UNEP-UNIDO-GEF PROJECT ON DEMONSTRATING AND CAPTURING BEST
PRACTICES AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR THE REDUCTION OF LAND-SOURCED
IMPACTS RESULTING FROM COASTAL TOURISM

OPTIONAL ANNEXES

Annex D: Threats and Root Causes and Barrier Analysis
Annex E:
Stakeholder Involvement Plan Summary
Annex F:
Summary of National Reports
Annex G: List of SCTSSA-related, GEF supported or funded initiatives in Africa
Annex H: Endorsement Letter from NFPs and Co-Financing letters (separate files)
Annex I:
Project Conformity with OP 10 Requirements
Annex J:
List of Private Sector Partners and Letters of Endorsement
Annex K: Project Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
Annex L:
Response to GEF Secretariat and Implementing Agencies Reviews at Submission

ANNEX D

THREATS AND ROOT CAUSES AND BARRIERS ANALYSIS
AND PROPOSED INTERVENTION LOGIC

The following Table of Analysis identifies the Threats and Root Causes in the context of the overall
Project Objective, i.e. What tourism-related impacts are threatening those marine and coastal
ecosystems of transboundary significance within the participating countries, and what issues and
concerns are acting as barriers to the adoption of more sustainable tourism approaches that would
effectively mitigate or remove such threats? Nearly all of the coastal and marine areas of these
countries have a potential or real transboundary significance that is or could be threatened by
inappropriate tourism activities and development. The coral reefs, wetlands, mangroves and seagrass
beds of the various participating countries represent important feeding and breeding grounds for
species that naturally migrate along the coast and that have planktonic stages that frequently settle
many 100's of miles from their origins (e.g., corals, lobster, etc). Quite a number of these species that
are of transboundary significance are also of commercial importance as well as critical to the balance
and well-being of the coastal and marine ecosystem. These same areas are also attractive to tourism for
development both in relation to their basic recreational nature (sun, sea , sand and culture) and in the
context of ecotourism related to the presence of these same ecological high-interest natural resources
(coral reefs, wetlands, mangroves, charismatic and endangered species, etc). This can create a conflict
of interest between the need to conserve and protect this coastal biodiversity and the demand to exploit
it for socio-economic benefit. The immediate dollar value is seen in relation to expansion and
development but currently at the expense and gradual obliteration of coastal biodiversity and natural
resources. Foremost among the threats are the impacts originating from land-based sources such as
contaminants and pollutants. The GEF OP10 aims to demonstrate barrier removal through adoption of
best practices and has a particular focus aimed at strategies for addressing land-based activities that
degrade marine waters. The Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine
Environment from Land-Based Activities lists pollutant categories as sewage, persistent organic
pollutants, radioactive substances, heavy metals, oils and hydrocarbons, litter, nutrients.

The overall risk at he global level therefore is the loss of significant transboundary marine and coastal
ecosystems, and the underlying causal threats and negative impacts resulting from tourism are listed
below (Column 1) along with their proximate causes (Column 2). Column 3 presents the Overall
Management Issues & Key Barriers and effectively summarises the set of root causes that need to be
addressed in order to mitigate and remove the impacts and causes identified under the two previous
columns. Column 3 thereby identifies the single integrated issues or barriers for intervention and/or
removal. Proposed solutions for such interventions and barrier removal are captured in the following
column (4). Column 5 describes any on-going baseline activities that may be addressing these issues
through regional level interventions.

D-1

Threat/Impact
Causes
Synopsis of Overall Management
Solutions: Interventions from
Baseline activity
Issues & Key Barriers
Project / Barrier removal
(The Root Causes)
activity
A. Brown-water and
Ineffective legislation addressing
Need for improved institutional
Realignment and streamlining of
Institutional and legislative,
Grey-water
pollution and contamination
arrangements between the key
institutional arrangements based on policy reviews have or will
discharges from
coupled with inadequate
agencies involved in tourism and
a review of current capacity and
soon been initiated by other
tourist amenities
monitoring and enforcement of
the environment, to improve
operations, adequacy of structure
regional projects (such as

legislation
coordination and local community
relative to sustainable tourism and
UNEP/GEF WIO-Lab and
B. Hydrocrabon

and private sector participation.
to remove overlap and clarify
GCLME), will provide a basis
discharges from
Appropriate treatment

mandates (e.g. environmental
for further review, but they
tourism-related
technologies (method and price)
Need for a more integrated set of
monitoring) and improve local
will not be specific to
vessels
for potential pollutants and
legislations, policies and
stakeholder and private sector
sustainable tourism

contaminants unavailable or
management strategies dealing
involvement
development.
C. Solid
contaminants
unknown to developers and private with pollution & contamination,

resulting from
sector
land zoning and use, protected
Reforms to existing legislation and Some countries are already
dumping and tipping

species/habitats and sensitive
policy in the participating countries making efforts to revise
(land-based) and
Limited use of Environmental
areas, natural resource exploitation based on a review of needs and of
national level legislations and
flotsam and
Management Systems and
(e.g. fisheries, water resources),
other successful case studies for
tourism related policies. In
jetsam(sea-based)
Accounting within the tourism
innocent passage and access and
effective legislation and policy in
most participating countries,

sector (linked to lack of incentives) incentives for environmental
other tourist destinations
Environmental Management
D. Sediments
from

management systems and self-

plans as well as Tourism
tourism-related
Appropriate mass treatment
regulation,.
Development and implementation
Management Plans are being
activities
facilities not provided by

of an effective information and
developed or have been
(construction
government or by private sector
Need for baseline information on
data gathering and management
prepared, others are
activities,

tourism and environmental
process to support coastal land-use developing ICZM.
deforestation,
Inappropriate allocation or
carrying capacity and a mechanism management, environmental

removal of coastal
approval of lands for development
to monitor on the impacts of
monitoring and zoning
A dialogue between public
protection/filtration

tourism on the environment, and

and private sector is being
functions provided by Absence of formal guidelines for
feed the information back to
Development and implementation
gradually developed. Some
wetlands and
developers and for tourist activities decision makers.
of a targeted information delivery
countries already classify and
mangroves)

mechanism with a two-way flow
licence hotels using

Poor awareness of importance of
Need for proper mapping and
allowing appropriate advice and
environmental criteria (e.g.
E. Noise
pollution
ecosystem functions such as
zoning that addresses sectoral land
guidance to reach decision-makers
Kenya), guidelines for EMS
impacting on senstive coastal protection against wave
use, critical habitats, ecosystem
and enabling decision-makers to
and environmental audit are
wildlife areas
action, soil stabilisation by
services, and community/
identify data and information needs being developed by others
(nesting, breeding
vegetation, filtration properties of
individual rights in terms of public for policy development
(e.g. Seychelles).
and feeding sites)
wetlands and mangroves, etc.
access, land tenure and livelihood

Identification of training needs
Some countries (e.g. Kenya
Absent or inappropriate
Insufficient numbers of trained
across a wide range of stakeholders and Seychelles) have
designation or management of
human resources to monitor
(CBOs, NGOs, CSO, Gov
undertaken coastal habitat
sensitive areas requiring special
compliance and to enforce
authorities/agencies & private
mapping and sensitivity

oversight or protection
legislation
D-3
sector) and evolution /
mapping. Methods /

implementation of training and
presentation could be

Threat/Impact
Causes
Synopsis of Overall Management
Solutions: Interventions from
Baseline activity
Issues & Key Barriers
Project / Barrier removal
(The Root Causes)
activity
2. DIRECT DESTRUCTION AND DEGRADATION OF

COASTAL AND MARINE ECOSYSTEMS
A. Land Clearance for Inadequate or absent legislation
construction purposes and policy relating to zoning of

coastal areas for development,
B. Reclamation
and management or protection
infilling of habitats

Perception that certain coastal
C. Physical
damage habitats are valueless and
caused by
expendable
recreational activities
(snorkelling, diving, No accountability among tourism
anchor damage,
operators
boating impacts, etc.)

Inadequate legislation for
protection of habitats and species
coupled with inadequate
monitoring and enforcement

3. UNSUSTAINABLE USE OF NATURAL RESOURCES
BY THE TOURISM SECTOR

D-4

Threat/Impact
Causes
Synopsis of Overall Management
Solutions: Interventions from
Baseline activity
Issues & Key Barriers
Project / Barrier removal
(The Root Causes)
activity
A. Overharvesting of Inadequate or absent legislation

living resources for and policy relating to fisheries
consumption and
(zoning, resource rights, quotas,
trade related to
catch size limits, methods and
tourism (fishing,
allowable gear, etc) coupled with
curios and
inadequate monitoring and
memorabilia)
enforcement of said legislation

B. Inappropriate
Unethical/unsustainable demand
harvesting techniques for living-resource curios
that damage habitats
and species
Inadequate or absent legislation
(dynamite fishing,
and policy relating to exploitation
sand-mining, coral- of natural resources coupled with
mining)
inadequate monitoring and

enforcement of said legislation
C. Excessive
water
abstraction depriving Limited or no control over water
ecosystems of a vital allocation, management and use as
life-support
a result of ineffective policy,
commodity
legislation and/or enforcement and

limited self-regulation by the sector
D. Other
conflicting, to promote water re-use and
specific needs for conservation
land-use creating

competiton between Inadequate or absent sectoral
human demands and zoning for land-use and limited
ecosystem
protection of critical or senstivie
requirements (e.g.
areas
agricultural land,

beach access. Fish Absence of effective legislation
landing sites)
protecting rights of free and

innocent access or recognising

common lands

D-5

ANNEX E

STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT PLAN

The primary stakeholders in this Project at the national level will be the various government agencies
responsible for tourism and for the management and protection of the environment, especially at the
coastal level, the private sector working directly and indirectly with tourism, the coastal communities
and those with livelihoods that depend on or conflict with tourism and the competing uses for the
coastal zone and associated habitats and resources. In reality all coastal dwellers and those engaged in
activities along the coastlines of the participating countries will be stakeholders to a greater or lesser
extent. At the regional and global level the stakeholders will be various signatories to environmentally-
related Multilateral Environmental Agreements (e.g. CBD, CCD, Nairobi Convention, Abidjan
Convention, etc) and all individuals and organisations associated with the sustainable management and
conservation of global biodiversity. The stakeholder participation plan per Project output is outlined
below along with details of the key stakeholders, their roles and interest in this Project, and any
potential sources of conflict and associated mitigation measures.

The project preparation involved a significant amount of stakeholder consultations at a number of
levels. During the UNEP/GEF-MSP development process under the African Process, eleven countries
worked collaboratively to identify priority areas for intervention. Later during the GEF PDF-B process
for the development of this current project, each participating country held national stakeholder
consultation processes and produced national reports providing situation analyses with respect to
coastal tourism and environmental impacts

COMPONENT 1:
CAPTURE OF BEST AVAILABLE PRACTICES AND TECHNOLOGIES

Output 1.A:
Identification of Best Available Practices (BAPS) and Best Available Technologies
(BATs) (on a global scale) applicable to sustainable tourism within the sub-Saharan
African situation

This Output primarily focuses on capturing information from case studies all over the world (including
the participating countries) that will provide valuable information for the guidance, design and
implementation of appropriate national strategies for sustainable tourism management. This will
involve a number of stakeholders in tourism and environmental issues outside of the system boundary
and the expectation is that this will generate new working partnerships and professional linkages to
individuals and agencies around the world that have similar concerns and interests. This should result
in the evolution of a valuable network of stakeholders at the global level who, although not always
having a `stake' in the precise activities happening within the participating country, have a global
concern and interest in sustainable management per se. Of course, all of the coastal stakeholders
within the 9 participating countries will benefit from this Output and a number, especially in the
private sector, may gain significant advantages from the identification of appropriate technologies and
other benefits that could be gained through tri-sector partnerships (e.g. efficiency and cost-savings
associated with resource use, corporate reputation, competitive advantages etc.). In the interests of the
incremental nature of GEF and the need for global benefits it should be noted that the benefits gained
by the private sector in this sense would be transferred to the objectives of the project and the global
aims by way of improvements in sustainable tourism management and the protection and maintenance
of important transboundary ecosystem functions.

Output 1.B:
Implementation of National Demonstrations to elaborate Best Available Practices
(BAPs) and Best Available Technologies (BAPS) for Sustainable Tourism

The identification and endorsement of the national demonstration sites and activities followed a
detailed stakeholder consultation process including an integrated problem analysis which was used to

E-1

identify Hotspots and Sensitive Areas (as part of the African Process). During the PDFB phase of
project, participating countries prepared National Tourism Reports through a stakeholder consultative
process, and identified eligible demonstration projects. Guidelines for the country reports included a
basic set of criteria to help countries identify suitable sites on the basis of: the availability of the basic
tourism features, background information, the presence of sustainability issues and the willingness of
local stakeholders to participate. The private sector was involved throughout this process and was
represented on the National Steering Committees and at National Stakeholder Meetings. Full details of
this process and the requisite stakeholder participation are given in Appendix A. The draft proposed
demonstration sites and thematic project descriptions went to a final stakeholder meeting in each
country for final endorsement before inclusion in this Project document.

Stakeholder involvement during the actual implementation of the more specific, on-the-ground
deliverables associated with the demonstrations will be considerable. A list of some of the
organisations (private and community based) that will be involved in the project are listed in Annex
A2 of Appendix A, and it is anticipated that more organisations may become involved at inception
following the National Partnership Meetings (Output 5.3). The Demonstrations that are dealing with
Environmental Management Systems and Eco-certification will require close liaison with and
involvement of the private tourism sector including in-house training in methods and techniques. The
Project will attempt, where possible, to undertake such training on a group basis both for reasons of
economy as well as to encourage the development of stakeholder networking and partnerships.
Demonstrations that are addressing alternative livelihoods will be working closely with community
level stakeholders, and particularly individuals who may need guidance with tourism-related
employment, or in improving their eco-friendly approaches and reducing impacts from their activities.
The Project will encourage group consultation and feedback from communities and tourism operatives
as well as fishermen and others who may find themselves in conflict with tourism operators and the
tourist industry. This would addressed through workshops and information field-trips and the Project
would assist in conflict resolution and identifying solutions to any such issues.

COMPONENT 2:
DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF MECHANISMS FOR
SUSTAINABLE TOURISM GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT

Output 2.A:
National reviews and assessments of policy, legislation, institutional arrangements and
financial mechanisms to identify needs and requirements

Effective and comprehensive stakeholder consultation will be essential during these reviews if the final
assessments are to be accurate and if all opinions and issues are to be properly aired and reviewed so
as to arrive at accurate conclusions and recommendations. Both the public and private sector have a
strong vested interest here in ensure that their opinions and inputs are properly considered and
recorded before the project moves to Output 2.B.

Output 2.B:
Development of model guidelines and individual national strategies and work-plans
for Sustainable Tourism based on 2.A and the Outputs from Component 1

Although the obvious and direct stakeholders here would be various line management agencies in
government and those bodies dealing with fiscal, legislative and policy measures, it will be important
also to liaise closely with those stakeholders who are most likely to be affected by any reforms. These
would include developers, contractors, tourism activity operators. These reforms will also have
implications for enforcement personnel such as police officers. Consequently the evolution and
development of such reforms and financial mechanisms will need to include regular opportunities for
consultation across all sectors and for stakeholder workshops to enable varying points-of-view to be
considered and discussed. Proposed new financial mechanisms (or alterations to existing ones) will be
of particular interest where the burden of payment falls on specific groups or sectors. The Project will
endeavour to make Output 2.A and 2.B a consecutive process ensuring the same stakeholders are
involved in the interests of transparency and accuracy.

E-2

Output 2.C:
Implementation of individual national strategies and work-plans for Sustainable
Tourism

The same stakeholders appertain to Output 2.C as to the previous two Outputs. It will be important to
arrange feedback workshops after implementation has begun to capture any concerns and needs for
fine-tuning or amendments to the Strategies. The Independent Terminal Evaluation of the Project will
be a vital instrument in advising the Project and its stakeholders on the success of this Component.
However, Post-Project evaluation is an important and necessary concept and activity that must be
captured. The concept of sustainable tourism and associated management mechanisms is by essence
dynamic and will inevitably need further revision and improvements and the Project will need to work
with the countries and stakeholders to ensure that provisions are left in place for such requirements.

COMPONENT 3:
ASSESSMENT AND DELIVERY OF TRAINING AND CAPACITY
REQUIREMENTS EMPHASISING AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO
SUSTAINABLE TOURISM

Output 3.A:
Assessment of national baselines and requirements within various sectors

Again training and capacity will be a multi-sectoral issue within the Project. Much as in 2.A. above,
the initial reviews and assessments will need to include all affected stakeholders. It may be that the
private sector has strong opinions on some of the training and capacity building necessary within
government departments and vice versa. No doubt the private sector itself is in need and would wish to
benefit from training and capacity building in more sustainable tourism practices that reduce wastes
and protect the landscape that is necessary for the continuation of a successful tourism business.
Appropriate stakeholder meetings will be organised by the Project and a final Assessment document
will be made available to interested parties in both the public and private sector.

Output 3.B:
Development of sectoral model packages and guidelines for national dissemination

Similar consideration applies here as in Output 2.B. Training packages will need to be focused at
appropriate groups of stakeholders although there should be flexibility allowed here by the project
inasmuch as there is value in allowing individual or groups from outside the obvious target group to
participate where they feel interested or may have a particular concern. Any opportunities for sharing
the issues and concerns of various stakeholders so as to propagate better understanding and chances for
discussion and explanation should be encouraged by the Project as part of its role in conflict-
resolution.

Output 3.C:
Adoption and implementation of national programmes for T&CB (with agreed work-
plans) targeting relevant sector

It will be important to have work-plans and schedules for implementing training programmes and any
capacity building exercises or procurements to ensure that A, appropriate numbers and types of
persons receiving the training and B. that the training is relevant to the national situation, especially in
relation to the deliveries form Component 2. The stakeholders related to particular packages or
programmes of training should be clearly identified but, again as mentioned under 3.B, with sufficient
flexibility allowed.

E-3

COMPONENT 4: INFORMATION CAPTURE, MANAGEMENT AND DISSEMINATION

Output 4.A:
Establish a Regional Information Coordination House (RICH) and an associated
Environmental Information Management and Advisory System (EIMAS) that
coordinates information and provides guidance and materials for the capture and
analysis and dissemination of data pertinent to Sustainable Tourism.

This Output addresses an enormous number of stakeholders across all sectors and throughout the
world. The primary stakeholders would, of course, be those agencies and individuals that rely on
precise and accurate information and data presentation upon which to base management and policy
decisions. In this respect the interest of such stakeholders have been well-addressed by the Project
through the EIMAS approach at both regional and national level and the incorporation of a two-lane
contra-flow information `highway' allowing information to be delivered to primary stakeholders but
also allowing them to request specific information. The RICH will help to coordinate the information
needs at the Project level to deal with the requirements of the various Outputs and their associated
stakeholders.

Output 4.B:
Identify national data capture and management needs (including GIS, mapping,
zoning, monitoring, presentation, etc)

The primary stakeholders for this exercise will be those agencies and individuals within the
government who dealing with mapping, zoning and GIS management. These will be the immediate
target of consultations and assessments regarding needs (as well as existing capabilities). However,
other stakeholders that should not be overlooked include developers, public works managers, and those
persons responsible for protection and management of the environment (especially in relation to
designated Parks and Protected Areas). Etc. These people may have valuable insights and may wish to
identify their own personal requirement sin the context of data capture and management

Output 4.C:
Develop national models for Environmental Information Management and Advisory
Systems (including feedbacks between data gathering and policy-making needs).

Again, the Project would need to consult with the same stakeholders as under Output 4.C. The
requirements of the line managers and policy makers should not be overlooked here. They will need to
have opportunities to define their information needs and to specify the most suitable format for
delivery.

Output 4.D:
Implement national work-plans for EIMAS adoption and institutionalisation

Stakeholders will be similar to Output 4.C and 4.D but careful consideration will need to given to the
work-plan and time schedule in relation to human resource needs and government plans, as well as to
the prioritisation of information needs. The most appropriate body/agency will need to be selected for
hosting a national EIMAS and this may not always be the most obvious or indeed the one chosen at
the initial stages of the project as an Information node.

Output 4.E:
Develop and implement national delivery programmes for targeted awareness
packages and policy level sensitisation

Important consideration will be needed from the Project and its management as to how these specific
packages would be delivered to their target audience. Certain stakeholders may be able and willing to
assist the Project and the NGO community is an obvious source of expertise and manpower that could
be requisitioned in the interests of

E-4

COMPONENT 5: PROJECT MANAGEMENT COORDINATION, MONITORING AND
EVALUATION

Output 5.1:
Establish Project Coordination Unit

Primary stakeholders here will be the National Focal Points, the EAs and the IAs as well as the host
country. However, in the long-term all of the participating countries as a whole should be stakeholders
depending on the fate of the PCU and the need for responsibilities defined during the Project lifetime
to be adopted through some other agency.

Output 5.2:
Establish Regional Coordination Mechanisms (Steering Committees and Technical
Advisory Groups)

The Regional Project Steering Committee membership will represent the stakeholder interests of the
countries as well as of the Implementing Agency (UNEP) and the Executing Agency (UNIDO). Other
stakeholder members may also be adopted onto the RPSC as appropriate (for example, from the
Nairobi and Abidjan Conventions and from NEPAD). The Technical Advisory Groups will represent
the technical interests of the countries. Both groups (Steering and Technical) will effectively be
representing the interest also of the various MEA Conventions.

Output 5.3:
Establish National Coordination Mechanisms (Interministerial Steering Committees
and Technical Advisory Groups)

National Stakeholder Committees will represent the policy and management concerns of stakeholders
at the country level and the Project will provide guidance on membership to ensure that this is both
effective and fully participatory. To achieve this the membership will need to be multi-sectoral and
with representation from the private sector and community level. Likewise for the National Technical
Advisory Groups which should also include NGO participation.

Output 5.4:
Adopt appropriate indicators and necessary M&E procedures (including assessment
and evaluation of post-project sustainability)

This is an important Output under which stakeholder participation needs to be carefully evolved and
encouraged. The actual success indicators for Project delivery (which are built into the Logical
Framework will be assessed and evaluated through a formal independent process driven by the PCU
and the IA. However, there is also a vital need to adopt and measure indicators more appropriate to
sustainable tourism and which can identify trends is such areas as water quality, maintenance of
ecosystem functions, welfare of biological habitats and species, social indicators of improvements,
financial indicators of economic growth, etc. The Project will define and agree on the most appropriate
indicators through its national and regional coordination mechanisms during the earliest stages of
project implementation, and will then work closely to identify the most appropriate stakeholder groups
to collect and process these indicators.

E-5

ANNEX F

SUMMARY OF NATIONAL REPORTS

Summary:
Although the tourism industry in each of the participating countries has unique characteristics and is at
different levels and stages of development, the growth of hotels and associated tourism infrastructure
in each of the participating countries is generating negative environmental impacts on sensitive coastal
and marine environments, which will be further exacerbated in the absence of improved environmental
management practices by hotels. At the same time, while the sustainability of the tourism industry
itself depends on a clean and attractive environment, in the absence of legally enforceable
environmental standards there is a tendency for many hotel developers to focus on profitability in the
short term. In some regions of the world, notably in Europe and North America, the tourism industry
has started to address environmental concerns, partly as a result of stricter environmental laws and
partly is response to consumer demands. However, in sub-Saharan Africa, tourism development is
generally taking place in the absence of such controls and consumer pressures. The project aims to
mitigate and reduce the environmental impacts of the tourism industry in coastal and marine areas
through implementation of a number of demonstration activities which will then be used as the basis
for wider application within each participating country.

Cameroon
Cameroon offers a surprising diversity of landscapes on the base of which the Ministry of Tourism
sales the destination with the slogan "The whole Africa in one country". In its southern part, the
country is covered by the humid equatorial forest which has made possible the constitution of parks
(Korup National park) and reserves (Dja reserve of biosphere). Mount Cameroon (4100 m) is one of
the highest spot of sub Saharan Africa. In North of the country, many games reserves (Waza, Benou�,
Bouba Ndjidadah). With its 360 Km of coastal line, the country shows a wide range of coastal
ecosystems, ranging from mangroves near the Nigerian boarder to the surprising beaches with brown
sand at the foot of Mount Cameroon. Southwards, the most beautiful beaches are in Mouanko,
Souellaba and Yoyo. Surprisingly, this huge potential is yet to be taped. The institutional awareness on
tourism started 45 years ago with the creation of the National Tourism Board. But it's only in 1989
that a whole Ministry will be created to develop this sector. Despite this political willingness to
develop tourism the sector input in GDP is only 2.3% (2003). According to the National statistics
directorate, tourism is ranked 13th among the first twenty branch of activities. Coastal tourism seems
to receive more attention. In the framework of the National Environmental Management Programme
(NEMP) coastal and marine ecosystems where identified as fragile ecosystems. To enable the
sustainable use of coastal resources, with the support of UNIDO, the country elaborated the Country
Coastal Profile. Recently, a presidential decree created a specific board (MEAO) whose purpose is to
submit guidelines for the management and tourism development in the southern coast of Cameroon.
Benefiting from the recent decentralization law endorsed by the national assembly, the municipalities
of the Kribi Campo coastal area decided to request technical support in order to draft an integrated
coastal zone management strategy. This was achieved thanks to SNV (Dutch Development
Organization) . The plan was endorsed by the Ministry of Plan and development. An intercommunal
Tourism Office is currently being implemented in Kribi. WTO is supporting the Ministry of tourism in
developing pro poor tourism activities through STEP (Sustainable Tourism to Eliminate
Poverty).These efforts are far to addressed the problems of coastal tourism in the country. Among
them, lack of physical planning, poor infrastructure, lack of coordinating mechanisms are the more
crucial. Te country suffers also from poor marketing of the destination, high international travel cost,
high entry fee. As a result of the above, even though some beaches still pristine, where there is no
problem of access, human pollution, illegal settlements (Londji beach), and mangrove degradation
(Yoyo beach) constitute serious concern. Every where, occupation of sea front by private investors
seems to accelerate natural erosion (Kribi, Limbe). Among the major threats on coastal areas, pollution
by industries (Industrial palm oil and rubber plantation in Kribi) Oil industries in Kribi and Limbe)
appears as the more critical one. Recently, the Ministry of Tourism completed a National tourism
strategy in which there is component on coastal zone tourism and another one targeting ecotourism.

F-1

On its side the Ministry of Environment and Nature protection is drafting guidelines on EIA and EMS.
Despite the fact tourism occupies the 13th position among the 20 best income generating activities, it's
consider by the presidency as the 5th priority sector for sustainable development. If lack of
enforcement and poor regulatory framework continue to hinder the development of this sector, the
private sector will continue to invest in sensitive areas. With no policy of capacity building and
awareness, local community will maintain the pressure on coastal natural resources. It's a pity to note
that in the Cameroonian case, success story in community based ecotourism from grassroots are not
rare (Ebodj�, Mount Cameroon). It's not late for Cameroon to tap its immense tourist potentialities and
protect its rich but fragile natural ecosystems. The root cause of the problem here is rather institutional
than linked to natural factors. This programme appears as a unique opportunity for the country to
demonstrate alternative approaches to sustainable coastal zone management. Cameroon should also
take advantage of the fact it is part of the GCLME whiwh targeted Kribi as a pilot demonstration site
for ICZM.

Gambia:
In The Gambia, tourism was introduced more than 40 years and there is increased pressure exerted on
coastal beaches as a result of rapid expansion and intensification of the tourist industry along the
coastal areas. The tourism industry has become a leading sector in the national economy, with direct
and indirect benefits estimated at 17% of GDP.. The sector is also one of the country's largest sources
of foreign exchange. Net foreign exchange earnings are projected to increase from an estimated $40
million in 2004 to $130 million in 2020. Tourism generated employment is projected to increase from
an estimated 16,000 jobs in 2004 to around 35,000 jobs in 2020. This level of economic impact makes
tourism economically significant to The Gambia and to the Gambian people; In the Gambia, this sector
provides employment for about 10,000 people directly and 15,000 people indirectly. Present bed
capacity is estimated at just above 6,000 beds. Tourist arrivals are increasing annually, as the number
of (tourist) hotels nearly doubled from 18 in 1989 to 33 in 1997.

The majority of these hotels (and beach bars and restaurants) are situated along the 80 km stretch of
coast. North of Serekunda, the Atlantic Coast resorts of Bakau, Fajara, Kotu and Kololi are the heart of
Gambia's tourist industry, with some 20 hotels along a 10km stretch of beach. At the Southern end of
the coastal strip at Kololi is the small wildlife reserve, Bijolo Forest Park, and just upstream from the
capital, Banjul, is the Abuko Nature Reserve. The long-term vision sees tourism in The Gambia
developing through ten differentiated Tourism Development Areas (TDA's)

Tourism and related activities are having an impact on the coastal vegetation because of the
construction of lodges and tourist camps along the estuaries where large areas of mangrove vegetation
are being removed. During the period 1972 to 1988 the forest cover of The Gambia declined from
some 30% of total land area to just 6%. Much of the remaining natural heritage is protected in national
parks and reserves that cover around 4% of the national land area. The Nuimi National Park, situated
in the northwest corner of the country, gazetted in 1996 proposed as a Ramsar site, is also under
pressure from the expansion of tourism including the building of more guesthouses Tourism
development along the coast has also changed much of the natural environment. Beach erosion is a
major threat to coastal tourism in The Gambia. Information is compiled from various sources,
including National Reports, World Tourism Organisation (WTO), and the Regional Tourism
Organisation for Southern Africa (RETOSA). 3 (1993 figure) habitat from Cape Point South to Bijilo..
The key institution leading tourism sector in the Gambia is GTA (Gambian Tourism Authority). The
Tourism Master Plan developed reviewed recently under the supervision of this authority highlighted
among other as key issues for tourism in the country the bumster problem which appears as key
priority for the country. The diversification of community based enterprises in tourism (eco tourism) is
also a priority as it appears as an income generating activity as well as an effective response to address
drift to urban areas. In this regard, the Kartung ecotourism project and the Makasutu culture forest are
considered as success stories even though improvements are awaited. They are selected as pilot
demonstration project for the country. Even though coordinating mechanisms were identified as
weaknesses, GTA is planning to improve its relations with NEA (National Environment Agency) in
order to address environmental issues related to tourism development.

F-2

Ghana:
In Ghana, tourism is an emergent key source of national income contributing an estimated US$400
million to the GDP of Ghana. It is currently the 4th largest foreign exchange earner in the country. Its
peaceful atmosphere and stable political climate make it a good choice for investors. As far as coastal
tourism is concerned, the country is endowed with a wide range of both natural and historical
potentialities. Thus, Ghana's coastline extends for about 550km and is generally low lying ( 200m
above sea level). The coastal zone of Ghana abounds in rich marine ecosystems coupled with
considerable historical monuments. Generally concentrated along the coast are attractive old forts and
castles built by Europeans during the period 1482 to 1837. The forts and castles which initially served
as trading posts for the trade in gold and ivory were later used as slave dungeons and transit points for
slaves who were shipped to the Americas. Currently a number of the forts and castles including Cape
Coast and Elmina castles have been designated as UNESCO World Heritage Sites. Ghana's castles
attract several thousands of international and domestic tourists annually. It must be noted that all
along the coast of Ghana, relatively improved road infrastructure is available. Ghana is one the West
African country with high class resort (e.g. La Palm Royal Beach Hotel, Elmina beach resort as well as
Busua beach resort). However, poor sanitation and management of human wastes in the coastal
settlements could adversely affect patronage of beaches by foreign tourists. In addition, sewage
pollution from major cities, like Abidjan in Cote d'Ivoire, has in the past resulted in algal blooms on
the western coast of Ghana, which besides creating serious problems for artisanal fishermen also
reduces the aesthetic value of the beaches. Plastic bags and other solid waste constitute in several
points of the coast a serious concern. This has recently led to a project of collection and recycling of
plastic in Central region of Ghana. The historic city of Ada, which is a major tourist attraction, has lost
some 150 meters of land (from the Volta estuary to Otrokpe ) to the sea as a result of coastal erosion
over the past 45 years. Other beaches suffering from erosion are The Keta coast (form Dzelukofe to
Blekusu); This led to the Keta land reclamation project. The Labadi beach which is seriously attacked
from Osu to Kpeshi lagoon). The mangroves and wetlands in Ghana are threatened and steadily being
destroyed as a result of fuel wood gathering, clearance for salt pans by the Salt extraction Industry,
urban Pollution and urban encroachment. The destruction of mangroves and wetlands affect biological
diversity and eventually pose a threat to coastal eco-tourism particularly bird watching activities. Sand
and gravel mining on the beaches although banned continues to be main supply source for construction
of houses in the smaller towns and settlements. It is one of the causes of coastal erosion. The exposed
pits from the quarries affect the aesthetical attractiveness of these areas. Despite these problems Legal
Framework for Coastal Zones and the Tourism Industry is regularly reshaped to offer a good
framework to address the above difficulties. But enforcement is yet to be successfully implemented.

A study by Ghana's Ministry of Tourism, UNDP and World Tourism Organisation in 1996 (National
Tourism Development Plan for Ghana, 1996-2010) noted that the entire Volta estuary offer good
beaches, quiet water areas for marine recreation and a serene environment suitable for picnicking,
walking and boating. In 2004 the sector contributed US $800,000 and created 180,000 jobs with
650,000 international arrivals. The Government of Ghana has a projected an income of about US $274
million from employment of 307,000 persons in the tourism industry by the year 2010 from tourism. It
further expects that net foreign exchange earnings will be US$1,250 million and total tourism receipts
of US $1,562 million. Contribution of tourism to gross GDP is expected to rise from 3.9% in 2000 to
7.4% in 2010. Trends in the contribution of the tourism sector to the economy of Ghana indicate a
steady rise. For example tourist arrivals in Ghana rose from 92,000 in 1986 to 146,000 by 1990. It is
further estimated that almost 300,000 arrivals were recorded in 1995. In terms of contributions to
GDP, receipts from tourism were 0.45% in 1986 and rose to 3.5% in 1995. It is projected that GDP
contribution will reach a gross 7.4% by 2010. Nominal receipts also rose from US$ 27 million in 1986
to US$237 million by 1995. Ghana's tourism development plan targets the coastal zone as one of the
centres for growth. In view of the above any degradation that could put tourists at risk will result in the
non-achievement of the set targets. It's important to point out that in some high class resorts, (Labadi
Beach Hotel, La Palm Royal Beach, there is a growing awareness on environmental management
systems. Efforts of overcome difficulties related to lack of coordinating mechanisms are being made.
The private Tourism sector association is very active in the country.

F-3

Kenya:
The coastal economy of Kenya is heavily dependent on maritime and harbour activities, fisheries,
commerce and tourism. In Kenya, tourism has been steadily growing both in terms of numbers and
revenue generated since independence and it continues to be one of the most important economic
sectors in the country. Tourism contributes 12.5% of the GDP to the country, of which, coastal tourism
accounts for 60%. Even though safari tourism has been for years the main tourist product for East
Africa, coastal region is currently the main tourist destination for both national and international
tourists (visitors). Immediately after independence, tourism was the fastest growing sector of the
Kenyan economy. Only coffee and tea production brought in more foreign exchange. Income from
tourism first exceeded that from coffee in 1989. Between 1990 and 1993, 3.23 million foreign visitors
came to Kenya, representing about 5% of the tourist trade in Africa and about 28% of that of Eastern
Africa. However, besides the positive gains from tourism, the sector also impacts negatively on the
coastal and marine environment. The first hotels in the northern part of Diani were built in the late
1960s/early 1970s, and over time it has grown to become Kenya's most developed beach resort. Beach
front property that priced at 1,000s of Kenya shillings an acre 30 years ago are now sold in the range
tens of millions. The result has been exclusion of fishing and other local communities from prime land
with beachfront access; the northern part of Diani has already lost three traditional fishery landing
sites, In the past, intense competition has existed between fishing and tourism and development
interests, with the latter succeeding in taking over beach-front land and conversion of many public
access routes to private property.

Mass tourism is at the origin of the key issues in coastal areas in the country. In Malindi, resorts are
constructed without any serious feasibility study. Cases of encroachment on fishing landing sites and
marine parks and privatization of beaches are numerous. Lack of physical planning in the coastal zone
has two main consequences: a) the development of resort at the sea front resulting in the acceleration
of beach erosion (Mombassa) ; b) occupation of sensitive habitats by local communities with it's
effects on biodiversity loss. Tourism activities in the coral reefs (Diani � Chale coral reef, Malindi
coral reef...) cause direct pressure e.g. boating and reef walking, whereas collection of ornaments
including shells and ornamental fish for the tourist market add indirect pressure on the coral
ecosystem. Generally, with the exception of protected areas, most coral reef areas along the coast are
under pressure from over-exploitation. Land development activities that increase pressure on the issue
include urbanization attributed with 30%, agriculture sector 30% and the tourism sector with 25%.
Coastal urban centres, including Mombasa, experience poor waste management because of inadequate
(as in Mombasa) or non-existent waste disposal facilities and infrastructure, such as sewage treatment
and/or sewerage facilities. Regulations are generally framed out but there is a critical problem of
enforcement, related to poor institutional governance. This is surprising in a country where private
sector seems to be well empowered and organized. Nevertheless, lack of an institutional framework
that would facilitate public-private partnerships in undertaking activities that would minimize the
negative impacts of tourism remains is a serious challenge. On the other hand, there is lack of
coordination with neighbouring countries in respect of developing tourist facilities and promoting
regional tourism, despite the fact that the country depends on and often share the same ecosystems as
it's coastal neighbours for tourism. Despite these problems, there is a growing awareness on the issue
of responsible tourism. Success stories generally come from the community based ecotourism projects
(e.g. Wasini, Watamu, Mida creek). Some key National and Regional institutions however have basic
capacities to address these constraints. Thus the NEPAD Coastal and Marine (COSMAR) Sub-theme
of the NEPAD Environmental Initiative has been established within the Ministry of Environment and
Natural Resources and is hosted through a Secretariat based in Nairobi. With the support from Global
Environmental Facility COSMAR has the responsibility to develop and protect the marine and coastal
environment. Another positive aspect is the experience of The Kenya in Eco-rating Scheme which is a
voluntary initiative by the Kenya tourism industry designed to further the goals of sustainable tourism
by recognizing the efforts aimed at preserving environmental, social and cultural values. The
Ecotourism Society of Kenya launched the Scheme in October 2003. Nevertheless, the country is yet
to succeed in minimizing the environmental and the socio cultural negative impacts of mass tourism.
Tanzania claims their sustainable tourism strategy aims at avoiding the difficulties Kenya is facing to
sustain this sector.

F-4

Mozambique:
Historically, Mozambique had a thriving tourism industry, mainly in the centre and south of the
country, with (the former) Rhodesia and South Africa providing the main markets. In recent years
tourism has re-emerged and is now one of the fastest-recovering sectors of the economy, with most
tourists coming from South Africa. The tourism potential of Mozambique speaks for itself, with 2700
km of tropical coastline, abundant nature and a rich cultural heritage. Tourism contributed 1.2 per cent
to the national GDP of Mozambique (Ministry of Planning and Finance); this is very low, compared to
a contribution of 8 percent in South Africa and an average contribution to GDP of 6.9 percent to GDP
in sub-Saharan Africa. As a prospective investment sector, tourism is doing well however. Tourism
accounted for 16% of total investment applications in Mozambique over the last five years (period
1998 � 2002). This makes tourism, with a total investment of 1,3 billion USD, the third largest sector
for investment in the Country, after Industry (33%) and Energy and Natural Recourses (18%).
Inhambane Province ranks at the third place as the favourite destination for tourism investment
applications, after Cabo Delgado and Maputo (data: CPI).
Tourist arrivals increased from 136,000 in 1994 to about 550,000 in 1996, and 400,000 in 2001 and
contributed 2% of GDP. The opportunity exists to develop both these historical markets and the
markets of the north, as Mozambique has excellent potential for both coastal and wildlife based
tourism. In 2000 there were 157 hotel establishments with 2,978 rooms and 5,382 beds. However, the
poor development of infrastructure and unsustainable tourism practices poses a major threat. Conflicts
over natural resource utilization (i.e. between tourism developments and local communities and
protected areas) is also a problem. Coastal tourism is well developed in the southern part of the
country, south of Save River. Beautiful sandy beaches and extensive corals characterize this region,
and tourism has expanded rapidly after the end of the civil war in 1992. Many areas in the southern
Mozambique are now experiencing tourist pressure due, in part, to uncontrolled tourism development.
Several sites of natural beauty and important biodiversity resources are particularly threatened, such as
Inhaca Island (located in the Maputo Bay) and Matutuine, where there are plans for developing a large
tourism industry that could threaten endemism. The Bazaruto Archipelago site that is threatened by the
development of tourism, which if not controlled may surpass the carrying capacity. The Marromeu and
Zambezi Delta wetland areas located near the Zambezi delta, is an important breading site for
migratory birds and also supports a variety of (terrestrial) wildlife, is another area of significance to
tourism. Corals and mangroves are also under some threat from tourism development, and represent a
threat to local communities that often have an important dependency on such resources. In a nutshell
the main threats of the tourism sector in Mozambique are the environmental impacts and loss of
marine resources through uncontrolled growth of tourism and local fishing techniques, the
uncontrolled growth and development of the tourism sector and the weak level of participation of local
communities in tourism sector.
Recognizing the opportunities in economic growth through tourism, the Mozambican Government has
created a separate Ministry of Tourism in 2000 and approved in April 2003, the National Tourism
Policy and Strategy. It's important to note that the responsibility for Conservation Areas was
transferred from the Ministry of Agriculture to the Ministry of Tourism in 2001. This statement in the
country TMP shows it's not a mechanic association: "Where conserved areas are well managed and
tourists enjoy their exposure to them, they form a constituency that supports conservation".
Mozambique, together with other countries from the region, made a strong commitment in the World
Summit in Johannesburg, to boost the protection of its coastal and marine resources. Actions are well
advanced in Mozambique for the creation of Ponta de Ouro Coastal/Marine Protected Area to be
linked with Saint Lucia Marine Park in South Africa to form a Transboundary Marine Protected Area.
This activity is being carried out within the Lubombo Spatial Development Initiative linking
Mozambique, Swaziland and South Africa. The same is happening in Northern Mozambique where
actions are being implemented to create a Marine Protected Area north of Quirimbas Marine National
Park, in Cabo-Delgado Province, to be linked with Mnazi Bay Marine Park in Southern Tanzania. In
its Strategic Plan for the Development of Tourism (Draft Version, April 2003), the Government has
identified 17 Priority Areas for Tourism Development (PATI's) that will be the focus of tourism

F-5

planning and resources. Of these zones 8 have been identified as short-term priorities, 3 as medium
term priorities and 6 as long-term priorities
Nigeria:
Nigeria is known to have many ecotourism potentials, which unfortunately are yet to be harnessed for
generating employment opportunities and foreign exchange. Nigeria's involvement in the preparation
of the African Process (Management of the Coastal and Marine Environment in sub-Saharan Africa)
already was a sign of the existing political will by the country to endorse positive development
activities towards the proper management of coastal areas. Tourism is becoming one of Nigeria's
fastest growing industries. Many areas along the coast are exceptionally favourable to coastal tourism.
Nigeria has a coastline that is rich in natural resources which stretches for over 700 kilometres and
dotted with small coastal settlements which engage primarily in farming, fishing, and trading. The
Calabar coast for example is blessed with natural attractions like game reserves, a national park with
variety of rare primates, birds' and other fauna. In addition, beautiful coastlines exist in Badagry and
Akassa areas.
Less than 4% of GDP comes from tourism and in 2000 only 800,000 tourists visited the country. The
total income derived from these arrivals was USD 800,000. This poor level of development is due to
the fact that the country has greatly planned it's development with a strategy of over dependency on oil
and gas. For decades, Nigerian tourism industry used to put more emphasis on inland tourism which
focused on cultural and natural areas of significance. Nevertheless there is growing interest in the
development of tourism and a suitable framework for tourism development is being prepared. In 1960
Nigeria had 1,129 forest reserve. These reserves serves, which have abundant flora and wildlife such
as, drill monkeys. Nigeria has the third largest rainforest in the world, which is located in Cross River
State. Today only 40 exist due to deforestation. Game reserves in the northern part of the country are
also areas crying for tourism development. However the country still lacks facilities, efficient means to
develop many sites for tourism. Various factors have contributed to the positive and negative influence
on tourism development in Nigeria. These factors consist of: a. Economic constraints b. Social
constraints Tourism development in Nigeria will assist in reducing unemployment and there by
alleviate poverty.
The current National Tourism Policy recognizes the appropriate use of Beach Fronts in the country and
proposes relevant institutional arrangements for such areas. The strategies and plans for the
implementation of the tourism policies as contained in the draft tourism policy (2004) are focused on
four main pivot areas. In 1992, the Federal Government promulgated the Decree No. 81 of 1992. This
replaced Decree No. 54 of 1976 which established the National Tourist Board (NTB). The new
Decree thus scrapped the National Tourist Board and replaced it with the Nigerian Tourism
Development Corporation (NTDC).
One of the major threat on coastal tourism in the country is pollution from exploration and exploitation
of petroleum resources. Most of these activities take place in the coastal areas. Inadequate treatment
and disposal of wastes from the petroleum industry inflict severe damages on the eco-system. The
effect on the soil and on economic crops is even more devastating as extensive agricultural lands have
become unproductive due to environmental hazards arising from spillage and other oil exploration
activities. It's a pity that the Lagos waterfront blessed with a marvellous lagoon stretching linking
Lagos to Badagry has not yet found appropriate responses to address the solid and liquid waste issue
due to lack of enforcement and poor physical planning strategy. Some local government. (Cross river,
Akwa Ibom, Lagos) have proved their commitment to promote and develop sustainable coastal
tourism. While Badagry relies on it's slave trade relics, Cross rover has been able to attract private
investor in a unique tourist and trade complex project in sub Saharan Africa (Tinapa). The Akwa Ibom
Coastal Tourism Project Area incorporates the major components of tourism (Ecotourism, wildlife
and landscape features, Culture, 5 star resort with marina). With the promulgation of various enabling
laws at federal and state levels along with the establishment of relevant institutional arrangements, the
development of coastal tourism in Nigeria has begun in earnest. The establishment of Niger Delta
Development Commission, the preparation of National Tourism Policy, and the National Tourism
Master Plan are some of the positive actions taken by the government to ensure effective development
of tourism.

F-6

Senegal:
The tourism industry in Senegal has grown at an annual rate of around 10% over the past 3 decades
and now ranks as the second industry in terms of foreign exchange earnings (78.7 billion CFA francs
in 1995), and contributes about 4.6% to GDP..Between 1973 and 2002, the grow rate of the hosting
capacities is estimated at 6,5% per annum; the number of beds is multiplied by 6, going from 3340 in
1973 to 8600 and 19729 respectively in 1982 and 2002. The night's stays followed the same tendency,
574 293 to 1 701 703 respectively in 1973 and 2002. The arrivals, with more than 85% non-residents,
doubled since 1994 due to the local currency (FCFA) devaluation which gave more competitiveness to
Senegal as a destination. The industry accounts for around 75,000 direct jobs, some of which are
seasonal. Arrivals reached 369,116 in 1999, and 530,000 in 2000. In 1999 there were 245 hotel
establishments and a total of 17,586 beds. Establishments range from four-star hotels (luxury) to
villages/camps ("campements villageois"), which is regarded as an innovation in "discovery tourism".
Most tourism development has been centered on the coastal zone, while there has been only limited
environmental management. The coastal areas constitute more than 90% of the tourist destinations.
Balneal tourism being the first product (54.3% of the night's stays in 2000). Almost all the tourism
infrastructures are in the coastal zone. The country is endowed with a total coastal line of 700 km
among which 300 km of sandy beaches. Tourism is especially well developed along the South Coast
and on the coast of Casamance. In the Saloum estuary, a big estuarine complex with a drainage basin
of 29 720 km2, tourism is one of the main activities, although it is not as developed as along the South
Coast. The National Report of Senegal identified an urgent need of improved planning and
diversification (ecotourism, discovery, game fishing etc.) of the tourism sector. While attention is
being given to the development of tourism, especially in coastal areas, far less attention is being given
to the social and environmental impacts. A unique Ministry deals with Tourism and Environment.
Senegal has set up a 3 levels SDP: Consultation frameworks, Planning and setting of a legal
framework and a Regulatory framework. The Decentralization law (1996) allows the transfer of NRM
to local communities. This strategy gives priority to community based protected areas. A 4 years
Action Plan involving all the actors (public/private) has been set up. From a General Delegation
(1969), Secretariat of State (1980) a whole Ministry was created for Tourism as from 1983. Efforts to
increase hosting capacity from 1000 rooms in 20 hotels to 5000 rooms in 115 hotels between 1978 and
1985. The Senegalese Tourism Strategic Plan sets itself the target to accommodate 1.3 million
international tourists by 2010 An Environmental Audit of tourism decided by the government revealed
the lack of basic drainage infrastructures in most of the tourist sites which were established without a
prior Impact Study. Nevertheless, few isolated initiatives of good EM practices were described:
(recycling of treated used water by Saly Portudal station). Coastal tourism in Senegal is facing (12-
18m between Ngaparou and Mbour ). Unplanned land use in tourism attractive areas resulted in
anarchistic occupation of the coast. So, the surface occupied by houses tripled from 1978 to 2001.The
beaches surface dropped drastically (105 ha in 1978 to 35 ha in 2001) around Saly station. In
Casamance and in the Saloum islands, destruction of the mangrove less by the touristic infrastructures
than by the populations themselves is a long term threat for the expansion of tourism in the zone.
Still some problems are yet to be addressed: the Lack of basic infrastructure (roads, electricity, water
and sewage facilities) Overlapping roles and mandates in land policies. Government is making efforts
to sustain the sector. Thus, SAPCO is a parastatal in charge of the promotion and the development of
coastal areas in Senegal. They have already planned the Saly station in la Petite C�te. Nowadays the
errors of planning as well as the negative social impacts identified in the Saly station are taken into
account in the process of conceiving new tourist development areas (Mbodienne). Capacity building in
GIS, physical planning and EIA exit in the country, the CSE (Center of Environmental Monitoring)
has been participating in elaborating ecological maps and carrying on sensitive zones surveys in
Senegal as well as in some neighbouring countries (Gambia). Interesting examples of community
based ecotourism can be visited in Ngasobil and in Saloum Islands. Important potentialities are
available also in a great variety of Birds Reserves, (Djoudj, Kalissaye), National Parks and Reserves
(Low Casamance, Langue de la Barbarie, Madeleine Islands...), archaeological sites (Saloum
Islands).But, there is no structured exploitation of these sites yet (no reliable hosting infrastructures, no
policy of promotion, lack of training, poor local sensitization).. If the issues of physical planning and
waste management are properly addressed, therefore the country can achieve it's goal of strengthening
tourism sector while preserving the ecosystems.

F-7

Seychelles:
Seychelles tourism industry started to take off in the early 1970's, following the opening of an
international airport in 1971. Since then tourist arrivals grew to around 50,000 per year in the early
1980s, to a peak of 130,955 in 1996. While arrivals declined slightly between 1996 and 1999, they
recovered to 130,046 in 2000 and 132,246 in 2002. Tourism is the most important pillar of the
Seychelles economy through direct and indirect contributions to the domestic economy (GDP), and
through inflows of foreign currency, including tourism receipts and foreign direct investment. Receipts
from tourism have increased steadily from SR 353 million in 1986, reaching about SR750 million in
1999. In 1999 tourism was calculated to contribute about 29% of total export or foreign exchange
earnings of the country, approximately 5,000 direct jobs or about 17% of total employment and about
20% of the Gross Domestic Product. Being constituted of a number of islands, the Seychelles can be
considered as coastal zones in their entirety. Given the fact that the hinterland of the main island is
constituted with heterogeneous relief characterised by steep slopes, thus roughly 90% of human
settlement and infrastructure are located on the coastal areas of the country. The above situation
explains why Seychelles is exclusively a coastal tourism destination, characterised by a sun sand and
sea label. In other words the contribution of tourist sector of 18.5% to the country GDP must be
attributed to coastal tourism. The growth in the tourism industry has largely been the foundation for
the remarkable advances in national socio-economic development achieved by Seychelles. In order to
sustain previous levels of socio-economic development, and also to meet the rising expectations of the
population, Government has found it necessary to promote the further growth of the tourism industry.
This will inevitably result in increased pressures of coastal and marine ecosystems, despite
Government's policy to promote sustainable tourism development, as is highlighted in the soon to be
published document "Vision 21: for Tourism Development 2001-2010 which starts with the following
statement: "Tourism in Seychelles shall continue to be developed to the highest standards for the
optimum social and economic benefits of the Seychelles people while maintaining a commitment to the
protection and conservation of the natural environment and biodiversity" In particular, the targeted
growth in tourist arrivals from 130,046 in 2000 to around 190,000 by the year 2010 will place a huge
strain on the carrying capacity of coastal areas that are considered as prime sites for tourism
development, particularly on the main islands of Mahe, Praslin and La Digue, as well as on natural
resources such as water. A major threat of such growth in the tourism industry, which was identified in
the National Report, is related to the modification and loss of sensitive marine and coastal habitats as a
result of continued beachfront development. There are 11 new hotel projects planned over the next 4
years which will add 2000 beds. Given the fact that Seychelles is a mountainous granitic island, the
narrow coastline concentrates almost all the economic activities including tourism. This narrow
constructive zone is subject to floods with consequences on high level of water table and related
consequences on sceptic tanks which are likely to contaminate fresh water. The main ecotourism sites
of the country are Vallee de Mai, Aride Island, the Botanical Gardens, Cousin Island, The Morne
Seychellois National Park. An Ecotourism strategy has been drafted in September 2003. Some of the
key issues addressed by the ecotourism strategy are : Eco-tourism activities related to the natural
environment, Marine related activities, Community based tourism, Cultural heritage, Handicrafts,
Public beach parks. The involvement of local communities is recognized as a major objective of this
policy. The first EMPS provided the government with a valuable instrument to plan and manage the
Seychelles' environment. In terms of project management the EMPS has been very successful and
about 90% of the projects have been implemented or are under implementation. A coordination unit
has been set up to ensure that the new EMPS is integrated across sectors and that the broader
principles of the EMPS are incorporated in all programmes

Following the example of Kenya, Seychelles has recently started to elaborate a voluntary scheme for
hotels. Green Globe is now trying to set up a more inclusive approach for sustainability certification of
hotels. It's seems there is an institutional awareness on the importance of certification scheme as it
could increase the exclusivity of Seychelles as tourism destination. So, VISION 21 has requested the
introduction of Eco-label and Eco-certification schemes in the hotel industry. One of the main goals of
this procedure is to convince existing establishment to adopt sustainable management practices. A

F-8

survey of the existing certification initiatives in the accommodation sector has been recently initiated
with the collaboration of one University in Switzerland.

Tanzania:
In Tanzania, tourism is one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy. The sector has shown a
positive growth and contributes significantly in economic development and the reduction of poverty.
The coastline is over 1,424 km long, and includes the islands of Zanzibar, Pemba and Mafia, which
offer a wide array of natural, cultural, historical and archaeological attractions. During the first three
decades following independence, tourism was given a very low profile, but the industry has been much
more actively promoted since the promulgation of the National Tourism Policy in 1991. This explains
the growth in visitor arrivals, from 153,00 in 1990 to 564,000 in 1999, before decreasing to 459,000 in
2000 and increasing again to 576,198 in 2003. The industry accounted for around 16% of the GDP in
2001/ 2002 with earnings of US$ 730 million in 2003. For years Tanzania used to rely mostly on
wildlife tourism, now with increasing demand on cultural and coastal tourism, this good coastal zone
potential is likely to be exploited intensively. This coastal zone offers diversified but rich ecosystems
that can serve as potential tourism attractions: Natural sand beaches found at various places along the
coast (Bagamoyo, Mafia) ;The great variety of flora and fauna of the coastal zone; An extensive coral
reef; Marine parks; Forest reserves and National parks (Saadani);
While it is generally felt that so far there have been only limited impacts from tourism on the coast, the
recent construction of large coastal resort hotels coupled with urbanization has resulted in greater
pressure on resources such as safe drinking water and clean bathing beaches. Garbage is accumulating
on beaches because of inadequate waste disposal systems. Ocean disposal of sewage from hotels
threatens to undermine the very resources tourists have come to enjoy, and has also resulted in
contamination of seafood. This situation is really critical in Dar Es Salaam where tourism is rather a
victim of pollution from the municipality. Thus, a resort project cannot step to implementation due to
severe environmental problems related to liquid and solid waste from the city. In Dar Es Salaam, for
instance, sewers serve only 20% of the area and, of this, 80% is discharged untreated into coastal
waters. The rapid growth of coastal tourism in Tanzania has put a tremendous pressure on existing
services and amenities. Poor land use planning has created the above existing problems especially in
Dar es Salaam and Bagamoyo. In Coastal Tourism, the Minister in charge of Environment is
responsible for approving/disapproving environmental impact statements on projects that might have
impact on coastal environment. (New Environmental Management Act, 2004). The Tourism Division
is responsible for the formulation, the enhancement and regulatory of the policy of this sector . The
TMP was validated by the Government in 1996 and revised in 2002. The TMP identifies the coastal
zone as one of the priority areas for tourism development. It provides a roadmap for future tourism
development in Tanzania. The plan focuses on the following areas: Expanding the tourism product;
maximizing linkages and minimizing leakages, provision of training; and regulate environment
surrounding tourism development.

However, lack of shared vision on how coastal tourism poses an obstacle to the coordination and the
implementation of these policies. Recently, the government in collaboration with donor agencies
through Tanzania Coastal Management Partnership (TCMP) has assessed the current status of Coastal
Tourism in Tanzania and has identified priority actions needed to develop sustainable coastal tourism.
They are now looking forward to prepare the implementation of some of the proposed actions. TCMP
targets coastal governance and sustainable development of coastal area. Among other activities, it's in
charge of the preparation of Integrated Costal Management Strategy (livelihoods of coastal
communities, environmental planning of key economic opportunities including tourism, management
of coastal habitats, and building institutions and human capacity for effective coastal management).
Currently, the MPRU (Marine Park and Reserve Unit) is assisting the local residents living in or
within the vicinity of Marine Park or close to Marine Reserves to play a big role in sustainable coastal
tourism as well as conserving the fragile marine and coastal ecosystems. The Mangrove Management
Project, financed jointly by the Forestry Division (MNRT) and NORAD among other projects along
the coast is in charge of one the numerous forest reserves. This Project is assessing the possibility of
developing eco-tourism facilities in selected Mangrove Reserves. Nevertheless the level of
participation by local communities in Ecotourism development is still low. Specific policies and plans

F-9

for eco-tourism development in coastal areas are yet to be formulated. With the anticipated further
growth of coastal tourism, it is important that the future development of coastal tourism infrastructure
is well-planned and regulated. This project will contribute towards addressing the most critical issues,
and in particular the need for environmental impact assessments prior to development; controlling and
limiting development in certain sensitive areas, and the establishment of setbacks and buffer zones.

F-10

ANNEX G

LIST OF SCTSSA-RELATED GEF SUPPORTED OR FUNDED INITIATIVES IN AFRICA

Country /
Project Name
Focal Agency
Project
GEF
Project
Area
Area
Type
Grant
Stage
(US$M)
Cameroon
National Capacity Self- MFA UNEP
Enabling 0.2
CEO
Assessment (NCSA) for Global
Activity
Approved
Environmental Management
Gambia
Integrated Coastal and Marine BD
IBRD
Medium
0.985
CEO
Biodiversity Management
Size
Approved
Project
Ghana
Biodiversity Conservation of BD
UNDP
Medium
0.52
CEO
Lake Bosumtwe Basin
Size
Approved
Project
Ghana
Coastal Wetlands Management
BD
IBRD
Full Size 7.2
Project
Project
Closure
Kenya
Assessment of Capacity Building BD
UNEP
Enabling 0.244
CEO
to Conserve Biological Diversity
Activity
Approved
Participation in the National
Clearing House Mechanism and
Preparation of a Second National
Report to the CBD (Add On)
Kenya
Biodiversity Strategy & Action BD
IBRD
Enabling 0.157
CEO
Plan and First National Report to
Activity
Approved
the CBD
Mozambique
Coastal and Marine Biodiversity BD
IBRD
Full Size 4.08
CEO
Management Project
Project
Endorsed
Senegal
Integrated Marine and Coastal BD
IBRD
Full Size 5.343
CEO
Resource Management
Project
Endorsed
Seychelles
Mainstreaming Biodiversity
BD
UNDP
Full Size 5.0
Under
Management into Production
Project
Submission
Sector Activities
Seychelles
Biodiversity Conservation and BD
IBRD
Full Size 1.8
Project
Marine Pollution Abatement
Project
Closure
Seychelles
Improving Management of NGO BD
IBRD
Medium
0.839
CEO
and Privately Owned Nature
Size
Approved
Reserves and High Biodiversity
Project
Islands in Seychelles
Seychelles
Integrated Ecosystem
BD
UNDP
Full Size 5.3
PDF B
Management in Seychelles
Project
Seychelles
Management of Avian
BD
IBRD
Medium
0.74
Project
Ecosystems
Size
Completion
Project
Seychelles
Marine Ecosystem Management BD
IBRD
Medium
0.747
CEO
Project
Size
Approved
Project
Tanzania
Development of Mnazi Bay BD
UNDP
Full Size 1.615
CEO
Marine Park
Project
Endorsed
Tanzania
Marine and Coastal Environment BD
IBRD
Full Size 10.33
CEO
Management Project (MACEMP)
Project
Endorsed
Regional
Addressing Land-based IW
UNEP
Full Size 4.511
CEO

G-1

Country /
Project Name
Focal Agency
Project
GEF
Project
Area
Area
Type
Grant
Stage
(US$M)
Activities in the Western Indian
Project
Endorsed
Ocean (WIO-LaB)
Regional
Addressing Transboundary
IW
UNEP
Full Size 5.845
Council
Concerns in the Volta River
Project
Approved
Basin and its Downstream
Coastal Area
Regional
Atlantic and Indian Ocean SIDS IW
UNEP/
Full Size 12
Pipeline
Integrated Water Resource and
UNDP
Project
Wastewater Management
Regional
Climate, Water and Agriculture: MFA IBRD
Medium
0.7
CEO
Impacts on and Adaptation of
Size
Approved
Agro-Ecological Systems in
Project
Africa
Regional
Combating Living Resource IW
UNDP/
Full Size 21.449
CEO
Depletion and Coastal Area
UNEP
Project
Endorsed
Degradation in the Guinea
Current LME through
Ecosystem-based Regional
Actions
Regional
Coral Reef Monitoring Network BD
IBRD
Medium
0.737
CEO
in Member States of the Indian
Size
Approved
Ocean Commission (COI), within
Project
the Global Reef Monitoring
Network (GCRMN)
Regional
Development and Protection of IW
UNEP
Medium
0.75
CEO
the Coastal and Marine
Size
Approved
Environment in Sub-Saharan
Project
Africa
Regional
Enhancing Conservation of the BD
UNEP
Full Size 6.35
CEO
Critical Network of Sites of
Project
Endorsed
Wetlands Required by Migratory
Waterbirds on the
African/Eurasian Flyways.
Regional
Groundwater and Drought
IW
IBRD
Full Size 7.35
CEO
Management in SADC
Project
Endorsed
Regional
Nile Transboundary
IW
IBRD
Full Size 17.15
CEO
Environmental Action Project,
Project
Endorsed
Tranche 1
Regional
Nile Transboundary
IW
UNDP
Full Size 10
Pipeline
Environmental Action Project,
Project
Tranche 2
Regional
Partnership Interventions for the IW
UNDP
Full Size 14.2
Council
Implementation of the Strategic
Project
Approved
Action Programme (SAP) for
Lake Tanganyika
Regional
Pollution Control and Other IW
UNDP
Full Size 10
Project
Measures to Protect Biodiversity
Project
Completion
in Lake Tanganyika
Regional
Reversal of Land and Water IW
UNDP
Full Size 10.294
CEO
Degradation Trends in the Lake
Project
Endorsed
Chad Basin Ecosystem

G-2

Country /
Project Name
Focal Agency
Project
GEF
Project
Area
Area
Type
Grant
Stage
(US$M)
Regional
Reversing Land and Water IW
IBRD
Full Size 13.375
CEO
Degradation Trends in the Niger
Project
Endorsed
River Basin
Regional
Senegal River Basin Water and IW
IBRD
Full Size 7.625
CEO
Environmental Management
Project
Endorsed
Program
Regional
Western Indian Ocean Islands Oil IW
IBRD
Full Size 3.164
CEO
Spill Contingency Planning
Project
Endorsed
Regional
Western Indian Ocean Marine IW
IBRD
Full Size 11.7
Council
Highway Development and
Project
Approved
Coastal and Marine
Contamination Prevention
Project
Global
Coastal Resilience to Climate BD
UNEP
Medium
1
CEO
Change: Developing a
Size
Approved
Generalizable Method for
Project
Assessing Vulnerability and
Adaptation of Mangroves and
Associated Ecosystems
Global
Development of Best Practices BD
UNEP
Medium
0.75
CEO
and Dissemination of Lessons
Size
Approved
Learned for Dealing with the
Project
Global Problem of Alien Species
that Threaten Biological
Diversity
Global
Reduction of Environmental IW
UNEP
Full Size 4.78
CEO
Impact from Tropical Shrimp
Project
Endorsed
Trawling through Introduction of
By-catch Technologies and
Change of Management
Global
Removal of Barriers to the IW
UNDP
Full Size 7.125
CEO
Introduction of Cleaner Artisanal
Project
Endorsed
Gold Mining and Extraction
Technologies

G-3

ANNEX H

ENDORSEMENT LETTES FROM NFPs AND CO-FINANCING LETTERS

Provided in separate files

H-1

ANNEX I

PROJECT CONFORMITY WITH OP10 REQUIREMENTS

OPERATIONAL PROGRAM 10
PROJECT CONFORMITY WITH
REQUIREMENTS
OPERATIONAL PROGRAM
Overcoming barriers to the adoption of best Best practices related to waste management and
practices that limit contamination of the pollution prevention and that are typical and
International Waters Environment, with particular specific to the regional tourism situation and its
reference to waste management strategies and impacts will be captured through all of the
pollution prevention
demonstrations. Those addressing EMS will, by
nature, directly address waste management and
discharges; Ecotourism planning and
management will also be required to confront
these concerns; while reef recreation and
management will be providing inventories of
those areas most sensitive to assist in zoning and
planning related to waste management and
pollution.
Use of new technology to assess and reduce The EMS and Ecotourism demonstrations linked
contaminant loading of International Waters
to coastal tourism businesses will be specifically
exploring appropriate and innovative
technologies for contaminant reduction and
treatment at the localised level with particular
focus on protecting sensitive areas and areas of
high biodiversity.
Involving the private sector in utilizing Private sector involvement is a key objective
technological advances for resolving
within the overall project and is clearly targeted
transboundary priority concerns
through the demonstration activities. The EMS
demonstration projects will achieve their
primary aim by engaging the private sector into
the EMS process, and strengthen public-private
partnerships in minimising negative impacts
from tourism on marine and coastal areas, and
especially on sensitive and vulnerable protected
areas
Leverage of substantial private sector resources The private sector will be encouraged to adopt
(through demonstration projects) to remove the Environmental Management Systems through
barriers to adoption of measures to prevent demonstration projects, which will contribute
pollution
towards reducing the contamination. The project
will explore the introduction of investment
incentives and awards schemes to raise
awareness, encourage and promote
environmentally responsible tourism operators.
An annual national award scheme will be
initiated to recognise environmental efforts by
the tourism industry, and to build industry
champions for different types of tourism
enterprises (e.g. hoteliers, dive operators,
guides) and document lessons. In the first year
the award scheme will reward existing best
practice, the criteria will be developed in
subsequent years to reward good management
practices. The project will also explore

I-1

mechanisms to encourage joint ventures and
partnership arrangements for assisting in
community based ecotourism projects.
Demonstrating strategies for addressing land-based The various demonstration projects will
activities (under the Global Programme of Action investigate appropriate innovative, cost effective
for Land-based Sources of Pollution) that degrade solutions for addressing such priority key issues
marine waters
as waste treatment (through appropriate effluent
treatment systems) to control coastal
degradation and erosion leading to raised
suspended sediments levels ( through zoning and
planning ) , etc .
Demonstrating the use of innovative policies or The EMS demonstration projects, will explore
economic instruments
the introduction of investment incentives and
awards schemes to raise awareness, encourage
and promote environmentally responsible
tourism operators. The Ecotourism
demonstrations will explore several novel
economic instruments including: 1. Joint venture
opportunities to develop sustainable tourism
enterprises that directly benefit the local
community and have minimal impact on the
environment by creating ecotourism concessions
on community land will be opened to
international tender. The tendering process will
ensure that investors incorporate proposals for
(a) local community equity, (b) local
employment, training and procurement; (c)
sensitive environmental management and EIAs;
(d) conservation management of local reserves /
MPAs. 2. How to strengthen the national
environmental planning for the tourism industry
by implementing Strategic Environmental
Assessment of coastal tourism into the existing
coastal planning and management programmes
and structures. 3. Maximisation of tourism
benefits, and identification of the economic and
environmental linkages between the tourism
sector and environmental costs/benefits within
the coastal zone and demonstrate how tourism
sectors' capacity to contribute to CZM and
cleanup activities that could be replicated
elsewhere in the region.
Demonstrating the removal of barriers related to a A region-wide needs assessments will identify
lack of information or lack of training, while the capacity and training requirements of the
addressing legal, regulatory or sectoral reforms for different stakeholder groups involved in the
the reduction environmental stress
tourism sector (Government, NGOs, CBOs,
Private sector) at the national level, within each
participating country. Training material on
planning and management of sustainable
tourism and on the specific tools and techniques
required for the implementation of
demonstration projects (e.g. EIA, SIA, SEA and
EMS) will be developed using technical experts
from within the region and elsewhere.

I-2

Workplans will be developed for 1. A regional
'training of trainers' programme, to expand the
pool of trained personnel able to provide
training at the national level, and 2. A series of
national training programmes targeted at
different stakeholder groups (where necessary).
Towards the end of the project the possibility of
starting specific training programmes in local
institutions on subjects such as EMS will be
explored to ensure a continued supply of well
qualified personnel.
Replication of demonstrations and approaches can The lessons and best practice examples from
be utilised by Implementing Agencies over time national demonstration projects on EMS,
for removal of barriers to the adoption of pollution Ecotourism and Reef Recreation will be
prevention measures
captured and stored on the Regional
Environmental Information System. The EIMS
will be a searchable database with information
on coastal tourism initiatives and other marine
and coastal programmes within the region with
relevance to marine and coastal conservation
management. The EIMS will developed
specifically for the project but will serve as a
major resource for use by Implementing
Agencies beyond the end of the project.
Regional guidelines and training modules
developed during the project on key strategic
tools for use in planning and management of
tourism activities will also be made available.
Delivering outputs such as the development of A regional Environmental Information
computer simulation models, use of remotes Management System (EIMS) will be developed
sensing technology and information systems, during the project. The EIMS will be a
especially for marine areas, to assist countries to geospatial database capable of storing different
sort through complex decisions for dealing with types of information on sustainable tourism
root causes of transboundary environmental related initiatives within the region. The EIMS
degradation
will have the capability of storing a numerical
and text information, as well as remotely sensed
raster and vector data types. As the information
will geographically referenced it will be possible
to search and query the database spatially as
well as by using 'keyword' style searches. The
EIMS will be developed and housed within the
Regional Project Coordination Offices. The
structure and design of the database will be
tailored to fit the needs of the project and to
ensure utility beyond the duration of the project.
The design will initially be based upon
information capture from a compilation and
review of existing tourism initiatives within the
regional, facilitated by the National Project
Coordination Offices. Once the structure has
been developed and it will be made accessible
online. National Project Coordination Offices
will be provided with the necessary resources
(trained personnel, hardware and software) to be
able to access the information and input

I-3

information from the demonstration projects as
other activities get underway. The volume of
information available EIMS will therefore
continue to grow throughout the duration of the
project and it will serve as an essential resource
to aid decision making at the national level as
well as regionally.

I-4

ANNEX J

PRIVATE SECTOR AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED IN PROJECT

Following is a list of Private Sector Stakeholders, CBOs, CSO, NGOs and IGOs that have been
consulted and agreed to participate in Project. There are a number of supportive letters to this effect:
Cameroon
NGOs:
� The Ebodj� community
� The Grand Batanga beach cook initiative
� WWF
� CAEC
� Kribi Urban Council, Kribi Rural Council,
� EBOTOUR, BEACH COOK, GICPATHBEL
Private Sector: Industrial Companies and Developmental Agencies: MEAO, MIDEPECAM,
HEVECAM SOCAPALM, COTCO SNV, IUCN, WWF, GTZ, COOPI , CERECOMA, CED SNH,
OMT-STEP, Chamber of Commerce and Industries,

The Gambia
Community Based Ecotourism initiatives to be supported:
�The Tumani Tenda CBE Project one of the first CBE, promoting the village and surrounds,
specifically their culture, handicrafts, cuisine and history.
�The Sanyan Community Forest is searching for partners to assist them.
�Oyster Creek tourist-boat owners operate mangrove and fishing tours and need coordination.
�The Kartong Community Ecotourism Site has basic accommodation and restaurant facilities. A joint
venture is being formed between the community and the private sector enterprise, Gamespirit.
Private Sector: Gamespirit

Ghana
Private Sector: Ghana Hotels Association (Letter of support below)
Bilateral Donors: Netherlands Development Organization (SNV)
NGOs: � Ghana Wildlife Society
� Resources and Environment Development Organization
� Ricerca e Cooperaczione (RC) International NGO
� Nature Conservation Research Centre
� Earth Service-

Kenya
�Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS)
�Tourism industry umbrella organisations (Kenya Tourism Federation, Kenya Tourism Board, Kenya
Association of Tour Operators, Kenya Association of Tour Guides)
Private Sector Hoteliers and their associations (Kenya Association of Hotel Keepers and Caterers,
Mombasa Coast and Tourism Association)

J-1

NGOs: � Ecotourism Society of Kenya
� Local boat operators and curio seller associations
� Tour operators and their associations (Kenya Association of Tour Operators)
� Beach Management Units (Fishermen)
� Local residents associations and NGOs
� Education and research institutions dealing with tourism issues

Mozambique
Private sector: Diving operators, hotels, activities through the representative associations (e.g.
Reserva do Pomene S.A.R.L.)
Local community based organizations, including the Comite de co-gestao de Tofo, Tofinao, Barra e
Rocha (CTBR), Hagitlrela (in Pomene) and fishing associations.
�Cento do Desenvolvimento Sustentavel (CDS) �experience in macrozoning
�Inhambane Provincial Tourism Association
�MICOA and MITUR (national Ministries of Environment and Tourism)
�Mozambique National Cleaner Production Centre (MNCPC) - a UNIDO-UNEP initiative which
provides give awareness raising seminars, trainings as well as undergo Cleaner Production audits.

Nigeria
Private Sector:
� Federation of Tourism Associations of Nigeria
� The Lagos State Waterfront and Tourism Development Corporation
� Nigeria Hotels Association
� National Association of Tourist Boat operators and water transport
� Shell Petroleum Developing Company (SPDC),
� Conoil Producing Limited
� ExxonMobil Producing Nigeria

Senegal
SAPCO (Soci�t� d'Am�nagement et de Promotion des C�tes et Zones Touristiques du S�n�gal) which
has the mandate for management and development of the entire tourism component of Petite Cote.

J-2

Annex K

Project Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

1.1.
Project Inception Phase

A Project Inception Workshop will be conducted with the full project team, relevant government
counterparts and National Focal Points, any co-financing partners, and representation from the
UNIDO, WTO and UNEP-DGEF as appropriate.

A fundamental objective of this Inception Workshop will be to assist 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 include 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.
Individual work-plans will be prepared by the country for the demonstration projects as listed in
Appendix A. The Inception Workshop will also review these individual work-plans which will be
formally adopted by the Steering Committee.

Additionally, the purpose and objective of the Inception Workshop will be to: (i) introduce project
staff to the UNEP-DGEF and UNIDO team which will support the project during its implementation
and to the Regional Coordinating Unit staff; (ii) detail the roles, support services and complementary
responsibilities of UNEP, UNIDO and RCU staff vis � vis the project team; (iii) provide a detailed
overview of UNEP/UNIDO reporting and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) requirements, with
particular emphasis on the Annual Project Implementation Reviews (PIRs) and related documentation,
the Annual Project Report (APR), Tripartite Review Meetings, as well as mid-term and final
evaluations. Equally, the Inception Workshop will provide an opportunity to inform the project team
on UNEP project related budgetary planning, budget reviews, and mandatory budget re-phasing.

The Inception 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, each
party's responsibilities during the project's implementation phase.

This Project will have an extended Inception Phase reflecting the need to capture effective baseline
data for M&E, particularly relating to the IW indicators (Process, Stress Reduction and Environmental
Status). Table K1 provides an indicative monitoring and evaluation work plan and Tables K2 to K5
provide a list of appropriate indicators for both the main project components and for the more specific
demonstration themes. Baseline data will be collected during the first 6 months of the Project and will
be used as a benchmark against which to compare and verify improvements in the reduction of impacts
using the same parameters as the baseline.

1.2.
Monitoring Responsibilities and Events
The Inception Workshop will present a Schedule of M&E-related meetings and reports. This will have
been developed by UNEP and UNIDO in consultation with the Project Coordinator.

Such a schedule will include: (i) tentative time frames for Tripartite Reviews, Steering Committee
Meetings, (or 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 Coordinator
based on the Project's Annual Work Plan and its indicators. The Project Team will inform

K-1

UNEP/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 Project Coordinator will fine-tune the progress and performance/impact indicators of the Project
in consultation with the full Project team at the Inception Workshop with support from UNEP and
UNIDO. 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. The local implementing agencies will also take part in the Inception Workshop in
which a common vision of overall project goals will be established. Targets and indicators for
subsequent years would be defined annually as part of the internal evaluation and planning processes
undertaken by the Project Team, and agreed with the Executing and Implementing Agencies.

Periodic monitoring of implementation progress will be undertaken by both UNEP and UNIDO
through the provision of half-yearly reports submitted by UNIDO to UNEP, Furthermore, specific
meetings can be scheduled between the Project Team, the UNEP, UNIDO and other pertinent
stakeholders as deemed appropriate and relevant (e.g. Steering Committee members, Focal Points, Co-
funding partners, etc). Such meetings 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. A
Mission Report will be prepared by the Project Team in coordination with UNEP and UNIDO, and
circulated (no less than one month after the Mission) to the Project Team, all SC members, the EA and
IA and any accompanying stakeholders.

Annual Monitoring will occur through the Tripartite Review (TPR). This is the highest policy-level

meeting of the parties directly involved in the implementation of a project. The Project will be subject
to Tripartite Review (TPR) at least once every year. The first such meeting will be held within the first
twelve months following the Inception Workshop. The project proponent will prepare an Annual
Project Report (APR) and submit it to UNEP and UNIDO at least two weeks prior to the TPR for
review and comments.

The APR will be used as one of the basic documents for discussions in the TPR meeting. The Project
Coordinator and Team will present the APR to the TPR, highlighting policy issues and
recommendations for the decision of the TPR participants. The Project Coordinator and Team 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.

Terminal Tripartite Review (TTR)
The terminal tripartite review is held in the last month of project operations. The Project Coordinator is
responsible for preparing the Terminal Report to be submitted by UNIDO to UNEP as per UNEP's
regulation. It shall be prepared in draft at least two months in advance of the TTR in order to allow
review, and will serve as the basis for discussions in the TTR. The terminal tripartite review considers
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. The TTR should refer to the Independent Terminal Evaluation report,
conclusions and recommendations as appropriate.

The TPR has the authority to suspend disbursement if project performance benchmarks are not met as
per delivery rates, and qualitative assessments of achievements of outputs.

K-2

1.3.
Project Monitoring Reporting

The Project Coordinator in conjunction with the Project extended team (PCU staff, UNEP and UNIDO
Task Managers) will be responsible for the preparation and submission of the following reports that
form part of the monitoring process. Items (a) through (e) are mandatory and strictly related to
monitoring, while (f) through (g) have a broader function and the frequency and nature is project
specific to be defined throughout implementation.

(a)
Inception Report (IR)
A Project Inception Report will be prepared immediately following the Inception Workshop. It will
include a detailed First Year Work Plan divided in quarterly time-frames detailing the activities and
progress indicators that will guide implementation during the first year of the Project. This Work Plan
will include the proposed dates for any visits and/or support missions from UNEP, UNIDO or
consultants, as well as time-frames 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 including 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, including and unforeseen or
newly arisen constraints.

When finalized, the report will be circulated to project counterparts who will be given a period of one
calendar month in which to respond with comments or queries. Prior to this circulation of the IR, both
UNEP and UNIDO will review the document.

(b)
Half-yearly Progress Report (HPR), Annual Project Report (APR) and Project
Implementation Review (PIR)
The HPR is a self-assessment report by project management to the UNEP Office and provides them
with input to the reporting process as well as forming a key input to the Tripartite Project Review. The
PIR is an annual monitoring process mandated by the GEF, to be conducted by the UNEP Task
Manager in consultation with UNIDO. It has become an essential monitoring tool for project managers
and offers the main vehicle for extracting lessons from ongoing projects. In addition, UNEP Task
Manager, based on the knowledge of the project progress, will submit to UNEP Evaluation and
Oversght Unit a annual project report, which is a UNEP self-evaluation tool.

An APR/PIR is prepared on an annual basis following the first 12 months of project implementation
and prior to the Tripartite Project Review. The purpose of the APR/PIR is to reflect progress achieved
in meeting the project's Annual Work Plan and assess performance of the project in contributing to
intended outcomes through outputs and partnership work. The APR/PIR is discussed in the TPR so
that the resultant report represents a document that has been agreed upon by all of the primary
stakeholders.

The items in the APR/PIR to be provided by UNEP GEF includes 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 and related expenditure reports
� Lessons learned
� Clear recommendations for future orientation in addressing key problems in lack of progress

K-3

UNEP analyses the individual APR/PIRs by focal area, theme and region for common issues/results
and lessons. The Reports are also valuable for the Independent Evaluators who can utilise them to
identify any changes in project structure, indicators, workplan, etc. and view a past history of delivery
and assessment.

(d)
Periodic Thematic Reports

As and when called for by UNEP or UNIDO, 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 UNEP/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. UNEP and UNIDO are requested to minimize their requests for Thematic
Reports, and when such are necessary will allow reasonable timeframes for their preparation by the
project team.

(e)
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.

(f) Technical
Reports
(project specific- optional)
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.

(g) Project
Publications
(project specific- optional)
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 UNEP, UNIDO, the government and other relevant stakeholder
groups, plan and produce these Publications in a consistent and recognizable format. Any publications
need prior clearance from UNEP and UNIDO. Project resources will need to be defined and allocated
for these activities as appropriate and in a manner commensurate with the project's budget.

2. INDEPENDENT EVALUATION

The project will be subjected to at least two independent external evaluations as follows:-

(i) 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

K-4

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 UNEP Evaluation
and Oversight Unit.

(ii) 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 should also provide
recommendations for follow-up activities. The Terms of Reference for this Mid-term evaluation will
be prepared by UNEP-Evaluation and Oversight Unit in line with the GEF evaluation requirements.

Audit Clause
UNIDO will provide UNEP with quarterly financial reports as well as certified annual financial
statements with an audit of the financial statements relating to the status of UNEP (including GEF)
funds according to the established procedures to be set out in the project document. The Audit will be
conducted by the legally recognized auditor, or by a commercial auditor.

3. LEARNING AND KNOWLEDGE SHARING

Results from the project will be disseminated within and beyond the project intervention zone through
a number of existing information sharing networks and forums. In addition:

The project will participate, as relevant and appropriate, in UNEP/GEF sponsored networks,
organized for Senior Personnel working on projects that share common characteristics.
UNEP/GEF shall establish a number of networks, such as Integrated Ecosystem Management, eco-
tourism, co-management, etc, that will largely function on the basis of an electronic platform.

The project will identify and participate, as relevant and appropriate, in scientific, policy-based
and/or any other networks, which may be of benefit to project implementation though lessons
learned.

The project will identify, analyse, and share lessons learned that might be beneficial in the design and
implementation of similar future projects. Identify and analysing lessons learned is an on- going
process, and the need to communicate such lessons as one of the project's central contributions is a
requirement to be delivered not less frequently than once every 12 months. UNEP shall provide a
format and assist the project team in categorizing, documenting and reporting on lessons learned. To
this end a percentage of project resources will need to be allocated for these activities.

K-5

TABLE K-1: INDICATIVE MONITORING AND EVALUATION WORK PLAN AND CORRESPONDING
BUDGET

Type of M&E
Responsible Parties
Budget US$
Time frame
activity
Excluding project team
Staff time
Project Coordinator
Within first two
Inception Workshop
UNEP
$40,000
months of project
UNIDO
start up
Project Team
Immediately
Inception Report
UNEP
None
following IW
UNIDO
Measurement of Initial Project Coordinator will To be finalized in
Start, mid and end
Baseline and Means of
oversee the hiring of Inception Phase and
of project
Verification for
specific studies and
Workshop. Indicative cost
Project Purpose
institutions, and delegate $175,000
Indicators
responsibilities to relevant
team members
Measurement of
Oversight by Project GEF To be determined as part
Annually prior to
Means of Verification
Technical Advisor and of the Annual Work
APR/PIR and to
for Project Progress
Project Coordinator
Plan's preparation.
the definition of
and Performance
Measurements by regional Indicative cost $25,000
annual work plans
(measured on an field officers and local IAs
annual basis)
APR and PIR
Project Team
None
Annually
UNEP
UNIDO
TPR and TPR report
Government Counterparts
None
UNEP
Every year,
UNIDO
upon receipt of
Project Team
APR
Steering Committee Project Coordinator
None Following
Project
Meetings
UNEP
IW and
UNIDO
subsequently at
least once a year
Periodic status reports
Project team
5,000
To be determined
by Project team,
UNEP and
UNIDO
Technical reports
Project team
15,000
To be determined
Hired consultants as needed
by Project Team,
UNEP and
UNIDO
Mid-term External
Project team
30,000 (includes rates, At the mid-point
Evaluation
UNEP
DSA and flights)
of project
UNIDO
implementation.
External Consultants (i.e.
evaluation team)
Final External
Project team,
40,000 (includes rates, At the end of
Evaluation
UNEP
DSA and flights)
project
UNIDO
implementation
External Consultants (i.e.

K-6

evaluation team)
Terminal Report
Project team
At least one month
UNEP
before the end of
None
UNIDO
the project
External Consultant
Lessons learned
Project team
Yearly
15,000 (average 3,000
UNEP
per year)
UNIDO
Audit
UNEP
5,000 (average $1000 Yearly
Project team
per year)
Visits to field sites
Yearly
UNEP
(UNEP staff travel
15,000 (average one
UNIDO
costs to be charged to
visit per year)
Government representatives
IA fees)

TOTAL INDICATIVE COST
US$365,000
Excluding project team staff time and UNEP staff and
travel expenses

INTERNATIONAL WATERS INDICATORS

The following tables (Table K2 to Table K5) list the principal indicators showing improvements in
Process, Stress Reduction and Environmental Status relative to Project activities and deliverables.
Process and Stress Reduction tables capture the primary indicators from the LogFrames (Main Project
and Demonstrations). The Environmental Status table defines indicators for which baseline data
MUST be collected within the first 6 months of the Project before national monitoring/sampling
programmes can effectively begin. The Project will arrange for each country to collect such baseline
date during its initial 6 month Inception Phase.

These tables and their indicators will be reviewed at the Inception stage and endorsed by each country
following any agreed additions or amendments. Following endorsement, the PCU will develop a
national monitoring template for Impact Measurement which directly relates to the requirements for
IW indicator monitoring and this will be adopted and implemented within the first 6 months so as to
allow monitoring to proceed at the national level during or immediately after the Inception Phase. This
will provide measured and verified date for the overall M&E plan which will A. confirm Project
delivery and B. confirm successful achievement of IW Indicator targets in Process, Stress Reduction
and Environmental Status.

K-7

TABLE K-2: REGIONAL LEVEL IW PROCESS INDICATORS

REGIONAL LEVEL IW PROCESS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Establishment of regional multi-stakeholder Comprehensive and representative stakeholder Within first 6 months
PCU and Steering Regional
steering committee to engage key stakeholders Steering Committee established for region
Committee Reports
that may be involved resolving transboundary
priority concerns
Documentation of Best Available Practices Annual Technical Reports and Guidelines on Inception through to Annual Reports on Regional Information
and Technologies (BATs and BAPs) to BATs and BAPs addressing general national Year 4 (on-going
BATs and BAPs Coordination House.
remove barriers to best practice strategies to issues and specific technical solutions compilation of BATs distributed by RICH IW:LEARN. National
limit contamination of the International available on website and through IW:LEARN
and BAPs)
to National Project Focal Points
Waters Environment, with particular reference
Coordinators and
to waste management strategies and pollution
EIMAS
prevention.
Documentation of the incentives and benefits A Benefits-Analysis Report on Partnership Within first 6 months
Partnership
All Participating
of tri-sector Partnerships for sustainable Incentives (including details of potential and
Incentives and
Countries
tourism for all stakeholders (civil, private and agreed national partnerships) finalised for
Benefit Analysis
public sector)
each country and synthesised for entire
Report at PCU.
Project. Report presented and discussed at
Minutes from
National Partnership Meetings
National Partnership
Meetings
Models for sustainable tourism strategies for A selection of models addressing various Year 4
Guidelines
from All Participating
addressing land-based activities (under the national needs and more specific guidelines
RICH. Draft National Countries
Global Programme of Action for Land-based for targeted priority issues distributed to each
Sustainable Tourism
Sources of Pollution) that degrade marine country and available on website and through
Strategies.
waters, developed based on all BATs and IW:LEARN
IW:LEARN
BAPs from the global case study reviews and
the demonstration lessons.

K-1

REGIONAL LEVEL IW PROCESS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Establishment of Regional Information Full regional EIMAS established within a First 6 months
PCU
reports. RICH - Nairobi.
Coordination & Clearing House (RICH)
Regional Information Coordination House and
Physical presence of National EIMAS
improving the availability, access and sharing hosted within the NEPAD Coastal and Marine
RICH. Website and centres as nodes - all
of lessons and BAPS/BATS pertinent to Secretariat (COSMAR) in Nairobi with
IW:LEARN
countries
sustainable tourism within the region, and linkages to the Regional Centre on Integrated
through other projects (e.g. GCLME, WIO- Coastal Management in Calabar. The regional
Lab) further afield through IW:LEARN etc
EIMAS will be linked to National EIMAS
nodes will be established within each
participating country
Replication of demonstrations and approaches Model guidelines for sustainable tourism From Year 1 onward
Reference to Project Participating countries
can be utilised by other countries and
approaches that mitigate LBS impacts and
and BAT/BAP
and other countries
Implementing Agencies over time for removal contaminants (along with more specific
reports in other beyond Project system
of barriers to the adoption of pollution technical guidelines) being distributed by
replicatory Projects. boundary.
prevention measures
IW:LEARN. Feedback of use through
Feedback to website
IW:LEARN and Project website. Direct
and evidence of
reference to use in GEF (and other donor)
replication
project submissions and evaluations
documented through
IW:LEARN

K-2

REGIONAL LEVEL IW PROCESS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Sustainability of Project Objectives (and Project evaluated as having achieved a level Year 5
Terminal Evaluation All Participating
therefore sustainability of environment and of sustainability (endorsed by national and
and Post-Project
Countries
ecosystems alongside economic development international stakeholders and involved
Evaluation
and maintenance of livelihoods) captured parties) that can be maintained beyond project
through Project outputs and deliverables
lifetime. Post-Project evaluation after 2years
and 5 years re-confirms sustainability within
minimum of 6 participating countries.
Raised awareness of sustainable tourism issues Positive feedback from majority of Year
3
MTE (and re- All Participating
(threats, impacts, mitigations, BATs/BAPS, stakeholders at MTE. Confirmation by
confirmed through Countries
etc) across all sectors.
Evaluators in particular of raised sensitivity
Terminal
and support at policy level. High level of
Evaluation). National
access to website and requests for information
Policy level
through IW:LEARN
stakeholders.
IW:LEARN
Appropriate IW indicators developed at Current Indicators (at Project Submission) After 6 months
Specific Report from All Participating
regional level and adopted at national level to reviewed and amended if necessary and
PCU. Minutes of Countries
provide monitoring and evidence of appropriate after 6 month Inception Phase
Stakeholder Meetings
improvements in Sustainable tourism practices once Baseline Information gathered
to review Indicators
Appropriate Project M&E processes are M&E reports to PCU and to PIR/APR. Annual
MTE and Terminal Regional and Individual
carried out during Project lifetime and beyond Detailed analyses and discussion of agreed
Evaluation review of Participating Countries
(where appropriate)
measurable parameters for Process, Stress
Indicators. APR/PIRs
Reduction and Environmental Status
Indicators included in reports at national level
and synthesised into regional level reports

K-3

TABLE K-3: NATIONAL LEVEL IW PROCESS INDICATORS

NATIONAL LEVEL IW PROCESS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Establishment of national multi-stakeholder Comprehensive and representative stakeholder Within first 6 months
PCU and Steering All Participating
steering committees to engage key Steering Committee established in each
Committee Reports
Countries
stakeholders that may be involved resolving country
transboundary priority concerns
Increased awareness of the incentives and Active and representative participation in By year 3
Minutes of National All Participating
benefits of partnership arrangements and national partnership meetings. At least 1
Partnership Meetings. Countries
documentation of the stakeholders
effective and active public-private partnership
Confirmation of
participating in the national multi-stakeholder established for each country and for each
Partnerships through
partnership meetings, and partnerships demonstration location
MoUs and confirmed
identified as a result
by MTE
Partners agree to enter negotiations to build Physical record of negotiations - MoUs and By Year 3
Record
of All Participating
partnerships / joint ventures through reaching LoAs
negotiations with
Countries
consensus on operational structure of
PCU assistance.
partnership (vision, objectives, tasks and
MoUs/LoAs
responsibilities, contractual arrangements and
available from PCU
grievance mechanisms)
Successful partnerships/ joint ventures Partnerships formally captured in MoUs or By Year 3
MoUs/LoAs
All Participating
established through project with active and Letters of Agreement with copies lodged at
available from PCU Countries
willing involvement with Private Sector and PCU.
and summarised
Civil Society Organisations.
details on websites

K-4

NATIONAL LEVEL IW PROCESS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Measures are put in place to ensure benefits to On-going Partnership meetings and
Partnership meetings Reports to PCU from All Participating
all parties in the partnership / joint ventures discussions to evolve and fine-tune every 6 months and on- National Focal
Countries
are maintained over time through a system of partnership arrangements and to reach going beyond Project
Points. Details on
regular evaluation and opportunity to review decisions on matters of mutual interest
websites. Confirmed
the context (needs, challenges, structure),
by MTE and TE
outcomes (i.e. business benefits, added value,
cost benefits etc.) and changes (learning from
achievements, outstanding problems, issues,
targets etc.).
Documentation and review of status of Regular annual review of status of Once a year
PCU records. Reports National Reporting and
partnerships established (information
Partnerships undertaken by PCU and formally
to Regional Steering regional synthesis
dissemination, consultation, participation) for reported
Committee.
the project.
APR/PIRS
National Demonstrations successfully
Demonstrations independently reviewed, 8 by end of Year 4. All Individual review
8 countries with Demos
implemented and completed at selected sites found to be successful and closed. BATs and 11 by end of year 5
reports for each
within the participating countries, and BAPs all successfully captured through RICH
Demo. Confirmed by
delivering valuable and replicable BAT/BAPs and disseminated through website,
MTE and TE.
for regional synthesis and dissemination
IW:LEARN and direct distribution
APR/PIR
National requirements for realigning and Initial Model Guidelines addressing policy, Appropriate Model
Annual M&E reports. All Participating
reforming policy, legislation and institutional legislation and institutional responsibilities Guidelines in every Confirmation by
Countries
responsibilities to support sustainable tourism, adopted in relevant sectors within every country by year 3. MTE and TE
along with options for sustainable financial country. Sustainable financing mechanisms to M&E reports show
mechanism (identified and approved by support reforms have been developed and links between reforms
national SteerComs) have captured essential adopted. New policies and legislation are and improvements to
needs of the countries in relation to sustainable delivering noticeable and measurable mitigation of LBS
tourism
improvements at the Stress Reduction and impacts and
Environmental Status level
contaminants

K-5

NATIONAL LEVEL IW PROCESS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
National Sustainable Tourism Strategies and
National Sustainable Tourism Strategies Drafting and agreement National Stakeholder All Participating
Work-Plans adopted, implemented and drafted and reviewed by each country. Formal in principle by end of Committee reports. Countries
functional within each country
adoption of Strategies and work-plans by each year 3. Formal
Government records.
government
Government adoption Terminal Evaluation.
by end of year 5
APR/PIRS
Effective assessments undertaken in each National Reports on Training and Capacity Within first 6 months of Reports lodged with All Participating
participating country identifying gaps and building completed and synthesised at Project
PCU and available Countries
needs in training and capacity building for regional level
for review
sustainable tourism with national reports
provided to the PCU
Training and capacity building packages Packages developed at regional level for Within first 9 months of Packages lodged with National and sub-
developed and approved (to include work- national and sub-regional delivery
Project
PCU
regional level
plans and implementation
schedules/guidelines) that are appropriate to
national needs and scenarios
National T&CB implemented successfully and Various packages delivered at national or sub- Within first 18 months Independent
National and sub-
demonstrating a more sustainable approach to regional level (dependent on cost of Project
reviewers. National regional level
tourism
effectiveness. Each country has participated in
reports on T&CB
a T&CB workshop pertinent to their needs.
package
Each country has completed a programme of
effectiveness.
T&CB as defined within their personal or sub-
regional packages. Each T&CB package
delivery reviewed and deemed successful both
by countries and by independent assessors

K-6

NATIONAL LEVEL IW PROCESS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Data capture and management needs and gaps Report from each country on data capture and Within first 3 months of Reports sent to PCU All Participating
for each country relating to sustainable management needs that define a proposed Project
for review
Countries
tourism identified through a national report programme for baseline and M&E data
and a regional synthesis
collection
National Environmental Information
EIMAS models defined for each country Within first 6 months
National
EIMAS All Participating
Management and Advisory System models along with a data capture and monitoring
Models and
Countries
created that clearly address the needs of programme. Models approved by
Programmes lodged
sustainable tourism, along with individual governments and by PCU
with PCU
national work-plans and strategies for their
implementation
Presence of active and functional EIMAS in EIMAS and M&E programme adopted. End of Year 1
National reports on All Participating
each country showing a positive improvement Baseline and M&E data available at national
EIMAS and data Countries. Regional
in the analysis and distribution of information level and through RICH. Appropriate
collection
Information
relating to sustainable tourism and indicators being measured and reported to
programmes
Coordination House
demonstrating effective impact on decision- relevant national agencies and to RICH (latter
(including solid
making at the management and policy levels
for Project M&E). Data processed and
evidence of use by
packaged for use by decision-makers
Decision-makers).
Regional synthesis of
M&E status for all
countries through
RICH.
Increase in the number of tourism Record and collation of formal adoptions of End of year 3
Verification
of All Participating
establishments / organizations adopting new codes of practices and self-regulatory
documents by MTE. Countries but
codes of conduct and best practice for tourism mechanisms by PCU with signed MoUs and
Selected in-country particularly at Demo
enterprises and tourists
LoAs.
verification
locations
Tourism industry personnel, professionals, Initially at least 3 person per establishment as Trained by end of 2nd Training reports from Relevant establishments
regulatory agency and local authority staff selected through the demonstration (including year.
Demo and PCU.
at demonstration sites
trained in EMS
one senior management person per
establishment).

K-7

NATIONAL LEVEL IW PROCESS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Capture of EMS training expertise at national 1 agency or body per country fully trained By end of 2nd year
Training reports from National level
level for further replication by training-of- that can specialise in EMS training for further
Demo and PCU
trainers within national expert bodies.
replication
Increase in the transparency, accountability, Clear evidence of cooperation and End of Year 3
Site
visits
to Relevant demonstration
democracy, coordination, conflict resolution partnerships between various tourism
Demonstrations and sites in particular
for hotels and coastal tourism operators
stakeholders. Partnerships established and
specific
self-regulatory principles adopted.
establishments
Increased participation of community and key Community Management measures adopted at End of Year 3
Site
visits
to Relevant demonstration
stakeholder groups in co-management and appropriate sites along with capture of best
Demonstrations and sites in particular
benefits from coastal resources
practices. Co-management measures show
specific
comprehensive and fully participatory

establishments.
stakeholder involvement including
Confirmation by
participatory monitoring programmes. Formal
MTE. M&E Reports.
adoption of co-management measures by local
Local/National
and national authorities. Community
authority records.
confirmation of increased benefits from
Minutes of
coastal resources related to tourism. Project
community groups
confirmation (supported by M&E data) of
parallel reduction in LBS impacts and
contaminants

K-8

NATIONAL LEVEL IW PROCESS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Increased human and institutional capacity at Local training workshops (documented) at within 18 months
Site
visits
to Relevant demonstration
local level to effect participation in coastal each demo site. Demo level institutional
Demonstrations.
sites in particular
tourism.
improvements (documented through regular
Confirmation by
demo reports). Clear evidence of greater and
MTE. M&E Reports.
more effective participation of all pertinent
. Minutes of demo
stakeholders (from Demo stakeholder
stakeholder meetings.
meetings)
Increased revenue generation and evidence of Evidence of formal revenue generation and End of Year 3
Site
visits
to Relevant demonstration
benefits to local community derived from financial sustainability mechanisms at demo
Demonstrations.
sites in particular
changes in coastal tourism practices and sites directly sourced from tourism and
Revenue generation
strategies.
tourist-related incomes. Direct benefits to
and sustainability
communities derived from these revenues and
mechanisms lodged
mechanisms (confirmed by communities with
with PCU by Demo
physical evidence)
managers.
Confirmation by
MTE. Minutes of
demo stakeholder
meetings.
Confirmation from
community groups

K-9

TABLE K-4: NATIONAL LEVEL IW STRESS REDUCTION INDICATORS

NATIONAL LEVEL IW STRESS REDUCTION INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Increase in hotels implementing EMS leading !00% of selected hotels within
Selected enterprises by Demonstration
Relevant demonstration
to a reduction in contaminant loading of Demonstrations implementing EMS
year 2. Replications by reports. MTE and TE. sites initially, then
International Waters.
approached by 2nd year. EMS approach end of year 4.
National Stakeholder replication national at
transferred and replicated within a further 10
reports. Confirmation key tourist locations
hotels, resorts and key tourist operations per
from PCU
country at major tourist locations by year 4
.EMS records show clear reduction in
pollutants, contaminants and discharges at all
demo sites
Increase in the effective use of new Adoption of new technologies for sewage Demo sites by Year 2 - Demo reports and Demonstration sites
technology to assess and reduce contaminant treatment to secondary or tertiary level as well Replication sites by verification by MTE
initially. Replication at
loading of International Waters
as and grey-water, oily wastes and other liquid year 4
other key tourism
wastes within major establishments and
locations later
operations at demonstration sites. Adoption of
new technologies to reduce sediment loading
from tourism-related industrial and other land-
based activities. Adoption of in-house
monitoring programmes by individual
establishments to ensure reductions in harmful
discharge parameters and aiming to reach
threshold levels as defined below. Replication
of BATs beyond demo sites to other key
tourism locations

K-10

NATIONAL LEVEL IW STRESS REDUCTION INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Increase in the utilizing of technological Identifiable new technologies adopted and Demo sites by Year 2 - Demo reports and Demonstration sites
advances for resolving transboundary priority functional within demo locations that Replication sites by verification by MTE
initially. Replication at
concerns including improved water
demonstrate water conservation and recycling year 4
other key tourism
management (e.g. water saving appliances, with water demands reduced by 25% at
locations later
solar water heaters, specific indicators to be individual establishments. New technologies
determined)
replicated outside demo area and also
achieving minimum 25% reduction in water
demand where applied
Increase in % of hotels and other tourism- 75% of hotels at relevant demo sites with all By year 4 both within Demo reports and Demonstration sites
related operations with effective sewage improvements in place, and further 20% of all and outside demo verification by MTE. initially. Replication at
treatment systems, waste management (solid other tourism operations showing improved locations
Required reporting other key tourism
and liquid) and monitoring systems and waste management and monitoring. Further
from hotels and locations later
responsible purchasing policies
10% of coastal hotels beyond demo location
establishments within
have adopted effective treatment and waste
the EMS/EMA
management and M&E systems
programme
Reduction of solid and liquid waste production Waste production from selected demo hotels By year 3 at demo Demo reports and Demonstration sites
from hotel sector
down by 25% below baseline as defined locations and by year 5 verification by MTE. initially. Replication at
during inception phase (except where values nationally
Required reporting other key tourism
at baseline already acceptable). Further
from hotels and locations later
replication of management techniques beyond
establishments within
demo location sees a further 25% reduction of
the EMS/EMA
waste production at a further 10% of hotels
programme
nationally

K-11

NATIONAL LEVEL IW STRESS REDUCTION INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Reduction in water consumption and increase Water demands reduced by 25% at selected By year 3 at demo Demo reports and Demonstration sites
in water re-use and grey water recycling from hotels within demo locations. Further locations and by year 5 verification by MTE. initially. Replication at
hotel sector
minimum 25% reduction in water demand by nationally
Required reporting other key tourism
top 5 largest hotels/consumers nationally as
from hotels and locations later
part of replication process
establishments within
the EMS/EMA
programme
Increase in the use of innovative policies or Innovative polices and new economic By year 3 at demo Demo reports and Demonstration sites
economic instruments to encourage the instruments adopted (where appropriate) at all locations and by year 5 verification by MTE. initially. Replication at
adoption of EMS and adherence to new establishments involved in the EMS process. nationally
Required reporting other key tourism
regulations
Successful replication within at least 5 other
from hotels and locations later
non-demo establishments nationally
establishments within
the EMS/EMA
programme
Benefits from tourism to host communities Clearly defined and measurable benefits to Access and land sites Demo reports and site Demonstration sites
improved (e.g. through enhanced alternative communities at each relevant demonstration secured by end of year visits, particular by initially. Replication at
livelihoods, secured access and landing rights, site. Access to traditional beaches and landing two. Alternative
Independent
other key tourism
etc)
sites re-established and/or secured at each site livelihoods shown to be Evaluators
locations later
as appropriate. Alternative livelihoods successful by end of
established with project support and verifiably year 3. Alternative
effective as can be demonstrated through Livelihoods replicated
replication elsewhere outside of the outside demos by end
Demonstration location.
of year 4

K-12

TABLE K-5: NATIONAL LEVEL IW ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS INDICATORS

NATIONAL LEVEL IW ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Reduction in the degradation and overall loss Overall National %ge cover of each critical Baseline at Inception Satellite imagery.
All participating
of coastal and offshore environments as a habitat type (Defined by each country in km2) remaining stable
National baseline and countries at selected
result of unsustainable tourism � measured as has not decreased since project start and throughout project
M&E plans. National national monitoring
Km2 of stable coral & mangrove cover
remains stable at near-baseline level.

reports (and regional sites

synthesis) on status of (with emphasis on
Survey undertaken at baseline (Inception) year
coastal environments demo locations
2 and year 4.
for each participating specifically)
country submitted to
PCU prior to MTE
Improvement in coastal water quality (pH, Contaminant loadings measurably reduced as Reduction from
M&E data collection Selected National
Temperature, Suspended Solids, Dissolved confirmed by monitoring of indicator baseline values by half programmes at national monitoring sites
Oxygen, total coliforms, faecal coliforms, parameters, particularly water quality (or to threshold levels) level (with sites
nitrate-nitrogen, phosphate, oil & grease, parameters as defined below. Blue Flag by year 3. All specifically established
phenols, arsenic, cadmium, cyanide,
designations given where possible and parameters at threshold to provide data at demo
chromium, copper, lead, total mercury).
appropriate. Sampling at selected sites every 6 or lower by year 5
locations). M&E
months minimum
reports from each
demo and each
country. Overall annual
M&E report from
Project

K-13

NATIONAL LEVEL IW ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Improvement in the condition of coastal Degraded habitats (as confirmed at baseline) Active rehabilitation M&E data collection Selected National
habitats in proximity to coastal tourism stabilised. Clear evidence of rehabilitation and taking place at 20% of programmes at national monitoring sites
developments (coral reefs, seagrass beds, expansion of habitats (where seen to be degraded sites by year level (with sites
mangroves, beaches etc) as a result of limiting degraded at baseline) back toward pre- 3 and 40% by year 4.
specifically established
contaminant inputs coupled with protection degradation levels.
to provide data at demo
and rehabilitation in degraded areas.

locations). M&E
Losses of habitats reversed along 50% of
reports from each
coastline at Demo locations and 20% of entire
demo and each
national coastlines with defined strategies to
country. Overall annual
expand this to a further 40%of national
M&E report from
coastline over 10 year period.
Project

Sampling every 6 months
Populations of Indicator species
Populations of flora and fauna indicator Flora and Fauna
Field sampling. M&E
Selected national
species in selected coastal habitats remain inventories
data collection
monitoring sites
stable or have increased. These species will be
programmes at national
selected during the inception phase.
level

Sampling every 6 months
Increase in the number of beaches qualifying At least two discrete Blue Flag beaches 2 by year 3; Further Project Blue Flag Nationally
for the Blue Flag scheme
established per country initially rising to 20% 20% by year 5
programme established
of recreational and protected beaches by end
by PCU
of Project

K-14

NATIONAL LEVEL IW ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Reduction in development of tourism facilities 10% of sensitive sites within system boundary 10% by year 3; 50% by MTE and TE
National sensitive areas
in sensitive sites of global significance
have legal protection from further year 5
confirmation. PCU
of global significance
development, rising to 50% by end of Project.
records National

Stakeholder meeting
Annual Surveys
minutes. National PA
designations and legal
reforms
Economic benefit to the community and to Measurable increases in economic benefits to Measurable
Community benefit
National demo sites
organizations
communities as a direct result of project improvements by year assessment carried out
activities in improving Processes and in Stress 3
for selected sites by
Reduction. E.G. Direct economic benefits
PCU with specific
overall and per capita, accessibility of micro-
figures supporting
financing and capture of tourist spending
improved benefits
within community relieving pressure on
environment.

Annual surveys of communities
Social
benefits
Improvement of health in coastal 10% improvement in Surveys of community Selected (at baseline)
communities, better waste management community health by health centres. Surveys community sites
defined as measurably less waste discharges year 4. 75% of of traditional disposal related to demo
and disposal in coastal areas
communities at demo sites. Physical evidence locations

sites have significantly of improved waste
Annual surveys of communities
improved waste
handling facilities
handling facilities
leading to 50 %
reduction in disposal
outside of facilities

K-15

NATIONAL LEVEL IW ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS INDICATORS
DESCRIPTION OF INDICATIVE
SOURCE OF
LOCATION OF
MEASURABLE PARAMETER
TARGET
ACTIONS
VERIFICATION
ACTION
Environmental benefits (area under
20% increase in designated and/or formally By year 4
PCU
report
on All Participating
management, specific measures of key managed sensitive areas where LBS impacts
sensitive and managed countries
ecological benefits such as area protected, area and contaminants are actively and effectively
areas. Confirmed by
rehabilitated, species conserved)
controlled
TE

Annual survey
Poverty
monitoring

20% increases in jobs for poorer local Measurable by year 3 PCU report on Benefits Selected demo sites
communities, 10% higher incomes for local and confirmed again at of Improved
communities engaged in activities related to year 5
Sustainable Tourism at
impact reduction from tourism income, other
Demo Locations
measurable contributions toward poverty
produced by year 3.
alleviation linked to impact reduction
MTE and TE
including improved water supplies to 20% of
confirmation
poorer coastal communities at demo sites.

Annual Survey
Local ownership in tourism and related Number of enterprises totally or partially By year 3
PCU
report
on Selected demo sites
enterprises
owned by local people increased by 20%
Benefits of Improved

Sustainable Tourism at
Annual survey
Demo Locations
produced by year 3

K-16

ANNEX L

RESPONSE TO GEF SECRETARIAT AND IMPLEMENTING AGENCIES REVIEWS AT SUBMISSION

REVIEW COMMENTS
RESPONSE
AMENDMENTS
ALL GEF SECRETARIAT REVIEW COMMENTS AND RESPONSES IN YELLOW SECTION
GEF IW M& E Indicators need to be incorporated to A separate set of indicators has now been included within the M&E Plan AMENDMENTS TO BRIEF
establish process and stress reduction Indicators so that that incorporates many of the Process indicators from the LogFrame as Para. 229 � M&E Plan
annual PIR will report on progress toward those well as more specific Stress reduction and Environmental Status AMENDMENTS TO EXEC. SUMM
indicators. Existing Indicators are too general in Indicators. The PCU will use these new Tables of Indicators to develop an Para. 44 � Monitoring and Evaluation
relation to the current Objective.
IW Indicator monitoring and sampling programme. This will begin with AMENDMENTS TO ANNEXES
collection of site baseline data in the first 6 months (Inception Phase) of Annex K � M&E Plan
the Project.
More specific design seems warranted for the demo Full demo details are now directly appended to the Project Brief as Addition of Appendix A
projects in order to understand how GEF funding would APPENDIX A - THE DEMONSTRATIONS which explains in detail for AMENDMENTS TO BRIEF
be spent. At Work Program inclusion the full project each demo what is being done, the location and how it will be done. This Amended Project Brief Summary
proposal will clearly indicate and describe in detail each Appendix also provides a comprehensive pre-amble on the selection Para. 107 � Rational and Objective
demonstration project (what, where, how). On-the- process for the demonstration sites in each location. The Appendix also Para. 119 � Output 1.B
ground demonstrations will be confirmed as the major provides details of the funds that would be allocated to activities within Para. 184 � Risks �Component 1
project component.
each Demo. Project Brief summary has been revised to reflect major Para. 201 � Sustainability
emphasis on demonstrations and their on-the-ground delivery.
Para. 214 � Replication
Para. 228. Cost Effectiveness
AMENDMENTS TO EXEC. SUMM
Para. 18 � Project Rationale
New Para 19 and Table � Outcomes
Para. 45 � Cost Effectiveness
Specific legislation/policy reforms to be achieved, not There is more detail in the types of reforms aimed at within APPENDIX AMENDMENTS TO BRIEF
just generic wording. Would be good to introduce some A � THE DEMONSTRATIONS. This has been captured and added to the Para. 178 to 180 � End-of-Project
specifics before Work Program inclusion, at least to the Project Brief and to the Executive Summary as a description of the Landscape
types of legislative reforms and policy reforms in the Reforms that can be expected to have been developed by the end of the AMENDMENTS TO EXEC. SUMM
demo projects.
Project
Para 20 to 22 � new section on end-
of-Project landscape
AMENDMENTS TO APPENDIX A
Page 1
(other details of reforms already exist
within individual Demos and are
highlighted now in the Brief as
defined above)

K-17

Various comments on the need for specific monitoring Addition of greater details on indicators and verifiable measurements now AMENDMENTS TO BRIEF
of outcomes of reduced degradation as a result of the addressed as a set of IW Indicators in tables appended to Annex K � the Para. 229 � M&E Plan
demos and overall project.
M&E Plan (also now referred to in the Executive Summary. This AMENDMENTS TO EXEC. SUMM
summarises the indicators from the Logframes (Main Project LogFrame Para. 44 � Monitoring and Evaluation
and Demo LogFrames) as well as adding some more specific measurable AMENDMENTS TO ANNEXES
Environmental Status Indicators.
Annex K � M&E Plan

Several comments referring to inconsistencies in Project Title altered to Demonstrating and capturing best practices and AMENDMENTS TO BRIEF
OBJECTIVE and need to link this to appropriate nature technologies for the reduction of land-sourced impacts resulting from Project Title
of indicators to show `reduced degradation' as per coastal tourism. This more clearly reflects the aims of the Project and the AMENDMENTS TO EXEC SUMM
Project title
OP10 eligibility. The project Objective is now standardised throughout Project Title
the Project as to demonstrate best practice strategies for sustainable
tourism to reduce the degradation of marine and coastal Project Objective is now standardised
environments of transboundary significance.
throughout all documents

Various comments on the need to define status of Project Brief and Exec Summary now recognises fact that there is AMENDMENTS TO BRIEF
baseline data (missing) and to address the need to generally insufficient baseline data upon which to base any realistic M&E Para. 150 � Description of
capture baseline data through the M&E plan
monitoring at the Environmental Status level. The Project will therefore Component 4
have an elongated Inception Phase during which the necessary baseline Para. 229 � M&E
data will be captured relating to the proposed indicators (see above). This AMENDMENTS TO EXEC SUMM
baseline data will be reviewed between 3-6 months into the Project and Page 8 - Component 4. Information
harmonised with the adopted IW M&E indicators.
Capture, Management &

Dissemination
M&E Plan now amended to include the need to capture baseline data
Page 20 - M&E Plan
AMENDMENTS TO ANNEXES
M&E Plan � Added text P. 1 plus
Increase in budget ($150,000) for
M&E to cover need for baseline data
capture. N.B. balanced across Project
budget so no overall increase in GEF
contribution
IW:LEARN is not involved. Brief should be revised to This was an unfortunate oversight on the part of the Project Developers AMENDMENTS TO BRIEF
incorporate into Replicability section that the Project and is now rectified as suggested by the GEFSec Reviewers.
Para. 128 � Component 1.
will hade a website consistent with IW:LEARN
Para. 216 � Replication
guidelines, will participate in IW:LEARN activities,
AMENDMENTS TO EXEC SUMM
and will contain funding for 2 country officials to travel
Component 1 description
to 2 GEF IW portfolio Conference to participate as well

as having a Project exhibition booth
The partnerships, joint ventures, investment incentives Indicators included in specific LogFrames established and included as AMENDMENTS TO ANNEXES

K-18

and award schemes with the private sector need to have part of APPENDIX A = THE DEMONSTRATIONS. These specific Heading to Annex B � ICA amended
indicators established and monitored
LogFrames are now referred to at the beginning of the Main Project And reflected in Both Brief and Exec
Logical Framework
Summary to draw attention to
specific LogFrames for Demos in
APPENDIX A � THE
DEMONSTRATIONS
As per recommendation of STAP reviewer, more Done � see Responses above relating to indicator requirements
See Amendments above relating to
specificity to be included in the demo projects including
indicator requirements
indicators of success in process and stress reduction
The Brief will confirm an adequate level of co- The figures are provided in Incremental Cost Assessment and confirmed AMENDMENTS TO BRIEF
financing (including cash co-financing)
in the Executive Summary but have not been highlighted in the Brief. Para. 228 � Incremental Cost and
This has now been amended
Project Financing
Stakeholder Participation and M&E Plans will be Stakeholder Participation and M&E are now included for each See APPENDIX A � THE
present for each demo ( by time of CEO endorsement)
demonstration through APPENDIX A � THE DEMONSTRATIONS
DEMONSTRATIONS
UNDP AND WORLD BANK REVIEW COMMENTS AND RESPONSES IN BLUE SECTION
There is concern that the linkages to .... the GEF UNDP has requested that the arrangements as defined within the UNDP- AMENDMENTS TO BRIEF
Seychelles Biodiversity Project `Mainstreaming GEF BD Project are now similar inscribed within this IW Project in the Para. 58 � Regional Context
Biodiversity Management into Production Sector section on Consultation, Coordination and Collaboration between AMENDMENTS TO ANNEXES
Activities' are not described (the comments provide IAs. However UNEP and UNDP Project Documents use different formats Annex G - List of SCTSSA-Related
further detail on agreements reached between the two and UNEP does not have such a section therefore this has been addressed GEF Supported or Funded Initiatives
Projects)
A. under Regional Context and B. in the Annex � List of SCTSSA- in Africa.
related, GEF supported of funded initiatives in Africa.
Page 6 - APPENDIX A - THE

DEMONSTRATIONS
These arrangements are also captured within APPENDIX A � THE
DEMONSTRATIONS
The scope of the Project extends outside the boundary Annex J (which it now transpires was not available to the reviewers) AMENDMENTS TO BRIEF
of activities permissible under OP10. As currently provides a detailed discussion of how the Project fits OP10 more Para. 105 to 111 � Rationale and
presented this would seem to overlap with the Strategic appropriately than any of the other OPs. The Project was specifically not Objective
Priorities for Biodiversity (particularly Priority 2 � co-joined with the Biodiversity portfolio as most of the countries are Para. 123 & 124 � Output 1.B
Mainstreaming Biodiversity into Productive Sector and pursuing related Biodiversity initiatives. This specific IW initiative is, AMENDMENTS TO EXEC SUMM
Landscapes). Clarification should be provided on these however, focusing on the demonstration of BATS and BAPs that would Para. 17 � project Rationale and
linkages and assurances given of full integration with reduce the impacts of contaminants, and the adoption of practices such as Strategy
activities pursued under the regional Project with environmental management systems and accounting, cleaner production, Component 1 description
national efforts spearheaded under the biodiversity adoption of sustainable enterprise strategies, use of public-private
focus area.
partnerships to adopt standards and self-regulation, and the
implementation of legislative and policy reforms based on successful
demonstrations of these new approaches, technologies and practices.
Elements of the demonstrations that may address tourist issues such as
impacts of reef recreation focus on the development of more effective

K-19

zoning and legislation to designate sensitive areas and MPAs that will act
to reduce and control allowable discharges and pollutant levels in such
areas and reduce impacts from contaminants such as sedimentation both
from land-based origins and from on-reef activities. Therefore, although
there may appear to be overlap into biodiversity issues the focus and
objective of the Project is clearly within OP10 and attempts to partner this
Project with the Biodiversity portfolio would expand its mandate and
objectives beyond the feasible and sustainable delivery of a single Project.
It is, however, recognised that this Project will need to coordinate and
even integrate its actions closely with Biodiversity initiatives addressing
CZM and watershed management and this has been further clarified
within the text. It is noted that such cross-thematic integration of project
efforts is now fully supported by GEF and was the subject of much
discussion and demand at the Brazil IW Conference in June 2005. All of
the main Project deliverables as well as those of the Demonstrations fit
within the OP10 requirements as defined under Annex J � Project
Conformity with OP10 Requirements. Further clarifications have been
made in the text as noted.

K-20

Document Outline