Changes made to the brief per bilateral consultations:
1. Administrative fees are included in the cover page as the project support services of the
project.
2. The summary on the cover page has been shortened. The overall length of the project brief
has also been shortened to a total of 14 pages. The project outputs are identified for each of
the four project objectives.
3. The project brief has been revised to include text that the future sustainability of project
results will be facilitated by the strengthening of the existing regional and national task
forces, which are inter-ministerial in nature (objective 1, and activity 1.4). They will facilitate
the definition of priority action programmes for each participating country. In order to
ensure that adequate financial resources and mechanisms are available for the sustainability
of the project, after year three of the project, an assessment of options for creating financial
and institutional sustainability in ocean fisheries management with recommendations for
future action will be prepared as appropriate (activity 3.9). Furthermore, the project will
review the opportunities for self-financing of project components at regional and national
levels, pinpointing the potential economic sources and mechanisms. Consultations will also
be undertaken with the co-operating governments and all stakeholders involved, including
the private sector, and a donor conference will be sponsored, using the on-going GEF project
as leverage, for the creation of necessary additional donors and the securing of loans.
4. The presentation of the project financing on the cover page and annexes 1 and 5 has been
improved. Annex 5 presents a set of interventions that constitute the baseline for the project,
and is so identified as "on-going, planned, or secured financing". Of the baseline, there is a
set of interventions that the project has leveraged as new financing for the proposed project,
and these are identified as co-financing. The baseline is separated by the four project
components/objectives as well. There is a third set of interventions identified that are also
planned, but are not considered as part of the baseline. These are identified as the associated
funding.
5. Efforts have been made to secure co-financing from UNDP for this project have not been
fruitful to date due to the very small amounts of TRAC resources, which are already
committed. However, UNDP will continue to seek agency co-financing during final project
preparation.
6. Palau, as with any other GEF-eligible South Pacific SIDS not presently requesting this project,
is welcome to join in when they are in a position to do so, as is the agreed arrangement for the
implementation of Strategic Action Programmes (e.g., when they have formally become a
participant in the GEF).
7. The project brief has been revised per minor suggestions for clarification given to
Andrew Hudson.
GEF Project Brief
________________________________________________________________________
1. Identifiers
Project Number:
RAS/98/A08
Project Name:
Implementation of the Strategic Action Programme (SAP) of
the Pacific Small Island Developing States.
Project Duration:
5
years
Implementing Agency:
UNDP
Executing Agency:
South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme (SPREP)
Requesting Countries:
Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati,
Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Samoa,
Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.
Eligibility:
Eligible under para. 9(b) of GEF Instrument
GEF Focal Area:
International
Waters
GEF Programming Framework:
OP #9: Integrated Land and Water Multiple Focal Area
2. Summary
The long-term objective of this project is to conserve and sustainably manage the coastal and
ocean resources in the Pacific Region. Project activities are designed to encourage
comprehensive, cross-sectoral, ecosystem based approaches to mitigate and prevent existing
imminent threats to International Waters. The SAP provides a regional framework within which
actions are identified, developed and implemented. Targeted actions will be carried out in two
complementary, linked consultative contexts: Integrated Coastal and Watershed Management
(ICWM) and Oceanic Fisheries Management (OFM). ICWM actions will focus on freshwater
supplies including groundwater, Marine Protected Area (MPA) enhancement and development,
sustainable coastal fisheries, integrated coastal management including tourism development, and
activities to demonstrate waste reduction strategies will be stressed. The OFM component will
target the Western Pacific Warm Pool ecosystem, whose boundaries correspond almost precisely
to the Western Pacific tuna fishery. Participating countries and regional organizations seek to
achieve long-term sustainable development of ocean fisheries, explore regional level options to
increase domestic benefits from the tuna fishery, increase the contribution of offshore fishery
resources to regional economic food security, and divert fishing pressure away from over-
exploited coastal resources. Interventions will include three other pressing concerns related to
SIDS, namely biodiversity, vulnerability to climate change, and land degradation. Management
capacity at the individual country and regional level will be strengthened and global benefits
would accrue. The project will provide working examples of economies of scale in
environmental management.
2.
Costs and Financing (Millions US$)
GEF Financing: Project
US$
11,580,000
Agency
Support
Cost
US$
420,000
PDF
US$
290,000
Sub-total
GEF
US$
12,290,000
Co-financing: South Pacific Commission
US$ 1,331,532
Forum Fisheries Agency
US$ 6,107,311
SPREP
US$
619,540
Total
Project
Cost:
US$
20,348,383
________________________________________________________________________
4.
Associated Financing (Million US$)
US$ 18,719,520. Please see Annex 5 for details.
5.
GEF Operational Focal Point Endorsements
B. Nair
for Permanent Secretary for
Savae Latu
Local Government, Housing and
Secretary for Lands, Survey and
Environment
Natural Resources
Ministry of Local Government and
Ministry of Lands, Survey and
Environment
Natural Resources
Government of Fiji
Kingdom of Tonga
29 April 1998
12 May, 1998
Sabino Anastacio
Sisilia
Talagi
Minister of State
Acting Secretary to
Ministry of State
Government/Head, External Affairs
Republic of Palau
External Affairs Office
20 April 1998
Government of Niue
12 May, 1998
Sharon G. Potoi-Aiafi
for Secretary of Foreign Affairs
Marie- Antoinette W. Niriua
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Officer-in-Charge
Government of Samoa
Department of Foreign Affairs
30 April 1998
Government of the Republic of
Vanuatu
Moses Biliki
12 May, 1998
GEF Operational Focal Point
Ministry of Forests, Environment and
Teken C. Tokalaake
Conservation
Permanent Secretary for
Government of the Solomon Islands
Environment and Social
17 April 1998
Development
Ministry of Enviironment and Social
Jonelik Tibon
Development
General
Manager
Government of Kiribati
Environmental Protection Authority
15 May, 1998
Republic of the Marshall Islands
14 May, 1998
6. IA
Contact
Kevin Hill, Technical Advisor
Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific/Global Environment Facility
DC1-2368
One United Nations Plaza
New York, NY 10017
Tel: (212) 906-5805; Fax: (212) 906-5825, E-mail: khill@undp.org
Table 1
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADB
Asian Development Bank
APEC
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation
CBD
Convention on Biological Diversity
CITES
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
CMT
Customary Marine Tenure
CS
Community
Specialist
CTA
Chief Technical Advisor
DPAC
Demonstration Project Advisory Committee
DWFN
Distant Water Fishing Nation
EEZ
Exclusive Economic Zone
ESCAP
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
EU
European
Union
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
FAO
Food and Agriculture Association
FCCC
Framework Convention on Climate Change
FFA
Forum Fisheries Agency
ForSec
Forum Secretariat
FSPI
Foundation for Peoples of the South Pacific International
GDP
Gross Domestic Product
GEF
Global Environment Facility
GPA/LBA
Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from
Land-Based Activities
ICLARM
International Centre for Living Aquatic Resources Management
ICM
Integrated Coastal Management
ICWM
Integrated Coast and Watershed Management
ICRI
International Coral Reef Initiative
IMO
International Maritime Organisation
IOC
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission
IUCN
International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources - World
Conservation Union
LME
Large Marine Ecosystem
MPA
Marine Protected Area
NEMS
National Environment Management Strategies
NGO
Non-governmental
Organization
NTF
National Task Force
OFM
Oceanic Fisheries Management
OP
Operational Programme of the Global Environment Facility
PCU
Project Coordination Unit
PECC
Pacific Economic Cooperation Council
PDF
Project Development Facility of the Global Environment Facility
PIC
Pacific Island Country
PICCAP
Pacific Islands Climate Change Assistance Programme
PIDP
Pacific Islands Development Programme
PPER
Project Performance and Evaluation Review
RTF
Regional Task Force
SAP
Strategic Action Programme
SIDS
Small Island Developing States
SOPAC
South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission
SPACHEE
South Pacific Action Committee on the Human Environment and Ecology
SPBCP
South Pacific Biodiversity Conservation Programme
SPC
South Pacific Commission
SPF
South Pacific Forum
SPOCC
South Pacific Organizations Coordinating Committee
SPREP
South Pacific Regional Environment Programme
STAP
Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel
TCSP
Tourism Council for the South Pacific
TPR
Tripartite
Review
TNC
The Nature Conservancy
UN
United
Nations
UNEP
United Nations Environment Programme
UNDP
United Nations Development Programme
UNCED
UN Conference on Environment and Development
UNCLOS
UN Convention on the Law of the Sea
UNCSD
UN Commission on Sustainable Development
UNDP
UN Development Programme
UNEP
UN Environment Programme
UNESCO
UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
USP
University of the South Pacific
WCMC
World Conservation Monitoring Centre
WPAC
World Protected Areas Commission
WWF
World Wide Fund for Nature
Project Description
I.
Background and Context (Baseline course of action)
Introduction
The South Pacific region comprises almost 38.5 million square kilometers, with less than two
percent of that vast area constituting the land base shared by Pacific SIDS. This vast and complex
marine system contains an enormous and largely undocumented array of diversity. It is known
in general, however, that the region contains the most extensive and biologically diverse reefs in
the world, the deepest ocean trenches, deep-sea minerals, the world's largest tuna fishery, as well
as an array of globally threatened species such as sea turtles and dugongs. The many thousands
of islands are, with the exception of some larger Melanesian Islands, entirely coastal in nature,
often with limited freshwater resources and surrounded by a rich variety of ecosystems including
mangroves, seagrass beds, estuarine lagoons and coral reefs. In addition to significant
biodiversity value, these coastal and marine ecosystems support large subsistence and
commercial fisheries. The fisheries are the major source of subsistence protein for much of the
Pacific and form an indispensable part of the economic fabric, both present and predictable
future, for many Pacific SIDS. Despite the remarkable and globally significant biodiversity of the
region, and despite the extent to which the present and likely future economic health of the
region is based on sustainable coastal and ocean fishery regimes, marine resource conservation
and management regimes are currently inadequate. Coastal areas are degraded by increased
land based sources of pollution, the modification of critical habitats, and growing, unsustainable
exploitation of living and non-living resources.
The necessity for a comprehensive and coordinated approach to coastal and oceanic management
is made all the more urgent by an increased environmental degradation. This degradation
negatively affects the region's natural resource base that is particularly sensitive to ecological
disturbance, highlighted by the fact that the largest number of documented extinctions world-
wide has occurred in the islands of the Pacific. Environmental degradation is further
underpinned by pressure from growing populations and economic growth curves that are in
many cases flat or falling. The biodiversity values and productivity of these resources, which are
global in nature, are affected by, among other things, fishing, tourism, infrastructure
development, waste disposal, and the introduction of exotic marine organisms - all of which are
directly relevant to the health of the region's shared international waters.
As a result of the broad social, economic and environmental significance of the Pacific Region, a
SAP which was formally endorsed at the ministerial level at the September 1998 meeting of the
South Pacific Forum, for International Waters of the Pacific Islands Region was initiated and
developed by the thirteen Pacific Island States participating in the work of the GEF. This work
represents a pioneering effort by this group of SIDS to integrate national and regional sustainable
development priorities with shared global environmental concerns for protecting International
Waters. The SAP is included as Annex 8.
Background - The Pacific Small Island Developing States
A defining feature of the area of which the PICs are a part is the Western Pacific Warm Pool
ecosystem. The limited land base of the area is distributed among 200 high islands and 2500 low
islands and atolls. All participating project countries lie in the tropical zone and experience sea
surface temperatures which rarely fall below 20 degrees Celsius. In general, the islands increase
in size from east to west, such that over 83% of the region's land mass is situated in Papua New
Guinea, and most of the rest is in the other Melanesian countries and territories.
The region's 6.5 million people are at various stages of development, and socio-economic
conditions vary widely between, and sometimes within, countries. Throughout the region urban
residents lead a more consumerist lifestyle than those in small isolated islands, remote coastal
areas, and the interiors of large islands. The latter follow a more subsistence way of life, have a
relatively low income, and, based on usual valuation methods, have a low standard of living.
PIC economies are largely based on agriculture, although for statistical purposes agriculture
often includes fishing. For the Pacific Islands as a whole economic growth during the past
decade has been almost nil. For many PICs populations are on track to double at the rate of
every 20 to 25 years, a rate of growth that will put tremendous pressure on already stressed
coastal ecosystems. While these rates may be decreased somewhat by limited migration to
metropolitan countries, expanding population will no doubt cause increased economic and
associated environmental difficulties.
While traditional measures of affluence clearly indicate an almost desperate situation for some
PICs, the
Traditional support systems are part of the region's rich cultural diversity. One-fourth of the
world's languages are found in Pacific Island countries, various traditional authority systems
exist, a wide range of religious institutions with significant influence characterize the region, and
the communal ownership and traditional systems of management account for 80% of the land
(often including the adjacent marine area). These characteristics are not only vital to social and
cultural identity and to the of transfer traditional knowledge between generations, but also add
considerable complexity in developing and implementing national management plans, especially
at the village level. The status and position of women differs considerably among Pacific Island
states due to factors such as cultural traditions, colonial history and level of socio-economic
development. As identified by the SAP, and as further identified in the STAP review (Annex 3),
traditional systems must be associated with achieving the economic, political and social goals of
the islands. It will be difficult but essential to include appropriate and significant principles of
traditional systems in national development planning and implementation if these plans are to be
truly sustainable.
The EEZs of the PICs cover approximately 30.5 million-sq. km., or about 74% of the region's
water surface. PICs thus look toward their substantial coastal and ocean fisheries as an
important, even indispensable means of advancing economic well-being through commercial and
subsistence fisheries. They are crucial to food security for the region and are also an important
source of employment and income, foreign exchange, and non-economic values which include
cultural, religious, and recreational significance. As a general rule, coastal fisheries have
provided non-monetary fish values in the form of subsistence protein and monetary value to
villages from the sale of coastal fish. The ocean fishery, largely tuna, has been generally used to
provide a source of foreign exchange.
Coastal fisheries are estimated to produce some 108,000+t/year of which up to 78%, or
84,000+t/year may be from subsistence fishing activity. This catch includes fin-fish and
invertebrates. Only about 5,000 tons of the coastal fish catch is exported. To date, fisheries
feature in national plans mainly in terms of their economic development potential and not for
their contribution to the subsistence economy or small island nutrition. Fisheries development
policies tend not to recognize or acknowledge the importance of the subsistence fishery in
general, of inshore invertebrate harvests, or for the role of women in these fisheries.
Oceanic fisheries contribute little to local food supplies, only 1 % of the 1 million tons of
industrial caught tuna enters to local economy, but the cash value of the Pacific region tuna
fishery is approximately US$ 1.7 billion and growing. While 50% to 60% of the tuna catch is in
the EEZs of the PICs, they realize 4% of the dollar value of the total catch. Four fishing methods
are generally employed in the tuna fishery, the purse-seine, longline, pole and line, and troll.
Although the purse-seine fishery takes about 84% of the total catch, it accounts for only about
51% of the total value. By contrast the longline fishery, with only 10% of the catch, accounts for
41% of the revenue.
The future of fisheries contribution to the social and economic fabric of the region is not at
present an optimistic one. The population of the Pacific islands will increase from 6,008,000 to
8,871,000 between now and the year 2010, a 48 % increase. If present levels of per capita fish
consumption are maintained this will result in a demand for fish of 166,776 tons in the year 2010,
or a 49% increase over the present level of consumption. If the current lack of effective
government management regimes continue to be the case, if destructive fishing practices
continue, and if coastal degradation is not controlled and the current level of loss reversed, the
actual yields from the coastal fishery are likely to decrease between now and the year 2010. The
most likely responses to decreased yields of available fish and rapidly increasing population will
be greater consumption of non-coastal fish resources (tuna and associated by-catch), greater
reliance on costly imports, and an overall decline in per capita fish consumption.
If the PICs are to avoid decreased diet quality, increased food costs, decreased revenues from the
ocean fishery, and deteriorating food security, then effective, integrated coastal fisheries
management must be dramatically emphasized, overall integrated coastal management must
receive high priority, and ways found to increase the extent to which the region's tuna and
associated by-catch can find their way into local economies. If these measures are undertaken on
a priority basis, there is still time for the PICs to achieve the long-term sustainabiltiy of both their
coastal and ocean resources.
The threats to living marine resources are related to over-exploitation and environmental
degradation. Over-exploitation, principally of inshore fisheries, is exacerbated by destructive
fishing methods, which include explosives and various types of toxic compounds such as
traditional vegetable poisons, household bleach, cyanide and herbicides, and by inappropriate
government incentives for coastal fisheries. Environmental degradation in the islands is
manifested in a number of ways, whose effects often exacerbate each other. In many cases the
degradation is chronic, with gradual rather than sudden changes in the resources, making the
relationship between cause and effect less obvious, and reducing the likelihood of timely and
appropriate action being taken. Fisheries management efforts alone, whether carried out with
regard to specific resources or to the ecosystem as a whole, may be insufficient to protect coastal
fisheries in the absence of actions to mitigate the deleterious effects of these threats.
An emerging threat to both critical species and habitats as well as living marine resources is the
introduction of exotic marine organisms. Vectors in the Pacific include intentional introductions
for aquaculture and accidental introductions via shipping (e.g., hull fouling and ballast water).
Finally, the non-living resource that all the Pacific Islands share and that is most seriously
threatened is the quality of both fresh and marine water. Groundwater is at risk because its loss
or degradation is often irreversible. The principal threat to water is from land-based sources of
pollution. These derive from sewage (poor sanitation), sediments (soil erosion, agriculture,
forestry), urban runoff, agro-chemicals and solid waste. Beaches, reef flat sand and coastal
aggregates are another resource that is threatened by over-exploitation; extraction rates far
exceed natural replenishment rates. Beaches are also important habitat.
For further information on the historical context of this project, please see annex 7.
II.
Rationale and Objectives (Alternative course of action)
Long-term objective
The long-term objective of the project is to achieve global benefits by developing and
implementing measures that emphasize economies of scale to restore, conserve, and sustainably
manage coastal and oceanic resources in the Pacific Region. The increasing number of
environmental concerns combined with a traditional sectoral approach to development pose
significant threats to the international waters of this region.
The STAP review made specific reference to the need to address the question of "information
gaps" and to be specific about the relationship of these information gaps to proposed project
activities. The SAP analysis concluded that while information gaps exist, these gaps should not
serve as a barrier against moving quickly to address the issues that are the subject of this Brief.
Actions recommended in the SAP, which were used as the frame of reference for the Activities
which follow, are made consistent with the conclusion that recommended actions could, with
existing data and information, be accomplished within the timeframe of and the resources
available to the project.
Rationale for GEF Financing
The economic, social, and environmental well-being of participating PICs have historically
depended upon the vitality of the vast, productive Pacific Ocean. The cooperatively prepared
and endorsed PDF-B submission and subsequent adoption of the SAP provide a sound technical
basis for, and country commitment to, participation in OP #9, specifically the Small Island
Developing States Component of that OP. The objective of OP #9 is to support "....better use of
land and water resource management practices on an area wide basis." Under this OP activities
are supported that have "......an area wide focus, and with biodiversity considerations often
included in project objectives, more proactive interventions aimed at protecting international
waters with important biodiversity are common." A major focus is to support measures for
"prevention of damage to threatened waters..."and the OP's long-term objective ".... is to achieve
global environmental benefits through implementation of IW projects which integrate the use of
sound land and water resource management strategies as a result of changes in sectoral policies
and activities that promote sustainable development." The project overall is constructed
consistent with this GEF guidance. Further, the objectives and programs of the SAP directly
correspond to GEF guidance under this OP and its SIDS component.
The SIDS component of OP#9 notes that "SIDS require more integrated approaches to improved
land and water management in order to address threats to their water resources." Further, it
states that "...activities are typically targeted to six major issues that SIDS have in common."
During activities related to the PDF-B and the SAP, the thirteen SIDS cooperating in this project
have worked consistent with the integrated approaches suggested in the OP and have targeted
each of the six major issues into the objectives and activities of this SAP implementation activity.
Further, the SAP identifies the "Solutions" to the identified priority concerns, imminent threats,
and ultimate root causes as being integrated coastal and watershed management and ocean
fisheries management. The proposed project, especially its reliance on criteria driven
demonstration projects in ICWM activities, and strengthening regional
management/institutional capability for both the ICWM and OFM components, also has a high
potential for successful replication both within and outside of the region.
The proposed project will contribute significantly to the reduction of stress to the international
waters environment in the Region. It also supports efforts of the thirteen countries and several
regional organizations to make changes in sectoral policies, target critical investments, and
develop necessary programs consistent with the conclusions of the SAP. The long-term
commitment of the countries is demonstrated by their involvement in, among other things, the
Barbados Programme of Action, the Pacific Way, and regional organizations such as the
Secretariat for the Pacific Community (SPC), the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme
(SPREP), the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC), and the Forum Fisheries
Agency (FFA). GEF support will serve a catalytic role in the project and the continuing
participation of existing donors will contribute to this multi-country, multi-regional organization,
and multi-stakeholder effort. Linkages with the UNDP/GEF initiative IW:LEARN will provide
for sharing of project results and replication of successful practices in other regions of the world
and specifically among other SIDS.
III.
Project Activities/Components and Expected Results
GEF project objectives and activities
Objective 1: Create Enhanced Transboundary Management Regimes and Project
Coordination Support
The participating countries have begun creating the necessary management structures to
accommodate project needs. Further, work under the SAP resulted in the formation of a
Regional Task Force (RTF). The responsibility of the RTF, under the direction of a Chief
Technical Advisor (CTA), was to both form and inform the process of SAP formulation. The RTF
will be continued during SAP implementation, its membership will be reviewed in light of
additional community involvement and participation needs identified in the SAP and changes
and/or additions will be made accordingly. A Programme Coordination Unit (PCU) to
implement the SAP will be established. There will be provision made for the recruitment and
hiring of a CTA. There will also be provision made for the recruitment and hiring of a full time
community assessment and participation specialist. This is important as there is as a need to
effectively coordinate and facilitate activities among thirteen countries, three different lineal
systems, and different islands types, languages and cultures. The community specialist will also
promote community based participation, particularly important to this project since governments
in the region have limited capacity to police and enforce top down environmental rules and
regulations and given a strong history of local control or customary tenure in relation to resource
use and practices. If this project is to be successful, there will have to be a level of local
participation and consultation far beyond any implemented to date, and that level of consultation
and participation will require a full time presence in the PCU. In order to improve the potential
for future sustainability of the project outputs, the regional and national task forces will be
strengthened. They will facilitate the definition of priority action programmes for each
participating country.
Output 1:
Creation of an enhanced transboundary management regime and effective
project coordination support mechanism
Activity 1.1 Recruit and hire the CTA;
Activity 1.2 Recruit and hire the Community Assessment and Participation Specialist;
Activity 1.3 Create the Pacific Islands Programme Coordination Unit (PCU) to facilitate,
coordinate, and communicate to participating countries, regional organizations, and others the
results of ongoing priority activities identified in the following activities;
Activity 1.4 Continue the RTF and the National Task Forces (NTF), which are of an
interministerial nature, where appropriate, following a membership and terms of reference
review, to better reflect the priority activities of the project, participating regional organizations,
stakeholders and overall project needs;
Activity 1.5 Plan and hold a Communications Workshop to develop a communications
strategy, including education and awareness, and identify the level of communications activities
and hardware and software, newsletters, email and internet services necessary to successful
project implementation;
Activity 1.6 Develop a Workplan for the region wide implementation of the SAP and , utilizing
the NTFs, update each of the 13 country annexes to the SAP including information on necessary
investments and commitments/plans for implementation; and,
Activity 1.7 Reconvene the RTF to assist in the formulation of the workplan, communications
strategy, community assessment and participation plan, and to help create the terms of reference
for, and advise during the conduct learn from the experience of the demonstration and other
major activities identified in this proposal.
Expected results from these activities would include enhanced transboundary management
regimes, effective project management support, the creation of an updated SAP document, and
thirteen updated country annexes.
Objective 2: Create the Conditions Necessary to Achieve the Conservation and Sustainable
Management of Coastal Living and Non-Living Resources
The SAP identified ICWM as one of two solutions to priority concerns, imminent threats, and
ultimate root causes of the degradation of international waters. Activities under this objective
will focus on freshwater resources, sustainable coastal fisheries, effective Marine Protected Areas,
and waste reduction initiatives. Waste management activities undertaken will be those that
address problems that have a demonstrable, negative effect on coastal living resources.
A comprehensive programme to address all of the priority concerns of the thirteen participating
countries is not realistic given the range of issues identified as priority concerns in the SAP and
the resources likely available. The targeted proposals provided to the SAP process by the
participating countries provide, in part, the basis for the selection of demonstration projects
based on selection criteria and organizational constructs that will maximize opportunity for
replication across the region. Criteria would include: maximum replication potential; adequate
community participation and support; consistency with the SAP; representation among the three
island types (high islands, low islands and atolls), among the three lineal systems in the region
(matrilineal, patrilineal, and mixed), and the three ethnic separations (Melanesia, Polynesia, and
Micronesia); previously stated country interest (as included in SAP related country project
submissions); and further analysis of the most appropriate sites for specific demonstration
activities.
The selection of priority issues for demonstration projects has been driven by the results of the
SAP and its supporting documents, and were chosen consistent with the GEF Operational
Strategy, Operational Programme #9, and the Indicative Activities for SIDS that are included in
the GEF Operational Strategy. OP #9 recognizes that SIDS "......share access to marine resources
and experience common water-related environmental problems (for example, saltwater intrusion
into groundwater supplies as a result of rising oceans) or stocks of fish being depleted....", and
that "...activities are targeted to six major issues SIDS have in common (coastal area management
and biodiversity, sustainable management of regional fish stocks, tourism development,
protection of water supplies, land and marine-based sources of pollution, and vulnerability to
climate change)."
The wide range of traditional authority systems, the communal ownership and traditional
systems of management that account for 80% of the land (often including the adjacent marine
area) as well as the strong role of individual communities in resource decision making, all argue
for special emphasis to be placed on community participation during the life of the project.
Community participation, including the private sector, will be an integral component of each
demonstration project. As a means to assure direct country participation and effective
communication during and after the demonstration activity, each demonstration project will
have a Demonstration Project Advisory Committee (DPAC) comprised of country
representatives, personnel from regional organizations, and the PCU. The CTA will convene
DPACs on an as needed basis and, to conserve resources, will utilize to the maximum extent
possible electronic communications to coordinate with the DPACs. To the extent possible,
provision will be made for cross membership among DPACs to assist the learning process during
activity implementation. DPACs will also be given opportunity to assist in developing the
synthesis the work of their respective demonstration projects, derive lessons learned and prepare
recommendations for how best to replicate activity results across the region. DPACs will be
encouraged to interact directly with IW:LEARN to facilitate the transfer of information and
project results to other SIDS for replication.
Output 2:
Programme for the sustainable development and use of coastal living and non-
living resources
Activity 2.1 Support for the creation of demonstration projects in selected countries to develop
robust techniques for protecting freshwater resources including assessment of watershed
capacity and quality, projecting the availability of potable water at acceptable pumping rates,
strategies for preventing and/or supplementing shortfalls, measures for demand-side
management/conservation of freshwater resources, and pollution prevention strategies with
special attention to aquifer recharge areas.
Rationale
The SAP gives priority to the need to address surface and groundwater issues. It cites excessive
exploitation of surface and groundwater for urban use and tourism development, reallocation of
surface water to domestic and agricultural uses, the draw-down of limited groundwater
resources, and saltwater intrusion into groundwater aquifers as issues requiring immediate
attention. The need to address surface and groundwater issues also receives frequent mention in
country project submissions. Climate variability and change and related sea level rise is
increasing the uncertainty of the availability of potable freshwater in islands. This was reflected
in Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 and the Barbados Programme of Action. Variability in rainfall,
affecting both surface runoff and groundwater recharge, as well as increased salinization of the
fragile groundwater lens of atoll States, are posing unprecedented problems for water resource
managers. This activity would need to be conducted within a framework that addresses the
overall quality of freshwater resources and related watershed management issues and ultimately
be useful to all Pacific Island States as they work to address this important sectoral issue. Where
relevant, integrated coastal management tools and techniques will be developed and applied.
Work on this issue will require collaboration between the SPREP and SOPAC.
Activity 2.2 Support to develop criteria for, and creation of an initial minimum three sites
within, a regional system of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that fosters a participatory,
community-based approach to these protected area initiatives.
Rationale
Marine Protected Areas can serve to promote the conservation and sustainable use of the natural
and cultural heritage of the Pacific. In particular, MPAs have the potential to significantly
contribute to conservation of endangered species and also to effective fisheries management
through MPAs in key species nursery areas or as stock refugia areas. Recent experience clearly
supports using a community-based approach to protected area initiatives that recognizes and
actively involves local resource users and owners. There are currently forty-one Marine
Protected Areas in PICs. These are generally small with often limited resources and information
which results in ineffective management. Many MPAs exist on paper only and often lack local
support largely due to an absence of local community involvement in the identification,
establishment and management of these areas.
This activity would create partnerships between SPREP, SPC Fisheries, governments and local
communities in the work of conceptualizing, creating, and ultimately managing MPAs. The SAP
identified the creation of effective marine protected areas as a high priority area requiring
immediate intervention, and marine protected area attention is explicitly called for in many of the
country project submissions. As a major emphasis in this Activity is the identification and
protection of globally significant biodiversity, it is consistent with the SIDS component of GEF
OP #9 which calls for "Close linkages to the biodiversity focal area." Work undertaken in this
component would focus on capacity-building, management, awareness/education/ involvement,
institutional strengthening, and, ultimately, investment.
Activity 2.3 Support for at least three (3) demonstration projects with the objective of the
further identification of regional elements necessary to the creation and long-term sustainability
of Coastal Fisheries;
Rationale
The SAP identified sustainable fisheries as a high priority activity requiring immediate
intervention. The need to develop sustainable coastal fisheries is also reflected in many of the
country project submissions prepared during the SAP. As Customary Marine Tenure (CMT) is
an inseparable feature of the coastal fishery in the Pacific, and as it represents the most "local"
form of fishery management practiced in the PICs, it provides the focus for this activity. Given
traditional fisheries often involve specialization of activities by gender, measures developed
within this activity to sustain the most positive elements of subsistence fishing and CMT will
likely require substantial local involvement of women.
Many PICs are characterized by a patchwork of CMTs along the coast, each having a different set
of rules controlling access to or use of the resource. This makes the development of larger-scale
fisheries and coherent national systems of fishery management very difficult to achieve. In fact
such a system has many parallels with an international fishery involving many nations. The
main difference is that in general PICs do not possess the equivalent of the UN Convention on
the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) at the local level. Indeed, at the national level, many PICs do not
even acknowledge the existence of CMT, let alone provide a framework for its expanded
operation. It seems clear that any successful plan to secure a sustainable future for PIC coastal
fisheries will have to take account of and incorporate the most favorable aspects of CMT.
This activity would complement and add to work already begun by the Secretariat of the Pacific
Community (SPC), through a project grant from the EU, integrated coastal fisheries
demonstration projects in Papua New Guinea, the Cook Islands, Tokelau, Fiji and Tonga. This
activity is clearly consistent with the SIDS component of GEF Operational Programme # 9 which
states that threats to water resources in SIDS can be addressed by, among other things, measures
to achieve the sustainable management of regional fish stocks. As with Activity 2.2, community
involvement will be emphasized throughout the life of the demonstration projects. There will be
particular attention paid to the role of gender in coastal fisheries activity as well as the role of
MPAs in coastal fisheries, the use of appropriate integrated coastal management approaches and
the introduction of exotic marine organisms. Partnerships will be stressed and there will be a
strong emphasis on the need to incorporate the many elements of sustainability inherent in many
environmentally sound and effective traditional fishing methods which instances and locations
are highly ritualized and gender specific. This Activity will provide for collaboration between
SPREP and the SPC.
Activity 2.4 Support for three community centered demonstration projects with the objective
of creating models of low cost/no cost community-based waste reduction activities, and support
for a feasibility study to determine the costs, benefits and desirability of regional recycling and
disposal options.
Rationale
The SAP identified waste management as one of four priority issues requiring immediate action.
PICs are not in a position to invest the very substantial amounts of money that would be required
to construct costly municipal waste treatment facilities or commit to other high cost waste
reduction strategies. This inability to commit the necessary resources to solve the issue of waste,
with its direct effects on coastal and marine ecosystems, is compounded by waste disposal
problems unique to SIDS. As an example, it is difficult to contract with shipping companies to
transport hazardous and toxic wastes from SIDS due to the risks these companies incur in
shipment. When it is possible to ship wastes for storage in mainland locations the cost is often
prohibitive. This activity, within the context of the Basel and Waigani Conventions, will include
a feasibility study of a regional approach to recycle hazardous or toxic materials. A regional or
sub-regional approach could take advantage of economies of scale to make the venture profitable
while at the same time reducing ongoing degradation of coastal waters.
A further intent of this activity would be to develop demonstration projects to show that there
are viable, low cost/no cost alternatives that can be implemented at the community level that will
reduce the current loadings of solid and liquid waste that have a detrimental effect on receiving
waters. As isolated island communities are brought into the market-based economy, non-
traditional products and their associated wastes including pesticides, petroleum-based products,
processed food products, and other industrial/manufactured products proliferate and
accumulate at the household and community level. Community-based activities will emphasize
integration of traditional practices, cultural values, and public participation for pollution
prevention, waste reduction, and improved sanitation. Since many of the participating countries
will find it difficult if not impossible to pay for costly, after the fact pollution problems, every
effort should be made to initiate pollution prevention awareness and activities. This activity
would include, where appropriate, the application of integrated coastal and watershed
management approaches to problem identification and the development of solutions.
Demonstrations would include, among other things, wastewater re-use strategies in a country
that has wastewater and sewage sludge treatment, waste reduction in the tourism sector and the
selection of pilot sites for demonstration projects for composting programs. Links between waste
management demonstrations, MPAs and coastal fisheries activities will be actively promoted.
Results of these activities would include the development and implementation to bring about the
sustainable development and use of the coastal living and non-living resources of the
particiapting countries.
Objective 3: Create the Conditions Necessary to Achieve the Conservation and Sustainable
Management of Oceanic Living Marine Resources
Participating countries and regional organizations seek to undertake measures to achieve the
long-term sustainable development of ocean fisheries, explore options to increase domestic
benefits from the tuna fishery and associated by-catch, and thereby reduce fishing pressure on
increasingly degraded and over-exploited near-shore resources. More specifically, the pelagic
fishery of the Western Pacific Warm Pool Ecosystem are globally significant resources where the
productive use benefits are diffuse and the fishery will over time suffer from an open access
problem. Individual SIDS capture only a small portion of the productive use benefit providing
no incentive to incur additional management costs. This warrants intervention on a regional
scale, but the transaction costs of regional cooperation serve as a barrier to joint management.
The result of this objective would be to remove this barrier and thus create opportunities to
improve ocean fishery management regimes in the EEZs of participating countries, give
participating countries greater leverage vis-a-vis distant water fishery operators, protect and
enhance globally significant biological resources and increase food security for the region.
Work centered on the oceanic living resources of the Pacific Region takes place within three
spheres: the national, the regional and the broader international sphere. Within their respective
EEZs, the participating countries undertake certain actions that benefit the individual countries
themselves, constitute a baseline investment, and thus are not the subject of GEF assistance.
Within the full range of certain ocean stocks, however, there is a need for ongoing consultation at
the regional and broader international levels that will result in direct regional and global benefits.
It is the provision of this incremental level of assistance, assistance aimed at increasing the
capacity of participating countries to act on a regional basis in these activities, that is the subject
of this element of the proposal. It is likely that activities envisioned in this Objective will create
conditions for the identification of broader regional opportunities in the future, activities that
could well become the subject of further GEF assistance. GEF assistance is being sought to
enhance ocean fishery related joint planning, enhance current skill levels, increase the capacity
and overall institutional effectiveness, and strengthen existing incentive systems.
The PICs, through their participation in the Multilateral High-Level Conference on the
Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central
Pacific, are committed to an ongoing process of enhancing regionally based management
arrangements. They have established a target date of June, 2000 for the completion of enhanced
consultative arrangements. The strengthening of regionally based management programs are
seen as essential if PICs are to take an effective, regional approach in discussions such as those
that are ongoing in relation to the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provision for the
United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 Relating to the
Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks,
commonly referred to as the Implementing Agreement (IA).
The countries are committed to taking a precautionary approach to the management of their
shared ocean fishery. Under a precautionary approach the absence of scientific certainty may not
be used as a reason for failing to take conservation and management measures. Work related to
the GEF funded OFM project component would be predicated on the precautionary approach.
The participating countries will be holding a workshop in May of 1998 to define how to apply the
principles of a precautionary approach to the ocean fisheries of the region.
Output 3:
Programme for the achievement of sustainable development and use of ocean
living marine resources
Activity 3.1 Provide technical assistance to the Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) to build project
related capacity, nationally and regionally, and to devise and implement management
arrangements on behalf of member countries as they seek ways to increase their direct benefits
from tuna fishery activity taking place within their EEZs;
Activity 3.2 Provide technical assistance to the Secretariat of the South Pacific Commission to
provide additional, project related scientific advice and accommodate additional reporting
responsibility deriving from its involvement in project activities;
Activity 3.3 Provide initial support to FFA member countries to secure their participation in
the development of additional and appropriate management regimes the objective of which will
be to maximize regional benefit from the regional tuna fishery and its associated by-catch. This
support would constitute seed money as countries explore means, including the possible use of
concessions money, to strengthen existing information and management regimes;
Activity 3.4 Provide support for increased fishery monitoring activity including monitoring of
non-target species through such mechanisms as observers and sampling programs at the national
and regional levels;
Activity 3.5 Strengthen, through the provision of additional training, the fisheries management
capabilities of the National Fisheries Administrations and similar organizations in participating
countries;
Activity 3.6 Support the coordination and continued development of regional surveillance and
enforcement activity with special emphasis on by-catch and management failures in ocean
fisheries;
Activity 3.7 Coordinate and Refine consultative processes within and between FFA member
countries with the objective of strengthening regional capability;
Activity 3.8 Provide assistance to review current and further develop harmonized minimum
terms and conditions for foreign fishing vessel access to the EEZs of participating countries.
Activity 3.9 After year three of the project, prepare an assessment of options for creating
financial and institutional sustainability in ocean fisheries management with recommendations
for future action as appropriate.
Expected results from these activities would include the development and implementation of
measures that would bring about the sustainable development and use of the ocean living marine
resources in the EEZ's of the participating countries.
Objective 4: Maximize Regional Benefits from Lessons Learned through Effective
Community Assessment, Participation, and Education During the Life of the
Project and catalyze Donor Participation in SAP Related Activities
The number of country participants, the wide range of languages spoken throughout the region,
the various lineal systems involved, the strong role of individual communities in resource
decision making, and the importance of gender roles around resource use all argue for special
emphasis to be placed on community based participation and assessment if any lessons learned
are to be effectively replicated for regional and ultimately global benefit. As noted under
Objective 1, the PCU will include a full time professional with overall responsibility for
community assessment and participation and will work closely with community groups, NGOs
and education resources already in place within SPREP and other regional organizations.
Objective 2 identifies clear links between local communities and the success of demonstration
projects in protecting biological resources, the conservation and sustainable management of
coastal fisheries, as well as improved waste management. Links between effective oceanic
fisheries management, addressed by Objective 3, and local food security have also been
highlighted. Thus it is important to develop effective means to assess the conditions for success
or failure within project activities. To promote lessons learned it will be essential to develop and
disseminate educational materials such as pamphlets, posters, and other teaching aids to
complement formal and non-formal educational programs. The extrapolation of lessons learned
to further national or regional investment in ICWM and OFM will also require the analysis of
new project costs and dialogue between relevant stakeholders and donors in the region. This
objective will include increasing the extent to which the NGO community, including but not
limited to specialized environmental, conservation, and resource management NGOs, needs to be
involved as active project participants.
Output 4:
Programme to effect project related community assessment, participation and
education
Activity 4.1 Create and provide resources for the Community Assessment and Participation
Advisory Committee to the overall project;
Activity 4.2 Review the current state of information relevant to the project regarding available
community assessment work, past public participation activities of this nature, currently
available community education materials, and update listings of all relevant community-based
NGOs throughout the region and their functions;
Activity 4.3 Support a workshop to review project elements and define appropriate
community assessment, participation and education strategies to assure effective levels of
community based participation in the work of the project. This activity element will be
coordinated with the Communication Strategy;
Activity 4.4 With the assistance of the Community Assessment and Participation Advisory
Committee and taking into account workshop results, devise the Workplan for the Community
Assessment, Participation, and Education activities of the project;
Activity 4.5 Provide the resources necessary to implement the Workplan referenced in Activity
4.4, including resources for specific assessment and participation initiatives for selected
Demonstration Projects under the ICWM project component and for the creation of a public
participation programme aimed at key stakeholders for the OFM component;
Activity 4.6 Review the opportunities for self-financing of project components at regional and
national levels, pinpointing the potential economic sources and mechanisms. Undertake
consultations with the co-operating governments and all stakeholders involved, including the
private sector.
Activity 4.7 Sponsor a donor conference using the on-going GEF project as leverage for the
creation of necessary additional donors and the securing of loans.
Expected results from these activities would include the development and implementation of a
programme creating effective project related community assessment, participation and
education.
IV.
Risks and Sustainability
Issue, Actions and Risks
The long-term success of regional scale management programs such as the one proposed here
depend, inter alia, on the political willingness of the participating PICs to cooperate. The latter in
turn depends on changing economic, political and social conditions at the individual country
level. For this project, the geopolitical factor appears to introduce only a low to moderate risk at
this time; countries have made clear their specific commitment to the project by their determined
and successful participation in preparation of the SAP and through active involvement in the
regional organizations of which they are all members. A more serious risk is likely to be the
temptation to focus short-term priorities away from environmental concerns to the potential
detriment of the project. It may be that country commitment to a regional approach on the issues
addressed by the project will help solidify movement to sustainable approaches to the ICWM and
OFM project components. Still, this risk is seen as being moderate. Another potential barrier to
success is the communication challenge posed by having to effectively connect thirteen countries,
many of which are not adequately served by or connected to adequate communications systems,
hundreds, perhaps thousands of powerful local communities, countless languages, various lineal
systems, and a myriad of other important interests whose involvement is essential to project
success. The risk that the communications challenge may prove problematic is seen as moderate,
even given the substantial amount of project resources that have been committed to the
communications challenge.
Sustainability
The project is designed to identify, stimulate and integrate the use of sound land and water
resource management strategies in the region through proactive interventions aimed at
protecting international waters. The project will also focus on building sustainable institutional
capacities for environmental monitoring through criteria driven demonstration projects in ICWM
activities and strengthened regional management/institutional capability for OFM components.
The project components have a high potential for successful replication of successful practices
both within and outside of the region.
The project also supports efforts of the thirteen countries and several regional organizations to
make changes in sectoral policies, target critical investments, develop necessary programs with
community participation, and, through the continuation of the RTFs, update each of the thirteen
country annexes to the SAP. The support of GEF will serve a catalytic role in the project to
leverage existing and potential donors to contribute to this multi-country, multi-regional
organization, and multi-stakeholder effort to ensure long-term sustainable and effective
environmental management and protection of the South Pacific Region.
Government Commitment
This proposal has the long-term commitment of the thirteen participating countries and all of the
relevant regional organizations. Participating governments and those of a number of other PICs
who do not qualify for GEF assistance, have already demonstrated strong commitment to
strengthening regional cooperation in the Pacific area and this commitment has been confirmed
by a readiness to cooperate on collaborative efforts such as their approach to UNCED,
development and endorsement of the Pacific Way, and membership in regional organizations
such as FORSEC, SPREP, SOPAC, FFA, and SPC. Country participation in the SAP was
exemplary, enthusiastic, and resulted in a consensus document that will serve the project well.
V. Stakeholder Participation and Implementation Arrangements
Stakeholder Commitment and Participation
Stakeholder Commitment and Participation are key elements of the project. During SAP
preparation each country committee undertook public consultation and the results of these
consultations were taken into account in final SAP preparation. Since many natural resource
decisions in the region are made at the local level, community participation and assessment
activities, and an effective educational component, will be provided for during implementation.
National and Regional Institutions
Direct and ongoing oversight of project activities will be the responsibility of the Project
Coordination Unit (PCU). The PCU will be comprised of a Chief Technical Advisor (CTA) and a
Community Specialist (CS). Administrative and technical support for the PCU will be provided
by SPREP for the ICWM component of the project and by the SPC and FFA for the OFM
component.
There will be a continuation of the RTF and participating countries will be asked to continue, if
relevant, their respective National Task Forces (NTFs). The RTF will, among other things, review
and comment upon the project document and generally oversee implementation activities. The
RTF will continue to be comprised of representatives from participating countries, regional
organizations, GEF Implementing Agencies, NGOs and the private sector. The NTFs will
continue to be, comprised of representatives from across ministries, disciplines and public
members from the business sector, community level, and NGOs.
Project Implementation
The South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme, which coordinated work done under the
PDF-B and the SAP formulation, will be the executing agency.
VI. Incremental Costs and Project Financing
The resolution of water-related problems in Pacific SIDS will yield important global and regional
benefits. The region's marine ecosystems and constituent biodiversity provide habitat for
endangered and migratory species such as tuna, a keystone species providing an important link
in the oceanic food chain. Ecosystems at the country level are interlinked with the regional
marine system as many islands within Pacific SIDS are entirely coastal in nature, a unique facet of
many SIDS. The GEF has recognized these unique characteristics by targeting activities for SIDS
into issues of coastal area management, biodiversity, sustainable management of regional fish
stocks, tourism development, protection of water supplies, land and marine based sources of
marine pollution, and vulnerability to climate change.
Pacific SIDS ecosystems have associated future use values (e.g., recreation potential, scientific
research, and concentrated biodiversity), and existence values, both of which accrue at the global
level. The costs of inaction are the loss of these benefits. The full project will demonstrate how
global and regional management objectives can be integrated into cross-sectoral activities at the
country level, thereby reducing negative externalities. The incremental costs (IC) associated with
the project, and which are the subject of the attached Annex 1, are those which are deemed
necessary to bring about the global and regional benefits consistent with the GEF Operational
Strategy and OP #9 of the GEF Operational Programs document.
Project budget: RAS/98/A08
Objective 1
Activities
Incremental Cost
1.1
Recruit and hire the CTA
500,000
1.2
Recruit and hire the Community Assessment, Participation
350,000
Specialist
1.3
Create the Pacific Islands Programme Coordination Unit (PCU) to
480,000
facilitate, coordinate, and communicate to participating countries,
regional organizations, and others the results of ongoing priority
activities identified in the following activities
1.4
Continue the RTF and the National Task Forces (NTF), following
200,000
a membership and terms of reference review, to better reflect the
priority activities of the project, participating regional
organizations, stakeholders and overall project needs
1.5
Plan and hold a Communications Workshop to develop a
630,000
communications strategy and identify the level of
communications activities and hardware and software, email and
internet services necessary to successful project implementation
1.6
Develop a Workplan for the region wide implementation of the
30,000
SAP/Update the Regional SAP after year 5 of the Project
1.7
Reconvene the RTF to help form the terms of reference for, advise
30,000
during the conduct of, and learn from the experience of the
demonstration and other major activities identified in this
proposal
Sub-total
2,220,000
Objective 2
2.1
Support for the creation of demonstration projects in selected
1,250,000
countries to develop robust techniques for protecting freshwater
resources including assessment of watershed capacity and
quality, projecting the availability of potable water at acceptable
pumping rates, strategies for preventing and/or supplementing
shortfalls, and measures for demand-side
management/conservation of freshwater resources.
2.2
Support to develop criteria for, and create an initial 3 sites within,
1,250,000
a regional system of Community-Based Marine Heritage and
Conservation Areas (MPAs).
2.3
Support for three demonstration projects with the objective of the
1,250,000
further identification of regional elements necessary to the
creation and long term sustainability of Coastal Fisheries
2.4
Support for three community centered demonstration projects
1,250,000
with the objective of creating models of low cost/no cost
community-based waste reduction activities, and support for a
feasibility study to determine the costs, benefits and desirability
of regional recycling and disposal options.
Sub-total
5,000,000
Objective 3
3.1
Provide technical assistance to the Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA)
700,000
to build project related capacity, nationally and regionally, and to
devise and implement management arrangements on behalf of
member countries
3.2
Provide technical assistance to the South Pacific Commission to
800,000
provide additional, project related scientific advice and
accommodate additional reporting responsibility deriving from
its involvement in project activities
3.3
Provide initial support to FFA member countries to secure their
1,000,000
participation in the development of additional and appropriate
management regimes the objective of which will be to maximize
regional benefit from the regional tuna fishery and its associated
by-catch.
3.4
Provide support for increased fishery monitoring activity
750,000
including monitoring of non-target species through such
mechanisms as observers and sampling programs at the national
and regional levels
3.5
Strengthen, through the provision of additional training, the
250,000
fisheries management capabilities of the National Fisheries
Administrations and similar organizations in participating
countries
3.6
Support the coordination and continued development of regional
-
surveillance and enforcement activity
3.7
Coordinate and Refine consultative processes within and
-
between FFA member countries with the objective of
strengthening regional capability
3.8
Provide assistance to review current and further develop
-
harmonized minimum terms and conditions for foreign fishing
vessel access to the EEZ's of participating countries.
Sub-total
3,500,000
Objective 4
4.1
Create and provide resources for the Community Participation Advisory Committee
4.2
Review the current state of information regarding available community assessment
work, past public participation activities across sub-regions, countries, and lineal
systems, currently available community education materials
4.3
Support for a workshop to review project elements and define appropriate
community assessment, participation and education strategies to assure effective
levels of community based participation in the work of the project
4.4
With the assistance of the Community Participation Advisory Committee and
taking into account workshop results, devise the Workplan for the Community
Assessment, Participation and Involvement activities of the project
4.5
Provide the resources necessary to implement the Workplan referenced in Activity
4.4.
Sub-total
860,000
Project Support Services
420,000
Total Project Budget
US$ 12,000,000
VII. Monitoring, Evaluation and Dissemination
Monitoring and Evaluation
Project objectives, outputs and emerging issues will be regularly reviewed and evaluated at
annual meetings of the Regional Task Force. The project will be subject to the various evaluation
and review mechanisms of UNDP, including PPER (Project Performance and Evaluation
Review), TPR (Tripartite Review) and an external Evaluation and Final Report prior to the
termination of the project. The project will also participate in annual PIR (Project Implementation
Review) exercise of the GEF. An output at the end of the project will be the creation of thirteen
annexes to the SAP summarizing specific policy reforms, new or reformed institutions that have
been created, investments needed in each country, and commitments or plans for implementation
of activities. Provision will also be made within the project for monitoring three types of IW
indicators: process, stress reduction, and environmental status indicators.
Lessons Learned and Technical Reviews
This project will be involved from the start in the new GEF International Waters LEARN
(Learning Exchange and Resource Network) programme. IW:LEARN is a distance education
programme whose purpose is to improve global management of transboundary water systems.
IW:LEARN will provide structured interactive conferencing capacity across and within the
portfolio of GEF International Waters projects which will allow participants to share learning
related to oceans, river basins, and coastal zone management. For environmental professionals
working on GEF-financed projects, IW:LEARN will greatly expand opportunities for peer-to-peer
consultation, collaborative research with physically distant colleagues, opportunities to exchange
best practices and training modules among projects, and the delivery of short courses.
Annexes
Annex 1:
Incremental Cost Annex
Annex 2:
Logical Framework Matrix
Annex 3:
STAP Roster Technical Review
Annex 4:
Summary of the Strategic Action Programme for the South Pacific Islands
Optional Annexes, available upon request
Annex 5
List of on-going or planned projects
This annex provides information on those programmes and projects that are in some way
associated with this project. In particular, this annex provides information on the baseline
activities to the proposed project to supplement the incremental cost matrix of annex 1.
Annex 6:
Table of Regional Environmental Threats
This annex provides information on the nature of threats and issues facing SIDS, including
damage to coral reefs, mangroves, seagrass beds, overfishing, surface and groundwater
pollution, tourism, among others. Symptoms, immediate and root causes, scale and severity of a
number of issues and threats are described.
Annex 7:
Historical Context of Project
This annex provides further background information on the historical context of the proposed
project, beginning with the decision in 1990 by the Pacific Island Countries to prepare a joint
regional position for the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development.
The background to the preparation of the proposed project is described as having an early draft
endorsed in October 1995 to the implementation of the preparatory project in 1997. In particular,
the annex details the milestones and other key events during the preparation of the proposed
project.
Annex 8:
Strategic Action Programme
This annex is the Strategic Action Programme (SAP) for International Waters of the Pacific Islands
Region which was initiated and developed by the thirteen Pacific Island States participating in the
preparatory work of the proposed project, with financial assistance from the Global Environment
Facility (GEF). It represents a pioneering effort by the Pacific small island developing states (SIDS)
to integrate their national and regional sustainable development priorities with shared global
environmental concerns for protecting International Waters.
Annex 9:
Country Focal Point endorsement letters
Annex 1a: Incremental Cost Annex
Domestic
Baseline Alternative Incremental
Benefits
Objective 1 Environmental management policies, strategies Coordination and management efforts among PICs. Interventions more effectively targeted at the
and programmes within individual PICs lack
regional level to removing the root causes of threats,
sufficient co-ordination; by themselves
thus improving the efficacy and cost effectiveness of
national efforts are insufficient to mitigate
national management endeavours.
threats to their shared international waters.
Objective 2 Countries face growing environmental, social Efforts targeted at removing the root causes of
The ecological sustainability of development
and economic costs from degradation of their coastal environmental degradation.
activities in country coastal areas will be better
respective coastal resources.
assured.
Objective 3 At present domestic benefits from ocean
Increased level of co-operation within existing
Increase in national fisheries management
resources are limited and benefits must be
regional fora will allow individual countries to
capabilities will ensure that each country can
increased within the limits of sustainability.
benefit economically and help reduce unsustainable participate more effectively in regional fora, thus will
fishing pressure in coastal areas.
yield direct country benefits as well.
Objective 4 Stakeholder involvement at national level
Targeted emphasis on project related common
Countries able to integrate communities and
uneven and overall poorly utilized given the
assessment participation information and education stakeholders into sustainable development activities
importance of local control over natural
will accrue to the benefit of each country.
based on project experience and results.
resources.
Global
Baseline Alternative Incremental
Benefits
Objective 1 Limited national activity does not take into
Regional and cross-sectoral approaches are
Increased interactions and regional transactions
account regional considerations and is not
emphasized as a means of bringing about long term facilitates planning, implementation and maximizes
cross-sectoral approach.
sustainable development for PICs.
learning from regional cross-sectoral approach to
problems.
Objective 2 Distances involved and lack of resource
Develop mechanisms for effective country experience Support for demonstration projects in coastal areas
availability within countries makes difficult a in coastal resource protection and enhancement
and development of mechanisms for maximizing
regional approach to integrated coastal
measures and ensure successful replication across the learning and replicability.
management.
region.
Objective 3 Regional organizations have made substantial Increase regional capacity to secure additional
Region benefits economically and socially from
progress in effectively representing regional
regional benefit from ocean fisheries and determine accessing ocean fisheries and a fishery of global
interests in ocean fisheries related international conditions necessary to assure long term
importance is sustained over the long term.
fora.
sustainability of ocean fishery resources.
Objective 4 Individual country stakeholders poorly
Raise regional stakeholder awareness of regional
Regional distribution of publications, brochures,
sensitized to the connection between regional connections through communication of the results of manuals and community participation models.
environmental sustainability and individual
and lessons learned from project activities and public
country environmental sustainability.
involvement in them.
Annex 1b: Incremental Cost Annex
Objective Baseline
(B)
Alternative (A)
Increment (A-B)
1
Support for the Creation of
278,070 2,498,070
2,220,000 (GEF)
Enhanced Transboundary
Management Regimes and
Project Coordination Support
2
Create the Conditions Necessary 51,600,405 57,474,607 5,000,000 (GEF) 874,202
to Achieve the Sustainable
(non-GEF)
Development and Use of Coastal
Living and Non-Living Resources
3
Create Conditions Necessary to
24,738,627 34,526,487
3,500,000 (GEF)
Achieve the Sustainable
6,287,860 (non-GEF)
Development and Use of Oceanic
Living Marine Resources
4
Assure that the Appropriate
863,333 2,619,654 860,000 (GEF) 896,321
Level of Community Assessment,
(non-GEF)
Participation, and Education
Characterizes Work Undertaken
During the Life of the Project
Project Support Services
420,000 420,000
Total
77,480,435 97,538,818 20,058,383
PDF
290,000
Total project cost
20,348,383
Please see Annex 5 for details on baseline and co-financing sources.
Annex 2: Logical Framework Matrix
Intervention Logic
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Sources of Verification
Assumptions and Risks
Long-term Objectives
Implementing the SAP to conserve and A framework and coordination for
PCU documents. Continued country commitment to a regional
sustainable manage the coastal and
regional and national interventions on RTF Meeting.
approach. Project capacity to adequately
ocean resources in the Pacific Region to behalf of PICs.
conceptualize and implement a community
achieve integrated sustainable
based approach. Key regional institutions
development and management of
and national governments working co-
International Waters.
operatively.
Improved national and regional
Changes in economic, political and social
capacities for the long term sustainable
conditions detract of country commitment to
development of ocean fisheries and
a regional approach.
improved ICWM capabilities in the
Pacific Region.
Project Purpose
Address the root causes of degradation Country participation in and
Completed OCM and ICWM
The number of countries make it difficult to
of International Waters through a
endorsement for the OFM and ICWM
workplans. National and
secure adequate country participation.
programme focus on improved OFM
workplans.
additional donor commitments to
and ICWM.
workplan elements.
PCU documents and working
Regional organizations and country
group reports.
participants are not able to work co-
operatively to the extent necessary for project
success.
GEF funds not adequately complemented by
country commitments and other donors.
Output 1
Creation of an enhanced transboundary PCU created and RTF, NTF re-
CTA and CS employed.
Executing agency willing to commit physical
management regime and effective
established.
space and support resources.
project coordination support
mechanism
Effective project communications
Adequate support staffing
Substantial investment in communications
system ensured. provided Results of
capability essential to project success.
Increased capacity for regional level
communication workshop and
Lack of clear lines of responsibility to the
participation in project related global
implementation of workshop
GEF project hamper implementation.
fora.
recommendations.
Intervention Logic
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Sources of Verification
Assumptions and Risks
Increased capacity to create national
Increased level of governmental Potential regional benefits merit higher level
benefits through enhanced
participation in regional fora.
government participation and capacity to
transbounday management regimes.
Increased extent to which explicit form regional positions. Short term national
regional positions are formed for needs outweigh increased level of
use in various global fora.
participation in regional fora.
Documents of existing and
potentially new regional fora.
Output 2
Program for the sustainable
Regional commitment to demonstration Approved workplan for the
Countries see the long term benefit deriving
development and use of coastal living projects. Effective country level
ICWM component. from a demonstration approach.
and non-living resources
participation in demonstration projects. PCU documents.
Demonstration sites selected through
application of criteria that maximizes
replication.
Demonstration project results effectively
Countries not willing to participate fully in
communicated at the regional level and
demonstration site work. Demonstration
replication of results begun.
Projects poorly executed.
Output 3
Program for the achievement of
Increased regional effectiveness in
FFA and SPC documents. Country benefits to be gained through
sustainable development and use of
global ocean fisheries negotiations.
Specific regional benefits derived regional cooperation justify country
ocean living marine resources
Increased regional benefit from tuna
in international fisheries
participation. Increased benefits from the
stocks in participating country EEZs.
negotiations. Country fisheries
tuna stocks in country EEZs can be realized.
related economic reports.
Increased capacity in monitoring and
Improved information on non
Short term benefits of country by country
surveillance of participating country
participating country tuna and
approach to tuna fisheries impedes regional
EEZs.
bycatch within country EEZs.
approach.
Strengthen fisheries management
Increased level of professional
capabilities within participating
training opportunities for national
countries to secure added regional
fisheries personnel. Increased
benefit.
quantitative and qualitative
national fisheries participation in
regional fora.
Output 4
Program to effect project related
Community advisory committee
PCU documents. Communities will recognize benefits of
community assessment, participation
created. Community participation
involvement. Stakeholders will recognize
and education
workplan developed and approved.
benefits of involvement.
Key stakeholders analyzed and
Report of stakeholder
Countries will be willing to partner with
involved in project activities.
analysis/study.
communities to improve activity results.
Intervention Logic
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Sources of Verification
Assumptions and Risks
General project progress and activity
Stakeholder consultation reports. Perceived benefits of participation
updates broadly disseminated
Report of the communications
insufficient to attract full range of
electronically and through other
advisory committee re: project
stakeholders. Project aims seen as
venues.
related communications
inconsistent or competing with local
requirements and associated
interests.
workplan.
New stakeholder networks created.
List of direct community group
Strong community influence on natural participants involved in project
resource use decisions harnessed.
activities.
General public awareness of project
List and description of written
related issues enhanced.
materials publicly disseminated.
Output/Activities
Output 1
Hiring of Staff
Issuance of Contracts.
Meeting Reports, Disbursement Staffing pattern can be completed within 3
records.
months.
Establish RTF/NTF
Disbursement records.
Establish Communications System
SAP workplan.
SAP Workplan Development
Communications workplan.
Advisory Committees formed
Output 2
Freshwater supply related
Specific demonstration sites selected.
PCU documents. Visits to project Countries can agree on demonstration sites
demonstration projects. Development of Workgroups established. Workplans
demonstration sites. Interviews to be chosen. Suitable criteria can be
pilot projects for a regional system of
completed. Project records.
with demonstration site
developed that will lead to replicability.
community based marine heritage and
participants.
conservation areas.
Coastal fisheries demonstration
Demonstration site activities poorly
projects. Waste reduction
implemented and badly managed. Host
demonstration projects.
country commitment may lessen due to
conflicting national priorities.
Output 3
Capacity building for FFA and SPC. FFA and SPC records. Development of Meeting reports. Availability of Country benefits to be gained through
Maximize regional benefit of
GEF project related work programme. work programme. Project
regional co-operation justify country
tuna/bycatch fisheries. Improved fish Availability of drafts and convening of documents defining new and
participation. Increased benefits from the
monitoring capability.
expert meetings according to agreed
improved management
tuna stocks in country EEZs can be realized.
workplan.
arrangements on behalf of
member countries.
Intervention Logic
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Sources of Verification
Assumptions and Risks
Improved fisheries management
Development of implementation
Project documents related to
Short term benefits of country by country
capabilities for regional effect.
strategies for each specific activity.
improved regional management approach to tuna fisheries impedes regional
regime for tuna fisheries/bycatch. approach.
Coordination/continued development Development of implementation
Project documents related to
Governments will release appropriate staff
of regional surveillance of enforcement mechanisms for each activity.
improved fisheries monitoring
for further training.
activity.
activities.
Strengthened consultative processes for
Project documents related to
FFA member countries
additional measures to strengthen
country fisheries management
capabilities.
Project document related to
improved regional surveillance
and enforcement activities.
Project document related to
continued development for
harmonized minimum terms and
conditions for FFV access to EEZs.
Output 4
Create community participatory
PCU documents. Successful
Publication of public information Government participants willing to
advisory committee. Create necessary establishment of the CPACs and
and educational materials.
incorporate public members and others in
site specific community participation
appropriate sub CPACs. Appropriate Interviews with community
project work. Adequate
advisory subcommittees.
materials developed.
stakeholders including NGOs.
level of community interest.
Workplan developed.
Manuals for effective community
based activities. Records of
public meetings and
consultations.
Review currently available community NG0s, key stakeholders and others
Participation of community
The work of involving community level
assessment, public participation,
identified.
members, NGOs and others in
persons seen as too difficult. Experts
community education experiences and
project activity workgroups.
conclude that presence of community
related materials
members on committees impedes work
progress.
Workshop to define community
participation workplan.
Identification of key stakeholders for the
OFM component
ANNEX 3: STAP
TECHNICAL REVIEW
1. Overall Impressions
The proposal is sound, well thought out and researched and has obviously drawn from the
experiences and work of a wide range of relevant sources. Given the background information
provided, the project should, without doubt, be placed high on the list of Pacific Island priorities.
The issues identified (although with an obvious coastal and marine focus) are all relevant to
multiple spheres of Pacific Island development, including the economic, social, cultural and
geopolitical.
This reviewer fully endorses the proposal and strongly recommends that it be finalized
expeditiously and forwarded to the GEF for consideration.
2. Relevance and Priority
The objectives of the project and the strategies outlined to achieve those objectives are in
consonance with the aims of the GEF operational programme "Integrated Land and Water
Multiple Focal Area", under which International Waters projects fall. Moreover, the proposal is
directly relevant, as it focuses on another critical GEF priority area - the special conditions and
needs of Small Island Developing States.
The proposal, as outlined, also seeks to equip Pacific Island states with the necessary tools to
meet their obligations with respect to important international conventions, to which many are
signatory. These include UNFCCC, MARPOL, UNCLOS, Convention on Biological Diversity,
inter alia.
In addition, the project focuses heavily on priority areas identified by the Pacific Islands
themselves, viz. degradation of water quality; degradation of associated critical habitats and
unsustainable use of resources. The whole programme appears to be internally driven, and has
the full support of the relevant national Governments.
3. Project Approach
Given the priority issues identified, the approach outlined appears generally capable of meeting
the overall objectives. The strategy focuses heavily on capacity building, stakeholder
participation, it takes cognizance of diversity among islands (political, ethno-cultural, linguistic,
environmental, resources availability etc), the need for self-financing, and seeks to improve the
overall quality of life in a sustainable manner. These guiding principles are critical if the
countries are to truly benefit from the project.
4. Objectives
Overall, the objectives have been well formulated and properly focused. For the most part, the
activities listed are consistent with those objectives.
Notwithstanding the above, there is the implied notion that adequate baseline (scientific and
technical), and that there is little need to undertake further research. This may well be the case,
but it does appear to be somewhat in conflict with the acknowledgement that there are
"Information Gaps". If in fact these information gaps exist, then there should be some specific
subset of activities that unambiguously address this need. If the project team believes that this
concern is fully covered under an existing set of activities, then perhaps a very clear statement to
that effect should be included in the appropriate section of the document. Obviously, the
unavailability of critical baseline data for all countries represented in the project could frustrate
the achievement of objectives.
5. Background and Justification
In this reviewer's opinion, adequate background information and supporting justification have
been provided. The document is properly referenced and substantiated by quality
documentation. Given the current needs of the Pacific Islands, the benefits to be derived, and the
fact that the proposal meets the objectives of both the GEF and the Pacific Islands, it is strongly
recommended that the project should be approved.
However, the project team might wish to consider including a brief section (1-2 paragraphs at
most) which provides an objective assessment of the state of data availability, and highlighting
any critical areas for which data is likely to be deficient. Such information would assist the
funding agency in deciding, a priori, whether project objectives could be realistically achieved
within the timetable proposed (This also relates to the comment highlighted in italics at (4)
above).
6. Critical Analysis of the Situation
All relevant and critical circumstances have been thoroughly considered and analyzed. The
threats and actions proposed for dealing with them have been clearly set out and are appropriate
for meeting the objectives of the project. Both the root causes of the identified problems (issues)
and overt manifestations of the problems (symptoms) have been adequately addressed. In
addition, critical system effects and externalities that are likely to impact on the project have been
fully considered.
7. Activities
The proposed activities are appropriate to the issues being tackled, and all indications are that
they are efficacious. It is not recommended that any of the proposed activities should be
excluded (See comments (4) and (6) in relation to other considerations, which might enhance
the proposal, however).
The sequencing of activities is logical, and obviously designed to ensure that each succeeding
component derives maximum benefit from each previous activity.
8. National Priorities and Community Participation
The proposal is in consonance with national and regional environmental plans and strategies for
the Pacific Region. The countries chosen for participation in the project are all appropriate, and
none should be excluded from the list. The project can also be meaningfully executed, with all
objectives achieved, without any further addition of countries to the list. The proposal has fully
considered and incorporated into the design, economic, social, cultural, ethnic, linguistic and
livelihood issues, within the context of the project's overall environmental objectives.
It is evident that extensive and meaningful stakeholder consultations have taken place, and that
local communities and populations will be involved in all phases of project preparation (i.e.,
design, execution, monitoring and evaluation).
9. Institutional Arrangements
Present institutional arrangements for project execution are adequate and appropriate. It is also
heartening to note that adequate flexibility has been built into the institutional arrangements, to
ensure that structural or other changes can be made where necessary, without jeopardizing
project success.
10. Time Frame
It is possible to achieve all project objectives within the proposed time frame.
11. Funding
The proposed GEF funding level appears to be adequate and appropriate, given the activities to
be undertaken. Proposed co-financing contributions would at this stage also appear to be
realistic and achievable.
12. Innovative Features/Replicability
The project is innovative in that it treats the Region's coastal and marine environment as a
unified system, while at the same time recognizing diversity in ecosystems at the micro (country)
level. Moreover, it is one of the first such efforts known to this reviewer, which seeks to
integrate both regional and national sustainable development priorities with shared global
concerns for protecting international waters.
The project can have a strong demonstration effect for other similar societies and many elements
can be replicated successfully. Such replication is possible in the small island developing states
in the Caribbean, and in the Indian Ocean region.
13. Sustainability
The project clearly provides for sustainability after the GEF funds expire, via a variety of
mechanisms. These include the assurance of continued Government commitment and "political
will" (both at the regional and national levels) well into the future; given the long-term, proactive
nature of the project and the emphasis on capacity building, resources will be optimized
providing a greater range of economic and social benefits for a wider range of stakeholders. In
this way, stakeholder commitment and participation beyond the GEF phase will be assured. In
light of the foregoing, other donor agencies and Governments of developed countries with strong
commitments to the achievement of sustainable development could be easily persuaded to
become partners in the process.
14. Development Dimensions and Rationale for GEF Support
It is important to note that there is strong focus on the development dimensions of the proposal.
Among the objectives are the improvement of the quality of life in the participating countries,
and the development of self-financing activities at the level of the local populations and other
stakeholders. Given the commitment of GEF to the achievement of global sustainable
development practices, in particular its programming framework "integrated land and water
multiple focal area"; there is strong justification for submitting the proposal to the GEF for
consideration. The project is therefore not only designed to meet key Pacific Island needs, but
without doubt, will assist in furthering the objectives of the sustainable development
programmes of the GEF.
15. Additional Comments
(a)
Annexes 1-5 provide a comprehensive listing of objectives and activities for each sub
component, while Annex 6 clearly identifies the key "regional environmental threats". However,
there does not appear to be a strong enough linkage (or cross-referencing) between the threats on
the one hand and the activities identified to mitigate/reduce the threats, on the other. While a
linkage is implied, there should be absolutely no doubt in the mind of the funding agency as to
whether the activities proposed are appropriate for achieving the stated objectives.
(b)
The proposal appropriately acknowledges (and includes) the need for an education and
awareness component. It also cites the importance of stakeholder involvement and participation
in the process. However, the project team might wish to consider strengthening this section of
the document by including a clearer focus on the importance traditional knowledge, technologies
and expertise, and indicating how these elements will be effectively incorporated as specific
activities.
(c)
While it is acknowledged that the proposal is not designed to focus on climate change and
sea level rise issues per se, stronger and more consistent references to this threat would enhance
the argument for implementation of the project. Apart from a direct reference to the subject on
page 14 of the draft GEF Project Brief under the subheading "Rationale", this relationship is not
pursued. Certainly the potential impacts of climate change will have implications for marine and
coastal ecosystems, habitat degradation and the sustainability of economic and social activity in
the coastal zone. Reference to the existing Pacific Region climate change project (PICCAP) would
also be useful in this connection.
Leonard A. Nurse, PhD (McGill)
Director
Coastal Zone Management Unit,
Bay Street,
Bridgetown,
BARBADOS
Tel: (246) 228-5955 (Work); (246) 432-0648 (Home)
Fax: (246) 228-5956
Email: lnurse@mailhub.cariburf.com
ANNEX 3A: INCORPORATION OF COMMENTS MADE BY THE STAP REVIEW
The STAP review gives a very favorable general review of the project brief. The review includes
four suggestions for the Project Team to consider. They include:
· a suggestion on the part of the reviewer that the issue of "information gaps" be explicitly
addressed, either in the context of such gaps having been taken into account or having
already been satisfactorily addressed;
· a suggestion that the project team consider including a brief section providing an assessment
of the state of data availability and highlighting any critical areas for which data is likely to be
deficient;
· a need to create stronger linkages between the table of threats on the one hand and the
activities identified to mitigate/reduce the threats on the other; and
· the need to strengthen the stakeholder involvement section by including a clearer focus on
the importance of traditional knowledge, technologies and expertise, and indicating how
these elements will be effectively incorporated as specific activities.
The first two needs seem to address the same issue, i.e., the extent to which information and data
gaps were identified, how they have been incorporated into project development, and, implicitly,
to the extent they have not been incorporated, how this could be accomplished. The Strategic
Action Programme makes explicit the results of the gap analysis that was undertaken in by
Regional Task Force and the various committees and work groups working with the Task Force.
The results of their analyses are included in Section VII of the SAP final report and are the subject
of Table 5 in the SAP document. The SAP is included as Annex 8 of the Project Brief. In
summary, the SAP concluded that while there were information gaps, the existence of such gaps
should not prevent actions being taken. Actions recommended in the SAP, which was used as
the frame of reference for Activity recommendations in the Project Brief, were made consistent
with the conclusion that the recommended actions could, with existing data and information, be
accomplished within the timeframe of and the resources available to the project. The reviewer
has stated in the Review that he is in agreement with this conclusion (See Sections 6, 7 and 10 of
the Review). The Project Brief will make note of this information.
The third need, i.e., the suggestion that there be stronger links between the table of threats on the
one hand and the activities to mitigate/reduce these threats on the other, is, in the opinion of the
project team, quite adequately addressed in the work of the SAP. It is the countries themselves,
their country representatives, representatives from regional organizations, and public members
who formulated the table of threats, undertook the synthesis of those threats, and created the
priority concerns that are the essence of both the SAP and the Project Brief. The work described
within the SAP document makes this clear (See SAP Sections IV, V, VI, and SAP Tables 2, 3 and
4).
The fourth need, i.e., to place a clear focus on traditional knowledge, technologies and expertise
and indicate how these elements will be incorporated as specific activities, is a welcome
suggestion and has now been incorporated into the Project Brief on Pages four and five. The
Project Team is hesitant, however, to be specific how these traditional elements will be
incorporated into specific activities. Traditional practices and associated technologies and
specialized expertise varies widely throughout the region. In the opinion of the Project Team, it
would premature to be specific about the incorporation of specific, tradition-based approaches
until the specific demonstration sites have been selected in the early work of project
implementation.
ANNEX 4: SUMMARY OF THE STRATEGIC ACTION PROGRAMME FOR THE SOUTH PACIFIC
ISLANDS
INTRODUCTION
The Strategic Action Programme (SAP) for International Waters of the Pacific Islands Region was
initiated and developed by the thirteen Pacific Island States participating in the work of the Global
Environment Facility (GEF). It represents a pioneering effort by a group of small island developing
states (SIDS) to integrate national and regional sustainable development priorities with shared
global environmental concerns for protecting International Waters.
The SAP has built on considerable national and regional work related to International Waters. This
work includes, e.g., reports of the National Consultations, the State of the Environment (SOE) Report
or National Environmental Management Strategy (NEMS) for each country, the Action Plan for
Managing the Environment of the South Pacific Region 1997-2000, the Draft Regional Strategy for
Development Priorities of the Forum Island Countries, the Action Strategy for Nature Conservation
in the South Pacific Region 1994-1998, the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the
Marine Environment from Land-based Activities, the Report to the United Nations Commission on
Sustainable Development (UNCSD) on Activities to Implement the Barbados Programme of Action
in the Pacific Region (1996) and the 1992 Report to the United Nations Conference on Environment
and Development (UNCED) in The Pacific Way.
International Waters
International Waters include oceans, large marine ecosystems, enclosed or semi-enclosed seas and
estuaries as well as rivers, lakes, groundwater systems, and wetlands with transboundary drainage
basins or common borders. The water-related ecosystems and critical habitats associated with these
waters are integral parts of the system. International Waters extend far inland and far out to sea.
This is because the global hydrological cycle links watersheds, airsheds, estuaries, and coastal and
marine waters through transboundary movement of water, pollutants and living resources.
This definition of International Waters fits precisely the reality of the Pacific Islands. Although
separated by vast distances, these islands are linked and controlled by the vast marine environment.
The land to sea ratio is generally so small that Pacific islands are wholly coastal in character. The
importance of the health of International Waters to the islands cannot be overstated.
Transboundary Environmental Concerns
Work undertaken during the SAP process resulted in the identification of three priority
transboundary concerns related to International Waters:
Degradation of their quality;
degradation of their associated critical habitats; and unsustainable use of their living and nonliving
resources. These concerns are inextricably linked by their causes and by the cumulative, mutually
exacerbating effects of these causes.
Imminent Threats
International Waters in the Pacific region are subject to a number of threats giving rise to
transboundary concerns. The threats were examined from the perspective of critical species and
their habitats and living and non-living marine resources.. Priority was given to those
transboundary concerns that arise from the following imminent threats to the health of those waters.
The priority concerns include:
1.
pollution of marine and freshwater (including groundwater) from land-based activities
2.
issues related to the long term sustainable use of marine and freshwater resources
2.
physical, ecological and hydrological modification of critical habitats
3.
unsustainable exploitation of living and nonliving resources, particularly, although not
exclusively, the unsustainable and/or inefficient exploitation of coastal and ocean fishery
resources.
Each imminent threat affects each transboundary concern. The linkages between the imminent
threats to and the transboundary concerns for International Waters require integrated measures to
address the concerns effectively.
Root Causes
The root causes were examined in their legal, institutional, socio-economic and environmental
context. The ultimate root cause underlying the imminent threats has been identified as deficiencies
in management. The factors contributing to the management root cause can be grouped into two
linked subsets: a) governance and b) understanding. The governance subset is characterised by the
need for mechanisms to integrate environmental concerns, development planning, and decision-
making. The understanding subset is characterised by the need to achieve island-wide ecosystem
awareness through improved education and participation. This island wide awareness and
participation will help make possible the development and implementation of measures to protect
International Waters.
Information Gaps
The SAP analysis revealed a set of information gaps relevant in particular to decision-makers (as
opposed to researchers) who must address ultimate root causes and respond to imminent threats.
Particularly important is the lack of strategic information presented in an appropriate manner to
decision-makers, resource users, managers and communities to evaluate costs and benefits of, and to
decide among, alternative activities. Improving information input and exchange at the regional,
national, and community levels is an objective of this SAP.
Proposed Actions
Actions to address the root causes of degradation of International Waters will be taken through
regionally consistent, country-driven targeted actions that integrate development and environment
needs. These actions are designed to encourage comprehensive, cross-sectoral, ecosystem-based
approaches to mitigate and prevent imminent threats to International Waters. The SAP provides the
regional framework within which actions are identified, developed and implemented. Targeted
actions will be carried out in two complementary, linked consultative contexts: Integrated Coastal
and Watershed Management (ICWM) and Oceanic Fisheries Management (OFM). Through the
ICWM and OFM approaches, the SAP sets out a path for the transition of Pacific islands from
sectoral to integrated management of International Waters as a whole, which is essential for their
protection over the long term.
Management in these two contexts will necessarily include three other pressing concerns in
sustainable development planning, namely: biodiversity, vulnerability to climate change and land
degradation. These are GEF focal and cross-cutting areas, and the remaining three of the seven
major issues identified in the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of
SIDS as common to most islands. The other three major small island issues from the Barbados
Programme have already been addressed above, and the seventh, tourism, can only be effectively
dealt with in this type of framework for national sustainable development. The SAP also meets the
objectives of the GEF operational programme entitled "Integrated Land and Water Multiple Focal
Area," to which International Waters projects addressing the needs and special conditions of small
islands are assigned by GEF. Consequently, the SAP is expected to involve and build upon the
complementary skills and experience available from organizations and groups active in our region.
The region receives much development assistance from a variety of donors for a wide range of
projects. The SAP will be taken into account in discussions with donors to plan and coordinate
regional and national development assistance for International Waters in order to address imminent
threats and their root causes more effectively. The SAP will facilitate the choice and design of high
priority interventions, remove duplication, and ensure that projects do not work at cross-purposes.
Funding from GEF per se can only support a small proportion of such interventions, hence the
importance of the SAP to organize and leverage additional assistance in order to receive maximum
benefit from available funds. The SAP is designed to comply with the requirements of GEF, but also,
and perhaps more importantly, to be a framework for overall national and regional planning and
assistance for the management of International Waters.
The SAP complies with the legal framework for regional cooperation and related obligations
established by the regional Conventions, the UN Convention on Law of the Sea, the Convention on
Biological Diversity, the Framework Convention on Climate Change and other international
conventions within which the Pacific Island countries identify common issues and coordinate
national approaches to address those issues. Application of ICWM and OFM approaches will
facilitate further joint action between sectors nationally and between governments regionally. As
experience with ICWM and OFM grows, this SAP will also evolve, reflecting the increased
knowledge of and changing conditions in the environment of our islands. To ensure that the SAP
remains a living, evolving and useful instrument for sustainable development, and to assess and
apply lessons learned from its implementation, the SAP will be reviewed every five years.
Priorities for Action
All sustainable development issues related to International Waters in this SAP cannot be addressed
at once. Therefore four high priority areas have been identified for immediate intervention:
improved waste management, better water quality, sustainable fisheries and effective marine
protected areas.
Targeted action within these activity areas is proposed in five categories: management, capacity-
building, awareness/education, research/information for decision-making, and investment.
Institutional strengthening is included under management and capacity-building. The analytical
framework within which proposals for assistance should be evaluated under the SAP is set out
below.
Goal of the SAP: Integrated sustainable development and management of International Waters
Priority Concerns:
Degradation of water quality
Degradation of associated critical habitats
Unsustainable use of resources
Imminent Threats:
Pollution from land-based activities
Modification of critical habitats
Unsustainable exploitation of resources
Ultimate Root Causes:
Management deficiencies
a)
governance
b)
understanding
Solutions:
Integrated Coastal and Watershed Management
Oceanic Fisheries Management
ICWM Activity Areas:
- improved waste management
- better water quality
- sustainable fisheries
- effective marine protected areas
OFM Activity Areas:
- sustainable ocean fisheries
- improved national and regional management capability
- stock and by-catch monitoring and research
- enhanced national and regional management links
Targeted actions:
- management/institutional strengthening
-
capacity-building
-
awareness/education
- research/information for decision-making
-
investment
1
Annex 5: List of on-going and planned projects
Programme / Project
Countries
Year
On-going
Co-
Associated Funding Agency Cooperative
and Planned, financing Funding and/or Country Agencies
Secured
Funding
Marine Resources
Regional 98 - 2000
Core
Budget
Division Management
478,941
from country
contributions
COASTAL
FISHERIES
Capture
Regional 98 - 2000
272,680 200,000 Core Budget and FAO and USP
545,360
on AusAid
funded position
Post Harvest
Papua New
98
38,376 300,000
UK Funded
Guinea,
76,751
ICFMaP
Tokelau,
Fiji, Tonga,
Cook
Islands
Training
Regional 98 - 2000
388,123
AusAid, France, SPC/Nelson
776,245
1,500,000
NZ,
Polytechnic
Commonwealth Pacific Island
Sec, UNDP
Fisheries
Officers
Course
Information Services
Regional 98 - 2000
276,781 900,000
France FFA
and
553,563
SOPAC
Resource Assessment
Regional
98
44,974 300,000 UK, EC, France
89,947
Women's Fisheries
Regional 98 - 2000
130,050
NZ,
AusAid
Development
260,100
OCEANIC
FISHERIES
2
Programme / Project
Countries
Year
On-going
Co-
Associated Funding Agency Cooperative
and Planned, financing Funding and/or Country Agencies
Secured
Funding
Administration
Regional 98 - 2000
180,549
Core
budget,
361,097
AusAid, NZ,
ROC/Taiwan
Fisheries Statistics
Regional 98 - 2000
France,
European
852,975
Commission,
Consultancies
Tuna and Billfish
Regional 98 - 2000
AusAid,
Research
930,495
ROC/Taiwan,
PNG, ACIAR
South Pacific Regional Regional 98 - 2000 2,905,088
European
FFA
Tuna Resource
Commission
Assessment and
Monitoring Project
(SPR Tramp)
OCEANIC
FISHERIES
Executive
Regional 98 - 2000
General
Fund,
Management
1,474,350
AusAid
Economics and
Regional 98 - 2000
1,600,739
General
Fund,
SPC
Marketing
3,201,478
NZODA,
AusAid, Canada,
EU, ADB, CFTC,
OFCF (Japan),
UNDP and
Taiwan
Legal Services
Regional 98 - 2000
558,767
General Fund,
1,117,533
UK, AusAid,
CIDA, CFTC,
NZODA, Rep. of
Korea
3
Programme / Project
Countries
Year
On-going
Co-
Associated Funding Agency Cooperative
and Planned, financing Funding and/or Country Agencies
Secured
Funding
Monitoring Control
Regional 98 - 2000
1,956,325
General
Fund,
and Surveillance
3,912,650
AusAid, US
Information
Regional 98 - 2000
688,632
General Fund,
Technology and
1,377,264
AusAid,
Communication
NZODA,
Corporate Treaty
Regional 98 - 2000 2,605,697 1,302,848
General Fund, US
Services
Treaty Funds
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
Resource
Regional
98, 99
Regular Budget,
Development - Water and country
536,450
85,200
CFTC, AusAid,
Resources
activities
UN Taiwan,
NZODA
Environmental
Regional
98, 99
Regular Budget,
Science - Coastal
and country
402,570
163,300 Canada, AusAid,
activities
Japan, Korea
Human Resources
Regional
98
Regular
Budget,
Development
250,630
CFTC, AusAid,
France, Canada
Information
Regional
98
Regular Budget,
Technology
278,070
16,330
Various, France
Sanitation and Public
Kiribati
Health
500,000
National Fisheries
FSM
Policy FSM
400,000
4
Programme / Project
Countries
Year
On-going
Co-
Associated Funding Agency Cooperative
and Planned, financing Funding and/or Country Agencies
Secured
Funding
Water Supply and
FSM
Sewage
11,500,000
Majuro Water Supply
Marshall
and Sanitation
Islands
10,800,000
Urban Development
Samoa
420,000
Sanitation and Master Vanuatu
Plan for Port Vila
470,000
Legislative
Vanuatu
Framework for Urban
405,000
Planning and the
Environment
Urban Infrastructure
Vanuatu
Project
12,400,000
Fisheries
Papua New Guinea
Management
12,000,000
Management
Regional 98 - 2000
1,687,260
5
Programme / Project
Countries
Year
On-going
Co-
Associated Funding Agency Cooperative
and Planned, financing Funding and/or Country Agencies
Secured
Funding
Finance and
Regional 98 - 2000
Administration
1,548,110
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL
RESOURCES
Project Management
Regional 98 - 2000
30,070
South Pacific
Regional 97 - 2000
4,468,319 UNDP
Biodiversity
2,831,000
GEF Funded
Programme
Natural Resource
Regional 98 - 2000
Conservation
268,400
1,504,140
Programme
Coastal Management
Regional
98 2000
and Planning
1,440,870
Programme
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION, INFORMATION AND CAPACITY
BUILDING (SPREP)
Project Management
Regional 98 - 2000
159,540
79,770
Environmental
Regional 98 - 2000
460,000 3,093,680
Policy/Strategy
230,000
Education,
Information and
Technology
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT
PLANNING
Project Management
Regional 98 - 2000
69,570
6
Programme / Project
Countries
Year
On-going
Co-
Associated Funding Agency Cooperative
and Planned, financing Funding and/or Country Agencies
Secured
Funding
Climate Change and
Regional 98 - 2000
4,297,000
Integrated Coastal
GEF Funding
Management
Environmental
Regional 98 - 2000
Management
295,000
3,110,000
Planning
Waste Management,
Regional 98 - 2000
3,275,000
Pollution Prevention
1,390,000
Total
77,480,434
8,058,383
18,719,520
The baseline of this project (US$ 77,480,434) is based upon those activities identified as on-
going, planned, or secured. The co-financing (US$ 8,058,383) represents the leveraged cost
of those new activities of the proposed project's of the baseline projects. Another US$
18,719,520 is planned for a set of activities associated with the proposed project.
7
Annex 5: List of on-going and planned projects (Baseline contribution)
Programme / Project Project Objectives and Issues
Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4
Addressed
Marine Resources
Technical guidance and develop
Division Management collaborative links with other
478,941
South Pacific Regional bodies.
COASTAL
FISHERIES
Capture
Training programmes in fishing
545,360
and seamanship skills, adaptation
of new fishing methods, technical
assistance in FAD programme
planning and implementation.
Post Harvest
Promotes income earning
opportunities through
76,751
introduction of new improved
seafood processing, packaging
and marketing. Information
resource base on post harvest
fisheries.
Training Development
and
776,245
implementation training courses
in small fishing business
management. Regional and
national workshops on grading
sashimi tuna, safety-at-sea public
awareness and fishing methods.
Information Services Provide information on a wide
553,563
range of fisheries development
and management issues.
Resource Assessment Assist with design and
implementation of inshore
89,947
resource surveys; programmes
for the collection, analysis and
interpretation of fishery statistics
and other activities and
mechanisms to prevent over-
exploitation of national fishery
resources.
Women's Fisheries
Promotes creation of income
Development
earning opportunities, building
260,100
capacity of rural women to
participate in seafood economic
activities.
OCEANIC
FISHERIES
8
Programme / Project Project Objectives and Issues
Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4
Addressed
Administration
Provide technical oversight for
OFP and develop collaborative
361,097
links with other regional and
international bodies working in
tuna research.
Fisheries Statistics
Maintain database on industrial
852,975
tuna fisheries for research and
monitoring purposes.
Tuna and Billfish
Monitor exploitation of
930,495
Research
commercial tuna and Billfish
stocks with DWFN's to guide
national fisheries development.
South Pacific Regional Implement continuous
2,905,088
Tuna Resource
monitoring of region's tuna
Assessment and
fisheries based on tuna tagging
Monitoring Project
programme.
(SPR Tramp)
OCEANIC
FISHERIES
Executive
Pivotal role in Agency internal
Management
management and regional
1,474,350
initiatives and developments.
Economics and
Assist member countries develop
Marketing
effective management
3,201,478
arrangements of their domestic
tuna industry and prepare for
MHLC2 related activities
designed to develop an effective
regional arrangement for
conservation and management of
the migratory stocks.
Legal Services
Assist member countries to
strengthen and fulfil their legal
1,117,533
responsibilities. Key role in
regional initiatives and
developments in international
law - involved in harnessing
benefits of UNCLOS and meet
new challenges.
9
Programme / Project Project Objectives and Issues
Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4
Addressed
Monitoring Control
Reinforce member countries'
and Surveillance
capacity to achieve compliance by
3,912,650
fishing operators with national
regulations and regional
arrangement license conditions.
Information
Develop effective and
Technology and
standardized information
1,377,264
Communication
technology and data
communication systems as a
priority for member countries.
Corporate Treaty
Accountable and efficient
2,605,697
Services
administration of treaties and
provision of personnel, finance,
property and office services.
COASTAL
ZONE
MANAGEMENT
Resource
Sustainable development and
536,450
Development - Water utilization of water resources in
Resources
member countries.
Environmental
Improved management of the
402,570
Science - Coastal
coastal zone of member countries
for preservation and sustainable
development.
Human Resources
Strengthen national capacity in
250,630
Development
geoscience through education
and training of member country
individuals.
Information
Support Regional electronic
278,070
Technology
databases, Internet services,
Installation and train member
country individuals.
Sanitation and Public TA to improve sanitation, sewage
500,000
Health
disposal and water supplies, and
to include institutional
strengthening.
National Fisheries
TA to develop national fisheries
400,000
Policy FSM
policy and preparation of action
plans for each of the states and
promote sustainable
development of fisheries.
10
Programme / Project Project Objectives and Issues
Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4
Addressed
Water Supply and
To improve health and quality of
Sewage
life of the people of FSM and
11,500,000
facilitate economic growth.
Rehabilitate and upgrade water
supply and distribution systems
serving the capital region areas of
four states of FSM.
Majuro Water Supply New water wells, reservoirs,
10,800,000
and Sanitation
water treatment plants,
transmission mains, sewage
pumping stations with
development of sector plans and
programmes.
Urban Development TA to prepare project to refurbish
420,000
and improve drainage and
sewage systems and drainage for
preparation of an urban
development plan for Apia.
Sanitation and Master TA to prepare Sanitation Master
470,000
Plan for Port Vila
Plan for development of
sanitation requirements for Port
Vila over 20 year timeframe.
Legislative
TA to assist the Government in
405,000
Framework for Urban reviewing, updating, drafting,
Planning and the
adoption and enforcing physical
Environment
planning legislation and
regulations, building codes and
physical plans.
Urban Infrastructure For rehabilitation and
12,400,000
Project
improvement of urban roads and
traffic management, water supply
and sanitation and repair of Port
Vila wharf.
Fisheries
Increase employment and
6,000,000 6,000,000
Management
incomes in PNG through the
establishment of a sustainable
domestic private sector fishing
industry.
Management
Effective implementation of
policies and directives of Sprep
1,687,260
Meeting on behalf of member
countries and effective
implementation of SPREP Action
Plan.
11
Programme / Project Project Objectives and Issues
Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4
Addressed
Finance and
Responsible for providing 'core"
Administration
administration services and
1,548,110
assisting management in
monitoring and implementing
obligations and requirements set
out in SPREP's Financial and Staff
Regulations.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL
RESOURCES
Project Management
30,070
South Pacific
Endeavour to identify, establish
Biodiversity
and initially manage a series of
-
Programme
large, diverse Conservation Areas
to protect important ecological
features.
Natural Resource
Participation by countries in
268,400
Conservation
regional campaigns on species
Programme
conservation and sustainable use
initiatives. Implementation of
Regional and International
Conventions, Agreements and
Strategies.
Coastal Management Coordinate coastal management
and Planning
and planning activities including
-
Programme
coastal resource surveys and
management plan development.
Assist member countries to
reduce and control disposal
causing pollution and coastal
erosion causing environmental
damage.
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION, INFORMATION AND
CAPACITY BUILDING (SPREP)
Project Management
79,770
Environmental
National Development Plans
230,000
Policy/Strategy
integrating environment and
Education,
strengthening institutional
Information and
support in member countries -
Technology
Environmental legislation.
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT
PLANNING
Project Management
69,570
12
Programme / Project Project Objectives and Issues
Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4
Addressed
Climate Change and
Integrated Coastal
Management
Environmental
Integrated Coastal Management
295,000
Management
approaches- EIA national
Planning
planning, Population and
environmental linkages.
Waste Management,
Pollution Prevention
1,390,000
Total
278,070 51,600,405
24,738,627 863,333
1
Annex 6: Table of Regional Environmental
Threats
Issue
Symptoms/Impacts
Immediate Causes
Root Causes
Scale
Severity
Degradation of associated critical
habitats
Coastal
Destruction of coral
Increased demand from
Inadequate
Localized
Moderate to
Development
reefs, lagoons, seagrass population growth, food
environmental
throughout severe
beds, beaches: Species
production, cash cropping,
guidelines for coastal the region
depletion or loss and
urbanization, tourism,
development. Lack of
ground and surface
industrialization, lifestyle
enforcement. Limited
water shortage.
changes, agro-deforestation, use of environmental
damming and canalization
assessment. Limited
awareness
Damage to
Loss of coral habitat by Nutrients derived from
Lack of education
Localized
Moderate to
Coral Reefs
collision and removal; sewage, soil erosion and
about sensitivity of
throughout severe
indirect impacts through agricultural fertilizers. Solid marine ecosystems:
the region
siltation; declining reef waste disposal and
lack of management;
associated fauna.
sedimentation from soil
lack of enforcement
Reduced capacity to
erosion dredging, coral
meet basic human needs mining, trampling of shallow
and loss of aesthetic and reef flats, breaking of corals,
recreational value
collecting of marine souvenirs
Mangrove
Deterioration of
Reclamation for land, landfill, Lack of regulations and Localized
Moderate to
destruction
mangrove habitats:
wood collection, shrimp farm management, lack of
and common severe
decreased fish and
construction and decreased
awareness, damming, in the
shrimp catches: reduced freshwater supply
of waterways and
western part
water quality: coastal
rivers: increased
of the region
erosion
population pressure.
2
Destruction of Signs of physical
Coastal dredging and filling. Lack of adequate
Localized
Moderate to
Seagrass beds disturbance: loss of
Pollution, overfishing and
regulations and
and common severe
and other
seagrass-associated
elevated nutrient levels and enforcement: limited
in the
subtidal
endangered species,
sedimentation.
awareness, limited
western part
habitats.
including turtles,
awareness of seagrass of the region
dugong, seabirds and
importance
certain cetaceans.
Issue
Symptoms/Impacts
Immediate Causes
Root Causes
Scale
Severity
Unsustainable exploitation of resources
Overfishing in Changes in biological
Increased fishing efforts - too Lack of surveillance
Regional Severe
the coastal areas community structure. many boats and too many
and enforcement of
Habitat modification,
fishermen for
existing regulations.
loss of protected species. subsistence/survival needs. Lack of stock
Decline in catches with Destructive fishing practices. assessment hampers
decrease in average size.
resource management.
Destruction of nursery
habitats (mangroves
and seagrass)
Turtle capture Decrease in nesting
Need for subsidiary food
Lack of public
Regional Severe
and egg
populations
supply in areas of poor fish
awareness, and
collection by
resources. Economic returns alternative food
local fishermen
from sales to tourists. By
sources. Lack of
and
catch of turtles in fisheries. enforcement and stock
communities;
assessment.
sale of shells to
tourists and for
export
3
Collection of
Breakage of corals and Unregulated collection of
Expansion of tourism; Regional Moderate
to
corals and
decline of live coral
corals and mollusks
lack of awareness; lack
Severe
mollusks for
cover; decline in reef-
of regulations and
souvenir trade associated fauna
enforcement
Ornamental fish Potential decrease in
Potential overfishing of
Lack of stock
Localized
Low to
collection for
reef fish populations,
individual species,
assessment, monitoring throughout moderate
export
damage to the reef
destructive fishing methods and management. Lack the region
of collector training
Conservation of Potential decline in
Accidental capture in fisheries Lack of awareness
Localized
Low to
marine
population
throughout moderate
mammals
the region
(especially
dugongs)
Overfishing of Potential decline in
Excessive bycatch and
Lack of monitoring and Regional To
be
oceanic
population
discards. Poor fishing gear
enforcement of
determined
resources
selectivity especially purse
regulations. Lack of
seine/longline
trained staff for
surveillance
Issue
Symptoms/Impacts
Immediate Causes
Root Causes
Scale
Severity
Degradation of water quality
Surface and
Excessive exploitation of Poor water reticulation and Inadequate regards for Regional in Moderate to
groundwater
surface and
distribution systems with
conservation measures urban areas severe
groundwater for urban inadequate concern for water including maintenance
use: reallocation of
conservation and excessive
of distribution systems
surface water to
pumping of groundwater
and household
domestic and
resources.
plumping - no pricing
agricultural uses; draw-
for water and lack of
down of limited
incentive for water
groundwater resources;
conservation.
4
saltwater intrusion into
coastal acquifiers
Sewage-related Marine and aquatic
Direct discharge of untreated Inadequate pollution
Localized in Severe
and solid
organism infections and or poorly treated sewage;
control regulations,
the vicinity
microbial
diseases. Eutrophication Lack of sewage treatment
monitoring and
of coastal
pollution
and alteration of marine plants
enforcement
urban areas
environment, habitat
and large
loss and human health
tourist
effects. Contamination
development
of groundwater.
s
Disposal of
Deterioration of
Improper solid waste disposal Lack of adequate waste Localized in Moderate to
Solid Waste
aesthetics, alteration of and beach litter.
disposal regulations
the vicinity severe
coastal habitats, physical
and enforcement,
of coastal
damage to coastal and
inadequate public
urban areas,
marine life;
awareness
coastal
contamination of
villages,
groundwater from
tourism
landfill
development
s and
adjacent to
major
shipping
lanes
5
Tourism
Destruction of coastal
Intense tourism development: Limited coastal zone
Regional
Moderate to
Development areas and adjacent
overexploitation of available planning and
severe
marine habitats
water resources; poor
infrastructure planning;
infrastructure linkages:
limited awareness of
excessive use of marine
adverse tourism
habitat: landfilling
impacts: unregulated
tourism activities and
access
1
ANNEX 7: HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF PROJECT
The early impetus for the current project was the decision of PICs in 1990 to prepare a joint
regional position for the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
(UNCED). This work occurred simultaneous with the development by the PICs of National
Environmental Management Strategies (NEMS) which transpired between 1990-1996.
UNCED provided the first opportunity for PICs to gather information, analyze results, and build a
regional consensus on integrating environmental and development concerns into a sustainable
whole, incorporating the knowledge and experience gained in the twenty years since the
Stockholm Conference on the Environment. The joint regional position presented at UNCED was
titled Environment and Development: A Pacific Island Perspective and The Pacific Way: Pacific
Island Developing Countries' Report to UNCED. The Perspective synthesized National Reports
from the Islands and presented extensive additional information on sustainable development in
the region. It was a supporting document for The Pacific Way, which presented a summary of the
state of the environment for the islands and a description of regional priority concerns, both of
which continue to be applicable.
Based in part on the results of The Pacific Way and the Perspective, the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP), SPREP and the Government of Australia co-financed a Global
Environment Facility (GEF) Pacific regional training and scoping workshop in Nadi, Fiji, 1-4
August 1995. It was agreed at this workshop that a regional proposal for preparation of a Strategic
Action Programme (SAP) to the GEF from Pacific Islands would combine the following activity
areas:
· Integrated conservation and sustainable management of coastal resources, including fresh
water resources;
· Integrated conservation and sustainable management of oceanic resources;
· Prevention of pollution through the integrated management of land- or marine-based wastes;
and
· Monitoring and analysis of shore and near-shore environments to determine vulnerability to
environmental degradation.
An early draft of the proposal was endorsed by the 8th SPREP meeting in October 1995. PDF Block
B funds were requested from GEF in November 1995. Following further regional and national
consultation the proposal was submitted to and endorsed by Heads of Government of
participating island countries. At the 1996 27th South Pacific Forum. The South Pacific Forum
requested SPREP to coordinate implementation of the proposal. The proposal was approved by
UNDP on 19 April 1997. The Chief Technical Adviser commenced work on April 22, 1997. The
initiation of the project was announced to participating countries, SPREP National Focal Points, the
SPREP collaborating institutions, Pacific Island Countries' (PIC) Missions to the United Nations
(UN) and members of the South Pacific Organizations Coordinating Committee (SPOCC) in SPREP
Circular No. 523. Participating countries were asked to establish a National Task Force (NTF) and
nominate Task Force Coordinators (TFCs) in SPREP Circular No. 524.
A Regional Task Force (RTF) to oversee preparation of the SAP was established. It was composed
of one representative from Fiji, Marshall Islands, Samoa, Tonga, and Vanuatu, with additional
2
members from SPC, SPF, SPREP, the three GEF Implementing Agencies (UNDP, UNEP, WB), two
NGOs (IUCN, TNC) and one private sector representative (Fiji Dive Operators Association,
recommended by TCSP). The ADB and ESCAP also participated. The RTF met on 5 and 6 June
1997 in Apia. It considered draft regional reviews, draft guidelines for national consultations, and
draft terms of reference for the TFCs. The report of the RTF meeting was circulated. The TFCs met
in Apia on 8 and 9 July 1997 to receive a briefing on GEF, the SAP preparation process and
objectives and suggested methodology for national consultations. They also received the draft
reviews and other materials for the consultations. The report of the TFC meeting was circulated.
The SAP was prepared in accordance with the results of the national consultations. The results, in
the form of national reports and targeted project proposals, were endorsed by the SPREP and GEF
national focal point and were submitted to SPREP. A preliminary draft executive summary of the
SAP was circulated to participating countries, SPREP National Focal Points, PIC Missions to the
UN, SPOCC members, RTF and TFCs in SPREP Circular No. 541. The draft SAP was reviewed
and approved by the RTF and the TFCs on 2 and 3 September 1997 at a joint meeting held in Apia.
The report of the meeting was circulated.
The SAP was reviewed and subsequently endorsed by the Heads of Government of the South
Pacific Forum at their twenty-eighth meeting in Rarotonga on 15-19 September 1997, built on
considerable national and regional work related to International Waters. This work includes, for
example, reports of the National Consultations; the State of the Environment (SOE) Report or
National Environmental Management Strategy (NEMS) for each country; the Action Plan for
Managing the Environment of the South Pacific Region 1997-2000; the Draft Regional Strategy for
Development Priorities of the Forum Island Countries; the Action Strategy for Nature Conservation in
the South Pacific Region 1994-1998; the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine
Environment from Land-based Activities; the Report to the United Nations Commission on
Sustainable Development (UNCSD) on Activities to Implement the Barbados Programme of Action in
the Pacific Region (1996); and the 1992 Report to the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development (UNCED) in The Pacific Way.
The SAP assists Pacific island countries improve regional capacity for management of
transboundary water resources and create improved management structures to address
environmental degradation and ensure the long term sustainability of ocean fisheries in the
Western Pacific Warm Pool ecosystem. The SAP also leads to improved integration of
environmental concerns into local, national and regional policy, and improved water quality and
the conservation of key coastal and ocean ecological areas. The Programme is consistent with the
GEF Operational Strategy and with Operational Programme #9, the Integrated Land and Water
Multiple Focal Area that addresses Small Island Developing States (SIDS).
These concerns represent part of what, overall, was identified by the SAP as threatening to
international waters in the Pacific. A review of critical species and habitats identified several forms
of land-based sources of pollution. The most serious threat is nutrients derived from sewage, soil
erosion and agricultural fertilizers. Nutrient overloads particularly affect coral reef ecosystems,
weakening the reef carbonate skeleton and smothering the reef with algae. The other two most
serious land-based pollution threats are solid waste disposal and sedimentation. Sedimentation is
derived from soil erosion, dredging, coastal development and upstream, inland activities. The
second set of threats derives from physical alterations of the seabed or coastline, in particular
3
through destruction of fringing reefs, beaches, wetlands and mangroves for coastal development
and by sand extraction. The final set of threats derives from over-exploitation. Coastal food
fisheries, especially near urban areas, are under pressure from over-fishing, as are commercially
valuable vertebrate and invertebrate export species
The SAP identifies the root causes of degradation of international waters and will address the
special conditions and needs of SIDS. Activities implemented under the SAP will encourage
sectoral changes needed to achieve the goals of sustainable development and implement measures
that are needed to address the root causes of ecological stress in the Pacific region. The sector by
sector approach to development is being challenged but remains dominant within the region. The
costs associated with reforming institutions to address the cross-sectoral nature of most sustainable
development issues facing islands are well beyond the current capacity of all island governments
of the region. The imperative for adopting an integrated approach to island development has been
clearly demonstrated and is reflected in the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable
Development of Small Island Developing States, which is scheduled for a comprehensive review
for the UN General Assembly in 1999.
Targeted actions identified by countries in the SAP will be carried out in two complementary,
linked consultative contexts: Integrated Coastal and Watershed Management (ICWM) and Oceanic
Fisheries Management (OFM). Through the linked ICWM and OFM approaches the SAP sets out a
path for the transition from sectoral to integrated management of international waters as a whole
which is essential for their protection - and for the sustainable future of the PICs - over the long
term.
The project will build capacity at the local, country, and regional level. Work in the ICWM area
will focus on the implementation of a series of demonstration projects based on criteria developed
to maximize replicability across the region. The demonstration projects will address issues of
sustainable freshwater resources, Marine Protected Areas, coastal fisheries, and improved waste
management and provide a framework for targeted proposals prepared by countries as part of the
SAP process. Each of these issues was identified within the SAP as "high priority areas" which
were in need of "immediate intervention." The project will also enable the PICs to further develop
and implement regional fisheries management arrangements the objective of which is to ensure the
sustainable harvesting of the oceanic fish stocks in country EEZs specifically and generally in
waters of the western and central Pacific. These fish stocks are of global significance and are
identified within the SAP as requiring immediate attention.
Management in these two contexts will necessarily include three other pressing concerns in
sustainable development planning, namely: biodiversity, vulnerability to climate change and land
degradation. These are GEF focal and cross-cutting areas, and the remaining three of the seven major
issues identified in the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of SIDS as
common to most island developing states. The other three major small island issues from the
Barbados Programme have already been addressed above, and the seventh, tourism, can only be
effectively addressed in the type of national sustainable development framework that this project will
begin to create for PICs.
The SAP meets the objectives of the GEF Operational Programme titled "Integrated Land and Water
Multiple Focal Area," to which International Waters projects addressing the needs and special
4
conditions of small islands are assigned by GEF. Consequently, the SAP is expected to involve and
build upon the complementary skills and experience available from organizations and groups active
in the region. Within the SAP root causes were examined in their legal, institutional, socio-
economic and environmental context. The ultimate root cause underlying the imminent threats
was identified as deficiencies in management. The factors contributing to the management root
cause are grouped into two linked sub-sets: a) governance and b) understanding. The region wide
nature of the needed interventions, coupled with the significant control that local communities
exercise with regard to natural resource issues, makes especially important the substantial,
planned community assessment, involvement, education and stakeholder participation in the
project.
The region receives much development assistance from a variety of donors for a wide range of
projects. Results of the SAP will be extremely useful to the planning and coordination of regional and
national development assistance for International Waters in order to address imminent threats and
their root causes more effectively. The SAP will facilitate the choice and design of high priority
interventions, avoid duplication, and ensure that projects do not work at cross-purposes. It is
important to note that funding from GEF per se can only support a small proportion of the needed
interventions, particularly in the coastal areas. Hence GEF funding for SAP implementation will be
used to leverage additional assistance in order to receive maximum benefit from available funds.
Finally, SAP implementation is designed to provide a focus for improved coordination and
collaboration between and among regional organizations through the South Pacific Organizations
Coordinating Committee (SPOCC).
From a regional perspective, the SAP is designed to encourage proposals with diverse applications
that achieve global benefits while maintaining the fundamental unity of approach and discipline
established by the SAP. The SAP intends to enable development of projects reflecting the different
national styles and circumstances of each participating country, and it is designed to be sufficiently
flexible to accommodate these differences. This variety will enable rapid regional learning,
provide examples of approaches tailored to disparate situations and assist national adaptations as
countries analyze and share the results of their work.
5
ANNEX 8:
STRATEGIC ACTION PROGRAMME FOR INTERNATIONAL WATERS
OF PACIFIC ISLANDS
by: Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue,
Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu through their
respective National Task Forces for International Waters
with the guidance of:
The Regional Task Force
The South Pacific Organizations Coordinating Committee
with the financial support of:
The Government of Australia
The Government of New Zealand
The Global Environment Facility through
The United Nations Development Programme
with the assistance of:
the staff of the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme
August 1997
6
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
I. Introduction
II.
International Waters
III. The
Region
Physical
Setting
Biological
Environment
Cultural
Characteristics
Economic
Structure
Legal
Framework
Intergovernmental
Cooperation
Non-governmental
Organisations
Global
Programmes
IV.
Transboundary Environmental Concerns
V. Imminent
Threats
VI.
Root Causes
VII.
Information
Gaps
VIII.
Proposed
Solutions
IX.
Priorities for Action
Tables
1.
Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects
2.
Proximate
Root
Causes
3.
Ultimate
Root
Causes
4.
Management
Issues
5.
Information
Gaps
Annexes
1.
Bibliography
2.
Acronyms
and
Abbreviations
3.
Coordinators of National Task Forces
4.
Regional Task Force
5.
The SAP Process
7
Executive Summary
I. Introduction
This Strategic Action Programme (SAP) for International Waters of the Pacific Islands Region
was initiated and developed by the thirteen Pacific Island States participating in the work of the
Global Environment Facility (GEF). It represents a pioneering effort by our group of small island
developing states (SIDS) to integrate our national and regional sustainable development priorities
with shared global environmental concerns for protecting International Waters.
The SAP has built on considerable national and regional work related to our International
Waters. This work includes, e.g., reports of the National Consultations, the State of the Environment
(SOE) Report or National Environmental Management Strategy (NEMS) for each country, the Action
Plan for Managing the Environment of the South Pacific Region 1997-2000, the Draft Regional
Strategy for Development Priorities of the Forum Island Countries, the Action Strategy for Nature
Conservation in the South Pacific Region 1994-1998, the Global Programme of Action for the
Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities, the Report to the United Nations
Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) on Activities to Implement the Barbados
Programme of Action in the Pacific Region (1996) and the 1992 Report to the United Nations
Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in The Pacific Way.
II. International
Waters
International Waters include oceans, large marine ecosystems, enclosed or semi-enclosed seas
and estuaries as well as rivers, lakes, groundwater systems, and wetlands with transboundary
drainage basins or common borders.
The water-related ecosystems and critical habitats associated with these waters are integral
parts of the system. International Waters extend far inland and far out to sea. This is because the
global hydrological cycle links watersheds, airsheds, estuaries, and coastal and marine waters through
transboundary movement of water, pollutants and living resources.
This definition of International Waters could have been designed with our Pacific Islands in
mind. Although separated by vast distances, our islands are linked and controlled by our marine
environment. Our land to sea ratio is generally so small that all our islands are wholly coastal in
character. The importance of the health of International Waters to our islands cannot be overstated.
III. The
Region
This section is descriptive rather than prescriptive, intending to highlight those parts of the
Pacific picture most relevant to the sustainable development of our International Waters as a
background to the analysis and proposals for action.
IV.
Transboundary Environmental Concerns
We have identified three priority transboundary concerns for our International Waters. These
are:
8
1.
Degradation of their quality
2.
Degradation of their associated critical habitats
3.
Unsustainable use of their living and nonliving resources
These concerns are inextricably linked by their causes and by the cumulative, mutually
exacerbating effects of these causes on the transboundary concerns.
V. Imminent
Threats
Our International Waters are subject to a number of threats giving rise to the transboundary
concerns. The threats were examined from the perspective of critical species and their habitats, living
marine resources and non-living resources. We consider that the priority transboundary concerns for
our International Waters arise from the following imminent threats to the health of those waters:
1.
pollution of marine and freshwater (including groundwater) from land-based activities
2.
physical, ecological and hydrological modification of critical habitats
3.
unsustainable exploitation of living and nonliving resources
Each imminent threat affects each transboundary concern. The linkages between the imminent
threats to and the transboundary concerns for International Waters require integrated measures to
address the concerns effectively.
VI. Root
Causes
The root causes were examined in their legal, institutional, socio-economic and environmental
context. We recognized that an important, ultimate root cause underlying the imminent threats is
deficiencies in management. The factors contributing to the management root cause can be grouped
into two linked subsets: a) governance and b) understanding. The governance subset is characterised
by the need for mechanisms to integrate environmental concerns, development planning and
decision-making. The understanding subset is characterized by the need to achieve an island-wide
ecosystem awareness in our people. This provides a focus for intervention to protect International
Waters.
VII. Information
Gaps
Our analysis revealed a set of information gaps relevant in particular to decision-makers (as
opposed to researchers) who must address ultimate root causes and respond to imminent threats.
Particularly important is the lack of strategic information presented in an appropriate manner to
decision-makers, resource users, managers and communities to evaluate costs and benefits of, and to
decide between alternative activities. Improving information input and exchange at regional and
national levels is an objective of this SAP.
VIII. Proposed
Solutions
We propose to address the root causes of degradation of International Waters through
regionally consistent, country-driven targeted actions that integrate development and environment
9
needs. These actions are designed to encourage comprehensive, cross-sectoral, ecosystem-based
approaches to mitigate and prevent imminent threats to International Waters. The SAP provides the
regional framework within which actions are identified, developed and implemented. Targeted
actions will be carried out in two complementary, linked consultative contexts: Integrated Coastal and
Watershed Management (ICWM) and Oceanic Fisheries Management (OFM). Through the ICWM
and OFM approaches, the SAP sets out a path for the transition by our islands from sectoral to
integrated management of International Waters as a whole, which we consider to be essential for their
protection over the long term.
Management in these two contexts will necessarily include three other pressing concerns in
our sustainable development planning, namely: biodiversity, vulnerability to climate change and land
degradation. These are both GEF focal and cross-cutting areas, and the remaining three of the seven
major issues identified in the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of
SIDS as common to most islands. The other three major small island issues from the Barbados
Programme have already been addressed above, and the seventh, tourism, can only be effectively
dealt with in this type of framework for national sustainable development. The SAP also meets the
objectives of the GEF operational programme entitled "Integrated Land and Water Multiple Focal
Area," to which International Waters projects addressing the needs and special conditions of small
islands are assigned by GEF. Consequently, the SAP is expected to involve and build upon the
complementary skills and experience available from organizations and groups active in our region.
Our region is the beneficiary of much development assistance from a variety of donors for a
wide range of projects. We will be able to use the SAP together with our donors to plan and
coordinate regional and national development assistance for International Waters in order to address
imminent threats and their root causes more effectively. The SAP will facilitate the choice and design
of high priority interventions, remove duplication, and ensure that projects do not work at cross-
purposes. Funding from GEF per se can only support a small proportion of such interventions, hence
the importance of the SAP to organize and leverage additional assistance in order to receive
maximum benefit from available funds. The SAP is designed to comply with the requirements of
GEF, but also, and perhaps more importantly, to be a framework for overall national and regional
planning and assistance for the management of International Waters.
The SAP complies with the legal framework for regional cooperation and related obligations
established by the regional Conventions, the UN Convention on Law of the Sea, the Convention on
Biological Diversity, the Framework Convention on Climate Change and other international
conventions within which the Pacific Island countries identify common issues and coordinate national
approaches to address those issues. Application of ICWM and OFM approaches will facilitate further
joint action between sectors nationally and between governments regionally. As experience with
ICWM and OFM grows, this SAP will also evolve, reflecting the increased knowledge of and
changing conditions in the environment of our islands. To ensure that the SAP remains a living,
evolving and useful instrument for sustainable development, and to assess and apply lessons learned
from its implementation, the SAP will be reviewed every five years.
IX.
Priorities for Action
We are mindful that we cannot address all sustainable development issues related to
International Waters in this SAP at once. Therefore we have initially identified four high priority areas
10
for immediate intervention: improved waste management, better water quality, sustainable fisheries
and effective marine protected areas.
Targeted action within these activity areas is proposed in five categories: management,
capacity-building, awareness/education, research/information for decision-making, and investment.
Institutional strengthening is included under management and capacity-building.
The analytical framework within which proposals for assistance should be evaluated under
the SAP is set out below.
Goal of SAP: Integrated sustainable development and management of International Waters
Priority Concerns:
Degradation of water quality
Degradation of associated critical habitats
Unsustainable use of resources
Imminent Threats:
Pollution from land-based activities
Modification of critical habitats
Unsustainable exploitation of resources
Ultimate Root Causes:
Management deficiencies
a)
governance
b)
understanding
Solutions:
Integrated Coastal and Watershed Management
Oceanic Fisheries Management
ICWM Activity Areas:
- improved waste management
- better water quality
- sustainable fisheries
- effective marine protected areas
OFM Activity Areas:
- sustainable ocean fisheries
- improved national and regional management capability
- stock and by-catch monitoring and research
- enhanced national and regional management links
Targeted actions:
- management/institutional strengthening
-
capacity-building
-
awareness/education
- research/information for decision-making
-
investment
11
STRATEGIC ACTION PROGRAMME FOR INTERNATIONAL WATERS OF PACIFIC ISLANDS
I. Introduction
This Strategic Action Programme (SAP) for International Waters of the Pacific Islands
Region was initiated and developed by the thirteen Pacific Island States participating in the work
of the Global Environment Facility (GEF). The SAP represents a pioneering effort by our group of
small island developing states (SIDS) to integrate our national and regional sustainable
development priorities with shared global environmental concerns for the protection of
International Waters.
The seminal impetus for the work that would ultimately culminate in this SAP was our
decision1 in 1990 to prepare a joint regional position to the 1992 United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (UNCED). UNCED provided the first opportunity for our islands
to gather information, analyze the results and build a regional consensus on integrating
environmental and developmental concerns into a sustainable whole, using the knowledge and
experience gained in the twenty years since the Stockholm Conference on the Environment.
This consensus is embodied in the national and regional studies on sustainable
development of our SIDS and the constraints. Their conclusions have been approved by our
Governments. We undertook this considerable analytical effort because we realized the need for
collective action to achieve a sustainable future for our islands. An overview of this effort to date
follows; it became the starting point of the work of the National Task Forces leading to our SAP.
Our consensus position was elaborated in two fundamental documents submitted to
UNCED in 1992: Environment and Development: A Pacific Island Perspective, and The Pacific
Way: Pacific Island Developing Countries' Report to UNCED. The Perspective synthesizes
National Reports from the islands and presents extensive additional information on sustainable
development in the region.2 It is a supporting document for The Pacific Way, which presents a
summary of the state of the environment for the islands and a description of the regional priority
concerns, both of which continue to be applicable.3
At national level, Pacific Island States participating in this SAP assessed the state of their
environment. We then went on to develop National Environmental Management Strategies
(NEMS) or programmes with similar objectives, taking into account National Development Plans.
Nearly all of this work is either adopted and published or expected to be adopted and available
soon.4
1This decision was taken at the third Intergovernmental Meeting of the South Pacific Regional
Environment Programme (SPREP) held in Nouméa, New Caledonia, September 1990.
2The Perspective was developed with the financial assistance of the Asian Development Bank (ADB)
and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
3See, e.g., State of the Environment Reporting for the Pacific, 1996.
4NEMS: Cook Islands (1993), Federated States of Micronesia (1993), Kiribati (1994), Marshall
Islands (1992), Nauru (draft under consideration), Niue (1994), Samoa (1994), Solomon Islands
12
At regional level, and over the same period since UNCED, the members of the South Pacific
Organizations Coordinating Committee (SPOCC) reached similar conclusions within their
respective mandates on priority concerns for sustainable development. Examination of these
concerns engaged national experts in an ongoing regional dialogue, and enabled the islands to
compare experiences and develop regional approaches.5
We found further confirmation of our assessment of our priority regional concerns in
independent studies by, e.g., the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the World Bank,6 and in
GEF's Operational Strategy for International Waters. Independent reviews of our region's
International Waters were commissioned to ensure that the SAP is based on the most current
information available.7 These reviews concur that the ample and consistent information on
sustainable development concerns and priorities for action in the region remain applicable.
For detailed and extensive descriptions of the full, current regional and national picture of
environment and development in our islands, separate consultation is recommended of this
comprehensive suite of documentation.8 Section III of the SAP briefly summarizes the present
regional context from these sources, which were provided to the National Task Forces for further
ground-truthing during National Consultations for the preparation of the SAP.9
(1993), Tonga (1993), Tuvalu (unpublished). Fiji, Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu have completed
variants thereof.
5Examples of the range of topics addressed specifically to the needs of the region include: an
inventory of land-based pollutants, the role of sediments as pollutants in and their transport to
the ocean via rivers, an overview of destructive fishing practices, introduction of aquatic
organisms, coastal management training needs, coastal protection trends and prospects, issues and
activities associated with coral reefs and related ecosystems, natural resource accounting,
traditional resource management and oceanic and coastal fisheries management.
6See, e.g., A Pacific Framework for Integrated Coastal Management (1994), ADB; Pacific Island
Economies (1993), World Bank.
7The reviews especially commissioned for the SAP are: Review of Critical Marine Habitats and
Species in the Pacific Islands Region by Chris Bleakley (1997); Review of Fishery Management Issues
and Regimes in the Pacific Islands Region, by Garry L. Preston (1997); A Review of Non-living
Resources and Threats in the Pacific Region, by Russell Howorth (1997); Strategies for Preventing
and Mitigating Land-based Sources of Pollution to Transboundary Water Resources in the Pacific
Region (1997), by Nancy S. Convard and Andrew Tomlinson.
8This work includes, e.g., the reports of the National Consultations, the State of the
Environment Report or NEMS, the Action Plan for Managing the Environment of the South Pacific Region
1997-2000, the Draft Regional Strategy for Development Priorities of the Forum Island Countries, the
Action Strategy for Nature Conservation in the South Pacific Region 1994-1998, the Report to the
United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) on Activities to Implement the Barbados
Programme of Action in the Pacific Region (1996) and the 1992 report to UNCED in The Pacific Way.
This documentation is fully referenced in the Bibliography, Annex 1.
9The reports of the National Task Forces are appended to the SAP in Annex 7.
13
Since UNCED we have been actively involved in international programmes of action to
address those global transboundary concerns which also reflect our priority transboundary
concerns. These programmes have been taken into account in the SAP.10
Our islands are widely scattered across but closely linked by the Pacific Ocean and they are
remarkably diverse. Yet the very existence of this SAP and its profoundly country-driven nature
demonstrate our determination to continue to seek a constructive unity in our diversity. With this
SAP we aim to enhance a strong history of regional cooperation in sustainably improving the
quality of life and protecting our fragile environment for our island peoples in a way that will
achieve national, regional and global benefits.
II. International
Waters
For purposes of this SAP, International Waters are defined in accordance with GEF's
Operational Strategy. International Waters include oceans, large marine ecosystems, enclosed or
semi-enclosed seas and estuaries as well as rivers, lakes, groundwater systems, and wetlands with
transboundary drainage basins or common borders.
The water-related ecosystems and critical habitats associated with these waters are integral
parts of International Waters, which extend inland and seaward. This is because the global
hydrological cycle links watersheds, airsheds, estuaries, and coastal and marine waters through
transboundary movement of water, pollutants and living resources. Oceans drive the hydrology
and the climate of the planet. International Waters encompass all our islands and their health
determines the quality of our life there.
GEF's definition of International Waters, with its emphasis on linkages between fresh and
marine waters, watersheds and coasts, habitats and resources, could have been designed with our
Pacific Islands in mind. Although separated by vast distances, our islands are linked and
controlled by our marine environment. The waters and ecosystems within and between our
Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) are vital to our existence. Our land-to-sea ratio is generally so
small that, with the possible exception of the largest land masses of Papua New Guinea, all our
islands are wholly coastal in character. This means that the whole island influences, or is
influenced by, marine coastal and nearshore activities and processes. It also means that a natural or
anthropogenic disaster such as a cyclone or an pollution accident often affects the entire society
and economy of an island.
10 The international programmes addressing our region's priority transboundary concerns in
particular include:
- the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States
(SIDS). To coordinate and facilitate its implementation, the South Pacific Forum set up an Advisory
Committee in 1994. The Committee's achievements so far are described in its regionally agreed 1996
Report to the UNCSD. The report also reviews priority concerns and needed actions.
- the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based
Activities (GPA/LBA), adopted in 1995; regional implementation has commenced in the context of the
South Pacific Regional Pollution Prevention, Waste Minimisation and Management Programme.
- the International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI), adopted in 1995; implementation has begun of a
specific Pacific Region Strategy developed and endorsed by Forum Island Countries.
14
The twenty-two countries and territories of the Pacific Islands region consist of only 550,000
km2 of land with 5.2 million inhabitants spread across 29 million km2 of ocean. If Papua New
Guinea is excluded, the figures drop to 87,587 km2 and 2.2 million people. In contrast, our EEZs
occupy about one-sixth of the earth's surface, or more than 30 million km2. This area is three times
larger than either the USA or China.
The importance of International Waters to our islands cannot be overstated; especially
important are those waters and associated habitats in the coastal and nearshore area. It is here that
most of our people already live and work in ways that are dependent on healthy International
Waters. Here also is focused most national planning for a variety of activities intended to enhance
our prosperity by expanding our economic base. The success of national development planning for
our SIDS is wholly dependent on the continued health of our International Waters.
III. The
Region
A. Physical
Setting
In addition to being widely separated from each other as nations, within our individual,
national borders we are also widely dispersed. Other than Nauru and Niue, which are single-
island countries, we are archipelagic. Many of our constituent islands are separated by vast
expanses of ocean, entailing a unique set of sustainable development challenges.
The islands are of two basic types: a) "high," which are large, mainly of volcanic rock,
forested, with fertile soil and usually with ample fresh water and b) "low," which are small, often
atolls, mainly of coralline limestone, with few trees, poor soil and, usually, little fresh water.11 The
type of island is a major determinant of the types of ecosystems present and of the sustainable
development options available.12
Climate conditions vary in the high islands; smaller islands have mild and humid weather
with rainfall typically of 2m or more per year. All the islands lie in tropical latitudes, where sea
surface temperatures generally stay above 20oC. These tropical areas are subject to trade winds and
vulnerable to devastating cyclones both north and south of the equator.13
B. Biological
Environment
The island nations have distinctly different terrestrial ecosystems ranging from very
diverse and high endemism in large mountainous high islands to the west to quite low diversity
and endemism in small low islands and atolls to the east. For some islands, 80% or more of the
resident species are endemic. The high endemism is due to the isolated evolution of island species,
11Howorth (1997), op. cit. at note 7.
12Bleakley (1997), op. cit. at note 7.
13Howorth (1997), op. cit. at note 7.
15
which also renders these ecosystems vulnerable to disturbance, with a limited ability to recover
once disturbed.14 Any habitat loss on a high island is likely to contribute to extinction of flora and
fauna. Susceptibility to such loss depends heavily on the state of the native forests, which must be
considered a habitat whose health is as critical to our islands' well-being as is the health of our
coastal habitats. Indeed, the health of the latter is intimately linked with the health of the former.15
Our region is one of the global centers of marine biological diversity which provides the
basis for the wealth of living natural resources whose benefits are shared by our communities and
the rest of the world. The Western Pacific has the highest marine diversity and the most extensive
coral reef systems in the world.16
The
marine habitats and species most critical to our sustainable development are briefly
described below, although the importance of terrestrial habitats, especially forests, must not be
forgotten.17 They are interdependent parts of complex natural processes, including food chains,
biogeochemical cycles, sediment fluxes and currents. As such they are linked to the global
environment. They are also central to our social and economic well-being. It is not possible to
single out one habitat or species for separate management in our region.18
1.
Critical
Habitats
a. Coral
reefs
Coral reefs are associated with all our islands and are the most important and extensive of
the types of ecosystems in our region. Coral reefs provide a variety of vertebrate and invertebrate
fishery resources for both commercial and subsistence purposes. They also provide income from
tourism, coastal protection, sand for beaches, construction materials, reservoirs of biodiversity,
breeding, nursery, feeding and shelter habitats and environmental health indicators.
b. Mangroves
Mangroves are common in the western part of the region and decline towards the east; in
the region covered by this SAP only Cook Islands have none. The other Pacific Island nations each
have a unique mangrove community structure.19 They help maintain coastal water quality by
14Bleakley (1997), op. cit. at note 7.
15The Perspective (1992), op. cit. at note 2, pp. 194-198.
16Bleakley (1997), op. cit. at note 7; Global Marine Biological Diversity (1993), edited by
Elliott A. Norse.
17Unless otherwise indicated, the information which follows, up to the section addressing fish,
is principally drawn from Bleakley (1997), op. cit. at note 7.
18Pacific Regional Report on the Issues and Activities Associated with Coral Reefs and Related
Ecosystems (1996).
19ICRI Pacific Regional Workshop (1996).
16
acting as a sink for sediments, nutrients, pollutants and contaminants; they provide coastal
protection, breeding, nursery, feeding and shelter habitats, a variety of vertebrate and invertebrate
fishery resources for both commercial and subsistence purposes, commercial and traditional uses
for construction and handicraft materials, fuel wood, medicines, fungicides and dyes.
c. Seagrass
beds
Like mangroves, seagrass beds are common in the west and decline towards the east; in the
SAP region, only Cook Islands, Nauru and Niue20 have none. They stabilise coastal sediments,
provide breeding, nursery, feeding and shelter habitats, are critically important to the endangered
dugong and sea turtle species, help to maintain coastal water quality by trapping and recycling
nutrients and contribute significantly to coastal productivity.
d.
Lagoons and Beaches
The region's lagoons vary widely, from those broadly open to the ocean to those that are
completely enclosed, resulting in unique combinations of conditions and species. Lagoon fisheries
are an important resource. Beaches are a dynamic and constantly changing coastal feature found
throughout the region, and include landward dunes and sand bars and sand reservoirs offshore to
seaward. They provide coastal protection, a tourist attraction, sand for cement and nesting areas
for marine turtles.
e. Estuaries
Estuaries are common on high islands with well-developed watersheds. They support
mangrove and seagrass areas, breeding, nursery, feeding and shelter habitats and a variety of
vertebrate and invertebrate fishery resources for both commercial and subsistence purposes.
Estuaries are among the richest and most productive of coastal habitats.
f.
The Western Pacific Warm Pool Large Marine Ecosystem
Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs) are regions where physical conditions and biological
communities are so intricately linked and interdependent that the area should be managed as a
whole.21 So far 49 potential LMEs have been identified; these are more coastal than oceanic.22
Recent research suggests that the Western Pacific Warm Pool might be an appropriate oceanic
LME, whose boundaries correspond almost precisely to those of the Western Pacific tuna fishery,
20Ibid.
21Large Marine Ecosystems "are large regions, often over 200,000 km2, that have unique
bathymetry, hydrography and productivity, and within which populations of plants and animals are
assumed to have adapted reproductive, growth and feeding strategies, and where the close linking of
physical conditions, biological communities and fish stocks indicate that the area should be managed
as a single unit. They include upwellings, semi-enclosed seas, shallow shelf ecosystems on western
ocean boundaries, coral reefs, ocean shelf-deltaic-riverain interactive systems." (Description by
Sherman and Alexander, quoted in: A Global Representative System of Marine Protected Areas, Volume
1, p. 12, 1995.)
22Preston (1997), op. cit. at note 7.
17
and which appear to encompass a functional physical and ecological unit which is of global
significance.23
2. Critical
species
These species tend to share a number of the following characteristics (in no particular
order): they are economically valuable, nutritionally important, relatively rare, sedentary, easy to
catch or collect, slow-growing, slow to reach maturity and reproduce, important to ecosystem
maintenance (keystone species), have few offspring and are found towards the upper end of the
food chain.
Because of their enormous economic and nutritional value, the region's fish are considered
critical as a group, which include four main tuna target species (albacore, big-eye, skipjack and
yellowfin), tuna by-catch species, and fish found in reefs and lagoons. At least 3,392 distinct
species of reef and inshore fish are known to occur in the region, which is more than half of those
known to occur worldwide. By-catch species include billfish and oceanic sharks, as fish; also
critical as a by-catch group are non-fish species, especially dolphins, turtles and seabirds.
Other economically and nutritionally critical species24 in the region are: turtles, sharks,
trochus, green snail, bêche-de-mer, giant clams, spiny lobster, coconut and mangrove crabs,
helmet, trumpet and conch shells. The species critical for other reasons listed above are: dugongs,
marine mammals, saltwater crocodile, and certain seabirds. The latter groups of species, and at
least two species of seabirds in the region are already classified as vulnerable, threatened or
endangered.
C. Cultural
Characteristics
Ethnically, the islands are usually classified as either Melanesian (75% of the region's
population), Micronesian or Polynesian. Their linguistic diversity is remarkable. The peoples of
Melanesia, in particular, and those of Micronesia speak a large number of separate languages, and
all are different from the languages of Polynesia. For example, more than 700 languages are spoken
in Papua New Guinea, and over 100 in both Solomon Islands and Vanuatu; the four states of the
Federated States of Micronesia each speak at least one different language. In Polynesia, each
country usually has one language, but that language is very different as between countries. One-
fourth of the world's languages are found in Pacific Island countries. This myriad of different
languages is vital to social and cultural identity and to transfer traditional knowledge between
generations, but it also adds considerable complexity in developing and implementing national
management plans, especially at village level.25
23Ibid.
24These species are also identified as critical by Preston (1997), op. cit. at note 7.
25The Perspective (1992), op. cit. at Note 2.
18
Various traditional authority systems exist; these are mostly matrilineal in Micronesia,
patrilineal in Polynesia and vary in Melanesia, depending on the dominant members of a given
society there. Religious institutions have enormous influence. The status and position of women
differs considerably among Pacific Island states because of factors such as cultural traditions,
colonial history and level of socio-economic development.
Perhaps the most distinctive cultural characteristic relevant to our sustainable development
is the communal ownership and traditional systems of management of land, and usually the
adjacent marine area, and the resources of both. This is prevalent in almost all island states, where
up to 80% of land is under communal ownership. In many cases fishing rights are maintained from
the beach to the seaward edge of outer reefs, and in some cases further offshore.26
Specific ownership and management forms vary widely throughout the region, but all are
essentially kin-based and subsistence-oriented.27 These are not strictly systems of property or
territory in the Western sense, but are complex and profound expressions of a given island's social
structure.28 These traditional land and marine management and tenure systems also carry with
them valuable knowledge about associated resources. In many local communities, chiefs maintain
control over communal land and resource use, usually with powers that parallel and often
supersede those of the national government.29
Our traditional systems must be associated with achieving current economic, political and
social goals of our islands. It will be difficult but it is essential to include appropriate and
significant principles of traditional systems in national development planning and implementation
if these plans are to be truly sustainable.
D. Economic
Structure
Our island states are at different levels of economic development, which can vary widely
even within one state. Nevertheless, our economies generally share the following elements, in no
particular order:30 a narrow resource base, small domestic markets, high costs for energy, access,
infrastructure, transportation, communication and servicing; substantial dependence on imported
petroleum and on external trade, long distances from export markets and import sources, low and
lumpy international traffic volumes, vulnerability and little resilience to natural disasters (at
26Bleakley, op. cit. at note 7, p. 18.
27Land Tenure in the Pacific (1987), edited by Ron Crocombe.
28Traditional Resource Management in the Melanesian South Pacific: A Development Dilemma (1997),
by G.B.K. Baines.
29The Perspective (1992), op. cit. at Note 2.
30The following is compiled from several sources, including: The Perspective (1992), op. cit. at
note 2; the Pacific Way (1992), op. cit. at note 8; Pacific Island Economies (1993), op. cit. at
note 6; Report to UNCSD on the Barbados Programme of Action (1996), op. cit. at note 8; Bleakley
(1997) and Preston (1997), op. cit. at note 7, and comments from the Forum Secretariat (1997).
19
present cyclones generally, earthquakes in certain countries, and possibly sea level rise in the
future), burgeoning populations, low economic growth, domination by the public sector, limited
opportunities for the private sector, and fragile natural environments.
For the region overall economic growth since the early 1980s has been very low.31
Meanwhile, our population has been growing at a natural rate of at least 2.3% per year, a rate
which was already considered unsustainable at the beginning of this decade.32 In many of our
countries per capita GDP has been declining, or, at best, remaining stagnant. Youth unemployment
is one particularly worrying concern. The mutually exacerbating combination of high natural
population growth and low economic growth is probably the most important long-term
sustainable development issue facing our islands.33
Population distribution varies widely. Migration to urban areas, usually the national or
provincial capital, is steadily increasing. These urban areas are invariably located on the coast. The
urban growth rate is at least 50-100% higher than the already large overall population growth
rates.34 National averages do not adequately reflect the actual densities found in some parts of the
countries, many of which have extraordinarily high concentrations of people in the urban area and
very low densities in rural parts of the "capital" island and on outer islands. Already in the early
nineties, seven of our countries were more than 50% urban, and the others had at least a quarter of
their population living in urban areas.
A distinctive economic characteristic of our region is the predominance of non-monetary
subsistence production to provide for basic needs. Both the monetary and subsistence economies
of our states are largely based on agriculture, fisheries and tourism. Agriculture, fisheries and
tourism are critically dependent on a healthy environment. National economies are augmented by
substantial development aid and, particularly in Polynesia, by cash remittances from relatives
overseas. The significance of cash remittances varies widely in the region; they are not reflected in
GDP figures.
Agriculture is the largest employer, producing subsistence food such as root crops and
garden vegetables and primary commodities such as copra and other coconut products, cocoa,
sugar (Fiji) and coffee for export income. Timber production and mining is significant in parts of
Melanesia. Non-traditional crops are being tried, such as vanilla and ornamental flowers.
Some smaller, atoll islands are physically unable to produce enough food for their populations and
must depend upon imported food. Other islands depend on imported food to the extent that their
land is being used for export crops.
31The six World Bank Pacific Member Countries (Fiji, Kiribati, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga and
Vanuatu) averaged 2.2% growth from 1983-1993; the GDPs of most Pacific Island countries fluctuated
around 1-3% during 1994-1995.
32The Pacific Way (1992), op. cit. at note 8; Pacific Island Economies (1993), op. cit. at note
6.
33Preston (1997), op. cit. at note 7; UNDP (1994), cited therein, p. 10.
34Bleakley, op. cit. at note 7, p. 18.
20
Despite the importance of agriculture, the amount of arable land per capita in the region is
small; atolls have the poorest soil and a consequently even higher dependence on marine resources
than high islands. Compared with our tiny land area, the economic importance and potential of
our extensive marine area is considerable. Currently, this potential is primarily manifested in the
fisheries sector. A brief overview follows.35
Fisheries in the region operate on a variety of scales: at one end are large-scale, high-
technology, export-oriented industrial fisheries and at the other are small, labor-intensive, low-
technology, subsistence and artisanal fisheries for domestic consumption, with a mix of methods
and outlets falling between these two extremes. Although there is some degree of overlap, the
sector is usually analysed in two categories:
a) oceanic fisheries, which primarily include the international tuna fishery straddling the Western
Central Pacific Ocean
b) coastal fisheries, which include reefs, lagoons and estuaries.
The oceanic fishery produces about 1 million tonnes of tuna and an unknown quantity of
by-catch per year, most of which is harvested by about 1,300 fishing vessels from 21 countries.
About 7% of the catch is taken by Pacific Islanders, and around 400 industrial-scale tuna vessels
are based in Pacific Island countries. The annual expenditure of these locally based vessels is
estimated at about $100 million.
The international tuna fishery provides our region with an important source of export
revenue, largely through access license fees, although these are a small proportion (about 3.7% or
USD$68 million) of the total value of the regional tuna catch, which was USD$1.7 billion in 1995,
up from about USD$375 million in 1982. The tuna catch now represents around 10% of the
combined GDP of all the nations of the region, and a third of the value of all exports from the
region. It provides 6-8% of all wage employment in the region. About 10,000 Pacific Islanders are
formally employed on tuna vessels and in tuna processing plants; direct and indirect tuna-related
employment is estimated at between 21,000-31,000 people. In terms of actual food, however, less
than 0.25% of the international tuna catch enters the domestic food supply of our islands.
The Pacific Islands region is the most important tuna fishing area of the world. About a
third of all tuna in the world comes from this region, and its tuna fisheries dwarf those of the other
three main tuna fishing areas both in volume and value. From a regional perspective, tuna
produces over nine times the amount of fish as all of the other fisheries of the region combined. In
terms of value, the tuna fishery is worth over six times that of all other Pacific Island fisheries
combined.
35A comprehensive review of living marine resource management regimes and issues specially
commissioned for this SAP is found in Preston (1997), op. cit. at note 7. The discussion of tuna
fisheries is derived from this review and from written comments on this section by the Forum
Fisheries Agency.
21
The coastal fishery produces about 108,000 tonnes per year of a highly diverse range of
finfish (including tuna), invertebrates and algae by thousands of male and female subsistence,
artisanal and commercial fishers from the region itself. Tuna forms a substantial component of the
catch of both subsistence and artisanal fisheries, and in terms of volume tuna appears to be the
most important family of fish for small-scale fisheries.
The contribution of the fishery sector to public health and welfare is often insufficiently
appreciated. Fisheries and related activities have cultural, religious and recreational significance
that are vital to social and community cohesion.
In addition to employment, coastal fisheries provide a key source of subsistence protein:
only about 20% of the fish and invertebrate catch enters the cash economy. Tuna makes up a
substantial portion of all fish consumed, especially in the most economically vulnerable countries
of the region. Fish is nutritionally essential to households that are unable to obtain equally
sustaining alternative protein sources. The food security situation in several Pacific Island
countries, many of which are already categorized by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO)
as Low Income Food Deficit Countries, would be even more precarious in the absence of tuna and
other fish. Future population pressures, together with the fully exploited nature of inshore and
coastal fisheries, mean that the future food security of the region will become increasingly more
reliant on its tuna resources.
The quantity of non-tuna exports from domestic capture fisheries is perhaps 5% of coastal
fishery production, derived from bottom fish, reef fish and crustaceans. The principal exports by
value are bêche-de-mer and shell products from trochus and green snail.
The economic contribution of the fishery sector as a whole to the region must not be
underestimated, especially because national assessments significantly undervalue its actual
importance to national GDP because of inadequate accounting for artisanal and subsistence
production.
Women play an important economic role in inshore marine resource use; they, rather than
men, are the principal regular suppliers of marine protein for the family meal. The men tend to fish
further offshore and for more commercial purposes.36 A large proportion of the subsistence
fishery for family consumption is comprised of invertebrates, which are gathered almost
exclusively by women.37 Their role as a source of information on the status of the coastal
environment is critical, and their involvement in managing the environment is essential to
successful management.38
36Preston and Bleakley (1997), op. cit. at note 7, both strongly emphasise this point in their
reviews.
37Preston (1997), op. cit. at note 7, p. 18.
38Bleakley (1997), op. cit. at note 7, p. 16.
22
Tourism is showing substantial growth in the region, with receipts of US$ 723 million,
representing about 5% of the region's GDP, in 1994. Receipts were nearing US$ 1 billion in 1996.
This regional aggregate does not adequately define the importance of tourism to individual
economies, with two countries not participating in this SAP accounting for about 42% of those
receipts.39 The aggregate figure also does not reflect the different levels of development of tourism
in countries in the region. Tourism has considerable economic potential if managed sustainably.
The South Pacific region has ideal resources to satisfy the growing interest in cultural and eco-
tourism. If development is undertaken so as not to erode the environmental conditions, it will
enable the region's unique products to be offered in a highly competitive international market.
Tourism places an economic value on cultural and natural resources that can ensure the resources
are used in a sustainable manner. Tourism is critically dependent on the management of a healthy
environment.
E. Legal
Framework
1. International
Our Pacific Island States are linked in a complex group of binding regional and global
international agreements which govern sustainable development of International Waters in
general and the marine sector in particular. These agreements form an extensive and evolving
international legal framework within which our sustainable development activities take place and
with which our present and planned activities must comply, for those of us who are full parties, or
at least not undermine, for those of us who are as yet only signatories. The SAP is designed to be
consistent with and assist in the implementation of our international commitments.
To keep this section to a size somewhat proportionate with the remainder of this overview,
the discussion is necessarily brief and furthermore limited to agreements immediately related to
the highest priorities, which are primarily land-based, identified in the SAP. Hence it was not
possible to address the important, complex and extensive suite of treaties developed under the
auspices of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) dealing with the activities of vessels.
Nevertheless, we recognise that, under UNCLOS and the SPREP Convention, the IMO treaties
must be addressed as well, and in particular those treaties dealing with vessel-source pollution.
Waste management is identified as one of the priority issues under this SAP, and integrated waste
management planning requires the inclusion of vessel-based waste.
a.
The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
From the plethora of treaties addressing or affecting International Waters, the most
important for this SAP is the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS,
entry into force: 1994), which is the fundamental global treaty addressing International Waters. Of
all relevant binding international instruments in force, it is by far the most comprehensive in scope
and the most powerful in terms of both rights accorded to and obligations assumed by its parties.
39French Polynesia and New Caledonia. Of those states participating in the SAP, Fiji, Papua New
Guinea, Vanuatu, Samoa, Solomon Islands and Tonga, in descending order of receipts, all had tourism
income in 1996 ranging from US$ 301 million in Fiji to US$ 12.6 million in Tonga, according to the
latest figures released by the Tourism Council of the South Pacific (TCSP).
23
All but one of the countries participating in the SAP are either full parties (9) or signatories (3) to
UNCLOS.40 UNCLOS is supplemented by an agreement on deep seabed mining41 and the
Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea....Relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly
Migratory Fish Stocks.42
UNCLOS has been described as "a constitution for the oceans."43 This Convention arose
from and is specifically founded on the proposition that "the problems of ocean space are closely
interrelated and need to be considered as a whole."44 This guiding precept is illustrated clearly
by, for example, Part XII on the marine environment, which addresses pollution of the marine
environment from any source, including those sources from land and air as well as from the sea. In
keeping with its constitutional nature, UNCLOS is designed to facilitate development of
agreements addressing or affecting specific marine issues in requisite detail and at appropriate
operational levels. In its holistic approach to management of International Waters, GEF's
Operational Strategy is consistent with UNCLOS.
Although much remains to be done in our region to implement UNCLOS,45 compatible
actions undertaken pursuant to other international and regional conventions addressing or
affecting marine issues may be viewed as a promising start to implementing UNCLOS as well, as
are compatible actions developed in the context of international and regional organisations
addressing and affecting marine issues. Such conventions, organisations and actions include those
described below and in the following two parts of this overview.
b.
The Convention on Biological Diversity
40As of 25 July 1997, full parties are: Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji,
Marshall Islands, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands and Tonga; signatories are: Niue,
Tuvalu and Vanuatu. Kiribati is not a signatory.
41Agreement Relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea (adopted 1994).
42As of July 25, 1997, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Nauru, Papua New
Guinea, Solomon Islands, Samoa and Tonga have become parties; Vanuatu is a signatory.
43Remarks by H.E. Tommy T.B. Koh, President of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of
the Sea, at the final session of the Conference in December 1982. The Law of the Sea, UN Official
Text (1983), p. xxxiii.
44UNCLOS, Preamble, third paragraph. The Law of the Sea. UN Official Text (1983), p. 1. Attempts
in the nineteen fifties and sixties to deal with ocean issues individually in separate treaties had
been unsuccessful.
45See, e.g., Environmental Law in the South Pacific (1996), edited by Ben Boer; Evaluation of
the Implications of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea for SPREP Activities (1996),
by Martin Tsamenyi.
24
In the context of this SAP, which requires linkages to other GEF focal areas, the Convention
on Biological Diversity46 (CBD, 1992) and the Framework Convention on Climate Change47
(FCCC, 1992) are important.
In implementing the CBD, the Jakarta Mandate on Marine and Coastal Biological Diversity
(1995) sets out a programme specifying that action should be taken by parties in five areas; the first
three are particularly relevant to this SAP and in the same order of priority action: Integrated
Marine and Coastal Area Management, Marine and Coastal Protected Areas and Sustainable Use
of Coastal and Living Marine Resources.48
In the Pacific Islands region, implementation of the CBD has commenced through the South
Pacific Biodiversity Conservation Programme (SPBCP). It is funded by GEF and executed by
SPREP, containing regional and national, terrestrial and marine components with local community
participation as a unifying theme. The SPBCP has supported the establishment of sixteen
community-based conservation area projects in the region. Two species-focused regional
programmes consistent with the CBD and UNCLOS are the Marine Turtle and the Marine
Mammal Conservation Strategies, executed by SPREP.
As required under UNCLOS and the CBD, the SAP also took into account other
international conventions specifically concerned with protection of species and habitats. These
include (in order of entry into force): the Whaling Convention,49 the World Heritage
Convention,50 CITES,51 the Wetlands or Ramsar Convention52 and the Migratory Species or Bonn
Convention (1979).53 A draft Regional Wetlands Action Plan for the Pacific Islands has been
developed under the auspices of SPREP that could assist in implementing relevant provisions of,
46In 1996 10 Pacific Island states participating in this SAP are parties to the CBD: Cook
Islands, Fiji, Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Papua New Guinea,
Samoa, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu. Non-parties are Niue, Tonga and Tuvalu.
47Only Tonga is not a party to the FCCC, of the countries participating in this SAP.
48The other two are: Implementing Environmentally Sustainable Mariculture Practice and
Introduction of Alien Species. This list is taken from: Biodiversity in the Seas (1996), by de
Fontaubert et al. Note that these are also issues in the Pacific Islands region, but they have not
been identified for immediate priority action under this SAP.
49International Convention on the Regulation of Whaling, Washington, 1946 and Protocol,
International Whaling Commission, 1956.
50Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, Paris, 1972.
None of the participants in this SAP are parties; only Solomon Islands and Fiji are signatories.
51Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, Washington, 1973. Of the states
participating in this SAP, only Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu are parties.
52The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat,
Ramsar, 1971 (entry into force: 1975; 1982 Protocol). Of those participating in this SAP, only Papua
New Guinea is a party.
53Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, Bonn, 1979.
25
e.g., the CBD, the Wetlands Convention and UNCLOS.54 The actions proposed in this SAP are
compatible with the CBD and will contribute directly and indirectly to the conservation of marine
and terrestrial biological diversity in our region.
c. The Framework Convention on Climate Change
Comprehensive and coordinated support by GEF to the Pacific Island parties for
implementation of their national reporting obligations under the FCCC commenced in 1997 under
the Pacific Islands Climate Change Assistance Project (PICCAP), executed by SPREP. A second
phase of CC:TRAIN, the GEF-funded global climate change training programme, is expected to
assist at least nine Pacific Island countries.
Pacific Islands are particularly vulnerable to the effects that climate change may have on
sea level rise. The actions proposed in this SAP with regard to, in particular, protection of critical
habitats, will have the additional benefit of mitigating effects of sea level rise.
2. Regional
The main regional conventions relevant to International Waters are, in order of entry into
force: the Forum Fisheries Convention,55 the Wellington or Driftnet Convention,56 the Apia
Convention,57 the Nouméa or SPREP Convention58 and the Niue Treaty.59 Not yet in force is the
Waigani Convention.60 The Forum Fisheries, Wellington and Niue Conventions address oceanic
fisheries.
54Annex 6.2 of the Report of the ICRI Pacific Regional Workshop (1995).
55The South Pacific Forum Fisheries Convention, Honiara, 1979.
56The Convention for the Prohibition of Fishing with Long Driftnets in the South Pacific,
Wellington, 1989.
57The Convention on the Conservation of Nature in the South Pacific, Apia, 1990.
58The Convention for the Protection of Natural Resources and Environment of the South Pacific
Region and its two Protocols on, respectively, prevention of pollution by dumping and cooperation in
combating pollution emergencies, Nouméa, 1990. Of the Pacific Island States participating in this
SAP, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Papua New Guinea,
Samoa and Solomon Islands are parties; Tuvalu is a signatory; Kiribati, Niue, Tonga and Vanuatu are
not signatories.
59The Treaty on Cooperation in Surveillance and Law Enforcement in the South Pacific, Niue,
1993.
60The Convention to Ban the Importation into Forum Island Countries of Hazardous and Radioactive
Wastes and to Control the Transboundary Movement and Management of Hazardous Wastes within the South
Pacific Region, Waigani, adopted in September 1995, not yet in force.
26
The Nouméa Convention places the most extensive responsibilities on its parties with
regard to protecting the marine environment. The Nouméa Convention includes land-based
activities affecting the marine environment; thus parties also have terrestrial obligations under this
Convention, as they do under UNCLOS. It is implemented largely through the SPREP Action Plan
(currently 1997-2000), which is approved by the Heads of Government at the annual SPREP
meeting, who also review the progress of the Action Plan.
The Apia Convention addresses both terrestrial and marine habitats. It is implemented
through an Action Strategy adopted at a dedicated Conference held every four years. The
achievements of the current Action Strategy61 will be reviewed at the Sixth Conference, to be held
in Pohnpei in October 1997. The Action Strategy also aims to ensure consistency with the CBD and
its implementing programmes, in particular the SPBCP and other relevant regional plans.
In this section attention has primarily been given to legally binding international and
regional treaties and conventions. A number of non-binding but widely endorsed international
instruments relevant to this SAP have been considered.62 Despite their non-binding nature, these
instruments are useful in developing state practice and in helping to establish a presumption in
favor of such practice becoming "generally recommended," a status which, under UNCLOS,
contributes to the eventual evolution of that practice into international law.63
3. National
At national level, implementation of conventions has been fragmentary. This is due to
several factors, including a limited awareness of the implications of the conventions and the extent
of the obligations imposed. These obligations engage numerous divisions of national
administrations, which need enhanced capacity to develop cross-sectoral approaches. A related
issue is the general need for Pacific Island nations to develop integrated national legislation that
supports sustainable development policies, and that is also consistent, enforceable and in keeping
with appropriate customary principles. The requisite institutional and administrative capacity and
mechanisms are largely insufficient at present.64
61 Action Strategy for Nature Conservation in the Pacific Region 1994-1998, adopted at the Fifth
South Pacific Conference on Nature Conservation and Protected Areas, Tonga, October 1993.
62Such instruments include (in order of adoption): Agenda 21 (1992), the Barbados Programme of
Action for SIDS (4/1994), the International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI, 5/1994), the Code of
Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (10/1995), the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of
the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities (11/1995) and the ICRI Pacific Regional Strategy
(12/1995).
63The Duty to Respect Generally Accepted International Standards (1991), by Bernard H. Oxman.
64See, e.g., Environmental Law in the South Pacific (1996), op. cit. at note 45; the critical
reviews by, respectively, Bleakley, Convard, Howorth and Preston (1997), op. cit. at note 7;
Evaluation of Implications of UNCLOS for SPREP Activities (1996), op. cit. at note 45; Report on the
Sub-regional Meetings to Identify Coastal Management Training Needs, by SPREP (1995), Overview of
Destructive Fishing Practices in the Pacific Island Region, by Joeli Veitayaki et al. (1995),
Pacific Island Economies (1993), op. cit. at note 6; The Perspective (1992), op. cit. at note 2; The
Pacific Way (1992), op. cit. at note 8.
27
F. Intergovernmental
Cooperation
Intergovernmental cooperation for Pacific Island development started again after World
War II, with the establishment in 1947 of the South Pacific Commission (SPC), the oldest
intergovernmental organisation in the South Pacific. As the issues to be addressed by the
governments of the region increased in scope and complexity, four other regional
intergovernmental organisations with different mandates were created between 1971 and 1979.65
Their activities are coordinated by the South Pacific Organisations Coordinating Committee
(SPOCC), formed for that purpose. The role and function of each organisation are regularly
reviewed.66 The regional system for dealing with marine issues spans an extensive range of
activities.
The South Pacific Commission (SPC), with 27 members, is one of the major general
development agencies in our region. Under its apolitical mandate, it provides advisory,
consultative and training services to governments on scientific, economic, social, environmental,
health, agricultural, rural development, community health, education, demographic and cultural
matters. Its broad marine experience ranges from village-level and coastal projects such as transfer
of appropriate boat-building technology, subsistence and artisanal fisheries research and
development, coastal fishery stock assessment and protection, all through its Coastal Fisheries
Programme, to scientific research on oceanic fisheries, especially tuna and billfish, in its Oceanic
Fisheries Programme. The latter prepares an annual report on the status of tuna stocks, monitors
and compiles regional tuna fishery statistics, and is studying the dynamics of the Warm Pool of the
Western Pacific, an LME which encompasses much of the region. The SPC works closely with the
Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) in this area.
The Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) was established pursuant to the Forum Fisheries
Convention (FFC) in 1979, and serves as the FFC's secretariat. The FFA developed from the
consideration that a regional approach would be an effective way for Pacific Island countries to
capitalise on opportunities being created in the mid-1970s by the Third United Nations Conference
on the Law of the Sea, which were dramatically altering international thinking on ownership,
65These four are, chronologically: the South Pacific Forum (SPF), convened for the first time in
1971 with its Secretariat established in Suva, Fiji in 1973; what is now known as the South Pacific
Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC), created in 1972, also based in Fiji; The South Pacific
Regional Environment Programme (SPREP), created in 1976 and now based in Apia, Samoa; the South
Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA), established in 1979 and based in Honiara, Solomon Islands. The
other members of SPOCC are (in alphabetical order): the Pacific Islands Development Programme (PIDP)
at the East-West Center in Honolulu, HI, the Tourism Council for the South Pacific (TCSP) in Suva,
Fiji, and the University of the South Pacific (USP), with several branches in the region and
headquartered in Suva, Fiji.
Unless otherwise indicated, the information in this section is based on the final report of
the review of regional institutional arrangements in the marine sector, commissioned by SPOCC,
(1995), The Perspective (1992) op. cit. at note 2, and comments from SPOCC members (1997).
66A review focussing on institutional arrangements in the marine sector, was commissioned by
SPOCC and completed in 1995. The recommendations of the review of ForSec have now been implemented.
A review of SPC was undertaken earlier this year.
28
management and use of ocean resources.67 FFA's 16 members include 14 Pacific Island nations,
Australia and New Zealand, but, purposely, no distant water fishing nations (DWFNs). For
fisheries issues, this difference between FFA and SPC in eligibility for membership is an important
distinction between the two organisations.
FFA's objective is to assist members with sustainable development and management of
their fisheries and related activities. FFA advises members on, e.g., maritime boundary
delimitation, legal, technical and economic issues, monitoring and surveillance of foreign fishing
activity, human resource and institutional strengthening, applied fisheries research, policy
assessments and representation at international fisheries meetings. FFA is developing
opportunities to increase member country involvement in existing foreign-based operations.
FFA helped conclude and serves as the secretariat for the Wellington Treaty and Niue
Convention. It takes a key role in assisting member countries to develop effective and
comprehensive fisheries management arrangements for tuna across the full geographical range of
the stock, including the high seas. It collaborates with SPC in pelagic fisheries data.
The South Pacific Forum is comprised of all 16 independent and self-governing nations of
the Pacific Islands region, whose Heads of Government meet annually. Its secretariat (ForSec)
executes the requirements of the Heads of Government expressed at the annual meetings. The
Secretary-General of ForSec provides the permanent Chair of SPOCC and the Division of
Development and Economic Policy serves as SPOCC's secretariat; ForSec thus provides the lead
coordination role in the region.
ForSec's mission is to enhance the economic and social well-being of the people of the
Pacific Islands, in support of the efforts of national governments. Its responsibility is to facilitate,
develop and maintain cooperation and consultation between and among its members on issues
such as trade, economic development, transport, energy, telecommunications and other related
matters. It seeks to support its members in pursuing their objectives through multilateral fora.
Currently, ForSec is concentrating on development and economic policy, trade and
investment policy, and political and international affairs. Focal areas include economic reforms
(especially public sector restructuring), development planning and cross-sectoral sustainable
development issues. ForSec also aims to assist private sector development, to provide financial
support to encourage exports and improve industrial skills, improve the regional investment
climate and increase awareness in its members of developments in the international trading
environment. The Pacific Forum Line is an example of a commercial marine enterprise resulting
from consultations within the framework of the Forum: it is a commercial shipping service set up,
owned and managed by 10 Forum members to meet specific regional needs. ForSec provides
advice and coordination services in international relations, security and law enforcement issues
and assists with legislative drafting.
67This Conference would culminate in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS),
discussed further in section E of this part.
29
ForSec is assessing developments in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) process
and represents its members on the Pacific Economic Cooperation Council (PECC). It maintains a
direct practical role with key regional donors, including the European Union (EU).
The South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission's (SOPAC) overall mandate is to assist
its members in assessment, exploration and development of their nearshore and offshore mineral
and other marine non-living resource potential. Its work also includes baseline data for coastal
engineering and development, hazard evaluation, assistance and training for local hydrography
and "lands and survey"-type activities. SOPAC advises Pacific Island states on environmental
effects of physical modifications to the coast. SOPAC has regional responsibility for the water and
sanitation sector; it coordinates with SPC on health-related issues and SPREP on pollution
issues.68
The University of the South Pacific (USP) was created by royal charter. It is governed by the
University Council comprising representatives from its twelve member countries.69 USP provides
tertiary education and undertakes scholarly and applied research and is closely involved on
educational matters with the Pacific Island governments, in most of whose countries it has a
branch. In the marine sector, USP features a Marine Studies Institute and Programme and
cooperative projects with other regional intergovernmental agencies such as FFA and SOPAC.
Environmental and pollution monitoring and EIAs are significant activities of the Institute of
Applied Science. The International Ocean Institute undertakes training for regional personnel in
marine and coastal management issues.
The Tourism Council of the South Pacific (TCSP)70 is jointly owned by its 12 member
countries. Its role is to work with national tourist offices, international airlines and tour operators
to increase visitor arrivals in the region, to market and promote tourism and to help the private
sector enhance the quality of their products and services through a variety of programmes on
training, tourism awareness and preservation of the environment. TCSP's other services include
production and distribution to the travel industry worldwide of South Pacific Travel Manuals and
Guides in English, French and German, organising regional participation at international travel
exhibitions, maintaining an internet site (SPICE) and collection and dissemination to the region of
tourism statistics, sector reviews, environmental guidelines and visitor surveys.71
The Pacific Islands Development Programme (PIDP) has 22 members. It draws academic
resources from regional and international organisations to plan and conduct projects mainly
68Of the countries participating in this SAP, Nauru and Niue are not members of SOPAC.
69Of the countries participating in this SAP, the Federated States of Micronesia and Papua New
Guinea are not members of USP.
70The following is drawn from the TCSP's own public information materials (1997) and TCSP's
comments on this section.
71Of the countries participating in this SAP, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru and Marshall
Islands are not members of TCSP.
30
concerned with private sector development, senior-level private and public sector management
training, formulation of national development policies and strategies and publication of research
results on these topics.
The South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) is the regional technical and
coordinating body responsible for environmental matters in the Pacific region. Its membership
comprises 26 Pacific Island States, territories and metropolitan countries, all of whom have agreed
that their mission in this organisation, facilitated by its secretariat, is to "promote cooperation in
the South Pacific region and to provide assistance in order to protect and improve its environment
and to ensure sustainable development for present and future generations. SPREP shall achieve
these purposes through the Action Plan adopted from time to time by the SPREP meeting, setting
the strategies and objectives of SPREP."72 The Action Plan for 1997-2000 was adopted at the Ninth
SPREP meeting in November 1996. The principal goal for the next four years is to "build national
capacity in environmental and resource management through support to government agencies,
communities, NGOs and the private sector."73 SPREP also serves as the secretariat for the Apia
and Nouméa Conventions; it will serve as the secretariat for the Waigani Convention when the
latter enters into force.
The Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), through its Pacific
Operations Center (ESCAP/POC) in Port Vila, and backed-up by its Environment and Natural
Resource Division at its headquarters in Bangkok, Thailand, provides a variety of advisory services
to Pacific Island countries. In recent years these services have included reviews of national marine
fisheries economics and management and of other issues related to sustainable development.
ForSec has assigned to ESCAP and SPREP the joint responsibility for monitoring and reporting on
the implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action in the region.74
G. Non-governmental
Organisations
Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are playing a steadily increasing role in our
region's sustainable development. They vary widely in their approach, the services they provide,
issues they address and their level of focus which may be local, national, regional and
international. International NGOs active in this region which address environmental aspects of
sustainable development include Greenpeace International, the Nature Conservancy, and the
World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). A unique form of non-governmental and intergovernmental
organisation is represented by the IUCN World Conservation Union, whose programmes are
described in section H below.
Regional NGOs include the Foundations for Peoples of the South Pacific International
(FSPI; now with branches in most Pacific Island countries), Maruia Society, Meltrust (the umbrella
72Article 2 of the Agreement Establishing SPREP (1993).
73SPREP Action Plan 1997-2000, p. 5.
74Information provided by Dr. Charles Kick, ESCAP/POC, 1997.
31
organisation of national, local community-based development NGOs located in New Caledonia,
Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu) and the South Pacific Action Committee on the
Human Environment and Ecology (SPACHEE).
National Councils of Women are established in all Pacific Island States and serve as the
umbrella women's organisation in most countries. Church and women's groups are also active; the
latter particularly assist women to improve their family's standard of living. Traditional leadership
councils often work as a form of NGO in determining land and coastal waters management; they
are gaining legal recognition for this role.
National NGOs play an important role in sustainable development in the region. Their
methods of operation, autonomy and sources of funding vary widely. Establishment of effective
partnerships between NGOs, the private sector and government will be essential to sustainable
development.
H. Global
Programmes
The Pacific Island region is involved in a variety of international programmes related to
International Waters. A brief, indicative selection follows.
- FAO's Fishery and Forestry programmes
- ICLARM and WCMC's Global Database on Coral Reefs and their Resources
(ReefBase)
- IMO's programmes for the prevention of vessel-based pollution
- IUCN - the World Conservation Union - has many programmes of relevance to the SAP,
particularly the Marine and Coastal Programme and the global network focussed on
developing a Global Representative System of Marine Protected Areas.
- UNDP's Capacity 21 Programme, with four main components related to sustainable
development: national frameworks, planning and financing, land and sea resources
management capacity and contribution of landholder organisations.
- UNEP's Regional Seas Programme in which the Noumea Convention and the SPREP
Action Plan represent the Pacific Islands.
- UNESCO/IOC programmes including: Environment and Development in Coastal
Regions and Small Islands; IOC/UNEP/WMO Global Ocean Observing System; Global
Coral Reef Monitoring Network.
- WHO's Healthy Islands Programme
IV.
Transboundary Environmental Concerns
The preparations for UNCED first enabled us to clearly identify and agree on principal
environmental concerns shared by all the Pacific Island States.75 These concerns were (no priority
implied):
75Certain concerns, such as salinisation, air pollution, sea-based pollution, and the effects of
mining are not considered significant regional issues at present, although they are nationally
significant for certain states in our region.
32
a. Proliferation of waste in various forms on our land and into our waters
b. Degradation of land (includes deforestation (high islands),agrodeforestation (high and
low islands), soil erosion and coastal erosion
c. Depletion or loss of coastal/inshore living marine resource and other species
d. Degradation of freshwater quality
e. Degradation and loss of habitats.76
These concerns became - and have remained - for us the priority environmental issues in
the region on which we have focussed since UNCED through appropriate regional
organisations.77
After the focal area and definition of International Waters was set out in GEF's Operational
Strategy and work on this SAP began, we reviewed our priority regional environmental concerns
in this more inclusive, globally focused, transboundary context.78 Table 1 presents the
environmental and socio-economic effects of each concern which have transboundary implications.
Viewed
globally, our International Waters are of considerable importance. Our region is a
major centre in the world for marine biodiversity, with remarkably high levels of terrestrial
biodiversity and endemism (particularly on our high islands) as well. Our region is also home to or
provides migratory, nursery, breeding or feeding grounds for globally significant populations of
vulnerable, rare and endangered species, including marine turtles, dugong, seabirds and certain
cetaceans.79
We have the most extensive system in the world of marine habitats (especially coral reefs)
that are critical to maintaining this biodiversity. The global role of these extraordinarily productive
systems as carbon sinks, and thus as potential moderators of the effects of climate change, cannot
be underestimated, though it remains to be precisely quantified.80
These habitats are also globally significant as natural filters of land-based pollution and as
natural protection against storms and sea-level rise.81 The natural filters help maintain the health
of offshore waters, ecosystems and associated species including oceanic fisheries. The natural
76See, e.g., The Pacific Way (1992), op. cit. at note 8.
77See, e.g., Report to UNCSD on Activities to Implement the Barbados Programme of Action (1996),
op. cit. at note 8.
78The Report of the Brainstorming Session on International Waters by the Scientific and
Technical Advisory Panel (STAP), 1996, was found helpful in setting our regional priorities in the
context of transboundary concerns.
79Bleakley (1997), op. cit. at note 7.
80Oceanography: A View of the Earth (1995), by M. Grant Gross.
81Reviews by Bleakley, Convard, Howorth, Preston (1997), op. cit. at note 7.
33
coastal protection helps maintain the physical security of our own people, their homes and their
livelihoods, and of commercial enterprises that also depend on a protected coast, such as
international tourism and shipping.
Furthermore, through their function as breeding, nursery and feeding grounds, these
habitats help maintain internationally important fish stocks, some of which range over the full
width of the Pacific Ocean. One reviewer remarks that: "the tuna fishery of the Western Central
Pacific Ocean is one of only two remaining major fisheries in the world still considered to be in
healthy condition and amenable to increased exploitation. This fishery, and the large marine
ecosystem on which it is based, is a global asset which requires the concerted attention and
support of the international community if it is to be managed sustainably."82
In addition to providing an important source of food to the rest of the world, primarily
through our oceanic fisheries, the health of our International Waters is also important to maintain
our own domestic food security, source of income and employment, and social and cultural
cohesion and welfare, in particular through our coastal fisheries and other resources.
Environmental refugees and the attendant social unrest are becoming an increasing international
problem. Maintaining the health of our International Waters will help us ensure that our people do
not risk becoming part of this issue.
Viewed in terms of activities that affect the health of International Waters, many if not all of
our priority concerns are already or will soon become transboundary by virtue of the fact that
these activities are prevalent in all thirteen of our island countries. This prevalence is likely to have
deleterious and cumulative effects on International Waters which will, if unchecked, seriously
impair the health of International Waters in and far beyond our region. This assessment is
supported by evidence of detrimental effects on the waters in and around our islands already.
Finally, we considered the importance of our regional water system in a global context. We
see ourselves as the custodians of one-sixth of the earth's surface, of which less than 2% is land,
and which harbors unique, diverse and fragile forms of life on that land and in its waters.83 The
Pacific Island region covered by this SAP is arguably the largest regional water system on earth.
This system is internationally shared not only by us, the participants in this SAP, but also by
fourteen other states and territories in the Pacific region. This water system is also vital to the
continued health of the planet as a whole. It is likely to be at risk from our priority concerns;
viewed in terms of their effect on International Waters as a system, these concerns are
interdependent and mutually exacerbating nationally, regionally, and so, inexorably, globally.
We came to three conclusions from our globally-focused review. First, our priority concerns
remain essentially unchanged. Second, many, if not all of these concerns are transboundary in their
linkages throughout our region with disquieting consequences for the International Waters we
share and on which we all crucially depend. Finally, viewed from the global perspective of the
82Preston (1997), op. cit. at note 7. p. 2.
83The Perspective (1992), op. cit. at note 2, p. 147.
34
effects of our priority concerns on International Waters, three overarching transboundary concerns
could be identified within which our regional priorities could be clustered. These are:
1.
Degradation of the quality of our International Waters (regional priority concerns a,b,d,e)
2.
Degradation of their associated critical habitats (regional priority concerns a,b,d,e)
3.
Unsustainable use of living and nonliving resources (regional priority concerns b,c,e)
V. Imminent
Threats
Our International Waters are subject to a number of threats giving rise to the
transboundary concerns. The preparation process for this SAP included the identification of these
threats from a regional perspective and an assessment of their imminence by the reviewers. The
National Task Forces were asked to review their conclusions. The reviewers each examined the
threats to International Waters from a different perspective: critical species and their habitats,
living marine resources and non-living resources. Their findings were clear, consistent and
bolstered even more by having been arrived at from these different points of departure, as
illustrated by a brief overview of the threats as perceived by each reviewer.
The three sets of threats to critical species and habitats84 consist first of several forms of
land-based sources of pollution. The most serious threat is nutrients derived from sewage, soil
erosion and agricultural fertilisers. Nutrient overloads particularly affect coral reef ecosystems,
weakening the reef carbonate skeleton and smothering the reef with algae. The other two most
serious land-based pollution threats are solid waste disposal and sedimentation. Sedimentation is
derived from soil erosion, dredging, coastal development and upstream, inland activities.
The second set of threats derives from physical alterations of the seabed or coastline, in
particular through destruction of fringing reefs, beaches, wetlands and mangroves for coastal
development and by sand extraction. The final set of threats derives from overexploitation. Coastal
food fisheries, especially near urban areas, are under pressure from overfishing, as are
commercially valuable vertebrate and invertebrate export species.
Tropical marine systems can be remarkably robust in recovering from severe natural
disturbances such as cyclones. But this natural resilience may be weakened in the face of chronic
threats such as overfishing, pollution, elevated nutrient levels and sedimentation. Mitigating these
threats is vital not just for the species and habitats themselves, or even just as resources, but also
for the sake of maintaining the overall health of marine systems.
The threats to living marine resources85 are divided into two sets: overexploitation and
environmental degradation. Overexploitation, principally of inshore fisheries, is exacerbated by
destructive fishing methods, which include explosives and various types of toxic compounds such
as traditional vegetable poisons, household bleach, cyanide and herbicides,86 and by inappropriate
84Bleakley (1997), op. cit. at note 7, pp. 16-18.
85Preston (1997), op. cit. at note 7, pp. 23-25.
86A detailed, country-by-country description of this threat and its effects in the Pacific
35
government incentives for coastal fisheries. Environmental degradation in the islands is
manifested in a number of ways, whose effects often exacerbate each other.87 In many cases the
degradation is chronic, with gradual rather than sudden changes in the resources, making the
relationship between cause and effect less obvious, and reducing the likelihood of timely and
appropriate action being taken. Fisheries management efforts alone, whether carried out with
regard to specific resources or to the ecosystem as a whole, may be insufficient to protect coastal
fisheries in the absence of actions to mitigate the deleterious effects of these threats.
Finally,
the
non-living resource88 that all the Pacific Islands share and that is most
seriously threatened is the quality of both fresh and marine water. Groundwater is at particular
risk because its loss or degradation is often irreversible. The principal threat to water is from land-
based sources of pollution. These derive in particular from sewage (poor sanitation), sediments
(soil erosion, agriculture, forestry), urban runoff, agro-chemicals and solid waste.
Beaches, reef flat sand and coastal aggregates are another major non-living resource that is
threatened by overexploitation; extraction rates far exceed natural replenishment rates. Beaches are
also an important habitat.
We concluded that three overarching imminent threats to our International Waters could be
derived from the reviews:89
1.
their pollution from land-based activities
2.
physical, ecological and hydrological modification of their critical habitats
3.
unsustainable use of their living and nonliving resources
We consider prioritisation of the threats to be inappropriate, because each threat affects
each concern. Pollution from land-based activities threatens water quality, critical habitats and
Islands is provided by the Overview of Destructive Fishing Practices (1995), op. cit. at note 64.
87The threats to living marine resources from coastal degradation are:
- organic pollution from human settlements (sewage), agricultural practices (fertilisers) or food
processing activities (sugar mills, fish canneries and transshipment sites)
- increased freshwater runoff and siltation from logging, mining, land clearance, coastal
construction and other major disturbances to watersheds and the terrestrial ecosystem
- loss of fish nursery grounds and other critical habitats, especially mangroves and seagrass beds,
due to deforestation, reclamation or other coastal activities
- physical damage to habitat from coastal sand and gravel mining, dredging, coastal construction,
blasting of reef passages, use of destructive fishing methods (explosives) and shipwrecks
- chemical pollution from agriculture (pesticides), industrial sites, mining, petrochemical
extraction and handling, ships running aground and use of poisons for fishing.
88Howorth (1997), op. cit. at note 7, pp. 33-39.
89Our conclusions were also supported by regional work cited elsewhere (see, e.g., notes 2, 6
and 8) and the ground-truthing by the National Task Forces.
36
sustainable use of resources. Habitat modification of the habitats threatens those habitats, water
quality and sustainable use of resources. Excessive exploitation of resources threatens their
sustainable use, the habitats and water quality. The linkages between the imminent threats to and
the transboundary concerns for International Waters require comprehensive measures to address
the concerns effectively.
VI.
Root Causes of the Transboundary Concerns
The root causes were examined in their legal, institutional, socio-economic and
environmental context. Differentiating between proximate and ultimate root causes was found to
be a useful analytical approach.90
It was evident from the analysis that each imminent threat was composed of a subset of
contributory physical problems which each had their own proximate root causes. These problems
differ both in type and severity and hence in the nature and extent of the effect of the overarching
threat on the transboundary concerns. Based on prior regional and national studies, the
commissioned reviews, and the work of the National Task Forces, priorities were also established
among the contributory physical problems in terms of the severity of their effects on the
transboundary concerns. The results are presented in Table 2.
The ultimate root causes of the threats were found in factors that influence the actions of
our island peoples in such a way as to result in the degradation of our International Waters. Based
on prior regional and national studies, the commissioned reviews, and the work of the National
Task Forces, priorities were also established among those factors. The results are presented in
Table 3.
We recognised that an ultimate root cause underlying the imminent threats is deficiencies
in management. The management issue permeates our society at all levels: from the individual
citizen right on up through the household and the village to private companies, national
government and regional organisations. Management deficiencies can be grouped into two linked
subsets: a) governance and b) understanding. The governance subset is characterised by the need
for mechanisms to integrate environmental concerns, development planning and decision-making.
The understanding subset is characterised by the need to achieve an island-wide ecosystem
awareness in our people. Table 4 presents the management issues arising under the two subsets.
This provides a focus for intervention to protect International Waters.91 For example, the
governance mechanisms envisaged include those which enable timely identification of
90Proximate causes are those producing the actual, demonstrable physical effects that threaten
International Waters and thus culminate in the transboundary concerns. Ultimate root causes are
those that influence human actions which then result in the proximate causes of the observable
physical effects. The innovative work of Dr. Laurence Mee on proximate and ultimate root causes in
the GEF focal area of International Waters must be recognised; the analysis in this SAP has
benefitted from his paper: International Waters and Environmental Security (1997).
91We note that our identification of management deficiencies as an ultimate root cause of the
degradation of our International Waters is consistent with the assessment of this issue for SIDS by
GEF.
37
development plans for activities which affect International Waters. They must ensure that these
plans explicitly consider other and alternative uses, including environmental uses and effects, and
all relevant stakeholders. Planning time scales must be expanded to comprise long-term costs and
benefits as well. The mechanisms must support the taking of clear, motivated decisions and their
enforcement.
Successful application of these governance mechanisms involves the understanding subset.
Understanding includes the ability to access and use information related to resources and
environment. Narrow, short-term individual sector-based perceptions of International Waters
resources by managers and users must also change to an inclusive and generally equitable
perspective. Increasing the understanding of these issues by the general public is central to
achieving effective management. Improved understanding of the consequences of behavior by the
people will assist with enforcement of management decisions. Sustainable development is a
national objective that requires active, correctly informed engagement by all citizens.
The independent reviews commissioned for this SAP and the other work referred to above
confirm both our own and the GEF's assessment of the priority transboundary concerns, their root
causes and, consequently, the fundamental need for improved integrated cross-sectoral
management of the resources of our International Waters to achieve sustainable development.
VII. Information
Gaps
Our analysis also revealed a set of information gaps relevant in particular to the work of
decision-makers (as opposed to researchers) in developing ways to address ultimate root causes
and to respond to imminent threats. These information gaps are presented in Table 5. The islands
already share national information through various regional mechanisms, which is also required
by the regional Conventions and UNCLOS. Improving information input and exchange at regional
and national levels is an objective of this SAP.
Attention is particularly drawn to the lack of strategic information presented in an
appropriate manner to decision-makers, resource users, managers and communities to evaluate
costs and benefits and decide between alternative activities. This information is vital to planning
for International Waters, because the uses of these waters are so versatile. That very versatility is a
significant asset in a development portfolio. Appropriately and adaptively managed with correct
information, International Waters can sustainably support a variety of uses which are now more
generally perceived as conflicting and mutually exclusive.
Information gaps do not prevent actions being taken. The gaps serve as a salutary reminder
of the need to apply the precautionary principle in developing activities and choosing between
alternatives, and of the corollary that preventing environmental problems almost always costs far
less than trying to remedy them after they occur.
VIII. Proposed
Solutions
We propose to address the root causes of degradation of International Waters through
regionally consistent, country-driven targeted actions that integrate development and environment
needs. These actions are designed to encourage comprehensive, cross-sectoral, ecosystem-based
38
approaches to mitigate and prevent imminent threats to International Waters. The SAP provides
the regional framework within which these actions are identified, developed and implemented.
Targeted actions will be carried out in two complementary, linked consultative contexts:
Integrated Coastal and Watershed Management (ICWM) and Oceanic Fisheries Management
(OFM).
A fundamental criterion for the success of targeted actions is the establishment of
appropriate ecosystem management units for national sustainable development planning. These
management units are the same for both developmental and environmental purposes. On our
islands these units should be comprised of upstream watersheds and their adjacent coastal and
offshore areas. Adding the inland watershed to the management unit for development planning is
essentially an upstream extension of the principles of Integrated Coastal Management (ICM). The
lack of effective mechanisms to include upstream activities has hampered the achievement of ICM.
Furthermore, such few models for this form of management as do exist are derived from large,
well-endowed countries, and are inappropriate for Pacific Islands. Hence the development of the
ICWM approach by our islands is established by the SAP.
A complementary consultative context established by this SAP is Oceanic Fisheries
Management (OFM), which concentrates initially on the tuna fishery. The international
complexities and specialised requirements of the oceanic fisheries sector involves DWFNs, regional
organisations and national governments in ongoing consultations at the highest level.92 The
Western Pacific Warm Pool Large Marine Ecosystem is proposed for investigation as a suitable
management unit. Enhancement of regional fishery management in light of developments with
regard to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the UN Implementing Agreement,
innovative ecosystem-based management approaches in the context of an LME, research on the
status of tuna stocks, examination of by-catch and other components of the ecosystem and the
integration of those aspects of oceanic fisheries relevant to overall national and regional
International Waters resource management are the principal elements of the OFM approach.
Crucial to the organizing principle and implementation of the SAP is the recognition that
ICWM and OFM are interdependent elements along the continuum that is the essence of
International Waters. As with the great oceanic gyres, ICWM and OFM are flywheels with cogs
that drive each other, but the mechanisms governing their relationship are not well understood.
The SAP aims to improve that understanding. Through the ICWM and OFM approaches, the SAP
sets out a path for the transition by our islands from sectoral to integrated management of
International Waters as a whole, which we consider to be essential for their protection over the
long term.
The SAP meets the objectives of GEF's operational programme entitled "Integrated Land
and Water Multiple Focal Area," to which International Waters projects addressing the needs and
special conditions of small islands are assigned by GEF. Interventions under the SAP will
necessarily include three other pressing concerns in our sustainable development planning,
92The most recent of these was the Second Multilateral High-Level Conference on the Management
and Conservation of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific, Majuro,
Republic of the Marshall Islands, June 1997.
39
namely: biodiversity, vulnerability to climate change and land degradation. The first two are GEF
focal areas and the latter is a GEF cross-cutting area.93 Consequently, the SAP is expected to
involve and build upon the complementary skills and experience available from organisations and
groups active in the region.
Our region is the beneficiary of much development assistance from a variety of donors for a
wide range of projects. Donors and the islands will be able to use the SAP to plan and coordinate
regional and national development assistance for International Waters to address imminent threats
and their root causes more effectively. The SAP will facilitate the choice and design of high priority
interventions, remove duplication, and ensure that projects do not work at cross-purposes.
Funding from GEF per se can only support a small proportion of such interventions, hence the
importance of the SAP to organise and leverage additional assistance in order to receive maximum
benefit from the available funds. The SAP is designed to comply with the requirements of GEF, but
also, and perhaps more importantly, to be a framework for overall national and regional planning
and assistance for the management of International Waters.
The SAP complies with the legal framework for regional cooperation and related
obligations established by the regional Conventions, UNCLOS, CBD, FCCC and other
international conventions within which the Pacific Island countries identify common issues and
coordinate national approaches to address those issues. Application of ICWM and OFM
approaches will facilitate further joint action between sectors nationally and between governments
regionally. As experience with ICWM and OFM grows, this SAP will also evolve, reflecting the
increased knowledge of and changing conditions in the environment of our islands. To ensure that
the SAP remains a living, evolving and useful instrument for sustainable development, and to
assess and apply lessons learned from its implementation, the SAP will be reviewed every five
years.
IX.
Priorities for Action
Achieving the goals of the SAP is a long-term effort. It is necessary to maintain regional and
national momentum, build in feedback and learning loops, and be able to measure success in
incremental but encouraging steps. We are also mindful that we cannot address all sustainable
development issues related to International Waters in this SAP at once. Therefore we have initially
identified the following high priority activity areas for immediate intervention. These are:
- improved waste management
- better water quality
- sustainable fisheries
- effective marine protected areas.
93These are also the remaining three of the seven major issues identified in the Barbados
Programme of Action as common to most islands. The other three major small island issues from the
Barbados Programme have already been addressed above, and the seventh, tourism, can only be
effectively dealt with in this type of framework for national sustainable development.
40
Targeted actions within these activity areas are proposed in the following five categories:
management, capacity-building, awareness/education, research/information for decision-making,
and investment. Institutional strengthening is included under management and capacity-building.
The targeted actions are designed to:
- assist decision-makers in changing sectoral development policies to make them consistent with
sustainable development,
- facilitate and catalyse GEF funding and "regular" assistance94 from the IAs and other donors,
- benefit from and be coordinated with other relevant national, bilateral, regional and
international sustainable environment/development initiatives in the Pacific Islands,
- assist with the implementation of international treaty obligations and commitments,
- promote collective action to address regional issues and minimise duplication of effort.
The analytical framework within which proposals for assistance should be evaluated under
the SAP is set out below.
Goal of SAP: Integrated sustainable development and management of International Waters
Priority Concerns:
Degradation of water quality
Degradation of associated critical habitats
Unsustainable
use
of
resources
Imminent Threats:
Pollution from land-based activities
Modification of critical habitats
Unsustainable exploitation of resources
Ultimate Root Causes:
Management deficiencies
a)
governance
b) understanding
Solutions:
Integrated Coastal and Watershed Management
Oceanic
Fisheries
Management
ICWM Activity Areas:
- improved waste management
- better water quality
- sustainable coastal fisheries
- effective marine protected areas
94In assessing the proposals, it is important to note that the baseline and agreed incremental
cost section of the project proposals are indicative estimates only, given that the incremental
costs must be agreed between the GEF and the recipient country. Determining incremental costs is a
process to be initiated within the framework of the SAP. These project proposals are the initiation
of that process, for further elaboration between the relevant national authorities, the GEF and the
Implementing Agencies. Detailed technical negotiations between the country and GEF are expected. The
Operational Strategy envisages that the IAs will assist substantively, each according to its
specialisation, with the development of project proposals from concept papers to full project
proposals.
41
OFM Activity Areas:
- sustainable ocean fisheries
- improved national and regional management capability
- stock and by-catch monitoring and research
- enhanced national and regional management links
Targeted actions: - management/institutional strengthening
- capacity-building
- awareness/education
- research/information for decision-making
- investment
From a regional perspective, the SAP is designed to encourage proposals with diverse
applications that achieve global benefits while maintaining the fundamental unity of approach and
discipline established by the SAP. The SAP intends to enable development of projects reflecting the
different national styles and circumstances of each participating country, and it is designed to be
sufficiently flexible to accommodate these differences. This variety will enable rapid regional
learning, provide examples of approaches tailored to disparate situations and assist national
adaptations as countries analyse and share the results of their work.
As the first SAP for International Waters of SIDS to be developed under the auspices of the
GEF, we are also concerned that our work be available and useful to other groups of SIDS. Insofar
as they may share our transboundary concerns and the root causes, we hope that our proposed
solutions will serve as examples for consideration beyond our own region.
1
Table 1: Environmental and Socio-economic Effects
I.
Transboundary concern:
Degradation of water quality
A.
Threat:
Land-based sources of pollution
1.
Sewage-related liquid and solid microbial pollution
Environmental
effects
a. Marine and aquatic organism infections and diseases*
b. Depletion of fish stocks and biodiversity*
c. Changes in biological diversity and food webs*
Socio-economic
effects
a. Human health effects*
b. Increased costs of human health protection
c. Loss of tourism/recreation value*
d. Loss of aesthetic values
e. Increased intake treatment costs
f. Increased potential for upstream/downstream conflicts*
g. Increased costs of alternative water supplies
h. Increased costs of medical treatment and prevention
i. Increased costs of fisheries product processing*
2.
Solid waste (domestic, industrial, litter, dredge spoil)
Environmental
effects
a. Habitat
loss*
b. Hydrological modification
c. Entanglement/suffocation of marine organisms*
d. Beach and sediment compositional changes
e. Endangerment of species
Socio-economic
effects
(a)-(d) in (1) above
e. Endangerment of commercial species*
f. Loss of property value
g. Increased costs of wildlife protection
h. Increased costs of clean-up
i. Increased costs of navigational surveys and dredging*
3.
Nutrients (includes sewage and fertilisers)
Environmental
effects
a. Redox changes (extreme anoxia)
b. Eutrophication
c. Increased algal blooms
d. Changes in algal community
e. Changes in macrophyte community
f. Changes in fish community with loss in case of anoxia
2
g. Loss of habitat (e.g., coral reefs)*
h. Changes in biological diversity and food webs*
3
Table 1: Environmental and Socio-economic Effects (continued)
3.
Nutrients (includes sewage and fertilisers)
Socio-economic
effects
(a)-(d) in (1) above
(e)-(f) in (2) above
g. Loss of water supplies*
h. Costs of water treatment
i. Change in fisheries value*
j. Compromise of options for aquaculture development
k. Loss of property values
l. Costs of weed control
m. Loss of wildlife (including migratory bird) sanctuaries*
n. Increased costs of navigational clearance*
o. Increased costs of fish surveillance and processing for toxin prevention*
p. Costs of reduced fish marketability*
4. Sediments
Environmental
effects
a. Habitat
modification*
b. Changes in biological community composition*
c. Changes in species growth/survival/reproduction*
d. Increased erosion
e. Increased
sedimentation/siltation
f. Destruction by smothering of benthic communities*
g. Changes in sediment redox conditions (organics)
h. Loss of water quality
Socio-economic
effects
a. Increased costs of navigational surveys and dredging*
b. Loss of reservoir storage capacity
c. Damage to equipment from particle scouring
d. Loss of tourism/recreational values*
e. Increased water treatment costs
f. Increased costs of coastal protection from waves/storms/erosion
g. Increased costs of cleaning intakes
h. Increased vulnerability to sea level rise*
5.
Toxic wastes (domestic, agricultural, industrial, hazardous)
Environmental
effects
a. Reproductive dysfunction in organisms*
b. Behavioral dysfunction in organisms*
c. Modified community structure*
d. Increased mortality of organisms*
e. Changes in biological diversity and food webs*
4
Table 1: Environmental and Socio-economic Effects (continued)
5.
Toxic wastes (domestic, agricultural, industrial, hazardous)
Socio-economic
effects
a. Loss in fisheries*
b. Loss of protected areas*
c. Increased costs of human health protection
d. Increased costs of fish processing*
e. Reduced options for other uses
f. Increased costs of water treatment
g. Loss of tourism/recreation value*
h. Potential for upstream/downstream conflict*
6.
Spills
Environmental
effects
a. Increased mortality in bird and other marine/aquatic life*
b. Habitat damage*
c. Long-term contamination of beaches and sediments with associated ecological changes*
Socio-economic
effects
a. Costs of clean-up
b. Costs of preventive measures
c. Costs of contingency measures
d. Real or perceived damage to fisheries
e. Loss of tourism/recreation values (temporary/permanent)*
f. Costs of litigation
g. Costs of insurance
h. Loss of protected areas and associated wildlife*
i. Costs of disruption to shipping, fishing, science and other activities during clean-up*
5
Table 1: Environmental and Socio-economic Effects (continued)
II.
Transboundary concern:
Degradation of critical habitats
A.
Threat:
Physical, ecological and hydrological modifications of critical habitats
Environmental Effects (common to all seven ecosystems)
a. Loss of natural productivity
b. Loss of biodiversity*
c. Loss of natural storm barriers*
d. Loss of natural protection from erosion
e. Loss of carbon sinks and release of carbon to atmosphere*
f. Loss of migratory species using the habitat*
g. Altered migratory patterns*
h. Effects on adjacent marine ecosystems*
i. Damage to endangered, threatened or endemic species*
j. Changes in community structures
k. Loss of natural filtration/cleansing systems*
l. Spread of disease*
m. Spread of exotic species*
n. Physical downstream changes of coastal dynamics*
o. Changes in ecosystem stability
p. Loss of environmental assimilative capacity*
q. Possible outbreaks of ciguatera
Socio-economic effects (common to all seven ecosystems)
a. Reduced capacity to meet basic human needs (food, fuel, shelter) for local populations
b. Changes in employment opportunities for local populations and associated changes in
social structures
c. Loss of aesthetic/recreational values for local populations
d. Loss of existing and future income from fisheries, tourism*
e. Loss of possible new commercial opportunities for the ecosystem (e.g.,
pharmaceuticals)
f. Human
migration*
g. Human conflicts*
h. Loss of educational and scientific value*
i. Loss of land due to loss of physical protection
j. Health damage/loss of life due to loss of physical protection
k. Increased costs of responding to risks
l. Disregard of intergenerational equity*
m. Loss of cultural heritage*
n. Costs of replacing natural protections with substitute services
o. Increased vulnerability to sea level rise*
p. Loss of opportunity for sustainable economic development*
q. Costs of restoration
6
Table 1: Environmental and Socio-economic Effects (continued)
2.
Freshwater shortage (ground and surface)
Environmental
Effects
a. Water quality change
b. Saltwater intrusion
c. Land
subsidence
d. Reduced aquifer capacity and recharge
e. Reduced vegetation cover
f. Increased soil erosion
g. Increased penetration of pollutants/contaminants
h. Desertification/land degradation*
i. Reduction in stream flow
j. Modification of riparian habitats*
k. Changes in sediment budgets
l. Depletion of fishstocks and species diversity*
m. Decreased wetland areas*
n. Reduced groundwater recharge
o. Reduced capacity to transport sediments
p. Increased siltation
q. Changes in biological diversity and food webs*
r. Alteration of coastal ecosystems*
Socio-economic
Effects
a. Damage to infrastructure
b. Increased costs for pumping and deepening wells
c. Loss of drinking water supply
d. Increased potential for upstream/downstream conflicts*
e. Loss of future use options
f. Increased cost of alternative water supplies
g. Increased vulnerability to sea level rise*
h. Loss of agricultural uses
i. Loss of tourism/recreational value*
j. Loss of aesthetic values
k. Loss of coastal harbors and inland transport*
l. Loss of hydro-electric power production
m. Loss of industrial uses
n. Reduced availability of fish for food
o. Loss of waste assimilative capacity*
p. Population migration*
q. Potential for conflict*
7
Table 1: Environmental and Socio-economic Effects (continued)
3.
Species depletion or loss
Environmental
effects
a. Loss of biodiversity*
b. Loss of natural productivity
c. Effects on adjacent ecosystems*
d. Changes in community structures
e. Damage to endangered, threatened or endemic species*
f. Changes in ecosystem stability
g. Loss of migratory species using the habitat*
h. Altered migratory patterns*
i. changes in population genome and gene frequencies*
j. Reduction of gene pool of wild stocks
Socio-economic
effects
a. Loss of existing and future income from fisheries, tourism*
b. Loss of protein for human consumption
4.
Introduction of non-indigenous species
Environmental
effects
a. Long-term changes in population genome and gene frequencies*
b. Reduction of gene pool of wild stocks
c. Loss of biodiversity in breeding areas/ecosystems
d. Replacement of/competition with indigenous species
e. Pest/disease
introduction
Socio-economic
effects
a. Increased risks for commercially valuable species*
b. Increased risk of disease
8
Table 1: Environmental and Socio-economic Effects (continued)
III.
Transboundary concern:
Unsustainable resource use
A.
Threat:
Excessive exploitation
1.
Overfishing (primarily inshore)
Environmental
effects
a. Changes in biological community structure*
b. Depletion of key commercial species*
Socio-economic
effects
a. Reduced economic returns to country
b. Loss of employment
c. Conflict between user groups*
d. Loss of protein for human consumption/health effects
e. Loss of import substitution function
f. Loss of cash income
2.
Destructive fishing (primarily inshore)
Environmental
effects
a. Changes in biological community structure
b. Habitat modification*
c. Loss of protected species*
d. Decreased productivity
e. Possible increase in crown-of-thorns starfish
f. Retarded recovery after natural destructive events
Socio-economic
effects
a. Loss of tourism/recreational values*
b. Loss of earnings/employment
c. Possible ciguatera outbreaks
d. Loss of food protein
e. Loss of coastal protection (reef destruction)
f. Physical harm to fishers employing the methods
g. Possible human health effects of tainted/poisoned food
h. Loss of commercial species
3.
Excessive by-catch and discards (inshore and oceanic)
Environmental
effects
a. Changes in food webs favoring scavengers
b. Changes in biological community structure*
c. Loss of protected species*
d. Loss of sports species*
Socio-economic
effects
a. Loss of income from tourist sport-fishing
9
b. Loss of food protein sources
c. Loss of income from target species (more work for less target catch)
Table 2: Proximate Root Causes
I.
Transboundary concern:
Degradation of water quality
A.
Threat:
Land-based sources of pollution
1.
Sewage-related liquid and solid microbial pollution
a. direct discharge of untreated or poorly treated sewage, animal and hospital wastes into
water or onto land
2.
Solid waste (domestic, industrial, litter, dredge spoil)
a. deliberate
dumping
b. casual discards
c. thoughtlessness
d. limited waste disposal options
3.
Nutrients (includes sewage and fertilisers)
a. sewage
b. fertilisers/animal wastes in agriculture
c. soil/sediment erosion, leaching, remobilisation
d. draining of wetlands
e. dredging,
damming
f. intensification of cash cropping
g. water impoundment
4. Sediments
a. soil erosion by runoff/aeolian transport
b. land/road development (excavation, earthmoving, construction, logging)
c. sewage/sewage sludge discharges
d. urban waste discharges
e. intensification of cash cropping
f. dredging
g. mining
5.
Toxic wastes (domestic, agricultural, industrial, hazardous)
a. urban/industrial waste discharge
b. leachates from solid waste landfill
c. weed/pest control, including antifoulants
d. disease vector control
e. road
runoff
6. Spills
a. Inadequate accident minimisation measures
b. Inadequate contingency response measures
2
c. Human
error
d. Force majeure
Note: increased growth and density of population and urbanization is a major proximate root
cause common to the issues in Table 2.
3
Table 2: Proximate Root Causes (continued)
II.
Transboundary concern:
Degradation of critical habitats
A.
Threat:
Physical, ecological and hydrological modifications of critical habitats
1.
Destruction or modification of ecosystems*
a. conversion/use for food, fuel, industry, waste dumping,
agriculture, aquaculture,
construction, infrastructure (housing, hotels, harbors, ports, marinas, airports,
causeways)
b. subsistence/survival needs
c. poverty
d. lack of employment
e. upstream activities (agriculture, logging, damming)
2.
Species depletion or loss**
a. all of the above under (1)
b. destructive fishing practices
3.
Freshwater shortage (ground and surface)
a. increased demand from population growth, food production, cash cropping,
urbanisation, tourism, industrialisation, life style changes
b. urban drainage and impermeability
c. rural land use patterns
d. agro-deforestation
e. impoundments, damming, canalisation
4.
Introduction of non-indigenous species
a. Discharge of untreated ballast water
b. Deliberate introduction of stock
(aquaculture/recreation/pest control)
*In approximate order of vulnerability: coral reefs, mangroves, lagoons, seagrass beds, wetlands,
estuaries, beaches.
**In approximate order of vulnerability: turtles, crocodiles, dugong, certain cetaceans, sharks,
spiny lobster, coconut crab, seahorses, seabirds; no order: bêche-de-mer, certain fish, giant clams,
green snail, grouper (live), pearl oysters, trochus.
4
Table 2: Proximate Root Causes (continued)
III.
Transboundary concern:
Unsustainable resource use
A.
Threat:
Excessive exploitation
1.
Overfishing (primarily inshore)
a. too many boats and too many fishers
b. subsistence/survival needs
2.
Destructive fishing (primarily inshore)
a. inappropriate
technology
b. poor harvest procedures
c. need for cash
d. traditional fish "drives"
3.
Excessive by-catch and discards (primarily oceanic)
a. poor fishing gear selectivity (especially purse seine/longline)
b. fishing tactics (e.g., around debris, associated non-target species such as porpoises)
c. overfishing of target species
d. perishability
e. lack of storage facilities
f. low economic value
1
Table 3: Ultimate Root Causes
I.
Transboundary concern:
Degradation of water quality
A.
Threat:
Land-based sources of pollution
1.
Sewage-related liquid and solid microbial pollution
a. inadequate regulation of waste disposal
b. lack of enforcement
c. institutional
deficiencies
d. inadequate management expertise
e. uncoordinated sectoral management
f. failure to charge costs of environmental degradation
g. lack of capacity to repair/maintain existing systems
h. sectoral/fragmented water quality monitoring/assessment
i. no reuse of organic waste, sewage, sludge, effluent
2.
Solid waste (domestic, industrial, litter, dredge spoil)
a. (a)-(g) above under (1)
b. increased use of unnecessary packaging
c. customary land tenure conflicts over dump siting
d. deficiencies in land-use planning
e. no EIA used for dump sites
f. no business planning for waste disposal
g. deficiencies in or no recycling programmes
3.
Nutrients (includes sewage and fertilisers)
a. (a)-(h) above under (1)
b. deficiencies in land-use planning
c. no EIA for land development
4. Sediments
a. (c)-(h) above under (1)
b. (b)-(c) above under (3)
5.
Toxic wastes (domestic, agricultural, industrial, hazardous)
a. (a)-(h) above under (1)
b. lack of infrastructure to transfer technology
6. Spills
a. Lack of development and implementation of preventive and remedial measures
b. Lack of governmental capacity, will or budget
2
Table 3: Ultimate Root Causes (continued)
II.
Transboundary concern:
Degradation of critical habitats
A.
Threat:
Physical, ecological and hydrological modifications of critical habitats
1.
Destruction or modification of ecosystems
a. lack of integrated coastal area/watershed management
b. lack of EIA in development planning
c. deficiencies in land-use planning
d. uncoordinated sectoral management
e. lack of enforcement
f. national development pressures
g. customary land tenure
h. loss of traditional management practices
i. national trade and investment policies
j. lack of waste management
k. undervaluation of ecosystem
l. lack of involvement of local communities
2.
Freshwater shortage (ground and surface)
a. (a)-(f) above under (1)
b. inappropriate water pricing
c. subsidies and other inappropriate incentives
d. inappropriate reservoir operation
e. lack of protection of recharge areas
3.
Species depletion or loss
a. (a)-(l) above under (1)
b. high prices
c. open
access
4.
Introduction of non-indigenous species
a. Failure of regulations re ballast water
b. Failure of quarantine regulations
c. Inadequate
planning
d. Uncoordinated sectoral management
3
Table 3: Ultimate Root Causes (continued)
III.
Transboundary concern:
Unsustainable resource use
A.
Threat:
Excessive exploitation
1.
Overfishing (primarily inshore)
a. subsidies and other inappropriate incentives
b. high prices
c. open
access
d. lack of integrated coastal/watershed management
e. uncoordinated sectoral management
f. lack of enforcement
g. loss of traditional management practices
h. lack of implementation at local/village level
i. high extra-regional demand
2.
Destructive fishing (primarily inshore)
a. (d)-(i) above under (1)
b. lack of appropriate harvest gear/technology
c. lack of ecological education
d. lack of other local income sources
e. easy availability of explosives and poisons
3.
Excessive by-catch and discards (primarily oceanic)
a. lack of research on product marketability
b. reluctance to keep/provide data by captains
c. inadequate on-board observer coverage
Table 4: Management Issues
A. Governance
1. no clearly defined responsibilities and poor coordination among government agencies
responsible for different sectors
2. inadequate coordination and delegation of responsibility between local, state,
provincial, national and sectoral levels of government
3. inadequate laws and regulations
4. inadequate harmonisation of laws
5. issues of traditional and customary property and user rights and practices
6. deficiencies in stakeholder participation
7. inadequate implementation, monitoring and enforcement
8. inappropriate
domestic
and international pricing
9. subsidies and perverse incentives
10. national investment policies
11. inadequate operating budgets
B.
Understanding
a) poor public education and awareness of issues and options
b) insufficient capacity to implement and enforce laws
c) inadequate understanding of valuation of environmental goods and services in
sustainable development planning
d) inadequate knowledge of technical response options
e) failure to use current information in decision-making
f) selecting inappropriate technology
g) ineffective data interpretation for management
h) inadequate/insufficient socio-economic analyses and data
i) inadequate or unreliable data collected through national
data and statistical
programmes
j) inadequate pre-operational prediction and planning (e.g., prior comparative analysis of
options, risk assessments, environmental/social/economic impact assessments,
complete costing
k) inadequate ongoing and post-operational analysis
l) inadequate access to information at the regional and international level by governments
m) inadequate scientific understanding
n) inadequate or inappropriate advice
Table 5: Information Gaps
I.
Transboundary concern:
Degradation of water quality
A.
Threat:
Land-based sources of pollution
1.
Sewage-related liquid and solid microbial pollution
a. Data on current and projected waste volumes
b. Data on sources, pathways and impacts of waste
c. Data on levels and effects of contaminants in water
2.
Solid waste (domestic, industrial, litter, dredge spoil)
(a)-(c) in (1) above
d. Population response to pollution charges
e. Likely recycling markets and stability
f. Actual, specific training needs
3.
Nutrients (includes sewage and fertilisers)
a. Relative importance of sources in a given situation
b. Limitations of information on incidence and bioavailability of nutrient forms (N and P)
c. Lack of precision of comparison among options
d. Insufficiently predictable outcomes of management intervention
4. Sediments
a. No data on suspended sediments budget in region
b. No quantified links between upstream causes and downstream effects
5.
Toxic wastes (domestic, agricultural, industrial, hazardous)
(a)-(c) in (1) above
d. No data on production rates, use and location of chemicals
e. Difficulty in quantifying relative magnitudes of sources
6. Spills
a. scale and timing of causes and effects
Table 5: Information Gaps (continued)
II.
Transboundary concern:
Degradation of critical habitats
A.
Threat:
Physical, ecological and hydrological modifications of critical habitats
1.
Destruction or modification of ecosystems
a. Recovery times after use
b. Extent of ecological damage after use
c. Carrying
capacity
d. Valuation methods
e. Lack of current information on ecosystems and their resources for decision-makers
f. Lack of data on which to design and evaluate ICM
g. Amount and rate of sea level rise
h. Lack of detailed bioinventory
i. Effects on women as major inshore gleaners
j. Actual physical areas of ecosystems, e.g., of reefs
2.
Freshwater shortage (ground and surface)
a. Effects of demographic and land-use changes on hydrology
b. Regional effects of climate change
c. Lack of water resource data
3.
Species depletion or loss
1. Insufficient knowledge on seagrass beds, including links to coastal fisheries and areas
threatened by coastal developments
2. Insufficient valuation of mangroves
3. Little knowledge about and local expertise in marine mammals in the region: especially
effects from subsistence, traditional and commercial harvests, bycatch and collisions
with vessels
4. Little data on dugong abundance, distribution and threats
5. Little data on reef fish biodiversity
6. Little data on species from deeper reef and shore systems
7. Very little background biological data on invertebrates
8. Need quantification of effect on mangrove cutting for smoking bêche-de-mer
4.
Introduction of non-indigenous species
a. scale and timing of causes and effects
Table 5: Information Gaps (continued)
III.
Transboundary concern:
Unsustainable resource use
A.
Threat:
Excessive exploitation
1.
Overfishing (primarily inshore)
a. Inadequate information on fish resources
b. Little information on socio-economic aspects, especially in local communities and on
women (I)
c. Little information on population biology and fishery dynamics of target reef-associated
finfish (I)
d. Little documentation on traditional and small-scale shark fisheries (I)
e. Very little background biological information on invertebrates to allow for stock
assessment and determination of sustainable harvests; catch and trade data are absent,
incomplete and inconsistent; actual valuation for local fishers expected to be high but
needs quantification (I)
f. Lack of information on species interaction and response to exploitation
g. Lack of suitable, standardised rapid assessment and monitoring techniques and
regional information based on these techniques
h. Lack of data on economic value of artisanal and subsistence fishery (I)
i. No basis on which to determine maximum productivity and sustainability level of
inshore fisheries (I)
j. Lack of knowledge of physical areas of ecosystems like reefs make extrapolation from
scaling factors based on individual surveys impossible (I)
k. Need for management rule-of-thumb techniques
l. Poor understanding of interaction issues and economic consequences
m. Poor understanding of non-tuna biotic components and system dynamics of the
Western Pacific Warm Pool LME
n. Long-term sustainable financing of international fishery management and research
2.
Destructive fishing (primarily inshore)
a. Little quantified data on environmental effects linked to destructive causes
b. Little data on nature and extent of destructive practices
c. Little data on relationship between ownership, access and destructive fishing
d. Little data on role of women in destructive practices
3.
Excessive by-catch and discards (primarily oceanic)
a. Prioritising between reducing and using bycatch
b. Abundance, biology and exploitation status of tuna by-catch species unknown
c. Little data on by-catch and discard levels
Annex 1
Bibliography
Action Plan for Managing the Environment of the South Pacific Region 1997-2000, SPREP, Apia,
Samoa.
Action Strategy for Nature Conservation in the South Pacific Region 1994-1998, SPREP, Apia,
Samoa.
Biodiversity in the Seas: Implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity in Marine and
Coastal Habitats (1996), by A. Charlotte de Fontaubert, David R. Downes and Tundi Agardy,
IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper No. 32; IUCN/World Conservation Union, Gland,
Switzerland, in collaboration with CIEL and WWF-US, Washington, D.C.
Coastal Protection in the Pacific Islands: Current Trends and Future Prospects (1993), edited by
Andrew Smith, prepared by the Secretariats of SPREP and SOPAC, SOPAC Miscellaneous
Publication No. 177; SPREP, Apia, Samoa.
The Duty to Respect Generally Accepted International Standards (1991), by Bernard H. Oxman; 24
N.Y.U. Journal of International Law and Policy 109.
Environment and Development: A Pacific Island Perspective (1992), by Robert Thistlethwaite and
Gregory Votaw; Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines.
Environmental Law in the South Pacific: Consolidated Report of the Reviews of Environmental
Law in the Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Kingdom of Tonga, Republic of the
Marshall Islands and Solomon Islands (1996), edited by Ben Boer, IUCN Environmental Policy and
Law Paper No. 28; IUCN/World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzerland and SPREP, Apia,
Samoa.
Evaluation of the Implications of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea for SPREP
Activities (1996), by Martin Tsamenyi, SPREP, Apia, Samoa.
Global Marine Biological Diversity: A Strategy for Building Conservation into Decision Making
(1993), edited by Elliott A. Norse, Island Press, Washington D.C.
Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based
Activities (1995), UNEP (OCA)/LBA/IG.2/7; UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya.
A Global Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (1995), Principal Editors: Graeme
Kelleher, Chris Bleakley and Sue Wells, prepared by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority,
the World Bank, the IUCN/World Conservation Union; The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Incremental Costs (1996), by the GEF Secretariat, Document GEF/C.7/Inf.5; unpublished, kindly
provided by Dr. Kenneth King of the GEF Secretariat, GEF, Washington, D.C.
1
International Waters and Environmental Security (1997), by Laurence D. Mee, Background Paper 2
for the Conference on Oceans and Security, organised by the Advisory Committee on Protection of
the Sea (ACOPS) in Washington D.C.; unpublished (as yet).
Oceanography: A View of the Earth (1995), by M. Grant Gross, 5th. ed.; Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.
Land-Based Pollutants Inventory for the South Pacific Region (1993), by Nancy Convard; SPREP
Reports and Studies Series No. 68, SPREP, Apia, Samoa.
Land Tenure in the Pacific (1987), edited by Ron Crocombe, 3rd. ed.; University of the South
Pacific, Suva, Fiji.
The Law of the Sea: Official Text of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea with
Annexes and Index (1983); United Nations, New York, NY.
Operational Strategy of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) (1996), by the GEF Secretariat; GEF,
Washington, D.C.
Overview of Destructive Fishing Practices in the Pacific Islands Region (1995), by Joeli Veitayaki,
Vina Ram-Bidesi, Elizabeth Matthews, Lionel Gibson and Veikali Vuki; SPREP Reports and Studies
Series No. 93, SPREP, Apia, Samoa.
Pacific Island Economies: Toward Efficient and Sustainable Growth, Volume 1. Overview (1993),
by Hilarian Codippily, Steven Tabor and Peter Johnston; The World Bank, Washington D.C.
A Pacific Framework for Integrated Coastal Management (1994), by Bob Thistlethwaite and Mike
Huber, prepared for the Office of the Environment of the Asian Development Bank, Manila,
Philippines.
Pacific Regional Report on the Issues and Activities Associated with Coral Reefs and Related
Ecosystems (1996), prepared by Andrew J. Smith; SPREP, Apia, Samoa.
The Pacific Way: Pacific Island Developing Countries' Report to the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (1992), edited by Gerald Miles and Roslyn Sharp, prepared by the
SPREP; South Pacific Commission, Nouméa, New Caledonia.
Perspectives in Aquatic Exotic Species Management in the Pacific Islands, Vol. 1: Introductions of
Commercially Significant Aquatic Organisms to the Pacific Islands (1994), by Lucius G. Eldredge,
SPREP Reports and Studies Series No. 68; South Pacific Commission, Nouméa, New Caledonia.
Report of the Brainstorming Session on International Waters (1996), by the Scientific and Technical
Advisory Panel; unpublished document from the GEF Secretariat, Washington, D.C.
Report of the International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI) Pacific Regional Workshop (1995); SPREP,
Apia, Samoa.
2
Report on the Sub-Regional Meetings to Identify Coastal Management Training Needs (1995),
SPREP, Apia, Samoa.
Report to the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development on Activities to Implement
the Barbados Programme of Action in the Pacific Region (1996), prepared by SPREP jointly with
the Pacific Operations Center of ESCAP; SPREP, Apia, Samoa.
Review of Critical Marine Habitats and Species in the Pacific Islands Region (1997), by Chris
Bleakley, with collaboration of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (appended to the
SAP); to be published.
Review of Fishery Management Issues and Regimes in the Pacific Islands Region (1997), by Garry
L. Preston, with collaboration of SPREP, SPC and FFA (appended to the SAP); to be published.
A Review of Non-Living Resources and Threats in the Pacific Region (1997), by Russell Howorth
(appended to the SAP); to be published as SOPAC Technical Report 247, SOPAC, Suva, Fiji.
Review of Regional Institutional Arrangements in the Marine Sector (1995), by S. Tu'a
Taumoepeau Tupou, Joseph Gabut, Richard Herr, Satya Nandan and Savenaca Siwatibau,
unpublished final report to the South Pacific Organisations Coordinating Committee.
Small Island States and Sustainable Development: Strategic Issues and Experience (1995), by
Stephen Bass and Barry Dalal-Clayton, Environmental Planning Issues No. 8, International
Institute for Environment and Development, London, UK.
Strategies For Preventing and Mitigating Land-Based Sources of Pollution to Transboundary Water
Resources in the Pacific Region (1997), by Nancy S. Convard and Andrew Tomlinson, to be
published by SPREP, Apia, Samoa.
Towards Effective Water Policy in the Asian and Pacific Region (1996), edited by Wouter L.
Arriens, Jeremy Bird, Jeremy Berkoff and Paul Mosley; Asian Development Bank, Manila,
Philippines.
Traditional Resource Management in the Melanesian South Pacific: A Development Dilemma
(1989), by G.B.K. Baines, in: Common Property Resources: Ecology and Community-Based
Sustainable Development, edited by F. Berkes; Belhaven Press, Pinter Publishers, London, UK.
Transporting Sediments via Rivers to the Ocean, and the Role of Sediments as Pollutants to the
South Pacific (1994), by M. Asquith, F. Kooge and R.J. Morrison; SPREP Reports and Studies Series
No. 72, SPREP, Apia, Samoa.
Wetland Conservation in the Pacific Islands Region (1996), edited by Roger Jaensch, Publication
No. 118; Wetlands International-Asia Pacific, Canberra, Australia.
3
Annex 2
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADB
Asian Development Bank
APEC
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation
CBD
Convention on Biological Diversity
CITES
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
DWFN
Distant Water Fishing Nation
EEZ
Exclusive Economic Zone
ESCAP
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
EU
European
Union
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
FAO
Food and Agriculture Association
FCCC
Framework Convention on Climate Change
FFA
Forum Fisheries Agency
ForSec
Forum Secretariat
FSPI
Foundation for Peoples of the South Pacific International
GDP
Gross Domestic Product
GEF
Global Environment Facility
GPA/LBA
Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from
Land-Based Activities
ICLARM
International Centre for Living Aquatic Resources Management
ICM
Integrated Coastal Management
ICWM
Integrated Coast and Watershed Management
ICRI
International Coral Reef Initiative
IMO
International Maritime Organisation
IOC
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission
IUCN
International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources -
World Conservation Union
LME
Large Marine Ecosystem
NEMS
National Environment Management Strategies
NGO
Non-governmental
Organisation
OFM
Oceanic Fisheries Management
PECC
Pacific Economic Cooperation Council
PICCAP
Pacific Islands Climate Change Assistance Programme
PIDP
Pacific Islands Development Programme
SAP
Strategic Action Programme
SIDS
Small Island Developing States
SOPAC
South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission
SPACHEE
South Pacific Action Committee on the Human Environment and Ecology
SPBCP
South Pacific Biodiversity Conservation Programme
SPC
South Pacific Commission
SPF
South Pacific Forum
SPOCC
South Pacific Organizations Coordinating Committee
SPREP
South Pacific Regional Environment Programme
STAP
Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel
TCSP
Tourism Council for the South Pacific
TNC
The Nature Conservancy
UN
United
Nations
UNCED
UN Conference on Environment and Development
UNCLOS
UN Convention on the Law of the Sea
UNCSD
UN Commission on Sustainable Development
UNDP
UN Development Programme
UNEP
UN Environment Programme
UNESCO
UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
USP
University of the South Pacific
WCMC
World Conservation Monitoring Centre
WPAC
World Protected Areas Commission
WWF
World Wide Fund for Nature
Annex 3
Coordinators of the National Task Forces
Cook Islands: Teresa Manarangi-Trott, Director, Island Wide Services, Rarotonga -
Fax: (682) 27007, email:trott@gatepoly.co.ck
Federated States of Micronesia: O'Kean Ehmes, Capacity 21 Programme Officer (Micronesia),
Palikir, Pohnpei - Fax: (691) 320-2933, email: oehmes@mail.fm
Fiji: Bale Tamata, Manager, Environment, Institute of Applied Sciences, University of the South
Pacific, Suva - Fax: (679) 300-373, email: tamata_b@usp.ac.fj
Kiribati: Alolae Cati, Consultant, Tarawa - Fax: (686) 21 348
Marshall Islands: Abraham Hicking, Environmental Protection Authority, Majuro - Fax: (692) 625-
5202, email:missa1@ntamar.com
Nauru: Joseph Cain, Senior Project Officer, Dept. of Island Development and Industry, Yaren
District - Fax: (674) 444-3791
Niue: Terry Chapman, Consultant, Alofi - Fax: (683) 4094
Papua New Guinea: Navu Kwapena, Director, Nature Conservation Division, Department of
Environment, Boroko - Fax: (675) 301-1694
Samoa: Tu'u'u Ieti Taule'alo, Public Works Department, Apia - Fax: (685) 21927,
email: opcv@talofa.net
Solomon Islands: Michelle Lam, Principal Fisheries Officer, Fisheries Department, Honiara
Fax: (677) 30256, email: sbfish@ffa.int
Tonga: Netatua Prescott, Senior Ecologist, Ministry of Lands, Survey and Natural Resources,
Nuku'alofa - Fax: (676) 23216
Tuvalu: Roger Moresi, Consultant, Funafuti - Fax: 688) 20666
Vanuatu: Sarah Mecartney, Capacity 21 Programme Officer (Melanesia), Port Vila
Fax: (678) 27421, email: environment@vanuatu.pactok.net
Annex 4
Regional Task Force
Country Representatives
Fiji: Maciu Lagibalavu, Director, Fisheries, Suva - Fax: (679) 361 184
Marshall Islands: Jorelik Tibon, Director, Environmental Protection Authority, Majuro -
Fax: (692) 625-5202, email: missa1@ntamar.com
Samoa: Frances Brebner, Treasury Department, Apia - Fax: (685) 21312,
email: plan_pol@talofa.net
Tonga: Saimone Helu, Director, Water Board, Nuku'alofa - Fax: (676) 23360,
email: twbhelu@cwand.to
Vanuatu: Dorosday Kenneth, Director, Fisheries, Port Vila - Fax: (678) 23 641, represented by
Moses Amos
South Pacific Organisations Coordinating Committee (SPOCC)
Anthony D. Lewis, Director, Oceanic Fisheries, South Pacific Commission, Nouméa, New
Caledonia - Fax: (687) 263-818, email: tonyl@spc.org.nc
Iosefa Maiava, Director, Development and Economic Policy Division, Forum Secretariat, Suva, Fiji
- Fax: (679) 300-192, email: iosefam@forumsec.org.fj
Andrew Munro, Waste Management Officer, SPREP, Apia, Samoa - Fax: (685) 20231,
email: munro@talofa.net
Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs)
Paul Holthus, Marine and Coastal Programmes, IUCN/World Conservation Union, Gland,
Switzerland - Fax: 41-22-999-0024, email: pfh@hq.iucn.org
Andrew Smith, The Nature Conservancy, Koror, Palau - Fax: (680) 488-4550,
email: 103732.3465@compuserve.com
Private Sector
Curly Carswell, President, Fiji Dive Operators Association, Savusavu, Fiji - Fax: (679) 850-344
email: seafijidive@is.com.fj
Implementing Agencies
Elizabeth Brouwer, Pacific Country Officer, The World Bank, Washington, D.C. - Fax: 1-202-522-
3393, email:ebrouwer@worldbank.org
Andrew Hudson, GEF IW Focal Point, UNDP, New York
email: andrew.hudson@undp.org
John Pernetta, GEF IW Focal Point, UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya - email: john.pernetta@unep.org
Sealii Sesega, Environment Officer, UNDP, Apia, Samoa - Fax: (685) 23 555,
email: fo.wsm@undp.org
Stuart Whitehead, The World Bank, Washington, D.C. - Fax: 1-202-522-3393
email:swhitehead@worldbank.org
Participants
E. Gordon Fox, Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines -
email: gfox@mail.asiandevbank.org
Charles Kick III, ESCAP/POC, Port Vila, Vanuatu - email: escappoc@vanuatu.pactok.net
Chief Technical Adviser
Philomène A. Verlaan, c/o SPREP, Apia, for the GEF project - email: paverlaan@gn.apc.org
Annex 5
The SAP Process
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), SPREP and the Government of
Australia co-financed a Global Environment Facility (GEF) Pacific regional training and scoping
workshop in Nadi, Fiji, 1-4 August 1995. It was agreed at this workshop that a regional proposal
for preparation of a Strategic Action Programme (SAP) to the GEF from Pacific Islands would
combine the following activity areas:
- integrated conservation and sustainable management of coastal resources, including
fresh water resources;
- integrated conservation and sustainable management of oceanic resources;
- prevention of pollution through the integrated management of land- or marine-based
wastes, and
- monitoring and analysis of shore and near-shore environments to determine
vulnerability to environmental degradation.
An early draft of the proposal was endorsed by the 8th SPREP meeting in October 1995.
Block B funds were requested from GEF in November 1995. Following further regional and
national consultation the proposal was submitted to and endorsed by Heads of Government of
participating island countries at the 1996 27th South Pacific Forum. SPREP was requested by the
South Pacific Forum to coordinate implementation of the proposal.
The proposal was approved by UNDP on 19 April 1997. The Chief Technical Adviser
commenced work on April 22, 1997. The initiation of the project was announced to participating
countries, SPREP National Focal Points, the SPREP collaborating institutions, Pacific Island
Countries' (PIC) Missions to the United Nations (UN) and members of the South Pacific
Organisations Coordinating Committee (SPOCC) in SPREP Circular No. 523. Participating
countries were asked to establish the National Task Force (NTF) and nominate Task Force
Coordinators (TFCs) in SPREP Circular No. 524.
A Regional Task Force (RTF) to oversee preparation of the SAP was established, with one
representative from each of five of the participating countries (Fiji, Marshall Islands, Samoa,
Tonga, Vanuatu), 3 members of and chosen by SPOCC (SPC, SPF, SPREP), 3 GEF Implementing
Agencies (UNDP, UNEP, WB), 2 NGOs (IUCN, TNC) and 1 private sector representative (Fiji
Dive Operators Association, recommended by TCSP). The ADB and ESCAP also participated.
The RTF met on 5 and 6 June 1997 in Apia. It considered draft regional reviews, draft
guidelines for national consultations, and draft terms of reference for the TFCs. The report of the
RTF meeting was circulated.
The TFCs met in Apia on 8 and 9 July 1997 to receive a briefing on GEF, the SAP
preparation process and objectives and suggested methodology for national consultations. They
also received the draft reviews and other materials for the consultations. The report of the TFC
meeting was circulated.
The SAP was prepared in accordance with the results of the national consultations. The
results, in the form of national reports and targeted project proposals, were endorsed by the
SPREP national focal point and were submitted to SPREP.
A preliminary draft executive summary of the SAP was circulated to participating
countries, SPREP National Focal Points, PIC Missions to the UN, SPOCC members, RTF and
TFCs in SPREP Circular No. 541.
The draft SAP was reviewed and approved by the RTF and the TFCs on 2 and 3
September 1997 at a joint meeting held in Apia. The report of the meeting was circulated.
The SAP was reviewed by the Heads of Government of the South Pacific Forum at their
twenty-eighth meeting in Rarotonga on 15-19 September, 1997.
ANNEX 9: COUNTRY FOCAL POINT LETTERS OF ENDORSEMENT