A GEF Project Implemented by UNDP

and Executed by IMO

Performance Evaluation

Building Partnerships in

Environmental Management

for the Seas of East Asia

(PEMSEA)

Project No. RAS/98/G33/A/1G/19

Gunnar Kullenberg, Ph.D

Cielito Habito, Ph.D

Kem Lowry, Ph.D

20 February – 20 April 2006

Terminal Evaluation Report

Gunnar Kullenberg, Ph. D.

Dr. Gunnar Kullenberg is currently the Rector of the International Ocean Institute (IOI) Virtual

University and is also an Independent Consultant for Marine Science.

He was formerly an Executive Secretary/Director General of the International Oceanographic

Commission of UNESCO in Paris and Executive Director of IOI. He chaired several committees,

including GESAMP, SCOR working group, Danish and Swedish national committees; Advisory

Committee on Marine Pollution of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, and the

consultative committee of the same organization.

Dr. Kullenberg was a professor of physical oceanography at the University of Copenhagen and the University

of Goteborg, where he obtained his doctorate. Aside from being a noted member of the academe, he is also

known internationally as a marine scientist in the field of coastal and ocean governance. Dr. Kullenberg has also

authored several books on coastal and marine management.

Cielito Habito, Ph. D.

Dr. Cielito Habito holds a Ph.D. in Economics and MA in Economics from Harvard University,

Massachusetts, USA. He is currently an independent policy consultant and analyst, and an

economics professor in leading universities in the Philippines. He is also involved in NGO work,

both local and international, including serving as Special Adviser to the Earth Council based in San

Juan, Costa Rica; Board Chairman of the Cahbriba Alternative School Foundation and a Board

Member of the Ramos for Peace and Development Foundation, among others.

He is an expert in the field of sustainable development having led the Philippine delegation to the UN

Conference in sustainable development. He has served as the Philippine National Economic Planning Secretary

(1992–1998) and was the chief architect of the Philippine economic reform program of the Ramos Administration.

He also worked in the private sector as board adviser and consultant of Metropolitan bank, the country's largest

bank.

He has written books and articles relating to economics, sustainable development and fiscal policy issues and

runs a column for the Philippine Daily Inquirer.

Kem Lowry, Ph. D.

Dr. Kem Lowry is a Professor and Chair of the Department of Urban and Regional Planning

(DURP) at the University of Hawaii, where he earned his Ph.D. in political science. He is also a

Faculty Associate for Natural Resource Management at the Public Policy Center at the same

university.

In addition to wide-ranging public policy mediation experience, Dr. Lowry is an expert on program

evaluation and coastal management. He has done extensive work as a mediator and assessment

expert in China, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia and is a consultant to

UNDP, China-UNICEF, Asia Foundation, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the U.N.

Development Planning Agency, the U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment and several state agencies

in Hawaii.

In addition to being a faculty member at DURP, he has been associated with the Hewlett Foundation-funded

Program on Conflict Resolution since its inception, and currently serves as its Director. He publishes extensively

in the fields of planning and environmental management, coastal management and policy evaluation and is also

the co-author of Choosing Change: A Self-Assessment Manual for Non-Profits.

A GEF Project Implemented by UNDP

and Executed by IMO

Project No. RAS/98/G33/A/1G/19

20 February – 20 April 2006

Terminal Evaluation Report

Performance Evaluation

Building Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA)

Terminal Evaluation Report

May 2006

This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes or to

provide wider dissemination for public response, provided prior written permission is obtained from the Regional

Programme Director, acknowledgment of the source is made and no commercial usage or sale of the material occurs.

PEMSEA would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source.

No use of this publication may be made for resale or any purpose other than those given above without the prior

written approval of PEMSEA.

Published by the GEF/UNDP/IMO Regional Programme on Building Partnerships in Environmental Management for

the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA).

Printed in Quezon City, Philippines

PEMSEA. 2006. Performance Evaluation Building Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East

Asia (PEMSEA), Terminal Evaluation Report. PEMSEA Information Series, 177 p. Global Environment Facility/

United Nations Development Programme/International Maritime Organization Regional Programme on Building

Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA), Quezon City, Philippines.

ISBN 978-971-812-015-6

A GEF Project Implemented by UNDP and Executed by IMO

The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the

Global Environment Facility (GEF), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),

the International Maritime Organization (IMO), and the other participating organizations.

The designation employed and the presentation do not imply expression of opinion,

whatsoever on the part of GEF, UNDP, IMO, or the Regional Programme on Building

Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA) concerning

the legal status of any country or territory, or its authority or concerning the delimitation

of its territory or boundaries.

iii

PEMSEA MISSION STATEMENT

The Global Environment Facility/United Nations Development Programme/International Maritime

Organization Regional Programme on Building Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of

East Asia (PEMSEA) aims to promote a shared vision for the Seas of East Asia:

“The resource systems of the Seas of East Asia are a natural heritage, safeguarding sustainable

and healthy food supplies, livelihood, properties and investments, and social, cultural and

ecological values for the people of the region, while contributing to economic prosperity and

global markets through safe and efficient maritime trade, thereby promoting a peaceful and

harmonious co-existence for present and future generations.”

PEMSEA focuses on building intergovernmental, interagency and intersectoral partnerships to strengthen

environmental management capabilities at the local, national and regional levels, and develop the collective

capacity to implement appropriate strategies and environmental action programs on self-reliant basis. Specifically,

PEMSEA will carry out the following:

• build national and regional capacity to implement integrated coastal management programs;

• promote multi-country initiatives in addressing priority transboundary environment issues in sub-regional

sea areas and pollution hotspots;

• reinforce and establish a range of functional networks to support environmental management;

• identify environmental investment and financing opportunities and promote mechanisms, such as

public-private partnerships, environmental projects for financing and other forms of development

assistance;

• advance scientific and technical inputs to support decisionmaking;

• develop integrated information management systems linking selected sites into a regional network for

data sharing and technical support;

• establish the enabling environment to reinforce delivery capabilities and advance the concerns of nongovernmental

and community-based organizations, environmental journalists, religious groups and

other stakeholders;

• strengthen national capacities for developing integrated coastal and marine policies as part of state

policies for sustainable socio-economic development; and

• promote regional commitment for implementing international conventions, and strengthening regional

and sub-regional cooperation and collaboration using a regional mechanism.

The 12 participating countries are: Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Democratic People’s Republic of

Korea, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, People’s Republic of China, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Singapore,

Thailand and Vietnam. The collective efforts of these countries in implementing the strategies and activities

will result in effective policy and management interventions, and in cumulative global environmental benefits,

thereby contributing towards the achievement of the ultimate goal of protecting and sustaining the lifesupport

systems in the coastal and international waters over the long term.

Dr. Chua Thia Eng

Regional Programme Director

PEMSEA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PEMSEA MISSION STATEMENT ................................................................................................ iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................. vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................... ix

1. Project Concept and Design Summary ............................................................................1

2. Project Results.................................................................................................................. 3

3. Project Management ....................................................................................................... 34

4. Findings and Conclusions ............................................................................................... 47

5. Recommendations.......................................................................................................... 51

6. Lessons Learned ............................................................................................................53

ANNEXES .................................................................................................................................. 57

vii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

BCCF - Bataan Coastal Care Foundation

BCRMF - Batangas Coastal Resources Management Foundation

BOT - build-operate-transfer

CASE - Cavite for a Sustainable Environment Inc.

CD - compact disc

COBSEA - Coordinating Body on the Seas of East Asia

CRM - Coastal Resource Management

CVM - contingent valuation method

DANIDA - Danish International Development Agency

DENR - Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Philippines

DPRK - Democratic People's Republic of Korea

EAS - East Asian Seas

ERA - environmental risk assessment

GEF - Global Environment Facility

GIS - Geographic Information Systems

GOT - Gulf of Thailand

ICG - Intercessional Consultative Group

ICM - Integrated Coastal Management

IEIA - Integrated Environmental Impact Assessment

IIMS - Integrated Information Management System

IMO - International Maritime Organization

IMS - Integrated Management System

IOC - International Oceanographic Commission

IRA - Initial Risk Assessment

LGU - local government unit

LME - Large Marine Ecosystems

LUAS - Lembaga Urus Air Selangor (Selangor Waters Management Authority)

MARPOL - International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships

MEG - Multidisciplinary Experts Group

MPP-EAS - Regional Programme for the Prevention and Management of Marine

Pollution in the East Asian Seas

NACA - Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia Pacific

NGOs - Nongovernmental Organization

PCC - Project Coordinating Committee

PEMSEA - GEF/UNDP/IMO Regional Programme on Building Partnerships

in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia

PES - payments for environmental services

PG-ENRO - Provincial Government's Environment and Natural Resources Office

PIR - Project Implementation Review

PMO - Project Management Office

PNLG - PEMSEA Network of Local Governments

PO - People's Organization

viii

PPP - public-private partnerships

PRF - PEMSEA Resource Facility

PSC - Programme Steering Committee

PSHEMS - Port Safety, Health and Environmental Management System

PTP - Port of Tanjung Pelepas

QAR - Quarterly Accomplishment Report

RA - Risk Assessment

RM - Risk Management

RMB - Chinese Renminbi

RNLG - Regional Network of Local Governments

RPO - Regional Programme Office

RPD - Regional Programme Director

ROAR - Results-Oriented Accomplishment Reports

ROK - Republic of Korea

RTF - Regional Task Force

SCC - Site Coordinating Committee

SDS-SEA - Sustainable Development Strategy for the Seas of East Asia

SEAFDEC - Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center

SEMP - Strategic Environmental Management Plan

SIDA-CMC - Swedish International Development Agency -

Coastal Management Center

SOLAS - International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea

THB - Thailand Baht

TWG - Technical Working Group

UN - United Nations

UNCED - United Nations Convention on Environment and Development

UNCLOS - United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

UNDP - United Nations Development Programme

UNEP - United Nations Environment Programme

USD - United States Dollars

WSSD - World Summit on Sustainable Development

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The GEF/UNDP/IMO Regional Programme on Building Partnerships in Environmental

Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA) is an innovative effort to integrate local,

national and international initiatives to address coastal and marine issues on habitat

degradation, unsustainable rates of resource use and resource-use conflicts, hazards and

the conditions of poverty that both contribute to and are caused by resource degradation and

depletion.

PEMSEA is at the end of its sixth year of phase 2. This evaluation was commissioned

to assess PEMSEA’s effectiveness in implementing the Programme and to make a

recommendation about its future. The members of the evaluation team have among them

decades of experience in international organizations, local, national and international coastal

and marine management programmes and programmatic and economic analysis.

Prior to convening in Manila, Philippines, the PEMSEA staff sent members of the

evaluation team electronic copies of many of the plans, technical reports, and project documents

prepared in the last five years. During the month-long evaluation visit (17 February – 18 March,

2006), members of the team reviewed additional materials on the outputs of the ten planned

objectives of PEMSEA and interviewed staff. In addition, members of the team conducted

site visits to Batangas and Bataan (Philippines), Danang and Hanoi (Vietnam), Bangkok and

Chonburi (Thailand) and Sihanoukville (Cambodia). Telephone interviews were also conducted

with officials in Port Klang (Malaysia), Bali (Indonesia), Xiamen (PR China) and national

officials in China and Japan. Meetings with UNDP Manila, Hanoi, Bangkok and Phnom Penh

and teleconferences with the GEF-UNDP International Waters Project and IMO Headquarters

were likewise undertaken (Annex 2).

As members of the evaluation team, we are mindful that all evaluation is comparative.

Judgments about the “success” or “effectiveness” of programmes and projects are based

on explicit references to control or comparison groups, to conditions before the programme

was initiated, to initial programme goals or to other standards or “best practices.” We have

explicitly focused on the degree to which PEMSEA has met the goals it set for itself, but

because of our broad experience, implicit comparisons with pre-programme conditions and

with other local, national and international coastal and marine management efforts are perhaps

inevitable.

The report is divided into six sections. Section 1 describes the project concept and

design. The primary analysis of PEMSEA’s effectiveness in addressing the ten programme

objectives occurs in Section 2. Section 3 discusses project management. Sections 4, 5 and

6 focus on findings, recommendations and lessons learned.

Overall Findings

1. PEMSEA’s overall development objective is “to protect the life-support systems and enable

the sustainable use and management of coastal and marine resources through

intergovernmental, interagency and intersectoral partnerships, for the improved quality

of life in the East Asian Seas (EAS) Region.” To achieve this objective, PEMSEA is built

around ten more specific objectives that are discussed in more detail in Section 2 of this

report. Associated with each of these ten objectives is a set of specific implementing

activities and initiatives that have been assessed.

2. The overall development objective is very ambitious, but PEMSEA’s efforts to date make

its eventual achievement more realistic. Substantial progress is being made as is evident

in the summary of other key findings below. The Immediate Objectives of PEMSEA have

been met. The results have also provided strong contributions to meeting the expected

outcomes of related GEF Operational Programmes, and PEMSEA has demonstrated

the feasibility of achieving the longer-term development objective.

Other general findings, organized by PEMSEA objectives, are noted below.

3. Integrated Coastal Management Demonstration Sites. Six demonstration ICM sites have

been developed as planned. In addition 18 parallel sites in five countries have been

developed using the PEMSEA ICM design, but without PEMSEA financial support. The

success of the demonstration sites is a reminder of the importance of a well-developed,

carefully adapted programme logic. The emphasis on management-relevant resource

profiles, risk assessments and other technical analyses, extensive stakeholder

involvement and carefully developed interagency collaborative arrangements provides

an effective, replicable model of local ICM. Implementation is occurring at all the sites.

The local ICM projects are resulting in increased policy integration and coordination. At

the longest operating sites, such as Xiamen, there are measurable improvements in

environmental and socioeconomic conditions.

4. Risk Assessment. In addition to the ICM sites, PEMSEA is addressing transboundary

environmental issues in the Gulf of Thailand and pollution “hotspots” in Manila Bay and

Bohai Sea. In all three cases, the need for technical analysis of the underlying issues is

essential. PEMSEA has used a risk assessment (RA)/risk management (RM) framework

to analyze these issues. In this process, they have first trained local counterpart staff in

the RA/RM framework and then jointly conducted the analysis. This training provides

both useful analysis and, equally important, builds key analytic skills among programme

staff. This process demonstrates the need for long-term strategies and action plans to

address major environmental issues, and to put in place environmental services, facilities

and clean technologies. They also show the need to address pollution control by focusing

on the watersheds that drain into the ocean.

5. Human Resource Development. PEMSEA organized 72 trainings for more than 1,400

trainees — thus substantially exceeding its goals for the period. The major strength of

PEMSEA’s capacity-building approach is that it focuses not only on skills, but also on

strengthening organizational contexts in ways that support the application of newlydeveloped

skills. This emphasis on organizational strengthening sets it apart from most

donor approaches to skill-building. The trainings, cross-site visits, internships and practicerelated

publications are helping lay the intellectual, technical and political foundations for

the eventual ICM coverage of 20 percent of the region’s coastlines by 2015.

6. Regional Networks/Regional Task Force. PEMSEA has created networks of experts, of

local governments and a Regional Task Force (RTF) of Experts which, when taken

together, firmly link the national ICM sites into a regional partnership. The networks created

by PEMSEA have been instrumental in promoting effective scientific advice to the planning

and decisionmaking processes and have linked the scientific communities to coastal

planners and managers as partners. The creation of networks has helped establish a

critical mass of expertise. A core base of practical experiences of ICM practices has

been developed. Linkages and partnership agreements have been created with

universities and other research institutions. Scientific communities are exposed to

management needs via these networks.

7. Investment Opportunities for Environmental Improvement. The PEMSEA approach is

based on the recognition that government resources and effort are unlikely to be sufficient

to generate the investments necessary to build sufficient sewage treatment plants and

other facilities needed to reduce the stresses on coastal resources and habitats. Hence,

PEMSEA has sought to generate potential public-private partnerships (PPP) to help fill

this gap. Despite major efforts by PEMSEA, PPPs are the weakest component of its

efforts to generate diverse resources, although the results at Xiamen demonstrate that

such partnerships for funding environmental infrastructure and resource protection can

be created given time and enabling conditions.

8. Scientific Support for Improved Management. Good science is fundamental to effective

coastal management. PEMSEA has sought to rely on regional scientists when they can

and to nurture the development of young technical professionals. The networking of

universities and other research institutions facilitated by PEMSEA is one mechanism to

strengthen research capabilities and encourage sharing of facilities and specialized skills

at the regional level. Scientific expertise and skills are available in the region to support

the implementation of the Sustainable Development Strategy for the Seas of East Asia

(SDS-SEA). The Multidisciplinary Experts Group (MEG) has provided scientific insight

and highlighted the importance of maintaining a balance between economic development

and environmental capacity. Policy studies have generated increased understanding of

the scientific dimensions and the complexities of key coastal and marine issues.

9. Integrated Information Management System (IIMS). Information on trends in resource

use, jurisdictions, environmental stresses and many other variables is obviously an

essential component of effective management. PEMSEA supports the development of

IIMS at each ICM site. PEMSEA continues to provide training, updated software and

technical assistance to each site. The types of management support offered by IIMS

vary among the sites, but the ultimate goal is a decision-support system. A regional

network linking ICM sites and pollution hotspots is being developed.

10. Collaboration with NGOs and Other Organizations. Coastal management does not occur

in a political vacuum. PEMSEA seeks to build support for management recognizing the

importance of a supportive civil society. PEMSEA’s strategy of establishing partnerships

with NGOs, media, schools, church and religious groups is critical to its advocacy efforts.

11. Integrated Approaches to Coastal and Marine Policy. A cornerstone of PEMSEA’s strategy

for sustainable coastal and ocean management is the recognition of the importance of

xii

integration among agencies, sectors, disciplines and levels of government. It has sought

and is succeeding in creating integrative mechanisms at the regional, national and local

levels. The SDS-SEA, the Regional Network of Local Governments (RNLG), the Manila

Bay, Bohai Sea and Gulf of Thailand (GOT) projects, and the Project Coordinating

Committees (PCCs) at each ICM site are among the most visible manifestations of

PEMSEA’s efforts to create and maintain active integrated management efforts. A sense

of high-level ownership has been achieved. Strong partnerships among staff in different

agencies are helping ensure continuity of management efforts in times of changes in

elected leaders. Many of these integrative efforts are vertical among agencies as well as

horizontal. PEMSEA’s effective use of partnerships and of local, national and international

collaborative networks to develop and maintain coastal management efforts is helping

make Agenda 21 a reality in the East Asian Seas.

12. Sustainable Regional Mechanism. PEMSEA has successfully completed the SDS-SEA

in collaboration with 16 national, regional and international collaborators and had the regional

strategy endorsed by the 12 participating governments through the Putrajaya Declaration

of 2003. This is a milestone achievement as it is the first regional marine strategy with

framework programmes consisting of 227 action plans covering local, national and global

environmental and sustainable development issues ranging from fisheries to climate

change. The framework provides opportunities for concerned governments and

international and UN bodies to collectively address national and regional concerns. PEMSEA

has thus provided the much needed leadership role to make this collaborative framework

possible.

Overall Assessment

Judged by the resources PEMSEA has attracted and the way it has used them, the

evaluation team views PEMSEA as a success worthy of close analysis and possible replication.

PEMSEA’s success is built on several key components that deserve special mention:

1. Clearly articulated programme logic. PEMSEA’s ICM work in particular is based on

explicit assumptions about the key ingredients for effective site management. These

ingredients include environmental profiles, PCCs, the development of a local coastal

strategy, extensive stakeholder participation and other elements more fully described

in Section 2 (Project Results). The logic is applied flexibly and reflectively in ways that

allow staff to identify issues and to adapt the logic as needed.

2. Stakeholder participation. PEMSEA relies on consultation to identify environmental

and socioeconomic issues, evaluate options, incorporate better technical analysis

and build understanding and commitment to individual projects.

3. A sophisticated approach to capacity building. Skills development is an important

component of most development projects. One of the things that distinguishes

PEMSEA’s approach is the degree to which it focuses on the organizational context in

which skills are applied. Risk assessment, for example, is only meaningful if

xiii

responsible agencies are attentive to environmental risks and willing to incorporate

risk management strategies into their management efforts.

4. Collaboration among disciplines, sectors, agencies and levels of government.

PEMSEA has encouraged collaboration among agencies and others by providing

incentives for participation. The primary incentive is programmatic. PEMSEA offers

the opportunity to cooperate in management efforts that are likely to be consequential

and to have positive impacts.

5. Management-relevant technical analysis. Millions have been spent on environmentrelated

scientific research projects in the region. Only a fraction of this expenditure

results in analysis that can be applied to management decisions. PEMSEA has

successfully encouraged a science-based approach to planning and management

thus making more efficient use of manpower and resources.

6. A diverse approach to the problems of the region. The PEMSEA management

approach includes conservation measures for protecting biodiversity, additional

research, education, community outreach, partnerships and the other elements of a

conventional environmental management strategy. However, it also recognizes that

the development of infrastructure necessary for pollution management and the

reduction of poverty will require more resources and effort than most governments

of the region are willing to provide. Hence, private sector participation is an integral

part of the PEMSEA approach.

7. A high level of leadership and staff professionalism. No doubt central to PEMSEA’s

success is the quality of its leadership and the energy, expertise and commitment of

staff. Leadership and professionalism were recurring themes during the site visits

and in the evaluators’ own observations.

PEMSEA has a record of solid achievement over the years. It has laid the technical,

institutional and political foundations for greatly strengthened local, national and regional

management. The momentum that has been generated by PEMSEA is instrumental in

motivating national, regional and international efforts in promoting the concept and the practice

of sustainable development for the seas and oceans. This momentum is critical in

accelerating the commitment and the management actions of the governments and partners

to implement the SDS-SEA. This is a pivotal moment in the evolution of PEMSEA’s work; a

moment at which additional resources and motivated partners can begin to reap the rewards

of the investments that have been made.

xiv

1. PROJECT CONCEPT AND DESIGN SUMMARY1

1.1. The economic development in the region has been very significant over the past decades,

being one of the fastest growing regions before the 1997–1998 financial crisis. Despite the

interconnectivity concerning environmental conditions, there are large social diversities

regarding socioeconomic, demographic, cultural and religious characteristics. Inadequately

planned coastal and marine developments with poorly regulated economic activities,

increasing population pressure and growth rates have led to continued considerable

degradation of coastal and marine ecosystems, including mangroves, coral reefs, seagrass

beds, wetlands and estuaries. Several international reviews have pointed at the deteriorating

situation with respect to the marine and coastal environmental conditions of the EAS. Large

parts of dominating coastal ecosystems, important for the functioning of the zone, are being

destroyed. Other natural resources, especially fish stocks, are being overexploited. The

sustainable use and development of coasts and seas is far from being achieved, at the

same time coastal and ocean management, or ocean governance, has not been a priority of

the governments. However, interconnectivity implies that most of the environmental problems

are transboundary, with the impacts spread throughout the region.

1.2. Existing management approaches are still sectoral and there is little or no coordination or

cooperation between ministries or agencies. Management primarily focuses on response to

environmental crises. Regional sectoral efforts, with action plans, have been initiated but

these are poorly implemented. However, many of the countries are signatories to the United

Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and have established broad policy

frameworks to address environmental concerns. After the United Nations Convention on

Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992, nations have taken noticeable steps to

respond to Agenda 21, and have committed resources to address environmental problems.

Considerable support has been provided from donors, capacity has been built, but

implementation has been uneven.

1.3. The excessive exploitation of natural resources and the unregulated resource-use activities

in coastal areas have caused severe environmental stress, influencing food and water security,

human health, employment and livelihood, causing social unrest and offsetting some of the

economic gains of the past decades. The socioeconomic developments and actions are not

in harmony with the ecosystems: interactions between ecological and economic systems

are unsustainable. This is manifested both as regards rates of use of resources, and waste

disposals beyond assimilative capacity.

1.4. In order to address the problem, PEMSEA has adopted a long-term strategic, programmatic

and system-oriented approach to coastal and marine management in the region. This is

needed due to the geographic coverage and the environmental interconnectivity of the region

as well as its diversity as regards the socioeconomic, cultural and political situation. The

substantial strategy is based on the use of risk assessment and risk management (RA/RM)

together with Integrated Coastal Management (ICM). By combining these frameworks, a

comprehensive coverage can be obtained of the marine and coastal environments and the

associated land-based and sea-based issues.

1.5. The implementation strategy is based on the establishment of partnerships through a bottomup

approach involving all stakeholders: central and local governments, communities, the

1 A description of PEMSEA and its development context is given in Annex 1.

public, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), people’s organizations (POs), the media,

scientific communities, international organizations, donor agencies and the private sector.

1.6. The approach is built on the experiences of the pilot phase of PEMSEA, the Regional

Programme for the Prevention and Management of Marine Pollution in the East Asian Seas

Region or MPP-EAS, which ran from 1994–1999. The partnerships established thus far have

a catalyzing effect and enable human resources and institutions to work together to develop

their solutions to problems. This generates a sense of ownership and confidence among

target beneficiaries that their problems will be really addressed. Partnership is the essence

of PEMSEA and its implementation strategy. Partnerships will provide for a regional platform

enabling various agencies and other programmes to work together. Furthermore, the strategy

of co-financing, with collaborative activities planned to be undertaken on a cost-sharing basis,

will pool resources and will further strengthen the sense of ownership at local and national

levels which are generated through the partnership.

1.7. ICM assumes a holistic, multiagency, multidisciplinary systems-oriented approach to the

management of uses affecting coastal and marine environments. This complex management

system needs trained coastal managers able to develop and implement the identified

management actions, taking into account political, economic and social tradeoffs. It is a

system-oriented approach requiring both adaptive learning and adaptive management. The

strategy of the Programme implies going the full cycle: preparation, initiation, development,

adoption, implementation, refinement and consolidation.

1.8. The project focuses on management through ICM, utilizing several tools and components:

sciences, information and communication, civil society, regional collaborative arrangements,

environmental investments, capacity building in a broad sense, coastal and marine policy

specifications, and networking. Building on the experiences from the MPP-EAS, when two

ICM demonstration sites were established, the Programme aims at replicating the ICM practices

in six more demonstration sites and a number of parallel sites to be established on local

government initiatives. This is expected to have a multiplying, scaling up effect, so as to

stimulate national policies to incorporate or endorse ICM as a tool to help achieve adequate

coastal and ocean governance. The feasibility of using the ICM practices at larger scales will

be demonstrated in subregional sea areas (e.g., Gulf of Thailand) and pollution hotspots

(e.g., Bohai Sea and Manila Bay).

1.9. At the regional level the project aims at preparing a framework for the establishment of a

sustainable regional collaborative mechanism which can generate a coastal and ocean

governance regime. This effort will build on the experiences from all the other components.

1.10. The project goes beyond the pilot phase in key areas: emphasis on finding management

solutions for transboundary problems; increase in collaboration with NGOs, POs, and

community-based organizations, the media and others; more emphasis on environmental

investments, policy, management, and legal frameworks; and taking steps towards the

creation of a sustainable regional cooperative mechanism.

2. PROJECT RESULTS2

Immediate Objective 1: Integrated Coastal Management (ICM)

2.1. ICM is a key component of PEMSEA.

2.1.1. ICM is one of ten components of PEMSEA. Implementation of ICM programs at the

sites has been nurtured by most of the supporting components including training,

environmental investments, technical analysis, integrated information management

systems (IIMS), and civil society. National policy development, as well as the

establishment of regional cooperation mechanisms, likewise strengthened the local

ICM practices by providing necessary policy and institutional support at both national

and regional levels in support of local coastal governance. At the same time, ICM

also contributed to the implementation of a subregional pollution hotspot component,

by providing useful management approaches and framework in addressing

transboundary and cross-sectoral issues.

2.2. The PEMSEA approach to ICM is based on a few key assumptions and a well-developed

approach to ICM project design that has evolved over time.

2.2.1. PEMSEA’s literature suggests that its approach to ICM is based on a few key

assumptions:

• Resource degradation and depletion, coastal hazards and other adverse

conditions are caused by both human activities and natural processes;

• Human and natural activities occur interactively over time and across geographic

space making it necessary to design management mechanisms that address

these activities comprehensively and systematically;

• Management occurs by and for people; people are part of ecosystems;

• ICM project designs tend to include several key design components such as

environmental profiles and public awareness strategies. However, these key

design components must be tailored to the conditions at individual sites. There

is no single ICM project design “blueprint” that is appropriate for all situations.

• Capacity building is critical and ongoing, but focuses on organizational

strengthening and institutional reform as well as skills development;

• Careful design includes both detailed technical analysis of resource conditions

and risks and significant stakeholder participation; and

• Multisectoral and interagency collaboration is required for effective project design

and implementation leading to sustainable resource conditions.

2.2.2. Good programmes are based on an explicit set of assumptions or programme “logic”

indicating how proposed activities are linked to intended outputs and outcomes. The

basic logic of the PEMSEA approach to ICM development is set forth in Figure 1 of

Annex 4.

2.3. PEMSEA successfully facilitated the design and implementation of six new ICM sites.

2.3.1. The MPP-EAS piloted the ICM sites at Batangas (Philippines) and Xiamen (China).

2 A summary showing PEMSEA’s Project Document compliance to Project Document requirements is given in Annex 3.

The success of these sites — and the lessons drawn from them — made it possible

to create successful demonstration sites at Bali (Indonesia), Chonburi (Thailand),

Danang (Vietnam), Nampho (DPR Korea), Port Klang (Malaysia) and Sihanoukville

(Cambodia). These demonstration sites have contributed to replication sites at

Bataan and Cavite (Philippines), Shihwa (RO Korea), Sukabumi (Indonesia), and

Quangnam (Vietnam) as well as ten sites in China and three additional sites in Bali.

2.3.2. The key features of the ICM programme development and implementation cycle are

illustrated in Figure 2 of Annex 4.

2.3.3. ICM project site development involves adapting the set of tasks or activities outlined

in Figure 2 of Annex 4 to the particularities of each site. Table 1 summarizes the key

tasks and their status at each of the six sites developed under PEMSEA.

Six national ICM sites selected.

Project development and management mechanism

developed.

ICM project staff trained in ICM principles and practices.

Environmental profiles developed.

Public perceptions on sustainable use of marine resources,

environmental stress and their solution analyzed.

Environmental risk assessment completed.

Action plans to address priority environmental and

management issues prepared and submitted to local

government for review and adoption.

Institutional arrangements, both organizational and legal, at

the local level to implement, manage, monitor and evaluate

and replicate ICM initiatives

A monitoring program to track environmental changes.

An IIMS for sharing, storage and retrieval of scientific, technical

and management data

Financing options and mechanisms to sustain environmental

management operations and to facilitate investment in

environmental improvement projects

Adoption by local government of the Strategic Environmental

Management Plan (SEMP), action plans, institutional

arrangements and financing options

Implementation of SEMP and action plans initiated.

A project monitoring program mechanism in place.

Key ICM Site Outputs

Completed

Completed for all sites

Completed for all sites, but incorporated in the

Coastal Strategy for Chonburi and Klang

Completed for all sites except Sihanoukville and

Nampho

Completed at all sites except Sihanoukville and

Nampho where incomplete data made it necessary

to establish an environmental monitoring program,

which included a laboratory, in order to gather

marine and coastal data

Completed for all sites

Ongoing for all sites except Nampho which has

been completed

Completed for all sites except Chonburi and Klang

Completed for all sites

Completed for Bali, Danang, and Klang. Ongoing

for Sihanoukville and not applicable to Chonburi

and Nampho

Completed for all sites

Current ICM Site Status

Table 1: ICM Project Design Tasks and Current Status for Six Sites under PEMSEA.

2.4. PEMSEA sites are demonstrating the benefits of ICM as an approach to coastal

management.

2.4.1. The PEMSEA ICM approach emphasizes the identification of key local counterparts,

intensive capacity building in ICM and others skills, the establishment of mechanisms

for interagency and cross-sectoral collaboration, stakeholder participation, careful

policy-relevant technical analysis and the production of action-oriented plans and

reports. Another key feature of the approach is guidance from the Regional

Programme Office (RPO) with regard to each of the key tasks in designing a site

plan. The PEMSEA approach also emphasizes realistic time frames for the

development of key groups, like the PCC, and the completion of significant tasks

such as the environmental profiles and coastal strategy. The combination of the key

ingredients of the PEMSEA approach, guidance, an orderly process and continuing

support has the effect of encouraging successful completion of the immediate project

outputs such as plans, technical reports, coordinating committees, action plans and

new institutions. It also helps build understanding among key constituencies about

the intentions and strategy of local ICM, technical credibility and local political

commitment. To varying degrees, these benefits can be found at all the project sites.

Moreover, these benefits are essential building blocks to sustainable resource

management institutions and improved environmental outcomes. One key indicator

of the benefits of the PEMSEA approach is the degree to which other jurisdictions in

the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam and China are replicating PEMSEA’s approach

at other sites. PEMSEA began with two pilot ICM sites in the first phase and added

six demonstration sites in the second phase. In addition, 18 self-supported parallel

projects based on the PEMSEA site development strategy have been organized.

Ten are in China and three are in Bali (Indonesia). Sites have also been developed in

Bataan and Cavite (Philippines), Quangnam (Vietnam), Shihwa (RO Korea), and

Sukabumi (Indonesia).

2.4.2. The ultimate test of the site management efforts is their impact on resource-use

conflicts, resource conditions and hazards in their jurisdiction — and the sustainability

of the ICM efforts. Conditions are perceived to have improved, but quantitative support

is uneven.

2.5 The PEMSEA repertoire of tools of local ICM allows the sites to effectively tailor

management strategies to local needs.

2.5.1. ICM requires a variety of strategies and management tools. Research, advocacy,

collaboration, infrastructure development, planning, awareness building, technical

analysis, PPP and regulation of coastal uses and activities are all among the

management strategies employed by PEMSEA in its ICM approach. The PEMSEA

approach incorporates a wide variety of management tools for each basic

management strategy. Technical analysis, for example, includes environmental

profiles and risk assessment. Regulation may include zoning. While the strategies

are similar from site to site, the importance of specific tools to support a strategy

varies among the sites. An awareness campaign to support solid waste cleanup

might be as simple as sending out a thousand flyers at one site — and as complex

as Bali’s combination of newsletters, poster contests, inter-high school contests,

awards, consultations with local traditional leaders and other activities.

2.5.2. One key management ICM strategy is collaboration and coordination among agencies

with coastal management responsibilities. All the sites have PCCs composed of

representatives from sectoral agencies. The PCC is designed as a mechanism for

information sharing, deliberation, priority-setting, conflict resolution and

decisionmaking. At most sites, a senior elected official or administrator, such as a

governor or vice-governor, chairs the PCC. They are often a key for determining

coastal policy priorities and initiatives. While the degree of authority and responsibility

the PCCs have been willing to assume varies among sites, they are important for

coordination purposes even when they only share information and deliberate about

their agency’s current activities and priorities. At a few sites, such as Bali, technical

coordination committees have also been developed to address more complex analytic

issues and to report to the PMO or PCC. Other coordinating committees have been

formed as well (e.g., communicators group in Danang, which represents different

government agencies and institutions). PEMSEA puts great emphasis on these

coordinating committees — and they have been important instruments in building

awareness and commitment to ICM among government officials with related

responsibilities.

2.5.3. It is perhaps useful to distinguish between those management tools that are under

the direct control of the PMO and the PCC and those that require other agencies or

organizations to take the primary implementation responsibility. Among the latter,

one of the primary tools is zoning. Integrated sea and land-use zoning schemes

have been prepared for several of the sites. They vary in their specificity, their

relationship to other planning and land guidance efforts and their regulatory authority.

Some of them are more in the category of land “suitability” analyses. That is to say,

on the basis of the analysis of soil types, topography, drainage, slope and location,

relative to other uses and other natural and socio-political characteristics, they identify

optimal potential uses for specific parcels or areas. Mangroves, for example, may

be identified as having the highest potential as natural habitats. Open, relatively flat

sites served by infrastructure may be deemed suitable for hotels, parks or recreational

sites. Zoning maps, on the other hand, usually identify preferred uses for specific

land units as well as prohibited uses. These often set forth very specific height and

bulk parameters. These generally have the force of law, but specific sites can and

are “re-zoned” by the governing legislative authorities.

2.5.4. In the case of PEMSEA sites, some of the zoning plans are just one of several

authoritative documents governing land use. At Sihanoukville, for example, there is

a DANIDA-sponsored zoning document as well as the PEMSEA-sponsored zoning

report. In this particular instance, PEMSEA’s zoning scheme has been adopted by

the National Coastal Steering Committee and has been endorsed by the current

governor. In general, however, zoning plans do not have authoritative legal status at

most of the sites. In light of the difficulties in getting a legal status for zoning plans,

PEMSEA should consider other approaches for the regulation of coastal resource

use including permit systems, performance standards and similar devices.

2.5.5. Coastal strategy documents, environmental profiles and action plans are also among

the repertoire of PEMSEA integrated management tools. Because of PEMSEA’s

long experience with these and other management tools and because their use has

been demonstrated at multiple sites, the RPO and site staff have multiple models of

what these tools are, how they relate to specific coastal uses and how they have

been tailored to specific contexts. These models and this experience are part of

what makes PEMSEA so successful at designing and implementing local ICM

projects.

2.6. PEMSEA sites are developing more permanent institutional structures and funding

strategies for the implementation of the ICM strategies.

2.6.1. The first generation institutional arrangements for site management relied primarily

on a PMO, often staffed by those seconded from local or provincial government.

Funding came from both PEMSEA and other sources, including local government. A

second key institution is the PCC, comprised of representatives from agencies with

coastal management responsibilities. All six PMOs exist within regular government

offices: Bali PMO (Environmental Impact Management Office of Bali Provincial

Government), Chonburi PMO (Sriracha Municipality), Danang PMO (Department of

Science and Technology of Danang Municipality), Port Klang PMO (Selangor Water

Resources Management Authority, also known as LUAS), Sihanoukville PMO

(Sihanoukville Municipal Government) and Nampho PMO (Coastal Management

Office under the Nampho City People’s Committee). The formation of PCCs in all

ICM sites was formalized through the issuance of appropriate local orders (e.g.,

Governor’s decree). The transformation of existing PCCs into a permanent

government structure is being reviewed by relevant local authority in some sites

(e.g., Bali through local ICM legislation, Danang, Sihanoukville).

2.6.2. The projects are all preparing financing options and mechanisms to sustain

environmental management operations and to facilitate investment in environmental

improvement plans. Sewage treatment and management plants are some of the

major environmental improvement initiatives common to several local agendas. While

several initiatives appear to be close to funding, only Danang and Sihanoukville have

initiated construction projects for sewage treatment. It is not clear whether the

difficulties in developing more PPP has to do with PEMSEA’s approach, lack of

incentives to private investors, inadequate legal frameworks, or some other factors.

2.7. People living at the ICM sites recognize the value of environment protection and

environmental services — and are increasingly willing to pay more for these services.

2.7.1. The contingent valuation method (CVM) was used at six sites (e.g., Bali, Bataan,

Danang, Klang, Malabon, and San Fernando) to assess the demand for particular

environmental facilities or services which may provide an investment opportunity. In

contingent valuation, the value of an environmental resource or service to an individual

is expressed either as their maximum willingness to pay or else their minimum

willingness to accept compensation to go without a resource or service. In the case

of Bali, for example, a survey of over 1,000 people in and around Denpasar indicated

solid waste as the primary environmental problem. The survey revealed that people

were willing to pay 125 percent more per household for better solid waste

management and even more for connection to a sewage system. At one site in the

Manila Bay project, a survey of about 500 respondents indicated that people were

willing to pay about 16 percent more on average for improved solid waste

management. CVM at these and other sites do suggest that people are acutely

aware of environmental conditions and that they value environmental services enough

to pay more for them in some cases.

2.8. PEMSEA is successfully developing the intellectual, institutional and political

foundations for ensuring that at least 20 percent of the region’s coastlines are under

effective ICM management by 2015.

2.8.1. PEMSEA’s goal is to encourage at least 20 percent of the region’s coastlines to

implement ICM by 2015. PEMSEA has developed a basic approach to local and

regional governance that is sufficiently well-developed and well-known to make their

goal plausible. This approach has been tested, refined and implemented at multiple

sites. While developing these sites, PEMSEA has trained more than 1,935 coastal

managers, national officials and others and assisted with the development of

numerous environmental plans, RAs, action plans and other strategies necessary

for the effective functioning of local ICM projects. The training manuals, technical

reports, ERAs, strategic plans and other documents, CDs, and videos constitute a

substantial documentation of the knowledge gained about the sites. They also serve

as high-quality models that can be used by governments and donor agencies in the

region. The approach, training and publications all provide a solid intellectual

foundation for replication and scaling up.

2.8.2. Perhaps most importantly, site projects have established interagency collaborations

and stakeholder participation strategies designed to increase integration among

organizations for the purpose of improving the coastal and marine management.

New institutions, such as intergovernmental working groups governing issues such

as oil spills, have been developed and are functional. PEMSEA has developed an

institutional framework that puts inter-sectoral and interagency collaboration at the

center of institutional development. Again, the institutional framework has been tested,

and is functioning.

2.8.3. PEMSEA’s commitment to fitting general management principles to local situations,

involving people in developing a local management agenda, funding research that is

biased toward management and prolonging their engagement at the site level are

among the factors that have served to build understanding, trust and commitment at

the local level. PEMSEA’s technical credibility, flexibility and willingness to help over

time have helped build the sort of political legitimacy that is rare among projects

regarded as donor projects.

Immediate Objective 2: Managing Pollution Hotspots

2.9. PEMSEA is testing strategies for the analysis and management of marine areas in

enclosed or semi-enclosed bodies of water receiving substantial pollution loads from

adjacent heavily urbanized areas.

2.9.1. Six coastal megacities with more than ten million people each are located in East

Asia. Pollution from land-based sources at these and other sites in the form of

untreated sewage, urban runoff, agricultural and aquacultural waste and industrial

discharge threatens public health and the integrity of coastal ecosystems. In a few

instances, the sustainability of fish stocks is threatened. PEMSEA has created

demonstration projects at three of these sites: Bohai Sea, Manila Bay and the Gulf of

Thailand. The Bohai Sea covers a water area of 77,000 km2, but about 40 rivers flow

into it from a drainage basin that covers 1.4 million km2 and is inhabited by 445

million people. Manila Bay covers an area of about 1,800 km2. The basin that drains

into Manila Bay includes an area of about 17,000 km2 inhabited by about ten million

people. The Gulf of Thailand is bordered by Thailand, Cambodia, Malaysia and Vietnam

and has a coastline of 6,935 km. Twenty-three rivers, including five major ones,

drain into the Gulf.

2.9.2. Reducing pollution in the Bohai Sea, Manila Bay and the Gulf of Thailand presents

coordination problems of great complexity. Scores of local, provincial and national

agencies share management responsibility for different aspects of sewage collection

and treatment, industrial discharge control, urban runoff, oil spills, agricultural wastes

and related pollution issues. A coordinated infrastructure investment strategy that

insures that all jurisdictions contribute fairly to pollution management is required.

2.10. PEMSEA’s risk assessment process was the technical basis for geographically larger

and jurisdictionally more complex planning processes for Manila Bay, Bohai Sea and

Gulf of Thailand.

2.10.1. PEMSEA has made RA/RM a critical component of the planning for water bodies

exhibiting transboundary environmental problems (e.g., Gulf of Thailand) and pollution

“hotspots” (e.g., Manila Bay and Bohai Sea). The risk assessment process has

been used in these contexts to identify the primary environmental concerns as well

as potentially important data gaps. The concerns are then the basis for identifying

potential interventions and management measures as part of the management

framework. The data gaps are addressed as part of the environmental monitoring

component.

2.10.2. In Manila Bay, Bohai Sea and the Gulf of Thailand, RA was the technical basis for

much of the planning that occurred in all three contexts. In the Manila Bay project,

the geographic scope included adjacent coastal provinces and the National Capital

Region. The planning processes included extensive consultation with multiple national

agencies, littoral provinces and many local governments. RA was the technical basis

for identifying priority environmental issues, an oil spill contingency plan and the

Operational Plan for the Manila Bay Coastal Strategy. In the Gulf of Thailand, RA was

used primarily in the context of planning an oil spill contingency strategy embodied in

an intergovernmental agreement involving Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam. In the

case of Bohai Sea, the RA was the technical foundation for what ultimately became

the Bohai Sea Sustainable Development Strategy. A legal framework for implementing

the strategy is under consideration by the national legislature.

2.11. PEMSEA’s emphasis on risk assessment as a key component of transboundary

environmental planning goes well beyond the conventional technical analysis required

in the development of most subregional plans.

2.11.1. The PEMSEA risk assessment approach distinguishes among retrospective RA,

prospective RA, RM and risk communication. Retrospective RA focuses on changes

in habitats, resource hazards or other coastal conditions, and the likely causes

associated with such changes in conditions. Prospective RA draws attention to

potential “stressors” in the marine environment, such as nutrient phosphate, nitrate

and heavy metals — and the degree to which the current concentrations exceed

specified standards. Risk management involves establishing the need for specific

collective interventions, such as more intensive sewage treatment requirements or

new technologies for disposing of solid wastes for reducing current and potential

stressors and improving resource conditions. Risk communication involves sharing

valid information about risks to residents, as well as potential costs and benefits of

various strategies for risk reduction.

2.11.2. While some jurisdictions confine risk assessment to the analysis of specific proposed

development activities (i.e., power plant construction, development of a fisheries

harbor), perhaps as part of an environmental impact assessment process, the

PEMSEA approach assesses risks more systematically over a specified geographic

area. Making RA the foundation of regional ocean planning is unique and innovative.

2.12. PEMSEA’s risk assessment process provides both a useful technical analysis of site

conditions — and successfully integrates the development of key capacities into the

project design process.

2.12.1. The PEMSEA approach to risk assessment begins as part of a training project for

staff and other key technical stakeholders. Those who participate in the training then

contact other agency staff involved in data collection and management. They share

their knowledge of RA and solicit data useful in developing the RA document. The RA

plan is thus applied learning — an end in itself and an important part of staff capacity

building. Participants are taught key concepts about RAs and methods of assessment

and use them immediately in the development of an RA for their area. They thus

learn the importance of RAs, how to develop such an assessment, and they begin to

assess the availability and usefulness of data for RA purposes in their area.

2.12.2. The process of preparing RAs has an additional important impact: it communicates

the importance of data collection, data sharing and careful technical analysis for

management. The act of preparing the RA both communicates the importance of

data collection and analysis for management. It also demonstrates a high standard

of technical analysis that helps communicate the significance of good technical

analysis in the ICM process.

2.13. Risk assessment preparation has helped develop networks of technical specialists

at the ICM sites, Manila Bay, Bohai Sea and Gulf of Thailand.

2.13.1. The use of local multi-disciplinary working groups in the preparation of RAs has

enhanced information-sharing and collaboration among local technical specialists.

It also facilitated the participation of local experts in other ICM activities including

environmental monitoring, IIMS and area/issue-specific projects. In most sites, this

approach required more time than would have been the case had consultants been

hired. However, working with a multi-disciplinary local team is a more sustainable

and cost-effective way of building local capacity for RAs and strengthening the link

between the technical experts and concerned management units.

2.14. Establishing the appropriate institutional mechanism for the long-term coordination

of the management of pollution hotspots is a major remaining challenge.

2.14.1. PEMSEA has facilitated a comprehensive technical analysis and planning effort at

each site. Technical Working Groups (TWGs) and other coordinative bodies have

been established and are functioning. In Manila Bay, an institutional mechanism must

somehow incorporate a large number of agencies and organizations at the national

and local levels with legal mandates and interests in the Bay. Building consensus

and political will are main factors for delay. A coordinating mechanism for the

management of Manila Bay has been proposed, and a draft Executive Order creating

a Manila Bay Council has been circulated for review and comment by the stakeholders.

In the case of Bohai Sea, national legislation on environmental management of the

Bohai Sea has been tabled at the State People's Congress. Its approval will facilitate

the establishment of a regional coordination mechanism. In the Gulf of Thailand, the

focus has primarily been on addressing oil spill preparedness and response. The

Partnership Agreement in Oil Spill Preparedness and Response in the Gulf of Thailand

signed by Vietnam, Cambodia and Thailand in 2006 constitutes a major institutional

achievement.

Immediate Objective 3: Capacity Building

2.15. PEMSEA has created a sophisticated strategy for building professional capacity that

incorporates not only developing and nurturing necessary ICM skills and knowledge,

but also focuses on strengthening ICM organizations and creating new institutions.

2.15.1. PEMSEA’s ICM and capacity-building strategy incorporates all three conceptions of

capacity building: skills transfer, organizational strengthening and institutional reform.

Developing management skills and knowledge is the primary emphasis, but direct

and indirect efforts to strengthen organizations and engage in institutional reform

are also obvious. Skill building, such as training in ICM concepts or oil spill contingency

planning, is a dominant part of the PEMSEA agenda. However, the distinction between

simple skill building and organizational strengthening is not always clear-cut. Training

in areas such as the design of IIMS, for example, is in one sense, skill building. The

intention is to develop the knowledge and skills necessary to design, construct and

maintain an information management system to support coastal management.

However, a larger purpose of IIMS is to provide for a decision-support system that

would improve the information basis for planning, investment and regulatory decisions

in coastal and ocean management. Finally, capacity-building activities such as the

training of national task forces to develop strategies for addressing land and seabased

activities contributing to ocean pollution or to set in place more systematic

processes for monitoring, evaluating and reporting on national and local ICM programs

constitute efforts to encourage institutional reform.

2.16. PEMSEA is successfully implementing a strategy of capacity building based on an

emphasis on “adaptive management.”

2.16.1. PEMSEA has developed a long-term, “adaptive management” approach to site-level

ICM projects. Adaptive management encourages a problem-oriented approach to

management and to capacity building. With regard to local ICM management, project

staff begins with environmental profiles detailing local conditions and engage with

local communities, government officials, NGOs and other stakeholders to identify

key coastal issues and develop and evaluate strategies for addressing these issues.

These management strategies are intended to be the most appropriate for addressing

coastal resource conditions — and the local political and administrative environment.

The notion of adaptive management assumes that as local ICM management

strategies are implemented, new administrative or environmental problems may

emerge. An “adaptive” capacity assumes that such problems can be correctly

diagnosed and once identified, new or modified strategies will be developed that are

better tailored to the revised understanding of local environmental, administrative

and political conditions.

2.16.2. The RPO’s emphasis on adaptive management in capacity building is manifest in

the numerous modifications it has made in its basic ICM training module; modifications

made to better respond to revised understanding of local management needs and

local staff skills and knowledge. The adaptive management emphasis can also be

seen in the additional trainings for those engaged in designing and implementing the

IIMS at ICM sites. The need for revised training became obvious as problems with

regard to implementing the IIMS became evident.

2.17. The core of PEMSEA’s capacity-building efforts is developing the necessary skills

and knowledge for adaptive ICM management for which it has created a remarkable

number and variety of training modules.

2.17.1. The major types of capacity-building activities carried out by PEMSEA are summarized

in Table 2.

2.17.2. As Table 2 indicates, training is the major capacity-building strategy. During the period

1994–2006, 90 trainings were organized, offered or supported by PEMSEA including

training on:

• ICM;

• Use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS);

• Marine pollution water quality monitoring;

• Oil pollution preparedness, response and cooperation;

• Integrated environmental impact assessment (IEIA);

• Implementing international conventions;

• Environmental risk assessment and natural resource damage appraisal;

• Chemical spill and port audit;

• Establishment of IIMS

• Coastal strategy development;

• Public awareness and participation

• Project development and management for coastal and marine environmental

projects;

• Development and implementation of coastal-use zoning plan and institutional

framework;

PROGRAMS Number of PROGRAMS Number of PERSONS

Pilot Phase (1994–1999)

Training 18 248

Internship 8 8

Study Tour 7 57

Total 34 314

Second Phase (2000–2006)

Training 72 1,419

Internships 14 14

UN Volunteers 1 1

Study Tour 8 185

Fellowships 2 2

Total for 2nd Phase 97 1,621

Grand Total 131 1,935

Table 2: Types and Participants in PEMSEA Capacity-Building Activities, 1994–2006

• Contingent evaluation and environmental resource valuation;

• Leadership in ocean and coastal governance;

• Integrating social science concerns into the ICM framework and programs; and

• Integrated Management System regarding port safety, health and environment.

2.18. PEMSEA’s skill-building agenda is defined primarily by its own conception of the

essential skill and knowledge “building blocks” of ICM and, to a lesser extent, by the

expressed preferences of project staff.

2.18.1. As the list above indicates, PEMSEA has developed and offered a wide variety of

training courses tailored to the needs of those responsible for designing and

implementing ICM projects. As the programme matures, the needs of some sites

have become more diverse and specialized — and thus there is some demand for

more site participation in the development of the training agenda.

2.19. Those participating in PEMSEA’s trainings regard them as both relevant and effective.

2.19.1. PEMSEA compiles evaluative comments from trainees at the end of each of their

trainings. These ICM courses were designed to encourage participants (senior

environmental and natural resource officers, coastal planners, managers and

trainers) to develop and implement ICM programs within their respective countries.

The participants from trainings held between 1995–1998 indicated that the ICM training

did further participant understanding of the ICM system and its application and

developed participant confidence in establishing an ICM program.

2.19.2. With regard to training and other capacity-building efforts, the larger question is how

effective they are in promoting effective application of skills and knowledge on ICM

projects and other activities. To answer this question, PEMSEA conducted a

questionnaire-based survey. Eighty-five trainees responded to the survey. Ninety

percent of those who responded had actually developed or assisted in the

development of coastal management projects subsequent to the training. Generally,

respondents felt that the trainings had succeeded in developing a positive attitude

toward ICM. The respondents indicated a strong general understanding of the ICM

approach, basic concepts and principles, but less familiarity with specific topics

such as GIS and institutional relationships.

2.19.3. Respondents indicated that several of these topics/skills were not applied because

of insufficient organizational capacity to make effective use of them. Respondents

indicated that the ICM training course had significantly influenced or contributed to

38 ICM initiatives in the region. Nearly 60 percent indicated that they felt better prepared

to meet the demands of coastal management. Finally, nearly all respondents (97%)

found the ICM course useful and recommended that their colleagues participate in

future ICM training courses.

2.19.4. This survey provides valuable insight into the effectiveness of ICM training during the

first phase — as well as indicating possible directions for future ICM training. For a

broader perspective on ICM capacity building, the quality of coastal management

initiatives undertaken as part of the regional approach can be examined and the

degree to which capacity-building efforts contributed to that success can be

speculated.

2.20. PEMSEA’s capacity-building trainings have been instrumental in developing the basic

human infrastructure and “intellectual capital” needed for effective ICM in the region.

2.20.1. PEMSEA’s trainings, particularly those related to ICM, are aimed primarily at local

and national government staff of agencies implementing ICM programs and projects.

Some of the more specialized trainings, such as those on port safety audits or oil

spill contingency planning, may be directed toward more specialized staff in particular

agencies with responsibilities in coastal areas. Other trainings, having to do with

topics such as resource and environmental valuation, may include academics as

well as agency staff. A total of 1,667 people have participated in PEMSEA trainings

since 1994. This is an impressive number, even allowing for some double counting

of people who participated in more than one training. It is not clear what proportion of

the total of those who might be thought of as regional ICM professionals this

represents.

2.20.2. Participants in training programs and workshops come from all over the region.

Table 3 summarizes the geographic distribution of trainees during the second phase.

2.21. PEMSEA’s internship program has developed a cadre of effective ICM practitioners

and advocates knowledgeable and supportive of PEMSEA’s SDS-SEA.

2.21.1. The internship program provides an opportunity for young professionals to work in

the RPO. The program provides opportunities for developing a variety of project

management skills, but perhaps more importantly, interns can get more direct

experience of the vision, philosophy and strategies for developing and expanding

local and regional ocean and coastal management. In the second phase, ten interns

participated in the program, including three each from Vietnam and Thailand, two

from China, and one each from Cambodia and the Republic of Korea. In addition,

there were four international interns, three of whom were from Canada and one from

France. One UN volunteer also participated. The long-term professional impact of

the program can be seen by examining the career trajectories of previous interns.

For example, one of the interns in the first phase is now the Deputy Director General

in the Ministry of Environment in Cambodia.

Country Phase 1 Phase 2

Brunei Darussalam 5 0.03

Cambodia 6 3

People’s Republic of China 11 8

DPR Korea 6 5

Indonesia 13 9

Malaysia 8 15

Philippines 21 20

RO Korea 3 5

Singapore 3 0.18

Thailand 11 20

Vietnam 8 11

Others 5 4

Table 3: Percentage of Participants in PEMSEA Training by Country.

2.22. In addition to developing ICM skills, PEMSEA’s capacity-building efforts are

successfully strengthening the organizations within which skills will be applied.

2.22.1. While activities such as training, study tours, internships and technical reports form

the backbone of its formal capacity-building efforts, how these efforts contribute to

PEMSEA’s organizational strengthening and institutional reform is significant. In

addition to the skill development associated with ICM-related trainings, several ICM

activities are designed in ways that have at least the potential of substantially

contributing to organizational strengthening. For example, one of the first steps in

the ICM development process is the formation of an interagency coordinating

committee at each of the ICM sites. These PCCs are comprised of representatives

from government agencies with management activities governing human uses and

activities that affect coastal areas, usually involving agencies whose jurisdiction

includes agriculture, planning, marine affairs, tourism, health, environment or fisheries.

One of the interagency committee’s prime functions is to coordinate all the related

environmental management efforts in coastal and marine areas. To the extent that

the committees have been successful, they have helped identify potentially conflicting

policies or endeavors as well as opportunities for joint action. They have created the

potential — and the practice — of sharing information, organizing deliberations on

how to address particular resource-use issues and improving communications among

agencies. This is one example of how the practice of ICM has helped build capacities

leading to organizational strengthening.

2.22.2. These organizational strengthening activities help provide part of the basic

infrastructure for sustained coastal management in the region. They form a critical

part of an organizational context in which the individual skills and knowledge ICM

practitioners gain in training can be continually applied. A systematic effort to build

and sustain organizational capacity is one of PEMSEA’s primary management

legacies.

2.23. Institutional reform, the most complex component of PEMSEA’s overall capacitybuilding

strategy, is proving effective in a variety of settings.

2.23.1. Some of the capacity-building activities are directed at more fundamental institutional

reform. Training on risk assessment, on port safety audits or oil spill contingency

planning can be thought of as institutional reform. They are designed to encourage

the substitution of new decisionmaking processes and standard operating procedures

for addressing key ocean and coastal issues. The Gulf of Thailand Project provides

a good example of institutional reform. With PEMSEA assistance and guidance,

Cambodia has developed its own oil spill contingency plan. Fourteen agencies

participated in the plan development process. The plan preparation process helped

identify gaps and misunderstandings about agency roles and responsibilities in

responding to a potential spill in the Gulf of Thailand. The plan is viewed as an “actionforcing”

document. Trainings on responding to a simulated spill have already been

conducted as a way of insuring clear understanding about roles and responsibilities

in case of a real spill.

2.23.2. Beyond training, the PEMSEA emphasis on interagency partnerships, PPP and other

institutional innovations are central to the notion of “integrated” coastal management.

Such integration requires new habits of consultation, information sharing, planning

and shared decisionmaking. The knowledge, skills, habits and dispositions associated

with such partnerships are cultivated by PEMSEA in its trainings, but reinforced in

meetings, site visits, study tours and publications. The intention is to create new

management procedures that are inclusive of relevant stakeholders, based on the

best available technical information and wise precedents for future management

actions.

2.24. PEMSEA’s efforts to successfully capture, record and apply what is being learned

about the design and implementation of effective ICM programs sets it apart from

most donor projects.

2.24.1. PEMSEA has created a very substantial library of conference proceedings, training

manuals, environmental assessments, site plans, technical reports, videos,

PowerPoint presentations, CDs, case studies and other materials that document

their activities in great detail. They also publish a substantial magazine, “Tropical

Coasts.” Many of these materials are accessible on their website.

2.24.2. The materials make it possible to trace the evolution of the design of specific site

strategies or the reorganization and refinement of how ICM training is conceived.

Detailed manuals on why and how to conduct port auditing, RAs, integrated

information management and a wide variety of other topics and issues are also

available. The editing and graphic design in published documents is generally superb.

2.24.3. Coastal managers in the region — and others interested in coastal management —

thus have access to a substantial body of material and models that can be useful in

the design or redesign of management programmes, in developing individual plans,

strategies or decisionmaking procedures. Important documents are also available

in local languages. Part of the value of this material is the consistency with which it

reflects an overall vision of how ICM should be designed and implemented. Because

PEMSEA promotes a particular strategic view of how ICM programs should be

constructed, the careful consumer — one familiar with PEMSEA’s strategic view —

can view the individual site’s environmental profiles, plans and other products as

manifestations of the overall PEMSEA strategy.

2.24.4. If there is anything missing from this material, it is more explicit attention to the

application of “adaptive management” in PEMSEA’s work. What were the significant

adaptations made by PEMSEA, both in the RPO and at the site level? How did the

need for adaptation emerge? How were the needs assessed? How were new

approaches or strategies developed? There’s no explicit strategy for learning, although

clearly learning has occurred. The RPO staff is a potentially great repository of “tacit

knowledge” about designing and running site programs and special projects. There

is much to be gained from a more systematic effort to collect and record their

experience with specific organizational strengthening and institution-building efforts.

Their capacity for “reflective practice” should be nurtured — and greater emphasis

should be put on collecting and recording their “lessons” from practice.

2.25. The continuing success of PEMSEA’s “adaptive management” strategy will require a

more explicit approach to learning and knowledge management at the project site level.

2.25.1. Looking from the RPO downward to the project sites, one can see a clear strategy

for ICM development. The ICM project development strategy is sufficiently explicit

that one might even speak of a “blueprint” or “template” for local management. To

the credit of PEMSEA staff, those terms work only in the most general sense. PEMSEA

staff are well aware that the general elements of local ICM design, such as

environmental assessments, PCCs, stakeholder participation strategies, action plans

and the like, will have to be carefully tailored to address the local environmental,

political, and administrative conditions, as well as the capacities of local staff. Learning

occurs and lessons are applied as site level problems develop and are addressed,

usually with the assistance of RPO staff.

2.25.2. At the local project level, the strategy for learning and adaptive management is often

less clear. For example, pilot and demonstration projects are a feature of most sitelevel

strategies. These specific projects should be thought of as mini-experiments

from which lessons can be extracted about whether to “scale up” to additional, similar

projects and, if so, what the requisite requirements are for constructing successful

projects. While these pilot and demonstration projects are often carefully and

thoughtfully designed, the procedures for learning from them is often not explicit. For

example, in Batangas a mangrove restoration project is being implemented at a site

at which a substantial number of migrants have located, mostly in temporary shelters

in the inter-tidal area. Water and sanitation facilities are lacking. The tides flush out

some of the waste, but returns with additional plastic bags, packaging material and

other flotsam associated with human settlements. What does this project suggest

about how to incorporate semi-permanent settlements in mangrove projects? What,

if anything, does it reveal about how to manage solid wastes in nearshore squatter

settlements? Most importantly, what is the strategy for learning from this experience?

It is not clear. Likewise, in Sihanoukville, a pilot solid waste management project is

being developed to address the growing accumulation of solid and human wastes in

a large non-tenured settlement. In another community, coastal fishers are being

organized. Both are potentially important projects addressing significant coastal

issues. Both lack an explicit strategy for extracting lessons for potential application

in other settings.

2.25.3. A more systematic emphasis on learning from the management experience at each

site might involve doing more of what already happens informally: reflecting on the

meaning and implications of practice. Staff from the PCC, the RPO and other local

agencies could meet once or twice a year to identify the perceived strengths and

weaknesses of the local management activities of the last several months and to

engage in dialogue about why some activities succeeded better than others and

how management might be improved. The "lessons" from such dialogues might not

be definitive, but the explicit practice of engaging in and recording reflections on

management practice could enhance organizational learning and lead to improved

management practice.

Immediate Objective 4: Regional Networks and Regional Task Force

2.26. PEMSEA has created networks of experts, of local governments, and regional task

force of experts that, when taken together, firmly link the national demonstration and

parallel ICM sites into a regional consortium and partnership. The regional networks

of experts have provided a range of support services in coordination with the field

activities.

2.26.1. The networks have proved highly useful in providing specialized skills training,

generating reviews, information exchange and knowledge transfer. Effectiveness

required merging of environmental monitoring and information networks with the

Regional Network of Local Government (RNLG), and the legal experts’ network with

the Regional Task Force of Experts (RTF). The networks have been used in making

scientific advice available in packaged form, in obtaining advice and technical

assistance in the context of verifications of priority issues and applications of risk

assessments, and the development of related environmental monitoring programs.

They have also assisted in the preparation of coastal strategies, the development of

coastal-use zoning schemes, and in obtaining experts for training and analyzing

specific problems. An IIMS has been developed and associated networking has been

put in place. These actions have helped link the available regional expertise and

expose this community to management activities and needs.

2.26.2. PEMSEA has successfully supported the use of modern high-technology

communication tools, in establishing e-forums and building websites, including the

PEMSEA website. The website interfaces with media through a media resource

center and with the youth through a youth center. This generated a surge in hits,

from about 6,000 in mid-2002 to over 235,000 in February 2004 (Tropical Coasts,

vol. 11, no. 1, p. 65). The PEMSEA website thus clearly fills a need for environmental

information dissemination and is an active and valuable source of information for a

variety of stakeholders, including policymakers, resource managers, the private

sector, civil society, and the academe. This situation stimulates the partnerships

even further. The ICM sites likewise have their own websites, linked to an e-community

network called Coastalinks, the aim of which is to establish a clearinghouse

mechanism for ICM knowledge in the region. It will help disseminate lessons learned

to all stakeholders throughout the region. Training workshops have been organized

to help the sites get the websites into practice.

2.27. The RTF provided field technical assistance in critical issues related to coastal and

marine management establishing interactions, cooperation, confidence and

partnerships.

2.27.1. The pool of experts, from which the RTF members are selected, was established

early on and RTF members have since been mobilized to enhance the skills of the

local PMO staff. An RTF concept paper with information on operational modalities

and a database of experts and RTF members and other networks were also prepared.

RTF members are mainly young professionals from the Regional Programme and

its partner organizations who are normally associated with work at the ICM sites.

When necessary, they can go to the sites to assist local staff and others in conducting

ICM project activities. Participating countries can ask for such assistance. The

development of the Sihanoukville Coastal Strategy and ICM program is one example

in which the RTF was helpful.

2.27.2. The RTF has been providing assistance through guideline generation on the analyses

of critical local issues. An example is the tourism survey in Sihanoukville, that included

the industry and its local and foreign customers. Based on this, the RTF specified

guiding principles for sustainable coastal tourism development using ICM practices.

Similar inputs have been provided in other cases, such as in Sukabumi. Assistance

has been provided with respect to the development of the coastal strategy and ICM

website, as well as the introduction of zoning schemes.

2.27.3. In initiating ICM parallel sites, partners have organized forums and workshop-type

consultations where the participation of experts from the RTF has been used. Initial

risk assessments have been carried out with multidisciplinary local working groups

and experts and the RTF. The process has also helped establish linkages with experts

throughout the Region. In this way, regional advisory and analytical support services

have been provided for implementation in the field.

2.28. The network of local governments by promoting information sharing and regional

collaboration has generated commitments, mutual reinforcements, and linked the

ICM sites into a regional partnership.

2.28.1. The development of a network of local governments has been a very important step.

The network has firmly linked the PEMSEA national demonstration and parallel ICM

sites into a regional network. The usefulness and efficiency of the network is

demonstrated through the annual forums, which are hosted by the participating local

or national governments on a rotational basis, facilitating sharing of knowledge, and

exchange of experiences, expertise and lessons learned. This has gradually led to a

collective commitment and effort in the region to achieve sustainable coastal and

marine development. An agreement has been reached to pursue a shared vision

under the framework of the SDS-SEA, which includes specific implementation targets

committed to by the governments. This is one example of a major result of PEMSEA

for which the Regional Network has played a significant role.

2.28.2. The network has generated due provision of recognition to the local governments

that are successfully implementing ICM practices. The network serves as a

mechanism for scaling up activities: obtaining enhanced commitments of local

leaders, generating support and assistance from donors, co-financing, and developing

cooperative programs. It stimulates the creation of local forums, such as the Shihwa

Civil Forum in ROK, generating cooperation, and enhancing information exchange,

transparency, accountability, public awareness and participation. Similar experiences

are found in Batangas and in Chonburi Province. The network has provided stimulation

to the local governments by noting that implementation of ICM practices is one means

of responding to national policies and meeting challenges of decentralization in a

proactive manner. The network has also in this way served as a mechanism to

establish and increase political will. This is a key factor in developing finance

mechanisms, and an enabling environment, including for public-private partnerships.

The network has reviewed the institutional arrangements and provided insights for

further developments in this respect. This effort has included exchanges with other

regions where related arrangements have been put in place, e.g., Australia and

Canada.

2.28.3. Through these reviews and regular exchanges, the network has further stimulated

implementation of specific ICM practices, such as zoning schemes. The linking of

the ICM sites has helped create a critical mass of sites and expertise in the region.

This shows governments and communities solid results, in the form of socioeconomic

and environmental benefits, as well as identified problems and lessons learned. The

network has also demonstrated that political will and commitments have been

generated through PEMSEA. This is further brought out by three more countries

joining the Regional Programme voluntarily. The foundation and mechanisms to

gradually achieve sustainable development of coastal and marine environments in

the region now needs to be utilized and sustained through the implementation of the

SDS-SEA.

Immediate Objective 5: Environmental Investments

2.29. PEMSEA has been at the forefront and has been aggressive in its efforts to create

investment opportunities in support of ICM.

2.29.1. The other important way by which partnership with the private sector is being

harnessed is through their direct investment in environmental enterprises such as

solid waste management facilities and water treatment and sewerage systems.

These can be undertaken as joint ventures with the local government units (LGUs),

or through a build-operate-transfer (BOT) scheme or its variants. These schemes

are particularly important in places where government resources are severely

constrained, as is the case in the Philippines. Not surprisingly, the earliest efforts by

PEMSEA in fostering PPPs in support of CRM have been undertaken in that country.

2.29.2. To this end, PEMSEA has organized various meetings and roundtable discussions

to promote greater understanding and interest in the PPP mode of providing

environmental services in support of ICM. These have succeeded in obtaining interest

from potential private sector investors, leading to actual proposals/bids for specific

projects in certain ICM sites. At the same time, local governments have benefited

from greater understanding of their financing options for important infrastructure

especially for waste management, and particularly how to pursue private sector

investments in such facilities. PEMSEA has also directly acted as “matchmaker” in

certain cases, helping bring potential private sector partners and local governments

together to discuss and forge potential partnerships. Technical assistance in project

development and documentation has also been provided in specific cases.

2.30. For reasons largely beyond PEMSEA’s control, progress has been slow in getting

PPP projects to reach actual operationalization.

2.30.1. There are inherent challenges in fostering PPPs especially in a situation where local

governments can have a short lifespan, and planning horizons are consequently

limited. The experience with attempts to push such PPPs in the Philippines, where

local governments face elections every three years, is illustrative. In Bataan province,

the process of negotiation and selection of a private sector partner for a proposed

waste management facility was overtaken by a change of leadership in the provincial

government. While the provincial government had gone through the process of

identifying and evaluating eight private sector proponents for a sanitary landfill facility

under the previous governor, actual selection of the firm was overtaken by the 2004

elections which resulted in the election of a new governor. The new administration

has yet to move the project forward due to certain questions on the project’s features.

In San Fernando City, Pampanga, in the Philippines, a proposed solid waste

management facility had reached the stage of actual identification of the private

sector partner before the elections led to the election of a new mayor. However, the

project has remained stalled due to difficulties in defining the appropriate mode of

financing the project.

2.30.2. There is also built-in tension between the objective of promoting more PPPs, and

that of promoting public welfare as these projects are put in place and operated.

While the need to attract more of these types of investments is well acknowledged,

it is also important to ensure that the services provided by the privately-provided

facilities are available at reasonable and affordable cost. One of the biggest obstacles

to attracting stronger private sector interest in provision of sanitation and sewerage

systems is the market uncertainty associated with the likely negative reception from

the public for additional user fees. Thus it has been a challenge to attract private

sector partners to go into PPPs for such facilities, which are a critical element in

sound ICM Practices.

2.31. The need for a clearer legal framework to govern PPP investments has partly

hampered progress in implementing such investments in support of ICM.

2.31.1. The other apparent obstacle to wider and faster promotion of PPPs in support of

ICM is inadequacies in the legal framework governing them. The Philippines played

a pioneering role in the 1990s by being the first to enact legislation (the BOT Law) to

govern PPPs in public infrastructure. Most of the other countries in the region have

yet to come up with a comprehensive legal framework to guide evaluation processes

and contract provisions for such PPPs, thereby hampering adoption of this mode of

provision for public facilities in support of ICM. In Danang, Vietnam, there was an

expressed need for clearer rules and guidelines to govern PPP investments in ICMrelated

facilities.

2.31.2. Notwithstanding these hurdles to PPPs largely beyond its own control, PEMSEA is

to be commended for its unrelenting efforts to (1) strengthen capability of local

governments in its member countries to undertake such innovative partnerships,

and (2) promote private sector interest in such arrangements through both forums

and bilateral discussions. The most immediate objective is to attain successful

operationalization of at least one such project at the local level, which could then

serve as a demonstration project to encourage and educate other similar ventures.

It may not be too long before such a viable demonstration project is finally achieved,

given that several such initiatives are already in the pipeline, thanks to PEMSEA’s

vigorous efforts in that direction.

Developing and adopting policy, legal and financing program reforms to facilitate

PPP investments is equally important, especially in countries where private sector

participation in environmental infrastructure improvement projects is new or relatively

uncharted. PEMSEA's strategy is to demonstrate the value of PPP as a viable option

for providing on-the-ground facilities at the local government level and, as a

consequence, stimulate and facilitate national government policy reform.

Immediate Objective 6: Scientific Research

2.32. PEMSEA has ensured that scientific inputs are used to support decisionmaking for

coastal and marine management.

2.32.1. PEMSEA seeks to link science to management. Strong linkages have been

established with research institutions, including universities. Cutting-edge issues

are being addressed, such as biological effects monitoring using tested, screened

bio-indicators, and eco-toxicology. Advisory groups of experts from required

disciplines have been established to incorporate science in the decisionmaking and

management. The scientific communities at the local level have been incorporated

as partners in the ICM activities, and have helped in analyzing key coastal concerns.

Site visits confirmed that the success of ICM implementation depends upon scientific

inputs. Training and exchanges have been provided. Through the ICM activities, the

trainees have been given tasks and work.

2.32.2. The close linkage to scientific institutions has stimulated establishment of training

centers for ICM at universities, including the international training center in Xiamen.

The environmental monitoring and assessment programs have been developed

based on scientific inputs, tools and data processing, including GIS, with quality

control and storage. Data management procedures have been installed, and data

bases created, with data reporting and data sharing (i.e., the IIMS is functioning).

2.32.3. One key to the strategy has been to build a core of local experts and professionals

who are part of the demonstration site team, are utilized in the programme, and can

be tapped for related activities in replication efforts. The strong linking of universities

to the ICM projects has implied that the scientific communities are exposed to the

needs of management and the significance of an integrated approach as regards

the coastal environment. PEMSEA actions are thus linking the research communities

to societal needs, without reducing the importance and freedom of cutting-edge

basic research. This will also support and enhance the understanding for the need

of integration of scientific results, and multi- and interdisciplinary research. In turn

this will lead to improved conditions for science in the region. Several scientific issues

have been analyzed through workshops, generating high-level training and educational

material, e.g., on determining environmental carrying capacity and establishing data

management and information services. A list of publications is provided in Annex 5.

2.32.4. PEMSEA activities have provided experiences and knowledge with regard to

institutionalizing scientific and technical inputs to decisionmaking, policy specification

and environmental management, and in partnership with the scientific community. It

has generated a mutual understanding between the partners, and helped weaken

an important barrier.

2.32.5. There is a need to maintain the considerable intellectual capital arising from PEMSEA

activities. An effective knowledge management system needs to be put in place.

The knowledge packaging, sharing and application need further refinement so as to

help countries, the region and others to achieve sustainable development.

2.32.6. Stronger partnership and understanding need be developed between the scientific

and management communities. This is best achieved at local level, as pursued by

PEMSEA, by involving consistently the complete range of scientific expertise in

addressing practical issues.

2.32.7. PEMSEA should expand and consolidate its current list of multi-disciplinary experts

into expert networks and involve them more proactively as partners in problemsolving

activities. The expert networks could interact with policymakers like their

counterparts in the Baltic and Mediterranean.

2.33. PEMSEA has successfully recruited leading scientists of the region into the

Multidisciplinary Experts Group (MEG) of coastal and marine experts.

2.33.1. The MEG has provided critical insights into the basic scientific issues facing PEMSEA,

has supported the use of science as a tool for management and has stimulated

research groups in the region to take up or strengthen research regarding issues of

an ecological and socioeconomic nature. It has stimulated interdisciplinarity and

integration, as well as use of indigenous knowledge. The membership has been

restricted but the required disciplines are represented, although the social science

participation should be strengthened. This is expected to be achieved through the

integration of social sciences concerns in the component.

2.33.2. While working on a reactive and demand driven basis, the MEG has provided

considerable input to the scientific aspects of the SDS-SEA, including emphasizing

the interconnectedness with regard to the ocean conditions in the region, the landocean-

atmosphere interactions, the need to consider the ocean as a whole and to

properly take into account the interactions between the environmental and ecological

compartments, as well as those of the climate system. The realization of these

complexities is a fundamental motivation for the regional approach and the formulation

of the SDS-SEA. The need for updating socioeconomic and ecological information

and bringing the new information into the adaptive management cycle has also been

demonstrated and stressed by the MEG. It has brought out the importance of

maintaining the balance and sustainability of the interactions between the ecological

and economic systems, as specified in the ecological-economics paradigm. The

MEG has recognized the significance of PEMSEA initiatives in this respect, particularly

on: ecosystem carrying capacity; transboundary impacts of national economic

activities; and trade-offs between economic development and ecological benefits.

The MEG has supported the development of scientifically-based water quality criteria;

biological indicators and use of biological effects monitoring; as well as the need to

further develop required techniques for use in the region. It has also helped with RA/

RM and IIMS, but has not entered into considering the usefulness of these tools for

insurance and financial mechanisms. The MEG has stressed the need to ensure

that these tools and environmental monitoring be pursued as part of a package for

management. This has, in effect, been very much the PEMSEA strategy.

2.33.3. As a result of PEMSEA and other actions, scientific expertise and skills have become

available in the region to support the implementation of the SDS-SEA. This was

confirmed during the EAS Congress 2003 through the presentation of several studies

with published reports (Annex 6), the Workshop on Skills and Expertise and the

Meeting of Experts to Identify Requirements for Scientific Support for the Seas of

East Asia, which included the MEG members. A special effort of PEMSEA is the

interdisciplinary forum of leading scientists, including some from outside the Region,

gathered at intervals at the City University of Hong Kong to address cutting-edge

environmental research needs.

2.34. PEMSEA policy research studies have promoted an increased understanding of the

scientific dimensions and the complexity of key coastal and marine issues and have

demonstrated the need for obtaining and utilizing scientific information in sensitive

and critical management actions.

2.34.1. Policy research studies have been utilized in the context of building PPPs (e.g., on

waste management in Batangas); promotion of opportunities for such efforts; public

awareness creation and education on environmental management; mobilization of

public participation; and formation of public sector corporations. The policy research

has brought out the need for obtaining and utilizing scientific information in

management actions, including: creation of public and other user understanding of

how the coastal environment functions on the basis of scientific facts; marine-zoning

schemes (e.g., Xiamen; land and sea-use zoning); establishing proper institutional

arrangements, adoption and integration of coastal policies, and legal regimes; and

decentralization of decisionmaking. The studies have demonstrated the need to have

the scientific community involved with the management team as a partner.

2.34.2. PPPs have likewise been initiated as a result of the development of local or national

coastal strategies. These new partners have understood the need for scientific inputs

and specialized technical assistance on environmental problems. The core of local

experts built through the ICM practices has then become very useful. Socioeconomic

concerns have been included and the linkages to environmental conditions brought

out (e.g., the Case Study on the Integrated Coastal Policy of ROK). This has

demonstrated the requirement to take the scientific aspects into account, as in the

ecological-economics paradigm. The importance of transfer and sharing of

knowledge has been shown, and this has been implemented and achieved through

the related networks.

2.34.3. Several analytical case studies have been developed using the networks and the

MEG, generating reports which integrate scientific information and the experiences

of PEMSEA into packages useful for management, decisionmaking and policymaking

(see list of references in Annexes 5 and 6).

2.34.4. Policy briefs have been prepared, bringing out the need for national policies, also

using the comparisons between the situations before and after the actions

implemented at the demonstration sites as arguments that improvements can be

achieved without slowing down economic development. These briefs have been

used by authorities.

Immediate Objective 7: Integrated Information Management System (IIMS)

2.35. The PEMSEA ICM approach is successfully addressing the continuing need for a

system that ensures the availability of valid information to support planning and

management.

2.35.1. Improved ocean and coastal planning and management requires valid information

about resource locations and conditions, potential impacts of uses and activities on

resources, jurisdictional boundaries, pollution sources, land-use plans and many

other variables. In most countries, data collection for coastal management is, at

best, incomplete and uneven. Even when there are data collection efforts, the

information useful for effective coastal and marine management is most frequently

collected and stored in multiple agencies in a variety of formats for different analytic

and management purposes.

2.35.2. The promise of PEMSEA’s IIMS is that the data necessary for effective planning and

management can be identified, collected, coded, verified, stored and made retrievable

in a single system accessible to all coastal management users. Such a system

requires agreements about what should be collected and by whom, how data will be

accessed and used, and what security measures, if any, are needed. Such a system

also requires system hardware, appropriate software and the skills to ensure effective

maintenance and use of both. Finally, such a system requires the understanding of

system purposes on the part of both information managers and users and appropriate

incentives to ensure effective system maintenance and use.

2.35.3. To a remarkable extent, PEMSEA is facilitating the creation of individual IIMS at project

sites that meet such requirements.

2.36. PEMSEA has a well-developed IIMS capacity-building strategy that is tailored to the

conditions of each site.

2.36.1. Project personnel and members of the IIMS task teams representing participating

agencies at the sites were given two training programs: basic training on information

management using IIMS and the IIMS Query System; and linkage to GIS and other

external software. The original project goal was to train three staff at each site.

Ultimately 201 participants were trained at 11 sites. However, capacity remains a

concern. Lack of previous experience with databases (or even computers, in some

cases) and language issues are among the challenges. Translation of the IIMS

software into Chinese, Vietnamese and Korean has speeded up encoding at those

sites. Manuals, special tutorials for some data managers, cross-site visits and other

demonstrations are contributing to increased capacity.

2.37. Information management systems are functioning at each site, although the types of

management support they are able to provide varies among sites.

2.37.1. PEMSEA’s strategy has been to “establish an IIMS for coastal and marine

environmental assessment planning, monitoring and management. This would enable

the PEMSEA sites, with an IIMS established, to use IIMS in facilitating planning,

management and other activities. The availability of information in a format that can

be used in these various activities will contribute to desired outcomes, which will

then facilitate the attainment of the overall goal of PEMSEA.”

2.37.2. Since the beginning of PEMSEA’s program, a primary system design objective has

been to refine the system software. In addition to improvements in system software,

a second key element in the IIMS strategy has been to ensure that the sites have the

required software and hardware. Software and hardware have been obtained for

Bali, Chonburi, Danang, Klang, Sihanoukville, Nampho, Bataan, Batangas, Cavite,

Manila Bay, and Bohai Sea.

2.37.3. PEMSEA’s goals were to: a) establish localized databases at each site; b) develop

an IIMS maintenance manual; and c) train key personnel at each site. All 11 sites

established local databases, but the level of use varies. Chonburi, Sihanoukville,

Nampho, Batangas, Bataan and Cavite only have databases. Bali, Danang, Klang

and Bohai Sea have linked databases to GIS. Manila Bay has linked its database

with both GIS and predictive models. Databases are being continuously updated.

Two manuals —The Guide to Establishing IIMS and the IIMS User Manual — were

developed. Sites have also developed sustainability plans indicating how they will

sustain and update the system.

2.37.4. The ultimate test of an information system is its usefulness in supporting planning

and management. The Phase II goals for the IIMS were modest: a) site-specific

demonstrations; b) preparation of technical reports; and c) preparation of executive

briefs to distribute to relevant decisionmakers. Most sites are using IIMS for data

storage. A few have used the data for specific applications such as RAs, coastal

strategies and implementation plan development, resource valuation and gender

analysis. Oil spill contingency analysis is being done for Manila Bay. Two papers are

being prepared to illustrate potential IIMS applications: Enhancing Coastal and Marine

Management through Effective Information Management and Applications of IIMS

in Manila Bay. PEMSEA staff believe that ultimately the IIMS will be sufficiently

accessible and understood to serve as a decision-support system. Progress is being

made, but effective use of the systems to support planning and management is

occurring at only a few sites.

2.38. Project sites are developing plans to sustain their IIMS projects.

2.38.1. Information systems frequently take time and project resources to develop. Even

when mature, their importance as an aid to planning and management is frequently

not fully understood by many of the agency personnel who might be expected to

make the most effective use of them. Potential users too often have limited knowledge

of how to access and use the system. This is a challenge to effective, informationbased

planning and management everywhere. Because of the frequent gaps in

training and disposition and responsibilities between information managers and

potential users, information systems are vulnerable to budget cuts and other forms

of administrative marginalization. PEMSEA has wisely mandated the preparation of

sustainability plans for all the project sites under contract, and they have complied.

Institutionalization is already occurring. In the Manila Bay project, the Department of

Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) is taking over the system. Similar plans

for incorporating IIMS in existing management agencies are occurring at Danang,

Bali, Nampho and Bohai Sea.

2.39. A regional network linking ICM sites and pollution hotspots is being developed.

2.39.1. The IIMS software has been upgraded into a web-based IIMS version and a manual

has been produced to guide users in uploading and accessing data. The software

was tested at the Manila Bay site. Data can now be uploaded and accessed on the

Internet from the three regional DENR offices. The Manila Bay Area Information

Network was formed and institutionalized at DENR Regional Offices and the

Environmental Management Bureau as the setting for implementing the network.

Training for the web-based version was provided for 32 staff from Manila Bay and

Bali. The Bali office is also uploading the Bali IIMS onto the Internet where it can be

better accessed by provincial and regency agencies and academics. The Nampho

ICM project is forming an IIMS network among 18 agencies to facilitate the sharing of

information and to improve information management.

Immediate Objective 8: Civil Society Mobilization

2.40. The hallmark of PEMSEA’s approach to achieving effective management of the seas

and coasts of East Asia is summed up in its first name: Partnerships.

2.40.1. That the various sectors and stakeholders in society must work together to attain

true sustainability had long been recognized and asserted in Agenda 21 from the

1992 Rio Earth Summit, and reaffirmed in the Johannesburg World Summit on

Sustainable Development (WSSD).

2.40.2. The distinctive value in the PEMSEA ICM approach lies in the way it provides for both

horizontal and vertical integration in the work to promote protection and management

of the seas and coasts of the region.

2.41. The horizontal integration achieved by PEMSEA has been more inclusive and

comprehensive than that attained in other similar initiatives.

2.41.1. Horizontal integration occurs across the major stakeholder groups (government,

civil society and private business sector) and within each group. On the government

side, for example, PEMSEA ICM sites bring together the various relevant agencies

and offices both in the coordination mechanism (i.e., the Programme and site

coordination councils) and in the implementation of specific projects and activities

within the Programme.

2.41.2. Various key sectors of civil society are likewise involved in the work of managing the

coasts and seas. These include NGOs and POs, the academe, church and religious

groups, youth (usually through schools and colleges/universities), women, media

and the local communities themselves. The deliberate inclusion of media as a key

partner is significant: much of the challenge in promoting sustainable management

of the seas of East Asia is in informing, educating and communicating to the general

public. Clearly, various mass media institutions and journalists are critical partners

in this endeavor, along with schools, colleges/universities, and church and religious

organizations.

2.41.3. As indicated earlier, private firms have also been effectively tapped as important

partners, particularly to provide financial, logistical and physical support for various

activities within the Programme. Their participation is provided either separately

through individual firms’ commitment of funds, projects or personnel (e.g., for coastal

cleanup or mangrove reforestation activities), or through pooled support via an

organized foundation, like the Batangas Coastal Resources Management Foundation

or BCRMF, and the Bataan Coastal Care Foundation or BCCF, which are both in the

Philippines. The challenge is to sustain support from the private firms (e.g., Cavite

for a Sustainable Environment Inc. or CASE began with 16 member firms but active

membership has reportedly dwindled down to four firms) whose level of support and

extent of involvement may be influenced by economic downturns that impinge on

the firms’ operations and profitability.

2.42. Effective partnerships have been well established at the technical and working levels.

2.42.1. There is clear evidence of well-established working mechanisms and coordination

at the technical and working levels in the various ICM sites and marine pollution

hotspots assisted by PEMSEA. Effective teamwork has clearly been achieved in

most cases, via the project coordination councils, site coordination councils, and

informal coordination mechanisms among the various government agencies and

stakeholder groups concerned. These strong coordination arrangements that have

been achieved at the technical and working levels are a source of confidence on the

part of the evaluation team that the good work that has been accomplished can be

sustained: 1) through changes in political leadership, and 2) beyond termination of

external funding support.

Immediate Objective 9: Coastal and Marine Policy

2.43. A valuable feature of the PEMSEA approach is in the way it provides an effective

combination of “top-down” and “bottom-up” impetus to policymakers to secure their

“buy-in” and commitment.

2.43.1. Initiatives like ICM are most effective when there is an active champion who is able

to inspire and mobilize action from the various partners in the endeavor. Usually it is

the political leader in the area who would be the logical and most effective person to

play this role. Thus, notwithstanding the good teamwork that has been achieved as

described above, it has been commonly expressed in field interviews that support

from the political leaders (i.e., local and national) is crucial, and can be either an

obstacle when lacking, or a significant boost when present.

2.43.2. The PEMSEA approach is able to address this particular concern very well in the

way it is able to provide an effective combination of top-down and bottom-up impetus

to political leaders and policymakers whose decisions can make or unmake sound

management of the seas and coasts of the region. The top-down pressure comes

from the international pressure generated by the presence of a coordinating office

(i.e., the RPO) that constantly monitors progress and assists in addressing possible

implementation hurdles in the various project sites. Another key component of the

top-down impetus is the mandate provided by the Putrajaya Declaration and the

commonly-adopted SDS-SEA, which forces national and local governments to

adhere to commitments agreed to, regionwide. There is also an important impetus

provided by the PEMSEA Network of Local Governments (PNLG) particularly to the

local executives. One clear manifestation of this is the way the new provincial

governor of Bataan was reportedly convinced of the importance of the ICM initiative

upon his attendance of the Bali meeting of the PNLG in 2005. While his province’s

parallel ICM site was established under his predecessor, his own “buy-in” was firmed

up upon meeting with his counterparts in the rest of the region in the Bali meeting,

and upon appreciating the much wider context of the initiatives in his province. On

the part of national government officials, impetus is provided by the regular conduct

of Programme Steering Committee (PSC) meetings, which makes it necessary for

them to be able to share progress and substantive accomplishments in this regular

forum.

2.43.3. On the other hand, the well-working teamwork, coordination and integration of efforts

at the technical and working levels has provided a strong impetus for the political

leaders from the bottom up. A leader cannot help but endorse an initiative that is

seen to be already working well and has had substantive accomplishments as driven

by dedicated workers at the operational level. The Governor of Batangas Province,

for example, attests to how the drive, competence and effectiveness of the Provincial

Government’s Environment and Natural Resources Office (PG-ENRO) and its

effective coordination of the Batangas coastal management program has convinced

him of the critical importance of the PEMSEA-initiated ICM project in his province.

This has in turn won his full support for the Programme, which the PG-ENRO and

the PMO cite as very important for the continued progress of work in the Batangas

ICM program.

2.44. PEMSEA has been instrumental in the integration of ICM principles and strategies in

the national policy frameworks of member countries.

2.44.1. The effective balance of top-down and bottom-up impetus as described above has

facilitated the integration of ICM principles and strategies into the national policy

frameworks of PEMSEA member countries. China, for example, has already

promulgated its Ocean Agenda 21 and its National Law on Sea-Use Management.

Indonesia and the RO Korea have seen it fit to establish a separate and integrated

ministry dedicated to ocean and marine resources. RO Korea also has its Ocean

Korea 21 and a Coastal Management Act that spells out national policy on the oceans.

The Philippines, Thailand, Japan, Malaysia and Vietnam have adopted or are working

towards a comprehensive national coastal and ocean policy.

2.44.2. There is likewise increasingly wider adoption of coastal zoning as an important

management tool for ICM in the region, the usefulness of which has become wellestablished

in PEMSEA ICM sites.

Immediate Objective 10: Regional Mechanism

2.45. The SDS-SEA initiated by PEMSEA provides a dynamic and useful regional framework

and collaborative platform for regional cooperation and partnerships in regional

coastal and ocean governance.

2.45.1. PEMSEA has successfully completed the SDS-SEA in collaboration with 16 national,

regional and international collaborators and has the regional strategy endorsed by

the 12 participating governments through the Putrajaya Declaration of 2003. This is

a milestone achievement as it is the first regional marine strategy with framework

programs consisting of 227 action plans covering local, national and global

environmental and sustainable development concerns ranging from fisheries to

climate change. The framework provides opportunities for concerned governments

and international and UN bodies to collectively address national and regional concerns.

PEMSEA has thus provided the much needed leadership role to make this collaborative

framework possible.

2.45.2. The SDS-SEA implementation is indeed a challenge to all stakeholders of the region.

Its endorsement by the participating governments and the collaborating partners

demonstrate the political willingness and the perceived values inherent in the strategy

for synergies and collaboration among the partnering stakeholders.

2.45.3. The SDS-SEA is a quality document, being: comprehensive (from problem

identification to policy reform, institutional arrangement and management actions);

relevant (Agenda 21, WSSD, MDG); holistic (pollution, climate change, land

degradation, river-basin to coastal seas management); strategic (responding to key

concerns at the local level, as well as cross-sectoral and cross-boundary concerns)

and integrative (policy and functional integration from watersheds to coastal seas).

The SDS-SEA allows the integration of sectoral strategies and action plans of line

agencies and projects and programmes within its general framework, and clearly

identifies roles and responsibilities of international and regional ocean-related bodies,

projects and programmes, such as IMO, IOC, UNEP, COBSEA, SEAFDEC and

NACA. It is undoubtedly a vehicle for intergovernmental, interagency and multi-sector

partnerships and collaboration.

2.45.4. The SDS-SEA is different from many other marine-related strategies in that it builds

upon the foundation of PEMSEA-tested local management actions, methodologies,

and capacities in coastal and ocean governance. This not only serves to develop

confidence in integrated management of coastal areas and the coastal seas, but

also promotes national government commitments in terms of legislation and policy

in scaling up demonstration activities to national and regional levels.

2.45.5. Substantial intergovernmental, interagency and multi-stakeholder consultations were

undertaken at the national and regional levels in developing and achieving consensus

on the vision, missions and action programs of the SDS-SEA, leading to its

endorsement by the 12 participating governments and 16 key national, regional and

international organizations. The consultative process has also served the region

well with regard to buy-in and ownership by countries and major stakeholders since

the signing of the Putrajaya Declaration, as evidenced in many areas, some of which

are highlighted below:

• formulation and adoption of the Programme of Activities for the Implementation

of the SDS-SEA by participating governments, including time-bound targets for

national coastal and ocean governance policy, as well as ICM program coverage

of the region's coastline;

• drafting and adoption in principle of a Partnership Agreement and Partnership

Operating Arrangements, giving definition to the intergovernmental, multi-sectoral

regional coordinating mechanism to oversee the SDS-SEA implementation, and

identifying the roles and responsibilities of the partners within the operating

arrangement;

• submission of proposals of financial support for the start-up and operation of a

PEMSEA Resource Facility Secretariat;

• development of a Strategic Partnership with World Bank and UNDP, covering

investments in pollution reduction in the LMEs of East Asia;

• signature of a Framework Programme for Joint Oil Spill Preparedness and

Response in the Gulf of Thailand, by Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam; and

• adoption of the Bali Resolution on the Establishment of a PEMSEA Network of

Local Governments for Sustainable Coastal Development.

2.45.6. Another feature of the SDS-SEA is the provision of a suite of indicators for countries

and their partners to track progress towards desired outcomes and changes, including

process, stress reduction and impact indicators. The strategy also identifies

monitoring and reporting responsibilities at the local, national, subregional levels,

including inputs from private sector, academe, and civil society. Countries have

indicated the seriousness with which they regard monitoring and reporting. A State

of the Coasts (SOC) reporting system has been confirmed as a means of collating,

analyzing and reporting on the performance of countries and other stakeholders in

meeting the objectives and targets of the SDS-SEA. An SOC report will be produced

and published every three years, and will be a principal reference document of the

triennial Ministerial Forum and East Asian Seas Congress.

2.46. Existing efforts in developing the partnership arrangements has formed the basis

for formalization of a regional institutional arrangement.

2.46.1. The adoption of the Putrajaya Declaration by the Ministerial Forum on SDS-SEA and

the subsequent work to put in place operational arrangements for SDS-SEA

implementation provides a sound foundation for the formalization of a regional

institutional arrangement. The current proposed implementation arrangements will

be formalized through a Partnership Agreement and Partnership Operational

Arrangements on Implementation of the SDS-SEA. A PEMSEA Resource Facility

(PRF) will be established to provide secretariat services and policy and technical

services, a partnership council to allow a forum for all partnering stakeholders to

discuss collaborative activities and a partnership fund arrangement to receive financial

contributions. The mechanism includes a triennial State of the Coast Report and an

EAS Congress, which also features a Ministerial Forum. These basic elements have

become the integral part of a dynamic regional arrangement that has yet to be tested

in terms of operation.

2.46.2. The preparatory process of SDS-SEA has also included a review of regional

mechanisms within and outside the EAS region. While economic and environmental

benefits are the major motivations for regional cooperation, the effectiveness and

sustainability of a regional ocean governance regime is highly dependent on a reliable

source of funding. A legal instrument to formalize a regional mechanism may not be

a prerequisite for success. Experiences from several other regions show that a

regional convention does not at all guarantee success in achieving the goals. A review

of existing regional mechanisms for coastal and ocean governance in the seas of

East Asia concluded that greater planning and interaction between different sectors

should be ensured; that the multi- and interdisciplinary approach must be emphasized;

and the lack of financial resources and legal personality should be addressed. These

results were utilized in the SDS-SEA preparation.

2.46.3. The uniqueness of the proposed PEMSEA implementing mechanism is that

“partnership” is placed at the center of all forms of regional, national and local level

cooperation. This approach is a departure from the standard conventional or nonconventional

approach, which is primarily centered on “governments.”

2.46.4. PEMSEA’s partnership approach has proven to be effective in strengthening

coordination of efforts, nationally and internationally, with firm political commitments.

Such coordination is conducive to strengthening joint efforts in the implementation

of international instruments that could contribute to reversing the trends of degradation

and unsustainable development as well as improving safety and security at sea.

Over the past 12 years, the region has seen an increasing commitment of the

participating governments in the ratification of international conventions — from 51

in 1994 to 93 in 2004.

2.46.5. Cooperation, coordination and partnerships with other regional mechanisms have

been pursued, including through scientific needs, e.g., with ICES; UNEP Regional

Seas; and LME projects. The interactions have generated exchange of knowledge,

experiences, as well as helped create groups or meetings to address cutting-edge

problems of scientific nature.

2.47. PEMSEA has created the needed political and economic opportunity for regional

cooperation through stronger buy-in of the participating governments and partners.

2.47.1. The number of countries participating in PEMSEA has increased from 12 to 15 with

the entry of Myanmar, Lao PDR and Timor-Leste. The increase in geographical

coverage is brought about by the need to incorporate all concerned countries in the

region but more so of the increased political and economic opportunities created

through improvement of environmental quality, increased investments and perceived

ultimate improvement in the quality of life, as demonstrated in some of the PEMSEA

ICM sites in the region.

2.47.2. While there is a recognized need for financial resources to arrest the rapid degradation

of environmental quality and habitat restoration, PEMSEA’s stepwise approach in

coastal and ocean governance enables participating governments and partners to

consolidate and pool resources through improved coordination at all levels and

effective use of existing resources.

2.47.3. That PEMSEA was able to secure a stronger commitment from the Governments of

China, Japan and ROK to commit financial resources to support the proposed PRF,

and from the Government of the Philippines to continue hosting the RPO with

expanded facilities, speak for the increasing buy-in of the participating governments.

The active involvement of more than 30 institutional partners in co-convening the

international conference for the EAS Congress 2006 speak for the synergistic and

catalytic effects of PEMSEA in mobilizing regional and international partnership.

2.47.4. The ability of PEMSEA to develop a strategic partnership with the World Bank in

pollution reduction also demonstrates the economic opportunities that can benefit

from partnership arrangements.

2.48. The development of national coastal and ocean policies by participating governments

and the efforts to scale up ICM will add momentum to the establishment of a formal

regional mechanism.

2.48.1. PEMSEA has demonstrated the cost-effectiveness of ICM application and many

countries in the region have already begun to replicate this working model throughout

their coastline (e.g., China, Vietnam, Philippines, Cambodia) with corresponding

efforts to support coastal and ocean governance through the development of national

coastal and ocean policy or legislation (e.g., China, ROK, Thailand, Indonesia,

Malaysia, Vietnam). The increased efforts in coastal and ocean governance in the

last decade have greatly enhanced public awareness and interest to safeguard the

life-support systems of the coasts and oceans.

2.48.2. Nevertheless, PEMSEA's current approach and level of effort is not sufficient to

meet the objective of ICM coverage of five percent of the region's coastline by 2010.

To achieve this target, it is essential that national governments develop and adopt

policies in support of ICM scaling up, build a critical mass of ICM sites and expertise

using good practices developed from PEMSEA's demonstration projects, and engage

local governments as partners in the development and implementation of national

ICM programs. Promoting ICM as planning and management framework for

biodiversity, fisheries, ports, and ecotourism and extending the geographical coverage

from river-basin to coastal seas as well as for poverty reduction in the coastal areas

will also provide a stronger incentive and geographical basis for scaling up.

2.48.3. The momentum that has been generated by PEMSEA is instrumental in motivating

national, regional and international efforts in promoting the concept of sustainable

development for the seas and oceans. This momentum is critical in accelerating the

political will and management actions of the governments and partners to implement

the SDS-SEA.

2.49. Overcoming Challenges to the Implementation of the SDS-SEA.

2.49.1. Beyond the rhetoric of regional collaboration, implementation of SDS-SEA is a

challenge especially when the funding support from GEF winds down. The key to

the successful and sustainable implementation of the SDS-SEA is the regional

partnership mechanism that is being forged among the PEMSEA participating

governments, international agencies, donors, private sector, NGOs, user countries,

and other concerned stakeholders. While the partnership approach to governance

of regional oceans is innovative and unfamiliar to many, it offers many advantages,

such as:

• the formation of an EAS Partnership Council will enable stronger and longer

term commitments among the governments and their partners, as the

implementation of the SDS-SEA fulfills international, regional and national

objectives and mandates of governments and many partnering organizations;

• the organization of a triennial Ministerial Forum provides senior government officials

the opportunity to review the progress and impact of the SDS-SEA implementation

programme, and to renew their countries' commitments to the sustainability of

the regional ocean;

• the conduct of a triennial EAS Congress will improve linkages among related

regional programmes and projects and ensure the transfer of lessons and good

practices among managers and practitioners in different countries; and

• the transformation of PEMSEA Regional Office into a PEMSEA Resource Facility

(PRF) will allow multi-source financing for SDS-SEA-related projects, other than

GEF.

2.49.2 GEF funding is essential as a catalyst to build upon and strengthen the regional

partnership mechanism that has been established under PEMSEA. While there are

admirable commitments from China, Japan, RO Korea and the Philippines in providing

major funding and facility support to the Secretariat and a few other participating

nations making in-kind contributions, long-term sustainability of the partnership will

depend on the capacity and willingness of the partners to work together to meet the

targets and objectives of the SDS-SEA over the long term. The estimated

commitments of countries, international agencies and institutions, donors, private

sector and NGOs to activities under the SDS-SEA framework are currently of the

order of $3 billion to $4 billion, but it is evident these activities and the benefits being

derived are not widespread among countries, or in some cases within countries.

The GEF funding provides the means to achieve equity among partners in the

governance of the East Asian Seas, and to confirm the value of the regional partnership

mechanism as a viable means of governance.

3. PROJECT MANAGEMENT

3.1. GEF Evaluation Criteria.

3.1.1. Implementation Approach

3.1.1.1. Effective programmes are based on an explicit set of assumptions about

how programme inputs and activities are designed to result in intended

outcomes. One of the most salient features of PEMSEA is the detail with

which the assumptions on the establishment of effective site level ICM

projects and regional collaboration strategies have been developed, tested

and refined. The PEMSEA implementation strategy includes:

• stakeholder consultations at each site concerning key environmental

and socioeconomic issues, including land-based activities, and use

and user conflicts affecting the coastal environments;

• the development of a PCC composed of personnel from key agencies

with coastal management responsibilities;

• a heavy emphasis on building ICM skills and knowledge and

strengthening organizations;

• crafting and adoption of a coastal strategy, with the shared vision for

sustainable coastal development, and identification of the missions of

various stakeholders, the strategies and action programs that would

address the issues, and the roles and responsibilities of each key

sector and agency;

• the preparation of a coastal environmental profile and other technical

studies, including risk assessment; and

• the identification and formation of key partnerships.

3.1.1.2. Agency and community involvement, as well as public awareness

campaigns, are critical parts of the PEMSEA design and implementation

strategy. The continued dialogues through partnerships and participation

have created a sense of ownership, and strengthened political will and

commitment to the Programme. These also helped reduce and resolve

conflicts and laid the ground for long-term collaboration with cost-effective

and socially acceptable solutions to the identified problems. The approach

also has broken down or weakened some traditional barriers and helped

create trust and confidence.

3.1.1.3. The logical framework of the Programme is based on the achievements,

issues and lessons learned from the GEF Pilot Project activities together

with an analysis of the major environmental issues of the region, the

causes, baseline conditions and alternative courses of action. A central

feature of PEMSEA’s implementation program is building partnerships to

achieve a sustainable, longer-term path to environmental management.

The partnerships have been initiated through generation of the shared

vision followed by capacity building at local levels using locals to the extent

feasible, providing techniques, technical and scientific advice, tools,

catalytic funding, and identification of participants and recipients. It has

basically been a bottom-up approach that involved the local government

and its leadership.

3.1.1.4. The logical framework has been followed, but has been tailored to the

unique characteristics of sites and the diversity of the region. The longerterm

perspective has been secured through the close involvement of the

governments and authorities at local and, as appropriate, at the national

level. The adaptive approach and management is demonstrated through

the successful implementation in very different political settings and

national legal systems, with decentralized governance in some cases

and strongly centralized ones in other cases. Very effective partnerships

have been established in all cases, with resulting local ownership.

3.1.1.5. Another important part of the implementation strategy has been the

networking involving a wide range of participants. Technical analysis is a

key component of the PEMSEA strategy. Scientific communities have

been linked to sites at local levels as partners in analysis, planning and

management, and at regional levels through networking and regional expert

groups. The results of the monitoring and evaluation activities have been

utilized in adaptive management, knowledge transfer, and specifications

of dedicated systems such as the IIMS. The recommendations in the

Mid-term Review have been implemented to the extent possible.

3.1.1.6. Identification of participants, recipients and stakeholders at local levels

through the conduct of consultations to generate consensus on a shared

vision, and the creation of partnerships, including local NGOs and

community groups, have stimulated communication. The locals have

been encouraged to develop and use an active communication plan. This

has generated trust, transparency and accountability and helped improve

equity and fairness.

3.1.1.7. The Programme has also stimulated this whole process through its

publication and the generation of an active, regularly updated website.

The high-level and diversified publication, Tropical Coasts, has generated

very good visibility for PEMSEA at all levels. The EAS Congress 2003

confirmed this and has cemented it. The media have been successfully

informed and cultivated in distributing information, creating awareness

and raising the profile of PEMSEA — and the issues it seeks to address.

An example is the Media Forum on Partnerships in Environmental

Communication at the Congress 2003, and the resulting interest of the

media. A media resource center has been established in PEMSEA’s

website where relevant information is posted from time to time.

3.1.1.8. PEMSEA also has been given strong recognition outside the region. This

is confirmed by the participation of PEMSEA, by invitation, in global

conferences, as well as invitations to the Regional Programme Director

(RPD) and staff to present PEMSEA in other countries and regions.

Exchanges, and in some cases, cooperation, have been established with

other regional organizations, including European and North American ones,

and with the UNEP Regional Seas Programme and Large Marine

Ecosystem (LME) projects. Throughout the implementation of the

Programme, the guidance of the Programme leadership has been very

essential in building PEMSEA towards a sustainable development

institution. This is demonstrated in many ways.

3.1.1.9. It is worth noting that the Programme has been able to involve high-level

participation such as former heads of states, ministers and heads of UN

and regional organizations, and CEOs of business communities. At the

local level, this has been matched by the concerned governors, mayors,

leaders from the communities, NGOs and other civil society. Processes

and programs are locally and regionally driven. The confidence of the

IMO in the decisionmaking processes at the RPO has been a very

important positive step to make this possible.

3.1.1.10. The following constraints in programme implementation are noted:

• the limitations of the RPO as regards staffing;

• the initial limitations as regards capacity of the local professionals at

the sites;

• the limited active technical support of the Executing Agency (although

its decentralization approach has been a blessing);

• some language barriers; and

• some gender problems in some countries.

3.1.1.11. The political setting and government structure in some countries with

respect to centralization or decentralization has, in some cases, been a

problem, which were overcome by flexibility and adaptation. Through the

development of many activities, and the synergistic effects of success,

the management has become quite complex with great demands on the

technical expertise and staff time of RPO and the leadership of the RPD.

The situation has been successfully handled through a pragmatic approach

using decentralization, relying on very dedicated staff and on noninterference

from the outside as long as the process worked, which has

so far been the case.

3.1.1.12. The implementation approach is considered highly satisfactory by the

Evaluation Team.

3.1.2. Country Ownership

3.1.2.1. The emphasis on local ICM projects that address local coastal issues

has often generated active community participation usually manifested

through the development of a shared vision and action programmes for

the sites. Local governments and stakeholders demonstrate a strong

sense of ownership and commitment. The success of the local ICM

practices, particularly in Bali, Batangas, Danang, and Xiamen, has

generated national interest. The ICM practices have been gradually

incorporated into national development plans (e.g., China) and legal

systems (e.g., China, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia and ROK) as part of

governance. There is, however, a need for further attention to the

integration of the ICM outcomes with socioeconomic planning and

development, and to the valuation of the benefits. Recognizing that

PEMSEA's focus has been on ICM implementation at the local government

level, it is apparent that not all central governments have the same

appreciation of the potential value of an integrated management approach

with regard to improved coasts and ocean governance. Additional effort

is required to package and present the outcomes of ICM projects to

policymakers at the national level, with a view to strengthening ICM scaling

up programs and supporting initiatives across participating countries.

3.1.2.2. Through strong partnership developments, networking, institutional

linkages, and pro-active communication, the policymakers and

decisionmakers have been incorporated into the system of governance,

which strengthens their sense of ownership of the Programme. Research

institutions and universities have been linked to the local sites and through

regional networks. NGOs have adequately participated at the local level.

Efforts to achieve stronger cooperation and coordination with other regional

organizations as well as other ongoing projects/programmes in the region

are being made (such as Yellow Sea, South China Sea project, IW:Learn,

COBSEA, FAO, UNEP-GPA, CMC, OPRF, Nippon Foundation, etc.).

Through intergovernmental partnership building, PEMSEA has facilitated

an atmosphere of cooperation, mutual understanding and trust. This has

contributed immensely to regional ownership of the regional programme.

The relevance of the results of PEMSEA has been demonstrated beyond

doubt, perhaps in particular, through the inclusion of ICM-related practices

in national directives and adjustments in legal systems, as in governance.

The sustained financial commitments are well-presented through

replication efforts in parallel sites, in scaling up efforts, and in ministerial

declarations. PEMSEA has provided only catalytic support to the parallel

sites, in the form of technical advice, access to information and training,

as well as membership in the RNLG. The international recognition of

PEMSEA and the ICM sites have also enhanced the possibilities to obtain

environmental investments through better access to interested investors

and financial institutions.

3.1.2.3. The Team finds the approach highly satisfactory.

3.1.3. Stakeholder Participation and Public Involvement

3.1.3.1. A basic part of the Programme strategy is the development of a shared

vision for change and sustainable development. Stakeholder participation

is a key component in developing that shared vision and commitment.

Participation begins with the designation of the PCC composed of

representatives of agencies with coastal responsibilities. The PCC sets

the policy direction for the ICM site, helps set policy priorities and addresses

key coastal conflicts. At some sites there are also TWGs to address

scientific issues. Most sites hold community forums and workshops as

routine component of their planning and programme design activities.

Each site also develops a public awareness plan that may include mailers

about the project, poster contests, videos, special components in high

school curricula and many other elements. The result, as previously noted,

is a high level of understanding and commitment to the project at all levels

of society. Another form of partnership is being developed between the

public and the private sector on the design and development of

environmental improvement infrastructures.

3.1.3.2. As a whole, there has been achieved a vertical as well as a horizontal

integration of stakeholder participation: vertically from governments to

municipalities and communities, and horizontally across municipalities

in a province participating in the ICM implementation, and across

stakeholder groups such as civil society organizations and the private

business sector. One possible scope for improvement would be enriching

the participation of the youth through more direct representation in planning

and coordination mechanisms such as the PCCs and Site Coordinating

Committees (SCCs). Youth should also be incorporated as an important

target sector in PEMSEA'S future network. The network mechanism could

be more aggressively pursued using the "cell model", starting at the local

level and progressing through provincial, national and regional levels (e.g.,

EAS Congress Youth Forum).

3.1.3.3. Stakeholder participation is judged highly satisfactory by the Evaluation

Team.

3.1.4. Sustainability

3.1.4.1. Over the past decade, PEMSEA has helped enhance the technical skills

among a large cadre of professionals, the knowledge of key ICM concepts,

the institutional foundations and the understanding and political

commitment needed for sustainable programme activities at both project

site and regional levels.

3.1.4.2. The SDS-SEA is the primary expression of PEMSEA’s strategy for

sustainable resource use and approach to promoting sustainable coastal

management practices. The SDS-SEA was developed through a series

of meetings, workshops and consultations involving governments at local

and national levels, community groups, scientific communities, public and

private enterprises, NGOs, academics and potential outside funding

sources. The SDS-SEA was presented to senior government officials

before it was formally adopted in December 2003 through the Putrajaya

Declaration by the respective Ministers. An implementation arrangement

is being put in place. This includes a Partnership Agreement on the

Implementation of the SDS-SEA, with Partnership Operating

Arrangements, and a Strategic Action Plan for the transformation of

PEMSEA into a regional implementing mechanism for SDS-SEA

implementation. Co-financing plans have been specified, including

potential catalyzing support through GEF/UNDP with co-financing of a

PRF secretariat from the Governments.

3.1.4.3. The SDS-SEA implementation approach thus follows the model of

PEMSEA. It is based on the progress made through the Programme. As

seen, this demonstrates collective commitments, including: timely,

sustained counterpart contributions from countries, together with the

establishment voluntarily of parallel ICM sites; sustained PPP

arrangements; inclusion of ICM practices in regulatory frameworks at

national and local levels; the development and regulatory confirmation of

institutional and community arrangements for the implementation of

coastal and marine environmental management including tested and

established ICM practices; development of the intellectual capacity,

scientific and technical skills through linkages with universities/academe;

and enhanced public awareness of the socioeconomic benefits of ICM,

public participation and households’ willingness-to-pay for improved

environmental facilities and services. Ecological factors are incorporated

in the management, realizing the significance of ecological economics.

3.1.4.4. The shared vision for development which has been agreed through

consensus remains a fundamental pillar for achieving sustainability. The

proven replication of ICM sites and entry of additional countries in the

Programme also shows the synergism, cooperation and willingness to

implement reforms, including institutional and policy changes. In the long

term, PEMSEA’s progress provides incremental global benefits through

a demonstrated effort in addressing freshwater-coastal sea linkages. Also

seen is the relation of the SDS-SEA to WSSD commitments. The

communication network is in place, covering local, national and regional

levels. This brief situation analysis underlines the significance of the

Programme achievements for future development, and the opportunity to

create sustainable practices and institutions at regional levels. The

Programme efforts have paved the way for the creation of a Regional

Commission, or Council, for Sustainable Development.

3.1.4.5. The Evaluation Team considers the efforts and the results of PEMSEA as

a whole to achieve sustainability to be highly satisfactory.

3.1.5. Replication Approach

3.1.5.1. The approach of PEMSEA is already being replicated. The first phase began

with two ICM pilot sites — Batangas and Xiamen. The success of these

sites — and the lessons drawn from them — made it possible to have

other successful demonstration sites at Chonburi, Bali, Danang, Nampho,

Port Klang and Sihanoukville. These demonstration sites have contributed

to replication of ICM sites at Bataan, Shihwa, Sukabumi, Cavite,

Quangnam as well as ten sites in China and three additional sites in Bali.

3.1.5.2. Thailand provides one example of replication. In Chonburi Province in

Thailand, the successful results in the Sriracha Municipality triggered

several other municipalities to adopt PEMSEA’s ICM approach. A provincial

program involving nine municipalities has been developed and agreed

upon by the respective Mayors and the Chonburi Governor for 2006–2008.

Funding has been allocated from the provincial budget and the

municipalities. In some cases, the program includes not only estimates

of costs but also of expected benefits. This gives an indication of the

benefit-cost ratio, in the range 30-40. The Chonburi case is a reminder of

how influential PEMSEA sites can be if the right opportunities are provided

to local officials to view local ICM site management practices.

3.1.5.3. Several countries are offering to develop their respective ICM sites,

provided PEMSEA will offer technical guidance and assistance. Such

assistance is being provided by the RTF. PEMSEA capacity building and

related network of education and research institutions have developed an

extensive skill resource in the region. The dissemination of lessons

learned, of experiences and knowledge is being achieved through several

high level publications, workshops reports, a network of information

exchange and of universities in the region, the use of an e-forum

mechanism, and the creation of international training centers and centers

of excellence.

3.1.5.4. The Team evaluates the approach as highly satisfactory.

3.1.6. Financial Planning

3.1.6.1. At the programme level, the GEF fund allocation for the project in the

amount of $24.2 million has provided the core funding for PEMSEA

activities in its two phases since 1994, which has subsequently leveraged

substantial resources coming from various sources (Annexes 7 and 8).

In addition to core project funds, member countries, notably the

Philippines, Malaysia, Japan, China, RO Korea and Thailand, have also

provided significant contributions by way of hosting major activities (e.g.,

the EAS Congress in December 2003, meetings of the PSC). The EAS

Congress held in Putrajaya, Malaysia was a concrete example of how

combining resources from various sectors, institutions (both public and

private) and countries can bring about tangible commitments to

safeguarding the coasts and seas of the region. Staff estimates place

counterpart funds that have been mobilized in support of PEMSEA at

around $25 million (Annex 7).

3.1.6.2. Within specific countries with ICM sites, national and local governments

have likewise provided counterpart funds to support the work of SCCs,

PCCs and PMOs. At the same time, the non-government sectors

including private businesses and NGOs provide resource contributions

either in cash and/or in kind to support various site-specific activities and

projects under the Programme within countries (see box). Voluntary

initiatives have been encouraged that are funded and managed by private

sector entities, either as individual enterprises or through a collective

foundation that brings enterprises to pool resources and efforts together

in support of ICM initiatives. Apart from the examples from the Philippines,

similar private sector participation is harnessed in the oil spill mitigation

initiatives in the Gulf of Thailand, in the ICM program in Xiamen, and in

other PEMSEA project sites.

3.1.6.3. Some ICM sites have managed to develop a certain degree of financial

self-sustainability via a user-fee system for environmental services (e.g.,

diving fees in the municipalities of Mabini and Tingloy in Batangas,

Philippines) provided within the project site. Indeed, PEMSEA can validly

claim to have produced some of the first concrete examples of working

mechanisms providing for payments for environmental services (PES),

now widely recognized to be an important instrument for achieving

sustainability in environmental protection initiatives.

3.1.6.4. It is quite important to note that apart from resources provided specifically

for PEMSEA-initiated activities in the various project sites in the region,

substantial resources have been provided for related and parallel activities

in support of coastal and marine resources management by other funding

agencies and entities. This has been facilitated by the way in which

PEMSEA promotes people-to-people as well as sector-to-sector

interactions through its ICM and subregional sea areas/pollution hotspots

management activities. In most cases, these non-PEMSEA but related

projects were actually facilitated, encouraged or catalyzed by

achievements made by PEMSEA initiatives, making it fair to attribute credit

to PEMSEA for having leveraged the allocation of such other resources

coming from other sources to the promotion of sound management of

the EAS, even outside PEMSEA’s own program.

3.1.6.5. PEMSEA’s management framework provides ample opportunities for

various local stakeholders to work in partnership to address issues of

mutual concern. In particular, the framework also enables various

concerned stakeholders, especially resource providers such as donor

agencies, international financial institutions, UN agencies and international

developmental organizations to work with national and sub-national

stakeholders collectively to provide solutions to priority problems and

capacity needs (Annex 9).

3.1.6.6. There are many examples that illustrate how the integrated management

strategy and approach has facilitated collaboration by third parties at sites/

projects where PEMSEA had helped prepare the foundation. In each case,

new investments and/or new opportunities were either provided directly

to local stakeholders, or in a collaborative effort with PEMSEA, to enhance

the capacity of individuals, communities or sectors. Some of these are

highlighted in Annex 10.

Private Sector Funding for PEMSEA Initiatives: Philippine Experience

In Bataan province in the Philippines, 17 companies located in the export processing

zone within the province have put up about PHP100,000 (about $2,000), while the

Petron Corporation, which has an oil refinery in the province, has contributed PHP1

million (about $20,000). The contributions have been pooled through the Bataan

Coastal Care Foundation, and administered by Programme Coordinating Council

(PCC) of the Bataan ICM Program through the PMO and utilized for projects such as

coastal cleanups, mangrove reforestation, alternative livelihoods for fisherfolk, and

establishment of a marine sanctuary.

In the province of Batangas, apart from monetary contributions made directly by

private member-firms to support projects of the Batangas Coastal Resource

Management Foundation (BCRMF), beach resorts have taken on the responsibility

of regularly maintaining the marine sanctuaries. It is in the same area where a diver's

fee system has been employed successfully by two adjacent municipalities to raise

funds for supporting various activities on coastal resource management in the ICM

site. PHP1.8 million (about $35,000) was raised in 2005 out of this diver's fee system.

3.1.6.7. An estimate made by PEMSEA staff of funding resources made available

for the pursuit of SDS-SEA implementation outside of direct PEMSEA

initiatives places the amount very conservatively at about $4.6 billion (Annex

11). This is likely to underestimate the real figure substantially, for at least

two reasons. First, the estimate only included cash resources provided,

whereas substantial resource contributions in kind have also been

provided by various partners in the member countries with project sites.

Second, in most cases and for most member countries, the estimate

only captures resource contributions from government and public

institutions, whereas non-government sources have also put in a

substantial amount of resources, both in cash and in kind. As such, the

above figure could easily double if a fuller accounting of all such resources

leveraged by PEMSEA efforts for the East Asian coasts and seas could

be taken.

3.1.6.8. The Team evaluates the financial planning as highly satisfactory.

3.1.7. Cost-effectiveness

3.1.7.1. PEMSEA has operated on core funding of $8 million for the first phase

(1994–1999), and $16.2 million for the second phase (1999–2006), or

$24.2 million over the last 12 years. This is equivalent to an average of $2

million a year, a relatively modest amount considering what has been

achieved within each member country and regionwide. The

socioeconomic benefits coming out of the PEMSEA initiatives come in

numerous forms. These include the increased revenues in existing

livelihoods and enterprises and generation of alternative livelihoods, which

are documented in published reviews. It is also manifested through the

improved environmental conditions, the enhanced efficiency in using

natural resources, including through use of zoning schemes, and the

adjustments of national legal systems and policy to include ecological

and marine environmental concerns and management. The Programme

has demonstrated that environmental degradation can be stopped and

reversed while maintaining economic development. ICM has been firmly

installed in the region, with adequate inter-sectoral and interagency

mechanisms institutionalized, including reliable local counterparts to

national and international partners, with partnership agreements and publicprivate

enterprises.

3.1.7.2. Compared to what is being provided in other similar projects, the

Programme has provided seed funding that is well within or comparable

to the norm. The cost-sharing and co-financing strategy of PEMSEA has

worked very well. The Programme has succeeded in raising more than

the expected co-financing, counterpart provisions and in-kind support.

As noted in the previous section, the latter have been quite substantial

and have amounted to more than the actual GEF core funding, thereby

effectively more than doubling original project resources. These

counterpart resources have been mobilized through public and

professional participation, media coverage, high-level attendances in many

consultations, meetings, and provision of infrastructure and equipment.

The largest counterpart support has been provided for ICM

implementations, from national and regional governments, municipalities

and other partners, to an amount of $17.7 million, slightly larger than the

GEF/UNDP provision for the whole programme. For the subregional

activities, Bohai Sea and Manila Bay in particular, an amount of $6.3 million

has been leveraged. The other programme components have received

counterpart support of about $1.5 million in total, of which about half came

from donors (SIDA/CMC), IMO and UNEP-GPA and the remaining from

foundations, research centers and government authorities. Even more

substantial are the resources from other sources and initiatives that have

effectively been leveraged by PEMSEA’s own initiatives. As indicated in

the previous section and in Annex 11, the estimated $4.6 billion that have

been invested in coastal and marine resources management in the region

by others is likely to be a significant underestimate, a large part of which

can be considered to have been provoked by PEMSEA’s own initiatives

and successes.

3.1.7.3. Cost-effectiveness compares very well with — and in certain areas (e.g.,

in the Philippines) appears to significantly exceed — that of some similar

actions in the area and in the region as a whole. Numerical estimates to

allow quantitative cost-benefit analysis regionwide cannot be done with

any degree of precision, but attempts to quantify costs and benefits in

specific areas, notably in Xiamen (Annexes 12 and 13 ) and Chonburi,

Thailand could be illustrative. In Xiamen, socioeconomic benefits of ICM

based on estimated incremental revenues in ports and shipping, marine

fisheries, tourism and real estate and property development, along with

direct nature and environmental services created, were estimated at RMB

29.3 billion in present value terms (about $3.6 billion) in the period 1995–

2001. Against total costs of RMB 1.9 billion or $235 million, the net benefits

amount to about $3.4 billion, or a benefit-cost ratio of about 15:3. (Annexes

14a–14f provide relevant data on costs and benefits associated with the

ICM program in Xiamen.) In Chonburi, coastal rehabilitation in Angsila

Municipality has been estimated to result in benefits amounting to THB

31.4 billion, against total costs of THB 849 million, or a benefit-cost ratio

of 37. From these illustrative examples, it appears safe to surmise that

the catalytic investments made by PEMSEA have probably yielded far

more in socioeconomic benefits in the region.

3.1.7.4. Programme delivery has been in accordance with the schedule, in the

range of 75–95 percent for all components in the second half of 2004,

except as regards the regional mechanism which was at about 60 percent

delivery at the time. This is very reasonable in view of this component

being dependent upon the others. The financial planning appears very

prudent, including contingency plans for delays and for a possible transition

period (see 10th PSC Proceedings, 2004).

3.1.7.5. The Team finds the cost-effectiveness highly satisfactory.

3.1.8. Monitoring and Evaluation

3.1.8.1. There are adequate monitoring and evaluation efforts made on PEMSEA’s

activities and outputs.

These efforts include the following:

• PEMSEA submitted Quarterly Accomplishment Reports (QARs) to

UNDP and IMO providing summary of the progress on Programme

activities. Each year, PEMSEA conducted planning sessions to identify

milestones for the year and confirmation of new targets for the coming

year. The planning sessions enhance collaboration and understanding

among the implementers of various program components and provided

the basis for in-house monitoring by its Management and Technical

Committees.

• PEMSEA also provided reports for the Assessment of Implementation

Progress by UNDP, governments and programme management

conducted by the Intercessional Consultative Group (ICG). Under the

assessment, governments have to assess whether the programme

is relevant, whether the programme has adequately used its resources,

and be given satisfactory ratings (e.g., ICG report of 2001).

• PEMSEA is also required to submit an annual Project Implementation

Review (PIR), with basic data on project progress, financial delivery,

participation by stakeholders and programme impacts. The reviews

presented state of implementation for each immediate objective and

descriptive assessment.

• From 2000 to 2003, PEMSEA also submitted Results Oriented

Accomplishment Reports (ROAR) to GEF on project progress and

performance.

• PEMSEA has undergone a Mid-Term Evaluation in mid-2003 which

confirmed that the outputs and outcomes have contributed to the

attainment of the development objective and that the Programme

adhered to the accomplishments of its log frame indicators.

• PEMSEA progress and outputs are also reviewed by the PSC which

meets annually to assess PEMSEA programme implementation,

progress of component activities and outputs, approval of workplan

and budgets as well as provide guidance for improvements.

• PEMSEA’s ICM project sites report their achievements, outputs,

lessons learned from ICM implementation at their annual workshop

through the regular meetings of the RNLG.

• Finally, the EAS Congress 2003 also provided opportunities for

PEMSEA to report to its partners and the policymakers regarding

PEMSEA’s progress and achievements.

3.1.8.2. The QARs also presented the problems encountered in project

implementation, which included delays due to time required for the

preparation of reports in appropriate languages; translations; frequent

changes in focal points and restructuring in governments or

administrations; changes of elected local or national decisionmakers

(governors, mayors, administrators); lack of experience in UN procedures

at ICM sites by the staff; and lack of proficiency in English.

3.1.8.3. The PIR of 2003 provides an information overview of progress and issues

during the fourth year of implementation. Some highlights are: (a) the

official participation of Japan in 2002; (b) a growing appreciation and

support of the SDS-SEA; (c) endorsement of coastal strategies with

stakeholders commitment; (d) establishment of more parallel sites such

as in Sukabumi, Indonesia; (e) a $1.2 billion leveraged private sector

investment in Shihwa and Bohai Sea; (f) Investors Roundtable Conference

for Manila Bay projects; and (g) the RNLG Forum.

Challenges encountered included: (a) difficulties with implementation of

activities in the environmental investments component due to lack of

awareness of the PPP mechanism, and related responsibilities and

commitments from the public sector; (b) the need to strengthen

awareness campaigns and networking efforts; (c) refinement of the IIMS

taking more time than expected and incomplete database at sites

complicating full application; (d) need for strengthening of technical skills

in specialized activities; and (e) some delays in project delivery, requiring

more technical assistance from the RPO.

3.1.8.4. PEMSEA has received highly satisfactory ratings from the Secretariat

Managed Project Review undertaken by the GEF.

3.1.8.5. Several lessons learned can be identified:

• Ownership by local governments for ICM implementation and

sustainability is important.

• The co-financing and cost-sharing approach of PEMSEA allows local

ownership to be developed.

• The government inputs to PEMSEA totaled $8.9 million by 2003,

exceeding the pre-determined $3.3 million by a factor of 2.7. This was

achieved through: consultation with and support of local governments

and agencies; project activities built on local governments needs;

strengthening of human and financial resources and facilities; and good

negotiation of PEMSEA staff.

• Sustainability can be achieved through strong government action,

supporting legal system, sound science and capacity building.

• Mobilizing local governments to address environment issues is the

right approach, together with institutional arrangements to ensure local

participation and strengthen local capacity.

• While multi-agency participation and intersectoral engagement is

required, this is often complicated by interagency conflicts and

competition at local and national levels. Negotiations, persuasion and

pragmatism are required.

• The PPP development is strongly affected by political commitment,

trust, and social acceptability of identified investment opportunities,

local awareness, and capacity among public and private stakeholders.

• Public awareness creation and participation is very essential for

success.

3.1.8.6. It appears that on the basis of the above, the monitoring and evaluation of

the Programme has been very thorough throughout the period. This is

also evidenced by the adaptive management which has been applied,

seen in the adjustments of training and capacity-building approach; in the

adaptive learning through which the differences between ICM sites and

their requirements were taken into account; the negotiation of the SDS46

SEA; and the efforts in addressing the coordination and cooperation with

other projects and programmes in the countries and the region which are

supported by donors or global financial institutions.

3.1.8.7. An overview of results of PEMSEA activities in relation to GEF-adopted

indicators are shown in Annex 15.

3.1.8.8. The Evaluation Team finds the monitoring and evaluation activities of

PEMSEA highly satisfactory.

3.2. Role of IMO and UNDP

3.2.1. The IMO as executing agency has played a significant role, both in accepting the

task and in realizing that the Programme should be regionally-owned, with its

implementation guided and managed within the region. The RPD has been given the

necessary authority to manage the implementation of the Programme, including

decentralized decisionmaking. Fully recognizing the importance of the EAS region

as a major maritime transport zone, the IMO has concurred with the strategy of an

integrated regional mechanism like PEMSEA. The Evaluation Team wants to put

this on record and stresses the necessity of maintaining the approach. The country

and regional ownerships are essential for the sustainability of the PEMSEA regional

mechanism.

3.2.2. The IMO has provided counterpart support and participated in activities of particular

interest to the Organization: maritime training courses and workshops. The

counterpart (third party) input from IMO is $431,000, or about 60 percent of the

expected, listed contribution. On the other hand the overhead received by IMO has

been slightly less than $1 million. The IMO has been represented at PSC meetings.

At the 11th PSC meeting in August 2005, the representative of IMO, while

acknowledging the achievements of PEMSEA, confirmed that IMO will not continue

as executing agency for PEMSEA after completion of the present phase. The

Evaluation Team considers this regrettable. PEMSEA has made very considerable

progress and by establishing the SDS-SEA, aim at a consolidated regional

implementation of WSSD commitments and Agenda 21, and also supporting

UNCLOS.

3.2.3. The UNDP Office in Manila, Philippines, has been instrumental in providing the

necessary administrative backstopping for PEMSEA. The Office has been very helpful

also in supporting the RPD so as to facilitate the management of the programme

implementation. The Evaluation Team found the interaction with and understanding

of the UNDP Office very helpful. Regrettably, the counterpart (third party) contribution

expected from UNDP has so far not been provided.

3.2.4. Obviously, the change in executing agencies implies a loss of experience and the

functional and operational cooperation that has been established among IMO, UNDP,

the participating countries and the Regional Programme Office. It is unfortunate that

IMO has found reason to withdraw its support at this critical point, during the transition

of PEMSEA into a regional mechanism when all efforts ought to be dedicated to

maintain and enlarge regional participation, rather than establishing a working

relationship with a new executing agency.

4. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

4.1. Attaining the Development Objective

4.1.1. The Evaluation Team is of the opinion that the development objectives “To protect

life-support systems, and enable the sustainable use and management of coastal

and marine resources through intergovernmental, interagency and intersectoral

partnerships, for improved quality of life in the EAS Region,” requires consistent

long-term efforts and commitments on the part of the governments, other stakeholders

and donor agencies. However, the Team noted substantial progress has been

achieved during the current phase in building partnerships for advancing policies,

implementing strategic management frameworks and action programs at national

and local levels, a pre-requisite in achieving the development objective.

4.1.2. PEMSEA has built the necessary cooperation framework at local, national,

subregional and regional levels to achieve the long-term development goals:

1. At the local level, the Evaluation Team noted that PEMSEA has successfully

demonstrated the applicability and cost-effectiveness of the ICM framework and

processes for achieving sustainable use of the natural resources and ensuring

environmental sustainability. The working models at the ICM demonstration and

parallel sites across the region shall serve as the learning centers for ICM

replication and scaling up. The outputs of the ICM sites, specifically the Coastal

Strategies and the respective Operational Plans, serve as references for provincial

and municipal medium-range economic development plans. Through the

implementation of these ICM programs at increased sites, the socioeconomic

benefits and improvement of environmental conditions will be gradually realized.

These findings are supported by the site visits of the Evaluation Team. Some

comparisons between present and previous environmental conditions were made

through interviews with local stakeholders, who also showed an enhanced

awareness of their responsibilities and the importance of the environment. Local

leaders and communities testified that some improvements have been made in

terms of human health, accessibility to clean water and sanitary facilities, as

well as cleaner environment and restored habitats, in part due to public awareness

and mind-set changes of local leaders and managers brought about by the ICM

projects.

2. At the national level, PEMSEA promoted the development of national coastal and

ocean policies, legislation and action plans to strengthen coastal and ocean

governance. PEMSEA provided policy guidelines, policy briefs and organized

policy workshops and think tanks to enhance national efforts towards this direction.

National efforts in managing larger body of coastal waters were also strengthened

through the implementation of the Bohai Sea project and the Manila Bay project.

PEMSEA has been playing a very important catalytic role in the bigger Bohai

region in facilitating the partnerships among the coastal provinces of Shandong,

Liaoning and Hebei, the City of Dalian, Tianjin Municipality and other stakeholders

to address common priority issues in relation to their shared resources. This

was manifested through the Bohai Sea Declaration and the Bohai Sea Sustainable

Development Strategy. Bohai Sea has unique social, economic and ecological

features, supporting about 35 percent of the population of China, producing some

40 percent of its seafood, and handling about 25 percent of goods going through

its ports. A national legislation on the Bohai Sea based on the implementation of

the Sustainable Development Strategy has been tabled at the National Assembly

for adoption. The implementation of this strategy with the enactment of national

legislation will enable a large scale clean-up and management of this important

inland sea of China. PEMSEA’s contribution in this aspect should not be ignored.

3. At the subregional sea level, PEMSEA has been able to engineer subregional

partnership among the littoral countries of the Gulf of Thailand. The development

and endorsement of the Joint Statement of Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam on

Partnership in Oil Spill Preparedness and Response in the Gulf of Thailand,

together with the related Framework Program is a clear evidence of a high-level

of commitment of these countries to sustain this subregional cooperation. This

has generated considerable developments as regards capacity and preparedness

in all three countries. A noticeable subset of the Gulf of Thailand program is the

Port Safety, Health and Environmental Management System (PSHEMS)

developed by PEMSEA, tested and established in the Port of Bangkok (Thailand)

and Port of Tanjung Pelepas (PTP) in Malaysia. The port management and

other stakeholders have considered this a successful undertaking, responding

to several international conventions, including the Basel Convention, SOLAS

and MARPOL. The replication of such efforts would certainly improve the port

safety, health and environmental measures of ports around the region.

4. At the regional level, the development and endorsement of the SDS-SEA, an

unprecedented output of PEMSEA, which has been adopted by the 12 participating

governments and 16 international and regional collaborators, has provided the

much needed regional policy and management frameworks and platforms for

regional cooperation. A partnership mechanism has been developed and, upon

endorsement by the concerned governments by the end of December 2006, will

provide the needed institutional arrangements for its implementation. The SDSSEA

is intended to catalyze and synergize national efforts to implement the various

strategic action programs contained in the document.

4.1.3. The Evaluation Team is of the opinion that efforts should build on these progresses

as a solid foundation to catalyze greater national and local commitments, and such

efforts should continue.

4.1.4. In most cases, however, actual valuation of social and economic effects from ICM

implementation remains to be done. Such valuation will be useful to generate deeper

commitments of elected leaders and policymakers, and the Evaluation Team

recommends that this be pursued.

4.2. Immediate Objectives and related GEF Operational Programmes

4.2.1. On basis of the synthesis given in Section 2 the Evaluation Team concludes that the

Immediate Objectives of PEMSEA have been met. Adaptive management has been

applied so as to adjust to changing conditions. At the time of the evaluation the

overall implementation rate was 95 percent.

4.2.2. The PEMSEA contribution to meeting expected outputs of related GEF Operational

Programmes, essentially 8, 9, 10, was analyzed in the Mid-Term Evaluation (see its

report at Annex 1). The progress has continued. The strong advances of PEMSEA

as regards the cost-sharing and co-financing strategy, with contributions from national,

provincial, local governments and municipalities are very encouraging signs with

respect to creation of longer-term commitments. Such are required for sustainable

development to be achieved and are essential for reaching the objectives of the GEF

Operational Programmes. The Evaluation Team finds that the policy commitments

resulting from PEMSEA actions are as important indicators in the same direction.

The adoption of coastal strategies and implementation plans with commitments

from provincial governments and municipalities are examples. The gradual adoption

of national coastal and ocean policies, often including ICM practices are examples

of national policy commitments. This is corroborated by the increase in ratifications

of international conventions, and the indications of enhanced understanding for their

roles.

4.2.3. The subregional activities in Bohai Sea, Manila Bay and Gulf of Thailand have

progressed further. The Government of China has committed about $7 billion to the

implementation of the activities outlined in the Bohai Sea Declaration. The Gulf of

Thailand riparian states have committed to an intergovernmental agreement contained

in the Joint Statement on Partnership in Oil Spill Preparedness and Response in the

Gulf of Thailand, and the related Framework Program. The Evaluation Team views

these as very important developments and commitments.

4.2.4. The private sector investments and the PPP mechanism have not progressed as

targeted. However, important breakthroughs have been made in the most advanced

ICM demonstration sites. These include Xiamen and Danang. The zoning scheme

introduced in Xiamen has generated considerable increased efficiency and returns

to both public and private sectors. The PEMSEA results have stimulated involvement

and positive interest from the private sector and have helped create the required

dialogue and understanding between the public and private sectors. The enhanced

awareness has generated a change in perceptions. User fees have been promoted,

are becoming acceptable and are introduced in several sites. However, the challenge

of putting more PPP projects into actual implementation remains. The Evaluation

Team is of the opinion that the take-off is not far away in time, provided the facilitation

prevails.

4.2.5. The capacity building and public awareness creation achieved by PEMSEA is providing

another foundation for medium-term commitments. The number of ICM sites has

increased impressively from two or three at the beginning of the 2nd phase to about

26 at the time of the evaluation. Through the operational networks, these sites are

linked together. This provides for a critical mass of ICM expertise and community in

the EAS region. A core base of practical experiences of ICM has been developed.

The skills need to be maintained and re-training and awareness creation must

continue of managers, experts, leaders and the public. Active and inclusive stakeholder

participation in ICM activities has enhanced sustainability of the initiatives and

commitment of the various partners. A further scope for improvement would be

enriching the participation of the youth through more direct representation in planning

and coordination mechanisms.

4.2.6. PEMSEA has generated a wealth of information and experience over the past years.

It will be extremely useful if efforts be made to provide synthesis and lessons learned

from the implementation of ICM programs and subregional seas and hotspots

especially distilling reasons why some sites are more advanced than the others in

terms of attaining the immediate objectives. Based on the PEMSEA experience,

further effort in building a critical mass of middle-level professions proficient in

integrated management would be beneficial for duplication and scaling up. More

attention on the development and consolidation of regional training centers could

help meet the manpower needs and create an enabling environment at local and

subregional levels. The importance of capacity development through ICM

demonstration sites should also be underscored.

4.2.7. PEMSEA has been focusing on local level implementation and to a certain extent

might have neglected building a stronger involvement of the central agencies other

than the yearly Programme Steering Committee meeting and the EAS Congress. It

is imperative that PEMSEA should reach out to central agencies by involving them

more frequently in policy or leadership workshops, seminars and study tours to

successful sites.

5. RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Having been witness to what PEMSEA has achieved over the two phases of GEF funding

support, the Evaluation Team strongly recommends continued GEF funding support for the

PEMSEA project, based on the following observations and arguments:

• The East Asian region is too critical in the world economy, and its coasts and seas far too

vital to the global environment, for it not to be able to access an appropriate share of GEF

funding support at this time.

• GEF support for PEMSEA has been relatively modest, yet has been extremely productive,

making it arguably one of the most efficient and effective uses of GEF resources.

• A considerable amount of time is required for effective partnerships for the environment

to be established and take root, and more time is needed to consolidate the gains made

towards the goals of SDS-SEA on a self-sustaining path.

• The unevenness of capacities within the region makes continued external support

essential, especially in the efforts toward leveling such capacities.

• There has been clear positive momentum attained so far with the various PEMSEA

initiatives, that an interruption through non-renewal of GEF support would be both costly

and wasteful.

5.2. Annex 16 provides more detailed support for the above observations and arguments.

5.3. Renewed support for PEMSEA is recommended over a transition and transformation period

of six years, as part of a ten-year regional programme. The proposed ten-year project time

frame is broken down as follows. The first three years, 2007–2010, constitute a transition

period which will build further momentum for the implementation of SDS-SEA through

partnership projects, and will further consolidate the PEMSEA results with the continued

catalytic support of GEF/UNDP. This will be followed by a three-year transformation period

wherein the region is largely “weaned” from external funding support as a sustainable selffinancing

mechanism is phased in. The final four years will constitute the period for achieving

sustainable operation.

5.4. Commitments for even stronger counterpart support have already been secured for a possible

third phase of GEF support to PEMSEA. The commitment from the Host Country to continue

providing infrastructure for the Regional Office has been obtained, with additional office space

already being offered. Commitments have been secured from China, Japan, and RO Korea

to provide significant financial support. Further commitments from other Governments of the

region are being sought to permit continued support and active participation in the

implementation of the SDS-SEA, as well as facilitate the interaction, coordination and

cooperation between PEMSEA and other related programmes in the region.

5.5. The proposed EAS Partnership Council with accompanying Ministerial Forum, an idea that

has already gained acceptance in principle by the Governments in the region, could provide

the comprehensive regional coordination and decisionmaking mechanism that would also

serve as venue for obtaining necessary government commitments. This mechanism could

potentially evolve into a more comprehensive Regional Commission for Sustainable

Development.

5.6. It could act as a facilitator, and could help in achieving the needed coordination and cooperation

among related international initiatives and projects in the region. It would also provide for an

enabling mechanism to attract investments and raise financial resources. The viability of

establishing this mechanism has been studied through the PEMSEA mechanism in the followup

to the Putrajaya Declaration, including through national consultations slated for the first

half of 2006. The results are to be presented for adoption at the EAS Congress 2006.

5.7. In light of the evaluation, the team expresses concern over the potentially large cost and the

wastefulness of interrupting the momentum of progress already built in the region through

the PEMSEA initiatives. To PEMSEA’s credit, site-specific initiatives in the various ICM sites

and marine pollution hotspots now mostly manifest sustainability on their own, owing to the

strong partnerships that have been firmly put in place and resource contributions and

commitments that have been made by various partners on the ground. Nonetheless, a

critical mass of human and financial resources for the entire region, while emerging, has yet

to be achieved, and external funding assistance will continue to be essential in firmly securing

such critical mass that will provide a self-sustaining momentum.

5.8. It is also incumbent upon the international organizations to acknowledge that, through their

participation and support, a valuable partnership arrangement has been created which should

be utilized, maintained and not lost or put to waste. The continued monitoring of the progress

at the local, national, subregional and regional level established through the partnerships and

networks will support the process. The proven and functioning partnership strategy with cofinancing

and cost-sharing requires solidarity and faithful delivery of commitments. It is quite

likely that seeing such a mechanism serving the EAS region well will provide encouragement

to other regions to follow suit.

6. LESSONS LEARNED

6.1. Efforts toward sound management of the seas and coasts of East Asia are by no means

confined to the PEMSEA initiatives. There are numerous other initiatives that have been or

are being undertaken by other entities, whether led by governments (both national and local),

donor agencies, civil society organizations, private business enterprises or communities

themselves. But the Evaluation Team share the view that none of these stand out as

prominently as PEMSEA’s overall approach and specific initiatives do, by virtue of its winning

formula summed up in the word making up its first name: Partnerships.

6.2. The PEMSEA record over the past 12 years offers distinctive lessons for other initiatives

addressing sustainable management not only of coastal and marine resources, but of natural

resources in general. Among these lessons, the Evaluation Team would particularly wish to

highlight the following:

Lesson 1: Success and sustainability hinges on the proper combination of key

Programme ingredients.

6.3. PEMSEA appears to have hit upon the right formula for success and sustainability in the

management of marine and coastal resources, not out of chance but borne out of careful

analysis and deliberate design, tested and refined through its 12 years in operation. Key

ingredients include (1) a clear shared vision, (2) inclusive, multi-level partnerships, (3) active

stakeholder participation sustained through appropriate incentive mechanisms, (4) adequate

funding streams marked with resource counterparting, (5) science-based management

support, (6) purposive capacity building and organizational strengthening, and (7) active

communication and advocacy. The vision must be well-articulated and widely owned, whether

at the level of the community, or at the level of the entire region (e.g., the SDS-SEA).

Partnerships need to be fostered among all concerned stakeholders, and at different levels.

Participation, not mere consultation, needs to be ensured and sustained through both material

and non-pecuniary incentives, including mechanisms to foster team building, community

spirit, and concern for the common good. Adequate resource support must be mobilized

from various sources, including private sector investments. Scientific knowledge, including

from the social sciences, must be put to good application in the management of programme

initiatives. Capacity building must be a continuous effort, addressing all partners and focused

on identified needs and weaknesses. And since sustainability ultimately hinges on responsible

citizens’ action, public information, communication and advocacy is a critical element that

demands an orchestrated approach and commensurate investment in effort and resources.

6.4. In PEMSEA, each of these elements has been deliberately pursued and strengthened as

critical components of a unified and coherent effort. It has been well-recognized that lack of

or weakness in one element impairs the effectiveness of the entire programme.

Lesson 2: Partnerships must be inclusive.

6.5. Inclusive partnerships that harness efforts and resources from all relevant stakeholder groups

at various levels and in all aspects of the work are critical to effectiveness and sustainability.

The hallmark of the PEMSEA approach has been its deliberate strategy of promoting both

vertical and horizontal integration. This entails coordination among the various levels of

governance spanning the community, municipal, provincial, national and regional levels, and

among and across the various functional units of government, enterprises in the private

sector, and sectoral groups in civil society. In PEMSEA, all relevant stakeholder groups are

harnessed in the partnership; all have defined roles and commitments to complete a unified

whole. The various government agencies concerned in ocean and coastal affairs (e.g., those

concerned with fisheries, ports management, watershed management, etc.) are brought

together to cooperate with private enterprises, NGOs, church and religious groups, the

academe, women’s groups, schools, and others. We have heard it cited, for example, that

other donor initiatives in coastal resources management in the region often focus primarily

on community and civil society participation, but fail to give commensurate importance to the

role of the private sector, of the academe, or even of the local government in the partnership.

Such lopsided participation is bound to handicap the effort sooner or later. PEMSEA avoids

this pitfall though its inclusive approach to partnership. The composition of the PCCs reflects

the comprehensive and inclusive nature of the partnerships that PEMSEA has engendered in

its various initiatives in the region. With such inclusiveness, complementarities and synergies

are maximized, thereby enhancing both efficiency and effectiveness in its outcomes.

Lesson 3: PEMSEA’s combination of top-down and bottom-up impetus is

effective in securing necessary political commitment.

6.6. Political support and commitment from the decisionmakers at various levels is critical to the

success of ICM. Without the “buy-in” from the concerned political leaders, partnerships are

incomplete and hampered from securing full and sustained benefits. The PEMSEA approach

has provided an effective combination of top-down and bottom-up impetus to political leaders

through its simultaneous vertical and horizontal integration strategy. Actual experience with

specific political leaders has demonstrated how the networking of local governments across

the region and other intergovernmental/international mechanisms in the Programme (e.g.,

PSC meetings, the EAS Congress) have been highly instrumental in attaining and reinforcing

their commitment. For example, it has been cited how the commitment of one local chief

executive from the Philippines who simply “inherited” his province’s PEMSEA project was

firmly secured and reinforced with his participation in the Bali meeting of the PEMSEA RNLG.

The meeting served as an eye-opener that reportedly impressed on him the larger context

and importance of the project at the regional and even global perspective.

6.7. At the same time, the active horizontal partnerships across municipalities, across relevant

national government agencies, and especially across the various stakeholder groups as

manifested through the PCCs have also provided a simultaneous impetus from the ground,

spurring the political leaders to exercise their leadership and political will in promoting ICM.

Such appeared to be the case in another province in the Philippines, where the new governor’s

political commitment was inspired by the demonstrated dedication and competence of the

multi-stakeholder council that oversees his province’s ICM program, and its technical

secretariat within his staff. Furthermore, site visits by municipal leaders and managers to

the ICM demonstration sites have been effective in convincing them of ICM’s benefits, and

moving them to initiate ICM practices in their own localities.

Lesson 4: Partnerships do not happen overnight.

6.8. Partnerships for the natural environment take time and patience to build and foster. PEMSEA’s

achievements in the region through its various site-specific projects certainly came neither

easily, nor promptly. To begin with, concern for the environment is not in the first level of

human beings’ hierarchy of needs. It takes much time to build awareness and appreciation

for the value of protecting and sustaining marine and coastal resources against the more

pressing need for food and income. Hence, building a critical mass of dedicated workers

and advocates on the ground necessarily takes a great deal of time and effort. To pursue

faithful implementation of SDS-SEA, critical mass has to be achieved at various levels. Such

critical mass appears to have been achieved at the level of the individual ICM sites, where

some measure of sustainability appears to have been attained. Critical mass has yet to be

achieved at the national levels, with less than five percent of national coastlines so far put

under ICM. This is even more so at the regional level, where the SDS-SEA objective of

placing 20 percent of the coastlines under ICM remains a distant goal.

6.9. Nonetheless, momentum has clearly been achieved, as experience has demonstrated that

partnerships, once formed, tend to take on a certain self-sustaining nature that makes their

maintenance much less costly than establishing them. The implication is that the PEMSEA

approach needs to be given further ample time with appropriate resource support for it to

reach self-sustaining momentum at the regional level.

6.10. PEMSEA has clearly shown the way to the sustainable management of the seas and coasts

of East Asia. Other initiatives in pursuit of the same end would do well to heed the lessons it

has generated through the last 12 years. In so doing, the same measure of accomplishment

it has achieved could conceivably be attained with future initiatives in considerably less time.

1 The Project and Its Development Objective

2 List of Persons Met and/or Interviewed (Individually or in Groups)

3 Summary Showing Project Document Compliance and Internal

Evaluation of ICM

4 Dynamics of Coastal and Ocean Governance and ICM Cycle

5 List of PEMSEA Publications

6 Summary / Overview of Other Materials Available to

the Evaluation Team

7 Resource Mobilization

8 Local Government Counterpart Resource Mobilization

9 PEMSEA Cooperation and Collaboration with Partners

10 Leveraging Collaboration and Support

11 Resources for the Pursuit of SDS-SEA Implementation

12 Selected Indicators of Benefits and Costs Associated with ICM in Xiamen

13 Quantified Benefits and Costs

Tables

a. Environmental and Socioeconomic Benefits of ICM (1995–2001)

b. Quantified Benefits and Costs

14 Documented Benefits from ICM: Xiamen Demonstration Site

Tables

a. Investments in Environmental Services (Million RMB)

b. Government Investment in Preservation Zones (Million RMB)

c. Number and Area of Natural Reserves of Xiamen

d. Earnings of the Port and Sea Transportation (in million RMB)

e. Status of Real Estate Market of Xiamen

f. Estimated Net Benefits of the Economic Sectors (million RMB)

15 Overview of Results in Relation to GEF Adopted Indicators

(Monitoring and Evaluation Working Paper 10, November 2002)

16 The Need and Merit of a Third Phase of GEF/UNDP Support

for the Seas of East Asia

ANNEXES

ANNEX 1

The Project and Its Development Context

The PEMSEA Programme vision is improved

quality of life in the East Asian Seas (EAS) region.

This region comprises seven named seas, from

the Bohai Sea in the north to the Indonesian Seas

in the south, and embraces six large marine

ecosystems (LMEs).

PEMSEA is motivated by the importance of

the coastal and marine resources for the people,

the social conditions, and the dominating role of

the seas as transport routes and for the economy

of all the countries. About 40 percent of the Gross

Domestic Product of the coastal nations is due to

coastal and marine areas. Fish provides the main

source of animal protein for the region. On

average, about 60 percent of

the nearly 2 billion people of

the region live within 100 km

of the coastline. In several

countries, close to a hundred

percent live within this zone

(e.g., The Philippines,

Republic of Korea,

Singapore, Malaysia and

Japan). The approach and

activities of the PEMSEA

Programme have been

designed to advance policies,

management frameworks

and action programs of each

participating country towards

achieving the longer-term

goal.

The EAS region is

socially, economically and

ecologically interconnected:

interregional population

movements, maritime trade

and the nutritional importance

of fish all contribute to

interregional connectivity.

Map of the East Asian Seas Region.

The tourism industry is of major importance for

most of the countries, with the coastal areas

becoming large attractions also for the recreation

of the population. Rapid urbanization of coasts

has added to the pressure. Several coastal

megacities have emerged, with large associated

ports and economic power, but with it came

significant poverty and large vulnerability. The

financial crisis of 1997–1998 and globalization

have stimulated further regionalization, brought

the countries closer and expanded the political

relationship between the economically, relatively

stronger northern countries with the southern part,

which has already been closely connected through

ASEAN for over three decades.

Annex 1. The Project and Its Development Context

Ecological interconnectivity is coupled with

ocean circulation, influenced by the Kuroshio,

the Equatorial currents, and the exchange

between the Pacific and the Indian Oceans, e.g.,

through the Java current. Wind-generated

surface layer circulation and mixing play major

roles in local and subregional conditions, along

with topographic features. The Asian monsoon

has a large influence on seasonal conditions,

with strong winter and summer seasons in the

northern parts of the region. In the southern

parts, the recurrent El Niño phenomenon can

have devastating effects, generating droughts

and forest fires.

Ocean circulation governs the physical,

chemical and biological conditions. Fisheries are

rich with several important migratory and shared

stocks. Aquaculture is a major industry. The high

biological productivity is also stimulated by

upwelling zones and terrestrial runoff. Several

large rivers enter the region, such as the

Mekong, Yangtze, Yellow and Red Rivers,

together with many smaller ones. The region is

the world center of marine biological diversity,

which is also strongly influenced by

oceanographic conditions. The biodiversity

constitutes a rich genetic resource, as yet not

really utilized.

The region is subject to severe natural

hazards, including tsunamis, earthquakes,

typhoons and other tropical storms, sandstorms

due to the Asian monsoon, forest fires and El

Niño-related effects. A number of environmental

hazards are related to human actions, e.g., red

tides, some other harmful algal blooms (HABs),

oil spills, urban runoff, contaminated seafood,

untreated sewage disposals, and the

introduction of non-indigenous (invasive species)

through deballasting. Coastal pollution and

degradation through many processes are very

serious. Coastal erosion is a growing problem,

illustrated by the gradual subsidence of major

coastal cities like Bangkok — a problem that will

be exacerbated by global climate change.

Many of the processes causing environmental

degradation require more time than a natural

hazard event like a tsunami or a typhoon to

generate the visible and economically-harmful

impact. This is due to the resilience and assimilative

capacity of the ecosystems. However, they also

require more time to be stopped and reversed. If

the capacity of the ecosystems is surpassed, the

impacts become irreversible. There is a continuous

interaction between economic and ecological

systems. The sustainability of these interactions

is elucidated in the ecological economics research.

In the region, impacts on the natural system are

being seen and are having socioeconomic effects.

There is a need for action, which has been

repeatedly pointed out by international reviews.

Most of the countries have realized this. This is

indicated by their endorsement of international

conventions and agreements. However,

implementation is weak. The interconnectivity has

stimulated political relationships, just as it has

illustrated the vulnerability. This interconnectivity

has started to stimulate common policies.

There are many opportunities that can be

used to further forward implementation as regards

the environment and sustainable development: the

UNCED 92 Process, with developments of national

Agenda 21s, institutional rearrangements, and

adjustments of legal systems; and the WSSD 2002

Process. The WSSD highlighted the interactions

between poverty eradication, environmental

improvement and security, in the broad sense,

including food, health and freshwater. In the region,

about 15 percent of the population is living on less

than one or two US dollars a day. Taken together,

all these factors are inspiring a new effort in

regional collaboration and partnerships. The aim

is to reverse the overexploitation of resources,

return to a sustainable interaction between

economic and ecological systems, and work

towards sustainable development. This vision may

be a dream, but it has nevertheless been the

context of PEMSEA — from Seven Seas to One

Ocean.

ANNEX 2

List of Persons Met and/or Interviewed

(Individually or in Groups)

List of Persons Met and/or Interviewed

(Individual and in Groups)

A. IMO

Mr. Jean Claude Sainlos – Via Teleconference

Director

Marine Environment Division

B. GEF OFFICE

Mr. Randall Purcell – Via Teleconference

Regional Technical Advisor

Land Degradation and

International Waters

Global Environment Facility

C. UNDP OFFICES

UNDP Manila

Mr. Kyo Naka

Deputy Resident Representative

Ms. Amelia Dulce Supetran

Portfolio Manager – Environment

Ms. Clarissa Arida

Programme Manager

UNDP Hanoi

Mr. Koos Nefjes

Head

Sustainable Development Cluster

Mr. Dao Xuan Lai

Programme Officer

Sustainable Development Cluster

UNDP Phnom Penh

Ms. Anne-Isabelle Degryse-Blateau

Programme Director and Deputy Resident

Representative

UNDP Bangkok

Mr. Poonsin Srisangkom

National Coordinator of GEF/SGP

Thailand

Mr. Kunchit Sukjaimit

Secretary

Thai Fund Association

Committee Member, GEF/SGP

Mr. Chalong Ditsee

Committee Member, GEF/SGP

D. PEMSEA RPO

Regional Programme Director

Dr. Chua Thia-Eng

Senior Programme Officers

Mr. Stephen Adrian Ross

Dr. Huming Yu

Dr. Jihyun Lee

National Officers

Ms. Nancy Bermas

Ms. Stella Regina Bernad

Ms. Bresilda Gervacio

Ms. Maria Corazon Ebarvia

Ms. Maria Teresita G. Lacerna

Technical Assistants

Ms. Cristine Ingrid Narcise

Ms. Belyn Rafael

Mr. Rainier Requinala

Ms. Maria Cecilia San

Ms. Kathrine Gallardo

Annex 2. List of Persons Met and/or Interviewed (Individually or in Groups)

E. PEMSEA PMOs AND RELEVANT

OFFICES

1. DANANG, VIETNAM

PMO Staff

Mr. Tran Dinh Lien

DOST Director and PMO Director

Dr. Nguyen Minh Son

Project Technical Adviser

Mr. Do Manh Thang

Ms. Phan Thi Thu Thuy

Ms. Tran Thi Tham Uyen

Mr. Truong Cong Hai

Project Management Office Staff

Local Government and Other Agencies

Dr. Nong Thi Ngoc Minh

Chair, PCC and Vice Chairperson,

Danang City

Mr. Pham Kim Son

Director, Department of Post and

Telecommunications

People’s Committee of Danang City

Vice-Director

ICM Project

Mr. Phung Tan Viet

Director

Department of Planning and Investments

Mr. Huynh Phuoc

Deputy Director

Danang DOST

Dr. Huynh Ngoc Thach

Association for Environment and Nature

Protection

Mr. Ngo Truong Tho

Department of Tourism

Mrs. Phan Thi Nu

Urban Environment Company

Mrs. Le Thi Tham

Chairperson

Danang’s Women Association

Ms. Ho Hoai Ha

Deputy Head of Consular

Foreign Affairs Department

Project Coordinating Committee

Dr. Nong Thi Ngoc Minh

Vice Chairman of Danang People’s

Committee

Chair of PCC.

Mr. Dinh Lien

Director

Department of Science and Technology

Director

ICM Project

Mr. Pham Kim Son

Director, Department of Post and

Telecommunications

People’s Committee of Danang City

Vice-Director

ICM Project

Mr. Phung Tan Viet

Director

Department of Planning and Investment

Mr. Le Hong Minh

Deputy Head

Office of Danang People’s Committee

Mr. Nguyen Dieu

Director

Department of Natural Resource and

Environment

Mr. Ho Pho

Director

Department of Aquaculture, Agriculture and

Forestry

Mr. Ngo Quang Vinh

Director

Department of Tourism

Mr. Nguyen Dinh Thu

Vice Chairman

People’s Committee of Ngu Hanh Son

District

Mr. Nguyen Thai Phien

Vice Chairman

People’s Committee of Son Tra District

Mr. Dang Cong Thang

Vice Chairman

Danang Farmer Association

Mrs. Nguyen Thi Thanh Minh

Vice Chairman

Danang Women’s Association

Mr. Huynh Phuoc

Deputy-Director

Department of Science and Technology

Dr. Bui Van Ga

Danang University

Dr. Huynh Ngoc Thach

Association for Environment and Nature

Protection of Danang City

Mr. Ngo Truong Tho

Department of Tourism

Mrs. Phan Thi Nu

URENCO

Mrs. Le Thi Tam

Chairman, Danang Women’s Association

Do Manh Thang

Specialist, PMO

Tran Thy Tam Uyen

Specialist, PMO

Truong Cong Hai

Specialist, PMO

Phan Thi Thu Thuy

Specialist, PMO

2. HANOI, VIETNAM

Vietnam Environment Protection Agency

(VEPA)

Mr. Phung Van Vui

Deputy Director

Mr. Hua Chien Thang

Head

ICZM

Marine and River Basin Management Division

Mr. Le Dai Thang

Officer

ICZM and RB Division

Ms. Tran Thi Le Anh

Officer, ICZM and RB Division

VINASARCOM (National Committee for

Search and Rescue of Vietnam)

Mr. Pham Quoc Te

Deputy Chief of Chancellery

National Committee for Search and Rescue

Office

Mr. Vo Ha Trung

Other Agencies

Dr. Tran Duc Thanh

Director

Institute of Marine Environment and

Resources

Vietnamese Academy of Science and

Technology

Annex 2. List of Persons Met and/or Interviewed (Individually or in Groups)

Ms. Phuong Thi Huong

Senior Environmental Manager

Vietnam Environment Protection Fund

Mr. Do Thanh Trung

Ministry of Planning and Investments

3. BANGKOK, THAILAND

National Focal Agency

Dr. Cherdchinda Chotiyaputta

Director

Marine and Coastal Research Center

Department of Marine and Coastal

Resources (DMCR)

Mr. Dhana Yingcharoen

Senior Policy Analyst

DMCR

Ms. Saowalak Winyoonuntakul

Head of International Relations Unit, DMCR

Ms. Sansanee Phuangthong

International Relations Officer, DMCR

Gulf of Thailand Project

Dr. Siri Jirapongphan

Board Commissioner

Acting Director General

Port Authority of Thailand

Ms. Sunida Skulratana

Managing Director

Bangkok Port

Port Authority of Thailand

Ms.Yawalak Haridamrong

Technical Officer 12 (Environment)

Project and Planning Department

Port Authority of Thailand

Ms. Aunporn Poopetch

Cargo Operations Officer 11

Port Authority of Thailand

Mr. Pakorn Prasertwong

Chief

Marine Environment Division

Marine Safety and Environment Bureau

Marine Department

Dr. Somrat Yindapit

Vice Chairman

Oil Industry Environment Safety Group

Association (IESG)

Dr. Charoen Nitithamyong

Head

Department of Marine Science

Faculty of Science

Chulalongkorn University

4. CHONBURI, THAILAND

Vice Governor’s Office

Mr. Veravit Vivathanavanich

Vice Governor

Chonburi Province

Mr. Wallop Waewwichit

Head

Provincial Natural Resources and

Environment Office

ICM Project Management Committees and

Working Groups

Mr. Chatchai Thimkrajang

Mayor of Sriracha Municipality

Mrs. Chinapak Suwannasilp

Sanitary Technical Officer

Laemchabang Municipality

Mrs. Chetsuda Trakoonthong

Representative

Koh Sichang Municipality

Mr. Supat Sutramongkol

Vice Mayor

Chonburi Municipality

Mrs. Napavon Chimklom

Deputy Municipal Clerk

Angsila Municipality

Mr. Thiam Varasiri

Deputy Municipal Clerk

Saensuk Municipality

Dr. Suriyan Thankijjanukij

Assistant Professor and Chief

Sriracha Fisheries Research Station

Kasetsart University

Mr. Phanlop Amphornphaiboon

Environmental Technical Officer

Mr. Thanoo Srichoo

Chief of the Public Works and City

Planning Provincial Office

Dr. Subuntith Nimrat

Associate Professor, Faculty of Science

Burapha University

Dr. Veerapong Vutthiphandchai

Associate Professor, Faculty of Science

Burapha University

Mr. Prachum Phothisarattana

Assistant Civil Works

Chonburi Municipality

Ms. Saowarot Prachakit

Sanitary Technical Officer

Mr. Phichet Phongkittisak

Sanitary Technical Officer

Mr. Phaiboon Suksomboon

Environmental Technical Officer

Mr. Rangsan Kwowarawan

Forest Officer

Mr. Olarn Tungtratrakoon

Clerk of Sriracha Municipality

Mr. Suthat Klangkumhaengdet

Deputy Clerk

Sriracha Municipality

Mr. Ornvara Korapin

Deputy Clerk

Sriracha Municipality

Mr. Chalermkiet Thanomchart

Director of the Civil Works Division

Sriracha Municipality

Mr. Somphong Mungkalasu

Head of the Clerk office

Sriracha Municipality

Mr. Arun Thongparn

Director of the Bansrimaharacha

Municipal School

Mr. Arthit Chachiyo

Student Inspector

Sriracha Municipality

Mr. Suphot Supharphan

Director of the Education Division

Mrs. Ketsara Punsiri

Veterinarian

Sriracha Municipality

Mrs. Nisakorn Wiwekwin

Sanitary Technical Officer

Sriracha Municipality

Mr. Thanet Phooyim

Director

Technical Services and Planning Division

Sriracha Municipality

Annex 2. List of Persons Met and/or Interviewed (Individually or in Groups)

Ms. Atchara Prasertlarp

ICM PMO Staff

Mr. Suphatra Songserm

Director

Public Health and Environment

Mr. Thaweephong Bunthanom

Teacher

Bansrimaharacha Municipal School

Mr. Pramern Sarote

Director

Sriracha Municipal School

(Wat Ratniyomthum)

5. PHNOM PENH, CAMBODIA

Mak Sideth, Msc

Director

Ministry of Public Works & Transport

General Department of Transport

Merchant Marine Department

Mr. Long Rithirak

Deputy Director General

Ministry of Environment

Mr. Khong Sam Nuon

Secretary of State

Ministry of Environment

6. SIHANOUKVILLE, CAMBODIA

Task Team Meeting for Solid Waste

Management Project

Mr. Hem Saroeun

Director

Department of Environment

Mr. Koev Phon

Vice-chief of Commune 4

Ms. Chab Vanna

Representative of Women Affair

Village 1 Commune 4

Mr. Chen Rasmey

Mr. Ith Chanda

Representative of Cintri Waste Collection

Company

Sihanoukville

PMO staff

Sihanoukville ICM Project

PCC Meeting

H.E. Prak Sihara

Second Deputy Governor

PMO Director

H.E. Chev Kimheng

Third Deputy Governor

Vice PMO Director

H.E. Phi Phan

Deputy Governor

Mr. Hem Saroeun

Director

Department of Environment

H.E. Ma Sun Hourt

Deputy Director General

Port Authority

Mr. Som Chenda

Deputy Director

Tourism

Mr. Phom Somphea

Deputy Director

Public Work and Transportation

Mr. Ke Pha

Deputy Director,

Forestry and Fishery and Agriculture

Department

Mr. Hun Phy

Deputy Director of Land Management

Department

Kong Samoeun

Governor

Mittapheap District

Nup Phean

Deputy Governor

Prey Nob District

Mr. Sok Phoun

Vice Chief of Cabinet of Municipality

7. BATAAN, PHILIPPINES

Mangrove Reforestation and Nursery

Program (Orion, Bataan)

Mr. Danilo Bunsoy

Councilor

Ms. Carol Generillo

Municipal Agriculturist

Mr. Jhun Hernandez

Fishery Tech

Mr. Fernando Bernardo

Chairman

SAMPAD, a People’s Organization

Mr. Jeremias Gonzales

SAMPAD

Mr. Noel Gloria

Mayor’s Office

Other members of SAMPAD

Marine Turtle Sanctuary (Morong, Bataan)

Mr. Manolo Ibias

Chairman

Bantay Pawikan, Inc.

Ms. Rosalie Ona

Provincial Director

DOST-Bataan

President

UNLAD-PRRM Bataan Chapter

PCC Meeting (Balanga City, Bataan)

Rodolfo H. de Mesa

Provincial Administrator

Provincial Administrator’s Office

Engr. Godofredo de Guzman

OIC

PG-ENRO

Rodora Cuaresma

Community Development Officer II

PG-ENRO

Ludivina G. Banzon

OIC

Provincial Planning and Development Office

Engr. Enrico T. Yuzon

Provincial Engineer

Provincial Engineer’s Office

Imelda D. Inieto

OIC

Office of the Provincial Agriculturist

Danilo C. Abrera

Provincial Fishery Officer

Office of the Provincial Agriculturist

Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources

(OPA-BFAR)

Ceasar V. Cuayson

Tourism Officer

Provincial Tourism Office

Jose Cesario O. Bautista

Manager

Port Services Division

Philippine Ports Authority

Annex 2. List of Persons Met and/or Interviewed (Individually or in Groups)

Joseph Ryan Fontanilla

Philippine Ports Authority

Christian Reyes

Phililippine Ports Authority

Rosalie V. Ona

Provincial Director

Department of Science and Technology

Eloisa Malibiran

Department of Trade and Industry

Col. Hernando Zafra

Provincial Director

Bataan Provincial Police Office (PNP)

Estrella S. dela Rosa

Department of Education

Miguela M. Reyes-Ramirez

Environmental Management Specialist

PENRO-DENR

Shirley Fantone

Environmental Management Specialist

CENRO-Pilar

Ireneo Aberin

CENRO

CENRO-Bagac

Amanda Dumagat

Deptartment of Interior and Local Government

Trinidad Tallorin

Provincial Veterinary Office

Roger Macalinao

OIC

Provincial Information Office

Lourdes Levera

Publisher

Bataan Chronicle

Crispin Tria

Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement

Narciso Bernardo

Chairman

Alyansa ng Mangingisda ng Bataan

Delfin Fonacier

Community Relations Manager

Petron Bataan Refinery

Rodolfo G. Castillo

Mununicipal Planning and Development Office

Mariveles

Remedios G. Herrera

Vice President for Finance

Philippine Resins Industries, Inc.

Abigail Ramos-Dumaup

World Wildlife Fund – Philippines

Merliza A. Torre

Environment Management Specialist II

CENRO – Bagac

Raymond Lim

Administration Manager

Oilink International

Arnel Tanda

Terminal Manager

UniOil Petroleum Phils.

Marivic Sioson

Orica Phils.

Catalina Cruz

Science Research Specialist

DOST – Bataan

Augusto P. Nilo

President & CEO

Phil. National Oil Corp. –

Petrochemical Development Corp.

Helen Cervantes

Community Relations Manager

Phililippine National Oil Corp. –

Petrochemical Development Corp.

George Aradanas

CENRO – Bagac

Filomeno San Pedro

Municipal Administrator

LGU – Limay

Roseller Reyes

Shift Engineer

Planters Products, Inc.

Amelia Mascariñas

Administrative Assistant

Municipal Planning and Developement Office –

Dinalupihan

Dr. Angelica M. Baylon

Director

Research and Extension Services

Maritime Academy of Asia and the Pacific

Malou L. Espina

Manager for Corporate Affairs

Total (Philippines) Corporation

Ramil Samson

Confidential Assistant II

Office of the Vice-Governor

Hon. Benjamin M. Alonzo

Vice Governor

Province of Bataan

Concepcion I. Tanglao

Vice President for Corporate Affairs

Phililippine Resins Industries, Inc.

Soledad G. Reyes

Project Development Officer III

Provincial Planning and Development Office

Rolando S. Publico

Bataan Provincial Police Office (PNP)

Eugenia Galvez

MPDC

Municipal Planning and Developemnt Office –

Bagac

Rafael Viray

President

Bataan Press Club

Greg Refraccion

Bataan Press Club

Jonie Capalaran

Provincial Information Office

Bernardo Rosete

Chairman

Bantay Dagat – Orion

Hon. Rolando Z. Tigas

Municipal Mayor

LGU – Samal

Butch Gunio

Provincial Information Office

Hon. Danilo Bunsoy

Municipal Councilor

LGU – Orion

Marlon J. Manuel

MPDC

Municipal Planning and Development Office –

Hermosa

Jhun Hernadez

Agricultural Technologist - Fisheries

Municipal Agriculturist Office – Orion

Carolina Generillo

Municipal Agriculturist

LGU – Orion

Jeremias Gonzales

Samahan Pamalakaya ng Daan Pari

(SAMPAD) – Orion

Fernando Borolo

Chairman

Samahan Pamalakaya ng Daan Pari

(SAMPAD) – Orion

Annex 2. List of Persons Met and/or Interviewed (Individually or in Groups)

Hon. Virgilio Isidro

Vice-Mayor

LGU – Orion

Rodelito Calara

MPDC

Municipal Planning and Development Office –

Samal

Hon. Melanio S. Banzon, Jr.

City Mayor

CGU – Balanga City

Desiree Enriquez

Pablo Roman High School

Leo Espinosa

Pablo Roman High School

Diego L. Resubal, Jr.

Agricultural Technologist

Office of the Provincial Agriculturist

Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources

(OPA-BFAR)

Abner Baldonado

Bataan Provincial Police Office (PNP)

Marilou G. Erni

Executive Director

Petron Foundation, Inc.

President

Bataan Coastal Care Foundation, Inc.

Allan S. Victorino

Project Officer

Petron Foundation, Inc.

Alexander M. Baluyot

OIC

Bataan ICM Program – PMO

Maria Carmelita C. Reyes

Planning & Admin Officer

Bataan ICM Program – PMO

Eleanor S. Tabing

Community Affairs Officer

Bataan ICM Program – PMO

Karen June A. Balbuena

Technical Assistant

Bataan ICM Program – PMO

Dennis Mariano

OIC

City General Services Office – Balanga City

8. BATANGAS, PHILIPPINES

Local Government

Hon. Armando Sanchez

Governor

Batangas Province

Hon. Rowell Sandoval

Mayor

Mabini, Batangas

Mr. Ronaldo A. Geron

Provincial Administrator

Ms. Kabaitan Dinglasan

Chief, Provincial Tourism Office

Ms. Evelyn S. Estigoy

Head

Provincial Government-Environment and

Natural Resources Office (PG-ENRO)

Ms. Amelia Rosales

Project Development Officer III

Provincial Planning and Development Office

Ms. Loreta Sollestre

Head

ENR Planning Section

PG-ENRO

Ms. Luzviminda Villas

MENRO

Mabini, Batangas

Annex 2. List of Persons Met and/or Interviewed (Individually or in Groups)

Mr. Reynaldo Farqueraro

Municipal Agriculture

Environmental and Natural Resource Office

San Jose, Batangas

National Government

Ms. Jinky M. Macatangay

Shipping Operations Specialists II

Maritime Industry Authority, Batangas

Mr. Maximo Soriano, Jr.

PENRO Officer

Provincial Environment and Natural Resource

Office

DENR, Batangas

Mr. Alberto Aguilar

Community Environment and Natural Resource

Office

DENR, Batangas

CMMO Efren S. Sabas

CGOSTL, Commander

Philippine Coast Guard

Mr. Rene B. Victor

Philippine Coast Guard

Ms. Amelia A. Velasquez

Terminal Supervisor

Philippine Ports Authority

Ms. Ruby C. Follosco

Chief Safety Officer

Philippine Ports Authority

Mr. Romel Bool

Senior Engineer

Philippine Ports Authority

Private/Business Sector

Mr. Jun Espina

External Affairs Manager, Shell Refinery

President, Batangas Coastal Resources

Management Foundation, Inc. (BCRMF)

Ms. Sandra Bianca Dalisay

Mr. Noel Mendoza

BCRMF

Mr. Pedrito S. Suministrado

Vice President, Plant Operations

United Coconut Chemicals, Inc

Mr. Laddie V. Ebreo

United Coconut Chemicals, Inc.

Mr. Buddy Panopio

HESS Manager

Babcock Hitachi Philippines, Inc.

Mr. Jaime S.Estrada

HRM Department Manager

Babcock Hitachi Philippines, Inc.

Mr. Romeo G. dela Cruz

Mr. Jun V. Montes

Mabuhay Vinyl Corp

Civil Society Groups

Ms. Jinki Cadana-Macalintal

Ms. Anna Meneses

Coastal Conservation and Education

Foundation, Inc.

Ms. Veneranda G. Tiangco

BATANGAN (local paper in Batangas)

Ms. Imelda M. delos Reyes

University of Batangas

Mr. Angel Manalo

Treasurer

Batangas Bay Region Environmental

Cooperative, Inc.

9. CAVITE, PHILIPPINES

Ms. Maxima Fidel

Municipal Agriculturist and ICM coordinator

Rosario, Cavite

Mr. Leonardo Notario

Assistant General Services Officer and ICM

Coordinator

Cavite City

Ms. Vicenta Lazaro

OIC Municipal Environment and Natural

Resource Officer and ICM Coordinator,

Bacoor

Ms. Estrellita Espineli

Municipal Agriculturist and ICM Coordinator

Noveleta

Ms. Marinel Punzalan

Agriculturist II

Provincial Municipal Agriculturist

Cavite City

Ms. Anabelle Loyola

Head, PMO

Cavite ICM

Sr. Environmental Management Specialist

PG-ENRO

Ms. Charmi Celeste Garcia

Staff

Project Management Office

Cavite ICM Parallel Site

Ms. Olivia Hermosa

Staff

Project Management Office

Cavite ICM Parallel Site

10. MANILA BAY

Mr. Restituto Bauan

DENR Region 3

Manila Bay Environmental Management

Project (MBEMP) –

Site Management Office Region 3 (SMO3)

Mr. Robert S. Jara

Coastal and Marine Management Office

(CMMO), DENR

Manila Bay Environmental Management

Project (MBEMP)

Ms. Jeslina B. Gorospe

Foreign-assisted and Special Projects

Office (FASPO), DENR

Ms. Araceli C. Oredina

Office of the Undersecretary for Policy and

Planning, DENR

Chair of Technical Working Group for the

Operational Plan for the Manila Bay Coastal

Strategy

Ms. Marlene S. Melarpis

DENR Region 4-A

Manila Bay Environmental Management

Project (MBEMP) – Site Management

Office Region 4 (SMO4)

Ms. Nilda S. Baling

DENR

MBEMP – Project Management Office

Ms. Elvira Sombrito

Philippine Nuclear Research Institute (PNRI)

Chair of Technical Working Group for

Integrated Environmental Monitoring

Program for Manila Bay

Mr. Herbert Narisma

Management Information System -

Environmental Management Bureau (EMB)

Chair of Technical Working Group for

Manila Bay Area Information Network

Ms. Floradema G. Colorado

MBEMP – Project Management Office

(PMO)

Mr. Rey M. T. Aguinaldo

Administration and Planning, DENR - NCR

MBEMP – Site Management Office National

Capital Region (SMO-NCR)

Ms. Giselle Garcia

Administration and Planning, DENR - NCR

MBEMP – SMO-NCR

Annex 2. List of Persons Met and/or Interviewed (Individually or in Groups)

Ms. Jocelyn Verdadero

MBEMP – PMO

Ms. Jennifer L. Jimenez

MBEMP – PMO

Dr. Joseph Aricheta, M.D.

Medical Specialist

Department of Health (DOH)

Chair of Technical Working Group for

Environmental and Resource Valuation of

Manila Bay Area

Ms. Erlinda A. Gonzales

Environmental Management Bureau (EMB)

Project Manager, MBEMP - PMO

11. STATE OCEANIC ADMINISTRATION, P.R. CHINA

Mr. Li Haiqing — Teleconference

Director General

Department of International Cooperation

12. XIAMEN, CHINA

PMO

Mr. Zhou Lumin

Director

Xiamen Project Management Office

13. KLANG, MALAYSIA

PMO

Mr. Amin Baker — Teleconference

Project Staff

Klang Project Management Office

14. BALI, INDONESIA

PMO

Ir. Ni Wayan Sudji — Teleconference

Head, BAPEDALDA (Badan Pengendalian

Dampak Lingkungan Kota Makassar/

Environmental Impact Management

Agency)

Director

Bali Project Management Office

15. OCEAN POLICY RESEARCH FOUNDATION,

JAPAN

Mr. Hiroshi Terashima — Teleconference

Executive Director

Institute for Ocean Policy

ANNEX 3

Summary Showing Project Document Compliance

and Internal Evaluation of ICM

Summary Showing Project Document Compliance

and Internal Evaluation of ICM

1 2nd Cycle ICM.

2 Environmental Profile incorporated in the Coastal Strategy.

3 Due to insufficient data with which to base Risk Assessment, the decision was to put up an

Environmental Monitoring Laboratory to enable data gathering for the coastal and marine condition.

1.1 Six national demonstration

sites selected

1.2 Project development and

management mechanism

developed

1.3 ICM Project Staff trained in

ICM principles and practices

1.4 Environmental Profiles

1.5 Public perceptions on

sustainable use of marine

resources, environmental

stress and their solutions

analyzed

1.6 Environmental risk

assessment

1.7 Strategic environmental

management plan (SEMP)

1.8 Action plans to address

priority environmental and

management issues prepared

and submitted to local

government for review and

adoption

1.9 Institutional arrangements,

both organizational and legal,

at the local level to implement,

manage, monitor, evaluate

and replicate ICM initiatives

1.10 A monitoring programme to

track environmental changes

��

ongoing ongoing ongoing ongoing ongoing

ongoing ongoing ��

��

Programme Component 1: Integrated Coastal Management.

Phase 1 Phase 1

Bali Chonburi Danang Klang Nampho Sihanoukville Batangas1 Xiamen1

×2 ×2

×3 ×3

NA NA

Outputs

Annex 3. Summary Showing Project Document Compliance and Internal Evaluation of ICM

Phase 1 Phase 1

��

1.11 IIMS for sharing, storage and

retrieval of scientific, technical

and management data

1.12 Financing options and

mechanisms to sustain

environmental management

operations and to facilitate

investment in environmental

improvement projects

1.13 Adoption by local government

of the SEMP, action plans,

institutional arrangements and

financing options

1.14 Implementation of SEMP and

action plans initiated

1.15 A project monitoring program

mechanism in place

1.16 Documentation of lessons

learned, etc.in Batangas Bay

and Xiamen

1.17 National and regional training

courses or in-service training

on the application of ICM

NA ongoing

��

NA ��

��

Outputs Bali Chonburi Danang Klang Nampho Sihanoukville Batangas1 Xiamen1

4 Environmental monitoring program and data management system incorporated in the Framework

Programme for Joint Oil Spill Preparedness and Response in the Gulf of Thailand.

Programme Component 2: Subregional Sea Areas.

Project Document Outputs Bohai Sea Gulf of Thailand Manila Bay

2.1 Project development and management mechanism

2.2 Scientific and technical personnel from each site

trained in basic and specialized tools for risk assessment

2.3 Initial risk assessment: screening of ecological,

human health and societal concerns in subregional sea

areas/environmental hotspots

2.4 Refined environmental risk assessment/Natural

resource damage appraisal (NRDA)

2.5 Risk management options and strategic

environmental management plan (SEMP)

2.6 Action plan development and implementation

2.7 Environmental monitoring program

2.8 Regional task force engaged in technical support

and training program

NA4

��

Annex 3. Summary Showing Project Document Compliance and Internal Evaluation of ICM

Programme Component 3: Capacity Building.

3.1 Assessment of impacts and lessons learned

from the training program undertaken during

the GEF Pilot phase

3.2 Specialized short-term training courses

organized for technical and management skills

upgrading of government officials, trainers,

and concerned stakeholders

3.3 Implementation of internship/professional

upgrading program

3.4 Degree training program to support special

skills development for participants from

selected countries in East Asia

• 6 ICM training courses (2 more

than what is required)

• 4 training courses on Risk

Assessment and Risk Management

(2 more than what is required)

• 8 training courses on Oil Pollution,

Preparedness, Response and

Cooperation (6 more than what is

required)

• 3 training courses on Port State

Control (2 more than what is

required)

• 3 training courses on Natural

Resources Damage Appraisal for

Tropical Ecosystems (1 more than

what is required)

• Facilitated degree training program

by posting fellowship opportunities

in the PEMSEA website

• Established linkage with City

University of Hong Kong, Xiamen

University, National University of

Singapore, World Maritime

University, etc.

• At least 2 participants currently

engaged in degree training

program.

partially

��

Project Document Outputs Completed Remarks

Annex 3. Summary Showing Project Document Compliance and Internal Evaluation of ICM

Programme Component 4: Regional Networks.

4.1 Functional networks to provide a range of

support services for coastal

and marine environmental management in

the region

4.2 A multidisciplinary Regional Task Force of

experts to provide field

technical assistance and support services

in response to critical and

timely issues related to management of the

coastal and marine

environment

partially

��

Project Document Outputs Completed Remarks

• Legal Advisors Network merged

under the concept of Regional

Task Force.

• Environmental monitoring network

merged under the Regional

Network of Local Governments

implementing ICM.

• The expertise of the local network

and marine affairs was utilized

during the Workshop for Better

Coastal and Ocean Governance.

��

Programme Component 5: Environmental Investments.

5.1 Environmental and coastal/marine resource

development or management opportunities

emerging from each ICM demonstration

and parallel site, and subregional pollution

hotspot location

5.2 Mechanisms to catalyze, promote and

advance investments in environmental

opportunities

5.3 Regional round table meetings of private

sector companies and investors,

intergovernmental and international

financial institutions and agencies, donors

and public sector institutions and agencies

5.4 Investment processes

5.5 Synthesis of policy/regulatory issues

related to creating a climate conducive to

environmental investments

5.6 Draft financial plan for supporting or

sustaining a regional mechanism

Project Document Outputs Completed Remarks

Annex 3. Summary Showing Project Document Compliance and Internal Evaluation of ICM

Programme Component 6: Scientific Research.

6.1 A multidisciplinary expert group (MEG) of

coastal and marine experts to provide

technical advice and guidance to the project

6.2 Analytical case studies in key areas of

applied scientific research in

coastal and marine environmental

management

a. Ecosystem carrying capacity

b. Impacts of maritime trade on endangered

species

c. Trade-offs between economic

development and ecological benefits

d. Transboundary impacts of national

economic activities

e. Socioeconomic benefits of ICM

Project Document Outputs Completed Remarks

Case studies on trade offs between

economic development and

ecological benefits and transboundary

impacts of national economic

activities merged and ongoing;

planned workshop to be conducted

piggybacking with APFIC Consultative

Forum, August 2006, Kuala Lumpur,

Malaysia.

Final meeting of the multidisciplinary

expert group (MEG) of coastal and

marine experts to be held as a Side

Event during the East Asian Seas

Congress in December 2006.

ongoing

��

Programme Component 7: Integrated Information Management System.

7.1 A prototype database, standard format and

guidelines for the collection, compilation,

processing and exchange of information

7.2 Project personnel trained in extended

applications of IIMS

7.3 A functional IIMS established at project sites

7.4 Application of IIMS for integrated

environmental impact assessment

7.5 An IIMS linking ICM sites and pollution

hotspots into a regional network

7.6 A technical support group within the PDMO

with responsibility for the management of

technical information for all aspects of the

project, including hardware, software and

peripherals required to link all the ICM sites,

hotspots and other relevant project sites/

institutions into a network

Project Document Outputs Completed Remarks

Annex 3. Summary Showing Project Document Compliance and Internal Evaluation of ICM

��

Programme Component 8: Civil Society.

8.1 A mechanism to promote collaboration and

involvement of concerned environmental

journalists, religious and other grass-roots

organizations in the planning and

management of the coastal and marine

environment in the East Asian Seas

8.2 Training and workshop opportunities for

concerned NGOs, grass-roots organizations

religions and other stakeholder and media

groups at the local or national level, to

increase their understanding of, and

participation in strategies and actions of the

Regional Programme in the protection and

management of the coastal and marine

environment

8.3 Young environmentalists concerned with

securing a sustainable future for the East

Asian Seas

8.4 Site and project personnel trained to integrate

social science concerns into coastal and

marine environmental management programs

and projects

8.5 Multimedia materials related to project

activities and outputs

Project Document Outputs Completed Remarks

��

Programme Component 9: Coastal and Marine Policy.

9.1 Cross sector reviews of current national

policy governing coastal and marine area

management as well as marine

environmental action programs including

identification of successes and constraints

9.2 Sample policy guidelines for the

development of a national and regional

management framework related to issues in

the coastal and marine environment

9.3 Recommendations for a policy framework

for building partnerships in environmental

protection and management of the East

Asian Seas

Project Document Outputs Completed Remarks

Annex 3. Summary Showing Project Document Compliance and Internal Evaluation of ICM

��

Programme Component 10: Regional Mechanism.

10.1 Analysis of the ratification and

implementation of international conventions,

bilateral and multilateral agreements related

to coastal and marine environmental

management in the East Asian Seas

including effectiveness, constraints and

barriers

10.2 Review of the processes, procedures, mode

of operation, cost and benefits, and

constraints of existing regional arrangements

for environmental protection and resource

management in other regional seas

10.3 Working group on international waters

projects in the region

10.4 Recommendations for a regional

arrangement for implementing international

conventions in the East Asian Seas including

mode of operation and a sustainable

mechanism prepared and reviewed by

stakeholders

10.5 A regional marine environment resource

facility

10.6 Policy conference on regional arrangement

for implementing international conventions in

the East Asian Seas convened

10.7 A functional regional mechanism established

Project Document Outputs Completed Remarks

The EAS Partnership Council will be

adopted at the Ministerial Forum in

December 2006. The inaugural

meeting of the ‘regional mechanism’

will be held on 15 December 2006.

��

ongoing

��

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1.1. Six dem o s ites

1. 2 Project mec h.

1.3 Staff training

1.4 Env Profile

1. 5 Public perception

1.6 ERA

1. 7 SEMP

1. 8 Action plan (Zoning)

1.9 Ins titutional arrangem ents

1. 10 Env . monitoring

1. 11 IIM S

1. 12 Financing

1. 13 Adoption

1. 14 Implem entation

1.15 Project Monitoring

1.16 Less ons learned

1. 17 IC M training

2.1 Project mec hanism

2. 2 Training for risk as s essment

2.3 Initial risk assessment

2.4 Refined ERA / NRDA

2.5 R isk m anagem ent options

2. 6 Action plan dev ' t and impl.

2. 7 Env ironmental m onitoring

2. 8 Regional tas k force

completed ongoing

Graph Showing Status of Project Document Completion (for Programme Components 1 and 2).

ANNEX 4

Dynamics of Coastal and Ocean Governance

and ICM Cycle

Figure 1 provides a general statement of the PEMSEA approach to

the design of ICM sites and intended outcomes. It indicates how identifying

issues of local concern, establishing coordinating mechanisms, doing careful

technical analysis and similar activities are designed to change perceptions

of what’s important and possible, create networks and support and ultimately

enhance environmental conditions and enhance livelihood conditions.

Driving forces Improved coastal governance Critical mass Sustainability

Adaptive

Learning

Focus

Vision

Platform

Improvement

of standard of

living

Protection of

ecological

integrity

Efficient and

equitable

economic

growth

Perception

change

Replication

Scaling-up

Buy-in

Mainstreaming

Networking

Mechanisms

Process

Integration

Coordination

Partnership

Mode

Coverage

Flexibility

Resilience

• Creating shared vision, objectives,

strategies and targets

• Addressing issues of local concerns

• Using effectively the ICM framework and

process

• Establishing coordinating mechanisms

for interagency and stakeholders

collaboration and partnership

• Enabling policy and functional integration

• Enabling local stakeholders to plan and

manage their natural resources

• Using scientific support for decision making

• Promoting environmental investment

• Improving communication among

stakeholders

• Monitoring environmental changes

Awareness

Otthheerr Goovveerrnnaannccee Meecchhaanniissmss

Dynamics of Coastal and Ocean Governance

Figure 1. Dynamics of Coastal and Ocean Governance.

Annex 4. Dynamics of Coastal and Ocean Governance and ICM Cycle

Figure 2. ICM Programme Cycle.

ANNEX 5

List of PEMSEA Publications

Technical Reports

1 Port Safety Audit Manual Vol. 2

2 Port Safety Audit Manual Vol. 1

3 The Development of National Coastal and Marine Policies in the People’s Republic of China: A Case

Study

4 Case Study on the Integrated Coastal Policy of the Republic of Korea

5 Integrated Environmental Impact Assessment for Coastal and Marine Areas: A Training Manual

6 Manila Bay Refined Risk Assessment

7 Danang Initial Risk Assessment

8 Southeastern Coast of Bali Initial Risk Assessment

9 Bohai Sea Risk Assessment

10 Port Klang Initial Risk Assessment

11 Chonburi Initial Risk Assessment

12 Framework for National Coastal and Marine Policy Development

13 Integrated Information Management System (IIMS) for Coastal and Marine Environment:

a) A Guide to Establishing IIMS and

b) User Manual with CD-ROM

14 Xiamen: An ICM Journey

15 A Perspective on the Environmental and Socioeconomic Benefits and Costs of Integrated Coastal

Management: The Case of Xiamen, PR China

Workshop Proceedings

1 Determining Environmental Carrying Capacity of Coastal and Marine Areas: Progress,

Constraints, and Future Options

2 The East Asian Seas Congress 2003: Regional Implementation of the WSSD Commitments for the

Seas of East Asia

Info. Series

1 Proceedings of the Pilot Intersessional Consultative Group Meeting

2 Proceedings of the Consultative Workshop on the Gulf of Thailand Environmental Management Project

3 Proceedings of the Senior Experts Dialogue on Coastal and Marine Policy

LIST OF PEMSEA PUBLICATIONS

Annex 5. List of PEMSEA Publications

100

4 Manila Bay Initial Risk Assessment

5 Regional Consultative Workshop on Strengthening Recovery of Ship Pollution Clean-up Costs and

Damage Claims

6 Proceedings of the National Conference on Media as Key Partners in Environmental Sustainability

7 Proceedings of the First Meeting of the Multidisciplinary Expert Group

8 Valuing Benefits from Integrated Coastal Management: Workshop Report

9 Proceedings of the Experts’ Meeting on Strategies for Better Coastal and Ocean Governance

10 Proceedings of the 2nd Forum of the Regional Network of Local Governments Implementing

Integrated Coastal Management (RNLG)

11 Proceedings of the Seminar on Leadership in Ocean and Coastal Governance

12 Proceedings of the Senior Government Officials’ Meeting on the Sustainable Development Strategy for

the Seas of East Asia (SDS-SEA)

13 Proceedings of the Preparatory Meeting for the Working Group on the Implementation of the SDS-SEA

14 Proceedings of the Working Group Meeting on the Implementation of the SDS-SEA

15 Consensus Building for the Formulation of the Sustainable Development Strategy for the Seas of East Asia

16 Meeting of the Working Group on the Regional Implementing Mechanism for the SDS-SEA

17 Proceedings of the 4th Subregional Meeting of the Gulf of Thailand Project Task Team

18 Proceedings of the Fourth Forum of the Regional Network of Local Governments Implementing

Integrated Coastal Management: Building Better Coastal Governance through Stronger Local Alliance

19 Proceedings of the Workshop on Ecosystem Management of Interrelated River Basins, Estuaries and

Coastal Seas

Tropical Coasts Magazine

1 Tropical Coasts, July 2000: Who Pays for the Damage? Oil and Chemical Spills

2 Tropical Coasts, December 2000: A Challenging Journey—Coastal and Marine Policymaking in East Asia

3 Tropical Coasts, July 2001: Transboundary Environmental Issues

4 Tropical Coasts, December 2001: Partnerships for the Environment

5 Tropical Coasts, July 2002: Keeping the Essentials Flowing

6 Tropical Coasts, December 2002: Rare...Endangered.. For Sale.

7 Tropical Coasts, July 2003: The Regional Approach

8 Tropical Coasts, December 2003: The Role of Media in Sustainable Development

101

9 Tropical Coasts, July 2004: PEMSEA Experiences in the Evolution of Coastal Management

10 Tropical Coasts, December 2004: Coast to Coast — From Demonstration to Replication

11 Tropical Coasts, July 2005: Call to Action — Disaster Risk Reduction and Post-Tsunami Reconstruction

12 Tropical Coasts, December 2005: Port Safety, Security, Health and Environment

Programme Steering Committee Meeting Proceedings

1 Proceedings of the 7th PSC Meeting

2 Proceedings of the 8th PSC Meeting

3 Proceedings of the 9th PSC Meeting

4 Proceedings of the 10th PSC Meeting

5 Proceedings of the 11th PSC Meeting

Strategies

1 Manila Bay Coastal Strategy

2 Danang Coastal Strategy

3 Environmental Strategy for the Seas of East Asia

4 Bali Coastal Strategy

5 Klang Coastal Strategy

6 Chonburi Coastal Strategy

7 Sihanoukville Coastal Strategy

8 Sustainable Development Strategy for the Seas of East Asia

9 Sustainable Development Strategy for the Seas of East Asia/Putrajaya Declaration of Regional

Cooperation for the Sustainable Development of the Seas of East Asia

10 Coastal Strategy of Nampho City, DPR Korea

11 Bohai Sea Sustainable Development Strategy

Policy Briefs

1 PEMSEA Policy Brief – Sustainable Trade in Marine Endangered Species in East Asia

Others

1 PEMSEA Mid-Term Evaluation Report

2 Sustaining Benefits

Annex 5. List of PEMSEA Publications

102

103

ANNEX 6

Summary/ Overview of Other Materials Available to

the Evaluation Team

104

Annex 6. Summary / Overview of Other Materials Available to the Evaluation Team

105

Summary / Overview of Other Materials Available to the Evaluation Team

Project Document Compliance Matrices

1. ICM sites

2. Pollution Hot Spots

3. Programme Components 3 to 10

Site Terminal Reports

1. ICM sites

2. Pollution Hot Spots

Programme Component Terminal Reports

1. Programme Components 3 to 10

References for Programme Management

1. Socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of PEMSEA countries

2. GEF Operational Program relevant to PEMSEA

3. PEMSEA’s Second Phase Objectives

4. GEF Contributions to the PEMSEA Regional Programme

5. Co-financing of the Regional Programme

6. List of GEF Focal Points

7. List of UNDP Resident Representatives

8. List of PEMSEA National Focal Points

9. Terms of References of National Focal Points

10. Organizational and functional charts

11. List of current and former staff

12. List of PSC Meetings

13. Terms of References of Programme Steering Committee

14. Status of implementation of Mid-Term Evaluation recommendations

15. List of mission reports (Second Phase)

16. List of sub-contracts issued to the sites (Second Phase)

17. List of Collaborative Projects

18. List of M&E Reports Submitted to UNDP/GEF

19. List of Planning Workshops held

20. Table showing financial auditing schedules and team

References for Immediate Obj.1 (ICM)

1. Framework of ICM Program Development and Implementation

2. List of local coastal strategies adopted and being implemented

3. Case Study on Socioeconomic Benefits of Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) in Xiamen,

PR China (1995–2001)

4. Marine Management and Coordination Committee of Xiamen, PR China

References for Immediate Obj.2 (Pollution Hotspots)

1. Joint agreements for Gulf of Thailand

2. Risk Assessment/Management in Subregional sea areas

3. Consultation Process on the formulation of the Manila Bay CS

106

References for Immediate Obj.3 (Capacity Building)

1. Capacity-Building Activities of the Regional Program for the Second Phase (number of

programs and trainees)

2. Participants to PEMSEA Capacity-Building Activities by Country (Second Phase)

3. Annual Total of Country Participants Trained by the Regional Programme for the second phase

4. List of Interns and Fellows of the Regional Programme for the second phase

5. List of Workshops and Seminars organized by Regional Programme (Second Phase)

6. List of Training Courses (Second Phase)

7. List of outside of the region participants to PEMSEA capacity-building activities

References for Immediate Obj.4 (Regional Networks/RTF)

1. List of RTF mobilization

2. Diagram PEMSEA database (PEMSEA gateway)

References for Immediate Obj.5 (Environmental Investments)

Diagram on Public-Private Partnership (PPP) for environmental management

Additional References for Immediate Obj.8 (Civil Society Mobilization)

1. List of Publications by Categories and Year Published (Second Phase)

2. List of NGOs involved in PEMSEA activities

3. List of Private Sector involved in PEMSEA activities

4. List of academic institutions involved in PEMSEA activities

5. List of Tropical Coasts published

6. List of videos produced

7. Graph showing trends of PEMSEA website

Reference for Immediate Obj.9 (Coastal and Marine Policy)

Outline of baseline information on the state of coast report

References for Immediate Obj.10 (Regional Mechanism)

1. International conventions ratified by the participating countries prior to 1994 and after 1994 (Table)

2. PEMSEA’s Partnership Agreement

3. Partnership Operating Arrangement

4. Development of SDS-SEA (Diagram)

REPORTS

Bali ICM Project

1. Summary Report Stakeholders Consultation for Governor Decree Concerning Integrated

Coastal and Marine Management in Bali Province

2. Inception Report: Strengthening Institutional Arrangement for the Implementation of Integrated

Management in Bali, Indonesia

3. Need Assessment: Strengthening Institutional Arrangement for the Implementation of

Integrated Management in Bali, Indonesia

4. Report: Inception Workshop of Coastal Strategy Implementation

5. Monthly Accomplishment Reports

Annex 6. Summary / Overview of Other Materials Available to the Evaluation Team

107

6. Quarterly Accomplishment Reports

7. Annual Accomplishment Reports

8. Traditional Villages Competition Report

9. Bali Integrated Solid Waste Management Scheme: Pre-Feasibility Study Report

10. Denpasar Sewerage Scheme Development: Pre-Feasibility Study Report

11. Summary Report of the Contingent Valuation Method Survey

12. Coordination Meeting at City and Regencies within Bali Province

13. Development of Integrated Environmental Monitoring Program for Bali, Indonesia: Inception

Report

14. Workshop Report on Integrated Environmental Monitoring Programme Development and

Institutional Strengthening for Integrated Coastal Management Implementation in Bali

15. Development of Integrated Environmental Monitoring Programme for Bali, Indonesia: Inception

Report

16. Preparation of a Draft Integrated Environmental Monitoring Programme for the Bali ICM

Demonstration Site (Assessment Report on Existing Environmental Monitoring Programme at

Bali)

Chonburi ICM Project

17. Report on application of IIMS Query system to generate reports for RA and environmental

profile

18. Final Report on Establishment of IIMS

19. Report on the Coastal Strategy Declaration Ceremony of the Chonburi National ICM Project

20. Coastal Strategy Consultation Report

21. Updates on Project on Strengthening of Capacity for Marine Oil Spill Prevention and

Management at the Local Level

22. Updates on Project to Enhance Local Capacity and Stakeholders’ Support for Wastewater and

Pollution Management

23. Updates on Enhancing Local Capacity and Stakeholders’ Support for Wastewater and Pollution

Management.

24. Inception Report on the Development of Sriracha Coastal Strategy Implementation Plan

25. Progress Report of the Chonburi National ICM Demonstration Project (July to September 2004)

26. Progress Report of the Chonburi National ICM Demonstration Project (April to May 2005)

27. Progress Report of the Chonburi National ICM Demonstration Project (July 2005)

28. Progress Report of the Chonburi National ICM Demonstration Project (August 2005)

29. Progress Report of the Chonburi National ICM Demonstration Project (September 2005)

30. Report on the Project Management Committee for the Chonburi ICM Project (June 2, 2005)

31. Final Report: Strengthening Municipal Level ICM Planning and Implementation

32. Report on the Coastal Strategy Declaration Ceremony of the Chonburi National ICM Project

33. Report on the Evaluation of Attitude/Consciousness of Target Groups towards Coastal

Resources

Danang ICM Project

34. Inception Report: Coastal Strategy Implementation Plan

35. Start-up Report: Development of Coastal Strategy Implementation Plan

36. Report on Result of Pilot Integrated Environmental Monitoring Program

108

37. Inception Report: Development of Integrated Environmental Monitoring Program in Danang City

38. Final Report on Institutional Arrangements for ICM Implementation in Danang City

39. Inception Report: Institutional Arrangements in Danang City

40. Workshop Summary Report on Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Public Awareness Activities

on Waste Segregation and Beach Cleanup

41. Summary Report of the Stakeholder Consultation Workshops on Waste Segregation and

Beach Cleanup

42. Report on Public Awareness Survey

43. Summary Report of the Danang-wide Stakeholder Consultation Workshops

44. Final Report on the Establishment of IIMS and Linkage with GIS, including the Plan of

Sustaining IIMS

45. Report on Application of IIMS and Linkage with GIS on the Generation of Data

46. Report on Collection, Collation, Standardization and Encoding of Data in IIMS

47. Report on IIMS and GIS assessment

48. Training on Environmental Risk Assessment for Danang ICM Site, 3-8 December 2001

49. Summary Report on the IEC Campaign of PPP in Environmental Investment

50. PEMSEA Investors Roundtable 2003

51. Summary Report on Danang Investors Roundtable 2003

52. Report on the Conduct of the Contingent Valuation Method Training Workshops

53. Report on CVM Pre-test

54. Monthly Accomplishment Reports

55. Quarterly Accomplishment Reports

56. Summary reports on Danang ICM Core Group meeting

57. Inception Workshop and Environmental Profile Development for the National ICM

Demonstration Site in Danang, Vietnam

58. Summary Report: Inception Workshop, Danang, 7-9 June, 2000

59. Minutes of PCC meetings

60. Coastal-Use Zoning Plan for Danang City

61. Summary Report on Classification of Coastal Use Zones within Sub-Project on the Development

of Coastal-Use Zoning Plan for Danang City

62. Report on Assessment of Coastal Use Conflict and Proposed Solutions for the Development of

Coastal-Use Zoning Plan of Danang City

63. Draft Report on the Coastal Use Regulatory System of Danang City

64. Summary Report on Training Course on the Development of an Integrated Coastal-Use Zoning

Plan and Institutional Framework for Implementation in Danang, Vietnam

Klang ICM Project

65. Port Klang ICM Projects Inception Report

66. Port Klang ICM Projects Revised Inception Report Project Management Summary

67. Port Klang ICM Projects Progress Report 1

68. ICM Project : Report on the Implementation and Evaluation of IEC Plan

69. Integrated Information Management System (IIMS) Training for Klang ICM Site

70. Training on Environmental Risk Assessment for Chonburi and Klang ICM Sites

71. 2nd Report on the Establishment and Operationalization of an IIMS for Port Klang

72. Public Awareness and Participation Training for Klang ICM Site

73. Mission Report of the Senior Programme Officer for the Technical Programme Operations,

Port Klang, Malaysia

Annex 6. Summary / Overview of Other Materials Available to the Evaluation Team

109

74. Annual Report 2001

75. Draft Integrated Environmental Monitoring Programme for the Port Klang ICM Demonstration

Site

76. Draft Pre-Feasibility Report: Environmental Investment and PPP Project PEMSEA

(UNDP-IMO-GEF)

77. Pre-Feasibility Studies for the Integrated Solid Waste Management in Klang and Kuala Langat

Batangas ICM Project

78. Planning Workshop Report: Updating the Strategic Environmental Management Plan of

Batangas, Philippines

79. Report on Initial Analysis: Updating the Strategic Environmental Management Plan of

Batangas, Philippines

80. Inception Workshop Report: Integrated Coastal Management in the Batangas Bay Region: A

Case Study

Sihanoukville ICM Project

81. IBEMP Pilot Monitoring Program Report, July to September 2005

82. Beach Cleanup Report, Occheauteal Beach, Sihanoukville, Cambodia

83. Report on IIMS Establishment in Sihanoukville, Cambodia

84. Monthly Accomplishment Reports

85. Quarterly Accomplishment Reports

86. PCC Meetings Reports

Xiamen ICM Project

87. Project Inception Report: Refinement and Updating of Xiamen Strategic Environmental

Management Plan (SEMP)

88. Project Start-Up/Organization Report for 2nd Cycle ICM Programme

89. Report on the Results/Findings of the Environmental Risk Assessment (Jiulongjiang

River Estuary)

90. Report on the Regional Training Course on the Development, Implementation and

Management of Coastal and Marine Environmental Projects, April 2–29, 2000

91. Progress Report of Regional Training Course on ICM in Xiamen, China, November 21–30, 2001

92. Pre-Feasibility Study Report on Environmental Integrated Management and Development

Project for Maluan Bay, Xiamen

93. Appendix Dataset of Project: The Socioeconomic Benefits of ICM in Xiamen

94. Project Implementation Report: Socioeconomic Benefits of ICM in Xiamen

95. Progress Report of National Training Course on ICM in Xiamen, China, June 24–29, 2004

96. Progress Report of National Training Course on ICM in Xiamen, China, Nov. 27 to Dec. 2,

2005

97. Progress Report of National ICM Training for Trainers in Xiamen, China, Sept. 21–24, 2004

98. Inception Report: ICM in Xiamen, PR China: A Case Study

99. Environmental Management Manual

Bataan ICM Parallel Site

100. Inception Report on the Coastal-Use Zoning Plan for the Province of Bataan

110

Bohai Sea

101. Report on the Establishment of IIMS database in Bohai Sea

102. Report on data gathering, screening and conducting GIS data and verification on linking IIMS

and GIS, National Marine Data and Information Services, SOA, China, May 31, 2004

103. Final Report: National Marine Data and Information Services, SOA, China, August 1, 2004

104. GEF Project – Integrated Information Management System of Bohai Sea

105. Summary of the Study and Discussion on the Training of IIMS

106. Assessment Report of GEF Bohai Sea Environmental Information Management System (IIMS)

107. The Report of the Plan for Ecological Environment Construction of Changxing Island in

Dalian City, Liaoning Province

108. Annual Report for 2004

109. Annual Report for 2004

110. Quarterly Report, October – December 2004

111. Quarterly Report, July – September 2004

112. Quarterly Report, January – March 2005

113. Quarterly Report, April – June 2005

114. Quarterly Report, April – June 2004

115. Quarterly Report, January – March 2004

116. Quarterly Report, October-December 2003

117. Quarterly Report, July – September 2003

118. Quarterly Report, April – June 2003

119. Quarterly Report, January – March 2003

120. Final Report of GEF/UNDP/IMO Project Entitled “ Development and Implementation of a Multisectoral

Marine Environmental Monitoring Programme

121. Report on Waste Assessment and Management Improvement Measures for Bohai Sea

122. Inception Report on the Bohai Sea Functional Zoning

123. Research Report on the Bohai Sea Functional Zoning

124. Conclusion Report on the Integrated Land and Sea Use Zoning Scheme for Bohai Sea

125. Report on the Implementation of Public Awareness and Establishment of IIMS

126. Summary Report on the Meeting to Review the Draft SEMP inside CIMA

127. Summary Report on Stakeholders’ Consultation Meeting for SEMP (draft)

128. Report of Legislative Framework of Environmental Management of Bohai Sea Area

129. Risk Management Plan in Bohai Sea, China

130. BCA of Risk Management Options and Recommendations on the Most Cost-Effective Options

in the Bohai Sea, China

131. Final Report The Benefit-Cost Analysis of Identified Economic Activities and Recommendations

on Priorities for Risk Management in the Bohai Sea

Gulf of Thailand

132. Report on Thailand’s Existing Regulations and Laws Pertaining to the Recovery of Claims for

Response/Cleanup Costs and Economic Damages as a Consequence of Oil Spills

133. Inception Report: Capacity Building for Natural Resource Damage Appraisal for Oil Spills with

Special Focus on Fishery and Aquaculture

134. Report on the Consultation Meeting to Adopt the Draft National Oil Spill Contingency Plan and

Joint Statement and Framework Programme of Cooperation for the Gulf of Thailand

135. Contingency Plan for Oil Spill Response in Cambodia

Annex 6. Summary / Overview of Other Materials Available to the Evaluation Team

111

136. Cambodia Country Report on Assessment of Oil Spill Risk and Its Impacts

137. Report on the Analysis of Risks Associated with Oil Spill in the Southern Marine and Coastal

Water of Vietnam and Proposed Response Strategy

138. Draft Joint Statement Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam on Partnership in Oil Spill

Preparedness and Response in the Gulf of Thailand

139. Project Inception Report: Project on Capacity Building for Oil Spill Response and Management

in the Southern Region of Vietnam

140. PEMSEA Claims and CP Workshop, July 7th to 10th 2003 – Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, Closeup

Report

141. Inception Report: Capacity Building for Oil Spill Preparedness, Response and Management in

the Southern Region of Vietnam

UNPUBLISHED PROJECT OUTPUTS

Bali ICM Project

1. Institutional Analysis for the Implementation of Integrated Management in Bali, Indonesia

2. Draft Implementation Plan for the Bali Coastal Strategy

3. Development of Integrated Environmental Monitoring Program for Bali, Indonesia: Action Plan

for Year 2004/2005

4. Integrated Beach Environmental Monitoring Program (IBEMP) for the Southeastern Coast of

Bali, Indonesia: Action Plan for Pilot Test

Chonburi ICM Project

5. Integrated Coastal Management Action Plan for Chonburi Province on 2006–2008

6. Program on Enhancing Local Capacity and Stakeholder Support for Wastewater and Pollution

Management

7. Strengthening of Capacity for Marine Oil Spill Prevention and Management at the Local Level

8. Impacts of Transfer of Dusty Cassava Flour and other Commodities in Sriracha Bay and Si

Chang Island

9. Project on Conservation and Restoration of Marine and Coastal Resources in Sriracha Bay,

Chonburi Province

10. Operation and Training Plan for the ICM Project of Chonburi Province, June to September

2005

11. Draft of Sriracha Coastal Strategy Implementation Plan

12. Coastal Management for Tourism and Conservation of Natural Resources at Koh Loi,

Sriracha Municipal Town

13. The Proposed Action Plan for Public Awareness and Community Mobilization Activities

14. Communication Plan for the Chonburi ICM Project

Danang ICM Project

15. Final Coastal Strategy Implementation Plan

16. Pilot Integrated Environmental Monitoring Program

17. Institutional Analysis and Preliminary Recommendations for ICM Institutional Arrangements in

Danang City

18. Communication Plan for ICM Danang

112

19. Action Plan on Community-based Cleanup

20. Action Plan on Implementation the Initial Risk Assessment

21. Pre-Feasibility Study of Construction of a Wastewater Treatment Plant in Hoa Khanh IP,

Danang City

22. Pre-Feasibility study Hazardous Solid Waste Treatment in Danang

23. PEMSEA Investment Opportunity Brief: Integrated Industrial Wastewater and Hazardous

Waste Treatment System, July 2003, Danang City, Vietnam

24. An Application of the Contingent Valuation Method on the Demand for Improved Sanitation

Services in Danang, Vietnam

25. Classification of Coastal Use Zones and Proposed Development of Regulatory System within

Sub-Project on the Development of Coastal-Use Zoning Plan for Danang City

26. Initial Analysis of Existing Institutional Framework

Klang ICM Project

27. Communication Plan for the National ICM Demonstration Project in Klang, Malaysia

28. Community-based Management Project ICM Port Klang 2005: Mangrove Rehabilitation at

Kelanang Bay

Sihanoukville ICM Project

29. Communication Plan for ICM: Sihanoukville

30. Action Plan: Strategy for Sustainable Coastal Tourism Development of Sihanoukville

31. Action Plan for Coastal Pollution Prevention and Habitat Protection

32. Costal Environmental Profile of Sihanoukville

Batangas ICM Project

33. Integrated Coastal Management in the Batangas Bay Region: A Case Study

Xiamen ICM Project

34. The 2nd Cycle ICM Strategic Management Plan for Xiamen, PR, China

35. Environmental Risk Assessment Report of Jiulongjiang River Estuary Region

36. PEMSEA’s Investment Opportunity Brief: Integrated Environmental Management and

Development Project for Maluan Bay

37. Technical Report: The Socioeconomic Benefits of ICM in Xiamen

38. ICM Domestic Training in China

39. A Review of Integrated Coastal Management in Xiamen Over the Past Decade

Bataan ICM Parallel Site

40. Pre-Feasibility Study on the Integrated Solid Waste Management Project for the Province of

Bataan

Bohai Sea

41. Sustaining IIMS in Bohai Sea

42. Risk Assessment Report

43. Initial Risk Assessment of Bohai Sea

44. Assessment Report on Changxing Island in Dalian City, Liaoning Province

Annex 6. Summary / Overview of Other Materials Available to the Evaluation Team

113

45. Final Report: Benefit – Cost Analysis of Identified Economic Activities and Recommendation on

Priorities for Risk Management in the Bohai Sea

46. Preliminary BCA and Action Plan

47. Final Report of Environmental Risk Assessment in the Bohai Sea, China

48. A Planning Study on the Control of Total Load of Sewage Discharged into the Bohai Sea

49. Advocacy and Communication Plan for the Bohai Sea Environmental Improvement Project

(BSEIP), National Marine Data and Information Services, SOA, China, June 2005

50. Website Construction of Bohai Sea Enivironmental Management Project

51. Project Implementation Plan for Establishment of a Legal Framework and Implementing

Mechanisms for Integrated Environmental Management of the Bohai Sea

Gulf of Thailand

52. Plan of Action: Capacity Building for Natural Resource Damage Appraisal for Oil Spills with

Special Focus on Fishery and Aquaculture

53. Damage Appraisal Guide/Standard Operating Procedures: Capacity Building for Natural

Resource Damage Appraisal for Oil Spills with Special Focus on Fishery and Aquaculture

54. Valuation Report: Capacity Building for Natural Resource Damage Appraisal for Oil Spills with

Special Focus on Fishery and Aquaculture

55. Guidance on Oil Spill Risk Assessments

56. Draft Oil Spill Contingency Plan for the Southern Region of Vietnam

57. Joint Statement of Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam on Partnership in Oil Spill Preparedness

and Response in the Gulf of Thailand

PUBLICATIONS

Bali ICM Project

1. ICM Bali Newsletter

2. Southern Coast of Bali Initial Risk Assessment

Chonburi ICM Project

3. The Chonburi Coastal Strategy

4. The Chonburi Coastal Strategy (Thai version)

5. Chonburi Initial Risk Assessment

Danang ICM Project

6. Coastal Strategy of Danang City

7. Danang Initial Risk Assessment

Klang ICM Project

8. Port Klang Coastal Strategy

9. Port Klang Initial Risk Assessment

Batangas ICM Project

10. Strategic Environmental Management Plan: Province of Batanagas

114

Xiamen ICM Project

11. Proceedings of the 2nd Forum of the Regional Network of Local Governments Implementing

Integrated Coastal Management (RNLG)

Bataan ICM Parallel Site

12. Review of Coastal Zone Policies related to Bataan

13. Bataan Coastal Strategy

Bohai Sea

14. Sustainable Development Strategy for Bohai Sea

15. Bohai Sea Environmental Risk Assessment

Gulf of Thailand

16. Gulf of Thailand Preliminary Oil Spill Risk Assessment

17. Proceedings of the Consultative Workshop on the Gulf of Thailand Environmental Management

Project, 13-15 May 2001, Bangkok, Thailand

VIDEOS

Chonburi ICM Project

1. Chonburi ICM Video

Xiamen

2. Xiamen Story

Bohai Sea

3. Save Bohai Sea: Environmental Changes in Bohai Sea

115

ANNEX 7

Resource Mobilization

116

117

Purpose Partner Counterpart

Support ($)

Demo Site

Indonesia

Vietnam

Thailand

Malaysia

DPR Korea

Cambodia

PR China

Parallel Site

Philippines

RO Korea

Indonesia

PR China

Waste management

facility (Batangas)

Quest simulation

model (Bali)

Provincial Government of Bali

People’s Committee of Danang

Municipality (Vietnam)

Provincial Government of Chonburi

State Government of Selangor

GBCIO1 (DPR Korea)

Municipal Government of Sihanoukville

Municipal Government of Xiamen

Provincial Government of Bataan

Bataan Coastal Care Foundation

Provincial Government of Cavite

MOMAF (Shihwa Project)

Sukabumi Regency

10 ICM Parallel Sites

Wastes Systems New Zealand

Hatfield Consultants

Subtotal Component 1

520,000.00

709,250.00

287,394.00

491,895.00

698,435.00

596,500.00

350,000.00

155,000.00

200,000.00

162,000.00

6,000,000.00

4,205,064.00

3,000,000.00

200,000.00

150,000.00

17,725,538.00

MOA of 13 March 2000

MOA of 07 June 2000

MOA of August 2001

MOA of 19 July 2001

MOA of 08 Sept 2000

MOA of 12 June 2000

MOA of July 2001

MOA of 10 Feb. 2000,

letter of 7 Feb. 2006

MOA of 8 March 2004

MOA of February 2003/

report of 1 Feb 2006

estimated 300,000/site

MOA of 14 July 1999

Proj. Doc. 22 June 2000

Remarks

Component 1

Component 2

PR China

Philippines

Manila Bay

Environmental

Management

Support for

PEMSEA

Manila Bay

Environmental

Management

Workshop on

Ecosystem

Management of

Interrelated River

Basins, Estuaries

and Coastal Seas

State Oceanic Administration (Bohai Sea)

Government of the Philippines

(Manila Bay)

Department of Environment and Natural

Resources

Government of the Philippines

MOMAF, Korea Maritime Institute,

Masan City Government and Kyungnam

University

Subtotal Component 2

2,647,300.00

1,867,347.00

948,347.00

777,000.00

142,000.00

60,000.00

6,441,994.00

MOA of 23 July 2000

Letter, January 2002

MOA of 8 January 2001

Letter, January 2002

Resource Mobilization

118

Component 3

Training/Regional

Mechanism (2000–2001)

Regional Training on IEIA

Regional Training on

Project Development

Management

Regional Training on ICM

Port Safety &

Environmental Management

System (2002–2003)

IMO

Sida/CMC

IMO

Subtotal Component 3

200,000.00

39,480.00

38,700.00

69,640.00

150,000.00

497,820.00

PID, 08 Feb 2002

1st RNLG Forum, Study

Tour

2nd RNLG Forum,

Leadership training, Study

Tour

3rd RNLG Forum, ICM

Study Tour,

EAS Congress

4th RNLG Forum

MOMAF

Municipal Government of Xiamen

Lembaga Urus Air Selangor

(LUAS), State of Selangor

Provincial Government of Bali

Subtotal Component 4

40,000.00

20,000.00

13,500.00

25,000.00

98,500.00

Component 4

Component 8

Sida/CMC

UNEP-GPA

Subtotal Component 8

39,000.00

19,000.00

80,000.00

138,000.00

MOU of

January 2003

MOU of May

2005

Purpose Partner Counterpart Support ($) Remarks

Tropical Coasts

Collaboration and Sharing

Experiences in the

Sustainable Development

of Marine Coastal

Resources

Renewal of Commitment

for Collaboration and

Sharing Experiences in the

Sustainable Development

of Marine and Coastal

Resources

119

EAS Congress (Maritime

Transport Workshop)

EAS Congress (Theme B

Workshops)

EAS Congress (Land Based

Pollution workshop)

EAS Congress (Fisheries

and Aquaculture Workshop)

EAS Congress

EAS Congress 2006

Local Organizing Committee

(LOC)

Hosting of the Preparatory

Meeting of the Working

Group on the Implementation

of the SDS-EAS

1st Meeting of the Working

Group on the Implementation

of the SDS-EAS

2nd Meeting of the Working

Group on the Implementation

of the SDS-EAS

Dynamics of Regional

Cooperation on Oceans and

Coasts

8th PSC Meeting

9th PSC Meeting

10th PSC Meeting

11th PSC Meeting

IMO

Ship and Ocean Foundation

UNEP-GPA

World Fish Center

Kualiti Alam Malaysia

Alam Sekitar Malaysia

State Oceanic Administration

Department of Environment (DOE)

State Oceanic Administration

Department of Environment and

Natural Resources

Department of Environment and

Natural Resources

Nippon Foundation

Subtotal Component 10

MOMAF, RO Korea

Provincial Government of

Chonburi

Municipal Government of Xiamen

Government of Cambodia

Subtotal Programme

Management/Resource

Mobilization

TOTAL

81,174.00

92,079.00

7,550.00

30,000.00

2,652.00

3,183.00

250,000.00

12,750.00

20,581.00

4,000.00

5,000.00

200,000.00

708,969.00

50,000.00

12,000.00

15,000.00

92,000.00

25,702,821.00

LOI, October

2003

Purpose Partner Counterpart Support ($) Remarks

Component 10

Grant Agreement

Programme Management/Resource Mobilization

Annex 7. Resource Mobilization

120

121

ANNEX 8

Local Government Counterpart Resource Mobilization

122

123

Local Government Counterpart Resource Mobilization

Contract/

Project Activity

1. PMO Operations

2. Coastal Strategy

3. Environmental

Risk Assessment

4. Environmental

Monitoring/IEMP

5. IIMS

6. Communication

Plans/Public

Awareness/

Videos/etc.

7. Knowledge

sharing/training/

ICM Training

Center/

Workshops/Case

Studies

8. Environmental

Investments

9. Coastal-Use

Zoning

10. Implementation

Plan for Coastal

Strategy

11. Institutional

Arrangements

12. Oil Spill

Contingency/

Response

13. Resource

Valuation/Natural

Resource Damage

Assessment

14. Coastal Strategy/

SEMP

Implementation

(i.e., other projects

not fitting into

above)

TOTAL

Bali Batangas Chonburi Danang Nampho SHV Port Klang Xiamen

Cash

(C)

11,156

1,200

4,600

6,600

7,900

7,500

4,255

43,211

Kind

(K)

8,400

1,700

800

4,025

14,925

C K C K

1,580

C K

45,090

28,160

41,520

27,850

22,200

13,600

75,600

43,700

297,720

2,750

1,680

3,000

6,400

3,400

1,600

18,830

C K C K C K C

79,863

14,630

104,095

22,280

3,800

10,306

25,975

658,071

919,019

6,953

46,468

21,665

7,121

6,100

746

43,035

39,181

171,269

25,000

8,000

33,000

32,500

130,000

34,475

0 0 0 164,475

Bataan

K C K

9,000

124

Contract/Project Activity

1. PMO Operations

2. Coastal Strategy

3. Environmental Risk Assessment

4. Environmental Monitoring/IEMP

5. IIMS

6. Communication Plans/Public Awareness/

Videos/etc.

7. Knowledge sharing/training. ICM Training

Center/Workshops/Case Studies

8. Environmental Investments

9. Coastal-Use Zoning

10. Implementation Plan for Coastal Strategy

11. Institutional Arrangements

12. Oil Spill Contingency/Response

13. Resource Valuation/Natural Resource

Damage Assessment

14. Coastal Strategy/SEMP Implementation

(i.e., other projects not fitting into above)

Cash

91,019

59,720

32,760

145,615

50,130

32,600

10,306

46,500

126,075

47,955

658,071

1,300,751

Kind

15,353

49,218

4,960

24,665

7,921

12,500

130,746

3,400

47,060

1,600

71,681

369,104

106,372

108,938

37,720

170,280

58,051

45,100

141,052

49,900

173,135

49,555

729,752

1,669,855

10%

44%

100%

Total ICM GRAND TOTAL Percentage to Total

* Exchange rate: as of Feb. 2006

USD 1 = 140.70 won

USD 1 = Rp 9,400

USD 1 = THB 40.84

USD 1 = PHP 53.05

*based on subcontractual contributions totalling $1,670,000; 70% in-cash - 30% in-kind.

Figure 3. Local Government Counterpart Resource Mobilization

by Project Activity at National ICM Demonstration Sites.

USD 1 = VND 15.885

USD 1 = KHR 4,067

USD 1 = MYR 3.73

USD 1 = RMB 8.07

125

ANNEX 9

PEMSEA Cooperation and Collaboration with Partners

126

127

1. PEMSEA conducted a Regional

Consultative Workshop on the Gulf of

Thailand Environmental Management

Project in May 2001 with the assistance of

the Marine/Harbour Department of

Thailand.

2. Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and

Cooperation (OPRC) training with the

Harbour Department (Thailand), the

Philippine Coast Guard, and East Asia

Response, Ltd. (EARL). The Regional

Programme in cooperation with IMO

Technical Cooperation Division and EARL

conducted an OPRC training course for

supervisors and on-scene commanders

in Bangkok, Thailand and Manila,

Philippines. The training aimed to build the

skills of relevant personnel in planning,

coordinating and supervising response

operations to oil spills along Manila Bay and

the Gulf of Thailand and to promote

intergovernmental, interagency and intersectoral

partnerships.

3. A regional training on Strengthening

Recovery of Ship Pollution Cleanup Costs

and Damage Claims was conducted in

partnership with the Maritime Port Authority

of Singapore (MPA).

4. A workshop on Regional Network for Local

Governments, implementation of the

Shihwa ICM parallel site, and development

of an environmental investment support

fund with MOMAF, Kyonggi Provincial

Government, City Governments of Ansan

and Siheung, and the County of Hwasung,

RO Korea.

5. Establishment of an ICM parallel site in

Bataan, Philippines with the Bataan

Coastal Care Foundation.

6. Waste management facility in Batangas,

Philippines with Waste Systems New

Zealand Ltd. and Batangas Environmental

Services, Inc.

7. Development of a simulation model for

Bali, Indonesia with Hatfield Consultants

and Envision Sustainability Tools, Inc.

8. Development of a hydrodynamic and water

quality model with Seaconsult Marine

Research, Ltd.

9. Collaboration with Burapha University for

the conduct of the risk assessment training

and development of the initial risk

assessment (IRA) for the Chonburi

national ICM demonstration site.

10. Collaboration with the Universiti

Kebangsaan Malaysia on the conduct of

IRA for the national ICM demonstration site

in Klang, Malaysia. The Port Klang Authority

partnered with PEMSEA in 2001 to develop

and field test the Port Safety Audit Manual.

11. Cooperation with Universiti Putra Malaysia

and Malacca Straits Development Centre

(MASDEC) for the organization and

conduct of an international conference on

the Straits of Malacca.

12. Establishment of a PEMSEA regional ICM

training center with Xiamen University. The

Training Center was officially inaugurated

on November 24, 2001. The Regional

Programme in cooperation with Xiamen

University’s International Training Center

for Sustainable Coastal Development

conducted a regional training on ICM. The

course was designed to provide

participants with the opportunity to analyze

Collaborative activities that the Regional

Programme has undertaken from July 2000

to December 2001

128

practical issues and problems arising from

multiple resource-use conflicts and

resulting environmental impacts and learn

about the process of integrated

management planning and implementation

for marine environmental protection and

management as applied in Xiamen.

13. Cooperative activities with the Coastal

Management Center (CMC) and the

Swedish International Development

Cooperation Agency (Sida) including

organization and conduct of regional

training courses and publication of Tropical

Coasts magazine.

14. The Ministry of Maritime Affairs and

Fisheries (MOMAF), RO Korea is jointly

undertaking with PEMSEA a study on the

establishment of an environmental

investment support fund and

environmental investment center.

15. Cooperation with World Wild Fund for

Nature (WWF) – Philippines in the

development of an environmental

sensitivity index mapping process for

Batangas Bay.

Collaborative activities undertaken by the

Regional Programme from January –

December 2002

1. The Regional Programme co-sponsored

the Asia-Pacific Conference on Marine

Science and Technology, which was

organized by the Malaysian Society of

Marine Sciences, the National

Oceanography Directorate of Malaysia’s

Ministry of Science, Technology and the

Environment, and the Institute of Biological

Sciences of the University of Malaya.

2. The Regional Programme collaborated

with the Environmental Studies Institute of

Miriam College, Globe Programme,

Philippine Science High School, Volunteer

Service Overseas and WWF for the

Development and Implementation of an

Environmental Youth Camp Program.

3. The Regional Programme, in cooperation

with EARL and Yantai Maritime Safety

Administration and with the financial

support of IMO, conducted a training

course on Oil Pollution Preparedness,

Response and Cooperation for Supervisors

and On-Scene Commanders (OPRC Level

2) in Yantai, PR China in June 2002.

4. In PR China, the Regional Programme cosponsored

and jointly organized with the

State Oceanic Administration (SOA) the

Regional Workshop on Sharing Lessons

Learned Towards Sustainable Coastal

Development, which was hosted by the

Xiamen Municipal Government. This

Regional Workshop coincided with the

Second Forum of the Regional Network of

Local Government, Leadership Seminar

and Study Tour held on 20–24 September

2002.

5. The Regional Programme participated in

the World Summit on Sustainable

Development in Johannesburg by setting

up the PEMSEA exhibit and participating in

the panel discussion at the workshop on

Large Marine Ecosystems, as well as in

ocean partnership group meetings and a

plenary session of the intergovernmental

meetings.

6. The Malaysia Institute of Maritime Affairs

(MIMA) hosted the Experts Meeting on

Better Coastal and Ocean Governance in

Kuala Lumpur on 18-20 November 2002.

7. An Agreement was issued with GMA

Network, Inc. for granting gratis et amore,

the right to use the excerpts from the motion

picture Muro-Ami to be included in the

documentary entitled, “The PEMSEA Story.”

129

8. In close coordination with PEMSEA,

several consultations with various

stakeholders were undertaken by HCL and

ESTI at the National ICM Demonstration

Project in Bali. The main output is a

software/computer simulation model (Bali

QUEST version 1 Beta) that facilitates

debate and discussion among a variety of

stakeholders, and was submitted in 2002.

During the 8th PSC Meeting, potential

collaboration with the following observers were

discussed:

1. ILO in the development of a

complementary manual to PEMSEA’s Port

Safety Audit Manual, which covers aspects

related to port worker safety in the landside

port operations;

2. INTERTANKO on issues and initiatives

relating to tanker port safety, oil spill

response, and the ratification and

implementation of international

conventions by various countries in the

region;

3. IOC/WESTPAC concerning testing of

NEAR-GOOS and Remote Sensing

Application for coastal management at

PEMSEA sites;

4. Nippon Foundation concerning joint

research toward a graduate degree

program in ocean governance, and the

establishment of a regional ocean think

tank;

5. The Global Ballast Water Management

Project on the development of a regional

action plan for ballast water control and

management;

6. The IMO Technical Cooperation Project on

Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas;

7. The IAEA in technical cooperation projects

related to harmful algal blooms;

8. The Maritime State University (MSU),

Vladivostok, Russia, on hosting PEMSEA

trainings using facilities of MSU and

development of GIS for the Far Eastern

Seas;

9. Tohoku University, Japan, concerning the

IOC-related activities as well as aspects

of satellite/physical oceanography;

10. UNEP/EAS on the Action Plan and the GEF

project in the South China Sea; and

11. The World Bank on policy advice and

financing of national coastal-related

projects and programs.

Collaborative activities undertaken by the

Regional Programme from January –

December 2003

1. The Marine Department of Thailand hosted

the 1st Senior Government Officials

Meeting (SGOM) on 4–5 August 2003, and

the 9th Programme Steering Committee

(PSC) Meeting in Pattaya, Chonburi

Province on 6–8 August 2003.

2. The Ministry of Science, Technology and

Environment, Malaysia hosted the East

Asian Seas Congress 2003 (8–12

December), in Putrajaya, Malaysia. The

Department of Environment, Malaysia, is

the National Focal Agency for PEMSEA,

and also co-organizer of the EAS

Congress 2003.

3. The Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) cohosted

the Training Workshop on Claims

Recovery and Contingency Planning in

February 2003.

4. A study tour in Xiamen ICM Demonstration

site was conducted in March 2003

involving representatives from the Manila

Bay area, Philippines; Sihanoukville,

Cambodia; and Sukabumi Regency,

Indonesia.

5. In February 2003, a Memorandum of

Agreement was signed by PEMSEA and

Sukabumi Regency to support, promote

and collaborate on the development and

implementation of an ICM parallel site.

Annex 9. PEMSEA Cooperation and Collaboration with Partners

130

6. Letter of Intention with the Ship and Ocean

Foundation formalizing partnership with

the Ship and Ocean Foundation to

undertake activities including promotion

and development of a regional strategy for

sustainable development of the seas of

East Asia, building national capacities,

establishment and operation of regional

think tank, organizing workshops and

conferences.

7. The Marine Department (formerly the

Harbor Department) hosted the 9th

Programme Steering Committee (PSC)

Meeting in Pattaya, Chonburi Province, on

6–8 August 2003.

8. The Project Management Office (PMO) of

Chonburi ICM Demonstration Site is

hosted by Sri Racha Municipality. Sri

Racha also hosted the field trip for the 9th

PSC Meeting in August 2003.

9. The Victoria Coastal Council was one of

the supporting organizations of the EAS

Congress 2003.

10. The Development Bank of the Philippines

(DBP) co-hosted PEMSEA’s Investors

Roundtable held on 6 May 2003 at the DBP

Building in Makati City.

11. In an agreement with Sky Foundation, Inc.,

the Knowledge Channel aired two

PEMSEA videos, namely, (1) Monsoon

Tale, which focuses on Xiamen, one of

PEMSEA ICM sites, and Manila Bay, one

of the subregional sea areas/pollution

hotspots, and (b) Kagandahan,

Kabuhayan at Kaunlaran para sa

Kinabukasan, which focuses on BIGKISBataan,

the ICM program of the Province

of Bataan.

12. The Philippine government-owned TV

station, National Broadcasting Network

(NBN-4), aired the Monsoon Tale video.

Another government-owned station,

Intercontinental Broadcasting Company

(IBC-13), regularly aired the Bataan video

and the Eco-Camp video.

13. The Management Association of the

Philippines (MAP) assisted PEMSEA in

promoting environmental investment

opportunities in the Manila Bay area to its

network of companies and executives, and

co-organized the PEMSEA Investors

Roundtable held on 6 May 2003 at the DBP

Building in Makati City. The MAP also

launched a book in February 2003, which

includes photographs from PEMSEA ICM

sites and activities. As part of the media

network, PEMSEA is also working with the

Environmental Committee of MAP to

disseminate information about PEMSEA

activities.

14. The Philippine Chamber of Commerce and

Industry (PCCI) co-organized the PEMSEA

Investors Roundtable held on 6 May 2003.

As part of PEMSEA’s Investment Network,

PCCI remains a partner in the promotion

of environmental projects among its

members in the Philippines and its

chamber partners within and outside the

region.

15. PEMSEA organized a special session

focusing on the Gulf of Thailand during the

6th International Conference on the

Environmental Management of Enclosed

Coastal Seas (EMECS 2003) held in

Bangkok on 18–21 November 2003.

16. The International Association of Marine Aids

to Navigation and Lighthouses Authorities

(IALA-AISM) is a partner of PEMSEA in the

development of the International Port

Safety and Environmental Management

(IPSEM) Code and has provided input as

part of the peer review.

131

17. International Association of Ports and

Harbors (IAPH) was a key partner of

PEMSEA in the development of the IPSEM

Code.

18. The International Navigation Congress,

formerly the Permanent International

Association of Navigation Congresses, or

PIANC worked with PEMSEA in the

development of the IPSEM Code and

promotion of PSHEMS, and has given its

inputs and suggestions as part of the peer

review of the IPSEM Code.

19. The International Tanker Owners Pollution

Federation (ITOPF), together with EARL,

co-organized training workshops on claims

recovery and oil spill contingency planning

for PEMSEA’s subregional sea areas/

pollution hotspots. It developed training

materials and gave lectures for the

workshops conducted in Manila in February

2003 and Ho Chi Minh City in July 2003.

20. A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)

between the International Ocean Institute

(IOI) and PEMSEA was entered into by both

parties in August 2003 to jointly pursue

activities to promote coastal and ocean

governance within the sustainable

development framework.

21. The WWF Sulu-Sulawesi Marine

Ecoregion Program held the Tri-National

Integration Workshop on the Formulation

of the Sulu-Sulawesi Marine Ecoregion

Conservation Plan in June 2003. PEMSEA

representatives participated in this

workshop, which also served as avenue

to review the integrated conservation

issues, actions and responsibilities within

local, national and ecoregional levels.

22. As a key partner of PEMSEA in the

development and promotion of port safety

and environmental management, United

Nations Conference on Trade and

Development (UNCTAD) Division for SITE

has provided inputs as part of the on-going

peer review of the IPSEM Code.

23. A key partner of PEMSEA in the promotion

of port safety and environmental

management is the United Nations

Environmental Programme (UNEP). The

Division of Technology, Industry and

Environment (DTIE) of UNEP-Bangkok

served as focal point and has provided

inputs to the IPSEM Code.

24. In April 2003, a Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU) was entered into by

PEMSEA and UNEP/Global Programme

of Action on Land-based Pollution (GPA)

to enhance cooperation and to share

experiences and knowledge in the

governance of regional seas and oceans

and sustainable development of marine

and coastal resources. PEMSEA and GPA

have agreed to collaborate on the

production of Tropical Coasts, linkage of

the respective websites, and development

and dissemination of studies on national

coastal policy, and to co-organize

conferences and workshops. A PEMSEA

staff participated in the Sixth Train-Sea-

Coast Course Developers Workshop

organized by UNEP-GPA and held in

Germany from 23 June–3 July 2003.

25. The Maritime Transport Division of OECD

has signified its willingness to be a partner

in the development and promotion of the

IPSEM Code.

26. Global Environment and Technology

Foundation (GETF)/International Center for

Environmental Financing and PEMSEA

signed an MOU on 16 October 2003 to

collaborate on innovative financing

arrangements including the development

of regional and national revolving funds.

Annex 9. PEMSEA Cooperation and Collaboration with Partners

132

27. Sponsors and Workshop Co-Organizers

of EAS Congress:

• Asia-Pacific Forum of Environmental

Journalists

• Global Environment Facility

• Global Programme of Action for the

Protection of the Marine Environment

from Land-Based Activities, Coordination

Office, UNEP

• International Maritime Organization

• Selangor State Government

• Ship and Ocean Foundation

• United Nations Development Programme

• UNDP-GEF Regional Coordination Unit

Asia and Pacific

• WorldFish Center

Supporting Organizations:

• China Institute of Marine Affairs

• Korea Maritime Institute, RO Korea

• Korea Ocean Research and

Development Institute, RO Korea

• Maritime Institute of Malaysia

• Philippine Center for Marine Affairs

• Victorian Coastal Council, Australia

• Association of Southeast Asian Nations

• World Bank

• Asian Fisheries Society

• Coastal Management Center

• Conservation International

• East Asia Response Pte Ltd

• International Association of Independent

Tanker Owners

• International Oceans Institute

• International Petroleum Industry

Environmental Conservation Association

• International Tanker Owners Pollution

Federation Ltd

• The World Conservation Union (IUCN) –

Asia

• World Wide Fund for Nature –

Philippines

Collaborative activities undertaken by the

Regional Programme from January–

December 2004

1. The Port Authority of Thailand (PAT) has

designated Bangkok Port as the

demonstration site for the Port Safety,

Health and Environmental Management

System (PSHEMS). Their participation

started with the field testing of the

PSHEMS manual. PEMSEA provided

technical support for the establishment of

PSHEMS at Bangkok Port, while PAT cofunded

the training workshops and

operating expenses of the project team.

2. An MOU with the Government of Quang

Nam Province and the Ministry of Natural

Resources and Environment on the

Development and Implementation of an

ICM parallel site in Quang Nam Province

was signed on 10 November 2004.

3. The Cavite Province of the Philippines

signed an MOA with the Department of

Environment and Natural Resources

(DENR) and PEMSEA on 8 March 2004

for the development and implementation

of an ICM parallel site in the province.

4. The Quang Nam Province of Vietnam was

officially accepted as PEMSEA’s 5th ICM

parallel site in August 2004 and signed the

MOA in November 2004.

5. PEMSEA signed on 26 October 2004 an

MOU with the Department of Sustainability

and Environment of Australia on the

collaboration and sharing of experiences

and knowledge in the sustainable use and

management of marine and coastal area.

6. Port of Tanjung Pelepas (PTP)

demonstrated its commitment to support

PEMSEA’s PSHEMS initiative through the

setting-up of the PSHEMS in the Port of

Tanjung Pelepas. A Steering Committee

133

and project team was established for the

implementation of the project. PTP cofunded

the training workshops and

operating expenses of the project team.

7. The City of San Fernando, Pampanga,

Philippines, and the Pro-Environment

Consortium, the selected private sector

partner, signed an MOA for the

development and implementation of an

integrated solid waste management

system for the city on 16 April 2004.

8. From 10–23 October 2004, the APEC

Marine Environment Training and

Education Center (AMETEC) of KORDI,

RO Korea, conducted a training course on

environmental monitoring related to oil

spills with 13 participants from PEMSEA

sites.

9. PEMSEA participated in the third APEC

Integrated Oceans Management Forum

held in Easter Island, Chile on 18–20

October 2004. PEMSEA shared the

common vision and the efforts of the

countries of the East Asian Seas region in

the development and implementation of the

SDS-SEA.

10. PEMSEA signed on 26 October 2004 an

MOU with Australian Network of Maritime

Education and Training Association on the

pursuance of the common endeavor of

assisting national capacity building for

improvements in the health of the marine

environment, including better coastal and

ocean governance within a sustainable

development framework.

11. The Department of Marine Science,

Faculty of Science of Chulalongkorn

University in Thailand organized two

workshops in collaboration with the

Pollution Control Department and

PEMSEA to increase awareness and

understanding of relevant agencies on

environmental resource valuation and cost

recovery from oil spills (i.e., CLC and FUND

Conventions).

12. The City University of Hongkong and

PEMSEA organized an IEIA training course,

held on 24 November–4 December 2004

in Hong Kong. The University provided the

course lecturers for the training course,

which included participants from PEMSEA

participating countries.

13. Under the partnership arrangements with

PERSGA, Dr. Chua Thia-Eng, PEMSEA

RPD, attended the PERSGA Retreat held

in Jordan, from May 21–24 to share

PEMSEA experience with regard to the

regional collaborative framework,

organization structure and sustainable

financing initiatives. In addition, PEMSEA

organized the missions of experts to assist

in the development and conduct of

PERSGA ICM Trainer Training in Sudan,

May 12-18, 2005, and to undertake a training

module on the application of economic

instrument in managing coastal and marine

resources in the PERSGA Workshop on

ICZM and Economics in Jordan, June 19–

23, 2005.

14. The IMPAC, CRC-Reef and PEMSEA

collaborated in the development of an

expression of interest to establish a

partnership arrangement on effective

management of the marine protected areas

(MPA).

15. The Nippon Foundation collaborated with

PEMSEA on the implementation of the

project entitled Dynamics of Regional

Cooperation on Coast and Ocean

Governance. The first phase of the project

began in March 2004 and was completed

in August 2005.

16. A regional cable news network, CNBC Asia

aired a 30-second special feature plug on

Annex 9. PEMSEA Cooperation and Collaboration with Partners

134

PEMSEA and its activities in the region.

The plug was aired daily for a one-week

period.

17. The Intercontinental Broadcasting

Corporation (IBC-13) of the Philippines

regularly aired the PEMSEA Story, the

Bataan Video “Kagandahan, Kabuhayan

at Kaunlaran para sa Kinabukasan,” and

the PEMSEA Eco-Camp video. The

videos began airing in May 2002. From

September 2003–September 2004, an

estimated 55 million viewers have seen

the videos. In addition, PEMSEA provided

IBC-13 two new videos for airing — the

EAS Congress Video and the Melasti: A

Festival of Hope video — last July 2004.

18. A privately owned production company,

Isla TV aired its documentaries on NBN-

4 and ZOE TV Channel 11. It aired the

Monsoon Tale video twice in both

channels.

19. Masan MBC, a major Korean TV

broadcast company, produced a special

one-hour TV program on Xiamen ICM

experiences, in cooperation with

PEMSEA and the Xiamen Municipal

Government.

20. A Joint Communiqué was signed on 20

October 2004 with the Global

Environment Facility Small Grants

Programme (GEF-SGP) on the

collaboration between PEMSEA and

SGP through project development and

implementation, relative to the

sustainable development and

management of marine and coastal

areas of the seas of East Asia and the

corresponding benefits derived by coastal

communities, the poor and other

marginalized groups within coastal

communities.

Collaborative activities undertaken by the

Regional Programme from January-

December 2005

1. The Bali Provincial Government hosted the

4th Forum of the Regional Network of Local

Governments Implementing ICM from 26–

28 April 2005.

2. In Indonesia, the Bali Provincial

Government, together with seven

regencies and one municipal government,

officially endorsed the Bali Coastal Strategy

Implementation Plan and the Coastal Use

Zoning Plan at the Bali ICM Workshop on

29 April 2005. As part of Bali Coastal

Strategy Implementation, a partnership

arrangement was also made between

BAPEDALDA, a university, the tourism

sector and other private sectors on the

development and implementation of an

Integrated Beach Environmental

Monitoring Program through the signing of

an MOA.

3. In Bataan, Philippines, an MOA was signed

between the Province of Bataan, BCCFI

and PEMSEA on 12 May 2005 for the

extension of the implementation of the ICM

program in the province. The Chair of the

League of Mayors was one of the

signatories of the MOA.

4. In Cambodia, with the assistance from

PEMSEA, the Sihanoukville ICM project

has initiated the implementation of an

Integrated Beach Environmental

Monitoring Program (IBEMP) through the

operationalization of the Sihanoukville

Environmental Laboratory (SEL). The

IBEMP is a major step in consolidating

efforts among public and private

institutions, such as the Danish

International Development Agency

(DANIDA), Cambrew Ltd., and the Ministry

of Environment, to conduct beach

environmental quality monitoring

135

operations. Part of this initiative is the threeweek

capacity-building program led by the

Regional Task Force members to

strengthen the skills of implementers in

data gathering and analysis. The project

also assisted in the development of a

Tourism Development Plan for one of the

major tourist destinations, the Occheauteal

Beach in collaboration with the

Department of Tourism and the

Department of Environment. The Municipal

Government allotted about $20,000 for the

implementation of initial activities for this

project. Meanwhile, the Coastal-Use

Zoning (CUZ) Plan was also finalized by

local officials and was presented to the

National Coastal Steering Committee

(NCSC) for review and approval on 30 May

2005. While awaiting the formal

acceptance and/or endorsement from the

NCSC, the Municipal Government is

identifying the preliminary mechanism for

its implementation.

5. A Training Course on Oil Pollution

Preparedness, Response and

Cooperation (OPRC) for Supervisors and

On-Scene Commanders, was held last

13–16 December 2005 in Cambodia. The

course was organized and conducted

through a partnership between PEMSEA,

the Marine Department of Thailand,

Industry Environmental Support Group

(IESG) - Thailand and EARL.

6. The Working Group Meeting on the

Implementation of the SDS-SEA was held

from 15 to 18 May 2005 in Manila,

Philippines. The Meeting was organized by

PEMSEA RPO and hosted by the

Philippine Department of Environment and

Natural Resources (DENR). DENR

provided support through hosting of

dinners, field trip and local transport.

7. In collaboration with the Ministry of Maritime

Affairs and Fisheries (MOMAF) of RO

Korea, PEMSEA has organized and

conducted the Workshop on Ecosystem

Management of Interrelated River Basins,

Estuaries and Coastal Seas in Masan, RO

Korea, from 31 May to 4 June 2005.

MOMAF has offered to host the

Secretariat and further pledged to organize

the second Twinning Workshop in Hainan,

China, in December 2006 during the EAS

Congress 2006.

8. The Government of Cambodia through the

Ministry of Environment co-hosted the 11th

PSC Meeting in Siem Reap last 1–4

August 2005. As the host country,

Cambodia contributed support to the

meeting by providing dinner for all the

participants, local transport, logistical

needs for the Secretariat Room, and

shouldered expenses for the field trips.

9. A MOA was signed by PEMSEA, Ministry

of Environment of Indonesia, Bali

Provincial Government and Regency

Governments of Buleleng, Jembrana and

Tabanan in October 2005 to establish,

develop and operationalize ICM parallel

sites as part of the implementation of the

SDS-SEA.

10. In October 2005, PEMSEA, the State

Oceanic Administration (SOA) of China

and the local governments of Dongying

Municipality, Fangchenggang Municipality,

Haikou City, Leting City, Lianyungang

Municipality, Panjin Municipality, Qingdao

Municipality, Quanzhou Municipality,

Wenchang City, Yangjiang Municipality

signed an MOA to establish, develop and

operationalize ICM parallel sites.

11. PEMSEA collaborated with the Xiamen

Municipal Government, UNEP, State

Environmental Protection Agency of China

and ICLEI in co-organizing the 2005 Global

Coastal Cities Forum in Xiamen. The

event took place last 8–11 October 2005.

Annex 9. PEMSEA Cooperation and Collaboration with Partners

136

12. An expression of interest followed by a

proposal was submitted to the Regional

Natural Heritage Programme (RNHP) of

Australia on 9 January 2005 for a

collaborative project on effective marine

protected area (MPA) management in the

Seas of East Asia. The project proposal

was jointly developed by PEMSEA, the

International Marine Project Activities

Centre Ltd., the Cooperative Research

Centre, Reef Research Centre Ltd., and

its associate, International Ocean Institute

Regional Operational Centre for Australia

and the Western Pacific and several

international NGOs such as WWF and the

World Conservation Union.

13. PEMSEA has forged a partnership with the

Thailand Environmental Institute (TEI) in

jointly pursuing sustainable coastal

management and development through

capacity building and promoting

partnerships. The MOU was signed on 25

April 2005 and will take effect until

December 2006. TEI has conducted an

on-site ICM training workshop in Sri

Racha Municipality on 16–18 February

2005.

14. PEMSEA signed an MOU with UNEPGlobal

Programme of Action (GPA) on the

renewal of commitment to collaborate on

the sustainable development of marine

and coastal resources and governance of

the Seas of East Asia on 8 June 2005.

The agreement will take effect until

December 2006.

15. The Regional Programme Director

attended and delivered a presentation at

the First Regional Partners Workshop on

Regional Coordination Mechanisms in the

East Asian Seas Region organized by

UNEP EAS Regional Programme and the

Coordinating Body on Seas of East Asia

(COBSEA) from 8–9 May 2005.

16. The Masan Munhwa Broadcasting Corp.

(MBC) produced the video Future of Our

Coasts that featured the ICM initiatives in

ROK. PEMSEA translated the video to

English for distribution to stakeholders and

partners. MBC gave PEMSEA the right to

distribute the translated video to media

partners in the Philippines for broadcast

in June 2005.

17. The Xiamen TV Station carried out the

production of the Xiamen Story video,

while PEMSEA financed the production

and polished the final editing. The Xiamen

Oceans Fisheries Department and

Xiamen Municipality also extended some

assistance in the development of the

video. The Xiamen TV Station aired the

video (Chinese version) twice in July 2005

in the program “Oceanic Viewpoint.” The

video was aired through the coordination

of the Xiamen PMO.

18. Danang Radio and Television aired the

Danang: A City at the Crossroads video

twice a month from June–September 2005.

The airing of the video was coordinated by

the Danang City PMO.

19. A letter of agreement was signed between

GEF/UNDP/IMO PEMSEA and CCI Asia

Group Corp. in June 2005 for the broadcast

of PEMSEA videos. The airing of videos

will continue until July 2006.

20. PEMSEA, Plymouth Marine Laboratory

(PML) and Plymouth Marine Applications

Ltd. (PMA) signed an MOU to enhance

collaboration and share experiences and

knowledge in the sustainable use and

management of coastal and marine areas.

21. The Training Course on Oil Pollution

Preparedness, Response and

Cooperation (OPRC) for Supervisors and

On-Scene Commanders was held 13–16

137

December 2005. The course was

organized and conducted through a

partnership between PEMSEA, the Marine

Department of Thailand, Industry

Environmental Support Group (IESG)-

Thailand and EARL.

22. A draft MOA was prepared between

PEMSEA, SCOTIA and the Municipality of

Puerto Galera for the Development and

Implementation of PPP projects.

Collaborative activities undertaken by the

Regional Programme from January 2006 to

the present

1. In line with the collaboration between the

Nippon Foundation and PEMSEA on the

implementation of the project entitled

Dynamics of Regional Cooperation on

Coast and Ocean Governance, a special

Tropical Coasts Magazine Issue on

Dynamics of Regional Ocean Governance

is being developed. The issue is scheduled

to be published by July 2006.

2. PEMSEA, in partnership with the City

University of Hong Kong and the Coastal

Management Center, is organizing a

training workshop from 5–10 June 2006 at

the Centre for Coastal Pollution and

Conservation of the City University of Hong

Kong. The Workshop will focus on

integrated environmental impact

assessment (IEIA) for coastal and marine

areas.

3. The countries of Cambodia, Thailand and

Vietnam signed the Joint Statement of

Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam on

Partnerships in Oil Spill Preparedness and

Response in the Gulf of Thailand on 12

January 2006. The signing was facilitated

by PEMSEA. The event marked a

significant milestone for the three countries

and the PEMSEA-supported Gulf of

Thailand Environmental Management

Project.

4. PEMSEA and the League of Cities of the

Philippines (LCP) signed an MOU to share

experiences and knowledge in integrated

coastal and marine management and

sustainable financing mechanisms.

5. The Department of Environment and

Natural Resources of the Philippines

agreed to host the 12th PSC Meeting in

Davao City, Philippines, on 1-4 August

2006. As host country, the Philippines

offered to provide logistical support (i.e.,

secretariat room, meeting materials and

equipment, local transport and guide), as

well as the hosting of a welcome dinner

and the field trip. The Regional DENR office

will also serve as the local Secretariat to

the Meeting.

6. The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and

Transport (MLIT) of Japan organized and

facilitated the PEMSEA lecture on SDSSEA

to the members of the Japanese

Association of Coastal Zone Studies last

15 February. The lecture was delivered by

Dr. Chua Thia-Eng.

7. The PEMSEA received an invitation to the

12th Pacific Congress on Marine Science

and Technology (PACON 2006) to be held

in Yangon, Myanmar, on 11–15 of June.

The RPD is invited to deliver the keynote

address.

8. PEMSEA received an invitation to the First

Technical Working Group Meeting for the

ASEM Ocean Initiatives. The Meeting will

be held in Manila, Philippines on 29-31

March. PEMSEA is invited to make a

presentation regarding its initiatives and to

contribute in the discussions regarding the

formulation of an Action Plan for the said

Ocean Initiative.

Annex 9. PEMSEA Cooperation and Collaboration with Partners

138

9. PEMSEA through the RPD participated in

the panels/forums at the Third Global

Forum on Coasts, Oceans and Small

Islands in January.

10. PEMSEA and the Municipal Government

of Sihanoukville, Cambodia, signed a

contract on the Pilot-Scale Implementation

of a Solid Waste Management Project in

Sihanoukville. The contract duration is

from 20 February–30 June 2006.

11. With the financial and technical support

of PEMSEA, the Municipal Government of

Sihanoukville will implement the Tourism

Development and Management Plan for

Occheauteal Beach in Sihanoukville.

12. To facilitate the sustainability of the ICM

Programme in Sihanoukville, PEMSEA

provides continuous financial and technical

assistance to the PMO operations. The

PMO will focus on the implementation and

evaluation of the ICM Program as well as

co-organize important events and forums

including the National Forum/Consultation

on Sustainable Coastal and Marine

Management in Sihanoukville held 6-8

March 2006, in coordination with the

Ministry of Environment of Cambodia.

13. With PEMSEA’s assistance, the

Environmental Management Department

(BAPEDALDA) of Indonesia and the Bali

Provincial Government will undertake

various activities to ensure sustainable

implementation of the ICM project activities

toward the completion of the ICM

demonstration project, and promote the

replication of Bali ICM experiences in other

coastal areas of Indonesia.

14. The Local Government Academy (LGA)

and PEMSEA agreed to collaborate in the

development and implementation of a

national ICM Training Program, with

Batangas Province as the demonstration

site. The LGA will be tapped to participate

in this project to provide expertise on

developing the teaching skills of the

professionals and packaging course

materials, based on the ICM framework

developed by PEMSEA.

15. A Consultative Workshop for the

Implementation of the SDS-SEA was held

in Chonburi Province, Thailand, on 7–8

March 2006. The workshop was organized

jointly by the Department of Marine and

Coastal Resources, Ministry of Natural

Resources and Environment (DMCRMONRE)

and the PMO of the Chonburi

National ICM Demonstration Project, with

guidance and input from the RPO.

16. EAS CONGRESS 2006: Confirmed

Sponsors, Conference Co-Convenors and

Supporting Organizations

• Asia-Pacific Fishery Commission

• Asia Pacific Forum of Environmental

Journalists

• Asian Fisheries Society

• Centre for Marine Environmental Research

and Innovative Technology, City University

of Hong Kong

• China Institute of Marine Affairs

• Coastal Management Center

• Department of Sustainability and

Environment, Victoria, Australia

• East Asia Response Pte. Ltd.

• Foundation for Environmental Education

• Food and Agriculture Organization of the

United Nations - Regional Office for Asia

and the Pacific

• GEF Small Grants Programme

• GEF/UNDP/IMO Global Ballast Water

Management Programme (GloBallast)

• Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts and

Islands

• Global Environment Facility

139

• Global Programme of Action for the

Protection of the Marine Environment from

Land-based Activities (GPA) Coordination

Office, UNEP

• International Maritime Organization

• International Marine Project Activities

Centre

• International Ocean Institute

• International Petroleum Industry

Environmental Conservation Association

• Korea Environment Institute, RO Korea

• Korea Maritime Institute, RO Korea

• Korea Ocean Research and Development

Institute, RO Korea

• Marine Aquarium Council

• Marine Environmental Emergency

Preparedness and Response Regional

Activity Centre of the Northwest Pacific

Action Plan (NOWPAP/MERRAC)

• Marine Stewardship Council

• Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries,

Indonesia

• Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries,

RO Korea

Annex 9. PEMSEA Cooperation and Collaboration with Partners

• Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-

Pacific

• Nippon Foundation

• Ocean Policy Research Foundation

• Plymouth Marine Laboratory

• IAEA/ Regional Co-operative Agreement

Regional Office

• Southeast Asian Fisheries Development

Center (SEAFDEC)

• State Oceanic Administration, China

• Thailand Environment Institute

• United Nations Development Programme

• UNEP/East Asian Seas Regional

Coordinating Unit

• UNDP/GEF Project on Reducing

Environmental Stress in the Yellow Sea

Large Marine Ecosystem (Yellow Sea

Project)

• Victorian Coastal Council, Australia

• Wetlands International

• The World Bank

140

141

ANNEX 10

Leveraging Collaboration and Support

142

143

PEMSEA promotes people-to-people as

well as sector-to-sector interactions through its

ICM and subregional sea areas/pollution hotspots

management activities. Each program provides

a management framework featuring:

a. institutional arrangements (organizational

arrangements, policies and legislation);

b. coastal strategies/environmental

management strategic plans (long-term

strategies) and issue and area-specific

action programs (short-term actions) to

address priority issues affecting sustainable

development;

c. capacity building (development of local

human resources);

d. stakeholders participation (private sector,

NGOs, POs, academe, etc.);

e. scientific support (methodologies,

approaches, expertise);

f. environmental investment (financing

environmental management facilities and

services); and

g. monitoring, evaluation and reporting

(environmental and programme monitoring).

This management framework provides

opportunities for various local stakeholders to

work in partnership to address issues of mutual

concern. The framework also enables various

concerned stakeholders, such as donors, IFIs,

UN agencies and international organizations to

work with national and sub-national stakeholders

collectively to provide solutions to priority problems

and capacity needs.

There are a number of examples available

which illustrate how the integrated management

strategy and approach has facilitated collaboration

by third parties at sites/projects where the

Programme had helped prepare the foundation.

In each case, new investments and/or new

opportunities were either provided directly to local

stakeholders, or in a collaborative effort with

PEMSEA, to enhance the capacity of individuals,

communities or sectors. Some of these are

highlighted below.

Replication of ICM. The Batangas Bay

Strategic Environmental Management Plan was

formulated and adopted by the Provincial

Government of Batangas and five coastal

municipalities in 1996. In 2000, after five years of

managing and implementing the ICM program, the

Provincial Government began to realize the

benefits and impact of the integrated

management approach, and determined that ICM

replication was needed. An MOA was signed

between the Provincial Government, the World

Wide Fund for Nature-Philippines, and the 11

coastal municipalities of Balayan Bay to replicate

the ICM framework and process, as applied in

Batangas Bay. This paved the way for the

formulation of an ICM plan for Balayan Bay in

2003, which was later adopted and endorsed by

the Provincial Development Council in 2004.

In 2005, the Strategic Environmental

Management Plan for the Province of Batangas

was prepared, with assistance from PEMSEA.

The revised plan now covers the entire coast of

the Province, providing a 25-year roadmap for

sustainable development of coastal and upland

areas, and extending ICM programs to all coastal

municipalities.

Water Quality Monitoring. Four

specialized laboratories of Shell Batangas, AG &

P, United Coconut Chem. Inc. and Sakamoto

Chemical Inc. joined with the Batangas City Water

District, Philippine Coast Guard and PBM Institute

of Technology to undertake water quality

monitoring of the Batangas Bay area. The

laboratory at the Provincial Government

Environment and Natural Resources Office (PGENRO)

coordinates the analysis of the water

Leveraging Collaboration and Support

144

samples. It is also responsible for ensuring

standardization of methodologies and verification

of results. This arrangement permits the

utilization of best available analytical facilities in

each laboratory in the Bay area. The partnership

arrangement results in cost efficiency by avoiding

duplication of effort, while promoting quality

outputs and better sharing of information among

the partners.

Development of an Innovative

Decision-Support System. A simulation model

developed in Canada and designed to create

awareness among policymakers and

stakeholders about future development

scenarios, was refined and tested at the National

ICM Demonstration Site in Bali, Indonesia. The

QUEST™ Integrated Coastal Management (ICM)

simulation model was co-financed by CIDA Inc.,

Canada, and tested in Bali, taking advantage of

the existing ICM operational framework, and the

information and analysis from the IIMS.

Oil Spill Response. EARL and the

International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation

(ITOPF) conducted training on Oil Preparedness,

Response and Cooperation (OPRC) in the Gulf

of Thailand and Bohai Sea, in support of the

respective efforts to improve management of

these subregional sea areas. The training was

specially intended for response to oil spills in large

bays and subregional seas where cross

boundary limitations often affect the smooth

mobilization of interagency support. The training

courses brought together concerned line

agencies, oil spill response companies and

technical experts to increase their awareness,

knowledge and cooperation in responding to oil

spills.

Port Safety Audit. PEMSEA’s efforts in port

safety audits are focused on the safe handling

and transport of dangerous cargoes in ports,

including the organization and coordination of

chemical spill prevention and emergency

response with local communities. The

assessment audit is designed to provide the port

authorities and operators with the capacity for

self-evaluation of port policies, regulations and

operations, relative to local, national and

international regulations, codes and guidelines,

and for the completion of an action plan designed

to assist port managers and their partners to

rectify any gaps or weaknesses in the system.

PEMSEA developed, tested and published a Port

Safety Audit Manual in December 2001. In 2005,

GTZ initiated a training project in seven ports in

the region on applicable international instruments

and an initial Port Safety Auditor training, including:

Muara (Brunei Darusalam); Sihanoukville

(Cambodia); Jakarta (Indonesia); Bintulu

(Malaysia); Iloilo (Philippines); Laem Chabang

(Thailand); and Saigon Port (Vietnam).

PEMSEA’s Port Safety Audit Manual is the main

resource document being used in the GTZsponsored

training program. In addition, it is

understood that the German Government is

sponsoring similar training programs in Africa and

South America using the PEMSEA Audit Manual.

Port Safety, Health and Environmental

Management System (PSHEMS). The

PSHEMS is a relatively new initiative of PEMSEA,

with co-financing provided by IMO. A PSHEM

Code has been developed as a voluntary standard,

against which a port authority or operating

company can measure the performance of its

operation with regard to safety and the protection

of health and the environment. A PSHEMS Manual

and training program has been developed and

tested at two ports in the region (i.e., Bangkok

Port and Port of Tanjung Pelepas), and a PSHEMS

Recognition/Certification procedure is currently

being implemented at these two ports. A German

non-profit institute for applied environment

protection and safety/security in shipping,

(gemeinnuetzige Gesellschaft fuer Angewandten

Umweltschutz und Sicherheit im Seeverkehr

(GAUSS) mbH ) has already requested approval

from PEMSEA to conduct PSHEMS training in

the ASEAN region, as well as other regions of

the world, using the PEMSEA resource materials.

Modeling the Behavior of Algal Blooms.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)

and the Philippines Nuclear Research Institute

(PNRI) implemented two research projects

focused in Manila Bay, in collaboration with

145

PEMSEA, namely: i) sedimentation studies to

gain information on natural histories of sediments

to correlate with red tide occurrences; and ii)

development of descriptive models of the behavior

of algal blooms as affected by the interactions

between the causative organism and

environmental parameters in the water column

and sediment. Research on the linkage between

red tide occurrences and environmental

conditions in the bay was employed in the

environmental risk assessment component of

PEMSEA’s Manila Bay project.

Marine Electronic Highway. The Marine

Electronic Highway (MEH) is an innovative marine

information and infrastructure system that

integrates environmental management and

protection systems and maritime safety

technologies for enhanced maritime services,

higher navigational safety standards, integrated

marine environment protection and sustainable

development of coastal and marine resources.

The concept paper and first proposal for the MEH

was prepared by PEMSEA and the three

countries bordering the Straits of Malacca

(Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore), as a

component of the Malacca Straits project. The

proposal was adopted by IMO, endorsed to GEF

and World Bank and accepted. IMO took over the

development of the project, and in December

2005 the full project for the development and

demonstration of the MEH for the Straits of

Malacca was approved. The project documents

are now being negotiated with Indonesia and

Malaysia for final signature and project start-up.

GEF/World Bank Partnership

Investment Fund for Pollution Reduction in

the LMEs of East Asia. The SDS-SEA was

adopted by the 12 participating countries of

PEMSEA as a framework for cooperation and

collaboration in developing and managing coastal

resources of the region. In response to this

strategy, the World Bank (WB) and the Global

Environment Facility (GEF) embarked on the

development of a Partnership Investment Fund

to reduce land-based marine pollution in the

LMEs of East Asia (the WB/GEF Partnership

Investment Fund or PIF), with technical support

from PEMSEA. The Partnership Investment

Fund, which was developed as the financing arm

of the SDS-SEA, was endorsed to the GEF

Council in August 2005 by the 11th PSC Meeting

of PEMSEA. In December 2005, the GEF Council

approved the US$80 million project. The project

will be managed by World Bank, and

implemented over a 10-year period. Four projects

have already been approved and are in the

process of being implemented under the PIF,

namely: a) GEF/WB Manila Bay Third Sewerage

Project; b) Ningbo (PR China) sewage, water and

institutional development project; c) Investments

in wastewater treatment and pollution control in

five coastal urban centers in Vietnam; and d)

Development of a regional revolving fund for

pollution reduction. The objective of the PIF is to

facilitate a 10:1 leverage on GEF funds by

enhancing public and private sector investments

in pollution reduction.

Special Skills Training. A number of cooperative

activities have been undertaken

between PEMSEA, the Coastal Management

Center (CMC), and the Swedish International

Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) to

enhance the skills of local scientists and technical

staff. In particular, training courses on Integrated

Environmental Impact Assessment, Formulation

and Management of Coastal and Marine

Development Projects and ICM were codeveloped

and co-organized over the past six

years. Participants to the training courses were