It will also contribute to the
preparation of IW Experience Notes
documenting important lessons and good
practice, and contributions to various
IW:LEARN-mediated regional and thematic
knowledge sharing activities.
4. Monitoring
Monitoring & Evaluation
Effective M&E mechanisms in place; GEF
469,000
2.4 19,400,000
97.6 19,869,000
and Evaluation
mechanisms set up including an
M&E indicators will set the basis for
System for the
M & E system for the project;
harmonized environmental status indicators
Project and the
Suite of GEF M&E indicators
for the Bi-annual regional status report; GoM
GoM LME
developed (process, stress
LME Data System established and functional;
4
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
reduction, and environmental
Completed Reports widely disseminated and
and socioeconomic status) to
used by decision-makers and resource
monitor SAP implementation;
managers.
GoM LME Environmental
Information System developed;
Bi-annual regional status report
developed on large-scale
ecosystem impacts in the GoM
LME.
5. Project management (part of the co-financing is coming from activities)
316,000
13.6
2,000,000
86.4
2, 316,000
Total Project Costs
4,502,500
95,574,780
100,077,280
* List the $ by project components. The percentage is the share of GEF and Co-financing respectively to the total amount for the component.
** TA = Technical Assistance; STA = Scientific & technical analysis.
5
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
B. FINANCING PLAN SUMMARY FOR THE PROJECT ($)
Project Preparation
Project Grant
Total
For the record:
a
Agency Fee
b
c = a + b
Project Grant at PIF
GEF
473,000
4,502,500
4,975,500
497,550
Co-financing
85,000
95,574,780
95,659,780
Total
558,000
100,277,280
100,635,280
497,550
C. SOURCES OF CONFIRMED CO-FINANCING FOR PROJECT PREPARATION AND PROJECT
(expand the table line items as necessary)
Name of co-financier
Classification
Type
Project
Project
Total
%*
(source)
Preparation
SEMARNAT
Nat'l Gov't
In-kind
15,574,780 15,574,780
16,30
US NOAA
Nat'l Gov't
In-kind
78,400,000 78,400,000
81,04
US EPA
Nat'l Gov't
In-kind
1,600,000
1,600,000
2,66
Total Co-financing
95,574,780 95,574,780
100%
* Percentage of each co-financier's contribution at CEO endorsement to total co-financing.
D. GEF RESOURCES REQUESTED BY AGENCY(IES), FOCAL AREA(S) AND COUNTRY(IES)
(in $)
GEF Agency
Country Name/
Focal Area
Global
PPG
Project
Agency Total
(a)
(b)
Fee ( c) d=a+b+c
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
--(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
(select)
Total GEF Resources
* No need to provide information for this table if it is a single focal area, single country and single GEF Agency project.
E. PROJECT MANAGEMENT BUDGET/COST
Total Estimated
Cost Items
person weeks
GEF
Other sources
Project total
($)
($)
($)
Local consultants*
1020
316,000
800,000
1,116,000
International consultants*
0
0
0
0
Office facilities, equipment,
0
900,000
900,000
vehicles and communications*
Travel*
0
300,000
300,000
Total
316,000
2,000,000
2,316,000
* Includes personnel of the Project Coordination Unit (PCU). The Details to be provided in Annex C.
F. CONSULTANTS WORKING FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COMPONENTS:
7
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Component
Estimated
Other sources
Project total
person weeks
GEF($)
($)
($)
Local consultants*
2,315
1.092,500
1.042,500
2,135,000
International consultants*
812
330,000
1,700,000
2,030,000
Total
3,127
1,422,500
2,742,500
4,165,000
* Details to be provided in Annex C.
G. DESCRIBE THE BUDGETED M&E PLAN:
Monitoring and Evaluation
Project Inception Phase
A Project Inception Workshop will be conducted with the full project team, relevant government counterparts including the national
executing agency, key stakeholder group representatives, and UNIDO.
A fundamental objective of this Inception Workshop will be for the project team to understand and take ownership of the project's
goals and objectives, as well as finalize preparation of the project's first annual work plan on the basis of the project's logframe
matrix. This will require reviewing the logframe (indicators, means of verification, assumptions), imparting additional detail as
needed, and on the basis of this exercise finalize the Annual Work Plan (AWP) with precise and measurable performance indicators,
and in a manner consistent with the expected outcomes for the project.
Additionally, the purpose and objective of the Inception Workshop will be to: (i) introduce the project staff to UNIDO's and
SEMARNAT's staff working on the project; (ii) detail the roles, support services and complementary responsibilities of UNIDO
and SEMARNAT staff vis à vis the project team; (iii) provide a detailed overview of UNIDO's reporting and monitoring and
evaluation (M&E) requirements, with particular emphasis on the Annual Project Implementation Reviews (PIRs), IW Results
Templates and related documentation, Tripartite Review Meetings, as well as mid-term and final evaluations. Equally, the
Workshop will provide an opportunity to inform the project team on UNIDO's project related budgetary planning, budget reviews,
and mandatory budget rephasings.
The Workshop will also provide an opportunity for all parties to understand their roles, functions, and responsibilities within the
project's decision-making structures , including reporting and communication lines, and conflict resolution mechanisms. The Terms
of Reference for project staff and decision-making structures will be discussed again, as needed, in order to clarify for all concerned,
each party's responsibilit ies during the project's implementation phase.
Monitoring responsibilities and events
A detailed schedule of project review meetings will be developed by the project management, in consultation with project
implementation/execution partners and stakeholder representatives, and will be incorporated into the Project Inception Report. Such
a schedule will include: (i) tentative time frames for Tripartite Reviews, Steering Committee Meetings, and relevant advisory and/or
coordination mechanisms, and (ii) project related Monitoring and Evaluation activities.
Day to day monitoring of implementation progress will be the responsibility of the Project CTA based on the project's Annual Work
Plan and its indicators. The Project Team will inform UNIDO of any delays or difficulties faced during implementation so that the
appropriate support or corrective measures can be adopted in a timely and remedial fashion.
The CTA and UNIDO will fine-tune the progress and performance/impact indicators of the project in consultation with the full
project team at the Inception Workshop. Specific targets for the first year implementation progress indicators together with their
means of verification will be developed at this Workshop. These will be used to assess whether implementation is proceeding at the
intended pace and in the right direction and will form part of the Annual Work Plan. Targets and indicators for subsequent years
will be defined annually as part of the internal evaluation and planning processes undertaken by the project team
Measurement of impact indicators related to global benefits will occur according to the schedules defined in the Inception
Workshop and tentatively outlined in the indicative Impact Measurement Template. The measurement, of these will be undertaken
through subcontracts or retainers with relevant institutions or through specific studies that are to form part of the projects activities
or periodic sampling
Periodic monitoring of implementation progress will be undertaken by UNIDO through quarterly meetings, or more frequently as
deemed necessary. This will allow parties to take stock and to troubleshoot any problems pertaining to the project in a timely
fashion to ensure smooth implementation of project activities
8
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
UNIDO's Office in Mexico (UOM) will conduct yearly visits to the project's field sites to assess first-hand project progress, or
more often based on an agreed schedule to be detailed in the project's Inception Report / Annual Work Plan. Any other member of
the Steering Committee can accompany UOM, as decided by the Steering Committee. A Field Visit Report will be prepared by
UOM and ciPCUlated no less than one month after the visit to the project team, all Steering Committee members, and the UNIDO
project management staff.
Annual Monitoring will occur through the Steering Committee meetings. This is the highest policy-level meeting of the parties
directly involved in the project's implementation/execution. The project will also be subject to a Tripartite Review (TPR) at least
once every year, undertaken according to UNIDO's procedures. The first such meeting will be held within the first twelve months
of the start of full implementation. UNIDO's project management staff will prepare an Annual Project Report (APR) and submit it
for review and comments at the TPR.
The harmonized APR/PIR will be used as one of the basic documents for discussions in the TPR meeting. UNIDO's project
management staff will present the APR/PIR at the TPR, highlighting policy issues and recommendations for the decision of the TPR
participants. UNIDO's project management staff will also inform the participants of any agreement reached by stakeholders during
the APR preparation on how to resolve operational issues. Separate reviews of each project component may also be conducted if
necessary.
The final Steering Committee meeting will be held in the last month of project operations. UNIDO project management staff will
prepare the Terminal Report. It shall be prepared in draft at least two months in advance of the terminal TPR in order to allow
review, and will serve as the basis for discussions at the terminal TPR. The terminal TPR will consider the implementation of the
project as a whole, paying particular attention to whether the project has achieved its stated objectives and contributed to the broader
environmental objective. It decides whether any actions are still necessary, particularly in relation to sustainability of project results,
and acts as a vehicle through which lessons learnt can be captured to feed into other projects under implementation of formulation.
Project Monitoring Reporting
The Project CTA in conjunction with UNIDO's project management staff will be responsible for the preparation and submission of
the following reports that form part of the monitoring process.
The Inception Report (IR): A Project Inception Report will be prepared immediately following the Inception Workshop. It will
include a detailed First Year/ Annual Work Plan divided into quarterly timeframes detailing the activities and progress indicators
that will guide implementation during the first year of the project. This Work Plan will include the dates of specific field visits,
support missions from consultants or UNIDO, as well as timeframes for meetings of the project's decision-making structures. The
Report will also include the detailed project budget for the first full year of implementation, prepared on the basis of the Annual
Work Plan, and will include any monitoring and evaluation requirements to effectively measure project performance during the
targeted 12 months time -frame.
The Inception Report will include a more detailed narrative on the institutional roles, responsibilities, coordinating actions and
feedback mechanisms of project related partners. In addition, a section will be included on progress to date on project establishment
and start-up activities and an update of any changed external conditions that may effect project implementation.
When finalized, the report will be reviewed by UNIDO's project management staff and then will be ciPCUlated to project
counterparts who will be given one month in which to respond with comments or queries.
The Annual Project Report (APR) & Project Implementation Review (PIR): The merged APR / PIR development process will be
managed by the PCU. The PIR is an annual monitoring process mandated by the GEF. It has become an essential management and
monitoring tool for project managers and offers the main vehicle for extracting lessons from ongoing projects, and for monitoring
the level of achievement of the Indicators included in the Project Results Framework. The APR / PIR process will come into effect
once the project has been under implementation for a year. The APR / PIRs will provide a key input to the Tripartite Project
Review. They will be prepared prior to the Tripartite Project Review, to reflect progress achieved in meeting the project's Annual
Work Plan and to assess performance of the project in contributing to intended outcomes through outputs and partnership work. The
format for the APR / PIRs will include the following:
· An analysis of project performance over the reporting period, including outputs produced and, where possible, information
on the status of the outcome
· The constraints experienced in the progress towards results and the reasons for these
· The three (at most) major constraints to achievement of results
· Annual Work Plans (AWP) and other expenditure reports (Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) generated)
9
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
· Lessons learned
· Clear recommendations for future orientation in addressing key problems in lack of progress
· The GEF International Waters Project Performance Results Template
The focal area PIRs are discussed in the GEF Interagency Focal Area Task Forces in or around November each year and
consolidated reports by focal area are collated by the GEF Independent M&E Unit based on the Task Force findings. The GEF
M&E Unit provides the scope and content of the PIR.
Quarterly Progress Reports: Short reports outlining main updates in project progress will be provided quarterly to the UNIDO's
office in Mexico by the project team.
Periodic Thematic Reports: As and when called for by UNIDO or SEMARNAT, the project team will prepare specific Thematic
Reports, focusing on specific issues or areas of activity. The request for a Thematic Report will be provided to the project team in
written form by SEMARNAT or UNIDO and will clearly state the issue or activities that need to be reported on. These reports can
be used as a form of lessons learnt exercise, specific oversight in key areas, or as troubleshooting exercises to evaluate and
overcome obstacles and difficulties encountered. UNIDO will minimize its requests for Thematic Reports, and when such are
necessary will allow reasonable timeframes for their preparation by the project team.
Project Terminal Report: During the last three months of the project the project team will prepare the Project Terminal Report.
This comprehensive report will summarize all activities, achievements and outputs of the project, lessons learnt, objectives met or
not achieved, structures and systems implemented, etc. and will be the definitive statement of the project's activities during its
lifetime. It will also lay out recommendations for any further steps that may need to be taken to ensure sustainability and
replicability of the project's activities. It will be submitted to the terminal TPR for review by its participants.
Technical Reports: Technical Reports are detailed documents covering specific areas of analysis or scientific specializations within
the overall project. As part of the Inception Report, the project team will prepare a draft Reports List, detailing the technical reports
that are expected to be prepared on key areas of activity during the course of the Project, and tentative due dates. Where necessary
this Reports List will be revised and updated, and included in subsequent APRs. Technical Reports may also be prepared by
external consultants and should be comprehensive, specialized analyses of clearly defined areas of research within the framework of
the project and its sites. These technical reports will represent, as appropriate, the project's substantive contribution to specific areas,
and will be used in efforts to disseminate relevant information and best practices at local, national and international levels.
Project Publications: Project Publications will form a key method of crystallizing and disseminating the results and achievements of
the project. These publications may be scientific or informational texts on the activities and achievements of the project, in the form
of journal articles, multimedia publications, etc. These publications can be based on Technical Reports, depending upon the
relevance, scientific worth, etc. of these reports, or may be summaries or compilations of a series of Technical Reports and other
research. The project team will determine if any of the Technical Reports merit formal publication, and will also (in consultation
with UNIDO, the government and other relevant stakeholder groups) plan and produce these publications in a consistent and
recognizable format. Project resources will need to be defined and allocated for these activities as appropriate and in a manner
commensurate with the project's budget.
Independent Evaluation
In accordance with UNIDO's procedures, the project will be subjected to at least two independent external evaluations as follows:
Mid-term Evaluation: An independent Mid-Term Evaluation will be undertaken at the end of the second year of implementation.
The Mid-Term Evaluation will determine progress being made towards the achievement of outcomes and will identify course
correction if needed. It will focus on the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of project implementation; will highlight issues
requiring decisions and actions; and will present initial lessons learned about project design, implementation and management.
Findings of this review will be incorporated as recommendations for enhanced implementation during the final half of the project's
term. The organization, terms of reference and timing of the mid-term evaluation will be decided after consultation between the
parties to the project document. The Terms of Reference for this Mid-term evaluation will be prepared by UNIDO.
Final Evaluation: An independent Final Evaluation will take place three months prior to the terminal tripartite review meeting, and
will focus on the same issues as the mid-term evaluation. The final evaluation will also look at impact and sustainability of results,
including the contribution to capacity development and the achievement of global environmental goals. The Final Evaluation will
also provide recommendations for follow-up activities. The Terms of Reference for this evaluation will be prepared by UNIDO.
10
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Budget
Activity/Reporting
Time/Frequency
Main responsibility
Budget ($)
GEF
Other
Inception Workshop
Within the first month of
National executing agencies;
20,000
10,000
project start up
country coordinators, UNIDO,
Inception Workshop report
Immediately following the
PCU and national executing
0
0
IW/Steering Committee
agencies
Project Implementation Plan,
Project Inception
PCU, UNIDO
0
0
review of work-plan and budget.
Annual Project Report and
Annually
UNIDO
0
0
Project Implementation Review
(PIR)
Quarterly Progress Report
Querterly
PCU
0
0
Half-yearly Progress and
Half-yearly
PCU, national executing
0
10,000
Financial Reports
agencies
Steering Committee meetings
Annually
PCU, national executing
40,000
20,000
and reports
agencies UNIDO, country
coordinators
Periodic Thematic Reports,
As agreed by the PCU,
National executing agencies
0
40,000
Technical Reports and
UNIDO, and executing
Project publications
agencies
Independent Mid-term Project
Mid-point of project
UNIDO
20,000
0
Evaluation
implementation phase
Mid-Term Stocktaking meeting
Mid-point of project
UNIDO, PCU, SC, National
5,000
10,000
implementation phase
executing agencies, National
coordinators
Final Independent Project
End of project
UNIDO
20,000
0
Evaluation
implementation
Terminal Report
One month before project
PCU,
10,000
0
termination
National executing agencies
Lessons learned and
At mid-point and end of
National executing agencies,
30,000
20,000
demonstration reports
project implementation
PCU
Audit
Annually
UNIDO
20,000
0
TOTAL
165,000
110,000
PART II: PROJECT JUSTIFICATION:
A. DESCRIBE THE PROJECT RATIONALE AND THE EXPECTED MEASURABLE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS:
The distinctive biophysical characteristics of the Gulf of Mexico Large Marine Ecosystem (GoM LME) make it one of the most
productive marine ecosystems in the world and an important global reservoir of biodiversity. However, this high productivity is at
risk from a suite of anthropogenic threats that include excessive fishing effort, destruction of critical coastal and marine habitats,
and nutrient-enrichment resulting in a "Dead Zone" of over 18,000 km2 that forms every year one of the largest hypoxic zones of
water in the world. Additionally, the LME is the focus of extensive oil and gas production as well as a rapidly increasing tourism
industry.
Many stocks in the Gulf of Mexico are over-fished, or are at (or close to) their maximum yield. Intensive fishing, the primary force
driving biomass changes in the GoM LME, is compounded by two other significant factors. Habitat modification, including loss of
critical habitats and connectivity, resulting from poorly planned growth in coastal and urban areas along the GoM coast, translates
into a trend of urban growth at the expense estuaries, marshes, seagrasses, coral reefs, mangroves and other vital ecotones.
According to data from the FAO, in the last 30 years Mexico has lost more than half of its mangrove coverage on both coasts.
Depletion and impacts on fish stocks affects both countries given that many stocks are shared, migratory, or connected via egg or
larval transport. Loss of habitats impacts on the life cycles of over 90% of GoM coastal and marine species, as does the increasing
pollutant and nutrient loads. Economic activities in the GoM are significant for both countries, with 85% of Mexico's oil extraction
originating in the region as well as 72% of the U.S. offshore petroleum production.
These growing anthropogenic threats evidence tight interdependencies in terms of causes and effects, and an LME-wide, ecosystem-
based management approach is required to effectively mitigate them in the long-term. However, existing management approaches
are not consistent with an ecosystem-based perspective and there are currently no agreed bi-
11
national programmes for managing
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
the GoM resources taking into account ecosystem-based requirements. Furthermore, the two countries have institutional
frameworks for coastal and marine resources protection, but no effective regional inter-sectoral project coordination mechanism
currently exists. In the absence of GEF intervention, fragmented efforts with a national and an often sectoral focus will continue to
be the norm.
The proposed GEF alternative will, through a TDA-SAP process, remove identified constraints and barriers, develop common
mechanisms and tools, and promote reforms and investments, to set the bases for application of the ecosystem approach in the
management of the GoM LME. This will be complemented by discrete capacity-building activities and pilot projects in three critical
aspects of the ecosystem approach: productivity, conservation and adaptive management, and robust monitoring and evaluation
frameworks, as well as cross-sectoral engagement. The transition towards the ecosystem-based management of the GoM LME will
depend on a greater convergence of policy tools including long-term joint programs and actions, a clearer distribution of
competencies at all three levels of government, and a robust monitoring and evaluation program. This will require a truly regional
GoM initiative supported through a combination of GEF financing and co-financing including a reoriented baseline.
Within this integrated approach, the project will address specific IW Priorities, in particular reduction of nutrient over-enrichment
from land-based pollution that creates anoxic "dead" zones in coastal waters, and restoration and maintenance of costal and marine
fish stocks and associated biological diversity, complemented by efforts to address degradation of coastal resources and processes.
In particular, the "dead zone" that forms every year in the Gulf of Mexico in critical areas for commercial and recreational fisheries
will require cross-sectoral, integrated suites of measures and reforms to address this issue as detailed in the IW Strategy. The project
will also develop mechanisms and undertake reforms for maintaining fisheries resources to within safe biological limits, and
encourage the sustainable use of all exploited living marine resources in the GOM LME. As an OP9 initiative, it emphasizes the
multi-focal connections that characterize the system. The project seeks to create a co-operative framework, together with the
necessary capacities, thereby enabling Mexico and the U.S. to address both imminent threats to the water body and develop joint
ecosystem-based management approaches.
The principal global benefit of the project is an enhanced understanding of LME functions, to serve as input into LME management
strategies through the TDA and SAP processes, and to establish an enabling environment and ecosystem-based management
practices that will contribute to the protection and maintenance of ecosystem functions and services. The Gulf of Mexico LME's
primary productivity supports an important global reservoir of biodiversity and biomass of fish, sea birds and marine mammals. The
LME supplies a diverse range of goods and services to the global community but these stand threatened by human-induced
pressures, including overfishing. These threats are transboundary in nature, and cannot be effectively abated through stand-alone
national initiatives. Global benefits can be secured through the institution of an LME ecosystem-based management framework,
allowing the countries to strengthen the management of LME living resources, and address land-based and marine pollution
including the reduction of nutrient loads that contribute to hypoxic zones in the LME.
The expected result of the set of interventions will be to reduce coastal pollution, restore damaged habitats, and restore depleted
stocks. The Project will make an important contribution by providing the needed building blocks such as information systems and
exchange, reinforced capacity and mechanisms for stakeholder participation. An enhanced knowledge of the oceanography of the
Gulf of Mexico LME will assist the countries in addressing uncertainty regarding ocean-atmosphere links.
B. DESCRIBE THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH NATIONAL PRIORITIES/PLANS:
Mexico's environmental policy is committed to sustainable development as embodied in the Physical Land Use Planning (LUP) and
the General Law of Ecological Equilibrium and Environmental Protection (Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y Protección al
Ambiente). The LUP is an environmental policy and planning instrument with the objective of promoting the preservation and
sustainable use of natural resources while protecting the natural environment. These and a number of other policies and instruments
provide the framework for the sustainable use, management, and protection of both terrestrial and marine areas and their natural
resources.
Of particular importance is the National Environmental Policy for the Sustainable Development of Oceans and Coasts
(NEPSDOC), which establishes public policy guidelines and strategies in an effort to reinforce integrated management of the
coastal zone through structural reform, effective inter-institutional coordination, and wide ranging public participation. This policy
represents a mainstreaming of effort between SEMARNAT and other secretariats and federal institutions responsible for the
different national economic sectors. This requires joint participation and responsibility from the authorities of the three levels of
government, as well as from all the social sectors directly involved in the use and appropriation of the coastal zone and its resources.
These efforts also seek to guarantee effective access to justice on environmental matters; apply integrated management approaches
to watersheds and coasts; recognize the economic and social value of natural resources and environmental services; and provide a
framework for economic development and improved quality of life for the inhabitants based on a better knowledge of the oceans
and coasts.
12
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
The National Strategy for Ecological Use Planning of Oceans and Coasts of 2007 sets out the Federal Government's goals towards
oceans and coasts. It provides the overall strategic framework for the conservation of oceans and coasts and includes guidelines to
strengthen public policies to ensure efficient management of coastal and marine natural resources based on ecosystem management
approach, including scientific knowledge and broad public participation. Thus, it strives to reach consensus among sectors and
governmental levels, to generate regional strategies, execute local actions and enhance regional and local capacities as well as to
reach consensus in transboundary shared marine ecosystems.
The National Strategy is setting in place key tools to further enhance the effectiveness and reach of these new policy regimes. A
major development is the creation of the permanent Inter-ministerial Commission for the Integrated Management of Oceans and
Coasts (CIMIOC). This approach represents a paradigm shift from a short-term, sectoral perspective to a long-term integrated
management regime that recognizes the interconnections between biological systems and economic and social systems. The
CIMIOC will generate a framework that will ensure close coordination and communication between the different economic sectors
and spheres of government, in order to develop integrated management actions based on the ecosystem approach. The CIMIOC will
guide the design, development and maintenance of a system of decisions and actions at different government levels, based on a
continuous planning process with the participation of the population and economic agents with interests in coastal and marine
resources.
Coastal and ocean management at the regional and sub-regional and local levels is evolving in Mexico. For instance, the Agreement
for the Coordination of the Regional Marine Ecological Zoning Plan for the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea brings together
federal and local governments to improve coastal zone management in this region. The Agreement was signed by the six Gulf States
(Tamaulipas, Veracruz, Tabasco, Campeche, Yucatán, and Quintana Roo) and 11 federal entities and this process has formally
installed its Executive and Technical Steering Committee where government and society at large is widely participating.
The current environmental policy framework includes domestic legislation (laws, regulations, norms, and codes), international
treaties and agreements, and bilateral cooperation agreements. Responsibility for the management of coastal areas and the ocean lies
with federal, state, and municipal agencies. SEMARNAT is the principal government agency responsible for the environment,
and is constituted by five decentralized entities: the National Water Commission (CONAGUA), the National Commission for
Protected Areas (CONANP), the Mexican Institute of Water Technology (IMTA), the General Federal Attorney Agency for
Environmental Protection (PROFEPA), and the National Institute of Ecology (INE). Other federal agencies with responsibility for
the environment (including coastal and marine areas and natural living resources) include the Secretary of Agriculture, Livestock
Production, Rural Development, Fisheries and Food (SAGARPA).
At present, the federal agency responsible for fisheries management, monitoring, and enforcement is the National Commission of
Aquaculture and Fisheries. The highest ranking and more specific instrument of Mexican fisheries legislation is the Federal
Fisheries Law, the objective of which is to promote the conservation, preservation and rational use of fisheries resources and
establish the basis for their adequate development and management. Stemming from this general law is the Fisheries Regulation,
prepared by the Executive on the basis of the general guidelines given in Federal Law. A recently implemented instrument in
Mexican fisheries management is the National Fisheries Chart elaborated by the National Fisheries Institute and published as an
Official Decree in 2000. This chart, which can be updated regularly, defines levels of fishing effort applicable to species and groups
of species in specific areas and provides guidelines, strategies, and provisions for conservation, protection, restoration, and
management of aquatic resources that could affect their habitats. There are also specific policies and programs for the protection of
specific resources, for example, those relating to marine mammals, tunas and dolphins, and marine turtles. Also of relevance to
coastal and marine living resources are the Law of National Waters and its Regulation and the establishment of marine protected
areas.
Within Federal waters, the U.S. has sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring, exploiting, conserving, and managing the living
and nonliving natural resources of the seabed and subsoil and the surface and subsurface of the waters. The Federal government also
has jurisdiction over the establishment and use of artificial structures, islands, and installations that have economic purposes, and
the protection and preservation of the ocean environment. Associated with these authorities is the Federal government's
responsibility to ensure that ocean activities are managed for the benefit of the public. Activities towards these ends are closely
coordinated with individual State governments.
The management of offshore activities by Federal agencies is a mixed picture. A variety of agencies are involved, the main ones
being the Departments of Commerce (which encompasses NOAA), Defense, Interior, and Transportation, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), and the Marine Mammal Commission. Some activities, such as fishing (under NOAA) or offshore oil
and gas development (under Interior), are governed according to well-developed regulatory regimes established in accordance with
specific legislative mandates while others, such as marine bioprospecting, are essentially unmanaged in federal waters. Other new
and emerging ocean uses, such as offshore aquaculture or wind energy, are subject to regulation by a number of authorities
executing va
13
rying responsibilities, but are not managed by any comprehensive federal law. There are efforts underway to develop
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
a coordinated offshore management regime, as recommended by the US Commission on Ocean Policy. Established in 2004 the
Commission presented its final report "An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century". The report contained 212 recommendations
aimed at realizing a far-reaching and comprehensive ocean policy, and emphasized the role of ecosystem-based management in the
attainment of that goal. In response, the President established a permanent Committee on Ocean Policy with a subsequent Ocean
Action Plan designed to implement the Commission's recommendations. The Committee consists of the Secretaries of 11 cabinet-
level departments as well as the heads of numerous other Federal agencies to provide for coordination of ocean-related matters "in
an integrated and effective manner and to facilitate coordination and consultation at all government levels as well as the private
sector, foreign governments, and international organizations."
For the purposes of this project, the lead agency is NOAA, specifically the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the
main legislative driver is the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Reauthorization (MSAR) of 2007. In
essence, MSAR confirmed the need for established national standards for fishery conservation and management in U.S. waters and
strengthened the role of science in determining allowable catches for managed species. The MSAR extended eight Regional Fishery
Management Councils composed of state and federal officials and fishing industry representatives that prepare and amend fishery
management plans for certain fisheries (including transboundary fisheries) requiring conservation and management. The MSAR
also requires that fishery management plans identify essential fish habitat and protection and conservation measures for each
managed species. In 1996, the Sustainable Fisheries Act amended the original Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act of 1976 to require NMFS to undertake a number of science, management, and conservation actions to prevent
overfishing, rebuild overfished stocks, protect essential fish habitat, minimize bycatch, enhance research, and improve monitoring.
There are several Federal-State cooperative initiatives to achieve these desired outcomes, including the MSAR-extended Gulf of
Mexico Fishery Management Council, the Gulf States Fisheries Management Commission (which coordinates activities of State
fishery agencies), and the newly-formed Gulf of Mexico Alliance (a partnership of the states of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana,
Mississippi and Texas, and thirteen Federal agencies which goal is to increase regional collaboration).
C. DESCRIBE THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH GEF STRATEGIES AND STRATEGIC PROGRAMS:
Despite existing bi-national agreements between Mexico and the U.S., the shared resources of the GOM are unsustainably
exploited. Existing management approaches are not consistent with ecosystem-based management and there are currently no agreed
bi-national programmes for managing the GOM resources from an ecosystem-based perspective. Furthermore, the two countries
have institutional frameworks for coastal and marine resources protection, but no effective regional intersectoral project
coordination mechanism currently exists.
This proposed GEF initiative is required in order to remove identified constraints and barriers to the use of the ecosystem approach
in the management of the GOM LME, through discrete capacity-building activities and pilot projects in three critical aspects of the
ecosystem approach: productivity, conservation and adaptive management, as well as cross-sectoral engagement. The transition
towards the ecosystem-based management of the GOM LME will depend on a greater convergence of policy tools including long-
term joint programs and actions, a clearer distribution of competencies at all three levels of government, and a robust monitoring
and evaluation program. This will require a truly regional GOM initiative supported through a combination of GEF financing and
co-financing including a reoriented baseline.
This proposed GEF project expands foundational capacity building to a highly strategic international water body and is therefore
fully consistent with the GEF Strategy and Priorities for International Waters, and in particular Strategic Objective 1. As an OP9
initiative, it emphasizes the multi-focal connections that characterize the system. The project seeks to create a co-operative
framework, together with the necessary capacities, thereby enabling Mexico and the U.S. to address both imminent threats to the
water body and develop joint ecosystem-based management approaches.
Within this integrated approach, the project will address specific IW Priorities, in particular land-based pollution and depletion of
coastal/marine fisheries. A hypoxic zone of over 18,000km2 forms every year in the Gulf of Mexico in critical areas for commercial
and recreational fisheries. Cross-sectoral, integrated suites of measures and reforms are required to address this issue as detailed in
the IW Strategy. The project will also develop mechanisms and undertake reforms for maintaining fisheries resources to within safe
biological limits, and encourage the sustainable use of all exploited living marine resources in the GOM LME. As called for in the
IW Strategy, this LME suffers from fisheries depletion but the stocks and associated biodiversity are not yet too degraded.
In keeping with GEF guidance, the project will finalize the preliminary TDA developed during the PDF-B phase. This constitutes
the basis for a robust Strategic Action Programme (SAP) that will define the policy/legal/institutional reforms and priority
investments, as well as on-the-ground pilots, needed to set in place regional collaboration on priority transboundary concerns for the
Gulf of Mexico Large Marine Ecosystem.
14
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Conformity
The project is fully compliant with the priorities identified for International Waters under GEF 4 and with Strategic Objective 1
(SO1): To foster international, multi-state cooperation on priority transboundary water concerns through more comprehensive,
ecosystem-based approaches to management, as its focus is on the development of response and mitigation measures to address
identified priorities: land-based sources of marine pollution that create anoxic "dead" zones in coastal waters, depletion of fisheries,
and degradation of coastal resources and processes. In terms of SO1, the project expands foundational capacity building to a highly
strategic international water body and, moreover, constitutes the first GEF Large Marine Ecosystem project in Latin America and
the Caribbean.
In terms of Strategic Programs in the international waters focal area for GEF 4, the project conforms to both SP1 and SP2. Strategic
Program 1 is concerned with restoring and sustaining coastal and marine fish stocks and associated biological diversity. Strategic
Program 2 focuses on reducing nutrient over-enrichment and oxygen depletion from land-based pollution of coastal waters in
LMEs consistent with the GPA.
As called for in the International Waters Focal Area Strategy and Strategic Programming for GEF4, land-based sources of
pollution that create anoxic "dead" zones are a priority for the project given the Mississippi-Atchafalaya River Basin and Gulf of
Mexico hypoxic zone of over 18,000km2 that forms every year in the Gulf of Mexico. The project addresses the cross-sectoral
collaboration and synergies required in order to coordinate regional efforts to address the distribution, dynamics and causes of
hypoxia. The project will also develop mechanisms and undertake reforms for maintaining fisheries resources to within safe
biological limits, and encourage the sustainable use of all exploited living marine resources in the GOM LME. These efforts will
complement activities and reforms geared at reducing ecosystem stress on critical coastal areas including bays, estuaries, and
wetlands. Based on the development of integrated, ecosystem-based management approaches, the necessary reforms, frameworks
and investments will be undertaken to support SAP objectives. It is therefore fully in conformity with identified GEF 4 strategic
objectives, priorities and programmes.
Through the International Waters focal area, the GEF has helped establish management and policy frameworks in large marine
ecosystems that provide the necessary foundation for marine protected areas to be successful. One of the pilots in the project
specifically focuses on the rehabilitation and restoration of coastal areas and critical habitats
As an Operational Programme 9 (OP9) initiative, it emphasizes the multi-focal connections that characterize the system, and seeks
to create a co-operative framework, together with the necessary capacities, thereby enabling riparian countries that share the
ecosystem to address both imminent threats to the water body and develop joint ecosystem-based management approaches.
The Program addresses GEF eligibility criteria agreed under the International Waters focal area by:
a) assisting groups of countries to better understand the environmental concerns of their international waters and work
collaboratively to address them;
b) building capacity of existing institutions, or through new institutional arrangements, to utilize a more comprehensive
approach for addressing transboundary water-related environmental concerns; and
c) implementing sustainable measures that address priority transboundary environmental concerns.
D. OUTLINE THE COORDINATION WITH OTHER RELATED INITIATIVES:
The improved coordination of institutions (SEMARNAT, INP, riparian state governments, municipalities) with mandates that
impact on the GoM LME, at both national and bi-national levels, is a keystone of this project. Key examples are the MEXUS-Gulf
initiative and the Gulf Governors Alliance. Moreover, this project builds upon existing mechanisms such as the permanent Inter-
ministerial Commission for the Integrated Management of Oceans and Coasts (CIMIOC) of Mexico that represents a paradigm shift
from a short-term, sectoral perspective to a long-term integrated management regime that recognizes the interconnections between
biological systems and economic and social systems. Inter-sectoral linkages promoted by the project will provide for greater
coordination and communication between economic sectors and spheres of government, in order to develop integrated management
actions based on the ecosystem approach. Similarly, the project feeds into existing policy frameworks such as the Land Use
Planning Programme for the Coast and Marine Areas of the Atlantic littoral currently being developed in Mexico. In addition, the
project will catalyze the already dynamic relationship between the U.S. and Mexico in the GoM LME and build upon a strong
baseline as reflected in the fact that the pilot demonstration projects seek to strengthen opportunities, expertise and know-how so
that Mexican counterparts can better participate in, and contribute to, ongoing efforts by the U.S. in the region.
Finally, the development of the SAP and the NAPs includes devising mechanisms for regional and national support commitments to
the project activities and to reach the objectives of the SAP. The creation of institutional mechanisms through the GoM LME as 15
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
well as a country-driven regional coordination mechanism will also ensure that the efforts initiated under this project are national
and regionally supported and will be on going after the conclusion of project activities.
This project will draw on lessons from other GEF LME projects both regionally and globally, while the results and lessons learned
from this project will benefit subsequent efforts to manage LMEs and coastal and enclosed seas. In this context, efforts will be made
to cooperate and share information with other transboundary water management projects in the region. In particular, this initiative
will be developed in close coordination with the GEF LME project "Sustainable Management of the Living Marine Resources of
the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem and Adjacent Regions", which is currently under preparation. These two projects share key
outcomes. Additionally, these initiatives share the support of important partners in the region including U.S.-NOAA and U.S.-EPA,
as well as platforms for leveraging other partnerships and resources such as Blue Water to White Water.
In keeping with established IW practices, the project will establish close cooperation with IW:Learn and explore possibilities to
develop learning tools for LME management. Consistent exchange of lessons learned and good practices through IW:Learn as well
as other fora at national and bi-national will facilitate the dissemination of information thus assisting in the creation of an enabling
environment for furthering project outcomes. The project will participate, with project funds, in the GEF Biennial International
Waters Conferences (2009, 2011). It will also contribute to the preparation of IW ?Experience Notes? documenting important
lessons and good practice, and contributions to various IW:LEARN-mediated regional and thematic knowledge sharing activities.
This project will be sustained through the far-reaching support mechanisms that are being incorporated into its development. It will
bring together the private sector, civil society representatives (including members of the Regional Councils for Sustainable
Development and NGOs), government agencies at all levels (SEMARNAT, the Secretary of the Navy, port authorities, riparian
state and municipal governments), and donors interested in supporting work within the region. Once under implementation, both the
project and the pilot projects will bring about evident economic and social benefits thus generating an incentive to replicate these
efforts. Within the pilot projects, there are built-in mechanisms for sustaining the outcomes after project support is complete, as well
as monitoring and evaluation that emphasizes acquiring improvements throughout the process and in subsequent implementation.
E. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL REASONING OF THE PROJECT:
The GEF will provide a proposed budget of US$ 4,975,500 incremental cost funding for the project. The Governments of México
and the USA have committed US$ 96,774,780 in-kind contribution to the project.
Baseline
Approximately 55 million people live in the coastal states of the GOM, 40 million in the USA and 15 million in Mexico. The Gulf
of Mexico LME is a major asset to these countries, in terms of fisheries, tourism, agriculture, oil, infrastructure, trade and shipping.
Commercial fishing and seafood processing are an important component of the LME's economy, with the most important species
being brown, white and pink shrimp, and red grouper. The infrastructure for oil and gas production in the Gulf of Mexico (including
oil refineries, petrochemical and gas processing plants, supply and service bases for offshore oil and gas production, platform
construction yards and pipeline yards) is concentrated in the coastal regions of both the USA and Mexico. The Gulf of Mexico LME
contains major shipping lanes, and the volume and value of shipping and port activities has increased in the region.
The five states that make up the Gulf Region in Mexico contribute approximately 10% of the gross domestic product for the
agriculture and livestock, forestry and fisheries sector. The environmental cost of this production, based on national averages is
equivalent to 11.8% of the regional GDP, without taking into account the aspects of global relevance in the Gulf of Mexico
ecosystem. It is also likely that the national average of environmental costs is lower than in the Gulf States given the intensity of
agricultural and livestock related activities in Veracruz, Tamaulipas and especially Tabasco.
Habitat conservation and restoration
CONANP will continue to declare protected areas, mostly terrestrial, aside from special reserves such as the soon-to-be announced
expansion of the Yum Balam (largely land-based) reserve to include a marine sanctuary for an emblematic species in Holbox Island,
the whale shark, or the manatee sanctuary established in Chetumal Bay on the southern border with Belize. However, it is unlikely
that productive marine systems outside of landscape, biodiversity (coral reefs) or keystone species considerations would be
established. PEMEX will continue to support the implementation of management plans for the protected areas in the company's
operational zone such as Pantanos de Centla and Laguna de Términos. CONAFOR will also continue to support mangrove
restoration efforts under its competitive subsidy program, without taking into consideration strategic nature of factors such as
primary productivity, climate change adaptation, etc. Ramsar resolution on marine protected areas is consistent with national
policies but in the absence of GEF support would not be considered as a priority nor would synergies between coastal and marine
ecosystems be actively sought. This baseline is estimated at US$ 21 million.
Pollution
CNA will continue to monitor simple parameters to report on beach water conditions, harmful algal blooms will be reported and
16
monitored, although with no systematic information sharing protocols with the USA. Water sanitation and treatment facilities will
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
be built and operated by CNA and the municipal governments. The US action plan on hypoxia will continue to be implemented in
the Mississippi Delta, however in the absence of GEF support, Mexico will have no systematic way assimilate relevant knowledge
generated in the US and replicate in relevant programs such as RPA-YUCATAN (see below). In the absence of the ecosystem
approach, agricultural run-off and nutrient loading will continue to be viewed as a result of seasonal fluctuations in the Gulf. The oil
industry is the single most important economic sector in Mexico. Oil extraction is particularly important in the states of Tabasco and
Campeche, the reserves of which are considered to be amongst the most important in the Western Hemisphere. PEMEX will
continue to operate its environmental management and industrial security program, including pollution mitigation practices,
emergency protocols and restoration. Mexico through SEMARNAT- will continue to prepare its National Implementation Plan for
the Stockholm Convention on POPS, including abatement measures for unintentional releases. This region has been selected for a
pilot project for the Global Program of Action (Regional Plan of Action for the Yucatan Peninsula RPA-YUCATAN), and close
cooperation with the Gulf of Mexico project is foreseen. This baseline is estimated at US$ 100 million.
Policy Framework
Mexico has made important advances in consolidating its environmental policy, and the past and current administrations have
placed importance on mainstreaming of the environment through cross-sector planning and budgeting. In 2006, SEMARNAT
adopted a National Environmental Policy for the Sustainable Development of Oceans and Coasts, which establishes public policy
guidelines and strategies in an effort to reinforce integrated environmental management of the coastal zone through structural
reform, effective inter-institutional coordination and wide ranging public participation. Mexico published a National Fisheries Chart
at the end of the 1994-2000 administration and although new versions were published in 2004 and 2006, it that was not taken on
board by subsequent administrations as a result of which several fishing stocks were depleted. Most recently, fundamental
modifications have been made to several official standards and it is expected that further fine-tuning of the legal and policy
framework would continue to take place. However in the absence of GEF support, it is unlikely that a harmonized policy framework
for the LME between Mexico and the USA, as well as between the Mexican Federal Government and the State and Municipal
governments, would be achieved. This component of the baseline is estimated at US$ 8 million.
Regional coordination efforts
Bilateral activities will continue to be carried in the Gulf of Mexico out on a wide-ranging number of issues including wildlife,
habitat, shipping, petroleum industry-related emergency contingency plans, shared watersheds, etc. Nevertheless, these efforts are
predominately sectoral in nature, and do not contemplate a shared approach, nor do they provide an enabling environment for
synergies through the ecosystem approach. The baseline is estimated at US$ 20 million.
Sustainable Livelihoods
SAGARPA currently provides limited support to riparian communities in the form of extension programs , some rural aquaculture
initiatives, and subsidized seeds, fertilizers and other inputs for subsistence farming. In spite of the limited support for aquaculture,
there is no real institutional effort made to provide alternative income to rural coastal fis her communities. CONAFOR operates
several subsidy programs principally for reforestation and commercial plantations, and is the main financial source for restoration of
ecosystems (see above in habitat). PEMEX through the National Indigenous Commission and other institutions provides some
support for productive alternatives in agriculture. CONANP allows for productive activities in the influence and buffer zones of the
region's protected areas but does not provide any financial support, and the management plans are not also linked to potential
financiers. Also, full stakeholder participation in the identification of these productive alternatives is still somewhat limited in spite
of important efforts in public outreach and awareness-raising. The baseline is estimated at US$ 15 million.
Summary of Baseline Investment
Issue
Detail
Cost US$
1
Habitat conservation and restoration
21,000,000
2
Pollution
100,000,000
3
Policy Framework
8,000,000
4
Regional coordination efforts
20,000,000
5
Sustainable livelihoods
15,000,000
Total
Total Baseline Expenditures (4 years)
164,000,000
Global Environmental Objective
The principal global benefit of the project is an enhanced understanding of LME functions, to serve as input into LME management
strategies through the TDA and SAP processes, and to establish an enabling environment and ecosystem-based management
practices that will contribute to the protection and maintenance of ecosystem functions and services. The Gulf of Mexico LME's
primary productivity supports an important global reservoir of biodiversity and biomass of fish, sea birds and marine mammals. 17
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
The LME supplies a diverse range of goods and services to the global community but these stand threatened by human-induced
pressures, including overfishing. These threats are transboundary in nature, and cannot be effectively abated through stand-alone
national initiatives. Global benefits can be secured through the institution of an LME ecosystem-based management framework,
allowing the countries to strengthen the management of LME living resources, and address land-based and marine pollution
including the reduction of nutrient loads that contribute to hypoxic zones in the LME.
The expected result of the set of interventions will be to reduce coastal pollution, restore damaged habitats, and restore depleted
stocks. The Project will make an important contribution by providing the needed building blocks such as information systems and
exchange, reinforced capacity and mechanisms for stakeholder participation. An enhanced knowledge of the oceanography of the
Gulf of Mexico LME will assist the countries in addressing uncertainty regarding ocean-atmosphere links.
In the absence of a GEF intervention, it is probable that the present types of single-country, sectoral-based interventions, which have
been demonstrated during the past twenty years as being ineffective in halting the pace of environmental degradation, will continue.
Without a concerted ecosystem-based regional approach to environmental management it is unlikely that the present rates of
pollution, habitat degradation and living marine resources depletion will be slowed. The likely consequence of such a scenario is the
reduction or impairment of ecosystem services and functions, loss of globally significant biological diversity during the next
century, combined with collapse of fish stocks and significant economic difficulties in the region (particularly for Mexico).
Alternative
The proposed GEF Alternative is directed at removing identified constraints and barriers to the use of the ecosystem approach in the
management of the GOM LME, including discrete capacity-building activities, pilot projects in three critical aspects of the
ecosystem approach: productive, conservation and adaptive management, as well as cross-sectoral engagement. The transition
towards the ecosystem-based management of the GOM LME will depend on a greater convergence of policy tools including long-
term, joint programs and actions, a clearer distribution of competencies at all three levels of government, and a robust monitoring
and evaluation program. Five outcomes have been mutually identified, to be supported through a mix of GEF financing and co-
financing including reoriented baseline.
Outcome 1: transboundary issues analysed and priorities defined
An objective, scientific and technical Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (TDA) defining the transboundary environmental
problems affecting the goods and services of the LME from an ecosystems perspective will be revised and disseminated. The TDA
will respond to the priority issues identified by both countries including transboundary pollution mitigation, reduction and control;
weak transboundary fisheries stock management; coastal resource degradation; incomplete knowledge on the LME's biodiversity, a
non-comprehensive legal and policy framework; and the lack of a coordinated approach for the LME management and conflict
resolution issues for the Gulf of Mexico. Under the alternative, GEF resources and co-financing will be used to finalize the
development of the TDA through a capacity needs and information gap assessment on the priority issues, as well as targeted
training, as needed. This will include the identification of biodiversity hotspots, ecosystem-wide sources of contaminants, and
preliminary economic valuation of the LME goods and services. (US$ 427,500 GEF, US$ 24,700,000 Co-finance).
Outcome 2: The SAP and associated NAPS are formulated and adopted at ministerial level
Nationally endorsed SAP and NAPs with accompanying sustainable financing plans will pave the way towards continued
incremental improvement in the GOM LME based on a solid foundation of regional commitment and consensus. GEF resources
will leverage considerable co-financing to identify and promote strategic partnerships within the SAP to address underlying socio-
economic and governance failures for the sustainable management of the LME. Domestic and global co-benefits will be generated
through LME-wide agreements on improved legal and policy frameworks; the incorporation of additional globally relevant
protected areas, including marine protected areas; targeted capacity building and institutional strengthening activities and concerted
action on ecosystem priorities and targets. The SAP and NAPs will also include the creation or strengthening of existing
institutional mechanisms for the regional coordination of LME-implemented activities. (US$ 1,130,000 GEF - US$ 9,000,000 Co-
finance).
Outcome 3: demonstration projects successfully implemented
Three priority pilot projects were jointly identified by participating countries to advance SAP implementation, and to set the basis
for its long-term sustainability. The pilot projects are fully incremental, will leverage significant co-financing and will contribute to
the adoption of ecosystem-based management of the LME by assisting Mexico and the US to coordinate conservation, fisheries and
monitoring activities. The pilot strategies will generate practical experiences to address a complex baseline of overlapping policies
and comp etencies for protected area conservation, social and economic development, and threats to terrestrial, coastal and marine
biodiversity. The harmonized development of the three pilots will contribute to defining a stronger baseline, and help enable the
development of validated integrated approaches that will facilitate upscaling and replication to other States and at a national level.
Successful implementation of the pilots will also provide concrete steps forward towards achieving the ecosystem goals to be 18
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
established in the SAP. Awareness programme on EBM for decision-makers, sectors and resource-user groups including project
web site consistent with IW:LEARN guidance and tools, and participation in biennial GEF IW Conferences (US$ 2,160,000 GEF -
US$ 40,474,780 Co-finance).
Outcome 4: Monitoring and Evaluation System for the Project and the GOM LME established
Effective monitoring and evaluation (M&E) is recognized as an indispensable tool in project and program management. The Gulf of
Mexico M&E plan and the process, stress reduction, and environmental status indicators developed as part of it in accordance with
GEF guidance, will serve both as a corrective function during the project cycle, enabling timely adjustments, and as a guide to
structuring future projects more effectively. GEF resources will mobilize co-financing to harmonize the currently disparate
monitoring efforts in the LME, with agreed bi-national standards and protocols for the collection, processing, analysis and
compilation of data and GI S information including the preparation of a regular bi-annual regional status report on large-scale
ecosystem impacts in the GOM LME. (US$ 469,000 GEF - US$ 19,400,000 Co-finance).
Outcome 5: Effective project coordination
The GEF alternative proposes improved regional mechanisms to meet and address the coordination needs and gaps that currently
inhibit the carrying out of system-wide interventions in the LME. By the end of the project, it is expected that an appropriate long-
term regional coordination mechanism will be defined by both countries. This will include joint definition of a long-term regional
coordination mechanism building upon existing bi-national initiatives and the establishment of a Regional Technical Advisory
Group (R-TAG). Incremental support will help promote the transfer of institutional arrangements from the support of GEF and
other donors to ownership by the region. GEF funding will also identify and apply best practices for public awareness and
involvement in order to mobilize regional political and stakeholder commitments to the broader development goals of the LME.
(US$ 316,000 GEF - US$ 2,000,000 Co-finance)
Summary of GEF and other donors Investment The Overall Incremental Cost
Outcome
Total
GEF
Co-finance
1
TDA finalized
25,127,500
427,500
24,700,000
2
SAP finalization and
10,130,000
1,130,000
9,000,000
implementation
3
Pilot projects
42,634,780
2,160,000
40,474,780
4
Monitoring and evaluation
19,869,000
469,000
19,400,000
5
Coordination
2,316,000
316,000
2,000,000
Total
100,077,280
4,502,500
95,574,780
Incremental Cost Analysis per Outcome
Outcome
Baseline
GEF
Co-Funding
Increment
Alternative
1. Transboundary issues analysed
$48,000,000
$427,500
$24,700,000
$25,127,500
$73,127,500
and priorities defined
2. Country agreement /
commitment to reforms &
$41,000,000
$1,130,000
$9,000,000
$10,130,000
$51,130,000
priority issues defined
3. LME-wide EBM approaches
encouraged & Pilot Projects
$33,000,000
$2,160,000
$40,474,780
$42,634,780
$75,634,780
defined
4. M&E System for the Project
$34,000,000
$469,000
$19,400,000
$19,869,000
$53,869,000
and the GOM LME established
5. Effective project coordination
$8,000,000
$316,000
$2,000,000
$2,316,000
$10,316,000
Total
$164,000,000
$4,502,500
$95,574,780
$100,077,780
$264,077,280
19
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Outcome 3 - Pilot Projects
Total Co-
Outcome
Baseline
GEF
Increment
Alternative
finance
1. Natural Habitat and
$ 9,000,000
655,000
$12,408,448
$13,063,448
$22,063,448
Ecosystem Conservation
2. Enhancing Shrimp
$ 5,000,000
705,000
$17,866,332
$18,571,332
$23,571,332
Production through EBM
3. Joint Assessment &
Monitoring
$ 19,000,000
750,000
$10,200,000
$11,950,000
$30,950,000
4. Awareness programme
on EBM including project
web site consistent with
IW:LEARN guidance and
50,000
50,000
50,000
tools, and participation in
biennial GEF IW
Conferences
TOTAL
$33,000,000
$2,160,000
$40,474,780
$42,634,780
$75,634,780
F. INDICATE RISKS , INCLUDING CLIMATE CHANGE RISKS , THAT MIGHT PREVENT THE PROJECT OBJECTIVE(S)
FROM BEING ACHIEVED AND OUTLINE RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES :
There are several risks inherent in this project. Acknowledgement of these and the level of risk posed provide a gauge for project
assessment. The long-term success of regional-scale marine ecosystem management programs, such as the one proposed here,
largely depend upon: the political willingness of the participating countries to cooperate; their willingness to continue project
programs and approaches after the life of the GEF intervention; and the extent to which activities successfully engage the
stakeholders that are the subject of intervention. In relation to political willingness, when compared with other IW projects
addressing similar sized water bodies, the risks may be lower in the GoM LME, due to the small number of countries participating.
The risks confronting the project were evaluated during the project preparation stage, and risk mitigation measures have been
designed. Four main risks have been identified, and are summarized below:
Risk
Risk Mitigation Measure
Governments at all
L
Approval by the governments of this project reflects support from the different
levels and key
levels (federal, state and municipal). However national commitment to needed
stakeholder groups do
sectoral, institutional, legal and economic reforms needs to be forthcoming and
not remain committed to
effective delivery of the project will only occur if there is country commitment
undertaking required
and the project has effectively communicated its role and expected outputs. The
sectoral, institutional,
reliance on the intersectoral committees as well as the clear requirement for
legal and economic
national financial commitments through the NAPs shall be stressed through out
reforms, nor do they
the project and will be key to overcoming this risk. Moreover the project builds
remain financially and
upon a strong suite of existing bi-national initiatives, and these will contribute to
politically committed to
laying the bases for effective development and implementation of the SAP and
a regional management
associated NAPs
framework
Relevant government
L
It is important that scientific and technical groups providing inputs are
agencies not willing to
committed to joint work and that there is reasonable access to national data and
share and provide data
information. National data can often be sensitive to the countries involved but to
and information
ensure the SAP process proceeds successfully, there is a need for countries and
organizations to be committed to providing the necessary data and information.
An understanding of the value of a regional Data and Information Management
(DIM) system, and a growing appreciation of its benefits, should encourage
stakeholders to be forthcoming with information and data.
20
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Risk
Risk Mitigation Measure
LME-wide objectives
M
Infrastructure development for tourism, the commercial fishing industry, the oil
may conflict with
industry and agriculture are all important economic activities for the countries.
local/national interests
Local and national resistance and objections to proposed changes to these
sectors are likely to arise. Broad stakeholder participation and support, achieved
through targeted awareness and information strategies, as well as stepwise
consensus building will be required and are built into the project as critical
components. Routine and effective involvement of stakeholders in planning,
management and decision-making can only be accomplished by on-going
encouragement, strengthened capacities, and financial commitment by the
project, donors and the countries themselves
Effective private sector
M
For the long-term sustainability of the GoM LME Program, the project aims to
involvement is difficult
demonstrate to productive sectors the long-term benefits to be derived from any
to achieve
jointly defined regional coordination mechanism that is established and that their
own further investment in the project will be less than the costs which would
accrue to them if these mechanisms were not in place. Although there may be
specific niches within the productive sectors that are non-responsive, current
high levels of CSR and investment in environmental projects, such as by
PEMEX, indicate that this risk is low.
[Rating: L = Low Risk; M = Medium Risk; H= High Risk]
G. EXPLAIN HOW COST-EFFECTIVENESS IS REF LECTED IN THE PROJECT DESIGN:
Cost effectiveness is inherent in the GEF -endorsed Large Marine Ecosystem approach. Recognizing the continuous negative
changes in the health and productivity of the Gulf of Mexico LME resulting from human impact and appreciating that living marine
resources and pollutants in coastal and marine environments respect no political boundaries and few geographical ones, the
countries have resolved to work together to address their common concerns through suitable management options. In addition, there
has been a common realization that historical national and sectoral approaches to management have failed to bring about the needed
changes to the environment and living resources. Consequently it has been accepted that GEF interventions that adopt a holistic and
multi-sectoral approach (embodied in the large marine ecosystem concept) are preferred.
The full GEF intervention will address the agreed priority transboundary environmental problems of the Gulf of Mexico LME by
rehabilitating marine and coastal ecosystems, recovering depleted fish stocks and reducing nutrient overloading to the Gulf of
Mexico Large Marine Ecosystem through the use of an assessment and management approach that considers LME productivity, fish
and fisheries, pollution and ecosystem health, socioeconomics and governance. In order to achieve this, the project will formulate
the full Strategic Action Programme (SAP) and associated National Action Programmes, and facilitate their initial implementation;
undertake strategic demonstration projects designed to be replicable and intended to demonstrate how joint, concrete actions can
lead to significant improvements; and develop a mechanism to objectively measure effects of management actions.
In terms of implementation, the project has been designed to ensure that outcomes are achieved in a cost-effective manner. The
design includes three pilot projects that are all sited in the same area, Terminos Lagoon, in order to achieve greater cost-
effectiveness, maximize synergies, and set the foundations for integrated, ecosystem-based approaches to natural resource
management. Setting the pilot projects in the same location ensures that they will generate practical experiences to address a
complex baseline of overlapping policies and competencies for protected area conservation, social and economic development and
threats to terrestrial, coastal and marine biodiversity. Thus, the pilot projects will contribute to testing cost-efficiency models from a
variety of different angles including ones focused on fisheries management and productive uses, habitat restoration and
management, and robust M&E tools. Overall, efforts to establish functional and effective ecosystem-based management approaches
are themselves cost-effective as the complex linkages and feedback mechanisms between natural systems, productive uses,
governance frameworks, impacts on the LME from associated land-use activities are addressed in an integrated and comprehensive
manner.
PART III: INSTITUTIONAL COORDINATION AND SUPPORT
A. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENT:
The GEF Agency for the project will be the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). UNIDO will be
responsible for both the implementation and the execution of the project. SEMARNAT, the Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y 21
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Recursos Naturales of México will also participate as National Execution Agency for the project. The US NOAA will support the
SEMARNAT in the execution of the project .
Regional co-ordination and collaboration will be facilitated through a Regional Project Coordination Unit (PCU), which will be
located in Mexico. A Chief Technical Advisor (CTA) will be recruited to facilitate the successful technical execution of project
activities and will be housed in the PCU. The PCU will have other staff working part-time/full-time. A Regional Project Steering
Committee, consisting of high-level official country representatives from the U.S. and Mexico and relevant stakeholders, will
oversee the implementation / execution of the project. It will meet at least once a year, A Regional Technical Advisory Group (R-
TAG) will be established that will advise the Steering Committee and the PCU on GoM technical issues and ensure coordination in
support of ecosystem-based management approaches. Finally, each country will have an Inter-Sectoral Committee (ISC) or its
equivalent, to assure broad intersectoral coordination and broad government stakeholder participation.
UNIDO will be responsible for the overall management of the project and its funds. It will assist SEMARNAT, the National
Executing Agency in the execution of the project through the provision of timely assistance at key phases of project
implementation, in the review of investigations and reports prepared as outcomes to the project, in the disbursement of funds
necessary for the recruitment of international experts and other related international expenditures.
Organigram of the Project
PARTICIPATING
GOVERNMENT
COUNTRIES
·
GEF National Focal Points
CIVIL SOCIETY
Mexico
·Inter-ministry Committees
Representatives
DONORS
USA
Project
Project
Project
Focal Point
Focal Point
Focal Point
STAKEHOLDERS
Representatives
Global Environment Facility (GEF)
Project
UNIDO (GEF Agency)
Steering
Regional Technical
Committee
Advisory Group (R-
TAG)*
SEMARNAT (Co- Executing Agency)
Project Management Unit:
National Action Programme (NAP)
Formulation Team*
Project Manager
Core team
* Part-time contributors
Strategic Action programme (SAP)
Formulation Team*
External Consultants*
22
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
PART IV: EXPLAIN THE ALIGNMENT OF PROJECT DESIGN WITH THE ORIGINAL PIF:
The Project design is fully aligned with the objectives of the preparatory phase (PDF-B). As explained in Annex D, Cuba was an
original participant of the project, but later decided not to participate in the preparatory phase. The project would realize a
substantial gain with the participation of Cuba, and it remains open to its later incorporation in the implementation of the project.
PART V: AGENCY(IES) CERTIFICATION
This request has been prepared in accordance with GEF policies and procedures and meets the GEF
criteria for CEO Endorsement.
D. Piskounov
P. Huidobro
UNIDO GEF Focal Point
Project Contact Person
Date: 30 September, 2008
Tel. and Email:+43-1-26026-3068;
P.Huidobro@unido.org
23
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
ANNEX A: PROJECT RESULTS FRAMEWORK
Objectively verifiable indicators
Goal
Sustainable development of the Gulf of Mexico LME enhanced through ecosystem-based management approaches
Objectives/Outcomes
Indicator
Baseline
Target
Sources of
Risks and Assumptions
P: Process Indicator
verification
SR: Environmental Stress Reduction
Indicator
E: Environmental Status Indicator
Objective: To set the
Improved national and regional
Despite existing bi-
Ecosystem
Project
Countries remain supportive of
foundations for LME-wide
capacities for monitoring,
national agreements
based
Management
regional management framework
ecosystem-based
rehabilitation and sustainable
on fisheries such as
management
Unit (PMU)
National commitment to needed
management approaches to
management of the GoM LME.
MEX-US Gulf the
approach is
Project files and
sectoral, institutional, legal and
rehabilitate marine and
Y4
shared resources of
widely
documents
economic reforms remains
coastal ecosystems, recover
the GoM are
implemented
Steering
forthcoming
depleted fish stocks and
Strategic partnerships
unsustainably
and linked to
Committees (SC)
Broad stakeholder participation is
reduce nutrient overloading
established with key stakeholder
exploited
conservation,
annual reports
achieved, including the private
groups in the main watersheds
rehabilitation,
Working group
sector
draining into the GoM, as well
Existing management
and resources
and technical
Assume continued national
as with coastal cities, to support
approaches are not
management
reports
commitment to the regional
initiatives to reduce land-based
consistent with
programs
Interministry
programme at each sector level,
sources of pollution. Y4
ecosystem-based
along the Gulf
Committee
including the provision of national
management (EBM)
of Mexico
reports
resources
Annual project
review
Outcome 1 Transboundary
Revised TDA available and
Fragmented and
TDA,
TDA document
Close, joint working relationship
issues analyzed and priorities agreed upon by both countries
sectoral analysis of
published and
among scientific and technical
defined (P).
Y2
selected regional
broadly
groups providing input is
parameters
disseminated,
forthcoming
provides basis
for informed
management
decisions at a
regional level
Outcome 2 Country
SAP endorsed at ministerial
No agreed bi-national
SAP agreed
SAP document
Countries continued commitment
agreement on and
level in both countries. Y4
programme for
and endorsed
to regional approach
commitment to regional and
managing the GoM
national policy, legal and
resources from an
Continued cooperation among key
institutional reforms to
ecosystem-based
regional institutions and national
address the agreed priority
perspective
governments
transboundary issues (P)
24
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Outcome 3 LME-wide
Pilot Projects all implemented
Not part of the
All three
Demonstration
Failure or delays in Parties'
ecosystem-based
and delivered on schedule. Y4
baseline program
demonstration project reports
involvement to integrate on-
management approaches
projects fully
ground actions
encouraged and strengthened
and
through the successful
satisfactorily
implementation of the Pilot
implemented
Projects (P, SR and E)
and all
objectives
completed
Outcome 4 Monitoring and
GoM LME Data and
Not part of the
GoM LME
Existence of
Lack of METADATA to support
Evaluation System for the
Information Management
baseline program
data and
DIM system and
the Monitoring System
Project and the GoM LME
System established. Y4
information
DIM standards
established (P)
system fully
and protocol
Failure of participant parties to
operational
document
provide updated, high quality
information to the System
Stakeholders
have full
access to the
system
Outcome 5
The project team is effectively
Countries in the
Project
Project
Effective delivery of the project
Effective project coordination coordinating the project and
region have
implemented
monitoring
will only occur if there is country
(P).
meeting the objective. All
institutional
in an effective
reports and files
commitment and the project has
outputs completed within budget frameworks for
manner in
Steering
effectively communicated its role
and according to the agreed
coastal and marine
accordance
committee
and expected outputs.
work plan. Y1 to Y4
resources protection,
with agreed
minutes
but no effective
work plans
Intersectoral
regional intersectoral
and budgets
committee
project coordination
minutes
mechanism currently
Regional
exists.
coordination
mechanism
meeting minutes
25
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Outcome 1 Transboundary issues analyzed and priorities defined
Outcomes/Outputs/Activities
Indicator
Baseline
Target
Sources of
Risks and Assumptions
P: Process Indicator
verification
SR: Environmental Stress Reduction
Indicator
E: Environmental Status Indicator
1.1 Capacities and gaps in
Detailed gap analysis
Each country at
A regional
Working group
Scientific and technical groups
regional monitoring
undertaken based on extensive
present has its own
assessment of
reports, project
providing inputs are committed
methods/standards identified
review of literature, information approach to
monitoring
monitoring reports to joint work
and data. Y1
monitoring and
capacity gaps
and files
indicators are not
completed
uniform throughout
Gap analysis
the region. There are
report
many gaps in
environmental
monitoring.
1.2 Key ecosystem assessment Detailed ecosystem assessment
Ecosystem-based
A regional
Working group
Countries and organisations are
and management gaps
and management gap analysis
management is not
assessment of
reports, project
willing to provide data and
identified
concluded based on extensive
being used for stock
ecosystem and monitoring reports information on key ecosystems
review of literature, information management in the
management
and files
and management gaps
and data by Y2.
Gulf of Mexico
capacity gaps
Regional, national, and local
completed
Ecosystem
policy,legal, and institutional
assessment and
reforms adopted; project
management gap
evaluations show
analysis report
implementation effectiveness
(IW-SP1; BD-1)
1.2.1 Biodiversity hot spots in Regional working group
Biodiversity hot spots A regional
GoM LME assessed and key
approves assessment of
assessed but national
assessment of
Biodiversity hot
knowledge gaps identified
biodiversity hot spots and key
efforts are not
biodiversity
spots report
knowledge gaps by Y2 Q2 (BD-
regionally coordinated hot spots
1)
completed
26
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
1.2.2 Existing information and Assessment of status and trends Current initiatives are
Assessment of Status and trends
Countries and organisations are
data on status and trends in
in GoM fisheries, particularly
country driven and are status and
as defined in
willing to provide data and
fisheries assessed
commercial aspects of shrimp,
regionally fragmented trends in GoM fisheries report
information on key ecosystems
reef fish, blue crab, red snapper,
fisheries,
and management gaps
mackerel and anchovies
particularly
fisheries finalized by Y2 Q2
commercial
aspects of
(IW-SP1 Fish stock and habitat
shrimp, reef
assessments)
fish, blue crab,
red snapper,
mackerel and
anchovies
fisheries
finalized
1.2.3 Ecosystem-wide nutrient Contaminant sources, in
Nutrient over-
A regional
Report on
Relevant regional organizations
over-enrichment and
particular LBS point and non
enrichment and
assessment of
assessment of
and river basin management
contaminant sources, flows
point, identified and assessed by contaminant sources,
nutrient and
ecosystem-wide
authorities are committed to
and levels assessed
Y2 Q2
flows and levels are
contaminant
nutrient over-
supporting project objective
assessed but national
sources
enrichment and
Monitoring of reduced levels of
efforts are not
completed
contaminant
Watershed and coastal
nutrients releases at demo sites
regionally coordinated
sources, flows and management available tools will
(IW-SP2)
levels
be harmonized and a shared
vision established towards a
healthy regional ecosystem.
1.2.4 Environmental impacts
Integrated analysis, including of Current assessment of A regional
Report on the
of transboundary pollution on
previous assessments, agreed by the environmental
report on the
environmental
the GoM ecosystem assessed
regional working group,
impacts of
Status of the
impacts of
describing transboundary
transboundary
Gulf of
transboundary
pollution impacts by Y2 Q2
pollution are
Mexico
pollution
predominantly
completed
Ministerially-agreed LME and
country driven and are
basin action programs and local
regionally fragmented
ICM plans adopted (IW-SP2)
1.2.5 Information on nutrient
Integrated analysis of nutrient
Current initiatives are
Integrated
Report on nutrient
over-enrichment and related
over-enrichment and related
country driven and are analysis of
over-enrichment
HABs collected and integrated HABs undertaken by Y2 Q2
regionally fragmented nutrient over-
related HABs
enrichment
and related
HABs
undertaken
27
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
1.3 Governance analysis of
Detailed document completed
Current analysis of
Detailed
Governance
Relevant government agencies at
relevant policy and regulatory
outlining current status and
relevant policy and
regional and
Analysis report
national and federal levels are
frameworks completed [as a
shortfalls of relevant national
regulatory
national level
supportive of efforts to
basis for 2.1.4]
policies, legislation and
frameworks relating
governance
harmonize regional approaches.
institutional arrangements
to the GoM LME are
analysis
related to natural resource
predominantly
completed
management and use in project
country driven
area as a basis for harmonizing
policy frameworks at a regional
level by Y3
1.4 Analysis of the
Integrated analysis describing
Current initiatives are
Preliminary
Socioeconomic
Quality information will be
socioeconomic impacts of
socioeconomic impacts
either non-existent or
assessment of
impacts report
available to the project.
priority transboundary issues,
finalized by Y2 ; per capita
country driven
value of
Institutional cooperation and
including a preliminary LME
income at demo sites
environmental
support will be forthcoming
wide economic valuation of
goods and
near shore and marine goods
Preliminary valuation of near
services
Economic
and services, undertaken
shore and marine goods and
completed.
Valuation report
services assessed by Y3 (BD2-
SP5)
1.5 TDA revised, finalized,
Revised TDA available and
Fragmented analysis
TDA,
TDA document
Additional data and information
published and disseminated
agreed upon by both countries
of selected regional
published and
will be available to fill the gaps
by Y3.
parameters
broadly
from the initial TDA
Regional, national, and local
disseminated,
Project
policy, legal and institutional
provides basis evaluations show
SC and national agreement
reforms adopted (IW-SP1)
for informed
implementation
attained with regards to TDA
management
effectiveness.
findings
decisions at a
regional level
28
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Outcome 2 COUNTRY agreement on and commitment to regional and national policy, legal and institutional reforms to address the agreed priority
transboundary issues
Outcomes/Outputs/Activities
Indicator
Baseline
Target
Sources of
Risks and Assumptions
P: Process Indicator
verification
SR: Environmental Stress Reduction
Indicator
E: Environmental Status Indicator
2.1 Strategies and actions for
Joint agreement on coordinated
Inadequate reduction
Coordinated
Report on joint
Countries continued financial and
the reduction and control of
strategies to work with relevant
and control of nutrient strategies and
agreement for the
political commitment to regional
nutrient over-enrichment,
institutions in coastal areas, and over-enrichment,
institutional
establishment of
approach
HABs and for the elimination
river basin management
HABs have increased
networking
defined targets to
of dead zones developed
authorities for establishment of
and extensive dead
will help to
reduce and control Continued cooperation among
defined targets by Y3
zones have developed reduce HABs
nutrient over-
key regional institutions and
in the GoM
zones in GoM
enrichment
national governments
Joint Action adopted by
regional institutions on nutrient
Relevant government agencies at
reduction. (IW-SP2)
national and federal levels are
supportive of efforts to
harmonize regional approaches
Private sector, in particular in
agriculture, are supportive of
project objective
2.1.1 Regional Plan of Action
RPA-Yucatan activities fully
RPA Yucatan is
Implemented
RPA-YUCATAN
for the Yucatan Peninsula
coordinated and harmonized
currently being
RAP-Yucatan
meeting minutes;
(RPA-YUCATAN) developed with GoM project programme
developed in a joint
will act as a
workshop reports;
by Mexico as a major
by Y3
effort between
catalyser to
RPA-YUCATAN
contribution to reduce land
Mexico
replicate this
document
based sources of pollution into
(SEMARNAT) and
approach to
RPA-specific
the GoM LME, implemented.
the US (NOAA). It
reduce LBS in actions reports.
Regional, national, and local
was presented at the
other areas of
policy, legal and institutional
GPA meeting in
concern in the
Project
reforms adopted (IW-SP1)
Beijing in October
GoM LME
evaluations show
2006 and is currently
region
implementation
being adopted and its
effectiveness.
implementation
initiated by Mexican
water authorities
29
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
2.1.2 Strategic Partnerships
Regional Land and Sea Use
There are currently no Linkages sand Strategic
Relevant regional organizations
between GoM LME
Planning Program for the Gulf
strategic partnerships. agreements
Partnership
and river basin management
programme and institutions
of Mexico and Caribbean Sea
White Water to Blue
between
Planning
authorities are committed to
responsible for integrated
developed Y1 (IW-SP2;
Water (WW2BW) US watershed and documents;
supporting project objective
management of the major
Regional Governance
initiative, adopted by
coastal
project monitoring
GoM river basins, as well as
framework)
Mexican authorities is management
reports and files
the main coastal cities,
currently being
authorities
developed
Land and Coastal Use Planning
implemented in
enhances
Program for four major
Mexico's driven
reduction of
Mexican States (Veracruz,
initiatives, on-ground
LBS of
Tabasco, Campeche and
actions, policy and
pollution into
Yucatán) in the Gulf of Mexico
regulatory framework. the GoM
developed Y3; (IW-SP2;
Regional Governance
framework)
Number of agreements defined
Papaloapan
between GoM programme and
Watershed
relevant river basin counterparts
Council,
to coordinate and harmonize
IBWC/CILA
nutrient reduction strategies by
for Rio
Y3
Grande/Río
Bravo, and
New watershed council created
Lower
for the Grijalva Usumacinta
Mississippi
basin by Y3
River
Watershed
Counci
2.1.3 Stocktaking of the
Gap analysis carried out. Y1
Previous work of the
Application of Gap analysis
Lack of commitment from
Papaloapan watershed
Papaloapan watershed relevant
findings.
watershed management
Commission to define
Relevant experiences to be
commission can be
experiences in
authorities.
opportunities for replication in replicated and documented. Y3
used to identify
the Grijalva-
Relevant
the Grijalva-Usumacinta and
opportunities for
Usumacinta
experiences
State-level coordination/mandate
Panuco river basins in order to
replication.
and Panuco
documented.
issues
provide for strong inter-
river basins
linkages between watershed
management authorities and
coastal managers.
30
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
2.1.4 Strategies for
Binational experts meeting on
The development and
Harmonized
Draft legal
Relevant government agencies at
harmonizing legislative,
Ecosystem Based Management
implementation of
legislative,
modifications;
national and federal levels are
policy and regulatory
Approach, with wide
strategies to
policy and
project monitoring supportive of efforts to
frameworks on agricultural
stakeholder participation Y2
harmonize legislative,
regulatory
reports and files
harmonize regional approaches
practices at LME wide levels
(IW-SP2 Joint action adopted
policy and regulatory
frameworks
developed, building upon the
by regional institutions on
frameworks at the
enhanced to
Land and Use
Gulf of Mexico Governors
nutrient reduction)
national level is
improve
Planning Models
Alliance.
carried out in a
overall
and Programs
Major Mexican river basins
`piecemeal' manner
environmental
published in
(Tuxpan, Coatzacoalcos,
with little regional
performance
Federal
Grijalva) have developed use
scope or application
and strengthen Government
planning process including
of the ecosystem
informed
official websites
appropriate frameworks towards approach
decision
and as official
sectoral practices such as
making in
decrees. (IW-SP2
agriculture, fisheries, forestry &
GoM.
on land-based
industry Y4 (IW-SP2 Joint
contaminants from
action adopted by regional
Land and Use
productive
Institutions on nutrient
Planning
sectors)
reduction)
Programs are
published as
By the end of year 3, both
Official
countries have developed and
Decrees in
encouraged the adoption of Best
Mexico (IW-
Management Practices that
SP2 on land-
provide for harmonized nutrient
based
control and reduction in
contaminants
agricultural practices. (IW-SP2
from
Monitoring reduced levels of
productive
nutrient releases at demo sites)
sectors)
2.2 Strategies and actions
Targets defined and agreed for
National strategies for Joint actions
Project monitoring Private sector is supportive of
formulated for sustainable
main commercial stocks by end the sustainable
and strategies
reports and files
ecosystem based management
management and use of
of Y4 (IW-SP2; Regional
management and use
set to manage
approaches and of set targets
exploited living marine
Governance framework)
of exploited living
fisheries will
resources, and for the
marine resources are
enhance the
recovery of depleted fish
currently poorly
recovery of
stocks to within safe
enforced and do not
depleted
biological limits formulated
take into account the
fisheries
ecosystem approach
stocks
31
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
2.2.1 Bi-lateral initiatives for
Surveys of productivity,
Current knowledge of
Joint regional
Project monitoring
regional surveying of
oceanography, stock assessment regional stocks, and in surveys will
reports and files
productivity and
and population assessments will particular of
help recover
oceanography, stock
be coordinated and undertaken
transboundary stocks,
depleted
Joint survey
assessment and population
through cooperative studies by
is incomplete and has
fishery stocks. reports
assessments encouraged and
Y4 (IW-SP1 Fish stock and
been predominantly
strengthened
habitat assessments;
carried out by each
Ministerially-agreed action
nation state and not
programs and local ICM plans
regionally.
adopted)
2.2.2 Review effectiveness of
Best management practices and
No baseline focused
Fishing
Fishing
Weak institutional commitment
compliance measures with
code of conduct for responsible
on ecosystem-based
activities will
Management
existing fisheries legal and
fisheries implemented. Y4 (IW-
fisheries management
be managed
Plans based on
regulatory frameworks in both SP1, Regional, national, and
under the
Ecosystem Based
countries, especially with
local policy, legal, and
scheme of
Management
regards to Illegal, Unregulated institutional reforms adopted)
FAO Code of
(EBM)
and Unreported (IUU) fishing,
Conduct for
excessive fishing capacity,
IUU levels will be reduced,
Responsible
Records of IUU
and enforcement and
excess fishing capacity
Fisheries
surveillance, and propose
identified and addressed, and
leading to
CONAPESCA
appropriate reforms and
enforcement and surveillance
reduction of
records.
measures.
activities enhanced Y4 (IW-SP1
IUU
Sustainable Fisheries)
2.2.3 Develop fisheries
Fisheries management plans for
Currently recovery
Management
Agreed recovery
Relevant government authorities
management plans for
selected key commercial
plans are either non-
plans
plans; Project
as well as private sector, are
selected key commercial
fisheries developed. Y4 (IW-
existent or localised
implemented
monitoring reports supportive of the measures
fisheries
SP1 Sustainable Fisheries)
and weak
that will
and files
developed
improve
processes to
recover
depleted key
commercial
fishery
resources
32
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
2.3 Establishment of
Establishment of a
Currently MPAs are
Establishment
Agreed MPA plan; Countries/local government are
representatives marine
representative suite of MPAs
country driven and are of MPAs
Project monitoring willing to develop, implement
protected areas (MPA)
that take into account EBM, and regionally fragmented based on the
reports and files
and endorse MPAs
provide for sharing of best
Ecosystem
practices at a regional level by
Based
Y4 (BD-1 Marine Protected
Approach
Areas)
(EBA) will
generate
greater
consensus in
the Region
and prevent
degradation of
ecosystem and
marine
resources,
strengthening
and enriching
the distinct
national
protected
areas system.
2.3.1 Recovery plans for
Detailed regional guidelines
Currently recovery
Bi-national
Regional guideline
depleted priority non-
developed, agreed and
plans for depleted
agreement at
documents;
commercial species and
disseminated for
priority species and
federal and
Project monitoring
associated marine flora and
implementation of recovery
associated marine
state level on
reports and files
fauna developed for additional plans for priority non-
flora and fauna are
recovery plans
species not currently
commercial species by Y4 (IW-
either non-existent or
for defined
addressed
SP1 Ministerially-agreed action
localised and weak
priority
programmes and local ICM
marine and
plans adopted)
coastal non-
commercial
species.
33
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
2.3.2 Management and
Training provided to promote
On-ground
Action plans
Evidence of
Institutional commitment will
capacity building
best practice in managing
rehabilitation and
and on-ground delivery of
ensure that training will build
requirements to restore
marine coastal resources and
restoration projects of rehabilitation
training in project
capacity at the systemic and not
degraded marine coastal
restoration of degraded marine
degraded marine
and restoration monitoring reports only individual level.
wetlands defined
coastal wetlands, sea grass beds coastal areas are
projects will
and files
and sand dunes by Y4
carried out in a
be conducted
`piecemeal' manner
in an
with little regional
integrated
scope or application
manner using
of the ecosystem
EBA and
approach
under strong
institutional
coordination
2.3.3 Marine and coastal
By the end of year 4, both
The development and
Policy
Project monitoring Relevant government agencies at
spatial zoning processes in
countries have developed
implementation of
changes at
reports and files;
national and federal levels are
individual countries
concrete approaches (legal,
plans and regulations
federal and
Draft legal, policy
supportive of efforts to
strengthened and implemented regulatory, and/or BMP
for protecting coastal
state level
and regulatory
harmonize regional approaches
thus enhancing sectoral links
specifications) that promote
habitats at the national reflect bi-
modifications
among sectoral users in
strengthened and harmonized
level is carried out in
national
marine and coastal zones
land and sea use planning
a `piecemeal' manner
agreement on
IW-SP1 Regional, national, and
with little regional
establishment
local policy, legal, and
scope or application
of integrated
institutional reforms adopted;
of the ecosystem
coastal zone
project evaluations show
approach
management
implementation effectiveness
34
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
2.3.4 LME-wide strategies for
Strategy for the Sustainable
Current marine &
Conservation
Strategies
Relevant government agencies at
conserving biodiversity and
Development and Use of
coastal zone
strategies,
published and
national and federal levels are
habitats in the coastal zones of Coastal and Marine Natural
management
supported by
reports of
supportive of efforts to
GoM LME supported and
Resources developed Y2 (IW-
initiatives are country stakeholder
meetings with
harmonize regional approaches
harmonized at a regional level SP2 Joint action adopted by
driven and are
groups in both stakeholders.
regional institutions on nutrient
regionally fragmented countries will
reduction)
be
Final report on
strengthened
results of the
Protection strategies for ma rine
and
conservation pilot
biodiversity endorsed and
implemented
project (3.1);
nationally implemented Y3.
(IW-SP1 Stocktaking for
Project monitoring
MPAs; BD-SP2 on MPAs)
reports and files
Agreed conservation strategies
and management plans
elaborated and strengthened,
and national endorsement
promoted by Y4;
Number/Increase of MPAs in
National System for Protected
Areas.
2.4 The Strategic Action
SAP and NAPs formulated and
A regional SAP will
SAP and
SAP and NAP
Long-term financial and political
Programme (SAP) and
endorsed at ministerial level in
not be completed and
respective
documents;
national commitment to the
National Action Programmes
both countries by Y4
endorsed under
NAPs
Endorsement
project
(NAPs) formulated and
baseline conditions.
completed and letters
endorsed
Regional, national, and local
endorsed at
policy, legal, and institutional
appropriate
Project
reforms adopted
levels (federal, evaluations show
state)
implementation
effectiveness.
2.5 Commitments to SAP
Evidence of private sector
National budgets are
Investment
Letters of
Countries, at both national and
implementation obtained and
commitment to supporting
stressed and adequate
plan
intent/commitment federal levels, may be unable or
sustainable financing
specific SAP activities Y4
budget is not provided developed that by relevant
unwilling to commit the
arrangements formulated
for environmental
defines SAP
institutions and
necessary resources for effective
matters. Minimal
co-financing
authorities
SAP implementation.
application of
commitments
economic instruments
Both countries have long-term
in addressing priority
financial and political
water-related issues in
commitment to the project, at
the GoM LME
both national and federal levels.
35
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Outcome 3 LME-wide ecosystem-based management approaches encouraged and strengthened through the successful implementation of the Pilot Projects
Outcomes/Outputs/Activities
Indicator
Baseline
Target
Sources of
Risks and Assumptions
P: Process Indicator
verification
SR: Environmental Stress Reduction
Indicator
E: Environmental Status Indicator
3.1 Pilot Project on Natural
Specific project sites with
There are national
Natural habitat Project monitoring Country support to facilitate the
Habitat and Ecosystem
emphasis on critical habitats
efforts to conserve
conservation
reports and files
LME-wide dissemination of
Conservation of Coastal and
such as mangrove ecosystems,
natural habitats in the
demonstration
results of the pilot project, with
Marine Zones of the Gulf of
wetlands, sea grass beds and
coastal and marine
project
R-TAG technical
participation of all sectors and
Mexico: Wetlands,
sand dunes rehabilitation
areas of the GoM but
successfully
review reports
stakeholders.
Mangroves, Sea Grass Beds
actions implemented and coastal they are currently
completed
and Sand Dunes
ecosystems health improved Y4
uncoordinated
Project progress
LME-wide objectives may
reports; Project
conflict with local interests
Strategies and actions for
monitoring reports
conservation in selected sites
and files
using ecosystem approach. Y4
Cost effective strategies to
mitigate impacts from erosion,
meteorological events
developed, Y4
36
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
3.2 Pilot Project on Enhancing Recovered depleted species
Fisheries management Fisheries
Project monitoring
Shrimp Production through
through an ecosystem based
using the ecosystem
management
reports and files
Country support to facilitate the
Ecosystem Based
management approach, focusing approach is not
demonstration
LME-wide dissemination of
Management
mainly on the shrimp fisheries.
undertaken by Mexico project
R-TAG technical
results of the pilot project, with
Y4
successfully
review reports
participation of all sectors and
IW-SP2 Ministerially-agreed
completed
stakeholders.
LME and basin action programs
Project progress
and local ICM plans adopted
reports; Project
LME-wide objectives may
monitoring reports conflict with local interests
Strengthened capacities for
and files
improved stock assessments and
data collection. Y4 (IW-SP1
Fish stock and habitat
assessment)
Established effective and
coordinated surveillance and
enforcement mechanisms. Y4
Improved knowledge of current
socioeconomic conditions
derived from shrimp fisheries.
Y4 (IW-SP1 Per capita income
at demo sites)
3.3 Pilot Project on Joint
Joint monitoring, assessment
There is currently no
Regional
Project monitoring
Assessment and Monitoring of and evaluation of the coastal
regional coastal
coastal
reports and files
Country support to facilitate the
Coastal Conditions in the Gulf environment of the Gulf of
assessment
assessment
LME-wide dissemination of
of Mexico
Mexico Large Marine
monitoring
monitoring
R-TAG technical
results of the pilot project, with
Ecosystem capacity developed.
programme
programme
review reports
participation of all sectors and
Y3
demonstration
stakeholders.
IW-SP1 Fish stock and habitat
project
Project progress
assessment; IW-SP2 Monitoring
successfully
reports; Project
LME-wide objectives may
reduced levels of nutrient
completed
monitoring reports conflict with local interests
releases at demo sites.
and files
3.4 Awareness programme on
Functional Website with Forum
Effective
Website; active
EBM including project web
for active participation and
learning tool
participation of
site consistent with
consistent with IW:LEARN
for EBM and
PM team in GEF
IW:LEARN guidance and
guidance.
communicatio
IW conferences.
tools, and participation in
Participation in biennial GEF
n of project
biennial GEF IW Conferences IW
results and
activities in
place
37
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Outcome 4 Monitoring and Evaluation System for the Project and the GoM LME established
Outcomes/Outputs/Activi ties
Indicator
Baseline
Target
Sources of
Risks and Assumptions
P: Process Indicator
verification
SR: Environmental Stress Reduction
Indicator
E: Environmental Status Indicator
4.1 M&E mechanisms set up
Monitoring and evaluation
Not a part of the
Effective
Annual reviews
Project Management structure is
including an M & E system
support provides timely
baseline program.
M&E
and mid-term/final operational very early in project
for the project
assistance to keep project on
mechanisms in evaluations
implementation
track and recommend strategies
place
to ease bottlenecks. Y4
4.2 Suite of GEF M&E
GEF M&E indicators are
Not a part of the
GEF M&E
Project progress
Relevant institutions are ready to
indicators developed (process, successfully monitoring the
baseline program.
indicators will
reports; Project
make available and distribute
stress, environmental status)
progress of the project. Y1
set the basis
monitoring reports data broadly.
to monitor SAP
for
and files
implementation.
harmonized
environmental
status
indicators for
the Bi-annual
regional status
report (4.4)
4.3 GoM LME Environmental Operational GoM LME Data
Countries in the
GoM LME
Existence of DIM
Relevant institutions are ready to
Information System developed and Information Management
region have national
Data System
system; DIM
make available and distribute
System established by Y2
environmental data
established
standards and
data broadly.
centres, but there is no and functional protocol document
regional information
system and only
limited sharing of
data.
4.4 Bi-annual regional status
First bi-annual report published
Uncoordinated
Completed
Bi-annual regional Timely delivery of data and
report developed on large
by end of Y2 and second report
national and
Reports
status report
information from the
scale ecosystem impacts in the in Y4
international efforts to widely
participating countries
GoM LME
monitor
disseminated
environmental
and used by
impacts in the GoM
decision-
LME are carried out.
makers and
resource
managers
38
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Outcome 5 Effecti ve project coordination
Outcomes/Outputs/Activities
Indicator
Baseline
Target
Sources of
Risks and Assumptions
P: Process Indicator
verification
SR: Environmental Stress Reduction
Indicator
E: Environmental Status Indicator
5.1 Regional Project
Project coordination is properly
Not part of the
Project
SC meeting
Efficiency of start up of the
Coordination Unit (PCU) set
staffed and executing the
baseline.
executed
minutes; Project
project.
up
project according to the agreed
under a well
reports
Timely appointment of CTA and
work plan and budget. Y4
staffed
Country Focal Points
coordination
unit according
to the agreed
work plan and
budget
5.2 Steering Committee and
Steering Committee meetings
Not part of the
Steering
SC meeting
High-level national input will
Regional Technical Advisory
are held to provide annual
baseline.
Committee
minutes; project
only occur if there is country
Group (R-TAG) established
project oversight. Y4
established
monitoring reports commitment and the project has
and meeting
and files
effectively communicated its role
according to
and expected outputs.
established
timeframe
5.3 Intersectoral coordination
ISCs or their equivalent are
Intersectoral
National
ISC meeting
High-level national input will
established through the
established and meetings
coordination exists to
intersectoral
minutes; project
only occur if there is country
development of Intersectoral
scheduled by Y1
a lesser or greater
mechanism
monitoring reports commitment and the project has
committees (ISCs) or their
degree in the GoM
developed to
and files
effectively communicated its role
equivalent in both countries,
states.
improved
and expected outputs.
including with private sector
wider cross-
involvement
sectoral public
Transfer of benefits is embraced
participation
as a concept in private sector
39
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
5.4 An appropriate regional
Regional coordination
No regional
Regional
Regional
Country commitment to regional
coordination mechanism
mechanism formally established mechanism in place
coordination
agreement signed; approach and to built upon
jointly defined
by Y4
for government, donor mechanism
meeting minutes;
existing joint agreements
and other stakeholder
established
project monitoring
IW-SP2 Joint action adopted by coordination,
that builds
reports and files
regional institutions on nutrient
consultation, strategic
upon existing
reduction
planning in promoting bi-national
multi-country
frameworks
integrated sustainable
and
management of the
agreements
GoM LME.
5.5 Information needs within
Information needs within the
Active and informed
Good
Project monitoring Country support to the
the relevant sectors identified
relevant sectors identified and
participation of the
understanding reports and files;
Stakeholder Involvement Plan
and addressed in order to
training provided to build
relevant sectors
of information Evidence of
ensure active and informed
capacity in order to ensure
associated with the
needs within
delivery of
participation
active and informed
GoM LME is patchy.
the relevant
training
participation. Y3 Q2
Some sectors are
sectors
highly engaged whilst providing the
others are not.
basis for
developing
targeted
awareness and
outreach
programs
5.6 Robust public awareness
Public Part icipation and
Existing stakeholders
Stakeholders
PPA committee
Routine and effective
strategies targeted at the
Awareness (PPA) strategies
at national level are
at all levels
meeting reports;
involvement of stakeholders in
different stakeholder levels
involving national experts,
not well identified or
are informed
National PPA
planning, management and
and groups developed
private sector, civil society,
organized for
about the
meeting reports;
decision-making can only be
NGOs and other interested
addressing priority
project and
Project monitoring accomplished by on-going
parties are ongoing. Y4
GoM LME issues.
therefore
reports and files
encouragement, strengthened
actively
capacities, and financial
participating
commitment by donors and
in its
countries.
implemen-
The project assumes the support
tation
and involvement of the private
sector
40
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
ANNEX B: RESPONSES TO PROJECT REVIEWS (from GEF Secretariat and GEF Agencies, and Responses to Comments from Council at work
program inclusion and the Convention Secretariat and STAP at PIF)
A) COUNCIL (JULY 2007)
CEO endorsement issue
México/USA/Agency response
Notes
Germany
Extensive socio-economic information has been
The project considers strongly in the development of pilot project
Approximately 55 million people live in the
included in the document, and additional information
around the Laguna de Terminos in Campeche and in the Gulf of
coastal states of the Gulf; 40 Million in the
is available in the annexes. As far as the mutual
Mexico, with in situ ground actions that will support and benefit
USA and 15 million in Mexico.
benefits to be generated through the project, we
both countries by:
The Gulf of Mexico is a major asset to both
understand this to be a desirable outcome of the LME
countries, in terms of fisheries, tourism,
approach, however given the scope of the project, the
Ø Promoting governance and improving sustainable use of
agriculture, oil, infrastructure, trade and
size of the LME and the project design, benefits
coastal and ocean resources
shipping. As Mexico and the United States of
directly generated from GEF-supported actions
Ø Strengthening critical habitats
America both are requesting countries and
would accrue only in the Mexican Gulf States and
Ø Promoting adequate ocean and coastal use planning
both are benefiting from this project, this
particularly in the Terminos Lagoon region, as befits
Ø Promoting sustainable development of coastal areas
should also be documented clearly in the
a project in which Mexico is the sole GEF -eligible
Ø Strengthening control of Land Based Sources of
Executive Summary of the Project Proposal.
party.
Pollution
Ø Improving understanding of the GoM Ecosystem in the
context of Climate Change
GoM LME project goals and benefits:
Ø Identifies pattern (mapping) of distribution of all
sectorial activities
Ø Reduce possibility of environmental and social conflicts
Ø Encourage productive sectors towards proper areas in the
region to prevents and reduces environmental impacts
Ø Promotes the equilibrium of all productive activities to
protects the environment
Ø Protects natural heritage
Ø Promotes alternative solutions to sectorial activities
Ø Supports informed decision making to other
environmental instruments
Also, the estimated costs for the project have
Tables have been reviewed and are consistent as
to be outlined in a consistent way. The figures appropriate. Please note that the table on page 16,
concerning the "Total Project Financing" on
which shows the cost of the project components, does
pages 1 and 16 are not yet consistent and
not include the PDF-B costs. This explains the
should therefore be reviewed.
apparent inconsistency.
41
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
United States
Mexico has adopted the concept of ecosystem-based
At the operational level, the project has been build upon four
management in managing watersheds, river-basins,
pillars that clearly promote the application of Ecosystem Based
28. As written, the document does not
estuaries, coastal areas and oceans through the
Management, enhancing inter-institutional coordination to
sufficiently explain how the project will
application of integrated and adaptive management
support a transboundary ecosystem-based
approaches to deal with important issues such as
efficiently attend current and emerging management and planning
approach to management of the LME. This
ocean and coastal pollution, biodiversity loss and
issues regarding oceans and coastal zones:
point should have greater emphasis in the
habitats deterioration, depletion of marine resources,
text. Moreover, there should also be greater
coastal erosion, land reclamation and other issues
1. Enhance the quality of life of coastal communities
emphasis on how
related to social, economic, political, cultural and
2. Promote harmonization between economic and social
management decisions will be based on
ecological features.
development and sustainable conservation of ocean
science. The science based ecosystem
marine resources
approach should consider the recovery and
Currently Mexico has directed its efforts to assemble
3. Achieve social equity and poverty alleviation and
sustainability of the goods and services of the
the Ecosystem Based Approach, through the Sea Use
4. Promote sustainable values and ethical appropriation
Gulf of Mexico LME,
Planning initiatives around all sea areas of Mexico.
including productivity, fis h and fisheries,
pollution and ecosystem health,
To enhance environmental information on marine
In order to ensure Ecosystem Based Management (EBM)
socioeconomic benefits, and governance
ecosystems and to improve inter-sectoral and
applicability in a multidisciplinary and multisectoral way the
mechanisms.
institutional framework and arrangements Mexico
project would in addition:
has set the "National Environmental Policy for the
Ø Will conduct common monitoring and understanding of
Sustainable Development of Oceans and Coasts:
the ecosystem condition, function and structure of the
Strategies for its Conservation and Sustainable Use"
GoM LME trough joint monitoring and assessment
and the "National Strategy for Sea Use Planning on
cruises,
the Territory". Both instruments have specific
Ø Build EBM and/or adjust as appropriate current national
mandates that in the near future will allow Mexico to
legal framework a, strengthening institutions and
establish similar or equivalent framework for oceans
aligning regional programs within the GoM,
and coasts with the US.
Ø Arrange available scientific data bases in a
42
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Ø systematic way
Thus Large Marine Ecosystem approach fits with
Ø Promote easy access to public in order to allow society
current major coastal and oceanic economic activities
to track EBM advances and degree of progress as to
such as: 1) fisheries, aquaculture, and mariculture; 2)
facilitate informed decision making.
tourism; 3) industrial activities; 4) energy production-
Ø Establish Ecosystem baseline information and indicators
related activities; and 5) ports and transportation
Ø Establish a compulsory evaluation of Environmental
activities. Activities that are in enduring competition
Impact Assessment of development projects and
for availability of natural resources and space
activities carried on oceans and coastal areas,
utilization, thus inducing a permanent tension among
Ø Develop and operate economic and environmental
uses, users and between environmental conservation
certification instruments,
and economic development objectives. The LME
Ø Define use and exploitation limits for all marine and
approach and under the current Project GoM LME
coastal resources through development planning and
would allow both countries to consolidate partnership
harmonization of sectoral activities,
and common understanding of the GoM LME
Ø Establish measures to control the introduction of exotic
process.
species into coastal and marine ecosystems,
Ø Develop conservation programs of coastal and marine
Main coastal and marine priority issues are: a)
ecosystems particularly vulnerable ecosystems and
decrease of the fisheries catch, b) water pollution, c)
threaten species,
habitat deterioration and habitat loss, d) biodiversity
Ø Develop regional programs to rehabilitate coastal and
loss, e) visual quality impact, f) increase of solid and
marine ecosystems and its incorporation into the Sea Use
liquid wastes due to urban growth, g) loss of public
Planning process,
recreation areas, and h) impacts on public health
Ø Develop techniques to assess economic value of
among others. Each of these factors can be used as
vulnerable ecosystems
indicators for identifying unsustainable natural
Ø Use of environmental criteria and best available
resources uses. The overlapping of economic
scientific evidence, and the precautionary approach
activities and conservation areas, and the resultant
during sectoral planning and management of coastal and
consequences, emphasize the need for a coordinated
marine resources,
management of the ocean and coastal zones in order
Ø Generate a regional planning model for coastal zones,
to guarantee trough ecosystem management the
compatible with sustainable development of productive
recovery of goods and services and the sustainable
activities and urban development,
development of both realms for the Gulf of Mexico
Ø Promote planning at the national level of urban and rural
LME.
development and human settlements along coastal areas
Ø Strength mechanisms to prevent and mitigate
natural environmental and human impacts due to
productive activities and growth of urban coastal
centers.
43
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
B) GEF SECRETARIAT ( 4 JULY 2008, 15 OCTOBER 2008)
Recommendation by program manager
Response
Specific local, national, and multinational policy/legal/institutional reforms
Have been added to Project Results Framework (Annex A, of this document).
will be specified for end-of-project situation (with indicators) by
Specifically in sections: 1.2; 1.2.2; 1.2.3; 1.2.4; 1.4; 1.5; 2.1.1; 2.1.2; 2.1.3; 2.1.4;
endorsement.
2.2; 2.2.1; 2.2.2; 2.2.3; 2.3; 2.3.1; 2.3.3; 2.3.4; 2.4; 3.2; 3.3; and 5.4
Please ensure to include the above mentioned national, regional
policy/legal/institutional reforms and specify them for the end of project
situation. Please make sure to include GEF 4 IW indicators
Please include standard text on IW:LEARN related issues as well as the
IW:LEARN related issues have been added :
budget line of $20K to support these activities
In this document: Table A : Project Framework; Part II, paras C and E (including
Budget for Outcome 3); Annex A Project Results Framework; para 3.4; as well as
in the Project Results Framework (Annex A);
In the Project Brief:
In para 4.3 Expected Outcomes and Activities
In Table 10, Incremental Cost Matrix
In Table 11, Total Budget, and in the Work Plan
In Appendix B: Stakeholders Involvement Plan
Please include stakeholder consultation plan
The Stakeholders Involvement plan has been included as Appendix B in the
Project Brief
M&E Planwith GEF IW Results based management M&E indicators is to be Please see response to the first Recommendation.
included at time of endorsement with proper funding shown to support the
work
Please include in the project framework as well as in the M&E Plan de GEF
IW indicators, as well as the specific national and regional reforms (as
mentioned above).
Please include wording on the comparative advantage of UNIDO
Reference to UNIDO's comparative advantage has been added in the Project Brief
(Pages 32-33)
Other: As requested by Mr. C. Severin on 3 September, to integrate gender
The issues of gender integration have been addres sed by the countries in the
considerations
Project Brief, in the sections on Policy and Institutional Context in Mexico (p.21),
and Policy and Institutional Context in the United States (p.22).
The above recommendations have been adequately addressed in the project
The co financing from PEMEX (US$1,200,000, or 1,2 % of total co financing)
documents, however the Co-financing letter from PEMEX is missing. Please has been withdrawn at this time.
resubmit the project and include all the co-financing letters.
44
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
C) STAP Roster Technical Review and Response to STAP comments
STAP ROSTER TECHNICAL REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED GEF-IW PROJECT:
"INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE GULF OF MEXICO LARGE
MARINE ECOSYSTEM
(MEXICO AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)
by J. A. Thornton PhD PH CLM
Managing Director
International Environmental Management Services Ltd United States of America
INTRODUCTION
This review responds to a request from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United
Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) to provide a technical review of the proposed
International Waters project seeking to develop a Strategic Action Program (SAP) for the Gulf of Mexico Large
Marine Ecosystem (LME).
I note that I am a designated expert on the STAP Roster of Experts with particular experience and knowledge
concerning watershed management and land-ocean interactions. I have served as Government Hydrobiologist
with the Zimbabwe Government, Chief Limnologist with the South African National Institute for Water
Research, Head of Environmental Planning for the City of Cape Town (South Africa), and, most recently, as
Principal Environmental Planner with the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (USA), a
position that I hold concurrent with my position as Managing Director of International Environmental
Management Services Ltd, a not-for-profit corporation providing environmental education and planning
services to governments worldwide. In each of these positions, I have had oversight of projects and programs
designed to assess contaminant loads to aquatic ecosystems from land-based activities, and to develop
appropriate and affordable mitigation measures to reduce such loads and minimize their impacts on the aquatic
environment, both freshwater and marine.
This review is based upon a thorough review of the UNDP Project Document (74 pages inclusive of the Logical
Framework Analysis and Incremental Cost Reasoning), and the three Pilot Project narratives ("Restoring
Depleted Shrimp Stocks through Ecosystem-based Management Practices in the Gulf of Mexico Large Marine
Ecosystem," 15 pages; "Joint Assessment and Monitoring of Coastal Conditions in the Gulf of Mexico," 16
pages; and, "Habitat and Ecosystem Conservation of Coastal and Marine Zones of the Gulf of Mexico:
Wetlands, Mangroves, Sea Grass Beds and Sand Dunes," 34 pages) of the GEF-UNDP/UNIDO International
Waters project, entitled: "Integrated Assessment and Management of the Gulf of Mexico Large Marine
Ecosystem." Other, relevant documents served as reference sources, including the GEF Operational Strategy,
Agenda 21, and related materials establishing the necessity and priority of land-based activities to control
marine pollution as set forth in the Global Program of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment
from Land-Based Activities (GPA).
SCOPE OF THE REVIEW
This review addresses, seriatim, the issues identified in the Terms of Reference for Technical Review of Project
Proposals.
KEY ISSUES
Key issue 1. Scientific and technical soundness of the project. Overall, the project appears to be scientifically
and technically sound. The approach proposed, which includes a further development of the preliminary
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (TDA), conduct of targeted demonstration projects, formulation of an
agreed Strategic Action Program (SAP), and implementation of project management arrangements--
45
including
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
project monitoring and evaluation, designed to contribute to the creation of a formal intergovernmental
cooperation mechanism for the transboundary waters of the Gulf of Mexico LME, adequately addresses the
needs to initiate multilateral actions to reduce land-based impacts on the Gulf of Mexico LME.
The Gulf of Mexico is a major international waterway. As such, it has been extensively studied by the adjacent
countries, at least insofar as their economic interests extend into its waters. Beyond that coastal economic zone,
the oceanography of the Gulf has been studied since the Gulf of Mexico forms the point of origin of the Gulf
Stream, a major contributor to the global circulation of the North Atlantic Ocean. However, all of these
investigations, as is noted in the Project Document have been relatively uncoordinated or sectorally driven. This
has resulted in a fragmented knowledge base, focused primarily on the nearshore waters of the Gulf of Mexico
LME. Consolidation of this knowledge base would have significant scientific value to the oceanographic
community, helping researchers to highlight gaps in knowledge, identify specific areas of research requiring
attention, and develop greater insights into this globally-important marine resource.
It also should be noted that the coastal countries have differing capacities to conduct oceanic research and
monitoring and differing abilities to respond to threats facing the Gulf of Mexico. Through the conduct of joint
research and scientific activities within the framework of this project, it is anticipated that capacities will be
strengthened. It is equally likely that the institutional relationships developed as a result of this project will
contribute to the development of ongoing relationships between Gulf organizations that will extend beyond the
project period. Indeed, it is a stated objective of the project to create not only the framework of an institutional
mechanism for the joint management of the Gulf of Mexico but also contribute to a shared understanding the
Gulf of Mexico LME.
As one of the first major transboundary ocean basins to evidence anthropogenic hypoxia, the Gulf of Mexic o is
potentially the forerunner of the future state of many enclosed oceanic basins in proximity to terrestrial nutrient
sources, and receiving nutrient-rich runoff from major river systems. In the case of the Gulf of Mexico, the
Mississippi River, drainin g the central portions of the United States of America (US) is the single largest source
of nutrient input to the Gulf, but several major rivers draining the US southwest and Mexico also contribute to
the development of hypoxia in the Gulf. As a result, this project can also serve as a demonstration project for
actions to limit marine pollution from land-based activities, the goal of the Protocol to the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLoS) of the same name. Lessons learned from this project, when shared
through the scientific literature, technical symposia and the IW-LEARN best practices database, amongst
others, could contribute to the prevention or management of similar conditions elsewhere in the world.
To this end, the inclusion of three demonstration projects within the proposed Gulf of Mexico project, and
focused on the three priority concerns identified during the framework TDA preparation, seek to address
specific issues of concern; namely, depleted shrimp stocks through ecosystem-based management practices,
joint assessment and monitoring of coastal conditions, and habitat and ecosystem conservation of coastal and
marine wetlands, mangroves, sea grasses and sand dunes. Experiences gained through these activities will
contribute to the global knowledge base relating to LMEs and their associated drainage areas. The joint
assessment and monitoring project will form the basis for ongoing collaboration between the coastal countries,
while the shrimp production project will prepare a methodology, embodied in an ecosystem model, which could
form the foundation for the development of similar approaches to managing other high value, over-harvested
marine organisms within the Gulf (and elsewhere). The siting of all three demonstration projects within the area
of the Terminos Lagoon takes advantage of the substantial body of knowledge already acquired on this
embayment, in addition to contributing to the synthesis and integration of this knowledge the necessary policy
instruments for the efficient and rapid implementation of a fully integrated near shore ocean management
program within the project period.
In the end, the marriage of these scientific findings with the institutional, legal and policy instruments that
currently exist or that will be developed during the project period will aid in the creation of an appropriate
regulatory framework, and creation of the necessary infrastructure to support and sustain the environmentally-
sound management of the Gulf of Mexico.
46
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Key issue 2. Identification of global environmental benefits and/or drawbacks of the project, and consistency
with the goals of the GEF. The proposed project establishes a framework within which to address the three
major causes of environmental stress within the aquatic environment of the Gulf of Mexico; namely,
eutrophication, habitat modification, and over-harvest of commercially important species. The activities
associated with the development of a Strategic Action Program to address these three principal environmental
concerns, identified during project preparation, will have relevance to the human response to these issues in
other areas. Based upon the evaluation completed as part of the GEF IW-supported Global International Waters
Assessment (GIWA), these three threats represent some of the most commonly occurring threats to the marine
environment on a worldwide basis. Consequently, development of mechanisms to mitigate, moderate or manage
these impacts is wholly consistent with the GEF IW focal area. Operational Program 9 (OP 9) of the GEF seeks
to encourage a broadly based, multisectoral approach to resolving conflicts in the area of international and
transboundary waters. Further elaborated as Strategic Objective 1 (SO-1) of the IW portfolio under GEF-4, OP
9 builds multi-state cooperation mechanisms to address priority concerns through an ecosystem-based
management strategy.
To this end, the proposed project further addresses two strategic priorities within the GEF IW portfolio; namely,
the management of fish stocks and associated biodiversity (SP-1), and the reduction of eutrophication or
enrichment of coastal waters caused by anthropogenic nutrient inputs (SP-2). In terms of the former priority,
this project would have crosscutting linkages to the protection of marine biodiversity, immediately relative to
shrimp and ultimately relative to other species, especially those of economic value.
The participation of the relevant governmental organizations with responsibility for the marine environment,
including environmental protection and marine fisheries agencies, would be an important element in ensuring
the implementation of the project outcomes. This participation is provided through the relevant national, state,
and local government agencies. Establishment of a functional operational agency, as proposed in the project
document, also will contribute to achieving this objective.
Finally, true global benefit is presumed as a result of the connection of the Gulf of Mexico with the Atlantic
Ocean by means of the Gulf Stream Current. This part of the Atlantic Ocean circulation has significant
implications for the European climate, among other benefits.
Key issue 3. Regional context. The Gulf of Mexico is bounded by the landmass of North America. Within this
landmass, the nations of Mexico and the United States of America comprise the southern/western and northern
extremes of the Gulf, respectively, while the island state of Cuba is located at the eastern extreme of the Gulf.
While Cuba was a participant in the project development activities, the country has opted not to participate in
the SAP formulation. From a socio-political perspective, this posture does not detract from the conduct of the
proposed project, and the emphasis of the GEF IW program on information sharing and dissemination means
that the results of the project will be available to the government of Cuba for their consideration. That said, the
dominant geographic positions of Mexico and the US are such that the project area encompasses virtually all of
the land mass draining to the Gulf.
Both Mexico and the United States are members, inter alia , of the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA) area, which entity provides the regional context for this project. Amongst its other provisions, the
NAFTA includes environmental provisions that are recognized and supported by this project. In addition, there
are numerous other binational and international agreements to which the participating countries are party that
contribute to the regional context for this project. One of the binational initiatives that merits noting is the Gulf
of Mexico Alliance, comprised of the six Mexican and five US states that border the Gulf and supported by the
federal agencies and other stakeholders from both countries. As noted in the project document, this Alliance
could provide "a model for regional and international collaboration."
The proposal clearly indicates an intention to disseminate information and results on a regional basis, both
within the Gulf of Mexico Basin and elsewhere. In part, this dissemination process will utilize the offices of the
national and state governments in both countries. The project also proposes inclusion of other stakeholders,
47
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
particularly from commerce and industry, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and academia, who will also
contribute to the regional context within which the project is to be executed.
Key issue 4. Replicability. The implementation of the three demonstration projects is a key feature of this
project, and clearly contributes to the potential for replication of beneficial practices and techniques. Further,
the inclusion of mechanisms for disseminating information and results achieved fosters replication of effective
and successful measures. To this end, the project explicitly includes a variety of stakeholders outside of the
governmental bodies noted as participating in the project. As noted above, these stakeholders include the private
sector, NGOs, and academia. The inclusion of the latter will promote the use of the project findings within
classrooms and in the community. Participation of NGOs and academic institutions will help to disseminate
knowledge of the Gulf, share information on best management practices (BMPs), and facilitate public "buy in"
with respect to the project outcomes. Similarly, inclusion of the private sector participants will encourage their
participation in the implementation of the strategies identified under the SAP.
Outside of the project area, the documentation of project results and dissemination of the outputs through
websites, scientific publications, and other media will facilitate replication of the techniques and approaches in
other LMEs bounded by significant landmasses. As noted elsewhere, potential areas for replication can be
identified in the GIWA inventories; many of the world's enclosed gulfs and seas would benefit from the
integrated land and water resource management approach being proposed for the Gulf of Mexico. To this end,
the participation in the project of global and regional NGOs, scientific institutions, corporations and other
stakeholders provides a mechanism for targeted dissemination of information leading to possible replication of
BMPs in appropriate situations elsewhere in the world.
Key issue 5. Sustainability of the project. A significant element of the sustainability of the project rests upon
the participation of the local, state and national governments, their operational agencies, and other civil
institutions. This participation is indicated in the project document through tasks to be performed by these
(largely unspecified) entities, through the governmental financial commitments to the project (Section III), and
through agency participation in project management (Section I, Part III). While there is always a risk that
agency budgets may limit participation--this risk being identified in the project document--the likelihood is
that these agencies and organizations will continue to maintain an interest in the project outcomes. In the case of
this project, the level of risk has been determined to be low to moderate, which seems a reasonable
representation of the prevailing situation in the region. Consequently, there is a high likelihood that the project
will be sustainable beyond the period of GEF intervention. This likelihood is increased through participation in
the project by civil society stakeholders, identified as NGOs, corporations, and local governments. These
stakeholders, yet to be identified under most Outcomes except as external consultants in the organigram
presented in Section 10.2 of the proposal (with the exception of Outcome 3 as elaborated in the pilot projects in
Appendix C, have a more immediate and direct link to a sustainable strategy for the management of the marine
resources of the Gulf and its riparian lands. Based upon the stakeholder identified in the Stakeholders
Assessment (Appendix B), there is a high likelihood of the project securing sustainable participation in other
aspects of the project.
Beyond this factual basis, the target of the project, embodie d in at least one of the pilot projects, is sustainable
management of high value marine resources; namely, shrimp. Development of resource management plans, a
stated output of the project, and the inferred desire of the economic stakeholders for continuation of their
livelihoods, would also suggest a strong potential for sustainability of the strategies developed within the
framework of the SAP. Dissemination of the outputs of the project as a whole, and not only of the pilot projects,
will encourage "buy in" by civil society in a more general sense, leading to sustainable outcomes.
Finally, the project proposes the creation of a bi- or multi-lateral body that would coordinate actions among the
Gulf countries that will build from and continue the momentum of the project coordination unit (PCU) and its
professional staff. The evolution of the PCU into a coordination mechanism bodes well for the sustainability of
the project outcomes.
48
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Key issue 6. Targeted Research Projects. Targeted technical demonstration and capacity building projects are
key features envisioned within the GEF International Waters Operational Program. These activities are clearly
included as major elements of this proposed project. The interventions proposed under the pilot projects, funded
in part by the GEF, strive for sustainability and the continuation of successful interventions beyond the project
period. Consequently, it is important that the demonstration projects continue to be monitored, and the results
reported using the information dissemination mechanisms previously identified, beyond the project period. Such
an approach is totally consistent with the catalytic nature of the GEF, and an essential element to the
sustainability of the project.
Capacity building and institutional strengthening, envisioned in the project document, become the basic
building blocks upon which this project will succeed or fail, both from the point of view of its sustainability and
from its scientific and technical integrity. Inclusion in this aspect of the project of not only governmental
entities but also corporate and community stakeholders should form a broad base from which targeted research
can be translated to practical experience and hence into replicable BMPs.
SECONDARY ISSUES
Secondary issue 1. Linkage to other focal areas. This project is formulated as an International Waters project
under OP 9 of the GEF Operational Strategy. While no specific crosscutting areas are identified, the project
clearly has linkages to the crosscutting area of protection of aquatic biodiversity in terms of its potential
beneficial impact on fisheries, as embodied under Strategic Priority 1 of GEF-4.
Secondary issue 2. Linkages to other proposals. The project constitutes the first LME project in the Latin
America and Caribbean (LAC) Region. Consequently, no specific linkages exist between this project and other
GEF IW initiatives in the LAC Region. However, the project does propose to make explicit use of the GEF IW-
LEARN network as a means of disseminating the results and outputs of the project.
Additionally, the project identifies specific linkages with ongoing initiatives of the United Nations, including:
the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Wider Caribbean Regional Seas Programme, the Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Western Central Atlantic Fisheries Commission
(WECAFC), and the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)-
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) Sub-commission for the Wider Caribbean (IOCARIBE).
The project also recognizes the complementarities between the management of transboundary waters of the
Gulf of Mexico and the management of the national coastal waters, linking with national- and state-level
programs within each of the participating countries. In addition, the project has complementarities with other
(global) projects utilizing land-based actions to minimize degradation of the marine environment as a result of
land-based activities under the GPA.
These linkages contribute to a high degree of connectivity within this project, and contribute to the likelihood
that the actions undertaken will be sustainable, and that the lessons learned can and will be transferred beyond
the project boundaries to other, similar situations and locations.
Secondary issue 3. Other beneficial or damaging environmental effects. The project has no known or obvious
damaging environmental impacts associated with the activities that it is proposed to execute. The beneficial
impacts of the project have been fully articulated above, and include the implementation of targeted
interventions that address both chronic land-based sources and potential, catastrophic ocean-based events that
contribute to the degradation of the Gulf of Mexico and its resources.
The provision of trained staff and institutional capacities needed to enforce and enhance existing environmental
protection regulations, and the dissemination of successful management measures further contribute to the
benefit of the Gulf and its drainage basin in both coastal countries. All of these benefits accrue not only within
the project area, but, as a result of their wider dissemination using the electronic and other media provided, also
to the wider Caribbean basin and beyond.
49
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
In this latter regard, the explicit connections between the project and ongoing national initiatives are
noteworthy. Specifically, these connections are embodied in large part within the elements of Outcome 2
that are fully cofinanced.
Secondary issue 4. Degree of involvement of stakeholders in the project. The involvement of stakeholders is
extensive, although limited to national-, regional-, and international-level governmental bodies, functional
bodies including academia and NGOs, and resource users. Involvement of the wider public is catered for
through informational programming inherent in the project dissemination proposals, and through the
involvement of NGOs. It should be noted that the proposal states that identification of local level stakeholders
was not undertaken. Given the scale of the Gulf and its drainage area, and the potential numbers of such
organizations, both governmental and nongovernmental, this decision is not unreasonable. Nevertheless, it is to
be hoped that the involvement of nationa l institutions will provide opportunities for these entities to liaise with
their counterpart state and local governmental bodies during the course of the project. The exception to this
generalization is the pilot projects, which make explicit linkages with such local institutions and organizations.
In this regard, the participation of the relevant national regulatory agencies and ministries, NGOs and academic
institutions in the execution and implementation of the project activities, including the project's explicit support
for capacity building and institutional strengthening with respect to these organizations, is critical to the
sustainability of the project and its expansion into areas not specifically involved in the pilot projects.
Secondary issue 5. Capacity building aspects. Capacity building is a critical element of the proposed project.
Creation and strengthening of appropriate institutions, conduct of the pilot projects, and recognition of the need
for regional level coordination within the Gulf of Mexico form the core of the GEF-financed elements of the
project as noted under Outcomes 2, 3 and 5. Dissemination of lessons learned with respect to coastal
development policy, fisheries management practices, and environmental information dissemination are essential
elements of the GEF-financed pilot project activities (Outcome 3) and the information management system
(Outcome 4). These latter elements also should be implemented in conjunction with the IW-LEARN initiative
being executed by the UNDP and the UNEP best practices database. These efforts will enable wider
dissemination of knowledge of practices that have positive effects. Such knowledge is an essential element in
building capacity and strengthening institutions in the region. Institutional "twinning" between agencies of
Mexico and the United States could also be considered in this vein.
Secondary issue 6. Innovativeness. Development of appropriate management practices for the management of
hypoxia in enclosed and semi-enclosed LMEs, such as the Gulf of Mexico, is a critical element for the
protection of the marine environment, within the context of an integrated land- and water-based management
program. By creating and strengthening the appropriate human resources, institutions, data acquisit ion and
dissemination systems, and shared management mechanisms, the proposed management program will
complement other pollution abatement and "blue water" management measures being implemented by the basin
governments and stakeholders. The proposed actions and approaches reflect state-of-the-art practices, and their
application in the Gulf of Mexico will significantly advance current practice in this Basin as well as in the wider
Caribbean region as a whole. In this manner, the project promotes innovation and development of regionally
applicable remedial practices and experiences.
GENERAL CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Overall, it is the conclusion of this reviewer that the proposed project is wholly consistent with the GEF
International Waters operationa l program, its broader philosophy, and funding criteria. Consequently, this
project is recommended for funding.
RESPONSE TO STAP REVIEW
We would like to thank the Reviewer for his very positive STAP Review. This includes his remarks that the
proposed Gulf of Mexico LME project is:
50
scientifically and technically sound; the proposed actions and
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
approaches reflect state-of-the-art practices; the approach is strongly participatory in ambit and provides a
mechanism for targeted dissemination of information; its BMPs are potentially replicable globally; it is
sustainable beyond the period of GEF intervention; and it is consistent with the GEF International Waters
Operational Program, its broader philosophy, and funding criteria.
We appreciate the Reviewer's comments that support the aim of the project: namely, to marry its scientific
findings with the institutional, legal and policy instruments that currently exist or that will be developed during
the project period to assist in the formation of an appropriate regulatory framework, and to develop the
necessary infrastructure to support and sustain the environmentally-sound management of the Gulf of Mexico
through the LME approach.
The Reviewer further supports the five Outcomes of the project and stresses that the approach proposed
adequately addresses the needs to initiate multilateral actions to reduce land-based impacts on the Gulf of
Mexico LME. The reviewer is also supportive of the three pilot demonstration projects within the proposed
Gulf of Mexico project which focus on the three priority concerns identified during the framework TDA
preparation and indicates that experiences gained through these activities will contribute to the global
knowledge base relating to LMEs and their associated drainage areas.
The only real criticism leveled at the project by the reviewer relates to the identification of stakeholder groups.
Reference is made in the project document that a significant element of the sustainability of the project rests
upon the participation of the local, state and national governments, their operational agencies, and other civil
institutions. However, the reviewer states that the tasks to be performed under each Outcome will be undertaken
by largely unspecified entities.
In response to this, we agree that stakeholder groups have not as yet been identified for specific
Outcomes/Outputs (apart from Outcome 3). This is largely because the scale of the GoM LME will require the
involvement of diverse stakeholder groups and although key groups have already been identified during the
preparatory stage, the project itself will continue to enhance robust and informed stakeholder involvement. In
order to ensure full stakeholder participation, the project will aim to identify the specific key stakeholders for
each outcome and ensure active and informed participation from the relevant sectors (Output 5.5). It will also
ensure that different stakeholder levels and groups are targeted through the development of a robust public
awareness strategy (Output 5.6). Key groups will probably participate in more than one Outcome. Additionally,
the engagement of other stakeholder groups, such as those working in specific watersheds including the
Mississippi river to address land-based sources, will itself be a major undertaking within the project.
It is also noted that the reviewer has indicated that as capacity building is a critical element of the proposed
project, the dissemination of lessons learned with respect to coastal development policy, fisheries management
practices, and environmental information dissemination are all essential elements of GEF-financed pilot project
activities (Outcome 3) and the information management system (Outcome 4). He indicates that they should also
be implemented in conjunction with the IW-LEARN initiative being executed by the UNDP and the UNEP best
practices database. We acknowledge that these efforts will enable wider dissemination of best practice and
consequently have reflected this in the project document.
51
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
ANNEX C: CONSULTANTS TO BE HIRED FOR THE PROJECT
$/
Estimated person
Position Titles
person week*
weeks**
Tasks to be performed
For Project Management
Local
Chief Technical Advisor
1,200
204
Overall programme and strategy guidance;
(GEF)
introduction of experience in strategic issues of
the Gulf of Mexico, and policy consultation
Technical Assistant
850
204
Assist the CTA in programming and executing
(GEF and other
activities.
sources)
PCU Administrator
850
204
Monitoring and tracking Work Plan and
(GEF and other
finances
sources)
Database management and IT
850
204
Provide IT services for PCU, maintain
expert
(GEF and other
database, develop and maintain web page
sources)
Socio-Economic Expert
1,000
102
Socio-economic analysis of the resources and
(GEF and other
services of the Gulf of Mexico
sources)
Stakeholder Expert
1,000
102
Update stakeholder analysis; formulate and
(GEF and other
monitor stakeholder plan and its
sources)
implementation
No International consultants will be recruited for Project Management
Justification for Travel, if any: Since the project involves two countries and three pilot projects, travel to Mexico City (4
trips per year x 4 years at $2,000 each totals $32,000) and Miami (2 travels per year x 4 years at $2,000 each totals $16,000) to
coordinate with the national focal points for the project are expected. Also travel to Corpus Christi (Texas) (2 trips per year x
4 years at $2,000 each totals $16,000) to coordinate with the Harte Research Institute and the Texas A&M University campus
there. Visits to the pilot projects in the field (4 trips per year x 4 years at $4,000 each totals $64,000), attendance to workshops
(4 trips per year x 4 years at $3,500 each totals $56,000) and training courses (4 trips per year x 4 years at $4,000 each totals
$64,000) etc., have also been considered.
For Technical Assistance
Local
Pilot project technical advisor
1,500
615
Day to day management of the project, design
technical aspects for restoration activities on
ground and coordination of pilot project
Management Specialist in
1,200
208
Provide with specific information on Laguna de
Marine and Coastal Protected
Terminos Lagoon Protected Area and linkage
Areas
with pilot projects to develop in the area.
Watershed Management
1,200
120
Feasibility assessment of implementing
Specialist (Geo-morphology and
integrated watershed management to enhance
hidrology monitoring)
restoration of wetlands and mangroves.
Including assessment of policies and
governance mechanisms focused at minimizing
land-based sources of pollution, surface soil
erosion, and sedimentation.
Geographic Information System
500
62
Analysis and systematization of environmental
and Data Base Management
information; data collection; management of all
digital data, maps and other related information
to restoration processes
Wetlands and mangrove expert
1,200
208
Oversee the design of restoration plans, on-site
inspection, co-ordination with local authorities,
stakeholders and agencies involved in the
process; prepare and submit technical reports
52
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Sea grass expert
1,200
208
Conduct on-site inspection and develop an
action plan for sea grass beds applicable to
areas with these ecosystems; prepare and
submit technical reports
Sand dune expert
1,200
208
Conduct on-site inspection and develop an
action plan for sand dunes applicable to areas
with these ecosystems; prepare and submit
technical reports
Monitoring assistant
800
148
Develop data base with environmental
information to assist restoration project and
processes aligned with other pilot projects as
well.
Stakeholder and public
1,200
116
Enhance public and stakeholder participation,
information outreach expert
update and disseminate information on project
progress, prepare information bulletins, reports,
etc.
Human ecology (including Socio
1,200
208
Analyze socio economic activities related to the
economic aspects) and Fisheries
local, regional and national chain market of
expert
fisheries, particularly related to the Laguna de
Terminos Lagoon and assessment of all
economic activities to enhance shrimp stock
recovery
Certified Production advisor
1,200
30
Promote the adoption and oversee the
application of sustainable production practices
(fishing and product management best
practices) including energy reduction, reduce
nutrient loading to ecosystem,
Monitoring expert
1,000
116
Compile, analyze, and integrate environmental
variability information, develop strategies to
use of environmental friendly gear fishing
technology.
Stakeholder and public
1,000
116
Enhance public and stakeholder participation,
information outreach expert
update and disseminate information on project
progress, prepare information bulletins, reports.
Compliance expert
1,000
30
Review and prepare documents for compliance
of all legal aspects of the project; submit
applications for permits
Legislative policy and regulatory
1,000
30
Analyze and review all agreements and
framework expert
documents that fit within the regulatory
framework of the project; develop strategies for
legislative policy implementation with an
ecosystem based approach
Environmental and Ecosystem
1,200
116
Compile, analyze, and integrate environmental
monitoring expert (including
variability information as well as integrate and
pollution, fisheries,
update an environmental information system on
environmental quality and
pollution, fisheries, environmental quality and
aquatic resources)
aquatic resources. Coordinate pilot project.
Municipal and state public
900
40
Enhance public policy information and
policy expert
participation from
municipal and state
stakeholders
International
Fisheries analyst
3,000
104
Improve fisheries stocks assessment and data
collection, planning and coordination of
workshops and meetings with stakeholders,
fisherman and authorities related to fisheries to
discuss overall stocks assessments.
53
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
Fishing gear specialist
3,000
104
Develop strategies to apply available and viable
new modern fishing gear technology to reduce
impacts on the ecosystem including bycatch
reduction strategies and improved mechanisms ,
particularly to protect endangered species
around the Protected Area; enhance fishing
efficiency with less environmental impacts
Coastal ecosystem indicator
3,000
36
Develop regional monitoring strategy,
expert
cinluding a series of coastal ecosystem
indicators that provides information for an
environmental information system. Prepare
mechanism to compare environmental
indicators with those developed in the US by
the EPA.
Marine ecosystem indicator
3,000
36
Develop a series of marine ecosystem
expert
indicators that provides information for an
environmental information system.
SAP/NAP Coordinator
2,500
80
Coordinate country team activities leading to
SAP and NAP formulation and approval
NAP Expert
2,500
8
Design and implement national training for
formulation of NAPs
Justification for Travel, if any: See above
* Provide dollar rate per person weeks or months as applicable; ** Total person weeks/months needed to carry out the tasks.
54
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
ANNEX D: STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND THE USE OF
FUNDS
A. EXPLAIN IF THE PPG OBJECTIVE HAS BEEN ACHIEVED THROUGH THE PPG ACTIVITIES
UNDERTAKEN.
The project preparatory phase was undertaken under the implementation of UNDP and the execution of UNIDO. Funding for
execution was made effective in the second semester of 2005. After the recruitment of the Regional Coordinator and
establishment of the project coordination office in Merida, Mexico, the inception workshop took place in January 2006. The
inception workshop and subsequent technical and Steering Committee meetings were not attended by Cuba, in spite of the
continuous efforts by both the IA and EA to facilitate the active participation of the country in all project activities. In
February 2007, the Cuban Vice-Minister of the Ministry for Foreign Investment and Economic Collaboration (MIN VEC),
Mr. Orlando Requeijo Gual, on behalf of the Government of Cuba officially informed the project partners of its decision not
to participate in the project. In its decision, the Government of Cuba indicated that the project did not fit within the
framework of the environmental priorities established in the country's Estrategia Ambiental Nacional (National
Environmental Strategy). The GEF Agencies and the participating countries recognize that Cuba exercised its sovereign right
to determine whether to participate in this initiative. Throughout the implementation of the preparatory phase, UNDP,
UNIDO and the Mexican Government made continuous efforts to elicit the participation of Cuba in all project activities.
Informal consultations were also carried out. Both the USA and Mexico have stated that Cuba's participation in the project
would be beneficial, and that their reincorporation at any point in the process would be welcome. In the project launch
workshop and subsequent steering committee meetings, the US and Mexican Delegations made statements regarding the
"open door" policy for Cuban participation in the project, if the country decides to reincorporate itself in the process.
During PDF-B implementation, UNDP recommended that the TDA and SAP be integrated on a provisional basis, to be
completed during the FSP execution phase. This allowed for the preparatory phase to be focused on the preparation of the
Project Brief for inclusion in the GEF Work Programme for 2007. Mexico and the US accepted this recommendation as an
informed decision drawn from the experience of similar GEF LME projects. With the guidance provided by the GEF
agencies, a preliminary TDA was drawn in order to provide the scientific basis for the priority issues to be addressed in the
FSP and subsequent SAP.
The timing of the preparatory phase coincided with extensive and substantial reforms within the framework of the GEF
operational policies and project cycle. For the inclusion of the project in the GEF 2007 Work Plan, and adhering to the new
GEF policies, the Government of Mexico decided to finalize the preparatory phase and to continue the FSP with UNIDO as
the sole GEF agency. This issue was addressed directly between the Mexican Focal Point and Council Member and the CEO
and Chairperson of the GEF during the week of 25 June 2007.
B. DESCRIBE FINDINGS THAT MIGHT AFFECT THE PROJECT DESIGN OR ANY CONCERNS ON PROJECT
IMPLEMENTATION, IF ANY:
The project concept was elaborated with the participation of the three countries that share the resources of the Gulf of
Mexico: Cuba, México, and the United States of America. As it has been explained in Annex A, the Government of Cuba
chose not to participate in the project design. The possible integration of Cuba during project implementation may require
adjustments to the project structure. Otherwise no major concerns have been identified.
55
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc
C. PROVIDE DETAILED FUNDING AMOUNT OF THE PPG ACTIVITIES AND THEIR IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS IN THE TABLE BELOW:
GEF Amount ($)
Project
Implementation
Amount
Amount Spent
Amount
Uncommitted
Preparation
Status
Approved
To date
Committed
Amount*
Activities
Approved
Project
Completed
166,600.59
136,192.39
0
30,408.20
Coordination
TDA Preparation
Completed
132,478.43
94,683.02
0
37,795.41
Total National &
Regional
Stakeholder
Dialogues &
Completed
108,999.99
51,619.30
0
57,380.69
Preparation SAP
Development &
Integration of GEF
Project Document
Completed
54,422.41
35,640.00
0
18,782.41
Workshops
Completed
10,498.67
10,341.15
0
157.52
Support
Total
473,000.09
328,475.86
144,524.23
56
CEO Endorsement Template-April-08.doc