REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE
2nd Meeting of the RSC
Honiara, Solomon Islands
10 October 2006
Paper Number
RSC2/INFO.1
Title
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
Document No.
Title
RSC2/INFO.1
List of Documents
RSC2/WP.2
Draft Agenda
RSC2/WP.3
Regional Steering Committee Representation
RSC2/WP.4
Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project Annual
Report - GEF/UNDP Project Implementation Report (PIR) / Annual
Project Report (APR)
RSC2/INFO.5
National Annual Project Reports
RSC2/WP.6
IUCN Report on Alternative Options
RSC2/WP.7
Financial Reports -2006
RSC2/INFO.1
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE
2nd Meeting of the RSC
Honiara, Solomon Islands
10 October 2006
Paper Number
RSC2/WP.2
Title
DRAFT AGENDA (rev 2)
a.
Opening of Meeting
b.
Apologies
c.
Adoption of Agenda
d.
Regional Steering Committee Representation
1. Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project Annual
Report - (UNDP/GEF Annual Project Report /Project
Implementation Report)
2. National Annual Project Reports
3. Financial Reports:
4. Other Matters
e.
Next Meeting
f.
Records of Proceeding
g.
Close of the Meeting
RSC2/WP.2
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE
2nd Meeting of the RSC
Honiara, Solomon Islands
10 October 2006
Paper Number
RSC2/WP.3
Title
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE REPRESENTATION
Summary
The purpose of this paper is to provide the Regional Steering Committee with relevant
information relating to representation at Committee meetings and in relation to that the
progression of project activities that deal directly with broad stakeholder participation and
awareness raising in project implementation, in particularly the outcome of the
consultants report on links with an environmental non-governmental.
Recommendation
The Regional Steering Committee is invited to:
i)
Consider the report of the consultant relating to establishing project links with a
regional environmental NGO and endorse the recommendation that the PCU
formalize that link with the WWF SPPO through a co-financing agreement;
ii)
Endorse the progression of discussion with PITIA with the view of concluding a
similar co-financing agreement; and
iii)
Endorse, subject to i) the continued participation of WWF SPPO, PITIA, Australia
and New Zealand as nominated non-government organizations, industry
association and project co-financiers.
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE REPRESENTATION
Introduction
1.
The adopted Terms of Reference for the Regional Steering Committee states
that the Committee will compromise individuals with fisheries technical expertise and
involvement in the fisheries management related issues in the Pacific islands region;
and that this would comprise of representation from:
· A National Focal Points appointee from each participating country
Governments;
· A nominee from UNDP-GEF as the project Implementing Agency;
· A nominee from the FFA as the project Executing Agency;
· A nominee each from co executing Agencies for the project, SPC & IUCN;
· A nominee from SPREP1;
· A nominee each from Non-government organizations (NGO) as agreed to by
the Committee;
· A nominee from industry associations as agreed to by the Committee; and
· A nominee from project co-financiers.
2.
The project document instructs that observers, who may be invited to attend by
the Steering Committee, may include regional stakeholder representation (including
fisheries industry), environmental NGOs (regional and international), other donor
agencies, etc. Observer attendance will be agreed by consensus within the Committee
membership.
Project Stakeholder Participation and Awareness Raising Activities
3.
In order to promote non-governmental stakeholder and public awareness of
oceanic fisheries management issues and strengthen NGO participation in oceanic
fisheries management, a regional environmental NGO and an industry NGO are to
be enrolled into project implementation. Their involvement in project implementation
is to be formalized through co-financing agreements. The following progress has
been made to date to identify and engage a representative regional ENGO and the
regional tuna industry association.
Environmental Non-governmental Organisation
4.
A consultancy has been undertaken of which the key objective has been to
provide a strategy with which to engage and establish links between the OFM Project
and regional environmental non-governmental organisations (ENGO). It included the
development of a co-financing arrangement between a Pacific ENGO and the OFM
Project.
5.
The first draft of the consultancy report was submitted in June and circulated
to Project Focal points for comment, of which none were received. The final report is
appended at Attachment A and has fulfilled the following requirements:
· The development of a strategy to engage ENGOs in project implementation to
promote NGO stakeholder and public awareness of oceanic fisheries
1 Pacific Regional Environment Programme as the key partner organization for GEF in the
region.
RSC2/WP.3
2
management issues and strengthen NGO participation in oceanic fisheries
management at national and regional levels;
· Established links with regional ENGOs (including contact details and point of
contact);
· Provide advice on the scheduling and framework for national and regional
workshops for ENGOs;
· Draft a co-financing arrangement with a Pacific ENGO; and
· Recommend ENGO representation at the Regional Steering Committee.
6.
The consultant concludes that the World Wide Fund for Nature, South Pacific
Programme (WWF SPP) is the logical choice to engage in project implementation,
for the promotion of oceanic fisheries management awareness and as ENGO
representation at the RSC. The report appends a draft co-financing agreement that
outlines relevant activities and commitments. With the RSC's endorsement of the
consultant's recommendation, the co-financing agreement can be completed with
signature by WWF SPP and the FFA.
Industry Non-governmental Organisation
7.
The Pacific Islands Tuna Industry Association (PITIA) is newly formed and is in
the process of establishing the policy and procedures of its office. The Project
Coordination Unit has established communication with PITIA's interim office bearers,
namely the care taker President, Mr. James Movick to discuss the support of industry
participation and awareness raising in Convention-related processes through the
following activities:
· The conclusion of a co-financing arrangement with Pacific INGO;
· Support Pacific INGO participation in the Commission;
· The provision of information flow on the Convention and oceanic
fisheries management issues to Pacific INGOs and businesses; and
· Support for a Pacific INGO consultations on the Convention and
oceanic fisheries management issues.
8.
The first annual general meeting of the PITIA to elect office bearers was to have
taken place in May this year but has been postponed until early 2007. Further
discussions to progress the above issues are planned with PITIA representatives in the
margins for the RSC in October.
9.
The PITIA has observer status at the WCPF Commission and participates in the
annual and sub-committee meetings of the Commission. In light of this, and the fact that
they are currently the only association representing industry region wide indicates that
formalized relations between the OFM Project and the PITIA should be completed and
that the RSC endorse their participation at the projects Regional Steering Committee
meetings as an observer.
Donor Observers at RSC
10.
Australia and New Zealand are traditional and significant donors to both
principal project executing agencies, the FFA and SPC and to the region. New
Zealand has made direct contributions to the project in the provision of funds for the
regional policy workshops, specifically the Management Options Workshop that will
be held annually for the duration of the project. Australia contributes significantly in
co-financing activities relating to the tuna tagging programme coordinated by SPC.
RSC2/WP.3
3
11.
Australia, as did WWF SPPO and Greenpeace Pacific, observed at the
informal meeting for the OFM Project that preceded the annual meeting of the Forum
Fisheries Committee held at Nadi in early May this year. This meeting provided
beneficiary countries with an update on project activities.
12.
Therefore, the RSC is asked to endorse both Australia and New Zealand's
continued participation at the projects Regional Steering Committee meetings as
observers under the auspices of identified donors and as a matter of procedure.
Recommendations
13.
The Regional Steering Committee is invited to:
iv)
Consider the report of the consultant relating to establishing project links with
a regional environmental NGO and endorse the recommendation that the
PCU formalize that link with the WWF SPPO through a co-financing
agreement;
v)
Endorse the progression of discussion with PITIA with the view of concluding
a similar co-financing agreement; and
vi)
Endorse, subject to i) the continued participation of WWF SPPO, PITIA,
Australia and New Zealand as nominated non-government organizations,
industry association and project co-financiers.
RSC2/WP.3
4
ATTACHMENT A
Strategy to Promote and Strengthen
Environmental NGOs Stakeholder
Participation and Public Awareness of
Pacific Oceanic Fisheries Management
Issues
Michelle Lam
June 2006.
The views expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily
represent positions of the OFM Project or FFA.
5
Table of Contents
Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... 6
Acknowledgement......................................................................................................... 7
Introduction ...............................................................................................................9
Structure of the Environment NGO Networks ...................................................10
E-NGOs in the Pacific..............................................................................................11
The Nature Conservancy ....................................................................................11
Foundations of the Peoples' of the South Pacific International (FSPI)............13
Conservation International .................................................................................14
World Wide Fund For Nature ..............................................................................15
Greenpeace..........................................................................................................20
PIANGO ................................................................................................................22
Selection Criteria the Environment NGO ...............................................................26
Recommendation of an ENGO representation at the Regional Steering
Committee................................................................................................................26
Other Options ..........................................................................................................27
Scheduling and framework for national and regional workshops for ENGOs; ...28
Communication Strategy ....................................................................................28
Appendix 1 ...............................................................................................................30
Appendix 2:..............................................................................................................32
Appendix 3:..............................................................................................................33
Appendix 4 ...............................................................................................................34
6
Acknowledgement
The author wishes to thank the many people who contributed directly or indirectly to
the production of this report. Thanks are expressed to organisation heads and
directors, as well as to the staff of regional environmental non-governmental
organizations who provided their time, information, advice and insights during this
consultancy. Ms. Barbara Hanchard of the Project Coordination Unit was especially
helpful in providing all the necessary documentation for the duration of the work.
Finally, the author wishes to express her gratitude to the other staff of the FFA,
especially the Information Technology and the Finance teams who provided technical
and administrative support to the consultant.
7
Acronyms
BSSE
Bismarck Solomon Seas Eco-region
CI
Conservation International
PIFFA
Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency
FSPI
Foundation for the Peoples of the South Pacific International
GEF
Global Environment Facility
IUU
illegal, unregulated and unreported
IUCN
International Union of Conservation Networks
ENGO
environmental non-governmental organization
NGO
non governmental organisation
NLU
National Liaison Unit
OECD
Organisation of Economic Cooperation for Development
OFP
Pacific Community Oceanic Fisheries Programme
PIANGO
Pacific Islands Association of Non-governmental Organisation
RFMO
regional fisheries management organisation
SPREP
Secretariat of the Pacific's Regional Environment Programme
SPC
Secretariat of the Pacific Community
TNC
The Nature Conservancy
WWF
World Wildlife Fund For Nature
WWF SPPO
World Wildlife Fund For Nature South Pacific Programme Office
UNGA
United Nations General Assembly
UNDP
United Nations Development Programme
WCPFC
Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission
8
Strategy to promote and strengthen
Environmental NGOs stakeholder
participation and public awareness of
oceanic fisheries management issues
"Knowledge is an asset that grows when shared"
Introduction
The Global Environment Facilitiy (GEF) is providing further assistance to the Pacific
Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management (OFM) Project to support Pacific small island
developing States (SIDS) efforts as they participate in the setting up and initial period
of operation of the new fisheries commission that is at the centre of the Western and
Central Pacific Fisheries (WCPF) Convention. Pacific SIDS are reforming, realigning,
restructuring and strengthening their national fisheries laws, policies, institutions and
programmes in order to take up the new opportunities which the WCPF Convention
creates and to discharge the new responsibilities which the Convention requires of
them.
The goals of the OFM Project combines the interests of the global community in the
conservation of a marine ecosystem covering a large area of the surface of the globe,
with the interests of some of the world's smallest nations in the responsible and
sustainable management of resources that are crucial for their sustainable
development.
Specifically, the OFM project aims to achieve global environmental benefits by
enhanced conservation and management of transboundary oceanic fishery
resources in the Pacific Islands region and the protection of the biodiversity of the
Western Tropical Pacific Warm Pool large marine ecosystem (WTPWP LME).
The design of the OFM Project involved a substantial consultative process, which
was warmly supported throughout the region. Reflecting outcomes of this process,
the project seeks to apply a regional approach in a way that recognises national
needs; to strike a balance between technical and capacity-building outputs by
combining technical and capacity building activities in every area; and to open
participation in all project activities to governmental and non-governmental
stakeholders.
The engagement of environmental non-government organizations (ENGOs) will allow
the flow of information through established networks that are efficient, cost effective,
and will encourage partnerships at all levels between government, non-governmental
organisations and the wider Pacific communities.
These networks will be important for vertical and horizontal exchanges and the
distribution of information to address in overall project management and coordination,
as well as providing information about the project and the Convention, the capture
and transfer of lessons and best practices and participation by stakeholders. The
networks will also contribute to assessments and measuring indicators and the ability
to identify early any project related management problems being experienced by
countries, organisations and other stakeholders.
9
In general, the ENGO network members share a common objective that is to raise
public awareness of oceanic fisheries management issues and strengthen their
participation in oceanic fisheries management in the Pacific region.
Establishing and maintaining effective partnerships and networks with ENGOs to
keep the oceanic fisheries management under review, is part of the work programme
of the OFM project and is consistent with the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries
Agency's (FFA) role as a facilitating agency by mobilizing institutional cooperation at
the relevant levels. The multidisciplinary nature of environmental issues and themes
coupled with the fragmentation of data and information across different countries,
makes it imperative to have structures in place to ensure that the promotion of non-
governmental stakeholder in project activities across regional ENGOs. This will occur
through a range of co-financed activities, which emphasize participation, awareness
raising and information exchange.
On the communications side, the dissemination of policy-relevant assessment
findings to policy-makers enables effective policies to be formulated in response to
pressing environmental concerns. In addition, the provision of access to
environmental information facilitates sound decision-making at all levels by a broad
spectrum of stakeholders ranging from governmental officials to the ordinary citizen.
Structure of the Environment NGO Networks
Over the past three decades, the Pacific region has spawned a number of
environmental NGOs, such as The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Conservation
International (CI), World Wide Fund For Nature (WWF), Foundations of the Peoples'
of the South Pacific International FSPI), Greenpeace, as well as the Pacific Islands
Association of Non-governmental Organisation (PIANGO). All of these networks deal
with some aspect of environmental data and information from the collection and
management of through to access, exchange and dissemination of environmental
data and information, though not necessarily in all countries.
Collectively, the established ENGO networks have a somewhat ad hoc approach,
and are not fully coordinated amongst themselves to allow effective dissemination of
the wide range of various environmental information, including those of oceanic
fisheries management. It may eventuate that a loose group of ENGOs form to
properly address information dissemination at some point in the future.
The OFM project is looking for a regional ENGO with a work programme that
includes oceanic fisheries and which has a wide distributed network of country
programs for dissemination of information and execution of project activities. The
relationship with a nominated Pacific regional ENGO will be set out in a co-financing
agreement. The partnership, between the OFM Project and the ENGO, will ensure
that the non-government stakeholders participate in regional and national oceanic
fisheries management processes, including the Commission meetings, have
enhanced awareness of oceanic fisheries management issues and improved
understanding of the WCPF Convention.
It is envisaged that specific forums will be developed for national level ENGO
participation and discussion processes and the promotion of awareness of national
and regional development and economic priorities and how these relate to
sustainable fisheries management.
10
The basic building block of information dissemination is the national environmental
information network, comprising of non-governmental organiations and community
focal points. These focal points, in cooperation with relevant partners will facilitate the
dissemination of information at the national level through their own networks.
ENGOs in the Pacific
There are only a handful of environmental NGOs in the Pacific region. Two are
unique to the region and up to three others belong to the international consortiums of
ENGOs. The section below describes each regional environmental NGO in some
detail in order to determine the best suited ENGO as the potential partner to the OFM
Project.
The Nature Conservancy
The Nature Conservancy is one of the leading conservation organisations globally,
working to protect the most ecologically important lands and waters around the world
for nature and people. The mission of The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is to preserve
the plants, animals and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on
Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive.
TNC is dedicated to protecting vital ecosystems and all the corals, fish and people
that depend on them. Their marine programme centers on coral reef projects all over
the world to ensure:
· Plant and animal diversity assessments throughout the Meso-American Reef;
· Training and education for coral reef managers from more than 30 countries;
· Support for designing and creating resilient marine protected area networks in
the Asia-Pacific region, known as the Coral Triangle;
· Effective management in Belize and Honduras where huge numbers of reef
fish gather each year to reproduce;
· Monitoring of Staghorn coral restoration efforts in the Florida Keys; and
· Science-based innovations in a conservation toolbox to protect tropical coral
reefs across the planet
The Nature Conservancy's `Global Strategies for Marine Conservation' recognise that
an increased and coordinated focus on marine areas is critical to protecting the
diversity of life on Earth. TNC's marine initiative is strengthening and developing the
following strategies:
11
priorities
coral
coasts
policy
Setting priorities Transforming
New tools for the
for marine
coral reef
conservation of
Advancing marine
conservation
conservation
estuarine and
policy frameworks
using marine
through
coastal
and building
ecoregional
innovative tools,
ecosystems include volunteer support
assessments to
on-the-ground
leasing, owning and
for marine
set a shared
science, networks restoring submerged conservation.
course of action
of resilient marine lands.
for governments,
protected areas,
communities, and and contributions
ocean managers. to global
conservation
forums.
In addition to these core strategies, TNC has over 100 marine projects in 21
countries and 22 United States.
In the Asia Pacific region, TNC supports the protection of more coral and fish
species than anywhere else on Earth and some of the healthiest forests. TNC is
helping preserve the most spectacular landscapes, from Indonesia's coral reefs to
the jagged peaks of China. Most, if not all of TNC's marine projects are coastal in
nature.
Fig : Map showing the countries where TNC
is
active in the Pacific
region.
12
Foundations of the Peoples' of the South Pacific International
(FSPI)
FSPI is a network of independent, like-minded, affiliated, non-governmental
organisations who work with communities in nine Pacific countries and in East Timor.
In addition, FSPI has three metropolitan partners in Australia, United Kingdom and
the United States. These affiliates work in partnership across the South Pacific with
the vision - "Together We Build Communities in the Pacific".
The main function of the FSPI Secretariat is to coordinate the planning and design of
regional development projects, based on the needs identified by the
member/affiliates and their constituencies. However, the work undertaken by FSPI
affiliates varies from country to country and from sector to sector. Community
development remains the core business of the network, which includes various types
of awareness programmes and advocacy work.
The mission of FSPI is to work with Pacific communities through people-centred
programmes to foster self-reliance within a changing world.
FSPI believes that it is the largest, most experienced, secular civil society network in
the Pacific, with affiliates in Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Kiribati
and Tuvalu.
Communities and Coasts Programme
The core of FSPI's Communities and Coasts Programmes work is assisting
communities to build on the strengths of combining new knowledge and institutions to
provide the fundamental pillar for achieving sustainable livelihoods from the sea.
The FSPI Communities and Coasts Programmes work with the national affiliates
through three strategic action areas in:
· Capacity building
o Training
o Site support
o Networks and partnerships
· Research and development
o Development of reef restoration techniques and sustainable coral
mariculture
o Develop awareness raising material
o Develop relevant participatory training material
o Conduct socio-economic analysis of potential coastal management
action e.g. coral mariculture
· Policy development and advocacy
o Participate in international for an advocating community-based
management processes
13
o Submissions to regional and international policy development
processes to ensure appropriate consideration is given to community-
based approaches in natural resources decision making.
The FSPI Communities and Coasts Programmes currently work in Solomon Islands,
Fiji, Vanuatu, Kiribati and Tuvalu as well as Barbados, Jamaica and Grenada in the
Caribbean.
The FSPI's marine focus is more on coastal activities. However, they have
expressed an interest in disseminating oceanic fisheries management information
through their network of affiliates
Conservation International
Founded in 1987, the Conservation International (CI) is an innovative leader in global
biodiversity conservation. CI's scientists, economists, communicators, educators, and
other professionals work with hundreds of partners to identify and overcome threats
to biodiversity. CI employs more than 800 people around the world with the majority
being based in countries where biodiversity is most threatened, and most are citizens
of the country in which they work.
The CI targets high-biodiversity areas where the needs are greatest and where each
conservation dollar spent can save the most species. These areas are:
· Biodiversity hotspots;
· High-biodiversity wilderness areas; and
· Key marine regions.
The CI is headquartered in Washington, DC, but concentrates its efforts globally.
They work in more than 40 countries, the majority of them developing nations in:
· Africa;
· Asia-Pacific; and
· Central and South America.
The CI believes in partnerships because no single organisation can safeguard the
Earth's biologically richest places. As such, enabling partners are the cornerstone to
their strategic approach. In 2004, the CI shared approximately one-fourth of their
budget with nearly 350 conservation partners throughout their priority areas.
In the Asia-Pacific region, the CI's effort spans six countries and three sub-regions,
reaching from Papua New Guinea and New Caledonia in Melanesia to countries in
Polynesia and Micronesia. Their Melanesian work includes preserving the sub-
regions's natural beauty.
The CI has joined with representatives from governments, local communities, and
wildlife groups in Melanesia to safeguard the region's flora and fauna by establishing
biodiversity conservation corridors. Corridors help shield marine life as well as plants
and animals from devastation, while creating sustainable economic opportunities for
local people.
The CI's others efforts include identifying threatened and endangered species,
promoting ecotourism, and educating villages about sustainable fishing practices.
14
Although they have a strong interest in the OFM Project, the CI have indicated that
they are not sure that they would consider themselves ideal for the coordinating role
of the ENGOs with the OFM Project. However, they do want to develop a good
working relationship in areas of mutual interest. Citing one example - at the SPC
OFP OFM meeting, the CI was able to assist SPC with Pacific seamount information
as they have a common interest in seamount research in the Phoenix Islands at
present.
World Wide Fund For Nature
The WWF South Pacific Programme Office (WWF SPPO) is a non-governmental
conservation organisation serving the Pacific Island countries. The programme was
established in 1990 as part of WWF's endeavor to work effectively and appropriately
in the region. The programme is managed from a regional base in Suva, Fiji and
organizes a series of strategic conservation field projects, policy reviews and
campaigns in different Pacific Island countries on behalf of the WWF network.
As well as the Regional Secretariat in Suva, country programme offices have been
established in the Cook Islands, Fiji, Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea as
well as a project office in the Cook Islands. WWF SPPO works closely with WWF
France on projects in New Caledonia and French Polynesia as well as throughout the
Pacific on regional issues. In 2004, WWF SPPO had more than 100 staff.
The WWF SPPO is part of WWF International. Established in 1961, the WWF
(formerly known as the World Wildlife Fund) is headquartered in Gland, Switzerland.
It has 4.7 million supporters and a global network active in more than 90 countries.
WWF is currently funding over 2,000 conservation projects around the world. In just
over four decades, the WWF has become one of the worlds largest and most
respected independent conservation organisations. The WWF's ultimate goal is to
stop and eventually reverse environmental degradation and to build a future where
people live in harmony with nature.
The staff of the WWF SPPO, made up primarily of Pacific Islandernationals, created
the following vision for the WWF SPPO programme:
"The Pacific islands and oceans in which ecological processes,
nature and biodiversity are conserved and live in harmony with the
long-term needs of Pacific Island people. There are supportive
legislation and policies that protect the customary cultural and heritage
rights of the Pacific Islands people, ensure the environment is
managed in a sustainable manner and promote the socio-economic
development of Pacific Islands countries. There is cooperation and
networking between Pacific Island governments, business and
industry, non-governmental and other civil society organisations to
maintain
conservation
and
sustainable
development.
Future
generations are guaranteed the use of natural resources to sustain
their lives and their children's lives".
The programme goal is:
"To support Pacific Island people to conserve and sustainably manage
our natural inheritance for present and future generations."
15
As is evident from these vision and goal statements, local livelihoods and
governance of natural resources are very important elements of the WWF SPPO
Programme.
The WWF SPPO's mission is living in harmony with nature through:
· Conserving the world's biodiversity;
· Ensuring that the use of natural resources is sustainable; and
· Promoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption.
The core of the WWF SPPO is the Secretariat, which provides guiding support to
conservation activities, sets standards, maintains financial accountability,
communications and administrative procedures. The programmes based in the
Secretariat are Finance, Human Resources, Administration, Communications,
Capacity Building and Sustainable Livelihoods, Regional Policy, Climate Change and
the Regional Marine Programme. Each programme has a manager or coordinator
who is responsible for day-to-day management and administration of activities,
infrastructure, staff and funds.
As part of a decentralized leadership base, each of the programmes in Cooks
Islands, Fiji, Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands has a Country Manager who is
responsible for the day-to-day management and administration of their programmes.
The WWF SPPO employs over 100 staff in various parts of the South Pacific. The Fiji
country programme office is based in Suva, not far from the Secretariat. It employs
nine staff, most of who work in Suva, or in field offices in Vanua Levu.
The Papua New Guinea country programme is the largest programme and has a
structure which comprises the Country Manager, Conservation Manager and six
Project Managers. The Translfy Ecoregion 2 and the Bismack Solomon Seas
Ecoregion (BSSE) Coordinators are also based in Papua New Guinea. Overall, the
four Papua New Guinea offices employ 34 staff. The Solomon Islands country
programme has offices in Gizo and Honiara headed by a Country Manager and
Conservation Manager. The Cook Islands project office is based in Rarotonga.
The WWF network, which contributes expertise and funding to the international
conservation programme, and carries out conservation activities in more than 90
countries, ranging from practical field projects and scientific research to advising on
environmental policy, promotion of environmental education, and raising public
understanding of environmental issues. With partnerships within the network
growing, the maintenance of existing relationships becomes a priority for the WWF
SPPO. The WWF SPPO is in the process of forming a partnership with WWF France
in an memorandum of understanding with the New Caledonia Programme and
French Polynesia.
The WWF is currently one of the few international networks with the potential to
become an interest group for the conservation of tuna globally and is well-placed to
engage in tuna conservation in the Western and Central Pacific. The WWF has been
working in the region since the 1970s with a strong presence in many of the coastal
States as well as in States with distant water fishing fleets that operate there. To
further develop the WWF's commitment to improving sustainable fisheries
management in the Western and Central Pacific, the WWF has decided to develop a
2 Transfly region covers 76000km2 of the Southern tip of the New Guinea island.
16
strategic initiative which will influence WCPFC management decisions affecting
target and non-target species, direct international aid and investments in the region
towards sustainable fisheries development, and harness market forces to apply
pressure to improve tuna fisheries management.
The following section provides excerpts from the WWF's Western Central Pacific
Tuna Business Plan, developed in partnership with TRAFFIC in May 2005 by
California Environmental Associates. The full document describes the WWF's
intended initiative towards supporting and achieving improvements in tuna fisheries
management in the Western and Central Pacific. The strategies described
throughout the business plan complement and leverage the WWF's current work in
the region and globally. It builds on work to achieve the full range of outputs and will
require dedicated funding. Consequently, the plan outlines a pragmatic and
leveraged strategy for the WWF's engagement, but it also provides a comprehensive
approach, encompassing issues of particular interest to potential funding agencies.
The original plan was structured to address the following principal elements:
1. Governing principles: the binding standards which guide the
plan's overall design;
2. Programme scope: overall objectives and required breadth of
the initiative;
3. Strategy design: the most effective and efficient opportunities to
achieve these objectives;
4. Critical path design: prioritized actions and investments;
5. Capacity planning: utilization of WWF and partner resources;
6. Initiative management and coordination: governance of the
initiative; and
7. Financials: costs of the outlined strategy and operational plan.
Because of the ecological, economic and cultural significance of the tuna fisheries in
the Pacific region and the great opportunity the WCPFC offers, the WWF have
decided to develop a well coordinated, strategic initiative to improve tuna fisheries
management in the Western and Central Pacific.
.
The WWF's strategy will focus on three principal issues that will underpin a transition
from unsustainable resource management to an ecosystem-based approach to
fisheries management in which they will be:
1. Promoting fisheries management and governance that
integrates an ecosystem-based approach and strict regulation,
enforcement and compliance;
2. Directing international finance in the form of access agreements
and development aid frameworks towards better, more sustainable
fishing practices; and
3. Harnessing the power of the markets to promote traceability of
products to legal sources and to give preference to sustainable
fisheries management.
The plan outlines a pragmatic, prioritized and highly leveraged implementation
strategy that will enable the WWF and its partners to effectively improve fisheries
17
management in the Western and Central Pacific, while fully heeding the complexity of
working in an evolving political framework with dynamic market interests. The plan
represents the WWF's position on what will be needed to ensure successful reform of
fisheries management, prioritized around the major leverage points in the region
influencing the WCPFC on ecosystem-based management and regulation
compliance and enforcement, directing international financing for sustainable
fisheries development and harnessing the power of the markets. The strategies and
activities outlined throughout complement and leverage work that is being done by
the WWF in specific countries throughout the region and globally.
The WWF's initiative will be structured around the following four major features:
1. Influencing policy from the "centre" through expert-driven, coordinated input in the
WCPFC's policy frameworks;
2. Seizing opportunities within the region by locating specific expertise where it
makes most sense, i.e. where the markets, fishing capacity and fisheries resources
are;
3. Dedicated leadership, coordination and network communication by being an
initiative leader in the region; and
4. A well-resourced communications strategy and the capacity to deliver the policy
reforms and promote broad awareness for the initiative in the region and beyond.
Each of these features is discussed in more detail below.
1. Influencing policy from the centre: expertise and coordination. The greatest
opportunity for the WWF is to influence the decisions that will be made by the
WCPFC in its first years of existence. The WWF will therefore focus on providing
coordinated, expert input on policy at the WCPFC. The WWF will do this by building
a WCPFC "team" and strategy, and ensuring there is representation in the key
countries in both chambers of the WCPFC by either a WWF presence on national
delegations or with observer status. Some countries, such as Fiji and Australia, allow
conservation representatives to take an active role in the WCPFC process and to
comment on policies and negotiations. In other countries, such as Japan,
conservation representatives are only allowed to observe negotiations and are not
allowed to take an active role. It is therefore imperative that the WWF convey unified
positions, because those countries that do not allow active participation can be
influenced by those that do. For example, Japan will pay much attention to the
positions of the US, the EU and Australia. The WWF's position on WCPFC
negotiations and activities by individuals at the country level will be guided by
regional experts in fisheries management and biology, and by technical analysts
focusing on regulation and compliance and distant water fleets.
2. Seizing opportunities within the region: locating specific expertise where it
makes the most sense. In addition to having policy expertise in the region to form
the WWF's positions in the WCPFC, experts on specific topics will be located
throughout the region to provide information on the WWF's activities and policy
positions. An expert in tuna markets will be placed in Japan because of the
importance of the sashimi market. An expert on traceability and trade will be placed
in Thailand; or the Philippines because of the importance of transshipment and
processing in these countries. A technical expert on distant water fleets and
developments in fishing capacity will be placed in Taiwan or Korea because of the
rate of growth in fishing capacity in these countries. An expert in access agreements
will be placed in the South Pacific Program Office to aide national offices in the
region with access agreement negotiations. These experts will focus on the activities
18
occurring immediately around them, but will use these developments to inform the
WWF's broader strategy in the region.
3. Dedicated leadership. Integrating the policy input at the top with the specific
topical expertise throughout the region will require strong coordination, a clear
mandate and careful leadership. A dedicated Initiative Manager, adequately
empowered to make resource prioritization and allocation decisions, facilitate and
review policy advice, monitor and evaluate progress, ensure adequate coordination
and drive both the overall and communications strategy will be required to lead the
activities of the various offices and the thematic approaches. This manager will use
the WWF network's considerable expertise and ability to engage on discrete
initiatives related to the overall campaign. Also, the initiative manager will ensure the
WWF is speaking with a unified voice, using consistent messages and involving
partner organisations in WCPFC activities, when appropriate. The overall leadership
will reside with the Initiative Manager in the region. The specific location of the
Initiative Manager is not important, but most likely they will reside in one of the Pacific
Island country offices, the Philippines or Indonesia.
4. Leveraging policy work with strong communications. One of the key factors
for successes for many of the WWF's campaigns is the integration of lobbying work
with high-level communications activities to maximize awareness of the WWF's aims
throughout the target community and beyond. The WWF's tuna initiative in the
Western and Central Pacific will similarly depend on strong communications to
support the policy work at the WCPFC and to reach key stakeholders.
Communications tools will be used to convey the WWF's messages from position
papers developed on specific topics of importance including the activities of distant
water fleets, access agreements and the environmental effects of fishing in the
region, e.g. turtle bycatch. Relevant "scorecards" will be used to track the progress of
various government and market player's actions in the region. The WWF will also use
the internet for online advocacy, marketing and as an information resource for the
initiative.
Improving the management of tuna fisheries in the Western and Central Pacific is
complex and potentially costly. The overall capacity of non-governmental
organisations (NGOs) in the Western and Central Pacific is greatly limited. The WWF
will take advantage of its current capacity, while strategically outlining where
additional capacity can be used most effectively.
The WWF will also leverage the expertise and capacity of its primary partner in the
region, TRAFFIC. The following outlines existing centres of competence and where
greater capacity is needed:
Existing Centres of Competence
The WWF has been active in the Western and Central Pacific region since the 1970s
and has multiple fisheries and marine related projects that can be called upon for the
Western and Central Pacific Tuna Initiative.
ForTuna WWF's Global Tuna Conservation Initiative. Tuna fisheries are not just
a priority for the WWF in the region, but globally. The WWF has a global tuna
conservation initiative that provides strategic coordination for the WWF's activities to
improve the management of tuna fisheries worldwide. The WWF is active in all tuna
regional fisheries management organisations globally, and has teams focused on
mitigating species bycatch in tuna fisheries and on using the power of the market to
apply pressure for management changes in tuna fisheries.
19
Fisheries expertise in the region. Several WWF offices in the region currently have
fisheries staff including Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam, Japan, Fiji,
Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, New Caledonia, Australia and New
Zealand. Additionally, there is capacity for marine conservation work in the three
most critical ecoregions for tuna conservation in the region (the Bismark Solomon
Seas Ecoregion, the Sulu Sulawesi Marine. Ecoregion, the Fiji Island Marine and
Ecoregion). Fisheries capacity is strongest in Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, the
Philippines and the South Pacific Programme Office (Fiji).
There is little to no WWF marine capacity currently in Thailand, China, Taiwan and
Korea. The fisheries expertise that the WWF currently has includes a mix of
scientists, policy-makers, ex-fishermen and natural resource managers, providing a
solid foundation for undertaking a regional tuna project of this magnitude.
Participation/presence at the Commission. The WWF has been actively involved
in the WCPFC since its inception, following the creation of the Commission and then
working to have a presence at WCPFC meetings. In previous WCPFC meetings, the
WWF has been part of national delegations for parties to the Commission. In 2005,
the WWF applied for formal observer status within the WCPFC which will allow the
WWF additional means for engaging with the Commission. Additionally, the WWF
asked to participate in technical committees for the WCPFC, all of which positions
the organisation well for continued engagement in Commission decision-making.
Lastly, the WWF has a global High Seas Strategy which pulls together all the WWF's
activities on high seas. The WWF is seeking to influence the review of the UN Fish
Stocks Agreement to drive greater implementation of the Agreement by RFMOs, the
UN General Assembly (UNGA) process to dismantle the Flags of Convenience
system and the Convention on Biological Diversity to drive the establishment of High
Seas Protected Areas.
The WWF has produced a global analysis of the legal challenges involved in creating
High Seas Protected Areas and is a member on the OECD Ministerial-led High Seas
Taskforce on Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported (IUU) fishing. One of the key goals
of this taskforce is to promote the development of an accountability mechanism
between RFMOs and the UNGA so that RFMOs actually have to start delivering
sustainable fisheries management.
The WWF has marine capacity throughout the Western and Central Pacific, the
Reforming Tuna Management in the Western and Central Pacific Initiative will be the
first major coordinated fisheries related initiative for the region by the WWF. It will
build on the Sustainable Seafood Choices project initiated by WWF Australia in 2002
(with a focus on fisheries certification) and help further build capacity for the
organisation in the region, extend the WWF's fisheries work into regional governance,
market-based measures and help put ecosystem-based management into practice.
The WWF SPPO showed great interest and potential to be a partner to OFM Project.
Greenpeace
Greenpeace is an independent organisation campaigning to ensure a just, peaceful,
sustainable environment for future generations. Its mission and core values are
based on independence, non-violence and bearing witness.
20
Greenpeace is an independent campaigning organisation which uses non-violent
creative confrontation to expose global environmental problems and to force
solutions which are essential to a green and peaceful future. Greenpeace's goal is to
ensure the ability of the earth to nurture life in all its diversity.
Greenpeace International began in Canada in 1971 and today has a presence in
more than 40 countries across Europe, the Americas, Asia and the Pacific.
Greenpeace Australia was founded in 1977 and joined forces with Greenpeace
Pacific in 1998. Together with more than 113,000 supporters forming the backbone
of Greenpeace Australia Pacific. Operating as a company, Greenpeace Australia
Pacific seeks to follow high standards of accountability and transparency.
Greenpeace's core values are:
Independence do not accept money from governments, corporations or political
parties because it would compromise our core values.
Bearing witness - follow the Quaker tradition of bearing witness. Philosophically and
tactically, our peaceful protests work to raise awareness and bring public opinion to
bear on decision-makers.
Non-violent direct action - Greenpeace strongly believes that violence in any form is
morally wrong and accomplishes nothing. However, Greenpeace believes that non-
violent direct action at the point of an environmental crime expose an environmental
problem that will ensure that no one gets hurt. Activists participating during a non-
violent direct action are fully trained. Examples of non-violent direct actions include
chasing whaling ships at sea or an activist using special equipment to lock
themselves to the front gates of nuclear facility.
Integrity, bravery, empowerment, confrontation and cleverness are inherent to
Greenpeace. While Greenpeace is best known for its non-violent direct actions,
public actions are just one of many strategies they employ.
Greenpeace, together with international experts, conducts scientific, economic and
political research into the causes and effects of environmental pollution. Using
Market force- political and corporate campaigners regularly meet with governments
and industry to ensure environmental considerations are factored into every level of
decision-making. Together with strong media and communications, the team gets the
word out, guaranteeing Greenpeace voice is heard around the world.
Although Greenpeace forms partnerships with other non-government organisations
(NGOs) in their Pacific work, their network in the regional is not fully established. For
example, in Papua New Guinea, they joined the Eco-forestry Forum (a not-for-profit
group of PNG-based organisations) to work with landowners and promote the
benefits of choosing sustainable, integrated community development over the "quick
fix" promised by logging companies but in Tonga, they have not established their
presence.
Behind the scenes, they campaign on many levels. Using non-violent, direct actions
to expose global environmental problems and force solutions. Our victories are a
testament to the effectiveness of Greenpeace's methods.
The Greenpeace Oceans Campaign officer indicated their interest to work with the
OFM Project. However, due to their network limitations in the Pacific as well as
21
having a relatively small oceans program, (other than the banning of commercial
whaling and sea mount fishing), it may not be effective to use this organisation.
PIANGO
The Pacific Islands Association of Non-Governmental Organisations (PIANGO) is a
regional network of NGO focal points or coordinating bodies known as National
Liaison Units (NLUs) based in 22 Pacific Island countries and territories.
PIANGO was formally established in 1991 to assist NGOs in the Pacific to initiate
action, give voice to their concerns and work collaboratively with other development
actors for just and sustainable human development. PIANGO's primary role is to be a
catalyst for collective action, to facilitate and support coalitions and alliances on
issues of common concern, and to strengthen the influence and impact of NGO
efforts in the region.
PIANGO had its origins in the growing movement towards increased networking
amongst Pacific Island NGOs which commenced in the late 1970s. The historical
framework of the region has included both French and British colonialism, which has
left a legacy that needs addressing in order to enable selfhood for all the
communities within the Pacific. Pacific island nations vary between fully sovereign
and independent countries, to freely associating states and non-self governing
territories relating to the United States, France and New Zealand. Geographic
distance is also a factor which inhibits communication between the nations of the
Pacific, given the logistics of transport, communication and language.
Following a process of regional consultation, the first PIANGO Council was held in
August 1991 in Pago Pago, American Samoa. The Council was funded by a range of
donors, including the Australian International Development Assistance Bureau
(AIDAB), the Commonwealth Foundation, the Government of New Zealand, and the
United Nations Development Program (UNDP).
The meeting was attended by more than 60 NGO delegates from 22 Pacific
countries. The idea of forming an NGO network to facilitate regional programs and
action was discussed, and there was unanimous support for the formal establishment
of PIANGO. A constitution was drafted, guidelines were set for its operation, and a
Coordinating Committee was elected.
Since then, PIANGO has taken significant steps to increase its profile and establish
itself as an effective support organisation to NGOs throughout the Pacific. Activities
over the past years have come under the following program areas; Information and
Communication,
Capacity
Building, Coalition and Alliance building, and
Administration. In addition, PIANGO also hosted its 5th Council during October
2005.
PIANGO currently has six full-time staff who are accountable to an elected seven
member Board. The office is located in Suva, Fiji. PIANGO currently has 17 national
NGO umbrella bodies who are full members. Seven other countries have interim
membership or observer status.
PIANGO exists to enable the Pacific extended family of NGOs to more effectively
promote and advance the interest and well being of their people. More specifically,
PIANGO is a network of Pacific NGOs, existing to facilitate communication; provide a
common voice at regional and international forums; and assist NGOs to strengthen
22
and develop Pacific identities, unity, cultures and forms of social action, as well as to
improve the well being of the communities they serve.
PIANGO's goals are to:
· Facilitate active networking among NGO's at all levels throughout the region.
Promote and enable access to, sharing and dissemination of information,
ideas, experience and resources (including human resources) among NGOs
throughout the region.
· Enable NGOs to better understand, fulfil and develop their roles and
functions, and strengthen their organisation and program capacities.
· Assist in identifying, monitoring and analysing the needs of people in the
Pacific, and ways of increasing the role of the people of the Pacific in their
own development, with emphasis on Pacific women and youth.
· Provide a means for a collective voice and action on issues of concern to
NGOs and the people they serve
· Play an active role in promoting a regional Pacific identity and Pacific ways of
thinking and responding.
· Cooperate with other networks and organisations within or beyond the region
which have similar aims.
PIANGO is governed by the PIANGO Council which meets every three to four years
and is responsible for establishing policy. PIANGO operations are managed by the
PIANGO Executive Committee which meets every four to six months. The PIANGO
Secretariat is based in Suva, Fiji.
Regional Members
· Council of Pacific Education
· Fiji Disabled People International Oceania
· Fiji Women's crisis centre
· Foundation of the People of the South Pacific
· Greenpeace
· PACFAW
· Pacific Resources Concern Centre
· Pacific Association of NGOs
· Pacific News Association
· Pacific OCEanic of Trade Union
· Pacific News Association
· Sth Pacific Oceanic of Trade Union
· World Council of Churches
· World Wide Fund for Nature
PIANGO's membership is made up of national bodies called National Liaison Units
(NLUs). These are organisations or networks of NGOs which are broadly
representative of NGOs in their country. With one NLU per country or territory, each
NLU has one vote in the PIANGO Council. Where there is no NLU, interim
23
membership may be issued to an NGO group working to establish an NLU. Regional
networks of NGOs can also be invited to take up associate status within PIANGO.
National Liaison Unit
PIANGO currently has National Liaison Units (NLUs) and Interim members in 21
Pacific countries and non-self-governing territories.
Member contact details can be found on the PIANGO website at
http://www.piango.org
Country
Member
Australia
Australia Council for International Development
(ACFID)
Cook Islands
Cook Islands Association of NGOs (CIANGO)
Federated States of Micronesia
FSM Alliance of NGOs (FANGO)
(FSM)
Fiji
Fiji Council of Social Services (FCOSS)
Hiti Tau
French Polynesia/Tahiti
Kiribati
Kiribati Association of NGOs (KANGO)
Nauru
Nauru Island Association of NGOs
New Caledonia/Kanaky
Unité Territoriale de Liaison de Nouvelle-Calédonie
(UTLN) Kanaky
New Zealand /Aotearoa
Association of NGOs of Aotearoa (ANGOA)
Niue
Niue Association of NGOs (NIANGO)
Papua New Guinea
Melanesian NGO Centre for Leadership (MNCL)
Samoa
Samoa Umbrella of NGOs (SUNGO)
Solomon Islands
Development Services Exchange (DSE)
Tonga
Civil Society Forum of Tonga (CSFT)
Tuvalu
Tuvalu Association of NGOs (TANGO)
Vanuatu
Vanuatu Association of NGOs (VANGO)
West Papua
Interim members
Bougainville
Nikana Ma'atara
Guam
Sanctuary Inc.
Palau
Palau Community Action Agency (PCAA)
Wallis & Futuna
Association Culturelle de Vailala
East Timor
Civil Society Capacity Building Fund (CSCBF)
Observers
American Samoa
Hawaii
Marshall Islands
Marshall Islands Council of NGOs (MICNGOs)
24
Board members were elected at 5th Council, Port Moresby, October 2005. The
newly elected PIANGO Board members are:
-
Chairperson: Adimaimalaga Tafunai of SUNGO
-
Madeleine Ayawa of UTLN Kanaky
-
Claire Baiteke is the Deputy Chairperson of KANGO
-
Douglas Ngwele is the Chairperson of VANGO
-
Drew Havea is the Chair of the Tonga CSO Forum
-
Ahohiva Levi, a Board member of NIUANGO
PIANGO publishes a quarterly newsletter. Submissions are to be limited to 500
words and can include images.
The PIANGO Director indicated her interest and support to the OFM Project by
offering to assist in the dissemination of information to its network. However, she
cautioned that information to be disseminated must be in a form suitable for non-
scientists audiences. She also recommended that vital information be translated in to
vernacular.
25
Selection Criteria the Environment NGO
The key objective of this consultancy was to provide a strategy with which to engage
and establish links between the OFM Project and regional environmental non-
governmental organisations (ENGO) by identifying a suitable ENGO to work with to
increase stakeholder awareness.
In forming a working relationship with an appropriate ENGO, the principal goal is to
improve the understanding of the transboundary oceanic fish resources and related
features of the Western and Central Pacific Warm Pool Large Marine Ecosystem.
For the purposes of this exercise a range of methods were used to identify regional
ENGOs and gather relevant information. These methods have included web-based
searches, use of existing NGO networks known to the consultant, field visits, email
communication, and follow-up teleconference calls.
Based on the information gathered, a desk review was completed to arrive at a
"shortlist" of regional NGOs that fell within certain criteria. Three principle criteria
were used to select the most suitable ENGO to be recommended to the OFM Project.
These include:
· The commitment to engage in this case, the regional ENGO must indicate a
commitment to be part of the OFM project.
· Have an existing work programme that includes oceanics
· Budget the ENGO must be able to produce a budget which would form part
of a co-financing arrangement.
Recommendation for ENGO representation at the Regional
Steering Committee.
Of the five regional ENGOs, only the WWF SPPO was able to fulfill all three criteria.
In interviews with the WWF SPPO they indicated a willingness to establishing a
working relationship with the OFM project. The WFF SPPO have a well coordinated,
strategic initiative as part of their work programme that seeks to improve tuna
fisheries management in the Western and Central Pacific.
.
The WWF SPPO's strategy focuses on three principal issues that will underpin the
transition from unsustainable resource management to an ecosystem-based
approach to fisheries management. These are by:
1. Promoting fisheries management and governance that integrate an
ecosystem-based approach with strict regulation, enforcement and
compliance;
2. Directing international finance in the form of access agreements and
development aid frameworks towards better more sustainable fishing
practices; and
3. Harnessing the power of the markets to promote traceability of products to
legal sources and to give preference to sustainable fisheries management.
26
This original plan outlines a pragmatic, prioritized and highly leveraged
implementation strategy that will enable WWF SPPO and its partners to effectively
improve fisheries management in the Western and Central Pacific, while fully
heeding the complexity of working in an evolving political framework and dynamic
market interests. The plan represents WWF SPPO's position on what will be needed
to ensure the successful reform of fisheries management, prioritized around the
major leverage points in the region influencing the WCPFC on ecosystem-based
management and regulation compliance and enforcement, directing international
financing for sustainable fisheries development and harnessing the power of the
markets. The strategies and activities outlined throughout complement and leverage
work that is being done by WWF SPPO in specific countries, throughout the region
and globally.
WWF SPPO's initiative is structured around the following four major features:
1. Influencing policy from the "centre" through expert-driven,
coordinated input in WCPFC's policy frameworks;
2. Seizing opportunities within the region by locating specific expertise
where it makes most sense, i.e. where the markets, fishing capacity
and fisheries resources are;
3. Dedicated leadership, coordination and network communication by
an initiative leader in the region; and
4. Well-resourced communications strategy and capacity to deliver the
policy reforms and promote broad awareness for the initiative in the
region and beyond.
Other Options
During interviews with regional ENGOs it was suggested that the OFM project could
also consider establishing or using a loose group of core regional NGO as the link to
the wider NGO community. While the advantage of this could provide good coverage
of the Pacific region as well as at the national level, limitations would be presented in
the difficulty of sharing allocated project resources across all participating members
of the ENGOs. It is however, However, it is recommended that such a core group be
used to disseminate information rather than being the actual implementing partner.
On the basis of their willingness to be involved in the OFM Project, the compatibilyt of
their work programme, strategies and initiatives and the Commission objectives the
consultant recommends that WWF SPPO be engaged as the Regional ENGO to
implement specified activities in component 3 of the OFM Project. As a result of this
outcome WWF SPPO with the Committee's concurrence becomes the NGO
representative at the annual session of the project Regional Steering Committee.
27
Scheduling and framework for national and regional
workshops for ENGOs;
Four workshops over the life of the project are identified as activities of Component 3
and sub-component 3.3 which require ENGO participation.
During discussions with WWF SPPO on co-financed activities, WWF SPPO have
proposed that the most appropriate use of funds will be to have one main regional
workshop and 3 consultative meetings over the course of the OFM Project. For
participation at these meetings and workshop the relevant NGOs will also be
identified by WWF SPPO. The workshop will serve to inform other relevant NGOs
about the project, identify the level of interest and understanding of issues, highlight
the expectations of the project and agree to a process for engagement to feed into
the meetings of the Scientific and Technical Compliance Committees and the Tuna
Commission.
Funding contingency will be reserved for relevant independent local NGOs not
represented by regional counterparts (Please refer to Appendix 3).
Preliminary discussions with WWF SPPO have resulted in the drafting of a co-
financing agreement that will be further negotiated with the Regional Steering
Committee's concurrence of their nomination as a partner in specific activities of the
Project. The draft co-financing agreement is appended at Appendix 4 and has yet to
be concluded.
Communication Strategy
The OFM Project anticipates the development of information packages to raise
awareness of the Commission issues in the co-financing arrangement with the
selected ENGO. The consultant recommends that a communications strategy be
developed for sub component 3.3 of the OFM project.
To establish an information dissemination process, thoughts must be given to how
this part is implemented. In this first instance this will be based on a range of co-
financed activities, emphasizing participation, and awareness raising and information
exchange. Existing media networks used in each country such as post, email and
internal/local internet e.g. PFNet, paid announcements (AM radio programs, service
messages etc.) as well as wireless radio communication as well as communication
by "word of mouth" is adequate. As the OFM Project proceeds, a more detailed
community communications approach for each of the participating country will need
to be defined.
The Communications Strategy proposed here attempts to address all major
communications elements that will be a factor during the implementation of the
project. This comprises three main elements: i) participation, ii) awareness raising
and iii) information exchange in general at the regional and national levels. These
three main elements operate across two broad but interconnected levels, targeting
regional as well as national audiences.
· The first level of the Communications Strategy should target regional
organisations with the objective of information exchange and raising
28
awareness of the project activities and achievements. Many elements and
activities at the regional strategy will be similar to those employed at the
national level.
· The second level will target the national audience including community's
stakeholders. At this level, the Communications Strategy should also involve
participation, awareness raising and information exchange. Particularly in
respect of oceanic fisheries management, the output will be to target
behavioral change within communities who will appreciate the gains made
though the Project in improved oceanic fisheries management and who will
have improved opportunities for their interests to be represented in national
and regional consultative and decision-making processes, including the
WCPF Commission, as well as in the Project.
To accommodate this combination of issues and audiences, the Communications
Strategy will require carefully planned, multi-faceted, multi-media information and
education campaigns at the regional and national levels with the aim of achieving the
establishment of an interactive network of stakeholders at all levels.
29
Appendix 1 Terms Of Reference
The Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management (OFM) Project was officially
approved by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) Chief Executive Officer; Mr.
Leonard Good on May 24 2005. The USD$11m five year OFM Project is executed
by the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) at which the Project
Coordination Unit is based. The project co-executing agencies are the Pacific
Community (SPC) and the World Conservation Union (IUCN).
The Project has three components, two technical components, which are specifically
designed to address the two immediate objectives and the two root causes, as
follows:
Component 1. Scientific Assessment and Monitoring Enhancement, aimed at the
Knowledge and Information Objective; and
Component 2: Law, Policy and Institutional Reform, Realignment and Strengthening,
aimed at the Governance Objective;
And a third component,
Component 3. Coordination, Participation and Information Services, designed to
support and enhance the outcomes of the two technical components.
Component 3 addresses the overall project management and coordination, the
provision of information about the Project and the Convention, the capture and
transfer of lessons and best practices and participation by stakeholders. The
process is designed to be inclusive, with stakeholder participation promoted
nationally and regionally.
This component will promote non-governmental stakeholder in Project activities
through the execution by regional environmental and industry (non government
organisations) NGOs of a range of co-financed activities, emphasizing participation,
awareness raising and information exchange.
The project recognises national, regional and global NGOs concerned with
conservation of oceanic fish resources and protection of the marine environment:
who will appreciate the gains made though the Project in improved oceanic fisheries
management and who will have improved opportunities for their interests to be
represented in national and regional consultative and decision-making processes,
including the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries (WCPF) Commission, as well as
in the Project.
Objectives
To be able to promote non-governmental stakeholder and public awareness of
oceanic fisheries management issues and strengthen NGO participation in oceanic
fisheries management, a regional environmental NGO will be enrolled in the
implementation of the OFM Project.
The key objective of this consultancy will be to provide a strategy with which to
engage and establish links between the OFM Project and regional environmental
non-governmental organisations (ENGO). This will include the development of a co-
financing arrangement between a Pacific ENGO and the OFM Project.
Scope of Consultancy
30
The scope of the work to be undertaken will include:
A professional report that includes:
· The development of a strategy to engage ENGOs in project implementation to
promote NGO stakeholder and public awareness of oceanic fisheries
management issues and strengthen NGO participation in oceanic fisheries
management at national and regional levels;
· Established links with regional ENGOs (including contact details and point of
contact);
· Provide advice on the scheduling and framework for national and regional
workshops for ENGOs;
· Draft a co-financing arrangement with a Pacific ENGO; and
· Recommend ENGO representation at the Regional Steering Committee.
31
Appendix 2: People Consulted
Organisation
People Consulted
Date
Pacific Islands Association of Non
Cema Bolobola
9 June 2006
Governmental Organisations
(Director)
(PIANGO)
Greenpeace Pacific
Nilesh Gounder
9 June 2006
(Oceans Campaigner)
World Wide Fund For Nature South
Louise Heaps
4-7 July 2006
Pacific Programme (WWF SPP)
(Marine Coordinator)
Seremiah Tuqiri
(Oceans Policy Officer)
Foundation of the Peoples of the
Hugh Govan
8 June 2006
South Pacific International (FSPI)
(Manager Coastal
Programme)
Conservation International
Sue Taei
Email 19 June
2006
32
Appendix 3:
Contact details and point of contacts with regional ENGOs
Organisation
Point of
email
Phone/Fax Postal/street
Contact
address
(position)
Pacific
Cema
piango@connect.com.fj
679-
30 Ratu
Islands
Bolobola
3302963
Sukuna
Association of (Director)
679-
Road, Suva,
Non
3317046
Fiji
Governmental
Postal: PO
Organisations
Box 17780,
(PIANGO)
Suva, Fiji
Greenpeace
Nilesh
greenpeace@connect.com.fj 679-
Level 1 Old
Pacific
Gounder
3312861
Town Hall
(Oceans
679-
Victoria
Campaigner)
3312784
Parade,
Suva, FIJI
World Wide
Seremiah
stuqiri@wwfpacific.org.fj
679-
4 Ma'afu St
Fund For
Tuqiri
3315533
Domain
Nature South
(Oceans
679-
Suva
Pacific
Policy
3315410
FIJI
Programme
Officer)
(WWF SPP)
Foundation of Hugh Govan
Hugh.govan@fspi.org.fj
679-
27 Gardiner
the Peoples
(Communities
3312250
Rd, Nasese,
of the South
and Coastal
679-
Suva, FIJI
Pacific
Programme
3313398
Postal: PO
International
Manager)
Box 18006,
(FSPI)
Suva, FIJI
Conservation
Sue Taei (
s.taei@conservation.org
685-21593 SPREP,
International
Private
Mailbag,
Apia,
SAMOA
Pacific
Mere Tupou
tvere@pcrc.org.fj
679-
83 Amy
Concerns
(Director)
3304649
Street,
Resources
679-
Suva, FIJI
Centre
3304755
(PCRC)
33
Draft
Appendix 4
Draft - Co-financing arrangement between FFA (OFM Project) and
WWF SPP
LETTER OF AGREEMENT
Letter of Agreement between the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA)
and the World Wide Fund For Nature South Pacific Programme Office (WWF
SPPO) for the Implementation of the United Nations Development
Programme/Global Environmental Facility (UNDP/GEF) Pacific Islands Oceanic
Fisheries Management Project (OFM Project).
Whereas the FFA is the Executing Agency for the OFM Project;
And whereas WWF SPPO is a partner responsible for the implementation of certain
activities in the order to achieve certain outputs and contribute to the achievement of
certain outcomes under the OFM Proejct;
And whereas the FFA and WWF SPPO agree to collaborate in the Implementation of
the OFM Project;
The Parties hereby agree that:
ARTICLE 1
General Duty
WWF SPPO will implement Component 3 which addresses the overall project
management and coordination, the provision of information about the Project and the
Convention, the capture and transfer of lessons and best practices and participation
by stakeholders.
The Component will promote non-governmental stakeholder in Project activities
through the execution by regional environmental and industry NGOs of a range of co-
financed activities, emphasizing participation, awareness raising and information
exchange.
Component 3 Outcome: Effective project management at the national and regional
level; major governmental and non-governmental stakeholders participating in
Project activities and consultative mechanisms at national and regional levels;
information on the Project and the WCPF process contributing to increased
awareness of oceanic fishery resource and ecosystem management; project
evaluations reflecting successful and sustainable project objectives.
ARTICLE 2
Obligations of FFA
34
The FFA will:-
i.
Communicate regularly with UNDP and other partners and provide timely
information to WWF SPPO on matters relating to the Project
ii.
Upon receipt of financial quarterly reports and requests for advance, review
and provide a consolidated report and request for that quarter to UNDP by the
2 week of each quarter
iii.
Make payment to WWF SPPO of the necessary funds, in accordance with the
approved advance, to be executed in the 4th week of each quarter and make
every endeavour to ensure WWF SPPO is not placed in a position of deficit
financing to support activities it is responsible for under the programme
iv.
Facilitate the participation of WWF SPPO in relevant activities in the
Stakeholder Participation and Awareness Raising component
v.
Provide copies of the relevant UNDP formats and reporting requirements and
vi.
Consult with WWF SPPO on project revisions
ARTICLE 3
Obligations of WWF SPPO
WWF SPPO shall undetake Project implementation in order to promote non-
governmental stakeholder and public awareness of oceanic fisheries management
issues and strengthen NGO participation in oceanic fisheries management.
The intended outcome of the Stakeholder Participation and Awareness Raising Sub-
Component is:
Outcome 3.3. Non-governmental stakeholder participation in national and regional
oceanic
fisheries
management
processes,
including
the
Commission,
enhanced;
awareness
of
oceanic
fisheries
management issues and the WCPF Convention improved.
Specific forums developed for NGO participation and discussion
process; promotion of awareness of national and regional
development and economic priorities and how these relate to
sustainable fisheries management.
The intended outputs and indicative activities of the Stakeholder Participation and
Awareness Raising Sub-Component are:
Output 3.3.1. ENGO participation and awareness raising in Convention-
related processes.
Activity 3.3.1.1. Conclude co-financing arrangement with a Pacific ENGO.
Activity 3.3.1.2. Support Pacific ENGO participation in the Commission.
Activity 3.3.1.3. Provide information on the Convention and oceanic fisheries
management issues to Pacific ENGOs.
Activity 3.3.1.4. Hold national and regional Workshops for ENGOs.
Activity 3.3.1.5. Produce information materials to raise public awareness on
oceanic fisheries management issues.
Activity 3.3.1.6. Organise regional and national fora on the Convention and
oceanic fisheries management issues for civil society
participation.
35
WWF SPPO will also:
a) Contribute to relevant activities in the Stakeholder Participation and
Awareness Raising component
b) Through its best endeavours, and in recognition that delays may lead to
disruption of the planned schedule for disbursement of funds, provide
financial quarterly reports and request for advance in an agreed format to the
FFA by the 5th of the month following the end of each quarter or shortly
thereafter. Here activities have involved multiple funding sources, reports will
describe such complementary or conterpart funding applied to activities
related to this programme
c) On request, provide support for the preparation of Quarterly Progress Reports
(QPR) to the FFA
d) Through its best endeavours, and in recognition that that delays may lead to
disruption of the planned schedule for disbursement of funds, provide
quarterly narrative reports on the progress to achieve the proposed outputs,
in an agreed format, to the FFA by the 5th of the month following the end of
each quarter
e) Participate in the work of the Project Steering Committee
f) Ensure that OFM Project is appropriately acknowledge in any reports
produced with the assistance of staff supported under the programme
g) Coordinate with IUCN on those activities in which IUCN is involved in the
Stakeholder Participation and Awareness Raising component
h) Facilitate the participation of the FFA in relevant activities in the Stakeholder
Participation and Awareness Raising component and
i) Communicate regularly with the FFA on matters relating to the project and
facilitate work of the Project Steering Committee.
ARTICLE 4
Exchange and Coordination of Information
The parties will:-
a) Bring to each other's attention any significant matters related to the project if
notification through the formal reporting process would not be sufficiently
timely and to establish an on-going dialogue on Programme-related issues;
and
b) Ensure that the work of national personnel and consultants engaged under
the project will be well coordinated;
c) Co-operate, to the maximum extent possible, on the implementation of related
International Waters Programme activities where there is scope for regional
benefits.
ARTICLE 5
Budgetary Matters
The work programme and budget attached at Annex A represents the financial
commitment for activities to be implemented under this project by WWF SPPO and
the FFA. The budget for activities to be implemented by WWF SPPO may be revised
36
by mutual agreement and an exchange of letters. Any such letters will form part of
this Letter of Agreement.
WWF SPPO will make its best effort to achieve incremental cost contribution and will
report such estimated incremental costs to the FFA annually.
IN WITNESS WHEREFOF, THE PARTIES hereby agree to sign this LETTER OF
AGREEMENT dated this .....................day of ..............................2006.
On behalf of the Forum Fisheries Agency
On behalf of the World Wide Fund For
Nature South Pacific Programme Office
Mr. Dale Withington
Mr. Feleti Teo
Director
Programe Director
Date:
Date:
Witness:.........................................
Witness:.........................................
(Print name underneath signature)
(Print name underneath signature)
37
Annex A
GEF/FFA-OFP WWF Proposed Work Plan and Co-financing Arrangement - 2006-2010
Figures are shown both in Fiji Dollars (FJD) unless otherwise displayed
ACTIVITY
YR 1
YR 2
YR 3
YR 4
YR 5
COMMENTS
1. Coordinate 1
Workshop x 2
Consultative
Consultative
Consultative
Workshop x 2
4 workshops were
Workshop and 3 ENGO
days
meeting x 1 day
meeting x 1 day
meeting x 1 day
days
identified in Component
Consultative meetings
3. It is suggested
(includes travel, per
however that there be 1
diem, accommodation &
GEF: 15,000
GEF:15,000
GEF: 15,000
GEF: 15,000
GEF: 15,000
main regional workshop
room rental)
and 3 consultative
meetings. Relevant
WWF: XX,XXX
WWF: XX,XXX
WWF: XX,XXX
WWF: XX,XXX
WWF: XX,XXX
NGOs will also be
[In-kind
[In-kind
[In-kind
[In-kind
[In-kind
identified. The workshop
Contribution
Contribution
Contribution
Contribution
Contribution
will be a leveller to inform
i.e. staff
i.e. staff salaries,
i.e. staff salaries,
i.e. staff salaries,
i.e. staff salaries,
other relevant NGOs
salaries, etc
etc please
etc please
etc please
etc please
about the project, identify
please estimate
estimate a cost
estimate a cost
estimate a cost
estimate a cost
the level of interest and
a cost for
for Seremia's
for Seremia's
for Seremia's
for Seremia's
understanding of issues,
Seremia's time
time and any
time and any
time and any
time and any
highlight the expectations
and any other
other WWF staff
other WWF staff
other WWF staff
other WWF staff
of the project and agree
WWF staff
involved]
involved]
involved]
involved]
to a process for
involved]
engagement to feed into
the Scientific and
Technical Compliance
committees and the Tuna
Commission.
Funding contingency will
be reserved for relevant
independent local NGOs
not represented by
regional counterparts.
Total XX,XXX
XX,XXX
XX,XXX
XX,XXX
XX,XXX
XX,XXX
38
2. Coordination of
GEF :40,000
GEF :40,000
GEF :40,000
GEF :40,000
GEF :40,000
This activity will carried
ENGO engagement in
out through the 5 years
WCPFC issues and
WWF : 10,000
WWF :11,000
WWF :12,000
WWF :13,000
WWF :14,000
process. (Salary,
operational costs, travel
& subsistence costs)
· Establish and
coordinate E-
mail NGO Forum
· Attendance at
annual WCPFC
meetings
· Inform ENGOs of
Commission &
related working
group issues and
outcomes
· Coordinate joint
advocacy and
promote joint
positions at the
Scientific &
Technical
Committees &
Commission
meetings, as
appropriate
· Coordinate
communications
and awareness
activities relating
to WCPFC
issues by
ENGOS, as
appropriate
· Attendance at
key WCPFC
meetings
39
Total 50,000
51,000
52,000
53,000
54,000
260,000
3. Awareness raising :
GEF : 16,000
GEF : 16,500
GEF :16,500
GEF : 16,500
GEF : 16,500
Awareness materials in
· Publication of
glossies (similar to an
awareness
WWF : 3,000
WWF :3,000
WWF :3,000
WWF 3,000
WWF :3,000
idiot's guide to OFP
materials
issues for public
· Awareness
awareness). This could
events
include the following: by-
· Consultancy
catch [turtles /cetaceans
fees for
/seabirds /sharks]; high
production of
seas bottom trawling;
key policy and
IUU; EAFM; capacity &
awareness
allocation; access
papers
agreements; markets;
WCPFC
Total 19,000
19,500
19,500
19,500
19,500
82,000
GEF Contribution
74,000
71,500
71,500
71,500
71,500
360,000
WWF Contribution
XX,XXX
XX,XXX
XX,XXX
XX,XXX
XX,XXX
XXX,XXX
Grand Total
Exchange rate: 0.559 (USD:1FJD)
40
ATTACHMENT A
UNDP GEF ANNUAL PROJECT REPORT (APR)/PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
REPORT (PIR) 2006
(1 October 2005 to 30 June 2006) 1
I. Basic Project Data
Official Title:
PACIFIC ISLANDS OCEANIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT
Country/ies:
Cook Islands, Federated States of
PIMS Number
2992
Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati,
Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue,
Palau, Papua New Guinea,
Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga,
Tokelau, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.
Atlas Project Number
[UNDP]
Focal Area
International Waters
Project Type (FSP/MSP)
Full-sized project
Strategic Priority
IW1 - Catalyse financial
Operational Programme
OP 9, Integrated
resource mobilisation for
Land and Water
implementation of reforms and
Multiple Focal
stress reduction measures agreed
Area, SIDS
through TDA-SAP or equivalent
Component.
processes for particular
transboundary systems;
IW2 - Expand global coverage
of foundational capacity
building addressing the two key
programme gaps and support for
targeted learning, specifically
the fisheries programme gap.
Date of Entry into Work
GEF Council endorsement
Planned Project
Five years
Programme
XXX March 2005
Duration
GEF CEO endorsement 24
May 2005
ProDoc Signature Date
(See Attachment A)
Original Planned Closing
2010
Date
Date of First Disbursement
28 October 2005 (USD628,676)
Revised Planned Closing
None currently
Date
proposed
Is this the Terminal
Date Project
While project
APR/PIR?
No
Operationally Closed
activities should
(if applicable)
be completed by
2010 provisions
have been made
1 Reporting Period: This `annual' report does not cover a full calendar year of project activity but
a nine month period between 1 October 2005 to 30 June 2005, taking in account project
commencement in the fourth quarter of 2005.
Page 1 of 35
for a post
evaluation to
verify IW
indicator
assessments in
2012
Date Mid Term Evaluation
Not Applicable
Date Final Evaluation
Not applicable
carried out
carried out
(if applicable)
(if applicable)
Dates of visits to project by
March 2005 (I Toorawa - UNDP
Date of last TPR Meeting
14 October 2005
UNDP country office
HIR)
June 2005 (Toorawa HIR, De
Graff Suva)
Date of last visit to project by
RSC - 14 Oct 2005
UNDP-GEF RTA
Project Contacts:
Title
Name
E-mail
Date
Signature
National Project
N.Barbara
barbara.hanchard@ffa.int
22
Manager / Coordinator
HANCHARD
September
2006
Government GEF OFP2
(optional)
UNDP Country Office
Asenaca RAVUVU
asenaca.ravuvu@undp.org
Programme Manager
UNDP Regional
Randall PURCELL
randall.purcell@undp.org
Technical Advisor
Page 2 of 35
Project Summary (as in PIMS and ProDoc)
Summary
Small Island Developing States (SIDS) have special conditions and needs that were identified for international attention in the
Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States and in the World
Summit for Sustainable Development's Johannesburg Plan of Implementation. Throughout these instruments, the
importance of coastal and marine resources and the coastal and marine environment to sustainable development of SIDS is
emphasised, with the Plan of Implementation specifically calling for support for the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries
Convention (the WCPF Convention).
The Global Environmental Facility (GEF) identifies sustainable management of regional fish stocks as one of the major
environmental issues SIDS have in common and as a target for activities under the SIDS component of OP 9, the Integrated Land
and Water Multiple Focal Area Operational Programme.
In addition, the GEF promotes the adoption of an ecosystem-based approach to addressing environmental problems in Large
Marine Ecosystems is through activities under the Large Marine Ecosystem Component of OP 8, the Waterbody-Based
Operational Program.
Consistent with this framework, GEF financing for the International Waters (IW) South Pacific Strategic Action Programme
(SAP) Project from 2000 supported the implementation of an IW Pacific Islands SAP, including a pilot phase of support for the
Oceanic Fisheries Management (OFM) Component, which underpinned successful efforts to conclude and bring into force the
WCPF Convention. Now, GEF assistance is sought for a new Pacific Islands OFM Project to support Pacific SIDS efforts as they
participate in the setting up and initial period of operation of the new Commission that is at the centre of the WCPF Convention,
and as they reform, realign, restructure and strengthen their national fisheries laws, policies, institutions and programmes to take
up the new opportunities which the WCPF Convention creates and discharge the new responsibilities which the Convention
requires.
The goals of the Project combine the interests of the global community in the conservation of a marine ecosystem covering a huge
area of the surface of the globe, with the interests of some of the world's smallest nations in the responsible and sustainable
management of resources that are crucial for their sustainable development.
The global environmental goal of the Project is to achieve global environmental benefits by enhanced conservation and
management of transboundary oceanic fishery resources in the Pacific Islands region and the protection of the biodiversity of the
Western Tropical Pacific Warm Pool Large Marine Ecosystem.
The broad development goal of the Project is to assist the Pacific Island States to improve the contribution to their sustainable
development from improved management of transboundary oceanic fishery resources and from the conservation of oceanic
marine biodiversity generally.
The IW Pacific Islands SAP identified the ultimate root cause underlying the concerns about, and threats to, International Waters
in the region as deficiencies in management and grouped the deficiencies into two linked subsets lack of understanding and
weaknesses in governance. In response, the Project will have two major technical components.
Component 1, the Scientific Assessment and Monitoring Enhancement Component, is aimed at providing improved scientific
information and knowledge on the oceanic transboundary fish stocks and related ecosystem aspects of the Western Tropical
Pacific Warm Pool Large Marine Ecosystem (WTP LME) and at strengthening the national capacities of Pacific SIDS in these
areas. This work will include a particular focus on the ecology of seamounts in relation to pelagic fisheries and the fishing
impacts upon them.
Component 2, the Law, Policy and Institutional Reform, Realignment and Strengthening Component, is aimed at assisting Pacific
Island States as they participate in the earliest stages of the work of the new WCPF Commission and at the same time reform,
realign and strengthen their national laws, policies, institutions and programmes relating to management of transboundary oceanic
fisheries and protection of marine biodiversity.
Component 3, the Coordination, Participation and Information Services Component, is aimed at effective project management,
complemented by mechanisms to increase participation and raise awareness of the conservation and management of oceanic
resources and the oceanic environment.
The design of the Project has involved a substantial consultative process, which has been warmly supported throughout the region.
Reflecting outcomes of this process, the Project seeks to apply a regional approach in a way that recognises national needs; to
strike a balance between technical and capacity-building outputs by twinning technical and capacity building activities in every
area; and to open participation in all project activities to governmental and non-governmental stakeholders.
The structure for implementation and execution of the Project builds on a record of successful collaboration between the United
Nations Development Programme (UNDP), regional organisations and Pacific SIDS in past activities in oceanic environmental
management and conservation, strengthened by planned new partnerships with The World Conservation Union (IUCN), a regional
environmental non-governmental organisation (ENGO) and a regional industry non-governmental organisation (INGO).
Page 3 of 35
II. Progress towards achieving project objectives
Level at 30 June 2006
Project Objective3 and
Description of Indicator
Baseline Level
Target Level
(quantitative indicator)
Outcomes
(quantitative indicator)
(quantitative numerical value)
(quantitative indicator)
Information and Knowledge
Improved information on the
Reports from the scientific
Commission Members can
Considerable progress has been achieved
Objective
biology and ecology of target
structure of the Commission
establish, resource and manage
towards the Information and Knowledge
To improve understanding of the
fish stocks, including their
show improved information
effective data and research
objective of the project since the start of
transboundary oceanic fish
exploitation characteristics
and assessment methods are
programmes. Project
the project in October 2005. Inaugural
resources and related features of
and fishery impacts, the
providing a credible basis for
mechanisms contribute
meetings of the Science (8 9 August,
the Western and Central Pacific
fishery impacts on non-target,
the formulation and
effectively to raising awareness
2005), the Technical and Compliance (5
Warm Pool Large Marine
dependent and associated
assessment of conservation
and improving understanding
9 December 2005) Committees for the
Ecosystem.
species and on the pelagic
and management measures,
within PacSIDS about oceanic
WCPF Commission convened, outputs of
ecosystem as a whole.
including measures to address
fisheries management.
which feed into important conservation
Substantially improved
broader ecosystem effects.
and management measures decision
understanding of Seamount
Commission reports and
making at the 2nd Regular Session of the
ecosystems, especially their
project documentation show
Commission held at Pohnpei, Federated
relation to migratory pelagic
that the information is being
States of Micronisia, 12 16 December
fisheries.
used in the Commission; is
2005.
reaching a broad range of
stakeholders; and is
Work continues to contribute towards
contributing to improved
improving the quality, compatibility and
awareness and understanding
availability of scientific information upon
of issues associated with
which to make those decisions. Some
transboundary oceanic
delays are being experienced in terms of
fisheries conservation and
some parts of the project that would
management.
investigate the ecology of seamounts.
Broad stakeholder participant at the
Commission level (both Environment
NGOs and the regional tuna association
have observer status at the Commission)
and in the implementation of the project
in terms of awareness raising is well
progressed, although the provision of
publications material needs to be
progressed. Much effort has been
3 Objective: (equivalent to "Immediate Objective"). The overall result that the project itself will achieve, independent of other interventions. What the project is
accountable for delivering. While the template instructs that there should be only one objective per project, the PI OFM Project in fact has two principal Objectives.
Page 4 of 35
Level at 30 June 2006
Project Objective3 and
Description of Indicator
Baseline Level
Target Level
(quantitative indicator)
Outcomes
(quantitative indicator)
(quantitative numerical value)
(quantitative indicator)
invested assisting Pacific SIDS improve
their national capacities in oceanic fishery
monitoring and assessment.
Governance Objective
The WCPF Commission
Commission reports
The WCPF Convention is
The WCPF Convention entered into force
To create new regional
established and functioning.
document the development of
ratified by sufficient states to
on 19 June 2004. This was largely due to
institutional arrangements, and
PacSIDS amend their
the Commission, its
make the Commission
the expeditious ratification of the
reform, realign and strengthen
domestic laws and policies
Secretariat and its compliance
effective. PacSIDS are able to
Convention by Pacific SIDS. The WCPF
national arrangements for
and strengthen their national
and science structures.
secure financing and sufficient
Commission's inaugural session and 2nd
conservation and management of
fisheries institutions and
Project documentation,
political commitment to make
regular of the Commission convened in
transboundary oceanic fishery
programmes, especially in the
including an independent
necessary legal, institutional
December 2005.
resources
areas of monitoring and
review, shows measurable
and policy changes.
The Technical and Compliance
compliance, to implement the
progress in PacSIDS national
Committee and the Science Committee of
WCPF Convention and apply
capacities in oceanic fisheries
the Commission are operationally having
the principles of responsible
management.
agreed to their rules of procedures
and sustainable fisheries
management more generally.
The progress by Pacific SIDS to realign
their legislation and policies with their
obligations to the WCFP Commission
will take place at a steady pace over the
life of the project. The complexity and
burden that this places on small
administrations and countries with small
resource bases can not be marginalised. In
the first nine months of the project
significant progress has been made
towards shifting policy approaches from
emphasizing fisheries development by
increasing catches to promoting
sustainable fisheries through conservation
and management.
An independent review of the projects
progress is expected to be conducted in
2007.
Page 5 of 35
Level at 30 June 2006
Project Objective3 and
Description of Indicator
Baseline Level
Target Level
(quantitative indicator)
Outcomes
(quantitative indicator)
(quantitative numerical value)
(quantitative indicator)
COMPONENT ONE
Substantial, relevant and
Commission Reports,
Commission membership
Inaugural meetings of the Science and the
OUTCOME: Improved quality,
reliable information collected
especially from the Scientific
prepared to accept scientific
Technical and Compliance Committees
compatibility and availability of
and shared between
Committee show that the
findings and statistical
for the WCPF Commission produced
scientific information and
stakeholders with respect to
Commission has access to,
evidence in formulating what
outputs of which feed into important
knowledge on the oceanic
transboundary oceanic fish
and is using, on-going
may be difficult policy
conservation and management measures
transboundary fish stocks and
stocks and related ecosystem
reliable statistics and
decisions on management of
decision making at the 2nd Regular
related ecosystem aspects of the
aspects, (particularly for
scientific advice/evidence by
the fisheries, and difficult
Session of the Commission in December
WTP warm pool LME, with a
seamounts). The Commission
end of project to formulate
management proposals for the
2005. These included estimates of both
particular focus on the ecology
using this information as the
and amend policy on oceanic
ecosystems. Sufficient
sustainable catch and effort levels for
of seamounts in relation to
basis for it discussions and
fisheries management within
sustainability available or
bigeye, yellowfin and South Pacific
pelagic fisheries, and the fishing
policy decisions on WCPF
the WCPF system boundary.
identified through project to
albacore, biomass projections for bigeye
impacts upon them. This
management. National
These reports show particular
support national capacity
and yellowfin tuna relative to 2003 catch
information being used by the
technical capacity and
progress in relevant
improvements in technical and
and effort levels, including the effects on
Commission and PacSIDS to
knowledge greatly improved
ecosystem analysis, including
scientific functions as well as
stocks of time/area closures, investigation
assess measures for the
results of the seamount-
to support continued regional
of measures to mitigate the catch of
conservation and management of
related work undertaken in
data coordination and analyses. juvenile bigeye and yellowfin including
transboundary oceanic fishery
the Project. The reports also
controls on setting on floating objects;
resources and protection of the
show that the results of the
and estimates of the mortality of non-
WTP LME. National capacities
ecosystem analysis are being
target species with an initial focus on
in oceanic fishery monitoring
used to begin to
seabirds, turtles and sharks, as well as
and assessment strengthened,
operationalise an ecosystem
data and other issues requiring
with PacSIDS meeting their
approach to conservation and
consultation between the Scientific
national and Commission-related
management. PacSIDS
Committee and the Technical and
responsibilities in these areas.
national scientific capacities
Compliance Committee (Resolutions and
improved to level whereby
Conservation and Management Measures
each national lead agency can
can be found at http://www.wcpfc.org/).
supply relevant and effective
data to SPC and the
To date five Resolutions and six
Commission, and can
Conservation and management measures
interpret and apply nationally
have been adopted and entered into force
results of regional data
since the establishment of the
analyses and scientific
Commission on December 2005.
assessments.
A Planning workshop report (available at
http//www.ffa.int/gef/) shows the in-roads
into making arrangements for seamount
related work to be undertaken as part of
the ecosystems based anaylsis.
Page 6 of 35
Level at 30 June 2006
Project Objective3 and
Description of Indicator
Baseline Level
Target Level
(quantitative indicator)
Outcomes
(quantitative indicator)
(quantitative numerical value)
(quantitative indicator)
While support for national scientific
capacities to improve data collection and
its interpretation and assessment is
ongoing, concentrated efforts to augment
this are being planned and specific
workshops will take place in the second
half of 2006.
COMPONENT TWO
WCPF Commission operating Reports of the Commission
Commission remains effective
Within the scope of this report it is
OUTCOME: The WCPF
with a formally adopted
and its Committees show that
throughout project lifetime and
premature to comment on the
Commission established and
framework of rules and
within 30 months of the
beyond. Countries continue to
effectiveness and sustainability of the
beginning to function
regulations. Commission
Project inception the
meet financial commitments to
WCPF Commission. However, the WCPF
effectively. Pacific Island
Secretariat has been
Commission is functioning
Commission to ensure its
Commission Secretariat has been
nations playing a full role in the
established and the core
with a full programme of
sustainability. Enormous
established and appointments have been
functioning and management of
science and compliance
work in compliance and
Convention area and project
made for the Executive Director and other
the Commission, and in the
programmes and Committee
science. Commission reports
system boundary can be
professional staff posts and science and
related management of the
structures are operational.
show PacSIDS are effectively
effectively monitored to ensure
compliance structures and programmes
fisheries and the globally-
PacSIDS are participating
participating in Commission
compliance. Programmes of
are well progressed and have begun to
important LME. National laws,
effectively in provision of
decision-making processes.
information collection and data
function in the manner for which they
policies, institutions and
information and in decision-
Independent assessments
analyses can be sustained
have been designed. Pacific SIDS have
programmes relating to
making and policy adoption
show that national capacities
throughout and beyond project
participated fully in all meetings of the
management of transboundary
process for WCPF fisheries
significantly improved to
lifetime. PacSIDS able to
Commission and significant efforts have
oceanic fisheries reformed,
management. National
meet commitments to
participate in the Commission
been invested in providing them with
realigned and strengthened to
institutions and supportive
Convention and to undertake
effectively.
coordinating briefs on issues of common
implement the WCPF
laws and policies have been
MCS responsibilities.
position.
Convention and other applicable
reformed effectively to
global and regional instruments.
support national roles in
A steady progression of effort over the
National capacities in oceanic
Commission and to meet
next 12 to 24 months will support Pacific
fisheries law, fisheries
national commitments both to
SIDS to reform national laws, policies
management and compliance
WCPF Convention, and to
and institutions to align themselves with
strengthened
other relevant MEAs, and
their Commission obligations and other
global treaties and
global commitments to conservation and
conventions.
management, particularly in terms of
transboundary oceanic fisheries
management and globally important
LMEs.
Page 7 of 35
Level at 30 June 2006
Project Objective3 and
Description of Indicator
Baseline Level
Target Level
(quantitative indicator)
Outcomes
(quantitative indicator)
(quantitative numerical value)
(quantitative indicator)
COMPONENT THREE
Project achieving its
Project Implementation
National commitment needs to
The Project Coordination Unit was
OUTCOME: Effective project
objectives. Project
Reviews and Project
be high to ensure fully
officially established in December 2005
management at the national and
implementation and
Performance Evaluations
participatory involvement in
with the appointment of the Project
regional level. Major
management is fully
provide justification that
project over lifetime.
Coordinator and other staff soon after.
governmental and non-
participatory with appropriate
project is successfully
Stakeholder commitment also
Prior to this the Forum Fisheries Agency
governmental stakeholders
involvement of stakeholders
achieving its objectives and
needs to be high to ensure
the principal Executing Agency
participating in project activities
at all levels. Information
deliverables. These are
continued contributions,
preformed coordinating functions to
and consultative mechanisms at
access is transparent and
supported by findings of the
sometimes at own cost. Policy-
maintain the momentum and prevent
national and regional levels.
simple. Information available
Independent Evaluations
makers are receptive to
disruption to proceedings.
Information on the project and
is relevant and significant.
(Mid and Terminal).
awareness-raising information
the WCPF process contributing
Public awareness raising at
Stakeholders confirm
and presentations.
Broad stakeholder participation and
to increased awareness of
national and regional policy
transparent participation in
national level commitments to project
oceanic fishery resource and
level is effective. High
the project, and
involvement are aggressively promoted
ecosystem management. Project project evaluation ratings.
improvements in knowledge
by the PCU. A co-financing agreement
evaluations reflecting successful
and awareness across all
has been developed with a major regional
and sustainable project
levels and sectors.
environmental NGO which anticipates the
objectives.
enhancement of awareness-raising
information through workshops with
targeted audiences.
The first six months of 2006 have
required a significant amount of effort to
settle in the project and establish routine
between the Implementing Agency and
the project Executing Agency. A more
concentrated effort on an effective
information strategy and general
awareness raising of oceanic resource
management and ecosystems based
management will commence in earnest in
the second half of 2006.
The mid-term review of the project will
take place in late 2007, early 2008 and the
terminal review at the close of 2010.
Page 8 of 35
Rating of Project Progress towards Meeting Objective
2005
2006 Rating
Comments
Rating
National Project
S
S
The establishment of a legally binding fisheries
Manager/Coordinator
management arrangement in the WCPO is a major
achievement which can only contribute positively
towards global environmental benefits for
transboundary oceanic fisheries, including sustainable
conservation and management measures across a
significant area of the global. The ability for Pacific
SIDS to participate effectively in this arrangement
remains challenging. Their capacity to absorb
commitments to the growing complexity of
international fisheries and conservation agreements
will be assisted greatly by the objectives of this project
but sustainability of that capacity becomes an issue for
anaylsis within the review processes of this project, as
will the status of resources and their overall
management through the Commission process.
Government GEF OFP
UNDP Suva - Instruction sheet advises that: In the
(optional)
case of a project involving more than 1 country, it is
suggested that for simplicity only the OFP (optional)
and Country Office Programme Manager from the lead
country sign-off. If representatives from more than 1
country sign off, please add additional rows as
necessary, clearly indicating the country name for each
signature.
UNDP Country Office
UNDP Regional Technical
Advisor
Action Plan to Address Marginally Unsatisfactory, Unsatisfactory or Highly Unsatisfactory Rating
Where a project has received a rating of MU, U or HU describe the actions to be taken to address this:
Action to be Taken
By Whom?
By When?
Page 9 of 35
II . Progress in Project implementation
List the 4 key outputs delivered so far for each project Outcome:
Project Outcomes
Key Outputs
Outcome 1: Scientific Assessment and
Monitoring Enhancement:
1.1 Fishery Monitoring, Coordination
A template for national integrated monitoring programmes and provision of data to the Commission
and Enhancement
The SOC OFP is developing a standard software package named TUFMAN (Tuna Fishery Data Management System), which provides
Integrated and economically sustainable
countries with a general purpose tuna fishery data management capability. Fourteen new reports were added to the TUFMAN database
national monitoring programmes in
during this reporting period, including a report used to reconcile logsheets with telex reports. Data entry modifications were made to
place including catch and effort,
screens for licensing, logsheets, port sampling, telex reports and reference tables. The system was installed in Tuvalu for the first time and
observer, port sampling and landing
updates of the system were sent to the Cook Islands, Palau and the Marshall Islands. TUFMAN is currently installed and functional in
data; Pacific SIDS providing data to the
Cook Islands, Fiji, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Tonga and Tuvalu. PNG has an independently developed system in place. TUFMAN
Commission in the form required;
will be installed and training provided in the remaining beneficiary countries during the course of the project.
national capacities to process and
analyse data for national monitoring
Several Commission data reports have now been incorporated into TUFMAN. Further development of the Commission reporting module
needs enhanced; improved information
is envisaged during the next year.
on fishing in national waters and by
national fleets being used for national
National monitoring systems based on the regional template for integrated monitoring, customised to meet national needs
policy making and to inform national
All countries were given an upgraded version of the Catch and Effort Query System (CES) in March 2006, and further upgrades were
positions at the Commission. Enhanced
provided to FFA, Cook Islands, Marshall Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu in April/May 2006.
quality and accessibility of fisheries
Dedicated travel was made to: Palau, where the TUFMAN database was installed and the port sampling database upgraded, and the
information and data leading to more
Marshall Islands, where the TUFMAN database was installed. Appropriate training was given to users in all countries.
effective development and improvement
of the Commission's policy and
National observer programmes are now established in 10 of the 15 FFA member countries (Palau, Marshall Islands, Kiribati, FSM, Fiji,
decision-making process.
PNG, Solomon Islands, Cook Islands, Tonga and Samoa), while three other countries aspire to running observer programmes in the future
(Vanuatu, Niue and Tokelau).
There has been significant focus during this reporting period on putting in place the regional observer debriefing policy. This requires
debriefers to be identified, a training course to be organised and the debriefing training format to be set up.
A complete review of the port sampling programme in the port of Pago Pago, American Samoa was undertaken in collaboration with staff
from NMFS, FFA and SPC during May.
Time was spent substantially revising the monitoring support for both Tonga and Samoa. The new MOUs now include observer
components and were put in place utilizing OFMP co-funding resources.
Data collection from 25 port sampling sites is also supported by SPC utilizing OFMP and co-funding resources. All data received during
the period were entered, checked and immediate feedback given to the port sampler supervisors.
The centrepiece of this activity is the establishment of National Tuna Data Coordinators (NTDCs) in beneficiary countries. The status of
Page 10 of 35
NTDCs in each country and a summary of support being provided by the project is as follows:
· Cook Islands NTDC is Pamela Maru. Position funded by Cook Is. Government. In-country support under review, likely in the
area of port sampling and observer programme part-funding.
· FSM NTDC is Steven Retalmai. Position funded by FSM Government. In-country support under review.
· Fiji NTDC is Jone Amoe. Position funded by Fiji Government. In-country support under review, likely in the area of IT
support.
· Kiribati NTDC is Tamaurea Tebao. Position funded by Kiribati Government. In-country support under review.
· Marshall Islands NTDC is Berry Muller. Position funded by Marshall Is. Government. OFMP provides 50% salary support for
Observer/Port Sampling Program Coordinator.
· Nauru NTDC is Karlick ?. Position funded by Nauru Government. OFMP providing IT support.
· Niue NTDC is Vanessa Marsh. Position funded by Niue Government. In-country support under review.
· Palau NTDC is Kathleen Sissior. Position funded by Palau Government. OFMP funding position of Assistant NTDC and IT
support (scanner).
· PNG NTDC is Donna ?. Position funded by PNG Government. Well developed fishery monitoring programme requiring
advisory and training support only.
· Samoa NTDC is Ueta Fa'asili. Position funded by Samoa Government. In-country support under review. Possible support for
Assistant NTDC position.
· Solomon Islands NTDC is under recruitment. Position funded by OFMP.
· Tokelau NTDC is ? In-country support under review. Support for NTDC position requested.
· Tonga NTDC is Tala'ofa Lotohead. Position funded by Tonga Government. POFM providing IT support (computer hardware,
internet connection).
· Tuvalu NTDC is Falasese Tupau. Position funded by Tuvalu Government. In-country support under review. IT support and/or
artisanal tuna data collection likely areas of support.
· Vanuatu NTDC is Tony Taleo. Position funded by OFMP.
A regional monitoring coordination capacity, to develop regional standards such as data formats, and to provide a clearing house
for information on fishery monitoring
During this reporting period 466 observer workbooks, 695 observer waterproof pads and 150 waterproof port sampling pads were
distributed to five countries with active sampling programmes.
The debriefing forms were printed and made available to relevant countries. Printed copies of the longline logbook were received from
the overseas printer and communication was established with a number of fishing captains who are willing to trial the logbook.
Work continued on documenting all form change requests. The 7th Data Collection Committee (DCC) meeting has been re-scheduled for
2007, so the development of data formats will take a lower priority during 2006.
The first regional statistics workshop is planned to be held in the 4th quarter 2006.
Resource material production continues to focus on observer needs with the Longline Observer Guide being brought through the layout
stage.
Work has started on the next edition of the newsletter ForkLength. The intention is to make this available for publication during the 4th
quarter of 2006.
Page 11 of 35
Training of national monitoring staff, particularly monitoring coordinators, observers and port samplers
A full basic observer training course was conducted in Marshall Islands and Palau, with a refresher longline training course given in
Tonga, while the observer component of the Pacific Islands Fisheries Officers course was presented in Nelson, New Zealand. A
dedicated debriefing trip was also undertaken to Tonga.
The OFP Observer and Port Sampler Trainer also attended the NMFS observer training course that was held in Hawaii. This activity
utilised co-funding.
There were attachments to the SPC/OFP during the reporting period - from Cook Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, PNG and Marshall Islands.
Attachment training included (i) an overview of tuna fishery data collection, (ii) familiarisation with OFP-developed database query tools
(e.g. CES) and TUFMAN, and (iii) having the trainees sufficiently advance their National Fisheries Report in preparation for the 2nd
meeting of the WCPFC Scientific Committee meeting (August 2006), using the skills obtained during the training.
1.2 Stock Assessment
National oceanic fisheries status reports prepared collaboratively with national scientific staff
Detailed information available on the
A significant amount of co-funding contributes to this output. During the reporting period, National Tuna Fishery Status Reports for
status of national tuna fisheries,
PNG, French Polynesia (OFP funded activity), and Solomon Islands were finalised, while work on NTFSRs for Cook Islands, FSM,
including the implications of regional
Vanuatu and New Caledonia (OFP-funded activity) was progressed.
stock assessments and the impacts of
local fisheries and oceanographic
No work in-country Stakeholder Workshops for delivery of National Status Reports were conducted during this period although a
variability on local stocks and fishing
timetable for provision of information was agreed with FFA, and significant contributions to briefs planned for 3rd quarter 2006.
performance; strengthened national
Advice to Pacific SIDS on scientific issues in the work of the Commission
capacities to use and interpret regional
No contributions to briefs on scientific issues for Pacific SIDS for meetings of the Commission, the Scientific Committee and Science
stock assessments, fisheries data and
Working Groups were conducted during this period although a timetable for provision of information was agreed with FFA, and
oceanographic information at the
significant contributions to briefs planned for 3rd quarter 2006.
national level, to participate in
Training of national technical and scientific staff to understand regional stock assessment methods, and interpret and apply the
Commission scientific work, and to
results; and to use oceanographic data
understand the implications of
The first regional stock assessment workshop was successfully held at SPC headquarters in Noumea. Extensive work on the development
Commission stock assessments.
of workshop materials and other preparatory activities took place during the reporting period with positive output.
No attachments or training of scientific counterparts in-country took place this reporting period, although planning for attachments is in
progress.
Observer sampling and analysis of commercial fishery catches to determine trophic relationships of pelagic species in the WTP
LME
24 samples of stomachs, muscle and liver have also been collected during a longline observer trip.
A complete list of the samples stored at SPC has been compiled. This information has been incorporated into the detailed list of the
samples already analysed; The sampling strategy and work-plan report had to be postponed but will be finalized and sent to PICT
observer programmes in July; it will also be presented as an Information Paper in the Ecosystems and Bycatch Specialist Working Group
of the second Scientific Committee of the WCPFC in August 2006. Biological sampling should start in the 3rd quarter 2006.
Some additional storage space has been added to the SPC biological laboratory to accommodate the increasing number of prey items
preserved for reference.
Two research assistants were contracted utilizing co-funding sources to continue lab-based analysis of stomach samples collected under
the previous OFM project and new samples collected during the current project. This work will continue through 2006 and beyond,
Page 12 of 35
subject to the availability of funding. During the reporting period, the contents of 535 stomachs (from multiple observer trips) were
examined and about 80% of the information has been entered into the database. Tissue samples have been dehydrated and sent to the
University of Hawaii for isotopic analysis.
The prey item reference collection was augmented and now contains more than 600 specimens from about 110 families.
With specimens collected from the New Caledonia longline fleet, the feasibility of conducting a growth study on albacore using otolith
seasonal structures was assessed. A lab assistant will be contracted for a 8 month period (using co-funded sources) to collect and analyse
the otoliths required for the study
Isotopes of 350 samples have been analysed and entered into the database.
IUCN
In mid-June, IUCN was informed that the research vessel to be provided by DeepOcean Quest (DOQ) was experiencing delays in the re-
fit. Given continued delays, and uncertainty of vessel preparedness, it became clear that IUCN could longer count on DOQ to complete
their outputs in the OFM project. DOQ indicated that remainded keen to do this expedition but were unable to provide assurance of i)
when the vessel would be ready to sail; and ii) when she would be available in the central Pacific.
Hurricane Katrina and refit and repair contracting problems continued to hinder progress. DQO are attempting to address their problems
by looking for a new shipyard and contractor to continue work within the next two months and had expected to test the vessel and
submersibles in the Sea of Cortez and eastern tropical Pacific (Cocos-Galapogos corridor) in 2007. However, DOQ refuse to make any
commitments until the vessel has been tested and is functioning, meaning that future cruise plans (e.g. IUCN plans for the Pacific) would
not be confirmed before early 2007 at the earliest. This would mean the actual expedition would not occur before mid- to late-2008.
IUCN continues to engage DOQ to press them to fulfill their original commitment and intends to obtain in a written commitment in early
2007 and proceed with the planned expedition but given the incertainty have decided it would be prudent to develop alternative options.
This will require a substantial reassessment of what types of activities are possible under the project. IUCN has employed a short-term
consultant to assist Dr. Rogers in this planning, in close collaboration with SPC.
Model-based analysis of ecosystem-based management options
Delays in the IUCN led research survey meant that SPC OFP have not been able to support national scientist participation in the benthic
biodiversity survey.
IUCN have indicated that project implementation on IUCN-led activities is slower than originally expected but still on target to meet
objectives. The primary reason for the delays in project implementation are that delays in the re-fitting of the research vessel due to
hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico in late 2005 have meant two postponements in the dates for the seamount cruises. Current plan is for the
cruises to take place from January April 2007, but this can only be confirmed once the vessel re-fit is complete and it has been tested on
the water. The vessel is expected to be ready for testing in early June 2006; once the seaworthiness is confirmed, exact dates for the
cruises will be set, and project resources will start being expended at increased rates.
Page 13 of 35
Estimate Levels of By catch in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean fisheries
Work has commenced on this activity and will continue through 2006. A NZ-based consultant, Dr Brian McArdle, was contracted to
assist SPC staff analyse observer data for the estimation of by-catch levels. This work is currently being documented and will be
presented to the 2nd meeting of the WCPFC Scientific Committee in August 2006.
By-catch estimates and a preliminary ecological risk assessment for selected species will be presented to the 2nd meeting of the WCPFC
Scientific Committee in August 2006.
Results of ecosystem analysis and proposals for long-term ecosystem monitoring and operationalisation of the ecosystem-based
approach for use by the Commission's Scientific Committee, especially its Ecosystems & Bycatch Working Group, and by Pacific
SIDS
No work has progressed towards this output.
Outcome 2: Law, Policy and
Institutional, Reform, Realignment
and Strengthening
2.1 Legal Reform
A strategy and workplan for activities on regional and national legal issues
Major Commission legal arrangements
The services of Professor Martin Tsamenyi of the University of Wollongong Australia have been secured to assist in national workshops
and mechanisms in place, including
and the analysis of legal implications from decisions adopted by the WCPF Commission. The specific outputs from this consultancy are
provisions relating to non-Parties and
the preparation of National Country Reports, the development of course material and where applicable draft legislation for PI countries.
sanctions for non-compliance; national
The work commence in second quarter of 2006 with the first of a series of in-country workshops for Tuvalu, the Solomon Islands and
laws, regulations, license conditions
Tokelau. Further workshops have been completed in advance of schedule for the Cook Islands and Vanuatu (originally scheduled for
reformed to implement the WCPF
August/September and June respectively).
Convention and other relevant
In-country national assistance has been re-programmed to provide for Samoa, Kiribati, Marshalls, Palau, FSM , Fiji, PNG, Tonga and
international legal instruments;
Nauru in the second two quarters of 2006
enhanced national legal capacity to
apply the Convention and national
Work has been completed in regards to a legal and technical review for Fiji on the implications of the decisions of the 2nd meeting of the
management regimes, including
WCPF Commission; the commencement of preliminary analysis on implications of WCPF Decisions for Tuvalu. A report was also
domestic legal processes for dealing
prepared on the challenges facing the management of the region's tuna resources for the 14th Annual Conference of the Australia and
with infringements.
New Zealand Society of International law in June.
A legal planning workshop for Pacific SIDS took place in Vanuatu in November 2005 with a significant contribution from a project
consultant. The workshop outcome determined priorities for national legal work under the UNDP GEF project for National Consultative
and the Regional Steering Committees consideration.
A review of Samoa's fisheries legislation has commenced as has work on the revisions for the Cook Islands Fisheries regulations to
incorporate obligations under the WCPF Convention and the emerging decision of the WCPF Commission. These activities were funded
by other sources.
New draft laws, regulations, agreements & license conditions in line with WCPF Convention prepared and shared with PacSIDS
Work in relation to the preparation of templates for legal provisions to implement the Convention for fisheries legislation has been
deferred until the second quarter of 2006 when a team of legal experts will meet in Brisbane.
TORs for a consultancy for the preparation of background materials for the development of guidelines to legislate for sustainable fisheries
Page 14 of 35
in the Pacific Islands has been completed.
Harmonising with outputs from the previous section, assistance continued to be provided to Tokelau, Samoa and Fiji on the review of
their national fisheries legislations. A contract has been signed with Consultant for legal reviews to be undertaken in all FFA members by
October 2006. A request has been received from Kiribati for review of national legislations. At the time of this report, discussions are
ongoing on the timing of the in-country visit to undertake the review.
Mr John Hauirae Maito'o of the Solomon Islands has been contracted to complete work in relation to the drafting of the Marshall Islands
High Seas Authorisation. This short term consultancy will finalise the High Seas Fisheries regulations for the Marshall Islands
establishing a High Seas Authorisation.
A meeting on guidelines for national fisheries legislations took place in Brisbane in May. The report on the meeting together with the
draft guidelines are being finalised.
Proposals for the Commission from Pacific SIDS for legal arrangements to implement the Convention
A draft report for the Marshall Islands on how to implement the recent decisions of the first and second annual sessions of the WCPF
Commission was prepared by the FFA.
A paper has been prepared on implications of Commission measures for FFA members. The papers were presented to the annual meeting
of the Forum Fisheries Committee and the Parties to the Nauru Agreement.
FFA has prepared a commentary on the Rules of Procedure for the Commission Scientific Committee. These were submitted to the
Executive Director of the WCPF Commission.
Regional consultations on the development of model legislation convened in Brisbane from 4 -8 July 2006 (outside the scope of this
report but worth mentioning).
Training of policy makers and legal personnel in oceanic fisheries management legal issues
No Regional Legal Workshops to date
An in-country Prosecution and Dockside Boarding workshop took place in Pohnpei, FSM from 3 7 April 2006 in cooperation with the
MCS Division at FFA. This exercise was co-financed with AusAID and NZAID funds.
National workshops have been conducted in Samoa and Fiji on the implications of decisions of the WCPF Commission.
An in-country Prosecution and Dockside Boarding workshop took place in Pohnpei, FSM from 3 7 April 2006 in cooperation with the
MCS Division at FFA. This exercise was co-financed with AusAID and NZAID funds.
National workshops have been conducted in Samoa and Fiji on the implications of decisions of the WCPF Commission.
A Ni-Vanuatu legal officer was attached to the Legal Division of FFA in June 2006.
A second legal attachment was for a legal fellowship from Tonga. The legal attachment for Tonga was undertaken at the Centre for
Maritime Policy at the University of Wolllongong.
2.2 Policy Reform
National oceanic fisheries management plans, policies and strategies
Page 15 of 35
Commission Secretariat and technical
A fisheries management plan for Vanuatu has been undertaken by Dr Rick Fletcher from Western Australian Fisheries, which includes
programmes established and
stakeholder consultations. Assistance has also been provided by regional based consultants and staff at Vanuatu Fisheries. This contract is
conservation and management measures
co-financed with FFA funds from other sources.
beginning to be adopted; national
Work is being progressed on the Cook Islands Fisheries Management Plan. This work is being done with the assistance of Mr. Les Clark,
oceanic fisheries management plans,
an OFM Project funded International Consultant.
policies and strategies prepared,
implemented and reviewed; adoption of
Work for the Palau TMP is in the planning stage in consultation with the Palau Fisheries.
a more integrated and cross-sectoral
approach and, improved coordination
Support and advice have been provided to RMI, FSM and Palau in addressing their pressing fisheries management and development
between government departments
issues, such as vessels reflagging, charter arrangements and IUU fishing in accordance with WCPFC decisions and resolutions.
(Fisheries, Environment, Development,
Economy, etc); enhanced understanding
Work has yet to commence on a plan, policy and strategy review.
by policy makers and enhanced national
Strategies and specific proposals for the overall development of the Commission, including its Secretariat and technical
capacities in regional and national
programmes, and for Commission conservation and management measures
policy analysis for sustainable and
On-going work. FFA and FFA consultant continues to work on analysis of management options for pacific islands input into the
responsible fisheries; enhanced
Commission meetings, SC2, TCC1 and WCPFC.
stakeholder understanding of
Commission and national policy issues,
Preparations for the FFC annual governing council in May will require the provision of advice and reports on oceanic fisheries
especially the private sector.
management issues in relation to proposals for the Commission and subsidiary bodies. Fisheries management expert has been retained as
an international consultant (co-financed by the OFM Project funds and other sources) and GEF funded Fisheries Management Advisor are
undertaking work in this quarter in anticipation of the May meeting.
Briefs for Science Committee and the Technical and Compliance meetings, FFC meetings to discuss issues that are relevant to island state
interests have been completed.
An FFA sub-regional EAFM workshop was held at Apia Samoa, 24 27 April.
FFA Southern Tuna Management Workshop was held at Honolulu, Hawaii in March 2006. This workshop was to discuss issues
pertaining to southern albacore fisheries as directed by the WCPF Commission 2 resolutions on conservation and management for tunas.
This workshop was attended by Commission members (includes FFA Pacific Island members) and cooperating non-members.
Identification of possible management options for seamounts, including compliance options
Given the overall project structure, the activities to be conducted under the Policy, Law and Compliance Component, need to wait until
the scientific research has been completed and initial analyses done. Therefore, very little expenditure is expected under this Component
in 2006; in fact, most expenditure will occur in second half of 2007 and in 2008 if the research cruise is to commence.
Training of policy makers, technical personnel and other Pacific SIDS stakeholders to increase understanding of sustainable and
responsible fisheries
The 2nd Management Options Workshop funded by New Zealand was held in Oct 2005. Consultancy services were provided by a GEF
funded consultant and a facilitator for the workshop which assisted Pacific SIDS to consider fisheries management work anticipated to be
considered by the 2nd meeting of the WCPF Commission in December.
Support was also provided for Pacific Islander representation at the 2nd meeting of the WCPF Commission held at Pohnpei, Federated
States of Micronesia in early December 2005
Page 16 of 35
A consultation of experts met at FFA in Honiara on 14 February 2006 to discuss and analyse the Commission resolutions to determine the
obligations of the Pacific island parties.
Communication has commenced with USP to discuss the joint delivery of a Train Sea Coast (TSC) Fisheries Management Policy course.
The revision of the existing module of the TSC Pacific Islands Region Fisheries Management will be undertaken as part of an existing
consultant contract for fisheries management. This is an on-going activity.
A national consultation with the Department of Fisheries, Vanuatu regarding the review process for the existing fisheries management
plan took place with the reporting period. Those consultations are on-going with Vanuatu as well as the Cook Island and Palau regarding
the reviews of their TMPs.
A newly appointed licensing officer from the Solomon Islands Fisheries department undertook an attachment at FFA in March.
Arrangements are being finalised for the training of key personnel from selected pacific island countries to attend the train the trainers
workshop in Vanuatu.
Support was provided to the 2nd FFC Officials and Ministerial governing council in May for the provision of advice and reports on
oceanic fisheries management issues in relation to proposals for the Commission and subsidiary bodies.
2.3 Institutional Reform
Strategies, plans and proposals for the reform, realignment and strengthening of national oceanic fisheries management
Public sector fisheries administrations
administrations
reformed, realigned and strengthened;
The provision of advice and consultation with the Government of Nauru on their proposed fisheries institutional reform program has
capacities of national non-governmental
commenced. Efforts to recruit expertise identified in the TORs submitted with the request for assistance under the OFM Project has been
organisations to participate in oceanic
progressed.
fisheries management enhanced;
consultative processes enhanced to
The design of an institutional strengthening project for Nauru Fisheries has commenced. This work is expected to progress over the next
promote a more integrated approach to
half of 2006.
fisheries management and
administration that encourages
A regional National Institutional Workshop has yet to be held. It is anticipated that work on an overall review needs to be completed first.
coordination and participation between
The work in this area is not on scheduled but priority has been given to addressing this in the last two quarters of 2006 and early 2007.
diverse government and non-
Processes for national consultation between stakeholders in oceanic fisheries management
government stakeholders.
Advice and support for national consultative processes in Vanuatu, Cook Islands and Palau have been provided.
Consultations with and provision of advice to Vanuatu on the issue of ENGOs and INGOs participation in the Vanuatu Fisheries
Management Plan review consultation scheduled for June 2006. An invitation to ENGOs and INGOs to participate in the Vanuatu
Fisheries Management Plan review consultation scheduled for June 2006 was extended.The same procedure was also carried out for the
Cooks.
WWF Pacific have been invited to attend the Management Options Workshop. Support will be provided to Industry representatives to
attend also.
Until the full complement of fisheries management staff at FFA have been recruited attachments and study tours for non-stakeholder
participants can not commence. This issues is expected to be addressed by second half of 2006.
Page 17 of 35
2.4 Compliance Strengthening
Strategies, plans and proposals for realigning and strengthening national oceanic fisheries compliance programmes
Realigned and strengthened national
An overall review of Convention implications for national compliance has yet to be conducted.
compliance programs; improved
Ongoing contributions to reviews of needs to strengthen and realign national compliance programmes under the auspices of activities in
regional MCS coordination; strategies
the legal sub-component continue.
for Commission compliance programs;
Arrangements for regional coordination of monitoring, control and surveillance activities
enhanced national compliance capacities The annual regional meeting for Monitoring, Control and Surveillance which includes as a prior meeting, an annual meeting for the
(inspection, observation, patrol, VMS,
coordination of aerial surveillance in the region was to be held in March 2006. However, to take into account the Commission schedule of
investigation).
meetings the MCS Working Group Meeting is now re-scheduled to take place in September.
Additionally, 0perations `Kurukuru' and `Islands Chief' supported by Australian Defence with contributions from FFA MCS Division,
assists sub-grouping of Pacific Islands countries to undertake coordinated surveillance operations between and across national
jurisdictions. These are expected to take place in the later part of 2006.
Requests for assistance from some Pacific SIDS for the preparation of Niue Treaty subsidiary agreements have been received. Resources
have been directed towards these activities.
A review of the agreement between Palau, FSM and the Marshall Islands is being proposed with the possibility of this extending to
include PNG and Kiribati.
An agreement is in place between the Cook Islands and Samoa as at 2005.
Dialogue between Vanuatu and New Caledonia is in progress and a draft document for surveillance exchanges between Samoa, Vanuatu,
Tonga, Fiji and Tuvalu has been completed
Nauru has held bilateral dialogue with each of Kiribati, the Marshall Islands and FSM on matters concerning a possible agreement.
Strategies and proposals for regional compliance measures and programmes
Pacific SIDS convened at a Monitoring, Control and Surveillance workshop in Honiara in October 2005 to consider preparations for the
first meeting of the WCPF Commission Technical and Compliance Committee held in December 2005.
Terms of Reference have been drafted for the development of a regional Monitoring, Control and Surveillance strategy for the Pacific.
Expressions of interest will be called for. The strategy will take into account compliance issues under the Convention and other
international instruments, including the requirement for the development of national plans of action for the prevention of IUU fishing.
The annual regional meeting for Monitoring, Control and Surveillance which includes as a prior meeting, an annual meeting for the
coordination of aerial surveillance in the region was to be held in March 2006. However, to take into account the Commission schedule of
meetings the MCS Working Group Meeting is now re-scheduled to take place in September.
Preparations have commenced for a meeting in the margins of the May FFC to discuss with Pacific SIDS issues relating to VMS and data
sharing policies in relation to the Commission.
Training of national compliance staff, especially in inspection and VMS
An in-country Dockside boarding and Inspection Workshop has taken place in FSM in the first quarter of 2006. The workshop was
Page 18 of 35
successfully completed with the assistance of the Australian Defence. Participants from Palau also participated. The workshop is seen as
positive steps towards building and developing national capacity in maritime enforcement. Three more national workshops are planned
for PNG, Vanuatu and a joint exercise for Fiji and Tuvalu third and fourth quarter.
With the roll out of updated VMS hardware a series of VMS training for national compliance staff is scheduled for the third and fourth
quarter of 2006.
A Fellowship from Tuvalu undertook an attachment at the FFA Monitoring, Control and Surveillance Division. A report of the work
undertaken by the Fellow is on file.
Outcome 3: Coordination,
Participation and Information
Services
3.1 Project information System
Project Information System for capture, storage and dissemination of project data, lessons and best practices, and provision of
Enhancement of awareness about the
information products
Project and understanding of its
Service of a website design company were engaged to design the project webpage which is located on the FFA website at
objectives and progress; establishment
www.ffa.int/gef/. The webpage is operational. A project logo was also secured and this will also be used on project documentation and
of a Clearing House for lessons and best
publications. Email request for IW Learn information and guidelines for developing websites unanswered. No follow up was done.
practices within the Pacific SIDS, as
Project Coordinator registered on the IW LEARN network and the BCLME Programme website as a comparable GEF project.
well as through linkages to other global
A specific document cataloguing system was developed by the PCU.
fisheries and their issues; capture of up-
to-date information and advice on
The process to engage a communications specialist to address awareness raising activities has commenced and it is expected that work
related ecosystem management and
will commence in late 2006 with the view for possible ongoing services throughout the project on a consultancy basis.
innovative fisheries management
approaches; transfer of lessons and
The OFM Project website is operational and will be maintained and administered by FFA and the PCU.
replication of best practices through an
The webpage menu contains relevant links, project documentation, list of national OFM Project focal points and other project related
active mechanism linked to the
information. Improvement in the upload of material to the webpage needs to occur.
Commission; active participation with
IW:LEARN
No progress has occurred to date but is expected to be addressed in the Communications consultancy.
Knowledge management process identifying innovative, best practice and replicable ideas within the Project and relevant to the
Project
Knowledge Management Strategy to be progressed in the second half of 2006.
Activities in relation to webpage and progress reports have occurred.
3.2 Monitoring and Evaluation
Measures of, and reports on, overall project performance and delivery, including independent evaluations of the Project
Effective monitoring and evaluation of
Mid-term evaluation is scheduled for late 2007, early 2008.
progress and performance, including
Terminal evaluation will be conducted at the close of the project in 2010
monitoring of process, stress reduction
The post evaluation will occur two years after the close of the project in 2012.
and environmental status indicators;
monitoring and evaluation outputs used
This report constitutes the annual report for the project by FFA. It will be consolidated with reports from other contributing Agencies to
in project management and in assessing
feed into the reporting template (APR/PIR) and systems of the GEF & UNDP.
the effectiveness of Commission
Preparations for the production of the annual report for the project have commenced. This will be prepared according to formats required
Page 19 of 35
measures.
by UNDP and GEF and taking into account the logical framework analysis and the results identified that require verification. UNDP will
reflect evaluation of their identified results.
The services of an independent Auditor has been secured for the audit of expenditure of project funds 2005. This relates only to the fourth
quarter at which point the project commenced with the first advance being received early November 2005. An audit of expenditure of
project funds 2005 was submitted to UNDP. A number of shortfalls were identified by UNDP and the PCU was asked to rectify these
with the engaged auditors. After consultation with the Auditor's a revised management letter and audit report was submitted to UNDP.
Analysis of process, stress-reduction, and environmental status indicators as per the GEF International Waters Operational
Strategy
Terms of reference are being developed for the engagement of consultant to identify environmental indicators for the project. These
TORs are being designed by the consultant who is currently engaged under the project as an Fisheries Management Consultant. Calls for
expressions of interest are expected to made once the TORs are agreed and finalised.
The inclusive of indicator measures in progress reports will be progressed as a priority in the second half of 2006.
3.3 Stakeholder Participation and
ENGO participation and awareness raising in Convention-related processes
Awareness Raising
A consultant has been recruited to perform a short term consultancy that will provide a database of regional environmental non-
Non-governmental stakeholder
governmental organisations in the region. The main purpose of the consultancy will be the development of a strategy to engage ENGOs in
participation in national and regional
project implementation to promote NGO stakeholder and public awareness of oceanic fisheries management issues and strengthen NGO
oceanic fisheries management
participation in oceanic fisheries management at national and regional levels; established links with regional ENGOs (including contact
processes, including the Commission,
details and point of contact); provide advice on the scheduling and framework for national and regional workshops for ENGOs; draft a
enhanced; awareness of oceanic
co-financing arrangement with a Pacific ENGO; and recommend ENGO representation at the Regional Steering Committee.
fisheries management issues and the
WCPF Convention improved. Specific
The report of the consultant that will be develop a strategy to engage ENGOs in project implementation is due for submission early Q3
forums developed for NGO
2006 and will be presented to the RSC in October.
participation and discussion process;
promotion of awareness of national and
Visits to Suva based environmental NGOs took place in June and the consultant was accompanied by the PC to some of the organisations.
regional development and economic
priorities and how these relate to
The next annual session of the Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at Apia Samoa in December 2006. The next meeting of the
sustainable fisheries management.
Science Committee is scheduled for 7 18 August 2006 at Manila Philippines. Discussion for the provision of support for the attendance
and participation of a Pacific ENGO at the Commission meetings will evolve in the course of the above consultancy.
A proposal to also invite the Pacific ENGO representative to participate in the policy workshop for Pacific countries to consider
management options for outcomes in the Commission has been agreed to. This is scheduled for October prior to the MOW workshop.
WWF have observer status at the Commission.
Greenpeace Pacific participated in the Legal Workshop in November 2005. Every effort is being made to facilitate the participation of
Pacific ENGOs in project workshops across the sub-components.
A Pacific ENGO will participate in the project Regional Steering Committee and the established practice by the PCU will be to include
the transmission of all information on the Convention and oceanic fisheries management issues to Pacific ENGOs.
National and Regional workshops for ENGOs forms part of the co-financing agreement with WWF Pacific Operations which is currently
Page 20 of 35
in a draft form. The agreement is currently with WWF.
Produce information materials to raise public awareness on oceanic fisheries management issues forms part of the co-financing agreement
with WWF Pacific Operations which is currently in a draft form and will also be conducted in con-junction with the PCU information
strategy process.
Organising regional and national fora on the Convention and oceanic fisheries management issues for civil society participation forms
part of the co-financing agreement with WWF Pacific Operations which is currently in a draft form.
Support industry participation and awareness raising in Convention-related processes
A newly formed Pacific tuna industry association has formed in principle but has yet to have an annual general meeting to confirm office
bearers. Contact has been established with the interim president, Mr. James Movick.
Discussions with the Pacific Islands Tuna Industry Association have been initiated and are ongoing with regards to project support for
their representative participation in the Commission. The Association have to date obtained observer status at Commission meetings as
have WWF.
The provision of information flow on the Convention and oceanic fisheries management issues to Pacific INGOs and businesses is to be
discussed in a formal co-financing agreement with the PITIA.
Support was to have been provided for a meeting of the Pacific Islands Tuna Industry Association that was planned for the first quarter of
2006. Due to the uncertainty of dates of other meetings which the Association meeting was to have convened along side it has been
postponed until the third or fourth quarter of 2006.
3.4 Project Management and
Project Coordination Unit staffing and office
Coordination
Appointment of the Project Coordinator was made on the 29 December 2005.
Project effectively managed and
Mr. Royden Gholomo was appointed as the Project Finance and Administration Officer. He commenced work on 6 February 2006.
coordinated between implementing and
Mr Daren Cameron accepted the post of Fisheries Management Advisor in January 2006 but due to prior commitments did not commence
executing agencies and other
work until 18 March 2006. He joins FFA from the Queensland Fisheries Management Authority where he was a Fisheries Manager for
participants in the Project; effective
seven years.
participation in Project management and
coordination by stakeholders; reports on
Computer hardware purchases for three positions have been completed. Software programmes are on order. Partial costs of a high end
Project progress and performance
printer for project use have been committed.
flowing between Project participants
Arrangements for coordination between Implementing and Executing Agencies
and being used to manage the Project.
The Inception Workshop in 2005 served as the preliminary collective consultations. FFA and SPC meet on a fairly regular basis at a
range of regional fisheries meetings. A face to face meeting between Andrew Hurd (IUCN) and the Project Coordinator took place in the
margins of the Third Global Oceans Policy held at Paris in January 2006.
Letters of Agreements were completed in 2005.
Communication with UNDP Suva began intermittently. We the departure of the Environment portfolio officer, Dr Jan MacDonald,
UNDP staffing issues at UNDP Honiara has meant that most project related queries have been directed to Suva with delays. Matters
arising have been addressed through the UNDP Honiara office. Face to face meetings have taken place with Mr Ismael Toorawa and the
Page 21 of 35
Project Finance and Administration Officer.
Consultations were held between UNDP-Suva and the PCU at Suva, Fiji in May. The meeting was attended by:
UNDP Suva Deputy Resident Representative, Hans De Graaff, Cecilia Pau'u, Finance and Ruth Verevukivuki, Programme Portolio
Manager
OFM Project Coordination Unit Barbara Hanchard, Project Coordinator and Royden Gholomo, Project Finance and Administration
Officer.
The meeting was productive in that a number of issues both administrative and financial were discussed to achieve common
understandings. A record of discussion is available on file.
Regional Steering Committee Meetings and Reports
An inception Workshop was held in August 2005 at the UNDP office in Suva Fiji. This workshop was attended by representatives from
UNDP Suva and UNDP Honiara, UNDP/GEF Bangkok and FFA. A report of this meeting is available.
The first meeting of the Regional Steering Committee took place in Oct 2005. The Committee approved their terms of reference, a
revised budget and the annual work plan and budgets for 2005 and 2006. The Committee also considered and accepted the Project
Inception Report.
Both FFA and SPC also take the opportunity to report project progress to their governing councils. SPC Heads of Fisheries meeting took
place at Noumea New Caledonia in March 2005 and FFA will report project progress to the annual meeting of the Forum Fisheries
Committee and Ministerial meeting in May at Honiara, Solomon Islands.
The next meeting of the Regional Steering Committee is scheduled for October 2006 in Honiara at which the PIR/APR report, revised
2006 budget, draft 2007 and reports by beneficiary countries will be discussed. A report of project progress was made to a Pre-FFC
meeting held at Nadi, Fiji in June. UNDP Suva was unable to attend. FFA and SPC covered aspects of the project for which they are
responsible for implementing. A report of the project is available at www.ffa.int/gef
National Consultative Committee Meetings and Reports
National Focal Points for the OFM Project have been secured. A list of these can be located on the project webpage.
The Project Coordinator has commenced a schedule of visits to Pacific countries to provide support for the national level activities of the
project. The assistance also includes reviewing the national priorities identified by the countries during the needs assessment missions of
the design of the project in 2004. A visit was made to the Department of Fisheries at Port Vila Vanuatu from 22 26 March 2006. The
Director for Fisheries Mr Moses Amos indicated that the management body that oversees fisheries management in Vanuatu is not
operational but that they hoped to revive the committee soon and matters relating to the project would form part of that bodies agenda. A
template for an AWP for national level activities was completed by the Fisheries Department during the visit.
Visits have been made to Tuvalu and Cooks Islands. Draft National Annual Work Plans were developed for the Cook Islands and Tuvalu.
Discussions relating to potential areas at which the countries will seek assistance at a national level took place. Reports of these visits are
on file. Early indications are that the formation of national consultative processes in countries is proving to be challenging and this is
reinforced by information collected by the DEVFISH EU Domestic Industry Project. While most countries have tuna management
committees formed during the processes to develop and implement tuna management plans many are not operational and are in the
processes of being re-establish. This does not apply to all countries.
Reports on Project implementation, workplan and finances
A quarterly financial and narrative report was submitted to UNDP in January 2006 and the request for an advance was declined by
Page 22 of 35
UNDP. A further financial report of acquittal was also submitted at the end of February.
A quarterly financial and narrative report was submitted to UNDP for the first quarter of 2006 at the end of March, beginning of April.
While this provided financial acquittals it did not include a request for advance funds, as the outcome of the first quarter advance request
was still pending.
RSC1 approved the revised AWP and budget which has reflected the real project start date. The revised project AWP & budget spread the
project over a 6 year period but still accounting for 5 years of 12 month.
The Committee also approved the revised 2006 Annual Work Plan and Budget. The PCU will place before the next RSC in Oct 2006, a
further revised 2006 AWP & Budget to better reflect expenditure and implementation progress, an acquittal of the 2005 finances and a
draft 2007 AWP & Budget.
The preparation of the required UNDP/GEF - PIR/APR is expected to commence in the next quarter. These will be facilitated by
discussions with the UNDP/GEF Technical Coordinator during a visit to Suva in July.
The preparation of the UNDP/GEF APR/PIR is coordinated by UNDP Suva. The PCU also takes the opportunity to present reports of
progress to the annual meetings of the governing councils of FFA and SPC and did so in the first half of 2006.
Page 23 of 35
Rating of Project Implementation
2005
2006 Rating
Comments
Rating
National Project
S
S
While a settling in period of the project has delayed
Manager/Coordinator
some aspects of the projects management and
coordination; it has had minimal impact on the
implementation of activities and outputs from the two
technical components of the project, largely due to the
professional dedication of the Executing Agencies.
Overall the Executing Agencies have done well to
`catch up' on activities that did not occur immediately
at the official commencement of the project in the last
quarter of 2005 due to uncertainties relating to
disbursement and some implementation guidelines
from the Implementing Agency. The first six months of
2006 also contained an element of distraction while
communication between the Implementing Agency and
the Executing Agency were addressed.
A significant activity that will not be implemented in
accordance with the approved work plan, is the work
in relation to research activities on benthic
communities of seamounts. This sub-component of
Ecosystems Analysis is to be performed by IUCN and
circumstances beyond their control have hampered
implementation. These events will be taken into
account in revised work plans and budgets that will
need approval by the Regional Steering Committee.
Government GEF OFP4
UNDP Suva - Instruction sheet advises that: In the
(optional)
case of a project involving more than 1 country, it is
suggested that for simplicity only the OFP (optional)
and Country Office Programme Manager from the lead
country sign-off. If representatives from more than 1
country sign off, please add additional rows as
necessary, clearly indicating the country name for each
signature.
UNDP Country Office
UNDP Regional Technical
Advisor
Action Plan to Address Marginally Unsatisfactory, Unsatisfactory or Highly Unsatisfactory Rating
Where a project has received a rating of MU, U or HU describe the actions to be taken to address this:
Action to be Taken
By Whom?
By When?
Page 24 of 35
IV. Risks [To be completed by UNDP Suva]
1. Please annex to this report a print out of the corresponding Atlas Risk Tab (please use landscape format and only print the frame).
2. For any risks identified as "critical" please copy the following information from Atlas:
Risk Type
Date
Risk Description
Risk Management Response
Identified
Page 25 of 35
V. Adjustments to Project Strategy
Please report any adjustments made to the project strategy, as reflected in the logical framework matrix, since
the Project Document signature:
Change Made to:
Yes/No
Reason for Change
Project Objective
No
Not Applicable
Project Outcomes
No
Not Applicable
Project Outputs/ Activities / Inputs
Yes
IUCN activities in relation to Benthic Survey on
Seamounts experiencing delays. Alternative options
are being investigated in consultation with the PCU
and SPC.
Adjustments to Project Time Frame
If the duration of the project, the project work schedule, or the timing of any key events such as project start up,
evaluations or closing date, have been adjusted since project approval please explain the changes and the
reasons for these changes.
Change
Reason for Change
Not Applicable
Page 26 of 35
VI. Financial Information
Name of Partner or
Nature of
Amount
Amount
Additional
Estimated
Expected
Contributor
Contributor
used in
committed
amounts
Total
Total
(including the Private
Project
in Project
committed
Disbursement
Disbursement
Sector)
Preparation
Document
after Project
to
by end of
(PDF A, B)
Document
30 June 2006
project
finalization
GEF Contribution
GEF
$0.6m
$10.9m
Nil
$1.6
Cash Cofinancing
UNDP Managed
UNDP (TRAC)
UN Agency
Cash Cofinancing Partner Managed
Project only: excludes PDF co-financing
NZAID
$0.4m
$0.4m
$0.8m
PNG NFA
$0.1m
$0.1m
Fr Pacific Fund
$.06m
$0.06m
ACIAR
$0.3m
$0.3m
Uni of Hawaii
$0.1m
$0.1m
Under consideration
EC
$1.9m
$1.91m
US Dept of State (OESI)
$0.2m
$0.2m
In-Kind Cofinancing
Participating Govts (in cash and kind):
$17.28m
$17.28m
Reg Org (in cash and kind):
$14.45m
$14.45m
NGOs (in cash and kind):
$0.6m
$.6m
NGOs (in cash and kind):
$0.4m
$.4m
Other WCPFC Members (Commission
$6.48m
$6.48m
contributions):
Other Estimated Co-financing
Fishing States (in kind regulation costs):
$32.25m
$32.25m
Surveillance Partners (in kind):
$7.20m
$7.20m
Total Co financing
$79.09m
$3.07m
Total for Project
$.6m
$90.03m
$3.07m
Comments
Please explain any significant changes in project financing since Project Document signature, or differences
between the anticipated and actual rates of disbursement:
UNDP Suva
Page 27 of 35
VII.
Additional Financial Instruments used in the Project
This section is not applicable to the OFM Project in this reporting period but two co-financing
agreements relating to stakeholder participation and awareness raising are expected to be concluded in
the last two quarters of 2006.
These agreements will involve a represented regional environmental non-government organization
and a regional tuna industry association.
Page 28 of 35
VIII.
Procurement Data
Note: For projects or project components executed by UNOPS this section must not be filled in - data will be
provided by UNOPS headquarters.
Please report the US$ value (in Thousands, e.g. 70,000 = 70) of UNDP/GEF Payments made to GEF Donor
Countries for Procurement. Please enter Project expenditure accumulated from project start up to the date of
this report into the matrix against the donor country supplying the personnel, sub-contract, equipment and
training to the project. Please report only on contracts over US$ 2,000.
Equipment
Training
Total
Supplying Donor
Personnel
Sub-contracts
(US$
(US$
(US$
Country
(US$ thousands)
(US$ thousands)
thousands)
thousands)
thousands)
Code: 71400
Code:71200
Code:72200/72800
Code:74500
SPC $237
SPC $4
SPC $7
SPC $-
$248
IUCN $24
IUCN $5
IUCN $-
IUCN $-
$29
FFA $65
FFA $82
FFA $11
FFA $11
$169
Total
$326
$91
$18
$11
$446
Page 29 of 35
IX. Lessons
Are there any lessons from this project that could benefit the design and implementation of other GEF-funded
projects? Please list up to three and indicate which one/s could be worth developing into case studies of
good/bad practice.
i) In the design phase of the full project, a strategic decision to recruit regional fisheries experts to work along
side international experts to consult with stakeholders proved to be exceptionally beneficial in the final
design of the project document. Notably, in designing the project emphasis is directed not only to the
regional aspects of project assistance but a clear direction to address national level interventions to address
the root causes and threats to international waters in the region, specifically deficiencies in management
relating to governance and lack of understanding. A well executed terminal review of the first phase with
clear recommendations also provided noteworthy guidance in the formation of the full Oceanic Fisheries
Management project for the Pacific region.
ii) The Pacific region has a long history of regional cooperation on oceanic fisheries management matters and
this is supported by the evolution of regional organizations whose technical and management competence
have worked for the benefit of the small island developing States in this area. In the case of the Pacific these
recognized and established mechanisms serve positively for addressing transboundary international waters
concerns, particularly for migratory resources.
iii) A set of guidelines detailing the processes, including timeframes, involved from project concept to the
official start date of projects might have prevented the delayed roll out of the PI OFM Project. While some
delays by their nature of needing scheduled committee type approval are unavoidable, others concerning
communication, preparation work and roles of responsibility could have reasonably been avoided with clear
guidelines for all organizations involved. In the course of addressing the accessibility of GEF assistance to
the Pacific region any advice provided should be inclusive of clear process guidelines with timeframes.
Page 30 of 35
X.
Project Contribution to GEF Strategic Targets in Focal Area
"The global concerns addressed by the GEF in activities in the focal area include:
"Excessive exploitation of living and nonliving resources due to inadequate management and control measures
(for example, overfishing...)"- Ch. 4. Operational Strategy of the GEF.;
and the overall strategic thrust of GEF-funded IW activities is:
"to meet the agreed incremental costs of (a) assisting groups of countries to better understand the
environmental concerns of their International Waters and work collaboratively to address them; (b) building
the capacity of existing institutions (or, if appropriate, developing the capacity through new institutional
arrangements) to utilise a more comprehensive approach for addressing transboundary water-related
environmental concerns; and (c) implementing measures that address the priority transboundary environmental
concerns." - Ch. 4. Operational Strategy of the GEF
Within the GEF IW focal area:
· sustainable management of regional fish stocks is identified as one of the major environmental issues that
SIDS have in common and a target for activities under the SIDS component of OP 9, the Integrated Land and
Water Multiple Focal Area Operational Program; and
· the adoption of an ecosystem-based approach to addressing environmental problems in Large Marine
Ecosystems is promoted through activities under the Large Marine Ecosystem Component of OP 8, the
Waterbody-Based Operational Program.
Consistent with this framework, GEF financing for the South Pacific SAP Project has been supporting the
implementation of an IW Pacific Islands SAP, including a pilot phase of support for the OFM Component,
which underpinned successful efforts to conclude and bring into force the WCPF Convention"
The Pacific Islands OFM Project supported Pacific SIDS efforts as they participate in the setting up and initial
period of operation of the new Commission that is at the center of the WCPF Convention and as they reform,
realign, restructure and strengthen their national fisheries laws, policies, institutions and programmes to take up
the new opportunities which the WCPF Convention creates and discharge the new responsibilities which the
Convention requires.
GEF support for the Pacific Islands OFM Project includes the following elements:
· The Project will provide a contribution towards meeting the incremental costs of implementation by Pacific
SIDS of the WCPF Convention, which is the first major regional application of the UN Fish Stocks
Agreement.
· The Project has supported Pacific SIDS in taking a leading role in the establishment of the new WCPF
Commission. The establishment of the Commission will put an end to the situation where there is no
regulation of fishing in the high seas of the Western and Central Pacific. With most of the Pacific SIDS'
major trade and aid partners involved in the Commission as fishing states, it is important for the Pacific
SIDS to be able to look to an independent multilateral agency for support in this work.
Page 31 of 35
· The Project will also support Pacific SIDS in making the necessary national legal, policy and institutional
reforms for the implementation of the SAP and the WCPF Convention. With much of the catch and fishing
in the WTP LME occurring in the waters of the Pacific SIDS, and an increasing share of the high seas
catches being made by vessels of Pacific SIDS, successful implementation of the oceanic fisheries
management component of the SAP and of the WCPF Convention depends heavily on the commitment and
capacity of Pacific SIDS to apply conservation and management measures in their waters that are
compatible with arrangements for the high seas and to exercise control over their vessels fishing on the
high seas. All Pacific SIDS will have to make substantial efforts to upgrade and realign their oceanic
fisheries management regimes and programmes to meet the responsibilities and standards arising from the
establishment of the new Commission. For many, this will require reforms of institutional structures to
make the necessary incremental resources available at a time of general restraint on levels of core public
service funds and posts. GEF is the most appropriate agency to support this effort. It has the necessary
capacity and mandate to assist these vital reforms and to provide the necessary support to capacity
enhancement and the sustainability of input from the Pacific SIDS.
· The Project will provide support to give effect to the adoption of the principles of the ecosystem approach
in the new arrangements for transboundary oceanic fish stock management in the WTP LME. In the pilot
phase of the OFM component of the South Pacific SAP Project, GEF support allowed work to begin in this
crucial area. Following the design of an appropriate approach to biodynamic modelling of the WTP LME,
biological sampling of ecosystem components, food web analysis and trophic level determination have
been initiated as a first step in what will be a long-term effort. This pilot activity was also successful in
leveraging additional complementary funding for collaborative ecosystem research on a Pacific basin scale
over a longer time frame. GEF support for activities related to the operationalisation of an ecosystem-
based approach will ensure that ecosystem analysis is given a high priority from the earliest stages of the
establishment of the Commission. Through collaboration with IUCN, the ecosystem analysis will be
broadened to support the first systematic efforts in the region to look at seamount-related aspects of an
ecosystem-based approach.
· The implementation of the Convention will mobilise a major increase in resources for conservation and
management from those who use the fishery resources of the region. Implementation of the Convention
will see the establishment of substantial technical, compliance and science programmes under the
Commission, also to be financed largely by those who use the region's fishery resources as well as
requiring the commitment of resources to expanded compliance and science programmes at national level
by those involved in fishing, especially in high seas fishing. In addition to increasing the resources
committed for these purposes, this will reduce the burden on Pacific SIDS who have, until now, carried the
major burden for research and monitoring of oceanic fisheries with funding from donors that could have
been used for other socio-economic purposes.
· The approach of the Project closely matches the GEF approach to IW Projects noted above. It has its
origins in the preparation of a SAP that identified transboundary concerns, the associated threats and their
Page 32 of 35
root causes. The Project itself is aimed at addressing the root causes identified in the SAP and it will assist
Pacific SIDS to utilise the full range of technical, economic, financial, regulatory and institutional measures
needed to operationalise sustainable development strategies for oceanic fisheries in the international waters
of the Pacific Islands region. It will help them to better understand the transboundary environmental
concerns related to oceanic fisheries and to work collaboratively to address them; to build a new regional
Commission and strengthen the capacity of existing national institutions to utilise a more comprehensive
approach for addressing those transboundary concerns; and to implement at regional and national level
measures that address the priority transboundary environmental concerns identified in the SAP.
· The Project will contribute to achievement of IW Strategic Priorities for the period FY04-06 through its
support for SAP-based management reforms, its SIDS focus and its LME and fisheries applications.
· GEF support for the Project will be the first tangible response by the global community to the call in
Section VII of the WSSD JPOI for actions to:
"Further implement sustainable fisheries management and improve financial returns from fisheries by
supporting and strengthening relevant regional fisheries management organisations, as appropriate,
such as the recently established Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism and such agreements as the
Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and
Central Pacific Ocean";
and supports the other relevant parts of the WSSD Plan of Implementation relating to SIDS noted above.
· There is a good basis for expecting that the Project will be effective. The SAP is in place and remains
appropriate. The WCPF Convention was concluded and has come into force earlier than expected, assisted
by the South Pacific SAP Project advisory and training activities - these have also led to some Pacific SIDS
completing ratification of the UN Fish Stocks Agreement and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
The WCPF Commission has therefore been established and provides a very clear focus for much of the
Project's proposed activities.
Page 33 of 35
ATTACHMENT A
Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project Beneficiary Country Endorsements, Confirmations and
Signatures on the Project Document
GEF Operational Points
Dates of Endorsement/
Project Document Signatures5
(at November 2004)
Confirmation
Cook Islands
Endorsed: 13 October 2003
Mr Vaitoti Tupa, Director, Environment Service Confirmed: 24 December 2004
Federated States of Micronesia
Endorsed: 6 November 2003
Mr John Mooteb, Deputy Assistant Secretary
Confirmed: 29 December 2004
Sustainable Development Unit
Fiji
Endorsed: 1 March 2004
Endorsed: 29 August 2005
Mr Cama Tuiloma, Chief Executive Officer, Ministry
C
o o
n f iL
r o
m c
e a
d l 1 February 2005
Government, Housing, Squatter Settlement & Environment
Kiribati
Endorsed: 28 November 2003
Mr Tererei Abete-Reema, Deputy Director, Environment and
Conservation Division
Republic of Marshall Islands
Endorsed: 16 September 2003
Ms Yumiko Crisostomo, Director, Office of Environ
Cm
o e
n n
fi tral
m ed 4 February 2005
Planning and Policy Coordination
Nauru
Endorsed: 20 October 2003
Mr Joseph Cairn, The Secretary, Department of Indu
Cst
o r
n y
f
i &
r
med 14 December 2004
Economic Development
Niue
Endorsed: 9 February 2004
Endorsed: 27 July 2005
Mr Crossley Tatui, Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Ex
C te
o r
n n
fia
r l
med: 24 December 2004
Affairs Office
Palau
Endorsed: 22 October 2003
Ms Youlsau Bells, National Environment Planner, O
Cff
o ic
nf e
i
r of
m
ed: 17 December 2004
Environmental and Response Coordination
Papua New Guinea
Endorsed: 19 February 2004
Endorsed: 10 August 2005
Mr Wari Iamo, Director, Department of Environmen
Ct
oa
nn
f d
ir med 2 February 2005
Conservation
Samoa
Endorsed: 17 October 2003
Mr Aiono Mose Pouvi Sua
Confirmed: 23 December 2004
Chief Executive Officer, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
Trade
Solomon Islands
Endorsed: 11 October 2003
Mr Steve Likaveke, Permanent Secretary, Ministry o
C f
o F
n o
fi res
m t
es,
d : 20 December 2004
Environment & Conservation
Tonga
Endorsed: 26 January 2004
Mr Uilou Samani, Director, Department of Environm
C e
o n
n t
firmed: 3 January 2005
Tokelau
Endorsed: 27 February 2004
Endorsed: 18 July 2007
Mr Falani Aukuso, Director, Office of the Council o
C f
o F
n a
fi irpu
m l
e e
d: 13 December 2004
Tuvalu
Endorsed: 7 November 2003
Endorsed: August 2005 (Mr. Enate Evi Tuvalu
Mr Nelesone Panapasi, Secretary to Government, Of
C f
o ic
nfe
i rof
m ed 1 February 2005
GEF Focal Point)
the Prime Minister
5 Status UNDP Suva.
Page 34 of 35
GEF Operational Points
Dates of Endorsement/
Project Document Signatures5
(at November 2004)
Confirmation
Vanuatu
Endorsed: 17 March 2004
Endorsed: 24 August 2005
Mr Ernest Bani, The Head, Environment Unit
Other Project Document Signatures
Implementing Agency
United Nations Development Programme
Suva
Endorsed: 30 September 2005
Mr. Hans de Graff
Deputy Resident Representative
Papua New Guinea
Endorsed: 4 August 2005
Ms. Jacqui Badcock
Resident Representative
Executing Agency
Endorsed: 13 July 2005
Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency
Mr. Feleti.P.Teo
Director General
Page 35 of 35
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE
2nd Meeting of the RSC
Honiara, Solomon Islands
10 October 2006
Paper Number
RSC2/WP.4
Title
PACIFIC ISLANDS OCEANIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT
PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT - GEF/UNDP PROJECT
IMPLEMENTATION REPORT (PIR) / ANNUAL PROJECT
REPORT (APR)
Summary
The Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project (OFM Project) as at the
reporting period of this report has been operational for nine months (1 October 30 June
2006). This paper presents a project report to date in a format required by the project
Implementing Agency (UNDP) and the Global Environment Facility (GEF). The report is
presented to the Regional Steering Committee for their review and discussion.
Recommendation
The OFM Project Regional Steering Committee is invited to consider:
i)
the draft project report which takes into account the first nine operational months
of the OFM Project; and
ii)
endorse the onward transmission of the report to UNDP and GEF.
PACIFIC ISLANDS OCEANIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT ANNUAL
REPORT - GEF/UNDP PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION REPORT (PIR) / ANNUAL
PROJECT REPORT (APR)
Introduction
1.
The Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project (OFM Project) as at the
reporting period of this report has been operational for nine months (1 October 30 June
2006). The first Regional Steering Committee (RSC) for the OFM Project met in Oct 2005
and addressed a number of establishment issues in its' role as the primary policy making
body for the project. The principal report to that Committee meeting was the Inception
Report that presented an overview of the endorsement and establishment process of the
project proper and the preparations undertaken to that point. It is considered a guiding
document for the early phases of project implementation.
Project Evaluation and Reporting
2.
The OFM Project objectives, outputs and emerging issues are to be regularly
reviewed and evaluated annually by the RSC. Reporting (annual and quarterly) is
undertaken by the Project Coordination Unit (PCU) based at the FFA in accordance with
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Global Environment Facility (GEF)
rules and regulations. Quarterly financial and narrative reports for 2005 and the first two
quarters of 2006 have been submitted to UNDP.
3.
The primary review document required by UNDP is the Annual Project Review
(APR), which is designed to obtain the independent views of the main stakeholders of a
project on its relevance, performance and the likelihood of its success. GEF also requires
each project to undertake a Project Implementation Review (PIR)1 on an annual basis,
which focuses on GEF's project criteria. The APR and the PIR are the principal annual
review documents considered by the RSC and they have recently been merged to form a
single consolidated report.
4.
The draft consolidated PIR/APR has been prepared by the PCU for the Steering
Committee's consideration and for onward submission to UNDP. The report is appended
at Attachment A. The Steering Committee is expected to review and discuss the report.
In the past, such APRs were the subject of review by a formal Tripartite or Multipartite
Review Board. The Regional Steering Committee (which effectively carries the same level
of representation) will act, effectively, as the Multipartite Review body.
Recommendation
5.
The OFM Project Regional Steering Committee is invited to consider:
i)
the draft project report which takes into account the first nine operational months of
the OFM Project; and
ii)
endorse the onward transmission of the report to UNDP and GEF.
1 The Project will participate in the annual PIR of the GEF. The PIR is mandatory for all GEF projects that have
been under implementation for at least a year at the time that the exercise is conducted. Particular emphasis
will be given to the GEF IW project indicator requirements (Process Indicators, Stress Reduction Indicators and
Environmental Status Indicators), which will serve to inform the monitoring and evaluation process as well as
being adopted by the participating countries as tools for long-term monitoring of project objectives.
RSC/WP.7
2
NATIONAL LEVEL ANNUAL REPORT
TO THE
OCEANIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE (OFM RSC)
Reporting Period October 2005 June 2006
1. Country: COOK ISLANDS
2. Project Title: Oceanic Fisheries Management: Implementation of the Strategic
Action Programme of the Pacific SIDs (Pacific SAP II)
3. Period Covered: 1 October 2005 30 June 2006
4. Summary of Overall Project Progress
The Legal Adviser of the Ministry of Marine Resources participated in the
FFA Meeting to develop a legal strategy of assistance for FFA Member
countries in Port Vila, Vanuatu from 14th -16th October, 2005.
As the Marine Resources Act 2005 is now enforced, the Cook Islands priority
had shifted from Legislation (the Act) to Regulations and Licensing Regime.
In July 2005, FFA conducted a Port-side Inspection and Prosecutions
Workshop, and as this such a success, and the fact the Cook Islands now has a
new Marine Resources Act, another Prosecution Workshop has been requested
be held in Rarotonga.
There had been plans to hold a Workshop for members of Cabinet on the
obligations under the WCPFC Convention - an awareness-raising workshop is
planned for 2009, taking into account that there was to be an election in 2008.
A Snap Election has been called for September 2006, therefore it maybe
timely to bring forward this awareness-raising workshop to early or mid-2007.
Cook Islands proactively participated in regional Workshops and Meeting
where GEF OFM Project had made contributions.
5. Specific Outputs/Results Achieved (as per annual work-plan):
National level activities
· An upgraded version of the `Catch and Effort Query System' installed
in May 2006 Offshore Fisheries Division up-skilled in its use.
· Mr. Les Clark, OFM Project International Consultant, continued
working on the Cook Islands Fisheries Management Plan.
Regional level activities
· Ms. Pamela Maru, National Observer Coordinator attended the 6th
Regional Observer Coordinator in Honiara.
· Mr. Ian Bertram, Secretary of Marine Resources participated at the
Seamount Research Planning Workshop was organized at SPC
Headquarters on the 20-21 March 2006.
· Secretary of Marine Resources attended the GEF Regional Steering
Committee Meeting in Nadi June 2006
6. Challenges/Issues Encountered
Challenges and issues encountered with project activities in this reporting period
(October 2005 June 2006) include:
· Les Clark had worked on a Fisheries (Tuna) Management Plan,
however the Cook Islands has now decided to incorporate this work
into an `Ecosystems Approach to Fisheries Management Plan'.
· Visit to Rarotonga by Ms Barbara Hanchard, Project Coordinator, was
timely and allowed the opportunity to review the Cook Islands Work
plan and also to discuss other areas where GEF may be able to support
the Cook Islands Marine Sector Institutional Strengthening Project
currently in progress.
· An issue encountered when preparing this Annual Report, was that the
National Focal Point was a little behind, in knowing what activities
Regionally, GEF had contributed to.
7. Solutions Applied (to address issues and challenges)
Solutions applied to address the issues and challenges included:
· EAFM In line with regional approach as promoted by FFA.
· Project Coordinators - Roundtable, informal discussions.
9. Recommendations for Future Action
As reported above, visits by the Project Coordinator are very useful, and we
believe they should continue on a more regular basis. We also believe that
the Work plan should be a living document and evolve with time,
e.g. if activities planned for a particular year are not undertaken, then they
should be able to be slotted into the following years activities.
10. Report Prepared By: Peter W Graham, National (OFM Project) Focal Point.
NATIONAL LEVEL ANNUAL REPORT
TO THE
OCEANIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE (OFM RSC)
Reporting Period October 2005 September 2006
1. Country: Federated States of Micronesia
2. Project Title: Oceanic Fisheries Management: Implementation of the Strategic
Action Programme of the Pacific SIDs (Pacific SAP II)
3. Period Covered: 1 October 2005 30 September 2006
4. Summary of Overall Project Progress
The FSM has benefited from several projects during their reporting period.
The FSM has participated in several regional workshops, attachments, training
programmes, and beneficiary to some the activities aimed at increasing FFA
members' understanding of issues and effective participation in the WCPF
Commission and related meetings.
Due to our practical reasons given our political setup, the FSM has not been
successful in fully engaging the private sector and NGOs in their consultative
process.
5. Specific Outputs/Results Achieved (as per annual work-plan):
National level activities
An in-country prosecution and port-side workshop was held in Pohnpei, FSM
in April 2006.
Regional level activities
On a regional level, FSM participated in various conferences, meetings,
workshops, trainings, and attachments aimed at building up the capacity of the
FFA members to meet their obligations and effectively participate in the work
of the WCPF Commission. These sessions include:
· first Steering Committee held in Honiara in October 2005;
· second FFA Management Options Workshop held in Honiara in
October 2005;
· the meeting to develop a strategy for legal assistance to FFA Member
countries in Port Vila, Vanuatu from 14th -16th October, 2005;
1
· a sub-regional Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM)
meeting held in Apia, Samoa in April 2006;
· an EAFM progress follow-up meeting held in Vanuatu, June 2006;
· a regional stock assessment workshop held in Noumea, New Caledonia
in July 2006;
· an observer training course that was held in the Majuro, Marshall
Islands in August 2006;
· work progressing on National Fisheries Status Report; and
· the provision of technical advice and materials for data collection,
observer and port sampling programmes.
6. Challenges/Issues Encountered
· It has been difficult to set a consultative committee given our political set-up.
Currently the NORMA board has been used for consultation purposes but the
process had not allowed the participation of the private sector and the NGOs.
· I am not sure which projects we had participated in had been funded by the
project.
7. Solutions Applied (to address issues and challenges)
Solutions applied to address the issues and challenges included:
· Other alternatives have been employed for consultations as the use of the
NORMA Board.
· Further consultation with the project coordination unit will be required in the
future.
9. Recommendations for Future Action
Closer consultation with the Coordination unit in the future will be very helpful.
Any project future activities should be clearly shown that they are funded under the
project.
10. Report Prepared By: Bernard Thoulag, National (OFM Project) Focal Point.
2
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE
2nd Meeting of the RSC
Nadi, Fiji
21 October 2006
Paper Number
RSC2/INFO.5
Title
NATIONAL ANNUAL PROJECT REPORTS
Summary
The Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project (OFM Project) provides for
assistance to Pacific Small Islands Developing States (SIDS) at two distinctive levels,
regionally and at individual national levels. Each of the countries participating in the OFM
Project has designated a Project National Focal Point to the project and these individuals
have a number of responsibilities, including the preparation of a national annual report.
This paper presents written national annual reports prepared and submitted by the
project focal points for the Cook Islands and Tonga.
Recommendation
The Regional Steering Committee is invited to:
i)
advise on the status of national consultative committee mechanisms in-
country;
ii)
note the national annual project reports submitted by the Cooks Islands
and Tonga;
iii)
provide verbal presentations where no written country report has been
submitted in advance; and
iv)
raise for discussion matters relating to any national concerns regarding the
project activities and their delivery.
NATIONAL ANNUAL PROJECT REPORTS
Introduction
1.
The Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project (OFM Project) provides
for assistance to Pacific Small Islands Developing States (SIDS) at two distinctive levels,
regionally and at individual national levels. Each of the countries participating in the OFM
Project has designated a Project National Focal Point (see Attachment A) to the project
and these individuals have a number of responsibilities.
National Level Project Management and Coordination
2.
The Project National Focal Point is expected to effect the establishment of a
National Consultative Committee (NCC) in countries. In reality, it is unlikely that in most
countries it is necessary to establish a new body to serve as the NCCs. It is most likely that
an appropriate national body that already functions at the intersectoral level can be
mandated to take on the role of the NCC (in order to avoid creating unnecessary
bureaucracy).
3.
The function of the NCCs is to capture the Project concepts and objectives at the
national level, to expedite national activities related to the Project components and outputs;
and to ensure complementary activities between national strategies and policies and
project objectives. This will firmly establish the National Focal Point as the key focal point
for interactions with the Project Coordination Unit. Furthermore, this will help to maintain a
focus of action at the national level.
National Consultative Committee
4.
The NCCs are expected to meet at least once a year to endorse requests for in-
country Project activities, monitor the effectiveness of in-country activities; prepare work
plans for in-country Project activities (based on the needs identified in the national
missions); discuss project progress and implications at a national level.
5.
The NCCs are also expected to identify national concerns regarding project
activities and delivery; ensure integrated coordination of actions and Project concepts
within those Government Departments that have responsibility/accountability for fisheries-
related and Convention-related issues; provide a voice for national, non-governmental
stakeholders; provide government representatives with an opportunity to update and
inform each other and non-government participants; ensure transparency of process and
multisectoral participation.
Reporting
6.
The National Focal Point in each country has been requested to provide the Project
Coordinating Unit (PCU) with a summary report of its discussions as they relate to project
issues highlighting specific issues that need to be brought to the attention of the Regional
Steering Committee. The PCU has provided Project National Focal Points with a
standardised reporting template for countries to complete and submit to the Regional
Steering Committee. The template has been designed to be concise and is mindful of the
need not to burden National Focal Points with extensive reporting requirements on top of
their daily national work responsibilities. The National Annual Project Reports for the Cook
Islands and Tonga are appended at Attachment B.
National Annual Work Plan
7.
Additionally, a standardised format for national annual work plans is being provided
to countries to assist with coordination and planning of project activities, particularly
national level activities. It was hoped that all participating countries will have completed
these by the end of year.
Recommendation
8.
The Regional Steering Committee is invited to:
RSC/INFO.5
2
i)
advise on the status of national consultative committee mechanisms in-
country;
ii)
note the national annual project reports submitted by the Cooks Islands and
Tonga;
iii)
provide verbal presentations where no written country report has been
submitted in advance; and
iv)
raise for discussion matters relating to any national concerns regarding the
project activities and their delivery.
RSC/INFO.5
3
ATTACHMENT A
OFM Project National Focal Points
Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project
NATIONAL (OFM PROJECT) FOCAL POINT NOMINATIONS
Country
Focal Point
Designation
Address
Telephone/Fax
Email
COOK
GRAHAM
Peter
Legal Advisor
P.O. Box 85
Tel: (682) 28721
P.W.Graham@mmr.gov.ck
ISLANDS
Ministry of Marine Resources
AVARUA, RAROTONGA
Fax: (682) 29721
Cook Islands
FSM
THOULAG
Bernard
Executive Director
P O Box PS122
Tel: (691) 320
norma@mail.fm
National Oceanic Resource Management
PALIKIR, POHNPEI
2700/5181
Authority(NORMA)
Federated States of Micronesia
Fax: (691) 320 2383
96941
FIJI
TUILAUCALA
Saimone
Acting Director of Fisheries
P.O. Box 358
Tel: (679) 336 1122
stuilaucala@mff.net.fj
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and
SUVA
Fax: (679) 331
Forestry
Fiji
8769/336 1184
Fisheries Division
KIRIBATI
TEKINAITI
Tooti
Ag. Principal Fisheries Officer
P O Box 276
Tel: (686) 21296 /
k2toosi@yahoo.com
Fisheries Department
BIKENIBEU, TARAWA
21099
Republic of Kiribati
Fax: (686) 22289 /
21120
MARSHALL IS
JOSEPH
Glen
Director
P.O. Box 860
Tel: (692) 625 8262
gjoseph@mimra.com
Marshall Islands Marine Resources
MAJURO
Fax: (692) 625 5447
mimra@ntamar.net
Authority
Marshall Islands 96960
NAURU
JACOB
Peter
Chief Executive Officer
Aiwo District
Tel: (674) 444 3739/
rdman@naurufisheries.com
Nauru Fisheries & Marine Resources
Republic of Nauru
3733
Authority
Fax: (674) 444 3812
NIUE
PASISI
Brendon
Director
P.O. Box 74
Tel: (683) 4032
fisheries@mail.gov.nu
Department of Agriculture, Forestry &
ALOFI
Fax: (683) 4079 / 4010
Fisheries
Niue
PALAU
MALSOL
Nanette
Fisheries Law Compliance Officer
P O Box 117
Tel: (680) 488 3125
dillymalsol@yahoo.com
Ministry of Resources and Development
KOROR
Fax: (680) 488 3555
tunapal@palaunet.com
Republic of Palau 96940
PNG
MARTIN
Paul
Industry Liaison Coordinator National
Investment Haus
Tel: (675) 309 0442
pmartin@fisheries.gov.pg
Fisheries Authority
P O Box 2016
Fax: (675) 3202061
RSC/INFO.5
4
PORT MORESBY, NCD
Papua New Guinea
KUMORU
Ludwig
Manager Tuna Fishery
Investment Haus
Tel: (675) 309 0442
lkumoru@fisheries.gov.pg
National Fisheries Authority
P O Box 2016
Fax: (675) 3202061
PORT MORESBY, NCD
Papua New Guinea
SAMOA
MULIPOLA
Antonio
Acting Assistant Chief Executive Officer
P.O. Box 1874
Tel: (685) 23863
mulipola.atonio@mfa.gov.ws
Fisheries Division
APIA
Fax: (685) 24292
apmulipola@lesamoa.net
Department of Agriculture
Samoa
SOLOMON IS
DIAKE
Sylvester
Under Secretary
P O Box G13
Tel: (677) 38674
sylvester_diake@yahoo.com.au
Department of Fisheries and Marine
HONIARA
Fax: (677) 38106 /
Resources
Solomon Islands
38730
TOKELAU
PELASIO
Mose
Senior Policy Advisory Officer
APIA
Tel: (685) 20822
Mose.pelasio@clear.net.nz
Fisheries
Samoa
Samoa
Tokelau-Apia Liaison Office
(690) 3127 - Tokelau
Fax: (690) 3108
TONGA
HA'UNGA
Silivenusi
[Designation]
SOPU, NUKU'ALOFA
Tel: (676) 27551
shaunga@tongafish.gov.to
Ministry of Fisheries
Kingdom of Tonga
Fax: (676) 27550
mofish01@tongafish.gov.to
TUVALU
APINELU
Nikolasi
Director of Fisheries
VAIAKU, FUNAFUTI
Tel: (688) 20836
apinelu@yahoo.com
Tuvalu Fisheries Department
Tuvalu
Fax: (688) 20151
Ministry of Natural Resources and Lands
VANUATU
AMOS
Moses
Director
Private Mail Bag 045
Tel: (678) 23621
fisheries@vanuatu.com.vu
Fisheries Department
PORT VILA
Fax: (678) 23641
tohlolo@yahoo.com
Republic of Vanuatu
moseamos@vanuatu.com.au
AUSTRALIA
ANDERSON
Gordon
Pacific Fisheries Program Development
02 6206 4315
mobile 0400003977
Advisor
Adviosry Group
Corporate Governance and Review
Division
AusAID
NEW
ROYSON
Tamsin
Second Secretary
New Zealand High Commission
Tel: (677) 28534
tamsin.royson@mfat.govt.nz
ZEALAND
P.O. Box 697
Fax: (677) 22377
Honiara
RSC/INFO.5
5
ATTACHMENT B
NATIONAL LEVEL ANNUAL REPORT
TO THE
OCEANIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE (OFM RSC)
Reporting Period October 2005 June 2006
1. Country: COOK ISLANDS
2. Project Title: Oceanic Fisheries Management: Implementation of the Strategic Action
Programme of the Pacific SIDs (Pacific SAP II)
3. Period Covered: 1 October 2005 30 June 2006
4. Summary of Overall Project Progress
The Legal Adviser of the Ministry of Marine Resources participated in the FFA Meeting to
develop a legal strategy of assistance for FFA Member countries in Port Vila, Vanuatu from
14th -16th October, 2005.
As the Marine Resources Act 2005 is now enforced, the Cook Islands priority had shifted
from Legislation (the Act) to Regulations and Licensing Regime. In July 2005, FFA
conducted a Port-side Inspection and Prosecutions Workshop, and as this such a success,
and the fact the Cook Islands now has a new Marine Resources Act, another Prosecution
Workshop has been requested be held in Rarotonga.
There had been plans to hold a Workshop for members of Cabinet on the obligations under
the WCPFC Convention - an awareness-raising workshop is planned for 2009, taking into
account that there was to be an election in 2008. A Snap Election has been called for
September 2006, therefore it maybe timely to bring forward this awareness-raising
workshop to early or mid-2007.
Cook Islands proactively participated in regional Workshops and Meeting where GEF OFM
Project had made contributions.
5. Specific Outputs/Results Achieved (as per annual work-plan):
National level activities
· An upgraded version of the `Catch and Effort Query System' installed in May
2006 Offshore Fisheries Division up-skilled in its use.
· Mr. Les Clark, OFM Project International Consultant, continued working on the
Cook Islands Fisheries Management Plan.
Regional level activities
· Ms. Pamela Maru, National Observer Coordinator attended the 6th Regional
Observer Coordinator in Honiara.
· Mr. Ian Bertram, Secretary of Marine Resources participated at the Seamount
Research Planning Workshop was organized at SPC Headquarters on the 20-21
March 2006.
· Secretary of Marine Resources attended the GEF Regional Steering Committee
Meeting in Nadi June 2006
6. Challenges/Issues Encountered
Challenges and issues encountered with project activities in this reporting period (October 2005
June 2006) include:
RSC/INFO.5
6
· Les Clark had worked on a Fisheries (Tuna) Management Plan, however the Cook
Islands has now decided to incorporate this work into an `Ecosystems Approach to
Fisheries Management Plan'.
· Visit to Rarotonga by Ms Barbara Hanchard, Project Coordinator, was timely and
allowed the opportunity to review the Cook Islands Work plan and also to discuss
other areas where GEF may be able to support the Cook Islands Marine Sector
Institutional Strengthening Project currently in progress.
· An issue encountered when preparing this Annual Report, was that the National
Focal Point was a little behind, in knowing what activities Regionally, GEF had
contributed to.
7. Solutions Applied (to address issues and challenges)
Solutions applied to address the issues and challenges included:
· EAFM In line with regional approach as promoted by FFA.
· Project Coordinators - Roundtable, informal discussions.
9. Recommendations for Future Action
As reported above, visits by the Project Coordinator are very useful, and we believe they
should continue on a more regular basis. We also believe that the Work plan should be a
living document and evolve with time,
e.g. if activities planned for a particular year are not undertaken, then they should be able to
be slotted into the following years activities.
10. Report Prepared By: Peter W Graham, National (OFM Project) Focal Point.
RSC/INFO.5
7
NATIONAL LEVEL ANNUAL REPORT
TO THE
OCEANIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE (OFM RSC)
Reporting Period October 2005 June 2006
Country : TONGA
1. Project Title: Oceanic Fisheries Management: Implementation of the Strategic Action
Programme of the Pacific SIDs (Pacific SAP II)
2. Period Covered: 01 OCTOBER 2005 30 JUNE 2006
3. Summary of Overall Project Progress
The Legal Adviser of Fisheries Department participated in the FFA Meeting to develop a
legal strategy of assistance for FFA Member countries in October, 2005.
Tonga, like all FFA member countries participated in all regional workshops and meetings
where GEF OFM Project had made contributions.
5. Specific Outputs/Results Achieved
National Level Activities
· A refresher longline training course for qualified regional observers was given in
Tonga by Mr.Fukofuka from SPC during the first quarter of 2006.
· A legal fellowship for Tonga was undertaken by Fisheries Legal Officer, Viliami
Mo'ale at the Centre for Maritime Policy at the University of Wolllongong,
Australia, during the first quarter of 2006.
· Tonga and some other member countries were given an upgraded version of the
Catch and Effort Query System (CES) during the 2nd quarter of 2006
· Preparations commenced during 2nd quarter of 2006 for Operations `Kurukuru' and
`Islands Chief'. This was supported by Australian Defence with contributions from
FFA MCS Division, to undertake coordinated surveillance operations between and
across national jurisdictions. The Operations were expected to take place just after
the 2nd quarter 2006.
Regional Level
Tonga's MCS officer participated in all the Regional Workshops and
Meetings.
Secretary for Fisheries attended the GEF Regional Steering Committee
just before the end of the 2nd quarter of 2006
6. Challenges/Issues Encountered
Challenges and issues encountered with the project activities within this reporting period
(October 2005 June 2006) included the following:
· One of the main issues encountered by Tonga is that the National Focal Point was
rather a little late in knowing the actual activities that GEF contributed to. However,
the quarterly reports are of great assistance.
7. Solutions Applied (to address issues and challenges)
· National Focal Point to be informed of all activities related to GEF contributions.
This can be done when coordinator is sending invitations to member countries.
8. Recommendation
Established better communications from coordinator.
RSC/INFO.5
8
Prepared by: Siliveinusi M. Ha'unga,
National ( OFM Project) Focal Point of Contact,TONGA
RSC/INFO.5
9
NATIONAL LEVEL ANNUAL REPORT
TO THE
OCEANIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE (OFM RSC)
Reporting Period 1 Oct 2005 30 June 2006
1. Country: MARSHALL ISLANDS
2. Project Title: Oceanic Fisheries Management: Implementation of the Strategic Action
Programme of the Pacific SIDs (Pacific SAP II)
3. Period Covered: 1 October 2005 30 June 2006
4. Summary of Overall Project Progress: The RMI benefited from various projects under
the overall project progress. A few of these highlights include:
1. The Chief Fisheries Officer for the Oceanic & Industrial Affairs Division, MIMRA,
completed an attachment to the SPC/OFP during the reporting period. Attachment
training included (i) an overview of tuna fishery data collection, (ii) familiarisation with
OFP-developed database query tools (e.g. CES) and TUFMAN, and (iii) having the
trainees sufficiently advance their National Fisheries Report in preparation for the 2nd
meeting of the WCPFC Scientific Committee meeting (August 2006), using the skills
obtained during the training. As a result, the RMI was able to complete and submit its
National Fishery Report in advance of the SC2.
2. The successful installation and periodical update of the TUFMAN also took place
during this reporting period; in addition, the RMI also received an upgrade to its Catch
and Effort Query System (CES).
3. The RMI National Observer Coordinator and key assistant attended the Observer
Coordinators Meeting in Honiara in January 2006.
5. Specific Outputs/Results Achieved (as per annual work-plan):
National level activities:
A full observer training course was conducted in Majuro in early February 2006; in
addition, a debriefing course took place in August 2006 with considerable assistance from
the Project's Fishery Monitoring Supervisor alongside FFA and SPC counterparts.
Regional level activities:
· The RMI National Observer Coordinator and assistant coordinator (senior observer)
attended the 6th Regional Observer Coordinator meeting in Honiara January 2006.
· Deputy Director attended pre-FFC project progress report briefing in Nadi May
2006.
· Chief Fisheries Officer for the Oceanic & Industrial Affairs, MIMRA attend EAFM
follow-up workshop in Port Vila in March 2006; also attended SPC stock assessment
workshop in Noumea in July.
6. Challenges/Issues Encountered
Challenges and issues encountered with project activities in the first 16 months (Oct 2005
June 2006 include:
· Lack of familiarity with the Project; specifically, which projects fall under or are entitled
to GEF funding, etc.
· Inability to keep track or up to date on overall progress of Project.
· Lack of local/national coordination in formally establishing a national project
coordinator at this juncture. In all likelihood, this is further complicated by the fact that
another government agency is GEF focal point.
7. Solutions Applied (to address issues and challenges)
Solutions applied to address the issues and challenges included:
· Need for increased and effective coordination with relevant agencies at the national
level.
· Increased awareness and up to date liaison with PCU.
· Possible in-country visit by PCU (subject to timing/schedule availability) to help assist
in identifying projects.
9. Recommendations for Future Action
As stated above, an in-country visit to hold local/national consultations and offer key
assistance in priority areas for future projects would be more than timely especially now with
proposed Work Plan envisaged taking into account the potential areas of assistance identified
during project design phase. Future correspondence with PCU is essential.
10. Report Prepared By: Samuel K. Lanwi, Jr. [for RMI National (OFM Project) Focal Point]
NATIONAL LEVEL ANNUAL REPORT
TO THE
OCEANIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE (OFM RSC)
Reporting Period 1 Oct 2005 30 June 2006
1. Country: Solomon Islands
2. Project Title: Oceanic Fisheries Management: Implementation of the Strategic Action
Programme of the Pacific SIDs (Pacific SAP II)
3. Period Covered: 1 October 2005 30 June 2006
4. Summary of Overall Project Progress
Solomon Islands has benefited both from the national and regional programme activities of
the Oceanic Fisheries Management Project (OFM Project) during the above reporting period.
On the national level, the Project has (i) run an in-country Prosecution and Dockside Boarding
Workshop for our Licensing Officers and Observers from the 17 -21st October 2005, (ii)
provided the Department with an upgraded version of the Catch and Effort Query System
(CES), (iii) Develop an MOU that has been signed for the recruitment of a National Tuna Data
Coordinator for Solomon Islands, (iv) drafted a National Tuna Fisheries Status Report
(NTFSR) for Solomon Islands by the OFP of SPC which is now finalised and (v) visits late last
year and early 2006 to the Department by the Fisheries Monitoring Supervisor at SPC to
liaise with our Observer Coordinator on observer issues. A visit was also made to the
Department in late 2006 by the Project Coordinator, Ms Barbara Hanchard of FFA and will be
the subject of the next annual country report. No National Consultative Committee has been
established yet under the project.
The planned attachments at FFA for the new Chief Fisheries Officer (Licensing, Surveillance
and Enforcement) and the Director of Fisheries with the OFP at SPC to help with the writing
of the NTFSR did not eventuate during the reporting period. The planned national workshop
to look at the legal implications of decisions adopted by the WCPFC did not take place as
anticipated and is due to official travel commitments by staff of the Department.
On the regional level, as part of our institutional strengthening programme, our staff have
benefited from the knowledge and experiences acquired from their participation at the (i) 6th
Regional Observer Coordinators' Workshop, (ii) the MCS Workshop in October 2005 and the
2nd meeting of the WCPFC in December 2005 and (iii) briefs provided has helped
representatives from the FFA member countries participate effectively at the WCPFC related
meetings and the FFC officials and the Ministerial meeting in May 2006. Our nominated
participants were sick and could not attend the first regional stock assessment workshop at
SPC and the Seamount Planning Workshop at SPC.
5. Specific Outputs/Results Achieved (as per annual work-plan):
5.1 National level activities
(i) An in-country Prosecution and Dockside Boarding Workshop for our Licensing Officers and
Observers was held in Noro, Western Province from the 17 -21st October 2005,
(ii) An upgraded version of the Catch and Effort Query System (CES) has been provided to
the Department,
(iii) An MOU between SPC and the Department of Fisheries and Marine Resources for the
recruitment of a National Tuna Data Coordinator for Solomon Islands was developed and
finally signed and
(iv) A National Tuna Fisheries Status Report (NTFSR) for Solomon Islands drafted by the
OFP of SPC is now finalized.
5.2 Regional level activities
(i) The late George Diau attended the 6th Regional Observer Coordinators' Workshop which
was held in early 2006 at the FFA conference centre in Honiara,
(ii) The Principle Fisheries Officer (VMS/S&E), Mr. Charles Tobasala and the Under Secretary
of Fisheries attended the MCS Workshop in October 2005
(iii) The 2nd meeting of the WCPFC in December 2005 was attended by the Director of
Fisheries, Mr. Edwin Oreihaka and the under Secretary of Fisheries
(iv) briefs were provided to representatives from FFA member countries to enable their
effective participation at the WCPFC related meetings and the FFC officials and the
Ministerial meeting in May 2006.
6. Challenges/Issues Encountered
Challenges encountered in the preparation of this national report are that activities carried out
nationally and at the regional level are not quite clearly known to the national focal point,
hence the unnecessary delays in the production of this report.
Challenges and issues encountered with project activities in the first 16 months (Oct 2005
June 2006 include:
. there has been a substantive delay in finalizing the MOU for the recruitment of National
Tuna Data Coordinator.
. there has been difficulties in making arrangements by the Department for the attachment
of the Director of Fisheries with the OFP of SPC to help with the writing of the NTFSR
and to learn the stock assessment methods used in the tuna fisheries status report.
. staff allocated to learn from regionally arranged tuna stock assessment and Seamount
planning workshops were not able to attend and sick was given as reasons for not
attending.
.the national and regional project activities are not all known to the national focal point
until the quarterly reports and checks are made with appropriate staff of the
Department.
7. Solutions Applied (to address issues and challenges)
Solutions applied to address the issues and challenges included:
. monthly updated reports on both national and regional activities involving a country,
. quarterly reports highlighting overall project activities for each member country,
. or regular e-mails noting project activities which each country benefited from per
month/quarter, and
. regular visits by the Project Coordinator to discuss project activities with national focal
points.
9. Recommendations for Future Action
Closer timely working relationship with national focal points which will include regular in-country
visits by the Project Coordinator and other project staff to discuss the implementation of project
activities and difficulties encountered should be encouraged in the future.
10. Report Prepared By: Mr. Sylvester Diake, National (OFM Project) Focal Point.
NATIONAL LEVEL ANNUAL REPORT
TO THE
OCEANIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE (OFM RSC)
Reporting Period October 2005 June 2006
1. Country : TONGA
2. Project Title: Oceanic Fisheries Management: Implementation of the Strategic
Action Programme of the Pacific SIDs (Pacific SAP II)
3. Period Covered: 01 OCTOBER 2005 30 JUNE 2006
4. Summary of Overall Project Progress
The Legal Adviser of Fisheries Department participated in the FFA Meeting to
develop a legal strategy of assistance for FFA Member countries in October,
2005.
Tonga, like all FFA member countries participated in all regional workshops and
meetings where GEF OFM Project had made contributions.
5. Specific Outputs/Results Achived
National Level Activities
· A refresher longline training course for qualified regional observers was
given in Tonga by Mr.Fukofuka from SPC during the first quarter of
2006.
· A legal fellowship for Tonga was undertaken by Fisheries Legal Officer,
Viliami Mo'ale at the Centre for Maritime Policy at the University of
Wolllongong, Australia, during the first quarter of 2006.
· Tonga and some other member countries were given an upgraded version
of the Catch and Effort Query System (CES) during the 2nd quarter of
2006
· Preparations commenced during 2nd quarter of 2006 for Operations
`Kurukuru' and `Islands Chief'. This was supported by Australian Defence
with contributions from FFA MCS Division, to undertake coordinated
surveillance operations between and across national jurisdictions. The
Operations were expected to take place just after the 2nd quarter 2006.
Regional Level
Tonga's MCS officer participated in all the Regional Workshops and
Meetings.
Secretary for Fisheries attended the GEF Regional Steering Committee
just before the end of the 2nd quarter of 2006
6. Challenges/Issues Encountered
Challenges and issues encountered with the project activities within this reporting
period (October 2005 June 2006) included the following:
· One of the main issues encountered by Tonga is that the National Focal
Point was rather a little late in knowing the actual activities that GEF
contributed to. However, the quarterly reports are of great assistance.
7. Solutions Applied (to address issues and challenges)
· National Focal Point to be informed of all activities related to GEF
contributions. This can be done when coordinator is sending invitations to
member countries.
8. Recommendation
Established better communications from coordinator.
Prepared by: Siliveinusi M. Ha'unga,
National ( OFM Project) Focal Point of Contact,TONGA
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE
2nd Meeting of the RSC
Honiara, Solomon Islands
10 October 2006
Paper Number
RSC2/WP.6
Title
IUCN REPORT ON ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
Summary
The World Conservation Union (IUCN) participates in the Pacific Islands Oceanic
Fisheries Management Project (OFM Project). The progress of the implementation of
work that is to be undertaken by the IUCN has experienced unavoidable delays beyond
the control of IUCN. The IUCN have prepared a report that reviews the current status of
IUCN-led activities in the Project and proposes a new work plan for activities will be
developed in the 4th Quarter of 2006. The report describes the current situation,
summarises the stated commitments of IUCN to the OFM project, the range of options
explored by IUCN to fulfil these commitments following the postponement of the DOQ
collaboration, and the immediate priorities for moving forward.
Recommendation
The second meeting of the Regional Steering Committee is asked to:
i)
Note the contents of the status report prepared by the IUCN concerning project
activities that they are responsible for implementing; and
ii)
Endorse the two recommended options proposed by IUCN in their status paper
(Attachment A) to move forward; that is to:
1. Continue striving to secure an appropriate vessel to conduct the
scientific research as planned. The variations of this option
include the following (with financial implications in parentheses):
a. Using MSV Alucia (DOQ) as originally planned (no
additional funds required)
b. Finding ways to complement efforts and join up with
SPC in their planned cruises with the N/O Alis (additional
funds most likely not required)
c. Securing either the N/O Alis or R/V Kaharoa to conduct
scaled-down versions of the original cruise developed with
the Alucia in mind (requires significant additional funding,
estimated at roughly 15,000 USD per day of ship-time at a
minimum)
2. Re-programme IUCN resources into alternative, non ship-
based, research activities to facilitate the wider goals of the OFM
project.
IUCN REPORT ON ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
Introduction
1.
The World Conservation Union (IUCN) participates in the Pacific Islands Oceanic
Fisheries Management Project (OFM Project) under the auspices of two sub-components
within the principal project components, Component One (Scientific Assessment and
Monitoring Enhancement); and Component Two (Law, Policy and Institutional Reform,
Realignment and Strengthening). The two sub-components are as follows:
· Sub-Component 1.3 (Ecosystem Analysis). IUCN and SPC/OFP are to
collaborate to undertake specific activities to obtain information on the ecology
of, and fishery impacts on, seamounts as a habitat of special concern The
seamount work will involve a review of historical fisheries data to determine
historical patterns of fishing in relation to seamounts; an extensive data
collection programme by observers and dedicated research cruises to
determine the ecological characteristics of seamounts; and tagging of tunas
and other pelagic species in the vicinity of seamounts to determine their
residence characteristics. IUCN will arrange a research cruise to undertake
underwater survey work at selected seamounts to determine benthic
biodiversity and the Sub-Component will support the participation of Pacific
SIDS technical and scientific personnel in the research cruise. The results of
the research cruise/benthic biodiversity surveys will be included in awareness
raising activities to complement information about fisheries and seamounts;
and secondly
· Sub-Component 2.2 Policy Reform. IUCN will provide analyses of the policy
implications of the results of ecosystem analysis under Sub-Component 1.3,
including policies for the regulation of pelagic fishing around seamounts. This
will support proposals for the adoption of ecosystem-based measures by the
Commission at the regional level and by Pacific SIDS in their national waters.
Seamount-related policy studies, including legal and compliance aspects will be
undertaken by IUCN.
2.
The progress of the implementation of project work that is to be undertaken by the
IUCN has experienced unavoidable delays beyond the control of IUCN. The delay in the
commencement of this work is regrettable and every effort has been invested by IUCN to find
ways in which to overcome the current situation.
3.
The report appended at Attachment A has been prepared by IUCN. The report's
purpose is to review the current status of IUCN-led activities under the Ecosystem Analysis
component of the OFM Project. Work under the Policy sub-component was scheduled to
begin upon completion of the scientific research cruises. However, this phasing is now being
re-evaluated in light of the information contained in the attached report and a new work plan
for activities will be developed in the fourth quarter of 2006.The report describes the current
situation, summarises the stated commitments of IUCN to the OFM project, the range of
options explored by IUCN to fulfil these commitments following the postponement of the
DOQ collaboration, and the immediate priorities for moving forward.
Recommendation
RSC2/WP.6
2
4.
The second meeting of the Regional Steering Committee is asked to:
iii)
Note the contents of the status report prepared by the IUCN concerning project
activities that they are responsible for implementing; and
iv)
Endorse the two recommended options proposed by IUCN in their status paper to
move forward; that is to:
a. Continue striving to secure an appropriate vessel to conduct the
scientific research as planned. The variations of this option include
the following (with financial implications in parentheses):
a. Using MSV Alucia (DOQ) as originally planned (no
additional funds required)
b. Finding ways to complement efforts and join up with SPC in
their planned cruises with the N/O Alis (additional funds most
likely not required)
c. Securing either the N/O Alis or R/V Kaharoa to conduct
scaled-down versions of the original cruise developed with the
Alucia in mind (requires significant additional funding,
estimated at roughly 15,000 USD per day of ship-time at a
minimum)
b. Re-programme IUCN resources into alternative, non ship-based,
research activities to facilitate the wider goals of the OFM project.
RSC2/WP.6
3
IUCN-OFM situation report - September 2006
ATTACHMENT A
IUCN CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE ECOSYSTEM ANALYSIS
COMPONENT OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS OCEANIC
FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROJECT
Report to: Andrew Hurd, IUCN Global Marine Programme, Gland, Switzerland
Prepared by: David Bowden, IUCN Consultant at the Institute of Zoology, London, UK
Date: 13 September 2006
SITUATION REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The purpose of the present document is to review the current status of IUCN-led activities
under the Ecosystem Analysis component of the OFM projecta The following sections
describe the current situation, summarise the stated commitments of IUCN to the OFM
project, the range of options explored by IUCN to fulfil these commitments following the
postponement of the DOQ collaboration, and the immediate priorities for moving forward.
DSV Alucia and Deep Ocean Quest
In mid-2005 the operators of the privately owned diving support vessel Alucia, Deep Ocean
Quest (DOQ) b, invited IUCN to develop a research itinerary for their vessel in the western
Pacific over 4 months in 2007. In collaboration with Dr. Alex Rogers at the Institute of
Zoology, London, IUCN subsequently developed a science plan for biological sampling of
seamounts in the western tropical Pacific as an integral element of the GEF-funded Pacific
Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management (OFM) Project. Under the working title of the Tui
Delai Gau Expedition, this plan consisted of four back-to-back research cruises to study
seamounts in Fiji, Tonga, Western Samoa, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu. The science objectives of
these cruises divided into two broad categories of research: surveys of the diversity and
distribution of seabed (benthic) organisms on seamounts, and studies of the influence of
seamounts on water-column (pelagic) primary productivity and on the vertically-migrating
zooplankton of the deep scattering layer (DSL)1,2.
These objectives were ambitious but were developed to exploit fully the capabilities of the
Alucia and the available sea time. Furthermore, it is central to the present situation that the
research programme was planned on the basis of DOQ's offer to make the R/V Alucia
available without charter fee. Thus, IUCN's budget for the project did not include vessel costs
and the overall cost for this contribution to the OFM was extraordinarily low for the quantity
and quality of data it had the potential to deliver. On this basis, while there was always an
a IUCN is also involved in the Policy Component of the OFM Project. Work under this Component was
scheduled to begin upon completion of the scientific research cruises. However, this phasing is now being re-
evaluated in light of the information contained in this document and a new workplan for activities will be
developed in the 4th Quarter of 2006.
b The Alucia was formerly operated by the French marine research institute IFREMER as DSV Nadir and in its
current ownership is linked to a private company called Deep Ocean Quest Quest (DOQ). In communications
since 2005 "DOQ" has been used to denote the team running the Alucia.
4
IUCN-OFM situation report - September 2006
element of risk involved in the arrangement, it would have been unreasonably cautious of
IUCN not to act on the DOQ offer.
During a major refit of the Alucia in New Orleans in 2005, the vessel and its associated
equipment were damaged as a result of hurricane Katrina. The hull was believed to be sound,
however, and in late 2005 the Alucia was towed to a shipyard in Seattle where the refit was
resumed. IUCN were informed that the planned date for completion of the refit would now be
set back to mid-2006: still in time for the proposed collaboration on the OFM Tui Delai Gau
cruises in 2007. However, when IUCN spoke to DOQ's project manager for the Alucia refit in
June 2006, it became clear that work had come to a halt and that the vessel would not be
operational in time to participate in the OFM before 2008 at the earliest. At this point, IUCN
decided it had no choice but to proceed on the assumption that the agreement with DOQ
would not come to fruition during the period of the OFM project. Without immediate funds to
charter an alternative vessel of comparable specification, it was also clear that the extensive
research plan drawn up for the Tui Delai Gau cruises would probably now be unachievable
and hence that the planned activities led by IUCN under the OFM project would have to be
re-evaluated.
Planned commitments by IUCN to the Ecosystem Analysis Component of the OFM
project
The primary focus of the OFM project is to provide information that will enable the
sustainable management of trans-boundary fisheries for tuna and other pelagic fish species in
the western central Pacific. Within this objective, the OFM seeks to improve understanding of
wider ecosystem-scale processes which influence the distribution and abundance of
commercial fish stocks and the effects of fishing on other species and habitats in the region.
The IUCN commitments to the OFM are contained in subcomponent 1.3 of the OFM Project
Document:
p. 41, paragraph 2
"The project will provide support to give effect to the adoption of the principles of the ecosystem approach
in the new arrangements for transboundary oceanic fish stock assessment in the WTP LMEc. ... Through
collaboration with IUCN, the ecosystem analysis will be broadened to support the first systematic efforts in
the region to look at seamount-related aspects of an ecosystem-based approach."
p. 51, paragraph 2
"... IUCN and SPC/OFP will collaborate to undertake specific activities to obtain information on the
ecology of, and fishery impact on, seamounts as a habitat of special concern. ...
"The IUCN will arrange a research cruise to undertake underwater survey work at selected seamounts to
determine benthic biodiversity. ... The results of the research cruise/benthic biodiversity surveys will be
included in awareness-raising activities to complement information about fisheries and seamounts. ...
"This information will allow assessments of the need for, and the utility of, seamount-specific management
measures. Moreover, it is anticipated that the results of the project will enable the scientific assessment of
specific proposals regarding the management of ecosystem impacts and the efficacy of specific classes of
management measures such as marine protected areas (MPAs)."
These commitments contribute to intended outputs summarised in the OFM Project Executive
Summary under the headings:
Output 1.3.2: Collection and analysis of information on seamounts in the WTP warm pool
Output 1.3.3: Model-based analysis of ecosystem-based management options
c Western Tropical Pacific large marine ecosystem
5
IUCN-OFM situation report - September 2006
The IUCN-led activities, therefore, would provide wider knowledge on the general ecology of
seamounts, particularly in relation to the influence of seamounts on the distribution and
feeding ecology of pelagic fish stocks and the potential effects of commercial fish-stock
exploitation on seamount benthic communities. Although the project document specifically
mentions only surveys of benthic biodiversity, the science proposal developed by IUCN
includes a large pelagic component as outlined above (page 1, para 1). The key focus of this
pelagic research is to assess the influence of seamounts on local biological productivity in
terms of two hypothesised mechanisms: the local enhancement of primary production through
topographically-induced upwelling effects1, and the `trophic-focussing' of zooplanktonic
organisms in the deep scattering layer (DSL) through a combination of passive lateral
advection and active diurnal vertical migration2. By investigating the mechanisms by which
seamounts cause locally enhanced biological production, this pelagic research would link
directly to studies of the feeding ecology of commercially important fish species associated
with seamounts and thus to the main components of the OFM project.
Of the extensive seamount sampling programme proposed by IUCN, it is the pelagic element,
rather than the benthic, which is of most direct relevance to the central aims of the OFM and
which is likely to generate the more important data for incorporation into the ecosystem
model outputs of the OFM project. Thus, while the benthic elements of the original proposal
are of considerable scientific interest, and could potentially contribute to policy decisions
regarding the conservation of marine biodiversity in the Pacific and perhaps globally, the
pelagic elements of the proposal must be considered to be of higher priority in relation to the
OFM project.
Potential courses of action for IUCN following postponement of the IUCN-DOQ
collaboration in 2007
Following the decision on the Alucia, the first move by the IUCN team was to investigate the
availability of alternative vessels that would be capable of fulfilling core elements of the
original sampling plan. This search was undertaken in the hope that, if a suitable vessel could
be found, it might yet be possible to raise funding for the charter fee. A range of options,
including the French research vessel Alis, the New Zealand research vessel Kaharoa, the
Tongan fisheries training and research vessel Takuo, commercial survey vessels chartered
from the USA, and the possibilities for collaborating with other research cruises planned in
the region were investigated. To date, most of these have proved to be unworkable but one or
two remain possibilities. In all cases, the primary constraint is cost but this is increasingly
exacerbated by timing: scientific research cruises require an extended lead-in period in order
to ensure that the vessel and specialist equipment can be mobilised, and that the scientific
personnel can plan around their existing professional commitments. Among the alternative
possibilities, IUCN also considered collaborations with other research cruises, and non ship-
based research.
The alternative courses of action considered by the IUCN Global Marine Programme
following the postponement of the 2007 IUCN-DOQ collaboration are summarised below.
1) IUCN could delay participation in the OFM project until 2008 on the expectation that the
Alucia will be operational in 2007.
If the Alucia were to complete sea trials by early 2007, the original cruise schedule in the
western equatorial Pacific could take place, one year late, in 2008. The OFM project runs
from 2005 to 2010 and ideally data collection would take place in the first years of the
project to allow a realistic period for collation and analysis of samples. However, if the
vessel could be secured for use in 2008 there would potentially be time to generate
6
IUCN-OFM situation report - September 2006
worthwhile output, albeit at a reduced level, within the remit of the project. Thus, there
remains a possibility that the original plan, using the R/V Alucia, might yet be viable
within the timescale of the OFM.
From conversations with Alucia project manager, Carlos de Paco, IUCN understand that
DOQ are confident of completing the refit of the Alucia by early 2007. Following sea-
trials and delivery to its home port in Costa Rica, the vessel is then scheduled to undertake
a programme of short range work-up cruises off the Pacific coast of Central America and
on the Cocos Ridge. If the vessel performs satisfactorily during this stage, DOQ anticipate
that it will be able to resume the original cruise programme, of which the Tui Delai Gau
Expedition formed part, in 2008. This scenario would allow IUCN to conduct many, if not
all, of its original research activities planned under the OFM. Consequently, the IUCN is
maintaining contacts and goodwill with DOQ so that they are in a position to utilise the
Alucia should she become available in the future. In light of the progress of the refit to
date, however, it must be assumed that this remains a risky option but one that should not
be discounted entirely as we should know the status with more certainty in the next three
to four months.
2) IUCN could charter an alternative research vessel.
This option is heavily constrained by the availability of suitable vessels, the high cost of
chartering, and the time required to raise the necessary funding. Furthermore, it is unlikely
that any vessel obtained at short notice and with limited funding would be capable of
fulfilling the original, very extensive, sampling programme. It will be necessary,
therefore, to concentrate only on priority work. The following possibilities have been
considered:
a) N/O Alis, operated by IRDd, Noumea, New Caledonia.
This is a well-equipped 28 m marine research vessel capable of deploying a range of
benthic and pelagic sampling gears. Although smaller than the Alucia, and not
equipped with submersibles, the Alis would be capable of fulfilling a significant part
of the mapping and sampling programme in the original Tui Delai Gau plan. In
particular, it would be capable of conducting the acoustic surveys and targeted mid-
water trawls required for recording DSL zooplankton dynamics. Being based in
Noumea, New Caledonia, the Alis would be an obvious first choice replacement for
the Alucia.
In July 2006, on the recommendation of Dr. Valerie Allain at SPCe, IUCN attempted
to contact Dr. Bertrand Richer-de-Forges at IRD, Noumea, regarding possible use of
the Alis. To date, there has been no reply to this enquiry, nor to a request made to IRD
in France for information on the availability of the vessel. Assistance with improving
these communications may be necessary if this possibility is to be pursued.
It is significant that SPC intend to submit a proposal for use of the Alis in 2008 to
conduct pelagic studies within the OFM project. If this application were to be
successful, the vessel would clearly then be ideally placed to conduct the IUCN
sampling programme if suitable funding and approval for use of the vessel could be
obtained. The timescale for applications to use the Alis is for proposals to be submitted
to IRD in January of the year preceding that in which cruises would take place.
d Institute de Recherche pour le Developpement
e Secretariat of the Pacific Communities.
7
IUCN-OFM situation report - September 2006
Therefore, there is still potential for the IUCN to raise funding and submit an
application for use of the Alis in 2008.
b) R/V Kaharoa, operated by NIWAf, Wellington, New Zealand.
This is another well-equipped 28 m marine research vessel capable of fulfilling a large
part of the original Tui Delai Gau programme. Specification is slightly more
technically advanced than that of the Alis but the overall capability is similar. New
Zealand already has commitments to the OFM project including financial
contributions from New Zealand Aid, the use of specialist seabed survey equipment
and the participation of NIWA scientists in the planned IUCN seamount cruises.
As with the Alis, use of the Kaharoa would depend on IUCN securing substantial
funding for charter of the vessel, and submission of a cruise proposal to the vessel's
operators no later than January 2007.
c) F/V Takuo, Tonga Fisheries training and research vessel.
This vessel will probably be used by SPC for longline sampling during the OFM.
Although conveniently located and potentially available, neither the design nor the
specification of the vessel is suited to the work IUCN intend to do. Specifically, the
vessel has no facility for deploying benthic or mid-water trawl gear and has
inadequate acoustics equipment for DSL work.
d) Other vessel on commercial charter.
IUCN has conducted a web-based search of research vessel specifications and
itineraries in the Pacific, and has discussed its requirements with Global Seas Vessel
Management, Seattle, who act as agents for a large number of commercial survey
vessels based in the eastern Pacific. No commercial vessels for which information was
available met the required minimum specification and none would have been suitable
without some modifications to deck hardware and the installation of specialist
acoustics systems. Considering the substantial costs involved in chartering, it was
concluded that adapting a vessel designed for another purpose would not be a
satisfactory or cost-effective course of action.
3) IUCN could investigate opportunistic collaborations with planned cruises from other
research initiatives.
Given the high cost and limited availability of sea-time on scientific research vessels, this
option was never likely to be realistic. In order to secure funding for ship-based deep sea
research, participating scientists are under considerable pressure to maximise the use of
time and resources during cruises. Schedules are, accordingly, planned with full
complements of scientific personnel to enable intensive sampling programmes with
minimum down-time. Furthermore, the benthic and pelagic biological sampling involved
in the IUCN component of the OFM project would require the shipping of specialised
equipment in addition to that required for the primary purpose of the cruise. It was always
highly unlikely, therefore, that any existing cruise plan would have the capacity to absorb
the extra personnel, equipment, and time demands necessary to conduct a worthwhile
sampling programme on seamounts. Nevertheless, lists of research vessels operating in the
western central Pacific area through 2007 were compiled (from web searches and contacts
f National Institute for Water and Atmospheric research
8
IUCN-OFM situation report - September 2006
at SOPACg and SPC) and, where available, schedules and research objectives were
evaluated to assess the potential for collaborative work. None were found which offered
any prospect of accommodating the required research.
4) IUCN could divert its resources into alternative, non ship-based, research activities to
facilitate the wider goals of the OFM project.
This input could be to any of the three major components of the OFM and might include,
for instance: the organisation of workshops to coordinate data-integration between work
groups; inputs to data-mining and analysis; or the collation and analysis of data which
does not require ship-based sampling. A relevant example of the latter might be the use of
satellite-derived sea-surface colour data to assess the local influence of seamounts on
oceanic primary production3.
For any contribution within this option, it would be essential to consult fully with other
partners in the OFM project in order to ensure that the work undertaken makes a useful
contribution to the project's objectives and does not duplicate work being done elsewhere.
Given the original research goals of the IUCN within the OFM project, and its wider
commitment to promoting research into biodiversity of the deep-sea, this is the least
satisfactory scenario for both the IUCN and the OFM project. However, given the present
situation with regard to funding and timescales it might prove be the most pragmatic
course of action and has the potential to deliver worthwhile outputs.
Main conclusions
1) Given the postponement of the IUCN-DOQ collaboration, IUCN will not be in a position
to conduct research activities as originally planned under the OFM project unless either:
the Alucia becomes available, or significant extra funding is obtained to charter an
alternative vessel.
2) In light of the continuing uncertainties surrounding the Alucia, the IUCN is faced with the
choice of either: pursuing substantially increased funding for the charter of an alternative
vessel, or diverting its existing resources into contributions to the OFM project which do
not involve ship-based sampling. Any work within this second option should be
undertaken only after detailed discussions with SPC and other partners in the OFM
project.
3) Of the research vessels potentially available, the N/O Alis or the R/V Kaharoa represent
the best chances of completing a worthwhile seamounts sampling programme within the
timescale of the OFM project.
4) The lead-in period for mobilising personnel and equipment for sampling cruises is now
too short for cruises to take place in 2007. Therefore, if ship-based sampling is to take
place, revised cruise plans and science strategies should be prepared for submission to
vessel operators no later than January 2007 for operations in 2008. This is the latest date
for sampling to take place if data are to be made available within the timescale of the
OFM project.
5) If ship-based sampling does take place, limitations of time and resources will probably
require that the research plan originally proposed by IUCN should be cut to include only
those elements which contribute directly to the central goals of the OFM project. In
g South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission
9
IUCN-OFM situation report - September 2006
practice, this would mean concentrating on the pelagic elements of the research,
particularly acoustic surveys of interactions between seamount topography and the
vertically-migrating zooplankton of the DSL, and the `ground-truthing' of these surveys
by use of controlled-opening mid-water trawls.
Recommendation
It is clear that there are two primary options for moving forward:
1. Continue striving to secure an appropriate vessel to conduct the scientific research as
planned. The variations of this option include the following (with financial implications in
parentheses):
a. Using MSV Alucia (DOQ) as originally planned (no additional funds required)
b. Finding ways to complement efforts and join up with SPC in their planned cruises
with the N/O Alis (additional funds most likely not required)
c. Securing either the N/O Alis or R/V Kaharoa to conduct scaled-down versions of the
original cruise developed with the Alucia in mind (requires significant additional
funding, estimated at roughly 15,000 USD per day of ship-time at a minimum)
2. Re-programme IUCN resources into alternative, non ship-based, research activities to
facilitate the wider goals of the OFM project.
IUCN proposes to pursue both options in parallel initially in order to allow sufficient time to
exhaust all the variations outlined under Option 1, but not lose any time in being able to move
forward under Option 2 in the event that Option 1 is deemed unfeasible. A date of 28
February 2007 is proposed at which time a final decision will be taken as to which option is to
be implemented. This five-month period will ensure adequate time to see how the Alucia refit
progresses, for consultation with OFM partners, as well as other potential collaborators, while
not jeopardizing the eventual delivery of project outcomes within the life-span of the project.
REFERENCES
1.
Rogers, A. D. The Biology of Seamounts. Advances in Marine Biology 30, 305-350 (1994).
2.
Genin, A. Bio-physical coupling in the formation of zooplankton and fish aggregations over abrupt
topographies. Journal of Marine Systems 50, 3-20 (2004).
3.
Longhurst, A., Sathyendranath, S., Platt, T. & Caverhill, C. An estimate of global primary production in
the ocean from satellite radiometer data. Journal of Plankton Research 17, 1245-1271 (1995).
10
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE
2nd Meeting of the RSC
Nadi, Fiji
21 October 2006
Paper Number
RSC2/WP.7
Title
FINANCIAL REPORTS - 2006
Summary
The purpose of this paper is to present the financial reports in 2006 for the Pacific Islands
Oceanic Fisheries Management Project. This report comprises the acquittal of the
approved 2005 Budget and Work Plan, a report on expenditure YTD 30 June 2006, the
revised 2006 Budget and Work Plan; and the Draft 2007 Budget and Work Plan.
Recommendation
The OFM Project Regional Steering Committee is invited to:
i)
approve the 2005 financial report year ending 31st December 2005;
ii)
consider and note the 2006 Interim Financial Report;
iii)
consider and approve the Revised 2006 Annual Work Plan and Budget; and
iv)
approve the 2007 Draft Annual Work Plan and Budget.
FINANCIAL REPORTS - 2006
Introduction
1.
The first meeting of the Regional Steering Committee (RSC) for the Pacific
Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management (OFM) Project was held at the FFA
Conference Centre, Honiara, Solomon Islands on 14 October 2005. In its inaugural
meeting the Committee endorsed the overall Project Budget and Annual Work Plans
(AWP) -2005 to 2010.
2.
This paper contains the financial reports for presentation to the second
meeting of the Regional Steering Committee for the Pacific Islands OFM Project
(RSC2) to be held at Nadi, Fiji on 21 October 2006. This report contains three parts
as follows:
Summary of the 2006 Financial Report to the RSC
Part One
3.
Part One presents the 2005 Financial Report. It reports the financial acquittal
of 2005 expenditures against the approved 2005 Annual Work Plan and Budget. It
reports the project financials for the period 1 October to 31 December 2005.
4.
An annual independent audit for the OFM Project was completed on 17 April
2006 and was submitted to UNDP Suva as the project Implementing Agency. The
Project Coordination Unit (PCU) of the OFM Project contracted the FFA appointed
auditor to perform an independent project audit. The Auditor's Report comprises an
audit report including a signed combined delivery report and a management letter all
of which conform to audit terms of reference required by UNDP. A copy of the 2005
Auditor's Report submitted and accepted by UNDP is appended at Attachment A.
Part Two
5.
Part Two of this report is presented in two sub sections. Part Two Section A
is the 2006 Interim Financial Report (January to June 2006). It reports the OFM
Project activities expenditures year-to-date (YTD) 30 June 2006.
6.
The second section of Part Two, Section B presents the OFM Project draft
revised annual work plan and budget for the year 2006 for the Regional Steering
Committee approval. It takes into account the project implementation issues, the
expenditure to date in 2006; and the forecasted expenditure for the remainder of
2006.
Part Three
7.
The third and final part of this report, presents the Draft 2007 Annual Work
Plan (AWP) and Budget for which endorsement is sought from the Committee.
8.
A number of tables are presented in this report. They are:
i)
Table A:
2005 Financial Report;
ii)
Table B:
2006 Interim Financial Report (YTD 30 June 2006);
iii)
Table C:
Summary of Revised 2006 Annual Work Plan and Budget;
iv)
Table D:
2006 Revised Annual Work Plan and Budget;
v)
Table E:
Summary of Draft 2007 Annual Work Plan and Budget; and
vi)
Table F:
Draft 2007 Annual Work Plan and Budget.
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
2
PART ONE
2005 Financial Report
9.
The total budget approved for the first year of the project - 2005, was
$628,6771. As at 31 December 2005 actual expenditure was $208,139 leaving an
unspent budget of $420,538. Table A reports the financial outcomes of the approved
2005 AWP and Budget at the close of the financial year ending 31 December 2005.
10.
The reporting period for the 2005 Financial Report is from 1 October to 31
December 2005. The reporting period for the OFM Project is against a calendar year
to synchronise Global Environment facility (GEF) and United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP) reporting requirements and their respective financial year end.
This report covers a period of three (3) months of project financial activity only.
11.
The disbursement of all OFM Project funds are executed using the FFA
Financial Rules and Procedures and in conjunction with UNDP's Programming
Manual, in particular sub section 6.5.
12.
The annual independent audit for the OFM Project was completed on 17 April
2006 and submitted to UNDP Suva, the project Implementing Agency. The project
has been audited by the FFA appointed auditor. The Auditor's Report comprises an
audit report including a signed Combined Delivery Report (CDR) and a Management
Letter all of which conform to audit terms of reference required by UNDP. A copy of
the 2005 Auditor's Report is appended at Attachment A.
13.
The 2005 project accounts were independently audited by CBL Certified
Practicing Accountants Ltd, who through tender, is the FFA appointed auditor. They
were separately contracted to perform the OFM Project audit on the 7 March 2006.
The audit was completed on the 17 April and was submitted to UNDP Suva on the
24 April 2006. The books of the OFM Management Project were audited together
with the CDR, a financial report generated by UNDP. The audit was performed in
accordance with international standards of auditing.
Executive Summary
14.
The 2005 Financial Report (Table A), presents the OFM Project expenditures
YTD period ending 31 December 2005 against the approved 2005 Budget. It reports
the 2005 expenditures against the approved OFM Project AWP and Budget reporting
format consistence with UNDP's standardarised financial and reporting formats and
accounting system known as ATLAS.
1 All figures are US Dollars
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
3
Table A:
2005 Financial Report
Ac
A tuls YTD
Resp.
So
S urce of
2005
5 Budge
g t
OUTCOMES/
S Outpu
p ts
Ke
K y Activities
Timeframe
Budge
g t Code
d
Am
A ou
o nt
31December
Party
fun
u ds
Uns
n pen
e t
20
2 05
1: Improved scientific information and
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
knowledge on oceanic transboundary
X
SPC
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$5,000
0
5,000
fish stocks and related ecosystem
Fishery Moni
n toring
SPC
GEF
71300 Local Cnslt
$20,000
19,435
565
aspects of the WTP WP LME; this
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$25,000
15,414
9,586
information being used to adopt and
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$4,500
0
4,500
apply conservation and management
measures; relevant national capacities
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$3,000
0
3,000
strengthened, with Pacific SIDS meeting
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
0
0
their responsibilities in monitoring and
X
SPC
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$4,000
0
4,000
assessment.
Stoc
o k As
A ses
e sment
n
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$ 25,000
0
25,000
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$4,500
0
4,500
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$3,000
0
3,000
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
0
0
X
SPC
GEF
71300 Local Cnslt
$0
0
Ecosystem
e Ana
n lysis
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$50,000
16,526
33,474
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$8,250
0
8,250
SPC
GEF
72100 Contr-Cmpy
$0
0
0
SPC
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$0
0
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$8,000
0
8,000
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
0
IUCN
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$60,000
2,663
57,337
IUCN
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$10,000
1,521
8,479
IUCN
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$0
0
0
IUCN
GEF
72400 Comm&AV
$0
0
0
IUCN
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
0
0
Pro
r jec
e t Supp
p ort
X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$7,500
0
7,500
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$11,218
13,887
-2,669
COMPO
P NENT 1 TOTAL
$24
2 8,968
69,44
4 6
179,
9 52
5 2
2. The WCPFC established and
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
beginning to function effectively; Pac
Le
L gal Ref
e or
o m
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$20,000
0
20,000
SIDS taking a lead role in the
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$3,000
0
3,000
functioning and management of the
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$70,000
43,874
26,126
Commission and in the related
Po
P licy Ref
e or
o m
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$35,000
28,014
6,986
management of the fisheries and the
LME; national laws, policies, relevant
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$25,000
2,898
22,102
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$10,000
0
10,000
institutions and programmes reformed,
FFA
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$0
0
0
realigned and strengthened; relevant
FFA
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$5,000
3,121
1,879
national capacities strengthened.
FFA
GEF
73200 PremAlter
$0
0
0
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$10,000
0
10,000
IUCN
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$0
0
IUCN
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$0
0
IUCN
GEF
71600 Travel
$0
2,473
-2,473
IUCN
GEF
72400 Comm&AV
$0
0
IUCN
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
0
Institutional Ref
e or
o m
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$24,000
0
24,000
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
0
0
Compliance
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$20,000
0
20,000
Stren
e gtheni
n ng
n
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$3,000
0
3,000
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$70,000
28,562
41,438
Pro
r jec
e t Supp
p ort
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$20,650
0
20,650
COMPO
P NENT 2 TOTAL
$315
1 ,650
108,94
9 2
206,
6 70
7 8
3. Effective project management at
Information System
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$1,500
0
1,500
national and regional level; major
FFA
GEF
72300 Matl&Goods
$0
0
0
governmental and NGO stakeholders Monitoring & Evaluation
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$0
0
0
participating in Project activities and
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$2,000
0
2,000
consultative mechanisms at national
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
0
0
and regional levels; information on the Stakaeholodedr
Project and the WCPF process
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$0
Par
a ticipa
p tion
0
0
contributing to increased awareness of Prorj. Mgmt & &
FFA
GEF
71200 Local Cnslt
$5,000
oceanic fishery resource and
0
5,000
Coordi
d nat
a ion
ecosystem management; project
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$1,368
1,368
evaluations reflecting successful and
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$0
0
sustainable project objectives.
FFA
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$7,500
6,242
1,258
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$42,500
23,509
18,991
Pro
r jec
e t Supp
p ort
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$4,191
4,191
COMPO
P NENT 3 TOTAL
$6
$ 4,059
29,75
7 1
34,
4 30
3 8
GRAND TOTAL
(Total Budge
g t , Bu
B dget
e Sp
S ent & bud
u get uns
n pent
n in 200
0 5)
$62
6 8,677
208,13
1 9
420,
0 53
5 8
Recommendation
The Committee is invited to approve the 2005 Financial Report.
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
4
PART TWO
Section A.
2006 Interim Financial Report (January to June)
15.
The total approved budget for year 2006 is $2,751,365.. The total working
budget inclusive of 2005 Carry Forward, amounts to $3,171,903. As at 30 June
2006 actual expenditure is $631,925 over a six month period. A number of activity
implementation issues have contributed to the proportional low expenditure to date
which will be detailed later in this report. These relate primarily to the delays in
research activities that command large budget items in two instances and other
factors. However, expenses posted after June 2006 and obligations determined for
the remainder of 2006 indicate that project implementation will on the whole,
progress according to the approved work plan.
16.
The reporting period for the 2006 Interim Financial Report is from 1 January
to 30 June 2006, covering six (6) months of OFM Project activities only.
17.
The annual independent audit for the OFM Project for the 2006 financial year
will be conducted after 31 December 2006, under contract to the FFA appointed
auditor. The FFA auditors are appointed on a bi-annual basis through a transparent
tender process. 2007 is the end of a two year period of appointment for the current
FFA Auditor. The outcome of the tender process to appoint a new auditor is not
expected to be approved until the annual session of the Forum Fisheries Officials
Committee meeting scheduled for the first week in May 2007. Therefore, the current
FFA Auditor, CBL Certified Practicing Accountants Ltd will be contracted in late 2006
to complete an audit on the project's 2006 accounts in the first quarter of 2007.
Executive Summary
18.
The 2006 Interim Financial Report (Table B), presents the OFM Project
activities expenditures YTD 30 June 2006 against the approved 2006 Annual Work
Plan and Budget.
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
5
Table B:
2006 Interim Financial Report (YTD 30 June 2006)
Actual
2006
Expenditures
2006 Budget
Resp.
Source of
Approved
2005 budget YTD Jan-June
Unspent YTD
Key Activities
Timeframe
Party
funds
Budget Code
Budget
cfwd
06
June 06
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
X
X
SPC
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$25,000
$5,000
$3,612
$26,388
Fishery Monitoring
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71300 Local Cnslt
$80,000
$565
$3,116
$77,449
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$100,000
$9,586
$51,273
$58,313
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$36,000
$4,500
$6,053
$34,447
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$0
$3,000
$2,449
$551
X
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$42,000
$0
$1,378
$40,622
X
X
SPC
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$30,000
$3,000
$0
$33,000
Stock Assessment
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$ 100,000
$0
$46,150
$53,850
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$36,000
$4,000
$33
$39,967
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$0
$25,000
$0
$25,000
X
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$42,000
$4,500
$40,863
$5,637
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71300 Local Cnslt
$60,000
$0
$328
$59,672
Ecosystem Analysis X X X X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$240,000
$33,474
$106,213
$167,261
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$59,500
$8,250
$2,893
$64,857
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
72100 Contr-Cmpy
$365,000
$0
$5,540
$359,460
SPC
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$100,000
$0
$188
$99,812
X
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$4,000
$8,000
$4,801
$7,199
X
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$20,000
$0
$7,522
$12,478
X
X
X
X
IUCN
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$18,000
$57,337
$6,418
$68,919
X
X
X
X
IUCN
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$60,000
$8,479
$24,000
$44,479
X
X
IUCN
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$30,000
$0
$0
$30,000
X
X
X
X
IUCN
GEF
72400 Comm&AV
$5,000
$0
$417
$4,583
X
X
X
IUCN
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$50,000
$0
$0
$50,000
Project Support
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$35,000
$7,500
$17,730
$24,770
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$94,115
-$2,669
$20,517
$70,929
$1,631,615
$179,522
$351,493
$1,459,644
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Legal Reform
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$72,000
$20,000
$9,750
$82,250
X
X
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$9,000
$3,000
$2,453
$9,547
X
x
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$20,000
$26,126
$31,108
$15,018
Policy Reform
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$100,000
$6,986
$20,510
$86,476
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$100,000
$22,102
$16,915
$105,187
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$45,000
$10,000
$6,865
$48,135
X
FFA
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$5,000
$0
$0
$5,000
FFA
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$0
$1,879
$818
$1,061
X
X
FFA
GEF
73200 PremAlter
$10,000
$0
$0
$10,000
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$40,000
$10,000
$30,589
$19,411
X
X
IUCN
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$20,000
$0
$3,333
$16,667
X
X
X
X
IUCN
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$25,000
$0
$4,167
$20,833
X
IUCN
GEF
71600 Travel
$4,000
-$2,473
$667
$860
IUCN
GEF
72400 Comm&AV
$1,000
$0
$0
$1,000
IUCN
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
$0
$0
$0
Institutional Reform X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$72,000
$24,000
$6,210
$89,790
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$20,000
$0
$0
$20,000
Compliance
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$60,000
$20,000
$29,135
$50,865
Strengthening
X
X
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$9,000
$3,000
$4,883
$7,117
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$90,000
$41,438
$14,000
$117,438
Project Support
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$45,640
$20,650
$22,820
$43,470
$747,640
$206,708
$204,224
$750,124
Information System
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$3,000
$1,500
$2,562
$1,938
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
72300 Matl&Goods
$4,000
$0
$0
$4,000
Monitoring &
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$10,000
$0
$0
$10,000
Evaluation
X
X
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$18,000
$2,000
$1,200
$18,800
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$80,000
$0
$0
$80,000
Stakeholder
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
Participation
$0
$0
$0
$0
Proj. Mgmt &
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Local Cnslt
$20,000
$5,000
$3,972
$21,028
Coordination
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$135,000
$1,368
$35,032
$101,336
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$30,000
$0
$15,272
$14,728
X
X
FFA
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$10,500
$1,258
$5,000
$6,758
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$42,500
$18,991
$3,615
$57,876
Project Support
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$19,110
$4,191
$9,556
$13,745
$372,110
$34,308
$76,208
$330,210
(Total Budget , Budget Spent & Budget Unspent in 2006)
$2,751,365
$420,538
$631,925
$2,539,979
Note the $3 difference being the rounding from excel sheet
Recommendation
The Committee is invited to consider and note the 2006 Interim Financial Report
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
6
PART TWO
B
2006 Revised Annual Work Plan and Budget
Introduction
19.
A number of factors relating to project implementation issues since the
commencement of the project have contributed to the need to present to the
Committee a revised 2006 Annual Work Plan and Budget. It is anticipated that this
will be a necessary procedure over the life of the project in the interest of
transparency and good accounting practices; and in recognition of the fact that the
implementation of many activities that contribute to the overall objectives of the
project are subject to many planning complexities that in many instance are not
exact.
20.
A great deal of uncertainty concerning the disbursement by the project
Implementing Agency of the first tranche of project funds in 2005 and the actual date
(28 October 2005) they were received by the FFA and the Project Coordination Unit,
impacted significantly on a number of project start up activities. This included among
other matters, the appointment of PCU staff and other professional technical
positions at the two central executing agencies, namely the FFA and SPC. As a
consequence project activities that were delayed have been taken into account in the
2006 budget in financial terms have amounted to $420,538 (2005 cwfd) from the first
disbursement of $628,677.
21.
The 2006 working annual work plan and budget, with the inclusion of the
2005 carry forward totals $3,171,903.
22.
The policy of budget carry forward is approved by UNDP and while this is
innocuous in terms of activities being completed under budget, it by no means
implies the non-performance of project activities according to the approved annual
work plan schedules. In instances of delays in the implementation of significant
activities, the RSC will be updated at every reporting opportunity.
23.
Delayed project work 2005 activities that accumulated in the disproportionate
carry forward for 2005 have been largely commenced in the first six months of 2006..
This essentially now aligns the projects work plan to a large extent. The overall roll-
out of the project has stabilized as at mid 2006 and on the whole significant targets
are expected to be met. Therefore, carry forward is expected to be primarily due to
spending under budget or minor delays in some project implementation between
consecutive years.
Proposed Revisions
24.
Taking into account actual expenditure to date and the forecasted obligations
provided by the FFA, SPC & IUCN, the PCU has prepared a revised work plan and
budget for 2006. The following table (Table C) summarises the proposed revision to
the 2006 Annual Work Plan and Budget.
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
7
Table C:
Summary of Revised 2006 Annual Work Plan and Budget
Approved 2006 AWP and Budget
$2,751,365
2005 cwfd
$420,538
2006 working budget (includes 2005 cwfd)
$3,171,903
Less proposed 2006 cwfd to 2007 AWP & Budget
$ 918,173
2006 Revised AWP & Budget
$2,253,730
25.
With the 2005 cwfd, the working budget for 2006 increased by 15.2% to arrive
at a working budget of $3,171,903.
26.
The estimated cwfd for the working 2006 budget is 29%.. At this point, the
2006 cwfd is based on actuals for the first half of 2006 and forecasted spending for
quarters three and four of 2006. The anticipated surplus budget of $918,173 is
presently proposed as carry forward to 2007. While the suggested carry forward
appears to be significant, two facts need to be taken into account. Firstly the impacts
of 2005 carry forward, particularly the delay of the start of salary payments, non-
expenditure by IUCN and the non-payment of 2005 project support costs to the FFA,
and secondly genuine under spending.
27.
The revised 2006 AWP & Budget ($2,253,730) reflects a percentage
decrease against the approved 2006 budget ($2,751,365) of 18.9 %.
28.
The Revised Annual Work Plan and Budget is shown in full in Table D. This
table also presents amended timeframe (please compare this with the 2006 AWP &
Budget approved at RSC1). This also reflects an updated work plan (timeframes)
taking into account project implementation of activities associated with the budget
lines.
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
8
Table D:
2006 Revised Annual Work Plan and Budget
Resp. Source of
Original 2006 2005 Budget
2006
Revised 2006
O
OUTCOMES/Outputs
Key Activities
Timeframe
Budget Code
Party
funds
Budget
cfwd
Adjustments
Budget
1: Improved scientific information and
Q1
Q2
Q3 Q4
knowledge on oceanic transboundary fish
X
X
SPC
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$25,000
$5,000
-17,056
$12,944
Fishery Monitoring
stocks and related ecosystem aspects of
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71300 Local Cnslt
$80,000
$565
-16,233
$64,332
the WTP WP LME; this information being
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$100,000
$9,586
-5,736
$103,850
used to adopt and apply conservation and
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$36,000
$4,500
-9,425
$29,075
management measures; relevant national
X
X
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$0
$3,000
-551
$2,449
X
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$42,000
$0
-0
$42,000
capacities strengthened, with Pacific SIDS
X
SPC
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$30,000
$4,000
-9,000
$25,000
meeting their responsibilities in monitoring Stock Assessment X X X X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$100,000
$25,000
-28,845
$96,155
and assessment.
X
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$36,000
$4,500
-26,017
$14,483
X
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$0
$3,000
1,400
$4,400
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$42,000
$0
-1,137
$40,863
Ecosystem
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71300 Local Cnslt
$60,000
$0
-39,970
$20,030
Analysis
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$240,000
$33,474
-46,221
$227,253
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$59,500
$8,250
-23,774
$43,976
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
72100 Contr-Cmpy
$365,000
$0
-139,178
$225,822
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$100,000
$0
8,503
$108,503
X
X
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$4,000
$8,000
-1,151
$10,849
X
X
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$20,000
$0
-12,478
$7,522
X
IUCN
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$18,000
$57,337
-68,919
$6,418
X
X
IUCN
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$60,000
$8,479
-44,479
$24,000
IUCN
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$30,000
$0
-30,000
$0
X
IUCN
GEF
72400 Comm&AV
$5,000
0
-4,583
$417
IUCN
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$50,000
0
-50,000
$0
Project Support
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$35,000
7,500
-708
$41,792
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$94,115.00
-2,669
8,597
$100,043
COMPONENT 1 TOTAL
$1,631,615
179,522
-556,961
$1,252,176
2. The WCPFC established and beginning
Q1
Q2
Q3 Q4
to function effectively; Pac SIDS taking a Legal Reform
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$72,000
20,000
-17,886
$74,114
lead role in the functioning and
X
X
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$9,000
3,000
-8,461
$3,539
management of the Commission and in the
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$20,000
26,126
-17,529
$28,597
related management of the fisheries and
Policy Reform
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$100,000
6,986
44,037
$151,023
the LME; national laws, policies, relevant
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$100,000
22,102
-65,602
$56,500
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$45,000
10,000
-33,165
$21,835
institutions and programmes reformed,
X
FFA
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$5,000
0
-3,153
$1,847
realigned and strengthened; relevant
X
X
FFA
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$0
1,879
-1,061
$818
national capacities strengthened.
X
FFA
GEF
73200 PremAlter
$10,000
0
-10,000
$0
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$40,000
10,000
4,470
$54,470
IUCN
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$20,000
0
-16,667
$3,333
IUCN
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$25,000
0
-20,833
$4,167
IUCN
GEF
71600 Travel
$4,000
-2,473
-860
$667
IUCN
GEF
72400 Comm&AV
$1,000
0
-1,000
$0
IUCN
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
0
$0
Institutional
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$72,000
24,000
-44,570
$51,430
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$20,000
0
-20,000
$0
Compliance
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$60,000
20,000
-20,865
$59,135
X
X
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$9,000
3,000
-1,617
$10,383
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$90,000
41,438
560
$131,998
Project Support
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$45,640
20,650
$66,290
COMPONENT 2 TOTAL
$747,640
206,708
-234,202
$720,146
3. Effective project management at
Information
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$3,000
1,500
0
$4,500
national and regional level; major
System
X
FFA
GEF
72300 Matl&Goods
$4,000
0
0
$4,000
governmental and NGO stakeholders
Monitoring &
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$10,000
0
-10,000
$0
participating in Project activities and
Evaluation
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$18,000
2,000
-18,800
$1,200
consultative mechanisms at national and
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
0
0
$0
S
regional levels; information on the Project
takeholder
X
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$80,000
$0
0
P
and the WCPF process contributing to
articipation
$80,000
Proj. Mgmt &
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Local Cnslt
$20,000
$5,000
-5,092
$19,908
increased awareness of oceanic fishery
Coordination
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$135,000
$1,368
-54,351
$82,017
resource and ecosystem management;
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$30,000
$0
-1,531
$28,469
project evaluations reflecting successful
X
X
FFA
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$10,500
$1,258
-1,758
$10,000
and sustainable project objectives.
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$42,500
$18,991
-35,478
$26,013
Project Support
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$19,110
$4,191
0
$23,301
COMPONENT 3 TOTAL
$372,110
$34,308
-127,010
$279,408
GRAND TOTAL
$2,751,365
$420,538
-918,173
$2,251,731
Recommendation
The Committee is invited to consider and approve the 2006 Revised Annual Work
Plan and Budget
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
9
PART THREE
Draft 2007 Annual Work Plan and Budget
Introduction
29.
In view of the estimated 2006 budget cwf, it is proposed that the Committee
revisit the approved total budget for 2007, with the view to endorse the proposed
amendments. In this regard, a draft 2007 Annual Work Plan and Budget has been
prepared for the Committee's endorsement.
30.
The annual 2007 budget approved at the first meeting of the Regional
Steering Committee in October 2005 as part of the overall project budget approval is
for $2,737,105. Table E presents a summary of the totals for the Draft 2007 Annual
Work Plan and Budget.
Table E:
Summary of Draft 2007 Annual Work Plan and Budget
Approved 2006 AWP and Budget
$2,737,105
2006 cwfd
$918,173
Draft 2007 AWP & Budget
$3,655,278
The Draft 2007 Annual Work Plan and Budget is shown in full detail in Table F.
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
10
Table F:
Draft 2007 Annual Work Plan and Budget
Resp.
Source
Original 2007 2006 Budget Revised 2007
OUTCOMES/Outputs
Key Activities
Timeframe
Budget Code
Party
of funds
Budget
cfwd
Budget
1: Improved scientific information
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
and knowledge on oceanic
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$25,000
$22,792
$47,792
transboundary fish stocks and
Fishery Monitoring
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71300 Local Cnslt
$80,000
$16,233
$96,233
related ecosystem aspects of the
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$100,000
$0
$100,000
WTP WP LME; this information
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$36,000
$9,425
$45,425
being used to adopt and apply
X
0
0
0
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$0
$551
$551
conservation and management
0
0
0
0
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
$0
$0
measures; relevant national
X
0
0
X
SPC
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$30,000
$9,000
$39,000
capacities strengthened, with
Stock Assessment
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$100,000
$0
$100,000
Pacific SIDS meeting their
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$36,000
$11,300
$47,300
responsibilities in monitoring and
0
0
0
0
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$0
$0
$0
assessment.
0
X
0
0
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
$43,298
$43,298
0
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71300 Local Cnslt
$60,000
$39,970
$99,970
Ecosystem Analysis
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$240,000
$55,993
$295,993
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71600 Travel
$59,500
$5,500
$65,000
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
72100 Contr-Cmpy
$315,000
$139,178
$454,178
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$100,000
$0
$100,000
X
0
0
0
SPC
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$0
$1,151
$1,151
X
0
0
0
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
$4,021
$4,021
0
X
X
X
IUCN
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$18,000
$68,919
$86,919
0
X
X
X
IUCN
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$30,000
$44,479
$74,479
0
X
X
X
IUCN
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$20,000
$30,000
$50,000
0
X
X
X
IUCN
GEF
72400 Comm&AV
$10,000
$4,583
$14,583
0
X
X
X
IUCN
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
$50,000
$50,000
Project Support
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$35,000
$708
$35,708
X
X
X
X
SPC
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$83,055.00
-$140
$82,915
COMPONENT 1 TOTAL
$1,377,555
$556,961
$1,934,516
2. The WCPFC established and
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
beginning to function effectively;
Legal Reform
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$72,000
$17,886
$89,886
Pac SIDS taking a lead role in the
X
X
X
0
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$9,000
$8,461
$17,461
functioning and management of
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$80,000
$17,529
$97,529
the Commission and in the related Policy Reform
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$100,000
-$0
$100,000
management of the fisheries and
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$100,000
$28,102
$128,102
the LME; national laws, policies,
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$45,000
$27,689
$72,689
relevant institutions and
X
0
X
0
FFA
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$5,000
$3,153
$8,153
programmes reformed, realigned
0
0
0
0
FFA
GEF
72800 InfoTechEq
$0
-$0
-$0
and strengthened; relevant national
X
0
X
0
FFA
GEF
73200 PremAlter
$10,000
$5,530
$15,530
capacities strengthened.
X
X
X
0
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$120,000
$0
$120,000
0
0
0
0
IUCN
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$64,000
$16,667
$80,667
0
0
0
0
IUCN
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$20,000
$20,833
$40,833
0
0
0
0
IUCN
GEF
71600 Travel
$24,000
$860
$24,860
0
0
0
0
IUCN
GEF
72400 Comm&AV
$2,000
$1,000
$3,000
0
0
0
0
IUCN
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$30,000
$0
$30,000
Institutional Reform
X
0
X
0
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$72,000
$44,570
$116,570
X
0
X
0
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$20,000
$20,000
$40,000
Compliance Strengthening
X
0
X
0
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$60,000
$20,305
$80,305
X
0
X
0
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$9,000
$1,617
$10,617
X
X
X
0
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$90,000
$0
$90,000
Project Support
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$55,440
$55,440
COMPONENT 2 TOTAL
$987,440
$234,202
$1,221,642
3. Effective project management
Information System
X
X
0
0
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$3,000
$0
$3,000
at national and regional level;
X
0
0
X
FFA
GEF
72300 Matl&Goods
$4,000
$0
$4,000
major governmental and NGO
Monitoring & Evaluation
X
X
0
0
FFA
GEF
71200 Intl Cnslt
$10,000
$10,000
$20,000
stakeholders participating in
X
X
0
0
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$3,000
$18,800
$21,800
Project activities and consultative
0
0
0
0
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$0
$0
$0
mechanisms at national and
Stakeholder Participation
X
X
0
0
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$80,000
$0
$80,000
regional levels; information on the Proj. Mgmt & Coordination
X
X
X
0
FFA
GEF
71200 Local Cnslt
$20,000
$5,092
$25,092
Project and the WCPF process
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71400 Cntract Serv
$135,000
$54,351
$189,351
contributing to increased
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
71600 Travel
$30,000
$1,531
$31,531
awareness of oceanic fishery
X
X
0
0
FFA
GEF
72200 Equip&Furn
$3,000
$1,758
$4,758
resource and ecosystem
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$65,000
$35,478
$100,478
management; project evaluations
reflecting successful and
Project Support
X
X
X
X
FFA
GEF
74500 MiscExp
$19,110
$0
$19,110
COMPONENT 3 TOTAL
$372,110
$127,010
$499,120
GRAND TOTAL
Draft Revised 2007 Annual Work Plan and Budget
$2,737,105
$918,173
$3,655,278
Recommendation
The Committee is invited to approve the 2007 Draft Annual Work Plan and Budget.
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
11
Conclusion
31.
This report has been prepared for the purpose of presenting the financial
reports in 2006 for the OFM Project, to the second meeting of the Regional Steering
Committee with whom the responsibility lies for overall oversight of the project. This
Committee paper contains:
i)
the 2005 Financial Report;
ii)
an interim financial report for 2006 reporting on expenditure YTD 30 June
2006;
iii)
a revised 2006 AWP & Budget; and
iv)
the Draft 2007 Budget and Work Plan.
32.
The PCU have prepared these financial reports adhering to best practice,
international standards of accounting and in accordance with the financial regulations
of the FFA and UNDP. The second meeting of the OFM Project Regional Steering
Committee is invited to consider and endorse the following recommendations.
Recommendation
33.
The OFM Project Regional Steering Committee is invited to:
i)
approve the 2005 financial report year ending 31st December 2005;
ii)
consider and note the 2006 Interim Financial Report;
iii)
consider and approve the Revised 2006 Annual Work Plan and Budget; and
iv)
approve the 2007 Draft Annual Work Plan and Budget.
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
12
ATTACHMENT A
AUDITOR'S REPORT
RSC2/WP.7_revised 19 October 2006
13
SECOND MEETING OF THE REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE (RSC)
FOR THE PACIFIC ISLANDS OCEANIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT
PROJECT
Tokatoka Resort, Nadi, Fiji
21 October 2006
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSION1
1.
The second meeting of the Regional Steering Committee (RSC) for the Pacific Islands
Oceanic Fisheries Management Project (OFM Project) was held at the Tokatoka Resort,
Nadi, Fiji on 21 October 2006. Representatives from the following participating
country Governments and organizations were present: Australia, Cook Islands,
Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue, New Zealand,
Palau, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, the Secretariat of
the Pacific Community (SPC), the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA),
World Wildlife Fund for Nature, and the United Nations Development Programme
UNDP/GEF and UNDP (Suva country office). A list of participants is appended at
Attachment A.
Opening of Meeting
2.
The Project Coordinator briefly welcomed the delegates and acknowledged the
presence of UNDP and other organizations at the meeting. Mr. Silivenusi Ha'unga was
invited to open the meeting with a prayer.
Introductory Remarks
3.
Mr. Hans de Graaf, Deputy Regional Representative, UNDP Suva, made introductory
remarks that explained the importance of the Oceanic Fisheries Management Project
(OFMP) and objective of the meeting. A copy of his introductory remarks is appended
at Attachment B.
Opening Remarks
4.
Mr Feleti Teo, Director-General of the Pacific Islands Forum fisheries Agency made an
opening address. A copy of his opening address is appended at Attachment C.
Procedural Issues
5.
Mr Randall Purcell, UNDP/GEF, noted the significance of the OFMP as the largest
GEF regional fisheries project and that the project was unique in its connection to the
Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPF Commission) i.e. support
for capacity-building and implementation of obligations under the Commission, as well
as its stress reduction indicators/ecosystem indicators.
6.
The procedural requirement to appoint a co-Chair was raised. Mr Bernard Thoulag of
the Federated States of Micronesia agreed to co-chair the meeting with Mr Hans de
Graaf (UNDP) on this occasion.
1 Endorsed on .... 2006
Apologies
7.
The Chair conveyed apologies of Niue, Palau, Samoa, Tokelau, SPREP and IUCN.
Adoption of Agenda
8.
UNDP Suva requested that the agenda item pertaining to the financial report be moved
forward and considered following the Annual Report to allow for their attendance. The
Committee agreed and a copy of the adopted agenda is appended at Attachment D.
Regional Steering Committee Representation
9.
The Project Coordinator provided a presentation on Regional Steering Committee
representation. The importance of stakeholder participation and awareness raising, and
the progress of representation, to date was stressed. The presentation noted that as a
result of a consultancy to determine environmental non-governmental organization
(ENGO) involvement on the Project, the World Wildlife Fund for Nature South Pacific
Programme (WWF SPP) was identified as the logical choice for regional ENGO
engagement in project implementation. It was noted that investigation continues for
similar arrangements with industry non-governmental participation in the project and
that the newly formed Pacific Islands Tuna Industry Association (PITIA) was the only
defined regional association representing industry in the region.
10. In addition, it was noted that in relation to donor observers at the RSC, Australia and
New Zealand, as significant contributions to fisheries management in the region, and
FFA and SPC should be formally recognized as continued participants at RSCs. Fiji
expressed their appreciation to the GEF and the Project and acknowledged the
contributions of Australia and New Zealand.
11. The Committee agreed that:
i)
the Project Coordination Unit (PCU) formalize the link with the WWF SPPO
through a co-financing agreement;
ii) the PCU progress discussions with PITIA with the view of concluding a similar
co-financing agreement; and
iii) the WWF SPPO, PITIA, Australia and New Zealand as nominated NGOs, and
project co-financiers participate in all meetings of the RSC.
Agenda Item 1: Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project Annual Report
(UNDP/GEF Annual Project Report/Project Implementation Report)
12. The Chair asked the Committee to take note of the Annual Report provided and invited
the FFA and SPC to make presentations in support of the Annual Report.
13. SPC made a presentation of science related work contained in Component One of the
OFM Project which they have the responsibility for implementing. They noted that
with the development of the regional observer programme under the Commission, there
would be a greater need for training of observers which is currently partially supported
by the Project.
14. Members commended current work particularly those that are relevant to addressing
local capacity issues in the areas of stock assessment, tagging, data analyses and
reporting. In addition, the Cook Islands sought funding for a small chest freezer for
their in-country work species sample collection. SPC agreed that they would make
enquiries on this.
15. In response to a query relating to environmental standards certification, it was noted
that FFA is currently looking at the Marine Stewardship Council certification and its
application to the Western and Central Pacific region's tuna fishery.
16. Fiji pointed out the lack of information on social and economic benefits or returns from
tuna fisheries, and requested that this information be provided as a matter of priority.
The Chair responded that the OFM Project does not address these important issues,
rather it seeks to assist Pacific Island countries to gain a better scientific understanding
to manage the tuna resources and that the Fiji's concerns were being addressed by
major parallel project funded by the European Union in the region (DEVFISH).
17. Questions were raised on the number of people that participated in the regional observer
and other training and the impact in countries of staff being absent from their duties for
extended periods of time. The SPC responded saying that this was a well recognized
issue and they were actively seek ways in which to make the delivery of training
initiatives more efficient and effective.
18. The FFA Secretariat made several presentations relating the progress of project work
undertaken, to date, within Components Two and Three respectively (legal, policy and
institutional reform, compliance strengthening and project coordination and
management) of the Project.
19. Members noted the importance of funds from the OFM Project that supported the
attendance at meetings and helped them prepare for Commission meetings and
expressed their gratitude for this assistance through the project. In relation to this the
RSC also acknowledged with gratitude New Zealand's project co-financed contribution
to the project for past and future convening of the Commission related management
options workshops. It was also noted that the OFM Project funded consultancies that
provided expert advice to the recently held 3rd Management Options Workshop.
20. The FFA Secretariat compliance presentation outlined the progress of work undertaken,
to date, towards strengthening compliance in Pacific island country project
beneficiaries.
21. PNG expressed their appreciation for the OFM Project supported in-country workshops
that has assisted them greatly in building national compliance and enforcement
knowledge and skills.
22. The Project Coordinator presented to the RSC a report on the coordination and
management of the project covering the period from, October 2005 when the project
commenced to June 2006.
23. Nauru asked if the OFMP was able to fund identified projects in a country where funds
were no longer available under an existing project, such as work on the Fisheries
internet website which has been under construction for some time. The Project
Coordinator encouraged Nauru to raise all matters relating to revised national priorities
in the course of completing their project national annual work plans and offered to
discuss this on the up-coming country visit.
24. The RSC noted and discussed the IUCN Status Report. In the absence of representation
from IUCN, the Project Coordinator outlined the key issues and a proposed way
forward for the IUCN components of the OFM Project.
25. The Committee noted that IUCN was striving to secure an appropriate vessel to conduct
the scientific research as planned, but that they would not know until February 2007
whether this would be possible.
26. The Committee noted the:
i)
draft 2006 Annual Report of the OFM Project and endorsed the forwarding of the
report to UNDP Suva once they had had the opportunity to comment on the final
version which required the completion of a risk analysis by UNDP; and
ii)
contents of the status report prepared by IUCN concerning project activities that they
are responsible for implementing and agreed to wait until February 2007 to see if
IUCN would be able to secure a research vessel before discussing alternative options.
Agenda Item 2: Financial Reports
27.
The PCU presented the 2006 Financial Report that tabled the 2005 Financial Report
year ending 31st December 2005; an interim 2006 Financial Report; the Revised 2006
Annual Work Plan and Budget; and 2007 Draft Annual Work Plan and Budget
28.
The Committee asked for clarification as to why the project funds were under spent in
2005 and early 2006 and whether the substantial amount of money not spend in 2005
resulted in planned activities not being implemented. In response, the PCU explained
that there was a great deal of uncertainty as to when exactly funds were to be
disbursed and neither FFA nor SPC where able to offer contracts and confirm start
dates for professional technical positions supported by the project until funds had
been received. A large proportion of the under spent funds in 2005 (4th quarter only)
related to staff costs including the Project Coordination Unit which was not
established until 31 December 2005. It was also explained that there were
unavoidable delays in the commencement of work to be undertaken by IUCN and
marginally, the SPC planned tagging exercise which was to have started in the second
quarter. The PCU confirmed that the latter had since commenced in the third quarter
and as costs related victualling a research vessel, expenditure rates were quite high.
29.
The Deputy Resident Representative for UNDP Suva (UNDP Suva DRR) stated that
they had great difficulty in accepting the work plan and budgets as presented and
sought further explanation of the impact on the project outcomes of the under
spending particularly in relation to the sub component on Ecosystems Analysis.
UNDP considered that they thought it unrealistic to think that the allocations in the
revised 2006 Work Plan and Budget would be spent considering the spending rate in
2005 and early 2006.
30.
The UNDP Suva DRR stated that in the formulation of the draft budget for 2007,
there should not be automatic carry forward and that it should be based on what can
be delivered in a work plan of activities. He stated that UNDP Suva could not accept
the draft 2007 Work Plan and Budget and suggested further consultation with the
PCU before the Committee endorses the 2007 Annual Work Plan and Budget.
31.
In response to questions from the UNDP Suva DRR, SPC stated that they worked
collaboratively with IUCN and the PCU in both formulating the work plan and
budget and in the implementation of activities. While the delays in the IUCN would
not prevent their work in ecosystems analysis they remained confident that project
outcomes could be achieved.
32.
The Project Coordinator stated that the draft 2007 work plan and budget was not
formulated in isolation and projections were obtained from those implementing
activities at FFA, SPC and IUCN. Project spending rates had increased significantly
across executing agencies due to the completion of staff recruitment, and as a flow on
the capacity to undertake the activities aligned with positions funded by the project.
33.
Fiji asked whether it was possible to possible to implement the extensive array of
activities with the number of staff recruited to the project. The Project Coordinator
explained that a large amount of the project activities were supported by the work
programmes of both the FFA and SPC and it was unnecessary to recruit further
project staff. It was explained that one of the attractive features of the project design
was the low administrative overhead.
34.
The UNDP Suva DRR again expressed his concerns as to whether 100 per cent of the
2006 budget could be expended by year end and would have great difficulty
approving the 3.6 million draft budget for 2007. He explained that UNDP Suva was
judged by its delivery of project outcomes and said that if large amounts were unspent
they would be held accountable for funds received that could have usefully been
applied elsewhere.
35.
The Project Coordinator again stated that she was confident that the project would
expend the revised UNDP Suva benchmark of 80%, a figure which differed from
early advice from UNDP Suva, in 2007 and that spending rates for the second half of
2006 which are not covered on the reporting period currently under examination were
on target. On advice from UNDP Suva the project retained some flexibility between
line items and that if anyone had real concerns about that level of detail for planned
expenditure for 2007, she would be only to happy to explain them.
36.
SPC stated that they would be able to provide detailed, line by line information to
support the draft 2007 work plan and budget and could provide adequate justification
for how the would spend the funds, despite being in the position of having to play
catch up.
37.
The UNDP Suva DRR reiterated that it would be poor financial planning and
management if what it approved could not be spend and again stated that UNDP
could not approved the draft 2007 budget and that further adjustments would need to
be made.
38.
Vanuatu stated that were happy to endorse the draft 2007 budget but in the interest in
moving matters forward they suggested that the Committee simply note the draft
2007 budget and the PCU and UNDP Suva discuss it further, the outcome of which
could be endorsed by focal points inter-sessionally.
39.
The Committee
i)
approved the OFM Project 2005 Financial Report Year Ending 31 December 2005;
ii)
considered and noted the OFM Project 2006 Interim Financial Report;
iii)
considered and approved the Revised 2006 Annual Work Plan and Budget; and
iv)
agreed that the PCU would further consult with UNDP Suva on the draft 2007 Annual
Work Plan and Budget, the outcome of which would be returned to the Committee
inter-sessionally for consideration.
Agenda Item 3: National Annual Project Reports
40.
The PCU presented information paper RSC2/INFO.5 National Annual Reports and
reiterated the responsibilities of the National Project Focal Points and making the
distinction between them and the established GEF recognised Political and
Operational Focal Points. The presentation also highlighted the low level of operation
of project National Consultative Committees noting that many countries are making
good progress towards re-establishing national tuna fisheries management
committees.
41.
The Committee noted the written submission of annual national project reports by
Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Papua New Guinea,
Solomon Islands, and Tonga. Those countries that had not submitted reports were
invited to submit them to the PCU as soon as practically possible.
42.
The Committee noted the attempt by the Project Coordinator to complete in-country
consultations to further discuss national issues before the annual committee meeting
and also noted the difficulty due to availability of key people in-country. The
Committee encouraged to the Project Coordinator to complete the visits and the
assistance with national level priorities and to assist focal points with coordination
responsibilities and reporting difficulties.
Agenda Item 4: Other Matters
43. The Committee agreed the next annual meeting of the Regional Steering Committee
shall be held in conjunction with the 4th Management Options workshop in 2007.
44. The Committee agreed that the Summary Record will be made available for comment.
The PCU will make available the final version for endorsement by the Committee inter-
sessionally.
45. The Committee agreed that the national Co-Chair for the third Regional Steering
Committee in 2007 would be Fiji.
ATTACHMENT A
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Australia
Kiribati
Mr James Lee
Mr Raikaon Tumoa
International Fisheries
Senior Fisheries Officer
Fisheries and Aquaculture Branch
Oceanic Fisheries Program
Department of Agriculture Fisheries and
Fisheries Division
Forestry
P O Box 64
GPO Box 858, Canberra ACT 2601,
Bairiki, Tarawa
Australia
raikaont@mfmrd.gov.ki
james.lee@daff.gov.au
Marshall Islands
Mr Gordon Anderson
Pacific Fisheries Programme Development
Mr Samuel K Lanwi Jr
Advisor
Deputy Director, Oceanic & Industrial
AusAID
Affairs
gordon.anderson@ausaid.gov.au
MIMRA
skljr@mimra.com
Cook Islands
Nauru
Mr Peter Graham
Legal AdvisorMinistry of Marine
Hon. Marcus Stephen, MP
Resources
Chairman
Box 85, Rarotonga
Nauru Fisheries & Marine Resources
P.W.Graham@mmr.gov.ck
Authority
Aiwo District, Nauru Island
Federated States of Micronesia
chairman@naurufisheries.com.nr
Mr Bernard Thoulag
Mr Felix Kun
Executive Director
Policy Adviser
NORMA
Nauru Fisheries & Marine Resources
P O Box PS122
Authority
Palikir, Pohnpei, FSM
Aiwo District, Nauru Island
bthoulag@mail.fm
felix.kun@naurufisheries.com.nr
Fiji
New Zealand
Mr Saimone Tuilacala
Ms Tamsyn Royson
Acting Director
Second Secretary
Fisheries Department
New Zealand High Commission
Ministry of Fisheries & Forests
Honiara
stuilaucala@mff.net.fj
tamsyn.royson@dfat.govt.nz
Mr Matt Hooper
Senior International Adviser
Ministry of Fisheries
matthew.hooper@fish.govt.nz
Papua New Guinea
Vanuatu
Mr Sylvester Pokajam
Mr Moses Amos
Acting Managing Director
Director
National Fisheries Authority
Fisheries Department
P O Box 2016, Port Moresby, NCD, PNG
fisheries@vanuatu.com.vu
spokajam@fisheriesgov.pg
Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency
Mr Ludwig Kumoru
(FFA) Secretariat
Manager-Tuna
National Fisheries Authority
Mr Feleti Teo
P O Box 2016, Port Moresby, NCD, PNG
Director-General
lkumoru@fisheries.gov.pg
P O Box 629 Honiara
Solomon Islands
Mr Paul Martin
feleti.teo@ffa.int
Industry Liaison Coordinator
National Fisheries Authority
Mr Steve Shanks
P O Box 2016, Port Moresby,NCS, PNG
Fisheries Management Adviser
pmartin@fisheries.gov.pg
steve.shanks@ffa.int
Mr Jack Kariko
Dr Manu Tupou-Roosen
Deputy State Solicitor (International Law)
Acting Legal Counsel
Attorney Generals Department
manu.tupou-roosen@ffa.int
P O Box 591, WAIGANI, NCD, 121,
Papua New Guinea
Ms Lara Manarangi-Trott
jack_kariko@justice.gov.pg
WCPFC Liaison Officer
lara.manarangi-trott@ffa.int
Solomon Islands
Mr Sean Sloan
Mr Eddie Oreihaka
Fisheries Management Adviser
P O Box G13
sean.sloan@ffa.int
Honiara , Solomon Islands
edohaka@yahoo.com
Ms Barbara Hanchard
OFM/GEF Project Coordinator
Mr Simon Alewera
barbara.hanchard@ffa.int
P O Box G13
Honiara, Solomon Islands
Mr Samasoni Sauni
Fisheries Management Adviser
Tonga
samasoni.sauni@ffa.int
Mr Silivenusi Ha'unga
Mr Lamiller Pawut
Fisheries Officer (Licensing)
Surveillance Operations Officer
Ministry of Fisheries
lamiller.pawut@ffa.int
shaunga@tongafish.gov.to
Ms Anne Vave
Tuvalu
Personal Assistant DG
anne.vave@ffa.int
Mr Samasoni Finikaso
Director of Fisheries
Ms Kakala Vave
Ministry of Natural Resources & Lands
Planning Coordinator
Fisheries Department
kakala.vave@ffa.int
Private Mail Bag
Teone, Funafuti, Tuvalu
fisheries@tuvalu.tv
safin07@yahoo.com
FFA Consultants
Mr Les Clark
les_g_clark@xtra.int
Secretariat of the Pacific Community
Mr Adam Langley
Principle Fisheries Scientist (Stock
assessment & modeling)
adaml@spc.int
United Nations Development
Programme
Randall Purcell
Regional Technical Advisor
UNDP/GEF Bankok
UN Building
Rajadamnern Nok
Bankok, Thailand
Email: randall-purcell@UNDP.ORG
Mr. Hans de Graaf
Deputy Resident Representative
UNDP Suva Country Office
Suva, Fiji
Email: hans.degraaf@undp.org.sb
Alvin Chandra
Environmental/GEF/Energy Associate
UNDP Suva Country Office
Suva, Fiji
Email: alvin.chandra@undp.org.sb
World Wildlife Fund Pacific
Mr. Seremia Tuqiri
Oceans Policy Officer
WWF SPPO
Suva
Fiji
stuqiri@wwfpacific.org.fj
ATTACHMENT B
UNDP OPENING REMARKS
Mr. Hans de Graaff, Deputy Resident Representative
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
Pacific Island Oceanic Fisheries Management Project
Tokatoka Resort Hotel,
Nadi, Fiji Islands
Saturday 21 October 2006
Good Morning to all of you
I am happy to be here at the 2nd Regional Steering Committee Meeting for the Oceanic
Fisheries Management Programme. I bid a special welcome to the country delegates, officials
from CROP organisations and the members of the regional steering committee.
The Pacific Island Oceanic Fisheries Management project has successfully progressed
into almost 10 months of operation now. The project is driven by the concerns of Pacific
SIDS on the unsustainable use of transboundary oceanic fish stocks of the Pacific Islands
region and unsustainable levels and patterns of exploitation in the fisheries that target stocks.
These are transboundary concerns that apply especially to the impacts of unregulated fishing
in the areas of high seas in the region, but also apply more generally across all waters of the
region.
The UNDP is strongly committed to the environmental concerns of the Pacific.
Equally important is the link between environment to poverty alleviation as what we do with
the environment impacts the daily sustenance of the disadvantaged in our rural areas the most.
Fisheries resources provide critical 'ecosystem services' on which development depends. Loss
of marine resources exacerbates poverty, and likewise, poverty is a major threat to fisheries
resources for island environments. Fisheries resources are very important in the future
economic development of Pacific SIDS.
The Regional Steering Committee meeting today will provide valuable input for the
project. We hope that the discussions from the last few days will also add to the review of the
project performance and provide strategic guidance for its future progress. It is indeed great to
see such great stakeholder participation. Your continued commitment and coordination will
determine the success of this project.
I would like to thank our partners, Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA), for their efficient
preparation and planning to make today's meeting possible. We are indeed laying foundations
for achieving MDG goals by such partnerships that support environmental sustainability. The
UNDP remains committed to such partnerships in the region so that jointly we can take the
dialogue of sustainable development forward.
I am sure we all look forward to a rich and rewarding discussion today.
Thank you
10
ATTACHMENT C
Brief Opening Remarks by the FFA Director General, Mr. Feleti
P.Teo to the Second Meeting of the Pacific Island Oceanic
Fisheries Management Project
At Nadi, Fiji; 21 October 2006
1.
Good morning to you all and nisa bula to you all. Please allow me to make some very
brief opening remarks as part of the opening formalities for this second meeting of the
Regional Steering Committee for the Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project.
2.
Many of you will have been here over the course of the last three days and have
participated in the Management Options Workshop. The programme for that workshop was
quite intensive and the special FFC meeting yesterday endorsed some very substantial and
concrete outcomes of the workshop that will now be forwarded to WCPF Commission as FFA
propose measure and related proposals. I congratulate those of you who were involved in that
workshop for the hard work and progress made on some of those substantive issues that will
no doubt feature predominantly in the meeting of the WCPFC in December in Apia, Samoa.
3.
For those of you, who have arrived specifically come for this meeting, let me
welcome you to Nadi.
4.
As you will all know this meeting was also scheduled to take place in Honiara on 10
October, last week, but for reasons of safety concerns in Honiara at that particular time, we
had to re-schedule the meeting for today. We apologise if this has caused any of you any
inconvenience but it was a clear case of being `better safe than sorry'.
5.
Please let me acknowledge the presence of UNDP/GEF and UNDP representatives
who are central in the coordination and implementation of the Oceanic Fisheries Management
Project; National Focal Representatives to the project who is also regular attendants at FFC
meetings; and some invited Observers.
6.
The Oceanic Fisheries Management Project has been operational for twelve months
now and has made significant contributions towards helping Pacific Island countries
participating in this project, to achieve some global environmental benefits through enhanced
conservation and management of transboundary oceanic fishery resources in the Pacific
Islands region. Recognizing the limitations in capacity of many of the participating countries
and the growing complexity of oceans governance and resource management issues makes the
assistance provided through this project funded by the Global Environment Facility very
timely and significantly essential. The machinery of the WCPFC is gaining momentum and
efforts to keep abreast of issues of conservation and management in that fora will continue to
challenge Pacific island countries. This makes efforts such as the Management Options
Workshop funded by New Zealand through NZAID as a co-financing activity to the Oceanic
Fisheries Management Project and the work by SPC to help countries draft National Tuna
Fisheries Status Reports and improve data collection to name but a few project related
activities, very important.
7.
While good progress is being made with the project, although a little slow at first in
terms of implementation start up, I would like to take this opportunity to encourage and urge
FFA member representatives with national level coordinating roles in this project to remain
11
vigilant in project matters in order to reap maximum benefits. Correspondingly, the FFA as
executing agency for the project will continue to diligently ensure that the objectives are met
in an accountable and transparent manner.
8.
I am conscious of the fact that this is a Saturday and that you have a full agenda for
today, so I don't want to take up much of your time. But I would like to wish the meeting of
the OFM Project Regional Steering Committee well and productive meeting and I look
forward to the outcomes of your deliberations.
Thank you.
12
ATTACHMENT D
REGIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE
2nd Meeting of the RSC
Honiara, Solomon Islands
10 October 2006
Paper Number RSC2/WP.2
Title ADOPTED
AGENDA
a.
Opening of Meeting
b. Apologies
c.
Adoption of Agenda
d.
Regional Steering Committee Representation
1. Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project Annual
Report - (UNDP/GEF Annual Project Report /Project
Implementation Report)
2. Financial Reports
3. National Annual Project Reports
4. Other Matters
e. Next
Meeting
f. Records
of
Proceeding
g.
Close of the Meeting
13