There were no deviations from the expected outcomes/outputs as per the original PDF-B Project Document. All outcomes and activities were achieved.
Detailed description of PDF-B Project activities and achievements
The Global Environment Facility (GEF) funded the preparatory phase (PDF-B) tasks for a full-scale GEF project “Building Partnerships to Assist Developing Countries to Reduce the Transfer of Harmful Aquatic Organisms in Ships’ Ballast Water (GloBallast Partnerships (GBP))”. The PDF-B Project’s objective was to develop the Project Document for GloBallast Partnerships (GBP), in consultation with the IMO Member States and other Key Stakeholders and Strategic Partners and to mobilize sufficient co-financing for execution of the Project. The full-scale project is expected to expand and build on a successfully completed GEF-IW global project on removing barriers to the effective implementation of ballast water control and management measures in developing countries (GloBallast Project).
The overall aim of GBP is to assist developing countries to enact, through effective partnerships, the necessary national level legal, policy and institutional reforms (LPIR) to prevent, minimize and ultimately eliminate the risk arising from the transfer of invasive aquatic species and pathogens in ships’ ballast water and sediments and to develop sustainable mechanisms for the control and management of ballast water and sediments. GloBallast Partnerships will focus on assisting specially vulnerable and sensitive new regions and will emphasis on integrated management. The partnerships will ensure a globally uniform approach and, to the extent possible, global coverage of the developing regions of the world.
The PDF-B project was implemented by UNDP and executed by IMO. PDF-B activities were coordinated by a Project Preparation Unit (PPU) located at IMO, London, supported by internationally recruited consultants. The specific activities that were undertaken under the PDF-B Project were:
Activity 1: Identification and selection of countries/regions for GBP participation and undertake preparatory activities for stakeholder consultations
Activity 2: Undertake stakeholder consultations with beneficiary countries / donors and project partners
Activity 3: Development of a detailed Legal, Policy and Institutional Reform Roadmap
Activity 4: Development of Initial Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting (MER) Plan and Stakeholder Involvement and Communication (SI&C) Plan
Activity 5: Development of a full-scale Project Brief for submission to GEF
Activity 1: Identification and selection of countries/regions for GBP participation and undertake preparatory activities for stakeholder consultations
This activity commenced in May 2005, with the engagement of a consultant (Mr Steve Raaymakers, Eco-Strategic Consultants, Australia), to undertake the following tasks:
Task 1: Develop draft selection criteria for identification of potential beneficiary areas for possible inclusion in the full GBP project.
Task 2: Collect background information to assist the potential beneficiary area selection process.
Task 3: Facilitate a Global Inception Workshop at IMO (25-26 July 2005).
Task 4: Identify and rank candidate regions for possible inclusion in the full GBP project.
Task 5: Prepare and submit a final inception report the outputs from tasks 1 to 4.
The major outputs of each of these Tasks are summarized as follows:
Task 1: Develop draft selection criteria for identification of potential beneficiary areas for possible inclusion in the full GBP project.
In order to identify candidate geographic areas suitable as potential high-priority beneficiaries under the full-scale GBP project, a draft selection criteria was developed including:
System Criteria:
§ Bioinvasion risk
§ Bioinvasion vulnerability
§ Relative global significance
§ Transboundary significance
§ Socioeconomic importance of marine and coastal resources
Contextual & Project Implementation (CPI) Criteria:
§ GEF eligibility (countries that are eligible to borrow from the World Bank or receive technical assistance grants from UNDP)
§ Region / country driven-ness
§ Practicality of implementation
§ Potential of links and integration with other existing and planned GEF IW projects.
Task 2: Collect background information to assist the potential beneficiary area selection process.
In order to support and inform the PDF-B process and development of the full Project Brief, the consultant then gathered information on other relevant global and international initiatives that might present opportunities for synergies with GBP, as well as information that is necessary for identifying and ranking the vulnerable areas for inclusion in the full project.
The type of information that was deemed to be relevant to ranking areas and supporting the development of selection criteria included:
- Factors contributing to the risk of bioinvasions, including shipping patterns
- Vulnerability to bioinvasions
- Transboundary significance
- Indicators of marine biological diversity
- Indicators of regional and/or global significance
- Region/country willingness and priority in relation to the issue of invasive aquatic species
- Any existing IAS/BW management regimes and action plans
- Likelihood of co-financing, including from established activities in a country / region and from other sources, including shipping and port industry
- Practicality of implementation, including any possible role regional organizations / existing projects could play in assisting the implementation of GloBallast Partnerships
The above information was collected at the regional scale, based on the Regional Seas groupings, as listed below.
Regions covered by the PDF-B Consultancy
|
Not included in GloBallast Pilot Phase |
Included in GloBallast Pilot Phase |
- Baltic Sea
- Caspian Sea
- Medeterrainian Sea
- North East Pacific
- Red Sea and Gulf of Aden
- South East Pacific,
- South Pacific (Pacific Islands)
- West & Central Africa
- Wider Caribbean
|
- Black Sea
- Eastern Africa
- East Asian Seas
- MERCOSUR Region (South West Atlantic)
- ROPME Sea Area
- South Asian Seas
|
Task 3: Organize the first GPTF and Global Inception Workshop at IMO (25-26 July 2005).
The workshop was well attended with senior/high level representatives from international and regional organizations and industry, as well as experts from Pilot Countries.
The workshop had three main objectives:
- Review the draft selection criteria developed by the consultant for the prioritization of potential candidate regions in the full project.
- Review of background information collected by the consultant to support the selection criteria and the prioritization of regions.
- Propose possible strategies / modalities for the design and implementation of the full project.
- Undertake a preliminary ranking of regions.
The main outcomes of the workshop in relation to each of these objectives were as follows:
Objective 1: Review the draft selection criteria
The workshop agreed that due to the highly complex, scarce, scanty, incomplete and uncertain nature of many of the data necessary to support the proposed system criteria, such criteria should be downgraded in the selection process.
Biodiversity experts at the workshop confirmed that exhaustive biodiversity data is not available for each region, and that the information that is available should not be used to score regions, but rather to provide background information that should be considered during selection, or be used in the development of another indicator/scoring approach.
The workshop agreed that higher priority should be given to contextual and project implementation criteria (CPI), as these are simpler, clearer, more-easily assessable and can be better justified.
Objective 2: Review of background information
The workshop considered the background information presented by the consultant and contained in the Appendices Inception report. Of particular note to the GBP Project Preparation Unit (PPU) was the background information on other global/international initiatives, which the PPU used to assist in developing the stakeholder and partner consultation plan.
Objective 3: Strategies / modalities for the design and implementation of the full project.
Through workgroups the participants brainstormed and proposed some possible strategies / modalities for the design and implementation of the full project. The full details of these are contained in the workgroup reports are reported in the final inception report. Some major points were:
- The over-riding objective of GBP should be to ultimately establish permanent, self-sustaining legal, policy and institutional (LPI) arrangements in developing countries to ensure uniform application of the IMO BWM Convention.
- The main objective of the PDF-B should be to design the full-project so as to optimize the catalytic and multiplier effects of the available GEF funds.
- The full-scale project should seek to catalyze LPIR at the national level but by using regional structures and mechanisms (to achieve the multiplier effect and a more efficient use of resources than if the project tried to assist countries directly).
- The Regional Seas provide logical geographical groupings for differentiating regions, while within these the LMEs should constitute key management units.
- The full-scale project should not only assist a few priority regions but should assist ALL GEF-eligible regions – i.e. take a truly global approach.
- Within this global approach – different levels and types of GEF assistance might be provided to different regions, based on priority ranking.
- The available GEF funds could be significantly expanded by including BW/IAS activities in the work plans and budgets of the GEF LME projects.
Objective 4: Undertake a preliminary ranking of regions
The workshop undertook a preliminary ranking of regions based on the existence or otherwise of Regional Action Plans for BW/IAS and related GEF LME and other projects in each region.
Based on outputs of the workshop (including discussion of the initial draft selection criteria), the background information collected for each region and consultations with various stakeholders, six high ranking of regions were selected for focused GEF intervention. Additional six pilot regions and two GEF regions were also included, however accorder a lower priority.
Participation in the workshop was enthusiastic and energetic and a strong feeling of partnership and ownership were generated by the end of the workshop, including from the shipping industry, and some new organizations not involved in phase-I (IOC, WWF, UNEP WCMC, Nippon Foundation etc). Representatives from regional organizations also expressed strong interest and a high level of driven-ness.
Activity 2: Undertake stakeholder consultations with beneficiary countries / donors and project partners
This activity commenced in September 2005 with an extensive pre-consultation discussions with the regional organizations. A lead international consultant (Mr Alan Fox, Transboundary Consultants, USA) and an associate consultant (Mr Adnan Awad, South Africa) were recruited to assist PPU in undertaking the stakeholder consultations. The main objectives of this activity were to:
- identify and securing engagement/commitment from lead partnering countries within the region for taking a lead role in the development of a draft national level legal, policy and institutional framework for ballast water management, implementing the legal, policy and institutional reform process and undertaking related technical and institutional capacity building.
- ascertain the present situation regarding ballast water management in the region including a preliminary assessment of available capacity for management and of the potential major barriers for legal, policy and institutional reforms as well as to undertake a needs assessment for prioritizing long-term and short-term capacity building needs for enacting/implementation of LPIR.
- secure engagement/commitment from the regional organizations for undertaking the project implementation and coordination activities at regional level
- identify specific opportunities for GBP to “plug in” to the ongoing GEF funded projects in the region to promote inclusion of BMW related LPIR in countries within the region and to obtain engagement/commitment from the GEF-LME Projects
- identify major regional partners and co-financing opportunities that can be followed up by the PPU/IMO to secure those partnerships and co-financing.
In order to achieve these objectives, the consultants and PPU participated in five regional workshops / meetings in the high priority regions to discuss GBP participation, to secure engagement and commitment from the Governments, to identify and agree on the regional coordinating organization (RCO) and to identify key stakeholders and partners, including shipping industry. These meetings were held as given in the table:
Region
|
Venue
|
Date
|
|
Mediterranean |
Protoroz, Slovenia |
November 2005
|
|
Red sea and Gulf f Aden |
Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia |
November 2005
|
|
West and Central Africa (GCLME region |
Accra, Ghana |
February 2006
|
|
Wider Caribbean |
Caracas, Venezuela |
February 2006
|
|
South East Pacific |
Guayaquil, Ecuador |
February 2006
|
The above meetings discussed the implementation strategy of GBP, identified follow-up actions to secure country engagements and identified strategy for further communications between PPU/RCO and Countries.
Meeting of the Mediterranean countries were organized under the auspices of MAP, in conjunction with the MAP-COP meeting in Slovenia and this was followed up with separate discussions with the two regional organizations namely REMPEC and RAC/SPA who were identified as the potential RCOs in the region. A draft implementation strategy for the region was discussed and it was agreed that REMPEC would take the lead RCO role in the region with the support of RAC/SPA in specific activities.
In Red Sea and Gulf of Aden region, which was identified as the highest priority region in the Global Inception workshop, the consultant undertook a detailed fact finding mission to discuss the project with key stakeholders in the countries as well as to identify the current status of ballast water management in these countries. This was followed by a regional meeting of the government and industry representatives from the PERSGA member states, hosted by PERSGA. This meeting also established a Regional Task Force and adopted a Regional Action Plan for Ballast Water Management, which included participation of the PERSGA countries in GBP.
In West and Central Africa region, the consultation process started with a regional meeting organized by the GCLME PCU with participation of key government representatives from all GCLME countries. The meeting also developed a regional action plan and agreed to form a regional task force to implement the action plan. The meeting also unanimously agreed that GCLME would be the ideal body to act as the regional coordinating organization for the implementation of GBP. Participation of Guinea in the GCLME project provides the necessary linkages with the CCME and this was highlighted in the meeting. Similarly discussions were held with Angola, who showed keen interest to take a lead role in GBP, thus providing good linkage with the BCLME region.
The Wider Caribbean Regional Meeting was held in Venezuela which was participated by several wider Caribbean Countries as well as a large number of maritime industry representatives in the region. The meeting organized under the auspices of UNEP CAR-RCU and REMPEITC. The meeting discussed the various issues associated with ballast water transfer of organisms in the region and identified the high priority needs and potential strategic partnerships.
South East Pacific Countries (CPPS region) participated in a consultation meeting organized by CPPS Secretariat. This meeting also discussed the ballast water issues and the importance of this issue to the region. All member countries of CPPS as well as Argentina participated in the meeting.
In all of the above meetings, the country representatives were requested to undertake further national consultations with other ministries and key stakeholders and to indicate their interest in participating in GBP by way of providing support /endorsement letters to the project. In addition, countries were informed that at least 2 to 3 lead partnering countries (LPC) would be identified based on the support letters, country commitment expressed through co-financing support and several other criteria including geographical representation, vulnerability of the country in terms of ballast water imports etc.
The above consultation meetings with various national stakeholders were further augmented by separate follow-up bilateral meetings organized by PPU with representatives of potential lead partnering countries, NGOs, IGOs and Private Sector Representatives who attended the IMO meetings (MEPC, MSC, BLG, IMO Council Meetings), to follow-up on the regional discussions in order to receive feedbacks on national level project components and to secure engagement and commitment.
In parallel to the regional/country level consultations, PPU undertook numerous discussions with potential strategic partners including private sector. These consultations included participation of PPU in separate regional meetings and bilateral meetings. A detailed list of these meetings are given in Part B.
One major achievement during the PDF-B phase was the production of a world class TV documentary on ballast water, with the financial support of industry and in cooperation with the BBC Worldwide. The film significantly helped raising awareness of the issue in the new regions and facilitated stakeholder engagement and commitments. The film won the Gold Award as the best UN Feature film in 2007.
Activity 3: Development of a detailed Legal, Policy and Institutional Reform Roadmap
A major objective of GBP is to assist developing countries to enact national level legal, policy and institutional reforms (LPIR), through effective partnerships, to prevent, minimize and ultimately eliminate risk to the environment, human health, property and resources arising from the transfer of invasive aquatic species and pathogens in ships’ ballast water.
In order to identify the major activities to facilitate LPIR reforms at national level, an international legal consultant (Prof P. K. Mukherjee, World Maritime University, Sweden) was recruited to draft a background report and a roadmap for legal, policy and institutional reforms in developing countries to address the issue of marine bioinvasion through ballast water. The consultant developed an LPIR roadmap based on the general experiences gained in such reform processes in developing countries that were aimed at addressing various marine environmental issues and from a review of lessons learned in countries that have instituted legal, policy and institutional reforms to reduce the risks associated with marine bioinvasion via ships’ ballast water.
Legal reforms within the LPIR roadmap included aspects related to national and local laws, regulations and formal guidance developed or revised to control relevant aspects of ballast water management and consistent with the international regulatory regimes, especially the International Convention on Ballast Water Management. LPIR process considered the IMO convention as the general framework which includes ballast water management measures such as the reception and management of sediments, the designation of sensitive areas and ballast exchange zones, on board and in-port treatment requirements, and the handling of ship manifests. The LPIR roadmap also took into account both flag state and port/coastal state administrative aspects. Policy reforms included efforts to connect ballast water management with global, regional and country – based environmental protection activities. The IMO Ballast Water Convention, together with regional protocols and strategic action plans form an expanding policy base within which countries can address marine invasive species risks. Institutional reforms included the selection of competent authorities, clarification of roles and responsibilities, the allocation of operational budgets and mechanisms for institutional capacity building, including training. The LPIR roadmap also took into account both flag state and port/coastal state administrative aspects.
The roadmap included milestones such as:
· establishment of a roster of experts in a transparent manner and modalities for including them in national, sub-regional and/or regional networks to assist the LPIR process
· assessment/stocktaking to provide information on the status of existing marine bioinvasion management measures and a review of existing legal, policy and institutional arrangements/frameworks
· identification and involvement of all stakeholders relevant to implementation of LPIR process and any ballast water management strategies/framework
· identification of country specific actions that need to be undertaken to enable countries to develop and implement the ballast water management strategy/framework including the ratification of International Convention on Ballast Water Management
· preparation of national level policy and legal framework and/or guidelines necessary for the implementation of ballast water management strategies
· identification of the new responsibilities derived from the Ballast Water Management Convention, how would they be assigned among the key stakeholders, need for new institutional arrangements and possible budgetary implications.
· development of a compliance monitoring and enforcement (CME) strategy and strengthening national level capacity for compliance monitoring and enforcement
· finalization of a ballast water management strategy/framework for implementation and setting in place the appropriate administrative structure to implement the strategy
Based on a generic roadmap identified as above and assessment of the potential barriers in implementing this roadmap in developing regions, the legal expert recommend the critical activities/actions to be undertaken by the developing countries during the GloBallast Partnership Project timeframe to overcome these barriers and the major activities that could be supported through the GEF intervention that will assist the countries to undertake the reform process. Such activities also considered the capacity building needs for the LPIR process in developing countries which included inter alia strengthening capacity for carrying out a LPI review , strengthening national capacity to develop national regulatory frameworks, strengthening capacity for competent decision-making and for compliance monitoring and enforcement including establishment of administrative systems to assist with. The study also identified the need for development of global templates, guidelines and tool kits that the countries/regions could use in the development of national level LPIR. The roadmap also identified the appropriate ways and means of involving the relevant stakeholders in the LPIR process and any specific activities that need to be supported by GEF to promote stakeholder involvement.
Although the LPIR process and the barriers for implementation of reform process may vary from region to region and country to country, it is expected that the roadmap and the GEF-supported activities that are identified for the full project would be generic enough for replication on a global basis. National decisions and activities on ballast water need to take into account legislative measures and ballast water regulatory systems of adjacent countries. Sub-regional cooperation in information sharing and harmonizing legal and regulatory instruments is crucial for effective management of ballast water issues. Maximising the use of institutional, financial, technical and human resources within a region will enhance a country’s ability to implement the ballast water management strategies and will facilitate an exchange of best practices and experiences. For this purpose the study also identified appropriate project components for regional consultations and cooperation and ways and means to facilitate such consultations and cooperation (e.g., regional policy harmonization workshop, regional task force formation and regional sustainability workshops).
Activity 4: Development of Initial Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting (MER) Plan and Stakeholder Involvement and Communication (SI&C) Plan
This activity was re-organized under activity 5.
Activity 5: Development of a full-scale Project Brief for submission to GEF
An international Consultant was recruited to develop a full-scale project brief (Mr Alan Fox, Transboundary consulting, USA) in line with GEF-UNDP guidelines. This task was divided into three phases:
1: Initial information collection to develop a draft project design and structure
2: Discussions with key stakeholders at national, regional and global level to identify priority needs / activities
3: Development of logical-framework, stakeholder consultation, monitoring and evaluation plans and finally to develop a full-size project document based on all the information collected and studies carried out.
The lead consultant obtained briefing and background materials on the Logical Frame Approach from other consultants, PPU and local counterparts and stakeholders and undertook a logical framework analysis to develop a list and prioritize project objectives, interventions and component activities according to the GEF standard. Based on the Draft Logical Framework Approach, a draft project framework was developed and a design of structure and mechanism for full project implementation was generated.
As part of this activity the a Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting plan (MER) and a Stakeholder Involvement and Communication Plan were also developed. A draft project budget was developed based on the expected GEF financing and co-financing from participating countries.
The second GPTF meeting discussed the draft project document, including the log-frame approach, project design, project components, project implementation plan and budget allocations and provided significant input to give a final shape to the document.
The final Project Documents (UNDP Project Document and GEF Executive Summary), incorporating GEFSEC and STAP comments, were submitted to GEFSEC on 23 March 2007 for the GEF work programme inclusion. In June 2007, the GEF Council approved the work programme including the GloBallast Partnership Project, subject to any further comments from Council members. Comments received from one Country (Switzerland) was addressed prior to the submission of final document for CEO endorsement.
Table 1: Completion status of Project Activities (Financial data is as per original Budget and Budget Revision A)
|
Approved |
Actual |
|
Proposed Activities at Approval |
GEF Financing
|
Co-financing
|
Completion status |
GEF financing
|
Co-financing
|
Uncommitted GEF funds |
|
1.1 Project Preparation Unit Established |
369,360
|
150,000
|
Completed
|
427,680
|
200,000
|
(58,320)
|
|
2.1 Vulnerable Area Criteria Developed |
4,320
|
50,000
|
Completed
|
7,560
|
20,000
|
(3,240)
|
|
3.1 First GPTF meeting Organized |
56,160
|
20,000
|
Completed
|
38,880
|
50,000
|
17,280
|
|
4.1 Basic Information gathered |
10,800
|
660,000
|
Completed
|
15,120
|
700,000
|
(4,320)
|
|
5.1 Stakeholder / Communication Plans developed |
4,320
|
0
|
Completed
|
4,320
|
20,000
|
0
|
|
6.1 Partner Consultations Completed |
156,600
|
1,050,000
|
Completed
|
156,600
|
700,000
|
0
|
|
7.1 Generic LPIR plan developed |
21,600
|
60,000
|
Completed
|
6,480
|
50,000
|
15,120
|
|
8.1 Initial MER Plan developed |
4,320
|
0
|
|
4,320
|
|
0
|
|
9.1 Draft Project brief Completed |
16,200
|
0
|
Completed
|
16,200
|
20,000
|
0
|
|
10.1 2nd GPTF meeting organized |
56,160
|
20,000
|
Completed
|
22,680
|
100,000
|
33,480
|
|
Total |
699,840 |
2,010,000 |
|
699,840 |
1,860,000 |
0 |
Notes:
1. By taking an adaptive management approach, to make better use of the in-house and external resources/expertise that were identified during the implementation of the project, the original budget allocations for various activities were re-apportioned among certain budget lines (as approved by budget revision –A). Reasons for budget changes for specific activities are given below against each activity number:
1.1 (a) In addition to the in-kind contribution by IMO for the PDF-B project, a number of activities were supported using IMO ITCP funds. This allowed an extension of the project from October 2006 to March 2007 (without any financial implications on the total GEF resources) to support the additional activities. This change was reflected through the extension of 6 months for PPU (1 Oct 06 – 30 March 07) at IMO in London and corrections for allowances. The PPU a) continued the consultations with industry and other partners b) finalised the project document incorporating the GEF comments c) undertook the PDF-B project closure activities including finalization of reports from PDF-B Project, mobilized significant additional co-financing.
(b) The Administrative Assistant was recruited for only 12 months as IMO Office for BWM provided administration assistance.
2.1 Actual time involved was more than originally budgeted foe due to the expanded scope of consultancy work.
3.1 GPTF budgets were reduced to account for the cost savings from arranging back-to-back meeting with IMO MEPC meetings.
4.1 Actual time involved was more than originally budgeted for due to the consultant’s participation in Inception meeting to present the report
7.1 No travel for the consultant required as this was re-scoped as a desktop study. Travel was avoided using teleconferencing between the consultant and PPU.
10.1 Significant cost savings were achieved as the funding support for travel of strategic partners came in the form of in-kind support from the partners
B – Record of Stakeholder Involvement in project preparation
During PDF phase, extensive consultations were carried out with a wide spectrum of stakeholders, to secure engagement and commitment from the Governments, to identify and agree on the regional coordinating organization (RCO), to identify key stakeholders and partners at national, regional and global levels, including shipping industry and to mobilize co-financing resources. These meetings were held as given in the table:
a) Global
Two Global Task Force Meetings involving a wide spectrum of stakeholders were organized with an aim to receive inputs for the design of the project components, need identification and to agree and approve the final project document.
Meeting
|
Venue
|
Date
|
Stakeholders Present |
|
First GPTF and Project Inception Meeting |
London, UK |
2005 July 25-26 |
Pilot Country reps, RCOs, Industry Reps, UN sister organizations – total 30 participants |
|
Second GPTF Meeting |
London, UK |
2006 July 6-7
|
Partnering Country reps, RCOs, Industry Reps, Strategic Partners, IFIs, UN sister organizations – total 26 participants |
In parallel to the regional/country level consultations, PPU undertook numerous discussions with potential strategic partners including private sector at global level. These consultations included participation of PPU in separate global meetings to explain the objectives of the Project and to seek engagement, support and input to project design and components. Some representative meetings are mentioned below:
Meeting
|
Venue
|
Date
|
Stakeholders
|
|
3rd GEF International waters Meeting, Brazil (Speaker) |
Salvador, Brazil |
2005 June 20-25 |
LME Project managers, GEF Beneficiary Country Reps, Donor Country Reps, UN organizations, IFIs, Industry Reps and Scientific and academic community – over 300 participants |
|
International Conference on Port and Maritime Technology (Speaker) – non-GEF Funding |
|
2005 September 5-6 |
Industry Representatives, scientific and academic community, shipping and port organizations, strategic partners, ballast water treatment technology vendors – over 200 participants |
|
UNEP Regional Seas Meeting (Global) (Speaker) |
Helsinki, Finland |
2005 October 17-20 |
Regional Directors of UNEP Regions Sea Programmes (also RCOs for GloBallast) in Priority Regions, IFIs, Strategic partners. – 40 participants (ref: Report of the Regional Seas Meeting, HELCOM) |
|
3rd Global Forum on Oceans, Costs and Islands (Speaker) |
Paris, France |
2006 January 24-26 |
Beneficiary Country Reps, Representatives from SIDS, Donor Country Reps, UN organizations, IFIs, Industry Reps and Scientific and academic community – over 400 participants |
|
World Maritime Technology Conference (Speaker) – non-GEF Funding |
London |
2006 March 6-10 |
Industry Representatives, scientific and academic community, shipping and port organizations, strategic partners, ballast water treatment technology vendors – over 200 participants |
|
International Shipping Conference (Speaker) – non-GEF Funding |
Colombo, Sri Lanka |
2006 May 25-27
|
Industry Representatives, Regional representatives of UN projects and programmes, scientific and academic community, shipping and port organizations, strategic partners – over 100 Participants |
|
3rd International Conference on Ballast Water Management (Speaker) – non-GEF Funding |
Singapore |
2006 September 25-26 |
Industry Representatives, scientific and academic community, shipping and port organizations, strategic partners, ballast water treatment technology vendors – over 130 participants |
|
4th GEF International Waters Meeting (Speaker) |
Cape Town, South Africa |
2007 Jul 31 – 3 August |
LME Project managers, GEF Beneficiary Country Reps, Donor Country Reps, UN organizations, IFIs, Industry Reps and Scientific and academic community – over 300 participants |
b) Regional
Meeting
|
Venue
|
Date
|
|
|
Caspian Region – Ballast Water Management workshop (non-GEF Funding) |
Baku, Azerbaijan |
2005 September 8-9 |
Invited members of five Caspian Littoral States representing Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transport, Ports, NGOs, oil majors and shipping industry. The meeting discussed short and long term opportunities to partner with GloBallast Project, by linking the ongoing activities within Caspian Environment Programme with those of GBP. Over 15 participants. |
|
Baltic Region: HELCOM Meeting |
Palanga, Lithuania |
2005 October 11-13 |
Maritime sub-committee members of the members of Helsinki Commission. The member represented their respective maritime and port administrations as well as industry organizations. The meeting discussed opportunities for cooperation between HELCOM countries and GloBallast project and identified a working group to provide input to the PDF-B process. Over 20 representatives. |
|
Red sea and Gulf f Aden - PERSGA Regional Consultation Meeting (non-GEF Funding) |
Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia |
2005 November 27-28 |
Invited members of PERSGA member Countries (Egypt, Yemen, Jordan, KSA, Sudan, Djibouti) representing Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transports, Ports, NGOs and shipping industry. The meeting also developed and adopted a regional cooperation plan to support implementation of GloBallast partnership activities – over 20 participants |
|
West and Central Africa (GCLME regional Consultation Meeting (non-GEF Funding) |
Accra, Ghana |
2006 January 30 to 2 February |
Invited members of 16 GCLME member Countries representing Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transports, Ports, NGOs and shipping industry. The meeting also developed and adopted a regional cooperation plan to support implementation of GloBallast partnership activities – over 20 participants |
|
Wider Caribbean Region Consultation Meeting |
Caracas, Venezuela |
2006 February 8-9 |
Invited members of Wider Caribbean Countries representing Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transport, Ports, NGOs, oil majors and shipping industry. The meeting identified the high priority needs for the region to address ballast water issues and identified the strategic partners for resource mobilization – over 50 participants |
|
South East Pacific region Consultation Meeting |
Guayaquil, Ecuador |
2006 February 13-14 |
Invited members of CPPS member countries and also government representatives of Argentina. The delegates represented Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transport, Ports, NGOs, and shipping industry. The meeting identified the high priority needs for the region to address ballast water issues and identified the strategic partners for resource mobilization – over 20 participants |
|
ROPME Region Consultation Meeting and Training (non-GEF Funding) |
Bahrain |
2006 June 16-22 |
Invited members of ROPME member countries representing Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transport, Ports, NGOs, oil majors and shipping industry. A resolution was developed that agreed on cooperation activities between ROPME and GloBallast, as well as relevant IMO ITCP activities. Over 20 participants attended. |
|
Mediterranean Regional Consultation Meeting |
Protoroz, Slovenia |
2006 November 7-10 |
Invited members of the member countries of Mediterranean Action Plan. Stakeholders represented ministry of environment, maritime administrations and research organizations, in addition to the regional NGOs. Over 20 delegates participated in this meeting. |
|
Mediterranean Regional Consultation Meeting |
Rome, Italy |
2006 December 6-7 |
Academic and Research organizations, Representatives of Regional Coordinating Organizations (REMPEC and RAC-SPA) |
|
Caspian Region Ballast Water management Roadmap development workshop (non-GEF Funding) |
Baku, Azerbaijan |
2007 March 12-14 |
Invited members of five Caspian Littoral States representing Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transport, Ports, NGOs, oil majors and shipping industry. The meeting developed a regional roadmap for ballast water management and also identified national level high priority activities. Over 20 participants attended. |
|
Red sea and Gulf f Aden – PERSGA Regional Consultation and training Meeting (non-GEF Funding) |
Hurgahda, Egypt |
2007 May 6-9
|
Invited members of PERSGA member Countries (Egypt, Yemen, Jordan, KSA, Sudan, Djibouti) representing Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transports, Ports, NGOs and shipping industry. The participants were also given a focused training on port biological baseline surveys, which is identified as a major activity for co-financing in project document. – over 15 senior level participants |
|
Caspian Biodiversity Workshop (non-GEF Funding) |
Atyrau, Kazakstan |
2007 May 23-24
|
Representatives of oil majors and shipping industries in Caspian region who are engaged in biodiversity issues. |
c) National
Meeting
|
Venue
|
Date
|
Stakeholders
|
|
IMO-MEPC 53 Session |
London, UK |
2005 July 18-22 |
Senior policy makers of the over 160 IMO member Countries representing maritime administration, various other ministries who deal with marine environmental protection. The meeting also included several IGOs, NGOs and industry representatives, in addition to the ballast water technology developers. GloBallast partnership project was presented and side meetings organized especially with the potential lead partnering countries that showed keen interest in participation in the project. Over 400 delegates participated in MEPC meetings. |
|
National Consultation meeting – Egypt (non-GEF Funding) |
Suez, Egypt |
2005 November 14-15 |
Associate Consultant of PDF Project undertook a detailed fact-finding mission to the country and discussed GloBallast project with senior members of Government administrations with a view to get input to the project design and to mobilize co-financing. |
|
National Consultation meeting – Yemen (non-GEF Funding) |
Sanaa and Aden, Yemen |
2005 November 16-20 |
Associate Consultant of PDF Project undertook a detailed fact-finding mission to the country and discussed GloBallast project with senior members of Government administrations with a view to get input to the project design and to mobilize co-financing. |
|
National Consultation meeting – Sudan (non-GEF Funding) |
Khartoum, Sudan |
2005 November 23-24 |
Associate Consultant of PDF Project undertook a detailed fact-finding mission to the country and discussed GloBallast project with senior members of Government administrations with a view to get input to the project design and to mobilize co-financing. |
|
IMO-MEPC 54 Session |
London, UK |
2006 March 20-24 |
Follow-up meetings with senior policy makers of the Lead Partnering and partnering Countries. The representatives included maritime administration, various other ministries who deal with marine environmental protection. The meeting also included several IGOs, NGOs and industry representatives, in addition to the ballast water technology developers. GloBallast partnership project was presented and side meetings organized especially with the potential lead partnering countries that showed keen interest in participation in the project. Over 400 delegates participated in MEPC meetings and over 80 members participated in the ballast water working group. |
|
IMO-MEPC 55 Session |
London, UK |
2006 October 9-13 |
Follow-up meetings with senior policy makers of the Lead Partnering and partnering Countries. The representatives included maritime administration, various other ministries who deal with marine environmental protection. The meeting also included several IGOs, NGOs and industry representatives, in addition to the ballast water technology developers. GloBallast partnership project progress was presented and side meetings organized especially with the potential lead partnering countries that showed keen interest in participation in the project. Over 400 delegates participated in MEPC meetings and over 70 members participated in the ballast water working group. |
|
National Consultation meeting – Turkey (non-GEF Funding) |
Istanbul, Turkey |
2007 March 16-18 |
Detailed discussions with the team leaders of National Ballast Water Project Work Packages (researchers, lawyers, shipping industry representatives, Black Sea Commission Director and representative of Maritime Affairs) |
|
Consultation meeting – Malaysia (non-GEF Funding) |
Kula Lumpur, Malaysia |
2007 June 7
|
GloBallast PDF-B PPU conducted one day national stakeholder meetings with senior policy makers from various government departments, industry representatives and academic community to identify ways and means of sustaining the momentum generated in First Phase. A national action plan was developed and agreed upon in the meeting, which included ratification of IMO Convention and linkages with GloBallast activities. Over 40 participants. |
|
National Consultation meeting – Vietnam (non-GEF Funding) |
Ho Chin City, Vietnam |
2007 June 9
|
GloBallast PDF-B PPU conducted one day national stakeholder meetings with senior policy makers from various government departments, industry representatives and academic community to identify ways and means of sustaining the momentum generated in First Phase. A national action plan was developed and agreed upon in the meeting, which included ratification of IMO Convention and linkages with GloBallast activities. Over 30 participants. |
|
Consultation meeting – Thailand (non-GEF Funding) |
Bangkok, Thailand |
2007 June 11
|
GloBallast PDF-B PPU conducted one day national stakeholder meetings with senior policy makers from various government departments, industry representatives and academic community to identify ways and means of sustaining the momentum generated in First Phase. A national action plan was developed and agreed upon in the meeting, which included ratification of IMO Convention and linkages with GloBallast activities. Over 35 participants. |
|
Consultation meeting – Philippines (non-GEF Funding) |
Manila, Philippines |
2007 June 13-14 |
GloBallast PDF-B PPU conducted one day national stakeholder meetings with senior policy makers from various government departments, industry representatives and academic community to identify ways and means of sustaining the momentum generated in First Phase. A national action plan was developed and agreed upon in the meeting, which included ratification of IMO Convention and linkages with GloBallast activities. Over 30 participants. |
|
IMO-MEPC 56 Session |
London, UK |
2007 July 9-13
|
Follow-up meetings with senior policy makers of the Lead Partnering and partnering Countries. The representatives included maritime administration, various other ministries who deal with marine environmental protection. The meeting also included several IGOs, NGOs and industry representatives, in addition to the ballast water technology developers. GloBallast partnership project progress was presented and side meetings organized especially with the selected lead partnering countries. Over 400 delegates participated in MEPC meetings and over 50 members participated in the ballast water review group. |
d) Private Sector
|
Venue
|
Date
|
Stakeholders
|
|
First Steering Committee Meeting for Ballast Water Documentary (non-GEF Funding) |
London, UK |
2005 April 29
|
Representatives of BBC, Vela, BP Shipping, Wallenius and IMO. |
|
Second Steering Committee Meeting for Ballast Water Documentary (non-GEF Funding) |
London, UK |
2005 September 30 |
Representatives of BBC, Vela, BP Shipping, Wallenius and IMO. |
|
1st Lloyds-GloBallast Industry Round Table Meeting (non-GEF Funding) |
London, UK |
2005 October 20-21 |
Representatives of major shipping companies and technology developers. Discussions focused on forming the Globallast Industry Alliance under GloBallast Project. |
|
Third Steering Committee Meeting for Ballast Water Documentary (non-GEF Funding) |
Bristol, UK |
2005 November 16 |
Representatives of BBC, Vela, BP Shipping, Wallenius and IMO. |
|
GIA Concept Meeting with Wallenius shipping (non-GEF Funding) |
Stockholm, Sweden |
2006 January 20 |
Bilateral discussion with the Potential GIA partner. |
|
EBRD Ballast Water Seminar (non-GEF Funding) |
London, UK |
2006 March 18
|
Representatives of the Environment and Shipping groups of the Bank. |
|
Fourth Steering Committee Meeting for Ballast Water Documentary (non-GEF Funding) |
London, UK |
2006 March 23
|
Representatives of BBC, Vela, BP Shipping, Wallenius and IMO. |
|
Meeting with MEH Consultants (non-GEF Funding) |
New York, USA |
2006 April 5
|
Representatives of UNDP and Geo Earth International who was heavily involved in developing marine electronic highways. The discussions focused on linking MEH concepts to the GloBallast Marine Electronic Information System component of the Project. |
|
GIA Concept Meeting with Vela International (non-GEF Funding) |
Dubai, UAE |
2006 June 24
|
Bilateral discussion with the Potential GIA partner. Obtained commitment of UU$250,000 towards GIA. |
|
GIA Concept Meeting with NOL/APL (non-GEF Funding) |
Singapore |
2006 September 27 |
Bilateral discussion with the Potential GIA partner. Obtained commitment of Us$250,000 towards GIA. |
|
2nd Lloyds-GloBallast Industry Round Table (non-GEF Funding) |
London, UK |
2006 October 16-17 |
Representatives of major shipping companies and technology developers. Discussions focused on Globallast Industry Alliance under GloBallast Project. |
|
Pacific Ship Initiative Stakeholder Workshop (non-GEF Funding) |
Seattle, USA |
2006 November 9 |
Representatives of the US shipping industry and technology developers including representatives of treatment technology test facility developers. GloBallast discussions focused on GBP role to facilitate a catalytic role in coordinating test facility interactions. |
|
Meeting on Florida State Ballast Water management Initiative and Links with GBP Caribbean Efforts |
Melbourne, USA |
2006 November 13 |
Discussions with representatives of Florida Institute of Technology (Dean of Engineering) and University of Miami who are implementing a project on developing a Florida State Ballast Water Management Strategy. Potential linkages and cooperation opportunities with GBP-CAR efforts were discussed. |
|
GIA Concept Meeting with BP Shipping (non-GEF Funding) |
London, UK |
2006 November 28 |
Bilateral discussion with the Potential GIA partner. Obtained commitment of US$250,000 towards GIA. |
|
GIA Concept Meeting with AGIPKCO (non-GEF Funding) |
London, UK |
2007 February 13 |
Bilateral discussion with the Potential GIA partner and also cooperation opportunities in Caspian region. |
|
ADB – Globallast Partnerships Meetings |
Manila, Philippines |
2007 June 15
|
Various Division Directors of ADB overseeing environmental portfolio of the Bank and the Regional Desk for South Pacific. |
PART II - PDF financial delivery
Table 2 – PDF Input Budget – Approvals and commitments
Input Description* |
Approved |
Committed |
Staff weeks |
GEF funds |
Co-finance |
Staff weeks |
GEF funds |
Co-finance |
Personnel |
144 |
291,600 |
- |
168 |
410,400 |
- |
Local consultants |
39 |
77,760 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
International consultants |
71 |
213,840 |
- |
76 |
227,880 |
- |
Training
|
|
- |
- |
|
|
- |
Travel
|
|
112,320 |
- |
|
61,560 |
- |
|
Office equipment |
|
4,320 |
- |
|
- |
- |
Misc
|
|
- |
- |
|
- |
- |
Total
|
|
699,840 |
- |
|
699,840 |
- |
Additional information:
In addition to the in-kind contribution by IMO for the PDF-B project, a number of activities were supported using IMO ITCP funds. This allowed a first extension of the project from October 2006 to March 2007 (without any implications on the approved total GEF allocation) to support the additional activities. This change was reflected through the extension of 6 months for PPU (1 Oct 06 – 30 March 07) at IMO in London and corrections for allowances. The PPU a) continued the consultations with industry and other partners b) finalised the project document incorporating the GEF comments c) undertook the PDF-B project closure activities including finalization of reports from PDF-B Project, mobilized significant additional co-financing.
Table 3: Actual PDF co-financing
|
Co-financing Sources for Project Development Preparation (PDF) |
|
Name of Co-financier (source) |
Classification |
Type |
Amount |
Expected ($)
|
Actual ($) |
|
International Maritime Organization (IMO) |
Executing Agency |
In-cash and In-kind |
740,000 |
600,000 |
|
Beneficiary Countries |
National Government |
In kind
|
300,000 |
400,000 |
|
Developed Countries |
National Government |
In kind
|
500,000 |
60,000 |
|
Shipping Companies |
Private Sector
|
In-cash and in-kind |
320,000 |
700,000 |
|
Regional Organizations |
Multilateral Organizations |
In-cash and in-kind |
100,000 |
50,000 |
UNDP
|
Implementing Agency |
In-kind
|
50,000 |
50,000 |
|
Total co-financing |
2,010,000
|
1,860,000
|
