Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel

The Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel, administered by UNEP, advises the Global Environment Facility
(Version 5)
STAP Scientific and Technical screening of the Project Identification Form (PIF)
Date of screening: 13 March 2008

Screener: Guadalupe Duron

Panel member validation by: Meryl Williams
I. PIF Information
GEFSEC PROJECT ID: 3524
GEF AGENCY PROJECT ID: PIMS 4063
COUNTRY(IES): Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines
PROJECT TITLE: Sulu-Celebes Sea Sustainable Fisheries Management Project (SCS)
GEF AGENCY(IES): UNDP,
OTHER EXECUTING PARTNERS: UNOPS
GEF FOCAL AREAS: International Waters,,
GEF-4 STRATEGIC PROGRAM(S): IW-SP 1,
NAME OF PARENT PROGRAM/UMBRELLA PROJECT: Asia Coral Triangle

Full size project
GEF Trust Fund

II. STAP Advisory Response (see table below for explanation)

1. Based on this PIF screening, STAP's advisory response to the GEF Secretariat and GEF Agency(ies):
Consent


III. Further guidance from STAP

2. STAP considers this proposal an important step towards improving the condition of fisheries and their
habitats in the Sulu-Celebes Sea. STAP encourages UNDP to specify how the results from the "growth"
mechanism and the "control" mechanisms will be measured and monitored. More specifically, STAP
believes that considering data collection would be a good idea for the adequate management -
monitoring of ecosystem based fisheries, and control efforts to reduce fishing in the project area. STAP
would be happy to offer further advice on this as the proposal is developed further.
3. Regarding partnerships and historical information relevant to the TDA, STAP suggests that several
NGOs, such as CI, WWF which have worked in the region be explicitly included, and that special
attention be paid to the tuna fisheries of the area, which have an active, long and sometimes contentious
history between the countries, especially between Indonesia and Philippines (see Butcher, J G. The
closing frontier: a history of the marine fisheries of Southeast Asia c. 1850-2000. Singapore, ISEAS,
2004. and some of the more recent WWF work on western and central Pacific tuna fisheries.)



STAP advisory
Brief explanation of advisory response and action proposed
response
1.
Consent
STAP acknowledges that on scientific/technical grounds the concept has merit. However, STAP may state its views on the
concept emphasising any issues that could be improved and the proponent is invited to approach STAP for advice at any time
during the development of the project brief prior to submission for CEO endorsement.
2.
Minor revision
STAP has identified specific scientific/technical suggestions or opportunities that should be discussed with the proponent as
required.
early as possible during development of the project brief. One or more options that remain open to STAP include:
(i)
Opening a dialogue between STAP and the proponent to clarify issues
(i ) Setting a review point during early stage project development and agreeing terms of reference for an independent
expert to be appointed to conduct this review
The proponent should provide a report of the action agreed and taken, at the time of submission of the ful project brief for
CEO endorsement.
3.
Major revision
STAP proposes significant improvements or has concerns on the grounds of specified major scientific/technical omissions in
required
the concept. If STAP provides this advisory response, a ful explanation would also be provided. Normal y, a STAP approved
review wil be mandatory prior to submission of the project brief for CEO endorsement.
The proponent should provide a report of the action agreed and taken, at the time of submission of the ful project brief for
CEO endorsement.

1

---