PROGRESS REPORT TO SECOND ASCLME PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING
MARCH 2009
SUMMARY OF 2008 ACHIEVEMENTS AND 2009 PLANS:
Since the First Workshop and Inception Meeting in Durban, South Africa (January 2008), the
ASCLME Project has moved into a very active phase with a lot of initiatives and activities now under
implementation. Initially this placed a lot of strain on the PCU until all of the requisite staff and
supportive consultants could be hired. We have since realised the importance of careful delegation of
activities and deliverables through the allocation of dedicated PCU Outcome Coordinators (at the
regional level) supported and guided by national level coordinators. Now the Project has the direct
involvement and support of the countries at the national level to the MEDA and TDA development
process, we are seeing a lot of activities beginning to happen `on the ground'.
The data capture and research cruises have been a great success so far and promise to continue to
collect new and exciting data through 2009. A significant and largely unsurveyed area of the Agulhas
LME has now received the attention of some 50 regional ecosystem experts plus a small group of
international technicians and scientist. These experts have brought with them many and varied skills
ranging from physical oceanography through nutrient and productivity analysis to fish taxonomy and
genetics. Local trainees and counterparts have been carefully selected by the countries, in co-
ordination with the PCU, to work alongside these experts and learn from their skills. Many of these
received their initial training earlier in 2008 during the Ecosystem Analysis Training Workshop held at
the University of Cape Town, sponsored by the Project, and supported by the South African
government, including the use of their research vessel, the Africana. 2009 will see the Project move its
focus, in August and September, to the Somali Current off the east African coast. This will be
followed by some cooperative research cruises around Comoros (in partnership with the CORDIO
WIO Coral Triangle Project), through the southern islands of Seychelles (at the specific request of the
Seychelles government), down the 55o E longitude to service two ATLAS moorings and deploy a third
(working with NOAA), and then onto the final leg from Réunion and down to the Agulhas Return
Current to map the eastern and southern boundary of the LME and to survey the seamounts along this
boundary (in cooperation with another UNDP GEF Project). We have also recently entered into
negotiations for a cooperative cruise in early 2010 which would be funded by the US Navy to test
state-of-the-art seismic technology for capturing data on smaller scale water-body movements.
Further data capture is planned for 2009 focusing on small-scale artisanal and coastal fisheries,
mariculture and coastal tourism (with an emphasis on the value of these activities and how this relates
to their sustainability through the ecosystem approach). The Project will also start to address those
concerns related to non land-based marine pollution (from shipping and offshore exploration) and the
introduction of invasive species through ship movements.
There has been a strong focus on data handling and management over the last year with a lot of
discussion about national inputs to the MEDAs and the TDAs. The MEDAs (Marine Ecosystem
Diagnostic Analyses) are a new LME-Based approach that is being pioneered by the ASCLME
1
countries. These were discussed and adopted at the First Regional Meeting for ASCLME National
Coordination Groups held in Mauritius in 2008. These aim to start the regional TDA (Transboundary
Diagnostic Analysis) process for the LMEs at the national level which A. delivers a product that is of
direct value to the countries themselves and B. creates national ownership of the overall regional
process. This process is progressing to schedule following a more recent meeting of all of the national
Data and Information Coordinators in Grahamstown, South Africa (where the PCU is based) in
February 2009. The issue of Data Management and Ownership has been attracted a lot of interest and
discussion and we now have a Data Management Agreement that has been reviewed by each
participating country that fully embraces the concerns and wishes of each country as well as the
regional needs of the LME Project itself. Plans for further data synthesis and generation through GIS
and predictive modelling along with remote sensing and multidimensional mapping activities are also
under development through partnerships with IRD, ReCoMaP and others.
The arrival of the new Policy and Governance Coordinator (a post and activity created during the 2008
Steering Committee Meeting) is an exciting step forward and will allow the Project to maintain a clear
focus on its primary objectives of developing effective governance mechanisms and policy strategies
in support of a long-term LME approach through the Strategic Action Programmes. Discussion is
already underway with regional governance agencies (e.g. AU, NEPAD, SADC, etc) regarding the
long-term requirements for an effective regional governance strategy and these will evolve and take
shape through further discussions at the bilateral and regional level to ensure that this process is truly
country-driven. This is essential if there is to be real ownership of the overall policies and governance
structures for LME management, both regionally and nationally.
Communications and public/stakeholder participation are being addressed through a number of
activities. Probably the largest and most intensive is the DLIST (Distance Learning and Information
Sharing Tool) initiative which will be working in all of the countries to undertake rapid assessments of
community linkages to ecosystem management and requirements for strengthening community
involvement and ownership of ecosystem governance. This DLIST initiative was launched in late
2008 and is currently opening up dialogue with all of the countries. Also, in terms of communications,
the Project has commissioned the production of two films on the ASCLME approach. One of these
will be a longer educational film aimed at all stakeholders; the other is a shorter promotional film
specifically focusing on raising the awareness and sensitivity of policy-makers and leaders of
government.
The project has also been very active in promoting itself through media promotions (e.g. published
articles and interviews, short television pieces and the Newsletter) and the ASCLME website has been
a big hit around the world with a lot of our co-funders and supporters logging in to keep a close eye on
activities. In this respect, the `cruise-blog' has been enormously popular with daily updates on the
various happenings and events associated with the cruises, and this will certainly be an activity which
will be given high priority during the 2009 cruise season.
In summary, it is fair to say that ASCLME, as a Project, is successfully raising its profile both
regionally and globally and has entered into a number of new partnerships both for science and data
capture, and for development of long-term governance mechanisms. The dynamic nature of such a
Project has required a re-think of the project activities, not in terms of alterations so much as in terms
of additions. This, in turn, has required some fine-tuning and re-allocation of the budget.
Annex 1 (end of document) provides a summary of the previous Steering Committee and Inception
Meeting discussions and includes a list of SCM Decisions and Agreed Actions. These are abbreviated
and highlighted in Table 1 below:
2
TABLE 1:
DECISIONS AND ACTIONS ARISING FROM THE 2008 STEERING
COMMITTEE MEETING
ITEM FROM 2008 STEERCOM
DECISION
ACTION TAKEN
PSC stressed critical importance of
PCU to develop ToR for a person to
LME governance module and need for
undertake specific role and functions,
P&G Coordinator hired
specific actions to brief and sensitise
and to hire new Coordinator
policy makers
A. Formal meetings of Policy-Makers
A. P&G Coordinator to liaise with
Meetings of an ASCLME Programme
from each country and B. Use of
countries and develop a ToR for Policy
Policy Committee and engagement of
opportunistic side events (e.g.
Meeting. B. P&G Coord. Identifying
Policy Makers
AMCEN)
possible venues for side events
This data and information mechanism
PSC felt ASCLME should take a
PCU to structure a data and information has been discussed and evolved through
central coordinating role for LME-
management mechanism at national and meetings of the national CoGs and
related data and Information
regional level
specifically the national D&I
management
Coordinators
Presented at 1st Regional Meeting of
PCU requested clear support to national PCU agreed to provide details on
National CoGs and further discussed
institutions and working groups for
support to countries as well as expected and agreed at D&I Coordinators
Data and Information management and
deliverables from countries
meeting in Grahamstown. Need NFPs
collection
to agree on mechanisms
Data Capture and Management MoU
PCU requested to draft an MoU for
MoU developed though CoG meetings
Required
country review and adoption
and D&I Coordinator WORKSHOPS
2 Projects to coordinate closely and
Sharing of data as well as CB&T
develop appropriate requirements and
Data Sharing Agreement developed and
between ASCLME and ReCoMaP
mechanisms for shared activities and
adopted by countries
data
All new studies and research to be
Peer review of all data required in
Quality -assurance of all data used in
properly peer-reviewed. All cruise
contracts of scientists. Being enforced
TDA
reports to be evolved into scientific
by Principal Oceanographic Advisor.
publications
Publications list already drafted
Peer-Review Committee or Mechanism Part of the ToR for the MEDAs and the
Quality Control of actual TDA
to be established
TDAs
Secretariat to communicate with PCU
D&I Coordinator has discussed this
Nairobi Convention to contribute
on possible areas for collaboration and
with NC Secretariat and appropriate
appropriate info to TDA process
data sharing
information is being identified
Gaps in both coastal and offshore issues Various stakeholder institution to liaise
and activities (e.g. mariculture, marine
with PCU to provide a detailed list of
PCU has, in close coordination with the
pollution, invasive species, etc)
gaps
countries (through CoGs and NFPs),
identified the priority gaps to be coastal
Development of an action plan to
National prioritisation needed on all
fisheries and mariculture, tourism,
address once country priorities
LME issues
invasive species and offshore pollution.
confirmed
PCU has developed new activities to
Countries to review deliveries to
LME data gaps not address by 3
address these at national and regional
TDA/SAP and amend in light of any
projects
level.
gaps
Discussed at Agency level. Need PSC
Timing of 3 TDA/SAP deliveries from
Specific Agenda Item for 2009
and country input and guidance at 2009
3 ASCLME Programme projects
SteerCom
meeting
3
National Needs discussed at first
Capacity Building and Training
regional COG meeting and at Regional
Need for coordination between all LME Coordinator to liaise with various
Project Coordination Forum. Training
related projects and initiatives over
projects and initiatives for joint training Plan drafted and to be presented to PSC
training needs
activities
before circulating to all projects and
initiatives
Joint meeting between Projects
A number of similar or overlapping
(primarily ASCLME and WIO-LaB but
activities and responsibilities exist
Need for closer coordination and
with SWIOFP representation) in
between the 3 projects, particularly
cooperation between the Sister projects
conjunction with PSCs to discuss areas
between ASCLME and WIO-LaB
of overlap or similarity
Somalia now officially a Country
Observer and being funded to attend
Need to incorporate Somalia in the
PSC meetings as well as ASCLME
Create Country Observer status
Project
regional technical workshops (e.g. 1st
Regional D&I Coordinator's Workshop
- Feb 2009)
Countries requested guidance on
PCU to provide work-plan and budget
Work-plan, structure, logistics and
national activities
etc
budget provided for national activities.
Potential structuring and objectives of
such a workshop discussed at Regional
Project and Programme Websites
Need for an IT workshop
Project Coordination Forum in late
2008. A draft agenda to be circulated in
2009 for consideration
Original Project Development
Need for continuous monitoring of
Specialist (responsible for LogFrame
PCU to identify activity and person
activities and deliveries
and Deliveries as per ProDoc)
contracted as a 'progress-chaser'
need for better definition of proposed
Organigram presented to Regional
New organigram needed as well as
new organisational structure related to
COGs meeting and Regional Project
linkages between projects
revised Outcomes and Outputs
Coordination Forum.
Format of future meetings
To be adopted
New PSC Meeting Format in use
Too little discussion of their role in the
Private Sector involvement
LME process. Needs to be 2009
On 2009 PSC Agenda for discussion
Agenda Item
ASCLME PSC and WIO-LaB PSC
Time next SteerCom to be held with
ASCLME and WIO-LaB to coordinate
coordinated in 2009 to allow for joint
WIO-LaB
session
Need for quality control on training and
All trainees now encouraged to
Trained personnel to present peer-
capacity building for ecosystem
undertake specific scientific research
reviewed publications
monitoring skill
objective and to publish their results
Priority has been given to use of
If outside expertise used there should be regional expertise (> 90% of scientists
Use of local and regional expertise for
a contractual obligation for
on Nansen cruises from ASCLME
training wherever possible
counterparting and training of local
participating countries). All non-
capacity
regional experts contractual required to
provide training.
4
2008 cruise schedule significantly
expanded due to market and economic
Priorities list to be reviewed by local
forces. Scheduled approved by
experts and circulated back to countries
Priorities for Oceanographic /
countries. 2009 schedule drafted and
and then a regional cruise coordination
ecosystem cruises
presented to Regional Cruise
workshop arranged to adopt schedules
Coordinators in Mauritius (end of 2008)
for rest of project
for approval. Now being presented to
PSC.
List of expertise and trainees provide by
Countries to provide list of
countries for 2008. To be updated for
Effective use of vessels
oceanographic expertise in region and
2009 for inclusion of both experts and
list of trainees also
trainees on the 2009 cruises
Countries to nominate focal institute
Done. National Cruise Coordinators all
Need for national level cruise
and person for national cruise
met at Regional COGs meeting in
coordination
coordination
Mauritius in 2008
Bilateral discussions between PCU and
countries led to decision to have two
levels. One nominal level of $20 per
day for junior scientists and trainees (to
Two levels adopted for junior and
cover simple costs such as shop
Sea-Going Allowances
senior scientists?
purchases on board) and another of $80
per day for Senior Scientists with
responsibility for the trainees, for on-
board work programmes and for data
analysis and write-up
Standard Letter requesting repatriation
1970's Nansen Data - where is it?
PCU to clarify available data from
drafted for consideration by the
Important input to TDA
earlier cruises and attempt to repatriate
Steering Committee for PCU to act on
behalf of the countries
PROGRESS BY OUTCOME:
Outcome 1: Information Captured for Development of the Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis
The 2008 cruises were very successful with some 4 months of work carried out by over 50 scientists
and trainees. A mass of new information on oceanography has been captured including a much clearer
picture of physical processes around and across the Mascarene Plateau. Two ATLAS (Autonomous
Temperature Line Acquisition System) moorings have been contributed to the data collection effort by
NOAA and deployed from the Nansen in the Mascarene Basin along with a series of Argo floats. A
number of new records and new species have turned up in the collections, especially from the
Mascarene Ridge trawls. Much of the area visited has never been surveyed for biophysical data
collection purposes. A list of detailed publications that are expected from the cruises is already being
compiled and agreed. There has also been much excitement at SAIAB (the South African Institute for
Aquatic Biodiversity) as the fish specimen collections arrive here from various storage facilities.
SAIAB has the primary collection facility for fish in Africa and will be holding the specimen
collections for ASCLME. Many of the samples are already turning out to be new records and even
new species.
The 2009 Cruise schedule has been submitted to the FAO EAF Nansen planners and has been
approved. This will start in the second half of 2009 in Kenyan waters and work down through
5
Tanzania to Comoros where a detailed survey of the Comoros Gyre will take place along with support
work to the Western Indian Ocean Coral Triangle project. Time is then scheduled for a visit to Aldabra
at the specific request of the Seychelles Government to collect data around these southern islands. The
ASCLME cruise will then steam down the 55 E longitude to service the two ATLAS moorings
deployed in 2008 and to deploy a new southerly mooring at 16 S. This will be a `fully-loaded'
mooring collecting information on a lot of additional parameters including carbon flux. The vessel will
then continue on down to Reunion to pick up colleagues for the UNDP GEF Seamounts project and
from there steaming south to visit the 5 seamounts between Réunion and the Agulhas
Return/Subtropical Convergence. This will provide vital information on the southern edge of the
Agulhas Large Marine Ecosystem. Finally back into Port Elizabeth where the cruises will terminate
toward the end of 2009. However, negotiations are also underway to continue the cruises from PE in
early 2010 to accommodate a US Navy request for assistance with data collection (see below) which
will provide both significant co-funding as well as significant additional data for the ASCLME
Project.
In line with discussions at the last Steering Committee Meeting in Durban (January 2008), the Project
has developed ToRs for coastal livelihoods assessments and coastal habitat mapping and is in the
process of hiring the appropriate regional coordination team. The coastal livelihoods activity will
focus on collecting vital data on near-shore artisanal and subsistence fisheries and tourism as
economically important sectors and translation of this data into an economic resource assessment that
highlights the cost-benefits of the ecosystem approach. This activity will be reflected also at the
national level through the hiring of national support teams.
Outcome 2: Long-term LME Data Collection, Management and Distribution Mechanisms
Established
Following the first regional meeting of the ASCLME COGs (National Coordination Groups) in
Mauritius in September 2008, good progress has been made toward the development of the MEDAs
(Marine Ecosystem Diagnostic Analyses) reports. These national reports will update each country
comprehensively on the state of their marine environment (scientific, economic, social and policy-
wise) and provide a conclusive set of Policy Briefing Guidelines for each country. Equally
importantly, these documents will provide the basis for the overall LME Transboundary Diagnostic
Analysis (one for Agulhas and one for the Somali Current LME) which will be the foundation for the
Strategic Action Programmes that are the primary objective of this Project and which will form the
legal agreements by the countries to manage the LMEs.
The first Regional Meeting of the Data and Information Coordinators was held in Grahamstown. Each
ASCLME National Focal Point has appointed a Coordinator from a focal institution in their country to
set policy and define activities for D&I management on the ASCLME Project, as well as to oversee
the collation and synthesis of information for their national MEDAs, which will be each country's
contribution to the TDA. This working meeting addressed all aspects of the national work programmes
for 2009 and 2010, leading up to the formulation of the TDA documents. Specifically, this included
developing a template for the national MEDA documents, so that the content produced by each
country is relatively consistent in layout. The meeting also reviewed the regional ASCLME Data and
Information Management Plan which translates the ASCLME data policy documents (finalised at
previous working group meetings) into technical actions for data management in institutions.
Countries have commenced writing their own national Data and Information Management Plans.
The Terms of Reference of sub-consultants and specialists were reviewed to prepare for the ASCLME
Steering Committee meeting, and work and data plans for specialist projects (on coastal livelihoods,
6
habitat mapping, and the oceanographic cruises) were discussed to ensure seamless incorporation into
the MEDA documents. Among other items discussed during the week, were data products, data and
information dissemination online, data repatriation from previous expeditions, data exchange between
projects and programmes, the ASCLME communications strategy, as well as overall timelines,
deliverables and reporting periods.
The ASCLME project has worked closely with its Sister Projects SWIOFP and WIO-LaB, as well as
other agencies in the region responsible for marine and coastal data management, notably the Nairobi
Convention and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO.
Outcome 3: TDAs and SAPs and Associated Sustainability Mechanisms in support of an LME
Approach Adopted
The ASCLME Project now has its new Policy and Governance Coordinator (Magnus Ngoile) on board
and full functional. Magnus has an impressive track record in the evolution and development of policy
and governance initiatives in the marine environment and is well-known both regionally and globally.
On the Policy and Governance front, the new P&G Coordinator and the Project Director attended a
high-level workshop in Singapore at the end of 2008 to discuss Governance in Areas Beyond National
Jurisdiction and presented a paper and a power-point slide show. This effectively described the need
for the LME approach to take into account those areas that are part of the ecosystem but beyond
national jurisdiction (but which might still impact on or be impacted by activities within national
waters). This was well-received and resulted in GEF acknowledging that the ASCLME System
Boundary must expand to include the entire western Indian Ocean which reflects our new partnership
also with the Seamounts Project in southern waters. The ASCLME Project was also adopted as the
global model for developing a mechanism for governance of ABNJ and linking this in with
governance of national waters within the regional LME approach. This has immense implications for
the global profile of the ASCLME Project as well as securing the importance of our work (and
hopefully associated funding) for the next 8 years. This new and innovative dimension to the Project
will be presented and discussed during the forthcoming Steering Committee in the Seychelles.
Following last year's highly successful training programme in Cape Town for regional oceanographic
trainees, ASCLME is planning another such 3-week course in early to mid 2009 using (at the request
of the National Focal Institutions) the same facilities (class and field) in Cape Town. Its is hoped that
ASCLME will once again be able to use the South African vessels Algoa or Africana, as well as
smaller vessels for training on inshore monitoring. Following the success of last year's training
programme, both the FAO EAF Project (Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries) and SWIOFP (South West
Indian Ocean Fisheries Project) have asked to be included as partners so they can send trainees also.
ASCLME trainees will then also be invited to attend the NanSis training programme scheduled for
2009 which will train them specifically on the use of the instrumentation on the Nansen and on
compatible data analysis techniques.
Other CB&T activities include attendance of ASCLME personnel at a number of EAF workshops. A
new CB&T Programme is being developed early this year for presentation to the Steering Committee.
Outcome 4: LME Coordination, Communication and Participation Mechanisms Established
The contract with DLIST was finally approved and signed and the field-work is now well under way.
A further contract with IKM and FOP has been signed for the two ASCLME films (educational and
7
promotional) and filming has commenced. The cost of the educational films is being shared with
WIO-LaB project and this film will also highlight that Project's achievements.
ASCLME has signed or is in the process of signing agreements with a number of new partners include
the FAO EAF Nansen Programme, IRD (French Institute for Research and Development), NOAA (US
National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) and the UNDP-IUCN joint project on
`Applying an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management with a focus on seamounts in the
southern Indian Ocean' (the Seamounts Project).
ASCLME is expanding its very fruitful partnership with NOAA to deploy yet another ATLAS
mooring in 2009 (as well as to service and maintain the existing line of moorings deployed in 2008).
The data form these large oceanic instrument arrays will be invaluable both to ASCLME and the
countries in terms of the LMEs but also for gaining a clearer understanding and predictive capacity for
climatic change. This will increase the level of co-funding from NOAA to nearly US$1.3 million.
Further co-funding is under negotiation through a partnership with the US Navy's Naval Research
Laboratory at the Stennis Space Center in Mississippi. They wish to undertake some cutting edge
seismic water column surveys using new technology, specifically around the Agulhas Return Current
area west of where we would finish our cruise lines in 2009. They have funding but are seeking a cost-
effective platform (ship) from which to operate. ASCLME is acting as a broker to secure the Nansen
and the US Navy has agreed to share data and train local scientists whilst on-board. This will help to
fill in one of our missing gaps re: the identification of the LME system boundary immediately south of
the Agulhas shelf. This constitutes some $500,000 of additional funding for ship's time plus free
access to state-of-the-art survey equipment and training.
Specific mention should be given to the close and mutually beneficial relationship between ASCLME,
SAIAB and ACEP which seems to grow stronger day-by-day. ACEP's support to ASCLME through
provision of a Cruise Coordinator (Tommy Bornman) has been both generous and absolutely essential
to the successes achieved in 2008. In return, ASCLME has managed to secure additional funding to
support Tommy and possibly another assistant for ACEP through our partnership with the Seamounts
project. In return for ACEP's input and support to this additional work, they will receive some support
funding for technical assistance through ASCLME. Logistical and administrative support and the
provision of accommodation from SAIAB is a clear demonstration of commitment by RSA to this
critically important regional project.
GENERAL PROJECT ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT
With the arrival of our new Policy and Governance Coordinator the ASCLME staff complement is
complete. The next Steering Committee is a particularly important meeting as we will be holding it
jointly with our Sister project WIO-LaB (Western Indian Ocean Land-Based Activities). We are still
planning to hold a high-level policy meeting in 2009 for all 3 projects within the ASCLME
Programme. We hope to attract senior level government people (Permanent Secretaries, Director-
Generals) as well as senior representation from entities such as the Nairobi Convention, SWIOFC,
IOTC, etc. This will set the scene for a more permanent Policy Level group to drive the policy and
governance development of the Strategic Action Programmes. The Project's Policy and Governance
Coordinator will be taking a key role in negotiations for this Policy Meeting and will be raising
awareness of its importance in the coming weeks and months.
8
BUDGET UPDATE:
The original project budget for 2008 was $2,333,610. The actual expenditure has been $2,388,175.
This represents an over-expenditure of just 2.3% above estimate which is acceptable considering the
extra work undertaken through the expansion of the sea-going activities toward the end of 2008. It
does mean that the Project is clearly meeting its disbursement targets. Even more accurately, at the last
Steering Committee we had predicted expenditure for 2008 of $2,338,200. This was within 2% of the
actual figure which is a very accurate estimate considering it was predicted 12 months in advance (See
Table 2 below).
TABLE 2:
SUMMARY OF PROJECT BUDGET EXPENDITURES
DRAFT OUTCOME TOTALS
2007
2008
2008
2009
Outcome
Actual
Predicted
Actual
Predicted
1. Information Captured for Development
of the Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis $249,530 $1,180,440 $1,952,406 $1,945,080
2. Long-term LME Data Collection,
Management and Distribution Mechanisms
Established
$19,475
$628,560
$266,681
$506,250
3. TDAs, SAPs and Sustainability
Mechanisms in support of an LME
Approach Adopted
$0
$189,810
$6,274
$476,010
4. LME Coordination, Communication and
Participation Mechanisms Established
$10,162
$334,800
$162,813
$523,530
Grand Total
$279,167
$2,333,610 $2,388,174 $3,450,870
From this Table we can see the following:
Outcome 1: 60% more actual expenditure than predicted. This reflects the unexpected requirement to
extend the research cruise day allocation from the originally planned 35 days to the 119 days that was
used in the final analysis. The increased daily cost of hiring the Nansen alone would have increased
this Outcome budget by $840,000.
Outcome 2: This Outcome's expenditure was 58% less than predicted. This shows a reduction in the
expected expenditure on contracting individuals and purchasing equipment related to data
management and storage. The Project took a deliberate decision to stall this process in order to give
the countries more time to nominate their Coordination Groups and define their needs in terms of
capacity building and data management so that these could be country driven and not defined by the
PCU or the Agencies. The Project would expect to see these activities progress in 2009.
Outcome 3: The MEDA-TDA-SAP process has been redefined and is now delivering first at the
national level before being expanded to the regional level. This important change in the focus of the
Project also creates a more country-driven process with ownership of a national product as well as a
regional product. The re-structuring and the need to set up national level groups with clearly defined
9
ToRs and contracts has resulted in under-expenditure in 2008 which, again, should rectify itself in
2009
Outcome 4: The focus in this Outcome has been on setting up the website and newsletter which are
not major cost items but are time-consuming yet very important in terms of awareness of Project
activities and as a source of information. Major expenditures under this Outcome which were delayed
were the DLIST contract and the promotional film. These expenditures have rolled over into 2009 and
will be reflected in that year-end budget
We can also see that the budget predictions for 2009 are equally as high which reflects again the
emphasis on field data collection, especially through use of the Nansen.
WORK-PLAN UPDATE
There have been quite a lot of amendments in the work-plan over the last 12 months as we fine-tune
the project to try and capture all the additional responsibilities and deliverables which GEF added at
the last minute before approval of the Project Document, especially in terms of coastal livelihoods and
nearshore resources. Furthermore, as new approaches have been identified to address this need, some
of the original proposed timing for delivery becomes inappropriate or redundant. Well over 70% of
the original planned work programme for 2008 has been addressed and completed, while much of the
rest has been rescheduled for a more logical delivery. This should be seen in the context of new
activities that have been progressed which were not in the original work-plan and which have
significantly moved the Project forward. One example is the adoption of the MEDA (Marine
Ecosystem Diagnostic Analysis) approach that has been introduced at the national level. Despite
requiring considerably more effort and input, both from the PCU and from the national coordinators,
this approach adds an important dimension of ownership to the project at the country levels. The
original Project Document had no activities for the development and adoption of these MEDAs which
actually deliver most of the work that will be needed in order to produce the TDAs. This means that
the Project is already well in advance in terms of the structure and logistic for delivering these TDAs
but this is not reflected in the original work-plan. The Project has also expanded its efforts and
activities in terms of coastal studies (coastal livelihoods, artisanal fisheries, tourism assessments)
which were also not in the original work-plan but which the Steering Committee (January 2009)
considered to be an essential part of the Project. In summary, the achievement and deliverables for
2008 have been well in advance of Project requirements despite some re-balancing of delivery time. It
is intended to present a revision of the outputs, activities and deliverables for each Project Outcome at
the Steering Committee meeting to capture this re-focusing within the Project and to ensure Steering
Committee support and concurrence.
Annex 2 (below) shows the original deliveries expected as of January 2008 against actual delivery as
well as notes on realignment and additions to activities.
LESSONS AND NOTES:
Despite the somewhat stressful requirements placed upon the Project to increase its 2008 cruise
schedule from less than 30 days to nearly 120 days, the cruises were immensely successful and we
have to thank many of our local/regional scientists for rising to the call and making the time to get on-
board the Nansen. The feedback from their work was very heartening and we have definitely created a
strong team of scientists in the region for this sort of work.
10
As ASCLME becomes `known' both regionally and globally we find ourselves developing very
valuable and fruitful partnerships with other regional and global agencies such as FAO, IRD, NOAA,
US Navy, etc. Now that we have `proven' ourselves as a Project that can deliver (especially in terms
of the cruises) there is a strong movement to work with ASCLME from those sectors that are at the
cutting edge of ecosystem and oceanographic science.
It is also clear now that the ASCLME project is adopting the role of being a GEF flagship for LMEs.
This became particularly poignant and important following a recent meeting in Singapore entitled
`Workshop on Governance of Marine Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: Management Issues and
Policy Options' which was organised by the Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands, the
National Parks Board, Singapore, and the University of Delaware Gerard J. Mangone Center for
Marine Policy, with funding support from the Nippon Foundation, Japan, and the Global Environment
Facility. This meeting had major global attendance and ASCLME was invited to give a detailed
presentation of its work. Following this, the meeting (including GEF) proposed that the ASCLME
Project should be adopted as a model for developing governance strategies at the LME level dealing
both with areas within, and areas beyond national jurisdiction. This is a very exciting development
which will be shared with the Steering Committee at the next meeting in Seychelles in March 2009.
PRIORITIES FOR ACTION OVER NEXT 12 MONTHS:
The main priorities for 2009 will include:
The Second Steering Committee (and action on its outcomes and decisions)
Implementation of the Coastal Livelihoods Assessment and Data Capture Activities
Development of the National Data and Information Management Plans (these are detailed
plans dealing with data handling, specimen collections, bibliographies and meta-databases)
Allocation of the specialists to the national teams for MEDA and TDA development
Finalisation of WIO habitats assessments contract and commencement of data processing
Finalisation of the Persistent Organic Pollutants contract
Presentation and endorsement of a Policy and Governance work-plan (at PSC)
Further expansion of dialogue with AU and NEPAD regarding overall governance process for
the LMEs (already successfully started in initial meeting in Grahamstown in February)
Assistance to Participating Countries to access the Sustainable Fisheries Investment Fund for
coastal fisheries issues
Further development of the 2009 cruise schedules and partnerships
Finalisation/Implementation of the 2009 training work-plan
Development and implementation of an integrated Stakeholder Assessment and Involvement
Plan
Early drafts of MEDAs completed
Policy Level Round Table group established
--------------------------------------------------
Signature of ASCLME Regional Director
11
ANNEX 1: SUMMARY OF THE FIRST STEERING COMMITTEE AND INCEPTION
MEETING FOR THE ASCLME PROJECT (including Decisions and Agreed Actions)
OVERVIEW
This was the first meeting of the Steering Committee for the ASCLME Project and constituted the first
time since the preparatory phase that the representatives of the countries had gathered to discuss
project issues and implementation. As per UNDP requirements this meeting of national
representatives, agency partners and observers was also used to inaugurate the Project through a
formal Inception Workshop.
The first day of the meeting included the permanent members of the Steering Committee which are the
countries, the executing and implementing agencies and the direct partners/co-funders as identified in
the Project Document. The agenda focused more on issues related to policy, protocol and
management of the Project as well as internal Project issues related to budget and delivery, monitoring
and evaluation.
The second day of the meeting included important national and regional observers and expanded the
subject matter into technical and scientific issues as well as those relating to the modular approach,
and especially long-term governance requirements.
Both meetings were extremely valuable and re-stated the intent for cooperation and understanding
between the countries, the PCU and other partners and observers that promises to evolve into a most
effective, supportive and successful partnership for guiding the Project, coordinating outside of the
project and delivering the overall objectives and outputs that will ultimately be critical and essential to
the sustainable management of these two important LMEs.
The following sections of the summary list some of the specific highlights of discussion and some of
the agreed actions to be taken (the latter in red). The full proceedings of each day's meeting follow this
summary.
SPECIFIC CONCERNS AND DISCUSSION POINTS
The Steering Committee discussed the need for long-term sustainability and ownership of the Project
and concluded that governance and policy issues and support would be critically important to the long-
term success of any LME Project and that these needed to be factored in at the earliest stages in the
ASCLME project. There was discussion regarding the expansion of the project from what was a more
`blue-water' oceanographic research effort to what is now more equally balanced with coastal issues.
This has been generally welcomed by the countries and it was noted that most of politicians and
decision-makers in the countries (esp. Continental Africa) are more concerned with the near-shore
issues than the offshore concerns so that these additions will tend to encourage policy-level support for
the Project. Artisanal fisheries are very important in this respect and should be the subject of clear
policy briefings. However, policy briefings are not the only requirements to achieve stakeholder buy-
in and, at the other end of the spectrum, there is a clear need for community outreach and a need to
forge links between Policy and Community. In this context it was pointed out that the former may
expect/require the latter to forego fishing rights in the interest of overall LME management
It was noted that the ASCLME Project was taking the correct approach in recognising that the TDAs
and SAPs may represent the end deliverables from this project but actually represent the beginning of
12
the overall LME management process and that this is an on-going and long-term process that will need
sustainability in terms of financing, long-term capacity, on-going monitoring and data/information
collection, and political support. It was agreed that there was a need for a clear work programme for
the SAP development at national and regional level with defined focal points, working groups, tasks,
deliveries, etc. The Committee also noted that it was important that the SAP documents also identified
the national structures, mechanisms and long-term resources to implement the SAPs.
The committee discussed and endorsed on the importance of the socioeconomic and cost-benefit
analyses and how these would be vital to `selling' the project and capturing senior level `buy-in' from
policy makers who are more likely to appreciate the importance of the LME approach when supported
by such information on benefits and advantages in terms of long-term economic and social value.
ASCLME should build on what WIO-LaB and the Nairobi Convention are doing at the national level
also. It was considered to be important therefore to explore their activities and achievements. It was
also noted that the EU have undertaken a number of economic assessments and studies in the region
and that these would be valuable for ASCLME. Further information should also be available from
IOTC.
There was general support from the Steering Committee for an ASCLME Programme Approach
incorporating close coordination between the three sister projects (ASCLME, SWIOFP and WIO-LaB)
but this needs to be understood, accepted and `sold' by engaging people and national institutions
which are cross-cutting in the region, as well as regional organisations.
The Committee reviewed the revised structure for project administration and management as
presented. This is as follows:
1.
A Programme Policy Committee (PPC): This will be a higher level committee advising
all three ASCLME Programme projects (ASCLME, SWIOFP, WIO-LaB) and providing
guidance at the policy level towards the development of effective TDAs and SAPs. The level
of representation on this PCC should be at the DDG or PS level or above.
2.
A Programme Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC): This will be a technical level
group comprised of the 3 project managers and key experts from the region, coordinating
action across projects. Although not originally foreseen in the Project Document the Steering
Committee recommended inclusion of ReCoMaP on this Committee as well as other relevant
regional initiatives.
3.
A Project Steering Committee (PSC): This would consist of
3.A. A core membership including one representative from each GEF eligible Country, one
representative from each of ACEP, UNDP, NEPAD, GEF, UNOPS and the Nairobi
Convention, and the Project Managers of the other regional Sister projects under the ASCLME
Programme (WIO-LaB, SWIOFP) as well as ReCoMaP The Steering Committee also agreed
that Somalia should have a special status as a Country Observer.
3.B. A stakeholder membership of additional observer members as agreed by the PSC Core
Membership. This would include donor agencies providing co-finance (e.g. France, Norway)
as well as technical agencies (e.g. NOAA, FAO)), and anyone else invited by the PSC to
attend.
13
4.
A Project Coordination Unit (PCU) Hosted by the South African Government and
based in Grahamstown.
5.
A Cruise Coordination Group (CCG): This group would aim to ensure the most
efficient use of ship's time amongst the Projects. It would also coordinate the inputs from the
individual national cruise coordinators.
6.
Inter-Ministerial Committees (building on existing IMCs in each country as per the
WIO-LaB project).
7.
TDA/SAP Preparation Teams
A question was raised regarding recruitment procedures within the Project. It was explained that all
recruitment processes had to adhere to UNOPS procedures for fair selection and that recruitment of
staff would be done on the basis of merit ("the best person for the job"). It was explained that
recruitment would need to be primarily `local' wherever possible to avoid the significant additional
cost to the Project of relocation and additional benefits for education, medical and pension support.
However, the Project would make every effort to balance this by recruiting consultants and experts
within individual countries for project activities in an attempt to ensure a more equitable distribution
of funding support and capacity building. It was also noted that if there is a source of strong capacity
within the region, then this should be exploited wherever possible to provide training and capacity
building for the less developed parts of the region, rather than bringing in expertise from outside the
region. Counter-parting skilled staff from one country with less experienced trainees from other
countries was in line with the practice of using locals to train locals. The aim should always be to use
expert capacity from within the region to build capacity within participating countries wherever it is
seen to be weak so that, at the end of the Project, there is clear evidence of transfer of skills and
expertise and of increased capacity and more trained personnel where they did not previously exist.
A revised budget and work-plan was presented to the Steering Committee based on a more logical
definition and sequence of Project Outcomes and Outputs (as revised from the original Project
Document). These were approved by the Committee.
DECISIONS AND ACTIONS
Policy and Governance Issues
The Steering Committee were in clear and strong agreement on how vital the issues of policy and
governance are to the success of the LME process. It was noted that this is one of the five LME
modules that usually gets the least attention from Projects and Programmes. It was noted that that the
TDA and SAP need to move forward in concert, together with a simultaneous process of awareness-
raising and sensitisation at the policy level, so key decision-makers are aware of the TDA process and
the significance of the SAP when it arrives at their desks and does not represent a mysterious and
unexpected document. In this context, the Steering Committee discussed the need for a very specific
mechanism that would focus on briefing and informing the policy level stakeholders, and it was agreed
that there should be a dedicated section and activity within the project coordination unit specifically
focused to ensure this vital module receives appropriate attention. Furthermore, the countries
supported the need for a clear policy and governance mechanism and structure, not only at
regional/PCU level but also at national level PCU agreed to develop ToR for a P&G Coordinator,
circulate, and hire as a priority. This person would then be responsible for developing guidelines and
providing support to implement appropriate national policy organs and focal points.
14
Meetings of the Programme Policy Committee and the engagement of the policy-makers could best be
achieved through a two tier approach i) though formal meetings of nominated policy representatives
from each country and ii) through opportunistic meetings dove-tailed into appropriate regional
gatherings of relevant Ministers such as AU meetings, AMCEN or the Nairobi Convention CoPs. It
was noted that an AMCEN (African Ministerial Conference on the Environment) was scheduled for
June 2008 and this would be an opportunity to initiate this process. A. PCU to coordinate with Nairobi
Convention Secretariat and with countries to attempt to organise a brief side-meeting at AMCEN and
to get the ASCLME on the agenda as a brief presentation. B. PCU to develop the necessary ToR and
logistics for a Programme Policy Committee (making use of the new Policy and Governance
Coordinator)
Data, Information and TDA Development
The Steering Committee requested that ASCLME should take a central coordinating role on coastal
and marine data and information management in the region. The Committee further requested that
consideration should be given to the use of one single regional system for all projects dealing with
marine resource data and information management. The ASCLME and other marine and coastal
initiatives could then make their data available to wherever this system is based within the region. It
was important, in this respect to ensure appropriate accessibility and storage as well as compatibility
of formats. PD said that the PCU would bear this in mind in structuring the entire data and information
management mechanism at the national and regional level.
The Committee also made note of the fact that it would be important for the project to provide some
degree of support to the appropriate and selected national institutions for data collection and
management as well as to assist and support the setting up of national working groups for such data
management and collection. The PCU respond by stating that it would provide more detail to each
country on what such support would represent and what would be expected of such working groups.
The Steering Committee agreed that, in view of past sensitivities over data capture and ownership, a
MoU was needed between the countries and the ASCLME Project regarding access to and storage of
data and information used by the Project in defining the TDAs and developing the SAPs. PCU to draft
a MoU using other examples such as SWIOPF. This to be circulated to the countries for review and
discussion.
The ReCoMaP representative noted that there were a lot of areas of similarity reflected in the activities
of the ReCoMaP and ASCLME Projects. It was noted that ReCoMaP could provide ASCLME with a
lot of its data needs and that the training and capacity building objectives would also have similarities.
It was agreed that the two projects should coordinate closely in these areas and that the Project
Director and ReCoMaP representative should develop this requirement.
The Steering Committee discussed the need to ensure that all data used to develop the TDA should be
quality assured. In this context it was agreed that, wherever possible, any new studies or research
carried out or supported by the ASCLME Project should be properly peer-reviewed. In relation to the
expected oceanographic research cruises, it was considered to be imperative that any experts or
specialists working on or with these cruises should be required to produce peer-reviewed publications
from their studies and results.
15
Further discussion on the subject of quality control raised the issue for overall peer review of data for
the TDA. It was agreed that the PCU would develop a peer-review mechanism for assessing and
quality-assuring data for inclusion in the TDAs.
The Nairobi Convention Secretariat is working closely with IUCN on development and
implementation of MPAs and could thus contribute a lot of information to the TDA development
process on Output 1.2.B (Key knowledge gaps in near-shore (artisanal/subsistence) fisheries updated,
nursery areas and other rich biological habitat mapped or otherwise identified using existing
information) and Output 2.2 (A region wide socio-economic valuation of near-shore marine goods and
services is undertaken to gain greater understanding of the social and economic importance of these
areas). The Secretariat representative will communicate with the PCU on possible areas for
collaboration and data sharing.
Following the presentation by ORI on the primary coastal zone issues relating to LME Management, it
was noted that there may be some gaps in both the coastal and offshore issues for the LMES
(including, but not limited to, mariculture, marine pollution and invasive species) ORI would liaise
with IUCN, ReCoMaP and the PCU to provide an expanded list for the PCU to circulate to the
countries. The countries would review these and provide comments and agreement. The PCU would
include the list of required information to populate the TDA in this circulation.
It was noted that it was now vital that countries confirm their priorities on all LME related issues. In
this context, the meeting agreed that a ToR for coastal activities related to ASCLME (along with a list
of priorities for the countries to review and amend as necessary) should be drafted and circulated
around the SC for comment and to move ahead with an action plan. This document should be drafted
through a coordinated effort between EnviroFish Africa, and ORI, CSIR.
It was considered to be equally as important to identify any gaps which were not specifically
addressed in any of the Projects through their signed documents (e.g. marine pollution, invasive
species, and socio-economic study of industrial fisheries. The PCU would send out a formal request to
the countries for feedback on this matter. This would highlight the areas of delivery expected from
each project into the TDA/SAP process so the countries could better identify such gaps.
The meeting discussed in some detail the inherent problem of WIO-LaB completing its TDA and SAP
on Land-Based Sources (which was planned to be part of the overall LME TDAs) well ahead of the
finalisation of the overall TDAs which depend on input from ASCLME and SWIOFP. The concern
here is that the TDA and SAP for WIO-LaB will be finalised some 2-3 years before it is possible to
implement through the ASCLME SAP structure, yet some of the issues are urgent and should be acted
on as soon as possible. It was considered that WIO-LaB should go ahead and implement its LBS SAP
through the Nairobi Convention and not wait for the full LME SAPs to be finalised. There will need to
be discussion about how this can later be embedded in the overall LME management and
Implementation process. In this respect, the meeting decided that the coordination and implementation
of the individual outputs form the three projects in terms of the final ASCLME SAPs is an area that
will require a specific Agenda Item at the next Steering Committee Meeting.
Coordination and Cooperation
ASCLME needs to coordinate with WIO-LaB and other organisations (e.g. ReCoMaP) and initiatives
regarding training needs and activities. WIO-LaB already has some ongoing and planned activities in
this area and has identified stakeholders and institutions through an Education Needs Assessment. An
16
early joint workshop would probably be appropriate. The Capacity Building and Training Coordinator
to liaise with WIO-LaB and identify other groups for coordination.
WIO-LaB is also undertaking some similar activities to those listed in ASCLME Output 4.1 Effective
and frequent communication and coordination established among the IAs, the various projects under
the programme and other related initiatives and institutions in the region, including linkages with
other GEF supported projects in Sub-Saharan Africa and globally and these should also be closely
coordinated between the two Projects PD, Communications and IT Coordinator and Policy and
Governance Coordinator to identify specifics and liaise with WIO-LaB Project Manager.
WIO-LaB specifically requested to work very closely with ASCLME in development of their ToR for
Coastal and Socioeconomic Studies in view of high potential for overlap but also for valuable
coordination PD to ensure that Warwick Sauer, ORI and IKM coordinate closely with Peter Scheren
on this.
ASCLME needs to coordinate with WIO-LaB over POPS POPs Coordinator (DAL) to liaise with
appropriate WIO-LaB people via Peter Scheren.
The Committee noted that there were overlaps between WIO-LaB's activities in relation to IW
Coordination and those of ASCLME. WIO-LaB and ASCLME to coordinate on amalgamating the IW
Coordination Meetings (WIO-LaB responsibility) and the Sub-Saharan Africa LME Coordination
Meetings (ASCLME responsibility).
Project Management and Steering Committee Functions
The Committee discussed in detail the role of Somalia in the Project. It was clarified by UNDP that the
Project could not send people to work in Somalia or schedule research vessels into Somalian waters,
but that it could support them financial through payments to Somalian experts for provision of data
and information (particularly existing data and the development and capture of RS and modelling
data), and for attendance at workshops and at the Steering Committee meetings if the Committee so
desired. The Committee agreed to create a specific membership category for Somalia as Country
Observers on the Steering Committee and also agreed that the Project should fund the attendance of an
appropriate representative.
Countries requested some guidance on the practicalities of initiating and implementing the project
activities in each country PCU to provide the countries with a clear national work-plan and resource
requirements ASAP. This to include information on appropriate level of Steering Committee
representation and the requirement for a National Coordinator, requirements for an Inter-Ministerial
Committee (In coordination with WIO-LaB), required working groups for TDA and SAP
development, Cruise Coordination, Capacity Building and Training, etc. This will also identify the sort
of financial support each country can expect.
The Steering Committee discussed the set up of ASCLME Project and Programme websites and
identified the possibility of keeping independent websites but sharing a common portal at the
Programme level. It was felt that a meeting of IT experts from the countries/region would be
appropriate to develop recommendations and mechanisms for such website coordination between the
ASCLME Sister Projects PCU to task the new Communications and IT Coordinator with this
coordination role and with setting up such a meeting/workshop when that person comes on-board
hopefully in April.
17
The Steering Committee felt that there was a requirement for a continuous process of monitoring and
evaluation of activities and deliverables to `progress-chase' the Project Outputs which would be an on-
going, project-driven process separate from the scheduled Independent Mid-Term and Terminal
Evaluations. The PCU agreed to develop a mechanism to this effect with consideration given to
identifying a specific activity.
The meeting considered the proposed new organisational structure related to the Outcomes and
Outputs as presented by the PCU and requested that a new organigram be developed that would clarify
this structure at the national, regional and PCU level, as well as defining the linkages between the
Sister Projects and the ASCLME Programme. The Project Director agreed to circulate such an
Organigram as soon as it was feasible to finalise this structure, and before the next Steering Committee
meeting.
The Committee discussed the format for future meetings. It was agreed that in future there would be
an overall ASCLME stakeholder meeting with all Steering Committee members and Observers present
plus any appropriate additional invitees. This would be followed by a meeting of the Permanent
Steering Committee members as required and consisting of the countries, the ASCLME Sister
projects, ACEP and UNOPS. This Permanent Steering Committee Member's meeting would provide
an opportunity to discuss more sensitive and diplomatic issues affecting the countries or the agencies.
The meeting noted that there had been very little discussion of the role of the private sector in the
ASCLME Project and it was agreed that this should be a specific Agenda Item for the next Steering
Committee Meeting.
The Steering Committee discussed the timing of its next meeting. It was agreed that, if feasible, the
next meeting would be held consecutive to the next WIO-LaB Steering Committee meeting, unless the
latter was too early in which case a separate meeting would be scheduled for later in the year.
Capacity Building and Training
In discussing the planned training and capacity building for oceanographic and ecosystem monitoring
skills, it was agreed that the `trained' personnel should be encouraged to present peer-reviewed
publications from their cruise work to WIOMSA.
It was recognised that wherever possible the project would use local and regional expertise in
accordance with the policy to train from within. However, it was agreed that if it where necessary to
use expertise from outside of the region, it would be a policy of the Project to ensure that there was a
contractual obligation on the part of such external expertise for counter-parting and to undertake
training of local capacity.
Sea-Going Research and Data Collection
The priorities for oceanographic and ecosystem assessment/monitoring cruises was presented to the
Steering Committee with the clarification that this annex from the project Document was now several
years old. It was agreed that A. the proposed cruise schedule for use of available ships in 2008
(training in the first part of the year followed by an ecosystem monitoring cruise off East Madagascar)
would be adopted as the initial schedule and B. the priorities list would be reviewed by regional
oceanographic experts(s) and circulated back to the countries and C. a regional cruise coordination
18
workshop would be arranged by the PCU to discuss this and adopt the schedule for the remainder of
the Project (with the proviso that this could be amended as necessary to fit in with vessel availability).
In order to ensure effective use of vessels it was agreed that the countries would provide a list of A.
Oceanographic expertise available for the various cruises and B. a list of appropriate trainee scientists
based on criteria provided by the PCU and agreed by the Steering Committee members.
The Committee also discussed the need for national level cruise coordination as well as regional level.
It was agreed that each country would nominate a focal institute and person for cruise coordination
within country to provide the information on expertise and potential trainees available as well as to
assist in securing permits for vessels and personnel to enter and work in the countries.
The Committee discussed the subject of sea-going allowances. It was considered by some to be an
unnecessary expense as A. all expenses on the vessel were already covered by the Project and B. most
oceanographers would consider it a professional privilege and an excellent opportunity to be able to
get research time on good research vessels. Others noted that a precedent had been set through the
BCLME project and that some government departments in the participating countries also paid sea-
going allowances. No conclusion was reached on this and a decision will need to be made by the
Steering Committee before the Nansen cruises start later this year. The PCU will lobby members for
their input and opinion.
The Committee noted that The R.V Nansen had undertaken a number of cruises through the region in
the 1970's. It was felt that this data would be of significant value to the preparation of the TDA and
particularly as a comparative data set for assessing ecosystem level changes. The Committee therefore
requested that the ASCLME PCU should clarify the available data from these cruises and take
whatever measures necessary to repatriate this data into the region for use by the Project and the
countries.
19
ANNEX 2: WORK-PLAN DELIVERY FOR 2008
OUTCOME 1: INFORMATION CAPTURED FOR MEDA-TDA DEVELOPMENT
2008
OUTPUT DELIVERABLES
J F M A M J J A S O N D
OUTPUT 1.1: Review existing data in region pertinent to ASCLME TDA and SAP development
(including the collection, repatriation, synthesis and storage of country and regional data, and the
repatriation of extra-regional data and information)
A. Information and Capacity Building Specialist identified X X
and contracted
B. Formally-adopted D&I Working Group Report
X
C. Agreed priorities for data collection and `gap-filling'
X X
D. Work programme and Budget for data collection and
X X
`gap-filling'
OUTPUT 1.2.A: Identify and prioritize ecosystem assessment and ecosystemic process information gaps
in key oceanographic areas of the ASCLMEs along with work-plans, cruise schedules, budgets and
responsibilities
A. Oceanographic experts identified and contracted
X
B. Revised and adopted list of Priorities for ASCLME X
Ecosystem Monitoring and Mapping
C. Project Cruise Plan and Schedule including training X X X X X
exercises both onshore and offshore (with timetable and
budget). This Cruise Plan to be closely coordinated with
SWIOFP and ACEP, as well as WIO-Lab where appropriate.
D. List of expected products from each cruise as an Annex X X X X X
to the Cruise Plan and Schedule
OUTPUT 1.2.B: Key knowledge gaps in near-shore (artisanal/subsistence) fisheries updated, nursery
areas and other rich biological habitat mapped or otherwise identified using existing information
A. ToRs developed, sub-contractors identified and sub-
Activity under revision to expand data
contracts signed
collection activities in-country
OUTPUT 1.2.C: Management and Policy needs identified as part of root cause requirements for TDA
development (national & regional)
A. Create ToR and contract short-term regional X X
governance/policy expert
N.B. Full-Time position created
B. Develop a Project Workplan for Governance and Policy X X
and filled at request of Steering
Coordination
Committee
C. Contract long-term Governance and Policy Specialist
X X
OUTPUT 1.3: Active offshore and coastal oceanographic data collection to fill gaps in ecosystem
assessment and status as necessary for development of TDAs and SAPs
A. Identify cruise coordination mechanism for ASCLME X X X
Project
B. Identify and contract person responsible for cruise X X
coordination
20
C. Cruise coordination agreement (including details of X X X
equipment requirements and sources as well as formal
agreement on ownership/sharing of data)
D. Sub-Contract with FAO for 2008
X
E. Sub-contract with FAO for remainder of project
F. MoU/Agreement between ASCLME and ACEP on use X X X
and deployment of SA research vessels
G. Coordinated Cruise Logistics Plan and Work-programme
X X X
for each year of project
H. Individual Cruise Reports based on adopted reporting
X X
protocol
I. Distribution list for cruise reports
X
OUTPUT 1.4: Baseline information obtained on persistent organic pollutants (POPs) within the LMEs
through use of key indicator species
A. Identify and recruit POPs Expert
X
B. Workplan, budget and timeline
Still under negotiation with University of
C. Final report on POPs and associated indicator species for
Réunion
use in TDA and SAP
OUTCOME 2: INFORMATION MANAGEMENT AND HANDLING TOOLS AND PROCEDURES ADOPTED
2008
OUTPUT DELIVERABLES
J F M A M J J A S O N D
OUTPUT 2.1: LME based indicators linked to national and regional M&E mechanisms are developed
and captured within institutional work programmes and budgets
A. LME Indicator Specialist recruited and contracted
Activity under revision to build on ecosystem
training workshops and to work with each
country to develop country specific ecosystem-
focus M&E Programmes with support to
B. ToRs for development of M&E Programmes and institutions and equipment (as per discussions
Indicators at national and regional level
at Regional COG Meeting
C. Report from national Workshops including information
Regional CoG Meeting discussed monitoring
cited above
needs
Discussion of LME requirements at regional
D. Report from Regional Workshop with requirements for
Workshop. No formal LME Indicators
LME Monitoring
adopted as yet
Specialist M&E team to work in each country
E. Nationally Adopted Work Programmes and Annual to develop M&E programme - this activity to
Reports
resume in 2009 with new in-country deliveries
OUTPUT 2.2: A region wide socio-economic valuation of near-shore marine goods and services is
undertaken to gain greater understanding of the social and economic importance of these areas
A. ToR developed for Socio-economic Survey sub-
Socio-economic Survey reformulated into a
contract
Coastal Livelihoods Analysis (focusing
primarily on nearshore artisanal and
B. Sub-contractors identified
subsistence fisheries and tourism) and an
C. Adopted Study Plan for Socio-Economic Survey
Ecosystem Approach Cost-Benefit Analysis
OUTPUT 2.3: National and regional data handling, storage and synthesis focal centres are established
21
A. Formal list of National Data Management Focal X X X
Institutes
B. Report from the Regional Workshop on Data
X X X
Management
C. Report from National Workshops on Data Management
X X X
and Handling
D. Formally adopted Regional and National Data X X X X X
Management Plans including work programmes and
budgets for capacity building
E. National Data Management Centres and Regional Data
This information provided by Data and
Management Node Annual Reports to ASCLME Information Coordinators from each country
Programme
OUTPUT 2.4: Use of GIS and predictive models expanded to increase systems knowledge
A. Identification of Work-Group and planning/convening X X
of workshop
B. Report from Working Group on GIS and Remote
Sensing data handling and management needs, along with
X X X
a work programme and budget that also addresses training
and capacity building at the national and regional level.
C. Reports from training workshops
X X X
D. Annual GIS/RS data management reports
X X
OUTCOME 3: TDA AND SAP ADOPTED WITH APPROPRIATE SUSTAINABILITY MECHANISMS
2008
OUTPUT DELIVERABLES
J F M A M J J A S O N D
OUTPUT 3.1: TDAs are negotiated and approved by technical stakeholders
X X
A. TDA Development Coordinator identified and recruited
New MEDA approach developed to
supersede TDA development. Work-plan
and Budget presented to Regional CoG
B. Overall Project TDA Formulation Work-Plan and Budget
meeting in October 2008
C. National Lead Agencies identified/established
X X X
D. MEDA stakeholder consultation plans adopted
X X
E. National MEDA Work-Plans and Budgets
X X X
F. Report from Regional MEDA Stakeholder Workshop
X X X
OUTPUT 3.2: SAPs are negotiated and adopted by Governments
IMCs adopted in some countries. P&G
Coordinator to pursue through formal
A. Interministerial Committees adopted and active
visits
P&G Coordinator to visit all countries
first to stress importance of Policy-Level
B. Policy Level Programme Steering Committee established group. Waiting for delivery of ASCLME
and active
promotional film
22
OUTPUT 3.3: Financial resources are brokered to ensure financial sustainability of monitoring,
evaluation and information systems to support the LME approach
A. Fiscal and Governance Sustainability Advisor recruited
Scheduling revised as a result of new
MEDA-TDA approach. Fiscal review now
falls under part of MEDA development
B. National Specialists identified
Process scheduled for second half of 2009
C. Donor Consultation and Communication Plan
Donor consultations also now re-
scheduled to follow on from MEDA
process - realistic dates for Donor
Conference would be late 2009 or early
D. Donor Information Update Reports
2010
OUTPUT 3.4: Institutional, programme and human capacity building requirements are identified and
addressed through training initiatives
A. National CB&T Specialists identified
X X X X
B. Specialist Training Advisors for Oceanography and Coastal X X X
Survey/Assessment identified
C. CB&T Working Group established
X X X
D. Preliminary Training and Capacity Building Analysis Report X X
(National and Regional Level)
E. Report from Regional Workshop on current and planned
X
T&CB initiatives and needs
F. Regional Work Programme (as defined above) for T&CB
X X
To be developed now in 2009 as part of
the national MEDA process through
G. National level Work programmes in similar vein
dedicated national CB&T Coordinators
H. Annual T&CB Implementation Reports
X
OUTCOME 4: COMMUNICATION, COORDINATION AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCEDURES IN
PLACE TO SUPPORT LME PROCESS
2008
OUTPUT DELIVERABLES
J F M A M J J A S O N D
OUTPUT 4.1: Effective and frequent communication and coordination established among the IAs, the
various projects under the programme and other related initiatives and institutions in the region,
including linkages with other GEF supported projects in Sub
A. Formal coordination mechanism (technical and policy level) Technical Coordination groups adopted.
established and adopted
Policy level still under negotiation
B. Annual Reports from ASCLME Programme Policy and
Technic
Technical Coordination Committees
al Only
Global meeting of LMEs called instead
C. Reports from Sub-Saharan Africa LME Stakeholders
in 2008. Only sub-Saharan LME in
meetings on "Best Lessons and Practices'
attendance was ASCLME
D. Annual Report to Steering Committee from Policy and X
Governance Coordinator
OUTPUT 4.2: Key policy stakeholders sensitized and engaged in LME process through appropriate
packaging and presentation of LME information and concepts
X X
A. Key Policy Level Stakeholder's list established and adopted
23
OUTPUT 4.3: Stakeholder engagement, public involvement, participation, and environmental education
initiatives are developed and implemented in the region
A. ASCLME Programme website active with individual project X X
pages
B. Annual Reports from DLIST programme
X X
X X
C. Annual Work Programme and Budget for Distance Learning
Media
F. Work Programme for use of Resource Materials and Media
Outreac
Outreach
h only
24